Future Canadian Skylines

[WhipperSnapper]

I love those who become far to sure of themselves.

It's a safe bet Surrey won't in our lifetimes overtake Mississauga and I doubt it ever will. The Mississauga we know today is unlikely to last another two decades and the regional government covers 1200 plus square kilometres.

[Metro-One]

Montreal is a more mature city than Vancouver and is significantly larger

Well that goes without saying, we are much younger than Montreal and yes we are smaller, just like Montreal is significantly smaller than Toronto and Ottawa, Calgary and Edmonton are all significantly smaller than Vancouver.

[Whalleyboy]

Surrey is not a suburb anymore. It has been dub as the second metropolitan area of the lower mainland.
There for it can not take over Mississauga as largest suburb so they got nothing to worry about over there.

[LeftCoaster]

Surrey is a suburb

[MolsonExport]

Surrey was, is, and will always be, a suburb. Like Mississausage, Burnaby, Longueuil, and North York.

[WhipperSnapper]

North York was and is a borough.

[caltrane74]

Originally Posted by Sacamano

North York was and is a borough.

Using that same logic, Mississauga is a city.

North York has a Suburban feel, Mississauga has a suburban feel. therefore both are suburbs of Toronto.

They are suburban Toronto......

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by Sacamano

North York was and is a borough.

To my knowledge, the term suburb has little to do with the legal creature that makes up a municipality.

[WhipperSnapper]

I do see your point but, it's unclear how applicable it is to his.

Using that same logic, Mississauga is a city.

Actually, by the same logic, Mississauga is a borough of Peel despite it's high level of automony.

[WhipperSnapper]

To my knowledge, the term suburb has little to do with the legal creature that makes up a municipality.

And Kirk never once said, "Beam me up, Scotty. "

[Boris2k7]

This is simply a matter of a confusion of definitions...

A suburb may be:

1 - a predominantly lower-density, automobile-dependent, and normally single-use community within the confines of a larger city (ie. having those qualities that make it "suburban")

or

2 - a smaller, independent community outside of a larger city that functions as a bedroom town for long-distance commuting


Surrey, North York, and other communities straddle those lines.


If you go to a place like Melbourne or Sydney, anything outside of the central core is regarded as a suburb, regardless of character or political boundary (ie. suburbs are a part of place-association).

[bob1954]

With all th 15-20 story stuff in an around the core, some of Calgary is starting to look like a suburb!

[Distill3d]

Originally Posted by bob1954

With all th 15-20 story stuff in an around the core, some of Calgary is starting to look like a suburb!

with about 85% of the population living outside of the core, Calgary is all on giant sprawling suburb hell! thats why Calgary is one of the largest uni-cities in the world. until Calgary annexed them, it used to be that Forest Lawn, Ogden, Bowness, and Midnapore were their own towns. and it wouldn't surprise me at all in 25-30 years if Calgary annexed De Winton, Okotoks, Langdon, Balzac, and Chestemere.

[Bradopulis]

What happens if Surrey's population one day grows larger than Vancouver's, Is it still a Suburb?

[Distill3d]

Originally Posted by Bradopulis

What happens if Surrey's population one day grows larger than Vancouver's, Is it still a Suburb?

of course. as much as Surrey is trying to be its own city, and its population could very much grow larger than Vancouver's, however its growth is still very much dependent on Vancouver.

[Doug_Cgy]

Originally Posted by Distill3d

with about 85% of the population living outside of the core, Calgary is all on giant sprawling suburb hell! thats why Calgary is one of the largest uni-cities in the world. until Calgary annexed them, it used to be that Forest Lawn, Ogden, Bowness, and Midnapore were their own towns. and it wouldn't surprise me at all in 25-30 years if Calgary annexed De Winton, Okotoks, Langdon, Balzac, and Chestemere.

WOW...Why you gotta be like that?? Sure we have sprawl issues...but I would hardly call Calgary hell...

[Distill3d]

Originally Posted by Doug_Cgy

WOW...Why you gotta be like that?? Sure we have sprawl issues...but I would hardly call Calgary hell...

hey, every time i come back to my hometown there's some new suburb like Bridle Ridge or Coral Hills or something like that. its like seriously, Calgary should put out a sign "Welcome to Calgary: All Your Suburbs Belong to Us!" instead of Hidy and Howdy.

[Boris2k7]

It largely depends on how and to what extent Surrey develops, but I can imagine a scenario in the future where Surrey is regarded in relation to Vancouver much like Saint Paul is regarded in relation to Minneapolis.

As far as Calgary... after some study of my own city over several years, I would expand the definition of what would be sprawling and suburban hell to a little further out. You can go out as far as, say, Glenmore Trail in the south before the communities really start becoming disjointed and ugly. Or north as far as about Nose Hill Drive. Or West as far Crowchild. In the East I cut it off at the Bow River. That is what I would roughly regard as "Central Calgary," and it roughly corresponds to police district maps as well as the extent of the grid pattern.

BTW,

Originally Posted by caltrane74

This is hawt. Way to go TO.

[wild wild west]

Originally Posted by Distill3d

with about 85% of the population living outside of the core, Calgary is all on giant sprawling suburb hell! thats why Calgary is one of the largest uni-cities in the world.

Calgary is most certainly not one of the World's largest uni-cities...well, it may be in population, but certainly not in land area. Calgary's footprint is the subject of constant gross media overexaggeration. Compared with other uni-city concepts...we cover about a quarter of the land area of the amalgamated City of Ottawa, and also much less than the amalgamated city-counties in the USA such as Jacksonville, Louisville and Nashville even though we are more populous.

The unicity is something Calgary has done right...show me another metropolitan area over 1 million in North America that has managed to contain 90% of its footprint in less than 300 sq miles...

[Wooster]

Originally Posted by Distill3d

hey, every time i come back to my hometown there's some new suburb like Bridle Ridge or Coral Hills or something like that. its like seriously, Calgary should put out a sign "Welcome to Calgary: All Your Suburbs Belong to Us!" instead of Hidy and Howdy.

As opposed to what city where subdivisions don't exist? Where is this magical city?

If you're thinking of Vancouver - a reminder that while Vancouver was growing its downtown population (admirably) by about 40 000 people over the past 20 years, the rest of the region grew by over 600,000. Guess what, most of that was in sprawly subdivisions in Surrey or other such urban utopias in the lower mainland.

In the GTA, the vast majority of new population in the past 30 years has gone to the 905 region - mostly in subdivisons in 'cities' like Vaughan, Mississauga, Markham, Aurora etc, even while downtown population is on the rise.

Calgary's also had a surge of residential population in the core of late, and seems to be hitting that critical mass where reurbanization is accelerating. However, like ALL cities in Canada, while it is growing up - it is inevitably growing out too.

As for unicity, I think it's a model that has worked well and will especially serve Calgary well into the future as the city becomes smarter about growth. Calgary's subdivisions still leave a lot to be desired, for sure, but on the whole, because they are all under the control of one entity, they are meticulously planned, are relatively comprehensive, and can be thought of as part of the greater whole of the Calgary region. As a result, you don't get leapfrog development, 25 different development standards in the region, and new communities for the most part have LRT, or are planned in areas where the LRT will go (which serves the unicity rather than stop where a jurisdictional boundary happens to fall).

Another positive consequence of the unicity model is you don't have disparate municipalities undercutting eachother's tax bases and competing for lucrative employment uses. Look at what's happened in Greater Vancouver and Toronto - so much office space has fled to suburban municipalities in the past 20 years, it's ridiculous. Now each city has horrendous employment sprawl, while Calgary remains extremely centralized. In Calgary, when employers flee the central business district, they land about 4 blocks south in the Beltline! (which is technically classified as 'suburban office space').

Fragmented regions like the GTA have a much more difficult time controlling suburban development, because amongst the various municipalities in the region trying to attract development, including residential and employment growth, it seems to be a race to the bottom in terms of development control, design and thoughtful growth. Exhibit A: Vaughan in the GTA! As bad as the worst possible subdivision or employment park is in Calgary - it's far, far better than what is being built in areas like Vaughan.