HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum

Since 1999, the SkyscraperPage Forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web. The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics. Welcome!

You are currently browsing as a guest. Register with the SkyscraperPage Forum and join this growing community of skyscraper enthusiasts. Registering has benefits such as fewer ads, the ability to post messages, private messaging and more.

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > SSP: Local Vancouver > Politics

View Poll Results: Should the B.C. government explore amalgamating Metro Vancouver's municipalities?
Yes 81 71.68%
No 32 28.32%
Voters: 113. You may not vote on this poll

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2010, 3:18 AM
mr.x's Avatar
mr.x mr.x is offline
with glowing hearts
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: █♣█ Vancouver, British Columbia
Posts: 12,806
Amalgamation of Metro Vancouver's municipalities

Since it's something several people here have mentioned, and it's becoming quite apparent that it's needed.....


Could 'Montreal style' amalgation benefit Metro Vancouver economy?
1 Jan 2009 | Post by Daniel in City Focus, Editorial

In 2007 I had the opportunity to partake in a delegation that visited Montreal to determine the benefits and downsides of amalgamation. Depending on who you spoke to, either Montreal was heading for a positive more prosperous future, or it was going to hell in a handbasket. I believe the truth lies somewhere in the middle.

After sitting through dozens of briefings regarding how over 20 city administrations were forced to amalgamate, I couldn’t help but think how long it would take for cities in the metro Vancouver area to consider their options. Besides Toronto and Montreal, Vancouver is the only Canadian city where this type of amalgamation would realistically make sense.

Metro Vancouver faces some serious issues in the next decade. One of those 'sleeper' issues is the fact that unlike Toronto and Montreal, Vancouver does not have a regional economic development strategy. This is clearly a serious mistake for a region about to play host to the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Games next year.

I have some personal experience (aka scars) on this file when in 2006 I was asked by Vancouver’s Mayor to initiate a dialogue with the Mayors of Surrey and Richmond to determine if we had some common interests. A number of meetings took place over the course of a year.

Vancouver, Richmond and Surrey incorporate the downtown business core, ports, airports, border crossings, etc. You would think it would be simple for these three cities to sit down and come up with a joint economic development plan to help promote our region abroad. Unfortunately, it wasn't that easy.

I quickly realized that due to the lack of amalgamation, each city remains fiercely competitive when it comes to the economic development file. I contend that most cities suffer from “civic myopicosis” - a medical condition which doesn’t allow them to think beyond their borders.

So it should come as no surprise when a multi-national company makes an investment in a new R & D facility in Richmond, it is perceived as “stealing jobs” from Surrey and vice-versa.

There are a few visionary folks out there who have been pushing the cause forward. One of them is Mark Betteridge, a highly regarded member of Vancouver Economic Development Commission.

He has been doggedly pursuing this file for years under the auspices of the Greater Vancouver Economic Development Initiative. Unfortunately, he discovered it takes a herculean amount of political leadership to realize the benefits of a coordinated regional economic development strategy.

Is the Montreal or Toronto version of amalgamation going to fly in metro Vancouver? Likely not in my lifetime, unless it is imposed on them as was the case in Ontario and Quebec. However, there are some key areas like economic development where joint efforts must be taken now, if cities in the Vancouver region want to retain their competitive edge.

I can report that my early meetings with Richmond and Surrey did eventually result in them signing a memorandum of understanding with Vancouver to promote economic development. Kudos to Watts and Brodie for taking this step. But a lot more must be done.

The Vancouver region needs to develop a cohesive regional economic development strategy signed on by every Mayor and Council. They need look look beyond their three year terms, and their borders.

Metro Vancouver cities also need to pro-actively seek out new investment opportunities. They also need to speak with one voice to the international business community who can invest almost anywhere they choose in this global marketplace. It simply doesn't make good business sense to have dozens of Metro Vancouver mayors selling the benefits of their respective cities to the CEO of an international corporation.

If cities within the Metro Vancouver region ever got really serious about the economic development file, I suspect that senior levels of government would step up in a big way to support them. That's been the case for the Toronto and Montreal regions for years, and their economies have benefitted as a result.

It's a shame when the world's business leaders arrive here in 2010, Metro Vancouver won’t have a coordinated business message to deliver. As they say, capitalizing on the Games is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, let’s hope the region’s leadership haven't missed the boat on this one.



http://www.citycaucus.com/2009/01/wo...ver-amalgamate







What I would like to see:

Vancouver
- Vancouver
- Richmond
- Burnaby
- New Westminster

North Vancouver
- District of North Vancouver
- North Vancouver
- West Vancouver

Coquitlam
- Coquitlam
- Port Coquitlam
- Port Moody
- Anmore
- Belcarra
- Pitt Meadows
- Maple Ridge

Surrey
- Surrey
- Delta
- White Rock
- Cloverdale
- Langley

Last edited by mr.x; Jul 22, 2010 at 4:03 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2010, 3:59 AM
worldwide's Avatar
worldwide worldwide is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Vancouver - Ktown
Posts: 688
Maple Ridge as part of Surrey makes no sense to me? can you explain your reasoning?
__________________
Hieroglyphics yeah, to the kick and the snare like that, there, yeah, we keep it raw rare
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2010, 4:03 AM
mr.x's Avatar
mr.x mr.x is offline
with glowing hearts
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: █♣█ Vancouver, British Columbia
Posts: 12,806
^ actually, I think I meant to put that in with Coquitlam. :p
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2010, 4:23 AM
whatnext whatnext is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 3,932
Combining Vancouver, the UEL and Burnaby are a no-brainer IMHO. Probably roll New West in there too. Richmond, by virtue of natural geographic barriers is a bit harder sell.

On the North Shore, the City and District of North Van should have been combined long ago.

Since Campbell's gone next election anyway, he should just go for broke and force this through.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2010, 4:35 AM
trofirhen's Avatar
trofirhen trofirhen is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,752
Quote:
Originally Posted by whatnext View Post
Combining Vancouver, the UEL and Burnaby are a no-brainer IMHO. Probably roll New West in there too. Richmond, by virtue of natural geographic barriers is a bit harder sell.

On the North Shore, the City and District of North Van should have been combined long ago.

Since Campbell's gone next election anyway, he should just go for broke and force this through.
Is it in his interest?? Has he got the guts??
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2010, 4:36 AM
go_leafs_go02 go_leafs_go02 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: British Columbia
Posts: 2,115
And looking at Surrey specifically, I would honestly think it would do better to divide that up in 3 ways but amalgamate in three separate directions.

North Delta should be combined with Whalley, Newton, Guildford, Fleetwood, and Fraser Heights into one. They are one large urban area and share alot in common (North Delta & Newton especially)

White Rock & South Surrey/Crescent Beach should be amalgamated to form the 2nd type of North Vancouver.

Langley City should merge with Cloverdale to become it's own municipality.

The geographic boundaries of the current districts and municipalities simply do not make much sense anymore.

Quick Map Idea.

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UT...279715dcd0ef7c
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2010, 4:38 AM
trofirhen's Avatar
trofirhen trofirhen is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,752
Quote:
Originally Posted by worldwide View Post
Maple Ridge as part of Surrey makes no sense to me? can you explain your reasoning?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr.x View Post
^ actually, I think I meant to put that in with Coquitlam. :p
Unless I read it wrong, I think Mr. X DID include Maple Ridge with Coquitlam. Either my eyesight's going or yours is.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2010, 4:44 AM
mr.x's Avatar
mr.x mr.x is offline
with glowing hearts
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: █♣█ Vancouver, British Columbia
Posts: 12,806
Quote:
Originally Posted by trofirhen View Post
Unless I read it wrong, I think Mr. X DID include Maple Ridge with Coquitlam. Either my eyesight's going or yours is.
haha, the power of editing.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2010, 4:47 AM
trofirhen's Avatar
trofirhen trofirhen is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 4,752
Quote:
Originally Posted by mr.x View Post
haha, the power of editing.
Heh heh heh. Sly Fox
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2010, 4:51 AM
worldwide's Avatar
worldwide worldwide is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Vancouver - Ktown
Posts: 688
yeah, I figured that would make a bit more sense.
__________________
Hieroglyphics yeah, to the kick and the snare like that, there, yeah, we keep it raw rare
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2010, 5:38 AM
SpongeG's Avatar
SpongeG SpongeG is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Coquitlam/Rainbow Lake
Posts: 26,182
it has to be all together or it won't happen
__________________
belowitall
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2010, 5:54 AM
Whalleyboy's Avatar
Whalleyboy Whalleyboy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,865
cloverdale is part of surrey...
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2010, 5:57 AM
Whalleyboy's Avatar
Whalleyboy Whalleyboy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,865
Quote:
Originally Posted by go_leafs_go02 View Post
And looking at Surrey specifically, I would honestly think it would do better to divide that up in 3 ways but amalgamate in three separate directions.

North Delta should be combined with Whalley, Newton, Guildford, Fleetwood, and Fraser Heights into one. They are one large urban area and share alot in common (North Delta & Newton especially)

White Rock & South Surrey/Crescent Beach should be amalgamated to form the 2nd type of North Vancouver.

Langley City should merge with Cloverdale to become it's own municipality.

The geographic boundaries of the current districts and municipalities simply do not make much sense anymore.

Quick Map Idea.

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UT...279715dcd0ef7c
as a surrey resident proud of my cities history i would hate to see surrey lose both cloverdale and crescent as these are some of surreys earliest settlements and where its history is held

also giving up port kells all to langley would be a bad thing as this is some of surreys most built up industrial area

and also surrey would be giving up alot of its farm land it has worked on to protect in your map
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2010, 6:04 AM
deasine deasine is offline
Vancouver Moderator
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 5,539
I rather see a regional government, effectively replacing TransLink and GVRD/Metro Vancouver Board, with a redistribution of roles and responsibilities between the municipalities and the new regional government rather than an amalgamation. I can see this government having a lot more power to move larger projects through and benefit the entire region as a whole.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2010, 6:17 AM
go_leafs_go02 go_leafs_go02 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: British Columbia
Posts: 2,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whalleyboy View Post
as a surrey resident proud of my cities history i would hate to see surrey lose both cloverdale and crescent as these are some of surreys earliest settlements and where its history is held

also giving up port kells all to langley would be a bad thing as this is some of surreys most built up industrial area

and also surrey would be giving up alot of its farm land it has worked on to protect in your map
And I'm sure Cloverdale, Crescent Beach and White Rock would likely all love to get rid of Whalley and Newton and keep their tax money in their locality.

Surrey would love to develop the ALR, they haven't done anything to protect it, they're simply forced to by the province.

There are three distinct parts to Surrey, and each of the three really have nothing in common with the other two parts of Surrey.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2010, 6:21 AM
invisibleairwaves's Avatar
invisibleairwaves invisibleairwaves is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Cloverhole, Surrey, BC
Posts: 494
Quote:
Originally Posted by go_leafs_go02 View Post
And looking at Surrey specifically, I would honestly think it would do better to divide that up in 3 ways but amalgamate in three separate directions.

North Delta should be combined with Whalley, Newton, Guildford, Fleetwood, and Fraser Heights into one. They are one large urban area and share alot in common (North Delta & Newton especially)

White Rock & South Surrey/Crescent Beach should be amalgamated to form the 2nd type of North Vancouver.

Langley City should merge with Cloverdale to become it's own municipality.

The geographic boundaries of the current districts and municipalities simply do not make much sense anymore.

Quick Map Idea.

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UT...279715dcd0ef7c
This gets my vote.

I'm not convinced of the benefits of Metro-Vancouver-wide amalgamation. We might not have the "fiefdoms" that we do now, but there'll still be NIMBYs around to "protect" their communities from much-needed projects.

The one thing I would like to see is a Metro Vancouver regional police force to get us off the RCMP teat. I don't think amalgamation is necessary for that to happen though.
__________________
Reticulating Splines
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2010, 6:23 AM
Whalleyboy's Avatar
Whalleyboy Whalleyboy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,865
Well take in note watts if from cloverdale and she seems to be doing a lot with whalley and newton
also watts does alot to protect the ALR areas
in multiple things advertising surrey i see them gladly put on there that 1/3 of surrey is ALR
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2010, 6:26 AM
go_leafs_go02 go_leafs_go02 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: British Columbia
Posts: 2,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whalleyboy View Post
Well take in note watts if from cloverdale and she seems to be doing a lot with whalley and newton
Whalley has the most potential for growth in Surrey. That's why. Cloverdale still technically is in the middle of nowhere from a Vancouver standpoint. Growth doesn't need to happen in that location right now. Instead you have the City Centre with a direct rapid transit connection to Vancouver, and a location that's been deemed the second metro centre in Metro Vancouver.

Pssst.. Whalley and Newton are also where the votes are too

Slightly updated the map for more accurate borders.

Last edited by go_leafs_go02; Jul 22, 2010 at 6:41 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2010, 7:30 AM
Whalleyboy's Avatar
Whalleyboy Whalleyboy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Surrey
Posts: 1,865
i have a feel the point of how central and easy it is to get around has something to do with it too why shes working with it so much
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Jul 22, 2010, 8:30 AM
Distill3d's Avatar
Distill3d Distill3d is offline
Glorfied Overrated Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Vancouver (Burnaby), British Columbia
Posts: 4,151
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpongeG View Post
it has to be all together or it won't happen
I'll second that one. It only makes sense. Really, outside of BC, people don't understand the intricate city boundaries that are here. Hell, I live here and I don't understand them most of the time. 1 big uni-city is the best answer.
__________________
The Brain: Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering?

Pinky: I think so, Brain, but this time, you put the trousers on the chimp.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
   
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > SSP: Local Vancouver > Politics
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 4:22 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.