something to look out for in bellevue wa

[Bcasey25raptor]

Originally Posted by ozonemania

I agree with your conclusion, but I think a fairer comparison would be to use the Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue MSA population of 3.7 million against the Vancouver-Fraser Valley figure you gave above. The Seattle CSA includes a much, much larger area, an urbanized area rivalling the size of the whole of Vancouver Island. It would probably take you over 3 hours of (American) highway driving to traverse the Seattle CSA.

The US is known for highly exaggerating the size of it's metro's I've noticed.

Even portland is probably realistically closer to 1.8 million and not 2.3 million as currently estimated.

[cornholio]

Originally Posted by Bcasey25raptor

The US is known for highly exaggerating the size of it's metro's I've noticed.

Even portland is probably realistically closer to 1.8 million and not 2.3 million as currently estimated.

Good point...to put things in perspective I picked some random major US metros, their all pretty much the same.

--Vancouver Island (tip to tip side to side, the whole thing) = 31,285sqkm

--New York metropolitan area = 34,490sqkm (pop:23.5mill) = Vancouver Island + 1 Metro Vancouver on top

--Seattle metropolitan area = 15,209sqkm (pop:3.5mill) = 1/2 of Vancouver Island or 5.5 Metro Vancouvers

--Los Angeles metropolitan area = 12,516sqkm (pop:12.8mill) = 4.5 Metro Vancouvers

--Greater Boston = 12,105sqkm (pop:4.6mill)

--Miami metropolitan area: 15,896sqkm (pop:5.5mill)

--Metro Vancouver = 2,877sqkm (pop:2.4mill)

---Draw a line from strait of Georgia to Hope to the US border to Nemaiha Valley (Chilko lake) to 70 Mile House. This gives you a square with a area of about 34,500sqkm the size of New York metropolitan area.

***I used Wikipedia for all my numbers. Accurate enough I figured for the sq area of the metros. Pop counts however I do find less reliable from Wikipedia as there are various counts and censuses and the numbers change all the time, and there is lots of bias from people editing the articles regarding population counts. anyways...

[crackerd]

I live in Portland and I think your estimation of 1.8 million in the metro is incorrect. Maybe 1.8 million on the Oregon side of the border but we also have Vancouver, WA USA and all their burbs such as kelso and camas. Just thought you should know we count Washington cities in our metro pop as well.

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by crackerd

I live in Portland and I think your estimation of 1.8 million in the metro is incorrect. Maybe 1.8 million on the Oregon side of the border but we also have Vancouver, WA USA and all their burbs such as kelso and camas. Just thought you should know we count Washington cities in our metro pop as well.

Fair enough, Vancouver WA definitely is an integral part of Portland, however can you explain why Skamania and Columbia Counties are considered part of Portland's Metro area?? They don't seem to be a part of the city, or a city at all for that matter.

[Bcasey25raptor]

Originally Posted by cornholio

Good point...to put things in perspective I picked some random major US metros, their all pretty much the same.

--Vancouver Island (tip to tip side to side, the whole thing) = 31,285sqkm

--New York metropolitan area = 34,490sqkm (pop:23.5mill) = Vancouver Island + 1 Metro Vancouver on top

--Seattle metropolitan area = 15,209sqkm (pop:3.5mill) = 1/2 of Vancouver Island or 5.5 Metro Vancouvers

--Los Angeles metropolitan area = 12,516sqkm (pop:12.8mill) = 4.5 Metro Vancouvers

--Greater Boston = 12,105sqkm (pop:4.6mill)

--Miami metropolitan area: 15,896sqkm (pop:5.5mill)

--Metro Vancouver = 2,877sqkm (pop:2.4mill)

---Draw a line from strait of Georgia to Hope to the US border to Nemaiha Valley (Chilko lake) to 70 Mile House. This gives you a square with a area of about 34,500sqkm the size of New York metropolitan area.

***I used Wikipedia for all my numbers. Accurate enough I figured for the sq area of the metros. Pop counts however I do find less reliable from Wikipedia as there are various counts and censuses and the numbers change all the time, and there is lots of bias from people editing the articles regarding population counts. anyways...

The funny thing about metro Vancouver's 2 877 sq km is that when we dive deeper, half of that is mountains and has nothing built on it.


Everything in the red dotted line is part of metro Vancouver, I drew a black like to show you how little is actually, well, buildable.

everything north of that line is mountains.


I did some other calculations the other day to find out how much of urban vancouver there is (the continuous built up area)

It turns out theres around 2.1 million people in the urbanized portion and it takes up less than 500 sq km.

in an area directly comparable with seattle's city limits, Vancouver has around 1.2 million million people.

Vancouver has 650k, burnaby has 250k, richmond has 200k, new west has 60k.

Combined thats 347 sq km. Population of the area is around 1.16 million people.

This is slightly shy of seattles 369 sq km.
Either way, theres a reason Vancouver feels much larger.

[trofirhen]

It's a compact, tight, dense area we're working on to develop. Now if we could just start the foundations of a real economy ... looking at Seattle - just their closer-in districts included, even.

[Bcasey25raptor]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

It's a compact, tight, dense area we're working on to develop. Now if we could just start the foundations of a real economy ... looking at Seattle - just their closer-in districts included, even.

I think we are getting better, the problem sadly is the cost of living and the fact we are in Canada.

Convincing international companies to set up offices here is difficult but I think we are definitely getting better.

I think we should try and convince some oil companies headquarters to well, um, move here.

[LeftCoaster]

It's not like the oscars after party where every party tries to court the coolest people, that's not really how business works...

If we want a stronger economy we need to build it ourselves by fostering a compettive business environment and building our own success stories.

Suncor isn't one day just going to up and move their 10,000+ employees to Vancouver because we asked.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

It's not like the oscars after party where every party tries to court the coolest people, that's not really how business works...

If we want a stronger economy we need to build it ourselves by fostering a compettive business environment and building our own success stories.

Suncor isn't one day just going to up and move their 10,000+ employees to Vancouver because we asked.

^^^^
Absolutely. We can't just ride merrily along and hope that manna will fall from corporate heaven.
It's the community's own initiative and resourcefulness that are will have to be the turbine of any major regional growth.

That said, a previously-posted link to a site that may be news to Bcasey25raptor:

http://www.canadianbusiness.com/comp...e-new-calgary/

[djmk]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

It's not like the oscars after party where every party tries to court the coolest people, that's not really how business works...

If we want a stronger economy we need to build it ourselves by fostering a compettive business environment and building our own success stories.

Suncor isn't one day just going to up and move their 10,000+ employees to Vancouver because we asked.

I can think of several reasons why a company would not to move to vancouver with the main reason being that the company's employees can't afford to live here.

[theKB]

Originally Posted by djmk

I can think of several reasons why a company would not to move to vancouver with the main reason being that the company's employees can't afford to live here.

That's a huge detractor. I remember reading an article about the challenges faced by companies seeking to attract top talent to Vancouver. People that would be in the 6 figure range salary but would barely be able to afford a tear down in east van when they are coming from a city where they can easily afford a nice lifestyle with a 3+ thousand square foot new home, kids in private school and a luxury car.

[Bcasey25raptor]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

^^^^
Absolutely. We can't just ride merrily along and hope that manna will fall from corporate heaven.
It's the community's own initiative and resourcefulness that are will have to be the turbine of any major regional growth.

That said, a previously-posted link to a site that may be news to Bcasey25raptor:

http://www.canadianbusiness.com/comp...e-new-calgary/

Cool link, great news.

Thanks for sharing. I do hope Vancouver can one day actually rival it's neighbour to the south a little more.

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by djmk

I can think of several reasons why a company would not to move to vancouver with the main reason being that the company's employees can't afford to live here.

Most of the worlds major companies are located in expensive cities, often far more expensive than Vancouver. Goldman Sachs isn't looking to leave New York due due to housing costs.

The cost of living in Vancouver is certainly overblown by the media, and one of the reasons it can seem so staggering is the lack of good jobs, not the cost.

Honestly, companies just don't move their head offices that often. Even if housing costs in Vancouver were half what they are now, companies are just not willing to tell tens of thousands of people to uproot and move themselves and their families. The Instances of major moves like that are honestly quite rare.

like i said we need to build out economy, not steal it. What needs to happen in Vancouver, and its happening slowly, is a fundamental shift in culture. People need to realize that not all business is evil. People in Vancouver need to continue to be entrepreneurial, creating the opportunities the city needs. I personally look to San Francisco as a city to emulate, as it has managed to blend business, sustainability and a liberal attitude successfully. It's not perfect but it offers a ton of lessons in how we can grow.