Quote:
Originally Posted by mr.x
Thanks for the info and links.
I think someone on here brought up a great analogy: that if we "spread the wealth" across the region and diffuse what should be in Downtown Vancouver, we'll end up as a region of a bunch of Saskatoons.
That was a brilliant analogy. Fact is, a strong central city enables greater economies of scale for more and better things (whether it be jobs, attractions, infrastructure, you name it) - not just for the central city itself, but for the entire region...which otherwise would not see the benefits incurred were it not for the focus on the central city.
That's why I'm greatly opposed to the idea of turning Surrey into a full-fledged second "metropolitan area" for Metro Vancouver.
Not saying there shouldn't be regional town centres though, those are fantastic and are within the medium - far short of becoming a metropolitan area.
And it's also why I'm a supporter of amalgamation of the region's numerous municipalities into larger clusters. That's how we'll get big picture thinking going instead of all the local-focused and petty squabbling. Regional needs and interests are thrown out the door in favour of ensuring their own municipalities keep job creation within their city and to also ensure their municipal tax revenues keep growing. It's all a petty local competition when we should be thinking regionally, and competing not against each other but rather nationally (Calgary, Toronto) and internationally.
|
I had coffee with a co-worker of my wife's yesterday while she was at a baby shower and had a discussion about Vancouver and the region in general. He is from Belgium and his wife from Australia. The company he works for (my wife works for) is an International company with offices all over and he had worked for 8 years prior to coming to Canada in Australia.
A point he made I think struck to the cord of why I believe it is inevitable that Surrey will become a second core. Affordability.
He said he found it amazing when they got to Vancouver after living in Australia and found that for the most part, people here in Vancouver get paid 30% less than those in cities he had lived in (Melbourne, Sidney, Perth) yet housing prices are near the same as in those cities. He also made the comment that it is quite difficult especially for a family to live in downtown Melbourne or Sidney (Perth not as much) so when they got here the first thing they wondered is how people, especially families, could afford to live in Vancouver itself especially downtown.
After being here 4 years now and on their way to having a baby their answer is, people can't unless they make a lot of money. In their case they make enough that they'll have the option of living in Vancouver itself (they all work downtown), but for most people, it's impossible.
So people are forced more often than not (and I know there are exceptions so don't argue the point that there are families being raised in Vancouver itself because it will go in circles with me telling you how most people that own those houses either are wealthy or bought them 50 years ago and we're talking TODAY) to move out to the 'burbs.'
What that does though in Metro-Vancouver is now over time move your work force further and further away from the place of work. As prices then go up and realestate demand with it, you start to slowly push out industry further and further away.
You say that today in Vancouver. Port of Vancouver was THE port for how many decades? Now you see Roberts Bank being expanded and expanded, Surrey Fraser docks being expanded, expansion in Tilbury and Annacis, and the realistic look to the future that there could be a time when you no longer see container ships in Burrard Inlet.
There also was a lot of industry around Terminal avenue and Main and slowly that has been removed. Chocolate factor becomes a storage building. Trucking companies become car dealerships. Industrial supply buildings become a Home Depot. More and more it gets pushed away to make way for residences and commercial.
So now you've moved your industry out to the burbs, and you've moved your workers out to the burbs. There becomes a point in time then when the works start to more and more demand that the jobs start moving to follow and the region transforms.
What do I see then?
I don't see Surrey become a full on second downtown in the sense of how you probably see it. What I do see Surrey becoming is a downtown for industry and logistics. I see Vancouver remaining and strengthening itself as the downtown for finance and corporations in mining, banking, and the likes.
So does that mean they will technically be competing with each other? I don't think so. Not if it happens the way it already is. I mean if Surrey suddenly has a bunch of industrial companies move their head offices to towers in Central Surrey, the workers already live SoF for the most part and their industrial buildings are more than likely this direction too, does that really take away from Vancouver?
No because that frees up more space for another mining company or financial company to move in with higher paying jobs bringing in employees that earn enough to actually live in Vancouver itself.
Who suffers though are the average middle-class people that want to live in Vancouver and can't. But I don't think that is avoidable. Vancouver is out of land. They can't build affordable housing. We've had discussions about Vancouver needing to have a "strategy for affordable housing" for 30 years now and there never is a final answer just a trickle of apartments here and there that ultimately go to the homeless.
That's my view though. I could be off my rocker, it's entirely possible.
Prev
Linear Mode
