Millennium Line - Broadway Extension: Planning & Pre-Construction

[CivicBlues]

To make matters worse, I don't think a ton of people living in Sydney know which suburb they're in, especially if they're right on a border.

I used to live on 220 Goulburn street in a neighborhood analogous to the West End which according to some was in Surry Hills, and to others in Darlinghurst (which would be correct):

[cganuelas1995]

Originally Posted by CivicBlues

To make matters worse, I don't think a ton of people living in Sydney know which suburb they're in, especially if they're right on a border.

I used to live on 220 Goulburn street in a neighborhood analogous to the West End which according to some was in Surry Hills, and to others in Darlinghurst (which would be correct):

Yeah I used to live on 1 Miller Avenue in Ashfield.

[dpogue]

Some updates on the Broadway SkyTrain project from the June 2018 TransLink Board Meeting:

Subject to final funding confirmation, the project is expected to be delivered using a Design Build Finance model, with TransLink assuming Operations and Maintenance responsibilities on opening day.

This is the same model used for the Evergreen Extension.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by VancouverOfTheFuture

Yup!

i wonder if having 3 cities would work better.
- City of Vancouver
- Municipality of Point Grey
- Municipality of South Vancouver

Or just one city, which is basically what everyone outside of the GVRD thinks anyhow.

Vancouver, with a Central borough, a North borough, a West Borough, a South Borough (Langara/Kerrisdale/Killarney etc), and an East borough (Burnaby).

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

Or just one city, which is basically what everyone outside of the GVRD thinks anyhow.

Vancouver, with a Central borough, a North borough, a West Borough, a South Borough (Langara/Kerrisdale/Killarney etc), and an East borough (Burnaby).

After seeing what happened with the suburban voters in Greater Toronto voting in Rob Ford over the voters in the City, that's the last thing I'd want to see here.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

After seeing what happened with the suburban voters in Greater Toronto voting in Rob Ford over the voters in the City, that's the last thing I'd want to see here.

Rah-ther !! Imagine Point Grey as Etobicoke, Burnaby as Scarborough, East York (New Westminster?) and North York the North Shore, with the Central district as West End - Downtown.

Of course, this is not to say that regoins of metro Vancouver could be designated, somewhat, but less rigidly that Metro Toronto used to be before it merged into just Toronto.

Having an overarching regional Metro government would be mandatory of course, but certain laws and powers could devolve to a more municipal or borough level.

Right now, Metro Vancouver is rather a hodge-pode as is, and could use some streamining into quasi-autonomous - on some levels - boroughs, but answerable to a metro gov't

[Migrant_Coconut]

We could at least consider merging Vancouver with Burnaby and the Tri-Cities. They're all on the same part of the region, and they've all got more or less the same views on most things... and it'll get rid of Corrigan.

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

We could at least consider merging Vancouver with Burnaby and the Tri-Cities. They're all on the same part of the region, and they've all got more or less the same views on most things... and it'll get rid of Corrigan.

Being at a distance, I'm not up on Corrigan, but seriously, I think your statelent of merger Vancouver -Burnaby-Tri-Cities makes total sense. Yes. That "common vision" works.

[Colin4567]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Being at a distance, I'm not up on Corrigan, but seriously, I think your statelent of merger Vancouver -Burnaby-Tri-Cities makes total sense. Yes. That "common vision" works.

The Tri-Cities are starting to have a huge amount of NIMBYs due to the development spurred by the Evergreen Extension. At least our city councils (PoCo, Coquitlam, Port Moody) are still pretty progressive and pro-density. In some ways, we're pulling more than our weight to keep house prices down. I would hate to see how bad the market would become with a NIMBY mayor controlling all of the North of Fraser region.

[cganuelas1995]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

Being at a distance, I'm not up on Corrigan, but seriously, I think your statelent of merger Vancouver -Burnaby-Tri-Cities makes total sense. Yes. That "common vision" works.

How about combining the Langley's with Abbotsford?

[jsbertram]

it could be simplified by merging

a) "north shore city + districts + towns + villages"

b) "north of fraser cities + towns + villages"

c) "south of the fraser cities + towns + villages"

as 3 boroughs of "metro vancouver"

names of these boroughs to be determined later

perhaps the boroughs of ... a) n. vancouver b) vancouver c) s. vancouver

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by jsbertram

it could be simplified by merging

a) "north shore city + districts"

b) "north of fraser cities + towns"

c) "south of the fraser cities + towns"

as 3 boroughs of "metro vancouver"

names of these boroughs to be determined later

perhaps the boroughs of ... a) n. vancouver b) vancouver c) s. vancouver

I certainly agree with you that, as it is, Metro Vancouver is too "chopped up" into often-competing cities and municipalities. And overall, yes,
I think that merging most of it into metropolitan boroughs, the way Metro Toronto was, would probably get things done faster.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

I think that merging most of it into metropolitan boroughs, the way Metro Toronto was, would probably get things done faster.

Rob Ford is a the perfect object lesson in why amalgamation is a horrible idea for the City of Vancouver.

[Jebby]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Rob Ford is a the perfect object lesson in why amalgamation is a horrible idea for the City of Vancouver.

Despite his personal issues, he was a very good mayor.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

Rob Ford is a the perfect object lesson in why amalgamation is a horrible idea for the City of Vancouver.

The GVRD's current "hungry hungry hippos" model isn't exactly working either.

Understand that most posters here are advocating for less mayors, not one mayor like Toronto. I highly doubt that an amalgamated Vancouver/Burnaby/Tri-Cities borough could or would elect a right-wing NIMBY.

[Bdawe]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

The GVRD's current "hungry hungry hippos" model isn't exactly working either.

Understand that most posters here are advocating for less mayors, not one mayor like Toronto. I highly doubt that an amalgamated Vancouver/Burnaby/Tri-Cities borough could or would elect a right-wing NIMBY.

But "Fewer Mayors" is what they did in Toronto - they annexed the inner-ring suburbs to the city. The outer suburbs remain as independent municipalities

[Hot Rod]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

The GVRD's current "hungry hungry hippos" model isn't exactly working either.

Understand that most posters here are advocating for less mayors, not one mayor like Toronto. I highly doubt that an amalgamated Vancouver/Burnaby/Tri-Cities borough could or would elect a right-wing NIMBY.

and what would the name of this combined city be?

[trofirhen]

Originally Posted by Hot Rod

and what would the name of this combined city be?

I think Vancouver would remain the best option.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by trofirhen

I think Vancouver would remain the best option.

Doubt that Burnaby, Coquitlam or the others would take kindly to being annexed. If anybody's got a better name than "Central" or "North Fraser" though, I'm all ears.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Bdawe

But "Fewer Mayors" is what they did in Toronto - they annexed the inner-ring suburbs to the city. The outer suburbs remain as independent municipalities

Fair enough. Though again, unlike Scarborough/Etibikoke/York, the NoF suburbs' politics roughly match the city's (albeit with left-wing NIMBYs instead of right-wing ones).