Why Isn't Vancouver (CN) a Megacity?

[SFBruin]

I was looking at the geography of Vancouver (CN), and it reminded me of that of Los Angeles.

Only, Vancouver gets substantially more rainfall, but is colder in the winter, though not as much so as many places with large populations, such as New York or Beijing.

I was wondering, what has held Vancouver back from being a megacity? It seems to have a nice setting, and other places on the West Coast of NA have developed large populations, if only one other place technically qualifies as a megacity.

[Nite]

It's far from Central Canada and doesn't have a strong pull factor for people in the Windsor-Quebec City corridor where all the economic, cultural and political power is.
Now is Vancouver was transported to Central Canada then it would be much larger in my opinion. The economies of Ontario and Quebec are highly diversified and are always hungry for more workers /immigrants, BC is less so.

The only negative factor for central Canada has is housing cost on the Ontario side but that wouldn't be improved by moving to Vancouver and Ontarians are more likely to move to the east coast than the west coast.

[SFBruin]

Originally Posted by Nite

It's far from Central Canada and doesn't have a strong pull factor for people in the Windsor-Quebec City corridor where all the economic, cultural and political power is.

Ah, makes sense.

[MonkeyRonin]

Because it's the third-largest city in Canada, and there are no megacities in Canada to begin with.

It's not competing for people with Los Angeles or San Francisco, it's competing with other Canadian cities. It's also quite a bit more land-constrained than any other west coast city, so even if there were a larger pool to draw from it'd eventually run into barriers for easy, low-cost growth (which it already has at 3 million people).

[TWAK]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

Because it's the third-largest city in Canada, and there are no megacities in Canada to begin with.

It's not competing for people with Los Angeles or San Francisco, it's competing with other Canadian cities. It's also quite a bit more land-constrained than any other west coast city, so even if there were a larger pool to draw from it'd eventually run into barriers for easy, low-cost growth (which it already has at 3 million people).

Toronto doesn't count?
Ah the 10 million mark...well some places should get a waiver!

[Gantz]

Originally Posted by TWAK

Toronto doesn't count?

No, it is small.

[TWAK]

Originally Posted by Gantz

No, it is small.

I checked Wikipedia and the Golden Horseshoe Region has 9.7 million, which is still under 10 million, but close enough for a waiver I'd think.
Is that good enough or does the GHR not count for a Megacity?

[Steely Dan]

^ the greater golden horseshoe is a region, not a city.

North America only has 3 megacities:

Mexico City
NYC
LA

[mrnyc]

also, its just fine as it is. afaik there is no one or no pressure pushing mega growth. outside of perhaps chinese overseas investment, which needs to be closely monitored.

[RC14]

I guess, just summarizing what others have said, Canada has a small population as it is and Vancouver is far from where the majority of Canada's population lives. If I remember right, 80ish% of Canada's population lives around the Great Lakes region.

Vancouver would be larger if it had a larger pool of people to draw from.

[Nite]

Originally Posted by RC14

I guess, just summarizing what others have said, Canada has a small population as it is and Vancouver is far from where the majority of Canada's population lives. If I remember right, 80ish% of Canada's population lives around the Great Lakes region.

Vancouver would be larger if it had a larger pool of people to draw from.

If 80% of Canadian (32 million) lived around the great lakes (Southern Ontario), Toronto would be by far the largest city in the Americas

[vanman]

Originally Posted by RC14

I guess, just summarizing what others have said, Canada has a small population as it is and Vancouver is far from where the majority of Canada's population lives. If I remember right, 80ish% of Canada's population lives around the Great Lakes region.

Vancouver would be larger if it had a larger pool of people to draw from.

80ish% of Canadians live near the US border not the Great Lakes.

[RC14]

Originally Posted by vanman

80ish% of Canadians live near the US border not the Great Lakes.

That's what it I was thinking of. My mistake.

[pj3000]

Beacuse that mofo is way up there!

[SnowFire]

What is its industry? Being an offshore money hole for children of autocrats isnt really a good one.

[lrt's friend]

Vancouver is highly geographically constrained, and already has very high housing costs. It is in a country with a much smaller population, so does not have the draw that western US cities have.

It does have a very good climate by Canadian standards, but the high cost of housing is a big deterrent from moving there for most Canadians. At least in Toronto, you can live in more distant suburbs.

Its housing costs have been inflated by Asian foreign nationals buying up property, condos and houses. They are competing with potential permanent residents.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by SFBruin

I was wondering, what has held Vancouver back from being a megacity?

Being located in Canada?

[pj3000]

How closely are Seattle and Vancouver connected to each other?

I know they're not contiguous or anything, but is there a relatively strong sense of cross-border connection?

The two areas growing together is the only chance for a "mega city" in those parts.

[homebucket]

Originally Posted by pj3000

How closely are Seattle and Vancouver connected to each other?

I know they're not contiguous or anything, but is there a relatively strong sense of cross-border connection?

The two areas growing together is the only chance for a "mega city" in those parts.

Very little. They’re too far apart and too much wilderness. It’s not like SD and TJ.

[iheartthed]

Originally Posted by pj3000

How closely are Seattle and Vancouver connected to each other?

I know they're not contiguous or anything, but is there a relatively strong sense of cross-border connection?

The two areas growing together is the only chance for a "mega city" in those parts.

I think you're thinking megalopolis here? Mega-city is a singular metro with +10M. Los Angeles is the only metro meeting that criteria west of the Rockies, and the only other metro out there that is remotely close to meeting that is the SF Bay Area.