kettal
Banned
Am I right or what?
|
|
|
Transit City: Sheppard East Debate
- Thread starter unimaginative2
- Start date
Am I right or what?
T
Tdot_one
Guest
To be honest I didn't see much positives with amalgamation. If a borough-esque setup as we see in NYC was setup, we'd see a more interesting developing especially in boroughs such as Etobicoke and Scarborough. Mississauga would've benefited a lot more (forming the Western-most borough) rather than being part of a centralized city.
Dan416
Senior Member
The point was that Mississauga wouldn't have its own mayor if the GTA were amalgamated into a single municipal unit, as was recommended back in the Harris days. Harris only did a half-assed job and amalgamated only the cities within Toronto, whereas Peel, York, Durham and Halton were all supposed to join Toronto.
kettal
Banned
Are you sure about that? I thought the plan was for a Peel Megacity and a York Megacity. But was cancelled when it was shown amalgamation didn't actually produce efficiency.
Let's just be happy it didn't happen
Let's just be happy it didn't happen
Last edited:
LAz
Active Member
Suburbanization is a disease. We must not support it at all costs, else we will pay the price three-fold in the far future.
Tuscani01
Senior Member
Actually, there was no plan for Peel, York, Durham or Halton. The Province stopped amalgamations before plans for these regions were created. They would have most likely ended up as mega-cities (seperate from Toronto) had the amalgamations moved forward. (ie. City of Brampton-Mississauga, City of Vaughan-Richmond Hill)
Dan416
Senior Member
Are you sure about that? I thought the plan was for a Peel Megacity and a York Megacity. But was cancelled when it was shown amalgamation didn't actually produce efficiency.
Let's just be happy it didn't happen
No, and no.
There were no plans for "Peel" or "York" megacities. What was recommended (not "planned") was for amalgamation of Toronto, Peel, York, Durham and Halton into ONE city of Toronto. Instead of a dozen mayors, one mayor. I couldn't tell you where I read it exactly, but it was either in the Toronto Star or the Mississauga News, it was in 1999 or prior, and it was the recommendation of Anne Golden, and it was the Golden Report. It's the report that led to the amalgamation of Metropolitan Toronto with the cities of Toronto, York, Etobicoke, North York, Scarborough and the borough of East York. That was only the first step. The rest of it was never implemented, but I always though it was a good idea.
Last edited:
Fresh Start
Banned
Why on earth would Mississauga want to give up its sovereignty, identity and status as the 7th largest city in the country? And if anything it should really just merge with Brampton and Oakville given how interconnected those cities are. Heck, throw in Bolton and Georgetown too for good measure. That'd make the resulting Mega-city 4th largest in Canada.
Tuscani01
Senior Member
Exactly... It was nothing but a recommendation, which the Province chose not to follow. What the Province did do was start its own process of amalgamating cities and towns. If you look at the pattern of amalgamations that did occur, I think its safe to suggest that Mississauga may have been amalgamated with Brampton.
Harris had a plan for amalgamations that would take place across the Province. Some of them happened, most of them didn't. The GTA is one area which had no been accounted for in this plan and would have been dealt with later.
Last edited:
Dan416
Senior Member
Did I ever claim Mississauga wanted to give up its "sovereignty"? And I have to laugh at the use of that word. We're talking about municipalities.
When you think about it, Mississauga and Brampton should be merged. Hell, so should Oakville. Why not just throw in Toronto as well?
I'm from Mississauga and I think it's a good idea. Why shouldn't Toronto annex Mississauga? Why shouldn't the GTA and the City of Toronto be synonymous? Would Mississaugans really care if their city ceased to exist? Mississaugans would still exist just as we still have people who live in Etobicoke, Scarborough or North York, even though those cities have been gone for over a decade!
Second_in_pie
Senior Member
I think at a municipal level, there's actually a good reason for the municipalities to be separate. I even think that the Toronto municipalities should separate again, and then all be united under a GGH mini-government.
Also, one thing I think if the entire GTA was Toronto is a loss of sustainability. If York, Durham, Peel and Halton were all part of Toronto, what's keeping Toronto from just focusing on more suburbs rather than intensifying as it needs to now?
kEiThZ
Superstar
Let's try and stay on topic. We don't want threads getting locked left, right and centre.
Rainforest
Senior Member
Ironically, if Scarborough did not join, it would have a better shot at getting subway(s) now.
kettal
Banned
Harris should have amalgamated regions instead. Like keep the lower-tier municipalities as they are, but join Peel, York, West Durham, and Metro into the Toronto Regional Municipality.
Fresh Start
Banned
If you want Mississauga to inherit the same incompetent City Hall cronies and scoundrels responsible for wide-sweeping labour strikes and the Summer of Garbage, be my guest.
As much as people like to put down Hazel at times, she's one effectual mayor and I'm certain that most Mississaugans are satisfied with how their city is being run; a sentiment that I long for here. But as far as amalgamation goes it is far more likely that Vaughan, Richmond Hill, Markham, Pickering and Ajax will join Toronto as one mega-regional entity; distinct but by no means cut off from dealings and various forms of intergration with a Oakville-Mississauga-Brampton triumvirate. Burlington naturally would merge with Hamilton-Stoney Creek-Dundas-Ancaster and Guelph-Cambridge-Kitchener-Waterloo would comprise another mega-regional entity.