Search results

The growth actually is still increasing: 2022 growth: 132K July 1st 2022 - July 1st 2023 growth: 184K Oct 1st 2022 - Current real time population clock estimate: 242K Now there could be some wonkiness with the real time population clock estimate but I still would guess the growth from Oct...

The growth from Q3 2022 - Q3 2023 is 184,399.using Stats Canada population estimates.

The gap in population between Montreal and Vancouver CMA's is actually slightly more than the gap between Calgary and Vancouver CMA's in absolute numbers. The problem for Vancouver is land. For it to keep growing without prices suppressing growth it has to get really dense...and that requires...

All I'm saying is I think there is potential there. Particularly if Canada's immigration rate stays high and people get squeezed out of other areas because of the cost of living. At the very least I would not be surprised if Lethbridge gets on a solid roll...especially if it reaches a critical...

My prediction was more....lots of people within Canada are looking for affordable places to live and the overlap between affordable places and decent climates in Canada now is pretty narrow. Southern Alberta is sort of overlooked in that sense. It's possible that Medicine Hat doesn't grow much...

I actually wouldn't be surprised if a place like Medicine Hat became more popular in the future. It's climate is arguably the best in the Praries and somewhat underrated within Canada.

Like I was saying... Canada’s largest port is struggling to acquire the land it needs to support trade, a growing population and economic activity. https://biv.com/article/2023/08/goods-businesses-will-move-elsewhere-if-industrial-land-issue-left-unaddressed

The immigration targets are 465K for this year, 485K for 2024 and 500K for 2025....and that number doesn't include Quebec. So I don't see Canada going down to 250K quota anytime soon. I guess the Conservatives could suggest lowering it and get elected but that presumably wouldn't be until 2025...

I think it's something 4.6-4.7% growth rate... I don't know if it will continue like this but on some level it will have to if Canada's immigration rate is high. Housing prices will in Ontario and BC will continue to squeeze people out of there. So Alberta will have high interprovincial...

Don't think people really realize the rate that Alberta is currently growing at: ~500K every 2.5 years....

Right but the increase in density is too marginal relative to the land costs. Some of this infill is just matching/slightly exceeding the density of what you get in a new suburb on the outer edges. It doesn't make sense really. It needs to be multi-storey.

My opinion: detached narrow housing/multiplex infill for inner city areas is kind of a failure. The density increase is too marginal. The prices kind of speak to that.

Unfortunately it's the reality of North American pro sports at the end of the day. The league is a monopoly...so they have leverage over the cities they operate in.

Once you look at BC in terms of it's topography and climatology (which are the same thing in many cases) maps you realize it doesn't have a lot of developable land in the areas that are most desirable. It's a series of valleys that all put together probably would be larger than PEI but not much...

Planning rules should be proactive not reactive...in fact it should just be more liberalized to begin with. Cities are so reactionary in terms of housing and transit. Canada is a growing country...why do you need to wait until infrastructure and housing demand is overwhelmed before doing...

I'm always skeptical when things are framed as a zero-sum binary choice instead of an all-of-the-above choice. It's not pragmatic and assumes there needs to be a loser somewhere n order to make "progress". In this case of prohibiting greenfield development the loss would be maintaining a...

First, the GTA greenbelt is a bit of a joke. It expanded significantly beyond the "special ecosystems" it's supposedly meant to protect. Not to mention Hamilton is literally already built on the Niagara Escarpment. Second, how does it prove the opposite of my point? They capped the urban...

If the rules haven't changed up to this point...why would one have any have any faith that the rules will magically change after greenfield development is restricted? In fact there are many examples of cities/municipalities in Canada where the urban boundary gets capped and then the adequate...

I guess the people who would potentially live in one of the new edge communities could go live in the Stephen Avenue project....oh wait that's also "bad". Precisely why Calgary shouldn't fall into this trap of restricting greenfield development. It just gives even more say to incumbent...

Restricting greenfield development is an incredibly bad idea. 1. Ample greenfield development is why Calgary is cheaper than Toronto and Vancouver. 2. Upzoning/density is NOT contingent on banning greenfield development. It's a false dilemma. 3. New greenfield developments today are not like...