Calgary 2019 Civic Census

[Surrealplaces]

Agreed. I think Glo was turned down because of some height and setback issues, but either way it's a fail on the part of the city. If height's a problem the city needs to increase the heights so that the SDAB who makes decisions based on rules doesn't overturn these projects. I'm not talking allowing 15 storey towers in the middle of Sunnyside, but really, 5 floors is very reasonable for something on 2nd ave. I think they could even go 6 floors, and 10-12 on 10th street or Kensington Road.

Places like 20th ave or 4th street NW, etc.. could easily see an increase in zoning. Right now developers are building duplexes on 20th ave....what a waste.

Glo is the perfect example of what's not working. One block from the train in the heart of what should be a bustling innercity neighbourhood. Not a great project however it fit the zoning requirements and would have added 100 new residents. I used to live across the street and honestly it makes no sense there are single family homes that close to the train.

 

[AccUnit]

Yeah it's ridiculous, and not to throw shade on anyone but those communities will be garbage. Even in award winning Mahogany you can't even walk to the store and get a gallon of milk or visit a doctor without crossing a 6 lane road. Seton "downtown south," pure garbage, seton bouleward is basically a major highway, how can anyone living in Auburn Bay actually walk to any of the services located there. I'm ranting but it frustrates me so much that our city just builds garbage on top of garbage in the suburbs without a second thought yet it takes years just to rezone from single family to 4 floor walkups next train stations.

 

[Rollerstud98]

Yeah it's ridiculous, and not to throw shade on anyone but those communities will be garbage. Even in award winning Mahogany you can't even walk to the store and get a gallon of milk or visit a doctor without crossing a 6 lane road. Seton "downtown south," pure garbage, seton bouleward is basically a major highway, how can anyone living in Auburn Bay actually walk to any of the services located there. I'm ranting but it frustrates me so much that our city just builds garbage on top of garbage in the suburbs without a second thought yet it takes years just to rezone from single family to 4 floor walkups next train stations.

I’m just going to nitpick on Mahogony here, there’s a Sobeys located in the shopping plaza there so absolutely no need to cross a 6 lane road to get milk, doctors I’m not as sure though. Most people living in that neighbourhood drive for groceries anyways though. But they do have a hospital within 5 minute drive so they do have that advantage.

 

[Just build it]

The increase was around what I was expecting. I would like to see it a bit higher, say 22-25K per year, but 18K is quite manageable. Disappointing to see that so much of the growth is in the outer fringes, but most of that is to be expected. I don't think the goal of 50% growth in established areas is realistic. It would be nice, but it's not realistic. Even if the city got super aggressive with zoning increases, SFH's in suburban areas will still be a popular choice for families. Personally I think 36% of new units being in established areas or centre city is not terrible. That said, the city could really up their zoning game, even if only to close the gap.

New housing units built 2019
Established areas 663
Centre city 1,165
Actively developing communities 4,974

 

[CBBarnett]

Here are some of the inner city results. Generally good, DT neighborhoods did surprisingly well. One would think EV was the reason for the large increase, but DT commercial Core, Chinatown, Eau Claire and EV all had fairly similar increases. Looks like unit decreases had an effect on pop decreases in mission, Kensington, and Inglewood. I suspect those two areas will see increases next census, as new units will be coming online.

Beltline
+242
Bridgeland
+314
Mission/Cliff bungalow (- 80 housing units)
-33
Hillhurst/sunnyside (-5 housing units)
-38
Downtown/Chinatown/East Village/Eau Claire/West End
+1257
Inglewood/Ramsay (-58 housing units)
-45

I expect to see Beltline and Downtown communities to keep putting up good numbers given all the development in there - perhaps not top 5 numbers, but those thousands of units keeps lots in the pipeline. I would be concerned about Mission/CB and Hillhurst/Sunnyside's relevance in supporting population growth though.

Both neighbourhoods are increasingly "built-out" - not actually of course - but aren't attracting the kind of volume of new development to keep up with the City Centre average, let alone the City a whole. They aren't as hot as they once were in the late 1990s and 2000s combined with limited unit growth potential without substantial upzoning which is proving difficult. I think the supply fundamentals favour Downtown/Chinatown/East Village/Eau Claire/West End, Beltline and Bridgeland for the majority of the inner city's growth for the foreseeable future.

20 Year Pop Growth (1999 to 2019), Absolute and %
Beltline
+7154 , +39.8%
Bridgeland
+2217, +48%
Mission/Cliff bungalow (- 80 housing units)
+896, +16%
Hillhurst/sunnyside (-5 housing units)
+2011, +24.2%
Downtown/Chinatown/East Village/Eau Claire/West End
+9324, +88%
Inglewood/Ramsay (-58 housing units)
+1203, +24%

Total 20 Year Pop Growth, absolute and %
+20588, 43%

 

[UrbanWarrior]

The six downtown neighbourhoods (Beltline, CBD, Eau Claire, Chinatown, East Village, West End) now have a combined population of 44 991 in an area of 4 km2! That gives us a core density of 11 248/km2! Only a couple more years and we'll be at 50 000! Hell yes. ?

 

[AccUnit]

I’m just going to nitpick on Mahogony here, there’s a Sobeys located in the shopping plaza there so absolutely no need to cross a 6 lane road to get milk, doctors I’m not as sure though. Most people living in that neighbourhood drive for groceries anyways though. But they do have a hospital within 5 minute drive so they do have that advantage.

That's partially true, and admittedly I am grumpy with how the census results turned out however the shopping in Mahogany has 52nd St. E on the west side and Mahogany Gate SE on the North side both of those are 6 lane roads.

 

[gsunnyg]

Examining the census in detail we can also see that the prime age group of 20-34 is decreasing, with that we can draw a strong correlation between weakening inner city growth and declining young adults that prefer denser/inner city living. Personally now seeing the census in further detail coupled with the gloomy media coverage, Im finding this years census rather very disappointing. This should be a wake up call for the City, yes our economy isn't great but there are areas where we can prioritize things like inner city investment over approving more suburban communities. Whats the point of the City having a census every year if your not going to react to the results accordingly as is intended. The glut of unoccupied homes and continuous sprawl should be an instant no brainer to reverse the 14 new communities approved or at least substantially reduce them.

On the other hand, news like this brightens up my day!
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/calgary-livable-cities-index-1.5269432
5th most livable city!

 

[Surrealplaces]

Very true. Both those neighborhoods are very desirable in general, but growth will be hampered by cost of development. You look at the cost of land and building in those neighborhoods and 4 floors isn't appealing to developers. I think the neighborhoods you mentioned like DT, EV, and Bridgeland will keep growing, as well as some new areas, like Hillhurst near 19th street, 24th ave NW, Edmonton Trail, 17th ave near 37th street, Killarney, etc.. places that are inner city with grid streets, but a little ways out.

I expect to see Beltline and Downtown communities to keep putting up good numbers given all the development in there - perhaps not top 5 numbers, but those thousands of units keeps lots in the pipeline. I would be concerned about Mission/CB and Hillhurst/Sunnyside's relevance in supporting population growth though.

Both neighbourhoods are increasingly "built-out" - not actually of course - but aren't attracting the kind of volume of new development to keep up with the City Centre average, let alone the City a whole. They aren't as hot as they once were in the late 1990s and 2000s combined with limited unit growth potential without substantial upzoning which is proving difficult. I think the supply fundamentals favour Downtown/Chinatown/East Village/Eau Claire/West End, Beltline and Bridgeland for the majority of the inner city's growth for the foreseeable future.

20 Year Pop Growth (1999 to 2019), Absolute and %
Beltline
+7154 , +39.8%
Bridgeland
+2217, +48%
Mission/Cliff bungalow (- 80 housing units)
+896, +16%
Hillhurst/sunnyside (-5 housing units)
+2011, +24.2%
Downtown/Chinatown/East Village/Eau Claire/West End
+9324, +88%
Inglewood/Ramsay (-58 housing units)
+1203, +24%

Total 20 Year Pop Growth, absolute and %
+20588, 43%

 

[Cowtown]

I think it's okay if Kensington and Mission are slow growing. They are already built out nicely, and are model inner city neighborhoods. They'll add a bit of growth here and there over time. Beltline, Sunalta, Inglewood, Bridgeland have room for more growth. Also neighborhoods like Renfrew, Capitol Hill and Kilarney have plenty of potential for growth, they only need some zoning increases.

Very true. Both those neighborhoods are very desirable in general, but growth will be hampered by cost of development. You look at the cost of land and building in those neighborhoods and 4 floors isn't appealing to developers. I think the neighborhoods you mentioned like DT, EV, and Bridgeland will keep growing, as well as some new areas, like Hillhurst near 19th street, 24th ave NW, Edmonton Trail, 17th ave near 37th street, Killarney, etc.. places that are inner city with grid streets, but a little ways out.

 

[AccUnit]

I agree that some innercity communities growth rates can will slow down however there are a ton of peripheral communities and places close to the train where growth is essentially non existent. Specifically i'm thinking of neighourhoods like: kingsland, windsor park, glendale, glenbrook, rutland park, rosscarrock, westgate, brentwood, charleswood, varsity, vista heights, haysboro, university heights, banff trail, dalhousie, highwood, highland park, and collingwood. These communities that may have some infill activity however they are either stagnant or slowly descreasing. These areas are where I would dedicate more attention in getting infills, towhomes and TOD's going.

 

[Surrealplaces]

Yep, couldn't agree more. It's great that there are some highrises going up, near LRT stations, but it would be nice if there were zoning changes to also allow low and mid-rise buildings near those train stations. Outside of the TOD catchment is fine, just as long as they are walkable to the station.

I agree that some innercity communities growth rates can will slow down however there are a ton of peripheral communities and places close to the train where growth is essentially non existent. Specifically i'm thinking of neighourhoods like: kingsland, windsor park, glendale, glenbrook, rutland park, rosscarrock, westgate, brentwood, charleswood, varsity, vista heights, haysboro, university heights, banff trail, dalhousie, highwood, highland park, and collingwood. These communities that may have some infill activity however they are either stagnant or slowly descreasing. These areas are where I would dedicate more attention in getting infills, towhomes and TOD's going.

 

[Atticus]

The reason for the approvals was the city not getting off their butts and coming up with a plan to generate more inner city development. I know they have the main streets initiative and they've done some increased zoning, and there's been lots of talk, but they haven't really gotten serious about it. My sister and brother in law just bought a place out in the burbs, even though they prefer the inner city. Having two kids, it was just easier to buy where they did. If they could get the same sized place somewhere inner city for around or even close to the same price, they'd move in a heartbeat.

I still haven't seen any justification of approving the 11 new communities. Does anyone know what led to that decision (other than the power and influence of the development industry over a majority of council)? Every article I've read that quotes councilors is just filled with platitudes about "getting development right" without actually saying why we are still approving more sprawl.

 

[CBBarnett]

I agree that some innercity communities growth rates can will slow down however there are a ton of peripheral communities and places close to the train where growth is essentially non existent. Specifically i'm thinking of neighourhoods like: kingsland, windsor park, glendale, glenbrook, rutland park, rosscarrock, westgate, brentwood, charleswood, varsity, vista heights, haysboro, university heights, banff trail, dalhousie, highwood, highland park, and collingwood. These communities that may have some infill activity however they are either stagnant or slowly descreasing. These areas are where I would dedicate more attention in getting infills, towhomes and TOD's going.

Here is some data that supports what you are saying. The city grew by 53% in that same period. Notably on this list (and compared to the city centre hoods I last one I posted), Windsor Park, Haysboro, Brentwood all grew by about the same amount as Mission/CB did, at a higher rate of growth. Windsor Park grew about as fast as Sunnyside/Hillhurst over the period.

20 Year Pop Change 1999 - 2019, (Number, Percent Change)
kingsland (+327, 7%)
windsor park (+870, 23%)
glendale (-97, -3%)
glenbrook (+393, 6%)
rutland park (-117,-5%)
rosscarrock (+263, 8%)
westgate (-220, -6%)
brentwood (+815, 13%)
charleswood /collingwood (-208, -3%)
varsity (+326, 3%)
vista heights (-17, -1%)
haysboro (+995, 16%)
university heights (+71, 2%)
banff trail (+699, 20%)
dalhousie (-424, -5%)
highwood (+117, 5%)
highland park (+89, 2%)

 

[Silence&Motion]

Examining the census in detail we can also see that the prime age group of 20-34 is decreasing, with that we can draw a strong correlation between weakening inner city growth and declining young adults that prefer denser/inner city living. Personally now seeing the census in further detail coupled with the gloomy media coverage, Im finding this years census rather very disappointing. This should be a wake up call for the City, yes our economy isn't great but there are areas where we can prioritize things like inner city investment over approving more suburban communities. Whats the point of the City having a census every year if your not going to react to the results accordingly as is intended. The glut of unoccupied homes and continuous sprawl should be an instant no brainer to reverse the 14 new communities approved or at least substantially reduce them.

It is very disappointing to see young adults decreasing. I think it does make a difference that Alberta (and Calgary in particular) is perceived as being politically backwards. Many young adults I talk to in other parts of the country wouldn't give Calgary a second thought because they see the city as synonymous with climate change denial and repealing gay rights. Not a fair assessment, but it's a problem we have to confront. Our terrible reputation is not helped when Calgary makes national news because the Downtown BIA approved the installation of a Billy Graham "crisis centre" on Stephen Avenue during Pride Week. Also, when some yahoo starts yelling at Jagmeet Singh's brother about "creeping sharia law", guess where he's from: Calgary.