Always_Biking
Senior Member
No breakdown yet. I went to check right away and see what the Beltline looked like.
|
|
|
Urban Development and Proposals Discussion
- Thread starter Surrealplaces
- Start date
UrbanWarrior
Senior Member
This is great. Last year, the metro grew by about 11 000 total. With this new data on the City of Calgary, our metro is up around 16,100 this year, and extrapolating conservatively for Rocky View County and Irricana (which aren't doing censuses this year) combined, we can safely say that the metro has grown by about 17,000 total over the past year. This is in line with the average rate of growth for the Ottawa-Gatineau CMA over the past 5-6 years. That is pretty remarkable, considering we're in the midst of one of the worst recessions of our provincial history.
A breakdown...
Calgary - 11,166
Airdrie - 3,080
Cochrane - 1,198
Chestermere - 616
Crossfield - 72
Census Total - 16,132
Extrapolation for RVC and Irricana ~ 868
CMA total ~ 17,000
Further, extrapolating for Foothills MD and its constituent municipalities, none of which conducted censuses this year, we're probably looking at a total of about 20 000 for Greater Calgary.
Also of note, as of the 2016 federal census, Alberta Census Division 6 (Calgary) is now at a population of over 1,498,000, up 14.3% from the 2011 federal census. This is the largest numerical increase of any CD in the province (187,000), and also the highest rate of increase. At 12,646 KM2, CD6 now has a population density of 118.5/km2, this is the only CD in Alberta with a density above 100/km2. It includes: City of Calgary, Rocky View County, Mountainview County, and Foothills MD.
The Calgary CMA, as of the 2016 federal census, was at 1,392,609. At 5,107.55 km2, our population density was 272.7/km2 in 2016, on course to be over 300/km2 by census 2021.
Adding in the ~20,000 growth of Greater Calgary since the 2016 federal census, while subtracting the 35,000 of Mountainview County, gives us a population for Greater Calgary of 1,483,000. This indicates that we'll be surpassing the 1.5 million mark easily within the next two years, if not by next year. At 8,298.69 km2, Greater Calgary now has a population density of 179/km2. For comparison purposes, this is significantly higher than the Edmonton CMA at 1,321,000 and 9,438.86 km2 with a density of 140/km2.
Projecting conservatively, down to 10% from our recent 14.3% over the past 5 years, and the 12.9% we grew from 2006 to 2011, assuming we hover around 10% until 2031, we will come in at about 2,015,000 by census 2031, not bad for 15 years.
Keep in mind as well that the federal census does have a substantial undercount for high-growth regions. As the Calgary Region has the highest growth rate in the country, it is likely that in reality we are already over 1.5 million. It is pretty much a certainty that the CMA is actually over 1.4 million. I believe the Census Bureau will be releasing an adjusted census sheet (to make up for the undercount) in the next year or so, so that should make things more clear.
#EndNerdout
A breakdown...
Calgary - 11,166
Airdrie - 3,080
Cochrane - 1,198
Chestermere - 616
Crossfield - 72
Census Total - 16,132
Extrapolation for RVC and Irricana ~ 868
CMA total ~ 17,000
Further, extrapolating for Foothills MD and its constituent municipalities, none of which conducted censuses this year, we're probably looking at a total of about 20 000 for Greater Calgary.
Also of note, as of the 2016 federal census, Alberta Census Division 6 (Calgary) is now at a population of over 1,498,000, up 14.3% from the 2011 federal census. This is the largest numerical increase of any CD in the province (187,000), and also the highest rate of increase. At 12,646 KM2, CD6 now has a population density of 118.5/km2, this is the only CD in Alberta with a density above 100/km2. It includes: City of Calgary, Rocky View County, Mountainview County, and Foothills MD.
The Calgary CMA, as of the 2016 federal census, was at 1,392,609. At 5,107.55 km2, our population density was 272.7/km2 in 2016, on course to be over 300/km2 by census 2021.
Adding in the ~20,000 growth of Greater Calgary since the 2016 federal census, while subtracting the 35,000 of Mountainview County, gives us a population for Greater Calgary of 1,483,000. This indicates that we'll be surpassing the 1.5 million mark easily within the next two years, if not by next year. At 8,298.69 km2, Greater Calgary now has a population density of 179/km2. For comparison purposes, this is significantly higher than the Edmonton CMA at 1,321,000 and 9,438.86 km2 with a density of 140/km2.
Projecting conservatively, down to 10% from our recent 14.3% over the past 5 years, and the 12.9% we grew from 2006 to 2011, assuming we hover around 10% until 2031, we will come in at about 2,015,000 by census 2031, not bad for 15 years.
Keep in mind as well that the federal census does have a substantial undercount for high-growth regions. As the Calgary Region has the highest growth rate in the country, it is likely that in reality we are already over 1.5 million. It is pretty much a certainty that the CMA is actually over 1.4 million. I believe the Census Bureau will be releasing an adjusted census sheet (to make up for the undercount) in the next year or so, so that should make things more clear.
#EndNerdout
Last edited:
Always_Biking
Senior Member
And for me one of the bright spots for me is the turnaround in net-migration, going from a fairly large negative number to a positive number. I'm happy to see the the direction it's trending, maybe next year the net migration will be even higher.
UrbanWarrior
Senior Member
We're on the right path, considering we had a negative net-migration of over 6500 last year, with a positive net-migration of 1000 this year. You can't really ask for a better bounce! 
CBBarnett
Senior Member
Beltline showed the bump that was expected with the new buildings opening:
2016: 21,958
2017: 23,219
Change: 1,261 (5.7%)
Edit: looking closer at the other very inner city districts there was general fluctuation but with a slight overall gain (+900, including the 1,261 from the Beltline). But most neighbourhoods were +/- 100-200 people so no real big drops or gains. With the high rental vacancy rate concentrated in the core, I would suspect wider growth/loss depending on the economy and over all growth if it increases/decreases more rapidly. Currently 7,200 unoccupied dwellings in inner city (not sure if their methodology includes under-construction or not).
2016: 21,958
2017: 23,219
Change: 1,261 (5.7%)
Edit: looking closer at the other very inner city districts there was general fluctuation but with a slight overall gain (+900, including the 1,261 from the Beltline). But most neighbourhoods were +/- 100-200 people so no real big drops or gains. With the high rental vacancy rate concentrated in the core, I would suspect wider growth/loss depending on the economy and over all growth if it increases/decreases more rapidly. Currently 7,200 unoccupied dwellings in inner city (not sure if their methodology includes under-construction or not).
Last edited:
UrbanWarrior
Senior Member
I said it would be over a thousand! Yayyy That's even beyond my wildest expectation though, almost 1300? Crazy!
That would make Beltline the 2nd or 3rd largest neighbourhood in the province. At 1.8 km2 (Stampede + Beltline = 2.2 km2 but obviously one should subtract the .4 km2 Stampede as it is undevelopable for residential indefinitely), this puts the density at 12,900/km2 and is now the most densely populated neighbourhood in the prairies! Ahead of Oliver in Edmonton and Osborne Village in Winnipeg! Pretty wild. Even including the Stampede, at 2.2 km2 the density of Beltline is 10,554/km2.
That's even beyond my wildest expectation though, almost 1300? Crazy!That would make Beltline the 2nd or 3rd largest neighbourhood in the province. At 1.8 km2 (Stampede + Beltline = 2.2 km2 but obviously one should subtract the .4 km2 Stampede as it is undevelopable for residential indefinitely), this puts the density at 12,900/km2 and is now the most densely populated neighbourhood in the prairies! Ahead of Oliver in Edmonton and Osborne Village in Winnipeg! Pretty wild. Even including the Stampede, at 2.2 km2 the density of Beltline is 10,554/km2.
Last edited:
Always_Biking
Senior Member
I just came here to post the Beltline results, but it seems others have beat me to it! wow, 23K and closing in on Panorama Hills, which only grew by a couple of hundred.
UrbanWarrior
Senior Member
Is it larger than Evergreen yet?
Just build it
Active Member
Beltline is second in population.
Way to go Beltline, 1291 new people is better than I expected.
Way to go Beltline, 1291 new people is better than I expected.
UrbanWarrior
Senior Member
Updated a few stats in the population analysis I posted above.
CBBarnett
Senior Member
The net migration numbers are a good story for sure. It's funny how people interpret demographics comparing Calgary (and Edmonton) to elsewhere. Ottawa for example, is a slow-growth but always positively growing city. It's CMA grew by ~75,000 people (5.5%) between 2011 and 2016, or around ~15,000 a year. Perhaps not the exciting like the 30-50,000 a year Calgary has gotten used to, a growth of 11,000 would be completely normal for that city. A growth rate of ~5% over a census period is similar to other major cities like Toronto (6.2%), Montreal (4.5%), and Vancouver (6.5%). Calgary is "normal" last year compared to other Canadian cities, but given what we are used to many reframe a slow-growth story as one far more negative and disastrous than it actually is. If we repeat 10 - 15,000 a year for the CMA until the next census we are right in the middle of the pack of our competitor cities.
Migration is another interesting story. Montreal and Toronto have lost people by the thousands to interprovincial migration for nearly every year for decades, yet neither city is accurately characterized as a city in decline. Far from it, they are both increasingly diverse, dynamic and vibrant places. It turns out, you don't need rapid growth, nor do you need wild migration swings to be a decent city to live in. You don't even need rapid job creation and enormous average incomes either.
All this is to say, statistics are fascinating but only part of the story. Being a bigger city offers advantages in many different ways, but quality does not increase from sheer quantity alone. I don't mind if Calgary never returns to the rapid growth of the past as long as we continue our evolution to offer more choices for residents, more vibrant public spaces, and increasing support for diverse lifestyles.
RyLucky
Active Member
"My Beltline is growing faster than my beltline!"
Seriously though...
A few short years ago, I would have described Calgary's main problem as lacking visible infrastructure for retail, arts, nightlife, and active lifestyle in the inner city. Yes, there were all of those things if you knew where to look, and the suburbs were fine (according to expectations of what suburbs ought to offer) but the inner city was a tough sell to people considering alternatives like Vancouver and Montreal. These stats about the Beltline's growth confirm that the inner city continues to improve and attract investment. Parking lots give way to offices and condos; auto thoroughfares give way to multimodal streets with separated bike lanes, parklets, street art, and attractive lighting. It's been 100 years since the Beltline has felt so safe, livable, and optimistic.
That said, there are some major concerns. Namely, the vast majority of Calgary's growth continues to be suburban. That in itself is not necessarily a problem, but undoubtedly it will contribute to (a) a dramatic regional increase in kilometers-driven-by-private-vehicles and (b) an increasing urban/suburban political divide.
My prognosis is that the market forces that create sprawl are nearly intractable, especially in the prairies where supply is so high. We can limit subsidies, but ultimately it may be human nature to choose a house with many rooms on a large and quiet property to tasteful and modest harmony with one's community (at least at a certain stage in life). I believe the prescription for this ailment is not to ignore and write off our wasting appendages, but rather to draw the suburbs into the fold with a minimum guaranteed level of (unsubsidized) transit and active infrastructure to encourage inclusion and participation in our utopian project. Apologies for the hyperbole, but it is what it is. We want every man, woman, and child to feel that the inner city is theirs.
And so, my point is that we should temper our celebration of Beltline growth with attention to the reality that this success pales in comparison to our continued tendency to sprawl.
Seriously though...
A few short years ago, I would have described Calgary's main problem as lacking visible infrastructure for retail, arts, nightlife, and active lifestyle in the inner city. Yes, there were all of those things if you knew where to look, and the suburbs were fine (according to expectations of what suburbs ought to offer) but the inner city was a tough sell to people considering alternatives like Vancouver and Montreal. These stats about the Beltline's growth confirm that the inner city continues to improve and attract investment. Parking lots give way to offices and condos; auto thoroughfares give way to multimodal streets with separated bike lanes, parklets, street art, and attractive lighting. It's been 100 years since the Beltline has felt so safe, livable, and optimistic.
That said, there are some major concerns. Namely, the vast majority of Calgary's growth continues to be suburban. That in itself is not necessarily a problem, but undoubtedly it will contribute to (a) a dramatic regional increase in kilometers-driven-by-private-vehicles and (b) an increasing urban/suburban political divide.
My prognosis is that the market forces that create sprawl are nearly intractable, especially in the prairies where supply is so high. We can limit subsidies, but ultimately it may be human nature to choose a house with many rooms on a large and quiet property to tasteful and modest harmony with one's community (at least at a certain stage in life). I believe the prescription for this ailment is not to ignore and write off our wasting appendages, but rather to draw the suburbs into the fold with a minimum guaranteed level of (unsubsidized) transit and active infrastructure to encourage inclusion and participation in our utopian project. Apologies for the hyperbole, but it is what it is. We want every man, woman, and child to feel that the inner city is theirs.
And so, my point is that we should temper our celebration of Beltline growth with attention to the reality that this success pales in comparison to our continued tendency to sprawl.
RyLucky
Active Member
@CBBarnett well said. Stats can never entirely capture the quality of a city. Many of the most interesting cities I've visited have been smaller but we'll connected to their region; or acutely aware of their history; or bare a special relationship to their geography and climate; or exist with expectation of 0% growth forever. Eventually, as (if?) world population growth slows and/or the new world reaches levels of development and density similar to the old world, growth WILL stop. Surely, there will always be disparity to drive migration and conflict of peoples, but we all live with the assumptions of the past two centuries. How will people live with themselves once couples produce 1.1 children at the age of 35 and life expectancy of 80 globally? Everything will change.
Just build it
Active Member
Well said @CBBarnett and @RyLucky I would be quite happy with growth of about 15-20K per year. 10k natural increase and about 5-10k in net migration. Both population groups affect the city in different ways. 10K of natural increase every year doesn’t put immediate strains on city infrastructure, and allows for buildup of a home grown population that calls Calgary their hometown. Decent migration allows for a buildup of diversity, and an influx of fresh ideas that newcomers bring. IMHO, a good balance is about 50/50 from each group.
The people migrating to Calgary right now in these slow economic times are more likely people who want to be here. When we get the net migration increases of 30K and such we start to see stresses on infrastructure, more transient population and more people who come here just to make money and care little for the city.
That said growth of 40k is still an adrenaline rush
My two cents.
The people migrating to Calgary right now in these slow economic times are more likely people who want to be here. When we get the net migration increases of 30K and such we start to see stresses on infrastructure, more transient population and more people who come here just to make money and care little for the city.
That said growth of 40k is still an adrenaline rush
My two cents.