[miketoronto]

Well the census just came out. The City of Toronto population for 2006 stands at 2,503,281. Only 0.9% above the 2001 figure. The 905 however is booming.

Will Toronto ever be able to reach its goal for a million new residents? Not if we keep up this small rate of growth and continue to bleed families to the outter suburbs.

Could Toronto be heading for an actual population decrease?

[vid]

:ahhh: THE SKY IS FALLING!! THE SKY IS FALLING!! :ahhh:
:ahhh: THE SKY IS FALLING!! THE SKY IS FALLING!! :ahhh:
:ahhh: THE SKY IS FALLING!! THE SKY IS FALLING!! :ahhh:

You only gained an amount of people equal to a city the size of Saskatoon? That is so sad. :(

[psychosomatic]

oh god no. not surprising tho. i hate how the city is sprawling over what was once farmland.

[psychosomatic]

more commie blocks, less town-and zero-lotline homes, thats what we need. our abundance of apartment towers is partially what has kept the GTA so green.

[flar]

0.9% of 2.5 million is still a lot of people moving to Toronto

[b13]

^ exactly how much people is that?

[HAMRetrofit]

A large portion of Toronto's growth is supplied through the condo boom. If the condo boom declines it might be possible to see negative population growth but unlikely since the Toronto housing stock is relatively cheap compared to other international cities. It would be nice to see Toronto diversify their residential development since most families want some type of ground level access. A market of 4 or 5 story walkouts would be nice.

[vid]

Toronto grew by only 4 people??????!!!!!!! :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

[b13]

^ thats not to bad if you caculate it, by 2027 Toronto will have reached 3 million. But I think Toronto will reach 3 million by 2015 or earlier.

[waterloowarrior]

Just under 250,000

that's a big 0.9%!

[Jackhammer]

Just under 250,000
I think you added a zero. 0.9% is a 25,000 increase over the last 5 years.

[LordMandeep]

no to blew your bubbles but there is still the undercount released in 2008 and that could change things by a lot.

[Deez]

When you consider that the 25K all went to brownfield development (I read somewhere the city has no greenfields left), I'd say it's pretty impressive.

[LordMandeep]

I am sure there is a undercount, because if you read Stas can wbsite, it can easily miss people who do not have a permanent home...

http://www.statcan.ca/estimadet-en.htm

[vid]

Maybe the forgot the 250,000 homeless Northern Ontarians that *some people* think live in Toronto???

[Doug]

Why would Toronto be subject to undercount any moreso than other cities? A large number of illegal immigrants maybe? I can't think of any other reason. Does the City of Toronto conduct its own census as well?

[LordMandeep]

has 1 million people living on rental properties...

[caltrane74]

Only 20K in 5 years for Toronto. Crazy!!!

With all the condo's you think the increase would be far larger.

[waterloowarrior]

lots of areas lost population..

http://geodepot.statcan.ca/Diss2006/Maps/ThematicMaps/CMA_CT_Maps/English/Toronto_PopDwell_Ec-2.pdf

[WHISTLERINMUSKOKA]

:ahhh: THE SKY IS FALLING!! THE SKY IS FALLING!! :ahhh:
:ahhh: THE SKY IS FALLING!! THE SKY IS FALLING!! :ahhh:
:ahhh: THE SKY IS FALLING!! THE SKY IS FALLING!! :ahhh:
:(




Lol, yes here he goes again. Mike Yes The city proper only grew by around 1%, but how do you expect it to grow any faster? Condo starts over the past 3 years have been higher then any other time. So many new buildings will be coming online over the next few years that the downtown population will be growing at a much faster rate then it has in the past. And if you actually did some research you'd know that land values around the fringe of the city have skyrocketed since the Ontario government has implemented a construction freeze on farmland and natural spaces. So the outward trend will be coming screeching to a halt very soon with smart growth plans in place with satellite cities based around transit hubs.

[LordMandeep]

i think its simple, the city has run out of places for single homes. All growth will come from High rise development.
Also most of the poor places in the city lost a lot of population. Notice the jane/Finch area lost over -10%.

Highlite, the downtown Toronto core is growing mostly between 0-10%+. Those condos are only having an effect there.
BIggest surprise, the older places in brampton and Mississauga are lossing population too. It appears people are just moving into newer homes.

[waterloowarrior]

It appears people are just moving into newer homes.

or dying... the 25 year olds of the 1950s (older suburbs and such) are now in their 80s.

[LordMandeep]

so your saying for the next while the suburban areas of Toronto will continue to decrease, while downtown will grow by a lot. Look at the map, most of the downtown is purple or blue meaning 0-10+% growth.

[waterloowarrior]

so your saying for the next while the suburban areas of Toronto will continue to decrease, while downtown will grow by a lot. Look at the map, most of the downtown is purple or blue meaning 0-10+% growth.

well we can hope the older suburbs get redeveloped like Don Mills is starting to see :) or that the housing stock is recycled and newer families move in as empty nesters move out. but household sizes have decreased quite a bit in Canada, so maybe redevelopment is a better option.

[LordMandeep]

well where ever the condos have gone up in the city is where we see growth in the city...

While my Suburbs grew 33% from 325k to 433k. My god, that is easily the most spectular growth in the country imo for its size.

Mississauga population growth is slowing fast., still impressive.
Population in 2006 668,549
Population in 2001 612,925
2001 to 2006 population change (%) 9.1

It appears in the next census it will slow down more. It appears it is slowly becoming more like a city.

[Doady]

As you can see on the map that WaterlooWarrior linked to, the new condos actually added a lot more than the population counts suggest. The reason that so many older suburban areas of not only Toronto, but also Mississauga and Brampton, lost population is because of decreasing household sizes. Picture a family getting older so the kids move out and start there own families and that is what is happening now. It is a simple demographic shift that is happening in the 905 as well and has nothing to do any supposed decline of Toronto.

Again, the population decline is actually mostly a suburban phenomenon; the downtown actually experienced huge population growth.

[MonkeyRonin]

There nust have been some SERIOUS undercouting. Its just physically impossible for Toronto to have grown by only 15,000 over the past 5 years, especially when estimates had the city at 2,650,000 for '06.. don't see how they coulda been off by 150k.

Even the country as a whole is obviously undercounted, considering estimates where around 33 million, but the census showed less than 32. Ah well, guess we'll just have to wait another year for some real numbers.

[LordMandeep]

true, Downtown has grown a lot, so we thought the city's population exploded, but that was the only place where the population exploded.


they should put out some real numbers then. The news is saying the sky is falling.

[LordMandeep]

here this shows what i am talking about

places that grew..
Willowdale: 129,356 108,454 +19.3
Scarborough - Rouge River: 130,974 115,437 +13.5
Trinity - Spadina: 115,361 106,094 +8.7
Toronto Centre: 121,407 114,581 +6.0
Scarborough Centre: 108,010 102,922 +4.9
Eglinton - Lawrence: 110,066 106,879 +3.0
Scarborough - Agincourt: 111,867 110,669 +1.1
Etobicoke - Lakeshore: 114,641 113,914 +0.6

places that really are losing...
Davenport: 104,615 111,705 -6.3
York West: 103,948 110,384 -5.8
Toronto - Danforth: 103,655 109,713 -5.5
Parkdale - High Park: 102,142 106,559 -4.1
Beaches - East York: 104,831 108,913 -3.7
Etobicoke North: 108,501 112,411 -3.5
Scarborough - Guildwood: 108,813 112,628 -3.4
Scarborough Southwest: 102,196 105,237 -2.9


also Toronto has fewer fewer people per household

Brampton has 130k homes for 433k people or 3.33 people per house
Toronto has 1 million homes for 2.5M people 2.5 people per house.

[Epi]

I think the population will catch up immensely in the next 5 years. First of all, there's a ton of new condos which will be completed in the next 5 years. Secondly, a lot of those people living in condos will be getting married in the next few years and even having kids. They won't be able to move out so quickly, so the density will shoot up quite a bit.

[LordMandeep]

True looking at the map all long Queen street from Bathurst to the DVP grew by a lot.

south of Bloor from bathurst to the DVP grew very strongly as well.


North of Bloor all along yonge the areas grew. The very nice ares in Midtown grew or were stable...

IN Mississauga, the older suburb of malton suffered huge population declines.


so the big areas of population growth is the downtwon core, North York City Centre, North Scarborough, South Etiboke.


North Etiboke, Western North York, South and western Sacrborugh, East York and York.

[tradlak]

Certainly growth in Toronto proper will come from infill, retrofitting old industrial buildings, creating new neighbourhoods along waterfront and of course lots more condos. The problem is that with higher density you need a higher level of amenity and more open spaces and transit to make it tolerable. Unfortunately, with how city has been bled financially it has not been able to invest like London, Chicago and Boston to make urban life more balanced. Hopefully, we 'll see more transit vehicles and more waterfront parks.

[LordMandeep]

really there could be a signifcant undercount...

well really in 2001 in Brampton the population was put at 301k and then a year after it was revised to 325k.

[WHISTLERINMUSKOKA]

Tor Star
Mar 14, 2007 04:30 AM
Francine Kopun
Feature Writer



Don't let those condo towers going up across Toronto fool you – the wave of immigrants driving population growth in Canada is flowing through the Big Smoke to settle in the surrounding suburbs and cities, according to the 2006 Census.

Growth is pushing newcomers even farther out than ever, to formerly sleepy little towns like Milton, which grew 71.4 per cent in five years, making it the fastest-growing municipality in Canada. Barrie grew 24 per cent over the same period. Not even Calgary, in the grips of an oil boom, grew more.

Statistics Canada counted 31,612,897 Canadians in May 2006, an increase of 5.4 per cent since 2001. Two cities joined the exclusive club of metropolitan areas with more than one million people: Calgary and Edmonton. Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver and Ottawa-Gatineau are also members. The six cities are home to 45 per cent of Canada's population.

Toronto's population growth flagged, at just under 1 per cent, although it remains by far the largest city in the country, with 2.5 million people. Second is Montreal with 1.6 million.

"The perception was that because of all the condominiums going up we would be having a larger population growth than .9 per cent, but the fact we are on the positive side of the ledger is encouraging," said Toronto deputy mayor Joe Pantalone.

"When you look beyond that statistic, what you see is really that we have a mature community with stable neighbourhoods which are really not being affected by population growth, which is good, which is what the official plan calls for."

Montreal and Vancouver also grew slowly, compared to the burgeoning communities around them. Overall the growth rate of municipalities surrounding Canadian CMAs was double the national average.

Cities and towns along the major arteries of big cities in Canada are filling up and a new outer ring of development is being created, says Pamela White, director of demography division, Statistics Canada.

"We are seeing this emergence of very strong growth in peripheral municipalities. This is really typical of urban spread," said White.

The trend is forcing urban planners and politicians to think not simply in terms of one city and its suburbs, but in terms of a vastly more complicated network of cities and suburbs and towns that need to work together to manage new population growth.

Pantalone says the increases in population in the outlying areas prove the region needs a comprehensive transportation plan.

In fact, one-quarter of Canadians – 8.1 million people – now live in what has come to be called the Greater Golden Horseshoe region along the western edge of Lake Ontario. It includes Toronto, Hamilton, Guelph, Peterborough, Barrie, Orillia, and the regions of Halton, Peel, York, Durham, Waterloo and Niagara.

Last year, the province announced plans to manage growth in the Greater Golden Horseshoe, which is expected to swell by another 4 million people in the next 25 years.

Canada had a faster rate of growth than any other member of the G-8 group of industrialized nations, according to the census. The U.S. was second at 5 per cent. New immigrants accounted for 1.2 million of the 1.6 million increase in Canada. According to projections, net immigration may become the only source of population growth in Canada by about 2030.

In the U.S., which enjoys one of the highest fertility rates in the developed world, 60 per cent of the population increase was due to births outpacing deaths. Canadian women have an average of 1.5 children; in the U.S. that figure is closer to two.

Growth in Canada's big cities is taking place mostly along major highways and transportation routes, says White, of StatsCan.

In Quebec, the Laurentian Autoroute, the main artery for people travelling to ski resorts in winter and cottage country in summer, is now choked with commuters during the week. In B.C., the SkyTrain has fuelled population growth in municipalities like Surrey.

Here in the Golden Horseshoe, populations are booming in communities along the 400-series highways and Yonge St.

Strong growth brings with it good and bad news for residents like Donna Danielli, a Halton district school board trustee with a business in Milton.

The increase in population has been great for traffic in her appliance store.

But growth took place so quickly that schools had to scramble to make sure there were desks for every student in September.

In Barrie, the Royal Victoria Hospital is seeking funding for an expansion.

About 5,000 people have been moving to the city each year for the past 10 years, says Jim Taylor, director of planning for the city.

"Barrie has all but run out of land," says Taylor.

Doug Norris, chief demographer for Environics Analytics, says there is no cause for concern in the fact that Toronto's growth was .9 per cent.

"It would be very difficult for Toronto, the way it's developed, the way it's built up, to have growth of 5 or 10 per cent these days," he said.

Pantalone said increases in the population living outside the city is good news.

"When you talk about Toronto, you have to remember the city of Toronto is the heart of the organism that is the GTA. The success of areas around the city of Toronto is Toronto's success as well."

[caltrane74]

women in the US are baby making machines.

[someone123]

The City of Toronto includes all kinds of post-war suburbs that have not seen a lot of infill. When that is coupled with shrinking household sizes the end result is population loss.

The same thing goes for areas like Brampton. Its older areas are slowly losing people.

As for the condos, they are being built in certain areas of the city and those parts are growing rapidly.

The trend is similar to just about every other Canadian city of any size. Central areas are growing along with the new suburban fringe but stable older areas are declining due to shrinking household sizes. Since those older areas make up a large part of most cities it takes a huge amount of infill to offset the decline.

[MonkeyRonin]

By the way, I'm wondering if anyone has the '06 census data for the wards or boroughs?

[miketoronto]

The trend is similar to just about every other Canadian city of any size. Central areas are growing along with the new suburban fringe but stable older areas are declining due to shrinking household sizes. Since those older areas make up a large part of most cities it takes a huge amount of infill to offset the decline.

Just a couple years ago it was the other way around. The demo shift saw Canada's inner cities losing population, except Vancouver.
That trend has reveresed since the late 90's. But untill then, inner city Toronto, Montreal, Calgary, etc were losing people. But as the old people died off and young families again populated the houses along with new condos, the pop went up.

want to see Toronto grow more in the 416 area, because its better overall for the region to reduce sprawl. But at the same time, slow growth or zero growth is not always bad. Most of Toronto's stable inner city hoods have held their population at around the same mark for decades now.

No growth or slight decline does not mean flight or a decay in an area. Its just part of a stable area.


One other issue I think may have an effect on population growth in the 416(and I don't want to open a can of worms) is employment in central Toronto and the 416 as a whole. Toronto's downtown core has been losing employment market share to the 905, as well as seeing hardly any new jobs in the last 5 years. Basically employment has stagnated in downtown Toronto, and in the City of Toronto as a whole.
We all know what that means. People have jobs in the outter suburbs, and that is going to be where they live, even if they want to live in Toronto.
Strong employment growth in central Toronto and the 416 as a whole I think would bring many people back to the inner suburban hoods, where access to downtown is easy via transit, etc.
But if there is no more need to go into the city, then I can't see people locating in say South Scarborough, where the commute to downtown is very easy via GO Train, but to get to any of the new jobs in the suburbs it is a pain in the ass by car or transit.
The health of large swaths of inner city Toronto, and inner suburban Toronto is tied to the health of our city core. And if it is lagging, then its going to bring down the rest of the city.

[malek]

How were the headlines in Toronto about that 0.9% ?

Over here they make it sound like the end of the world and we had 2.4% in the city center.

Its extremely harder for a city center to grow at a big pace because the concentration of population is such that adding more people costs more and more $$$ (in between many more complexities).

[someone123]

In many cases population densities actually drop as areas become wealthier, since rich people can afford more space. Some poor neighbourhoods are overcrowded. It really depends on the specific situation.

The City of Toronto isn't really the "city centre", it's about half of the metropolitan area. Downtown Toronto's population probably grew 10% or more. Most of the tracts in that area were over 10% growth.

[vid]

Our paper made it sound bad too. The guy who predicted we'd drop to 80,000 by 2010 said the growth was surprising, and it was probably because of people from the bush moving in for jobs.

But apparently, the people at the Chronicle Journal were so distraught by the 0.1% increase, that they made NO LESS than 13 errors in their story! :tup: Good on them! :)

[Taller Better]

I suspect the .9% figure will be raised when the final numbers are released. As usual, I'll be willing to bet that the previous "estimates" are more accurate than these preliminary figures that represent only people who bothered to fill out the forms.

[someone123]

They will probably compare the corrected 2006 figures to corrected 2001 figures, which means that only a small percentage of the undercount (often ~3%) will end up counting as population growth.

[Taller Better]

We'll have to wait and see, I suppose. I'll bet this thread is still going in 2008 when the final figures are released.
Toronto certainly seems healthy, and it seems to the untrained eye to be growing with all the condos, etc... going up. There has been no obvious flight from the city, so we will have to see how it all shakes out. I'm curious why the difference between the estimates and these preliminary figures is so great. The most obvious thing is that the metropolitan area of Toronto is booming , and that fact seems to be getting missed somehow...

[miketoronto]

We'll have to wait and see, I suppose. I'll bet this thread is still going in 2008 when the final figures are released.
Toronto certainly seems healthy, and it seems to the untrained eye to be growing with all the condos, etc... going up. There has been no obvious flight from the city, so we will have to see how it all shakes out. I'm curious why the difference between the estimates and these preliminary figures is so great. The most obvious thing is that the metropolitan area of Toronto is booming , and that fact seems to be getting missed somehow...


It is true Toronto is pretty healthy. However at the same time, the 416 has lost many middle income to upper middle income families to the 905, due to the factor of Toronto not being considered classy and good enough for these families. That can not be denied that we have lost a large segment of young families with high incomes. One just needs to look at the 905 to see how much more wealthy they are compared to most of Toronto. And that is because they have moved out of places like Scar, North York, Etobicoke, etc.

[Taller Better]

Well, so many factors are known... ie, occupancy rates, etc.. that I have a hard time believing the growth rate has only been 0.9% . Seems like last week the City was talking about the strain being put on the infrastructure by the influx to Toronto, so I am having a hard time swallowing that it is all imaginary.

[softee]

So what is the final 2001 census population figure for Toronto? When I look at the 2001 census, it still lists the population as 2,481,494, which was the so-called preliminary figure before it was adjusted for the undercount (I know this for a fact, as I still have the issue of the Toronto Star from the day when the 2001 census figures were first released).

Where can I find the population figures that were later adjusted? I would like to see what North Bay's actual (adjusted for undercount) 2001 population was.

[LordMandeep]

well in Brampton it was put at 301k in 2001 but it was 325k.

[WhipperSnapper]

However at the same time, the 416 has lost many middle income to upper middle income families to the 905, due to the factor of Toronto not being considered classy and good enough for these families.

I disagree with you there - just about everywhere I look in the 416 older building stock is being demo or expanded upon which only the upper middle class to the weathly could afford (a far less frequent occurance in the older communities in the 905)

[miketoronto]

I disagree with you there - just about everywhere I look in the 416 older building stock is being demo or expanded upon which only the upper middle class to the weathly could afford (a far less frequent occurance in the older communities in the 905)

True. But overall Toronto families make something like 20 grand less then 905 families. The 905 average is 90,000-100,000 a year per family. Toronto is like 60,000.

We are poorer on average. That has to have some effect on where people move to. People are going to move where they think its classy and well kept(905).

[LordMandeep]

thats because of the really crappy neighbourhoods in North Etiboke and Western North York and other areas.

Most places are quite healthy imo...

Not all of the inner city is collapsing,the worst or "poorest parts" are getting hit the most.

well kept

well kept my foot, i had to pick up garbage through this whole week in front of my house because lazy bastards in my neighbour hoods let thier garbage cans fly around in the wind, because the hardly visit thier home because there likely growing drugs or god knows what else.
Okay i am ranting, but seriousily this place reminds of a Moscow suburb in the dead of Winter.

Were my close cousin lives, about 10 mins his area is 40 years old but there isn't garabage flying around everywhere.

really i gurantee the new subdivison is in this terribile state in 7 years, this place will be much worse in 30-40 years.

However imo, all areas look decent in the summer, though.

[WHISTLERINMUSKOKA]

These numbers may also represent people who are moving out of rental units into condos in better parts of the city.

[miketoronto]

I know most people on here are not really into suburbs, and I do like the city to. But I do want to touch on the fact, that as far as suburbs go, I feel the City of Toronto(as in 416) has amazing suburbs, that give you choices not only in housing, but also in being able to take quality transit(yes we complain but overeall transit even in the suburbs is great in 416), has places that you can walk to, etc.

I think that we really should be promoting Toronto's inner suburbs to young families and making them see that they don't need to flee to 905 for good housing and neighbourhoods, etc. It really bugs me when people say they can't afford Toronto or even Scar and have to flee to Whitby. Yet they totally overlook neighbourhoods like mine where you can get amazing houses in the 300,000-400,000 range or even cheaper if you are willing to go for a smaller house, because its not along the lake or in some other trendy spot in Toronto or Scar.

We really should be promoting and showing how great these older suburban communities are. Because if it is suburbs you like, then you can't get better then the 416 inner suburbs in Greater Toronto.

I think its really sad that so many 905 families today will totally overlook areas like the one below, because its in the inner suburbs.

The area below as suburban as it looks, alows you to talk to everyday things like the milk store, and banks, in about 5min, and also has 24 hour transit, with buses running every 5min during most periods.
So lets promote the hell out of our inner ring to families, because I think the quality of life is leaps and bounds better then 905 to be honest. I really have no resentment growing up in inner suburban Scarborough in the hood below, and still being close to the city.

So lets promote and get the families back in 416. Hell the area below is a steal. The houses only start at about $320,000 and go into the $400,000 range for the bigger ones on the ravine. That is totally a bargin, considering you are 5min bus ride from U of T Scarborough, 2min from the hospital, a 15min walk to Centennial College, 5min bus ride from the subway, 20min drive from downtown Toronto, and 10min bus or drive to the lakefront parks of Scarborough. Yet young families are totally bypassing inner areas like this for the crap of 905, just because its new.

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/miketorontoscar/pegfall20061.jpg

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/miketorontoscar/pegmay200621.jpg

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/miketorontoscar/peg20051.jpg

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/miketorontoscar/birkdale7.jpg

[LordMandeep]

thats a nice area. That was how old neighbourhood was in Brampton. I liked it much better!!

[miketoronto]

It is nice. Yet like I said, people are bypassing. Out of all the young people in our hood, I would say 95% of them once they got married, left their parents home in the inner ring here, and moved out to the farthest out 905 suburbs you can think of. A further 5% I would say moved into inner city Toronto. And only two or three stayed in the inner ring.

I just think we should be promoting areas like this more, as viable family areas again.

[CharlesMunroe]

Hey MikeToronto, I agree with you those are great neighbourhoods. I would much sooner live there then some cul de sac hell. I dont know what your getting all worked up about though. Scarborough looks to be doing great. Lots of ugly new subdivisions in the northeast and lots of tall condos around the town center. Looks like lots of building going on around Kennedy/Sheppard.

Its not like those older subdivisions are vacant are they? There is people living in them all isnt there? They're not boarded up. Subdivisions of that age are all around the gta. I think a lot of people living in them now are people who've lived in them for decades and are now empty nesters. Whenever one of these homes go up for sale, how long do they sit on the market? I'll bet not long and they don't often go up for sale.

Those houses can also still be bought for half that price in Oshawa but there are reasons other then money why people leave the 416. Some dont like the idea of millions of people all around them in every direction and prefer being on the periphery. They take comfort in knowing they are only 10-15 minutes max. to being in the country. Toronto is too busy and they dont like the constant hustle and bustle.

There is also a wide belief that the 905 is safer. Even though Scarborough seems to have been a lot quieter the last couple of years, it earned itself a pretty bad reputation.

I have heard many white people saying they dont like feeling like a minority living in Toronto. Just as the chinese like living among chinese and have taken over Markham, just as east indians flock to Bramptom to live together, and just as Italians own Woodbridge, lots of white people prefer living among white people and will seek out those communities.

I dont think you have to worry about those neighbourhoods in Scarborough becoming abandoned. They will be full of young families shortly after being put up for sale.

[LordMandeep]

really even the ares suffering the largest declines still you won't hardly ever see a boarded up house in Toronto.

[WhipperSnapper]

True. But overall Toronto families make something like 20 grand less then 905 families. The 905 average is 90,000-100,000 a year per family. Toronto is like 60,000

where are you reading that? anyways, median household income statistics between suburb and city are not really comparable since demographics differ so much

[softee]

According to a population study I found on North Bay's city website, the undercount in 2001 was 3.68%. So then Toronto's adjusted population in 2001 would have been 2,572,813.

[vid]

3.68% of what? 3.68% of the growth (1000x1.0368) or 3.68% of the entire population? (100000x1.0368)?

[softee]

The 2001 population figure was undercounted by 3.68%.

[caltrane74]

True. But overall Toronto families make something like 20 grand less then 905 families. The 905 average is 90,000-100,000 a year per family. Toronto is like 60,000.

We are poorer on average. That has to have some effect on where people move to. People are going to move where they think its classy and well kept(905).


crapola.

[LordMandeep]

According to a population study I found on North Bay's city website, the undercount in 2001 was 3.68%. So then Toronto's adjusted population in 2001 would have been 2,572,813.

are you sure it couldn't have been the other way around. meaning that there are other numbers posted then the undercount is added to give the 2001 population of 2.480 million???

[softee]

No, because I still have the copy of the Toronto Star from 5 years ago when the 2001 census figures were first released, and the city's population was reported to be 2.480 million then - before being adjusted for the undercount. That's why I was wondering where on the Statcan website one could find the adjusted population figures, because none of the 2001 census figures on the website seem to be adjusted for the undercount, they're still the same as when they were first released, except for those places that have had boundary changes between 2001 and 2006.

[nec209]

Wow

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/miketorontoscar/pegfall20061.jpg



Well it is funny the picture you posted is how the old suburbs use to be big lots and the house pulled back from the street now all the new suburbs small lots and the house almost touching the other house and almost at the street.

Well before small homes now big homes:)

[vid]

I didn't notice it at first but..

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/miketorontoscar/pegfall20061.jpg
This is almost exactly like a house on Rockwood Avenue S

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/miketorontoscar/pegmay200621.jpg
This is very similar to a house on Hill Street S

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/miketorontoscar/peg20051.jpg
If that turn was 50m further, that would be Robinson St

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/miketorontoscar/birkdale7.jpg
And that is very similar to McVicar Riverway, by the 55+ centre


Seems to me that this "every suburb is identical" thing has been around for a while. I wonder what places like Vaughn and Mississauga will look like in 2040?

[LordMandeep]

the new suburbs will either become nice old neigbourhoods or shitty ghetto's.

Its all based on how well people take care of thier homes in that area.

Plus what area is that house in Mike?? (what street area)