Calgary census results 1,019,942

[KrisYYC]

Short of annexation, can the city of Calgary demand something from cities who majority of residents work in Calgary?

I remember seeing a story on global a while back about traffic. It was about some poor womans long commute from $#@%& Airdrie to her job near downtown Calgary. She was complaining that the city isn't doing enough blah blah, this from someone who chose to live in Airdrie and doesn't pay taxes to Calgary. That pissed me off.

[feepa]

Originally Posted by KrisYYC

Short of annexation, can the city of Calgary demand something from cities who majority of residents work in Calgary?

I remember seeing a story on global a while back about traffic. It was about some poor womans long commute from $#@%& Airdrie to her job near downtown Calgary. She was complaining that the city is doing enough blah blah, this from someone who chose to live in Airdrie and doesn't pay taxes to Calgary. That pissed me off.

I would say... look at Edmonton. Edmonton has a rough pop of 750,000 with a metro pop of over a million. This story thats starting to develop in Calgary has been going on for a long time in Edmonton. Edmonton seemingly gets screwed by other users in region not contributing to the actual city, but their far-flung burb. They also then like to complain how the city does nothing to fix potholes...(but contribute nothing to the pothole repair...)


The basic government plan to deal with all the traffic was to build and maintain the ring road around Edmonton... Mind you, this would be a better solution for Edmonton has its workforce is spread out more so over the entire region, as compared to Calgary huge workforce downtown and central areas...

[Zilla]

Originally Posted by furrycanuck

Airdrie is 30,000+ now.

Did anybody notice that Cliff Bungalow lost almost 10% of its population? I'm wondering if a lot of that's due to evictions such related to condo conversions?

I noticed that too and I think you're right as to the cause. I also noticed the dramatic Beltline increase after several years of stagnation or decline. But they're not going to be putting much density back into Cliff Bungalow. After things settle out they'll likely only recover their pre-conversion population.

[Zilla]

Other stats that point to condo conversion:

Vacant Renovation
2007: 3,348
2006: 2,113

Inactive Unit
2007: 4,342
2006: 2,653

[freeweed]

Another stat that indirectly points to just how many condo conversions are happening - Calgary has the highest rate of home ownership in the country. In the second most expensive city to live in.

Neat, that.

[Calgarian]

As was noted on Global news tonight, we should be hitting the 2 million mark (city proper) by 2030 or so. Look out Vancouver, here we come.

[Arch26]

Originally Posted by mersar

Qualified to become, I wouldn't expect them to though. Same with Cochrane, we're at something like 15,500 or so now (there was an article in one of the local papers about growth, and the town is predicting that we'll be back at 15% annual growth for 2008 with all the new subdivision approvals, some 700+ new lots approved for construction and several thousand more are awaiting ASP's to be done and approved)

So why haven't Cochrane, Canmore and Okotoks chosen to incorporate themselves as cities yet? To my knowledge, those are the three largest towns in the province and with populations hovering around 15,000, they seem pretty huge to still maintain town status? At what point (if ever) are they forced to re-incorporate?

[Boris2k7]

Originally Posted by Arch26

So why haven't Cochrane, Canmore and Okotoks chosen to incorporate themselves as cities yet? To my knowledge, those are the three largest towns in the province and with populations hovering around 15,000, they seem pretty huge to still maintain town status? At what point (if ever) are they forced to re-incorporate?

City-status is entirely voluntary. They will never be forced to do so.

For clarity's sake, I will state that me question earlier to Furry was really whether or not he had news of such a redesignation... not whether or not they qualify. That stuff is easy enough to find in the Municipal Government Act.

[Arch26]

Originally Posted by Boris550

City-status is entirely voluntary. They will never be forced to do so.

For clarity's sake, I will state that me question earlier to Furry was really whether or not he had news of such a redesignation... not whether or not they qualify. That stuff is easy enough to find in the Municipal Government Act.

It's interesting how the law differs from province to province. In BC, a town is required to become a city after they reach a population of only 5,000 (Local Gov't Act).

Also, to further my first question, why wouldn't Cochrane, Okotoks, and Canmore choose to become cities now that they have the option? Is there a drawback?

[Boris2k7]

In Alberta's case, there is very little difference whether or not a municipality redesignates itself. There are a few obvious ones though, such as:

Title to roads

16(1) The title to all roads in a municipality, other than a city, is vested in the Crown in right of Alberta.
(2) The title to all roads in a city is vested in the city unless another Act or agreement provides otherwise.
(3) Nothing in this section gives a city title to mines and minerals.

The conditions for being able to become a city in Alberta:

City

82 A city may be formed for an area in which

(a) a majority of the buildings are on parcels of land smaller than 1850 square metres, and
(b) there is a population of 10 000 or more.

Actually, the ONLY differences in the Alberta MGA between cities and the rest have to do with roads...

The advantages they might see in not redesignating could be as simple as wanting to be seen as "home away from the city" or something quaint like that...

[mersar]

Yep. And with the title to roads comes the responsibility for maintaining the highways (not just the local roads). And that requires money, which often isn't available from the province, so up go the taxes.

Thats the main argument I've heard used by town council in Cochrane over the years, with 2 primary highways running through town. Plus right now the company that maintains them (Volker Stevin) has their yard in just about the furthest point in town from where the highway entrance they use is located, so during snow storms they plow the road they use to get to the highways, which is a heavy industrial traffic route, at little (or likely no) cost to the town. Plus the town also becomes responsible for traffic signals, pavement repairs, bridges, etc. which are all quite expensive (the province just built a new intersection last year in town, and to move the road about 50' and add lights cost somewhere into the high six figures)

[Rob D]

Originally Posted by Arch26

So why haven't Cochrane, Canmore and Okotoks chosen to incorporate themselves as cities yet? To my knowledge, those are the three largest towns in the province and with populations hovering around 15,000, they seem pretty huge to still maintain town status? At what point (if ever) are they forced to re-incorporate?

Look at the population of Sherwood Park near Edmonton. IIRC they are still officially a hamlet when they could have had city status decades ago.

[Rob D]

It's official: Calgary is a million strong
Growth slows but pressure still on city
Kim Guttormson, with files from Jamie Komarnicki and Colette DerworizCalgary Herald

Thursday, July 26, 2007


CREDIT: Darren Francey, Calgary Herald, City of Calgary 2007 CensusCalgary's Steady Growth: (See hard copy for graphic).CREDIT: Darren Francey, Calgary Herald, City of Calgary 2007 CensusCalgary's Changing PopulationCalgary's population grew by 28,000 people in the past year, and for the first time, the city census shattered the million mark.
While growth slowed from 35,681 in the previous year, newcomers crowding into the city limits continued to strain civic resources.
"The last decade has shown that Calgary is clearly a magnet for growth, and accommodating that growth requires us to plan and build for the future," said Mayor Dave Bronconnier.
Bronconnier said a slight slowdown in the city's growth isn't necessarily bad news, as Calgary grapples with how to build the infrastructure necessary to accommodate so many new residents.
"A little bit of a slowdown is not such a bad thing," Bronconnier said.
"We can catch our breath, deal with the infrastructure challenges we have."
The city census released Wednesday, which covers the 12 months between April 2006 and April 2007, shows the city grew by 28,183 people during that period.
Of that, 10,552 were natural growth -- births minus deaths. The rest, 17,631, were from net migration -- those moving here minus those moving away.
It's the equivalent of 77 people a day streaming into Cowtown.
Harry Hiller, the director of the Calgary in-migration study at the University of Calgary, said it's no surprise the city's population explosion would slow down at some point.
"One of the things we keep forgetting is how high things really were," he said, pointing out last year's was still the third-highest increase.
The 2005-2006 census found that of the 35,681 in total city growth, more than 25,000 of that number was due to people moving here.
"A drop from 25,000 to 17,000 in net migration, that's minor," Hiller said.
He added that when you consider people are also moving out of the city, many more than 17,000 actually moved to Calgary last year.
But the downside of the boom is bound to act as a brake, he said.
"The fact is, there is so much negative implications to growth that word gets out," Hiller explained.
As the city's boom hit a high point last summer, stories began to surface about difficulties finding housing and labour.
Jennifer Pyykka, owner of Accurate Moving, opened her company 51/2 years ago after coming west from Winnipeg. But after difficulties retaining and finding staff, she and her husband are shutting down the company and moving back.
"It started about a year and a half ago. I don't even know how to describe it," she said. "At one point, we had 13 full-time staff. One month later, we were down to six full-time staff and a couple (of) part-timers.
"Within a few months of that, we had two full-time staff."
But Hiller said that while the growth brings problems, the city doesn't have anything to worry about yet.
"Normally, we'd expect more natural increase than migration. A city where the economy is growing and expanding, that's going to find net migration is higher," he said, which is the case in Calgary. "And it's been consistently higher for some time now."
Barb Clifford, the city's chief returning officer, said until recently the natural increase portion of the census had been declining.
"We were down around 6,000," she said. "Last year was one of the first years there was a significant increase over previous years, and this year it went up again from what it was last year.
"That is a reversal of what the trend was previously."
Bronconnier said the high number of births in the city will put a strain on resources over the next few years -- everything from day care and pools to libraries, recreation centres and schools.
The city's population now sits at 1,019,942, with most of those people living in the suburbs. Two new communities in the south grew by more than 200 per cent last year: Auburn Bay and Silverado. Twelve outlying neighbourhoods grew by more than 1,000 people last year.
But the Beltline, an inner-city community immediately south of downtown, also saw an increase of more than 1,000 residents. It's an example of the city's successful efforts to redevelop established neighbourhoods, said David Watson, the city's general manager of planning.
While the Beltline growth is encouraging, Watson said the city will still need to grow out as well as up.
"If you start thinking about how to get 17,000 people into the Beltline, you'd need a huge number of towers beyond what we've got now," he said. "There just isn't that amount of land.
"Since January, council has passed more than 4,000 acres in outline plans, all at higher densities than we've seen before. Even with the higher densities, it'll be a number of years before we're going to say we don't need to grow further out."
Bronconnier and city officials said the numbers weren't a surprise and fit in with long-term projections for growth and infrastructure needs.
But funding those needs will continue to be an issue, with the city still in discussions with the province over affordable housing money and infrastructure dollars.
"We see the (population increase) in this range for the next five years," the mayor said. "It speaks to a very positive economy and the need for long-term, sustainable funding to meet the challenges of growth."
kguttormson@theherald.canwest.com
Calgary Census
Stories Inside
Raining Babies
"Calgary's population is predominantly young.
Everywhere you go, women are preggers. Some days it seems like it's raining babies. For city planners, that means more schools, more playgrounds and more recreation facilities . . ."
Robert Remington, Page A4
Core Appeal
Calgary's downtown core has grown by more than 1,000 residents in the past year.
Page A5
The Downside
The civic census highlights the extent of Calgary's housing crisis.
Editorial, Page A18

[Rob D]

Downtown lures 1,000 residents
'We're seeing a Beltline resurgence'
Colette Derworiz, with files from Kim GuttormsonCalgary Herald
Thursday, July 26, 2007

CREDIT: Ted Rhodes, Calgary HeraldJennifer Pyykka, owner of Accurate Moving, says she is shutting her business and moving back to Winnipeg.Even though Calgary continues to see most of its growth on the outer edges, the downtown core has lured more than 1,000 residents in the past year.
The 2007 civic census, conducted in April and released Wednesday, shows the Beltline -- a neighbourhood made up of Victoria Park and Connaught -- grew to 17,794 residents, up 1,132 people from April 2006.
"We're seeing a Beltline resurgence," said Mayor Dave Bronconnier. "Most cities would be very envious in one year to see 1,100 people move into their downtown."
According to the census, the Beltline was among 14 communities with a population increase of more than 1,000 people.
Others included outlying communities such as Coventry Hills, Cranston, Evergreen, McKenzie Towne, Saddle Ridge, Sherwood, Springbank Hill, Taradale and Tuscany. Two communities -- Auburn Bay and Silverado -- saw their population increase by more than 200 per cent in the past year.
But city officials said they were most surprised by the growth in the Beltline communities.
"Three or four years ago there were no permits at all going on in the Beltline," said David Watson, general manager of planning, development and assessment. "I think the market is really responding.
"People are putting their money where their mouth is and building downtown," he said.
There are more than a dozen residential towers being built in the Beltline, leading city officials to estimate the population could grow by another 7,000 people in the next few years.
Ald. Madeleine King, whose ward includes the area, said the census numbers confirm the city has been successful in attracting more people to live and work in the downtown core.
"There is a very significant momentum toward development in the Beltline," she said. "It's not only a benefit to the Beltline, it's really important to the city -- it cuts down on the amount of sprawl.
"If we can get more people who want to live in apartments and condos to come and live close to the downtown core . . . (it) contributes significantly to the vibrancy of the city."
However, she noted there have been challenges, particularly safety issues, in the growing area.
While Bronconnier acknowledged there are concerns, he said there is council policy to reinvest in the inner city -- including such programs as Clean to the Core, which puts more police and bylaw officers on the streets to deal with "crime and grime."
"The inner city comes with many challenges, between the homeless situation, between crimes and graffiti," he said. "Trying to deal with all of those challenges is immense."
cderworiz@theherald.canwest.com

© The Calgary Herald 2007

[Rob D]

Youthful Calgary couples love making babies
Robert RemingtonCalgary Herald

Thursday, July 26, 2007


CREDIT: Lorraine Hjalte, Calgary HeraldCensus figures show Calgarians are a young bunch. Elizabeth Loades, 18 months, and Ryan Cory, 2, are part of that large, new generation.CREDIT: Jenelle Schneider, Calgary HeraldElla Sledz, 2, rides on the see-saw at Riley Park Wednesday. According to the recent census, the number of kids in Calgary is on the rise.Babies, babies, babies. Everywhere it's babies.
Calgary is crawling with them. They're in the malls and in the parks. There are so many of them they've overtaxed the sanitation capacity of the wading pool in Eau Claire. Yuk. Oh well, that's babies for you. Cute as all get out, but rather messy.
According to the latest civic census, released Wednesday, Calgary has become a city of babies. Migration to the city has slowed, but the young people living here have been getting busy. Boy, are they busy.
According to the census, the city's "natural increase" -- the number of births over deaths -- was 10,552, up 665 from last year's figure of 9,887.
The actual number of babies born during the census period, from April 2006 to April 2007, was 15,721, according to Calgary Health Region spokesman Bruce Conway. That compares to 14,729 for 2005-06. Officials didn't expect to see these types of local birthrates until 2010.
For the calendar year of 2006, Calgarians had 14,085 babies, according to Service Alberta, the province's vital statistics agency.
"2006 was the year of the baby boom in Calgary," said Mayor Dave Bronconnier.
The 275-page census report confirms the obvious. Calgary's population is predominantly young. Everywhere you go, women are preggers. Some days it seems like it's raining babies.
For city planners, that means more schools, more playgrounds and more recreation facilities in a city where it's already almost impossible to get ice time.
"In five years, all of these babies are going to need schools," says David Watson, the city's general manager of planning.
"We don't build them. That's the responsibility of the province and the school boards. We can only plan where they go."
More babies also means more pressure on the 'burbs. When you're young and single, you want to live downtown, where the action is. But when you start a family, the dream of the white picket fence is still alive.
Just ask Katy Bauer, who was downtown at Olympic Plaza on Wednesday with her two children. She and her husband used to live downtown, but moved to Southwood when their children were born.
"We specifically bought where we did because of the green space at the schoolyard," she said.
Bauer is a typical Calgary mom.
So typical that her kids' names -- Nathan, 4, and Madison, 2 -- rank
seventh for boys and fifth for girls on the most popular names for children in Alberta, according to statistics
kept by Service Alberta.
"We wanted a safe community, knowing who your neighbours are and having neighbours you can trust."
The top-5 areas of the city with the greatest number of children under five years of age are Ward 3 in the city's northeast (8,414), followed by Ward 1 in the northwest (5,746), Ward 12 in the far southeast (5,544), Ward 6 in the west end (5,212), and Ward 13 in the southwest (4,774).
Watson says the city wants more young families living in the city centre and hopes to achieve that with the Rivers development in the East Village on the eastern side of downtown.
The area, from 3rd Street S.E. to Fort Calgary and from 9th Avenue to the Bow River, won't offer many white picket fences -- but will have townhouses and more family-sized condos, as opposed to bachelor pads.
For play areas, the river parkway system and the Fort Calgary area should be the biggest backyard any kid in the Rivers could want.
But not with 20 homeless guys urinating in open view. Go ahead. Take a stroll through there now, if you dare.
In addition, two new parks are planned for the Rivers development.
"We want to incorporate playground areas in those parks and make them safe environments for children," Watson said.
But the Rivers development is years away. Basic infrastructure should be going in this fall, along with enough dirt to raise portions of the area above flood plain.
In the meantime, the challenge for the city is to find a way to accommodate the needs of young families with the amenities, and safe neighbourhoods, they need.
Calgary is the youngest city in the country, with a median age of 35.7 -- nearly five years younger than anywhere else, according to national census figures released last week.
So far this year, Service Alberta reports that Calgary has had 8,282 registered births as of Wednesday, the highest number of little gaffers in the province.
Welcome to the city of babies.
rremington@theherald.canwest.com

© The Calgary Herald 2007

[Rob D]

A snapshot of the downside
Civic census highlights extent of Calgary's housing crisis
Calgary Herald

Thursday, July 26, 2007


If one thing leaps out immediately from the City of Calgary's 2007 Civic Census, it is the startling way in which this city's affordable housing crisis can be tracked by the results of the census. Clearly, housing is the No. 1 problem in Calgary, and like a living entity, it leaves its footprints on page after page of the census report.
The first footprint appears on the first page with the population changes tabulated year over year. Natural population increase -- the excess of births over deaths -- is up (10,552 in 2006-2007, compared with 9,887 in 2005-2006), but net migration -- the difference between the number of people who moved to Calgary and who moved out of the city -- is significantly down. Net migration in 2005-2006 was 25,557, dropping to 17,631 in 2006-2007. Fewer people are moving here -- and more are leaving -- no doubt discouraged by the near-impossibility of buying a home, not just for those in lower-income categories, but for middle-income earners as well.
When times are prosperous, people have more babies, and that traditional observation is certainly reflected in the increase in newborn Calgarians. It is safe to assume that the parents of these babies have been comfortably established here at least for a few years, bought their homes before prices soared out of reach, and are thus able to afford to have more children.
The footprints of the housing crisis come sharply into focus again upon examination of movements in and out of various Calgary neighbourhoods. Only two communities boasted of a 100 per cent population increase -- Auburn Bay and Silverado. Both of those are outlying subdivisions in the southern half of the city, reflecting the outward radiating of the affordability spectrum. Calgary's growth is mirroring that of Vancouver's -- as housing costs increase, affordability moves to the farthest out neighbourhoods.
It is also telling that of communities showing an increase of more than 1,000 people, only one of them -- the Beltline -- is part of the inner city. The rest are also more far-flung subdivisions, including Bridlewood, Cranston, Evergreen, McKenzie Towne, Royal Oak, Springbank Hill and Tuscany. The census shows housing stock is on the increase, with existing and under-construction housing up 11,768 units this April over last. While more homes are becoming available, the affordability factor is deterring the migration of people here from other provinces who otherwise would be buying them.
Calgary faces a dilemma that is costly for taxpayers and for the environment. Middle-income earners are flocking to the outermost suburbs because that's where it's cheapest to live. Yet, these suburban homesteaders require an ever-increasing and expensive network of services -- utilities, schools, parks, police, fire, ambulance, roads, garbage collection, buses and assorted other infrastructure -- that creates new drains on the public purse, besides adding to Calgary's already triple-E size environmental footprint.
The city cannot simply continue to sprawl, building roads and subdivisions in perpetuity, but must find ways to redirect the flow back to the city. Expecting that everyone who moves to Calgary, the third most expensive city in Canada after Toronto and Vancouver, should be able to live in a single-family home is not realistic. Developers must begin to look at other options such as high-rise apartment blocks closer to downtown, as Toronto has done.
For the economy to continue booming, Calgary needs workers. It cannot afford to let housing costs turn them away; rather it must seek innovative ways to welcome them here.

© The Calgary Herald 2007

[murman]

Originally Posted by freeweed

Another stat that indirectly points to just how many condo conversions are happening - Calgary has the highest rate of home ownership in the country. In the second most expensive city to live in.

Neat, that.

Calgary's had very high ownership rates for MANY years, but it's only recently that housing has been comparatively expensive. Not THAT neat.

[CMD UW]

Originally Posted by Rob D

Look at the population of Sherwood Park near Edmonton. IIRC they are still officially a hamlet when they could have had city status decades ago.

Yes, Sherwood Park has remained a 'hamlet' due to Strathcona's 'Specialized Municipality' designation. In this regard, the County maintains control over its roadways other than Provincial highways, etc.

[Western Spaghetti]

I'm happy to see the Beltline grow by over a thousand people. That type of growth for an inner city neighborhood would be significant in any North American city, and it's only going to grow more next year

[Daver]

Originally Posted by Boris550

In Alberta's case, there is very little difference whether or not a municipality redesignates itself. There are a few obvious ones though, such as:



The conditions for being able to become a city in Alberta:



Actually, the ONLY differences in the Alberta MGA between cities and the rest have to do with roads...

The advantages they might see in not redesignating could be as simple as wanting to be seen as "home away from the city" or something quaint like that...

You're forgetting a very important thing Boris. "Money" which is the most inportant factor in determining wheather a community decides to gain it's city charter. A "Town" will benefit consideribly more than will a city of the same size in terms of capital, municipal infrastrucure and C-fip grants issued by both the provincial and federal governments. A city doesn't get the stransfers and grants a Town, Village or Hamlet will. A city is self-sustaining. I know that Drumheller was a city since 1930. and in 1997 it dropped it's city charter after amalgamation with the Municipal District of Badlands. In doing so it was more eligable to recieve more grant money for infrastructure inprovements and acutually increased it's annual capital budget by 20 to 30%.