Ottawa - Worst Suburban Sprawl in Canada

[Harley613]

CBC has used AI to measure population density in Canada's major urban areas from 2001 to 2021, and guess which city wins the prize for the worst urban sprawl in Canada?

https://ici.radio-canada.ca/info/202...climatiques/en

Montreal -9.7%
Toronto +1.9%
Calgary +3.3%
Edmonton +5%
Hamilton -11.2%
Ottawa-Gatineau -18.5%
Quebec -1.7%
Vancouver -1.5%
Winnipeg -12.9%

Ottawa is far and away the least sustainable worst managed city in Canada. A National embarrassment in the era of rapid climate change. We are doing the least to prepare for the future, and it's sad. Million dollar cookie cutter townhomes in tracts extending to the horizon is what we want and it's what we continue to get.

[vtecyo]

Originally Posted by Harley613

CBC has used AI to measure population density in Canada's major urban areas from 2001 to 2021, and guess which city wins the prize for the worst urban sprawl in Canada?

https://ici.radio-canada.ca/info/202...climatiques/en

Montreal -9.7%
Toronto +1.9%
Calgary +3.3%
Edmonton +5%
Hamilton -11.2%
Ottawa-Gatineau -18.5%
Quebec -1.7%
Vancouver -1.5%
Winnipeg -12.9%

Ottawa is far and away the least sustainable worst managed city in Canada. A National embarrassment in the era of rapid climate change. We are doing the least to prepare for the future, and it's sad. Million dollar cookie cutter townhomes in tracts extending to the horizon is what we want and it's what we continue to get.

Ouch... I knew the growth of the suburbs was significant - but dude...

BTW - that website is super-slick, I love the use of 3d map/chart/things.

[Harley613]

Mods can we change my thread title to worst SUBURBAN sprawl in Canada?

[rocketphish]

Originally Posted by harley613

mods can we change my thread title to worst suburban sprawl in canada?

[Nowhere]

I'm surprised to see that the population density increased in Calgary. They seem to have a lot of sprawl similar to Ottawa.

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Nowhere

I'm surprised to see that the population density increased in Calgary. They seem to have a lot of sprawl similar to Ottawa.

I think some of this is how large the city limits are. Edmonton and Ottawa are both very large so most of the sprawl counts against them. Toronto much of it is outside the GTA. Hamilton almost all of it is.

[Nowhere]

Originally Posted by YOWetal

I think some of this is how large the city limits are. Edmonton and Ottawa are both very large so most of the sprawl counts against them. Toronto much of it is outside the GTA. Hamilton almost all of it is.

They were looking at the urban areas, not within the city limits, so there must be another explanation.

[Harley613]

If you look at Ottawa and Calgary side by side at the same scale, the difference is jarring. Calgary is so dense and contained within or close by it's ring road. Ottawa looks like a random paint accident with very little sense to it's sprawl. The furthest you can walk in one direction and still be within the urban agglomeration is 9 kilometers less in Calgary than in Ottawa, and in Ottawa that extra 9kms is unserviced greenbelt land that we are extending our utilities across.

[m0nkyman]

How dismal.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by Harley613

If you look at Ottawa and Calgary side by side at the same scale, the difference is jarring. Calgary is so dense and contained within or close by it's ring road. Ottawa looks like a random paint accident with very little sense to it's sprawl. The furthest you can walk in one direction and still be within the urban agglomeration is 9 kilometers less in Calgary than in Ottawa, and in Ottawa that extra 9kms is unserviced greenbelt land that we are extending our utilities across.

The Greenbelt is what kills us when it comes to lack of density, for better or worse. That, and the ridiculous expanse of land, thanks to Mike Harris. Gatineau has some huge gaps as well, with Golf Clubs in the west and nothingness between the airport and Anger, followed by another stretch of nothing to Masson and Buckingham.

That said, the inner Greenbelt to me seems far denser than Calgary or Edmonton. Clusters of towers in quite a few spots. The "urban" downtown neighbourhoods stretch further as well, roughly 13kmx6km, while Calgary, there isn't much outside Downtown and the Beltline (3kmx2km) and Edmonton, a bit more expansive than Calgary (maybe 4kmx3km).

Full disclosure, I've never been to Calgary or Edmonton, but they do seem more like American Cities, with a tower cluster Downtown and a sudden drop to single family outside the core. But yes, they are far more compact as they don't have Greenbelts and they've grown by annexing areas outside town bit by bit instead of amalgamating with rural counties far and wide, which encouraged further sprawl in Ottawa (and Gatineau).

[Richard Eade]

Yup, there are lots of ways to interpret statistics.

Just for fun, since the majority seem to be comparing Ottawa-Gatineau to Calgary, based on what the Radio-Canada site presents, I’ll give a different interpretation:

(All numbers that I use are from the data used in the Radio-Canada article, and can be found at https://ici.radio-canada.ca/info/cod...alysis.nb.html)

In 2001, Calgary’s population was 977,810; its urban area was 427 km2; giving a density of 2,282 people per km2.
In 2001, Ottawa-Gatineau had 1,127,704 people; in an area of 380 km2; giving a density of 3,091 people per km2.

Based on that, I would say that Ottawa-Gatineau was winning the ‘density competition’ by a fair amount, in 2001.

Fast forward to 2021, and Calgary has increased its urban area by 201 km2, while Ottawa-Gatineau has only increased its urban area by 189 km2. So, Ottawa-Gatineau started smaller and increased by a smaller amount, compared to Calgary.

Well, why is Calgary being praised and Ottawa-Gatineau vilified? Because Calgary’s density increased, while Ottawa-Gatineau’s dropped.

How can that be, if Ottawa-Gatineau increased their urban area by a smaller amount? Because more people mover to Calgary than to Ottawa-Gatineau – a lot more people. Calgary’s population increased by 504,698, while Ottawa-Gatineau’s population grew by 306,644. Thus, Calgary was fortunate enough to have enough new people come there to compensate for the large growth in its urban area.

It turned out that there was something of an ‘oil boom’ during recent times. That puts money into Alberta, which attracts people. Looking at the population growth numbers: Calgary and Edmonton grew by about 50%, having the highest draw (petroleum money); Vancouver, Toronto and Ottawa-Gatineau by about 27%, being quite desirable places; ‘Winter’peg, being less desirable, grew by only 19%; then there were the two Quebec-based cities, Montreal and Quebec City, which only grew by about 18% (perhaps because of the language issue); Hamilton was at the bottom of the growth list at 14% (but, having visited Hamilton, I can understand why).

I have sometimes heard people proclaim that “numbers don’t lie.” But, sometimes, they don’t tell the whole story, either. There are usually reasons behind the numbers.

Oh, and the urban density competition, even after Calgary’s gain and Ottawa-Gatineau’s decline, still goes to Ottawa-Gatineau, with a 2021 density of 2,520, over Calgary’s 2,358 people per km2.

Oh, and if you go to the website listed above, you can find interesting phenomenon; like the sudden increase in Ottawa-Gatineau’s urban size when Watson became mayor. (I will leave you to decide if it was payback for help getting elected. It may not be, since there were several cities that increased the rate of urban expansion around the same time.)

[Williamoforange]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

Yup, there are lots of ways to interpret statistics.

Just for fun, since the majority seem to be comparing Ottawa-Gatineau to Calgary, based on what the Radio-Canada site presents, I’ll give a different interpretation:

(All numbers that I use are from the data used in the Radio-Canada article, and can be found at https://ici.radio-canada.ca/info/cod...alysis.nb.html)

In 2001, Calgary’s population was 977,810; its urban area was 427 km2; giving a density of 2,282 people per km2.
In 2001, Ottawa-Gatineau had 1,127,704 people; in an area of 380 km2; giving a density of 3,091 people per km2.

Based on that, I would say that Ottawa-Gatineau was winning the ‘density competition’ by a fair amount, in 2001.

Fast forward to 2021, and Calgary has increased its urban area by 201 km2, while Ottawa-Gatineau has only increased its urban area by 189 km2. So, Ottawa-Gatineau started smaller and increased by a smaller amount, compared to Calgary.

Well, why is Calgary being praised and Ottawa-Gatineau vilified? Because Calgary’s density increased, while Ottawa-Gatineau’s dropped.

How can that be, if Ottawa-Gatineau increased their urban area by a smaller amount? Because more people mover to Calgary than to Ottawa-Gatineau – a lot more people. Calgary’s population increased by 504,698, while Ottawa-Gatineau’s population grew by 306,644. Thus, Calgary was fortunate enough to have enough new people come there to compensate for the large growth in its urban area.

It turned out that there was something of an ‘oil boom’ during recent times. That puts money into Alberta, which attracts people. Looking at the population growth numbers: Calgary and Edmonton grew by about 50%, having the highest draw (petroleum money); Vancouver, Toronto and Ottawa-Gatineau by about 27%, being quite desirable places; ‘Winter’peg, being less desirable, grew by only 19%; then there were the two Quebec-based cities, Montreal and Quebec City, which only grew by about 18% (perhaps because of the language issue); Hamilton was at the bottom of the growth list at 14% (but, having visited Hamilton, I can understand why).

I have sometimes heard people proclaim that “numbers don’t lie.” But, sometimes, they don’t tell the whole story, either. There are usually reasons behind the numbers.

Oh, and the urban density competition, even after Calgary’s gain and Ottawa-Gatineau’s decline, still goes to Ottawa-Gatineau, with a 2021 density of 2,520, over Calgary’s 2,358 people per km2.

Oh, and if you go to the website listed above, you can find interesting phenomenon; like the sudden increase in Ottawa-Gatineau’s urban size when Watson became mayor. (I will leave you to decide if it was payback for help getting elected. It may not be, since there were several cities that increased the rate of urban expansion around the same time.)

Ottawa lost a court case around 2011 when they tried to not expand the urban boundary. So no nothing untowards done by a mayor....and its incredibly ... to even attempt to imply as much....

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottaw...dered-1.976213

[Nowhere]

I wonder how Radio-Canada calculated the urban density. 1,945 people / km² for 2021 for Ottawa - Gatineau according to the website linked below, rather than the 2,520 / km² cited by Radio-Canada.

Kanata is far enough that they consider it a separate urban area with a surprisingly higher density than the Ottawa - Gatineau urban area, 2,199/km².

Map of Ottawa urban area : https://www.citypopulation.de/en/can...tawa_gatineau/
Map of Kanata urban area : https://www.citypopulation.de/en/can...A0399__kanata/

[YOWetal]

Originally Posted by Richard Eade

Yup, there are lots of ways to interpret statistics.

In 2001, Calgary’s population was 977,810; its urban area was 427 km2; giving a density of 2,282 people per km2.
In 2001, Ottawa-Gatineau had 1,127,704 people; in an area of 380 km2; giving a density of 3,091 people per km2.

Based on that, I would say that Ottawa-Gatineau was winning the ‘density competition’ by a fair amount, in 2001.

Fast forward to 2021, and Calgary has increased its urban area by 201 km2, while Ottawa-Gatineau has only increased its urban area by 189 km2. So, Ottawa-Gatineau started smaller and increased by a smaller amount, compared to Calgary.

Well, why is Calgary being praised and Ottawa-Gatineau vilified? Because Calgary’s density increased, while Ottawa-Gatineau’s dropped.

How can that be, if Ottawa-Gatineau increased their urban area by a smaller amount? Because more people mover to Calgary than to Ottawa-Gatineau – a lot more people. Calgary’s population increased by 504,698, while Ottawa-Gatineau’s population grew by 306,644. Thus, Calgary was fortunate enough to have enough new people come there to compensate for the large growth in its urban area.

It turned out that there was something of an ‘oil boom’ during recent times. That puts money into Alberta, which attracts people. Looking at the population growth numbers: Calgary and Edmonton grew by about 50%, having the highest draw (petroleum money); Vancouver, Toronto and Ottawa-Gatineau by about 27%, being quite desirable places; ‘Winter’peg, being less desirable, grew by only 19%; then there were the two Quebec-based cities, Montreal and Quebec City, which only grew by about 18% (perhaps because of the language issue); Hamilton was at the bottom of the growth list at 14% (but, having visited Hamilton, I can understand why).

I have sometimes heard people proclaim that “numbers don’t lie.” But, sometimes, they don’t tell the whole story, either. There are usually reasons behind the numbers.

Oh, and the urban density competition, even after Calgary’s gain and Ottawa-Gatineau’s decline, still goes to Ottawa-Gatineau, with a 2021 density of 2,520, over Calgary’s 2,358 people per km2.

Oh, and if you go to the website listed above, you can find interesting phenomenon; like the sudden increase in Ottawa-Gatineau’s urban size when Watson became mayor. (I will leave you to decide if it was payback for help getting elected. It may not be, since there were several cities that increased the rate of urban expansion around the same time.)

Good analysis and as usual better than the journalists who have a story to push (not that they are wrong that 20 years of Ottawa development has been unending sprawl). When you look only at density but ignore the increase in the urban area you are making a meaningless comparison.

So our huge increase in housing in Stittsville Rockland etc doesn't count against us but adding huge swaths of farmland to the urban boundary and then only slowly developing it does.

The Green belt is also irrelevant to this analysis even though as others said it is a huge source of sprawl. The only thing I will say to that is having the Greenbelt and places like Mer Bleu, Green Creek, Chipmunk trail, the beaches close to the city does have value.

[phil235]

Not that Ottawa doesn’t have some big issues, but it seems that the Experimental Farm is included in Ottawa’s calculations, which is a pretty big hit to the city’s density. I’m not clear on the greenbelt. If that is also included, then that is the whole answer as to why Calgary is denser. Because from the eye test, it definitely is not.

[YOWflier]

Originally Posted by phil235

Not that Ottawa doesn’t have some big issues, but it seems that the Experimental Farm is included in Ottawa’s calculations, which is a pretty big hit to the city’s density. I’m not clear on the greenbelt. If that is also included, then that is the whole answer as to why Calgary is denser. Because from the eye test, it definitely is not.

Only been to Calgary once about 10 years ago but I was surprised by how dense it wasn’t outside the core area (e.g. we have and had back then mid/high rises sprinkled all around town…didn’t notice similar there).

Doesn’t change that Ottawa’s excessively sprawly. I largely blame the farm and the belt.

[phil235]

Originally Posted by YOWflier

Only been to Calgary once about 10 years ago but I was surprised by how dense it wasn’t outside the core area (e.g. we have and had back then mid/high rises sprinkled all around town…didn’t notice similar there).

Doesn’t change that Ottawa’s excessively sprawly. I largely blame the farm and the belt.

Yeah, I have family in the Calgary hinterlands and it is really sprawly. Ottawa actually has quite a lot of high rises/multi family housing in its suburbs, relatively speaking.

Agreed, the greenbelt and farm exist and are big sprawl generators.

[YOWflier]

And satellite imagery at the above scale doesn't convey that type of density all that well. You just see built up area where it’s visible* but it could be chalk full of SFHs.

* are these images typically captured at a time of year where deciduous tree canopy isn’t developed yet? Something like that could easily affect the appearance of density.

[Harley613]

No matter how the data is presented, I will always be opposed to extending the outer suburbs when we have so much farmland in the Greenbelt. In my perfect world, we expropriate the farms, preserve the natural spaces, and open up the next 50 years of sustainable growth.

[OTSkyline]

Yet the City of Ottawa keeps approving expansions, rubber-stamping all low-density SFH neighbourhoods while delaying and fighting new denser projects within the greenbelt; opposing height & density even on major roads near rapid transit.