HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #21  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2011, 3:08 AM
BretttheRiderFan's Avatar
BretttheRiderFan BretttheRiderFan is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 2,667
Quote:
Originally Posted by thefourthtower View Post
i believe Reginas population has reached 220,000 already way way off on that stat.
Like I said the stats are from the 2001-2006 census growth rates so obviously it's not entirely accurate, just showing what would happen if those growth rates continued.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #22  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2011, 3:12 AM
JHikka's Avatar
JHikka JHikka is offline
ハルウララ
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,853
St. John's, Halifax, Thunder Bay, & Regina/Saskatoon.

No real particular reason for each. St. John's would continue to be the centre for everything in NFLD, Halifax would continue it's upward growth. Thunder Bay becomes a larger centre in Northern Ontario, and either of the Saskatchewan cities become more important in the prairies.

The bigger cities are always important, but it's just as fun watching the mid-size places grow.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #23  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2011, 3:54 AM
TallBob TallBob is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 3,135
I feel the prosperity of the provinces will be the determining factor in how large some smaller cities grow. Also, small cities prosper the large cities prosper more. I also feel Saskatewan and Manitoba will do better than anticipated. Just my opinion.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #24  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2011, 4:13 AM
Andy6's Avatar
Andy6 Andy6 is offline
Starring as himself
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Toronto Yorkville
Posts: 9,764
I'd guess that as business becomes more Internet based, there will be a lot of people leaving the Toronto area, and some other larger cities, for smaller more 'livable' places. I'd expect that Halifax, Fredericton, Saint John, Peterborough, Orillia, North Bay, Sault Ste. Marie, Regina, Saskatoon and Victoria, among others, will be big beneficiaries of this movement over the next 50 years.

If I could come up with a catchy name for this theory, and stretch it into book-length, I could be the new Richard Florida.
__________________
crispy crunchy light and snappy
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #25  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2011, 4:15 AM
Black Star Black Star is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 7,259
Hey pretty cool thread.

Who knows what the future holds.

But...Calgary surpassing Van...lol.

Anyway just an observation.

I see Edmonton as the dark horse. But we all know bigger is not better.

The people..the character...and of course the Downtown and its restaurants lol.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #26  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2011, 6:39 AM
suburbanite's Avatar
suburbanite suburbanite is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Toronto & NYC
Posts: 5,649
Churchill, Manitoba. We need a deep sea northern port .
__________________
Discontented suburbanite since 1994
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #27  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2011, 6:45 AM
Spoolmak Spoolmak is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: British Columbia
Posts: 692
If calgary could surpass van, then Vancouver could and Should surpass mtl.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #28  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2011, 7:12 AM
logan5's Avatar
logan5 logan5 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Mt.Pleasant - The New Downtown South
Posts: 8,169
Quote:
Originally Posted by suburbanite View Post
Churchill, Manitoba. We need a deep sea northern port .
That's a good point about a northern port. Tuktoyaktuk could be a maja playa in the future.

With global warming, routes in the Arctic are opening up along with the possibility of oil and gas exploration. There could also be a gas pipeline and port set up near Tuktoyaktuk at the mouth of the Mackenzie.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #29  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2011, 11:13 AM
Tone's Avatar
Tone Tone is offline
Riki beach
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Rimouski, Qc
Posts: 3,437
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spoolmak View Post
If calgary could surpass van, then Vancouver could and Should surpass mtl.
Seriously? You're aware that Montreal is almost twice the size of Vancouver and is adding more people than Vancouver every year right?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #30  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2011, 11:35 AM
caltrane74's Avatar
caltrane74 caltrane74 is offline
gettin' rich!
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 34,204
After Toronto, Vancouver adds the most people.

54,000 more people added last year.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #31  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2011, 12:08 PM
Tone's Avatar
Tone Tone is offline
Riki beach
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Rimouski, Qc
Posts: 3,437
^Your right, my mistake! (only 41,000 for Montreal)

Anyway, i looked more for the last decade growth which gave me 433,000 for Montreal and 404,000 for Vancouver.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #32  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2011, 12:59 PM
eemy's Avatar
eemy eemy is offline
Closed account
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 4,425
After visiting it briefly for the first time, I think Yellowknife would make a fantastic larger city - say, 100k or so. The location would be breathtaking for a city that size.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #33  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2011, 2:58 PM
kool maudit's Avatar
kool maudit kool maudit is offline
video et taceo
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 14,345
only polemicists (hi, mark steyn) extrapolate demographic data more than a few years into the future.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #34  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2011, 3:56 PM
floobie floobie is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Calgary
Posts: 474
Basically everything, honestly. The sheer distances between some major population centres are pretty ridiculous at times.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #35  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2011, 5:28 PM
halifaxboyns halifaxboyns is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet earth
Posts: 3,883
I definately see the potential in Halifax to become a major centre beyond what it is now. The growth rate will put the end population well beyond 425,000 as was expected in their regional plan by 2027 - the population now is 408,000 (give or take). If the shipyard lands either the big or small ship contract, it will create lots of jobs which I suspect will be another draw for people to Halifax.

I honestly could see HRM hitting 700,000 if it does things right - granted that would be in 40 years.

St. John's is an interesting cookie. It will always be the centre of NFLD, but I don't know if I see it growing past 200,000 in 40 years. I'm just not sure on that.

London and Hamilton are great little cities, from what I've seen or read. They have tremendous potential to be bigger, especially Hamilton. I suspect the importance of the Hamilton airport will grow over the coming years as Pearson becomes more congested.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #36  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2011, 5:44 PM
north 42's Avatar
north 42 north 42 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Windsor, Ontario/Colchester, Ontario
Posts: 5,934
I think Regina and Saskatoon will be very interesting to watch grow, kind of like their Alberta counterparts have grown.

Halifax would also make sense to grow, given that it's the main centre of commerce in on east coast. St Johns also would be fun to watch grow.

Here in Ontario, Windsor, London, K-W, and Hamilton would also be great to see grow and prosper again. Southern Ontario has so much potential to have many large growing urban centres, especially outside of the GTA.

Yellowknife has great potential to grow, it already has a great skyline for it's tiny population.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #37  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2011, 6:07 PM
roccerfeller's Avatar
roccerfeller roccerfeller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: BC
Posts: 2,932
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jamaican-Phoenix View Post
St. John's, Halifax, Moncton, Saint John, Fredericton, Chicoutimi/Saguenay, Gatineau, Ottawa, London, Hamilton, Kitchener-Waterloo, Windsor, North Bay, Sudbury, Thunder Bay, Winnipeg, Regina, Saskatoon, Red Deer, Kelowna, Prince Rupert, Prince George, Victoria, Yellowknife, Iqaluit.
This one. I like this one.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #38  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2011, 6:09 PM
roccerfeller's Avatar
roccerfeller roccerfeller is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: BC
Posts: 2,932
Quote:
Originally Posted by BretttheRiderFan View Post
Like I said the stats are from the 2001-2006 census growth rates so obviously it's not entirely accurate, just showing what would happen if those growth rates continued.
Cool that's a really neat list - just goes to show how much growth rates can change in a few years.

I know it's been said a few times already, but looking solely at Regina as an example, it already has around that population. 50 yrs early.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #39  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2011, 6:19 PM
PoscStudent's Avatar
PoscStudent PoscStudent is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: St. John's
Posts: 3,817
Quote:
Originally Posted by halifaxboyns View Post
St. John's is an interesting cookie. It will always be the centre of NFLD, but I don't know if I see it growing past 200,000 in 40 years. I'm just not sure on that.
St. John's population is probably around 195,000 at the moment so I cannot imagine it would be that hard to reach 200,000 over the next 40 years.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #40  
Old Posted Sep 6, 2011, 6:39 PM
whiteford's Avatar
whiteford whiteford is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,526
1: Red Deer
2: Victoria
3:prince Rupert
4:Halifax
5:kelowna
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:44 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.