Canadian Maps and Graphics

[MonctonRad]

Thanks! Very interesting article.

I am not at all surprised that Moncton is not considered "amenity dense." I personally live in the suburbs, and have to drive all the time for even the smallest purchase. This is a pain, but at least things that I want are almost always less than 10 minutes away by car. Even my place of work is only 10 minutes away, which is a luxury given the length of commutes in most larger cities.

[EspionNoir]

Thanks for posting J.OT13. It seems that currently Winnipeg's situation in this aspect is actually ok after all. Recent efforts in increasing density in central neighborhoods must have paid off. It is evident in the the fact that many developments are coming. University of Manitoba certainly has played a major role in the increased density in southern Winnipeg.

[ghYHZ]

Originally Posted by Andy6

There was a big US Air Force base (Kinross, later Kincheloe) at the Sault in those days...........

The Canadian Government once contributed funding to establish Airports and radio range stations on Michigan’s Upper Peninsula in the mid 1940's at Kinross, Grand Marais and Houghton

The original Trans-Canada Air Lines (Air Canada) Transcontinental Route from Toronto to Winnipeg and onto Vancouver was north of Lake Superior through Kapuskasing and Armstrong, Ontario. In the mid 1940's the airway was realigned to provide a shorter route from Gore Bay on Manitoulin Island, Ontario (south of Sault St Marie) to Port Arthur-Fort William (Thunder Bay) Canada’s DOT required airports be at approximately 100 mile intervals along the route.....so the need to establish those airports in Upper Michigan and so the funding contribution.

Trans-Canada Air Lines actually managed the airport at Kinross, Michigan until the USAF took over and then TCA became the tenant. Sault Ste Marie, Ontario was served from Kinross until the Department of Transport establish a new airport in the Sault in 1961. Until then, Canadian passengers (flying domestic) were carried “In Bond” across the border by bus and not required to clear US Customs (can you imagine that happening now!)

TCA 1944 Map....the Transcontinental Route goes through Kapuskasing.....





TCA 1947 Map....the route now goes through Michigan’s Upper Peninsula and Kapukasing was now at the end of a spur from North Bay and Porquis







(and a New Brunswick note to MonctonRad......notice in the first map above that Saint John and Fredericton were served through Blissville about midway between the two cities. Then on the 1947 map.....the Saint John Airport was now at Pennfield))

[someone123]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

From the Globe & Mail.

Rendered kind of useless by the strange boundaries. Halifax is really no different from the other cities except for amalgamation; the difference in proportions is therefore not meaningful.

Many of the supposedly amenity-dense blocks in Vancouver are semi-suburban blocks with nothing but houses. There is no way that all of these residential parts of South Vancouver are more amenity-dense than all of downtown St. John's which is shown as "not amenity dense".

[MolsonExport]

flytrippers

[MolsonExport]

For old time's sake:

amazon

[MolsonExport]

narcity

[MolsonExport]

Canada currently only has the 38th largest population in the world, and that number has been gradually slipping since 1955 when we were in 30th place. Experts predict that by 2045 we'll fall back in 47th place. Woot?

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by someone123

Rendered kind of useless by the strange boundaries. Halifax is really no different from the other cities except for amalgamation; the difference in proportions is therefore not meaningful.

Many of the supposedly amenity-dense blocks in Vancouver are semi-suburban blocks with nothing but houses. There is no way that all of these residential parts of South Vancouver are more amenity-dense than all of downtown St. John's which is shown as "not amenity dense".

Ottawa's similar to Halifax in terms of land area, encompassing a vast rural expanse around the built-up area. We're a little over half the size of Halifax in area.

I find that post-war suburban areas, up until the 1980s-90s had a decent 15 minute neighbourhood feel. That was the era of the strip malls, where they provided your grocery store and pharmacy, with a few smaller independent shops/restaurants in between. They often included a generous sidewalk in front of the strip mall. In the Ottawa area, Touraine in Gatineau (60s) and Fallingbrook in Orleans (80s) are good examples of this, where it's possible to walk/bike to those strip malls, run a few errands and still feel welcome/safe doing it.

It's the age of the big box store that completely destroyed the idea of community oriented development, with nothing but huge chain stores spread-out in massive parking lots along wide car-oriented boulevards. I would never feel safe biking or walking down Innes or Terry Fox.

My Touraine and Fallingbrook examples with their strip malls are more walkable than denser big box store Le Plateau (2000s) in Gatineau in my experience.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by EspionNoir

Thanks for posting J.OT13. It seems that currently Winnipeg's situation in this aspect is actually ok after all. Recent efforts in increasing density in central neighborhoods must have paid off. It is evident in the the fact that many developments are coming. University of Manitoba certainly has played a major role in the increased density in southern Winnipeg.

That map is extremely flattering to Winnipeg... many of the walkable areas are either technically walkable only in the sense that there are stores and other amenities close to each other but it's still car dominated and no one would really ever find walking around there an enjoyable experience (like the areas near Burrows & Keewatin or around St. Vital Mall), or the areas are poor with few amenities and relatively high crime and therefore not the most pleasant places to walk, particularly at night (parts of the North End, Centennial).

That said, it does give some areas that are not always thought of as well rounded, walkable areas their due, like Transcona and West Kildonan/Scotia Heights.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by J.OT13

Ottawa's similar to Halifax in terms of land area, encompassing a vast rural expanse around the built-up area. We're a little over half the size of Halifax in area.

It is true that in Atlantic Canada there are often very limited amenities in suburban locations. But then again a lot of people there like to live in exurbs on large lots; they consciously make a trade-off to have more space and privacy in exchange for fewer amenities.

The City of Vancouver is equivalent to something like a portion of the city of St. John's or the old City of Halifax prior to amalgamation (peninsula plus some mainland suburbs that were developed around the early 1900's to 1950's). Toronto and Vancouver are not even quite comparable.

Another factor that tends to be ignored is that some areas are more expensive than others. In many of these high amenity detached housing neighbourhoods houses cost $1M or more. It's possible that they could become more affordable if they were more common but richer households tend to be able to support more amenities around them. For most Canadian families it's not practical to move to inner Toronto or Vancouver.

[Andy6]

Don't we have cars to go to amenities in? There are long stretches of winter in Winnipeg where you'd drive somewhere rather than walk 2 minutes, let alone 15. Small neighbourhood shops are going to have a very tough time of it during the winter, when it's easier to get everything done at the mall or Costco.

[EspionNoir]

Originally Posted by Andy6

Don't we have cars to go to amenities in? There are long stretches of winter in Winnipeg where you'd drive somewhere rather than walk 2 minutes, let alone 15. Small neighbourhood shops are going to have a very tough time of it during the winter, when it's easier to get everything done at the mall or Costco.

People who live in neighborhood like the Exchange district and Osborne Village would think otherwise I guess. There are many businesses in these areas. In addition, shopping delivery services are popular nowadays, which saves considerable amount of time.

Originally Posted by esquire

That map is extremely flattering to Winnipeg... many of the walkable areas are either technically walkable only in the sense that there are stores and other amenities close to each other but it's still car dominated and no one would really ever find walking around there an enjoyable experience (like the areas near Burrows & Keewatin or around St. Vital Mall), or the areas are poor with few amenities and relatively high crime and therefore not the most pleasant places to walk, particularly at night (parts of the North End, Centennial).

That said, it does give some areas that are not always thought of as well rounded, walkable areas their due, like Transcona and West Kildonan/Scotia Heights.

In my opinion, these factors don't defeat that these neighborhood have amenities and that people are living in these areas. Despite that things can get rough in some of these neighborhoods, they still have amenities residents can enjoy.

[Jaws]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Canada currently only has the 38th largest population in the world, and that number has been gradually slipping since 1955 when we were in 30th place. Experts predict that by 2045 we'll fall back in 47th place. Woot?

A lot of developing countries have high birth rates? Too many people in the world as it is. Obviously we’ll have to rely on immigration to keep our growth rate high enough to service the economy given our aging demographic.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Canada currently only has the 38th largest population in the world, and that number has been gradually slipping since 1955 when we were in 30th place. Experts predict that by 2045 we'll fall back in 47th place. Woot?

Canada is a victim of it's climate and geography. Our population density will always be low compared to almost every other country. I have great difficulty imagining a Canada with more than 75-80 million people; but even that would be something, putting us roughly on par with major European countries like Germany, the UK and France.

[wave46]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Canada currently only has the 38th largest population in the world, and that number has been gradually slipping since 1955 when we were in 30th place. Experts predict that by 2045 we'll fall back in 47th place. Woot?

That's more a story of some other countries growing very rapidly.

I think we'd be better off focusing on what kind of Canada we want to build, instead of a number for the sake of a number.

[Peggerino]

Originally Posted by wave46

That's more a story of some other countries growing very rapidly.

I think we'd be better off focusing on what kind of Canada we want to build, instead of a number for the sake of a number.

Totally. I don't see how having a relatively small population is a negative thing if it's not negatively impacting society, which it really isn't at the moment. It's also not like the country isn't growing, it's just not growing as fast as a lot of less developed countries are which is a good thing.

[JHikka]

Originally Posted by Peggerino

Totally. I don't see how having a relatively small population is a negative thing if it's not negatively impacting society, which it really isn't at the moment. It's also not like the country isn't growing, it's just not growing as fast as a lot of less developed countries are which is a good thing.

But it means we have to point at the population listing on wikipedia and sigh as we only rank 38 instead of 34 or 35, disappointed by our ability as a country.

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by wave46

That's more a story of some other countries growing very rapidly.

I think we'd be better off focusing on what kind of Canada we want to build, instead of a number for the sake of a number.

I agree, and I am not fetishizing a larger population for the sake of a larger population, especially since we all know that most of the growth is going to go in the places that are already very crowded. One thing I do lament about our comparatively small population is that we are completely overshadowed by the colossus to the south, whether it comes to our own culture, technology, corporations, and increasingly, politics.

[esquire]

Originally Posted by JHikka

But it means we have to point at the population listing on wikipedia and sigh as we only rank 38 instead of 34 or 35, disappointed by our ability as a country.

We need to get our act together and climb up the standings, or we'll miss the population playoffs!

I am much more concerned with quality of life and overall prosperity. If growing our population will improve those things, then let's pump up the numbers. But I'm not really convinced that's the case.