Dr. David L. A. Gordon leads a research project at Queen's University that is focused on determining the proportion of the Canadian population that lives in a suburb. Why this is interesting is because the data isn't normally looked at in this way. As I understand it, the way Statistics Canada thinks about things is that you're either rural or you're urban, living in a major population center.
But this isn't exactly right. Obviously there's a difference between living in a dense transit-oriented community and living in a car-centric one. The former is actually "urban" and the latter is not.
So what the research team set out to do was more accurately classify Canadian cities. And after doing that, they ended up with four categories within each census metropolitan area: (1) active core, (2) transit suburb, (3) auto suburb, and (4) exurban. See above example. What they then discovered is that about 66% of Canadians live in a suburb. And in our largest cities -- Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver -- the figure is over 80%.
Canada is often referred to as one of the most urbanized nations in the world. But as we can see here, that's not exactly true. Canada is more accurately a suburban nation.
Image: Canadian Suburbs
This is an interesting chart from Bloomberg showing the most affluent metropolitan areas in the US in 1949. As you can see, at the top of this list is Detroit, followed by mostly older industrial centers.
Now here's the list today:
I opened Twitter today and one of the first tweets that I saw was about Austin passing a new resolution that allows 3 homes on every lot by-right; lowers the minimum lot size to 2,500 sf; and expedites planning approvals for triplexes and fourplexes. I then scrolled a bit further and found a tweet on how Vancouver is about to vote on a new motion that will allow 4-6 homes on every residential lot as-of-right. (The US typically uses the term "by-right", whereas in Canada we use "as-of-right".)
None of this is surprising. As many of you know, Toronto just did something similar by allowing fourplexes + a laneway or garden suite on every residential lot. But all of this is still noteworthy because it reinforces one simple fact: cities across North America are all starting to rethink their low-rise single-family neighborhoods. I know that many of you will say that fourplexes are not enough. We should be doing more. But I think this is an important step.
The single-family home hegemony is ending. We are now asking our cities to do more with the same amount of land.
Dr. David L. A. Gordon leads a research project at Queen's University that is focused on determining the proportion of the Canadian population that lives in a suburb. Why this is interesting is because the data isn't normally looked at in this way. As I understand it, the way Statistics Canada thinks about things is that you're either rural or you're urban, living in a major population center.
But this isn't exactly right. Obviously there's a difference between living in a dense transit-oriented community and living in a car-centric one. The former is actually "urban" and the latter is not.
So what the research team set out to do was more accurately classify Canadian cities. And after doing that, they ended up with four categories within each census metropolitan area: (1) active core, (2) transit suburb, (3) auto suburb, and (4) exurban. See above example. What they then discovered is that about 66% of Canadians live in a suburb. And in our largest cities -- Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver -- the figure is over 80%.
Canada is often referred to as one of the most urbanized nations in the world. But as we can see here, that's not exactly true. Canada is more accurately a suburban nation.
Image: Canadian Suburbs
This is an interesting chart from Bloomberg showing the most affluent metropolitan areas in the US in 1949. As you can see, at the top of this list is Detroit, followed by mostly older industrial centers.
Now here's the list today:
I opened Twitter today and one of the first tweets that I saw was about Austin passing a new resolution that allows 3 homes on every lot by-right; lowers the minimum lot size to 2,500 sf; and expedites planning approvals for triplexes and fourplexes. I then scrolled a bit further and found a tweet on how Vancouver is about to vote on a new motion that will allow 4-6 homes on every residential lot as-of-right. (The US typically uses the term "by-right", whereas in Canada we use "as-of-right".)
None of this is surprising. As many of you know, Toronto just did something similar by allowing fourplexes + a laneway or garden suite on every residential lot. But all of this is still noteworthy because it reinforces one simple fact: cities across North America are all starting to rethink their low-rise single-family neighborhoods. I know that many of you will say that fourplexes are not enough. We should be doing more. But I think this is an important step.
The single-family home hegemony is ending. We are now asking our cities to do more with the same amount of land.
It's largely a different list; but importantly, it's not an entirely new list. San Francisco was a wealthy city in 1949 and it remains one of the wealthiest today. But could that be changing? Given the city's current challenges, some are questioning whether it might end up as another Detroit.
I don't see that happening. And for what it's worth, here's evidence of nearly 75 years of resiliency.
Images: Bloomberg
It's largely a different list; but importantly, it's not an entirely new list. San Francisco was a wealthy city in 1949 and it remains one of the wealthiest today. But could that be changing? Given the city's current challenges, some are questioning whether it might end up as another Detroit.
I don't see that happening. And for what it's worth, here's evidence of nearly 75 years of resiliency.
Images: Bloomberg
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog
Share Dialog