1625 replies to this topic

[Sparky]

Looks like an average 20 new bodies every day.

[Citified.ca]

 

Westshore population growth to outpace Saanich and Victoria as region heads towards 500,000 inhabitants

https://victoria.cit...00-inhabitants/

[Nparker]

I didn't realize how much the west shore was starting to look like Victoria, complete with harbours and cruise ship facilities. 

Edited by Nparker, 09 July 2019 - 09:08 AM.

[aastra]

I assumed that was Saanich.

[Coreyburger]

% population growth is an exciting number, but absolutely population growth (and job growth) is actually what matters. And by that metric, the Core is growing as fast or faster than the Westshore

[Mike K.]

% population growth is an exciting number, but absolutely population growth (and job growth) is actually what matters. And by that metric, the Core is growing as fast or faster than the Westshore

 

As per the article above:

 

"The majority of that growth is likely to occur on the Westshore, notes BCS, where the population will balloon from its 2018 estimate of 83,100 individuals to 125,400 (a net increase of 42,300) at a growth rate of 51%."

 

"Showing a growth rate of 14.5%, the core municipalities are on-track to accommodating 304,500 individuals, an increase of 38,500 over 2018. Dwellings will increase to 137,900-units from the current 111,300-units, a rise of 24%."

 

And that's with the core having assumed View Royal, which for two decades was considered a Westshore municipality until the CRD transferred the designation. I suspect that the Westshore will reach sustained growth parity with the core by the 2026 census (in 2016 the Westshore grew by 8,791 vs. the core's 12,887; in 2011 it grew by 10,187 vs. the core's 3,571) with the gap widening far above the forecasted 3,800 by 2038.

[Victoria Watcher]

view royal switching sides is like italy in ww2. for that reason alone it deserves to be annexed from all sides. coincidentally like poland at the beginning or berlin at the end of ww2.

[Mike K.]

No kidding. Split it up already.

[Coreyburger]

As per the article above:

 

"The majority of that growth is likely to occur on the Westshore, notes BCS, where the population will balloon from its 2018 estimate of 83,100 individuals to 125,400 (a net increase of 42,300) at a growth rate of 51%."

 

"Showing a growth rate of 14.5%, the core municipalities are on-track to accommodating 304,500 individuals, an increase of 38,500 over 2018. Dwellings will increase to 137,900-units from the current 111,300-units, a rise of 24%."

 

And that's with the core having assumed View Royal, which for two decades was considered a Westshore municipality until the CRD transferred the designation. I suspect that the Westshore will reach sustained growth parity with the core by the 2026 census (in 2016 the Westshore grew by 8,791 vs. the core's 12,887; in 2011 it grew by 10,187 vs. the core's 3,571) with the gap widening far above the forecasted 3,800 by 2038.

 

I'd take projected growth rates with a grain of salt. Having worked on them in a past, they are very much black box and have margins of error. Further, Victoria and Saanich have outgrown their projected rates in the past.
 

Edited by Coreyburger, 09 July 2019 - 09:32 AM.

[Mike K.]

I think you need to re-assess your opinions on population growth patterns in the CRD.

 

The core was outgrown 3:1 between 2006 and 2011, and had it not been for the View Royal switch, the biggest growth spurt the core had seen in decades would have ended less than 2,000 individuals above the Westshore.

 

The meagre 3,800 person increase for the Westshore is a very, very low and very, very safe estimate. By 2038 the Westshore is likely to be 10,000 residents ahead in terms of new population, based purely on the fact that the core attracts retirees and DINKS, while the Westshore attracts families and newlyweds who intend to have families (this is evidenced by the major school expansion plans on the Westshore).

[aastra]

Methinks we should note that Saanich's crazy post-1950s growth was expected to continue much longer than it did. Also, did anybody predict the CoV's current spurt?

 

 

Daily Colonist
January 29, 1977

Saanich plan: Eight local meetings urged

Saanich alderman Fred Severson would like to see eight public meetings held throughout the sprawling municipality to discuss the official community plan.

"If every community had their way there would be no growth, this is the feeling."

Severson wants to see a population in Saanich by 1995 of no more than 110,000. The Capital Region planning forecast by 1995 is 143,000. (aastra says: Saanich's population in 2016 ended up being only 114,000.)

[Coreyburger]

I think you need to re-assess your opinions on population growth patterns in the CRD.

 

The core was outgrown 3:1 between 2006 and 2011, and had it not been for the View Royal switch, the biggest growth spurt the core had seen in decades would have ended less than 2,000 individuals above the Westshore.

 

Yes, but fairly close. And look at 2011 to 2018:

 

Peninsula 4387 Westshore 13779 Core 25042

even if you allocate View Royal's 1,754 to the Westshore, you still are way above in the core.

[Mike K.]

Right. In 1977 nobody would have ever imagined that the dirt roads heading into Langford from the TCH would ever be paved.

 

Even Stats BC admits that their growth patterns initially put too much emphasis on politics (i.e. the CRD's urban containment aspirations) and didn't account for the desire for land, which the Westshore has an abundance of.

[Mike K.]

Yes, but fairly close. And look at 2011 to 2018:

 

Peninsula 4387 Westshore 13779 Core 25042

even if you allocate View Royal's 1,754 to the Westshore, you still are way above in the core.

 

I'm not sure what those numbers are referencing. Can you cite the source?

[RFS]

In what world are total numbers more informative than percentage growth? Context is everything.

[Mike K.]

Census data shows the Westshore would have actually outgrown the core between 2001 and 2016 had View Royal remained part of the Westshore.

 

WS: 25,226

WS + VR: 28,363

Core + VR: 27,090

 

So one has to wonder, was the removal of VR from Westshore data political? Otherwise the Westshore would have outgrown the core in terms of sheer population growth a decade ago. Even so, 25k vs. 27k is negligible when you consider the core has over 3x the population of the Westshore.

[aastra]

 

In what world are total numbers more informative than percentage growth? Context is everything.

 

Percentage growth can be very misleading. A physically large jurisdiction with a low population can throw up huge percentage growth numbers.

[Mike K.]

Oh, and core minus VR: 23,953 (vs. 28,363).

 

But it doesn't matter. View Royal's growth is occurring "on" the Westshore anyways, so as far as the impact on the economy the benefits of that growth are Langford's/Colwood's more than they are Victoria's (schools, shopping centres, sport complexes, etc.).

[RFS]

Percentage growth can be very misleading. A physically large jurisdiction with a low population can throw up huge percentage growth numbers.

Sure but when comparing growth between an older area with a couple hundred thousand people to a newer area with 60 or 70 thousand I'd say percentage is far more relevant

[Mike K.]

Looking at the numbers like we have been, the core has been lagging the Westshore's population growth for years now with a 4,500 person discrepancy if we forget the political boundaries of VR and focus on the physical boundaries.