Cassidy:
Let's be honest with ourselves here, people's housing desires and preferences are not like a new iPhone that we want but don't need but lets use that analogy for a second. Rockland, Gonzales, and Fairfield people have new shiny iPhones, some because they worked really hard, some because they inherited them, and some because of sheer damn luck they were born in a time when housing prices were not stratospherically disconnected from incomes. The rub is that all taxes payers and members of the region are paying for their cell phone plans at Rogers, Bell, and Telus monopoly rates. Even worse, because of this cell phone subsidy is outpacing appreciation of other plans (aka housing types), the monthly rates go up and up and up.
Freedom57:
Rockland 45 year population change (1971 - 2016): -17 people (decrease is 0.39% per year)
Rockland zoning: 90% single family (2nd place behind Gonzales at 98% and third place goes to Oaklands at 87%)
Rockland development: 17% of new units were built on existing MF lands (50% of MF is apartments, major density imbalance)
Rockland density increase (2011 - 2016): 4.8% compared to the city average of 9.4%
Rockland Density: 40 people per hectare (lowest in the City, City average is 90 ppl/ha)
Rockland seniors/kids ratio (2006-2016): 1.9 to 2.6 (City avg: 1.4 to 1.8)
Rockland working age population: down 10% (2011 to 2016)
Rockland households: second lowest share of millennial head of households in the City (Gonzales is first)
Rockland dwelling mix: unchanged over last 10 years
This notion that Rockland is pulling its weight and is a balanced community is not reflected in real life