this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2023
44 points (100.0% liked)

Canada

10069 readers
584 users here now

What's going on Canada?



Related Communities


🍁 Meta


🗺️ Provinces / Territories


🏙️ Cities / Local Communities

Sorted alphabetically by city name.


🏒 SportsHockey

Football (NFL): incomplete

Football (CFL): incomplete

Baseball

Basketball

Soccer


💻 Schools / Universities

Sorted by province, then by total full-time enrolment.


💵 Finance, Shopping, Sales


🗣️ Politics


🍁 Social / Culture


Rules

  1. Keep the original title when submitting an article. You can put your own commentary in the body of the post or in the comment section.

Reminder that the rules for lemmy.ca also apply here. See the sidebar on the homepage: lemmy.ca


founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

On Monday, the Canadian Urban Transit Association released a study on how Canada can best integrate the policy areas of housing and transportation.

top 6 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 11 points 2 years ago

I recently got lucky enough to be able to work for three months remote from Barcelona. Yes you fucking can and it's awesome.

[–] jcrm@kbin.social 8 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Not without funding they can't. Cities got all the responsibilities for transit and housing, but none of the funding they used to go with it. The feds and provinces need to pay up, and fund cities properly, or give them autonomy to find their own funding sources.

[–] frostbiker@lemmy.ca 14 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Not without funding they can’t

A big part of why our cities are broke is because they have to maintain roads, sewers and other infrastructure in areas that give back very little tax revenue in relation to the amount of infrastructure they require. Those cost centers are are low-density suburbs with single-family homes.

Once mid-density housing is allowed to flourish, especially mixed-use buildings, funding and other problems disappear: tax revenue increases in relation to liabilities, frequent public transit is economically feasible, traffic is reduced as more people are able to go about their daily lives without a car, and the reduced car traffic means streets become quieter and safer.

[–] jcrm@kbin.social 5 points 2 years ago

This is part of the problem, Toronto specifically has to pay for two highways that are almost entirely used by people who don't pay for them. Building that middle density housing would fix a lot, but we'd actually still be in a difficult financial position, because municipalities here are so limited in how they can generate income. The province can override any decision a municipality makes whenever they want, and that neede to change.

[–] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 children)

By providing all that shit for free, we've basically been subsidising lifestyles that are otherwise wasteful. And then we added low-density zoning on top of it, so here we are.

I'm not on the private roadways "train" (lol), but I think they should be self-funded by a hypothecated tax, or user fee depending on how you want to look at it. If we did that, public transit would probably grow itself.

[–] apprehensively_human@lemmy.ca 3 points 2 years ago

People living along roads that get "improvements" see their property tax go up to cover the expense, but the people who actually use the damn things don't have to spend a dime. It's a no brainer that people choose to live in tax subsidy zones where everything is shiny and new and they can just use the new highway to commute to work anyway.

Meanwhile it's an unavoidable tragedy when people inevitably get struck and killed by cars since we've taken away everything that makes being a human person with two legs worthwhile and given it to cars instead.