Raise the Hammer

There is certainly a good case to be made for cross-subsidization and that all residents benefit from some forms of infrastructure, but I don't think that examining the cross-subsidies, or countering mistaken impressions is divisive.

The point of Dr Blais's talk was that the perception that it is the suburbs that subsidize the urban core (as your final comments suggest) are backwards. You can't just go on impressions, you actually need to measure the costs. These studies are not some sort of anti-suburban conspiracy, they are careful attempts to evaluate the true costs of providing services to different forms of land use. A high density development in the suburbs would be better than a low density development in the core.

The economic well-being of our city depends on knowing what the costs and benefits are so we can make informed decisions.

The main point was that if cities like Hamilton are serious in promoting density (which they claim they are and must do under provincial legislation) they need to reform their development charges to promote higher instead of lower density. The current cost structure encourages greenfield development and makes infill development very expensive. But that's not what we claim we want.

It is straightforward that higher density is cheaper to service than lower density (although the actual differential varies), and Halifax gives an example of how much the difference can be. Edmonton and Peel region did similar studies and came to similar conclusions. I don't see any reason Hamilton would be very different.

And we are talking about different urbanized areas of the city: agricultural lands are protected from development and taxed at a much lower level. No one is suggesting that this is not a good principle. The question is whether our development charges and tax structure promote the types of development the city claims it wants. Note that Hamilton has still not achieved its (rather modest) 40% new development in urbanized area goal!

p.s. Here is the link to the Halifax study so you can see how they arrived at their conclusions:

http://usa.streetsblog.org/wp-content/up...

They based the calculation on these services:

Roads • Transit • Water • Wastewater & Stormwater • Solid Waste • Parks & Recreation • Libraries • Police • Fire

Comment edited by kevlahan on 2015-12-01 11:25:26