People in older, central neighbourhoods often fight against density because “we’re dense enough already”.
We need to reckon with the consequences of that: pushing people out to the suburbs to have longer commutes, worse amenities, mandatory car ownership.
It makes the central city more exclusive.
We need to reckon with the consequences of that: pushing people out to the suburbs to have longer commutes, worse amenities, mandatory car ownership.
It makes the central city more exclusive.
Comments
Stopping people from building housing is a zero-sum game. The costs associated with the restrictions are direct and straightforward.
Being able to bike to work rocks. More people should be able to.
The fact that housing policy is influenced by multiple levels of government doesn't really change anything fundamental about that.
So yeah when they would cry “we’re already dense” it’s like
1)um false
2)where should more people live, if not NEXT TO DOWNTOWN
It’s such an annoying bad-faith claim. Because I have worked on a lot of big projects for local govt. And I know almost always by law local govts (at least big urban ones) have so many reporting and public engagement req.
But those efforts *do* exist. Flyers and brochures are passed out at engagement events.
Info cards are mailed out.
This is like a bare minimum (& to me represents a good-faith effort to inform the public) & to have that ignored is unfair.