Cost of housing in Canada

[lenaitch]

People tend to establish their own 'year zero'. Every established neighbourhood was an established something else before the neighbourhood was built. Often a farm, sometimes a former factory.

As the population increases and becomes increasingly urbanized, cities either densify or sprawl into surrounding greenfield areas. Lower density is more expensive to service.

 

[Good2Golf]

You're completely backwards. There is no evidence for your claims. Downtown subsidizes the suburbs, espeicially the modern mcmansion of cul de sac ones, which don't pay nearly enough taxes to pay for the infrastructure they require. It's been well documented by city planners and other experts in the field. There is no movement to absorb suburbs, it's just a consequence of the out of control urban sprawl in the USA.

Tell me you’re an urbanite without telling me you’re an urbanite.

Downtown subsidizing the suburbs (or semi-rural) areas? Riiiight…

‘Well documented?” Okay, how about some references if it’s so well documented?

The most services I use (and pay for) in my suburban home is garbage and tertiary snow clearing once the big city’s downtown is cleared. I’m on well and septic, never seen a cop come by my street, etc. I’d have to be convinced that the revenue-expense figures are backwards for suburban areas like you profess…

 

[IKnowNothing]

The most services I use (and pay for) in my suburban home is garbage and tertiary snow clearing once the big city’s downtown is cleared. I’m on well and septic, never seen a cop come by my street, etc. I’d have to be convinced that the revenue-expense figures are backwards for suburban areas like you profess…

There's your difference in perception. When most people talk of suburbs, it's about places on municipal water and sewer- the delivery costs of which per residential unit are inversely proportional to density.

 

[Good2Golf]

Not all suburbs are on full services, and especially your big McMansions are likely further out towards semi-rural edges of the suburbs. *A large proportion of Ottawa Senators, for example, are on well and septic.

 

[IKnowNothing]

Not all suburbs are on full services, and especially your big McMansions are likely further out towards semi-rural edges of the suburbs. *A large proportion of Ottawa Senators, for example, are on well and septic.

No offense, but I find a lot of these types of debates get derailed by emotion when people apply societal generalizations out of context to their own non-standard anecdotal situation.

As to a source- here's a pretty recent and comprehensive one

https://metrovancouver.org/services/regional-planning/Documents/costs-of-providing-infrastructure-and-services-to-different-residential-densities.pdf

 

[PrairieFella]

Tell me you’re an urbanite without telling me you’re an urbanite.

Downtown subsidizing the suburbs (or semi-rural) areas? Riiiight…

‘Well documented?” Okay, how about some references if it’s so well documented?

The most services I use (and pay for) in my suburban home is garbage and tertiary snow clearing once the big city’s downtown is cleared. I’m on well and septic, never seen a cop come by my street, etc. I’d have to be convinced that the revenue-expense figures are backwards for suburban areas like you profess…

A good example are the roads you drive on. I imagine you're in Ottawa where the city limits are way too big and encapsulate what would be rural municipalities in any other city. Fair enough, Ottawa is weird. That said, I legit just posted a heatmap of taxes paid in Edmonton. But if you want more sources, ask and thou shalt receive.

A good video breakdown:

Heres another tax heatmap for Calgary, notice the conglomeration of revenue in the core.



How about this one of Milwaukee, which is very glaring.


Also, I am an urbanist. Strong Towns are better towns. I am also a rural farmer and plan to return to the farm. You can be both haha.

 

[Remius]

Tell me you’re an urbanite without telling me you’re an urbanite.

Downtown subsidizing the suburbs (or semi-rural) areas? Riiiight…

‘Well documented?” Okay, how about some references if it’s so well documented?

The most services I use (and pay for) in my suburban home is garbage and tertiary snow clearing once the big city’s downtown is cleared. I’m on well and septic, never seen a cop come by my street, etc. I’d have to be convinced that the revenue-expense figures are backwards for suburban areas like you profess…

Those are fair points however plenty of people in those suburbs make use of the urban areas and that infrastructure that support the surrounding areas.

I personally think that the surrounding areas are under served for what they pay into. But that’s just me.

 

[IKnowNothing]

Also, I am an urbanist. Strong Towns are better towns. I am also a rural farmer and plan to return to the farm. You can be both

As someone who resembles that remark -they go hand in hand. The more cities overflow their borders, the less land is left available for actual country living. The more people get squeezed out of cities, the more the effect gets passed outward to turn nice rural towns into sleeper suburbs, which then overflow their borders, leaving less land available for actual country living.

 

[PrairieFella]

As someone who resembles that remark -they go hand in hand. The more cities and towns overflow their borders, the less land is left available for actual country living. The more people get squeezed out of cities, the more the effect gets passed outward to turn nice rural towns into sleeper suburbs.

Exactly. The towns in the farming RM I grew up in lost all their culture, businesses dried up and people became less friendly and less community oriented. This is a direct result of the "bedroom community" effect. Luckily the old ways still exist out in the area where the farm is, I can't wait to raise my family out there the way I was raised, but I also love my vibrant, fun neughbourhood downtown in Wpg right now.

 

[Brad Sallows]

You're completely backwards.

I'm passing along information about what other people are doing. Blame them for their actions and, in particular, the excuses they are making. They see middle and high income earners living in suburbs and not paying taxes in the dense urban locations of employment and want to grab that. They've written about it. Are their experts wrong about their calculations of who can pay what?

Here's some further reading.

The Real Reason Your City Has No Money

Problems have solutions. Predicaments have outcomes. We're in a predicament.

www.strongtowns.org

Not to be taken seriously if they're doing estimates based on "once a generation" replacement. Burnaby is an example of a well-run mid-sized city. Last time I was paying attention, their sewer/water replacement aim was about 2% of the total each year, so replacement every 50 years. I've lived in locations long enough to also observe that roads and bridges do not need to be replaced "once a generation".

 

[PrairieFella]

I'm passing along information about what other people are doing. Blame them for their actions and, in particular, the excuses they are making. They see middle and high income earners living in suburbs and not paying taxes in the dense urban locations of employment and want to grab that. They've written about it. Are their experts wrong about their calculations of who can pay what?

I posted maps showing the density of revenues are concentrated downtown but if you want to go off vibes, all the power to you lol. Cities are smartening up and raising mill rates in far flung suburbs, should have happened decades ago.

Not to be taken seriously if they're doing estimates based on "once a generation" replacement. Burnaby is an example of a well-run mid-sized city. Last time I was paying attention, their sewer/water replacement aim was about 2% of the total each year, so replacement every 50 years. I've lived in locations long enough to also observe that roads and bridges do not need to be replaced "once a generation".

On one side you talk about crumbling infrastructure but on the other you say infrastructure doesn't need to be replaced generationally? Pick one.

 

[Brad Sallows]

There's your difference in perception. When most people talk of suburbs, it's about places on municipal water and sewer- the delivery costs of which per residential unit are inversely proportional to density.

Savvy municipalities require developers to pay all or part of the cost of the service and infrastructure upgrades. Then they're on the hook for maintenance and replacement.

I can guess that municipalities that contract out many routine functions are facing fewer fiscal pressures that those that insist on having unionized work forces, or union wage-matching contracting policies, and have been allowing compensation to increase above inflation for the past three decades. Sometimes they do dumb things like settle wage agreements with formulae that consider wages paid in higher cost-of-living cities. Sometimes they insist on building stadia and theatres to serve people who will never pay the full cost of operations, let alone the initial capital outlay. They will, knowing that each mile of rail transit must be subsidized by amount X per year for operations, increase the number of miles and then complain that they need to increase taxes to increase the subsidies.

Any proponent of the suburbs-are-unsustainable argument who fails to put up calculations shorn of all the unnecessary waste and subsidy loses me right there. There is a lot of ideologically-driven fat that could be trimmed. It may not reasonably be treated as part of the cost base.

If a suburb is struggling to get by, but is maintaining itself by a mix of raising municipal taxes and effectively managing its expenditures and imposing its own densification policies on itself ("it's either this or increased taxes, people"), it's obviously "sustainable".

 

[IKnowNothing]

Savvy municipalities require developers to pay all or part of the cost of the service and infrastructure upgrades.

And developers pay for that out of the goodness of their hearts, or does it contribute to the overall cost of the development?

It's math Brad. More road, more transmission line, more pipe, more shut offs, more wye's, for less residential unit equals higher cost per unit. That applies across ideological tangents. It's an all else equal truth.

 

[Brad Sallows]

I posted maps showing the density of revenues are concentrated downtown but if you want to go off vibes, all the power to you lol. Cities are smartening up and raising mill rates in far flung suburbs, should have happened decades ago.

I know revenue density is higher "downtown", particularly on commercially zoned lands. The problem is revenue-vs-expense. Looking at charts of one side is useless.

On one side you talk about crumbling infrastructure but on the other you say infrastructure doesn't need to be replaced generationally? Pick one.

To which comment I made about crumbling infrastructure do you refer?

 

[SeaKingTacco]

And developers pay for that out of the goodness of their hearts, or does it contribute to the overall cost of the development?

Contributes to the cost of the new housing.

There is no free lunch.

 

[Brad Sallows]

And developers pay for that out of the goodness of their hearts, or does it contribute to the overall cost of the development?

It's passed along. Did I write something that suggested I believe people who want to move into an area shouldn't pay for it?

 

[IKnowNothing]

Contributes to the cost of the new housing.

There is no free lunch.

It was rhetorical.

 

[mariomike]

No offense, but I find a lot of these types of debates get derailed by emotion when people apply societal generalizations out of context to their own non-standard anecdotal situation.

"Time Performance" may be a consideration for some people. It's called "Taipa" in Japan.

It essentially refers to the level of satisfaction you get from an activity relative to the time invested in it. Essentially, it's about how well you utilize your time and what you gain in return.

They might rule out any housing more than a 10-minute walk from the train station. Goods and services are often in close proximity .

In our town, some folks own small condominiums downtown. Not used as a primary residence, but for convenience during the work week, and occasional overnight visits in the city. Pied-à-terre.

The whole "15 minute city" thing has been so distorted by both sides that it's toxic to most normal people.

 

[Good2Golf]

In our town, some folks own small condominiums downtown. Not used as a primary residence, but for convenience during the work week, and occasional overnight visits in the city. Pied-à-terre.

So they’re taking additional homes off the market for their convenience, tendering those unavailable for people looking for a primary residence?

 

[brihard]

Tell me you’re an urbanite without telling me you’re an urbanite.

Downtown subsidizing the suburbs (or semi-rural) areas? Riiiight…

‘Well documented?” Okay, how about some references if it’s so well documented?

The most services I use (and pay for) in my suburban home is garbage and tertiary snow clearing once the big city’s downtown is cleared. I’m on well and septic, never seen a cop come by my street, etc. I’d have to be convinced that the revenue-expense figures are backwards for suburban areas like you profess…

You’re probably not a great example due to the huge rural catchment of our city. I think he’s talking more the kind of suburb I’m in and less where you are. I can walk to the stop sign, look around, and see city transit, municipal sewer, an occasional cop car… Easy walk to a municipal rec centre, there’s a police station in my suburb, a shitty train, etc etc. Everything out here has to be much less dense and spread out than providing the same services to denser suburban neighbourhoods within the greenbelt, or to truly urban neighbourhoods closer in to downtown. There’s also all of the municipal ‘operating cost’ that you won’t see when you step outside and look around, but that we all pay for.

A good example are the roads you drive on. I imagine you're in Ottawa where the city limits are way too big and encapsulate what would be rural municipalities in any other city. Fair enough, Ottawa is weird. That said, I legit just posted a heatmap of taxes paid in Edmonton. But if you want more sources, ask and thou shalt receive.

A good video breakdown:

Heres another tax heatmap for Calgary, notice the conglomeration of revenue in the core.

View attachment 93300

How about this one of Milwaukee, which is very glaring.

View attachment 93301
Also, I am an urbanist. Strong Towns are better towns. I am also a rural farmer and plan to return to the farm. You can be both haha.

Can confirm Ottawa is super weird in our geography. The physical size of Ottawa as a single legal municipality providing services could swallow the physical geography of Canada’s 5 or 6 largest cities by population. We have a massive rural catchment.