I’m a firm green infill YIMBY so I agree with you on the policy stuff there. As for PP, fortunately the greenbelt is provincial so he doesn’t have the right to do so. This is constitutional. And he’s calling out Vancouver, a place where there is no place to sprawl, so necessarily cutting out red tape and unlocking housing would mean upzoning, they’d have literally no other option to allow more housing.
If he wanted to push for that why hasn’t he used supporting language like density and transit? I hope for the best for these cities but I worry the conservative take will just mean more McMansions while SFH continue to be converted into multi units owned by landlords.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: !canada@lemmy.ca
I’m a firm green infill YIMBY so I agree with you on the policy stuff there. As for PP, fortunately the greenbelt is provincial so he doesn’t have the right to do so. This is constitutional. And he’s calling out Vancouver, a place where there is no place to sprawl, so necessarily cutting out red tape and unlocking housing would mean upzoning, they’d have literally no other option to allow more housing.
If he wanted to push for that why hasn’t he used supporting language like density and transit? I hope for the best for these cities but I worry the conservative take will just mean more McMansions while SFH continue to be converted into multi units owned by landlords.
I mean he is? He specifically calls out density limits around transit hubs.