this post was submitted on 24 Oct 2025
23 points (87.1% liked)
Fuck Cars
1292 readers
33 users here now
Your hub for collection of materials that contribute to a world with less car ownership. Including buses, motorcycles, bicycles, skateboards, longboards, scooters, hoverboards, e-scooters, pedestrians, walking, running.
Learn
- AboutHere - Videos to understand your city better. Creator is based out of Vancouver, BC.
- NotJustBikes - Stories of successful and not so successful urban planning.
- RMTransit - In-depth analysis of public transit systems around the world.
- Cycling Fallacies
Basic Rules:
- be constructive: there is no need of another internet space full of competition, negativity, rage etc.;
- no bigotry, including racism, sexism, ableism, transphobia, homophobia or xenophobia;
- be empathic: empathy is more rebellious than a middle finger;
- no porn and no gore: let’s keep this place easy to manage;
- no ads / spamming / flooding, we don’t want to buy/consume your commodified ideas;
- occasional self-promotion by active members is fine.
Chat
Get Involved
- Alberta - Alberta Cycling Coalition
- Edmonton - Bike Edmonton
- British Columbia - The BC Cycling Coalition
- Vancouver - HUB Cycling
- Victoria - Capital Bike
- Manitoba
- Winnipeg - Bike Winnipeg
- Ontario - Share the Road Cycling Coalition
- Ottawa - Bike Ottawa
- Toronto - CycleToronto
- Quebec - Vélo Québec
- Saskatchewan
- Saskatoon - Saskatoon Cycles
* message the mods to add any missing local advocacy groups.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
These are often called DCCs (Development Cost Charges), and they’re necessary. I help set them.
You can’t massively increase density without upgrading infrastructure. There’s only so much capacity in your watermains and sewermains. So, either:
To me, #3 is the most reasonable approach.
The mantra is "growth pays for growth"... but at a certain point upgrades and new amentities with density benefit existing homeowners and local businesses as much as the new development, so there's an argument that this would justify some degree of cost sharing. Definitely not a popular argument with most residents though.