So is Victoria directly subsidizing suburban services? No, not in the conventional sense due to the municipal separation between different regions of the CRD. However, when it comes to large scale projects that benefit the region as a whole, including the Johnson St Bridge, the city does take a large financial burden on for something that is a key link among the suburban areas that are heavy users of said bridge. Ultimately, though, my initial statement was more in reference to cities where there have been amalgamations, such as Toronto. What has happened here, instead, is that low density municipalities, such as Oak Bay, are in a constant financial struggle to get enough tax revenue coming in to do expensive upgrades to existing services as the tax-base per capita is not sufficient to cover the costs of upgrading services on an on-going basis. For instance, the rate of replacing the city’s aging clay pipe water infrastructure is falling behind due to high cost per unit area versus the tax revenue generated. Oak Bay needs higher densities (such as the newer Bowker project) in order to bring up that tax revenue.

As for what you’re describing about the costs borne out of living in suburbia, those are nearly all attributed to poor initial planning of these communities. In the initial development, these communities are built around inefficient cul-de-sac road networks instead of conventional gridded streets, which means public transit (like in the case of Sooke) is difficult to efficiently deliver except along the one main arterial road. No central and walkable villages are planned, so essential services are more costly to access due to the need to drive everywhere for them. Is this easily fixed? No. But it can start to be resolved by increasing density in the suburbs and by establishing mixed-use urban villages. Unfortunately, a lot of people in suburbs are extremely nimby about this, and so they are in a ‘want their cake and eat it too’ situation.

...a lot of people in suburbs are extremely nimby about this, and so they are in a ‘want their cake and eat it too’ situation.

A lot of people choose to live in the suburbs because they prefer less urban settings. I don't think it is a "have your cake and eat it too" situation at all, and I say this as someone who has chosen to live in an urban environment for over 30 years.

What has happened here, instead, is that low density municipalities, such as Oak Bay, are in a constant financial struggle to get enough tax revenue coming in to do expensive upgrades to existing services as the tax-base per capita is not sufficient to cover the costs of upgrading services on an on-going basis.

--

Daily Colonist
March 18, 1950

Oak Bay: A Model Municipality

From comparative obscurity before the turn of the century, Oak Bay has earned itself the reputation of being one of the most-envied municipalities in British Columbia.

Oak Bay has attained this valued position because of much expert guidance since its incorporation in 1906. Careful management and sound investment have made Oak Bay a financially healthy municipality which stands high in the bond dealers' register.

Good municipal government has kept taxes low in comparison with other municipalities. Services are considered good. The municipality's bonded indebtedness is low...

Like other municipalities, Oak Bay is in the midst of a building boom with attractive subdivisions springing up throughout. In order to maintain a high standard, municipal building restrictions are strict...

From a population of about 300 in 1906, the area has grown into a thriving municipality of 12,500 residents and 3,600 homes. Homeowners are well protected by well-planned zoning regulations.

Oak Bay has great natural beauties with its winding seashore, sandy beaches and bountiful park areas. There are two world-famous golf courses within its bounds. Boating, yachting and fishing enthusiasts find Oak Bay ideal.

EFFICIENT MUNICIPAL SERVICES are a keynote in Oak Bay. Councils have avoided amalgamation like the plague. Police and fire departments give the taxpayer the protection he deserves.

(Caption to picture: ON THIS STREET note absence of telephone and electrical poles and lines... Street pictured above is in new subdivision and has been developed along more modern town-planning ideas. Street is gracefully curved and all poles are erected on back of lot lines instead of front. Note neater appearance.)

So is Victoria directly subsidizing suburban services? No, not in the conventional sense due to the municipal separation between different regions of the CRD. However, when it comes to large scale projects that benefit the region as a whole, including the Johnson St Bridge, the city does take a large financial burden on for something that is a key link among the suburban areas that are heavy users of said bridge.

You don’t think the CoV sees the most value out of that bridge, for its own purposes and industry? No bridge would equal problems for the CoV, not Metchosin. It was also partially funded by the federal government, so all of Canada subsidized it.

What has happened here, instead, is that low density municipalities, such as Oak Bay, are in a constant financial struggle to get enough tax revenue coming in to do expensive upgrades to existing services as the tax-base per capita is not sufficient to cover the costs of upgrading services on an on-going basis. For instance, the rate of replacing the city’s aging clay pipe water infrastructure is falling behind due to high cost per unit area versus the tax revenue generated. Oak Bay needs higher densities (such as the newer Bowker project) in order to bring up that tax revenue.

That’s Oak Bay’s problem, though. It’s not an issue for someone in Esquimalt.

As for what you’re describing about the costs borne out of living in suburbia, those are nearly all attributed to poor initial planning of these communities. In the initial development, these communities are built around inefficient cul-de-sac road networks instead of conventional gridded streets, which means public transit (like in the case of Sooke) is difficult to efficiently deliver except along the one main arterial road.

You’ll note I’m sure, that Victoria has begun to cul-de-sac its streets, too, where traffic formerly flowed right through. It turns out that this slows down vehicles and makes neighbourhoods more pleasant for residents. At least that’s what the CoV says, so the suburbs are a step ahead here, maybe?

No central and walkable villages are planned, so essential services are more costly to access due to the need to drive everywhere for them. Is this easily fixed? No. But it can start to be resolved by increasing density in the suburbs and by establishing mixed-use urban villages. Unfortunately, a lot of people in suburbs are extremely nimby about this, and so they are in a ‘want their cake and eat it too’ situation.

Sooke has a very walkable central village. It just doesn’t have enough retail, because of Langford serving as the main retail hub. But in decades past Sooke had a much more diverse retail make-up and a more localized job sector which government had played a role in curtailing (forestry, fishing, sports fishing, mining, mill work, etc).

Its transit services are also poor but not because of a lack of demand or infrastructure, just a lack of attention from BCT. There is no difference between the road network of Sooke or Saanich in some regards, but Saanich has a much more developed route network in low and high density areas because it gets more attention. Sooke residents all pay for transit in their property taxes and gasoline, subsidizing the rest of the region (especially Saanich and Victoria).

But let’s address this financial burden on urban society from the suburbs. We haven’t addressed how Sooke costs Victorians direct dollars or how Esquimalt subsidizes North Saanich. Can we address that? And no voodoo math or conjecture, let’s see some real numbers.