Canadian cities are well known in the world of film for their ability to stand-in for other global cities. They rarely play themselves, which actually pisses me off. Because I take it as a sign that we're not doing nearly enough to make Canadian cities the most beautiful and remarkable cities in the world. Canadian cities should play starring roles. Movies should want to feature them, rather than repurpose them.

That said, it's an interesting phenomenon to explore. And that's exactly what the Canadian pavilion will be doing this year at the Venice Biennale. The exhibition is called Impostor Cities and it will explore the various buildings and cityscapes that have been featured in films but that most people probably had no idea were Canadian.

It is perhaps a new perspective on Canadian cities, bringing our stand-ins into the limelight. And it'll be available online and onsite (yes, real life) starting May 22. I'm sure it'll be great. I just hope that it makes us realize how embarrassing it is that our cities aren't being celebrated in the way that they should be. Let's be bolder. Let's build greatness.

Benjamin Dachis and Rhys Godin of the C.D. Howe Institute have a new report out talking about the effect of COVID-19 on the future of public transit in Canadian cities. In it, they make the argument that public transit is a key enabler of the agglomeration economies that make cities so valuable. And right now, most people aren't using it (see above).

Why are agglomeration economies so important?

According to some studies, doubling the population of an urban area has tended to increase mean incomes by between 3-8%. In the Canadian context, similar research has found that people living in more populated regions (cities) tend to have incomes that are between 3-5% higher than those living in more rural areas. So when it comes to average incomes, bigger cities tend to be better. (Does Zoom change this? I'm not convinced.)

Of course, to make bigger cities function properly, you generally need public transit. And when you do have fast and reliable transit, that, they argue, is going to help drive the agglomeration economies which ultimately help to increase incomes. Because of this important relationship, Dachis and Godin argue that Canadian governments have a habit of systematically undervaluing the importance of transit investment.

If you're interested in reading the full report, click here.

This is an excellent article by Alex Bozikovic, Joe Castaldo and Danielle Webb about the 15-minute city. In it, they do a block-by-block analysis of how many Canadians actually live in what they are calling an "amenity dense" neighborhood.

Their definition of amenity dense:

• Grocery store, pharmacy, and public transit stop within one kilometer

• Childcare facility, primary school, and a library within 1.5 kilometers

• Healthcare facility within three kilometers

• Place of employment within 10 kilometers

Once you apply this filter to Canadian cities, it turns out that only about 23.3% of city dwellers live in this kind of amenity dense neighborhood. It's really only our three largest cities. For the most part, we have built environments that want you to have a car.

When it comes Toronto, and also Montreal, it is a tale of two almost equally divided cities. If you live in a central neighborhood, you're probably dense with amenities. But in the inner suburbs, it becomes pretty spotty. And though it can be done, this is not an easy change.

The full article has many more of these city maps and so I would encourage you to check it out. It's a great piece of journalism.

Photo by Chloe Evans on Unsplash