The Familia
Active Member
What are the red squares on the concrete slab?
|
|
|
Urban Development and Proposals Discussion
- Thread starter Surrealplaces
- Start date
whatchyyc
Active Member
Man I can already tell that pathway will be beautiful at night
gsunnyg
Active Member
Calgary short on housing supply
Even though Calgary had record housing starts in 2022, supply isn't keeping pace with demand.
calgaryherald.com
I discussed this topic earlier last month but in Calgary, I'm finding the number of developments being proposed and actually starting up extremely underwhelming. Disappointing since one would think that given the current housing demand conditions and overcoming years of poor development proposals due to economic weakness, we'd finally get tons of midrises and highrises popping up.
Calgcouver
Active Member
Build everything at 3-6 stories everywhere. It’s why there are a billion wood frame (for sale) starts in the burbs but almost no concrete for sale starts in the city. Give me inner city land and low rise prices and everything would explode if everything wasn’t being held by land speculators with zoning for high rise that won’t budge on price and let the land sit waiting for towers to be profitable"But growth has seemingly not kept pace with other provinces like British Columbia and Saskatchewan."Calgary short on housing supply
Even though Calgary had record housing starts in 2022, supply isn't keeping pace with demand.
I discussed this topic earlier last month but in Calgary, I'm finding the number of developments being proposed and actually starting up extremely underwhelming. Disappointing since one would think that given the current housing demand conditions and overcoming years of poor development proposals due to economic weakness, we'd finally get tons of midrises and highrises popping up.
smart_development
New Member
My opinion: detached narrow housing/multiplex infill for inner city areas is kind of a failure. The density increase is too marginal. The prices kind of speak to that.
ahuch
Active Member
Maybe I just had a bad experience, but I wouldn't wish living in a wood frame apartment on my worst enemy. Maybe building codes are better now but I could hear EVERYTHING above me, lol.
I think the materials or buildings codes have improved...at least going by my one personal experience. My grandmother was living in a newer wood framed building (built late 90's) and the sound was perfectly fine, but I lived in one that was built in the 1982, and it was horrific. Like really, really bad.
CBBarnett
Senior Member
shouldn’t the market already correct for this? If we have so much zoned capacity everywhere that’s priced to a typology of growth that isn’t realistic, wouldn’t we see developments occur below the zoned capacity and transactions occur at that lower price reflecting what can development can be realized?
Or is the market assuming speculators are right and there eventually will be the market so prices remain in this weird zone where the value is justified yet it’s not economic to build anything?
Or is the land supply for 6-storey infill developments so limited that there isn’t land available for redevelopment to kick off right now to take advantage of demand?
Or is holding costs just so low, speculative land investments can just wait forever?
Anecdotally, there seems to be tons of infill redevelopment sites on the market right now of various sizes, I assume many of these were smaller speculators getting caught by interest rate increases.
Those are just some ideas I had, Curious for the thoughts of those that know land economics and infill development Better than me to explain these issues
ahuch
Active Member
I suspect there's a degree of "holding costs are just so low"... just based on a bunch of relatively "inner city" parcels that have sat for 2-3 decades with no development. The assessed value of bare land keeps the property taxes low-ish and the taxes only go up once they build something on it.
jhappy77
Active Member
This reaffirms my belief that land probably ought to be taxed at a different rate than improvements. The current system does too much to incentivize long-term land speculation and not enough to encourage improvements which actually benefit communities.
darwink
Senior Member
The regulatory barriers still contribute too much to those projects. Not direct costs, but risk and time which for small developers is expensive.
smart_development
New Member
Right but the increase in density is too marginal relative to the land costs. Some of this infill is just matching/slightly exceeding the density of what you get in a new suburb on the outer edges. It doesn't make sense really.
It needs to be multi-storey.
badc0ffee
Active Member
We can make more efficient use of these lots even without going beyond 2-3 storeys. The new mid-block R-CG and H-GO, row houses with a courtyard, gets us closer.
Calgcouver
Active Member
This @CBBarnett, Holding costs are very low, especially on surface parking lots and there are a lot of folks that have so much money that got into land flipping, and are so bullish on the calgary market they are willing to wait decades and decades for there payday. Crank up the costs of holding unproductive land (surface parking) and watch things turn over.
Out of curiosity, what would the holding costs be for an inner city lot? just regular property tax I take it?