Quote:
Originally Posted by Bend it like Bourgeois
Pfft - I think the official position is 800 sq ft condos not 500  I'm kidding.
Honestly I'd still love someone to explain this one to calgarians without getting defensive or landing solely on ideology.
People want to live and work in Calgary as it is. But that doesn't mean we can't get better in lots of ways - and won't. Seems like something is going to change, unless its all smoke. But what will it mean for people not in the planning business?
The same amount of single family homes, just on smaller lots? How much smaller? More expensive? How much more? Fewer of them? How many fewer?
Or maybe none of those things in any one area, just slower development in general to let inner city density catch up?
I am guessing any mayor would not like to release that info in an election year where he is unopposed, but that would be really unfortunate. It should be a debate opened to - even forced on - the public. I should add to be clear I am not poking at the mayors transparency in general. This issue is clear as mud though. |
If the current plan to increase developer fees in 2015, if executed, would have these expected effects:
- developer fees increased by $7000 per single-family home (approximate average)
- price of a single-family home would increase by less than $7000 (as the developers would not be able to pass on the whole price increase)
- the price that the developer gets, after developer fees, decreases by less than $7000
- fewer single-family homes would be sold and built (demand sees a price increase and supply sees a price decrease)
- high-density homes would become more expensive to purchase (susbstitution effect of the price increase in SFH)
- taxes on high-density homes would be reduced (or tax increases avoided)
- tax benefit gained would surpass the net present value of the capital cost increase for high density homes (net effect of price increase and tax reduction is a decrease in the total cost of living)
- more high-density homes would be built and sold (market reaction the lower total cost that demand pays and increase in purchase price that supply)
That's still a simplification that doesn't capture all the likely effects (small houses to manage the cost? more services for the inner city instead of a tax break?) but I think it captures the main ones. Also, the Growth Management Framework would have different effects.