Quote:
Originally Posted by kermitology
Developers are looking elsewhere, but a lot of these developers are pretty big. Like, Genstar and Brookfield are pretty big orgs and they do work in many cities around the world or across Canada. They'll just de-prioritize Calgary. That being said, it just doesn't make sense to continue to develop outward.
I was talking about this with my wife this morning, she used to be a development consultant and put forward the business case for 2 of the maligned 14 new communities from last year. One argument she put forward is that these communities aren't being built out at once, it's over a 25 year time period. But city administration and city services (like fire, police, CBE) are pushing for service infrastructure to be available at the onset of the community. Like how you need a fire-station in a new community area to ensure response times, except that it's not needed until someone is actually living there. Similarly, some of these are build outs that compliment existing development commitments. Just to provide some other side of the fence arguments.
The reality is that Calgary needs to shift the property tax burden from denser existing communities to the new communities, except that smashes the subsidy of the reduced upfront costs of buying a brand new home in these new communities. If we were to properly price things out those $400k homes would go for $700k like they do in inner city redevelopments.
|
So given that each community requires large costs on the city side, would it not make more sense to build out a community in 5 years, then move on to the next one? Why do we need so many on the go at once. Random number of 5 at a time makes a lot more sense.