Quote:
Originally Posted by Table 5
If your goal is to make Canmore a cheaper place to live, you either look to reduce demand, or increase supply. It's a pretty little mountain town an hour away from a big city with an increasing population...so I don't see demand going anywhere but up. So more supply is the only choice (there and elsewhere in the Rockies). Maybe more second homes aren't the best path forward to do that, but it sure is better than no homes at all. Saying no to these developments means the existing stock gets even more expensive, cutting even more people out.
But yep, Canmore is definitely not what it used to be. And neither is Banff, Cochrane, Calgary or pretty much any place within 2 hours of it. It's progress, for better or worse.
|
That's assuming the rules of supply and demand should apply to housing. But in a place like Canmore, supply is limited(mountains, rivers, flooding) so you need regulations to maintain a balance. Restrictions on percent of unoccupied housing would help, and having developments actually pay for the entirety of increased costs, so it isn't downloaded onto existing residents would be a good idea, too.
Quote:
|
Canmore Council approved a 12.5 per cent municipal tax increase in 2023, and said residents can expect a 5.5 per cent increase in 2024.
|
https://www.thecragandcanyon.ca/news...capital-budget
Does that sound like a well planned budgeting process? This has been happening for years. Is that fair to young families trying to stay in the valley?
It's kind of hilarious reading all these Calgarians trying to tell locals how they should manage their town. These aren't just my concerns, they are those of most long term residents.