Calgary eliminates sprawl subsidies for new housing

[shermanator]

City council has unanimously approved the requirement that new developments pay 100% of infrastructure costs required, up from 50%. Costs will be passed on to the consumer. IMO, this is a massive development towards reducing costly urban sprawl.

I look forward to the upcoming late sippers vs. yop gobblers debate.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgar...ncil-1.3399577

[CaptainCrunch]

Wonder how much actual development is going to happen for the next 4 years.

[polak]

Woohoo for increased property value for existing suburban properties?

It's not like the demand for recent builds with a backyard will go away.

[Muta]

About time. As a late sipper myself (and the inventor of the term yop gobbler), I don't have a problem with people paying for the infrastructure that only they will use. If you want to live that far out in a big house with a big yard, have at 'er. Just be prepared to pay the cost of doing so.

[darklord700]

The cost is only "from $6,267 for a single family home to $2,593 per unit in a multi-unit development". Don't see this being a big deal for prospective home buyers.

[llwhiteoutll]

I agree. I don't think a 1-2% increase in cost is going to do a whole lot to bring people in from the burbs, especially when the cost for comparable homes inner-city is much more than than.

[northcrunk]

Welcome to Chestermere!

[OnesAndZeros]

Originally Posted by Muta

About time. As a late sipper myself (and the inventor of the term yop gobbler), I don't have a problem with people paying for the infrastructure that only they will use. If you want to live that far out in a big house with a big yard, have at 'er. Just be prepared to pay the cost of doing so.

So, I am never going to use any of the pedestrian bridge not build in my neighbourhood. Should the rest of Calgary pay for that bridge too? Same argument for the airport tunnel.

Have you thought about people living that far is because they simply can't afford 600k for a fixer upper?

[nik-]

Originally Posted by OnesAndZeros

So, I am never going to use any of the pedestrian bridge not build in my neighbourhood. Should the rest of Calgary pay for that bridge too? Same argument for the airport tunnel.

Have you thought about people living that far is because they simply can't afford 600k for a fixer upper?

the cost will be anywhere from $6,267 for a single family home to $2,593 per unit in a multi-unit development.

If $6300 kills your dream of owning a home, you probably shouldn't be buying a home anyway.

[Bend it like Bourgeois]

Good lord. Sprawl subsidy. The Trump would be proud.

[Nyah]

Originally Posted by nik-

If $6300 kills your dream of owning a home, you probably shouldn't be buying a home anyway.

That's not the point he was making.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Nyah

That's not the point he was making.

He suggested that people buy out because they can't afford the cost of in. I'm suggesting that this isn't really affecting affordability at all. As for the infrastructure, we all pay for things we don't always use. That's part of the cost of living in a society.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by OnesAndZeros

So, I am never going to use any of the pedestrian bridge not build in my neighbourhood. Should the rest of Calgary pay for that bridge too? Same argument for the airport tunnel.

Have you thought about people living that far is because they simply can't afford 600k for a fixer upper?

There's benefits living in the inner city too, such as lower costs of gas and other available transportation options. Also, you can find properties in the inner city for well below $600k. Not everyone needs, or desires, a big house with a big yard and a white picket fence. I don't need a backyard when I've got Princes Island Park and Edworthy so close, which is better than a backyard anyways. But I digress.

As for the bridge, lol.... that's been beaten to death. If you want to complain about a highly used bridge that cost pennies compared to other infrastructure projects that the majority of the city won't regularly use, then be my guest.

[peter12]

Originally Posted by Muta

There's benefits living in the inner city too, such as lower costs of gas and other available transportation options. Also, you can find properties in the inner city for well below $600k. Not everyone needs, or desires, a big house with a big yard and a white picket fence. I don't need a backyard when I've got Princes Island Park and Edworthy so close, which is better than a backyard anyways. But I digress.

As for the bridge, lol.... that's been beaten to death. If you want to complain about a highly used bridge that cost pennies compared to other infrastructure projects that the majority of the city won't regularly use, then be my guest.

Inner city living for the win. You sacrifice space, but not much else.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by OnesAndZeros

So, I am never going to use any of the pedestrian bridge not build in my neighbourhood. Should the rest of Calgary pay for that bridge too? Same argument for the airport tunnel.

Have you thought about people living that far is because they simply can't afford 600k for a fixer upper?

This can go down a slippery route, but in talking to friends who have moved to the burbs over the years, the sentiment is that they want lots of space and a new house. You're right - you won't get that at the same price in the inner city, but most people also don't think very hard about the long-term investment and the opportunity cost - long commutes, more spent on gas, less free time, further away from amenities, etc.

Calgary is also not designed using multiple power centres, so living further and further out had to be curbed sometime.

[Regorium]

Originally Posted by OnesAndZeros

So, I am never going to use any of the pedestrian bridge not build in my neighbourhood. Should the rest of Calgary pay for that bridge too? Same argument for the airport tunnel.

Have you thought about people living that far is because they simply can't afford 600k for a fixer upper?

Seriously? You want to go there?

Okay. The other latte sippers and I will take over the costs of the Peace Bridge (50M) and the bike lanes (4M).

You and the rest of the yop gobblers will take the cost of the ring road and all the interchanges (2B+).

Deal?

[Hockeyguy15]

Originally Posted by Regorium

Seriously? You want to go there?

Okay. The other latte sippers and I will take over the costs of the Peace Bridge (50M) and the bike lanes (4M).

You and the rest of the yop gobblers will take the cost of the ring road and all the interchanges (2B+).

Deal?

I know that yop gobblers require very wealthy latte sippers to come and tell us what we need to do in our community because they understand vibrancy better than we do.

[Muta]

Originally Posted by Regorium

Seriously? You want to go there?

Okay. The other latte sippers and I will take over the costs of the Peace Bridge (50M) and the bike lanes (4M).

You and the rest of the yop gobblers will take the cost of the ring road and all the interchanges (2B+).

Deal?

The Peace Bridge cost about $22M, so significantly less than your estimate.

[undercoverbrother]

I feel like I have the best of the Yop Gobblers and latte sippers

[GGG]

Overall I like this but one problem is that the pre-90s or so construction that really drives sprawl and was subsidized to do it. Anyone with a 50ft lot should be taxed more than a 35 or 25 ft lot who should be taxed more than a condo.

So it's nice that they are making new communities pay for infrastructure required (although they will CRF inner city revitalization) users of space should be paying for the space through ongoing taxation.