MF YYC Politics - there, I mega did it

[bizaro86]

Upper Mount Royal actually has its own special DC zoning, so it won't be affected by this. That's BS, but I doubt it's likely to change either.

Some of the other "fancy" areas are (imo) likely to see the remaining tear-down houses converted into high end row house type stuff here and there. Depends how robust the new process is for "this fits the zoning so it's approved whether the rich neighbours complain or not".

Not likely to see affordable housing built there but new supply of any kind increases the amount of residences available.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

I’m just trying to unpack “there’s no reason for SFHs to exists that close to downtown.” It’s a pretty bold statement. Maybe it’s just hyperbole, but it’s a weird way to say ‘it would be better if there were fewer SFHs close to downtown’ (if that is what you actually meant).

How about no reason to have SFH as the ONLY OPTION POSSIBLE that close to downtown.

But it's weird, he didn't use bold text. So wtf are you talking about that it was a bold statement? Words have meaning after all and if we're going to throw them around willy nilly like that I don't know how we'll ever have a constructive discussion.

[GullFoss]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

Elbow Park has nothing to worry about. At least not until areas like Wildwood, Rosscarrock, Windsor Park, Banff Trail, Highland Park etc. run out of spots to redevelop. The land cost in Elbow Park and other similar areas that are at the highest rung won’t be development targets.

I disagree. Oversized lots on elbow drive could be prime spots for townhouses. Even mc2 apartments after the lap process.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

I disagree. Oversized lots on elbow drive could be prime spots for townhouses. Even mc2 apartments after the lap process.

Main streets and nodes are obviously a different conversation than the heart of neighbourhoods. Busy roads are least desirable properties that have a built in value difference.

They'd still require a land use to upzone higher than R-CG.

[GullFoss]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

Main streets and nodes are obviously a different conversation than the heart of neighbourhoods. Busy roads are least desirable properties that have a built in value difference.

They'd still require a land use to upzone higher than R-CG.

Sure, but r-cg is now open to developers. And it wasn't a week ago. If I was a developer, I'd look to do r-cg on this lot now, for example. Pretty cheap land.

https://realtor.ca/real-estate/25814...alsharelisting

Was involved with a similar sale a few months ago in Elboya to a developer that seemingly overpaid for some reason. I think I now know the reason

I think people who say it won't happen in elbow park and elboya and other similar neighborhoods will be surprised at how good developers are at finding undervalued lots.

Upper Mount Royal and Brittania would be ideal candidates for r-cg if not for the protective covenants. Some of the land is pretty cheap on a psf basis relative to higher density communities.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

Sure, but r-cg is now open to developers. And it wasn't a week ago. If I was a developer, I'd look to do r-cg on this lot now, for example. Pretty cheap land.

https://realtor.ca/real-estate/25814...alsharelisting

Was involved with a similar sale a few months ago in Elboya to a developer that seemingly overpaid for some reason. I think I now know the reason

I think people who say it won't happen in elbow park and elboya and other similar neighborhoods will be surprised at how good developers are at finding undervalued lots.

Upper Mount Royal and Brittania would be ideal candidates for r-cg if not for the protective covenants. Some of the land is pretty cheap on a psf basis relative to higher density communities.

It's probably another nine months to a year by the time council approves the zoning change officially, the bylaw is revised and the land use maps changed to make it able to develop R-CG on these former R* lots.

[timun]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

Sure, but r-cg is now open to developers. And it wasn't a week ago.

There is a higher prospect of R-CG being open to developers now; nothing happens until the LUB is amended. That will be main event on the fight card.

[GullFoss]

The reason r-cg has become so attractive for politicians and developers is that mortgage helper basement suite is magnified in an era of higher interest rates. It costs less than $40,000 to build a secondary suite on a new build vs a developed basement and is a $200,000 mortgage helper. So it helps people afford homes they otherwise couldn't buy, via subsidizing their above grade townhouse or r-2 unit that the mortgage helper suite is tethered to.

For politicians, it's also one of the least expensive new rental suites one can rent. So it's affordable incremental supply . These suites should cost $1,400 per month I think.

That's primarily why you won't see it explode in neighborhoods like Elbow Park and Upper Mount Royal. Because people buying in those neighborhoods don't need or want a $200,000 mortgage helper. Even in Altadore and South Calgary, I'd be surprised if this proliferate as the buyer pool is small.

This product is going to be super attractive in neighborhoods where r-cg is already super popular (reduces cost of an already successful business model) like Banff Trail. And in more affordable neighborhoods where insufficient redevelopment is happening this will be great because lots will be super cheap. Like Glendale and Glamorgan. Which makes the product even more affordable.

What I don't understand is that if experts could have largely figured out the specific communities where this matter, why not just blanket those specific communities. Why do it city wide?

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

Sure, but r-cg is now open to developers. And it wasn't a week ago. If I was a developer, I'd look to do r-cg on this lot now, for example. Pretty cheap land.

https://realtor.ca/real-estate/25814...alsharelisting

Was involved with a similar sale a few months ago in Elboya to a developer that seemingly overpaid for some reason. I think I now know the reason

I think people who say it won't happen in elbow park and elboya and other similar neighborhoods will be surprised at how good developers are at finding undervalued lots.

Upper Mount Royal and Brittania would be ideal candidates for r-cg if not for the protective covenants. Some of the land is pretty cheap on a psf basis relative to higher density communities.

Well, r-cg always was kind of available. According to the mayor, 95% of zoning change applications are approved.In my neighbourhood several r-cg were rezoned to d-c over the objections of the neighbours and community association. This will make it easier though for sure, though I imagine much of the focus will be on places like Altadore where they can carve up a lot and still charge premium prices.

As an aside, I found the mayor's rationale pretty circular. "We (the developer-friendly council) approve almost all applications that come our way no matter what the community input is, so we might as well blanket approve all of them." I wonder how this will affect their future donations from developers?

[Slava]

Originally Posted by edslunch

Well, r-cg always was kind of available. According to the mayor, 95% of zoning change applications are approved.In my neighbourhood several r-cg were rezoned to d-c over the objections of the neighbours and community association. This will make it easier though for sure, though I imagine much of the focus will be on places like Altadore where they can carve up a lot and still charge premium prices.

As an aside, I found the mayor's rationale pretty circular. "We (the developer-friendly council) approve almost all applications that come our way no matter what the community input is, so we might as well blanket approve all of them." I wonder how this will affect their future donations from developers?

I don't know, if they're already approving ~95%, the overall impact of this has to be small?

[GullFoss]

Originally Posted by edslunch

Well, r-cg always was kind of available. According to the mayor, 95% of zoning change applications are approved.In my neighbourhood several r-cg were rezoned to d-c over the objections of the neighbours and community association. This will make it easier though for sure, though I imagine much of the focus will be on places like Altadore where they can carve up a lot and still charge premium prices.

As an aside, I found the mayor's rationale pretty circular. "We (the developer-friendly council) approve almost all applications that come our way no matter what the community input is, so we might as well blanket approve all of them." I wonder how this will affect their future donations from developers?

This was ultimately about lowering costs.

It helps developers save money on the production of two products (row houses with and without mortgage helper basement suites), which will drive more supply at lower prices.

It's 100% rationale to upzone because if they're all being approved, why waste the time and money doing a land use application at all. Just cut the red tape, pass the savings on to developers and they will then pass the savings on to consumers via the wonder of competition in a free market economy.

That's again why I wonder what the rationale was to extend this blanket upzoning into neighborhoods where this doesn't matter. Why not just blanket upzone the 30 communities where this is obviously needed an then leave the other neighborhoods to sort it out in an LAP process.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by Slava

I don't know, if they're already approving ~95%, the overall impact of this has to be small?

It's more about targeting. A lot of R-CG upzoning has been lots that went from R-C2 to R-CG, or corner lots in neighbourhoods that had a lot of semi-detached infill.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Slava

I don't know, if they're already approving ~95%, the overall impact of this has to be small?

It's pretty costly to bring an application for a zoning change, both in terms of the cost of the application itself but moreso the cost of holding a property (and paying mortgage interest, taxes, etc) during the process. If you weren't confident you'd be able to get it done you wouldn't spend the money doing the process.

This opens up development where developers weren't previously highly confident they could get the change through.

[edslunch]

Originally Posted by Slava

I don't know, if they're already approving ~95%, the overall impact of this has to be small?

95% of the applicants who go through the time and expense to file a land-use application. This will take months and $1000s of dollars out of the process so should encourage more such developments. They still have to go through the development permit process, but from what I've seen, almost nothing can stop them at that point unless they flagrantly ignore the regulations. As opposed to normal pushing the envelope which is green lights through town.

Note: I'm not opposed to this, I just find the whole development process a bit a show.

[GullFoss]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

It's pretty costly to bring an application for a zoning change, both in terms of the cost of the application itself but moreso the cost of holding a property (and paying mortgage interest, taxes, etc) during the process. If you weren't confident you'd be able to get it done you wouldn't spend the money doing the process.

This opens up development where developers weren't previously highly confident they could get the change through.

I think it's more just about cost cutting which (1) expands the opportunity set to less desirable neighborhoods and (2) allows developers to lower prices which drives more demand in existing neighborhoods

You can already see that in more desirable r-2 neighborhoods there is far less r-cg. I've had many discussions with developers about how they can make more money doing r-2 or even r-1 in desirable neighborhoods (even if r-cg was an option). It's not an upscale product so it largely won't be going in upscale neighborhoods.

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

I think it's more just about cost cutting which (1) expands the opportunity set to less desirable neighborhoods and (2) allows developers to lower prices which drives more demand in existing neighborhoods

You can already see that in more desirable r-2 neighborhoods there is far less r-cg. I've had many discussions with developers about how they can make more money doing r-2 or even r-1 in desirable neighborhoods (even if r-cg was an option). It's not an upscale product so it largely won't be going in upscale neighborhoods.

But you said this earlier when I said it won't be going in upscale neighbourhoods.

Originally Posted by GullFoss

I disagree. Oversized lots on elbow drive could be prime spots for townhouses. Even mc2 apartments after the lap process.

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

I think people who say it won't happen in elbow park and elboya and other similar neighborhoods will be surprised at how good developers are at finding undervalued lots.

Upper Mount Royal and Brittania would be ideal candidates for r-cg if not for the protective covenants. Some of the land is pretty cheap on a psf basis relative to higher density communities.

I definitely know that there are many homes in the Upper Mount Royal/Elbow Park area which are in relatively poor condition and the renovation/redevelopment costs are not attractive so it would make a lot of sense to turn those properties into more viable homes. We lived in Altadore/South Calgary for many years and one property still stands out to be because I believe the land is still sitting empty but it is the lot at the corner of 38 Ave and 14 Street. It was a couple of old dilapidated houses that were finally torn down.

Another thing that should be looked at is all the old churches sitting on valuable inner city land. They should be expropriated and developed into housing.

[Red Slinger]

I'm not sure if this adds to the conversation, but I just moved into an infill 4-plex in Altadore and the area is great. There's a mix of SFH, duplex, 4-plex and apartments. There's also a mix of high-end, middle and lower income properties. It's early days for me but it feels like Altadore has done it right. The area seems mixed and therefore organic.

That said, if I paid a couple million or more for a SFH in Elbow Park or Mount Royal I wouldn't be too happy about a middle or low income apartment complex going up in my neighborhood. But also, F those rich bastards

[GullFoss]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

But you said this earlier when I said it won't be going in upscale neighbourhoods.

And then I think we agreed it's most likely limited to nodes and corridors where the optimal density might be even higher than r-cg. And best left to the LAP process to figure out.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Red Slinger

I'm not sure if this adds to the conversation, but I just moved into an infill 4-plex in Altadore and the area is great. There's a mix of SFH, duplex, 4-plex and apartments. There's also a mix of high-end, middle and lower income properties. It's early days for me but it feels like Altadore has done it right. The area seems mixed and therefore organic.

That said, if I paid a couple million or more for a SFH in Elbow Park or Mount Royal I wouldn't be too happy about a middle or low income apartment complex going up in my neighborhood. But also, F those rich bastards

Not too likely low income apartments go up there.

$1.5MM luxury brownstones, sure.