That's great. I believe this will be the first condo development with over a hundred units to go ahead since the market crashed! ?
 
Like I said, with over a hundred units. I highly doubt any of the 4 storey stucco shitboxes in the suburbs have over a hundred units in an individual building.

Perhaps that one 6 storey one in West District or wherever? Maybe August in University District, not sure. But they started that one without any sales.
 
If you visit Skyview/cityscape recently they got some pretty large ones being made up there. More reasons I just hate greenfield development, it just dumps more supply in areas where pro density guys like me just hate to see.
 
MichaelS said:
Most of the multi-family sites in the suburbs are there because of Council policy mandating minimum UPAs for new communities. I assure you, most land developers in the suburbs would prefer to see fewer of them, and more single family homes.
Click to expand...
I know but ideally I would like to see 0 new communities for at least another decade or until we hit at least 3000 people per sq.km. So much for 50/50 growth, Calgary led all major Canadian cities with 90% of its population growth happening in the suburbs (2006-2017). But I guess thats a whole another topic that I don't want to get into again, it just evokes anger in me towards city hall so I'll leave it at that. :rolleyes:
 
gsunnyg said:
I know but ideally I would like to see 0 new communities for at least another decade or until we hit at least 3000 people per sq.km. So much for 50/50 growth, Calgary led all major Canadian cities with 90% of its population growth happening in the suburbs (2006-2017). But I guess thats a whole another topic that I don't want to get into again, it just evokes anger in me towards city hall so I'll leave it at that. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I know what you mean. While the idea of more density in the suburbs sound appealing on paper, I don't like the way it's working out. I guess it's still better than the same amount of new communities with half the people, but it would be nicer to see density increases in established parts of the city - which we are, but at a faster pace, and something more affordable.

I know a young couple who just bought a condo in Skyview, for $215,000. I don't know what their building looks like, but their unit is around 900 and some sq ft and has two bedrooms. If there was any way to get that same sized unit for that price or close to that price in say Renfrew or Capitol Hill etc.. the place would sell out instantly.

I know ideas around this issue have been thrown around before, but it's a difficult issue to solve.
 
There's no easy answer to that situation. Land is simply a lot more expensive in the inner city neighborhoods. Fortunately, development is still happening in those areas because even though price per square foot is more expensive, the areas are desirable. The city can increase the levy on greenfield, and use it towards incentives for inner city building, but new development in the inner city also brings need to increase infrastructure.

In the end, the best way IMO is to increase density in inner city neighborhoods, particularly along arteries and let the development industry do their thing. Some incentives couldn't hurt.
 
Yeah, I really like the idea of a levy fund where first time home buyers are eligible to get cash from additional greenfield levies if they buy in existing communities in the inner city. I mean if a condo in Skyview costs $215 000, an extra something 10k on a mortgage would not be the end of the world, a $225,000 condo would still be very cheap relative to other big cities, and with that $10k you could allocate it in a fund and redistribute it to first time home buyers as cash incentives. People usually buy new furniture, renovate or take on additional upgrades when they buy a new home. Liquid cash would be a really strong incentive I think. Doesn't hurt to try it out, nothing else seems to be working at the moment.

But the councillors are also quite big hypocrites. Votes play a huge part in how they make decisions. I remember councillor Gondek going on about how she was able to secure infrastructure funding in place for a project in her ward thanks to the approval of 14 new communities. Like give me break, now we're balancing our budgets on greenfield development? Its a dirty cycle city hall has got themselves into and density is just a play on word for them. I think only 2 or 3 councillors actually take Calgarys sprawl seriously. I slammed my local councillor with a message for voting in favour of the 14 new communities. In turn I got no reply from his team, not surprising when you got Mattamy Homes and bunch of other suburban developers contributing to your election campaign.
 
Can confirm. Heavy machinery on-site.


IMG_7765.JPG
 
gsunnyg said:
Yeah, I really like the idea of a levy fund where first time home buyers are eligible to get cash from additional greenfield levies if they buy in existing communities in the inner city. I mean if a condo in Skyview costs $215 000, an extra something 10k on a mortgage would not be the end of the world, a $225,000 condo would still be very cheap relative to other big cities, and with that $10k you could allocate it in a fund and redistribute it to first time home buyers as cash incentives. People usually buy new furniture, renovate or take on additional upgrades when they buy a new home. Liquid cash would be a really strong incentive I think. Doesn't hurt to try it out, nothing else seems to be working at the moment.

But the councillors are also quite big hypocrites. Votes play a huge part in how they make decisions. I remember councillor Gondek going on about how she was able to secure infrastructure funding in place for a project in her ward thanks to the approval of 14 new communities. Like give me break, now we're balancing our budgets on greenfield development? Its a dirty cycle city hall has got themselves into and density is just a play on word for them. I think only 2 or 3 councillors actually take Calgarys sprawl seriously. I slammed my local councillor with a message for voting in favour of the 14 new communities. In turn I got no reply from his team, not surprising when you got Mattamy Homes and bunch of other suburban developers contributing to your election campaign.
Click to expand...

Agreed - this and add toll roads to all major freeways. This should be a user pay system. Inner city residents that rarely use the ring road shouldn't have to pay for it the same way a commuter from Cochrane or Airdrie does.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top