I still can't believe Macto has complete ownership of such a large site next to a semi-underground LRT station and hasn't done crap with it over the last decade. In these sorts of situations, a vacant lot tax needs to be hammered on. If you can't get shovels in for a high-density designated site like Westbrook then the City ought to have the developer sell it under tax pressures.

For future public land sales, the City needs to start considering implementing conditions in the sale, such as putting in something like "a developer will start construction in so and so years." EV has faced a similar fate where the core of the neighbourhood has sat vacant because developers have held onto the land, citing poor economic demand, and then let the land appreciate in value and then sold it off to another developer. In the midst of a housing crunch, these sorts of tactics need to be hammered down on.
 
gsunnyg said:
I still can't believe Macto has complete ownership of such a large site next to a semi-underground LRT station and hasn't done crap with it over the last decade. In these sorts of situations, a vacant lot tax needs to be hammered on. If you can't get shovels in for a high-density designated site like Westbrook then the City ought to have the developer sell it under tax pressures.

For future public land sales, the City needs to start considering implementing conditions in the sale, such as putting in something like "a developer will start construction in so and so years." EV has faced a similar fate where the core of the neighbourhood has sat vacant because developers have held onto the land, citing poor economic demand, and then let the land appreciate in value and then sold it off to another developer. In the midst of a housing crunch, these sorts of tactics need to be hammered down on.
Click to expand...
There's a weird thing that happens in Calgary where sites become "too big to succeed". To pull off the original Westbrook vision would take multiple phases, concrete towers and a long development runway - obviously that didn't happen as economic conditions shift before you can implement anything and now you're locked into a higher price starting point.

Perhaps a different way to do it would be for The City to build all the public spaces and set the conditions for the development, then sell off individual smaller parcels individually. This guarantees the built form and access networks to the LRT, but also chunks up the development risks between a bunch of different scales and economic trigger points. If some sites on Westbrook were more conducive to 6 storey wood frame for example, those could have likely already been built if they were all consolidated to a single developer with poor timing.

Same thing happens downtown such as the Eau Claire redevelopment - perfect site, but huge and expensive. So big, expensive and complex that by the time they get close to starting the economics change and they start over again.
 
CBBarnett said:
There's a weird thing that happens in Calgary where sites become "too big to succeed". To pull off the original Westbrook vision would take multiple phases, concrete towers and a long development runway - obviously that didn't happen as economic conditions shift before you can implement anything and now you're locked into a higher price starting point.

Perhaps a different way to do it would be for The City to build all the public spaces and set the conditions for the development, then sell off individual smaller parcels individually. This guarantees the built form and access networks to the LRT, but also chunks up the development risks between a bunch of different scales and economic trigger points. If some sites on Westbrook were more conducive to 6 storey wood frame for example, those could have likely already been built if they were all consolidated to a single developer with poor timing.

Same thing happens downtown such as the Eau Claire redevelopment - perfect site, but huge and expensive. So big, expensive and complex that by the time they get close to starting the economics change and they start over again.
Click to expand...

Yes, and those smaller sites should all have building commitments attached to them. No suburban land developer would sell a lot without requiring construction to start within a reasonable amount of time, but the City didn’t attach that condition to the Westbrook lands. Seems like a solveable misalignment of interests.
 
gsunnyg said:
I still can't believe Macto has complete ownership of such a large site next to a semi-underground LRT station and hasn't done crap with it over the last decade. In these sorts of situations, a vacant lot tax needs to be hammered on. If you can't get shovels in for a high-density designated site like Westbrook then the City ought to have the developer sell it under tax pressures.

For future public land sales, the City needs to start considering implementing conditions in the sale, such as putting in something like "a developer will start construction in so and so years." EV has faced a similar fate where the core of the neighbourhood has sat vacant because developers have held onto the land, citing poor economic demand, and then let the land appreciate in value and then sold it off to another developer. In the midst of a housing crunch, these sorts of tactics need to be hammered down on.
Click to expand...
It's such a shame. Not just Westbrook, but almost all of our LRT stations are so poorly leveraged. I'm in Vancouver and have been admiring the way they have developed stations like MetroTown, Brentwood, Coquitlam city centre, etc.. I don't think we need 60 story towers like they have here in Van, but anything would be a vast improvement over the crap we have now.
 
Surrealplaces said:
It's such a shame. Not just Westbrook, but almost all of our LRT stations are so poorly leveraged. I'm in Vancouver and have been admiring the way they have developed stations like MetroTown, Brentwood, Coquitlam city centre, etc.. I don't think we need 60 story towers like they have here in Van, but anything would be a vast improvement over the crap we have now.
Click to expand...
Exactly! It's disheartening to see proposals like Kensignton 9A, which lacks ground-level retail despite its prime location right at the doorstep of an LRT station in the heart of Kensignton. Meanwhile, the Skytrain at New Westminster station stops practically inside of a movie theatre. We just have poor vision and execution when it comes to TOD's in Calgary.
 
IMG_6911.jpeg
 
gsunnyg said:
I still can't believe Macto has complete ownership of such a large site next to a semi-underground LRT station and hasn't done crap with it over the last decade. In these sorts of situations, a vacant lot tax needs to be hammered on. If you can't get shovels in for a high-density designated site like Westbrook then the City ought to have the developer sell it under tax pressures.

For future public land sales, the City needs to start considering implementing conditions in the sale, such as putting in something like "a developer will start construction in so and so years." EV has faced a similar fate where the core of the neighbourhood has sat vacant because developers have held onto the land, citing poor economic demand, and then let the land appreciate in value and then sold it off to another developer. In the midst of a housing crunch, these sorts of tactics need to be hammered down on.
Click to expand...
Was the land sold by the city? I’m not disagreeing, only clarifying.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top