[The Familia]

Put me in the camp that is very disappointed the heritage apartment is coming down. Such a waste…this city will never learn.

 

[UrbanWarrior]

 

[zzkwilliamcanada]

Put me in the camp that is very disappointed the heritage apartment is coming down. Such a waste…this city will never learn.

there is one thing i am super dont understand.. we have a lot parking lots, unused lot, grassland in our city, why those developer always want to demolish some building first then build another one. why doesnt go straight to those unused land...

 

[CalgaryTiger]

there is one thing i am super dont understand.. we have a lot parking lots, unused lot, grassland in our city, why those developer always want to demolish some building first then build another one. why doesnt go straight to those unused land...

They do not own that "unused" land and it's not that expensive to sit on developable land for those that do own it.

 

[GoVertical]

Plus I wonder how much of the interiors of those buildings have been modified over the years. Maybe only the facade could be listed. Still a sad loss

 

[The Familia]

Don't know why they couldn't build around the apartment or incorporate it somehow. Just lazy and cheap.

 

[Mountain Man]

Plus I wonder how much of the interiors of those buildings have been modified over the years. Maybe only the facade could be listed. Still a sad loss

I'm sure the interior of the building has been modified many times over the years. It's been offices for as long as I can remember.

 

[Alex_YYC]

They do not own that "unused" land and it's not that expensive to sit on developable land for those that do own it.

That’s one of the problems we have is that developers can buy a lot and leave it empty for eternity.
I’m in support of a free market economy, but maybe some adjustments can be done such as the city can add an extra tax on inner city lots that aren’t developed, unless the developer makes it into a park or a basketball court or something useful.

 

[adamyyc]

City needs to put more stringent TLU requirements in place for vacant lots.

 

[JTron]

It's nice to see another development moving ahead, but for the love of god, can a developer in this city just once build something an empty lot?!?!

 

[O-tac]

Between this and First & Tenth I'm starting to dislike Truman. It's like they are targeting unprotected historical buildings.

 

[maestro]

Developable sites such as parking lots sell at higher premiums than old buildings with high vacancies or in need of repairs. Why cities need to be pro active in heritage protection designations.

 

[JoeUrban]

Developable sites such as parking lots sell at higher premiums than old buildings with high vacancies or in need of repairs. Why cities need to be pro active in heritage protection designations.

Whereas in Calgary we rely on the benevolence of owners and corporations to preserve our historic sites.
Works pretty bad compared to the rest of the country.

 

[stev3n]

That’s one of the problems we have is that developers can buy a lot and leave it empty for eternity.
I’m in support of a free market economy, but maybe some adjustments can be done such as the city can add an extra tax on inner city lots that aren’t developed, unless the developer makes it into a park or a basketball court or something useful.

Calgary should implement a land tax and decrease the property tax by an equal amount. By taxing the land value rather than the property value, we could stop providing tax incentives to lower the property value as much as possible while squating on it. It's better than a more targeted "empty lot" tax, because he can just put a parking lot sign on it, or an outhouse and call it developed. Land tax would also provide tax incentive to build denser housing/ just use land more productively in general.

 

[JoeUrban]

Calgary should implement a land tax and decrease the property tax by an equal amount. By taxing the land value rather than the property value, we could stop providing tax incentives to lower the property value as much as possible while squating on it. It's better than a more targeted "empty lot" tax, because he can just put a parking lot sign on it, or an outhouse and call it developed. Land tax would also provide tax incentive to build denser housing/ just use land more productively in general.

100%. And it wouldn't necessarily backfire with heritage, encouraging those owners to densify, because one of the upcoming incentives will be tax reduction/abatement. As well in some communities there is the ability to sell off unused density of heritage sites to other development sites.