News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 9.4K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.3K     0 

archited said:
Let's try to keep it a "choice" -- we don't need a Toronto or a Vancouver "experience".
Click to expand...
and why not?

as much as i love edmonton, we do nothing here that is not done elsewhere in the world. we do the odd thing better and we do the odd thing worse but for the most part we muddle along in the middle taking inordinate lengths of time to achieve mediocre results at best.

i think one of the reasons for that is this strange penchant to pursue “made in edmonton” solutions instead of pursuing and happily plagiarizing the best solutions regardless of where they originate from.

there are many “experiences” in toronto and vancouver - and london and paris and singapore and barcelona and amsterdam and new york et al - that i would love to see in edmonton.

are there are also many mistakes and experiences elsewhere to avoid? absolutely. but that kind of parochial approach ultimately means we we will doomed to repeat their mistakes at a much higher rate than we will replicate their successes, particularly if we avoid their successes simply because we don’t want their experiences.

if it’s a good experience, we should be stealing it in a heartbeat. just like we did with the fringe…
 
Last edited:
^^^^ I was referring to the phenomena of out-of-country purchasers of condos whereby the buyer has no intention of occupying the unit and thereby drives up the price of condos generally, creating a price-vortex that benefits no-one. Both Toronto and Vancouver are afflicted with this disease; I would hate to see it become a "thing" in Edmonton.
 
^

it’s not unique to vancouver and toronto.

it’s common place in london and singapore and new york and paris and monaco and the algarve the azores and panama and palm springs and phoenix and miami and the caribbean and cabo. many of those places are quite popular with and for canadians. closer to home for albertans you see it in canmore and kananaskis and pigeon lake and mameo beach etc.

you see this happen when these places have or have done something that makes them desirable destinations. this is exactly what we should want edmonton to become, not something that we should try to avoid or undermine.

are there some real and perceived concerns that might accompany some of that? of course there are, but they pale in comparison to the concerns we will otherwise have to address. the key will be to develop responses and solutions to those concerns (something else we can apply best practices from elsewhere towards reconciling) instead of thinking kitty-bar-the-door is a step forward and not a step backward.
 
^^^^ I realize that the phenomena is broader than Canadian cities -- of course. I posted an article on this site some while ago that underscored the damage done to cities vis-a-vis sky-high pricing due to this phenomenon -- both Toronto and Vancouver are Canadian examples of cities that have been affected and infected. It is a major part of the reason that condo prices are so high in those cities and underscores the vast gulf in prices compared to Edmonton (also part of the reason, I surmise, that Toronto developers are stymied by the Edmonton market price for high-rise condos). The article that I submitted was peer-reviewed and suggested a number of "fixes" had been tried -- particularly in NYC -- without much measurable success.
 
^

i don't recall that particular post or attachment but i'm not surprised that most efforts to "increase housing affordability" fail over time and often much less time than would be first thought.

if i'm not mistaken, most of those fixes have always attempted to "manage" the affordability issue from the supply side and it's my belief that that is doomed to fail.

many of those efforts end up creating their own upward pressure on overall market pricing as they limit new supply while reducing overall mobility in the marketplace as occupants are loath to lose their subsidized position in the market by moving. the more that happens, the fewer units there are that are actually in the market. what happens is that you have people continuing to occupy units that would otherwise be vacated and added to the market.

artificial suppression of pricing - particularly rental pricing - simply forces the market to get creative in working around the those limits with things like "key money", compulsory rent to own furniture deals, etc. they move from initially providing more affordable housing to introducing a black market in housing that becomes higher priced and not less. those black market surcharges are often completely untaxed, thereby imposing yet one more burden on the system. lack of maintenance with the resulting higher demand on emergency services is a similar additional burden as is the ultimate demolition by neglect.

there are some interesting alternative approaches being applied at micro and macro scales around the world - everything from universal basic incomes to requiring employers to provide staff housing (particularly in resort communities where it can be tied to high demand new development permits) to broader civic initiatives like those taking place in amsterdam and copenhagen. interestingly enough, not all of those initiatives are completely income based but they do differentiate between affordable and special needs housing. on the special needs side, some of those models are now requiring an initial reserve fund sufficient to provide case management and support services for 15 years periods in an attempt to avoid catastrophes like what took place with macdonald's lofts and dwayne's home where there is a net loss of both housing and public and private capital.
 
ChazYEG said:
You've never been to Latin America, have you?
Click to expand...
Depends where, I haven't been around the Columbia, Nicaragua, Panama, El Salvador, etc, but I've been to about half of S.A. and a few central America.
Unlike other second and third world countries, Detroit was a sprawling city with huge swaths of the city abandoned, burned down, or reclaimed by forest. Its clear the population is down to 30 percent of it's peak in the 50s, and the art deco infrastructure is both intriguing and creepy.

Sorry to derail, but there's legit lessons to be learned from Detroit.
 
Stevey_G said:
Depends where, I haven't been around the Columbia, Nicaragua, Panama, El Salvador, etc, but I've been to about half of S.A. and a few central America.
Unlike other second and third world countries, Detroit was a sprawling city with huge swaths of the city abandoned, burned down, or reclaimed by forest. Its clear the population is down to 30 percent of it's peak in the 50s, and the art deco infrastructure is both intriguing and creepy.

Sorry to derail, but there's legit lessons to be learned from Detroit.
Click to expand...
Take a walk around the older industrial regions in cities like Rio, Medellin, Lima... It's not unlike Detroit.

I do agree that considering the urban development patterns, the lessons we have to take from Detroit are probably more valuable, but just wanted to point out that the urban decay in some formerly important big cities in countries like Brazil, Colombia, Peru and Mexico is just as bad, if not worse.
 
ChazYEG said:
Take a walk around the older industrial regions in cities like Rio, Medellin, Lima... It's not unlike Detroit.

I do agree that considering the urban development patterns, the lessons we have to take from Detroit are probably more valuable, but just wanted to point out that the urban decay in some formerly important big cities in countries like Brazil, Colombia, Peru and Mexico is just as bad, if not worse.
Click to expand...

Most of those cities are experiencing positive growth in urban and economic development though. Detroit is facing legitimate urban blight on a city wide scale.
 
We could use about 100,000 foreign buyers yesterday, if we could limit them to condos rather than SFH. Would be a huge boost to urbanization and densification efforts plus return Edmonton to largest population in Alberta.
 
Stevey_G said:
Most of those cities are experiencing positive growth in urban and economic development though. Detroit is facing legitimate urban blight on a city wide scale.
Click to expand...
Their growth in urban and economic development is limited to the newer and wealthy areas, while entire neighborhoods are being neglected and flat out abandoned, leaving the few residents on their own, against crime, poverty and crumbling infrastructure.

It is easy to judge how well they're doing visiting as a tourist or reading foreign media outlets. Living in these places and their reality gives an actual perspective of how things really are.
 
occidentalcapital said:
We could use about 100,000 foreign buyers yesterday, if we could limit them to condos rather than SFH. Would be a huge boost to urbanization and densification efforts plus return Edmonton to largest population in Alberta.
Click to expand...
Sure, but this type of thought experiment can't exist in the real world where people have choice.

I think a better way to frame it is how can we make condos and central living attractive enough to bring in 100K new residents. Right now the value proposition of central condos isn't there relative to SFH. Make the DT stunning and filled with one-of-a-kind experiences that cannot be replicated in the suburbs and you'll start to see more inflow.
 
What 10 are under way?
1.) Falcon 1
2.) Parks
3.) StationLands
4.) Cidex 122st
5.) Edward
6.) Mercury Block
7.) Open Sky 121st / Jameson
8.) Oliver Crossing
9.) The one behind the Emerald zombie pit
10.) ????
 
tkoe_ said:
Sure, but this type of thought experiment can't exist in the real world where people have choice.

I think a better way to frame it is how can we make condos and central living attractive enough to bring in 100K new residents. Right now the value proposition of central condos isn't there relative to SFH. Make the DT stunning and filled with one-of-a-kind experiences that cannot be replicated in the suburbs and you'll start to see more inflow.
Click to expand...
In addition to this I think the bad reputation of the core needs to be addressed at the same time we bring in cool shops and amenities. I've heard enough people complain about how bad downtown is and then in the next breath complain about trying to fix it. There's a few systemic safety and transit issues that need delt with before the public buys in.
 
  • Like
Reactions: God
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top