archited
Senior Member
3 sources -- my magical crystal ball, my Tarot cards, and a little bird -- all very useful in prognostication.
|
|
|
- Thread starter Daveography
- Start date
IanO
Superstar
Ok there Punk-saw-tall-knee-thrill.
archited
Senior Member
Are you trying to compare me to an oversized gopher?
Gronk!
Senior Member
IanO
Superstar
Such a cool spot and unique spaces.
IanO
Superstar
UDI-Edmonton Metro | LinkedIn
UDI-Edmonton Metro | 2,414 followers on LinkedIn. We are now BILD Edmonton Metro. Follow us and our new account. Or visit bildedmonton.com. | The Urban Development Institute-Edmonton Metro is a non-profit, member-driven organization representing leaders in the real estate development industry in...
www.linkedin.com
IanO
Superstar
As they say, “As goes your downtown, so goes your City.”
(https://www.edmonton.ca/sites/defau.../Downtown_Vibrancy_Strategy.pdf?cb=1662497825)
(https://www.edmonton.ca/sites/defau.../Downtown_Vibrancy_Strategy.pdf?cb=1662497825)
Kosy123
Active Member
Isn't the $100 per square foot program in Calgary only for office conversions? Correct me if I'm wrong but I haven't seen anything it being used for new developments
TAS
Senior Member
View attachment 548619View attachment 548620View attachment 548621View attachment 548622UDI-Edmonton Metro | LinkedIn
UDI-Edmonton Metro | 2,414 followers on LinkedIn. We are now BILD Edmonton Metro. Follow us and our new account. Or visit bildedmonton.com. | The Urban Development Institute-Edmonton Metro is a non-profit, member-driven organization representing leaders in the real estate development industry in...
In that letter Kalen Anderson and UDI is lobbying the city to put up $100/sq ft "a figure consistent with the City of Calgary". I guess industry stakeholders here say this figure is a "neccessity".
However, Calgary's figure was $75/sq ft for their program not $100 - that's a 25% difference. And I've seen people there suggest $50/sq ft might be more suitable now if in fact they decide to further fund this incentive program. Regardless, UDI should be more accurate with their numbers if they want to argue city taxpayers should cough up a figure consistent with what Calgary did.
The $75/sq ft is referenced here.
How Peoplefirst Decided to Convert Calgary's Petro Fina Building
Peoplefirst Developments is taking advantage of Calgary's Downtown Development Incentive Program to convert the Petro Fina Building.
storeys.com
Last edited:
David A
Senior Member
I am very sick of those that treat our government money as a piggy banks or slush funds for their interests and want to abscond with as much as they can.
It does little for credibility to put forth a number and claim it is the same as somewhere else if it is not and makes those proposing it look foolish or greedy.
It does little for credibility to put forth a number and claim it is the same as somewhere else if it is not and makes those proposing it look foolish or greedy.
jason403
Active Member
No need for govt to subsidize private industry here. Would be a gross misuse of taxpayer funds for corporate welfare.
Greenspace
Senior Member
I disagree. It is one of the last catalyst projects identified in the Capital City Downtown Plan that is still unfunded. The numbers to build concrete construction Downtown or convert do not make sense. Industry of course should provide some financials to back that up.
We are on track to build 20,000 units in the Edmonton area this year, almost exclusively in the suburbs. Sure there's a bit of infill but almost very few units per year Downtown. At our current rate its going to take 100 years to fill up all our vacant land. I just don't see how we can do that. Edmonton continues to sprawl ever outwards and that will have future implications for our tax base and Downtown sustainability.
We are on track to build 20,000 units in the Edmonton area this year, almost exclusively in the suburbs. Sure there's a bit of infill but almost very few units per year Downtown. At our current rate its going to take 100 years to fill up all our vacant land. I just don't see how we can do that. Edmonton continues to sprawl ever outwards and that will have future implications for our tax base and Downtown sustainability.
Last edited:
David A
Senior Member
Units are being built where people want to live. In Edmonton people do not want to live downtown because of safety concerns, lack of jobs and the limited number of retail services in the area.
If you have to drive to the edge of downtown or beyond for these things what is the attraction of being downtown? The problem is not affordability.
If you have to drive to the edge of downtown or beyond for these things what is the attraction of being downtown? The problem is not affordability.
IanO
Superstar
Cheap, quick, easy. Got it.
TAS
Senior Member
Cheap, quick, easy definitely describes building in the suburbs for developers even though it isn't cheap for the city to maintain.
What also makes this so easy is a car centric city that has evolved, lots of land and our seemingly endless desire to build more roads.
All that puts downtown at a disadvantage. Given the state of our downtown, it always surprises me how costly the land is versus the suburbs where so many prefer to live. If it's supply and demand, maybe we need to end the supply of suburban land and new road projects that facilitate those builds.