Chinook Arch
Active Member
I’m sorry, but I don’t buy that. Rich people will always have their houses somewhere and middle-class neighbourhoods like Glamorgan or Rundle will always exist as well.On this whole tax v. cost thing, an important nuance is that because we don't densify everywhere, growth goes elsewhere. UMR itself is a bit player, but an illustrative example. Places like UMR existing as-is are an indirect reason why places like the Rundles, Hawkwoods and Glamorgans exist is precisely because we didn't add more homes in places like UMR the past century. UMR cost per house/per person to service are both likely far higher than any of the other suburban examples, which in turn are all far higher cost per resident to service than higher density areas like Mission examples.
.
Calgary‘s problem is they haven’t been taxing some of those inefficient middle class neighbourhoods well enough in my opinion.
I guess the city could also tax neighbourhoods like Mount Royal a little more, but they are already taxing them 10 times as much as other middle class neighbourhoods so I don’t see it as being a problem. And let’s face it, we only have a few of those neighbourhoods around, but we have dozens upon dozens of suburban sprawl middle-class neighborhoods, that aren’t paying their proportionate share.