|
|
|
I was just watching Nenshis interview and he was suggesting them approving 8 new communities. IMO it should be 0. Even condo developers have suggested a good way to increase densification and allow more inner city development is to provide a densification subsidy and force developers to build in existing city limits by stopping Greenfield development. I think I've mentioned this before, the fact you can buy a single detached home for the same price as a condo in the inner city/downtown is not helping attract consumers to denser options. In Vancouver, many people have been squeezed out of the detached homes market and thus have adjusted to buying condos in hopes of some sort of home ownership (this is why condos are still booming compared to single homes) Calgary is already way to big for such a small population, at this rate I can't imagine how ridiculous our footprint from satellite is going to look when we hit a population of 2.5 million. IMO, they should eventually consider freezing new greenfield development for a few more years until density is around at at least 3000/sq.km. Home prices and condo prices are relatively cheap compared to other Canadian cities, now would be a good time to constrain detached homes supply and support condos/townhomes because if theres another boom, you don't want to be in a postion talking about density when cost of homes begin skyrocketing due to high demand. Calgary is so lifeless already and costing taxpayers a lot of money. Nenshi even said all this outrage over public art and such expenses is peanuts compared to the costs of supporting more sprawl through new communities. So yea, this was my little emotional rant because Im becoming a little impatient with our current progress on densification and would like to see Calgary feel at least as vibrant as Montreal/Toronto within the next 10-15 years and hopefully reaching the current vibrancy levels that are seen in Vancouver/Boston in my lifetime, that would be one of the greatest achievements for Calgary as a city imo
Overall subdivision design is a big problem for Calgary and many other North American cities. Now matter how dense the city makes its new subdivisions, they're still silos that don't interconnect with neighboring communities, and a car is needed in order to go anywhere outside the neighborhood. The city is moving in the right direction, and at least seems to understand that sprawl is an issue, but the city still can't think outside the box. Instead of looking at completly new ways to do subdivisions they simply cram more density into them, which doesn't really solve anything. I would feel better about greenfield developments if they were all developed in smaller clusters along grid corridors that interconnect to other small clusters.
I completely agree with you but when it comes to greenfield development what I'm trying to say is the city could forcefully make detached homes more expensive to buy and provide developer subsidies for developers looking to build high-rises within city limits. As long as we keep providing people cheap affordable single detached homes available through ever expanding greenfield development, we're not going to be densify anytime soon. We have so much room to grow within our current limits that I don't think affordability would be an issue for anyone interested in home ownership but it would sure help change peoples taste in the type of homes if all of a sudden detached homes become more expensive. Trust me I tell you from my own experience here in the NE, I have so many families and friends that owned a home first in Pineridge, Rundle etc, then moved up to Saddleridge, Taradle, etc, and now are moving up to new communities like Sky view. It just never stops, and they keep going because these homes in new developing communities are more modern yet still relatively cheap. I see the problem first hand with people who I share a relationship with, no amount of fancy infilling or unique condo/townhome buildings is gonna make them change their taste, at the end of the day money comes first as priority when buying homes, the price range has to be reasonable for you to justify your specific taste. Now I agree Vancouver is an extreme example that comes with a whole lot of issues and I don't wanna go down that route but you sure can take the basic concept of why the condo market is doing so well over there and even in Toronto, greenfield development and single home starts can't keep up with demand leading to ridiculous prices pushing consumers out of that price range. Land is cheap in Calgary so I don't see us becoming like Vancouver's condo market with inflated prices. There are plenty of denser cities around the world that don't expand their greenfield development yet homes are still very well priced.
