HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Calgary > Calgary Issues, Business, Politics & the Economy


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2010, 4:48 AM
Wentworth Wentworth is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Wentworth
Posts: 430
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpongeG View Post
ewww thats what passes for a house in calgary? vinyl siding and ugly?
People who live in cities with "Vancouver Special" homes should not throw stones.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2010, 6:00 AM
fusili's Avatar
fusili fusili is offline
Retrofit Urbanist
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,692
Quote:
Originally Posted by suburb View Post
I agree that no one needs to convince others, but at the same time we need to be fair and honest. The low ball in your post above is the suggestion that anywhere outside of the inner city cannot have a ton of shops within a five minutes walk.
OK, I challenge you to find anywhere to as many shops within a 5 minute walk that I have anywhere in the city:

Coffee Shops: Bumpys, Beano, Chiasso, Kawa, Good Earth, Steeps, 2 Starbucks, Tim Hortons, Second Cup, Cafe Espresso, new Coffee shop on 17th and 9A (forgot the name)
Breakfast Places: Nellies (2), Red's, Galaxy Diner, new Grill place by MEC
Fast Food: Dairy Queen, Big John's Pizza, Opa, Pizza 73, Dominos, Kim Ahn, Thai Tai, Tarboosh, Bite Me, Edo, Subway, Quiznos, Fat Tonis, Mirchi (awesome)
Grocery/Drug Stores: Shoppers, Safeway, London Drugs (Co-op is just outside a 5 min walk), Kalamata
Liquor/Wine Stores: Ferocious Grape, Liquor Depot, Liquor Barn, new wine store in Mount Royal (Co-op again just outside a 5 minute walk)
Restaurants: Where to start? BPs, Golden Bell, Kings Chinese, Coop, Sushi places (2), Farm, King and I, Gnoccis, Bonterra, Buon Giorno, Manies, Brava, Living Room, Fiore, Una, Palace of Eats (I am forgetting several)
Bars/Pubs: Classic Jacks, Met, Melrose, Ship and Anchor, Mercury, Local 510, Brewsters, Yardhouse
Hairdressers: At least 5.
Clothing Stores: More than 20
Ski shops: 4.

Look, I am not low balling. I like this much choice. Nowhere in the suburbs has anywhere close to as many amenities within walking distance as I currently have. And even then, I want more than I have already. It is not a myth. No suburb in Calgary, or anywhere else for that matter, would have this amount of stores, ever. Otherwise it wouldn't be a suburb.

So yes, nowhere outside of the inner city can have tons of shops within a 5 minute walk. Not even close.


EDIT- I forgot to mention Ric's Grill. And that is technically 0 metres from my place, because it is in the same building.
Also forgot to mention that all these amenities are within 600m of my condo. According to the map you provided earlier of your place, you have exactly zero amenities within 600m of your house.
__________________
Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2010, 6:36 AM
Ramsayfarian's Avatar
Ramsayfarian Ramsayfarian is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 5,271
Quote:
Originally Posted by Policy Wonk View Post
That is not a road that goes where you think it does... the costs of upgrading and maintaining infrastructure in dense urban areas are catastrophic. Running roads and utilities across virgin prairie is a bargain in comparison.
I just wanted to say great avatar. That's one of my favourite movies.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2010, 6:59 AM
elconsulto's Avatar
elconsulto elconsulto is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Calgary
Posts: 214
Quote:
Originally Posted by fusili View Post
OK, I challenge you to find anywhere to as many shops within a 5 minute walk that I have anywhere in the city:

Coffee Shops: Bumpys, Beano, Chiasso, Kawa, Good Earth, Steeps, 2 Starbucks, Tim Hortons, Second Cup, Cafe Espresso, new Coffee shop on 17th and 9A (forgot the name)
Breakfast Places: Nellies (2), Red's, Galaxy Diner, new Grill place by MEC
Fast Food: Dairy Queen, Big John's Pizza, Opa, Pizza 73, Dominos, Kim Ahn, Thai Tai, Tarboosh, Bite Me, Edo, Subway, Quiznos, Fat Tonis, Mirchi (awesome)
Grocery/Drug Stores: Shoppers, Safeway, London Drugs (Co-op is just outside a 5 min walk), Kalamata
Liquor/Wine Stores: Ferocious Grape, Liquor Depot, Liquor Barn, new wine store in Mount Royal (Co-op again just outside a 5 minute walk)
Restaurants: Where to start? BPs, Golden Bell, Kings Chinese, Coop, Sushi places (2), Farm, King and I, Gnoccis, Bonterra, Buon Giorno, Manies, Brava, Living Room, Fiore, Una, Palace of Eats (I am forgetting several)
Bars/Pubs: Classic Jacks, Met, Melrose, Ship and Anchor, Mercury, Local 510, Brewsters, Yardhouse
Hairdressers: At least 5.
Clothing Stores: More than 20
Ski shops: 4.

Look, I am not low balling. I like this much choice. Nowhere in the suburbs has anywhere close to as many amenities within walking distance as I currently have. And even then, I want more than I have already. It is not a myth. No suburb in Calgary, or anywhere else for that matter, would have this amount of stores, ever. Otherwise it wouldn't be a suburb.

So yes, nowhere outside of the inner city can have tons of shops within a 5 minute walk. Not even close.


EDIT- I forgot to mention Ric's Grill. And that is technically 0 metres from my place, because it is in the same building.
Also forgot to mention that all these amenities are within 600m of my condo. According to the map you provided earlier of your place, you have exactly zero amenities within 600m of your house.
you're making me drool, cut that out.

heheheheh
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2010, 7:57 AM
Policy Wonk's Avatar
Policy Wonk Policy Wonk is offline
Inflatable Hippo
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Suburban Las Vegas
Posts: 4,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by fusili View Post
OK, I challenge you to find anywhere to as many shops within a 5 minute walk that I have anywhere in the city:
And just who do you imagine needs to be in walking distance of 1/10th of that?
__________________
Public Administration 101: Keep your mouth shut until obligated otherwise and don't get in public debates with housewives.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2010, 8:01 AM
Policy Wonk's Avatar
Policy Wonk Policy Wonk is offline
Inflatable Hippo
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Suburban Las Vegas
Posts: 4,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ramsayfarian View Post
I just wanted to say great avatar. That's one of my favourite movies.
It is easily my favorite movie, it was time for a change since Doug Wilson when we last saw him was living in a tree house in his ex-wifes yard.
__________________
Public Administration 101: Keep your mouth shut until obligated otherwise and don't get in public debates with housewives.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2010, 2:38 PM
Riise's Avatar
Riise Riise is offline
City Maker
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Calgary | London
Posts: 3,195
Quote:
Originally Posted by Policy Wonk View Post
The costs of maintaining low-density infrastructure just aren't really that burdensome.
The costs of maintaining both their infrastructure & services is rather burdensome. Here's a sample of some of the numbers for which some are asking: Density's Impact On Infrastructure Costs.
__________________
“Such suburban models are being rationalized as ‘what people want,’ when in fact they are simply what is most expedient to produce. The truth is that what people want is a decent place to live, not just a suburban version of a decent place to live.”
- Roberta Brandes Gratz
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2010, 3:09 PM
fusili's Avatar
fusili fusili is offline
Retrofit Urbanist
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,692
Quote:
Originally Posted by Policy Wonk View Post
And just who do you imagine needs to be in walking distance of 1/10th of that?
Nobody needs it. But I want it. As do most residents who live in neighbourhoods like this.
__________________
Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2010, 3:13 PM
freeweed's Avatar
freeweed freeweed is offline
Home of Hyperchange
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Dynamic City, Alberta
Posts: 17,566
Quote:
Originally Posted by Policy Wonk View Post
And just who do you imagine needs to be in walking distance of 1/10th of that?
One Starbucks is never enough! What if the one location runs out of lattes?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2010, 4:47 PM
Policy Wonk's Avatar
Policy Wonk Policy Wonk is offline
Inflatable Hippo
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Suburban Las Vegas
Posts: 4,015
Quote:
Originally Posted by Riise View Post
The costs of maintaining both their infrastructure & services is rather burdensome. Here's a sample of some of the numbers for which some are asking: Density's Impact On Infrastructure Costs.
Your link doesn't work,

Newly built density, to the point of diminishing returns is plenty efficient - that is however not what is typically being built. Introducing and maintaining and continually developing density in intensely developed urban areas is catastrophically expensive.

I don't know what your link says because it won't open - but every argument I have seen that claims urban infrastructure costs are favourable is based on a wholly unrealistic static situation that just isn't found in urban areas that aren't completely moribund.
__________________
Public Administration 101: Keep your mouth shut until obligated otherwise and don't get in public debates with housewives.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2010, 4:48 PM
kw5150's Avatar
kw5150 kw5150 is offline
Here and There
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Calgary
Posts: 5,807
Quote:
Originally Posted by Policy Wonk View Post
And just who do you imagine needs to be in walking distance of 1/10th of that?
Theres no imagining needed. Plenty of people love this style of living. Plus there is no road rage.
__________________
Renfrew, Calgary, Alberta.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2010, 4:51 PM
kw5150's Avatar
kw5150 kw5150 is offline
Here and There
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Calgary
Posts: 5,807
Quote:
Originally Posted by Policy Wonk View Post
Your link doesn't work,

Newly built density, to the point of diminishing returns is plenty efficient - that is however not what is typically being built. Introducing and maintaining and continually developing density in intensely developed urban areas is catastrophically expensive.

I don't know what your link says because it won't open - but every argument I have seen that claims urban infrastructure costs are favourable is based on a wholly unrealistic static situation that just isn't found in urban areas that aren't completely moribund.
Whatever, then why would the City of Calgary care about suburban subsidies so much? They seem to be VERY interested.
__________________
Renfrew, Calgary, Alberta.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2010, 5:04 PM
polishavenger polishavenger is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,498
Quote:
Originally Posted by Policy Wonk View Post
And you imagine that the perceived discrepancy in your taxes is alone subsidizing sprawl?
There is no percieved discrepancy, its easily measured. When you compare my 1400 sq.ft. townhome with a 1400 sq.ft. townhome in the burbs, I pay way more in property tax simply because of the market value formula. Do i get any more services for it, no, I probably get less.


Add to the fact that a huge chunk of the cities budget comes from the DT core alone (i've heard the number of 50% thrown around, but I cant confirm), it shows how a single dense area is used to subsidize sprawling neighbourhoods.

Initial construction cost isnt the only issue, its the replacement of the infrastructure as it ages. Do you think that the deerfoot once built lasts forever without maintenance, bridge replacement etc? The city barely has enough money to build the new stuff required to service the growth of the city, let alone replace what exists once the time comes.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2010, 5:27 PM
kw5150's Avatar
kw5150 kw5150 is offline
Here and There
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Calgary
Posts: 5,807
Quote:
Originally Posted by polishavenger View Post
There is no percieved discrepancy, its easily measured. When you compare my 1400 sq.ft. townhome with a 1400 sq.ft. townhome in the burbs, I pay way more in property tax simply because of the market value formula. Do i get any more services for it, no, I probably get less.


Add to the fact that a huge chunk of the cities budget comes from the DT core alone (i've heard the number of 50% thrown around, but I cant confirm), it shows how a single dense area is used to subsidize sprawling neighbourhoods.

Initial construction cost isnt the only issue, its the replacement of the infrastructure as it ages. Do you think that the deerfoot once built lasts forever without maintenance, bridge replacement etc? The city barely has enough money to build the new stuff required to service the growth of the city, let alone replace what exists once the time comes.
Amen......except for the part about the 50% of the budget coming from downtown. We need some confirmation!
__________________
Renfrew, Calgary, Alberta.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2010, 6:29 PM
freeweed's Avatar
freeweed freeweed is offline
Home of Hyperchange
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Dynamic City, Alberta
Posts: 17,566
Quote:
Originally Posted by polishavenger View Post
There is no percieved discrepancy, its easily measured. When you compare my 1400 sq.ft. townhome with a 1400 sq.ft. townhome in the burbs, I pay way more in property tax simply because of the market value formula. Do i get any more services for it, no, I probably get less.
And I pay more income taxes than someone who earns less than myself, even though I use on average far fewer services than most people (especially low income earners). Most of our taxes are progressive in this country.

Maybe we should scrap the concept of property taxes and go with user fees instead.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2010, 6:46 PM
Wentworth Wentworth is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Wentworth
Posts: 430
If this suburban subsidy was really true, then you'd see a huge difference in the property tax rate in Airdrie (where there is no inner city that is subsidizing taxes) as compared with Calgary. But the rates are more or less identical, 0.0058734 for Calgary and 0.00609469 for Airdrie. That amounts to about $90 difference on a $390,000 home. Considering homes are cheaper in Airdrie, you'd probably end up spending less on taxes by moving there.

Airdrie rates

Calgary Rates

As for the market value tax system, cities use this system because they get more taxes that way as opposed to a flat tax system where they'd have to work with the lowest common denominator in terms of what people could afford to pay.

Last edited by Wentworth; Dec 22, 2010 at 6:52 PM. Reason: Numbers were reversed
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2010, 7:01 PM
fusili's Avatar
fusili fusili is offline
Retrofit Urbanist
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,692
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wentworth View Post
If this suburban subsidy was really true, then you'd see a huge difference in the property tax rate in Airdrie (where there is no inner city that is subsidizing taxes) as compared with Calgary. But the rates are more or less identical, 0.0058734 for Calgary and 0.00609469 for Airdrie. That amounts to about $90 difference on a $390,000 home. Considering homes are cheaper in Airdrie, you'd probably end up spending less on taxes by moving there.

Airdrie rates

Calgary Rates

As for the market value tax system, cities use this system because they get more taxes that way as opposed to a flat tax system where they'd have to work with the lowest common denominator in terms of what people could afford to pay.
Or we could work out an income tax transfer from the province and scap the whole property tax thing altogether.
__________________
Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2010, 7:04 PM
fusili's Avatar
fusili fusili is offline
Retrofit Urbanist
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,692
Quote:
Originally Posted by freeweed View Post
And I pay more income taxes than someone who earns less than myself, even though I use on average far fewer services than most people (especially low income earners). Most of our taxes are progressive in this country.

Maybe we should scrap the concept of property taxes and go with user fees instead.
Market value property taxes aren't necessarily progressive. In fact, they are pretty regressive for some. Low income families spend a greater proportion of their income on housing than the average and retired seniors usually live in houses that are more expensive (as a virtue of being in the community longer). This is incredible regressive.
__________________
Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2010, 7:07 PM
freeweed's Avatar
freeweed freeweed is offline
Home of Hyperchange
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Dynamic City, Alberta
Posts: 17,566
Quote:
Originally Posted by fusili View Post
Or we could work out an income tax transfer from the province and scap the whole property tax thing altogether.
Interesting idea, but I don't know that that would change much. Property values tend to have a fairly strong correlation to income, at least in our current low interest rate world - "get as big of a mortgage as you can afford" is the watchword of the day.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Dec 22, 2010, 7:14 PM
freeweed's Avatar
freeweed freeweed is offline
Home of Hyperchange
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Dynamic City, Alberta
Posts: 17,566
Quote:
Originally Posted by fusili View Post
Market value property taxes aren't necessarily progressive. In fact, they are pretty regressive for some. Low income families spend a greater proportion of their income on housing than the average and retired seniors usually live in houses that are more expensive (as a virtue of being in the community longer). This is incredible regressive.
Most if not all low income families don't pay property taxes at all in a city like Calgary. They can't conceivably even think of affording a mortgage. If anything, it's the rental system itself that is incredibly regressive. When they can, the old "3x your income" rule applies to them as much as it does anyone. Now, they typically spend a greater proportion of their *disposable* income, sure. But that applies to just about everything else in their lives, too.

I'm sure we can find a few millionaires to skew the mean here (which is why medians should always be used), but damn near everyone I know that's ever bought property has spent in proportion to their income.

Anyway, the point was that for almost every tax that exists, those who can pay more typically do. So it's not much of an argument to say "I pay more than I use in services" - yeah, welcome to the real world, friend.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia > Calgary > Calgary Issues, Business, Politics & the Economy
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 11:38 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.