General Vancouver Updates

[Jimbo604]

Originally Posted by zahav

There should definitely be a vacant land penalty, IMO. Land is supposed to be used, not held up by a future plan. If an owner/developer isn't ready to build, then sell it to someone who is. If we are taxing empty homes, vacant land should be as well (don't get me started on the dog parks or community gardens, these developers should be getting on with building and not just sitting on the land). I understand things come up and developers might hit a roadblock, but demolishing existing buildings just to have land sit empty is insane in a city like this, and there should be rules against it.

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/1401-robson-street-vancouver
1401 Robson

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Jimbo604

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/1401-robson-street-vancouver
1401 Robson

TBH, a lot of 'parks' downtown are just small, empty grassy lots with a little bit of landscaping.

What's the difference?

[jollyburger]

What's the difference between someone not building on vacant land versus someone building a SFH on a large land plot or someone with a low density building that could be redeveloped?

Exactly the same reason people will think expropriating land as a solution to housing problems.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

What's the difference between someone not building on vacant land versus someone building a SFH on a large land plot or someone with a low density building that could be redeveloped?

Exactly the same reason people will think expropriating land as a solution to housing problems.

My point is more that it's kind of dumb to point to private developers for not developing properties for whatever reason when CoV has lots of poorly-utilized land.

If anything, they're the largest holder.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by zahav

There should definitely be a vacant land penalty, IMO. Land is supposed to be used, not held up by a future plan. If an owner/developer isn't ready to build, then sell it to someone who is. If we are taxing empty homes, vacant land should be as well (don't get me started on the dog parks or community gardens, these developers should be getting on with building and not just sitting on the land). I understand things come up and developers might hit a roadblock, but demolishing existing buildings just to have land sit empty is insane in a city like this, and there should be rules against it.

Perhaps you'd be interested in a land value tax.

Simply tax land at a greater rate and reduce the tax on physical structures and improvements. Disincentivise land speculation and incentivise land development.

Or, if an LVT is not politically viable right now, we could try out the Pennsylvania style split-rate tax and reduce the rate of taxation on structures. BC assessment already assesses land and structures separately, so it wouldn't be hard for the province to allow municipalities to tax both seperately.

IMO property tax as a system has fundamental structural issues; It's essentially a land value tax with an added wealth tax on structures, and as a result has all the issues of a wealth tax. Why build or improve anything if it means you're going to get taxed harder on it? It won't solve the housing crisis, but reforming land taxation is a step in the right direction.

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by fredinno

My point is more that it's kind of dumb to point to private developers for not developing properties for whatever reason when CoV has lots of poorly-utilized land.

If anything, they're the largest holder.

Yeah I agree with you. Vacant lots seem to be the least of their problems.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Devil's advocate: the City doesn't have to create for-profit housing (e.g. it could also be a community/rec centre, park, non-profit housing, etc), but developers do (i.e. the only reason they'd sit on a property is to raise the value). A vacant land tax provides a kick in the ass to redevelop the site while the land is still kinda-sorta cheap.

[chowhou]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Devil's advocate: the City doesn't have to create for-profit housing (e.g. it could also be a community/rec centre, park, non-profit housing, etc), but developers do (i.e. the only reason they'd sit on a property is to raise the value). A vacant land tax provides a kick in the ass to redevelop the site while the land is still kinda-sorta cheap.

IMO a vacant land tax is kind of a half baked idea, after all what is the definition of "vacant"? If you move an RV onto the property is it no longer vacant? Is a temporary community garden no longer vacant? If you use it to store your grass is it no longer vacant? Is 1916 William St vacant but 1050 Expo Boulevard and 4851 Belmont Ave aren't?

Just have a blanket increase in land tax and end the structure tax. Then you have a kick in the ass to make sure your land is productive.

[Migrant_Coconut]

True, though something like requiring a minimum of (let's say) 0.5 FSR of development to get an exemption should be enough to stop most tax evasion.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Devil's advocate: the City doesn't have to create for-profit housing (e.g. it could also be a community/rec centre, park, non-profit housing, etc), but developers do (i.e. the only reason they'd sit on a property is to raise the value). A vacant land tax provides a kick in the ass to redevelop the site while the land is still kinda-sorta cheap.

On the other hand: What if they're holding onto the site because they want better zoning?
Kind of pointless for Concord to be forced to redevelop Molson with its current industrial zoning right next to Senkaw, for instance.

If you do that, you're wasting money and the zoning probably isn't economically viable.



Or the opposite way around with Fraser Mills, which Coquitlam seems to insist be condos despite having no infrastructure to make that viable.
Every plan that gets sent out increases the size of the 'industrial' section while increasing the density of the condos to compensate.

There's been 0 progress on the residential section (not even pits), while the industrial section is opening up for customers.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by fredinno

On the other hand: What if they're holding onto the site because they want better zoning?
Kind of pointless for Concord to be forced to redevelop Molson with its current industrial zoning right next to Senkaw, for instance.

If you do that, you're wasting money and the zoning probably isn't economically viable.



Or the opposite way around with Fraser Mills, which Coquitlam seems to insist be condos despite having no infrastructure to make that viable.
Every plan that gets sent out increases the size of the 'industrial' section while increasing the density of the condos to compensate.

There's been 0 progress on the residential section (not even pits), while the industrial section is opening up for customers.

Could you start a thread on this topic if you want to debate it, as you're taking it further and further away from General Vancouver developments.

[Migrant_Coconut]

By contrast, NEFC is fully zoned and waiting on Concord, but they're dragging their heels and stalling the entire project because... reasons? Ditto Holborn and the Little Mountain fiasco: sh*t or get off the pot, please.

[fredinno]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

By contrast, NEFC is fully zoned and waiting on Concord, but they're dragging their heels and stalling the entire project because... reasons? Ditto Holborn and the Little Mountain fiasco: sh*t or get off the pot, please.

Because they want the rest of the lot, not just the western half of the NEFC lot, most likely.
They're making the (probably correct) assumption Vision Vancouver's plan was too costly and ambitious (especially now with inflation), and they'll need to reduce the parkland that Concord has to hand over to make it viable.

Also, technically, the land is not 'unused' (well, not all of it).

Other than the parking lots (which can't be developed until the entire lot starts development), Concord is using it as a temporary park and as a sales center for all their Vancouver developments (instead of building a new one for every tower in the area- they did this in Surrey too, which is why they didn't build a tower on the lot on Park George closest to the station.)


If the plan didn't involve a complete reorganization of the current road network, maybe building on the parking lots and temporary park only would be viable.


Finally, the current plan has a chicken and egg problem, where Concord has to spit out the money to get started- but Concord can't get started on the buildings (and recoup the CAC costs) until the road network is built, meaning they kind of just have to 'trust' CoV that the road network will be built out in a timely fashion if they don't want to take huge losses.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Well Concord can't have the Plaza of Nations (that's CMP property, currently under development since Concord lost the suit), and even the new Council isn't ready to scrap the demolition plan, so it's just them being stubborn at this point.

And again, there's Holborn at Little Mountain. It's mostly developers finding it more lucrative to sit on the property until land value goes up and then develop.

[madog222]

Chalmers Lodge on 12th at Granville will open in the fall with 125 supportive housing units. The province paid $40M for the site.

https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2023HOUS...n%20to,Hastings%20and%20in%20Crab%20Park.

[hollywoodnorth]

the 7-11 at Joyce/Kingsway has closed as of the 1st and is now being demoed for that 6 story rental project planned for the site.


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/rental-h...even-at-kingsway-and-joyce-street-corner

[mcj]

Zoning rules stop Vancouver barber's planned move to Victoria Drive

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/zoning-ruins-barber-planned-move-victoria-drive

[GenWhy?]

Originally Posted by mcj

Zoning rules stop Vancouver barber's planned move to Victoria Drive

https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/zoning-ruins-barber-planned-move-victoria-drive

Ya these old grandfathered shops were supposed to be fixed last council. Hopefully in the next 3 years as some councilors from ABC last erm (Kirby-Young I think?) said this was their big item to solve with their 4-store-corner-store talk.

[vanman]

Originally Posted by hollywoodnorth

the 7-11 at Joyce/Kingsway has closed as of the 1st and is now being demoed for that 6 story rental project planned for the site.


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/rental-h...even-at-kingsway-and-joyce-street-corner

That's some nice infill.

[officedweller]

Photo op on Granville Island....

A Message from Granville Island
Please be advised that multiple shipping containers will be delivered to the Circle Wellness construction site beside Granville Island Hotel next Thursday, April 13, starting at 7AM. These containers will comprise the Circle Wellness building.

There will be Traffic Control in the area escorting the trucks and assisting with getting them into place and with exiting the crane staging area. There may be interruptions to traffic at times while the delivery trucks are coming or going. All 8 containers should be in place in 8 hours or less and break down of the crane lift will take place on April 14.