Calgary Public Transit II

[Wigs]

Originally Posted by RyLucky

Nice photos! This one really emphasizes the high density around Tuscany.

yeah, too bad Tuscany has a clusterfuck of a street layout

We seriously need to go back to a more gridded system of streets for newer subdivisions so that you can have higher density + walkability. just my $0.05

[Me&You]

Originally Posted by sim

Well I more or less agree. Ideally, large single trip generating entities would be held more accountable vis a vis a higher financial contribution to the infrastructure that serves them.

That tax stuff is obviously very complicated, but it's not like they are newly contributing to the tax base - they are just doing it from a different location. Assuming that they would now pay the same amount of tax as previously, it's effectively a negative contribution as they've just imposed a greater burden on the public system. Parking lots are cheaper for them, but come at a greater cost to everyone else.

But back to transit and sorry for further derailing the construction thread, if they were to allow anyone and everyone onto their private shuttles this may be less of an issue. Hey, they could even call up Jacobs and friends and pool resources optimally to provide a service benefitting all. Perhaps, to avoid unneccessarily allocated resources to something that isn't core to their business, they could even set up an agency to do so for them wherein they pay their fare share........

This is all great... The basis of why I started this little tangent was because IOL were (seemingly) being singled out... I cannot get behind that, but by all means, levy whatever taxes and fees onto ALL OF THOSE that will benefit from SELRT (basically anyone and any business within a certain radius).


Unless I misunderstood, IOL went from tenant to landlord, no? If that's the case, it could be argued that they (IOL) are now more directly contributing to the tax base (and in a roundabout way, SELRT) than they were as a DT tenant.

[H.E.Pennypacker]

Originally Posted by Me&You

This is all great... The basis of why I started this little tangent was because IOL were (seemingly) being singled out... I cannot get behind that, but by all means, levy whatever taxes and fees onto ALL OF THOSE that will benefit from SELRT (basically anyone and any business within a certain radius).


Unless I misunderstood, IOL went from tenant to landlord, no? If that's the case, it could be argued that they (IOL) are now more directly contributing to the tax base (and in a roundabout way, SELRT) than they were as a DT tenant.

Just discovered this today, Remington actually still owns the parcel and, unless there is some cost-sharing agreement between them and IOL, Remington is actually paying for the development themselves ... So technically they're still on the hook for the taxes

Now I expect IOL to buy the property/building from Remington at some point, but I'm curious to know when it will happen .. That will be one large transaction, the combined BP's value is estimated at roughly $135 million for the cost of the building - which is likely a lowball from what it actually will be .. Seems like it would have been cheaper for IOL to buy the land themselves and develop it if they're just going to buy it from Remington after it's finished .. But anyways

Regardless, IOL's putting a lot of money into their new building/property to begin with so I doubt they'll want to fork a ton of money over right away for a SELRT .. My bet is that they're banking on the City making that decision on their own without any help .. I could only see IOL making a contribution if there isn't an LRT line there 10-15 years from now

It would be helpful if IOL did put some money into it, maybe something to cover the cost of a QP station or something IMO

[Me&You]

Originally Posted by H.E.Pennypacker

Just discovered this today, Remington actually still owns the parcel and, unless there is some cost-sharing agreement between them and IOL, Remington is actually paying for the development themselves ... So technically they're still on the hook for the taxes

Now I expect IOL to buy the property/building from Remington at some point, but I'm curious to know when it will happen .. That will be one large transaction, the combined BP's value is estimated at roughly $135 million for the cost of the building - which is likely a lowball from what it actually will be .. Seems like it would have been cheaper for IOL to buy the land themselves and develop it if they're just going to buy it from Remington after it's finished .. But anyways

Regardless, IOL's putting a lot of money into their new building/property to begin with so I doubt they'll want to fork a ton of money over right away for a SELRT .. My bet is that they're banking on the City making that decision on their own without any help .. I could only see IOL making a contribution if there isn't an LRT line there 10-15 years from now

It would be helpful if IOL did put some money into it, maybe something to cover the cost of a QP station or something IMO

Interesting... I'm learning too!

Point is, it's not a matter of right timing or anything else - there is nothing saying IOL will / has to / could / would fork over any money for a public infrastructure project. At least, not in the form of cutting a cheque.

The city should be "making this decision on their own, without any help"... That's what the City does - makes decisions and builds the city. Corporations like IOL instead employ citizens and pay taxes. And as I said, IOL will never just cut a cheque towards this project, not even in 10-15 years.

And again, why should it be IOL... Why not Jacobs? Or Cardel? Or the Co-Op?

Tax the entire area, create levies, whatever. But forget about a direct contribution from a corporation... That idea deserves a smilie - or maybe

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by WIGS

just a thought:
it's too bad Calgary couldn't implement a short term sales tax (0.25%) like SLC to get going ASAP on both the NC and SE LRT projects.

If only a City Charter was possible...

Originally Posted by WIGS

yeah, too bad Tuscany has a clusterfuck of a street layout

We seriously need to go back to a more gridded system of streets for newer subdivisions so that you can have higher density + walkability. just my $0.05

I completely agree. What ever happened to straight lines? Not creative enough for developers ? Also, it might be nice if blocks had more than one developer... just like the good ol' days...

[RyLucky]

Originally Posted by Me&You

Interesting... I'm learning too!

Point is, it's not a matter of right timing or anything else - there is nothing saying IOL will / has to / could / would fork over any money for a public infrastructure project. At least, not in the form of cutting a cheque.

The city should be "making this decision on their own, without any help"... That's what the City does - makes decisions and builds the city. Corporations like IOL instead employ citizens and pay taxes. And as I said, IOL will never just cut a cheque towards this project, not even in 10-15 years.

And again, why should it be IOL... Why not Jacobs? Or Cardel? Or the Co-Op?

Tax the entire area, create levies, whatever. But forget about a direct contribution from a corporation... That idea deserves a smilie - or maybe

I'd be willing to give Imperial (or another oil company) exclusive retail rights to the entire CMA if they funded the SELRT. Nothing but Esso, baby! ...until we build another line...

[freeweed]

1. I doubt a .25% sales tax would generate billions, but to be honest I'm clueless about our total annual retail sales in this city. Regardless, Canadians hate nickel-and-diming, municipal taxes. Once you start, you never stop. You end up with 12 taxes listed on a receipt that never seem to go away.

2. IOL will not end up as a landlord. Every major O&G company has long since gotten out of the real estate business (it's possible there's an exception I'm unaware of).

3. Corporations contribute directly to transportation infrastructure all the time. I've driven by countless office campuses that have their own off-ramps, etc, and in many cases the company paid a goodly chunk to have that happen. I see nothing wrong with the city going to IOL, cap in hand, and pointing out that THEY chose to abandon public transit. The city is under no obligation to waste money on a band-aid for their poor decisions. It would be the highest form of corporate welfare, to subsidize transportation to IOL just so they can save some money on rent.

[artvandelay]

Originally Posted by Me&You

Unless I misunderstood, IOL went from tenant to landlord, no? If that's the case, it could be argued that they (IOL) are now more directly contributing to the tax base (and in a roundabout way, SELRT) than they were as a DT tenant.

The vast majority of commercial leases are net, meaning that the landlord recovers property tax expense from the tenant pro-rated based on the proportion of space occupied. So in practice, there is no difference between Imperial owning their own space or leasing it.

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by freeweed

1. I doubt a .25% sales tax would generate billions, but to be honest I'm clueless about our total annual retail sales in this city. Regardless, Canadians hate nickel-and-diming, municipal taxes. Once you start, you never stop. You end up with 12 taxes listed on a receipt that never seem to go away.

2. IOL will not end up as a landlord. Every major O&G company has long since gotten out of the real estate business (it's possible there's an exception I'm unaware of).

3. Corporations contribute directly to transportation infrastructure all the time. I've driven by countless office campuses that have their own off-ramps, etc, and in many cases the company paid a goodly chunk to have that happen. I see nothing wrong with the city going to IOL, cap in hand, and pointing out that THEY chose to abandon public transit. The city is under no obligation to waste money on a band-aid for their poor decisions. It would be the highest form of corporate welfare, to subsidize transportation to IOL just so they can save some money on rent.

Agreed 100%.

[ByeByeBaby]

Originally Posted by freeweed

1. I doubt a .25% sales tax would generate billions, but to be honest I'm clueless about our total annual retail sales in this city. Regardless, Canadians hate nickel-and-diming, municipal taxes. Once you start, you never stop. You end up with 12 taxes listed on a receipt that never seem to go away.

Alberta's August retail sales were $6 billion; assuming that's 1/12 of the annual, that's $72 billion per year. The greater Calgary region has 40% of the provincial personal income; the city proper is about 85% of the population in that region. A 0.25% sales tax here would produce roughly $5M per month, or $60M per year.

Speaking from total ignorance about the SLC plan, my assumption would be that they passed a sales tax, then used bonds backed implicitly or explicitly by this new revenue source to get the money to build the transit projects.

[Me&You]

Originally Posted by O-tacular

Agreed 100%.

(I'm not picking on you, O, I promise!)

Why would this be considered corporate welfare?

IOL (and all of the other companies and businesses in QP) aren't asking the city to build the SELRT to serve them. It's a brownfield development that's long been considered to be along the eventual LRT line... If IOL bought land out in Springbank and were asking for an LRT line for their employees, sure, that's "corporate welfare"... But signing a lease, with a developer who's developing office space along an established transit alignment??? Sounds like just about the best option there is, next to, of course, staying in DT.

If there's any sort of "welfare" associated with the SELRT, it would be going to those that continually buy homes on the outer edges of the city. IMO, they should be taxed, levied, whatever before IOL (et al) is...

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by freeweed

1. I doubt a .25% sales tax would generate billions, but to be honest I'm clueless about our total annual retail sales in this city. Regardless, Canadians hate nickel-and-diming, municipal taxes. Once you start, you never stop. You end up with 12 taxes listed on a receipt that never seem to go away.

A 0.25% sales tax (not including on real estate, retail sales only) would generate between 18 and 30 million a year. I doubt you could cover the administrative cost with that much revenue.

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by Me&You

Why would this be considered corporate welfare?

IOL (and all of the other companies and businesses in QP) aren't asking the city to build the SELRT to serve them. It's a brownfield development that's long been considered to be along the eventual LRT line... If IOL bought land out in Springbank and were asking for an LRT line for their employees, sure, that's "corporate welfare"... But signing a lease, with a developer who's developing office space along an established transit alignment??? Sounds like just about the best option there is, next to, of course, staying in DT.

If there's any sort of "welfare" associated with the SELRT, it would be going to those that continually buy homes on the outer edges of the city. IMO, they should be taxed, levied, whatever before IOL (et al) is...

It depends. If IOL moves into an area, and is satisfied with the transportation in place, then I'm fine with that.

However, that rarely (read: never) happens. Inevitably, the company and its employees will start to notice that the road system and available transit are sub-par. They will begin asking for road improvements. They will begin asking for transit improvements. And then the previous area residents will notice just how clogged their roads have gotten. And their trains/buses. And THEY will begin screaming for improvements. And eventually, given enough corporate pressure or citizens screaming, the city will give in and build new roads. Add bus routes. Add a train line. Whatever it takes to make this new location not such a congested cluserfuck.

Now, IF current transportation infrastructure is acceptable in the short term, and IF the city has a well-defined plan to do improvements out there that have nothing to do with a sudden shift of thousands of employees from an already well-serviced downtown core, and IF the LRT gets laid out on the CITY'S schedule, and IOL moving down there has little to no impact on that... then sure. It's not corporate welfare. It's simply the city planning for growth and change, and companies responding to new opportunities.

I just don't ever see things actually happening that way. Invariably, some developer/company sees cheap land, decides to use it, then pisses and moans about how there's no infrastructure in place, and demands the city do something about it.

The SELRT isn't even PLANNED yet, let alone budgeted and scheduled. Yes, it'll eventually go there. Yes, eventually IOL will have LRT service. But that could be 5, 10, maybe even 15 years from now. In the meantime, IOL's actions will basically choke up the Deerfoot and other arteries, all so they can save a few bucks on rent.

And yes, this is a lot like people building houses on the extreme edge of the city. Except in this city, that's almost always about new growth, not relocating and abandoning perfectly good land.

Remember, this is an established company, that exists in a location well-serviced by road and public transit networks. THEY are the ones choosing to abandon that, for short-term financial gain. I see zero reason why we should encourage that sort of behaviour. But yeah, it's arguable whether or not an LRT line that will eventually be built counts as that. We'll have to see if IOL exerts any pressure on the city to prematurely assist fixing their own bad decision.

[freeweed]

PS: thanks for the sales tax analysis, guys. Didn't have a clue where to start with numbers.

What I do find interesting is that say we went with a 5% sales tax... that would generate over a billion a year. Can you imagine the LRT system we could build with that?

While most of this city could trivially afford it (I'll gloss over the regressive nature of sales taxes here), good luck convincing Calgarians to pay 5% on their DVD player just so we can have a world-class LRT system. The money would inevitably end up in general revenue and basically be spread too thin.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by freeweed

It depends. If IOL moves into an area, and is satisfied with the transportation in place, then I'm fine with that.

However, that rarely (read: never) happens. Inevitably, the company and its employees will start to notice that the road system and available transit are sub-par. They will begin asking for road improvements. They will begin asking for transit improvements. And then the previous area residents will notice just how clogged their roads have gotten. And their trains/buses. And THEY will begin screaming for improvements. And eventually, given enough corporate pressure or citizens screaming, the city will give in and build new roads. Add bus routes. Add a train line. Whatever it takes to make this new location not such a congested cluserfuck.

Now, IF current transportation infrastructure is acceptable in the short term, and IF the city has a well-defined plan to do improvements out there that have nothing to do with a sudden shift of thousands of employees from an already well-serviced downtown core, and IF the LRT gets laid out on the CITY'S schedule, and IOL moving down there has little to no impact on that... then sure. It's not corporate welfare. It's simply the city planning for growth and change, and companies responding to new opportunities.

I just don't ever see things actually happening that way. Invariably, some developer/company sees cheap land, decides to use it, then pisses and moans about how there's no infrastructure in place, and demands the city do something about it.

The SELRT isn't even PLANNED yet, let alone budgeted and scheduled. Yes, it'll eventually go there. Yes, eventually IOL will have LRT service. But that could be 5, 10, maybe even 15 years from now. In the meantime, IOL's actions will basically choke up the Deerfoot and other arteries, all so they can save a few bucks on rent.

And yes, this is a lot like people building houses on the extreme edge of the city. Except in this city, that's almost always about new growth, not relocating and abandoning perfectly good land.

Remember, this is an established company, that exists in a location well-serviced by road and public transit networks. THEY are the ones choosing to abandon that, for short-term financial gain. I see zero reason why we should encourage that sort of behaviour. But yeah, it's arguable whether or not an LRT line that will eventually be built counts as that. We'll have to see if IOL exerts any pressure on the city to prematurely assist fixing their own bad decision.

Wow. Great post. Quoted for truth.

I agree that the SE LRT is needed. But I always get this thought that everyone in the SE moved to a place that is completely isolated and far from anything else, extremely expensive to serve with transit, and then complain that traffic sucks. The parallels to IOL moving to Quarry Park and complaining about transit are staggering.

The GM of transportation shares this sentiment about IOL.

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by fusili

I agree that the SE LRT is needed. But I always get this thought that everyone in the SE moved to a place that is completely isolated and far from anything else, extremely expensive to serve with transit, and then complain that traffic sucks. The parallels to IOL moving to Quarry Park and complaining about transit are staggering.

To be fair, it's always a chicken-and-egg problem. Do we build an LRT line when nobody is there, so that when they move in the area is already well-serviced? I am of course working on the assumption that green/brownfield development is going to happen regardless.

I guess my real hangup with IOL is that this isn't some "new" company or development. Calgary, as a city, has spent billions designing an amazing transportation system into the downtown core, and all companies present benefit from it. To simply abandon that system is lunacy. Dear IOL: part of your "rent" includes public transit! That's one reason land downtown costs so much, because it's well-serviced.

Reminds me a lot of "white flight" of previous decades. Let's all abandon functioning, well-serviced inner cities, to move to areas with nothing - and then demand services. It's actually one of the small but important reasons I enjoy Calgary and think our future will be a bit easier. We've never really had to overcome the "emptying out" effect to any large degree. Which is probably why the IOL move pisses me off so much, if it's the start of a trend. We simply as a city cannot afford to abandon all of what makes our CBD great, just so some big companies can save a few bucks.

And as most of y'all know, I say this as a pretty happy suburbanite. So I recognize the slight hypocrisy.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by freeweed

To be fair, it's always a chicken-and-egg problem. Do we build an LRT line when nobody is there, so that when they move in the area is already well-serviced? I am of course working on the assumption that green/brownfield development is going to happen regardless.

I guess my real hangup with IOL is that this isn't some "new" company or development. Calgary, as a city, has spent billions designing an amazing transportation system into the downtown core, and all companies present benefit from it. To simply abandon that system is lunacy. Dear IOL: part of your "rent" includes public transit! That's one reason land downtown costs so much, because it's well-serviced.

Reminds me a lot of "white flight" of previous decades. Let's all abandon functioning, well-serviced inner cities, to move to areas with nothing - and then demand services. It's actually one of the small but important reasons I enjoy Calgary and think our future will be a bit easier. We've never really had to overcome the "emptying out" effect to any large degree. Which is probably why the IOL move pisses me off so much, if it's the start of a trend. We simply as a city cannot afford to abandon all of what makes our CBD great, just so some big companies can save a few bucks.

And as most of y'all know, I say this as a pretty happy suburbanite. So I recognize the slight hypocrisy.

You're absolutely right. I think something that Calgary has always had, and benefitted from, is a culture that inner city living is a desirable place for the wealthy. Mount Royal, Rideau Park, Roxboro, Hillhurst are all very wealthy neighbourhoods and all incredibly close to downtown. We never really had a dense inner city, other than Connaught, Mission, parts of Victoria Park and perhaps parts of Sunnyside for a long time, but we had a wealthy inner city. In no small way, those wealthy residents have encouraged services to stay within the core. They are of course now being joined by tens of thousands of yuppies (myself included), which is further strengthening our core. Calgary is definitely a suburban city, but it was never exclusively a suburban city in the same way that many US cities are.

[freeweed]

Yeah. I remember my first visit to Calgary as a near-adult. I marvelled at how little "bad" existed in the inner city. Victoria Park's crack dens were still there, sure, and I kinda laughed at the thought of walking to Stampede through that shithole, but beyond that? There really was no DTES. No North End. Nothing remotely comparable to what exists in virtually every US city.

It was surreal as a teenager, and quite possibly the earliest reason I had for wanting to move here. It was just so cool to see a downtown and inner city that wasn't on the downward slope.

[Policy Wonk]

And we're back to the great urban impasse. The type of development that is being championed by most of those on this website is the very thing that inevitably drives people and businesses out of the core.

At the end of the day the role of the corporation is not to build architecturally fantabulous skyscrapers and pay as much rent as is possible. For many businesses it is getting harder and harder to justify the cost of being downtown.

You guys wanted the "luxury city" and congratulations you won don't be sore winners.

[mersar]

Originally Posted by freeweed

The SELRT isn't even PLANNED yet, let alone budgeted and scheduled.

Not quite... Calgary SE LRT Functional Plan (2010)

Of course it will be updated before anything is built, but its been planned at a quite detailed level already.