900 King St W | 25 fl | U/C

[ijmorlan]

But it should!!!

Are you saying demolition should only be allowed if the replacement is already approved?

If so I don’t think this will have the effect you want. People won’t just keep operating the building they would prefer to demolish; they’ll just leave it empty and do minimal maintenance on it.

Then the next government will come along and try to address the problem of unwanted empty buildings, and cause even more distortion.

Much better to just set some basic rules on how empty lots have to be maintained to avoid real eyesores.

[plam]

Or tax it so that it's unprofitable to leave empty...

[ijmorlan]

Or tax it so that it's unprofitable to leave empty...

Easier said than done: define “empty”.

Generally speaking, it’s a good idea to really dig into an apparent problem and understand it thoroughly before attempting to solve it by changing the rules that other people have to follow with their stuff.

[plam]

Or tax it so that it's unprofitable to leave empty...

Easier said than done: define “empty”.

Generally speaking, it’s a good idea to really dig into an apparent problem and understand it thoroughly before attempting to solve it by changing the rules that other people have to follow with their stuff.

Yes, implementation details matter too, but the principle of taxing things that we don't want is actually a good one.

[tomh009]

Easier said than done: define “empty”.
Generally speaking, it’s a good idea to really dig into an apparent problem and understand it thoroughly before attempting to solve it by changing the rules that other people have to follow with their stuff.

Yes, implementation details matter too, but the principle of taxing things that we don't want is actually a good one.

Agreed. Some things are easy: vacant land in a PARTS zone (near a station) clearly shouldn't be discounted. An empty building that cannot be rented? Should be the same as one that is rented.

Other cases can admittedly be more complicated.

[ijmorlan]

Yes, implementation details matter too, but the principle of taxing things that we don't want is actually a good one.

Agreed. Some things are easy: vacant land in a PARTS zone (near a station) clearly shouldn't be discounted. An empty building that cannot be rented? Should be the same as one that is rented.

Other cases can admittedly be more complicated.

Those are great examples where the complicated tax policy pushes in the wrong direction, so things can be improved by simplifying the tax code to stop pushing. This is easy to justify and requires much less care than making the tax code more complicated in order to push for some outcome.

On a similar note, I’ve heard that tons of buildings in New York (and probably other cities as well) have empty storefronts because the value of the building (relevant for mortgage-backed securities) depends on the rent; but for some reason it doesn’t depend on the rent collected but on the stated rent. If they say the space is “for rent” for $100,000 per month, then the value of the property is some multiple of $100,000; but if they actually rent it for $90,000 per month, the value drops by the corresponding 10%.

This is of course absurd, and calls into question the intelligence of the bankers; except that I’m sure their bonuses are being paid, so their intelligence is fine; but the regulators really ought to do something about it, like require them to use the rent they can actually realize as the basis for valuation.

[bgb_ca]

So where do I file a NIMBY complaint about this project. It's going to block my view of the CTV Microwave tower from my place...

(Just kidding)

[Spokes]

But it should!!!

Are you saying demolition should only be allowed if the replacement is already approved?

If so I don’t think this will have the effect you want. People won’t just keep operating the building they would prefer to demolish; they’ll just leave it empty and do minimal maintenance on it.

Then the next government will come along and try to address the problem of unwanted empty buildings, and cause even more distortion.

Much better to just set some basic rules on how empty lots have to be maintained to avoid real eyesores.

I actually meant it as a joke. Disregard Haha

[TMKM94]

So where do I file a NIMBY complaint about this project. It's going to block my view of the CTV Microwave tower from my place...

(Just kidding)

I wonder how CTV and Bell media feels about the building? I'm assuming a 25 floor tower across the street from there studio would block a big portion of there aerial view of Waterloo from the tower.

[ijmorlan]

So where do I file a NIMBY complaint about this project. It's going to block my view of the CTV Microwave tower from my place...

(Just kidding)

I wonder how CTV and Bell media feels about the building? I'm assuming a 25 floor tower across the street from there studio would block a big portion of there aerial view of Waterloo from the tower.

Move the tower on top of the new building … I understand that is why the CN Tower was built, although in other big cities the same problem was typically solved less iconically.

[Lebronj23]

https://outline.com/UMJehx

[Chris]

https://outline.com/UMJehx

Headline = 25-storey rental tower slated for midtown Kitchener, across from Grand River Hospital

[ac3r]

The developer is considering partnering with the Grand River Hospital Foundation to provide 13 hotel rooms for families of people who are in hospital on a long-term basis.

Interesting. I wonder how useful this would be.

At least this will be a rental building rather than a condo that is out of reach for half the people who live here...not that renting is that affordable either.

[Rainrider22]

I would say it would be very useful considering many people travel here for Cancer care from outside our region. A lot of people in Bruce and Grey county utilize Grand River hospital for cancer care.

[jeffster]

https://outline.com/UMJehx

Headline = 25-storey rental tower slated for midtown Kitchener, across from Grand River Hospital

Some in the nearby Mary-Allen neighbourhood in Waterloo are worried about additional traffic congesting their streets.

Legally, do they even have a say? Not their city.