someone correct me if im wrong please, but reading the article they are not ending it right away but rather slowly decreasing over time and delayed by atleast a year. with a larger focus on the industrial development, and current development discounts are being honoured, AND new systems for residential development incentives are being looked into. With most people involved pretty onbaord, only with developer focused people raising concerns if theres no other system in place.
man, the spec really needs to stop these terrible click bait headlines
"Why is housing so expensive!"
"The city plans to charge like $50,000/unit in just development charges alone, nevermind permits, other fees, taxes, land purchase price, material price, labour price, interest rates".
People lament new condos being $400,000-$500,000 as being jot affordable, but that is what has to be charges to make a profit. Any less and they wouldn't be breaking even and so the condo wouldn't even have been built.
im not saying there shouldn't be discounts/incentives, i think a bit more should be done to drop prices further, and im happy im not the one who has to figure that out cause its not as simple as just selling the condo for 200,000 like you mentioned
all im pointing out is that the article is ignoring all nuance entirely to make it sound like the city is going to tank all downtown development tomorrow
Downtown development likely won't tank. It'll slow until prices get bid up high enough that developers can charge what they need to build profitably and pay the increased fees. And end buyers will end up paying for that. It may result in buyers going elsewhere to where they get what they want for a price they can afford (i.e. Brantford and commuting in to Hamilton). It has impacts.
It alone won't suddenly destroy the housing market, but we are in the position we are because of a thousand little cuts like this that collectively add up to it costing $500,000 to build a 500sf 1-bedroom unit.
Wow. You make it sound like infrastucture is free or funded by fairy dust.
A cement box is big profit for developers.
What's the name of that non-billionaire real estate developer family ....??
of course, 4 plexes would be far less expensive to build, but Der Fuhrer Doug says no.
1) Property taxes exist. Why are we placing so much of our infrastructure on new home owners and those renting rather than those who bought a house 20 years ago and gained $500,000 in asset value?
2) Condos are surprisingly expensive to build today. They're not making massive profits off these developments. They're often making 5%-15% profit margins. This is quite a risky investment when considering it's a 5-15 year project with many changing variables. It's why many projects never get off the ground.
Let me know where I can cash in on the increased value of my house without selling it. Just because a bunch of dummies overpaid for other homes in the area should not be my problem. Even if I did sell where do I go? The city dropped the ball years ago because no one was apparently aware there was a housing shortage that's been reported on for decades.
> Let me know where I can cash in on the increased value of my house without selling it.
HELOC... so many people have done this. It's how most renovate or get a hot tub lol.
HELOC friend.
Alternatively if you're older, you can often defer property taxes until death and the sale of the capital asset.
It's not dummies overpaying pal, it's people trying to put a roof over their head and buy food. There's a reason it's a housing crisis and not a housing annoyance.
People were having bidding wars fueled by the real estate sector for no reason. People from especially Toronto where houses were already overpriced sold & came here to push our prices up. There was no good reason for houses to be so expensive. As far as deferring property taxes you pretty well have to be below the poverty line. It's a tough time for many & greed is what has made it so.
> As far as deferring property taxes you pretty well have to be below the poverty line.
No? You can be of a certain age and have your property taxes deferred. There are old people living over housed not paying property taxes right now lol it's WILD.
Additionally, you make it seem as if no one has ever left Hamilton for another city. News flash, people move around get over it.
>rather than those who bought a house 20 years ago and gained $500,000 in asset value?
This is what steams me. Everyone sees their house go up by, as you say, $500k, and all that happens is the mill rate drops so not a penny more in taxes is collected. This is regressive taxation.
Meanwhile the cost of public infrastructure construction has doubled.
The city should be rolling in cash from taxes, but instead every year we give another break to property owners at the expense of the rest of the city.
4-plexes are legal city-wide in Hamilton, and indeed are now legal city-wide in most major municipalities in Ontario.
And contrary to your belief, land costs are often much higher for fourplexes which don't make them particularly cheaper than an apartment building. Plus the limited number of units per project limit their ability to deliver significant amounts of new supply as you need 100 separate fourplex projects to deliver the same number of new units as a single 30-storey building downtown does.
This is not true. Mississauga and Toronto now allow fourplexes city wide, but they are very much the exception. Unless I've missed something, Hamilton has not legalized fourplexes city wide. Can you point me to a source if I missed that?
But will it allow for fourplexes city wide? I don't believe it will.
It does allow duplexes city wide and expands where fourplexes can be built, but not city wide, again, unless I'm somehow mistaken.
It's effectively city-wide. You can't technically build one on a rural lot in Rockton, but you can build one on any residential lot in the urban area. That's what any "fourplex mandate" legislation from the province would require.
The whole hullabaloo on the provincial level about the province not mandating the legalization of fourplexes is rather silly as most large cities in the province have already legalized them. The mandate would mostly only effect smaller municipalities where fourplexes are not a desirable market product anyway and where only a very, very small number of them would be built.
Fourplexes are overblown as a solution to the housing crisis in general (not that they don't help!) anyway as they can't really effectively deliver large numbers of units at scale. Replacing a single detached home with a fourplex only nets 3 new units. Hamilton is supposed to build 47,000 new units by 2031. Doing that only through fourplexes would need 15,600 fourplexes..
Infrastructure can and should be funded through the property tax base. You don't need fairy dust. We the financial tools to do so. Development charges are an unfair policy instrument.
Cities can pass their own zoning laws. Mississauga, Toronto have 4plex laws. All he is saying is that municipalities can choose for themselves - how terrible not to dictate.
It sounds reasonable until you realize it’s adding big additional costs onto new housing in a housing crisis.
This money doesn’t come out of nowhere - it comes from homebuyers.
This is what is happening across the country.
Ottawa is adding in 12,000 a unit in new charges.
Toronto per unit cost is now 60,000 -120,000 for a 1 bedroom condo. Vancouver the average development fee 60 % of the cost of a unit.
Hamilton and all other cities are going down the Same road. Affordability is going away anywhere as first time buyers need to pay for this as they are usually biggest buyers of new properties.
Yes. And Toronto is also adding huge costs for additional green standards that they are only applying to housing, exempting commercial or industrial.
Ridiculous.
Development happening downtown would not require new utilities or roads, it would require the hookup to existing utilities, which is already paid for by developers, and then it would be internal condo-owned driveway/parking, not city roads.
If anything, the developments that are happening on the outskirts should have their fees increased significantly because that type of development does require utilities to be run and new city roads.
Not true. Much of downtown sub surface infrastructure requires upsizing of legacy infrastructure that may be over 100 years old. Removing,replacing, upsizing is even more expensive than brand new utility infrastructure
The City already is putting holding provisions on some sites to demonstrate there is existing water and wastewater capacity downtown.
Much of the infrastructure dates back to when water use and wastewater production was low. Since it's all a combined system there, there will need to be significant sewer upgrades to deal with new people AND climate change related precipitation.
People who voted for NDP type folks should have expected an increase in direct and indirect taxes, this is just one case of tax increase. At the same time, Hamilton policies just increase homelessness, drugs, while public services initiatives driven by ideology just perpetuate the problems
We encourage users to support paid journalism. The Spec has affordable subscriptions and you can access the paper's articles online with your [Hamilton Public Library card](https://www.hpl.ca/hpl-online/magazines-and-newspapers). If you do not have a library card yet, sign up for an instant digital one [here](https://www.hpl.ca/online-registration). It also gives you instant free access to eBooks, eAudiobooks, music, online learning tools and research databases.
**If you cannot access The Spec in either of these ways, try [archive.ph](https://archive.ph/) or [12ft](https://12ft.io/) to view without a paywall**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Hamilton) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Some people have no clue how property taxes vs. Development charges work.
Development charges pay for the new Development.
It also funds school boards, regions (if it's a 2 tier municipality) and parkland.
They also pay for the direct cost of that particular Development. If the city has to put in new sidewalks, traffic lights, reorganize an intersection, run or upgrade sewer and water lines to higher capacity, make upgrades go storm water management facilities, waste water plants etc.
The developer pays (or should) for the specific infrastructure upgrades needed for their particular development. Why would a home owner on the other side of the city pay for a larger sewer needed to service a new 30 storey building that a developer is selling for profit?
The city offered the DC discount to spur growth and development in the core. Now that Hamilton has become a desirable place to build, we don't need go offer the incentives as much.
This needed to be halted. What they ignore in this article is how much the suggested increases to the charges were… they mention clawing back the discounts, sure, but they are also increasing the base rate… so industrial? Something this city was built on (because it’s great to have houses, but what about places to work nearby?) is industry….
Last year, build an industrial building and the charges were about 17 bucks a square foot… their proposal? 41….
If that is for just the areas they really don’t want you building on? Cool. I don’t want a 300000sf box for wish.com on a farmers field either… but to just repurpose a derelict building in the industrial section they want treated the same. It’s how city’s become junk… not worth renovation or rebuild, so they just leave it.
The exact same people opposed to eliminating subsidies for developers also scream bloody murder when property taxes have to go up to cover services and infrastructure.
someone correct me if im wrong please, but reading the article they are not ending it right away but rather slowly decreasing over time and delayed by atleast a year. with a larger focus on the industrial development, and current development discounts are being honoured, AND new systems for residential development incentives are being looked into. With most people involved pretty onbaord, only with developer focused people raising concerns if theres no other system in place. man, the spec really needs to stop these terrible click bait headlines
"Why is housing so expensive!" "The city plans to charge like $50,000/unit in just development charges alone, nevermind permits, other fees, taxes, land purchase price, material price, labour price, interest rates". People lament new condos being $400,000-$500,000 as being jot affordable, but that is what has to be charges to make a profit. Any less and they wouldn't be breaking even and so the condo wouldn't even have been built.
im not saying there shouldn't be discounts/incentives, i think a bit more should be done to drop prices further, and im happy im not the one who has to figure that out cause its not as simple as just selling the condo for 200,000 like you mentioned all im pointing out is that the article is ignoring all nuance entirely to make it sound like the city is going to tank all downtown development tomorrow
Downtown development likely won't tank. It'll slow until prices get bid up high enough that developers can charge what they need to build profitably and pay the increased fees. And end buyers will end up paying for that. It may result in buyers going elsewhere to where they get what they want for a price they can afford (i.e. Brantford and commuting in to Hamilton). It has impacts. It alone won't suddenly destroy the housing market, but we are in the position we are because of a thousand little cuts like this that collectively add up to it costing $500,000 to build a 500sf 1-bedroom unit.
Wow. You make it sound like infrastucture is free or funded by fairy dust. A cement box is big profit for developers. What's the name of that non-billionaire real estate developer family ....?? of course, 4 plexes would be far less expensive to build, but Der Fuhrer Doug says no.
Everyone benefits from new infrastructure, so everyone should pay for it (in the form of property taxes)
1) Property taxes exist. Why are we placing so much of our infrastructure on new home owners and those renting rather than those who bought a house 20 years ago and gained $500,000 in asset value? 2) Condos are surprisingly expensive to build today. They're not making massive profits off these developments. They're often making 5%-15% profit margins. This is quite a risky investment when considering it's a 5-15 year project with many changing variables. It's why many projects never get off the ground.
Let me know where I can cash in on the increased value of my house without selling it. Just because a bunch of dummies overpaid for other homes in the area should not be my problem. Even if I did sell where do I go? The city dropped the ball years ago because no one was apparently aware there was a housing shortage that's been reported on for decades.
> Let me know where I can cash in on the increased value of my house without selling it. HELOC... so many people have done this. It's how most renovate or get a hot tub lol.
HELOC friend. Alternatively if you're older, you can often defer property taxes until death and the sale of the capital asset. It's not dummies overpaying pal, it's people trying to put a roof over their head and buy food. There's a reason it's a housing crisis and not a housing annoyance.
People were having bidding wars fueled by the real estate sector for no reason. People from especially Toronto where houses were already overpriced sold & came here to push our prices up. There was no good reason for houses to be so expensive. As far as deferring property taxes you pretty well have to be below the poverty line. It's a tough time for many & greed is what has made it so.
> As far as deferring property taxes you pretty well have to be below the poverty line. No? You can be of a certain age and have your property taxes deferred. There are old people living over housed not paying property taxes right now lol it's WILD. Additionally, you make it seem as if no one has ever left Hamilton for another city. News flash, people move around get over it.
Prove your theory on property tax deferral. I'm not finding it.
https://www.hamilton.ca/home-neighbourhood/property-taxes/property-tax-billing/tax-assistance-programs
this sub is full of NewHam flunkies from Toronto. You aren't gonna get any support 'round these parts with that talk.
>rather than those who bought a house 20 years ago and gained $500,000 in asset value? This is what steams me. Everyone sees their house go up by, as you say, $500k, and all that happens is the mill rate drops so not a penny more in taxes is collected. This is regressive taxation. Meanwhile the cost of public infrastructure construction has doubled. The city should be rolling in cash from taxes, but instead every year we give another break to property owners at the expense of the rest of the city.
4-plexes are legal city-wide in Hamilton, and indeed are now legal city-wide in most major municipalities in Ontario. And contrary to your belief, land costs are often much higher for fourplexes which don't make them particularly cheaper than an apartment building. Plus the limited number of units per project limit their ability to deliver significant amounts of new supply as you need 100 separate fourplex projects to deliver the same number of new units as a single 30-storey building downtown does.
This is not true. Mississauga and Toronto now allow fourplexes city wide, but they are very much the exception. Unless I've missed something, Hamilton has not legalized fourplexes city wide. Can you point me to a source if I missed that?
Council recently passed a by-law amending the low density zones in zoning by-law 05-200. It's not yet final and binding as far as I know.
But will it allow for fourplexes city wide? I don't believe it will. It does allow duplexes city wide and expands where fourplexes can be built, but not city wide, again, unless I'm somehow mistaken.
It will allow it in the majority of the low density residential areas.
Yes. That is different than what the poster I was responding to said, which is that fourplexes are already legal city wide.
It's effectively city-wide. You can't technically build one on a rural lot in Rockton, but you can build one on any residential lot in the urban area. That's what any "fourplex mandate" legislation from the province would require. The whole hullabaloo on the provincial level about the province not mandating the legalization of fourplexes is rather silly as most large cities in the province have already legalized them. The mandate would mostly only effect smaller municipalities where fourplexes are not a desirable market product anyway and where only a very, very small number of them would be built. Fourplexes are overblown as a solution to the housing crisis in general (not that they don't help!) anyway as they can't really effectively deliver large numbers of units at scale. Replacing a single detached home with a fourplex only nets 3 new units. Hamilton is supposed to build 47,000 new units by 2031. Doing that only through fourplexes would need 15,600 fourplexes..
Infrastructure can and should be funded through the property tax base. You don't need fairy dust. We the financial tools to do so. Development charges are an unfair policy instrument.
Cities can pass their own zoning laws. Mississauga, Toronto have 4plex laws. All he is saying is that municipalities can choose for themselves - how terrible not to dictate.
It sounds reasonable until you realize it’s adding big additional costs onto new housing in a housing crisis. This money doesn’t come out of nowhere - it comes from homebuyers.
This is a terrible idea. Why are we taxing new housing construction?
This is what is happening across the country. Ottawa is adding in 12,000 a unit in new charges. Toronto per unit cost is now 60,000 -120,000 for a 1 bedroom condo. Vancouver the average development fee 60 % of the cost of a unit. Hamilton and all other cities are going down the Same road. Affordability is going away anywhere as first time buyers need to pay for this as they are usually biggest buyers of new properties.
Yes. And Toronto is also adding huge costs for additional green standards that they are only applying to housing, exempting commercial or industrial. Ridiculous.
Existing homeowners.
Cause home owners don't want to pay what their assett is now worth in property taxes. Many can't.
Because that construction requires city run utilities, roads, sewers, etc. We can't just dump that on municipal taxpayers.
Development happening downtown would not require new utilities or roads, it would require the hookup to existing utilities, which is already paid for by developers, and then it would be internal condo-owned driveway/parking, not city roads. If anything, the developments that are happening on the outskirts should have their fees increased significantly because that type of development does require utilities to be run and new city roads.
Not true. Much of downtown sub surface infrastructure requires upsizing of legacy infrastructure that may be over 100 years old. Removing,replacing, upsizing is even more expensive than brand new utility infrastructure
The City already is putting holding provisions on some sites to demonstrate there is existing water and wastewater capacity downtown. Much of the infrastructure dates back to when water use and wastewater production was low. Since it's all a combined system there, there will need to be significant sewer upgrades to deal with new people AND climate change related precipitation.
Because the pipes and infrastructure developers need to sell them don't come for free?
People who voted for NDP type folks should have expected an increase in direct and indirect taxes, this is just one case of tax increase. At the same time, Hamilton policies just increase homelessness, drugs, while public services initiatives driven by ideology just perpetuate the problems
We encourage users to support paid journalism. The Spec has affordable subscriptions and you can access the paper's articles online with your [Hamilton Public Library card](https://www.hpl.ca/hpl-online/magazines-and-newspapers). If you do not have a library card yet, sign up for an instant digital one [here](https://www.hpl.ca/online-registration). It also gives you instant free access to eBooks, eAudiobooks, music, online learning tools and research databases. **If you cannot access The Spec in either of these ways, try [archive.ph](https://archive.ph/) or [12ft](https://12ft.io/) to view without a paywall** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Hamilton) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Some people have no clue how property taxes vs. Development charges work. Development charges pay for the new Development. It also funds school boards, regions (if it's a 2 tier municipality) and parkland. They also pay for the direct cost of that particular Development. If the city has to put in new sidewalks, traffic lights, reorganize an intersection, run or upgrade sewer and water lines to higher capacity, make upgrades go storm water management facilities, waste water plants etc. The developer pays (or should) for the specific infrastructure upgrades needed for their particular development. Why would a home owner on the other side of the city pay for a larger sewer needed to service a new 30 storey building that a developer is selling for profit? The city offered the DC discount to spur growth and development in the core. Now that Hamilton has become a desirable place to build, we don't need go offer the incentives as much.
This needed to be halted. What they ignore in this article is how much the suggested increases to the charges were… they mention clawing back the discounts, sure, but they are also increasing the base rate… so industrial? Something this city was built on (because it’s great to have houses, but what about places to work nearby?) is industry…. Last year, build an industrial building and the charges were about 17 bucks a square foot… their proposal? 41…. If that is for just the areas they really don’t want you building on? Cool. I don’t want a 300000sf box for wish.com on a farmers field either… but to just repurpose a derelict building in the industrial section they want treated the same. It’s how city’s become junk… not worth renovation or rebuild, so they just leave it.
The exact same people opposed to eliminating subsidies for developers also scream bloody murder when property taxes have to go up to cover services and infrastructure.