Tower 101 | 175m | 50s | Regency Developments | DER + Associates

[Stevey_G]

I thought there was this initiative: https://www.edmonton.ca/residential..._assessment/derelict-residential-tax-subclass

But I'm not sure if it applies to commercial properties.

Tax forgiveness at the bottom is ridiculous. Whatever money comes from a derelict tax should go into a reserve fund to pay for improvements or reclamation but it shouldn't go back to the owner. To do so completely ignores the losses, whether they be financial or aesthetic, to the community.

 

[degrandprix]

Tax forgiveness at the bottom is ridiculous. Whatever money comes from a derelict tax should go into a reserve fund to pay for improvements or reclamation but it shouldn't go back to the owner. To do so completely ignores the losses, whether they be financial or aesthetic, to the community.

Derelict property owners who clean up their properties can apply to be refunded their taxes paid at the higher derelict rate for the months of the year after they cleaned up their properties.

Looks like it's just meant to refund any derelict tax paid after the clean-up was finished, which seems fair to me. What is unfair though is that people are being taxed for this while the BMO site gets away scot-free.

 

[Gus Haynes]

^Yes, that's exactly right. They want to create an incentive for timely clean-up of properties. The way it was before, the property owner would be dinged for the entire tax year, even if they took remedial steps in a quick fashion. This is meant to provide an appropriately "pro rated" penalty, not zero penalty, to the offender.

 

[MattPT]

 

[Stevey_G]

Derelict property owners who clean up their properties can apply to be refunded their taxes paid at the higher derelict rate for the months of the year after they cleaned up their properties.

Looks like it's just meant to refund any derelict tax paid after the clean-up was finished, which seems fair to me. What is unfair though is that people are being taxed for this while the BMO site gets away scot-free.

I get the idea of a soft-handed approach getting the properties cleaned up but it doesn't consider the neighbours and the losses they experience financially and aesthetically. Just tax them until they clean it up then make them prove the lots have been cleaned. We shouldn't tell owners of the future that they can keep their lots in disarray and that when the tax comes in they can just clean it up. Strict enforcement is key.

 

[Gus Haynes]

Just tax them until they clean it up then make them prove the lots have been cleaned.

Isn't this exactly what the current approach is?

 

[Stevey_G]

Isn't this exactly what the current approach is?

There's no penalty though, just a deposit. This tells me as a build owner I can demo a vacant building for example and create a blight on the community and reap the tax benefits until the lot is identified as a problem lot.

Then when it is I'll just go clean it up, which I should have done as a responsible owner from the get-go. But if all I care about is cash, and I live in LA, why would I?

 

[degrandprix]

There's no penalty though, just a deposit. This tells me as a build owner I can demo a vacant building for example and create a blight on the community and reap the tax benefits until the lot is identified as a problem lot.

Then when it is I'll just go clean it up, which I should have done as a responsible owner from the get-go. But if all I care about is cash, and I live in LA, why would I?

How is it a "deposit"? Problem properties are taxed at a higher rate until they are cleaned up, it's pretty simple.

Yes an owner could get away with not paying the derelict tax for a while until their property is reported as such, but that's an enforcement issue, not an issue with the tax itself.

 

[Gus Haynes]

Stevey, you're misreading the policy. The original news release spells it out fairly clearly:

Under the subclass, properties assessed as derelict are charged a tax rate that is approximately three times higher than the general residential rate. With this new policy, property owners can apply for a refund of the derelict residential property tax for the portion of the year that their property was cleaned up. For example, if a derelict house is demolished on May 1, this prorated tax forgiveness would mean the property owner would pay taxes at the derelict tax rate for January-April, and then would receive a refund so that their net amount paid is equivalent to the general residential rate for May-December.

“We’ve seen great progress from our residential derelict tax subclass in only one year, and this is another positive step,” said Cate Watt, Branch Manager of Assessment and Taxation. “Incentivizing property owners to clean up their derelict properties more quickly has a positive impact on community safety and vibrancy, and reduces the disproportionate amount of City costs associated with derelict properties for services like fire rescue response and bylaw enforcement.”

Under the city's example, the derelict property owner would still be paying triple tax for January-April, but back to the regular rate for May-December. The refund is not a total refund of the penalty, just a prorated refund as of the date of compliance.

 

[Stevey_G]

Stevey, you're misreading the policy. The original news release spells it out fairly clearly:



Under the city's example, the derelict property owner would still be paying triple tax for January-April, but back to the regular rate for May-December. The refund is not a total refund of the penalty, just a prorated refund as of the date of compliance.

Gotcha. My bad.

 

[David A]

I'm really not a fan of the dog in the manger approach to leaving things sit for such a long time, so if they don't have the capacity to do something nice here, I hope someone else who does buys it instead.

 

[husky]

This site is an absolute blight on downtown. The screening on the fence is becoming non-existent again. Such a prime piece of property and nothing is being done with it. Such a shame.

 

[Avenuer]

Thanks again Raj!

 

[Platinum107]

This site is an absolute blight on downtown. The screening on the fence is becoming non-existent again. Such a prime piece of property and nothing is being done with it. Such a shame.

View attachment 622018

Every time this thread pops up I still feel a faint glimmer of hope that something has changed here...

Just sell this already Regency, along with the Emerald site too. This has to be embarrassing to have in your portfolio, no?

 

[Oilguy]

Every time this thread pops up I still feel a faint glimmer of hope that something has changed here...

Just sell this already Regency, along with the Emerald site too. This has to be embarrassing to have in your portfolio, no?

It’s clear to me that they feel nothing about having it in their portfolio. What an umitigated disaster this site is, it gets worse and worse all the time. The fencing is now being patched with more fencing, in the spring you will see so much garbage and weeds growing,

This should never have been permitted for partial demo without a path for reconstruction. Full demo and turned into grass and trees would be way, way better than what we were left with.