LVC support in York Region

[Frank de Jong]

So far, so good, in the Greater Toronto Area transit funding debate. 

Richmond Hill Mayor Dave Barrow and Markham Mayor Frank Scarpitti include Land Value Capture as one of the main ways of financing new transit. 

Also, Toronto Council rejected all types of funding except a new sales tax and "development charges" which are the same as land value capture.

Thanks to Myles O'Brien <myle...@gmail.com> for sending this to me.

http://www.yorkregion.com/news-story/2875025-more-mayors-pledge-support-for-civicaction-plan/

As a York Region resident this was encouraging - at least 3 of the region's mayors support LVT in some form...

-- 

Frank de Jong

Earthsharing Canada

[Stephen Wickens]

Land value capture can mean many things. The devil is in the details.

  And development charges can take you exactly where you don't want to go if they make it more expensive to develop where transit is or will be good, but cheaper where the only development can be car-dependent sprawl.

  A version of MTR's Rail + Property model, adapted to the GTA-specific context is undoubtedly what we need, but people have become afraid of such talk and tend to lump it in with the nonsense Rob Ford has spouted about getting subways for free. 

  And passive value capture will not work anywhere that isn't already dense, mixed-primary-use, pedestrian-friendly urbanism.

S

   

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Earthsharing Canada" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to earthsharing-ca...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to earthshar...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/earthsharing-canada?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

Stephen Wickens – freelance writer and editor – stephen....@gmail.com – worldwidewickens.com

[Frank de Jong]

Thanks, Stephen, for referring to Hong Kong's model. Hong Kong owns the land and leases it to developers (to finance the transit), working closely with them to design public access, commercial space, residential needs... 

http://www.bre.polyu.edu.hk/Happenings/2011Photo/20110412_BREAdvancedLectureSeries-RailwayandPropertyModel-MTRExperience/RailwayandPropertyModel-MTRExperience.pdf

Here land is privately owned, so land value capture is the best way to finance transit: effectively making transit self-financing. 

Frank

[Stephen Wickens]

I've been studying the MTR model for decades and people here are too quick to dismiss certain lessons from it.

  Also, we have lots of publicly owned land in strategic locations for transit that remain undeveloped or unleveraged. Even some hydro corridors could be very valuable both for redevelopment and transportation is the cables are buried as part of the project.

  Value capture can mean several things. Passive value capture was good enough when we built expensive subways in truly urban areas. But value capture must be directed and aggressive in suburbs built for cars or in green field areas.

   The funding discussions at both the city and Metrolinx levels have been thin ... more of the same old.