Comment 36737

By JonC (registered) | Posted January 03, 2010 at 11:46:34

You again demonstrate that you have never owned land in your life.

Not to blow your mind, but the primary value of the vast majority of properties in Hamilton is land and thus large lots are penalized. My residence's value is around the hypothetical price, and for me to double the value of the house I'd have to make the actual building 3 to 4 times more valuable, typically larger (note: the land is worth more than the house and does not change in value by this construction). So hypothetically, the building could hold more people, have more floor space for private business to run, etc. A business downtown would have more floor space or units. All those things require more city services. If I was just creating a monstrosity for my wife, the dog and me, sure I'd be paying double the taxes, but we would have just dropped a few hundred grand to buy unneeded floor space, so we'd probably have some extra cash floating around come tax time. In the majority of cases, increases that dramatic result in LESS taxes per occupant/business usage sqft (which actually makes sense, since less infrastructure is required).

Overall, switching to a straight square footage system would do is penalize those living in currently less desirable neighbourhoods and reward those living in

The only immediate change that needs to be made is to place a shortened limit on the reduced taxation rate for vacant land, and maybe to not have city council encourage illegal surface parking on those vacant lots.

Permalink | Context

Events Calendar

There are no upcoming events right now.
Why not post one?

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Blog Archives

Site Tools