Winnipeg Free Press

Winnipeg Free Press (Newspaper) - September 3, 2006, Winnipeg, Manitoba Freedom of Trade Liberty of religion Equality of civil rights a9 from newest Winnipeg free press sunday september 3, 2006and beyond the in built City owners of vacant land downtown should be taxed at a higher rate to Spur development by Steve Cohlmeyer a recent article in this newspaper bemoaned Winni Eggers Lack of Pride and our embarrassment about our City As a place to visit. There is a lot about the City which makes it Well Worth the visit and we have for years enjoyed showing surprised visitors How Large varied and Rich Winnipeg is. Many years ago we gave a Short tour to famed urbanist and thinker Jane Jacobs ? whose comment was that Winnipeg was remarkably Urban the ultimate compliment ? and much More Urban than bigger and faster growing Vancouver. However there is one overriding reality in Winnipeg that makes it very difficult to con Vince those who love to experience Good cities that Winnipeg is anything More than an Over grown town. That reality is the immense amount of in built space in our downtown. Just 40 years ago this in built space was full of four and five Storey buildings and the Lack of those buildings in today a downtown has resulted in a distressing Range of problems for our City. The most obvious of these problems is aesthetic. The wide open spaces Between Broadway and Portage Avenue Are the epitome of uninviting space. With Little to attract Resi dents or visitors and with Little to attract exploration or buying of goods it is very difficult to introduce the Small scale and incremental com Merce that is the hallmark of the worlds great cities. If the problem were Only aesthetic an unattractive place can be simply ignored and we can All go to the Park or explore the Exchange District or stroll our tree lined residential streets or go to the mall. After All every City has its less than perfect Underbelly and what a the big Deal if we have one too the big Deal of course is that a downtown is not a place to be hidden away and forgotten. It is the symbolic and very real face we present to ourselves and to others. The costs of a wind blown downtown Are great. Winni Eggers themselves Are embarrassed by our downtown. We Are surprised that someone might want to visit and we appear to feel that there is nothing Worth seeing. The most rapidly growing sector in the worlds Economy is tourism and we shut out our share of the worlds Market because of the downtown we show the world. The costs of having a City no one wants to visit Are real and Large. The attractiveness of Winnipeg is so Low that even our children leave for the Bright lights of the romantic cities in remarkable numbers and not Many come Here looking for our Bright lights. Costs Are not just aesthetic and social. The streets of downtown were built and equipped at great expense to service Many times the demands which Are put on them. Sewer water and Road systems Are capable of serving at least 10 times their current Load at no addition Al expense. And those under used systems continue to Cost Money simply to be kept operational ? even though they remain under used. Public moneys have been and continue to be spent and literally wasted because of our development history. Another Side of this under use is that additional serviced lands have to be constructed on the City a outskirts even though there is a Supply of underused serviced land lying fallow downtown when tourists and residents stay away in droves the snowball effect of inaction is costly. Businesses Are less successful and either fail or at Best pay less tax. The under used serviced lands downtown generate some tax Rev Enue from surface parking lots but the tax that is generated is minuscule compared to that which can be generated by successful continuous Urban development. Winnipeg is not the Only City to have this problem. Cities like Dallas and Houston make Winnipeg look downright dense. But no one wants to visit downtown Dallas or Houston either. Because these problems Are not limited to Winnipeg there is a tremendous resource out there in the rest of the world ? of planners architects politicians policy wonks and citizen activists who have been struggling to get rid of the holes in their City centres. Some of the tools used in other places have worked and some have not. Some of the tools which have been successful in other places would not be appropriate Here. But there Are lessons to be Learned and a real problem to be solved. In Des Moines Iowa the City expropriated abandoned or under used lands cleared debris and empty buildings and installed topsoil and Sod ? creating so called Greenfield Sites in Brownfield locations. The result has been new investment and revitalization. Montreal passed a Law two years ago with a Blanket prohibition of surface parking lots. In Lisbon landowners in an older Section of the City showed no inter est in investing ? waiting until some magic Day in the future when everything would be Rosy. They resisted the City a efforts to encourage development and the City expropriated their lands built what they had been trying to encourage and in Many cases re sold the improved lands to the original landowners ? who Are now making handsome returns on the entire affair. In Winnipeg we have a problem similar to that in Lisbon. Landowners Are Able to operate surface parking lots at a reasonable level of profit and pay taxes based on Low use of their lands. The framework is Ideal for sitting still until some far off Day when real profits can be made. And the inertia is killing us the True civic Cost of having to build More serviced streets while the streets downtown remain underused and the True civic Cost of choking a vital and robust downtown Are not borne by those who sit on their vacant lands. Those costs Are borne by the rest of us ? As we literally subsidize the Long term interests of the wait and see landowners. In response to this problem there is a grow ing movement to re consider the Way Urban land and property Are taxed. The traditional Means of establishing tax rates is to determine the value and earning potential of commercial property and to tax the land and buildings based on those earnings. Under this system land with a building on it attracts High taxes while an empty parcel attracts Low taxes. This is an Ideal framework for wait and see owners of vacant land who can sit Back while those who develop and own buildings pay the nearly full share of downtown subsistence. The concept of taxing the land rather than the buildings on the land is gaining support As a tool to counter All of the ill effects of wait and see vacant land ownership. In a land tax system building owners must still pay significant taxes. The difference is that vacant land owners must pay taxes based on the real value of their lands and they quickly find that sit Ting on vacant land is not such an attractive proposition. They Are forced to sell their lands to those who Are prepared to build and truly use their lands or they Are forced to build and become real participants in the economic life of downtown. With a successful Cycle of re birth land values Rise and Gross tax revenues Rise and people do not avoid the formerly empty places and commercial enterprises can thrive. It is a pretty attractive picture and one which makes a lot of sense for Winnipeg. Steve Cohlmeyer is a Winnipeg architect. A Federal Urban Agenda by any other name by or. Loleen Berdahl f or a number of years the Politi Cal leaders of Canadas Large cities had their sights focused on the Federal government As a Poten tial solution to their woes. It was a strategy that made sense at the time. While the Federal government suffered an embarrassment of budgetary surpluses cities financial needs were and still Are vast in the face of rapid urbanization aging infrastructure and growing pressures on Urban social sup ports and environmental Quality. While the provincial governments either pleaded a Lack of moneys due to health care costs or simply turned a Blind Eye the liberals in Ottawa were recep Tive to talking Money with the cities. Sure prime minister Jean Chr Tien was somewhat cautious in his approach but his successor Paul mar tin appeared prepared rhetorically at least to throw open the vaults in his efforts to address Urban problems and woo Urban voters. January selection marked not Only a change in government but also a significant change in the face of the fed eral Urban policy debate. Unlike prime ministers Chr Tien or Martin conservative prime minister Stephen Harper does not appear to see Urban Canada As the next Federal Frontier. After fewer than nine months of conservative government there has been a largely wholesale shift away from the rhetoric of a Federal Urban evidence of this shift can be seen in the reaction or Lack thereof to the Public release of the final report of the Federal external advisory committee on cities and communities. The commit tee chaired by Mike Harcourt was established under the Martin govern ment in february of 2004. Its recommendations Are far reaching including a double devolution of responsibilities and resources from the Federal government to the provinces and Terri tories and then again from the provinces and territories to the municipalities. Such a recommendation ? and the report As a whole ? would have received considerable attention and debate in years past. Given the shift away from a Federal Urban Agenda however the report has been largely ignored. This recent Cooling of Federal inter est in Canadas cities strongly Illus trates a Central criticism Many levelled at the idea of a Federal Urban Agenda in the first place. Critics argued that Federal interest in cities is Short lived unsustainable and unreliable. When cities Are the policy Issue do Jour the Federal government is Happy to sweep the municipalities off their feet with promises of a Long and Beautiful future together. But the critics warned when a newer and shinier policy priority emerges or in this Case when there is a change in Power the Federal government will inevitably Retreat leaving the municipalities and provinces holding the bag. The shift away from a Federal Urban rhetoric demonstrates the potential for such Urban Heartbreak. But it is inter Esting to note that while rhetoric has declined Federal Urban engagement has not. The Martin government had ample Federal Urban rhetoric but while it made a number of significant changes ? most notably the fuel tax sharing agreements the get rebates and the designation of a minister responsible for communities ? Many Felt that its actions failed to meet the scope of its rhetoric. In contrast the Harper government does not talk As sweetly save for a Promise in budget 2006 that the finance minister will consult with the federation of Canadian municipalities to ensure that the perspectives and priorities of cities and towns Are under stood and yet the Harper government has maintained the Steps taken by the Martin government increased Overall infrastructure fund ing and added a number of Public transit initiatives including a tax incentive and the Public transit Capi Tal Trust that will inevitably Benefit cities. In an article published just after the throne speech i argued that the Harper government should appoint a big cities task Force with a mandate to examine what the Federal government can do to assist big cities in areas with in exclusive or concurrent Federal jurisdiction. Doing so would provide the conservative government with an Opportunity to build Bridges and Good will in the big cities something that should be of interest Given the party a demonstrated electoral weaknesses in Toronto Montreal and Vancouver. More importantly such a task Force would provide the Federal government with an increased understanding of Federal Urban policy issues. While i stand by this suggestion i am not holding my breath. The big cities Agenda is More Likely to receive Federal attention through quieter Means ? in areas that greatly Impact the cities but Are not officially identified As Urban. Infrastructure is an Issue with which the Harper govern ment has considerable Comfort and addressing Canadas infrastructure debt will necessitate taking Steps to address the country a significant Urban infrastructure shortfalls. This is one area where the Harper government May move to assist cities without Ever calling it an Urban Agenda. Another area is Public transit. The Harper government has pledged to create and implement a made in Canada alternative to Kyoto. Given its Early indications of interest it is reasonable to imagine or at least Hope that Federal investment in Public Tran sit systems will be part of that alter Nate plan. But again should this come to pass it will be presented As an environmental program rather than an Urban policy. Such Steps wont Advance a Federal Urban Agenda quickly and advocates of an increased Federal role in Urban matters Are Likely to be dissatisfied. And these Steps will do Little to Advance the conservative party a Appeal in the Large cities or to Demon Strate the party a awareness of the challenges facing Urban Canada. Yet it would be unfair to character ize such Steps As a Retreat from a fed eral Urban presence. The rhetoric May not be As pretty and the movement for Ward May not be As fast As some would like but the end result will still be an investment in Canadas big cities. Or. Loleen Berdahl is a senior researcher at the Canada West foundation ;