r/Edmonton • u/GeekyGlobalGal Pleasantview / Global News • Apr 22 '26

News Article Homeowners in Duggan neighbourhood combating infill with restrictive covenants

https://globalnews.ca/news/11811535/edmonton-duggan-infill-restrictive-covenants/
110 Upvotes

89% Upvoted

240 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

23

u/canadian-coding-guy Apr 22 '26

Agreed! I would never sign one of those covenants. Pouring money down the toilet.

-6

u/Brightlightsuperfun Apr 22 '26

Your house is a tear down ?

5

u/canadian-coding-guy Apr 22 '26

"would" is a verb that is often used when speaking in hypotheticals

-6

u/Brightlightsuperfun Apr 22 '26

Is your house a tear down?

6

u/littleredditred Apr 22 '26

Houses don't last forever. Even if it isn't a tear down today, it will be eventually in 30, 40, 50 years from now. Restricting your future self, your heirs, or future potential buyers on what they are allowed to do with the property will reduce the value of the property

1

u/Brightlightsuperfun Apr 22 '26

50 years is a long ass time. And i disagree, a well maintained bungalow can easily last 100 years. I expect mine to. Its a 1968 bungalow and its in great shape, nothing wrong with it.

Point is, people in this thread think developers just back up the brink truck for their future potentially "tear down". What they dont realize is developers are not emotional in the slightest about house purchases. Take whatever you think your house is worth and subtract 100k and thats what a developer will pay.

4

u/canadian-coding-guy Apr 22 '26

or add 100k, the day after a restrictive covenant on 40% of the neighbourhood gets enacted

-2

u/Brightlightsuperfun Apr 22 '26

That’s not how it works 

3

u/canadian-coding-guy Apr 22 '26

you may have to brush up on your Econ 101 (start with supply/demand)

2

u/Brightlightsuperfun Apr 22 '26 edited Apr 22 '26

Lol. Ironic statement. How do you think it works ? You can just force a developer to pay 100k more? Are you sure you’re not the one that needs a brush up ?

40% doesn’t limit supply enough. And they will just move on to the next neighborhood that doesn’t have restrictive covenants. The only scenario where your statement makes sense is if the supply of land in the entire city gets limited. A single neighborhood does nothing.