The assessment cycle, 2015 to 2026.
What The City of Calgary’s own roll says happened to office building values. Across 494 comparable sites the total assessed value moved from $25.27B to $7.35B, a median change of -37.9% per site.
Downtown and everywhere else are two different markets
Inside the downtown core box the median comparable site changed by -65.7%. Outside it the median changed by +2.4%. That single split explains more of the record than height, age or transit access.
Inside downtown, the taller the building the further it fell
Height bands are shown for downtown sites only. Every comparable site above 45 m in this record is downtown, so a citywide height table would silently restate location as height.
By community
Communities with at least five comparable sites, worst median first. Counts are shown because a median of five sites is not a market.
| Community | Comparable sites | Median change |
|---|---|---|
| Downtown Commercial Core | 103 | -82.2% |
| Downtown West End | 17 | -69.8% |
| Beltline | 106 | -59.8% |
| Eau Claire | 7 | -59.3% |
| Cliff Bungalow | 5 | -43.6% |
| Varsity | 6 | -42.0% |
| Mission | 7 | -39.2% |
| Chinatown | 11 | -24.0% |
| Manchester | 10 | -20.7% |
| South Airways | 5 | -20.4% |
| East Fairview Industrial | 5 | -13.9% |
| Capitol Hill | 6 | -8.8% |
| Sunalta | 31 | -5.4% |
| Bowness | 6 | +9.4% |
| Manchester Industrial | 22 | +11.6% |
| Hillhurst | 8 | +11.7% |
| Inglewood | 6 | +23.6% |
| Tuxedo Park | 6 | +25.9% |
| Westwinds | 5 | +34.0% |
| Crescent Heights | 5 | +35.4% |
| West Hillhurst | 5 | +39.6% |
The largest declines
Sites assessed at $10.0M or more in 2015, ranked by the steepest fall. 104 comparable sites lost more than three quarters of their assessed value.
| # | Building | Community | Roof height | 2015 → 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 138 4 Ave SE | Chinatown | 35.1 m | -97.3% $12.8M → $345,000 |
| 2 | Lougheed Building 604 1 St SW | Downtown Commercial Core | 28.3 m | -91.8% $39.0M → $3.2M |
| 3 | 500 4 Ave SW | Downtown Commercial Core | 124.9 m | -91.6% $170.7M → $14.3M |
| 4 | Gulf Canada Square 401 9 Ave SW | Downtown Commercial Core | 91.1 m | -90.6% $610.3M → $57.3M |
| 5 | 316 5 Ave SW | Downtown Commercial Core | 114.9 m | -90.6% $225.3M → $21.2M |
| 6 | 645 7 Ave SW | Downtown Commercial Core | 109.9 m | -89.6% $215.4M → $22.3M |
| 7 | 411 1 St SE | Downtown Commercial Core | 113.8 m | -89.5% $432.0M → $45.3M |
| 8 | Intact Place 311 6 Ave SW | Downtown Commercial Core | 75.8 m | -89.2% $277.6M → $30.1M |
| 9 | 329 5 Ave SW | Downtown Commercial Core | 66.2 m | -88.8% $142.1M → $15.9M |
| 10 | Oddfellows' Temple (Chamber of Commerce) 100 6 Ave SW | Downtown Commercial Core | 20.1 m | -88.2% $16.2M → $1.9M |
| 11 | 735 8 Ave SW | Downtown Commercial Core | 91.3 m | -88.1% $149.5M → $17.8M |
| 12 | Utilities Building 119 6 Ave SW | Downtown Commercial Core | 25.5 m | -88.0% $32.0M → $3.8M |
| 13 | 505 3 St SW | Downtown Commercial Core | 64.6 m | -88.0% $71.4M → $8.6M |
| 14 | 520 5 Ave SW | Downtown Commercial Core | 99.6 m | -87.4% $96.7M → $12.1M |
| 15 | 635 8 Ave SW | Downtown Commercial Core | 104.2 m | -87.1% $130.6M → $16.9M |
| 16 | 808 5 Ave SW | Downtown Commercial Core | 94.5 m | -86.6% $130.5M → $17.5M |
| 17 | 700 6 Ave SW | Downtown Commercial Core | 85.9 m | -86.4% $84.7M → $11.5M |
| 18 | 1122 4 St SW | Beltline | 55.3 m | -86.3% $40.9M → $5.6M |
| 19 | 605 5 Ave SW | Downtown Commercial Core | 127.5 m | -85.9% $245.4M → $34.7M |
| 20 | 801 6 Ave SW | Downtown Commercial Core | 115.8 m | -85.8% $217.9M → $31.0M |
| 21 | 601 5 St SW | Downtown Commercial Core | 125.8 m | -85.7% $545.7M → $77.8M |
| 22 | Britannia Building 703 6 Ave SW | Downtown Commercial Core | 39.7 m | -85.5% $41.0M → $6.0M |
| 23 | 1221 8 St SW | Beltline | 49.9 m | -85.4% $27.1M → $4.0M |
| 24 | 1000 7 Ave SW | Downtown West End | 46.2 m | -85.2% $78.3M → $11.6M |
| 25 | 240 4 Ave SW | Downtown Commercial Core | 127.4 m | -85.1% $390.6M → $58.3M |
The largest increases
The same floor, ranked the other way. 83 comparable sites gained more than a quarter.
| # | Building | Community | Roof height | 2015 → 2026 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 600 3 Ave SW | Eau Claire | 102.3 m | +143.2% $72.4M → $176.0M |
| 2 | 7710 5 St SE | Fairview Industrial | 11.7 m | +35.6% $18.1M → $24.5M |
| 3 | 2000 8561 8A Ave SW | West Springs | 18.6 m | +12.7% $15.9M → $18.0M |
| 4 | 4040 Bowness Rd NW | Parkdale | 20.9 m | +10.5% $40.8M → $45.1M |
| 5 | 1313 10 Ave SW | Beltline | 22.4 m | +2.3% $15.8M → $16.2M |
| 6 | 1525 10 Ave SW | Sunalta | 19.1 m | +0.2% $18.1M → $18.1M |
| 7 | 30 Springborough Blvd SW | Springbank Hill | 12.9 m | -5.2% $27.1M → $25.6M |
| 8 | 1216 10 Ave SW | Beltline | 13.9 m | -21.1% $10.8M → $8.5M |
| 9 | 300 1100 8 Ave SW | Downtown West End | 83 m | -21.5% $11.4M → $8.9M |
| 10 | 4455 110 Ave SE | East Shepard Industrial | 9.5 m | -24.7% $18.6M → $14.0M |
| 11 | 4715 8 Ave SE | Forest Lawn | 16.8 m | -30.7% $28.4M → $19.7M |
| 12 | 120 17 Ave SW | Beltline | 19.1 m | -31.3% $14.6M → $10.0M |
| 13 | 5340 1 St SW | Manchester | 21.5 m | -32.7% $18.2M → $12.3M |
| 14 | 1550 5 St SW | Beltline | 17.8 m | -33.2% $11.0M → $7.3M |
| 15 | Ford Motor Company of Canada Warehouse 902 11 Ave SW | Beltline | 15.7 m | -37.4% $12.1M → $7.6M |
The long run
Over 21 roll years, 365 sites qualify on both endpoints. The median site changed by +71.3% while the total across them moved from $5.08B to $4.23B.
Questions
What this comparison is and is not.
Which office buildings are in this comparison?
494 of the 612 sites in the record. A site qualifies only when its accounts carry a usable value in both 2015 and 2026, and those accounts make up at least 95% of the site’s current assessed value. Re-numbered, split and partially assessed accounts are excluded rather than charted, because the City re-uses roll numbers across restructurings and a raw comparison of them would be meaningless.
Are these sale prices?
No. These are The City of Calgary’s assessed values for taxation, published by roll year. Alberta does not publish transaction prices, so nothing here is a sale price, an asking price, a rent or an appraisal, and a change in assessment is not a realised gain or loss.
Why do the median and the total move in opposite directions over the long run?
Because size is concentrated. Between 2005 and 2026 the median qualifying site changed by +71.3%, while the total across those 365 sites moved from $5.08B to $4.23B. Many small suburban parcels rose; a small number of very large downtown ones fell far enough to outweigh them in the total.
Does a lower assessment mean the building is empty?
It does not. Assessment follows the City’s valuation model for taxation. The record holds no vacancy, availability, rent or occupancy data, and no Canadian public source publishes office vacancy, so no such inference is drawn here.
Public record sources: Current Year Property Assessments (Parcel), Historical Property Assessments (Parcel), Assessment Subproperty Use Codes, 3D Buildings - Citywide (LiDAR roof outlines), Land Use Districts, Transit LRT Stations, Green Line Stations, Plus 15, Historic Resource (Inventory of Evaluated Historic Resources), Development Permits, Building Permits, Calgary Existing Buildings - Performance Metrics (BenchmarkYYC), Calgary Business Licenses, On-Street Parking Zones with Rates, Building Inspections Results — The City of Calgary, retrieved 2026-09-22. Contains information licensed under the Open Government Licence – City of Calgary. Building names, floor counts and architects, where shown, come from Wikidata (CC0). No brokerage, listing-data or commercial research source is used.
Boundary: Assessed values are the City’s assessment-roll figures for taxation and are not sale prices, asking rents, vacancy or availability; Alberta does not publish transaction prices. LiDAR heights are roof-surface elevations above the lowest ground point at the building perimeter and can differ from architectural heights. Storey equivalents are derived at 3.9 m per storey and are not floor counts. Distances are straight-line. Permit descriptions are the City’s records at retrieval and do not establish current use, tenancy or availability. Read the methodology.