Quote:
Originally Posted by Mazrim
Removing the requirement doesn't mean developers won't consider it. The minimums aren't needed and the market will determine if they can stand having no parking on a development.
|
In that case you are socializing the parking challange. If we banned on street parking for residents then letting the market take care of the issue might work.
In our current world of parking where parking on the street has no or low cost and even reserving on street parking has low cost the market is distorted. Secondly reducing the cost of the supply only lowers the cost of the product if the constraint on new housing is investment return. So you would need to show that decreasing the cost of the requirements wouldnt just directly increase the cost of land a corresponding amount because the current supply constraints all still exist.
Lowering development cost is a trickle down theory. At some point these cost do provide real obstacles to new development but also at some point lowering them more doesn’t change the amount of entrants it’s just increases profit.
So before implementing the mistakes we are seeing from the pre-bylaw rules which we are currently actively dealing with we should have evidence this would actually lower pricing. I’m not confident it would.