Commentaire
I do not support many changes to the Development Act. Growth must pay for growth.
How will the government ensure that any cost savings to developers will actually reduce home costs, or if the developer will take an increased profit.
Development charges pay for important services such as infrastructure. If a municipality receives less money, property taxes will increase. If I have an existing house, how is it fair that I pay for new development. I already paid for services where my house is when I bought it.
Even if the house is reduced, property taxes will increase, so no money will be saved except for the developers. This seems like a proposal to increase profits for few, and penalize the rest of us.
Perhaps developers need to build higher density housing to fund the development.
Another solution is increasing greenfield density targets. The targets are currently very low. Gone are the days of 50 foot lots. The government could set a minimum target of units, and/or percentage as 3+ units that are detached, townhouses, high rises.
Again, there are numerous solutions. The government should undertake a comprehensive approach that makes sense, and creates affordable housing.
Soumis le 18 novembre 2022 7:45 PM
Commentaire sur
Modifications proposées à la Loi sur l’aménagement du territoire et à la Loi de 1997 sur les redevances d’aménagement : Fournir une plus grande certitude quant aux coûts des redevances d’aménagement municipales
Numéro du REO
019-6172
Identifiant (ID) du commentaire
70445
Commentaire fait au nom
Statut du commentaire