Commentaire
I'm not a fan of this entire Bill, but to comment on this regulation I believe that the parkland rate should be reconsidered. By adjusting the rate to one hectare per 600 units you may end up will some pretty unliveable neighbourhoods. Not to mention the high costs required to build new infrastructure to service this new areas.
Also, if you're destroying the greenbelt can you at least incentivize developers to build high density units? It's still unclear to me what types of units we're talking about. It seems like it will you be your sprawled out single family detached homes with large driveways and backyards. That is not a very effective use of land.
Encouraging the supply of rental housing is good, but there is a good chance that the developers will own and rent the units they build. So they get a discount on building it and can charge high rents maximizing profit. Are there provisions to ensure that the developer isn't essentially double dipping?
Soumis le 4 décembre 2022 3:06 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
78387
Commentaire fait au nom
Statut du commentaire