“More affordable” by cutting out amenities like how McDonalds makes their burgers “more affordable” by using meat paste to make the patties. These people will still own cars and need to park them somewhere and I’m sure these wealthy developers are also building private parking garages on the side so that they can charge these residents a monthly subscription for something that used to be included in their purchase.
the “amenities” eliminated are parking minimums, and you’re assuming that the parking minimums aren’t causing oversupply of unused parking lots. check out the very third photo in the article (the overhead view of a parking lot), its first example of a housing development benefiting from the change. notice how less than half of the spots and thus less than a quarter of the land was being used
plus, for housing, the parking minimum’s only eliminated for affordable housing, senior housing, childcare, and homes <1,200 ft2. family housing still requires 1 parking spot per home
These people will still own cars
not necessarily
the “amenities” eliminated are parking minimums, and you’re assuming that the parking minimums aren’t causing oversupply of unused parking lots.
That’s like “saving time” by not installing electricity or smoke alarms. What a boondoggle; especially in car-dependent America!
deleted by creator
That seems entirely dependent on where you live. Some cities make it real easy to live without a car, but most don’t and every city in WA outside of Seattle (2.5hrs from the city in this article) is just the same.
deleted by creator
So it sounds like we’re in agreement that they are needed in Vancouver, WA.
deleted by creator