05-14-2016, 11:04 AM
I can't disagree that there will be a transition period until the market figures things out, but the current situation is very bad: we're using land inefficiently, and increasing costs to the people who can least afford them by burying the costs of parking in residential and other costs. I can see why you might say there's a catch 22, but I can't see it: if parking minimums were eliminated, developers would be free to build fewer parking spaces, or offer parking spaces separately from units. But plenty would opt not to do that until the market adapted. Developers won't suddenly opt to build zero parking spaces if it means they can't sell their units. They will instead offer the parking spaces their customers actually demand and are willing to pay for.
Maybe this should be moved to 'Parking,' but I'm really curious about Northdale. I haven't read about serious complaints about parking. What is actually going on with parents visiting their kids? That they can't park their for no cost to them as close to their destination as they would be able to at a suburban shopping mall? This has been mentioned here before, but parking meters are an obvious solution and of benefit to both the parents (since the parking will be available, since market rates are charged) and the City.
Maybe this should be moved to 'Parking,' but I'm really curious about Northdale. I haven't read about serious complaints about parking. What is actually going on with parents visiting their kids? That they can't park their for no cost to them as close to their destination as they would be able to at a suburban shopping mall? This has been mentioned here before, but parking meters are an obvious solution and of benefit to both the parents (since the parking will be available, since market rates are charged) and the City.