Inclusionary Zoning

[bravado]

And development fees unnecessarily increase the cost of housing. In the current situation where so many people have having difficulties affording housing those extra, the people who can least afford those extra costs end up being the ones who pay them. A better idea would be to just raise property taxes in general and share that burden equally across all of us, especially since both a denser city and lower housing costs benefits all of us, not just the people moving into those new buildings.

Um, you can certainly argue around the edges about development fees, but there is absolutely no reason why I should be paying for new parks, roads, schools, and utility servicing for a new development, nor why the people moving into new development should not have to pay.

To the extent that public services are required in order for new development to exist, it’s perfectly reasonable to charge the new developments for the expansion of said public services.

I wouldn’t be surprised if development charges in older areas of the city were too high; after all, the services all exist already. On the other hand, as the city densifies, eventually sewers will have to be replaced with bigger sewers (for example) so it’s not unreasonable to collect a bit of money from each new development as it occurs so the money will be there when the replacement is needed.

I think that if the public was forced to equally pay for new public goods, we would make better decisions. Even if you don’t use a park or road, it’s still public property and we might make more sustainable investments if everyone was actually invested in their creation.

I don’t see this as any different than paying for a new hospital or school I might not end up using. It’s owned and paid for by everyone…