Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

CJYP t1_itgzhrm wrote

Reply to comment by noob_tube03 in Email City Council to Abolish Minimum Parking Requirements! City Council is meeting at 5:30pm on Monday, October 24th to discuss making it easier and cheaper to build new housing by eliminating requirement for unneeded parking spaces by Responsible-Bath2778

People who need a car will rent an existing apartment with parking spots. People who don't, can rent an apartment without spots. If there's more people who need parking than people who don't, then developers will continue to build parking. And people will park in the off street spots their apartment provides.

8

noob_tube03 t1_ith0b42 wrote

I trust developers to build less revenue generating property as much as I trust rats to stay out of the trash. I suppose you think developers will create affordable housing all in their own for the good of the residents too

0

CJYP t1_ith0kh1 wrote

I 100% trust developers to follow the profits. If people want parking, it won't be profitable to build housing without parking, and they will build parking.

4

IntelligentCicada363 t1_ith3wol wrote

This person has their slice of Cambridge and wants to shut the door behind them. Its that simple.

5

noob_tube03 t1_itjkwq4 wrote

This other person seems to think people both need parking and increasing the population of Cambridge doesn't require more infrastructure. Which is it, do people need parking or not? Minimum parking requirements mean new development can accommodate parking. If you think people people don't want parking, then how am I "shutting the door behind me"? Especially since I'm the one who wants parking for them?

0

noob_tube03 t1_ithugkc wrote

Do you have an example of a recent project that required parking, and the building hit occupancy while the parking wasn't utilized?

1