Quote:
Originally Posted by lorenavedon
no parking is great in a hot market or a city with limited space like Manhattan. In those conditions, people are willing to make sacrifices. I'll buy a 250k condo with no parking vs having to spend 350k if anything is even available. Calgary has no shortage of land and the hot market is cooling. If things REALLY cool off and condos start flooding the market, you will never be able to unload a condo with no parking. Buyers will become way more picky and discerning and immediately dismiss a condo with no parking unless you're basically giving it away. So while in a hot market these ideas sound good, in a dead market these places will be the most illiquid pieces of real estate in the city. Calgary is not Manhattan, San Francisco, Tokyo, London etc. It's a wanna-be big city that got lucky with oil and now that luck is running out. N3 will sell, but overtime it will be nothing more than a rental slum, not a place people will want to call home.
|
I always find such comparatives show a fundamental lack of understanding of why something is or isn't done in terms of transportation. There are villages that don't require parking, there are small cities that don't require parking and there are megacities that do require parking. There is no natural city size, geometry, density, structure or network typology that dictates a place should or should not, or require or not require parking; not to mention that the now belief that parking is effectively a non-eliminable requirement is essentially a self-fulfilling prophetic - parking is required, because we require parking.
Had we never implemented
policy that requires parking years and years ago, this whole discussion wouldn't exist.
Threaded Mode