Housing shortfall, costs and affordability

[tomh009]

I think site plan approval would be a reasonable criterion. Developers may not get actual building permits if they are going to put the project on the shelf, but once the site plan is approved, the city has essentially approved the project subject to a building plan that meets the standards (and matches the site plan).

Still no guarantee that a project that received site plan approval that doesn't get built doesn't come back to the city.

At least, if I understand the process correctly, the city often modifies the proposal from developers. The city is not necessarily privy to the developers business plan, and those changes could turn a project from a profitable one to pursue to an profitable one to shelve and try to divest of.

As in, the developer could request a modified site plan, after the city has already approved one? (The city will not typically request any significant changes at the building permit stage.)

The point being, that if the city has approved a site plan, the developer has the ability to proceed. If the developer doesn't accept the changes, the site plan does not normally proceed to the approval step. (Whether their business plan is viable is not something the city can determine.)