05-27-2015, 08:03 AM
(05-27-2015, 07:43 AM)Viewfromthe42 Wrote: On one hand, 455 is closer to the region's 85 than to the developers' 1,000+.
On the other hand, the amount of developable land the developers would have had in our region with their number, new and existing: ~4,500
Now, they see "only" ~4,000.
So really, it's only reducing the developable area by ~10%, not 50%+. I'm also curious if the rationing - 200 now, 255 in a few years - will add argument to make this a regular assignment of land to the developable area, that being whatever land a developer purchased at a discount on the peripheree of the region.
The pessimist in me saw the compromise and thought that the developers can only develop half of what they originally wanted, but will now be able to develop more than five times what the Region initially thought was sensible.