05-27-2015, 09:13 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.
I wondered if it had to do with particular plots of land being approved while others being rejected