There’s been some coverage of me in the local paper, the northern district times - check out
And look for pages 8 and 9. Note the article has lifted some material from my candidates’ statement, and it was not even really written as a media release. So, good …
And, hi Miles …upon reflection, increasing land values and development are not directly related, though they may be symptoms of the same malaise. One free market apologist statement is that if the market were let rip, there would be so much development that land values would drop. But, in fact it is dwelling not land prices that would be that much affected if they were, and you’re talking about high density dwellings as compared to other dwellings, and land values might even increase into the bargain if there’s synergy. The other question is - why has the market “picked on” Ryde? What’s so different? Are we so differently regulated compared to other regions?
The other factor in the equation is zoning decisions. They can increase property values in a way which sits outside of the market to some degree. I understand from Mark G that the book “Game of Mates” talks about this in some detail, it a book I still need to read. A set of zoning changes could have the “double whammy” of increased land prices and increased development all at once ( and also loading on facilities and traffic as well into the bargain).
But, can such increases change accessibility of stuff? Well, not directly. However, if you have zoning changes which increase population density without addressing the increased need for services, you’ll then have changes to accessibility. But perhaps it is so easy to tick a box on zoning changes without enforcing some engagement with infrastructure and access to services.
Lots of thoughts all over the place here, but maybe MarkG will make better sense of them, and I hope to have it clearer in my head in case voters ask me questions at candidates’s forums.