Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Dbol504 t1_itqpucf wrote

Reply to comment by Cloud_Disconnected in Vote NO on Question #1 by [deleted]

If you want undeveloped land go live in the country. Living in the city you kind of sign up for everything to get developed.

5

Cloud_Disconnected t1_itqzd1f wrote

Maybe we don't need to pave every inch of ground inside the city limits.

16

the_honeyman t1_itr4279 wrote

Tight, compact development is actually better in the long run for the environment than infinite subdivisions.

11

Cloud_Disconnected t1_itr6ctf wrote

Fair point, but I'd rather a subdivision didn't go in there either.

It's going to get developed one way or the other, I just think it's a shame.

4

the_honeyman t1_itr7v41 wrote

Yea, the subdivision thing was more about continuing to push single family developments towards Rogersville, Ozark, and Nixa because people constantly make interior development such a headache. Even the Grant Avenue parkway caused a ruckus, so I'm not singling out Galloway on that particular issue.

Your second sentence is why something like this, with a developer that is adding back green space into their plan and making it mixed use, feels like something to encourage.

4

xPeachesV t1_itrn5d3 wrote

I'm somewhere in the middle on this. I love being near Downtown (5-7 min drive) and am glad something is being done with all that land on the Bypass in between Chestnut and Sunshine.
When I look to buy next, I'm sure I will move just a little bit further out into one of the surrounding town.

1