Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

banjomin t1_itqtjag wrote

Find me an argument for why this land should be developed into apt buildings that wouldn't also work to argue developing the land in the ACTUAL PARK and maybe voting yes will start making sense to me.

10

ShartsvilleDestroyer t1_itqxuzt wrote

Because the park isn't undeveloped land. It's a public park.

10

banjomin t1_itqygzi wrote

That's not an argument for why we should develop the land around the park into a boutique apartment village. Try again.

−11

ShartsvilleDestroyer t1_itqyx5h wrote

You asked for a reason to develop the proposed land that wouldn't also work for developing the park. One is undeveloped land. The other is a park. We can develop undeveloped land, we can't develop a park.

5

banjomin t1_itqzszo wrote

You're not giving any argument for why we should develop the land.

−5

Cold417 t1_itqyut0 wrote

If we develop the land next to the park, then the developer gets to offload their greenspace to the public and sell it as a feature!

4

ShartsvilleDestroyer t1_itr2c5x wrote

I thought I read that the developer upped the amount of greenspace to include and is well above what even the city required. Maybe I misread it though.

0

[deleted] OP t1_itqtxwc wrote

[deleted]

6

banjomin t1_itr2ihy wrote

I'm asking for a reason to vote yes that wouldn't also work to argue for developing the park. I'm asking the question because I think we should all be able to agree that we don't want to convert our public parks into apartment buildings, but the arguments I'm seeing to vote yes are arguments that you could also use to argue that we should convert public parks into apartment buildings.

Like, if the argument is affordable housing, and we need these apartments to increase the amount of affordable housing (directly or indirectly), then hell, why not develop the park into affordable housing or apartment buildings as well?

If building the apartments is going to impact homelessness so much that we are overlooking the issues with the development, then why not just develop the park as well?? If we need the housing that badly then it would really help to develop the park and the surrounding area into these apartment buildings. "Or do you not care about the problem of homelessness and care so much more about having a nice stroll??"

If the argument is about NIMBYs, then I can basically say the same thing. "Why are we so committed to preserving the scenic views of rich old people living around this park??"

−8