> does this proposal threaten to “destroy” the character of the community, or does it provide needed services?

It does both. The issue as presented is a false flag.

First, will it destroy the character of the community. Absolutely, a 99 unit facility built where there was once a field will change all the things brought up in the article. It will increase traffic, business will be built to cater to the population that works there, putting a place like that in what was once a field is a first step to a diminishing rural aesthetic.

Second, does it provide a needed service? ABSOLUTELY! It is not like old people are a finite population. Everyone will be old at one point and many will need a place like this to go. The way we treat our elderly is near criminal and projects like this are at the very least a first step to addressing that.

Maybe if we were able to get over the “you’re wrong! No, you’re wrong! “ mentality and have an actual discussion we could as a society make progress.

The real question that should be getting asked is, are the changes to the character of the town that are needed to support the elderly acceptable. If not, consider a different approach, if so, start building. The longer both sides refuse to admit they are both right and both wrong the longer divisive stuff like that can be used to further drive a wedge between poor and middle class people so we don’t look around and notice the buffet of prosperity we are supposedly being served is nothing but scraps.

*The fact nobody agrees this should be a conversation speaks volumes about reddits problem with group think.