3 ms·
Parks are parks though. They're not meant to hold internet buildings and other large infrastructure buildings. Why not locate them on commercial space or simila
by sqldba 10y ago
Parks are parks though. They're not meant to hold internet buildings and other large infrastructure buildings. Why not locate them on commercial space or similar?
- DannyBee 10y agoCertainly you realize if it was that simple it would have been done.
- x0x0 10y agoBut was it cost, lack of available commercial space at the correct nexuses, or ???
- DannyBee 10y agoDoes it matter? (I ask seriously) I think you can safely assume that Google would avoid this problem if the cost was not going to seriously affect their plans, because it would be dumb not to. Given that, whether the cost makes it impossible to profit, or the space has to be where it is for logistical reasons, or ... doesn't seem to matter much to me.
- x0x0 10y agoPerhaps Google perhaps didn't understand quite how delicate certain community members are. Personally, I would have assumed that the city / council would be pretty cognizant of that and, once the city council bought in, it was likely to be ok.
- ensignavenger 10y agoI'm not a Google Fiber engineer, but I imagine it was a combination of: Proximity- some neighborhoods are far away from suitable commercial property. Cost- the city was probably providing the land for free or at a discount (This may be a legitimate concern in and of itself) Not so many other utilities- There may have been less other utilities to contend with in the park versus a a commercial location. As another poster pointed out, most cities have a lot of far uglier utility infrastructure and city storage build all over town.