3 ms·

This is an important check to developer greed. You have to be able to maintain quality of life with new development.

• tersers 4y ago
  This is a bad-faith argument. I have heard it throughout council hearings on housing in my city. NIMBYism itself is a prime example of greed and I don't see how it's any different.
  • pessimizer 4y ago
    > This is a bad-faith argument. You can't just declare this, you have to say why. > I have heard it throughout council hearings on housing in my city. The fact that you hear it all the time might mean that a lot of people actually believe it.
• doom2 4y ago
  Shouldn't Escala then be torn down for the very reasons they're arguing against the new construction?
• pwinnski 4y ago
  Why do you have to be able to "maintain quality of life?" How do you define "quality of life?" For whom must this be maintained? The quality of life for the people who currently have no place in the city to live is pretty bad, building 3000 more units will dramatically improve QoL for them, so a net gain regardless of the negative impact on the 269 existing tenants of Escala, right? The federal government no longer allows "those solar panels are unsightly" to be considered for quality of life, so there's some progress. This shadow nonsense sounds like it's being rejected, too. Bring on the developer greed, so long as they don't cut corners.