04-13-2024, 03:44 PM
(04-13-2024, 01:58 PM)bravado Wrote: A new 700 acre housing development would be a financial liability and incur massive future costs on the city, all for short-term benefit in fees.
A 700 acre industrial site (with actual projects attached to it) would be a financial benefit for a lot of people and help an industry that almost everyone believes is essential: manufacturing.
We have ample land for housing, we just choose not to use it smartly. Land for industry is another issue entirely and has a very different set of demands.
The countryside line seems to mean very different things when applied to housing vs industry and I don't think that's a crazy claim.
I'm sorry...how does a 700 acre industrial site not incur costs on the city? The city still has to maintain and build roads and services for the site. Possibly they are different services, but also possible than in 80 years we have to spend eleventy trillion dollars removing environmental contamination spread over 700 acres...or more likely just have a highly contaminated wasteland in what will no doubt be the middle of the city.
As for the benefits, a single 700 acre site like this will not contribute overly much in property taxes either. And while many people believe that manufacturing is essential, housing....also fucking essential.
As for whether we have enough land for industry, we do...at least according to the regional plan. And no, the countryside line should not mean different things when applied to housing or industry....otherwise it would say that. Feel free to read the documents around it.