I find it fascinating how many contradictory things seem to be true at the same time in these housing debates:
- small scale infill development is nowhere near sufficient to solve the housing crisis! (so don't build any I guess?)
AND
- small scale infill development is going to be so prevalent and wide spread that it's going to ruin communities! They should build elsewhere! (but not sufficient to solve anything I guess?)
AND
- they are just going to be $1M duplexes, so how are they really going to help affordability!?!?!
AND
- these million dollar duplexes are also going to actually be 8-plexes which are going to lead to crime and people parking on my front lawn and garbage bins everywhere! Density is great, but only where it makes sense!
BUT
- not at Glenmore Landing of all places! My dog ####s on that green strip!
This is the big problem with discussing at the land-use level. Every possible boogeyman is apparently fair play, no matter how contradictory or theoretical. That's why it's much better to focus on the development-permit phase, where the realistic concerns can actually be mitigated.
|