06-14-2016, 08:59 AM
I think that probably counts as NIMBY. The test is whether he thinks there should be larger buildings anywhere- larger buildings which make more efficient use of resources, and keep his and other residents’ taxes low, along with other benefits- but just not in his “tight-knit” neighbourhood.
The comment about the units being rented to “anyone who can pay for them” was especially unfortunate. We’re in a city, and for each of us that means maybe interacting with people who aren’t like us. The residents here get the benefit of being within walking distance to Uptown- it’s not right for them to try to deny that benefit to other people, even if they’re not the “young professionals” they might prefer as neighbours.
One spot per unit is in fact unnecessary here. With good indoor bike storage, and a transit stop a five minute stroll away, this is the type of location that might attract people who don’t feel the need for a car. As it stands, those people will be subsidizing the parking of those who do. But, anyway, that happens routinely, and it’s a positive thing for less parking, even it might be more than necessary.
The comment about the units being rented to “anyone who can pay for them” was especially unfortunate. We’re in a city, and for each of us that means maybe interacting with people who aren’t like us. The residents here get the benefit of being within walking distance to Uptown- it’s not right for them to try to deny that benefit to other people, even if they’re not the “young professionals” they might prefer as neighbours.
One spot per unit is in fact unnecessary here. With good indoor bike storage, and a transit stop a five minute stroll away, this is the type of location that might attract people who don’t feel the need for a car. As it stands, those people will be subsidizing the parking of those who do. But, anyway, that happens routinely, and it’s a positive thing for less parking, even it might be more than necessary.