Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

CallMeHelicase t1_jc2hwy8 wrote

Reply to comment by ice_cold_fahrenheit in Petition: Save the Locust Point Community Garden! by elephantsandrainbows

We have too many houses in the city and not enough residents. Adding more houses benefits no one, and leads to more vacant houses that kill firefighters. It is so wasteful to build new houses when so many are being knocked down.

4

ice_cold_fahrenheit t1_jc2qkym wrote

> Adding more houses benefits no one

It would definitely benefit Locust Point renters who would have their rent prices decrease (unless you’re one of the people who thinks building new housing increases rents). It would also benefit people who would want to move there in the future (unless you think, for whatever reason, that more people shouldn’t move there in general).

> And leads to more vacant housing

How does that lead to more vacant housing??? If this was built in a blighted area sure, but I bet new housing in Locust Point would get snatched up like hotcakes.

> It’s wasteful to build more houses

Whose resources are being “wasted?” This is a private developer who will be using their own funds to build housing on land sold by Under Armor, none of whom would otherwise be using their resources to tear down vacant housing.

2

CallMeHelicase t1_jc418oa wrote

Natural resources matter. The plastics produced for these homes and the lumber that has to be harvested. I don't care if under armor spends money, I care about material waste.

0

ice_cold_fahrenheit t1_jc45ry9 wrote

New infill housing in a dense, walkable area like Locus Point will result in far less CO2 emissions than in a sprawled out suburb. If you want to criticize material waste in housing, criticize the suburban McMansion hell that characterizes most of America.

2