Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

vcelloho t1_j8pijm5 wrote

Reply to comment by Fit-Accountant-157 in Developer has abandoned plans to demolish a former Hampden bookbindery by physicallyatherapist

I think this building was a bit different from typical NIMBY objections that part of Hampden isn't on the street grid and there are only three routes out Falls Cliff, which is 2 ways but only one car at a time, a one-way blind turn on Singer and Keswick, and Chestnut and Falls Rd also only one car at a time. If the building hadn't been proposed as a 78' tall building I don't think it would have been met with as much resistance. The Fox building conversion to apartments went through for example as did the Crittenton development and apartment conversation.

10

Fit-Accountant-157 t1_j8q5m15 wrote

I agree that the project was too big. But I do think the approached used to block it, historical preservation and wildlife protection, are very typical NIMBY tactics.

4

keenerperkins t1_j8rmrzq wrote

Yes, particularly historic preservation. I work in the field and see it get tossed out as a last ditch effort too often to prevent housing and "undesirables" from moving in.

3

HorsieJuice t1_j8s1shj wrote

It's amazing that, even after the project has fallen through, people are still trying to get landmark status for an unremarkable building built in 1930.

2

maryellentokar t1_j8rukvr wrote

>Hampden

100 percent THIS! Concise and worded well. Definitely not NIMBYism in my opinion.

1