Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Aimless78 t1_ivi1986 wrote

The problem is that the land deeds for University Heights have a clause written into them that the property cannot be zoned for commercial or multiple family residences. The original wording for those deeds is nearly 100 years old and the developer is trying to change it without the people's input through the ballot box.

19

Ballyhoo-45 t1_ivkf9xa wrote

Well today is the day voters approve it so will all of you be quiet after that? You don’t own the roads, the park, or the development in this town. It’s getting a little obnoxious.

−7

417SKCFAN t1_ivky0ne wrote

You are confusing the Galloway Village zoning and efforts at National and Sunshine, there is no ballot measure related to this property currently.

4

Aimless78 t1_ivntsy5 wrote

I am not confusing the ballot measures. If this measure had been approved it would give an open door to affect the zoning of this area as well. Why do you think the people in University Heights were so opposed to it?

0

417SKCFAN t1_ivo9x69 wrote

Springfield has a specific path to override the zoning board, the Galloway project ended up getting 70% no. Turns out developers aren’t just able to do whatever they want.

1

Aimless78 t1_ivkuu62 wrote

And the developer doesn't own any of that either so maybe he ought to stop pushing developments in areas that they aren't wanted. There are plenty of areas that are available for development that don't require changing the zoning or need special consideration.

0

Ballyhoo-45 t1_ivl83sv wrote

When you don’t understand how development works…

2

Aimless78 t1_ivl8oos wrote

I completely understand it but I also understand keeping historical things preserved. You are probably the type of person that would destroy a beautiful old building that has been around for 100+ years and put up a sterile ugly building in the name of progress.

2

Ballyhoo-45 t1_ivldh0w wrote

Development is meant to meet the needs of the entire community. You may get a voice, but it’s far from the only one considered. City leaders, engineers and the business and education community fully support this project.Full speed ahead!

−2

Aimless78 t1_ivlih43 wrote

Yes but sometimes those people don't have the community in mind They have kickbacks, bribes, and just pure profit in mind with disregard to what is needed or wanted.

2

Aimless78 t1_ivlio3y wrote

And I love how you are saying my voice is only one voice, which you don't want to hear but yet your voice should be heard and valued more. Why on Earth is your opinion any more valid than mine? (Hint: it is not!)

2

Ballyhoo-45 t1_ivm2hmz wrote

That pure conjecture and you know it. Can’t you disagree with real arguments?

For the rest of the city, this is an objective issue about development and business and the needs of Springfield. For you and your neighbors it is an emotional decision.

1

Aimless78 t1_ivnugr6 wrote

I don't even live in that neighborhood so it is not emotional for me and my neighbors. I do feel that we don't need to tear down every old building in the name of progress. Take a look at thr apartments they built where the YWCA used to be downtown, they were built so quickly and so poorly that they have had nothing but problems since being built. Just what the students that occupy that building want because nothing says home like backed up sewage, electrical issues, and other problems.

2

Aimless78 t1_ivnt1ac wrote

Well you can be quiet now the people have spoken with their votes!

1