Resident sees parallels between Oakwood and TOH
To the Editor:
What’s the drive behind the city’s plan for the Top of the Hill project—the need for new housing, more retail? Would renovating existing space, or a scaled down mixed-use project be better, or just a parking garage make more sense? Are there any metrics showing that there is a market demand for these kinds of buildings?
Seems to me the driver—the appeal of the project—is that it is new, fun and exciting. Can’t we think of anything fun to build that is not heavily subsidized with our tax dollars? Are we all going to get our money’s worth of excitement out of the project?
City leaders, having despoiled the northeastern part of the city by the wrong and destructive decision not to accept Trust for Public Land’s offer and turn the former Oakwood Country Club into a Metropark, apparently are using the same decision-making skills regarding the Top of the Hill project.
God bless ‘em, they probably mean well; they just don’t know how to make a sound economic decision, nor will they listen to anyone trying to help them do so. But why should they? They were never held accountable for the colossal error regarding Oakwood, and the death sentence that it gave to Severance Town Center.
There is a difference between believing something will work, versus knowledge that makes its success likely. Taking the risk is a lot more fun when it is not your money, but the public’s.
There is no final design for the Top of the Hill project—that’s another reason to call the push to build it into question. So, there is still time for others to voice their opinion—please do so. And, best of luck to all of you who live in the area—where is the traffic and water runoff from all that asphalt and concrete going to go?