Wednesday, October 5, 2016
To the Editor:
In response to the letter from Chris Nielsen, the false assumption is that more density is unavoidable. Starting with this lie of course everything else seems reasonable. Remove the B.S. and the story changes. Instead of asking where we want “more density to occur” the question we should be asking is do we WANT more density?
We have control over what kind of city we live in. The city council wants us to believe their idea of “development” is a unavoidable. The implication is that if we don’t build more housing there will be homeless people walking the streets.
Instead, the city council wants to let builders over populate an already stressed area of town while giving away our public funds to private builders in subsidies and tax breaks.
Where will they park? Where will their children go to school? How will the water, sewer, police, fire and ambulance services be effected? What about crime? Adding thousands of people would seem to be a sure way to increase the crime rate. Will renters be willing to invest in Shoreline or will they just move somewhere else when things get bad? And the big question, is there even one city council member living within the affected area? I doubt it.
Why wasn’t this put to a vote by the residents of Shoreline? So, who benefits from this? The builders the council catering to. Who loses? Anyone who drives or lives in Shoreline anywhere near this mess.
Does the city council represent us or themselves? Are we really willing to give control over the whole city to just seven individuals? I’m not. How about you Chris?