Most of the Minneapolis Park system as we know it was underpinned by speculative real estate development. And yet, 100 years later, we're still enjoying it. What a bunch of rubes we are. Don't we know that it helped rich people make money?
I'm obviously failing to avoid this thread...
Can you substantiate this post? Links? Books? I'm not saying the post is false but it it seems very broad ("Most of the...underpinned by..."). I have no doubt that you could find examples of speculative development being "underpinned" by a park but to say "most" and apply that assertion to development patterns over 100 years ago sounds dubious.
I'm sure there is a shot at my frustrations in this post but I'm having trouble understanding what it is. Is the "shot" that I'm a rube for being angry at developers for making money off of a park and/or I'm naive for not understanding capitalism? You are suggesting that rich people in Minneapolis created "most" of the park system to bolster their development plans 100+ years ago. On the surface, this claim seems ridiculous but I'll read up if there is any evidence for the claim. I don't have a landscape architecture degree or an urban planning degree so perhaps you can substantiate the claim and/or it is a well known fact in such circles. Again, I'm having trouble reading the point of this post...
I'm open to criticism/ridicule but either you haven't read my earlier posts (no blame there) or I'm being inarticulate. I'll try to put in in a crucible:
I'm angry because:
1. The images/renderings presented that were used to win approval for the whole development are NOT representative of the actual "park" that is emerging.
2. "Bait and switch" imagery/tactics are disgusting and should be decried by anyone who cares about best possible urbanism.
I'm not now, nor have ever been against people making money. What I AM against is false imagery that wins projects and then getting a much worse project than advertised. *IF* I'm reading your post correctly it sounds like you are willing to just shrug your shoulders and accept these kinds of tactics because capitalism. Apologies if I'm missing the point but the process that you seem willing to accept is not acceptable to me - not that it matters to anyone because I'm a (relatively) powerless/penniless individual.
City-building/great urbanism seems impossible when capitulation to the whims of developers/capitalism is the default but maybe we have different definitions of great urbanism.