Quote:
Originally Posted by Jets4Life
Have you ever been to Calgary? It's a city in Western Canada that has over a dozen treatment centres in close proximity, or even in residential communities. The centres have been there for decades, and property values never have significantly decreased. Here is one study done by the US National Institute of Health:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3205983/ |
You have to look at how much less they may have increased relative to other neighbourhoods. Also, depending on buyer awareness, it would also affect time spent on the market. Real estate has pretty much gone uppppp throughout history. Point is, it's a potential hindrance for a homeowner's or homebuyer's perceived value of a home, which has effects. Period.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jets4Life
I think it is obvious most people in St.James support this initiative. You cannot look at 50 NIMBY's protesting, and call them the "majority of residents."]
|
Swap out "majority" with "strong opposition". It's not a stretch of the imagination so you can stop pretending it is.
It's obvious to anyone that it offers zero upward push to someone's home value. Positively no one thinks "I hope my neighbourhood has an addictions treatment centre. Schools, playgrounds, parks, perhaps retail or stransit, sure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jets4Life
NIMBYism 101. Can you provide any proof neighborhoods with a treatment centre have had an increase in crime, or a decrease in property value?
|
You can stop trying to catchphrase this. We usually discuss NIMBYism in regards to property and urban development, not social matters. Still Nimby, but noticeably different.
Some studies decry a correlation to crime. Good! But a strong contingent of people living near DTC's tell a completely different story.
Point is, even perception has an affect.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jets4Life
...and there are equal amounts of addicts in your area of Winnipeg. The addicts in North Main/Downtown just happen to do it out in the open. Meanwhile, there is probably someone you know a couple of houses down engaging in cocaine or meth. Perhaps even opiates. Many are not getting checked into treatment either, but as long as they do it indoors, you can always pretend it does not happen on your street.
One last note I should make. Were you aware that putting a liquor store up at the corner strip mall is far more damaging to a residential neighborhood than any proposed treatment centre, especially when it comes to criminal activity? However, when is the last time the community was up in arms, when a new liquor store was constructed by the local strip mall.
Source: https://hub.jhu.edu/magazine/2016/sp...ament-centers/ |
I highly doubt there are equal numbers in my area of town. More than the common person assumes, sure. Also, an addict who can keep their shit together is a probably different thing than an addict that requires treatment and lives in poverty. It makes a big difference that they do it in their house and not out and about.
Literally the opening line on google (conducted a prelim search) was "Drug treatment centres aren't always welcome neighbours" in the tagline. It was that very article.
Secondly, what liqour stores are we talking about?
Private ones in Baltimore, the shittiest city in the continent. No kidding those mom and pops booze joints have more crime! Those places are DUMPS! While I'm sure the Ellice LC has some struggles, by and large it's a quality tenant in Winnipeg that pays good rent. Not even remotely comparable.
Furthermore, it's like the pro-weed crowd saying "well, alcohol's more dangerous, so..." Well no kidding! But it's here to stay! By comparing a DTC to a poor neighbourhood liquor store you're hurting its case. We all know shitty liquor stores are bad, and the mere comparison validates concern for an addictions centre.
Again, I'm for the centre, but also because it's no on my street. I can understand the opposition, although I hope they stand down.