The Boston Globe. (2021, August 8). Environmental justice advocates seek to block development proposed for Hyde Park, call on city to act. Retrieved August 9, 2021, from https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/08/08/metro/environmental-justice-advocates-seek-block-development-proposed-hyde-park-call-city-act/
This article is heavily focused on a very specific environmental injustice issue in Hyde Park, and the disagreements that arose in trying to preserve the trees in this park. The author explains the situation of Hyde Park and those who lived near it, as well as the decisions that were going to be made on removing trees to create more housing. Some disagreed with this because they wanted to preserve the trees and environment of the park, but others argued that the trees those wanted to preserve were not worth the new housing that would be built.
This article was only focused on one specific case of environmental injustice, and about the disagreements that arose within. I liked that the author talked about how there can be disagreements and multiple perspectives that arise when trying to resolve an environmental injustice, because not everything is something that everyone can agree on. However, I did agree that new housing, possibly for homeless people or for those who couldn’t afford other housing, would be a greater benefit than preserving trees in the park that may have been invasive or not a benefit to the environment.
It’s interesting how there are multiple points of view on the subject of cutting down the trees. Was it promised that the land in Hyde Park would be used for the homeless or those who couldn’t afford housing or was that just a good idea that you had?
I agree that is important to view all the different perspectives of an argument. Everything is worth a listen, and issues should be compromised. What do you think an ideal compromise would have been in this situation?
Thanks for reading! Although it wasn’t promised, the idea that workforce housing would be build was a proposal. Because people had found that the park’s condition was not necessarily worth preserving (disease ridden, contained invasive species), I personally think that the benefit of housing would outweigh the benefit of preserving the trees.