You may as well argue against having parks because one happened to have been built on similar ground. This instance might just have been recovering from a bad situation, but that doesn't mean it's a bad idea in general. Granted, it would be better to set aside space for it at the planning stage.
> This isn't to say that I'm not happy for them; I just don't want to find myself in the same situation
I'm not arguing against this happening, I am happy they are improving their city. All I'm saying is that I hope I never find my citing in a position where we say "whelp, we have massive chunks of deserted unkempt land, lets knock down these abandoned condemned buildings and make a forest". While that action is an improvement, being in that position in the first place implies a shitty situation all around.
Kind of like how somebody getting a new fancy robot arm is great, but I certainly don't want to get one myself because that would imply that I had lost my arm.
