Street of Dreams fires?

So, it's a slightly controversial topic, but I thought I'd put some feelers out about it since it was a local issue. What do y'all think about the act of eco-terrorism initiated by the ELF on last year's Street of Dreams?

The entire matter makes my head spin a bit. What's to be gained by the ELF by torching homes that were specifically designed to showcase alternative building techniques? Certainly, not all of those enormous homes were the pinnacle of sustainability, but they were certainly doing something to address the issue and raise awareness. It wasn't exactly greenwashing, was it?

And if you don't think it was the ELF (despite the fact that causing economic damage is their primary mandate), who has something to gain by framing the ELF?

And for those of you whom I've confused terribly, you can catch up on your reading here:
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/snohomishcountynews/2004258337_arson04m.html

Million dollar homes on a street named Street of Dreams makes one wonder what the motivation was for billing them as green...how many ecocitizens can afford million dollar homes? Is cluster development Intentional Community or just more advantageous for developers maximizing construction on restricted properties for maximum cost? Locals say nearby wetlands were threatened by the clustering and further proposed developments so environmental impact reduction and ecosystems weren't the main consideration of the developers. 

Developers labeling controversial development and questionable construction under the title Green to make it more palatable to consumers risk controversial returns on their investment. Unfortunately, as so often happens, it's the individual sellers who took the loss. Advertising that takes advantage of social movement buzz-words to take advantage of consumer concerns to make a profit trivialize the concerns behind those buzz-words. Trivializing concerned social movements in the name of profiteering makes it very difficult for worried citizens to make their concerns heard to their local, regional and federal governments and to thereby resolve their concerns at the polls. That hurts us all. When things can't be done legally it gets more important to citizens to get them done illegally.

Large-scale arson of questionable home construction releases dangerous amounts of carbon and pollutants into the air. No good for that nearby wetland either.

What a topic!!

Although I think the tactic SUCKS (getting people pissed off tends to do less then getting people empowered), it was interesting that I talked to some Built Green folks afterwards, that Also said (besides that the tactic sucks for so many reasons)
" those houses Were ridiculous" and
"I understand why they did it, working within the system is so frustrating"

alexisavoire wrote:
how many ecocitizens can afford million dollar homes?

I don't think the target of the show homes were people that were already "ecocitizins". The target would be to make "eco" trendy, and upscale and that is a good thing. The general american population idolizes rich and famous (I know its sickening but its true) they all want to be like "them". so wouldn't it be a good thing to get those people modeling some good lifstyle habits and ideals and not wasteful harmful lifestyles and ideals. I think organizations like ELF are small minded and the people that orchestrate events like this are more in it for ego rather than eco.

And, though those houses were the Street of Dreams in the past, most of them were still sitting empty. Huge. Empty. Why hadn't all the upscale greenie folks moved in yet?

and, the location was anything but green. I think it was a rural cluster away from like, walking distance to a grocery store. In my book that means urban sprawl development. (I could be wrong about the walk to the grocer store thing, Heck, maybe the houses were even on a bus route...but would the rich folks Take the bus???)