Because
a) the only proposal publicly available on their website is the old one
b) the new proposal was not much more than a revised overhead shot, and only saw the light of day at one public meeting so far
c) the proposal has not been part of the OMB process to date - they have simply been asking for a reversion of zoning.
If they make the new proposal public (and available for others to see on their website for example), then I will revise my original post. But I have to point out that the new proposal still does not fit in with the inno park zoning. They were verbally adamant that they could not move forward unless they had two large single storey retail buildings in their development (they did not specify but the implication was grocery and "automotive" which will likely be cantire). As a result, the revised plan they showed at the meeting was still mainly single storey with loads of parking - but they added a second storey to a few of the smaller buildings. Well, you can see earlier in the thread - it's still not anywhere near the league of the MIP as far as density and diversity of uses...
So let's hold on and see what the MIP attracts. It's worth waiting for. Lets not let these guys cash in "on the ground floor" without giving anything back to the city (in the form of future development promise).
Once the MIP is up and running, that land is going to be premium - and to pry it out of Trinity's hands is not going to be easy. We are setting ourselves up for disappointment if we give in to them now