Personally, I would have assumed that the city / council would be pretty cognizant of that and, once the city council bought in, it was likely to be ok.
Proximity- some neighborhoods are far away from suitable commercial property. Cost- the city was probably providing the land for free or at a discount (This may be a legitimate concern in and of itself) Not so many other utilities- There may have been less other utilities to contend with in the park versus a a commercial location.
As another poster pointed out, most cities have a lot of far uglier utility infrastructure and city storage build all over town.
e.g., "Housing is too expensive but I don't want them to build apartments by me" or "I want to pay less rent but I don't want them to build more apartments by me"
Notably, objecting to the building of high speed internet infrastructure doesn't fill one of these criteria unless it is widely seen as an important thing or they want high speed internet.
Needless to say, the lack of similar offerings doesn't mean much price competition for broadband speeds.