41–50 of 77 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You bought a property, not the entire neighborhood or city. Those do not belong to you. Cities change and adapt over time.
Once again, you use the passive. Change is active. Someone is doing the changing, and then they are trying to insult the people that refuse to let them have their way.
Boulder, CO is an example of #2 - they put a bunch of restrictions on growth years ago , so what 'change' looked like there is wealthy people moving in, and the working class being pushed out to 'leapfrog development' like Longmont, where they then commute in the serve the landed gentry.
You can easily see the first kind, but you have to look at statistics to see the second - income averages, price of housing, vacancy rates, what kinds of jobs your kids' friends' parents have and so on.
There are different things that could create demand to live somewhere - jobs, and amenities are common ones though.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You bought a property, not the entire neighborhood or city. Those do not belong to you. Cities change and adapt over time.
And then the current residents leave before their investments (their homes) lose value and the neighborhood as a whole loses value (or turns into a slum). People vote with their feet and their wallets.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They want to keep out the poors (read: blacks.) American racism, same as it ever was.
I think NIMBYism around the world is often "to keep out the poors", they don't have to be black. Slots in my theory that a lot of racism is just classism.
A related article on NITBYism and the built environment, but from the perspective of modern finance and how financial instruments may increase the amount of ugly buildings. https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/you-probably-own...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My experience is mostly with the car-oriented city I live in; I can't speak as much to what it might look like elsewhere.
Fair enough, just adding development of new housing in places I know is strongly opposed with the reasons given are things such as strains on existing local services, environmental impacts (e.g. on endangered or protected species), and lots of other things. I do not think this is all NIMBYism, as I think some reasons are valid. it is also true that you cannot add a lot of population to some places without changing it…
As to change, that happens when demand to live somewhere changes, one way or another. See my other comment where I discuss an increase in the demand:
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Once again, you use the passive. Change is active. Someone is doing the changing, and then they are trying to insult the people that refuse to let them have their way.
I explained two kinds of change, one that is more visible, where housing is built to accommodate people moving in, and a second kind where supply does not meet demand so the people change. Boulder, CO is an example of #2 - they put a bunch of restrictions on growth years ago , so what 'change' looked like there is wealthy people moving in, and the working class being pushed out to 'leapfrog development' like Longmont…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fair enough, just adding development of new housing in places I know is strongly opposed with the reasons given are things such as strains on existing local services, environmental impacts (e.g. on endangered or protected species), and lots of other things. I do not think this is all NIMBYism, as I think some reasons are valid. it is also true that you cannot add a lot of population to some places without changing it…
If you are building outwards, 'sprawl', the environmental concerns have some validity, I think. But most of the NIMBYism I see is people opposing, say, an apartment building right in the middle of town. That's actual a big win for the environment ( https://www.sightline.org/apartments-are-the-climate-solutio... ) - they can be more walkable/less car dependant, require less resources, don't pave over farms or forests,…
With regard to the environmental impact, I was not thinking about climate change but things such as endangering habitats of rare species.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What about "I bought this property because I like this environment to live here" is difficult to understand?
You bought a property, not the entire neighborhood or city. Those do not belong to you. Cities change and adapt over time.