I realize I was being somewhat inflammatory with my talk of "being in the majority" and "missing flags" - thanks for being willing to engage anyway. :-) I also

I realize I was being somewhat inflammatory with my talk of "being in the majority" and "missing flags" - thanks for being willing to engage anyway. :-) I also like your characterization of "upper-middle-class white-bread cisnormative-with-2.3-kids neighbors" - this is who we're usually speaking of when we talk about the "NIMBYs". You're right that there is a difference between starting up an oil refinery and building an apartment complex. The problem with many of these organizations you mentioned is that they weaponize their power (intended for use against oil refineries) against people, lifestyles, and forms of housing they don't like. In Seattle (as elsewhere) it is justified in order to, for example, preserve the availability of free public street parking in front of and near their home. This perceived "right" to public, shared property has extended to mobilizing against dense housing like "apodments" for fear it would "take up street parking" in my town. In my opinion, if you want parking, you should build it on your own plot and not expect the city to limit development to provide it for you free of charge. You seem to have a pretty reasonable expectation of entitlement - no 7-11, but fine with small in-home business - and I wish there were more like you out there. In practice, these "NIMBYs" move to an area circa 1970 and expect it to never change again. This is untenable in downtown SF, Seattle, or any other major metropolitan area, as I think you realize. The natural evolution of these HOAs, neighborhood associations, and like seems inevitably to be towards oppression - anyone more Laissez-faire wouldn't bother joining one in the first place.