4 ms·

This statement is so vague as to be meaningless. Many YIMBY groups aren't willing to concede the benefits that exist, instead of making the better argument that

This statement is so vague as to be meaningless. Many YIMBY groups aren't willing to concede the benefits that exist, instead of making the better argument that the damages outweigh the benefits. "Certain types of zoning" could mean: - density regs,which I think are environmentally destructive garbage - commercial/residential segregation, which I think lead to shitty suburb-type cities that you neeed to drive around -PDR/residential ratio regs, which I think are reasonable (usually) - heavy-industrial/residential segregation. I'm personally in favor of those.

zjaffee 9y ago
The concern I'm expressing is there are a large number of people saying the phrase "abolish all zoning". That last point you made is rather important, additionally things like mandated setbacks allow cities to require there to be things like sidewalks around buildings. Other zoning includes not allowing features that could easily fall on people when walking along those sidewalks. You could go through this list for a long time, and keep finding aspects of why zoning is a good thing. Yes using zoning as a tool to prevent diversity/mixed commercial use is a bad thing, but for essentially any other reason that zoning is used, it's usually a good thing.
- closeparen 9y ago
  The overwhelming majority of zoning’s actual function in the cities in question is to reserve most land exclusively for single-family homes and parking spaces. This isn’t a minor abuse of a mostly-good concept. It is the concept. Still, I think it would be beneficial to reframe the YIMBY position as “upzoning” or “legalize apartment buildings” because the “deregulation” spin invokes a bunch of right-wing baggage unnecessarily. Relatively few of us want complete deregulation. We want different regulations.
  - joeblubaugh 9y ago
    Yeah, my city supervisor recently wrote me to say that SB87 is “supply-side, failed Ronald Reagan” economics. You have to make an argument that wins in CA and you do that by focusing on the benefits to middle class and working class people, which are numerous.
    - closeparen 9y ago
      I love that "explicitly capping supply leads to shortages" is Reaganomics now.

zjaffee 9y ago

The concern I'm expressing is there are a large number of people saying the phrase "abolish all zoning". That last point you made is rather important, additionally things like mandated setbacks allow cities to require there to be things like sidewalks around buildings. Other zoning includes not allowing features that could easily fall on people when walking along those sidewalks. You could go through this list for a long time, and keep finding aspects of why zoning is a good thing. Yes using zoning as a tool to prevent diversity/mixed commercial use is a bad thing, but for essentially any other reason that zoning is used, it's usually a good thing.

closeparen 9y ago
The overwhelming majority of zoning’s actual function in the cities in question is to reserve most land exclusively for single-family homes and parking spaces. This isn’t a minor abuse of a mostly-good concept. It is the concept. Still, I think it would be beneficial to reframe the YIMBY position as “upzoning” or “legalize apartment buildings” because the “deregulation” spin invokes a bunch of right-wing baggage unnecessarily. Relatively few of us want complete deregulation. We want different regulations.
- joeblubaugh 9y ago
  Yeah, my city supervisor recently wrote me to say that SB87 is “supply-side, failed Ronald Reagan” economics. You have to make an argument that wins in CA and you do that by focusing on the benefits to middle class and working class people, which are numerous.
  - closeparen 9y ago
    I love that "explicitly capping supply leads to shortages" is Reaganomics now.