3 ms·

The article speaks in generalities and in doing so ignores the concrete impacts of development on people, and loses track of the core underlying forces that exp

The article speaks in generalities and in doing so ignores the concrete impacts of development on people, and loses track of the core underlying forces that explain the real and reasonable reasons why progressives may oppose new housing. What is often happening here is that low income progressives in old rent controlled housing are literally being faced with being evicted and displaced for new developments that they cannot afford. It should be no wonder why someone would oppose being thrown out of their home, or why a project kitty corner to them would bring fears that "they're next." The underlying problem is that the neighbourhoods that developers are seeking to build in are ones with cheap land, which not coincidentally is where the most working class, poor and most vulnerable people live. If we saw developers going to rich low density mansion districts to redevelop into apartments you certainly wouldn't see "Left-NIMBYs" complaining! Of course this never happens. So you have the Left YIMBYs that can afford these new market priced condos upset and wondering why low income progressives won't roll over and let themselves evicted. Maybe wealthy left YIMBYs should focus their activism on redeveloping other areas of cities that wouldn't harm the working class and poor?

kmeisthax 6y ago
The problem is that the conversation never gets this far. By the time you start talking about upzoning a neighborhood with actual money in it, everyone who lives there will be screaming for the head of the head of the local city planning commissioner on a pike, and whatever land developer was interested in the project will quietly look for another poor neighborhood to pull a Robert Moses on. A lot of city governments are effectively gentleman's clubs: they serve the interests of the people who can afford to live and vote there, not the interests of the people as a whole. State or federal prohibitions on certain zoning restrictions might be a way to go around that, as the people who can't afford to live in certain cities would still be able to outvote those who can. I keep hearing California proposing to force city governments' hands on density; but it keeps getting stymied for stupid reasons. Having a "no reducing affordable housing units" rule should still be allowed, but a "no dense housing" rule should be banned as a clear attempt at fixing prices within a neighborhood.
- Tiktaalik 6y ago
  The solution is to organize the working class and bring in representatives that can tackle established wealth and protect the poor. There's less of wealth than the working class but the working class needs to find their voice and be able to show up and vote. Sadly with so much wealth and power putting their thumb on the scale it's an incredible challenge. We've seen that this past year with the way wealth has been able to influence Prop 22 and the Democratic Primaries.
presentation 6y ago
But that’s not even the case... when I lived in SF and went to public housing hearings, NIMBYs would show up in droves to protest housing being built literally amongst skyscrapers in the financial district on the Embarcadero, which is about as far as one could get to a working-class, poor neighborhood where people will be displaced. NIMBYism in SF has gone far beyond worries about eviction into an all out war to fossilize SF as it is today.
- Tiktaalik 6y ago
  Well that's nimbyism of another sort. Aside from the concerns of the working class that may be pushed to nimby to protect what little they have, there remains the established rich which nimby for a whole other set of reasons.
hedora 6y ago
If you make housing scarce, then housing will be more expensive. I don’t have any sympathy for neighborhood groups that are anti-transit, anti-road, anti-development, pro-rent control, and pro-prop 13. All of those things helped turn bay area housing into a giant pyramid scheme. Now that housing is expensive and scarce, the people that voted in those changes are worried they might have to move, forcing them to pay the bill like the rest of the marks. The reality is that demographics are shifting towards people that did not grow up here, and that are tired of paying out the nose for housing. Eventually, newcomers will manage to vote in a massive redistribution of wealth. The longer it takes, the more painful it will be.
- Tiktaalik 6y ago
  You're talking about right-nimbys that have established wealth. Those are the people that own houses that support prop13. Doesn't matter if they vote democrat. They're not left and it's not the left nimby that I or this article is talking about.
  - hedora 6y ago
    I haven’t met any right NIMBYs that are against roads or for rent control. I’ve met many people on the left (homeowners or not) that think we should have fewer roads and more rent control.

kmeisthax 6y ago

The problem is that the conversation never gets this far. By the time you start talking about upzoning a neighborhood with actual money in it, everyone who lives there will be screaming for the head of the head of the local city planning commissioner on a pike, and whatever land developer was interested in the project will quietly look for another poor neighborhood to pull a Robert Moses on. A lot of city governments are effectively gentleman's clubs: they serve the interests of the people who can afford to live and vote there, not the interests of the people as a whole. State or federal prohibitions on certain zoning restrictions might be a way to go around that, as the people who can't afford to live in certain cities would still be able to outvote those who can. I keep hearing California proposing to force city governments' hands on density; but it keeps getting stymied for stupid reasons. Having a "no reducing affordable housing units" rule should still be allowed, but a "no dense housing" rule should be banned as a clear attempt at fixing prices within a neighborhood.

Tiktaalik 6y ago
The solution is to organize the working class and bring in representatives that can tackle established wealth and protect the poor. There's less of wealth than the working class but the working class needs to find their voice and be able to show up and vote. Sadly with so much wealth and power putting their thumb on the scale it's an incredible challenge. We've seen that this past year with the way wealth has been able to influence Prop 22 and the Democratic Primaries.

presentation 6y ago

But that’s not even the case... when I lived in SF and went to public housing hearings, NIMBYs would show up in droves to protest housing being built literally amongst skyscrapers in the financial district on the Embarcadero, which is about as far as one could get to a working-class, poor neighborhood where people will be displaced. NIMBYism in SF has gone far beyond worries about eviction into an all out war to fossilize SF as it is today.

Tiktaalik 6y ago
Well that's nimbyism of another sort. Aside from the concerns of the working class that may be pushed to nimby to protect what little they have, there remains the established rich which nimby for a whole other set of reasons.

hedora 6y ago

If you make housing scarce, then housing will be more expensive. I don’t have any sympathy for neighborhood groups that are anti-transit, anti-road, anti-development, pro-rent control, and pro-prop 13. All of those things helped turn bay area housing into a giant pyramid scheme. Now that housing is expensive and scarce, the people that voted in those changes are worried they might have to move, forcing them to pay the bill like the rest of the marks. The reality is that demographics are shifting towards people that did not grow up here, and that are tired of paying out the nose for housing. Eventually, newcomers will manage to vote in a massive redistribution of wealth. The longer it takes, the more painful it will be.

Tiktaalik 6y ago
You're talking about right-nimbys that have established wealth. Those are the people that own houses that support prop13. Doesn't matter if they vote democrat. They're not left and it's not the left nimby that I or this article is talking about.
- hedora 6y ago
  I haven’t met any right NIMBYs that are against roads or for rent control. I’ve met many people on the left (homeowners or not) that think we should have fewer roads and more rent control.