3 ms·

Many NIMBYs aren't purely financially driven. What they want is for their neighborhood to stay exactly as it was when they moved in, with the same type of peopl

Many NIMBYs aren't purely financially driven. What they want is for their neighborhood to stay exactly as it was when they moved in, with the same type of people, and same amount of traffic. Bay Area has plenty of this type. Many of them already have had property value skyrocket (50K -> 2M is not uncommon), so they can just have both (high property values, and preserve their neighborhood exactly as they want it).

bangoimby 5y ago
Honestly I think this would be fine. The problem is they allow FANG to build giant offices, which brings new 400k-income jobs and bids up the restricted supply. I think they should be forced to choose one or the other. Keep their SFH and say no to FANG, or accept townhomes and condos to balance out the new jobs.
- kelnos 5y ago
  This is also in part due to tax revenue. Because of Prop 13, residential units in CA generate very little property tax revenue (revenue which doesn't grow much until the property changes hands, which is unpredictable). Commercial units don't have this problem, so municipalities can depend on a decent amount of property tax, with predictable increases over time.
  - bangoimby 5y ago
    Prop 13 applies to commercial property too, I'm pretty sure. I think commercial property just doesn't burden the city. A Google office has private security, a fire suppression system, and doesn't house kids who need to attend the school district.
    - jandrese 5y ago
      Commercial property does burden the transit systems (LOL for CA) and roads. The road issue is pernicious because they take up enormous amounts of real estate to begin with and are extremely difficult to expand after the fact. This is one of the primary arguments against building high-rise housing in SoCal. Neither the transit systems nor the roads are able to deal with the additional people. The roads probably never will at this point--there is no room to expand them. Yet the transit systems are woefully underdeveloped for the size of the population and would take years to catch up even if the local politics supported them.
pkaye 5y ago
I see a lot of this from People on Nextdoor. They see their favorite landmark demolished to build yet another block of apartments and condos. I've seen a sporting goods store gone, a furniture store gone. A bowling alley was saved but it will be built around. Some places I've seen low density industrial being replaced with housing. Some people fear that at the end it will just be housing and big box stores left.

bangoimby 5y ago

Honestly I think this would be fine. The problem is they allow FANG to build giant offices, which brings new 400k-income jobs and bids up the restricted supply. I think they should be forced to choose one or the other. Keep their SFH and say no to FANG, or accept townhomes and condos to balance out the new jobs.

kelnos 5y ago
This is also in part due to tax revenue. Because of Prop 13, residential units in CA generate very little property tax revenue (revenue which doesn't grow much until the property changes hands, which is unpredictable). Commercial units don't have this problem, so municipalities can depend on a decent amount of property tax, with predictable increases over time.
- bangoimby 5y ago
  Prop 13 applies to commercial property too, I'm pretty sure. I think commercial property just doesn't burden the city. A Google office has private security, a fire suppression system, and doesn't house kids who need to attend the school district.
  - jandrese 5y ago
    Commercial property does burden the transit systems (LOL for CA) and roads. The road issue is pernicious because they take up enormous amounts of real estate to begin with and are extremely difficult to expand after the fact. This is one of the primary arguments against building high-rise housing in SoCal. Neither the transit systems nor the roads are able to deal with the additional people. The roads probably never will at this point--there is no room to expand them. Yet the transit systems are woefully underdeveloped for the size of the population and would take years to catch up even if the local politics supported them.

pkaye 5y ago

I see a lot of this from People on Nextdoor. They see their favorite landmark demolished to build yet another block of apartments and condos. I've seen a sporting goods store gone, a furniture store gone. A bowling alley was saved but it will be built around. Some places I've seen low density industrial being replaced with housing. Some people fear that at the end it will just be housing and big box stores left.