7 ms·

> Those changes are fine and should be decided by those affected, not some set of interlopers Those "interlopers" are people's sons and daughters who want to l

> Those changes are fine and should be decided by those affected, not some set of interlopers Those "interlopers" are people's sons and daughters who want to live where they grew up, growing families that need more space, the retired on a fixed income, the working poor struggling to stay housed, those who spend hours commuting, etc. All of these people are your neighbors, not the enemy. > who just want to basically steal the value that has been created and maintained over decades or centuries. That depends on your definition of "value". Do you mean the well-being of everyone in the community? or the market price of your house? For many people jobs, amenities, and culture make for desirable neighborhoods. Single family single use zoning doesn't contribute to any of that.

toss1 5y ago
>>Those "interlopers" are ... I notice that your example start with actual locals growing out of a locale to people who have nothing to do with the locale. Whether someone is enemy or friend all depends on attitude. Are you trying to work with and build upon what the previous generations have built, or are you trying to merely appropriate it because you don't like the price of single-family zoning? >>That depends on your definition of "value". Do you mean the well-being of everyone in the community? or the market price of your house? The market price of the house has little to do with it (and could plausibly increase w/more building by inducing local demand). For me, and everyone I know, market value is not motivating. What IS motivating is threats to the CHARACTER and ENVIRONMENT of the locale - especially the environment - open land, walking trails, actual wildlife and an ecosystem hosting endangered species, butterflies, birds, etc.. THIS is real value to the people who choose to live here. And in fact, the property values are not that great, and certainly have not increased like other areas. So, NO, property values are NOT even close to the top priority of me or anyone I know in this or any other such town I lived in. Yet, in your limited understanding of the issues, property values are all you see. >>the retired on a fixed income, the working poor struggling to stay housed, ihe town I currently live in and surrounding towns have all approved some senior and low-income housing developments (and denied other damaging proposals). >>those who spend hours commuting, etc. Yes, from here commuting is hours to the city center; about 45min in an off time, but nearly two hours at commute time. So, building more here will just create more massive commuting issues. In fact, an MIT study in the area found that it was only the addition of about 250 commuters in an area of three adjacent towns that caused the commuting traffic to go from doable to regularly 'gelling' into intolerable jams — literally just over 100 extra units now regularly extra choked traffic in the whole region. >>For many people jobs, amenities, and culture make for desirable neighborhoods. Single family single use zoning doesn't contribute to any of that. Fine, so find an area that doesn't have single-family zoning and build that up for more jobs, amenities and culture. Do not presume that you have some right to come and literally trash the place because the population density and pricing is not to your liking. That is no different than some developer saying that he should be able to put up a condo development, strip mall, and office zone in a National Park because he thinks it has too low a population density.
- mikem170 5y ago
  Your note above contains a lot of assumptions about what I think, and vitriol, words like steal, destroy, trash, etc. This seems to be something that you are emotional about. Lots of people think it's immoral for neighbors to be able to micromanage the living spaces of other neighbors outside of basic safety issues. I'm not sure how you'd defend imposing your will on other people just because you can at any given moment. Who are you to hijack the decades and centuries that goes into a city, like you mentioned, and freeze it in time for your convenience, at the expense of others who were born into the same society you were. We're all here together, you can't morally just marginalize people you're afraid of. I stand by my original statement that I think it's wrong for you to characterize everyone who doesn't agree with the way zoning has evolved in this country over the last 100 years as an interloper. We live in a democracy. These are fellow citizens, people who are just as important as you and me. I'm not in favor of big developers or corporations or profits. I don't want to build a high rise or a factory next to your house. I am in favor of lots more real neighborhoods, as opposed to suburban developer big-box retail car centric sprawl. I am opposed to single use zoning. If I had a magic wand I think that the way the Japanese do zoning is much better than the way it has evolved in the U.S. [0]. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfm2xCKOCNk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfm2xCKOCNk
  - toss1 5y ago
    One more fallacy you have posted: >>Lots of people think it's immoral for neighbors to be able to micromanage the living spaces of other neighbors outside of basic safety issues. I'm not sure how you'd defend imposing your will on other people just because you can at any given moment. No one is micromanaging the living spaces of other neighbors. As you say, it's a democracy. I have lived in towns that had zoning, and voted it out. Some years later, there were meetings where people were asking "If we had zoning, this siht would not have happened, would it?", but they did decide to create zoning, then abolish it, then reinstate it. It is simply false to imply that I have some micromanaging power over my neighbor, beyond the democratically agreed rules that require them to apply for variances to the zoning rules, and allow abutters to submit comments on those variance requests, which must also be considered. In Switzerland, you will drive around and see poles standing on land. These are marking the corners of a proposed new building and must be erected for months before a hearing on the building, so everyone can comment and post objections, requests for adjustments, etc. before permission is granted to build. This is not some kind of unfair micromanagement, it is taking into consideration everyone's local concerns before making a decision. Zoning does not exist as you imaging because of petty concerns over property value and fear of unknown people. It exists because too many people will build things that negatively affect their neighbors, and are democratically introduced. I get to vote on them in my town, and you in yours. I don't get to vote in your town, and you don't get to vote in mine, any more than I get to vote in Switzerland, or some Swiss guy gets to vote here.

toss1 5y ago

>>Those "interlopers" are ... I notice that your example start with actual locals growing out of a locale to people who have nothing to do with the locale. Whether someone is enemy or friend all depends on attitude. Are you trying to work with and build upon what the previous generations have built, or are you trying to merely appropriate it because you don't like the price of single-family zoning? >>That depends on your definition of "value". Do you mean the well-being of everyone in the community? or the market price of your house? The market price of the house has little to do with it (and could plausibly increase w/more building by inducing local demand). For me, and everyone I know, market value is not motivating. What IS motivating is threats to the CHARACTER and ENVIRONMENT of the locale - especially the environment - open land, walking trails, actual wildlife and an ecosystem hosting endangered species, butterflies, birds, etc.. THIS is real value to the people who choose to live here. And in fact, the property values are not that great, and certainly have not increased like other areas. So, NO, property values are NOT even close to the top priority of me or anyone I know in this or any other such town I lived in. Yet, in your limited understanding of the issues, property values are all you see. >>the retired on a fixed income, the working poor struggling to stay housed, ihe town I currently live in and surrounding towns have all approved some senior and low-income housing developments (and denied other damaging proposals). >>those who spend hours commuting, etc. Yes, from here commuting is hours to the city center; about 45min in an off time, but nearly two hours at commute time. So, building more here will just create more massive commuting issues. In fact, an MIT study in the area found that it was only the addition of about 250 commuters in an area of three adjacent towns that caused the commuting traffic to go from doable to regularly 'gelling' into intolerable jams — literally just over 100 extra units now regularly extra choked traffic in the whole region. >>For many people jobs, amenities, and culture make for desirable neighborhoods. Single family single use zoning doesn't contribute to any of that. Fine, so find an area that doesn't have single-family zoning and build that up for more jobs, amenities and culture. Do not presume that you have some right to come and literally trash the place because the population density and pricing is not to your liking. That is no different than some developer saying that he should be able to put up a condo development, strip mall, and office zone in a National Park because he thinks it has too low a population density.

mikem170 5y ago
Your note above contains a lot of assumptions about what I think, and vitriol, words like steal, destroy, trash, etc. This seems to be something that you are emotional about. Lots of people think it's immoral for neighbors to be able to micromanage the living spaces of other neighbors outside of basic safety issues. I'm not sure how you'd defend imposing your will on other people just because you can at any given moment. Who are you to hijack the decades and centuries that goes into a city, like you mentioned, and freeze it in time for your convenience, at the expense of others who were born into the same society you were. We're all here together, you can't morally just marginalize people you're afraid of. I stand by my original statement that I think it's wrong for you to characterize everyone who doesn't agree with the way zoning has evolved in this country over the last 100 years as an interloper. We live in a democracy. These are fellow citizens, people who are just as important as you and me. I'm not in favor of big developers or corporations or profits. I don't want to build a high rise or a factory next to your house. I am in favor of lots more real neighborhoods, as opposed to suburban developer big-box retail car centric sprawl. I am opposed to single use zoning. If I had a magic wand I think that the way the Japanese do zoning is much better than the way it has evolved in the U.S. [0]. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfm2xCKOCNk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfm2xCKOCNk
- toss1 5y ago
  One more fallacy you have posted: >>Lots of people think it's immoral for neighbors to be able to micromanage the living spaces of other neighbors outside of basic safety issues. I'm not sure how you'd defend imposing your will on other people just because you can at any given moment. No one is micromanaging the living spaces of other neighbors. As you say, it's a democracy. I have lived in towns that had zoning, and voted it out. Some years later, there were meetings where people were asking "If we had zoning, this siht would not have happened, would it?", but they did decide to create zoning, then abolish it, then reinstate it. It is simply false to imply that I have some micromanaging power over my neighbor, beyond the democratically agreed rules that require them to apply for variances to the zoning rules, and allow abutters to submit comments on those variance requests, which must also be considered. In Switzerland, you will drive around and see poles standing on land. These are marking the corners of a proposed new building and must be erected for months before a hearing on the building, so everyone can comment and post objections, requests for adjustments, etc. before permission is granted to build. This is not some kind of unfair micromanagement, it is taking into consideration everyone's local concerns before making a decision. Zoning does not exist as you imaging because of petty concerns over property value and fear of unknown people. It exists because too many people will build things that negatively affect their neighbors, and are democratically introduced. I get to vote on them in my town, and you in yours. I don't get to vote in your town, and you don't get to vote in mine, any more than I get to vote in Switzerland, or some Swiss guy gets to vote here.