4 ms·

A more charitable description of NYMBY-ism would be that these people are mainly against the externalities that construction projects in their neighbourhood wou

by avar 4y ago

A more charitable description of NYMBY-ism would be that these people are mainly against the externalities that construction projects in their neighbourhood would cause, as opposed to being strongly for one end result over another.

quantified 4y ago
How do you distinguish between externalities and end results? Aren't both are the sum total of the outcomes?
- gonzo41 4y ago
  It's all about the commute and the noise, and if someone who's retired is staying home all day they have A LOT of time to dwell on the small stuff like hearing a jack hammer for a few hours one day.
  - freedomben 4y ago
    I've gotten more sympathetic to this over time. A few years ago I lived in a young (and constantly under construction) neighborhood. after weeks hearing jack hammers and other construction noise, it starts to get old. especially if you work night shift and try to sleep in the morning... If it ever stopped that would be one thing, but it never does. It just moves around a bit but never stops. The noise, the bad traffic, the unpredictability, the random power outages, etc start to get really old and for the several years we lived there, it was never "done." Maybe I'm just old now, but I really understand the appeal of an established and static neighborhood that doesn't change.
    - Karrot_Kream 4y ago
      I'm not sure how likely you are to avoid this problem. Even in a static neighborhood, you need maintenance on utilities and change dealing with advances in energy and information transmission. That said, understandably there are benefits to staying in a constant neighborhood. The problem is that nobody wants to live in the static neighborhoods as there are few jobs or attractive businesses there. You can get a static area by moving to a rural area.
      - hattmall 4y ago
        That's not true at all there are tons of static neighborhoods all over major cities. But they are wildly expensive.
    - zbrozek 4y ago
      Don't worry, in those neighborhoods we have leaf blowers.
      - gonzo41 4y ago
        Electric leaf blowers kinda rock and are somewhat quieter. I feel less bad about the environment (my electricity is hydro) at least. Though I use it more in autumn than my old petrol version. So it's probably a wash.
        wongarsu 4y ago
        The emissions of leaf blowers are pretty terrible because they use small two-stroke motors designed for power-to-weight above all else. Even if you had a coal-rich electricity mix you would have to use the electric version a lot more to come close.
        zbrozek 4y ago
        I've got a backpack-wearable one from Ego and I love it. That said, my comment above was mostly a joke. :)
      - captainbland 4y ago
        Around here it seems to be a guy chasing around no more than five leaves for several hours.
    - kelnos 4y ago
      I'm not sympathetic. I've lived with a lot of construction noise over the past 5-10 years, and yes, it's annoying, but I would never object to a project on those grounds. Cities are not static, and if you want to live in one, you have to accept the fact that there will be construction noise. Invest in a good pair of comfy earplugs, or a white noise machine, or something like that. For me, it's more painful, because I tend to stay up late and wake up late. Construction usually starts between 8 and 9 in the morning, and by then I've usually only had 5 hours of sleep or so. But that's life! I can choose to move, or to adjust my sleep schedule, or just deal with it! I don't think any of this should give me the right to torpedo useful projects that others benefit from. The people that do are just exceedingly selfish and un-neighborly.
      - einpoklum 4y ago
        > I would never object to a project on those grounds. The thing is, it's not a binary. There's a lot of possible mitigation. Noise-absorbing panels can perhaps be placed around where the jackhammers work; or around the first row of residential buildings in the vicinity. Neighbor windows can be replaced with double-glazed ones, reducing noise. Of course this costs money, but it might make the difference. Another option is offering people to move away temporarily with the rentals being part of the project costs. Of course this all costs money; but there's a multi-parameter tradeoff, it's rarely just "do it" or "don't do it".
    - quantified 4y ago
      How quiet and convenient was the construction of that established neighborhood?
  - astrange 4y ago
    In my experience (studying Nextdoor) nobody cares about suburban noise pollution, which really is far worse than anything they do care about. What they care about is 1. a 2-story building might cast a shadow on something 2. a person under 50 years old might walk in front of their house, causing gentrification 3. there might be some traffic, somewhere 4. tech employees are too poor to live in their city and will lower property values 5. tech employees are too rich and will park their sports cars in front of their house, attracting crime
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

by avar 4y ago

quantified 4y ago

How do you distinguish between externalities and end results? Aren't both are the sum total of the outcomes?

gonzo41 4y ago
It's all about the commute and the noise, and if someone who's retired is staying home all day they have A LOT of time to dwell on the small stuff like hearing a jack hammer for a few hours one day.
- freedomben 4y ago
  I've gotten more sympathetic to this over time. A few years ago I lived in a young (and constantly under construction) neighborhood. after weeks hearing jack hammers and other construction noise, it starts to get old. especially if you work night shift and try to sleep in the morning... If it ever stopped that would be one thing, but it never does. It just moves around a bit but never stops. The noise, the bad traffic, the unpredictability, the random power outages, etc start to get really old and for the several years we lived there, it was never "done." Maybe I'm just old now, but I really understand the appeal of an established and static neighborhood that doesn't change.
  - Karrot_Kream 4y ago
    I'm not sure how likely you are to avoid this problem. Even in a static neighborhood, you need maintenance on utilities and change dealing with advances in energy and information transmission. That said, understandably there are benefits to staying in a constant neighborhood. The problem is that nobody wants to live in the static neighborhoods as there are few jobs or attractive businesses there. You can get a static area by moving to a rural area.
    - hattmall 4y ago
      That's not true at all there are tons of static neighborhoods all over major cities. But they are wildly expensive.
  - zbrozek 4y ago
    Don't worry, in those neighborhoods we have leaf blowers.
    - gonzo41 4y ago
      Electric leaf blowers kinda rock and are somewhat quieter. I feel less bad about the environment (my electricity is hydro) at least. Though I use it more in autumn than my old petrol version. So it's probably a wash.
      - wongarsu 4y ago
        The emissions of leaf blowers are pretty terrible because they use small two-stroke motors designed for power-to-weight above all else. Even if you had a coal-rich electricity mix you would have to use the electric version a lot more to come close.
      - zbrozek 4y ago
        I've got a backpack-wearable one from Ego and I love it. That said, my comment above was mostly a joke. :)
    - captainbland 4y ago
      Around here it seems to be a guy chasing around no more than five leaves for several hours.
  - kelnos 4y ago
    I'm not sympathetic. I've lived with a lot of construction noise over the past 5-10 years, and yes, it's annoying, but I would never object to a project on those grounds. Cities are not static, and if you want to live in one, you have to accept the fact that there will be construction noise. Invest in a good pair of comfy earplugs, or a white noise machine, or something like that. For me, it's more painful, because I tend to stay up late and wake up late. Construction usually starts between 8 and 9 in the morning, and by then I've usually only had 5 hours of sleep or so. But that's life! I can choose to move, or to adjust my sleep schedule, or just deal with it! I don't think any of this should give me the right to torpedo useful projects that others benefit from. The people that do are just exceedingly selfish and un-neighborly.
    - einpoklum 4y ago
      > I would never object to a project on those grounds. The thing is, it's not a binary. There's a lot of possible mitigation. Noise-absorbing panels can perhaps be placed around where the jackhammers work; or around the first row of residential buildings in the vicinity. Neighbor windows can be replaced with double-glazed ones, reducing noise. Of course this costs money, but it might make the difference. Another option is offering people to move away temporarily with the rentals being part of the project costs. Of course this all costs money; but there's a multi-parameter tradeoff, it's rarely just "do it" or "don't do it".
  - quantified 4y ago
    How quiet and convenient was the construction of that established neighborhood?
- astrange 4y ago
  In my experience (studying Nextdoor) nobody cares about suburban noise pollution, which really is far worse than anything they do care about. What they care about is 1. a 2-story building might cast a shadow on something 2. a person under 50 years old might walk in front of their house, causing gentrification 3. there might be some traffic, somewhere 4. tech employees are too poor to live in their city and will lower property values 5. tech employees are too rich and will park their sports cars in front of their house, attracting crime
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]