3 ms·

Exactly. The root cause of NIMBYism is not preservation of property values. It is preservation of neighborhood character -- low density, peace and quiet, low tr

Exactly. The root cause of NIMBYism is not preservation of property values. It is preservation of neighborhood character -- low density, peace and quiet, low traffic, etc. People who just spent hundreds of thousands of dollars for a down payment on a house in the suburbs do not want their neighborhood to change into something that is not a suburb. If they wanted to live in a dense urban area, they would have done that. As housing gets more expensive, this tendency will only increase -- if you had to work really hard for a really long time to buy a house, you will probably be more unhappy to find out that your neighborhood is changing than if you didn't have to try that hard to get into it -- especially when your options to move elsewhere are at least as expensive.

JKCalhoun 4y ago
The obvious solution then is to convert areas that already lack "character", are high density, noisy, high-traffic, etc. The article points out alleys, train underpasses. Why does this not happen in the U.S.? Is that also NIMBYism?
- twblalock 4y ago
  NIMBYism is not restricted to rich people in the suburbs. Poor people who live in areas that can be revitalized also frequently oppose new construction because they worry that if their neighborhoods become more attractive to people with higher incomes, gentrification will force them out. That has happened to people, so it's a valid concern.
ajmurmann 4y ago
> People who just spent hundreds of thousands of dollars for a down payment on a house in the suburbs do not want their neighborhood to change into something that is not a suburb. If they wanted to live in a dense urban area, they would have done that. I did spent a lot of money on a house in the suburbs. I would have preferred to buy something more dense and walkable, but getting anything decent like that was not an option. Because so much low-density gets built and the higher infrastructure need per unit in low-density areas gets subsidized by hifh-density areas, the economics work out greatly in favor of the suburbs in a lot of places.

JKCalhoun 4y ago

The obvious solution then is to convert areas that already lack "character", are high density, noisy, high-traffic, etc. The article points out alleys, train underpasses. Why does this not happen in the U.S.? Is that also NIMBYism?

twblalock 4y ago
NIMBYism is not restricted to rich people in the suburbs. Poor people who live in areas that can be revitalized also frequently oppose new construction because they worry that if their neighborhoods become more attractive to people with higher incomes, gentrification will force them out. That has happened to people, so it's a valid concern.

ajmurmann 4y ago

> People who just spent hundreds of thousands of dollars for a down payment on a house in the suburbs do not want their neighborhood to change into something that is not a suburb. If they wanted to live in a dense urban area, they would have done that. I did spent a lot of money on a house in the suburbs. I would have preferred to buy something more dense and walkable, but getting anything decent like that was not an option. Because so much low-density gets built and the higher infrastructure need per unit in low-density areas gets subsidized by hifh-density areas, the economics work out greatly in favor of the suburbs in a lot of places.