6 ms·
…which is why none of that value should really accrue to the homeowner. It’s a collective product, not their own.
by bugglebeetle 3y ago
…which is why none of that value should really accrue to the homeowner. It’s a collective product, not their own.
- jjav 3y agoI'm trying to interpret how this comment relates to the thread above but not clear to me. I was stating that the "character of a neighborhood" is a very tangible thing that has value to people (I don't mean value in dollars, but value in that they enjoy it and want to live there). That character attracted them to move there. So it is value that can be destroyed by greatly changing the character. There's no value accruing here, it's value being destroyed. For example I know of a few people who moved to a quiet street, very walkable and had nearly zero traffic so it was great for kids & pets and strolling around. A couple decades later that quiet no-traffic street had turned into a six lane avenue, with their front lawns right on the edge of that. The character of the neighborhood sure was changed and its value was destroyed to everyone who had chosen to live there precisely because it was quiet and had no traffic.