5 ms·

I wonder if this idea could help overturn the negative incentives behind NIMBYism: 1. Homeowners in functional local democracies block new construction because

I wonder if this idea could help overturn the negative incentives behind NIMBYism: 1. Homeowners in functional local democracies block new construction because it reduces the prices of their homes in exchange for no benefit to them, but... 2. When new, higher-density homes are constructed the total value of all houses increases much more than the total decline in the price of all old houses. This implies... 3. There is enough money available in the overall venture of new construction to compensate previous owners for the decline in prices, and although there could be many ways to accomplish it, 4. A tax on changes in assessed value that can go negative if the change is below a threshold, where the threshold is set so that the city collects net-zero revenue from this tax, would result in lump sum payments from developers (who dramatically increase assessed value) to people for whom the growth in their home prices had been depressed below the city's average by a nearby supply increase (whose assessed value would increase the least in that year if there was any truth to their objections).

appreciatorBus 2y ago
For those motivated purely by fear of their home no longer increasing in value, faster than inflation, a scheme like this might help soften their opposition. Unfortunately, the coalition of people who oppose housing is not purely financially motivated. There our groups of people for whom low density living is all about status and excluding others, and there is no amount of money that would compensate them for loss of status and exclusion. There are others for whom the argument is purely aesthetic or sentimental - they legit cannot imagine any type of nice neighbourhood composed the buildings that are single-family homes with triangle roofs. Some have never lived in anything other than a single-family home, and their understanding of multifamily buildings comes from news media and cultural stereotypes. They believe that as soon as you have a multi family structure, it’s automatically a ghetto of some sort, while simultaneously being luxury housing. Many fear increased traffic, but will also oppose any effort to limit cars. Others just fear change of any kind. I have been to more housing hearings than I can count, and the reasons people oppose housing are myriad. I don’t think there’s any sort of silver bullet to lessen opposition, and I suspect people have been opposing housing for as long as housing has existed. What I think went wrong is that we gave people an unusually powerful set of tools in the 20th century to really lock down the aggregate total of floor space that it’s possible to build in a given region, so there’s almost no wiggle room. We made the default that building is unusual and bad, and put the onus on builders to justify construction, rather than forcing opponents to justify using government power to ban construction. To get out of it, we either need to abolish this set of tools, or at least raise the default so significantly that it is higher than any foreseeable demand. Not only does this accomplish the goal of simply allowing housing to be built, but by ensuring that the amount that can be built is much higher than any amount anyone would ever want to build, it removes the leverage of landholders. No particular plot is more special than any other simply because the government said so.
- whatshisface 2y ago
  Has anyone ever tried answering the objections you listed with some form of compensation? My understanding of human nature is that people don't like to trust strangers and take what are for them risks if there's nothing to be gained from it and some (even if unlikely) potential loss. Just imagine going to one of those meetings and asking everyone in the room to do a trust fall exercise. Even if the thought that you wouldn't catch them is totally unfounded, I bet you wouldn't be able to get a plurality. :-)
- bluefirebrand 2y ago
  > Some have never lived in anything other than a single-family home, and their understanding of multifamily buildings comes from news media and cultural stereotypes. They believe that as soon as you have a multi family structure, it’s automatically a ghetto of some sort I grew up in single family homes and when I moved out on my own I lived in apartments Hearing my neighbours screaming through the walls and floors did a lot to convince me that multi-family housing only works when either the homes are very soundproofed, or the culture is a lot more respectful of shared space I bought a detached home as soon as I could and got the hell out of dense housing, it sucks to live like that
  - ghaff 2y ago
    There’s a lot of romanticism or just preference for dense city living—especially at certain stages of life. But there are significant tradeoffs that many people just aren’t willing to make however hard as it is for others to understand. I do like cities but, at this point, I can just travel to for trips and that makes more sense.

appreciatorBus 2y ago

For those motivated purely by fear of their home no longer increasing in value, faster than inflation, a scheme like this might help soften their opposition. Unfortunately, the coalition of people who oppose housing is not purely financially motivated. There our groups of people for whom low density living is all about status and excluding others, and there is no amount of money that would compensate them for loss of status and exclusion. There are others for whom the argument is purely aesthetic or sentimental - they legit cannot imagine any type of nice neighbourhood composed the buildings that are single-family homes with triangle roofs. Some have never lived in anything other than a single-family home, and their understanding of multifamily buildings comes from news media and cultural stereotypes. They believe that as soon as you have a multi family structure, it’s automatically a ghetto of some sort, while simultaneously being luxury housing. Many fear increased traffic, but will also oppose any effort to limit cars. Others just fear change of any kind. I have been to more housing hearings than I can count, and the reasons people oppose housing are myriad. I don’t think there’s any sort of silver bullet to lessen opposition, and I suspect people have been opposing housing for as long as housing has existed. What I think went wrong is that we gave people an unusually powerful set of tools in the 20th century to really lock down the aggregate total of floor space that it’s possible to build in a given region, so there’s almost no wiggle room. We made the default that building is unusual and bad, and put the onus on builders to justify construction, rather than forcing opponents to justify using government power to ban construction. To get out of it, we either need to abolish this set of tools, or at least raise the default so significantly that it is higher than any foreseeable demand. Not only does this accomplish the goal of simply allowing housing to be built, but by ensuring that the amount that can be built is much higher than any amount anyone would ever want to build, it removes the leverage of landholders. No particular plot is more special than any other simply because the government said so.

whatshisface 2y ago
Has anyone ever tried answering the objections you listed with some form of compensation? My understanding of human nature is that people don't like to trust strangers and take what are for them risks if there's nothing to be gained from it and some (even if unlikely) potential loss. Just imagine going to one of those meetings and asking everyone in the room to do a trust fall exercise. Even if the thought that you wouldn't catch them is totally unfounded, I bet you wouldn't be able to get a plurality. :-)
bluefirebrand 2y ago
> Some have never lived in anything other than a single-family home, and their understanding of multifamily buildings comes from news media and cultural stereotypes. They believe that as soon as you have a multi family structure, it’s automatically a ghetto of some sort I grew up in single family homes and when I moved out on my own I lived in apartments Hearing my neighbours screaming through the walls and floors did a lot to convince me that multi-family housing only works when either the homes are very soundproofed, or the culture is a lot more respectful of shared space I bought a detached home as soon as I could and got the hell out of dense housing, it sucks to live like that
- ghaff 2y ago
  There’s a lot of romanticism or just preference for dense city living—especially at certain stages of life. But there are significant tradeoffs that many people just aren’t willing to make however hard as it is for others to understand. I do like cities but, at this point, I can just travel to for trips and that makes more sense.