The DMV needs a YIMBY revolution

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't YIMBYs be happy living in their crowded apartment buildings in NoMa or Navy Yard, or whatever the new hotspot is, and walking to whatever fancy restaurants and gyms make them happy, and leave the rest of us alone? It always feels like, deep down, they are miserable and want to spread that misery to everyone.

Bingo. Miserable people who resent anyone who lives in a single-family home with a nice yard. This thread is hilarious.

+1

It's a bunch of self congratulatory wannabee intellectuals that can't afford a SFH in..... Del Ray, so they want to instead ruin it for those that can. Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people how they need to live.

Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people what they are and aren't allowed to do with their own property.

This is what I don’t understand about YIMBYs. It’s not surprising that people why buy homes within a SFH neighborhood choose the location because they want to be IN a SFH neighborhood. If an apartment building goes up nextdoor they are no longer in the neighborhood they bought in.

If you already live in a mixed use community that gets more densely developed that’s a different story because it doesn’t change the entire structure of the neighborhood.

Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell your neighbor that they're not allowed to build a building on their property, because you don't like change.

There must be a major difference/disconnect in how people feel about their neighborhoods. It’s clear that there are those that truly feel that you should only care about your own house and not care about the neighborhood as a whole or what you’re living nextdoor to.

There are also many of us who value our neighborhoods as a whole, whether it’s a TH development, a SFH development or condo community. We bought based on the entire neighborhood and not just our personal homes. If we wanted to live next to a business or apartment or whatever, we would have bought next to one.

There's a meaningful distinction between "care about" and "own". I care about my neighborhood. I don't tell my neighbor he can't paint his door a color I don't like.

If you don't want to live next to a business or apartment or whatever, then you need to buy the property next door.

There’s a big difference in living next to a home with a door color you don’t care for and living next to a multi family unit in your SFH neighborhood. Not remotely a similar comparison.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't YIMBYs be happy living in their crowded apartment buildings in NoMa or Navy Yard, or whatever the new hotspot is, and walking to whatever fancy restaurants and gyms make them happy, and leave the rest of us alone? It always feels like, deep down, they are miserable and want to spread that misery to everyone.

Bingo. Miserable people who resent anyone who lives in a single-family home with a nice yard. This thread is hilarious.

+1

It's a bunch of self congratulatory wannabee intellectuals that can't afford a SFH in..... Del Ray, so they want to instead ruin it for those that can. Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people how they need to live.

Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people what they are and aren't allowed to do with their own property.

This is what I don’t understand about YIMBYs. It’s not surprising that people why buy homes within a SFH neighborhood choose the location because they want to be IN a SFH neighborhood. If an apartment building goes up nextdoor they are no longer in the neighborhood they bought in.

If you already live in a mixed use community that gets more densely developed that’s a different story because it doesn’t change the entire structure of the neighborhood.

Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell your neighbor that they're not allowed to build a building on their property, because you don't like change.

There must be a major difference/disconnect in how people feel about their neighborhoods. It’s clear that there are those that truly feel that you should only care about your own house and not care about the neighborhood as a whole or what you’re living nextdoor to.

There are also many of us who value our neighborhoods as a whole, whether it’s a TH development, a SFH development or condo community. We bought based on the entire neighborhood and not just our personal homes. If we wanted to live next to a business or apartment or whatever, we would have bought next to one.

There's a meaningful distinction between "care about" and "own". I care about my neighborhood. I don't tell my neighbor he can't paint his door a color I don't like.

If you don't want to live next to a business or apartment or whatever, then you need to buy the property next door.

There’s a big difference in living next to a home with a door color you don’t care for and living next to a multi family unit in your SFH neighborhood. Not remotely a similar comparison.

So it's not ok to tell my neighbor he can't paint his door purple because I don't like purple, but it is ok to tell my neighbor he can't build a duplex because I don't want to live next to a duplex?

If I told my neighbor he can't build a duplex because I don't want to live next to a duplex, my neighbor would ask me how much I'm offering him to buy his property.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Most Europeans cities and towns were laid out before the advent of the automobile - which is why they are walkable because they had to be. And so they planned public connective transit because they had to and did that very well.
But there are many areas of Europe that are not connected by transit and are not walkable. The poster above is referencing major towns.
They do have some wastelands of parking and strip mall areas, not as much as the US, but they do exist. They are ugly and tucked in the back away from town centers.

There is a difference between advocating for multi-family dwellings and arguing against urban planning centered around the automobile. Don't conflate the two as they are completely different issues.

The point is, all of those "pre-car" walkable places are the ones that everyone loves to visit Clearly more livable and human scale. So why not make that the norm, rather than auto-centric dreck that we have in every cookie cutter suburban area in the US?

People also love to visit museums, the Grand Canyon, and Disney World.

And Disney has "public transportation" and is entirely walkable. Ironic.

So is Washington, DC. What is your point? You're complaining that one of the most walkable cities in the world isn't walkable.

Meanwhile someone else is demanding that the freaking Eden Center be remade for their own tastes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If we don't go YIMBY we'll become Toronto. Where housing prices are so sky high that owning a home is a luxury out the of reach for most.

But those that can do buy and take care of their properties - preserving and increasing the value. Sounds like - gulp - capitalism.

Capitalism would - gulp - generally allow owners of private property to decide what to do with their private property, including what to build on it..

So right, PP - so let met add you mix zoning etc etc folks have at it. SFH is like high end anything- scarcity is value. So - any smart capitalist knows this and is not giving up that scarce commodity because of its value - to multiple unit builds which lower the value of their good. Gulp - college and econ is a good route to take to understand these concepts.

If the owners of private property aren't going to build duplexes anyway, why are you so strenuously opposing the rezoning that would allow them to do so? Why would you bother opposing it, if you weren't worried that they actually will build duplexes?

You know the answer - SFH keeps folks who are not interested in building family wealth out. And you must also know that you need serious capital to buy into real estate in DC - which either means the smaller price tags of SFH or you are a developer in private equity buying in. Do you have either of these? Why do you protest so much? Can you own - property in DC or are you writing because you can't? There is not a shortage of rentals in DC - have at it.

I'm sorry, I have no idea what point you're making. What does my owning property in DC, or not owning property in DC, have to do with the idea of rezoning residential areas from only allowing one type of housing, to allowing several types of housing?

You either have standing or you don't. Sounds like you don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If we don't go YIMBY we'll become Toronto. Where housing prices are so sky high that owning a home is a luxury out the of reach for most.

But those that can do buy and take care of their properties - preserving and increasing the value. Sounds like - gulp - capitalism.

Capitalism would - gulp - generally allow owners of private property to decide what to do with their private property, including what to build on it..

So right, PP - so let met add you mix zoning etc etc folks have at it. SFH is like high end anything- scarcity is value. So - any smart capitalist knows this and is not giving up that scarce commodity because of its value - to multiple unit builds which lower the value of their good. Gulp - college and econ is a good route to take to understand these concepts.

If the owners of private property aren't going to build duplexes anyway, why are you so strenuously opposing the rezoning that would allow them to do so? Why would you bother opposing it, if you weren't worried that they actually will build duplexes?

You know the answer - SFH keeps folks who are not interested in building family wealth out. And you must also know that you need serious capital to buy into real estate in DC - which either means the smaller price tags of SFH or you are a developer in private equity buying in. Do you have either of these? Why do you protest so much? Can you own - property in DC or are you writing because you can't? There is not a shortage of rentals in DC - have at it.

I'm sorry, I have no idea what point you're making. What does my owning property in DC, or not owning property in DC, have to do with the idea of rezoning residential areas from only allowing one type of housing, to allowing several types of housing?

You either have standing or you don't. Sounds like you don't.

The rezoning proposals are not only in DC, and they affect renters as well as homeowners.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If we don't go YIMBY we'll become Toronto. Where housing prices are so sky high that owning a home is a luxury out the of reach for most.

But those that can do buy and take care of their properties - preserving and increasing the value. Sounds like - gulp - capitalism.

Capitalism would - gulp - generally allow owners of private property to decide what to do with their private property, including what to build on it..

So right, PP - so let met add you mix zoning etc etc folks have at it. SFH is like high end anything- scarcity is value. So - any smart capitalist knows this and is not giving up that scarce commodity because of its value - to multiple unit builds which lower the value of their good. Gulp - college and econ is a good route to take to understand these concepts.

If the owners of private property aren't going to build duplexes anyway, why are you so strenuously opposing the rezoning that would allow them to do so? Why would you bother opposing it, if you weren't worried that they actually will build duplexes?

You know the answer - SFH keeps folks who are not interested in building family wealth out. And you must also know that you need serious capital to buy into real estate in DC - which either means the smaller price tags of SFH or you are a developer in private equity buying in. Do you have either of these? Why do you protest so much? Can you own - property in DC or are you writing because you can't? There is not a shortage of rentals in DC - have at it.

I'm sorry, I have no idea what point you're making. What does my owning property in DC, or not owning property in DC, have to do with the idea of rezoning residential areas from only allowing one type of housing, to allowing several types of housing?

You either have standing or you don't. Sounds like you don't.

The rezoning proposals are not only in DC, and they affect renters as well as homeowners.

Thank you for affirming my point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If we don't go YIMBY we'll become Toronto. Where housing prices are so sky high that owning a home is a luxury out the of reach for most.

But those that can do buy and take care of their properties - preserving and increasing the value. Sounds like - gulp - capitalism.

Capitalism would - gulp - generally allow owners of private property to decide what to do with their private property, including what to build on it..

So right, PP - so let met add you mix zoning etc etc folks have at it. SFH is like high end anything- scarcity is value. So - any smart capitalist knows this and is not giving up that scarce commodity because of its value - to multiple unit builds which lower the value of their good. Gulp - college and econ is a good route to take to understand these concepts.

If the owners of private property aren't going to build duplexes anyway, why are you so strenuously opposing the rezoning that would allow them to do so? Why would you bother opposing it, if you weren't worried that they actually will build duplexes?

You know the answer - SFH keeps folks who are not interested in building family wealth out. And you must also know that you need serious capital to buy into real estate in DC - which either means the smaller price tags of SFH or you are a developer in private equity buying in. Do you have either of these? Why do you protest so much? Can you own - property in DC or are you writing because you can't? There is not a shortage of rentals in DC - have at it.

I'm sorry, I have no idea what point you're making. What does my owning property in DC, or not owning property in DC, have to do with the idea of rezoning residential areas from only allowing one type of housing, to allowing several types of housing?

You either have standing or you don't. Sounds like you don't.

The rezoning proposals are not only in DC, and they affect renters as well as homeowners.

Thank you for affirming my point.

But what is your point?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't YIMBYs be happy living in their crowded apartment buildings in NoMa or Navy Yard, or whatever the new hotspot is, and walking to whatever fancy restaurants and gyms make them happy, and leave the rest of us alone? It always feels like, deep down, they are miserable and want to spread that misery to everyone.

Bingo. Miserable people who resent anyone who lives in a single-family home with a nice yard. This thread is hilarious.

+1

It's a bunch of self congratulatory wannabee intellectuals that can't afford a SFH in..... Del Ray, so they want to instead ruin it for those that can. Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people how they need to live.

Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people what they are and aren't allowed to do with their own property.

This is what I don’t understand about YIMBYs. It’s not surprising that people why buy homes within a SFH neighborhood choose the location because they want to be IN a SFH neighborhood. If an apartment building goes up nextdoor they are no longer in the neighborhood they bought in.

If you already live in a mixed use community that gets more densely developed that’s a different story because it doesn’t change the entire structure of the neighborhood.

Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell your neighbor that they're not allowed to build a building on their property, because you don't like change.

There must be a major difference/disconnect in how people feel about their neighborhoods. It’s clear that there are those that truly feel that you should only care about your own house and not care about the neighborhood as a whole or what you’re living nextdoor to.

There are also many of us who value our neighborhoods as a whole, whether it’s a TH development, a SFH development or condo community. We bought based on the entire neighborhood and not just our personal homes. If we wanted to live next to a business or apartment or whatever, we would have bought next to one.

There's a meaningful distinction between "care about" and "own". I care about my neighborhood. I don't tell my neighbor he can't paint his door a color I don't like.

If you don't want to live next to a business or apartment or whatever, then you need to buy the property next door.

There’s a big difference in living next to a home with a door color you don’t care for and living next to a multi family unit in your SFH neighborhood. Not remotely a similar comparison.

So it's not ok to tell my neighbor he can't paint his door purple because I don't like purple, but it is ok to tell my neighbor he can't build a duplex because I don't want to live next to a duplex?

If I told my neighbor he can't build a duplex because I don't want to live next to a duplex, my neighbor would ask me how much I'm offering him to buy his property.

Seems like the Trumpy property rights Libertarians have discovered DCUM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't YIMBYs be happy living in their crowded apartment buildings in NoMa or Navy Yard, or whatever the new hotspot is, and walking to whatever fancy restaurants and gyms make them happy, and leave the rest of us alone? It always feels like, deep down, they are miserable and want to spread that misery to everyone.

Bingo. Miserable people who resent anyone who lives in a single-family home with a nice yard. This thread is hilarious.

+1

It's a bunch of self congratulatory wannabee intellectuals that can't afford a SFH in..... Del Ray, so they want to instead ruin it for those that can. Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people how they need to live.

Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people what they are and aren't allowed to do with their own property.

This is what I don’t understand about YIMBYs. It’s not surprising that people why buy homes within a SFH neighborhood choose the location because they want to be IN a SFH neighborhood. If an apartment building goes up nextdoor they are no longer in the neighborhood they bought in.

If you already live in a mixed use community that gets more densely developed that’s a different story because it doesn’t change the entire structure of the neighborhood.

Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell your neighbor that they're not allowed to build a building on their property, because you don't like change.

There must be a major difference/disconnect in how people feel about their neighborhoods. It’s clear that there are those that truly feel that you should only care about your own house and not care about the neighborhood as a whole or what you’re living nextdoor to.

There are also many of us who value our neighborhoods as a whole, whether it’s a TH development, a SFH development or condo community. We bought based on the entire neighborhood and not just our personal homes. If we wanted to live next to a business or apartment or whatever, we would have bought next to one.

There's a meaningful distinction between "care about" and "own". I care about my neighborhood. I don't tell my neighbor he can't paint his door a color I don't like.

If you don't want to live next to a business or apartment or whatever, then you need to buy the property next door.

There’s a big difference in living next to a home with a door color you don’t care for and living next to a multi family unit in your SFH neighborhood. Not remotely a similar comparison.

So it's not ok to tell my neighbor he can't paint his door purple because I don't like purple, but it is ok to tell my neighbor he can't build a duplex because I don't want to live next to a duplex?

If I told my neighbor he can't build a duplex because I don't want to live next to a duplex, my neighbor would ask me how much I'm offering him to buy his property.

Are you being purposely obtuse? If zoning is for SFH then you’re not able to tell your neighbor what they can or can’t build. Zoning takes care of it. There are many people who do NOT want the zoning changed to allow different types of structures. It’s not about telling your neighbor what you personally want. It’s about leaving the zoning as is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If we don't go YIMBY we'll become Toronto. Where housing prices are so sky high that owning a home is a luxury out of reach for most.

And where the prime minister is pathetic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If we don't go YIMBY we'll become Toronto. Where housing prices are so sky high that owning a home is a luxury out of reach for most.

Yep, the YIMBY mindset is driven by resentment and envy that you don't own homes like others do.

I wrote that post, and I do indeed own my home. I love it, and don't envy and resent others for owning their homes. I just don't think they should tell others what kind of home they are allowed to build.

By your logic, why shouldn’t I be able to open a junkyard, a hotel, an automotive shop, a dog kennel, or a restaurant next door to you? Why should you tell me what to do with my property? So either you want zoning laws or you don’t. You don’t get to decide what zoning laws (particularly ones that have been in place for years) are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't YIMBYs be happy living in their crowded apartment buildings in NoMa or Navy Yard, or whatever the new hotspot is, and walking to whatever fancy restaurants and gyms make them happy, and leave the rest of us alone? It always feels like, deep down, they are miserable and want to spread that misery to everyone.

Your taxes are the only way they’ll fund all of the services they want but can’t afford.

YIMBYs are the result of society giving an entire generation trophies for losing.

This. Young and stupid. At least when we were young and stupid we didn't have a voice. They have one now are trying to ruin the country. Grow up or move to another country more to your liking, OP.

DP. Since this is happening, maybe you're the one who will need to accept it or move to another country to more to your liking?

It is people like you who will cause an insane person like Tr*mp to get elected. The majority of the US doesn't believe in your ultra-progressive causes. You even turn off those of use who want progress. You push too hard too fast and the cause breaks and you lose ground.

Trump is definitely going to win now that Kamala is embracing YIMBYs obsessed with eliminating single family zoning and destroying the suburbs. This will destroy her chances of winning many swing states. Americans don’t want to hear virtue signaling from Obama about how everyone else should have apartments in their backyard while he enjoys his multi-million dollar Hamptons beach house.

That's probably what it looks like in your right-wing on-line bubble, which you spend so much time in that you can't perceive how weird this seems to everyone else.

I live in an area that mostly votes democrat, but my neighbors are pissed about this. There is a significant subset of suburban Dems that don’t want these YIMBY policies

Subverting SFH zoning isn’t necessarily a Democratic position at all. In fact the leading proponent of effectively ending SFH zoning in NW DC neighborhoods is a senior advisor to the Trump campaign. He also works for big development interests who want to change zoning to build luxury condo buildings throughout sought-after SFH streets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If we don't go YIMBY we'll become Toronto. Where housing prices are so sky high that owning a home is a luxury out of reach for most.

Yep, the YIMBY mindset is driven by resentment and envy that you don't own homes like others do.

I wrote that post, and I do indeed own my home. I love it, and don't envy and resent others for owning their homes. I just don't think they should tell others what kind of home they are allowed to build.

By your logic, why shouldn’t I be able to open a junkyard, a hotel, an automotive shop, a dog kennel, or a restaurant next door to you? Why should you tell me what to do with my property? So either you want zoning laws or you don’t. You don’t get to decide what zoning laws (particularly ones that have been in place for years) are.

You're comparing housing to junkyards, hotels, automotive shops, dog kennels, and restaurants. Why? I suppose I'm grateful that you didn't compare housing to toxic waste dumps and industrial waste incinerators.

Of course I don't get to decide what zoning laws are, because I am not on the city council or county council or whatever. However, the city council or county council or whatever does get to decide what zoning laws are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't YIMBYs be happy living in their crowded apartment buildings in NoMa or Navy Yard, or whatever the new hotspot is, and walking to whatever fancy restaurants and gyms make them happy, and leave the rest of us alone? It always feels like, deep down, they are miserable and want to spread that misery to everyone.

+1000

They're angry at the fact they can't afford to buy and still rent at 38 years old. They resent it tremendously. Therefore they have to ruin what others have and worked hard to obtain simply because of jealousy.

OP should get more education and a better job if they wanted to own a home. Stop trying to tear down what others have because of their own shortcomings.

I'm 48, have owned homes for 20 years, live in a SFH in upper NW that's across the street from an empty plot of land earmarked for future development and am totally fine with making my neighborhood denser even if it means a new big apartment building across the street from me. People on both sides of this endless debate make the mistake of assuming that everyone like them shares all their opinions.

I do think the YIMBYs' faith in the market to provide all solutions to housing problems is misplaced, but I also think the idea that "I live here and I don't want change, therefore, there shouldn't be any" is wrong.

The YIMBYs’ faith in the market ends as soon as a developer wants a subsidy or tax break. Then it’s time for a market intervention.

Or for some, YIYBY ends when it really is their backyard. An ANC commissioner along Connecticut Ave was a loud booster for dense “build, baby build” until some developer proposed to build a building that affected the light and view from her condo.

!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why can't YIMBYs be happy living in their crowded apartment buildings in NoMa or Navy Yard, or whatever the new hotspot is, and walking to whatever fancy restaurants and gyms make them happy, and leave the rest of us alone? It always feels like, deep down, they are miserable and want to spread that misery to everyone.

Bingo. Miserable people who resent anyone who lives in a single-family home with a nice yard. This thread is hilarious.

+1

It's a bunch of self congratulatory wannabee intellectuals that can't afford a SFH in..... Del Ray, so they want to instead ruin it for those that can. Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people how they need to live.

Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell other people what they are and aren't allowed to do with their own property.

This is what I don’t understand about YIMBYs. It’s not surprising that people why buy homes within a SFH neighborhood choose the location because they want to be IN a SFH neighborhood. If an apartment building goes up nextdoor they are no longer in the neighborhood they bought in.

If you already live in a mixed use community that gets more densely developed that’s a different story because it doesn’t change the entire structure of the neighborhood.

Imagine the level of entitlement it takes to tell your neighbor that they're not allowed to build a building on their property, because you don't like change.

There must be a major difference/disconnect in how people feel about their neighborhoods. It’s clear that there are those that truly feel that you should only care about your own house and not care about the neighborhood as a whole or what you’re living nextdoor to.

There are also many of us who value our neighborhoods as a whole, whether it’s a TH development, a SFH development or condo community. We bought based on the entire neighborhood and not just our personal homes. If we wanted to live next to a business or apartment or whatever, we would have bought next to one.

There's a meaningful distinction between "care about" and "own". I care about my neighborhood. I don't tell my neighbor he can't paint his door a color I don't like.

If you don't want to live next to a business or apartment or whatever, then you need to buy the property next door.

There’s a big difference in living next to a home with a door color you don’t care for and living next to a multi family unit in your SFH neighborhood. Not remotely a similar comparison.

So it's not ok to tell my neighbor he can't paint his door purple because I don't like purple, but it is ok to tell my neighbor he can't build a duplex because I don't want to live next to a duplex?

If I told my neighbor he can't build a duplex because I don't want to live next to a duplex, my neighbor would ask me how much I'm offering him to buy his property.

Are you being purposely obtuse? If zoning is for SFH then you’re not able to tell your neighbor what they can or can’t build. Zoning takes care of it. There are many people who do NOT want the zoning changed to allow different types of structures. It’s not about telling your neighbor what you personally want. It’s about leaving the zoning as is.

It's about leaving the zoning as is that tells property owners they are not allowed to build duplexes - because you don't want to live next to a duplex.

Vs. changing the zoning that would allow property owners to build duplexes, even if you don't want to live next to a duplex.