So does everything have to be YIMBY vs NIMBY now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, we have a housing crisis and a climate crisis.

We either deal with both of them asap, or we don't.

Being moderate because you prefer three stories to 7 is playing the fiddle while Rome is burning.

[/quote

Yet the housing crisis seems to be all about living in "desirable neighborhoods". Huh.]

[Anonymous]

Someone has Bob Ward, whoever that is, living rent free in their head. It is actually quite amusing to see this same tripe raised on thread after thread. He must be quite effective to have such an impact.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: YMBY is not a libertarian movement.

It is a movement that understands that the racist roots of much of the single family zoning has artificially inflated the cost of land and homes. It is a movement that recognizes that the zoning regime and historic preservation has been weaponized to maintain a classist status quo.

Of course. Racist!!! SFH are racist. People who live in them - racist! What a crock full of sh!t.

NP here. I didn’t even know about the NIMBY vs YIMBY debates until this thread. However, I feel confident if you wanted to know what information is out there around single family zoning history and impact on class and racial segregation you could find it. It took me less than three minutes https://www.investopedia.com/single-family-zoning-5192299. The person above did not say living in a SFH is racists they said much of the single family home zoning has racists roots.

There is a failure here of understanding correlation and causation. When zoning fist started in America it was a very racist country so every public policy decision was permeated with racism. However, zoning itself was about separating desirable and undesirable land used to improve quality of life and public health. For example, living next to a factory or a pig sty was determined to be negative for health and quality of life and residential, industrial and agricultural zones were thus separated. Keeping in mind that zoning also started after the Spanish Flu pandemic, typhoid, etc and as a result, public health was also a concern and because people were racist they thought that Black, Brown and Irish people were vectors for disease, so they tried to make policy to keep themselves away from the Irish. It’s not that complicated.

Yes, and take it a step further. Whose neighborhoods were insulated from the negative uses and whose neighborhoods were placed right next to them?

Get the answer to that and then we can actually have a discussion. You are sooooo close.

You still don’t understand the difference between correlation and causation. There is a whole body of literature around “coming to the harm” and intent versus disparate impact. If you want to argue “disparate impact” is the important frame of analysis you would be contrary to current law and arguing that personal agency and choices are irrelevant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Someone has Bob Ward, whoever that is, living rent free in their head. It is actually quite amusing to see this same tripe raised on thread after thread. He must be quite effective to have such an impact.

Kind of like Steve Bannon and Roger Stone, Ward keeps popping up in different places.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wasn't a 'yimby' until I saw the hell by neighbor had to go to replace his deck that was built in ~1970. Another neighbor made it his life work to prevent that from happening.

IT WAS A LITTLE DECK FOR CRYING OUT LOUD.

I think the reaction 'nimbys' get is since they've really started overreaching.

Speaking of decks, the Bowser Administration is forcing Rodman’s on Wisconsin Ave. to dismantle an outdoor platform that was installed outside this independent, family-owned business that has served NW Washington for sixty years or so. At the same time, the DC government is happy to see unregulated, ratty streeteries remain, even in Wisconsin Ave. and also seems to jump through hoops whenever a large chain wants some government favor. Some speculate that the Bowser Administration at the behest of interested developers would just as well see Rodman’s forced to close so that the site can be developed for “vibrant, dense-mixed use.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wasn't a 'yimby' until I saw the hell by neighbor had to go to replace his deck that was built in ~1970. Another neighbor made it his life work to prevent that from happening.

IT WAS A LITTLE DECK FOR CRYING OUT LOUD.

I think the reaction 'nimbys' get is since they've really started overreaching.

Speaking of decks, the Bowser Administration is forcing Rodman’s on Wisconsin Ave. to dismantle an outdoor platform that was installed outside this independent, family-owned business that has served NW Washington for sixty years or so. At the same time, the DC government is happy to see unregulated, ratty streeteries remain, even in Wisconsin Ave. and also seems to jump through hoops whenever a large chain wants some government favor. Some speculate that the Bowser Administration at the behest of interested developers would just as well see Rodman’s forced to close so that the site can be developed for “vibrant, dense-mixed use.”

Ding, ding, ding.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, we have a housing crisis and a climate crisis.

We either deal with both of them asap, or we don't.

Being moderate because you prefer three stories to 7 is playing the fiddle while Rome is burning.

[/quote

Yet the housing crisis seems to be all about living in "desirable neighborhoods". Huh.]

Save the planet! Stop climate change! Make AU Park the next Navy Yard! (Talk about heat islands.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Basically there is a group of people who call themselves YIMBYs and if you disagree with them on anything you are a NIMBY. That’s how it works now. Sorry.

The YIMBYs fancy themselves as cape crusaders who understand how and where everyone should live, what mode of transportation they should use, and so on and so forth. They have the one true belief and think "staff" can work out the thorny details like schools, water runoff, parking, rec facilities, crime and so on and so forth. They are almost caricatures of earnestness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Basically there is a group of people who call themselves YIMBYs and if you disagree with them on anything you are a NIMBY. That’s how it works now. Sorry.

The YIMBYs fancy themselves as cape crusaders who understand how and where everyone should live, what mode of transportation they should use, and so on and so forth. They have the one true belief and think "staff" can work out the thorny details like schools, water runoff, parking, rec facilities, crime and so on and so forth. They are almost caricatures of earnestness.

Cape crusaders? Maybe, but they’re more Robin than Batman.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wasn't a 'yimby' until I saw the hell by neighbor had to go to replace his deck that was built in ~1970. Another neighbor made it his life work to prevent that from happening.

IT WAS A LITTLE DECK FOR CRYING OUT LOUD.

I think the reaction 'nimbys' get is since they've really started overreaching.

Speaking of decks, the Bowser Administration is forcing Rodman’s on Wisconsin Ave. to dismantle an outdoor platform that was installed outside this independent, family-owned business that has served NW Washington for sixty years or so. At the same time, the DC government is happy to see unregulated, ratty streeteries remain, even in Wisconsin Ave. and also seems to jump through hoops whenever a large chain wants some government favor. Some speculate that the Bowser Administration at the behest of interested developers would just as well see Rodman’s forced to close so that the site can be developed for “vibrant, dense-mixed use.”

They didn't have a permit. Pretty easy decision. They need a building permit to construct a deck in public space. Right decision. But I would certainly support the permit application, if they submit one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wasn't a 'yimby' until I saw the hell by neighbor had to go to replace his deck that was built in ~1970. Another neighbor made it his life work to prevent that from happening.

IT WAS A LITTLE DECK FOR CRYING OUT LOUD.

I think the reaction 'nimbys' get is since they've really started overreaching.

Speaking of decks, the Bowser Administration is forcing Rodman’s on Wisconsin Ave. to dismantle an outdoor platform that was installed outside this independent, family-owned business that has served NW Washington for sixty years or so. At the same time, the DC government is happy to see unregulated, ratty streeteries remain, even in Wisconsin Ave. and also seems to jump through hoops whenever a large chain wants some government favor. Some speculate that the Bowser Administration at the behest of interested developers would just as well see Rodman’s forced to close so that the site can be developed for “vibrant, dense-mixed use.”

They didn't have a permit. Pretty easy decision. They need a building permit to construct a deck in public space. Right decision. But I would certainly support the permit application, if they submit one.

I don't think the Bowser Admin cares about that site one way or another. Someone complained and the city had to follow the book. Honestly these NIMBYs who keep ratting out business seem to pop up everywhere!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: YMBY is not a libertarian movement.

It is a movement that understands that the racist roots of much of the single family zoning has artificially inflated the cost of land and homes. It is a movement that recognizes that the zoning regime and historic preservation has been weaponized to maintain a classist status quo.

Of course. Racist!!! SFH are racist. People who live in them - racist! What a crock full of sh!t.

NP here. I didn’t even know about the NIMBY vs YIMBY debates until this thread. However, I feel confident if you wanted to know what information is out there around single family zoning history and impact on class and racial segregation you could find it. It took me less than three minutes https://www.investopedia.com/single-family-zoning-5192299. The person above did not say living in a SFH is racists they said much of the single family home zoning has racists roots.

There are many good things that have racist, sexist, ableist, or classist roots. Does that mean we should abolish them all? Our constitution comes to mind.

Yes we should fix the racism etc..

[Anonymous]

At least in Montgomery County the NIMBY/YIMBY thing is over and thank god. The debate is boring and involves some of the very worst people on both sides.

The new debate for the next four years will be developers vs developer. I cannot wait for the YIMBY bros to learn that it is developers and not powerless old people are what controls housing supply.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At least in Montgomery County the NIMBY/YIMBY thing is over and thank god. The debate is boring and involves some of the very worst people on both sides.

The new debate for the next four years will be developers vs developer. I cannot wait for the YIMBY bros to learn that it is developers and not powerless old people are what controls housing supply.

Will YIMBYs ever see that? The loudest voices in the local movement are funded by developers and land use lawyers. They’re never going to turn on their money, and any ideas that don’t align with those loud voices are immediately attacked as NIMBYism. We could eliminate density limits around the red line and YIMBYs would be blaming the ag preserve for high housing prices. YIMBYs will find any reason to blame government so they don’t have to face reality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At least in Montgomery County the NIMBY/YIMBY thing is over and thank god. The debate is boring and involves some of the very worst people on both sides.

The new debate for the next four years will be developers vs developer. I cannot wait for the YIMBY bros to learn that it is developers and not powerless old people are what controls housing supply.

Will YIMBYs ever see that? The loudest voices in the local movement are funded by developers and land use lawyers. They’re never going to turn on their money, and any ideas that don’t align with those loud voices are immediately attacked as NIMBYism. We could eliminate density limits around the red line and YIMBYs would be blaming the ag preserve for high housing prices. YIMBYs will find any reason to blame government so they don’t have to face reality.

There are 2 developer interests. (1) Builders that don’t currently own land or own undeveloped land and want to build greenfield, such as Toll Bros., and (2) existing Commercial Real Estate owners, like Greenhill, who want to maximize profits on properties they currently own.

The first group can build the types of entry-level homes for sale that the market is desperate for, with the primary goal to sell as quickly as possible and exit with profit. The second group, which includes Greenhill, Peterson snd FRIT, wants to extract money through literal rent, as well as economic rent seeking and therefore tries to use the government to prevent the first group from building to protect their margins.

The first group had a friend in Ike Leggett and I suspect also in David Blair, who even made a TV commercial about greenfield development at White Flint. The second group had Riemer and Hucker in their pockets and will continue to have friends in Casey Anderson, Friedson, and now Natali Fani Gonzalez.

Within 12 months, I bet that the second group is going to start sounding like NIMBYs (talking about “smart growth” and affordability requirements which YIMBYs would rightly see as impediments to housing supply) as they try to block development proposals pushed by Blair, particularly upcounty in and around places like Damascus, Boyds and Marriottsville. I think we will also see them get quite protective about White Flint when the Council and Planning spent the last 4 years pretending it did not exist (my personal take is that I was up in Towson recently and that would be a perfect site to attract a university). They will also try to block enabling infrastructure for development, particularly roads.

The fight over the SSP/“growth and infrastructure policy” in 2 years is going to be massive.