Can anyone cite an example in which NIMBY policies have worked?

[Anonymous]

Manila?

[Anonymous]

Every beautiful historically protected area or building is an example of NIMBY policies working.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hearst Park Pool. Originally, it was going to be huge and built on the grass playing field. The field itself was going to be converted to artificial grass. That angered dog owners who use the park to exercise their dogs. It also angered others who protested that artificial grass is a heat sink and that Hearst is an increasingly rare natural urban oasis. There was also debate about removing the large trees that ring the park.

A compromise was worked out. A smaller version of the pool was built on an existing tennis court. The field is grass, but dogs are banned. (most dog owners seem to be respecting the ban. At least that's what I have noticed.) Construction was completed by removing a single ailing tree.

Demand for the pool last weekend was overwhelming. People were waiting in line for over an hour to get in. That proved that neighbors were right to be concerned about being crowded out of parking on their own streets. It also showed that there needs to be more outdoor pools in DC.

In the end, I think, NIMBY or YIMBY. A workable compromise was worked out.

Wow I didn't know this is why the pool is so small. We were there today and it was very crowded, but there was plenty of street parking. We saw several neighbors with young kids. Seems like it is mostly neighborhood people walking over to use it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Every beautiful historically protected area or building is an example of NIMBY policies working.

Such as the parking lots in Takoma park?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hearst Park Pool. Originally, it was going to be huge and built on the grass playing field. The field itself was going to be converted to artificial grass. That angered dog owners who use the park to exercise their dogs. It also angered others who protested that artificial grass is a heat sink and that Hearst is an increasingly rare natural urban oasis. There was also debate about removing the large trees that ring the park.

A compromise was worked out. A smaller version of the pool was built on an existing tennis court. The field is grass, but dogs are banned. (most dog owners seem to be respecting the ban. At least that's what I have noticed.) Construction was completed by removing a single ailing tree.

Demand for the pool last weekend was overwhelming. People were waiting in line for over an hour to get in. That proved that neighbors were right to be concerned about being crowded out of parking on their own streets. It also showed that there needs to be more outdoor pools in DC.

In the end, I think, NIMBY or YIMBY. A workable compromise was worked out.

Wow I didn't know this is why the pool is so small. We were there today and it was very crowded, but there was plenty of street parking. We saw several neighbors with young kids. Seems like it is mostly neighborhood people walking over to use it.

The NIMBYs wouldn't want a bigger pook.

[Anonymous]

The flipside of the NIMBYs is the GGWash nuts who want to turn the entire DMV into barren soulless concrete towers.