Reply to Can anyone cite an example in which YIMBY policies have worked?

Forum Index » Metropolitan DC Local Politics

Reply to "Can anyone cite an example in which YIMBY policies have worked?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Most of "downtown" Arlington; Cathedral Commons, the Wharf, Navy Yard, 14th Street, H Street, U Street, Bethesda Row, Pentagon Row, I could go on, just in the DC area.[/quote]

Haven’t all those places gotten MORE expensive?[/quote]

You're missing the point. Development of a particular piece of land is going to be done because it can be converted to a higher use, so yes, the thing you build is going to be more expensive than the thing it replaces. It would be hard to get people to put money up otherwise. The idea is that by building more housing you increase the supply and prices across the market don't rise as much as they would have otherwise.

It's hard to prove whether it works or not because you can't run controlled experiments. Who knows what prices in DC would be if Cathedral Commons hadn't been built? It's just too speculative. [/quote]

In other words, YIMBY does not actually produce the benefits that it's proponents tout [/quote]

No, in other words nobody really knows. [/quote]

A bunch of the Arlington YIMBYs, including the chairman of the Arlington planning commission, live in single family neighborhoods along Langston Blvd., an area heavily touted for duplexes, triplexes, and small apartment buildings.  Could it be that these YIMBYs stand to profit if their single family home increases significantly in value because the lot is upzoned to R-14 and suddenly they have a much more valuable lot.

YIMBYs act idealistic, but turn one over and they always have a greedy motive.  The last Arlington YIMBY meetup was in the sprawling back yard of a YIMBY who stands to gain a good deal by upzoning.[/quote]

I’m the Bay Area poster and I used to believe in the YIMBY movement. Then I realized just how tied it was to large, wildly anti-environmental, and massively greedy developers. It’s a disaster as far as I’m concerned. Keep away from those folks. They are just greedy. They don’t actually want to help anything other than their own pockets. [/quote]

So basically you hate capitalism? I mean, we need more housing, and someone has to pay to build housing. What’s your alternative, fully govt funded housing?
[/quote]
I’m happy that you posted this because it so perfectly encapsulates the YIMBY mindset. According to YIMBYs, average Americans making money off their house is a very, very bad. But billion dollar corporations making money off the same house is very, very good. I’ll let everyone draw their own conclusions why that is.  [/quote]

This a completely nonsensical characterization (and of course for reasons only you know, you’re fixated on the “YIMBY mindset” rather than actual housing policy discussion.)

Anyway- I don’t know anyone who thinks people should not be able to profit of their SFH. The objection comes when homeowners try to claim they have a right to control zoning and public space for their exclusive benefit. Developers, in contrast, are part of the market creating housing. And since we live in a market economy, yes, they need to have a viable profit. Further, YIMBYs believe that SFH owners should have more rights in their property - the right to build ADUs, renovate into duplexes, etc. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics