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.
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.
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.
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.
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.”
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.
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.
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 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.”
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.
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.
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.
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.]