I don’t understand why NIMBY hate is in vogue.
What’s wrong with letting a nice town stay nice? We don’t need to turn everything to shit just to satiate socialist schadenfreude.
Build it somewhere else
What’s wrong with letting a nice town stay nice? We don’t need to turn everything to shit just to satiate socialist schadenfreude.
Build it somewhere else
It's an inefficient use of space, it socially isolates us, and it has devastating ecological consequences.
I'll wait, take your time.
"That land is in use already."
"Lololol strawman! No u!"
Alright, sure.
Mandating one 18-hole golf course for every 2K people in municipalities would also create positive offsets to impervious surface and add to the benefit.
Reminds me of a Ben Shapiro quote:
Let's say for the sake of argument that all of the water levels around the world rise by, let's say, five feet over the next 100 years. Say 10 feet over the next 100 years. And it puts all of the low-lying areas on the coast underwater. Let's say all of that happens. You think people aren't just going to sell their homes and move?
"Want to buy my land?"
"Sure, why are you selling?"
"It'll be literally devoured by the seas soon and totally worthless."
"That sounds like a great investment. Sold!"
How do you sell a multi-million dollar home in a remote location with no access to water?
If people want houses to be treated as investments, then they should be punished as such when their bet goes sideways.
Lose money imvested in stock/crypto/whatever? Too bad so sad.
House value even so much as commits the sin of not appreciating because of whatever reason? Stop the presses and think of the children!
I don't think ordinary folks should lose their shirts off their backs if they lose their homes. Sure, I have zero sympathy for the investors who are manipulating markets, but the every day worker? Nah.
Usually if the solution seems that simple, and you think everyone else is an idiot for not realizing it, then they are not the ones being idiots. It's a pattern we should all consider when we "don't understand" a widely understood concept.
> Build it somewhere else
If everybody says "build it somewhere else" where are you supposed to build?
My land, I decide what gets built there.
Don't like it? Buy it off of me for the price I state.
I own and live in an 80-year old single family house. My neighborhood -- one of the more desirable ones in my city -- has had a massive ongoing build out of 3-5 story apartment buildings in the past 10 years. They don't bother me in the least. It's either that or people can't afford to live here, which seems bad.
AB 686 also makes changes to Housing Element Law to incorporate requirements to AFFH as part of the housing element and general plan to include an analysis of fair housing outreach and capacity, integration and segregation, access to opportunity, disparate housing needs, and current fair housing practices.
It's pretty transparent discrimination, tbh.
You don't have to design around the car...
But there's no reason not to take the things that work well in them and bring them elsewhere. Traffic separated bike lanes and Dutch style intersections are common sense improvements that we can build that improve access without requiring a car.
Even if that means billionaires might lose some of their home value.
Okay... _where_?
Thats the whole point of why NIMBY is reviled. Not In My Back Yard.
Wouldn't that indicate there's at least some YIMBY attitude in this location?
It's probably safe to assume the people who need affordable housing want it.