Anonymous user
NIMBY: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
imported>Eaymer No edit summary |
imported>Eaymer No edit summary |
||
Line 7:
In some markets, such as San Francisco, the call from NIMBY advocates has been to socialize or otherwise heavily regulate housing and to specifically build affordable housing for low-income residents versus building market rent housing units.
NIMBYists also argue that the market-as-a-driver leaves communities vulnerable to the whims of developers, who going where the profit is, might choose to (re)zone and develop property for non-residential uses, if that is what is most lucrative and ignore the need for housing.
Outside of housing development, other types of projects targeted for opposition by NIMBY activists include bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure, homeless shelters and public transportation installations.
Line 12 ⟶ 14:
Some NIMBY slogans include: "Gentrification is colonization," "No demolition. No displacement," and "Stop evictions."
NIMBY fears ignore the fact that many YIMBY activists are pushing for
In Portland, Oregon, for example, the Residential Infill Project, a committee of residents, builders, city planners and low-income housing experts is researching changes to regulations on height and scale requirements for new homes, increased density as well as an easement to limits on demolitions. Portlanders are also exploring duplex and triplex [[Co-housing|co-housing]], [[Accessory_dwelling|accessory dwelling]] units, building around natural features like trees and converting large single household dwellings into apartments.
Other YIMBY strategies that speak to stated NIMBY concerns about affordable housing focus on lowering the cost to build affordable units by building on disused or underutilized municipal land (e.g. vacant lots and parking lots), lowering parking requirements for new developments and streamlining interior installations in units slated for low-income residents. Coupled with inclusionary zoning, linkage payments and increased density housing near public transportation hubs, this is the approach being examined in Cambridge, Massachusetts (see[http://www.abettercambridge.org/ A Better Cambridge]). In response, NIMBYists raise the concern of whether linkage payments and inclusionary zoning programs result in the creation of enough units (particularly two and three bedroom units for families versus smaller units geared towards singletons and childless couples) that rent for rates low enough to be affordable for the poor.
== See also ==
Line 31 ⟶ 35:
Portland growth survey shows 'not in my backyard' attitude | KGW.com. (2016, August 1). Retrieved from [http://www.kgw.com/news/local/portland-growth-survey-shows-not-in-my-backyard-attitude/63872102 [1]]
Kanson-Benanav, J. (2015, September 29). Guest Column: How to keep Cambridge affordable - News - Cambridge Chronicle & Tab - Cambridge, MA. Retrieved from [http://cambridge.wickedlocal.com/article/20150929/NEWS/150926026 [1]]
| |||