I'm really curious what NIMBYism looked like 40, 50, or 60 years ago. Were the farmers of Long Island up in arms about Levittown, or did they welcome it as "progress?" I feel like development was talked about differently in past generations, but I didn't live through it and can only consume the news/advertising/propaganda that has survived.
This is one of the big questions I've never gotten a great answer to. Part of the answer is in the whole small-town boosterism of the late 1800s/early 1900s, at the tail end of the railroad town era and all that. But I'm not sure not everyone wanted their little village to be the next New York City or whatever. Nolan Gray wrote about NIMBYism in a Latin American country, I don't recall the piece right now, but he said there's no legal mechanism to stop development there, so people don't have NIMBY opinions. IOW, American NIMBYism may have been created by making it possible legally. But also it definitely grew out of a backlash to urban renewal. But then zoning goes back to the early 1900s too...
One thing I've never had a great handle on is how representative these sentiments really are. Most of the commenters in a given Facebook page are pretty NIMBY, but it's also true that most people who live in a given town don't comment on local stories like this at all. I think there's a quite large pool of people who just can't be bothered to get involved at all, which is kind of frustrating. Turnout for local elections is typically incredibly low, at least in most places I've lived, and most people just don't pay much attention to local news.
Yeah I think so as well. I find that hopeful actually, because it means even a lot of the people who grumble about stuff don’t really mind, it’s just kind of like grumbling about the weather. In a way those people are closer to us than they are to the ultra-NIMBYs who actually go to the meetings and speak and get rowdy sometimes. One of the things I try to do is split those people off from the broader general public. The election turnout thing is true though. Local pols are often intimidated by these sentiments for that reason, I think.
Two things: one, you forgot the euphemism "quality of life" and two, I suspect any change in prior eras that might be considered "different" (in any regard) would have been opposed, for example the Long Island development in the prior comment.
“Quality of life” and also “neighborhood character.” Those who associate these concepts with the built environment (rather than the residents) of a community can be resistant to development. Someone pointed out (maybe on Deleted Scenes, or maybe in Andy Boenau’s substack) that if we think of neighborhood character as the byproduct of the collection of people who occupy an area, we help preserve it by making it easier for these same people to continue to reside in their community. That generally means providing more housing options for different stages of life and different income levels, accompanied by a willingness to welcome newcomers to the old neighborhood.
This is right on! I'm on our county commission and we hear about the evil "theys" every land use meeting. THEY are very active developers apparently.
I'm really curious what NIMBYism looked like 40, 50, or 60 years ago. Were the farmers of Long Island up in arms about Levittown, or did they welcome it as "progress?" I feel like development was talked about differently in past generations, but I didn't live through it and can only consume the news/advertising/propaganda that has survived.
This is one of the big questions I've never gotten a great answer to. Part of the answer is in the whole small-town boosterism of the late 1800s/early 1900s, at the tail end of the railroad town era and all that. But I'm not sure not everyone wanted their little village to be the next New York City or whatever. Nolan Gray wrote about NIMBYism in a Latin American country, I don't recall the piece right now, but he said there's no legal mechanism to stop development there, so people don't have NIMBY opinions. IOW, American NIMBYism may have been created by making it possible legally. But also it definitely grew out of a backlash to urban renewal. But then zoning goes back to the early 1900s too...
One thing I've never had a great handle on is how representative these sentiments really are. Most of the commenters in a given Facebook page are pretty NIMBY, but it's also true that most people who live in a given town don't comment on local stories like this at all. I think there's a quite large pool of people who just can't be bothered to get involved at all, which is kind of frustrating. Turnout for local elections is typically incredibly low, at least in most places I've lived, and most people just don't pay much attention to local news.
Yeah I think so as well. I find that hopeful actually, because it means even a lot of the people who grumble about stuff don’t really mind, it’s just kind of like grumbling about the weather. In a way those people are closer to us than they are to the ultra-NIMBYs who actually go to the meetings and speak and get rowdy sometimes. One of the things I try to do is split those people off from the broader general public. The election turnout thing is true though. Local pols are often intimidated by these sentiments for that reason, I think.
Here, here!
Two things: one, you forgot the euphemism "quality of life" and two, I suspect any change in prior eras that might be considered "different" (in any regard) would have been opposed, for example the Long Island development in the prior comment.
“Quality of life” and also “neighborhood character.” Those who associate these concepts with the built environment (rather than the residents) of a community can be resistant to development. Someone pointed out (maybe on Deleted Scenes, or maybe in Andy Boenau’s substack) that if we think of neighborhood character as the byproduct of the collection of people who occupy an area, we help preserve it by making it easier for these same people to continue to reside in their community. That generally means providing more housing options for different stages of life and different income levels, accompanied by a willingness to welcome newcomers to the old neighborhood.
Thank you!