this is a really important point! Change absolutely does bring loss, and dismissing people's feeling about that is no way to win them over. And this extends to more than just nostalgia for the look of the past. I live along the Purple Line construction in Maryland, which required the cutting down of numerous huge mature trees along a street I have to walk along to get almost anywhere. Along with the aesthetic loss, especially with climate change it's now a huge hit to my quality of life to have lost the benefit of their shade.
But at one point I saw an advocate (who I otherwise am usually 100% in agreement with) seem to kind of poo-poo this loss and it made me very angry. The project has to plant saplings in some other neighborhood entirely to compensate for the trees, apparently? But how on earth does this address MY loss of shade and all the other known benefits of street trees? It does not, and it's dismissive to imply that it makes up for the fact that my life has gotten objectively worse on this point. I absolutely understand that sometimes the good of the many has to outweigh the good of the few, but I think it's vital to acknowledge when some people actually are making a sacrifice for the good of the many.
100%. It's almost frankly sadistic to expect people to cheer their own immiseration for a "cause." At least, that is the natural reaction to putting people in what feels like that position.
I see this, sometimes, with YIMBYs. I was at an event and someone was telling a story and laughing about an old lady who was upset about an apartment high-rise because it would shade her garden. And I was like...maybe that sunny garden was this old lady's joy in life. How *else* do you expect her to react? (This is one reason why I think the entire public-comment system should probably be scrapped, but that's a different issue.)
I would have had a hard time not punching the person telling that story. Seriously, who even wants someone who thinks like that on our side? Isn't the whole ultimate freaking point of housing advocacy that people should be able to live in places that allow some joy in life instead of constant struggle?
She was an actual in-the-weeds housing advocate, and this was an internal group. I suspect the people involved in advocacy have heard all these two-bit complaints so many times they’re just noise. So she hears a random cantankerous old person who wants to block housing for 200 young families.
I’m happy I’m not involved in political advocacy directly, because I suspect it would test my patience, and I think my patience is one of my assets as a communicator!
yeah I totally get how that happens. but also I feel very strongly that, if you are not a person who understands the value of a garden, if you do not feel a gut reaction of "ugh, this does need to be done but that is really sad," then you are not a person I want involved in building my housing.
This is a great question to raise. And maybe, somewhere, for some people, grieving is an answer. My experience, though, is that nostalgia can at least sometimes be overcome by demonstrating sufficient respect for the past in the way change is designed and managed. In communities that have history (which some suburbs don't, and that's a problem), you can even remind people that the past was, in fact, one of very different living arrangements.
But in many places, the NIMBY position is fraught with moral judgement that is hidden behind the nostalgia. I will add that the YIMBY position is also, at root, a moral one. And when different moral visions collide, change can only come through force (the application of power), or the difficult work of trying to change how people view the world. Unless we want to sow bitterness, as Alex points out in his comment, through the use of force (and more to the points, ignore the universal law that what goes around eventually comes around, that the force you apply to others will be applied to you) that means we need strong moral leadership.
Thanks for espousing on this, you just nailed the divide in Annapolis. Your pragmatic economic view is where I am on the issue of change. People who grew up with the old ways always say they want what was in the past, to which I reply “sure and I want a pony, but I’m not going to get it”. As a previous commenter mentioned oldey-timey Facebook groups don’t really work to *resolve* the grief issue and it’s not that they get people worked up, rather they just live with the fact that it is not “good” anymore. Frankly, I kind of disagree with the premise that any kind of grieving would ultimately change people’s nostalgic view of a place to the point where they would be more accepting. What I typically see is people leave for another place when they have had enough if they have the ability or stay and are bitter and not accepting until the end.
With historical preservation, there are efforts to protect and preserve rare, unique and historical buildings (e.g., a 1700s house of a significant public figure or an 1800s courthouse), and efforts to preserve a much more recent and much less historically important building, like a 1960s diner. While the 1960s diner may not be an important piece of architectural history, it still holds an important place in local people's hearts.
When there is a move to tear down a place like a 1960s diner (let's call it the Addison Diner) to replace it with a 25-floor apartment building, a strong NIMBY effort can mobilize to protect the diner. Many local people have memories of dates there and hanging out by the jukebox with their pals. One solution is to require the developer of the new building to add a room in the entrance floor that celebrates and remembers the Addison Diner. The facade, milkshake counter, a few booths, and the jukebox could be installed inside, museum-style. Photos of diner patrons in the 1960s and 70s adorn the walls
Win-win. The community gets to celebrate its memories of Addison Diner and the developer gets to build a 25-story apartment building.
They are doing something like this in Silver Spring! (Which may be where you got the idea). I love it, and I think it should just about be industry best practice for this kind of intensification of land use. Obviously it adds an extra expense and maybe some other regulation should be cut to make it cost-neutral, etc., but I think there is some value in the “something else used to be here” acknowledgement.
Very insightful! I wonder how many people would actually stop being against these changes and developments if they had space to grieve. The old timey Facebook groups are one of those spaces and that doesn’t seem to work all that well, just kind of riles people up. Maybe it has to be physical space or group that can actually bond people together over the future rather than the nostalgia of the past.
Yeah, the FB groups are full of NIMBYism. But that’s kind of the point, that those sentiments just naturally end up together but they don’t have to. There are some good YIMBY-ish folks in my own hometown’s groups, and we get nice comments to the effect of “I wish it was like it used to be but things change and this new thing seems pretty good.” That’s a great improvement! I mean the other aspect is the changes do actually have to seem good to people which is a different question
this is a really important point! Change absolutely does bring loss, and dismissing people's feeling about that is no way to win them over. And this extends to more than just nostalgia for the look of the past. I live along the Purple Line construction in Maryland, which required the cutting down of numerous huge mature trees along a street I have to walk along to get almost anywhere. Along with the aesthetic loss, especially with climate change it's now a huge hit to my quality of life to have lost the benefit of their shade.
But at one point I saw an advocate (who I otherwise am usually 100% in agreement with) seem to kind of poo-poo this loss and it made me very angry. The project has to plant saplings in some other neighborhood entirely to compensate for the trees, apparently? But how on earth does this address MY loss of shade and all the other known benefits of street trees? It does not, and it's dismissive to imply that it makes up for the fact that my life has gotten objectively worse on this point. I absolutely understand that sometimes the good of the many has to outweigh the good of the few, but I think it's vital to acknowledge when some people actually are making a sacrifice for the good of the many.
100%. It's almost frankly sadistic to expect people to cheer their own immiseration for a "cause." At least, that is the natural reaction to putting people in what feels like that position.
I see this, sometimes, with YIMBYs. I was at an event and someone was telling a story and laughing about an old lady who was upset about an apartment high-rise because it would shade her garden. And I was like...maybe that sunny garden was this old lady's joy in life. How *else* do you expect her to react? (This is one reason why I think the entire public-comment system should probably be scrapped, but that's a different issue.)
I would have had a hard time not punching the person telling that story. Seriously, who even wants someone who thinks like that on our side? Isn't the whole ultimate freaking point of housing advocacy that people should be able to live in places that allow some joy in life instead of constant struggle?
She was an actual in-the-weeds housing advocate, and this was an internal group. I suspect the people involved in advocacy have heard all these two-bit complaints so many times they’re just noise. So she hears a random cantankerous old person who wants to block housing for 200 young families.
I’m happy I’m not involved in political advocacy directly, because I suspect it would test my patience, and I think my patience is one of my assets as a communicator!
yeah I totally get how that happens. but also I feel very strongly that, if you are not a person who understands the value of a garden, if you do not feel a gut reaction of "ugh, this does need to be done but that is really sad," then you are not a person I want involved in building my housing.
This is a great question to raise. And maybe, somewhere, for some people, grieving is an answer. My experience, though, is that nostalgia can at least sometimes be overcome by demonstrating sufficient respect for the past in the way change is designed and managed. In communities that have history (which some suburbs don't, and that's a problem), you can even remind people that the past was, in fact, one of very different living arrangements.
But in many places, the NIMBY position is fraught with moral judgement that is hidden behind the nostalgia. I will add that the YIMBY position is also, at root, a moral one. And when different moral visions collide, change can only come through force (the application of power), or the difficult work of trying to change how people view the world. Unless we want to sow bitterness, as Alex points out in his comment, through the use of force (and more to the points, ignore the universal law that what goes around eventually comes around, that the force you apply to others will be applied to you) that means we need strong moral leadership.
Thanks for espousing on this, you just nailed the divide in Annapolis. Your pragmatic economic view is where I am on the issue of change. People who grew up with the old ways always say they want what was in the past, to which I reply “sure and I want a pony, but I’m not going to get it”. As a previous commenter mentioned oldey-timey Facebook groups don’t really work to *resolve* the grief issue and it’s not that they get people worked up, rather they just live with the fact that it is not “good” anymore. Frankly, I kind of disagree with the premise that any kind of grieving would ultimately change people’s nostalgic view of a place to the point where they would be more accepting. What I typically see is people leave for another place when they have had enough if they have the ability or stay and are bitter and not accepting until the end.
With historical preservation, there are efforts to protect and preserve rare, unique and historical buildings (e.g., a 1700s house of a significant public figure or an 1800s courthouse), and efforts to preserve a much more recent and much less historically important building, like a 1960s diner. While the 1960s diner may not be an important piece of architectural history, it still holds an important place in local people's hearts.
When there is a move to tear down a place like a 1960s diner (let's call it the Addison Diner) to replace it with a 25-floor apartment building, a strong NIMBY effort can mobilize to protect the diner. Many local people have memories of dates there and hanging out by the jukebox with their pals. One solution is to require the developer of the new building to add a room in the entrance floor that celebrates and remembers the Addison Diner. The facade, milkshake counter, a few booths, and the jukebox could be installed inside, museum-style. Photos of diner patrons in the 1960s and 70s adorn the walls
Win-win. The community gets to celebrate its memories of Addison Diner and the developer gets to build a 25-story apartment building.
They are doing something like this in Silver Spring! (Which may be where you got the idea). I love it, and I think it should just about be industry best practice for this kind of intensification of land use. Obviously it adds an extra expense and maybe some other regulation should be cut to make it cost-neutral, etc., but I think there is some value in the “something else used to be here” acknowledgement.
Very insightful! I wonder how many people would actually stop being against these changes and developments if they had space to grieve. The old timey Facebook groups are one of those spaces and that doesn’t seem to work all that well, just kind of riles people up. Maybe it has to be physical space or group that can actually bond people together over the future rather than the nostalgia of the past.
Yeah, the FB groups are full of NIMBYism. But that’s kind of the point, that those sentiments just naturally end up together but they don’t have to. There are some good YIMBY-ish folks in my own hometown’s groups, and we get nice comments to the effect of “I wish it was like it used to be but things change and this new thing seems pretty good.” That’s a great improvement! I mean the other aspect is the changes do actually have to seem good to people which is a different question
Treating other people's feelings as an inconvenience for you to manage away will alienate them even further.
100%. Same with willfully misinterpreting what’s behind those feelings.