This is pretty typical for city politics. American politics has struggled from the founding with what the framers called the "mob" or the tyranny of the majority. With the financial incentive of your single family home being our biggest, most valuable asset, then vociferous opposition to anything that reduces the value of this asset is baked in. It plays out every single day across this nation. The paradox is these homeowners are planning to sell the valuable asset of their homes to fund our downsizing in their old age. Then, they won't be able to find a smaller unit in their old neighborhood.
One way a smart city could balance the needs of the property value partisans and the need for more affordable housing is to set the standard that the developer make a case for how its development will enhance or be neutral as to the property values in the neighborhood. I believe such a thing can be done. Business can conform to the people's needs and still do its project. Nobody ever seems to ask it to do that though.
A fact which developers could use is that as these single family homes soar in market value, young families with children can't live there. This causes the school district to decline in enrollment and funding - especially as over 65 exemptions kick in. When the school district declines, guess what? Home values decline. A smart developer could also play up how nice their apartment will be for future retireees.
Good leadership at City Hall would think of the long-term viability of the City. It might listen, analyaze and synthesize each project by throwing the good of the City into the mix. But, it usually does not. City councils usually just wait for the mob to show up at council meetings and then react by placating it. In smaller cities, everyone in city hall usually has a day job. This limits the "vision thing" for them.
These are fair points about listening versus leading. But when there is a continued pattern, influenced by boards strategic board appointments, as well as the elected with an agenda,... that treats residents as adversaries, we get to this point. Pepper Square was proposed to the city and area to be 12 stories… So of course residents were up in arms about that in their single family neighborhoods below. The reality is that it will be 4 now after all the financing has come through. Why put residents through the ringer when it's just not necessary? The council person did not even feign "representing " her constituents, at a time when the project, was apparently not well planned. Leadership means guiding, ..not ruling one way or the other.
Always interesting to watch sentiment do a 180 as policy/proposal becomes a perceived “personal problem” for your immediate neighborhood. Core legacy Dallas single-family neighborhoods aren’t creating density anytime soon; commercial corridors and pockets of Dallas that served more as logistics and manufacturing are picking up the slack. The Cedars is a great example of this- palimpsest industrial with no NIMBYS to gripe about new housing.
This is pretty typical for city politics. American politics has struggled from the founding with what the framers called the "mob" or the tyranny of the majority. With the financial incentive of your single family home being our biggest, most valuable asset, then vociferous opposition to anything that reduces the value of this asset is baked in. It plays out every single day across this nation. The paradox is these homeowners are planning to sell the valuable asset of their homes to fund our downsizing in their old age. Then, they won't be able to find a smaller unit in their old neighborhood.
One way a smart city could balance the needs of the property value partisans and the need for more affordable housing is to set the standard that the developer make a case for how its development will enhance or be neutral as to the property values in the neighborhood. I believe such a thing can be done. Business can conform to the people's needs and still do its project. Nobody ever seems to ask it to do that though.
A fact which developers could use is that as these single family homes soar in market value, young families with children can't live there. This causes the school district to decline in enrollment and funding - especially as over 65 exemptions kick in. When the school district declines, guess what? Home values decline. A smart developer could also play up how nice their apartment will be for future retireees.
Good leadership at City Hall would think of the long-term viability of the City. It might listen, analyaze and synthesize each project by throwing the good of the City into the mix. But, it usually does not. City councils usually just wait for the mob to show up at council meetings and then react by placating it. In smaller cities, everyone in city hall usually has a day job. This limits the "vision thing" for them.
These are fair points about listening versus leading. But when there is a continued pattern, influenced by boards strategic board appointments, as well as the elected with an agenda,... that treats residents as adversaries, we get to this point. Pepper Square was proposed to the city and area to be 12 stories… So of course residents were up in arms about that in their single family neighborhoods below. The reality is that it will be 4 now after all the financing has come through. Why put residents through the ringer when it's just not necessary? The council person did not even feign "representing " her constituents, at a time when the project, was apparently not well planned. Leadership means guiding, ..not ruling one way or the other.
Always interesting to watch sentiment do a 180 as policy/proposal becomes a perceived “personal problem” for your immediate neighborhood. Core legacy Dallas single-family neighborhoods aren’t creating density anytime soon; commercial corridors and pockets of Dallas that served more as logistics and manufacturing are picking up the slack. The Cedars is a great example of this- palimpsest industrial with no NIMBYS to gripe about new housing.