"Character," of course, usually means "things the way they are today," and is consequently undone by the slightest bit of construction--I have seen people sue to prevent a medical clinic from replacing its cloth awnings with more weatherproof vinyl ones, it's insane
-
-
Show this thread
-
So let's put that aside for a moment and look at the other complaints. Rich say transit will tank property values, poor say transit will spike them. Well, which is it?
Show this thread -
The answer, of course, is that it could do either one. And, more importantly, that there are a LOT of factors that change property values (as I'm sure you all know, they're not exactly constant in places without transit)
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This is 100% true for the SF Bay Area. We also have a chicken-egg problem. NIMBYs vote against new housing development because they don't want home values to drop, new transit isn't built because NIMBYs say lack of new housing development makes it redundant.
-
They're perfectly happy to back candidates who talk a big game about housing costs, they just don't want it anywhere near them. They want low/mid income to find housing in "designated affordable housing areas".
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
CHANGE IS SCARY OH GOD PLEASE DON’T CHANGE ANYTHING AHHH
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.