I'm very in favor of making it legal for ppl to build whatever housing they want, but I am a little surprised I haven't heard NIMBYs talk that much about the increased traffic that would come from increased density. This seems like a decently strong argument to me.
Conversation
Replying to
...based on my hundreds of hours playing cities skylines, yeah. i design a very careful transportation system, but then you allow denser zoning and suddenly nobody can move anywhere and u have to tear down entire neighborhoods to build new freeways
26
1
83
Replying to
Traffic is good because it incentivises people to make use of other modes of transport. Driving a car *should* be less convenient. And building neighborhoods where you can actually access things without getting in a car makes the tradeoff possible.
1
11
Show replies
Replying to
I've heard that argument constantly from NIMBYs in Palo Alto. Usually though the housing people are trying to build is dense and near mass transit/downtown (so people wouldn't have to commute in and cause traffic). NIMBYs want the housing far from town which increases traffic.
1
4
Well really the NIMBYs don't want it at all, but if it must exist they push for it to exist elsewhere far away from where people want to be.
Replying to
Cities skyline forces you to separate commercial, residential, etc. The key is mixed use, then most trips you take can be very short (grocery store, cafe, school, etc)
