Fighting UNDERLYING NIMBY Assumptions

Joining Forces for Affordable Housing has started a new YIMBY Committee, because site-based opposition by neighbors is the biggest obstacle (aside from funding) to getting new affordable housing built.

---

While we hear about fears of people with low incomes throughout north suburban Cook County, in Evanston, very few people will say outright that they are against affordable housing. Yet, whenever a new development is proposed, we hear nearby residents say the same thing: “We’re all for affordable housing, but…..” And the rest of the sentence typically has to do with concerns about one or more of the following: 

• Property values 
• Character of the community (which can mean many different things) 
• Aesthetics (how it will look) 
• Physical impact on current neighbors (lights, shadows, noise, traffic, parking, etc.) 
• Physical impact on the environment (flooding, trees, birds, density, etc.) 
• Emotional impact on current neighbors (fears around crime, property upkeep, garbage, people with mental illness or addictions, etc.) 

 
Some of these concerns can and should be addressed through the municipality’s regulatory processes. Others are based on generalizations about affordable housing and people with low incomes or on misinformation. What is unavoidable is that any new building will bring change, and usually it is change that some people will not like. 
 
Underlying most objections to an affordable housing development is another important assumption that many people buy into without thinking. It is the assumption that the rights and desires of people who live in a neighborhood (particularly those who don’t need affordable housing) take precedent over the rights and basic needs of people who don’t live in that neighborhood—whether they live in the same municipality or not. Another assumption is that the discomfort that new affordable development will cause among nearby residents should trump the benefit that that housing will provide to its residents, and to the community as a whole.  
 
Given the severity of the affordable housing shortage, Joining Forces for Affordable Housing is looking to bring these assumptions to light and question them. We are focused on creating arguments in support of affordable housing, public education campaigns, and a YIMBY-focused mobilization effort to support new affordable development. 
 
If you are interested in joining the YIMBY Committee and contributing your time, energy, contacts, and/or expertise, please contact Nathaniel at [email protected]. ​

Comments from YIMBY Committee Members

Phyllis Nickel,
"In Heather McGhee's book, The Sum of Us, she makes clear that a community good benefits everyone in a community.  Her analysis is of the cost of racially biased policies and practices harming everyone, including the white people who imposed the limits gets to the issue. 

How can we prosper together?  

• Property values--data can answer that concern. And without unscrupulous real estate actors, values aren't likely to be impacted negatively.
• Character of a community--that's basically a "dog whistle" for race or class concerns and is an emotional issue to deal with.
• Physical impact on current neighbors--data can often shed light on some of these concerns as well.  Traffic, parking, lights can be studied or monitored for actual results, not just feared ones.
• Environmental impact--data or regulations can be used to counter concerns
• Emotional impact on current area residents--here are likely the sources of the NIMBYism we need to find ways to address.  Data can be provided to counter concerns about crime, trash, property upkeep, etc.  And/or solutions designed to prevent problems or better yet find ways to incorporate new residents into social networks of current residents. But in my opinion, they are still hot-button issues relating again to race and class that folks don't want to mention.  The mental illness and addiction fears are on another level yet because in the best of cases those individuals should have access to supportive housing beyond affordability.  

Thanks for your dedication. We are going to find particularly suitable ways to combat NIMBYism in Evanston!"

Mark Karlin,
"​I think that we should acknowledge that there are objections to every new building and not infrequently to houses, which often ask for variances, particularly in relation to building a house larger than allowed based on lot size. I think we should, in commentary, recognize that there are concerns about almost every new project, but that we will take all comments seriously. However, many objections shouldn't hinder the value of a new housing project because there are so many offsetting positives to the community as a whole.

I think this would have been particularly appropriate for Church-Darrow and South Boulevard. It's interesting that even though the Grant project wasn't affordable housing, neighbors expressed objections about this development that are usually addressed about affordable housing developments.

I also think that the Church-Darrow project and South Boulevard will enhance their neighborhoods, not detract from them.  I think that in some cases we should go on the offensive. Really, we're speaking to the commissions and the City Council at this time. 

Outreach to Evanston communities, I know, is a next step."