NIMBY
Ever
heard of NIMBY?
I’ve
got a feeling that before this essay ends, we’ll be looking toward
its central idea as an example of things.
NIMBY
stands for Not In
My Back
Yard. To my knowledge it was
born from people with good intentions. Think of a prison, and
you get the idea why some people would immediately not want it
built on the property adjacent to theirs.
But
NIMBY has shifted a bit over time. Might have even been named
after the shift. These days, the overall concept remains that
someone doesn’t want something built next door. But, it has come
to include things like landfills and national restaurant chains
and more, where the people against building it aren’t debating
the potential community benefits of such facilities, they just
want them placed near someone else. They’re not telling us they
don’t want Building Project A or don’t need Building Project A,
but they want it placed outside a comfortable radius from their
property.
I
think anyone that signs a lease or arranges a mortgage can appreciate
the potential frustrations. You select a residence for certain
reasons. Number of bedrooms and bathrooms. Size of the yard for
pets. Schools. The view. You did your homework, explored the neighborhood,
and maybe even visited town hall. Everything from the views to
property taxes is great to acceptable. Then, three years after
you move in, something begins getting discussed by politicians
and community businesses. Never mentioned before. Five years after
you move in, a new landfill is operating or townhouses being sold,
with the edge of that property wedged right up against the edge
of yours.
Chances
are good that a strong majority don’t pick a place for their new
home based on the possibility of a shopping center being constructed
directly across the road.
But
I wonder.
Many
years ago, there was a great story that came out of Wisconsin.
Woman wanted a chain restaurant in her community. The public went
bonkers about it. They didn’t like her request. They pointed out
that their town had been able to avoid many multi-location businesses
in favor of unique locally owned stores and restaurants. They
named dining options nearby that offered high quality menus. They
basically asked her if she was thinking clearly. But all she wanted
was bottomless salads and endless breadsticks.
I
just recently learned that the community is now, many years later,
set to add an Olive Garden. And government officials are bragging
about the arrival as long overdue. Times, I suppose, evolve.
But
do they?
Sure,
new arrivals and efforts are going to be promoted and cheered.
What I’m not as sure of is someone that doesn’t like sweets suddenly
caring about the opening of a new place featuring homemade ice
cream. I think it becomes more a question of individual preferences.
If
you exercise and love being outdoors, news that your city is going
to invest in preserving a section of land while investing a few
million dollars to create scenic walking and bicycle paths around
it would probably be exciting. But if you don’t leave the house
much, and those dollars came at the expense of fixing the sidewalks
near your apartment building, and maintaining the park comes with
a rise in property taxes, the emotional response could be quite
different.
It's
a “what about me?” response. It’s real. And it should be considered.
I’m not saying it means saying no to a new bike path. I am saying
it’s the heart of what makes decisions in Alaska different than
decisions in North Carolina, decisions in Chicago different than
decisions in Key West.
I
can hear trains occasionally. Not often, but occasionally. I kind
of like it, but I’m happy they’re off in the distance.