To play devil's advocate, protecting one's (likely) most significant investment is not selfish - it is reasonable. The fact that you do not like their actions doe snot make them any less reasonable and sane.
back
5 comments
> protecting one's (likely) most significant investment
Because some additional housing is going to completely crater house prices in the area?
I don't buy it.
You can get more out of a house than resale value, and thus "protecting" doesn't pertain only to resale value.
If you buy a house because it has a nice view of the mountains, fighting billboards that obstruct your view is "protecting your investment".
I can understand protecting genuinely historic stuff, but Silicon Valley? The area is all about change. If there weren't constant change, the area would still be rural.
I can understand wanting to channel it to some degree, too, but it's ultimately an iron triangle where something has to give. Right now, it's the less economically fortunate who are getting turfed out and losing access to an area that generates a phenomenal amount of wealth.
It's reasonably selfish. People by homes expecting their value to be retained; housing density increase tends to have the opposite effect. To the extent they can protect their investments, you'd expect people to do so.
> housing density increase tends to have the opposite effect.
Which is why house prices in Manhattan and Paris are so low?
I think 'reasonable' has many nuances. One can definitely sympathize. Although a truly selfish person who isn't shortsighted could be better served by making sure that other members of society on whom he depends on can live in the same neighbourhood as well.
Their property would be worth even more than it already is if more dense development was allowed.
It's not strictly a matter of protecting investments and real estate values. Many people simply don't enjoy living in dense areas. They prefer having a little space, privacy, and quiet. There's nothing wrong with wanting that, and the complaints by residents who have been there for years about the impacts of greater density are legitimate.