Hurdles for Housing Diversity

NIMBY.

Please make sure your comments are substantive, not personal, and not name calling. This forum is for encouraging adult discussion amongst members of the Cape Elizabeth community.

A Public Apology — My intent in using the term, “NIMBY” (“Not In My BackYard”), was to answer the question posed (“What are the greatest hurdles to supporting housing diversity and affordability in Cape Elizabeth?”) and not to be pejorative. I apologize for using the term without a substantive response explaining my use of the term, which usually carries a negative connotation.

Here is what I should have added: There may be value in recognizing the concept, the ramifications on public discourse, and the varied motivations that might be at the core of opposition to change, whatever that change might be and in whatever community.

Two links that might be of interest with regard to the term and its impact on discourse and decision making follow. The first is from The Atlantic and the second is a recent scholarly article describing how “NIMBYism” was a barrier to housing and social mix in San Francisco. The latter in particular points out impact on public hearings.

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2011/08/is-nimby-a-bad-word/243874/

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8149917/

Again, my apologies. I hope that the above comment is constructive and is received in the positive manner intended.

@Mylan Cohen Thanks for all of this. I didn't take your first comment in context as derogatory toward any particular individual, but I deeply appreciate the thoughtfulness of your reply here as well as the links to these other resources.

Thank you for the explanation and detailed comment, that is very helpful.

Trying to solve all issues with housing. Is it for diversity? families? Local workers such as police, fire, teachers? Downsizing so empty nesters move out? We need clarity of who it is for and then we can tackle how and where

Some zoning regulations are a barrier. Several of our most desirable (and quite beautiful) neighborhoods are more dense than newer ones, which have had to conform to regulations requiring larger lot sizes and larger set-backs. Oakhurst, for example, would not be able to be built today. My neighborhood has larger required lot sizes and set-backs than Oakhurst, but it is not any nicer. The primary difference seems to be simply more grass on larger lots, less housing for people. So... I would like to see us reduce minimum lot sizes, reduce minimum set-backs, at least to what our historical neighborhoods have. Also, I would like mixed-use buildings to be permitted more widely.

Here is a piece illustrating a highly desirable Sarasota, Florida neighborhood that does not conform to the current zoning. - with lots of photos (Laurel Park, a Sarasota neighborhood) https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2023/2/21/a-century-old-neighborhood-provides-a-model-for-the-present-day?apcid=0062ed9d8e3aad1e37dd7700

I know from the documentation compiled by Camoin Associates that there isn't a lot of available acreage to support new development. Current zoning regulations are also a limitation, but that is by design...to maintain a rural/agrarian feel to Cape Elizabeth. Significantly changing zoning regulations in zones already developed would not likely be well received by those living in those zones. When people choose a place to live, they account for the "as is" environment in their decision - changing a zone significantly seems unfair. I think new zoning regulations for undeveloped areas might help with options for really dense housing.