Post

Three great reported essays on the inter generational conflict over housing and active transportation, particularly in Northern California: First, a Berkeley-raised writer’s exploration of his parents’ generation’s complicated feelings about the proposed apartments and the Hopkins bike lane:

Second, @jerusalem.bsky.social on the environmentalist movement’s generational conflict over urban housing and other climate infrastructure. (Gift link) www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archiv...

The 3rd article was 4 years ago. Any progress on building the condos on she opposed?

People like where they live snd change puts that at legit risk. YIMBYs (of which I am one) need to grasp it rather than seeing these folks as racist or other isms.

yes, naked self interest often militates against the wider good, and one of YIMBYism's greatest accomplishments has been to remove the smug veneer of righteousness/environmentalism/ social justice that incumbent homeowners use to disguise it.

This new one by Charley Locke re Oakland seniors being against senior housing is good too: www.bloomberg.com/news/feature...

An interesting thread running through all three articles is the conflation of the 1950s suburbanization boom with contemporary housing construction - none of them quite seem to approach that it is not building, but *what is built*, that is environmentally friendly or unfriendly