I live near a small town of about 10,000 people that's about 30 minutes away from a "hot commodity" city. The crown jewel of this small town is the main street, which retains a bit of kitschy Americana that has remained charming for decades and even draws tourists, for whatever reason.

A local business owner bought up one of the blocks in the center of the street and announced plans to demolish it in order to build a 5-over-1 complex several stories higher than any of the other buildings.

Without the public comment process, he'd have been able to do this practically overnight, completely ruining the street. The public fought back long and hard for many months and eventually won by convincing the town council to vote against the rezoning that would permit this construction.

I can't say I'm opposed to the public comment process.

(Note that this was not a case of never-change NIMBYism; tons of other similar buildings are going up all over the town completely unopposed. It was the ugly, generic design and the sheer size put so blatantly in the middle of everyone's favorite part of town.)

▲

tptacek 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I don't know, this sure sounds like NIMBYism to me. Public comment was used to organize against multifamily housing units. That's approximately the whole story; I think you pretty much just have to add "organizing against new renewable and grid upgrades" to complete it.

▲

quacked 2 hours ago | parent [-]

They weren't multifamily units.

	▲	alex43578 an hour ago \| parent [-]
		"5-over-1 or over-1s, also known as a one-plus-five or a podium building,[1] is a type of multi-family residential building commonly found in urban areas of North America", so either you're wrong about them wanting to build a 5 over 1 or wrong about them being multi-family.

▲

lacy_tinpot 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

If it's everyone's favorite part of town why not just codify it at the city level?

	▲	quacked 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		That's what they're working on next.

▲

sethherr 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

You clarified it wasn’t “never change NIMBYism” - was it a case of just changes I don’t like NIMBYism?

▲

quacked 2 hours ago | parent [-]

As I understand it, NIMBYism is "don't ever build anything anywhere in the neighborhood/town", not "don't build in this one spot we all really like". As I said, there are tons of other buildings going up over town.

	▲	greatquux an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Exactly. The "my" in "my backyard" can apply to everyone therefore nothing gets built. The alternative is everything gets built. There has to be a middle ground, which is what zoning laws are meant to accomplish. We have buildings and multi-family housing going up in our town too, but we also have historically-protected buildings on the main street that require some more work if you want to do stuff with them. This is a good balance.
	▲	tptacek an hour ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		It's literally "don't build on this one spot I really like". It's in the name!