NIMBY = Protect Our Neighborhood

NIMBY has been used to make people feel guilty about not wanting an offensive land use next to, or near their homes or property.  The thought is, "we have to put obnoxious part of our social existence  somewhere, so you should not complain if it impacts you because you benefit too."

But the other side of the coin of NIMBYism, is the fierce desire in each of us to protect our homes and surroundings.  Whoever coined the term, NIMBY, surely had a commercial purpose in mind, and most likely lived in a home secure from assaults to their quality of life.  NIMBY is not a bad thing, as long as we don't then dump our troubles onto some other neighborhood in the desire to protect one's own.  This is a fight we undertake as neighbors so when the problem moves down the block to our homes, they too will sense the urgency to protect ours.

For most inhabitants, the small town character of Lake Oswego is worth fighting for along with what happens on our own street.  Resistance to the Wizer Block development is widespread; we seek to protect our small-town way of life, and our safe, quiet neighborhoods from the onslaught of increased density - especially when done in an offensive, and unalterable fashion.

A letter to the editor in this week's Lake Oswego review caught my eye.  The author, a resident of Old Town, commented on the Wizer Block development to say that it was a good thing and in the right place.  However, a few years prior, the same person spoke to the Planning Commission about the Comprehensive Plan and conceding his neighborhood was zoned for multifamily, peaded for no more.  Follow the links for the entire scripts.

Contrast Reamer's 2009 comments  to the Planning Commission, to the Letter to the Editor in the 1/16/2014 Lake Oswego Review:

1/12/2009

The Old Town Neighborhood Association is very concerned about the pressure to increase density in the Old Town Neighborhood.

We are keenly aware that we are zoned multi-family, and we also know the history of that 1975 change in use and the parties and motivations involved.  And of course there are issues of land use surrounding Metro requirements, compliance, urban growth boundaries, etc., but we also feel strongly that our neighborhood has more than adequately met its share of those requirements, and the time has come to stop.

We would encourage the Planning Commission to look at neighborhood needs and desires when you review the Comprehensive Plan and code modifications.  We would encourage this process to move along and not get stuck in "process."  The character of the neighborhood should be protected.  In many neighborhoods, not only Old Town, the vision and character of the neighborhood has been set down in print.  Unfortunately, infill has become the by-word and excuse for high density.  And in the name of  infill, house size, lot lines, scale, and setback are sacrificed and the character of the neighborhood is unalterably changed.  

Richard Reamer

Chair of the Old Town Neighborhood Association

1/16/2014

Years ago I applauded the original discussion of density when it related to our neighborhoods but these aren’t our residential neighborhoods. The Wizer block and Foothills are the precise places where increased density should go. They are places that actually could have better access to amenities than many of our neighborhoods. They have grocery stores, retail, transit centers, recreation, entertainment and restaurants. Why would we not want our need for increased housing be located there?

I’m not sure of the answer but I could guess fear of change, a fear of something new. I suspect some people would just as soon put gates at the city limits rather than welcome signs. It seems this continuing density argument is a smokescreen for something else — no more people.

And finally, we don’t live on quarter-acre plots of land any more. We’re not a village when McMansions and three-story 4,000-square-foot houses are more common than bungalows. We’re not a village any more when planning and DRC hear requests for residential zero lot lines and setbacks.

Richard Reamer

Here is an excerpt of a Letter to the Editor from the same 1/16/2014 newspaper:

1/16/2014

I think we should strive for something better: a development that complements and improves our downtown — not this current proposal that will overwhelm its neighbors and possibly ruin Lake View Village and the plaza.

Diana Boom
Secretary of the Evergreen Neighborhood Association