YIMBY Archives - Carolina Planning Journal

This week, we are featuring another book review from Volume 46 of the Carolina Planning Journal, The White Problem in Planning. Nora Louise Schwaller reflects on Conor Dougherty’s Golden Gates: Fighting for Housing in America.

Book Review by Nora Louise Schwaller

There is no state where an individual working a full-time minimum-wage job can afford a one-bedroom housing unit without paying in excess of 30% of their income, the standard benchmark for affordability. While stagnant wage growth has contributed to this issue, an increasing imbalance between supply and demand in the housing market is a major feature of the problem. In Golden Gates: Fighting for Housing in America, Conor Dougherty focuses on the ever-growing housing shortage by sharing stories from those living in the cities of the Bay Area, California. In doing this, Dougherty lends insight into the economics, laws, history, and human experiences behind the rising housing prices and reasons why ‘The Rent is Too Damn High’.

Dougherty is well suited to this task. He is both a Bay Area native and current resident. He works as an economics reporter for the New York Times, focusing on the West Coast, real estate, and wage stagnation. His experience allows him to write with both the sober perspective of a researcher and the insight of someone who has lived in the midst of this evolving crisis. This background gives him credible authority to note that he has never seen it quite so bad.

In San Francisco, the average rent for a 1-bedroom apartment is $2,650. Dougherty delves into the history of how we got here with clear-sighted nuance. The real-life characters in his book veer to polarized ends of the debate (e.g., affordable housing advocates who don’t want to see developers make a profit, or local residents who use racist dog-whistle comments to discuss the “horrors” of new housing construction). However, Dougherty balances the risks of displacement and homelessness with the practicalities of having the means to make money in and from a competitive housing market. In doing so, he gives fair consideration to those who often become the local villains of housing scarcity – the techies in their Google Buses, the developers, and suburban natives – by contextualizing them in the biases and incentive structures of local governments that often limit dense construction.

Dougherty anchors his book with Sonja Trauss, the founder of the Yes in My Back Yard (YIMBY) activism movement. The book begins with her first appearance at a public hearing where she spoke in favor of more housing just about anywhere in the Bay Area. She was nearly 30 then, an economics PhD drop-out oscillating between teaching math and working at a local bakery. At this time of her life, she was long on passion but short on concentration – with a list of discarded hobbies that included weight lifting, role playing games, and participating in comedy troupes. Affordable rent advocacy focused her, and before long, she was showing up at any public hearing on residential construction, from affordable mid-rises to high end apartments, asking them to build anything so long as it was more.

Her organization, coined San Francisco Bay Area Renters Federation (SF BARF), gave a voice to the disparate group of people who were hurt by the non-building of homes that they could have lived in, or that could have at least put downward pressure on rents. This was a marked shift in housing advocacy that expanded the conversation around new construction far beyond local residents and the project developers, the typical stakeholders. Her ‘build everything’ position, habit of inserting herself in local fights, and colorful comments put her at odds with traditional affordable housing non-profits, local residents, city councils, and developers. But her movement was designed to get attention, and she succeeded in attracting local reporters and big time donors.

While Dougherty does an admirable job noting the privilege of the YIMBY movement, which is predominantly white and often funded with tech money, this is not the main focus of the book. Still, he contrasts SF BARF with an impactful chapter covering advocacy by and for low-income service industry employees, who are often at the greatest risk of displacement. This includes an in-depth story centered on an apartment building that was bought and flipped in a majority Hispanic neighborhood. Through this process, Dougherty describes the actions and perspectives of the developers, the residents who suddenly found themselves faced with $1,000+ increases in monthly rent, the residents’ children, and local activists and charities. This chapter is reminiscent of influential reporting from the turn of the 19th century, such as the work captured in How the Other Half Lives by Jacob Riis, or mid-century activism work, such as The Death and Life of Great American Cities by Jane Jacobs. However, in this ending, the Robert Moseses of the world carry the day.

Dougherty makes clear that the housing shortage, and the displacement, homelessness, and inequity that follows it, calls for a human rights discussion centered on the conscience of the nation. While he discusses solutions such as imposing rent control, reducing building restrictions, changes to the building industry, and increasing multi-family zoning, they do not form the central thesis of the book. Instead, Golden Gates ends on how the housing crisis is, in many ways, about what we are willing to provide for those of us who have the least when it comes at the cost of those with more affluence and power. These moral questions are contrasted with the mismatch of incentives for addressing wide-spanning issues at the local level when the responsibility for the problem is diffused across states, countries, or even the global population. This point is captured by Steve Falk, a city planner for Lafayette, California, who resigned in the face of resident outrage during discussions on increasing density near a BART (light-rail transit) stop: “All cities – even small ones – have a responsibility to address the most significant challenges of our time: climate change, income inequality, and housing affordability” (116).

Golden Gates is on Time’s list of 100 Must-Read Books of 2020, is an Editor’s Choice of the New York Times, and is on Planetizen’s list for Top Urban Planning Books of 2020. These accolades are well deserved. The book is accessible to readers working outside of this subject area, and interesting to those, such as planners, working within it. Even housing scholars will find new insights and unfamiliar stories, while those without such a background will be able to pick it up and find themselves invested in the intricacies of local planning and the friction of the democratic process.

Buy Golden Gates here.

Find Volume 46 of the Carolina Planning Journal online here.

Nora Louise Schwaller is a PhD candidate at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill in the Department of City and Regional Planning, and a registered architect in the state of North Carolina. Her research interests focus on migration, climate change adaptation, and equitable recoveries.

By Elijah Gullett

In response to the post-2008 housing crisis, a pro-building, pro-development movement, often referred to as “Yes-In-My-Backyard” (YIMBYs), has grown significantly over the last few years. Self-titled YIMBY organizations (some more formal than others) have popped up across US cities to advocate for the abolition of “exclusionary” (single family) zoning, as well as other state and local regulations that slow the development process.^[i] The regulations they oppose vary, but typically include parking minimum requirements, building height restrictions, community input requirements, and historical preservation review boards. YIMBYs argue that exclusionary zoning increases the price of housing and furthers class and racial segregation.

On the other hand, there are more “traditional” housing justice activists who focus their energies on affordable housing programs, anti-displacement, anti-gentrification, and tenant organizing.^[ii] Housing justice advocates and YIMBYs have often found themselves at odds, with YIMBYs supporting the construction of “luxury” developments as a way to increase overall housing supply. Housing justice advocates often find themselves at the other end, protesting the construction of luxury housing, arguing that these developments propel gentrification forward and do not contribute at all to housing affordability.

In this piece, I argue that housing justice advocates and YIMBY activists need one another, and that each other’s positions are strengthened by the inclusion of the other. Previous attempts to create affordable housing and prevent displacement have often floundered, so it only makes sense that a new approach would be presented. Synthesizing these two approaches can help create a pragmatic and effective movement for affordable housing.

Where do they differ?

Housing justice activists often deride YIMBYs for their “neoliberal” approach to affordable housing, suggesting that YIMBYs believe increasing the supply of market-rate housing will be sufficient to solve the affordable housing crisis.^[iii] YIMBYs criticize traditional housing activists for halting housing development and being “NIMBYs” (Not-In-My-Backyard) activists. Eric Adams, the New York City Democratic mayoral candidate, recently derided anti-gentrification activists for protesting new housing developments, arguing that this seeming hypocrisy is part of the problem of affordable housing in NYC.^[iv]

Where do they converge?

The goals of housing affordability, sustainable urban development, safe streets, and transit diversity cannot be achieved without broad coalitions; despite their different ideologies, both sides fundamentally need each other for the subsequent reasons.

Firstly, and most importantly, affluent NIMBY homeowners who oppose all new housing construction (affordable or market-rate/“luxury”) are central to stalling new housing. Affluent, older individuals who have the finances and stability to attend town hall meetings regularly have far more sway over local decision-making. This pattern isn’t just anecdotal: research^[v] indicates that the individuals who are more likely to attend local political meetings are not representative of their own communities. They are typically white, wealthier people who are disproportionately homeowners.

This reality poses a stark problem for affordable housing advocates, regardless of their more specific positions. Renters, who have the most to gain from increased housing supply and affordable housing production, are highly underrepresented in local democratic proceedings.^[vi] They are less likely to live in the same place for long periods of time, they do not pay property taxes directly, and they are excluded from homeowners’ associations that give local community members so much leverage in political decision-making.

The underrepresentation of renters -the people most directly impacted by affordable housing policies – makes it all the more necessary for YIMBYs and housing justice advocates to work in tandem. On their own both sides are doomed to fail in the face of this entrenched power dynamic, but together they can create a sustainable movement for housing affordability. Furthermore, building this local political power provides the capacity for future tenant organizing to prevent evictions and displacement, and give tenants more leverage over landlords.

Also, the two sides’ policies often depend on each other. For example, local housing justice advocates across the country fight in favor of new affordable housing construction, but these projects are often shut down by local NIMBYs. Affordable housing faces other problems too: local governments may try to shut down housing along racist and classist lines through targeted rezoning,^[vii] and the often arduous process of affordable housing permitting and construction disincentivizes building new affordable units.^[viii] In these cases, the YIMBY policy toolkit is vital. Reducing permitting and land-use regulations and easing the process of residential development can make all the difference.

That being said, YIMBY advocates should engage more deeply with housing justice advocates’ criticisms. While data is beginning to show that new housing construction lowers nearby housing prices,^[ix] this relationship is not fully solidified. A case study from Chicago found the opposite to be true, suggesting local context matters. Furthermore, the YIMBY argument about housing market “filtering” – where housing units that begin as market-rate become increasingly affordable as they age – does not appear to always hold.^[x] Some housing markets, such as Los Angeles and Washington, DC, appear to filter “upwards,” and older units become more expensive. In these locations, market-based approaches are likely insufficient and should be supplemented with additional interventions.

Final Takeaways

America’s housing problems are huge and varied, ranging from a looming eviction crisis to broad housing unaffordability for renters, and will require a broad coalition of advocates to confront them.^[xi] Under these circumstances, infighting amongst factions who both believe that more housing, whether affordable or market-rate, is necessary to address these issues is unwise. Instead, the two movements should work together to protect low-income renters and build towards a future with abundant housing for all.^[xii]

^[i] California YIMBY. (2021) “2021 Policy Framework.”

^[ii] Tenants Together. (2021). “Mission and Vision.”

^[iii] Imbroscio, David. (January 2021). “Say It Ain’t So, Joe: Biden’s Ill-Advised Plan to Eliminate Exclusionary Zoning.” Shelter Force.

^[iv] Klein, Ezra & Adams, Eric. (October 2021). “‘We’ve Become too Complicated’: Where Eric Adams Thinks Democrats Went Wrong.” The New York Times.

^[v] Einstein, Katherine L., Glick, David M., & Palmer, Maxwell. (2019). “Neighborhood Defenders: Participatory Politics and America’s Housing Crisis.” Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/9781108769495

^[vi] Quednau, Rachel. (January 2017). “How Renters can be Neighborhood Advocates.” Strong Towns.

^[vii] Mississippi Center for Justice. (February 2016). “Mississippi Center for Justice and Venable LLP Sue City of Ridgeland, MS for Race-Based Fair Housing Violations.”

^[viii] Reid, Carolina. (March 2020). “The Costs of Affordable Housing Production: Insights from California’s 9% Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Program.” Terner Center for Housing Innovation.

^[ix] Li, Xiaodi. (October 2019). “Do New Housing Units in Your Backyard Raise Your

Rents?”

^[x] PD&R Edge. (June 2020). “Impacts of Filtering and Rent Control on Housing Supply.”

^[xi] Quigley, Fran. (September 2021). “America’s Housing Crisis Is About to Get Much, Much Worse.” Jacobin Magazine.

^[xii] Dumont, Andrew. (September 2019). “Housing Affordability in the U.S.: Trends by Geography, Tenure, and Household Income.” The Federal Reserve.

Elijah Gullett is a fourth-year undergraduate student majoring in Public Policy with minors in Urban Studies and Environmental Justice. His academic interests include fair and affordable housing, sustainable development, and LGBTQ+ urban life.

Edited by James Hamilton

Featured image: YIMBY & tenant activists rally for and against SB827 in California. Courtesy of Joseph Smooke

Tag: YIMBY

Book Review from the Journal: Golden Gates, Conor Dougherty

Join our announcements list

Back Issues