Alessandro Rigolon
banner
alerigolon.bsky.social
Alessandro Rigolon
@alerigolon.bsky.social

Associate prof of urban planning. Research on green space equity, green gentrification, climate adaptation, and health equity. Love SLC, my family, and the great outdoors. Opinions (good or bad) are my own 🇮🇹🇺🇸 🌩️👀 rJgnW3igNgz7 .. more

Environmental science 45%
Geography 11%
Pinned
My older daughter learned to ride a bike today. She was so happy. As she was riding, she said, “I feel free.” My heart is full.

Utah towns near national parks have already seen a big decline in foreign visitors due to the president’s shenanigans. This move to make national parks more expensive for international tourists will put the nail in the coffin for those gateway towns
National parks have SO MANY people from other countries (since they get real vacations!)

And they spend a lot of money on hotels, food, souvenirs, etc.

This is unbelievably dumb, it will destroy entire tourist towns

I still remember when tenant groups in SLC fought against re-legalizing SROs. I can’t even

Utah officials: “you’re already breathing the Great Salt Lake arsenic dust. No need to ingest arsenic via your Thanksgiving turkey, too
We get amazing public safety warnings in Utah www.fox13now.com/news/local-n...

Utah leaders treat California like the ex girlfriend they’re totally still in love with but pretend so hard to be over her
Some of the greatest hits by the Utah GOP, all in one article:

1. Baseless fearmongering about Utah turning into California
2. A disdain for voters being able to choose for themselves.

Classic

We already breathe the arsenic dust. We don’t need to put it in our food too
National parks have SO MANY people from other countries (since they get real vacations!)

And they spend a lot of money on hotels, food, souvenirs, etc.

This is unbelievably dumb, it will destroy entire tourist towns

One more thing: governments in various countries fund this kind of research. As they keep over-funding car infrastructure. Checks out

Much of that research frames pedestrians and cyclists as an impediment to the free flow of cars. An inconvenience. And it uses findings on compliance to suggest policies on street design or traffic lights timing that maximizes level of service. Deaths from non compliance are collateral damage

As I work on a literature review on traffic calming, I have found so much transportation engineering research focusing on pedestrians' + cyclists' compliant vs. non-compliant behaviors. Victim-blaming kind of research. That helps explain that profession's attitude toward non-car road users

I'll take this one step further: The city-imposed design and facade mandates are often created based on community engagement processes. So the same people who contributed to these standards might be the ones who later complain about new projects looking ugly
What if I told you they all look *like that* because of city-imposed design and facade mandates, not because people (or developers) like them?

Hot take: Elected officials and planners should dismiss complaints about the aesthetics of new housing projects and counteract that we have a housing affordability and homelessness crisis.

That said, this looks like a a great paper
NEW PAPER w/ @cselmendorf.bsky.social & @jkalla.bsky.social:

An under-appreciated reason why voters oppose dense new housing, especially in less-dense neighborhoods: they think it looks ugly and want to prevent that, even in other neighborhoods.

Some of what we think is NIMBYism might not be!

PS: This is real. It's not The Onion

We get amazing public safety warnings in Utah www.fox13now.com/news/local-n...

Reposted by Alessandro Rigolon

What if I told you they all look *like that* because of city-imposed design and facade mandates, not because people (or developers) like them?

And the same housing and transportation policies at the state and local levels that caused all of that

Someone needs to use AI to make an image of the GOP leadership as a classic rock band

We have absolutely zero immediate danger of any of that

They're like an aging rock band, with a few old trite singles, and that's all they can play, regardless of the show. The crowd even asked them to stop playing them because they're tired of hearing the same old songs, but they can't help playing those songs

Some of the greatest hits by the Utah GOP, all in one article:

1. Baseless fearmongering about Utah turning into California
2. A disdain for voters being able to choose for themselves.

Classic
NEW PAPER w/ @cselmendorf.bsky.social & @jkalla.bsky.social:

An under-appreciated reason why voters oppose dense new housing, especially in less-dense neighborhoods: they think it looks ugly and want to prevent that, even in other neighborhoods.

Some of what we think is NIMBYism might not be!

Sorry if I misinterpreted, but “always show their colors” seemed to imply that

That no YIMBY group supports social housing or tenant protections

Some of your statements aren’t true so I’ll leave this here as an example cayimby.org/legislation/...
AB 2053 - California YIMBY
This bill would establish the California Housing Authority, an independent state body, and authorize this authority to construct housing and lease it to a mix of household income ranges through an own...
cayimby.org

The issue is that those “starter” homes aren’t that affordable anymore in SLC. So we could protect them (and to some extent we do via historic preservation districts) but they’re no longer affordable for middle class households

That’s right. There is a flawed understanding that if we don’t allow development we can freeze the neighborhood in time and people won’t get displaced. That isn’t true, especially in Utah where tenant protections don’t exist and landlords can just raise the rent or evict people

Single family zoning was born from classism and racism (right NIMBY) in the early 1900s. What is hard to comprehend is that left NIMBYs today often defend that exclusionary zoning as a way to stop development, which they believe will limit displacement (a fact free assertion)

Left YIMBY: build anything, especially social housing; protect renters
Left NIMBY: build only social housing; protect renters; developers shouldn’t make a profit
Right YIMBY: build only market rate housing. Property rights
Right NIMBY: build only luxury single family; density and cities are scary

Love this category, “Best NIMBYs”

Great question! My guess is that Cox has (1) more name recognition and (2) has been two-faced so that people are tired of him pretending to be moderate and then signing pretty much everything the legislature sends him

Congrats Max!