NIMBY's Strike again ...this time in Tempe (living, moving)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
From a technical perspective, you are right. A newborn is now a valley native. I was defining a "Valley Native" like observer53 who is a longtime resident. After all, this area has exploded in population over the past 40 years. So to clarify, I would say older valley natives (in their 40's and 50's) are in the severe minority.
I'm not in my 40s but I do agree that as a Valley Native myself, I don't find many like me in my age bracket compared to the overall population, other than the ones I knew growing up.
While I think new2colo logic is "out there" on this topic, some of us have taken notice when it comes to your themed posts. I get the feeling that you think you are more virtuous than others simply because you are a "Valley Native". There are a lot of "Valley Native" posters here at C-D. But they don't have your bite in their posts like you do and they are more professional than posting things like "WAAAH WAAAH" and "New2Zona". If you disagree with someone, say so but do it professionally. Dropping your "Valley Native" card has become overused. Other long term residents are not fans about the high rises either. Partially because of the title of the thread.
Have you read that poster's other comments? A lot of what he/she posts is quite negative ... and worse yet, carries a tone of arrogance, especially the parts telling others to move if they don't share the same viewpoints. A newcomer telling natives & long term residents to move is very unprofessional and unacceptable. Maybe it's a matter of being more virtuous on my part, but it's a matter of who was here first. I equate it to the complainers who decide to live within close proximity of Luke AFB or Sky Harbor and then protest the jet noise. Who was there first? Obviously the AFB and the airport were in place long before those NIMBYs moved in, and Luke & Sky Harbor shouldn't have to change just to suit the newbies.
I'm wondering if you ever had the "pleasure" of dealing with NIMBYs on a personal level. I have (in my own neighborhood), and I can assure you that they can be some of the most pompous, stubborn, and despicable individuals I have ever met. NIMBYs usually have no financial stake in the land or the projects they are protesting ... so it's really none of their concern what somebody decides to build on his/her land. NIMBYs only care about "their" tranquility, "their" mountain views, or "their" sunlight being obstructed by development. Ironically, many NIMBY types are transplants. They not only protest highrises/midrises, but other things like freeways, stadiums, airports, and theme parks to name a few. If they like their desert settings, mountains, and tranquility that much, why do they live in a large metro area such as this where those things are less prevalent???
Quote:
Originally Posted by MN-Born-n-Raised
Since the Valley has exploded in population, "Valley Natives" are now the severe minority. The reality is once someone moves into your town and they get a vote, then the deck gets reshuffled. It is what it is. I can appreciate your opinion (you make many valid points). But it is time to minimize your self righteous "valley Native" attitude. Even though it does mean something to me, growing up here isn't your trump card (pun intended).
Let me harp on the first part of your statement ("since the Valley has exploded in population"). This precisely why NIMBYs are way off base in their opposition: the Valley has grown by leaps & bounds, so development of all kinds is going to occur whether NIMBYs approve of it or not. And with a larger population comes more diversity. Not everybody is wanting a low density suburban neighborhood. There will always be a market for that, but there is now a greater demand for higher density development in the form of infill and taller buildings. To be so vocally against these projects is absolutely ludicrous, especially in Tempe which has one of the densest urban cores.
Have you read that poster's other comments? A lot of what he/she posts is quite negative ... and worse yet, carries a tone of arrogance, especially the parts telling others to move if they don't share the same viewpoints. A newcomer telling natives & long term residents to move is very unprofessional and unacceptable. Maybe it's a matter of being more virtuous on my part, but it's a matter of who was here first. I equate it to the complainers who decide to live within close proximity of Luke AFB or Sky Harbor and then protest the jet noise. Who was there first? Obviously the AFB and the airport were in place long before those NIMBYs moved in, and Luke & Sky Harbor shouldn't have to change just to suit the newbies.
I'm wondering if you ever had the "pleasure" of dealing with NIMBYs on a personal level. I have (in my own neighborhood), and I can assure you that they can be some of the most pompous, stubborn, and despicable individuals I have ever met. NIMBYs usually have no financial stake in the land or the projects they are protesting ... so it's really none of their concern what somebody decides to build on his/her land. NIMBYs only care about "their" tranquility, "their" mountain views, or "their" sunlight being obstructed by development. Ironically, many NIMBY types are transplants. They not only protest highrises/midrises, but other things like freeways, stadiums, airports, and theme parks to name a few. If they like their desert settings, mountains, and tranquility that much, why do they live in a large metro area such as this where those things are less prevalent???
Let me harp on the first part of your statement ("since the Valley has exploded in population"). This precisely why NIMBYs are way off base in their opposition: the Valley has grown by leaps & bounds, so development of all kinds is going to occur whether NIMBYs approve of it or not. And with a larger population comes more diversity. Not everybody is wanting a low density suburban neighborhood. There will always be a market for that, but there is now a greater demand for higher density development in the form of infill and taller buildings. To be so vocally against these projects is absolutely ludicrous, especially in Tempe which has one of the densest urban cores.
And there's plenty of space left in the designated, voter approved urban core for projects this size. More going in as we speak. Low density suburban neighborhoods have a place in Tempe, too.
And there's plenty of space left in the designated, voter approved urban core for projects this size. More going in as we speak. Low density suburban neighborhoods have a place in Tempe, too.
Lower density areas are more common in south Tempe. The area of interest is just west of the downtown/Mill Avenue district. With that particular area being so close to one of the densest cores in the entire Valley, it makes no sense to be so vocally opposed to what amounts to a midrise development at best. I saw the design, and it's admittedly not the most attractive in the world, but it would still be more aesthetically pleasing than what's currently there. This is what I can't understand about NIMBY types: they balk against something that could actually enhance the neighborhood & increase property values, but they don't protest the presence of ugly vacant dirt lots that accumulate weeds, trash, and blight.
Lower density areas are more common in south Tempe. The area of interest is just west of the downtown/Mill Avenue district. With that particular area being so close to one of the densest cores in the entire Valley, it makes no sense to be so vocally opposed to what amounts to a midrise development at best. I saw the design, and it's admittedly not the most attractive in the world, but it would still be more aesthetically pleasing than what's currently there. This is what I can't understand about NIMBY types: they balk against something that could actually enhance the neighborhood & increase property values, but they don't protest the presence of ugly vacant dirt lots that accumulate weeds, trash, and blight.
Depends on how you describe "just" west, and "south" Tempe. I've lived in Tempe over forty years, I know where the neighborhoods are and where the big apartment buildings are. Single family home neighborhoods are found all over the city, north to south, east to west.
I didn't get a chance to drive by there Sunday as I planned, but as I understand it from City of Tempe documents, the land in question is not vacant., at least not entirely so The residents of the area are entitled to different opinions than yours, or the developer's, about whether a large apartment building "enhances" their neighborhood, without being called NIMBYs. As I recall the Tempe 2040 plan, it has a strong component of preserving neighborhoods.
And, if you make one exception to the urban core, then the next one comes along that they'll say is "well, just a bit outside the core", and so on and so on. Don't get me wrong, I like what's going on in the designated urban core; but it doesn't need to extend its boundaries with that big a project. The camel's nose can stay outside the tent.
And there's plenty of space left in the designated, voter approved urban core for projects this size. More going in as we speak. Low density suburban neighborhoods have a place in Tempe, too.
Right, and I don't want to be lumped in with those that say this type of product isn't wanted in the valley - it is, and I like seeing these type developments in the right areas. Like I said, keep it between Ash and College (or on the lake), in what is actually downtown Tempe. Downtown Tempe still has many plots of land that are underutilized and I would like to see that core developed first before branching away from downtown. You can say Hardy and 1st is "close" to downtown, but the fact is, it's a ways from light rail and is a more sparsely populated area with single family homes and 2-3 story apartment buildings. The one exception to increased height outside of downtown is the Apache Corridor, which is directly on the light rail line so we're seeing TOD replacing previous lower uses such as trailer parks and motels, and I'm OK with that.
Yes, we older folks who have been here at least since childhood are likely now a minority (I'd like to see some statistics on that issue). But everyone gets to have an opinion. The amount of knowledge/experience with the area (and the characteristics of the other places they have lived) may influence that opinion, and how others perceive that opinion, but everyone gets to have one.
Some interesting numbers on the topic of native AZ's that frankly surprised me:
"In 2012, only 38 percent of Arizonans were natives."
"Between 1900 and 2012, only 31 percent to 43 percent of Arizona residents were natives. The rest, well, it's a pretty hearty mix of Southerners and Midwesterners, though it depends on the time frame."
Interesting interactive migration map in/out of AZ & other states:
"In 2012, only 38 percent of Arizonans were natives."
"Between 1900 and 2012, only 31 percent to 43 percent of Arizona residents were natives. The rest, well, it's a pretty hearty mix of Southerners and Midwesterners, though it depends on the time frame."
Interesting interactive migration map in/out of AZ & other states:
Those figures don't surprise me. If you added in the folks like me who "might as well be natives" because we moved here before we started kindergarten, and those who moved here as grade school age kids, the number would likely level out. There's quite a few of us still here!
"In 2012, only 38 percent of Arizonans were natives."
"Between 1900 and 2012, only 31 percent to 43 percent of Arizona residents were natives. The rest, well, it's a pretty hearty mix of Southerners and Midwesterners, though it depends on the time frame."
Interesting interactive migration map in/out of AZ & other states:
Not surprised that Illinois ranks so high for us. That why we have so much deep dish!
There you go!
The one thing that I'm still surprised at is going back 100+ years and how the "born in AZ" population remained so consistent. I would have guessed we'd see a steady drop in that population for a while now with so many new people coming into the state, "watering" down in a sense that population segment.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A newborn is now a valley native. I was defining a "Valley Native" like observer53 who is a longtime resident. After all, this area has exploded in population over the past 40 years. So to clarify, I would say older valley natives (in their 40's and 50's) are in the severe minority.
If you disagree with someone, say so but do it professionally. Dropping your "Valley Native" card has become overused. 
Other long term residents are not fans about the high rises either. Partially because of the title of the thread.
