Issue 1: Community Revitalization

NIMBYism Newsbrief

by Sheila Crowley

Good news for advocates, residents, and developers of housing for low income people! Research by Briggs, Darden, and Aidala (“In the Wake of Desegregation,” Journal of the American Planning Association, Winter 1999) adds to the small, but growing, body of evidence debunking the commonly held view that assisted housing per se adversely affects property values and community cohesion in the neighborhoods in which it is located.

The Housing Authority of Yonkers, New York, under a court ordered desegregation plan, built 200 units of public housing in seven sites in predominately white, middle income neighborhoods. Very low income Black and Latino families occupied the new units. Analysis of housing sales records from 1985 to 1996 indicates no discernable effect on surrounding property values either after the location of the new public housing was announced or after the new residents moved in.

Moreover, a survey of white homeowners who lived near the new scatter-site housing and who lived elsewhere in the city found similar levels of satisfaction with their neighborhoods between the two groups. In fact, those who lived near the public housing were committed to staying in their homes for longer periods of time than people in other parts of the city. Nor did proximity to the public housing have a significant effect on the sense of community and control over their neighborhoods felt by all residents, renters and homeowners alike. The group most likely to be dissatisfied with their neighborhood was white male homeowners who lived near the assisted housing and who held conservative political opinions and stereotypically negative racial attitudes.

The findings of the Yonkers study are particularly noteworthy because the political and social context in which the new development took place was highly charged. The leadership of Yonkers strenuously resisted the desegregation order and predictions of dire consequences to the receiving communities were widespread. The forecasted ill effects did not occur.

It is the rare developer of housing for low income people and people with special needs who has not faced fierce opposition to siting. Even local elected officials who are sympathetic to the housing needs of their low income citizens will buckle under NIMBY pressure from more prosperous residents who cite the certainty of declining property values as the justification for their objections. My observation is that the property value argument is often code for bias or fear of people who are different from themselves. This study provides housing advocates with valuable data to help local officials overcome resistance to affordable housing programs and their reluctance to make politically risky decisions.