I'm not a NIMBY. I'm all for dense, walkable communities that have a range of housing types for everyone. Cities are coming back and that's exactly what I've wanted as a result of my career. 1/
YIMBYs have a very valid point - there's currently not enough of the urban built environment around to support everyone who wants it, and if we believe in cities, we must create cities. 2/
But the community development and housing activists who've aligned themselves under the (unfortunate, IMO) PHIMBY name? I also agree with them. 3/
I see a fundamental philosophical difference between YIMBYs/PHIMBYs. PHIMBYs want low-income nghbd revitalization. YIMBYs do too, but it doesn't seem to be a primary objective like it does for PHIMBYs. It's a side effect. 4/
Most PHIMBYs (I prefer CEDers) want nghbd investment that brings new amenities and opportunities for existing residents. YIMBYs seem to have anxiety over their impact in nghbds, so choose to stay away from places where their investment has the greatest impact. 5/
I fear that upzoning measures have the impact of substantially increasing housing and investment in general in the hottest nghbds, while leaving the low-income nghbds starving for investment untouched. 6/
I'd rather pursue a path of meaningful engagement between nghbd newcomers and longtime residents, so that benefits accrue to many, not just a few. 7/
I think there are community/economic development types who would welcome meaningful nghbd investment commonly called "gentrification", if given a chance to manage its impacts and help existing residents. 8/
Part of the frustration that PHIMBY/CEDers might have with YIMBYs is upzoning potentially cuts off the opportunity to actually have meaningful nghbd investment in low-income areas. 9/
I understand the YIMBY anxiety regarding displacement but I think engagement is the answer, not avoidance. 10/10
