Chronotope’s Twitter Archive—№ 76,449

The idea that NIMBY and YIMBY are the only two stances for dealing with housing issues is terrible and *not joking* hurting America.
Permalink On twitter.com ❤️ 3 Favorites 2017 Feb 17 Mood -5 🙁

…in reply to @Chronotope
Neighborhood cohesion, gentrification and supply and demand are all factors in a much more complex equation than "More housing Y/N?"
Permalink On twitter.com 2017 Feb 17 Mood -1 🙁

…in reply to @Chronotope
The oversimplification of housing supply and demand considerations is hurting both NIMBY and YIMBY people at every step of discussion.
Permalink On twitter.com 2017 Feb 17 Mood -5 🙁

…in reply to @Chronotope
Sure, more density is needed, but if that prices out humans in exchange for more units used to hide money in, it isn't really density is it?
On twitter.com ❤️ 1 Favorite 2017 Feb 17 Mood -1 🙁

…in reply to @Chronotope
And if the density pushes out stores and culture than you're basically building a self-destructing neighborhood. Not sustainable.
Permalink On twitter.com ❤️ 2 Favorites 2017 Feb 17 Mood -2 🙁

…in reply to @Chronotope
But also resistance to increasing housing density is just racism in action. Which should be defeated.
Permalink On twitter.com ♻️ 1 Retweets ❤️ 3 Favorites 2017 Feb 17 Mood -5 🙁

…in reply to @Chronotope
These three tweets are already more complex than the average NIMBY vs YIMBY housing article and that sucks for all of us.
Permalink On twitter.com ❤️ 2 Favorites 2017 Feb 17 Mood -3 🙁

…in reply to @Chronotope
It would just be awesome if we could all understand that any housing action has to start with lower middle-class residents first.
Permalink On twitter.com ♻️ 1 Retweets ❤️ 1 Favorite 2017 Feb 17 Mood +4 🙂

…in reply to @Chronotope
Building unaffordable neighborhoods will always eventually kill themselves, even if the greedy win temporarily.
Permalink On twitter.com ❤️ 1 Favorite 2017 Feb 17 Mood -1 🙁

…in reply to @Chronotope
NYC housing policy, for example, is creating a bloated market selling unaffordable units to rich people who don't live in them.
Permalink On twitter.com ❤️ 2 Favorites 2017 Feb 17 Mood +1 🙂

…in reply to @Chronotope
Eventually we'll just end up with a wasteland of empty streets and fully sold apartment buildings with a dead city in-between them.
Permalink On twitter.com 2017 Feb 17 Mood -4 🙁

…in reply to @Chronotope
And NYC knows from Times Square of old what type of environment that leads to. One not easy to fix.
Permalink On twitter.com 2017 Feb 17 Mood -1 🙁

…in reply to @Chronotope
Policy that balanced living humans in units with market forces and sustainable neighborhoods is badly needed...
Permalink On twitter.com ❤️ 1 Favorite 2017 Feb 17 Mood 0

…in reply to @Chronotope
But no one even has policy tools in place to understand much less maintain thru law a sustainable neighborhood. But that *is* what we need
Permalink On twitter.com ❤️ 1 Favorite 2017 Feb 17 Mood +1 🙂

…in reply to @Chronotope
The point is that you can't just throw a bunch of housing developers at some property and get a working sustainable city block out of it.
Permalink On twitter.com ❤️ 1 Favorite 2017 Feb 17 Mood +1 🙂

…in reply to @Chronotope
But you also can't freeze development and expect your city to be healthy. Strangle or Bloat, the solution is somewhere in-between.
Permalink On twitter.com ❤️ 1 Favorite 2017 Feb 17 Mood +3 🙂

Search tweets' text