From NIMBY To YIMBY: Community Involvement Is Essential To The Success Of Smart Growth

Early next month, the District of Columbia Council is expected to make a decision on the proposed Takoma Central District Small Area Plan, the center piece of which is a transit oriented development around the Takoma Metro station. While a number of area organizations and residents support the TOD concept and generally support the plan (with recommended changes) there is significant opposition to it, with one Advisory Neighborhood Council and the City of Takoma Park (MD) opposing adoption of the plan.

At first glance developers and even some smart growth advocates may be tempted to yell "nimbys!" - opposition to increased density and infill development in established neighborhoods is a real problem as growing areas try to find way to overcome sprawl.

Nimbyism seems to be on everyone's lips these days. From affordable housing advocates discouraged by suburbanites who refuse to allow affordable housing or multi-family developments into their communities, to developers who don't understand why urban neighborhoods don't want new infill development. As the smart growth movement gains strength and moves forward, advocates are discovering with some surprise that neighborhood residents don't always embrace new development - however smart, walkable, and attractive it may look to the rest of us. If only neighborhood residents understood the value of smarter growth and better design they would welcome the new transit-oriented development in their neighborhood, right? Just because it makes sense to planners or developers doesn't mean residents will welcome it with open arms. And just because residents aren't jumping on the bandwagon doesn't mean they should be labeled as Nimbys.

Yes, there are real Nimbys out there. There are also communities with very legitimate concerns about how development is done, and how they have or have not been involved in the process. Often these are lower income urban, older suburban and rural communities. For example in the late 1990s in East Austin, a predominantly Mexican-American neighborhood in Austin, TX, a community group opposed a light rail proposal. While light rail sounds like the smart thing to do, community leaders opposed it because it would have cut right through the heart of their neighborhoods and they feared it would fragment their community and cut them off from the rest of the city forming "urban reservations." Nimbyish? Not really. Residents weren't opposed to development, but wanted the opportunity to participate in the process and share their views on what the neighborhood needed and wanted In fact, they went on to develop their own comprehensive land-use plan that included a bike trail and green area in place of the light rail.

While there are cases where the term nimby is rightly used, dismissing any community opposition to development as nimbyism has become an easy out. It ignores the complex range of issues behind "resistance" and blames residents for not taking anything that comes along. The acronym nimby and the newer yimby (yes in my backyard) both put the burden on residents to "accept" development rather than expecting that planners and developers to effectively engage residents from the beginning of a process.

When you listen the concerns of the Takoma Park residents they don't sound so much opposed to development as frustrated with not being listened too. Their dissatisfaction goes back to the beginning of the development process. The Washington Metropolitan Transit Authority (WMATA) had been looking for a developer for years for a parking lot at the Takoma metro station. Residents learned in February 2000 that WMATA had found a developer, and that city staff had been notified the previous November. In the following months letters to WMATA and the DC Department of Planning from residents and local organizations express dismay in a process where meeting notices were sent out only days before meetings and where inadequate visualization tools made it difficult for residents to understand exactly what was being proposed. A charrette that should have been a participatory exercise was instead a Q&A session with residents responding to proposals from the planning department.

Residents don't necessarily oppose development - they reject a broken process. While the TOD concept has been supported by area smart growth advocates and many residents, some feel that the process has alienated a significant number of residents who otherwise had originally been in favor of development of the site, while further distancing opponents. Letters to the DC Department of Planning also include recommended improvements to the proposed design, such as better-designed green space, reduced density of housing and buffers against noise and traffic. There are also residents who do not want any new development there, and undoubtedly some of these object for selfish and intolerant reasons, like not wanting increased density for fear it means "low-income." But the larger picture is not a simple case of nimby versus developer. It is one of community involvement and control.

"… When we disapprove we become bed people, uncompromising people, violent, because we are no longer silent…" Marcos de Leon, East Austin Resident.

Leah Kalinosky is the coordinator for the National Neighborhood Coalition's Neighborhoods, Regions and Smart Growth Project, coordinating NNC's smart growth activities, which focus on promoting an equitable vision of smart growth that provides new opportunities for low-income communities in urban, rural and older-suburban communities. She is co-author of the report "Smart Growth, Better Neighborhoods: Communities Leading the Way" and author of NNC's most recent report, "Smart Growth for Neighborhoods: Affordable Housing and Regional Vision."

The National Neighborhood Coalition brings together the nation's leading affordable housing, community development, and social justice organizations to provide a voice for neighborhoods and promote a strong role for community-based organizations in revitalization of lower-income communities.