I'm not sure that YIMBY is the way to go

The Globe and Mail ran a long article this weekend devoted to the concept of YIMBY (Yes In My Back Yard), as opposed to NIMBY. This is the idea that we should welcome new developments in old neighbourhoods, so that we can democratize the property market and avoid the establishment of unattainable upper class ghettos.

No doubt, this is entirely laudable and politically correct, but I find myself unable to get fully behind it. And not because I live in an unattainable upper class ghetto (although the way prices are still pushing ever upwards, it's probably only a matter of time). 

I just have this feeling that nice old districts should be protected and preserved, not so much for the wealthy that live there (and bear in mind that not all of the residents of nice areas are rich and famous, there are still legacy family homes, although admittedly fewer and fewer), but for everyone else, and for the future. 

I visit nice areas to walk around the interesting old architecture, in much the same way as I visit parks. If we mix new (and often architecturally boring, especially if we are looking to provide affordable housing) buildings in among the old, then I'm sorry but we are spoiling the charm of the old, a charm that we will never get back. 

Yes, I know we need more affordable housing. I just think we need to be careful what we destroy in our pursuit of it. And neither am I saying that we need to relegate new developments solely to existing poor (and probably impractical and over-stressed) areas. I would just like to see heritage areas protected. And by that, by the way, I don't mean perching a new high-rise awkwardly atop an old building. That is not protesting anything, in my view.

Call me an old reactionary fuddy-duddy - although I maintain that is not the position I am coming from - but please think twice about going full YIMBY.