{"id":1683,"date":"2012-08-04T08:02:04","date_gmt":"2012-08-04T14:02:04","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/?p=1683"},"modified":"2012-09-30T08:00:56","modified_gmt":"2012-09-30T14:00:56","slug":"developing-9th-and-colorado-part-13","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/?p=1683","title":{"rendered":"Are “One Percenters” Shaping the Public Debate about 9th and Colorado?"},"content":{"rendered":"

We\u2019ve been writing a lot about 9th<\/sup> and Colorado lately. Consequently, the Denver website This Could Be Interesting<\/a> suggests that We Might Be Obsessed<\/a>. \u00a0The number of 9th<\/sup> and Colorado posts\u00a0at\u00a0Intercultural Urbanism\u00a0<\/em>currently amounts to just under 20% of the total. \u00a0<\/em>If that’s obsessed, then\u00a0<\/em>I guess we are.\u00a0 However, the development of 9th<\/sup> and Colorado is an irresistible topic because issues of race, class, culture, historic preservation,\u00a0<\/em><\/strong>urban planning,<\/em><\/strong>\u00a0corporate ethics, citizen activism, city council politics, and urbanism (specifically New Urbanism) are colliding in some particularly interesting ways.<\/em><\/strong><\/em> Minimally, we provide an alternative to pro-developer<\/a> and anti-developer<\/a> websites.<\/p>\n

The two big 9th<\/sup> and Colorado events that occurred this week were Wednesday\u2019s Denver Planning Board<\/a> meeting to vote on the project\u2019s design guidelines and Thursday’s open public meeting sponsored by Colorado Boulevard Healthcare District (CBHD).\u00a0 The Planning Board meeting was the tamer of the two. \u00a0The guidelines summarized by city planning department staff were deemed consistent with both Blueprint Denver<\/a> and Comprehensive Plan 2000<\/a>.\u00a0\u00a0 Planning Board members expressed some concern about the quality of the design plan\u2019s screening walls and masonry, and these will be addressed by city planners. \u00a0The most substantive citizen comment suggested that the guidelines don\u2019t provide the kinds of \u201cvisual information\u201d (e.g., the architecture of the big box store) that would allow lay persons to fully appreciate what might happen at the site.\u00a0 There was a concern about the increased traffic load on Colorado Boulevard and its threat to bikers and pedestrians.\u00a0 There was a concern about the availability of budget to properly maintain open space over time.\u00a0 Critical comments about Walmart were occasionally smuggled in. \u00a0One person wondered if the development plan will include guidelines for retailers about fair labor practices.\u00a0 Another suggested that the greatest urban design in the world will only amount to \u201clipstick on a pig\u201d if Walmart is the anchor tenant.\u00a0 One speaker voiced concern about the residential element.\u00a0 She warned that \u00a0any \u201clow income housing\u201d \u00a0would significantly change the \u201ctone\u201d of the neighborhood and effectively turn it into a \u201cghetto.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

Denver Planning Board Meeting, 1 August 2012 (D. Saitta)<\/p><\/div>\n

Speaking for the developer, Marcus Pachner mentioned that the General Development Plan addresses these issues.\u00a0 A separate budget will be available for maintaining open space. The residential component<\/a> will be high end. \u00a0Many in attendance, including Planning Board members, appreciated the concern about the plan\u2019s deficit of visual information.\u00a0 The site renderings are illustrative only, but they are also aspirational given comparable infill developments that have been produced elsewhere. \u00a0The project\u2019s architects reiterated their intention, reported here<\/a>, that the development will incorporate a variety of architectural \u201clooks\u201d to break up the mass of bigger buildings, and use shape changes, color, and other aesthetic moves to alter the \u201crhythm\u201d of the complex. The Planning Board decided that the guidelines are adequately prescriptive to ensure a high quality product. The motion to approve them passed unanimously.<\/p>\n

The CBHD board meeting, attended by an overflow crowd, was a bit livelier. The Denver Post<\/em><\/a> has the story\u00a0 as do 9 News<\/a> and Fox 31<\/a>. The Post<\/em> story notes that, because of ground rules that \u00a0limited the public to just asking questions, the August 2 meeting \u201clacked much of the invective that permeated the June 26 meeting.\u201d Still, there were audible \u00a0grumblings and \u00a0some spontaneous outbursts of opposition.\u00a0 The neighbors remain deeply concerned about Walmart\u2019s presence despite assurances (supported by conceptual renderings) that the store will be appropriately scaled and architecturally-detailed.\u00a0 Citizens are especially concerned about the possibility that the store will be open 24 hours. They were assured that covenants and binding contracts will prevent the sale of firearms. That assurance should be held as sacred by all parties for the entirety of the development’s lifespan<\/em>. But with the Aurora shooting<\/a>\u00a0still fresh in every Coloradoan’s mind it’s not clear that neighbors will accept this repeated assurance. \u00a0This stands to threaten the 87% of the project that’s non-Walmart related. \u00a0Citizens were assured that all public financing will go to the infrastructure to support development, not to the developer or to Walmart. \u00a0There were several blunt questions about what it would take to stop the project in its entirety.\u00a0 The City Council vote to approve or not approve public subsidy (TIF financing<\/a>) will be key, but that vote is still some months away.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

CBHD Board Meeting, 2 August 2012<\/p><\/div>\n

Mr. Pachner was again on hand and he suggested\u2014quite reasonably, I think\u2014that public response to the current plan has been \u201ctoo fixated on one element,\u201d namely Walmart. \u00a0There\u2019s a bigger picture with multiple attractive features.\u00a0 For example, the preserved Nurses Dorm\u2014if done right\u2014has the potential to provide a wonderful mixed use \u201cheart and soul\u201d of office, medical, senior housing and\/or family housing space. \u00a0There’s provision for good open space and the preservation of mature trees. Some of the restaurants will be distinctive, \u201cchef-driven\u201d establishments. That prompted an audience member to request an example of a chef-driven restaurant that has followed Walmart into an upscale development \u201canywhere in the universe.\u201d\u00a0 Nothing specific was offered in response, except a conviction that such restaurants will come (it was noted that none of the potential tenants so far approached has an issue with the prospect of co-residing with Walmart, and that chef-driven restaurants are typically the last establishments to sign on).<\/p>\n

On this point I can\u2019t help wondering if the quest to secure high-end, chef-driven restaurants\u2014even ones that are otherwise Walmart-averse\u2014wouldn’t be helped by preserving or creatively modifying a few more historic structures<\/em> on the site, such as the iconic 9th<\/sup> Avenue Bridge<\/a> that\u2019s currently slated for demolition. \u00a0In its original development plan Shea Properties envisioned the bridge as affordable housing space, but like other elements of its plan the dream ran afoul of infrastructural limits and a TIF funding gap.\u00a0 Alternatively, a restaurant on the bridge (even a modified bridge) would be a pretty distinctive thing. \u00a0It might be worth re-considering the infrastructural investment that’s required to allow something<\/em> unique to happen in several<\/em> historic structures on the site.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

9th Avenue Research Bridge (D. Saitta)<\/p><\/div>\n

There was an interesting\u2014and transparently loaded\u2014question from a citizen about the \u201ctarget demographic\u201d for the development.\u00a0 The question\u2019s subtext is that the surrounding neighborhoods do not make an environment where a Walmart can succeed. Predictably, anonymous citizen commenters on The Post<\/em>, 9News, and Fox 31 websites are much more direct in their belief that Walmarts should \u201cgo where the poor people are,\u201d like Aurora<\/a>. \u00a0In response Jeff Fuqua cheekily (and in my view bravely) suggested, in so many words, that \u201cone-percenters\u201d are shaping the discussion about what should happen at 9th<\/sup> and Colorado. This was deemed pretty offensive by neighbors sitting within earshot.\u00a0 However, other people besides Mr. Fuqua have suggested that if we\u2019re not talking about resistant one-percenters, then we\u2019re certainly talking about resistant ten-percenters<\/a>. Personally, I\u2019m starting to think of the resistors less as x-percenters and more as \u201cPauline Kaels<\/a>,\u201d after the long-time\u00a0New Yorker<\/em> film critic who, in commenting on Richard Nixon\u2019s election back in 1972, became the poster girl for what Jon Podhoretz<\/a> calls \u201chermetic liberal provincialism.\u201d Said Kael:<\/p>\n

I live in a rather special world. I only know one person who voted for Nixon. Where they are I don\u2019t know. They\u2019re outside my ken. But sometimes when I\u2019m in a theater I can feel them.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Change the subject of this quote from Nixon voter to \u201cpoor person\u201d and you get a sense of the attitude that\u2019s held, I think, by a fair number of those who are especially worried about the current plan for 9th<\/sup> and Colorado. \u00a0Neighbors have reasonable concerns about Walmart’s business ethics. But they also don\u2019t want poor people flocking in and changing the character or “tone” of the neighborhood. This has been made abundantly clear not only in social media but also at open public meetings. As noted previously on this blog, census data and simple observation indicate that ethnic and class diversity already exists<\/em> in the 9th<\/sup> and Colorado trade area, especially in the Hale neighborhood. The ethnic diversity might only rise to the level of what the Pew Research Center<\/a> would consider \u201cmoderate\u201d <\/strong>(the Denver map can be found here)<\/a>, but it’s there nonetheless. With respect to class, available data indicate that average household income for Hale and some neighborhoods immediately adjacent to the site to the north and west is below<\/em> the Denver city-wide average. \u00a0As argued previously on this blog, this demographic underclass might appreciate the availability of a value shopping alternative, especially one that\u2019s within walking<\/em> distance. What this also means, of course, is that Walmart (or any other Big Box retailer) shouldn\u2019t go too far to provide an \u201cupscale\u201d shopping experience for local residents. Great world cities aspire to be\u00a0Cosmopolis<\/a>, not Pleasantville<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The CBHD Board wisely promises to form subcommittees to discuss big topics of concern like tenants and amenities, retail labor practices, and the impact of the Big Box on small businesses. \u00a0And, wisely, these subcommittees will include citizen representatives.\u00a0 In the meantime, the next two public meetings of the CBHD Board are on September 6 (to talk transportation) and October 4 (to update the developer\u2019s plan in light of additional public comment). Both meetings are 4:00 pm, at the Molly Blank Conference Center of National Jewish Hospital.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

We\u2019ve been writing a lot about 9th and Colorado lately. Consequently, the Denver website This Could Be Interesting suggests that We Might Be Obsessed. \u00a0The number of 9th and Colorado posts\u00a0at\u00a0Intercultural Urbanism\u00a0currently amounts to just under 20% of the total. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"spay_email":"","footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_is_tweetstorm":false,"jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true},"categories":[3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1683","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-9th-and-colorado"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p1H2bI-r9","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1683","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1683"}],"version-history":[{"count":46,"href":"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1683\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2073,"href":"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1683\/revisions\/2073"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1683"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1683"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1683"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}