{"id":2135,"date":"2012-10-13T05:35:50","date_gmt":"2012-10-13T11:35:50","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/?p=2135"},"modified":"2012-12-15T06:20:49","modified_gmt":"2012-12-15T13:20:49","slug":"who-won-the-walmart-war-at-9th-and-colorado","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.interculturalurbanism.com\/?p=2135","title":{"rendered":"Who Won the Walmart War at 9th and Colorado?"},"content":{"rendered":"

As reported in The Denver Post<\/em><\/a> and the The<\/em> Denver Business Journal<\/em><\/a>, Walmart has pulled out of the development at 9th<\/sup> and Colorado.\u00a0 Neighbors have declared victory<\/a>, as captured in this statement<\/a> from the Anti-Walmarteers at\u00a0Do It Right at 9th<\/sup><\/a>:<\/p>\n

We couldn’t be more pleased. We are proud of the role played by concerned neighbors in communicating to City Council representatives that Wal-mart was not the right way to go at 9th and Colorado. It is a real victory for ‘the little guy’. Councilwomen Susman and Robb were so responsive and helpful – we are deeply grateful. Now we can get down to working with the developer, the City and CU on a plan that works for the surrounding neighborhoods and is truly beneficial for all of East Denver.<\/em><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

If it’s a victory at all it’s a victory of superficiality over substance.\u00a0 It\u2019s a victory of image and ideology\u2014including thinly-veiled elitism and racism\u2014over disciplined thought about inclusive city-building.\u00a0 It\u2019s a victory of NIMBY-ism over strategic thinking that serves the greater public interest<\/a>. \u00a0It\u2019s a victory of hypocrisy<\/a> over sincerity.\u00a0 It\u2019s a victory for a very particular demographic<\/a>, not \u201cEast Denver.\u201d \u00a0It\u2019s a victory that didn\u2019t require a compelling urban vision or any novel alternative<\/em> planning and design ideas to achieve. It’s a victory that certainly didn’t require any heroic citizen efforts\u00a0(many, many neighborhoods nationwide have “been there and done that” when it comes to demonizing Walmart).\u00a0 It\u2019s a victory that had the neighborhood associations being for<\/em> the general plan accommodating a big box retailer before they were against<\/em> it<\/a>.\u00a0 It\u2019s a victory based on misinformation and fear-mongering instead of a nuanced appreciation of site history and context.\u00a0 It\u2019s a victory enabled by clumsy political leadership<\/a> and capitulating councilpersons<\/a>.<\/p>\n

As for this being a victory for the little guy, \u201clittle guy\u201d doesn’t exactly describe the demographic<\/a> that was so visible and overbearing at the public meetings. \u00a0The little guy is the person who depends upon the availability of value shopping alternatives: the more the merrier, and the closer to home the better.\u00a0 The little guy is the person who lacks time and transportation to attend public meetings, or time and technology to engage in Facebook chit-chat. The little guy is the person who lacks a front yard and rents rather than owns.\u00a0 The little guy is the person who may self-identify as part of the \u201celement\u201d of humanity that 9th<\/sup> and Colorado neighbors suggested, on Day One<\/a>, was not welcome in their \u201ccommunity.\u201d\u00a0 I\u2019ve always wondered how many real<\/em> little guys are in the network of neighborhoods that surround 9th<\/sup> and Colorado. I asked my councilwomen point blank for their understanding of neighborhood diversity<\/a>, and I\u2019m still waiting for an answer.<\/p>\n

In my view what was lost here exceeds what was won.\u00a0 Lost was an opportunity to seriously explore inclusive place-making with a motivated and willing-to-compromise retail giant in way that could set an example for other cities while also, perhaps, taming the tiger<\/a>. \u00a0In a development and retail world currently filled with all sorts of risk and unpredictability, and given a site as challenging and as costly to remediate as 9th<\/sup> and Colorado, it might have been wise to at least consider<\/em> what a national, \u201ctop quality\u201d retail tenant\u2014i.e., one that is financially-sound and credit-worthy\u2014like Walmart might have contributed to the project of urban place-making.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

Conceptual Rendering of Georgia Avenue Walmart, Washington DC<\/p><\/div>\n

At least a few cities provide some examples<\/a> of how Denverites might have joined with Fuqua Development and Walmart in what I\u2019ve called \u201cparticipatory design and \u201cnegotiated development.\u201d My fellow blogger and Walmart agnostic\u00a0Richard Layman<\/strong> describes, in some detail, the case of Washington, DC at his excellent website Rebuilding Place in the Urban Space<\/a>.\u00a0 There, community activists and city officials applied pressure that led to a \u201cCommunity Benefits Agreement<\/a>\u201d (CBA) with Walmart that, among other things, stipulated the following<\/a>:<\/p>\n