The meeting was called to discuss the proposed re-zoning of the Phillips Center, a commercial building near our home. The current owner, is considering selling the property to a developer that wants to re-zone it as mixed commercial and residential, and put in a mixture of apartments, lofts, and potentially, store fronts (think coffee!).
There were about 12 Cole residents present for this meeting, with a diversity commensurate with our neighborhood--A mixture of black, white, and hispanic, including one woman that didn't speak a lick of English.
Most of the discussion centered around the proposed usage of the building, and whether this renovation would potentially add or detract from the neighborhood. Most of the people in attendance were relatively positive about the proposed changes, as if done correctly, it could add much-needed local retail space, as well as take what is largely an industrial building and give it some additional curb appeal. It also could potentially draw even more responsible neighbors into the area in my opinion--But admittedly if the new developers do the right thing in their work. And heaven forbid if it would possibly help our homes grow in value.
What amazed me at this meeting, and has in a general sense since we've moved into the neighborhood, is some residents' fear of the inevitable gentrification of the neighborhood.
First up, what is gentrification? Dictionary.com defines it as:
"The restoration and upgrading of deteriorated urban property by middle-class or affluent people, often resulting in displacement of lower-income people."
For a more comprehensive account of gentrifications and it's origins, see:
http://www.2blowhards.com/archives/001671.html
In simple terms, some residents of the neighborhood, from what I can see, mostly African American and Hispanic, are afraid of developers, largely generalized as white people, coming into the neighborhood and fixing and "flipping" properties for a profit. Their concern seems to be that in renovating the neighborhood, higher-priced homes and structures will replace the lower-priced ones, drive property taxes up, and as a result, displace those that can't afford the higher taxes. In regards to the Phillips Center, it seems they're afraid that there is no guarantee that the re-development will in fact provide at least some low-income housing, accelerating, and contributing to, the displacement. I share their concern, though, I must admit, I'm more concerned about the development's future owners not screening and monitoring the rental units in the new structure more than anything--We have enough sketchy characters and "independent pharmaceutical reps" (a.k.a. drug dealers) in the neighborhood. I'd rather see a well-maintained, high-priced rental property than a poorly-run, poorly-maintained low-income housing property. (In all fairness, there are several multiple-family rental properties just north and east of our neighborhood on the way to Downtown Neighborhood that I think qualify as "low income" or Section 8 housing, and they're beautiful, well maintained by their residents, and a welcome addition to the neighborhood, so I have no problem with lower-income housing if it's done correctly).
What the current residents don't seem to comprehend about gentrification, however, is the "restoration and upgrading of deteriorated urban property" part. How is this a bad thing? Can somebody please tell me that?
I'm all for diversity, both cultural and architectural. I would hate for this neighborhood to get largely scraped and re-built ala what is happening on the border between Lodo and the Highlands. I also would hate to see the neighborhood get developed into an overpriced, urban-hipster-type area like Ballpark or even Stapleton has become. I personally have seen enough "lofts" to last me for the rest of my life. I love the taco stand on the corner of Bruce Randolph and Downing, less than a block from our home, as well as the small fruit and vegetable stand there. I love the street vendors selling helados and elote, and would hate to see that flavor lost.
I also would be a little disappointed if I saw an Evil Empire (Starbucks) pop up in the neighborhood instead of a Peaberry's (at least a Colorado company) or an independent coffee shop, but anything--ANYTHING would be better than the mix of ghetto liquor stores and Mexican clothing stores we have now. Yes, we have local shopping, as long as you want to by a 40 of King Cobra, a pair of shrink-wrapped boot cut jeans and a ten-gallon hat.
I apologize for that rant-ish digression: My point is, our neighborhood is clearly "deteriorated" and in need of "restoration and upgrading", and it seems to me that gentrification is the only way this is going to happen. There are more old homes in this neighborhood that are falling apart due to neglect as their are that have been lovingly restored. Personally, if the existing residents aren't going to fix them up, I say give someone else a chance. It's understandable to not be financially able to rebuild or completely renovate your house (God knows Ash and I can relate, as we're really scraping by to make this home-ownership thing fly) but we're just asking you to take the stair-climber off your porch, pick up a beer bottle and pull a weed once in a while. In other words, take some pride in your home, and your neighborhood.
Take us for example. Our house was owned by a drug dealer, and was in a terrible state of disrepair before the developers fixed it up and we purchased it. Since we've moved in, we've greened the grass, planted trees and flowers, and regularly pick up rubbish on our block. Heck, I pick up rubbish on OTHER PEOPLE'S BLOCKS. I would think that folks would be thrilled to have us here, rather than the previous owner.
However, for example, at this neighborhood meeting, The current owner of the building in question seemed to single out my wife and I as the deserving recipients of a soapbox tirade (not too far removed from a rant) about how much he has done for the neighborhood (honestly, which he has, but we're not the enemy here), and implying that it wasn't the place of someone who just moved in to question his motives and plans for selling and renovating the Center.
Another woman there, who lives a few blocks away in a bordering neighborhood, supported his feelings about newcomers, and, interestingly, commented that there was "too much police presence" and racial profiling in Cole and that we didn't need it as "this is a great neighborhood". (Let me say here that I will be the first to admit I have no idea what it is like to be an African American in Denver, and if the police racially profile. I'm sure it happens from time to time, and that is a shame in this day and age. But I would hope that even the most liberal African American would agree that an increased police presence, especially in this neighborhood, will reduce the drugs, and crime in general, and that is a good thing. I would also hope that they would at least consider the probability that the DPD as a whole has our best interest in mind--and like any other group or organization, there can be bad members that reflect poorly on an otherwise admirable whole.) Oops, tangent alert--Anyway, she made it clear that she resented the newcomers to the neighborhood as they (we) were diluting the diversity. Ironic, since as one of the few white couples in the 'hood, by moving in we actually are increasing the diversity--do the math folks. But anyway, my point here is that newcomers (we, basically) were portrayed almost like colonialist invaders or something. Reverse discrimination anyone? So what if Cole is a historically black neighborhood. Should that prevent us from moving in? Do you think it would fly if Thornton, a largely white suburb, discouraged blacks from moving in? It's not any different.
Bottom line, if the folks that are moving in are fixing it up and taking more pride in the neighborhood, and you're against these folks moving in, then you're against the neighborhood being fixed up. This is simple logic here folks (A=B, B=C, therefore, A=C; one of the few benefits of my liberal arts education). With this in mind, it seems pretty clear to me that there are in reality many residents here that are anti-progress, anti-revitalization, and would rather have the neighborhood remain run-down, trash-filled, and crime infested, which I find quite sad. Can anyone tell me why one would take low property taxes over living in a safer, cleaner, nicer neighborhood?
And don't try to convince me this neighborhood doesn't still have a ways to go. We still have a terrible trash problem, and still have the occasional gang banger and druggie pass through our overall very benign block. Unless residents want to drive these dirt-bags out, a vigilant police presence is essential. And whether it's trash, vandalism, drugs, or other crime, many of the long-time residents that still live here don't seem to care in my opinion. They still keep old furniture on their porches, drop trash and beer bottles in the street, look the other way when someone is selling crack on the corner, and don't maintain their homes.
If this is the diversity that we risk losing, I say let it happen. Yup, you can add me to your "most hated" list right below President Bush. It'll be hard, but I'll get over it.
I personally don't care whether the "gentrifiers" are black, white, Hispanic, Native American, whatever, as long as they care about the neighborhood and take some pride in ownership in their homes, they're welcome additions to me.
Unfortunately, in my opinion, too many minorities simplify the gentrification issue into a purely racial subject--Namely white people moving in and displacing blacks and hispanics. No doubt, in Denver, that's largely the case.
But that illustrates some sort of larger social question I guess--Namely, why aren't there more affluent blacks and hispanics moving into these urban neighborhoods? Why is it generally affluent whites that see treasure in another man's trash and are investing their time and money in renovating historic neighborhoods like ours? I don't know. I know this, though: If more affluent blacks and hispanics were making a commitment as many younger whites are to move into, and stick it out in these urban neighborhoods, get involved, and make a difference, no one would have a problem with the gentrification. Heck, gentrification might not even be a term in our lexicon. It would simply be called "progress".
With that in mind, I, a white guy from Podunk, Michigan (I'm holding up my hand and pointing to my palm right now), invite anyone, white, black, hispanic, anyone, to join me in revitalizing the Cole neighborhood. Buy an old home here, clean it up, become involved in the neighborhood, and help maintain the diversity of this great old neighborhood! But if you aren't willing to maintain your house, pick up your own trash, and call the police when you see something suspicious, I don't care what race you are, it's time you moved on.
Thanks for reading.
gentrification
