My take: Neighborhoods must evolve

This is my response to a letter that opposes new development in Northwest Denver.

My wife and I moved to Northwest Denver 25 years ago. We spent the first 23 years in a Victorian home in West Highland. Almost two years ago, we bought a new town home, also in West Highland.

I loved living in the Victorian home and love living in a town home.

That is why I was puzzled by Shannon Attridge’s vitriolic attack against Lonna Harris, who in a previous  letter to the North Denver Tribune wrote that she saw nothing wrong with  “run-down, eyesore rentals,” being razed and replaced with new homes.

No where in Harris’s missive did she say would  “only deem people of a certain income level,” to be a good resident, as Attridge claimed. What Harris, owner of “Sell by Design Realty,” did write was that  “new construction not only brings good residents, but it also helps property values to appreciate more quickly.”

While most people rent at some point in their lives, one thing I learned as the real estate writer for the Rocky Mountain News for 26 years, is that it truly is the American Dream to be a homeowner. Harris’s sentence preceding the one criticized by Attridge, was talking about owner-occupants replacing renters. I don’t know whether that equates to a “good resident.” But I do know that studies have shown that homeowners are more likely to vote than renters; they are more likely to become involved in their communities than renters; and the children of homeowners are more likely to graduate from high school than the children of renters. And every President of the United States since at least Herbert Hoover has encouraged homeownership. Even in these troubled economic times, I am not aware of any serious discourse on removing the mortgage subsidy, which encourages people to buy homes.

Beyond that point, Attridge clearly does not like the new architecture in the neighborhood, that she describes as “big, beige, boxy housing” that is “blanding-down,” the neighborhood.

That is her right, of course. But does that mean she prefers the “eyesores,” that Harris wrote about? Are there any examples of new architecture in Northwest Denver that meets Attridge‘s approval?

If not, does she prefer that Northwest Denver comes to a standstill, as far as architectural styles? Should builders have stopped at Victorian-style home, and never built any Denver Squares, for example? Does every post World War II home with bad plumbing, almost no insulation, and one bathroom, have to stay?

Also, I can just about guarantee that some of these homes that Attridge so sternly disapprove of will be considered architectural gems by at least some people in the future. Frank Lloyd Wright’s early work was criticized by many and the Opera House in Sydney, Australia, was pilloried by many critics when it first opened.

I’m not saying the new additions to Northwest Denver will stand such a test of time. But one thing I learned at the Rocky it is surprising what will catch people’s fancy. For example, John Hickenlooper, long before he was Mayor, at one point wanted to save the Post Office Annex building near Union Station in downtown, because he thought it was a good example of its 1950’s architecture.

Finally, I think it is ironic that Attridge  believes that  Harris’s “attitude belong in the suburbs.”

It seems to be, someone who doesn’t want change, does not want to see a neighborhood’s architecture evolve,  and  does not want a mix of housing prices in close proximity to each other, is the one who belongs in the suburbs. In most  suburban subdivisions, homes are grouped together by price range. That is often not the case in older, city neighborhoods ,as Elise Cohen pointed out.

Indeed, Forest City, when it developed Stapleton, attempted to get away from that suburban paradigm and used Denver’s densest neighborhood, Capitol Hill, as a template, where you could walk a block and go past entry level housing as well as  million-dollar range homes.

Share this: