[nri] report

Globeville Housing AssessmentCollege of Architecture and Planning - 2011

G

S

AJK

Globev

Surveyo

Andersonohnson, JKelli; Stoc

ville Ne

ors:

, MichaeJennifer; cking, Jon

ighbor

l; Day, ChLau, Cheathan; Su

rhood R

hristophelsea; McDurarez, Za

Revita

r; Doyle, Daniel, Anaira; Trem

lizatio

Sarah; Frnnalisa; Omblat, Car

n Initia

rancois, JeOreamunorrie; Welc

ation A

ean‐Micho, Jeos; Sch, David

Assessm

hel; chicher,

ment

Table of Contents

Project Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 2

Project Overview .............................................................................................................................................. 2 Habitat for Humanity ....................................................................................................................................... 2 The Neighborhood Revitalization Initiative ..................................................................................................... 2

History of Globeville ...................................................................................................................... 3

Globeville Timeline .......................................................................................................................................... 3 Overview and History .................................................................................................................................... 3

Light Rail Station at 41st and Fox Street ......................................................................................... 5

Primary Goals ................................................................................................................................................ 5 Key Concepts ................................................................................................................................................. 5 Transit-Oriented Development .................................................................................................................... 5 Opportunities and Constraints ..................................................................................................................... 5 Implementation and Next Steps .................................................................................................................. 6

Methodology and Assessment Process .......................................................................................... 7

Block Level Analysis ...................................................................................................................... 8

Overview of Block Level Findings ............................................................................................................... 8 Observation Definitions .............................................................................................................. 10

Globeville Housing ...................................................................................................................... 12

Housing Tenure Map ......................................................................................................................................12 Housing Market Map .....................................................................................................................................12

Mapping Observation ................................................................................................................. 13

Roof Condition Map .......................................................................................................................................13 Chimney Condition Map ................................................................................................................................13 Gutter Condition Map ....................................................................................................................................14

Downspout Condition Map ............................................................................................................................ 14 Cladding Condition Map ................................................................................................................................ 15 Paint Condition Map ...................................................................................................................................... 15 Window Condition Map ................................................................................................................................. 16 Sidewalk Condition Map ................................................................................................................................ 16 Porch Condition Map ..................................................................................................................................... 17 Porch Rail Condition Map .............................................................................................................................. 17 Step Condition Map ....................................................................................................................................... 18 Step Rail Condition Map ................................................................................................................................ 18 Fence Condition Map ..................................................................................................................................... 19 Retaining Wall Condition Map ....................................................................................................................... 19 Ramp Condition Map ..................................................................................................................................... 20

Mapping Assessment .................................................................................................................. 21

Poor Condition Assessment ‐ I ....................................................................................................................... 21 Poor Condition Assessment ‐ II ...................................................................................................................... 21 Poor Condition Assessment ‐ III ..................................................................................................................... 21 Poor Condition Assessment ‐ IV ..................................................................................................................... 22 Poor Condition Assessment ‐ V ...................................................................................................................... 22 Poor Condition Assessment ‐ VI ..................................................................................................................... 23 Poor Condition Assessment ‐ VII .................................................................................................................... 23

Recommendations ...................................................................................................................... 24

Repairs .......................................................................................................................................................... 24 Community Development ........................................................................................................................... 24

Conclusion .................................................................................................................................. 25

Appendix .................................................................................................................................... 26

2

Project Introduction

Project Overview

This report details a collaborative effort by Habitat for Humanity of Metro Denver and graduate students from the University of Colorado Denver School of Architecture and Planning. During the Fall 2011 semester, students in the Urban Housing course teamed with the local chapter of Habitat for Humanity to conduct an assessment of the housing stock in the neighborhood of Globeville. In order to conduct a survey of all the housing units, the class created a housing assessment protocol that included the development and piloting of different tools to ensure a comprehensive and consistent process.

The goal of this undertaking is to support Habitat in its Neighborhood Revitalization Initiative. The purpose of the housing assessment was to identify homes that would benefit from a range of repairs that would positively benefit the residents’ quality of life as well as improving the overall quality of the neighborhood. The housing assessment was only part of a larger community assessment that was undertaken to help Habitat effectively and efficiently target its resources. To this end, the class completed research that surveyed the neighborhood’s history, current demographics and potential changes and plans that may affect the future of the area.

This report provides an overview of the assessment process, the data and research collected, tools employed, as well as recommendations for how this information may be employed. It is our sincere hope that these deliverables are able to aid Habitat in its mission to provide affordable housing, while positively impacting the surrounding community.

Habitat for Humanity

Habitat for Humanity is not for profit, community based organization that focuses on providing affordable housing. Habitat understands the importance of having a safe, quality place to call home, as well as the benefits that homeownership can provide. Stable, affordable housing can be the foundation of a fulfilling life, while at the same time strengthening and improving communities. As a non-profit organization, Habitat relies on donations to build homes. They also rely on the hard work of volunteers and Habitat homeowners to build new homes. As conditions of sale, homeowners are required to take

homebuyer classes and to invest “sweat equity” in the construction of their new home. It is these principles and goals that have guided Habitat for Humanity of Metro Denver to partner with Denver communities and residents to produce affordable homes for low-income families.

The Neighborhood Revitalization Initiative

Habitat’s core values are also guiding its vision for its new Neighborhood Revitalization Initiative (NRI). The NRI is Habitat’s new model to broaden its scope and impact within a community by expanding its product spectrum of services. While building a home can transform the life of a family and make some impact on the surrounding community, the NRI program acknowledges that community issues are bigger than one home. The program takes a more holistic approach to neighborhood revitalization that takes into account not only the built environment, but the social environment as well. The approach incorporates community development, advocacy, lending services and family services with new home construction and rehabilitations of vacant and foreclosed properties. In addition, depending on community needs, the NRI program will provide the following services:

• A Brush with Kindness: minor repairs and painting for existing low-income homeowners

• Critical Home Repairs: repairs made to address issues of health and safety

• Weatherization: repairs made to improve energy efficiency and indoor air quality

The program also recognizes the ability of local affiliates, like Habitat for Humanity of Metro Denver, to better identify the needs of their local community and to respond in a way that will best result in a long-term and transformative impact. A vital part of this initiative is collaboration and partnership with local community organizations and agencies to identify community needs, as is the case for this project. Through the Neighborhood Revitalization Initiative, Habitat hopes to empower residents to revive their neighborhoods and enhance their quality of life.

3

History of Globeville

Globeville Timeline

1858-1878 – Homesteading - Globeville was once home to a few trappers, traders, and the Cheyenne and Arapahoe tribes. The discovery of gold brought prospectors, homesteaders and entrepreneurs—among them Globeville’s first mayor, William Hanford Clark. With the coming of the railroads and the construction of the Boston and Colorado Smelter in 1878, the area changed from a rural outpost to an industrial town.

1878-1903 – Industrialization - Globeville became the era where heavy industry, smelters, railroads, and meat packing rose to new heights. Along with the rest of the nation, people in Globeville were seeking the new jobs these industries created. Many of these workers came from Eastern Europe where they were told by family members that in the U.S., they could earn a good wage and be a part of the American dream. The new settlers were also seeking religious freedom and economic opportunity, choosing Globeville because their countrymen had settled there. Globeville was annexed into the city of Denver in 1902.

1903-1930 – Progress and Assimilation - Just as Globeville became a part of the city of Denver, its resident immigrants were becoming American citizens. Children were learning to speak English in school and educating their parents in American customs—music, foods, movies and baseball. Jobs in the railroads, foundries, brick yards and meat-packing plants helped families buy homes and even some cars. Small businesses and churches prospered. The American dream seemed attainable.

1930-1950 – Depression and War - The stock market crash of 1929 seemed worlds away from Globeville, but the ripple effect began to be felt there by the 1930s. The railroads cut the work week from six days to two, the meat-packing plants laid off workers and churches experienced a dramatic drop in membership. Federal programs would provide some jobs with flood control, rat control in the stock yards and the installation of sanitary sewers. Globeville and the nation did not begin to recover economically until the United States entered World War II.

1950- Present – Battle for Survival - Along with the rest of the nation, the people of Globeville sought new jobs after the War. With the shortage of housing, second generation descendants sought new loan opportunities for building houses in the suburbs of Denver. In addition, the Valley Highway and the construction of I-70 split Globeville in half and removed a large number of original houses from the Globeville area.

Overview and History

Globeville was established on a ranch purchased for the use of smelter production by the Globe Smelting and Refining Company. The community was originally platted in 1889 and was officially incorporated as a town in 1891. Settled in the late 1880s, William H. Clark became the mayor in 1892. Located North of Denver along the Platte River, originally Globeville was occupied by farmers and homesteaders on the outermost edge of Denver. Since its conception, Globeville has been isolated by the railroads and South Platte River. Due to its isolation from Denver and lack of transportation, Globeville’s residents have worked and lived in the neighborhood. The city and county of Denver annexed Globeville into Denver in 1902.

The changing patterns of Globeville have been inextricably influenced by the history of the community and its ethnic and religious groups. The diverse immigrant populations in Globeville were early workers of the major industries, the Globe Smelting and Refining Company, railroads, foundries and brickyards, and meat-packing plants. The first immigrant populations were the Austrians, Croatians, Germans, Polish, Russians, Scandinavians, Slovenians, and other Slavic working-class immigrants who came in the mid-1880s in search of economic opportunity and religious freedom. The immigrant populations thrived through churches and social organizations. Recently, the second generation of immigrants to Globeville, Mexican-Americans, is replacing the first generation.

Figure 1: GGlobeville19500

4

Histo

Globeand silcrisis untoucheld thopenedsmelteWest 4arouseafter thpeopleto buil(ASARrich orOmahadisman1950, Denveand sm

Certaintoday. town oas “Gaschool

GlobevInterstaa four-past fechangeare runneededrehabiwill fac

ory of Gl

eville’s smelver in the mdeveloped

chable unlehem. Nathad up the B

er was wildl44th and 47e around thhe mythica

e soon referlding the O

RCO Globeres, and fira and Grantled until othe demoli

er’s glory damelting era.

n areas of The princ

office and jaarden Place, a bar and

ville was imate 70 in 19-way split oew decadesed. Despitn down becd renovatiolitation reprce in the fut

obeville

elting operamountains bd as business the metaniel P. Hiloston and y successf

7th Avenue e Boston a

al ship sailerred to the

Omaha and) plant in 1re led to thant smelteronly the ention of the ays of mini

Globeville wcipal area ail. The are,” which cad restaurant

mpacted by 964. The hof the comms, the raciate deep necause manons. The resent somture.

e

ations begabrought horness leadetals could bll was the fColorado Sul and expaand Fox tond Coloraded by Jasosmelter by

d Grant sm886. Chahe closing r closed shnormous sGrant Sme

ng and sm

were differewas called

rea immedian be seent, a church

the constrhighway conmunity, andal and ethneighborhoodny residents

needs of me of the cu

an in 1858rdes of fortuers realizebe separatefirst to find Smelter neaanded to Go Pecos Strdo smelter. on in searc

the same meltering pnges in tecof Boston

hortly aftermokestack elter smokeelting, sym

entiated byd “Old Globately south

n today by tand Argo P

ruction of Innstruction rd a loss of nic composd pride mas are financindustry, t

urrent plann

, when theune seekered the mied from thea solution ar Black H

Globeville bereet. A cla The village

ch of the Gname. Thelants in 18

chnology, dand Color

r in 1903 remained.

estack, a 3mbolized the

y names thabeville,” wi

h of Old Glothe names

Park, still loc

nterstate 25resulted in acommunityition of the

any of the icially unabransportatio

ning challen

e discoveryrs to the terineral weae complex oto the probawk in 186etween whassic compae was nam

Golden Fleee firm’s suc882 and thepletion of

rado in 190and was g. On Febr350-foot reme end of th

at can still bth its wateobeville waof the pub

cated in Glo

5 in 1948-1a loss of 30y identity. Oe neighborhindividual dle to underon, and renges that G

y of gold rritory. A alth was ores that blem and 67. The at is now any town ed Argo, ece, and ccess led he Globe

mineral-02. The gradually ruary 26, mnant of e mining

be found er works, as known lic grade obeville.

958 and 0 homes, Over the

hood has dwellings rtake the esidential Globeville

SummAsses

mary of Keyssment in 2

Educating neighborhproportionInvestigatethat are deare movingRedevelopresidentialIndustrial aIn these aimpacts ofThe increaVacant prWorking wviolations Circulationrailroads. opportunitstreets, anImproving and bicyclstation plaDespite thof some re“contaminacommunityAccess tobetter-paythemselveAccess to neighborhbicycle arethese facil

y Issues Id2008

and addood are cr of this neige the land-eveloping pg in that map areas thal uses and and residenreas, creatf industrial uasing numbroperties awith Neighband improv

n around t As new

ies arise tnd pedestria

access to le connecti

anning proche previousesidents is ated.” Rey by cleanin

o quality joying emploes out of po

quality heaood resideeas and wities.

dentified in

ressing thritical. Theghborhood.-use classifper the maray not be idat contain provide accntial land uste a buffer zuses on adj

bers of forecare an eyeborhood Insve property the neighbow developto provide ans. the new raons will neess. clean-up ethat outsiddevelopmeng up the g

obs and edyment, cruverty. althcare annts’ quality

wayfinding s

n Globeville

e special younger p. fications in ket conditio

deal for the a mixture cess to the ses and zozone or lanjacent residclosures is

esore and spection Semaintenanorhood is

pment or better con

il station in eed to be a

efforts that ders view thent of the Agroundwateducation wiucial for lo

nd the existy of life. Tsignage is

e per the C

needs of population

Globeville ons. Mixedarea. of industrianew light raning abut a

ndscape scdences. an importacan lead

ervices (NISnce will help

limited dueredevelopm

nnections b

Globeville assessed a

have occuhe GlobevilAsarco siter and soil cill open adower-incom

ting parks sThe addition

needed to

City of Den

the youthmakes up

to allow fod-use prope

al, commerail station.

against onereening to

ant issue toto code vS) to addre

p limit thesee to freewment occubetween si

will be critias part of th

rred, the pelle neighboe would becontaminatiodditional opme resident

system willn of pedest direct res

nver

h in the p a large

or trends erties that

rcial, and another. minimize

o monitor. violations. ess code e issues. ways and urs, new dewalks,

ical. Bus he future

erception rhood as

enefit the on.

ptions for ts to lift

improve trian and idents to

5

Light Rail Station at 41st and Fox Street

This plan was developed for the future land use and infrastructure decisions for the transit oriented development to be located at 41st and Fox Street along the Gold Line Commuter Rail. Ideas and concepts were developed and based upon the Denver Comprehensive Plan 2000, Blueprint Denver, and other adopted city-wide plans.

Primary Goals

Improve pedestrian connections to the station between neighborhoods and along major corridors

Create opportunities to add more housing, jobs and services to the station area

Incorporate plazas, parks and open space into redevelopment areas Capitalize on the station area’s proximity to Downtown and location on

the Gold Line and Northwest Rail corridors Balance the needs of new development and existing uses

Key Concepts

Development of a high intensity activity node close to the station on east side

Creation of pedestrian shopping corridor along Fox Street Mixed-use redevelopment of the former Denver Post site Linked park and open space improvements to enhance neighborhood

livability by providing positive orientation, buffering, aesthetics, recreational amenities, and stormwater management

Capture partnership benefits with Regency Student Housing by encouraging ties between academic institutions, student populations, and incubator employment uses

Incorporate historically significant structures by drawing design inspiration from the area’s historic, industrial character

Promote pedestrian and bicycle connectivity improvements Capture views of Downtown and buffer the station area by locating taller

structures along I-25 and I-70

Transit-Oriented Development

Place-making: Creating safe, comfortable, varied, and attractive station areas with distinct identities

Rich Mix of Choices: Provide housing, employment, transportation and shopping choices for people of all ages, household types, incomes and lifestyles

Location Efficiency: Placing homes, jobs, shopping, entertainment, parks, and other amenities close to the station to promote walking, biking, and transit use

Value Capture: Using plans to encourage all stakeholders – residents, business owners, RTD and the city – to take full economic advantage of the value of transit infrastructure

Portal to the Region: The station area should serve as a gateway to the regional transit network by providing sage and welcoming environment

Opportunities and Constraints

Opportunities

First stop on the Gold and Northwest rail lines. Good visibility and direct access from I-25 will increase marketability for

high and medium rise buildings The station already contains large parcel assembly of existing private

lands, which will allow for easy access for redevelopment. Proximity to the vibrantly growing Highland and Sunnyside

neighborhoods Constraints

• I-25 and the Union Pacific and BNSF railroad tracks are major barriers to connectivity

• Traffic congestion along 38th Avenue and Fox Street • Infrastructure is deficient for growth (streets lack curbs, gutters,

sidewalks, and street trees) • New parks and community spaces are necessary

6

Light Rail Station at 41st and Fox Street

Implementation and Next Steps

Implementation for the transit orientated development will not happen overnight. The market, planning, infrastructure, community and political readiness around each of Denver’s existing and future FasTracks stations will vary considerably. Some of the implementation steps that will need to occur are:

Initial planning, making targeted investments, and putting the full range of necessary tools and leadership into place

Cost benefit payback: target the limited funds available for public investment and infrastructure and economic development to transit areas

Ensure that all necessary steps have been taken to make the station area development ready such as regulations, zoning, entitlements, basic infrastructure, and incentives.

Real estate market dynamics Timeframe of actions Regulatory Tools Infrastructure Tools Partnership Tools

Globeville’s future outlook will be significantly changing. The neighborhood will evolve over time with the implementation of transit-orientated development. Globeville’s story will be ever-changing but the past still remains and will continue to be an important part of the community.

7

Methodology and Assessment Process

Protocol Development (September 30 – October 20)

This report is the result of a semester long process that began in the fall of 2011. The process began with Habitat for Humanity of Metro Denver partnering with students in the Urban Housing course to conduct an assessment of the housing stock in the Globeville neighborhood of Denver. At the end of September, students met with members of Habitat to be brief on their Neighborhood Revitalization Initiative (NRI) in Globeville. Over the next three weeks an assessment protocol was developed that included identifying and mapping housing units, visual inspection and assessment criteria were developed and refined, a survey tool was created, letters to community members were drafted and a project timeline was set.

Instrument Testing (October 21)

At the end this period the entire team pilot tested the assessment and survey tools by evaluating a number of houses in Globeville. The result of this exercise was further refinements to the survey instruments in order to ensure a high level of consistency.

Assessment Protocol and Tools Refined (October 22 – 29)

It was estimated that the neighborhood had roughly 1,600 housing units, this number was later refined, as many units found to be accessory buildings. The neighborhood’s units were divided into six sections for assessment purposes. Too efficiently cover the whole neighborhood and maintaining consistency, surveyors were divided into teams of two with each team assigned a neighborhood section. This system ensured that survey teams would have to concur on evaluation of conditions.

Data Collection (October 29 – November 10)

Over a three week period, teams collected housing condition data and addresses for every housing unit. This data was entered into a database. During this period additional observations of block-level conditions were collected and recorded in a narrative format as well.

Data Preparation and Mapping (November 11 –17)

The data was then “cleaned up” and geocoded for importing into Geographic Information Systems program in order to conduct a spatial analysis. Maps, tables and graphs for each condition were produced, with each condition broken into 3 categories of poor/fair/excellent.

Spatial and Data Analysis (November 18 – December 1)

Spatial patterns and raw data were analyzed and discussed. Issues with collection methods and instruments were also identified. Finally, some statistical analysis was conducted leading to more robust analysis

Recommendations and Neighborhood Research (December 2 – 8)

From the analysis and assessment process, conclusion and recommendations were developed. This information was compiled and summarized. The analysis and assessment was combined with pertinent research related to neighborhood demographics, history, future plans and other relevant data.

Presentation and Project Deliverables (December 9 – 16)

A final presentation and report were produced as deliverables for Habitat for Humanity of Metro Denver. Included in the final deliverable package are updates based on Habitat feedback, all assessment tools and instruments, and raw data sets, as well as databases, maps and GIS shapefiles. It is the hope that these deliverables may aid in future analysis that supports the Neighborhood Reinvestment Initiative (NRI), the Globeville community and possibly other communities in the Denver region.

8

Block Level Analysis

Overview of Block Level Findings

The majority of Globeville is in relatively good condition at the block level. The streets, sidewalks, and alleys were well maintained in the majority of the Globeville neighborhood. There were very few reports of graffiti, poor drainage, or street and sidewalk obstructions. While the majority of Globeville was in relatively good condition, there are a few problem areas where Habitat for Humanity should focus their resources to improve the neighborhood as a whole. Namely, the area in the northeast corner, or Zone 6 has the most distressed blocks overall. A few patterns emerged from our block level observations. Blocks that shared industrial and commercial uses tended to be in worse shape than areas that were exclusively residential with fewer sidewalks, paved roads, and lighting. The conditions in the industrial areas north of the railway and east of Broadway are particularly poor. In general, block level conditions tended to be worse in the peripheral areas and areas near the railroad and Interstates. Additionally, the few blocks with graffiti also tended to have plant overgrowth.

Zone 1:

Surrounded by commuter mega arteries and rail depots Zone 1 represents a unique neighborhood located south of Interstate-70, and east and west of Interstate-25. The clear juxtaposition of commercial/transportation arteries and the neighborhood’s planned network undermine urban design in this area as the mega-arteries compete with the neighborhood network. West of Interstate-25 you find the Regency Student Housing tower. This tower is clearly out of character in relation to the surrounding neighborhood, but holds its ground by facing away from the town and disguising its mass behind the elevated highway. Fox Street is the main street running north/south on the west side of Interstate-25; it modestly serves a few heavy industrial parks and some reuse housing units. We found that sidewalks were missing on many of the blocks in this portion of the study area, making the neighborhood less inviting for pedestrians. West 44th Avenue inconspicuously connects the relatively modest housing stock on the west side of Interstate-25 with a more grounded community on the east side that surrounds a well maintained school (Garden Place Elementary). The school’s character reflects the neighborhood as most of Leaf Court and Lincoln Street south of East 45th Avenue are well maintained. The houses and blocks found north of East 45th Avenue show some negligence, which may be in part due to their proximity to Interstate-70.

Zone 2:

Zone 2 is a three block by six block area stretching from 46th Street south to 44th Street, and from Pearl Street in the east to Sherman Street in the west. The area is completely walled in on the north by the elevated stretch of I-70, and is bounded on the south by the fenced-off rail yard.

All of the north-south streets in this zone are in good condition—well-paved, well-lit and generally trash-free. All of the north-south alleys appear to have at least one mid-block street light. The east-west streets in Zone 2, however, pose a problem—and an opportunity. 46th Avenue is the dead end of all of the north-south streets in this Zone. The massive wall that supports the interstate overhead feels like it belongs on a fortress, or maybe a prison. There were once trees planted against that wall, but all that remains are stumps. The street itself is in adequate condition, but the space feels inhuman and scary.

45th Avenue, which bisects Zone 2, is a very busy, wide, commercial-feeling street (although there are some residences facing it). The sidewalks are narrow, there are few street trees, and the few bus stops are not sheltered. The commercial businesses on this street—e.g., a liquor store—are shabby.

44th Avenue, like 46th Avenue, is the southern dead end of the north-south streets in this Zone. Also like 46th Avenue, it does not currently feel like a place that is welcoming to the residents of the neighborhood. Most of the lots on 44th are vacant—perhaps they are kept vacant by the railroad companies.

The vacant lots and wide easement next to the railyard leave 44th Avenue feeling exposed. There are no sidewalks on this street and the lighting is minimal. Additionally, there are dangerous “pits” at the corners of the intersections—if a car turns too sharply, it will be severely damaged. These pits are extremely hazardous to pedestrians as well, particularly those with sensory disabilities.

However, with effort, these challenging streets could become unique neighborhood amenities. 45th Avenue needs to become more pedestrian-friendly and walkable, with wider sidewalks, street trees, and covered bus stops. Creating spaces for small vendors—such as a weekly farmers’ market—will bring people to this central corridor and could spark further economic development.

9

Block Level Analysis

46th Avenue could be turned into a Dutch-style woonerf — a shared-use street that is primarily designed for children’s play but remains accessible to slow-moving cars. The I-70 wall could be used as a community art wall or a mural space. Basketball hoops against the wall, or fitness stations spaced along the street, along with street trees, could help make the space feel like a linear park. The vacant lots along 44th Avenue would be ideal places for community gardens—something that might help make up for the fact that there are absolutely no grocery stores in this area. Any of these lots could work for a small playground, a green park, a dog park, or a fitness-station park. 44th Avenue, at a minimum, needs intersection repair, sidewalks, lighting, and street trees to make it feel like a strong neighborhood edge, rather than an extension of the railyard. With creative effort and public-private partnership these streets can become neighborhood amenities, turning this section of Globeville into a protected enclave, rather than a forgotten place. Zone 3:

Bounded by 46th Avenue, Broadway, 47th Avenue, and Pearl-is in pretty good condition; Over all it is a safe-looking area in the late morning, with an unusual number of children observed playing in the neighborhood at that time. Primarily single-family residences with some multi-family units and two churches, the zone had only one observable instance of graffiti tagging. One path was found that should have been a paved sidewalk. Lighting was scarce, found mostly in the alleys, except along Lincoln between 46th and 47th Avenue, which had pedestrian-level lighting along the street as well as the only RTD bus stop in this zone. All of the observed alleys were paved similarly to the streets, relatively clean, and had at least one streetlight.

Zone 4:

The blocks in Zone 4 were in relatively good condition overall. Bounded by 47th Avenue, 48th Avenue, Washington Street, and Broadway, Zone 4 is a purely residential area. Sidewalks and alleys were very well maintained for the most part. Block conditions tended to decline in the areas near Zone 4’s East and West borders. In particular, 45th Street between Pearl and Pennsylvania needs a number of block improvements. This portion of 45th lacks sidewalks, lighting and paved streets. On the other side of the study area, Leaf and Broadway between 48th and 47th Street also have a number of problems. The street condition is poor due to potholes, and sidewalks are missing in sections,

compromising pedestrian connectivity. Additionally, on Leaf Court, facades face the backs of the houses, giving the block the feel of an alley.

Zone 5:

This section of Globeville is bounded by 51st Avenue, Grant Street, 48th Avenue, and Broadway. The streets, sidewalks, and alleys were all in very good condition. Storm drains did not have material blocking them. The alleys were all concrete and did not have a problem with excessive trash. One potential problem, however, was lighting on Grant Street and Sherman Street near 51st Avenue. Most streets in Zone 5 had two or three street-lights per block, but these two streets had no lighting for more than half a block. For the most part the blocks were well maintained, except for some graffiti off of 51st Avenue. Graffiti was located on a garage on the western end of the Globeville Townhouses facing 51st Avenue. Garages facing 51st Avenue in the two alleys between Grant Street and Lincoln Street also had graffiti. Neighborhood-level issues such as noise from I-25, a high level of surrounding industrial uses, and nearby polluted sites also affected this zone.

Zone 6:

Zone 6 block conditions varied substantially depending on the types of uses contained on the blocks. The study area is diagonally intersected by train tracks. West of the train tracks is mainly residential with various community centers while the eastern side consists of industrial, residential, and commercial uses. Block conditions are substantially worse to the East of the tracks, surrounded by a diverse range of uses. All the blocks in this area suffer from poor or non-existent sidewalks, litter, and poor drainage systems. Residential streets in this zone are affected by proximity to industrial uses (such as a diaper cleaning facility). 51st Avenue links the areas east and west of the train tracks. Although this particular street is in satisfactory condition, residential blocks on the western edge of the tracks are in overall poor condition. Residential blocks in the western portion of the zone, including the recently developed Habitat for Humanity town homes, are in relatively good condition with sidewalks, paved streets, and virtually no litter. While the block conditions are good, developing bicycle lanes, crosswalks and other traffic calming measures may be extremely beneficial in this zone of the study area given the heavy industrial traffic passing through.

10

Observation Definitions

Roof Condition:

We evaluated ‘poor conditions’ under the following criteria: missing sections, worn shingles, warped areas in the roof, and overall poor looking roof. We found there to be 128 units within the area to have poor roofs; of these units, 56 were owner-occupied. The area northeast of Argo Park, south of the railroad tracks to the east of Argo Park, and in the northwest corner of the neighborhood have clusters of homes that received poor ratings.

Cladding Conditions:

We evaluated ‘poor conditions’ under the following criteria: warped or cracked cladding, and brick in significant need of tuck-pointing. Most of the cladding issues are related to wood cladding with brick cladding being overall in good condition. We found there to be 74 units with poor cladding conditions; of these, 35 are owner-occupied. There is no real cluster of poor-rated cladding conditions.

Paint and trim Conditions:

We evaluated ‘poor conditions’ under the following criteria: paint peeling or no paint at all. We found there to be 159 units with poor paint and trim conditions; of these, 83 units are owner-occupied. Most of these issues are related to the trim of the house. There is a cluster of poor ratings in the area of the neighborhood south of I-70.

Chimney Conditions:

We evaluated ‘poor conditions’ under the following criteria: missing bricks, or the chimney is falling down. If the chimney was metal its condition was generally not recorded or was considered to be in good condition. We found there to be 78 units with a rating of poor for chimney conditions; of these, 33 were owner-occupied. There is a cluster of poor ratings south of I-70 and also northeast of Argo Park.

Sidewalk Conditions:

We evaluated ‘poor conditions’ under the following criteria: narrowness, tripping hazards, and cracks. We found there to be 116 units with poor or missing sidewalks; of these, 49 are owner-occupied. Of these units there was a

concentration in the southwest and northeast areas of the neighborhood, which are mostly industrial.

Gutter Conditions:

We evaluated ‘poor conditions’ under the following criteria: no gutters, gutters missing in sections, the gutter not being attached to the roof, or the gutter falling off. If gutters are missing, this can lead to foundation problems. We found there to be 121 units with a poor rating for gutter conditions; of these, 99 were owner-occupied. There is a cluster of poor ratings northeast of Argo Park.

Downspout Conditions:

We evaluated ‘poor conditions’ under the following criteria: downspout not attached to gutters, not leading the water away from the house, or not secured to the house. Missing or poor downspouts can lead to foundation problems. We found there to be 309 units with poor or missing downspouts; of these, 148 were owner-occupied. There is no real clustering of poor ratings as there are a large number of units with gutter problems across the neighborhood.

Window:

We evaluated ‘poor conditions’ under the following criteria: missing windows (including the attic window), broken or cracked window glass, problems with windows around air conditioning units, or windows with sealing problems. We found there to be 119 units with poor or missing windows; of these, 57 are owner-occupied. There was a cluster of poor ratings south of I-70 and also between 47th and 48th Ave. We also determined that windows with a rating of ‘fair’ could use some updating or some type of weatherization. We rated 335 units as fair.

Retaining Wall Conditions:

We evaluated ‘poor conditions’ under the following criteria: falling down, cracked, or missing sections. We found there to be 11 units with poor conditions; of these, 6 were owner-occupied. The poor conditions are distributed across the Globeville neighborhood.

11

Observation Definitions

Porch Conditions:

We evaluated ‘poor conditions’ under the following criteria: uneven, falling apart, sagging, and being unsafe. We found there to be 73 units with poor porch conditions; of these, 32 are owner-occupied. These poor units are distributed across the Globeville neighborhood.

Porch Rail Conditions:

We evaluated ‘poor conditions’ under the following criteria: missing when one is needed, falling down, and not structurally sound. We found there to be 249 units with poor or missing porch rail conditions; of these, 131 are owner-occupied. By combining poor and missing conditions, we neglected to dismiss porches that did not ‘officially’ need a rail; therefore, the count might be significantly lower. The poor or missing conditions are distributed across the Globeville neighborhood.

Step Conditions:

We evaluated ‘poor conditions’ under the following criteria: steps are missing when needed, too narrow, material is falling apart, and unevenness. We found there to be 58 units with poor step conditions; of these, 25 were owner-occupied. The poor conditions are distributed across the Globeville neighborhood.

Step Rail Conditions:

We evaluated ‘poor conditions’ under the following criteria: missing when needed or not structurally sound. We found there to be 323 units with poor or missing conditions; of these, 175 were owner-occupied. There is heavy number of these in the area north of I-70.

Fence Conditions:

We evaluated ‘poor conditions’ under the following criteria: missing sections in the fence, sections falling down, or sections that were broken. We found there to be 67 units with poor conditions; of these, 22 were owner-occupied. There is a cluster of these in the area south of I-70.

Ramp Conditions:

We evaluated ‘poor conditions’ under the following criteria: the material used is not suitable for a ramp, the slope is too high, or it is falling apart. We found there to be only 2 units with poor ramp conditions. There are a relatively low number of ramps in neighborhood, but given the resident population, there is likely a need for more ramps.

12

Globeville Housing

Housing Tenure Map

Housing Market Map

55% owner occupied; little correlation between poor conditions and housing tenure

13

Mapping Observation

Roof Condition Map

Material Poor Fair Good Unknown Total

Asphalt 119 339 389 1 848Asphalt/Wood 1 1 0 0 2Flat Roof 0 1 2 0 3Wood 3 0 1 0 4Unknown 5 2 0 0 7Total 128 343 392 1 864

% of Total 15% 40% 45% 0% 100%

Chimney Condition Map

ConditionNum. of

Units% of

Total

Poor 78 15%Fair 182 36%Good 250 49%Unknown 1 0%Total 511 100%

Ownership Status Poop/Missing Conditions Roof Condition:

56 of the 109 poor are owner occupied – approx. 51.37% owner occupied

Chimney Condition:


14

Mapping Observation

Gutter Condition Map

ConditionNum. of

Units% of

Total

Missing 133 15%Poor 88 10%Fair 227 26%Good 428 49%Total 876 100%

Downspout Condition Map

ConditionNum. of

Units% of

Total

Missing 205 23%Poor 104 12%Fair 231 26%Good 333 38%Unknown 2 0%Total 875 100%

Ownership Status Poop/Missing Conditions Gutter Condition:

99 of the 187 poor/missing are owner occupied – approx.52.94% owner occupied

Downspout Condition:

148 of the 266 poor/ missing are owner occupied – approx. 55.6% owner occupied

15

Mapping Observation

Cladding Condition Map

Material Poor Fair Good Total

Vinyl 19 105 246 370Wood 38 73 70 181Brick 6 58 113 177Stucco 3 30 60 93Concrete 0 3 7 10Other 8 16 19 43Total 74 285 515 872

% of Total 8% 33% 59% 100%

Paint Condition Map

ConditionNum. of

Units% of

Total


Ownership Status Poop/Missing Conditions Cladding Condition:


Paint Condition:


16

Mapping Observation

Window Condition Map

ConditionNum. of

Units% of

Total


Sidewalk Condition Map

ConditionNum. of

Units% of

Total

Missing 106 12%Poor 10 1%Fair 114 13%Good 649 74%Total 879 100%

Ownership Status Poop/Missing Conditions Window Condition:

57 of the 101 poor are owner occupied – approx..56.4% owner occupied

Sidewalk Condition:

49 of the 92 poor/missing are owner occupied – approx.. 53.26% owner occupied

17

Mapping Observation

Porch Condition Map

Material Poor Fair Good Unknown Total

Concrete 28 182 385 1 596Wood 34 47 38 0 119Brick 3 6 13 0 22Enclosed/Semi-enclosed 4 12 12 6 34Other 4 4 10 2 20Total 73 251 458 9 791

% of total 9% 32% 58% 1% 100%

Porch Rail Condition Map

ConditionNum. of

Units% of

Total

Poor/Missing 249 38%Fair 107 16%Good 302 46%Unknown 2 0%Total 660 100%

Ownership Status Poop/Missing Conditions Porch Condition:

32 of the 59 poor are owner occupied – approx.. 54.23% owner occupied

Porch Rail Condition:

130 of the 221 poor/missing are owner occupied – approx..58.82% owner occupied

18

Mapping Observation

Step Condition Map

Units Poor Fair Good Total

Concrete 37 214 378 629Wood 18 20 20 58Brick 2 3 5Stone 2 3 5Other 3 3 3 9Total 58 241 407 706

% of total 8% 34% 58% 100%

Step Rail Condition Map

ConditionNum. of

Units% of

Total

Poor/Missing 323 57%Fair 77 14%Good 164 29%Total 564 100%

Ownership Status Poop/Missing Conditions Step Condition: 25 of the 48 poor are owner occupied – approx.. 52.08% owner occupied

Step Rail Condition:

175 of the 289 poor/missing are owner occupied – approx.. 60.55% owner occupied

19

Mapping Observation

Fence Condition Map

Material Poor Fair Good Total

Chain-Link 47 165 258 470Wood 11 41 80 132Iron 6 22 51 79Brick 0 0 6 6Combination of Materials 2 6 10 18Other 1 5 11 17Total 67 239 416 722

% of total 9% 33% 58% 100%

Retaining Wall Condition Map

Units Poor Fair Good Total

Concrete 6 28 41 75Brick 0 4 18 22Stone 0 4 8 12Wood 5 5 6 16Other 0 1 3 4Total 11 42 76 129

% of Total 9% 33% 59% 100%

Ownership Status Poop/Missing Conditions Fence Condition:


Retaining Wall Condition:

6 of the 9 are owner occupied – approx.. 66.67% owner occupied

20

Mapping Observation

Ramp Condition Map

Ramp

Condition% of Total

Rail Condition

% of Total

Poor 2 11% 2 11%Fair 6 32% 3 17%Good 9 47% 9 50%Missing/Needed 1 5% 2 11%None --- --- 1 6%Unknown 1 5% 1 6%Total 19 100% 18 100%

Poor Condition Assessment I

21

Mapping Assessment

Poor Condition Assessment II

Poor Condition Assessment III

22

Mapping Assessment

Poor Condition Assessment IV

Poor Condition Assessment V

23

Mapping Assessment

Poor Condition Assessment VI

Poor Condition Assessment VII

24

Recommendations

It is evident through research and observation that the Globeville neighborhood would significantly benefit from Habitat for Humanity’s Neighborhood Revitalization Initiative program. Repairs provided through Brush with Kindness, Critical Home Repairs, and Weatherization would be instrumental in aiding individual units, while broader scale concerns could be aided by the Community Development. Repairs

Although houses in Globeville were found to be in relatively good condition, some recommendations can be made based on needed repairs. Mapping of housing conditions show that about 30 houses display more than two poor ratings, including poor roofs, gutters, downspouts, windows, and/or cladding. These houses are dispersed around the neighborhood and should be focused on because their conditions may render them inhabitable. Furthermore, houses with poor roof and window conditions necessitate immediate remedy given Denver’s climate. Maps of observed conditions also show that gutters and downspouts have the largest number of missing or poor ratings. Perhaps starting with these relatively minor but common conditions would be an appropriate beginning for repairs in the area. Poor trim and paint conditions are also noticeable throughout the neighborhood. Working to fix these details would make an immediate impact visually on neighborhood housing conditions.

It is noticeable by navigating through Globeville that porches are a common, significant element in the neighborhood’s houses. Improving porch conditions is therefore recommended as an adequate way to improve the housing on a wide scale. Community Development

The 41st and Fox Station Area Plan is predicted to develop over the coming years. Along with new residents and businesses, the area is set to be provided with improved pedestrian connections and new plazas, parks and open space. Habitat for Humanity should take advantage of interest in the area brought about by new plans by the city and other non-profit organizations. By collaborating with organizations like LiveWell Colorado and Groundwork

Denver, as well as the City of Denver, Habitat could potentially provide the neighborhood with a wide range of community assets. One of the primary goals of working alongside other organizations investing in the area is the opportunity to better identify opportunities for incorporating neighborhood residents into plans for the area. It would be extremely beneficial to the community to create better internal connections, for example, by opening routes beneath I-25 to reestablish historic connections between the southeast, southwest and northern areas of the neighborhood. The neighborhood would also benefit from planned open space and parks, and by overall goals of connectivity and walkability. Globeville would also particularly benefit from street-level improvements such as sidewalks and traffic calming. Documentation shows that the more industrial areas in the northeast and southwest of the neighborhood are the most affected. These areas are usually missing sidewalks and pedestrian-friendly amenities. It is important for movement of residents and visitors—particularly wheelchair users, overall walkability, and connectivity to jobs to improve these conditions. These areas’ proximity to industrial land uses were observed to result in a high frequency of industrial vehicle traffic. A traffic calming system would be beneficial for residents. The recommendations set forth here are based on our assessment of the area at the small scale of individual units, as well as at the broader scale of block-level evaluations. The scale range of the recommended repairs, from smaller housing elements to infrastructure, will require thoughtful sequencing in order to provide the greatest benefit to the Globeville neighborhood as a whole. Participating in restoring the neighborhood for the benefit of its residents, as well as ensuring the neighborhood’s future as an integral part of Denver are essential parts of Habitat for Humanity’s goal of creating a better quality of life for individuals and communities.

25

Conclusion

Observation of current housing conditions in Globeville based on the aforementioned categories led to a catalogue that yields an overall assessment of the area. Resulting diagrams illustrate that the highly industrial areas in the northeast and southwest areas of the neighborhood are experiencing inferior conditions. These problems include specific housing units as well as missing sidewalks and unpaved streets. Overall, we identified a total of 30 houses with several characteristics in poor condition. These units were found scattered throughout the neighborhood. This finding negates any preconceived notions of a “ripple effect” in which houses in poor condition negatively affect houses and areas in close proximity. Most of the housing unit problems we observed were regarding a) gutters and downspouts, which were mostly missing, and b) roofs, which were often buckling, peeling or layered. Other minor deficiencies observed include chipping paint on trims and missing railings for porches and steps. Only a few accessible ramps were observed, some requiring repair. However, more ramps are thought to exist but were located behind houses or in areas where their conditions could not be readily observed. Other areas that need some improvement are yards with junk, landscaping, and tree trimming, particularly when they are too close to houses. Planned Changes for the Area: There are planned changes for Globeville and areas nearby that will have an impact on the neighborhood. While some, like the new light rail station at 41st Street and Fox Street will inevitably but indirectly affect the area in a diversity of ways, other initiatives are proposed to benefit the neighborhood itself. It is necessary for Habitat for Humanity to be aware of these plans and collaborate with the other participating organizations and agencies. 41st and Fox Station Area Plan: Predicted to develop over the coming decades, the station area plan concept is focused on the long-term redevelopment of the entire area east of the railroad tracks to create a complete, transit-friendly neighborhood. This would require a transition over time through private redevelopment from heavy industrial uses to more light industrial, office, commercial, mixed-use, and residential uses located close to the transit station. Its convenient location with views of downtown is predicted to make the area appealing to people and bring people with diverse economic and social backgrounds to the area.

These anticipated outcomes of the plan might be important for the future of the neighborhood. Considering that the existing housing stock is single-family and affordable, the presence of the station may increase property values and the overall desirability of the area. Improved pedestrian connections to the station, between neighborhoods, and along major corridors could potentially include better connections within the neighborhood itself. Another anticipated benefit of the new station area plan is the incorporation of open spaces like plazas and parks, which would prove beneficial for residents of Globeville.

CCCD LiveWell Colorado: LiveWell Colorado is a nonprofit organization that works to reduce obesity by promoting healthy eating. It was recently awarded a $40,000 grant to work in Globeville.

Groundwork Denver’s Globeville Valley Redevelopment: This organization will be working in the area around Grant Street and Logan Street. This valley is about three blocks long and two blocks wide, with dirt roads, residences, horse stables and historic buildings, all of which are in conformance with the City of Denver’s ordinances through “grandfather” clauses. This former superfund site has experienced illegal dumping, crime, and vandalism. Despite the current condition of the property, nearby residents are involved in helping improve the Valley in an effort to address connectivity and crime issues, to provide themselves with a place for physical activity, create opportunities for urban gardening and a farmers’ market, and to enhance the neighborhood overall. It is important to note that this community-led process was developed by residents and other stakeholders. Overall, housing units in the Globeville neighborhood were found to be in generally good condition. It was apparent through observation and research that residents are involved in their community and take pride in their homes. Even in the most industrial areas, which suffer the most damaging impacts, some residents go to great lengths to maintain their yards and make necessary home improvements. These are indicators of community pride and investment. The fact that most houses are owner-occupied is a further indication of long-term residents who would greatly benefit from Habitat for Humanity’s focus on the neighborhood.

26

Appendix

CD Content

1. Field Data Collection Sheets Field Survey Form Field Analysis Descriptions

2. Field Public Handout English Handout Spanish Handout

3. Data & Tables Field Data Collected Survey Conditions table and pie charts

4. Globeville Historic Pictures Circulation Analysis Ecology and Geology Infrastructure Land Use & Business Materiality

5. 41st and Fox Station City Plans Station Plan Blueprint Denver Blueprint Denver Plan Map Fox Sections Vision

6. Maps Maps – Observations Maps – Assessment GiS Shapefiles

7. Presentation Housing Assessment

8. Report [NRI]_Report

[nri] report

Documents

block level findings