metamorphic
urbanism
The Team          Investigative Dialogue          Background
The Project
Our Call • Activating Activism
Per definition, activism is disassociated from the authoritative processes of the status quo which it challenges. This doesn't mean, however, authorities & other actors of development have to be disassociated from what activism calls for. The findings of this ethnographic research study seeks to engages with many actors: 

⟫   ⨳   ⟪

VOICE - historically, marginalized communities have not been included with decisions governing the areas their communities are rooted with. For a longtime, this was accepted as appropriate under the argument, the "poor don't know how to help themselves." In the United States, as working class communities throughout the country saw the carpets ripped out from under their feet in the names of "slum clearance" and "urban renewal." As early as the 60s, activist such as Jane Jacobs started to call out the fallacies of this sort of top-down thinking. Many of the neighborhoods which planners were calling "slums" were actually well-knitted, functional communities; the ripping apart of the intricate social and economic threads in the name of progress was actually regress, as communities were torn from their jobs, roots, and trusted social communities.☙

Unfortunately, while great awareness has been brought to putting an end to slum clearance and urban renewal, the overlying inequities of marginalized communities not being involved with the authoritative changes in their communities continues. Today, this is seen with the negative externalities of gentrification, where changing economic interests in urban cores, such as Hoffman Heights, are driving prices up, and pushing long-time residents out. 

Through the stories captured in the interviews & observations of this work. There is a place to consolidate, and quantify these suppressed outcries for acknowledgment. If any user of this site feels like they have a story they could add, or help share this information to help pressure change, we welcome & encourage them to do so.

⟫   ⨳   ⟪

POWER - while activism can help to call out the inequities and injustices of urban development, it takes developers and urban/regional governance to work with these stories to enact many changes which may have the potential to help generations. 

We hope that planning authorities (be it municipal staff, boards, or elected officials) work with these findings to drive economic incentive to push development to not only consider these marginalized voices - but actually work with them and their wants and needs.

⟫   ⨳   ⟪
​​​​​​​
VOICE + POWER = PROGRESS - and we need to work together to make meaningful impact.
Methodology • Project Definitions & Goals
With the intent to understand the correlation between development, gentrification, and marginalized voices, this project takes the theme: « Finding the Gaps between Change & Progress. » To help establish this theme we first established our definitions; followed by formulating goals; finally evaluating our definitions and goals per our findings. 

⟫   ⨳   ⟪

DEFINITIONS - change, progress, gentrification, marginalized, local

Change • in the context of this project, change equates the processes of transition of users, use, and values associated with the space. 

Progress • in the context of this project, progress equates to the improvement of conditions in the space. Conditions is further refined to this definition to include both intrinsic and extrinsic values (economic, social, environmental, civil, comfort, design, etc.).


Marginalized • focusing primarily on users, this research project will define the term as the social exclusion or ignorance to individuals and communities. People can be marginalized for their gender, sex, sexuality, race, ethnicity, age, income, profession, citizenship legal status, nationality, primary spoken language, and appearance to name only a few. 

Local • defining this work is easily subjective and controversial according to interpretation. Our project actually looks to see how people see "local" in Hoffman Heights. Are newly inhabited residences and businesses considered local? Are Aurora natives local? Or, are only the people who have lived/worked in the neighborhood for generations considered local?

⟫   ⨳   ⟪

GOALS - in addition to looking to better understand how the community defines the definitions listed above (such as « local ») our project aspired to achieve the following:

Identify • stakeholders of change and progress in Hoffman Heights.

Establish • how voices are communicated and empowered - finding how varying users identify progress and change.

Assemble • findings and establish codes which link perspectives; compare and contrast these codes to establish categories of commonalities; finally, use the categories to craft what ultimately became the theme of this research: « Finding the Gaps between Change & Progress. »

Relay & Connect • the perspectives of the users of Hoffman Heights on this website, in addition to sharing our own analysis and transparency of the process we took.

⟫   ⨳   ⟪

EVALUATION - as our research unfolded and we set on finding these definitions and achieving the goals (listed above), our findings lead us to refine and modify our foci. In the following subsections (Research Design & Final Findings), we discuss this evaluation in further detail. 



Methodology • Research Design

In this subsection, we will further discuss the methodology we took to reach our theme. We will explain why selected Hoffman Heights & why we proceeded in the manner we established for fieldwork observations and interviews. We will then conclude with an exact breakdown of the process and a critical reflection on this breakdown process itself. Our research was framed in a deductive manner - where we looked to identify our “project” as we carried out observations. What we would ultimately establish as our theme « Finding the Gaps between Change & Progress, » was reached after multiple reiterations where research unveiled increasingly more information. 

⟫   ⨳   ⟪

WHY HOFFMAN HEIGHTS - When selecting the teams we would work with, Sydeny and I sought each other out for geographical considerations - we both lived relatively close to each other in Aurora. Because this research called for abundant fieldwork, we wanted to select a neighborhood in close proximity to ease any strains on transportation. Minus a couple of framing guidelines, this research was established in a deductive manner. These preliminary guidelines, however, lead us to select this neighborhood. 

Our selected site was to build off of discourse on feminist urbanism; because of time restraints, we were encouraged to find a neighborhood which had a notable presence of public / commercial space to ease any efforts it would take to engage in conversation/interviews. Conversations around feminist urbanism pushed us to select a site which we were cognizant of social tensions. 

Hoffman heights quickly became ideal as there were several major changes happening within and around the neighborhood which also yields robust residential, commercial, and civil activity. 


⟫   ⨳   ⟪


THE PROCESS - Procedures
This project took on the following format: the timeframe that is allotted for each phase wasn’t perfectly linear and sometimes the phases would overlap. Throughout the processes our team would meet to assign individual tasks; some tasks asked for working together. 

Research and precedence (~1 week): talk about overarching theme of an area to consider for research (in our case, feminist urbanism). Look into ethnographic best-practices and legal framework, and moral considerations for ethnographic research:

• Commence with discourse on preceding themes of feminist urbanism - utilizing work such as Punt 6’s research and activism in Barcelona; 

• Researching the ethics of interviewing techniques - H. Russell Bernard, Social Research Methods (2000). Take CITI Program (The Collaborative Institutional Training Initiative) courses to certify in-depth considerations of the legal and moral impact of ethnographic research (particularly interviews).

Develop initial programming of ethnographic research (~1 week): during this phase we conducted research on our site, drafted interview questions, and considered the different approaches we could take for the ethnographic study.

• Establish and conduct preliminary research on site location: maps, data, history, windshield observations (quick trips to capture the tour of our site. 

• Consider and develop insight on differing interview styles (informal vs. formal; structured, semi-structured, and unstructured); identify interview styles which would work best, draft interview questions, set target interviewee demographics for study (age, race, ethnicity, occupation, sex, etc.).

Ethnographic study (~1.5 weeks): it was time to put our tools and studies to practice. During this stage much of the work was together.

• Site observations - visiting the site for a long period of time and capturing as much detail as possible. Capturing physical, as well as emotional features. Taking down notable sites with media (video and photography)

• Interviews - with a target of at least one (1) hour of dialogue, utilize interview guides as well as informal interview techniques to find how users perceive the area; transcribe the interview(s).

• Reflections - promptly after conducting observations and interviews, reflect on the information which was absorbed and connect it with any larger considerations for research study and consider what was missing, or possibly was changed, from the initial research considerations.

Final analysis (~1 week): after assembling all the data that was taken, we could assign value to our collected information, see where connections or gaps existed or otherwise whatever would stand out as prominent. Make an argument to why this was significant; finally, review for publishing.

• “Code “ our research findings - review all interviews, photos, transcripts, reflections, observations, research, and any other data, to find connections between everything; label these connections.

• “Categorize” the codes to understand how the individual data connected to broader insights.

• “Establish a theme” to signify the categories to make an argument for what was discovered with the research. (It would be okay if our discovery was, “a need to further investigate” as this would still fulfill understanding there was a gap in understanding).



⟫   ⨳   ⟪


THE PROCESS - Setting the stage
For deductive ethnographies, researchers have to establish what they are looking for as they execute their observations. We began this investigation looking at precedence for feminist urbanism to set the stage of considerations to look for. From the discourse on feminist urbanism, we discovered there were multiple waves of feminism: 

1st wave - establishment of the women’s rights (primarily in the 19th and turn to the 20th centuries). This movement established legal rights; most notably, the right to vote. 

2nd wave - took on predominant themes of sexuality, chivalry, and the portrayal of women in society to name a few. 3rd wave feminism built off of the cultural expansion of the 2nd wave, but critiqued the thinking of the time to be too focused around middle-upper-class white women. 

3rd wave - looked to more wholesomely raise awareness of the cultural injustices of women as they related to different marginalized classes (while 3rd wave feminism took off towards the end of the 20th century, it had its roots as early as 19th century 1st wave feminism, seen with Sojourner Truth’s famous, “Ain’t I a woman?” speech). 

4th wave - this wave is still being defined. Research demonstrates this contemporary wave of feminism encompassing a more holistic view of feminism as it relates to all of humanity - taking particular note to relate to sexuality and gender norms and expectations as they relate to both women and men (4th wave feminism is argued to began around the turn of the 21st century). 

With these definitions in mind, our group looked to relate our ethnographic research with particular alliance to 3rd and 4th wave feminist thought. While our much of our definitions and research commenced around the relationship with change and progress as it relates to women, we expanded this view to see how all genders, races, ethnicities, and sexualities took stance as they related with change and progress. Upon noticing the rapidly changing demographic makeup in the neighborhood, we assumed this was aligned to the gentrification spurring from the new development on the northern end of the neighborhood and its neighboring neighborhoods. 

Mid-point in our observations and interviews, we discussed, “Poverty and profit in the American City”, Evicted (2016). For the purposes of this assignment, our research lacked the time-scale required for the level of detail entailed with a genuine ethnographic study such as Matthew Desmond’s. However, we still wished to capture lessons learned through his work. 

As the initial observations and background research rolled out, we increasingly grasped the essence of the neighborhood. There were, indeed, changing demographics throughout Hoffman Heights and the surrounding neighborhoods as a result of gentrification. The immense development which was occurring had zoning and building code considerations to allow large hospitals, condos, apartments, and educational institutions (such as CU Anschutz) to move into the areas which were previously housed by mobile-home communities. These changes had substantial impact on the initial capacity of the infrastructure of the area - roads and sidewalks had to be widened, sewage & stormwater outlets expanded, and ample investment was put into growing the electric and gas capacities in the area. 

Initially, this neighborhood was built as one of America’s many “mass-produced” neighborhoods following the housing boom of WWII. Decades later, this once suburban community came to be respected quasi-urban relative to the sprawl that had more than doubled since the neighborhood’s conception - suggesting that values likely stagnated or declined as values were pushed increasingly further into the ever-growing urban periphery.

As cultural trends started to bring back appreciation to urban cores, this area became increasingly desirable and prices started to go up. Conversations with people in the area suggested mixed feelings on this, as some appreciated this increased value (property owners and businesses), as it allowed them to get a larger return on their investments. Tenants, and waged workers did not share this appreciation, as this increased the cost of living and put strains on their already stringent budget, and pushed them out. Many residents saw a correlation with minorities being pushed out. Investment showed to be primarily benefiting white, young, professionals.

We weren’t able to inhabit a space to “mock” the experience of living within Hoffman heights - which would have made for a profoundly intricate study with great details. However, we were able to take in a lot of information from the interviews, observations, and study. After assembling our findings we skimmed through language and photographic/video-graphic media to establish our codes:

Transportation impacts on community; racial discrimination & ignorance; demographic transitions in correlation to augmenting values (forced and voluntary); emotional ties and resentment towards neighborhood; bureaucratic processes - often detached from areas most prominent users; distrust in authority & authoritative relationships; sense (or lack) of community; suspicion &/or curiosity.

This last code had a lot to do with the conversations and harassment that naturally occurs when we were walking around with a camera and/or asking questions, suspicion was usually lowered when our student status was revealed. Many explained that there was a lot of anger towards land surveyors (or at least an anger of what people equated their presence with), government officials, developers, and media. Understandably, when we walked with recording devices, we could have easily been misjudged for one of these profiles.

We were then able to categorize these codes into groups of gentrification/displacement; change (in demographics and land-use/density); emotional connection to changes and history in the area. 

When you look at these codes, they spell out: pressure (changes in values and use) and heat (emotion and displacement) - thus the showcased metaphor, « metamorphic urbanism. »


⟫   ⨳   ⟪

CONCLUSIONS

Our theme, « Metamorphic urbanism, » is a play on the metamorphic process of heat and pressure. While this process creates many valuable mineral compositions, it can only be done so through a very violent process whereas the initial state of the minerals are brutalized into a different composition.The glorified « marble » of Hoffman Heights is the large investment seen through the educational institutions, chain stores, and luxury/quasi-luxury apartment/condo developers. This development has been built out of the cyclical relationship between investment and displacement of original residences. When the “less desirable” residences are “eroded away” by the raised costs or land owners incentivized to sell their lots, and the new development pushes prices up even more.

Many residents (both local and visitors) have taken enough notice, and they can see right through this « quartz. » City government, businesses, and developers are increasingly noticing some of the negative externalities spurred by their relationships with each other. Very rarely, do either of these “powers” have the intention to cause such strains, the tectonic mass of government is pushing to raise tax revenues and popular image to be able to increase the value and quality of public services; the tectonic mass of capitalism is pushing to appease investors by giving them a constant return on their investment. Increasing studies such as this one have demonstrated that many - and often those who are already unstable - are being crushed by this process. 

Public policy has more public benefit if it is able to start paying attention beyond “if” policy is working to yield growth - and looking to investigate “who.” Who is getting to benefit from the excavated gem-stones created by the increased land values these policies create? The history of legislation and urban planning screams with the injustices towards minority populations who have been ignored: communities disinvested in to give preference to suburban development - suburban development which loaned mortgages to only middle and upper-middle class caucasians; communities able to come together to create social and service markets to fill in these voids only to be bulldozed in the name of urban renewal. 

There exists plentiful opportunity with public policy to protect the next generation of vulnerable populations° from suffering from the next wave of land-value influxes spurred by the gentrification process. We see examples of this with tax and incentive programs. The success of these programs comes by genuine discourse with people in these communities and hearing their concerns and hearing out their ideas - much like what is already happening in preference of businesses such as Hyatt*, the billion-dollar institutions such as the University of Colorado*, and major property management companies such as the Lincoln Property Company*, Greystar*, the Catalina Development Company* to name a few. 

°People who have been longtime residences; and/or many who are limited on other options of affordable housing with reasonable access to employment. 

*Private enterprises benefiting from development ROI in Hoffman Heights.