Opinion: Denver Is Doubling Down on a Decade of Failed Policies

A recent memo from Denver’s Community Planning and Development has halted rezonings of detached single-unit housing to allow for higher-density housing. The memo claims stopping new housing will help prevent the displacement of long-time West Area residents — an issue that has persisted for over a decade — until counter strategies are developed. Yet, by delaying rezonings, CPD is doubling down on a failed strategy that will only exacerbate displacement in the short term.

In 2020, the National Community Reinvestment Coalition ranked Denver as the second most gentrified city in the nation. The top-ranked city, San Francisco, offers a cautionary tale: Restrictive housing policies have driven land values and rents far beyond what working-class residents can afford, making it the most intensely gentrified city in America. Research shows even small amounts of new housing mitigate displacement. Economist Kate Pennigton demonstrated that new construction led to a 2 percent decline in nearby rents and reduced renter displacement. At the same time, researchers at the UpJohn Institute studied market-rate housing effects from 2013 to 2018 — including in Denver — and found new construction lowered rent trends by 5 to 7 percent, absorbing demand from higher-income households and preserving housing for lower-income families.

We do not need to simply trust the conclusions of economic researchers. A 2020 study by New York City’s Department of City Planning found Black population declines in nearly all areas — except those with high levels of new construction. In Oakland, housing activist Darrell Owens found Black population declines were lowest in neighborhoods with the most new buildings. Finally, in Seattle, Black and minority populations grew in areas permitting new housing but declined in zones restricted to single-family homes. In these cases, it did not matter whether the housing was subsidized affordable or market-rate. While research shows that adding affordable or subsidized housing is better than market-rate in minimizing displacement, adding market-rate units is still better than the status quo of no new units and a static environment.

None of this is meant to suggest that new housing cannot lead to instances of direct displacement. As long as private property is bought and sold, voluntary and involuntary displacement of individuals and families will continue to occur, especially in areas where land and home values have nearly tripled in value due to a lack of supply. However, policymakers often focus on the aesthetics of displacement — what is immediately visible — rather than the deeper, long-term forces driving it. This allows them to claim they are “doing something,” even if that action worsens the problem.

So, what should we be doing instead? In 2019, Portland, Oregon, launched its residential infill project and performed a displacement risk analysis. While three neighborhoods would see a higher risk of displacement, overall, Portland neighborhoods identified as Displacement Risk areas would see a 21 percent reduction in indirect displacement for low-income renters living in single detached homes. Meanwhile, Houston’s citywide legalization of townhouses led to more affordable housing in high-value neighborhoods, countering the claim that new development fuels gentrification.

Portland also identified several anti-displacement strategies, including educational efforts, tenant protections and some financial strategies that can widely be categorized as “give lower-income households money.” These strategies are painfully obvious, but it should be apparent at this point that delaying infill until an allegedly perfect set of displacement provisions is in place is incredibly harmful.

More than four years ago, the CPD announced Denver’s own Residential Infill project, but due to a lack of leadership from then-Mayor Michael Hancock and Denver City Council, it stalled progress. Denver’s best option would be to go back in time and make better policy decisions years ago, but that is obviously impossible. Denver has recently seen a decline in rents for small apartments due to a surge in supply increasing the vacancy rate and giving renters more leverage over landlords, but we also need to address Denver’s shortage of middle housing for families.

Stopping rezonings on the Westside will not solve this shortage or stop displacement, but ending exclusionary zoning and legalizing middle housing citywide will. Denver families cannot afford another two years of bureaucratic delays. We need action now.

Kevin Matthews is a YIMBY Denver Lead and YIMBY Denver Policy Committee Chair; contact him here.

On weekends, Westword.com publishes commentaries on matters of interest to the community; the opinions expressed are those of the authors, not Westword. Have one you'd like to submit? Send it to [email protected], where you can also comment on this piece.