HomeMy WebLinkAboutREDTAIL PONDS - PDP - PDP130030 - CORRESPONDENCE - CITIZEN COMMUNICATION (5)Respectfully,
Kendra Spanjer
Jason Holland
From:
Kendra Spanjer <kendraspanjer@yahoo.com>
Sent:
Wednesday, July 10, 2013 9:18 AM
To:
Jason Holland
Subject:
Comments on Redtail Ponds - Development #91
Follow Up Flag:
Follow up
Flag Status:
Completed
Categories: Print
Hi Jason,
My family's business is located near the FCHA project near Redtail Ponds. I understand there were a lot of concerns
brought to light at the public meeting Monday night regarding appropriate safety and scale of a project that is meant to
house chronically homeless people with a range of issues that could include mental instability, physical disabilities,
challenging pasts, etc. While I don't live or work near the area where the proposed development would be built, I wanted
to write to you with my experiences living near an existing project that serves a similar population, in hopes that it might
shed light on a constructive and mutually beneficial way forward for the Housing Authority, prospective residents, and
their neighbors.
I own a home within 1 block of a Single Room Occupancy home at 811 E. Myrtle, which houses a demographic similar to
those who would live in the Redtail building. Because the group of residents at 811 is very small, I have seen little to no
impact on our neighborhood. I don't know how many individuals live there, but I would guess there are between 5 and
10 residents. In our neighborhood, which is a mix of single-family homes, townhomes, duplexes and small-scale
apartment complexes, a SRO residents are able to live peacefully alongside everyone else. In fact, it is the more densely
populated apartment complexes that seem to play host to any disruptions.
Though I'm certainly an outsider, it seems to me that a small-scale SRO like 811 enables residents to come and go freely
and discreetly with as much independence as possible —and considerably less security than the larger SROs like Redtail
Ponds (and others in Denver) require. It seems that the staff -to -resident ratio makes any negative issues or ongoing
personal development/goal-setting highly manageable and highly productive. The smallness of the building and closeness
of the group seems to discourage any individual from starting trouble or bringing home unauthorized guests. The fact
that there are only a handful of residents seems to reduce any stigma toward them among neighbors, it seems to give
residents a great deal of privacy and independence, it seems to help residents blend into the community, and it seems to
aid in their transition to self -sufficiency —all in ways that a large, segregated project would not.
I appreciate that there must be a great deal of study at the state and national level toward the theoretical advantages of
housing today's chronically homeless in much larger populations, however it seems like smaller homes dispersed
throughout a city are already working really well to integrate this population into the community and help them succeed
without the stigmas and fears that come up when homeless individuals are rounded up and segregated from the
community in a single, high -density area. As with any dorm -like setting —whether housing high-school athletes, college
kids, sleep -away campers, military personnel, executives in retreat, homeless people, etc. —a large group home setting
will innately present a greater risk of bad behavior than would a less anonymous housing arrangement designed to
enforce accountability and truly support personal growth. (I, for one, would rather live within a block of the quiet, 8-
person SRO for formerly homeless men, than within a block of a 60-unit dormitory —no matter who's living there.) My
main concern is that a 60-unit solution already seems like a forgone conclusion, regardless of what would produce the
best outcome for all involved.
I understand the concerns that my folks' neighbors have expressed about security, overflow, loitering, property crimes,
and overall safety that would result from inundating a small area with a large number of formerly homeless individuals,
but I firmly believe that every single one of those issues would be mitigated by dividing and dispersing the population into
smaller, homelike settings that allow residents to break away from their former culture and grow into their new lives.
Just some food for thought.