DENVER | Main Development Thread #6

[Brainpathology]

I'm convinced by this thread and the irrelevant thread that editors pick a topic, pick the name of a city randomly and then assign their "writers" to find a very specific set of statistics to make that city seem plausibly at the top.

[Brainpathology]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

65k is retarded expensive? Yeesh. Also, "retarded expensive" ??? That is both offensive (the r-word is no good) and makes no logical sense as an expression.

It's pretty self explanatory why someone who thinks 65k is unattainable would also use the other word don't you think?

[The Dirt]

Ate we talking after taxes?

[Scottk]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

65k is retarded expensive? Yeesh. Also, "retarded expensive" ??? That is both offensive (the r-word is no good) and makes no logical sense as an expression.

As a recently graduated college student working an entry level corporate position and making around 34 K a year.... Yes, I consider 65 K a lot of money.

My point was that Tonys shouldn't be considered a true urban grocer because only the upper middle class can afford it. Sorry, but I am not trying to spend 60 dollars for two days worth of food. I think I am being reasonable here. The fact that everyone on this board seems to think tonys is an effective urban grocer and that 65K is something to sneeze at shows just how out of touch the rest of you are with reality.

Also I was not saying that 65 K a year is retarded expensive. I was using 65K as a base income that would enable someone to afford shopping at Tonys. Which brings me back to my original point (that you all seem to have ignored) which is that a grocery store that only serves the elites is not an effective grocery store, and we should not be referring to it as so.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by Scottk

The fact that everyone on this board seems to think tonys is an effective urban grocer and that 65K is something to sneeze at shows just how out of touch the rest of you are with reality.

I don't think we're out of touch, or at least I am perfectly aware of how much 65k is. I think the point is more that none of us feel Central Denver is a place that is (or will be) affordable for people making 65k, let along 34k. That ship has sailed. People who make 34k live in Aurora or Englewood. Central Denver is 6-figure territory - even at 90k, you're pushing it if you want more than a tiny space or any amenities.

Now, Comrade Bunt does not think that is okay, which is why I rail against our affordability crisis. But I'm in the minority. Wong thinks you should just move to Aurora. (And yes, some others deny there is a problem.)

[mhays]

Of course it's affordable for people earning $65,000. Very easily. Assuming we're talking about typical downtown-type residents, i.e. without kids and possibly without car.

Hell, for many of those people it's often much cheaper than having to buy a car, and a huge time saver vs. commuting. So what if your kitchen table can only seat three, your couch only sleeps one guest, and you don't have a yard...there are restaurants, hotels and parks nearby.

[comoneymaker]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

lol. Today in misleading renderings:

I actually really dislike the base. I wish it would be lowered two of those lines. It would make it look a heck of a lot taller.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by mhays

Of course it's affordable for people earning $65,000. Very easily. Assuming we're talking about typical downtown-type residents, i.e. without kids and possibly without car.

Hell, for many of those people it's often much cheaper than having to buy a car, and a huge time saver vs. commuting. So what if your kitchen table can only seat three, your couch only sleeps one guest, and you don't have a yard...there are restaurants, hotels and parks nearby.

You greatly overestimate the ease of living here without a car. You are talking about a tiny, tiny subset that wants to live in central Denver and accept the gross inconvenience of not owning an automobile, when they can otherwise afford one. Sure, half those people are on this forum, which is why you actually see debate on the topic. But that's not even an option most people here consider. It's a pain in the butt. And also greatly limits your employment options. There is almost nothing smart about that decision. It's purely an ideological one.

33% of take home pay at $65k is $1250 per month. That's a chunk - a third of pay. And that doesn't rent you anything.

[blm3034L!fe]

King den city & Wong.

I appreciate your comments, I know Denver isn't in a position for such a development. Even though out local economy is Very strong and we'll ahead of the nation.

Like I said, a guy can dream right. Maybe one day, I'm still so very proud of this city and very pleased with the developments that have strengthened the city over the past decade.

There's nothing to complain about. Oh is anyone putting together that breakdown together of the developments and their status?

It seems like there's a decent ain't taking place right now, with am attractive amount soon to come.

Ya gotta love Denver Baby...

[Wizened Variations]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

You greatly overestimate the ease of living here without a car. You are talking about a tiny, tiny subset that wants to live in central Denver and accept the gross inconvenience of not owning an automobile, when they can otherwise afford one. Sure, half those people are on this forum, which is why you actually see debate on the topic. But that's not even an option most people here consider. It's a pain in the butt. And also greatly limits your employment options. There is almost nothing smart about that decision. It's purely an ideological one.

33% of take home pay at $65k is $1250 per month. That's a chunk - a third of pay. And that doesn't rent you anything.

Agreed.

Hey, we all can't get what want we want, but, we can get close. $65k income will get a single person or even a couple a good life here. We just have to accept that there are places we cannot afford, and, look at making a compromise.

The metro area has all sorts of nice, affordable "spots", but, one has to look. Small areas can provide somewhat of a pedestrian experience yet be only 20 or 25 minutes from the 16th Street mall by train or bus.

The city has a large number of young people that are urban settlers and areas are being developed or might be.

Naw, the 95K/year gross downtown experience would only mean much to me if I got laid a lot, and, I had no desire to do anything but consume. But, hey, I am decades past that. Besides, if I was still in my perpetual in-heat years, I would go to one of this micro-areas and live like a king, rather than in Lodo where I would (likely) live in stick wall box.

Get one beater and a couple of bikes. Have no collision, just liability. Use your bike a lot. Public transportation can be a cool tool to help choose an affordable place to live that you like.

[bunt_q]

Wizened is dead on. Central Denver is overpriced as a meat market.

[bcp]

Um...you gotta whack 25% (taxes etc) off of that 65k before calculating reasonable rent budgets...

Awesome things and locations are expensive...thats life!

[RyanD]

Originally Posted by bcp

Awesome things and locations are expensive...thats life!

No. No it's not. In 2010 I was making $24,000 and living downtown comfortably. I could eat well, and had one hell of a view. That was only four years ago... I have a higher bar as far as comfort of living goes. When I'm out of college and making even 50k starting, I'm ready for Aurora or Denver fringes to live and eat comfortably. But we've all heard my rants on downtown... I'm, for a lack of better words, severely disappointed with the new affordability down here. Hmpf...

Originally Posted by Wizened Variations

Get one beater and a couple of bikes. Have no collision, just liability. Use your bike a lot. Public transportation can be a cool tool to help choose an affordable place to live that you like.

You just summed up my life perfectly.

[awholeparade]

Ryan, you can still live in one of the city neighborhoods for 30-50k, no problem. Didn't you live in the Denver House? It sounds like you're comparing a hideous building, with absolutely no nice finishes, to the new construction that's going up. You can still find decent 1-bedrooms for around $1,000/month, they just won't be in any of the new construction.

[Stonemans_rowJ]

Originally Posted by Wizened Variations

Get one beater and a couple of bikes. Have no collision, just liability. Use your bike a lot. Public transportation can be a cool tool to help choose an affordable place to live that you like.

exactly.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by Scottk

As a recently graduated college student working an entry level corporate position and making around 34 K a year.... Yes, I consider 65 K a lot of money.

Question.

I may be a little removed from the entry level just out of college position, but who only makes $34K right out of college? Hell, an E-1 in the Army would make that much at age 18 (assuming BAH).

Are positions really that low-priced or is that what a BA in 16th Century Italian Tapestries gets you?

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Question.

I may be a little removed from the entry level just out of college position, but who only makes $34K right out of college? Hell, an E-1 in the Army would make that much at age 18 (assuming BAH).

Are positions really that low-priced or is that what a BA in 16th Century Italian Tapestries gets you?

That's about where we start a paralegal with a 4-year degree. I'd say that's about right. Possibly even higher than average for a plain old non-tech job.

A starting civil engineer wouldn't make more than $45k. A starting attorney is probably low-to-mid 50s.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Now, Comrade Bunt does not think that is okay, which is why I rail against our affordability crisis. But I'm in the minority. Wong thinks you should just move to Aurora. (And yes, some others deny there is a problem.)

If Comrade Bunt can explain why the premier urban neighborhood in Denver, or rapidly becoming the premier one, should have opportunities for someone making $35K than I am all ears. No one expects that they should be able to buy into Greenwood Village, Castle Pines, Cherry Hills, Cherry Creek, Boulder, etc. at $35K and why should downtown be any different? Capitol Hill can provide $35K living and so will other areas as downtown matures. Those Soviet blocks that are going up can't maintain luxury rental prices forever and will provide the affordable housing stock of the future. The Metro in Prospect is coming in at $1.50/sq ft and is only ten years old.

There are other areas for the bottom 4 quintiles to reside. Downtown Denver shouldn't necessarily be one of them unless you really buy into that whole everyone should be afforded the same opportunity bullshit.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Wizened is dead on. Central Denver is overpriced as a meat market.

Which is what I understood Scottk to be saying.

Let the Good Times Roll. The trend is your friend (until it's not).
One of the early lessons I learned from Cirrus was unlike older urban areas, Denver doesn't (yet) have the roster of 30 year old buildings needed to provide more affordable housing.

The recent success of downtown is a generational happening. It's been awesome; it is awesome. I want to see anything that is in the pipeline get funded and under construction.
Who knows and who cares if supply gets ahead of demand. That would be a good thing actually. Just get her built.

[bcp]

Opportinity, yes...absolutely. Afforded the same outcomes? Hell no....

Bunt im surprised you would use such anecdotal evidence to make a point...2010 was still a recession, demand was much lower, and the hip factor was lower. Prices go up with these variables....or should we have artificial price controls?