DENVER | Main Development Thread #6 - Page 20

trace™ · #**381** Posted **Jul 1, 2014, 6:52 PM**

a little tangent and rant....I do wish Denver would make an effort to improve its skyline. Just got back from a trip to Charlotte and was surprised to see how much more attractive their skyline is and how bland ours is.

I don't think there's a redeeming highrise downtown besides the Hyatt (which really isn't that 'high').

Riverfront was at least starting to look interesting with Glass House (bland design, but at least the glass made it look somewhat interesting, especially against the blasé downtown), but that completely feel apart with all of the generic apartments going up (granted, there are a few that are half decent, but they are all more or less the same footprint, same height, etc. Platform being one nice exception).

/rant over

Cirrus · #**382** Posted **Jul 1, 2014, 7:55 PM**

^
Charlotte does have some very pretty buildings. It's a marvel of great modern skyscraper design. But Denver is a much much much better city overall. Charlotte has nothing like LoDo, nothing like 16th Street, nothing like Five Points or Highlands or Capitol Hill. Charlotte's urbanism is a skin-deep facade pasted atop a city with less urbanism than Colorado Springs. It has some trappings of a big urban city, put in place to make it look like one, by people who must have thought "Hey, big cities have X, so let's have X," but don't be fooled.

If I had to pick between Denver and Charlotte, I'd pick Denver 100 out of 100 times.

EngiNerd · #**383** Posted **Jul 1, 2014, 7:57 PM**

We need to lure the big evil bank companies here then to build those purty building...which people on here would probably also complain about.

Wizened Variations · #**384** Posted **Jul 1, 2014, 8:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cirrus

^
Charlotte does have some very pretty buildings. It's a marvel of great modern skyscraper design. But Denver is a much much much better city overall. Charlotte has nothing like LoDo, nothing like 16th Street, nothing like Five Points or Highlands or Capitol Hill. Charlotte's urbanism is a skin-deep facade pasted atop a city with less urbanism than Colorado Springs. It has some trappings of a big urban city, put in place to make it look like one, by people who must have thought "Hey, big cities have X, so let's have X," but don't be fooled.

Agreed.

One really has to walk a downtown a little to "rate" a skyline. Large buildings such as those built in the "new LA downtown" in the 80s and 90s may look spectacular, but, the real down LA consists of block after block of 5 to 10 or so stories largely built before WWII. Old Downtown LA can have huge pedestrian crowds, while "new downtown LA" is best suited for filming car commercials.

Denver has a "good" downtown ambiance, say a 7.0 on a 10.0 US scale (10.0 being, what else, NYC). And the number rating for Denver is steadily improving, even compared to far larger cities such as Dallas, Phoenix or Atlanta.

A very tall skyscraper, say not a supertall, but, between 270 meters and 300 meters, is a hugely costly undertaking, and, demands very specialized market conditions in order to rationalize being built. In the US, as of 2014, this means NYC, with a scattering in SF, LA, Philly and, Miami. The market for such buildings is a mix of corporate ego (Comcast in Philly), very deep pocketed condo buyers (NYC), and acute office space shortages (possibly NYC).

Denver, at this point, has none of the pre-requisite ingredients. While downtown does not have an office vacancy glut, by any means, Denver has enough available land to spread office space growth into 100 to 150 meter tall buildings that cost significantly less per square meter to construct.

bunt_q · #**385** Posted **Jul 1, 2014, 8:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by EngiNerd

which people on here would probably also complain about.

Not so long as they give me a good beige Colotecture base.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wizened Variations

Denver, at this point, has none of the pre-requisite ingredients. While downtown does not have an office vacancy glut, by any means, Denver has enough available land to spread office space growth into 100 to 150 meter tall buildings that cost significantly less per square meter to construct.

Does Charlotte have anything like the Tech Center 15-30 minutes outside of its downtown? (Genuine question.)

EngiNerd · #**386** Posted **Jul 1, 2014, 8:35 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Not so long as they give me a good beige Colotecture base.

Does Charlotte have anything like the Tech Center 15-30 minutes outside of its downtown? (Genuine question.)

I was more referring to if we lured some big bank companies here (like Charlotte did) that actually have the wherewithal to build a nice big pointy tower that some on here probably wouldn't like the big banks being here, but it definitely has to be Colotecture, that's a given.

Cirrus · #**387** Posted **Jul 1, 2014, 8:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Does Charlotte have anything like the Tech Center 15-30 minutes outside of its downtown?

Nothing that large. It has some decent-sized edge cities like Southpark and Ballantyne, but they're more at Broomfield or Lakewood scale than DTC scale.

TakeFive · #**388** Posted **Jul 1, 2014, 9:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by EngiNerd

I was more referring to if we lured some big bank companies here (like Charlotte did) that actually have the wherewithal to build a nice big pointy tower that some on here probably wouldn't like the big banks being here, but it definitely has to be Colotecture, that's a given.

Exactly. Charlotte was one (of many) city that was building office towers in the pre-recession go-go days. Bank of America has the HQ there as did Wachovia before they had issues and were bought by Wells Fargo. Not sure but does Duke Energy or Lowe's have a nice downtown building?

As I've previously pointed out, three of Denver's more recent successfully growing companies - Arrow, IHS and CH2M Hill - have as yet not preferred a downtown location. Plus, all three companies have grown substantially through acquisitions both domestic and abroad so their need for HQ space not as great as their success might suggest.

Also, I'm with Wizened as that which looks flashy on first appearance often doesn't wear as well as a more classic look. Just as the reason for why I prefer blondes, so to blonde (brick) buildings have more fun anyway.

TakeFive · #**389** Posted **Jul 1, 2014, 9:17 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cirrus

Nothing that large. It has some decent-sized edge cities like Southpark and Ballantyne, but they're more at Broomfield or Lakewood scale than DTC scale.

I would guess that the Research Triangle has a ripple effect on a city like Charlotte. May be a good financial center but many office space gobblers flock to "the triangle."

RyanD · #**390** Posted **Jul 1, 2014, 9:34 PM**

Southpark kind of looks like Cherry Creek... They have the central closed in mall, with some mid to high density development around it. Along with that, they also have the two huge spines like Cherry Creek's 1st Ave and University Blvd.

EDIT: Looking at Southpark on streetview, it is nowhere near as walkable as CC.

TakeFive · #**391** Posted **Jul 1, 2014, 9:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by enjo13

Yep nothing has changed on those lots. There is still a very juicy parking lot right behind the Spire as well.

Thanks for the feedback. That was the block I had previously ranted about being prime for convention space and hotel room expansion.

With an intent to preserve "Bubba Gump" there's a number of ways I'd think that some interesting architecture could be incorporated. Not sure about comoneymaker's tall boy but surely something that would make him go "Wow."

Everybody could then give directions by proclaiming that they were staying right next to (or above) Bubba Gump Shrimp Co. (LOL)

Riverfront Park · #**392** Posted **Jul 2, 2014, 12:07 AM**

Quickly on that rendering, everything on 16th is a little to a lot off. The triangle is too big, generally. The renderer doesn't account for the plaza and that seems to make the building too bug generally. Cadence is 140' and is taller here. 1900 is a little too tall, and mislabeled. But, the buildings immediately adjacent the station are the right height.

This rendering was created by one of the apartment guys, but it suited the 5280 guys needs the best. (And is the most photorealistic.)

trace™ · #**393** Posted **Jul 2, 2014, 12:15 AM**

I wasn't trying to compare quality of life, I don't know what it is like there (but I will say that I liked it and their downtown was so much nicer than 16th street, it actually felt more like an East Coast city I grew up w/ - NY and Boston).

It really comes down to architecture. Our downtown has many more buildings of good size, but they are just ugly with no vision. Even the Four Seasons is about as banal as you can get (not offensive, like the Qwest or Cash Register buildings, but nothing positive besides changing leds).

I just hope there is something to promote some vision. Union Station had so much potential, but just the worst timing ever. That can be said for many of the buildings going up - great sites, bad buildings (yeah, better than parking, but I'd prefer it to remain parking until something decent would go up). And when I say 'bad', I am using that loosely, some are ok for what they are, but the program is as generic as you can get. This, of course, is the case all the way around the country.

When this bubble bursts, I pray that there will be some vision to move forward with more unique projects (condos, namely). If not, we'll see a billion apartments offering free year leases just to get someone in.

comoneymaker · #**394** Posted **Jul 2, 2014, 1:42 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by trace™

I don't think there's a redeeming highrise downtown besides the Hyatt (which really isn't that 'high').

That is the worst building in the city...

comoneymaker · #**395** Posted **Jul 2, 2014, 1:58 AM**

Anyone seen this rendering of the Gaylord Hotel

Here is the article from back in Feb

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/loc...r-round-indooroutdoor-water-park02062014

Cirrus · #**396** Posted **Jul 2, 2014, 2:05 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by TakeFive

I would guess that the Research Triangle has a ripple effect on a city like Charlotte. May be a good financial center but many office space gobblers flock to "the triangle."

The Research Triangle is in Raleigh, 150 miles and 2.5 hours away. It's an entirely different market.

bobg · #**397** Posted **Jul 2, 2014, 2:44 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by comoneymaker

Anyone seen this rendering of the Gaylord Hotel

So I take it they suckered Aurora into literally moving mountains in order to get this hotel done?

Good ole suburban races to the bottom. What insane incentives will they come up with next.

TakeFive · #**398** Posted **Jul 2, 2014, 2:47 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cirrus

The Research Triangle is in Raleigh, 150 miles and 2.5 hours away. It's an entirely different market.

Uh huh, so I guess you're saying they don't draw away potential companies from Charlotte.

awholeparade · #**399** Posted **Jul 2, 2014, 2:55 AM**

Ho. Lee. Shit. That rendering!!

It looks like an awful Thomas Kinkade painting.

Cirrus · #**400** Posted **Jul 2, 2014, 3:14 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Uh huh, so I guess you're saying they don't draw away potential companies from Charlotte.

RTP draws away companies from Charlotte in the same sense that San Francisco draws away companies from Charlotte. Or that Dallas draws away companies from Denver. To a certain extent, the whole country is one market.

But that's an entirely different issue than where companies locate within a single region. DTC draws away companies from downtown Denver, but only companies that still want to be in the Denver metropolitan area. Companies that want to be in the Charlotte metropolitan area cannot go to Raleigh, nor vice versa. They're too far apart to be fungible like that.