DENVER | Main Development Thread #6

[bcp]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Because the street is public space, you do not have a right to a parking space on the street, there are not enough parking spaces on the street for everybody, and if you depend on one, you will always be subject to losing it through reasonable regulations, time restrictions, metering, whatever. that is why we have offstreet parking requirements, because local residents are not entitled to monopolize the street for their private benefit. And if we don't make them have off street parking, then it becomes a fierce NIMBY issue the minute "others" want to use "their" parking.

but..............those public spaces belong to residents as much as they belong to visitors, shoppers, or employees. any of those can "dominate" a space.

we just need balance on this...not residents vs. everybody else...but parking in denver is NOT difficult....parking requirements can be dialed up AND down as neighborhoods fill-in and densify...is there any reason there cannot be parking requirements that vary by district based on current supply / demand / density?

capitol hill - new projects have pretty solid off-street requirements
lohi - ditto...maybe a little lighter
five points....even ligther
bum fuck train stations...super light

essentially, use reductions based on a rational variable (not just screaming nimby's and neighbors) and adjust over time. any legal reasons denver couldn't do that?


that said, within 1/4 mile of transit there should be zero requirements these days.

[bunt_q]

No legal reasons we can't do that. And I would support that. But good luck with the politics. We're not Chicago - we have leadership that hovers between cowardly and nonexistent.

Disagree on the 1/4 mile if transit stations though. Transit here doesn't go anywhere - completely unrelated to the need for owning a car. Transit is for commuting, not for living.

[Stonemans_rowJ]

I agree, Bunt, that Denver is not the easiest city to be car free if you were a single person. Even if you did not use a car on a daily basis it is still hard. We agree on that. It is easier for 1 couple to share 1 car.

Even in cities like NYC, Chicago, SF, they have off street parking but it cannot be to the ridiculously high standards that we employ here. Their streets are filled with cars because of the densities; not everyone can have a 2 car garage. I just walked my dogs around for a quick jaunt this morning. Despite all the new apartment buildings in Lohi, the streets are empty. Few people park on the street. The perception that it is hard to park in Lohi is perpetuated by people who drive here to go to eat on the weekend. Capital Hill is arguably the hardest neighborhood to park. This problem helps to make it very walkable, and one of the most urban neighborhoods.

Highland Square has the opposite problem. Many of those homes have alley-side garages but the residents still want to park in front of their houses, taking up spots that could otherwise go to a visitor.

My feeling is that 2 car parking in these townhome projects leads to crappy urban design. You obviously can't have a garden level if your garage is the 1st floor. As stated earlier, garden level apartments serve a purpose. In order to accommodate every unit having a 2 car garage , many of these projects feature a new curb cut in front even though they have alley access. Quite a few of them then stack the units parallel to the street. The whole point is to cram them in like sardines. They just doesn't activate the street like homes that front the street. That is my main complaint. I welcome the density, but you can achieve that density with better design. You can make rowhomes that front the street, with garden level, and a small alley-side garage. You might even be able to have a small yard, which you do not get with these new Denver townhomes. Or, you can have a narrow Chicago style up-down triplex. These are everywhere in Chicago. I reference Chicago because I have been there many times and know it better than NYC.

Of course, you couldn't fit as many units in if they fronted the street and therein lies the problem. sigh. If only there were requirements in the code such as that the residence had to face the street. Seems pretty basic but obviously must not be a requirement.

***With all this being said, the "brownstone" development in Curtis Park/5 points actually looks decent from the rendering. From what I can tell, the units all front the street. The materials look nice. I just wish they either had a garden level, or at least a basement or something to provide for an above grade entrance. If you're going to have your place front the street with minimal setback, you probably don't want people peering in the windows at you.

[bcp]

i love it when bunty and i agree

i'm not sure of what the political battles would be...it plays into the hands of nimbys by saying "more parking for already dense neighborhoods"...and allows "wild west" development in areas that are urban but not dense...

i guess the fight then becomes how you measure (err..dictate) this to create a MOOSHY policy...one that changes over time readily.

this is why ken needs to become mayor and then hire me as parking czar (a most hated term, but i'll go with it...)

[RyanD]

I'm just curious how the 5x2 block region of Union Station is going to handle an injection of, optimistically on the low end, 1500 additional cars. A good chunk, if not closer to the majority, of the people living in DUS will not really be using the transit because where are they going to go on rail? Sure, a few will utilize the bus but I guarantee most of those people are still going to drive to Target, etc.

[BG918]

You can make rowhomes that front the street, with garden level, and a small alley-side garage. You might even be able to have a small yard, which you do not get with these new Denver townhomes. Or, you can have a narrow Chicago style up-down triplex. These are everywhere in Chicago. I reference Chicago because I have been there many times and know it better than NYC.

I've noticed some of the newer townhomes in Wash Park, University and Platt Park neighborhoods are front facing with a small yard between the garage and house. I'm thinking about buying one near the Louisiana-Pearl station, an area that is gaining more density around a rail station without any parking. I think the same thing will happen around the University station. The people priced out of Wash Park are moving south of I-25 and north of Evans. That neighborhood is still mostly students between Downing and High but that is changing.

[denverryan]

Originally Posted by RyanD

I'm just curious how the 5x2 block region of Union Station is going to handle an injection of, optimistically on the low end, 1500 additional cars. A good chunk, if not closer to the majority, of the people living in DUS will not really be using the transit because where are they going to go on rail? Sure, a few will utilize the bus but I guarantee most of those people are still going to drive to Target, etc.

I think this is something that will work itself out. As people will move into the area, so will the incentives to not drive or not have a car:

— Lots of restaurants nearby
— Two grocery stores nearby
— Light rail access to Park Meadows, albeit far away
— BRT to Flatiron Crossing
— A train to the airport that is more convenient than driving/parking
— Tons of carshare services available downtown

A revival of the Ski Train or other convenient rapid transit service to the mountains could be another big contributor to people opting out of driving. I haven't had a car for 3-4 years, and people seem to get it logistically apart from how to get to the mountains.

[RyanD]

^ Agreed on all counts. I'm just very curious to see how it all plays out and what actually gets used. It's a pretty big test for Denver and it's intercity-getting-around options.

Anyways... I do love snow.


City Park Winter - 03 by RyanDravitz, on Flickr

[Octavian]

Deleted

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by RyanD

I'm just curious how the 5x2 block region of Union Station is going to handle an injection of, optimistically on the low end, 1500 additional cars. A good chunk, if not closer to the majority, of the people living in DUS will not really be using the transit because where are they going to go on rail? Sure, a few will utilize the bus but I guarantee most of those people are still going to drive to Target, etc.

It's going to be a mess for sure. I agree that the vast majority of the residents in the area will be driving for most of their needs and streets like Wewatta are going to become pain in the ass boulevards (it also means I'll lose my hidden gem of a parking spot). Residents of Union Station are not going to take the choo-choo to Park Meadows: they'll drive to Cherry Creek instead as Denver's transit system is lacking due to the focus on the commuter system. They'll also ride their bikes to go get shit-faced in the Highlands and will end up getting creamed by an auto trying to go down 15th Street the wrong way, though that might not necessarily be a bad thing in the whole as it will raise further awareness of the use of streets by multiple users and that bad bikers are just as terrible as bad drivers.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

No legal reasons we can't do that. And I would support that. But good luck with the politics. We're not Chicago - we have leadership that hovers between cowardly and nonexistent.

Disagree on the 1/4 mile if transit stations though. Transit here doesn't go anywhere - completely unrelated to the need for owning a car. Transit is for commuting, not for living.

Agree on the leadership. Did you see some of the city's residents pushing for mayoral appointees to have residency requirements because they are pissed that Brad B. is pushing density in *gasp* urban environments while he cavorts about on his ranch?

[Fritzdude]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Residents of Union Station are not going to take the choo-choo to Park Meadows: they'll drive to Cherry Creek instead as Denver's transit system is lacking due to the focus on the commuter system. .

I agree with this... people are not going to take the train to Park Meadows to shop.

I'd love to see an inter-city transit system connecting downtown with Cherry Creek, though.

If you had an elevated train running over Cherry Creek all the way to Glendale, I think people would take it not only for the convenience, but the views as well.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by Fritzdude

If you had an elevated train running over Cherry Creek all the way to Glendale, I think people would take it not only for the convenience, but the views as well.

True, but I'm perfectly willing to settle for branded frequent bus service between downtown and Cherry Creek. If the City can assemble local and federal funding to elevate Speer, Colfax, Broadway, Colorado, Federal etc bus routes to be similar to what's proposed for Colfax quasi-BRT, that would be a huge improvement, and a good start, on existing transit in Denver.

It could also probably be done for a lot less than half a billion.

[mhays]

I bet a large majority of residents in the Union Station area will walk or take transit to get to work. Anyone who works Downtown will very likely do so. A sizeable percentage who work elsewhere will do the same...it's the best spot in Denver to reverse commute from.

How often is that trip to Cherry Creek necessary? Twice a year? Food will be walkable. Even buying a shirt will be walkable in many cases.

I have a hard time believing that half of Denver heads to the mountains every weekend. The center of town has a lot to do, and not everyone is a hiker or skier.

If I was a developer, and my financial backing would take the leap with me, I'd build 0.7 parking ratios for housing around there. That's normal in some peer cities. And then I'd imagine a third of those would move during morning rush hour, with most of the rest moving maybe a couple times a week at most.

As for the 1,500-car volume....that doesn't sound like much. Downtown Denver has what, 40 times that many parking spaces, the majority of which arrive or leave at rush hour? A lot of the 1,500 will sit there until it's time to visit friends outside the core or whatever. Even if they all moved, that's <10% of a baseball crowd for example.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by mhays

Even buying a shirt will be walkable in many cases.

Ha. Where? If you want to pay boutique prices. Just like you can get toilet paper and contact solution, if you're willing to pay double. There's a reason the Glendale Target does such a killer business.

Originally Posted by mhays

I have a hard time believing that half of Denver heads to the mountains every weekend. The center of town has a lot to do, and not everyone is a hiker or skier.

No, they don't. But 90% of Denver goes to the mountains every once in a while - it's the main reason people live here. And for that, you need a car. And as I've said 1,000 times, if you can afford $2,400 for your 1-bedroom apartment, you'll probably find a way to afford a car too. It's why no developer yet is trying to do a project without above-minimum parking. The market demands it. Car-free living is for people who have a lot of free time; people with a lot of free time rarely can afford $2,400/month in rent.

Originally Posted by mhays

As for the 1,500-car volume....that doesn't sound like much.

it's the specific configuration of that neighborhood folks are talking about. There's only one street in/out. It's basically a cul-de-sac.

[seventwenty]

Relevant: http://www.postmates.com

And more info: Denver Post write up about Postmates

Originally Posted by Denver Post

Postmates.com promises to hand-deliver gourmet hot dogs from Biker Jim's, prescriptions from your pharmacy and organic bananas from Whole Foods within an hour.

The San Francisco-based service launched in central Denver Tuesday and promises to deliver anything you order from a store or restaurant in areas including LoDo, Uptown, Cherry Creek, Capitol Hill, RiNo, Five Points, Baker, Highlands, DU and LoHi. If the item is available, Postmates wants to deliver it to you 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

This isn't to say this service is the end all be all of delivery issues for downtown, that'd be foolish, but it does provide a small solution to the rich people moving downtown who are willing to pay a fee to not have to go get minor things. Shame it doesn't include Glendale right now.

My friend who lives in DC loves the service, fwiw.

[mhays]

I can't figure out how the mountain thing is so different than San Francisco, Seattle, Portland, or even New York. Most people get out of town sometimes, often to mountains, or beaches, or small towns, or the Jersey Shore. They rent cars, or go with friends, use transit, or in some cases go less because that means they can save $10,000 per year.

Paying $2,400? Not having a car is precisely how many people can do that. Yes, people who pay $2,400/mo are generally on budgets too.

The cul de sac point is a good one. But the traffic volume is still insignificant unless everybody drives to work.

I'll defer to you on shirts. But a growing population means at least a minimal amount of retail should arrive in short order. (PS, your logic is inconsistent...those $2,400 renters don't care about the cost of buying a car, but they cheap out on shirts?)

Car free living might take a lot of time in the suburbs, but in a downtown it can be far more convenient than having one. Union Station must even have a taxi stand if all that transit isn't enough.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by mhays

PS, your logic is inconsistent...those $2,400 renters don't care about the cost of buying a car, but they cheap out on shirts?

You don't spend enough time in Portland and Denver - we have the filthiest wealthy young people around. We don't do high style. We smell bad, we don't shave, etc.

Originally Posted by mhays

Car free living might take a lot of time in the suburbs, but in a downtown it can be far more convenient than having one.

Not here. Theoretically, maybe. But not in practice, not today.

[seventwenty]

Honestly, I find the whole "how do I get things from Target or Best Buy or wherever?" argument a bit of a red herring for many things. Mainly because places like Best Buy are struggling, often due to online retailers. Last time a I checked, you could get big ticket items delivered from Amazon. You didn't need to go get them, so you didn't need a car.

Services like Postmates, Uber, Lyft, Car2Go, ZipCar, BCycle, Zappos, Amazon, Grubhub, Milehighmenus, etc etc all diminish the need for a car for the people that are going to able able to afford to live downtown. Yes many of these rich people will have cars, but they will have many ways to not use them, which lends more weight to the problem of parking their cars.

[Octavian]

All photographs provided courtesy of Denver International Airport.