DENVER | Main Development Thread #6

[Stonemans_rowJ]

The master build-outs and what has enfolded for Commons, Riverfront, and Union Station seem very pragmatic and well-designed. Very impressed by what we as a city have accomplished here.

I am a short walk to 3 professional stadiums. How many cities can say that? None that I know of. Just wish the Rapids stadium was down near Pepsi too; I'd go to so many more matches.

So much potential in the Pepsi Center area. Hopefully after US is finished we will see some development there.

As noted in some of those plans, great potential for retail exists in US and adjacent Pepsi Center area.

[Denver]

I am just going to post this here for you all to read. It is a critique of Denver's urban development that was published in Medium. I personally found the authors arguments, while poorly developed, to be interesting and worthy of further discussion. I am curious what other people on the forum have to say.

https://medium.com/@nateragolia/denver-s-missed-opportunity-7298fcdfbb73

Today, we’re somewhere near the peak of an incredible real estate boom in the Mile High City. Rents are soaring (just this year mine increased 15%) and the housing market is a shark tank in which first-time buyers are the chum. We applaud our city for its popularity, and its continued success while most of the country stagnates in slumping markets… but we shouldn’t. Denver is missing its last opportunity to become a world-class, 21st Century city. It’s choosing, instead, to be an average, 20th Century American city, and that means we all lose out on something special....

[bunt_q]

I think the article is exactly right, on all counts. We are squandering a big opportunity right now; settling for mediocrity. Worse, we are living off of plans conjured up over a decade ago (Fastracks and most of the major planning initiatives), long before most of the folks singing downtown's laurels even lived here. What's the next big plan? We don't have one. We're all busy cheering Union Station, but that was set in motion in the early 2000s. Now that we're really booming and could do so much more, we're complacent. What big thing - what Union Station - are we starting today that folks will be cheering as great in 2025? I can't think of anything.

Meanwhile, we're allowing a housing situation to develop that all but guarantees today's booming growth downtown will be tomorrow's suburban boom. We don't have any more Stapletons in our back pocket, the next generation of forumers are going to be forced to Aurora. And that really is a situation that can quickly become to late to ever fix; you can't undo high housing prices once you have them. Denver is more short sighted and complacent today than I've ever seen - many of our leaders and visionaries seem to have slipped into a "I got mine already" mode - and I think the results will be apparent in another 10 years.

[Denver]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Meanwhile, we're allowing a housing situation to develop that all but guarantees today's booming growth downtown will be tomorrow's suburban boom. We don't have any more Stapletons in our back pocket, the next generation of forumers are going to be forced to Aurora. And that really is a situation that can quickly become to late to ever fix; you can't undo high housing prices once you have them. Denver is more short sighted and complacent today than I've ever seen - many of our leaders and visionaries seem to have slipped into a "I got mine already" mode - and I think the results will be apparent in another 10 years.

So as a policy maker how do you solve this issue? What type of plans have other cities implemented that could be beneficial to Denver? If a construction defect fix does happen, in your opinion, will that actually have an impact on the price of housing?

[Stonemans_rowJ]

Originally Posted by Denver

I am just going to post this here for you all to read. It is a critique of Denver's urban development that was published in Medium. I personally found the authors arguments, while poorly developed, to be interesting and worthy of further discussion. I am curious what other people on the forum have to say.

https://medium.com/@nateragolia/denver-s-missed-opportunity-7298fcdfbb73

Denver is missing its last opportunity to become a world-class, 21st Century city. It’s choosing, instead, to be an average, 20th Century American city, and that means we all lose out on something special....

This is a ridiculous statement. He loses pretty much any credibility in my eyes after I read that.

I still believe Denver to be affordable. I did "get mine" according to Bunt in that I had the good sense and prescience to buy a few years ago. These other guys, I'm sorry but it sounds like sour grapes. If you look hard and make some sacrifices you can still live downtown or close to it, whether that be renting or buying. Some prefer to complain because they didn't "get theirs" while it was still a bargain.

To say that Denver is "choosing to be average" though is laughable and hyperbolic.

[BG918]

I think the article is exactly right, on all counts. We are squandering a big opportunity right now; settling for mediocrity. Worse, we are living off of plans conjured up over a decade ago (Fastracks and most of the major planning initiatives), long before most of the folks singing downtown's laurels even lived here. What's the next big plan? We don't have one. We're all busy cheering Union Station, but that was set in motion in the early 2000s. Now that we're really booming and could do so much more, we're complacent. What big thing - what Union Station - are we starting today that folks will be cheering as great in 2025? I can't think of anything.

Aerotropolis, sadly. That's the big project for the current administration and the East line and Gaylord projects will start to set it in motion. Besides building more apartments and a few office towers there is no grand vision for central Denver. It boggles my mind that Kansas City is building a streetcar while we aren't even realistically discussing the possibility of one connecting the urban districts in Denver. We need a new mayor that will change that mindset.

[seventwenty]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

What big thing - what Union Station - are we starting today that folks will be cheering as great in 2025? I can't think of anything.

Ski choo-choo, which is troubling because we're putting so many of our creative wishes into a very expensive basket. Smaller plans include redeveloping the Stock Show and the Denver Design District, though that latter plan appears more neglected.

[seventwenty]

Originally Posted by Stonemans_rowJ

I did "get mine" according to Bunt in that I had the good sense and prescience to buy a few years ago. These other guys, I'm sorry but it sounds like sour grapes. If you look hard and make some sacrifices you can still live downtown or close to it, whether that be renting or buying. Some prefer to complain because they didn't "get theirs" while it was still a bargain.

Dunno which comment I wanna use. Take your pick:

1. Gets his and ignores everyone else.
2. Sorry for getting an education brah. Mind if I borrow your bootstraps? Mine aren't quite smug enough.
3. Future NIMBY in the making.

[mojiferous]

Imagine the great cities of the world. New York, London, Paris, Amsterdam… What do these cities have in common?

You know what all of those cities have in common? Prices that make Denver look like Detroit. Seriously, he could have picked better options… Oh wait, no he couldn't, because price is a problem in almost every city across the world. Cities grow and prosper and people move to them and prices go up.

You know how we could make it affordable for everyone to live downtown again? Destroy our urban fabric or chase our industries away. Or we could make sure that enough dense housing is being built and that median income levels stay roughly equal to cost. Even that is probably not enough. Only great disaster will likely keep the center of Denver as affordable as it was when Lodo was mostly abandoned, people avoided Cap. Hill because of crime, and the Highlands were "the north side".

Also, yes Atlanta is big and sprawling, but it is also expensive. So is LA. Poor transportation planning did not save them from high cost of living or high real estate costs.

And

And it means finding a middle ground between Europe’s best examples and innovative thinking about a future that isn’t here yet.

I agree with this wholeheartedly, but have you been to London or Paris (or most European cities)? All of them have huge rings of suburbs that are poorly served by public transportation. Giant, ugly sprawls of cookie-cutter homes and bland architecture that seems cut right from the very parts of America he despises. Why? Because it is cheaper to live farther out and commute in and because these parts of the cities were built for cars, just like most of Denver.

Overall I agree that we could be doing more — building better transportation is definitely high on that list. But did anyone really look at the poll he links to? https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1Z43jk8fXF_NBmxb-lDbctdiTAS-8PCrwjUK6TJf5Nbw/viewform
It includes things like

Relaxed zoning restrictions and residential opposition for new commercial and residential development

Protection from short-sighted developers

a crowd-funded cooperative of Denver residents to compete with and win against big corporate developers from out of state.

That sounds like a perfect formula for NIMBYism to me. Just what we all want!

[seventwenty]

Originally Posted by mojiferous

Or we could make sure that enough dense housing is being built and that median income levels stay roughly equal to cost.

And we're not doing a great job on this front.

[mojiferous]

Originally Posted by seventwenty

And we're not doing a great job on this front.

Agreed. We're doing a terrible job.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

I think the article is exactly right, on all counts. We are squandering a big opportunity right now; settling for mediocrity. Worse, we are living off of plans conjured up over a decade ago (Fastracks and most of the major planning initiatives), long before most of the folks singing downtown's laurels even lived here. What's the next big plan? We don't have one. We're all busy cheering Union Station, but that was set in motion in the early 2000s. Now that we're really booming and could do so much more, we're complacent. What big thing - what Union Station - are we starting today that folks will be cheering as great in 2025? I can't think of anything.

Meanwhile, we're allowing a housing situation to develop that all but guarantees today's booming growth downtown will be tomorrow's suburban boom. We don't have any more Stapletons in our back pocket, the next generation of forumers are going to be forced to Aurora. And that really is a situation that can quickly become to late to ever fix; you can't undo high housing prices once you have them. Denver is more short sighted and complacent today than I've ever seen - many of our leaders and visionaries seem to have slipped into a "I got mine already" mode - and I think the results will be apparent in another 10 years.

Really? Please tell me you don't honestly think that the article "is exactly right on all counts". Do you agree that:

-We can plan for a future where cars will be obsolete, where people will walk and bike and share their rides.

-The Near-Downtown neighborhoods, once gritty and creative, loaded with passion to make our city an artistic and musical mecca are choking out their young, in favor of high-priced developments and suburb-employed commuters.

Or how about the poll options that demonstrate what measures can be done to improve Denver? Which of these are spot on:

-Protection for renters to limit rent increases for existing/re-signing tenants
-Affordable and moderate means condos and housing
-Inter-city public rail transit connecting local neighborhoods (Highlands, Cap Hill, Baker, Congress Park, Cherry Creek, etc.)
-Rent protections for local small businesses
-Limits on outside investors purchasing homes and condos
-Relaxed zoning restrictions and residential opposition for new commercial and residential development
-Dedicated bike lanes throughout near-Downtown neighborhoods
-Funding for arts and cultural incubators, jobs and businesses

With the mishmash of market controls, free market dynamics, bohemian artist bullshit, and anti-car idea that the author exposes I can't believe that you think the author is spot on.

[Stonemans_rowJ]

Originally Posted by seventwenty

Dunno which comment I wanna use. Take your pick:

1. Gets his and ignores everyone else.
2. Sorry for getting an education brah. Mind if I borrow your bootstraps? Mine aren't quite smug enough.
3. Future NIMBY in the making.

Brah,

1. I am as in favor of affordable and moderately-priced housing as anyone on this board. Unfortunately its not quite as simple as waving a wand.
2. I don't even know what that means. I got an education too. Smug? hardly.
3. Nope, but nice try, brah.

I am merely stating that the author of the aforementioned article has a very simplistic and ridiculous assertion that Denver is "becoming an average city."
Who in their right mind would call Denver an average city?

The insurgence of outside real estate investors and costly condo developments, and luxury apartments in the near-Downtown neighborhoods are killing Denver. This boom needs corresponding moderately priced and affordable housing companions, but neither can be found. The Near-Downtown neighborhoods, once gritty and creative, loaded with passion to make our city an artistic and musical mecca are choking out their young, in favor of high-priced developments and suburb-employed commuters. Vibrant, resurgent and diverse neighborhoods are getting facelifts, but the underlying substance is being swept away. On the balance sheet, this is progress, but it means Denver may become another failed commuter metropolis, packed with discontented and alienated citizens.


Read this. I don't even know where to start.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by comoneymaker

So the fence changed and dirt has been moved finally at Hampden and Clarkson last week. Drove by today and there are several trucks with crane sections! Weird though cause there isn't anything dug yet to stick it in. So maybe the crane is for another spot near by?

I don't think that it's a new project on that site. This looks like it's a staging yard for the expansion project at Swedish Medical Center.

[DenverInfill]

I thought the article contained a few good points (more affordable housing, better intra-city public transit) but a lot of it was nonsense and overall far too pessimistic.

Regarding the next Union Station/"big plans" for Denver, I agree we need that, and I've been saying that for several years now. Later this year, Denver will begin Denver Moves: Transit to envision a network of enhanced transit that could include BRT, streetcars, buying up service from RTD, etc. I'm not sure if that is the next great "grand plan" but it will certainly help us in many ways. The redo of the National Western complex is a fairly big deal.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by mojiferous

You know how we could make it affordable for everyone to live downtown again? Destroy our urban fabric or chase our industries away. Or we could make sure that enough dense housing is being built and that median income levels stay roughly equal to cost. Even that is probably not enough. Only great disaster will likely keep the center of Denver as affordable as it was when Lodo was mostly abandoned, people avoided Cap. Hill because of crime, and the Highlands were "the north side".

Overall I agree that we could be doing more — building better transportation is definitely high on that list. But did anyone really look at the poll he links to? https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1Z43jk8fXF_NBmxb-lDbctdiTAS-8PCrwjUK6TJf5Nbw/viewform
It includes things like

That sounds like a perfect formula for NIMBYism to me. Just what we all want!

Well stated comment!

Originally Posted by wong21fr

With the mishmash of market controls, free market dynamics, bohemian artist bullshit, and anti-car idea that the author exposes I can't believe that you think the author is spot on.

Exactly!!

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by DenverInfill

I thought the article contained a few good points (more affordable housing, better intra-city public transit) but a lot of it was nonsense and overall far too pessimistic.

Regarding the next Union Station/"big plans" for Denver, I agree we need that, and I've been saying that for several years now. Later this year, Denver will begin Denver Moves: Transit to envision a network of enhanced transit that could include BRT, streetcars, buying up service from RTD, etc. I'm not sure if that is the next great "grand plan" but it will certainly help us in many ways. The redo of the National Western complex is a fairly big deal.

I think that Bunt is talking more about "big plans" in regards to downtown. While the Stock Show redo, coupled with the I-70 redo, is certainly a major project it's not exactly going to transform NE Denver into the next urban enclave. Globeville is still going to suck and these projects will probably end up benefiting Stapleton, Green Valley Ranch, and the cancer that is Aurora more than downtown. Denver Moves: Transit hopefully results in a robust transit network for Denver itself that will benefit downtown through increased connections and frequency, though it's not a sole-focus project on downtown. But what's the next big push for downtown?

I'm left wondering where our area of focus should be downtown after Union Station is built out in the next five years. Maybe the next big project should be redoing the Pepsi Center area as a new neighborhood with a focus on affordable housing, or a massive student residence complex on Auraria that would bring 5,000 students to the campus.

[seventwenty]

Originally Posted by Stonemans_rowJ

Brah,

1. I am as in favor of affordable and moderately-priced housing as anyone on this board. Unfortunately its not quite as simple as waving a wand.
2. I don't even know what that means. I got an education too. Smug? hardly.
3. Nope, but nice try, brah.

I am merely stating that the author of the aforementioned article has a very simplistic and ridiculous assertion that Denver is "becoming an average city."
Who in their right mind would call Denver an average city?

The insurgence of outside real estate investors and costly condo developments, and luxury apartments in the near-Downtown neighborhoods are killing Denver. This boom needs corresponding moderately priced and affordable housing companions, but neither can be found. The Near-Downtown neighborhoods, once gritty and creative, loaded with passion to make our city an artistic and musical mecca are choking out their young, in favor of high-priced developments and suburb-employed commuters. Vibrant, resurgent and diverse neighborhoods are getting facelifts, but the underlying substance is being swept away. On the balance sheet, this is progress, but it means Denver may become another failed commuter metropolis, packed with discontented and alienated citizens.


Read this. I don't even know where to start.

1. Hardly your sentiment. Your sentiment has been "oh we can still afford it," but we'll see for how long.
2. It means some of us have slightly different priorities and slightly different plans. And yes it's smug to say something like "sour grapes" because some of us chose a slightly different path.
3. Yeah that was low of me, but we'll see what happens.

I do agree with some of the article's sentiment, albeit for different reasons. Looking at these previous lawsuits, many people have come to expect from Denver: an excellent single family house near downtown. No high-rises anywhere, and we'll sue to keep it that way. Such an attitude makes it difficult for Denver for maximize its potential, and the resulting limited supply from a successful NIMBY campaign assists in pricing people out.

Another reason I agree with the "we're getting too expensive" sentiment is because many projects aren't being built to their maximum zoning potential. Sure we have Confluence, Platform, EnV (or whatever it's called now), but we also have Alta City House, Speer Boulevard Apartments, 8th and Broadway, etc. Projects like those latter 3 weren't build to their maximum potential, often for understandable reasons, but they do represent missed opportunities. Of course there's an inherent risk within this sentiment; if we build everything to the max, we run the risk of oversupply, and gunshy developers as a result. But are we building enough?

[bcp]

^ "chose" is the key word there...you chose, is it fair to jump on Stoneman (who seems like a pretty level headed forumer) for his choices if they turn out better than yours?

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by BG918

Aerotropolis, sadly. That's the big project for the current administration and the East line and Gaylord projects will start to set it in motion. Besides building more apartments and a few office towers there is no grand vision for central Denver. It boggles my mind that Kansas City is building a streetcar while we aren't even realistically discussing the possibility of one connecting the urban districts in Denver. We need a new mayor that will change that mindset.

Oh good grief.

Perhaps you missed wong's post awhile ago or the extensive coverage of the redevelopment plan for National Western Stock Show site. That plan is an $850 million detailed outline of one HUGE project. It was Mayor Hancock who quickly jumped on board keeping the Stock Show in Denver core and it was he who set in motion the planning wheels among various placeholders that resulted in the current proposal.

Gaylord which has been discussed greatly would relate to the Mayor of Aurora, not Denver. I can't think of one thing related to downtown that the Mayor hasn't been enthusiastic about? Now if you wish for an alternative candidate with a different vision that's fine. Not a voter so I won't comment.

So far as the Aerotropolis as an idea there's nothing wrong with it. If you think in terms of the metro area adding a million more people over time it's a good idea to plan for ways that development near DIA would benefit the city. There is no bigger asset to the city and metro than DIA.