DENVER | Main Development Thread #6 - Page 251

wong21fr · #**5001** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 3:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bunt_q

No, there is not a point where we can just be happy. Because no, "it could have been much much worse" is not the standard many of us want Denver holding itself to. That's pathetic. There is always room for improvement, and we only get that through dialogue. If you want to be content with childish cheerleading, then by all means, enjoy yourself. But do not discourage people who want something better. The Arapahoe Square design standards process that PLANSIT posted yesterday is a great example. Do you think that effort would be happening if we embraced an attitude of "finally, somebody is building in AS" and left it at that? Without the concern that many of us have expressed about the form of buildings we're getting? Of course not. We complain so that things can be incrementally made better, exactly like is happening right there. That is the difference between a meaningful rant, and the rant of a disengaged citizen who is content to just pay homage to the process.

Ra ra ree, yay Denver, we are the best! Happy? Now let's get better.
.

USA! USA! USA! If Bunt admits that he loves his country and the free exchange of ideas and thoughts that are a cornerstone of democratic society, then I'll just be happy. Hell, I'll even put the US flag on my house and stop flying the DPRK one as I swell with patriotic fever.

BG918 · #**5002** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 3:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bcp

why? there is nothing to really call a view in that direction - it's mountains or city...gotta put the stairwell somewhere!

There is a good view of Pikes Peak from the higher floors in this area right at that corner that has stucco/precast or whatever they are cladding this in besides glass curtain wall.

bunt_q · #**5003** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 3:55 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by wong21fr

USA! USA! USA! If Bunt admits that he loves his country and the free exchange of ideas and thoughts that are a cornerstone of democratic society, then I'll just be happy. Hell, I'll even put the US flag on my house and stop flying the DPRK one as I swell with patriotic fever.

Would you still swell, fever, and exclaim in joy if I told you I loved Colorado, and swore my undying loyalty to Article II of the Colorado Constitution? Or do we have to drag Washington into this?

Hell, if there's anybody on this forum who relies on free exchange of ideas to avoid being locked in irons (or bike chains?), it's me.

TakeFive · #**5004** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 5:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bcp

Awesome post...just wait until some people want to start protecting parking lots...

Well, they should at least need approval from city council.

Stonemans_rowJ · #**5005** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 5:23 PM**

Good materials cost (significantly) more and this cost is then passed on to the renter. Complaining about material and architectural design in one post and then the high cost of rents in another is a little contradictory.

The Sugar Cube is awesome. But you pay for it.

We can't have our cake and eat it too.

EngiNerd · #**5006** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 5:41 PM**

Looks like construction at 1975 18th St., the affordable apartment project in DUS area, has kicked off.

http://denverurbanreview.com/2015/07/work-begins-on-two-denver-projects/

http://denverinfill.com/blog/tag/1975-18th-street

Hoping this is the actual rendering now, and not the old one that was on DenverInfill a while back. The color scheme is almost exactly like 3500 Rockmont.

http://www.denvergov.org/Portals/646/doc...esign_Standards_Compiled_Set_updated.pdf

http://denverinfill.com/blog/tag/1975-18th-street

Octavian · #**5007** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 5:51 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by EngiNerd

Looks like construction at 1975 18th St., the affordable apartment project in DUS area, has kicked off.

[snip]

So are the only lots not under construction behind DUS now the lot next to millennium bridge and the one right next to the train canopy (and maybe the hotel across from King Soopers?).

bunt_q · #**5008** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 6:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stonemans_rowJ

Good materials cost (significantly) more and this cost is then passed on to the renter. Complaining about material and architectural design in one post and then the high cost of rents in another is a little contradictory.

The Sugar Cube is awesome. But you pay for it.

We can't have our cake and eat it too.

This is not necessarily true, particularly for rental projects. It's more complicated than that. Developers can only charge what the market will bear, and they are not always able to pass on those costs. The correct answer would actually be, increasing material costs might reduce the number of projects we see built, because they are less likely to pencil. But I believe (as do many others) that there is enough of a gap now between actual hard development costs and market prices that some of these requirements could be implemented with little to no impact on pricing or pace of construction.

balugajames · #**5009** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 7:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Denver

Uhhhh.....question. You have an issue with widening I-70 and building a train. Yet you also praised Metro Denver for its past projects that that helped transform the city. One of those project was T-Rex which included...wait for it....a widening of I-25 and a train! the East Line will be good for connecting DIA with Union Station and Downtown Denver. However, IMO, it will not be good for much else unless you happen to live in Stapleton.

I am also proud to be an American... That doesn't mean I condone dropping atomic weapons on people...

Whats your point? Because I praised Denver's past decisions I am now immediately on board with T-Rex? I personally would have rather seen the train on its own route, having it along the freeway is bad design and not conducive to 'using a train', but I know concessions had to be made, and joining those projects was optimal. This is not the case for I-70.

Optimally I would say, fix the bridge and leave it alone. I don't care too much about tearing it out necessarily but I am definitely against putting a major investment there given all the other things we need. Its about what's important... To me I-70 is not that important between I-25 and Quebec... Definitely not worth a few billion dollars and 10 years of grind. Force through traffic to use E-470, or 76/270 and toll one of the 3 lanes in each direction... Problem solved, 1 billion in the bank!

If millennials can fit 2/3 people in a studio, we can fit a few more cars on our already overly invested freeways!

If only you could see the paradigm you live in and free yourself!!!

Cheers!

Cirrus · #**5010** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 7:42 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bcp

just wait until some people want to start protecting parking lots...

You joke, but...

wong21fr · #**5011** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 7:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by balugajames

I am also proud to be an American... That doesn't mean I condone dropping atomic weapons on people...

Can't make a post-war world w/o breaking some eggs and strongly better to break the other persons eggs then 1M or so of yours in a Home Island invasion.

wong21fr · #**5012** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 7:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cirrus

You joke, but...

Really? Please don't give any NIMBY's in Denver any ideas.

mhays · #**5013** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 8:08 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bunt_q

This is not necessarily true, particularly for rental projects. It's more complicated than that. Developers can only charge what the market will bear, and they are not always able to pass on those costs. The correct answer would actually be, increasing material costs might reduce the number of projects we see built, because they are less likely to pencil. But I believe (as do many others) that there is enough of a gap now between actual hard development costs and market prices that some of these requirements could be implemented with little to no impact on pricing or pace of construction.

I'm sure the odd developer would be fine with that (and some are) but the financing world won't play along. Money goes where the likely returns/risk decides. Lower returns but the same or more risk...sorry! Your money goes to a project in Austin instead.

corey · #**5014** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 8:13 PM**

I don't complain about the design of apartment buildings as long as they are mostly brick or other higher quality finish material other than EIFS. The last apartment building built near downtown I dislike is 2020 Lawrence. I don't expect apartment buildings to be architecturally unique masterpieces. I am more critical of Class A office buildings and the high end condominium buildings, but I can't think of anything I really dislike other than the Excel (Tetris) building. I think that building looks really amateurish and stupid. But that is just my opinion. I am completely satisfied that there is such a building boom going on and that a lot of nice buildings have been built.

TakeFive · #**5015** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 8:22 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by EngiNerd

Looks like construction at 1975 18th St., the affordable apartment project in DUS area, has kicked off.

http://denverurbanreview.com/2015/07/work-begins-on-two-denver-projects/

Hoping this is the actual rendering now, and not the old one that was on DenverInfill a while back. The color scheme is almost exactly like 3500 Rockmont.

http://www.denvergov.org/Portals/646/doc...esign_Standards_Compiled_Set_updated.pdf

Took awhile for them to get to a groundbreaking but matters not. Glad this will be built. Looks fine.
Thanks for finding the rendering.

corey · #**5016** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 8:25 PM**

I guess they didn't have the money for a bigger building, but if they are going to build an affordable (i.e. subsidized) apartment building at such a prime Union Station location shouldn't it maximize the number of apartment units possible? Couldn't that site easily hold a 250 unit building or more? It is really an underutilization of a prime piece of property and kind of insulting. Or is it just a token, PC, feel good project in the first place? At least the latest design for the building is better than the original one, albeit very generic.

balugajames · #**5017** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 8:36 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by corey

I guess they didn't have the money for a bigger building, but if they are going to build an affordable (i.e. subsidized) apartment building at such a prime Union Station location shouldn't it maximize the number of apartment units possible? Couldn't that site easily hold a 250 unit building or more? It is really an underutilization of a prime piece of property and kind of insulting. Or is it just a token, PC, feel good project in the first place? At least the latest design for the building is better than the original one, albeit very generic.

I know right. First, we get 2020 style developments across the board, and the few meaningful/subsidized projects are super tiny on uber expensive land. Its quite annoying. Definitely a feel good project not worth its weight in anything.

bunt_q · #**5018** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 8:37 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by balugajames

Optimally I would say, fix the bridge and leave it alone. I don't care too much about tearing it out necessarily but I am definitely against putting a major investment there given all the other things we need. Its about what's important... To me I-70 is not that important between I-25 and Quebec... Definitely not worth a few billion dollars and 10 years of grind. Force through traffic to use E-470, or 76/270 and toll one of the 3 lanes in each direction... Problem solved, 1 billion in the bank!

If millennials can fit 2/3 people in a studio, we can fit a few more cars on our already overly invested freeways!

If only you could see the paradigm you live in and free yourself!!!

Cheers!

That's not an option. The bridge has already been rehabbed, now it has to be replaced. Even the "no action" alternative in the EIS contemplated a rebuilt viaduct, which would cost over $800 million. Bridges don't last forever. The added cost is mostly related to making the highway not suck for the neighborhood (the partial cover lowered alternative).

You can't just take out a freeway either, be realistic. 270/76 would need massive reconstruction, you'd have to build the 46th Ave arterial to serve existing businesses, etc. That option is actually more expensive.

Also, you can't use that $1 billion very widely - it's legally restricted to being used for decrepit bridges. So it's not "money in the bank" per se, even if doing nothing was a realistic option.

TakeFive · #**5019** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 8:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by corey

I don't complain about the design of apartment buildings as long as they are mostly brick or other higher quality finish material other than EIFS. The last apartment building built near downtown I dislike is 2020 Lawrence.
...but I can't think of anything I really dislike other than the Excel (Tetris) building.

At least the two buildings you don't care for, were built to high energy/environmental standards so there's that. I rather like the variety as well. What's a swan w/o a few ugly ducklings?

Quote:

Originally Posted by bunt_q

The correct answer would actually be, increasing material costs might reduce the number of projects we see built, because they are less likely to pencil.

It's why I believe that the demand/supply curve could change noticeably with all the product being built and in the pipeline. But based on the latest quarterly report, so far absorption continues strong so keep building and building. Not my concern what the market is like in 18 months.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mhays

I'm sure the odd developer would be fine with that (and some are) but the financing world won't play along. Money goes where the likely returns/risk decides. Lower returns but the same or more risk...sorry! Your money goes to a project in Austin instead.

I know Seattle is especially strong but would you concur that generally the overall quality in this cycle is quite solid in comparison to past cycles?

TakeFive · #**5020** Posted **Jul 31, 2015, 9:20 PM**

balugajames ... I-70 is one of the primary commercial corridors for moving goods and services as well as people. It serves the heartland and is critical for moving goods into and through the mountains.

Your angst should be directed at those who didn't lay out downtown Denver better and then compounded the problem by gentrifying an industrial area.