DENVER | Main Development Thread #7

[HighSt.]

Originally Posted by The Dirt

Since DUS is wrapping up, Denver really needs to focus on upper downtown/uptown. Just look at it (red are existing surface parking lots, green are lots that were recently/currently/soon to be redeveloped):

Does anyone know anything new about the Dikeou/Tryba-led rezoning proposal that would cover quite a few of these lots? If I ruled the world I would have taken much more aggressive measures to get the Dikeous to stop parking lot slum-lording all this prime real estate.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by HighSt.

Does anyone know anything new about the Dikeou/Tryba-led rezoning proposal that would cover quite a few of these lots? If I ruled the world I would have taken much more aggressive measures to get the Dikeous to stop parking lot slum-lording all this prime real estate.

I believe that the Dikeou/Tryba-led rezoning proposal (the Sherman Street North Redevelopment Vision) only encompasses two parcels at 18th & Sherman on the NE & NW corners (the El Jebel tower site would be included as well, but that already is upzoned). There's another city-led plan in the works that would encompass more, but that's several years away.

So our one of our favorite local slumlords doesn't have a ton of impact on this area.

[mr1138]

I recently looked up ownership vs. renters in several major us cities, and there seems to be a pretty clear trend. Cities that tend to have more multi-family buildings also tend to have lower rates of homeownership. Granted, this is also subject to economic cycles (it has been dropping nationwide since the recession).

I'm not sure that we can scapegoat generic infill buildings as being at the root of this problem. I also feel it is a bit disingenuous, as wong21fr alluded to, to act as though transient members of the community don't contribute to that community. I know plenty of people who have come and gone from places like Cap Hill in their lives, maybe only living there for a few years in their 20s. If anything, the vast number of metro area residents who have lived in that neighborhood at some point in their lives gives the neighborhood MORE of an identity, not less of one.

[HighSt.]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

I believe that the Dikeou/Tryba-led rezoning proposal (the Sherman Street North Redevelopment Vision) only encompasses two parcels at 18th & Sherman on the NE & NW corners (the El Jebel tower site would be included as well, but that already is upzoned). There's another city-led plan in the works that would encompass more, but that's several years away.

So our one of our favorite local slumlords doesn't have a ton of impact on this area.

If I remember correctly, that 3/4 of two blocks at 16th between Lincoln & Sherman (just South of this image's area) is also Dikeou property, and is also part of the proposed rezoning. Any kind of development there would be Yuge.

[CherryCreek]

Interesting article in DP noting the huge upsurge in downtown area population but noting that the uptick is largely "white, single, and well off."

https://www.denverpost.com/2018/05/16/downtown-denver-white-single-wealthy/

The article goes on to lament the lack of diversity but doesn't say much about why that is or what might change it. The article ends with “We’ve got some work to do.”

I always find these type of articles not very illuminating. Is there anything unusual about Denver? Are other tech/millennial boom towns such as Austin, Seattle, Nashville, Salt Lake, or Charlotte attracting much greater numbers of minorities than Denver?

Or is the Denver trend simply reflective of the fact that the type of high paying jobs that are pulling to and keeping people in Denver are disproportionately filled by white people?

Also, this article focuses on new arrivals filling buildings and areas that weren't previously occupied, whereas most of controversy historically has been about long-time minorities pushed out by gentrification. No useful information in the article is provided about that.

At the end of the day, I suspect Denver is merely reflective of the nation as a whole as far as who is getting the high paying jobs. We have been more successful in getting good jobs than most cities.

(As an aside: the article notes the average income of downtown households is $120,099. Not sure I would agree that a household with that income level is "well off." Lol.).

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by CherryCreek

(As an aside: the article notes the average income of downtown households is $120,099. Not sure I would agree that a household with that income level is "well off." Lol.).

Says a rich person. Considering the median household income in Colorado is something $62,500 per the Census (although I think 2017 estimates might push it up over $66,000). Your $120,000 household sits around the 85th percentile for Colorado households.

This comment is why we can't have nice things in America. Because rich urban liberals (me included) have convinced ourselves we are "middle class" and that all of the great social programs we want can be funded if only we'd "tax the rich." Hate to break it to most of us, but we are the rich. Just because there are some millionaires and billionaires who are richer does not change the math that the overwhelming vast majority of Americans make much less.

[The Dirt]

Originally Posted by CherryCreek

(As an aside: the article notes the average income of downtown households is $120,099. Not sure I would agree that a household with that income level is "well off." Lol.).

Wait what? What is well off in your book? I would also point out that 120k as a single person household is way different than as combined income of a couple with or without kids.

[Robert.hampton]

Originally Posted by HighSt.

If I remember correctly, that 3/4 of two blocks at 16th between Lincoln & Sherman (just South of this image's area) is also Dikeou property, and is also part of the proposed rezoning. Any kind of development there would be Yuge.

Yeah that's right -- it would basically be 4 lots total plus the El Jebel tower -- so amazingly transformative. With that being said there aren't any developers lined up -- just the notion that 'if you upzone they will come', which is probably true. The Civic Center masterplan had one of those lots as a potential 3 story apartment building -- what a waste that would be, right next to civic center station.

I heard the city was pretty interested in the re-zoning as was Councilman New, but the neighborhood groups aren't being too helpful. The Dikeou's would just sell the lots upon re-zoning, which does make the whole thing seem pretty shady.

[mishko27]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Says a rich person. Considering the median household income in Colorado is something $62,500 per the Census (although I think 2017 estimates might push it up over $66,000). Your $120,000 household sits around the 85th percentile for Colorado households.

This comment is why we can't have nice things in America. Because rich urban liberals (me included) have convinced ourselves we are "middle class" and that all of the great social programs we want can be funded if only we'd "tax the rich." Hate to break it to most of us, but we are the rich. Just because there are some millionaires and billionaires who are richer does not change the math that the overwhelming vast majority of Americans make much less.

This. Our $180k doesn't feel like that much, but I remind myself that we're DINKs and we have plenty friggin money. Tax me more. We are not super financially safe (we only recently got here, I am only two years out of grad school) and it's gonna take us time to get actually comfortable, but still. Tax me 5% more, I won't feel it as much and it will help so many more people.

Having said that, tax the millionaires even more

[SnyderBock]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Says a rich person. Considering the median household income in Colorado is something $62,500 per the Census (although I think 2017 estimates might push it up over $66,000). Your $120,000 household sits around the 85th percentile for Colorado households.

This comment is why we can't have nice things in America. Because rich urban liberals (me included) have convinced ourselves we are "middle class" and that all of the great social programs we want can be funded if only we'd "tax the rich." Hate to break it to most of us, but we are the rich. Just because there are some millionaires and billionaires who are richer does not change the math that the overwhelming vast majority of Americans make much less.

This is very true. If my wife and I combined to bring in $120,000/yr, instead of $75,000/yr, we would have an extra $45,000 in just one year, which would literally pay off everything we owe to anyone for anything. That in turn would free up $1200/month in disposable income, greatly increasing our quality of life. Then the 2nd year, we would be able to save as much as $50,000 in just one year if we wanted to bad enough. That means we could then become home owners, instead of renters and begin building net wealth much more rapidly. We would most certainly consider ourselves to be rich at that point.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by mishko27

This. Our $180k doesn't feel like that much, but I remind myself that we're DINKs and we have plenty friggin money. Tax me more. We are not super financially safe (we only recently got here, I am only two years out of grad school) and it's gonna take us time to get actually comfortable, but still. Tax me 5% more, I won't feel it as much and it will help so many more people.

Having said that, tax the millionaires even more

$100K to $120K (about in that ball park) doesn't feel like much to me. But I'm in the SWIK category and kids are a giant black hole for money. They suck it all down with the vain hope that, when SS is abolished, they won't sell me to the Soylent Green Corp to make next month's rent.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by CherryCreek

The article goes on to lament the lack of diversity

I wished I could recall wong's exact words since he has that special way with words but he declared a few years ago when this boom was just getting started that downtown would be for only the liberal urban elites or something to that effect. Said that years ago. So prescient.

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Because rich urban liberals (me included) have convinced ourselves we are "middle class" and that all of the great social programs we want can be funded if only we'd "tax the rich." ...the math that the overwhelming vast majority of Americans make much less.

As a proud centrist who will lean to the left on some issues and the right on others, I think there's now merit to (some of) conservative thought on reducing dependence on social programs. Back when Obama was elected I fully supported the liberalization given that the economy was dropping like a rock and that employment is always a slow lagging reality. But things are different now.

[mishko27]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

As a proud centrist who will lean to the left on some issues and the right on others, I think there's now merit to (some of) conservative thought on reducing dependence on social programs. Back when Obama was elected I fully supported the liberalization given that the economy was dropping like a rock and that employment is always a slow lagging reality. But things are different now.

As a proud socialist (I remember when people told me that will change as I earn more money, turns out my moral compass and understanding of my privilege does not change), I feel like you're ignoring structural issues that people with low income face. The salaries have not been growing that much. Schools are hurting for money. People can't afford healthcare because insurance companies make billions in profit each quarter, while hiking premiums.

Middle income earners are struggling to live the middle income lifestyle nowadays. I am all about getting everyone self dependent - I am actually fiscally conservative socialist (we have to balance our budget). But we need to move to single payer healthcare, and public pre-school. These two changes would lift millions people up from poverty.

But this is a forum about development in Denver. Any news about Block 162? Has the groundbreaking been scheduled for a specific day yet?

[CherryCreek]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Says a rich person. Considering the median household income in Colorado is something $62,500 per the Census (although I think 2017 estimates might push it up over $66,000). Your $120,000 household sits around the 85th percentile for Colorado households.

This comment is why we can't have nice things in America. Because rich urban liberals (me included) have convinced ourselves we are "middle class" and that all of the great social programs we want can be funded if only we'd "tax the rich." Hate to break it to most of us, but we are the rich. Just because there are some millionaires and billionaires who are richer does not change the math that the overwhelming vast majority of Americans make much less.

Well, I suppose it depends on what you think the words "well off" means. For many, it's a synonym for rich (see https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Well%20off). And, as you say, even "rich" has no real widely shared meaning (I think this one from Urban Dictionary has it right https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=rich).

I don't disagree that's 120 K for a couple is good income (I interpreted "household as 2 people), but whether you are "well off" depends on where you are in life. If you are a couple five years out of grad school, with large student debt, who just bought a "typical" 450 or 500k Denver "starter" home then your combined 120K income may have you well on the road to financial security, but you may not feel particularly "well off". You may be one economic downtown and a job lay off from real insecurity. That's not just hypothetical insecurity - in the Great Recession that sort of slippage happened to millions.

On the other hand if your household income has been 120K for the past 10 years, you have paid-off your home, you've accumulated 500+ in your 401K, and are otherwise debt free, then yea, I can see how many would say that's pretty well off.

To me "well off" pertains more to net worth than income. Net worth is more secure and meaningful than cash flow from a salaried job that could disappear next year.

[BG918]

Originally Posted by SirLucasTheGreat

There has been a lot mid-rise residential infill in the Golden Triangle area. If you were to compare that neighborhood two years ago with two years from now, I think that it would be one of the more pronounced changes in Denver.

There is also this office building proposal for 955 Bannock, immediately north of the behemoth Parc on Speer apartment tower under construction. This would replace the 2 story building where Rooster & Moon (RIP) used to be.



https://alpineinv.com/investments/#Current_Projects

[jimluka]

Since the view plane thing keeps popping up, I went and dug this out of the cloud, I don't think any view planes have changed since I made this, but it is probably 5 or so years old FWIW

https://www.google.com/maps/d/edit?mid=1...7133777540326%2C-104.98734618612673&z=14

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by jimluka

Since the view plane thing keeps popping up, I went and dug this out of the cloud, I don't think any view planes have changed since I made this, but it is probably 5 or so years old FWIW

Thanks! Nice contribution for your 3rd post.

WELCOME to the commenting side.

Originally Posted by mishko27

As a proud socialist (I remember when people told me that will change as I earn more money, turns out my moral compass and understanding of my privilege does not change), I feel like you're ignoring structural issues that people with low income face. The salaries have not been growing that much. Schools are hurting for money. People can't afford healthcare because insurance companies make billions in profit each quarter, while hiking premiums.

Middle income earners are struggling to live the middle income lifestyle nowadays. I am all about getting everyone self dependent - I am actually fiscally conservative socialist (we have to balance our budget). But we need to move to single payer healthcare, and public pre-school. These two changes would lift millions people up from poverty.

Healthcare is an issue and policy unto itself. It's fast becoming the #1 concern especially for anybody that doesn't have great coverage through their employer. The fact that wages haven't gone up as some anticipated is largely due increasing HC costs/allowance at work instead. Yugely complex, but I've always viewed HC as more of a right than a privilege. Some type of (modified) single-payer system sounds ideal to me. I've always thought the best way to pay for it was a VAT.

I've always supported early childhood education and have never voted against a school mill levy increases. Education is an interesting topic that will be front and center in Colorado. Are you aware of the recent US News & World Report school rankings? Arizona had 8 of the top 20 ranked HS's. Arizona's school funding is down at the bottom with Mississippi, Alabama and Utah. Go figure. That doesn't tell the whole story though and in fact AZ teachers recently went on strike and AZ's governor decided they had treated schools badly long enough. There's now a plan to increase funding enough to provide a 20% raise for teachers by 2020.

Nah, the stuff I was referring to is where you have multi-generational dependency or fraud. There's room for improvement in these areas. Note: I said I was a centrist who leans... not a right-wing nutjob.

[twister244]

So this is an interesting, but great story for Denver.

https://www.denverpost.com/2018/05/17/slack-headquarters-denver-incentives/

1) This is a great shot into the office market (and local economy).

2.) More importantly, this really puts Denver on a level that should make anyone questioning if Denver can attract larger tech interests reconsider their positions.

It's a feel-good story all around.

[CherryCreek]

Originally Posted by twister244

So this is an interesting, but great story for Denver.

https://www.denverpost.com/2018/05/17/slack-headquarters-denver-incentives/

1) This is a great shot into the office market (and local economy).

2.) More importantly, this really puts Denver on a level that should make anyone questioning if Denver can attract larger tech interests reconsider their positions.

It's a feel-good story all around.

Awesome. This story doesn't say where, but earlier stories said they were looking downtown. Here's an Idea: Tabor 2. Perhaps they can take the 4 or 5 floors that WeWork just leased in Tabor 1 in the interim. Perhaps they already have.

[chickenbone]

Are we seeing a shift in the balance away from the Tech Center and back toward Downtown? In the 90s, it seemed like nothing was being built downtown and most companies wanted to be in the Tech Center. Downtown was only for banks and oil companies. Now, it seems like the Tech Center is mostly law firms, insurance, and real estate companies, along with telecommunications. All the new tech companies seem to want to be in downtown, LoDo or RiNo.