DENVER | Main Development Thread #7

[vblack]

I'm a longtime occasional lurker here, but have been interested in Denver development, tall buildings specifically, for many decades.

I used to keep track (via typewriter) of all the new projects that occurred in the early 1980s. That was fun.

Anyway, I'm curious if anyone else here has this poster:

https://i.imgur.com/MnocZ8U.jpg

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by jhwk

They were also a partner in the Glass House last cycle and have some good looking high rises in their portfolio...

Interesting; I wasn't aware of that.

If I were to rewrite the script it's possible their phase of building 5-story repeatable projects has largely run its course. Except City House, I believe they've sold every project they've built in Denver/metro.

Perhaps they're looking to new-phase into more vertical projects. I see where they have built a number of mid/high rises, mostly in Atlanta where their HQ is. I'll assume their success in recent years enables them to fund something like this so I'll switch my tune to hopeful.

[roshea999]

Hope everyone navigated the snow today without any issues. What a mess.

Any word on this project (1480 Wewatta)? http://denverinfill.com/blog/tag/1750-15th-street Apologies if I've missed an update. Seems like it was supposed to break ground last summer.

Also - This intersection still needs work. The lanes do not line up correctly resulting in honking/near misses nearly every morning as I go towards Auraria Campus.

[pablosan]

Originally Posted by vblack

I'm a longtime occasional lurker here, but have been interested in Denver development, tall buildings specifically, for many decades.

I used to keep track (via typewriter) of all the new projects that occurred in the early 1980s. That was fun.

Anyway, I'm curious if anyone else here has this poster:

https://i.imgur.com/MnocZ8U.jpg

Lmao. Yes... I have that one.

[SirLucasTheGreat]

Massive mixed use project breaking ground in RiNo this week.https://milehighcre.com/mixed-use-project-to-break-ground-in-rino-this-week/

[Fritzdude]

Originally Posted by SirLucasTheGreat

Massive mixed use project breaking ground in RiNo this week.https://milehighcre.com/mixed-use-project-to-break-ground-in-rino-this-week/

Wait.. those two large structures currently standing are both coming down and will be replaced by this one massive apartment complex? This is mammoth.

[BG918]

Originally Posted by Fritzdude

Wait.. those two large structures currently standing are both coming down and will be replaced by this one massive apartment complex? This is mammoth.

Yeah this will be a major anchor for a currently-sleepy stretch of Brighton

459 apartment units, an additional 92,000 square feet of creative office space, and 30,000 square feet of retail space, in addition to parking

[COtoOC]

This is an interesting fight over a proposed 20 story development at the Belleview station.

https://www.denverpost.com/2019/01/28/south-denver-zoning-fight-hotel-development/

[CherryCreek]

Originally Posted by COtoOC

This is an interesting fight over a proposed 20 story development at the Belleview station.

https://www.denverpost.com/2019/01/28/south-denver-zoning-fight-hotel-development/

I saw that. I'm not sure there was anything the city could do to make the new developer pay a share of the infrastructure costs that the prior developers paid. I suppose that eventuality needed to be considered and addressed at the time the agreement was made with the city.

As one of the comments noted, the desire to put a 4 Star hotel here may be the real issue - the developers of Belleview station may have had their own plans for a hotel - this may trump that.

One other point bears mentioning. The congestion and traffic flow at I-25 and Belleview (and from South Quebec onto Belleview) is already among the worst in the City. Just wait till the Newmont Mining + this 20 story project are done! It will be TOTAL gridlock (it already is at peak times, with cars frequently caught in the middle of the intersection during light changes). Additional work might have to be done to re work this intersection (South Quebec and Belleview). Or additional access may have to be built to east-bound Belleview at South Newport or Niagara Street to allow additional access to the Belleview station development.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.6243143,-104.9104779,17.04z

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by Fritzdude

Wait.. those two large structures currently standing are both coming down and will be replaced by this one massive apartment complex? This is mammoth.

I believe that building at 3060 Brighton, the one on the corner of 31st, will remain and will remain and will be renovated ala Industry across the Street. The larger warehouse is coming down and will be replaced by the apartment building and another office building.


Anyone else notice the third crane up at the Rockies lot development?

[COtoOC]

Originally Posted by CherryCreek

I saw that. I'm not sure there was anything the city could do to make the new developer pay a share of the infrastructure costs that the prior developers paid. I suppose that eventuality needed to be considered and addressed at the time the agreement was made with the city.

As one of the comments noted, the desire to put a 4 Star hotel here may be the real issue - the developers of Belleview station may have had their own plans for a hotel - this may trump that.

One other point bears mentioning. The congestion and traffic flow at I-25 and Belleview (and from South Quebec onto Belleview) is already among the worst in the City. Just wait till the Newmont Mining + this 20 story project are done! It will be TOTAL gridlock (it already is at peak times, with cars frequently caught in the middle of the intersection during light changes). Additional work might have to be done to re work this intersection (South Quebec and Belleview). Or additional access may have to be built to east-bound Belleview at South Newport or Niagara Street to allow additional access to the Belleview station development.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.6243143,-104.9104779,17.04z

I drive through here every day (on the fwy, not getting off at Belleview) and it seems ok. But I'm not exiting there. Overall, it seems like a logical project to be located near the train station.

[mishko27]

Originally Posted by COtoOC

I drive through here every day (on the fwy, not getting off at Belleview) and it seems ok. But I'm not exiting there. Overall, it seems like a logical project to be located near the train station.

Getting onto Belleview from Quebec is an absolute nightmare and the 1 mile stretch between my office and the freeway can take 20+ minutes in the traffic. It's bad, but I am not sure what the solution is.

Having said that, the hotel, in that spot, makes perfect sense. And whoever pointed out that the issue here may be the fact the Belleview Station developer planned their own hotel is most likely right. Their master plan shows hotels directly adjacent to the property in question.

[mr1138]

"The main complaint was that the new development would get a “free ride,” taking advantage of infrastructure funded by other developers and property owners."

While I understand the fundamental sense of unfairness that one developer could piggyback on infrastructure paid for by somebody else, I can't help but feel that this kind of sentiment is a big part of why we often can't have nice things. The notion that the infrastructure that serves a development is the sole property of that development seems to be a race to the bottom that simply results in redundant infrastructure. This attitude strikes me as the reason we get ridiculous urban design like duplicate slot home access divided by a privacy fence. And why dedicate land for old-fashioned resources like alleyways, when instead you could build private (and redundant) service access to each individual property that can be horded over like a little fiefdom? This just results in puke-tastic site plans like this one.

Can you imagine if we had built our city this way to begin with? "Sorry Mr. Brown, your new neighborhood can't have access off of Broadway because that's not your infrastructure."

[The Dirt]

Was anyone not surprised by Espinoza's vote?

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by mr1138

"The main complaint was that the new development would get a “free ride,” taking advantage of infrastructure funded by other developers and property owners."


This just results in puke-tastic site plans like this one.

Can you imagine if we had built our city this way to begin with? "Sorry Mr. Brown, your new neighborhood can't have access off of Broadway because that's not your infrastructure."

Isn't that site plan driven more by emergency vehicle access than anything else?

[BG918]

Originally Posted by mishko27

Getting onto Belleview from Quebec is an absolute nightmare and the 1 mile stretch between my office and the freeway can take 20+ minutes in the traffic. It's bad, but I am not sure what the solution is.

Having said that, the hotel, in that spot, makes perfect sense. And whoever pointed out that the issue here may be the fact the Belleview Station developer planned their own hotel is most likely right. Their master plan shows hotels directly adjacent to the property in question.

Yes developers have planned a mid-rise apartment tower at Chenango & Newport and an adjacent mid-rise hotel (rumored to be the Kimpton brand) at Chenango & Olive.

[CherryCreek]

Originally Posted by mr1138

"The main complaint was that the new development would get a “free ride,” taking advantage of infrastructure funded by other developers and property owners."

While I understand the fundamental sense of unfairness that one developer could piggyback on infrastructure paid for by somebody else, I can't help but feel that this kind of sentiment is a big part of why we often can't have nice things. The notion that the infrastructure that serves a development is the sole property of that development seems to be a race to the bottom that simply results in redundant infrastructure. This attitude strikes me as the reason we get ridiculous urban design like duplicate slot home access divided by a privacy fence. And why dedicate land for old-fashioned resources like alleyways, when instead you could build private (and redundant) service access to each individual property that can be horded over like a little fiefdom? This just results in puke-tastic site plans like this one.

Can you imagine if we had built our city this way to begin with? "Sorry Mr. Brown, your new neighborhood can't have access off of Broadway because that's not your infrastructure."

The other irony here is that the HUGE piece of infrastructure that really added value to this property was the multi-billion dollar light right rail line itself, and this station in particular. Of course tax payers paid for that, I presume the developers did not offer to "pay extra" to contribute to the valuable infrastructure that had been built earlier, disproportionately benefiting this development, and that they intended to leverage for profit.

These sort of "negotiated" deals with local governments to create special funding mechanisms are just that - negotiated. I suppose in theory you could have asked for a clause that said the city would pay all or a portion of real estate property taxes paid by additional developers within the defined area over to reduce the the obligation of the original developers. Not sure if the city could have agreed to do that, but would have been interesting to try.

[mr1138]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Isn't that site plan driven more by emergency vehicle access than anything else?

Oh probably. That makes sense. It still doesn't excuse the fact that they had an opportunity to break up a superblock into a more urban pattern and chose instead to make it as much like a suburban complex as they could get away with. It looks like even the one street that they did build is still on private property - no ROW dedication.

Their prefabricated parking garage even comes all the way to the north end of the building - this would have been a PERFECT place to build an alley. But god forbid we ever expect a developer working at this scale to carve out and dedicate ROW for new city streets that neighboring properties can later share for access.

All snark aside - I understand that this has at least something to do with the way regulations are written. But it still feels like a classic collective action problem. The planning decisions probably make sense to each land owner in isolation, but leave us with an urban fabric that isn't as efficient as it should be. Why not offer some regulatory carrots (density bonuses?) and set better expectations about creating shared access?

There are examples of these awkward lot line conditions all over the metro area. While I appreciate the density of the "Texas Doughnut" form, these complexes seem to be the worst offenders in terms of this kind of site planning. It's like the high-density version of this. It may bring in a better ROI for the initial developer, but leaves the community holding on to an inefficient block and lot pattern.

[SnyderBock]

Originally Posted by mishko27

Getting onto Belleview from Quebec is an absolute nightmare and the 1 mile stretch between my office and the freeway can take 20+ minutes in the traffic. It's bad, but I am not sure what the solution is.

Don't drive there, there is a train station right there. That is the solution. Or you can move to within a few blocks of where you work. That's a good solution.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by The Dirt

Was anyone not surprised by Espinoza's vote?

Between laughing and rolling my eyes I'd guess not.