DENVER | Main Development Thread #7

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by DenverInfill

Rendering fail: Cars on Speer going the wrong direction.

You'd think that for $12,000 a month they could figure out which way the cars should be going. At least they didn't need to show which way the wind was blowing.

Originally Posted by CherryCreek

Say hello to Mayor Giellis. With just under 40 percent of vote there is no way Hancock wins a run off. Also, it looks like mushrooms will only be legal for Pizza.

You sure you didn't get into some magic mushrooms? It's amazing how much of the map Hancock dominates but that aside it's more about where Penfield Tate's and Lisa Calderón's voters move to? I don't mean to be wacist but I'll guess Hancock is the primary beneficiary, irrr-regardless.

Does it appear to others that NIMBY's are ascendant? I forget who all represents what.

Originally Posted by twister244

Fortunately, the city has appeared to reject 300 by a large margin so far, with 9 news already calling that a defeat.

Losing 84% to 16% isn't just a landslide it's a 'no-show.' I'm always amazed by the idiocy of what some people expect from the electorate at large.

Was reading a recent empathy piece on Denverite and I'm convinced Denver attracts a lot of homeless due to its generous support and policies. Not here to pass judgment; merely making an observation of unintended consequences.

[BG918]

Originally Posted by Fritzdude

Does anyone know who’s luxury home is going on that last lot in Riverfront: corner of Little Raven and Bassett. That’s going to be one swank pad.

Isn’t that Chris Frampton’s house? It’s the last parcel in Riverfront Park.

I noticed the old building at the 4120 Brighton Blvd site came down today. Is that where the residential portion of that project is going?

[twister244]

Originally Posted by CherryCreek

Say hello to Mayor Giellis. With just under 40 percent of vote there is no way Hancock wins a run off. Also, it looks like mushrooms will only be legal for Pizza.

I wouldn't necessarily jump onto the "Hancock is toast" train..... mostly because.... he's not toast. Had there been less candidates on the ballot, he might have breached 51% and we wouldn't be having this conversation. I still see him winning in the spinoff. I just can't get on board with anyone who sits there in RiNo, rails against development, then takes money from the developer who was one of the first to plant his flag in RiNo...... It just reeks of hypocrisy to me.

[Agent Orange]

A lot of District run-offs, too. Candi v Albus in my hood. It would be a real shame to lose Brooks' voice on the council. Also really disappointed in Mary-Beth Susman coming in 2nd place in District 5. She has been the boldest YIMBY voice. Seems Denver is not at all on the Minneapolis or San Diego track.

[Sam Hill]

I think Hancock may be in trouble. Did you guys watch the debate? There were three anti-Hancock candidates spouting a similar anti-Hancook message: "He's been allowing developers to run rampant and gentrify our neighborhoods! It's time for a change!" I think the anti-Hancock, anti-development voters were torn between many candidates. Now they can coalesce.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by Agent Orange

A lot of District run-offs, too. Candi v Albus in my hood. It would be a real shame to lose Brooks' voice on the council. Also really disappointed in Mary-Beth Susman coming in 2nd place in District 5. She has been the boldest YIMBY voice. Seems Denver is not at all on the Minneapolis or San Diego track.

District 5 is a poor representation of a YIMBY area- it's the most Leave it to Beaver District in the entire city. It deserves to burn.

Candi's solid showing in District 9 shows her strong door to door outreach- I feel like Albus kind of mailed it in on the outreach. Hopefully he steps it up in the run-off.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by Sam Hill

I think Hancock may be in trouble. Did you guys watch the debate? There were three anti-Hancock candidates spouting a similar anti-Hancook message: "He's been allowing developers to run rampant and gentrify our neighborhoods! It's time for a change!" I think the anti-Hancock, anti-development voters were torn between many candidates. Now they can coalesce.

It's funny that the neighborhoods undergoing the most gentrification actually went for Hancock. Giellis' area of strength was in the SE quadrant of the city- aka the wealthy white portion. Be interesting to see how Calderon's and Tate's voters will split between Hancock and Giellis.

One thing for sure- either candidate will suck sucking up to the developers. Just depends on which developer and whether Denver wants a white woman or a black man gentrifying their neighborhood.

[twister244]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

One thing for sure- either candidate will suck sucking up to the developers. Just depends on which developer and whether Denver wants a white woman or a black man gentrifying their neighborhood.

Except Jamie already is.... she accepts donations from Kyle Zeppelin, who I have mixed feelings on. In one hand, he has developed some cool properties in RiNo (Source, Taxi, etc). On the other hand, he is such a poser, attempting to be on the side of the local residents getting priced out when he was one of the first developers to plant his flag in the RiNo area. One has to wonder if he has political aspirations in his sight, because no other normal developer would behave like him.

Also, I would love to see Hancock highlight that if they have any additional debates. Grill Jamie on the fact she has taken money from Kyle and she resides over one of the most rapidly changing parts of town....

[fleury]

Originally Posted by CherryCreek

Say hello to Mayor Giellis. With just under 40 percent of vote there is no way Hancock wins a run off. Also, it looks like mushrooms will only be legal for Pizza.

I love that she wants to bring back Denver streetcars. That would be epic.

[JB1530]

Originally Posted by twister244

Except Jamie already is.... she accepts donations from Kyle Zeppelin, who I have mixed feelings on. In one hand, he has developed some cool properties in RiNo (Source, Taxi, etc). On the other hand, he is such a poser, attempting to be on the side of the local residents getting priced out when he was one of the first developers to plant his flag in the RiNo area. One has to wonder if he has political aspirations in his sight, because no other normal developer would behave like him.

I think "accepts donations" is putting it mildly. Recall the quote from Denver Post where he told Hancock "I'm going to find someone to take you out" after he didn't get his way with something. I think he found that someone...

[TakeFive]

Councilmember District 1
Going into the runoff, Amanda Sandoval has a significant lead over Mike Somma. Amanda sounds like me ie zoning should be complicated and not simplistic. That's a good thing meaning she's not a NIMBY.

Councilmember District 3
Jamie Torres has a small lead over Veronica Barela; no opinion; guess is Torres would be fine.

Councilmember District 5
Chalk one up for the NIMBY crowd as going into the runoff, Amanda Sawyer has a small lead over incumbent Mary Beth Susman. Additionally anti-development Michele Fry came in third. Fourth place went to Steve Replin who was even more extreme than Fry. Not looking good for the good guys choice of Susman but still too close to call.

Councilmember District 9
Horse race between incumbent Albus Brooks and Candi CdeBaca. Votes for the two other candidates would seem to favor Candi in a runoff but it's too close to call.

Councilmember District 10
Incumbent Wayne New has a healthy lead over Chris Hinds going into the runoff. Likely Wayne New.

Mayor
Hancock with a comfortable lead over Giellis (56K to 37K) has to be considered the front runner IMO. But Lisa Calderón has a cache of 25,000 votes while Penfield Tate received over 21,000 votes. Who wins most of these is a key question; just a guess that Hancock prevails.

Voters
You're on the clock; what will your decision be?

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by twister244

Except Jamie already is.... she accepts donations from Kyle Zeppelin, who I have mixed feelings on. In one hand, he has developed some cool properties in RiNo (Source, Taxi, etc). On the other hand, he is such a poser, attempting to be on the side of the local residents getting priced out when he was one of the first developers to plant his flag in the RiNo area. One has to wonder if he has political aspirations in his sight, because no other normal developer would behave like him.

Man is apparently a political junkie which explains his strong activism. He seems to have some small vocal support in these areas, Candi loves him, but I feel like he's rubbed the old guard social advocates the wrong way.


It's interesting that her platform is so aligned with his pet projects (bike lanes, streetcars, green roofs, etc.) it's almost like she's been totally bought and paid for. But, she's so independent that Jaime wouldn't be a mouthpiece for Kyle, would she?

[Sam Hill]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

You sure you didn't get into some magic mushrooms? It's amazing how much of the map Hancock dominates but that aside it's more about where Penfield Tate's and Lisa Calderón's voters move to? I don't mean to be wacist but I'll guess Hancock is the primary beneficiary, irrr-regardless.

I don't even know what this "wacist" argument is supposed to mean. Tate and Calderón's voters are primarily interested in voting for anybody that's not white?

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by Sam Hill

I think Hancock may be in trouble. Did you guys watch the debate? There were three anti-Hancock candidates spouting a similar anti-Hancook message: "He's been allowing developers to run rampant and gentrify our neighborhoods! It's time for a change!" I think the anti-Hancock, anti-development voters were torn between many candidates. Now they can coalesce.

This could possibly work to Hancock's favor if you assume that another debate or two would be one against one. But that is an interesting point.
With respect to 'wacist' - it crossed my mind but also that they might be more comfortable with what they know - but tbh, this was more 'silly' than substantive.

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Candi's solid showing in District 9 shows her strong door to door outreach- I feel like Albus kind of mailed it in on the outreach. Hopefully he steps it up in the run-off.

Interesting; wasn't aware of the on-the-ground outreach. Looks to be very close runoff.

Among the entirety of the city I wouldn't expect Kyle Zeppelin to have any particular influence. Jamie is mostly on her own in selling herself to voters.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by fleury

I love that she wants to bring back Denver streetcars. That would be epic.

Would it really? She's talking about getting four corridors going (Colfax, Broadway, 38th, and Federal). How's that solve the transit issue in the eastern, southern, and central portions of the city? Upgrading all of the major transit corridors with BRT is probably a $3B project, and she wants to spend probably that amount on four stinking corridors.

Curious what rainbow she expects to find the pot of gold to pay for this. Taxing ride share doesn't even come close.

[SirLucasTheGreat]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Would it really? She's talking about getting four corridors going (Colfax, Broadway, 38th, and Federal). How's that solve the transit issue in the eastern, southern, and central portions of the city? Upgrading all of the major transit corridors with BRT is probably a $3B project, and she wants to spend probably that amount on four stinking corridors.

Curious what rainbow she expects to find the pot of gold to pay for this. Taxing ride share doesn't even come close.

The economic viability argument that I've heard from her is that streetcar systems have proven to attract more investment than regular bus services. The upfront capital costs are substantially higher but I believe the long term costs are less than bus on a per passenger basis. I'd have to pull citations though if you would like any of those claims substantiated. It seems to me that Colfax should be the priority. The 0 and the 0L move up and down Broadway pretty well.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by SirLucasTheGreat

The economic viability argument that I've heard from her is that streetcar systems have proven to attract more investment than regular bus services. The upfront capital costs are substantially higher but I believe the long term costs are less than bus on a per passenger basis. I'd have to pull citations though if you would like any of those claims substantiated. It seems to me that Colfax should be the priority. The 0 and the 0L move up and down Broadway pretty well.

Except the Alternatives Analysis for Colfax already screened out a streetcar. So if you want that, you'd have to restart the whole planning process. Great campaign talking point (a lot of us really wanted the streetcar over BRT) but not easy in the real world.

Also, the expected (speculated) real estate investment, and subsequent tax revenue generated by it, is nearly impossible to capture for upfront capital expenditure. It is not a substitute for actually having to pay for a project. All it does is, theoretically, pay the City back over time. Given our bonding limitations, a P3 is an alternative, but again real estate is nearly impossible to monetize for upfront public stuff at any significant scale. So realistically, in a world with extremely constrained federal transit dollars, we are talking a tax initiative going to the voters. That's when we will start to see the real pocketbook cost of the dream. (I've been doing that math for a very long time. Infrastructure finance is what I do, after all.)

[mojiferous]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Councilmember District 3
Jamie Torres has a small lead over Veronica Barela; no opinion; guess is Torres would be fine.

This race makes me glad I live in District 3 (right on the edge, the opposite side of our street is District 1)
Torres is the Chair of DHA and both she and Barela (who was the president of NEWSED) talk about the need for home ownership, apartment construction and improving the developer/community relationship. Both have mentioned that they want to encourage a diverse selection of housing and reduce the impression that all development equals gentrification. They both talked about how building smaller, cheaper apartments (like the missing middle example on here recently) is a good way to reduce rental costs. AND they've both been involved in building exactly that at their organizations. They might not be full-on free-market build-anything-anywhere types, but it's a strong contrast to the Penfield Tate/Candi CdeBaca-style NIMBYism that will do nothing but damage to the people they claim to be wanting to help. I wish there were more people running for city government like them, tbh

[SirLucasTheGreat]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Except the Alternatives Analysis for Colfax already screened out a streetcar. So if you want that, you'd have to restart the whole planning process. Great campaign talking point (a lot of us really wanted the streetcar over BRT) but not easy in the real world.

Also, the expected (speculated) real estate investment, and subsequent tax revenue generated by it, is nearly impossible to capture for upfront capital expenditure. It is not a substitute for actually having to pay for a project. All it does is, theoretically, pay the City back over time. Given our bonding limitations, a P3 is an alternative, but again real estate is nearly impossible to monetize for upfront public stuff at any significant scale. So realistically, in a world with extremely constrained federal transit dollars, we are talking a tax initiative going to the voters. That's when we will start to see the real pocketbook cost of the dream. (I've been doing that math for a very long time. Infrastructure finance is what I do, after all.)

Thanks for the insight! I'm certainly no expert on the issue but that was just the argument that I heard Jamie make,.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by SirLucasTheGreat

Thanks for the insight! I'm certainly no expert on the issue but that was just the argument that I heard Jamie make,.

Jamie's been saying a lot of things. Like there's a $200M fund that can be tapped to provide downpayment assistance for the "Missing Middle" to get housing.

Yep, she, an urban planner by training, is misusing the term.