DENVER | Main Development Thread #7

[laniroj]

Originally Posted by pablosan

I always felt that this tower could have been 10 to 15 stories taller, and they still would have filled it. I don't really know if the developer had maxed out the FAR. Although it is a great tower, it gets lost from certain vantage points.

I completely agree as to they could have filled more and this brings up another point I've kind of mentioned previously. Developers in Denver will do several smaller projects at once, but nobody seems to have the appetite to do one large project even though they're taking an equivalent risk across multiple properties. Call it diversification or some other mumbo jumbo from their equity or debt partners, but sure seems a lot of developers are leaving money on the table by choosing lower density, especially in the Downtown Hotel scene. Maybe the developers here simply don't have the balance sheet to do to the big kahunas (though they seemingly have that balance sheet elsewhere they develop). I still say Denver suffers from cow town syndrome, perceived from the outside or otherwise...

[mhays]

I guarantee those developers don't consider multiple small buildings as "equivalent risk" vs. one big job.

[DenvertoLA]

I'm not sure on that logic. A developer constructing 500,000 sq ft of office space in one project vs 3 is still going to demand the same amount of sales to fill them.

I think it must be more profitable for these companies to do multiple project than build one giant structure right now. Especially if they are taking advantage of an opportunity zone.

[mhays]

Here are three key points of their thinking:

1. Three buildings can offer the option of phasing each separately.

2. Each building is typically much quicker than one tall one.

3. Tenanting can be much easier, as many tenants want entire buildings and will pay more for them.

You could also think from a stock investor perspective. Buying three stocks spreads the risk vs. one stock, despite investing the same amount of money.

[laniroj]

Originally Posted by mhays

Here are three key points of their thinking:

1. Three buildings can offer the option of phasing each separately.

2. Each building is typically much quicker than one tall one.

3. Tenanting can be much easier, as many tenants want entire buildings and will pay more for them.

You could also think from a stock investor perspective. Buying three stocks spreads the risk vs. one stock, despite investing the same amount of money.

1. Get it, though there's no discernible economic advantage (less risk) to this unless one phase starts after the previous is complete. I am not referring to this scenario. The ones I'm referring to have multiple projects going, often times in close proximity to each other with no real phasing benefit.

2. Definitely, but these folks seemingly think the market has depth because they keep starting new projects, again in close proximity to their others.

3. I'm not sure where you're coming from on this. Other than a few build to suit anchor tenants in the tech center and a couple flanking Union Station, none of whom took whole buildings, the vast majority of projects are not like this.

I am convinced the caliber of developer we have locally just doesn't have the balance sheet depth or history that you see on the coasts building the giants, not to mention experience...not anyone can just go and build a giant, you sort of need experience and so we need outsiders to come in and do it. I am somewhat optimistic that the next cycle will bring some outside expertise that might yield more of the Amacons, Hines, and Relateds of the world in Denver.

[CherryCreek]

So long, Coors. It's been good to know ya!

https://www.denverpost.com/2019/10/30/molson-coors-closing-denver-headquarters-chicago/

[SirLucasTheGreat]

The Denver Business Journal has a cool and free slideshow documenting 19 current development projects.

https://www.bizjournals.com/denver/news/...tm_medium=trueAnthem&utm_source=facebook

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by CherryCreek

So long, Coors. It's been good to know ya!

Meh. If/when they announce that the Golden Brewery is closing, that would be something to wail and gnash about.


Still, that a couple floors of office space downtown that will be needing a new tenant.

[TakeFive]

Camden scores site for 471-unit apartment project

https://www.bizjournals.com/denver/news/...roject.html?iana=hpmvp_den_news_headline

Kenneth Ho, a principal with Westside Investment Partners, told Denver Business Journal that 50 S. Kalamath St., a large parcel and site of a vacant warehouse once used by Sports Authority that the developer purchased in June for $16.5 million, is now under contract by Houston-based Camden, a multifamily real estate firm. On Tuesday, an architect representing Camden filed a concept plan — the earliest stage in the city's development process — for a five-story, 471-unit apartment project on the parcel that's currently zoned industrial.

Interestingly, I recently mentioned Camden building Phase 2 of a ~1,200 unit project near Mayo Clinic in Phoenix. REIT's are doing well and raising lots of money. Like many builders though Camden prefers more of a standard 4 or 5-story design. At least they are a quality builder and hold their projects long term.

What's the plan?

According to that plan, 80% of the units, or 377, would be one-bedroom units, with the remaining 20% or 94 units being two-bedroom units. The average unit size would be 850 square feet. Plans also call for 700 parking spaces.

[RyanD]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Camden scores site for 471-unit apartment project

Oof that's super disconnected from what people think as "Baker". Also the 700 parking spaces is kind of a lol since it will be in the middle of a pedestrian hostile environment.

[CherryCreek]

Originally Posted by RyanD

Oof that's super disconnected from what people think as "Baker". Also the 700 parking spaces is kind of a lol since it will be in the middle of a pedestrian hostile environment.

True, lol. On the other hand that area of "Baker" (might need a new name) has a lot of potential residential redevelopment land right where density makes sense - reasonably close to downtown, Cherry Creek, and light rail.

https://www.google.com/maps/@39.7202234,-104.9985556,1504m/data=!3m1!1e3

That could be a new RiNO of redeveloping warehouse and industrial spaces to more mixed use.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by RyanD

Oof that's super disconnected from what people think as "Baker". Also the 700 parking spaces is kind of a lol since it will be in the middle of a pedestrian hostile environment.

Speculating a little bit, I see where Camden's unit size seems bigger than most projects. They've been in metro Phoenix for some time and I'd guess 80% of their apartments are in upscale areas - Scottsdale especially. That said, while they build a very nice product it's less upscale than say Mill Creek.

Young Hispanic families are good at finding good value. A couple with one (or two) kids have no problem fitting into a one-bedroom apartment - if it has reasonable size. I happen to pick up a bright young Hispanic lady from Camden North who worked in Republic Services beautiful corporate HQ. There's a lot of money in "Waste Management" their trade name and annual sponsor of the local PGA "TPC" tournament. In any case I suspect Camden will be a good addition to the neighborhood.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

There's a lot of money in "Waste Management" their trade name and annual sponsor of the local PGA "TPC" tournament. In any case I suspect Camden will be a good addition to the neighborhood.

FYI, Waste Management is an entirely different company from Republic Services.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

FYI, Waste Management is an entirely different company from Republic Services.

That hilarious! Having owned Waste Management stock (although it's been a few years) I should have been well aware. Some wires obviously got crossed.

[TakeFive]

You Work, We all Work

Why Rockies owner Dick Monfort still wants to strike a WeWork deal at his new development
Oct 31, 2019 By Andrew Dodson – Reporter, Denver Business Journal

Despite WeWork's recent turmoil, Colorado Rockies owner Dick Monfort is still in talks with the New York-based coworking company over taking an undisclosed amount of square footage at McGregor Square... In an interview with... Monfort confirmed that WeWork initially committed to all 210,000 square feet of office space... But as the coworking giant’s failed IPO unraveled, the commitment scaled back and Monfort started conversations with some additional tenants about taking office space to play it safer.

So where do things stand now?

Still, Monfort expects to reach a deal with WeWork by year’s end for an undisclosed amount office space, but potentially a majority of the 210,000 square feet.

“[WeWork] sort of pivoted and honestly, they probably needed to slow down and catch their breath,” Monfort said. “I still believe in their concept and I think there’s a lot of reasons they will work for this project.”

What the strategic thinking here?

He added that WeWork plans to gear its McGregor Square location toward enterprise companies, as opposed to a room of desks for smaller startups. “They’ve got some tenants in mind,” Monfort said.

One of those companies could be Snowflake, a Bay Area tech company that’s setting up a major hub in Denver with plans to hire 300 people by the end of 2020. A WeWork proposal obtained by DBJ confirmed plans for Snowflake to grow its operations at WeWork’s Wells Fargo Center location before moving to McGregor Square in 2021.

[tommyboy733]

Excavation has began at the 35th & Brighton Hotel, which had been quiet for a few months since the "ground breaking".

[IMG]IMG_20191101_104139076 by Tom Conley, on Flickr[/IMG]

[SirLucasTheGreat]

Originally Posted by tommyboy733

Excavation has began at the 35th & Brighton Hotel, which had been quiet for a few months since the "ground breaking".

[IMG]IMG_20191101_104139076 by Tom Conley, on Flickr[/IMG]

Thanks for the update! I want to be swing by to see it

[Matt]

410 17th Street is currently being repainted from its natural beige to a very dark brown/black color. Although this building has never been a notable player in Denver's skyline - literally being overshadowed by Republic Plaza and 555 17th St. - this repaint seems to be taking 410 17th in the wrong direction. I believe the darker color only exacerbates the unattrictiveness of this mundane 1970s-era box; 410 17th St. has gone from "unremarkable" to "eyesore".

If the property owners are willing to invest money into changing (improving?) the building's exterior, I'm at a loss for words as to why they would choose such a dreary and putrid color. I simply don't understand the "paint everything dark brown" mentality of Denver that reflects our complete lack of architectural aesthetic so pervasive and widespread in nearly everything we build.

To be fair, if the "master plan" here involves tinting the windows bronze or gold so as to avoid the post-apocalyptic "windows blown out" vibe of a war-torn city in the Middle East, I actually think the finished product could be pulled off quite nicely with at least a hint of architectural appeal - or at least a hint that they tried to make this building look somewhat decent or presentable. Unfortunately, I doubt hiding the interior blinds through window tinting was even considered; what we'll be getting is a tower featuring all of the charm and appeal of 1980s Beirut.

Granted, upgrading the original design didn't allow for many options short of completely re-cladding the facade, but surely Denver can do better than this?










Seems the rebel forces have been shelling this building for quite some time now:

[semiurban]

Who doesn't like matte black spray paint?

[RyanD]

Obviously their favorite drink is a black and tan...