DENVER | Main Development Thread #7

[The Dirt]

The only reason that Lone Tree is able to do this is because this is all greenfield development with no NIMBY backlash to put the brakes on it. This is the same reason why the light rail lines go through freight rail right of ways instead of, say, Broadway, and the bulk of the development is happening in TODs near formerly industrial areas (RINO). Stops in poorer locations have also had more success (Lincoln Park) versus relatively more affluent stations (Yale). Don't underestimate the power of the NIMBYs. They have the power to stop just about any positive change.

[RyanD]

Originally Posted by bulldurhamer

it's now $10.50 to take the A line that will probably be delayed from downtown to the airport.

Cost me 5 bucks to get from O'Hare to the Loop in Chicago on a train line that runs every 7 minutes. Sure the Blue Line is... Well the Blue Line, but it's reliable and I could rely on it for my needs.

Taking the A-Line I plan 3 trains. 1) Super early 2) Earlier than I still want to be at DIA 3) I pray to the heavens that this train will not be delayed.

[rct]

Originally Posted by bulldurhamer

it's now $10.50 to take the A line that will probably be delayed from downtown to the airport.

an uber with door to door service is $30.



until we're ready to make some hard choices about uber, rtd will continue to languish. not only are they ripping off their drivers, but they're also destroying almost every public transportation system they can. that's all part of the plan of course. free labor = disaster for us all.

stop uber or shut up.

I like your points, but think you logic is backwards. Competition is good for the consumer. The consumer is what matters right? RTD needs to lower their fares and they will get many more riders and maybe more revenue. A train is a fixed cost, an Uber driver isn't. The train runs no matter if there are riders or not. Supply and demand. The biggest thing i don't think RTD gets is that say you have 2 or 3 maybe 4 passengers in an Uber on top you have door to door service its border line cheaper than the train and way more convenient...[/B]and i like the Train[/B]... but on a cost basis it doesn't make sense unless you're traveling by yourself. Kinda sad...

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by The Dirt

Let's just change it from CBD to THC. "The Heart of the City".

No wonder we can't have nice things.

Define nice things.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by bulldurhamer

it's now $10.50 to take the A line that will probably be delayed from downtown to the airport.

an uber with door to door service is $30.

until we're ready to make some hard choices about uber, rtd will continue to languish. not only are they ripping off their drivers, but they're also destroying almost every public transportation system they can. that's all part of the plan of course. free labor = disaster for us all.

stop uber or shut up.

I'm sorry you've had such a bad experience with Uber but you own experience creates a huge misperception.

According to Pew Research:

Even as the share of Americans who use ride-hailing has grown substantially in recent years, the new survey finds that few adults overall are making these services a part of their regular routine. Only one-in-ten users of ride-hailing services say they use these apps at least weekly, including just 2% who say they use them every day or almost every day. Another 22% are monthly users...

Downtown Denver Partnership's own survey gives ride-share and Taxis a 1.5% commuter share while 40% come by transit. Ride-share isn't economically realistic for most people - well except for the 1.5% in Denver according to Downtown Denver Partnership and I'll guess that most of these are shorter trips. Even if ride-share commuting were to double to 3% that's hardly a threat to transit.

You reference the A Line and airport specifically; turns out that the A Line is already the busiest single line in the system so it's doing fine and nicely growing.

The airport is a really big ride-share deal. I went out Thurs and made $102 in four hours. Yesterday afternoon I made $55 in 2 1/2 hours.

On an average day DIA has 120,000 local users (including visitors). Most local flyers leave from home. Most flyers live in the suburbs. Most flyers in the suburbs that choose the convenience of point-to point ride-share find it faster, less stressful than driving their own car. Out of all the airport trips I've done all riders went from where they slept to the airport or vice-versa which includes hotels in the case of travelers.

BTW, I went out after the Nuggets game last night for 2 1/2 hours and only made $16 per hour but it was an easy, relaxed time. I picked up a young lady from a Sports Bar going home who recognized me from when my son and I stopping in for a DQ at her other job. BTW, cash tips (outside the APP) usually add about 10%.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by The Dirt

The only reason that Lone Tree is able to do this is because this is all greenfield development with no NIMBY backlash to put the brakes on it. This is the same reason why the light rail lines go through freight rail right of ways instead of, say, Broadway, and the bulk of the development is happening in TODs near formerly industrial areas (RINO). Stops in poorer locations have also had more success (Lincoln Park) versus relatively more affluent stations (Yale). Don't underestimate the power of the NIMBYs. They have the power to stop just about any positive change.

There's no question that the light/commuter rail system took the path of least resistance and a much less expensive undertaking.

RyanD points out the biggest drawbacks of transit in general - reliability, time and convenience. I'd blame it on those impatient millennials except these characteristics are important to all of us.

It's easy to forget that 90% of the jobs in metro Denver are outside of downtown. People living in the suburbs (including near Yale Station which is more of a blue collar area)) may not work downtown. If you work a blue collar job or in retail/restaurant industry for example there's likely no need to schlep all the way downtown or your skills have you going in a different direction.

Downtown Denver does easily has the highest job density so for urban stations transit would be naturally attractive. After all, there's also many lower paying jobs in downtown.

Originally Posted by kemachs

Maybe I'm missing something, but from what I can see, the areas around the transit stations in LT aren't particularly pleasant from an urban perspective. Yes they are higher density in terms of residential, but it doesn't have the integration of retail/housing the same way even Belleview Station does. Now if you're talking about future plans around Lone Tree Station, maybe I can get on board...but we're talking a ways out until that's fully realized.

It's fair to say Denver's rail transit is very different with respect to urban versus suburban stations in general. The area around Belleview Station was a matter of good timing. It was the last to be developed in the DTC resulting in a 'today' approach to mixed use.

RyanD mentions Chicago but those lines have been around for a hundred years so a lot has changed. Plus Chicagoland had 8.5 million people. Many of Denver's rail lines are less than 3 years old; chances are over a couple of decades a lot will change with respect to TOD in Denver.

[DenvertoLA]

Originally Posted by RyanD

Cost me 5 bucks to get from O'Hare to the Loop in Chicago on a train line that runs every 7 minutes. Sure the Blue Line is... Well the Blue Line, but it's reliable and I could rely on it for my needs.

Taking the A-Line I plan 3 trains. 1) Super early 2) Earlier than I still want to be at DIA 3) I pray to the heavens that this train will not be delayed.

Ryan, do you know if the trains in Chicago is a PPP or purely publicly funded? Could this be the source of the problem...?

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by rct

I like your points, but think you logic is backwards. Competition is good for the consumer. The consumer is what matters right?

Nicely stated.

Originally Posted by rct

RTD needs to lower their fares and they will get many more riders and maybe more revenue.

OOps... You ran off the rails here. I appreciate this is a common myth perpetuated by the left but it's all wrong... er, at least 90%. Liberals are notorious for "assuming" what others want or should want as if they don't have the mental capacity to decide for themselves. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Reasons people don't use transit

• The Number One reason is... it won't take them where they need to go.
• The Number Two reason is... TIME, especially if they'll need to make a transfer, transit can take two to three times as much time.
• The Number Three reason is... convenience/accessibility. Most don't want to walk 20 minutes to the bus/train stop. Many times security is a concern especially after dark and for women.
• The Number Four reason is... transit is not reliable.
• The Number Five reason is... too many stops. Once somebody is boarded they hate having to stop 10 times and wait at each stop for other people to board.

The cost to ride is literally last on any list and usually not even on the list; Everybody has to get to work somehow and only walking or biking is cheaper.

I do ride-share and I like variety so one day I'll pick up riders going to the airport who live in gated communities where I have to stop so they can write down my name, driver's license number and plate number - or if they've updated their tech they just take photos of my driver's license and license plate.

I also like to work in (my son's) working class neighborhood with amazing diversity, from economic to all colors of the rainbow. Picked up a nice black lady, no car, who was called to work the night shift at a senior care center. She had a bit of a load and transit wasn't really a good option. She gave me a $3 tip for a $4 ride. Working class riders are generally more likely to tip even if it just a few $'s than uppity class riders. Obviously it's not about getting a low-dollar ride. Bus transit in the area is quite good but there's a gazillion reasons why 'poor' people pay for ride-share. In many cases they just prefer it for either security and comfort reason or just simply time and convenience. These are more typically low cost short rides but it can vary.

Point is people, all people, including poor people, decide for themselves what their priorities are. What a concept.

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Define nice things.

According to the two guys I picked up last night it was the hot ladies at Isabella's Kitchen and when we pulled up they were correct. Except one of the ladies had ordered a Black Car/SUV ride which is two to three times the cost as the X ride these guys showed up in.

[DenvertoLA]

does anyone know what is planned at the Fed Reserve downtown? On the gov's site development map it highlights the block as having an under review project.

"Under Review
Address: 1020 16th St.
Log Number: 2019PM0000373"

[mojiferous]

Originally Posted by DenvertoLA

does anyone know what is planned at the Fed Reserve downtown? On the gov's site development map it highlights the block as having an under review project.

"Under Review
Address: 1020 16th St.
Log Number: 2019PM0000373"

Yeah, I got really excited when I saw that too - but digging further it is just a truck port and some parking changes... meh.

[Denverbone]

If someone were to propose a new supertall skyscraper for downtown Denver, where would it go? Downtown is quickly losing it's surface parking lots to medium height buildings. (I like the infill, but we really could use some actual skyscrapers) Just saying - or whining.

[Matt]

Originally Posted by Denverbone

If someone were to propose a new supertall skyscraper for downtown Denver, where would it go? Downtown is quickly losing it's surface parking lots to medium height buildings. (I like the infill, but we really could use some actual skyscrapers) Just saying - or whining.

A proposal was leaked last year for an 80-story tower at 650 17th Street - the corner of 17th and California (IMO the visual epicenter of the Denver skyline) - but the project never materialized and fell fate to not having secured the proper land acquisition from Paradise Land Company (Buzz Geller). Notwithstanding that snafu, the project still had little chance of succeeding but was at least something we could pin our hopes on for a little while.

What I found most troubling was the massive opposition this 1,000' "trophy building" received from the NIMBY crowd - arguing it was too tall for Downtown Denver. 7News (ABC) even ran an incredibly biased story that posited all of the typical trope for opposing a project of this scale (too tall, too dense, increased traffic, blocking the mountain views, not in character/context with the surrounding area, etc.). For a city that has witnessed such incredible growth over the last several decades, it's extremely sobering to contemplate that Republic Plaza has been Denver's tallest building for 35 years.

[BG918]

Originally Posted by Denverbone

If someone were to propose a new supertall skyscraper for downtown Denver, where would it go? Downtown is quickly losing it's surface parking lots to medium height buildings. (I like the infill, but we really could use some actual skyscrapers) Just saying - or whining.

I was just in Austin and the number of new tall buildings there is impressive for a metro much smaller than Denver. Lots of great-looking apartment and condo towers all over downtown. Not sure why we can’t have a similar number of new towers, we have a ton of population growth and a booming tech industry along with high property values that necessitate building density. Yet we still have tons of low and mid-rises going up.

[Sam Hill]

Originally Posted by BG918

I was just in Austin and the number of new tall buildings there is impressive for a metro much smaller than Denver. Lots of great-looking apartment and condo towers all over downtown. Not sure why we can’t have a similar number of new towers, we have a ton of population growth and a booming tech industry along with high property values that necessitate building density. Yet we still have tons of low and mid-rises going up.

Developers build in neighborhoods that are hot - they go where the demand is - and the hot neighborhoods in Denver are zoned for mid-rise. The only 'hood that was zoned for actual skyscrapers throughout most of this boom was the CBD, and it's been relatively cool compared to RiNo, LoHi, Union Station, etc. I'm looking forward to River Mile getting off the ground and I'm hopeful Golden Triangle will get zoned for taller point towers - which it looks like it might. Arapahoe Square also has high-rise potential now that it has been zoned for taller point towers. Hopefully that neighborhood gets hot.

I have a feeling we'll see an actual skyline-changing high-rise boom next cycle. We'll be poised for it. River Mile will be to the next cycle as Union Station was to this one, and when developers start tinkering around in Arapahoe Square and GT again, they'll hopefully take advantage of the new zoning and we'll get some point towers to broaden the skyline.

[twister244]

Originally Posted by Sam Hill

Developers build in neighborhoods that are hot - they go where the demand is - and the hot neighborhoods in Denver are zoned for mid-rise. The only 'hood that was zoned for actual skyscrapers throughout most of this boom was the CBD, and it's been relatively cool compared to RiNo, LoHi, Union Station, etc. I'm looking forward to River Mile getting off the ground and I'm hopeful Golden Triangle will get zoned for taller point towers - which it looks like it might. Arapahoe Square also has high-rise potential now that it has been zoned for taller point towers. Hopefully that neighborhood gets hot.

I have a feeling we'll see an actual skyline-changing high-rise boom next cycle. We'll be poised for it. River Mile will be to the next cycle as Union Station was to this one, and when developers start tinkering around in Arapahoe Square and GT again, they'll hopefully take advantage of the new zoning and we'll get some point towers to broaden the skyline.

I totally agree here. This last boom was really about giving rise to the Union Station neighborhood, the birth and rise of new neighborhoods near downtown, and laying the foundation for future growth. To be fair, it's not like we didn't get any skyscrapers. I actually am pretty happy with 1144 and it was very exciting to see it rise into the skyline after moving here. With all of the infill and plans for what has been mentioned, I am pretty optimistic about Denver's future urban footprint.

[TakeFive]

No tall buildings here but...

As developers raze parts of Brighton Boulevard, this property owner has something else in mind
Nov 11, 2019 By: Lance Hernandez - Denver7

He said he's not in a hurry to get them all done. "We're not developers. We're family-owned businesses, so we go slower and march to a different drummer than a developer does, primarily because of money," he said. Burgess said one of his buildings under renovation is already leased out.

What motivates Larry Burgess, long-time property owner.

The property owner told Denver7 that what he is doing is a nod to history and to the work ethic of families that operated industrial shops in the neighborhood for generations. "The work ethic was for their family and for themselves," he said. "Today, the work ethic of the corporation is different from what I'm expressing there."

Colten Janssen said the neighborhood has great character. "I'll tell you what I like most about this area is just the art culture that's in this area — the graffiti and murals and stuff like that," he said. "It really embraces the art culture of Denver."

[Valley Highway]

Took a few pictures of Block 162 and want to post them, but I don't see any way of attaching a photo. There are options for sending a URL link, but no way that I can see to simply add a shot from my own computer. (And I did open the photo, copy it and try pasting in this space and that does not work)

Any assistance would be greatly appreciated.

[laniroj]

Originally Posted by kemachs

Maybe I'm missing something, but from what I can see, the areas around the transit stations in LT aren't particularly pleasant from an urban perspective. Yes they are higher density in terms of residential, but it doesn't have the integration of retail/housing the same way even Belleview Station does. Now if you're talking about future plans around Lone Tree Station, maybe I can get on board...but we're talking a ways out until that's fully realized.

#1 - within a half mile of each of Lone Tree's existing stations, there is an abundance of housing, office, medical, and yes, even retail and hotels. It's by far the most diverse stop in our system, at the moment. 38th/Blake is coming, the downtown Aurora will one day build out similarly, and the Stapleton station should get there in the next decade. Belleview Station has the potential for some of the LT components and much closer to the station, but missing medical.

#2 - Have you seen the plans for the Lone Tree east of I25? If notIt's like an urban planner's dream if it comes to fruition as envisioned. Incredible density relative to it's suburban location and a good mix of uses. There's nothing wrong IMO with greenfield sprawl like Lone Tree IF those areas are keeping workers and people in that area and not forcing them to drive everywhere. If sprawl has to happen (and it will) this is what it should look like. Greenbelts are a great idea as well to protect urban areas from combining into a massive super city a la DC to NYC, but only if density is provided for within the confines of the greenbelt.

https://ridgegate.com/

[laniroj]

Originally Posted by bulldurhamer

it's now $10.50 to take the A line that will probably be delayed from downtown to the airport.

an uber with door to door service is $30.



until we're ready to make some hard choices about uber, rtd will continue to languish. not only are they ripping off their drivers, but they're also destroying almost every public transportation system they can. that's all part of the plan of course. free labor = disaster for us all.

stop uber or shut up.

RTD's prices are a joke and if not the highest, among the highest in the country. While there's no science or data behind it, I believe that's a main reason for their ridership issues. As they dig their heels in for a poorly planned system, they raise prices to maintain revenue. Local planning hasn't done a damn thing to help them though.

Regarding ride shares, until a better alternative comes along people will continue utilizing ride share services. I,

[PLANSIT]

Originally Posted by laniroj

RTD's prices are a joke and if not the highest, among the highest in the country. While there's no science or data behind it, I believe that's a main reason for their ridership issues. As they dig their heels in for a poorly planned system, they raise prices to maintain revenue. Local planning hasn't done a damn thing to help them though.

Regarding ride shares, until a better alternative comes along people will continue utilizing ride share services. I,

The latest fare hike was to offset the low-income fare programs advocates pressed for.