DENVER | Main Development Thread #7

[laniroj]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

People in every city in the world shout "we're not XYZ city"...Saying none of that matters because "Denver isn't coastal" is an abortion of rational thought, made because sticking one's head in the sand is easier than admitting the long-accepted way we've done things causes massive structural problems.

Just returning from a long vacation and catching up. Cirrus, this entire post is pure gold. Can you to attend my rezoning hearings? Or maybe you just run for public office?

Seriously though, the thoughts in this post nail it. It doesn't matter if we have open land here or there, it's moot if folks don't want to live there more than somewhere else. When folks say "we have room for growth there, don't come here", they are missing the point. Unfortunately, many well intentioned people (not nimbys, they are rotten to the core) who want to protect neighborhoods from displacement think that preventing development in their neighborhood will somehow protect the existing make-up when the truth is that effort is only a short stall. The most vulnerable WILL be displaced under the existing status quo.

Thanks Cirrus, for putting into words what many people think but aren't eloquent enough to describe.

[laniroj]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Places like 41st and Fox Station, Pecos Junction Station, Westminster Station, Clear Creek & Federal Station, 60th and Sheridan Station have plenty of land and opportunity to build affordable housing and this is just one of six corridors.

The amount of land available in close-in neighborhoods like RiNo, Elyria-Swansea-Globeville, Sunnyside, Sun Valley(Mile High), Gates, Santa Fe Yards, and other areas is more than enough for many decades of added density and more affordable options.

TakeFive - You, and some others, consistently make the argument that we have enough land - in fact, you say we have more than enough. If that is true, and assuming all of that land has adequate zoning as your statement implies, then why do we still have a housing crisis? Or do you not think we have a housing crisis? If you don't, then please educate yourself with the number of households nationwide who are housing cost burdened - some people say that means you pay more than 30% of your gross income to housing, but what it really means, the personal side of that story, is you foregoe healthcare or groceries so that you can simply have a roof over your head. Under your very own set of 'facts' (ie we have enough land to accommodate all the current and future growth), we shouldn't have a housing crisis and yet, we do. So what gives?

Cirrus' point is spot on and it applies to just about every neighborhood everywhere, in Denver's center, in Denver's outter rings, and in the suburbs and exurbs - not just Curtis Park. Pretty much every neighborhood is nimby, broadly speaking - I've never encountered an outright YIMBY neighborhood except for the prairie dogs in Aurora (oh wait no there are numbys even there). Some neighborhoods are more active with more resources than others and the ones who have resources kill development and push it elsewhere. The areas without those resources to fight development bear the brunt of the growth issues the folks like Bulldurhamer bemoan (rightfully so). Every neighborhood needs to open for business so that a neighborhood here and there aren't 'sacrificed' for total overwhelming change. It's the greater good theory - if everyone allows a little, nobody will have to allow too much.

[laniroj]

Originally Posted by mojiferous

Dense apartments are a way to build affordably - let them be built in neighborhoods that are really really close to where good jobs are. Let them be built with no parking to save money. Assuming somewhere else nearby can take all the development so your picture perfect little suburban life within spitting distance of the CBD can continue is absurd.

I am convinced the side of this statement you land on is a generational thing. Older folks (I'll say born prior to 1980) are against this type of thinking because they have the charmed suburban life within spitting distance of the CBD and younger folks are ok with this out of necessity because they just need a place to live a better life.

[DenvertoLA]

One Platte broke ground with what seems no lease contracts signed. If I'm right, 1144 and block 162 both broke ground on pure speculation as well. Does this mean that Denver's market has reached a level where it is easier to secure financing? If so... wtf T2


"No tenants have committed to the project. That’s a change from the original plan; a Nichols executive said last year the company wanted a signed lease before it broke ground."

https://businessden.com/2020/02/10/nicho...n-to-develop-office-building-one-platte/

[laniroj]

Originally Posted by RyanD

My 'Cherry on Top' gondola idea will fix that.

I'm all for your gondola from CCN along Cherry Creek to the convention center. It would connect downtown to a major tourist hub (which is what will keep it a going concern) - maybe even fork a new route once River Mile goes in. Routing it to civic center will kill it from the get go. Hell, let Vail build and run it - it'll be cheaper, faster, and better than if the City or RTD takes it on!

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

We've talked about urban design a thousand times, but maybe not for a few years.

Funny b/c the 1st thing that popped was the long and ongoing rants about design around the time that 2020 Lawrence was built. That was back in 2012.

Hotels have always been a target as they tend to be efficient but bland and leave one side blank where new development could occur. The well known Denver 'land barges' have also been a recurring topic. Over at Denver Infill architecture and design are a constant with new construction.

Moving out into the neighborhoods there has been much discussion of the fugly slot homes. Fortunately, the Denver City Council made changes to avoid the worst offenders.

Originally Posted by laniroj

I'm all for your gondola from CCN along Cherry Creek to the convention center. It would connect downtown to a major tourist hub (which is what will keep it a going concern) - maybe even fork a new route once River Mile goes in. Routing it to civic center will kill it from the get go. Hell, let Vail build and run it - it'll be cheaper, faster, and better than if the City or RTD takes it on!

Beat me to it as I thought of this over the weekend.

Other options could be a monorail or at Phoenix Sky Harbor they call it the Phoenix Sky train. Also referred to as a people mover it uses train cars by Bombardier Transportation. I've ridden this and it's really nice.

[mhays]

Its MUCH easier to build a lowrise on spec than a highrise. Smaller bet, easier to fill, shorter schedule...

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

The West Line Village @ Sheridan Station post above demonstrates how more affordable options of various densities and types can be built nearby to rail stations.

Why in the world would most of these stations provide more affordable housing in any significant number? Central Park Station is in the wealthiest zip code in Denver- you're not going to see very much new housing stock there that would be considered somewhat affordable. 38th & Blake is probably the hottest real estate along the Front Range. Most of the other stations you mentioned you mention lack large amount of open land that would be readily developable- let alone at the unit density needed to deliver large amounts of somewhat affordable housing. It's not that TOD won't play a part in providing the needed housing in the metro area, but it's not a game changer that moves the needle.

Even the example of West Line Village shows attached housing that's right about the median sales price in the metro area. If a household can deliver income in the range of $90-100K that probably works, but that's sill 25% higher than the median average income.

[CherryCreek]

Interesting news on the acquisition of Taubman Centers, the owner of Cherry Creek mall by Simon Property Group:


Simon Property Group Inc. (NYSE: SPG) will indeed acquire Taubman Centers Inc. in a deal foreshadowed by reports in early February.
As the biggest mall owner in the U.S., Simon plans to fund the $3.6 billion acquisition of fellow mall-owner Taubman (NYSE: TCO) with “existing liquidity,”
according to a release announcing the deal. Simon owns three shopping centers in Colorado: Colorado Mills in Lakewood, Denver West Village in Lakewood
and Denver Premium Outlets in Thornton. Taubman owns the upscale Cherry Creek Shopping Center in Denver.



https://www.bizjournals.com/denver/news/...hopping-center-taubman-centers-sale.html

The West Side of Cherry Creek (the old Bed, Bath & Beyond & Container Store), is just begging to be scraped and turned into a multi-use redevelopment (retail, hotel, housing, restaurant). Cherry Creek has the highest commercial rates in Denver, I would think a major office/multi use plan would really pencil out.

Perhaps this acquisition will do that - I love the weekend farmers market but this primo real estate could definitely use a much denser and higher use.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by laniroj

TakeFive - You, and some others, consistently make the argument that we have enough land - in fact, you say we have more than enough. If that is true, and assuming all of that land has adequate zoning as your statement implies, then why do we still have a housing crisis? Or do you not think we have a housing crisis?

How many times do I need to 'splain this?

1) Historically, going back 6 or 7 decades when there has been a recession, whether housing was at the center of it or only mildly affected by the recession, housing construction has led the way out and up. It has always (or predominantly) started with entry-level housing which then led the move-up market and so on.

2) This time, coming out of the Great Recession, builders declined to build entry-level housing. They went with the lower hanging fruit which coming out of this recession meant upscale and luxury homes. It goes to all the changes that were made with respect to qualifying for a loan.

3) Because of the changes in qualifying for a loan, we became a rental nation. Hopefully you've noticed this.

4) It's only been recently that some builders have pivoted to building a more affordable, entry-level product; more builders are now joining the parade. See this post as one good example.

[TakeFive]

Part Two:

Originally Posted by laniroj

TakeFive - You, and some others, consistently make the argument that we have enough land - in fact, you say we have more than enough. If that is true, and assuming all of that land has adequate zoning as your statement implies, then why do we still have a housing crisis? Or do you not think we have a housing crisis?

Coming out of the Great Recession we experienced the Great Millennial Migration - to city centers. No one had predicted this and it's always hard to predict the future as to specific demand and how it will play out. Denver benefited partly from all the positive vibe from FasTracks and this became a powerful catalyst for the ever growing Millennial migration.

Because developers like economists don't possess magical prediction powers, the earliest development tended to be 4 to 5-story apartments. As demand continued to out-pace supply developers gravitated to more and more stories for their apartment projects.

Developers rule the roost and since it's their money (including investors) they build to profit potential and prefer as mhays can tell you what pencils out the easiest. So they started small and increased their density over time as the demand warranted.

Whether catering to upscale housing or 'luxury' apartments downtown we only get what they decide to build. End of story.

[Cirrus]

The recession isn't why meaningful amounts of affordable housing aren't getting built in central cities. It may be why it's not getting built out on the edge of sprawl. But unless you're going to argue that forcing affordable housing out to the edge of sprawl is ideal policy, that's really only a small part of the issue.

The issue is that for a century now all of our regulatory processes have assumed that the edge of sprawl is the only place ongoing significant growth happens, but there's both excellent reasons and gigantic demand for much much much more of it established areas.

And no, not everyone wants/needs to live close to downtown. But unless you're going to argue that our laws should prevent those who want to from doing so, then we've got a problem beyond recession finances.

[Cirrus]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Whether catering to upscale housing or 'luxury' apartments downtown we only get what they decide to build. End of story.

When zoning only allows enough units to satisfy 10% of the demand in a place, developers only build for the 10% wealthiest buyers. This is the situation in central cities today.

We've been through this before. I'm not getting sucked in again. Have a nice day.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

The recession isn't why meaningful amounts of affordable housing aren't getting built in central cities. It may be why it's not getting built out on the edge of sprawl. But unless you're going to argue that forcing affordable housing out to the edge of sprawl is ideal policy, that's really only a small part of the issue.

Perhaps you hadn't had the chance to read my Part Two?

It wasn't the recession but what happened after the recession as I explained above.

West of the Mississippi and especially in Denver, downtown had not been in high demand. Everything changed with the Great Millennial Migration which nobody could have predicted. But sure play Monday Morning QB all you want.

Originally Posted by Cirrus

When zoning only allows enough units to satisfy 10% of the demand in a place, developers only build for the 10% wealthiest buyers. This is the situation in central cities today.

That is totally false for all the reasons stated above and for the fact that there has been no shortage of land and there still isn't.

[TakeFive]

Many of these propsed hotels are going funky

Originally Posted by SirLucasTheGreat

There are a substantial number of hotel developments in the pipeline. BusinessDen compiled an interesting list of 10 major projects expected to break ground this year

https://businessden.com/2020/01/06/10-ma...ected-to-break-ground-in-denver-in-2020/

It appears with these latest hotels nearby to the Colorado Convention Center there will be nice healthy pickings. But then when larger conventions arrive all the rooms in the downtown fill up anyway.

Between the Marriott which should become like a second anchor there will also be the historically fun Emily Griffith hotel and presumably the Hawkeye-built hotel will be more downscale so it's a nice mix.

Which makes me wonder when and if they'll ever get around to the convention center expansion. I wouldn't be surprised that with all the delay they're now having difficulty getting the project to pencil out.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Why in the world would most of these stations provide more affordable housing in any significant number? Central Park Station is in the wealthiest zip code in Denver- you're not going to see very much new housing stock there that would be considered somewhat affordable.

This is what is said:

What is affordable housing anyway? It literally depends on who you ask.

All these corridors beckon for TOD of some type and density and all will contribute closer-in living opportunities of varying affordability.

Supposedly the River Mile development is to include affordable housing. Will that actually happen and what does that mean? How the hell should I know what will end up happening.

It's still too speculative to know exactly how much and at what price points but it's clear that some TOD sites are highly likely to be more affordable than others.

Y'all like to conflate things.

Unless you're reading selectively, I am not categorically against any added density in places like Curtis Park. But whether any of the added density adds what someone might consider 'affordable' is highly speculative and even doubtful.

If Y'all want to destroy the current historical quality of all nearby neighborhoods I'm not the obstacle. I don't live or vote in Denver.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by DenvertoLA

One Platte broke ground with what seems no lease contracts signed. If I'm right, 1144 and block 162 both broke ground on pure speculation as well. Does this mean that Denver's market has reached a level where it is easier to secure financing? If so... wtf T2

"No tenants have committed to the project. That’s a change from the original plan; a Nichols executive said last year the company wanted a signed lease before it broke ground."

https://businessden.com/2020/02/10/nicho...n-to-develop-office-building-one-platte/

Virtually all spec building are by developers who have horsepower to do so. With One Platte I see where Shorenstein Properties has become an equity partner. Interestingly I only recently posted about their sale of Denver City Center.

[mhays]

Per typical, Cirrus and laniroj are saying basically what I would (and often better than I could). TakeFive, you keep confusing issues.

As for affordability, the two biggest issues might be these:
1. Very little land allows significant density, so the land that does is far more expensive than it should be.
2. Scarcity of close-in housing has meant an increasing premium for it (all kinds) in recent decades.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by mhays

Per typical, Cirrus and laniroj are saying basically what I would (and often better than I could). TakeFive, you keep confusing issues.

As for affordability, the two biggest issues might be these:
1. Very little land allows significant density, so the land that does is far more expensive than it should be.
2. Scarcity of close-in housing has meant an increasing premium for it (all kinds) in recent decades.

I understand you're on the same philosophical page.

But the reading comprehension around here is lacking. I originally responded to laniroj whose comment was all over the map. He claimed we had a national housing crisis. Well there's no housing crisis in the Rust Belt and there's no housing crisis in the Sunbelt.

I've been speaking directly to the historical record and how and why we ended up where we now are. It's not just about downtown it the whole metro area https://www.zillow.com/denver-co/home-values/

The median home value in (metro) Denver is $451,513. The median price of homes currently listed in Denver is $465,000 while the median price of homes that sold is $438,900. The median rent price in Denver is $2,150,

The escalation in Denver prices (everywhere) has been on steroids in recent years as a direct result of the reasons I articulated.

The escalation in land prices in RiNo (for example) is a relatively recent event. Those early projects built along Brighton Blvd predated that as did many other projects. All of the apartments in or near downtown while called "luxury," there's really only a handful of legitimately higher end apartments like along Speer Blvd or in Union Station neighborhood. Most of the rest are tomorrow's more affordable housing, once they get a little age on them.

As to what 'should' happen that's a different kettle of fish. With regard to specific neighborhoods that's also a specific topic. There's a lot of assumptions being made based on a simplistic view of supply and demand but it's not that simple.

As for what you'd like to do it has nothing to do with me. It's about the citizen-voters of Denver.

[TakeFive]

Steam on the Platte

https://denverite.com/2020/02/10/a-sun-v...ge-parking-garage-but-maybe-not-forever/

Developer Susan Powers is readying a warehouse and a parking lot in Sun Valley for their next lives as a 4-story parking garage wrapped by either office space or apartment homes.

The proposed structures are the latest piece of Steam on the Platte, a riverside development meant to reinvent the area around 2060 W. Colfax Ave. with a nod to its industrial past. On Monday, the Denver City Council OK’d new building parameters on the site, next to Raices Brewing Company, that allow eight stories and a mix of things like offices, restaurants, retail space and homes.

Sachs understandably doesn't like that parking garage.

“I would love to be one of those people that agrees that we don’t need or should have less parking at all these buildings, but the reality is, everybody’s still driving their car in Denver,” Powers told Denverite. “We can pretend like that’s not happening, but it’s happening.”

University of Colorado Denver researcher Wes Marshall studies urban transportation, including the role that parking can play in traffic generation. But he also understands how it gets built despite Denver’s stated goals of encouraging more sustainable transportation modes. “It is a legitimate stance to take, especially because most lenders won’t give you money unless you have what they consider enough parking,”