DENVER | Main Development Thread #7

[SirLucasTheGreat]

Thanks for the responses! Hopefully, the Denargo area might get some retail and revitalization of the Platte River. That area seems like a bunch of high density residential development for a development tucked in a fairly unwalkable part of the core Denver neighborhoods.

Thanks for the info on the Gates District! I think that project was initially supposed to start when everything went to crap in Spring 2020. Between I-25, Broadway, Santa Fe, Platte River, and one of the busiest light rail hubs servicing 5 lines, the Broadway Station seems like one of the more desirable spots for office development. However, I don't know that we will be getting many other major office hubs outside of downtown, DTC, and maybe 38th and Blake.

[TakeFive]

Kamala Harris comes to town and I get to learn about cool adaptive reuse

Maria Empanada
1298 South Broadway






Photos courtesy: Lorena Cantarovici/Maria Empanada

[TakeFive]

Honestly; it can be hard to keep up with the world of construction

Originally Posted by gopokes21

I wonder if some of these construction jobs are being automated

Originally Posted by laniroj

Bring on those 4 bedroom developments - a place for families, finally!

3D-printed housing developments suddenly take off – here’s what they look like
MAR 12 2021 By Diana Olick - CNBC

• Video Link

Barely a month ago, a 3D-printed house was listed for sale to the public for the first time in the U.S. Now, a small, 3D-printed community in Texas is following suit. Another, larger community in California is also in the works.

In other words, 3D-printed real estate is taking off in a big way.

Wait... what?

ICON, a pioneer in 3D-printed homes in the U.S., just completed four homes in East Austin, Texas. In partnership with Kansas City-based developer 3Strands, the two- to four-bedroom homes are now on the market, starting in the $400,000 range.

“The demand has been off the charts, hard to manage even,” said Gary O’Dell, co-founder and CEO of 3Strands. “The feedback could not have been more positive.”

Images courtesy ICON

Could this help with homelessness?

A year ago, ICON printed seven, one-story, 400-square-foot homes in Austin, in collaboration with Mobile Loaves & Fishes, an Austin non-profit. The homes are part of a community for the homeless.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Could this help with homelessness?

Sure, if you have large green fields of available free land that are already served by infrastructure.

[spr8364]

It looks like the Austin houses are only printed on the ground floor. The upper level is stick-built. That means they won't be able to realize the 50% cost and time savings that the other firm was advertising. I also wonder how they insulate those printed walls to what would be needed in a cold climate like Denver. I presume they just fill the cavity with blown insulation like fiberglass or cellulose. But, how do they know that don't have gaps in the fill?

But still, a step in the right direction for affordability.

[The Dirt]

Land is still the majority of the cost in places like Denver. If you want to build out on the prairie and have people commute 2 hours to work by car, go for it.

[rds70]

Originally Posted by laniroj

Some kind of meaningful dirt work is happening at Gates on the west side of the railroad tracks east of Santa Fee. Not sure if it's for vertical development or not, hard to tell...

Work has started on the Kentucky Avenue bridge over the South Platte to provide access to the Santa Fe Yards office site west of the tracks.

[EngiNerd]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Honestly; it can be hard to keep up with the world of construction



3D-printed housing developments suddenly take off – here’s what they look like
MAR 12 2021 By Diana Olick - CNBC

• Video Link

Wait... what?

Could this help with homelessness?

In CO currently, unless they can get this to fall under the purview of a manufactured home, they will still have to get a geotech report and foundation permit for each and every home. Because these homes are "attached" to the ground, I suspect they can't be considered manufactured homes. So yes it could help speed up the building process, but affordability probably just won't be all that affected unless they can change the permitting process for these homes.

A home with foundation in the Denver metro area still has to at minimum ~3' foot deep foundations for frost depth, and the builders would have to overcome the desire for every home here to have a basement.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by The Dirt

Land is still the majority of the cost in places like Denver.

With respect to Denver, there's plenty of entry-level homes and neighborhoods.

If you want to live on the East side there's Virginia Village homes starting ~ $425K and up; University Hills homes start ~ $475K. On the West side Ruby Hill homes start ~ $400K and Harvey Park homes start ~ $425K; Athmar Park homes start ~ $400K. Most of these neighborhoods were built in the 1950's as Denver developed outward. There's other comparable neighborhoods.

We can all name nicer areas with more expensive homes but the point is that as Denver developed they really did build a lot of entry-level and lower cost homes. As far as today's market values they are what they are.

It's possible that there exists miscellaneous infill lots that could accommodate these 3D homes but it wouldn't be much.

[The Dirt]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

With respect to Denver, there's plenty of entry-level homes and neighborhoods.

If you want to live on the East side there's Virginia Village homes starting ~ $425K and up; University Hills homes start ~ $475K. On the West side Ruby Hill homes start ~ $400K and Harvey Park homes start ~ $425K; Athmar Park homes start ~ $400K. Most of these neighborhoods were built in the 1950's as Denver developed outward. There's other comparable neighborhoods.

We can all name nicer areas with more expensive homes but the point is that as Denver developed they really did build a lot of entry-level and lower cost homes. As far as today's market values they are what they are.

It's possible that there exists miscellaneous infill lots that could accommodate these 3D homes but it wouldn't be much.

I'm talking about the cost builders incur on building new housing, not home buyers. If your lot costs 500K, that cost is passed down to the buyers.

Since you have no capability of not moving goalposts to make your points make sense, I'll indulge you. If you think $400K+ for a starter home is reasonable, you're crazy. A single person making 100% AMI (70K) or a couple making 100% AMI (80K) can reasonably afford a $285K house max. That doesn't exist in Denver. This is also due to the cost of land.

Going back to my point. If a crumbling, unlivable 1950s house is prime for demolishing, a (re-)developer is still having to pay $450-600K for the property. This is typically 2/3rds of the total cost, so let's do some fuzzy math:
-$500K for land
-$250K for new construction
-10% developer profit
-$925K cost of the new development

Since most of Denver is zone for SFH, you're looking at replacing $500K shacks with $925K homes.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Sure, if you have large green fields of available free land that are already served by infrastructure.

Well, I understand Lakewood prefers more modest density development and there just happens to be 59 acres that could be ideal especially if they could get Federal grants for infrastructure.

Just curious; what does the Counsellor think of this interesting dilemma. My hunch is that it's overreach or too broad.

Very Interesting

Originally Posted by EngiNerd

In CO currently, unless they can get this to fall under the purview of a manufactured home, they will still have to get a geotech report and foundation permit for each and every home. Because these homes are "attached" to the ground, I suspect they can't be considered manufactured homes. So yes it could help speed up the building process, but affordability probably just won't be all that affected unless they can change the permitting process for these homes.

A home with foundation in the Denver metro area still has to at minimum ~3' foot deep foundations for frost depth, and the builders would have to overcome the desire for every home here to have a basement.

That did cross my mind, wondering if warm climate areas might be better for this.

However, most of the entry-level home neighborhoods I mentioned above did not have basements; they were built on slabs (at least on the east side that I'm more familiar with).

[TakeFive]

I wholeheartedly agree.

Originally Posted by The Dirt

I'm talking about the cost builders incur on building new housing, not home buyers. If your lot costs 500K, that cost is passed down to the buyers.

I wasn't trying to disagree with you; in fact I've previously said there is No Land within Denver that's available for building new affordable homes - other than any "designated" affordable homes.

I think what I was trying to say is that land within Denver available for (affordable) Entry-level housing was gobbled up and developed in the 1950's and 1960's.

So I 100% agree with your analysis; in fact I've got a similar post coming that makes much the same point.

Originally Posted by The Dirt

If you want to build out on the prairie and have people commute 2 hours to work by car, go for it.

We've all observed that Denver/metro has been growing full tilt over the last decade and should continue. Population is exploding.

Others have noticed this and as Denver population continues to grow the need for industrial warehouse-style buildings for wholesaling, fulfillment centers etc are also growing. A lot of this type of construction is and will continue along the East I-70 corridor and especially where it intersects with E-470. This construction segment remains HOT as a result.

Given that thousands of new jobs are and will be created there's a growing need for nearby affordable housing so that workers can drive 15 minutes to work.

Remember ~90% of the metro area jobs are outside of downtown Denver.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

My hunch is that it's overreach or too broad.

I think it's a perfectly fine restriction under the spending clause. How is it any more intrusive than telling states their legal drinking age has to be 21, or that their maximum speed limit has to be 55 mph? States' recourse when they don't like a condition is not to take the money. On its face, it's not unconstitutional.

Now, a smarter Republican state would lower taxes and then litigate the question of whether the COVID funds were in fact going to "pay for" the decrease. Presumably they could show some commensurate reductions elsewhere in the state budget - services that sort of overlap with the application of the COVID funds, but not directly - and challenge it as applied, if the feds dare to try and take back relief funds already paid out. As they say about the golden rule: he who holds the gold makes the rules. Take the money; litigate later.

[tommyboy733]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

With respect to Denver, there's plenty of entry-level homes and neighborhoods.

If you want to live on the East side there's Virginia Village homes starting ~ $425K and up; University Hills homes start ~ $475K. On the West side Ruby Hill homes start ~ $400K and Harvey Park homes start ~ $425K; Athmar Park homes start ~ $400K. Most of these neighborhoods were built in the 1950's as Denver developed outward. There's other comparable neighborhoods.

How is $425 to $475 "entry level"? I think entry level would be $200 to $300.

[BG918]

Originally Posted by tommyboy733

How is $425 to $475 "entry level"? I think entry level would be $200 to $300.

*Should* be $200-300k but the reality in Denver is that $400-500k homes are entry-level.

[Agent Orange]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

With respect to Denver, there's plenty of entry-level homes and neighborhoods.

If you want to live on the East side there's Virginia Village homes starting ~ $425K and up; University Hills homes start ~ $475K. On the West side Ruby Hill homes start ~ $400K and Harvey Park homes start ~ $425K; Athmar Park homes start ~ $400K. Most of these neighborhoods were built in the 1950's as Denver developed outward. There's other comparable neighborhoods.
.

Wow. I appreciate your enthusiasm for Denver, but boy are you out of touch if you think homes in the 400s are "affordable" for working class and aspiring middle class folks. Sorry, things are not okay with this market.

To latch on to Dirt's post, we need to let the middle class bid against the wealthy on subdividing those 500k single family home scrapes by allowing 4 or 6-plexes everywhere. I've got my eye on Tacoma, which is proposing simplified zoning where all the residential parts of the city are either zoned low intensity (townhomes, fourplexes, ADUs) or mid intensity (apartment blocks). It's in the early stage, but it sounds like the best zoning reform proposal I've heard from an American city yet. How come we're not hearing anything like this in Colorado yet? Allow missing middle by right.

[SirLucasTheGreat]

https://denverite.com/2021/03/18/denvers...-move-to-globeville-not-rino-as-planned/

Denver’s World Trade Center will move to Globeville, not RiNo as planned

[BG918]

Originally Posted by SirLucasTheGreat

https://denverite.com/2021/03/18/denvers...-move-to-globeville-not-rino-as-planned/

Denver’s World Trade Center will move to Globeville, not RiNo as planned

41st & Fox is the new hot spot. Lots of positive changes coming to "Fox Island" but it's still really disconnected from the adjoining neighborhoods. Like 38th & Blake it's only one stop from Union Station so it makes sense that it's seeing increased density.

[SirLucasTheGreat]

Yeah seems like 41st and Fox is blowing up. Hopefully something happens at that 38th and Blake site because that is a great location

[TakeFive]

I totally get it; However

Originally Posted by Agent Orange

Wow. I appreciate your enthusiasm for Denver, but boy are you out of touch if you think homes in the 400s are "affordable" for working class and aspiring middle class folks. Sorry, things are not okay with this market.

I was pointing out where entry level homes were built. Obviously a lot has happened since the 1950's and 1960's.

Originally Posted by BG918

*Should* be $200-300k but the reality in Denver is that $400-500k homes are entry-level.

If Denver's entry level homes were NOT affordable then they wouldn't sell and the prices would have to come down. That's how markets work; certainly I have no control over what buyers in Denver deem affordable.

Originally Posted by Agent Orange

To latch on to Dirt's post, we need to let the middle class bid against the wealthy on subdividing those 500k single family home scrapes by allowing 4 or 6-plexes everywhere.

I've got actually a couple of posts coming (next week?) but to clarify are you talking about creating rentals (other than townhomes)?