DENVER | Main Development Thread #7

[TakeFive]

You want to keep breathing then pay your bills

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Tents don't murder people, the people who sleep in them murder people.

That's more of a (conservative) talking point albeit a good one, usually.

Any 🞵🞵🞵 violence with respect to homeless in Denver likely comes from the outside as a result of drug dealing and debts. If you don't pay your bills you may just lose your source but the rules in THAT world can be very unforgiving. At least to-date I haven't heard of any 'armed' encampments.

🞵🞵🞵 violence in Denver is relatively modest. Phoenix is like a 'shooting gallery' compared to Denver but that's b/c we have a much larger population of poor people. With respect to downtown Phoenix it's on par with Denver's 🞵🞵🞵 violence.

Denver probably has a little more gang violence than you'd like but even that isn't terrible. That's always been there to a degree; it seems to ebb and flow.

[TakeFive]

Which got me to thinking so I started googling

Originally Posted by coolmandan03

I just went to Woods Boss Brewery yesterday at 22nd and California. The amount of tents and homeless people on the sidewalks was incredible. How is there so much demand to live in this area? Who is renting these? If I was new in town and signed a lease, I wouldn't stick around a second year...

I finally decided to ask myself "why is the homeless problem so much worse in Denver than in Phoenix?" Actually, statistically it's not that much different (maybe 20%) given Phoenix (city) has over twice the population.

Downtown Phoenix doesn't have a 'large' homeless population; a few pockets here and there but very little "between the 7's"; downtown Phoenix is generally defined (east/west) as being between 7th Ave and 7th St. I decided that the homeless in Phoenix are much more entrepreneurial. Like the city, they tend to spread out looking for their own niche to live and thrive (from donations).

I happen to recall there was a popular methadone clinic in a corner of the Sunnyslope neighborhood, sort of a Bohemian area. Some rideshare drivers have catered to this crowd as many get vouchers to get their daily dose. Sunnyslope is 8 miles north of downtown Phoenix.

So then I googled for methadone and opioid addiction clinics. They're all well outside the city center. Pockets along Indian School Rd have long had (wait for it) a high Indian population which used to mean alcohol addiction. Essentially there are no addiction treatment centers in downtown Phoenix.

So then I googled for Homeless Centers and again there are none in downtown Phoenix. They're mostly located in poorer neighborhoods which may not be that far from downtown. NOTE: While it may not be as dense the urban core in Phoenix is probably four times the size of Denver's urban core. There is definitely all kinds of diversity.

Most of the nearby neighborhoods in Phoenix, not unlike Denver are middle-class historic places to live. Many have complained about the 'growing' homeless population so it's not dissimilar in that respect.

Summary: As Denver has grown and gentrified a lot of the previous pockets of poverty have evaporated. The current concentration of homeless services didn't use to be "downtown" in most people's mind.

The Problem: is clearly that the homeless are attracted to downtown 'partly' b/c that's where the services are. But the other even bigger problem is that they have been 'empowered' to squat wherever they want to. They're treated like Queens and Kings. Why should they want a job when the homeless life is good.

[Agent Orange]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Ugh. Don’t depress me with that thought. I think that an Eric Adams-esque candidate would easily dispose of Candi, but I can’t remember the last time Denver had a candidate (non-lawyer law and order background) like that. If ever.

I tend to think so, too, though it'll depend what the mood and biggest concerns are come spring 2023. Violent crime, evil greedy developers, traffic/transit, economy? The question is, do we have any moderate liberals with experience and motivation who want to run for mayor in two years? Feels like the field is pretty weak.

And I'd be curious how popular Candi remains as a councilwoman. Sure, she has her activist allies, but she won by a very slim margin in District 9 and has since gone on to have several scandals and created plenty of enemies. If someone ran against her and actually campaigned, they'd have a lot of material to deploy. And I swear, if the redistricting means her boundaries shift eastward and I end up getting represented by her again, I'm gonna be livid.

[Sam Hill]

I just re-read my last few posts and I don’t like the tone of them. I need to take it easy, lol.

I guess I’m still mad at New for the torrent of NIMBY junk mail he sent to my mailbox last election. The vote I voted for Hinds was just about the most enthusiastic vote I ever voted. And now I probably harbor some sort of blind brand loyalty to Hinds that isn’t exactly 100% rational. Honestly, I don’t know much about his stance on the homeless camps. I still like him though. I think he’s the closest think we’ve got to a YIMBY on the Council.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by Sam Hill

I think he’s the closest think we’ve got to a YIMBY on the Council.

It's easy to be a YIMBY when your own district has almost NONE of the growth that is driving concern around development in the City.

I say this as one of those much despised rich white guys who lives in a historic district in an evil single family home. IN HIS DISTRICT.

He's got it easy - a vote in favor of development in OTHERS' districts is no skin off his back - almost none of it even comes close to touching his constituents. Other than the Golden Triangle, where there isn't a lot of population to oppose the new stuff - and that rezoning went through with almost no help from him (and he managed what controversy there was terribly). City/CPD staff deserves all of the credit for that - he did less than nothing. If you want to see if he's a real YIMBY, try and build... well... almost anything around Cheesman Park, Congress Park, or hell, even in Cap Hill, and see how that goes. My view is he is vulnerable.

You know what his district does have a lot of? Homeless.

[Sam Hill]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

It's easy to be a YIMBY when your own district has almost NONE of the growth that is driving concern around development in the City.

I say this as one of those much despised rich white guys who lives in a historic district in an evil single family home. IN HIS DISTRICT.

He's got it easy - a vote in favor of development in OTHERS' districts is no skin off his back - almost none of it even comes close to touching his constituents. Other than the Golden Triangle, where there isn't a lot of population to oppose the new stuff - and that rezoning went through with almost no help from him (and he managed what controversy there was terribly). City/CPD staff deserves all of the credit for that - he did less than nothing. If you want to see if he's a real YIMBY, try and build... well... almost anything around Cheesman Park, Congress Park, or hell, even in Cap Hill, and see how that goes. My view is he is vulnerable.

You know what his district does have a lot of? Homeless.

District 10 includes Uptown, the Golden Triangle and Cherry Creek. If those aren’t high growth areas… do I really need to finish this sentence?

Man, I’m really trying to bite my tongue here. I already regret telling one guy he doesn’t know what he’s talking about…

Look, Chris Hinds is a self-professed YIMBY, who ran as an urbanist, brazenly spouting off urbanist ideals, in a political climate in which, supposedly, anyone who wasn’t a NIMBY was doomed to lose, and yet he won - against a well-heeled yet gutless opponent who read the political tides wrong and suddenly went full-blown NIMBY on us.

He’s just a vote. And so far all he’s done is vote the right way on every damn thing. Maybe he ain’t superman but he ain’t no villain either.

[Robert.hampton]

Doublempost

[Robert.hampton]

Originally Posted by Sam Hill

District 10 includes Uptown, the Golden Triangle and Cherry Creek. If those aren’t high growth areas… do I really need to finish this sentence?

Man, I’m really trying to bite my tongue here. I already regret telling one guy he doesn’t know what he’s talking about…

Look, Chris Hinds is a self-professed YIMBY, who ran as an urbanist, brazenly spouting off urbanist ideals, in a political climate in which, supposedly, anyone who wasn’t a NIMBY was doomed to lose, and yet he won - against a well-heeled yet gutless opponent who read the political tides wrong and suddenly went full-blown NIMBY on us.

He’s just a vote. And so far all he’s done is vote the right way on every damn thing. Maybe he ain’t superman but he ain’t no villain either.

He might profess to be a YIMBY but his district has turned into the antithesis of a walkable urban environment, with people sick and tired of going anywhere near cap hill because of all the needles, 🞵🞵🞵🞵, etc. (to which Hinds general response has been ‘quit being scared of poor people’). Hipster bros are fleeing to Broomfield and Arvada because their urban dreams have been crushed. hinds biggest supporters are probably the Marxist/socialist/mutual aid crowd that actually want the neighborhood to be a large unensanctioned camp (which it basically is).

Wayne New played to his country club crowd in the elections but was actually very pro-development outside of cherry creek/country club. He was an outspoken proponent of the rezoning that ended up being Bespoke Uptown, said he wanted to see projects like it up and down colfax and 17th, was a vocal supporter of BRT, and also was pushing for the city to sell of the district 6 police station at Washington and Colfax for mixed use development. I am sure Wayne New would have been pressuring the mayor and police to do something about the homeless situation, whereas Hinds places most of the blame on ‘housed neighbors’ for vilifying the ‘Unhoused neighbors’ which are pooping on their porch, stealing their bikes, and lighting their dumpsters on fire. Super urban, bro.

Hinds as far as I know has been silent on BRT and has said he wants the district 6 police station to be city-owned section 8 housing rather than a mixed use development (which is completely 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 nuts). He also seems to tacitly endorse the hostile historic designations/opposition to development that has been rife in cap hill in recent years.

[mhays]

I love the "hotels to homeless housing" idea. Apparently we're all doing it. One reason is related to TakeFive's comment about dispersal of services rather than concentration. These cheap hotels can be a mix of core and suburban locations, as long as they have transit.

Another reason is they're immediate. In one example, the kitchen is still full of the hotel's "continental breakfast" handouts, as it was still operating right up to the sale. You can spend four years funding, designing, and building a perfect facility, or you can build something that's not perfect but still pretty good and open right away, including the furniture, fixtures, and equipment (aka FF&E) already in place. You can put a real dent into the street population in this way.

A related idea is to buy micro or studio buildings before they open, made possible by developers too pessimistic to try the rental market at the time they complete the projects. A couple of these purchases have happened in my area.

[gopokes21]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

You want to keep breathing then pay your bills

That's more of a (conservative) talking point albeit a good one, usually.

Any 🞵🞵🞵 violence with respect to homeless in Denver likely comes from the outside as a result of drug dealing and debts. If you don't pay your bills you may just lose your source but the rules in THAT world can be very unforgiving. At least to-date I haven't heard of any 'armed' encampments.

🞵🞵🞵 violence in Denver is relatively modest. Phoenix is like a 'shooting gallery' compared to Denver but that's b/c we have a much larger population of poor people. With respect to downtown Phoenix it's on par with Denver's 🞵🞵🞵 violence.

Denver probably has a little more gang violence than you'd like but even that isn't terrible. That's always been there to a degree; it seems to ebb and flow.

No offense, but most of us (Denver locals) would find anything remotely similar to Phoenix to be absolutely unacceptable here. Not just the sprawl, but the 🞵🞵🞵 violence too.

We're trying to get a handle on an uptick before it becomes the norm. Any 🞵🞵🞵 violence is absolutely unacceptable.

[gopokes21]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

It's easy to be a YIMBY when your own district has almost NONE of the growth that is driving concern around development in the City.

I say this as one of those much despised rich white guys who lives in a historic district in an evil single family home. IN HIS DISTRICT.

He's got it easy - a vote in favor of development in OTHERS' districts is no skin off his back - almost none of it even comes close to touching his constituents. Other than the Golden Triangle, where there isn't a lot of population to oppose the new stuff - and that rezoning went through with almost no help from him (and he managed what controversy there was terribly). City/CPD staff deserves all of the credit for that - he did less than nothing. If you want to see if he's a real YIMBY, try and build... well... almost anything around Cheesman Park, Congress Park, or hell, even in Cap Hill, and see how that goes. My view is he is vulnerable.

You know what his district does have a lot of? Homeless.

This has already been called out, but this perspective is just... wow.

You don't think we have much growth and development in District 10. Okay, well that's an interesting perspective, for sure. Just because Colfax is one big "area of change," along with Cherry Creek, Uptown, etc does NOT mean that Congress Park has to get bulldozed for development. If you hate Congress Park so much, as you always post about, then don't live there. Different strokes for different folks, you know. I think people who are 100% NIMBY or 100% YIMBY are equally insane because they have this fragile belief that everything needs to be the same. You think everything needs to be a mid-rise EIFS building, and the NIMBY folks think everything needs to be a bungalow with a yard. Both sides get over yourselves and learn to adapt.

I don't understand why it's so hard to celebrate redevelopment on Colfax as well as preservation in Congress Park, at the same time. Yin and yang. Better with each other.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by gopokes21

Just because Colfax is one big "area of change," along with Cherry Creek, Uptown, etc does NOT mean that Congress Park has to get bulldozed for development. If you hate Congress Park so much, as you always post about, then don't live there. Different strokes for different folks, you know.

What are you talking about? I think you need medication. Or you might be confusing me with somebody else. I'm the guy who lives in one of the protected old single family neighborhoods; not planning on bulldozing them anytime soon.

Originally Posted by gopokes21

This has already been called out, but this perspective is just... wow.

You don't think we have much growth and development in District 10.

Other than Golden Triangle, which I was very clear about. No, District 10 does not have much growth. Colfax has seen, what, a couple projects? Uptown, same, it's not like Uptown has changed overnight. Congress Park, Country Club, nada. And Capital Hill has nothing going on. There's growth coming around Governor's Park, but the most is yet to come. (Cherry Creek, while it looks like a lot, is mostly commercial. And in terms of square footage, it's not that much relative to, oh, one building downtown.)

I think both Councilwoman CdeBaca and Councilwoman Sandoval would take issue with any whining from folks in 10 about how hard Hinds has it. Districts 1 and 9 barely look like the same city they were 10 or 15 years ago. Now, I am not complaining about those changes, not one bit. But that is the development pressure that has folks up in arms across the City; that is why Fugly exists. It's not this imaginary surge of growth in Uptown, on Colfax, and in Cap Hill that has made Councilman Hinds' job managing the change of so difficult. Give me a break. Face it, he's a do-nothing on Council. And certainly isn't known for leading on the #1 issue in his district, which is the proliferation of homeless camps.

Watch redistricting. I bet 10 has to get larger to keep pace.

[Arapahoe]

I don't see Candi getting re-elected, its just too easy to expose her:

• Everyone wants safe and clean streets yet she was out protesting the city clean-ups and yelling at the crew. However, when the city proposed a safe outdoor space by the Coliseum for her district, she blocked it because it was too close to her neighborhood. What hypocrisy.
  
• Then she called on eliminating the police department. Nobody wants that. In fact she was the only person on Council who voted for her proposal. What a joke.
  
• Then during the rioting last summer, she tries to incite unrest against the police by posting a picture of a cop holding 🞵🞵🞵 near a homeless person. It turns out the officer was recovering the weapon from the camp. She never apologized.
  
• To top if off, this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkuBmsfSiUM


Anyone running could easily take her out.

[bunt_q]

Her views on capitalism aren’t new. And didn’t prevent her from getting elected the first time. Against Albus, who was (and is) well liked and, I would argue, quite effective at problem solving. He stood for most of what folks on this forum are advocating for. And she still won.

[SirLucasTheGreat]

Candi barely won an election against a guy, problem solving skills notwithstanding, that did not seriously campaign. Candi did all in her power to market herself as the second-coming of AOC at a time where Denver was becoming exceedingly inaccessible to the poor, which is a good strategy when people don't often know the root causes of our housing problems. More than anything else, I view her election as a statement of how inept or apathetic the Albus campaign was. After all, Albus had himself a pretty sweet gig lined up so I can see why maintaining his City Council position was not critical even if he left downtown in the hands of a political arsonist.

[Arapahoe]

Originally Posted by coolmandan03

Either way - can anyone explain why all of some of the largest apartment developments are happening in the worst spot? Why not the surface parking lots in Golden Triangle, Lincoln Park, Cap Hill, or further north in Five Points? For some reason, California/Welton north of Broadway is becoming the hub of 16+ apartment buildings!

Denver is growing and apartment developments are long term investments. Arapahoe Square is short walk to CBD, Rino, Ballpark, Lodo etc. As density increases, the land value goes up. People on the tree lawn is very insignificant against the onward march of people moving to Denver. Arapahoe Square will look very different in 5 years. People who make money see the big picture.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by SirLucasTheGreat

After all, Albus had himself a pretty sweet gig lined up so I can see why maintaining his City Council position was not critical even if he left downtown in the hands of a political arsonist.

I think the sweet gig came after the fact, but I hear you.

[Arapahoe]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Her views on capitalism aren’t new. And didn’t prevent her from getting elected the first time. Against Albus, who was (and is) well liked and, I would argue, quite effective at problem solving. He stood for most of what folks on this forum are advocating for. And she still won.

Albus Brooks ran a pathetically weak campaign. He took it for granted he would win. Anyone with political savvy could easily win against her. Albus could retake the seat if he wanted it.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by Arapahoe

Albus Brooks ran a pathetically weak campaign. He took it for granted he would win. Anyone with political savvy could easily win against her. Albus could retake the seat if he wanted it.

Agreed that Albus mailed it in. His ground game was weak and he did not appear vested in the community. Candi was out there pounding pavement almost nonstop and my anecdotal take is that willingness to talk with the district on their front porches gave her the edge.

Does anyone remember that Candi also was endorsed by one of the DPD organizations? Yeesh.

[The Dirt]

Hinds sure sounded like a YIMBY when he campaigned (and he got our endorsement), but man, has he been a massive disappointment. He's literally done nothing but kissed up the the Country Club crowd and kissed up to Candi. He's completely misread his constituent voters and he's vulnerable.

Candi has zero political savvy, no ability to compromise, no ability think critically, and is outright despised by her constituents. That level of discontent should translate in a lot of "anyone but Candi" votes. Agreed that Brooks mailed it in and that's why he lost. Same goes for Sussman, which is how we got Badmanda.