DENVER | Main Development Thread #7

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

The only thing "investors" would have been involved in was a proposed P3 which was always a reach. There was a brief period when many thought P3's could be some type of panacea.

This isn't really accurate.

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Most of the National Western Center projects were to be funded by the 'tourism' tax per voter approval. Investors bought the bonds is all. First problem was there was a boatload of new or changed infrastructure projects needed. 2nd, the tourism tax is currently a dumpster fire.

The voted bonds only covered Phases 1-2. (And in the end, due to overruns, have only built about half of those.)

The P3 would have operated Phases 1-2 (since nobody over thought about how operations would be paid for) and constructed and operated Phases 3-8, which were never funded.

Originally Posted by TakeFive

There was a brief period when many thought P3's could be some type of panacea.

There was a brief period when folks thought P3s meant free money, but that passed a long time ago. The argument for the P3 at National Western was (1) unified operations over the entire site, (2) event programming coordinated with those operations, (3) coordinated construction on a very difficult site where phasing is everything, and (4) capturing private real estate value in a way that really can't really be done unless somebody is coordinating the big picture site plan and site development.

Originally Posted by TakeFive

First problem was there was a boatload of new or changed infrastructure projects needed.

Not sure what you're referring to here. I don't think that's accurate.

Originally Posted by TakeFive

2nd, the tourism tax is currently a dumpster fire.

Not so much anymore.

Originally Posted by TakeFive

The one saving grace may be the bipartisan infrastructure bill. Read somewhere that Federal funds could cover up to 90% of the cost - not sure where or how this specifically works.

No, not really. A few limited programs in there maybe (environmental remediation comes to mind), but not really much in there for National Western that I see.

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Additionally, presumably voter approval won't be necessary if they don't need to raise taxes.

Not true. TABOR requires us to vote bonds, even if taxes do not go up.

Originally Posted by TakeFive

The arena is the one, next critical piece; the rest of the vision can happen over time.

Not sure I agree. I am worried doing the arena alone now, without a plan for how the rest of the site follows, ends up actually precluding ever completing the rest. For a lot of very complicated reasons.

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Early priority (in addition to infrastructure) went towards CSU's "Spur" facilities which is a Great Idea IMO.

None of the voted money went to this.

Originally Posted by TakeFive

The one saving grace may be the bipartisan infrastructure bill.

Unrelated, I don't expect the infrastructure bill to be a saving grace for much. Don't get me wrong, happy for the money. But I can already sense any efficiencies going out the window - it's going to be a race to spend. Those dollars are not going to go anywhere near as far as they can or should.

[laniroj]

Originally Posted by Robert.hampton

I think this bond package will have a real hard time passing. No one is buying the National Western Complex vision (including investors, which is why this is coming to a bond in the first place) and the rest of the projects are pretty visionless and filled with a bunch of deferred maintenance.

I'd rather spend all this money on a safe outdoor site in every neighborhood and then throw the rest of the unsanctioned campers in jail.

Robert Hampton for Mayor!

[TakeFive]

Really good stuff

Originally Posted by bunt_q

This isn't really accurate.

To the best of my knowledge investors don't invest in public facilities unless it's some kind of public private partnership. Any private investments as a part of a public master plan are something different. There are also donors who contribute to specific projects but that's not an investment other than for one's ego.

Originally Posted by bunt_q

The voted bonds only covered Phases 1-2. (And in the end, due to overruns, have only built about half of those.)

The P3 would have operated Phases 1-2 (since nobody over thought about how operations would be paid for) and constructed and operated Phases 3-8, which were never funded.

That's unfortunate although from Big Picture guestimates it's always hard to appreciate unforeseen things as well as construction costs/inflation.

Originally Posted by bunt_q

There was a brief period when folks thought P3s meant free money, but that passed a long time ago. The argument for the P3 at National Western was (1) unified operations over the entire site, (2) event programming coordinated with those operations, (3) coordinated construction on a very difficult site where phasing is everything, and (4) capturing private real estate value in a way that really can't really be done unless somebody is coordinating the big picture site plan and site development.

Definitely appreciate your intimate knowledge on the topic.

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Not sure what you're referring to here. I don't think that's accurate.

I'm referring to the Infrastructure Master Plan January 2015 and the NATIONAL WESTERN CENTER DISTRICT NFRASTRUCTURE ASSESSMENT PRELIMINARY AUGUST 2016.

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Not so much anymore.

Appreciate that this is recovering nicely but until there's a full recovery in the convention business there's still a long ways to go. Speaking of the CCC, I'd assume this would have priority for payback along with any other existing bonds over floating any more bonds for the National Western Center which I also assume is part of their problem.

Originally Posted by bunt_q

No, not really. A few limited programs in there maybe (environmental remediation comes to mind), but not really much in there for National Western that I see.

I could have clarified this better but I had moved on to larger, even megaprojects by both the city and state per your comment.

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Not true. TABOR requires us to vote bonds, even if taxes do not go up.

Thanks for the reminder/clarification. I was thinking partly that if the Feds are paying 90% then CDOT (for example) wouldn't need to float any bonds. They might need some $'s allocated from the legislature though; that is possible.

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Not sure I agree. I am worried doing the arena alone now, without a plan for how the rest of the site follows, ends up actually precluding ever completing the rest. For a lot of very complicated reasons.

That's very fair.

But the Arena is critical as a standalone project for very specific reasons. It is important to the stock show's success with multi other useful purposes. I'd add in the historic renovation of the Coliseum which who's cost is painless.

Originally Posted by bunt_q

None of the voted money went to this.

Good point. I assume (other than for some infrastructure) that was funded by CSU with some help from the Legislature - IIRC.

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Unrelated, I don't expect the infrastructure bill to be a saving grace for much. Don't get me wrong, happy for the money. But I can already sense any efficiencies going out the window - it's going to be a race to spend. Those dollars are not going to go anywhere near as far as they can or should.

Generally agree but I assume you're referring to block grants with few guardrails. I'd assume that most so-called infrastructure projects need to pass muster as normal (unless they're paid from grants with no strings).

While it's a lot of money it goes into many different pots, like electricity, water projects and so on, so yeah it will get spread around.

[TakeFive]

bunt mentions a lack of vision. No argument from me; there's a bunch of boring people around here.

A 10,000 seat arena? Any good examples for this?

Mohegan Sun Arena

Mohegan Sun Arena is now ranked consistently among the top venues in the world according to Billboard Magazine, Pollstar and Venues Today.

When it comes to live music and entertainment, top headlining concerts and premier sporting events, the 10,000-seat Mohegan Sun Arena, located in Connecticut, is the leader in the entertainment business. From Billy Joel, Fleetwood Mac, The Eagles, Taylor Swift, Jennifer Lopez, Jay Z, Keith Urban, Bon Jovi and Kenny Chesney in addition to championship boxing and MMA, top-touring stand-up comedy, WWE, NCAA Division 1 and professional basketball - Mohegan Sun gets them all.

1 Mohegan Sun Boulevard
Uncasville, CT 06382


Source

Why not Denver?

Orlando has a 10,000 seat arena


Source

http://www.spectraexperiences.com/our-work/addition-financial-arena

Addition Financial Arena continues to rank as one of the top performing arenas in the world by Pollstar Magazine. The venue was also recently ranked as the #3 Meeting & Banquet Facility in Central Florida by the Orlando Business Journal.

Lady Gaga (sold out); Carrie Underwood (sold out); Elton John (sold out); Katy Perry (sold out); Tyler, The Creator (sold out); Tool (sold out); Reba McEntire (sold out); Hillsong United (sold out); Kevin Hart, Bob Dylan, Miranda Lambert, Lady A, Adam Sandler, DJ Tiesto, Paw Patrol Live!

Why not Denver?

There's a tremendous opportunity to cater to entertainment options whether musical acts, meeting and/or banquet demand in today's market - for a 10,000 seat arena as apposed to larger ~20,000 sports arenas. There's a lot of acts that would crave for a 10,000 seat venue. In addition to Red Rocks or in the case of rain-outs, events could easily be moved to a downtown arena - if available.

For whatever reason, many people are convulsing over the arena being used by the Stock Show (one week a year) as apposed to visualizing a year around asset and entertainment venue. Too many people are stuck in yesterday's boring options. If AGE is a state-of-mind it feels like Denver is accumulating to many people acting like 70-year-old's - at least when it comes to entertainment and venue options.

[AlSmithee]

Why build new?

https://cubuffs.com/facilities/cu-events-center

[TakeFive]

Sometimes, for inexplicable reasons the interwebs missfire

Originally Posted by AlSmithee

Why build new?

https://cubuffs.com/facilities/cu-events-center

It looks like you're missing a < /2 > on the end but that isn't a very satisfying result either.

To your suggestion, what's interesting is that I also did some checking into markets like Austin and Phoenix. Austin has somewhat limited options other than large warehouse type structures or smaller venues. But Austin also benefits from the University of Texas/Austin being right there. Phoenix similarly benefits from ASU (Tempe) being an integral part of the urban core. Phoenix also has a wide variety of options but many are older, not very inviting.

[AlSmithee]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Sometimes, for inexplicable reasons the interwebs missfire


It looks like you're missing a < /2 > on the end but that isn't a very satisfying result either.

To your suggestion, what's interesting is that I also did some checking into markets like Austin and Phoenix. Austin has somewhat limited options other than large warehouse type structures or smaller venues. But Austin also benefits from the University of Texas/Austin being right there. Phoenix similarly benefits from ASU (Tempe) being an integral part of the urban core. Phoenix also has a wide variety of options but many are older, not very inviting.

The point is the there’s an arena of the size wanted already in place, with easy transit access too.

Why spend on something superfluous?

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by AlSmithee

Why build new?

https://cubuffs.com/facilities/cu-events-center

You mean the arena that even CU would like to tear down?

Easy answer, though - because that arena has too small of a field of play (floor) for most of the events this arena would host. There's more to arena design than seat count.

[Robert.hampton]

Formal site development plan now submitted at 16th and Pearl for the X Denver-style frat house. Looks like they've already gotten underway with the value engineering from an interesting masonry exterior reminiscent of Market Station to some cheap EIFS paneling.

[The Dirt]

Can't wait for another shitty parking lot to be eradicated in my hood.

[bulldurhamer]

3930 Blake St.
did we talk about this? i see it's under construction now. no more sweet smells of cannabis growing as we walk past...

https://missourirealestatenews.com/apart...cture-merges-architecture-with-greenery/

Chinese firm MAD Architects is the design architect for One River North. This is just the company’s second residential project in the United States. Davis Partnership Architects is the executive architect. Saunders Construction is the general contractor.

Wynne told BusinessDen that One River North is slated to have 187 units, and about 9,000 square feet of ground-floor retail space.

[AlSmithee]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

You mean the arena that even CU would like to tear down?

Easy answer, though - because that arena has too small of a field of play (floor) for most of the events this arena would host. There's more to arena design than seat count.

Reduce, reuse, recycle, renovate, repurpose.

[BG918]

Originally Posted by Robert.hampton

Formal site development plan now submitted at 16th and Pearl for the X Denver-style frat house. Looks like they've already gotten underway with the value engineering from an interesting masonry exterior reminiscent of Market Station to some cheap EIFS paneling.

What project is this?

[Robert.hampton]

Originally Posted by BG918

What project is this?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.denverp...apartments-planned-in-uptown-denver/amp/

[Brainpathology]

Originally Posted by Robert.hampton

I'd rather spend all this money on a safe outdoor site in every neighborhood and then throw the rest of the unsanctioned campers in jail.

I agree! (I said, just finishing piling onto Boulder for being fake-liberal)

[The Dirt]

Liberals - uniting to sweep one problem into a bigger problem since 1776.

Don't get me wrong, allowing way more sanctioned camping sites is great, but putting homeless people in jail because we just don't want to have to see the problem is dumb. How about we decriminalize drug use (like Portugal did in 2001) and get serious about funding massive rehab programs.

If life was full of easy fixes then the War on Drugs, the War on Guns, and the War on Terror would have actually worked. But, nah, let's spend no more than 5 minutes thinking about the problem then either sweep it out of sight or throw money at it... maybe both? How about we throw the CIA in the mix and have them arm the homeless because, I guess that's what this country does.

[Robert.hampton]

Originally Posted by The Dirt

Liberals - uniting to sweep one problem into a bigger problem since 1776.

Don't get me wrong, allowing way more sanctioned camping sites is great, but putting homeless people in jail because we just don't want to have to see the problem .

That’s a cute talking point but not wanting to see the problem is probably reason number 67 on my list of why I think the city should crack down on unsanctioned camping if suitable alternatives are available.

[RyanD]

Originally Posted by bulldurhamer

3930 Blake St.
did we talk about this? i see it's under construction now. no more sweet smells of cannabis growing as we walk past...

Yep it's U/C





https://denverinfill.com/2021/08/one-river-north-has-broken-ground.html

[DenvertoLA]

So we have a giant 2 tower condo project about to break ground, is there any movement on a giant apartment tower entering the scene in the CBD?

[The Dirt]

Originally Posted by Robert.hampton

That’s a cute talking point but not wanting to see the problem is probably reason number 67 on my list of why I think the city should crack down on unsanctioned camping if suitable alternatives are available.

The key word is suitable. There's a myriad of reasons why someone doesn't want to spend a night in a homeless shelter or a hypothetical sanctioned camping site, which currently have pretty strict qualifications. Drug use is the obvious one, but small things like theft, pet restrictions, and being split from your significant other come into play.

While I don't want to see someone spreading trash, shooting up, or being a drugs dealer magnet, putting someone in jail for spending the night outside is not an effective means of solving the problem. Just like sweeps, people just end up back where they were a few days later. It simply doesn't solve the problem that we all want it to solve.