DENVER | Main Development Thread #7

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

I'm not sure I agree. I am not sure that a majority of Denver residents care if we abandon core Downtown permanently, in favor of a slightly less urban lifestyle on the fringes of Downtown (Highlands, RiNo, South Broadway, all fit the bill - that's where the action is). Especially in a remote-work post-COVID world, is there any need for Civic Center anymore, or is its best function to contain that scene? On the other hand, central (but not too central) playgrounds, like what the National Western Center could become, are exactly what a future City might need. We did a lot of that crap in the 60s, 70s, and 80s - self-contained, not-at-all-organic, entertainment districts - and they worked just fine. If you believe we are moving into a different phase of urban development in America - a phase of live-work in an environment that is dense enough to support neighborhood-feeling amenities, allow you to drive, and still be in contact with your fellow man...

This triggered a thought I had couple of week ago when I was doing some random searches.

It turns out that last year Scottsdale reversed the trend of apartments getting ever smaller. In2020, the average size of a new apartments in Scottsdale increased by over 200 square feet to 1140 square feet. Some of this would be attributable to new high end apartments but the presumption also is that they're thinking of those who need space to work from home.

It got me to wondering if pieces of Denver like Broadway Station or anywhere might look at this strategy for new apartments.

Originally Posted by Robert.hampton

I think your average voter sees national western as a solution to a problem/opportunity that doesn’t exist.

Civic center park by contrast everyone is a problem that I think most people believe needs to be fixed if Denver wants to be a world class city.

While there's clearly some focused opposition to the arena I wouldn't impute that to the average voter. My guess is that the average city-wide voter isn't even aware of or hasn't thought about the bond vote, yet. I'm anticipating a positive campaign ahead and how much of an impact that might have is hard to say.

It will be interesting to see if having 'Park Rangers' around the clock will make a big impact on the (non-green) seedy nature of things at Civic Park.

[Arapahoe]

Originally Posted by Robert.hampton

I think your average voter sees national western as a solution to a problem/opportunity that doesn’t exist. The mayor says ‘hey don’t you really need a place to serve the role that the Denver coliseum played for 50 years?!’ And nearly everyone roles their eyes and says ‘no I don’t need to go watch monster truck shows and I can still do that at the Denver coliseum’. I mean the pitch for national western really, really sucks.

Civic center park by contrast everyone is a problem that I think most people believe needs to be fixed if Denver wants to be a world class city. It’s hard to take pride on your city with the capital/civic center/library in its current condition. And if you tell everyone ‘we’re going to turn this place into the next Millenium park and make it a destination just like we did with union station’ anyone who has ever been to Millenium park or union station would say ‘shit yeah I would love that in Denver, especially replacing that rat hole’.

I totally agree with your perspective! I'm sure all the tech companies moving into the city, especially downtown, and thus driving our economy into the future do not relocate here because of a yearly cattle show or another arena for middle-aged rock stars. We need beautiful parks, safe streets and 5280 loop plus other resident infrastructure to stay competitive.

[Denver]

Originally Posted by laniroj

In theory you are correct. In reality, the fact someone is getting (or thinks they will get) 95% financing for a luxury multifamily rental is worrisome because either 1) they are getting it and it's a sure sign we're all going belly up very soon or 2) they are so inexperienced a developer that they felt making that public statement was a good idea which doesn't lend much credibility to this project moving forward (at least with this sponsor/developer). Hell, let's just bring back stated income loans for unemployed folks if we're handing out 95% financing to developers!

Zero percent chance they got a 95% LTC mortgage. I recently did a 100% preleased project with a credit tenant on a 15 year term and couldn’t get above 80% LTC. 95% does not exist. Especially in a class AA multifamily building in a B location (sorry stop Arapahoe square has too many issues to be class A).

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by Arapahoe

We need beautiful parks, safe streets and 5280 loop plus other resident infrastructure to stay competitive.

Are you familiar with the specific projects on the 2021 RISE General Obligation Bond Program Project List? All the things you mention on on the list so I at least hope you'll vote for those.

Nobody loves parks more than I do and I've enjoyed most of Denver's parks over the years. Parks and Rec are always a BIG beneficiary whenever there's a bond proposal. Are you aware that Denver voters passed a dedicated .25% sales tax in November of 2018 specifically for parks? Most of the parks and places worth visiting according to Tripadvisor are outside of downtown Denver.

With respect to Civic Center Park, over the years it has hosted various annual events. It's the only space (that I can think of) on the edge of downtown that can accommodate setting up booths and thousands of people. That said if they want to make additional improvements that might be nice. They are currently looking into doing this but it's not on this year's ballot.

Denver doesn't need a new arena to have a music scene but are you familiar with SXSW? It's the magnet that brought Apple to Austin (1992) followed by Google, Facebook and others. SXSW while anchored by their music scene also includes other creative arts.

Denver does have several advantages. Many companies learn that Denver is an easy place to recruit employees from out of state. I'm not sure any of Denver's appeal goes to specific parks etc; it's more about the mountains and perhaps a Mile High vibe and (believe it or not) the the light rail system.

[Arapahoe]

Originally Posted by Denver

Zero percent chance they got a 95% LTC mortgage. I recently did a 100% preleased project with a credit tenant on a 15 year term and couldn’t get above 80% LTC. 95% does not exist. Especially in a class AA multifamily building in a B location (sorry stop Arapahoe square has too many issues to be class A).

I guess they could be making false statements to the media, but this is a quote from the developer:

“We have people literally coming out of the woodwork offering debt financing, up to 95% financing for debt for construction, which is unheard of. I mean, last year we would have been lucky to get 55% debt financing. We're looking anywhere between 75% to, like I said, we had one group approach us with 95% financing. So I think this is a whole different landscape than it was last year.”

[Arapahoe]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Denver doesn't need a new arena to have a music scene but are you familiar with SXSW? It's the magnet that brought Apple to Austin (1992) followed by Google, Facebook and others.

Not sure what point you are trying to make. Are you aware Facebook & Amazon have offices in downtown Denver and Google is in Boulder? Denver just nabbed the HQ for Palantir among several other tech companies adding HQ2s in downtown Denver.

SXSW requires hotels, restaurants, convention center, performance theaters and many smaller venues. We have this downtown, not way over in the NWC.

While the mountains are the big headline attraction when people think of Denver, its quality of life and relative affordability that really counts for companies & people deciding to relocate. Denver area has fantastic cultural, sports, and academic institutions. We need to work on keeping our streets clean and will support all measures on the ballot that do so.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by Arapahoe

SXSW requires hotels, restaurants, convention center, performance theaters and many smaller venues. We have this downtown, not way over in the NWC. .

This is incorrect - there have been plenty of discussions about how to attract (or more likely, create) a SXSW like event in Denver. Downtown can’t support it - the venues aren’t right. The NWC campus, if fully built out, could (not just in the big arena - there are something like 10 different smaller arenas and event spaces on the campus at buildout). Hosting major events other than the stock show was always specifically part of the plan for the campus. And the proximity to Mission Ballroom and other budding venues in RiNo makes that all the more likely to occur up there. Downtown is not where this sort of event ends up in today’s (or tomorrow’s) Denver) Quote all the tech companies you want - there are only 3x major events booking companies out there anymore, they know their business, and they are all more interested in that part of town than downtown.

Not suggesting we do not need to keep the streets clean. Only suggesting you have an incorrect vision of what the NWC is supposed to be. (Which isn’t surprising because the City couldn’t possibly do a worse job of explaining “why” this bond package than they have.)

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by Arapahoe

I think this is really a confusion on viewing angles. The new render that Ryan posted on DenverInfill is a vantage looking northeast, whereas, the original render was a vantage looking northwest. Here they are for reference in the approved site development plan:

Orignal render from Northwest (still the current design!)


New render from Northeast (same building!)

This is by far my favorite current residential proposal. As much as anything, because of where it is located. These buildings will feel gargantuan at that location, right on the edge of Curtis Park - I love it. I agree with the skepticism around 95% debt financing, but I also think the Developer is probably speaking in hyperbole a bit to make a point about how far the market has moved in the last year and to generate excitement.

[Arapahoe]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

This is incorrect - there have been plenty of discussions about how to attract (or more likely, create) a SXSW like event in Denver. Downtown can’t support it - the venues aren’t right.

You seem to forget this isn't just about music, it is a gigantic conference that requires a convention center and thousands of hotel rooms - over 400,000 people attend, many traveling for it. Sure NWC could host some stuff, but without downtown it would be virtually impossible to host something on that scale. PERIOD. A couple boutique hotels in RiNo don't cut it.

[mhays]

It's amazing what a few swoopy scrims can do. I like it. This is a cost-efficient project that gives the illusion that they're spending a lot.

As for Civic Center, arenas, voters...sooo familiar from my area.

[Robert.hampton]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

This is incorrect - there have been plenty of discussions about how to attract (or more likely, create) a SXSW like event in Denver. Downtown can’t support it - the venues aren’t right. The NWC campus, if fully built out, could (not just in the big arena - there are something like 10 different smaller arenas and event spaces on the campus at buildout). Hosting major events other than the stock show was always specifically part of the plan for the campus. And the proximity to Mission Ballroom and other budding venues in RiNo makes that all the more likely to occur up there. Downtown is not where this sort of event ends up in today’s (or tomorrow’s) Denver) Quote all the tech companies you want - there are only 3x major events booking companies out there anymore, they know their business, and they are all more interested in that part of town than downtown.

Not suggesting we do not need to keep the streets clean. Only suggesting you have an incorrect vision of what the NWC is supposed to be. (Which isn’t surprising because the City couldn’t possibly do a worse job of explaining “why” this bond package than they have.)

Sounds like a gamble that could end up in a similar situation as the 1st bank boondoggle. If the opportunity is so strong it seems there would be more strategic ways to finance that would let taxpayers of the hook for the risk, rather than going via a GO bond? The risk of having an entertainment district that no one uses at the edge of town in a neighborhood that doesn't even want it seems pretty clear.

By contrast recreating/rethinking Civic Center park (or addressing other issues around own) is much more of a no-regrets approach. You are tackling a serious problem spot in the city and creating a gathering space in one of the most densely populated areas of town that is in desperate need of a quality outdoor space (a need that will continue to grow as golden triangle continues to build out). That place will be enjoyed by thousands of people every day, without question.

Just feels like the city is better positioned to try and tackle some growing problems in the city right now, and turn those problems into opportunities. What problem is national western addressing?

[Arapahoe]

Originally Posted by Robert.hampton

Sounds like a gamble that could end up in a similar situation as the 1st bank boondoggle. If the opportunity is so strong it seems there would be more strategic ways to finance that would let taxpayers of the hook for the risk, rather than going via a GO bond? The risk of having an entertainment district that no one uses at the edge of town in a neighborhood that doesn't even want it seems pretty clear.

By contrast recreating/rethinking Civic Center park (or addressing other issues around own) is much more of a no-regrets approach. You are tackling a serious problem spot in the city and creating a gathering space in one of the most densely populated areas of town that is in desperate need of a quality outdoor space (a need that will continue to grow as golden triangle continues to build out). That place will be enjoyed by thousands of people every day, without question.

Just feels like the city is better positioned to try and tackle some growing problems in the city right now, and turn those problems into opportunities. What problem is national western addressing?

[Denver]

Originally Posted by Arapahoe

Civic Center Park is already a great gathering space. While it needs some TLC, it does not need a significant amount of capital invested. Regardless of how much money is or is not invested in the park, the status-quo will stay the same until Denver starts enforcing the laws in the park. This is an issue created by the City. If you look at the park in front of the State Capital, it is clean, inviting, and safe. The reason for this is CSP enforces the laws and does not allow camping in the park where as DPD has been unable to enforce the rules leading to a shut down of the park. No amount of money thrown at the park will fix these issues without major policy changes around the use of the park.

As far as NWSS Complex goes, I think some of you assertions need to be addressed:

1) "No one will use the entertainment district" The amount of private investment in the neighborhood has been outstanding. Denver's newest concert venue is spitting distance away from the NWSS Complex. The area is also seeing the highest concentration of high density housing in the city. I cannot list the number of projects on going on Brighton Blvd.

2) "The area cannot support a 400,000 person event" Over a two week period roughly 417,000 people visited the 2019 SXSW. In comparison, over the over 16 days, 707,000 visited the stock show. Many of the visitors are from out of town. If the site can handle a 700,000 person event, then it will be more the capable of handling a 400,000 event.

3) "What problem does NWSS address" Aside from the cultural impact the NWSS has on our city and the fact that it is the one truly unique event that Denver hosts (in the same way that SXSW is unique to Austin) putting money into the NWSS address's the same problems that investing money into any City owned building does. To get more specific on the arena, the arena will allow the NWSS to grow its presence while helping to attract new events. Denver as a currently lacks enough event space. The Coliseum is functionally obsolete. It does not have the technology, accessibility, design, or aesthetics that a modern arena requires. The amount of money that would need to be invested in the Coliseum to bring it "up to snuff" is essentially the same as the amount the City wants to invest in a new arena. Investing in a new arena is no different than investing in expansions to the convention center.

4) The NWSS Complex is a place for "a yearly cattle show." Ignoring the ignorance of you thinking the Stock Show is merely a cattle show and its cultural importance to the region, the NWSS Complex (and the renovation to it) represents and houses much more than just the stock show for two weeks out of the year. CSU is building a 300,000 for campus at the NWSS Complex. The campus will be research and outreach based with an emphasis on partnering with non-profit, for profit, and governmental organizations. The NWSS Complex also provides facilities for high school sports, trade shows, concerts, and large scale meetings Further the NWSS Complex provides over 10,000 sf of gallery spaces for western art and community meeting spaces. The area is activated year round and will only become more busy/popular as the complex is built out.

[Robert.hampton]

Originally Posted by Denver

1) "No one will use the entertainment district" The amount of private investment in the neighborhood has been outstanding. Denver's newest concert venue is spitting distance away from the NWSS Complex. The area is also seeing the highest concentration of high density housing in the city. I cannot list the number of projects on going on Brighton Blvd.

This begs a previous question -- if there is such unbridled interest, why then should this be funded by a GO bond funded almost entirely by tax payers? Aren't there other ways to structure a bond so that it would be repaid by revenue generated by the arena that would ensure taxpayers are not on the hook? I understand that is how 1st bank was financed and was the only saving grace of building an events center in the middle of nowhere that opened in the economic crisis.

[Robert.hampton]

Originally Posted by Denver

3) "What problem does NWSS address" Aside from the cultural impact the NWSS has on our city and the fact that it is the one truly unique event that Denver hosts (in the same way that SXSW is unique to Austin) putting money into the NWSS address's the same problems that investing money into any City owned building does. To get more specific on the arena, the arena will allow the NWSS to grow its presence while helping to attract new events. Denver as a currently lacks enough event space. The Coliseum is functionally obsolete. It does not have the technology, accessibility, design, or aesthetics that a modern arena requires. The amount of money that would need to be invested in the Coliseum to bring it "up to snuff" is essentially the same as the amount the City wants to invest in a new arena. Investing in a new arena is no different than investing in expansions to the convention center.

I think the biggest problem I have with this argument (which is similar to the pitch from the mayors office) is that I don't know anyone that says 'man, I miss when we the coliseum was a really nice building! We are missing out on X, Y, or Z now!'

Short of hosting the next incarnation of sxsw, what exactly is the X,Y and Z we are missing out on that isn't covered by pepsi center/1st bank/ogden/fillmore/levitt/mission ball room/red rocks? And if the was such an obvious gap, wouldn't the mission ball room have been designed to fill it?

On a separate note -- a transformational outdoor venue seems a lot more timely right now compared to an indoor arena. I'd go to a show at millenium park 10x out of 10 over whatever they build at the stock show.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by Arapahoe

Not sure what point you are trying to make. Are you aware Facebook & Amazon have offices in downtown Denver and Google is in Boulder? Denver just nabbed the HQ for Palantir among several other tech companies adding HQ2s in downtown Denver.

I'm not particularly interested in touting Austin's chops but there's a difference between having an address and few employees (Palantir) versus having a large impact.

As we've recently learned Boulder ain't Denver and relies on lots of people commuting from Adams Co to function. Google's 800 employees growing to 1,300 with added space is nothing to sneeze at. It's comparable to Austin until Google moves into it new 790,000 sq. ft. building for 5,000 employees.

Amazon's 700 employees in downtown Denver are certainly welcome. It hardly compares to the 40+ buildings it occupies in Seattle. Amazon has also picked NoVa and Nashville for substantial office growth.

Originally Posted by Arapahoe

Denver area has fantastic cultural, sports, and academic institutions. We need to work on keeping our streets clean and will support all measures on the ballot that do so.

Having 'local pride' is a good thing but are you saying other places lack these attributes?

Good guess that the Univ of Texas and ASU/Tempe graduate twice the number of tech-related and engineering degrees as Colorado and North Carolina is recognized for it's best-in-class universities.

Originally Posted by Arapahoe

We need to work on keeping our streets clean and will support all measures on the ballot that do so.

Keeping the streets clean etc are budgetary items and policy enforcement and NOT capital projects.

Originally Posted by Arapahoe

While the mountains are the big headline attraction when people think of Denver, its quality of life and relative affordability that really counts for companies & people deciding to relocate.

I can agree - to a point. Denver is no longer as business-friendly and there are good reasons why Austin as well as the RTP in North Carolina have been magnets for established tech companies.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by Denver

As far as NWSS Complex goes, I think some of you assertions need to be addressed:

Dayum; That may be the best post I've ever read on this site.

Originally Posted by Robert.hampton

This begs a previous question -- if there is such unbridled interest, why then should this be funded by a GO bond funded almost entirely by tax payers? Aren't there other ways to structure a bond so that it would be repaid by revenue generated by the arena that would ensure taxpayers are not on the hook? I understand that is how 1st bank was financed and was the only saving grace of building an events center in the middle of nowhere that opened in the economic crisis.

That's a fake argument like any good propaganda talking point.

Did you also vote against expanding the convention center (in 2005) and Coors Field. Did you know that the City of Denver had to finance the gargantuan (at the time) convention center hotel because no private sector parties were able to?

The CCC and Coors Field are bookends to downtown and two of the strongest economic drivers that downtown Denver has ever witnessed. The spinoff business from both is large. The tax revenue collected by the city as a result is enormous. Not saying a the NWC will be this impactful but Denver articulates an impressive vision and likely spot on vision.

Originally Posted by Robert.hampton

On a separate note -- a transformational outdoor venue seems a lot more timely right now compared to an indoor arena. I'd go to a show at millenium park 10x out of 10 over whatever they build at the stock show.

I'm not entirely apposed to your desires for Civic Center....

However, Civic Center already hosts events for thousands of people. That's not the biggest issue with the park as already pointed out. Civic Center is not nearly as large as Millennial Park.
Denver already has one of the most renowned concert venues in the country with Red Rocks. For smaller concerts outside you can't beat the Denver Botanic Gardens.

[Arapahoe]

Originally Posted by Denver

4) The NWSS Complex is a place for "a yearly cattle show." Ignoring the ignorance of you thinking the Stock Show is merely a cattle show and its cultural importance to the regiont.

LOL,was hoping someone would notice that. Ok, it has a rodeo and some other stuff, I give you that. But a stock show, by definition, is to exhibit livestock, aka cattle. This conception is widely held, therefore most of Denver's population shares this ignorance of the great wonders to be had at the National Western Complex.

When I look at the events calendar, I see ooooh, a Mineral & Gem Show, a Turf Grass Conference, Enduro Cross, and Hot Tub and Spa sale as headliners. WOW, you are right, this is SO MUCH MORE than a cattle show.

Ok, kidding aside, I am voting for this proposal for no other reason than its easy money that is virtually free at current interest rates, there is no alternative that I can pick from, and that Candi Dbacca, or whatever the hell her name is, is AGAINST it and I absolutely can not withhold a vote for something that might further legitimatize a communist on city council.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by Robert.hampton

Sounds like a gamble that could end up in a similar situation as the 1st bank boondoggle. If the opportunity is so strong it seems there would be more strategic ways to finance that would let taxpayers of the hook for the risk, rather than going via a GO bond?

This is not true. Only two arenas in America that have been built without public subsidy of some kind; and none without a major sport primary tenant. Need (or desire) for an arena for a community, and ability for an arena to pay for its own capital and operating costs are not correlated.

(I actually do this stuff for a living, so I am not really talking out of my ass on this one, like I do so often on other topics.)

Also, 1ST Bank and the NWC arena would serve a different mix of events, they're only competing with one another at the margins. (There have been multiple studies done on this.)

[bunt_q]

Unrelated - but on the Millennium Park discussion - wasn't that a railyard before the park was built? We're not talking about revitalizing a rundown space like Civic Center. In Chicago, they were creating new park space on previously unused land that is water adjacent. I love Millennium Park, but I struggle to see what we can learn from that experience for revitalizing Civic Center. (That's more akin to the creation of Commons Park here, which was unquestionably a success.)