DENVER | Main Development Thread #7

[TakeFive]

Insanity Is Doing the Same Thing Over and Over Again and Expecting Different Results
(Author unknown)


Source

What about doing what America does best; seek out the ingenuity of Free Markets. Yes, I understand that sometimes government has to be tasked with meeting the collective needs of the community - but shouldn't that include both common sense and the collective wisdom of the community?

"Brother, can you spare a dime?"

A lot of things have changed since Grandpa's days.

Whether you go to McD's, to Starbucks, to Einstein Bros. Bagels or Sam's No. 3, count on pulling out at least $10.

Originally Posted by mr1138

My best personal example is that about two years ago I decided to catch a bus on 15th street around 4pm to meet my husband for dinner at 32nd and Lowell where we could then drive home to Arvada together afterward. The route I had to take - I believe it was the 32 - felt PAINFULLY slow. Between the wait and the slow route, I think it took almost 40 minutes to get to West Highland. I can't help but think that it shouldn't take that long to get to an "up and coming" urban neighborhood that is only 2 miles from Downtown. Again - I could have gotten home to Olde Town Arvada faster than that, and it is almost twice as far away. There are no doubt countless other examples of this just within 2-4 miles of downtown.

Would you pay $10 to have gone from point to point?

There's lots of reasons why people prefer Uber/Lyft. Why not a city sponsored van-shuttle service that cost $10 per ride? But it needs to be on-demand service.

Exceptions noted but generally fixed routes only work for certain corridors and during peak periods. There's lots of people who would much prefer the convenience and security of point to point service, especially during off-peak hours, especially after dark - even for 'poor' people.

[Ndj]

Originally Posted by Sam Hill

In the meantime, our freeways need to be expanded so our lack of mobility doesn’t continue to hurt our economy.

Alternative forms of transit will never overtake SOVs if we continue to pour massive amounts of resources into making driving in SOVs the most convenient form of transportation. It's as simple as that.

There is no "in the meantime" with this. You reap what you sow when it comes to how cities are built. Expanding highway capacity will result in more development that relies on driving. This comes at the expensive of viability for other methods of transportation.

Originally Posted by TakeFive

There's lots of people who would much prefer the convenience and security of point to point service, especially during off-peak hours, especially after dark - even for 'poor' people.

This is a false dichotomy. The idea that we should de-prioritize unsustainable and detrimental methods of transportation (cars) is not exclusive of people's ability to continue to have point-to-point transit. No one is talking about outlawing cars and demolishing roads here. The point is that we should not be expanding highway capacity if we truly want alternative forms of transit to succeed. At the risk of repeating myself: expanding highway capacity will result in more development that is incompatible with alternative forms of transportation.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

There's lots of reasons why people prefer Uber/Lyft. Why not a city sponsored van-shuttle service that cost $10 per ride? But it needs to be on-demand service.[

Exceptions noted but generally fixed routes only work for certain corridors and during peak periods. There's lots of people who would much prefer the convenience and security of point to point service, especially during off-peak hours, especially after dark - even for 'poor' people.

I know you have put this idea out before (I think you spent about a week and twenty posts to do so) and I do find merit in it as a means of providing service in the suburbs for point to point and RTD should contract out for such a thing in a good chunk of it's service are geography wise. I do say that RTD should lop off the bottom third of it's routes by performance and replace it with such. As long as you provide this plus commuter routes RTD can then put effort (as originally promised by FasTracks) into providing additional fixed-route service where it works which is not just Denver, but also large portions of the first-ring suburbs.




(In addition: RTD should be looking at contracting out it's entire operator and maintenance workforce but maintain the capital assets. To expand frequency, and service the FasTrack's debt, O&M needs to be reduced per operational hour. There's also their retirement funding issue that's another source of efficiencies)

[TakeFive]

Why are you being so obtuse?

Originally Posted by wong21fr

The H Line goes into the Auraria Campus and downtown (your mention of the Tech Center is laughable, you might want to check Google Maps), so I fail to see how your subtle assertion that it's an example of a suburb-to-suburb connection that works is valid. If the R Line was an extension of the H Line it would probably be different in ridership terms, but than it's not a suburb-to-suburb connection, is it?

I never once said that Aurora shouldn't get a choo-choo, but that how the choo-choo was laid out due to political interference (going through the Aurora "City Center", not going through the middle of Anschutz) is what is wrong with RTD. They screwed up a line that was already going to be a middling performer not due to value engineering (which RTD tends to be good at), but because they feel too much pressure to cow to special interests whether that be the City of Aurora or disability advocates that force parents to pull their kids out of strollers and fold them up before boarding RTD vehicles.

But please, keep on pontificating from Phoenix using your extensive knowledge of Google and Google Maps.

I specifically mentioned the I-225 portion of light rail; that was a 'copy' of some very good analysis that was done by Cirrus some time ago.

Since I highlighted "especially downtown" I'm totally familiar with the ridership statistics going into downtown via the H Line. In fact, I've ridden the H Line from downtown to Florida.

Even before the R Line, Aurora residents had good access to the tech center via the H Line Southmoor Station. Were you unaware of this option?

I specifically conceded the design flaw; it was even in highlighted print. But that's not totally on Aurora; it's never wrong to ask for the moon but the agency responsible for making decisions has to make those final decisions. I specifically stated above that light rail should have run along I-225 (up to the Colfax and Peoria Stations).

You want to have a contest about knowledge of SE Denver and Aurora? Bring it on.



Source

Originally Posted by The Dirt

I miss Eeyore. At least his nonsense was entertaining and funny.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Even before the R Line, Aurora residents had good access to the tech center via the H Line Southmoor Station. Were you unaware of this option?

Wait so we're talking about commutes involving transfers versus one-seat rides? Well crap, everything in the Denver Metro Area and beyond is reachable via the R Line in that case.

You want to have a contest about knowledge of SE Denver and Aurora? Bring it on.

If I want to have a lesson about what it looked like 25 years ago, I'll be sure to reach out to you. But that's about as helpful as asking a Gulf War vet to call for fire using modern comm systems. Your subject matter knowledge is just a bit antiquated.

[TakeFive]

Source

I think I was speaking to mr1138
But I guess he does live in an inner-ring suburb

Originally Posted by wong21fr

I know you have put this idea out before (I think you spent about a week and twenty posts to do so) and I do find merit in it as a means of providing service in the suburbs for point to point and RTD should contract out for such a thing in a good chunk of it's service are geography wise. I do say that RTD should lop off the bottom third of it's routes by performance and replace it with such. As long as you provide this plus commuter routes RTD can then put effort (as originally promised by FasTracks) into providing additional fixed-route service where it works which is not just Denver, but also large portions of the first-ring suburbs.

There are lots and lots of peeps out there (like Sam Hill) that have no interest in riding Big Bertha buses. But give them the option of taking a shuttle-van, many, many would opt in. During Rush you'd want a subscription service for say $15 a ride as it would be impractical to service everyone. But if you don't give consumers what they want then consumers will make their own decisions and find their own way.

Outside of peak hours it is horribly inefficient and costly to run Big Bertha buses with 3 or 4 riders up and down most routes. During off-peak hours there would be more than sufficient demand for on-demand shuttle service in the urban area as much as anywhere else.

It is feasible that many urban shuttle routes could be fixed, say down Brighton Blvd and up Market street; maybe along Downing St etc but I'd guess even during off peak hours shuttle-vans would be the better option.

Easy to Agree; not likely to happen.

Originally Posted by wong21fr

(In addition: RTD should be looking at contracting out it's entire operator and maintenance workforce but maintain the capital assets. To expand frequency, and service the FasTrack's debt, O&M needs to be reduced per operational hour. There's also their retirement funding issue that's another source of efficiencies)

I'm happy to give you the last word.

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Wait so we're talking about commutes involving transfers versus one-seat rides? Well crap, everything in the Denver Metro Area and beyond is reachable via the R Line in that case.

[B]
If I want to have a lesson about what it looked like 25 years ago, I'll be sure to reach out to you. But that's about as helpful as asking a Gulf War vet to call for fire using modern comm systems. Your subject matter knowledge is just a bit antiquated.

[TakeFive]

Some hyperbole but generally well said

Originally Posted by Ndj

Alternative forms of transit will never overtake SOVs if we continue to pour massive amounts of resources into making driving in SOVs the most convenient form of transportation. It's as simple as that.

Who's talking about "massive" amounts of resources and it's important to be specific as to where you're talking about. Within Denver other than the critical Central 70 project there won't be much freeway expansion going forward.

The planned rebuild/expansion of '270' nobody should care about unless you're just against all expansion ideologically. Also the planned expansion along E 56th street out east is just needed; sufficient transit service does not exist and/or would be cost-inefficient. North Washington Street is more of a multi-modal rebuild. What specific expansion bothers You?

Originally Posted by Ndj

There is no "in the meantime" with this. You reap what you sow when it comes to how cities are built. Expanding highway capacity will result in more development that relies on driving. This comes at the expensive of viability for other methods of transportation.

That's a reliable talking point that I've read thousands of times but is misleading, rarely accurate.

Freeway expansion almost always follows development that has already happened (or in some cases is already planned, is inevitable).

BTW, much of today's suburban development is mixed-use and mixed density and often is planned along transit routes where available - like Lone Tree.

Reality Check

Originally Posted by Ndj

This is a false dichotomy. The idea that we should de-prioritize unsustainable and detrimental methods of transportation (cars) is not exclusive of people's ability to continue to have point-to-point transit. No one is talking about outlawing cars and demolishing roads here. The point is that we should not be expanding highway capacity if we truly want alternative forms of transit to succeed. At the risk of repeating myself: expanding highway capacity will result in more development that is incompatible with alternative forms of transportation.

Another believe it or not but I'm a huge fanboy of transit; I'm especially infatuated with trains.

But reality is that solving the 'first and last mile' ain't going to be easy but I wouldn't say it's impossible. Generally, trying to service the suburbs with transit is uneconomical.

Maybe, get up, close and personal with RTD's budget; come up with a priority list and we can go from there.

We can't just stop providing road access to a growing population. Chances are that people who live outside of the city or outside of inner-ring suburbs don't care about or want transit so there's jurisdictional/political problems.

[gopokes21]

Why are you all insulting each other over a badly executed light rail network? It's all the same if it's at-grade and stuck in traffic... with our only options consisting of value-engineered street-running LRT or BRT, what even gives?

As for further expansion of freeways, how about HELL NO until Polis makes funds available for subway in Denver. Then we can talk about more shiny new shit for the burbs. I'm tired of Denver getting screwed over and over and over by the State and Region. It seems like we only get something nice if the burbs want it, or need it to be centrally located in Denver, otherwise we get no State support and the City squanders the entire city budget on political hobnobbing. We spend billions each year with very little to show for it besides money funneled to special interests. The reality about infrastructure discussions here is that choo choo, freeway, or subway would all happen if only it was good for special interests connected to Hick Polis and Hancock.

The region's core city is neglected at the end of the day. It could grow into a world-class city, but won't for lack of long-term vision and strategic investment. We're just content to be a divided, angry city of WFH techies and their underpaid uber drivers. What kind of community is that?

[Arapahoe]

look at Colorado Springs putting on its big boy pants..



As reported by The Gazette: A 25-story residential tower that would be the tallest building in Colorado Springs history would be constructed downtown along with an 11-story office structure as part of a proposed $270.1 million mixed-use project that would dramatically change the city's skyline.

https://gazette.com/premium/25-story-tow...e1d66d2-35ab-11ec-9ccb-0bab26c8e247.html

[SirLucasTheGreat]

Interesting about the Springs. Surprised that they haven't had many improvements to their skyline with their recent growth

[Sam Hill]

Originally Posted by Ndj

Alternative forms of transit will never overtake SOVs if we continue to pour massive amounts of resources into making driving in SOVs the most convenient form of transportation. It's as simple as that.

There is no "in the meantime" with this. You reap what you sow when it comes to how cities are built. Expanding highway capacity will result in more development that relies on driving. This comes at the expensive of viability for other methods of transportation.

For most of this metropolis, alternative forms of transportation will never overtake cars, period. It’s literally impossible to replace our sprawling suburbs with the dense neighborhoods that would be required to make public transportation even remotely more practical or appealing than SOVs. Limiting the capacity of our freeways in the hopes it will eventually force people living in sprawl to use public transportation is not smart.

The sprawl already exists. And it’s politically impossible to change it from sprawl into anything other than sprawl. In terms of ecology, I’m afraid electric cars are our best hope.

When it comes to alternative forms of transportation overtaking SOVs, let’s focus on urban areas where it’s actually viable. Our recourses are limited and they’re not being used wisely when they’re wasted on a sprawl-serving system of park-n-rides and freeway-hugging light rail lines, while the urban areas in which transit is actually viable are left with inadequate, inconvenient public transportation, and our suburbs are left with inadequate, clogged freeways.

[Curtis Park]

Yes, please!

Denverite:Here’s why one developer says he quit building multifamily market rate apartments in favor of million-dollar houses

"His fixes: make it easier to build more multi-family housing, increase density, do away with single-family zoning statewide and strip back the regulations that add costs for developers."

[COtoOC]

Originally Posted by Arapahoe

look at Colorado Springs putting on its big boy pants..



As reported by The Gazette: A 25-story residential tower that would be the tallest building in Colorado Springs history would be constructed downtown along with an 11-story office structure as part of a proposed $270.1 million mixed-use project that would dramatically change the city's skyline.

https://gazette.com/premium/25-story-tow...e1d66d2-35ab-11ec-9ccb-0bab26c8e247.html

Wow! That skyline hasn't changed in my lifetime! Well, maybe a building in the '80s. Downtown CS always seemed like a missed opportunity to me. Great to see something finally planned.

[RyanD]

Sorry if I'm late to the convo about the R-Line. Bunt_q and I rode it when it opened and it was the most frustrating train I've, honestly, ever been on. Sitting and waiting for light cycles with zero train priority is really the downfall of this line. I did a write up quite a while ago if you're interested:


https://denverurbanism.com/2017/03/come-take-a-ride-on-rtds-brand-new-r-line.html

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by Arapahoe

As reported by The Gazette: A 25-story residential tower that would be the tallest building in Colorado Springs history would be constructed downtown along with an 11-story office structure as part of a proposed $270.1 million mixed-use project that would dramatically change the city's skyline.

Nice find. Hopefully COS' skyline starts to flesh out a bit more as indicative of the city's size. Considering the dearth of construction there in the last few decades, which thankfully is no longer the case, the city has a lot of potential to capitalize on the urban center.


In other news, there's now two multi-story apartment complexes u/c in Central Park along Central Park Blvd: The previously mentioned Trammel Crowe 300-unit near the station and now ReyLenn's ~300-unit project has broken ground. There's still another 3000-4000 units in the planning/development stage scattered through the neighborhood as well so everyone's favorite yuppies with kids paradise keeps on growing.

[TakeFive]

Largely unmolested, hardly gentrified and mostly unbothered; Let's keep it that way

Happy to help you out

Originally Posted by wong21fr

If I want to have a lesson about what it looked like 25 years ago, I'll be sure to reach out to you.

From what I can gather not much has changed in 25 years (when I discovered this gem) for what I'd describe as the "Richest in Culture" neighborhood and stretch of road in all of Denver. Let's hope that over the next 25 years we can still say: "not much has changed."

If you have extra time it may be worth the effort to take a drive, stop along the way and taste the local cuisine or maybe find some Knick knacks for decorating your place of gentrification.

Let me also pay props to Denverite along the way.

Originally Posted by RyanD

Oof... Moving to a West Alameda address soon. Thank goodness I'm not quite in Limon.

West Alameda is one of the more interesting streets in Denver.

Starting at So Broadway which is mere blocks from Wash Park it has nice access to light rail, all the way out past Casa Bonita and Belmar.

Moving to the other side of the Platte, Federal Blvd and West Alameda is ground zero for some great ethnic, especially Asian choices for food. Back in January 2017 Ashley Dean/Denverite did a nice writeup of restaurants in the area entitled "The best Denver restaurants on Federal Boulevard, according to locals."

Heading west there's any number of interesting things along Alameda and it's also where one can turn left onto Morrison Road.

Some of the best writing ever on Denverite was the recent series of pieces about Morrison Road: "Street Week: Morrison Road."

In the face of massive change in Denver, Morrison Road might have a secret weapon: Its art and feel
Sep. 29, 2021 By Maggie Donahue/Denverite

“If you see art in the public that is representative of your history, or representative of your children or your community, then you feel a stronger tie to the area. And potentially, that is enough strength there that helps you fight to stay.”

JWLC Mendoza's mural on the side of Morrison Road's Re:Vision co-op building. Sept. 22, 2021. Kevin J. Beaty/Denverite

There are those places where you can say "not much has changed" over 25 years and it's a very good thing.

[TakeFive]

"Building affordable housing is too risky, too slow and too mired in bureaucracy, he said."

Not difficult to agree with that.

Originally Posted by Curtis Park

Yes, please!

Denverite:Here’s why one developer says he quit building multifamily market rate apartments in favor of million-dollar houses

"His fixes: make it easier to build more multi-family housing, increase density, do away with single-family zoning statewide and strip back the regulations that add costs for developers."

Except for the no single-family zoning I'm happy to agree. Most of the problems are the result of NIMBY and/or liberal crap. Interestingly, Jon Roberts actually points out the benefits of single-family zoning and review.

What frustrates him?

“With the passage of the voter-led Green Buildings Ordinance in 2017, new multifamily and new commercial buildings must also reduce their environmental impact by installing a cool roof and taking additional steps to benefit our neighborhoods, including offering green space or a green roof, significantly reducing energy usage or using renewable energy, or achieving a national green building certification,” she adds.

It's not that I'm averse to the goals here; but why not employ incentives like a tax rebate for including such benefits. Why penalize the builder? If it's for the common good then let all taxpayers 'chip in' by providing incentives rather than time consuming penalties to the builder.

On the surface it all sounds reasonable.

“New multifamily buildings are reviewed to ensure they meet building and energy codes as well as for traffic impact mitigation, parking, storm water drainage, sanitary sewer capacity, emergency services access, sidewalks, tree protection, and view planes, among other site-specific factors.

It appears that much of the problem was timing. There were times when the city’s permitting process was totally backed upped. Apparently things are much better now.

These days, permitting for residential homes and commercial projects should take around four weeks, though new homes are currently taking six weeks, according to the Community Planning and Development website... In September, 82 percent of commercial reviews were being completed on time,

Ofc politics gets messy, strange bedfellows and all that. As The Dirt knows well many NYMBY's are liberals.

While doing away with "single-family zoning" is a builder preferred change popular with many liberals none of his delays had anything to do with that. Land costs are generally the biggest impediment to building more affordable homes.

[kemachs]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Some of the best writing ever on Denverite was the recent series of pieces about Morrison Road: "Street Week: Morrison Road."

In the face of massive change in Denver, Morrison Road might have a secret weapon: Its art and feel
Sep. 29, 2021 By Maggie Donahue/Denverite



JWLC Mendoza's mural on the side of Morrison Road's Re:Vision co-op building. Sept. 22, 2021. Kevin J. Beaty/Denverite

There are those places where you can say "not much has changed" over 25 years and it's a very good thing.

I love Westwood - it's like a little slice of New Mexico here in Denver - but I can't help but wonder if the massive white-washing that's taken place in Sunnyside (and the rest of the Northside) is heading straight for that neighborhood as well. I'm a fan of Denverite and their reporting, but usually articles like this signal the transformative wave of gentrification, as investors start to gravitate - i.e. remember when River North actually had a nice mix of establishments, and wasn't just an extension of the Bro Corridor? Tennyson too - south of 44th, it has filled in/developed the way a lot of us urbanists would like to see, but you can't deny the old feel/authenticity of Berkeley has been disappearing in the process.

It looks like the community is taking steps to preserve the cultural identity of Morrison Rd. and I hope they are successful - I'm just cynical after seeing so many places try and fail to do that. Neighborhoods with a unique/vibrant culture attract artists/galleries first, then people with $$$ follow, and then housing values...well, you know the pattern. Don't really know if there's a way to prevent the full cycle from happening, especially in 'it' cities like Denver or Austin, but I'm very interested in urban planning theories on how to do so. That feels like the next frontier of place-making / retaining sense of place, now that promoting the three prongs of density/walkability/mixed-use alone has proven to be lacking (in a cultural sense).

[SirLucasTheGreat]

Is the Flora under construction at 3500 Chestnut? I can't get too good of a view from the car but it looks like the foundation might already be excavated.

[RyanD]

Originally Posted by SirLucasTheGreat

Is the Flora under construction at 3500 Chestnut? I can't get too good of a view from the car but it looks like the foundation might already be excavated.

Sure is!






https://denverinfill.com/2021/11/flora-breaks-ground.html