DENVER | Main Development Thread #7

[TheGeographer]

TakeFive,

I live in SLC and can shed some light. Comparing SLC to San Francisco/other large cities as the article and study references did is comparing apples to oranges. Not really appropriate to do considering there are many different variables at play. For example, SLC still has a homeless problem that has gotten worse with rapidly increasing housing costs in the valley, there’s just not as many as San Francisco. We still have crime in the ballpark neighborhood, it just got overlooked in the study. A lot of the tech here is in Lehi “silicon slope”. I work in tech and our office is downtown. I’ve been in a handful of times since the pandemic. So the work from home trend for tech still holds true for some in SLC. Another thing different about SLC is the population density is pretty low compared to other downtowns. This is changing. There’s a decent amount of residential development downtown, but it’s not on the same level as Denver. Still, like Denver lots of people from the big coastal cities are moving to SLC because of its access to the outdoors. Much of SLC downtown still revolves around the LDS business buildings. They just completed a large office building. Pretty sure they never fully went home/remote at anytime during the pandemic compared to other cities.

I’m was born and raised in the Denver area. Moving to SLC has made me appreciate Denver downtown when I go back to visit family. SLC has the better access to the outdoors but doesn’t have the urban environment Denver does. If we had a River Mile equivalent project in the plans in SLC we’d be losing our minds on the SLC forum. Hell we get pretty excited about any building over 300 ft, let alone any rumors of our first skyscraper. Denver has so much going on in the RINO north and scattered throughout downtown. Seeing all those cranes in the recent pics on denverinfill and here made me envious but also excited for my next visit.

[TakeFive]

Thanks for the feedback

Originally Posted by TheGeographer

I live in SLC and can shed some light. Comparing SLC to San Francisco/other large cities as the article and study references did is comparing apples to oranges.

I'll respond now since I won't have time tomorrow.

Having taken a deeper dive I see what happened. For political purposes, the NY Post looked at both larger and medium sized cities. But the article is how I found the sourced analysis.

The research is quite impressive for how they determined a "Recovery Quotient" for each city for 162 cities. I had read previously, which I pointed out, that medium-sized cities were more likely to have recovered with everyone back to the office. So that's what the NY Post took advantage of. But I couldn't care less about the politics. In hindsight I should have skipped the NY Post piece.

There are legitimate concerns and questions for those cities that have struggled to recover. For example, why have cities like S.F., Minneapolis and Portland struggled so much more than other cities? Why have cities like San Diego, Las Vegas and Phoenix recovered so much better? (I picked out cities west of the Mississippi) I'll go with what I know.

If Denver were to build a humongous cluster of 'human services' (that could accommodate a large homeless encampment) along Washington Street in Globeville then you'd be just like Phoenix. The site in Phoenix might as well be in another world.

For certain, Phoenix has more homeless people than Denver but if most of them were hanging along I-225 in Aurora, nobody in downtown Denver would care. Phoenix has homeless peeps all over the place but for context Phoenix has more people that Denver, Aurora, Lakewood and Englewood combined. But they're not in downtown with few exceptions; nor are they in downtown Tempe or downtown Scottsdale, the three growing urban areas. Proof positive that downtowns aren't relegated to be homeless destinations by some decree.

[laniroj]

Originally Posted by RyanD

Didn't realize 800 N Broadway in the Golden Triangle was "South Broadway".

haha. I'm still struggling to accept large portions of ballpark as RiNo!

[Agent Orange]

Originally Posted by laniroj

haha. I'm still struggling to accept large portions of ballpark as RiNo!

In both cases it's good marketing, if geographically inaccurate. South Broadway and Rino don't have the same public perception challenges that downtown/LoDo/Cap Hill have acquired in recent years.

[wong21fr]

Does anyone have any information on what's going on with the Fitzgerald apartment building off of Market? There have been not any resident move-ins and a ton of construction work internally over the last few months.

Seems like some sort of construction defect that needed to be corrected before it can be occupied and curious as to what that might be.

[RyanD]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Does anyone have any information on what's going on with the Fitzgerald apartment building off of Market? There have been not any resident move-ins and a ton of construction work internally over the last few months.

Seems like some sort of construction defect that needed to be corrected before it can be occupied and curious as to what that might be.

Found this on e-permits: MOD Dwgs Slab demo and replacement on Lvl P2 of parking garage for update the waterproofing and trench drain.


Their website shows that units are available 9/15. Living in a brand new apartment building that was phased construction, I'll tell you... The amount of defects and oversights in construction are astounding.

[DenvertoLA]

Originally Posted by RyanD

Found this on e-permits: MOD Dwgs Slab demo and replacement on Lvl P2 of parking garage for update the waterproofing and trench drain.


Their website shows that units are available 9/15. Living in a brand new apartment building that was phased construction, I'll tell you... The amount of defects and oversights in construction are astounding.

Oh no, are you a 'Grand' refugee?

[Sam Hill]

I happened upon a local tv news story recently (that was probably somewhat sensationalized so I took it with a grain of salt) about people living in new-builds that had water pouring into their apartments during all that rain the past couple weeks and I wondered how a new-build could have so many problems. (And no, the story wasn’t about The Grand.)

[RyanD]

Originally Posted by DenvertoLA

Oh no, are you a 'Grand' refugee?

Luckily no. Our building is still habitable with not too much flooding going on. Just things like defective HVAC units, broken windows, bad drywalling, hilarious toilet installations, bad electric work, some structural inconsistencies, you know... the usual.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by RyanD

Luckily no. Our building is still habitable with not too much flooding going on. Just things like defective HVAC units, broken windows, bad drywalling, hilarious toilet installations, bad electric work, some structural inconsistencies, you know... the usual.

I love how we take these things for granted in every private construction projects. And they get handled.

But the same thing on a public project is an opportunity for a contractor to enrich itself (guaranteed 20% no matter how bad you are at your trade) and general acceptable that the government is the one doing it wrong. But when government tris to tighten the belt to protect the taxpayer dollar - and, you know, do things every private developer would do - contractors run to the legislature crying for protection against "alternative delivery" (meaning, delivery that doesn't guarantee them a profit). The double standard is real.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

I love how we take these things for granted in every private construction projects. And they get handled.

But the same thing on a public project is an opportunity for a contractor to enrich itself (guaranteed 20% no matter how bad you are at your trade) and general acceptable that the government is the one doing it wrong. But when government tris to tighten the belt to protect the taxpayer dollar - and, you know, do things every private developer would do - contractors run to the legislature crying for protection against "alternative delivery" (meaning, delivery that doesn't guarantee them a profit). The double standard is real.

Hey sounds just like the $50B we just blew on the SLS and Orion.

[Sam Hill]

If you search redfin or zillow for homes in Denver, and sort by price, the very cheapest piece of real estate you will find in the entire city is a 330 square-foot condo in a new-build on 6th and Inca. $150K. They’re income restricted. I don’t qualify for one but a close friend of mine does and he recently bought one. I worry a bit for him. Something doesn’t smell right. And these recent stories of new-builds falling apart don’t help. I hope everything works out okay for him.

One thing I wonder is how exactly does this income-restricted new-build condo concept work in terms of equity. A new-build studio in this city typically goes for well over $300K at a minimum. Does that mean my buddy instantaneously doubles his money the moment he signs the paperwork? My assumption is no 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 way. Obviously. My guess is, whatever monetary value the place gains is completely disconnected from reality. But I haven’t looked into it. It’s one complicated little slice of the market I’ve never taken the time to understand.

Anyway, I worry about the guy. He’s so excited about this place but something about the idea of a $150K new-build condo just doesn’t smell right.

I don’t trust new-builds right now.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by Sam Hill

If you search redfin or zillow for homes in Denver, and sort by price, the very cheapest piece of real estate you will find in the entire city is a 330 square-foot condo in a new-build on 6th and Inca. $150K. They’re income restricted. I don’t qualify for one but a close friend of mine does and he recently bought one. I worry a bit for him. Something doesn’t smell right. And these recent stories of new-builds falling apart don’t help. I hope everything works out okay for him.

One thing I wonder is how exactly does this income-restricted new-build condo concept work in terms of equity. A new-build studio in this city typically goes for well over $300K at a minimum. Does that mean my buddy instantaneously doubles his money the moment he signs the paperwork? My assumption is no 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 way. Obviously. My guess is, whatever monetary value the place gains is completely disconnected from reality. But I haven’t looked into it. It’s one complicated little slice of the market I’ve never taken the time to understand.

Anyway, I worry about the guy. He’s so excited about this place but something about the idea of a $150K new-build condo just doesn’t smell right.

I don’t trust new-builds right now.

I imagine he gets stuck the same way renters of rent controlled apartments in NYC get stuck. He won’t have crazy equity to walk away with and upgrade into something better. But as long as he stays he has a roof over his head, which I guess is the point.

[laniroj]

Originally Posted by RyanD

Found this on e-permits: MOD Dwgs Slab demo and replacement on Lvl P2 of parking garage for update the waterproofing and trench drain.


Their website shows that units are available 9/15. Living in a brand new apartment building that was phased construction, I'll tell you... The amount of defects and oversights in construction are astounding.

One of the (not so) hidden costs of multifamily property ownership...you end up spending significant amounts of money every year fixing and refixing defects, though not enough to warrant an insurance claim - just becomes part of OpEx which gets passed down to residents and essentially makes housing more expensive. The labor shortage is a contributing factor to housing affordability in a round about kind of way. At this point, I suspect most developers have a line item in their budget for defects - outside and beyond their typical hard cost contingencies.

[laniroj]

Originally Posted by Sam Hill

...One thing I wonder is how exactly does this income-restricted new-build condo concept work in terms of equity. A new-build studio in this city typically goes for well over $300K at a minimum. Does that mean my buddy instantaneously doubles his money the moment he signs the paperwork? My assumption is no 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 way. Obviously. My guess is, whatever monetary value the place gains is completely disconnected from reality. But I haven’t looked into it. It’s one complicated little slice of the market I’ve never taken the time to understand.

Anyway, I worry about the guy. He’s so excited about this place but something about the idea of a $150K new-build condo just doesn’t smell right.

I don’t trust new-builds right now.

This is an excellent question and one the City has spent a lot of time thinking about in the wake of the affordable ownership debacle that occurred from their prior inclusionary housing efforts...mainly out in Green Valley Ranch. That's exactly what the folks in version 1.0 did, doubled their equity or much more. I believe the new program is that their home values increase from the initial purchase price at CPI (or some equivalent) each year so that the folks build equity and the units remain affordable, but folks don't get to take advantage of the system as they did before where they get hundreds of thousands of free equity.

If you're wondering how these units get built well that's easy - the city, state, and other philanthropic causes write huge checks to cover the gap between the cost to build the housing and the proceeds they can generate from a sale to an income qualified individual. The mountain communities are pros at it, the City of Denver is trying to do more but it will only ever be at the tiny margins of production and it comes at a yuuuuge per home price tag.

Background from the Denver Post: https://www.denverpost.com/2018/09/05/denver-affordable-housing-mess/

[laniroj]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

I imagine he gets stuck the same way renters of rent controlled apartments in NYC get stuck. He won’t have crazy equity to walk away with and upgrade into something better. But as long as he stays he has a roof over his head, which I guess is the point.

^Yep, exactly. This is what we call a static housing market. It's the single most dangerous thing for housing in america and nearly every large city is quickly approaching it. In many ways, Denver is already there, but not full on static like the majority of the east coast cities and california.

[bulldurhamer]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

I'd also suggest that the system works better in the vast majority of the city that was laid out post 1940's (hint: the alley's are wide enough for bins to go on both sides and we don't write passive-aggressive notes to each other on that issue). Moving from dumpsters to individual bins in the pre-1940's area was a mistake in that regard. I think that some sort of centralized collection system is necessary again. Though screw the dumpsters- go Amsterdam style with their recessed bins.

As for the fee structure- there's definitely an incentive for abuse in the proposed system. I'm all for adding a few dozen code enforcement agents and dropping the hammer on non-compliance. Back it up with asset seizure and kick the scofflaws out of the city. If you can't manage your trash bin, there's no way you're responsible enough to manage a home.

There will be inspections, supposedly.

Im still trying to figure how out I'm supposed to keep someone else from using my bins. We can’t keep people from attempting to steal from our cars and yards on virtually a nightly basis, but policing our trash is a priority? How about we do something useful and address this petty crime instead of the typical attacks on the property tax paying homeowners.

The good news is the poor people won’t have to pay so there may finally be some good coming from having revolving gang bangers living right here. We’ll all just put our extras in their large bins. Yimby!

[bulldurhamer]

Originally Posted by laniroj

^Yep, exactly. This is what we call a static housing market. It's the single most dangerous thing for housing in america and nearly every large city is quickly approaching it. In many ways, Denver is already there, but not full on static like the majority of the east coast cities and california.

Of course all of this affordable housing is ridiculous. But then again I suppose with affordable housing we can just give up on that segment ever really doing anything. Keeping the poors in line so they can keep their beds. Not the worst plan ever devised i guess

[bulldurhamer]

Originally Posted by mhays

It's several benefits at once: Reducing the total volume of solid waste, reducing that goes to landfills, providing useful compost, and (perhaps last) providing recyclable material.

IIRC Seattle produces relatively little landfill waste vs. its population and workforce. This is a big part of it.

The point for this thread is people do follow garbage-sorting and graduated-fee programs when they're asked and there's enforcement.

The bin size charges are one of those little nudges that really do work. Every penny increase on cigarette taxes will reportedly spur a relatively predictable decrease in sales, which we know because 50 states and many countries have detailed evidence. Every 10 cents can reduce soda consumption. Every 5 cent bag fee will reduce bag overuse (turns out you can use em several times!).

How many households are really going to start using less trash now? Of course offering composting will help, but you could have been doing that aleady. They made this problem a problem by not bringing the recycling trucks by enough and now get to claim that the landfill will be spared because recycling is coming more often.

This is a self inflicted problem that’s really about the tax, with the landfill questions as the fluff. On the mailer the city even DETERS you from downsizing your trash. I mean come on. They say right there that they dont want you downsizing.

So again, all this really is is just another targeted revenue stream that will only impact homeowners.

[bulldurhamer]

https://denverite.com/2022/08/19/denver-speed-bumps-bikeway/

We’re getting speed bumps to save the bikers! ������
Bike lanes recently installed on 23rd and 26th. But now they need speed bumps on 25th? If anyone needs protection, it’s the pedestrians from the bicyclists. That’s no joke.

So how many bicyclists versus pedestrians have been hit in recent years? Yet how much money have been poured into bike infrastructure while the pedestrian crossings and walks have been consistently neglected? Man the political power these cyclists have here is nuts.