DENVER | Main Development Thread #6

[Longshanks]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Haha... it quickly jumped out at me as something that might cause a bit of controversy. I wonder if Pat didn't intentionally start out reaching for the stars as a negotiating strategy. Time will tell; perhaps much time.

I live a block from there. The controversy already happened last decade and this plan was the compromise approved by the historic preservation people after a neighborhood process. They had a clock in which to go ahead with this plan, which is working on running out. I think the underground parking might actually be a huge improvement for the neighborhood, and the density should fire up our very limited mixed-use/retail/watering hole economy over there. Not really looking forward to the construction mayhem but I'm hopeful it will improve values for everyone nearby. I'm thinking it will happen.

[Wizened Variations]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

You'd have to be blind in one eye and can't see out of the other not to notice the invasion. Fortunately, it's hardly like the scourge of locusts or grasshoppers.

It seems like each new generation has a way of making their own mark. At least until they are corrupted er assimilated into "normal" society they usually march to the beat of a different drum.

Many were just coming of age in 2008. They may not have been mature enough to fully grasp the Great Recession but chances are that many have personally experienced a foreclosure or family job upheaval. If not, then maybe a close personal friend or at the least they knew of others. Many found finding a good job or even a job hard to come by. It's no wonder Milennials have no visions of "white picket fences" and much preferred renting when they couldn't predict what job or where they might be living a year into the future.

Millennials are the Smart Phone - Twitter generation. They socialize more in groups (than dating) and prefer accessibility and convenience to entertainment and jobs. Nothing better than the "perfect storm" that is the Y generation to fulfill the hopes and dreams of urban planners.

The DBJ connects the dots between renting downtown and millennials HERE.

When I read a couple of months ago that Millennials were lovin' downtown rentals in Birmingham and Orlando then I knew this was a virus that had spread everywhere.

Credits to BG918 for inspiring this comment.

Very nice write up. Too often, we tend to march in step with our age peers, and, dismiss the innocence of those younger than we are (one has to be innocent to be the "hero.")

Historically, that innocence provides the energy to gets things done.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

I hope the latter. I'm a renter, and I'm pretty insulted by insinuation that I'm less of a good citizen for it.

You're a less wealthy citizen for it. And beholden the the whims of a landlord you have no influence over - that stresses some people out, particularly in a "seller's" market. It's one thing if it's a choice. It's another thing if you live in a state that has effectively banned for-sale multi-family housing.

And yes, wong, blame the lawyers. That would be perfectly appropriate. I'd also blame wealthy democrats. Bunch of greedy sharks the lot of them.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by Longshanks

I live a block from there. The controversy already happened last decade and this plan was the compromise approved by the historic preservation people after a neighborhood process. They had a clock in which to go ahead with this plan, which is working on running out. I think the underground parking might actually be a huge improvement for the neighborhood, and the density should fire up our very limited mixed-use/retail/watering hole economy over there. Not really looking forward to the construction mayhem but I'm hopeful it will improve values for everyone nearby. I'm thinking it will happen.

I also live near here and am not looking forward to the construction mayhem, but the project would bring some additional density to a neighborhood that needs it. Plus that's 600 or so new residents that can then buy the overpriced homes in the neighborhood and shift the demand curve out further.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

And yes, wong, blame the lawyers. That would be perfectly appropriate. I'd also blame wealthy democrats. Bunch of greedy sharks the lot of them.

What, you mean wealthy homeowners seek incentives to increase the value of their homes by raising entry barriers through the political process? Perish the thought!

[Wizened Variations]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

You're a less wealthy citizen for it. And beholden the the whims of a landlord you have no influence over - that stresses some people out, particularly in a "seller's" market. It's one thing if it's a choice. It's another thing if you live in a state that has effectively banned for-sale multi-family housing.

And yes, wong, blame the lawyers. That would be perfectly appropriate. I'd also blame wealthy democrats. Bunch of greedy sharks the lot of them.

There is no such thing as a free lunch. Anyone who pays taxes on their property, in effect, is renting their property from the state. A renter, depending on the city, country and, state, can be out on the street within 60 days of no payment of rent.

Property owners are insulated from increases in value by the their mortgage, but, vulnerable to tax increases based upon assessment, and, rate. Renters can only lock in rent (unless there is rent control) rates for the length of their lease.

I think that the biggest advantage renters have concerns the amount of money that can be LOST due to market corrections. Renters are far less at risk from real estate bubbles (and all of us in Denver from the early 80s have seen TWO). I personally believe that we will see more.

As to the political parties: any significant difference between the two concerning the most important issue- monetary policy- has been obliterated by the huge amounts of money congress people and senators at the national level must raise to get elected and remain in power.

[Longshanks]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

I also live near here and am not looking forward to the construction mayhem, but the project would bring some additional density to a neighborhood that needs it. Plus that's 600 or so new residents that can then buy the overpriced homes in the neighborhood and shift the demand curve out further.

Howdy, neighbor. Hear, hear on the home prices. We bought a rare condo unit 22 months ago and identical units in our building are now selling for about 40% above what we paid. The single-family homes look to have outpaced even that increase in the same span.

[Wizened Variations]

Originally Posted by Longshanks

Howdy, neighbor. Hear, hear on the home prices. We bought a rare condo unit 22 months ago and identical units in our building are now selling for about 40% above what we paid. The single-family homes look to have outpaced even that increase in the same span.

When everybody starts getting a free lunch, then, get the heck off the wagon as fast as you can! Remember, the last time the market adjusted the banks got away with murder, while the millions of home buyers went upside down.

It is far easier to regret a lost opportunity when one still has money in the bank.

[Scottk]

Originally Posted by Wizened Variations

When everybody starts getting a free lunch, then, get the heck off the wagon as fast as you can! Remember, the last time the market adjusted the banks got away with murder, while the millions of home buyers went upside down.

It is far easier to regret a lost opportunity when one still has money in the bank.

The housing market in Denver is not going to collapse anytime soon. The lack of for sale housing and ever increasing demand for housing in the central areas all but guarantees his condo will remain valuable for a long time.

Do you really believe that a another market adjustment is imminent?

[bcp]

Absolutely...it just won't be as bad as last time.

[Brainpathology]

Originally Posted by Scottk

Do you really believe that a another market adjustment is imminent?

I would certainly expect one if there is reform of the law preventing condo buildings. If not an outright drop after the market is nearly flooded at least very very flat appreciation for a long time.

Anyone who buys a condo right now in Denver pretty much should automatically start writing their Democrat friends and beg them not to hurt poor poor homeowners by not letting them sue as easily as possible. (and also guarantee your condo is rare, expensive, and if it's new, in line for free repairs or even damages). I'm too tired to think of ways this happened in Boulder over the years but I'd bet the cost of drywall repair that similar "we care about the environment/students/the view/our neighborhoods/crime/etc, (wink wink, nudge nudge)" lead to the state it's in now.

[DownhomeDenver]

Originally Posted by Denver

From James Real Estate Services

Lets hope this pans out...

Edit. Link http://jres.com/articles/show/Broe-to-Add-Country-Club-Towers/18289

So I'm not sure if this means anything but...see below from the Landmark Preservation Commission. Maybe it doesnt mean anything at all but "Owner has Withdrawn Application" seems rather negative to me.


MEETING AGENDA

Landmark Preservation Commission

1:00 p.m., Tuesday, July 1, 2014 at 201 W. Colfax Ave., room 4.F.6


Approval of Meeting Record

Approval of June 17, 2014 Meeting Record

Public Comment (limited to 2 minutes per speaker)

Public Hearing on Design Guidelines Update



Update Item - City Staff

Development Agreement Amendment for Country Club Gardens

Description: Update on proposed amendment to Country Club Gardens development agreement. (Relates to #314-14 and #536-14 below.)


Demolition Public Hearings - Barbara Stocklin-Steely

#314-14 33 S. Downing Street (also known as 16-23 S. Downing St.; Legal Address: 15 S. Downing St. & 14 S. Ogden St.)

Description: Hold continued public hearing for demolition of front 6’ of Buildings CCG 1B and 2B, Contributing Buildings to the Country Club Gardens Historic District. Owner has withdrawn application.


Design Review Projects - Barbara Stocklin-Steely

#536-14 33 S. Downing Street (also known as 16-23 S. Downing St.; Legal Address: 15 S. Downing St. & 14 S. Ogden St.)

Description: Continued Conceptual Mass & Scale of Infill Construction. Owner has withdrawn application.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION: No action

[DownhomeDenver]

And from the Lower Downtown Review board for Z Block


1523 18th Street
Description: Demolition of a Non-Contributing Structure
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval with Conditions

1812 Wazee Street
Description: Demolition of a Non-Contributing Structure
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval with Conditions

1835 Blake Street
Description: Demolition of a Non-Contributing Structure
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval with Conditions

1825 Blake Street
Description: Demolition of a Non-Contributing Structure
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval with Conditions

1855 Blake Street
Description: Demolition of a Non-Contributing Addition
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Approval with Conditions

1800 Wazee Street
Description: Mass, Form and Urban Context
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Deny

Brochure for the project

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by bob rulz

Are we actually arguing that renting is a virus or is there some sort of sarcasm I'm missing?

My comment which describes or defines Millennials, 1st explains why their preference is understandably to rent. It then moves to discuss why they prefer urban living. The "virus" was yes tongue-in-cheek sarcasm but was in reference to the preference of downtown living ie. if this is happening in Birmingham Alabama or in Orlando then it's clear that it's a Millennium thing. It's happening everywhere.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

I also live near here and am not looking forward to the construction mayhem, but the project would bring some additional density to a neighborhood that needs it. Plus that's 600 or so new residents that can then buy the overpriced homes in the neighborhood and shift the demand curve out further.

I have a nephew that lives several blocks SE of this. They picked up a neat Victorian and added a 2nd floor.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by Scottk

The housing market in Denver is not going to collapse anytime soon. The lack of for sale housing and ever increasing demand for housing in the central areas all but guarantees his condo will remain valuable for a long time.

Do you really believe that a another market adjustment is imminent?

They won't ring a bell before everything collapses. Wizened's advice is sound w/o being predictive.

The sense I get is that there's a long runway ahead. Nothing, like say the stock market, ever goes straight up though. But we've come out of the Great Recession (the country) as the clear winner and the prettiest girl at the dance. Presumably we learn to live with the growing income disparity. I sure can't sniff any potential rock slides so I'm not anticipating anything serious.

[trace™]

Originally Posted by Brainpathology

I would certainly expect one if there is reform of the law preventing condo buildings. If not an outright drop after the market is nearly flooded at least very very flat appreciation for a long time.

Anyone who buys a condo right now in Denver pretty much should automatically start writing their Democrat friends and beg them not to hurt poor poor homeowners by not letting them sue as easily as possible. (and also guarantee your condo is rare, expensive, and if it's new, in line for free repairs or even damages). I'm too tired to think of ways this happened in Boulder over the years but I'd bet the cost of drywall repair that similar "we care about the environment/students/the view/our neighborhoods/crime/etc, (wink wink, nudge nudge)" lead to the state it's in now.

The bill was defeated recently (I posted many pages back) that would have reformed the liabilities that could/would/does fall on the developer's shoulders. Though, it should be noted, the liabilities are still there, just the process takes lawyers out of the process (arbitration before lawyers). The D's in power stopped it (ironically, it was a Democrat sponsored bill).

There will be something that passes, everyone is behind it and everyone agrees that the imbalance is going to be a problem.


My guess: apartment prices will plummet once all these (what, 20-30k?) come on line in the next few years. As they do, competition will force rent everywhere down, as rents go down all those investors that bought up homes for rent income will start to sell as their rent return drops (they'll reap a hansom reward for having held the home through the rise, so won't be that painful to liquidate). That'll drive overall prices down, or at least bring some logical stability until more condos can be built.


I just don't see how apartments can make any sense at the rates going on.




Any thoughts on whether some of these will be converted to condos? My guess is not, as most (if not all) the financing is coming from entities that want long term cash flow, not immediate returns.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by trace™

There will be something that passes, everyone is behind it and everyone agrees that the imbalance is going to be a problem.

This is actually not true at all. Not everyone is behind "it" (the least precise word you could've possibly used to describe a policy prescription), nor does everyone agree the imbalance is a problem (I assume you mean the imbalance between rentals and condos - because if you're looking at rental vs. for sale overall, there is no imbalance, if you're willing to move to a single family home).

It's also not at all ironic that Ds killed a D sponsored bill. Not the same democrats at all. Wealthy urban social issues democrats are not the same thing as a Commerce City democrat. If the GOP would get off their religious social issues high horse, half those wealthy Denver dems would probably be persuadable. But the GOP will never be the populist party.

[Wizened Variations]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

This is actually not true at all. Not everyone is behind "it" (the least precise word you could've possibly used to describe a policy prescription), nor does everyone agree the imbalance is a problem (I assume you mean the imbalance between rentals and condos - because if you're looking at rental vs. for sale overall, there is no imbalance, if you're willing to move to a single family home).

It's also not at all ironic that Ds killed a D sponsored bill. Not the same democrats at all. Wealthy urban social issues democrats are not the same thing as a Commerce City democrat. If the GOP would get off their religious social issues high horse, half those wealthy Denver dems would probably be persuadable. But the GOP will never be the populist party.

There are only two ways in representative democracy to get elected: buy votes or sell votes. That describes the difference between the two parties at this time.

Neither is particularly honorable.

[Wizened Variations]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

They won't ring a bell before everything collapses. Wizened's advice is sound w/o being predictive.

The sense I get is that there's a long runway ahead. Nothing, like say the stock market, ever goes straight up though. But we've come out of the Great Recession (the country) as the clear winner and the prettiest girl at the dance. Presumably we learn to live with the growing income disparity. I sure can't sniff any potential rock slides so I'm not anticipating anything serious.

The question, IMO, is "Can you afford the payment?" more than whether there will be the inevitable adjustments. If one can afford the total payment (mortgage service + insurance + taxes + possible HOA + possible home repairs) then a 7 to 15% dip that lasts a couple of years need not be terrifying.

I planned for this when I started paying for my current home in 2004. I assumed that I needed to put enough down (at a time when almost no money down was an option) to cover a 10% drop in assessed value without going upside down. Of course, I experienced a still tolerable 15% drop, so I had to pay down the principal in order to refinance at a much lower interest rate and remain "above water."*

Those of you that are thinking of jumping aboard the wagon, remember to hedge your bets by having enough "cash" to lower your loan balance to where you would no longer be upside down, a 15% purchase price hedge after down payment would be ideal.

Today, in Denver, I would have 15% of the purchase price cost set aside as a hedge. Do this, and, keep your job, and, you should be able to weather most economic storms.

*This is simply a yardstick. I am not including money down at purchase which determines the amount of principal that may need to bought down. What happened the last time, was that the assessed value dropped far less than the market value. The market value is the key, of course.