DENVER | Main Development Thread #6 - Page 269

Cirrus · #**5361** Posted **Aug 20, 2015, 4:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DUPio

They also claimed having the previous light rail orientation would increase risk to pedestrians and they didn't want the trains going street level through the heart of campus. FWIW.

Which is bullshit, and further makes me think they were just throwing spaghetti against the wall, hoping something would stick.

Brainpathology · #**5362** Posted **Aug 20, 2015, 5:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Wisconsin Walker? That line through the University of Minnesota just opened in 2014, so it's very recent experience.

Oh good gracious yes that one!

Let's pretend I meant he was so close to Minnesota that he polluted the intellectual air somehow.. and not that I just completely flubbed a basic geography fact.

trubador · #**5363** Posted **Aug 20, 2015, 5:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by EngiNerd

Unless there is someone here on the inside, we won't really know until the parking structure is nearly done, and even then we may never know for sure. If they leave all of the columns, walls, etc. at the interior sticking above the top level, its sometimes (but not always) a good indication that they have designed the garage for additional levels as they intend to tie into the structure below.

For instance, the newest garage at the Anschutz Children's Hospital has been designed to be 11 stories at full build-out (the one at the SE corner of 17th Pl and Victor) from the current 4, but the one directly to the south of that on has not been designed for any future levels, though they looks similar structurally. The garage behind (and below) the Four Seasons has been designed for a tower in the future and you can tell because they left the columns sticking above grade, when they didn't have to. It will be nearly impossible to tell just by looking at the foundations if it has been designed for future levels.

I'm a little confused by your statement about the Children's garages. The SE garage is the older garage and the NE one is the newer one. I think they expanded the SE garage a few years ago by adding an addition further east, but they didn't go taller at that time.

Brainpathology · #**5364** Posted **Aug 20, 2015, 5:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cirrus

Which is bullshit, and further makes me think they were just throwing spaghetti against the wall, hoping something would stick.

Why would they do that though? There are VAST areas of empty land all over that campus.. even with the building spree they've been engaging in for the past 10 years. How would real access to transit do anything but help the campus if there wasn't an actual concern for things?

And I'm not challenging you.. there's no real protections for pedestrians on the campus now so that concern IS bull; I have no idea on the merits of vibration v research. But other than real concern I'm curious why they would sabotage a route. Are they planning on gaining money from selling/leasing land the rail would have taken up? OR worried about parking revenue - which would really just be pure evil. Or something I'm not thinking of?

EngiNerd · #**5365** Posted **Aug 20, 2015, 5:53 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by trubador

I'm a little confused by your statement about the Children's garages. The SE garage is the older garage and the NE one is the newer one. I think they expanded the SE garage a few years ago by adding an addition further east, but they didn't go taller at that time.

The newer NE garage is designed for future vertical expansion up to 11 total levels, and horizontal expansion to the east of the same height potentially, whenever the hospital decides they need it.

trubador · #**5366** Posted **Aug 20, 2015, 6:09 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by EngiNerd

The newer NE garage is designed for future vertical expansion up to 11 total levels, and horizontal expansion to the east of the same height potentially, whenever the hospital decides they need it.

thanks. The SE garage is straight from 1970's USSR, but the new NE garage might be even uglier. They have some strange mismatched pre-cast paneling, like they got some at a garage sale and didn't have enough. I should take pics someday.

trubador · #**5367** Posted **Aug 20, 2015, 6:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brainpathology

Why would they do that though? There are VAST areas of empty land all over that campus.. even with the building spree they've been engaging in for the past 10 years. How would real access to transit do anything but help the campus if there wasn't an actual concern for things?

And I'm not challenging you.. there's no real protections for pedestrians on the campus now so that concern IS bull; I have no idea on the merits of vibration v research. But other than real concern I'm curious why they would sabotage a route. Are they planning on gaining money from selling/leasing land the rail would have taken up? OR worried about parking revenue - which would really just be pure evil. Or something I'm not thinking of?

The core part of campus is built out. I think they originally planned to put it down Montview, which would have been awesome. since 2008 or so, they have built a new pharmacy school a rec center to the south, UPI moved into a new building on the north side. Also on the north side are a huge apartment complex and two research buildings (I think that is what they are), so Montview really filled in these past few years.

It still would have been quite a trek to get to the hospital from a stop on montview and is really just a bit further than Colfax. The stop at Sand Creek, is useless for the next decade at least.

Cirrus · #**5368** Posted **Aug 20, 2015, 6:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brainpathology

Why would they do that though?

In Maryland it was simple knee-jerk NIMBYism. It was eventually drowned out by pro voices from the students and faculty, who mostly all wanted the line as convenient as possible. I can't speak for Fitz.

wong21fr · #**5369** Posted **Aug 20, 2015, 6:43 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brainpathology

Why would they do that though? There are VAST areas of empty land all over that campus.. even with the building spree they've been engaging in for the past 10 years. How would real access to transit do anything but help the campus if there wasn't an actual concern for things?

And I'm not challenging you.. there's no real protections for pedestrians on the campus now so that concern IS bull; I have no idea on the merits of vibration v research. But other than real concern I'm curious why they would sabotage a route. Are they planning on gaining money from selling/leasing land the rail would have taken up? OR worried about parking revenue - which would really just be pure evil. Or something I'm not thinking of?

How about the undesirable poor people aspect? You have a transit stop right in the middle of the campus and you have a tougher time controlling who can enter and exit. This explanation also explains why CU pushed to have the bus routes that run along Colfax to stop doing a dogleg into the campus.

CU will already have to contend with all the filthy veterans going to the VA Hospital, but at least they'll congregate around the Colfax station.

Brainpathology · #**5370** Posted **Aug 20, 2015, 6:53 PM**

That makes no sense either. There are SOOO many uninsured and otherwise indigent people getting treatment at Children's and CU in standard of care and experimental settings.

(Making no sense doesn't mean it isn't true though)

bunt_q · #**5371** Posted **Aug 20, 2015, 7:10 PM**

Remember, we have about half the rate of uninsured people in Colorado that you have in Florida, and that figure is dropping rapidly, down 6 percentage points in one year alone. I don't expect we'll have any uninsured people in a few more years (apart from what I'll call the structural uninsured rate - people who are just falling through the cracks). Unlike Florida, we haven't made it a policy decision to keep as many people as possible without health coverage just to spite the President.

I believe it was a combination of being scared of the vibrations - whether it's a legit concern or not - and not caring about the light rail. Let's be honest, that line is going to require a transfer for nearly everybody. It's just not going to have a ton of ridership.

EngiNerd · #**5372** Posted **Aug 20, 2015, 7:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by trubador

thanks. The SE garage is straight from 1970's USSR, but the new NE garage might be even uglier. They have some strange mismatched pre-cast paneling, like they got some at a garage sale and didn't have enough. I should take pics someday.

You can probably see it on google street view...and just wait until its 11 stories tall

Brainpathology · #**5373** Posted **Aug 20, 2015, 8:31 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Remember, we have about half the rate of uninsured people in Colorado that you have in Florida, and that figure is dropping rapidly, down 6 percentage points in one year alone. I don't expect we'll have any uninsured people in a few more years (apart from what I'll call the structural uninsured rate - people who are just falling through the cracks). Unlike Florida, we haven't made it a policy decision to keep as many people as possible without health coverage just to spite the President.

I believe it was a combination of being scared of the vibrations - whether it's a legit concern or not - and not caring about the light rail. Let's be honest, that line is going to require a transfer for nearly everybody. It's just not going to have a ton of ridership.

Correct but both hospitals are large referral centers from states who surround you (all of which would like to do even MORE to spite the president), and the VA may also be. Having a way to get from the airport/downtown to the hospitals would help

blah blah it's moot anyway. I'll just resign myself to not knowing why. Maybe there is something in the water in Aurora that makes stupid urban development decisions the default.

bunt_q · #**5374** Posted **Aug 20, 2015, 8:46 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brainpathology

Maybe there is something in the water in Aurora that makes stupid urban development decisions the default.

Maybe there is something in the water in Colorado that makes stupid transit decisions the default. Because they are the default.

Brainpathology · #**5375** Posted **Aug 20, 2015, 9:16 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Maybe there is something in the water in Colorado that makes stupid transit decisions the default. Because they are the default.

Better than the ones here. . . though yeah.. that's the equivalent to "better than a parking lot" for buildings.

But live here a couple years and you may agree.

better yet.. don't. I'd rather you be happy and think I'm a moron than live in Florida.. I have to be able to sleep at night.

DownhomeDenver · #**5376** Posted **Aug 20, 2015, 11:08 PM**

Dont forget to take the new RiNo park survey:

http://rinoparkdenver.com/survey-2/

Cirrus · #**5377** Posted **Aug 21, 2015, 4:16 AM**

Oh yeah, man, Florida sucks.

I haven't been to Miami but Denver absolutely throttles every other Florida city, easily.

mojiferous · #**5378** Posted **Aug 21, 2015, 7:12 PM**

Here is a report about median rent values, from a website I had never heard of before the DBG posted about it:
https://www.zumper.com/blog/2015/08/zumper-national-rent-report-august-2015/

Denver doesn't even make the top 10 for most expensive, at least in their analysis.

Brainpathology · #**5379** Posted **Aug 21, 2015, 7:15 PM**

That's not THAT surprising. The rent in Denver isn't stipend demanding yet for academic positions. It's the for sale picture that I really think is dangerously out of whack.

bunt_q · #**5380** Posted **Aug 21, 2015, 7:32 PM**

I don't know what that site is or where they're getting their data, but a 5.3% quarter over quarter decrease in rents in Denver? I'd like to see a source. They're claiming their own data, which cries BS.