DENVER | Main Development Thread #6

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by ski82

The supply & demand argument is limited. Back to Micro 101, the purpose of the supply and demand curve is price discovery. Prices in this point are constantly adjusting to shifts in the demand curve. There has been very little change in the supply side, which is heavily influenced by zoning, governments, and other non-free-market factors that many try to pass off as free market under the moniker of “supply and demand”.

Which brings us too things mhays suggests above, things that would actually shift the supply curve and enable a new price equilibrium. If the problem of land is too high? Upzoning wide ranges of land across the area would be a great way to increase the supply. In this way, it could bring down the price of a piece of land downtown even if that land itself didn’t change its zoning at all.

Way too sophisticated for me. I like to keep things simple. More demand than supply drives price up; less demand that supply drives price down. That's all the sophistication that I need. I know there's all manner of iterations but that's for the sophisticated which I'm not.

[TakeFive]

Just some of the ugliness to downtown living?

First 7News Denver has the story of two guys trying to rob light rail passengers which turned into more of a Keystone Cops episode.

7News Denver also has the story about four women assaulted by the same crazy guy on/near the 16th Street mall. They caught this deviant.

Lastly they discuss the 16th Street Mall with Tami Door.

They should hire (or subcontract out) a bunch of "ambassadors" to roam the mall after dark. They could wear some attractive vests and answer questions, give directions as well as just be extra eyes and ears along the mall. They do that down here I assume partly as a courtesy to snowbirds.

[CherryCreek]

Interesting article that I think is basically true. From Denver to the Wyoming border, northern Front Range Coloradans invested tens of billions between the the late 80s to2015 to pave the way for the future. Colorado Springs did not. Those cities now boom, while Colorado Springs lags behind.


http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/blog/f...oming-thank-the-cities-that-planned.html

[RaspberryD]

Originally Posted by CherryCreek

Interesting article that I think is basically true. From Denver to the Wyoming border, northern Front Range Coloradans invested tens of billions between the the late 80s to2015 to pave the way for the future. Colorado Springs did not. Those cities now boom, while Colorado Springs lags behind.


http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/blog/f...oming-thank-the-cities-that-planned.html

It's interesting (and sad). I'm a Colorado Springs native, so this hits home. I recently had a friend work for one of the major developers there. One particular plan they're working on is several 20-story buildings (within the next 20 or so years haha). The push back and logistics are unbelievable. The Springs is basically the poster child for suburban sprawl. There really isn't any sort of traction on investing in building up a strong urban core. Even growing up, I never had much of an expectation of staying there for a career. I think the mindset of most people born in the Springs is that it's a relatively peaceful town to grow up, but all the economic activity that you'd want to get into is largely in Denver (or out of state).

[EngiNerd]

http://www.denverpost.com/business/ci_28...apartment-started-taking-tenants-tuesday

Denver's first large-scale micro apartment started taking tenants on Tuesday
Tenants this week have started moving into Turntable Studios, in a major test of how willing Denver renters are to take a smaller space for a lower rent payment.

"This is the biggest micro-housing development in Denver," said James Johnson, a principal with Johnson Nathan Strohe, which designed the revamp of the former Hotel VQ near Sports Authority Field at Mile High.

The project, developed by Nichols Partnership and Capital Realty Group, has 179 apartments. Aside from a few penthouses on the 13th floor, most are about 335 square feet.

For perspective, Denver requires developers to provide 350 square feet of parking space for each apartment unit they bring to market. The trade-off for tiny is a central Denver rent under $1,000 a month, which would make the units affordable to someone earning in the mid-$30,000 range.

....

[DenverPoke]

Looks like the Cottrells building on 16th and the lot behind it sold last week for about $6M. Anybody know if there are plans to redevelop it?

[PLANSIT]

Originally Posted by DenverPoke

Looks like the Cottrells building on 16th and the lot behind it sold last week for about $6M. Anybody know if there are plans to redevelop it?

Any idea who the buyer is?

[corey]

I was wondering about Colorado Springs. How have home prices been appreciating there? I wonder if they get a boost just because the Denver metro has gone up a lot. I like the Springs and I think all the town really needs is more multi-family housing downtown and, this would be awesome, street cars from the Colorado College area to south of downtown and from downtown along Colorado Ave. to Manitou Springs. I am as socially liberal as the come and I have never voted for a Repiblican so the vocal evangelical side of the Springs has always been a turn off to me. But there is a liberal, artsy side there (primarily around CO College, old Colorado City, and Manitou Springs) where I feel at home. It seems like the Springs is partially controlled by rich Texans that like to vacation there, like the Lebanon of the U.S. I would certainly move there over Salt Lake City or Boise though.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by PLANSIT

Any idea who the buyer is?

Kin Yon LLC is the Grantee. Address of record for the LLC just happens to be the same as NAI Shames Makovsky. Searching the SoS business database shows that the registered agents is NAI Shames Makovsky.

Go figure. First Fontius and now Cottrell's. Evan is da' man.

[DenverPoke]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Kin Yon LLC is the Grantee. Address of record for the LLC just happens to be the same as NAI Shames Makovsky. Go figure. First Fontius and now Cottrell's. Go Evan!

Beat me to it! This.

[Denver Dweller]

http://www.businessden.com/2015/09/04/developer-digging-up-funds-for-new-project/

[corey]

So happy that Makovsky bought the Cottrell's Building! That building has been an embarrassment for decades. I wonder if they will completely renovate it or tear it down. My guess is they'll convert it to a two story restaurant like that Canadian chain place Earl's down the street. Now I wish he could be the one to get the Dikeaou's (sp? I know the name has a lot of vowels in it) to sell the Colorado Building. That building could be an awesome boutique hotel. On smaller projects like this Sage Hospitality moves quickly and with excellent results.

Are older condo and town homes outside of central Denver nearly non-existent on the Denver market right now? It seems the prices every one is quoting are for single family homes. I would think Urbanists would rather have a condo or town home than a SFDH in the first place. I am selling my house and getting a condo or townhouse instead because I am f'ing tired of keeping up a stupid yard. I'm finding nice condos along Cherry Creek in Denver south of Leetsdale for less than $200,000. I bought my house at the top of the market in 2006 with $0 down and had a first mortgage of 6.5% and a second mortgage of 7.5% for a combined mortgage payment of almost $2,300 a month. These were considered good rates for a first time home buyer. The housing prices then almost immediately started to crash and I was way under water for years. We seriously considered selling for a big loss or walking away from it. My wife and I had to both work two jobs to stay afloat. Being underwater I couldn't refinance. At least Denver didn't crash as bad as a lot of other places. When my house was no longer under water I was able to refinance. Just some perspective. Buying a house years ago wasn't any easier. The housing prices are cooling off and the builders will catch up with the demand sooner or later. Also, it looks like low interest rates are here to stay for the foreseeable future. Lenders will also start lowering their lending requirements again. Hopefully lower priced condos will start to be built in large numbers again. I think they will because there has never been more of a demand for them. I also think when looking at the increase in housing prices you need to look at how much they've appreciated from the 2007 highs and not from the 2012 lows.

[PLANSIT]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Kin Yon LLC is the Grantee. Address of record for the LLC just happens to be the same as NAI Shames Makovsky. Searching the SoS business database shows that the registered agents is NAI Shames Makovsky.

Go figure. First Fontius and now Cottrell's. Evan is da' man.

And it all makes sense now.

[corey]

The real tragedy in the U.S. Is that real incomes for most people have not risen in way too long.

[Denver Dweller]

http://www.denverrealestatewatch.com/201...home-faces-hostile-historic-designation/

[Stonemans_rowJ]

Originally Posted by Denver Dweller

http://www.denverrealestatewatch.com/201...home-faces-hostile-historic-designation/

Olson said he has been told by real estate experts that home could be sold for $575,000, or maybe even more.

He estimated Sonnleitner could sell the house and the adjoining land for $1.2 million or more, while Adams Development has offered him $1 million.


I love how the neighbor is opining what the house may be worth really knowing nothing about property value or the condition of the house! Unreal. In its current state it's value is really only in the land or a wholesale price to a flipper, 70%, maybe less of "market value."

Problem is if you keep the house, the tiny adjacent lot isn't worth much since you coudn't build much on it except for a single family home. I'd say a Chicago-style triplex with the zoning but we don't build those here. Denver's patented sideways stacked rowhomes wouldn't fit on that size lot if you kept the house.

I am normally very pro-preservation, but this is a very unique case. I'd love to see this go to court and unlike RedPeak, if the landowner wins, stick these idiots with the fees.

[corey]

Originally Posted by Stonemans_rowJ

Olson said he has been told by real estate experts that home could be sold for $575,000, or maybe even more.

He estimated Sonnleitner could sell the house and the adjoining land for $1.2 million or more, while Adams Development has offered him $1 million.


I love how the neighbor is opining what the house may be worth really knowing nothing about property value or the condition of the house! Unreal. In its current state it's value is really only in the land or a wholesale price to a flipper, 70%, maybe less of "market value."

Problem is if you keep the house, the tiny adjacent lot isn't worth much since you coudn't build much on it except for a single family home. I'd say a Chicago-style triplex with the zoning but we don't build those here. Denver's patented sideways stacked rowhomes wouldn't fit on that size lot if you kept the house.

I am normally very pro-preservation, but this is a very unique case. I'd love to see this go to court and unlike RedPeak, if the landowner wins, stick these idiots with the fees.

Who says the house is in bad condition? It is owner occupied and looks to be in excellent condition. Just wondering.

[rds70]

Originally Posted by corey

Who says the house is in bad condition? It is owner occupied and looks to be in excellent condition. Just wondering.

Read the article that was posted by Denver Dweller.

[mr1138]

Looks can definitely be deceiving. A professor of mine who lived in Lower Highland told me that the condition of the structures can vary wildly depending on how they've been cared for over the years. Some are in great condition, others he told me are basically falling down. Remember how much people hate "stick builds"? This is a big part of why I think. Whether we like it or not, the people who built these homes didn't necessarily intend for them to last forever.

Of course the property owner could be exaggerating how bad his situation is, but I think that's kind of beside the point. The burden should be on historic preservationists to get ahead of the game, create historic districts, and protect worthy buildings ahead of time; not as a knee-jerk reaction to stop development. This burden should not be on private property owners who have been planning their investment decisions for decades based on the rules as they are written - rules (specifically zoning) that actually intend for the neighborhood to largely transition from single family to a higher density form in the coming decades. I think it's perfectly reasonably for the majority of property owners, especially the ones who's structures are in mediocre to bad shape, to have planned for the ultimate sale and redevelopment of their properties.

[corey]

I was going to suggest that Denver needs more historic districts, but I figured everyone would come down on me for that idea also. So I said fuck it and didn't bother.