DENVER | Main Development Thread #7

[Robert.hampton]

Originally Posted by BG918

What project is this?

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.denverp...apartments-planned-in-uptown-denver/amp/

[Brainpathology]

Originally Posted by Robert.hampton

I'd rather spend all this money on a safe outdoor site in every neighborhood and then throw the rest of the unsanctioned campers in jail.

I agree! (I said, just finishing piling onto Boulder for being fake-liberal)

[The Dirt]

Liberals - uniting to sweep one problem into a bigger problem since 1776.

Don't get me wrong, allowing way more sanctioned camping sites is great, but putting homeless people in jail because we just don't want to have to see the problem is dumb. How about we decriminalize drug use (like Portugal did in 2001) and get serious about funding massive rehab programs.

If life was full of easy fixes then the War on Drugs, the War on Guns, and the War on Terror would have actually worked. But, nah, let's spend no more than 5 minutes thinking about the problem then either sweep it out of sight or throw money at it... maybe both? How about we throw the CIA in the mix and have them arm the homeless because, I guess that's what this country does.

[Robert.hampton]

Originally Posted by The Dirt

Liberals - uniting to sweep one problem into a bigger problem since 1776.

Don't get me wrong, allowing way more sanctioned camping sites is great, but putting homeless people in jail because we just don't want to have to see the problem .

That’s a cute talking point but not wanting to see the problem is probably reason number 67 on my list of why I think the city should crack down on unsanctioned camping if suitable alternatives are available.

[RyanD]

Originally Posted by bulldurhamer

3930 Blake St.
did we talk about this? i see it's under construction now. no more sweet smells of cannabis growing as we walk past...

Yep it's U/C





https://denverinfill.com/2021/08/one-river-north-has-broken-ground.html

[DenvertoLA]

So we have a giant 2 tower condo project about to break ground, is there any movement on a giant apartment tower entering the scene in the CBD?

[The Dirt]

Originally Posted by Robert.hampton

That’s a cute talking point but not wanting to see the problem is probably reason number 67 on my list of why I think the city should crack down on unsanctioned camping if suitable alternatives are available.

The key word is suitable. There's a myriad of reasons why someone doesn't want to spend a night in a homeless shelter or a hypothetical sanctioned camping site, which currently have pretty strict qualifications. Drug use is the obvious one, but small things like theft, pet restrictions, and being split from your significant other come into play.

While I don't want to see someone spreading trash, shooting up, or being a drugs dealer magnet, putting someone in jail for spending the night outside is not an effective means of solving the problem. Just like sweeps, people just end up back where they were a few days later. It simply doesn't solve the problem that we all want it to solve.

[Arapahoe]

Originally Posted by The Dirt

The key word is suitable. There's a myriad of reasons why someone doesn't want to spend a night in a homeless shelter or a hypothetical sanctioned camping site, which currently have pretty strict qualifications. Drug use is the obvious one, but small things like theft, pet restrictions, and being split from your significant other come into play.

While I don't want to see someone spreading trash, shooting up, or being a drugs dealer magnet, putting someone in jail for spending the night outside is not an effective means of solving the problem. Just like sweeps, people just end up back where they were a few days later. It simply doesn't solve the problem that we all want it to solve.

You have to follow rules no matter what your status is in life and being homeless doesn't exempt you from dealing with rules. As long as shelter space is available, these camps, piles of trash, food & human waste, rats, needles and rampant vandalism & property theft has to be dealt with for public health and safety PERIOD. If you want to have a partner or a pet, time to get your life together and take advantage of the many programs already available. Once we have full shelters and drug addiction/employment programs bursting at the seams -- we spend more money and expand services. If you are just waiting for your free house with no rules or obligations.. sorry, time to wake up.

[coolmandan03]

Originally Posted by The Dirt

The key word is suitable. There's a myriad of reasons why someone doesn't want to spend a night in a homeless shelter or a hypothetical sanctioned camping site,

Imagine the audacity of moving to someplace that you can't afford and demand the city make it suitable for you! I should move to Malibu (which i can't afford) and demand my beachfront property that they should give me! It's almost like literal beggars can't be choosers.

[DenvertoLA]

Originally Posted by coolmandan03

Imagine the audacity of moving to someplace that you can't afford and demand the city make it suitable for you! I should move to Malibu (which i can't afford) and demand my beachfront property that they should give me! It's almost like literal beggars can't be choosers.

So you're against all accessibility features for the physically disabled people in a city? Or just against policies that help those that are mentally unfit for our economy?

Do you not want an inclusive society?

[The Dirt]

Originally Posted by coolmandan03

Imagine the audacity of moving to someplace that you can't afford and demand the city make it suitable for you! I should move to Malibu (which i can't afford) and demand my beachfront property that they should give me! It's almost like literal beggars can't be choosers.

Imagine the audacity of moving to a place then spending the next 70 years artificially constraining housing supply through exclusionary zoning and onerous and contradictory regulations.

Imagine buying a house next to Wash Park for $40K in the 90s and funding your retirement by selling it for $1.4M in 2020, then complaining when it gets torn down to be replaced by a McMansion.

Imagine getting a massive generational government handout then complaining that young people are too lazy and entitled to be just like you.

Then imagine that the places that we've systematically manipulated at the federal, state, and local levels to be completely unaffordable for anyone that doesn't make triple the median household income level are "just how things naturally are".

[SirLucasTheGreat]

With homelessness specifically, I don't think we can view this solely, primarily, or even largely through the lense of local zoning and urban policy. There is a strong migratory component to homelessness and it is a problem that is not confined to what we do locally when cities nationwide are hooking up any willing homeless person with a greyhound ticket. I think HUD just needs much more housing for homelessness and we need to do whatever we can to add density. The trick, when looking at places like SF and Seattle, is supporting homelessness without significantly increasing the in-flow of out of state homelessness into Denver

[Agent Orange]

Drivetrain developer has bought a block in Rino. It's the block just north of Improper City, Blake/Walnut/33rd/34th.

Carmel hasn’t submitted any development plans to the city for the block it purchased. But Oberg secured certificates of demolition eligibility for all the structures earlier this year, paving the way for redevelopment.

The parcels are zoned for up to five stories but are within the 38th and Blake zoning overlay district, which allows developers to build taller than that if they meet certain requirements regarding income-restricted housing.

https://www.denverpost.com/2021/08/31/apartment-complex-city-block-denver-rino/

[Ich]

Originally Posted by Agent Orange

Drivetrain developer has bought a block in Rino. It's the block just north of Improper City, Blake/Walnut/33rd/34th.





https://www.denverpost.com/2021/08/31/apartment-complex-city-block-denver-rino/

This article has more info - 12 stories and 500 units, ground breaking 1H 2022

Curious to see what it will look like. Maybe something similar to Union Denver

https://www.bizjournals.com/denver/news/...ck-in-rino-sold-to-developer-carmel.html

[coolmandan03]

Originally Posted by DenvertoLA

So you're against all accessibility features for the physically disabled people in a city? Or just against policies that help those that are mentally unfit for our economy?

Do you not want an inclusive society?

My comment is nothing about the disabled. They don't have a choice and I think we as a society can help them out. My problem is the physically able that are homeless (most that are living in tents).

[coolmandan03]

Originally Posted by The Dirt

Imagine the audacity of moving to a place then spending the next 70 years artificially constraining housing supply through exclusionary zoning and onerous and contradictory regulations.

Imagine buying a house next to Wash Park for $40K in the 90s and funding your retirement by selling it for $1.4M in 2020, then complaining when it gets torn down to be replaced by a McMansion.

Do you honestly think that's most of Denver? Or just a few people... come on... that's a silly comment as to why there are homeless.

Originally Posted by The Dirt

Imagine getting a massive generational government handout then complaining that young people are too lazy and entitled to be just like you.

I must have missed my hand out! I only got $90k in student loans as government help. Yet, i never lived in a tent on the street. What handout did you get? Your quote seems to insinuate that you must have got a handout, or you live in a tent... I guess I'm one of the few...

Originally Posted by The Dirt

Then imagine that the places that we've systematically manipulated at the federal, state, and local levels to be completely unaffordable for anyone that doesn't make triple the median household income level are "just how things naturally are".

I see... so you do think that it's the City of Mailbu's fault that I can't buy a beachfront house for $120k. Shame on Malibu! They should accommodate me and what I want!! /s

[gopokes21]

Anyone who thinks experiences of homelessness are a function of "housing selfishness in Wash Park" or whatever, get a grip and open your eyes.

That is so mind-blowingly ignorant idk how to even...

[The Dirt]

Originally Posted by coolmandan03

Do you honestly think that's most of Denver? Or just a few people... come on... that's a silly comment as to why there are homeless.

I was responding to your comment about buying a house in Malibu. That had nothing to do with homelessness, which is why my response had nothing to do with homelessness.

I must have missed my hand out! I only got $90k in student loans as government help. Yet, i never lived in a tent on the street. What handout did you get? Your quote seems to insinuate that you must have got a handout, or you live in a tent... I guess I'm one of the few...

"Can you imagine" is a figure of speech, which is why I wasn't talking about you specifically. I have no idea what generation you are or what your financial situation is, so I wasn't going to make any assumptions about you.

I see... so you do think that it's the City of Mailbu's fault that I can't buy a beachfront house for $120k. Shame on Malibu! They should accommodate me and what I want!! /s

Actually, yes. Look at any major coastal city as large and desirable as Malibu that doesn't have restrictive zoning (think outside of the US). They don't have single family mansions lining the coast. They have 12-50 story condo towers. Those condo towers maximize the utilization of highly desirable land by spreading the cost of this land amongst many people. You think those mansions exist "naturally"? No, they are the product of restrictive zoning. The city of Malibu literally makes it illegal to build anything other than $20M mansions.

In regards to how any of this relates to homelessness, there's an effect called filtering. There are many people living on the street or in their cars and working full time. If we built enough housing, the cheapest housing available today would be cheaper and people at the lowest income levels would be able to afford housing.

[TakeFive]

Sorting out the pieces to define and understand them is, well, "It ain't easy."

Originally Posted by coolmandan03

My comment is nothing about the disabled. They don't have a choice and I think we as a society can help them out. My problem is the physically able that are homeless (most that are living in tents).

Denver through it various agencies as well as non-profits has done a credible job of meeting the various needs of this group.

We don't pay it much attention here b/c this site is about urban skyscrapers, primarily. But over the last decade there has been a number of projects that specifically serve those with disabilities. New projects have provided housing specifically for homeless veterans and/or veterans with various disabilities. There was one new-built project in west Denver and another in Aurora.

Historically, nobody has been better served perhaps than affordable housing for women with varying issues including single moms. There has also been new housing built with a more general as well as specific disability needs.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by The Dirt

In regards to how any of this relates to homelessness, there's an effect called fiiltering. There are many people living on the street or in their cars and working full time. If we built enough housing, the cheapest housing available today would be cheaper and people at the lowest income levels would be able to afford housing.

IMO, affordably-cheap housing and homeless only overlap at the margin but's a fair point to make.

That article on "filtering" is indeed one of the better things I've read. I don't have any particular issues with it; what I would say is that what you take away will depend on what you focus on.

Yes, density and zoning are issues but that's harder to understand why than a simplistic talking point or two.