DENVER | Main Development Thread #7

[TakeFive]

A lot to like with this development

Originally Posted by rds70

An interesting Adams County proposal:

A transit supportive development at 60th and Federal that is planned to include over 930 residential units, including apartments condos and townhomes ,as well at a village green and 31,000 square feet of retail. The site is 21 acres and less than 1/4 mile from the Federal G line station. The developer is RP Capital of Utah.

You gotta like the housing diversity.

------------------------------

BREAKING....

1741 Gaylord Street



In a rare move, City Council approved owner-opposed landmark designation of 1741 Gaylord St.
April 24. 2023 by Rebecca Tauber/Denverite

Supporters advocated on behalf of the house, arguing that preservation and affordable housing are not mutually exclusive.

City Council voted unanimously Monday night to grant landmark preservation status to 1741 Gaylord St. in City Park West, in a rare owner-opposed designation.

“The demolition application for this property illustrates the flagrant disregard for the people, the culture and the history of our city,” said Councilmember Candi CdeBaca, who represents District 9, which includes 1741 Gaylord St. “Many have expressed that this city is losing its soul to predatory development. This property is a perfect example of that assertion on so many levels. We have a developer who can actually look at this building and see nothing but dollar signs.”

Candi CdeBaca and me; like two peas in a pod.

[laniroj]

Originally Posted by jhwk

Is Republic Plaza skinny enough to convert to residential? It looks like it has a smaller floor plate than our other tall buildings. Not sure how you could do the operable window thing, though. If it was it would make a huge improvement in upper downtown.

Perhaps there is an architect or engineer on the forum who could advise, but I don't believe operable windows are code required, moreso just a marketability thing. Anyone know?

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by jhwk

Is Republic Plaza skinny enough to convert to residential? It looks like it has a smaller floor plate than our other tall buildings. Not sure how you could do the operable window thing, though. If it was it would make a huge improvement in upper downtown.

Marketing that as residential would be fun, not sure if the 25K sq ft floor plates are indeed feasible. Also, where would you site the porte cochere?

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by rds70

A new concept plan has been submitted to the City for the other half of Block 176.

Amacon is proposing another two tower development with a mix of residential and hotel uses. Both towers would be 39 stories and include 611 units, per the application. It is not clear whether the hotel rooms are included in the unit count or not.

It looks like the project includes the 7-11 site as well as the surface parking lot.

UPDATE:

There would be 611 residential units and 96 hotel rooms. Additionally, here is a rendering:

Here's the Denver Business Journal article with a bit more information, but not too much (RDS' summary covers most everything):

https://www.bizjournals.com/denver/n...-downtown.html


Hopefully this is indicative of Amacon's bullishness on downtown residential since it would see a ~1100 residential units and ~100 hotel units on a single block downtown. If the CBD could add 5K or so residential units via new construction and office conversions over the next five years or so it would make for a large improvement on the decreased vitality of this portion of downtown.

[TakeFive]

Here We Go Again

Denver among top 10 places people are leaving in 2023
Apr 24, 2023 by: DJ Summers - Fox31 KDVR

For Starters
There's a key difference between "looking" to leave and actually leaving.

They Come; They Go
Good guess that among Gen Z there's more churn than among other demographic groups.

Nice Graphics and what they tell us

East and West Coast cities are losing the most people.

San Francisco tops the list, having lost 31,100 people in the first three months of 2023. New York City, Los Angeles and Washington, D.C. lost between 18,000 and 23,400 people apiece.

Colorado/Denver would seem to fall within the "noise" margin.

Regional Migration

Generally, people are looking to leave West Coast, Mid-Atlantic and Great Plains states, while more people are looking to enter southern, southwestern, New England and mountain states.

Do people really like Crazy Conservative Politics?

By state, Florida is the biggest winner followed by Texas, Arizona, Tennessee and South Carolina. Biggest Losers are California, New York and Washington, D.C.

Speaking of Retailers and Portland

PORTLAND, Ore. (KOIN) – Portland Pearl District will lose another large commercial tenant in early 2024 as REI announced Monday it plans to close its store. In an email sent to members, REI said the Portland store had its highest number of break-ins and thefts in two decades despite actions to provide extra security

Crime really is a thing

Consider the smaller guy wanting to scratch out a living in parts of Denver that were once very retail-friendly but now not so much.

With respect to Denver

Some of this could be the logical result of a housing and affordability shortage. With a lot of apartments under construction and lower in-migration numbers than in the past, this might take some of the pressure off.

[bunt_q]

I still think the nearly empty Denver Energy Center is better for a residential conversion. Floor plates are half Republic - 12,000, maybe 12,500.

And hey, the buildings are such pieces of shit that the windows creak and groan and leak. You could probably market that as providing airflow, if not “operable” per se.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Here We Go Again

Jeez man, for a guy who bitches about statistics....

Methodology
This data does not reflect actual moves. The latest migration analysis is based on a sample of about two million Redfin.com users who searched for homes across more than 100 metro areas. To be included in this dataset, a Redfin.com user must have viewed at least 10 homes in a three month period. This dataset excludes all rentals data.

[rds70]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Here We Go Again

Denver among top 10 places people are leaving in 2023
Apr 24, 2023 by: DJ Summers - Fox31 KDVR

For Starters
There's a key difference between "looking" to leave and actually leaving.

They Come; They Go
Good guess that among Gen Z there's more churn than among other demographic groups.

Nice Graphics and what they tell us

Colorado/Denver would seem to fall within the "noise" margin.

Regional Migration

I love the small print from Redfin, specifically on a map titled “Where people are moving to and from”:

This data does not reflect actual moves. The latest migration analysis is based on a sample of about two million Redfin.com users who searched for homes across more than 100 metro areas. To be included in this dataset, a Redfin.com user must have viewed at least 10 homes in a three month period. This dataset excludes all rentals data.

[Brainpathology]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

1741 Gaylord Street



In a rare move, City Council approved owner-opposed landmark designation of 1741 Gaylord St.
April 24. 2023 by Rebecca Tauber/Denverite

Candi CdeBaca and me; like two peas in a pod.

In Denver, is Historic designation used for ANY other purpose than to oppose development? I'm starting to have a bias for anyone who says they are interested in historic architecture thinking what they really mean is they want to halt any and all development for any reason whatsoever... while simultaneously whining about the rent being high.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by Brainpathology

In Denver, is Historic designation used for ANY other purpose than to oppose development? I'm starting to have a bias for anyone who says they are interested in historic architecture thinking what they really mean is they want to halt any and all development for any reason whatsoever... while simultaneously whining about the rent being high.

Nope.

Don't get me wrong, it's a nice house that someone will eventually pick up, gut the interior, and then sell for ~$2.5M. A nice upper middle-class white couple from out of state will move in who Candi will promptly vilify as destroying the soul of Denver. Rinse and repeat.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Jeez man, for a guy who bitches about statistics....

Did you 'read' or just skim the Post. I thought I provided reasonable caveats. For example.

Colorado/Denver would seem to fall within the "noise" margin.

What did you think of my 'Gen Z' observation; Likely or not likely?

I intentionally focused

on the Big winners and Big losers. Check out the most recent U.S. Census Bureau data for their own migration statistics. You'll likely notice the similarity in results and trends.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Did you 'read' or just skim the Post. I thought I provided reasonable caveats. For example.

They sounded like well-articulated observations from a Tucker Carlson episode: garbage in, garbage out. A caveat would be acknowledging the data limitation and imprecise methodology. I get you're just wanting to post to foster some dialogue, but this is a weak one article to go off of.

What did you think of my 'Gen Z' observation; Likely or not likely?

Eh.... geographic mobility has generally trended downwards for the last several decades. But by age group the highest amount of migration occurs in late 20-years olds. Which makes sense given that this likely represents post-college graduates moving as they begin careers. However, the overall trend is still down. So likely, but not exactly a ground-breaking observation.

[mr1138]

Originally Posted by Brainpathology

In Denver, is Historic designation used for ANY other purpose than to oppose development? I'm starting to have a bias for anyone who says they are interested in historic architecture thinking what they really mean is they want to halt any and all development for any reason whatsoever... while simultaneously whining about the rent being high.

Agreed. While helping a friend knock on doors recently, he commented to a resident how beautiful her home was. She commented that she had always wondered if her home or others like it in the neighborhood would be eligible for historic protections (my guess was Yes, they probably would be). My inner voice, however, was saying "Yes - so what is stopping them from submitting an application?... oh that's right, there is no imminent development proposal to try and block."

Speaking of trying to stop development while simultaneously whining about the rent being high - word is that SB23-213 has just been gutted to the point of being essentially meaningless. And I have a sneaking suspicion that my own (Arvada) state senator is responsible.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

They sounded like well-articulated observations from a Tucker Carlson episode: garbage in, garbage out. A caveat would be acknowledging the data limitation and imprecise methodology. I get you're just wanting to post to foster some dialogue, but this is a weak one article to go off of.

That's one strange comparison but I can enjoy the humor of it.

If you know the rules of how they come up with the data then it should be obvious that the specific numbers aren't what's important. The question is do they suggest real trends or not. That's my way of understanding and not getting caught up in the dots.

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Eh.... geographic mobility has generally trended downwards for the last several decades. But by age group the highest amount of migration occurs in late 20-years olds. Which makes sense given that this likely represents post-college graduates moving as they begin careers. However, the overall trend is still down. So likely, but not exactly a ground-breaking observation.

Agree with the logic of this which is different from what I'm suggesting.

I was thinking more of fresh out-of-HS or college Gen Z-ers moving to Denver because it sounds sooo cool. At some impulsive moment they realize there's not a "match" and decide to move on.

[TakeFive]

Side Topic

Originally Posted by mr1138

Speaking of trying to stop development while simultaneously whining about the rent being high - word is that SB23-213 has just been gutted to the point of being essentially meaningless. And I have a sneaking suspicion that my own state senator is responsible.

But at least the legislature is patting themselves on the back along with their dog Spot when it comes to being Pet-Friendly.

https://www.cpr.org/2023/04/21/landl...nor-signature/

Colorado will soon cap the amount of money landlords can charge residents for pet rent. State Democrats gave final approval to a new bill this week, and now only need the governor’s signature to make it law.

How very nice of you.

“We've given options and predictability to pet lovers and pet guardians across the state,” said Sen. Sonya Jaquez Lewis, a Democratic sponsor of the bill. “We’ve heard from animal shelters that pet surrenders from renters have gone up, so we’re trying to save these pets and families.”

This part is especially Rich.

The measure also makes it against the law for homeowner’s insurance companies to discriminate against specific dog breeds when selling policies.

Unintended Consequences

Many insurance companies could just decide not to offer tenants policies in Colorado while others raise their premiums for tenant policies by two or three times.

Many currently pet-friendly landlords could just say "Screw it" and no longer allow pets.

I've never heard of pets being a problem in the Desert. I wondered about Scottsdale so I googled Camden Properties which has tons of apartments in Scottsdale and they're all Pet-Friendly.

But leave it to Liberals to fix a problem that isn't really a problem or they don't understand. While most pet owners are responsible there are many exceptions.

Needless to say I don't care for business-unfriendly policies or anti-free market crap.

[mhays]

There's absolutely a cycle of 20-somethings moving to certain cities to start their careers, then moving away to cheaper locales when they want big houses with yards. I imagine Denver would show this trend.

As for housepets, I'd love to live somewhere with no dogs allowed. Thankfully I'm in a condo with plenty of karens to deal with them so I never have to say anything. But there've been cases in the past where barking was (briefly) a real problem.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

I was thinking more of fresh out-of-HS or college Gen Z-ers moving to Denver because it sounds sooo cool. At some impulsive moment they realize there's not a "match" and decide to move on.

Probably less of a trend then you might suppose. Colorado seems to be resuming some strong natural migration trends due to the economic migration and the natural population change is still strong. This suggests that the Redfin result is probably families moving from Denver to the 'burbs in pursuit of that 3rd or 4th bedroom to support growing families. As we know, Denver's building tons of multi-family, but not in the setup that enables families to go past one kid at the most. The last frontier of SFH growth in Denver in CP and GVR and they're rapidly approaching build-out.

The continued interesting migration trend IMO is the grey migration to the areas like TN, FL (duh), SC, AZ, NV, AL, etc. It's not young families in search of opportunity but rather the grey hairs moving to stretch their budgets. Compare that with TX, CA (gasp), UT, NY WA, GA, CO, VA, etc. I'll take the natural growth that is suggestive of strong economics fundamentals, i.e. people willing to stay and have children, versus the other migration trend that sees your state go the way of Japan.

It's the all-around strong growth of places like TX, UT, GA that remains the most impressive.

[Ndj]

Any owner-opposed historical preservation submission should require a buyout offer at the unencumbered market value by the submitter with a usage plan and proof of ability to upkeep for the next 50 years.

[TakeFive]

Well Said

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Probably less of a trend then you might suppose. Colorado seems to be resuming some strong natural migration trends due to the economic migration and the natural population change is still strong. This suggests that the Redfin result is probably families moving from Denver to the 'burbs in pursuit of that 3rd or 4th bedroom to support growing families. As we know, Denver's building tons of multi-family, but not in the setup that enables families to go past one kid at the most. The last frontier of SFH growth in Denver in CP and GVR and they're rapidly approaching build-out.

Much of this I'd agree with and while the jury may still be out on Denver's future prospects - at the worst that would still be quite good. Denver can still appeal to those coming from even more expensive states. I'd worry more about their growing business-unfriendly policies though.

Just to pick a few nits

Originally Posted by wong21fr

The continued interesting migration trend IMO is the grey migration to the areas like TN, FL (duh), SC, AZ, NV, AL, etc. It's not young families in search of opportunity but rather the grey hairs moving to stretch their budgets. Compare that with TX, CA (gasp), UT, NY WA, GA, CO, VA, etc. I'll take the natural growth that is suggestive of strong economics fundamentals, i.e. people willing to stay and have children, versus the other migration trend that sees your state go the way of Japan.

It's the all-around strong growth of places like TX, UT, GA that remains the most impressive.

Your Grey obsession is waay overrated - not that it isn't a real thing.

Florida, for example has a large and growing Hispanic population which mean growing families or natural growth. More established people moving from the NE or eve from California is very real. Same is true in Arizona.

The one huge advantage of the whole SE is their population density in general and in the NE in particular. It's why all manner of manufacturing has set up shop in those states. You won't find grey hairs manning the assembly lines at BMW, Mercedes etc. Boeing rings the bell So Carolina along with with their many suppliers etc.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by Ndj

Any owner-opposed historical preservation submission should require a buyout offer at the unencumbered market value by the submitter with a usage plan and proof of ability to upkeep for the next 50 years.

In this particular case the relatively 'new' owner assumed the emotional advantage of offering 'affordable' housing would carry the day. Let's just say he counted his chickens before they hatched. It was irrelevant to the key question.

Historical preservation has rarely been an issue or won the day but it can happen when warranted. Sadly, Denver doesn't have that much left that's worth preserving unlike older cities with their large stock of historical buildings.