DENVER | Main Development Thread #7

[TakeFive]

It's a bit of a conundrum

But I wouldn't agree with this:

Originally Posted by laniroj

We have essentially tried this "induced public transportation demand" with trex and fastracks. It's fairly well proven it doesn't work from a self sustaining financial perspective. Did we get light rail? Yes. Can we afford to operate and maintain it without significant operating subsidies that hamstring the rest of our transportation efforts? NO.

AFAIK, the four-tenths percent dedicated FasTracks tax is enough to pay for the capital and maintenance costs of light/commuter rail. I do believe/guessing that the operational costs for rail service comes out of the other six-tenths percent RTD tax. But that's hardly unreasonable given that 7 rail corridors provide half the ridership of 142 bus routes (in 2019).

The 7/8-county RTD district voters wanted and agreed to pay for the four-tenths percent tax for a light and commuter rail system. wong isn't wrong that anticipating leftover money they then intended to use any extra money to enhance bus service. Oh well.

Originally Posted by gopokes21

Part of the fatally-flawed institutional design of RTD includes gerrymander-style cracking and packing. All of Denver's dense eastside hoods are packed into District A which consolidates (thus minimizing) political will to serve these neighborhoods, while ensuring suburban control of RTD. We may just have to get rid of RTD to be quite honest,

I have speculated much the same as to potentially reorganizing RTD. Plus I like the boundaries that laniroj defines.

Originally Posted by laniroj

We can't even support existing light rail (not even close) and ridership among our suburban commuter focused regional bus system is abysmal. To make public transportation MORE attractive for the Center City of Denver only, four major changes must occur and all will take decades. I am writing off anything outside the center City (call it I25 south, I 70 north, Wadsworth to Quebec) except RidgeGate because there's not hope for our second and third tier suburbs.

The obvious "elephant in the room" is why should the voter/taxpayers of 7/8 counties pay six-tenths percent tax for bus service within the above defined boundaries?

[Cirrus]

> Can we afford to operate and maintain it without significant operating subsidies that hamstring the rest of our transportation efforts?

No transportation system pays for itself. Not even toll roads*. That's not the goal and never has been, for any mode, except for when someone wants an excuse to not pay for something. Transportation is a means to an end. The end is a functioning civilization with whatever characteristics you value. The civilization you get is the civilization you pay to build.

Where and how to build transit are separate/important questions, and of course the ability to reduce costs by recouping some user fees does factor into the calculation. But nothing pays for itself.

* Tolls roads do not pay for themselves because they're useless unless you can access them via free surface streets. They require a huge surrounding network of subsidized streets to get any paying customers at all.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by laniroj

EXACTLY. I have been saying this for 4 years: Denver/Colorado aren't growing faster, we've just restricted all of our zoning so that we can't build housing. We don't have a growth problem, we have a housing and land use problem. The 2010's should be the fourth or fifth slowest decade of growth in Colorado's history.

Couple of things; raw statistics is fine but based on percentages can also be incomplete.

City/county of Denver started the last decade in a deep recession although Denver wasn't nearly as impacted as many places. Growth within the city center was parabolic once it got going about 2012. Then the pace tempered off at the end of the decade based on percentage but was still solid based on absolute numbers on a growing base.

Denver’s population growth leads Colorado as urban areas outpace rural
Many of the state’s smallest counties have lost population since 2010
March 26, 2020 By JON MURRAY - DP

That rate was down just slightly from Denver’s 1.6% growth the year prior — and the city’s boom has tempered considerably from earlier in the decade. Since 2010, the city’s population has grown by a cumulative 21%, adding more than 127,000 people.

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

Originally Posted by laniroj

First - Denver doesn't have near enough residential density to support a robust public transportation system so we need much MUCH more of it. ... To get the density that would support robust public transportation, we need modest upzones City-wide or aggressive upzones within 3 blocks of every major road (7 stories) and modest upzones (3 stories) within one block of every arterial road.

I have said for a long, long time that with the exception of Cap Hill Denver didn't generally build outward with much density. As a result it didn't have any natural transit corridors outside of East Colfax which has always been a busy transit corridor.

I have always favored upzoning nearby natural transit corridors.

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

Originally Posted by mhays

I'd couch the parking-minimums point a little differently. We're probably saying the same thing.

I still contend that the parking controversy is way overblown; it's a myth.

Originally Posted by mhays

First, the typical resident of a no/low-parking building doesn't have a car. These buildings are typically in areas with good transit and walkability, units are typically small, and residents self-select. (Some will have cars, and I acknowledge some effect on free on-street spaces.)

This is just now starting to happen (more) in downtown Denver. While I didn't previously make the point, you do with respect to type of unit being built/offered.

Going back to say 2012, most of the new apartment construction was considered "luxury" which is common apartment-speak. But they weren't smaller 'micro' units or of the new 'social' communities which are clearly (and finally) appealing to those with a more modest budget.

With respect to pubic parking within the CBD or adjacent to public cultural facilities any available public parking should be as cheap as possible IMO. It's an important courtesy to those outside the city center who need to drive. Rideshare can provide an option for some (assuming it remains available at a reasonable cost). This includes those doing short-term business downtown or those attending cultural (or sports) facilities. For the record Denver downtown doesn't even have that much public parking and more will be lost to dedicated bus lanes etc. I'm not counting land bankers; that's a different topic and temporary thing.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

> Can we afford to operate and maintain it without significant operating subsidies that hamstring the rest of our transportation efforts?

No transportation system pays for itself. Not even toll roads*. That's not the goal and never has been, for any mode, except for when someone wants an excuse to not pay for something. Transportation is a means to an end. The end is a functioning civilization with whatever characteristics you value. The civilization you get is the civilization you pay to build.

Where and how to build transit are separate/important questions, and of course the ability to reduce costs by recouping some user fees does factor into the calculation. But nothing pays for itself.

* Tolls roads do not pay for themselves because they're useless unless you can access them via free surface streets. They require a huge surrounding network of subsidized streets to get any paying customers at all.

I hope you're doing well?

Simple Question: Which did you like more?

Jenifer Lopez singing "This Land is Your Land" and "America the Beautiful" or Amanda Gorman reciting her poem "The Hill We Climb"?
(or something else)

[gopokes21]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

It's a bit of a conundrum

The obvious "elephant in the room" is why should the voter/taxpayers of 7/8 counties pay six-tenths percent tax for bus service within the above defined boundaries?

It just depends if they want help funding, maintaining, operating, and expanding the FasTracks network they rely on for attractive commutes to downtown (along with the added benefit of coordinated service delivery) or if they want to be on their own for operating that.

Aside from Denver Union Station and 38th and Blake a half-dozen smaller stations, Denver isn't really a feature of FasTracks and shouldn't maintain it if we are totally on our own for local transit.

[gopokes21]

By the way apologies for the big transit debate; this being a development summary thread, here's some news on the aggregate:

https://milehighcre.com/denver-a-top...t-opportunity/

CBRE named Denver the #3 market for multifamily opportunity, #4 for retail opportunity, #11 for industrial opportunity, and #16 for office opportunity (we still need to absorb the latest huge wave of deliveries that came right before or during COVID). Across all asset classes, that makes Denver the #6 market for development opportunities. We're behind Atlanta, Dallas, Phoenix, (Orlando somehow?) and Seattle, but we beat Austin.

It's so weird to me that locally we're grappling with back-breaking cost escalations and concerns that skyrocketing costs will erode Denver's competitiveness. However, from the outside looking in, nobody is batting an eye at the cost of things in Denver.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by gopokes21

It just depends if they want help funding, maintaining, operating, and expanding the FasTracks network they rely on for attractive commutes to downtown (along with the added benefit of coordinated service delivery) or if they want to be on their own for operating that.

Aside from Denver Union Station and 38th and Blake a half-dozen smaller stations, Denver isn't really a feature of FasTracks and shouldn't maintain it if we are totally on our own for local transit.

Huh? Is this the typical "the real Denver is only the Center City" group think that's present in urbanite circles? Because Denver has damn near half of the light rail and commuter rail stations in the network and the majority of the high-ridership stations.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

AFAIK, the four-tenths percent dedicated FasTracks tax is enough to pay for the capital and maintenance costs of light/commuter rail. I do believe/guessing that the operational costs for rail service comes out of the other six-tenths percent RTD tax. But that's hardly unreasonable given that 7 rail corridors provide half the ridership of 142 bus routes (in 2019).

The 7/8-county RTD district voters wanted and agreed to pay for the four-tenths percent tax for a light and commuter rail system. wong isn't wrong that anticipating leftover money they then intended to use any extra money to enhance bus service. Oh well.

https://www3.drcog.org/documents/arc...racks_Plan.pdf

Go back and read the original 2004 proposal that underpinned the ballot (start of page 1-22). FasTracks was supposed to provide local bus service with an additional 300,000 hours over 2003 levels of service. Something that never materialized. It wasn't leftover money, it was a core part of the plan that, combined with a reconfigured local network, was supposed to provide frequent local service that would compliment and enhance the rail network.

[laniroj]

Originally Posted by gopokes21

You're trying to say that we can't serve areas of the city where density does exist because it didn't go so well when we spent $6-7 billion on LRT serving almost entirely industrial warehouse sections of Denver.

I'm not sure I follow that logic. Why don't we actually follow rooftops then?

So what do you want, more density, and more rooftops? Because it's on the way (and given how much more supply we need, we know that will be the case for a long time). Now we need to mitigate this cycle of increasing car-dependency along with density as a result of higher-income new residents - that shit aint sustainable. Overbuilding parking is also a HUGE part of our (un)affordability situation, and I think most of us also share the concerns about local cost escalations.

What I'm saying is Denver isn't dense, really anywhere. Cap Hill is dense for Denver, but not really that dense and certainly not dense or large enough to support a subway. Cap Hill, by the most generous measure, is about 18k/sq mile and it's maybe one square mile. NYC on average is 27k people/sq mile. We don't have anywhere close to enough people living in Denver to support a subway. Could we support little stretches that serve the convention center and cherry creek? Maybe, if tourism dollars went to pay for it but ridership won't carry the cost. We need vast amounts of additional density before things like subways start to make sense from a ridership perspective, we are nowhere close to being able to support those kinds of investments through ridership which is why I say we can vote to tax ourselves to build them, but it will ultimately cripple our ability to operate them over the long term.

[laniroj]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

The obvious "elephant in the room" is why should the voter/taxpayers of 7/8 counties pay six-tenths percent tax for bus service within the above defined boundaries?

Your point in and of itself is an elephant in the room, voters! LOL. Because voters are voters and all the city folk wanted wolves re-introduced to mountain communities?!

[rds70]

El Jebel Tower is back (although shorter).

Concept review submitted to City:

30 Story residential tower (340 feet) with some retail at the ground level. 120 residential units totaling more than 250,000 SQ FT. 5,000 SQ FT of retail space at Sherman Street level, and 175 space parking garage.

Architect is listed as DLW Architects, Dunedin, FL

[TakeFive]

In 2003/2004 I was lucky if I could distinguish the back end of a bus from the front end

Originally Posted by wong21fr

https://www3.drcog.org/documents/arc...racks_Plan.pdf

Go back and read the original 2004 proposal that underpinned the ballot (start of page 1-22). FasTracks was supposed to provide local bus service with an additional 300,000 hours over 2003 levels of service. Something that never materialized. It wasn't leftover money, it was a core part of the plan that, combined with a reconfigured local network, was supposed to provide frequent local service that would compliment and enhance the rail network.

Thanks for the link; this is a fun read. Fun thinking back.

These achievements, as well as many others, led to RTD being named this year as the best transit agency in North America by the American Public Transportation Association (APTA).

It's very clear early that FasTracks was a "metropolitan" vision with Denver at its core.

FasTracks responds to current sentiment on transportation needs within the metropolitan area. In a recent survey ... the lack of public/mass transportation was identified as one of the top transportation issues. The CDOT survey also states that if transportation funds became available, in the metro area, the highest priority for spending that money should be on light rail.

Yes, they do specifically mention Bus Rapid Transit... and they did that and it's hugely successful. They also mention enhancing - re-organizing bus service around light rail hubs etc.... and they've done that also. Whenever a new line was opened they redid the bus routes to feed into light rail. Ofc I'm most familiar with Nine Mile Station as a hub which has 9 bus routes that feed into that station.

Seriously, that's a helluva good planning effort. I'll finish reading but won't drone on...

In summary, the optics presented to voters were primarily about TRAINS; that's what I voted for...

You Sexy Thing
I believe in miracles
Where're you from, you sexy thing

We came close enough.

[SirLucasTheGreat]

Originally Posted by rds70

El Jebel Tower is back (although shorter).

Concept review submitted to City:



Architect is listed as DLW Architects, Dunedin, FL

That's cool! I was definitely skeptical of the +50 story original but this seems more realistic in this market

[The Dirt]

I thought they wanted to stick with the original tower because it was fully entitled and they wouldn't have to hire a new architect. Of course, building a 650 ft. hotel tower with 8 stories of parking wouldn't be the most profitable use of the site nowadays. Residential makes sense, but I wonder what they plan to do with the historical building? They've been working on the exterior for 3 years now.

[rds70]

A final rendering of the apartment project that will replace the Ramada Inn at Colfax and Downing (333 apartments, 6,200 square feet of retail, 7 stories):



The developer is Kairoi Residential.

[TakeFive]

Development; sweet sweet development

Originally Posted by gopokes21

Aside from Denver Union Station and 38th and Blake a half-dozen smaller stations, Denver isn't really a feature of FasTracks and shouldn't maintain it if we are totally on our own for local transit.

Not only for your benefit but for all of us, let's review the existing and potential TOD in and around or 'not too far' by train from central Denver. Since I've referenced corridors, let's paint a picture of potential buildout value for each corridor starting with the East Corridor and moving counter-clockwise. I'll guestimate values which I'll pull out of my butt so other's feedback is welcome.

QUESTION: Does anybody know the approximate value of the built-out Denver Union Station neighborhood, both public and private? Since this is virtually finished I assumed the value was readily searchable. I was wrong.

The hub of the wheel - Denver Union Station
neighborhood or "district" (which Ken uses) I'll guestimate at $1.5 billion to $2 billion.

East Corridor - along the A Line

• 38th & Blake Station - Value of TOD at buildout: Three quarters of a billion $'s and up
• Central Park Station - Value of TOD buildout: Pending urban/suburban density decisions I'd guess one-third to one-half of a billion $'s

North Corridor - The N Line

• 48th & Brighton / National Western Center Station - This is already a designated billion $ project. The potential for additional mixed-use development should be in the neighborhood of one-third of a billion $'s and up

Northwest Corridor The B and G Lines

• 41st and Fox Station - interesting conceptual plans out there, this TOD could easily be a half billion $'s or more.
• Pecos Junction Station - there's been some land assemblage but plans remain early stage - let's guess quarter billion $'s.

West Corridor - along the W Line

• Decatur - Federal Station - if you combine the master plans of Sun Valley and the Stadium District this one could pop nicely but assuming mid-level density we'll go with half a billion $'s but more likely 3/4 of a billion $'s.

South and Southwest Corridors

bunt likes this one and so do I; but we'll combine two station as one extended area of TOD. This has been traditionally a favored direction or part of town.

• I-25 & Broadway and Alameda Stations - one billion $'s and up.

Noteworthy:
I didn't include River Mile projections which will take advantage of and benefit from the transit station. Much the same could be noted about the Auraria campus. Rail transit is important for both of these.

In Total
Not counting DUS which is done there's an addition over $4 billion and likely closer to $5 billion in potential TOD before it's all done.

Aerotropolis Denver

• Couple of billion $'s of TOD?

[TakeFive]

I like this

Originally Posted by rds70

A final rendering of the apartment project that will replace the Ramada Inn at Colfax and Downing (333 apartments, 6,200 square feet of retail, 7 stories):



The developer is Kairoi Residential.

It's good that Kairoi has had the 'extra' time to focus on this after walking away from their pointless Bell Tower efforts.

While they were playing games with the LoDo Design Review crew, they came across a unique opportunity and moved quickly to acquire a site in Austin that they now will co-develop with Lincoln Property Co to build Austin's first 'super-tall' (at least 984 feet) office and residential tower. Who knows though the Pandemic problems with going forward on this one?

[gopokes21]

That Kairoi project is perfect. That stretch around Downing has gone really downhill during the pandemic - all of these delayed/stalled projects are becoming blight. Can't wait to see the Franklin/Colfax Burger King development move forward. Pretty much everything that's vacant/abandoned on that stretch of Colfax is so because of slowly-moving projects. Blight by pre-development, if you will.

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Development; sweet sweet development


Not only for your benefit but for all of us, let's review the existing and potential TOD in and around or 'not too far' by train from central Denver. Since I've referenced corridors, let's paint a picture of potential buildout value for each corridor starting with the East Corridor and moving counter-clockwise. I'll guestimate values which I'll pull out of my butt so other's feedback is welcome.

QUESTION: Does anybody know the approximate value of the built-out Denver Union Station neighborhood, both public and private? Since this is virtually finished I assumed the value was readily searchable. I was wrong.

The hub of the wheel - Denver Union Station
neighborhood or "district" (which Ken uses) I'll guestimate at $1.5 billion to $2 billion.

East Corridor - along the A Line

• 38th & Blake Station - Value of TOD at buildout: Three quarters of a billion $'s and up
• Central Park Station - Value of TOD buildout: Pending urban/suburban density decisions I'd guess one-third to one-half of a billion $'s

North Corridor - The N Line

• 48th & Brighton / National Western Center Station - This is already a designated billion $ project. The potential for additional mixed-use development should be in the neighborhood of one-third of a billion $'s and up

Northwest Corridor The B and G Lines

• 41st and Fox Station - interesting conceptual plans out there, this TOD could easily be a half billion $'s or more.
• Pecos Junction Station - there's been some land assemblage but plans remain early stage - let's guess quarter billion $'s.

West Corridor - along the W Line

• Decatur - Federal Station - if you combine the master plans of Sun Valley and the Stadium District this one could pop nicely but assuming mid-level density we'll go with half a billion $'s but more likely 3/4 of a billion $'s.

South and Southwest Corridors

bunt likes this one and so do I; but we'll combine two station as one extended area of TOD. This has been traditionally a favored direction or part of town.

• I-25 & Broadway and Alameda Stations - one billion $'s and up.

Noteworthy:
I didn't include River Mile projections which will take advantage of and benefit from the transit station. Much the same could be noted about the Auraria campus. Rail transit is important for both of these.

In Total
Not counting DUS which is done there's an addition over $4 billion and likely closer to $5 billion in potential TOD before it's all done.

Aerotropolis Denver

• Couple of billion $'s of TOD?

Almost entirely along the fringes of the City and County of Denver. Still, I appreciate your summary - you're not wrong, but a number of things can be true at once. All of the development is great but there's a lot of existing neighborhoods in Denver (in fact most of the City) and they're starting to get anxious about whether they will ever see mass transit.

What's REALLY concerning - you named a bunch of development hotspots, there is actually more development occurring in neighborhoods NOT served by mass transit. 9th + CO is a great example. Many of us in Congress Park are very concerned about adding 1,000 to 2,000 more units, and a ton of retail, in an auto-dependent area where traffic is already bad. We've already seen this happen around Lowry, Cherry Creek, and Glendale where major infill has exacerbated problems in an area that was already gridlocked. Cars aside, it's also really unpleasant and unsafe to be a bicyclist or pedestrian around bad traffic (Quebec, Monaco, Colfax, Colorado, Speer, York/Josephine/Univ, Park are all overwhelmed rn).

I do not want to oppose more major infill initiatives that truly improve our built environment, but we need to reconsider how auto-dependent these areas of the city are. I'm not sure how I feel right now about major infill at the Park Hill Golf Course, Monaco/Evans, Krisana, Colfax/Colorado, Johnson & Wales campus, Krameria area (super under the radar, but everything around there is being rezoned). Each of those areas will see at least 1,000 new units and we don't have any mass transit in east Denver. That's cumulatively at least 10,000 new units across rail-free east Denver over the next decade. Nobody else is concerned by this, and some people still say subway is "impractical"?

I'm trying really hard not to beat a dead horse (for instance I'll let the anti-core and anti-subway comments go) but there's just a few points that bear repeating, including the fact that FasTracks is a regional system not a Denver system. Sure it's better than nothing for Denver, but Denver aint its focus, and we don't really serve east Denver nor any natural urban corridors unless you count the 15 Bus and 0 Bus.

Many of RTD's rail lines, the south corridor cutting through Baker being a prime example, zip past actual Denver neighborhoods without stopping. Can't slow down the suburban commuters apparently.

edit: Forgot about Johnson & Wales, which is another huge redevelopment not served by any transit

[gopokes21]

Does anyone know what just broke ground on Park between California and Welton?

I know there was an approved SDP for another ugly REIT multifamily groundscraper (or landship if you will) but then that site got sold to a different developer...

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by gopokes21

Does anyone know what just broke ground on Park between California and Welton?

I know there was an approved SDP for another ugly REIT multifamily groundscraper (or landship if you will) but then that site got sold to a different developer...

600 Park Avenue? Did that finally break ground? Still the same 13 story, quarter
block development as a few years back. I believe that Greystar is the developer.

Interestingly, that was the first project to go through the AS (now Downtown) design review.