DENVER | Main Development Thread #7

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by SirLucasTheGreat

I like the discussion of rail in the abstract but I do not think that we will be in the position to make capital-intensive investments like that soon, especially when we already have a 100 mile rail system, despite being imperfectly designed. Like bunt_q said, we are not at European level density and won't be close unless virtually every planned unit in GT, AS, RiNo, and River Mile are constructed. I would just like to see neighborhoods like Golden Triangle, Arapahoe Square, LoDo, and River North maximize residential infill to make Denver's urban core much more vibrant. From a transit standpoint, I am really interested in projects like the 5280 loop and revitalization of the platte river. I went to law school in San Francisco. Much of SF is not very well served by either BART or Muni Rail. However, MUNI's bus system was great and I used multiple times every day for several years. It seemed like almost every stop had a real-time information monitor. It is so much more convenient walking to the end of the block in SF and knowing, based on real-time GPS data, how far away a bus is. I think RTD provides comparable functionality on their app but there is an appeal to having those features at the stops themselves. It makes transit much more visible and convenient. In addition, Denver can do a lot more with its bike system. If we had a bike system half as decent as Boulder or Ft. Collins, that would really add to the livability of the city.

Nice comment!

It's mostly city focused which is fine.

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Time is also your friend in regards to the debt servicing levels for FasTracks. 2035-40 is the magic time period because that's when the initial debt for FasTracks begins to drop off the books as RTD has new debt capacity to tackle additional projects. We had a discussion a number of years ago if it would be legal for RTD to infidelity extend the debt capacity and 4/10's tax to continue to develop more aspects of FasTracks and even new corridors, but I don't recall if it was a viable path forward. If it is, there's a funding opportunity right there.

That must have been before I had any clue and you and bunt were more intimate with those doc's than I.

From what I've gathered my guess is that Fastracks' tax couldn't add new rail projects aside from additional extensions. Whether that would include extending the G Line into Golden I'm not sure.

I will assume that any freed-up bonding capacity within the FasTracks tax will be needed to fund refurbishment and replacement.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by gopokes21

Yes, Gov Polis is going to make sure that every inch of Boulder County is served by mass transit before any Denver neighborhoods get mass transit. We all knew this would be coming.

I'm all for different strokes but our transit system is like spreading peanut butter thinly over bread. We've had multiple pages of this discussion already but it's a joke that Arapahoe County is better served by transit than Denver, but that's how politics works.

For me, Context is Everything

With respect to Polis I was merely stirring the pot for grins; as a citizen he has but one vote like everybody else. Those 'Stimulus' $'s afaik were for RTD's "General" fund. Any train to Boulder has to be funded within the FasTracks budget. Good luck with that and twister244's comment is especially relevant;[ B]bunt's[/B] comment also.

Back to DUS - neighborhood

That $2 billion in buildout is ~75% private sector capital. That's a Schnitt-load of taxes that did and will continue to flow into City of Denver's coffers. Afaik, The public sector costs are outside of FasTracks.

With respect to TOD -
within the (extended) city center, the projected TOD will be closer to 90% private sector investment to 10% public sector investment. That will be many Schnitt-loads of tax revenue for Denver. That's an amazing return on investment.

Fastracks and Beyond

Your $7 billion figure sounds reasonable for the total buildout of rail projects (plus BRT to Boulder). That's an averaged cost of $62 million per mile over all 113 miles. Of that $7 billion, ~$3 billion came via Federal Grants.

Austin's Project Connect light rail will cost closer to 4X as much per mile. That's like saying Denver built 75% of their 113-mile rail system FOR FREE compared to Austin.

[Robert.hampton]

Originally Posted by coolmandan03

1 - yes it was, it was 3 separate lots that were joined as a single lot in 1924 (Denver public library maps). Since the neighborhood is filled with buildings developed from 1880-1890, it's more than likely that there were structures here - see map -> https://ducdn.denverurbanism.com/wp-...ghborhoods.jpg
2 - I fail to see why this is relevant... so a storage facility in Stapleton is OK now, but not in 20+ years if it becomes more dense (and therefore needed more)?
3 - So should they build a historic building instead? How do you do that, Doctor Who?
4 - Yes it was - it was built because of the extremely booming neighborhood and lack of places to store things as new comers came into Denver and settled for tiny apartments while they house searched (You must not have read the article I posted)
5 - Plenty of surface parking lots all of the neighborhood and city... This is Denver, not Manhattan
6 - Your right. And by placing self storage in a dense neighborhood, people don't have to drive to a storage unit in Stapleton (where it seems you think they should be). So it removes traffic!
7 - You can walk 1.5 miles (union station) in 5 minutes? That's an 18mph walk. At that pace, the 1926 storage is only an additional 3 min away.
8 - it's needed for the residences. As other said - it's not shiny but required; just like utilities and other needs. It's almost 100 years later - people still have stuff to store; especially in dense growing neighborhood. If we want people to continue to live in the smaller old apartment buildings in Cap Hill (those that don't have on-site storage or gyms), then the community will provide them nearby. If not, the apartments will go empty and they'll be demolished. When my wife and I looked at apartments, an on-site storage unit was a must (just for winter tires and Christmas decorations alone) - and that wouldn't fit in any apartment we looked at.

This is just beyond dumb. You are saying walking to self storage is as important as hot water because you need to fill up a storage unit with Christmas ornaments (and be able to walk to it once a year, because driving to get your Christmas ornaments is a big hassle). Ugggghhhh

[gopokes21]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Time is also your friend in regards to the debt servicing levels for FasTracks. 2035-40 is the magic time period because that's when the initial debt for FasTracks begins to drop off the books as RTD has new debt capacity to tackle additional projects. We had a discussion a number of years ago if it would be legal for RTD to infidelity extend the debt capacity and 4/10's tax to continue to develop more aspects of FasTracks and even new corridors, but I don't recall if it was a viable path forward. If it is, there's a funding opportunity right there.

The bonded debt on FasTracks won't be as big of an issue as it is now throughout the remaining term on it. Here in ten years we'll all be making 25% more and COL will be 50% more; simultaneously we'll have paid it down some and it could probably even be refinanced in some strategic way.

It's kind of like my townhouse that I bought in 2018 for what I thought was an insane amount of money (I wouldn't have approved the loan). Already most comps in Congress Park/greater Cap Hill sell for 25-50% more today. Also in 2018 my appraiser used townhome comps from north of City Park which I thought was insane - just 3 short years later, that might actually be to my benefit. Don't underestimate how seemingly concrete things can change.

I think the reason we're always behind the growth curve here in Denver is just that we're not thinking big enough. We accomplish big ideas that keep attracting more growth than we expect, and despite every prediction to the contrary - Denver's growth has proven more elastic than diametric. We keep growing faster, not slower.

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Back to DUS - neighborhood

That $2 billion in buildout is ~75% private sector capital. That's a Schnitt-load of taxes that did and will continue to flow into City of Denver's coffers. Afaik, The public sector costs are outside of FasTracks.

Fastracks and Beyond

Your $7 billion figure sounds reasonable for the total buildout of rail projects (plus BRT to Boulder). That's an averaged cost of $62 million per mile over all 113 miles. Of that $7 billion, ~$3 billion came via Federal Grants.

Austin's Project Connect light rail will cost closer to 4X as much per mile. That's like saying Denver built 75% of their 113-mile rail system FOR FREE compared to Austin.

I think what matters more than the costs or any efficiencies is what we actually get for our investment. We've spent an amazing amount of money; $2 billion later the Union Station neighborhood is basically the City of Oz, and we have mass transit serving the entire region but not Denver neighborhoods. Money is not our problem.

Going forward, we know FasTracks can't be the end of transit projects in Denver. It's going to be very challenging to effectively serve the quickly densifying neighborhoods across Denver, because streetcars will be stuck in traffic and the sprawl of urban Denver is too extensive to serve at small-scale.

Grade-separated corridors will be very expensive but the land value increase from an effective mass transit system (meaning more convenient than driving) yields significant value capture potential, which would be combined by FTA grants, hopefully state funding, meaning that the actual local match doesn't have to be prohibitive.

[TakeFive]

Denver Urban Activism Revisited

Originally Posted by gopokes21

I think the reason we're always behind the growth curve here in Denver is just that we're not thinking big enough. We accomplish big ideas that keep attracting more growth than we expect, and despite every prediction to the contrary - Denver's growth has proven more elastic than diametric. We keep growing faster, not slower.

For many years Denver has had an active group of Urban Activists. It probably started bubbling up in 2012. It appears as though organization started by the Spring of 2014. The group was anointed the name "Denveright." Their primary motivation was improved "mobility" starting with sidewalks to bike lanes on up. But Denveright also covered the various interests and city districts. The city, itself also had many must-do priorities.

Denveright website

Every nine years or so Denver floats a REALLY BIG bond issue for investing in and improving existing city assets and infrastructure. This time around the process was significantly a grass roots planning effort. In the end they ended up with $937 million list of over 500 projects in what is now called "Elevate Denver" bond program.

They spent an intense year determining priorities and making final decisions. Transportation & Mobility projects approved for the bond program totaled $431,042,500 (46%). The voters approved the effort in November of 2017.

You may be particularly interested in Districts 9 & 10 although Baker is in District 7.

Happy Hunting:

• Map of Denver Districts
• Elevate Denver website
• Program Overview
• COUNCIL DISTRICT 10 PROJECTS
• COUNCIL DISTRICT 9 PROJECTS

When they started the envisioning 'wish list' phase, when asked about transit everybody wanted to ride a train; buses not so much - but it was a wish list so that's to be expected. The $55 million for the East Colfax BRT was actually quite a leap for Denver-only voters.

[gopokes21]

Yes, $55 million is a pretty significant local match (especially compared to Aurora's $0) for a mass transit project that won't offer anything that isn't already on East Colfax (and get stuck in traffic). We already have a pretty good tandem of local and express service, some nicer stations, streetscape elements, signal priority, and extended traffic cycles. I guess we'll see what $300 million for branding does to change all of that, because that was clearly the problem.

Elevate Denver is a great example of lagging behind the growth curve. Most large cities, particularly those with good debt ratings (well-managed, growing cities), use general obligation bonds to finance most routine infrastructure and maintenance (repavings, new trails/bike lanes, police stations, parks, etc). Everything this side of "megaprojects" which are financed differently.

$937 million is a very aspirational 10-year GO bond for a city of 600,000 people, which Denver was when that planning initiative began. It is not a very impressive issuance for a city of 800,000 people, which Denver is close to now if not already. It's downright paltry for a city of 900,000 people, which Denver will be once Elevate Denver is complete. Meanwhile the state isn't helping with their fair share because they projected Denver's growth to flatten and non-Richard Florida (more conservative) demographers all think El Paso County is the future of Colorado.

Denver is simultaneously rolling in dough and under resourced. Someone could do a lot of good by realizing that and connecting potential resources to solutions that confront Denver's biggest problems head-on instead of incrementally tinkering around the edges.

The other cities I've lived in, Dallas, Austin, and OKC, all issue larger GO bonds than that, and none of those cities are consolidated city/counties (which effectively doubles the scope of local govt). I don't know any other cities that have transformed themselves as much as those three. Denver has a stronger headwind but it hasn't harnessed the wind in its sails. All this is just to say that Denver should take a more active role in its own transformation, but that's just me - I keep "provoking" discussion with this viewpoint lol.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by gopokes21

Denver is simultaneously rolling in dough and under resourced.

You keep saying this, but I am not sure what reality you are living in. I have seen an awful lot of City projects get cancelled this year because there isn't enough money.

Originally Posted by gopokes21

The other cities I've lived in, Dallas, Austin, and OKC, all issue larger GO bonds than that, and none of those cities are consolidated city/counties (which effectively doubles the scope of local govt). I don't know any other cities that have transformed themselves as much as those three. Denver has a stronger headwind but it hasn't harnessed the wind in its sails. All this is just to say that Denver should take a more active role in its own transformation, but that's just me - I keep "provoking" discussion with this viewpoint lol.

What you seem to forget is that most cities can issue bonds/debt without going to the voters to authorize every penny. Denver cannot.

Remember, before any of your subway dreams come true - let's say even one starter line from Lower Highland to Alameda/Colorado via Cherry Creek and Downtown, so ~7 miles, call it - the voters of Denver would have to approve a ballot measure that say something along the lines of:

SHALL CITY TAXES BE INCREASED $146,000,000 ANNUALLY FOR A THIRTY-FIVE YEAR PERIOD AND $42,000,000 PER YEAR THEREAFTER IN PERPETUITY, AND SHALL CITY DEBT BE INCREASED $2,000,000,000 WITH A MAXIMUM REPAYMENT COST OF $3,200,000,000, TO PAY FOR LOCAL TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS, AND IN CONNECTION THEREWITH, SHALL THE CITY SALES AND USE TAX RATE BE INCREASED BY 1.00% FOR A THIRTY-FIVE YEAR PERIOD AND 0.30% THEREAFTER...

That's a heavy lift politically for anything - there is a reason TABOR requires the horribly scary and aggressive ballot language. Even more of a lift for a single subway line that would only serve a small portion of the city. By my back of the napkin (rough, but it's probably not terribly far off, unless a lot of new federal dollars appear), for initial capital costs and then ongoing operating costs, you'd need to increase the City sales tax by about 20%, or a full percent (as much as RTD gets)... for one 7-mile line. (I could do property taxes too, but those are much smaller; you'd have to double the City's take of those.)

You've mentioned value capture a couple times. While that would help defray some of the hit to the City longer term (maybe you could reduce the long term tax to cover O&M somewhat), there's really no good way to capture that upfront to cover initial capital costs of the project. Certainly not at this quantum. Some folks get paid a lot of money to go around the country bursting the dreams of people who think value capture will solve their problems. It's tricky, and even in the best case requires substantial credit support. (Best recent example is probably Chicago and their use of TIF.) Moynihan Station in New York didn't even pencil on value capture alone - and that was with 1,000,000 square feet of facebook office space sitting on top - it still needed state support.

When you say confront Denver's biggest problems head-on... who has the political capital to take something like that to the voters? Nobody I know of in City politics today.

[coolmandan03]

Originally Posted by Robert.hampton

because driving to get your Christmas ornaments is a big hassle

And this exact quote is the #1 reason why everyone needs a car. You're the problem. You're the car culture.

[TakeFive]

Let me Google that

Originally Posted by gopokes21

The other cities I've lived in, Dallas, Austin, and OKC, all issue larger GO bonds than that, and none of those cities are consolidated city/counties (which effectively doubles the scope of local govt).

Cities by population in 2020

• Austin - passed the One Million mark in 2020
• Dallas - 1,350,000
• Denver - 750,000

City Infrastructure funding programs

Austin
The 2016 Mobility Bond is putting Austin In Motion

Austin voters approved $720 million in bonds in 2016 for transportation and mobility improvements throughout the city.

NOTE: This is mostly a street improvement program including intersections; bikeways, sidewalks and trails were also included.

Dallas
2017 DALLAS BOND PROGRAM - $1.05 BILLION

The 2017 Dallas Bond Program was approved by voters November 7, 2017. The Program consists of approximately 1,400 projects organized into ten propositions

NOTE: On a per capita comparison Dallas program is much smaller than Denver's.

Denver - $937 million - over 500 projects, passed in 2017

Rail transit ridership - According to the 2019 Fourth Quarter Report from APTA

Light Rail Average Weekday Ridership

• Austin - None
• Dallas - 92,000
• Denver - 95,300

Commuter Rail Average Weekday Ridership

• Austin - 2,200
• Dallas - 7,200
• Denver - 40,000

Combined Light and Commuter Rail Average Weekday Ridership

• Austin - 2,200
• Dallas - 99,200
• Denver - 135,300

NOTE: Denver has 33% more rail ridership than Austin and Dallas combined. Also note that Dallas has 80% more population than Denver; Austin has 33% more population than Denver.

Since transit systems serve the metro areas, the MSA populations are:

• Austin/Round Rock - 2,250,000
• Dallas/Ft Worth - 7,750,000
• Denver - 3,000,000

[Ich]

Saw this add on my FB feed. Looks like someone on behalf of Greystar is giving peeps the opportunity to become an investor for a shovel ready project in Union Station. Think it’s the project at the end of 19th. Curious how much funding they need before they break ground.

https://app.crowdstreet.com/invexp/p...station-denver

[SirLucasTheGreat]

I drove around town yesterday. The hotel near 35th and Brighton and the apartment tower at 10th and Bannock are making a lot vertical progress. Market Station and Mcgregor Square are looking great but I'm interested to see how long it takes for many retail tenants to start up on the ground floor

[bulldurhamer]

There's activity on the 40th/Walnut Crescent site in Rino. Looks like a fence is about to go up and a parking lot is getting torn up.


https://www.crescentcommunities.com/...ly/novel-rino/

[Paulopolis]

^^Market Station and McGregor Square are such nice developments. I'm excited about those two.

Modera Cherry Creek is well under construction, and there's been a ton of activity at the development at 18th & Emerson that burned down.

[bunt_q]

So I did a Jefferson Park / Sloan's Lake walkabout this weekend with the family. Holy toledo there is some awful, awful stuff in there. And not a few - entire blocks replaced wholesale with slot homes selling for a million bucks each. It's almost enough to make a person understand why Denver Fugly exists!

[Robert.hampton]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

So I did a Jefferson Park / Sloan's Lake walkabout this weekend with the family. Holy toledo there is some awful, awful stuff in there. And not a few - entire blocks replaced wholesale with slot homes selling for a million bucks each. It's almost enough to make a person understand why Denver Fugly exists!

Driving up 17th from Federal gives me a little indigestion.

[laniroj]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Light Rail Average Weekday Ridership

• Austin - None
• Dallas - 92,000
• Denver - 95,300

Commuter Rail Average Weekday Ridership

• Austin - 2,200
• Dallas - 7,200
• Denver - 40,000

Combined Light and Commuter Rail Average Weekday Ridership

• Austin - 2,200
• Dallas - 99,200
• Denver - 135,300

NOTE: Denver has 33% more rail ridership than Austin and Dallas combined. Also note that Dallas has 80% more population than Denver; Austin has 33% more population than Denver.

That's all fine and good but a better comparison would be ridership PER MILE OF TRACK. If you have 20 lines spanning 1,000 miles that generate twice as much as 2 lines spanning 100 miles, it's not really a relevant comparison (at least for funding and financial viability discussions).

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

So I did a Jefferson Park / Sloan's Lake walkabout this weekend with the family. Holy toledo there is some awful, awful stuff in there. And not a few - entire blocks replaced wholesale with slot homes selling for a million bucks each. It's almost enough to make a person understand why Denver Fugly exists!

So blocks of 1950's era fugly replaced by 2010's fugly?

I have never understood people's sentimental feelings toward's Sloan's Lake.... outside of the park it has all the character of Montbello asides from some bigger trees. Though Sloan's is certainly is a testament to how a good-intention building form change can have horrible unintended consequences.

[SirLucasTheGreat]

Saw a lot of construction equipment at the Santa Fe Yards development this morning. I believe that the city is building a park there but there were bulldozers and other equipment all over the entire site. Does anyone have any understanding of what is going on there? That is a huge project

[rds70]

A building permit has been submitted for the dual brand hotel at 1320 Glenarm:

[BG918]

Originally Posted by bulldurhamer

There's activity on the 40th/Walnut Crescent site in Rino. Looks like a fence is about to go up and a parking lot is getting torn up.


https://www.crescentcommunities.com/...ly/novel-rino/

Saw that, looks like Milender White has mobilized. Now we just need World Trade Center to get restarted across the street.