Denver Infill Blog

August 2005

Here's where I will regularly share news, observations, rumors, ideas, or anything else about urban redevelopment, infill projects or Downtown Denver that doesn't fit into one of the other sections on this website.

Blog Archives

July 2005

August 30, 2005.   It's been a slow week and not a lot of news on the infill front, but into today's Rocky Mountain News (Trump's Hat Barely in Ring) we learn that Donald Trump's development company filed a 6-paragraph Statement of Qualifications in response to the city's Request for Qualifications for the master developer position at Union Station.  Any serious SOQ would be dozens of pages in length at a minimum for such a huge and complex project, and some developers provided upwards of 90 pages.  Trump submits 6 paragraphs.  Either his ego is so inflated that he thinks he is beyond needing to prove to anyone that he is qualified to do this job, or he did it as a joke.  Either way, is that someone we really want to be in charge of one of the most important projects in the history of the city?  Hardly.   

August 24, 2005.   So Donald Trump is interested in serving as the master developer for the Union Station redevelopment project!  According to an article (Trump Up For City Project) in yesterday's Denver Post, Trump's company was one of 11 firms that submitted qualifications for the master developer role.  Who knows if Trump will ultimately be chosen, but let's take a quick look at exactly what land is being considered under this master plan.  What we are not talking about is all the undeveloped land between Union Station and the railroad tracks.  Most of that land is covered by a different plan, the Commons PUD (Planned Unit Development), which you can view as Project # 24 on the Central Platte Valley (North) neighborhood page. The area in question is just the land between Wynkoop and Wewatta Streets and between 16th and 18th Streets, plus the little triangle-shaped parcel across from the Gates HQ.  For more on the Denver Union Station Master Plan, see Project # 23 on the Central Platte Valley (North) page.  Here's a link to a graphic from that page showing the parcels covered under this master developer proposal (the areas in orange).  The total buildout of the Union Station parcels is about 1.4 million square feet, not counting the historic station building itself.  The gap in the development pattern along the 17th Street alignment is for the Union Station view corridor, the topic of yesterday's blog entry.

Does Denver want "The Donald" in charge of this high-profile redevelopment opportunity?  It would elevate the city's profile and provide a fresh perspective on Downtown development.  On the other hand, he could also be a royal pain in the neck.  Who knows?  Either way, it's good to see some national interest in this project and that it's moving forward.  A follow up article in today's Post (Whirlwind Tour Sold Trump Team) indicates that the RTD-owned block where Market Street Station is currently located is also to be part of the territory redeveloped by the chosen master developer.  

August 23, 2005.  A few more details have emerged about the proposed St. Charles Place at Riverfront Park development in the Central Platte Valley (see Project # 30).  Apparently, the project will now be called One Riverfront Park and will consist of two components: a 7-story condo building and 3-story townhomes.  The condo building will be located next to the Park Place lofts, while the townhomes will be located just north of the condos, next to the Glass House towers which are currently under construction.  The "step down" in height with the townhomes is necessary due to the Union Station view corridor, which preserves the view of the center of Union Station's west-facing facade.  Here are two images that describe the Union Station view corridor: This first image is a cross-section drawing showing how the 160-foot wide view corridor relates to Union Station as viewed from the west.  Next, here is part of one of the pages from the Riverfront Park P.U.D. that shows the view corridor with the St. Charles (One Riverfront Park) project.  Photos of the proposed One Riverfront Park project coming soon.

August 19, 2005.  Big news today!  How does a new 22-story building for Downtown sound?  In today's Rocky, John Rebchook has a story (Deal Nears on Luxury Hotel Downtown) about the Denver Athletic Club hotel, a project that was originally announced back when Bruce Berger was unsuccessfully trying to launch a convention headquarters hotel and before the city stepped in and put the Hyatt project together.  Once the Hyatt started, the DAC project was put on indefinite hold.  Well, it's back!  I do have the project listed currently as an Infill Update from the previous proposal.  Check out Block 171 for info on the project (as envisioned back then) as well as a rendering of what it was proposed to look like.  Of course, all that has changed.  According to Rebchook's article, it is now going to be 22 stories and will have an entirely different look and a different architect.  Until I have a chance to update the page for Block 171, here's a close-up of the rendering of the new hotel (Proposed DAC Hotel August 2005). 

August 18, 2005.  There's a new development in the ongoing saga over the proposed removal of Block 242 & 044 from the Lower Downtown Historic District... a necessary first step toward the development of a 30-story condo tower at that location.  This has been the topic of two blog entries already, see August 10 and July 11.  The latest: the Landmark Preservation Commission agreed at their meeting of August 2 to hold a Public Hearing on the matter of de-designating the block from the LoDo district.  Here are the relevant pages from the August 2 LPC minutes.  Of note is the comment from commission member Stephen Leonard: "I don't think anyone doesn't like the project.  It's the precedent of chopping blocks out of districts."  If Mr. Leonard is correct and that the question is really about precedent and process, that's a good sign. At least we're not dealing with people who are fundamentally opposed to the project.  The Public Hearing has been scheduled for Tuesday, September 20, 2005.  I'll get the specifics (time/place) and post it here when available.  In the meantime, take a look at the site and decide for yourself: Should these two triangular-shaped blocks split by Cherry Creek be in the LoDo Historic district and subject to its 55-foot height limit?  If you don't think so, and you support the removal of these blocks from the district to allow for Mr. Geller's high-rise project to move forward, then please plan on attending the public meeting!  This is one of those situations where maybe a small number of individuals could decide the fate of a project like this.  Mark September 20 down on your calendar and don't just say you support Downtown development. Prove it!

August 15, 2005.  According to the most recent (2nd Quarter 2005) office market reports, Denver's Central Business District was the big winner among the many office submarkets in the greater Denver metro region.  The Downtown vacancy rate is now down to 12.8%, a marked improvement over just a year or two ago when rates were around 20%.  Trailing the Downtown market in vacancy is the southeast Tech Center-area market, which is still up around 17%.  Does this mean we'll see office construction in Downtown Denver any time soon?  Unlikely, except for build-to-suit construction, like what we're seeing in the new EPA Regional HQ building where the old Postal Annex used to be, and the new Denver Newspaper Agency building under construction at Broadway and Colfax.  Since both of these organizations are already located Downtown, the space they will leave behind when they move to their new buildings will add to the inventory of existing vacant space in the CBD.  But at least the trend is in the right direction.  For now, however, residential is king in Downtown Denver real estate and probably will remain so for the near future.

August 12, 2005.  David Owen Tryba Architects (DOTA) has been selected by the City of Denver to be the consultant to establish the urban design plan for the entire Denver Justice Center complex.  While specific architects will still be chosen through an international design competition to design the individual buildings in the complex, DOTA will set the overall context and design framework for the project.  For more information, read the article (Tryba to Design $378 Million Justice Center) by John Rebchook at GlobeSt.com.  In addition to this news about the Justice Center, on June 21, 2005, the Denver Justice Center Final Report was released by the City.  It was prepared by the consultant team of Reilly Johnson Architecture, Anderson Mason Dale Architects, and Helmuth, Obata + Kassabaum, Inc.  In their final report are two significant changes to the preliminary plan for the complex as recommended by the Urban Land Institute in their report of April 2004.

In the ULI report, the recommendation was for the Courts building to be located on the eastern block next to the US Mint, while the Detention facility was to be located on the western block, between Elati and Fox.  Additionally, the ULI report also recommended that Gene Amole Way (1400 block of Elati) be converted into a landscaped pedestrian-only plaza.  In the Final report from this June, the recommendation is to switch the location of the Court and Detention facilities.  The Detention facility will go next to the Mint, and the Courts will go on the block to the west.  The rationale for the change, according to the report, is:

"The east block option minimizes the impact of the Detention loading and sally port functions by locating them on Delaware Street, opposite the manufacturing wing of the Mint. In addition, having the Courts building on the west block facilitates possible future expansion of the Justice Center to the west more readily than if the Detention Center was located there. The Detention Center is not planned for expansion and on the west block it would block Courts expansion west of Fox Street from the new facility. The Detention Center as planned will be 80 feet high, whereas the Court building’s tallest component will approach 108 feet. The shorter Detention Facility is more compatible with the Mint from a height and mass standpoint and on the east block it provides a transition to the higher Courts building. Locating the Courts building on the west block will assure that the public will view it as they approach the Justice Center from the west, as opposed to the Detention Facility. The visual presence of the Detention Facility is minimized if it is located between the Courts building and the Mint."

Also, Gene Amole Way will not be made into a pedestrian plaza.  Instead, the Detention facility will be set back from Colfax, creating in front of that building a public plaza.  Gene Amole Way will remain a two-lane through street, although one with significant pedestrian amenities and landscaping.  The rationale for this change is stated as follows:

"The conceptual design preserves Gene Amole Way as both a pedestrian and a vehicular connection from the Golden Triangle Neighborhood and to the Silver Triangle north of Colfax. The site will be activated during non-operational hours by vehicular and pedestrian traffic on Gene Amole Way. The idea of creating a “superblock” by closing the street was carefully considered and was the basis of many potential concepts. However, the “superblock” concept was ultimately dismissed in favor of maintaining vehicular use on Gene Amole Way. The closed street would be largely uninhabited during non-operational hours and it would contribute to the creation of unnecessarily large and inactive urban spaces."

Here are a few renderings from the report.  Remember, these are not what the buildings will necessarily look like, but represent the location, orientation, and massing of the various buildings in the new Justice Center complex. (DJC Site Plan), (DJC Complex from NE), (DJC Complex from SW), (DJC Courts from SE), (DJC Detention from NE), (DJC Parking Garage from NE).  To view or download the entire report, go to the city's website here.  Warning: The whole report is 55 MB in size!    

August 11, 2005.  How much has the Central Platte Valley in Denver changed over the past 150 years?  Let's take a look.  Here's a handout I put together for the walking tour I led during the national conference of the American Planning Association held here in Denver in 2003 (CPV History).  The photos in the handout are courtesy of the Western History Collection at the Denver Public Library (which, if you've never investigated it, is well worth the visit at: http://photoswest.org/presearch.html).  Then, to provide another perspective of change in the CPV, here are two pictures, one from the same Western History Collection at DPL taken of the now-demolished 16th Street Viaduct under construction over the Platte River in 1922, and one taken by me of the new Pedestrian Bridge over the Platte at the exact same location in 2005 (CPV Bridge Comparison).  Visible in both photos is the historic D&F Tower in the background. 

August 10, 2005.  Denver's Landmark Preservation Commission (LPC), whose oversight responsibilities include the approval of any demolition, renovation, or construction of structures in any of Denver's designated historic districts, recently met to review the preliminary plans by Denver developer Richard "Buzz" Geller for his site at 14th & Larimer, where he plans a high-rise condominium tower.  The tower is planned in the 350-foot to 370-foot range, with about 30 floors, with the top of the proposed tower having approximately the same elevation as the historic D & F Tower at 16th and Arapahoe.  The situation is complicated, but in a nutshell, the developer wants to remove the site from being within the boundaries of the Lower Downtown Historic District, since any new building within that district would have to meet a 55 foot height limit.  The Lower Downtown Design Review Board (LDDRB) gave their preliminary approval to removing the site from the LoDo district (see my blog entry from July 11), but since the site is currently within the LoDo historic district, the LPC gets to address the matter as well.  If you read the minutes from the LDDRB from July 11 and then read the minutes from the July 19 LPC meeting, you should get the picture of what's going on.  What's next is a joint meeting between the LPC and the LDDRB and possibly a public hearing after that.  But from reading their minutes, it appears the LPC might need some convincing.  If you'd like to see this tower happen, I suggest you contact the members of the LPC and the LDDRB and tell them how you feel.  Here are links to the City's website with a list of the members of these boards: LPC and LDDRB.  Also check out the Big Picture section for a photo simulation prepared by DenverInfill.com showing the location and approximate massing of Geller's proposed tower.

August 9, 2005.  More information was released today about the 30-story high-rise planned by the St. Charles Town Company for the corner of 14th and Stout on Block 131.  The project will be Downtown's first age-restricted project, aimed at those individuals 50 years of age or more.  This is great news.  A residential tower oriented towards seniors located next door to the proposed 41-story condominium tower planned by the Nichols Partnership geared toward young professionals makes for a great combination.  The age diversity of these two projects' residents will further enhance Downtown's demographics. Plus, the proximity of this site to several light rail stations makes it particularly attractive for older residents as they become more transit dependent.  For more information, read the Denver Post article (New Condo Tower on Tap). 

August 8, 2005.  A few new Infill rumors...  Looks like a condo development called "The Rapids" may be in the works for along the east side of Platte Street just north of the Platte River Rowing Club near 19th Street in the Central Platte Valley.  Also, word is that there are several new developments being planned for the Highland neighborhood, including a new condo development on 16th Street between Boulder and Central, and another residential project at 15th & Boulder.  I'll see what more info I can dig up to get these upgraded to official "Infill Updates."  Of course, I'm always happy to receive infill news from DenverInfill.com visitors.  If you know about any of these, send me an email! Finally, since we're talking about the Highland and Central Platte Valley neighborhoods, the Highland Bridge, the third and final pedestrian bridge linking the Highland neighborhood to Downtown is now under construction.  A construction fence is in place at the east end, and equipment and supplies are starting to slowly accumulate at the site.  DenverInfill.com will keep you updated with periodic construction photos as this project builds towards completion in Fall 2006.  If you're not familiar with what this bridge will look like, check out project #1 on the Central Platte Valley (North) page, or visit the project website at www.highlandbridgedenver.com.

August 7, 2005.  The whole mixed-use concept is alive and well in Downtown Denver's urban infill developments. According to the DenverInfill.com database, of the 123 projects that have some residential land use component, 47 or approximately 38% of them have some type of additional use incorporated, such as ground-floor retail, office, or hotel uses, while 76 are residential only. This is a significant percentage, considering the number of residential projects that consist of townhome, rowhouse, or low-rise building types where vertical integration of uses is not typically attempted.  The median number of residential units in projects without any other use is 30, and the median number of residential units in projects that incorporate other types of uses is 96.  In terms of total units, as of today's Infill Scoreboard totals, 6,167 residential units are located in buildings without any other land use type, and 6,826 residential units are located in mixed-use buildings of some type. 

August 5, 2005.  Today we have a bit of a rant against a Rocky Mountain News article that ran on Monday, August 1, 2005. It's been bothering me ever since I read it, so now you get to hear about it.  I think it has to be one of the best examples of bad journalism, sloppy statistics, and "so what?" reporting I've read in quite a while from one of our dailies.  First, please read the article (More Than Just a Suburb), then come back to the blog so I can explain.

OK, so this was a happy little piece about how Aurora is becoming a "big city" and how it's approaching "twin city" status with Denver, right?  I won't dwell (too much) on the fact that this supposed "twin city" status is based solely on municipal population, which anyone who takes a moment to think about it realizes is an arbitrary measure that has little to do with urbanity or the greatness of a city.  Please don't take this as anti-Aurora, because I think, as a suburb, Aurora has made good progress of late in planning for density and in diversifying its community.  But no one would ever confuse Denver/Aurora with the likes of Minneapolis/St. Paul or Tampa/St. Petersburg or San Francisco/Oakland or Dallas/Fort Worth.  The comparison is nonsensical in every way other than perhaps population, and even that, as we shall see, does not apply in this case.   

Anyway, let's get to why this article is so bad, beyond the point made above.  The article starts off with the sub-headline of "Burgeoning Aurora could pass Denver in size as early as 2035."  OK.  That's plausible.  So let's check out the numbers and see if that makes sense. 

The first sentence in the fourth paragraph says this: "According to city projections, Aurora could be bigger than Denver with 580,057 residents as soon as 2035 if growth exceeds 2 percent per year."  Wow.  "If growth exceeds 2 percent per year" is a little vague, don't you think?  If Aurora's growth rate was, say, 15 percent per year (which does exceed 2 percent, by the way), then Aurora would have a 2035 population of over 20 million, making it the largest city in the United States!  Perhaps something a little more specific next time would be helpful.  Anyway, we're also not told the base year from which the forecasts are made, nor the specific population for Aurora for that base year.  But let's assume the base year is 2005 and the base population used was the consultant's estimate of 303,833.  After some quick number-crunching in Excel, I find that an annual growth rate of 2.179% would result in a 2035 population for Aurora of 580,075.  Close enough.  There's only one small problem... what's Denver's population expected to be in 2035?  The article doesn't say.  But according to the State Demographer's office, Denver's population in 2030 (five years short of 2035) is forecast to be 752,753 while DRCOG's forecast for Denver for 2030 is 720,945!  Wait. I'm confused.  I thought they said that Aurora would be bigger than Denver by 2035!  But according to several reliable population experts, by 2035, Denver will still have a population advantage over Aurora of around 150,000 or more!  So apparently, the way that Aurora would "pass Denver in size by 2035" is by aliens from outer space landing in Denver and placing the entire city into some kind of suspended animation for the next 30 years!  Can you believe the News published an article that uses such completely bogus quantitative analysis?

Then, right after talking about this hypothetical annual growth rate that exceeds 2 percent, the article states that the current and expected annual growth rate is likely to be around 1 percent, followed by a quote from Aurora's mayor that says he doesn't foresee Aurora passing up Denver in population! 

So the essence of this newspaper article is this:  Aurora could have a larger population than Denver by 2035 if it grows at an annual rate that no one expects will happen, and only then if one compares this unrealistic 2035 population projection for Aurora to Denver's current population in 2005.  This is supposed to be news?! 

August 3, 2005.  Let's talk a bit more about the Golden Triangle.  We've seen a number of infill projects get developed in the Triangle in the last decade or so, particularly along Cherokee Street and, of course, the three Nassi towers mentioned in yesterday's entry.  There are even a few projects under construction or in the planning stages today.  But it seems like the pace of development that one might have expected has not occurred there.  Around the new Denver Art Museum expansion and Cultural Center Parking Garage mixed-use development, a project that was authorized by voters in 1999, is one of the worst concentration of surface parking lots in the Downtown area.  In fact, I count over 20 different surface parking lots within 2 blocks in any direction of the art museum and garage project site.  It's been about 6 years since the art museum project was approved, yet not one of those 20 plus parking lots has been developed.  Why is that?  The Triangle has a great location, has great edges (Speer Boulevard/Cherry Creek, South Broadway, and the Civic Center area), has new world-class cultural facilities, and has already demonstrated a capacity to sustain residential infill projects.  Yet despite all these advantages, there sit today these dozens of parking lots, still as blighted as ever. 

Perhaps it is time for the City to restructure the way it assesses property taxes in the Downtown area.  Perhaps a lot that is vacant or used for surface parking should be taxed based on the market value of the lot as if it were fully developed.  Perhaps it's time we look at Land Value taxation for Downtown, to create an economic disadvantage to what amounts to perpetual speculation, a situation where the market is just never quite hot enough to justify selling.  Just hold on to that vacant parcel you own Downtown and do nothing, because if you sell now, just think of the fortunes you could have made if you had only held on to it and sold it in the future!  The problem is, the future never comes.  So we're left with vacant lots across the street from our sports stadiums and our trophy office towers and our cultural and civic institutions that sap the vitality from the area, block the restoration of our built environment, and are essentially anti-urban.    

August 2, 2005.  Whoa!  What happened to the rest of the blog?!  Not to worry, all of July's blog entries are safely stored over to your left in the new Blog Archives section. This page was getting a bit long, so once a month seems like a good time to start with a clean slate.

So our August blog starts with an infill project announcement! Denver developers Harry Burgwyn (who has developed a number of affordable housing projects throughout central Denver) and Parvez Malik (who's currently developing the affordable 1135 Broadway project) will partner to build a 10-story, 63-unit apartment tower at the southeast corner of W. 12th Avenue and Elati Street (or basically 12th & Speer) in Denver's Golden Triangle neighborhood. The project will be directly across W. 12th Avenue from the Belvedere. The building will also include two levels of parking and ground-floor retail. One of the nice attributes about this project is its visibility from Speer Boulevard.  Along with the proposed 1000 Speer project and the existing towers in the area, this will further reinforce the "towers along the boulevard" feel to Speer.  I haven't gotten my hands on a rendering yet, but according to the article about this project in today's Rocky Mountain News, the building will feature a "European Renaissance" style architecture.  This is a bit disappointing to me, as I believe too much of any one architectural style in a neighborhood (particularly in high-rises) is not a good thing.  Developer Craig Nassi gave us plenty of "European Renaissance" style buildings in the Belvedere, the Prado, and the Beauvallon.  How about something different or original?  Architecturally, why don't we focus on developing a "21st Century Denver" style instead of poorly replicating an architectural style from another continent from another century?   Anyway, I'll get this project added to the Golden Triangle page in the Center City Neighborhoods section as soon as I can.