DENVER | Main Development Thread #7

[Tykendo]

Originally Posted by SirLucasTheGreat

I'm stoked about Zara coming to Denver. I like their stuff a lot more than H&M. I remember speaking with a cashier at a Seattle location about how I wished that Zara would open a store in Denver. She remarked: "I think they are just sticking to the major US cities", ignoring the fact that Seattle and Denver are more or less the same size.

Grew up in the Pacific Northwest, and Seattle and it's Metro area are massive in comparison to Denver and it's Metro. Denver and Portland are similar though size wise.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by Tykendo

Grew up in the Pacific Northwest, and Seattle and it's Metro area are massive in comparison to Denver and it's Metro. Denver and Portland are similar though size wise.

The cities are comparable: Seattle no doubt has grown faster than Denver of late, listed at 704,352 (2016) while Denver is listed at 682,545 (2015). The Seattle metro is much bigger at 3.7 million compared to Denver metro at 2.8 million.

Originally Posted by wong21fr

I'm actually loving the International Style elements of this building- even the blank wall. Though I want to see what the material would be- maybe 34 stories of EIFS panels?

They have a new process where a drone sprays Teflon on the building sides; comes with a full guarantee that bugs won't stick to the sides of the building. They understandably call it their 'bug-free guarantee'.

[rds70]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

The cities are comparable: Seattle no doubt has grown faster than Denver of late, listed at 704,352 (2016) while Denver is listed at 682,545 (2015). The Seattle metro is much bigger at 3.7 million compared to Denver metro at 2.8 million.

To be consistent, Seattle's population on July 1, 2016 was estimated at 704,300, while Denver's was estimated at 693,100. Comparing CSA's for the same date, Seattle-Tacoma was 4,684,500, while Denver-Aurora was 3,470,300.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by Tykendo

Grew up in the Pacific Northwest, and Seattle and it's Metro area are massive in comparison to Denver and it's Metro. Denver and Portland are similar though size wise.

That is an odd sense to have. Portland feels lie a small town to me. Seattle feels bigger than Denver, for sure, but still in the same tier. (Despite all their recent success, it wasn't that long ago that Seattle was a city with NO rail transit.) I think the CSAs bear out the closeness. Seattle's core is better than Denver's, but that's not because of its inherent size - it's because they didn't stupidly gut their own city core through urban renewal to the extent we did. We've been playing catch-up from our own widespread destruction for decades.

[Meliorem]

Originally Posted by rds70

To be consistent, Seattle's population on July 1, 2016 was estimated at 704,300, while Denver's was estimated at 693,100. Comparing CSA's for the same date, Seattle-Tacoma was 4,684,500, while Denver-Aurora was 3,470,300.

Adding to what's already been said, the land area of Seattle's CSA is also far greater and encompass the entirety of the following metro- and micropolitan areas:

• Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area
• Olympia-Tumwater, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area
• Bremerton-Silverdale, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area
• Mount Vernon-Anacortes, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area
• Oak Harbor, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area
• Centralia, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area
• Shelton, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area

The regions are actually similarly dense and if you extend the otherwise modest CSA of Denver (Denver-Aurora-Lakewood, Boulder and Greeley) towards Colorado Springs and Fort Collins, which is roughly the area Seattle's CSA currently encompass, you have a total population just shy of 5 million. Likewise, DIA (roughly 50 sq mi) takes up a third of Denver's total land area (city; 153.33 sq mi) so you end up with skewed density figures. Apples to apples, it's pretty close to Seattle in terms of density which is impressive since Denver is landlocked.

[CherryCreek]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

That is an odd sense to have. Portland feels lie a small town to me. Seattle feels bigger than Denver, for sure, but still in the same tier. (Despite all their recent success, it wasn't that long ago that Seattle was a city with NO rail transit.) I think the CSAs bear out the closeness. Seattle's core is better than Denver's, but that's not because of its inherent size - it's because they didn't stupidly gut their own city core through urban renewal to the extent we did. We've been playing catch-up from our own widespread destruction for decades.

Add to that, the impact of geography on density - with the Puget Sound, Seattle waterfront and other geographic features naturally concentrating density on the urban core. For a city with endless miles of flat open country nearby and few geographic barriers to sprawl, Denver is remarkably dense.

[Meliorem]

Seattle (2016)

• Population: 704,300
• City: 142.5 sq mi
• Airport: 3.9 sq mi / 2,500 acres
• Density (adjusted):
  8,811/sq mi = 79.93 (142.5 (city) - 58.67 (water) - 3.9 (airport))

Denver (2016)

• Population: 693,060
• City: 154.97 sq mi
• Airport: 52.39 sq mi / 33,531 acres
• Density (adjusted):
  6,865/sq mi = 100.95 (154.97 (city) - 1.63 (water) - 52.39 (airport))

For the sake of comparison, let's take a look at another landlocked city, Phoenix. The fifthmost populous city in the country, on paper at least.

Phoenix (2016)

• Population: 1,615,017
• City: 518.90 sq mi
• Airport: 5.31 sq mi / 3,400 acres
• Density (adjusted):
  3,152/sq mi = 512.34 (518.90 (city) - 1.25 (water) - 5.31 (airport))

So there you have it. You would be hard pressed to find a landlocked city in the US that can rival the density of Denver. It has many coastal cities beat too.

[Cirrus]

Seattle feels a lot bigger than Denver to me, Portland a lot smaller, and Vancouver about the same.

Feels.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

Seattle feels a lot bigger than Denver to me, Portland a lot smaller, and Vancouver about the same.

Feels.

Vancouver feels vastly larger than either Seattle or Denver to me. Interesting.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by Meliorem

So there you have it. You would be hard pressed to find a landlocked city in the US that can rival the density of Denver. It has many coastal cities beat too.

Interestingly, Phoenix neighborhoods (as Cirrus would say) *feels* more dense than Denver's, generally, although I can't think of anything as dense as Cap Hill. Phoenix has yuge chunks of land set aside as desert preserve including local mountains and three major wash systems used for flood control. Additionally, I'd guess as much as 25% of Phoenix is still undeveloped (especially on the north side).

The reason I mention Phoenix is that I'm familiar and to point out while statistics are good for ballpark comparisons, they don't talk, they don't paint pictures or conversely they lack context.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Vancouver feels vastly larger than either Seattle or Denver to me. Interesting.

I feel that as well. Though my frame of reference is skewed as it's been a moment since I last visited Seattle outside of airport layovers and it's only been a couple of years since I was last in Vancouver.

[soleri]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Interestingly, Phoenix neighborhoods (as Cirrus would say) *feels* more dense than Denver's, generally, although I can't think of anything as dense as Cap Hill. Phoenix has yuge chunks of land set aside as desert preserve including local mountains and three major wash systems used for flood control. Additionally, I'd guess as much as 25% of Phoenix is still undeveloped (especially on the north side).

The reason I mention Phoenix is that I'm familiar and to point out while statistics are good for ballpark comparisons, they don't talk, they don't paint pictures or conversely they lack context.

Phoenix is finally beginning to evolve some urban energy but it cannot be compared to Denver. There's no Capitol Hill area, no Cherry Creek, no Central Platte Valley. The downtown is virtually the size of a postage stamp. Both Denver and Phoenix are sprawling sun-belt cities, of course. The salient difference is their respective urban cores. Denver has one, Phoenix, not nearly as much.

[spr8364]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

That is an odd sense to have. Portland feels lie a small town to me. Seattle feels bigger than Denver, for sure, but still in the same tier. (Despite all their recent success, it wasn't that long ago that Seattle was a city with NO rail transit.) I think the CSAs bear out the closeness. Seattle's core is better than Denver's, but that's not because of its inherent size - it's because they didn't stupidly gut their own city core through urban renewal to the extent we did. We've been playing catch-up from our own widespread destruction for decades.

I have been to Portland many times (but not in the last 20 years) and always felt that it was larger than Denver at that time. I think that is because of their very dense downtown which is all but devoid of any surface parking. When I would drive there, I always parked in one of the parking garages near the edge of town and then just walked everywhere.

[CastleScott]

^ I felt that with Portland as well and that was even back in the early 2000s. A place that had a bit of a Denver feel was Minneapolis St Paul and their downtowns reminded me of home.

Sacramento is denser with a smaller downtown and with lots more trees and it also has some rougher hoods than Denver.

[Tykendo]

Originally Posted by spr8364

I have been to Portland many times (but not in the last 20 years) and always felt that it was larger than Denver at that time. I think that is because of their very dense downtown which is all but devoid of any surface parking. When I would drive there, I always parked in one of the parking garages near the edge of town and then just walked everywhere.

Portland Metro is only a couple hundred thousand people smaller than Denver, but Seattle is over a million people larger than both Denver and Portland. Grew up in Portland, and have lived here for 23 years. Portland is similar in size to Denver, but Seattle is way larger, even though the city population of Denver and Seattle are similar. Metro Area is truly how big a city is. LA is 3mil., but when you add Metro, it's over 20 mil.

[MountainRush]

Originally Posted by spr8364

I have been to Portland many times (but not in the last 20 years) and always felt that it was larger than Denver at that time. I think that is because of their very dense downtown which is all but devoid of any surface parking. When I would drive there, I always parked in one of the parking garages near the edge of town and then just walked everywhere.

I don't know about 20 years ago, but as of today I don't think Denver looks like a smaller city. Portland definitely has a more dense urban core, but you don't really drive around Portland and see highrises spread across the city like you do in Denver. The mountains and trees make Portland's metro look like a smaller city as well. Although I don't really agree when people say it looks like a town.

[Cirrus]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Phoenix neighborhoods *feels* more dense than Denver's, generally, although I can't think of anything as dense as Cap Hill.

This is 2010 density data, but take a look. Denver's immediate core is much denser, but the non-core neighborhoods are pretty close with maybe a slight edge to Phoenix. Might be able to tease out clearer differences by changing the color break points.

[Meliorem]

Originally Posted by Tykendo

Portland Metro is only a couple hundred thousand people smaller than Denver, but Seattle is over a million people larger than both Denver and Portland. Grew up in Portland, and have lived here for 23 years. Portland is similar in size to Denver, but Seattle is way larger, even though the city population of Denver and Seattle are similar. Metro Area is truly how big a city is. LA is 3mil., but when you add Metro, it's over 20 mil.

That's not correct.

Metro: 2,814,330
Metro: 3,733,580

You cannot compare the CSA figures as Seattle has a substantially larger footprint. It stretches 100 miles south (Centralia, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area) and 75 miles north (Mount Vernon-Anacortes, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area) of downtown Seattle. Colorado Springs and Fort Collins are 70 miles and 65 miles away from downtown Denver, respectively. If you add those to the CSA of Denver, you end up with something well short of the 175 mile footprint in Seattle.

Denver: 4,522,555 (2016)

• Fort Collins, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area
• Greeley, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area
• Boulder, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area
• Denver-Aurora-Lakewood, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area
• Colorado Springs, CO Metropolitan Statistical Area

Seattle: 4,684,516 (2016)

• Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area
• Olympia-Tumwater, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area
• Bremerton-Silverdale, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area
• Mount Vernon-Anacortes, WA Metropolitan Statistical Area
• Oak Harbor, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area
• Centralia, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area
• Shelton, WA Micropolitan Statistical Area

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

This is 2010 density data, but take a look. Denver's immediate core is much denser, but the non-core neighborhoods are pretty close with maybe a slight edge to Phoenix. Might be able to tease out clearer differences by changing the color break points.

Wow; Your talents can amaze.

To add color commentary
The light area on the south side is an industrial area equivalent to the I-270/I-70 corridor in Denver. The airport is in the area between Phoenix and Tempe. The area east of Scottsdale is an Indian reservation but does have some commercial/resort-casino development. The Talking Stick Resort area is where the Colorado Rockies and AZ Diamondbacks share Spring Training facilities and a baseball park.

Where it says 'Paradise Valley' is substantially mountainous. Paradise Valley is the equivalent of Cherry Hills Village and on the southern end lies Camelback Mountain and the 'village' works its way through and around the mountains. The light colored areas towards the NW and NE are either mountains or ravines/washes... lots of area set aside as desert preserves.

Zeroing in on Tempe where there's darker green is also an area of some of the most post-recession urban development. Height however is limited to the 10 to 15-story range. It would include ASU, the downtown Mill Ave. area and Marina Landing where State Farm has their new 8,000 employee regional HQ. Tempe is connecting all that with an under construction streetcar which will intersect with light rail at two different spots.

Well done!

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by soleri

Phoenix is finally beginning to evolve some urban energy but it cannot be compared to Denver. There's no Capitol Hill area, no Cherry Creek, no Central Platte Valley. The downtown is virtually the size of a postage stamp. Both Denver and Phoenix are sprawling sun-belt cities, of course. The salient difference is their respective urban cores. Denver has one, Phoenix, not nearly as much.

Howdy! I haven't bumped into you for awhile. I'd guess that following the urban development in Denver and Portland respectively keeps us both too busy to blog much on the Phoenix threads.

With respect to downtown Phoenix and 'Yay' it is experiencing some nice urban energy but is still falling behind Denver as the development intensity in downtown Denver is magnitudes higher.

My comment was in response to an analysis of density/square mile within city boundaries but Cirrus nicely demonstrated my point other than the skewed results due to all the non-developable areas in Phoenix.

Since there's been several comments
comparing Denver and Portland why don't you give us your own impressions since you live in Portland and are familiar with both?

Originally Posted by soleri

There's no Capitol Hill area, no Cherry Creek, no Central Platte Valley.

Yes and no...

I already acknowledged the density of Capitol Hill. I would guess that although more spread out that Phoenix has the equivalent or higher multi-family per capita as Denver though.

With respect to Cherry Creek, Central Platte Valley etc whose current development is really impressive I'd offer that the urban energy in Phoenix consists of an area that connects downtown Phoenix to Tempe and to South Scottsdale.

Tempe has had the most intensive urban development post-recession. While the development occurred more before the recession the Camelback Corridor specifically near 24th street has the equivalent business/attorneys/ accountants as does Cherry Creek. As cool as retail is in Cherry Creek it's still pales in comparison to Fashion Square/Old Town Scottsdale area. To be fair that area experiences magnitudes higher tourism.

Also Kierland Commons and Scottsdale Quarters have become a bookend on the north to Fashion Square along Scottsdale Rd. The 'financial district' between the two while not as vertical would be competitive in size and is impressive for its overall construction quality and architectural appeal as Cherry Creek and downtown Denver combined, I'd think. Note: my reference is to more specialized financial business than total office square footage. The techie stuff is split among Scottsdale, Tempe and downtown Phoenix.