DENVER | Main Development Thread #7

[PLANSIT]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

I don’t actually see what the problem is. Sure it’s ugly. But it looks pretty much the same as everything else we are building these days; that’s just what modern materials look like. Otherwise, it’s a 5 story lot-line mixed use building on a main street - exactly what we want more of and what real cities are uniformly made of. So I refuse to criticize it on architecture alone. Hate to break it to you all, but the Victorian era is over, and so are the days of building lovely charming brick structures at affordable prices.

I would actually be curious what suggestions any of you would make to improve this building that are not mainly about materials and a gut feel about how the building looks. I can predict maybe two people on this forum who will be able to offer a single constructive suggestion that doesn’t effectively amount to wanting an architectural time machine. Sometimes I feel like I should get you all (and even more so, the Fugly crowd) red ballcaps made that say Make America Brick Again.

Also, find me a set of building architecture anywhere in the country - or the world, even - that you all like that is not also primarily occupied by/built for the wealthy. I would venture everything you all like is also expensive. But most people are not wealthy, and most buildings are not beautiful, and that is okay. Even most of Paris is Fugly. I am sure this building is quite nice for those who will live in it, and that is what matters. If the criticism is that this doesn't belong on Tennyson - well, I would remind those of you who have lived in this city for longer than 15 minutes that until very recently, there was nothing fancy about Tennyson. Quite the opposite - it was a neighborhood for regular working people. I find it hard, then, to criticize a building that appears to have been built for regular working people because it is not fancy enough.

The only thing really wrong with the building is the ground floor; needs a more creative facade for the parking (transparency) and better aesthetic mitigation for the gas meters. I also think a 3-5 foot setback would have been better, but with a more transparent ground floor, that might not have been necessary. Everything else is fine and exactly what’s needed on Tennyson.

There are a few examples down the street that accomplish this much better.

[DenverInfill]

Originally Posted by PLANSIT

The only thing really wrong with the building is the ground floor; needs a more creative facade for the parking (transparency) and better aesthetic mitigation for the gas meters. I also think a 3-5 foot setback would have been better, but with a more transparent ground floor, that might not have been necessary. Everything else is fine and exactly what’s needed on Tennyson.

There are a few examples down the street that accomplish this much better.

I was going to make this same point. The building is an average background building architecturally, but it fails at the ground level for its engagement (or lack thereof) with the pedestrian.

[mhays]

Maybe the basic problem is that parking is above-grade. But going below-grade is expensive and inherently tough geometrically, especially with today's requirements for turning radii and ramps. This is probably the only way to get that many parking spaces on the site. Or we could step back even further and say the basic problem is that so much parking is wanted/needed at all.

[corey]

When a new building detracts from its location more than it enhances it, that is a problem. The ground level is a complete fail. The building across Tennyson is the same height, but is all brick and looks much, much better. This building would acceptable if they used only a 1/3 the EIFS. Save that crap for suburban mini-malls and eLofts out by the airport. The fact that Paris, Berlin, Madrid, Milan, Rome, and countless other cities have really crappy apartment blocks in the outer neighborhoods shouldn’t be an excuse for us to settle for cheap crap that will only look worse and worse with time. Again, this building is on a prominent corner that always the heart of the neighborhood. That should make a difference.

Side note: It appears that they were trying to give this building some Art Deco style, but they failed by using such cheap materials. 2020 Lawrence also looks terrible with its cheap Art Deco-ish details. Art Deco is my favorite style and it is maddening to me to see cheap imitations like this. Maddening!

[CastleScott]

^ Well said corey-like you I'm a big fan of Art Deco as well.

[Valley Highway]

Is there a way to have this thread come up as the first thing when I log in? I'm not really interested, on a regular basis, about what is going on in LA or Chicago or...But I would like to keep up on Denver construction (while also following DenverInfill). Thanks in advance.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by PLANSIT

The only thing really wrong with the building is the ground floor; needs a more creative facade for the parking (transparency) and better aesthetic mitigation for the gas meters. I also think a 3-5 foot setback would have been better, but with a more transparent ground floor, that might not have been necessary. Everything else is fine and exactly what’s needed on Tennyson.

There are a few examples down the street that accomplish this much better.

I generally don't bother too much with crappy architecture knowing that affordability is an issue. But when I thought about setback my mind jumped to One City Block which is an unfair comparison (since that was awesome in every way). But another level better than what exists might have made a significant difference. That is so uninviting the way it is.

Originally Posted by Valley Highway

Is there a way to have this thread come up as the first thing when I log in? I'm not really interested, on a regular basis, about what is going on in LA or Chicago or...But I would like to keep up on Denver construction (while also following DenverInfill). Thanks in advance.

The way I prefer (on my desktop) is to look at the top of the page where you see two header lines. At the end of the top line is says Mountain West. Left click-hold-drag to tabs. Then when you click on that next look for Denver and where it says Last Page; click on. Logging in is a separate issue and you have a choice to stay logged in if you like.

[Denvergotback]

Originally Posted by Valley Highway

Is there a way to have this thread come up as the first thing when I log in? I'm not really interested, on a regular basis, about what is going on in LA or Chicago or...But I would like to keep up on Denver construction (while also following DenverInfill). Thanks in advance.

Maybe just bookmark the mountain west page and just log in from there every time. It should just redirect you back to the mountain west page after logging in

[CastleScott]

^ Welcome aboard Valley Highway! I like your user name-I kinda remember the Valley Highway back before TeREX-loved those older bridges with the concrete arches-those were so cool plus driving under the old Colfax viaduct before the new one was built and Denver cool vibe to it back then (back in the ole drinkin days). I lived in Arvada and one of my best buddies lived just almost right east of I-25 and University off South Adams St and I"d take I-25 all the time going down there-ahh the memories..

[Cirrus]

Originally Posted by Valley Highway

Is there a way to have this thread come up as the first thing when I log in? I'm not really interested, on a regular basis, about what is going on in LA or Chicago or...But I would like to keep up on Denver construction (while also following DenverInfill). Thanks in advance.

Yes. Just bookmark this thread's unique URL and set your cookie settings to accept a continuous login. I'd consider at least bookmarking the Mountain West forum instead of this thread though; a lot of Denver discussion happens in other threads.

Originally Posted by CherryCreek

the new-ish apartment building across from the Oriental Theater is probably the most atrocious building I have seen in recent years.

I bet the people who live in it are happy it's there.

I like pretty things a lot too, and hate uglied up cities. But also if you could afford to live in a newer unit in a closer-in neighborhood, in exchange for it being this ugly, I think most of the people who like living in cities would take that deal.

Originally Posted by PLANSIT

The only thing really wrong with the building is the ground floor

Certainly that's the worst part, and it could be inexpensively improved by just lining up the first floor windows instead of staggering every other one, and by giving a high school art class paint for a mural (seriously this is the sort of building murals are perfect for). But I do think it could look better with other minimally expensive / functionally free changes:

• Window trim that's almost any other color than white.
• Use a different color for that top panel of EIFS, to simulate a heavier cornice.
• Attach a flagpole to the side of the most prominent corner, one floor from the top, and call it a spire.

Originally Posted by bunt_q

find me a set of building architecture anywhere in the country - or the world, even - that you all like that is not also primarily occupied by/built for the wealthy.

How about HOPE VI?

[bulldurhamer]

Rock Drill District
https://ibb.co/Yh74wf3

Meeting December 18

[CherryCreek]

Good discussion on the Tennyson area and the 44th and Tennyson building. I think that most agree it's a poorly designed building. I suppose the division breaks down between those who emphasize affordable housing and density above all else, accepting crap like this as a "cost" of density and affordability, and those who think such ugliness to be a too high of a price to pay.


I tend to reject the idea that things like this are inevitable, and purely a function of cost. The evidence is that there is plenty of construction in similar areas in Denver going on that hasn't led to outcomes as bad as the Tennyson area. I think most of the infill in Fivepoints/Rino, Uptown, LoHi, and CapHill, although far from perfect, is much superior to what we've seen in the Tennyson area.

There's another point though, not yet mentioned. This sort of crap helps build political opposition to all infill and density. There's plenty of opposition already, and really bad design that truly craps on the neighborhood will build that opposition. The "density at all costs" crowd may end up getting far less additional density if these sort of developments create political backlash (fyi, there's an election in May) that brings us policies that limit both "good" and crap development.

[laniroj]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

I don’t actually see what the problem is. Sure it’s ugly. But it looks pretty much the same as everything else we are building these days; that’s just what modern materials look like...

New user here, but long time reader.

Bunt's point on this building was so encouraging to me, as a real estate developer, that I decided to jump in on the posting side...and no my name is not Mike Mathieson! So many people, including on this forum, often only see development through rose colored glasses when the truth is most large cities are, by necessity, utilitarian with highlights thrown in here and there. Like everyone else, I'd love to see better buildings anywhere and everywhere (I have a few theories as to why so many buildings these days are aesthetically and sometimes functionally ugly), but I'd rather see more people able to enjoy the urban experience than not. While some projects are real design turds, they are also people's homes and those people walk the street, become residents, and ultimately create a vibrant community. I, for one, would much rather see Denver trending toward a diverse socio-economic population than to have rich, white, and liberal single family home owners above the age of 45 dig in and continue to exclude all future generations from the beauty of our 'old' cities. Looking forward to contributing meaningfully to this forum and appreciate all of your viewpoints, which I think help me sometimes be a better developer!

[Robert.hampton]

Originally Posted by CherryCreek

I tend to reject the idea that things like this are inevitable, and purely a function of cost. The evidence is that there is plenty of construction in similar areas in Denver going on that hasn't led to outcomes as bad as the Tennyson area. I think most of the infill in Fivepoints/Rino, Uptown, LoHi, and CapHill, although far from perfect, is much superior to what we've seen in the Tennyson area.

It really does seem like the vast majority of thoughtless stucco box-type development has gone west of I25 (lo-hi, Jefferson Park, Tennyson, sloans lake) while the majority of what I would consider ‘thoughtful’ projects have gone up east of I-25. Does it trace back to zoning? Do people west of I25 just have bad taste?

[TakeFive]

Your affordable One-Year-Old


Courtesy of ApartmentFinder.com


Courtesy of Apartments.com

According to BusinessDen, Infinity LoHi, a 273-unit apartment complex just sold for a cost of over $400K per unit to Black Rock. One bedroom units rent for $1,900 average.

For reference, Denver Infill's final update.

Originally Posted by laniroj

Bunt's point on this building was so encouraging to me, as a real estate developer,

Anybody who can agree with bunt is Okay in my book.

WELCOME and a toast to the posting side. Srsly, I'm sure your feedback should be most relevant and fun.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by Robert.hampton

It really does seem like the vast majority of thoughtless stucco box-type development has gone west of I25 (lo-hi, Jefferson Park, Tennyson, sloans lake) while the majority of what I would consider ‘thoughtful’ projects have gone up east of I-25. Does it trace back to zoning? Do people west of I25 just have bad taste?

One factor is likely less of a built environment to play off of. Just a shit ton of pre-war bungalows, post WW2 ranches, and one story commercial. Contrast that with Uptown, Five Points, Cap Hill, the GT, etc.

Oh, and higher density seems to breed more thoughtful architecture in this case- probably because it pencils out cost-wise.

[Cirrus]

Originally Posted by CherryCreek

Most of the infill in Fivepoints/Rino, Uptown, LoHi, and CapHill, although far from perfect, is much superior to what we've seen in the Tennyson area.

Originally Posted by Robert.hampton

It really does seem like the vast majority of thoughtless stucco box-type development has gone west of I25, while the majority of what I would consider ‘thoughtful’ projects have gone up east of I-25.

This is the predictable pattern of how gentrification works. It's because if you want to live in the city, your ideal location is in one of those more core neighborhoods like Five Points, generally east of 25 plus maybe LoHi. West of I-25 (particularly as far out as Tennyson) is acceptable but less ideal to most urban buyers. So the west gets the spillover growth from gentrifiers who were priced out of getting what they really wanted in LoDo or Cap Hill, and thus otherwise comparable products are cheaper to the west than in the center (ie the east).

Not to say stuff west of I-25 is "cheap." Obviously it's not. But say you have a $400,000 budget--objectively in the "affluent gentrifier" range. But you're not getting a Cap Hill bungalow or a LoDo loft. Your options are a smaller/older unit in Cap Hill, or a newer/larger unit further out. Thus the newer/larger units on Tennyson are cheaper than the newer/larger units in Cap Hill, and thus are also generally cheaper design/construction.

And it's not just the the less desirable neighborhood is cheaper. It's that the buyers are a little more desperate. If you 1) really want an urban condo in a walkable neighborhood, and 2) you're set on a brand new building with modern amenities, and 3) you're looking on Tennyson instead of closer-in, then you've already exhausted most of Denver's options. If you don't buy what you can no matter how ugly it is, you're going to have to start making some hard choices really soon. Either not a brand new unit, or in a location that's hard to defend as really walkable/urban. So design is the thing you compromise on as a buyer.

[TakeFive]

Assuming you prefer the long-winded, historical, macro-view

Originally Posted by Robert.hampton

It really does seem like the vast majority of thoughtless stucco box-type development has gone west of I25 (lo-hi, Jefferson Park, Tennyson, sloans lake) while the majority of what I would consider ‘thoughtful’ projects have gone up east of I-25. Does it trace back to zoning? Do people west of I25 just have bad taste?

The 'areas' to the East and Southeast have always been favored and hottest - and more prone to pockets of density.

It's hardly a surprise that the Denver Technological Center developed along and (mostly) east of I-25. The area to the west of I-25 starting with Cherry Hills Village and extending to Greenwood Village, lies mostly between I-25 and Broadway, Orchard to Hampden and are your prime rib areas.

Starting with the City Center, think Speer Blvd and University initially as primary arteries. Country Club, Cherry Creek, University of Denver neighborhoods which mostly lie between So Broadway and Colorado Blvd. Although not without variety these areas have primarily been upscale or rock solid stable, solid areas. Needing variety and more affordability we find Cap Hill, Virginia Village and University Hills as examples. Directly east is similar.

Perlmutter, once a prominent developer of more affordable product not only build Northglenn but he and others built their signature 3-story walk-ups all over SE Denver including Cap Hill.

wong gives a nice short answer which also goes to favoring the east/SE parts of Denver.

The Western parts of Denver have their fans. I developed a fondness for Highlands partly because then it was more "attainable" yet a really cool area.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

This is the predictable pattern of how gentrification works.

Excellent!.!

Perhaps I'll find time to expand on that - or not.


RTD Removes Bathroom Stall Doors in Union Station Over Drug Concerns
DECEMBER 15, 2018 By CHRIS WALKER/Westword


Credit: Chris Walker/Westword

Not without some wit:

That trickle of news came in this week when a Westword source mentioned her surprise at visiting the underground women's restroom in the bus terminal and finding that her private business wouldn't be, well, so private. Westword, of course, did its own deep dive to investigate the missing stall doors. On December 14, we verified that the stalls in the underground men's restroom in the bus terminal had also become a bit more breezy — and the removal of the doors seemed intentional.

Welcome to Union Station

“RTD purposely took off the stall doors for security reasons,” says RTD spokeswoman Michelle Brier in an email. “It is due to the extreme use of drugs and concern for the persons overdosing or passing away in the stalls.”

[mhays]

Couldn't possibly crack down on public drug use. Better just ruin things for the whole public.