Union Station’s first mixed-income residential project is starting to make some progress. As a refresher, this is a four story, 108-unit apartment combining both market rate and low income units.
The concrete podium is now complete with the wood framing now up two stories. Here are two perspectives of the project from 19th Street.
1975 18th Street has one more floor to go until it is topped out. This project takes the entire half block between 18th and 19th Street along Chestnut Place.
How about some bonus pictures? As I was out taking photos, there were trains everywhere; from light rail to the freight lines. Each photo features five trains, how wonderful!
1975 18th Street is expected to finish later this year.
Most dense Transit Oriented neighborhood in over 1000 miles…. and yet this building tops out at 4 stories. smh.. 🙁
Type-V – what a f-ing waste of valuable real estate.
Tear this one down along with Alta and try again.
This is the kind of crap that makes Denver take a back seat to other developing American cities (Seattle, Portland, etc.)
Eh, it’s pretty obvious that this less-prime part of the neighborhood was planned for less intensive development. This sexy, low-slung long building nicely reflects one of the trains going by, don’t you think? Nvm (I’ll show myself out)
You would expect better building codes to apply to this neighborhood. Nothing this shabby and cheap could get through design review a few blocks away in LoDo.
And this, ladies and gentlemen, is how we know we’re a second tier city.
Lower income housing comes with lower scaled buildings. That shouldn’t be the case. Including low income housing in high-rise buildings should not be an issue and we should be pushing harder for developments that include affordable housing and higher density. Mayor Hancock has been slow to introduce more options and we will reget designs like this to create a more inclusive city.
Sad how few units there are in the Union Station neighborhood. How high in theory could this building be?
I believe this lot was zoned to 140 feet, the same height as Union Tower West behind it.
We also have a five story office building that is adjacent to the station
I ranted against this project two years ago, when it was announced, precisely because of its size, and ratio of affordable-to-market-rate units. It accomplishes a laudable goal for Mayor Hancock’s administration — affordable housing — but with serious downsides to taxpayers and even the residents of this building.
Because about 60 percent of this project is affordable units, the entire project’s amenities will be reflective of the below-market total cash flow of building, essentially putting the building’s residents in a lower economic/social class than their neighbors in surrounding buildings. Although not managed by the Denver Housing Authority, this building becomes, de facto, public housing.
The site was zoned for up to 140 feet tall, allowing up to about 13 stories, like the sites all around it. If the project’s affordable rate ratio was, say, 20 percent of the total project’s units, it could have been several hundred new apartments, mostly market-rate, and the over-all amenities would have been on a par with the neighborhood. And most important, the affordable-rate tenants would be able to enjoy a lifestyle far above what they’re going to get in this budget-rate project.
The taxpayers would be getting a far higher property tax return on this site, considering that it’s a highly subsidized, leveraged project. Instead, the tax breaks to the developer for its affordable-rate units end up short-changing the taxpayers.
Look, the reality of urban zoning and Denver’s excessive height/density restrictions — which strictly govern Union Station — amount to nothing less than Social Engineering, the choosing of who lives and works where, what they do, and how they travel (parking). When you put lots of MAXIMUM height and density uses on land, but without MINIMUM requirements, you end up with projects like 1975 18th and Alta City House.
So the lesson, to me, is that politicians and planners need to not just respond to NIMBYS, putting maximum limits on developers, but also pay a lot more attention to the broader constituencies of citizens and taxpayers of Denver, by equally requiring minimum development requirements, as well.
well said.
We knew this was coming but still disappointing and seemingly short-sighted.
“The site was zoned for up to 140 feet tall, allowing up to about 13 stories, like the sites all around it. If the project’s affordable rate ratio was, say, 20 percent of the total project’s units, it could have been several hundred new apartments, mostly market-rate, and the over-all amenities would have been on a par with the neighborhood. And most important, the affordable-rate tenants would be able to enjoy a lifestyle far above what they’re going to get in this budget-rate project.”
Seriously dude? What amenities are they lacking?? An infinity pool? A doggie wash room?? Obviously you are out of touch with what affordable renters require. How about a place to call home? How about easy access to mass transit and the amenities called LoDo, Union Station oh and there’s downtown–but let’s just be honest. You’re just mad cuz this building is short. That’s all it is. Because every building has to max out its zoning regardless of the finances that are needed to accomplish that task. Your comment is ignorant and typical. In 50 years this building may not even be here. So why is it so hard to accept that cities are in flux, they grow, they diminish, they boom, they collapse. Look back a hundred years at the development of Denver and you will see that. Being an actual taxpayer and property owner in this city, I don’t feel shortchanged at all. I feel there should be more of these types of buildings like the Saint Francis Apartments at Cathedral Square.
Ivan G, as “an actual taxpayer and property owner in this city,” like you, I disagree. This website is great, because we can debate important issues, and lots of other people can, too.
Ivan G, the Saint Francis Apartments at Cathedral Square are of an appropriate scale for the surrounding neighborhood whereas this project is not. Furthermore, the city of Denver gave the developer various loans to help make this project happen. Those loans essentially paid for the site. Lastly, conditions for those loans “included a covenant requiring that the complex remain affordable housing for 60 years”, so this building could likely still be here in 50 years. The source for that information came from here: http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/blog/real_deals/2014/01/affordable-housing-development-planned.html
Given that the city loaned the developer the money to buy the property, the developer easily could have built something of a more appropriate scale relative to the surrounding neighborhood and provided much more affordable housing than just 78 units. It was a wasted opportunity.
To fully understand what this project means to this area and why the it is the size that it is, it may help if everyone understood how the low income, or LIHTC, program works.
Here is a link so that you can educate yourselves.
https://www.chfainfo.com/arh/low-income-housing-tax-credits
If you note the minimum requirements for affordable units required in a project, vs the number of tax credit units the state has to allocate, these projects cannot be done on a large scale. CHFA, is doing a service by allocating these to areas all over the state for those in need. Not just in Denver. HUD regulates and doles out the credits to states based need. This is a national issue, governed by HUD, not just a Denver or Colorado issue. Any affordable housing in Denver is welcome housing.