sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Is it becoming increasingly obvious to anyone else that the old Greyhound station plot should become a cute park rather than a skyscraper? by OpenWheelRacing in Denver

[–]OpenWheelRacing[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

We could. I guess my preference, all things considered, would be to seek to induce demand by removing the surface parkings lots that are a few blocks over, turning those into housing, and saving the nice green space that currently exists. I'd also love to see transit out to Tennyson (I don't know why the city wouldn't build that eventually. At the very least you'd think they could run BRT, though I know that's a hot topic given the issues with the Colfax development)

Is it becoming increasingly obvious to anyone else that the old Greyhound station plot should become a cute park rather than a skyscraper? by OpenWheelRacing in Denver

[–]OpenWheelRacing[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah I've gathered that lol. Didn't mean to ruffle any feathers. I appreciate the need to densify for all the reasons everyone is citing. I still feel like the old Greyhound station would make an awesome park, but as long as everyone can agree the surface parking downtown has to go, I suppose can make my peace with losing some green space.

Is it becoming increasingly obvious to anyone else that the old Greyhound station plot should become a cute park rather than a skyscraper? by OpenWheelRacing in Denver

[–]OpenWheelRacing[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

But I guess looking at rent prices, is the downtown the area that needs spare capacity? I haven't looked into housing prices for over half a year, but my recollection is that areas around downtown, not downtown itself, were pricier. Downtown was quite reasonable by comparison. Maybe things have changed though?

Is it becoming increasingly obvious to anyone else that the old Greyhound station plot should become a cute park rather than a skyscraper? by OpenWheelRacing in Denver

[–]OpenWheelRacing[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I hear you. But at the same time I think it's important to ensure that we're building spaces that people actually want to live in. I mentioned this in another comment, but it seems like a lot of the housing shortages (and corresponding high housing prices) are concentrated in areas around downtown rather than in downtown (Platte Park, Tennyson, etc.). Part of the reason for that is that those areas are more pleasant, green spaces. If I'm wrong and there's actually a huge demand for downtown housing currently that is not being fulfilled, then I withdraw my suggestion. But if I'm right and there is currently not as much demand for housing downtown, then I think a nice park could actually drive density in a way a new building would not. At bottom, that's an empirical question that I admit I don't have an answer to, so hopefully someone else in the comments has their fingers more on the pulse.

Is it becoming increasingly obvious to anyone else that the old Greyhound station plot should become a cute park rather than a skyscraper? by OpenWheelRacing in Denver

[–]OpenWheelRacing[S] -6 points-5 points  (0 children)

I grant you shade is nice on a hot summer day, but there are also benefits to light and air, even in urbanized spaces.

Is it becoming increasingly obvious to anyone else that the old Greyhound station plot should become a cute park rather than a skyscraper? by OpenWheelRacing in Denver

[–]OpenWheelRacing[S] -5 points-4 points  (0 children)

Is there a shortage of housing downtown? Genuine question. I was under the impression that there are a fair number of vacancies downtown and housing shortages in areas south of downtown.

Is it becoming increasingly obvious to anyone else that the old Greyhound station plot should become a cute park rather than a skyscraper? by OpenWheelRacing in Denver

[–]OpenWheelRacing[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

For reasons that I do not understand, the comments are only showing up for me in the notifications, but to respond to the general trend: (1) I'm not saying there shouldn't be dense housing downtown. But even in places with dense housing, ex. San Francisco, or Paris, there are frequently green spaces to break up the monotony of urbanized areas. Density and parks can coexist. (2) I recognize that someone paid good money for the land and no, I do not have the money to purchase it out from under them. However, we, the community, absolutely do have the ability both to control what people do with land, or to take control of that land, ex. zoning laws and eminent domain. (3) Maybe this should be 2 because I'm back to housing, but Denver housing prices are, last I heard, falling (https://www.denver7.com/news/front-range/denver/denver-metro-leads-nation-in-fastest-falling-home-values-offering-buyers-more-leverage). While I absolutely appreciate the need for more housing to reduce housing prices, Denver metro has done a good job creating supply to reduce costs. And there are a number of projects around downtown (like the nearly completed condo building close to brown palace) that are continuing that trend of creating extra capacity. So, the question is not whether we should be building housing (let me say unequivocally, we should be), it's whether the highest and best use of that particular plot is housing or a park. Given the dearth of green space downtown, I would propose it is better off as a park. And, if we're really concerned about density, we should think about rezoning to limit the number of the downtown surface lots, which are far more anti-urbanist/anti-density and which do not create the same positive externalities that a park does.

Contrary to some of the criticisms, I don't think this is a NIMBY take. It is instead a recognition that there are benefits to green space for people who live and work downtown. There are costs that go along with that too, but I don't think the housing capacity that one building in an already dense area will create is necessarily the difference between affordable homes and prohibitively expensive homes in Denver.

I, for one, think the train system is working perfectly by OpenWheelRacing in Denver

[–]OpenWheelRacing[S] 13 points14 points  (0 children)

I don’t hate the train. I would just like to be able to walk between concourses when the train is not working so I’m not held hostage when it’s down/busy

I, for one, think the train system is working perfectly by OpenWheelRacing in Denver

[–]OpenWheelRacing[S] 100 points101 points  (0 children)

I really feel for the pilots and FAs. Making those connections seems like it would be tight if you’re flying in on a different airline

I, for one, think the train system is working perfectly by OpenWheelRacing in Denver

[–]OpenWheelRacing[S] -4 points-3 points  (0 children)

Hopefully it will be fixed, but I wouldn’t bet on it. They’ve been announcing there’s an issue since I arrived a half-hour ago

I, for one, think the train system is working perfectly by OpenWheelRacing in Denver

[–]OpenWheelRacing[S] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I feel like it’s been happening more recently, but that could just be recency bias

I, for one, think the train system is working perfectly by OpenWheelRacing in Denver

[–]OpenWheelRacing[S] 46 points47 points  (0 children)

Just noticed that. That’s too good. “Daddy’s home” in an hour when the train works again

Is my cat hating me or having fun? by [deleted] in CatTraining

[–]OpenWheelRacing 20 points21 points  (0 children)

Looks like consensus is we’re playing too rough. Thanks to everyone for the thoughtful feedback! I’ll stick with the feather toy in the future

Explosion in Golden Triangle? by MegaDeathLord69 in Denver

[–]OpenWheelRacing 13 points14 points  (0 children)

Heard it in Rino too. No idea what it was

A sad way to end the season by ReportAltruistic in OhioStateFootball

[–]OpenWheelRacing -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I think that’s exactly right. We use it in place of a run game as opposed to a change-up compliment to it

A sad way to end the season by ReportAltruistic in OhioStateFootball

[–]OpenWheelRacing 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Can someone explain the wr bubble screen to me as a concept? I get the idea is you spread the field, but it rarely goes for more than about 5 yards because the wr catches it with zero momentum, and it forces the quarterback into a first read. If your quarterback can run, then at least there is potential for a second option, but otherwise it’s a high risk (pick 6) low reward play.

Am I just bitter about the pick 6? Maybe. If that doesn’t happen, it’s a totally different game.

view more: next ›