DENVER | Main Development Thread #6

[Chucolo]

This should spur some discussion. Like Paglia wrote, limiting it to 10 was tough.... And it didn't even include the Aloft Hotel......

http://www.westword.com/arts/the-ten-worst-21st-century-buildings-in-downtown-denver-6882500

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by seventwenty

Eviva broke ground. Http://m.bizjournals.com/denver/blog/rea...cherokee-apartments-break-ground-in.html

So it's official? We got shovels? Wasn't sure this one would ever happen.

Per tumblr.com:

Per the linked DBJ write-up.

"Our main objective is to connect the diverse facets of the communities where we build, and this is no exception," said Christopher Martorella, president of Integral's commercial real estate division. "Eviva Cherokee is designed to attract renters of all ages from Gen-Y to baby boomers looking for a new standard in luxury living in a thriving neighborhood."

Courtesy The Integral Group via Confluence Denver

Great addition to the landscape. I'm So Happy.

Courtesy of TotalProSports

[Stonemans_rowJ]

Originally Posted by Chucolo

This should spur some discussion. Like Paglia wrote, limiting it to 10 was tough.... And it didn't even include the Aloft Hotel......

http://www.westword.com/arts/the-ten-worst-21st-century-buildings-in-downtown-denver-6882500

I'm surprised One Lincoln Park is on that list. And, what's wrong with the A Loft? It's perfectly good filler. Used to be a Burger King for crying out loud!

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by Chucolo

This should spur some discussion. Like Paglia wrote, limiting it to 10 was tough.... And it didn't even include the Aloft Hotel......

http://www.westword.com/arts/the-ten-worst-21st-century-buildings-in-downtown-denver-6882500

Eh, I don't think any of them are all that bad. In fact, it's been so long since I saw a photo of The Beauvallon that I even like that one albeit an interesting building. I think it's useful to put the properties within the context of their neighborhoods also.

Few Plain Jane's downtown, all hotels.
The one miss for me would be White Lodgings's Embassy Suites. Unfortunately the timing was such that they must have struggled a bit getting financing as I recall it was going to have more floors initially and there was clearly some value engineering that occurred. C'est la vie.

[bunt_q]

The monstrosity that is 2020 Lawrence should be on that list. I am not sure why Solera made it over that one. They're the same architecture basically, except one has a manageable footprint, whereas the other looks like it should be stretching across the plains of Siberia.

[Cirrus]

A lot of those buildings are ugly, but the author's continual attacks on developers for daring to maximize square footage is pretty off-putting. In case he hadn't noticed, we have a housing crunch. Maybe if the zoning weren't so restrictive architects could have more creativity.

And AMLI Riverfront Park doesn't belong anywhere near a list like that. I'm not sure 2785 Speer Boulevard belongs either. 2020 Lawrence is definitely much worse than either.

[enjo13]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

The monstrosity that is 2020 Lawrence should be on that list. I am not sure why Solera made it over that one. They're the same architecture basically, except one has a manageable footprint, whereas the other looks like it should be stretching across the plains of Siberia.

I agree.. also where is Lincoln Terrace? (http://madronaridgellc.com/upload/i20130117161819/img1.jpg)

One Lincoln Park is awful, but that's not?

[enjo13]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

And AMLI Riverfront Park doesn't belong anywhere near a list like that. I'm not sure 2785 Speer Boulevard belongs either. 2020 Lawrence is definitely much worse than either.

Bah, any chance we have to hate on that building we should take. It's not that the building is awful (it's..fine). It's the lack of retail that kills me.

[mr1138]

There seems to be a populist sentiment, being popularized by columns like this one, that developers and politicians have colluded to jack up housing costs in Denver. If you listen to these people, every new building that goes up just sets a new price precedent, and everything would be better if the city just put a stop to all development and tell the newcomers to "go elsewhere." Of course, the majority of us on here, and anybody who understands supply-and-demand can see the flaw in this logic - but most people I've seen re-posting these things on places like Facebook really don't want to take the time to investigate the phenomenon more deeply. It's easier, and sells more papers, for the writer to just cast developers as villains and pretend that this is a very black and white situation of people who love their city vs. people who want to "destroy" it.

In all seriousness though, we are getting quite a few ugly buildings (though I am admittedly a knee-jerk defender of most of them). But I still think that many of these just really don't make the cut. 2785 Speer and OLP in particular actually look fairly sharp if you ask me. I think to this writer "big"="bad." Though I also agree that it was lazy of him to choose something like Solera over 2020 Lawrence.

I would throw in the new drive-through Starbucks at Speer and Galapago, or the new 1st Bank strip mall at 6th and Broadway, or any number of other single-story retail structures - if we want to really talk objectively about new buildings that are bad. But those don't play in to Westword's key message that apartment developers, large buildings, and new residents are ruining the city.

[Sam Hill]

Originally Posted by Chucolo

This should spur some discussion. Like Paglia wrote, limiting it to 10 was tough.... And it didn't even include the Aloft Hotel......

http://www.westword.com/arts/the-ten-worst-21st-century-buildings-in-downtown-denver-6882500

The last three on that list seem like they were chosen at random - they look just like just about every other five-story building built in Denver in the past 10 years.

I too am surprised Aloft isn't on the list. I'm even more surprised the Tetris Building isn't on the list. For a long time I assumed that building was universally despised, but I'm starting to realize (from conversations I've had with my Denverite friends, and now this) that I'm alone in my opinion that the Tetris building is the ugliest thing on the skyline.

I'm also really surprised Solera was chosen over its ugly sister across the street.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

A lot of those buildings are ugly, but the author's continual attacks on developers for daring to maximize square footage is pretty off-putting. In case he hadn't noticed, we have a housing crunch. Maybe if the zoning weren't so restrictive architects could have more creativity.

And AMLI Riverfront Park doesn't belong anywhere near a list like that. I'm not sure 2785 Speer Boulevard belongs either. 2020 Lawrence is definitely much worse than either.

Full agreement.

Solera is LEED's platinum rated which doesn't speak to the architecture but I'd give it a pass and as bunt suggests its on a small footprint.

Originally Posted by enjo13

I agree.. also where is Lincoln Terrace? (http://madronaridgellc.com/upload/i20130117161819/img1.jpg)

One Lincoln Park is awful, but that's not?

Haha, that one is so ugly it's a unique gem. It is for affordable and low income people so I'll say it's fun even if awful.

[The Dirt]

Originally Posted by Sam Hill

the Tetris building is the ugliest thing on the skyline.

How dare you, sir! You take that back!

In all seriousness, Denver is the only city where a building like that would work. It's context is a perfect statement of Denver's transition from 70s/80s boxes to value engineered contemporary glassy boxes.

[Brainpathology]

I hate stuff.

Here are ten things I hate. (because they look bad behind pictures of handlebar mustaches).

I work for a pretend newspaper which taps into hipsters who think it's cool to use 200 year old technology for "reasons" and who also hate stuff. Especially stuff that someone had to go to a traditional school for. Like architecture, or accountants, or whatever that thing is called that makes thingies run good or stand up without collapsing. So they will gladly publish these ten things I hate (and join me as I "delight in pointing and laughing" at some of the things I hate).

If enough fellow Denverites join me in hating enough things/people we can be just like Boulder... where no one hates anything.

EDIT: In fairness he DID do a ten best list as well. But any article which blends developers are evil and their buildings are evil and "historic structures routinely go under the wrecking ball" in Denver loose me instantly. We USED to destroy historic buildings here. Now I'd be surprised if you could replace a pile of dirt that had been sitting around long enough without fighting a preservation fight.

[Brainpathology]

Although DEAR LORD having just read the best of list he obviously threw in the tetris building to make it just a teeeny bit less transparent that the sine qua non of a good building in Denver is that it be partially funded by the government through either public private partnerships, donations, or bonds.

I need to go shower. Holy crap those two articles are icky.

[bcp]

Originally Posted by mr1138

There seems to be a populist sentiment, being popularized by columns like this one, that developers and politicians have colluded to jack up housing costs in Denver. If you listen to these people, every new building that goes up just sets a new price precedent, and everything would be better if the city just put a stop to all development and tell the newcomers to "go elsewhere." Of course, the majority of us on here, and anybody who understands supply-and-demand can see the flaw in this logic - but most people I've seen re-posting these things on places like Facebook really don't want to take the time to investigate the phenomenon more deeply. It's easier, and sells more papers, for the writer to just cast developers as villains and pretend that this is a very black and white situation of people who love their city vs. people who want to "destroy" it.

In all seriousness though, we are getting quite a few ugly buildings (though I am admittedly a knee-jerk defender of most of them). But I still think that many of these just really don't make the cut. 2785 Speer and OLP in particular actually look fairly sharp if you ask me. I think to this writer "big"="bad." Though I also agree that it was lazy of him to choose something like Solera over 2020 Lawrence.

I would throw in the new drive-through Starbucks at Speer and Galapago, or the new 1st Bank strip mall at 6th and Broadway, or any number of other single-story retail structures - if we want to really talk objectively about new buildings that are bad. But those don't play in to Westword's key message that apartment developers, large buildings, and new residents are ruining the city.

Well said, this list and populist arguments seem poorly thought through. If "article commenter type populists" want developers to lower prices and increase quality and lower density and add more parking....fine.

But will they also provide protections for revenue and profit when the market dips?

[CharlesCO]

I admit that I only glanced at the Westword article, but that's only because it really depresses me to see that Westword has decided in the last few years to reposition itself as some local version of Buzzfeed. What happened, Patty Calhoun?

But as long as we're going to make a list of the ugliest new buildings in Denver, any list loses any credibility if it doesn't have the Vistaloft across from DU at number 1.

[Denver]

Originally Posted by CharlesCO

But as long as we're going to make a list of the ugliest new buildings in Denver, any list loses any credibility if it doesn't have the Vistaloft across from DU at number 1.

Really? I think Vistaloft is great. I definitely would not call it an ugly building. The worst IMO are the affordable housing building on Lincoln next to the YMCA, Aloft, and any Cap Hill high-rise that was built between the 1970s and 1980s (they all look the same and are horrible at street level).

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by Brainpathology

Although DEAR LORD having just read the best of list he obviously threw in the tetris building to make it just a teeeny bit less transparent that the sine qua non of a good building in Denver is that it be partially funded by the government through either public private partnerships, donations, or bonds.

I need to go shower. Holy crap those two articles are icky.

Always enjoy your "insight."

Yes, with his "Best of" list, Paglia clearly shows his civic side bias. It did allow for reminiscing to earlier Skyscraper days and the many nice, fun and interesting contributions to the Civic Park neighborhood.

With respect to his "Worst of" list I'll give Paglia a nod for his architectural chops but I don't care much for his prejudice.

For grins, I went back to DenverInfill and reviewed RyanD's very nice Final Update of AMLI Riverfront. Given its siting, I like it just fine. I like the extensive use of brick and its hardly unimaginative or boring understanding its purpose for existing.

I also checked out RyanD's Final Update for Line 28 at LoHi. Here Paglia is bothered by the "Hipster" name and developer's (Holland Partners) efficient process. He should have scheduled a couple of sessions with his shrink before he put this list together.

As for the Zocalo projects, including the "monstrosity" at 2020 Lawrence I won't argue the architectural appeal. I am much more interested however on how these significant residential projects will age given their much better than average bones and quality on the inside. I expect they'll appeal to those who want to live in the urban core for a very long time.

[Cirrus]

Originally Posted by mr1138

There seems to be a populist sentiment, being popularized by columns like this one, that developers and politicians have colluded to jack up housing costs in Denver

This is nothing new. It's been a populist sentiment since at least the 1970s.

[TakeFive]

Who knew that Pivot Denver had already broken ground in the Union Station neighborhood?