Wraps are off proposal for unusual building
Members of review board call for more refinement of plan
By John Rebchook, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)
Published June 19, 2008 at 9:05 p.m.
Do you like the design of Bell Tower?
Fentress Architects
The proposed Bell Tower, shown in a drawing, would have 33 units with possible prices of $7.5 million up to $25 million.
Developer Buzz Geller on Thursday unveiled drawings of his proposed $300 million residential and office tower along Speer Boulevard and Larimer Street.
Geller and architect Curt Fentress say the 33-story building would be unique in Denver.
The tower would have 33 units starting at about $1,000 per square foot, with the possibility of the penthouse commanding about $2,000 per square foot.
With an average size of 7,500 square feet, the typical unit could cost $7.5 million. The penthouse unit could cost $25 million.
"These are for someone who is downsizing from a 30,000-square-foot home in Cherry Hills, or a star hockey player, the quarterback of the Denver Broncos, a big-time basketball player, or a CEO of a big corporation - not you or me," Fentress said following the meeting of the Lower Downtown Design Review Board.
Members of the board agreed that they had never seen anything like the green and white glass building, where numerous balconies jut out like shards. Some board members said they liked how the building has evolved, but they made no final decision and called for the plan to be refined more. They said they wanted it to appear "lighter, more slender, more featherlike."
Dee Chirafisi, an owner of Kentwood City Properties, at one point held up two drawings of Bell Tower, saying she liked the way it looked from one perspective, but from another angle it appeared too massive.
Geller said he thought he had accomplished what the board had asked at the last meeting and was "somewhat frustrated" that they didn't give him a green light.
He said what board members are calling for would necessitate building more of a typical box, and he wouldn't be able to command the prices of a unique tower.
"The bottom line is that this has to make money, even if it is only a nickel," Geller told Tyler Gibbs, a city planner, after the meeting. "If I'm going to just stack the floors on top of each other, it's going to be like what Great Gulf planned or Brooks Tower."
Geller said he could revert to an option that would cover the site with two relatively low-rise buildings and lose a park.
Fentress, who designed Denver International Airport and the Colorado Convention Center, said he has run into initial resistance of his designs in the past.
rebchookj@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-954-5207
Post your comment
Registration is required. Click here to create your free user account, or login below.
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
Featured
-
Denver turns 150
Read about the city's history, look at old photos and see a list of influential Denverites.
-
Mount Crushmore
Which four Broncos greats should be immortalized on Mount Crushmore? Vote here.
-
Winter Escapes
Your insider’s guide to the copious joys of the coolest season.
-
Rocky Multimedia
The news comes alive in our videos and slide shows. Catch up on what's happening today.
-
Weekend plans?
Figure out things to do this weekend with the help of our entertainment calendar.
-
Bronco Dean's rant
Listen to Bronco Dean's pregame rant on the Raiders.
-
Season To Share
The Post-News Season To Share campaign provides grants to area nonprofits.
-
The Rocky @ 150 Years
The Rocky was there when Colorado became a state in 1876. Read our coverage.
-
A Dozen on Denver
And the winner is... Robert Ziegler! See the whole fiction series by clicking here.
June 20, 2008
8:16 a.m.
Suggest removal
jronczy writes:
I have to agree with the developer and Fentress - an iconic tower at that site acts as a "beacon" to the west edge of downtown - a totally appropriate location for a disctinctive piece of architecture. This is not a background site, and it should not be a background building.
June 20, 2008
8:28 a.m.
Suggest removal
SayWhat32 writes:
The problem is with the presentation of the building. The renderings are cartoon-ish and that makes the building look like a mass rather than a light glass structure. Fentress should know better and understand that this is not a competition proposal for a concept it is a presentation to a governing board. \
I am not a fan of Fentress work and but this one is ok. It is a good concept but good buildings are more than just a concept and Fentress has shown a lack of detail and refinement to his buildings. The Convention Center is a example of a good concept that was not given the proper refinement. It is a clunky building with bad detailing. Although Fentress takes credit for the design of DIA it was not his original design. He took over a design concept that was generated from another architect.
June 20, 2008
10:34 a.m.
Suggest removal
ColoradoFan writes:
Terrible building. Why must Denver be plagued by buildings that are so busy and unrefined? The initial design of two years ago was much more sophisticated.
June 20, 2008
10:58 a.m.
Suggest removal
Vagabond writes:
In our travels to other parts of the world we've been impressed
by new and enormously creative urban architecture, especially in China, Malaysia, Singapore and Australia.
The Fentress design is both creative and unusual, a welcome break from Denver downtown's "box and slab" orientation. I hope that we don't end up forcing Geller into the "two relatively low rise buildings" option, to join the phalanx of other undistinguished "relatively low rise buildings . . ."
June 20, 2008
11:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
Bob299 writes:
I rather like the edginess of the building. I agree with SayWhat32 that the renderings probably do not do it justice and properly portray the use of glass.
June 20, 2008
11:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
astro writes:
Wow! Finally an interesting residential highrise on the Denver Skyline. Most residential projects are extruded boxes and I am sick of it. I think the design is great and while I agree the rendering doesn't do it justice I think it would be a wonderful addition to the skyline. Think of the site... to put another box on that site would be a crime. I think that the glass facets and angles would produce an ever changing sculpture in different light. I have to agree with the developer and give him credit for the courage to do something different for a change. I hope the city will find the same courage. Denver's bland skyline needs all the help it can get.
June 20, 2008
12:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
SayWhat32 writes:
Colorado Fan - the design you refer to several years ago is a safe ok design approach. One that is done in Denver all too often. I am not sure I will like the final design of the building by Fentress because of what I mentioned before. Denver will continue to be referred to as a "Cow Town" if conservative buildings are built one after the other. Case in point the Four Seasons Hotel (in the background of one of the renderings) is a terrible design approach but I am sure it is pleasing to you.
June 20, 2008
8:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
FunctionForm writes:
I think the building's design is excellent. I'm not sure what problem the Lower Downtown Design Review Board would have with it. If the concern is to make or keep Larimer Square unique, one way to do that would be to allow buildings exactly like this immediately adjacent to the block. Basic design reminds us that our eye is drawn to the highest contrast. If Larimer Square is surrounded by high-rise construction of glass and steel, then the brick, low-rise nature of Larimer Square would become the highest contrast and even more of a focus. In my opinion, that would be intensified even more by the increase in downtown residents making the block even more lively. Denver will continue to grow and we need to recognize and allow good design.
June 22, 2008
6:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
warrengfunk7 writes:
That is a very nice building - it reminds me of some of Wright's best designs, such as the Price tower. This would be a true Architectural gem for the City of Denver!
June 23, 2008
12:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
kalonblake writes:
When they built the Invesco Field, its height was restricted because of viewshed criteria. The viewshed involved was from the SW end of Larimer Square. Why isn't that a factor here? This looks like it will completely eliminate that view.
June 23, 2008
7:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
Depenbusch writes:
Slender” is a design or code issue?
Design of buildings is best decided by architect & client rather than an ad hoc board, in the same vein that brain surgery is in the hands of the Doctor & patient not a board. Is the LODO Board aware that Bell Tower is derivative of a Piet Mondrian painting circa 1920’s in 3 colors with slanted faces ala Daniel Libeskind circa 2006? Bell Tower, pricy as a Faberge egg with no 2 floors alike, owes it’s jagged edges to de-constructivist design theory, as per the sharp slashes in the Libeskind Berlin Museum. If public critique of private work is fair then why limit the critique of Bell to subjective design and not sustainable design? Why quibble about subjective appearance alone?
Within the vertical chaotic scheme is an unifying rhythm of modular vision glass and spandrel glass at balconies/ floors that make it well suited for integrated solar power. The entire south face spandrel glass (at floor line) could be sloped solar photovoltaic (PV) panels set within a curtainwall grid, imagine rows of dark angular sapphires in a wall of pave set emerald crystal. Angled PV would also shade the glass below like a roof overhang. PV panels in lieu of spandrel about 80 feet wide) could provide +/- 5,000 watts of power or 5kw per floor. A PV plan 150 feet wide to provide 10,000 watts was featured in a CBS news story and is being reviewed by Greenwood Village. Bell Tower could produce 165,000 watts of green power to run elevators and lighting needs with excess power sold back to the power grid. What is the anticipated carbon footprint of the luxury units? Aspen requires solar in large luxury residential, how high must gas go before Denver follows suit?
Our President said we are addicted to oil and need renewable energy. Governor Ritter made an Energy Office to support renewable and put PV on a roof on the mansion grounds. Every Congressional candidate has wind turbines or renewable energy in their TV ads. Even politicians know that sustainable design means green power not just recyclable carpet.
Free market companies are betting on solar as PV roof tiles are now made modular to fit seamlessly with a spanish tile roof. Technological wonders are being built in London, Dubai, China, Taiwan and Malaysia while we allow groups of elite taste arbiters to stifle innovation. Integrated PV will cover the facades of new high-rise structures in this decade but will Colorado, home of the NREL, lead or follow?
June 24, 2008
12:02 p.m.
Suggest removal
timeandagain writes:
Hideous!