Day and night renderings of the most current design for the tower planned at 300 Colorado Street, commonly known as 3rd & Colorado. Photo courtesy of GDA Architects.
Editor’s Note: Since publishing this story, we’ve heard back from developer Riverside Resources with some clarifications about these images. As it turns out, despite the renderings portraying the brick facade and swimming pool cantilevered out over the street only recently being uploaded to the portfolio of GDA Architects, that doesn’t make them new — they’re early concepts that don’t reflect current plans for the building. According to the developers, the building seen in the two renderings above this note are the most current design for the 3rd & Colorado tower, and that’s that.
Thanks to Riverside Resources for clarifying this — we certainly don’t want to mislead anyone. Since they’re an interesting look at how a project evolves, we’re keeping the renderings in the story but adding a disclaimer to each caption to make it clear that that’s not the tower we’re expecting. I’m gonna miss that pool.
Hey, remember the apartment tower planned for the current site of Sullivan’s Steakhouse at 300 Colorado Street? Of course you do.
Last time we heard from this plucky little tower, the city’s Historic Landmark Commission had a few concerns about the historic status of the building that’s housed Sullivan’s since 1996, but actually dates back to 1924 with a fairly interesting set of past lives as a bottling plant and various other commercial uses.
Thanks to the research conducted by the commission to determine the historic status of the building, we know that at one point in 1927, they were bottling soft drinks in the building with flavors like “Stimulator.”
explain the "stimulator" flavor, please pic.twitter.com/xGYt2EQG75
— James Rambin (@JamesRambin) October 3, 2017
Back in August, here’s where the commission stood on the issue:
This building is too important to the character of the
Warehouse District to not entertain and evaluate options other than strict demolition.— Historic Landmark Commission, August 28
But by September, they were whistling a different tune:
The building, while representing a rich history of various commercial and warehouse uses, has been significantly modified over the years with new face bricks, infill, and other modifications that have compromised its historic appearance. Documentation of this building appears to be the best means of preserving the history of the building and the Warehouse District. Staff therefore cannot recommend historic landmark designation for this building.
— Historic Landmark Commission, September 25
Huh. For a second there, I thought we’d see a bigger fight over this tower, but it seems like everything’s hunky dory all of a sudden. The impression I get from watching these meetings is that while the commission is interested in preserving the historic warehouses in the area, this particular building is a bit too much of an edge case to really make their last stand here.
However, the commission’s members are beginning to discuss the possibility of Local Historic District designation for the Warehouse District, which would mix the development scene up a little on that side of town. We’d probably see a lot more adaptive reuse and towers rising straight out of historic facades, which isn’t everyone’s cup of tea, but it’s better than burning down this whole side of town and replacing it with a bunch of blue glass boxes — at least in my opinion.
See the editor’s note at the top of the post for a clarification on these renderings — it turns out the one on the right is older, and the digital screen and nightmare pool aren’t in the cards after all. Images courtesy of GDA Architects.
It’s unclear if any of these design tweaks, particularly the bricktastic street-level facade, reflect the initial concerns of the Historic Landmark Commission in order to better preserve some aspect of the original building, but at least we’ve now got full confirmation that Sullivan’s is the new building’s major ground floor restaurant tenant, although I think we sort of knew that already.
You know what, hold up a second. I just realized the other street-level renders on the GDA site don’t look like the one up there. This rendering, for instance, looks a whole lot like the original version of the tower on the left side of my collage above:
Another rendering of the 3rd & Colorado tower at street level. See the editor’s note at the top of this post for a clarification on these renderings. Photo courtesy of GDA Architects.
Not as many bricks on this guy. Maybe they had a couple of design choices for the ground floor of the tower based on whether or not the city raised a fight over the site’s historic building. I’m gonna try to get in touch with the folks at GDA and shed some light on this, but really, it’s just a good excuse to show you all these sweet renderings.
Also, I’m gonna go ahead and assume that colorful graphic on the eastern side of the building is a digital screen, which is nifty — I guess it is almost 2019, we’re bound to see this kind of thing show up somewhere.
One last observation. Can we talk about this for a second?
See the editor’s note at the top of this post for a clarification on these renderings. Photo courtesy of GDA Architects.
This part, specifically:
Photo courtesy of GDA Architects.
Yep, that’s one of those horrifying nightmare pools designed to induce vertigo in people on YouTube. This feature doesn’t show up in all the renderings on GDA’s site, but I’ve already decided it has to happen. I’m hoping the fact that this particular rendering includes both the horror-pool and the warehouse-looking brick facade means it’s the most current look for the tower.
Anyway, stay tuned for the start of demolition at 300 Colorado Street — I’m gonna try to keep a brick!
Leave a Reply