2020 Lawrence Update #6

Over at the newly completed 2020 Lawrence, there’s a new lighting element on this huge half block 10-story apartment building. Lighting on buildings is a key element to any major city and makes the city itself more visually appealing. Let’s take a look.

As of right now the colors cycle between blue, orange, pink, and purple. I’m curious to see if in the future they will change the colors occasionally, like the Four Seasons spire, versus having them cycle every few seconds. Here is the entrance to the building.


And here is the 2020 Lawrence looking towards 20th Street from 21st Street.


This is very opposite to the traditional white lighting over at the newly complete Ralph Carr Judicial Center but location is key for certain types of lighting. Arapahoe Square/Ballpark is more of a hip, up and coming neighborhood where Civic Center is very traditional. What do you think of the new lighting?

By | 2016-12-18T10:08:47+00:00 December 28, 2012|Categories: Arapahoe Square, Infill, Residential, Urbanism|Tags: |11 Comments


  1. Django December 28, 2012 at 11:53 pm

    It looks very cool! Gives the building and area a dose of pizazz.It would be great to see more buildings DT lit up.

  2. chachafish December 29, 2012 at 12:22 am

    Very positive. I live across the street from the Abu Dhabi, Yas Island Viceroy and the outer shell of the building is made of over 5,000 LED lights. The constantly changing colors give a neighborhood a feeling of motion and liveliness.

  3. JR ronczy December 29, 2012 at 4:16 am

    I think I like the concept, but what is key, as was mentioned, is how the lighting is modulated. In New York, the top of the Empire State Building is uplit with new colors and combinations on a daily basis, sometimes related to the significance of the day. I find myself looking up to see what each day’s color is. But it is a foreground building and consequently appropriate. On the other hand, a constant active modulation might be enjoyable to the occasional visitor, but uncomfortable or even downright annoying to the resident. It will be interesting to see what follows in the neighborhood.

  4. DMC December 29, 2012 at 8:53 am

    The lighting is cool. However, in the daytime, at least, this is not a good-looking building. I think that’s due to the large, cheap-looking bricks.

  5. Peter December 29, 2012 at 4:41 pm

    I think the lighting livens up the area and I like it. Having said that, I agree with DMC’s comment: this building is not good looking at all when the sun is out. I don’t understand this trend of apartment buildings with horrible pastel colors but I hope it ends soon. It’s still a great development though.

  6. Corey December 29, 2012 at 6:38 pm

    It reminds me of Miami Beach. Good.

  7. joe December 29, 2012 at 9:05 pm

    great idea, i hope to see more led lighting in the future around downtown denver, maybe even some large video advertisement screens on the sixteenth street mall. the visual impact would be stunning for visitors and locals alike.

  8. David December 29, 2012 at 9:34 pm

    Lipstick on a pig

  9. Randy December 31, 2012 at 9:39 am

    The comments regarding the architecture and building materials on this site crack me up. New building that is stucco – horrible/ugly/boring. New building that is block and steel – horrible/ugly/boring. New building that is/isn’t wood – horrible/ugly/boring.

    It’s a lot like politics – not everyone is going to be happy with everything.

    • MarkB December 31, 2012 at 3:58 pm

      Amen. What matters more than the material choices the developer makes (I assume most architects on residential projects like this struggle with too-small budgets) is the architecture itself. Yes, a lot of these buildings have similar elements. I’m not an architect, but I suspect that has to do with what’s available in the marketplace at a reasonable price–most architects don’t get Frank Lloyd Wright (or Frank Gehry) budgets. Most great cities have thousands upon thousands of buildings that all look similar to each other, and that were probably built with the most cost-effective materials available at the time. So what? They’re still great cities.

      This is a great project to add density and life to an area that has been essentially dead longer than most readers of this blog have been alive. It’s at the right scale–this is what we need to be building. And as for aesthetics–give it time. Never judge a new building until it has had time to age a bit.

  10. Keith January 2, 2013 at 2:35 pm

    I’m surprised nobody mentioned the strange art deco design elements on the front of this building. This is 2013, not 1938, right? This building is just another boring cookie-cutter Denver in-fill 10 story box with little creative inspiration. Developers are throwing up these inexpensive boxes all over the city, especially in the ballpark neighborhood. The ballpark neighborhood is starting to look like a miniature version of Co-op City is the Bronx, a cluster of almost identical boxy buildings that offer absolutely no aesthetic appeal to architecture enthusiasts, with the only difference being the silly color clashing hipster paint jobs that often pattern parts of the building facades. One Lincoln Park in downtown is in my opinion the only building built in the last 5 years in Denver that offers unique appeal and the majority of that credit goes to the design of the roof.

Comments are closed.