We are long overdue for some ‘final updates’ here on DenverInfill with one of those projects being Broadstone Blake Street, which completed around April of this year.
Announced in 2012, DenverInfill followed this project for two years, closely watching an ugly surface lot across from Coors Field transform into a high density, urban development. Here are all of the previous updates for Broadstone Blake Street:
New Ballpark District Project: Broadstone Blake Street
Goodbye Empty Lots, You Will Not Be Missed
Ballpark: Broadstone Blake Street Update
Ballpark: Broadstone Blake Street Update #2
Ballpark: Broadstone Blake Street Update #3
Ballpark: Broadstone Blake Street Update #4
Ballpark: Broadstone Blake Street Update #5
Now to the pictures, which I actually took back in April when Broadstone Blake Street just opened. This project rises a total of seven-stories and is providing the Ballpark neighborhood with 164 apartment units.
The main entrance, along with some walk-up units, line Blake Street with the parking ramps along 22nd Avenue. The parking garage location is a strategic move by the developers as Blake Street is closed off for the majority of Rockies games.
The Ballpark neighborhood is riddled with parking lots creating huge holes in our urban fabric. With three significantly sized projects now complete, we can only hope more projects will be coming to this neighborhood soon. For amenity and leasing information, check out the project’s website.
Nice project but it would’ve been nice if they had included some street trees.
Check google street view. It is more recent and there are street trees there now.
Unfortunate piece of infill…nice street level and overall shape – but they should have thought about the view from the stadium which is across the street. You look off the upper level and its a monster wall of stucco. In a brick city like Denver, and a cool district like ballpark the developer should have been more sensitive with the material choices. Blah. Very unimpressed. Hopefully with the boom Denver is going through we can get a few buildings that aren’t so offensive. Stucco should be illegal!
While I agree that brickwork or another type of masonry would have been far better (stronger design guidelines maybe?), I think that stucco walls are far better than a parking lot. Now if only the stadium authority was wiling to go that far and we could get rid of that massive lot at the southwest end of the stadium.
At least it’s brick at street level. And really, the mixture of materials and color make for an interesting enough exterior appearance, especially in comparison to the metal Public Storage building sitting just south of it. That has to be temporary, right?
Yes stucco is better than an asphalt parking lot but that is not saying much. Especially for a prime property directly across of the ballpark (LoDos biggest attraction). I agree that this is very cookie cutter and overall a disappointment. The only leg that is has to stand on is it has some bland and un-interesting brick on the bottom and its better than a parking lot. This doesn’t say much for the developer, architect or our City. I still don’t understand the reasoning for doing walk up apartment entrances directly off the street at this location. Why not have some retail. Before people chime in and say “not every building needs groundfloor retail”, I will say that I agree not EVERY building does but THIS building in THIS location does.
Very unfortunate indeed. Infill and density when done well is an incredible thing and enhances the city. I fear when all the surface lots are gone, we wont be terribly proud of a large amount of what has taken its place. I happen to like that tin building.Its a real building in a real place. One cant say the same for this project or many others (sometimes quite literally) just like it. Please save some of the surface lots for more sensible periods of development and design in this city.
That could take decades. And by that time, probably, most of the buildings that have been built will be nearing the end of their life and new stuff will be built in their place.
Like all the other posters; unimpressed, given the location. Pretty strong fail by the city not having the zoning regs in place to ensure that such a prime location was not more aesthetically pleasing/required better outward-facing materials, at a minimum along Blake St. Relying on developers to “do what they should” hardly ever works – they’re in it to make $. Strong regulations are necessary to ensure they “do what they must.” This was one area/block that should have had increased scrutiny, IMO.
I’ll go on record and disagree with all the above comments. While stucco isn’t my favorite, the building is quite relatable at ground level and very much helps the pedestrian experience at the intersection of 22nd and Blake, especially as one walks towards the First Base Entrance of Coors.
It is miles better than the eyesore of a dirt lot that used to be there, it is a good height for the neighborhood, and it’ll add some extra life to the surrounding area during the off-season in the form of a goodly amount of extra tenants.
One really gets the sense reading the comments on this blog that a great many people would rather have parking lots than the mid-rise buildings of no particular distinction that compose the majority of every major city on Earth.
Okay, We Get It ! You don’t like parking lots. But those are UGLY buildings. Square and no style.
Why does Denver keep approving buildings with no attention to the streetscape!?
Squeeeee! More earth tone boxes for Denver!