What's new
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

Design firm "Populous" doing Folsom project - some of their other work

I actually had to do some research on that during my time as an undergrad cause I couldn't figure out how this ugly mess ended up in the middle of my campus.

1921 CU architecture committee decided on a "tuscan vernacular" design. In 1964 a rule was enacted that all designs would have to be approved by architecture review board and University president to keep consistent a aesthetically pleasing campus. They then enacted a specific set of rules which govern things like sandstone size, texture, roofing regulations, pedestrian access etc etc.... I nauseating long list of things. Yet after reading it I started looking at the building and technically it does meet all the rules. The flagstone siding is present (and rule doesn't state whole thing need be sandstone). It is right size, has right roofing, pathways, landscaping, access etc. So really fit all the rules and somehow the president at the time it was built didn't have the stone to stand up and say "I know technically this meets our standards, but hell no"

I know they were discussing building a new engineering center back in early 2000's but never heard anything more about it.... Would love to see this eye sore come down and get replaced with something that actually fits in with the rest of campus
If they did that, where else would a young, aspiring Aerospace Engineer learn about the flying characteristics of a large CRT TV? For the record, L/D was not actually calculated, but observation would suggest it was pretty close to 0.
 
Ugh... spent too many nights in that building.

Everyone commenting on the tuscan vernacular are spot on. CU has an architectural committee that verifies designs and construction practices. They are on site at least once a week verifying that the stone work matches the campus standard, which has changed over the years. The exterior aesthetic of the building will have to largely reflect that of campus and more specifically Folsom. Now they could incorporate a more modern approach to that, which would not be a bad thing, but I would expect something similar to the C4C or the Basketball Practice Facility to be the inspiration for design.
 
The architecture at CU, with its consistency and classic look, really separates the campus and makes it more special. The exceptions stand out in a bad way (Will Vill, Engineering, CEC - though that was improved with the reno).

The down side: for those of us who don't have the campus building map imprinted in our brains, everything looks the same and it's damn difficult to find your way around when you can't tell one building from another. Small price to pay to not have the campus take the turn that Princeton's did.
 
Does CU have to get approval or buy in from the State Historical Preservation Officer for designs? Or is that just a fed thing?
 
The architecture at CU, with its consistency and classic look, really separates the campus and makes it more special. The exceptions stand out in a bad way (Will Vill, Engineering, CEC - though that was improved with the reno).

The down side: for those of us who don't have the campus building map imprinted in our brains, everything looks the same and it's damn difficult to find your way around when you can't tell one building from another. Small price to pay to not have the campus take the turn that Princeton's did.

What they did to Princeton ought to be against the law.
 
Does CU have to get approval or buy in from the State Historical Preservation Officer for designs? Or is that just a fed thing?

The AD operates separately from CU in terms of being a public entity. I believe the AD is able to design and build as would any private business
 
Just got my update e-mail from RG. Sounds like donations and new Buff Club members are increasing with his aggressive fundraising skills. If my tax returns are good, I'll throw some more $$$ his way
 
Watched video for the plans for Rupp arena renovation in kentucky. That video is going to create many donors.

We need to something similar, and packaging it with the Born to Lead documentary wouldnt hurt either....IF that thing ever gets out?
 
Watched video for the plans for Rupp arena renovation in kentucky. That video is going to create many donors.

We need to something similar, and packaging it with the Born to Lead documentary wouldnt hurt either....IF that thing ever gets out?

My lord that is out of control. 310M renovation. Completely different basketball world. LINK
 
They aren't. A significant portion is being financed by the city. Their donations for their basketball program will be able to pay for the rest.
Hey, that's a great idea. We need to get Boulder to step up with a hundred mil!
 
Hey, that's a great idea. We need to get Boulder to step up with a hundred mil!

Sure -- based on my limited time following sports in the area, all that will need to happen to get the public referendum to pass is to convince the Broncos to play one game/year at Folsom.

OK, that was sarcasm, but if the Broncos would move one pre-season game each year to Folsom (do they sell out preseason too -- 60 seconds of searching didn't uncover that info?), Boulder could re-coup that money in just over 15 years: $125/ticket * 53,000 seats * 16 years will cover it. Make it a 20 year deal to account for interest. All that's left is to talk Pat Bowlen into parting with that revenue for the next 20 years and figure out how to sell beer at the game.
 
Even at a 50/50 split that would be huge for CU. Hell even a broncos scrimmage during training camp at $35 a ticket would be enough to get our AD out of the red, and get our facilities program moving.
 
Sure -- based on my limited time following sports in the area, all that will need to happen to get the public referendum to pass is to convince the Broncos to play one game/year at Folsom.

OK, that was sarcasm, but if the Broncos would move one pre-season game each year to Folsom (do they sell out preseason too -- 60 seconds of searching didn't uncover that info?), Boulder could re-coup that money in just over 15 years: $125/ticket * 53,000 seats * 16 years will cover it. Make it a 20 year deal to account for interest. All that's left is to talk Pat Bowlen into parting with that revenue for the next 20 years and figure out how to sell beer at the game.
Given that the Broncos sellout every game, I'm 99% sure they sell all their season ticket packages as a 10-game plan like almost every other team in this situation. Season ticket holders hate having to buy exhibition games at regular season prices but the demand is there.
 
Given that the Broncos sellout every game, I'm 99% sure they sell all their season ticket packages as a 10-game plan like almost every other team in this situation. Season ticket holders hate having to buy exhibition games at regular season prices but the demand is there.

Yep, every Bronco season ticket package includes both pre-season games. At full ****ing face value. :huh:
 
Yep, every Bronco season ticket package includes both pre-season games. At full ****ing face value. :huh:
Yeah I get the complaining about it, it sucks. But it's supply and demand. One way to look at it is IMO is a non-refundable deposit to watch the Broncos regular season games every year, knowing many people don't even bother to go or just give away their tickets.
 
You mention this little factoid to a Boulderite and they tend to get very angry.

[SUP]2[/SUP]Boulder·ite noun \ˈbould(er)ite-\
Geographical: a person who has moved to Boulder, Co., from a different region or country.
: Possesses a sense of attitude and entitlement, is indifferent to locals, historical values, and specifically natives (endangered species list) and hippies (extinct).
: A one percenter with a trust fund, an attitude and a Subaru.
: Someone who ruins something.
 
Last edited:
The person who designed that building was an engineer and not an architect. That was the most confusing, easiest building to get lost in.
Bull****. If it's confusing and easy to get lost in, it was designed by an architect.
 
Rumor is that a student led group designed the engineering center. It could be total bull****.
 
Back
Top