
The unapproved courtyard wall at “The Real World” Denver house in LoDo.
– OK, so this isn’t the most exciting news in the world, but here’s an update on that post from last week concerning “The Real World” Denver’s apparent illegal construction of a courtyard wall at their Denver house. Denver Post reporter Scott Lieber checks in with this update from the hearing this morning…
– “The Real World” is off the hook — for now. The Lower Downtown Design Review Board postponed ruling on their architectural redesigns to the house at 1920 Market St. and will recall the case in November, after filming ends.
– The house — the old locale for B-52’s Billiards — underwent reconstruction in preparation for the show’s filming. To legally rebuild the place, the owners needed a zoning permit and board approval. But rather than earn approval from the LDDRB, “The Real World” went through the mayor’s office and acquired a temporary building permit, skipping one necessary step for reconstruction — approval from the LDDRB.
– Kerry Buckey, an assistant city attorney who oversees the board, called it a “mistake.? Representatives from the architecture and design firms that made the adjustments appeared at the meeting, which took place at 1400 16th St. this morning at 7:45 a.m., but nobody from Bunim/Murray Productions or MTV showed.
– The main concern was the courtyard wall that they built at the house. It blocks the public from a patio area and also has two mini-garage doors for privacy. Behind it is a hot tub and basketball court. Board members took issue with the garage doors, specifically. Before MTV built the wall, a chain-link fence had occupied the area, offering the public a view of the courtyard.

The inside of the courtyard at “The Real World” Denver house in LoDo.
– The design board said it wasn’t prepared to do anything before the November close-out (when MTV’s lease ends), so it accepted the wall as a temporary structure and said it would rule on the project at its Nov. 2 meeting. If representatives fail to appear at that meeting, the wall will be removed.
– Board members noticed the redesigned area only recently, Buckley said, which is why the issue came forth so long after production started. At the November meeting, board members will hear the case “as if it were being looked at for the first time,? said member Paul Haack. The board will determine whether the wall will be approved or whether it will require changes.
– According to CBS4 reporter Brian Maass, who broke the story last week, the wall 20-foot-high wall cost $25,000 to build.
More from Get Real Denver
- The Out-of-Towners
- “Dirt” on “The Real World”
- Davis interview in The Advocate
- Casting for “The Real World” #19 in Denver
- The sour taste of MTV

wow, could you fit a little more editorializing in your posts? You wasted my day! I went there out of curiosity and it was muchado about nothing. They said the wall wasnt illegal and not the fault of mtv people but an internal errror. You made it sound so salacious and it turned out to be really lame, I thought your follow up would be more honest and you still go for the salacious angel. Well, whatever, point is, if people want to read this for stupid kicks go for it….but if you read this and then actually take time out of your day to go to meetings expectig sparks tofly….expect to be dissapointed.
i didnt realize how much editorializing you put in ur columns, makes me question the validity of the rest of your posts.
Comment by Sara — August 5, 2006 @ 11:11 am
Sara — This is a blog so editorializing is fine as long as I’m not distorting the facts. And even though you think we’re making much ado about nothing, we have yet to misrepresent this case. We actually wrote in the above post that the assistant city attorney who oversees the board called it “a mistake,” which is what you referenced when you talked about the internal error. We never predicted MTV was going to get nailed to the wall for this. Anyway, sorry to make you go out of your way to attend a boring meeting, but what do you expect from a design review committee? We weren’t making it salacious, just placing it in context…
Comment by John Wenzel — August 6, 2006 @ 6:17 pm