Bay Village Apartment Tower | 212 Stuart St. | Bay Village

393b40 said:
The Revere is a tough one... you could build over the lower half but the actual current tower is there for a long long time. You cant go terribly tall here to offset demo and construction costs due to shadows on the common.
Click to expand...
The only hope for getting rid of the Revere is if it suffers the systems engineering inflexibility of concrete towers of its era.

The need for systems upgrades can drive major change. Harbor Towers bit the bullet and assessed the condo owners the $75 million or so needed. MIT with Eastgate chose demolition and a new tower because the cost was so prohibitive.
 
Maybe someone will give it (Revere hotel) the government center garage treatment, looks like it could work here too.
 
Other than the expensive tear down, there are plenty of relatively inexpensive ways to screen over the garage to make it much more attractive.
2B0983CD-8D46-4DC0-AACF-A22DE668601E.jpeg
 
The South End would probably pitch a fit if a developer proposed anything more than a 5+1 as a replacement.
 
Last edited:
Not a big fan of the east side facing the Revere but it's pretty clear the developers decided that at some point that view is probably going to be blocked by _something_
 
We cover this every time a building goes up on a tight, narrow lot - see the Moxy or 45 Province. It's not a choice left to the architects or developers, it's a function of the building code. This is built quite close to the lot line, and that controls the percent of the East elevation that can be given to windows. And yes, at some point the garage could be redeveloped, as has been proposed for the Motor Mart across the street ... although in this case it would presumably be a complete demo.
 
Pardon my ignorance - why would the lot line control the east elevation percentage in terms of windows?

StillInTheHood said:
We cover this every time a building goes up on a tight, narrow lot - see the Moxy or 45 Province. It's not a choice left to the architects or developers, it's a function of the building code. This is built quite close to the lot line, and that controls the percent of the East elevation that can be given to windows. And yes, at some point the garage could be redeveloped, as has been proposed for the Motor Mart across the street ... although in this case it would presumably be a complete demo.
Click to expand...
 
StillInTheHood said:
We cover this every time a building goes up on a tight, narrow lot - see the Moxy or 45 Province.
Click to expand...
Glad you mentioned the Moxy and 45 Province. The Moxy’s architects chose fun to cover their blank wall as shown by Pics posted by Kz and Beeline

49917864358_d2f8a0070a_b.jpg



And we all know how 45 Province’s eyesore of a blank wall turned out. Hopefully, the architects for 212 Stuart will be somewhat creative as well. All in all, I really like this building!
2EA960F2-5E95-48C3-AF4E-12CDC4AE21DC.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Coyote137 said:
Pardon my ignorance - why would the lot line control the east elevation percentage in terms of windows?
Click to expand...
Fire Code. If it is essentially on the lot line, the wall has fire rating requirements. IIRC it is not so much that the code says you have to limit windows, it is that the code says the windows (and wall) need to be fire rated, which means $$$$ per window. So developers limit the windows due to the cost of meeting the code. (Fire rated wall is much cheaper.)

Also future considerations. The development has no inherent right to windows directly on the lot line. So windows on a lot line wall are at risk of being blocked by a party wall if the owner of the garage next door decided to develop to the lot line as well.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top