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

20211016_134439.jpg
 
It definitely does look better in person and with the right ambient light.

But at the same time, I think the architect dropped the ball here... not majorly, but its a flawed design.
 
gac108 said:
It's like saying "he/she has really nice... elbows..."
Click to expand...

In Architecture, you design a corner. In architecture, you treat a corner like an elbow. This design team on this (a good one) definitely thought about the corners.

I think it's a good design. What would make it great is 2x-ing the height to make the proportions work, and perhaps having some texture on the windows that aren't as dark.
 
gac108 said:
It's like saying "he/she has really nice... elbows..."
Click to expand...

No, corners are a really important part of architecture (think of old residential architecture and quoins or the difference between glass that turns the corner on a tower or a column at that corner)(to be pedantic).

They often get just ignored and I appreciate that this designer thought about them and made creative decisions.
 
stefal said:
In Architecture, you design a corner. In architecture, you treat a corner like an elbow. This design team on this (a good one) definitely thought about the corners.

I think it's a good design. What would make it great is 2x-ing the height to make the proportions work, and perhaps having some texture on the windows that aren't as dark.
Click to expand...
I know, and I get that. My point being that, like a model whose arms are exposed and taken into account for the design of a shirt, they may be viewed as an attractive part, but the overall attractiveness of the model is certainly not hinged upon the elbow. The sharply defined corners of this building are a positive, and for me at least, that's about where it ends. Nothing else works for me and I don't think making it taller would've rectified that.
 
Just drove by this yesterday, and I realized what bothers me most about this: those colossal four story rows being emphasized way too much by the too-dark glass. In an area loaded with masonry and punch-out windows (aka the human scale) it manages to feel too vertical and too squat at the same time.

I definitely appreciate the details they got right and by no means do I hate it, but overall it feels like a curious Edward Durell Stone relic from the 1960s.
 
There are certain aspects of this project that don't quite work, but just by virtue of having halfway decent materials and some depth in the facade it's better than ~80% of new development in my book.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top