urbanMSP

Specific Complaints:

The Brick is not real brick, you can see the sections.
The painted cement panels (are low quality construction) are painted two browns that go together awfully.
The browns also don't get along with the Red trim, which may be it's best unique feature.
It has the ugly AC Pack things on the exterior.

It's just a case of a building that had good potential, decent lines and shape, but was finished cheaply, and by someone terrible at picking out materials. So it killed it.

Well articulated. I love brick buildings but this is just...well, ugly.

All brick exteriors unfortunately have ugly expansion joints now, especially over wood framing Perhaps that is what you are seeing If it is 'fake' brick, do you mean thin bricks that go on like wall tile?

It is "real" brick. Though they're likely half bricks glued to a large panel installed in sections. A cheaper alternative.

Not all new buildings go this route. The Lofts at Farmers Market's brick exterior was done by individually placed full size bricks. It's a shame not every developer goes the extra mile. Doran has done some nice projects, but this isn't one of them.

Foto, thanks for your specific complaints. I mean this with all sincerity as it allows me to see what people dislike instead of just the sweeping "it's hideous" statement. I think FISHMAN is onto something. When folks dislike aspects of the building, could we be clear on what aspects we dislike? I think it would add to conversations as its difficult to argue against sweeping claims. Cheers.

On that note, I should take my own advise and say why I like this building haha. I think it add appropriate density to the areas and I actually don't mind the color scheme. I think the brick patten (whether fake or not) and metal pieces add a cool industrial look to the building.

All brick exteriors unfortunately have ugly expansion joints now, especially over wood framing

Does this mean that they will eventually expand and be less visible? Because yes, this is what makes it so hard to look at new buildings like Soltva that use brick paneling. How long till the expansion joints become less obvious?

Some reading- http://www.masonrymagazine.com/3-03/controljoints.html

Better yet-

http://www.gobrick.com/Portals/25/docs/ ... /TN18A.pdf

Thin brick (fake brick) -

http://www.gobrick.com/Portals/25/docs/ ... /TN28C.pdf

http://www.gobrick.com/Portals/25/docs/ ... s/TN28.pdf

Come on. What is with this fake brick crap? You know we had brick buildings in the 1800's. Why would any developer want to make their building look like it was built 130 years ago? This is horrible. If I were Minneapolis I would pass ordinances that specifically ban new construction from using certain types of facades. Ugly fake brick being one of those facades on the ban list.

I'm gonna go ahead and quote this post. Even if this isn't an opinion shared by everybody (or anyone for that matter) but when this is the only specific criticism, it's hard not to lump them all together.

I also have to say that this is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. We shouldn't use brick because they used brick 130 years ago? Does that mean we shouldn't use wood for anything either? It's just such a stupid critique. I'm willing to accept specific points, but so many of these threads turn into an echo chamber of "It stinks!" that it's impossible to have any real discussion.

Come on. What is with this fake brick crap? You know we had brick buildings in the 1800's. Why would any developer want to make their building look like it was built 130 years ago? This is horrible. If I were Minneapolis I would pass ordinances that specifically ban new construction from using certain types of facades. Ugly fake brick being one of those facades on the ban list.

I'm gonna go ahead and quote this post. Even if this isn't an opinion shared by everybody (or anyone for that matter) but when this is the only specific criticism, it's hard not to lump them all together.

I also have to say that this is the stupidest thing I've ever heard. We shouldn't use brick because they used brick 130 years ago? Does that mean we shouldn't use wood for anything either? It's just such a stupid critique. I'm willing to accept specific points, but so many of these threads turn into an echo chamber of "It stinks!" that it's impossible to have any real discussion.

I would agree with you that most of the "it's boring" criticism on the board in general is vague and repetitive, but I would also say that this building in particular is pretty terrible.

I'm going to come out as highly biased on this, but as a self proclaimed Masonry Expert (I'm an exterior designer, my parents worked for Wonder Klein Brick, Brock White, and Hedberg, and I worked at Hedberg's Masonry department for over 12 years). Veneer Brick is not great construction. It has so many more chances of failing. It also does not give the final aesthetic appearance of brick, if you are looking closely. Full Brick has a depth that you can only achieve using a lot of thin brick corners (expensive) so thin brick buildings end up looking flat and non dimensional. (IE around all of the windows, with a full brick, they would be set back 2-3 inches. With the veneer they are essentially flush creating a paper flat look to the whole face of the building, they could build out the walls and wrap those corners in veneer for the dimension but why not just use full brick for the added cost of the thin brick corner pieces.) I'd compare it to the way a piece of full wood furniture just looks and feels WAY better than a piece of MDF furniture with a wood grain veneer.

You can see that Greenleaf looks MUCH better, has depth around all the windows, because they used a full Endicott Brick. It just creates a richer more dimensional look. And it's even a much more modern brick that doesn't harken back to the early 1900's.

I'm going to come out as highly biased on this, but as a self proclaimed Masonry Expert (I'm an exterior designer, my parents worked for Wonder Klein Brick, Brock White, and Hedberg, and I worked at Hedberg's Masonry department for over 12 years). Veneer Brick is not great construction. It has so many more chances of failing. It also does not give the final aesthetic appearance of brick, if you are looking closely. Full Brick has a depth that you can only achieve using a lot of thin brick corners (expensive) so thin brick buildings end up looking flat and non dimensional. (IE around all of the windows, with a full brick, they would be set back 2-3 inches. With the veneer they are essentially flush creating a paper flat look to the whole face of the building, they could build out the walls and wrap those corners in veneer for the dimension but why not just use full brick for the added cost of the thin brick corner pieces.) I'd compare it to the way a piece of full wood furniture just looks and feels WAY better than a piece of MDF furniture with a wood grain veneer.

Fantastic! I personally could use more of THIS and less of "it sucks!".....I agree with NickP.

I find it to be incredible irony that Green Leaf, the subsidized housing project, looks better and is more critically acclaimed than just about all of the private, for-profit developments around town! It just goes to show you that anybody can achieve architectural excellence if they put their mind to it!

Maybe it's an indication that real brick is too expensive for market rate? Though I doubt this since this project is luxury student housing (right?) and no matter how good a developer is, the point of luxury student housing is to screw rich parents out of money. So why wouldn't we go the extra mile and try to save some money on construction?

But all that being said I'm not bothered by brick look. I like the flush look it gives the building.

Then again I like brutalism so maybe I'm just Wrong (TM).

Well said foto! Great critique.

I also LOVE brutalism, but I just don't like shortcuts...

I like the red thing, whatever that is supposed to be! I still think that little Tofu House right next to this thing makes for interesting urban fabric, knowing that my opinion is not a popular one.

i agree - it's pretty cool to see it still there. it helps that area feel less sterile. maybe the owner had no interest in selling to the developer. and if the color is so bad, it'll cost $20 to buy a gallon of paint so it's not a big deal.

Come on. What is with this fake brick crap? You know we had brick buildings in the 1800's. Why would any developer want to make their building look like it was built 130 years ago? This is horrible. If I were Minneapolis I would pass ordinances that specifically ban new construction from using certain types of facades. Ugly fake brick being one of those facades on the ban list.

brick is one of the oldest building materials and is still one of the most popular. it is used today throughout the known universe (well all of earth anyway) and it will be used forever all over the world because of it's simplicity, abundant resources, and beautiful results. if you pay attention to detail (and it's not too difficult on this one),this building does not look old at all, certainly not 130 years old.