I don't know if I'd go that far, but it definitely seems out of place in that neighborhood these days (especially with all the glass and steel mid-rise stuff there in that part of Arlington and Crystal City) but when it was built, it probably fit right in perfectly with everything across the river in D.C. or the Pentagon up the street.That is the most dreadful building I've ever seen.
Well, the MCM style probably hit its nadir of popularity 1-2 decades ago but is only slowly crawling its way back up the incline. it will be interesting to see if minimalist styles will make the full recovery in reputation that, for instance, art nouveau and art deco achieved.That is the most dreadful building I've ever seen.
The building in question is, in fact, a "machine for living in", on the assumption that the life is quite car-centred and on the reductionist utility concept that sustaining life is consistent with ignoring a sense of visual complexity and delight.
I never saw that building as MCM.Well, the MCM style probably hit its nadir of popularity 1-2 decades ago but is only slowly crawling its way back up the incline. it will be interesting to see if minimalist styles will make the full recovery in reputation that, for instance, art nouveau and art deco achieved.
That's about the same scale as the MCM homes in my area... maybe 1700-2000 sq ft or so.Here's a local example of a modest Haver home from right by my daughter's school (note the church is the background which is a very cool MCM building in it's own right).
And another in the same neighborhood:
Same here. My house was built in 1951, though it's been updated and additions added since then, but at least it still retains it's outward charm and most of my immediate neighborhood remains intact with no tear downs on my street and most houses all retaining their original brick and character, which is nice.My neighborhood was built between 1950 and 1960, but most homes are best described as "traditional". There is a portion that is true MCM and yes, they go for about 30-50% more per square foot.
Yep. Haver didn't design many larger homes. Mostly humble homes with good MCM character designed for the everyman/woman. He did design quite a few commercial buildings in the area, though.That's about the same scale as the MCM homes in my area... maybe 1700-2000 sq ft or so.
The NW corner of Cheektowaga (Cleveland Hill) never seemed like Cheektowaga to me. I rarely ventured up that way; if I did it was usually for Ja Fa Fa Hots and no further. Seemed more like Eggertsville or Snyder.
This one is In Bloomfield Hills. Yamasaki lived in Bloomfield Hills for years and years so I imagine there are a few more of his residential designs scattered around. The ones that I have stumbled across seem to be on oddly shaped parcels and make heavy use of natural topography like hills, lakes, and marshes and it seems like he (or his clients) may have had a penchant for utilizing parcels that just weren't selling or that other owners/developers found to be undevelopable or unmarketable.So.... in/around Bloomfield Hills?
That's a nice one! Some great Art Moderne touches.In my (Victorian/Edwardian) neighbourhood, a rare 1938 modernist house.