What do you think of CentrePointe’s design?

I’ve heard a lot of comment about CentrePointe’s design, little of it positive. The most scathing view I’ve seen comes from Anthony Eardley, a former dean of the University of Kentucky’s architecture school, who lives in an old downtown house he renovated.

CentrePointe200Eardley submitted a 2,000-word critique of CentrePointe to the Herald-Leader’s editorial page, whose editors asked him to trim it to the 700-word limit for guest columns. Rather than do that, he has been circulating it around town by email. It has been published on a local blog, Dialogic. You can read it here.

Like CentrePointe, Eardley’s critique suffers from being massive and pretentious. But it makes some excellent points about the building’s design, its unsuitability for the location and its flaunting of the downtown master plan.

Eardley considers it a “most monumental attack on our ravaged and still fragile downtown.” He urges the Urban County Council to reject CentrePointe’s design and establish an architectural review panel, such as the one Cincinnati has had since 1964, to review the design and suitability of new downtown projects.

As a longtime editor, I couldn’t resist tightening Eardley’s prose. Here’s my summary, in haiku:

The Webbs, philistines.

Their building worse than ugly.

City, just say no.

What do you think of CentrePointe? Post a comment below with your thoughts, in haiku if you like.