A common justification for building anew (as opposed to renovating an existing building) is the claim that the client can get “exactly what is wanted” or that new construction will be a “fresh start” – a chance to “do things right”.  Of course, this only works if both the client and the designer/architect involved are capable of imagining and creating good design. This is especially critical when the building is civic in nature; such buildings are not only used by entire communities but frequently serve as their public image or “face”. Their visibility and role creates a memorable impression – especially for visitors.  Increasingly, however, both clients and planners are slacking – intent only goes so far.

And it’s not a matter of the skyrocketing cost of construction, either, though that does takes a toll on the outcome. More frequently, it’s a result of architectural illiteracy – an increased failure on the part of our culture to distinguish between good design and crap. The failure to make such distinctions has very real ramifications. Not only can the end result be unattractive and therefore a detriment to the building’s immediate neighborhood, but poorly-conceived ideas can be expensive both in terms of unneccessary waste initially and then later on in terms of maintenance and remediation.

While the following series of photos will highlight shortcomings of one specific building, similar flaws are all too common in contemporary construction efforts.  At first glance from the street it is evident that this building was recently built, and that it is warehouse-like in nature. Issues of scale are readily obvious; the overall effect is that of a cartoon caricature of a traditional building.  While the use of contrasting materials (brick veneer and synthetic stucco in alternating units) does help to break up the great visual width of the structure, it falls short of succeeding.

The center section of brick fails to extend to the ground; such a feat is laughably improbable.   Brick does not float; it requires visual support as well as physical support.  Simultaneously, a dark horizontal band below the windows only emphasizes the width of the building.   This band actually extends into the masonry corners – expressed with rusticated concrete block – but mercifully the block is of a hue which is similar enough to the brick that it does not stand out.  Click on any of the images which follow for a more painful view.

The type of metal building which is increasingly replacing traditional masonry structures in central business districts. The concept of scale is all but a lost art in the early 21st century.

The building, a multi-use structure housing a senior citizen center, bowling alley and movie theater, was built in 2010 as the result of significant community effort. New construction was favored over renovating existing and adjacent mid-20th century buildings on the same site – one of which was already a movie theater.  Despite having the opportunity to design from scratch an attractive new facility, the end result is visually chaotic and functionally less-than-optimal. It also ran over budget. The visual chaos is especially evident on the side elevation, home to a recreation center and “meal site” for senior citizens. It also serves as an object lesson in the inefficiency of poor design. Let’s take a closer look:

Downspouts as unintended design features.

The center of the facade is flanked by two entrances sharing a central ramp.  Underscaled guttering at the roofline requires multiple downspouts which  visually chop the facade into small units. In order to prevent the sidewalk/ramp paving from becoming unduly icy in the winter, primary downspouts connect to drain pipes hidden in the walkway, only to drain into the handicapped parking spaces! Meanwhile, secondary guttering on the two covered entrances drains directly onto the walkway, effectively defeating the hidden drain pipes.  Handicap-reserved parking signs add more visual clutter. Multiple horizontal paved surfaces, both stepped and ramped, create more distraction. Finally, disparate colors and textures compete with eachother for attention and work only to create dischord. And this is only the center of the South facade!  Let’s step back a bit and wrap our heads around other aspects of this recent example of community-driven civic architecture:

Lots of visual clutter – both horizontal and vertical!

Lovely. The obligatory handrails flanking the concrete steps appear to be designed for a horizontal (rather than sloped) installation; their posts are angled rather than conventionally vertical. Black paint only emphasizes the mistake. Advertising benches of different colors lack cohesion and add more visual clutter. Downspouts not only detract from the brick porch supports they are attached to, but they direct water onto a paved ramp!

Why weren’t the porch gutters connected to the adjacent downspouts on the wall instead? Also, note that the three center windows have “frames” separate from the horizontal band that runs beneath them while other windows have frames integral with the band. The lack of consistency contributes further to the already cluttered appearance. The transition between the brick porch supports and the corrugated metal siding of the porch cover is rather abrupt; there are no capitals or entablatures and the gables are stylistically at odds with the main facade.

The ramp may be accessible to handicapped people, but the rest of the area is an obstacle course for able-bodied pedestrians!!

What is the purpose of the intermediary sidewalk level between the parking area and the porch level? It serves only as a place of potential hazards and barriers for any pedestrians who might ever attempt to walk here. There are not only railings and concrete steps to be dodged, but weighted sign holders. At the east end (far right) the walk terminates at an elevated and perpendicular sidewalk – a newly constructed tripping hazard. The opposite (west) end of this walk is similarly termiated, but by a wedge of concrete on the ground that serves more as a retaining wall than a potential pathway.  Yellow caution paint acknowledges the potential hazards.

Oops… forgot to plan a place for the dumpster… No big deal; we’ll just stick it in a parking spot near one of the entrances. It’s not like the driver of a car which might have parked there could have easily reached the building, anyway!

Whether approaching by car or on foot, nothing says “civic pride” and “good planning” quite like highly visible air-conditioning units and a dumpster.

A diagonal walk at the west end is presumably an effort to connect to the paved walk on the other side of an alley. In the event that pedestrians do approach the building from this direction, they are directed past air-conditioning units on the left and a dumpster on the right before reaching the building entrance. The location of these functions was apparantly not taken into consideration during the design phase. The dumpster occupies what was intended to be a parking space.  Before we move on the main facade, let’s take a final look at this one:

This place really was built this way.

As we turn the corner, we find inconsistency in the “street furnishings” peppering the walk.  A change in pavement – presumably to designate a waiting area – appears to retain ice better than the surrounding pavement.  Further, it creates a disruption in the visual continuity of the sidewalk much like a mis-matched later repair might.

Would you like your bench sloping or non-sloping? Would you like your pavement icy or dry?

Ornate cast iron and wood benches, one of which is listing a bit, join a simpler advertising bench. A group of diminutive lamp posts, like the iron benches, are under-scaled for the building and stylistically out of sync with its relatively austere and stepped facade, vaguely reminiscent of 1930’s movie houses.

How many different kinds of windows can you find?

Windows lack unity; some are 8 over 1 double-hung units while others are single-pane fixed sash.  Heights vary.  The taller windows in the brick sections are more pleasing in scale than their shorter counterparts, the row of which helps to emphasize the horizontality of a building which is already too wide. Likewise for the extraneous canopies beneath the two rectangular signs; their worth as either shelter or decoration is negligible.

Sometimes less really is more.  This exterior could have been less fussy and gained stature in the process. By emphasizing the vertical – rather than the horizontal – this building could have stood a little taller.  By maintaining a consistent approach to windows and eliminating the fussy fake muntins in the top sashes, visual appeal would be enhanced.  By scrapping the brick veneer which wraps the corners, secondary entrance posts and “floating” center section, more unity could be achieved.  Staggering color in alternate sections across the main facade was a good idea, but the concept fails to carry through fully; there needs to me more contrast to be effective.  By using corrugated metal as an exterior cladding in lieu of brick veneer, greater verticality can be achieved.

By eliminating both the secondary porches and the three cantilevered awnings across the front an opportunity exists to give consistency to the entrances and both elevations with simplified marquees.  Below is a rough conceptual sketch incorporating these concepts:

Conceptual sketch of a less cluttered – and visually stronger – facade.  It’s still the same ungainly box, but not nearly as chaotic.

What will this building look like in 20 years? How will it age – both physically and in the public opinion?  Time will tell.