The Value of Ugly Buildings
Oftentimes, while reading an architectural blog or a fancy magazine, I come across comments to the effect of "we don't need another brown, boring, ugly building" or "all structures should be interesting and add value to their surroundings." It's a pretty thought, but the construction industry isn't going to be following that recommendation anytime soon.
For starters, good design costs money. It sometimes costs a lot of money. A famous architect or engineer can bring a lot of clout and notoriety to an otherwise unknown project, but there is no guarantee that he or she will deliver additional value. And if it's one thing that owners want, it is good value. Just the same as you or I when we are deciding what to buy at the grocery store or picking out which cable channel package to pay for. It's all about value.
The construction industry is full of examples where highly compensated designers failed to provide a structure that met the requirements of the owners. I don't think we should blame the designers, because you'll have problems in any large project but only the famous architects get written up in the press because of it. But the fact of the matter is that highly ambitious projects are going to face more problems. There is a greater risk when the owner asks for a paradigm breaking building - simply because nobody else has done it before. And there also a cost premium during construction.
Contrast this with the boring, ugly buildings you see around you everyday. The homes with the fake shutters, fake balconies, and mismatched window styles. Or the strip mall with fake stucco. Or the industrial building made from vertical precast double-tee sections. Are the owners unhappy with these buildings? Probably not, or they would have been torn down by now. All of these buildings serve a purpose, are well used and maintained, and probably cost significantly less than a limestone facade with ornamental niches or a post-modern steel sculpture.
Ugly buildings often serve a purpose. They help make communities livable. They allow economic activity to continue without an architectural standard taxation on construction. If a structure is well-built and maintained, it will always have value.
For starters, good design costs money. It sometimes costs a lot of money. A famous architect or engineer can bring a lot of clout and notoriety to an otherwise unknown project, but there is no guarantee that he or she will deliver additional value. And if it's one thing that owners want, it is good value. Just the same as you or I when we are deciding what to buy at the grocery store or picking out which cable channel package to pay for. It's all about value.
The construction industry is full of examples where highly compensated designers failed to provide a structure that met the requirements of the owners. I don't think we should blame the designers, because you'll have problems in any large project but only the famous architects get written up in the press because of it. But the fact of the matter is that highly ambitious projects are going to face more problems. There is a greater risk when the owner asks for a paradigm breaking building - simply because nobody else has done it before. And there also a cost premium during construction.
Contrast this with the boring, ugly buildings you see around you everyday. The homes with the fake shutters, fake balconies, and mismatched window styles. Or the strip mall with fake stucco. Or the industrial building made from vertical precast double-tee sections. Are the owners unhappy with these buildings? Probably not, or they would have been torn down by now. All of these buildings serve a purpose, are well used and maintained, and probably cost significantly less than a limestone facade with ornamental niches or a post-modern steel sculpture.
Ugly buildings often serve a purpose. They help make communities livable. They allow economic activity to continue without an architectural standard taxation on construction. If a structure is well-built and maintained, it will always have value.
Labels: architecture, Urban Environment
posted by Graeme at
12:52 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home