My partner designed a “traditional” house for a client of ours. It’s currently under construction and we went out for a site visit. It’s nicely designed. However, the owners have made some poor decisions and mucked up the proportions. It’s now taller than it should have been. As designed, it was pretty good. But I couldn’t like it. I kept wondering why.

Last night, if figured it out. I figured out some of what I don’t like about traditional styles, or why modern interpretations of traditional bothers me so much.

It’s really not very complicated. While I may not like some “traditional” architecture (and by this I mean early 20th century or older) I can appreciate it. I do enjoy their proportions, detailing and I’ve gained a better understanding of why they did what they did.

What I don’t like about modern “traditional” stuff is simple. It’s badly done. And, there is so much of the bad stuff that the good stuff sometimes just gets lumped in with everthing else. The details are similar and from a road distance, the good blurs by. I’m so used to seeing poorly done “traditional” that I’ve stopped looking at it all together. In the end, I may miss well done “traditional”.

It’s much like thinking that Totino’s Frozen Pizza is what pizza is. If most of your experience is Totino’s, then you may not have much of a desire for a really good brick oven pizza from the local pizza parlor. Good pizza is easy to find and make. Unfortunately, good “traditional” isn’t easy to design or build. That’s probably why we don’t see much of it. And when we do, we’re likely to lump it in with Totino’s.

PS: I actually like a Totino’s… once a year. Any more than that and we’ve exceeded my ability to deal with it.

It wasn’t until I walked into the Utah Veteran’s Memorial when I was in my twenties that I became conscious of the Spirit of Place. I vaguely remember the feeling being somewhat familiar suggesting that while this was the first time the sensation was strong enough to break through the hidden barrier of awareness, it must not have been the first time I had ever felt it.

Read the rest of this entry »

New urbanism (NU) is based on the idea that diversity is a value (rather than diversity being a fact). The more diverse the population base, the more diverse the uses, and the more public transportation, the healthier the community. At least that’s the theory. New urbanists point to points and places from the past stating “this is how it ought to be…again.” As discussed in Part I, this idea is based on fable and myth. If you research the NU communities, you’ll discover that they are not diverse in population base and, after a while, they’re really not diverse in uses. Finally, most have very weak public transportation systems. Read the rest of this entry »