For as bad of a rap that post-modernism gets, it appears that we are repeating the same thing all over again... With the "newfound" success of bringing density to the suburbs, developers have found it to be much more profitable to bring the density of urban life to the outskirts of cities packaged and sold in a way that allows people to feel like they are in places that accurately capture the spirit of an urban center.
Many of these buildings are covered in mock-historic veneer to imitate their historic counterparts, however now there is a mega-plex cinema around the corner from $1200 / month studios.... in the suburbs. 6 story buildings with storefront retail at their base (maybe Rem's Harvard Guide to Shopping was right after all?) Developers claim they've created a "new urban paradigm for America" reminiscent of SOHO or Greenwich village.
I feel these buildings could be tremendous opportunities to bring contemporary architecture to the suburbs, instead they've resulted in place-making and branding exercises invoking imagery from the urban centers their inhabitants refuse to inhabit.
I'm frustrated y'all.... Why do I feel like we've been through this before?
Hmm this is actually a pretty good assessment. I've done some tenant spaces in a few of these new "village centers". It is all just a po-mo interpretation of places like Wicker Park or Greenwich village.
they have "town centers" like the ones described going up all over the suburbs of Atlanta. There's one near my old job in Smyrna (Smurh-nuh) that had housing over the shops, a main "street", colonaded walks, a fountain, etc. I find these new types of typologies in the suburbs interesting largely because it seems in 40 years we've gone from Malls to Strips to Strip Malls and these kind of "village centers" maybe the latest iteration of retail typology in the suburban landscape. Alot of the people i've talked to like theses kinds of places and they seem to be a hit, at least in A-town. Once again however, it seems we as architects are being largely ignored, even though this latest iteration seems more "architectural" than previous ones. These new suburbanisms could be great places to flex some design muscle, but most of the stuff i see is just crappy nostalgic rehashes with lots of my favorite: EIFS brick.
they're called lifestyle centers and the same accounting methodologies apply to these as to any other b.s. strip malls. ie discounted cash flow. please understand this geniuses of the design world.
why won't the general public, and the developers, accept our self-important ideas of validity in the suburbs? probably cuz we come across as assholes trying to tell folk what to do with their money.
a great example of this atrocity is at new jersey's golden coast. developers (the really cheap ones who want quick profits, like khovanian) are butchering some of the best real estate left with their cheap and tacky bldgs and flashy marketing. but i have to admit, it's really popular and i actually live there mainly bc the city has gotten way too expensive for me and it's clean and convenient. the paradigm works, i just think there has to be a better, more innovative way to implement it. if only they weren't such slutbags and hired some competent architects, they could have made, what is now just good real estate, into excellent real estate without turning the area into a 3 mile post-modern nightmare.
new (sub)urbanism - post-modernism redux?
For as bad of a rap that post-modernism gets, it appears that we are repeating the same thing all over again... With the "newfound" success of bringing density to the suburbs, developers have found it to be much more profitable to bring the density of urban life to the outskirts of cities packaged and sold in a way that allows people to feel like they are in places that accurately capture the spirit of an urban center.
Many of these buildings are covered in mock-historic veneer to imitate their historic counterparts, however now there is a mega-plex cinema around the corner from $1200 / month studios.... in the suburbs. 6 story buildings with storefront retail at their base (maybe Rem's Harvard Guide to Shopping was right after all?) Developers claim they've created a "new urban paradigm for America" reminiscent of SOHO or Greenwich village.
I feel these buildings could be tremendous opportunities to bring contemporary architecture to the suburbs, instead they've resulted in place-making and branding exercises invoking imagery from the urban centers their inhabitants refuse to inhabit.
I'm frustrated y'all.... Why do I feel like we've been through this before?
why do insist on enforcing your jagged shiny buildings on america's landscape?
Hmm this is actually a pretty good assessment. I've done some tenant spaces in a few of these new "village centers". It is all just a po-mo interpretation of places like Wicker Park or Greenwich village.
would this be the greenwich village of lou reed or the greenwich village of mary kate and ashley?
oh vado, there are other ways to be modern and contemporary without invoking libeskind
they have "town centers" like the ones described going up all over the suburbs of Atlanta. There's one near my old job in Smyrna (Smurh-nuh) that had housing over the shops, a main "street", colonaded walks, a fountain, etc. I find these new types of typologies in the suburbs interesting largely because it seems in 40 years we've gone from Malls to Strips to Strip Malls and these kind of "village centers" maybe the latest iteration of retail typology in the suburban landscape. Alot of the people i've talked to like theses kinds of places and they seem to be a hit, at least in A-town. Once again however, it seems we as architects are being largely ignored, even though this latest iteration seems more "architectural" than previous ones. These new suburbanisms could be great places to flex some design muscle, but most of the stuff i see is just crappy nostalgic rehashes with lots of my favorite: EIFS brick.
they're called lifestyle centers and the same accounting methodologies apply to these as to any other b.s. strip malls. ie discounted cash flow. please understand this geniuses of the design world.
LOL.
waaay too funny. architects feeling left out?
why won't the general public, and the developers, accept our self-important ideas of validity in the suburbs? probably cuz we come across as assholes trying to tell folk what to do with their money.
jump, you have totally hit the nail ON the head!
a great example of this atrocity is at new jersey's golden coast. developers (the really cheap ones who want quick profits, like khovanian) are butchering some of the best real estate left with their cheap and tacky bldgs and flashy marketing. but i have to admit, it's really popular and i actually live there mainly bc the city has gotten way too expensive for me and it's clean and convenient. the paradigm works, i just think there has to be a better, more innovative way to implement it. if only they weren't such slutbags and hired some competent architects, they could have made, what is now just good real estate, into excellent real estate without turning the area into a 3 mile post-modern nightmare.
Good post. I need to get back in here after work...
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.