Why not require consistent architectural styles downtown?

[PuppiesandKittens]

Cities that are built mostly in one style of architecture can be more attractive that cities whose buildings are a jumble of styles.

For example, streets in Prague and Paris, with consistent architectural styles, are often more attractive than ones in Manhattan, where there is a jumble of styles.

Downtown Greenville has a lot of consistency, with attractive brick buildings.  But there are some exceptions, such as the brutalist Daniel Building and law enforcement center, and new 2020-era boxes here and there.  And there are proposed new buildings that don’t match the surrounding areas, such as the residential building proposed next to Grace Church (former Downtown Baptist).

Why not require more uniform architectural styles in central Greenville?  This would help keep downtown attractive.  Pick one- maybe Georgian- and encourage new construction to be in that style?

 

[GvilleSC]

No. 

[Exile]

10 hours ago, PuppiesandKittens said:

Cities that are built mostly in one style of architecture can be more attractive that cities whose buildings are a jumble of styles.

For example, streets in Prague and Paris, with consistent architectural styles, are often more attractive than ones in Manhattan, where there is a jumble of styles.

Downtown Greenville has a lot of consistency, with attractive brick buildings.  But there are some exceptions, such as the brutalist Daniel Building and law enforcement center, and new 2020-era boxes here and there.  And there are proposed new buildings that don’t match the surrounding areas, such as the residential building proposed next to Grace Church (former Downtown Baptist).

Why not require more uniform architectural styles in central Greenville?  This would help keep downtown attractive.  Pick one- maybe Georgian- and encourage new construction to be in that style?

 

 

54 minutes ago, GvilleSC said:

No. 

There are those of us who sympathize with you on this.  We're not few, but very few of us are developers or investors. Or architects.

There are places to go to see surviving collections of beautiful architecture: Memphis & St. Louis come to mind because they've got density. Birmingham has a nice surviving collection of older, really beautiful stuff, but less dense. Richmond & Baltimore too. Charlotte would be on the opposite extreme, of course, a fact not infrequently lamented in that forum here on UP. Practically nothing left but glass downtown. I wouldn't call it ugly overall, just nondescript.

Are there any architects left who can design buildings in that manner? Or who would be willing? Would you ruin your reputation as an architect if you did? Do architects get cancelled? The volume of nondescript-to-downright-ugly stuff that gets built these days is pretty overwhelming. Makes one wonder.

But I don't think Greenville needs to limit itself to one style, unless that style is a baseline or a touchstone and not an absolute limitation. Even in those cities I mentioned, it's not all just one style, but everything does work together--until you get to the glass expanses. But just limit the glass and the weird angles, and generally refuse to let Greenville be a laboratory for architectural experimentation.

[GvilleSC]

11 hours ago, PuppiesandKittens said:

Cities that are built mostly in one style of architecture can be more attractive that cities whose buildings are a jumble of styles.

For example, streets in Prague and Paris, with consistent architectural styles, are often more attractive than ones in Manhattan, where there is a jumble of styles.

Downtown Greenville has a lot of consistency, with attractive brick buildings.  But there are some exceptions, such as the brutalist Daniel Building and law enforcement center, and new 2020-era boxes here and there.  And there are proposed new buildings that don’t match the surrounding areas, such as the residential building proposed next to Grace Church (former Downtown Baptist).

Why not require more uniform architectural styles in central Greenville?  This would help keep downtown attractive.  Pick one- maybe Georgian- and encourage new construction to be in that style?

 

A great question for anyone who claims precedent due to surroundings: what do you propose as precedent for any particular site? To setup this sort of restriction, you'd have to be very specific and place guardrails on the path forward for property owners.  Is it size and proportion, is it materiality, floor-to-floor height, setbacks from the street, is it a building's actual use? Any of these could be argued. However, where does the precedent come from? Is it any adjoining property, is it a one-block radius? Or does it only come from nearby buildings over a certain age? What is considered fair?

In your example: what is the precedent you'd set forth to limit the design and development opportunities at the Grace Church site? There's certainly lots of glass and height at Poinsett Plaza. Is it the color of the church? The movable panels were proposed to match the patina of the steeple. Is it the low rise buildings across the street? Perhaps the bus station is the appropriate precedent? 

The funny thing is that places that have a widespread, historic character in place were built using the current technologies and practices of the day. Miami Beach was not developed to be iconic by way of restrictions. 

[PuppiesandKittens]

Prague was built using neo-Renaissance and other “retro” styles, even by late 1800s standards.

Georgian architecture is easy.  Plenty of new houses are built in that style.  

I appreciate the responses above.  I’ll change my proposal to be that “architecture consistent with Georgian and other traditional South Carolina styles should be encouraged”.

Brick buildings with Georgian-style ornamentation and proportions have been the prevalent style of construction of commercial buildings in South Carolina downtowns for ages.  That should be encouraged, for consistency.  Greenville has plenty of examples of new buildings built that way. 

Just as the 1978 Office Park Style along I-385 and the Daniel Building and law enforcement center look very dated  now, I suspect that some of the 2020s boxes being built downtown will look very dated at some point.  That can be avoided.

 

[hauntedheadnc]

The architecture of downtown, and pretty much everywhere else in Greenville, is already consistent.  The prevailing style here is boxy, modern, and dull, aka "Charlotte Boring."  Charlotte Boring is pretty much all the rage everywhere now, though.  

[gman]

Please, no to this question, unless it is art deco like at Miami Beach. Seriously, if you stream the Magnolia Network, watch the Puzzle Maker. Awesome show. The one about the history of art deco in Miami Beach is season 1, episode 7. https://magnolia.com/watch/show/1663cb58-4c65-4ad5-965c-855a17353e21/the-piece-maker/episode/c0f15ae7-be47-5341-b73e-df46b8865876/miami-where-time-stands-still/

Edited June 4, 2023 by gman

[gman430]

The state of North Carolina apparently completely outlawed DRB’s so it could be much worse in Greenville. 

[GvilleSC]

4 hours ago, gman430 said:

The state of North Carolina apparently completely outlawed DRB’s so it could be much worse in Greenville. 

Are you serious? That’s absurd. Granted, I’m sure jurisdictions just have another mechanism within their zoning departments that assist in regulating design.