The dozen or so new market-rate housing developments in New Haven almost universally use “Stick Frame over Podium” building systems to create a good return on investment. Everything above the parking, public and commercial ground floor is built like a raised ranch. That very inexpensive framing technique has collateral impact: the nature of its skin. It has to resist fire, so in New Haven we have seen cement board on some, fake veneer brick on others, some synthetic stucco and, at “Crown & College,” some distracting art.
These architectural wallpapers all have a common denominator: they are merely thick paint, a veneer so insubstantial that the huge boxes they swaddle seem more 3 a.m. wrapped Christmas presents than buildings. In some cases architects struggle to turn “Lick & Stick” brick into animated expression: but a box is a box is a box.
In short: Money makes the world go round, and affordability allows for the risk of investment — but the “breakthrough” mitigation of “Lick & Stick” brick, cement board siding and synthetic stucco has yet to be built. Join me on the latest episode of “Design Czar” as I dive headfirst into the issue. Just click on the audio above, or find the episode free for download on Soundcloud, iTunes, or any podcatcher under “WNHH Community Radio.”
Not mentioned in your piece Duo is the economic inefficiency of barriers erected in the path of these major developments. Entitlements are numerous and varied but can be effectively broken down into three interrelated categories: appeasement, approval and enabling. Appeasement by way of gaining support from local, state and in some cases federal officials, grassroots and neighborhood stakeholders and various other social and political actors. Approval would follow in the form of gaining all necessary permits from the boards, commissions, and authorities having jurisdiction over the work. Next Enabling would be more physical and may almost appear to the non-practitioner as real work, but fundamentally it is work that does not directly support program. Enabling might include removing derelict or unwanted buildings and site features (Novella, College/Crown), abating legacy pollution (470 James, English Station), relocating infrastructure and utilities (Coliseum). Speaking from experience it can take 2 - 3 times the duration of construction just to get a project to the starting line. Sadly money which may have gone into making the building more beautiful or durable, has already been spent simply to make the building possible. When we bemoan the stylistic, design or cultural output of a project in arrears, it may be useful to balance that with consideration of just how much resource was extracted in advance.