Stucco Jungle
Jun 21st, 2007 by nghbr
“A doctor can bury his mistakes but an architect can only advise his clients to plant vines.”
Frank Lloyd Wright
We have been noticing the predominance of certain building styles, and more specifically, building materials around town lately. Once defined by classic brick structures and the flagstone construction that dominates the campus of the University of Colorado, and compliments the stone native to the area, Boulder is quickly becoming a stucco (or more accurately, faux stucco) jungle. Known as Exterior Insulation Finishing System, or EIFS for short, these pre-fabricated exterior finishes offer a low-cost alternative to brick and flagstone (and even traditional stucco) exteriors and don’t require the craftsmanship that more traditional finishes demand.
Since these materials come in at a price-per-square-foot of around 1/10 the cost of stone, brick or metal finishing, it is understandable why developers and architects choose to incorporate them into their designs, and done tastefully with a mix of other materials and finishes, a modern urban look can be successfully achieved. Unfortunately, more and more structures seem to be dominated by EIFS finishes, keeping costs down for developers, while the price / sf of the finished space resembles what one would expect for the utmost in quality craftsmanship. While the interiors of some of these new developments look nice (I cannot speak from experience, only photos) I can only wonder what corners were cut to keep costs down on the inside as well.
Further, EIFS, marketed under the brand name Dryvit, claims to offer a “vast array of finish options to suit any design consideration.” Either that’s not true, or there are a few pages missing from the catalog that the developers around town are looking at in their design meetings. With the exception of a few of the more architecturally significant uses of the material, it seems like the same finish is being utilized in every new development. More importantly, there are not enough existing structures built from this material that have been around long enough to determine how it will stand the test of time.
How do you feel about the new architectural look-and-feel that has popped up over night? Does it concern you as a citizen that there are currently 15 single-spaced pages of properties under application review in Boulder, the biggest of which are controled a handful of architects and developers, furthering the chances that specific building styles are repeated ad nauseum around town?
A few examples of EIFS / Dryvit and similar materials around town:
The Good
7th & Pearl. Although unaffordable for the average Boulderite, these new condos
achieve a nice blend of classic and contemporary styles, while keeping the historic first-floor structure intact.
The Bad
Parts of One Boulder Plaza, specifically the most noticeable portions of the facade at the Broadway / Canyon and Broadway Walnut intersections are built almost entirely out of EIFS.
The Ugly
Am I the only one that feels like the quaint former home of SkyChair, a local Boulder business has been turned into a monstrosity of EIFS and faux brick amongst the other relatively well-played new construction on West Pearl?
What is keeping people from using different exterior materials? Do people not know where to look for alternatives?
I came across a product called Nanogel. It is installed in between panes of glass and can be used as an exterior veneer, providing both light and insulation.
I am guessing that most people are using stucco due to its durability and price. Most stucco is installed for $5-8 per sq. ft. as opposed to brick at $12-20 per sq. ft and stone at $16-50+ per sq. ft. The Elastomeric product is good for our climate due to its elastic tendencies.
The most $practical$ decision for exteriors is stucco, but it has a substantial effect on the “feel” of a space…………
Are other people feeling the same way as nghbr?
I see candidates for Kunstler’s “Eyesore of the Month” everywhere. The new building are cardboardy. I don’t know why various metal features seem so popular, or exactly who is liking that style so much. That is my main gripe about Boulder architecture. Lack of craftsmanship, no sense of beauty, bland boxes, no texture to please my eye. Intellectually designed look, perhaps is due to ease of designing flat and squarish things on computer (see last chapter of Dan Willis’ The Emerald City, “The Impact of the Computer on Architectural Practice” - the more i look the more i have this impression he’s right in a big way about that.
Places that don’t look very homey though they are intended as such, and even look stress-making. I’m not sure stucco or faux anything is mostly to blame though is it sure is a co-conspirator.
Happily there are neighborhoods with wonderful houses, mostly nearer the foothills, but elsewhere too. It’s good to walk and bike around town to see the variety.
GreenSquiggle-
It’s true that Dryvit, faux stucco, etc are not any more to blame than the desire to build quickly and earn a maximum ROI on investment properties. However, those issues come full-circle back to materials and architectural considerations, since exterior finishes can be one of the more expensive aspects of a project.
The metal features you mention (I’ve heard people referring to the metal shade features as “eyebrows”) are also perplexing to me as they rarely seem to serve a functional purpose and their aesthetic value seems minimal.
I find more pleasure in the neighborhoods around town as well, but unfortunately I spend more of my time interacting with (or trying to interact with) the new structures downtown, since I spend more of my time in this part of town. Beyond mere aesthetic opinions, how could developers, architects and the city create space that are more interactive, or at least less monolithic?
My office is close to the old Sheet Metal shop. They renovated the building last year.
Although the renovation is primarily stucco. They pulled it off, by mixing colors. They did keep the original brick which still has remnants of old signage from years past. The blend of old and new feels right. I get the sense that it is texture as well as character “architecture” in the building that really bring it to life.
Rheinzinc panels often used in Europe on new buildings would be a great alternative for exterior veneers.
Some US architects have picked up the product and are starting to spec it into their designs.
The price point is considerably more than stucco; however it has a longevity that is 2 times that of stucco. It also has a natural patina that develops more character the longer it has been installed.