Wednesday, September 16, 2009
201 Twenty-One, Ghent’s Newest Development
Words Michael Bergin
Wednesday, September 16th, 2009 at 3:26 pm
201 Twenty One is Ghent’s newest development–a sprawling 250-unit, mixed-use ‘luxury apartment complex’, complete with a full fitness center.
201 Twenty One--great in theory, awful in execution | Photo Alexandra Fenton
Mixed-use; I love it. It’s the kind of development that makes perfect sense. It liberates us from our cars, facilitates social interaction and creates robust communities. The Ghent neighborhood in Norfolk actually has a lot of mixed-use development, but until now it has been oriented horizontally. 21st St and Colley Ave–on which most of the businesses are located–create a perimeter around a dense, residential neighborhood. 201 Twenty One is an example of vertical residential, with ample retail space on the ground floor for more great local businesses, and living space built above. Being the first major loft development in Ghent, it could signal a change for the better.
So in theory, with all of the amenities, great location, fancy renderings and exciting program for this project, I should love it. But in execution it just feels like I’m walking through a B-movie set. It seems fake.
First a little architecture history: Architects have had a long riddled history concerning the importance of honesty in design. Classical architecture set the bar for what most of us consider aesthetically pleasing. As designers we (sometimes grudgingly) draw and spec the same cornices and pilasters that were hand-crafted by stone artisans for millenia; details that were honest creations born of the spirit of a time. As America developed, the powers-that-be sought to invoke some of the tried-and-true decadence of their European ancestors. This period, known as the Beaux-Arts movement, leaves behind some of the most inspiring American buildings; including the Boston Museum of Fine Arts and the New York Public Library.
The quintessentially modern Kirn Library | libraryjournal.com
Most of downtown Norfolk’s architecture is of the modern style, which was the major movement of post-war America up to the ’80s. These hulking glass-and-steel boxes–which you may interpret as having little or no ‘character’–are a result of backlash to the ‘gilded age’ development of the early 20th century. Modernism followed suit during the World Wars, when materials had to be conserved and beautiful buildings were created as efficiently as possible (or at least as efficient as you can be with air conditioning). But as the construction techniques fell into the wrong hands, the style became an excuse to build as fast and as cheap as possible. Say what you will about monotonous glass-and-concrete high-rises of the modern era…at least they’re honest.
Which brings me back to 201 Twenty One, and to post-modernism. Post-modernism is a movement unconsciously practiced by a huge majority of American architects for the past 30 years. Its principles are that complexity and contradiction are good things, and raw expression of structure is boring. Post-modern theorists even claimed that the signage on Las Vegas’ casino buildings was more important architecturally than the buildings themselves. Pioneer Robert Venturi famously parodized the king of modern, Mies Van der Rohe, by stating, “Less is more? No, less is a bore.”
A rendering of 201 Twenty One | roselandproperty.com
201 Twenty One has more…more colors than a gay parade, and more materials than Home Depot. There are so many reveals and oddly-proportioned pieces of trim that it’s hard to focus. Much of Ghent’s charm comes from great little shops and its eclectic nature, and perhaps that’s what generated the design of the apartments. But its disparate portions are like five different buildings from five different angles.
There’s an unbelievable disparity between the illustrations and the final product. The renderings show an updated take on the American stick style, in which structure is reflected in exterior trim and stucco finish. I’m guessing there was a lack of clear communication between the designer, contractor and client here, as materials were substituted and details were fudged. There are many clues that support the fact that the design team just didn’t do their research. Instead of studying the history and texture of the existing community, they attempted to create their own context, with a tragic outcome. The product is a Fisher-Price version of what was sold to the city’s design review board.
A detail of the shoddy exterior | Photo Alexandra Fenton
Granted, the developer, Roseland Property, completed a majority of the construction during the worst recession in 80 years. So a little skimping here and there should be expected. But it seems that as the project moved on there was less and less confidence in a return on investment, and the exterior turned out rather embarrassing. The hardy panel system is uninspiring, and the pattern of reveals looks as if it could’ve been pasted on with a glue stick. It’s ugly. Not Elephant-Man ugly, but cubic zirconium, tube top and heavy eyeliner ugly. The four foot parapets invoke visions of mini-malls. It’s clear that the treatment of the elevations was meant to say, “Look at my high, opulent ceilings,” when really it’s hoping you don’t walk around back and find the crisis center and homeless shelter.
I would give the developers credit for re-using the existing structure from the Sears building. But the reason being is that developments receive tax credits for maintaining a certain percentage of the previous building. Some of the more successful projects in the area to have done so include 435 Monticello and Golds Gym. These buildings preserve the exterior idea of the facade–a more environmentally responsible approach, and honestly represent the past while moving elegantly into the future. But sadly there is no visible reminder of the former occupant of the site at 201 Twenty One.
If you can afford to spare the $2,000 a month that a two-bedroom unit will cost you to be a part of the cool crowd at 201 twenty one, you’ll probably find it a pretty nice place to live. Looking at the empty shell now I can imagine a whole slew of projects like this creating a neighborhood like Georgetown in the distant future. I hope that the high aspirations of Roseland Property are not devastated as they find they had overestimated the housing demand in the area. We need more mixed-use; and it would be terrible if it became a symbol of failure, warning against similar endeavors. I could comment all day about misproportioned reveals and unflattering color schemes, but when all is said and done it’s about what the community makes of the project. After all, buildings are just brick and mortar. It’s really the occupants and the communities that make architecture.
COMMENTS
Facebook comments:
Post a comment
ABOUT THE WRITER
Michael moved to Hampton Roads in September of 2008 from Amherst, Massachusetts. He currently resides in Norfolk with his family (an Alex and a Fox).
Other posts by Michael Bergin.
Other posts by Michael Bergin.
RELATED POSTS
More Opinion Posts
RSS
Fantastically well written opinion. You put to words what I could only describe as a vague sense of unease whenever I looked at the building.
There have been proposals for a total of 2 interesting buildings in Norfolk since I returned in 2004: a slim, tall, modern building with simple design and much glass to be built on a narrow (still empty) lot on Granby, and the ORIGINAL proposal for the new social hall for Christ & St. Lukes.
The building on Granby was nixed for being too modern, too tall, too skinny, and not fitting in with the character of the buildings on Granby St – because as we all know nothing on Granby St has ever been torn down, and nothing ugly and modern has been built, certainly not the Federal Building or the TCC building.
The Christ & St. Luke addition was attacked by well-heeled neighbors who pretended to be concerned with the architectural integrity of the neighborhood, but were actually already hating the fact that C & St. L is an increasingly popular destination congregation (which makes it difficult for rich people with no off-street to park in front of their houses on Sunday), and they desperately fear that additional space at the church will increase the congregation’s charitable activities, especially participation in the NEST program and their soup kitchen – both of which attract unsightly homeless people to Stockley Gardens, which certain homeowners in the vicinity feel is, well, really theirs. (This was especially apparent during the deafening silence surrounding the massive expansion of Ohef Shalom, one whole block from Christ & St. Luke.)
At least 4 (maybe 5) good buildings have been torn down in that same time period, notable among the older ones was the Ikon building, which was solidly 19th century, and sported what I believe was the last Mansard roof in downtown Norfolk.
Then there was the truly tragic loss of the Kirn. There’s Modern, and there’s Modern, and the Kirn epitomized everything that was good about Modern architecture. It was hard to tell, I know, down-at-heel as it had become from decades of neglect, overcrowding, and the loss of visual perspective due to the erection of the monstrosity know as MacArthur Mall; but when you stood on the east side of the building looking through the open staircase into the lobby, you could see it, and from certain other street angles you could tell – it was exquisitely proportioned, graceful, and light, with homage to buttress and column built into the exterior. It’s a loss not yet properly understood, in the name of progress, thrift, and expediency.
But I digress.
Really, in short, the problem is this – Norfolk developers keep building ugly buildings because City of Norfolk’s design review board keeps approving them (while nixing good things), and idiots with money desperate to buy into what they perceive as the “alternative culture” of Ghent or the “downtown lifestyle” keep buying it. If that can be changed, we might be able to salvage the remainder of what good remains from the past, and avoid yet another block-sized pile of crap – which reminds me, the other loss was the simple, lovely Deco Sears Building, the corpse of which forms the core of the pitiable trifle we now know as “201 Twenty-One”.
Wow! what a well written article. Great job. I hope to see many more articles from the person that wrote this. He certainly has a flare for journalism. As well as a great knowledge of architecture. Keep up the good work.
There is so much I’d like to say…how I agree with rehabbing old buildings and reclaiming city life in the wake of urban sprawl and unoriginal McMansion suburban developments. I also agree whole-heartedly with Michael’s description of 201’s design flaws… but I am completely distracted by the photo of the Kirn Library.
Or shall I shall the former Kirn Library. Call me crazy, but I love Modern Architecture. I love its clean square boxes, interior floating stairwells, and reflective glass facades. Kirn was actually one of the few (decent) examples of this style in Hampton Roads…and I was very sad to see this era of architectural history destroyed, even if it was to build public transportation. Modern Architecture is at that precarious crossroads that all old buildings must face; where no one quite wants to champion the style as being historically significant and owners/potential buyers think it will be easier (and cheaper) to blow them up and start from scratch. Virginia has plenty of old Victorian, Federal, and Colonial-style buildings that are trumpeted and saved from the wrecking ball. But, I can’t help but wonder how long it will be before we wake up to the fact that Virginia’s architectural history didn’t die at the turn of the century???
interesting read
very well written-the only thing needed now is RETAIL!! so many condo’s going up between ghent and downtown norfolk, you’d think someone who has expertise in this field would have realized by now that retail is needed to support all these residences…NOT more nightclubs on granby street!-more nightclubs equals more riffraff, more riffraff equals the downtown of 20 years ago…scary
Yo Michael!
A vote of no confidence in the City of Norfolk’s design review board, by the voters is long overdue. 201 Twenty One is nothing but ’strip mall chic’, and was clearly so, even at the design stage.
Well written!
sooo who are these people that can afford these condos? certainly not anyone who could appreciate the atmosphere they are going for? john katsias hasnt got a fucking clue. a future symbol of failure indeed.
Thanks for all the kind words…
Retrospectively as I walk around Ghent, I can’t help but notice the Palace Shops which surely would have garnered a far more scathing review, but have become an integral part of the Ghent landscape. 201 Twenty One could surely have some bonus points if they came across some great ground level retail. Unfortunately, their price point will likely attract chain shops and restaurants. The disoriented, kitchy design could end up being to its benefit in the end, only time will tell. In the future we can only hope for some dignified, well refined designs for what is surely one of Virginia’s finest neighborhoods.
I take my dog for a walk down Manteo Street most days, and the design of the houses and apartments on this road are stunning. It makes me feel like this neighborhood is somewhere that I would want my kids to grow up. I wish that architects and developers would take more of a look to the past when investing in our future, there is a social responsibility of designers to act conscientiously and preserve a milieu, a spirit of place.
Who does this community belong to? Can anyone put anything, anywhere they wish? Those who have negative opinions about these developments should learn what they can do to influence them. How about a protest against poor design… bringing attention to the problem can help solve it.
Followup :
The building has actually been painted over,
“201 Twenty One has more…more colors than a gay parade, and more materials than Home Depot. There are so many reveals and oddly-proportioned pieces of trim that it’s hard to focus…”
Should now be read as,
201 Twenty One should be thanked for either their good natured interpretation of my critique or own ability to see the error in their ways, either way the newly made over facade is more respectful of the context of the neighborhood and I commend what surely turned out to be a very expensive effort!
I have no expertise on good design, but I do approve of developments that encourage urban living. That side of Ghent could really use more people living there; walking and biking to shops instead of driving. I hope this development does this. Maybe it won’t. It’s price point may be too high. But it seems an improvement on what was there before. Actually I’m more bothered by McRae Commons which looks like they were trying to fit in with Colley Ave, but didn’t actually finish the job.