here again- the same goddamn boring flat petro chemical based rofftop.
Put all of the junk on your rooftop that you dont want anyone to see.The only really viable yuppie use for a roof other than utilities to be out of sight & out of mind is for their goddamn "decks" which are always built of the worst possible materials and fall apart in our humid climate in just a few years.Mosquitos also find these flat rooftops ideal for mass breeding farms.Believe me- the flat roof one day will be seen as a big mistake. It is laziness and bad for architects to ignore the roof in design.
flat roofs are fine for this region. Peaked roofs were built to shed water and snow. In this region, that is less of an issue. Therefore it was ok architecturally to build flat roofs, and cheaper besides.
I do have a peaked roof in my bungalow though...
I disagree totally. I think the flat roof was used in this region after the Civil War as a cheap way out- prior to that time- most architects would never build a flat roof. It is the most difficult to maintain and in the long run the most expensive- and it looks ugly as sh*t from an airplane.You really need to see what good basic building craftsmanship has come up with in this arena. I vividly recal in the 1960's & 70's, builders did not want to "waste money" on facades of brick or stone- or to make them at all nice to look at. Now you see it all over the place. Butterfield House on Penn Avenue SE at least pays tribute to some of these issues [ but the builder still tried badly to hide the ugly utilities on the top and blew it].Richard- this stuff is far more improtant than you are seeing. You need to read what the Prince of Wales writes on this topic. He has done wonderful things to revive building crafts in the UK. We have totally dropped the ball in the USA.
buildings need nice hats to finish the effect.
If I ever buy a house with a turret, I want the roof to be in the shape of a Dairy Queen ice cream cone. Complete with the swirl.
creative thinking- have you ever been to Copenhagen? There is a church there that has a spire in the shape of a twirl- and it is 300 years old- you can climb to the the base of it- it's very old and creaky.So much character in places like that- where uniformity is not the norm. Prince Charles inveighs against bad skylines-and DC- despite our shorter buildings- also has a skyline- but it has been ignored. These developers and regulators need to allow for more creativity and move away from the conformist look of the institutional flat roof. Im tired of it.why not swirls & twirls, domes and spires, pyramids and the like? Why is that so seldom pursued?And dont give me that lame excuse "it would be too expensive"to justify laziness on the part of the builders - who always give us the same over & over again when we are the wealthiest country the world has seen and our built environment is so damn boring and stifling.
too often we are satisfied with blandness.
Commenting by HaloScan
