The San Francisco chapter of the American Institute of Architects names its “top 5” San Francisco residential buildings and manages to include an entire block. In the order that they’re pictured (left to right, top to bottom):
1. The Curran House (145 Taylor)
2. The Plaza Apartments (Sixth and Howard)
3. The Russell House (3778 Washington)
4. The 3200 block of Pacific Avenue
5. The Haas-Lilienthal House (2007 Franklin)
A couple of nice picks from the past, but perhaps not San Francisco’s modern finest (much less “top five”). Any “plugged-in” readers care to try their hand at besting the list? Or at the very least, expanding all of our horizons?
∙ Gems of the city: A list of S.F.’s top 25 [SFGate]
Um.. do these people even do their research? That’s NOT the 3200 block of Pacific. It’s the 2600 block.
Where’s Yerba Buena Lofts? I love the work of Stanley Saitowitz. The Plaza and Curran are nice but nothing special imho. AIASF obviously doesn’t agree with the Phaidon Atlas of Architecture.
I’m a bit disappointed in this list as well. Everyone knows that the Palace of Fine Arts, City Hall, etc. are great buildings, but are they really the “top 25” designs? It seems to me that many on the list are just tourist destinations, whereas the truly good DESIGN in the city is not mentioned, especially the residential architecture.
I’m so upset that my favorite building didn’t make #1. Talking about the AAA building on Van Ness – what a treasure.
If I may defend the Palace of Fine Arts, great architecture has a context in time and theory, so that it is not just the design itself, but the people who created it and the historical circumstances that allowed it to develope. A perfect example is the inclusion of the Swendenborgian Church which may appear perfectly ordinary at first glance driving by, but could possibly over time be regarded as THE most interesting architectural artifact in this city. Leslie Freudenheim’s excellent book “Building With Nature” shows how the designing and construction of this church was the point round which a new Bay Area aesthetic developed. I hardly think books will be made about the Yerba Buena lofts 130 years from now. Thanks for the laugh regarding whether the work of Bernard Maybeck is “truly great design”. I have over the past 5 years become amazed at the lack of understanding within the design community regarding the regional architecture of this area that is celebrated by the rest of the world, and overlooked here as we copy the latest trends coming from Los Angeles.
Evaluating buildings like this is subjective and top 5, top 20 lists are pointless.
Dog poo to you is fudge for me.
Maybe if the AIA took the trouble to explain and tabulate the parameters for evaluation, it might help. Maybe if they were a little more scientific in their approach, I’d pay attention and respect the list more. How about having a point system ranging from 1 to 10 on various issues such as budget/schedule, context, circulation, post occupancy evaluation, aesthetics, sustainability, etc.
DUDE –
AAA complex is for sale if you’re interested.
Really? My own slice of lime green, oxidized mid-60s Eastern Bloc architectural heaven. Wonder how much it would cost to add bay windows….