Classical Proportions, Modern Practicality: A Style That Makes Sense

Ihave always associated classical architecture with gravitas -- the large imposing columns and pediments that grace the front of serious places, like courthouses and banks. It hasn't seemed a living tradition that can inform land-use planning and the architecture of everyday life.

But that was before I interviewed several architects who describe themselves as "modern classicists." They espouse a practical, no-nonsense approach to design that extends beyond individual buildings to encompass neighborhoods and whole towns.

They don't limit themselves to the details and proportioning systems used by the original classicists, the builders of ancient Greece and Rome. They also draw on American architectural traditions that have evolved over 400 years, from the most humble and utilitarian barn to the lavish houses of the rich and powerful.

But the way that these modern classicists look at spaces and organize them is strikingly similar to that of their ancient counterparts. All the pieces -- the facade of a house, the streetscape of a block or a multi-block area of a town -- must fit together in a logical and orderly fashion.

The new classicists have had their greatest success in the land-use planning for housing developments, especially those that follow the tenets of New Urbanism, a design approach that has adapted urban traditions to modern American life.

New Urbanist developments have much higher densities than are found in most suburban subdivisions; the houses are close to one another and to the sidewalk and public spaces. Rowhouses, garden apartments and single-family houses are intermingled. Land use is also mixed; some blocks have shops at the street level and living areas above.

With houses and apartment buildings crammed together, the need for visual order is obvious, and the classicists' restraint has found a receptive audience. Their work with developers has included specifications for building heights and envelopes, setbacks from the sidewalks and side lot lines, window and door proportions, exterior trim details, and exterior building materials.

Zeroing in on the house itself, New York architect Marianne Cusato emphasized in an interview the common sense that underlies a classical approach to design. It can produce a spareness and discipline that are similar to modernism, but to a very different effect.

Cusato criticized the big-house facades of recent years, often derided as McMansions, as a "fruit salad" of materials, styles and proportions. Her proposed alternative: a stripped-down version that is easier on the eyes and the pocketbook and avoids visual devices that make a big house look bigger still.

The first thing Cusato would streamline: the roof. Sometimes a house will have three to five roof gables projecting from the front to make it look more grand. (A gable is the triangular area under a double-sloping roof.) Cusato would rein things in and use only one roof profile. It would have a slope that is adequate to shed water and might enclose a real attic, not one that is outrageously steep simply to make the house look bigger.

Eliminating the roof gables also eliminates the bump-outs of the walls and foundations below. That reduces cost, she said.

Instead of five window styles, Cusato would use one, maintaining the same proportions but varying the size as function requires. She would use only one exterior siding material for the whole house instead of two or three upscale ones on the front and a cheaper one for the other three sides. With the money that saves, she would add windows to the sides to get cross-ventilation and more daylight inside. Side windows are often an option not included in the base price of a new house.