An architect explains why so many cities now look depressingly similar

VANCOUVER — Picture some of the most iconic places in the world: The historic neighborhoods of Paris. The colorful favelas of Rio. The arched-pedestrian bridges of Venice. They are notable not only for their beauty but for their distinctiveness.

Then consider most new developments today: homes, apartments, offices and retail shops that look similar in cities around the world.

A "creeping sameness" is besetting the planet, prominent New York architect and urban planner Vishaan Chakrabarti argued in a talk at the TED conference Thursday, a trend he says threatens to rob cities of their individuality.

To illustrate his point, he showed the six photos below, all of urban developments built in the 20th century. Aside from local landmarks in the skylines, the buildings could be anywhere.

Aesthetics matter to the daily lives of residents, affecting how people feel and interact with spaces. As more people move to urban areas, design takes on increasing importance. "Cities, if they’re going to attract people, have to be great," Chakrabarti says.

The blandness sweeping the globe can be largely explained by three factors:

Mass production of building materials. The widespread availability of concrete, drywall, steel and glass means building designers and contractors can make easy use of them, deploying them in cost effective and "mind-numbingly similar ways across the planet," Chakrabarti says.

Building codes. Regulations require architects to design spaces for cars, fire prevention and accessibility. "I’m all for pedestrian safety, firefighting and certainly wheelchair access," Chakrabarti said. "But we have to acknowledge that all of these well-intentioned rules have the tremendous unintended consequence of making illegal the ways in which we used to build cities."

A fear of difference. When designing a new project, architects frequently get questions from clients: If we try that new idea, will we be sued? Will we be mocked? This leads to a better-safe-than-sorry mentality that only adds to homogeneity.

For an example of how these factors conspire together, Chakrabarti points to apartment designs.

Nineteenth century apartments, such as the one picture above, were built in small buildings with an elevator, a staircase surrounding it and about a dozen apartments. This created a sense of community; residents knew each other because they passed them on the stairs.

Such a building would be illegal to construct today. Modern buildings need fire-proof stairwells and greater accessibility. Developers, confronted with the cost of installing multiple elevators and a complicated internal infrastructure, need to spread the expense over more apartments — leading to bigger buildings.

"What that results in is the dull thud of the same apartment building being built in every city across the world," Chakrabarti says. "This is not only creating physical sameness, it’s creating social sameness. These buildings are more expensive to build, and it’s creating an affordability crisis in cities all over the world."

Better design is possible by making greater use of local materials and by insisting on more creative approaches.

His firm, PAU, is working on a project in Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia that will include new housing, workplaces, shops and cultural buildings in the heart of the city's downtown. The designs, shown below, include colors that reflect Mongolia's light; small-scale buildings use local construction materials. He praised the work of architects in Mexico City, Chile and India for similarly reflecting local needs.

In the U.S., Chakrabarti blames dull design not on building codes but on developers' aversion to spending the cash or taking the risks necessary for more provocative structures.

So part of the solution may involve shaming, Chakrabarti said in an interview with LinkedIn following his talk. In San Diego, an architecture foundation asks the community to vote every year for the "Onion," an award for the worst in local architecture. (The San Diego International Airport car rental center took home the dubious prize last year.)

Civic organizations need to laud developers who try to build something different — instead of erecting yet another cookie-cutter structure. Consumers also play a role.

"It amazes me that people pay astronomical amounts to live in buildings that are really no different than a lot of social housing, just with marble bathrooms and kitchens," Chakrabarti said. "The market has to push back a bit."

Chakrabarti, for his part, is developing a prototype for a new kind of residential building: a modern, three-story structure similar to the 19th century apartment model.

He wants to create a cost-effective design that can exist within current building codes, while remaining flexible to local climates and preferences. While it is too small to ever build in expensive urban centers like Manhattan, it may be ideal for neighborhoods between suburbs and downtown areas that need greater housing density.

The prototype will need to be customized: designs will shift, as will building materials, depending on where it's located. Structures will not look the same from city to city.

That, he says, is exactly the point.

Read more coverage of the TED conference here.