Fullerton's Design Standards

GOVERNMENT AND GOOD DESIGN RARELY MIX

And now, loyal Friends of Fullerton’s Future, we return to a theme a bit neglected of late, namely: our built environment, with an emphasis on both aesthetic and policy issues. In the past we have spent some time highlighting some really good examples of appalling public architecture and design paid for by the taxpayers.

Now let us cast our attention to an example of bad design foisted on a private commercial development by Fullerton’s own tasteless planning bureaucrats. Most of us have come to associate strip center developments with crappy design. Some folks blame the lack of aesthetic achievement on the tacky taste of commercial center’s owners, and there is no doubt that this is often a fair assessment. But what is not commonly appreciated is the role of government planners in the strip center development.

A case study is unfolding on Rosecrans and Euclid where an existing commercial center is undergoing a “facelift” (as Barbara Giasone would call it). In the coming weeks we will pictorially document progress on this site, although “progress” seems like such an inappropriate word!

Oh no! God-awful, tacked-on rooflets of various shapes and sizes – nothing more than useless vertical appendages enclosing wasted space and consuming perfectly good construction materials. The only redeeming thing about this work is that in twenty year’s time it too, will be torn away and replaced with something else.

We can see from the framing just what is being added – nothing of use. We may recall Louis Sullivan’s old saying: form ever follows function. Well, here Friends, is form with no function. “Ah, but what about beauty” some uninitiated readers may be inclined to cry. To which we can only reply that too many people are satisfied that a remodel of some kind is a guarantee of aesthetic improvement. We will document the emerging hodgepodge of roof add-ons and see if our readers agree with us!

Finally, we must relate the saddest part of this story. For some reason the owner of this project was required to undergo bureaucratic design review that apparently consisted of a low level planner foisting his own aesthetic preferences of design propriety for this site onto the owner. We believe what is emerging on Rosecrans and Euclid shows all the design traits of bureaucratic interference. We are not sure why this review was even necessary in the first place; its effectiveness will soon be very evident, indeed!

16 thoughts on “GOVERNMENT AND GOOD DESIGN RARELY MIX

  1. YOOO! Tony, what’s up. How much dough you puttin’ into this crap website. We know that FFFF is just a bogus front for your personal pet peeves, and the fact that no one takes you seriously because you are such an airhead. You were a great FJC football player, but now it seems you just got hit in the head to many times. Try knitting, it is much more theraputic

    BEASTY

  2. yikes, this is a great website! And if you live in Fullerton you should be grateful it’s here. It’s already helped saved you a ton of money!

  3. It looks like they’re trying to go for a “down home” country theme. I guess we’ll find out when the hay loft doors get stuck on. Maybe they’ll stick some fake hay up there too.

    North Fullerton is just soooo rural!

  4. Hey Friends, how a bout a regular feature showing the worst architecture in Fullerton? Then show us what you think is good (if there is anything!). Should be a lot of fun.

  5. Yikes, my personal pet peeves are:
    Limited government, holding government officials accountable for their actions, promoting the concept of sustainable design, preservation, liberty, and freedom.

    I would try knitting, but, since I have already helped save the residents of Fullerton millions, and since the obvious in Fullerton seems to be not so obvious, this site seems to be working just fine!

    And thanks for being the 15,618th visitor to our site, and for the compliment! I loved carrying the football it was lots of fun, and so is doing good for our community, in a way, its kind of like carrying the football.

    By the way, is “BEASTY” your bar name?

  6. rosecrans & euclid corner is a blight, but the ugliest architecture in fullerton is the tarantula building on the corner of harbor and commomwealth seconded by the bhuddist clock on the corner of gilbert & rosecrans. again, thanks tony for being the antidote to the inane Fullerton Observer steered by idiot sharon (artist) kennedy. Friends for fullerton’s future has stopped the stupid venom from reaching my brain

  7. Big box, all 4 buildings on each corner of Harbor and Commonwealth are insulting. I was told that all 4 buildings were subsidized by the Fullerton Redevelopment Agency. The worst is the one (s.e. corner) with the fake second floor, who were they trying to fool?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.