The City doesn’t seem to get it; neither does the architect. It is frustrating.

At last night’s transit plaza workshop, the City unveiled its latest — and apparently final — design of the cafe building (or mercado) which will define the transit plaza, and it is not good. The building does not resemble, reinforce, or even hint at the historic character of the community; it is simply another horrible, post-modern, abstract building designed by the same architect that previously attempted to force his vision on the Waterfront (only to be rebuffed by residents, which resulted in a lengthy series of public workshops; again, no lessons learned).

Renderings of the design are currently unavailable (they may be posted online later today), but that may be a good thing. I’d hate to spoil your weekend. (But I’ll post them when they are released.)

What was most perplexing last night was the design team’s inability to explain why the building looked the way it did.

The design team used alternating rationale: at one point, the architect said that it was important the structure “blend in” with the train station, and yet later, another designer said that the building is a “beacon” because of its prominent location. The building is in a prominent location — it will be the first building that will be seen by pedestrians coming from not only the surrounding neighborhoods, but also from the parking garage for commuters. So it important that it is distinct, unique and historic in character. The design team is abandoning the local pedestrian element who will see and use the mercado daily. Why should it blend in? (It is also rather large, approximately 1300 square feet; the building will stand out either way.)

The design team also used illogical arguments, suggesting that since the two structures — the train station and the mercado — will be built around the same time, and be the first structures on the site, they must look the same. Why? They had no answer for that question, except to say that they wanted it that way.

When I asked whether there is local or historical precedent for the mercado to match the train station, after repeated attempts to avoid the question, the design team finally relented. No, there wasn’t.

What is clear is that the design team just doesn’t get New Urbanism. By insisting that the mercado match the style of the train station, they are equating the two structures — a point the design team themselves reinforced, arguing that matching them will reduce confusion for commuters. (The station tower, of course, is 85 feet high, and will not be missed from any vantage point in the Waterfront — possibly the entire city — so there should be no confusion as to where the train station is.) Every building will look unique in the Waterfront. Why not the mercado building?

Matching the styles is the typical approach for suburban commuter hubs. Look, see that building, it matches the train station, that must be where I park my car and buy tickets. Except it is not. The mercado has no relation to the train station’s use (except for an awkwardly located shared restroom facility). In fact, the train station is un-manned, and new visitors will wrongly assume that the matching auxiliary building is where they buy tickets or ask questions. It is not.

And the most unfortunate part is that the mercado building will define the feel of the plaza itself. And with the introduction of another abstract structure, the City is forfeiting any semblance of an historic character, despite the design team’s rhetoric on the subject. The design of the mercado will carry the design of the plaza. No single piece of artwork or stamped concrete facade will be able to change that.

It is truly unfortunate that we are back where we started. And it is also worth revisiting Planning Commissioner Richard Mitchell’s comments in July, where he cautioned against the phenomenon of “an architect’s ‘thing’…”

Note: It should be mentioned that the design team purposely muted the mercado design during the final stage of the train station workshop process (for good reason), and stated that the design of the mercado would be considered later. Unfortunately, it was considered without public input. Again.

UPDATE — Renderings have been published.