What will be the future of Pittsburgh Architecture? Pittsburgh’s many building sites have the potential to host great architecture. Unfortunately, this rarely happens. Much new construction in Pittsburgh fails to recognize the surrounding context and underestimates its power in shaping the experience of the city. How can we as architects design quality buildings and maintain the public’s trust? Recently, Bea and I had the honor of lecturing at the Allegheny HYP club on this topic to an impressive crowd of our peers.
Overview
Bea and I are actively working at Fisher ARCHitecture to achieve what we call an “Architecture of Trust”. Design is a continuing spectacle in which vision is translated into reality, one in which spaces are born from dialogue, collaboration, and shared responsibility. We feel that the architect’s role in the design process is to cultivate consensus, balancing ambitions with humility in order to materialize ideas that endure in the built environment. Architects’ designs must foster connections between people, place, and purpose.
There is much architects can do to improve their relationship with clients, the public, and with other architects. Built projects must become visual representations of their designers’ integrity and credibility.
Learning from Abroad
Throughout this talk we will be presenting examples of architecture from abroad to buttress our arguments. Pittsburgh faces issues that are being addressed head on at this moment around the world. It is in everyone’s best interest here to look elsewhere for inspiration. US architecture tends to prioritize functionality and practicality over ornate aesthetics. Europe, on the other hand, has deep-rooted traditions and design philosophies that have developed across centuries.
European architecture generally boasts a stronger emphasis on historical context, intricate craftsmanship, attention to detail, and integration with the surrounding environment than in the United States. As well, there is a greater focus on preserving older buildings. The result is often a more visually appealing and culturally rich cityscape —as the more than twenty million US citizens who travel to Europe every year can attest!
European examples are relevant as we consider Pittsburgh’s future because, fundamentally, Pittsburgh is a European city. After European diseases and broken treaties forced the native Lenape and Shawnee Native Americans to flee, the Pittsburgh region was settled first by the French and then by the British. Following the city’s incorporation in 1816, one wave of European immigrants after another have left their mark on Pittsburgh’s structure.
European cities demonstrate that change can occur quickly, sometimes in less than a decade. Even here in Pittsburgh, Uber, scooters, and the bike revolution—for better or worse depending on your point of view—have quickly altered the way we view public transportation!
The Effects of Global Warming
As awful as it may be to succeed at the expense of others’ misfortune, Pittsburgh is likely to be much better off than many other cities as climate change devastates the globe over the coming decades. Incredibly, in 2022, natural disasters forced well more than half a million Americans to flee their homes and not return as the result of natural disasters. Worldwide, the number of people “living in displacement” was up more than 40% from the year before.
Pittsburgh is far from the hurricanes, floods, earthquakes, and droughts that are wreaking havoc elsewhere, and, as Breathe Project director, Matthew Mehalik, has noted, we have the water resources to flourish in the future. By 2050, cities will be home to an additional 2.5 billion people, with two out of every three people living in urban areas. This will lead to increased pressure on housing, transportation, and infrastructure. Here in Pittsburgh, it will also create new opportunities for economic growth and innovation, with a greater emphasis on sustainability and environmental responsibility.
Current Plans
Pittsburghers are in the process of developing a cohesive vision for the future. However, it’s complicated: This vision must address current problems like our current affordable housing shortage while at the same time addressing challenges we are just beginning to face like the consequences of climate change and rising energy costs.
Though top down civic and governmental organizations are in the process of implementing plans that have the goal of promoting equity and growth, arranging the rules as well as they can, they face resistance when residents don’t feel heard. That being said, Architects bear profound responsibility for ensuring that these plans respond organically from the bottom up to address citizens’ direct needs and concerns. They are the ones who will determine the way Pittsburgh will look in the future because they are the ones who will draw every line of the drawings that will be translated into tomorrow’s forms.
The Future of Pittsburgh Architecture: A Crisis of Identity
Our city’s cultural identity is shifting. Whereas in the past Pittsburgh was a place where blue collar industrial workers and their bosses could work and dwell, today our city is fast becoming a place for innovators, technologists, and health care professionals. Though we are oft-described as America’s “most livable city”, our city is still not livable for many.
We continue to bear the unfortunate legacy of a past redolent with racism and income disparity codified by redlining and so-called urban renewal.
I clearly remember my impressions when I first started exploring Pittsburgh on my own, back in 2012. I told my Italian family about the city’s industrial soul, of course, but I also spoke about the city’s historic buildings. Outsiders think of our tall skyscrapers surrounded by rivers—the Allegheny, the Monongahela and the Ohio —when they imagine Pittsburgh.
Every Neighborhood a Kingdom
However, our downtown forms just one part of the story. The reality is that ninety neighborhoods surround our central hub. To this day, each has its own nationality-driven personality distinct from the one next to it. These places define our city’s true “high-contrast” identity.
In the past, every neighborhood was a kingdom. Neighborhoods were fortresses that protected inhabitants from the prejudice they would face elsewhere and monasteries inside which a complicated network of partnerships could flourish. They provided a home for commerce and social interaction, a place to mingle, a place to collaborate, a place to deal, a place to get married, and a place where one could meet one’s end surrounded by familiar faces.
One can best understand this history by studying the places where these rituals occurred, the churches, synagogues, meeting halls, jazz clubs, schools, libraries, courthouses, and jails: St. Nicholas Church in Millvale with its twenty-five powerful World War 1 inspired murals, St. Stanislaus Kostka Church in the Strip, the Northside Teutonia Männerchor, Immaculate Heart of Mary Church in Polish Hill, and the Hill District New Granada Theater, are just a few notable examples among many.
However, Pittsburgh’s neighborhoods are changing. Tech workers and new immigrants, along with people attracted to the city’s job opportunities, lifestyle, and colleges, have changed the city’s population even as redevelopment has changed its physical appearance.
The Uncanny Valley
Today Pittsburgh is a liminal place: Pittsburgh occupies a space in its “uncanny valley” that feels “in between” its industrial past and its rapidly developing, tech-focused future. Elements of both eras are visibly present, creating a unique blend of old and new. This juxtaposition can evoke either feelings of sadness, nostalgia, and unease, or their opposite, generating feelings of comfort and resolution, depending on where you look.
Many people find it hard to see anything “historic” or worth saving in certain Pittsburgh buildings because they cannot discern anything about them that speaks of Pittsburgh’s identity as a whole. However, the reality is that the character of our old buildings is as eclectic as our people. Here is a link to our AIA National Convention on the subject of preserving ordinary buildings. Like many older American cities, Pittsburgh is an architectural alphabet soup with letters derived from immigrants’ home cultures. No wonder that in 1926 the newly built Cathedral of Learning added its famous Nationality Rooms on floors one and three.
Acknowledging History
As Pittsburgh writer, Emma Riva, has remarked in a recent Belt magazine article about one Allegheny County neighborhood, “It would be wrong to describe Sharpsburg only by its past, a mill town split in two by the railroad, or only by its present as a growing art community…The past, present, and future coexist simultaneously in Sharpsburg, and for the moment, one hasn’t pushed the other out..”
The organizers of Pittsburgh’s Comprehensive Planning Process have noted that any consistent, shared vision of Pittsburgh’s future has to acknowledge and embrace our city’s entire history, “from the legacy of heavy industry to the heavy-handed government policies that disrupted neighborhoods and displaced residents and contributed to the degradation of the region’s air, soil and water.”
We are optimistic that this vision will generate tolerance and openness to new perspectives. Said one writer, “This city couldn’t have its rich and eclectic mixture of Polish, German, Italian and Irish heritage if every person was met with constant hatred.”
The Future of Pittsburgh Architecture: The Architect
Just as Pittsburgh is facing a twenty-first century identity crisis, so too are the city’s architects. It takes great conviction to bring one’s visions to life in a world where people resist new things: “Too expensive. Too out there. Can’t be built.” Pittsburgh architects have heard it all. Yet even as they stand up for what they feel is right, architects must listen l carefully and subsequently fashion the world not in their own image, but rather in the image of their clients and the special places where their projects are located.
The stereotype of the black-wearing, egotistical genius portrayed in books and movies is a myth. In reality Pittsburgh architects have three concerns—a crisis of income, a crisis of artistic performativity, and anxiety about the limited role they actually play in creating the look of the city. Of necessity, they have devised strategies designed to ward off this lack. Just as fake brick hides wood construction, so does the architects’ facade hide the reality.
Though riddled with insecurity, architects sacrifice themselves daily to their designs, living and dying with every line they draw. Yet myth, unlike “The Fountainhead”, is not fiction. Architects remain self conscious of their own fictional nature even as they search for their true identity.
In turn, the idea of the architect is useful to the public, which places the idea of the creative organizer on a pedestal. Pittsburgh needs architects with their Introverted, Intuitive, Thinking, and Judging traits, these “thoughtful tacticians who love perfecting the details of life, applying creativity and rationality to everything they do.” On the one hand, architects are at the mercy of others, hopeless objects of an external will acting at the behest of ideology. On the other they are influential themselves.
Trend Following
The problem starts from the top among design professionals: Many among the small community of critics and educated people who actually care a lot about good design follow only the latest trends. New designs for elite clients often celebrate style at the expense of theory. The result is that buildings that don’t resemble those being published are often ignored. Though architects must continue to surprise and provoke, “starchitects” like Bjarke Ingels—whose work we admire—often do the profession no favors when they present their $1500.00/sf proposals. In Pittsburgh, buildings designed like expensive clothing often remain unbuilt and will become obsolete when fashions change. Architecture has a two thousand year history. Pittsburgh architects shouldn’t just design reflexively in response to the latest trends and tech.
Here is a second challenge: Just as architects’ identities often feature style over quality, so too do far too many of our buildings. Ideas of dubious quality appear over and over around town with little variation. The problem is not, as most architects claim, that they design too few buildings. The problem is that they design too many. Eager to collect commissions to “feed the beast” of their own overhead, architects have limited time to think carefully through the project ideas and develop the details.
Above all, strong architecture takes time to design. Lots of time. It IS possible for a professional practice to be ambitious and adventurous. However, it takes radical effort.
Trust through Quality Design
Thus far, we’ve introduced two crises of identity: that of Pittsburgh and that of our city’s architects. As a designer to the core, I see the quality of Pittsburgh’s architectural future depending on the quality of architects’ designs. Bea, who was the 2022 president of the Pittsburgh American Institute of Architects, is more policy-focused than I am. She believes Pittsburgh’s architectural future depends primarily on architects’ relationships with their clients and the public.
Clearly these two ideas are two heads of the same coin. On the one hand, Pittsburgh architects must produce designs that the public can relate to. On the other hand, they require the public’s trust to be able to implement daring work.
Respecting Context
If two hundred years of Pittsburgh has taught us anything, it would be that Pittsburgh has a can-do mentality. Pittsburgh has been a city of firsts. We featured the first newspaper west of the Alleghenies, the first all-aluminum building, the first mass transit busway system, the first robotics center, and the first Ferris Wheel. As well, we are a city that has successfully reinvented itself in the last forty years.
Even so, change is difficult for many. Contractors and developers resist change because it may cost them money, architects are concerned that unexpected designs may cost them clients, and the public often feels more comfortable with the status quo than they are with an uncertain future. There’s a palpable concern among residents of losing rights and privileges.
As we’ve discussed, Pittsburgh’s neighborhoods have long and important histories. In an era of political divisions and overwork, people are increasingly drawn to their roots, holding tightly to their identities.
Today it is generally understood that positive change arises based within a community’s traditions rather than as a consequence of seeking a complete and deliberate break with the past. To obtain the public’s trust, Pittsburgh architects must embrace our city’s rich, multicultural heritage.
Learning from History
History is our legacy, the lasting impact that we carry forward, which forms our sense of community and identity. By studying history, we can learn valuable lessons and avoid repeating mistakes. Similar to the Italian architect, Aldo Rossi, Pittsburgh architects now believe that, “The city itself is the collective memory of its people, and like memory is associated with objects and places.” We believe that Pittsburgh architects need to address these memories directly and then build upon them.
Attempts by architects to isolate their process from culture—to develop different projects the same way—have met with failure. Times have changed. We are no longer so absolute in our intentions or beliefs. The architect’s creation always exceeds their intentions, whether they are aware of it or not.
Many more buildings than the limited set of those which have been deemed historic are worth saving. Similar to the architects Fabrizio Barozzi and Alberto Veiga we believe that “No project really stands by itself; rather it is accompanied by something that existed before that constitutes its foundation.”
Yet this doesn’t mean that new buildings simply copy the look of adjacent older buildings. Placemaking is important. However, the concept of context goes much further. It is a mistake to view context as a “materialist, dead, and objectified ‘formal’ collection of buildings and physical features. Such a ‘context’ can never be the origin for the generation of meaningful architectural ideas and built work.”
We are not, as the architectural critic and “Architecture Magazine” writer, Aaron Betsky, seems to fear, “calling for the stifling of innovation in order to produce safe, ‘predictable’ architecture from some bygone era.” Rather, we are advocating “a progressive approach to design that seeks to mediate between the global and the local…”
Let Old Be Old and New be New
As John F Kennedy once said, “Change is the law of life. And those who look only to the past or present are certain to miss the future.” Let old be old and new be new. Treat existing buildings with respect: Restore them and preserve them whenever possible. Then, when you build new, build in such a manner that you respond to today’s needs and construction techniques.
As a result of a new sensitivity to a wider definition of Context, and a recognition of its continuing importance throughout the design process, new architecture may come to exhibit, as Sanford Kwinter has observed, “…a more calculated swerving, adjusting, and turning” than has ever been present before in the profession. This signals a huge liberation for the architect because now different architects can design in different ways. It is possible now for a contextual professional practice to truly become a place, to paraphrase the architect, Peter Eisenman, “…of constant renovation, constant rereading, constant reinterpretation, (and) constant reinvention.”
The Pittsburgh public DOES have the ability to recognize quality work. For that reason, Aaron Betsky goes too far when he suggests that “Architecture is not made by or for a wide spectrum of the population.” Experiencing architecture should not require a ‘trained eye.’ “Whether Mr. Betsky likes it or not, 99.99% of the public are not architects or architectural critics, but are subjected to the physical and psychological effects of the built environment nonetheless.”
When clients see their priorities honored in the built environment, trust can become the foundation upon which their vision can be transformed into reality. Then it will become possible for Pittsburgh architects to design spaces that are not only functional but profoundly meaningful and ultimately successful.
Designing Well
Every building site possesses an inevitable unbuilt work of great architecture waiting to be revealed. When an outstanding building is complete it seems as though it had been present at its site even before it was constructed. Architects have to understand the negative—to see what is missing and then to fill in the pieces—and to do so in such a way that the process seems natural and even simple. Building sites are like illnesses awaiting cures or ancient civilizations waiting to be unearthed. And make no mistake, the extent to which sites desire their potential buildings is exceeded only by the architects’ desire to build them. If you ask an architect, “What is your best project?” they will always say it is their next one.
Pittsburgh is facing a crisis of construction: The best Pittsburgh architects have produced ingenious, unexpected design solutions through the years. However, these fortunate designers remain the exceptions, as most new Pittsburgh buildings aren’t very well designed. You may well ask how that could be the case: They stand up, they satisfy their functions, they make their owners money, and they will last a long time if they are well taken care of. We believe that is not enough.
Good design has always been a rarity. However, in the past there were formal rules that ensured at least a modicum of taste and quality. Today there are no rules. In particular, suburbia has suffered. “It is astonishing that in the past quarter-century a vast landscape has been produced without the kind of buildings that architects consider ‘architecture,’” a landscape almost entirely uninformed by the critical agendas or ideas of the discipline.”
No More Cookie-cutter Architecture
Though architects bear some responsibility for our current situation, they certainly don’t deserve all the blame. Nationwide, less than two percent of all homes are even architect designed.
Even so, “much recent architecture resembles mid-century work in its rejection of place-based forms in favor of more modernist expressions of an international or global style.” However, place-based forms deeply connect people to their environment, fostering a sense of belonging, identity, and—ultimately—trust. Also, cookie-cutter reproduction has become the norm. No wonder the trust of the public in architects is at a minimum.
In order to actualize their best designs, Pittsburgh architects first must rediscover their OWN identity by fostering social bonds with one another that revolve around shared traits. Then, they need to reconnect to the world around them. Existing Pittsburgh design-focused organizations must continue to play a strong role in bringing ALL architects together, not just the half that are members of the American Institute of Architects. As well, CMU and Pitt must go even further in connecting their students to the world outside the university walls in order to communicate the exciting, sometimes messy reality of the work that graduates will actually undertake.
The complicated truth is that architecture is a multidisciplinary endeavor that shapes spaces that respond to both human needs and environmental context through collaboration with clients, communities, and governing agencies. Architecture fosters a sense of belonging and agency when it embodies shared principles—whether they are concerned with a place’s unique cultural values or of more universal human experiences. Every built project is a testament to trust, a trust which results when clients recognize their own values reflected in the proposed work.
Architects Must Raise their Game
Architects must raise their game to be effective in planning the future. At its best, Quality architecture can “inspire us, help us heal, give us a profound spiritual experience, trigger feelings of awe and wonder, and bring us together as families, groups of friends, or as entire communities…It is an art and a science that records our past, defines our present and shapes our future. Good architecture is fundamental to the development and well-being of societies. Quality architecture can transform communities, enhance the quality of life, and foster a sense of identity and belonging.” Here are some additional Fisher ARCHitecture thoughts on that subject.
The path for architects to achieve the public’s trust is paved with well-designed work. Here is a collection of ways architects can design better buildings.
These are our core values at Fisher ARCHitecture
1. Collaboration:
Work with your partners, not against them. Collaborating closely with other trades, contractors, and even clients can lead to innovative solutions and build trust. Teamwork does not dilute creativity; it enhances it by bringing diverse perspectives to the table. However it’s not enough to simply bring people together. Close collaboration requires careful listening. In a very real sense, an architect’s designs are nothing more than physicalized meeting notes.
2. Representation:
Effective communication through drawings and models is essential in order to make clients understand and respect your ideas. Though some architects don’t want to show too much for fear of losing their clients, clear, compelling visuals help clients understand and fall in love with your vision.
3. Radical Openness:
How can you trust somebody if they withhold information? Architects, above all, should lay all their cards on the table—ideas, agenda, intent, and budget. Communication should be simple and direct. Architects should praise others’ successes and acknowledge mistakes. Radical Openness takes courage, but you have to feel the fear and do it anyway.
4. Induction:
Identify larger truths through bottom-up design research. A bottom-up approach means that architects get their hands ALMOST dirty with a whatever-it-takes approach, both in practice and in theory. In practice, it’s about achieving creativity within constraints by, for example, using unconventional ways to employ conventional materials and methods. In theory, it involves understanding and elevating the values and memories of each particular building site.
“Bottom up assumes that you can have striking form and meet the needs of clients. It is a both/and approach compared to top down. Architects that master the bottom up approach become known not for design language or style, but for project outcomes.” Our projects all look so different because each has its own formative conditions.
5. Teaching:
Architects must educate and inform clients, contractors, and the public about alternatives to the status quo, whether those alternatives be new ideas and conceptual strategies or new construction methods and techniques. Architects are not serving their clients’ best interest when they give them just what they are expecting. There’s no guarantee that just because a solution has worked before that it will continue to work in the future. At Fisher ARCHitecture, we give clients just what they ask for. Then, we also show them unexpected solutions.
6. Leadership by Design:
The process of fighting conventionality does not begin and end with client communication. (You have to put it into practice. Constantly question design choices and explore new solutions, whether they may originate locally or abroad, that provide value and enhance the project experience.
Never take anything for granted and always present multiple strategies to your clients. Last, always undertake in-house private investigations: An architect’s unbuilt work provides fertile ground for the exploration of ideas.
7. Building Smaller, Building Better:
Encouraging clients to focus on quality over quantity can lead to more efficient and aesthetically pleasing designs. Smaller, well-designed spaces can meet clients’ needs without unnecessary excess. Instead of adding more space to an existing building, suggest creative ways to make the most of their properties. Let’s design smaller projects with higher design densities! Here is a recent Fisher ARCHitecture lecture on the subject.
8. Sustainability:
Advocating for green building practices is not only environmentally responsible but also economically beneficial in the long run. Emphasizing the financial advantages of sustainable features can persuade clients to invest in them.
9. Flexibility:
Flexibility is an asset that should apply not only to architects as individuals but also to the arrangement of their firms. In order for architects to respond more directly to clients’ diverse needs and to encourage a more thorough exploration of design possibilities, firms must be both agile and resilient, with a stream-lined decision-making process. Clients must communicate directly with experienced firm principals who subsequently design the work themselves. Incredibly, micro-businesses can provide nearly twice as much service as their larger competitors for the same fee.
10. Thoroughness in Execution:
First, charge a Fair Fee. Then, rather than pocketing the extra money, use that extra money to spend more time designing projects. A fully resolved project requires sustained focus. Everyone suffers when projects are not complete: the architect who loses money on the project, the contractor who receives insufficient drawings to properly construct the building, and the client who receives a shoddy product.
As the French artistic director, Pierre-Alexis Dumas, argued in a 2024 “60 Minutes” interview, the true cost is “the actual price of making an object properly with the required level of attention so that you have an object of quality. ‘Expensive’ is a product which is not delivering what it is supposed to deliver, but you have paid quite a large amount of money for it and then it betrays you.”
The Future of Pittsburgh Architecture
In contrast to the stereotype, architects do not wear black, we are humble (enough), we frequently work in groups, we listen carefully to our clients, and we give our collaborators credit. We should acknowledge this. Pittsburgh architects MUST continue to express their unique points of view alongside those with “pro forma” driven mentalities, limited vision, or short-term interests.
Change begins with trust—trust in new ideas, trust in collaborative processes, and trust in the transformative power of architecture. Architects’ ability to achieve the public’s trust in the future will be dependent on their ability to create quality work. Then, they will be able to more effectively educate and empower the public to envision alternative futures.
Conclusion
These changes within the profession will happen far more slowly than would be good for ourselves or our city, but they WILL happen. In a future rife with uncertainty and disruption, groups can resist change and fade into irrelevance, they can wait and react to change, then hang on for dear life, or they can anticipate change and thrive. At this moment, we fear the architecture community is too unwieldy to proactively adapt. However, architects are both clever and resourceful. Eric and I predict long term success.
Our prediction is that architects will continue to bring their unique blend of creativity, technical expertise, and problem-solving skills to transform abstract concepts and practical needs into functional, aesthetically pleasing environments. However, they must do so better than ever before. Then, they will truly be better able to reimagine the spaces where nature, history, and modern life converge.
Together with their clients, future Pittsburgh architects will design buildings that respect our past, embrace innovation, and foster a connected, thriving city, often using European models of sustainability and urban cohesion as examples. Their buildings will be timeless because they will “resonate” with the public both at the time of their construction and as they age. This is how architects will keep Pittsburgh a welcoming city and make it ever more resilient and inclusive.