Some peculiarities include 4 upstairs classrooms (with no elevators / very non-ADA-ready). Also, the young men and young women have their own side of the building.

I can see the pro’s and cons to the standard buildings the church builds now. It is great when you are in a different city, for example, because you know which one is the LDS church without even looking for the sign. Also, when you are visiting a different ward, everything is located in pretty much the same spot. It adds to the unity of the church – the same floor plan, same lesson, same heirarchy as every other ward. And i understand the need for the church to save money wherever possible.

On the downside, when you live here in the suburbs of Salt Lake and there are 10 buildings on one road that look exactly the same (and i mean down to the brick, carpeting, etc) it is not only drab and obnoxious but painfully difficult to know which building you are supposed to be at. several times i have missed farewells, baby blessings, etc because i went to the wrong church and didn’t figure that out until it was too late. I for one would sure appreciate larger address numbers that can be seen well from the street.
I love that my building was built in the 70′s “H” pattern. We do have a little bit of natural light thanks to the floor to ceiling windows at the front of the chapel (we hold our satelite broadcasts in another, newer building in our stake) It might have a rust-orange color scheme and be made entirely of cinderblocks (we dont have velcro walls!), but at least it is a little unique and still extremely functional… with plenty of dead ends for catching the little ones.

Clean lines, judicious use of color and texture, good lighting-these are the things from which an attractive building is derived. Properly used they can convey a sense of beauty without drawing attention to themselves. In this respect, architecture is like a woman’ make up. If it’s done poorly, a man notices the eye shadow and lipstick. Done well, he sees remarkably attractive eyes and lips.

I might add that in this day and age, inviting one’s neighbors and friends to church is usually more effective evangelism than knocking on doors. Hence, an attractive worship space might have some positive bearing on gaining a few converts. It’s not going to replace caring and spirituality, but it might make visitors a bit more comfortable and at home, so they can concentrate on the message and not how unimaginative the building is or why they’re sitting under a basketball hoop. (BTW, I LOVE basketball :-)

When I was a new convert to the church, I felt the same as my friend David who posted blog #54. BORING and in a few cases, some of the older chapels seemed to me even “tacky” in their out dated mode. It didn’t take long for me to realize that what is missing in physical attractivness is more than made up for in spiritual fulfillment.

Now, when I go into houses of worship that are adorned, and are breathtakingly beautiful, I often see it as a distraction instead of an attraction.

The building I now attend was built by the members in the early 1970s. Many of the members are still here and can point out what they helped with.

The small temples may not be breathtaking, but the insides really are lovely. Not having to travel thousands of miles to the nearest temple more than makes up for the size. I believe that blessing the people of the world is more important than stained glass windows.

List of wants in church buildings:

Forget natural light. I would like a building without a hallway that goes clear around the building like a track. That is a nightmare for parents with small children. There needs to be a dead end, like in the plan above.

More bathrooms and a nice mother’s nursing lounge.