Architects, or anyone knowledgeble about this--is there a name for this early 1900s style?

Cafe Society
1

A few blocks from home I came across this small commercial building, which according to public records goes back to 1912.

Link.

It reminds me of early Frank Lloyd Wright, but given the location I don’t think that’s too likely. I wouldn’t be surprised, though, if it was designed by a pupil or imitator of Wright.

A close-up of the transom windows:

Link. The one on the left, or the middle one of the three, has been replaced by louvered windows, probably some time in the 1950s or 60s, and the left transom, outside the frame to the left, has been replaced by a heavy-duty AC unit.

Also it appears that some earthquake retrofitting was done, judging from the visible studs here:

Link.

I do like the way much of the decorative quality of the building consists of merely arranging the bricks in different ways.

AFAIK it’s vacant, though evidently not on offer to prospective tenants. Precursory googling reveals that a hairstyling salon was there for a time, but I haven’t been able to find out anything further. FWIW, the building next door (to the left) is a civil engineering firm.

In fact, I should show a better view of the engineers’ building, which according to the records was built about 1960.

Link.

I like this building too because it seems to go very well with the 1912 building, in spite of being 48 years newer.

2

No particular style name, though the details are certainly characteristic of American commercial buildings of the era. It might originally have had a storefront that occupied the entire height inside the “proscenium,” and the upper-story or transom windows went in later along with a more conventional ground-floor entrance.

The engineering building is actually more interesting architecturally, because of the banded windows on the upper floors. The architects were clearly influenced by the work of Lescaze and Neutra that they were seeing in the architecture magazines.

Would I be correct in guessing Southern California?

3

Beaux-Arts, perhaps. Or a down-market version thereof.

4

Beaux-Arts would be a very strange description for such a prosaic building with no classical ornament or proportioning.

5

I want to say Neo Classical mixed with modern.

6

I’m pretty sure the building has always been single-story, although I can’t really see inside.

It was the banded windows that drew my eye, too. I didn’t think it looked much like Neutra, though, because what Neutra buildings I’ve seen around here tend to be more minimalist, like my old junior high school, built in 1937-38. Speaking of that date, I think the engineering office looks considerably older than its build date of record, and it does happen sometimes that the first build date is decades later than the actual time of building known from other sources. To me it looks like the 1930s idea of “contemporary”. Incidentally, this building is clearly two stories.

You have hit the nail on the head and are entitled to the cigar or coconut. It’s on Motor Avenue a few doors south of National, west side.

7

It reminds me of the Ninth Avenue Terminal in Oakland, which is considered to be Beaux-Arts. Here’s an excerpt from a re-use proposal, and an image of the Terminal:

The Terminal building is a fine example of Beaux Arts derived architectural style applied to create monumental imagery to a utilitarian, industrial municipal building. Designed for breakbulk cargo, the building is now used primarily for storage.

8

Buildings of this type frequently had a partial loft or mezzanine office.

I cannot imagine any architectural historian describing the Ninth Avenue Terminal—much less the OP’s building—as Beaux-Arts. A Beaux-Arts, or neoclassical, building generally has a symmetrical composition and makes extensive use of classical forms and elements, particularly columns, vaults, domes, pilasters, colonnades, dentils, and applied ornament. Neoclassical is a rare example of a style that architects deliberately choose to work in, rather than an era name or stylistic judgment made decades later as a mere classification tool.

Most utilitarian buildings—then and now—are simply a solution of the client’s problem using the architect’s command of devices both old and new, materials available at the site, and a certain amount of the current fashion.

All this is a longwinded way of saying: most buildings don’t have a style that can be named.

9

I wasn’t expecting to learn that the building is a textbook-picture-perfect example of something, but rather just what it was the builder might have been leaning towards, which in turn might lead to more information through googling.

I wouldn’t be surprised if there was a mezzanine level, possibly at the back; I’ve seen buildings having that feature from the same period in San Francisco, although not in this style. With regard to the Motor Avenue building, I’m almost positive there’s no mezzanine in the front, because that’s one part I can see through gaps in the butcher’s paper that was taped all over the windows on the inside.