Good Bye Civic Center

[Double A]

Isn't that what this whole mess is about? The current city hall isn't the latest fashion and therefore below the extravagant standards of our high maintenance Mayor. Image over substance seems to be the guiding principle in making this unnecessary move such a priority.

[Conan71]

HT-

I will admit the alternative isn't looking a whole lot better at this point, but that doesn't change the fact that most Tulsans hate the present City Hall.

You can polish that pig as much as you want and it's still a dump and embarrassment to our city's image.  Maybe if this whole issue fails, they will hire you into a consultant's role to brain-wash convince us into believing that's a spectacular piece of architecture.

[Renaissance]

quote:Originally posted by Double A

Isn't that what this whole mess is about? The current city hall isn't the latest fashion and therefore below the extravagant standards of our high maintenance Mayor. Image over substance seems to be the guiding principle in making this unnecessary move such a priority.

Wrong.  The current city hall is an embarassment.  No respectable, efficient business has a headquarters like that.  It is a direct reflection on our city.

I understand the position that the current deal wouldn't make sense for the city.  I disagree with that position but I respect it.  But don't try to put lipstick on a pig.  This deal makes sense in a lot of ways.  If you want to frame it in terms that are appropriate for talk radio, go ahead, and the adults will make the decisions for you while you froth at the mouth.

[Renaissance]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

HT-

I will admit the alternative isn't looking a whole lot better at this point, but that doesn't change the fact that most Tulsans hate the present City Hall.

You can polish that pig as much as you want and it's still a dump and embarrassment to our city's image.  Maybe if this whole issue fails, they will hire you into a consultant's role to brain-wash convince us into believing that's a spectacular piece of architecture.

^
+1

[Double A]

quote:Originally posted by Floyd

quote:Originally posted by Double A

Isn't that what this whole mess is about? The current city hall isn't the latest fashion and therefore below the extravagant standards of our high maintenance Mayor. Image over substance seems to be the guiding principle in making this unnecessary move such a priority.

Wrong.  The current city hall is an embarassment.  No respectable, efficient business has a headquarters like that.  It is a direct reflection on our city.

I understand the position that the current deal wouldn't make sense for the city.  I disagree with that position but I respect it.  But don't try to put lipstick on a pig.  This deal makes sense in a lot of ways.  If you want to frame it in terms that are appropriate for talk radio, go ahead, and the adults will make the decisions for you while you froth at the mouth.

When people look to move to a city or remain in a city, the last thing people are concerned about is whether or not city hall is fashionable or aesthetically pleasing. I think they are much more concerned about the condition of the streets, public schools, public health, and public safety. The best argument you can come up with is city hall is ugly so we should move, proving my point that image over substance seems to be the guiding principle in making this unnecessary move such a priority. This mentality is absurdly irrational and completely irresponsible.

[Hometown]

There are no important stylistic differences between City Hall and the BOK Tower, or Tulsa’s other tall flat top towers.  All cut from the same cloth.  

No one is addressing the separate issue of the importance of Civic Center to Tulsa.

[Wrinkle]

I'm with AA on this.

Except, I will add, that to me it's been handed her to implement and she feels some obligation to see it through.

It reeks of cronyism, besides being an absolute economic comic, especially for a building so illsuited for a City Hall function.

I'm quite certain the Civic Center can achieve quite acceptable dynamics for the intended purpose. IF it had been maintained, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

But, entertaining a new building, to suite the function, is a better alternative than One Tech. For that matter, doing nothing is a better solution than One Tech.

[swake]

quote:Originally posted by Hometown

There are no important stylistic differences between City Hall and the BOK Tower, or Tulsa’s other tall flat top towers.  All cut from the same cloth.  

No one is addressing the separate issue of the importance of Civic Center to Tulsa.

Really? None?

Come on. You aren't even being honest in this debate.

[Hometown]

quote:Originally posted by swake

quote:Originally posted by Hometown

There are no important stylistic differences between City Hall and the BOK Tower, or Tulsa’s other tall flat top towers.  All cut from the same cloth.  

No one is addressing the separate issue of the importance of Civic Center to Tulsa.

Really? None?

Come on. You aren't even being honest in this debate.

Same elements to one degree or another in each of Tulsa's tall flat tops and our City Hall.  All first cousins in the family of strict Modernism. All immediate descendants of Art Deco.

Swake, I've answered several questions for you now.  Can you please answer one?

Is having a civic center important to Tulsa?

[MichaelBates]

quote:Originally posted by Hometown

There are no important stylistic differences between City Hall and the BOK Tower, or Tulsa’s other tall flat top towers.  All cut from the same cloth.  

That's why Tulsa's tall flat top towers leave so many of us cold. It's all so much conveniently packaged square footage. You couldn't say "cut from the same cloth" about Tulsa's assortment of Art Deco buildings or Gothic Revival buildings.

quote:Originally posted by Hometown

No one is addressing the separate issue of the importance of Civic Center to Tulsa.

Civic Centers were a planning fad, closely related to the craze of homogenizing uses through zoning. Mixing uses, not segregating them, keeps an area dynamic. And the plan that was actually implemented bore little resemblance to the original mid '50s concept that won some degree of praise from planners and architects.

Rather than mourn the loss of the Civic Center, better we should mourn the neighborhood it replaced and the impact the Civic Center had on downtown. Before the Civic Center, the area west of Denver was a continuous neighborhood of single-family homes, three and four story apartment buildings, churches, retail, and light industrial (e.g. the old Wonder Bread bakery), that extended all the way south to the river. Today's Riverview neighborhood, south of the IDL, is all that remains. The Civic Center superblock was the start of the eradication of residential development adjacent to the central business district, as almost everything west of Denver was replaced with government buildings.

Closing 5th Street disrupted a natural flow of traffic coming from the west on Route 66 and into the heart of downtown shopping. Putting the Assembly Center (arena) furthest west created a two-football-field long barrier between event attendees and the downtown cafes and other businesses they might have patronized.

I take your point about how architectural styles fall out of favor and are later rediscovered, but the problems with the Civic Center go beyond style to matters like a lack of human scale. Well-designed modern buildings like the Central Library could be part of a pedestrian-friendly streetscape.

I have serious concerns about the wisdom of the proposed move to OTC, but the demise of the Civic Center is not among them.

[Hometown]

The following statement on the tradition of civic centers bears repeating:

“Traditionally, the center of most cities has been a “commons,” a civic space built according to democratic principles. The commons may be a historic commercial square, as in Madison, Wisconsin, or it may be a mall (in the original sense), like the ones that grace San Francisco’s City Hall and the U.S. Capitol. In almost every case, major public and cultural institutions are located around the commons, forming a civic center of enormous practical and symbolic importance.”

So Michael, this writer believes that civic centers are a tradition, not a passing fad as you have stated.  Civic centers continue to be an important part of many cities across the United States.  Fort Worth has recently added one.

If Tulsa decides she wants an iconic City Hall the thing to do would be to build at Civic Center and also restore and update the plaza.  You could combine the Municipal Building and City Hall and Council Chambers into one new facility.  I would suggest we hire a name architect.  And don’t cut important design elements to save $15,000 like we’ve done with the Arena.  That’s what I call penny wise and pound foolish.

The important thing is to build upon, not throw away, our enormous investment in the Civic Center area.

[swake]

quote:Originally posted by Hometown

quote:Originally posted by swake

quote:Originally posted by Hometown

There are no important stylistic differences between City Hall and the BOK Tower, or Tulsa’s other tall flat top towers.  All cut from the same cloth.  

No one is addressing the separate issue of the importance of Civic Center to Tulsa.

Really? None?

Come on. You aren't even being honest in this debate.

Same elements to one degree or another in each of Tulsa's tall flat tops and our City Hall.  All first cousins in the family of strict Modernism. All immediate descendants of Art Deco.

Swake, I've answered several questions for you now.  Can you please answer one?

Is having a civic center important to Tulsa?

Is it important? Obviously the answer is NO since no one uses it today. People may take advantage of the functions of the buildings, but the plaza aspect is completely unused, and to my knowledge always has been.

The colors and textures of City Hall are a mess. Yes, it might appear to float, but the material the building is clad in is the same as what the plaza is constructed of, so it more seems to just blend in to an off-brown mess. And the pebble stone they used is all wrong for modern, it’s busy and the color isn’t consistent, which messes with the clean lines.  And then to top it off, there are two varied and really clashing colors of pebble stone used. It’s just awful. Modern should be glass, cut stone, concrete, something clean, look at the Warren building as an example. It floats too.

And, the way 5th ends isn’t a terminus, it’s an artificial end into nothing, an empty void. It seems and looks and really is a pointless end to the street. The bad city hall off to the side only makes it worse, and you can’t even see the convention center back at the end of the plaza very well.  It is a much better example of Modern than City Hall, but it’s too short and wide to be a good back drop to the plaza area as you get to the end of 5th.

A good terminus to a very good International Style building is Boston Avenue ending at the Williams Center with the striking and clean lined One Williams Center rising above.

[Conan71]

This is civic center and modern done right.  Williams Square at Las Colinas (Irving, Tx.)



It may well fall out of favor with Texans in another 20 years, but it has a lot more interest and is built quite a bit better than the smoking dung heap in the middle of our downtown.

[Hometown]

That's the spirit Conan.  Let's save our Civic Center.  Fix it don't F**k it.

[swake]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

This is civic center and modern done right.  Williams Square at Las Colinas (Irving, Tx.)



It may well fall out of favor with Texans in another 20 years, but it has a lot more interest and is built quite a bit better than the smoking dung heap in the middle of our downtown.

That is a far better plaza and far better buildings, in the International Style.

And just LOOK at ALL the hordes of people there!