Sunday, September 07, 2008

Why Are These Buildings So Ugly?

The 100 and 200 blocks of N. 12th Street [aka Tucker Blvd.] are a civic embarrassment, nearly on the scale of the west side of the 300 block and the east side of the 400 block. This was once the city's grand ceremonial street; today, it's the armpit of downtown--or the stinky groin between the legs of the arch.

These buildings are shameful assertions of the International Style ethic. They lack any contextual relevance, and worse, are hostile to pedestrian activity. 210 presents a brick wall to the pedestrian on its north and south sides that extends unrelieved all the way up. 100 is only slightly better, having a little bit of glazing on the ends. Both buildings present ample glazing to the 12th St. sidewalk, but the few openings into the lease space are closed and the glazing in both buildings is obscure.

The crane docks of 210 actually improved the appearance of this bland slab, which is a sad tribute to its 'designer'. The post office moved its lobby to Olive St, which removed a storefront that had formerly provided a bit of pedestrian interest to 12th. The reflective coating on the glass of 100 renders it as useful as those massive, blind end walls on 210. With the removal of the Cupples curtain wall on 300 N. Tucker, these dogs' behinds stand out even more, a glaring intrusion on the views of the Civil Courthouse, one of my favorite interpretations of the tomb of Mausoleus, and the old Federal Courthouse, which is the most stunning Art Deco courthouse I could imagine--inside and out.

Unfortunately, both buildings have substantial structural systems that will keep them there for generations to come, and the city is in no hurry to require new construction to be sidewalk friendly. So, there's little hope that 12th St. will ever have a vibrant pedestrian presence, which is a shame, because that means there won't be anything to help feed active use of Poelker Park, even if the impressive plan for its renovation ever comes into reality.

[links and pictures to follow...]

No comments: