Legacy Union (former Charlotte Observer redevelopment)

[CLTProductions]

1 minute ago, caterpillar2 said:

Is there any new speculation on what will become of the huge old Observer building?

The building itself is gone. No matter what. It's in really bad shape. (I think it's ugly so I'm not mad lol. I don't like brutalist.)

[Dale]

Amazing to me how many people do.

[go_vertical]

Brutalist architecture is a strange beast. When done right, and the natural surroundings are taken into consideration it can be quite nice. When it isn't done right it can be just awful. Sadly, it is done poorly more often than correctly.

[kermit]

1 hour ago, go_vertical said:

Brutalist architecture is a strange beast. When done right, and the natural surroundings are taken into consideration it can be quite nice. When it isn't done right it can be just awful. Sadly, it is done poorly more often than correctly.

Can you offer any examples of good brutalist? I am not trying to be argumentative, I'm just not an architecture guy so I can't think of any examples.

EDIT: Thanks Toz, Habitat looks pretty cool.

Edited January 6, 2016 by kermit

[tozmervo]

Habitat '67 & Rudolph Hall are two notable examples.

[SgtCampsalot]

Essentially, brutalist buildings need to go all the way like the Galactic Empire or the Federation of Planets or something. When it fails is when it goes half-ass like the Downtown Civic Center.

[Bikeguy]

and this.   

[tozmervo]

As much flack as Boston City Hall gets, most of the criticism is focused on the plaza space. The building itself is actually kind of neat.

[queensguy06]

While we are on brutalism, two of my favorites are the Geisel Library and the Barbican Estate in central London.  The flats are really open on the inside, and quite large (also expensive as hell).

EDIT:  Also anything done by Louis Kahn.  He probably created some of the most recognizable brutalist buildings.  There is a great documentary about his work I highly suggest called "My Architect."  Great insight into the architect and the idea behind brutalism in general.

Back on topic - with Lincoln Harris having yet to close on the site, are we expecting to see any sort of announcement in 2016?  Or is this more likely to sit on the burner until '17-'18?  One follow up - are the tentative plans one giant build out, or is this expected to be built in phases due to the size of the property?

Edited January 6, 2016 by queensguy06
Added link.

[Dale]

Good question. I was assuming that this was further along.

 

[go_vertical]

I was going to also suggest Geisel Library in San Diego but queens guy beat me to it. The Sao Paulo museum of art is pretty nice too. A slight twist on the style since it is a bright red instead of cold concrete.

[Dale]

I suppose the prevalence of glass serves to soften these two.

[Miesian Corners]

Closer to home, there's this: Florence (SC) City-County Complex

[Dale]

^ oh

[Silicon Dogwoods]

I love brutalist architecture. But there's greater and lesser, like all architectural styles.

I saw the U Mass @ Amherst concert Hall when I was a teenager and I remember being so wowed.

 

Edited January 8, 2016 by Silicon Dogwoods

[Silicon Dogwoods]

On 1/6/2016 at 3:19 PM, go_vertical said:

I was going to also suggest Geisel Library in San Diego but queens guy beat me to it. The Sao Paulo museum of art is pretty nice too. A slight twist on the style since it is a bright red instead of cold concrete.

The Sao Paulo Museum of Art is more internationalist than brutalist. Or maybe it's a mix, with the glass walls elevated over a covered plaza (see Lever House and others) but the red supporting structure is closer to brutalist, I guess.

[Spartan]

To me, this begs the question: If this is the only noteworthy piece of brutalist architecture in Charlotte, should it be preserved - even if it's not a great example of that style?

[CLTProductions]

2 minutes ago, Spartan said:

To me, this begs the question: If this is the only noteworthy piece of brutalist architecture in Charlotte, should it be preserved - even if it's not a great example of that style?

My opinion is absolutely not. But I do not like this building at all. Is 129 West Trade an example of brutalist? But given the potentially incredible scope of LH's project on this site, this building is certainly not worth saving.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Jayvee said:

Is 129 West Trade an example of brutalist? 

Modernist/Post-Modern/International

 

[CLTProductions]

1 minute ago, ricky_davis_fan_21 said:

Modernist/Post-Modern/International

 

Well alrighty then

[Spartan]

I agree that the building is hideous. I won't be too upset to see it go - but at the same time we've made the mistake of tearing down building that we didn't like in the past only to regret it in the future. There are old Observer articles that actually talk about how unattractive rows of old brick commercial buildings are, and how widening the adjacent street was going them a favor by tearing them down. These are the types of buildings that we lament not having today.

So with all of that said, I think its hard for us now to look into the future and see what people might say about tearing that building down. Maybe it won't be missed at all. This same argument goes for any architectural style that comes from the 50s-70s (brutalist, international/modern, post-modern, etc). So, are we repeating the mistakes of the past?

[CLTProductions]

2 minutes ago, Spartan said:

I agree that the building is hideous. I won't be too upset to see it go - but at the same time we've made the mistake of tearing down building that we didn't like in the past only to regret it in the future. There are old Observer articles that actually talk about how unattractive rows of old brick commercial buildings are, and how widening the adjacent street was going them a favor by tearing them down. These are the types of buildings that we lament not having today.

So with all of that said, I think its hard for us now to look into the future and see what people might say about tearing that building down. Maybe it won't be missed at all. This same argument goes for any architectural style that comes from the 50s-70s (brutalist, international/modern, post-modern, etc). So, are we repeating the mistakes of the past?

Part of the situation here is this building is in HORRIBLE shape and the footprint of it doesn't make  it practical for the grand plans LH probably has. I think if it was on a different site more off the beaten path, than fine repurpose. But here there's too much at stake on this site to bother saving it.

[Spartan]

That's the essentially same argument being used for the removal of the Polk State Building at Trade/Graham.

Again - just playing the devil's advocate here: I'm not sure what else is at stake. Having another large tower isn't that big of a deal. They could still build around it and gut the inside. There's no such thing as a building that is unsavable. 

[CLTProductions]

1 minute ago, Spartan said:

That's the essentially same argument being used for the Polk State Building at Trade/Graham.

Again - just playing the devil's advocate here: I'm not sure what else is at stake. Having another large tower isn't that big of a deal. They could still build around it and gut the inside. There's no such thing as a building that is unsavable. 

I dont like that building either LOL, but yeah I just don't think there is enough creativity with those in charge to be able to save this building, integrate it, make it practical and make the numbers work.

[kermit]

I am no architectureoligist so bear with my uneducated perspective on preserving the observer building.

I had to ask the question "is there any good brutalism" earlier because every example I had seen of it is fortresslike. They are all massive concrete buildings which were inward facing, refused to connect to the street with ground-level windows (and generally had small 'arrow-slit'  windows above street level) and typically had front doors that were tucked away and easy to 'defend'. The specific buildings that made me feel like all brutalism was designed from a 'siege mentality' perspective were all built during the urban dark ages in the 1970s where concerns about crime and continued decline were nearly universal  (see Georgia State University campus, the downtown Greensboro Marriott and the street level of the Renaissance Center in Detroit)

In short, I have always associated brutalist architecture as devices designed for the urban apocalypse that was looming in the 1970s. Most of these structures were intended to isolate themselves from the surrounding community -- a characteristic which always make the surrounding city less human. The Observer building is no exception, its presence will (IMO) always make it difficult to build a healthy pedestrian environment around it. Regardless its historic value there is no reason to mourn its loss.

I also acknowledge that I am (in the words of Harold and Kumar) a "hypocritisizer," I have argued here before that just about every historic building should be preserved, just because it was historic. Shrug. 

Edited January 8, 2016 by kermit