Quote:
Originally Posted by Syndic
I'm not a fan of international style architecture or Modern architecture as a whole (I prefer Beaux-Arts and Neotraditionalism, personally). It's usually just featureless boxes. I understand that there's some attachment to it because it's reflective of the era it was built in. And I like that it's mixed-use. It actually creates a nice feel at street level. But the fact remains that it's on The Main Street of Texas, Congress Ave, and we could probably do better with a new building. I'd probably be okay with keeping it if they tore down that little abandoned, single-use mid-rise section next to it. That just destroys the whole continuity of the pedestrian environment.
That's my main beef with the international style and Modern architecture as a whole; the lack of mixed-use and the disregard for urban environment. It's permanently linked with an era of car-centric suburbanism and ghost town inner cities; a time when we thought it was okay to create surface level parking lots and single-use urbanism, if there is such a thing.
Actually, though no one may want to admit it, and it may even be blasphemous to say it, Congress's real bugaboo is One Congress Plaza and 100 Congress. I agree that they're beautiful, and they carried the load for Austin's skyline for a long time, but they destroy walkability more than any other two buildings. One Congress Plaza, in particular. It's more of a business park than anything else. I think this will become more noticeable once JW Marriott is built and people start wanting to walk that block.
|
Here's a an old magazine ad I scanned in a few years ago. The original rendering of One Congress Plaza incorporated an additional 'wing' stepping down to street level along portions of Congress and 2nd Street. This could have allowed for street-level uses.
EDIT: This rendering dates back to the mid-80s. The addition to the building was likely part of a 2nd phase, never built due to the Texas real estate crash of the late 80s.