Going Back to the Journey
Downtown Dallas - stunning architecture, but ...
A few weeks back I traveled to Dallas and had this to say:
Downtown Dallas is missing something.
None of it really links together. The streets aren’t walkable. Downtown Dallas has a lot of “districts,” but not one of them, not even West Village, is enough to rise up and say “this is Dallas!”
Looking back, my criticism of some of the newest development in downtown Dallas didn’t go far enough. To be blunt, if having a W Hotel in Dallas is considered tops, I’ll take the Skirvin and Colcord over that any day. I’m sorry, but the W is like everything else around it. The Victory area architecture, in particular, is one great tribute to self-absorbed architects who clearly spent little to no time trying to figure out how it could all relate to life on the street.
Friday afternoon in Victory, downtown Dallas. Lifeless.
An editorial in yesterday’s Dallas Morning News nails it home:
What downtown Dallas needs more of: street-level bustle that entices worker-bees out of their cubicles and draws people at night and on weekends. What downtown Dallas has enough of: indifferent, monumental buildings whose sole contribution to urban life is bulk.
The drawing looks great. And I’m sure similar drawings were released before Dallas city leaders began construction of the Victory development. But the razzle dazzle of the drawings often cause you to overlook what’s missing:
What is different in this picture of Victory in downtown Dallas and the rendering of what's envisioned for Core to Shore?
It’s too clean, too tidy, too spectacular to have life. To have soul. To have character. To have a personality.
And inevitably, if Core to Shore is come to pass, it will likely mean the demolition of buildings like these:
Imagine this building not as it is, but what it was and what it could be. It stands where Mayor Mick Cornett and the Greater Oklahoma City Chamber have suggested building a convention center as an anchor for Core to Shore.
Thank you for joining our conversation on OKC Central. We encourage your discussion but ask that you stay within the bounds of our commenting and posting policy.
Comments
I see what you’re saying. The biggest problem with you argument, that I see, is that the buildings in the Core to Shore area don’t have that much redeeming virtue, IMO. Perhaps it was the availabity of land back then that caused people to build out, not up, as well. If you look at cities like Chicago and New York, which have great old buildings that ooze character, they’re three and four story buildings….they’re old neighborhoods and retail centers that the city encroached upon. Film Row (or whatever it’s called on Sheridan) has that feel, but again, they’re one story buildings.
I think we need to be very careful with Core to Shore. We need first floor retail at rental prices that would allow some mom and pop business or even, god forbid!, a small grocery store. But, I also think that the one thing that distinguishes the plans for Core to Shore from Dallas is the park, which is why it is so important. A great downtown park is one of the many things lacking in Dallas. A park which pulls people out of their surrounding homes and businesses will add a lot of vitality to the area, and that’s why it needs to be one of the key items in MAPS 3.
My thoughts, exactly, Jill on the park. The more I think about it, a 53-acre central park will give the impression of density. A huge 300-acre park would be too big for our population size. I want a place where people are everywhere…biking, jogging, reading, playing, picnicking, philosophizing, recreating.
Thumbs up on this post, Steve! Very insightful. It’s the concept of authentic urbanism versus inorganic Pei Plans and their offspring…Something for us all to ponder.
Out of curiosity, I drove through what I understand to be the proposed park area today and took 28 or so pictures. I’m sure I’ll make a blog article using them sooner or later, but you can see them now in this Photobucket album: http://s8.photobucket.com/albums/a49/DougLoudenback/coretoshore/
Great post Steve! I’ve been worrying about this since the unveiling of Core to Shore. I would like some of these buildings to stay, or even incorporated into a larger project, like TAP’s old proposal in Bricktown. The Factory?
What I’ve been advocating for is a historic preservation district along SW 3rd, from Western to one block east of Walker. Does the City Council meet this upcoming Tuesday?
Great post.
I fail to realize sometimes that what gives Bricktown it’s mystique is that it isn’t a new, rigid set of buildings but old warehouses with a lot of character.
I think you appreciate the gestalt of Bricktown without even realizing how unique the city really is with it’s revitalized use of old buildings.
Fantastic call-out.