Why It’s Vital City Hall Remains Standing: We Asked the Architects
Share News:
As the unprecedented rush to determine the fate of Dallas City Hall unfolds, I’ve been reaching out to the people we should be listening to. Those who possess the education, experience, and knowledge about architecturally significant buildings — architects.
This is not a decision that should be made based on economic gain. In fact, it should never have even become a discussion. But here we are, so let’s listen to the professionals before tonight’s public meeting at 6 p.m. at City Hall, 1500 Marilla St. We hope everyone will voice their opinions on the fate of this historically and architecturally significant building, one that is globally recognized and a defining feature of our city.
Max Levy, FAIA
The Dallas City Hall, together with its Plaza, is arguably the finest example of Modern civic architecture in the country. It is unlikely that the City has the artistic commitment and budget to replace this distinguished work at the same level of excellence. To demolish it on the basis of practicality and efficiency would be a bewildering episode of civic effacement. Repair and restore it, inhabit it with sensitivity and gratitude for its uplifting proportions and civic atmosphere.
Cliff Welch FAIA
It would be incredibly shortsighted to lose such an iconic piece of Dallas’s history and culture from an architect as influential and respected as I.M. Pei.
Willis Winters, FAIA
The suggestion to demolish an internationally renowned public building to make way for a basketball arena is preposterous and should be firmly rejected. Civic landmarks are not fungible assets to be replaced by private entertainment venues. The value of City Hall as a symbol of democracy, history, and architectural achievement far exceeds any hypothetical benefit of an arena in this location.
Norman Alston, FAIA
Dallas City Hall embodies everything that architecture should. It is a direct result of Dallas desperately seeking to reshape and rebrand itself after the Kennedy assassination. It is the first and probably the purest representation of those efforts that was ever accomplished. The Plaza was designed to bring the community together. The architecture was designed to be bold and progressive, and it was, whether you like it or not.
In the 1970s, it was an internationally recognized and important building, and by 1970s standards, it was transparent. They were absolutely going for the theme of government transparency. It’s not a disposable building. It was not meant to be here for only 50 years and tossed.
We don’t have enough specific information to detail it. The actual repair numbers are not north of $300 million. We could fix everything at Fair Park for that.
It’s a great building at any level. There is no justification for tearing it down. Fix what is broken.
Stephen B. Chambers, AIA
The Brutalist inverted pyramid by I.M. Pei is a bold and provocative gesture that we have too little of in Dallas. It’s not just another forgettable shiny glass object. It invites thought, conversation, and opinions. It’s unforgettable and dynamic.
Eddie Maestri, AIA
As an architect, I believe tearing down buildings, especially ones of civic and architectural significance, is often a very shortsighted decision. Throughout history, we’ve seen how structures that fall out of favor in one era are later recognized for their cultural or design importance. Think of the loss of New York’s original Penn Station or the urban renewal projects of the 1960s that erased so much early-20th-century architecture. Beyond the historical implications, demolition can be inherently wasteful and far from sustainable. Preserving and adapting our existing civic buildings is almost always the greener, wiser, and more forward-thinking approach.
Carl Elefante, former president of the American Institute of Architects
“The greenest building is… one that is already built.” This concept encapsulates the idea of “embodied energy,” which refers to the investment of materials and energy in existing buildings.
10 Comments
Leave a Comment
Replacement would cost almost one billion dollars; repair cost created by gross City mismanagement over many years of an icon building probably considerably less than three hundred million. Those who want to rush to tear it down should have their motives examined! I cannot believe we are having this discussion.
The Las Vegas Sands Hotel group is behind this. What they proposed in Irving did not fly. Now they want the City of Dallas to hand over their City Hall to them in order to have a new arena built? The story on the street is that Hillwood Development has offered the Mavericks the former Valley View Mall site. That would make more sense!
That’s an interesting take. Do you have proof? Otherwise it’s just hearsay. I drove by Valley View last week and thought the same thing.
Oh, all the Architects think it’s great……La di da.
Repair City Haa and do not rebuilt for $1B
Mavericks should build new arena at Valley View shopping center
Well Jane, the entire point of this was to ask those with knowledge that the average citizen does not have.It’s about basic education, which they provided.
Tim I absolutely think that is a terrific idea. The demo has been done and all they have to do is build there.
I have lived in Denver, Atlanta, Chicago and now Dallas. Denver and Atlanta went through urban renewal and lost hundreds of architecturally significant buildings of every style and type. Atlanta gave the city keys to John Portman who ripped downtown down and poured enough concrete to pave the way between Dallas and Atlanta. City politicians have done the wreckage to city hall, essentially kicking the can to the next group. Every major city has similar problems but the Dallas city hall is beyond unique. I favor fixing it. There’s lots of glass and steel downtown if they want to move. I’m sure someone must know a broker. But let’s not move to a new building, like was done with code enforcement only to find the codes hadn’t been enforced. How much did the taxpayers pay for that mistake. Be brave, save it. And, send the teams north to an empty space with easy access and lots of parking space. Yes I lived in Chicago when the “da Bears” took the city for millions to enlarge Soldier Field and now they are moving. They could have been the Gary Bears.
I go down there often to meet with various departments. You have to see in person inside and out the uniqueness of the building- There is nothing like it. The design and floors and material it is made of are one of a kind . in person, you can see how solid it is with all the concrete. It would be devastating for it to leave.
Urban renewal in the 60’s & 70’s DESTROYED fabulous downtown architecture in major cities across America. In many cases killing the very essence of the cities.
Only after the dust settled and a few decades passed did folks realize a horrible mistake had been made.
It seems we are aching for a redux of those mistakes of the decades gone by..
New money in Dallas is its Achilles heel.