In Defense of the Columbus Convention Center.
I have a habit of defending old or cooky buildings from the snobbery of architects, but today I’m going to be taking the other position, AGAINST the public perception. The Columbus Convention Center by Peter Eisenman is hated by almost everyone. I think there is good reason to resent its existence, but if the main issue with the building is its design, I think you need to check your emotions at the door.
A bit of history about the site and building itself. It sits on the previous site of Union Station, one of Columbus’ only decent Beaux-Arts buildings (the Wyandotte building downtown was by the same architect, who also did the Flatiron in NYC).
One of the main arches is still standing for the public to be reminded of their beloved station that was demolished in the dead of night as the Ohio Historical Society was obtaining a restraining order against S.G. Loewndick & Sons (look at that body of work, they have destroyed like half the history of the city at this point… almost impressive) to halt work. Battelle (the corporation that owned the property at the time and still a fixture in Columbus) allowed them to take the only remaining arcade and preserve it off-site (thanks, dicks). A lot of people blame the convention center for the Union Station demolition despite being almost 17 years between the demolition and the construction of the Columbus Convention Center. We shouldn’t blame an interesting building for the sins of Battelle.
If you are interested in the history of Union Station, check out the wikipedia. I considered doing a post on it, but I am decidedly not an expert on it and would just be paraphrasing the wikipedia. It is a super interesting story including the fact that it would have cost Battelle $9 million and by demolishing the building the lost $7 million in funding.
Between those years Battelle Hall occupied the site.
A pretty pathetic brutalist design. It’s still off Nationwide Blvd, if you want a specific building to be angry at.
The new convention center incorporates this design by hiding it in the far reaches of the site.
The swooping forms mimicking the railroad tracks that used to occupy the site is, while not obvious, a clever way to connect to the site’s history. The forms on the front are shifting post-modern blocks in an uncommon pastel palette. The patterns and forms feel like they shift as you pass. The rhythm of the set backs and jutting tipping forms carries the urban fabric without breaking up the interior. It was supposed to come with death lasers, but we’re still waiting on those to be installed.
This is a really solid street scape. I can’t think of another convention center that is in the middle of a dense urban fabric that doesn’t absolutely destroy it.
If people hate this building, they would have really hated the two other proposals that were a part of the competition.
This is the only image I can find of Michael Graves’ design. They don’t have any images of their model or mention this design’s existence on their website. Yes that’s a ships mast. Yes that’s a ship fountain. Yes that’s a ships hull made of glass. If you thought Eisenman’s post-modern blocks were bad, we could have ended up with a post-modern hodgepodge of ship’s parts. Those that don’t know much about Columbus, we’re a landlocked city with no ships or port within 150 miles. The only thing I can think is that this is a reference to Christopher Columbus (who the city is obviously named after). Considering we just removed a statue of Christopher Columbus from City Hall, I can’t imagine this would have held up well, architecturally or politically.
Holt Hinshaw Pfau Jones (now Jones Partners) put forth a bit more serious proposal. I actually like the form, but I can’t imagine driving down High Street with historic brick buildings and being flanked by an industrial sci-fi inspired mass. It doesn’t blend into the urban fabric and instead oppresses the site, not something a convention center should do (but often does). They are at least proud enough to still have this design on their website, which is fair because it is quite a striking design despite its shortfalls.
I’ll take the cartoonish swooping blocks over either of these.
If you want my opinion boiled down to three points:
It isn’t to blame for Union Station.
It fits in the urban fabric and respects the history of the site.
It was better than the alternatives and it wasn’t even close.
Plus we have this statue of Arnold Schwarzenegger outside. That has to count for something.