RE: [UC] UCHS and Civic Center demolitions: a review

[Dubin, Elisabeth]

When one comes toward West Philadelphia over the Schuylkill, there are three salient things to look at as one crosses the bridge: the triumvirate of art deco buildings comprised by the post office, the train station, and the old convention hall.  There will soon be a fourth - the Cira Center.   Tony says that we need to "treasure the best from the past while letting the rest go."  The problem is that "best" is a matter of opinion, and in this country we tend towards not being willing to regulate taste.   I would also like to add we shouldn't equate possible adaptive reuse of the Convention Hall with turning it into a hospital.  In other works, no one is suggesting using the hall as a new hospital.  When I started investigating this topic, I read somewhere that a feasibility study was done for that idea and found it to be unworkable (naturally).  I am curious because it seems that there is a lot of land in that area that is empty, so the construction of a world class cancer facility and adaptation of the convention hall wouldn't seem mutually exclusive.  The more that area becomes a hospital center, the more it becomes a little city unto itself.  People in hospital-city might welcome somewhere to go to shop or have lunch other than the hospital cafeteria.  Saying that a commercial adaptation in that area is unreasonable is like saying that Union Station in DC should have been raised and replaced with a government facility instead of the shopping area it is now.  All I am saying is that there are certainly possibilities for it's reuse if the situation were amenable.   Personally, I'm still trying to collect information on the history of these decisions and always welcome more information on the topic of the Convention Hall.       ELISABETH DUBIN Hillier ARCHITECTURE One South Penn Square, Philadelphia, PA 19107-3502 | T 215 636-9999 | F 215 636-9989 | hillier.com   From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Anthony West Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2004 2:20 PM To: univcity@list.purple.com Subject: [UC] UCHS and Civic Center demolitions: a review Intrigued by all the commentary, I went out last evening to view the buildings in question, taking with me an authentic history-loving tourist. My brother, a scholar of Horace, Spenser and Emerson as well as a lifelong, obsessive Victorian rehabber, was in town for the MLA Convention. The last time he was here he stayed at the high-Vic bed & breakfast on Chester Ave. and dropped his bucks at the Renaissance drawing exhibit at the Art Museum, and he's been keeping Architectural Antiques afloat down on 2nd Street for decades. So he's the sort of person whose judgement should matter to Philadelphia-as-trove-of-period-treasures boosters. We brought along an honors student of his for the ride.   The two buildings in question are utterly different. There is no question of their forming an architectural unity; they consist of two different eras and styles fastened together with duct tape, so to speak, hemmed in by a modernistic hospital complex, a dashing Italianate museum and a ratty old stadium, all ungepatchke.   Neither building is a trailblazer architecturally and neither style is rare. But the old Commercial Museum is quite a pretty piece of fin de si�cle Classical Revival style. We rated it a B+. It would be nice to see it recycled for yet another use. One should note, however, that routine Classical designs are not intrinsically significant since they are, by definition, later imitations of an earlier style. If you ever feel there aren't enough faux Parthenons around, after all, nothing stops you from commissioning yet another one!   Convention Hall -- call it a B-. It looks nice enough, is well balanced and has some pleasing Art Deco trim. But it is not memorable. It is a costly, workmanlike public building that was designed for transient users and transitory experiences. Translation: it's a convention hall. There's a lot better Art Deco arond town, like the old U.S. Court House (now a post offce) at 9th & Market. It's not in the same league with the current Convention Center, either historically or esthetically. If it were torn down, our cityscape would suffer small loss.   There is a common confusion in some quarters that Old = Lovely. In fact, though, many old books and many old buildings are mediocre, just like many modern cultural artifacts. While they still merit study by specialists, there is no reason to insist that the man on the street be forced to look at either. True "lovers of history" are those who learn how to select and treasure the best from the past while letting the rest go.   So much for the esthetics. As for the supposed historical importance of these buildings, I fear some folks are confusing the frame with the painting. A full museum is where important things are kept; an empty museum is empty of their importance. A former convention hall in which a president once stood to give a speech is no more important to future generations than a former Getty station where Nobel Prize winners used to gas up.   The likelihood that out-of-town tourists will ever flock to Philadelphia to gawk at these two old buildings is zero. Plus, they're in a hospital district these days. Hospitals are also a draw for travelers and they too matter to this region's future. Now, from personal experience, I can state that period architecture is not what we're looking for when we choose our cancer center. We're hoping for the latest thing, in fact, on the inside.   I have to say that I agree with both the UCHS and the University of Pennsylvania here. I think there are other buildings more deserving of preservation, and better uses for this real estate than preservation.   I wish only well to the Committee to Save Convention Hall, provided they rely on their dime instead of mine. And it's important to have watchdog groups like these. But it's important to note what watchdogs are and are not. We have a watchdog at home. She barks when there are strangers or intruders, and that's good. But she also barks when there are letter carriers, slammed car doors and long-awaited visitors. Most of the time, in other words, she's wrong. Someone else must decide whether to open the door.   For that same reason, we should never let historical watchdogs take over the role of deciding which parts of history need preserving. That's the job and the right of ordinary citizens.   -- Tony West