Current State of Innovation… Say What?

Disclaimer: If you are a resident of Indiana, an employee of HKS, or a lover of faux-traditional architecture, I apologize. What you are about to read may be offensive.

Yesterday, the news feed at WAN released a description and images of the new Indianapolis Colts stadium by HKS. It claims a level of sophistication, responsiveness to historical models, and integrates positively into the urban fabric.

I’m going to call that a stretch. What I saw looked like the centerpiece of a new shopping center.

[Image: Recently completed Lucas Oil Stadium for the Indianapolis Colts. Courtesy of WAN.]

HKS design innovation attracts big names in sport

This line is what first piqued my interest to further investigate the story. Having been caught up in the Olympic flurry lately, I was excited to see what other stadium was being tagged with “design innovation.” Needless to say I was disappointed with the imagery, but when I continued to read the description I was appalled.

First of all, it now appears that the executive board of the sports world is now the governing body of architecture as a benchmark for success.

Chosen as the site of the 2012 NFL Super Bowl, the NCAA 2010 Men’s Final Four and the NCAA 2011 Women’s Final Four, the $720 million facility has already received a significant stamp of approval from the highest levels of championship sports.

For dissenters, I will grant you the fact that client happiness and user functionality are key measures of the success of a building.  However, this building is just experiencing its 15 minutes, and will be overshadowed by the next city that gouges its tax payers to build a dangling carrot for these organizations.  This statement only reflects the buildings quality of being shiny and “marketable.”

If you want, I can overlook my point here, because it only gets more interesting.  The WAN (or whoever at HKS provided the text) considers the next highlight as the buildings’s reflection on stadium design and Indiana architecture.

…the stadium features a brick exterior reminiscent of the traditional Indiana field houses and collegiate football stadiums of the early 20th century… The design for the stadium exterior harkens back to Indiana’s rich sports heritage. The exterior’s brick, stone and glass reflect the traditional forms of Indiana’s college stadiums and high school sports field houses. The pre-cast concrete structure is covered in reddish-brown brick that also mirrors the historic manufacturing buildings in downtown Indianapolis. With Indiana limestone surrounding its base, the exterior creates a striking effect.

Why on earth are we creating dated imagery.  If you want another example, you don’t have to look past New York and the new stadium for the Yankees.  A recent comment I read at New York Magazine had a clever way of illustrating this point.

We are way too nostalgic in New York. Example: The Olympics are about to start and their new stadium is an amazing piece of architecture done by Herzog and de Meuron. We also have a couple of new stadiums coming up in New York… why do they have to look like Babe Ruth built it himself?

The rest of the world, except maybe London, is interested in modern interpretation.  In Beijing, they managed to take Chinese symbolism and project it in modern terms.  Whether you think the iconography is too literal is beside the point.  Cultural interpretation happens on many different levels.  So, maybe its not too far off that a new stadium in the states looks like it belongs in a strip mall.

[Image: Rendering of Lucas Oil Stadium showing retractable roof in open position. Courtesy of WAN.]

However, in relation to Beijing’s stadium, I will grant you that it resulted from a portion of a $43 billion Olympic budget.  It’s easy to conclude that Lucas Oil Stadium was a fraction of the cost of the Bird’s Nest.  However, budget is not a limitation on creativity, despite what any architect tells you to the contrary.  “Cutting edge” should strive to capture more than just the technological aspects, it should be descriptive of the art in architecture as well.

Look, I am not against learning from precedents or local materials and construction methods.  I am, however, against replication and design without content.  Designing a building in this faux-contemporary style with similarities to historical buildings is merely playing public politics.  Buildings funded by taxpayers must now appeal to everyone.  Therefore, notions of memory are offered up for the traditionalists and words like “innovative” are offered up for the progressives.  Yet, the end result leaves few satisfied.

Returning to notions of innovation, what WAN is really referring to is the stadium’s retractable roof.

…the stadium delivers modern technology and fan amenities that create a big win for fans, visitors and the community.

An important design feature is the retractable roof. Most retractable roofs are designed with overlapping panels extending from the stadium’s end zones but Lucas Oil Stadium’s unique retractable pitched-roof design will open along the longest sides of the building and come together at the top of the building’s highest point at 296 feet above the playing field.

Since this was done at Minute Maid Park (Enron Field at the time, and yes, my hometown’s ballpark), it has become a required amenity for athletic buildings.  Somehow, this is now a requirement of functionality.  Poppycock.  This is a gimmick, plain and simple.

[Image: Interior rendering illustrating the retractable roof open at night. Courtesy of WAN.]

Yes, it does provide two different experiences for visitors - open and closed - but this is not innovative design.  Sure, there were new technologies developed to produce the “unique retractable pitched-roof,” but what’s the real significance?  Sex Gimmick sells?  The world’s most advanced retractable roof has reduced the architecture to a secondary consideration.

Maybe it’s not about the architecture, and really serves as urban stimulation; which in the end is the argument of most new stadiums.  Here’s what they claim of the building’s response to the urban context.

The stadium was designed to enhance its urban, downtown Indianapolis location… John Hutchings, HKS principal-in-charge of the Lucas Oil Stadium said, ‘We challenged ourselves to be efficient, so the roof could open the other way and create a distinctive profile that enhances its surroundings.’

They don’t give too many any reasons why this stadium is actually responsive to site conditions.  If you look at the aerial, you will soon understand why.

[Image: Aerial view of Lucas Oil Stadium showing little relationship to context. Courtesy of WAN.]

Sore thumb right?  For some reason they felt the need to rotate the building.  Perhaps, this is what they mean by enhance.  Basically, the only piece of this project that respects the street edge is the parking to the south.

What could be the reason then? Is someone trying to use the “i” word [shudder] in defense of merit? Being different does not mean it is interesting, and even if it did, interesting is not a validation and tells me nothing about urban relationships. Current and future architecture students, if you don’t believe me, try using this logic in your next crit. Let me know how far it gets you.

If I were to guess what their reasoning is, I would say that they have “created” pockets of public space through this not-so-subtle plan rotation.  However, it is obvious in the rest of the siting that they expect very few people to enter from or use this space.  The building does not relate to anything else in it’s context.  It wants to be singular, so don’t pitch it as enhancing its context.

In the end though, perhaps I’m being too harsh.  I mean their plans may actually be more advanced than the Chinese.  Apparently, the Watercube will be stripped and refit as a shopping mall when its initial use has expired.  This still leaves room for confusion though.  People that live outside Beijing will come to visit expecting a world class pool, instead to find an Olympic size shopping mall.  Not in Indianapolis.  They have the vision to foresee this future use.  When the next “innovative” stadium is needed in Indianopolis, this one can easily be converted.  Not only will it look, feel, and smell like a mall, but it will be a mall.

Iconography misunderstood.

[Image: Could Lucas Oil Stadium easily become an outlet mall?. Courtesy of WAN and crefeed.]

For a more enlightening piece of architecture, please read about the Kimbell Art Museum.

If you enjoyed this post, please leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Powered by Wordpress | WP Premium theme by WP Remix
Copyright 2007. agents of urbanism. All rights reserved

• Home
• About
• Archives
• Glossary
• Poll Archive
• Sitemap