Lexington should take note of Olympic architecture

China's National Aquatics Center and National Stadium illuminated by fireworks during Friday night's opening ceremonies for the 2008 Summer Olympic Games. Associated Press/Color China Photo. Below, the proposed design of the CenterPointe project in Lexington.

We've been treated to a lot of stunning images from Beijing over the weekend with the opening of the Olympic Games, including the exquisite opening ceremonies and the astonishing victory by the United States' men in the 400-meter relay, which I am so glad I stayed up to see last night.

Some of the most striking images we have been treated to over and over are new structures, built specifically for the games.

The National Stadium, aka the Bird's Nest, and the National Aquatics Center, aka the Water Cube, are the two structures we are seeing the most, and like most exceptional architecture, they never fail to fascinate.

The New York Times has a great interactive graphic showing some of the thought processes behind these structures as well as the new facility for China's state television network, the National Theater, and Airport Terminal. It's interesting to note the care that went into both tailoring these facilities to their purposes and making them visually stunning.

It's something for Lexington to contemplate as we discuss adding a new signature building to our skyline. While the primary argument about the downtown CentrePointe  development has been the demolition of what some regard as historic properties, there's also been a lot of discussion about the design of the proposed new structure -- a combination of a four-star hotel, luxury condominiums, and shops -- and what it will add or detract from Lexington's skyline. A July 22 Herald-Leader story offered up a trio of alternative designs from three teams invited by the University of Kentucky College of Design. They generally went over like a lead balloon with our readers.

But those ideas, as well as designs that can be seen in cities as close as Cincinnati, and the images we're seeing from China should prompt us and even CentrePointe's developers to think. The National Stadium and Aquatics Center, even that crazy state television building, will become signatures of Beijing's skyline, structures that will become synonymous with the city in years to come.

Here in Lexington, we of course have our postcard-perfect countryside. But what are and will be our urban signatures? What do we want them to say about us? And should we think about them a little bit more?

Comments

[Edd]

Missing in this debate about our Lexington downtown is not that we do not want the Webb's project. We just want something that is not a sterile generic copy of whats been done before, something that will not make Lexington look like anytown USA, too late now!

[CW]

Many people won't agree on traditional or "modern" for downtown, but at least you can have buildings that are in conversation with one another, and that recognize the history of the place.

The Centrepointe (Centerpoint? why all those tacky E's?) building is a big middle finger in the middle of the city, telling everyone what the developers think about conversation. And it is safe, and therefore rather dead. I would prefer any of the other designs, as at least they're sensitive to place, even if people don't understand them (at first glance).

And just having a name architect, the "starchitects" like Rem Koolhaas, Zaha Hadid, or Herzog & de Meuron, can put a city on the map. It worked for Cincinnati. Lexington, I guess, prefers aiming low and letting developers tell them what to think.

[Andrew H Owens]

I agree with Bruce's comment in part... I do not believe that Lexington can find a happy medium in this debate. I disagree, however, with the degree to which we are ready for a 'modern' look. The proposed design is anything but simple; perhaps a more appropriate word would be safe, or perhaps comfortable. It's unsettling that we, as, Lexingtonians, are happily entrenching ourselves behind outdated and unimaginative designs. I believe that this, not the loss of a couple venues and hotspots, is what bodes ill for the younger generation in this city. Lexington is resolutely unwilling to move forward, and Centerpointe is an unfortunate byproduct of our backwards philosophy. This is why the number one export of our fine city is young, talented professionals. We send a pointed message that we simply do not want to be forced to move forward. Not only are we 'ready' for a modern design, we desperately need it! The Webb Companies should select the new landmark of our city based on aesthetic, not price. The design they rejected in Atlanta will always be cheaper, friends, but is the true cost worth it?

[Bruce J. Rose]

I see nothing wrong with the proposed new structure. In fct I find it pleasing. It will certainly be much more attractive that the squalor that it replaces. There are other structures in the city worth restoring, but not the block that has just been razed.

[Rightmyer Rants]

Since I live outside of Lexington, I didn't realize there were going to be changes in downtown. I just hope they decide to go with some type of "green" construction.

I'm anxious for the Kentucky Agricultural Heritage Center to break ground in Harrodsburg. The entire project is supposed to center around green technology.

[Brian]

I have to admit, I am sick of hearing about the development of downtown. Lexingtonians will never be satisfied whether we stick with traditional design or go for a more modern look. Personally I don't think the community can handle a modern look, hence why the Webb Company stuck with something simple.