Raleigh Municipal Building: Should It Be Demolished?

all photos by John Morris unless otherwise noted

Over the past few months, there has been a lot of votes, discussion and opinions about whether or not the Clarence Lightner Public Safety Center should be built on the North side of Nash Square in Downtown Raleigh. The discussion and opinions have mostly been focused on the future of the site but little has been discussed about the history of the site and whether or not we should actually keep the building that currently sits in the spot of the proposed building.

After considering this and thinking about the existing Raleigh Municipal Building, we decided to ask a few some folks who we knew had an opinion about the situation what they thought about the future of the Municipal Building. Below are the responses of three individuals, Raleigh City Council member Bonner Gaylord, a photographer and writer with a passion for Raleigh architecture John Morris and Clearscapes Architect Jon Zellweger, AIA. Each have different backgrounds and current employments, but all share a love for downtown area, its character and its future.

photo from Triangle Modernist Homes

Bonner Gaylord - Raleigh City Council Member

For over half a century, the Municipal Building at 110 S. McDowell Street, on the corner of McDowell and Hargett, has been the fulcrum of Raleigh, NC.  Here is why we shouldn’t destroy it:

Sustainability

From a sustainability perspective, tearing down any building to build another in its place is never best practice. Putting an entire building (and the embodied energy/carbon impact) into a landfill is rarely the answer if the goal is environmental stewardship and conservation. Consider not only the resources of the physical structure, but also the gasoline, diesel, coal, nuclear, etc. fuels that were required to fabricate the materials, transport the workers, and build that structure. Tear the building down, and all that energy, effort, and resultant pollution is for naught. The best way to conserve resources is to conserve the structures that we already have in place.

From Preservation North Carolina’s Website (See Preservation North Carolina’s Stance on this Issue, N&O Article along with Facebook Page): “The greenest buildings—as Carl Elefante, a noted Washington DC architect, told us during Preservation NC’s 2007 Annual Conference—are the ones already built, and many are the historic places that tell North Carolina’s story. ‘Taking into account the massive investment of materials and energy in existing buildings,’ Elefante has written, ‘it is both obvious and profound that extending the useful service life of the building stock is common sense, good business, and sound resource management.”

Now this isn’t always possible and certainly shouldn’t be mandated for all circumstances, but the City of Raleigh should be setting an example by preserving and enhancing our existing buildings.

Our Mission Statement

The City of Raleigh Mission Statement includes that: “We conserve and protect… We welcome growth and diversity through policies and programs that will protect, preserve and enhance Raleigh’s existing neighborhoods, natural amenities, rich history, and cultural resources for future generations.”

Preserving this building could not more fully represent the implied and explicit values expressed in our Mission Statement. To truly exhibit integrity, the City of Raleigh should hold itself accountable to its own Mission Statement.

Our History

From Civil Rights, Kennedy, and Vietnam until today, the history in this building is palpable.  Walk the beautiful worn terrazzo floors under towering ceilings with solid oak trim work. You can close your eyes imagine the stories. You can feel the visceral desperation of the accused, sense the honor of public service, and hear the echoes of many lifetimes of dedication given by generations past. 

This building has soaked up and still represents a core of honor, duty, and service. We live in a disposable culture, but we shouldn’t dispose of everything.  The values represented by this building are worth keeping. If we tear down this building, the physical embodiment and daily reminder of the best of what we stand for is lost forever.

Art

The man who designed the Municipal Building, G. Milton Small Jr. “was a student of Mies van der Rohe and was one of the foremost modernist architects working in the southeastern United States” (NCSU Libraries “Guide to the George Milton Small Papers” Abstract).  His works are listed on the National Register of Historic Places.  One of his buildings at 105 Brooks Ave. (visible from Hillsborough)  “is considered one of the city’s best examples of the International Style of architecture and a historical touchstone for aspiring students.” (News and Observer) In fact, tours of this building are part of the curriculum at NC State University’s College of Design. (Student Tours Mandatory)

Is the Municipal Building Small’s Masterpiece?  It doesn’t matter… You don’t throw away a Picasso because today’s trend ascribes some relative value. G. Milton Small Jr.‘s architectural ideas and designs are revered and taught to this day in design schools.  Indeed, his work is preserved in NCSU Libraries Special Collections. We preserve these drawings as important to our history because G. Milton Small Jr. was a Master.  Architecture produced by a master is nothing less than art. 

Hotel Carolina from the State Archives

Community

Architecture produced by a master is art.  Art is the physical and lyrical expression of an idea.  Our ideas form our collective consciousness.  Our collective consciousness establishes our community.

Destroy this building and we not only destroy art, we destroy our community.  We don’t have to look far, or far back, to see when this city has made a mistake tearing a building down which harmed our community; the current City Hall is located on the site of the beautiful old Hotel Carolina (See above photos from North Carolina State Archives). At the time the public was told that the building wouldn’t support the weight of file cabinets and other office equipment…  Let’s not tear down another part of our community under the banner of another lame excuse.

Summary

The City of Raleigh should abide by its own Mission Statement and recognize that the greenest building is the one that’s already built. 

The City of Raleigh should not trash a history of honor, service, and duty; we should not demolish our community; and we should not destroy art.

If you agree with the two sentences above, I hope you will join the effort to preserve this building.

Whether you agree or not, I would love to hear your thoughts on this or any other matters; feel free to email me any time at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

John Morris - Publisher of Goodnight, Raleigh!

Let’s Not Repeat Mistakes: Don’t Destroy the Municipal Building
(see John’s blog for a complete photo-filled version of his article)

In mid-March, the Raleigh City Council stalled on the resolution to replace the old Municipal Building with the new Clarence Lightner Public Safety Center. In the past few days, there has been a renewed push in exploring ways to overcome objecting Councillors’ concerns about the cost of the project.

The debates both for and against building the new Safety Center had valid supporting arguments, but noticably absent from the debate was the case for preserving the existing structure. That has changed in recent weeks, and I’m going to add my voice to the growing chorus of citizens calling for preservation rather than destruction.

Some Background: Raleigh’s Modern Legacy

Many cities are known for a dominant architectural style. Miami, Asheville, and Durham are known for their for their splendid Art Deco buildings. New York, San Francisco, and Detroit have large swaths of beautiful Victorian-era architecture. Chicago, Los Angeles, and to a lesser extent, Raleigh, are all known for their modernist buildings.

The Municipal Building that would be destroyed is one of Raleigh’s buildings that contributes to this legacy.

Anchoring Nash Square

Nash Square is in a unique position with regard to the buildings that sit on its perimeter: every side of the square has a modernist structure. In addition to the Municipal Building, there is the News & Observer Building, Raleigh Fire Station One, and the original location of the Raleigh Times. The old Raleigh Times building was retrofitted with a modern facade at some point in the late 60s or early 70s.

Most of Raleigh’s modern buildings (and in particular the residential ones) are on the west side of town.

Designed By a Local Legend

Milton Small’s office building near the corner of Hillsborough St. and Brooks Ave. No other architect has received as much attention on this blog as G. Milton Small. His office building on Brooks Avenue was one of the first architecture articles to be posted to this site, and at one point I proclaimed him as my favorite architect. Milton Small left a mark on Raleigh like few others have.

Lower left is Capital Bank Plaza, known as the “Little Seagram Building” after bearing a striking resemblance with the building in New York designed by Small’s mentor.

Historically, Raleigh has been a follower and not a leader when it comes to archtiecture and trends in design. Small was at the forefront of those that brought these trends to Raleigh. He was a student and disciple of perhaps the most influential modernist architect of all time, Ludwig Mies van der Rohe. Lured to Raleigh like so many others in the early days of the College of Design by Dean Kamphoefner, he had a role in educating others as well as running his own firm.

Why This Building Matters

When the City Councilors of 1959-1960 met in this new building, Raleigh was a much different place. Officers of the RPD would check in via callboxes and payphones. Schools and businesses were segregated. Jesse Helms was young man serving on City Council.

The previous buildings which housed City Government have long since been demolished. The most recent location, ironically, was razed to make way for the BB&T Building (now Capital Bank Plaza) designed by Milton Small.

Looking to the Past

Everything comes full circle—we generally adore the architecture of our grandparents but not of our parents’ generation. Victorian architecture was very out of fashion at the time in which Raleigh razed most buildings in this style. It wasn’t until a good time later before people began to appreciate it.

Looking to the Future

We’re at a unique point—more and more people are beginning to come around to the beauty of the modern style. So much, in fact, that George Smart of Triangle Modernist Houses has an ever increasing crowd of fans taking tours of modernist homes. We have an opportunity before us to save this building at the right time, when it is appreciated by
the citizens of Raleigh.

The building has been vacated as the Raleigh Police Department has relocated its headquarters. It could serve as commercial or municipal office space. In either scenario, we gain more by utilizing it rather than razing it. Not all buildings warrant being preserved simply because they have been around for a while. This building matters though, and can be modernized and utilized in other ways—a process far more “green” than building a LEED-certified structure.

I’m in favor of building the Lightner Center—our city’s first responders need a state of the art facility. But let’s build it somewhere else, such as on top of one of our countless parking lots. We have the opportunity to preserve a building that embodies an architectural style that Raleigh is known for—we shouldn’t squander it.

Jon Zellweger, AIA - Architect at Clearscapes, PA

Previously Jon wrote a great article on New Raleigh about the Garland Jones Building, RIP

When first asked to comment on the value and fate of Raleigh’s Main Police Station, formerly the Raleigh Municipal Building, I knew it was due to my advocacy for saving Wake County’s Garland Jones Office Building. As buildings from the same period, they are infused with similar ideologies from the Modernist playbook as it was codified at that time as ‘the International Style’.  Both possess ahistorical detailing, are machine-like with their curtainwall construction and generally speaking, were/are models of efficient, cost-effective building practices emerging from the post-Great War period.

Despite the similarities, I do not immediately leap to the conclusion that it is absolutely necessary for this building to be saved. However, rather than spend my effort arguing for its prompt razing (because I do not necessarily believe we should do that either), I’d like to take the opportunity New Raleigh has offered me to voice my interest in something that I see as a greater issue:  How do we, the citizens of Raleigh, begin to have a more effective discussion - that then feeds into an effective process - in determining what buildings have collective value and should be saved and reused?

Let me begin by stating that I am not a preservationist, but rather a strong believer in the adaptive reuse of our built environment. The difference between the two is that I believe buildings should not be embalmed but rather, like people, should evolve over time. With this comes change of use, new paint jobs, new openings are cut and former openings are closed. There’s a reason why people sometimes trade war stories about broken bones and scars: That’s where things get interesting; there resides memory and a story of becoming. 

Coupled with the fact that science has accumulated enough data to demonstrate that the world is not a place of infinite resources, this is only more reason to consider building reuse. Furthermore, is it not true that in a capitalist economy, material efficiency is commensurate with fiscal responsibility and profitability? 

While culturally we are all enchanted by something shiny and new, we also hold great value in tradition and the heritage of our forebears. We frequently transfer that reverence to many of our buildings and to such an extent that in 1974 Raleigh made the Oakwood neighborhood its first historic district. This was a public proclamation of our common values in that some things SHOULD stay. 

Now, let’s take beauty off the table for a moment. In 1974 we actually did:  prior to this, we thought those Victorians were so damn ugly that we were tearing them down, left and right until some little old ladies stood in the way of “progress”. If there is one thing I have observed, it is that you cannot judge a building by its appearance alone. If you do, you might be tearing down that next “Oakwood”.

I won’t pretend to know whether the City should save the former Municipal Building, the issue is very complex. I will say that we definitely have not demonstrated that we know our city’s history, because this may be the third time we doom ourselves to repeat it.  Also, I feel strongly that today we judge our buildings superficially with a narrow preconception of beauty.

I’d like to see us open the discussion to the wastefulness of throwing away all that concrete, glass, steel and masonry, already in place. I’d like to participate in a dialog about what a building does well or poorly, so we can learn how to make our buildings work better in our environment. I’d like to share ideas on how we can creatively adapt well-built structures to help tell the story of what went on there.I’d like to learn how we can better embrace our heritage while moving passionately in to the future. I’m just not sure we did that this time….again.

Read More

Architecture , Other posts by Jedidiah.

Tagged

City Council Bonner Gaylord Goodnight Raleigh Lightner Center John Morris Raleigh Municipal Building Nash Square Clearscapes Jon Zellweger

Related