The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel shows off the work of Populous, which has been hired to design the Bradley Center replacement, wherever it ends up, and if it’s built, in Milwaukee:
If we want to understand the stakes for a new downtown arena for the Milwaukee Bucks, we only need to refer to the playbook of the massive international architecture firm recently hired to lead the design process.
“They can shape our towns and cities more than almost any other building type in history, and at the same time place a community on the map,” states the second chapter of “Stadia,” essentially a textbook for professionals about sports architecture from Populous.
These expensive, monumental and highly complex projects have changed a great deal in the last 20 years, and Populous is one of a handful of firms that have revolutionized and dominated the increasingly specialized field of sports architecture.
Brad Clark, the design principal with Populous on the Milwaukee project, wasn’t at liberty to offer specifics about the plans for the Milwaukee arena, including the site where it will be built, in an initial interview, though he did say those details would be revealed soon. …
It has designed 15 NBA or NHL arenas and is the only firm in the world to have designed three Olympic main stadiums, including London, Sochi and Sydney. It often refers to its arenas, stadiums and ballparks as “the new cathedrals” of our time, echoing the ambitions associated with the museum building boom of 15 or 20 years ago, language that stands in contrast to the more austere architectural trends of the moment.
Populous, which changed its name from HOK Sport in 2009, was the firm behind the BMO Harris Bradley Center, the arena the new project will effectively replace. The Bradley Center, completed in 1988 to replace the much maligned MECCA arena across the street, is one of the oldest functioning NBA arenas in the country.
“Our hope is that we are looking at a building that is extremely forward looking,” Clark said of the new arena, “that’s about the incredible future of what is a really vibrant Milwaukee today and really taps into that energy and that spirit but does respect what’s come in the past.”
Populous is capable of architecturally distinctive and telegenic projects, such as the undulating, glassy Aviva soccer stadium in Dublin, but it’s not a given.
Tom Dyckhoff, the architecture critic for the Times of London, for instance, called its Olympic Stadium for the 2012 Summer Games in London “tragically underwhelming,” echoing a common refrain. Christopher Hawthorne, architecture critic for the Los Angeles Times, wrote in 2011 that selecting Populous for a facility there showed “limited imagination.”
With such detractors, Populous, despite its size and dominance in the field, has much to prove, and that may be a good thing for Milwaukee. Might they be in a position to up their design game?
It does seem that the firm’s design ambitions are on the rise. On Tuesday, the firm was chosen as the architects for the high-profile Bristol Arena based on a dramatic design with an illuminated, adaptable, high-tech facade that promises to be the “most sustainable” arena in England.
Some more recent projects such as the Quebecor Arena in Quebec City, a swirling sculptural form inspired by snow drifts slated to be completed in fall of this year, and the zoomy Las Vegas Arena, expected to be done next year, appear to be decidedly more design minded. It is hard to tell at this stage whether these projects will live up to their promise.
The question then becomes: How might that square with the aspirations of the Bucks? In recent weeks, Peter Feigin, the Bucks’ new president, has said he’d like the multipurpose arena, expected to cost between $450 million and $500 million, to look like it “embraces Wisconsin” and be “ingrained” into existing architecture.
This had some wondering, myself included, if this might lead to banal historicism, a riffing on old forms. …
We’re not likely to see another design misadventure such as Miller Park or the Wisconsin Center, projects with many fine qualities that fail architecturally because they are boilerplate homages to great architecture.
They lacked the courage to be of their time.
Still, one question that remains after talking with Clark and looking at images of the many projects that Populous has done in recent years around the world is whether the Milwaukee project will emphasize the sculptural form of the building, a structure that will be an ambassador for the city on TV screens around the world, or whether the Bucks might place greater emphasis on the arena’s interior, on the engagement of the fans and luxury spaces, for instance.
This was not written by Whitney Gould, the pretentious former Journal Sentinel architecture critic (ask yourself why a newspaper needs an architecture critic) who hated anywhere except downtown Milwaukee, particularly the Milwaukee suburbs and the Fox Cities. One could be fooled because of the writer’s beating on Miller Park, which has done nothing other than to raise the financial fortunes of the last Major League Baseball team Wisconsin will ever have, principally by ensuring that someone driving from Madison or Green Bay or Eau Claire to see a Brewers game will actually get to see the game.
Populous’ current work can be viewed here. I am not especially interested in how the building looks from the outside. (Though it should be pointed out that one of the most popular tourist attractions in Milwaukee is the Calatrava addition to the Milwaukee Art Museum, which certainly looks like nothing anywhere else in Milwaukee.) I am much more interested in how those paying good money to see a Bucks game can see. Having seen games in the Bradley Center (which is a bad place to watch anywhere other than in the lower bowl inside the basketball court end lines) and recently at the Resch Center in Ashwaubenon and the Kohl Center in Madison (which are terrific places to watch), I find it much more pertinent to examine how the building will work, not how it will look.
“Will work,” of course, depends on whether it’s built.
Leave a comment