The renovation plans for the Mann Auditorium have at last been presented to the public, following several years of a secretive, provoking, non-democratic planning process, which has not at all added honor to the city. There is little consolation in the fact that it is not only the city engineers, but other officials as well, who have forgotten that scorning due public process eventually backfires. The day will come when the public no longer accepts the distorted scenario whereby there is no option but to accept the decisions of impolite civil servants.

 

The public uproar that accompanied the process has almost settled. Yet the public is not aware of its right to have the building unequivocally included in the category of 'restricted conservation'. If the public does not do what it must, the renovation of that piece of culture will only mark the beginning - as the impending renovation of its neighbor, Habima Theater, will once again demonstrate how the municipality makes fun of public rights.

 

Mann Auditorium - ‘Heichal Hatarbut’, was planned in the fifties by two of the leading architects of the time - Dov Karmi and Zeev Rechter (project architect Yacov Rechter). As a building that has a clear distinction between the interior content and the outside mantle it may be considered one of the first Post-Modern signifiers, only mistakenly placed in the late Modern style or earlier Brutalist one. As such, the building is a fine example of how one can freely express an interpretation of a home of culture.

 

In his book “The Struggle for Independence of Israeli Architecture”, Abba Elchanani says: “...apart from its excellent interior, the building was designed with careful regard for its proximity to Habima Theater... out of noteworthy consideration, the architects chose to veil the hall within a crisscross of columns and beams that scale down the building and prevent a clash between the two large buildings... such a network creates a play of light and shade - a fine architectural feature of this fascinating assemblage.'

 

Sharing an equal ownership with the Tel-Aviv municipality, Heichal Hatarbut is the home of the Israel Philharmonic Orchestra. Hence, the main reasons for its renovation are its acoustic deficiency and its malfunctioning as a multipurpose hall. Disregarding the latter, most of the acoustical problems are basic ones, and can be improved today electronically, without resorting to prominent structural changes. However, since the main source of income of the IPO comes from leasing the hall out to other performances, it was decided “to go for it all” and carry out an overall renovation, whether the public likes it or not.

 

It is important to clarify that the greatest influence on the renovation process was not at all the acoustics issue, but rather an unlimited budget which made a cardinal impact on the owners - the orchestra management, who prefer to function in a bombastic “home”, rather than a modest structure from the 1950s. Hence, although  the plan is based on three central objectives - improving the acoustics, making the hall multi-functional, and adding supporting functions, the plan exhibits no constraints, and the result is a major change of the interior, projected to the buildings exterior as well.

 

Section 10 of Amendment 31 to the Planning and Building Code instructs every local authority to establish a five-party conservation committee, whose first assignment is to prepare a list of buildings requiring conservation. The problem is that this rather political forum, has no “teeth”, and the interpretation of the term ‘conservation’ is left to the local authority - an undemocratic body which decides, plans and controls the procedure, if it does anything at all.

 

I know no one who seriously believes that a 50 year old building need not be updated. Technologies available today surpass tenfold those of several decades ago, and planning mistakes must be corrected. The fact that Heichal Hatarbut has become a cultural landmark does not make it free of errors. However, the most severe one was the exclusion of the building from the list of 240 Tel-Aviv buildings of 'restricted conservation', i.e. buildings that must be preserved entirely, both within and outwardly. Unwisely, Heichal Hatarbut was included only in the less restricted list of 880 buildings - those less important, whose facades alone must be preserved.

 

Fortunately, this mistake is not incurable. Section 3 of Amendment 31 states clearly that a decision regarding conservation can also be announced by any interested body approved by the Minister of Interior. Therefore, if the public feels an injustice has been done, it has a full legitimacy in taking action and doing something about it.

 

A close study of the Kolker-Kolker-Epstein approved plan, reveals that it by far exceeds the legal definition of its conservation status, insofar as it will cause a noticeable change in the mantle - mainly in the roof, which is considered its most notable feature.

 

It is no accident that Kolker-Kolker-Epstein chose to describe the motive for their plan using the poetic words of their acoustics consultant, Larry Kirkegaard:

 

'A fine concert hall is the story of the relationship between the performers and the audience, who share an emotional experience... a warm and inviting pure architectural space... a hall where the quietest pianissimo is heard in the furthest seat, and the loudest fortissimo can enlighten the spirit of the listener, without causing him a headache.'

 

Kirkegaards advice was to alter the fan-shape into a shoebox hall, and the architects cleverly did so by shifting the side walls. Reverberation improvement was also achieved by dismantling the concrete ceilings, while uplifting the roof at the south, and adding an extra level to the building at the north. In order to turn the concert hall into a multifunctional one, the stage was widened and lifted at an angle, thereby improving visibility for the back rows and acoustics on stage. A transparent ceiling with openings for lighting and screens will enable the hall to hold theatrical shows. Naturally, the plan also calls for the removal of all wall coverings and furniture, as well as redesigning the lobby, stairwell and other parts of the original building.

 

To understand the extent of the changes that have occurred in the plans since it was presented to the office of Yacov Rechter in 2000, one might study his proposal, which was based on less than half the budget allotted to the accepted plan of Kolker-Kolker-Epstein.

 

Like Kolker-Kolker-Epstein, Rechters plan was based on modifying the acoustics and adapting the hall to other performances. His acoustic consultant - Prof. Helmut Miller - a world renowned expert, who was hired by the Tel Aviv Fund, agreed to collaborate with Rechters conservative scheme, and left the original fan-shaped hall in place.

 

Rechter’s modest proposal was based on changing the angle of the wood panels by the stage, and lifting the ceiling above the orchestra to improve reverberation. A main physical element of Rechter’s plan regarded the use of underground spaces, particularly for a new rehearsal hall.

 

Following the death of Yacov Rechter, his son Amnon continued working on the plans together with architect Dan Eitan. However, despite being at advanced stages of the working plans, their work was stopped.

 

Needless to say - the choice of Kolker-Kolker-Epstein, a serious office decorated with prizes, was not necessarily a mistake. However, while Rechters plans coincided with the building’s legal status of conservation, in the Kolker-Kolker-Epstein plan, it is the image of the building which is preserved, rather than the building itself.

 

Since the next building to be amusingly renovated is the adjacent Habima Theater, one must not forget the municipality’s mishandling of the conservation issue. City Hall is not a private business of any clerk. As a public entity, its ownership of the building only reinforces the publics hold on it.

 

The central question that a wise municipality should ask today is: why not renovate the Mann Auditorium minimally, so it may function a further 50 years as a national landmark. The rest of the budget could then be used to build a fancy new theater in another place, without caprice and constraints, but this time - not before a competition open to the public is held democratically.