1,099
Expert MemberExpert Member
1,099

PostNov 06, 2007#101

The St. Louis Art Museum article regarding the expansion.


Saint Louis Art Museum Announces Expansion Design

$125 Million Project Adds Galleries and Public Amenities; Chipperfield Plan Extends and Enhances Museum Campus



November 5, 2007—The Board of Commissioners of the Saint Louis Art Museum unveiled designs today for a $125 million expansion of its historic facility in Forest Park. The expansion will increase the Museum's galleries and public spaces, providing new exhibition space for the Museum's comprehensive collection of more than 30,000 objects and for touring exhibitions.



The design will result in the relocation of surface parking into a 300-space below-grade parking garage. The project also includes a new restaurant and a new, fully accessible entrance directly off Fine Arts Drive with a dedicated entry to the south of the building for school and adult group arrival. The Museum expects to break ground on the expansion project in late 2008, with completion anticipated in 2011.



Recognized in October with England's highest honor for architecture-the Royal Institute of British Architects' James Stirling Prize-London-based architect David Chipperfield unveiled models and renderings for a design that demonstrates his firm's sensitivity to both the Museum's historic Cass Gilbert-designed building and its dramatic setting in Forest Park.



The design calls for an addition to the east and south of the original 1904 building with a dark, polished concrete façade incorporating Missouri river aggregate. New galleries and public spaces will feature skylights and a number of floor-to-ceiling windows to invite and provide views from both inside and outside. The plan provides for 82,452 square feet of new galleries, public space and collections support plus 128,979 square feet for below-grade parking.



...



Chipperfield's design organically links the expansion to the current structure by connecting to existing primary circulation axes. It features a new central staircase to more clearly connect the main level to a new, lower level public concourse serving an expanded café and the existing museum shop and auditorium. A new restaurant will feature a dramatic overlook of Forest Park to the north. Existing Museum surface parking will be relocated to a three-level, below-grade parking garage. Through the expansion project, the current facility will also be improved, with 13,325 square feet of space renovated for education, classroom and public use, as well as additional permanent collection galleries.



"The Cass Gilbert building—the only remaining building from the 1904 Louisiana Purchase Exposition—is integral to the Museum's history and identity," Chipperfield said. "We sought not only to maintain its Sculpture Hall as the symbolic heart of the Museum but to create a strong relationship between landscape and architecture."

2,821
Life MemberLife Member
2,821

PostNov 06, 2007#102

Framer wrote:I'm confused by the first rendering, though. It looks like the new building is entirely behind the original Cass Gilbert building, yet the second rendering and the plan clearly show it alongside the original, with an entrance facing Art Hill. What gives?
The first rendering looks toward the northwest - parallel to Fine Arts Drive - or toward the upper right in the third rendering.

The second rendering looks south.

10K
AdministratorAdministrator
10K

PostNov 06, 2007#103

I'm not impressed, especially after seeing what Kansas City did at Nelson-Atkins.

2,430
Life MemberLife Member
2,430

PostNov 06, 2007#104

The design is what I figured it would be: unobtrusive. Many people don't really want more expansion in Forest Park and if such expansion must occur, best that it be unnoticeable. I am all for the Museum expanding, however, I wonder what would have been possible if SLAM was more willing to split up their collection and build the expansion off site (be it in downtown or in Grand Center). Besides, a new SLAM building on the Gateway Mall is the type of development we could all get behind. :wink:

2,821
Life MemberLife Member
2,821

PostNov 06, 2007#105

^You can get behind this one, too, although with all of the extracurricular activities in Forest Park, someone might wonder what you are doing back there.

212
Junior MemberJunior Member
212

PostNov 06, 2007#106

Ah thats so so so so so bland!!!!

2,821
Life MemberLife Member
2,821

PostNov 06, 2007#107

^Yes, but it is bland in a "Recognized in October with England's highest honor for architecture-the Royal Institute of British Architects' James Stirling Prize-London-based architect" kind of way.

2,331
Super ModeratorSuper Moderator
2,331

PostNov 06, 2007#108

Simple, tasteful, understated. It works. It defers to the prominence of the original building. I think something over the top would soon get old. Agreed, not exciting. It isn't a new landmark for St. Louis. But, I think that is the idea, especially since it is in Forest Park, which few people would want altered. I like JMedwick's idea of building a branch downtown. That would be a chance to create a new landmark.

2,430
Life MemberLife Member
2,430

PostNov 06, 2007#109

^ It doesn't even necessarily have to be a SLAM only building. For all that the Arch symbolizes westward expansion, the truth is that the Museum of Westward Expansion under the Arch is pretty pathetic. I have long thought a joint local effort between SLAM, Missouri Historical Society and the Mercantile Library could put together a much better museum, especially if such a museum participated as a Smithsonian satellite facility.



Either way, it is good to see SLAM expanding to display more of their collection.

4,489
Super ModeratorSuper Moderator
4,489

PostNov 06, 2007#110

Larger renderings



















Source

6,661
AdministratorAdministrator
6,661

PostNov 06, 2007#111

I like it. The simpleness of the design fits in well.

339
Full MemberFull Member
339

PostNov 06, 2007#112

It is hard to make a bold addition without deferring interest and the entrance away from the main building (which is what they were worried about). While I like the new addition (it will obviously undergo some changes), I think they could have done a bit more...judging from the renderings. I will be interested in the final product when complete.



Cheers,

TFG

4,489
Super ModeratorSuper Moderator
4,489

PostNov 06, 2007#113

DeBaliviere wrote:I'm not impressed, especially after seeing what Kansas City did at Nelson-Atkins.
Not that I was expecting a Frank Gehry or anything, and I understand the assertion that the new building needed to defer to the Cass Gilbert and Forest Park, but this seems too understated - although it is growing on me. I would love to see some night-time renderings.



Also, I think the difference between St. Louis' project and KC's is a new money mentality (audacious, risky) versus an old money mentality (practical). It seems to me an old money mentality is written all over this project.



In addition, although I don't believe bigger (or spending more) is necessarily better and results in a higher quality product, KC spent more money whereas St. Louis seems to be demonstrating her same old practical ways of doing things. Simple and functional. I wish St. Louis would step out of the box with these new projects going up in the metro area. Again, the expansion did not need to be a Gehry, but it could have been just a tad more alluring.



In writing about Chipperfield's selection for the SLAM expansion, the Architectural Record wrote,


"Chipperfield’s quietly elegant addition to the Neoclassical-style Museum of Modern Literature in Marbach, Germany, opening this month, reportedly helped give him an edge in a list of more than 100 architects."



Source


In the upcoming months, we'll see what the real architectural critics have to say in regards to this expansion.

10K
AdministratorAdministrator
10K

PostNov 06, 2007#114

You pretty much summed up the way I feel about this project, AC. I'm sure it will be nice - I expect the interior to be great, and it should be a wonderful place in which to view and appreciate the museum's collection.



And like you said, the exterior design is growing on me. Slowly. At the same time, a major museum expansion like this is the perfect opportunity for something with a little (or a lot) of "wow" factor. KC took full advantage of the opportunity with their museum expansion. It's great, and something that their residents are very proud of - I know, because my friends who live in KC keep fawning over it. :) Will this be something that we St. Louisans will be proud of, something that we can brag about? Not likely. Why not make a splash, why not try something different?



I think that after reading Jive and Gasm's posts for so many years, their way of thinking has finally rubbed off on me.



BTW, I like the design for the German museum better than what we're getting.

2,426
Life MemberLife Member
2,426

PostNov 06, 2007#115

^^What a nice plug!



It's decent in my opinion... It almost looks like a '50s design.

11K
Life MemberLife Member
11K

PostNov 06, 2007#116

JMedwick wrote:^ It doesn't even necessarily have to be a SLAM only building. For all that the Arch symbolizes westward expansion, the truth is that the Museum of Westward Expansion under the Arch is pretty pathetic. I have long thought a joint local effort between SLAM, Missouri Historical Society and the Mercantile Library could put together a much better museum, especially if such a museum participated as a Smithsonian satellite facility.



Either way, it is good to see SLAM expanding to display more of their collection.


The Mercantile Library at the Arch would have been (would be) fantastic! Can you imagine actually having a resource down there that would be of use to someone other than a tourist? I guess it would never work - much better to have it at UMSL. :roll:

1,768
Never Logs OffNever Logs Off
1,768

PostNov 06, 2007#117

I'm actually really liking this addition. Foremost it defers to the only permanent structure from the World's Fair, but also will stand out oin its own, while blending with the wooded area around it.



To me its seems a near direct inspiration by PJ's Glass House.

277
Full MemberFull Member
277

PostNov 06, 2007#118

Phillip Johnson's Glass house.

1,768
Never Logs OffNever Logs Off
1,768

PostNov 06, 2007#119

:oops:

10K
AdministratorAdministrator
10K

PostNov 06, 2007#120

Grover wrote:The Mercantile Library at the Arch would have been (would be) fantastic! Can you imagine actually having a resource down there that would be of use to someone other than a tourist? I guess it would never work - much better to have it at UMSL. :roll:


I'd settle for having it back at Broadway and Locust. :cry:

212
Junior MemberJunior Member
212

PostNov 06, 2007#121

Seeing that huge expanse of flat roof on the picture of the model makes me wonder if they had considered, or might still consider, using a green roof on all or part of the addition. Seems Forest Park would be a great place to start thinking about green architecture.

277
Full MemberFull Member
277

PostNov 06, 2007#122

Way of the Arch, I think you're on to something with that comparison; At their respective cores, the two buildings have a similar strategy - to defer to their environments. It's a pretty simple idea: large glass walls are about as unobtrusive as you can get. At night, they reveal the building's inside; during the day, they reflect the outside.

[/quote]

6
New MemberNew Member
6

PostNov 06, 2007#123

It's hard to feel strongly about the design, one way or the other. It is what it is -- modernist architecture in all it's neutral blandness. At best it doesn't fight with the Beaux Arts style of the old building. At worst, there's nothing to distinguish it from any other modernist building. This must have been what they wanted when they hired Chipperfield as it looks exactly like every other thing he's done.

127
Junior MemberJunior Member
127

PostNov 06, 2007#124

It's being reported today that MIT is suing Frank Gehry because of basic design flaws in the much hyped Stata Center. Even before this news, I think that Gehry has jumped the shark to some extent.



I'm glad that SLAM opted against a “bold” design involving a cartoonish outgrowth from the original building. We’ve seen far too many expansions that look like UFOs crashing into old buildings. The view that this stuff is great architecture is fading fast. Often times it’s pure starchitect ego.



Obviously, we'll need to see more renderings of the expansion to better judge the design. But I bet the best views of the expansion will be from the inside looking outwards.

10K
AdministratorAdministrator
10K

PostNov 06, 2007#125

Roy314 wrote:We’ve seen far too many expansions that look like UFOs crashing into old buildings.


Like this piece of crap in Chattanooga:




Read more posts (153 remaining)