St. Louis Art Museum expansion and renovation

the central scrutinizer · PostNov 06, 2007#1262007-11-06T21:56+00:00

Framer wrote:Very nice. Understated, but ellegant. I like it.

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?

I agree. Nice.

It is behind and beside. Mostly beside, which is a fairly big change from the original direction, which had it mostly behind the Cass Gilbert building.

One thing I was really happy to read about this morning is that they are sticking with the plan to build the grand staircase in the sculpture hall to descend to the lower level. A fantastic addition.

Alex Ihnen · PostNov 06, 2007#1272007-11-06T23:24+00:00

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

Like this piece of crap in Chattanooga:

Yeah, that sucks hard.

I may really like the SLAM expansion, but it's hard to tell from the rendering. I'd like to see more pics - like the parking entrance, view from the north zoo entrance, etc. before really deciding (oh, and then I'd like to wait until I see the finished building in person, and THEN I'll only make a "final" judgement after I see how the building's aged of a number of decades!

)

fromthelou · PostNov 07, 2007#1282007-11-07T03:08+00:00

I think the SLAM addition will look nice. Now they need the Mo Botanical Garden to design some cool gardens around the building since there will be huge windows looking out at Forest Park.

wheelscomp · PostNov 07, 2007#1292007-11-07T04:33+00:00

Isnt anyone disappointed that it isnt going to be tan-colored brick???

the central scrutinizer · PostNov 07, 2007#1302007-11-07T04:42+00:00

Some thoughts from tonights presentation:

1) I love listening to Chipperfield talk about architecture

2) The addition looks great!

3) There will be an underground corridor connecting the addition with the South Wing and the Sculpture Hall

4) Three levels of underground parking beneath the addition for 300 cars. Entrance off of Fine Arts Drive

5) At one point Chipperfield circled the South Wing with his laser pointer and said "At some point in the future, hopefully this thing will be gone". (applause) He hates it, and who can blame him?

6) The special exhibition hall will be moved to the addition, along with a new restaurant over looking Forest Park. The current special exhibition gallery will be restored to regular gallery space, so now a visitor will be able to see all the way through the museum on both a north/south axis (sculpture hall) and the east/west axis. Very nice.

7) There will be a grand staircase that will descend from the Sculpture Hall to the Lower Level, where it will tie in with the corridor from #3, which means that....

8 ) The dreadful fountain is gone! Yes! Yes! Yes! Yes! Yes! Yes! Yes! Yes! Yes! Yes! Yes! Yes! The old farts in the crowd where grumbling, but Brent stood his ground

Only two negatives, neither of which had to do with the addition:

1) About 30 minutes into the lecture, some idiot in the crowd shouts out something about a performing arts center instead of an Art Museum expansion in the park. Or something like that. I think. I don't think anyone really knew what the hell he was talking about. I guess he walked out thinking he had made an important statement, but what he was too stupid to understand is that 300 people where laughing at him. Including the two on the stage he was trying to reach!

2) Q&A at the end. Two fantastic questions - one about improved access to the third floor (there is a long term plan for that, it was glued on in the 60's(?) and never properly designed), and one about the exterior of the addition (polished concrete with aggregate). Time for one more question. Then the oxygen thief steps to the microphone. Two excellent questions have already been asked, many more are probably out there, and all this idiot can ask about is how many bathrooms there will be. Unbelievable. And then to top it off, she says something about wanting to see the Kiel Opera House redeveloped. Luckily the host cut her off. Memo to the oxygen thief: What the f*ck do David Chipperfield, Brent Benjamin and the St. Louis Art Museum have to do with the freakin Kiel Opera House? What the hell is wrong with you? Thank you for wasting everyone's time. I noticed you were about 70. Hopefully, you will die soon. Your's truly, TCS

3) Brent tried to placate the oldsters by telling them they will try to find a spot for the ghastley fountain outside. Somewhere. Hopefully behind some trees. Near a dumpster. With a sign one it that says "free to a good home".

That's all I can think of now. Any questions?

PostNov 07, 2007#1312007-11-07T04:43+00:00

wheelscomp wrote:Isnt anyone disappointed that it isnt going to be tan-colored brick???

No.

Alex Ihnen · PostNov 07, 2007#1322007-11-07T05:05+00:00

TCS - thanks for the synapsis and reminding me that the real value of the addition will only be recognized when someone actually visits and experiences the new addition. After all, the addition is being built to display art and host people, not to look pretty on a hill.

framer · PostNov 07, 2007#1332007-11-07T05:19+00:00

The more I study the renderings, the more I read about it, the more I like this new building. Actually, I think it's going to be beautiful.

One thing to keep in mind; this isn't some crappy developer-driven, for-profit building. This is being built by the Museum as a legacy to be handed down through the ages. Think about it; how many buildings of this size do you know of that cost over $100 million? This Chipperfield guy is the real deal; he knows what he's doing, and the architectural community has acknowledged his talent with multiple awards and commissions all over the world.

In other words, this is the kind of building that's gonna look much better in person than any rendering can ever convey.

Also, the idea of a grand central stairway is really growing on me. I've always had a fondness for the fountain, but the more I think about it, the more I realize how this sculpture-hall makeover really does make sense.

Alex Ihnen · PostNov 07, 2007#1342007-11-07T05:22+00:00

Framer wrote:In other words, this is the kind of building that's gonna look much better in person than any rendering can ever convey.

Won't that be a nice change!!!!

And I think the central staircase will be awesome. It's very awkward to get to (find) the lower level in the museum.

MattnSTL · PostNov 07, 2007#1352007-11-07T05:25+00:00

Thanks for the summary, CS. Sounds like a solid plan.

jlblues · PostNov 07, 2007#1362007-11-07T09:22+00:00

The Central Scrutinizer wrote:1) About 30 minutes into the lecture, some idiot in the crowd shouts out something about a performing arts center instead of an Art Museum expansion in the park. Or something like that.

I was going to ask if that was you CS until I got to this point in your post.

It was rather unintelligible, but I think maybe the "idiot" was b*tching about spending public money and taking up green space to build a building in Forest Park, when the money could be better spent building a new fine arts building as part of a greater performing arts center. Where he would like this to be located, I am not sure, but I think he mumbled something about downtown. Then of course the other lady started talking about Kiel Auditorium, and referenced the first guy.

A few other architectural points from the presentation, for anyone interested:

1) The ceiling of the entire expansion will be a coffered grid - you can see this in the third rendering of Arch City's post above - with sunlight reflected from skylights into the coffers over the exhibit spaces, and all artificial ambient and spot lighting hidden in the coffers, i.e. the grid will appear uninterrupted from below except by the exhibit room walls. So for those wishing for a green roof - ain't gonna happen.

2) They will remove the existing exhibit hall space in the Cass Gilbert building, thus restoring the original uninterrupted view down the east-west axis of the building. Edit: NM, glossed over this in CS's post.

3) This plan is being developed with future expansion in mind, possibly with a mirror image of this expansion on the other side of the Cass Gilbert building, but with the flexibility to do something different. It sounds like a significant chunk of the cash being spent on this overall expansion/renovation plan is going towards improving the functionality and behind-the-scenes operation of the Art Museum as a whole, again, with future expansion in mind.

4) Chipperfield didn't seem all that confident about the black polished concrete exterior walls, looking down at his lap and muttering something like, "Ah well, you gotta have faith with these things", after which Brent Benjamin just stared at him for a few seconds (Chipperfield probably wanted marble

). He did say that they would produce several mock-ups of the walls - thus a trial-and-error approach - before they settle on a specific size, color, and composition of the wall panels. BTW, the exterior concrete wall panels are to be cast on the first floor slab, polished, and then tilted up and into place.

timeforguinness · PostNov 07, 2007#1372007-11-07T14:25+00:00

jlblues wrote:4) Chipperfield didn't seem all that confident about the black polished concrete exterior walls, looking down at his lap and muttering something like, "Ah well, you gotta have faith with these things", after which Brent Benjamin just stared at him for a few seconds (Chipperfield probably wanted marble ).

This is why I love Chipperfield. He cracks me up...

the central scrutinizer · PostNov 07, 2007#1382007-11-07T15:34+00:00

Grover wrote:And I think the central staircase will be awesome. It's very awkward to get to (find) the lower level in the museum.

Which is exactly the point Chipperfield made. Same for access to the third floor. They said they have given thought to that, it is in the long term master plan, and there is actually a drawing of it. But that is another project for another day.

PostNov 07, 2007#1392007-11-07T15:38+00:00

jlblues wrote:It was rather unintelligible, but I think maybe the "idiot" was b*tching about spending public money and taking up green space to build a building in Forest Park, when the money could be better spent building a new fine arts building as part of a greater performing arts center. Where he would like this to be located, I am not sure, but I think he mumbled something about downtown. Then of course the other lady started talking about Kiel Auditorium, and referenced the first guy.

Which exposes him as an even bigger idiot. This is NOT being built with public money.

I wish I could have gotten a look at the guy, so I could laugh at him if I ever saw him again.

b.a. · PostNov 07, 2007#1402007-11-07T16:46+00:00

I like it - it's not an over-blown "dig me" kind of building.

And the view of the park from inside the gallery is going to be awesome.

southsidepride · PostNov 07, 2007#1412007-11-07T17:59+00:00

B.A. wrote:I like it - it's not an over-blown "dig me" kind of building.

And the view of the park from inside the gallery is going to be awesome.

But is it an over-dug "blow me" kind of building? That is the question

arch city · PostNov 07, 2007#1422007-11-07T23:27+00:00

jlblues wrote:4) Chipperfield didn't seem all that confident about the black polished concrete exterior walls, looking down at his lap and muttering something like, "Ah well, you gotta have faith with these things", after which Brent Benjamin just stared at him for a few seconds (Chipperfield probably wanted marble ). He did say that they would produce several mock-ups of the walls - thus a trial-and-error approach - before they settle on a specific size, color, and composition of the wall panels. BTW, the exterior concrete wall panels are to be cast on the first floor slab, polished, and then tilted up and into place.

Marble definitely would have been more attractive, but obviously more expensive.

dmmonty1 · PostNov 08, 2007#1432007-11-08T00:01+00:00

According to the architect, they wanted the building clad in monolithic pieces, so they couldn't use marble because such large pieces (if they could be found at all) would be impossible to transport. The concrete can be poured/polished on site, so they can make them as big as they want. At the presentation they described it as a terrazzo-like material with bits of the meramec river stone visible in the black concrete. I'm anxious to see what this will look like (truly anxious, though cautiously optimistic)!

jlblues · PostNov 08, 2007#1442007-11-08T00:08+00:00

^True, true, marble wouldn't work unless maybe you cast it into the concrete panels, and then it wouldn't appear monolithic, I suppose. I was trying to think of reasons why Chipperfield might have seemed so hesitant about it. This has certainly been done before, with mixed results. Maybe it is the mixed results he is worried about, or maybe he just doesn't have much faith in the contractor.

dmmonty1 wrote:At the presentation they described it as a terrazzo-like material with bits of the meramec river stone visible in the black concrete.

Brent Benjamin also mentioned pieces of brass in the aggregate.

Maybe he was just talking out of his ass, I don't know, but I would think expansion and contraction of the different materials would be a problem, not sure, I'll have to look it up...

I suppose one of the advantages of casting the panels on site is that, if it doesn't turn out like you want it, you can always break it up and start over.

Alex Ihnen · PostNov 08, 2007#1452007-11-08T00:59+00:00

I'm actually a huge fan of terrazzo (sp?). It has a bad name because it's been used in so many institutional buildings, but I recently saw it in a home and really liked it. I'd say it's similar to colored concrete in that there are many, many variations in color and visual texture.

the central scrutinizer · PostNov 08, 2007#1462007-11-08T05:02+00:00

dmmonty1 wrote:According to the architect, they wanted the building clad in monolithic pieces, so they couldn't use marble because such large pieces (if they could be found at all) would be impossible to transport. The concrete can be poured/polished on site, so they can make them as big as they want. At the presentation they described it as a terrazzo-like material with bits of the meramec river stone visible in the black concrete. I'm anxious to see what this will look like (truly anxious, though cautiously optimistic)!

Exactly. I'm not sure why others are selling this as if Chipperfield isn't on board. Of course he is on board - he designed it! He wasn't hesitant at all regarding the choice of materials. He jokingly made a reference to "I hope it all turns out", but he knows damn well it will.

jlblues · PostNov 08, 2007#1472007-11-08T05:27+00:00

The Central Scrutinizer wrote:Exactly. I'm not sure why others are selling this as if Chipperfield isn't on board. Of course he is on board - he designed it! He wasn't hesitant at all regarding the choice of materials.

I was there too. If architects always got their way in the design of projects, every building would cost at least 50-100% more to construct. What is he going to do if there isn't enough money to do everything he wants to do, walk away from the project?

I have worked over, under, and alongside far more than enough architects to be able to read between the lines of their public statements. Maybe it is just his sick sense of humor, but I guarantee you that if Chipperfield had made a comment like that, publicly or privately, to certain commercial developers I know, about a project of their's that he was designing, they would have ripped him a new a**hole. And it wouldn't matter how many design awards he has won.

The Central Scrutinizer wrote:He jokingly made a reference to "I hope it all turns out", but he knows damn well it will.

Oh yes, and superstar architects never screw up...

the central scrutinizer · PostNov 08, 2007#1482007-11-08T13:52+00:00

jlblues wrote:
The Central Scrutinizer wrote:Exactly. I'm not sure why others are selling this as if Chipperfield isn't on board. Of course he is on board - he designed it! He wasn't hesitant at all regarding the choice of materials.
I was there too. If architects always got their way in the design of projects, every building would cost at least 50-100% more to construct. What is he going to do if there isn't enough money to do everything he wants to do, walk away from the project?

I have worked over, under, and alongside far more than enough architects to be able to read between the lines of their public statements. Maybe it is just his sick sense of humor, but I guarantee you that if Chipperfield had made a comment like that, publicly or privately, to certain commercial developers I know, about a project of their's that he was designing, they would have ripped him a new a**hole. And it wouldn't matter how many design awards he has won.

The Central Scrutinizer wrote:He jokingly made a reference to "I hope it all turns out", but he knows damn well it will.
Oh yes, and superstar architects never screw up...

OK, whatever. This is his design and he knows it will work.

threeonefour · PostNov 08, 2007#1492007-11-08T17:16+00:00

The Central Scrutinizer wrote:Memo to the oxygen thief: What the f*ck do David Chipperfield, Brent Benjamin and the St. Louis Art Museum have to do with the freakin Kiel Opera House? What the hell is wrong with you? Thank you for wasting everyone's time. I noticed you were about 70. Hopefully, you will die soon. Your's truly, TCS

I guess she's friends with that Ed Goltermann (sp?) dude or something.

I'm weighing in late on this, but I agree with what others have said. I think it's a clean and attractive design, and I like that it doesn't compete with the original Beaux Arts building for attention and how it blends in with the natural environment surrounding it. I imagine it will be especially nice to see at night.

I'm sure there will be a faction of St. Louisans who hate it because it's not a 1904 replica, but I couldn't care less about what they think anyway.

the central scrutinizer · PostNov 08, 2007#1502007-11-08T17:25+00:00

ThreeOneFour wrote:
The Central Scrutinizer wrote:Memo to the oxygen thief: What the f*ck do David Chipperfield, Brent Benjamin and the St. Louis Art Museum have to do with the freakin Kiel Opera House? What the hell is wrong with you? Thank you for wasting everyone's time. I noticed you were about 70. Hopefully, you will die soon. Your's truly, TCS

I guess she's friends with that Ed Goltermann (sp?) dude or something.

I'm weighing in late on this, but I agree with what others have said. I think it's a clean and attractive design, and I like that it doesn't compete with the original Beaux Arts building for attention and how it blends in with the natural environment surrounding it. I imagine it will be especially nice to see at night.

I'm sure there will be a faction of St. Louisans who hate it because it's not a 1904 replica, but I couldn't care less about what they think anyway.

I wonder if "that Ed Goltermann (sp?) dude" is the nut who left half-way through?

Yeah, Chipperfield talked about that a lot. He wanted to defer to the Cass Gilbert, but not be subservient to it.

I love the new design, but I also love the tweaks to the Cass Gilbert galleries, and the behind the scenes (and below ground) infrastructure improvements.

With any luck, maybe in another 20 years we can bring him back to tear down the South Wing and built a west/south expansion. And the improved access to the third floor.

St. Louis Art Museum expansion and renovation

Choose Display Mode