wheelscomp wrote:Isnt anyone disappointed that it isnt going to be tan-colored brick???
No.
- 6,775
No.
- 11K
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.
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.
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.
- 11K
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.
I was going to ask if that was you CS until I got to this point in your post.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.
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.- 339
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...
- 6,775
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.
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.
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.
And the view of the park from inside the gallery is going to be awesome.
- 2,093
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
Marble definitely would have been more attractive, but obviously more expensive.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
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)!
^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.
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.
Brent Benjamin also mentioned pieces of brass in the aggregate.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.
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.
- 11K
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.
- 6,775
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.
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.
Oh yes, and superstar architects never screw up...The Central Scrutinizer wrote:He jokingly made a reference to "I hope it all turns out", but he knows damn well it will.
- 6,775
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 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.
Oh yes, and superstar architects never screw up...The Central Scrutinizer wrote:He jokingly made a reference to "I hope it all turns out", but he knows damn well it will.
OK, whatever. This is his design and he knows it will work.
- 5,433
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.
- 6,775
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.
It's Ed Golterman, and I was wondering if that was him too. He did look familiar, but I haven't heard anything about him in a long time.The Central Scrutinizer wrote:I wonder if "that Ed Goltermann (sp?) dude" is the nut who left half-way through?
- 2,772
DeBaliviere wrote:Like this piece of crap in Chattanooga:
That looks more like a photoshopped picture from The Onion than it does an actual building
- 11K
Who was the south extension done by? What was the planning process? Was it disliked from the beginning? I'm asking because it's always fashionable for people to say that some previous building should be replaced.
- 476
Juice13610 wrote:DeBaliviere wrote:Like this piece of crap in Chattanooga:
That looks more like a photoshopped picture from The Onion than it does an actual building
Especially with the beautiful building its connected to.
Grover wrote:Who was the south extension done by? What was the planning process? Was it disliked from the beginning? I'm asking because it's always fashionable for people to say that some previous building should be replaced.
Kivett and Myers, 1976.
There's some interesting info on earlier expansion proposals, including models and renderings, on the Art Museum's web site. Go to "Library", then "Building Archives", then browse "South Wing"