urbanSTL

^The structure of the building is basically complete, but lots of work still needs to be done inside, including the installation and testing of advanced climate control systems and the careful installation of millions of dollars worth of artwork.

I'm curious about the new grand staircase in the original building...is it still boxed off from view? Not in town, so can't go by myself.

Here's a 360 panoramic view of the SLAM complex from Art Hill.

You can also go on a tour of the very nice East Wing galleries.

To me, it's a beautiful simple addition that makes a big statement. A gaudy over-the-top building isn't necessary to showcase fine pieces of art. For a change, I like this conservative approach. This is a HUGE, timeless addition. Plus, I like the natural light elements inside of the new wing and how the new wing doesn't compete with the Cass from the Grand Basin.

A few of the galleries:
-The New York School
-Art in Cologne
-Abstraction in the 80's
-Dusseldorf School of Photography
-Neo Expressionism
-Pop Art
-Surrealism in New York
-Post War German Art

....just to name a few.

The new addition is featured in this month's Architectural Record magazine:

http://archrecord.construction.com/news ... -Month.asp

I visited this addition for the first time today. It's neat and clean, but it lacks any sort of soul or character. I can't believe it cost $160M for what is effectively a giant concrete rectangle.

What bothered me most is this: of all the emphasis on the LEED award, using natural light, and connection with the outside, the hundreds upon hundreds of directional lights have old, incandescent style bulbs. Seriously? This is a place where investment in LED lighting technology could have paid off in about a year and continued to reap benefits into the future. But they blew $160M on a concrete box with 100-year old lighting technology.

Don't get me wrong; it's nice, just not $160M nice.

Don't get me started on that piece of work and its, um, aggressive, docents.

Despite the high price-tag, I see this project as a rather savvy financial move by the museum. Because of its simple/humble design it actually costs a great deal less than the additions many museums have put up in recent years (which have in turn have caused many museums to find themselves in financial dire straits). Many museums that went with the extravagant designs of Frank Gehry or Daniel Liebskind are now finding those buildings extremely expensive to maintain (ie Biloxi). Finally, the construction of the large underground garage should provide a good deal of parking revenue for decades to come (following the zoo's model), and to a lessor extent, the restaurant will also be a net revenue gain.

While the project has been criticized for these blatantly economic and non-artistic elements, if it means the museum can create multiple new revenue streams without becoming overburdened by debt, then it's certainly a triumph. The most important issue is that the museum remain Dedicated to Art and Free to All. I see this addition as both protecting and furthering that goal.

There was already a restaurant, so kind of a wash there. Panorama isn't off to a great start ("Masterpiece of Failure" ,"No Masterpiece") but hopefully it will get turned 180 degrees into something respectable.

I'm not complaining that they didn't put up some ridiculous Gehry schlock by any means. Simple is fine. Just for being so expensive, it's awfully cheaply fitted out. In addition to the energy hogging lighting, I also noticed things like the giant new doors between building were sticking together and noisily opening and shutting, the cafe was impossibly cold and drafty, and the gift shop is the same tiny size (talk about missed revenue, though there is a small additional shop in the new wing).

I'm wondering just what exactly took four years and a hundred thirty million (correction - 30M for endowment) dollars to build.

I would think the museum would have a state of the art security system, fire/disaster prevention system, and super HVAC temperature and filtration system to help preserve and protect the art. What other high ticket items might an art museum need?

It does have lots of grates underfoot as you walk through the galleries. So clearly some major HVAC there.

i recently visited for the first time as well and found it pretty underwhelming. for the most part i appreciate the simplicity of the design but i just can't understand how a world-renowned architect thought it acceptable to design an art museum with vents running the entire length of the floor every 20 feet or so. some of the vents are already getting bent up, presumably from having dollies loaded with heavy pieces of art rolled over them. and the vents absolutely effect one's viewing of the various sculptural pieces sitting directly on top of them. absolutely absurd.

also, i hope they're planning on installing a more formal, permanent-looking information desk at the main entrance. the one that's there now looks like it's made out of plywood.

i appreciate the simplicity of the design but i just can't understand how a world-renowned architect thought it acceptable to design an art museum with vents running the entire length of the floor every 20 feet or so.

Agreed. I find the vents in the floor and the pattern they create become a visual distraction to some of the art. I don't get that design choice either.

Not sure how the tens of millions of dollars in investments prevents kids from grabbing the frames, or earthquakes (I guess the pile of rubble piece that runs DIRECTLY OVER the vents in the floor could just be re-assembled, but that would be true anywhere), or people breathing on the canvases, or....

None of this mitigates the fact that it is a 100+ million dollar concrete box with some very glaring, even shocking, deficiencies.

As an aside (not related to your post), I really wish any criticism of the new addition wasn't automatically assumed to be about its architectural style. I'm not sure I've heard a single complaint about being modern or minimal in design.

Cool! As if we needed any more reasons to frequent the park....



ST. LOUIS • A $5 million donation has jump-started construction of the new St. Louis Art Museum sculpture garden.
http://www.stltoday.com/entertainment/e ... 22e37.html

bprop wrote:Not sure how the tens of millions of dollars in investments prevents kids from grabbing the frames, or earthquakes (I guess the pile of rubble piece that runs DIRECTLY OVER the vents in the floor could just be re-assembled, but that would be true anywhere), or people breathing on the canvases, or....

None of this mitigates the fact that it is a 100+ million dollar concrete box with some very glaring, even shocking, deficiencies.

As an aside (not related to your post), I really wish any criticism of the new addition wasn't automatically assumed to be about its architectural style. I'm not sure I've heard a single complaint about being modern or minimal in design.

It looks like the Art Museum at least agrees in part that the giant grates crossing the floor are a distraction to the artwork.



Kind of a crude cover-up.

Also, if you are looking at a floor piece like this, one can't help but notice that these HVAC channels are filled with garbage - paper tickets, tissues, glitter, lint, toothpicks. It's disgusting...and apparently they are not easy to lift up to clean. They have to be cut out.

I still contend that this addition was total amateur hour.