there were two issues: first, the neighborhood wanted the museum out of the park because of the traffic and parking nightmares which have always been a problem for that area. many others felt similarly about location - that the museum should be in the heart of the city, specifically in the civic center area where the asian art museum had just relocated.
the second complaint was about scale and visibility. the renderings showed the building well below surrounding trees. now, the tower towers over the trees.
bottom line is that san francisco is a difficult place to get buildings built. the fact that this thing is going up is a miracle.
parking has alway been a problem, yes, so it seems that none of that blame should fall on the NEW building for the old institution, right?
I suppose moving it out to another neighborhood would displace the parking issue to another area better equipped with lots...?
GGPark, it could be argued, IS the heart of the city
it is taller than the old deyoung tower and possibly taller than the windmills out at the beach (can somebody confirm that for me, please?)
it seemed that when i was approaching the building (from the richmond side road) the trees obscured it from the angle i was approaching (although it is clearly the tallest element from the front). the view from outside of the park is definitely altered by new skyline element and i can see the argument against it but (as stated in the text) i am definitely drawn to the new view of the old neighborhood from within the park.
i'm not so sure. the selection of a-list architects to design a large new museum was certainly made with the idea of creating a building that in itself would be an attraction. more visitors means more parking problems. the parking situation already existed, yes, but people saw this as an opportunity to fix that problem by moving the museum.
the building is far more imposing than the public, or the public that had complaints, was lead to believe. i agree that it is least visible when you walk into the park from the richmond side. but if you are walking from the east toward the ocean there is nothing blocking your view, and that is the wide side of the tower. keep in mind that i like it and i'm just making points that others have somewhat validly made. sounds like you live here or are familiar with the city so i won't get too into it. while the park could be considered the geographic heart/center of the city, it isn't used the same way that central park is used. gg park isn’t a pedestrian thruway so it becomes a destination. many in the city wanted to bring more life to the civic center area during non-business hours. and they wanted the museum to be more conveniently accessed during weekdays – say go to the museum on your lunch break. it was a fair argument and one that wouldn't have precluded the selection of hdm as architects.
The controversy about the tower was quite interesting because the "original" HdeM renderings were countered by some local architects renderings showing the towers real height and presence in its surroundings. The discussion, aided by pictures from several sources propably paved the way for the project.
the tower is now topped off, it wont go any higher. Isn't the underground parking they are building going to alleviate the parking problem? I think the park is a great place for the museum, even if it does have a big ugly tower.
There was an article in the NYTImes this weekend that talks about the deYoung construction a bit...
It says that the panels are by A. Zahner,
"a 108-year-old family-run metal company in Kansas City, Mo. The idea was to cover the building in a textured copper skin, embossing it with an image of sunlight filtering through trees. Without any precedent on which to draw, Zahner, a company whose name is in the Rolodex of every European architect with American aspirations, figured out a way to make 3,000 individual panels pixelated with dents of varying depth to produce the desired image."
Building a Bad Reputation: Sloppy American Construction
By JULIE V. IOVINE
I must say that the enthusiasm of the Contractor Site Super that gave us the tour was quite apparant. He expressed a great understanding of the ideas that were at play and seemed to enjoy tackling the atypical details...
How often does THAT happen?
Herzog & de Meuron's new joint in San Francisco
What was all the controversy about?
Some photos and description of the construction site...
http://riogood.blogspot.com/2004/08/only-good-deyoung.html
I am jealous you got to go on a tour. I have to satisfy myself with sneaking peaks everyday when I go to the park.
there were two issues: first, the neighborhood wanted the museum out of the park because of the traffic and parking nightmares which have always been a problem for that area. many others felt similarly about location - that the museum should be in the heart of the city, specifically in the civic center area where the asian art museum had just relocated.
the second complaint was about scale and visibility. the renderings showed the building well below surrounding trees. now, the tower towers over the trees.
bottom line is that san francisco is a difficult place to get buildings built. the fact that this thing is going up is a miracle.
thanks for the info.
parking has alway been a problem, yes, so it seems that none of that blame should fall on the NEW building for the old institution, right?
I suppose moving it out to another neighborhood would displace the parking issue to another area better equipped with lots...?
GGPark, it could be argued, IS the heart of the city
it is taller than the old deyoung tower and possibly taller than the windmills out at the beach (can somebody confirm that for me, please?)
it seemed that when i was approaching the building (from the richmond side road) the trees obscured it from the angle i was approaching (although it is clearly the tallest element from the front). the view from outside of the park is definitely altered by new skyline element and i can see the argument against it but (as stated in the text) i am definitely drawn to the new view of the old neighborhood from within the park.
i'm not so sure. the selection of a-list architects to design a large new museum was certainly made with the idea of creating a building that in itself would be an attraction. more visitors means more parking problems. the parking situation already existed, yes, but people saw this as an opportunity to fix that problem by moving the museum.
the building is far more imposing than the public, or the public that had complaints, was lead to believe. i agree that it is least visible when you walk into the park from the richmond side. but if you are walking from the east toward the ocean there is nothing blocking your view, and that is the wide side of the tower. keep in mind that i like it and i'm just making points that others have somewhat validly made. sounds like you live here or are familiar with the city so i won't get too into it. while the park could be considered the geographic heart/center of the city, it isn't used the same way that central park is used. gg park isn’t a pedestrian thruway so it becomes a destination. many in the city wanted to bring more life to the civic center area during non-business hours. and they wanted the museum to be more conveniently accessed during weekdays – say go to the museum on your lunch break. it was a fair argument and one that wouldn't have precluded the selection of hdm as architects.
Isn't the tower going to be 14 stories high... or maybe it's 8?
the stuff they specify for cladding is always eye catching, the perforated copper panels, where do they get this kinda stuff?
the reflecting panels on the ceilings are cool, reminds me of Alvaro Siza's all white museum in Spain
The controversy about the tower was quite interesting because the "original" HdeM renderings were countered by some local architects renderings showing the towers real height and presence in its surroundings. The discussion, aided by pictures from several sources propably paved the way for the project.
the tower is now topped off, it wont go any higher. Isn't the underground parking they are building going to alleviate the parking problem? I think the park is a great place for the museum, even if it does have a big ugly tower.
There was an article in the NYTImes this weekend that talks about the deYoung construction a bit...
It says that the panels are by A. Zahner,
"a 108-year-old family-run metal company in Kansas City, Mo. The idea was to cover the building in a textured copper skin, embossing it with an image of sunlight filtering through trees. Without any precedent on which to draw, Zahner, a company whose name is in the Rolodex of every European architect with American aspirations, figured out a way to make 3,000 individual panels pixelated with dents of varying depth to produce the desired image."
Building a Bad Reputation: Sloppy American Construction
By JULIE V. IOVINE
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/08/08/arts/design/08IOVI.html
I must say that the enthusiasm of the Contractor Site Super that gave us the tour was quite apparant. He expressed a great understanding of the ideas that were at play and seemed to enjoy tackling the atypical details...
How often does THAT happen?
a year later...
some deyoung museum photos
http://www.flickr.com/photos/22677102@N00/sets/626619/
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.