As the Smithsonian Institute's massive $2 billion redevelopment plans struggle to gain both public and governmental support, BIG, the firm heading the project, has released a revised proposal. Controversy surrounding the original master plan has been centered largely around the changes that would be made to the Enid A. Haupt Garden, and the seemingly, unnecessarily high costs for the overall overhaul.
Responding to concerns previously voiced by Members of the Commission of Fine Arts (CFA), local decision makers, residents and garden enthusiasts, the firm has now presented updated designs. “Since our last proposal, we’ve been listening very closely to the public. We wanted the general feeling and fondness for the Haupt Garden to remain the same while also increasing its enjoyment and use, offering educational elements and after hour programs,” expressed Bjarke Ingels while presenting the new proposal to CFA yesterday.
Major changes to the design include a stronger attempt to mime the original character of the beloved Haupt garden; however, the plans still retains some of the controversial features such as the glass entries to the galleries below that calls for the corners of the garden to be elevated. Another major change to the proposal is that the design will no longer include a sloping entrance to the Castle building.
While the revision certainly incorporates new solutions to some of the previous concerns that have been expressed, there is still a long road ahead for both BIG and the Smithsonian in order to get everyone on board with the project. Elizabeth Meyer, one of the commissioners at CFA, was particularly dismissive remarking "this is a redesign. It has nothing to do with preservation and it's not a good design."
“I got the impression that BIG finds itself between conflicting interests which remain to be reconciled. I thought the presentation, based on the parameters that BIG described, provided for a very elegant solution" commented Pascal D. Pittman, AIA, Director of Quality Assurance at the engineering firm Setty & Associates. Members of the architectural community have submitted opinions as well that have tended to be more favorable of the design changes.
In the end, the Commission, one of two federal agencies charged with approving the plan, has decided the scheme still needs some work and decided to take no action.
4 Comments
where is the revised master plan? these are all renders///
I like the curvature of the exposed wooden structure.
so they didn’t change anything, just made it look more “conservative” with landscaping.... but the Trees undercut the entire point, which is increased visibility. Just going in circles here. Another symptom of a decaying design media, these orgs should know who the better architects are: Holl, Ban, Berke, and down the list would do better.
Between this and the Obama Library, it's a wonder any major works of civic architecture are built these days.
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.