The Citizens Brigade for Saving LACMA has announced a list of finalist entries for the group’s LACMA Not LackMA design competition that includes proposals from Barkow Leibinger, Coop Himmelb(l)au, Kaya Design, Paul Murdoch Architects, Reiser + Umemoto, and TheeAe (The Evolved Architectural Eclectic).
The Citizens’ Brigade to Save LACMA is unaffiliated with the registered not-for-profit advocacy group Save LACMA that is moving ahead with a proposed ballot initiative seeking greater transparency and public accountability for the Atelier Peter Zumthor-designed proposal that is currently under construction.
Describing the intention behind the competition, Citizens’ Bridgade to Save LACMA co-chair Joseph Giovannini explains in an announcement, “Our call for ideas was to open and make public what has been a closed process, and to present alternatives that inspire and show a way forward for a LACMA that is improved, fresh, and practical, not reduced and compromised.” Greg Goldin, fellow co-chair of the group, adds, “This collection of six designs represents the ideas the jury found most compelling,” adding, “We are not proposing any one of them be built as-is, but that the public, the museum board, and the County Board of Supervisors view them as inspirations to consider alternatives that truly capture people’s eyes, hearts, and minds, and showcase the collections in a practical and architecturally stimulating environment that embodies—rather than usurps—LACMA’s purpose and spirit.”
The winning entries were selected by a jury that included Aaron Betsky, director of Virginia Tech’s School of Architecture + Design, Winka Dubbledam, founder of Archi-Tectonics and Miller Professor/chair of architecture at University of Pennsylvania, J. Patrice Marandel, chief curator of European Art (retired) at LACMA, Los Angeles, William Pedersen, FAIA, founding design partner of Kohn Pedersen Fox Associates (KPF), Barton Phelps, FAIA, principal of Barton Phelps & Associates Architects and Planners, as well as Giovannini and Goldin.
The five proposals offer a variety of approaches for dealing with the existing complex of buildings, with a press release touting the winning entries describing the approaches as follows: “Three propose to build from the ground up, while three chose to work with the existing architectural fabric.”
Titles Tabula LACMA Barkow Leibinger’s proposal offers a “reconstitution” of the LACMA campus that creates “an unusual hybrid of old and new, as it maintains the scale and context of the original LACMA buildings by reconstructing them with modern, sustainable materials, then interconnecting them with a new plinth form punctured by courtyards,” according to the architects.
Coop Himmelb(l)au’s LACMA Wing proposes “an architecture that combines functionality with aspiration,” by unifying a landscape plinth and a series of multi-level “floating gallery wings,” according to the competition organizers. The proposal links “public circulation on ramps connecting the volumes would be encased by expressive amorphous forms whose openness to the outside refreshes the museum visiting experience.”
Kaya Design’s proposal, like all the others, replaces the existing 1986 building designed by Hardy Holzman Pfeiffer (HHP) in an effort “to preserve the best elements of the past while creating a more contemporary, multi-use alternative space.” Here, a new “elevated volume that respects the scale of the existing structures” takes shape instead, offering “solid walls on three sides for curatorial flexibility” while also presenting an all-glass, north-facing facade.
The Unified Campus by Paul Murdoch Architects was created to, according to the architects, “create greater institutional cohesion” by taking “a holistic approach to the entire LACMA campus and its relationship to the cultural institutions flanking it” through the addition of an open, porous horizontal slab building defined by its “abundant use of controlled natural light.”
Re(in)novating LACMA by Reiser + Umemto attempts to “create a coherent, retroactive masterplan that builds off the campus’ prior successes and seeks to engage and reinvigorate the full breadth of LACMA’s collection,” according to the architects. Using a “three-pronged approach” that tops the existing Ahmanson building with a giant cone, adds a bar-shaped elevated gallery building that “transects the campus from north to south” and replaces the 1986 building with a cluser of pod-shaped galleries.
Hong Kong-bsed TheeAe brings “a new cultural platform that connects people from different walks of life” to the site. The proposal offers “enclosed cultural spaces and an open, sculpted, outdoor landscape,” according to the project press release, and includes a five-level gallery space topped by a roof garden that is marked by an undulating facade along Wilshire Boulevard where the current HHP building creates an impenetrable wall.
15 Comments
Good lord - looked like none of them took this competition seriously, given there is no chance of any of these getting built. Most of them seemed to have phoned it in with interns, based on the depth of thought and quality of graphics. As maligned as Govan's project has been, this is not doing his detractors any favors.
OMG, these are fucking horrible. No wonder Zumthor's turd is getting built.
Zumthor's gonna be spec~tacular!
All very predictable and uninspiring, what a waste of time!!
Are Coop Himmelblau and Resier + Unemeto doing the renderings themselves? (I know Himmelblau is a lot older than that, maybe they kept the same intern for 2 decades)
That's totally 90's raytracing style renderings, or is that coming back?
They sure did not bother to pay professional renderers for whatever they submitted. With all due respet to the Save LACMA folks, they shot their own cause in the foot with this competition.
bummer man, I was thinking my Raytracing skills could come back...
Those did have a weirdly retro 90s vibe like you said. Can't tell if it was deliberate or they were in a rush to submit and quality didn't matter.
Agreee, Zumthor's is better.
It seems that it was a waste of time when all the finalist are not local architects and their statements on their design concepts tend to be generic and contradicting. It's sad that these designs doesn't capture the spirit of the city nor a sustainable model for the environment but more about self-branding which also includes Zumthor's design.
That Coop Himmelb(l)au one is insane, but their sketch thankfully explains it all:
terrible! Really terrible! Really nothing!
There's a book in this I'd be curious to see that might be representative—the players involved, their motives, their uneasy relationship with LA, the state of our culture, the state of design itself. These guys haven't represented the last well. Compromise and indecision may be the major themes.
Somewhere Michael Govan is laughing his head off.
It is better to see full version of each project details before concluding. It is concept design. So better to see what is the concept behind first.
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.