Kimbell Expansion May Go On West Lawn
In this photo, green = lawn expansion site, blue = original expansion site.
I’ve heard rumors about this, and this is the first official confirmation: the S-T is reporting that Renzo Piano’s Kimbell expansion may not go on the parking lot next to the Kimbell and Modern after all, but instead may go on the lawn to the west of the Kimbell.
Kimbell Art Museum expansion may go on west lawn
BY GAILE ROBINSONFORT WORTH — The Kimbell Art Museum, whose officials last year announced plans to expand by adding a building across Arch Adams Street, may construct that space even closer — in its own front yard.
Kimbell officials acknowledged Monday that the museum and architect Renzo Piano are considering the lawn just west of the Louis Kahn-designed museum as a second possible site for the proposed expansion.
Piano, designer of Dallas’ Nasher Sculpture Center and other highly regarded museum buildings around the world, will prepare plans for both sites, Kimbell officials said. Kay Fortson, president of the Kimbell Art Foundation, said the museum hoped to reveal its choice of site and unveil design plans by the end of this year.
In a news release in 2007, the museum announced that the addition would be built across the street, on the southeast corner of Arch Adams and Darnell streets where its auditorium building is now.
Asked on Monday when the front lawn became available for Piano’s consideration, Fortson said, “I always assumed the entire property could be considered.”
I’m inclined to call this starchitect arrogance – personally, I think the lawn ought to be preserved. The way the Kimbell opens up across its courtyard and fountains into the lawn space is one of the many things I love about the design. I also value the lawn as a bit of greenspace as the CD densifies. Comes across to me as Piano exercising some of that starchitect ego. I’d like to see the design before making too much of it, but it still rubs me the wrong way. What do you think?
I agree. I don’t like the idea of building on the lawn. That’s one of the things that I love about the museum. It’s a great part of the design concept that would be lost if there was a building on the site. If Renzo wants to succeed in this project, he has to remember to respect the Kimbell and it’s design, not try to overtake the Kimbell . However, it will be interesting to see how he responds to the Kimbell Art Museum in his design. It should be interesting.
The lawn is part of the original architectural design. Architecture is not simply the structure, but the entire space. It would be a travesty to lose such a beautiful green space in the midst of all this development. It would be like building into Central Park in Manhattan. The lawn must be preserved. And we should get organized before this nonsense gains momentum. According to Renzo’s philosophy, why not demo the rock garden as well? When did the Dallas City Council get involved in this? LOL
Everyone I have talked to about this today agrees: Save the Lawn. Think of all the school kids who have gone to the Kimbell for a field trip, and picnicked on that lawn. Think of all the collective miles flown by frisbees on that lawn. It would be an absolute tragedy to lose this lawn.
I couldn’t agree more. We need to preserve all of the green spaces we have! This one is one of the more beautiful ones in the city and as it was previousy pointed out is part of Kahn’s original vision. Plus, I used to play touch football on this lawn as a kid! Seriously though, it should stay.
I dunno, sounds more like the foundation being stingy than “starchitect ego” to me. They’re in charge of the property, so if anything’s going to get changed around from the original plan, it’s going to be because they wanted it done, not because Piano just woke up and decided to ruthlessly compromise Kahn’s design and build a monument to himself. Besides, Piano is hardly someone deserving of the “starchitect” moniker – he’s actually a brilliant guy who does pretty subtle and elegant work, the fame in this case is simply well earned.
Back to the expansion, though, consider this: if the Kimbell loses all that parking east of the current building, they’re going to have to replace it, and the most logical design solution would be to put it underground – which is expensive. While it was the original plan (and I would bet the one Piano himself prefers), I can see why the foundation would be interested in a less expensive option given the current rising nature of construction costs. With that said, it would definitely be a shame to see that green space gone. With the urbanization of the neighborhoods around the cultural district, this spot has the potential to be a truly special urban retreat – something that won’t happen if a building gets built there. I hope the foundation considers that more important than their bottom line.
For sure…SAVE THE LAWN. I’d rather see a sign proclaiming it the “Pepsi Lawn” or “Frito Lay Greenspace” than have yet another building go up in the Cultural District. Something of beauty needs to remain in this district 30 years from now when all the gas well folks abandon the city and leave all the vacant retail space and the discount-priced glut of condos. I kid…sort of….but geesh, isn’t one of the nice things about the Kimbell is its current size and designation as one of America’s greatest small museums?
I’d take issue with the vacant retail space and glut of condos thing. This stuff isn’t going anywhere – in fact, there will be more of it as the changing world situation continues the long, slow death of the modern suburbs.
A greenspace such as this is vitally important in the continuing redevelopment of the district, though. It would be incredibly short-sighted of us to ruin the lawn while keeping a parking lot.
what currently exists in the blue section? i definitely prefer using it to the green space. Also, with a little planning that Arch Adams/Darnell intersection could be a great public plaza tying together the three buildings while also creating an inviting, dare i say pedestrian friendly, connection with the plaza being built equidistant from camp bowie at the other end of Arch Adams. Kevin I put you in charge. Make this happen.
Austin,
The blue section has a tiny little auditorium building and a parking lot.
I also think that the intersection there would make a great plaza. I doubt we’d be open enough at this point to shutting down the roads there to create it, though.
Actually, from what I know, that was the original plan. I seem to also recall finding some street vacations on the agenda for both Arch Adams and Darnell in front of the Kimbell. Dr. Potts seemed to indicate the idea was to create a “park block”, in essence, for the Kimbell, Modern, and Kimbell annex.
The real estate belongs to the city.
Fort Worth’s citizens should have a say in its use.
But we do not.
We used to own the Kimbell Art Collection and Foundation.
But now, we do not.
It all belongs to Kay Fortson, and she has, obviously, no problem whatsoever doing exactly as she pleases.
Let’s please organize to oppose expansion of the Kimbell onto itself: The Lawn is part of the museum, literally, as Kahn designed it. And that’s not even the most compelling reason to keep the green space!
If all who oppose this organize and present a well-considered argument, I think we have a good chance of reversing the decision and permanently protecting the Lawn. But we must act soon and strong: the bulldozers are coming.