Comments on: Kimbell Expansion May Go On West Lawn

By: Don Watenpaugh

Don Watenpaugh — Sun, 07 Dec 2008 05:04:13 +0000

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.

By: Jerry

Jerry — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 22:27:55 +0000

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.

By: Weekly Roundup | West And Clear

Weekly Roundup | West And Clear — Tue, 19 Aug 2008 02:12:57 +0000

[...] the commenters over at Fort Worthology are not the only ones worried about losing the “Frisbee Lawn” at the Kimbell. Our friends over at Pegausus News are a little worried, [...]

By: Jon

Jon — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 04:10:53 +0000

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.

By: Kevin

Kevin — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 14:25:39 +0000

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.

By: austin

austin — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 14:17:08 +0000

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.

By: Kevin

Kevin — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 13:48:30 +0000

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.

By: Will

Will — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 13:09:36 +0000

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?

By: Jon

Jon — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 05:12:22 +0000

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.

By: Jeremy

Jeremy — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 20:45:45 +0000

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.