Does this work?

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/arts/culture/la-et-cm-old-lacma-20130721,0,6057989.story
Hello Everyone:

Wilshire Entrance to the Los Angeles County Museum of Art
arcthemagazine.com

Today I'd like to come back to a topic I've previously talked about, the proposed redesign of the Los Angeles County Museum of Art (http://www.lacma.org).  Specifically, an article in the Sunday edition of the Los Angeles Times by architecture critic Christopher Hawthorne, "For LACMA's 'old' buildings, no time like the present," provided inspiration for today's post and a field visit to the museum.  Mr. Hawthorne asks the reader to reconsider the 'old' buildings, slated for demolition to make way for the proposed plan by architect Peter Zumthor.  What Mr. Hawthorne tries to discover is who the new building fit on the site.

Los Angeles Times Central Courtyard
golosangeles.com

Proposed courtyard of new LACMA
archdaily.com

I spent part of a warm July afternoon sitting in the Los Angeles Times Central Courtyard observing how the space is used.  What I was looking to find out if the proposed plan would indeed open the space up more to Wilshire Boulevard on the south side of the campus and be more inviting to pedestrian traffic.  Would people want to come into the museum or, at the very least walk through the facility.  Here are some of my observations:  the courtyard space hasn't really changed much over the twenty-ish years it's been in place.  It's been spruced up over time and the really good coffee cart that used to be in front of the Art of the Americas Building (Anderson Building) has either been moved or taken away.  The courtyard is not really closed off to the north or south sides of the campus.  The gateways provide a transition space between the busy street and green spaces to the main campus.  My only critic is that perhaps the museum should install some sort of interactive kiosks along the walls or on the column inside of the courtyard for patrons to learn about the exhibits or buy tickets.  I'm not one hundred percent sure why this space has to be eliminated.  As I was sitting there, making notes, I noticed that the tables and chairs in the courtyard were rarely used by patrons and employees.  The courtyard had the same feel as train or airport terminal, people just moving along, going to where they need to get to.  Maybe this is a good enough reason to eliminate it in favor of Mr. Zumthor's more open approach that addresses all sides of the campus.  I'm curious, could this space be used for other cultural activities like outdoor movies, theatrical presentations, or concerts?  When you look at the two spaces together, what you see in the proposed plan is definitely a more open space that has a Zen garden-esque feel to it.

Los Angeles County Museum of Art map
lacma.org

However, Mr. Hawthorne asks us to reconsider the 'old' buildings.  Mr. Hawthorne states, for the record, that he was an early supporter of the new campus design.  What did our architecture critic discover?  Mr. Hawthorne discovered that the buildings slated for demolition, the William Pereria designed Ahmanson Building, Hammer Building, Bing Building, and the much-hated Art of the Americas Building by Hardy Holzman Pfeiffer Associates, work better together than separately.  In fact, Mr. Hawthorne gained a new appreciation for the Art of the Americas Building, calling "...a piece of architecture with more verve-better sense of humor-than I'd realized."  The William Pereria plan for LACMA consisted of three separate, mostly windowless buildings clad in split-face marble tile, set back from Wilshire Boulevard, and lifted above a series of reflecting pools.  The pools have been paved over and converted into the existing central courtyard.

Proposed plan by Peter Zumthor
designboom.com

In a previous blog post ("The Future of a Los Angeles Icon," June 18, 2013), I wrote that when it came to large-scale civic buildings, Los Angeles has historically fallen back on period-style academic architecture tropes. The proposed design seems to takes its cue from post-modernism, referencing the tar pits on the site.  When you look at the plan from above, what you see is this amoebic looking shape that appears to be oozing out of the main pit, which faces Wilshire Boulevard.  The new buildings, described as "the black flower," would be raised up on legs and clad in floor to ceiling glass.  From certain angles, the new buildings will appear transparent, open at ground level.  Mr. Hawthorne finds this proposal potentially quite thrilling in terms of bold civic architecture.  I tend to look at it from a more nuts and bolts approach, will there be something of interest for the people to come?

LACMA from Wilshire Boulevard, east
latourist.com

This ambitious plan still has a long way to go before the first corner stone can be laid.  Aside from the extremely entrenched bureaucracy of Los Angeles City and County government, the design still has to undergo many more revisions.  Of course, there is the whole "who's going to pay for this" issue.  It would be exciting to see what finally comes out of all of this.  Mr. Hawthorne's observations about the potentially thrilling and bold civic architecture seem a bit giddy.  While I agree with his observation that Los Angeles civic buildings have far too long relied on historicism and there isn't enough innovation, however, I don't think that civic architecture should be about coming up with the latest design bells and whistles.  It should be about working with the site and the other buildings around it.  That said, there nothing wrong with a civic building standing out from the crowd.  Just not like a sore thumb

http://www.facebook.com/lenorelowen
http://www.twitter.com/glamtroy