The Icing on the Cake: Large-Scale Museum Extensions to Historic Buildings AR 597: Dissertation Kent School of Architecture University of Kent March 2015 IOANNIS MEXIS Supervisors: Dr. Manolo Guerci, Dr Timothy Brittain- Catlin. Word Count: 8789 ACKNOWLEGMENTS I would like to express my gratitude to Dr. Manolo Guerci and Dr. Timothy Brittain- Catlin for the valuable assistance in writing this essay. ABSTRACT This dissertation investigates how historic buildings are conserved and revitalized by extension projects. More specifically, it is about large scale contemporary museum extensions to historic compositions. The investigation of the topic is achieved through a series of case studies based on three different types of extension projects: “Juxtaposing free- standing extensions”, “Weaving extensions” and “Homogenous free-standing extensions”. Through the first category we will investigate: the Royal Ontario Museum by Daniel Libeskind (2007), MAXXI Museum by Zaha Hadid (2010) and Stedelijk Museum by Benthem Crouwel Architects (2012). All three of these extensions, are examples of bold interventions that contrasts both the historic building and their context and have become landmarks in the cities they are located in. In the second category, we will examine: the Neues Museum by David Chipperfield (2009) and Tate Modern by Herzog and de Meuron (2000). Both extensions are in direct relation with the existing building. The architects’ interventions are respectful towards the existing composites, giving the existing building a refreshed appearance. In the last category we will explore: the second extension project to Tate Modern by Herzog and de Meuron (2016) and the James Simon Gallery by David Chipperfield (2017). Both of these free standing extensions are cases of interventions that respect the existing building and their context but still manage to stand out of their context on a deferential manner. In the last part of this thesis, assumptions will be provided, according to the following questions, asked within this essay: what are the main themes that emerge in extension projects; what is the importance of historic buildings; finally, what are the reasons for their conservation and revitalization. 0.0. TABLE OF CONTECTS 1.0. INTRODUCTION………………………………………………………………………………….…………………………………………………………….……. 2. 2.0. JUXTAPOSITIONING FREE-STANDING EXTENSIONS…………………………………………………………………………….…….…………… 4. 2.1. ROYAL ONTARIO MUSEUM ………………………………………………………………………………………………................…….… 5. 2.2. MAXXI MUSEUM ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……..……….… 11. 2.3. STEDELIJK MUSEUM……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….….....……….. 15. 3.0. WEAVING EXTENSIONS……………..………………………………………………..…………………………………………………………….………… 19. 3.1. NEUES MUSEUM……………………………………………………………………………………………………..…………………....……….. 20. 3.2. TATE MODERN …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….…………. 24. 4.0. HOMOGENOUS FREE-STANDING EXTENSIONS……………..………………………………………………………………..…….……..……… 27. 4.1. TATE MODERN…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……….…. 28. 4.2. JAMES SIMON GALLERY……….……………………………………………...…………………………………….…….……….……………. 30. 5.0. MAIN THEMES THAT EMERGE ON EXTENSIONS…………………………………………………………………………………….……………. 33. 6.0. THE IMPORTANCE OF HISTORIC BUILDINGS AND THEIR CONSERVATION……………………………………….………..………… 35. 7.0. CONCLUSION……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….……………...………………. 38. 8.0. BIBLIOGRAPHY…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….….….……………………..… 40. 1 1.0. INTRODUCTION. “This recovered time comes back to life again, healed, as Debenedetti points out, redeemed from a malignant self- destructiveness. Clearly, this relation between the past and the present is a revision, a reconstruction of a dialogue of processes that are not only mental but also sensory. The memory lives again in virtue of a previous time.”1 Architects have been dealing with historic buildings since the 19th century, when the idea of restoration and preservation of such buildings emerged. After Carlo Scarpa’s first major breakthrough on restoration projects (with the connotation given to this term today), with a radical, for the time, extension to the Castelvecchio Museum in Verona; the past two decades, architects have redefined the architectural relationship between present and past. The reuse of historic buildings, especially as exhibition spaces has nowadays increased dramatically. As a result, historic values are preserved and there is a positive impact on the context itself as a result of this preservation. When it comes to reusing old buildings, apart from renovations, extension projects quite often take place as well. These historic buildings are of great value. Thus, designers must respect them, and should try not to overshadow them with their contemporary extension. The extension’s purpose should be to revitalize and enhance the existing building. When looking at large- scale extension projects, one can see a motif emerging: in many cases, these buildings house museums. 1 Marotta, Contemporary museums, 207. 2 Through research on museum renovations and extensions internationally, one can see many different approaches by architects. This intrigues the spectator to ask questions like: Why is conservation of historic heritage important? Why do architects undertake extension projects on historic buildings as a preservation technique? The Sharp Center for Design, in Toronto, by Alsop Architects2, was one of the extensions that increased my interest on this topic, because of the bold approach by the architects towards historic buildings (Figure 1). The aim of this essay is to identify techniques used by architects in such projects and to determine which of these Figure 1: Sharp Center for Design (2004), Toronto, techniques are justified. To arrive to a successful conclusion, a broad range of museum extension needs to be Canada, Alsop Architects in association with Robbie, Young+ Wright, Architects. investigated. These interventions will be categorized depending on their relation with the existing building as, “Juxtaposing free-standing extensions”, “weaving extensions” and “Homogenous free-standing extensions”. Through the analysis of these case studies, the following will be explained: the importance of historic buildings; the beneficial influence of these extensions (both to the existing building and to its context); and the reasons behind the wide use of extensions as a revitalization method. 2 Architectural Review, “RIBA Worldwide Awards 2004”, 36-37. 3 2.0. JUXTAPOSING FREE-STANDING EXTENSIONS. Free-standing extensions can usually be described as “parasites” which are attached to the existing building. In these types of projects the extension can wrap around the existing building, emerge from it, or just sit aside it. The extension can be clearly legible, due to the differences in materiality, form, scale and colour. The existing building becomes the generator of the extension, and despite their contrast there usually is a symbolic relationship between the two. In these cases, architects can be creative and design elements juxtaposing towards the existing building. The contrast between the two structures is celebrated, with the existing building usually benefiting from it. 3 In this chapter, we will investigate the extension strategies used in the Royal Ontario Museum (ROM) by Daniel Libeskind, the MAXXI Museum by Zaha Hadid and the Stedelijk Museum by Benthem Crouwel Architects. ROM, was chosen in order to explore Libeskind’s bold design, which despite being too dominant towards the existing building, benefits both the composition and the city. In this case study we can also see the development of the four extension projects that have taken place. MAXXI was selected for being one of the finest museums built in the 21st century. Despite its contrast with the existing building, we can see how its architect has symbolically adapted it, to its wider context. Stedelijk will be studied for it is a highly controversial extension, where the architect has managed to create a new landmark for Amsterdam by designing a building that seems to have no clear relation with its existing composition. 3 Bollack, Old buildings, New Forms, 65- 66. 4 2.1. Royal Ontario Museum. “The City of Toronto needs cultural monuments as most cities do, to create an aura of civic dignity and to act as a magnet for tourists.” 4 That was the concept behind the design of the Royal Ontario Museum’s (ROM) latest extension by Daniel Libeskind in 2007. ROM was designed by Darling and Pearson and built in 1914. Since then it has been renovated and extended four Figure 2: J.N.L. Durand’s museum plan, 1802. times. Each of these extensions, influenced by their era’s museum trends, have moulded the current museum’s form. ROM was initially designed by architectural firm Darling and Pearson, influenced by a French architectural theoretician J.N.L. Durand. Durand developed the “ideal” museum plan using the Louvre as a precedent (Figure 2). His plan was forming a square with small exhibition spaces on its perimeter that were connected by long corridors. Inside the square Figure 3: ROM plan by Darling and Pearson, 1909, with the 1914 section shaded. there were more rooms and corridors forming a Greek Cross with a dome on its centre.5 The first design for ROM utilized only half of Durand’s prototype plan. After the first part of the museum was built, in 1914, a T-shaped extension was designed by the architectural firm Chapman and Oxylen. It was aimed to double the museum’s size and relocate the main entrance, forming