Contemporary St. Louis -- an Urban Design Failure

A brief post by Tyler Green tells us that institutions are now using the form of the blog. For example: Contemporary - Pulitzer. I hesitate to suggest that they will be blogging -- there seems to me to be a dissonance between the personal informality of a blog and the institutional voice. So the most one can say is that someone at the institution is using the blog as a means of public "outreach." Which is fine. Go for it.

At any rate, I was reminded that one of the institutions -- the Contemporary Art Museum St. Louis -- has recently built a typically  ("cultural" institutions are among the most oblivious to urban design) terrible anti-urban building of which, believe it or not, it is incredibly proud. It's as if the museum is walking around with a dunce cap on its head and thinks it's fashionable:

Btw, I have indeed visited The Contemporary. Now if you like cold, sterile, pretentious interiors -- the phrase "the poetics of space" tolled in my head when I was inside -- this is the place for you and I pass no judgment. The interior is private space and people should be able to create any sort of environment they like, or dislike. But the streetscape is a commons. And the Museum offers a blank and thus rude gaze to it. I would like to suggest that the Museum is totally negligent and mis-guided in the design of its frontage -- this in a neighborhood in St. Louis which is supposed to be, wants to be, undergoing redevelopment into an urban neighborhood pleasant to walk.

•••

Yes. Let's all go down, hang-out and pitch pennies at that blank wall. No? Hel-lo!

•••

How can it be that so many visually-aware people with genuine public-spirited intentions can build in a manner so adverse to their own true goals? I know these art people; they are my friends: they are my people. And yet they build the dumbest stuff.

Comments

[Chip]

I don't know much about art or architecture, but I know what I like.

That is one butt-ugly building. Fugly even.

[Brian Miller]

From the photograph (a questionable source) at least it doesn't appear to be as massive and looming and lowering (even on the "good" elevation) as that temple of urban design and renewal, Disney Hall.

[David Sucher]

Oh I agree, Brian. It could be worse. But St. Louis is at a delicate stage in its downtown redevelopment. A new museum there is a terrific idea -- but not if the building is something which would fit in well in a warehouse district in the suburbs. Being rude and cold is not cool.

[John]

That image is actually a flattering one, because it doesn't show the dumpsters and loading dock that's just out of view to the right.

[clew]

They could host a lightly-moderated, ever-changing gallery of graffiti^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H demotic mural art.

[Mike Schuh]

The dumpsters and loading dock are actually not visible, unless we are receiving a delivery or having our garbage picked up, which would only have the gates open for a few minutes; an hour tops, depending on the delivery. Just wanted to clear that up. Also, I'm interested in hearing about any specific aspects of the building that make it so problematic. Or, if there are any possitive attributes worth noting, I would appreciate hearing about those too. Thanks.

[David Sucher]

Mike.
Thanks for stopping by.
You ask about "...specific aspects of the building that make it so problematic."
You don't see the problem?
The Museum presents a blank face to the pedestrian.
The building does not interact with sidewalk activity -- it is a fortress.
It does not support street life.
It is boring to walk beside it -- I have done so -- as well as creating feelings of insecurity.
It is a frontage appropriate for a secret police prison,

Can anyone else help me in explaining the problem?

[Tyler Green]

What you consider a problem (and I understand your points) some people might consider a space that creates a blissfully world-excluding temple in which art may be quietly considered.

[Mike Schuh]

Thanks, David.

[Mike Schuh]

and thank you, Tyler.

[David Sucher]

Tyler.
You seem to be creating an either/or situation which is not necessary.
I am somewhat astonished that you could even remotely defend the St. Louis Contempo as a piece of urban design.
Bear in mind please that I am not commenting on the interior of the museum.
An architect attuned to creating a pedestrian-friendly streetscape could have easily created a "blissfully world-excluding temple" and also a street front which gave delight to the pedestrian; it's elementary.
There is no contradiction and yet so many -- you, too, Tyler, judging by your comments -- suggest that it is an either/or situation: either a great street front or a great interior. That perspective discourages me.
Those blank walls could have been avoided.

[Tyler Green]

Actually I don't think I said that.

[David Sucher]

Sorry if I misinterpreted, Tyler.

[Michael Blowhard]

Man, that does look ugly. You're right too: why are so many "cultural centers" so anti-urban in their exteriors? You'd think that they'd make a point of adding a little visual interest (at a minimum) to their neighborhood.

FWIW, I took a tour of downtown St. Louis with a city planner a couple of years ago. He pointed out some stuff he was proud of and hopeful about. He also confided that he basically thought downtown St. Louis is a write-off -- that there's no way it'll ever come back. In his view, the interstates have carved up downtown into noncommunicating sectors. Soulard's cute and funky people will settle there for a while, but it's got nothing to do with any other neighborhood. Also, the money and prosperous people have not only fled to the surrounding towns and mini-cities (Clayton, etc), but they're used to it out there. They take the new Edge City arrangements for granted -- they're fine with it. They'll make occasional scoots downtown for an event or two, but they mostly don't care what happens to downtown, except from a p-r point of view.

[Lorin]

If you want to gripe about urban design problems in the downtown area why not spend your keypunches bitching about the vacant lots, payday loans, and pawn shops? This museum is not part of the problem with downtown. Maybe it is a little foreboding and it doesn't perhaps have the most engaging facade, but it is a private art museum that is only open twice a week. It is not a public
building and should not be judged as such. At least someone was willing to put up the cash to have a premier architect do a real building in Downtown St. Louis. This is the first building by Tadao Ando in the US and we should feel honored. Maybe you guys like sloppy crap architecture like the suburban housing projects that are popping up all around downtown.
Or better yet let's talk about the waterfront here in St.L. Is there any reason to go to the landing?
Or how about the "loft district," all I ever see down there are clubbers and yuppies and uh.. cluppies.
Instead of picking on one of the few buildings built in downtown in the last decade that was actually designed, why don't you lay into the real problem. There isn't anything worth doing in downtown St. Louis (besides maybe the City Museum, Everest Cafe , and The Contemporary.)

[David Sucher]

You are right about downtown St. Louis, Lorin, and the tragedy is that this building by Tadao doesn't help very much. It's just another piece of nothing.

[Lorin]

What the hell do you expect from a contemporary art museum? Should it have a jungle gym jutting out of the side of it? Maybe you would prefer if it was just another rip-off of some antiquated historical style. How many of you are familiar with Ando's previous works? How many of you have a bachground in architecture or urban design? By the way nobody but indigents are walking down the street in that neighborhood. If you don't think that this building stands out then you must be blind or undereducated. You guys sound like a bunch of social workers blaming the great for making the stupid look stupider.

[Kathleen Muro]

You seem to be knowledgeable about urban development failures. Can you suggest a few that I might research? Our downtown residents and small businesses are fighting a proposal by the city of El Paso (Texas) to level 130 acres of downtown, displace 1,500 very low income people and dozens of home-owned small businesses and turn it over to a REIT formed for the purpose of redeveloping the area. The city plans to use eminent domain-before the state can close the Kelo loophole.

Unlike downtowns in other communities, the "Segundo Barrio" is vibrant and lively, with a park, library, schools, and low crime rate. There are no vacant storefronts because the area is a popular shopping destination. It is also where El Pasoans supplied the various generals during the Mexican revolution, and where Mexican generals on the outs went to hide. Lot's of history.

The problem for the area is that it sits on the land in fromt of the US-Mexican border. Two international bridges cross the neighborhood, entering and exiting downtown Cd. Juarez. This makes the land very valuable--more valuable than its present use might indicate.

I have traveled all over the US and Europe, and our Segundo Barrio is more like what one might see in an old European city, or Buenos Aires actually. Except it is populated by very poor people and the stores cater to them.

[Lorin]

Dear Kathleen,

I have read up a little on this development proposal and the community's reaction to it. It is communities like Segundo Barrio that make this country worth anything. It disgusts me to see eminent domain being used for the private gain of wealthy developers. Municipal governments bow to these outsiders and completely ignore the people that they are supposed to represent. You will never win if you play their game by their rules. Instead you should show that even though your community is not wealthy, it is a community. Use the community as your tool, use your people as your force. Make them hear you, refuse their proposal, refuse to submit to their will. Have sit-ins and protest, call out to surrounding communities. Boycott, force their hand. I do not advocate violence of any type, be it a molotov cocktail or the vivisection of historic culturally vibrant neighborhood. I do advocate taking back our democracy by showing the government that it still depends on us and we still know it.

Another suggestion, you should make a counter proposal that relocates the development to a wealthy neighborhood.

I wish I was there to see what is happening first hand.

Good Luck
They can't have it if you won't give it to them.

Peace,

Lorin

[Tina]

This comment is a bit late, but I hate to see an egregious error stand uncorrected. Lorin, the Contemporary Art Museum in St. Louis is NOT designed by Tadao Ando. And if it were, it still wouldn't be the first building in the US by Ando. A private residence by Ando in Chicago precedes the Contemporary by several years. Next door, the Pulitzer Foundation for the Arts is Ando's first public building in the US, and is not affiliated with the Contemporary. Finally, the Contemporary is NOT LOCATED IN DOWNTOWN ST LOUIS. It's more like Midtown.