BERKELEY, CA.- The University of California, Berkeley’s plans for a new Berkeley Art Museum and Pacific Film Archive (BAM/PFA) are being modified due to lingering economic uncertainty, museum and university officials announced. Several intriguing concepts for a new BAM/PFA home are under review and a detailed plan is expected to be unveiled early next year, said Lawrence Rinder, the director of BAM/PFA, which is one of the largest university art museums in the United States in both size and attendance. Rinder emphasized that the university and BAM/PFA will remain committed to building a new facility on university property at the corner of Center and Oxford streets, on the edge of Berkeley’s burgeoning theater and arts district.
“Our goal has not changed,” said Rinder. “We will create a remarkable new home for the museum. I’m confident we will find an innovative and affordable solution that advances our mission to inspire the imagination through art and film.”
He pointed to continued commitment from lead donors and trustees of BAM/PFA, who are embracing the decision by campus and museum leadership to modify the building project.
“The creation of a new home for the Berkeley Art Museum and Pacific Film Archive in downtown Berkeley continues to be a crucial step in UC Berkeley’s longstanding commitment to the visual arts and to engagement with our broader community,” said UC Berkeley Chancellor Robert Birgeneau. “While the architectural plans will change, what will not change is our shared goal of building a dynamic, welcoming, and seismically safe new museum at the corner of Center and Oxford streets.”
“Art is educational for students and children of all ages. We’re determined to achieve our goal of a new museum in downtown Berkeley; I couldn’t be more excited about our future,” said Barclay Simpson, chair of the BAM/PFA Board of Trustees.
A structural analysis found that BAM/PFA’s current space on Bancroft Way was seismically inadequate and led to the 1999 relocation of the Pacific Film Archive Theater to temporary campus quarters that it still occupies. A partial seismic retrofitting of the museum in 2001 has enabled BAM/PFA to stay open during planning for a new facility.
Toyo Ito & Associates, a Japanese architecture firm known for its innovative concepts and structural approaches, was brought on in 2006 to design a new museum. Toyo Ito’s design for BAM/PFA met with critical support and enthusiasm in arts and architecture circles and efforts were underway to raise private funds to pay for most of the $200 million campaign.
However, university and museum leaders said that, in the current economic climate, modifying the project’s proposed scope and expense by moving on to a new design is the only way to ensure BAM/PFA remains on track for a new museum.
Given the current economic mess, this is a wise decision. But what I'd like to see is a floor plan of the inside of the museum. The Bay Area has several "new" or "newish" museums and they do a poor job of displaying the art. The new Jewish Contemporary Museum has an expensive, stainless steel gizmo attached on one side of the old building. It only seems to have two floors, one of which is used for a gift shop. The other floor is often used for exhibits which have sound as part of their presentation. That sound bleeds into the gift show and even the museum staff find it intrusive. Now, that doesn't seem like a very good use of expensive space although I'm sure that the architect is a happy camper. Furthermore, the fancy architecture can't be seen because it's crammed down a small alley with large buildings on either side. So, what's the point? As an artist, of course I'd prefer that there be more space for art. As an art historian, I wish that what art they have could be better displayed. The same goes for the current Berkeley Art Museum. Outside it looks like a huge concrete bunker. Inside - it looks like a huge concrete bunker. Traditional paintings are overwhelmed in this cold space; even works of contemporary painters like Howard Hodgkins or even Hans Hoffman don't show well when hung against a huge concrete wall. Our new De Young Museum still looks like a Stalinist prison from the outside and the inside foyer is three ceilings high. Where is the room for the art? Call me old fashioned but I think that the purpose of a museum is to display the art inside. Anybody else care to comment?
Lee Rosenbaum at Culture Girl weighed in on the decision
Will someone please buy Nicolai a good stiff drink?
http://www.artsjournal.com/culturegrrl/
As did Kenneth Baker.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/11/18/MN721AM4LA.DTL
Berkeley Art Musuem: http://bampfa.berkeley.edu/
E-mail Nancy Ewart at namastenancy@hotmail.com
Comments
How can the University pay for this museum expansion if they are raising student fees over 30% and laying off employees?
This is a horrible time to be spending millions on a new art museum.
DON'T build this wasteful project and use the money to pay down the student Fee increase.
Wasteful projects like this and the athletic department are part of the part of the UC budget.
I completely agree. The Regents spend millions for buildings and nothing for the students, more money for administration and little for the worker bees. With unemployment at 12% and rising, we need a new WPA but that's not forthcoming.
This project is paid for by donations to the project. These donations cannot be used to pay tuition.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!