Mark Friday, June 06, 2008

Architecture

Raleigh Contemporary Art Museum (CAM) Round 4

We brought you the first look at the original Pugh+Scarpa/Clearscapes designs for Raleigh’s anticipated Contemporary Art Museum (CAM). Last night, a new set of plans was revealed to the public—at least the fourth different scheme we’ve seen in the past few years.

click the image for slideshow

The residential element of the project is gone, and the building is a renovation of the current space, with the addition of a porch and lobby area.  The existing parking lot will become a garden and open space for public and event use.  The interior retains the existing building and its large, original steel trusses.  The current building has three different levels and, as seen in the renderings, by cutting a large piece of the top floor out, the design connects all three levels, creating a more dynamic space for art and gathering.

This should be a good addition to the Warehouse District, which is becoming increasingly saturated with arts and culture.  The first Pugh+Scarpa design would demolish the existing building—another step towards a loss of history and industrial vibe for the neighborhood. In whatever form, CAM has the potential to increase the number of events, foot traffic, and business for this area. When asked if the residential component was still in the long-term plans for CAM, Louis Cherry mentioned that the museum would either seek to develop the parking lot adjacent to the existing building, or seek another site altogether in attempt to realize a project which would align more with the spirit of the previous design that we’ve seen.

Read More Architecture

Filed Under:

  • Jim06/06 03:46 PM

    boo, hiss.

  • RaleighRob06/06 03:50 PM

    Sad to see the residential component removed.  That could have been very helpful for the Warehouse District to get more of.
    But otherwise, it looks like an OK design.

  • Rusty06/06 05:58 PM

    Those renderings leave something to be desired… but that covered outdoor space could quite possibly make up for it (if it’s actually used.)

    I second the “Sad to see the residential component removed.“ Not that Raleigh needs more condos necessarily, but something semi-affordable on that side of town could be quite nice.

  • David06/06 06:44 PM

    Oh good they got rid of anything that could be mistaken for interesting.  The original renderings were awesome because they brought something outlandish and different to the copy+paste buildings dotting that area.  Now it looks like a public library.. wait, no, Cameron Library is way cooler.

  • Betsy06/06 08:38 PM

    The huge planter barricading the entry area, along with the reflective glass windows baldly facing the sidewalk, are two of the worst practices of mid-70’s anti-urbanism in site design.  They betray a misunderstanding of what an urban setting should be. 

    Cheers for saving and rehabbing the existing warehouse buildings.

    I would just ask for a more sophisticated approach to streetscape design in that entry plaza, to match the urbane and contemporary art that will no doubt fill the museum’s interior.

  • the truth06/06 08:49 PM

    these architects need a typography lesson.

  • Rusty06/06 10:30 PM

    MOST architects need a typography lesson smile

  • Meredith06/06 11:07 PM

    “to match the urbane and contemporary art that will no doubt fill the museum’s interior.“

    Well, according to those interior sketches, the space is filled with Jeff Koons, a Rothko and some other AbEx pieces that look pretty dated themselves.

  • Raborn McNamara06/07 11:55 AM

    The scale back in CAM’s scope, I think, was due to the pulling out of developer, Grubb Properties.  The housing and lending climate change revealed that the project was no longer financially viable. (The big egg-shaped object in the former renderings was probably never viable from the budget set by the client anyway). 

    Another example of that is the proposed Reynolds tower on the corner of Hillsborough and Dawson Streets where a big gaping hole in the ground now resides.  That building isn’t going up anytime soon b/c the banks decreased the percentage they were willing to lend on the project’s cost. 

    Regardless, CAM is arguably an underfinanced agency (due just as much to their own bungling as to a lack of support of public art in the area) who will be challenged to even pull this modest scope off…

  • DPK06/07 01:42 PM

    I have mixed feels.  One, bravo on attempting to save an aspect of the warehouse district.  Two, the design kind of doesn’t draw me into the space at all.  It just feels so dated.  That and a lack of a residential component.  That is what made this project originally so interesting.  Find a new developer to partner with if that’s the problem.

  • Jedidiah06/07 02:30 PM

    What does this have to do with typography?  Please explain ‘the truth’

  • Raborn McNamara06/07 02:39 PM

    Other developers were sought…the market is just soft enough now….

    Other than projects already underconstruction, have you heard or seen movement on other downtown residential projects?  No body is sticking their neck out when the odds are so high for a loss….

  • Christopher Triplett06/08 12:57 PM

    Bus Station?

    The interior options are limited, so removing a portion of the upper floor is probably the best option for an update and a space unification.

    The massive awning is the most overused architectural element I can think of.

    If it looks like this when complete, people aren’t going in.  If there is too little funding to take this all the way, then the project needs to wait.


    -CJT

    http://ginkotron.com

  • joshua06/08 01:10 PM

    i can help with the type!
    architecturally speaking, i’d prefer the hive. like that particular design or not, it was intriguing given the warehouse context.

  • DPK06/08 01:50 PM

    Unless they can come up with something a bit more “unique” then I suggest they wait longer on this project.  There’s so much potential here and what was the residential component.

    They’ve sat on this project for so long already, another year wouldn’t hurt.  In a sense they kind of designed themselves into a hole.

  • CVB06/08 11:56 PM

    That’s not an awning, it’s a security barricade.

    And the rest of the design - well, I guess if funding for the operations of the museum falls apart or attendance flags, the building is well suited to house a Kwik-E-Mart.

  • CVB06/08 11:59 PM

    Oh, and nice placement of the trashcan as an obstruction to pedestrian traffic. Pedestrian traffic calming? (Yes, I know it’s just a trash can and can easily be moved, but the fact that the architects were insensitive to this in the rendition may be a sign of bigger issues.)

  • Dan R06/09 01:19 PM

    It looks like Exploris. I liked the cracked sidewalk.

  • Robb L.06/10 01:23 AM

    I might be crazy but I think I am 100% more likely to go to this CAM than the one we currently have.  Sure the beehive was cool, but the funding isn’t there.  I think its good that they have decided to do something that they might can pull off.  Who knows, maybe this will lead to a coffee shop, some loft condos, a second hand store, a bar, etc etc etc.  I think Raleigh needs to think less about design if such process always leads to delay.  Don’t get me wrong, if we could afford to clone Frak Lloyd Wright and have him design a space that would certainly draw people, but I am hopeful that just having a space to exhibit interesting art will bring people to the space.  Here’s to hoping that this project actually happens and that the warehouse district gets a boost from it.

  • Jedidiah06/10 02:50 PM

    “Who knows, maybe this will lead to a coffee shop, some loft condos, a second hand store, a bar, etc etc etc….Here’s to hoping that this project actually happens and that the warehouse district gets a boost from it.“

    Here, Here, Robb!

  • Christopher Triplett06/10 02:55 PM

    Word!  Totally agree with you both.

  • Arthur06/14 11:25 AM

    Why would anyone want to live in the middle of a club/ resturant area? Only young single people? But can they afford a 300sq foot $550,000 condo?

  • Raborn McNamara06/14 11:38 AM

    The same reason someone might live a block off of Columbus Circle in NYC or along Michigan Ave. in Chicago…..some people are actually exhilarated by the 24/7 qualities, or the mixed layers of business, retail and recreational elements of a working city….we’ve got plenty of choices for a quiet, listen-to-the-crickets-on-your-one-acre plot-in-the-burbs….let’s provide a RANGE of environments to choose from.

    Also, I’m not sure if we’re REALLY at a point where square footage costs are in excess of $1800/sf (the math if you take Arthur’s figures, above).....probably closer to $300-400 a square foot, however….and we still have yet to offer real choices for a diversity of incomes!

  • Raborn McNamara06/14 11:40 AM

    I fogot:  and we need to offer real choices for families!

  • Raborn McNamara06/20 04:27 PM

    an historically contextual look over at RDUWTF:

    http://rduwtf.com/blog1/?p=118

Welcome to New Raleigh. We welcome your participation in the ongoing discussion. Before posting we ask that you read our Comment Policy and we invite you to register with our site. If you want to keep up with the news on our blog, subscribe to the RSS feed or get emailed every time we post.




Remember my information for next time I comment

Send me an email of follow-up comments?