This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/24/arts/design/guggenheim-helsinki-unveils-design.html

The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Guggenheim Helsinki Unveils Design Guggenheim Helsinki Unveils Design
(about 1 hour later)
The Guggenheim has become something of a brand over the years, with satellite locations in Venice and Bilbao, Spain, and one planned in Abu Dhabi. Now this museum’s proposed branch in Helsinki has taken a step closer to reality, with the selection of a design that features charred timber and glass punctuated by a lighthouselike tower overlooking South Harbor. The Guggenheim has become something of a brand over the years, with satellite locations in Venice and Bilbao, Spain, and one planned in Abu Dhabi. Now this museum’s proposed branch in Helsinki, Finland has taken a step closer to reality, with the selection of a design that features charred timber and glass punctuated by a lighthouselike tower overlooking South Harbor.
It is still uncertain whether the design, by the relatively young husband-and-wife firm Moreau Kusunoki Architectes, founded four years ago in Paris, will be accepted by its surrounding city, which has been bitterly divided over the project, largely because of concerns over its price of about $147 million.It is still uncertain whether the design, by the relatively young husband-and-wife firm Moreau Kusunoki Architectes, founded four years ago in Paris, will be accepted by its surrounding city, which has been bitterly divided over the project, largely because of concerns over its price of about $147 million.
The winning design, made public at the Palace Hotel in Helsinki on Tuesday, was chosen from 1,715 anonymous submissions in a yearlong competition that the jury’s chairman said had actually been improved by the controversy. The winning design, titled “Lighthouse” and announced at the Palace Hotel in Helsinki on Tuesday, was chosen from 1,715 anonymous submissions in a yearlong competition that the jury’s chairman said had actually been improved by the controversy.
“Architecture should always be incubated within debate,” said the chairman, Mark Wigley, a professor and dean emeritus of the Graduate School of Architecture, Planning and Preservation at Columbia University. “Public money especially should never be taken for granted.”“Architecture should always be incubated within debate,” said the chairman, Mark Wigley, a professor and dean emeritus of the Graduate School of Architecture, Planning and Preservation at Columbia University. “Public money especially should never be taken for granted.”
The design features a series of connected pavilions and plazas organized around an interior street. The tower is connected to the nearby Observatory Park by a pedestrian footbridge and served by a harbor promenade.The design features a series of connected pavilions and plazas organized around an interior street. The tower is connected to the nearby Observatory Park by a pedestrian footbridge and served by a harbor promenade.
“It kind of undoes the monumentality of most museums,” Mr. Wigley said, adding that the main concern of the 11-member jury “was to find a design that was open to an evolution — that wasn’t frozen in its own beauty — because for sure this project will change.”“It kind of undoes the monumentality of most museums,” Mr. Wigley said, adding that the main concern of the 11-member jury “was to find a design that was open to an evolution — that wasn’t frozen in its own beauty — because for sure this project will change.”
The architects said they had tried to integrate the design of the building into the existing landscape of forest and sea and to use indigenous materials.The architects said they had tried to integrate the design of the building into the existing landscape of forest and sea and to use indigenous materials.
“Our approach was to try to make a building that is closely linked with the city, with the way people use it,” said Nicolas Moreau, who founded the firm with Hiroko Kusunoki, his wife.“Our approach was to try to make a building that is closely linked with the city, with the way people use it,” said Nicolas Moreau, who founded the firm with Hiroko Kusunoki, his wife.
Public support for the project has been modest. Public support for the project has been modest and some critics claimed that the winning design would also add another controversy because of the height of the main tower and its dark coloring.
“The slogan for our city is ‘Daughter of the Baltic’ or ‘The White City of the North,’ ” said Eric Adlercreutz, a Helsinki architect whose firm did not participate in the competition. “This winning entry has black wood as its major material. What they build in the South Harbor should not disturb our main landmarks of the Lutheran church and the Russian church.”
Newspaper polls in 2011 showed that most residents opposed the project, and local artists objected to the idea that the new Guggenheim would absorb the existing Helsinki City Art Museum. For the most part, economics have played a greater role than aesthetics in the discussion.Newspaper polls in 2011 showed that most residents opposed the project, and local artists objected to the idea that the new Guggenheim would absorb the existing Helsinki City Art Museum. For the most part, economics have played a greater role than aesthetics in the discussion.
The mayor of Helsinki and pro-business advocates have supported the new museum as an engine of economic development. A Helsinki-funded report by the Boston Consulting Group estimated that the museum could generate $56 million a year and create nearly 500 jobs in and around the institution — as well as 800 construction jobs.The mayor of Helsinki and pro-business advocates have supported the new museum as an engine of economic development. A Helsinki-funded report by the Boston Consulting Group estimated that the museum could generate $56 million a year and create nearly 500 jobs in and around the institution — as well as 800 construction jobs.
But opponents have questioned whether too much of the museum’s cost — initially projected at $177 million and later reduced — will be borne by the public. (The Bilbao construction cost $98 million.)But opponents have questioned whether too much of the museum’s cost — initially projected at $177 million and later reduced — will be borne by the public. (The Bilbao construction cost $98 million.)
“My basic feeling is that it will be well received,” said Richard Armstrong, the Guggenheim’s director, in a telephone interview from Helsinki, which he said could enjoy economic benefits like increased investment and tourism, akin to what happened in Bilbao.“My basic feeling is that it will be well received,” said Richard Armstrong, the Guggenheim’s director, in a telephone interview from Helsinki, which he said could enjoy economic benefits like increased investment and tourism, akin to what happened in Bilbao.
“The so-called cost amortizes out very quickly in terms of net tax increase, not to mention the intangibles, which are frequently change of perception of the venue and willingness on the part of other investors to look at a site,” Mr. Armstrong said. “We’re not saying the Bilbao effect will be totally replicated; we’re saying that’s our history — the payback is really quite rapid.”“The so-called cost amortizes out very quickly in terms of net tax increase, not to mention the intangibles, which are frequently change of perception of the venue and willingness on the part of other investors to look at a site,” Mr. Armstrong said. “We’re not saying the Bilbao effect will be totally replicated; we’re saying that’s our history — the payback is really quite rapid.”
The project has been controversial since it was announced in 2011. Critics initially questioned the terms of the development deal, under which the Guggenheim would make most of the decisions but Helsinki would shoulder the costs.The project has been controversial since it was announced in 2011. Critics initially questioned the terms of the development deal, under which the Guggenheim would make most of the decisions but Helsinki would shoulder the costs.
The next year, in a narrow vote, a city board rejected the project because of financial concerns, particularly a $30 million licensing fee for use of the Guggenheim name.The next year, in a narrow vote, a city board rejected the project because of financial concerns, particularly a $30 million licensing fee for use of the Guggenheim name.
In 2013, the Guggenheim revised its proposal in response to some of the criticism, agreeing not to charge the licensing fee but to instead help local supporters solicit private donations through a newly formed foundation. The Guggenheim also increased estimates of annual admission revenues and reduced by half the expected operation fees, to almost $1.4 million a year. The city board has since agreed to reconsider and will review the project again now that the final design has been selected. But the foundation has collected about $11 million, according to Osku Pajamaki, vice chairman of the city’s executive board, which will decide whether to proceed with the project, and several political parties are pressing for more private investment. In 2013, the Guggenheim revised its proposal in response to some of the criticism, agreeing not to charge the licensing fee but to instead help local supporters solicit private donations through a newly formed foundation. The Guggenheim also increased estimates of annual admission revenues and reduced by half the expected operation fees, to almost $1.4 million a year. The city board has since agreed to reconsider and will review the project again now that the final design has been selected. So far a local Helsinki fundraising foundation has collected only about $11 million, according to Osku Pajamaki, vice chairman of the city’s executive board, which will decide whether to proceed with the project, and several political parties are pressing for more private investment.
“What people hoped to see with the final designs was real ‘wow’ architecture,” said Mr. Pajamaki, speaking before the announcement about the finalists’ proposals. “But that did not happen. They did their best job, but it’s not the fashion to create ‘wow’ architecture anymore, like Frank Gehry’s design for the Guggenheim in Bilbao.”“What people hoped to see with the final designs was real ‘wow’ architecture,” said Mr. Pajamaki, speaking before the announcement about the finalists’ proposals. “But that did not happen. They did their best job, but it’s not the fashion to create ‘wow’ architecture anymore, like Frank Gehry’s design for the Guggenheim in Bilbao.”
Mr. Pajamaki added later that it appeared that the winning design would dominate the harbor despite pledges to fit it into the environment of Helsinki’s neo-classical architecture facing the harbor.
“The symbol of the lighthouse is arrogant in the middle of the historical center,” he said. “It’s like you would put a Guggenheim museum next to Notre Dame in Paris. People are approaching from the sea and the first thing that they will see is that the citizens of Helsinki bought their identity from the Guggenheim.’’
Finns are particularly sensitive to economics these days, given government budget cuts for education and day care that prompted street demonstrations this month. As part of the city’s deliberations over the museum, Helsinki has already commissioned another cost study of the project, by Oxford Research.Finns are particularly sensitive to economics these days, given government budget cuts for education and day care that prompted street demonstrations this month. As part of the city’s deliberations over the museum, Helsinki has already commissioned another cost study of the project, by Oxford Research.
The other five finalists were AGPS Architecture, Asif Khan, Fake Industries Architectural Agonism, Haas Cook Zemmrich Studio2050, and SMAR Architects.The other five finalists were AGPS Architecture, Asif Khan, Fake Industries Architectural Agonism, Haas Cook Zemmrich Studio2050, and SMAR Architects.
As the winner, Moreau Kusunoki will receive a cash award of about $113,000. Submission materials from all 1,715 entrants are available on the competition’s website, which has over four million page views.As the winner, Moreau Kusunoki will receive a cash award of about $113,000. Submission materials from all 1,715 entrants are available on the competition’s website, which has over four million page views.
“We wanted to use the competition as a platform to share ideas about where architecture is today and what architects are thinking about museum design,” said Ari Wiseman, the Guggenheim’s deputy director.“We wanted to use the competition as a platform to share ideas about where architecture is today and what architects are thinking about museum design,” said Ari Wiseman, the Guggenheim’s deputy director.
In observance of European Union and Finnish procurement rules, all competition submissions were kept anonymous during the process.In observance of European Union and Finnish procurement rules, all competition submissions were kept anonymous during the process.
Ms. Kusunoki, who earned her degree from the Shibaura Institute of Technology in Tokyo, began her career in the studio of Shigeru Ban. Mr. Moreau, who trained at the École Nationale Supérieure d’Architecture de Paris-Belleville, worked in the studios of Sanaa and Kengo Kuma.Ms. Kusunoki, who earned her degree from the Shibaura Institute of Technology in Tokyo, began her career in the studio of Shigeru Ban. Mr. Moreau, who trained at the École Nationale Supérieure d’Architecture de Paris-Belleville, worked in the studios of Sanaa and Kengo Kuma.
In 2008, Mr. Moreau and Ms. Kusunoki left Tokyo together so Mr. Moreau could open an office for Mr. Kuma in France. Their firm’s other projects include the Beauvais Theater in northern France; the House of Cultures and Memories in Cayenne, French Guiana; the Polytechnic School of Engineering in Bourget-du-Lac in southeastern France; and the plaza for the Paris District Court (designed by Renzo Piano) in the Porte de Clichy section of Paris.In 2008, Mr. Moreau and Ms. Kusunoki left Tokyo together so Mr. Moreau could open an office for Mr. Kuma in France. Their firm’s other projects include the Beauvais Theater in northern France; the House of Cultures and Memories in Cayenne, French Guiana; the Polytechnic School of Engineering in Bourget-du-Lac in southeastern France; and the plaza for the Paris District Court (designed by Renzo Piano) in the Porte de Clichy section of Paris.
The architects said they were not concerned about potential continuing opposition. “We were in the process of competition, which just ended,” Mr. Moreau said. “Now it’s time to show the project, to explain it.”The architects said they were not concerned about potential continuing opposition. “We were in the process of competition, which just ended,” Mr. Moreau said. “Now it’s time to show the project, to explain it.”