Frances Bula header image 2
← →

Art gallery under the gun to get new site and fast, says board

March 10th, 2010 · 59 Comments

The Vancouver Art Gallery’s efforts to move to a new site, with a landmark building double the size of where it is now, are going to be a fascinating show of its own in the next few months.

This is one of those epic stories that happen to cities only every so often, as one group or another launches a major effort to remake a neighbourhood, create a grand new institution or take the city in a new direction. Our neighbours to the south of us in Seattle have been doing quite a bit of cultural monument building in the last couple of decades — library, art gallery, theatre, music museum —  thanks to a lot of Microsoft money floating around.

But we really haven’t had a big debate over a cultural building since the new central library was built. The art gallery promises to generate that kind of heated discussion and more, as it lobbies for the land and, if that’s successful, runs a no-doubt international architectural competition to get a design for the new building.

Here’s my latest info on the gallery move, after a lengthy interview Monday with the heavy hitters there. And, just randomly, I found this story elsewhere about the mistake one architecture critic thinks the Seattle Art Museum made by agreeing to co-exist with an office tower in downtown Seattle — something that the city is pushing the local gallery to do on its 150 Dunsmuir site, rather than taking over the whole block for itself.

Categories: Uncategorized

←  Older Comments
 →
  • Urbanismo

    or . . . http://www.vieux.montreal.qc.ca/tour/etape16/eng/16fena.htm

  • mike0234

    There may be too many plazas along Georgia, but really the problem is that there are too many unbounded plazas along Georgia setback from larger-than-human-scaled buildings, plazas that give no reason for the passerby to shortcut through. Of the plazas along Georgia east of Burrard, only the north lawn of the art gallery and the space just north of the library are at all enclosed by buildings.

    Especially at the post office and the QE theatre, there is no reason to casually walk through the plaza in front. But there is also no reason to enter the library plaza except to go to the library. And this space has other problems: it is in shadow nearly all day, and though it is partially enclosed it lacks buildings across the street to face onto it.

    Incidentally, the plaza in front of the QE theatre covers 1/3 of the block.

    Georgia is an ode to modernism on a monumental scale through a dead zone some like to call our cultural precinct. For those who value consistency, another block-sized monument with a windswept plaza is a fitting last piece in this puzzle. There is no space for both a Washington Square and an art gallery. And I’m having trouble picturing Place d’Armes across from the Sandman Inn.

    My desire is for a more human scale, but it is a compromise that tries to fit into the theme on Georgia. It includes a mixture of uses on the site, a small plaza enclosed by cafes and restaurants in the mid-day sun (Georgia/Cambie), maybe the entrance to the new gallery itself, and a shortcut through the block that gives people no reason at all to be there. It includes the monument, but one that is adapted to the space around it.

  • MB

    The Larwill block has every advantage for a fine-grained exciting urban plaza coupled with an art museum.

    The north side of Georgia is sunnier than the south. An art museum / gallery will generate more daily foot traffic than the QE Theatre, which is tied primarily to evening performance schedules, especially if the space is animated by restaurants and outdoor performances. And a plaza enclosed on three sides with the above amenities will cut the wind.

    Moreover, I think Georgia Street is ripe for a revamp given how badly it’s been treated so far. Remember, this was supposed to be our Grand Ceremonial Way. The reality is that it became little more than a traffic conduit with poorly executed open spaces and architecture (with the exception of the Rattenbury and the Bay) at its edges.

  • Urbanismo

    http://members.shaw.ca/urbanismo/2010.pdf

  • Bill Lee

    Somewhat hidden on the [site map] vanartgallery.bc.ca/sitemap.html

    A recent selection
    http://www.vanartgallery.bc.ca/press_releases/news_about_annual.html
    But the latest posted is 2008-2009
    http://www.vanartgallery.bc.ca/pdfs/Annual_Report_2008_2009.pdf

    96 pages (yawn) about one quarter illustrated (Herzog alert on fourth page and 56th ) and lots and lots of ‘names’
    Donors (assumed cash) down to the $500 level. Donors of art (always controversial) start on page 77. Accounts start on page 79

    @evilfred // Mar 10, 2010 at 11:41 am
    Fiona Morrow story from May 19 2009 Globe and Mail
    EvilFred quotes “and membership has grown from 9,000 in 2001, to 50,000 this
    year – with an annual operating budget of just $13.3-million.”

    But 2008-2009 Memberships $816000 / 50,000 members = $16 Oh?
    Is there a discrepency? 816000 / $70 = 11,600 individual members

    but note Note 17 (always check the notes)
    ” [Note] 17. PRIOR YEAR RESTATEMENT:
    In prior periods, the Association recognized revenues from annual memberships when the memberships were sold. During the current year, the Association changed its accounting policy to more appropriately recognize the revenue from annual memberships over the life of the memberships. The change in accounting treatment has been applied by management on a retroactive basis with the impact of decreasing 2009 opening net assets by $370,205 (2008 – $389,735), decreasing memberships revenue by $104,852 (eighteen months ended June 30, 2008 – increasing memberships revenue by $19,530) and increasing deferred memberships revenue by $475,057 (2008 – $370,205). The prior year comparative figures have accordingly been restated.”

  • Bill Lee

    Speaking of their annual report and the tiny amount that comes in via admission tickets, the recent Toronto’s ROM (Royal Ont. Museum, an applied arts and crafts museum with some zoology specimens) ticket rises for their “Diamond” addition provoked
    http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/02/03/are-admission-prices-too-expensive/

    Are admission prices too expensive?
    Museum and gallery officials struggle with their costs and what people can afford to pay
    by Anne Kingston on Wednesday, February 3, 2010 10:10am – 5 Comments

    When Edmonton’s Art Gallery of Alberta, or the AGA, opens its glass doors this weekend, lineups are expected to mimic the steel ribbons furling around the building’s exterior. Ten thousand free-entry tickets for the first two days have been snapped up by locals keen to check out the $88-million reno. The response echoes the excitement surrounding Frank Gehry’s revamped Art Gallery of Ontario (AGO), which drew 68,000 on its free first weekend in November 2008, and continues to attract 1,500 to 2,000 to its no-charge Wednesday evenings.

    The spectre of crowds clamouring for gratis access to gawk at Goya and Degas reflects a modern Catch-22 with more twists and turns than the AGA’s bold new facade: on one hand, there’s a decided hunger for the public gallery experience, reflected in strong emerging 2009 attendance numbers. As Kelvin Browne, the vice-president of marketing and major exhibitions at the Royal Ontario Museum (ROM), puts it: “In a virtual age, the power of real things increases.” Yet there’s also resistance (and inability) to pay the admission these institutions must charge to cover budget cutbacks and still create the “Wow!” spaces and quality exhibits required to attract audiences fed a diet of virtual spectacle. Adult admissions to the country’s major institutions vary widely: the AGA is raising its to $12 from $10, due to higher costs of running its expanded space and an ambitious new programming push, says executive director Gilles Hébert. “It’s a thing of value,” he says. Post Gehry redo, adult entry to the AGO rose to $18 from $15, an increase that prompted the architect’s quip, “highway robbery.” Ottawa’s National Gallery charges $9. The Vancouver Art Gallery (VAG) charges $19.50 (winter), $20.50 (summer). And at the ROM, it’s $22.

    ….Calculating admission prices is an “art and science,” says Sue Bloch-Nevitte, head of AGO public affairs. “Research says you never ask, ‘How much would you be willing to pay?’ ” Among other considerations, galleries do due diligence to ensure rates are in line with similar local venues, says Dana Sullivant, the VAG’s director of marketing and communications (the VAG measured itself against ski resort Grouse Mountain, $37.95, the Aquarium, $22, and Science World, $18.75).

    Pricing admission to induce people to take out a membership is a less overt gambit. This delicate tipping-point practice is explicit in the ROM’s entry, where a sign announces it’ll cost $74 for two adults and two children, $104 for two adults and four children, but a (relatively) mere $139 for an annual membership offering unlimited access.

    Paradoxically, offering free access can be a gateway drug that makes people come back for more. Last year, the Toronto library system began offering almost-impossible-to-procure free passes to cultural institutions, including the AGO and ROM. People who live two hours away from the venue by public transit line up for hours, says board spokesperson Linda Hazzan. Many end up taking out memberships.

    —— I argue for free for all, and a special welcome to out-of-towners (a free coffee and cake?) [to compensate for the poor exhibits not on the Michelin guides (that’s the UBC MoA)]

  • Frank Murphy

    You may be aware of the Hespeler Library in Cambridge On. A glass wrap encasing the original brick Carnegie Library. Kongats Architects.

  • Ron

    WRT plazas on Georgia Street – the question I suppose is whether you improve the existing open spaces (maybe by building restaurants and retail around their perimeters or at least opening up additional doorways from existing structures along their periemters) or starting from square one on an adjacent site expecting that the difference in the built form between the two will miraculously draw the sparse number of pedestrians in the area to come to one over the new kid on the block.

    Also, from the sound of the VAG’s desire for an iconic structure, that doesn’t seem like it will have streetfront retail at pedestrian scale around its perimeter (whether an external perimeter or an internal courtyard). Neither the ROM or the AGO in Toronto have that – and neither does the Guggenheim in Bilbao, Centre Pompidou or even the Louvre. I suspect that we may see a largely blank facade with tourists walking the perimeter in search of the entrance. At best you may get another Gallery Cafe and a VAG Souvenir Shop.

  • Norman

    There is no way taxpayers should shell out $300 million for a new art gallery. For a fraction of price, that solutions could be found to the problems at the current location. A lot more effort should be put into attracting exhibitions that the public wants to see. How about this for a solution to the storage problem: put the Group of Seven and Emily Carr paintings away for about 10 years.

←  Older Comments
 →