Download Good Old-Fashioned Modernism

blueprints
Volume XXVI, No. 1
National Building Museum
in this issue:
The New Face of Preservation
An Interview with Richard Moe
Good
Old-Fashioned
Modernism
Federal Modern
Assessing and Preserving a Legacy
Renewing
Urban Renewal
Silo Point:
An Industrial-Strength
Renovation
Winter 2007–08
in this issue
Is Modern the New Victorian?
from the executive director
British novelist L.P. Hartley wrote: “The past is a foreign
country; they do things differently there.” If we accept this
maxim, we might assume that proximity matters—in other words,
that the recent past is likely to be less foreign than the distant past,
in much the same way that Canada is more familiar to the typical
American than, say, Cambodia. When it comes to history, however,
that assumption may be illusory.
We all remember the recent past—or at least we think we do—and having lived through
it, we have inevitably formed biases and emotional associations that color our perceptions
of that history. With respect to our built heritage, it is often difficult for us to appreciate
the true significance of relatively recent works of architecture—buildings that we may have
seen under construction; buildings that may have replaced earlier ones that we remember
fondly; buildings that are, perhaps, all too familiar. So how do we assess the aesthetic,
cultural, and material value of structures that have not been around very long?
In architecture, the term “modern” tends to evoke images of rational, unornamented
structures fabricated of human-made materials such as steel or concrete—in short, the
antithesis of “historic” architecture. Nonetheless, there are numerous indisputably modern
buildings that are now 50, 75, or even—by some people’s reckoning—100 years old. Many
of those buildings are unquestionably significant, whether aesthetically, technologically,
or historically. They are now as much a part of our cultural heritage as log cabins, corner
stores, and brownstones.
Preservation groups are taking notice of the growing body of “historic modern”
architecture, and there is increasing public debate about which buildings from the
(relatively) recent past are worthy of keeping. Meanwhile, design and building professionals
are grappling with the technical challenges of preserving or reusing modern structures,
which often employed experimental materials and construction methods. The preservation
of modernism is also becoming central to the sustainability movement, as proponents
of green development argue that even very mundane structures should be at least partially
preserved in order to reduce waste.
It seems, then, that our fundamental assumptions about the purpose, practice, and
politics of preservation are likely to change dramatically in the near future. Is Modern
the new Victorian? Perhaps not, but it clearly represents a rich and varied legacy that
we are just beginning to understand.
Chase W. Rynd
Executive Director
2
6
10
14
18
25
20
Good Old-Fashioned Modernism
Currently on view at the National Building
Museum is Marcel Breuer: Design and
Architecture, an exhibition organized by
the Vitra Design Museum that explores
the diverse career of one of the modern
movement’s most influential figures.
This is the first component of a broad
Museum initiative intended to encourage
reconsideration of the legacy of 20thcentury modernism, which is all too easily
taken for granted by virtue of its ubiquity.
As part of the initiative, this issue of
Blueprints focuses on the preservation
and reuse of aging modernist structures.
shop NBM!
Paris on the Potomac:
The French Influence on the
Architecture and Art of Washington, D.C.
Edited by Cynthia R. Field, Isabelle Gournay, and Thomas P. Somma
2
6
10
14
18
24
25
The New Face of Preservation
Richard Moe, president of the National Trust for Historic
Preservation and recipient of the ninth Vincent Scully Prize,
reflects on the evolution of the American preservation movement.
Federal Modern
The nation’s biggest landlord celebrates the jewels in its portfolio
while freshening up the ugly ducklings.
Renewing Urban Renewal
In Southwest Washington, D.C., an icon of the “urban renewal”
revolution in the 1950s and ’60s is now undergoing a
transformation of its own.
Silo Point:
An Industrial-Strength Renovation
A seemingly obsolete industrial facility finds a new career as hip
urban housing.
Museum News
• For the Greener Good Part II
• Breuer exhibition member opening
• 2007 Turner Prize recognizes Gehry and colleagues
• Furniture designer lends expertise to Museum outreach program
• Festival of the Building Arts draws thousands
• Hardy headlines Builders event
• Spotlight on DeGarmo
• Raffle winners enjoy Chihuly sculpture
• NBM/Kreeger Museum tour of Bauhaus architecture
Contributors
• Donor Profile: U.S. Department of Energy
• Grateful applause to our recent donors
Mystery Building
“Step Right Up!”
Released in November 2007, Paris on the Potomac is a compilation of
essays that explores aspects of the French influence on the artistic and
architectural environment of Washington, D.C. which continued long
after the well known contributions of Pierre (Peter) Charles L’Enfant,
the transplanted French military officer who designed the city’s plan.
Cynthia R. Field, one of the book’s editors, is a founding trustee of the
National Building Museum and is an architectural historian
who recently retired from the Smithsonian Institution.
Marcel Breuer: Design and Architecture is made possible
by the National Endowment for the Arts; Vitra, Inc.;
and other generous contributors.
Available in the Museum Shop.
$44.96 Members / $49.95 Public
opposite right and cover: Church of St. Francis de Sales, Muskegon, MI, by Marcel Breuer, 1964–6.
Photo by Hedrich Blessing. Courtesy of Chicago Historical Society / Hedrich Blessing
left: Cover of Paris on the Potomac by Cynthia R. Field, Isabelle Gournay, and Thomas P. Somma.
Courtesy of Ohio University Press and Swallow Press.
Winter 2007–08 blueprints An Interview with Richard Moe
The New Face
of Preservation
by Martin Moeller
On December 13, 2007, the National Building Museum presented the ninth
Vincent Scully Prize to Richard Moe, president of the National Trust for Historic
Preservation. The award recognized Moe’s leadership in moving preservation into the mainstream of American society and expanding the public’s
understanding of the significance of our built heritage. In accepting
the prize, he joined a prestigious roster of past recipients
including Jane Jacobs, Phyllis Lambert, His Highness the
Aga Khan, and His Royal Highness the Prince of Wales.
fo-
blueprints Winter 2007–08
In an interview excerpted here, Moe discussed some
of the ways in which the National Trust and the
preservation movement in general have evolved.
Particularly noteworthy are the Trust’s growing
commitment to the preservation of modernist
buildings, many of which are now more than
50 years old, and the organization’s explicit
focus on environmental sustainability.
Martin Moeller: In 1949, the same year that the National
Trust was established, Philip Johnson completed his
famous Glass House in New Canaan, Connecticut. Do you
think any of the Trust’s founders could have imagined a
day when such a quintessentially modern building would
be designated a National Trust Historic Site?
Richard Moe: It’s interesting to think back on what the
leaders of the then-new Trust would have thought of a
modernist structure like that being historic. I think the more
far-reaching and visionary of those men and women would
have foreseen that perhaps this iconic structure would
someday be historic—many others would not.
But the answer, I think, really lies in the history of the
preservation movement. Different styles of architecture have
become historic at different periods, and usually over some
public resistance. For example, Victorian architecture was
very unpopular with a lot of people—nobody could imagine
saving that stuff. Now, of course, we prize it. Same thing with
Art Deco. Well, the time of modernism has arrived, and the
iconic Glass House, of course, just represents the very best
of modernism, and it is historic, even in a literal and legal
sense—it’s [more than] 50 years old.
Moeller: Have the Trust’s forays into the preservation
of modernism led to any general changes in the
organization’s strategies or policies?
Moe: Modernist architecture, by definition, hasn’t been
with us that long, so our biggest obstacle is persuading the
public that much of this is great architecture and deserves
to be saved. We’re losing great modernist structures all the
time. For example, in New Canaan, where Johnson’s Glass
House is located, there have been a lot of tear-downs.
Great, iconic modernist structures have been torn down
and replaced with McMansions.
We are going to take steps in the very near future to set up
a Recent Past Initiative in our Western Office in California
and a Center for Modernism based at the Glass House in
New Canaan, to give specific focus to these styles of
architecture. In terms of the recent past, something need
not be historic to have value and to be worthy of being
preserved. So we are breaking the mold a little bit here.
Some of our predecessors in the preservation movement
didn’t think that we should preserve anything before its time
came. Well, unfortunately, we lose a lot in the first 50 years,
and sometimes we have to intervene and save the best of
the recent past, which is what we are trying to do.
Moeller: A burgeoning interest in modernism is just
one aspect of what the Trust calls “the new face of
preservation in America.” Another is the growing
participation of diverse ethnic groups and communities.
What is the Trust doing to reach new constituencies?
Moe: We have really tried hard in recent years to expand
the constituency for preservation and to make it clear
that preservation is relevant to everyone in this country
regardless of where they are, or what they do, or what
their income level is. I think we have to concede candidly
that 50 years ago preservation appealed to very few
people—it was mostly people who cared about great old
houses, and that was fine and still a lot of us do that. But
preservation’s evolved enormously over the last 50 years,
and it really has become relevant to more and more people.
ONLINE
VIDEO!
To see a video
of the interview with
Richard Moe, visit
www.nbm.org.
bottom: In June 2007, the
National Trust opened
Philip Johnson’s iconic
Glass House in New
Canaan, Connecticut
to the public.
Photo by Paul Warchol.
bottom right: Richard
Moe, president of the
National Trust for Historic
Preservation, speaking
at the organization’s 2007
annual conference in
St. Paul, Minnesota.
Photo by Tony Nelson.
We’re broadening the definition of what
preservation really is. And in doing that, we’ve
undertaken a very serious and far-reaching
effort to diversify not just the National Trust,
but the preservation movement. At my
very first National Preservation Conference in Miami 16 years ago, we initiated
a Diversity Scholarship Program, which
Winter 2007–08 blueprints literally changed the face of our annual conference. These
were largely minority students, people from lower-income
neighborhoods, whom we brought to the conference as
diversity scholars. We’ve continued to do that.
Moeller: Another aspect of the “new face of
preservation” is the Trust’s explicit focus on
sustainability. How are you promoting preservation
as an environmental imperative?
Moe: We have long maintained that preservation of older
buildings is inherently a sustainable activity. The restoration
and reuse of older buildings is the ultimate recycling. We’re
saving enormous energy, we’re saving natural resources,
we’re filling fewer landfills.
above right: In collaboration
with the Preservation
Resource Center of New
Orleans, the National Trust
developed the “HOME
AGAIN!” program, which
provides funding to help
residents who were
displaced by Hurricane
Katrina to restore their
homes. Here a group of
volunteers works on a
house in the city.
Photo by Mary Fitzpatrick.
below: The Hampton Hotels
“Save-a-Landmark” program
was created in 2000 to foster
recognition and preservation
of the historic—and sometimes quirky—places that
enliven the American road.
Here a volunteer works
at Carousel Gardens in
New Orleans, which boasts
one of only 100 remaining
antique wooden carousels
in the country.
Photo courtesy of the Hampton
Hotels “Save-a-Landmark”
We are now undertaking a program at the Trust to research
these factors quantitatively. In this time of trying to combat
climate change and CO2 emissions, we think preservation
has a lot to contribute in this area, and [we will be taking]
these data and converting them into public policy proposals.
Should there be new tax credits? Should there be changes
in the Secretary [of the Interior’s] Standards [for the
Treatment of Historic Properties]? In the U.S. Green Building
Council’s LEED [Leadership in Energy and Environmental
Design] standards, should preservation get more credit?
The other thing we’re doing—on our new website—is
trying to help owners of historic homes and other older
buildings learn how they can retrofit their existing buildings
and make them more energy-efficient and greener.
Moeller: One of the Trust’s most widely known
initiatives is its annual list of the 11 Most Endangered
Places. How are the sites selected each year, and
how exactly does the Trust use this list to advance
its advocacy efforts?
Moe: The criteria are quite broad: it’s a historic site that’s
threatened by some cause. I like to say that [it] is a list of
different kinds of significant historic sites, in different parts
of the country, coming under different kinds of threats. So
it’s really an educational device in that sense. It’s by far the
most effective public vehicle we have for bringing attention
to endangered sites. We’ve lost a few that have been on
the list, but very few.
Anybody can nominate a site, and then our regional
offices recommend them and we make the final decision
in Washington. But, you know, people love lists, and the
media love lists, and it’s just a great vehicle and we’re very
pleased with its effect. We take very seriously the listing of
a site, because we don’t just believe in putting out a press
release saying, “This is an endangered site.” Our regional
offices and other departments at the Trust put together a
strategic plan for trying to address the threat to each specific site that’s listed, and then they spend as long as
it takes to try to remove that threat.
blueprints Winter 2007–08
Moeller: Clearly, one of
the most endangered
places in the country
today is the city of
New Orleans.
What are the latest
developments
in the Trust’s
efforts to protect
the city’s built
heritage in the
aftermath of
Hurricane Katrina?
Moe: Hurricane Katrina,
in my view, represented not
just a great human tragedy
but also. . . probably the greatest
cultural disaster in the history of our
country. There were more historic
properties lost or threatened than at any other
time in our history. In the city of New Orleans itself, there are
some 20 National Register [historic] districts. They encompass
physically half of the city. They contain 39,000 historic
structures, most of them shotgun houses, Creole cottages,
corner stores, and so forth, but great historic buildings. And
most of those were flooded. Most of them can be saved.
We opened an office right away in New Orleans, and
we’ve worked with our partners with shared field staff
in Mississippi and we’re still doing that, and we’ve said
we’ll do it as long as it takes. We’ve raised several million
dollars, we’ve done a lot of advocacy, we’ve persuaded
Congress to appropriate $50 million so far just for historic
properties in the Gulf Coast. We have worked with our
partners in New Orleans to stop the demolition—the
unnecessary demolition—of historic sites, and this is all
coming to a head now because FEMA has established
deadlines for compensating homeowners for demolition.
So far we think we’ve helped save over 600 homes, and
I hope we can save many more.
Moeller: How have the economics of preservation
changed over the past couple of decades?
Moe: If you take a look back over the history of preservation
in America, there have been different themes underlying
it—different reasons why preservation’s been regarded
as important. If you go back to the very earliest days when
Mount Vernon was saved by Ann Pamela Cunningham
and a group of courageous, effective women, they were
trying to save a great architectural and historic icon, and
that’s what preservation was for a hundred years. Then in
the middle of the 20th century, that started to change, and
people started seeing the economic value of preservation,
and they started setting up revolving funds, and they saw
the value of adaptive reuse—using a building for a purpose
other than that for which it was designed. And then came
the adoption of federal tax credits, which were a great
incentive. The whole theory behind historic tax credits was
that the public gets to enjoy the continued historic value of
the exterior of a building, and that’s a great public benefit,
which now, happily, has expanded to 29 states.
Moeller: One of your fellow Scully Prize
recipients was Jane Jacobs, who argued
that healthy communities need a variety
of buildings in terms of age, use, and
size. How have her views influenced
your work?
Moe: We owe a lot to Jane Jacobs and I
think we owe especially a debt of gratitude for her really making us understand
the value of eclectic neighborhoods, with
different kinds of buildings, different eras
of buildings, different uses. She was a
great advocate of mixed uses, as am I. This
is what makes vibrant communities, really
lively communities, interesting communities that
attract people. I think the most vibrant downtowns, for example, in America, are those that have
saved their great iconic historic buildings, but they’ve
also built great new buildings. . . it’s really a blending of the
old and the new together that makes for a great city.
Moeller: In what areas is the United States at the
forefront of preservation compared to other countries
around the world?
Moe: The United States is clearly in the lead on the
Main Street program, [which] is probably the most
successful program the Trust has ever had. We’ve been
in over 2,000 communities revitalizing downtowns with
the business communities that are there, and it’s basically
trying to make downtown a more attractive place to come
and a more successful place to do business. And it’s
not just preservation—fixing up the old storefronts and
putting in public amenities—but it’s also organizing the
business community, marketing it effectively, filling in the
vacancies, and making it possible to compete with the
big-box retailers.
Every dollar that we put into a Main Street program
leverages $40 of public and private money brought
to the community. Now we’ve brought the program
to larger cities—not the downtowns of larger cities,
but neighborhood commercial districts—and the
same principles have applied. It’s very important for
communities to have viable commercial districts so not
everybody has to go out to the strip mall or the big boxes
to do their shopping. And this is a program that doesn’t
really exist anywhere else in the world, and there’s a lot
of interest in it.
Moeller: Where do you think the preservation
movement is headed in the near future?
Moe: I wouldn’t be surprised if preservation expanded its
wings sometime soon and got into contemporary design
issues. In other words, if we’re being asked to preserve
what’s important, why shouldn’t we contribute to making
new buildings important and significant? That’s a bit of a
reach now, but I can foresee the day when that might be
seriously discussed.
It’s really intriguing to try to look forward. Obviously, we’ll
have different styles of architecture—that will continue
to evolve—and they will eventually become historic, and
the best of those styles of architecture will deserve to be
preserved. So just as we’ve experienced this with Victorian
architecture and Art Deco and modernism, we’ll experience
it with whatever is yet to come. And something else will
come for sure. •
above: The preservation
of the Socorro Mission
in El Paso, Texas, was
recognized with the
National Trust’s Honor
Award in 2006.
Photo courtesy of the National
Trust for Historic Preservation.
below: Hilliard Homes
in Chicago, Illinois, was
recognized with a 2007
National Trust / HUD
Secretary’s Award for
Excellence in Historic
Preservation for its
recently completed,
$99 million rehabilitation.
Photo courtesy of the National
Trust for Historic Preservation.
Similarly, with tax credits—although every country’s tax
system is different—the fact that we give tax credits for
investing in historic buildings is very interesting to those
who have tax systems that lend themselves to this.
Winter 2007–08 blueprints Federal Modern
Assessing and Preserving a Legacy
by Susan Piedmont-Palladino
Susan Piedmont-Palladino
is a curator at the National
Building Museum and a
professor of architecture at
Virginia Tech’s WashingtonAlexandria Architecture
Center.
blueprints Winter 2007–08
“
I
t was the best of times, it was the worst of times.” Charles Dickens was referring to the period just
before the French Revolution, but could just as
easily have been describing the architecture commissioned by the U.S. government after the Second World
War, with its decidedly mixed legacy of buildings and
cityscapes. The decades from the 1950s to the ’70s gave us
the architecture of the post-war economic boom and then
the Great Society, with the promise of an efficient and
transparent government ensconced in buildings to match.
But during that time old buildings were regularly razed
in the name of progress and too often replaced
by banal boxes indistinguishable from typical office
buildings of the time.
Now, what was once new is old, and one of the largest
landlords and property managers in the country, the
U.S. General Services Administration (GSA), finds
itself with a huge portfolio of buildings and landscapes,
the majority of which were built in the last 50 years.
The frequently used, catch-all descriptors “mid-century
modern” and “post-war” embody in shorthand just
how much the architecture after World War II differed
in scale, style, and philosophy from that which came
before. These differences pose unique challenges for the
caretakers of that architectural legacy, and for the citizens in whose name these buildings were designed and
constructed. In the United States, true modernism really
arrived with the end of the war: literally, with the immigration of a generation of modern masters from Europe,
and metaphorically, in that the end of the war marked
the beginning of a more optimistic and prosperous era.
Modern architecture was the symbol of that beginning.
Changing Attitudes Toward Governmental Architecture
There are hidden forces that shape the built environment,
and they are at work before the architect and client ever
draw the first line. In the case of federal construction, these
hidden forces have often taken the form of executive orders
and legislative acts, successively strengthening, enforcing, or
even undoing various preceding directives. With so many
contemporary design firms actively specializing in civic
projects today, it is difficult to imagine that the appropriateness of the federal government’s procurement of design
services from the private sector was once hotly debated.
The Tarsney Act of 1893 opened the doors to private
firms like McKim, Mead and White, D.H. Burnham &
Company, and the office of Cass Gilbert, but the act was
repealed in 1912 over concerns that the private sector might
be overcharging the government, proving that, while architectural tastes may change, friction over budgets is timeless.
The biggest federal building boom started about two decades later, beginning with the Public Works Administration during the Great Depression, accelerating during the
mobilization for World War II and escalating in the years
following the war. The construction program even before
the war more than doubled the total number of buildings
under government ownership. In 1949, President Harry
Truman established the GSA, recognizing the exponential
increase in the responsibilities for designing and constructing the buildings that the larger central government would
need, not to mention managing those that already existed.
Indeed, in its first decade, the agency focused on simply
bringing order to the diverse portfolio it
had inherited.
By the early 1960s, a series of Executive Orders and
Congressional legislation cemented attitudes that were
already changing regarding federal building. Several
attempted to remedy the perceived aloofness and insularity of the first modern buildings. Among the most
influential was a set of principles issued in 1962 that
came from a committee convened by President John F.
Kennedy to take stock of the state of federal architecture. Written by Daniel Patrick Moynihan, a lifelong
champion of excellence in building and city design,
the Guiding Principles for Federal Architecture encouraged the “finest contemporary American architectural
thought.” They urged architects to be sensitive to context, treat the site and landscape as equally important
as the building, and warned against any official “style”
of architecture. As with all guidelines, the generalities
are unassailable, but the details are wicked. What is the
“finest contemporary American architectural thought”
and who decides? At the time, it wasn’t entirely clear.
The twin forces of economic growth and the desire for
newness threatened buildings and landscapes throughout the 1950s and ’60s. Iconic single acts of destruction,
such as the demolition of Penn Station in New York
City, as well the Federal Highway Administration’s
inexorable paving of city and countryside, were among
the forces that motivated the 1966 National Historic
Preservation Act. Recognizing that the “spirit and direction of the Nation are founded upon
and reflected in its historic
below: The U.S. Tax Court in
Washington, D.C., was designed by
Victor Lundy and completed in 1974.
The building won a GSA Honor Award
in the agency’s first Design Awards
program in 1972.
Photo by Carol M. Highsmith Photography,
Inc., courtesy of GSA.
Winter 2007–08 blueprints heritage,” the language of the act expressed a sense
of urgency: “Historic properties significant to the
Nation’s heritage are being lost or substantially altered,
often inadvertently, with increasing frequency.” Preserving these properties in the “face of ever-increasing
extensions of urban centers, highways, and residential,
commercial, and industrial developments” was clearly
in the national interest. Just three years later, the National Environmental Policy Act was passed, extending similar protections to the natural environmental,
in recognition of the “profound impact of man’s
activity on the interrelations of all components
of the natural environment.” The same threats
were cited: “influences of population growth,
high-density urbanization, industrial expansion,
resource exploitation”; and the same motivations:
to “preserve important historic, cultural, and natural
aspects of our national heritage.”
above top: The Federal Building
in Des Moines, Iowa, after its
completion in 1968.
Photo by Wetherell Harrison Wagner
and McKleeven, courtesy of GSA.
above bottom: The Federal Building
after recladding.
Courtesy GSA.
below: Designed by Marcel
Breuer and Associates and
constructed from 1965 to 1968,
the Robert C. Weaver Federal
Building in Washington, D.C.,
was the first federal building
in the country to use precast
concrete as the primary structural
and exterior finish material.
Photo by Ben Schnall, courtesy of GSA.
opposite right: The four-story central
public hall, also called the Hall
of Justice, in the U.S. Tax Court
in Washington, D.C. The hall is
crowned by a clerestory roof
that admits light into the space.
Photo by Carol M. Highsmith
Photography, Inc., courtesy of GSA
blueprints Winter 2007–08
A Campaign to Preserve
Modern Landmarks
Today the complex interplay between environmental conservation and historic preservation is being
brought to bear on the very buildings and landscapes
that were young then. The irony is inescapable: The
National Historic Preservation Act set out to protect
the familiar, often beloved, yet arguably inefficient
and old-fashioned buildings of previous centuries
from demolition by the forces of progress. Now, the
very buildings that were once the enemies of history
may enjoy the generous embrace of preservation…if
they can pass the test. The 1966 act fundamentally
changed the way the government, the public, and the
design community saw older buildings, but seeing
the work of the recent past in the same light still
poses a challenge. “In many people’s minds,” explains
Rolando Rivas-Camp, FAIA, director of GSA’s Center
for Historic Buildings, “‘historic’ equals ‘traditional,’
so making the case to preserve modern buildings is a
challenge.” To address that challenge, the center issued
Growth, Efficiency and Modernism: GSA Buildings from
the 50s, 60s and 70s. The study includes a rigorous set
of criteria for assessing the merit of modern federal
properties. “In evaluating these properties,” notes
David L. Winstead, commissioner of GSA’s Public
Buildings Service, “we must consider not only the
building’s architecture, but its potential historical
significance, and the significance it may have to the
community.” In some cases, being able to connect a
building to a specific architect is sufficient to save it,
or at least forestall its demolition.
Such was the case with the Strom Thurmond Federal
Building and U.S. Courthouse, in Columbia, South
Carolina. Completed in 1979, the exposed rough
concrete, or béton brut, building expressed its divided
functions with the courthouse in a horizontal wing and
the office space in a tower, both connected by a plaza.
In 2003 the federal courts left for new quarters, leaving
the fate of the structure in doubt. Not well-loved even
when new, it had few champions and the circumstances
of its construction were not well known. Through the
efforts of Jeffrey Jensen, a historic preservation specialist
with GSA’s Southeast Sunbelt Region, however, it was
revealed to be one of the very last works by the Bauhaus
master Marcel Breuer, in partnership with Herbert
Beckhard. The building’s attribution to Breuer raised its
value, even as questions about his actual contribution to
the design fueled the debate. While the office tower still
houses federal workers, the courthouse wing now sits
vacant. With the original modern interiors for the major
spaces still intact, this late work of Marcel Breuer awaits
another use.
Federal construction has been influenced by all of the
same movements and counter-movements that have swept
through architecture and design as a whole in the last
century, each seemingly convinced of the errors of its immediate predecessors. The ethos of preservation has given
us a more generous perspective on the past, including the
recent past. “We have a responsibility to the evolution of
architecture,” says Rivas-Camp. “We can’t cut out a part of
it and still claim to tell a true or complete story.” Modernism itself is more eclectic than we often think, encompassing stripped classicism, New Deal murals and heroic
sculpture, streamlined Art Deco, béton brut, and the muchmaligned glass box. Each building and landscape in GSA’s
portfolio reflects some aspect of the relationship between
the government and the citizens at the time the project
was built. The Center for Historic Buildings is marshalling
the spirit of the Guiding Principles for Federal Architecture
with the principles of stewardship in the National Historic
Preservation Act to ensure that the “finest contemporary
American architectural thought” is represented from every
era of our history. •
What’s in a Word?
“Brutalism”
What began as a bi-lingual pun,
usually attributed to influential
architecture critic Reyner Banham, the
label “brutalism” became the common
name for a whole body of modern
building. Literally translated from the
French, béton brut means “raw concrete” and describes a style of modern
architecture that expresses the truth
of its own construction. Unfortunately,
thanks to Banham’s quip, it became an
apt mistranslation, worn as a badge of
honor by some architects, but leveled
as a rebuke by those who preferred
their buildings finished and refined.
Even the most cursory stroll down
K Street or Pennsylvania Avenue,
however, will only confirm the truth of
the double meaning. Some buildings
deserve the epithet “brutalist,” but others are just raw.
Determining the Fate of
Less Important Structures
Clearly, not everything warrants preservation. Deciding among the alternatives—renovate, re-clad, reuse,
or demolish—involves evaluating the relative merits of
the structure itself and its potential for other uses. The
reuse of the Strom Thurmond Courthouse is difficult
precisely because of the orthodox modernism of its
architects; the more faithfully form follows function
the more resistant the building is to new functions.
And function isn’t the only issue that makes evaluating
mid-20th-century modern architecture difficult. While
conservation techniques for pre-modern buildings
are well-developed, they are just being developed for
modern materials and methods, many of which were
still experimental when first used. The Federal Building
in Des Moines, Iowa, was beset by technical problems
almost immediately after it was completed in 1968. GSA
assessed its architectural significance and found little.
With the support of the local architectural community
the decision was made to give the building a makeover.
In this case, being both modern and architecturally
unremarkable allowed the Des Moines building to
avoid demolition and instead have its technology and
appearance upgraded. Environmental conservation took
precedence over historic preservation: less material for
the landfill, and much of the embodied energy in the
structure and infrastructure was re-used.
Winter 2007–08 blueprints A Case Study in Southwest D.C.
by Amanda Murphy
Amanda Murphy
is a development
coordinator at the
National Building
Museum. She is
currently pursuing
a master’s in Historic
Preservation from
Goucher College.
below: Rendering of Fairfield
at Marina View Towers,
showing two existing
towers at I.M. Pei’s Town
Center (left and right
center) and two proposed
towers by Esocoff &
Associates/Architects
(far left and far right).
Courtesy of Esocoff &
Associates/Architects.
opposite right: One of the
towers at I.M. Pei’s Town
Center, as it appears today.
Photo by Amanda Murphy.
10 blueprints Winter 2007–08
Renewing Urban Renewal
T
he innermost part of
Washington, D.C.’s
Southwest quadrant is one
of the oldest neighborhoods in the
District of Columbia, pre-dating
the establishment of the federal
city. Few remnants of these early
days remain, however, thanks to
the sweeping, post-World War
II urban renewal initiatives that
erased much of the area’s architectural heritage. Today, despite
its proximity to the capital’s
monumental core, this precinct
is largely overlooked by tourists
and locals alike.
Given its relative obscurity, coupled
with the fact that most of its buildings are barely 50 years old, Southwest D.C. would seem an unlikely
focus of a historic preservation campaign; yet it is becoming just that.
Like other post-war urban renewal
zones that are now coming of age,
the area is increasingly recognized
as a site of historical and architectural significance. Recently, due to
rising real estate pressures in D.C.,
planners, developers, and architects
have begun to consider opportunities to restore and enhance some of
the defining characteristics of this
modernist neighborhood while fixing
obvious urbanistic errors of the past.
The Urban Renewal Era
Between 1950 and 1965, more
than 550 acres of small businesses,
working-class row houses, and
slum dwellings in Southwest were
cleared in the name of remaking
D.C.—as President Harry Truman
put it—“the best-planned city in
the world.” A vibrant if decrepit
old neighborhood was soon
replaced by coolly rational high-rise
apartment blocks, Brutalist federal
office buildings, modern town
houses and churches, open green
space, and parking lots. Such
ambitious redevelopment schemes
were common throughout the
country during that time despite
controversy over their disproportionate impact on African
American families.
The new Southwest reflected a desire
for rebirth as well as a rejection of
traditional attitudes about urban
living—sentiments that were deeply
rooted in the ideals of modernism.
Although popular in Europe for
several decades, modernist urban
design principles were just beginning
to take hold in the United States,
largely due to the influence of
European émigré architects such as
Walter Gropius and Marcel Breuer.
Southwest Washington became a
major testing ground for such new
design paradigms, not to mention
the largest single urban renewal site
in the world at that time. Breuer
himself designed two government
buildings in Southwest and some
of Gropius and Breuer’s students,
including I.M. Pei, would also have
an influence on the new modern
landscape in a city that had been,
until that time, emphatically
traditional.
The result of their efforts was one
of the first truly modern urban
neighborhoods—and one of the
most successful urban renewal
efforts—anywhere in the country.
Unlike many similar projects in
other cities, Southwest ultimately
managed to attract and retain
solidly middle-class individuals
and families. A half-century after
many of its constituent developments were completed, it is now a
well-maintained, leafy, quiet enclave
with much to offer both residents
and visitors.
Nonetheless, the original Southwest
plan had serious flaws that were
typical of large-scale urban renewal
schemes of the period. Inward
facing superblocks diminished street
activity; cul-de-sacs confused traffic
circulation; high fences isolated
residents from one another; and
unrealized projects such as a town
center and a grand mall on 10th
Street showed the dangers of
attempting to start over from
scratch. Such fundamental design
decisions have prevented the
neighborhood from becoming a
truly vital, modern community.
A Second Rebirth
Today, Southwest is on the brink
of its most significant redevelopment since the initial urban renewal
period. Residents, preservationists,
planners, architects, and developers
are once again actively exploring
possibilities for radical changes to
the neighborhood, while this time
acknowledging the need to preserve
existing architectural resources.
David Maloney, the state historic
preservation officer for D.C.,
is optimistic that a proposed
development called Fairfield
at Marina View will serve as a
model for the reconsideration of
Southwest—one in which existing
modernist buildings are gently
renovated while new structures are
added into the mix. This project, led
by the Washington architecture firm
of Esocoff & Associates, involves
the rehabilitation of two apartment
buildings in the Town Center
complex designed by I.M. Pei and
completed in 1962. Importantly,
however, Fairfield at Marina View
will also entail the construction of
two new residential buildings;
restoration and rejuvenation
of public open spaces; and
a plan for reconnecting the
complex with the surrounding neighborhood.
Although the Pei buildings are
not registered landmarks, the
architects and the developer, Fairfield Residential, decided to work
with the D.C. Historic Preservation
Office, D.C. Preservation League,
and other interested parties to
devise a plan in which the two
towers would be treated sensitively.
Ultimately, there was agreement
that, whatever alterations were
made to Town Center, the property
should retain sufficient historic and
architectural integrity to remain
Winter 2007–08 blueprints 11
eligible for inclusion in a potential
historic district nomination for the
entire Southwest urban renewal
precinct. As Philip Esocoff, FAIA,
principal of Esocoff & Associates,
put it, the approach was a matter of
“saving the baby and throwing out
the bathwater.”
background: Aerial view
of Southwest Washington
in 1959.
Courtesy of the Washingtoniana
Division, DC Public Library.
below: I.M. Pei’s Town
Center, completed in 1962.
Avery Architectural and Fine
Arts Library, Columbia University.
opposite top right: View of
Town Center today.
Photo by Amanda Murphy.
opposite bottom left:
Site plan of Fairfield
at Marina View.
Courtesy of Esocoff &
Associates/Architects.
opposite bottom right:
Rendering of proposed
building for the Marina
View project as seen from
the intersection of 6th &
M Streets.
Rendering courtesy of Esocoff
& Associates/Architects.
12 blueprints Winter 2007–08
In rehabilitating the Pei buildings,
Esocoff’s firm went to great lengths
to apply the nationally recognized
preservation guidelines known as
the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, which provide direction for
even the most minute details of a
project. For example, hairline cracks
in Pei’s concrete structure are being
cleared of the mismatched grout
that was applied in a haphazard
fashion over the years. They will
be re-patched with grout of a more
compatible color, and then sealed
with a clear coat. This method will
allow the original texture and color
of the concrete—as well as the
natural patina it has acquired over
time—to remain visible.
Windows posed a bigger problem. The original single-glazed units
were energy-inefficient, and their
thin aluminum frames were not
structurally capable of supporting new insulated glass panels. It
was therefore unavoidable that the
old windows would need to be
replaced. However, a thoughtful
way to preserve Pei’s design intent
was devised. First, the characteristic
dimensions of the existing
windows—7 feet by 7 feet—will be
retained. While the new window
frames are thicker than the originals,
they will be two-toned, with an
outer silver band similar in scale to
the full width of Pei’s originals. The
inner, dark bronze band of the new
frames will visually recede and be
subsumed into the varying window
treatments and lighting conditions
of individual apartment units inside.
Esocoff noted that the window
problem raises philosophical
questions that preservationists will
need to address in order for other
modernist buildings to be eligible
for historic preservation tax credits,
since so many buildings of this era
feature exteriors almost entirely
of glass. Would removal of these
original features compromise a
structure’s architectural integrity?
Can 80% or more of a building’s
exterior be removed without
running afoul of generally accepted
historic preservation standards? If
those standards do not allow full
replacement, how can the buildings
conform to even minimal standards
for thermal efficiency? Such
questions illuminate the delicate—
and sometimes difficult—balance
that architects and preservationists
must pursue when trying to figure
out how best to adapt older
structures to current standards.
New Design Based on
Neighborhood Precedent
Repairing the Modernist Breach
of the Streetscape
In designing the two new towers for
Fairfield at Marina View, Esocoff
and senior associate Linda Palmer,
Associate AIA, wanted them to
complement, rather than match,
the Pei buildings. They decided
to survey other urban renewal-era
buildings in the area for inspiration.
Noting that even the mid-20thcentury modernists often looked to
classical antiquity and other periods
for ideas, Esocoff said, “The built
environment is a book you can
open and read.”
As part of the Marina View project,
much of the original Town Center
landscape will also be restored,
though the high walls and fences
that currently separate the complex
and from the street will be removed,
and pedestrian walkways, public
garden areas, and refreshment stands
will be added. This aspect of the
project is being directed by the
landscape architecture firm of Zion
Breen Richardson; partner Don
Richardson worked on the original
design of Town Center while an
associate with the firm, then known
as Zion Breen, in the 1960s.
The design for the new construction
is largely inspired by Chloethiel
Woodard Smith’s nearby Capitol
Park apartment towers, which date
from the late 1950s and early ’60s
and were the first Southwest urban
renewal-era buildings to receive
a historic landmark designation.
Esocoff’s buildings will feature
undulating curved walls of glass
and concrete, cantilevered metal
balconies, and obvious “nonsupporting” decorative brick
features—all elements that Smith
used in the design of her buildings.
Esocoff feels the new buildings
reflect the essential elements of
both Pei’s and Smith’s buildings
without actually copying their
specific motifs.
In a sense, the construction of
two new residential buildings just
outboard of the original Town
Center towers may be viewed as a
historic restoration of sorts. After
all, the modest buildings that the
Town Center towers replaced would
have come right up to the sidewalk,
thus creating a strong street edge as
was typical in 19th-century cities.
By contrast, the post-war buildings
were sited in the modernist fashion
as “towers in the park,” allowing
for more green space and parking
lots, but also destroying the clear
sense of the streetscape. By placing
buildings along the street lines once
again, Esocoff is undoing one of the
urban design blunders common in
Southwest. Moreover, the residential
building facing M Street will have
retail and restaurants on the first
floor, reinforcing the character of
that street as a commercial corridor.
Another way in which the Marina
View project will improve upon the
mid-20th-century urban pattern is
through environmentally conscious
design strategies. The Pei towers,
for instance, will be retrofitted
with green roofs, while the new
buildings will be topped with green
roofs from the start. The landscape
design also incorporates multimodal planning that will encourage
walking and bicycling, while
still accommodating cars in an
appropriate way.
If Fairfield at Marina View proves
successful, the D.C. Historic
Preservation Office is likely to
consider using the project as an
explicit model for guidelines for
future redevelopment of urban
renewal-era structures in Southwest.
Like everyone involved in this
endeavor, Maloney, the D.C.
preservation officer, is hopeful that
the project will demonstrate that
modernist buildings can be both
meaningfully preserved and
carefully updated to meet the
needs of present-day living. •
Fall Winter 2007–08 blueprints 13
Silo Point
An Industrial-Strength Renovation
By Christopher Pfaeffle, AIA, NCARB
Preservation of modern-era buildings is not limited to landmarks designed by famous architects.
As this article about a project called Silo Point makes clear, the American landscape includes
industrial buildings and other essentially modern structures that could easily be forgotten or
dismissed, but in fact can be handsomely and profitably transformed to serve new purposes.
While such projects are likely to entail substantial changes to the existing structures rather
than pure restoration, they nonetheless can serve to preserve important aspects of a
community’s historic character while also minimizing expenditures for entirely new resources.
Christopher Pfaeffle, AIA NCARB, is principal and founder of Parameter Inc. in Baltimore,
and is the architect for Silo Point.
D
uring the winter of 2003, Patrick Turner,
president of Turner Development Group, and
I meandered through one of his company’s
recent acquisitions: the towering shell of what was once
the world’s largest and fastest grain elevator. The Locust
Point Grain Terminal Elevator, built by the Baltimore &
Ohio Railroad in 1923 on the southernmost peninsula in
the city of Baltimore, stood hauntingly quiet except for
the sound of faraway seagulls and the occasional train
passing through on the tracks below. While the concrete
was damp and the windows squeaky and tilted, our tour
provoked the kind of raw wonder that any five-year-old
might experience when seeing such an astonishing sight
for the first time. Our ambition was to transform the
iconic structure—along with portions of the adjacent
array of 187 silos—into a sleek, modern residential
complex while still respecting the original building’s
industrial character.
14 blueprints Winter 2007–08
Sign Me Up!
Silo Point was the subject of
one of the Museum’s popular
Construction Watch Tours, which
are open to members. If you are not
a member and would like to sign up
in order to participate in the tours,
contact the Membership Department
at 202.272.2448, ext. 3200,
or [email protected].
Pat and I never once considered demolishing the
elevator tower, despite the naysayers who insisted that
the only sensible approach was to take it down and
build from scratch. While starting with a blank slate
is often easier, it was just not an option in this case as
we came to admire the grittily elegant structure. We
were convinced that saving the building was worth the
effort, and four years after our initial visit, the complex
that we now call Silo Point is finally being transformed
from an archaic industrial facility into a stylish
condominium with 228 airy apartments.
entire spread: Rendering
of Silo Point project
superimposed on
panoramic view of
Baltimore.
Courtesy of Parameter Inc.
Winter 2007–08 blueprints 15
above: Historic photo of Locust
Point Grain Terminal Elevator.
Photo provided by Parameter Inc.
above right: Rendering of the lobby
of Silo Point.
Courtesy of Parameter Inc.
below: Photo of the Locust Point
Grain Terminal Elevator in 1926.
Photo provided by Parameter Inc.
16 blueprints Winter 2007–08
Old Dog, New Tricks
A Striking Model for Urban Living
We wanted to create a cutting-edge work of architecture
that would reveal much of its past without expressing
it too literally. Our adaptive reuse strategy involved
coming to an understanding of how the building was
designed and how it worked, and then translating
that into a modern use. For example, one of the most
important aspects of the grain elevator structure was the
sense of vastness one felt when walking around both
the interior and exterior. We wanted to preserve that
aspect of the elevator building’s character while taking
advantage of every opportunity to let the building tell
its own story.
Any new residential development must stand out from
its competitors, of course. Fortunately for Silo Point,
the site’s vivid history, awe-inspiring structures, and
waterside setting make for an inherently interesting
and attractive living environment.
When approaching any adaptive reuse project, the
design team must decide which elements of the existing
structure to retain and which to remove. In the case of
the B&O grain elevator, the extant concrete tower was
tall, narrow, and long, with views of the harbor and city
skyline. It was easy to see how that arrangement could
translate very well into a modern residential project. In
contrast, the windowless, virtually impenetrable storage
silos would not lend themselves readily to any other
uses. It quickly became clear that keeping the entire
silo farm was not possible, so we devised an alternative
strategy to maintain a small number of the silos and
to incorporate them into the new complex. The retained
silos will serve as visual anchors, as well as highly
evocative relics of the site’s industrial past. The new
architectural elements will snake around the remnants,
creating a dialogue between historic and contemporary
materials and forms. In many cases, existing footings
and piles are being reused to accommodate the
new structure.
Another challenge was the 16-foot-by-16-foot structural
grid that was used throughout the original elevator
and silos. Although such a grid bears no relationship to
typical modern dimensions for residential construction,
we felt compelled to retain it and integrate it into the
new construction to preserve the project’s historical
continuity. In the end, original beams and columns
remained in place, as we found ways to make the
contemporary apartments conform to the unusual
structural dimensions. Ultimately, as we came to
understand the ramifications of this decision, it
helped us to design better living units.
The incorporation of elevators—for people, that is,
rather than grain—also posed quite a problem. In a
typical new construction project, stock elevators are
placed in shafts designed specifically to accommodate
them. At Silo Point, elevators had to be custom made
to fit in the building’s existing silos on that unusual
16-foot-by-16-foot grid. Moreover, we had to design
special platforms in adjacent silos to access the
elevators’ counterweights, and had to “suspend”
elevator pits in the basement. Additionally, new
elevators were placed at the perimeter of the project.
The public spaces of the complex are designed to
celebrate the project’s origins. Robust, octagonal
columns march through the main lobby, emphasizing
the great weight of the structure above and creating
dramatic perspectives. The basilica-like quality of this
space will serve as a powerful reminder of the vastness
of the original structure that so impressed us on our
initial visit. Visitors will be able to look up and see
the lit interiors of the grain silos rising 10 stories
overhead. The lobby itself—aside from the columns—
will remain practically empty.
The columns in the lobby extend into the lower level,
which will house a fitness club, a business center, a
billiards room, a wine club, and a gallery. The lowerlevel spaces will feature exposed pile caps, which
will further enhance the visitor’s appreciation of
the massive structure.
The additions to the building, including the elements
interwoven with the remaining silos and a multistory block on top of the existing tower, are being
constructed out of concrete, glass, and various forms
of corrugated metal. A 550-car parking garage, capped
by two- and three-level townhouse-like structures, will
be linked to the tower by a three-story glass bridge.
In a project of this type, a cookiecutter approach to apartment layout
would be impossible, and Silo Point
will therefore offer a broad range
of unit options. To pay homage to
the site’s history, we decided to call
the residential units “bins.” Each
“bin” number will be illuminated
on the floor in front of the apartment door—an allusion to the
original system in which a plate in
the floor identified the number of
each storage bin. Some condo units
will have ceilings as high as 18 feet,
most with floor-to-ceiling windows. Units near the top of
the skyscraper will have glass on two or three sides, and
since no nearby buildings approach the complex’s 22-story
height—and current zoning prevents any other high-rise
construction in the area—Silo Point’s residents will enjoy
spectacular views for years to come.
above: Rendering of an apartment
in the Silo Point project.
Courtesy of Parameter Inc.
Another important design consideration was the
provision of outdoor space for residents. Every bin at
Silo Point has access to some kind of outdoor area—be it a
private balcony, the lushly landscaped common terrace on
the roof, or the walking trails that surround the property.
The landscape design will allude to the complex’s original use
by incorporating mounds representing the volume of grain
that would fit in one silo, as well as grain-like plantings.
In the end, we expect that Silo Point will be an exciting and
dynamic marriage of seemingly disparate histories, uses,
materials, and forms. The project also serves as a compelling
reminder that our landscape is dotted with many
structures—some abandoned, others merely underutilized—
that may be ripe for new functions. By preserving and
adapting elements of a structure that could easily be dismissed as a white elephant, we hope to create a unique and
vibrant residential community that will serve
as a model for urban
revitalization in Baltimore
and elsewhere. •
Winter 2007–08 blueprints 17
museum news
for the
GREENERGOOD
Sixth Turner Prize Recognizes
Gehry and Colleagues
Conversations that
Will Change the World, Part 2
by Scott Kratz, Vice President for Education
by Scott Kratz, Vice President for Education
T
he National Building Museum’s sustainability program series goes
global, with a second slate of programs scheduled from January
through April 2008. Building on the success of last fall’s events,
which focused on domestic issues, we will once again convene
leaders in the field of architecture, planning, economics, history, and
environmental causes to discuss paths to a more sustainable future.
Engage in a conversation with the past research chief of the United
Nations Center for Human Settlements. Talk with world-renowned
planners and architects on what one billion people living in slums means
for the environment. Hear representatives from Abu Dhabi discuss plans
to create a carbon-neutral city in the middle of the Arabian desert. Watch
as historians debate if planned utopias ever develop according to plan.
Listen to California Assemblywoman Fran Pavley describe how her state
is tackling greenhouse gases. Witness journalists, planners, and environmentalists from China discussing the master plan of the Beijing Olympics
and how to balance historic preservation with the most modern new
green building standards. •
For more information and to watch/hear the first four programs in the
series, go to the Museum’s website at www.nbm.org.
For the Greener Good Lecture series is presented by The Home
Depot Foundation.
PARTNERS IN SUSTAINABILITY
On October 3, 2007, more than 1,200 people gathered in the National
Building Museum’s Great Hall to celebrate the sixth recipient of the
Henry C. Turner Award for Innovation in Construction Technology: Gehry
Partners and Gehry Technologies. Accepting the award were founder and
principal architect Frank Gehry on behalf of Gehry Partners and chief technology officer Dennis Shelden on behalf of Gehry Technologies. Gehry is
known around the world for his sinuous buildings that push the boundaries
of construction and engineering technology. Such cutting-edge work has
been made possible by continuous advances in computer-aided design by
Gehry’s affiliated digital technology firm.
The Henry C. Turner Prize, named after the founder of Turner
Construction Company, recognizes an invention, an innovative
methodology, and/or exceptional leadership by an individual or team
of individuals in construction technology. Jury chair Norbert Young,
president of McGraw-Hill Construction, said that Gehry “challenged the
industry to innovate new construction methods.” He added that Gehry
Partners and Gehry Technologies leveraged software and digital design to
create some of the world’s most recognizable structures.
Thomas R. Turner, vice president of Turner Construction Company,
commended the selection, saying, “The Turner Prize recognizes achievements that have had a transformative impact on the built environment
and the jury’s choice of Gehry Partners and Gehry Technologies strongly
reflects this criterion.”
Since its inception in 2002, the Turner Prize has been awarded to
structural engineer Leslie E. Robertson, architect I.M. Pei, engineer
and builder Charles A. DeBenedittis, the U.S. Green Building
Council, and, most recently, Stanford professor Paul Teicholz.
The prize carries a cash award of $25,000 from an endowment
established by Turner Construction Company. •
above: Coordinating curator Susan Piedmont-Palladino
speaks to the group about Breuer’s furniture designs.
Photo by Peter Cutts.
opposite left: An audience member asks a question of a panelist during the program
Gone Fission: Can the Nuclear Industry Help Save the Environment? Photo by Peter Cutts.
above: (from R to L)Norbert Young, president of McGraw-Hill Construction, and 2007
Henry C. Turner Prize recipients Dennis Shelden and Frank Gehry discuss the future of
innovation in the construction industry. Photo by Paul Morigi.
below: Frank Gehry accepts the 2007 Henry C. Turner Prize during
an award ceremony at the Museum. Photo by Paul Morigi.
ONLINE
VIDEO!
To see a video
from the October
award ceremony, visit
the Museum’s website
at www.nbm.org.
Museum Friends
explore Marcel Breuer:
Design and Architecture
By Tasha Passarelle, Development Events Manager
Marcel Breuer was among the most important
and prolific designers of the 20th century. On
October 30, the Museum celebrated Breuer’s
diverse career during a private preview of the
retrospective exhibition Marcel Breuer: Design
and Architecture with the exhibition’s sponsors
and the Museum’s Corinthian-, Professional Circleand Builder-level members.
Developed by the Vitra Design Museum in
Germany, the exhibition presents Breuer’s
extraordinary achievements in furniture and
interior design and reintroduces his often overlooked, but historically significant architectural
work. Vitra’s director, Alexander von Vegesack,
and curator, Mathias Remele, traveled from Europe
to partake in this exclusive opening and to lead
private, behind-the-scenes tours for the 200 guests.
Exhibition sponsors, many of whom attended the
opening event, include the National Endowment
for the Arts; Vitra, Inc.; Deborah Berke & Partners
Architects LLP; Gensler; Perkins + Will; Henry and
Jessica Townsend; I.M. Pei; The Honorable Nancy
G. Brinker; and Mr. and Mrs. Richard England, Sr.
The National Building Museum is the only North
American venue to present this exhibition, which
will be open until February 17, 2008. •
18 blueprints Winter 2007–08
Winter 2007–08 blueprints 19
F BA
museum news
!
n
u
F
l
a
v
i
t
s
e
Fall F
IN
E BUILD
L OF TH
A
IV
T
S
E
F
Modernist Mentor:
An Interview with Daniel Donnelly
by Ellen Jacknain, Festival of the Building Arts Coordinator
by Jamee Telford, Associate Outreach Programs Coordinator
T
his year’s Festival of the Building Arts took
place under sunny autumn skies as visitors
and exhibitors alike focused on the many
different aspects of our built environment. On October
13, more than 2400 children and adults participated in
interactive displays presented by more than 20 groups
of professional craftspeople. Both inside and outside
the Museum, youngsters in yellow plastic hard hats—
gifts from the festival’s sponsor Associated General
Contractors of America—were hammering nails,
sawing wood, drilling, creating, building, surveying,
and climbing on shiny new construction vehicles.
Growing up in the antiques industry, his father an estate auctioneer and his
mother an interior designer, Daniel Donnelly learned at a young age how
to cultivate, collect, and create quality furniture. Twenty-one years ago, he
established an antique and custom furniture shop in Old Town Alexandria
and has seen it grow into a full-fledged modern design studio. He
produces his own line of furniture, sells classic pieces from the likes of
Marcel Breuer and Charles and Ray Eames, and restores vintage furniture.
This fall, Donnelly collaborated with the Museum’s Design Apprenticeship
Program (DAP) to offer guidance to area high school students as they
constructed furniture for donation to a local organization called the Dinner
Program for Homeless Women. In the interview excerpted below, he talked
about his design work and experiences with the DAP kids.
top circle: This moveable
bench—designed by
students in DAP 16: Furnishing Forward—can be reconfigured to fit any space.
Photo by Museum Staff.
middle circle: A DAP
design team deconstructs
a piece of furniture to
see how it works.
Photo by Museum staff.
above top: One of the
DAP 16’s designed a cube
bookshelf to be used in a
local community center.
Photo by Museum Staff.
below: Isokon Nesting
Tables, designed by
Marcel Breuer.
Photo courtesy of Daniel Donnelly.
Jamee Telford: What is your design philosophy?
Daniel Donnelly: It varies—most times the solution is just
a slight shift in approach or different angle of attack. Some
designers tend to over-think a problem. You just need to
keep it simple. Let your materials do the work. Let your
materials serve their original purpose. When envisioning
a space, I start as a minimalist, then layer details—work on
functionality first, then let the contents work themselves in.
I try not to manipulate materials too much.
Telford: What led to the resurgence of interest in
mid-20th-century furniture?
Donnelly: I think it is a generational thing. Appreciation of
popular styles tends to skip a generation. In our case, this
happened to coincide with a generation that produced an
enormous output of inspired design. Mid-century design
embodies a functional approach to living spaces and is a
good fit with our technology culture today. Herman Miller
realized the groundswell in the early ’90s and re-released its
classic collection. Since then others have followed, including
me. You no longer have to search through antique shops or
family estates to find the work of Eames, Nelson, or Noguchi.
G ARTS
Telford: What was the
DAP students’ biggest
challenge in creating
furniture for the Dinner
Program for Homeless
Women?
Donnelly: Comfort. The students
are creating seating for this organization, seating that will be used quite often. The challenge
is, how can they make it comfortable and durable? How
can they create seat cushions that will last a long period
of time? What materials are available to do this? If they
choose not to use seat cushions, how will the materials
they use to construct the furniture create a comfortable
design? These are the questions they have to answer.
Telford: What did you learn from your experience
with the students?
Visitors of all ages were able to talk to architects,
masons, roofers, thatchers, plumbers, drywall finishers,
and timberwrights, and explore different materials and
processes—both traditional and sustainable—used in
construction. Woodworkers, art glass designers, stone
carvers, gilders, and interior designers were on hand
to give insight into creative home improvement ideas.
Landscape architects educated the public on the
advantages of, and creative processes behind, green
roofs; and young visitors also had the opportunity
to make their own model green roofs to take home.
Debuting at this year’s festival was a life-size custom
playhouse constructed with sustainable materials by
Pardee Homes as part of HomeAid’s National Project
Playhouse. Children explored the new playhouse and
then designed their own miniature versions to take
home. The playhouse will remain at the Museum as
a permanent part of the Building Zone exhibition. •
The 2007 Festival of the Building Arts was presented by the
Associated General Contractors of America. The National Building
Museum thanks all organizations, as well as the many individual
and company exhibitors, for participating in this successful festival.
Through this signature event, the Museum aims to introduce
visitors of all ages to the building trades and building arts by
offering demonstrations of crafts and skills, many of which include
hands-on components; special children’s
activities; and displays of construction
machinery.
The National Building Museum wishes to
thank all the individuals and organizations
demonstrating their crafts and skills at the
2007 Festival of the Building Arts:
American Society of Interior Designers (ASID)
ASID, Washington Metro Chapter
American Society of Landscape Architects
Blacksmiths’ Guild of the Potomac
Blue Ridge Timberwrights
The Clark Construction Group
Capitol Greenroofs, L.L.C.
COTEdc: American Institute of Architects, DC
Committee on the Environment
Covenant House Washington,
Artisans Program Workshop
DC Association of Land Surveyors
Gold Leaf Studios
International Masonry Institute and
the International Union of Bricklayers
and Allied Craftworkers
Lafarge
Colin McGhee, Master Thatcher
Metropolitan Washington PlumbingHeating-Cooling Contractors
Miller and Long
National Capital Art Glass Guild (NCAGG)
Potomac Antique Tool and Industries
Association (PATINA)
Andy Seferlis and John Sonnier:
Stone Carving
Superior Concrete Materials, Inc.
Wagner Roofing
Washington Woodworkers Guild
far left: The new Project Playhouse in The Building Zone.
Photo by Peter Cutts.
left: A volunteer at the
Festival of the Building Arts
teaches a builder-in-training
how to hammer.
Photo by Peter Cutts.
below right: A young attendee
participates in a surveying
demonstration at the
Festival of the Building Arts.
Photo by Marshall Cohen.
Donnelly: I am extremely impressed with the quality of
questions the students asked during our initial meeting.
They were thinking like designers. It was so refreshing
to be in conversation with them. They wanted to know
everything about the space, what the constraints were, and
how to solve the problem. It was apparent the students
wanted to meet the needs of their clients. I would continue
to encourage their problem-solving skills.
A good designer is an excellent problem solver. If they continue the cultivation of the skills I have seen so far, these
students will be on the right track. •
20 blueprints Winter 2007–08
Winter 2007–08 blueprints 21
museum news
Hardy Headlines Members’ Event
by Mark Davis, Membership Manager
Late last summer, members of the Museum’s Builders and Professional Circle groups enjoyed an evening reception and presentation by Hugh Hardy, FAIA, principal
of H3 Hardy Collaboration Architecture LLC based in New York. Hardy is
known for high-profile public projects including the restoration of Radio City
Music Hall and the design of the National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum
in Cooperstown, New York. His lively remarks provided insights into H3’s creative
endeavors, including the firm’s contribution to the Museum’s recent exhibition
Reinventing the Globe: A Shakespearean Theater for the 21st Century—a hypothetical
theater in the middle of Times Square that could be adapted to travel to all of
New York City’s five boroughs. The entertaining evening included a special
surprise: a cake in honor of Hardy’s birthday, which he happily shared with
members. To join The Builders or The Professional Circle and receive invitations
for programs and events like these, please contact Mark Davis, Membership
Manager, at 202.272.2448, ext. 3200, or [email protected]. •
above: Architect Hugh Hardy
speaks with a Museum
member during The Builder’s
and Professional Circle
reception in August 2007.
Photo by Museum Staff.
right: The Museum presents
Hugh Hardy with a cake in
celebration of his birthday.
Photo by Museum Staff.
National Building
Museum and Kreeger
Museum to Offer
Joint Study Tour
“Cradle of Modernism: The Bauhaus
Legacy in Four German Cities”
by Martin Moeller, Senior Vice President and Curator
The National
Building Museum
and the Kreeger Museum are cooperating to
offer an unprecedented
tour tracing the legacy
of the Bauhaus, the
groundbreaking school
that changed the course of modern design history.
Scheduled for September 12–22, 2008, the tour will
feature the three cities that successively served as home
to the school—Weimar, Dessau, and Berlin—as well as
Stuttgart.The itinerary includes visits to architectural
landmarks designed by Bauhaus faculty, museums that
contain works by Bauhaus masters, and other sites of
historic or architectural importance.
The tour will begin in Stuttgart, site of the Weissenhof
housing complex, which was one of the largest works by
Bauhaus architects, and two important art museums—
the Kunstmuseum and the Staatsgalerie. In Weimar,
stops will include the Art Nouveau house of Henry van
de Velde, who headed the predecessor institution to the
Bauhaus, as well the historic homes of major literary
figures such as Goethe and Nietsche. The highlight
of the stay in Dessau will be the famous Bauhaus
itself—the only entirely new structure ever built for the
school—and the houses of Bauhaus founder Walter
Gropius and other leading teachers. The tour concludes
in Berlin, where participants will visit the Bauhaus
Archives, the National Gallery designed by Ludwig
Mies van der Rohe, and the contemporary Jewish
Museum by Daniel Libeskind.
The total cost of the tour including airfare from
Washington, luxurious hotel accommodations, and
numerous meals is $5,995. For more information
contact Martin Moeller, at 202.272.2448, ext. 3451
or [email protected]. •
22 blueprints Winter 2007–08
above: The Museum’s
executive director,
Chase Rynd, presents
the Dale Chihuly
sculpture Cobalt
Basket set with Red
Poppy Lips (2001)
to the raffle winners.
Photo by Museum staff.
Spotlight on DeGarmo
by Melinda Hungerman, Corporate and Association Relations Manager
On September 24, a crowd of more than 250 people attended a lecture by Todd
DeGarmo of STUDIOS architecture presented by the Museum as part of its
prestigious Spotlight on Design series. As CEO of STUDIOS architecture and founder
of the firm’s New York office, DeGarmo has had a profound influence on the design
of base buildings, renovations, historic preservation, and interior architecture. In his
lecture, he discussed how the Washington, DC office’s expertise has informed national
and international projects, including the interiors of the IAC/InterActiveCorp
headquarters by Frank Gehry, the Bloomberg LP headquarters, and the Kingman
Island Environmental Education Center.
After the lecture, the Museum and STUDIOS architecture hosted a reception in
the Pension Commissioner’s Suite, with nearly 100 guests including Corinthian and
Professional Circle members, and STUDIOS architecture staff and clients. •
above: Todd DeGarmo, CEO and founder of
STUDIOS architecture’s New York office.
Photo by Ron Solomon, courtesy STUDIOS
architecture.
And the Winner is…
by Mary Zehe, Assistant Director of Development
This past summer, the Museum held a raffle for
the chance to win the elegant sculpture Cobalt
Basket Set with Poppy Red Lip Wraps (2001) created
by world-renowned glass artist Dale Chihuly.
Chihuly generously donated this piece as a salute
to his former classmate at the Rhode Island School
of Design, David Macaulay, and to support the
Museum’s exhibition: David Macaulay: The Art
of Drawing Architecture.
After being open for more than three months,
the raffle was held on September 14th. The lucky
winners were Museum members Michael D. Blau
and Jacqueline A. Moore, who is also a member of
the Museum’s Teacher Advisory Board. Both glass
artists in their own right, Michael and Jacqueline
said they were thrilled to have won and are
looking forward to enjoying this beautiful piece
in their home. •
left: Todd DeGarmo discusses STUDIOS
architecture’s work in Washington, D.C.
and beyond during a Spotlight on Design
lecture at the Museum.
Photo by Museum staff.
Winter 2007–08 blueprints 23
contributors
Board of Trustees
donor profile
The Museum thanks the following individuals, companies, associations and agencies for gifts
of $250 or more received from August 1–October 31, 2007. These generous gifts provide
essential support for the Museum’s exhibitions, education programs, and endowment funds.
Some of the contributions listed below are in partial fulfillment of larger pledges.
U.S. Department
of Energy
by Tim Carrigan, Donor Relations Coordinator
$50,000 and above
$2,500–$4,999
$250–$999
American Planning Association
Deutsche Bank Private
Wealth Management
U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development
Aon Risk Services
David C. Evans Esq.
Fentress Architects
Grunley Construction Co., Inc.
Costas Kondylis
& Associates, P.C.
Linda B. Lyons and
Jonathan S. Lyons
Microdesk
Musee des arts et metiers/
CNAM
The New York Times
Ann Satterthwaite, AICP
STUDIOS Architecture
Virginia Tech
Leonard A. Zax
Agnes Artemel
Bob and Kathy Baer
Thomas M. Ballentine
Linna M. Barnes
and Christian J. Mixter
C. Kaya Biron, AIA
A. R. Braunmuller and
Christine L. Krueger
Robert Bush
William F. Clinger, Jr.
Kim Coletta
Jerome A. Conlon
Einhorn Yaffee Prescott
Joan Eisenstodt and Joel Levy
Frances Ferguson
Guardian Industries Corp.
Delon Hampton, PhD, PE
Patricia Harrison
Joseph F. Horning, Jr.
Craig Howie
Mr. and Mrs. Joel Hunter
Island Press
Dudley Ives
Kasteel Construction
Keane Enterprises, LLC
Joyce Kessler and
Amy Kessler Pastan
John P. Kyle
Michael L. Marshall, AIA
Randolph Q. McManus
G. Martin Moeller, Jr.
and Steven Dickens
John E. Moyer, AIA
Sakura Namioka
National Association of Women
in Construction
Thomas E. O’Brien
Lawrence O’Connor and
Ashley Power O’Connor
Joseph Palca and Kathy Hudson
Laura Peebles
Thorn L. Pozen
Quadrangle Development Co.
Edna R. Ranck and Martin
Fleischer
Susan A. Retz, AIA
and Charles J. Lovett
Edward T. and Dee Ann Revere
Robert Silman Associates, PLLC
SKB Architecture & Design
Albert H. and Shirley Small
George Stavropoulos
Robert A. M. Stern Architects LLP
Sustainable Design
Consulting LLC
Keene Taylor
Shar Taylor
Kristen and Christopher Ullman
United Way of the
National Capital Area
Anna G. Wade and Nancy Laws
Christine Wirkkala
Marion E. Yeck
$10,000–$24,999
Since 2002, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)
and the National Building Museum have worked
together on numerous programs—such as the
exhibitions Big and Green and The Green House, as
well as the noontime lecture series Building for the
21st Century—which advance the agency’s mission
of ensuring the ongoing availability of reliable, clean,
efficient, and affordable energy.
For the 30 years since it was established, DOE
has provided the framework for a comprehensive
and balanced national energy plan. The
department is responsible for long-term research
and development of energy technology, federal
power marketing, energy conservation, military
applications, energy regulatory programs, and
a central energy data collection and analysis
program. Today, DOE continues to ensure the
nation’s energy security by maintaining the safety
and reliability of nuclear stockpiles, cleaning up
the environmental impact of the Cold War, and
spearheading scientific and technological advances
and research into viable energy alternatives.
“The National Building Museum’s programs put
a wonderful ‘shine’ on the often gritty research
conducted in our national laboratories and on
building sites all around the U.S.,” said Mark
Ginsberg, board member of DOE’s Office of
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy. “The
U.S. Department of Energy is a proud partner
with the National Building Museum. We look
forward to a continued relationship where the
results of building research—better, safer, and more
energy efficient homes and buildings and building
practices—can be showcased and shine on in such
a wide variety of programs and exhibitions.”
The Museum relies on the support of government
and industry partners like the U.S. Department
of Energy. The Board of Trustees and staff are
grateful for the agency’s continued support. •
24 blueprints Winter 2007–08
Apollo Real Estate Management
Mr. and Mrs. Thomas N.
Armstrong, III
Associated Builders and
Contractors, Inc.
The Beech Street Foundation
Bentley Systems, Incorporated
The Beverly Willis Architecture
Foundation
BFC Partners
Bloomberg
Facchina-McGaughan, LLC
Freddie Mac
Gensler
Robert W. Holleyman, II
Kohn Pedersen Fox
Associates PC
Lafarge
The Meltzer Group
National Association
of Home Builders
Perkins + Will
Reznick Group
Skidmore, Owings & Merrill LLP
$5,000–$9,999
American Society
of Civil Engineers
The Associated General
Contractors of America
Deborah Berke & Partners
Architects LLP
Cassidy & Pinkard Colliers
Nancy B. and Howard K. Cohen
Construction Industry
Round Table
Cushman & Wakefield
D.C. Office of Property
Management
Mr. and Mrs. Charles A.
DeBenedittis
Cynthia R. and Charles G. Field
Handel Architects, LLP
Robb & Stucky Interiors
Thornton Tomasetti, Inc.
$1,000–$2,499
Sandy Apgar
Atmosphere Inc.
The Honorable
Nancy G. Brinker
Brownrigg Charitable Trust
Champion Title and
Settlements, Inc
Christie’s America
DeSimone Consulting
Engineers
Dewberry
Mr. and Mrs. Richard
England, Sr.
Herb and Barbara Franklin
Gilbane Building Company
Elika Hemphill and
Richard Confalone
S. Kann Sons Company
Foundation, Inc.
Kishimoto.Gordon.Dalaya PC
Jacqueline and
Marc Leland Foundation
Mortgage Bankers Association
Charles A. and Diana R. Nathan
National Society of
Professional Engineers
The National Trust for
Historic Preservation
Scott and Maggie Nelson
Oehme, van Sweden
& Associates
Parsons Brinckerhoff
Robert A. Peck
I.M. Pei, FAIA
Jillian Hanbury Poole
Quite a Stir in Catering!
Rathgeber/Goss Associates, P.C.
Rippeteau Architects, P.C.
RMJM Hillier
David Rockwell, AIA and
Rockwell Architecture,
Planning, and Design, PC
Stephen E. Sandherr
Tompkins Builders, Inc.
mystery building
Readers Show Powers
of “Observation”
Perched at the edge of a dramatic
precipice, its white walls gleaming in the sunlight (when it’s
not too smoggy), its terraces
commanding spectacular
views of the Los Angeles
Basin (when it’s not too
smoggy), is the Fall 2007
Mystery Building, better
known as the Griffith
Observatory. Designed
by John C. Austin and
Frederick M. Ashley in an
elegant Greco-Deco style,
the observatory opened
in 1935 and has long been
a favorite backdrop for
Hollywood films, ranging from
the classic Rebel Without a Cause
to the recent Transformers movie. The
landmark building recently reopened after
an extensive renovation and addition by Pfeiffer
Partners Architects Inc., working in association with Levin &
Associates Architects.
The Mystery Photo was taken from the “promenade walkway,” looking up the
side of the faceted, buttressed drum that supports the central planetarium dome.
Six readers correctly identified the building. Each of the first five respondents
received a National Building Museum coffee mug as a prize. The prize winners
were: Carl Thomas Engel, Painesville, OH; Edward T. Revere, McLean, VA;
and John Edwards, Nick Wafle, and David G. Wood, all of Washington, DC.
The sixth correct respondent was Jan D. Carline of Seattle, WA. •
Chair
Honorary Trustees
Michael J. Glosserman
Harold L. Adams
Howard M. Bender
Carolyn Schwenker Brody
David C. Evans
M. Arthur Gensler Jr.
Mike Goodrich
Thomas J. Klutznick
Frederick A. Kober
Stuart A. McFarland
Robert McLean III
Elizabeth B. Moynihan
Marilyn Perry
James W. Todd
Mallory Walker
Leonard A. Zax
Executive Director
Chase W. Rynd
Secretary
Gilbert E. DeLorme
Treasurer
Robert H. Braunohler
Elected and Voting Trustees
William B. Alsup III
Frank Anton
Thomas N. Armstrong III
David S. Bender
Deborah Berke
William M. Brennan
Kelly Caffarelli
Joan Baggett Calambokidis
Donald A. Capoccia
Dennis J. Cotter
Christopher Dorval
Delon Hampton
Gary P. Haney
Philippe Hardouin
Robert W. Holleyman, II
Joseph F. Horning, Jr.
Gerald M. Howard
Mercy Jiménez
A. Eugene Kohn
Deryl McKissack
Hollis S. McLoughlin
Melissa A. Moss
Robert A. Peck
Whayne S. Quin
Stephen M. Ross
Deborah Ratner Salzberg
Stephen E. Sandherr
Robert A.M. Stern
Norbert W. Young, Jr.
Founding Trustees
Cynthia R. Field
Herbert M. Franklin
Edward T. Hall
Nancy Stevenson
Beverly Willis
Ex Officio Trustees
Secretary Dirk Kempthorne
Department of the Interior
Secretary Alphonso Jackson
Department of Housing and
Urban Development
Senator Barbara Boxer
Chair, Senate Committee on
Environment and Public Works
Representative James Oberstar
Chair, House Committee on
Transportation & Infrastructure
Lurita Doan
Administrator
General Services Administration
Adrian M. Fenty
Mayor of the District of Columbia
David L. Winstead
Comissioner,
Public Buildings Service,
General Services Administration
Stephen T. Ayers
Acting Architect of the Capitol
Allen Weinstein
Archivist of the United States
James H. Billington
The Librarian of Congress
Cristián Samper
Acting Secretary of the
Smithsonian
Richard Moe
President
National Trust for
Historic Preservation
Christine McEntee
Executive Director and CEO
The American Institute
of Architects
this issue’s mystery...
National Building Museum Editorial Board
?
Step Right Up!
Something curious is going on with
those doors. Can you identify the
Mystery Building and its location?
Responses will be accepted by e-mail
or regular mail. To be eligible for a
prize (reserved for the first five correct
respondents only), send an e-mail to
[email protected]. You may also
respond by regular mail, though you will
not be eligible for the prize.
The mailing address is:
Mystery Building
National Building Museum
401 F Street, NW
Washington, DC 20001
Johanna Dunkel, Marketing and Communications Manager
Catherine Crane Frankel, Vice President for Exhibitions and Collections
Melissa Kennedy, Senior Graphic Designer
Scott Kratz, Vice President for Education
Bryna Lipper, Vice President for Marketing and Communications
G. Martin Moeller, Jr., Senior Vice President and Curator
Chase W. Rynd, Executive Director
Shar Taylor, Vice President for Development
Blueprints
Editor-in-Chief, G. Martin Moeller, Jr.
Managing Editor, Johanna Dunkel
Designer, Jennifer Byrne
Blueprints is the quarterly magazine of the National Building Museum.
Subscriptions are a benefit of Museum membership.
Blueprints ©2007. All rights reserved. ISSN 0742-0552
Paper contains 50% recycled content including 25% post-consumer waste.
The National Building Museum explores the world we build for ourselves—
from our homes, skyscrapers, and public buildings to our parks, bridges,
and cities. Through exhibitions, education programs, and publications, the
Museum seeks to educate the public about achievements in architecture,
design, engineering, urban planning, and construction. The Museum is
supported by contributions from individuals, corporations, foundations,
associations, and public agencies.
Drawing the Museum
Limited Edition Antoine Predock Print
by Johanna Dunkel, Marketing Communications Manager
In 2001, the National Building Museum commissioned renowned architect Cesar Pelli
to create a portrait of our historic home. The result was an oil pastel of the Museum’s
brick and terra cotta main façade. The limited-edition print of the drawing was very
popular, and soon sold out.
This year, the Museum once again commissioned a leading architect—2006 AIA
Gold Medalist Antoine Predock—to draw the Museum. Predock’s drawing beautifully
and evocatively depicts the Museum’s Great Hall and its famed Corinthian columns. Only
100 of the 18” x 24”, signed, and numbered prints were produced and they are available
exclusively at the National Building Museum Shop. Be sure to pick one up today.
The Pelli and Predock prints are the first two in a series of drawings that the Museum
intends to commission. Stay tuned for information on the next drawing in the series.
$270.00 Museum members / $300.00 Public
Drawing of the Great Hall. © Antoine Predock.
exhibitions on view
Lasting Foundations:
Marcel Breuer:
The Art of
Design and Architecture
Architecture in Africa through February 17, 2008
through January 13, 2008
David Macaulay:
The Art of Drawing
Architecture
extended through
May 4, 2008
Washington:
Symbol and City
Long-term
Cityscapes Revealed:
Highlights from
the Collection
Long-term
Investigating
Where We Live
extended through
January 13, 2008
Building Zone
Long-term
Above from left to right: © Margaret Courtney-Clarke; © Hedrich Blessing; © David Macaulay, photo by Christopher Benson; Models by RAF Models and Displays, photo by Cary; National Building Museum collection; ©Amanda Barber; ©F.T. Eyre
National Building Museum
401 F Street NW Washington, DC 20001
202.272.2448 / www.nbm.org
Red Line Metro, Judiciary Square
Nonprofit Organization
U.S. Postage Paid
Washington, D.C.
Permit No. 488