18.10.2024

Kunstmuseum Bern competition decided

Building design

Rendering, winning project "Eiger", view from Waisenhausplatz
Visualization: Studio Blomen, Zurich © Schmidlin Architekten

The Kunstmuseum Bern is something special. Founded in 1879, it is one of the oldest art museums in Switzerland after the Kunstmuseum Basel. However, both the old building by Eugen Stettler from 1879 and the extension from 1984 – which stands on a foundation from 1936 – have been in need of renovation for several years. Deficits were identified with regard to the lighting concept, supporting structure, building services, safety and escape route requirements and the protection of cultural assets. As a result, some parts of the building could only be operated with special permits. Against this backdrop, debates about a new replacement building and the renovation of the existing extension began years ago.

A feasibility study from 2018 revealed that a future concept would have to be considered beyond the actual Kunstmuseum Bern site. However, the situation on Hodlerstrasse, which has been a UNESCO World Heritage Site as a whole since 1983, is highly complex due to the different ownership and usage relationships as well as various publicinterests. In order to master this complexity, those responsible have organized various panel events, surveys and over 50 workshops involving the people of Bern in recent years. The findings gathered were ultimately incorporated into the invitation to tender for an international architecture competition. A total of 148 teams applied in the open 2-stage process. From these, a jury selected 39 offices to take part in the competition. This was ultimately won by the Swiss firm Schmidlin Architekten with MOFA urban landscape studio GmbH SIA. Their entry “EIGER” impressed with its clear urban volume, which opens up a square situation on Hodlerstrasse.

“It’s the kind of building we want,” said Nina Zimmer, Director of the Kunstmuseum Bern and the Zentrum Paul Klee since 2016, commenting on the winning design. Extensive renovations and a new replacement building are planned. The architects emphasize that the new solitary building is not an extension, but an equal counterpart in dialogue with the neoclassical Stettler building. It will thus become a further player in the series ofrepresentativepublic buildings on thenorthernslope of the Aare. This architectural self-confidence goes hand in hand with the inclusion of the public space. By moving the new building slightly towards the slope of the Aare, a spacious public square is created. This museum square is linked to the promenades and squares up to Bärenplatz and is thus integrated into the urban fabric. The square willfeatureacaféand will serve as a meeting place and venue for art in the extended publicspace. The square is also intended to contribute to cooling the urban climate with a water feature and vegetation.

The museum square is not the only open space upgrade envisaged by the design. A terracedcourtyard garden also connects the planned new building and the bistro, thus setting the city wall in a new light. In addition, a wide flight of steps will be created between the Stettlerbau and the new building, leading down to the newly created Aare terrace. This public space is suitable as a picnic area or for art education, among other things.

Overall, the urban planning gestures and the museum square succeed in bringing the three surrounding buildings together to form an ensemble. In doing so, the architects preserve the special features of the individual buildings, as the jury report makes clear: “The different eras of the buildings are harmonized, their structural differences are emphasized and at the same time the lasting heritage of the institution is strengthened.” In order to create a cohesive whole, as it were, Schmidlin designed a well thought-out spatial arrangement that creates a link between the historical andcontemporaryelements. They also proposed a uniform material palette. The new building is an impressive monolith made of sandstone, the texture of which references the tradition of Bernese stone quarrying techniques. The sandstone façade on the first floor is based on the traditional concept of rustication and becomes smoother towards the top. Individual openings are glazed flush with the façade. The roof of the new building is flat, an abstraction. In contrast to the structured roof of the Stettler building, the new solitaire has a flat roof.

The harmonious dialog betweencontemporaryand historical art experiences also continues inside. The result is a “two-part experience“. These areas can be experienced from a multifunctional entrance foyer. The new building consists of three autonomous, vertically stacked exhibition spaces. From there, the transition into the existing building resembles an immersion into the essence of the 19th century art museum. In the Stettlerbau, Schmidlin Architekten envision a two-storey high space with unexpected light and views. According to the jury, this bold proposal still needs to be reviewed in terms of monument preservation. Ultimately, however, it was precisely the special connection between the old and new buildings, as propagated by Schmidlin Architekten, that convinced the jury.

“The selected proposal exceeds the original requirements for the museum extension,” was the jury’s verdict. The EIGER project proposal not only fits seamlessly into the historical context, but also strengthens the presence of the Stettler Building and offers the city of Bern a new space and a distinctive location for the “renewed” Kunstmuseum Bern. The task now is to continue working on the winning project. Among other things, the façadeis to be reworked to create a more extensive structure in order to establish deeper links with the surroundings. The listed status of the Stettler Building and Hodlerstrasse 6 should also be examined in greater depth. And finally, the open space design of the museum square needs to be fleshed out. A committee of the jury will oversee the revision of the project in close cooperation with the city’s monument preservation authorities. The final project should then be available at the beginning of 2028.

25.12.2024

Exhibitions

For a differentiated approach to the portfolio

Building design

General

Architects usually try to create finished houses, i.e. coherent works of architectural art for eternity. But does this claim stand up to reality? Should that even be the claim? Inspired by references from architectural history, art and anthropology, the young Stuttgart-based studio Kaiser Shen has developed various theses and tested them on the basis of its own projects. From […]

21.11.2024

Tens of millions for the unloved barn

Building design

General

The Museum der Moderne will be expensive. Very expensive. But what is scandalous is not that the budget was approved. But how it was approved. Here is the opinion of architecture critic Falk Jaeger.

Herzog & de Meuron’s Museum der Moderne has been criticized from all sides for years: it is far too expensive, the design is not appealing and the visual axis between the National Gallery and the Philharmonie is being obstructed. Now the budget committee of the German Bundestag has approved the cost plan for the project. How can it be that politicians are ignoring all the facts and public objections and approving the exorbitant cost plan for a new museum, while the other buildings of the Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation have long been in need of renovation?

Visualizations: Herzog & de Meuron

Rarely has a public building project in Germany provoked so much headwind as the Museum der Moderne. A shitstorm, you could almost say, if the contributions to the discussion were not of a serious nature. “The most expensive crusty bread in the world”, was the headline in the FAZ, referring to a metaphor used by jury chairman Arno Lederer. “This barn is a scandal” was the headline of another FAZ article, a scathing all-round attack that scandalized the location, architecture, size, environmental aspects and costs in equal measure.

Some points of criticism even overshoot the mark. The castigation of the sacrilegious proposal to block the line of sight from Mies van der Rohe’s Neue Nationalgalerie to Scharoun’s Philharmonie (nicely illustrated by Stefan Braunfels in another polemic) is an all too superficial, silly stop-the-thief argument. Of course, a new building in this location would interrupt the view, but Scharoun had already planned it that way in terms of urban development, and Mies had to assume this in his planning.

Why would the view be so indispensable? If you want to see the Philharmonie, you can just step outside the door. In the beginning, when the Tiergarten was still free of trees due to the war, you could even see the Brandenburg Gate from the Neue Nationalgalerie, so what the heck.

The Tagesspiegel described the situation as “eyes closed and through”, and was right: the budget committee of the German Bundestag approved another hefty gulp from the taxpayers’ purse for the Museum der Moderne, thereby imposing a voluntary commitment for future increases in building costs from 364.2 million to a forecast 450 million euros. It certainly won’t stay at that, it’s more likely to be 600 million. But then the project will be under construction and there will be no turning back.

Dependence on private donors

The real scandal is how the Minister of State for Culture, Monika Grütters (CDU), has pushed through her personal “Grand Projet” against the most diverse reservations in the backrooms of politics. The political caste is making up its own mind about the project. Facts, pragmatic considerations and public opinion play no role. Perhaps the highly controversial architecture of the Museum der Moderne (“barn”, “ALDI discount store” etc.) would not have been a sufficient reason for a rejection, after all it was the result of a competition with a prominent jury. However, the urban planning problems, the reduction in the floor plan with the consequence of the expensive, difficult-to-calculate lowering into the extremely problematic Berlin building ground, should have given the housekeepers food for thought.

It is also annoying to see the submissive dependence on some private donors who had threatened to move their collections elsewhere. This is due to the fact that the foundation can hardly organize its own major projects, internationally attractive exhibitions, and is dependent on partners who are willing to pay.

Too many building sites

The Prussian Cultural Heritage Foundation is constantly being “gifted” new, magnificent museums by the federal government, which then have to be used and maintained. However, there are already decades of renovation backlogs at the existing houses. In addition, there is inadequate funding for qualified specialist staff and a pitiful acquisition budget of 1.6 million for all museums. None of this fits together.

The Foundation should finally be consolidating. Instead, the Humboldt Forum in the palace replica is to be brought back on track in 2020, the general renovations of the Pergamon Museum, the New National Gallery and Scharoun’s State Library are devouring huge sums of money and so on…

It’s no wonder that Berlin looks longingly at the popular major exhibition events in Paris, London, Amsterdam and New York. We want to play in that league too, we want to have something like that here again.