Morning:
6°c
Pyramid on the Thames: Tate Modern's 'unique' extension gets the go-ahead
Katharine Barney and Will Hurst27 Mar 2009
A £215MILLION extension to make Tate Modern one of the most astonishing public buildings in the world is to be given the go-ahead.
The Herzog-designed extension to the South Bank gallery is described as "extraordinary and unique" by planners in Southwark. Councillors vote on Tuesday and are expected to approve the revised plans.
The gallery must raise £145 million to build the 70-metre tall building, for which some funds are already in place. Director Sir Nicholas Serota expects the building to be completed by 2014.
Designs for the extension, known as Tate Modern 2, were drawn up five years ago. They have been revised by Swiss architects Herzog & de Meuron - the firm which created the gallery from a disused power station - because of soaring visitor numbers.
The original design, a pyramid made of glass cubes, was redrawn to look as if it is "growing out" of the original gallery. The 11-storey building will provide nearly 25,000sq m of floor space, including a 1,500sq m gallery.
It has become vital to the future of the gallery because of rising visitor numbers. Tate Modern was designed for 1.8million visitors annually, but has reached an average of 4.6 million over recent years and is one of Britain's most popular attractions.
A Tate spokesman said: "There is huge pressure on public facilities. More space is needed to maintain and develop our programme."
The only hold-up in the scheme is a minor objection from Boris Johnson over sloping floors.
His planning officials have told Southwark Council they have concerns that some of the floors and spiral staircases are not accessible to wheelchairs.
But Southwark Council said it posed no "serious barrier to mobility". The gallery is understood to be confident it will not hold up the scheme.
A spokeswoman for the Mayor said he was supportive of an extension to the Tate but added: "He did raise valid issues in respect of accessibility which officers are seeking to resolve."
The council report states: "The architectural qualities are of the highest standard. Its scale and confidence of execution give it an enduring quality that will find its place in the public consciousness over time."
'Brick walls are folded like paper'
Rowan Moore, the Evening Standard's architecture critic, wrote about the new version of the Tate's proposed extension last year: "What was a glassy pile of boxes has become brick and smooth-skinned. The new version is still emphatic, a hefty, hard-to-miss brick tower, but it is no longer a battle of design ideas. The big move is to use the same material as that of the old power station that houses Tate Modern, while using it to make a brick building such as has never been seen before. The bricks hover. Light shines through them. Brick walls are folded like paper... futuristic. Quite simply, the design has got better."
Reader views (31)
It will relieve the ugliness of the former power station chimney - which I suppose is a Grade 1 listed edifice?
- Peter Seekings-Foster, Mildenhall, Suffolk., 24/05/2009 21:21
Report abuse
Looks great itself, but will overtake the beauty of 'old' Tate. I really like the green bits in front of museum. Proportionally won’t go with the bridge. Maybe idea for the balance to St. Pauls, but hope won’t go higher than the cathedral. I think square cement giant looks more terrifying then carvings and shine art of the church. Probably we will have to use to this, but I'm still not convinced with it and Shakespeare’s Globe by.
- Kasha, London, 24/05/2009 20:21
Report abuse
Is this really neccessary? It's more like rubbing our noses in it, with regard to those who are losing homes, jobs and respect for the might of wealth and the desire to impress others with their baubles.
- Corneilius, Harrow, 24/05/2009 20:21
Report abuse
All new buildings in London should be no more than two stories so that they do not blight the landscape. I agree with Kimberly, how are drivers like me expected to get to this safely anyway? I only feel safe south of the river when I'm in my SUV, its an awful place. At least if it was a car park we could enjoy the views of the river from the safety of our cars.
- Mr N Imby, London, 24/05/2009 20:21
Report abuse
Bizarrely, I like the design: but is it any wonder that London is sinking - what with all these big buildings being slapped up on a muddy river-bank . . . ?
- Roz, Chamonix, France, 24/05/2009 20:21
Report abuse
Mr Moore seems a fitting spokesman for a generation of architects who know nothing about building, but seem to believe their job is just to conceive wacky shapes. Brick is built in vertical walls to accept load, and minimise the fall of water on to its absorbent surface.That is why it is usually protected by an ovehanging roof, and string courses on taller buildings. This shape will create cascades of runoff, concentrated in certain areas (possibly over doorways), creating leaks and staining. You can risk this with impervious materials, but not with brick. The Gherkin, 'iconic' but hated by its occupants, was found, because of its outward bulge halfway up, to send a waterfall on the heads of people once they were three feet away from the door on a wet day. Also,unbelievably, the glass panels have to be replaced from the outside.
My curmudgeonly advice would be to deny entrance to architecture school to anyone who has not practised a building trade out in the rain for two years.: let the imagination run free once the basics have been understood. You would not trust a doctor who had not learned anatomy.
- Mdj E10, london uk, 24/05/2009 20:21
Report abuse
I love it! Much better that all that ugly junk around St Pauls.
- Jenny, san francisco ca ( ex-londoner), 24/05/2009 20:21
Report abuse
The old Bankside power station was a terrific elegant building, instead of maintaining that Tate Modern have daubed it with graffiti and childish rubbish. They are about gimmicks and commercialism, they would not know real art if it bit them. The proposed extension is as bad as the blurb explaining it is nonsensical.
- Geoff, Bristol UK, 24/05/2009 20:21
Report abuse
I looks hideous! and to will hide the tate modern behind it is wrong...
- Mike, london, UK, 24/05/2009 20:21
Report abuse
Is this really the best use that could be made of taxpayers' money in the current financial climate? And why does modern art always have to be big (and therefore demand equally large galleries to display it? ) My answer to the latter, if it wasn't on a vast and vulgar scale, we might notice that the Emperor isn't wearing any clothers.
Purely as architecture, it's quite good.
- Nigel, London, 24/05/2009 20:21
Report abuse
As someone who works adjacent to the proposed building, while this design is an improvement on the 'Lego' blocks previously proposed, it's still drab, hideous and ugly.
It is being built on the only green space in the area too, and wont sit easily with the rest of the modern architecture in the area.
And in response to Kimberley's comments on the area being rough, don't believe everything you read. It is undergoing a regeneration, and by July another 3,500 office workers will be in the area.
And why on earth do you need to drive when there are two Tube stations 8 mins walk away and bus stops in Southwark Street, 3 mins walk away served by two routes?
I cant understand why people feel the need to drive in London when public transport is more than adequate.
- Chris Hill, Willen, Milton Keynes, 24/05/2009 20:21
Report abuse
I trust Kimberly was making her comment in jest? Unsafe?
The whole area is so overrun with tourists (just try walking from the Royal Festival Hall to Borough Market and see). And yes, I said try walking.
- Dt, Harrow, UK, 24/05/2009 20:21
Report abuse
Oh great. An addition to the existing drab, brutal building in the same dried-turd colour. Cover it in stainless steel or something!
- Robert C, London UK, 24/05/2009 20:21
Report abuse
What a wonderful edifice to highlight run away government spending of tax payer money.
I'd come visit, but wouldn't want to be one of those tourists clogging up the streets...
- Trunk, US, 24/05/2009 20:21
Report abuse
One thing that is not made clear about this project is that it sits at the back of the current building away from the Thames.
This means that it's top will be seen above the line of the current building when viewing the site from the Thames but the main building is not hidden.
Also much of the space gained from this work comes from the use of the old underground oil tanks, that are currently unused.
- Roger, London, 24/05/2009 20:21
Report abuse
Tate would be better building a car park on this space. I drove to the museum last month with my children to be told there was no public car park! How do they expect people to safely visit there, south of the river is quite a rough area to take public transport to.
- Kimberley, London, 24/05/2009 20:21
Report abuse
It looks sort of impressive, though I do wish the use of night shots was banned as they are so misleading. Also it is too high and will detract from the original power stations iconic silhouette. Also, far too little of the space is give over to exhibition space. Tate Modern need to get out more of their classic paintings and sculpture, and show less of the conceptual erm, rubbish.
- Stephen, London, 24/05/2009 20:21
Report abuse
Well keeping in mind the times we are living in,I'd rather say "not particularly",the rationale is the building should be appreciated for its economo-ecologic qualities rather than by its futuristic shape (hehe with all respect given for architects of course),but this only a personal opinion of course
- Andre, CH, 24/05/2009 20:21
Report abuse
Having been a culture vulture and been in London for over 5 years 
, I have fond memories of Tate Modern.
First things first, the whole idea of hiding part of the old building with the new extension is not done. The original Tate Modern building should never lose its identity by the new extension, hiding its architecture. This is hideous. Either the extension should be behind the original one or by its side, not overshadowing the latter.
Secondly, they mentioned about 25,000sq m of floor space having 1,500sq m of gallery. Now either this is a typo or I need to be enlightened why not even 10% of the total sapce is dedicated to the gallery? The main reason of having the new building is to exhibit art in gallery space; so why only 10% floor space dedicated to art gallery??? There has been of late been a concerted effort by the institutions to give more attention to shop space, restaurants, bars, recreation rooms, corporate hiring space et al diluting the very raison de etre of a museum. Is that the reason for having just 1500 sq m of gallery space in 25,000sq m of total floor space?
Lastly, I am assuming most of the money will be not from taxpayer's money and will be generated through celebrity dinner ticket sales, volunteer arts' sales of the present famous artists, donations of the corporate institutions and so on for the noble cause of having an extension.
- Niladri Roychowdhury, Pune, India, 24/05/2009 20:21
Report abuse
My earlier comment was said in jest as we already have enough attractions for the white middle classes to visit. Why not spend this money on somewhere for old people to go. My local bingo hall survives without subsidy and is the only venue in the borough which seems to cater for their needs.Its time lottery money is ploughed back to the people that bought the tickets, up the workers!
- Jack Spratt, Richmond, England, 24/05/2009 20:21
Report abuse
It will help relieve that awful (in my opinion) chimney stack.
- Peter Seekings-Foster, Mildenhall, Suffolk., 24/05/2009 20:21
Report abuse
Er has anyone thought about St Pauls across the river from this monster which will be dwarfed?
- Tracey, london, 24/05/2009 20:21
Report abuse
It looks fantastic! I cant wait to see inside.
- Selwyn Channon, epsom, 24/05/2009 20:21
Report abuse
The building is ok but it's in the wrong location.
- Jb Hove, hove sussex uk, 24/05/2009 20:21
Report abuse
Looks like it was 'designed' by a NuLab committee.
- Dave Morris, Sunderland, 24/05/2009 20:21
Report abuse
Will it keep the rain out?
- Jim, London, 24/05/2009 20:21
Report abuse
To me a large part of the attraction of Tate Modern is its stark exterior, reflecting the playoff between its former function as a massive power station and its new contrasting function. Technology versus the arts. With the pyramid addition, all of that will be lost. It will just be a hybrid -- neither this, nor that. I sincerely hope this plan does not get approval. If an extension is needed, I hope that it is built separate from the present structure and sufficiently spaced from it that it does not detract from the present look of the old power station.
- Phil Jones, London UK, 24/05/2009 20:21
Report abuse
We need the bleak wastes of the Tate Modern expanded to attract people away from the real Tate Gallery so I can that enjoy that one in comfort.
- Jack Spratt, Richmond, England, 24/05/2009 20:21
Report abuse
I like the shape but not the materials chosen. That said the Tate is such a fantastic gallery that for me whats on show inside is the most important.
It is great to see that this internationally important tourist venue is being expanded and that more people will be able to enjoy the experience in an uncrowded environment. I have just returned from NY and it did occur to me that the Tate Modern is unique amounst galleries worldwide in that respect.
The sooner Sir Nicholas gets this built the better,perhaps the completion could be brought forward in time for the 2012 Olympics?
- D.J.,London, London ,UK, 24/05/2009 20:21
Report abuse
Why don't all you lot just keep away. Whinge, whinge, whinge. That's all you do. Morning, noon and night. London is, and always will be, cutting edge. Gloriously English. Beautifully eccentric. Lovely.
And as for you grumpy lot, stick to the pie & mash in your local caff.
- Haskey, London SE1, 24/05/2009 20:21
Report abuse
The amazing question is where is the money coming from,?surely we have greater needs than this,where is the electricity coming from,?and don't forget the water!!
- David., Chertsey.UK., 24/05/2009 20:21
Report abuse
