University struggles to keep Broad museum under budget, on time
By Justin Harris (Last updated: 03/30/09 10:49pm)Winter is beginning to give way to warmth, but progress on MSU’s new art museum — which was set to break ground this spring — remains frozen.
At the time of its announcement last January, projected cost for the building was about $40 million. However, MSU President Lou Anna K. Simon said last week initial outside estimates for the entire project were about $160 million — or roughly four times the original projected cost.
The problems are “based on confusion of competition,” Simon told Residence Halls Association members. “I remain hopeful we’ll get this thing done,” she said.
Simon was traveling and was unable to comment further during the weekend.
The Broad Art Museum — a state-of-the-art facility set to be built at the Collingwood Drive entrance of campus — was announced last spring after London-based architect Zaha Hadid won an international competition to design the building.
Billionaire MSU alumnus Eli Broad and his wife Edythe donated $26 million to the university to build the museum. Through other private donations, MSU said it would raise the remaining $14 million.
Simon told RHA that fundraising for the project is ongoing.
“If we get out of this economic crisis, the odds of raising money (are) much higher,” she said.
Bringing down the cost
Although Simon raised the possibility for the cost of the facility exceeding earlier estimates, MSU’s Associate Provost for Academic Services Linda Stanford said the museum will still be completed at or around the $40-million mark.
“There were some issues with cost and making sure we had enough donations to make it happen,” she said. “We’re still close to that. It’ll be close to $40 million.”
Stanford said the inflated budget estimate came after examining the feasibility of Hadid’s winning design. The design had to be altered in order to make the project more cost-efficient, Stanford said.
All aspects of the design are being considered to lower costs, including the materials used to build the museum and utilities needed to maintain the art, she said.
“They started with an idea,” Stanford said. “They started holistically and then they designed the parts of it and then we had someone cost it out. That’s how it appeared too big and then they said, ‘oh, OK, how are we going to bring it back down?’
“It’s kind of a reverse of the way you might build a house. I think people tend to start small and then they have add-ons. It’s the exact opposite approach.”
In regard to achieving the spring groundbreaking, however, Standford didn’t seem as confident.
“That would be great,” Stanford said. “I’m hoping for that, but I can’t officially say that.”
Design dilemmas
After announcing Hadid as designer for the museum, MSU hired Barton Malow Company as its construction management firm for the project. Barton Malow also was hired as lead contractor of the Skandalaris Football Center and the addition to Spartan Stadium.
Jed Dingen, a teaching specialist in the MSU School of Planning, Design & Construction, has examined the drawings of the art museum and uses them for senior projects in his classes. He said Barton Malow looked internationally to hire an envelope contractor, who would oversee all facets of construction.
“If you hired a roofer guy separate from a glass guy, separate from a joint guy, all three are going to blame each other for a leak,” Dingen said. “I would hire an envelope contractor who would then hire those three and he’s the one guy you got to talk to.”
However, Dingen said the response to the project from potential envelope contractors was lackluster.
“These guys all came back with, ‘I don’t really want to do this,’ or ‘this is too high for me to even price,’” Dingen said.
An e-mail to Barton Malow was not returned. Hadid’s firm declined to comment.
Dingen said the pleated roof becomes a problem in the winter when snow and ice would collect in the pleats. He said options for heating the roof exist but would be expensive.
“We have steam tunnels available and we can steal steam,” he said. “You could grab it and if you want, just heat the ceiling. It’s very difficult, very expensive.”
Back to the drawing board
Dingen said the building’s original dimensions of 18,000 square feet didn’t have sufficient gallery space for paintings. Because of that and other cost issues, Hadid and her firm are back at the drawing board, tweaking the original design.
“The architect gets to go back to the drawing board with a fresh start,” he said.
Stanford said a new budget agreement between MSU, Barton Malow and Hadid’s firm would be announced sometime in the future. Once that happens, ground can be broken and construction can begin. After the start of construction, Stanford said the building will take about 18 months to complete, and it will take an additional six months before art can be put on display.
Despite ongoing negotiations and a redesign from Hadid, Dingen said completing the museum for around $40 million is still possible.
“They’re just going to have to tune in that roof so it’s buildable,” he said. “I’m worried about just keeping it a signature building. Sometimes things can get watered down and lose their punch. You go to leave it strong and they will, I think.”
Staff writer Chris Vannini contributed to this story.
Originally Published: 03/30/09 10:44pm
down with the art museum
03/30/09 11:22pmI hope this art museum never becomes a reality. This is the worst idea since building Wilson Hall and the rest of the ugly buildings on campus. This museum belongs on the moon! Why would the school spend the extra millions of dollars that it did on the parking garage, to fit it in with the rest of the buildings, if they knew they were going to build something like this space station-like building?
student
03/30/09 11:44pmThis guy that wrote the first comment is a moron. The museum is being privately funded. This must be one of those um haters that doesn’t know how to read.
AlsoStudent
03/31/09 12:47amI concur. It is obvious they just skimmed, and chose parts that agreed with how they previously thought. Unfortunate. Go back and read the entire article.
Nick K.
03/31/09 7:21amDon’t get me wrong — I love the idea of having a new art meuseum on the north part of campus, but I really dislike the look of this building. I mean, north campus is full of old, historic and beautiful buildings. This is … well, not that. It just dosen’t match. It dosen’t match the EL buildings, or anything near by. Had the campus come up with a design that was more sane, and fitting for the area, I would be more supportive.
That being said — had this building been on south campus, lets say by the Wharton center, I would have been all over it. It is a work of art.
Alum 06
03/31/09 7:47amI agree with Nick k. That is a part of campus I used to stroll regularly to admire the brickwork. This building does not fit the decor.
Sparty
03/31/09 9:29amI’d just like to thank Eli & Edythe Broad for donating so much to Michigan State University. THANK YOU! We really appreciate it.
Rob
03/31/09 10:10amI’m afraid I have to agree with many of the previous comments. While I am very grateful to the Broads for their donation, this building will look like it dropped out of space like Skylab. I’m not saying it has to be identical to the surrounding structures, but there should be at least some architectural tie-ins. This structure would look great in a downtown setting, not an ivy-covered Big Ten college campus.
Brian
03/31/09 10:53amI will have to disagree that this building would not be a great addition to the university. I agree that it will not necessarily fit in perfectly with the brick buildings surrounding it but that is a good thing. It is a art museum of modern art. A brick building would be a terrible mistake. How many modern art galleries do you know that would look like OHB? It is a piece of art itself and with theme with modern architecture. I am saddened that it is behind schedule and over budget but I think it will be an amazing addition to MSU. With a $40 million art gallery will certainly put us on the map. Not saying we are going to be an art school but definitely a source of pride as a Spartan.
student 1
03/31/09 10:56amI also have to agree with those that are grateful for the gift that was given to the university, but it definitely does not fit on that side of campus. As mentioned before, if it were near the Wharton Center, this wouldn’t be an eye sore that it will be on north campus. Just like Rob said, “This structure would look great in a downtown setting, not an ivy-covered Big Ten college campus.”
Ed
03/31/09 10:58amEvery art gallery swaps out the displays to get something new and fresh. If your building itself is a work of art, how do you swap it out in 20-30 years when it’s dated and boring?
The point of the building should be to maximize display space. We’re better off with a normal, cheap building with lots of great art inside.
Townsend
03/31/09 12:54pmThe 1st poster’s a knucklehead troll — ignore the fool.
For the rest of you, I understand some concern. We have a very traditional, beautiful red brick/Gothic campus. However, that particular corner won’t be damaged by (what I think is) Hadid’s outstanding, futuristic design. Keep in mind, its location is supposed to bridge Grand River-E.L and campus; and be an asset, as well as be equally accessible, to both.
...View full comment »
Townsend
03/31/09 12:55pmEd,
the building, itself, is supposed to be a work of contemporary art. You must not get out much, do you?
Darko
03/31/09 1:29pmThe economy needs more art.
my opinion
03/31/09 2:33pmSorry. I don’t like it. Maybe I’m just not into “contemporary art” but this thing looks like some really tall grand building that someone sat on. It definitely doesn’t fit in there. We do already have an art museum, and I think 40mil can be better spent elsewhere, even if it is private donors.
cruzio
03/31/09 2:41pmWho budgeted this project? MSU was too busy looking at the bright lights of the museum to realize that it may cost $160 million. A student at East Lansing High School has more vision than our city council. The projects devised by MSU and East Lansing are insane – city center II and cedar village redevelopment. Smells of corruption.
Why aren’t we ashamed of how bad Shaw Lane looks? Those dorms make MSU look like a military facility. When people come to campus, they are most likely driving through Shaw Lane. The current aesthetic is shameful. Please spend money on beautifying South Campus.
umm
03/31/09 2:55pmCruzio, i dono if you grew up in a palace or something but i kinda think shaw lane looks pretty nice. In fact, i’d say MSU campus is one of the best looking in the country. And while we have the largest non-military dorms in the nation (which is good to provide an option for a lot of students) i dont think the exterior of them look like a “military facility” which I assume you mean they look “spartan” (Yay Pun!). but I’d say they look pretty nice.
Ken
03/31/09 3:13pmI don’t really understand why the art museum needs to “match” the rest of the buildings on campus. That is a rather antiquated vision of design, shouldn’t a building strive to reflect the ethos of the contained discipline? I see nothing wrong with the classic, austere buildings of north campus which house administration, health services, and students. But does an art museum need to lack character simply because the other buildings do? A big sell of this project is the building, not just the art inside.
Concerned student
03/31/09 4:10pmInstead of arguing over the look of the building, why don’t we start to question why private donors are interested in building a new museum in the first place? I am a big supporter of art and creativity, however, in economic times like these, there are more important things for money to be spent on. Even the projected cost, $40 million, could do so many amazing things for students who are falling further into loan debt, for the students who live in the residence halls and don’t have clean water to drink. I don’t understand why our basic needs are being overlooked by donors, while we erect new buildings that are nice, but unnecesary.
SteveL
03/31/09 10:24pmI just can’t believe a $120 million over run. And the excuse is confusion of competition?! What the heck does that mean ? Who is the bright light that thought the project was going to cost $40 million dollars? This whole thing sure sounds very suspect. And I agree the dsign and the amount of space in the building sure doesn’t seem like we would be getting even $40 million dollars worth. Some one needs to keep digging to get the whole story.
felixthecat
04/11/09 4:56pmThis building will put us on the map!! Well, at least as another mid-western city without any taste. I’m hoping that we at least win an “Eyesore of the Month” award from Js. Kunstler.