New MUSC hospital evokes image of sail straining against the windBy Robert Behre (Contact)
The Post and Courier
Monday, October 1, 2007
 Photo GalleryMUSC's New Hospital MUSC's new hospital won't open for a few more months, but it's not too early to judge how its architecture does or doesn't fit in with Charleston. Here are some images of the nearly completed building, one of the most ambitious ever built in the city.
Medical University of South Carolina president Ray Greenberg still remembers the criticism when MUSC's new hospital design went before Charleston's Board of Architectural Review. "Someone said, 'This could be anywhere. This could be in Houston.' " Greenberg said he first was amused because Houston, regardless of how you feel about its architecture, has some of the world's best health care facilities. "I was thinking if there were aspects of our building that would be competitive with Houston, that would be wonderful," he said. But Greenberg remembers the comment for another reason: He and MUSC's architects really didn't want a building that would be equally at home in Houston, Baltimore or anyplace else. They wanted something that would fit into and be sensitive to Charleston. "I don't remember who it was (who made the quip about Houston)," Greenberg said, "but it really turned out to be a very powerful statement." The university could have played it safe, much like Roper Hospital did a few years ago with a new building whose color and design mirrored its existing hospital and created a comfortable extension of its familiar Calhoun Street presence. But MUSC's site was farther away from the city's historic core, and the school had a bit of a freer hand. Architect Tim Johnson of NBBJ said the first obstacle was dealing with the building's massive size, some 641,000 square feet. "The beauty of Charleston is its pedestrian scale, whether you're south of Broad, at the College of Charleston or this campus. How do you keep that scale intact? You have to transcend the single family house model quite a bit." The resulting building is broken into three separate clumps: a flat four-story technology wing that is linked to an eight-story bed tower by a soaring lobby space that helps people find their way around. Like a single house, the hospital has sheltered outside space connected with the building. These masses also surround a front garden off Courtenay Street, where patients will be dropped off. This space riffs on two of Charleston's well-known open spaces: MUSC's square horseshoe park off Ashley Avenue and the tiered nature of the Butterfly Lakes at Middleton Place. The hospital's design includes a colonnade along Courtenay Street, where most people will be arriving, with the city's familiar bluestone under foot. The ground floor of this facade also includes retail spaces for small businesses like a florist or coffee shop. A theme of the building's design is MUSC's acknowledgement that its modern architecture should be clustered on the western end of campus, farthest away from the historic city. Not only is this hospital on the western edge, but its own design follows that same philosophy. The traditional materials of brick and precast are found on its eastern facade, while its western end includes more modern metal panels. But the hospital's main feature, the one that contributes to the city's skyline and to MUSC's new logo, is its sail-shaped glass tower. "Dark bricks that far in the sky visually seem very distressing to me, very heavy and not right in its feeling," Johnson said. "We sort of wanted it to disappear." Johnson said the glass facade reflects the water and sky, adding, "It's almost more diaphanous (sheer and light)... You almost see through it." Upon closer inspection, the glass tower has four different types of glass, which Johnson said gives it a depth, texture and a more human scale. "So much of the concern of the community with a glass finish was that it's all going to look the same," he said. "You can't tell if it's a room or not." The tower is designed to let the maximum amount of natural light into the building while protecting patient privacy and minimizing heat gain. Its clear glass edges are designed to evoke the feeling of a sail, a feeling that the glass is being pulled taut across the curved surface. It also helps the glass transition into the sky. Does the building fit in with the city? Or do we still have a Houston problem? If everyone agreed on the answer, this wouldn't be Charleston. Robert Behre may be reached at 937-5771 or by fax at 937-5579. His e-mail address is rbehre@postandcourier.com, and his mailing address is 134 Columbus St., Charleston, SC 29403. |
Article tools |
|
Notice about comments: Charleston.net is pleased to offer readers the ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Charleston.net does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not charleston.net. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "suggest removal" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website. Full terms and conditions can be read here. |
Comments
This article has 21 comment(s)
Posted by Early on October 1, 2007 at 8:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I got an idea,,,,,how about building it somewhere else. Somewhere near where most of the patients come from. Somewhere where you can be cutting edge on design and not worry about offending the architect of downtown. Somewhere where people who live in this are will benefit from it's presence. How many people who have lived here a while actually enjoy going downtown? Just a thought.
Posted by Reader on October 1, 2007 at 9 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The new building is an eyesore. Typical large-scale, uninspired trash. The idea of evoking a sail every time there is a curve in a building was a cliche twenty years ago. And the only place it even looks like a continuous curve is when you see the building from the south. When you look at is from the Crosstown/Spring St., you clearly see that the curve of the roofline is nothing more than a bunch of panels bolted to the roof with nothing behind them other than the mechanical units. That sort of cheap, fakery permeates this entire design.
Posted by trm2105 on October 1, 2007 at 9:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Fitting in, that seems to be all folks are concerned about here. We need some architecture that stands out. I think the reason most people are resistant to "non-traditional" design is that there isn't good (forget exceptional) examples of contemporary Architecture here in the city. Charleston hasn't produced a significant architect since Robert and hasn't supported any significant architectural design since the canonization of the single house.
This addition to MUSC isn't much to talk about. "New" materials over there, "traditional" materials over here; what kind of design strategy is that? No, I'm sorry to say that this building doesn't do much for the the state of architectural discourse in the city. At least it will provide space and shelter for those that can afford their health insurance.
Posted by trm2105 on October 1, 2007 at 9:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Mills, Robert Mills.
Posted by captivated on October 1, 2007 at 9:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
UGH!!! Looks like a wharehouse! Looks like someone ran out of bricks and could not finish the outside! But, as usual, nobody asks the public for architectural opinions until after the fact. Besides, we all know that whatever MUSC want, MUSC gets. And what color is that, anyway? Looks like mold.
Posted by trm2105 on October 1, 2007 at 9:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Can we please have architecture!?
Posted by trm2105 on October 1, 2007 at 9:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
the public? since when does the public, largely not versed in architecture, have the right to say how a building is designed. I'm not defending this work, but that kind of crazy talk only leads to too many cooks in the kitchen. Design by committee, now you're asking for bad design.
Posted by icbmman on October 1, 2007 at 9:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Yes, let's continue looking like a small town with more cliched, overvalued single houses. Hell, let's put all businesses and hospitals in single houses. I mean, we live in Chaaaaaaahhhhhleston, not a big city. <end sarcasm here>
BTW, when this country was first founded up until the mid-1800s, Charleston was the 5th largest city in the nation. I wish this city would start acting like it again.
This new building is actually something that should've been built here 10 years ago. We finally have something a litte modern and unique in the Chas skyline rather than flat, brick or stucco "walls" with little windows. I would have preferred that this building had been built taller, say around 18-23 stories to create more of a statement, but I guess positive change has to come in little increments.
Posted by MooMoo on October 1, 2007 at 9:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Speaking of ugly buildings: (at least from the exterior) how abut the Addlestone Library at the C of C? What an eyesore - completely out of scale and place. How did that monstrosity get past the BAR?
They should have maintained the old Bishop England front somehow and used it - it was beautiful. But instead we got that ugly grey monolith - UGH!!
Posted by Native_Ink on October 1, 2007 at 10:35 a.m. (Suggest removal)
It's not a building to be proud of. Sorry.
Posted by CHRISJIII on October 1, 2007 at 11:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I think that the new hospital at MUSC is a welcome change from the boring, low buildings that currently makeup the Charleston "skyline". I wish that we did have some buildings that looked like those in Houston!! Maybe then the knuckleheads on the BAR would realize that Charleston is a city and not a village somewhere in the English countryside. MooMoo, the Addlestone Library is a beautiful addition to my alma mater's campus. By the way the building isn't grey and the BE facade needed to go the way of the old school bldg.to the rubble heap!!!!
Posted by mplex on October 1, 2007 at 12:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)
For all the complaining, it's nice to see something new on the skyline. If you want to complain about MUSC, complain about the old campus buildings, which are downright ugly. There is no 'design' or look to them, they are just a series of additions and renovations. I would much rather see some modern buildings downtown than anymore ugly brick buildings in the 60s style. I welcome the change and hopefully there will be more to come, as most of the skyline in the medical corridor is an eyesore.
Posted by MooMoo on October 1, 2007 at 1:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Well Chris, it's my alma mater too, and we'll just have to agree to disagree on the Addlestone library. It'a all a matter of opinion. There is some modern architecture that I like a lot, and I am all for eclectic variety, but I think the library is horrendously ugly from the outside. I hear it's realy neat from the inside.
As for the BE front, it was far more aesthetically pleasing in my opinion. Not your taste perhaps, but on the rubble heap? Come on.
Posted by MooMoo on October 1, 2007 at 1:07 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Chris, What color is Addlestone library? I haven't been down that way in a while, but it sure looked gray to me when I saw it...
Posted by leblackw on October 1, 2007 at 3:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)
A hospital should be easy to find. At least we can check that box!
Addlestone is cream.
Posted by MooMoo on October 1, 2007 at 3:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)
okay, okay, ugly CREAM monolith...LOL.
Thanks for the clarification, Leblack.
Posted by ImplantedYankee on October 1, 2007 at 3:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Charleston -- 300 years unhindered by progress. The same complaints were made about the new bridge. This is going to come up whenever something new comes to Charleston.
The part of the city that most, especially visitors, equate with the word "Charlestonian" is distant enough from the campus that the university should be given a freer hand to expand. We're fortunate to have it here. It's high time that the city expanded upward a little, rather than outward.
The appearance of the building would be far more uniform had the architect not been forced to accommodate a patchwork of different styles (read "egos") pushed by the various factions that control what gets built in this town. It would seem that the old adage "If you try to please everyone you will lose your ...." bears repeating.
Posted by Native_Ink on October 1, 2007 at 4:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Reading this article makes the strange side profile of this building a little more understandable. Still, I wish they would have used glass for the entire facade. The brick in the back just looks strange. But frankly, the standards for architecture in that area are so low that this building doesn't really bother me. If nothing else, it adds a little bulk to the skyline. I just hate to hear the MUSC president brag about it. It's understandable that he's proud of his campus, but it's a little silly to call this building "a very powerful statement."
Posted by jerseylegal on October 1, 2007 at 10:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Sail straining against the wind? How about bowels straining against ceramic?
Posted by Cid95 on October 2, 2007 at 2:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)
It's so tiring that everything in Charleston has to look like an 18th century residence or an enlarged version thereof.
Have any of these architects ever been to Europe? Thousand year old buildings next to cool and contemporary modernist structures. It didn't destroy Barcelona or Berlin, I think holy Charleston may be able to manage it also.
Posted by jeg111 on October 7, 2007 at 8:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I certainly looks out of place, but it is better than what was there. Now they need to level the other eyesore, Charleston Memorial.