LACMA Scraps Plans for South L.A. Satellite

Wetlands Park, South Los Angeles

LACMA has formally terminated a 2017 agreement to operate a satellite campus at South Los Angeles' Wetlands Park, reports Urbanize Los Angeles. According to a Board of Recreation and Park Commissioners memo, "geotechnical and structural engineering studies… have shown that the cost to repair and retrofit Building 71 will far exceed what LACMA had initially estimated." In 2018 Michael Govan said the project could cost "$25 million plus." He envisioned as many as five LACMA satellites spread across the county.

That hasn't happened, but the museum has been supplying small shows of LACMA art to such area institutions as the Charles White Elementary School, the Vincent Price Art Museum, and the Lancaster Museum of Art. 

More recently the conversation (and controversy) has turned to Govan's agreement to lend LACMA art and programming to the planned Las Vegas Museum of Art.

Comments

esotouric said…
LACMA never had any intention of activating the South L.A. wetlands site, essentially squatting on this useful, historic City-owned transit barn for years. They used the South L.A. community as a bargaining chip, while shaking the County down for millions to span Wilshire with the ill-starred Zumthor building.

As we reported in 2020 (https://esotouric.com/lacma-satellite), the museum has long been in violation of its sweetheart City lease, failing to provide any required community programming. Previously, senior LACMA administrators, including Michael Govan, told us they had decided to abandon plans for the site due to cost.

What a squandered opportunity!

Who needs LACMA? Building 71 belongs to Angelenos, and it should be activated for the public good, with creative and community spaces, a senior center with air conditioning, pop up retail and food options, classes, a history display interpreting the building's artifacts, ecological programming inspired by the wetlands setting, etc.
Anonymous said…
^ I don't have confidence in the judgment of Govan. It's not just one thing about him, it's several things about him that aren't ideal. That includes his lack of transparency. But since LACMA is tethered to him, there's now no turning back.

Example: More of the footprint of the Zumthor building should have been north of Wilshire, not south of it. The area around the entry court (which is reminiscent of canopies of LA public schools built over 60 years ago) and the Broad and Resnick buildings should have been filled up by more of the mass of the new building.

When LACMA already has enough on its hands dealing with one location, the thinking by Govan that it should also have satellite locations is technically, conceptually and financially irresponsible.
Anonymous said…
More of the footprint should NOT have been north of Wilshire. Spatial efficiency and program are NOT the be all and end all of architecture.
Anonymous said…
On the question of the footprint should go: the decision was a negotiation between LACMA and the Natural History Museum, which actually controls the site. The NHM was not interested in LACMA eating up any more space in the park than they already occupied.
Anonymous said…
The area west of the former Ahmanson Gallery originally was a small street and parking structure for the building now occupied by the AMPAS museum (the old May Co). The acreage just a bit east of the Broad and Resnick buildings wasn't park space and is where more of the footprint of the Geffen building should have been inserted.