A New Vision for A Washington Landmark Design Guidelines FOR THE Expansion and Completion of the National Building Museum Washington, D.C. i rr f A NEW Vision for a Washington Landmark Design Guidelines FOR THE Expansion and Completion OF THE National Building Museum Washington, D.C. Report of the Design Charrette Team August 1995 Prepared for the General Services Administration and the National Building Museum Prepared by the Design Program of the National Endowment for the Arts Thomas Walton, Ph.D. Rapporteur School of Architecture and Planning The Catholic University of America Washington, DC Background Notes and the Design Challenge In its most recent mission statement (September 1993), the National Building Museum recon- firms its unique commitment to "examining and interpreting the many aspects of building in America. " In particular, it seeks to honor and explore - in the words of noted architec- tural critic and historian Brendan Gill - "the unremarked anonymous architecture of city streets, of factories, of country barns, and churches, [for it] is largely in this vernacular architecture that the history of America may be read, manifosting as it does the skills of a hundred disparate occupations: masons, car- penters, plumbers, electricians, metalworkers, roofers, and painters." In this profile, the goal of the Museum is not to focus on individual monuments (that task is left to others), but rather, to analyze the broad context of the built environment in the United States and to high- light the hard work and many talents that went into creating it. In the end, the hope is that by better understanding the past, we will be able to design a richer and more viable future. The idea for such a museum was first dis- cussed almost three decades ago and moved towards reality when a Committee for the Museum of the Building Arts was established in 1975. Finally in 1980, Congress passed legislation to establish the National Building Museum as a public-private partnership among the General Services Administration (which would provide space for the institution), the Department of the Interior (which would pro- vide federal jurisdiction for the new organiza- tion), and the Museum itself (which would take responsibility for funding and developing pro- grams and exhibitions). In each phase of this evolution, the U.S. Pension Building - a nineteenth-century Washington, DC, landmark - was designated as the home of the National Building Museum. In 1967 when the first report on the project was issued, there was concern that this historic structure might be torn down. Fortunately as time passed, the importance of both the site and the Museum became more firmly entrenched in the minds of decision makers. The General Services Administration, as custodian of the Pension Building, restored it in the 1980s to serve the needs of the National Building Mu- seum at its beginning and to accommodate the space requirements of federal agencies. Today, the challenge is to completely transform the Pension Building, programmatically and archi- tecturally, into an enduring national celebration of the built environment. A Few Words Concerning This Historic Site In a city of monuments, the Pension Building is one of Washington, DCs most wonderful secrets. The building, which marks the north- ern boundary of Judiciary Square and fills an entire block between 4th and 5th, F and G Streets, NW, is a structure rich with contrasts and unexpected surprises that add to its impact and significance. On the one hand, as is the tradition in the capital, the facade is hallmarked The U. S. Pension Building - a nineteenth century Washington, DC, landmark — was desigruxted the home of the National Building Museum in 1980. Background Notes and the Design Challenge by classical detail - in this case, an interpreta- tion of the Renaissance Palazzo Farnese in Rome. But rather than the stone and marble found in many federal edifices, the Pension Building is constructed with brick and deco- rated with a frieze of terra cotta panels. In an- other juxtaposition, the structure reveals its function as an office building with an imposing rhythm of pedimented windows. Within, how- ever, visitors discover not many rooms but the Great Hall, an awe-inspiring interior courtyard measuring 1 16 by 316 feet which, in its center section, rises more than 150 feet. The designer of the Pension Building was Montgomery C. Meigs (1816-1892), the Quartermaster General of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and a builder with considerable experience. He had constructed aqueducts and bridges for Washington, DC, refined various projects expanding the U.S. Capitol, erected innumerable defense facilities used during the Civil War, and supervised the development of what is today the Smithsonian Institution's Arts and Industries Building. When he received the commission for the Pension Building in 1881, Meigs had a reputation for being not only a competent designer but also a cost-conscious and effective administrator. Specifically, the mandate for this structure was to build an inexpensive, fireproof office for the Civil War Pension Bureau. Meigs approached the work with his typical blend of pragmatism and creativity. Because it was both low-cost and fireproof, brick was the material of choice. But the decision to exploit traditional masonry construction in no way limited the engineer's imagination. With its classical details and terra cotta frieze depicting Civil War veterans, the Pension Building com- bined a commitment to long-revered styles with Term cotta frieze depicting Civil War veterans. Beneath each of the exterior windows three bricks were left out so that ftesh air could flow into the offices and then out through openings near the top of the skylit Great Hall. Meigs calculated this would induce a change of air every two minutes and significantly improve the health of the Bureaus employees. a contemporary sense of history. And in certain respects, the structure was distinctively innova- tive. Beneath each of the exterior windows three bricks were left out so that fresh air could flow into the offices and then out through openings near the top of the skylit Great Hall. Meigs calculated this would induce a change of air every two minutes and significantly improve the health of the Bureaus employees. Indeed, after the building was occupied, he reported that because of his thoughtful design time lost by sickness was reduced by 8,622 days over a one-year period when compared to offices of similar size. Meigs also provided shafts for the future installation of elevators and proposed illuminating the Great Hall with electric lights at night. Another scheme he suggested was to landscape the atrium as a grand interior garden. This never happened, but even before the Pen- sion Building was completed, the sheer wonder of the space captured the imagination of Presi- dent Grover Cleveland, and he selected the Great Hall as the site for his inaugural ball - a tradition revived in the twentieth century by Richard Nixon and all his successors. This, then, is a snapshot of the very special place that for the past fifteen years has been home for the National Building Museum. In the years preceding 1980, the Pension Building Background Notes and the Design Challenge was occupied by tenants such as the General Accounting Office, the Civil Service Commis- sion, and the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. There are pictures of the Great Hall filled with files, desks, and lights, and by the 1980s, certain details of the design (notably tilework, urns, frescoed vaulting, light fixtures, and decorative busts) were damaged or destroyed. By 1985, most of the clutter had been removed, and the interior and exterior restoration of the building was well underway. The first public exhibitions opened that same year. Today the Museum boasts of having pre- sented more than fifty exhibitions, almost 1,000 educational programs including work- shops, films, lectures, and symposia, and the ability to attract 1 50,000 visitors per year. Still, it has always had to share its home with other government agencies including most recently, the General Accounting Office and the Com- mission of Fine Arts. In addition, it depends on renting the public spaces - especially the Great Hall - for various meetings and social functions as a major source of revenue. 77?^ General Accounting Office occupied the Great Hall in 1926, filling the wondrous space with fitles, desks, and lights. The space captured the imagination of President Grover Cleveland, and he selected the Great Hall as the site for his inaugural ball — a tradition revived in the twentieth century by Richard Nixon and all his successors. A Brighter Future AND A New Design Mandate In the history of both the National Building Museum and the Pension Building, 1995 marks an important transition. After decades of dedi- cated effort, the Museum can at last completely transform its landmark venue into an enduring home. Until now, individual areas have been renovated for various exhibition, office, and commercial functions. At this juncture, as a component of the Museum's larger Blueprint for the Future (a multifaceted master plan for the Museum addressing a spectrum of questions in such areas as architecture, exhibitions, collec- tions, audience development, budgeting and fund-raising), the time has come to develop a comprehensive design plan. To guide this task, the National Building Museum, in cooperation with the General Services Administration (GSA), identified a series of design issues that focused on urban design and architectural concerns, identity and orientation issues, and program- ming activities. In the area of urban design and architecture, professional design assistance is needed to: I Study the site and its history to develop a proposal that will allow the building to function effectively as the home of the Museum and contribute to the capital's urban fabric. I Offer architectural design solutions for using the entire building as a museum. I Suggest strategies for integrating reconstruc- tion and full-scale building exhibitions into the Museum and surrounding site. I Accentuate innovative and progressive con- cepts in the aesthetic and technical dimensions of various proposals. Identity and orientation issues call for profes- sional designers to: I Investigate the use of more than one primary entrance and the impact this has on orientation, access for the physically impaired, the location of an information center, and other visitor services. I Investigate alternative exhibition installation and graphic design strategies that can help express the presence of the Museum while respecting the building's historic character. I Develop a logical visitor circulation and move- ment system using the entire envelope of space. I Resolve the problems associated with distin- guishing between office and gallery functions. I Create a facility master plan that heightens awareness of upper floor galleries and encour- ages the public to visit them. I Propose ways to maintain the ability to rent the Great Hall for private functions while pre- serving the Museum's identity. And, in the area of programming, professional design attention is needed to: I Determine the square footage required to create a compelling museum experience, and propose scenarios for distributing this space throughout the building. I Identify how spaces for educational program- ming and visitor amenities should be accom- modated in the Museum. I Determine the appropriate location for an auditorium. I Articulate how the Great Hall can be used to exhibit the content of the Museum's mission with multimedia displays. The Charrette Response and Project Focus Clearly, a broad range of design issues needed to be addressed. Both the Museum and GSA realized, however, that getting too involved with details at this early stage of a major long- term undertaking could be counterproductive. What was needed first was a larger view - a set of conceptual proposals that would: I Establish design parameters for the National Building Museum's master plan. I Guide and inform the design of key projects. Both groups also felt these recommendations should include fresh insights and counsel from outside professionals. To this end, GSA and the Museum sought the assistance of the National Endowment for the Arts (NEA) Design Program's Federal Design Improvement Program (an initiative that since 1972 has advocated and fostered design quality for the largest design client in the world - the U.S. government). The parties agreed to convene a two-day "charrette." Charrette comes from a French phrase describing the hectic rush of students at the Ecole des Beaux-Arts to com- plete their architectural drawings on the cart, en charrette, as the boards were being collected as entries to various competitions. Today, the term refers to a thorough study of any particu- lar design problem within a limited time frame. From their experience with past cooperative undertakings, GSA and NEA knew that the outcome from the charrette would accomplish two key objectives: First, it would focus atten- tion on and generate enthusiasm for the project, opening up a valuable dialogue among the National Building Museum, GSA, NEA, and many private sector constituents involved in this effort. Second, it would provide a design vision for the Museum - not a final proposal nor a design mandate, but a rich set of guide- lines from the charrette design team that the Museum and GSA could accept, modify or reject as they continued to develop the project lurther. June 21 and 22, 1995, were chosen as the dates for the event, and NEA put together a multidisciplinary team headed by Deborah Sussman, principal in the Los Angeles-based and internationally recognized Sussman/Prejza & Company identity and environmental design firm. Her associates were Jay Farbstein, archi- tect/researcher and head of his own firm in San Luis Obispo, California, specializing in design evaluation and programming; Richard Gluckman, a New York City architect whose firm has designed numerous arts and museum facilities in the United States, Europe and Asia; Michael Rock, graphic designer and professor at the Yale University School of Art; and Paul Trapido, a senior exhibit and visitor center designer for the award-winning exhibit design firm DMCD Incorporated, in New York City. The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them. — Albert Einstein "The Museum must create an identity for itself that juxtaposes the dynamic, diverse, ever-contemporary face of the built environment with the historic context of ITS HOME." — Deborah Sussman Articulating a Theme for THE Guidelines When this diverse group of experts gathered in the National Building Museum conference room, they had a full agenda. Much of the first day was devoted to becoming familiar with the issues and scope of the project. There were presentations on the mission of the Museum and the history of the Pension Building. There was a review of how the building has been used and a walking tour of the site, interior spaces, and current exhibitions. As the dialogue took a more creative shift, there was a round-robin discussion of critical problems, opportunities, and goals. The outcome of this exchange of information and ideas was consensus on a theme that pro- vided an overall framework for a set of guide- lines. Specifically, the design team committed itself to the notion that: The design of national Building Museum SHOULD express AND CONTRAST DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE CONTAINER AND THE CONTAINED. The Pension Building venue for the Museum is a wonderful historic structure, the integrity of which must always be preserved and enhanced. This reverence, however, should not override the necessity for the Museum to have its own memorable and independent profile. Just as the present edifice contrasts Neoclassicism with industrial technology, so the Museum must create an identity for itself that juxtaposes the dynamic, diverse, ever-contemporary, and in- evitably eclectic face of the built environment in the United States with the historic context of its home. Moreover, this respectful contrast should be evident on many scales - as an urban design strategy, throughout the immediate site, in the building's organization, in the way exhi- bitions are presented, and in the details of the Museum's new design. With this principle defined, the team developed guidelines in five major areas on the second day. Each of these areas is described in the pages that follow: Identity and Urban Design Guidelines which provide an introduction to and context for the Museum in the city; Entry Guidelines which will help to ensure that the visitor is clearly directed towards and welcomed into the Museum at the F Street entrance; Programming and Exhibition Guidelines which will strengthen the presence of the Museum within the building envelope and help visitors orient themselves and circulate among the exhibitions and visitor services; Guidelines for the Great Hall which will identify this grand space with the National Building Museum and invigorate it with details and activities; and Design Detail Guidelines which provide specific design recommendations for the building as the home of the National Building Museum. Identity and Urban Design Guidelines Washington, DC, is a ciry of tourists, playing host to 19 milhon visitors each year. They come to explore the halls and see the monumental sites associated with our nation's government. They come to see exhibitions at an array of world-renowned museums. They come for conferences, meetings, and lobbying. They come for the city's history and beauty. They come to learn and shape the future of the na- tion. In this context, the charrette design team confirmed the presence of a potentially vast audience for the National Building Museum. The challenge - in a metropolis full of compet- ing attractions - was how to make sure both visitors and local residents know about the Museum and discover the building. The follow- ing guidelines are the team's recommendations related to these issues. as a complement to the building and exhibition design initiative, the national Building Museum needs a marketing/ PROMOTION program THAT GIVES THE institution a VISUAL IDENTITY AND PRESENCE EVEN W/HEN IT IS NOT SEEN. While easily accessible via Metrorail, the National Building Museum is off the tradi- tional pathways to Washington's monuments and museums. People come because they have heard about and want to see the building, the Museum, a specific exhibition, and/or the ex- cellent museum gift shop. Perhaps a few things can be done to increase the number of sponta- neous visits (there are some design suggestions in later guidelines that might have a modest impact in this regard). But essentially, if the Museum wishes to increase its audience beyond the 1 50,000 it now attracts annually, it must do so by creating and promoting a compelling identity, one that engages people's interests even when the institution or building is unseen. Establishing a reputation for exciting exhibi- tions will help, but this task also requires a marketing/promotion strategy that includes: reevaluating the existing logo so that it speaks to the content as well as the location of the Museum; making sure the Museum is featured in tour books and tourist literature; using tech- nology to make potential visitors aware of the Museum while in their homes and offices, and when at hotels and at other museums in Washington; and developing a strategic public relations and advertising campaign. All these activities should be addressed in the Blueprint for the Future master plan, including a com- mitment to involve professional designers in this important effort. To ASSURE CONSISTENCY OF VISION OVER THE LONG-TERM, A MASTER PLAN SHOULD BE DEVELOPED TO GUIDE THE DESIGN OF SPECIFIC EXTERIOR AND INTERIOR FEATURES, AS WELL AS THE IDENTITY ELEMENTS, OF THE MUSEUM. Obviously, the restoration, renovation, and adaptive reuse oi the historic Pension Building as a world-class museum is a complex undertak- ing. Since it is unlikely that the resources to complete the work will be available all at once, and since there is value in involving a variety of different design firms and disciplines in this effort over the years, a master plan should be prepared that articulates the overall design strategy and major elements of the project in some detail. This document should establish priorities and propose a schedule/sequence for various components of the job. It should be reviewed and updated periodically. 10 As PART OF AN URBAN DESIGN STRATEGY, THE BUILDING NEEDS AN EXTERIOR "ICON" OR "BEACON" THAT CAN BE SEEN FROM A DISTANCE AND ANNOUNCES THE MUSEUM AS A SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC INSTITUTION. Because it is tucked into the fabric of the city and not on a Museum "trail," the National Building Museum needs a way to make its visual presence known from a distance. Cities traditionally exploit a variety of symbols, such as a tower, or steeple, or dome, to call out im- portant institutions, add interest, and help create identifying profiles for districts and neighborhoods within the larger urban context. In this case, a subtly designed icon, which might have a memorable silhouette and/or use light, would create a modest presence on the Washington, DC, skyline, inviting questions and attracting the curious. One suggestion was to use the image of cranes as the National Building Museum's urban marker. FLAGS, BANNERS, AND OTHER SIMILAR DISPLAYS ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING SHOULD BE USED NOT ONLY TO ANNOUNCE EXHIBITIONS BUT ALSO TO HELP CONVEY THE MESSAGE THAT THIS IS A BUILDING THAT WELCOMES VISITORS. This would represent a final layer of urban design elements. (Along these lines, it is inter- esting historically that the building once had window awnings.) Today, such hangings should be placed along the south, probably perpen- dicular to the building in order not to hide the dramatic vista of that facade across Judiciary Square and from the Metrorail exit. They might be made of metal, plywood, or other construc- tion materials as well as fabric. They could herald the title of exhibitions and, regardless of their content, would help express the idea that this is a special place that invites the public to enter. hv^ijLrt 1 urv; The Museum needs to make its visual presence known from a distance. Identity AND Urban Design Guidelines As A VISUAL ANCHOR ALONG AN INCREASINGLY IMPORTANT F Street corridor, the Museum should help generate and participate in the development of a streetscape design that will link the institution to others nearby such as the national portrait Gallery, the National Museum of American Art and the proposed downtown arena. Complementing the "icon" guideline just mentioned, a second urban design strategy that could help establish a stronger presence lor the National Building Museum and encourage visitor traffic is to make the Museum part of a promenade of public institutions. In this particular situation, the National Building Museum would be the eastern boundary of such a pathway (further to the east, there is a sunken highway and an office building for the FBI is under construction). To the west, how- ever, there are several opportunities to create a lively F Street corridor. A new downtown arena will be located at 6th Street, and the National Portrait Gallery and the National Museum of American Art are located between 7th and 9th Streets. Ideally, this five-block stretch, which is served by two Metrorail stops (Gallery Place and Judiciary Square), could be graced with well designed paving, landscaping, street furni- ture, and lighting, as a way of encouraging people to explore and visit the area. If commer- cial functions - cafes, bistros, clubs, and private galleries - were also to be incorporated within and nearby the promenade, the area would be all the more attractive. At this point, one major difficulty with this concept is the fact that the facade of the sports arena nearest the National Building Museum is being developed as the "back" of the entertain- ment facility with few, if any, public amenities. To keep open as many options for the future as possible, a spokesperson for the National Build- ing Museum should discuss this concern with the sports arena team as soon as possible. A streetscape design should be developed to link the Museum with other institutions along F Street. Propoied Sports Arenti National Museum of American Art National Portrait Gallery F Street 12 Secondary Approach Icon Possible Outdoor EXHIBrrSi/PROGRAMS -< >■ I.D. EXHIBITS G Street Deemphasize Secondary Entry Museum ^-i^ Expand . , . : ENTRY Zone Courts Judiciary Square ™^ METRO Metrorail I Station i (@) Service/Parking Improve Dock Appearance F Street Courts Main Approach Those involved with the next phase of the development process should explore alternative locations for the "urns" currently proposed to define the four corners of the museum site. As part of the landscape improvements under- taken several years ago, four urns were designed to define the corners of the National Building Museum site within the context of the proposed closing of F Street. However, with the develop- ment of plans for a downtown sports arena two blocks away, it is unlikely that F Street will be closed. Given this, the charrette design team indicated that the scale and location of the urns potentially detracted from the identity and design of the Museum. They advocated, at a minimum, looking into different options for placing the urns around the Museum's site. "The CHALLENGE IN A CITY FULL OF COMPETING ATTRACTIONS IS HOW TO MAKE SURE BOTH VISITORS AND LOCAL RESIDENTS KNOW ABOUT THE MUSEUM." -Jay Farbstein 13 Entry Guidelines Designing a powerful and welcoming entrance to a building is crucial. For this reason, the team came up with several guidelines concern- ing this topic. The F Street (south) entrance should be developed as the single "front door" INTO THE Museum. Currently, the public can enter the National Building Museum from both F and G Streets while the 5th Street (west) side of the building is landscaped with a walk that emphasizes a door (used only for emergency egress) along that face of the structure. These real or imagined multiple entries create confusion on the outside and make orientation within the Museum more difficult. The consensus was that F Street - given its gracious siting opposite Judiciary Square and almost theatrical on-center axis with a Metrorail exit - should be designed, indeed celebrated, as the Museum's major entrance. This was how the building was originally designed, and some of the historical reasons for this choice remain persuasive today. As in the past, the entrance can be approached axially across an open space or, on more contemporary terms, from the subway. Moreover, the central door can be distinguished within an impressive frontal view of the entire Pension Building facade. This is a memorable vista that must be exploited with signage and perhaps awnings or other overhead details that appropriately desig- nate this unique structure as the National Building Museum. As part of this design effort, the entrance itself can and should be renovated to accommodate persons with disabilities. Mak- ing the south entrance the major entrance will be a challenge, however, as the south facade is set back only a short distance from F Street. The G Street and 5th Street (north and WEST) entries and LANDSCAPING SHOULD BE REDESIGNED SO THAT THESE AREAS ARE NOT PERCEIVED AS ENTRANCES TO THE MUSEUM. This is the corollary to the preceding guideline. On the north side, the charrette design team felt the awning should be removed, and the landscaping and paving redesigned to play down the curved driveway. This vehicular entry still might be used occasionally for dignitaries but otherwise should not be regarded as a sig- nificant access point. On the west, a landscaped outdoor park/exhibition space should replace the existing pedestrian pathway. The area might display models and/or sculptures, and could, perhaps, be set off with a low wall and, if feasible, treated as an extension of an interior exhibition. The F Street entrance should be celebrated as the major entrance. 14 The transition from the narrow entrance into the Great Hall should be a carefully articulated procession. The design for the F Street entrance SHOULD EXPLOIT THE METRORAIL EXIT AS PART OF THE ENTRY SEQUENCE EVEN BEFORE THE BUILDING CAN BE SEEN. The challenge is to stimulate visitor interest in the Museum in the Metrorail station and create a sense of anticipation so the awe-inspiring vista at the top of the escalator is linked with the Museums identit)' and its many creative exhibi- tions. This might include having billboards and brochures for people as they emerge from the subway. Or it could be expressed with some kind of physical link at street level - perhaps paving or a clear canopy - between the Metrorail escalators and the building. The design of the F Street entrance should enhance the contrast between the tight passage through the walls of the building and the explosion into the great hall. The last dimension of the entry into the National Building Museum is the movement from the sidewalk into the Great Hall. It is a potentially dramatic moment. Visitors have just taken in the expansive brick facade, but unless they have come to the Museum before, most do not suspect the vast covered atrium that lies beyond the heavy vaults of the masonry entrance. The design team selected for the project should take advantage of this surprising change of scale. The density and thickness of the transition should be amplified with appro- priate lighting and material finishes. The arcade should be articulated as yet another, different layer of space. Finally, as visitors actually arrive in the Museum, they should be delivered from a procession that is measured and controlled to the threshold of the enormous and unexpect- edly dynamic environment of the Great Hall. The LOADING DOCK (EAST AREA) SHOULD BE REDESIGNED. Very simply, this is an eyesore. It needs to be developed so it does not detract from the build- ing, accommodating trucks and parking in a manner that blends function with an aesthetic that enhances the F Street elevation. 15 Programming and Exhibition Guidelines Devising the optimum layout and content of a museum is a complex undertaking, one not solved at a two-day meeting. The charrette team did enumerate, however, several concep- tual programming and exhibition guidelines they hope the National Building Museum, GSA, and their designers will consider as the project is developed in greater detail. As A FIRST STEP IN THE PROGRAMMING PROCESS, THE NATIONAL BUILDING MUSEUM SHOULD CONCEPTUALLY COMPARE THE MERITS AND PROBLEMS OF DIVIDING SUPPORT AND EXHIBITION FUNCTIONS HORIZONTALLY VERSUS VERTICALLY. Not including the Great Hall, arcades, circula- tion, and services, there are about 100,000 square feet of rooms divided fairly evenly over four floors that can be used for exhibition and support functions. In a fine arts institution, 35 percent of the space is typically devoted to public galleries. At the National Building Museum, perhaps up to 40 percent of the rooms could be devoted to exhibitions with the remaining areas used for support activities including research, curatorial, visitor service, office, and storage functions. This said (and this is simply a rough breakdown using estab- lished museum space allocation formulas), the initial programming challenge is to decide con- ceptually whether to arrange the division of exhibition and support functions horizontally (e.g., use the lower two floors for exhibitions and the upper two floors for support) or verti- cally (e.g., use the west side of the building for exhibitions and the east side for support). To this end, a design team should develop space estimates for major functions and evalu- ate alternative horizontal and vertical configura- tions based on criteria developed from the perspective of both visitors and staff including such items as exhibition scheduling, ease of access, clarity of layout, flexibility, security, and safety. An INFORMATION/GRAPHIC SYSTEM SHOULD BE DEVELOPED THAT ESTABLISHES A HIERARCHY OF DATA FROM THE ANNOUNCEMENT OF EXHIBITIONS TO THE IDENTIFICATION OF STAIRS, VISITOR SERVICES, OFFICES, ETC. In a Structure as vast as the Pension Building where visitors must select pathways to various exhibitions and services from a grand open hall, information and circulation options have to be communicated clearly and quickly. To facilitate wayfinding, the designers should create an information and graphics system that incorpo- rates a full range of media from the installation and exhibition elements mentioned in the Guidelines for the Great Hall section of this report to the signage for offices, stairs, and restrooms. 16 The initial programming challenge is to decide whether to arrange the division of exhibitions and support functions horizontally or vertically. Orientation and the distinction among FUNCTIONS within THE BUILDING SHOULD BE EASILY UNDERSTOOD. Expanding on the previous guideline, the goal of the information/graphics system should make it possible for visitors to ascertain with minimum effort where exhibitions are located, where services such as the gift shop, cafe, and restrooms might be found, where the audito- rium is, and where research, office, and meeting facilities are distributed. Without oversimplify- ing the sights and sounds in the Great Hall, the design should make this orientation as intuitive as possible. The information desk should be relocated to the Great Hall near the F Street entrance where, in addition to Museum staff, visitors might discover interactive computer terminals to print out itineraries and/or a brief orientation audiovisual show. CIRCULATION - ESPECIALLY VERTICAL CIRCULATION AND THE OPTIONS FOR MOVING UP USING STAIRS AND/OR ELEVATORS - SHOULD BE REASONABLY SELF-EVIDENT AND COMPLEMENT THE DISPOSITION OF FUNCTIONS WITHIN THE BUILDING. One of the more significant design challenges in renovating the entire Pension Building as the home of the National Building Museum is dealing with vertical circulation. The elevators are small and slow, and it is not clear whether the stairs meet fire egress codes. In all likeli- hood, a new elevator will be needed to accom- modate an increasing number of visitors. This might be located in the Great Hall either as an independent structure or as a feature of the installation/intervention described later in this document. Whatever its position, the design of the elevator should help orient visitors and clarify the horizontal or vertical division of exhibition and support functions. With respect to stairs, the charrette team felt the north stair- case should be identified as the primary path for visitors who desire to walk. It is generously proportioned, and opposite the F Street entry. Finally, horizontal circulation is problematic if there are areas on a floor that need to be closed to visitors. This requires detailed study and should be a criterion in evaluating the vertical or horizontal division of museum functions. VERTICAL DIVISION HORIZONTAL Division Support Exhibition Exhibition Support 17 Programming and Exhibit Guidelines Approximately two-thirds of the exhibition SPACE should be DEVOTED TO A PERMANENT, CORE EXHIBITION WITH THE REMAINING ONE- THIRD USED FOR TEMPORARY EXHIBITIONS. This ratio is based on an economic rationale. Although temporary exhibitions attract repeat visits, they generally require a commitment of time and money that can become a burden to an institution if too much of its space is desig- nated for this type of show. Experience has shown that two-thirds permanent/one-third temporary offers a reasonable balance in terms of the allocation of resources and the ability to ensure audience growth. Whatever space the National Building Museum reserves for tempo- rary exhibitions, it should know what it costs to support that effort and budget accordingly. The GROUND FLOOR OF THE MUSEUM SHOULD INCLUDE FUNCTIONS THAT WILL KEEP IT ANIMATED AND FULL OF ACTIVITY THROUGHOUT THE DAY. One of the charrette team members commented that he was astonished by the "profound empti- ness" he discovered upon entering the building. Without violating the spatial and architectural integrity of the Great Hall, it is essential that "emptiness" not be the impression the National Building Museum leaves with visitors. This institution should be full of life. By locating exhibitions - one of which should be tempo- rary — on the north side of the ground floor, there should be a continuous flow of people from the F Street entrance across the atrium. Visitor service functions - a gift shop and cafe seem appropriate - could fill the southern rooms, and both exhibitions and visitor services could be designed to thoughtfully spill into the Great Hall. The cafe might even be an exhibi- tion itself with sitting spaces in a construction site, furniture made of various building materi- als, or niches with computers programmed with unique building/design games. Of course, the installation/intervention (see Guidelines for the Great Hall) will no doubt animate the Museum. In addition, however, the designers might consider placing the children's area and resource center on the ground floor, convening demonstrations in one corner of the atrium. Interestingly, the charrette team thought the auditorium might be located on the second floor, drawing people up to that level where the dead times during and between shows or lec- tures would not be so noticeable. Confirming the mission of the National Building Museum, exhibitions SHOULD explore THE FABRIC OF THE built environment in the United States rather than present the story of monumental buildings. This should include exhibitions, displays, pre- sentations, and research on a variety ol fascinat- ing historical and contemporary topics includ- ing urban, suburban and neighborhood design, examples oi vernacular and craft architecture from across the country, the design process, construction techniques, building materials and the various building trades, roads and bridges, energy conservation, earthquakes and other environmental hazards, and a peek into the infrastructure of buildings and the services that support the places where we live, work, and play. Topics the National Building Museum should not focus on include the study of well known designers and their celebrated architecture. 18 4£N5TRO£r ORIBNTATWW • AfiT otuecT The goal is to create a dynamic rather than a passive museum experience. Jma(KI emteamcs The National Building Museum should consider including nontraditional Museum functions as part of its program — for example, a BUILDING AND DESIGN EXPLORATORIUM, an ENERGY OR BUILDING MATERIALS RESOURCE CENTER, A CONSTRUC- TION-WATCH SPACE, A DESIGNER'S OFFICE, A PUBLIC SCHOOL CLASSROOM, OR AN ARCHITECTURAL SCHOOL DESIGN STUDIO. Essentially, these and other similar activities would help animate the Museum and broaden its audience. The exploratorium, for instance, would attract children from all age groups with demonstrations on how buildings are con- structed, earthquake shake tables, and oppor- tunities to measure, work with and compare various building materials. The professional resource center would bring in tradespeople and do-it-yourselfers. The construction watch space would provide a video "window" into one or more actual construction sites with the potential for including lunchtime commentary from a museum expert. The offices, classroom, and studio would permit additional unique vistas and interactions related to design and building processes. Overall, the intention would be to create a dynamic rather than passive mu- seum experience that, beyond attracting visitors to traditional exhibitions and presentations, would serve certain special built-in audiences and consider the built environment in America as material for the Museum's collection. 19 Programming and Exhibit Guidelines "The orientation and the distinction among functions within the building should be easily understood." Paul Trapido Vertical Scheme BYU\ A I nOKJ Ground floor p)(>»Ainoo r ««.>o)mne>o Second floor m. •ouckiioo rVAitj tKJiwjwas Di •»*<01» tiA^M' "^ M 1_^ aM:,^LMklO Thirdflo ^yi\h\nou ?f »HuuJ*>^3 »1^^»1T»C>-^ @ •fctoi-i* ■hvtsi UMUl- 1 !^ o » 1» 9 m 4 ^ ^«w»nv»o < / Fourth floor 20 Horizontal Scheme 6tWfllT10N / ^ ftlV «i«\P Ground floor m •«T9i ■ fRClAttT Twvs I vHon Third floor ~W »i»cmwc / »tu»^ mwT8>- J" I ^TB: Kiev vAtc Second floor gntvxBinotJ ^ ^ •smit «i-*^ o 6 e o P ^typ^ LOWb«UTiDM Fourth floor The Museum should consider including nontraditional museum fiinctions as part of its program — for example, a building and design exploritorium, a construction watch space, or a designer's office. 21 Programming and Exhibit Guidelines Structural and mechanical features OF THE Pension Building might be exposed AS PART OF the EXHIBITION PROGRAM. The notion, here, is that the Pension Building itself- with its blend of masonry and industrial technologies - makes a wonderful display. People love to know how things work. Thus, by "excavating" walls, floors and maybe even ceilings, it would be possible to reveal how this awe-inspiring structure stands up, how pipes, conduits and ductwork run through the build- ing with utilities and services, how the elevator functions, how the stairs are constructed, and perhaps even how the roof, skylights and trusses are designed to keep rain out and, in the atrium, let light in. The STORAGE, ARCHIVES, AND RESOURCE CENTER AREAS SHOULD BE DESIGNED TO PERMIT MODEST PUBLIC ACCESS AS EXHIBITION SITES. Over the years, the National Building Museum has accumulated models, photos, pieces of buildings, bricks, construction drawings, post- cards, sample building materials, and innumer- able other objects. No doubt this trend will continue. Hiding these objects in storage or making them available only to curators and researchers is a terrible waste of resources. Some portion of the "back room" functions of the Museum should be open to the public. These spaces might have casual monthly exhibitions and tours of the institution's more interesting holdings - objects that might never be part of a formal exhibition or perhaps even a preview of projects planned for the future. Stairs and corridors should, when effective, be exploited as exhibition SPACES. While it would be distracting, and perhaps overwhelming, to fill every nook and cranny of the Pension Building with exhibitions, circulation spaces can serve multiple uses. The National Building Museum designers should not overlook this opportunity when it might complement or enhance other functions. "The GROUND FLOOR SHOULD INCLUDE FUNCTIONS THAT WILL KEEP IT ANIMATED AND FULL OF ACTIVITY THROUGHOUT THE DAY." - Richard Gluckman 22 Guidelines for the Great Hall The Pension Building's Great Hall is the most striking and memorable space in the National Building Museum's home. Meigs always envi- sioned it as lively and dramatic place, an appro- priate setting for an expansive indoor garden or an inaugural ball. In this tradition, the time has come once again to reinvigorate the atrium with details and activities that will ensure its vitality day in and day out. The charrette design team proposes these guidelines to forward that objective. Conceptually, the Great Hall should be treated as a piazza, part of an interior streetscape where the atrium is a grand and unique arcaded city square. With some 36,000 square feet of skylit space, the Great Hall is the architectural culmination of a world-class building. In its scale and de- tailing, it is indeed an urban space, and as the design focal point of the National Building Museum, this civic quality should be empha- sized. This is the place where people gather, where they come to get their bearings, then wander off to explore and make exciting discov- eries, only to return and set off in another di- rection. In this context, the redesign of the Great Hall should balance regularity with the unexpected. The rhythm and sense of order need to be maintained. But like any great piazza, there is room for figural elements within this framework to energize the space with a valuable hierarchy of objects and activities. What is particularly exciting about this environment is that visitors cannot only observe the combina- tion of elements from the square - the atrium — itself, but also from the multistory buildings - the arcades - that surround the square. The VISUAL HIGHLIGHT OF THE GREAT HALL should be a multistory installation/ intervention that becomes the campanile of that extraordinary space, an object that reflects the mission of the national Building Museum and potentially incorporates exhibition, information, multimedia projection, circulation and other functions. There was a unanimous and strong belief that the Great Hall and identity of the Museum itself would be significantly enhanced by this kind of major interior construction. Because it does not exist, however, and because the char- rette team did not want to stifle creativity with preconceptions, it is difficult to describe the specifics of this addition. Still, there was con- sensus on the general qualities and character of this object and some of the functions it might embody. It should be sited in the northwest area of the atrium, clearly visible as the figural event upon entering the Great Hall. It should be both sculpture and architecture. Its style should be contemporary, perhaps with allusions to historical building elements. It might have construction/engineering features - scaffolding, beams, bridges, the cross-section of a building facade. It might penetrate the arcades at certain points. It could include an elevator and/or stairs with access to the Museum's upper floors. It could be the projection center for a sound and 23 Guidelines for the Great Hall 24 "Without violating the integrity of the great hall, it is essential that 'emptiness' not be the impression the museum leaves with visitors." — Michael Rock light show. It could receive projections. It could be decked out with screens and monitors as an interactive, multimedia event. It could be part of the information center. Above all, paralleling the impact of the atrium, it should be the mod- ern "Ah Ha!" event, the heartbeat, the memo- rable image of the National Building Museum. exhibitions in spaces around the Great Hall should include elements THAT "announce" THOSE EVENTS TO PEOPLE STANDING IN THE ATRIUM. These should not compete with the installa- tion/intervention just described, but they should have a presence in the Great Hall and be significant enough in terms of size to indicate the locations and content of exhibitions. Such "signs" could include screens, banners, panels, buildings, or pieces of buildings, cantilevers, passageways, or bridges. They could emerge from the floor or be suspended from a ceiling. They could lead people from the atrium or arcade directly into exhibition spaces. And, they could be made of any number of materials - fabric, plywood, metal, masonry, or plastic. While interventions and objects in THE Great Hall should be planned so THAT IT continues TO BE POSSIBLE TO HOLD NON-MUSEUM, PUBLIC ACTIVITIES IN THAT SPACE, MOST OF THESE OBJECTS SHOULD REMAIN VISIBLE AND CONVEY THE MESSAGE TO GUESTS THAT THEIR EVENT IS BEING HELD AT THE National Building Museum. Well designed, the additions to the Great Hall might contrast with but will not destroy the integrity of that atrium. They also will become the visual identity of the National Building Museum and, as such, should not be removed or hidden (certain minor objects might be rolled away or stored to accommodate activi- ties) when the space is rented for non-museum events. The space above the ground plane of the Great Hall also could be used to suspend dis- plays from the ceiling. These objects could be moved up and down, if needed, to accommo- date non-museum events and activities. Indeed, the goal should be to design a Great Hall so exciting that organizations will want to use it because it is the National Building Museum, assuring the institution that its stream of rental income (currently, about $1 million per year) can be maintained. The Great Hall should be so exciting that organizations will want to use it because it is the National Building Museum, assuring the institution its stream of rental income. 25 Design Details Guidelines Although the charrette team did not focus on design details, it did make the following specific recommendations: The tile floor in the Great Hall SHOULD BE restored. Conceptually, as a piazza, the atrium should be paved in a hard material. The tilework should also be restored because, anticipating heavy visitor traffic, it is much more attractive and durable than carpeting. This change might generate acoustical problems, but assuming these can be mitigated with other design strate- gies, the return to a beautifully tiled floor is well worth the effort and investment. The arcade lighting should be redesigned to illuminate those corridors more architecturally and help identify exhibition and public spaces. Existing arcade lighting is dull and sometimes insufficient. New lighting should play up the interior layers and architectural forms of the building. It should call out exhibition and cir- culation functions. It might also include the infrastructure to support future special effects. There should be a stronger contrast IN THE palette OF COLORS, IF THE INTERIOR IS TO BE PAINTED. Over the decades, the Pension Building atrium has known many different color schemes. Origi- nally, the first floor columns were maroonish- brown. The faux-marble effect on the great columns was introduced in the 1890s. The present hues revive a 1915-look and are so close in value they do little to bring out the architec- tural character of the Great Hall. A 1990s approach might use colors that contrast more dramatically to call out the elements and layers of the building. An additional idea was to use a section of the arcade to portray the variety of color schemes as they have changed over time. The BUILDING DESIGN TEAM SHOULD EXPLORE THE OPTION OF LETTING THE NATURAL COLOR AND TEXTURE OF MATERIALS BECOME PART OF THE COLOR SCHEME OF THE MUSEUM. This might be done selectively - on certain floors or for certain features of the building. Allowing the materials - such as metal or stone - to be exposed might be a substitute for painting. The tile floor should be restored and the natural color and texture of materials exposed in various places. 26 The visual highlight of the Great Hall should be a multistory object that reflects the mission of the Museum. Appendix 1 : Summary of the Guidelines Project Theme I The design of the National Building Museum should express and contrast differ- ences between the container and the contained. Identity and Urban Design Guidelines I As a complement to the building and exhibition design initiative, the National Build- ing Museum needs a market- ing/promotion program that gives the institution a visual identity and presence even when it is not seen. I To assure consistency of vision over the long-term, a master plan should be devel- oped to guide the design of specific exterior and interior features, as well as the identity elements, of the National Building Museum. I As part of an urban design strategy, the building needs an exterior "icon" or "beacon" that can be seen from a dis- tance and announces the Mu- seum as a significant public institution. I Flags, banners, and other similar displays on the south side of the building should be used not only to announce exhibitions but also to help convey the message that this is a building that welcomes visitors. ■ As a visual anchor along an increasingly important F Street corridor, the Museum should help generate and participate in the development of a streetscape design that will link the institution to others nearby such as the National Portrait Gallery and the Na- tional Museum of American Art and the proposed down- town arena. I Those involved with the next phase of the development process should explore alterna- tive locations for the "urns" currently proposed to define the four corners of the Na- tional Building Museum site. Entry Guidelines I The F Street (south) entrance should be developed as the single "front door" into the Museum. I The G Street and 5th Street (north and west) entries and landscaping should be rede- signed so that these areas are not perceived as entrances to the Museum. I The design for the F Street entrance should exploit the Metrorail exit as part of the entry sequence even before the building can be seen. I The design of the F Street entrance should enhance the contrast between the tight passage through the walls of the building and the explosion into the Great Hall. I The loading dock (east area) should be redesigned. Programming and Exhibition Guidelines I As a first step in the programming process, the National Building Museum should conceptually compare the merits and problems of dividing support and exhibi- tion functions horizontally versus vertically. I An information/graphic system should be developed that establishes a hierarchy of data from the announcement of exhibitions to the identifi- cation of stairs, visitor services, offices, etc. I Orientation and the distinc- tion among functions within the building should be easily understood. I Circulation - especially vertical circulation and the options for moving up using stairs and/or elevators - should be reasonably self-evident and complement the disposition of functions within the building. I Approximately two-thirds of the exhibition space should be devoted to a permanent, core exhibition with the remaining one-third used for temporary exhibitions. I The ground floor of the Museum should include functions that will keep it animated and full of activity throughout the day. I Confirming the mission of the National Building Museum, exhibitions should explore the fabric of the built environment in the United States rather than present the story of monumental buildings. I The National Building Museum should consider including nontraditional museum functions as part of its program - for example, a building and design explora- torium, an energy or building materials resource center, a construction-watch space, a designer's office, a public school classroom, or an archi- tectural school design studio. I Structural and mechanical features of the Pension Build- ing might be exposed as part of the exhibition program. I The storage, archives, and resource center areas should be designed to permit modest public access as exhibition sites. 28 I Stairs and corridors should, when effective, be exploited as exhibition spaces. Guidelines for THE Great Hall I Conceptually, the Great Hall should be treated as a piazza, part of an interior streetscape where the atrium is a grand and unique arcaded city square. I The visual highlight of the Great Hall should be a multi- story installation/intervention that becomes the campanile of that extraordinary space, an object that reflects the mission of the National Building Mu- seum and potentially incorpo- rates exhibition, information, multimedia projection, circu- lation and other functions. I Exhibitions in spaces around the Great Hall should include elements that "announce" those events to people stand- ing in the atrium. I While interventions and objects in the Great Hall should be planned so that it continues to be possible to hold non-museum, public activities in that space, most of these objects should remain visible and convey the message to guests that their event is being held at the National Building Museum. DESIGN Details Guidelines I The tile floor in the Great Hall should be restored. I The arcade lighting should be redesigned to illuminate those corridors more architec- turally and help identify exhi- bition and public spaces. I There should be a stronger contrast in the palette of col- ors, if the interior is painted. I The building design team should explore the option of letting the natural color and texture of materials become part of the color scheme of the Museum. Students construct a house in the Great Hall in the If I Had a Hammer program. 29 Appendix 2: The Design Team and Participants in the Charrette This charrette involved several different groups. Five designers were selected to lead that dimen- sion of the discussion and their biographies follow. In addition, the National Building Mu- seum, GSA, and NEA each invited several other participants. Their names and affiliations are listed after the biographies. The Design Team Jay Farbstein (San Luis Obispo, CA) Jay Farbstein is an architect and researcher and heads Jay Farbstein Associates, in San Luis Obispo, California, which specializes in design evaluation and programming. He has written numerous articles and handbooks and is author, with Min Kantrowitz, oi People and Places: Experienc- ing, Using and Changing the Built Environment. He was a juror for the NEA Design Research Recognition Program in 1983, and he has won a number of awards for his work, including two awards from Progressive Architecture for applied research and a research award from the Royal Institute of British Architects. Mr. Farbstein holds a Ph.D. in Environmental Studies and is a registered architect. Richard Gluckman (New York, NY) Richard Gluckman formed Richard Gluckman Architects in 1977, in a loft in theTribeca section of New York City, where the firm is still practic- ing today. The firm has been involved in a wide range of commercial, residential and institutional projects throughout the United States and in the People's Republic of China and Spain. From the beginning, a major component of Mr. Gluckman's practice has been the design of art-related facili- ties. Mr. Gluckman has worked on site specific art installations with many artists including Dan Falvin, Walter DeMaria, James Turrell, jenny Holzer, and Richard Serra. As architects lor the DIA Center for the Arts for fifteen years, the firm has worked on the conversion of numerous indus- trial buildings into exhibition, storage, and ad- ministrative spaces. The firm recently completed the Andy Warhol Museum in Pittsburgh and other work for the Whitney Museum ol American Art, the Museum of Fine Arts in Boston, the Carnegie Museum of Art, and Site Santa Fe. Mr. Gluckman received his architectural degree from Syracuse University. Deborah Sussman, CharretteTearn Chair (Culver City, CA) In creating visual images and applying them in highly inventive ways to a variety of architectural and public spaces, Deborah Sussman is widely acknowledged as a pioneer in the field of environ- mental graphic design. Ms. Sussman is a principal of Sussman/Prejza in Culver City, CA. Her career began in the office of Charles and Ray Fames. She opened her own olfice in Los Angeles in 1968, incorporating Sussman/Prejza & Co., Inc. in 1980. The multi- disciplinary staff is internationally recognized for developing imagery tor urban, architectural, and corporate identity programs. S/P s clients include Hasbo Inc., Disney Development, and Apple Computer. The firm led the team that developed the environmental graphics lor the 1984 Olympic Games in Los Angeles, considered a milestone in the history of urban graphics. S/P's many architectural collaborations include Phillip Johnson, Moore Ruble Yudell, Barton Myers, Cesar Pelli, Pei Cobb Freed, and SOM. S/P was featured as the cover story in Interiors magazine (February '95) and is the subject ol a 144 page monograph recently published by Process Architecture. Michael Rock (New York, NY) Michael Rock is an Associate Professor of Design at the Yale University School of Art and contrib- uting editor and graphic design critic at I.D. Magazine in New York. Currently an associate 30 with 2x4, he has worked with a range of chents inckiding Levi Strauss and Company, MIT List Gallery, International Center of Photography, Architecture New York, and Monacelli Press. This work has received awards from a variety of profes- sional organizations and publications including the American Institute of Graphic Artists, Print- ers Society of America, Graphis, The Society of Illustrators, Print, and the American Center for Design. Previously, he was cofounder and partner of the graphic design and photography studio, (i)nformation incorporated, in Boston. From 1984-1991 he was Adjunct Professor of Graphic Design at the Rhode Island School of Design. Mr. Rock holds a B.A. in Humanities from Union College and a Master of Fine Arts in Graphic Design from the Rhode Island School of Design. Paul Trapido (New York, NY) Paul Trapido is a project manager and specialist in museum and visitor center design with DMCD, Incorporated, a leading New York City- based museum exhibit design firm. At DMCD, Mr. Trapido has just completed managing the Panasonic Learning Lab installation, an interac- tive multimedia environment that required com- plete design, systems programming, and integra- tion for over 20 CD-ROM laptop computers, a video wall, video conferencing, 3DO technology, and more traditional exhibitry. He also recently completed the master plan and exhibit concepts for the Mighty Eighth Air Force Heritage Museum in Savannah, Georgia. Currently, Mr. Trapido is a senior designer and project manager for the 95,000 square foot PETRONAS Petroleum Dis- covery Centre in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Some of his previous design projects include: the Texas Seaport Museum in Galveston, Texas; the Cody Firearms Museum in Cody, Wyoming; and the Martin and Osa Johnson Safari Museum in Chanute, Kansas. He has designed exhibits for the Brooklyn Children's Museum and the Staten Island Children's Museum. Mr. Trapido holds degrees in environmental design and photography. National Building Museum Participants Susan Henshaw Jones President and Director Donald Albrecht Project Director/ Blueprint for the Future Jacqueline V. Eyl Volunteer and Visitor Services Coordinator Edward McWilliams Facilities Manager GSA Participants Andrea Mones-O'Hara Regional Historic Preservation and Fine Arts Officer, National Capital Region NEA Participants Samina Quraeshi Director, Design Program Thomas Grooms Director, Federal Design Improvement Program, Design Program Thomas Walton, Ph.D. Rapporteur, School of Architecture and Planning, The Catholic University of America 31 Appendix 3: Charrette Agenda Wednesday, 21 June 1995 9:00 Welcome Susan Henshaw Jones President and Director, National Building Museum Samina Quraeshi Director, Design Program, NEA Andrea Mones-O'Hara Regional Historic Preservation and Fine Arts Officer, National Capital Region, GSA 9:15 Challenges Presented by the Building Susan Henshaw Jones President and Director, National Building Museum Donald Albrecht Project Director/Blueprint for the Future, National Building Museum 9:30 History of the Site and Building Andrea Mones-O'Hara Regional Historic Preservation and Fine Arts Officer, National Capital Region, GSA 9:45 Break 1 0:00 Tour of the Building Jaqueline Eyl Volunteer and Visitor Services Coordinator, National Building Museum Edward McWilliams Facilities Manager, National Building Museum 11 :00 Initial Observations and Organization of the Charrette 12:00 Lunch 1:00 Charrette Continues 3:00 Break 3:30 Charrette Continues 5:30 Adjourn Thursday, 22 June 1995 8:45 Reconvene Charrette 12:30 Lunch 1:30 Charrette Continues 3:30 Wrap-Up and Preparation for Presentation 4:30 Presentation and Summary of Design Guidelines Attending: Board members and staff of the National Building Museum, staff of the General Services Administration, and staff of the National Endowment for the Arts. 5:30 Adjourn 32