Tate Modern 2 by Herzog & de Meuron



Herzog & de Meuron have received planning permission for Tate Modern 2 - an extension to the Tate Modern contemporary art gallery in London, which was also designed by the Swiss architects.


The 11-storey extension, shown in these new images, will give the gallery 60% more gallery space.


Tate Modern - a conversion of the former Bankside power station - opened in 2000. The TM2 extension is due to open in 2012.






Posted on Sunday April 1st 2007 at 7:58 am by . Copyright policy | Comments policy

  • I can’t help it, I totally hate this design. Why would you want to cover up the beautiful elegant lines of the power station with a mountain of boxes? I hope they will never build this thing…

  • nobody knows!

    one of the first projects of hdm i absolutly dont understand…

  • dill

    There’s something really great about the Tate the way it is right now. Walking up to this old building through the small garden in front of it is a really nice experience, and, even though this particular “experience” doesn’t make money, it is still valuable. For one, the few times I visited the Tate I was impressed because it is in an old building and you can see it from the other side of the river. Putting such an atrocious new wing on the museum is ridiculous.

    But how is one post supposed to sway the decision…

    If anything, the architects / planners should try and preserve the look of the tate… If anything, they should build on the other side, away from the river…

    Honestly, I think these images are a monstrosity and will destroy the image of the Tate. There’s enough post-modern architecture in London already, there doesn’t need to be another institution following suit.

    What is proposed above isn’t original… it seems like it’s only trying to be original.

    It would be more interesting to see the new wing built out of the same material as the original building.

  • David

    I agree with Moritz, this a building that will age really badly in terms of style (it already looks dated) and that totally conflicts and overshadows the beautifull timeless revamping of the London power station.

  • Personally, I am really upset with the architects’ decision to provide what they think is current and desirable architecture, rather than staying consistent with their core design values. This firm has always been known for clean lines and innovative materials… and I’m not seeing any of that here. I know that we all want to remain current and relevant, but I don’t think this means that we should leave all the lessons of the past behind us. I just don’t understand why H&deM are forgetting all of the clarity of their past work in favor of an attempt at something popular. I feel like they are trying to be something they just aren’t, and its evident in this disastrous project. All I can ask is why?

  • I have to agree with most of the sentiment here – but i also thought it worth mentioning – whatever my personal opinion of this building may be – that it seems totally hypocritical that this ‘radical’ building gets planning permission while plans for – in my opinion much nicer – developments nearby (like the proposed Beetham tower) get into so much trouble.

    I have no doubt though that tourists will flock to it, which i suppose is the point.

  • Amit Sisack

    I`ve studied H&M works and went from being fascinated oftheir clean yet incredibly sofisticated work to a state of amazement (not in a positive way) caused by this ground breaking (this project literally breakes every composition principle and spits on sensitivity)… thing. it looks as if the city of Tokio vomit in London!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • mmmaja

    go ahead build it. elsewhere!!!

  • One positive thing about recession – at least this never got built….