Salk Discovers an Architectural Furor : Development: The man who invented the polio vaccine says he will not be deterred by criticism of his institute’s expansion. Critics decry ripping out of eucalyptus grove, which they say was part of Louis Kahn’s revered design.

Sixty-seven eucalyptus trees have crashed to the ground on what now resembles an open pit. A fleet of bulldozers has begun excavating, pushing the defenders of a classic work of architecture to the brink of no return.

It may appear that the battle is over, but the critics of a controversial expansion of the Salk Institute for Biological Studies say the real fight has just begun.

In recent days, the skirmish between the institute and some of the nation’s premier architects has widened to include state and national offices for historic preservation and agencies that give the research facility up to $28 million a year in federal money.

Scores of architects are accusing one of the world’s leading scientists of ruining one of the world’s most heralded pieces of design by uprooting the eucalyptus grove. But Dr. Jonas Salk and his board of directors have shown no signs of being the least bit deterred by the criticism.

They followed all the proper steps, they say, in seeking to build a $21-million, 113,000-square-foot, two-story annex to the institute between the UC San Diego campus and the bluffs overlooking the Pacific Ocean.

The herd of critics, whom the institute has sought to paint as Johnny-come-latelies, include such architectural luminaries as Robert Venturi, James Ingo Freed, Philip Johnson, Richard Meier and Vincent Scully.

Salk and other executives of the 31-year-old institute have refused to meet with any of the detractors, setting off a feud that threatens to be long-lived. As a result, recent protests have become decidedly more aggressive.

“We’re not going to lie down in the field,” said Los Angeles architect Stuart Emmons.

But they may try anything short of that.

“We’re obviously working against an American icon, and it’s a great challenge for us,” Emmons said. “But this (proposed) building does not comply with the master plan, which he says it does.”

Salk, who invented the vaccine for polio, calls the charge patently untrue. “People who speak about things like that must check their authenticity.”

The now-absent eucalyptus grove, which is fueling most of the outrage, “was not part of the original design--categorically,” Salk said recently. “We simply filled in space” with trees, pending what he calls completion rather than expansion.

Although he and others have refused to meet with 23 of the world’s most prominent architects who opposed the destruction of the eucalyptus grove, Salk said he welcomes their presence at the site to judge for themselves, “to see what I see . . . to see that it’s enhanced and in no way compromised” the complex.

But in recent weeks, the institute has drawn protests from the state Office of Historic Preservation, which is seeking a public review of the project; the National Trust for Historic Preservation, and the Los Angeles chapter of the American Institute of Architects.

Courtney Damkroger of the National Trust for Historic Preservation said her organization is seeking to have the institute’s directors at least meet with some preeminent architects to consider alternative designs.

Steade R. Craigo of the Office for Historic Preservation said his organization has called for a public review based on the fact that the institute receives $28 million in federal money out of an annual budget of $42 million.

The money comes primarily from the National Institutes of Health but also from the National Science Foundation, National Aeronautics and Space Administration and other federal agencies.

Asked about the challenge to federal funding, Salk said: “I have nothing to say about that.”

“It may already be too late,” Kate Diamond, president of the Los Angeles chapter of the AIA, said of the growing protest. “And I think Dr. Salk has the right to be upset with the architectural community for not responding earlier with its concerns.”

Nevertheless, Diamond said, many architects view the events at the Salk Institute as being tragic and unforgivable.

It is not the expansion itself that they oppose, Diamond said. They object to the placement of two new buildings that, in their view, robs the complex of its legendary grove, and in the process, scuttles the original design of the late and renowned architect Louis I. Kahn.

“There are so few magical pieces of architecture in the United States, and this is clearly one of the big ones,” Diamond said.

Designers speak in reverential tones about the concrete-and-travertine complex. They wax poetically about seeing the sun rise over the grove and set over the sea, a key component of Kahn’s vision.

They marvel at the narrow stream of water that trickles from the lip of the former grove to that of the canyon leading to the shore. Some in their ranks have compared the structure to the Acropolis and Stonehenge and say it is like no other American building.

Now, in a wry irony, they say the sun will only set over the complex.

Salk says they are being ridiculous.

With the roar of bulldozers muffling his words, Salk pointed to the pit that was once the grove and said the new buildings, lower in height than the existing complex, will glorify rather than diminish the beauty that was Kahn’s creation.

New trees will be planted, he said, just not as many as before. And the design can and will be adaptable.

“Of course!” he said with a shout. “How could it not be, with me involved?”

Salk said that rather than sharing the outrage, Kahn would be delighted with the new design.

But one of the fiercest critics of the expansion is Nathaniel Kahn, a New York-based playwright, filmmaker and son of the architect.

Kahn says his father always envisioned the eucalyptus grove and would have never tolerated its removal. He accused Salk of misrepresenting his father’s viewpoint to further his own agenda, a charge Salk calls absurd.

Kahn and Emmons say Salk and his board of directors have departed from expansion plans they submitted to the San Diego City Council and California Coastal Commission.

The landscape design plan submitted in 1991 dictated that “permanence and site identity will be maintained by retaining the existing eucalyptus grove,” which was razed in preparation for laying the foundation.

Officials for the institute maintain that the expansion is occurring on private property--theirs--and that proper procedures were followed. Emmons said the land was donated by the city of San Diego and that the expansion is a public rights issue.

“We say they are the caretakers of an important American masterpiece,” Emmons said, “and they have the responsibility to maintain its architectural integrity. They receive a lot of public funding, and the complex is on public land. We just want them to be accountable. Nothing more.”

Salk dismissed the furor as “a matter of perception” and said he had no way of knowing why Kahn’s two children and his widow so ardently oppose the institute’s plans.

“I feel sad about the whole thing,” he said.