Home Page link

FOG

Home| Search | About
Login Password
Register Now! Lost Password?

Architecture and Design - Building design/construction and related topics. 

Page 2 of 3       < 1 2 3 > last >> Bookmark this page:  YahooMyWeb Yahoo!  Google Google  Windows Live Favorites Windows Live  del.icio.us del.icio.us  digg digg  Add to Netscape Netscape
Subject Author Date
FOG EDS 11-06-2007
---> Re: FOG 3D Peruna11-06-2007
| |--> Re: FOG Pierre Levesque11-06-2007
| `--> Re: FOG Michael Bulatov...11-06-2007
| ---> Re: FOG Michael Bulatov...11-13-2007
| | ---> Re: FOG Michael Bulatov...11-13-2007
| | ---> Re: FOG Michael Bulatov...11-15-2007
| | | `--> Re: FOG Michael Bulatov...11-18-2007
| ---> Re: FOG Michael Bulatov...11-18-2007
If you were  Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
Posted by Michael Bulatovich on November 13, 2007, 9:46 am
You must go way back. I can't recall any.

I wrote to the editor of the Toronto Globe and Mail, who's former editor in
chief, William Thorsell, later commissioned Libeskind to design an addition
to the Royal Ontario Museum, and asked the question, "Who is dumber? The
architect who pulls his pants down and stumbles around in public for money,
or the guy who pays him money to do it?" No one answered, but it points to
the shared responsibility in architecture between the client and the
architect.

Good architecture takes good clients and good architects. Star-struck, or
otherwise uncritical, clients will likely get what they deserve. Sit back
and enjoy the show.
--


MichaelB
www.michaelbulatovich.ca


>A couple of fun editorials...
>
>
http://www.nypost.com/seven/11112007/postopinion/opedcolumnists/frank_lloyd_wrong_878032.htm?page=0
>
>
http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2007/11/revenge-of-the-nerds-mit-sues-gehry.php
>
>
>
> This group used to have a few Gehry fanatics. Where are you guys?
>
>
>> MIT is suing FOG.
>> From The Boston Globe:
>> "The Massachusetts Institute of Technology has filed a negligence suit
>> against world-renowned architect Frank Gehry, charging that flaws in his
>> design of the $300 million Stata Center in Cambridge, one of the most
>> celebrated works of architecture unveiled in years, caused leaks to
>> spring, masonry to crack, mold to grow, and drainage to back up.
>> The suit says that MIT paid Los Angeles-based Gehry Partners $15 million
>> to design the Stata Center, which was hailed by critics as innovative and
>> eye-catching with its unconventional walls and radical angles. But soon
>> after its completion in spring 2004, the center's outdoor amphitheater
>> began to crack due to drainage problems, the suit says. Snow and ice
>> cascaded dangerously from window boxes and other projecting roof areas,
>> blocking emergency exits and damaging other parts of the building,
>> according to the suit. Mold grew on the center's brick exterior, the suit
>> says, and there were persistent leaks throughout the building.
>>
>>
http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/11/06/mit_sues_gehry_citing_leaks_in_300m_complex/
>>
>> Guess he never designed for a cold climate.
>>
>> EDS
>>
>>
>
>



Posted by ++ on November 13, 2007, 11:31 am


Michael Bulatovich wrote:

>You must go way back. I can't recall any.
>
>I wrote to the editor of the Toronto Globe and Mail, who's former editor in
>chief, William Thorsell, later commissioned Libeskind to design an addition
>to the Royal Ontario Museum, and asked the question, "Who is dumber? The
>architect who pulls his pants down and stumbles around in public for money,
>or the guy who pays him money to do it?" No one answered, but it points to
>the shared responsibility in architecture between the client and the
>architect.
>
>Good architecture takes good clients and good architects. Star-struck, or
>otherwise uncritical, clients will likely get what they deserve. Sit back
>and enjoy the show.
>
>

I think there should be more one board open design competitions to raise
the number of so=called design architects and to vary the short lists of
pepople allowed to compete for projects. A new sense of the old
American Public Works Program would help, too. What's the situation in
Canada?


Posted by Michael Bulatovich on November 13, 2007, 12:40 pm

>
>
> Michael Bulatovich wrote:
>
>>You must go way back. I can't recall any.
>>
>>I wrote to the editor of the Toronto Globe and Mail, who's former editor
>>in chief, William Thorsell, later commissioned Libeskind to design an
>>addition to the Royal Ontario Museum, and asked the question, "Who is
>>dumber? The architect who pulls his pants down and stumbles around in
>>public for money, or the guy who pays him money to do it?" No one
>>answered, but it points to the shared responsibility in architecture
>>between the client and the architect.
>>
>>Good architecture takes good clients and good architects. Star-struck, or
>>otherwise uncritical, clients will likely get what they deserve. Sit back
>>and enjoy the show.
>>
>
> I think there should be more one board open design competitions to raise
> the number of so=called design architects and to vary the short lists of
> pepople allowed to compete for projects. A new sense of the old American
> Public Works Program would help, too. What's the situation in Canada?

From my perspective, competitions are not for small (one man) practices for
practical reasons, unless you married well. Public work is done by various
levels of governments, and they vary in how receptive they are in giving
work to small practices:

The Feds are not friendly at all. They wear belts and suspenders.

The Province, as I understand it, is pretty good about spreading around the
work, though I've never bid on any myself. I've been meaning to give it a
try, as one of my current clients use to be a big wig at the agency that
doles out the work, and he could hold my hand though the process, but it's
relatively uninteresting to me so I never do it.

The municipalities are highly political, and, blind competition or not, the
staff know the work of their friends, and the staff pick the juries who also
know the work of their friends...We're starting to get a bland sameness to
public work that a colleague has dubbed, "Beaver Modern." This has led to a
race to hire name brand foreigners selling 'sizzle' on purple stilts, or
crumpled aluminum trainwrecks overhanging the public realm, where the
commissions are by semi-private institutions.

For some, a more worrisome local trend has been the bundling of projects so
that you have to be big to do a small thing, because they'll only give out
small things out in clumps, or attached to big things. There are billions
about to be spent here over the next few years so there is a feeding frenzy
now going on with big firms eating other big firms to become bigger firms so
they can handle all this work, and American firms are buying up mid-sized
firms to get a foothold in the province. Pity the employees after it's all
over....

I keep my nose out of it and work for private clients, mainly entrepreneurs.
They are used to weighing options, making decisions, and judging people's
abilities.
--


MichaelB
www.michaelbulatovich.ca



Posted by ++ on November 15, 2007, 6:49 pm


Michael Bulatovich wrote:

>> A new sense of the old American
>>Public Works Program would help, too. What's the situation in Canada?
>>
>>
>
>From my perspective, competitions are not for small (one man) practices for
>practical reasons, unless you married well. Public work is done by various
>levels of governments, and they vary in how receptive they are in giving
>work to small practices:
>
>The Feds are not friendly at all. They wear belts and suspenders.
>
>

I rather like suspenders, when the are red or bright green or otherwise
scream.

>The Province, as I understand it, is pretty good about spreading around the
>work, though I've never bid on any myself. I've been meaning to give it a
>try, as one of my current clients use to be a big wig at the agency that
>doles out the work, and he could hold my hand though the process, but it's
>relatively uninteresting to me so I never do it.
>
>
I rather like the patriotic aspect of federal or local work.

>The municipalities are highly political, and, blind competition or not, the
>staff know the work of their friends, and the staff pick the juries who also
>know the work of their friends...We're starting to get a bland sameness to
>public work that a colleague has dubbed, "Beaver Modern."
>

Have any examples you can steer us all to view? Hard to get a concept.

>This has led to a
>race to hire name brand foreigners selling 'sizzle' on purple stilts, or
>crumpled aluminum trainwrecks overhanging the public realm, where the
>commissions are by semi-private institutions.
>
>

My most unfave was what I call the neobrutalists....

>For some, a more worrisome local trend has been the bundling of projects so
>that you have to be big to do a small thing, because they'll only give out
>small things out in clumps, or attached to big things. There are billions
>about to be spent here over the next few years so there is a feeding frenzy
>now going on with big firms eating other big firms to become bigger firms so
>they can handle all this work, and American firms are buying up mid-sized
>firms to get a foothold in the province. Pity the employees after it's all
>over....
>
>

The bundling aspect is bad, especially since some large A/Es try to
claim they can do it all when sometimes they would be better off , or
the project would be better off, subcontracting certain parts of
expertise.

Doesn't Canada have small business setasides? I actually wish the US
had micro business setasides to keep small firms in actions, especially
tiny minority and tiny women owned (or both or all). I really think
that architectural vision is enhanced when there are lots of happy
helping hands, so to speak.

>I keep my nose out of it and work for private clients, mainly entrepreneurs.
>They are used to weighing options, making decisions, and judging people's
>abilities.
>
>

That's solid

Posted by Michael Bulatovich on November 15, 2007, 7:17 pm

>
>
> Michael Bulatovich wrote:
>
>>> A new sense of the old American Public Works Program would help, too.
>>> What's the situation in Canada?
>>>
>>
>>From my perspective, competitions are not for small (one man) practices
>>for practical reasons, unless you married well. Public work is done by
>>various levels of governments, and they vary in how receptive they are in
>>giving work to small practices:
>>
>>The Feds are not friendly at all. They wear belts and suspenders.
>>
>
> I rather like suspenders, when the are red or bright green or otherwise
> scream.

Not you too! Don, no problem. Ken, of course, but you?

http://www.redgreen.com/

>>The Province, as I understand it, is pretty good about spreading around
>>the work, though I've never bid on any myself. I've been meaning to give
>>it a try, as one of my current clients use to be a big wig at the agency
>>that doles out the work, and he could hold my hand though the process, but
>>it's relatively uninteresting to me so I never do it.
>>
> I rather like the patriotic aspect of federal or local work.

I like the *civic* aspect. I mistrust patriotism.

>>The municipalities are highly political, and, blind competition or not,
>>the staff know the work of their friends, and the staff pick the juries
>>who also know the work of their friends...We're starting to get a bland
>>sameness to public work that a colleague has dubbed, "Beaver Modern."
>
> Have any examples you can steer us all to view? Hard to get a concept.

Muted color pallete. A little zinc, some exposed varnished wood, even though
it'll disintegrate. Add clear annodized aluminum, maybe some horizontal
stone, a pinch of stucco. Gluelam with exposed metal connectors. Oh
yeah...must be assymetrical. Very safe.

>>This has led to a race to hire name brand foreigners selling 'sizzle' on
>>purple stilts, or crumpled aluminum trainwrecks overhanging the public
>>realm, where the commissions are by semi-private institutions.
>>
>
> My most unfave was what I call the neobrutalists....

Links?

>>For some, a more worrisome local trend has been the bundling of projects
>>so that you have to be big to do a small thing, because they'll only give
>>out small things out in clumps, or attached to big things. There are
>>billions about to be spent here over the next few years so there is a
>>feeding frenzy now going on with big firms eating other big firms to
>>become bigger firms so they can handle all this work, and American firms
>>are buying up mid-sized firms to get a foothold in the province. Pity the
>>employees after it's all over....
>>
>
> The bundling aspect is bad, especially since some large A/Es try to claim
> they can do it all when sometimes they would be better off , or the
> project would be better off, subcontracting certain parts of expertise.
> Doesn't Canada have small business setasides?

If I knew what that was I could answer. As I said, the province here does
make an effort to see that some of the work is available to small firms
through the ORC, which uses "Merx"
http://tinyurl.com/34y6sf , or at least, it has in the past.
--


MichaelB
www.michaelbulatovich.ca



Page 2 of 3       < 1 2 3 > last >>

Contact Us | Privacy Policy

XML SitemapXML Sitemap