Previous Shop Talk: Interdisciplinary Science at Duke U.; Failing Pipes at Truman State U.; and More |
Next |
November 12, 2007, 08:28 AM ET
More on MIT: How Well Did Both Sides Manage Risk?
Another response to Thursday’s article about the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s lawsuit alleging negligence on the part of Gehry Partners, architects of MIT’s Stata Center (right). This is from Ron McCoy, university architect at Arizona State University:
First of all, this is unfortunate for everybody involved: the institution, the architect, and the contractor. I also know that sorting out responsibility in these things is incredibly complex and nobody on the outside should jump to conclusions.
It is pretty clear that some of the best architects are risk takers. Their work is generally notable because it is different, it advances the discipline of architecture, and it explores new territory. In general, culture benefits from this risk. This often involves uncommon and difficult construction issues, although it would be interesting to see how contemporary collaborations and technologies compare to the history of architecture.
Not all experimental architects are aggressive in their use of uncommon construction details and techniques, so the two should not be linked — star architects do not necessarily involve experiments in construction.
It should be pretty clear that institutions electing to work with Mr. Gehry need to be prepared for a higher level of risk. This should not be surprising, as certain businesses and institutions make great gains by assuming risk and leading the way. Even so, it is the responsibility of all institutions to understand the level of risk they can assume and to assiduously manage that risk.
I think the question here is how well did all parties understand and manage and minimize their risk?
It is also interesting to read how different stakeholders seem to be responding in this situation, particularly some of the very positive quotes I’ve seen from the users. It is not surprising that many are thrilled with the quality of the space and its contribution to the culture and work environment of the university. Not surprisingly, these are not the individuals who have to bear the burden of costly maintenance and repairs. Campus buildings need to respond to multiple value sets. The best architecture satisfies most of the values most of the time. That appears not to be the case in this instance.
Add Your Comment
Commenting is closed.