 |
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
|
THE ARCHITECTURE ISSUE
The Chronicle Review's yearly look at architecture examines buildings on and off campuses. Above, Caltech's new Cahill Center for Astronomy and Astrophysics, designed by Morphosis. (Chronicle photograph by Lawrence Biemiller)
Other News
U. of Tennessee Landmark to Move to Nearby Location
New campus buildings
Multimedia
Pomona's Skyspace
The artist James Turrell turned a Pomona College courtyard into a work of art worth waking up at dawn for.
Subscribe
Subscribe to Buildings & Grounds in a feed reader.
Get the Buildings & Grounds widget for Facebook, Myspace, or your own blog.
About Buildings & Grounds
Buildings & Grounds is written by Scott Carlson (left) and Lawrence Biemiller (right). Scott Carlson writes about architecture, facilties, energy, and sustainability, among other topics. Lawrence Biemiller writes about architecture and facilities and contributes to Notes from Academe. What's happening on your campus? Let us know.
More on MIT: Gehry Requires Big Budgets, Receptive Clients
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 Jim Winer, a principal in the firm of Menefee + Winer:
“Four hundred thousand square feet for $300-million is an unbelievably expensive building! We’re wrapping up construction for a university building (labs, classrooms, offices) in February of 2008 at 230,000 square feet for $36-million. That is an unbelievably tight budget, but more the norm on campuses throughout the country.
“I appreciate MIT’s commitment to architecture as evidenced by the money spent and what appears to be an attitude of patronage. For the price, the building should be, and is, magnificent. There would be no excuses for it to be otherwise. The building should, and might, make almost everyone working in it smile and feel inspired, because a premium was paid for the building that could have been spent on more usable space, scholarships, and research. Only MIT knows whether the right balance was struck between pragmatics and maintaining the essential need for inspiration. Given the money involved, it is also more than reasonable for MIT to expect something as fundamental as waterproofing to be right, and it is also reasonable to expect parts of the building not to require rebuilding within the first few years of occupancy.
“Mr. Gehry’s work is distinguished and inspiring, but it is only achievable with very distinguished (read BIG) budgets and receptive clients. The vast majority of practicing architects struggle with inadequate budgets and fees to build the bare minimum. There are many more talented architects in this country than there are opportunities for great architecture. I appreciate and admire Mr. Gehry’s genius and powers of persuasion, and I envy his opportunities, but I also admire the architects and clients who struggle with low construction budgets and fees and produce admirable buildings. Those quoted in your article who claim that the work of Mr. Gehry is economical live in such a rarefied world that they have no idea what economical really is. They contribute to the delusion that the opportunities for great architecture abound, and the built environment would be better if only there were more star architects.”
Lawrence Biemiller | Tuesday November 13, 2007 | Permalink | Contact us
Previous: Preservationists Fear for an Early Louis Kahn Building at Penn
Next: Student Fees at U. of Illinois Support Sustainability