DUTCH DESIGN WEEK 2009
PRAGUE DESIGN DAYS 2009
LONDON DESIGN FESTIVAL 2009
GIZMODO GALLERY 2009
EUROBIKE 2009
MAKER FAIRE AFRICA
NEW YORK INTERNATIONAL GIFT FAIR
ISTANBUL DESIGN WEEKEND 2009
BAUHAUS SUMMER SCHOOL 2009
Posted by Jeannie Choe | 7 Nov 2007
|
Comments (10)
Numerous leaks, cracked masonry, backed-up drains, and a moldy exterior have driven the Massachusetts Institute of Technology to file a negligence suit against Frank Gehry for his flaw-filled design for its $300 million Stata Center, built in 2004. MIT claims to have spent more than $1.5 million on services by a different company to repair and rebuild the amphitheater. The construction company involved, Skansa, claims Gehry ignored its warnings regarding his sketchy plans and even rejected a formal request to create a design that included soft joints and a drainage system.
Enjoy this quote by former Boston University president John Silber:
After learning of the lawsuit yesterday, Silber said Gehry "thinks of himself as an artist, as a sculptor. But the trouble is you don't live in a sculpture and users have to live in this building."
thanks bryman!
Dutch Design Week
Prague Design Days
1 Hour Design Challenge Winners!
Coroflot Salary Survey Results
Comments
Did Ghery hire the builders? either way, the builders are to blame, not the architects. The builders probably didn't pay attention to details. Any lawyer will say the same thing.
Some interesting discussion regarding this going on at Archinect:
http://www.archinect.com/forum/threads.php?id=67219_0_42_0_C
http://archinect.com/news/article.php?id=67205_0_24_0_C
You'd figure that all the engineering potential at MIT would've seen this coming a mile away. Traditional building practices are there for a reason. Stretching the envelope, as designers do, always ends up with complications. If you ask for high design you inherit the risk involved.
Looks cool though.
One word for you Frank...Booyah! A "professional" designer/architect is one who solves problems through design, not makes them. If the issues are truely a product of Frank's design and vision, then MIT has every right to go after his ass. I have come across and worked with too many "famous" designers/architects who forget the real reason for the profession.
"Any lawyer will say the same thing."
Doubtful. We'll find out, I suppose. I suspect the opposite is true.
Design ethics 101:
Architects being the leader and organizer of the whole process of course is responsible for such flaw. Gehry probably didn't pay attention to the details! that's what it is.
The hardest part of any construction is water proofing. As an exaggeration, if I wanted a water proof, low maintenance building, I would not have hired Gehry to design my building in the first place, especially in New England. I think that should have been understood by MIT ahead of time.
I disagree. The builders probably built exactly what Gehry's plans said to build. Gehry doesn't like being told no. I've had the pleasure/displeasure of trying to achieve what he wants and he will not take no for an answer. I can put a lot of belief in the side of the argument that says he ignored warnings that the structure's design needed to be modified.
The architects are to blame. So are the civil engineers. In cases like this they are always to blame. if a building were to collapse we don't blame the construction workers, we first look to structural flaws that might have been from a poor design.
Any architect should apply "reasonable skill and care" in designing buildings. This was certainly not the builders fault, especially as they warned Mr Gehry about the faults (as they are contractually obliged to). The blame lies squarely on Gehry, he's designed enough of these types of buildings to anticipate possible problems with the design. The fact he ignored the warnings is just irresponsible!
I think that Gehry's organic/abstract style do play a part in the problematic developments. It is harder to predict how the buildings will "live" in reality. For instance, certain shape intersections may harbor rain puddles and promote rusting and leaks. Whether these types of situations were looked at or not, could play a role in the failures surfacing. With simpler building, there are less factors/situations to consider. We have seen this before with his Walt Disney Concert Hall. See PDF: http://www.sbse.org/awards/docs/2005/1187.pdf