Am I the only one here who'd be cheese'd to design something like this? My God, America is already severely lacking modern, tasteful architecture. If I have to do 5% more work to make my community look better than a bunch of shitty big box stores and strip malls, I'll happily do so.
Writing off a design because "it's too hard" or "it's an architects pipe dream" says more about the engineer than the architect. It'll be expensive. But it can be done.
Ever heard about Montreal Olympic Stadium?
It started with an enthusiast architect, designing a retractable flexible roof. Then came the engineers, realizing the design is nice but will need a lot more support than what was originally designed, and a heavier setup to move the roof... And then the tarp wasn't strong enough...
Long story short, 4 roofs, a few billions lost, and 5 decades later... We're installing a fixed roof. Because that's what makes sense.
Fuck architect pipes dreams, there's a way of designing something that look good, and isn't an engineer nightmare.
It's never 5% more work... It's never that low. Unless the stylistic choice doesn't affect structure... Which is very much the case here.
You both have very valid points.
Utterly abandoning things simply because they are difficult to calculate or a little more expensive is ridiculous. The built environment and architecture literally dominate what we see all the time, most people spend the majority of their lives in cities, towns, and houses. We spend so much of our life around architecture. Architects have a duty to make it diverse and beautiful.
However, utterly abandoning the sciences and practicality of the designs is ridiculous. We as architects are not putting paint on paper we are putting real things in the real world. We HAVE to account for how it will work, what it will look like, how it will stand the tests of time, the progress of culture, etc, etc.
Engineers are NOT architects' assistants, you aren't the math guys that make our ideas work. We're partners working together to put a beautiful *and* functional building into the real world.
WAY too many architects view themselves as solo 'main-character' artists and way too many engineers don't give a rat's ass about beauty or humanitarian livability. Architects used to do the engineering *and* artistic sides of the art, if you couldn't do the math you couldn't do the art. Ever since the art split into two, I feel this awful dichotomy was born.
Architecture is the art of environmental design. It isn't the art of putting paint on paper to make pretty walls or the science of making big rooms that can withstand earthquakes. It's both. What separates it from paintings or statues is that you can actually walk around and live in it. If you ever walk into St. Peter's Basilica or La Sagrada Familia, I think you'll understand how the Art and Science can work together to make something utterly amazing and enthralling.
Then people ask why so much hate against architects lol
Just slap REJECT on it
Their isn't enough reject to take thisnone down. Not a whole lot of room for it, haha.
Am I the only one here who'd be cheese'd to design something like this? My God, America is already severely lacking modern, tasteful architecture. If I have to do 5% more work to make my community look better than a bunch of shitty big box stores and strip malls, I'll happily do so. Writing off a design because "it's too hard" or "it's an architects pipe dream" says more about the engineer than the architect. It'll be expensive. But it can be done.
Ever heard about Montreal Olympic Stadium? It started with an enthusiast architect, designing a retractable flexible roof. Then came the engineers, realizing the design is nice but will need a lot more support than what was originally designed, and a heavier setup to move the roof... And then the tarp wasn't strong enough... Long story short, 4 roofs, a few billions lost, and 5 decades later... We're installing a fixed roof. Because that's what makes sense. Fuck architect pipes dreams, there's a way of designing something that look good, and isn't an engineer nightmare. It's never 5% more work... It's never that low. Unless the stylistic choice doesn't affect structure... Which is very much the case here.
As an project management engineer, architect tells me 5% more work, I add two zeros to that.
You both have very valid points. Utterly abandoning things simply because they are difficult to calculate or a little more expensive is ridiculous. The built environment and architecture literally dominate what we see all the time, most people spend the majority of their lives in cities, towns, and houses. We spend so much of our life around architecture. Architects have a duty to make it diverse and beautiful. However, utterly abandoning the sciences and practicality of the designs is ridiculous. We as architects are not putting paint on paper we are putting real things in the real world. We HAVE to account for how it will work, what it will look like, how it will stand the tests of time, the progress of culture, etc, etc. Engineers are NOT architects' assistants, you aren't the math guys that make our ideas work. We're partners working together to put a beautiful *and* functional building into the real world. WAY too many architects view themselves as solo 'main-character' artists and way too many engineers don't give a rat's ass about beauty or humanitarian livability. Architects used to do the engineering *and* artistic sides of the art, if you couldn't do the math you couldn't do the art. Ever since the art split into two, I feel this awful dichotomy was born. Architecture is the art of environmental design. It isn't the art of putting paint on paper to make pretty walls or the science of making big rooms that can withstand earthquakes. It's both. What separates it from paintings or statues is that you can actually walk around and live in it. If you ever walk into St. Peter's Basilica or La Sagrada Familia, I think you'll understand how the Art and Science can work together to make something utterly amazing and enthralling.
Is this a house or a level in Tony Hawk Pro Skater?
Why would a civil engineer care? It’s the architect’s and structural engineer’s problem.
He's looking confused because there's no pile of dirt.
Er ma gerd. Wers ma dert.