Mike,
I was reading over the materials and I hope you can clarify a few things.
It sounds like Group 7 is an established group that has been together for a while now. Does Group 7 have a central facebook page, forum, blog, etc? I am trying to determine what contribution I and others could make coming in now have as there is a project planned laid out in the word document. Are you still trying to recruit volunteers for this effort? There was some vagueness at the end of the word document about who to contact.
A few notes on the presentation (Group 7 smallesta). I am making my notes based off what I observe in presentation understanding that there might be additional information provided in a presentation.
Slide #2:
Text reads “Does it concern you that architects design so few of the houses that are built in the US today?” I think this text is a little misleading as architects are involved with the suburban developments (my father was a developer/contractor and did hire an architect to provide base plans. I understand this is not the norm), but as designers know these places are not conducive to community building or sustainability. This sentence is also very limiting to purely residential architects and could be seen as alienating to other sectors like sports, office, and higher education. I also do not like this phrase as it continues to stipulate a continuation of the status-quo of unsustainable suburban development instead of the issue at hand which architects are being left out of the process. A phrase one of my good friends talked about was: “2% of the buildings worldwide are planned by architects” (Source: Quote starts at 1:10). While this phrase might not directly relate to things happening in the U.S., it does highlight a global problem with the professions serving the needs of the people. It would be good to have a source for the statistic being made as it would provide a concrete fact instead of a subjective observation.
Slide #3:
Good point, but I think it misses the mark. LEED does support design in elements like buildings orientation, generous window sizes, and material selection, but many of the points have to be verified or are directly controlled by engineers and contractors. It might be good to quote Steven Mouzon as he has talked about the failure of the technology-focused path of LEED (engineering) versus the low-impact design path that should be pursued (architectural). Steve also proposed a new system called Anti-LEED to focus on those issues: Source. The credits you point out (Innovation in Design) are generally for items above and beyond the standard (all water is recycled to a potable level), but tend to be engineering focused or not directly influenced by architects.
Slide #4:
It might help to clarify what is our reputation. Based on the images it appears that you are directly talking about environmentalism. In our industry it is understood that is a goal, but outside of the profession we are not known for this.
Slide #5:
I understand that the point has to do with the text displayed on the signs, but it might be better to counter with physical examples of what you desire and what is the reality.
Slide #6:
I think Buckminster Fuller is overused. Modern contemporaries include Francis Kere building low-cost, community built schools in Burkina Faso (TED Talk) or Cameron Sinclair with Architecture for Humanity. This again helps keep the presentation fresh. I still include something of Fuller’s as he is the epitome of what you see as an architect making a better world.
Slide #7:
I am seeing some circling reasoning is the text. It might be better to bring up the point that the IPD is design to contractual bind the architect and contractor and since the architect has given up all liability related to the nuts and bolts of construction, the architect is not seen as a leader.
Slide #12:
The dog marking its territory is incredibly unprofessional and vulgar.
Slide #14:
Term “rich kids” is unprofessional and uncalled for. It might be better to state “architects built the cultural monuments of their time (relates to later slide).
Slide #15:
Related to public health this is strong imagery, but I would recommend using a second slide immediately after showing the U.S. highway and infamous 24 Hour Fitness escalator. These latter images speaks volumes to the current health crisis of obesity, lack of exercise, and destruction of placemaking. If you are willing, I would also show images of the highway protests in Ferguson, Oakland, and Hong Kong about the destruction of community in the built environment.
Slide #16:
Change image to the Pompidou Center. The jumbled image is difficult to read.
Slide #17:
I do not see the invention of steel as a negative and this would paint your presentation as being pro-historicist which would alienate modernist architectures. I think the attack should change to how the car destroy the architectural scale and community, but this is my political frame of mind and again will alienate particular designers.
Slide #18:
You might have to clarify further as the current analogy is not bad as a violin is still a beautiful designed object. It might be more interested to relate back to the master builder where the architect then designed the “whole” and now they are only a “part”.
Slide #21.
I would eliminate the “Possible answer?” as it shows uncertainty in your position. The image also relates too much to a historicist attitude. Harry Malgrave has some interested writing related to neuroscience. It might be more forward looking to include other professions that can help influence us. IDEO is another good example of design focused on the human experience.
Slide #22:
Very good simple example. BNIM project where we used evidence based design to convince the client on a particular route. Evidence-based design is an emerging way of practice in healthcare architect and provides a scientific method to “right answers” in design.
Slide #23:
Change to “Focus on how things work instead of what they look like”. This allows the images to be stand-alone supports to what you would say in a presentation instead of reading from the slide.
Slide #26
I would include some new literature being produced. Very happy to see Jan Gehl’s book here.
Slide #27
I am surprised you did not mention anything about the integration of construction into architectural education. Just nearing the completion of the AREs, this was something a lot of peers commented on as a failure of architectural education. This was in response to NCARB granting licensure after graduation and who they would have been professional unprepared for a licensed.
Slide #30
Change to “focus on everyday people”, this helps tie the Public-Interest Design groups and the socially conscience architects into the mix. I am confused why Thom Mayne is on this slide.
Slide #32
I would omit this slide as it is as you are indirectly saying “let’s give up one of our responsibilities to another profession” which is counter to overall theme of your presentation. It might be better to go along on the lines of “style does not matter and it should not be decisive in our culture. Let’s work on what works”
Slide #33
The change to previous can help reinforce this slide as now it is about how the business of architecture is performed.
Slide #36
Millennial will not understand this joke and it shows that you are aiming your message to a particular group of people while excluding others. Also the yellow comic book talk bubble is not professional. It would be better to include a quote from a famous individual.
Slide Layout:
I do not understand the two images in the upper right hand corner as they put an unneeded constrain on the slide layout. I also recommend having a title to each slide in the larger front with supplement text in a much smaller font. This allows those who want the big idea to breeze through the presentation while the smaller text is for the deep readers. It also help to establish a grid or set of rules how each image is shown as it creates visual organization and students will be very nitpicky of the visuals.
Overall:
Related to the built environment, I was a little surprised by the lack of elements related to the health of those who enter our buildings. At BNIM we changed our mission statement to “We deliver beautiful, integrated, living environments that inspire change and enhance the human condition” as we see the future of architecture being directly related to the health of those we serve. If an architect’s main goal is to protect the safety and wellbeing of those who occupy are buildings, it would be irresponsibility for architects to not include physical health from the equation. Mental health was talked about in the presentation, but not deeply. Harry Malgrave is doing some interesting work related in this area.
There also needs to have a laid out of the current economy framework we find ourselves in. In client meetings I have found many ideas that individuals would consider very sensible (walkable communities, emphasis on materials, design that enhances health) be shot down as they are unrealistic as I am solely responsible for making the building “look pretty” and I do not know what I am talking about. This has forced me to consider what the true paths to creating change are and integrate those into my repertoire. This is why I admire the New Urbanists and joined a planning commission as Andres Duany in the 1980s realized that changing the zoning code had a larger impact in creating a sustainable community then trying to shoehorn a particular design through the current government process. Other professions have realized the power of political office and what it brings to their profession. I recently attended a contractor design award ceremony and they were not shy at actively promoting a particular political agenda and helping members achieve political office. The AIA has a lobby, but that will do little good as they do not have foothold into the political door. They are only currying favors like every other lobbyist group in the country. I have also been following the Business of Architecture as it relates to other paradigms of work like “Architect as Developer” and the value architects bring (this would be a good partner to bring aboard).
I hope this is helpful and hope that what Group 7 is doing reinvigorates the Repositioning effort.
Kyle Rogler
architecture
BNIM | 2011 AIA National Architecture Firm Award
d 816.783.1606 m 913.433.6410 f 816.783.1501