Industry Professional's comments
Worth pointing out he was sacked from the £1billion Cambridge University project for failing to meet brief and budget after 12 months of trying.
Having looked at the planning application I continue to fail to see anything unusually eco about this project. The massing and modelling of the rear of the building is also rather sad - a compromise between good neighbourlyness and commercial greed for floor area.
All of these things are taking place in London, there are other places where architecture is practiced in the UK.
It's quite embarrassing that this whole thing thing went on so long. If the AJ wasn't in the middle of a "girl power" movement at the moment this wouldn't have had half the airtime.
The fact that one of the topics at the top of AJ is "women in architecture" highlights the magazines priorities at the moment. Why isn't there a tab for "young architects", "old architects", "part qualified architects", "architects of diverse ethnic origin", "homosexual architects", "heterosexual architects", "handicapped architects"???
Surely selecting one group as worthy of acknowledgement above all others is wrong! It seems that the entire section is in place purely to provide Christine Murray with a job and a platform to vent her personal frustrations. Surely to comment adequately on the profession you would need to be fully immersed in it, not just watching from the sidelines and choosing your own agenda.
Is the personalisation of space so bad?... is architecture more important than self espression?... Cambridge has streets of Victorian terrace houses part of their charm is the fact no two are the same, part of there appeal is their flexibility and adaptability over time. In an age where we are encouraged to design for changing households, lifetime homes and new patterns of tenure, are the beautiful hosues of Accordia relevant?...
Thank god this was rejected. No matter how much work she has claimed to have done, the award wasn't given to her and it appears common sense has prevailed
This is almost as horrendous as when Americans glue fake classical details to their homes and consider it to be a sign good taste.
It looks like a tacky recreation of what Prince Charles deems classically English!
No two homes the same... intentionally ofset pitches to appear as though they were built at different times!!! Where is the horse and cart to really fool us all???
Why are there no images of the interior?
Bring back Fielden Clegg
Demolishing quite a chunk of London to the west of the station?.... no more St James Square
David Adjaye?... seriously?... why?... for what?....
I am startled that you make such an incendiary claim of 'ethnic cleansing' showing a lack of knowledge of what this term means - ask anyone who lived through the Yugoslav wars and they will tell you that murder and torture were the order of the day not downsizing award payments (current borough average is £1500 flat payment in addition to £400 for each bedroom given up) nor moving payments to help with furniture removal. Nor the offer of a different property elsewhere. Nor were they given the opportunity to stay by paying a small contribution to their rent.
Not forgetting that 'social housing tenant' is not an ethnicity! For example, in Essex the majority of social tenants are caucasian, in Tower Hamlets the majority are Bangladeshi.
Having worked for a social housing provider I have seen first hand the impact of under occupiers on those living in overcrowded accommodation.
We had many households as follows:
Parents living in a 3 bed house with no children. Both children on turning 18 received their own 1 bed social housing flats. So the need is for 3 bedrooms and they are occupying 5.
We had many other households as follows:
Parents sleep on sofa in lounge, 2 children share a bedroom. So the need is for 3 bedrooms and they have 1.
You cannot consistenly build large accomodation and then have it stay with families when they separate. It just doesn't work in the long-term.
This government policy is about equalising provision of social housing with private housing. In other words, someone renting or owning in the private sector who has non-resident parents or wants a friend to stay has to make do - perhaps with a sofabed.
If a private landlord wants to sell up or extricate their tenants they give 2 months notice and those tenants have to find new accomodation, no financial support to move (as in social housing) and no guarantees about staying in the local community, close to family or friends.
In the private market you pay for every additional square metre, so why should social housing be any different.
‘Leaked’ is a rather over dramatic way of describing a document that was circulated by link to all RIAS members via a regular emailed newsletter?
But there are no winners here.
A profession so desperate it will regularly give away its expertise virtually free in competitions condoned by its professional bodies; in the hope of negotiating a desultory fee for a project with a wholly inadequate budget.
Or the OJEU process itself? Fair playing field? Much fairer perhaps for some of the practices that Glasgow City Council phoned, invited to submit and subsequently shortlisted?
Sympathies for JMP, but honestly you’re probably better off out of it.
I wasn't aware that BRE publish figures related to 'projects in the process of certification'. If the figures published here are a comparison of BREEAM certified vs. LEED certified + LEED in progress, it isn't possible to use them to draw conclusions on which of the schemes have greater traction in a particular territory.
Another speculative response. How can you have any idea about the quality of experience gained and if the responses are truthful. I work in an open and fair office that pays everone equally badly. As previously mentioned, the only way to generate useful and factual articles that don't make such sweeping statements is to obtain the information directly from the companies and have them assess their relevant experience.
If it is true that some women earn less then this is not right at all and should be addressed, but there are guys, girls and others that earn various ammounts depending on how they entered into their terms and conditions when signing up for a contract. If your skill set is in demmand you have a better barganing chip, it is as simple as that.
Regarding the career being affected by having a baby, surely that is down to personal choice... if you are no longer able to put in the ridiculous hours that most architects do then you will find yourself slip down the promotion list as others will offer the company more time and effort than somebody who feels they have to leave on time to take care of their families. It is a choice how you prioritise various elements of your life.
Ridiculous statements and graphs. Anything that starts "do you think..." implies that the answers are not fact based and therefore redundant and irrelevant. As architect's most of us believe that we are underpaid and over worked, so as a general rule most of us will assume the worst case scenario applies to us.
Please re-write the article with some solid factual indformation. But I doubt you will be abvle to achieve this without full disclosure from a range of different sized architectural practices. This way you would have a leg to stand on and not just be putting irrelevant graphs into poorly thought through articles.
As an industry we need to demmand more money for all, not just men, women, old, young etc.
I agree with Jonathan £150 is ridiculous for any competition, but particularly for such a small and temporary structure.