How to Ensure Architectural Excellence
Content
qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqw ertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwert yuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyui opasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopa How to ensure Architectural Excellence? sdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdf PROFESSIONAL PRACTICES ghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghj klzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklz xcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcv bnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbn mqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmq wertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwe rtyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwerty uiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuio pasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopas dfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfg hjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjk
2/23/2012 AKSHYA SINGHVI (A/1934/2007)
Architectural excellence?
In today’s world where impatient capital and economic concerns are the overriding factors, how does one ensure that architectural quality of a building also gets it due in the whole process? Guiding the development of the city so that the aesthetic quality of its urban fabric is not compromised is a vital task .It was specifically for this purpose that “The Delhi Urban Art Commission “was set up by an Act of Parliament in 1973. Unfortunately the role of the DUAC has been reduced to “a fifth wheel in the chariot of sanctioning authorities”. (Fernandes, 2006 ).It’s role is that of a sanctioning authority and it has no influence at the start where the design is actually conceived. In countries such as France and Germany and to a certain extent, the USA, there is a formal framework so that buildings that have an impact on the urban aesthetic are chosen through competitions. According to Nasar (1999) in Germany all public buildings are built after architectural competitions since . In France all public buildings as well as other projects whose cost exceeds a certain threshold are required to hold competitions. This has resulted in fantastic architecture that both pushes architectural boundaries and contributes to the city fabric.
The Architect and the Builder
The “builders” in the construction industry today (DLF, Jaypee,etc), dominate all large scale projects and not without good reason. They have the wherewithal to execute these on time ,teams with specific expertise to envision various aspects of the building , and they are economically well equipped for the task .All in all they provide great value to the client (government or otherwise) . The Commonwealth Games of 2010 aptly showed the prowess of builders .The projects finished on time and they are functioning satisfactorily, but we may never know whether something better may have been built. An architectural competition would have most probably yielded much more innovative architecture of a superior quality. This is where the architect comes into picture. The traditional architectural firm is too ill equipped to compete head on with a large construction firm. With the limitations on investments in architectural firms and the personal liability of the architect in every project he does, it is simply not feasible for him to operate at that scale. What is possible is that both collaborate and use their own respective proficiencies. The builders’ proficiency in construction, management and delivering quality & the architects’ ability to come up with innovative designs.
Competitions
What is an architectural competition?
As opposed to the conventional process where the client identifies the architect based on prior reputation, in a design competition the client picks the designer based on design for the specific project (Nasar, 1999) In the Indian context, the Council of Architecture (COA), the body which defines the conduct of architectural practices heavily advocates architectural competitions. According to the “Professional Practice Competition Guidelines” the various merits of this system include – new architects getting a chance to prove their mettle, an increased chance for outstanding work to emerge and new solutions to be discovered.
Benefits of design competitions.
In a competition architects are pressed to do their best work. It is very different working to win than when an architect already has a commission…The client is like the dealer: He cannot lose. He gets a design, models, drawings and publicity. –Peter Eisenman In a design competition an architect is required to do his best work if he wishes to win. The complacency of getting a commission is replaced by the need to innovate .We can see that the most famous buildings of the world were the outcome of design competitions- La Grande Arche de la Défense, Parc de la Villette, Centre Georges Pompidou, Sydney Opera House and Royal Danish Library are only a few examples to prove this point. Competitions have great potential because they open up opportunities to talented architects that may be young and unrecognized to become recognized - Cesar Pelli, architect It certainly as value in terms of giving that young practitioner the chance to be recognized -Steven Izenour,AIA National Honor Award winner A design competition allows new talent to emerge. A pioneering architect or group of architects may never get the chance to propose their solutions if there are no competitions. A competition is the best way to award commissions on merit and help new talent (however obscure) to emerge and bring in new solutions.
Drawbacks of design competitions
Professional Juries are swayed by the look of the presentation rather than the substance of the design – Joan Blutter(Designer of the year , ASID)
Some people argue that the competition leads to a very superfluous examination of the design and that the jury in influenced by other things rather than just pure design. While this might be true, it is relatively easier to correct than the situation that emerges out of holding no competitions. The jury might include not only a jury of architects but also of the client and other stakeholders .If design is given its due diligence then good design will emerge.
Plugging the Architect into the System
The competition may yield remarkable designs but a lot more is needed to realize the project .The process from conceptualization to realization of a design is made possible by a wide array of expertspeople dealing in construction, management, marketing etc. This array is already in place in a builder’s firm and what is needed is to plug in the architect based on the competition. The architectural firm might exist in isolation and then be plugged into the system after winning a competition and then again plug out after the project is over.
Public Participation
So, in all these competitions ….the building has been a disappointment to the owners and the public – and the jury escaped unscathed.- Arthur Erickson, architect The scope of this seminar includes buildings that affect the city fabric of Delhi (those buildings that come within the purview of the DUAC).This is public architecture that affects the general population profoundly, so it is crucial that they too have a say. Currently another argument against the competition is that the process is non-democratic and elitist (Nasar, 1999).It is said that the common public is left out in the name of lack of expertise whilst simultaneously claiming that the process is democratic is for the greater public good. There are divided views on whether the general public must get a vote. Some people argue that the public isn’t sufficiently well-informed when it comes to design whereas the other side argues that the public participation is essential if one desires the building to be accepted. A solution might be to use a process in which due weight is given to the vote of the general public in conjunction with other parties (the client , the jury etc).What may also be done is that the jury be conducted in a two-step process. The jurors might shortlist entries and then open these for public vote or vice versa.
Conclusion
The pace of the construction industry in Delhi today has profoundly affected the architecture of the city. Though the designs that emerge through this process may be functional and satisfactory they are not the best solutions to the brief. There is a need to pay due diligence to the design process as an integral part of the development process so as to keep the aesthetic order of Delhi consistent. The role of the DUAC which was setup for this very purpose has been undermined for the last 30 years. There is a need for alternatives and we find precedence of such alternatives In other countries in the form of design competitions. Though they may have their drawbacks, they are preferable to the status quo and with a little tweaking they may well benefit the capital city. What is needed though is policy change to ensure that such competitions happen. Germany and France have had such legislation since the 80’s and it helped their cities develop more coherently.
2/23/2012 AKSHYA SINGHVI (A/1934/2007)
Architectural excellence?
In today’s world where impatient capital and economic concerns are the overriding factors, how does one ensure that architectural quality of a building also gets it due in the whole process? Guiding the development of the city so that the aesthetic quality of its urban fabric is not compromised is a vital task .It was specifically for this purpose that “The Delhi Urban Art Commission “was set up by an Act of Parliament in 1973. Unfortunately the role of the DUAC has been reduced to “a fifth wheel in the chariot of sanctioning authorities”. (Fernandes, 2006 ).It’s role is that of a sanctioning authority and it has no influence at the start where the design is actually conceived. In countries such as France and Germany and to a certain extent, the USA, there is a formal framework so that buildings that have an impact on the urban aesthetic are chosen through competitions. According to Nasar (1999) in Germany all public buildings are built after architectural competitions since . In France all public buildings as well as other projects whose cost exceeds a certain threshold are required to hold competitions. This has resulted in fantastic architecture that both pushes architectural boundaries and contributes to the city fabric.
The Architect and the Builder
The “builders” in the construction industry today (DLF, Jaypee,etc), dominate all large scale projects and not without good reason. They have the wherewithal to execute these on time ,teams with specific expertise to envision various aspects of the building , and they are economically well equipped for the task .All in all they provide great value to the client (government or otherwise) . The Commonwealth Games of 2010 aptly showed the prowess of builders .The projects finished on time and they are functioning satisfactorily, but we may never know whether something better may have been built. An architectural competition would have most probably yielded much more innovative architecture of a superior quality. This is where the architect comes into picture. The traditional architectural firm is too ill equipped to compete head on with a large construction firm. With the limitations on investments in architectural firms and the personal liability of the architect in every project he does, it is simply not feasible for him to operate at that scale. What is possible is that both collaborate and use their own respective proficiencies. The builders’ proficiency in construction, management and delivering quality & the architects’ ability to come up with innovative designs.
Competitions
What is an architectural competition?
As opposed to the conventional process where the client identifies the architect based on prior reputation, in a design competition the client picks the designer based on design for the specific project (Nasar, 1999) In the Indian context, the Council of Architecture (COA), the body which defines the conduct of architectural practices heavily advocates architectural competitions. According to the “Professional Practice Competition Guidelines” the various merits of this system include – new architects getting a chance to prove their mettle, an increased chance for outstanding work to emerge and new solutions to be discovered.
Benefits of design competitions.
In a competition architects are pressed to do their best work. It is very different working to win than when an architect already has a commission…The client is like the dealer: He cannot lose. He gets a design, models, drawings and publicity. –Peter Eisenman In a design competition an architect is required to do his best work if he wishes to win. The complacency of getting a commission is replaced by the need to innovate .We can see that the most famous buildings of the world were the outcome of design competitions- La Grande Arche de la Défense, Parc de la Villette, Centre Georges Pompidou, Sydney Opera House and Royal Danish Library are only a few examples to prove this point. Competitions have great potential because they open up opportunities to talented architects that may be young and unrecognized to become recognized - Cesar Pelli, architect It certainly as value in terms of giving that young practitioner the chance to be recognized -Steven Izenour,AIA National Honor Award winner A design competition allows new talent to emerge. A pioneering architect or group of architects may never get the chance to propose their solutions if there are no competitions. A competition is the best way to award commissions on merit and help new talent (however obscure) to emerge and bring in new solutions.
Drawbacks of design competitions
Professional Juries are swayed by the look of the presentation rather than the substance of the design – Joan Blutter(Designer of the year , ASID)
Some people argue that the competition leads to a very superfluous examination of the design and that the jury in influenced by other things rather than just pure design. While this might be true, it is relatively easier to correct than the situation that emerges out of holding no competitions. The jury might include not only a jury of architects but also of the client and other stakeholders .If design is given its due diligence then good design will emerge.
Plugging the Architect into the System
The competition may yield remarkable designs but a lot more is needed to realize the project .The process from conceptualization to realization of a design is made possible by a wide array of expertspeople dealing in construction, management, marketing etc. This array is already in place in a builder’s firm and what is needed is to plug in the architect based on the competition. The architectural firm might exist in isolation and then be plugged into the system after winning a competition and then again plug out after the project is over.
Public Participation
So, in all these competitions ….the building has been a disappointment to the owners and the public – and the jury escaped unscathed.- Arthur Erickson, architect The scope of this seminar includes buildings that affect the city fabric of Delhi (those buildings that come within the purview of the DUAC).This is public architecture that affects the general population profoundly, so it is crucial that they too have a say. Currently another argument against the competition is that the process is non-democratic and elitist (Nasar, 1999).It is said that the common public is left out in the name of lack of expertise whilst simultaneously claiming that the process is democratic is for the greater public good. There are divided views on whether the general public must get a vote. Some people argue that the public isn’t sufficiently well-informed when it comes to design whereas the other side argues that the public participation is essential if one desires the building to be accepted. A solution might be to use a process in which due weight is given to the vote of the general public in conjunction with other parties (the client , the jury etc).What may also be done is that the jury be conducted in a two-step process. The jurors might shortlist entries and then open these for public vote or vice versa.
Conclusion
The pace of the construction industry in Delhi today has profoundly affected the architecture of the city. Though the designs that emerge through this process may be functional and satisfactory they are not the best solutions to the brief. There is a need to pay due diligence to the design process as an integral part of the development process so as to keep the aesthetic order of Delhi consistent. The role of the DUAC which was setup for this very purpose has been undermined for the last 30 years. There is a need for alternatives and we find precedence of such alternatives In other countries in the form of design competitions. Though they may have their drawbacks, they are preferable to the status quo and with a little tweaking they may well benefit the capital city. What is needed though is policy change to ensure that such competitions happen. Germany and France have had such legislation since the 80’s and it helped their cities develop more coherently.
