i've noticed a few of these. deyoung in SF is recent example. as far as i've read, unoin square (ca 2001) was similarly split between concept and gruntwork.
but i'm not sure how much gruntwork is done by a local firm. my imperssion is that some locals may be necesasry for legal/licensing/reg reasons, and certainly local hort knowledge should be good (but undervalued anyways!)
i'd prefer to do it all, because i can't imagine getting max design results by leaving detail design to someone else. and i wouldn't want to harass someone else to design details the way i think i would.
sloppy post, so make of it whatever, but just don't advertise your doors in this thread :-)
not only that, but correct me if i am wrong, there isn't a reciprocity agreement between NCARB and other governing bodies. so H&DM would almost certainly be required to find an architect of record, unless they of course hired an licensed american architect with a license in california.
if the design architect is out of country, they'll have to hire a local architect to join forces with, primarily to use the local architect's license & local knowledge of codes, technology and climate. usually the local architect must govern or oversee the generation of construction documents. so to divide the project up by firm: design - outsider/famous architect, cds - local architect is the natural division.
also have heard that some famous firms are more specialized in design work, churning out images, models for competitions or presentaitons. they choose to hire other architects for larger jobs with greater capacity (people and skills) to do intense production work for construction drawings. that way the first design firm doesn't need to hire more people for production or reallocate their existing employees to production work & can continue dd or job searching work.
My group is doing our Case Studies research on the new ICA in Boston by DS+R. We got all of our drawings from the local architect, but have heard nothing from DS+R. You're right. That kind of task allocation happens all the time.
sorry to be off topic, but weren't the sides of the ICA originally meant to be chanel glass ? I recall that the concept renderings showed the steel truss beyond through something translucent. i've seen that yellow exterior sheathing all over the sides in the construction photos.... any idea what happened to the channel glass ?
that's really too bad that they eliminated a tranlucent material for a wholely opaque one. that was a huge part of the design. of course the impressive dutch cantilever remains... what is it about proximity to water that makes architects want to cantilever stuff ....? haha.
famous arch does concept, with gruntwork by unknowns
i've noticed a few of these. deyoung in SF is recent example. as far as i've read, unoin square (ca 2001) was similarly split between concept and gruntwork.
but i'm not sure how much gruntwork is done by a local firm. my imperssion is that some locals may be necesasry for legal/licensing/reg reasons, and certainly local hort knowledge should be good (but undervalued anyways!)
i'd prefer to do it all, because i can't imagine getting max design results by leaving detail design to someone else. and i wouldn't want to harass someone else to design details the way i think i would.
sloppy post, so make of it whatever, but just don't advertise your doors in this thread :-)
not only that, but correct me if i am wrong, there isn't a reciprocity agreement between NCARB and other governing bodies. so H&DM would almost certainly be required to find an architect of record, unless they of course hired an licensed american architect with a license in california.
if the design architect is out of country, they'll have to hire a local architect to join forces with, primarily to use the local architect's license & local knowledge of codes, technology and climate. usually the local architect must govern or oversee the generation of construction documents. so to divide the project up by firm: design - outsider/famous architect, cds - local architect is the natural division.
also have heard that some famous firms are more specialized in design work, churning out images, models for competitions or presentaitons. they choose to hire other architects for larger jobs with greater capacity (people and skills) to do intense production work for construction drawings. that way the first design firm doesn't need to hire more people for production or reallocate their existing employees to production work & can continue dd or job searching work.
My group is doing our Case Studies research on the new ICA in Boston by DS+R. We got all of our drawings from the local architect, but have heard nothing from DS+R. You're right. That kind of task allocation happens all the time.
sorry to be off topic, but weren't the sides of the ICA originally meant to be chanel glass ? I recall that the concept renderings showed the steel truss beyond through something translucent. i've seen that yellow exterior sheathing all over the sides in the construction photos.... any idea what happened to the channel glass ?
Yeah. We were wondering that too. It wasn't too hard to get the drawings, but to get questions answered is a little harder. Still working on that one.
that's really too bad that they eliminated a tranlucent material for a wholely opaque one. that was a huge part of the design. of course the impressive dutch cantilever remains... what is it about proximity to water that makes architects want to cantilever stuff ....? haha.
a place from which to jump?
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.