-Anything with a Child Molestorium (Sorry. Super inside joke from OSU.)
-Any extreme group's building (A professional risk not worth taking)
-All of ochona's items

do tell us about the molestorium

A fast-food chain, not that they would ask.

Well I'd just figured out why I'm still the render guy: I was trying to find the ones I would turn down, and then I ended searching for the ones I would like to design. There's not many I tell you.
Anyway, something I would definitely refuse to work on is a military facility or weapon storage building. And the same as above, but the abortion clinic. It's so loaded as you said, that it has to be interesting to design.

Ha ha The day before a design review of a house I asked a student (whose first language wasn't English - but it was in good fun) if he had remembered to include his Child Molestorium. He started to freak out when I told him I didn't see it in his model and plans. He didn't question what it was. All he knew was we were hours away from the review with no time to slap on a Molestorium and he now had to come up with an excuse for the citics. After about five minutes I couldn't take - I slowed my pronunciation and he had a good laugh.

Good times, but nearly as funny as adding a top layer to a friend's huge, time-consuming cardboard contour model and writing "Nice model" on it. I think he messed himself before he realized it was just a loose piece of cardboard resting on top.

correction: not nearly as funny as...

I think I would design anything, not whoring myself, if they are coming to me I would say what my priorities are.
I think fast-food
car buying
abortion getting
and many other programs need major rethinking

I think that architects should put themselves in situations to influence, instead of running away from controversial structures...

I would have to draw the line on the molestorium though.

i turned down an indoor pool project..but mostly to protect myself form liability, not out of principle.

walmart
strip centers that don't respond to the urban context (full disclosure: i spent 2.5 years working on retail shopping centers and trying to knock some sense into the developers that just want to maximize square footage and parking on the site, i think that i was mildly successful on a few projects, but i just couldn't take it anymore so i left)
NRA headquarters
Republican Party Headquarters
G.W. Bush Presidential Library

things that I disagree with, but would like to design:
churches (see the atheist architects thread) since it would be a study in the research of ritualistic activities...i'd just have to disconnect myself from the fallacy that is organized religion...
gun range - again, could be a cool study in program and form

... i like your thinking and your courage

golf course/ 1000 lot single-family housing developer project

i left florida for a reason...

This:

http://www.trasaccovalley.com/site/

And I would turn it down because I am too stoopid. An old acquaintance does it, and his wealth would make your eyes bleed.

q+ - damn straight. If we run away from the situation they'll just find someone else with a weaker backbone.

i agree and disagree with +q. i agree architects should put them in positions to influence, but not everyone or every situation can be influenced. i think a more important question is who would you design for? it is just as important for you to interview a potential client when they want to bring work to you to see if you are compatible. like any relationship, not all work. when i take on work, i am more interested in who they are, do they have an open mind, and like any successful relationship, will we both get something out it.

Completely agree. Sometimes you have to take solace in the fact that the project is better off for you having been a part of it. If more good architects went after the "black sheep" jobs, there might be some possibilities for real change.

That said, I worked on enough shopping centers in my last job to make me never want to see one again.

I don't turn them down - but I DO charge double $$ to all my baby boomer clients - a preemptive measure - 'cause they are going to try to take it all back when they reach "the uttermost end of need"

I call them reluctant clients....those who find there way to your door after dumping a wad in some designers pocket then realizing they can't seal the drawings which the local jurisdiction is requiring because it is an assemby occupancy....so they call and ask you if you can review the drawings and seal them.....no way, it is a land mine in the making. Nothing but trouble from day one, first they have no regard for DESIGN...or for paying!....RUN!!!! RUN!!! or just say, I'm to Busy with Clients, who consider Architecture a Profession,
and come to me and request a proposal and agree with my fee before going to a designer.

used car lot. why? design is on the scale of cars, not people. also, client type doesn't sound promising for compatibility with me.
also, single family mcmansion for a relative. for obvious reasons.

PsyArch- right on...

when i saw this, i threw up a little in my mouth:



(i like the clearly photoshopped sky, someone needs to learn to mask properly)

So funny I was going to type the exact same thing! HA

I wouldn't turn anything down - cos someone else would build it, anyway. Atleast by designing it, i'd get to have my say.

Manu,

you might get to talk while the developer screws you,
but you'll still feel like a whore in the morning.

Anything tuscan. It took over South Africa and its absolutely horrible

Anything tuscan. It took over South Africa and its absolutely horrible

anything you'd turn down - with exception to pedophilia, molestation, and places for that kind of thing - i would like to do. think about it, how many clients care what your process is or what the intrinsic meaning of your project. i think the opportunity to critique those constructs, and tear down the same is fantastic challenge. i had a professor in school that wondered why no one design a project/memorial to pro-life/pro-choice, or designed a real memorial critiquing slavery in the US instead of all of the "quaint", modest and "respectful" memorials - where is social commentary reflected in architecture, where is that work that punches you in the gut like Chris Ofilis[sp] work did to the right, or Piss Christ did to Jesse Helms?? we are all cowards.

lets not forget those backstabbing architect[s] Paul Murdoch Architects, Nelson Byrd Woltz, who grabbed their collective ankles and bent over due to public pressure for their Flight 93 memorial. they allowed their design to be changed because some felt it honored islamic terrorists. bullshit, they should have said no and left the competition, rather than change. think about how the swastika was co-opted by the Nazis, it exists in several religions and cultures, yet if anyone were to use that symbol they would be branded as anit-semitic.

beta, out.