Hey Kids. I'm finally getting my M.Arch this May and have started to do a bit of shopping for a place to live/work. I'm in the states, so a large amount of my interest is aimed towards NYC for all the typical reasons: good firms, horribly sweaty summers, high rent... I love/hate the place.
At the same time, there's another side to the question that includes cities like Seattle, San Fran, Denver and VANCOUVER. I have friends in Seattle, I'm from Denver, but I know almost nothing about Vancouver in terms of interesting firms/projects. A Canadian architect that I was working with in Germany (@ Behnisch - Stuttgart) was able to drop a few names...
Patkau
Busby
Henriques Partners
If you have love for any particular firm or project in Vancouver, please pass it along... because if my student loans aren't enough debt, I can always add to it by moving out of country (again).
Best,
pD.
Patkau is good... I think they are small though, check out Bing Thom Architects. They have nice projects and good staff. www.btagroup.com and I am not sure about Busby... some of my friends work there and they don't seem to like it. Good luck
forsythe + macallen
pechet + robb
lang wilson
AA Robins
Neale Staniszkis Doll Adams
and yeah, mcfarlaneGreene - nice work.
i'd love to move up to vancouver... seattle is just way to stagnant/small/conservative - it gets annoying. but i find it difficult moving to canada when i'd probably be happier in switzerland, austria, or germany.
The names covered are pretty good bet Although I would also check out Nigel Baldwin, Roger Hughes, and Henriquez, Depends on the work each office has and I would certainly follow up with them so you don't get stuck on housing when you want to be doing museum's etc.
1. well, strangely, i've worked at all three firms initially written about. all are interesting and all are good...and bad...like all things, they aren't perfect, but depending on what you are looking for, i consider them three really good firms. if you want more information, contact me.
2. is the salary survey results accurate? yes, but it's garbage in, garbage out. the categories are confusing and have no real clarification on what they mean. for instance, there are interns architects who are 40 and leading projects because of their 10+ years of experience, and there are interns who have 2 hours of experience and can barely draw a line in cad. they are lumped in the same pay category? yah, go figure that results varies.
3. i think that, in general, vancouver murders ambition. i'm sure people will disagree with me, but that's how i see it. the culture, attitude, and environment of the amazing city (i love it) kills motivation to do bleeding edge architecture. that, coupled with the fact that planners rule things, tend to create a sea of sameness...
they are so different. they really are night and day. montreal has history, culture, and a strong design ethos. it is filled with passionate designers who partake in many different shows, talks, celebrations, parties, openings, closings, and anything remotely related to design...there is almost always a huge turn out. there, of course, is the cca and there is a gallery dedicated to architecture (galerie monopolie) amongst the many many many other galleries in the city. there are two architecture schools in the city (most of any city in canada) along with many other very good design schools (uqam, concordia, dawson...etc...)
then again, you probably know all that. is montreal more cutting edge? i would have to say so. i don't know if its the culture of the city, or the firms, or the fact that there aren't the number residential developers and developments that there are in vancouver (which nearly all architecture firms in vancouver seem to work for...and as you know, residential developers aren't exactly interested in bleeding-edge design...)
in my horribly naive semi-ignorant point of view, i think that vancouver designers tend to look towards the idea of west-coast modernism as a default position. i think that designers in montreal tend to look towards contemporary european/global design more often than not. that's my two cents.
it seems that there are a lot of interesting things happening in both cities however...
Gee you mean that the west coast is looking to what goes on in Clifornia more than back east and tends to be more regional in their design ethos than Montreal, and Montreal looks to europe for their design ethos..... You've pretty much described how the country started in the 1700's . Everything in our country's development could be defined in those terms, so its no real surprise.
maybe what i meant to say is that vancouver looks inwards a lot, whereas montreal looks outwards. i know that westcoast modernism refers to designers like neutra and the california of the 1960's, but to me, indoctrinated in bc, i refer it to ron thom, erickson and of recent (but not too too recent because they seem to be deviating from their previous work) the patkaus. maybe i'm wrong.
tee, I see where you are coming from but I see it a bit differently... agreed there is a bit of that going on, internal influences and "aesthetic incest" or at least, the creation of a regional language in Vancouver, but I think that's true of most cities...
I never really think of "regional style" as a negative, if anything it happens only where there's a tight enough community and strong enough confidence in the work... There are plenty enough cities, take Toronto for example, which always seem to look beyond the local for what avant garde "is suppposed to look like", that can be seen as progressive, but it can also often be criticized as a "metropolitan insecurity complex"... Trying to be like any place other than itself... (Love the city, it's not necessarily my own opinion, just what alot of people say... Anyway I'm from Toronto, so I'm allowed to say it...) Also, I'm not sure that Vancouver is any less outward looking, it maybe has more of an asian international influence than Montreal, which is more heavily influenced by europe... For example, the treatment of density in residential towers reminds me alot of hong kong, maybe its also the water and mountain landscape... But it's something distinct to vancouver in north america, haven't seen that sort of slender dense residential development influence in any other northwest city here in the states... Also, Vancouver has plenty of local art beyond architecture... Local art is where it's at, not just big famous internationally travelling shows...
Also, when we talk about pacific northwest modernism, how much of that is real, and how much of it is just what's written out in architectural history books and magazines? I mean, I think Vancouver has it's fair share of international modern, po mo, art deco, etc. as the next city...
Also, the regional sometimes is simply the result of context, the relationship with climate and nature... My personal take on some of the work we're talking about-- erickson, ron thom, patkaus, etc. is that there's something there that is not just stylistic... It may be an approach to assembly and materials that is related to the place... An awareness of context, not just a chosen aesthetic? Because you'll notice that an Erickson or Ron Thom project changes quite a bit depending where it was built...
Firms in Vancouver?
Hey Kids. I'm finally getting my M.Arch this May and have started to do a bit of shopping for a place to live/work. I'm in the states, so a large amount of my interest is aimed towards NYC for all the typical reasons: good firms, horribly sweaty summers, high rent... I love/hate the place.
At the same time, there's another side to the question that includes cities like Seattle, San Fran, Denver and VANCOUVER. I have friends in Seattle, I'm from Denver, but I know almost nothing about Vancouver in terms of interesting firms/projects. A Canadian architect that I was working with in Germany (@ Behnisch - Stuttgart) was able to drop a few names...
Patkau
Busby
Henriques Partners
If you have love for any particular firm or project in Vancouver, please pass it along... because if my student loans aren't enough debt, I can always add to it by moving out of country (again).
Best,
pD.
mcfarlaneGreen
ActonOstry
BattersbyHowat
Peter Cardew
Hotson Bakker
Nick Milkovich (Arthur Erickson)
James Cheng
patkau...
oops sorry
Patkau is good... I think they are small though, check out Bing Thom Architects. They have nice projects and good staff. www.btagroup.com and I am not sure about Busby... some of my friends work there and they don't seem to like it. Good luck
forsythe + macallen
pechet + robb
lang wilson
AA Robins
Neale Staniszkis Doll Adams
and yeah, mcfarlaneGreene - nice work.
i'd love to move up to vancouver... seattle is just way to stagnant/small/conservative - it gets annoying. but i find it difficult moving to canada when i'd probably be happier in switzerland, austria, or germany.
The names covered are pretty good bet Although I would also check out Nigel Baldwin, Roger Hughes, and Henriquez, Depends on the work each office has and I would certainly follow up with them so you don't get stuck on housing when you want to be doing museum's etc.
I'll second lwpac
www.lwpac.net/
had him as a teacher (in LA). great guy! great work
MDLER WAS HERE
How intersted are you? Your timing couldn't be better.
www.aibc.ca
left hand side 2006 Salary Survey Results.... are they accurate?
who knows.
i'm awesome at posting to dead convos.
1. well, strangely, i've worked at all three firms initially written about. all are interesting and all are good...and bad...like all things, they aren't perfect, but depending on what you are looking for, i consider them three really good firms. if you want more information, contact me.
2. is the salary survey results accurate? yes, but it's garbage in, garbage out. the categories are confusing and have no real clarification on what they mean. for instance, there are interns architects who are 40 and leading projects because of their 10+ years of experience, and there are interns who have 2 hours of experience and can barely draw a line in cad. they are lumped in the same pay category? yah, go figure that results varies.
3. i think that, in general, vancouver murders ambition. i'm sure people will disagree with me, but that's how i see it. the culture, attitude, and environment of the amazing city (i love it) kills motivation to do bleeding edge architecture. that, coupled with the fact that planners rule things, tend to create a sea of sameness...
there are plenty worse seas of sameness in the urban world...
tee, i noticed from the other thread that you are working in montreal now... how does it compare?
i love both cities, i admire alot of the firms mentioned above... do you think montreal is more cutting edge?
montreal vs. vancouver.
they are so different. they really are night and day. montreal has history, culture, and a strong design ethos. it is filled with passionate designers who partake in many different shows, talks, celebrations, parties, openings, closings, and anything remotely related to design...there is almost always a huge turn out. there, of course, is the cca and there is a gallery dedicated to architecture (galerie monopolie) amongst the many many many other galleries in the city. there are two architecture schools in the city (most of any city in canada) along with many other very good design schools (uqam, concordia, dawson...etc...)
then again, you probably know all that. is montreal more cutting edge? i would have to say so. i don't know if its the culture of the city, or the firms, or the fact that there aren't the number residential developers and developments that there are in vancouver (which nearly all architecture firms in vancouver seem to work for...and as you know, residential developers aren't exactly interested in bleeding-edge design...)
in my horribly naive semi-ignorant point of view, i think that vancouver designers tend to look towards the idea of west-coast modernism as a default position. i think that designers in montreal tend to look towards contemporary european/global design more often than not. that's my two cents.
it seems that there are a lot of interesting things happening in both cities however...
Gee you mean that the west coast is looking to what goes on in Clifornia more than back east and tends to be more regional in their design ethos than Montreal, and Montreal looks to europe for their design ethos..... You've pretty much described how the country started in the 1700's . Everything in our country's development could be defined in those terms, so its no real surprise.
what is interesting that is going on in vancouver right now other than canada line? I love looking in those holes. Am I'm being serious, I really do.
whistler: you got me. true enough...
maybe what i meant to say is that vancouver looks inwards a lot, whereas montreal looks outwards. i know that westcoast modernism refers to designers like neutra and the california of the 1960's, but to me, indoctrinated in bc, i refer it to ron thom, erickson and of recent (but not too too recent because they seem to be deviating from their previous work) the patkaus. maybe i'm wrong.
tee, I see where you are coming from but I see it a bit differently... agreed there is a bit of that going on, internal influences and "aesthetic incest" or at least, the creation of a regional language in Vancouver, but I think that's true of most cities...
I never really think of "regional style" as a negative, if anything it happens only where there's a tight enough community and strong enough confidence in the work... There are plenty enough cities, take Toronto for example, which always seem to look beyond the local for what avant garde "is suppposed to look like", that can be seen as progressive, but it can also often be criticized as a "metropolitan insecurity complex"... Trying to be like any place other than itself... (Love the city, it's not necessarily my own opinion, just what alot of people say... Anyway I'm from Toronto, so I'm allowed to say it...) Also, I'm not sure that Vancouver is any less outward looking, it maybe has more of an asian international influence than Montreal, which is more heavily influenced by europe... For example, the treatment of density in residential towers reminds me alot of hong kong, maybe its also the water and mountain landscape... But it's something distinct to vancouver in north america, haven't seen that sort of slender dense residential development influence in any other northwest city here in the states... Also, Vancouver has plenty of local art beyond architecture... Local art is where it's at, not just big famous internationally travelling shows...
Also, when we talk about pacific northwest modernism, how much of that is real, and how much of it is just what's written out in architectural history books and magazines? I mean, I think Vancouver has it's fair share of international modern, po mo, art deco, etc. as the next city...
Also, the regional sometimes is simply the result of context, the relationship with climate and nature... My personal take on some of the work we're talking about-- erickson, ron thom, patkaus, etc. is that there's something there that is not just stylistic... It may be an approach to assembly and materials that is related to the place... An awareness of context, not just a chosen aesthetic? Because you'll notice that an Erickson or Ron Thom project changes quite a bit depending where it was built...
I somehow sometimes feel like the comparison of Vancouver to Montreal is a bit like the comparison of Seattle to Boston somehow...
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.