In many discussions within class we almost always unite on
the side against the developer, no matter the project. Most of the time it is
for good reason. They conduct projects based on meeting market criteria while
trying to meet a specific ‘look’ for the company’s portfolio. This is a very
terrible way to go about designing projects for people to live in. Especially
since they themselves do not live in the areas they are developing, and this is
when we are met with gentrification. When product comes before people then we
lose the human scale. It becomes an issue with profit.
In my time at Charleston, I had the opportunity to work at a
Real estate developer that had the contract to a very large and important project.
About 70 acres on previous call-to-port cruise storage into a large
multi-purpose downtown extension. Part of my experience involved sitting in on
the big, “all hands on deck” meetings with our west coast office and the external
architects. The arguments always boiled down to the needs for including housing
that is missing in the greater Charleston area (primarily from the architects)
and this met resistance from the marketing team from the west coast who knew what
can go in due to market demands on how many service occupancies to hospitality
and how to park that appropriately. The route of every argument came down to
how they thought people would use the buildings they wanted to put there. And
after a lot of push and give, I believe the proposal left all parties satisfied.
If Architects and Developers can get off the anger bridge
and come to friendship shore, I think a lot of projects can start to become
really successful and useful to the community.
I completely agree that these types of meetings *can* potentially be beneficial to the overall goals of the project - but only if the architect has dedicated themselves to be an advocate for the community in which they are designing.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Hayden. Unless the architect is a strong advocate for their community or the community they are working in, the impact they have on the development is minimal. It would be interesting to think about the architect being in the developer role. What would change about the project if the top priority was helping the communities you're designing within, instead of making the most possible profit.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you Kyle. Ego driven conflicts are not always the best answer to real life problems. Getting on the same page as the other party or coming to an agreement with them at an earlier stage of the process can save a lot of time and resources while delivering great solutions. Either it’s Architect-Contractor relationship or an Architect-Developer relationship.
ReplyDeleteI've always wondered why architects don't transition into becoming developers. Obviously there is a lot of money to be made in the world of developing and housing and architects that have the money to start a development business seem to never do so. Just like architects taking on political roles. It seems that architects have become comfortable in strictly architectural firm roles and do not have any wish to put themselves in a position in which sincere change can occur. These positions of change only occur with tension and disagreement, which architects also go out of their way to avoid. If we truly care about community and don't only view the topic as "outside our wheelhouse" then we can tackle these issues head on. In my mind, I don't believe architects care 'that much' about community. They feel the need to do what they can when they can, but outside of that it seems to be a "your problem and not my problem" ideology. Those who work hard and diligently to make change typically find themselves in different roles than just an architect. Why don't architects spend time at: public meetings, board meetings, development meetings, etc.? It's hard enough to get parents to go to their children's school board meetings less ask more of an architect to do all these 'extra curricular' and 'unnecessary' things that do not increase the depth of their pockets. As a human race, one may go as far to state we are all majority profit driven. How does one reflect on this and improve for future generations to come? Thanks for the provocative piece, Kyle.
ReplyDelete