It is hideous!
They had $300 Million to blow on a new building complex, yet we are told constantly about how education never gets enough money ...
LOL! Is the picture before or after it started collapsing because it looks like a bombing victim!
It is hideous!
With Gehry, you get what you pay for.
That’s not the first architectural screw-up at MIT. They put up a building on three inclined legs (in the late 50’s I think), and pretty soon the legs started moving apart.....
Isn’t MIT a world-class engineering school? Shouldn’t the preeminent scholars in engineering have been able to spot the glaring design flaws?
Didn’t Ghery have problems with another of his acclaimed works, the Walt Disney Concert Hall in LA? IIRC, the reflection of sunlight off some of the walls blinded drivers and caused some extreme micro climate temperatures.
Didn’t anyone from MIT check out the structural integrity of the building? I thought they were all geniuses up there.
Gehry’s buildings all look like they’re snapshots of a structure in the process of collapsing, so this surprises me not at all.
Hmm...out here in snow country the norm is a steep roof, usually metal. You learn very quickly not to stand under the eaves in springtime.
These structures do have a certain avant garde visual appeal if you like that sort of thing. The problem is that it makes function tend to follow form instead of the other way around. When that happens you have to adjust to the building instead of it adjusting to you. Bottom line - suck it up, buttercup, you approved the plans.
OTOH, those who wonder why a world-class engineering enterprise such as MIT could get whacked by this might recall that teaching ain't doing. Universities with world-class computer science departments still hire professionals (many without degrees) to run their infrastructure. Gaudy is great but somebody's gotta make the terlits flush.
And pointing out a design error, oops "oversight" - holy (blank) - get ready for a fight. Even getting a ceiling lowered a couple inches in a stinking closet is like .. trying to get a pony from Santa.
Architect's ... Arggggggggghhh!
The construction industry has to endure the problems caused by the usage and religous devotion to these “top” architects that incorporate what some critics have called a gee-whiz nature to many elements or the overall design. The detailers and the engineering consultants are stuck with trying to detail-out the actual construction documents for the design prima dona that comes up with this stuff.
It will end up being blamed on his roof consultant, structural engineer or some other underling he has on his team and the issue of refusal to retreat from a stupid design will never arise as it should.
These idiots are catered to on lots of jobs and it is the fault of Owners trying to impress each other or the community at large and wasting money in the effort.
A University Construction-Engineering and Facilities Department has engineers and architectural types within its staff that know what they are buying and they should have had the emergency brake applied when a design like this is submitted. Instead, they chose to accept the potential problems thinking that the Architect has insurance and now this thing will be a lawsuit mess with the poor Contractor drug in because he will be sued as well, I am sure, in some sort of cross claim or contributary liability suit.
Since this is in Boston, I guess we’ll have to call it “The OTHER Big Dig”.
Well jeepers . . . did they want a work of art, or a building?
Does anyone know if this eyesore is LEED Certified?
Must be something in the water.
Food for thought, maybe Kansas City’s Nelson Art Gallery should get in touch with the MIT folks. Their Tractor Shed isn’t what they bargained for either.
This city is run by morons. Having spent a lot of time down at City Hall and knowing most of them personally, I suspect they like Gehry because their thought processes are as pointless and chaotic as his "designs."
