Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
sevfiv

Developments on the Rice University Campus

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Luminare said:

 

Thought this building look very German or what I normally saw out of places like Berlin. Barkow Liebinger is one of most solid arch firms in Germany. Didn't know they ventured this far into the states.

No, it looks very chocolate.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Luminare said:

 

Thought this building look very German or what I normally saw out of places like Berlin. Barkow Liebinger is one of most solid arch firms in Germany. Didn't know they ventured this far into the states.

 

On a few university project I've worked on. I've seen the design architect is an out-of-country firm, but the project architect/production architect is a local firm. Basically, the Architect of record is a local firm, but the design/appearance of the building is determined by the design architect.  It would not surprise me if thats the case here. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Purdueenginerd said:

 

On a few university project I've worked on. I've seen the design architect is an out-of-country firm, but the project architect/production architect is a local firm. Basically, the Architect of record is a local firm, but the design/appearance of the building is determined by the design architect.  It would not surprise me if thats the case here. 

 

Well their main office is in Berlin, and they have another in New York, so they would definitely require a local firm. Who are the local folks drafting it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Luminare said:

 

Well their main office is in Berlin, and they have another in New York, so they would definitely require a local firm. Who are the local folks drafting it?

 

I dont know how it breaks down in the Architecture world specifically from project to project. Ive seen it where the design firm creates renderings, and may do drafting of interior and exterior elevations at the SD level (Schematic Design/drawings for those unfamiliar with the term). Then DD(Design Development/drawings) and CD (Construction Design/Drawings) is handled by the local firm. But the two will work together to make sure the Schematic design, especially with appearances is met in accordance with the over-arching firm. This happens some in the Structural World but it works a little differently. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Luminare said:

 

Well their main office is in Berlin, and they have another in New York, so they would definitely require a local firm. Who are the local folks drafting it?

 

Appears to be Kirksey

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
53 minutes ago, Purdueenginerd said:

 

I dont know how it breaks down in the Architecture world specifically from project to project. Ive seen it where the design firm creates renderings, and may do drafting of interior and exterior elevations at the SD level (Schematic Design/drawings for those unfamiliar with the term). Then DD(Design Development/drawings) and CD (Construction Design/Drawings) is handled by the local firm. But the two will work together to make sure the Schematic design, especially with appearances is met in accordance with the over-arching firm. This happens some in the Structural World but it works a little differently. 

 

Depends. If its a firm that normally operates out of state then it will mostly be design work and then they will partner up with a local firm. Most firms will just operate with licenses in the state they originate from since its already expensive for individuals to carry one license. Architects with licenses from multiple states are highly competitive in the market with firms. With that being said, the business model for some firms is to stay exclusively in the design realm of projects. A Houston example would be Munoz + Albin which only handles design work before normally passing it off to another. Lake | Flato is another example in Texas which does this. The advantage is that they can divert resources and produce more design work at once without being shackled to one area or one state, and aren't on a single project for too long, but the disadvantages are the costs associated with bringing another firm into the mix and the coordination efforts to make the design a reality. Sometimes this will reduce the quality of design during VE if a design firm isn't knowledgeable in how their designs are actually constructed. This is why typically you really only see a purely Design firm + Architect of Record team up in state when the project has a big enough budget or seeks a design presence which requires the specificity of a design firms focus, and then save the costs for CD's by passing it to an Architect of Record which has the manpower to get the drawings done quickly. In out-of-state examples its to associate a brand name architect and their design expertise for a significant project that will have a great design presence, and then again pass the CD production to one which has the manpower to handle a marquee or iconic project. There is also a third option where this situation occurs, which is actually great for the industry, which is sometimes you get firms that want to get into a certain field of design, or particular clients, but don't have the design clout to get picked up for marquee, iconic, or significant projects. In this situation the becoming an architect of record could be seen as a favor from a more established design firm so the architect of record can get the experience they want, so they can add it to their portfolio.

 

Away from all that complicated stuff, in most cases firms are all one stop shop from SD to CA. This is the case with the firm that I work at, which I prefer, because I want to know how to carry a design from start to finish. I'm sure their is overlap in the Structure world as well where if its out of state then its dependent on if the firm on the project has a person who is licensed in the state they are doing a particular project in. The downside to this kind of firm is that if they want to branch off into new fields in the industry it can be tough because they prefer to do it all, and if they don't have the portfolio to back it up it can be a wait till you find the right client who will take a chance on you.

 

EDIT: With that being said, Barkow Liebinger, to my knowledge is not an exclusive design firm, but an all in one firm.
EDIT2: Kirsey is an all in one firm, but typically isn't recognized as a firm with design cloat to do marquee, iconic projects, but has a great manpower and so is a great candidate to be an architect of record. Of course this project isn't something that I would describe as "marquee, or iconic", but my guess is with the name associate with this new building and the fact that it is Rice, they prefer to attach bigger design brand names onto their more visible campus projects and then they give their interiors, maintenance work, and general renovations to people like Kirksey, or PBK, etc... (who are key players in the Education Architecture field).

Edited by Luminare
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Luminare said:

 

Depends. If its a firm that normally operates out of state then it will mostly be design work and then they will partner up with a local firm. Most firms will just operate with licenses in the state they originate from since its already expensive for individuals to carry one license. Architects with licenses from multiple states are highly competitive in the market with firms. With that being said, the business model for some firms is to stay exclusively in the design realm of projects. A Houston example would be Munoz + Albin which only handles design work before normally passing it off to another. Lake | Flato is another example in Texas which does this. The advantage is that they can divert resources and produce more design work at once without being shackled to one area or one state, and aren't on a single project for too long, but the disadvantages are the costs associated with bringing another firm into the mix and the coordination efforts to make the design a reality. Sometimes this will reduce the quality of design during VE if a design firm isn't knowledgeable in how their designs are actually constructed. This is why typically you really only see a purely Design firm + Architect of Record team up in state when the project has a big enough budget or seeks a design presence which requires the specificity of a design firms focus, and then save the costs for CD's by passing it to an Architect of Record which has the manpower to get the drawings done quickly. In out-of-state examples its to associate a brand name architect and their design expertise for a significant project that will have a great design presence, and then again pass the CD production to one which has the manpower to handle a marquee or iconic project. There is also a third option where this situation occurs, which is actually great for the industry, which is sometimes you get firms that want to get into a certain field of design, or particular clients, but don't have the design clout to get picked up for marquee, iconic, or significant projects. In this situation the becoming an architect of record could be seen as a favor from a more established design firm so the architect of record can get the experience they want, so they can add it to their portfolio.

 

Away from all that complicated stuff, in most cases firms are all one stop shop from SD to CA. This is the case with the firm that I work at, which I prefer, because I want to know how to carry a design from start to finish. I'm sure their is overlap in the Structure world as well where if its out of state then its dependent on if the firm on the project has a person who is licensed in the state they are doing a particular project in. The downside to this kind of firm is that if they want to branch off into new fields in the industry it can be tough because they prefer to do it all, and if they don't have the portfolio to back it up it can be a wait till you find the right client who will take a chance on you.

 

EDIT: With that being said, Barkow Liebinger, to my knowledge is not an exclusive design firm, but an all in one firm.
EDIT2: Kirsey is an all in one firm, but typically isn't recognized as a firm with design cloat to do marquee, iconic projects, but has a great manpower and so is a great candidate to be an architect of record. Of course this project isn't something that I would describe as "marquee, or iconic", but my guess is with the name associate with this new building and the fact that it is Rice, they prefer to attach bigger design brand names onto their more visible campus projects and then they give their interiors, maintenance work, and general renovations to people like Kirksey, or PBK, etc... (who are key players in the Education Architecture field).

 

 

Yeah, Thats about what I would expect. Touching on structural licencing. I'm registered in about 12 states and I agree with you, I dont like a 3rd party engineer signing and sealing my work and prefer to see my projects end to end. Generally if I have an out-of-state project, I make the effort to get licenced in that state. Even then, My boss has something like 42 states so generally we're covered for out of state projects. We've had projects where a "top dog" structural engineering firm designs really high-level engineering drawings for very unique structures, and then we go through and "finish the design" -- I really am not a fan of that as, similar to the architecture world, the "top dog" structural firm doesnt understand the VE implications or worse, "construct-ability" of a structure. 

 

Swinging back to Architecture, Ive been in situations where the "design firm" and Architect of record have butted heads, and its just ugly and difficult to work with at times. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, hindesky said:

3BNif8G.jpg

 

 

I know the opera hall is getting a lot of hate on here, but I think it fits the architecture of the rest of the campus perfectly.  Can't wait to see all the landscaping finished.

  • Like 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rechlin said:

 

I know the opera hall is getting a lot of hate on here, but I think it fits the architecture of the rest of the campus perfectly.  Can't wait to see all the landscaping finished.

 

They could have at least designed better cupolas, and put them on both sides. The ones on there right now are pretty weak.

 

Now the front of this, looks really good, though I've been meaning to chat with our classical detailing design expert, at my work, for his opinion of this, and if they did the detailing right.

Edited by Luminare

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...