Aga Khan Foundation: Islamic Community Center

[Ross]

I drove past this the other day. The hole in the ground is far larger than I had imagined. If anyone can get a drone shot, it would be great to see what this looks like from above.

[hindesky]

New images released.

[tangledwoods]

I fully expect that this building is going to end up gorgeous but every rendering they put out is horrible.  After staring at these for a while I finally realized its the lighting.  They all seem to use a very diffuse natural lighting which gives the renderings a very bland feel.  For the kind of money the are paying Moussavi, I would have expected a much better product.

Its also a big pet peeve of mine when architects put out renderings that ignore the structural and MEPF disciplines. I get that ductwork and diffusors arent always sexy but its never good to just ignore it. 

[Luminare]

2 hours ago, tangledwoods said:

I fully expect that this building is going to end up gorgeous but every rendering they put out is horrible.  After staring at these for a while I finally realized its the lighting.  They all seem to use a very diffuse natural lighting which gives the renderings a very bland feel.  For the kind of money the are paying Moussavi, I would have expected a much better product.

Its also a big pet peeve of mine when architects put out renderings that ignore the structural and MEPF disciplines. I get that ductwork and diffusors arent always sexy but its never good to just ignore it. 

1) these are likely overly compressed jpeg versions. As an example I normally export from render programs at 4k because its always better working with more pixels in photoshop, but to get everything out to our clients I at least export down to 1080 or "Desktop" size. For some reason after that is where things get fussy. I think a lot of marketing crews just mindlessly compress images down further because they always get fussy after they leave any office. For me the renders just look overly compressed or were exported at really low res.

2) lighting seems fine to me, but lighting is always tricky in renders. Its all about mood at the end of the day. I remember the last place I worked at my renders tended to be on the darker side, and my boss would be like "is there any way to make this look...happier?" Moussavi strikes me as a very serious architect, so I'd imagine she likes her images more moody and quiet.

3) As far as bland, I do think they probably could up the saturation of the image to show of the subtle blues and other colors. Maybe its an overlay problem? I don't think the building looks bland, but the colors aren't really shining through like we are seeing already with the exterior mockup of the pigmented concrete (I'm guess thats what it is, might be cast stone).

4) I don't know what your expectation of a religious building is, but even the most modernist interpretations of religious buildings, spaces are really clean and even where you do have structure its well integrated to be the aesthetic or hidden nicely, and MEP is designed in a way so it can be unseen. This just isn't a building to show case that, and I'll be real with you, most architects do not have the time to put that into their models. My office I currently work for never puts in families of MEP items and rarely structural (though I put them in to coordinate). Most offices are like this as well, unless you are an architect that really likes to highlight these things. Otherwise they will be absent. Its just not important and lets be real when you are in a space with these items you mind normally "hides" them yourself, so you only see the aesthetics of the space minus the light switches and registers, just like our brain selectively reads, or remembers faces.

Edited August 12, 2022 by Luminare

[MexAmerican_Moose]

not important until the RFIs start coming in LMAO - engineer

Edited August 12, 2022 by MexAmerican_Moose

[arche_757]

Project like this will have a near endless stream of RFI’s I’ll wager.  It’s all figured into the price.

Question for any Architect’s/Engineers and Contractors on here:  have any of you ever worked on a high profile project with a crazy high budget - such as a museum or building like this?

[Luminare]

2 hours ago, arche_757 said:

Project like this will have a near endless stream of RFI’s I’ll wager.  It’s all figured into the price.

Question for any Architect’s/Engineers and Contractors on here:  have any of you ever worked on a high profile project with a crazy high budget - such as a museum or building like this?

I wish, but no.

You and I both know though that it doesn't have to be a high profile project to get a flood of RFI's. Lets say I know a project that currently has like over 200? 300? something crazy and its just a simple run of the mill garden style apartment job.

During my studies over the prior 3 exams I've passed thus far its pretty clear the most important things are; how good is your contract and does everyone know their responsibilities and take them seriously, did you pick a contractor that actually priced in what was actually bid, or did they low ball the number and are then trying to make up lost profits by picking apart ambiguity in the drawings, are your drawings thorough enough for the work at hand so it can be priced reasonably, and how firm is the architecture office in their procedures handling situations during CA, do they have a structured RFI system or not, do they enforce contract language or not, and do they reject bs a contractor sends them during the submittal phase.

The only RFI's one should expect on a project like this are obviously situations that the contractor and subs aren't accustomed too right?

My bet, personally, is they probably went the IPD (Integrated Project Delivery) route or at least this is the route I would have taken.

Edited August 13, 2022 by Luminare

[arche_757]

I’m just going to go out on a limb and suppose the architect is a tad zealous with regard to controlling the details here.  That is reinforced by the developer/owner who likely wants to have as crisp and perfect of a job as possible.  I suspect that money is not an issue for this project in the slightest.  It is the centerpiece of this foundations American presence, and a prominent one at that.

[Luminare]

11 hours ago, arche_757 said:

I’m just going to go out on a limb and suppose the architect is a tad zealous with regard to controlling the details here.  That is reinforced by the developer/owner who likely wants to have as crisp and perfect of a job as possible.  I suspect that money is not an issue for this project in the slightest.  It is the centerpiece of this foundations American presence, and a prominent one at that.

ah yes the dream client for any architect haha.

[tangledwoods]

Quote

Question for any Architect’s/Engineers and Contractors on here:  have any of you ever worked on a high profile project with a crazy high budget - such as a museum or building like this?

Contractor here: I've worked on a couple very high profile and also high budget jobs, they are rarely the same. I was involved in a Billion + job that argued about the price of accent wall tile, just because it is bigger and higher profile doesn't mean the client wants to blow money out the window....Typically when you deal with people that have billions of dollars you quickly find out how they got that way (by not recklessly spending it).

I have worked on a few crazy high budget jobs, they tend to be smaller urgent type things where client needs "x" and they need it completed no later than "y".  You then throw shift work, overtime and the kitchen sink at it.  Its nice to have all the money in the world but there are some schedules that even money has a hard time improving so these jobs can be as stressful as the ones without any money!

I have yet to be on a job that was both crazy high profile and crazy high budget.

One thing to keep in mind, in my experience the best clients to work for are people who build frequently and have an organization to support the process.  The worst clients I've worked with have been people who wanted something "epic" or "grand" but also had little experience building stuff.  

[arche_757]

Amen to that @tangledwoods regarding clients who are organized versus those who aren’t...  That said the Aga Kahn Foundation probably doesn’t build all too often, and may not be as experienced as a local hotel or gas station developer.  Neither does the MFAH, but I would suspect these would be rewarding and quality clients despite the overall lack of experience.

Edited August 15, 2022 by arche_757

[Houstoni]

Better quality pics of new renderings via Facebook https://www.facebook.com/theismaili/posts/pfbid02NRvCc2hLx8LtNbz897rqyD31AuTC2mGSb3E3dLxDmK4SwraeNA95c4Jo8ntQagFnl

courtesy: Imara Houston Inc.

 

Edited August 17, 2022 by Houstoni

[bobruss]

This is going to be beautiful!

[EllenOlenska]

So I think the building is great. I'm very high on it. One thing that I keep thinking of is that even for Houston, even for that area it seems a little private, a little pulled back from the street. I'm not going to pretend to know or presume on the foundation's public or privateness but even then, I'm afraid the building will be lovely and (despite some of its renderings) from many spots difficult to see. 

[strickn]

Just like Holl's and Lake Flato's recent local arts buildings, or this Dallas palace under construction right now,

https://www.archdaily.com/981862/morphosis-designed-new-arts-campus-breaks-ground-in-texas

can't help noticing that the architecture has nothing to say to the rest of the city that is its home.  How different is this Aga Khan cool textured beauty from say the reserved geometry of the Tampa Museum of Art (2010)?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tampa_Museum_of_Art

Like them, these design renderings could really be clipped from magazine articles about recent climate-minded modernism in Tampa, Atlanta, Phoenix, San Diego, or Tehran just as easily as Houston -- probably more easily.  Academic or commercial architects are both equally out of step with Houston's distinctive rhythm and texture.

Edited August 17, 2022 by strickn

[Luminare]

1 hour ago, strickn said:

Just like Holl's and Lake Flato's recent local arts buildings, or this Dallas palace under construction right now,

https://www.archdaily.com/981862/morphosis-designed-new-arts-campus-breaks-ground-in-texas

can't help noticing that the architecture has nothing to say to the rest of the city that is its home.  How different is this Aga Khan cool textured beauty from say the reserved geometry of the Tampa Museum of Art (2010)?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tampa_Museum_of_Art

Like them, these design renderings could really be clipped from magazine articles about recent climate-minded modernism in Tampa, Atlanta, Phoenix, San Diego, or Tehran just as easily as Houston -- probably more easily.  Academic or commercial architects are both equally out of step with Houston's distinctive rhythm and texture.

Holl has never been known to be contextual. He's been a Post-Modernist through and through. Always focusing on the abstract. Tom Mayne is cut from the same cloth, but is more dynamic with his facades, and is more curvilinear. The Jewel box example in Tampa Bay also Post-Modern. Don't expect Post-Modernist to care about their surroundings. Just not their MO. The only group you mentioned that actually focuses on Context is Lake Flato and you probably chose their worst example among very stellar work they have done regarding Contextualism. As for Farshid Moussavi what we are seeing in these images is right in her wheel house. Highly geometric forums/patterns in the abstract. Not known for being Contextual. Very Post-Modern as well, but I'll tell you what I look at this building and see plenty of connections to things are very key to Houston prototypically. To be one with context does not necessarily mean you match 1 to 1 with what is existing (though that would be more engaging). You can focus on Contextual in the abstract and focus on very meta or macro aspects of context. When I look at this project I see a lot of masonry, which has always been very southern. Nice big porches and overhangs (very big deal in Houston and the south), and Houston has always been well regarded for its gardening culture, and this facility looks to have massive one at that. To me it looks like a very abstract and upsized version of your prototypical house made w/ masonry with a deep porch and a very nicely landscaped backyard. That hits a lot of the hallmarks of buildings/construction in this region of the country and Houston as a whole. What else do people need from this?

[strickn]

If your concept is that a public building can perfectly well be a cartoon of a private single-family home if the postmodern style calls for it, then to start with, people need something else from this at the level of artistic license:  just asserting it doesn't absolve the artist from picking a more sensible style in the first place.
 

Michael Graves already gave Allen Parkway another cartoon house job in the form of a Federal Reserve sub-branch, and that choice poorly suited both the utility and the dignity of a public-sector institution.  This jamatkhana has utility and dignity but the classic criticism of postwar Houston urbanism is that it is too disjointed and hermetically sealed from its surroundings.  If your building is open air but treats everything offsite as a blank slate both artistically and urbanistically, it is still disjointed.

[Montrose1100]

16 hours ago, strickn said:

If your concept is that a public building can perfectly well be a cartoon of a private single-family home if the postmodern style calls for it, then to start with, people need something else from this at the level of artistic license:  just asserting it doesn't absolve the artist from picking a more sensible style in the first place.
 

Michael Graves already gave Allen Parkway another cartoon house job in the form of a Federal Reserve sub-branch, and that choice poorly suited both the utility and the dignity of a public-sector institution.  This jamatkhana has utility and dignity but the classic criticism of postwar Houston urbanism is that it is too disjointed and hermetically sealed from its surroundings.  If your building is open air but treats everything offsite as a blank slate both artistically and urbanistically, it is still disjointed.

It's yet another fortress along Allen Parkway. I understand what you're saying, but it's fashionable for Houston.

[Luminare]

17 hours ago, strickn said:

If your concept is that a public building can perfectly well be a cartoon of a private single-family home if the postmodern style calls for it, then to start with, people need something else from this at the level of artistic license:  just asserting it doesn't absolve the artist from picking a more sensible style in the first place.
 

Michael Graves already gave Allen Parkway another cartoon house job in the form of a Federal Reserve sub-branch, and that choice poorly suited both the utility and the dignity of a public-sector institution.  This jamatkhana has utility and dignity but the classic criticism of postwar Houston urbanism is that it is too disjointed and hermetically sealed from its surroundings.  If your building is open air but treats everything offsite as a blank slate both artistically and urbanistically, it is still disjointed.

I don't disagree with any of this. I'm merely pointing out that its not fair to compare things that aren't 1 to 1, or to ask something of a thing which will never be. Post-modernism by its own tenants celebrates a divorce from context because it believes that everything is relative in relation to everything else, which also means that its pursuits and even its execution will entirely remain in the abstract. My guess is that you understand this, I'm simply stating this for the rest of the room (the thread) for the layperson who doesn't spend time noting these distinctions. These distinctions are important when making comparisons. For the many faults of Post-Modernism, and my personal feelings and reservations I have for Post-Modernism as a movement, and philosophical movement, I still believe its fair to give the devil its due. This building is what it is and for the framework that it places itself in, even if its in the abstract, it excels in its category (for the moment, lets see the finished product). In your hypothetical framework, and the traditional framework, and the contextual framework it most certainly does not pass in these regards, but that doesn't mean it this can't be a success in its own right and in its own way. As an example the Guggenheim in New York is most definitely a Frank Lloyd Wright example, and a modernist example, but with the framework you have presented fails in that regard, yet after enough time has passed we instantly see the Guggenheim as a definitive New York City building, and can't imagine it anywhere else. Most abstracts rarely will achieve this, but that is for time to judge, not us.

Edited August 18, 2022 by Luminare

[X.R.]

On 8/17/2022 at 11:51 AM, EllenOlenska said:

So I think the building is great. I'm very high on it. One thing that I keep thinking of is that even for Houston, even for that area it seems a little private, a little pulled back from the street. I'm not going to pretend to know or presume on the foundation's public or privateness but even then, I'm afraid the building will be lovely and (despite some of its renderings) from many spots difficult to see. 

If I was them, I'd be balancing my need for privacy of the faithful vs inviting the public. Its a fine line but I think they are balancing it well. Whether the sightlines make for easy viewing, I'm unsure, but I know it will be very, very busy. They will have a good presence in the area. Their population here is comparatively large, and other Muslims will 100% utilize this space as well.

This has fortress-elements, but I don't think in their case its a Houston-specific issue. If you check their Canada-based centers they have similar, more recessed layouts for what I can tell from google maps and the images. And if they do have a sizeable pedestrian presence, as I alluded to above, it further detracts from the fortress element. The layout makes sense, its a bit of a campus, and if I was going there for programming that spoke to my faith or heritage I don't want cars zooming down Allen pkwy to be in the background. Enough land was there to both add to the city at large and to Ismaili community, which is what I think they are trying to do. 

[j_cuevas713]

5 minutes ago, X.R. said:

If I was them, I'd be balancing my need for privacy of the faithful vs inviting the public. Its a fine line but I think they are balancing it well. Whether the sightlines make for easy viewing, I'm unsure, but I know it will be very, very busy. They will have a good presence in the area. Their population here is comparatively large, and other Muslims will 100% utilize this space as well.

This has fortress-elements, but I don't think in their case its a Houston-specific issue. If you check their Canada-based centers they have similar, more recessed layouts for what I can tell from google maps and the images. And if they do have a sizeable pedestrian presence, as I alluded to above, it further detracts from the fortress element. The layout makes sense, its a bit of a campus, and if I was going there for programming that spoke to my faith or heritage I don't want cars zooming down Allen pkwy to be in the background. Enough land was there to both add to the city at large and to Ismaili community, which is what I think they are trying to do. 

Yeah this is going to draw an incredible amount of people. I see this section along the bayou completely redeveloping from streets to new development very very fast.

[Luminare]

56 minutes ago, X.R. said:

If I was them, I'd be balancing my need for privacy of the faithful vs inviting the public. Its a fine line but I think they are balancing it well. Whether the sightlines make for easy viewing, I'm unsure, but I know it will be very, very busy. They will have a good presence in the area. Their population here is comparatively large, and other Muslims will 100% utilize this space as well.

This has fortress-elements, but I don't think in their case its a Houston-specific issue. If you check their Canada-based centers they have similar, more recessed layouts for what I can tell from google maps and the images. And if they do have a sizeable pedestrian presence, as I alluded to above, it further detracts from the fortress element. The layout makes sense, its a bit of a campus, and if I was going there for programming that spoke to my faith or heritage I don't want cars zooming down Allen pkwy to be in the background. Enough land was there to both add to the city at large and to Ismaili community, which is what I think they are trying to do. 

I suspect some take issue with this because of the current zeitgeist which is that "inclusivity" must be made a priority over "exclusivity". In this current age exclusivity is seen to be inherently wrong, or since we are talking about a religious building which will house participants of a religious faith, exclusivity is seen by some to be inherently sinful. With that being said you are correct, the very nature of any group with a strong established beliefs means that they will create a building that will be focused on being an exclusive experience for its faithful. This isn't an all-faith's chapel, right? Certainly it will be a building that will have semi-public and public spaces, but at the end of the day its for the Ismali first, and everyone else second, and that is perfectly okay. You can't have anything that pleases or is home to everyone, nor do we as architects design spaces in that way. Even the fortress like nature of its massing is very in-line with typical Islamic massing of its worship spaces, mosques, etc... considering its history, and how its faith practices.

[hindesky]

[classic]

On 8/17/2022 at 10:51 AM, EllenOlenska said:

So I think the building is great. I'm very high on it. One thing that I keep thinking of is that even for Houston, even for that area it seems a little private, a little pulled back from the street. I'm not going to pretend to know or presume on the foundation's public or privateness but even then, I'm afraid the building will be lovely and (despite some of its renderings) from many spots difficult to see. 

An extremely important and integral part of the project is the landscaping and outdoor spaces, and I highlight this as we often only think of projects as the building proper, and that is not the best frame here.  I think access to and activation of the extensive landscaping (being led by NBW https://www.nbwla.com/projects/boards/ismaili-center-houston ) will be brilliant.

It could be an interesting exercise to check out outdoor space activation at the Aga Khan Museum in Toronto to get a possible touchstone.  They have often hosted outdoor photo exhibitions, arts events, and even a major Canada Day themed multi-day music festival.

This was the line-up for the 2022 Rhythms of Canada festival at the Aga Khan Museum and Ismaili Centre Toronto, held virtually exclusively in their outdoor spaces:

https://express.adobe.com/page/dryki8ryrd0J5/

Edited August 20, 2022 by classic

[EllenOlenska]

Honestly, looking at it more closely. It seems like the entirety of the gardens is surrounded by hedges and a large wall, with only small gates for entry, which who knows may be locked. I don't know (I'm asking), but it seems the entrance faces into the neighborhood, away from the perspective of almost all the renderings. So to get to the garden you'd have to go through this impressive but not exactly conductive building. I'm not exactly sure if the gardens are meant to be accessible in the same way Hermann Park is. 

Are people going to have unfettered access to the gardens daily? 

Edited August 20, 2022 by EllenOlenska

[bobruss]

i imagine that you will have to enter from the main building to gain access. Besides if it wasn't fenced you'd have people camping with their tents all over the grounds.

[arche_757]

I’m of the impression the compound is designed with security in mind.  Period.

It is architecturally significant, but it isn’t destined to be a “feel free to walk off the street and just mill about” sort of place.

[phillip_white]

9 hours ago, EllenOlenska said:

Honestly, looking at it more closely. It seems like the entirety of the gardens is surrounded by hedges and a large wall, with only small gates for entry, which who knows may be locked. I don't know (I'm asking), but it seems the entrance faces into the neighborhood, away from the perspective of almost all the renderings. So to get to the garden you'd have to go through this impressive but not exactly conductive building. I'm not exactly sure if the gardens are meant to be accessible in the same way Hermann Park is. 

Are people going to have unfettered access to the gardens daily? 

I would assume access will be similar to the BAPS Mandir or any other architecturally significant religious structure that has public interest. You check in, they give you a run-down of the grounds, ask you to be culturally/religiously appropriate, and send you on your way. The same is to be expected for any other church or religious property.

I've visited mosques before where they provide head coverings for women and robes for men (if you're wearing shorts). I haven't looking into whether other Aga Khan community centers have similar dress codes, but I wouldn't be surprised if they do.

[Skyboxdweller]

I think that the design is in keeping with the tradition of enclosed gardens in Persia and India and is appropriate for  its intended use. . It's not a place of commerce, or finance or mass entertainment , but rather a place more contemplative and a refuge from all of that;  a sacred space amid the profane. It's certainly more connected to the physical environment and a more meditative environment  than  some of the other  houses of worship in Houston that have a regional or national reputation, e.g.  Lakewood Church, Second Baptist or the Cathedral downtown.  It doesn't shout " Look at Me" or attempt to dominate or intimidate .   Given that we experience most of the built environment in Houston as a drive by, I assume that there will be many who pass by this center on Allen Parkway on a daily basis and will have no clue as to the garden and architectural spaces. But not all.  There are many who avail themselves of the trails along  Buffalo Bayou and I think it will pique their curiosity.  In the way that it doesn't give it all away at the street level , it's quite seductive. If the center develops a program of lectures and concerts and other public events it will be experienced by many Houstonians of all faiths, including non-believers.  Security  has to be a major concern to a large Islamic center of worship in the US , and especially in Texas with its open carry laws. It would be unwise to have people with  guns walking in off the street into this center without having to pass through a security checkpoint.  

[classic]

On 8/20/2022 at 11:38 AM, EllenOlenska said:

Honestly, looking at it more closely. It seems like the entirety of the gardens is surrounded by hedges and a large wall, with only small gates for entry, which who knows may be locked. I don't know (I'm asking), but it seems the entrance faces into the neighborhood, away from the perspective of almost all the renderings. So to get to the garden you'd have to go through this impressive but not exactly conductive building. I'm not exactly sure if the gardens are meant to be accessible in the same way Hermann Park is. 

Are people going to have unfettered access to the gardens daily? 

I don't have an answer to this for the Houston project, but the Toronto touchstone (IE the Aga Khan Park wherein the Ismaili Centre Toronto and Aga Khan Museum reside) is fully accessible all the time.  Quite literally, all the time.