Unknown's avatar

More on boring buildings

Following up on the post with the quote:
“Architecture should have the confidence and the kindness to be a little boring.” – Alain de Botton

Denver has lots of new buildings that are junk.  Our new art museum is an interesting, although not very functional building, that was either not designed well, or was not constructed well, because the roof has been recently replaced because of leaking.  A large ugly apartment building nearby, also new, has been shrouded in scaffolding and plastic, because of leaking at doors and windows and other major water problems.  Foundations on houses and condos all over the metro area crack like crazy because nobody analyzed the soils or nobody read the geotechnical report or somebody designed the foundations improperly.  Lawyers have a field day with these construction defects, or design errors or omissions.
 
Good technical details and execution of those details need to be a prerequisite, achieved before “interesting” can be attempted.  Here in Denver, that doesn’t always happen.  I’d like to see some boring buildings that stay weathertight for 50 years, instead of the attempts at “interesting” that need to be completely revamped because of some failure in design or construction.  Interesting can be good, AFTER the basics of sound construction are achieved.

Unknown's avatar

More on the improper use of the word “architect”

Below is some of what I posted on the Denver Post Online, regarding the improper use of the word “architect”:

People need to know that the Department of Regulatory Agencies of the State of Colorado has some statements about the legal use of the title “architect.”

From the DORA website http://www.dora.state.co.us/aes/licensing/licensure-arc.htm :

“The unlicensed practice of architecture and the improper use of the title ‘Architect’ or the word ‘Architect’ may constitute a violation of the Colorado Architect Law.”“Title 12, Article 25, Part 3 of the Colorado Revised Statutes (‘Architect Law’) creates the Board and grants it the authority to examine and license duly qualified applicants to practice architecture and use the title ‘Architect’ in Colorado.”

I believe that an education in architecture is a great background, one that translates easily into many fields of work.  But having a degree in architecture does not make someone an architect.  An architect’s training comes primarily from working under the direct supervision of a licensed architect.  That is why Colorado law (and the law in most other states) requires architecture school graduates to work under the direct supervision of a licensed architect for a certain number of years before being deemed eligible to take the licensing exam.  Only after passing the licensing exam and being registered in the State of Colorado is a person allowed to call himself an architect here. 

This is the reason that the media should not use the term “architect” as casually as it does.

Unknown's avatar

Improper use of the word “architect”

The media is misusing the word “architect” again.  See the text of my Letter to the Editor of the Denver Post, below:

In the April 18, 2010 Denver Post article “Off the Grid,” the Post referred to Mr. Wayne Snider, the town manager of Fowler, as “architect of the project.”  Mr. Snider is not an architect.

Colorado law defines an architect as “a person licensed… and entitled thereby to conduct a practice of architecture in the state of Colorado.”  An architect is licensed by the State to perform the professional services of planning and design of buildings, preparation of construction contract documents including working drawings and specifications for the construction of buildings, and the observation of construction. 

The casual, improper use of the word “architect” dilutes the meaning of the word and misleads readers.  Please do not use the word “architect” to describe people who are not architects.

Liz O’Sullivan, AIA
Denver