Posted by Peter on November 02, 2002 at 11:18:21:
In Reply to: Re: "maintain, increase, and diffuse knowledge, by assuring the conservation and protection of the world's heritage posted by Manuel Oliveros on November 02, 2002 at 10:16:32:
Good points Manuel.
The dynamic I see in small scale (the most common) development of buildings (and piecemeal growth of towns) is that while these are not developed "to gain the maximum power available to them, by whatever the means, and in COMPLETE disregard of anything and anyone outside their will"--they are developed with the profit motive high if not foremost. In any community, developers will be at the extreme of, or overreaching, their means to complete a project. Therefore the result cannot be the most optimum for the time and place--at best it is optimum given a certain budget and program (again determined by a developer who, while not evil, is perhaps misguided or short-sighted). The architect will be pulled into the process and should try to bring a greater vision for sustainability, beauty and contextual vision. When does an architect, given an RFP, simply refuse to do the work due to it's inappropiateness? Undoubtably another will pick it up and do what is required of them, for better or worse. Like a lawyer they grasp a project and suddenly become a proponent of whatever the client wants or whatever will get the project built.
We've had clients express the utmost desire to good for the community. These are local people who have been there for years and come into land and fortune over years of hard work. Their families have a stake in the community. The out-of-towners typically are only looking at the profit and possibly a building that is attractive to tenants or which they can be proud of personally. This is the argument for city planners taking a more active role in expressing the needs of the community, whether or not they are capable of it.
Free 3D Models