i can't see the tile in the picture, but i think it's a silly complaint. i like the two side-by-side columns. just because you don't like the style doesn't mean it's a bad design.Originally Posted by techblue4
|
|
|
|
|
i can't see the tile in the picture, but i think it's a silly complaint. i like the two side-by-side columns. just because you don't like the style doesn't mean it's a bad design.
Trust me, you have to see it in person to really get what I'm talking about. Also the color of the tile does it no favor. It is a yellowish color that clashes with the color of the stucco on the enterprise building. It matches the color that is used on all of NLULM's buildings. Different styles of architecture or not, we need to have consistent base color on all of our campus buildings.
We can argue all day on the columns as a matter of personal preference but the use of neoclassical style round columns doubled up like that, looks forced on a building that is more modern in design.
It looks like a building that should be on ULM's campus.
See, that's what I meant in an earlier post. I haven't thought to check out the business building, but seems like that would have been built to be similar to the enterprise one and/or one or both could have been in the style of Keeny or any of the really old buildings; and like you said, at least in color, something to tie them together. Seems like the Lambright addition on the west side could have matched somewhere. At least the slanted "bird beak" roofs on the newest apartments match the slant on the enterprise building....
I know people on here have discussed how the 70's buildings stick out (Harper, Caruthers, etc.), and now with this new rash of construction going on, they're doing it all over again but 2012 style. Seems like they would have done it "right" this time. Still going to have a big mixture all over. Well, at least it looks that way to some of us on here. (OK, waiting for some of you to let me have it and tell me I'm stuck in the olden days.)
I think the new buildings look great.
Those two are in serous need of renovation. I hope it's at least somewhere on the to-do list.
it's okay if you don't like the building, but don't say "as an architect" as if that makes a difference. your complaints are all matters of aesthetic opinion. a non-architect's opinion counts just as much as an architect's in this case.
I have to agree with techblue4 and Dawg06 on this one. The new business building looks out of place with the tile.
The long-term plan is to close the road in front of the building and for it to share a lawn with Keeny Hall and University Hall. Tech spend millions gutting and renovating Keeny Hall in the 1980s in order to modernize it while still preserving its architecture. The same is true for University Hall. Like Keeny, its present look is what was in place 75 years ago when it functioned as the library. After it sat empty for the past 12 years, Tech spent millions renovating it while still preserving its original look. Given those facts, I assumed a new academic building that was in such close proximety to the other two and one that was to be tied in a way to the other two would be designed in a way that would complement the other two.
Also, I do wonder what potential donors were shown in the way of architectural models when Tech was soliciting donations for the business building 5 to 7 years ago. I've seen the renderings that were posted on this board a year or two ago, but I do wonder if that is what was first envisioned for the building. Did the original plans include the tile?
The renderings on Tech's website did not have tile.
http://business.latech.edu/alumni/bu...n/pictures.htm
Dawg06:
Were there models older than these renderings? I would love to know if this is what was shown to donors 5 to 7 years ago - when the CAB was soliciting donations.
I have no idea. All I know is what I saw online and how ugly the tile is in person.
That's exactly what I was getting at.
Hell, with the situation as it is in the State regarding higher education, I'm just glad there IS new construction at LA TECH. Y'all can bitch about form all you want, but the function is there.
Who was the architect for the CAB? One reason there is a mishmash is because we don't have the same designers working on every building. I think a more comprehensive and cohesive master plan would go a long way.
That said, QNG is right. Most campuses have buildings that are different styles...the CAB is not a departure from the norm...at least not for the campuses I've been to.
Yeager, Watson and Associates of Alexandria
Most campuses I have been to have similar architecture or at least stick with the same shade of brick.
I posted some years back about the architectual style of the new buildings. I compared it to Frank Lloyd Wright, although that is probably not technically accurate. I was referring to the flat roofs and square lines. Said I didn't like it back then, and of course got grilled for it.
As for the comment one should just be glad new construction is occurring at Tech....well, obviously that person hasn't been on other campuses across the state. I have. Every campus I have visited this past year has construction/renovation occurring. I think Tech has the most new construction right now. Even more than LSU-BR. But, all have something going on.
Back to the point. The renovation of Hale Hall, to preserve the historic integrity, was done right. This new construction should have followed that general design, IMO.
I'm sorry but it does make a difference. I'm not saying your opinion is not valid, I'm just giving credibility to mine. There is a reason we go see dentists about a toothache and not the plumber.
I have a higher standard that I set when it comes to my university. I never said the building is a bad design, just that it could have been done better, and that details that should have tied it in with the rest of the buildings on campus were overlooked.
One last professional recommendation to you, go see the building in person and take it in with the surrounding campus buildings, then let me know what you think.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
