yes, you are of the opinion that architects should design for 1930 and the way of life then, instead of 2002. The houses fit perfectly their time and place, as the little shacks in the neigborhood did in 1930. It was a working class suburb of Austin, then. People had a 800 sq, ft home and one little closet with two changes of clothes in there… a home office space was a foreign concept, etc… 78704 now it is a urban suburb 3 minutes from downtown. you can see downtown from the decks in winter, just a few blocks away.
The office space and apartments on Congress are considered downtown and bear the price tag accordingly…
Sure there’s a difference, it’s called a house in 1930 and a house in 2002. Big difference, wait… maybe we should ban mini-skirts and bring back segregation too?
You should ask the neighbor that was mad because she can’t see the ramp house from her backyard anymore since they built a huge "bungalow on the empty lot in between.
some people love the houses, some hate them… that’s the way it is.
So is the neighbor you are speaking about the one that built her house in 3 months with the fake mullions the t-11(70’s siding) and the beige pitched corrugated roof? right across the street ? or is it the one with the beige vinyl siding and again the fake mullions and the fake gree shutters. talk about throwing up…
They are sweet neighbors by the way, but architecture experts they are not. The children like the houses, though. sometimes they come over and run around, playing with the hidden touch latch cabinets and the screens and decks.
OK, the fort and anyone else who has had formal training in architecture or claims to be particularly knowledgeable in this area, help me out here. Is it or is it not a fundamental principle of architecture that structures should be designed to be compatible with their surroundings, both natural and manmade?
Is this correct or is it not?
the fort, do you feel that these buildings are compatible with the rest of the neighborhood? Yes or no.
That’s what the pit is about. I’m not going to fume about it over drinks tonight. Hope to see you and the Big one discussing other items on this board.
I get a suspicion that Big Mingus may be Mr. Neal, Mr. Kolenda, or Mr.(Ms.) Vines. You don’t have to tell me.
I do have a cousin in Austin. I plan to go sailing with him sometime in July. I will get him to drive me by the house. He lives in a similar neighborhood a little north of Downtown Austin. Got his house back in 92, for under 50k. His property taxes have spiked up since.
It’s a human factors disaster. I could care less if artistic types think it’s fancy-shmancy. It’s purpose is to advertise the owner’s wares and tallents in the most effective fashion possible, and due to it’s almost utterly useless interface, it fails miserably. I could care less if Apple has profiled it, or if artsy folk think it’s advant guard: The target market can’t use it, and that’s an advertising fuck-up. In fact, it comes across as pretentious, insufferable, and totally unconcerned about the user. In short, it says: “I don’t care what you think, or whether I’ve inconvenienced you.”
Is that really a good message to be sending to potential clients…? If the owner actually thinks that’s a good message, his judgement is seriously suspect. I sure as hell wouldn’t hire an architect that doesn’t care what I think.
Come to think about it, by dropping buildings that don’t fit into a neighborhood, I think he’s conclusively demonstrated that he doesn’t care what people think.
He just landed on my list of Tallented People Whom Are Irrelavent.
Having a website that shows a callous disregard for design principles is a small crime compared to what’s probably pissing off a lot of Austin residents here: Neal’s apparent collaboration with the invading Pushy Software Engineers From Up North that are gentrifying all of the affordable parts of Austin and raising the rent to levels where normal people can’t afford to live there anymore. Housing costs there are already hideous, and building half-million-dollar mansions in middle-class neighborhoods isn’t going to help any. My friends who have restaurant jobs (for example) in that part of town survive by renting houses (possibly vomit-inducing, but the best they can afford) in neighborhoods like that and splitting the rent five or six ways. If it gets turned into a high-rent area, who’s going to wait on all of those systems analysts when they go to Kerbey Lane to talk loudly on their cell phones?
yes I do, truly. Compatibility can be by contrast too, I think. In Europe you see it much more than here, and the contrast is even greater there. You’ll see a 16th century palazzo next to a glass structure, and I love it! I like it certainly better than an imitation of the past. Time and place for buildings and things change over time. What was adequate in 1930 or 1530 is not adequate today.
I also think that the houses take the scale and essence of what is around them profoundly into account. look closely to how the houses are placed in the lot and how the volumes are distributed in relationship to the houses next to them. Also look up to the tall pecans, they are there too, right?
Also the use of copper (and wood on the ramp house) will make the buildings change over time with the weatherization and natural patina. They don’t look like the houses next door but that doesn’t mean they don’t belong there, in my opinion.
About the taxes and all that, talk to the farm house lady… her house went for 450,000 across the alley from RH. Again, these are 3 houses… central City builders has built how many in the area? (more than 20) I bet y’all like those
Now how did the Frank Gehry thread manage to stay so civil and this one is so icky-- is it just because it’s in the Pit? How would this architect fare in Cafe Society?
BTW-- looked a few of these sites, and I must say I do prefer Gehry still. I don’t have a PROBLEM with the afterlife of Bauhaus/Brutalist/International style, though-- perhaps it’s a good style for mass housing-- very efficient. What sort of style would you guys prefer for this place? Or is it the whole mass-housing situation in general?
I find this entire discussion amusing. Fort, what do you think these message boards are for other than expressing opinions? You can’t take it personally…whether or not you’re his wife, friend or whoever…
C’mon, you can’t tell me that M. J. doesn’t enjoy the discussion - why would he put these modernistic structures in these neighborhoods…thus only moving the gentrifiation of Austin more quickly. He enjoys the controversy and that’s OKAY. But if so, he and you and the “investors” must be willing to take some heat from those who, as M. J. describes them, don’t “get it.” But you know what…if he can find buyers and they’re happy about their homes, then why should these comments bother you so much? Perhaps because two of the three haven’t sold???
Your assertion, too, that one has to create something to give an opinion about someone else’s creation is crap. If you have a website and message boads exist, then you guys are leaving yourself open to opinion. And it’s not opinion about M. J. as a person - simply his style of architecture.
M. J. has had an opportunity to follow his dream. Good for him. But don’t expect us all to buy into the style…particularly with his attitude that the conventional houses most of us live in are passe. Perhaps we really like them.
