I don't know where you're getting random Joes. The bulk of criticism for this design is from architects. Why did Charlie ignore it? Great question. Anyway, they cancelled the building a few months ago.
“Our collective response to this proposal is not a critique of style, rather this is a critique of the unacceptable, inhumane living conditions that will no doubt have a psychological impact on its inhabitants and the community at large,” the letter reads. “This project shows complete disregard to the building’s scale and proportion in relationship to its immediate surroundings and the negative impact it will have to the community in which it’s located.”
[...]
“We are grateful to Architect Dennis McFadden for his service on the University Design Review Committee and for standing up against this project,” the letter says. “AIASB strongly agrees with Mr. McFadden and the many other voices of opposition and urges the University to take immediately action to halt and reconsider this project in its entirety.”
- Open letter from the the Santa Barbara chapter of the American Institute of Architects
A valid citation that's completely unrelated to your assertion about criticism from architects. Can you cite any architects who support the design, other than the architect of record for the project?
I don't like kneejerk reactions either, and I wouldn't describe it as incredible, but surely we can all appreciate the irony that you responded with a strong kneejerk reaction about strong kneejerk reactions?
Speaking as someone who's done similar things many times. There is some kind of adverse selection process in internet discussions, where we respond when we've had our buttons pushed and it never seems to go well. Even when we had a substantive point to make.
I guess what I'm trying to say is, we all have a common enemy, and it's the way the Internet exploits our humanity to create drama. Let's try to remember that and be charitable to one another.
Munger is not a trained architect. Just as I would not want to undergo surgery by someone without a medical degree, I wouldn't want to live in a building not designed by an actual architect. Being rich doesn't suddenly make you an expert in all fields.
Large buildings cannot be built in America without the sign off of licensed architect. No architect would sign off on the building of it was an unlivable monstrosity.
You can find at least one of <almost any profession> in America who will happily sign off on dubious work in exchange for $$$.
That's capitalism for you.
Yes, there are people with high standards and ethics, but it'd be hard work to find a professional niche that was solely made up of people that couldn't be influenced by a chequebook.
An ugly building is a no brainer .. it's not like it's teetering on the verge of collapse and about to kill all the residents.
I can't believe there are many architects signing off for money on dubious designs, since they wouldn't be architects for long as soon as one thing went wrong with the building.
I have no idea what point you are trying to make. Normally students would be able to say that they don't want windowless dorms. In this case Munger said that if they didn't build windowless dorms they wouldn't get dorms at all. What does this have to do with architects?
Students generally don't have much say over the design of their dorms.
And 80% of students who toured a demo space were positive or neutral on it.
No, Munger didn't say they would get no dorms at all if they didn't build it. He said he would not give them $200M if they didn't follow his plans. I'm not aware of his ability to unilaterally prevent the building of dorms on any campus.
What this has to do with architects is that architects don't sign off on unlivable spaces.
> Students generally don't have much say over the design of their dorms.
They generally don't care that much. If they care a lot about windows in the dorms should they be able to decide?
> And 80% of students who toured a demo space were positive or neutral on it.
Are they deciding if they get windows or not?
> He said he would not give them $200M if they didn't follow his plans.
Right, they needed dorms, Munger said I will give you dorms but I will make you live without windows because it pleases me. As far as I know they didn't have any alternatives.
> What this has to do with architects is that architects don't sign off on unlivable spaces.
The issue isn't whether the space is unlivable, it's whether the students are deciding on what spaces they are living in or are the subject to the depravities of a billionaire. By your logic why can't Munger mandate that full sized murals of himself be painted in every room, or that they have to eat gruel or whatever else entertains him?
I don't know where you're getting random Joes. The bulk of criticism for this design is from architects. Why did Charlie ignore it? Great question. Anyway, they cancelled the building a few months ago.