http://www.inhabitat.com/2008/12/18/eco-laboratory-by-weber-thompson/ Future-forward design for the world you inhabit Sun, 22 Nov 2009 11:34:26 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=abc hourly 1 http://www.inhabitat.com/2008/12/18/eco-laboratory-by-weber-thompson/comment-page-1/#comment-114573 archytextural Thu, 08 Jan 2009 09:01:02 +0000 http://www.inhabitat.com/2008/12/18/eco-laboratory-by-weber-thompson/#comment-114573 Congratulations design team for the win! That has to feel pretty good. However,I'm sorry but I don't find this as visually pleasing as the article makes it out to be, and the renderings don't give it any help until the last image, which actually feels fairly decent. My criticism is that I would have liked the designers to be less overt with their "green" features and intergrate them more successfully into the overall design of the building. There appears to be no over riding idea that brings the building together as a whole, leaving it feeling a little bit like a glazed sturctural system with sustainable features attached here and there. I don't see capital "A" Architecture here. I see engineering and systems but no soul. While I understand this was for a Cascadia design competition, we're still designers and shouldn't use "carbon nuetral" as an excuse to build unpleasant buildings. Would any of you really choose to live/ work there for it's aesthetics? I'm just asking if you think the Ipod would have been as successful if it had just been the raw electronics without the styling of the case? But, again congratulations on the win. Congratulations design team for the win! That has to feel pretty good.
However,I’m sorry but I don’t find this as visually pleasing as the article makes it out to be, and the renderings don’t give it any help until the last image, which actually feels fairly decent. My criticism is that I would have liked the designers to be less overt with their “green” features and intergrate them more successfully into the overall design of the building. There appears to be no over riding idea that brings the building together as a whole, leaving it feeling a little bit like a glazed sturctural system with sustainable features attached here and there. I don’t see capital “A” Architecture here. I see engineering and systems but no soul. While I understand this was for a Cascadia design competition, we’re still designers and shouldn’t use “carbon nuetral” as an excuse to build unpleasant buildings. Would any of you really choose to live/ work there for it’s aesthetics? I’m just asking if you think the Ipod would have been as successful if it had just been the raw electronics without the styling of the case? But, again congratulations on the win.

]]> http://www.inhabitat.com/2008/12/18/eco-laboratory-by-weber-thompson/comment-page-1/#comment-113058 Kay Fri, 19 Dec 2008 20:26:27 +0000 http://www.inhabitat.com/2008/12/18/eco-laboratory-by-weber-thompson/#comment-113058 Looking forward to seeing this come to fruition. As a born and raised here, Seattlite, it is exciting to see green growing up around the city that is equitable for lower income people. More space for growing food and more green is a good thing especially in this day of pesticide laden choices. The building is looks like a beautiful design. Looking forward to seeing this come to fruition. As a born and raised here, Seattlite, it is exciting to see green growing up around the city that is equitable for lower income people. More space for growing food and more green is a good thing especially in this day of pesticide laden choices. The building is looks like a beautiful design.

]]>