<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" 	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Duplex House for Make It Right / GRAFT</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.archdaily.com/28043/duplex-house-for-make-it-right-graft/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.archdaily.com/28043/duplex-house-for-make-it-right-graft/</link>
	<description>Architecture News: The latest buildings, projects and competitions every day.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 21 Mar 2010 04:41:47 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Ali</title>
		<link>http://www.archdaily.com/28043/duplex-house-for-make-it-right-graft/#comment-43822</link>
		<dc:creator>Ali</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2009 00:52:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.archdaily.com/?p=28043#comment-43822</guid>
		<description>niiice Tony!
I could not agree more.

I have not seen any better attempts from a group of architects, or the city, at rebuilding New Orleans. It certainly is not a new problem ... what 4 years now? 

Now, wouldn&#039;t it be fantastic if this project could encourage all the critics out there to stop blogging, raise some money, go out to the L9W and do it better, if they can ... or have they even tried?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>niiice Tony!<br />
I could not agree more.</p>
<p>I have not seen any better attempts from a group of architects, or the city, at rebuilding New Orleans. It certainly is not a new problem &#8230; what 4 years now? </p>
<p>Now, wouldn&#8217;t it be fantastic if this project could encourage all the critics out there to stop blogging, raise some money, go out to the L9W and do it better, if they can &#8230; or have they even tried?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: tony trinh</title>
		<link>http://www.archdaily.com/28043/duplex-house-for-make-it-right-graft/#comment-41993</link>
		<dc:creator>tony trinh</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 11 Jul 2009 21:19:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.archdaily.com/?p=28043#comment-41993</guid>
		<description>@ anonymous, nitpicking, bitter, blowhard, envious, armchair quarterbacking, frustrated designer/architect, academic, desk-critics:

go get some sun...get a life.  put up or shut up.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ anonymous, nitpicking, bitter, blowhard, envious, armchair quarterbacking, frustrated designer/architect, academic, desk-critics:</p>
<p>go get some sun&#8230;get a life.  put up or shut up.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: corto</title>
		<link>http://www.archdaily.com/28043/duplex-house-for-make-it-right-graft/#comment-41637</link>
		<dc:creator>corto</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 12:36:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.archdaily.com/?p=28043#comment-41637</guid>
		<description>this foundation type is commonly used in Russia (because of climatic issues) and it is a very expensive solution... those concrete piers won&#039;t be that shallow...

so, i am sorry to say that the principle of a &quot;floating foundation&quot; is not original.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>this foundation type is commonly used in Russia (because of climatic issues) and it is a very expensive solution&#8230; those concrete piers won&#8217;t be that shallow&#8230;</p>
<p>so, i am sorry to say that the principle of a &#8220;floating foundation&#8221; is not original.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ecobuilder</title>
		<link>http://www.archdaily.com/28043/duplex-house-for-make-it-right-graft/#comment-41544</link>
		<dc:creator>ecobuilder</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2009 01:51:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.archdaily.com/?p=28043#comment-41544</guid>
		<description>You cannot LEED certify a project before it begins! The certification can only be done after it is constructed and third party verified. This is like much of the greenwashing that is goin on. I like the idea of LEED but people are using it as a selling point, what if it doesn&#039;t pass certification?  Then what is it? Stop lying and telling people it is LEED certified before you begin it is confusing and misleading to consumers. While you may hope to get LEED Platinum certification that remains to be seen, but please stop the green washing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You cannot LEED certify a project before it begins! The certification can only be done after it is constructed and third party verified. This is like much of the greenwashing that is goin on. I like the idea of LEED but people are using it as a selling point, what if it doesn&#8217;t pass certification?  Then what is it? Stop lying and telling people it is LEED certified before you begin it is confusing and misleading to consumers. While you may hope to get LEED Platinum certification that remains to be seen, but please stop the green washing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Abe Froman</title>
		<link>http://www.archdaily.com/28043/duplex-house-for-make-it-right-graft/#comment-41466</link>
		<dc:creator>Abe Froman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 18:05:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.archdaily.com/?p=28043#comment-41466</guid>
		<description>I am sorry to say, but this house reminds me of the Pontiac Aztec.  Too much stuff going on but nothing really new, or shall I say sophisticated in regards to architectural design.  It just looks clumsy and it appears to be lacking in any real rigor of understanding to the forms, spaces, and values that they are proposing.  It looks like the goal is to bring attention to itself rather than service its occupants and bring a level of cohesion to fragile neighborhoods of New Orleans.

(Thumbs down)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am sorry to say, but this house reminds me of the Pontiac Aztec.  Too much stuff going on but nothing really new, or shall I say sophisticated in regards to architectural design.  It just looks clumsy and it appears to be lacking in any real rigor of understanding to the forms, spaces, and values that they are proposing.  It looks like the goal is to bring attention to itself rather than service its occupants and bring a level of cohesion to fragile neighborhoods of New Orleans.</p>
<p>(Thumbs down)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ralf</title>
		<link>http://www.archdaily.com/28043/duplex-house-for-make-it-right-graft/#comment-41457</link>
		<dc:creator>Ralf</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 16:55:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.archdaily.com/?p=28043#comment-41457</guid>
		<description>Come back to the 70&#039;s</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Come back to the 70&#8217;s</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mookie Wilson</title>
		<link>http://www.archdaily.com/28043/duplex-house-for-make-it-right-graft/#comment-41443</link>
		<dc:creator>Mookie Wilson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 15:51:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.archdaily.com/?p=28043#comment-41443</guid>
		<description>This is really terrible. 
The beauty of the original NO neighborhoods is that a typical form evolved (shotgun rowhouse) and was repeated and elaborated upon. The entire architectural scheme derives from the front porch, the small amount of expression that was imprinted onto the tiny front facade, and the strong connection between the public life of the house (porch) and the public sidewalk. It&#039;s a generic form that allows small amounts of individuality and craft, while maintaining a neighborhood commonality. Any successful attempt at reviving this spirit has to address this need and come up with a strong and repeatable solution to the new types main conflict: connection to the sidewalk in a form that is required to be elevated off the ground plane. Everything in these designs that does not address this problem is nonessential.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is really terrible.<br />
The beauty of the original NO neighborhoods is that a typical form evolved (shotgun rowhouse) and was repeated and elaborated upon. The entire architectural scheme derives from the front porch, the small amount of expression that was imprinted onto the tiny front facade, and the strong connection between the public life of the house (porch) and the public sidewalk. It&#8217;s a generic form that allows small amounts of individuality and craft, while maintaining a neighborhood commonality. Any successful attempt at reviving this spirit has to address this need and come up with a strong and repeatable solution to the new types main conflict: connection to the sidewalk in a form that is required to be elevated off the ground plane. Everything in these designs that does not address this problem is nonessential.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brad Pitt&#8217;s Make It Right presents duplex homes for NOLA &#124; ArchDaily</title>
		<link>http://www.archdaily.com/28043/duplex-house-for-make-it-right-graft/#comment-41424</link>
		<dc:creator>Brad Pitt&#8217;s Make It Right presents duplex homes for NOLA &#124; ArchDaily</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 14:27:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.archdaily.com/?p=28043#comment-41424</guid>
		<description>[...] You can see a detailed post about this project at Duplex House for Make It Right / GRAFT. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] You can see a detailed post about this project at Duplex House for Make It Right / GRAFT. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stan</title>
		<link>http://www.archdaily.com/28043/duplex-house-for-make-it-right-graft/#comment-41421</link>
		<dc:creator>Stan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 14:06:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.archdaily.com/?p=28043#comment-41421</guid>
		<description>Compared to some other schemes, this actually flows and composes itself a single resolved form. I think trying to park will be treacherous and torturous. Imagine having to avoid those piers while parking at an angle. One would also have to back out the long driveway. These Euro starchitecs probably underestimate the residents attachment to their cars and their necessity.

I also worry about the self indulgent nature of this project with every architect trying to twist, manipulate and pack in every design trick they can. It&#039;s like each ego is lined up next to each other shouting and competing. Only time will tell how such a jumble of loud design will feel together. How well it will endure over time is also a question. I&#039;m not just speaking about materials which are questionable, expensive, and hard to maintain.  Take the stucco shown on this project. I find that it is very expensive and usually reserved for high end houses when one is putting it over stud walls requiring lathe etc. The backer board has to be the expensive cement board in a humid climate. I mean this is getting in the $200 s.f. range. 

I am an architect and a modernist but seeing these all together gives me pause that something is not right here in this &#039;make it right&#039;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Compared to some other schemes, this actually flows and composes itself a single resolved form. I think trying to park will be treacherous and torturous. Imagine having to avoid those piers while parking at an angle. One would also have to back out the long driveway. These Euro starchitecs probably underestimate the residents attachment to their cars and their necessity.</p>
<p>I also worry about the self indulgent nature of this project with every architect trying to twist, manipulate and pack in every design trick they can. It&#8217;s like each ego is lined up next to each other shouting and competing. Only time will tell how such a jumble of loud design will feel together. How well it will endure over time is also a question. I&#8217;m not just speaking about materials which are questionable, expensive, and hard to maintain.  Take the stucco shown on this project. I find that it is very expensive and usually reserved for high end houses when one is putting it over stud walls requiring lathe etc. The backer board has to be the expensive cement board in a humid climate. I mean this is getting in the $200 s.f. range. </p>
<p>I am an architect and a modernist but seeing these all together gives me pause that something is not right here in this &#8216;make it right&#8217;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: pedja</title>
		<link>http://www.archdaily.com/28043/duplex-house-for-make-it-right-graft/#comment-41408</link>
		<dc:creator>pedja</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 13:13:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.archdaily.com/?p=28043#comment-41408</guid>
		<description>hahahahahaa......great,and true!!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>hahahahahaa&#8230;&#8230;great,and true!!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>