Activity

It is purposely designed to be uncomfortable so its function is for short usage periods. The tubular steel rails seperate users. All those perforations imply a need for a quick draining surface. The design is very “institutional”. The obvious principal use seems as a shower seat for geratric inmates in a prison. 

Not having a LAAB accredited degree is a killer, too, as you usually have to have a lot more time under your belt to even sit for the exam (depending on the state). I had to swtich jobs to get the requisite experience, as I too was working with engineers and architects. I agree with those who said that there is w WORLD of difference in experiences…[Read more]

 
I’d have to see the scale of it, but it looks extraordinarily uncomfortable, and the bars on the back are just at the right height to create pain in the lower back trying to avoid them to get maximum ass-to-seat contact on what looks to be a very narrow bench. I looked at the specs online, and the total depth is 16, not the seat, but from o…[Read more]

Kind of like the “orphanage” in Slumdog Millionaire? Gouging eyes out so they make more effective beggars?

Home to where?

I think it was designed to make homeless people go home!

It was designed to keep homeless people from snoozing.

Funny.  I thought the same thing about the rail slide.

It will be great once they get all the flower pots on it and put some seating around it.

First impression:
 
ow!

contrived. forced. disconnect between materials. If you’re going to have a back rest, have a back rest. People naturally dictate their “personal space without having dividers. Without knowing the context of the bench, I don’t understand the need to have alternating seating orientations. feels awkward.
not to be a total downer, it does look…[Read more]

I think…how will this meet ADA in SF.

I’ve just been snacking all day… crackers, cheese, and fruit.

I think the thread is a hoax… you’re right, it doesn’t add up… I like the concept though… maybe instead of a textile sweat shop we could teach them a real world “technical” skill such as AutoCAD because being strapped to a desk for 16 hours a day is much more humane than being at a loom… Then we could outsource all of our drafting to…[Read more]

Well, according to the Board of AELSLAGID’s website, http://www.aelslagid.state.mn.us/landscapearch.html, you should be able to use up to two years of experience under a licensed engineer and/or architect:
 
Part 4 – 1800.1500 – Education and Experience –  Subpart 5 – G. “Qualifying experience in architecture or engineering shall receive full cr…[Read more]

Tanya, thanks for the supporting words.  Somehow I missed the connection that you made between PEs/Archs being allowed to stamp/sign LA drawings, but not provide supervision to an emerging LA candidate.  Very interesting.  I have often thought about licensure in adjacent states, and while valuable as we do work in many of these states, I have a fe…[Read more]

You may have a valid complaint about the legality of what they are doing. If PE’s and Architects are qualified to stamp landscape architecture drawings in MN (which they appear to be as they are exempt from the LA licensing statute) they are qualified to provide experience for a landscape architect. I hate to say this as I am rarely an advocate…[Read more]

I can definitely understand your perspective Sara.  My current firm is very much 40:60 Civil:Architecture, so it’s a mixed bag.  Another frustration I have is that when I tried to get some answers and attempt to appeal by explaining some of my individual experience, I receive a reply that says that the board no longer hears appeals, and that I h…[Read more]

I just came from working for 8 years at a strictly landscape architect firm to now working for a PE&A firm, and I can tell you there is a world of difference, especially in the attitude towards environment, sustainable practices, pedestrian design, lack of social science perspective, attention to aestetics, etc. etc….BUT I will say my s…[Read more]

That’s a good point John, I suppose I didn’t consider the law as “protecting the profession.”