The Gutter: Gutterland Party Report: Reed Takes Chicago

Gutterland Party Report: Reed Takes Chicago
Friday, April 21, 2006

reed_t[1].jpg We were forced, at overlord-point, to miss last night's ~~Cameron Sinclair~~ Architecture for Humanity-organized ~~panel discussion~~ publicity rally in Chicago. Which is why we are, as ever, grateful for those more inclined to take on these more academic of issues, these loftier of thoughts, while we continue to sharpen our swords and tighten our slings. From a Dear Reader, utterly un-averse to this note-taking we hear is catching on quite well (but can't quite manage to enjoy), a Report on La Kroloff:

I attended the event in Chicago last night, which was mostly civil throughout but got briefly nasty in the middle and again at the very end.

The speakers, in order, were

Thomas Murphy, Urban Land Institute
Reed Kroloff, dean, School of Architecture, Tulane University
John Norquist, President and CEO, Congress for the New Urbanism
Kate Stohr, co-founder, Architecture for Humanity
Ned Cramer (moderator), Chicago Architecture Foundation

Murphy gave a decent overview of the problems faced in the re-building of New Orleans, as did Kroloff. Kate Stohr followed John N. with an account of her organization's work on the Gulf coast, which has consisted mainly in providing one-to-one building and instruction-for-dealing-with-the-bureaucracy services to displaced residents---all in all, very admirable work, but not strong on planning and/or policy. Cramer let the audience do Q and A at the end with an even hand. Stohr and Cramer are apparently both former employees of Kroloff (I presume at Architecture Mag), and Murphy and Kroloff have apparently worked together in New Orleans. John was therefore somewhat on his own, though the audience appeared to me much more curious than hostile; and it was only at a couple of points (including the end) where bad feeling really overflowed.

More thoroughness, con dis, after the jump.

Kroloff is very articulate, and spoke without notes pacing up and down the center aisle of the audience like Phil Donahue (but with a lapel mic). The presentation was so smooth and witty that you had to be paying attention to realize that by the time he finished he had really said very little beyond that the Katrina had exposed what had been a rotten culture in New Orleans for quite some time (a quite unassailable contention) and that we had all better be alert for the inevitable natural disasters that would likely be coming to all of us at some point. Not quite "The end is near! Repent!" or even "We are a wicked people and deserve to be punished;" but close enough. What was especially striking about both Kroloff's and Murphy's presentations and their subsequent panel remarks was that neither of them appeared to have *anything* substantive beyond a big flow chart diagram to offer for the physical planning of post-Katrina communities---though at one point Kroloff said that his local efforts in New Orleans to produce a physical plan had been undermined by New Urbanists working with the anti-NO political leadership of Baton Rouge.
Nevertheless, Kroloff's original presentation though vacuous was solicitous. John N.'s presentation appeared equally solicitous in intent. John highlighted modernist buildings in traditional contexts, perhaps to a fault. The fireworks started when John showed the zig-zag image from Kroloff's Hollandaise charrette. In the dark Kroloff's silhouette appeared, arms waving accompanied by the words "You lying bastard!" John moved quickly on and quickly past another Kroloff Hollandaise image, downplaying any polemical intent beyond letting the images speak for themselves. (I read John's situation as difficult. He didn't appear to want to attack, but had to be ready to defend. At least this is how I read the presence of the Kroloff images in his presentation.) Anyway, John moved quickly past them, was sporting in not pressing his advantage (X sitting beside me said afterwards that New Urbanists could not have invented a better foil than Kroloff), and proceeded to give a good account of what New Urbanists have to offer and have offered to Katrina-damaged communities on the Gulf Coast (interestingly, there was *no* mention that I can recall of the current Gentilly charrette).

The conversation continued during Q and A, with good questions and civil responses from the panel. I can't recall details, but John made intelligent comments with occasional dry wit; and Kroloff was only occasionally sarcastic, though visibly rolled his eyes at John's mention of the Gulf Coast pattern book. The fireworks came at the end when Kroloff in his remarks accused the CNU of sabotaging local planning efforts in New Orleans, which John denied, to which Kroloff responded vehemently with "Liar! You're a liar!" At which point the moderator intervened, thanked the panelists, and suggested that this was a good point at which to end.

[at] dinner at a nearby restaurant, and about fifteen minutes later the rest of the panel party entered and were seated at a nearby table. After we had finished and were about to leave, John went over and thanked his Chicago Architecture Foundation host, bid everybody a good evening, and shook hands all around, including Kroloff's. [x] remarked to me on the way out: "That's the difference between me and a good politician; I couldn't have done that."

All in all a very interesting evening. And I have to say in summary that while Kroloff is very stylish and may very well be sincere in his architectural and urban concerns, it is astonishing to me how little he and his neo-avant garde confreres have to offer to the rebuilding of a ravaged landscape and urban environment.

Astonishing, indeed. If you're from Mars.

Posted in The Provinces

Reader Comments (15 extant)

well written summary

By the admonisher at April 21, 2006 3:55 PM

Nice review however the event was organized by the Chicago Architecture Foundation and co-sponsored by Civic Blueprint, National Trust for Historic Preservation (NTHP) Midwest Office, and Structural Engineers Association of Illinois (SEAOI).

http://www.architecture.org/programs.html#katrina

amazed no one reported on the 'black like me' dig.

By business as usual at April 21, 2006 4:40 PM

Chicago Public Radio's Edward Lifson mentioned on the air Kroloff and "Black like me," wondered aloud what it could mean, then told people to go find out at the event.

By x at April 21, 2006 6:28 PM

The issue in rebuilding comes down to urban design. The architects, like Kroloff, don't get it. They focus on what they see as "Truman Show"-like "traditional" building facades in New Urbanist projects, but the issue really comes down to how the neighborhoods are designed as neighborhoods. Architects apparently, or at least at Tulane, aren't learning about site and master planning, and it shows.

Thanks for the report.

By Richard Layman at April 23, 2006 7:59 PM

Norquist to pay about $95,000 toward sex settlement

By GREG J. BOROWSKI
Journal Sentinel
Posted: July 23, 2002
Mayor John O. Norquist will pay at least $95,000 of his own money toward reimbursing the city for its costs to settle sexual harassment allegations against him, based on a campaign finance report filed Monday.

The report shows Norquist's campaign fund, which soon will be closed to cover the bulk of the $375,000 settlement cost, had a balance of $279,160 as of June 30.

In April, when the city settled ex-mayoral staffer Marilyn Figueroa's complaint, Norquist agreed to dissolve his campaign fund, pay that amount to the city, and then make up the remaining amount with his own money.

With some additional bills to be paid before the fund is formally closed, the personal share could grow somewhat. At this point, assuming there were no contributions into the fund this month, that share is $95,840.

Norquist, now in his fourth term, has said he will not seek re-election in 2004.

"The payment will end this matter once and for all," said Norquist attorney Lester Pines. "There is no more to be said about it after that. It's over."

The city settled Figueroa's sexual harassment and discrimination complaint in April, treating the case as a worker's compensation claim. Figueroa's doctors had diagnosed her with post-traumatic stress disorder.

Figueroa had claimed she was the victim of an unwanted pursuit by Norquist, who coerced her or physically forced her to have sex multiple times. Norquist has said the relationship was consensual and denies any harassment or discrimination occurred.

While the $375,000 settlement will, in effect, be reimbursed by Norquist, nearly $50,000 in outside costs - such as for expert witnesses and court reporters - has been paid by taxpayers.

City Attorney Grant Langley has said he would not ask Norquist to pay those costs. And Norquist, through his attorney, has said he will not pay them.

Those costs include $18,355 for court reporters, transcripts, copies of medical records and similar costs. Also, $16,627 went for an actuarial evaluation of Figueroa's future prescription drug costs, and $9,731 was paid for psychological and vocational evaluations.

Another $5,175 went for mediation services provided by Resolute Systems Inc., whose fee was split between the city and Figueroa.

Norquist has yet to make the payment to the city. That is due, in part, to some final bills that must be paid before the campaign fund can be closed.

Pines said he did not know, and had not asked, what Norquist and his wife, Susan Mudd, would do within their own finances to pay the remaining amount. Norquist makes about $125,000 a year as mayor. Norquist's most recent ethics report showed investment holdings of at least $245,000.

The campaign report filed Monday covers the first half of the year. It lists nearly $14,000 coming in after April 22 - the day of the settlement, when Norquist said he would not run again.

Most of those contributions are listed on April 24. It is unclear, however, if the listing is due to previous checks counted on that day, or a series of checks coming in at once. Norquist aides said there was no post-settlement appeal for contributions, any of which would help offset the personal cost to Norquist and Mudd.

Among the post-settlement contributors: businessman Ralph Eder, $1,650; attorney John Finerty, $500; developer Mark Irgens, $250; Milwaukee Metropolitan Sewerage District official Mark Kass, $250; Gregory Marcus of the Marcus Corp., $250; Walter Sava of the United Community Center, $200; and attorney Thomas St. John, $250.

The contribution from Eder, affiliated with In Place Machining and a longtime Norquist supporter, came on June 12.

By Reed at April 24, 2006 10:24 AM

that would be juicy if it weren't almost four years old now.

By gnat at April 24, 2006 1:27 PM

I had John as a professor when I attended UW-Milwaukee. Perhaps he has become more presentable since then (Fall Semester of 2004), but he couldn’t teach his way our of a paper bag back then. I admit he was also going through said sexual harassment suit and being the “mayor” of the city, but you would think the man that quit in the middle of his term (a topic for another “non-biased” Gutter story) to work for the CNU would have some clue on how to talk to people about urban design. At the end of the semester I learned more from Peter Park (who quit as the city planner of Milwaukee, but I am not implying anything) in two guest lectures than from John over the other 13 weeks.

On the other hand, I recently was at Tulane and completely agree with above statements on the lack of master planning being taught at the school of architecture.

By Anonymous at April 25, 2006 10:27 AM

Quick edit to above comment, I didn’t notice the year was incorrect the Fall of 2003 when I had John Norquist for an Urban Planning class at UWM.

By Anonymous at April 25, 2006 10:30 AM

You guys paid $20 to attend and listen to this pretentious snooze?

The only person worse in the Chicago architecture scene than Ned Kramer is that total joke of a "Critic" Edward "I ride my bike to work and someone should run me over and put me out of my misery" Lifson. That dude knows jack shit about architecture. One painful conversation I recall on Lifson's embarassing Sunday morning show "Hello, Beautiful!" had Lifson and Kramer patting each other on the back about how not every high-rise building in Chicago had to be a signature building and how the "conventional" Pei-designed Hyatt center was a better choice than the Foster-designed building the Pritzkers jumped ship on. Huh? Conventional? The Pei building has curved sides which make laying out offices a royal pain (and attracting most tenants) whereas the Foster building used 30% less steel that a typical steel building its size, had bigger floorplates and no interior columns. Which kind of structure is in demand today? Neither tweedle dee nor tweedle dum is the pundit to ask. And then as for the cultural issues of a family that gives the "Nobel prize" of architecture awards... you get the picture.

Sadly. our local public radio station has let go of a program, Odyssey, which challenged its listeners and its host, Gretchen Helfrich, in favor of of the kind of irrelevant love-in that "Hello, Beautiful!" and this conference represent.

By Reality Check at April 27, 2006 4:05 AM

10.

Dear Reed,

You got pwned.

Sincerely,
The Audience

By Oskeewowza at May 3, 2006 12:38 AM

11.

Are you sure they talked about
>>how the "conventional" Pei-designed Hyatt center >>was a better choice than the Foster-designed >>building the Pritzkers jumped ship on.

I see on Lifson's blog:
http://www.chicagopublicradio.org/blog/hellobeautiful/2006/02/hello-beautiful-oath-for-city-planners.asp

"So, are we letting New York build better than we do? ... We were supposed to get a Foster, for the Hyatt Center on Wacker. After Sept. 11, 2001 it was deemed "too expensive."

What we got, by the New Yorker Henry Cobb, is very nice, but it's not Foster-quality, not as exciting as a Foster, and indeed, is a retread of Cobb's EDF tower near Paris."

Is the new building by Pei or Cobb? He does not say its better than Foster, he says its less interesting. And do you really believe all of Foster's claims to save steel?

By anonymous at June 11, 2006 12:32 AM

12.

bbw squirting bbw black porn

By Aahrto at October 9, 2006 2:06 AM

13.

shit stained pantyhose pantyhose vids

By Glnfbaeu at October 24, 2006 3:19 AM

14.

anime comix porn manga hentai manga online

By Gabnpvkucri at October 30, 2006 4:57 AM

15.

exda