Embarrassing "Train Wreck"?

"What the hell happened?"

This opinion post began as a comment on LinkedIn: "Design-Build Professionals Group" mixed with reports I've read from ENR...

One "designs" in reaction to a known (or stated) problem, i.e. keep water off my head. One might say the designer is predicting how water is kept off the head (a roof), but the "design" is a reaction to being wet. The "design" reacts to the "problem". Sullivan taught us form "follows" function. "Reaction" is also why owner's "qualify" designers based on experience (are you a good problem-solver?) 


When one builds the stated design, they must "predict" the activities necessitated by the "design-directive" (assembling foundations, columns, rafters, and shingles). This we call "means & methods". The "build" predicts the activities required of the "design". For instance, placing the foundation ahead of the shingles may seem apparent, but "pre-fab" has changed that sequence option. 

In the mid 19th Century, the AIA formed a "crack" in the society of architecture (translated as Master-Builder) by segmenting the design profession from the craft of construction. Since 1918, the Spearin Doctrine has driven the wedge between design and construction deeper. 

What I respect most about "design-build" is that it is NOT simply "designing & building", it is much more (or can be). All A&E's have the skill to create a design, and every competent builders can stack bricks. 

What our professions are most challenged by is satisfying the owner's "problem" with a successful outcome relative to scope, schedule, and budget (a true solution)...despite our design "thinkery" or construction "mastery". 

Talk about a "train wreck" (pun intended). Just look at what's happening at the "Silver Springs Transit Center" in Maryland....google it. 
I bet the people of Montgomery County Maryland are saying, "All we wanted was a transit center".