... on Proposed Academic Building on CEPT Campus by Christopher Benninger

Dear Christopher,

I got to see the video presentation of the academic hub at CEPT. 

I must first say with the kind of standing in the profession and having been in CEPT? it was a poor presentation coming from you and after so much time working on it as you say. 

But putting that aside and not trivialising so many other things I am taking the freedom to say a few things. 

1. The ethos of a campus that was open and participatory seems to have been lost in your scheme. 

2. The symbolic reference to the supposed iconic building as you refer to is just words and does not come through at all. 

3. The promenade...less said the better. It's worse than a young students attempt. 

4. The hinge that you proclaim just is an empty space and remains undefined in any way. 

5. The connection with the plaza is just by proximity and not with any architectural intention that is seen. 

6. The pathetic reference to the trees and the manner in which the building responds is very immature to say the least. 

7. I dread to see the internal spaces that connect the compartmentalised class rooms. This is the ethos missing that made and makes what CEPT is. 

8. The mound... well in attempting to protect it you succeeded in destroying the undefined connections that we had with the built. You seem to have kept it bounded because you did not know how to deal with it. This is clearly shown in the manner you have addressed your response in the promenade. 

9. I though must say you have a difficult job to do but with your experience and connect with the campus much was expected. 

10. I would think you need to clean the slate and start all over again. 

I have taken the liberty to express my individual opinion as you had put it out to discussion and I hope these comments are not taken as offensive which it is not. 


Pramod Balakrishnan

CEPT 1974.