Architect Frank Gehry passed away on December 5, 2025 in Santa Monica. He was 96. I wrote about Frank Gehry’s influence on me as a 90s architecture student at East Los Angeles College and SCI-Arc.
Excerpt:
Thirty years later, Gehry’s ideas challenging form, challenging materiality, challenging function, challenging convention, challenging orthodoxy, challenging the architecture establishment, challenging one’s own profession, remain with me as an urban planner.
Gehry was a driving inspiration in my early development. I’m taking time to reflect on his impact and work. Meantime, check out my 1996 three bedroom residence designed in the spirit of Frank Gehry.
I’m on a panel recognizing the legacy of Mike Davis with writer legends Carolina A. Miranda, Kyle Paoletta, David Kipen, and Mike The PoeT Sonksen at the Urban History Association Conference 2025 in Los Angeles. More to come soon.
Join us on Saturday, October 11th, 1:15-2:45pm at the Biltmore Hotel in Downtown LA.
I was interviewed by Abigail Bassett in the Observer for this article on fake jobs. I told the story of receiving a cold call offering me a job at an architecture firm that does not exist.
BRODIE: What are the conversations like about this among your colleagues and other people who do what you do? . . .
PACHECO BELL: A lot of times city planners get blamed for this, but in fact, it’s oftentimes not city planners that are deciding to add hostile architecture. Rather, it’s the absence of mechanisms within city planning to deal with it. One of my longstanding critiques.
So, yes, there are instances where public agencies or the state might support the addition of hostile architecture, but there are also many instances where the private sector is doing this.
You have sometimes groups that form together to create hostile architecture to add in public space, to drive away those who they deem undesirable, and then sometimes you have sort of lone wolf individuals.
So this is a multidimensional issue. This is a multidimensional public space equity issue with a lot of people involved in it. My critique is that the urban planning field has done very little to address it.
The sharpest critiques that are coming out right now about hostile architecture are coming from the citizen journalists, young people on TikTok. And that is giving me hope that we’re going to have a turning point where we can start really talking about this as an international public space equity issue driven by young people on social media.
You know the Dingbat apartment building even if you don’t know its history. Architecture historian Reyner Banham coined the Dingbat phrase in the 1970s. It’s that clunky stucco box with a quirky facade perched precariously above parking spaces. Maligned by some, revered by many, studied ad infinitum: the Dingbat is distinctively “L.A.”
The book’s many essays illuminate the Dingbat’s origins, meaning(s), and (possible) future(s). Pictures are plentiful. Diagrams and photo simulations abound. A newly developed Dingbat taxonomy provides a handy guidebook for spotting them in the environment. And whereas prior studies focus almost exclusively on the Dingbat’s unmistakable facade, Dingbat 2.0 ventures to step inside. Residents share what it’s like to live in this particular form of multifamily housing. This new dimension brings us closer to a “complete comprehension” of the Dingbat.
Dingbat 2.0 is a must-read for urbanists, architects, historians, housing advocates, and everyday Angelenos.
You must be logged in to post a comment.