More signs the tipping point is drawing near. HOK’s Sport architecture group with collaboration from Peter Cook unveiled the design for the Olympic stadium for the 2012 games earlier this week. The approach was to emphasize functionality and flexibility rather than iconic architecture (think the polar opposite of the 2008 Stadium in China). They even devised a sustainability plan for after the games so it could be scaled down to a 25,000 seat permanent stadium to become a new home for athletics and other uses. Sounds all well and good.
But as Amanda Baillieu writes for Building Design Online;
First, there is nothing sustainable about building a 80,000-seat stadium for less than two months’ use. Apart from the pollution caused by its construction, let alone the time and effort by all involved, the legacy plans are still unclear.
Then there is the structure itself, which is to be removed and, we’re told, reused. There has been vague talk about palming it off on Glasgow for the Commonwealth Games, but why would anyone want to buy something that’s been purpose-designed for a totally different event?
The asthetics of the stadium are also being questioned. BDOnline is running a page of reaction comments from their readers. Alex Liddell’s comment seems to sum up reaction to the proposal.
in the spirit of the innovative design i am going to re use the comments of Andy Korn: disappointing, bland, embarassing. This is an insult to architecture.
Facebook
Twitter
Digg
Reddit
StumbleUpon
