Grupo Danhos has commissioned the Office for Metropolitan Architecture (OMA) to design Torre Bicentenario in the centre of Mexico-City. The tower will become the tallest of Latin America and will be completed in 2010, the 200th anniversary of Mexico’s Independence.
The building is to accommodate 198,000 m2 of office space, a convention centre, site museum and gym as well as retail and restaurants. In addition a 196,000 m2 public parking garage is part of the project.
The 300 meter tall building will be located at the intersection of Reforma and Anillo Periférico, on the northeast corner of Mexico City’s Chapultepec Park, home to the Presidential residence..
The tower is envisaged as a symbol of the Bicentenario, 2010, the 200th anniversary of Mexico’s Independence and the 100th anniversary of the Mexican Revolution.
The high-rise is conceived by the stacking of two pyramidal forms. This produces a form that is at once familiar yet unique. At the junction of the two pyramids, a sky lobby acts as the transfer point between shuttles and local elevators. This space will offer extensive views over the park and the city beyond.
Two voids penetrate the building at its widest point providing ventilation and natural light. Whilst traditional high-rises tend to internalize this feature with an atrium, the Torre Bicentenario, projects it onto the façade cutting into the building. A pattern of reflective glass panels covering 50% of the interior surface maximizes light penetration. The void twists at its midpoint, opening at the bottom toward the park and at the top toward the city, connecting the building to its surroundings.
The two districts adjacent to the Torre Bicentenario, Las Lomas and Polanco, are separated by a major highway. To provide a link between them, a new pedestrian bridge is proposed establishing a shortcut reconnecting formerly disengaged sections of the park and the city.
Grupo Danhos is one of the largest real estate development companies in Mexico. During the last three decades it has developed residential, corporate and shopping center projects. Grupo Danhos is currently concluding a mixed-use development desinged by Teodoro González de León which is to be the largest and most visible project in Mexico City.
At OMA, the Bicentenario project is lead by partner Rem Koolhaas and Shohei Shigematsu who is the director of OMA New York. Their previous collaborations include the design of the Whitney Museum Extension in NYC, the China Central Television Headquarters Building in Beijing, the Shenzen Stock Exchange, the Millstein Hall for Cornell University, Ithaca, NY and a hotel and residential highrise at 111 First Street in Jersey City, NJ.
Grupo Danhos has commissioned the Office for Metropolitan Architecture (OMA) to design Torre Bicentenario in the centre of Mexico-City. The tower will become the tallest of Latin America and will be completed in 2010, the 200th anniversary of Mexico’s Independence.
The building is to accommodate 198,000 m2 of office space, a convention centre, site museum and gym as well as retail and restaurants. In addition a 196,000 m2 public parking garage is part of the project.
The 300 meter tall building will be located at the intersection of Reforma and Anillo Periférico, on the northeast corner of Mexico City’s Chapultepec Park, home to the Presidential residence..
The tower is envisaged as a symbol of the Bicentenario, 2010, the 200th anniversary of Mexico’s Independence and the 100th anniversary of the Mexican Revolution.
The high-rise is conceived by the stacking of two pyramidal forms. This produces a form that is at once familiar yet unique. At the junction of the two pyramids, a sky lobby acts as the transfer point between shuttles and local elevators. This space will offer extensive views over the park and the city beyond.
Two voids penetrate the building at its widest point providing ventilation and natural light. Whilst traditional high-rises tend to internalize this feature with an atrium, the Torre Bicentenario, projects it onto the façade cutting into the building. A pattern of reflective glass panels covering 50% of the interior surface maximizes light penetration. The void twists at its midpoint, opening at the bottom toward the park and at the top toward the city, connecting the building to its surroundings.
The two districts adjacent to the Torre Bicentenario, Las Lomas and Polanco, are separated by a major highway. To provide a link between them, a new pedestrian bridge is proposed establishing a shortcut reconnecting formerly disengaged sections of the park and the city.
Grupo Danhos is one of the largest real estate development companies in Mexico. During the last three decades it has developed residential, corporate and shopping center projects. Grupo Danhos is currently concluding a mixed-use development desinged by Teodoro González de León which is to be the largest and most visible project in Mexico City.
At OMA, the Bicentenario project is lead by partner Rem Koolhaas and Shohei Shigematsu who is the director of OMA New York. Their previous collaborations include the design of the Whitney Museum Extension in NYC, the China Central Television Headquarters Building in Beijing, the Shenzen Stock Exchange, the Millstein Hall for Cornell University, Ithaca, NY and a hotel and residential highrise at 111 First Street in Jersey City, NJ.
oma has always seemed to be an amazing generator of lots of ideas. it seems that the ideas are still there, but have they been doling them out in a more parsimonious way?
the more recent stuff has almost looked like the exact collision of their famous blue foam and one over-arching idea.
foam + idea = done!
it's not that i don't think this is a seductive tower. i do. and i think i like what it's doing from a cityscape standpoint. but there's really not much to it. maybe this is a sort of test-marketing: put it out there and, however people respond, we can take it ___ direction...
I'd love to see the engineering on that tower. Mexico city has had it's share of major earthquakes and it would be interesting to see how the turning moment on a mass that large is handled. The location of the "pyramid bases" on the elevation probably had a lot to do with OMA's conversations with the structural engineer...
It seems to me the "dystopian blade runner style" has a lot more to do with the photo at night.
You know, Koolhas has recently been trying to pull out a new form-concept of his own, probably based on the ikea/muji/ responsible design trend. He call it "generix" or some bull ... like that; it's supposed to be some sort of no design architecture, so all of his most recent projects have been looking like foam models from then...
yeh but you know this is already 500% better than what usually gets built with such projects.
i am impressed. for commercial architecture it is very good. as architecture in general it is just sort of ok, but not every building needs to be an icon.
seems to me rem gets it either way on this site. if real icon he gets slammed for starchitecting, if more normal then he is a boring one-liner show...basically people just wanna slam his office wither way cuz he is now, at last, and formally, the MAN.
love the blade runner night rendering. totally hot.
the conservative in me wishes that towers would go back to being variations on extruded rectangles, more about the detailing than a big gesture form, but as these things go, it's pretty good.
I'm not blaming him, and I like the project. I completely agree with the "500% better" part; I was just trying to put the shape of the project in context, but maybe I was a little too laydback...
I have serious doubt about the honesty of this generix thing though; I bought everything he has come up with before, but his recent disgust for competition and formal architecture isn't too clear for me.
call me a layman, i only see a taper rectangle (axis of taper defined at the center of the rectangle) with party walls at both sides which i found pecular, since it mostly apply to dense urban narrow slots... and i do not see any bladerunner, foam, dytopian, responsible form... etc.etc.
there's 3 main areas of "ground" in Mexico City (included in the construction regulations) one is called "lake" which is mostly in the center of the city, and the most unestable, then "transition" (which is a mid-firm ground) and then comes "lomerio" which is the most solid groud of the city, basically formed of Hills and or rocky terrains, the area where thistower is going to be built is into the "LOMERIO" area (in Las Lomas neighborhood), so the strcuture wont worry me as much as other issues do...
TO ALL basically they want to build a 100 stories building in a 6 stories level (max) regulated area (and thats why now grupo Danhos is advertising the project everywhere, after keeping it hermetic for almost 2 years, to make noise and then making the local goverment more flexible about regulations, aiming to the "icon" builduing, for one of the biggest cities in the world, one of the pritzker archs, blah blah blah bullshit)...
as also in the site they most demolish a building which is one of the best examples of the mexican modernism designed by Vladimir Kaspé (1940's)..
so thats basically the whole thing about the local controversy, the problem also is the lack of urban/architectural culture of people in Mexico in general, which wont allow the public to have a recognizwed opinion about the whole thing, and most of "influent architects", the so-called "critics a.k.a. as Miquel Adria (critic invited to the 10x10 v2) havent said anything or pro or con...u know they just wanna be politically correct...but anyways, thats mexico, everyone has their own personal interest, so yeah lets see what happens with the OMA/Kool.ass building...
status right now?: construction stopped for the lack of permit to build that height in an area which is not allowed to...
i posted more about this previously in this thread:
I dunno, I like the sort of one liner structural "tricks" these buildings tend to exhibit, like the TVVC or the Seattle Public Library, and the program is generally quite cleverly integrated into the concept... i'm tired of seeing glass shards and crappy little cants that are purely because it is either "concept" driven (had enough of this), fashionable, and/or it's the only thing the client can afford that makes the project "interesting"
And I almost respect the disrespect for the material aspects of these projects.
Granted, these forms are quite expensive, and use up the rest of the budget, like any finishes. But as far as a very unique urban experience, I love them, foam model driven or not.
While reading yesterday's headlines in the Chinese newspaper People's Daily I stumbled upon an interesting article, mentioning Rem's next journey into joining the high-rise rat race. What's next to expect to keep this race interesting? Building the highest skyscraper on the South Pole?
What is interesting about the blurb in the newspaper article, which is not so different from the one that started this article is the following sentence;
"Dutch architect Rem Koolhaas designed the tower. He won the Pritzker 2000 award and his masterpieces include Oporto's Music House in Portugal and the Leeum Samsung Art Museum in Seoul."
If I am not mistaken Rem is also designing something in Beijing. Why would one not mention this; has it to do with the project or has he already became a household name for the masses? Nothing to serious speculate about, but thought was interesting.
in asia, when u fill up the site with 0 set back and shoot up the party wall 100 storey high from top to bottom, is called "Greed Urbanism" or "fuck the neighbor"
similar shape, punky, but totally different attitude/approach, both in the resolution and the (stated) reasoning. if we get trapped into just responding to the overall form and don't look further, we'll be encouraging more and more simplistic form-making.
the oma project does a few things different. it acknowledges the difficulty of inhabiting the thicker middle with the cutouts, and then makes the cutouts relevant to the siting. instead of a straight tube through the building (a la architechtonica in the 80s) it turns to address different urban connections/views. i'd say it has as much borrowed inspiration from the architechtonica and holl's simmons hall as it does from the simpson project you posted. i don't see anything wrong with borrowing. and its also a continuation of the prismatic mass set that oma's been showing us lately, so it's very clearly 'oma'-branded.
i think i'm interested in this building more as a postmodern phenomenon than anything else. it's part of an evolving body of work that oma's been generating and, while each project is possibly less interesting on its own, the ouevre of projects that might result are a commentary about iconic structures in major cities. not a positive commentary, necessarily, but a somewhat cynical one. i don't think this is about giving mexico city a great building. it's about giving mexico city something that big cities want in an efficient way, simply varying the theme of what oma's giving other big cities. the more these projects look the same, the more the stakeholders feel they've gotten what they ordered. i mean, who wants to order up a bilbao and get an experience music project? keep it simple.
i expect the next rem book to address these as a 'set' and why it doesn't matter what they design as long as it satisfies the economic and political desires of the players involved: to have a symbol on the skyline. the description will probably be a continuation of the theme started in 'content' regarding the shoebox house-cum- porto.
in a strange way, even though rex is now not-oma, i think of louisville's museum plaza as part of this same oma prismatic mass set.
"i expect the next rem book to address these as a 'set' and why it doesn't matter what they design as long as it satisfies the economic and political desires of the players involved: to have a symbol on the skyline."
i think this is spot on right up to the colon. i don't think it's a symbol rem's going for. that just doesn't seem in line with the oma ethos. i believe the office designs these projects with a very close attention to the various economic, political, technological, etc. forces at play, but once those criteria are met there's more an element of play to the final form, what just looks cool to them. for as much as oma is derided as empty formalists, i believe the first phase of the design, the conceptual phase very much grounded in the realities of the client's interests, is really what the office is most interested in.
i don't think it's a symbol rem's going for. that just doesn't seem in line with the oma ethos
Ja, that's what rem says, what he does with his projects winds up being the exact opposite. CCTV is as much a symbol for Beijing now as Tiananmen gate is, I wouldn't be suprised if it shows up on their currency in 20 years. Rem prides himself on creating "anti-architectures", to the point he's tried to kill the skyscraper in Beijing with CCTV. The built form is far more epic than any tower i have ever seen. The amount of steel and structure, coupled with that massive cantilevered mass makes it easily the most egotistical piece of modern architecture I've ever seen. I'm really impressed by it, but don't let rem fool you, he's aware of what he's doing is highly symbolic which is usually what his high-dollar clients want.
As for mexico, again I like it, but I feel like alot of the lessons learned at CCTV with his quest to kill the skyscraper were lost. The voids, while connecting on a macro scale, don't neccesarily do it on the micro i think because there is not enough rigor in the application of those moves. The best space in the whole building is along those voids. Most of the building will be the banal, pancake-floor typologies he was rebelling against at CCTV.
Formally, it looks exactly like something i thought up as an 11 year old, so of course i like it but I'm suprised he's doing a tower in this fashion, and not something more radical.
apu, i can see your point, and rem certainly has the awareness to know that cctv in particular is iconic (i hesitate to say symbolic). but that act of creating an icon is incredibly political and economic; therefore i'm not sure the form really deviates from the guiding conceptual principles of the design.
all i'm saying is that the weight of the project is grounded in the realities of its context. the form of the design is only relevant to the extent it affects these realities. after that, it's pure play.
having a giant name, to design a giant building, for your giant company, to sell comercial space and appments at giant prices, in a city where the social/economical gap is giant, is something GIANT, i guess grupo Danhos could be named grupo GIANT after this year...before Bjarke Ingels reconsider BIG is not big enough for his studio name :P....oh wait a second!!, isnt Bjarke part of a recent generation of ex-OMAs?? i guess u cannot deny ur blood...
sorry this is in spanish, but i consider it quite interesting point of view, to all of you that can read/understand spanish (published aug-13-'07 at Reforma newspaper, mexico):
Bitramposaurio Por Denise Dresser
(13-Ago-2007).-
Un proyecto que se vende como lo que no es. Una obra que se presenta como emblemática de la modernización cuando esconde todo lo que en México persiste para frenarla. Una torre erigida para conmemorar las fiestas nacionales cuyos principales beneficios irán a parar a manos de particulares. Como un aguijón clavado en el corazón de Chapultepec. Punzante. Hiriente. Lastimoso. Colocado allí por un gobierno que se dice vanguardista pero sugiere -tanto con la sede escogida, como con el proceso cuestionable para conseguirla- que aún no entiende cómo serlo. Setenta pisos de tergiversaciones; 300 metros de manipulaciones; 6 mil 500 cajones de estacionamiento cargados de contradicciones. Una trampa para la ciudad, para el PRD que la gobierna, para los ciudadanos que la habitan.
Edificio tramposo para el proceso democrático que el PRD dice defender. Porque hay mucho de la Torre que huele mal, se ve mal, corre en contra de la transparencia y los esfuerzos para fomentarla. Paso tras paso, declaración tras declaración, el proyecto revela todo aquello que lo hace criticable. La transmutación de políticos en desarrolladores; la metamorfosis de funcionarios públicos en constructores privados; la promoción gubernamental de un proyecto que indudablemente generará multimillonarias ganancias, pero no necesariamente para la ciudad. Y una izquierda que se presta a la legislación a modo; al "fast track", a los cambios que exigen un manojo de empresarios y sus amigos.
Obra tramposa para el Estado de Derecho que la ciudad y el país necesitan. Pocas cosas peores en este trance que contemplar el aval de Marcelo Ebrard a la "flexibilización" de la ley. Que ver las reglas generales reformadas para servir a intereses particulares. Que presenciar las normas de desarrollo urbano sacrificadas por quien ganaría credibilidad con el apego irrestricto a su aplicación. Ebrard aspira a presentarse como miembro de una izquierda distinta, pero su comportamiento en este tema indica que todo cambia para permanecer igual. La misma discrecionalidad, la misma opacidad, la misma manera de gobernar al Distrito Federal que contribuye a su retroceso en lugar de asegurar su avance.
Torre tramposa para los ciudadanos que acabarán subvencionando -de diversas maneras- una obra que hará más rico al Grupo Danhos, pero a costa de los capitalinos. Los ciudadanos que pagarán el precio de ceder 30 mil metros cuadrados del Bosque de Chapultepec. Los que acabarán otorgando plusvalía mediante el cambio del uso de suelo y las reglas de altura a un terreno que actualmente vale 15 millones de dólares y acabará valiendo 180 millones más. Los que contribuirán al negocio redondo que Jorge Gamboa de Buen, "en nombre de la Ciudad", hará para sus socios. Los que padecerán el desborde de 13 mil carros previstos y tan sólo 6 mil 500 lugares de estacionamiento prometidos. Los que sufrirán días de obras interminables, meses de vialidades congestionadas, años de remodelación exasperante.
Edificio cuyo espíritu y cuyo arquitecto contradicen una celebración de lo que México es y a dónde quiere llegar. Rem Koolhaas forma parte de la corriente arquitectónica basada en la premisa: "fuck the context". En pocas palabras, no le preocupa el contexto o el futuro del Distrito Federal o la calidad de vida de sus habitantes. Lo que importa es el edificio en sí y el modo de vida "moderno" que representa: el fin de la ciudad, el fin de la identidad, el fin de la comunidad. Un estadío donde según dice, "the city is to be superseded by Bigness" (la ciudad debe ser superada por lo Grande). Y en efecto, la torre será grande pero no necesariamente grandiosa. Será alta pero no particularmente hermosa. Será -sin duda- un edificio icónico, pero no de la mexicanidad sino de los esfuerzos de un nómada global por dejarla atrás. Koolhaas ha dicho que "la arquitectura no puede hacer lo que la cultura no quiere". Y si la cultura mexicana quiere celebrar 200 años, no debería aceptar la construcción de un edificio mal bautizado que la desdeña.
Ante este racimo de razones, el gobierno de Marcelo Ebrard se equivoca -y seriamente- al argumentar que quienes se oponen al proyecto lo hacen por "mezquindad política". Es cierto que unos y otros han usado el tema para combatir al perredismo en la capital y lo seguirán haciendo. Pero al margen de las batallas políticas, existen argumentos de fondo, preguntas legítimas, preocupaciones válidas, ciudadanos consternados y con razón. El gobierno del Distrito Federal haría mal en cerrar los ojos frente a ellos. Sobre todo cuando le urge diferenciarse del autismo ante muchas causas ciudadanas que demostró su predecesor. Sobre todo cuando necesita distanciarse de aquello que aqueja a la imagen del perredismo y contribuye a desacreditarlo.
Por ello, Marcelo Ebrard y el PRD en la capital necesitan pensar en las siguientes preguntas: si el objetivo es conmemorar el Bicentenario, ¿por qué no convocar a un concurso de arquitectos mexicanos de talla mundial -Enrique Norten, Ricardo Legorreta, Teodoro González de León, entre otros- para construir un edificio que promueva lo mejor de nosotros mismos? Si lo que se busca es colocar a la ciudad en el escenario internacional, ¿por qué no construir un centro cultural o un museo o una sala de conciertos al estilo de lo que se ha hecho en Dubai o Abu Dhabi? Si el objetivo de la Torre es el desarrollo de la zona, ¿por qué no cambiarla a un lugar que realmente lo requiere, como el área de Ejército Nacional? Si el objetivo del gobierno es mejorar la vialidad y combatir el desorden en Las Lomas, ¿por qué no se aboca a ello independientemente del proyecto propuesto? Si el objetivo es cambiar la faz del paisaje urbano, ¿por qué no hacerlo en un lugar menos conflictivo? Si el objetivo es generar empleos, ¿por qué no fomentar su creación en colonias del Distrito Federal que los necesiten más? Si la Torre es "en favor de la ciudad", ¿por qué sus beneficios están tan concentrados en tan pocas manos?
Hasta ahora, la respuesta a estas interrogantes ha sido la evasión o la descalificación. El manoseo de cifras que cambian y datos que se modifican a conveniencia. La apariencia de autoridades coludidas con empresarios rapaces. La proliferación de argumentos poco convincentes que ocultan grandes intereses. El desdén a la ciudadanía y el atropello a sus derechos. Todo aquello asociado con la peor manera de hacer política y de tomar decisiones sobre el desarrollo urbano. Y por eso, la Torre del Bicentenario no es -como argumenta Marcelo Ebrard- "un símbolo del futuro de la metrópoli". Más bien parece un símbolo del pasado y las trampas que todavía puede tender.
-------------------
*Denise Dresseres una reconocida periodista y académica mexicana, especialista en Ciencias Políticas. Estudió un doctorado en la Universidad de Princeton. Es también una periodista cuya obra gira en torno a la vida política de México. Es profesora de Ciencias Políticas en el Instituto Tecnológico Autónomo de México (ITAM) y es autora de varios trabajos académicos especializados sobre la política mexicana y las relaciones entre México y los Estados Unidos.
Como periodista, escribe una columna en el Diario Reforma y en el Semanario Proceso y participó en programas de televisión como es el caso del programa El cristal con que se mira en el segmento de "La mesa de los periodistas" en la cadena Televisa, o haciendo comentarios editoriales en El Noticiero con Joaquín López-Dóriga. También ha sido analista de la Mesa Política de Radio Monitor con José Gutiérrez Vivó y es articulista de la Revista Proceso
Denise Dresser contribuye frecuentemente como experta en varios medios estadounidenses. Dresser ha sido visitante académica en el "Pacific Council on International Policy" de la Universidad de California.
Ha expresado su abierta oposición a las prácticas monopólicas en México, especialmente en contra de la llamada Ley Televisa, que según ella favorece el duopolio televisivo de Grupo Televisa y TV Azteca, y en contra de Carlos Slim, el magnate más poderoso del país que aglutina la casi totalidad de la red telefónica mexicana .
A project that is sold like which is not. A work that appears like emblematic of the modernization when it hides everything what in Mexico it persists to restrain it. An erected tower to commemorate the national celebrations whose main benefits will stop at hands of individuals. Like a sting nailed in the heart of Chapultepec. Sharp. Hiriente. Pitiful. Placed there by a government who is said vanguardista but suggests as much - with the selected seat, like with the questionable process for conseguirla- that not yet understands how to be it. Seventy floors of distortions; 300 meters of manipulations; 6 thousand 500 loaded drawers of parking of contradictions. A trap for the city, for the PRD that the weathervane, the citizens who inhabit it. Cheating building for the democratic process that the PRD says to defend. Because there is much of the Tower that smells bad, it is bad, it runs against the transparency and the efforts to foment it. Passage after step, declaration after declaration, the project reveals everything what it makes criticizeable. The transmutación of politicians in developer; the metamorphosis of officials government in private constructors; the governmental promotion of a project that doubtlessly will generate multimillionaires gains, but not necessarily for the city. And a left that is lent to the legislation to way; to "fast track", to the changes that demand a handful of industralists and its friends. Cheating work for the State of Right that the city and the country need. Few worse things in this critical moment than to contemplate the endorsement of Marcelo Ebrard to the "relaxation" of the law. That to see the general rules reformed to serve particular interests. That to be present at the sacrificed norms of urban development by that would gain credibility with the unrestricted attachment to its application. Ebrard aspires to appear like member of a different left, but its behavior in this subject indicates that everything changes to remain equal. The same discretion, the same opacity, the same way to govern to the Federal District that contributes to its backward movement instead of assuring its advance. Cheating tower for the citizens who will end up subsidizing - of diverse ways a work that the Danhos Group will make richer, but at the cost of the inhabitants of the capital. The citizens who will pay the price to yield 30 thousand square meters of the Forest of Chapultepec. Those that will end up granting capital gain by means of the change of the ground use and the rules of height to a land that at the moment is worth 15 million dollars and will end up being worth 180 million more. Those that will contribute to the round business that Jorge Gamboa de Buen, "in name of the City", will do for his partners. Those that will suffer the overflowing of 13 thousand predicted cars and only 6 thousand 500 engaged hardstandings. Those that will undergo days of interminable works, months of congested roads, years of exasperante remodeling. Building whose spirit and whose architect contradicts a celebration of which Mexico is and to where it wants to arrive. Rem Koolhaas comprises of the architectonic current based on the premise: "fuck the context". Briefly, to the context or about the Federal District or the quality of life of its inhabitants does not worry to him the future. What matters is the building in himself and "the modern" way of life that represents: the aim of the city, the aim of the identity, the aim of the community. Estadío where according to it says, "the City is to be superseded by Bigness" (the city must be surpassed by the Great thing). And in effect, the tower will be great but not necessarily huge. She will be high but not particularly beautiful. It will be - without doubt an iconic building, but of the mexicanidad but of the efforts of a global nomad not to leave it back. Koolhaas has said that "the architecture cannot do what the culture does not want". And if the Mexican culture wants to celebrate 200 years, it would not have to accept the construction of a building badly baptized that scorns it. Before this cluster of reasons, the government of Marcelo Ebrard is mistaken - and seriously when arguing that that is against the project they do it by "political meanness". It is certain that and others have used the subject to fight to the perredismo in the capital and they will continue it doing. But to the margin of the political battles, arguments of bottom, legitimate questions, valid preoccupations exist, citizen consternados and with reason. The government of the Federal District would make bad in closing the eyes them in front of. Mainly when he is urgent to him to be different itself from the autismo before many citizen causes that his predecessor demonstrated. Mainly when he needs to be distanced of what aqueja to the image of the perredismo and contributes to discredit it. For that reason, Marcelo Ebrard and the PRD in the capital need to think about the following questions: if the objective is to commemorate the Bicentennial, why not to summon to an aid of Mexican architects of world-wide stature - Enrique Norten, Ricardo Legorreta, Teodoro González of Leon, among others to construct a building that promotes the best thing of we ourself? If what looks for is to place to the city in the international scene, why not to construct to a cultural center or a museum or a concert hall in the style of which one has become in Dubai or Abu Dhabi? If the objective of the Tower is the development of the zone, why not to change it to a place that really requires it, like the area of National army? If the objective of the government is to improve the road and to fight the disorder in the Hills, why is not led it of the proposed project independently? If the objective is to change the face of the urban landscape, why not to do it in a less conflicting place? If the objective is to generate uses, why not to foment its creation in colonies of the Federal District that need more? If the Tower is "in please the city", why its benefits so are concentrated in so few hands? Until now, the answer to these questions has been the evasion or the disqualification. I handle of numbers that they change and data that are modified to convenience. The appearance of authorities coludidas with industralists rapaces. The proliferation of little convincing arguments that hide great interests. The disdain to the citizenship and the upsetting to its rights. All that associate with the worse way to make policy and to make decisions on the urban development. And for that reason, the Tower of the Bicentennial is not - as a symbol of the future of the metropolis argues Marcelo Ebrard- "". Rather it seems a symbol of the past and the traps that still can tend. * Denise Dresser is one recognized Mexican, specialistic academic journalist and in Political Sciences. It studied a doctorate in the University of Princeton. She is also a journalist whose work turns around the political life of Mexico. She is professor of Political Sciences in the Independent Technological Institute of Mexico (ITAM) and is author of several academic works specialized on the Mexican policy and the relations between Mexico and the United States. Like journalist, a column writes in the Reformation Newspaper and the Weekly Process and participated in television programs as the crystal is the case of the program whereupon it is watched in the segment of "the table of the journalists" in the Television chain, or commening out publishing in the Reporter with Joaquin Lopez-Do'riga. Also she has been analyst of Political Mesa of Radio Monitor with Jose Gutiérrez Vivó and is contributor of the Magazine Process Denise Dresser contributes frequently like expert in several average Americans. Dresser has been academic visitor in the "Pacific Council on International Policy" of the University of California. It has expressed his open opposition to the monopolistic practices in Mexico, specially against the call Television Law, that according to her favors duopolio televising of Television Group and Aztec TV, and against Carlos Slim, the most powerful tycoon of the country that almost agglutinates the totality of the Mexican wire net.
in a way aside form the discourse, I am troubled by the fact that they call this "the tallest structure in LATIN AMERICA" when in fact, MEXICO is part of North America, not Latin America, which usually is used in reference to South America (since most of the latin nations reside there). You never hear then saying that Central America equates Latin America, so how in the heck is Mexico Latin America?? I just really want this clarified.
Aside from that, I don't have a problem with the project. Like it was said above, it doesnt seem (at these stages) as though it would be an icon of a bldg/structure that would be on my "to go see" list, hence, it's just another bldg by a large/well established firm using it's "muscle" to generate some interest.
By its geographical location, Mexico is part of NORTH AMERICA from the Itsmo de Tehuantepec (between the areas of state of Tabasco and Oaxaca, or if u preffer parallels 15 to 20) to th north, and from the same point to the south (states of Oaxaca, Tabasco, Campeche, Yucatan, Quintana Roo, Chiapas) is part of CENTRAL AMERICA, but the whole country at the same time is part of what is called LATIN AMERICA, which at the same time is part of America the continent... so yeah a lot of miss-uses of terms and names in this continent it seems...
from WIKIPEDIA: Latin America (Portuguese and Spanish América Latina, French: Amérique Latine) is the region of the Americas where Romance languages, those derived from Latin (particularly Spanish and Portuguese), are primarily spoken. Latin America is contrasted with the lesser known term Anglo-America, that region of the Americas where English predominates.
...Strictly speaking, Latin America designates all those countries and territories in the Americas where Romance languages (i.e. languages derived from Latin, and hence the name of Latin America) are spoken: Spanish, Portuguese, but also French, and their creoles. Indeed, this was the original intent when the term was coined by the French. This would then include former French colonies such as Quebec in Canada, Haiti, Martinique and Guadeloupe in the Caribbean, and French Guiana in South America.
It's good to get the clarification, even to a certain extent I have heard/known of some of this. My reasoning for the question, was out of shear need to educate those out there, and not let them continue to believe in things they have 'heard' vs the history/and or facts behind it.
OMA designs tallest tower Latin America
Grupo Danhos has commissioned the Office for Metropolitan Architecture (OMA) to design Torre Bicentenario in the centre of Mexico-City. The tower will become the tallest of Latin America and will be completed in 2010, the 200th anniversary of Mexico’s Independence.
The building is to accommodate 198,000 m2 of office space, a convention centre, site museum and gym as well as retail and restaurants. In addition a 196,000 m2 public parking garage is part of the project.
The 300 meter tall building will be located at the intersection of Reforma and Anillo Periférico, on the northeast corner of Mexico City’s Chapultepec Park, home to the Presidential residence..
The tower is envisaged as a symbol of the Bicentenario, 2010, the 200th anniversary of Mexico’s Independence and the 100th anniversary of the Mexican Revolution.
The high-rise is conceived by the stacking of two pyramidal forms. This produces a form that is at once familiar yet unique. At the junction of the two pyramids, a sky lobby acts as the transfer point between shuttles and local elevators. This space will offer extensive views over the park and the city beyond.
Two voids penetrate the building at its widest point providing ventilation and natural light. Whilst traditional high-rises tend to internalize this feature with an atrium, the Torre Bicentenario, projects it onto the façade cutting into the building. A pattern of reflective glass panels covering 50% of the interior surface maximizes light penetration. The void twists at its midpoint, opening at the bottom toward the park and at the top toward the city, connecting the building to its surroundings.
The two districts adjacent to the Torre Bicentenario, Las Lomas and Polanco, are separated by a major highway. To provide a link between them, a new pedestrian bridge is proposed establishing a shortcut reconnecting formerly disengaged sections of the park and the city.
Grupo Danhos is one of the largest real estate development companies in Mexico. During the last three decades it has developed residential, corporate and shopping center projects. Grupo Danhos is currently concluding a mixed-use development desinged by Teodoro González de León which is to be the largest and most visible project in Mexico City.
At OMA, the Bicentenario project is lead by partner Rem Koolhaas and Shohei Shigematsu who is the director of OMA New York. Their previous collaborations include the design of the Whitney Museum Extension in NYC, the China Central Television Headquarters Building in Beijing, the Shenzen Stock Exchange, the Millstein Hall for Cornell University, Ithaca, NY and a hotel and residential highrise at 111 First Street in Jersey City, NJ.
Grupo Danhos has commissioned the Office for Metropolitan Architecture (OMA) to design Torre Bicentenario in the centre of Mexico-City. The tower will become the tallest of Latin America and will be completed in 2010, the 200th anniversary of Mexico’s Independence.
The building is to accommodate 198,000 m2 of office space, a convention centre, site museum and gym as well as retail and restaurants. In addition a 196,000 m2 public parking garage is part of the project.
The 300 meter tall building will be located at the intersection of Reforma and Anillo Periférico, on the northeast corner of Mexico City’s Chapultepec Park, home to the Presidential residence..
The tower is envisaged as a symbol of the Bicentenario, 2010, the 200th anniversary of Mexico’s Independence and the 100th anniversary of the Mexican Revolution.
The high-rise is conceived by the stacking of two pyramidal forms. This produces a form that is at once familiar yet unique. At the junction of the two pyramids, a sky lobby acts as the transfer point between shuttles and local elevators. This space will offer extensive views over the park and the city beyond.
Two voids penetrate the building at its widest point providing ventilation and natural light. Whilst traditional high-rises tend to internalize this feature with an atrium, the Torre Bicentenario, projects it onto the façade cutting into the building. A pattern of reflective glass panels covering 50% of the interior surface maximizes light penetration. The void twists at its midpoint, opening at the bottom toward the park and at the top toward the city, connecting the building to its surroundings.
The two districts adjacent to the Torre Bicentenario, Las Lomas and Polanco, are separated by a major highway. To provide a link between them, a new pedestrian bridge is proposed establishing a shortcut reconnecting formerly disengaged sections of the park and the city.
Grupo Danhos is one of the largest real estate development companies in Mexico. During the last three decades it has developed residential, corporate and shopping center projects. Grupo Danhos is currently concluding a mixed-use development desinged by Teodoro González de León which is to be the largest and most visible project in Mexico City.
At OMA, the Bicentenario project is lead by partner Rem Koolhaas and Shohei Shigematsu who is the director of OMA New York. Their previous collaborations include the design of the Whitney Museum Extension in NYC, the China Central Television Headquarters Building in Beijing, the Shenzen Stock Exchange, the Millstein Hall for Cornell University, Ithaca, NY and a hotel and residential highrise at 111 First Street in Jersey City, NJ.
For images:
http://www.oma.eu/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=92&Itemid=6
watchdog, are you somebody's alias?
oma has always seemed to be an amazing generator of lots of ideas. it seems that the ideas are still there, but have they been doling them out in a more parsimonious way?
the more recent stuff has almost looked like the exact collision of their famous blue foam and one over-arching idea.
foam + idea = done!
it's not that i don't think this is a seductive tower. i do. and i think i like what it's doing from a cityscape standpoint. but there's really not much to it. maybe this is a sort of test-marketing: put it out there and, however people respond, we can take it ___ direction...
I give it a B. Not horrible, but nothing I'd go out of my way to see, either (even if I was in the same city).
Looks like the infamous "one liner" project.
i think it looks oppressive
dystopian blade runner style
is it 1810 feet high like a mexican freedom tower?
I'd love to see the engineering on that tower. Mexico city has had it's share of major earthquakes and it would be interesting to see how the turning moment on a mass that large is handled. The location of the "pyramid bases" on the elevation probably had a lot to do with OMA's conversations with the structural engineer...
It seems to me the "dystopian blade runner style" has a lot more to do with the photo at night.
I think they forgot to add all the smog that D.F. suffers from in those renderings.
I'll bet that Zapatistas think that Mexico is a dystopia.
You know, Koolhas has recently been trying to pull out a new form-concept of his own, probably based on the ikea/muji/ responsible design trend. He call it "generix" or some bull ... like that; it's supposed to be some sort of no design architecture, so all of his most recent projects have been looking like foam models from then...
yeh but you know this is already 500% better than what usually gets built with such projects.
i am impressed. for commercial architecture it is very good. as architecture in general it is just sort of ok, but not every building needs to be an icon.
seems to me rem gets it either way on this site. if real icon he gets slammed for starchitecting, if more normal then he is a boring one-liner show...basically people just wanna slam his office wither way cuz he is now, at last, and formally, the MAN.
poor little rem koolhaas.
love the blade runner night rendering. totally hot.
the conservative in me wishes that towers would go back to being variations on extruded rectangles, more about the detailing than a big gesture form, but as these things go, it's pretty good.
I'm not blaming him, and I like the project. I completely agree with the "500% better" part; I was just trying to put the shape of the project in context, but maybe I was a little too laydback...
I have serious doubt about the honesty of this generix thing though; I bought everything he has come up with before, but his recent disgust for competition and formal architecture isn't too clear for me.
call me a layman, i only see a taper rectangle (axis of taper defined at the center of the rectangle) with party walls at both sides which i found pecular, since it mostly apply to dense urban narrow slots... and i do not see any bladerunner, foam, dytopian, responsible form... etc.etc.
there's 3 main areas of "ground" in Mexico City (included in the construction regulations) one is called "lake" which is mostly in the center of the city, and the most unestable, then "transition" (which is a mid-firm ground) and then comes "lomerio" which is the most solid groud of the city, basically formed of Hills and or rocky terrains, the area where thistower is going to be built is into the "LOMERIO" area (in Las Lomas neighborhood), so the strcuture wont worry me as much as other issues do...
TO ALL basically they want to build a 100 stories building in a 6 stories level (max) regulated area (and thats why now grupo Danhos is advertising the project everywhere, after keeping it hermetic for almost 2 years, to make noise and then making the local goverment more flexible about regulations, aiming to the "icon" builduing, for one of the biggest cities in the world, one of the pritzker archs, blah blah blah bullshit)...
as also in the site they most demolish a building which is one of the best examples of the mexican modernism designed by Vladimir Kaspé (1940's)..
so thats basically the whole thing about the local controversy, the problem also is the lack of urban/architectural culture of people in Mexico in general, which wont allow the public to have a recognizwed opinion about the whole thing, and most of "influent architects", the so-called "critics a.k.a. as Miquel Adria (critic invited to the 10x10 v2) havent said anything or pro or con...u know they just wanna be politically correct...but anyways, thats mexico, everyone has their own personal interest, so yeah lets see what happens with the OMA/Kool.ass building...
status right now?: construction stopped for the lack of permit to build that height in an area which is not allowed to...
i posted more about this previously in this thread:
http://www.archinect.com/forum/threads.php?id=60808_0_42_0_C
How tall is it? I didn't feel like reading all that stuff...
I dunno, I like the sort of one liner structural "tricks" these buildings tend to exhibit, like the TVVC or the Seattle Public Library, and the program is generally quite cleverly integrated into the concept... i'm tired of seeing glass shards and crappy little cants that are purely because it is either "concept" driven (had enough of this), fashionable, and/or it's the only thing the client can afford that makes the project "interesting"
And I almost respect the disrespect for the material aspects of these projects.
Granted, these forms are quite expensive, and use up the rest of the budget, like any finishes. But as far as a very unique urban experience, I love them, foam model driven or not.
While reading yesterday's headlines in the Chinese newspaper People's Daily I stumbled upon an interesting article, mentioning Rem's next journey into joining the high-rise rat race. What's next to expect to keep this race interesting? Building the highest skyscraper on the South Pole?
The article can be found here;
Tallest building in Latin America to be built in Mexico City
What is interesting about the blurb in the newspaper article, which is not so different from the one that started this article is the following sentence;
"Dutch architect Rem Koolhaas designed the tower. He won the Pritzker 2000 award and his masterpieces include Oporto's Music House in Portugal and the Leeum Samsung Art Museum in Seoul."
If I am not mistaken Rem is also designing something in Beijing. Why would one not mention this; has it to do with the project or has he already became a household name for the masses? Nothing to serious speculate about, but thought was interesting.
in asia, when u fill up the site with 0 set back and shoot up the party wall 100 storey high from top to bottom, is called "Greed Urbanism" or "fuck the neighbor"
i liked it when ian simpson designed it like a year ago. bad copy OMA, bad copy.
http://www.aecmag.com/index.php?option=content&task=view&id=142
similar shape, punky, but totally different attitude/approach, both in the resolution and the (stated) reasoning. if we get trapped into just responding to the overall form and don't look further, we'll be encouraging more and more simplistic form-making.
the oma project does a few things different. it acknowledges the difficulty of inhabiting the thicker middle with the cutouts, and then makes the cutouts relevant to the siting. instead of a straight tube through the building (a la architechtonica in the 80s) it turns to address different urban connections/views. i'd say it has as much borrowed inspiration from the architechtonica and holl's simmons hall as it does from the simpson project you posted. i don't see anything wrong with borrowing. and its also a continuation of the prismatic mass set that oma's been showing us lately, so it's very clearly 'oma'-branded.
i think i'm interested in this building more as a postmodern phenomenon than anything else. it's part of an evolving body of work that oma's been generating and, while each project is possibly less interesting on its own, the ouevre of projects that might result are a commentary about iconic structures in major cities. not a positive commentary, necessarily, but a somewhat cynical one. i don't think this is about giving mexico city a great building. it's about giving mexico city something that big cities want in an efficient way, simply varying the theme of what oma's giving other big cities. the more these projects look the same, the more the stakeholders feel they've gotten what they ordered. i mean, who wants to order up a bilbao and get an experience music project? keep it simple.
i expect the next rem book to address these as a 'set' and why it doesn't matter what they design as long as it satisfies the economic and political desires of the players involved: to have a symbol on the skyline. the description will probably be a continuation of the theme started in 'content' regarding the shoebox house-cum- porto.
in a strange way, even though rex is now not-oma, i think of louisville's museum plaza as part of this same oma prismatic mass set.
"i expect the next rem book to address these as a 'set' and why it doesn't matter what they design as long as it satisfies the economic and political desires of the players involved: to have a symbol on the skyline."
i think this is spot on right up to the colon. i don't think it's a symbol rem's going for. that just doesn't seem in line with the oma ethos. i believe the office designs these projects with a very close attention to the various economic, political, technological, etc. forces at play, but once those criteria are met there's more an element of play to the final form, what just looks cool to them. for as much as oma is derided as empty formalists, i believe the first phase of the design, the conceptual phase very much grounded in the realities of the client's interests, is really what the office is most interested in.
that's fine as long as the client isnt just about building themselves a big dick.
Ja, that's what rem says, what he does with his projects winds up being the exact opposite. CCTV is as much a symbol for Beijing now as Tiananmen gate is, I wouldn't be suprised if it shows up on their currency in 20 years. Rem prides himself on creating "anti-architectures", to the point he's tried to kill the skyscraper in Beijing with CCTV. The built form is far more epic than any tower i have ever seen. The amount of steel and structure, coupled with that massive cantilevered mass makes it easily the most egotistical piece of modern architecture I've ever seen. I'm really impressed by it, but don't let rem fool you, he's aware of what he's doing is highly symbolic which is usually what his high-dollar clients want.
As for mexico, again I like it, but I feel like alot of the lessons learned at CCTV with his quest to kill the skyscraper were lost. The voids, while connecting on a macro scale, don't neccesarily do it on the micro i think because there is not enough rigor in the application of those moves. The best space in the whole building is along those voids. Most of the building will be the banal, pancake-floor typologies he was rebelling against at CCTV.
Formally, it looks exactly like something i thought up as an 11 year old, so of course i like it but I'm suprised he's doing a tower in this fashion, and not something more radical.
you're right about the colon, jafidler. that last bit was an afterthought and it really doesn't fit, does it?
IT DOES MATTER. THE ECONOMICS AND POLITICAL DESIRES OF THESE CLIENTS IS DESPOTIC. FUCK.
apu, i can see your point, and rem certainly has the awareness to know that cctv in particular is iconic (i hesitate to say symbolic). but that act of creating an icon is incredibly political and economic; therefore i'm not sure the form really deviates from the guiding conceptual principles of the design.
all i'm saying is that the weight of the project is grounded in the realities of its context. the form of the design is only relevant to the extent it affects these realities. after that, it's pure play.
anything that is big enough is by default iconic.
having a giant hole through it doesn't hurt either.
having a giant name, to design a giant building, for your giant company, to sell comercial space and appments at giant prices, in a city where the social/economical gap is giant, is something GIANT, i guess grupo Danhos could be named grupo GIANT after this year...before Bjarke Ingels reconsider BIG is not big enough for his studio name :P....oh wait a second!!, isnt Bjarke part of a recent generation of ex-OMAs?? i guess u cannot deny ur blood...
sorry this is in spanish, but i consider it quite interesting point of view, to all of you that can read/understand spanish (published aug-13-'07 at Reforma newspaper, mexico):
Bitramposaurio
Por Denise Dresser
(13-Ago-2007).-
Un proyecto que se vende como lo que no es. Una obra que se presenta como emblemática de la modernización cuando esconde todo lo que en México persiste para frenarla. Una torre erigida para conmemorar las fiestas nacionales cuyos principales beneficios irán a parar a manos de particulares. Como un aguijón clavado en el corazón de Chapultepec. Punzante. Hiriente. Lastimoso. Colocado allí por un gobierno que se dice vanguardista pero sugiere -tanto con la sede escogida, como con el proceso cuestionable para conseguirla- que aún no entiende cómo serlo. Setenta pisos de tergiversaciones; 300 metros de manipulaciones; 6 mil 500 cajones de estacionamiento cargados de contradicciones. Una trampa para la ciudad, para el PRD que la gobierna, para los ciudadanos que la habitan.
Edificio tramposo para el proceso democrático que el PRD dice defender. Porque hay mucho de la Torre que huele mal, se ve mal, corre en contra de la transparencia y los esfuerzos para fomentarla. Paso tras paso, declaración tras declaración, el proyecto revela todo aquello que lo hace criticable. La transmutación de políticos en desarrolladores; la metamorfosis de funcionarios públicos en constructores privados; la promoción gubernamental de un proyecto que indudablemente generará multimillonarias ganancias, pero no necesariamente para la ciudad. Y una izquierda que se presta a la legislación a modo; al "fast track", a los cambios que exigen un manojo de empresarios y sus amigos.
Obra tramposa para el Estado de Derecho que la ciudad y el país necesitan. Pocas cosas peores en este trance que contemplar el aval de Marcelo Ebrard a la "flexibilización" de la ley. Que ver las reglas generales reformadas para servir a intereses particulares. Que presenciar las normas de desarrollo urbano sacrificadas por quien ganaría credibilidad con el apego irrestricto a su aplicación. Ebrard aspira a presentarse como miembro de una izquierda distinta, pero su comportamiento en este tema indica que todo cambia para permanecer igual. La misma discrecionalidad, la misma opacidad, la misma manera de gobernar al Distrito Federal que contribuye a su retroceso en lugar de asegurar su avance.
Torre tramposa para los ciudadanos que acabarán subvencionando -de diversas maneras- una obra que hará más rico al Grupo Danhos, pero a costa de los capitalinos. Los ciudadanos que pagarán el precio de ceder 30 mil metros cuadrados del Bosque de Chapultepec. Los que acabarán otorgando plusvalía mediante el cambio del uso de suelo y las reglas de altura a un terreno que actualmente vale 15 millones de dólares y acabará valiendo 180 millones más. Los que contribuirán al negocio redondo que Jorge Gamboa de Buen, "en nombre de la Ciudad", hará para sus socios. Los que padecerán el desborde de 13 mil carros previstos y tan sólo 6 mil 500 lugares de estacionamiento prometidos. Los que sufrirán días de obras interminables, meses de vialidades congestionadas, años de remodelación exasperante.
Edificio cuyo espíritu y cuyo arquitecto contradicen una celebración de lo que México es y a dónde quiere llegar. Rem Koolhaas forma parte de la corriente arquitectónica basada en la premisa: "fuck the context". En pocas palabras, no le preocupa el contexto o el futuro del Distrito Federal o la calidad de vida de sus habitantes. Lo que importa es el edificio en sí y el modo de vida "moderno" que representa: el fin de la ciudad, el fin de la identidad, el fin de la comunidad. Un estadío donde según dice, "the city is to be superseded by Bigness" (la ciudad debe ser superada por lo Grande). Y en efecto, la torre será grande pero no necesariamente grandiosa. Será alta pero no particularmente hermosa. Será -sin duda- un edificio icónico, pero no de la mexicanidad sino de los esfuerzos de un nómada global por dejarla atrás. Koolhaas ha dicho que "la arquitectura no puede hacer lo que la cultura no quiere". Y si la cultura mexicana quiere celebrar 200 años, no debería aceptar la construcción de un edificio mal bautizado que la desdeña.
Ante este racimo de razones, el gobierno de Marcelo Ebrard se equivoca -y seriamente- al argumentar que quienes se oponen al proyecto lo hacen por "mezquindad política". Es cierto que unos y otros han usado el tema para combatir al perredismo en la capital y lo seguirán haciendo. Pero al margen de las batallas políticas, existen argumentos de fondo, preguntas legítimas, preocupaciones válidas, ciudadanos consternados y con razón. El gobierno del Distrito Federal haría mal en cerrar los ojos frente a ellos. Sobre todo cuando le urge diferenciarse del autismo ante muchas causas ciudadanas que demostró su predecesor. Sobre todo cuando necesita distanciarse de aquello que aqueja a la imagen del perredismo y contribuye a desacreditarlo.
Por ello, Marcelo Ebrard y el PRD en la capital necesitan pensar en las siguientes preguntas: si el objetivo es conmemorar el Bicentenario, ¿por qué no convocar a un concurso de arquitectos mexicanos de talla mundial -Enrique Norten, Ricardo Legorreta, Teodoro González de León, entre otros- para construir un edificio que promueva lo mejor de nosotros mismos? Si lo que se busca es colocar a la ciudad en el escenario internacional, ¿por qué no construir un centro cultural o un museo o una sala de conciertos al estilo de lo que se ha hecho en Dubai o Abu Dhabi? Si el objetivo de la Torre es el desarrollo de la zona, ¿por qué no cambiarla a un lugar que realmente lo requiere, como el área de Ejército Nacional? Si el objetivo del gobierno es mejorar la vialidad y combatir el desorden en Las Lomas, ¿por qué no se aboca a ello independientemente del proyecto propuesto? Si el objetivo es cambiar la faz del paisaje urbano, ¿por qué no hacerlo en un lugar menos conflictivo? Si el objetivo es generar empleos, ¿por qué no fomentar su creación en colonias del Distrito Federal que los necesiten más? Si la Torre es "en favor de la ciudad", ¿por qué sus beneficios están tan concentrados en tan pocas manos?
Hasta ahora, la respuesta a estas interrogantes ha sido la evasión o la descalificación. El manoseo de cifras que cambian y datos que se modifican a conveniencia. La apariencia de autoridades coludidas con empresarios rapaces. La proliferación de argumentos poco convincentes que ocultan grandes intereses. El desdén a la ciudadanía y el atropello a sus derechos. Todo aquello asociado con la peor manera de hacer política y de tomar decisiones sobre el desarrollo urbano. Y por eso, la Torre del Bicentenario no es -como argumenta Marcelo Ebrard- "un símbolo del futuro de la metrópoli". Más bien parece un símbolo del pasado y las trampas que todavía puede tender.
-------------------
*Denise Dresser es una reconocida periodista y académica mexicana, especialista en Ciencias Políticas. Estudió un doctorado en la Universidad de Princeton. Es también una periodista cuya obra gira en torno a la vida política de México. Es profesora de Ciencias Políticas en el Instituto Tecnológico Autónomo de México (ITAM) y es autora de varios trabajos académicos especializados sobre la política mexicana y las relaciones entre México y los Estados Unidos.
Como periodista, escribe una columna en el Diario Reforma y en el Semanario Proceso y participó en programas de televisión como es el caso del programa El cristal con que se mira en el segmento de "La mesa de los periodistas" en la cadena Televisa, o haciendo comentarios editoriales en El Noticiero con Joaquín López-Dóriga. También ha sido analista de la Mesa Política de Radio Monitor con José Gutiérrez Vivó y es articulista de la Revista Proceso
Denise Dresser contribuye frecuentemente como experta en varios medios estadounidenses. Dresser ha sido visitante académica en el "Pacific Council on International Policy" de la Universidad de California.
Ha expresado su abierta oposición a las prácticas monopólicas en México, especialmente en contra de la llamada Ley Televisa, que según ella favorece el duopolio televisivo de Grupo Televisa y TV Azteca, y en contra de Carlos Slim, el magnate más poderoso del país que aglutina la casi totalidad de la red telefónica mexicana .
Here's the above, by way of Babelfish:
A project that is sold like which is not. A work that appears like emblematic of the modernization when it hides everything what in Mexico it persists to restrain it. An erected tower to commemorate the national celebrations whose main benefits will stop at hands of individuals. Like a sting nailed in the heart of Chapultepec. Sharp. Hiriente. Pitiful. Placed there by a government who is said vanguardista but suggests as much - with the selected seat, like with the questionable process for conseguirla- that not yet understands how to be it. Seventy floors of distortions; 300 meters of manipulations; 6 thousand 500 loaded drawers of parking of contradictions. A trap for the city, for the PRD that the weathervane, the citizens who inhabit it. Cheating building for the democratic process that the PRD says to defend. Because there is much of the Tower that smells bad, it is bad, it runs against the transparency and the efforts to foment it. Passage after step, declaration after declaration, the project reveals everything what it makes criticizeable. The transmutación of politicians in developer; the metamorphosis of officials government in private constructors; the governmental promotion of a project that doubtlessly will generate multimillionaires gains, but not necessarily for the city. And a left that is lent to the legislation to way; to "fast track", to the changes that demand a handful of industralists and its friends. Cheating work for the State of Right that the city and the country need. Few worse things in this critical moment than to contemplate the endorsement of Marcelo Ebrard to the "relaxation" of the law. That to see the general rules reformed to serve particular interests. That to be present at the sacrificed norms of urban development by that would gain credibility with the unrestricted attachment to its application. Ebrard aspires to appear like member of a different left, but its behavior in this subject indicates that everything changes to remain equal. The same discretion, the same opacity, the same way to govern to the Federal District that contributes to its backward movement instead of assuring its advance. Cheating tower for the citizens who will end up subsidizing - of diverse ways a work that the Danhos Group will make richer, but at the cost of the inhabitants of the capital. The citizens who will pay the price to yield 30 thousand square meters of the Forest of Chapultepec. Those that will end up granting capital gain by means of the change of the ground use and the rules of height to a land that at the moment is worth 15 million dollars and will end up being worth 180 million more. Those that will contribute to the round business that Jorge Gamboa de Buen, "in name of the City", will do for his partners. Those that will suffer the overflowing of 13 thousand predicted cars and only 6 thousand 500 engaged hardstandings. Those that will undergo days of interminable works, months of congested roads, years of exasperante remodeling. Building whose spirit and whose architect contradicts a celebration of which Mexico is and to where it wants to arrive. Rem Koolhaas comprises of the architectonic current based on the premise: "fuck the context". Briefly, to the context or about the Federal District or the quality of life of its inhabitants does not worry to him the future. What matters is the building in himself and "the modern" way of life that represents: the aim of the city, the aim of the identity, the aim of the community. Estadío where according to it says, "the City is to be superseded by Bigness" (the city must be surpassed by the Great thing). And in effect, the tower will be great but not necessarily huge. She will be high but not particularly beautiful. It will be - without doubt an iconic building, but of the mexicanidad but of the efforts of a global nomad not to leave it back. Koolhaas has said that "the architecture cannot do what the culture does not want". And if the Mexican culture wants to celebrate 200 years, it would not have to accept the construction of a building badly baptized that scorns it. Before this cluster of reasons, the government of Marcelo Ebrard is mistaken - and seriously when arguing that that is against the project they do it by "political meanness". It is certain that and others have used the subject to fight to the perredismo in the capital and they will continue it doing. But to the margin of the political battles, arguments of bottom, legitimate questions, valid preoccupations exist, citizen consternados and with reason. The government of the Federal District would make bad in closing the eyes them in front of. Mainly when he is urgent to him to be different itself from the autismo before many citizen causes that his predecessor demonstrated. Mainly when he needs to be distanced of what aqueja to the image of the perredismo and contributes to discredit it. For that reason, Marcelo Ebrard and the PRD in the capital need to think about the following questions: if the objective is to commemorate the Bicentennial, why not to summon to an aid of Mexican architects of world-wide stature - Enrique Norten, Ricardo Legorreta, Teodoro González of Leon, among others to construct a building that promotes the best thing of we ourself? If what looks for is to place to the city in the international scene, why not to construct to a cultural center or a museum or a concert hall in the style of which one has become in Dubai or Abu Dhabi? If the objective of the Tower is the development of the zone, why not to change it to a place that really requires it, like the area of National army? If the objective of the government is to improve the road and to fight the disorder in the Hills, why is not led it of the proposed project independently? If the objective is to change the face of the urban landscape, why not to do it in a less conflicting place? If the objective is to generate uses, why not to foment its creation in colonies of the Federal District that need more? If the Tower is "in please the city", why its benefits so are concentrated in so few hands? Until now, the answer to these questions has been the evasion or the disqualification. I handle of numbers that they change and data that are modified to convenience. The appearance of authorities coludidas with industralists rapaces. The proliferation of little convincing arguments that hide great interests. The disdain to the citizenship and the upsetting to its rights. All that associate with the worse way to make policy and to make decisions on the urban development. And for that reason, the Tower of the Bicentennial is not - as a symbol of the future of the metropolis argues Marcelo Ebrard- "". Rather it seems a symbol of the past and the traps that still can tend. * Denise Dresser is one recognized Mexican, specialistic academic journalist and in Political Sciences. It studied a doctorate in the University of Princeton. She is also a journalist whose work turns around the political life of Mexico. She is professor of Political Sciences in the Independent Technological Institute of Mexico (ITAM) and is author of several academic works specialized on the Mexican policy and the relations between Mexico and the United States. Like journalist, a column writes in the Reformation Newspaper and the Weekly Process and participated in television programs as the crystal is the case of the program whereupon it is watched in the segment of "the table of the journalists" in the Television chain, or commening out publishing in the Reporter with Joaquin Lopez-Do'riga. Also she has been analyst of Political Mesa of Radio Monitor with Jose Gutiérrez Vivó and is contributor of the Magazine Process Denise Dresser contributes frequently like expert in several average Americans. Dresser has been academic visitor in the "Pacific Council on International Policy" of the University of California. It has expressed his open opposition to the monopolistic practices in Mexico, specially against the call Television Law, that according to her favors duopolio televising of Television Group and Aztec TV, and against Carlos Slim, the most powerful tycoon of the country that almost agglutinates the totality of the Mexican wire net.in a way aside form the discourse, I am troubled by the fact that they call this "the tallest structure in LATIN AMERICA" when in fact, MEXICO is part of North America, not Latin America, which usually is used in reference to South America (since most of the latin nations reside there). You never hear then saying that Central America equates Latin America, so how in the heck is Mexico Latin America?? I just really want this clarified.
Aside from that, I don't have a problem with the project. Like it was said above, it doesnt seem (at these stages) as though it would be an icon of a bldg/structure that would be on my "to go see" list, hence, it's just another bldg by a large/well established firm using it's "muscle" to generate some interest.
(that's my $.02 cents)
Punky....I would say one is a breast man the other an ass man....
By its geographical location, Mexico is part of NORTH AMERICA from the Itsmo de Tehuantepec (between the areas of state of Tabasco and Oaxaca, or if u preffer parallels 15 to 20) to th north, and from the same point to the south (states of Oaxaca, Tabasco, Campeche, Yucatan, Quintana Roo, Chiapas) is part of CENTRAL AMERICA, but the whole country at the same time is part of what is called LATIN AMERICA, which at the same time is part of America the continent... so yeah a lot of miss-uses of terms and names in this continent it seems...
from WIKIPEDIA: Latin America (Portuguese and Spanish América Latina, French: Amérique Latine) is the region of the Americas where Romance languages, those derived from Latin (particularly Spanish and Portuguese), are primarily spoken. Latin America is contrasted with the lesser known term Anglo-America, that region of the Americas where English predominates.
...Strictly speaking, Latin America designates all those countries and territories in the Americas where Romance languages (i.e. languages derived from Latin, and hence the name of Latin America) are spoken: Spanish, Portuguese, but also French, and their creoles. Indeed, this was the original intent when the term was coined by the French. This would then include former French colonies such as Quebec in Canada, Haiti, Martinique and Guadeloupe in the Caribbean, and French Guiana in South America.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_America
yuk!, babelfish really dont make good translations...but hopefully someone can understand a bit...thanx
Thanks MADianito......
It's good to get the clarification, even to a certain extent I have heard/known of some of this. My reasoning for the question, was out of shear need to educate those out there, and not let them continue to believe in things they have 'heard' vs the history/and or facts behind it.
In any event thanks!!
actually I think babelfish did okay with this:
"the city must be surpassed by the Great thing"
it's hard to read, but it's poetry.
but to the margin of the political battles
arguments of bottom
legitimate questions
valid preoccupations exist
citizen consternados
and with reason
Hey MADianato,
Are you entering the bicentenario plaza competition? Maybe we should set up a discussion about this one...
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.