The 600 seats in question only concern 10-meter platform events, which start Monday. Small portions of the dives may not be visible. The Zaha Hadid-designed Aquatics Centre features a dipping roof that limits viewing from the highest seats. — sfgate.com
30 Comments
What the F**k! So Zaha missed the most important part of a performance venue! Sight lines!
if you read the designers' statement, it makes a lot more sense. they were contracted to provide appropriate (non-compromised) seating for a certain number of spectators at diving events, they provided even more than required, and - since there were even MORE seats available in the space, these intended for swimming events - the ticketing agency just went ahead and sold those too!
the compromised views were never meant to be seating for diving events.
the ticketing agency screwed this up but, as usual, the architect over-performs and gets slapped down for it.
admin, i sort of think that this headline should be modified. or at least include ZHA's statement so that it's not so damning.
Steven, isn't the architect supposed to keep possible future screw-ups, even if they are related to operations?
I think this is more like an extra stairway with risers too tall. you can tell the code official that this stairway is not required by code so it doesn't have to meet egress requirements, but they're likely to tell you that if people see a stair they are going to use the stair, and it is required to meet egress requirements anyway. in that scenario, the architect didn't go out of their way to make extra stairways and they didn't over-perform; they overlooked what is, by contemporary standards, a safety risk.
Architect as ticketsales personnel?
Client asks for 5,000 seats for swimming and diving. The architect provides the 5,000 plus an additional 3,000 seats for post-olympics swimming events.
Instead, the ticket sales office sells all the seats for a diving event without looking over the design brief. Out of all those additional seats very few of them have partially obstructed views of the dives, but all of them can see the entire pool.
They could make the seating 7,500 and be ok.This problem is not exclusive to ZHA, rails and columns are the usual suspects of obstructed views, something this design doesn't have.
Similar, curt, except that viewing isn't a safety issue. We're held far more accountable for safety than we are for optimal function.
it's not at ALL like an extra stair not meeting code.
if you build a swimming venue for 10,000 spectators (idk actual number) which ALSO has to accommodate 5,000 spectators for diving events, the ticketing model is supposed to be built around those same specs. it's not in the least bit unusual for venues that serve different uses to have different seat counts. my wife, when working for a promoter, had to built different seat models for each performance at each venue. for any knowledgeable ticketing agency this should be old hat.
sometimes, if it's an important/desirable enough show, you sell tickets with obstructed views, but you tell the buyers in advance and usually charge less. people will buy these. (some people don't care if lenny kravitz's marshall stack keeps them from seeing the keyboardist.)
the ticketing agency, in this case, oversold. probably intentionally. without telling anyone about the potential for obstructed views. and ZHA gets the blame.
I keep trying to write something intelligent about why I hate this building but I give up: the downward slope of the ceiling makes no sense in a stadium. Temporary stands or not, the sagging roof just looks ridiculous, even if it is a pretty shape form the exterior of the building.
Steven does have a wife in the ticket business, so yes, what he said.
Zaha gave them more than was requested, it sounds like, and then someone either misunderstood or got greedy.
Whenever I purchase tickets for an event that has assigned seating, I try to dig up a seating chart to check out sight-lines and such, but this is usually a futile exercise since no venue will provide the ROOF DIPPING CHART! This is not Zaha's fault. It's the greedy venue that hides the fact from public that all roofs awkwardly dip like that. Fuck those guys. AND LEASE ZAHA ALONE!!!
Well, to fill my continuing role as spoiler/curmudgeon here, I wouldn't let Zaha off so easily. Yes, technically she gave the client what was asked for, and I agree about the greed of the ticketing agency, but I've been closely watching all the camera shots during the swimming competition and have looked at other photos of the arena and I think that swooping down ceiling is a bad design move.
The seats she provided technically all have a view of the water, but it appears that many of them have no views across to the rest of the arena, no complete view of your fellow spectators and what they are doing, which is also a part of being at a sporting event ("look, the other side is doing the wave" or "look at that sign that guy is holding"). You can even see that in the picture above. To me that whale hump curve seems like an exercise in clausthrophobia and separation and is used in the wrong place and for no apparent functional reason (and I'll grant that my sense of that is not informed by actually being inside the place).
" no complete view of your fellow spectators "
17500 seats for the olympics and 2500 in legacy mode... and 600 seats have partially obstucted views. Seems like a nonissue really.
I get your point, Rusty, I mostly don't want to look at the freakazoids either, but your nice collage is also the point: I'm very suspicious of our illustrious species when we're gathered in large numbers in one place, and if a riot is starting on the other side of the arena (I know, this ain't soccer) I'd kind of like to see it with my own eyes.
The other point is that Zaha felt the need to intrude visually with her architecture on the space at all times...you know, her ego just won't tolerate that the events take precedence over her design. I could probably go check it out myself next time I'm in London just to confirm some of this, but there's so many other things to do and see that I don't think Zaha's thing will get any attention from me, and by then it'll probably be shuttered and unused like most other old Olympic venues.
The other point is that domed stadiums feel the need to intrude visually with their spectators on the space at all times...you know, domed egos just won't tolerate that the events take precedence over seeing british spectators. I could probably go check out a stadium myself next time I'm in London just to confirm some of this, but there's so many other things to do and see that I don't think domed spaces will get any attention from me, and by then it'll probably be shuttered and unused like most other old Olympic venues.
The other point is that anonn stadiums feel the need to intrude visually with their spectators on the space at all times...you know, anonn egos just won't tolerate that the events take precedence over ldsfd jkdierr-=3 fooie97j. anonn could probably go check out his belly button lint next time he's in London just to confirm some of this, but there's so many other things to do and see that I don't think anonn spaces will get any attention from birds, and by then it'll probably be annon.
L'autre point est que sensation de stades d'anonn la nécessité de s'imposer visuellement avec leurs spectateurs sur l'espace à tout moment… que vous connaissez, des moi d'anonn juste ne tolérera pas que les événements ont la priorité au-dessus du ldsfd jkdierr-=3 fooie97j. l'anonn pourrait aller probablement contrôle dehors sa fibre de bouton de ventre la fois prochaine qu'il est à Londres juste pour confirmer une partie de ceci, mais il y a ainsi beaucoup d'autres choses pour faire et voir que je ne pense pas que les espaces d'anonn obtiendra n'importe quelle attention des oiseaux, et d'ici là ce seront probablement annon.
Der andere Punkt ist, daß Gefühl von Eselsfüllenstufen die Notwendigkeit, mich sichtlich zu jeder Zeit mit ihren Zuschauern auf dem Raum aufzudrängen…, daß Sie kennen, mich von gerechtem Eselsfüllen nicht tolerieren werde, daß die Ereignisse die Priorität über dem ldsfd haben jkdierr-=3 fooie97j. das Eselsfüllen könnte wahrscheinliche Kontrolle draußen gehen seine Faser des Bauchknopfes das nächste Mal, daß er in London soeben ist, um einen Teil von dies zu bestätigen, aber es gibt so viele andere Sachen, um dafür zu sorgen und zu sehen, daß ich nicht denke, daß die Eselsfüllenräume irgendeine Beachtung der Vögel erhalten wird, und bis dahin werden es wahrscheinliches Eselsfüllen sein.
Emilio, I think you raise a valid point about the general use/pleasure of large spectator events. The non-disclosed obstructed view ticket sales is still in no way Zaha's fault, but I like your take on it.
Rusty that gif is Olympic Gold!
In Rusty we trust.
Thanks, Donna, and just to clarify, I don't hate the building, it's not bad. From one angle it's a bit reminiscent of Saarinen's TWA Terminal. And I'll revise what I said: I would actually try to check it out if I were in the neighborhood, never having visited a Hadid building in the flesh. I was just talking about the bump-down inside and that only from TV shots and photos.
^agreed with above, it's a pretty building but that droopy ceiling is just bad - and looking at the sections it seems a deliberate formal move, not a structural or otherwise neccessary move
.
.
way up in the illegal zone
and just because I'm still awake...
The ceiling bulge reflects the asymmetrical divide between the diving and swimming areas, its purpose is not exclusive to singular notions like structure, form, or program. It blends these things, that is its deeper purpose.
This project exemplifies the struggle between getting a unique design built (perhaps a variation of Saarinen in that his building was more monomaterial), and those who wants to impose conventional profit models on design intent. Its not always a problem but in this case someone crossed a line.
This is merely someone trying to milk the architect again, going low enough to pull a publicity stunt and it finally caught up to them. No one would be asking to raise the ceiling if more seats weren't shoved in, and I think ZH made sure that they would be clear of any wrong-doing if this was to occur. This is especially evident when you look at the original renderings for the project, which was better IMO.
It's important to read between the lines in these situations, as far as I'm concerned the ticket agents can remove those seats and save the drama for TMZ.
Thanks for that view from the illegal seats, email!
Ugh, that view of the exterior is not graceful at all, IMO. I hope there are better sides!
Ok, Donna, I've solved why the exterior is not graceful, which I thought it was when I had seen the original rendering: the extra seats don't only ruin the interior, they mess up the exterior as well. This article gave it away:
"The Zaha Hadid-designed Aquatics Centre will have a capacity for 17,500 spectators during the Games, reduced to a maximum of 2,500 post-Games. The two clumsy wings on either side (which house additional seating but detract from the centre’s visually pleasing wave shape) will take 10 months to dismantle, after which the centre will provide two 50m swimming pools for public use, doubling the number of Olympic-size pools in London."
As you can see in this comparison, the top photo is what it should look like, after those stupid tack-on straight sections are removed:
...and also answers the question of the interior...I'm sure the drop down curve will work just fine with the original seat layout back to 2,500. And I would go out of my way to see the top building, not so much the bottom.
And, based on that article, I also take back the comment about the aquatics center being eventually empty and unused. It's nice to see that London did some thinking about this for a change.
Wow! Thanks for that background, Emilio. It is lovely in the rendering!
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.