Apologies if this has already been discussed, if so merge it in, otherwise.... discuss!

The architect Ken Woolley has gone one better, with a proposal that would allow the Opera House complex to stage the grandest of grand operas without remaking either the opera theatre or concert hall. His idea is to build a 1800-seat opera theatre next to the Opera House, partly over the harbour and partly into the Botanic Gardens. He says this could be done for $400 million.

Woolley admits his idea will not appeal to all. "Some critics will feel it compromises Utzon's original vision, while others will say it just will not work … It does demand courage. Only the brave would dare build something near the sacred monument."



http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/its-time-to-take-the-opera-out-of-the-opera-house/2008/03/21/1205602658555.html

http://www.smh.com.au/images/gr_opera.jpg

Plans & Eles

http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2008/03/25/kenwoolleyplan_wideweb__470x365,0.jpg

And link to flythrough.......

http://www.smh.com.au/multimedia/2008/national/opera-house-theatre/operahouse.html

Of all people- ex Prime Minister Paul Keating has his say......

This place is no site for a structure of the kind proposed by Ken Woolley as illustrated on the front page of Saturday's Herald. Viewed from the most advantageous place, Mrs Macquaries Chair, or the wider Botanical Gardens, it would present as an ungainly and all too proximate appendage to the great composition. And from the harbour it would appear as some giant garage at the rear of the house; or a large, lookalike auditorium.

Right now, the Opera House is approachable on foot from either the city or the gardens. You can stroll up to it, where all of a sudden it reveals its majesty: you do not have to work your way around or have your vista obliterated by another building.

A giant box dropped into this space, I believe, has absolutely no merit. And to provide a theatre on the scale proposed by Woolley would need to be much larger, far larger than that illustrated in the Herald. A major auditorium will look like a major auditorium.

Woolley is an esteemed member of the architectural fraternity of Sydney. And justifiably so. Many of his works have added to the common stock of this city. But what he is proposing for the forecourt of the Opera House and the foot of the gardens has more to do with landscape, composition and aesthetics than it has to do with architecture.

Utzon has done the architecture and his building sits harmoniously in its space.

Any changes to be considered for the future should first and foremost be considered only in Utzon's terms.


http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/keep-your-mitts-off/2008/03/24/1206207010875.html

Paul saved me a post when he said it would present as an ungainly and all too proximate appendage to the great composition. And from the harbour it would appear as some giant garage at the rear of the house; or a large, lookalike auditorium.

If it smells like a piece of crap, and looks like a piece of crap, then is it?

HELL NO PLEASE that is digusting

:badnews:

Surely, stick this at the end of Barangaroo and let it 'echo' the opera house from the other side of the bridge.

Best bit is Ken saying it is brave of him to do something like this.

Brave is one word..... dumb is another ;)

there is another thread in main section about this proposal, but i think sydney section can do with its own thread.

If this gets built the government should be tried for vandalism of a world heritage site.

http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2008/03/25/operahouseartist_wideweb__470x351,0.jpg

The curtain is finally up on the interior vision conceived by the original architect, writes Joyce Morgan.

THIS is what it could be: an interior as dramatic as the Sydney Opera House's world famous exterior white shells.

The bands of red and gold across a new ceiling, on walls and above the stage, are part of the bold vision for a refurbished Opera Theatre.

This is the vision conceived by the original architect, Joern Utzon, who is working in conjunction with Sydney's Richard Johnson.

Red and gold are the traditional colours for opera house interiors - with their red velvet drapes and ornate gilt plasterwork. But the colours are given an elegant reworking.

The red and gold interior is the most obvious change envisioned for the Opera House should the planned refurbishment go ahead.

But most of the changes will not be visible to the public. And that is where the political challenge lies. Is the public prepared to pay in the vicinity of $700 million for changes it might hear - for most of the changes are to address the acoustics - but mostly cannot see?

After all, for that sort of money it could get a new hospital. Or a new opera house.

Debate has raged this week about whether Sydney should build just that, with the architect Ken Woolley proposing a new house near the Botanic Gardens.

Richard Evans, the newly installed head of the Opera House, said he welcomed the discussion but would not be drawn on the merits of the Woolley plan. Evans has arrived at the Opera House just as the problems that have beset it for years - including poor sound, sight lines and lack of wings space in the Opera Theatre - are reaching a critical point.

"This is a key cultural asset which is getting to the end of its useful life. It needs to be refurbished," said Evans. "But it is a big project and of national and international significance. It's a World Heritage site and a major tourist asset and we don't take the work lightly. It's not a project that can be rushed."

The Utzon/Johnson plans have been closely guarded - indeed these two images are the first glimpse - although the two main users of the Opera Theatre, Opera Australia and the Australian Ballet, have had detailed discussions about their needs over several years.

The plans involve closing the Opera Theatre - one of the five main performing venues in the Opera House - for up to three years to address the mechanical, backstage and acoustic problems, including the problematic pit. The new theatre would have improved sight lines and offer better access, including better disabled access.

Yet as the Utzon/Johnson plans are on the drawing board, comes the vastly different proposal by Woolley.

While the plan has been slammed by the former prime minister Paul Keating, the idea is worth considering, says a leading arts figure, Noel Staunton, head of the Sydney Dance Company.

"The reality is none of us have really seen the detailed plans for the Opera House," said Staunton. "When the industry sees the detailed plans we'll be able to make a valid judgment about whether - if all this money is going to be spent - it solves the problem. And if it doesn't solve the problem, how do you solve it?

"If it doesn't solve the problem, another theatre on the same site could be a very good idea. Because people will say they're going to the Opera House and if they're going to building one, two or three doesn't make any difference … At the end of the day, you want to hear a proper orchestra and see the same scale works you do in Melbourne and Adelaide and Brisbane and be able to do grand opera."

The Herald's architecture critic, Elizabeth Farrelly, believes a new opera house has merit, but not on the Botanic Gardens site. East Darling Harbour - or Barangaroo - is an ideal site, she said.

"Putting it next to the Opera House is not the way to go. You can't do anything but compete so you end up doing a self-effacing building which is not what you want for an opera house. You want something grand … You want to feel like you need to get dressed up in diamonds and furs, you don't want to feel like you just go in your jeans and thongs. The building has to give you that sense of occasion."

But firmly opposed to a new house is the theatre's main user, Opera Australia. Adrian Collette said his preferred option is to rebuild the Opera Theatre - despite all the difficulties this would entail.

"The Opera House effectively subsidises the production of opera nationally and within the state companies. If we didn't have the attraction of this extraordinary building, we wouldn't have that," said Collette.

He is confident the refurbishment plans address the venue's problems and will provide long-term sustainability for the art form.

"I would have far fewer sleepless nights if some alternative venue was built, but we feel so strongly [about the venue] that we are prepared to take on the challenge of holding the company together for the three or four years we're out of the House," says Collette.

Meanwhile, a spokesman for the Premier, Morris Iemma, said the Opera House should be used for its original purpose as a centrepiece for the performing arts. Work is under way to look at how to resolve problems that resulted from the 1967 decision to use the small hall for opera and ballet, rather than the larger venue, now the Concert Hall.

"This project has the potential to be a massive undertaking, and there must be careful consideration of all the options. This is happening," said the spokesman. "Suggestions that a new venue would be the best solution need to consider a number of factors including the viability and sustainability of having two, potentially competing, venues."

But while discussion in recent days has centred on whether there should be a new venue for opera, the reality is Sydney already has two - aside from the Opera House.

The Capitol and Star City are both capable of mounting operas. But with rare exceptions, no one wants to use them for that. Why not? Quite simply there's no getting away from the magical - and box office - pull of the Sydney Opera House. The rainbow that tapped Sydney on the shoulder, as Keating called Utzon's masterpiece, still has a pot of gold at the end of it.
A TROUBLED ICON

1955 The NSW premier, Joe Cahill, announces an opera house will be built at Bennelong Point.

1957 The Danish architect Joern Utzon wins the international design competition. The initial estimate of the cost of the Sydney Opera House is £3.5 million.

1958 Demolition starts at Bennelong Point.

1959 Cahill lays foundation stone.

1963 Utzon and his family move to Sydney.

1964 Cost revised to £17.5 million, with completion estimated by March 1967. Stage machinery and lighting arrive from Europe.

1965 Conflict between Utzon and newly elected conservative coalition led by Robert Askin, with Davis Hughes the minister for public works.

1966 Hughes refuses to pay Utzon's outstanding fees, forcing Utzon's letter of withdrawal in February. In April, the Sydney architects Hall, Todd and Littlemore are named to complete the project. Utzon leaves Australia on April 28.

1973 The Opera House is opened by the Queen on October 20. The final cost is $100 million.

1998 Utzon approached to see if he will collaborate on renovation plans.

1999 Utzon officially re-engaged as a design consultant working with his son, Jan, and the Sydney architect Richard Johnson.

2002 The Utzon Design Principles, Joern Utzon's guidelines explaining his original conception, are released, providing a framework for future renovations.

2003 Joern Utzon is awarded the Pritzker Prize for the Sydney Opera House; Jan accepts the prize in Madrid on behalf of his father.

2007 Opera House declared a World Heritage site and a masterpiece of 20th-century architecture.

If this gets built the government should be tried for vandalism of a world heritage site.

Of course it didn't stop them building the toaster on its fucking doorstep. Everytime I look at that thing I think it's about the attack the Opera House.

People loathed Bennelong Apartments but Sydneysiders love it now. It has revitalised East Circular Quay with great restaurants, shopping and even a cinema. Great part of town.

They had the good sense to use the Harbour tunnel machines to dig the spiral carpark for the Oprea House. They could continue that idea with a large theatre, cut down into rock behind the Man O war steps It could be landscaped and covered up with grass like they did with the Con extensions just up the road. A box or pyramid - like the Louvre - could be installed next to Government Hse to allow light and space for the stage equipment. The two could be linked underground below the SOH forcourt.

People loathed Bennelong Apartments but Sydneysiders love it now. It has revitalised East Circular Quay with great restaurants, shopping and even a cinema. Great part of town.

Not all Sydneysiders, mate. It's WAY too close to the Opera house steps and it sells nothing but up-market tat for yuppies. I mean, fine, if you want to pay four dollars for a coffee then buy a fake Chagall print? The building remains a monument to the greed of the state government and it's crappy late-80s/early 90s tatty marble design is already looking dated.

I actually don't mind the Toaster. I think if it was left undeveloped then the Opera House would feel more removed from the city if you had walk through a baron area to get to it. Whilst it is a great building, we can't put it on too much of a pedestal and leave it feeling lonely.
I am sure there were and still could be better designs for the Toaster, but for now I think it is fine. I also think the cafe/restuarants are fine, whilst they are not to everyone's budget, at the end of the day they are catering for the tourist dollar, and locals going there would know that it will be more expensive than other's in Sydney, so that is your choice whether to go. I also know that I would rather have up market cafes there than some cheap cafe that would probably look tacky and cheap. After all this area is near the Opera House and generally the market that go to Opera's will not mind paying $4 for a coffee.

Nice article. I say redevelop the SOH to it's original specs AND build a new building at EDH. Win:win. The building at the EDH can be a concert hall if the it gets shifted in the redev. Anything built on the edge of the hungry mile near the water will be a spectacular venue regardless of design (even tho i'm sure it will be iconic).

^^^^
Great idea zulu. Move the ent cent up there as well.

Nice article. I say redevelop the SOH to it's original specs AND build a new building at EDH. Win:win. The building at the EDH can be a concert hall if the it gets shifted in the redev. Anything built on the edge of the hungry mile near the water will be a spectacular venue regardless of design (even tho i'm sure it will be iconic).

I don't know why the State Government isnt examining a second opera house for Sydney. I am not saying that the Sydney Opera House is inadequate, but we need a venue that can cater to all types of theatrical productions.

Would the Opera House lose its standing as a great opera house - no. It's iconic status is guaranteed. It will cater for more specific productions, operas and audiences. It will always be intimate as well.

The western colonnade is finished: Farrelley's take:-

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/still-waiting-for-that-moment-or-did-utzon-have-the-last-laugh-after-all-20091116-iibl.html

The halls needs fixing. Acoustics is terrible.

That's the plan but mega million $ needed.

sorry i have no sources but i think i read it in afr that the opera house authority (name?) couldnt gain funding for the total revamp project so was settling for cheaper options.. any news???

Yeah, there is no news. In the current political climate, as they say, no political party has the balls to suggest spending a large amount on the SOH interior renovation. Governments have always, historically, borrowed to pay for large development projects, but these days even the suggestion that $10 might be borrowed sends just about everyone into an hysterical meltdown. This is just plain unintelligent: how many people can afford to pay for a house or apartment without borrowing funds? Ditto governments.