SkyscraperCity banner
1 - 20 of 57 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,982 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Scope of works:

Application for the erection of temporary structures for the purposes of hosting Olympic and Paralympic Games at the Olympic Hockey and Paralympic Football Centre, details being:

1. Laying of temporary surfaces in back of house areas
2. Installation of a temporary Hockey/Football 7-a-side pitch and erection of a 16,000 seat stadium for the purposes of the Olympic Hockey event and Paralympic Football 7-a-side event
3. Installation of a temporary warm-up Hockey/Football 5-a-side pitch and erection of a 3,000 seat stadium for the purposes of the Paralympic Football 5-a-side event
4. Erection of temporary front of house structures
5. Erection of temporary back of house structures
6. Erection of temporary security fence
7. Associated temporary ground works and utility connections in the area forming the application site
8. Laying of surface water conduits
9. Construction of hard paved concourse areas to provide pedestrian circulation
10. Laying out of open space hardworks
11. Laying out of open space softworks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,724 Posts
So they're not going to bother wrapping these stands either? wow, austerity isn't the word! Let's hope when the renders of the final design are a little more appealing, drawings never give me a sense of final projects *fingers crossed*
 

·
actual gherkin
Joined
·
13,931 Posts
Great to see some hand drawings in an architectural presentation! I'm bored with 3dsMax renderings. The design though looks pretty shocking, but certainly something to be expected from a temporary stadium focusing on a bit on a non-event.

The emphasis of the drawings is on the surrounding landscape - the trees and the canal. Hiding an ugly building with trees is one of the oldest tricks in the book... and people usually fall for it :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,982 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
This is a failure on so many levels.

Nobody can disput the temporary stands. They can't look much different, and I am in no way suggesting a different temporary stand design.

BUT from design, to access, to the layout, its all just ridiculous.

Spectators entering basically along the side of the warm up track?
No roof?
No seating at the second field? What happens when the schedule is a bit messed up and they need to use both fields...16,000 seats at the on, 100 at the other?
Is a media area really necessary adjacent to the IBC and MPC?
Can't the stands be wrapped in a similar fashion to the Water Polo venue?
Where is the branding?
Which part of this design acknowledges the setting?

Why are temporary buildings spread out around the site?
Can't concession be integrated into the temporary stands as they have before? Why must the block views across the park?

Is that roof really sufficient for media using laptops, computers, equipment?
Why is the back of house layout so inconsistent with the guidelines of previous Games?


Its a bit of a mess.
 

·
Ho hum
Joined
·
2,936 Posts
This is a failure on so many levels.

Nobody can disput the temporary stands. They can't look much different, and I am in no way suggesting a different temporary stand design.

BUT from design, to access, to the layout, its all just ridiculous.

Spectators entering basically along the side of the warm up track?
No roof?
No seating at the second field? What happens when the schedule is a bit messed up and they need to use both fields...16,000 seats at the on, 100 at the other?
Is a media area really necessary adjacent to the IBC and MPC?
Can't the stands be wrapped in a similar fashion to the Water Polo venue?
Where is the branding?
Which part of this design acknowledges the setting?

Why are temporary buildings spread out around the site?
Can't concession be integrated into the temporary stands as they have before? Why must the block views across the park?

Is that roof really sufficient for media using laptops, computers, equipment?
Why is the back of house layout so inconsistent with the guidelines of previous Games?


Its a bit of a mess.
Don't worry - it'll never get past CABE looking like that!!



...oh!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,982 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
Don't worry - it'll never get past CABE looking like that!!



...oh!
you forget the IBC got through CABE after they were paid to be nicer once they added "squares" to the facade.

Architect: presenting the IBC..MPC
CABE: horrible, its a shed, hideous, we are concerned, horrific
Architect: add squares to IBC, add yellow panels to MPC
CABE: ok we are now happy.

and out the door went CABE's credibility
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,982 Posts
Discussion Starter · #11 ·
Of course it is, but how does one trust the opinion of a body which totally rips apart a building, and when squares are added, do a complete u-turn and are satisfied...?

They then redeem themselves with their reviews of Tottenham Court Station, the Aquatic Centre landscaping, and Water Polo arena.
 

·
Ho hum
Joined
·
2,936 Posts
Of course it is, but how does one trust the opinion of a body which totally rips apart a building, and when squares are added, do a complete u-turn and are satisfied...?

They then redeem themselves with their reviews of Tottenham Court Station, the Aquatic Centre landscaping, and Water Polo arena.
Sadly with CABE, the quality of the review always varied with the individuals you get doing the reviewing.

I had one scheme where the 'lead' reviewer was someone we'd beaten in the competition to do the scheme they were reviewing. They went first with the comments along the lines of "I wouldn't have done it like that", which clouded the whole review.

Still a real shame that they've been culled though. They were still a force for good.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
28,982 Posts
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Sadly with CABE, the quality of the review always varied with the individuals you get doing the reviewing.

I had one scheme where the 'lead' reviewer was someone we'd beaten in the competition to do the scheme they were reviewing. They went first with the comments along the lines of "I wouldn't have done it like that", which clouded the whole review.

Still a real shame that they've been culled though. They were still a force for good.
Well I'm glad you agree because I thought I was going mad reading CABE's first comment on the IBC and then there second review after the "squares"...well rectangles to be correct.

Then you get the Water Polo venue where they actually understand what they are talking about and making meaningful suggestions to the architectural quality and clarity of the venue.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,724 Posts
do they mean the temporary hockey stadium, or the purpose built one in Eton Manor?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,258 Posts
Hey at this rate why not get Southend FC to move into the Aquatic Centre! In fact just sell of the whole project to football, obviously that's the only way the future is now.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,724 Posts
I thought Orient were annoyed that Spurs/West Ham will be moving in and 'encroaching their territory', wont moving into the hockey stadium just mean they'll be even closer to the olympic stadium?
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
20,259 Posts
I just think it's Barry Hearn looking for even more attention. He's already made his feelings well known about Tottenham or West Ham (especially West Ham) moving to the Olympic Stadium.
 

·
wishing i was in bkk
Joined
·
370 Posts
yeah.. i think it is just hearn looking for attention. it gets people talking, and leyton have not had this much attention in a very long time, might even help them with attendance tonight against MK dons.... thinking of going myself
 
1 - 20 of 57 Posts
Top