Fate Of Koolhaas' TVCC Still Unclear

In the aftermath of the February fire that scorched the TVCC building in Beijing, China, investigations continue on the strength and structural integrity of the burned building bringing up the question of what should be done with the building now? Will it need to be completely rebuilt or simply repaired? And if the latter, will anyone stay in it? The fire not seen as particularly ominous for the building.

Andrew Mueller-Lust, principal at Severud Associates, also involved in the investigation, is of the opinion that the chance of re-occupation of the building is not very high and points to certain historical precedents. One of these was the One Meridian Plaza, a Philadelphia office tower stricken by a fire on the 22nd floor in 1991. The fire raged for 18 hours, burning out one floor before moving on to the next, until it ran out of fuel at the 38th floor. Testing showed that the building could have been restored, but no one was willing to reoccupy it. It stood for years before finally being razed.

Unfortunately, it seems the same fate just might await TVCC. “As I read the Chinese newspapers, according to the official statements, the main structure is very little damaged,” said Tian-Fang Jing, principal at Weidlinger Associates. While that might be the case, the greater issue remains whether anyone would willingly go into a repaired TVCC.

It seems like Koolhaas and OMA just cant catch a break with this disaster. When I wrote about the fire last month, the common consensus in China was that the building burned to the degree that it did due to shoddy construction work in the design. Now that it is obvious (at least I think it is obvious) that this was not the case as the building structure is still sound, current public sentiment is that no one wants to have to move in after it is repaired. So what now?





Images obtained from: archpaper.com
For more information, check: http://rudenoon.com/absalletc/archives/1190

Another Koolhaas Design Under Threat

Some members of the Cornell University community have begun a movement to halt the planned construction of Milstein Hall to be designed by Dutch architects, Rem Koolhaas of OMA. which comes just after the final approval for construction to begin. Opponents of the project state that they feel it should be scraped due to an over-extended school budget and the fact that the project will not receive a LEED Gold rating while those supporting the project say that the Koolhaas project is a vital move for the school's success, and that canceling the project could lead to a lack of accreditation.

It should be noted though that the majority of the faculty do feel that the project should continue on schedule and are incensed that their opponents have gone to various media outlets making it seem like all of the Ithaca community are opposed to Koolhaas' proposal. Adrian Lewis, Professor of Operations Research and Information Engineering points out that any delay in starting construction, will be detrimental to the school. He went on to state that NAAB (the national architecture accreditation board) "has warned us for over a decade, and have explicitly stated that the last accreditation we got is the FINAL one they will grant without compliant facilities. They have just denied us an accreditation review for our new M.Arch 1 program this spring because of delays to the final approval process. When they return next year, they plan to review both the M1 and B.Arch programs -- if we don't have a building in process at that point, the B.Arch will LOSE its accreditation, and the M1 will be denied the same."

As can be imagined, losing their accreditation will be catastrophic for Cornell as enrollment will decline and current students would begin to transfer out causing a precipitous decline in tuition obtained and the reputation of the school. These all seem like a lot to lose just because the design will not get a LEED Gold certificate and whatever costs are spent on the building will be worth it since their accreditation depends on it so much. Besides, Koolhaas presented his design to the school two years ago and won their unanimous approval then. So did they just realize that it would not be awarded the LEED Gold?



Image obtained from: www.archinect.com

Koolhaas Blamed For TVCC Blaze

It has been taken as a particularly bad omen for the TVCC building in Beijing to burn down on the Chinese new year holiday and this has sparked some surprising bouts of finger pointing. Though investigations so far have indicated that illegal firecrackers set off by new year revellers was the cause of the fire, public sentiment is that this happened because China has allowed itself to become a testing ground for Western architects.

The TVCC and CCTV buildings were designed by Dutch architect, Rem Koolhaas of OMA as a pair to be the headquarters of the state broadcaster (Central China Television). The latter of the two is definitely the most unique and most easily recognizable as Koolhaas designed it to be, "an alternative to the tyranny of the skyscraper." Instead of soaring straight up into the sky, the building bends in on itself, describing a giant square in the sky with a continuous loop of TV studios, offices, and other facilities that reconfigures the typical top-to-bottom relationships of the traditional office building. Due to its shape, the scale of this building is often underestimated making it look squat though it stands at a soaring 54 storeys. The TVCC building in comparison is a relatively simple arrangement of boxes containing a hotel and a performance theatre, all wrapped in an angular cloak of metal at 34 storeys.

Inexplicably, rather than blame the firecracker throwing revellers, lax construction of the building is being pandered around as one the reasons why the building burned. I am not sure why this is Koolhaas' fault as every since the Sichuan earthquake, China has been blamed for sub par construction standards regardless of design specifications. Also, unless Koolhaas or other members of the office for metropolitan architecture were caught on camera throwing firecrackers themselves, he really shouldn't be blamed for the fire. The Chinese government knew that Koolhaas was a "Western architect" when he was selected for the project so what does it matter now?



Image obtained from: www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/2009/feb/10/beijing-fire-architect-cctv

OMA Wins Design For Taipei Performing Arts Center

The scheme by OMA partners Rem Koolhaas and Ole Scheeren includes a 1,500 seat theatre and two 800 seat theatres which plug into a central cube, clad in corrugated glass, that combines the stage accommodations of the three theatres in a single whole. Each theatre can be used independently or in combination with the other theatres. Connecting the different theatres offers new and experimental theatrical possibilities. A public trajectory inside the cube exposes parts of the backstage areas otherwise hidden in typical theatres. The cube is placed on a socle preserving the existing lively local food market.

OMA will collaborate with local architect Artech Inc. to build the 120,000 square foot theatre complex. The stage design is being developed with Ducks Sceno and the engineering is being provided by Arup. The centre is scheduled to be completed in 2013 with a budget of 3.8 billion Taiwan dollars (90 million Euro). The Taipei city council expects the centre to further facilitate the development of local performing groups and add to Taipei’s image as an international cultural hub.

The project is led by OMA partners Rem Koolhaas and Ole Scheeren. The competition team included associate André Schmidt and architects Adam Frampton and Mariano Sagasta, amongst many others. Koolhaas’s and Scheeren’s previous collaborations include the CCTV Headquarters and TVCC Cultural Centre in Beijing, as well as Prada Epicentre Stores in New York and Los Angeles.”

Source: OMA

Image obtained from: architecturelab.net