Zaha Hadid Architects have completed four stations on the Nordpark Cable Railway in Innsbruck, Austria.
The scenic railway, which serves ski stations in the mountains above the city, opens this weekend.
Photos are by Hélène Binet. Above: Alpenzoo station
Above: Loewenhaus station
Above: Hungerburg station
Above: Loewenhaus station
Above: Congress station
Above: Hungerburg station
Above: Congress station
Above: Alpenzoo station
–
Posted by Marcus Fairs
November 29th, 2007 at 9:47 pm
Incredible! What a gorgeous project by Zaha. Props to Innsbruck for having the vision to go forward with such a proposal.
November 29th, 2007 at 11:09 pm
I agree with Mattia, It is stunning!!! what a fantastic project by Hadid, it really does cement her as a true architectural icon of our time.
November 29th, 2007 at 11:21 pm
fantastic!! art
November 30th, 2007 at 4:05 am
i get erections when i see architecture like this.
November 30th, 2007 at 9:07 am
ok, some nice photos, congratulations to the photographer. the project looks like a fat suspended woman. why would you do that?
November 30th, 2007 at 10:17 am
shapeless body , hidious , congratulation for the contractor though!
November 30th, 2007 at 10:40 am
…mmmhhh…everyday the same shapes. Hadid do the same !!!…eheh. and certainly it’s art, but what about architecture? Where’s architecture ?I think that’s not sufficient to have beautiful forms to do a ” space ”
BZ rulez amigos !!!!
November 30th, 2007 at 10:58 am
I think the congratulations should go to Helene Binet for making this project look significantly better than it actually is. All these photos are taken at night. If you saw the photos in last week’s Architects Journal (taken during the day), you wouldn’t be congratulating the contractor or Zaha. They reveal shoddy workmanship and bad detailing. It’s a bit like pulling someone in a nightclub who looks gorgeous, only to find the next morning in the broad light of day, they are a minger. Surfaces with this level of complex curvature need to be resolved perfectly, otherwise they look ridiculous.
November 30th, 2007 at 3:06 pm
very expensivo.
So much more can be achieved with so much less (and less $). I can’t wait to see how this will look like in 5 years when it starts falling apart.
November 30th, 2007 at 7:29 pm
good one Mondi
at night it looks beautiful, though… really gorgeous flowing forms.
what is it made of?
November 30th, 2007 at 8:12 pm
We see every 2 weeks a new design by Hadid.
It looks like they have some kind of algoritm in a render program that PRODUCES architecture..
Take a step back and look at what you are doing please.
This architecture has lost its value…
December 1st, 2007 at 12:55 am
Jelle is right, Zaha has become so predictable as of late. I know it’s “her” style, but come on, evolve! I hate those tiles too, they look so plastic-y and cheap, even though I’m sure they’re expensive..
December 1st, 2007 at 1:22 am
I think it´s wonderful! Zaha doesn´t design the same shapes, she creates diferent ones each time. Everybody uses CAD programs and everybody knows that it´s easier to do boxes than other things like this one.
December 1st, 2007 at 3:54 am
a bit confused about the context/meaning/rationale/etc…wondering what we’re becoming as architects w/out fundamental ‘parameters’ and constraints…are we now only visual artists/technicians w/out responsibility to a larger audience who must interact w/our whimsies on a daily basis?
jg
December 1st, 2007 at 11:32 am
Boring!
December 1st, 2007 at 4:17 pm
I wonder who gives money for this kinds of crap. People in one end of world must starv so that people in other could have gigantic spitlike constructions over their heads!
December 1st, 2007 at 4:45 pm
if you want to blame someone dont blame ZAHA..
blame those municipality officials because they are the decision makers.
they tell zaha to scribble and voila..
this is cold and inconsiderate
December 1st, 2007 at 7:48 pm
mano i bet you, you will never do the same!
December 2nd, 2007 at 2:13 am
Herman,
anyone can do it. Take Rhino, do a nurbs sphere, make it almost flat, pull some control points. Then call your buddies at Arup and send the 3d model - they figure everything out for you. Is it a train station? Nooooooouuuu. It’s a freakin’ squashed piece of nothing. Good architecture is nowasays so simple yet so elusive. Everybody has Zaha on a pedestal due to her ‘groundbraking’ designs… but they’re not so good, they’re just built. Paperless studios at schools are filled with projects like these. Come on guys, there’s better stuff! Zumthor anybody?…
December 2nd, 2007 at 2:24 pm
I can’t believe the comments I am reading… I have never been taught to critic this aggressively, negatively, and emotionally most of all. I wonder why hmmmm….. its ur opinion. although I find her thinking outside the box from as one of u mentioned” the other side of the hungry world”. her re defining of space seen in her pattern of her similar work is so different if you look deeper than u are. and I don’t you should allow your ignorance to generalize the rest of whom is out their in the field” from this part of the world. We have many great architects convey and expressing different conceptual work, and ideas; such as Ammar khamash, Rasim Badran, Khalid Nahhas, Faris Al-Zaru, and many others. its not zahas fault its the trends fault is making her work popular. As a young Arab designer among many others, we are very proud of her, and wish her good luck, and definitely wish to see other of her work.
December 2nd, 2007 at 3:14 pm
don’t like it either. has nothing to do with hadid. just don’t like her style. creating spaces with a combination of organic and cube-forms is not easy. here it definetely does not work out. i also think its gonna look like crap in two years…
December 2nd, 2007 at 7:56 pm
would be nice to see more Calatrava up on DeZeen….
just saying…
December 3rd, 2007 at 11:40 am
Just wanted to say to those stupids above how easy it is to create those kind of shapes these days. Quiuquiu said it all. Dudes, wake up, anyone can create a shape like that in 10 minutes using a 3d modeling software. And again arup resolves these kind of complex structures to all those guys, from zaha to foster. The point is … is this what architecture should be? A f***ing crap (i mean craaaaaaaaaaaap) nurb detailed by a major engeneering company?
December 3rd, 2007 at 11:44 am
Ahhh … also … Damned Herman … where are you from? Just because you have never been in touch with any 3d software or a paperless studio in school it doens’t mean there aren’t piles of little dudes doing it all over. So just don’t come here saying so muuch bulshiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit!
What a shame!
December 3rd, 2007 at 7:30 pm
well i have been to innbruck and have seen all the stations and they are really incredible. i have been very sceptical before going there, but what you see just flashes you.
especially the upper station has an incredible feeling to it.. the organisation, the light, the material, its great.
there is much more effort in this project, than most of you think.
some of the glas-elements are to be exchanged, since the company that produced them went over the limitations. plus there is no projekt on earth that is build accurate to a millimeter, epecially when it is bended double sided.
yes, there are some weird zaha-designs, but that one i definately NOT one of them.
i wanna see a project designed and manifactured like this from any of those not so polite commentators here… but i guess there is nothing and they are just letting out frustrations on this blog about their not so perfect success.
December 4th, 2007 at 4:22 am
zeina- zaha as a female doesnt even enter to the equation. it’s not about the person, it’s about the work (that sucks).
December 4th, 2007 at 12:35 pm
‘telling’ - u said it all. Completely agree u.
And to all those so-called computer geniuses out there who think all it takes is a Nurbs surfacce/Rhino sphere and to pull control points - why dont you actually try making that surface work? let alone >>building << it!
dezeen allows us to comment so we can make intelligent critique & dialogue. not for this immature rubbish. everyone has an opinion, but this…. now c’mon - grow up guys!
December 4th, 2007 at 1:49 pm
Hey Telling and Emkay (aka right-track guys) … this is not about letting frustration out or proving you can build a crap like that. It’s about understanding what architecture is and that architecture is not about creating weird shapes. But this is pretty much waste of time. There will always be bunches of kids like you who just don’t know what quality or refinement mean in architecture, getting so enticed by whatever it is just because looks weird. Just because it is difficult to be built (”bended double sided”) doens’t necessarily makes it good.
Personally i can find a couple of amazing building by Zaha, but unfortunatly not the last two posted in this blog - they are the best examples of cheap thinking in architecture. They are nothing, express nothing, comunicate nothing but a 10 minutes form produced in rhino, brought to Arup to make it stable (and sure … it was complicated to build it …).
And Emkay, don’t be so contraditory. Who thinks all it takes to produce good architecture is a nurb surface is you. You are delighted with it. Adjusting control points in a empty form and state it as architecture is exactly the kind of posture i disagree. So i won’t waste my time on that.
December 4th, 2007 at 8:43 pm
Hi Rarc,
you seem to be an expert when it comes to Nurbs Geometry. 10 minutes for shapes like that.. I give you a day to come up with a shape - then let’s see what you can achieve. Or are you a leisure architect that likes to sit on a drawing board sharpening your pencil?
Of course it isn’t only the kind of tool that you use to make a good design but how well you can handle it - so bring it on Rarc
December 5th, 2007 at 12:30 pm
Lol, hi prototype … which one was your former name?
So really? all i have is a day? Oh dude, please don’t do that to me, please! In a day … oh i’ll get caught!
And finally the discussion here is definitely not about tools )i’ve said i myself can find some weird shape buildings good buildings) … but what a good design should be!
So, stop worrying about somebody elese’s life and go to study a little bit!
Or, tell us why do you like this crap so much!
December 5th, 2007 at 9:46 pm
A great gift to the world of aesthetics. if a fat woman looks like this then I love the form of fat woman and so what if it is a shape/form is not original. It still deserves merit. So for all you negative people, here is a tip, there is always something one can appreciate in everything. Go figure…….
December 6th, 2007 at 2:11 am
See, it’s not about the cv’s, rhino or whatever. It’s the fact that people associate complicated (not complex) forms with good architecture and sometimes simple beautiful architecture is neglected just because it is simple and ‘easy’ to build. Sometimes I hear people saying ‘boring’ just because it’s not nurby. I have a felow co-worker who worked for zaha and this person has told me, in his/her very naive stupidity, that I have to ‘move on’ because I like Pawson and Chipperfield - that these people do not represent the spirit of our times. How does that sound?… I also was a nurbs addict when I was in school, and after I got to my first job I discovered that true, useful and durable architecture is built with bricks and f*&$# mortar.
December 6th, 2007 at 3:01 pm
I’m very impressed. Something tells me 0% of England fans will get to use it at te Euro’s.
http://www.mattkelly.typepad.com
December 6th, 2007 at 8:03 pm
think we’re losing ground of this conversation - which is to critique the building at hand.
We all know double or single curvature doesn’t make beautiful buildings. Tools are,… well, just that - Tools. And I am sure the guys at Zaha hadid don’t have a magic 3D program to simply ‘Produce’ this stuff as someone was saying. Love it or hate it, the art of making this is pure genius. And thats where all the rest of you come in. Cuz you dont use these 3D tools doesnt make you any lesser guys. don’t let the tool intimidate you.
these shapes are not produced by CAD, so the subject is a dialogue of form against tools. & Prototype, i agree with you, but you know what? lets not make this personal. If Rarc believes in sharpening his pencil rather than work out these exciting shapes, then I am sure he his happy with that.
quiuquiu - Which part of this project looks nurby or complicated to you? Some of these are really simple shapes we see in nature itself. And what according to you is ‘useful& durable architecture’? You probably mean those carbon-crazy glass boxes we see on every major cosmopolitan street corner? Trust me, I absolutely love Pawson’s work - but in their own right. I am completely with you on that. But that does not mean you lose the eye for beauty. Pawson is as much the spirit of our time as Hadid is.
Rarc - I am still waiting for your ‘intelligent’ critique. Don’t know if it will ever come..
December 8th, 2007 at 9:18 pm
while I find the criticism and discussion interesting, I think we architects need to recognize that our profession is difficult enough without us shooting each other down every chance we get… take a look at other creative industries, like the art world or best of all the movie industry. those people know how to prop. each other up so that they seem to the public to have more talent than they actually do. I believe that we could all learn something from their camaraderie. as per Zaha, there are far worse architects out there to be bothered by. hate it, like it or love it, it is taking us forward and making us relevant as a profession. we should all be thankful for that because we all know its not easy to win that sort of notoriety.
December 10th, 2007 at 12:28 am
great design, its too expensive though..can be rationalized much more efficiently with flat panels..I bet those double-curved panels costed enormous money, if not, they will look like crap a couple of years later..
zaha, m’lady.. come on u can do better, enough with playing those cheap toys, get rid off patrik and make a much more clever team.
December 10th, 2007 at 6:06 pm
well guys this is a nice discussion goin on here even if theres much of flameing btw…
well to put my 2 cents in here… some people try to critisize zaha or gehry for their repeating formal languages… i agree… the languages (in general) are repeating… but an everyone has repetition in theirportfolio… so if zaha or gehry manages to make great spaces… or great spatial qualities with great useage of natural light etc. their work is fantastic as it was the last 20 years… dont critisize em for the forms… they dont make the difference inthe end… look at the qualitis and judge the projects fair!
and yes… this one isnt one of the better hadids
December 11th, 2007 at 12:45 pm
zaha is working into the future - each project has another step - another evolution in form -
and this project is/are 4 buildings - with 4 diffrent landscapes and one strategie to handle - and it works …
January 25th, 2008 at 12:43 am
Organic shapes
Expensive Material
Great spaces
Zaha sometimes does not get the best from herself
but sometimes takes the best and just… catch me.
January 30th, 2008 at 7:09 pm
So, some interesting responses. For what it’s worth, perhaps leaving the tag ‘Zaha Hadid’ out of the discussion and just reviewing the forms separate from other preceding projects might help?
I think that any architecture that can generate this much discussion is somewhat useful, however the problem with this discussion is that it sounds like for the most part, it is being generated from photographic representations of the project. Since when was architecture stagnant? Architecture should be moved through to be experienced. It is the emotive quality of a space that makes it unique, no? It’s ability to generate some sort of response or thought is significant as a participant, not simply the formal qualities. I can imagine a certain delight that one might find alighting from a train into a space like this… somewhat relevant to its snowy context? Perhaps the forms have Hadid trademarks, but it is also echoing the dominant snowy winter surrounds that make the train line necessary in the first place. It seems relevant to me.
So I would leave the generation of the form and the construction problems out, it does not really generate useful of interesting debate.
Surely there is something valuable to be taken from this design, aesthetics, nurbs, and personal taste aside.
February 28th, 2008 at 10:15 pm
Wow. These are great photos. I was in Innsbruck several times this past year and I saw much of the construction but did not think this was complete or operational yet. Is it running?
Of course, the walk up the hill to the Zoo is worth taking.
April 20th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
I think its ridiculous how critical some people are. Especially those saying it will look rubbish in a few years, what do you know? I don’t believe for one moment that this building will look worn in a few years time. Your like the people who moan about interesting architecture because a window leaked. Boring buildings can have leaks too you know! What a dull world we would live in if you were in charge.
And whats up with the individuals in this thread who seem to think that a Zaha design is somehow the definitive of what architecture is becoming? Lighten up, it’s one architect.
Chicago_boy - I’d love to see your version with flat panels lol
Personally its great that someone is trying new things. I think its an amazing project and the form fits its function fantastically, nurbs or not. Also can’t wait to see it covered in snow.
May 15th, 2008 at 10:43 pm
It is quite artic-istic! Beautiful to look at on a cold snowy night from the starbucks across the street - but man-oh-man how cold it would feel! I think I’ll sit awhile longer and enjoy my hot coffee!
May 20th, 2008 at 12:08 am
I really do not understand the negative feedback that has been left. These are beautiful railway stations and I love the material theyre made from. I’ve seen photos during the day and they look just as good. I’d like to hear what some of these people think is great architecture - because this is original and utterly beautiful. Come on pierre and wilson… what do you consider to be good architecture?
June 21st, 2008 at 2:24 pm
I feel very sorry for most of the negative people that have posted comments here and elswhere. As an admirer of many architects and designers curvacious expressionist’s through to refined rectilinear minimalists, geometry driven or phenomenologically evolved …..all inspire in their own way and have a valued place in the world of ideas and potential.
June 24th, 2008 at 8:22 am
does anyone know who the contractor on this project was? or the material used and weither it is available in Australia?
September 29th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
I just wanted to let you all know this was not designed in rhino using nurbs and control points. This project was designed using the most advanced parametric software out there.
This project may be just as good if it were done by a great minimal architect like Ando. However, I do think we should give it credit for being one of the only buildings build that has used parametric software. It pushes the boundaries of architecture in so many ways. This may very well be the future of architecture, and this project may be one of the pioneering projects.
It may not be the best Zaha project, but I do think it has value. I think it could be a lot better as a built piece of architecture, but it is far more than a useless form.
Emma- This project uses the same fiberglass panels as the chanel mobile art pavilion did. That project was also designed parametrically.
I would like to see this technology used for a more thoughtful building, but that will come with time.
October 13th, 2008 at 2:10 am
me parece algo bello ya que tengo un trabajo en mi univercidad veo que los fractales se pueden utilizan en una variedad de diseños y acabados siendo en ella la mejor presentacion su propia cara
October 15th, 2008 at 9:20 am
well i rekon its a great piece of archetecture. !
October 17th, 2008 at 2:19 pm
I believe that this archtitecture truly represents the natural aspects of the surrounding area. It adds a unique characteristic and offers a different slant in todays society, which is something that is much needed. I think that it is truly astonishing and delightful.
October 17th, 2008 at 3:43 pm
I believe it’s laminated glass, not fiberglass. Done in China, CNC thermoforming.
Dan: I’d be curious to know what that software is. ZHA uses rhino, maya, 3D max…. why wouldn’t it be rhino?
October 18th, 2008 at 3:09 am
people back to 1st principles pls. do not judge it as a form. it seems like people are judging it as a sculpture. architecture should not be seen, it should be experienced. go and EXPERIENCE its space (feel it) don’t LOOK at its form.
and who cares how its made. these are only tools to create space.
November 5th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
Dan: Also curious here what “parametric software” it is?
BTW my boss who has been a “box” guy all his life suddenly dreamed up some nurby forms for our recent job, he so easily drawn on yellow trace and I am here trying to make a model of it with AutoCAD and my colleagues trying to transform those lovely sketches to plans with, again AutoCAD, we are all in great pain…
Surely tools are important. Great tools save us a hell lot of time and it takes time to think and develop a design! We work 10-16 hours a day becoz of doing this nurby form without the appropriate tool!
December 27th, 2008 at 1:11 pm
i dont know.. i like it..i dont! like it! no.. i dont..some times i do , sometimes i dont!! but the material looks very interesting!
January 20th, 2009 at 8:05 pm
I just want to add my two cents. I have always believed that architecture was about designing space. It seems that Hadid’s work is about sculpture more than architecture. Take a look at the spaces created by these curved forms. Does anyone find the space adequate for a rail terminal? Or is it that we are all to be so “wowed” by the super clean forms that we ignore the totally banal spaces enclosed by them.
Don’t be fooled my fellow architects. It is a sham, and Hadid is just cashing in on the poor Tiroleans. The ski jump was enough for Innsbruck.