Comments on: Raffles City Hangzhou by UNStudio

By: J

Sun, 27 Sep 2009 07:39:15 +0000

Well, I feel that basically the market for governing urban level coherence/aethetics is missing.

The issue is perhaps more like an economic one rather than architectural. cos I am pretty sure architects know how to think on urban level but they eventually work for the developers, who are enterprices that exist to make money. And to do that, they look at immediate sourrounding and metro.

There are a number of regulations such as the height and orientation constrains by the authority to pay respect to the lake but that’s about it. we should be thankful that the authority even stipulated ample landscape and setback requirements on ground level.

If someone can actually think of a way to put a price on those qualities which are large scale/ contextual/historically sensitive etc. then the architects should have no prob delivering. Afterall, no one wants to do things that are not really paid well in the market.

By: Margaret Lee

Margaret Lee — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 12:52:30 +0000

oh no, pleeease don’t put this building in Hangzhou!!!! Agree with Marvis Lian. Keep these buildings in New York, or Dubai. I don’t hate it, but it really does not have the beautiful and natural flow of forms that is unique of Zaha’s creations. I love the Chanel exhibition design I visited in Hong Kong.

By: Katsudon

Katsudon — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 11:25:43 +0000

I have the same feeling as Mavin Lian. I know very well Hangzhou and love this city!
I’m caught between two feelings.
The old city of Hangzhou have completly disapeared! If you want to remember the ancient beauty of the city, you have then to go along the West Lake and close your eyes to ignore the modern city center that have no architectural or urban interest.
Despite of this the landscape, from the lake in the city center to the tea fields in the hills is an enchantement! Hangzhou is absolutely a lovely place providing no ending discoveries and deserves a real reflection on it’s urban renewal! There’s great things to bring to this city!
I don’t think that UN’s OBJECT is ugly, and i know the district this will take place is not architecturaly sensible (it’s outside the city center, completely newly urbanised with wide speedways along which spreads a kind of urban tower park), but this PROJECT looks just nothing more than a vase dropped into the city! You could take it, drop it in another completely different place and change the text to make it match with the new location. But this is typical of what happen everywhere in China. I know they probably had no time/informations or whatever to work on a larger scale and think urban impact “for real”. But come on, stop those excuses texts, it’s like making fun of the audience!
Look at chinese architects doing a IN DEPTH exciting job, like Urbanus most of time, Pei Zhu very often and Wang Shu everytime!!! They give me hope for chinese urban landscape!

UN, PLEASE DON’T PIMP MY HANGZHOU.

By: m

Thu, 23 Jul 2009 11:52:09 +0000

@seth

“Towers are a particularly interesting and difficult typology to design”

In a way, towers have the problem of being exactly the opposite: uninteresting and easy. Ironically, any simple two storey villa is in essense a much more demanding and rich design question than a tower – where the space of flow is linear, predictable and one-dimensional, and every storey has no context, except for the storey above and below and the air. There is no routing and there is not much architecture except for interior design, the ground floor (shopping centre in this case) and the facade.

Sure, due to their size towers can be used to create impressive architectural formalism, if one wishes, but this has very limited power to create an essencially better (or more interesting) tower than a simple repetition of a layout of effecient appartments. It’s make-up, basically.

By: arne

arne — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 16:30:21 +0000

i can not stand these hyperrealistic render images…
in the end it will never look like this once finished…
please let me see some artistic visualizations, where i can feel the project.

By: Pierre Sinsua

Pierre Sinsua — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 08:42:48 +0000

zaha hadid influenced? zaha uses such styles that it has become her, althought this work should not resemble her

By: Mavis Lian

Mavis Lian — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 07:50:13 +0000

“The philosophy behind the Raffles City concept is to integrate mixed use in an urban context, but in such a way as to give this concept a twist by focussing on where the urban context meets the landscape of the city”

Yeah Right..
I am from Hangzhou.
These two towers to me look more like they should be belong to somewhere at the East River side of Shanghai, or New York, or Hong Kong.
I think UNstudio should just be honest and say it is total computer programed architecture which has minimal to do with the surrounding context.
I think it says pretty clearly on the rendering pictures itself .

By: William Smith

William Smith — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 06:56:18 +0000

@ Royal: well said. I would not have a problem with the form of the building if it was somehow continuing a form of the city’s, or was tapping into an existing vernacular. Instead it seems like an object plugged into an arbitrary spot in the ground. @Imnop: I do not mean to belittle this work by any means. Instead I mean only to look at one particular aspect of this architecture. People very often say that a work is hideous or beautiful. I think the outcome depends heavily on how the architecture is made a piece or part of its place, rather than just dominating it.

By: royal creme

royal creme — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 10:53:28 +0000

@ William Smith: I choose to create a vernacular for the city as a whole. I suspect this is why I often feel betrayed by these curve heavy designs…

By: hj

hj — Sun, 19 Jul 2009 18:27:34 +0000

couldn’t they keep the plinth and get rid of those towers?