Aedas to design twisting skyscraper
for Shanghai

| 9 comments
 

News: architecture firm Aedas has won a competition to design a twisting 33-storey skyscraper for Shanghai, China (+ slideshow).

Aedas to design Xuhui Binjian Media City 188S-G-1 Tower and Podium in China

The Xuhui Binjian Media City 188S-G-1 Tower will rise to a height of 155 metres. The rectangular building will gradually twist from its central axis as it rises.

"It begins with an extruded rectangular plan," Aedas architects said. "Going upward, the west wall is gradually warped to accommodate the subway setback that cuts off the corner of the otherwise square project site; and the north wall is warped to the east."

Aedas to design Xuhui Binjian Media City 188S-G-1 Tower and Podium in China

The facade will comprise groups of three glass panels, angled in four different directions, to reflect light and mimic a media screen.

Aedas to design Xuhui Binjian Media City 188S-G-1 Tower and Podium in China

"Curtain wall details were then developed to accommodate small differences in glass sizes and the four different aluminium mullion angles to minimise costs and fabrication time," said Aedas.

Aedas to design Xuhui Binjian Media City 188S-G-1 Tower and Podium in China

A separate podium platform at the base of the tower will be used as a public green space, floating above a number of glass boxes housing retail, restaurant and cafe units. A large warped canopy on the podium will be designed to mimic the skewed shape of the nearby skyscraper and will serve as a cover for outdoor events.

Aedas to design Xuhui Binjian Media City 188S-G-1 Tower and Podium in China

The project will be located within a nine-block development in Shanghai. "The whole development contains nine square blocks and DreamWorks [Animation] will occupy three blocks in the middle," Jess Wong, public relations manager at Aedas told Dezeen.

"The Xuhui Binjian Media City 188S-G-1 Tower and Podium will occupy one block, with a view over the DreamWorks blocks. The developer will take up 20% of the tower space and lease out the rest (80%) to media industry tenants," Wong said.

The project is scheduled for completion in 2015.

Aedas to design Xuhui Binjian Media City 188S-G-1 Tower and Podium in China

Last month we featured a roundup of our featured twisted skyscrapers, which included The Grove at Grand Bay, a 20-storey residential development for Miami by BIG and the curvaceous and twisting Absolute Towers in Canada by Beijing firm MAD.

See more twisted buildings »
See more features about China »

  • Paraphernal

    Pitiful knock-off of any generic BIG tower project. Dezeen should campaign for an anti-knockoff international day and see whether Aedas and all other architecture eunuchs can abstain.

    • http://twitter.com/Talkitect @Talkitect

      Completely agree. This is is just a BIG knockoff.

      • david samuel

        I think BIG is knock-off from Aedas design not the other way around because Aedas was there much earlier. BIG not so old.

        • paraphernal

          This is not the hen versus egg philosophical debate. One company has a solid published track record in such formal approach, whereas the other (the hen a.k.a. Aedas) lacks substance in the architectural game, i.e. the necessary eggs to endorse it as a valid hen.

          Some of us architects believe in originality and an honest approach to design. That’s what makes some buildings stand out before others.

  • student

    “Large company to design twisting skyscraper for chinese urbanisation.” If I had a nickel for every time I saw that.

  • Lewis

    As a Chinese person, it is sad. Another no heart, soulless building with a recycled idea. The building form and proportion is really bad.

  • grogfa

    Looks like the KBT tower in Kuwait.

  • Garnier

    The thing I wonder is what architect would want to put a knock-off like this onto his or her CV?! It is basically the end of your career. Unless you are planning to spend the rest of your days at Aedas’ copier?

    • sollbacken

      I don’t think Aedas so bad. Have you look at their webpage? They have lots of cool design that could have been design by famous architects. So they must be good too.