Zaha Hadid forced to throw in the towel over Tokyo Olympic stadium

| 19 comments
Categories:

Zaha Hadid Architects has had to give up its battle over the Tokyo 2020 Olympics stadium after failing to secure a construction company for its design.

Zaha Hadid teamed up with Japanese architecture and engineering firm Nikken Sekkei to renew its bid for the stadium design earlier this month, but the firms have announced that they will be unable to enter the competition.

Zaha Hadid's design for the Tokyo 2020 Olympic stadium

"It is disappointing that the two years of work and investment in the existing design for a new National Stadium for Japan cannot be further developed to meet the new brief through the new design competition," said Zaha Hadid Architects (ZHA) in a statement.

Related story: Zaha Hadid teams up with Nikken Sekkei to submit new bid for Tokyo 2020 stadium

A new design and build competition was opened for the project after the Japanese prime minister scrapped Hadid's original winning proposal in July 2015.

Zaha Hadid's design for the Tokyo 2020 Olympic stadium

The competition requires entrants to form consortiums with firms that can carry out the construction and supervise the project build, but ZHA and Nikken Sekkei were unable to find suitable partners.

Hadid's original design faced backlash from the public and a number of high-profile Japanese architects, who complained that the stadium was too large and expensive.

Zaha Hadid's design for the Tokyo 2020 Olympic stadium

The British-Iraqi architect hit back at the criticism in an interview with Dezeen in 2014, describing it as "embarrassing" and "hypocritical".

"They don't want a foreigner to build in Tokyo for a national stadium," Hadid told Dezeen. "On the other hand, they all have work abroad."

Tokyo National Stadium latest images by Zaha Hadid Architects Japan

The revised guidelines for the new competition, which was launched 1 September 2015, cap the cost at ¥155 billion (£850 million) – a significant reduction compared to the ¥250 billion (£1.37 billion) estimate for Hadid's initial design. The amount of seating has also been scaled back.

Related story: Richard Rogers steps in to defend Zaha Hadid's scrapped Tokyo 2020 Olympic stadium

Despite the set back, ZHA hopes to lend the knowledge gained during the project to whoever eventually wins the competition.

"Nikken Sekkei and ZHA are prepared and able to deliver a cost-effective stadium that meets the revised brief, is ready in good time for the 2020 Games and provides a new home for sport in Japan for generations to come," said ZHA.

"While the current competition is closed to the existing design team we stand ready to use the wealth of detailed knowledge and expertise, built up through the thousands of hours dedicated to the project, to assist the National and Tokyo Governments and Japanese people deliver a stadium fit to welcome the world in 2020 and go on to host national, international and community events for the next 50 to 100 years."

Zaha Hadid's design for the Tokyo 2020 Olympic stadium

The Tokyo 2020 Olympics has also faced controversy over its logo, after claims that its designer Kenjiro Sano copied it from a Belgian theatre. Although Sano denied the accusations, his logo was withdrawn by the organising committee earlier this month.

Images are by Methanoia.

  • nuno

    At least she ended it on her own terms.

    • Guest

      I’m sure that’ll be of great comfort to her.

  • fva

    Finally.

  • robert

    Case closed.

  • Sv

    I’m glad it didn’t work out. The second variation was a compromise and to scale that back further would have been a disgrace. The original concept was a world-class marvel and I hope she renders similarly in years to come. Hopefully a post-sanctioned Iran will apply a bid at Olympics in a decade or India try their ambition to stamp as China did.

  • Patrik Schumacher

    This is the biggest disappointment for us ever. It’s very hard to accept after nearly three years of work – to give up on this project and the prospect of some amazing moments and collective experiences, and the promise of leaving a valuable long lasting legacy.

    And it’s doubly hard to accept when a culture of frank and transparent communication could have avoided this train crash, which we saw coming but were powerless to divert.

    Also, I wish our Japanese colleagues Maki and Ito could have resisted letting their personal jealousy spoil the positive Olympic vibes. We might have been able to solve all issues in a supportive collegial environment.

    • ZimArch1t3ct

      It must be a disappointment after such a hard work. Ever experienced in college when a project you worked on and investigated fiercely gets turned down by your professors, because perhaps it’s ambitious and immature with its surroundings.

      Well that’s what happened here; sorry to break it to you. I’m sure Maki Sā and Ito himself have nothing to envy. They are just conscious of Japanese traditional architecture, when even Modernism had to adapt itself to traditional Japanese architecture as an example Kikutake’s Sky house, or Tange Sā, Yoyogi National Gymnasium.

      Japan is just the wrong place for Zaha’s spectacular buildings, especially when it comes to a public facility. Japan is not London or Dubai there is a sense of tradition in the everyday life, and by turning down this proposal is an act of respect to the Japanese community and its traditions.

      In the decor of the spectacle, the eyes meet only things and their prices. Explains the high budget and the beautiful render and design. By “Olympic vibes” I understand Olympic money, how sad love money. Japan is a bit more aware of building architecture not for design but for life, it is clear when you visit a shrine or understand the concept of a tatami.

      The walls have ears, but some ears have walls.

      • pickachoo

        ZimArch1t3ct, you are very naive. Architecture is not just about design. Architecture is connected to politics, power and money also. The design was not rejected just based on design criteria and budget issues. Design can be modified and budget can be adjusted, there are other factors that are not spoken about in media openly.

        Japan wanted to show that once again it became a country open to changes and new ways but disappointingly stopped short.

        You are also ignorant to point out that architecture in Japan is for life. The general lifespan of buildings in Japan is about 30 years and longer for large-scale public buildings. Technological development allows new developments in architecture that is constantly renewed.

        • ZimArch1t3ct

          I will not waste my time discussing with somebody who opens a paragraph with a subjective attack on an opinion of an ‘spectacular’ building not being built.

          Secondly, who’s lack of understanding a main idea in a four-paragraph text is not transmitted and clear. As an example, the second sentence. But I will say one thing. The concept is simply staggering. Pointless, but staggering. Long live the ephemeral.

        • Nicole

          I have read an article (I believe it was in The Guardian) that Zaha is an architect that is not exactly open to changes in her architecture. The very least she could have done is start from scratch, but their video insisted that this was the only possible design.

          http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2013/sep/08/zaha-hadid-serpentine-sackler-profile

          http://www.archdaily.com/772592/zaha-hadid-doesnt-deserve-the-tokyo-stadium-commission-and-heres-why

          Before placing the blame on the “nature of the Japanese”, it’s entirely possible that Zaha was being uncompromising with her design and acting like a spoiled brat.

    • Nicole

      It is a big disappointment. Personally, I liked the original design and not the revised one. But was it really impossible to construct something within the budget? Other award-winning and highly-regarded firms have managed to do so with much smaller budgets, and I’m sure something fantastic will be built within this new budget.

      Could Zaha not have come up with something true to her principles and aesthetics and demonstrate fiscal responsibility? I don’t see how Maki and Ito were professionally jealous at all, just aware of the problems of the built environment in Tokyo, how they both do not wish to see gigantic architecture overshadowing people and greenery any more in such a densely populated city, especially in the area you were going to build in. Maybe it would have helped if you included more greenery in the interiors of your building renders?

    • http://archagendadebates.splashthat.com Daniela

      This is a formidable loss for the advancement of architecture with respect to its societal function; a staggering mistake for Japan, and a waste of design expertise.

  • Guest

    Zaha Hadid, Zaha Hadid, Zaha Hadid… Some news of Christian De Portzamparc, for example, for a change? Not polemical enough, perhaps?

  • ygk2015

    It’s a total shame that there’s news coverage that Toyo Ito and Nihon Sekkei teamed up and entered the new design and build competition.

    Although the news has not been confirmed, there seems to be no way to avoid the voice insisting that Ito and other Japanese architects just wanted to take back the opportunity to design the new National Stadium from a foreign firm.

    The legacy continues; architectural competitions in Japan always suck.

  • Leandro Llorente

    I visited and observed D’Leedon last night here in Singapore, one of Zaha’s. After, it felt that the Japanese prime minister did the right thing in Tokyo.

  • http://volkov-alexander.blogspot.ru/ Александр Волков

    Waiting result?

  • Captain Zero

    The lesson here folks… Never lead with vagina and follow up with bike helmet. ALWAYS SAVE VAGINA FOR EMERGENCIES.

Categories:
Tags: