Zaha Hadid wins RIBA Gold

The Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) has awarded its Gold Medal, the highest honor in its repertory, since 1848. This year, on Wednesday, at a black-tie ceremony in RIBA’s stately Art Deco building in London, Zaha Hadid, Hon. FAIA, officially received the award, the first woman in the institute's history to win it in her own right.

In the context of England’s clubby association of architects, still very much a fraternity, awarding the Gold Medal to an Iraqi-born exponent of a radically unorthodox modernism—perhaps best known here for twice winning the Cardiff Opera House competition, only to be rejected twice under cloudy circumstances—was a very big deal. Per protocol, Queen Elizabeth II approved the award. Prince Charles, the architectural traditionalist, was probably not amused.

Though Hadid was trained at London’s Architectural Association, and has practiced in the city since her graduation in 1977, it seems every major international architectural prize beat RIBA in honoring the architect: the Pritzker Prize was awarded in 2004, Japan’s Praemium Imperiale Prize in 2009, and the Queen even dubbed her Dame Commander of the Order of the British Empire in 2012. Though RIBA twice awarded Hadid the Stirling Prize and numerous specific building citations, a deep moat of silence surrounded the institute regarding the Gold Medal. Hadid was conspicuous by her absence on the list.

Finally, this year, under the direction of Jane Duncan (only the third female RIBA president), the institute has redressed the “oversight.” Sir Peter Cook, Luisa Hutton, and David Chipperfield, Hon. FAIA, architects with an international point of view, nominated her.

Source: www.architectmagazine.com/practice/why-zaha-hadids-gold-medal-matters_o

Chelsea have submitted a planning application to rebuildStamford Bridge into a 60,000-seat stadium.

Chelsea have submitted a planning application to rebuild
Stamford Bridge into a 60,000-seat stadium.

The Premier League champions have consulted over the redevelopment of their West London home, which currently has a capacity of 41,600. And a statement on the club's official website on Tuesday confirmed plans would be submitted to Hammersmith and
Fulham council. Chelsea submit planning application to rebuild Stamford
Bridge into a 60,000-seat stadium. https://t.co/IZhuZmIhDV pic.twitter.com/mCSyTW8DR4
- ESPN FC (@ESPNFC) December 1, 2015

"A planning application for a new stadium at Stamford Bridge with an expanded seating capacity has been submitted," the statement read. "This follows a successful consultation process during which we received very helpful feedback.

"The main details of the application are: stadium seating capacity to expand from 41,600 to 60,000 spectators; an outstanding view of the stadium from every seat; an arena designed to create an exciting atmosphere; direct access to and from Fulham Broadway Station, making travel more efficient; stadium facilities improved for every area.

"The planning process will last beyond the end of the season; if the application is granted planning permission there will still be a lot of work to do before redevelopment can start, including obtaining various other consents." Chelsea owner Roman Abramovich, who bought the club in 2003, would finance the work, which has an estimated cost of £500 million. The planning application was submitted by Abramovich's Fordstam company on Nov. 19, Hammersmith and Fulham council said.

It is confirmation of Abramovich's commitment to the club, despite a woeful start to the season which sees Chelsea 14th after 14 games. There is plenty to do before a new stadium becomes a reality, not least finding a temporary home for around three seasons. The build would be complicated and more lengthy in duration if Chelsea were to remain on site, adding to the cost. Both Chelsea and Tottenham, who are building a new stadium at White Hart Lane, have reportedly been in discussions with the Football Association to play games at Wembley.The build would be complex and involve excavation, with the plan to lower the arena into the ground to achieve the capacity on a 12-acre site. The site is bordered by two train lines which must be built over.

A statement on the council's website read: "The application
comprises the demolition of the existing football stadiumwhich has a capacity of 41,600 seats and other buildings
within the ground, and the construction of a new larger football stadium with a 60,000-seat capacity.
"Other features include ancillary stadium-related uses including a club shop and museum, plus a separate restaurant/cafe use."

Chelsea's plans to redevelop the stadium -- their home since 1905 -- had been initially accepted by the localauthority in September, with the Blues keen to rival thecapacity of Premier League clubs such as Arsenal (60,260)and Manchester United (75,653).

In 2013, Chelsea's hopes of building a new super-stadiumon the site of the Earls Court Exhibition Centre were dashed,after the local council granted planning permission for more than 7,500 new homes on the site.
Chelsea also had plans to develop Battersea Power Stationa year earlier, but the Malaysian consortium given preferred
bidder status announced the completion of a £400 million deal for the site.

Information from the Press Association was used in this
report.

BUILDING ART: THE LIFE AND WORK OF FRANK GEHRY Paul Goldberger

From Pulitzer Prize–winning architectural criticPaul Goldberger: an engaging, nuanced exploration of the life and work of Frank Gehry,undoubtedly the most famous architect of our time. This first full-fledged critical biography presents and evaluates the work of a man who has almost single-handedly transformed contemporary architecture in his innovative use of materials, design, and form, and who is among the very few architects in history to be both respected by critics as a creative, cutting-edge force and embraced by the general public as a popular figure.

Building Art shows the full range of Gehry’s work, from early houses constructed of plywood and chain-link fencing to lamps made in the shape of fish to the triumphant success of such late projects as the spectacular art museum of glass in Paris. It tells the story behind Gehry’s own house, which upset his neighbors and excited the world with its mix of the traditional and the extraordinary, and recounts how Gehry came to design the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao, Spain, his remarkable structure of swirling titanium that changed a declining city into a destination spot. Building Art also explains Gehry’s sixteen-year quest to complete Walt Disney Concert Hall, the beautiful, acoustically brilliant home of the Los Angeles Philharmonic.

Although Gehry’s architecture has been written about widely, the story of his life has never been told in full detail. Here we come to know his Jewish immigrant family, his working-class Toronto childhood, his hours spent playing with blocks on his grandmother’s kitchen floor, his move to Los Angeles when he was still a teenager, and how he came, unexpectedly, to end up in architecture school. Most important, Building Art presents and evaluates Gehry’s lifetime of work in conjunction with his entire life story, including his time in the army and at Harvard, his long relationship with his psychiatrist and the impact it had on his work, and his two marriages and four children. It analyzes his carefully crafted persona, in which a casual, amiable “aw, shucks” surface masks a driving and intense ambition. And it explores his
relationship to Los Angeles and how its position as home to outsider artists gave him the freedom in his formative years to make the innovations that characterize his genius.

Finally, it discusses his interest in using technology not just to change the way a building looks but to change the way the whole profession of architecture is practiced.

Paul Goldberger is my favorite architectural critics. I have no doubt that this is a master piece about a master of architecture.

The book is sold for $35.00 here.

Information from bookhampton.com was used in this report.

News: Tokyo 2020 Olympics: Zaha Hadid's £1.3bn stadium design ditched amid spiralling costs

The curvaceous Aquatics Centre she
created for the London Olympics in
2012 was described as “magnificent”, winning over doubters despite its expense. But Zaha Hadid’s plans for an even more ambitious Games venue have
been left in tatters after Japan pulled
the plug on its controversial national
stadium.

The celebrated British-Iraqi architect’s winning design for the venue, set to be the centrepiece of the Tokyo 2020 Olympics, had been compared to a bicycle helmet. But scepticism turned to anger as the stadium’s construction costs spiralled out of control, with one
critic describing it as “a turtle waiting for Japan to sink so that it can swim away”.

In the face of increasing public fury
over the venue’s £1.3bn price tag, the Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe announced that the project would be ditched. The decision means the stadium will now not be ready in time for the 2019 Rugby World Cup, throwing preparations for the tournament into disarray.

“We are scrapping our plans for the
stadium, and starting from zero,” Mr
Abe said. “The Olympics are a party for our people, and they and the athletes are the main players. We need to make it something that they can celebrate.”

Japan’s decision is the latest setback for Ms Hadid, whose firm has been criticised for working in countries with questionable human rights records.

She is one of my favorite modern Architects,  read more about this news here.