An amazing design and functionality, completely accessible to the blind and disabled, partially powered by its own solar energy and containing its own water treatment facilities and on site pubic transport:
anz stadium
Why should we be concerned about the construction and design of a stadium? Surely, as long as the sports are enjoyable and the construction and design is secure and relatively cozy, why should the beauty of it be important? If we consider that sporting achievement is as important an outlet for human expression as the theatre or cinema, or the rest of the arts, why shouldn’t the structures in which we stage this outlet be as impressive and as awe inspiring as those we would hope for in other parts of cultural life? In fact, it could be argued that because stadiums are often far more filled with customers than theatres etc, we should really give more, and not less, attention to their shape, construction and design. Stadiums have often been called ‘cathedrals’. Football has often been named ‘the opera of the people’. How better, therefore, to increase the general public’s exposure to quality aesthetics than to give them the very best structures, constructions and designs in the one part of life that seems to affect them most? Could it even be possible that better stadiums might just create happier and better citizens?
Olympic Stadium Australia
Perhaps I am a dreamer. Maybe I should simply agree that sport, and its affiliates is just a gaudy business, while stadium design and construction is usually driven by pragmatists and misers. Indeed, bizarrely some of the most popular stadium constructions in the world are also amongst the least beautiful, innovative or architecturally pleasing or best designed. Old Trafford football ground in Manchester, the Yankee Stadium in New York, Ellis Park in Johannesburg: each has gotten its renown more from the events that have taken place there, from its associations, than from the actual shape , construction or design . In addition, stadiums whose designs and shapes have been praised – such as the Maracana in Rio, or the San Siro in Milan – have been disappointing several functional design aspects. It has never been easy to strike precisely the right balance between aesthetics and design and functionality.
Grand Final, Stadium Australia
Homebush Bay, Australia was the location of the principle Olympic Games compound for the Sydney Olympics of 2000. If approached practically and with imagination, the possibility to host the Games can bring magnificent advantages in the long term if not for sport then for the noble cause of urban regeneration and construction. Following in Barcelona’s footsteps, Sydney certainly began its urban re-generation in a very impressive way. Initially, the 760-hectare site at Homebush Bay, once the site of an abattoir, a racecourse, brickworks and light industrial units, seemed in the middle of nowhere – it was in fact fifteen kilometres from the centre of Sydney and in the heart of the city’s extensive conurbation. Some ₤1.3 billion worth of construction and design and reclamation was set up with a view to post-Olympic functionality. Strict guidelines, diligently monitored by Greenpeace, made sure that the 2000 Games would be the most environmentally friendly ever. In addition, much of the work was attractive, unique and lively. ‘A reflection of the Australian spirit,’ they said.
Aerial View Stadium Australia
At the heart of Homebush, Australia was the main location for the Olympics, Stadium Australia. It was paid for by a BOOT (Build, Own, Operate and Transfer) contract, which meant that the Stadium Australia, led by the contractors Multiplex and the financiers Hambros, bore the bulk of the construction costs, in return for which it was permitted to operate the facility for thirty years, and therefore, it hopes, regain its costs, before handing the construction over to the New South Wales government in the year 2030.
Tags: aesthetics, australia, construction, design, shape, stadium
