New London tower
-
Dermot,
Brilliant suggestion!! Attach a demolition ball to the top and you have the mother of all bar skittles. Now we're getting somewhere!
For our Americans cousins http://www.mastersgames.com/cat/pub/table-skittles.htm
Regards,
Bob -
so.
they'll spend 19 million on that...but the Athletes that make up the UK team could use the money in the form of facilities to train in.
hmm. shows where the priorities are.
-
@khai said:
so.
they'll spend 19 million on that...but the Athletes that make up the UK team could use the money in the form of facilities to train in.
hmm. shows where the priorities are.
There's probably been at least a few hundred million been spent on athletics training facilities over the last decade.
-
and they always need more.
what will this tower do for them? something to run up and down ?
-
@khai said:
so.
they'll spend 19 million on that...but the Athletes that make up the UK team could use the money in the form of facilities to train in.
hmm. shows where the priorities are.
apparently, much of the cost is being covered privately..
@unknownuser said:
The cost of the 1,400 ton steel structure has been put at around $30 million, although most of the bill is being picked up by steel magnate Lakshmi Mittal who, like Kapoor, is India born, but resides in the British capital.
-
Hi,
i like the Gerkin construction. Also the new London Tower seems to be a interesting construction. It would be interesting to replicate this tower with Sketchup.
-
Looks like a tricky one to model, too elaborate for the 'model this' section I'm afraid.
-
@khai said:
and they always need more.
what will this tower do for them? something to run up and down ?
This tower will hopefully be one of the iconic structures which helps to build a successful Olympic Games. It will give visitors to the game a fantastic vista over the Olympic Park and over towards the London skyline.
Billions will be spent hosting the games. Hundreds of millions have been spent for athletic facilities throughout the UK. To suggest that spending £20m or so on an iconic tower means that the priorities lay away from athletics is ludicrous.
-
With reference to Jeff Hammond's comment, the tax payer will only have to pay 3 million. Extract from article:
" Financing deals have been signed between principal backer Lakshmi Mittal, the steel magnate, who has committed £16 million towards the £19.1 million cost, and Mr Johnson who dreamed up the project. It is hoped work will begin within weeks on what officially will be called the ArcelorMittal Orbit"
So, that's okay then, or is it? Perhaps Mr. Mittal had a job lot of steel he couldn't get rid of.
Bob
-
Already a Wikipedia entry:
-
@johnsenior1973 said:
@khai said:
and they always need more.
what will this tower do for them? something to run up and down ?
This tower will hopefully be one of the iconic structures which helps to build a successful Olympic Games. It will give visitors to the game a fantastic vista over the Olympic Park and over towards the London skyline.
Billions will be spent hosting the games. Hundreds of millions have been spent for athletic facilities throughout the UK. To suggest that spending £20m or so on an iconic tower means that the priorities lay away from athletics is ludicrous.
really? I'm from the UK before I moved to Canada...and they were complaining about facilities being closed because of budget cuts..... on my mail route (was a mailman) I personally saw 4 locations either shut down or be 'temporarily' closed due to no money.
so I'll be 'ludicrous' and suggest the money can be better spent. sorry if that's a problem..
-
Mittal will probably provide at least half of the cost of this tower. The rest of the cost of the tower will probably be recovered by spectators paying £10 to go up the tower during the games.
The Olympic Games is now getting lots of publicity just over this tower.
The Olympic Stadium is being done on the cheap. Compared to the facilities at Beijing and the stadia in South Africa, they haven't even bothered trying to compete. Judging from the renders (and I accept they might not be accurate) there seems to be very little else that is being done to make the area visitor friendly.
I think ATM very few people like this tower. But what if the actual tower actually does look magnificent and makes a profit? Even if it looks as bad as it does in the render but makes a profit, isn't whining over the waste of money slightly daft if there has been no waste of money?
-
whining?
excuse me?
I make a point and it's 'whining'? have I called your points 'whining'?I don't think we have anything further to say to each other, do you?
-
what a waste! what does this say of mankind? they tell us to turn out our lights and recycle our cardboard, then they waste hundreds of tons of materials and man hours and energy on a pile of junk!
it serves NO purpose, can't even shelter the homeless! shame on the wastefulness. at least make it from used beer cans!
Bitch... pleaze!
-
Here is Kapoor talking about his sculpture:
and some information on the selection process,
A few more images of the structure:
ArcelorMittal Orbit by Anish Kapoor | Dezeen
Artist Anish Kapoor has won a commission to design a 115m high public artwork at Olympic Park in London, to be built as part of London's Olympic Games in 2012. The sculpture, called ArcelorMittal Orbit, has been designed in collaboration with structural engineer Cecil Balmond of Arup. Top image courtesy of Arup. Here's the press
Dezeen (www.dezeen.com)
and a nice commentary by Dan Fox, senior editor of Frieze Magazine,
Page Not Found | Frieze
Sorry, we're unable to find the page you are looking for. Try finding the page using the search bar or navigation menu above. Back frieze.com home.
(www.frieze.com)
Dan Fox finishes his article with:
Kapoor can waffle all he likes about how the tower demonstrates his and Balmond’s interest in ‘the way that form and geometry give rise to structure’, but the bottom line is that the ArcelorMittal Orbit is a monument to politics and big business, and as critic Owen Hatherley observes, this kind of “‘aspirational’, ‘iconic’ but deliberately meaningless, non-figurative edifice” fits their purposes perfectly. File under ‘art and power’.
Advertisement