ArchDaily | Broadcasting Architecture Worldwidethe world's most visited architecture website
i

Sign up now and start saving and organizing your favorite architecture projects and photos

i

Find the most inspiring products for your projects in our Product Catalog.

i

Get the ArchDaily Chrome Extension and be inspired with every new tab. Install here »

h

Nominate now the Building of the Year 2017 »

All
Projects
Products
Events
Competitions
  1. ArchDaily
  2. Projects
  3. Amphitheater
  4. New Zealand
  5. Jasmax
  6. 2007
  7. Wellington Zoo Amphitheatre / Jasmax

Wellington Zoo Amphitheatre / Jasmax

  • 01:00 - 6 October, 2009
Wellington Zoo Amphitheatre / Jasmax
Wellington Zoo Amphitheatre / Jasmax

Wellington Zoo Amphitheatre / Jasmax Wellington Zoo Amphitheatre / Jasmax Wellington Zoo Amphitheatre / Jasmax Wellington Zoo Amphitheatre / Jasmax +10

  • Architects

  • Location

    Wellington, New Zealand
  • Architects

    Jasmax
  • Client

    Wellington Zoo Trust
  • Area

    500.0 sqm
  • Project Year

    2007

From the architect. The Wellington Zoo Amphitheatre is a multi purpose performance space. The primary challenge was to create a powerful and symbolic building with a very tight budget. The most difficult – and hence innovative aspect of the project – was opening up the rear of the theatre in a way that was technically simple, robust and yet elegant whether open or closed.

The building is comprised of tiered seating covered by a simple lean-to roof that folds down to an inclined rear wall. The roof at its lower edge is staggered and the rear wall stepped to allude to the concept of a traditional (radial) amphitheatre. The sides are semi-enclosed with translucent plastic sheeting. The rear wall folds open to a public area allowing the audience to overflow on fine summer days.

The zoo context demanded a robust building. In response, we worked with very simple and effective building technologies but deployed them in a highly crafted way: areas of striated wood soften and warm the space; rigorous attention to critical details – flashings in particular – give a fineness to its edges; the translucent sheeting creates a light effect that is soft and slightly mysterious and when lit up in the evenings it glows like a lantern in the heart of the zoo.

Location to be used only as a reference. It could indicate city/country but not exact address. Cite: "Wellington Zoo Amphitheatre / Jasmax" 06 Oct 2009. ArchDaily. Accessed . <http://www.archdaily.com/36993/wellington-zoo-amphitheatre-jasmax/>
Read comments

14 Comments

Matt Gibala · November 09, 2011

what are enclosures, please? (in the floor plan)

salvadore · November 16, 2009

NO NO NO! the amphitheater is all about the ascending seating not circular or open air or anything like that... the first most important ones were made like that. a round table with some seats around out in open air is not an amphitheater!!

Craig VanDevere · October 10, 2009

I agree it is a nice looking project, well done. The only thing that I could add to this discussion is if the seating had been placed in a semi-circular design you would have had more comfortable sight lines for all viewers. That is everyone's bodies would be basically perpendicular to the stage allowing one to look straight on versus having to turn their heads and/or bodies to comfortably see the what was going on at the stage. Must keep in mind that this is an amphitheatre for a zoo and therefore can be somewhat more lax on how they design for sight lines and comfort.IMO

dito · October 09, 2009

haha...lots of critic on the text! build a bridge (i.e get over it!)

Go New Zealand!!

sarkis · October 08, 2009

What the hell is the big deal, I think its a nice project very well done!

KJS · October 07, 2009

Classically, an amphitheatre is a complete circle or oval, and a theatre is a semi-circle. An amphitheatre was distinguished from a theatre precisely by having seating that surrounded the viewing area entirely, as e.g. in the Colosseum. This project would fit neither specification as far as classical models are concerned. But modern English usage is much looser, and "amphitheatre" is more frequently used to denote an outdoors venue as opposed to an enclosed "theatre." Since this project does open to the outdoors, I would say "amphitheatre" is an appropriate appellation. More importantly, I think it is very attractive & well-done!

Goldschmidt R · October 07, 2009

João my friend, I dont said literaly, but it is one open space, eh, but why do we bother for the name it have. I like the building and that is all. If I like to call one building of mine Train staiton, and it is a Post office, I don't see what is the problem, and the shape it is an "fan" plan, but it is more today than thousand's of years ago. Abd don't bother João, it isn't a personal thing!

João · October 07, 2009

Well, considering that "amphi" is a latin word that comes from Greek, and means "on both sides" or "around", we must conclude that an amphitheatre is related wiht the circular form, and not the out-door.

So, even recognizing the lack of importance of it... this is not an amphitheatre!

Squidly · October 07, 2009

Lucky they didn't build this in the US, they would have been required to add a ramp access to the stage!

Goldschmidt R · October 07, 2009

Hey come on, let the ancient Greac to rest in peace, bought of them have that shape semi circular, but the differance is that: The amphitheatre it is an open air, and thea theatre is enclosed. And I think that is a hybrid, because it is an open space, but it is just coverd. Anyway, I like the design, it is using warm material, and I don't think the sound will be bad.

salvadore · November 16, 2009 01:50 AM

who are you ppl???? does nobody learn history of art or something??? ascending seating makes it an amphitheater.....

PB · October 06, 2009

An amphitheatre is usually an out-door, open air performance venue, usually with the seating being semi-circular in plan. The semi circle was used because of it's natural amplification qualities that allowed performances to be heard clearly in the back rows without the aid of artificial amplification.

This is an enclosed space, but is not cut off from the out doors (the building is more of a shelter). It does not look like it has or needs artificial amplification, so, regardless of the shape in plan, I think it qualifies as an amphitheatre.

Regardless, I think it's a quite attractive design and hope it sounds as good as it looks while in use. I like the variety of materials, and it seems warm and inviting while being a contemporary design.

salvadore · November 16, 2009 01:47 AM

ascending seating makes a it an amphitheater!

Ruth · October 07, 2009 06:31 AM

The theatre was in fact semi-circular (or at least fan shaped) in it's very early design, however this was "value engineered" away - as described in the blurb, cost was a key driver. Nonetheless the rectangular seating works well and we think provides a very elegant form - Amphitheatre or not!

astor · October 06, 2009

I wish they had put a central photo of the stage...

João · October 06, 2009

The shape.
And this is not an amphitheatre...

salvadore · November 16, 2009 01:41 AM

and how did you get to this smart conclusion that this in not an amphitheatre??

before you say things that you don't know, make some research.

designdummy blogger · October 06, 2009

What makes a theatre, an amphitheatre?...anyone?

···

Comments are closed

Read comments

惠灵顿动物园的阶梯剧场 / Jasmax