Urban Forest / MAD Architects
Upon first glance, MAD Architects’ latest project for Chongqing, China looks like an impossibility. The project, entitled Urban Forest, features a stacked set of floors that cantilever drastically from their central support. The floors are designed to bring more nature and open space into a densely compacted urban area.
More images and more about the project after the break.
The building is a commercial high-rise whose form was inspired by the mountainous typology of the surroundings. Each one of the seventy floors is unique with a different abstract curved shape and layered slightly off-center from it neighboring floors. The floors give an organic and textured effect to the façade as it rises into the sky.
Floor-to-ceiling glass windows offer users an uninterrupted panoramic of the city as a way to combine nature with the urban metropolis. Pools, trees and courtyards are scattered about the walk-around balconies providing an aesthetic which is quite different from the typical office or residential space.
As seen on Inhabitat
ok, so which part of ‘these type of projects can’t be built and should not be proposed anymore’ is it that mad architects don’t understand?..
do you not see that’s the point of the project and exactly what MAD is trying to do and fight against? it’s what makes them “unique”. in reality, it probably IS feasible with the co-design with a structural engineer, but to see “Upon first glance, MAD Architects’ latest project for Chongqing, China looks like an impossibility.” in the first sentence of this write-up is a complete give away. this is how they get attention; pairing a “unique” strategy of design/work/production/pr with sexy images.
to be honest, i hate mad. their museum is one of the most disgusting buildings i’ve ever seen, and to see it being built is even more nauseating. most of their other projects i cannot stand as they have no tact or refinement. this project is at least somewhat serious.
i can’t agree when people say architecture is not a thing to be taken lightly. archigram? lightly or heavily, architecture is a medium of communication. the specific style should not be judged, but more what it is saying (which people are taking as such surface value here)
aa: the realms of possibilities are to be challenged, not simply accepted. most engineers in ARUP have a “nothing is impossible” drive in them. what’s wrong with proposing extraordinary designs that push the envelope?
Agreed, but what aa probably means is that the design is lacking structure. This lack of structure gives the images this transparent and surreal look of floating slabs. If one proposes a concept like this, the structure should be at least addressed at a conceptual level. The guys at Arup can develop it more. `Cantilevers drastically` is not adressing the issue realistically.
So, If I understand correctly, these realms of possibilities are mostly regarding on engineering possibilities? I mean, we as architects have the purpose of designing not something that is good but designing something that “pushes the envelope”?
there are firms that do good design and there are firms that push the envelope. MAD pushes the envelope, that’s what they do. and our collective comments are probably all they’re after. sometimes it’s interesting to design something crazy, put it out there and see how people react. similar to science fiction, really… as Clive Thompson said… It’s a kind of simulation, to understand how we’d react if you change a few basic rules.
needless to say, if i were MAD, i would be recording every comment here on archdaily re this project. :)
start on from middle rise building… and from that continue on other high rise project. if not it would be a total waste…
I really hate this… no match at all.
Same here.
Not to be pleasant to me the form and that that the architecture has not sat down in environment absolutely
how these trees are supposed to grow without soil and with so little natural light and water?
…and getting blown off by the strong winds on the higher levels. It also looks more like a garden than a forest to me. Ever been in one? It´s not only about some trees you know.
I agree with gorgos, when designing that kind of building structure at a conceptual level should be addressed early in the design process
I love this concept! It’s one of those ideas that makes your heart beat faster. The organic shapes fighting against the city and the scary, unbalanced height, like a massive tree.
Pie in the sky stuff. It may be ‘technically’ possible, but why would you want to build it??
I agree aswel with the statement about it being less of a ‘forest’ and more of a vertical garden.
欢迎中国的朋友加入ASKETCH建筑讨论qq群92452790
i remain constantly surprised that MAD gets so much attention for high quality renderings of 2nd/3rd year student work. Ignoring the cost of construction, the absence of preliminary construction concept, or any of the personal feelings about aesthetics that abound here on arch daily…in a strictly formal sense MAD’s work is just boring.
Criticize the popularity of the blob or the, “highly geometrically complex for no particularly good reason,” style of architecture as much as you want but at least know the difference between good work in that school of thought and poor work in that school of thought.
This is what maybe…draw 5 or 6 floor plates, move vertically, loft, contour…smooth and rotate randomly? Maybe just hand draw some new ones in arbitrarily for differentiation. Extrude a bunch of floor plates, white VRay rendering, 2 hours in photoshop, publish it.
This work is insulting to architects on both side of the digital architecture fence.
Amen
Calm down, plots.
I think MAD is not as bad as you thought. Doesn’t this building remind you a little about the Absolute Building in Canada. That one is getting built. What do you think about that duilding? I think it’s different and nice, although it is hated by the structural engineers (that is what I heard).
MAD is a young firm and they are just trying to do something different than what we’ve seen in the architectual world before, which can’t be successful every time. But at least they are trying and their effort shouldn’t be totally denied.
I think you’re misunderstanding my point.
There are lots of architects out there pushing the envelope of what is and is not architecture, and I agree that, successful or not, that type of work is absolutely crucial to the development of architecture as a discipline. However, the work that MAD offers up is not representative of the work that should be getting international attention within the group of those trying to push the envelope.
When I say their work is boring I mean their work is almost strictly formal. Sure they often attach social agendas to their work but those agendas are never well thought out or implemented (see Mobile China Town or the above). And I don’t have a problem with it being strictly formal, except that the forms are not indicative of the strengths of the systems they use to design them. I could, literally, model a building like the Urban Forest in less than half an hour. That doesn’t mean I’m a good architect, it means I know how to use basic tool setups in modeling software.
MAD’s work is just playing in the sandbox, using the digital process as a tool, not as an environment for design which is where it’s real strength lies.
They are not high quality renderings
Plots, I think I clearly understand your point. But again, whether or not MAD’s work should be getting international attention is not decided by single person, like you and me. In fact, if MAD is really that bad as you mentioned, did you ask yourself why they keep getting so much attention? There must be a reason, right? Apparently not their modeling skill, because many people here can do it within half an hour although I don’t think I can. If you ask me, I think some of their work especially those being built are not bad, which deserve some attention.
As far as the how to use computer modeling as a design tool, I a wm with you. I am just saying it would be nice to judge an architect by all/most of his work as a whole, but not only one or two, such as some conceptual designs….
Striking.
this just looks like a defragmented version of absolute towers.
obviously, Ma is not yet over with ‘absolute’. shake it off man!
They tend to re-use their designs if you look at their proposals at their website. The proposal for WTC appears in two other projects.
It seems though as they exaggerate their proposals just for the effect and that they then tone down the actual project. I think its a fun way of presentation. Its a little 2/3rd year student work about it though.
Have they gone MAD?!
just more MADsturbation
Plots got me right.
It’s not that we, as architects, should not push the limit and shouldn’t look for innovative structures, etc. My point is that you do that when you know what you are doing. Architecture is not to be taken as lightly as some architects (like Mad) do.
I think there’s plenty of problems out there to be resolved before one should attempt to even begin thinking of impossible cantilevers with trees growing on them on a building that does not even address relevant questions to contemporary architecture. Can they do 3d models in rhino or whatever, yes, can they render them w/ vray and publish them, sure they can – most likely they will impress the student population. Now that they’ve drawn everyone’s attention can they do something productive?…
This should be filed under “Childish Fantasy Architecture.” For instance, how do you propose keeping a 25 foot deciduous tree alive on a 12 inch floor slab? Would I be overstating the obvious by saying that something as terrestrial as a “forest” adds little value to the urban landscape when it sits, cantilevered, on the 70th floor. Please, stop celebrating absurd and truly unsustainable propositions.
plots, you rock.
also…please! stop photoshopping trees into high rise slabs!!!! It just looks sustainable, in reality a few trees don’t do anything. You might as well put fake ones if you need to see some green color.
Let’s please move on to searching for intelligent sustainable designs!
stop playing with form please!
I am here to inform you guys that mad has stated that they just got mad.
Will the vegetation serve as habitat for local fauna? Or is just meant to be ornamental?
I like the project. Don’t like photoshoped trees in imposible areas to grow.
Have you ever been to Chongqing? I’ve been there – This is total CHAOS – urban Jungle (riverfront-port area is insane). I think they need a serious urban solution at large (huge) scale to make it right.
What is it with architects and these fantasies? What’s the point…How is this helping or improving citys? I don’t get it…
it’s almost as if the more amazing & outrageous architectural renderings look the more evident it becomes that the architects behind it don’t have the slightest clue of how the building actually works or how it’s going to get built for that matter…
That’s an amazing idea.
That’s an amazing idea. It start with just a concept.. but eventually the concept will be turned into reality. The more ideas get shared with green buildings at the center, the better the ideas will become.
As architects we do have to capacity to build alsmot everything, f some are but should we build only what we imagine or should we build of some what are belongs or what is rooted often in a less visible round not apparent?
Build almost everything? What are you talking about?
“The floors are designed to bring more nature…”
I like to know what they mean by nature… do they even know what it is?
โครตเท่เลย
สุดๆเลยอ่ะ
คิดได้ไง
แจ่มๆๆๆๆๆๆๆ
Trees growing on 50cm-floor… :)
Visualizations are nice, but let’s get back to reality. Some things aren’t able to do, even with very high technology, because of the Nature.
Stairway to pancake heaven….
Originality is noted. However, I don’t feel it does anything much for the city skyline. It might work better in a smaller scale.
why should people not understanding what the hardships of an architect comment as if they know all bout designing? if you, civil-engineering people & those standing by their side keep underestimating architects & the profession then what makes you right? I’m an architecture student & i think i should take a stand for this profession because an architect NEVER DESIGNS FOR HIMSELF ALONE,oftentimes,HE EVEN WORKS WITHOUT DESIGNING AT ALL JUST MAKING SURE HIS PROCESS CAN COVER ALL PEOPLE, THE SOCIETY ITSELF & MANY OTHER THINGS. HAIL THE ARCHITECTS!!! HAHA.
Futuristic city idea, beats a concrete jungle in the concrete jungle: http://www.archdaily.com/42968/urban-forest-mad-architects/
So does everyone just get their own floor? I’m lost. That would cost so much money, and every floor would have to have all of its individual “landscaping” done? Jesus.
mad.. another architectural icon of this time
这是中国的山水文化
mad are mad
8:38 AM Aug 30th
Reading: "Urban Forest / MAD Architects | ArchDaily"( http://twitthis.com/2ay9lv )
3:32 PM Oct 8th
Urban Forest / MAD Architects | ArchDaily http://t.co/G4HQLCM via @archdaily