Santiago Calatrava: Architect or Engineer?

Santiago Calatrava: Architect or Engineer?

Leonardo Ali Dissertation AR597 Kent School of Architecture University of Kent 2014

Abstract Architecture is the ultimate design profession in the world. That description in itself refers to the great responsibility for the architect to develop the face of the planet - a job that cannot be completed without the vast network of expertise involved.

Architects cannot design buildings on their own; they need the counsel of engineers, planning officers and more in order to accomplish a brief. The primary job for an architect is to come up with the concept which will influence the overall design of the project, whether it is in rural or urban landscapes.

A visit in the summer of 2008 to the City of Arts and Sciences in Valencia – the hometown of world-renowned architect, Santiago Calatrava – quickly became my inspiration for studying architecture; many would be in awe of the new, organic and complex shapes based on nature. It has always been my desire to further explore his proposals and discover his techniques.

Through research and analysis I have explored to figure whether Calatrava is an architect or an engineer. To do this I have studied structures designed by Calatrava and examined how successful they have been in design and construction perspectives.

Acknowledgement I would like to thank Luciano Cardellicchio for his guidance and expertise through the process to help me accomplish a successful dissertation. I have appreciated his knowledge in the field of construction and engineering.

Contents 1.0 Introduction…………………………………………………………………... 1 1.1 The Calatrava Style 1.2 Methodology 1.3 Calatrava’s Relationship with Contractors 2.0 Growing Reputation………………………………………………………. 3 2.1 Growing Up 2.2 Early Career 2.3 Precedents 2.4 Global Breakthrough 3.0 Olympic Stadium, Athens………………………………………………. 7 3.1 Introduction 3.2 The Roof 3.3 Design 3.4 Construction 4.0 Other Projects………………………………………………………………… 19 4.1 Mediopadana Train Station, Reggio Emilia 4.2 Light Rail Transportation Bridge, Jerusalem 5.0 Controversies…………………………………………………………………. 20 5.1 Ponte della Costituzione Bridge, Venice 5.2 Palau de les Arts, Valencia 5.3 Zubi Zuri Bridge, Bilbao 6.0 Conclusion: Is Calatrava an Architect or Engineer?......... 35 7.0 Bibliography…………………………………………………………………… 36 8.0 Illustrations……………………………………………………………………. 40 Figure 1. Santiago Calatrava

1.0 Introduction 1.1 The Calatrava Style Calatrava’s signature in design can be described as steel structures on a large scale. His introduction of nature appears to originate from animal skeletons and wings of birds, creating forms which appear weightless and defy gravity, (Pollalis, 2006).

Architecture requires many skills and Calatrava is one who describes himself as an architect and engineer, (Euronews, 2009). Despite studying architecture in his hometown Valencia, it was at Zurich Technical School where he graduated with a PhD in engineering, (Pollalis, 2006).

1.2 Methodology The first case study is the roof designed for the existing Athens Stadium for the 2004 Olympic Games; a project only completed days before the Opening Ceremony. The second project is the Mediopadana Train Station in Italy, neighboured by three bridges.

Lastly is the Jerusalem Bridge in Israel, which takes the shape of the King David’s harp; an important figure in Israeli history.

Figure 2. Palau de les Arts

As these projects are recent, documentation is mainly dependent on internet based sources. Spiro Pollalis, from Harvard University, has reported the full sequence of construction for Athens Stadium; extracting the required information will help determine whether Calatrava is an architect over an engineer. Investigations into reports and journals help discover what makes him controversial in certain projects, but why clients spend vast amounts of capital to have a Calatrava design.

Figure 3. Science Museum

1

Examinations into drawings photos determine how Calatrava’s structures work. Communication with other credits, such as engineers and contractors can support this.

1.3 Calatrava’s Relationship with Contractors Italian company, Cimolai, are behind the manufacture of Calatrava’s projects. Construction into infrastructure projects including stadiums, bridges and large, steel buildings. They began in 1949 after World War II to build steel gates, developing strongly during the 1960’s due to growing markets and partnerships with brands such as Zanussi and Fiat. After completing projects internationally, they became a contractor to Calatrava. They have highly automated machinery, such as drilling machines to create the steel assemblies Calatrava demands, (Cimolai). Implementations of unique mechanical work including an arc welding plant are to produce the curves and irregular shapes for construction. Studying how this company worked with Calatrava, will help to understand Calatrava’s qualities as an engineer.

Figure 4. Jerusalem Bridge

Figure 5. Mediopadana Station

2

2.0 Growing Reputation 2.1 Growing Up Born on July 28th 1951, Calatrava grew up in a family who plied their trade in Spanish agriculture, which provided a strong financial backing for their son to pursue a career in art. His father had a love for art, taking Calatrava to the Prado museum in Madrid. From a young age, it was clear to see Calatrava had an interest in sketching and sculpture, taking art classes from the age of 8 years-old, (NotableBiographies.com).

Calatrava’s ambition was to attend art school and live life as a painter, (Calatrava, 2005). Calatrava’s parents struggled financially during the political situation in Spain, seeing their son’s career prospects better served abroad. When he was 13 years-old, they sent him to Paris on a student exchange with the hope at 16 he could join the School of Fine Arts. However political issues took over in deciding Calatrava’s fate as classes were cancelled because of intense student protests, causing Calatrava to return to Valencia to study architecture at the Technical University of Architecture, (NotableBiographies.com).

Calatrava’s knowledge in engineering would come afterwards, where he studied civil engineering. By 1981, he gained PhD degrees in structural engineering and technical science at the Federal Technology University in Zurich. This is where he met his wife, Robertina, a law student who is now an important lawyer for Calatrava, (NotableBiographies.com).

2.2 Early Career The post-Bauhaus design movement of creating buildings inspired by nature, particularly ribcages and wings originates when Calatrava

Figure 6. Alamillo Bridge

began working in Zurich immediately after qualifying as an engineer.

Calatrava recites an old Italian phrase, “l’architectura depende della membra del’uomo”, which translates to “architecture depends on the human members”. This is a key concept whereby the composition of the body is a form of architecture, from the mathematic proportions of the body to even the way hands are put together, knees are bent, etc. This does not mean that nature is a direct solution to architectural and engineering problems, but one to use as a metaphorical expression in buildings. Using nature as a precedent, Calatrava sets out a building to look like a natural representative, but by the time it is designed and constructed, it is entirely artificial, (Calatrava, 2005). An example of this is at the IMAX Cinema in Valencia, with the metaphorical illusion of an eye, nevertheless everything in an architectural and engineering manner is artificial.

This approach got Calatrava quickly accepted as an architect. Once he opened his office in Zurich, one of his projects was to build the Zurich train station. A friend studying veterinary gave Calatrava the ribcage of a dog. Calatrava used it as a precedent when designing the train station because he admired it for its engineering faultlessness, (NotableBiographies.com).

Calatrava designed many bridges in his early career, a structure which allowed him to combine his architectural and engineering expertise. This was an opportunity to construct with white concrete and steel, for example, the Alamillo Bridge in Seville (background image), (NotableBiographies.com). Most of his bridges would be in Europe, which are functionally important to cities, (Rose, 2010).

Calatrava believes in a utilitarian Europe; one which has a history

3

full of connections, in institutions such as monasteries and universities, (Euronews, 2009).

2.3 Precedents Historical influences are a precedent for every architect, making Calatrava no different. Antoni Gaudi was famed for his asymmetrical designs which were reminiscent to nature in buildings such as the Sagrada Familia and landscapes like Parc Guell, (NotableBiographies.com). After visiting both Calatrava and Gaudi’s work, there are certain similarities between Calatrava and Gaudi.

The picture on the right is from Parc Guell by Gaudi in Barcelona, with this space as part of the walkway through the landscape.

Similarly, on the right we see a sheltered walkway at Calatrava’s City of the Arts and Sciences. Both have angled columns as they curve up towards the roof. This is one of many comparisons between Gaudi and Calatrava; Gaudi was also very knowledgeable in engineering and architecture.

Figure 7. Parc Guell

The second historic influence to Calatrava was Finnish-American designer, Eero Saarinen, (NotableBiographies.com), where his building designs were simple but abstract. He was playful with spaces, and it is understandable how Calatrava’s work can be described as a balance between the two architects.

Figure 8. City of Arts and Sciences

4

Figure 9. Milwaukee Museum

2.4 Global breakthrough It is the home of Saarinen where Calatrava was next to impress, the United States of America. Calatrava reused his construction materials of glass, concrete and steel to work on projects in New York, but it was in Milwaukee where he his first constructed. This was Calatrava’s breakthrough after his work in Europe, a building that brought him to celebrity status as an international architect.

Previously designed by Saarinen, the Milwaukee Art Museum was an architectural and engineering sensation by Calatrava which prompted a positive response with the museum multiplying in visitors.

Calatrava had to work hard on this project; parts of the centrepiece – folding sunshades which controlled how much sunlight entered the building – had to be constructed in Spain and transported to Milwaukee. The uplifting appearance that metaphorically gives the experience of wings was a good match for the American optimism, (NotableBiographies.com).

Figure 10. Milwaukee Museum

His design for the World Trade Centre Transportation Hub in New York won approval to be constructed – a design similar to that in Milwaukee – as part of the project to replenish Ground Zero that was attacked on September 11th 2001. This is an important structure as it is one of the first projects Calatrava works with Cimolai, (Calatrava, 2005).

Figure 11. New York Transit Hub

6

3.0 Athens Stadium 3.1 Introduction As his reputation grew, he began to have large projects in Europe, such as the opera house in Tenerife. However, no bigger project came through than to design the roof of Athens Stadium for the 2004 Olympic Games. This epic event was matched by Calatrava’s linking again of architecture and engineering in forming two girder arches which resemble “bent-leaf” structures made of steel, (Jodidio, 2009).

Located in Marousi, a suburb in the north of Athens, Greece, the Olympic Athletic Centre of Athens (OACA) would host the 2004 Olympic Games. It is one of the biggest briefs Calatrava had been given in his career, going much further than just the roof itself; with requirements also for a new roof at the refurbished Velodrome, new areas for athletes and more including improved pedestrian connections to public transport, (Jodidio, 2009).

Figure 12. Athens Stadium

As part of the landscape, a need for plazas and canopies were required along with sculptural features. The Nation’s wall, a 250m by 20m monument made from tubular steel exists resembling a vertical version of Calatrava’s moveable Wave sculpture in Texas, USA, which portrays movement – a key theme in Calatrava’s work, (Pollalis, 2006, p. 7).

Figure 13. Athens Stadium

7

3.2 The Roof The roof over the existing stadium is designed to cover 25,000m2; spanning 304m in length, parallel to the long side of the stadium.

The arch is positioned there to be in direct resemblance with the long jump event, where the athlete takes the parabolic path similar to the steel girder, (Jodidio, 2009).

From initial design to the end of construction, was not a simple path. Calatrava’s reputation was on the line when it came to constructing the roof, with details and surveys inadequate, meaning deadlines were not met. There was criticism worldwide by the media as the roof was supposed to be finished two months in advance of the Opening Ceremony to allow television cameras and lighting to be installed – it was not even ready a month before the main event, (Pollalis, 2006, p. 1).

“Obviously the roof will be ready on time. I would never risk my reputation if I were not sure about it” This was the quote Calatrava gave two months before the start of the games – when construction should have finished. This project certainly came with controversy, straight from the beginning when Dennis Oswald, Chairman of the IOC (International Olympic Committee) Coordination Committee for the Athens Games said that there was no need for a roof at the Olympic Games, (Pollalis, 2006, p. 1).

The vision of the roof began in 2001, where two groups, the ATHOC (Athens Organising Committee) and the GSS (General Secretiat for Sports) took control of the construction. For a stadium that was built in 1982, the 2004 Games were to host all track and field competition, as well as the final of the Mens Football, (Pollalis, 2006, p. 1).

Calatrava has a history with Greece; earlier in 2001 he gave lectures in Athens hosted at the National Gallery. He also helped decide on the design for the Acropolis Museum of Athens along with other architects and engineers from around the globe, (Pollalis, 2006, p.

4).

There was controversy with the commission to Calatrava, as by regulation there is meant to be an international competition.

However through the European Directives, Calatrava was allowed to be commissioned with the project as it fell under the category of a “purely artistic nature, unique and original”, (Pollalis, 2006).

Figure 14. Calatrava Sketch Figure 15. Athens Stadium

8

3.3 Design For Calatrava to show his architectural prowess, he looked to reflect on the Greek culture for his inspiration as he studied Byzantine and classical styles. He drew on the vaults and arches related to the Byzantine theme, creating spaces that were suitable for spanning across long distances. The double arches were made to reduce the amount of coverage by nearly 20,000m2 in an effort to eliminate the stress on the tubular steel girders, (Pollalis, 2006, p. 6).

Structurally, the arches are similar to an earlier pedestrian bridge of his, the Zubi Zuri Bridge in Bilbao, Spain. The system works so that the arch deals with the load vertically, with transverse beams supporting a glass deck. A cylindrical beam then holds the transverse beams up. Such big spans with arches are structurally sound, (Pollalis, 2006, p. 6).

Figure 16. Athens Stadium Roof

Calatrava would have lost its “slender” appearance and look industrial had he used a lattice arch. The parabolic geometry still holds strength only capable through big steel arches that have circular sections to have the same stiffness in both axes. The arches in this form would make the structure look lighter, although it needing to be heavier, (Pollalis, 2006, p. 8).

Calatrava’s office was in Zurich, so to help with communication, he collaborated with Greek firm, Betaplan in Athens. They hired consultants in Greece to assist the project; these included civil engineers and landscape architects. GIBB Hellas was one of the most important consultants to the project as they were the ones to give the green light after checking the construction details. Along with Victor Segovia, Calatrava’s assistant who had checked his

Figure 17. Zubi Zuri Bridge

9

details in the past, suggested that there were issues with a list totalling 25 problems that needed to be addressed. It was not until March 2002 – much later than the anticipated deadline – were the new details passed, (Pollalis, 2006, p. 10). This brings into question Calatrava’s qualities as an engineer, despite the complexity of the design.

needed to be stronger, as there was no horizontal support applied from the foundations. Calatrava did attempt to use piles installed at an angle at the foundations; which would have produced the horizontal force. Calatrava’s reasoning for this would be to keep the structure as light as possible, however this would have detrimental effects as there would be seismic stresses and a generation of high thermal mass, (Pollalis, 2006, p. 12).

The structure was made heavier with larger cross sections from 2.50m to 3.20m in diameter. The tube thickness would range between 50 to 100mm, providing greater thickness where stress was most applied. The weight of the structure increased by 30%, which made it more expensive; however safety is paramount and cannot

Figure 18. Initial sketch

Figure 19. Developed sketch

3.4 Construction When construction began in September 2002, construction companies from Greece allied together to form a joint venture.

Aktor, Athina and Themeliodomi teamed up with Italian company Cimolai. However, in total there were 15 subcontractors working on the roof, (Pollalis, 2006).

British consultancy firm SKM (Sinclair Knight Merz) detected the design was not structurally efficient. They proved the structure would not hold up due to load combinations. Construction was delayed because the circular section of the two steel arches needed to be bigger to make the structure stiffer, (Pollalis, 2006, p. 12).

The torsion arch and the cables create ‘tying’ elements which delivered the horizontal forces required for the arch. The arch

Figure 20. Plan of Athens Olympic Site

10

Figure 21. Athens Stadium

be questioned. These details were checked again and wind tunnel tests were taken out at London University, Canada, to judge that the structure was capable of enduring wind speeds of over 120km/h, (Pollalis, 2006, p. 13).

Calatrava engineered the design better in the first place, or even if deadlines were met, more time could have been afforded to suspend sets from the roof; therefore saving construction time and money.

The arches were not the only issue with the design; as mentioned earlier, glass is one of the three materials Calatrava commonly uses.

The original design used glass to act as cover over the stadium.

Although because of its heavy weight, which had structural implications gravitationally, this was replaced with polycarbonate panels. These panels were manufactured in Israel before transported to Germany for treatment which made the panels weigh 14.4kg/m2 – roughly half as light as glass. They are arguably better than glass because of the additives in the plastic, as most of the radiant heat is reflected. However, it allows light to come through; to prevent darkness but keeping the temperature cool for spectators. Construction wise, the panels are scratch-resistant, meaning tools such as drills and saws can be applied without any damage, (Pollalis, 2006, p. 14). It is this balance in engineering and architecture where Calatrava had to compromise due to the different appearance of the panels, but is able to keep the form of an elegant cover over the stadium.

GSS were aware that planning was paramount as deadlines meant there were no excuses for mistakes. Construction began in May 2003, for two arches at 72m to cover 304m in length. The initial member was the upper arch with a diameter of 3.20m, followed by the lower arch, with the diameter measuring 3.60m. This had to finish within 14 months along with the installation of electrical and mechanical equipment. Bored piles of 31m deep with a diameter of 1.5m were part of the foundations to support the structure. Using these piles underneath the piers was the most efficient method to bare the long span and heavy weight of the steel girders.

Engineering problems continued for Calatrava as for part of the opening ceremony, equipment needed to be installed on the roof. A lot of it had to be suspended, which was causing stress through loads in a direction where it was weakest for the structure – perpendicular to the arches. Due to time restraints and safety concerns, a decision was taken to introduce a new system separate to the roof, where 6 large pylons and 24 secondary elements would be situated around the stadium, (Pollalis, 2006, p. 13). Had

Figure 22. Polycarbonate panels

12

It was not as simple as that though as Edafos (the foundation consulting firm) discovered that on the south-eastern pier – 25m deep – there were weak layers of soil thought to have been from an old river bed. This slowed the construction process as there was an anxiety that the piles would follow into the soft soil layers, which would affect the bearing capacity of the foundation. The resolution that Edafos gave to Calatrava was to have more piles at each pier and make them longer, increasing lengths by an additional 10m.

There would be between 32 to 48 piles at each pier, (Pollalis, 2006, p. 15).

It was established before the design process that whatever type of roof they were to construct, it was not to be supported by the stadium already in place. Constructing the roof in two halves, with both 70m away from its intended position was the solution to not disrupt the existing structure, (Pollalis, 2006, p. 17). This was a good proposition by Calatrava and the joint venture of contractors, as it left the old stadium untouched and created a clear separation between the contemporary showcase of the roof and the original arena.

Despite this engineering victory, the architectural beauty was still a primary concern. Calatrava was specific in moulding his form, particularly not neglecting the detail in connections; as he welded the steel structure to ensure protruding bolts were not noticeable for the benefit of the aesthetics. Although welding acts as reinforcement for some of the stresses in the structure, this resulted in the tubes of the arch having up to 100mm in thickness.

Calatrava and Cimolai agreed there were challenges to accomplish quality welding for a metal arch that was question to bending and torsion. To get around this, connections were made using bolts with

Figure 23. Installing steel girders

Figure 24. Installing steel girders

Figure 25. Prefabrication of tubes with altering thickness

13

Figure 26. Athens Stadium

interior flanges that were aligned to larger tubes at the points where the arch is not visible from the outside, (Pollalis, 2006, p. 17).

After the foundations had been put in place, steel sections for the arches were manufactured in Italy by Cimolai before being assembled in Athens. Before this, temporary pylons would sit on a base of reinforced concrete. The construction process was broken down into six phases: 1. The initial sections of the upper arch – including the piece which was at the highest point – are placed on the ground by the temporary steel towers, directly under where it is intended to be positioned.

2. These parts are then lifted onto the tower, awaiting the pieces that will connect in between them as the illustration shows.

3. The subsequent parts of approximately 55m in length, are fixed into position through special jacks. These are connected together to form an arch with bolts inside the tube.

4. The torsion tube is created in three longer pieces which are welded on the ground, underneath their final position.

5. After the central piece has been lifted into position, the neighbouring two parts are raised and welded to create the second arch.

6. The final pieces, supported by Figure 27, shows how the end of both tubes are connected together and to the ground.

Figure 27. Construction of arches

Figure 28. Lifting prefabricated tubes into position

15

Calatrava and Cimolai had to use this sequence of construction to satisfy the forces being acted on by the weight of the structure; where more force is applied to the torsion tube along with the torsional forces from the girders, (Pollalis, 2006, p. 18).

More engineering decisions were required by Calatrava before the assembled towers were moved aside, such to only complete approximately 30% of installing the polycarbonate panels which were fixed to the girders, before each half of the roof was slid into the final position. These structural, primary girders were installed to the lower tube in pairs with secondary beams known as perlins to connect them together to control forces horizontally. This supporting frame creates the platform for the roof for the stadium to have a suspended level for the M&E equipment, (Pollalis, 2006, p.

20).

Figure 29. Only 30% of cover installed

In April 2004, the towers were removed as the arch could now support its own weight. In anticipation for the sliding of the roofs, Calatrava and Cimolai had to calculate using computing technology a prediction for the deformation the arch would suffer once it had to bear its own weight. The deformation was replicated to what was shown during computer simulation when the towers were gradually removed, proving that the arch was constructed correctly. The sliding of the arches could begin after agreement between all parties, including Calatrava, (Pollalis, 2006, p. 22).

The joint venture of contractors installed two concrete beams which would be fixed with rails and hydraulic equipment for the sliding of the roofs. At separate intervals of 5 minutes, the roofs are moved across the track which took 3 days each. Careful cautions were taken by the contractors to ensure that the sliding of the roofs did

Figure 30. Plan of Roof in final position

16

not deform the structure. As it was on two separate tracks, it was ensured by Cimolai and others that the abutments on both sides of the arch moved at simultaneous speeds. Any difference in speed would mean one side was moving quicker than the other, creating torsion in the members of the structure. Wind pressure and seismic forces were accounted for during design to enable deformations, therefore meaning the materials have elasticity properties allowing the geometry to return to its original form, (Pollalis, 2006, p. 22).

Figure 31 & 32. Sliding Track This was a risky situation because the tests were carried out with 100% of the covering installed on the roof. Deformation could have been permanent because of wind pressure as the roof only has a third of its covering. This caused nervous times for Calatrava and others due to the time constraints allowing no time for errors, (Pollalis, 2006, p. 23).

The two arches were connected at the nodes once the two structures were in position. These were connected to the abutments by the piers. This was not so straight forward, as both abutments on the north ends of the structures were secured on the piers. Yet the southern ends had to be connected in order to permit negligible movements along the longitudinal axis, (Vegvesen, p. 69).

This was performed because of thermal systole and diastole. This is because of the changes in heat, resulting in the metal to expand and therefore change geometry, (Pollalis, 2006, p. 23). Therefore the southern piers are indeed entirely restrained; however slight longitudinal displacements can occur. This is different to the north abutments, where they are fully restrained to any movement and rotation, (Vegvesen, p. 66).

Figure 33. Process of sliding the roof into position

17

There were certainly flaws and progressions in architectural as well as engineering aspects of the Athens Roof. However, this would not have been so without the help of others and in particular Cimolai; who helped with the construction.

Although the Olympics overshadowed the work Calatrava had done, his involvement in Athens will be remembered as a symbolic moment bringing together architecture, engineering and sports, (Jodidio, 2009).

The stadium has continued to function, when in 2007 it hosted the UEFA Champions League Final, as AC Milan conquered Liverpool, 21.

Figure 34. Detail of abutment

Figure 36. Olympic Ceremony

Figure 35. 2007 UEFA Champions League Final

18

4.0 Other Projects 4.1 Mediopadana Train Station The Mediopadana Train Station was part of a big infrastructure project by Calatrava in the northern area of Italian province, Reggio Emilia. The project included three bridges in a new expressway between Reggio Emilia and Bagnolo. Along with a roof to cover a toll station and a train station, the new development was part of an urban renewal project, (DETAIL, n.d.).

A station between Parma and Bologna was designed by architect, Angiolo Mazzoni, during the 1930’s to replace an original passenger building, (trenidicarta, 2011). This was destroyed during World War II, resulting in a redesign by another architect; Roberto Narducci, (MDA, 2013). The station operates on the high speed train line between Milan and Bologna.

Calatrava was approached to create the design by the Municipality of Reggio Emilia. Part of the Project Team also included structural engineering company, SETECO Ingegneria Srl. More importantly though, was the inclusion of Cimolai under the same Project Manager that worked on the roof for the Athens Stadium, Denny Regini. This was because of a harmonious relationship between architect and contractor, (ASI, n.d.).

As the façade faces the motorway, the Mediopadana train station is a steel and glass structure taking up the shape of a sinusoidal curve; repeated across 19 modules. Each module is composed of 25 whitepainted steel elements, fixed 1m away from each other, (DETAIL, n.d.).

Figure 37 & 38. Initial Sketches

19

Figure 39. Mediopadana Train Station

The structure goes parallel with the motorway at a length of 483m.

The curve of the motorway elevation takes a calmer form in comparison to the opposite elevation. The curves are more dynamic as it is based on two waves overlapping symmetrically as part of specific principles in geometry. These waves are visible in both plan and elevation, (DETAIL, n.d.). Calatrava’s reasoning behind a ‘wave’ concept replaces the original idea of ‘sails’ to differ the station from the bridges, (IB, 2013).

Reinforced Concrete Walls

Steel Arches

The average height of the structure is 20m due its 3D sinusoidal form, with the roof itself rising from 7.5m to a peak height of 14.5m, (DETAIL, n.d.). The difference in height is resisted by the establishment of the stairs and mechanical lifts that exist on the edge of the corridor; which is between the lower section of the structure and the viaduct, (S+F, 2013).

The location is important for Reggio Emilia to show it is the ‘station port’ for Italy’s most important cities, (S+F, 2013). From a 40-minute trip to Milan, to a 2-hour trip to Rome, Calatrava believes strongly in train travel and its role in Europe. Calatrava believes new modern infrastructure will help in the bad economic situation, as it provides opportunities for cities away from the main financial areas.

Calatrava reflects on success that occurred to connect the high speed railway link from Madrid to Seville, as opposed to Madrid and Barcelona. In this situation the less developed areas economically in the south, in provinces such as Andalucía, to be connected with the wealthier north, (Euronews, 2009).

Calatrava describes train stations as “gates to go out” or “enter the city”. After a successful design for the train station at Liege, Belgium, Calatrava believes train travel is competing with the

Steel Beams

Concrete Pier

Steel Portal

Repeated across plan

Installation of Services (Elevators, Stairs, etc.)

Figure 40. Construction process

21

aeroplane, with the high speed railway producing impressive times for links in Spain and Italy, (Rose, 2010).

The project cost the council approximately 70 million euros, using 14,000 tonnes of steel and nearly 10,000m2 of glass. The opening was celebrated in 2013 for a structure which has two floors. The lower ground floor is for entrance to the building which takes the traveller through stairs and mechanical lifts to the top floor where the platform is, (DETAIL, n.d.).

Calatrava attempts to lessen the impact the train station has on the environment and immediate landscape by creating lots of green spaces along the railway line and around the entrance. Calatrava manipulates the levels of the landscape to enhance the elevation of the station. For example he has the car park on a lower level surrounded by trees to not disturb the façade, (DETAIL, n.d.).

Figure 41. Constructing the Steel Arches

Figure 42. Installation of the Steel Portal

The construction process was quite straight forward. As the railway line is already there, all that is required is the “organic madness” of the structure to form a station, (McKenzie, 2013). To support the angular elements, walls of reinforced concrete are built on both sides. After that, steel arches are fixed at intervals along the rectilinear plan to then support the steel beams. These in turn support the concrete pier which is where people access, (DETAIL Online, n.d.).

Next are the steel portals, which begin with the central pieces being held into position by a frame ahead of the north and south pieces fixed on the sides all the way across as the images show, (DETAIL Online, n.d.).

Figure 43. Frame used to initially load central pieces of steel portal

22

Therefore in section it is easy to understand how the gravity load works, with the weight going down the edge and into the foundation. However Calatrava had to consider the lateral forces too. To create global stability to the volumetric structure, there is a pipe bracing system which has a diameter at approximately 100mm.

These pipes are connected to the structure through articulated connections with plates that limit system deflection, (ASI, n.d.).

Figure 46. Pipe Bracing System

Figure 44 & 45. Order of Constructing the Steel Portal

Figure 47. Bracing System between Steel Portals

23

Figure 48. Jerusalem Chords Bridge

4.2 Light Rail Transportation Bridge Otherwise known as the Chords Bridge, Calatrava’s S-shaped structure – which hovers above an intersection at Jaffa Road with Theodor Herzl Boulevard – has proven to be one of Calatrava’s most controversial projects. Its weightless appearance is supported with a steel pylon reaching 118m high, (straus7, n.d.).

Calatrava was approached by Ehud Olmet, the Mayor of Jerusalem, to design a bridge to act as a symbol. The proposal included a single inclined pylon showing clear visual direction to the city. The location is significant, as it is by the Near Eastern Gate to the historic city of Jerusalem. This road had connected the ancient city of Jerusalem with the Tel Aviv motorway, making it a key artery into modern Jerusalem, (arcspace, 2008).

Calatrava is a keen believer in responses to grade up the quality of life of cities by creating a focus. This gives the city an identity when structures such as bridges, stations and cultural buildings are invested in. A bridge in particular can improve the daily lives of the public. As well as improving transport links, places such as stations and bridges bring people together. There is a confidence that these buildings have an added symbolic value, (Calatrava, 2005).

The design is symbolised by King David’s harp to represent a holy and inspiring city. The cables connected to the main deck range in lengths from 30m to 140m, (straus7, n.d.). They are arranged in a parabolic shape as originally drawn to reconcile the curved plan of the bridge with the elevation. This was important to interact with its surroundings, (arcspace, 2008). Calatrava takes his inspiration from the biblical reading of Psalm 150:3: “Praise Him with a blast of the trumpet; praise him with the lyre and harp”. Calatrava forms the

Figure 49 & 50. Jerusalem Bridge in context

25

bridge to replicate a harp, with the pylon pointing towards heaven, (Hecht, 2008).

S-shaped path to introduce a public square underneath, (Sachs, 2003).

From an engineering view, this was Calatrava’s most difficult and delicate bridge because of its slender appearance. There was a need to reduce sections due to its weight, but as a result increase the thickness of the material to provide strength, (JM, n.d.).

Calatrava initially sketches in an abstract manner to discover forms.

He understands that bridges with cables bring to mind instruments with strings. Calatrava sketches vigorously to explore possible solutions by taking precedents – in this case the harp, the instrument King David used to play, (Sachs, 2003) – and experiments with the members to figure structural solutions, (Tzonis, 2005). This method gives new, complex forms such as the pointing mast to act as a focal attraction intended to look as light and transparent as possible, (Sachs, 2003).

The bridge caused major outcry from the local community, some claiming it did not understand why it had cost so much, at just under $70 million, (Hecht, 2008). Calatrava has always defended himself strongly when money has come under question, using the excuse that the cost on infrastructure is nowhere near the same as the money invested to “save a paper economy, a purely administrative economy”. Calatrava believes investment into such structures can benefit businesses and in turn, the economy, (Euronews, 2009).

After communicating with Jerusalem journalist, Ami Ran, he believes the bridge expresses Calatrava’s style very well. However, the design has no relation to the city, as it is damaging to the main entrance of Jerusalem with no meaning of a gate, (Ran, 2014).

Calatrava thinks bridges are pragmatic, meaning the design process had to be sensible and realistic. Calatrava earns respect for his architectural methods by firstly attempting to understand the soul of the area and its surrounding landscape, (Calatrava, 2005). He then tries to recognise the problem and what he can do to improve it; in this case, it was to give character to the area while making life easier for pedestrians. Calatrava discovered there was a need for an

Figure 51. Calatrava sketch

26

Calatrava produces incredibly unique forms by sketching to design new structures. Calatrava is different to other architects because of his knowledge in engineering. This allows him to draw like an artist, but think like a scientist. He uses what he describes as the “spontaneity of the sketch”, to come up with geometrical forms. He combines this innovative inspiration and uses his scientific rigor to come up with a defined solution, (Sachs, 2003).

Calatrava does not design only in an artistic or mathematical manner, it is essential for him to utilise both. The book, “Santiago Calatrava’s Creative Process”, has been printed in two volumes. The first issue, “Fundamentals”, explains Calatrava’s use of mathematics and engineering across his structures. The second issue, labelled “Sketchbooks”, is a display of thousands of Calatrava’s drawings.

However, the two books are packaged together, a key representation that a designer cannot work with one without the other, (Sachs, 2003).

Calatrava admits his obsession for sketching can sometimes leave him with problems of no intention to stop. This can infuriate the client, who will tell him to pursue with the construction. Calatrava admits there is a certain feeling when he is satisfied for a project when he enters “a new land”, (Sachs, 2003). This is to suggest only when he reaches this feeling, does he feel confident to turn it into reality.

After Calatrava comes up with a solution, he produces a model ready to show the client. He may develop or begin a new idea, until he has models for 3 different proposals. To explain his ideas, Calatrava will have thought about aspects other than form, such as materiality, (Calatrava, 2005). There was an understanding that to

Figure 52. Calatrava sketch

Figure 53. Model of Jerusalem Bridge build in Jerusalem, it was necessary to construct with Jerusalem stone. Calatrava adds glass and steel to counteract with the honeycoloured rock to keep the bridge modern, (Sachs, 2003).

Calatrava picked his choice of colours carefully, as he chose to use blue lights which ran down the public footpath. Blue is an important colour to Israel, as it is used on their flag and the traditional prayer

27

shawl which is worn by people worshipping Judaism – the dominant religion in Israel, (Sachs, 2003).

A supporting mast in a bridge is nothing new in Calatrava’s work.

Similarly, in the Alamillo Bridge in Seville, there is the angled tower which holds up the bridge with cables through tension. The first idea was to replicate a straight, angled mast again, however through computer modelling, it realised there would be too much pull on the pylon. Development on this approach presented two legs supporting an angled mast. Tests through physical and computer models showed that Calatrava could in fact remove one of the legs. This made the design much slender, making it fit at the centre of the S-shaped bridge, (Sachs, 2003).

The ability to use just a single pylon to hold up a bridge, means there is no need for pillars to block the public square underneath the bridge. However, through individual analysis of the bridge and revisiting construction images, there is some uncertainty that this bridge is actually supported directly through the pylon alone. What raises this doubt is that the cables are attached to the bridge, at a position where it makes no structural sense as to how the cables are pulling the heavy bridge aloft. As the image shows, it does not seem capable for 66 cables to hold a bridge with an overall length of 360m when holding it only from one side, (JM, n.d.).

Figure 54. Cables only connected on one side

The cables appear to show to hold the S-shaped steel deck 6.45m above the intersection on the inner surface, (JM, n.d.). This makes little sense across the load-bearing pylon; it would perhaps be more understandable if the structure was held along the spine of the bridge. A much more realistic solution would appear if the cables Figure 55. Construction of Bridge

28

were connected to both the inner and outer walls of the bridge.

This theory is through observation and analysis of the construction; which raises questions about the bridge and as a result, Calatrava’s credibility as an engineer. On the other hand, Calatrava is a modern architect, he claims this bridge is in fact held up by a 118m-high pylon and used computer models to test its strength. Calatrava guessed even Antoni Gaudi, a previous Spanish surrealist architect, would do the same when designing the currently, incomplete Sagrada Familia in Barcelona. Due to a lack of technological advancements, Gaudi used weights and strings to produce structural models, (Sachs, 2003).

A lot of controversy surrounded this project, with a great weight of opposition coming from environmental groups and residents. This was immediately rejected by Ehud Olmet, who described it as a “sculptural gateway to the city which attracts tourists”. However, opposition groups argue that Jerusalem, which is one of the poorest cities in Israel, has enough tourism due to its religious history, (Hecht, 2008). Calatrava thought a bridge would be fitting in a city like Jerusalem – a place sacred to three religions. The word, ‘religious’, comes from the Latin meaning of ‘creating a link’, which is the function of a bridge in a landscape. Calatrava argues that “bridges join places that were separated”, (Sachs, 2003).

This quote came from Calatrava just as construction began.

Calatrava at this moment declared the assembly process to take 16 months, (Sachs, 2003). Cimolai was once again the company that worked with Calatrava to construct the project. Unsurprisingly with Calatrava, the time period to build the bridge was much longer.

Politics was to play a part in slowing the construction as there was a

temporary injunction against construction above the ground in 2006, (Hecht, 2008).

Nonetheless, one of the greatest uproars from the public was the lack of transparency throughout the whole design process, from planning to the inauguration of the bridge. Details such as the high cost were kept hidden from the public and they were not able to see the design until it was constructed. This caused a large outcry into how close the structure was to neighbouring apartment buildings, (Hecht, 2008).

Also, by the time the bridge could operate, the light rail transportation system had criticism due to the necessity for the trains to decrease in speed on the bridge. This was because of the curved nature of the bridge which meant at a faster speed, the train would derail from the change in direction, (Nicolin, 2009, p. 48).

Controversy is nothing new to Calatrava, as his reputation as an architect and an engineer are both damaged by a series of law suits and public uproar from some of his projects.

Figure 56. Construction

29

5.0 Controversies 5.1 Ponte della Costituzione Bridge Architecture is a very subjective topic, it is open to people’s opinions as to whether a design works or not. However in some cases, the criticism can be fierce and there is a public remorse to a certain design. Many factors influence opinions such as cost, or whether the public feel they are getting value for money, particularly with Calatrava when his labour comes at an expensive price.

Other problems include aesthetics: does it fit in with the landscape?

Calatrava’s designs attract attention from across the globe, as they become tourist landmarks. Is it correct for the Jerusalem Bridge to be so tall, that it becomes visible from every point in the city?

(Nicolin, 2009, p. 48) Figure 57. Ponte della Costituzione Bridge However, nothing can quite match the anger caused by a development when it fails functionally. Calatrava’s bridge in Venice, Italy, drew criticism when it was designed with no consideration of disabled access. The walkway was unsuitable for wheelchair users because the bridge had steep, glass steps. This was not only inconvenient for disabled people, but also for the elderly, as these steep steps do not fit in regulations, (Govan, 2008). Also, the glass material becomes slippery during wet weather conditions, which in fact makes it a hazard for anyone to walk on, (Karen, 2013).

As a result under court order, a mechanical system had to be installed to the edge of the bridge, called the ‘Ovovia’ – an Italian translation for the gondola – which carries people over the Grand Canal river, (Karen, 2013).

Figure 58. Steep glass steps

30

The investment into these mechanical carriages meant the cost of the bridge had gone 80% over the original budget. Huge public criticism came Calatrava’s way for his choice of material as the glass is either frequently broken, which again caused added costs for repair. Another engineer fault was the fear that the supports at the canal banks were not strong enough to hold the bridge in place.

These works had caused delays resulting in the inauguration to be cancelled. The Mayor of Venice, Massimo Cacciari had to acknowledge the disapproval for the bridge, with many questioning what was the need for it, as the Ponte degli Scalzi Bridge is very close, (Salmi, 2008).

Calatrava defends himself on the engineering aspects and claims it was not in his hands to select the construction company for the first bridge to be built in over 70 years, making it only the fourth bridge to cross over the Grand Canal. He claims his work was limited to only the form, explaining his design received no criticism when it was first revealed at the Piazza of San Marco. Instead he blamed the administration, for failure to execute the project successfully, which has damaged his reputation as both an architect and an engineer, (Govan, 2008).

Figure 59. The Ovovia

For all the problems the bridge had functionally and during construction, the aesthetics received a mixed response. Critics referred to it as a “lobster”, whereas enthusiasts called it the “carpet of light”, (Govan, 2008). The critics were mainly unimpressed as for all of Venice’s medieval architecture, Calatrava’s bridge was inappropriate because of its modern and minimalistic approach, (Salmi, 2008).

31

5.2 Palau de les Arts Government authorities set aside €300 million euros to complete an urban regeneration comprising an opera house performance hall, a science museum, a planetarium and a bridge with surrounding pools reflecting the white colours the site dominated in, (Daley 2013).

However they were eventually required to pay four times as much, leaving the opera house – Palau de les Arts – to cost €478 million, (Bono, 2014).

These huge costs prompted one local politician, Ignacio Blanco, to develop the website, Calatravatelaclava, which means ‘Calatrava bleeds you dry’. The entire complex has costs rising to €1.2 billion, as he released information that €700 million is still owed, (Daley, Santiago Calatrava Collects Critics as Well as Fans, 2013).

Another financial repercussion has been the €3 million required to strip the tiles off the façade from the Palau de les Arts. A serious engineering mistake has been performed by Calatrava, this time it has seriously affected the aesthetics of one of his projects. The ceramic mosaic produced from tile shards, otherwise known as trencadis, was used by Gaudi and other Catalan architects which prompted Calatrava to use it on the face of the opera house.

However, 8000m2 of this material has had to be removed as it began to wrinkle and look undesirable, which is a particular issue for a building so young, (Bono, 2014). Where some critics already refer to it as ‘Darth Vader’s helmet’ for its skeletal and curved appearance, the peeling started only six years after construction, (Daley, Santiago Calatrava Collects Critics as Well as Fans, 2013).

Calatrava argues the project was an investment that put Valencia “on the map” (Rosenfield, 2013). Although Valencian authorities were hoping it would have the same impact on the city as Frank Gehry’s Guggenheim Museum had on Bilbao, (Daley, 2013).

However, there has been major criticism aimed at Calatrava, not just for his mercenary-attitude, but also towards his designing and construction methods. The geometry of the interior design at the opera house has resulted in the views from 150 seats to be obstructed. The science museum was designed with no consideration for fire escapes or elevators for the handicapped, (Daley, 2013). These are serious issues in Calatrava’s designing, questioning his integrity as an architect. Does he work only conceptually; to then use a team to configure the geometry into a functional building? Or does he do this intentionally, to lengthen the process and increase the cost?

Figure 60. Peeling façade

32

Valencian architect, Vicente Blasco, reported how the buckling of the tiles was avoidable on Calatrava’s part. This is because it was predictable to judge the behaviour of the materials in connection with one another. The construction detail included the ceramic tiles attached to a curving steel plate emulating the geometry of the façade. Blasco states it should have been anticipated that the steel and tile, contract and expand at altered rates throughout days of swift fluctuations in temperature, (Daley, 2013).

This was what Cimolai in other projects did for Calatrava, as well as the construction; they did all the small, necessary details for Calatrava to satisfy clients. This is why projects such as the Mediopadana train station worked successfully, unlike the structures at the City of Arts and Sciences where even elevators were missing from designs.

A study was carried out by the Construction Technology Institute – otherwise known as Aidico – which reported that approximately 60% of the ceramic mosaic, was installed incorrectly, blaming it on either faulty design or construction. As a solution, once the tiles are detached, the steel dome underneath will be painted white.

Calatrava, as a world-renowned architect, has to take full responsibility for a design which failed elsewhere. As at one point, part of the structure caved in, causing part of the premises to be flooded, (Bono, 2014).

It is worth pointing out how Cimolai were not involved in the construction of this build. Perhaps it is the project in Valencia which can be used as evidence why Calatrava has such a good relationship with Cimolai.

Figure 61. Exposed steel surface

Ignacio Blanco criticised Calatrava for his costs due to delays. The delays were contributed by Calatrava’s lack of ability to provide construction details for the building to commence. Blanco had stated there was an unbelievable contrast between Calatrava and Félix Candela, the architect who worked on the aquarium for the City of Arts and Sciences. Candela provided a comprehensive file of details whereas Calatrava had very few, (Bono, 2014).

33

5.3 Zubi Zuri Bridge The bridge which Calatrava used to base his design for the roof of the Athens Olympic stadium has had its own controversy surrounding its glass deck floor, similar to that of his bridge in Venice.

their business because the leaks cause variations in humidity which affect the quality of their wine produce, (Daley, 2013).

His designs are continued to be slaughtered aesthetically by some, with his bridge in Valencia resembling the ‘jamonero’, a tool used in Spain to cut ham safely, (Saz, 2008).

Calatrava’s obsession to use glass as an outdoor floor decking had landed him into trouble. The council have had to pay approximately $300,000 in repairs for the glass pavers. It is claimed that in the past 10 years, every glass block of 560, has had to be replaced at least once. There have also been damages paid for lawsuits against them due to accidents cause by the slippery surface during wet conditions, affecting roughly 50 citizens,(Cohn, 2007).

Calatrava uses glass to allow lighting to come from underneath the bridge. The aesthetics are unobstructed as this avoids lampposts intruding with the structural arches. Calatrava believed in this so strongly, he reportedly refused the change the glass deck, with the council having no choice but to lay anti-slip tapes to avoid accidents, (Daley, 2013).

Calatrava has had his criticism on all sorts of projects including the New York Transit Hub; which is an incredible, 6 years behind schedule. The project is costing roughly $4 billion, which was twice the original budget. Complications have occurred due to Calatrava wanting mechanical systems such as ventilation installed to the exterior of neighbouring buildings. In Oviedo, Calatrava was ordered to pay €3.3 million for damages after the conference centre suffered a dramatic collapse. Furthermore in Spain, a winery company is suing Calatrava for leaks through its roof which takes the same form of Calatrava’s Wave sculpture. This is detrimental to

Figure 62. Zubi Zuri Bridge

Figure 63. Repairing broken glass

34

6.0 Conclusion Calatrava is a proud individual who continues to believe in his work, despite whatever is said about him and his designs. Standing strong, he uses examples such as the train station in Liege and the bridge in Dallas to highlight his successes. In fact, he has been so successful in these cities that the clients have asked him to do further projects, (Bernstein, 2014).

When the question of whether Calatrava is an architect or an engineer arises, the true answer lies beyond some basic controversy. Calatrava grew up in a city with the vivid sunlight penetrating against objects he liked to draw, such as people, buildings, animals and plants. Most of the things he enjoyed to draw had a sense of movement; he challenged himself to capture this motion into static sketches. It was only after this did he want to learn the mathematics to understand the possibilities of geometry, and like Le Corbusier, he took functions as simple as stairs and aimed to produce a sculptural masterpiece. A form that would look like it was defying the weight of gravity, giving the sense that there was a state of motion, (Rosenfield, 2013).

His enthusiasm to pursue movement in architecture was discovered in his PhD dissertation, when he studied geometrical-mechanical systems – the springboard to his Milwaukee Museum later in his career, (Tzonis, 2005, P.144). This is what distinguishes Calatrava from the existing group of elite architects; he has a second occupation, as an engineer. Engineers do not tend to design buildings, just as much as architects are not engineers. This has meant Calatrava has been able to ignore the traditional divide between the two professions and allow himself to express his architecture without fear of the construction, (Sachs, 2003).

After extensive research into the life of Calatrava, his architectural and constructional methods, there is a greater understanding of a man who produces eye-catching architecture across the globe.

Calatrava exhibits traits like any other architect, such as his study of precedents and exploration of works from Gaudi, Saarinen and Le Corbusier. However, there are the qualities which single him out; as well as his knowledge in engineering, he adores the form of nature and is inspired by Roman architect, Vitruvio. Calatrava learns from him that architecture should have three qualities; utility, beauty and solidity. Solidity, from the literal translation fermitas, can also be translated to ‘permanence in time’. This translation leads to a biblical reference that there is something divine in everyone.

Because of this Calatrava understands that architecture should be based on humans and nature. After all, we are humans, designing for humans. It is these qualities which make Calatrava such a respected architect, (Calatrava, 2005).

The research undertaken has significantly revealed that Calatrava’s relationship with Cimolai greatly aids him during construction.

When Calatrava has not used the Italian company, there have been faults in the design. He is still a knowledgeable engineer, but perhaps his conceptual designs are even too much for him to understand.

Although there are arguments to suggest Calatrava is both an architect and an engineer; the research collected has come to suggest that Calatrava is more of an architect. This is a statement I agree with and hope to enjoy more of Calatrava’s work in the future.

35

7.0 Bibliography Architecture: Calatrava, Mediopadana railway station, Reggio Emilia - News:. (2013, August 5). Retrieved October 14, 2013, from Floor Nature: http://www.floornature.com/architecturenews/news-calatrava-mediopadana-railway-station-reggioemilia-8791/ arcspace. (2008, July 21). Light Rail Train Bridge - Santiago Calatrava. Retrieved October 27, 2013, from acrspace.com: http://www.arcspace.com/features/santiagocalatrava/light-rail-train-bridge/ ASI. (n.d.). Railway station conveys high speed standing still (PDF).

Retrieved anuary 9, 2014, from Australian Steel Institute: steel.org.au media File Steel Aust Dec 2013 1819.pdf Bernstein, F. A. (2014, June 27). Newsmaker: Santiago Calatrava News - Architectural Record. Retrieved February 29, 2014, from Architectural Record: http://archrecord.construction.com/news/2012/06/120627 -Newsmaker-Santiago-Calatrava.asp Bono, F. (2014, January 12). Calatrava’s opera house: a rip-off? | In English. Retrieved January 29, 2014, from EL PA�S: http://elpais.com/elpais/2014/01/12/inenglish/1389532824 _503639.html Calatrava, S. (2005, October 2). The John Tusa Interview with Santiago Calatrava. (J. Tusa, Interviewer)

http://mv.vatican.va/1_CommonFiles/pdf/Eventi/convegni/ 21_calatrava_progetti.pdf Cimolai. (n.d.). Company. Retrieved November 4, 2013, from Cimolai: http://www.cimolai.com/company_detail.php?id=1 Cohn, D. (2007, December 11). Judge Rules Against Calatrava in Bilbao Suit | News. Retrieved January 30, 2014, from Architectural Record: http://archrecord.construction.com/news/daily/archives/07 1211calatrava.asp Cohn, D. (2007, December 11). Judge Rules Against Calatrava in Bilbao Suit | News | Architectural Record. Retrieved January 30, 2014, from Architectural Record: http://archrecord.construction.com/news/daily/archives/07 1211calatrava.asp Daley, S. (2013, September 24). Santiago Calatrava Collects Critics as Well as Fans. Retrieved January 30, 2014, from The New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/25/arts/design/santiago -calatrava-collects-critics-as-well-as-fans.html?_r=1& Daley, S. (2013, September 24). Santiago Calatrava Collects Critics as Well as Fans - NYTimes.com. Retrieved January 30, 2014, from The New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/25/arts/design/santiago -calatrava-collects-critics-as-well-as-fans.html?_r=1&

Calatrava_Project_web.pdf - 21_calatrava_progetti.pdf:. (2013, January 18). Retrieved October 27, 2013, from

36

DETAIL. (n.d.). The Perfect Wave: New High Speed Train Station in Italy - DETAIL-online.com:. Retrieved October 27, 2013, from DETAIL Online: http://www.detailonline.com/architecture/news/the-perfect-wave-new-highspeed-train-station-in-italy-021674.html# Euronews. (2009, May 30). Santiago Calatrava: Finding Architecture's Soul. Retrieved August 14, 2013, from Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2sOMdilDWU giannantonio. (2013, June 8). The star architect Santiago Calatrava opened his extraordinary work: the railway station of highspeed trains of Reggio Emilia - CNN iReport:. Retrieved October 2, 2013, from CNN: http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-985487 Govan, F. (2008, September 4). Santiago Calatrava defends controversial 'lobster' bridge over Venice's Grand Canal Telegraph. Retrieved January 30, 2014, from Telegraph: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/italy /2682100/Santiago-Calatrava-defends-controversiallobster-bridge-over-Venices-Grand-Canal.html Hecht, E. (2008, May 5). Calatrava’s Bridge in Jerusalem Incites Controversy | News | Architectural Record. Retrieved 10 29, 2013, from Architectural Record: http://archrecord.construction.com/news/daily/archives/08 0505calatrava.asp IB. (2013). Stazione Mediopadana. Retrieved October 27, 2013, from Info Build: http://www.infobuild.it/progetti/stazionemediopadana/

JM. (n.d.). Jerusalem Light Rail Project. Retrieved January 10, 2014, from Jerusalem Municipality: http://www.jerusalem.muni.il/jer_sys/publish/HtmlFiles/24 102/results_pub_id=29722.html Jodidio, P. (2009). Santiago Calatrava: Completed Works 1979-2009.

Cologne: Taschen.

Karen. (2013, February 22). More controversy on the Calatrava bridge. Retrieved January 29, 2014, from The Venice Experience: http://theveniceexperience.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/morecontroversy-on-calatravabridge.html#sthash.9rtM0POn.a1YjKoFl.dpbs McKenzie, A. (2013, October 25). Reggio Emilia Station | Santiago Calatrava:. Retrieved October 27, 2013, from Angela McKenzie Design: http://angelamckenziedesign.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/reggi o-emilia-station-santiago-calatrava.html MDA. (2013, July 26). Reggio Emilia Station by Santiago Calatrava | Milan Design Agenda:. Retrieved October 27, 2013, from Milan Design Agenda: http://www.milandesignagenda.com/reggio-emilia-stationby-santiago-calatrava/ (n.d.). Retrieved October 2, 2013, from DETAIL Online: http://www.km129.it/Sezione.jsp?idSezione=40&idSezione Rif=6 Nicolin, P. (2009). Landscape Infrastructures. Lotus, 48-63.

37

NotableBiographies.com. (n.d.). Santiago Calatrava Biography - bio, family, name, story, wife, school, son, born, tall, house, time, year, Began Art Classes at Eight. Retrieved November 30, 2013, from Encycopedia of World Biography: http://www.notablebiographies.com/supp/Supplement-CaFi/Calatrava-Santiago.html Pollalis, P. S. (2006, February). The Roof of the Olympic Stadium for the 2004 Athens Olympic Games: from Concept to Implementation. Retrieved November 12, 2013, from Harvard Design School: http://www.gsd.harvard.edu/images/content/5/3/538968/f ac-pub-pollalis-case-OACA-v1.pdf Ran, A. (2014, January 8). Effect of Chords Bridge to Jerusalem. (L. Ali, Interviewer) Rose, C. (2010, February 10). Charlie Rose _ Sandra Bullock: Santiago Calatrava, an Appreciation of Charlie Wilson Video Dailymotion:. Retrieved August 2013, from Daily Motion: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x120vd2_charlie-rosesandra-bullock-santiago-calatrava-an-appreciation-ofcharlie-wilson_news Rosenfield, K. (2013, January 30). Calatrava Criticized for Valencia Complex. Retrieved January 30, 2014, from ArchDaily: http://www.archdaily.com/326165/calatrava-criticized-forvalencia-complex/ Rosenfield, K. (2013, January 20). How Santiago Calatrava blurred the lines between architecture and engineering to make

buildings move | ArchDaily. Retrieved January 30, 2014, from ArchDaily: http://www.archdaily.com/321403/howsantiago-calatrava-blurred-the-lines-between-architectureand-engineering-to-make-buildings-move/ S+F. (2013, May 21). Station Mediopadana | Italy | by Santiago Calatrava - Blog - Architecture + Design:. Retrieved October 4, 2013, from Solid+Form: http://www.solidform.co.uk/blog/2013/5/21/stationmediopadana-italy-by-santiago-calatrava.html Sachs, A. (2003, November 30). To Draw a Bridge - New York Times.

Retrieved January 10, 2014, from The New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/30/magazine/to-drawa-bridge.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm Salmi, L. (2008, August 28). Quarto Ponte sul Canal Grande, Santiago Calatrava, world architecture news, architecture jobs. Retrieved February 4, 2014, from World Architecture News: http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/index.php?fuseact ion=wanappln.projectview&upload_id=10251 Saz, S. d. (2008, December 12). New Calatrava's bridge in Valencia ... the controversy goes on. Retrieved January 29, 2014, from Flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/salvita_42/3103698693/in/p hotostream/ straus7. (n.d.). Jerusalem Light Rail Transportation. Retrieved September 31, 2013, from straus7: http://www.straus7.com/jerusa9e.htm

38

Tremlett, G. (2012, May 8). Architect Santiago Calatrava accused of 'bleeding Valencia dry' | World news | theguardian.com.

Retrieved January 30, 2014, from theguardian.com: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/may/08/architec t-santiago-calatrava-valencia trenidicarta. (2011, May 3). www.trenidicarta.it - Prospetto cronologico dei tratti di ferrovia aperti:. Retrieved October 27, 2013, from http://www.trenidicarta.it/aperture.html Tzonis, A. (1999). Santiago Calatrava: The Poetics of Movement.

London: Thames & Hudson.

Tzonis, A. (2005). Santiago Calatrava: The Athens Olympics. New York City: Rizzoli International Publications.

Vegvesen, S. (n.d.). TURNING TORSO. MALMĂ– - 362130:. Retrieved January 9, 2014, from Statens Vegvesen: http://www.vegvesen.no/_attachment/185984/binary/362 130?fast_title=Santiago+Calatrava+outstanding+bridges+an d+special+structures.pdf

39

8.0 Illustrations 1. http://www.dublincity.ie/RoadsandTraffic/MajorTransportP rojects/Samuel%20Beckett%20Bridge/PublishingImages/Cal atravaportrait_02.jpg 2. Image captured by Leonardo Ali 3. Image captured by Leonardo Ali 4. http://www.calatrava.com/#/Selected works/Architecture/Jerusalem?mode=english 5. http://www.designboom.com/wpcontent/uploads/2013/05/mediopadana_14.jpg 6. http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3231/2514933378_aae69501a 9_o.jpg 7. Image captured by Leonardo Ali 8. Image captured by Leonardo Ali 9. http://www.globeimages.net/data/media/5/calatravas_mil waukee_art_museum__wisconsin__america.jpg 10. http://static.panoramio.com/photos/large/3290478.jpg 11. http://www.metro-magazine.com/images/news/WTCTransport-Hub-full.jpg 12. http://www.calatrava.com/#/Selected works/Architecture/Athens?mode=english 13. http://www.calatrava.com/#/Selected works/Architecture/Athens?mode=english 14. Jodidio, P. (2009). Santiago Calatrava: Completed Works 1979-2009. Cologne: Taschen.

15. http://blog.marinadodis.com/wp-content/gallery/athensolympic-stadium/img_8114.jpg 16. http://www.calatrava.com/#/Selected works/Architecture/Athens?mode=english 17. http://i.imgur.com/jEI53rl.jpg 18. http://en.wikiarquitectura.com/images/3/37/11at.jpg

19. http://en.wikiarquitectura.com/images/2/27/10at.jpg 20. Tzonis, A (1999). Santiago Calatrava: The Poetics of Movement. London: Thames & Hudson 21. http://blog.marinadodis.com/wp-content/gallery/athensolympic-stadium/img_8020.jpg 22. http://www.gsd.harvard.edu/images/content/5/3/538968/f ac-pub-pollalis-case-OACA-v1.pdf 23. http://www.gsd.harvard.edu/images/content/5/3/538968/f ac-pub-pollalis-case-OACA-v1.pdf 24. http://www.gsd.harvard.edu/images/content/5/3/538968/f ac-pub-pollalis-case-OACA-v1.pdf 25. http://www.straus7.com/atene02e.htm 26. http://blog.marinadodis.com/wp-content/gallery/athensolympic-stadium/img_8079.jpg 27. http://www.gsd.harvard.edu/images/content/5/3/538968/f ac-pub-pollalis-case-OACA-v1.pdf 28. http://www.straus7.com/atene02e.htm 29. http://www.vegvesen.no/_attachment/185984/binary/362 130?fast_title=Santiago+Calatrava+outstanding+bridges+an d+special+structures.pdf 30. Tzonis, A (1999). Santiago Calatrava: The Poetics of Movement. London: Thames & Hudson.

31. http://www.gsd.harvard.edu/images/content/5/3/538968/f ac-pub-pollalis-case-OACA-v1.pdf 32. http://www.gsd.harvard.edu/images/content/5/3/538968/f ac-pub-pollalis-case-OACA-v1.pdf 33. http://www.gsd.harvard.edu/images/content/5/3/538968/f ac-pub-pollalis-case-OACA-v1.pdf 34. Tzonis, A (1999). Santiago Calatrava: The Poetics of Movement. London: Thames & Hudson.

40

35. http://www4.pictures.gi.zimbio.com/2007+UK+Sport+Pictur e+Year+Photographer+Choice+2NRd9WCFlral.jpg 36. http://www.neilsonclyne.com/audiotechnica/Post_Olympic s2004/ATHENS2004.JPG 37. http://mv.vatican.va/1_CommonFiles/pdf/Eventi/convegni/ 21_calatrava_progetti.pdf 38. http://mv.vatican.va/1_CommonFiles/pdf/Eventi/convegni/ 21_calatrava_progetti.pdf 39. http://www.detailonline.com/typo3temp/pics/bahnhof_reggio_emilia_1_fass ade_eingang__33af4ce8b1.jpg 40. http://www.km129.it/Sezione.jsp?idSezione=40&idSezione Rif=6 41. http://www.comune.re.it/retecivica/urp/retecivi.nsf/PESId Doc/B1AFB1B2C5C84AAAC12577EB002CB3A8/$file/Confere nza_stampa_13_12_2010.pdf 42. http://www.designboom.com/wpcontent/uploads/2013/05/mediopadana_07.jpg 43. http://www.designboom.com/wpcontent/uploads/2013/05/mediopadana_10.jpg 44. http://www.designboom.com/wpcontent/uploads/2013/05/mediopadana_17.jpg 45. http://www.designboom.com/wpcontent/uploads/2013/05/mediopadana_16.jpg 46. http://www.detailonline.com/uploads/pics/bahnhof_reggio_emilia_23_galeri e_innen_03.jpg 47. http://www.detailonline.com/uploads/pics/bahnhof_reggio_emilia_22_galeri e_innen_03.jpg

48. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e3/Jer usalem_Chords_Bridge_5.JPG 49. http://www.hsh.info/jeru08/jerf2694.jpg 50. http://www.hsh.info/jeru08/jerf2664.jpg 51. http://www.arcspace.com/CropUp/380x287/media/19111/ 5jerusalem.jpg 52. http://www.jerusalemite.net/modules/article_files/get_ima ge.php?image=1523 53. http://img.jspace.com/f-92659.jpg 54. http://www.hsh.info/jeru08/jerf1708.jpg 55. http://www.hsh.info/jeru08/jerf1711.jpg 56. http://www.hsh.info/jeru08/jerf0219.jpg 57. http://www.calatrava.com/#/Selected%20works/Architectu re/Venice?mode=english 58. http://www.appstate.edu/~maleyrr/architecthtml/images/ Ponte%20della%20Costituzione%20in%20Venice.3.jpg 59. http://2.bp.blogspot.com/4O882gOgdG0/USfP55x_xnI/AAAAAAAAGCA/0d8lt1Q_O8/s320/pod2.JPG 60. http://smu.edu/newsinfo/releases/images/04159calatrava-lg.jpg 61. http://ep00.epimg.net/elpais/imagenes/2014/01/12/inengli sh/1389532824_503639_1389533007_sumario_grande.jpg 62. http://www.100hdwallpapers.com/wallpapers/1920x1200/ zubizuri_bridge_spain-widescreen_wallpapers.jpg 63. http://www.flickr.com/photos/kenlee2010/5633153961/in/ photostream/

41

Cover Page photo of Santiago Calatrava: https://encryptedtbn3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSy0loyQDWKjCCXnEGlqg5S xEi0hT71GC_96sts82y1R3NHUY20jg

42