Faculty of Architectural Engineering

Level: 4 - Semester: 8 - Term: Spring 2015/2016

Course Name: Research and Programming
Course Code: ARCH 436

A Comprehensive Architectural Program for the Project:

Opera House Complex

Cultural
Located at: Beirut, Lebanon

Submitted by: Nael Houssam Jammaz

ID Number: 201301656

Word Count: 8985 word

May, 2016

ARCH-436 Page 1
Table of Contents
1- INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................. 5
1.1- DEFINITION .................................................................................................................... 5
1.2- HISTORICAL BACKGROUND ............................................................................................ 5
1.3- CLIENT............................................................................................................................. 6
1.4- PROJECT PURPOSE ......................................................................................................... 6
1.5- VISION............................................................................................................................. 6
1.6- PROJECT GOALS .............................................................................................................. 7
2- LOCATION....................................................................................................................... 7
2.1- Site Locations ..................................................................................................................... 7
2.2- Site Selection Criteria ........................................................................................................ 11
2.3- Site Analysis....................................................................................................................... 15
2.4- Weather Data……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….20

3- Case Studies ............................................................................................................... 23

3.1- Guangzhou Opera House ................................................................................................. 23
3.2- Oslo Opera House ........................................................................................................... 27
3.3- Harbin Opera House …………………………………………………………………………………………………….32

3.4- Casa Da Musica ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………36

4- Questionnaire..............................................................................................................39
4.1- Questionnaire analysis………………………………………………………………………………………………….43

5- Standards ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….46
6- Program……………………………………………………………………………………………………………... 51

6.1- Program Table …………………………………………………………………………………………………………….51

6.2- Bubble & Zoning Diagrams ………………………………………………………………………………………….53

ARCH-436 Page 2
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 zoomed out top view of site 1 (Google Earth, 2016) ................................................................ 8
Figure 2 zoomed in top view of site 1 (Google Earth, 2016) ................................................................... 8
Figure 4 zoomed in top view of site 2 (Google Earth, 2016) ................................................................. 9
Figure 3 zoomed out top view of site 2 (Google Earth, 2016) ................................................................ 9
Figure 3 zoomed out top view of site 3 (Google Earth, 2016) .............................................................. 10
Figure 4 zoomed in top view of site 3 (Google Earth, 2016) ............................................................... 10
Figure 5 Site selection Criteria Table showing the best site to be selected (Mearig, 1997) ............... 15
Figure 9 Site Accessibility Nearest important regions (Google Earth, 2016) ....................................... 16
Figure 6 zoomed in & zoomed out site location (Google Earth, 2016) ................................................ 16
Figure 10 Accessibility from nearest roads (Google Earth, 2016) ......................................................... 17
Figure 11 surrounding zones land use (Google Earth, 2016) ................................................................ 17
Figure 8 Site Dimensions (Google Earth, 2016) .................................................................................... 18
Figure 7 Wind & Sun path analysis (Google Earth, 2016) .................................................................... 18
Figure 15 this section has a slope of 3.6% over 700m (Google Earth, 2016) ........................................ 19
Figure 14 section showing the topographic line in this section the average slope 10.4% over 360m
(Google Earth, 2016) ............................................................................................................................. 19
Figure 16 Three Dimensional Section lines shows that the land is slightly elevated its considered a flat
land (Google Earth, 2016) ..................................................................................................................... 20
Figure 17 Guangzhou Opera House Perspective (Saieh, 2010 ) ........................................................... 23
Figure 18 Picture of the Opera House taken from short distance showing the form and the scale of
the building (Saieh, 2010 )..................................................................................................................... 24
Figure 19 Ground Floor Plan Zoning & Program (Saieh, 2010 ) ........................................................... 25
Figure 20 First Floor Zoning & Program (Saieh, 2010 )......................................................................... 25
Figure 21 Second Floor Zoning & Program (Saieh, 2010 ) .................................................................... 26
Figure 22 Section Zoning of the Guangzhou Opera House. (Saieh, 2010 ).......................................... 26
Figure 23 Oslo Opera House Photo Showing the Main Facade and the public ramp accessing the
roof. ....................................................................................................................................................... 27
Figure 24 Oslo Opera House Mass Plan............................................................................................... 28
Figure 26 Map of Oslo, showing central location of Opera House with primary access routes (red
arrows). Inner circle represents Bjørvika bay area surrounded by the outer circle of downtown Oslo.
The black dot indicates the former location of the Norwegian National Opera (ArchDaily, published
daily by Plataforma Networks, 2011) .................................................................................................... 28
............................................................................................................................................................... 29
Figure 25 The conceptual elements of the opera building (The Wave, The Carpet, and The Factory),
by Snøhetta (ArchDaily, published daily by Plataforma Networks, 2011) ............................................ 29
Figure 27 Panoramic view of Bjørvika Bay, surrounded by traffic lanes and construction. (ArchDaily,
published daily by Plataforma Networks, 2011) ................................................................................... 29

ARCH-436 Page 3
Figure 28 Opera House Main Entrance & Approach (ArchDaily, published daily by Plataforma
Networks, 2011) .................................................................................................................................... 30
Figure 29 Diagram: Describing the current traffic conditions in Bjørvika. The red represents heavy
car traffic that cuts off the Opera House from downtown Oslo, only by using two pedestrian bridges
to cross (shown in blue). The new Bjørvika tunnel also shown. (ArchDaily, published daily by
Plataforma Networks, 2011) ................................................................................................................. 30
Figure 30 Diagram: Analysis of site access and movement, new development, and points of social
engagement. (ArchDaily, published daily by Plataforma Networks, 2011) .......................................... 31
Figure 31 Ground Floor Plan of the Oslo Opera House Showing zones program and areas in squared
meters and the Floors continue as typical but changes only above the Production Area (ArchDaily,
published daily by Plataforma Networks, 2011) ................................................................................... 31
Figure 32 Harbin Opera House bird eye view photo showing the building and the city .................... 32
Figure 9 Picture showing the main entrance and the plaza of the opera house (ArchDaily, published
daily by Plataforma Networks, 2015) .................................................................................................... 33
Figure 34 Ground Floor Plan of the Harbin Opera House showing the zoning and the program
(ArchDaily, published daily by Plataforma Networks, 2015)................................................................. 34
Figure 35 Mass Plan showing the top view of the Opera house (ArchDaily, published daily by
Plataforma Networks, 2015) ................................................................................................................. 35
Figure 36 Section and zoning (ArchDaily, published daily by Plataforma Networks, 2015) ................. 35
Figure 37 Casa Da Musica photo from the main street showing the form and the approach
(ArchDaily, published daily by Plataforma Networks, 2014)................................................................. 36
Figure 39 Site Analysis showing the urban fabric and site accessibility (Karlson, 2011) ...................... 38
Figure 10 Top view of the Casa De Musica showing the Urban Context and the Building (Karlson,
2011)...................................................................................................................................................... 38
Figure 40 Main floor plan of Casa De Musica showing zones and areas (Karlson, 2011) ..................... 39
Figure 41 Programs of the four projects showing the different and similar aspects of the elements
and the different ones........................................................................................................................... 40
Figure 42 Table showing the program and the space requirements for the opera house spaces and
will result as a conclusion in the zoning and bubble diagram............................................................... 52
Figure 43 Bubble Diagram ..................................................................................................................... 53
Figure 44 Zoning Diagram ..................................................................................................................... 54

ARCH-436 Page 4
 1. INTRODUCTION.

1.1- DEFINITION

An Opera House is a theatre building used for opera performances that

consist of a stage, an orchestra pit, audience seating, and backstage facilities
for costumes and set building. While some venues are constructed specifically
for operas, other opera houses are part of larger performing art centers

The Opera House Project is a project that emphasis on culture and art and
also which the city lacks.
Beirut is the capital of Lebanon but is also the capital of art and culture of the
Middle East, & it lacks this type of building which is a Landmark of its own and
creates amazing opportunities for the city and its people.

It is a unique project by its own which can be a Landmark that shapes the
skyline of the Modern Beirut. (for example the moment we say Sydney the first
thing that pops into our minds is the Sydney Opera House building.)

Cultural wise Beirut is a city of art, music, & passion so a building such as the
opera is a must in such city a building of great importance to shapes and
presents the civilized face of the city.

1.2- HISTORICAL BACKROUND.

The first public opera house came into existence in 1637 as the Teatro San
Casino in Venice, Italy, in a country where opera has been popular through
the centuries among ordinary people as well as wealthy patrons; it still has a
large number of working opera houses. In contrast, there was no opera house
in London when Henry Purcell was composing and the first opera house in
ARCH-436 Page 5
 Germany was built in Hamburg in 1678. Early United States opera houses
served a variety of functions in towns and cities, hosting community dances,
fairs, plays, and vaudeville shows as well as operas and other musical events.
In the 17th and 18th centuries, opera houses were often financed by rulers,
nobles, and wealthy people who used patronage of the arts to endorse their
political ambitions and social positions or prestige. With the rise of
bourgeois and capitalist social forms in the 19th century, European culture
moved away from its patronage system to a publicly supported system. In the
2000s, most opera and theatre companies raise funds from a combination of
government and institutional grants, ticket sales, and private donations. (Allison,
John (ed.), 2003)

1.3- CLIENT.

LEBANESE GOVERNMENT- Ministry of Culture

The Ministry was formed after the Lebanese Civil War in 1993, originally as
part of the Ministry of Culture and Higher Education from which it became a
separate entity in August 2000. A new law was passed in October 2008
regarding a re-structuring for the Ministry. It now has responsibility over
matters of heritage, antiquities, arts, literature, cultural industries and
management of cultural and historical property (Livingston, 2008).

1.4- PROJECT PURPOSE.

Lebanon is a country at the feet of the Mediterranean Sea a small country in

deed only 10452 square kilometers a country which is known for its art and
artists.
People from Lebanon made him Famous worldwide because of their art and
especially singers & vocalists like Feiruz, Sabah, Wadea Al Safi, Zaki Naseef,
Nasri Shams el Deen and many others who were pioneers of the arabic music
and who delivered a legitimate picture of the art in this small country.

1.5- VISION.

As a dedication for those pioneers and the artists and for the continuity of this
art of sound and music among the talented future generations, and to draw an

ARCH-436 Page 6
 attention to the City as the city of art and music and to be a Landmark that is a
symbol, an icon, & a flagship that shows a civilized & beautiful image of Beirut.

1.6- PROJOECT GOALS.

Main Goals.
- Artistic Excellence: Produce and present imaginative and engaging
performing arts events from Lebanon & the Middle East.
- Community Engagement and Access: Beirut Opera House belongs to
everyone and all communities will have access to this building.
- Creating an indispensable part of Culture Fabric: Building Beirut Opera
House is building a part of the national cultural fabric which has been
missing and needed
Secondary Goals.
- Important Piece of Tourism Infrastructure
- Reuniting the Lebanese community: Reuniting people from all cultural and
socio-economic backgrounds to consider this building a national symbol.
- Evolving the economy : and that’s by providing Job opportunities
- Developing the Community Member’s mentality: And that by letting the
young youth generation tend toward developing skills that involve art and
culture and deviate them from going to violence and joining the
sociological violence.
- Setting new horizons to the art and the quality of performed art.

2- LOCATION

2.1- Site Locations

An Opera House is a project which needs a very unique location an overseeing one a
place where access comes at ease and the building is visible as a landmark.

From here comes the three site location proposals in Lebanon:

ARCH-436 Page 7
Site 1 :Beirut Waterfront a site which is close to the central district and close to Biel and
Zeytouna Bay.

Figure 1 zoomed out top view of site 1 (Google Earth, 2016)

Figure 2 zoomed in top view of site 1 (Google Earth, 2016)

ARCH-436 Page 8
Site 2: Kfar Yassine, Mount Lebanon beside Casino Du Liban

Figure 3 zoomed out top view of site 2 (Google Earth, 2016)

Figure 4 zoomed in top view of site 2 (Google Earth, 2016)

ARCH-436 Page 9
 Site 3: Saida, South Lebanon beside Masjid Al-Hariri

Figure 3 zoomed out top view of site 3 (Google Earth, 2016)

Figure 4 zoomed in top view of site 3 (Google Earth, 2016)

ARCH-436 Page 10
2.2- Site Selection Criteria

The site selection process is a scientific process which relies on many factors (some of a
major and some of lesser importance) & which by we can select the site unbiased and
based on real scientific factors

Sites

Criteria Sub-Criteria BIEL Kfar

Weighting
SAIDA xWF (BEIRU xWF Yassi xWF
Factor
T) ne

Site size is within 30% of

the calculated
programmatic space TBA - TBA - TBA -
requirements for the
proposed facility
Site size is within 20% of
the calculated
programmatic space TBA - TBA - TBA -
requirements for the
proposed facility
Site size is within 10% of
the calculated
programmatic space TBA - TBA - TBA -
requirements for the
Size 5
proposed facility
Site size is adequate to
meet the calculated
programmatic space TBA - TBA - TBA -
requirements for the
proposed facility
Site size exceeds the
calculated programmatic
space requirements for
proposed facility and
TBA - TBA - TBA -
provides
room for building
expansion and/or activity
use expansion
compatible with future
Future 2 5 10 6 10 3 6
expansion
ARCH-436 Page 11
 Significant variances with
Expansion 4 8 5 10 1 2
future expansion
Some variances with
1 2 7 0 2 4
future expansion
Corresponds well with
5 10 5 10 3 6
future expansion
Corresponds ideally with
5 10 4 10 3 6
future expansion
Site is inaccessible during
Year 0 0 0 0 0 0
certain times of the year
Access is routinely
interrupted by
Round 2 8 2 8 8 0
weather/temperature
conditions
Access is periodically
Accessibility over swampy, unstable 4 4 16 3 16 4 16
soils
Typically year-round well
drained ground/road 5 17 4 16 4 16
access
Fully accessible; only
severe storms may 2 18 4 20 5 20
temporarily hinder access
Site contains significant
topographic relief, and
0 0 0 0 0 0
cannot accommodate
anticipated uses
Site is not level, and can
only accommodate a
0 0 0 0 0 0
limited number of
anticipated uses
Topography Site is not level, but can 3
still accommodate all 0 0 0 0 0 0
anticipated uses
Site is mostly level and
can accommodate all 1 3 1 3 1 3
anticipated uses
Site is level and can
accommodate all 1 3 1 3 1 3
anticipated uses
Driveway access from
National Highway System,
5 10 3 6 4 8
Principal Arterial, or
Interstate
Road Driveway access from a
low volume internal 2 0 0 3 6 1 2
Access
residential-only street
Driveway access from a
0 0 5 10 3 6
Major Arterial roadway
Driveway access from a 0 0 0 0 0 0

ARCH-436 Page 12
 Minor Arterial roadway
Driveway access from
Local Road or Collector
(not generally a low 0 0 3 6 4 12
volume residential-only
street)
Adequate intersection
sight distance cannot be
Visibility 0 0 3 6 3 6
provided or is very difficult
to provide.
Adequate intersection
sight distance can be
& Safety 2 0 0 0 0 4 8
provided but requires
clearing and/or earthwork.
Adequate intersection
sight distance can be
5 10 5 10 3 6
provided without any
major work.
Aesthetic Will never be aesthetic 0 0 0 0 5 9
Has few natural aesthetic
Value 0 0 1 2 0 0
features and little potential
Has some aesthetic
features; potential for
1 2 1 2 0 0
more with considerable 2
effort
Could have many
aesthetic features with 4 8 5 10 0 0
minimal efforts
Has many aesthetic
4 8 5 10 0 0
features naturally
Site is in constant shadow
Sun during fall, winter and 0 0 0 0 0 0
spring months
Site is mostly in shadow
Orientation during winter months with 0 0 0 0 0 0
some fall/spring sun
Site is mostly exposed
3 0 0 0 0 0 0
winter sun
Site is exposed to year-
round sun with some 0 0 0 0 0 0
obstructions
Site is exposed to full
year-round sunlight; no 5 15 5 15 5 15
obstructions
Site is fully exposed to
Protection prevailing winds; no 5 10 5 10 5 10
obstructions
Site is mostly exposed to 2
From 0 0 0 0 0 0
prevailing winds
Elements Site is partially protected 0 0 0 0 0 0

ARCH-436 Page 13
 from prevailing winds;
some natural barriers
Site is mostly protected
0 0 0 0 0 0
from prevailing winds
Site offers full protection
0 0 0 0 0 0
from prevailing winds
Unstable soils throughout;
highly specialized 5 10 5 10 6 10
foundation required
Mostly unstable soils;
specialized foundation 0 0 0 0 0 0
required
Isolated area of the site
have unstable soils, some
0 0 0 0 1 2
Site Soils specialized foundation 2
likely
Most areas of the site
have stable soils;
0 0 0 0 0 0
conventional foundation
possible
Stable soils; conventional
foundation system 0 0 0 0 0 0
possible
Ease Of Site is inaccessible 0 0 0 0 0 0
Transporting
Transporting materials/equipment will 0 0 0 0 1 2
be very difficult
Transporting materials will
Construction 0 0 0 0 1 2
be difficult
Transporting will be fairly 2
Material easy, routes will need 2 5 3 6 2 4
upgrading
Transporting of
equipment/materials will
5 9 4 8 3 6
be simple; on established
routes
Clear or unclear title,
Site owner/seller not 0 0 0 0 0 0
interested
Uncertain title/boundaries;
Availability 0 0 0 0 0 0
multiple owners
Some
3
encumbrances/easement 0 0 0 0 0 0
s, etc., multiple owners
Clear title, recent survey,
0 0 0 0 0 0
possibly available
Clear title, recent survey,
5 15 5 15 7 15
definitely available
Site has no possibilities
Alternative 3 0 0 0 0 0 0
for alternative energy

ARCH-436 Page 14
 systems
Site is adjacent to
alternative energy
Energy 0 0 0 0 0 0
systems; significant effort
to develop
Site is adjacent to
alternative energy 5 15 4 12 7 9
systems; easily developed
TOTAL 33 86 222 107 250 100 214

Ranking Places 2nd rank 1st rank 3rd rank

Figure 5 Site selection Criteria Table showing the best site to be selected (Mearig, 1997)

Weighting Factors:
1 = not very important
2 = somewhat important
3 = important
4 = very important
5 = essential

Criteria Ranking Scores

0 = unacceptable (least desirable/least cost effective)
1 = poor
2 = fair
3 = good
4 = excellent
5= ideal (most desirable/most cost effective)
(Mearig, 1997)

- Weighting Factors: the weighting factors shows us the load of the criteria
importance since there is criteria that are essential and selecting a site with
a low score is wrong and can’t be done so the importance of the selection
criteria is illustrated to be sure of the criteria and their selection.
- Results : the results shows that Beirut water front site is the best since it
best complies with the selection criteria with size requirements and gives a
room for future expansion also its accessibility is easy and not hard also
topographic wise the land is nearly flat which is adequate for an opera
house complex project . In addition to Visibility & safety it’s located in the
water front area which is highly safe and of an iconic location on the
Mediterranean Sea which gives it high Aesthetic Value.
Also recognizing its Orientation to sun and wind direction it’s perfectly
adequate also recognizing the protection from elements and site soils.

ARCH-436 Page 15
 2.3- Site Analysis
- Site Location: Beirut Waterfront, Beirut,
Lebanon

Figure 6 zoomed in & zoomed out site location (Google Earth, 2016) `

Its 11 km away from Rafic Al

Hariri International airport
Beirut harbor which is one of the most
which is the most important
significant places of an indispensible
facility that connects
American University of Beirut socio-economic value and one of the
Lebanon with the other
(A.U.B) which is one of the most most important places that connects
countries worldwide
significant educational cultural hub Lebanon withother countries
in the city

The economic & touristic & political high value area (Beirut
Downtown) the location of the Lebanese Parliament and
the Council of Ministers

Figure 9 Site Accessibility Nearest important regions (Google Earth, 2016)

ARCH-436 Page 16
 Sea side road which is a main road
which makes the project easily
accessible Access from North (Dawra Highway &
the Northern part)

Riyad Al Soleh public road which create an important

access to the project from the heart of the city

Figure 10 Accessibility from nearest roads (Google Earth, 2016)

Leisure –Touristic Zone

Residential – Touristic Zone

Commercial Residential Zone Commercial – Touristic Zone

Commercial-Touristic Zone

Residential-Nightlife Zone

Residential – Zone
Residential-Commercial Zone
Residential Zone

Figure 11 surrounding zones land use (Google Earth, 2016)

ARCH-436 Page 17
 Figure 8 Site Dimensions (Google Earth, 2016)

Prevailing wind Sun path

Figure 7 Wind & Sun path analysis (Google Earth, 2016)

ARCH-436 Page 18
 Figure 14 section showing the topographic line in this section the average slope 10.4% over 360m (Google Earth, 2016)

Sun Path

Figure 15 this section has a slope of 3.6% over 700m (Google Earth, 2016)

ARCH-436 Page 19
 Figure 16 Three Dimensional Section lines shows that the land is slightly elevated its considered a flat land (Google Earth,
2016)

2.4- Weather Data

AVERAGE WEATHER IN BEIRUT, LEBANON ( World Weather and Climate

Information., 2015)
Beirut has a Mediterranean climate characterized by a hot, dry summer, a pleasant autumn and spring, and a cool,
rainy winter.

What's the best time to travel to Beirut in Lebanon? Here are some facts:



Hot season / summer is in June, July, August and September.


Most rainfall (rainy season) is seen in January, February, November and December.


Beirut has dry periods in May, June, July, August and September.


On average, the warmest month is August.


On average, the coolest month is January.


January is the wettest month.
August is the driest month.

ARCH-436 Page 20
AVERAGE MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM TEMPERATURE OVER THE YEAR (
World Weather and Climate Information., 2015)

AVERAGE MONTHLY HOURS OF SUNSHINE OVER THE YEAR ( World

Weather and Climate Information., 2015)

AVERAGE WATER TEMPERATURE OVER THE YEAR ( World Weather and

Climate Information., 2015)

ARCH-436 Page 21
AVERAGE MONTHLY PRECIPITATION OVER THE YEAR (RAINFALL, SNOW)
( World Weather and Climate Information., 2015)

AVERAGE MONTHLY RAINY DAYS OVER THE YEAR ( World Weather and
Climate Information., 2015)

AVERAGE HUMIDITY OVER THE YEAR ( World Weather and Climate

Information., 2015)

ARCH-436 Page 22
AVERAGE WIND SPEED OVER THE YEAR ( World Weather and Climate
Information., 2015)

3- CASE STUDIES.

3.1- Case Study One.

Guangzhou Opera House

Zaha Hadid Architects

Guangdong, China

Schumacher

Figure 17 Guangzhou Opera House Perspective (Saieh, 2010 )

Long Jiang, Ta-Kang Hsu, Yi- Ching Liu, Zhi

Wang, Christine Chow, Cyril Shing, Filippo Innocenti, Lourdes Sanchez, Hinki Kwong,
Junkai Jiang

Investment Architectural Designing Institute

China)

ARCH-436 Page 23
Institute (Guangzhou, China)

bourne, Australia)

(Guangzhou, China)

China)

From the architect. Like pebbles in a stream smoothed by erosion,

the Guangzhou Opera House sits in perfect harmony with its riverside location. The
Opera House is at the heart of Guangzhou’s cultural development. Its unique twin-
boulder design enhances the city by opening it to the Pearl River, unifying the adjacent
cultural buildings with the towers of international finance in Guangzhou’s Zhujiang new
town.

The 1,800-seat auditorium of the Opera House houses the very latest acoustic
technology, and the smaller 400-seat multifunction hall is designed for performance art,
opera and concerts in the round. (Saieh, 2010 )

Figure 18 Picture of the Opera House taken from short distance showing the form and the scale of the building (Saieh,
2010 )

ARCH-436 Page 24
Figure 19 Ground Floor Plan Zoning & Program (Saieh, 2010 )

Figure 20 First Floor Zoning & Program (Saieh, 2010 )

ARCH-436 Page 25
Figure 21 Second Floor Zoning & Program (Saieh, 2010 )

Void above Stage

Stage Area
Auditorium

Figure 22 Section Zoning of the Guangzhou Opera House. (Saieh, 2010 )

ARCH-436 Page 26
Conclusion: The design evolved from the concepts of a natural landscape and the
fascinating interplay between architecture and nature; engaging with the principles of
erosion, geology and topography. The Guangzhou Opera House design has been
particularly influenced by river valleys – and the way in which they are transformed by
erosion. (Saieh, 2010 )
The Scale of this Building is huge and it’s landmark by its own and it’s the kind of building
we wish to reach as a final design .

2.1- CASE STUDY TWO.

OSLO OPERA HOUSE

Figure 23 Oslo
Opera House
Snohetta Photo Showing
the Main
Facade and the
Norway public ramp
accessing the
roof.

Engineering ANS

Løvaas og Kirsten Wagle

tre Planning: Theatre Project Consultants

ARCH-436 Page 27
 For centuries the Bjørvika pier
has been one of Oslo’s economic
lifelines and a point of contact
with the rest of the world,
however like so many other
historic harbor cities, the site
became underused and in a state
of decay as harbor activity moved
away from its central location. In
1999, after tireless political and
cultural championing, the
Norwegian Parliament decided
that the Norwegian National
Opera needed to move from its
existing location in Anchor
Figure 24 Oslo Opera House Mass Plan. Square and construct a new
opera house in Oslo. With the
passage of the Opera Bill and much debate over different site possibilities, an open
design competition was announced for the Bjorvika region that would bring in hundreds
of design proposals, along with attracting an unprecedented amount of media attention
and public interest. The international jury would declare the Norwegian design firm of
Snøhetta the winner with a building concept based on three main elements: the Wave
Wall, the Factory and the Carpet. The Wave Wall would develop into an extensive oak
wall that composes a literal threshold between the public and private functions of the
project, while The Factory represents the production area that would accommodate over
600 employees working in about 50 professions and trades for the new Opera House.
(ArchDaily, published daily by Plataforma Networks, 2011)

"The passing of
the Opera Bill
was not that
popular at the
time. It did not
happen by
popular
demand. But
then the
building rises
out of the dust,
and people
embrace it as if
Figure 26 Map of Oslo, showing central location of Opera House with primary access routes (red it was something
arrows). Inner circle represents Bjørvika bay area surrounded by the outer circle of downtown Oslo.
The black dot indicates the former location of the Norwegian National Opera (ArchDaily, published they have
daily by Plataforma Networks, 2011) yearned for!

ARCH-436 Page 28
That is nothing short of a marvel and a conscious effort to showcase Norway as a
cultural nation.‖ - Anne Enger, former Minister of Culture

Figure 25 The conceptual elements of the opera

building (The Wave, The Carpet, and The Factory),
by Snøhetta (ArchDaily, published daily by
Plataforma Networks, 2011)

After the opening in 2008, the Oslo

Opera House project was considered
a success, both inside and outside,
rising from the sea and linking the fjord to the city. The white platform rapidly became
one of Oslo's most popular public properties, paired with the equally accessible Opera
House foyer, granting visitors access to buy tickets for performances, eat in one of the
restaurants, sit and enjoy a coffee, visit the Opera Shop or just stroll around and immerse
yourself in the atmosphere. The openness and horizontality became the most
evident characteristics of the project. However, once you leave the boundaries of the
site, the building that prides itself on accessibility and free movement becomes
increasingly marginalized in a undetermined context. Approaching the site from
downtown Oslo today is like being transported through a cattle corral, leading visitors
through restrictive enclosures toward greener pastures. Two pedestrian bridges, one
from the north and the other from the west, lead visitors over a moat of networked
roadways, only to land and encounter another footbridge spanning an excavated channel
(Opera Canal) that seperates the Oslo Opera House from land. A series of events that
would isolate a project, rather than accommodate within a city context. (ArchDaily,
published daily by Plataforma Networks, 2011)

Figure 27 Panoramic view of Bjørvika Bay, surrounded by traffic lanes and construction. (ArchDaily, published daily by
Plataforma Networks, 2011)

ARCH-436 Page 29
Figure 28 Opera House Main Entrance & Approach (ArchDaily, published daily by
Plataforma Networks, 2011)

The Oslo Opera House can surely be seen as an invigorating urban presence in the
quickly redeveloping Bjørvika district. A building designed not be noticed, but intended to
actively engage urban dwellers - elevating them out of the city on an unprecedented civic
device that is developed with Norwegian character. As one of Norway’s first opera
houses (waiting 120 years to become reality) it surely has an attractive programmatic
force that can direct attention, but it is that powerful integrated public landscape that has
an ongoing dynamic relationship with the opera house that can transform an entire area -
seen in such examples as New York’s High Line and Seattle’s Olympic Sculpture Park.
The architecture becomes an activity rather than a singular object, able to entice human
experiences of movement, conversation, performance, assembly and so much more.
Like Baade’s warrior on the coastal rocks, one can stand on top the Opera’s glacial
structure and
experience their
own
transcendent
journey.
(ArchDaily,
published daily
by Plataforma
Networks, 2011)
Figure 29 Diagram:
Describing the current
traffic conditions in
Bjørvika. The red
represents heavy car
traffic that cuts off the
Opera House from
downtown Oslo, only
by using two
pedestrian bridges to
cross (shown in blue). The new Bjørvika tunnel also shown. (ArchDaily, published daily by Plataforma Networks, 2011)

ARCH-436 Page 30
 Figure 30
Diagram: Analysis
of site access and
movement, new
development, and
points of social
engagement.
(ArchDaily,
published daily by
Plataforma
Networks, 2011)

Figure 31 Ground Floor Plan of the Oslo Opera House Showing zones program and
areas in squared meters and the Floors continue as typical but changes only above
the Production Area (ArchDaily, published daily by Plataforma Networks, 2011)

Conclusion: This building has led to a discussion of the whole surrounding area, traffic,
adjoining functions and the openness of the urban spaces. There has been a lot of
discussion about how to make these areas as vibrant as possible; a discussion that

ARCH-436 Page 31
 demonstrates that public attention has really been alerted to the importance of urban
development and public space.

2.2- Case Study Three.

HARBIN OPERA HOUSE

 Architects: MAD Architects

 Location: Harbin, Heilongjiang, China
 Directors: Ma Yansong, Dang Qun, Yosuke
Hayano
 Area: 79000 m2
 Project Year: 2015
Figure 32 Harbin Opera House bird eye view photo showing


the building and the city
Design Team: Jordan Kanter, Daniel Gillen,
Bas van Wylick, Liu Huiying, Fu Changrui,
Zhao Wei, Kin Li ,Zheng Fang, Julian Sattler, Jackob Beer, J Travis Russett, Sohith
Perera, Colby Thomas Suter, Yu Kui, Philippe Brysse, Huang Wei, Flora Lee, Wang Wei,
Xie Yibang, Lyo Hengliu, Alexander Cornelius, Alex Gornelius, Mao Beihong,
Gianantonio Bongiorno, Jei Kim, Chen Yuanyu, Yu Haochen, Qin Lichao, Pil-Sun Ham,
Mingyu Seol, Lin Guomin, Zhang Haixia, Li Guangchong, Wilson Wu, Ma Ning, Davide
Signorato, Nick Tran, Xiang Ling, Gustavo Alfred Van Staveren, Yang Jie
 Associate Engineers: Beijing Institute of Architectural Design
 Façade/cladding Consultants: Inhabit Group, China Jingye Engineering Co., Ltd.
 BIM: Gehry Technologies Co., Ltd.
 Landscape Architect: Turenscape, Earthasia Design Group
 Interior Design: MAD Architects, Shenzhen Z&F Culture Construction Co., Ltd.
 Lighting Design: Toryo International Lighting Design Center, Beijing United Artists
Lighting Design Co., Ltd.
 Acoustic Consultants: Zhang Kuisheng Acoustics Research Institute of Shanghai Modern
Design Group
 Stage Lighting Design:EKO Lighting Equipment Co., Ltd.

ARCH-436 Page 32
 Stage Mechanical Engineers: Chinese PLA General Armament Institute of Engineering
Design
 Signage Design: Shenzhen Freesigns Signage Co., Ltd.

(ArchDaily, published daily by Plataforma Networks, 2015)

From the architect. MAD

Architects unveils the
completed Harbin Opera House,
located in the Northern Chinese city
of Harbin. In 2010, MAD won the
international open competition
for Harbin Cultural Island, a master
plan for an opera house, a cultural
center, and the surrounding
wetland landscape along Harbin’s
Songhua River. The sinuous opera
house is the focal point of the Figure 9 Picture showing the main entrance and the plaza of the
opera house (ArchDaily, published daily by Plataforma Networks,
Cultural Island, occupying a building 2015)
area of approximately 79000 square
meters of the site’s 444 acres total area. It features a grand theater that can host over
1,600 patrons and a smaller theater to accommodate an intimate
audience of 400. (ArchDaily, published daily by Plataforma Networks, 2015)

ARCH-436 Page 33
 Figure 34 Ground Floor Plan of
the Harbin Opera House
showing the zoning and the
program (ArchDaily, published
daily by Plataforma Networks,
2015)

ARCH-436 Page 34
Figure 35 Mass Plan showing the top view of the Opera house (ArchDaily, published daily by Plataforma Networks, 2015)

Embedded within Harbin’s wetlands, the Harbin Opera House was designed in response
to the force and spirit of the northern city’s untamed wilderness and frigid climate.
Appearing as if sculpted by wind and water, the building seamlessly blends in with nature
and the topography—a transfusion of local identity, art, and culture. ―We
envision Harbin Opera House as a cultural center of the future – a tremendous
performance venue, as well as a dramatic public space that embodies the integration of

Foyer

Auditorium
Stage Area

Figure 36 Section and zoning (ArchDaily, published daily by Plataforma Networks, 2015)

ARCH-436 Page 35
 human, art and the city identity, while synergistically blending with the surrounding
nature,‖ said Ma Yansong, founding principal, MAD Architects. (ArchDaily, published
daily by Plataforma Networks, 2015)

Conclusion: Surpassing the complex opera house typology, MAD articulates

architecture inspired by nature and saturated in local identity, culture and art. As
the Harbin Opera House deepens the emotional connection of the public with the
environment, the architecture is consequently theatrical in both its performance of
narrative spaces and its context within the landscape.

2.3- Case Study Four

CASA DA MUSICA

 Architects: OMA
 Location: Avenida da Boavista 604, 4050-104
Porto, Portugal
 Architect in Charge: Rem Koolhaas and Ellen van
Loon
 Project Architects

 Adrianne Fisher, Michelle Howard Figure 37 Casa Da Musica photo from the main street
showing the form and the approach (ArchDaily,
 Area: 22000.0 sqm published daily by Plataforma Networks, 2014)

 Project Year: 2005

 Project Team: Isabel Silva, Uwe Herlijn, Nuno Rosado, Robert Choeff, Barbara Wolff,
Stephan riek, overt erritsen, Saskia Simon, Thomas Duda, Christian von der
Muelde, ita Amado, Philip Koenen, Peter Muller, Krystian Keck, Eduarda Lima, Christoff
Scholl, Alex de Jong, Alois Zierl, Olaf Hitz, Jorge Toscano, Duarte Santos, Nelson
Carvalho, Stefanie Wandinger, Catarina Canas, Shadi ahbaran, Chris van Duijn, Maria
Baptista, Andre Cardoso, Paulo Costa, Ana Jacinto, Fabienne Louyot, Nicolas Firket,
Christina Beaumont, Anna Little
 Local Architect: ANC Architects, Jorge Carvalho, Teresa Novais` (ArchDaily, published
daily by Plataforma Networks, 2014)

For centuries the Bjørvika pier has been one of Oslo’s economic lifelines and a point of
contact with the rest of the world, however like so many other historic harbor cities, the
ARCH-436 Page 36
site became underused and in a state of decay as harbor activity moved away from its
central location. In 1999, after tireless political and cultural championing, the Norwegian
Parliament decided that the Norwegian National Opera needed to move from its existing
location in Anchor Square and construct a new opera house in Oslo. With the passage of
the Opera Bill and much debate over different site possibilities, an open design
competition was announced for the Bjorvika region that would bring in hundreds of
design proposals, along with attracting an unprecedented amount of media attention and
public interest. The international jury would declare the Norwegian design firm of
Snøhetta the winner with a building concept based on three main elements: the Wave
Wall, the Factory and the Carpet. The Wave Wall would develop into an extensive oak
wall that composes a literal threshold between the public and private functions of the
project, while The Factory represents the production area that would accommodate over
600 employees working in about 50 professions and trades for the new Opera House.

The final element, The Carpet, becomes the most obvious architectural characteristic
with 190,000 sq.ft. of sloping marble roofscape growing out of the harbor’s waters. The
defining element was specifically designed as common property - both a sculpted
landscape and an topographic agora that allows free access for all and becomes a
democratic source of experience that is independent of other theater functions. The
pattern of the roof landscape, designated as artwork, is clad in a stone that traditionally
has been used for public squares, sculpted as a jigsaw puzzle of tactile qualities that
encourages movement through different visual perspectives and a heightened
awareness of one’s surroundings. Ultimately, the sculpted roof exhibits the intention of
the project, which is to return the location on which the opera house was constructed to
the public and it’s natural surroundings. A quality rarely seen in civic design and one that
ultimately speaks to Le Corbusier’s famous five points of architecture almost a century
ago. Primarily used to illustrate the concept of domestic architecture as a standardized
object, Le Corbusier’s theory emphasized the potential of restoring the area of ground
covered by the house and bringing the landscape into the architecture with views and
openness - blurring the relationship between built structure and the surrounding
environment.

"The passing of the Opera Bill was not that popular at the time. It did not happen by
popular demand. But then the building rises out of the dust, and people embrace it as if it

ARCH-436 Page 37
was something they have yearned for! That is nothing short of a marvel and a conscious
effort to
showcase
Norway
as a cultural
nation.‖ -
Anne
Enger,
former
Minister of
Culture
(Karlson,
2011)

Figure 10 Top view of the Casa De Musica showing the Urban Context and the Building (Karlson,
2011)

Figure 39 Site Analysis showing the urban fabric and site accessibility (Karlson, 2011)

ARCH-436 Page 38
Figure 40 Main floor plan of Casa De Musica showing zones and areas (Karlson, 2011)

Conclusion: With this concept, issues of symbolism, visibility and access were resolved
in one gesture. Through both continuity and contrast, the park on the Rotunda da
Boavista, after our intervention, is no longer a mere hinge between the old and the new
Porto, but it becomes a positive encounter of two different models of the city.

ARCH-436 Page 39
 Page 40
Figure 41 Programs of the four projects showing the different and similar aspects of the elements and the different ones

ARCH-436
 4- Questionnaire
Questionnaire
This is a survey questionnaire designed to assess the user experience of an Opera House Complex, it
will help to understand the functionality of the spaces, and develop a better Approach to the Program &
Design

The Questionnaire targeted a sample of 100 people of different age range between 20 & 60 which are
the most influential ages that are still socially active and we can derive reliable conclusions from their
answers.

Full Na e: ………………………………………….

Ge der: Male Fe ale Natio ality: ………………………..………………………….

Age: ……………………………………………. Year Date: ……………………………………………………….…….

Circle the best rating, in your opinion, considering the following questions (1 strongly agree/3 Moderate/5 Strongly
disagree)

Design Approach
I.
1 Opera house an important Landmark building 1 2 3 4 5
2 The existence of an Opera house increases your interest 1 2 3 4 5
Of you visiting the city
II.
3 Beirut Lacks an Opera House building 1 2 3 4 5
4 Exterior design is extremely important in such project 1 2 3 4 5
III.
5 The auditoriums needs to be Exterior and Interior 1 2 3 4 5
IV.
6 Landscaping and outdoor parks attract you more than the 1 2 3 4 5
Presence of performances regularly
7 Distance between terminal and plane 1 2 3 4 5

1. Please state the most Interesting aspect of such a project to you.

ARCH-436 Page 41
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………….

2. How often do you think of watching plays and performances in such a place?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………….

3. In your opinion, what is the most important facility that should be present in such a project ?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
……………………….…

Program
I.
1 An outdoor Theater is more interesting than an indoor one 1 2 3 4 5
2 The Theatre should be large 1 2 3 4 5
II.
3 Reception desks are spacious and welcoming 1 2 3 4 5
III.
4 Waiting area is accessibility to entrance 1 2 3 4 5
5 such a project should contain outdoor concert court & outdoor park which 1 2 3 4 5
acts like touristic avenues and social gathering areas
IV.
6 An Opera House increases the cultural awareness 1 2 3 4 5
7 Music and visual arts are important and should be more focused 1 2 3 4 5
On

4. Would you like to have a retail area in the Opera ?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………….

Common Questions
Please answer these questions (For both Arrival and Departure)

5. Would you prefer the retail and shops to be accessible from inside or outside the terminal?

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………….

6. Describe any facilities you think an Opera House Complex should include. (Add reason of choice if
possible)

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………….

ARCH-436 Page 42
4.1- Questionnaire Analysis
Analysis in the form of histogram of the most influential questions that affected the design
approach & the program

Design Approach
I-
1- Opera house an important Landmark building

70

60

50

40 50-60
20-30
30
30-45

20

10

0
Strongly agree Agree Moderate disagree Strongly diagree

2- The existence of an Opera house increases your interest Of you visiting the city

35

30

25

20 50-60
20-30
15
30-45

10

0
Strongly agree Agree Moderate Disagree Strongly diagree

ARCH-436 Page 43
 II-
3- Beirut Lacks an Opera House building

45

40

35

30

25 50-60
20-30
20
30-45
15

10

0
Strongly agree Agree Moderate Diagree Strongly diagree

Program
1- An outdoor Theater is more interesting than an indoor one

40

35

30

25
50-60
20
20-30

15 30-45

10

0
Strongly agree agree moderate diagree Strongly diagree

ARCH-436 Page 44
 2- such a project should contain food courts & outdoor park which
Acts like touristic avenues and social gathering areas

40

35

30

25
60-50
20
20-30

15 30-45

10

0
strongly agree agree moderate disagree strongly disagree

CONCLUSION.

An Opera House is an important Landmark which Beirut Lacks and affects all the country
and not only the city which is built in it increases cultural awareness and make the
community think big about performative arts.

Moreover, this opera house complex should focus on creating more outdoor spaces
rather than building a traditional opera house and that what was deduced from the
analysis of the questionnaire that the people need more open spaces and specially at
Beirut water front area where these spaces contains touristic attractions and parks in
addition to outdoor theatres which can host festivals and concerts at summer time since
also all the concerts that take place at Beirut are usually done at Biel (enclosed space) &
Forum De Beirut (enclosed space).

ARCH-436 Page 45
5 – Standards

5.1- Audiences: assessing demand

An important element of a feasibility study is the assessment of Demand for performing

arts within the community that the facility is Proposed to serve. The aim is to establish
whether there are audiences for the proposed program of use, and to define catchment
area from which audiences are to be drawn. Assessment of the area under consideration
includes studies of:

- Population characteristics
- Transportation characteristics
- Potential audiences
- Local cultural traditions
- Existing provision
- Actual audiences
- Pilot scheme (Neufert, 2000)

5.2- Auditorium and stage/playing area

Seating capacity In general, the maximum capacity of an auditorium depends on the

format selected, and on aural and visual limitations set by the type of production. Other
factors include levels, sightlines, acoustics, circulation and seating density as well as size
and shape of platform/stage. (Neufert, 2000)

5.3- Size of auditorium:

An area of at least 0.5 m2 per spectator is to be used for sitting spectators. This number
is derived from a seat width x row spacing of at least 0.45m 2 per seat, plus an additional
minimum of 0.5m x 00.9m i.e. approximately 0.05m2/ per seat. (Neufert, 2000)

5.4- Length of rows:

A maximum of 16 seats per aisle 25 seats per aisle is permissible if one side exit door of
1m width is provided/ 3-4 rows. (Neufert, 2000)

5.5- Exits, escape routes:

1m wide per 150 people (min. width 0.8m) (Neufert, 2000)

ARCH-436 Page 46
5.6- Volume of room:

This is obtained on the basis of acoustic requirements (reverberation) as follows:

Playhouses approx. 4-5 m3/spectator, opera approximately 6-8m3 /spectator of air

volume. For technical ventilation reasons, the volumes should be no less than these
figures so as to avoid air changes which are too pronounced draughts. (Neufert, 2000)

5.7- Proportions of auditorium:

These are obtained from the spectator's psychological perception and viewing angle, as
well as the requirement for a good view from all seats.

- Good view without head movement, but slight eye movement of about 30°.
- Good view with slight head movement and slight eye movement approx.
80
- Maximum perception angle without head movement is about 110°, in. in
this field everything which takes place 'between the corners of the eyes' is
perceived. There is uncertainty beyond this field because something may
be missed from the field of vision.
- With full head and shoulder movement, a perception held of 360° is
possible. (Neufert, 2000)

5.8- Proportions of the classical auditorium:

(Opera. multipurpose theatre, If additional playhouse) Maximum distance of last row

from the proscenium line (start of stage):

- For opera - 32m (important movements still recognizable (Neufert, 2000)

5.9- Width of auditorium:

This is derived from the fact that spectators sitting to one side should still be able to see
the stage clearly. Variants are possible The comfortable proportions and often good
acoustics of the classical theatres of the 18th and 19th century we based on special rules
of proportion. (Neufert, 2000)

ARCH-436 Page 47
5.9.1- Elevation of seating:

Elevation of seating (gradient) in the auditorium is obtained from the lines of vision. Such
lines are valid for all seats in the auditorium (stalls as well as circles). Since the
spectators sit in 'gaps', only every second row requires full sight elevation (12cm).
Special mathematical literature addresses the subject of sight problems in theatres in
which the randomness of the distribution of different sizes of spectators is also taken into
account. The rows of spectators should be formed in a circular segment with respect to
the stage, not just for better alignment but also to achieve better mutual perception
(feeling of integration). (Neufert, 2000)

5.9.2- Workshops for making scenery

In his 1927 Book Stage technology today, stage technician Kranich demanded that
workshops should be excluded from the theatre. He gave two reasons: danger of fire,
and limited space options.

In old theatres, the workshops were often installed in completely inaccessible places.
Today, the demand is to have the workshops within the theatre with the aid of
appropriate space planning so as to retain the specific, positive operating climate in the
theatre (identification with the work). However for space or economic reasons, in the
case of large theatres, the workshops are often installed in separate buildings. Space
required for scenery workshops in medium theatres (normal and multipurpose theatres)
is 4-5 times the area of the main stage. In large opera houses or double theatres (opera
and plays), ten times the area is required. Always install workshops On one level whether
in or outside the theatre.

There are several classes of scenery workshop:

(a) The painting room area must be sufficient to allow two large back -drops or round
horizons can be spread flat on the floor for painting. Average size of a round horizon is
10m x 36m. Due to spraying work, it is necessary to subdivide the room with a thick
curtain. Floor heating is needed for drying the painted backdrops, and a wooden floor for

ARCH-436 Page 48
spreading the canvases. A sewing room should be near the painting room for sewing
together the canvas sections. Its size should be about ¼ of the painting room.

(b) The carpenters' shop is subdivided into bench and machine rooms. It has wooden
floors and a connected wood store for 3-10 productions.

(c) The upholstery room is about l/10 the size of the painting room.

(d) Metalworking shop: size as for carpenters' shop, with a screed floor.

(e) Laminating shop: size as for (b) and id).

(f ) The workshops should be grouped around an assembly room, which serves for
practice setting up of the scenery. The surface area should be as for the stage, and
height according to proscenium height plus 2m, 9-10m across.

(g) Changing, washing and rest rooms (canteen) are required for technical personnel.
Offices are needed for technical management personnel. Additional workshops are
needed for sound, lighting, props and costumes. The size of these rooms should be
according to requirements lie, production intensity, personnel numbers, etc.). (Neufert,
2000)

5.9.3- Personnel rooms

These are needed for artistic personnel, directors, and administration. From an historic
perspective, the personnel rooms were placed on either side of the stage: women to the
left and men to the right. However, this was unfavorable for the operation, so, nowadays;
personnel rooms are built on one side, opposite the technical side, and on several floors.
Here also are found the mask making shops, frequently also the costume workshop,
administration and directors. (Neufert, 2000)

5.9.4- Rehearsal Rooms

To reduce the load on the main stage, every theatre must have at least one rehearsal
stage e.g. in a small theatre, the scenery for the current piece is on the stage, with

ARCH-436 Page 49
rehearsal on the rehearsal stage. Dimensions of the rehearsal room should be asper the
main stage. (Neufert, 2000)

5.9.5 - Experimental theatre

Personnel and rehearsal rooms, workshops and stores are also required in reduced form
for continuous operation. (Neufert, 2000)

5.9.6 - Technical utilities

Transformer room, medium- and low –voltage switchroom, emergency power batteries,
air-conditioning and ventilation plant, water supply (sprinkler system) according to local
requirements and specialist planning. (Neufert, 2000)

5.9.7 - Public areas

The classical Italian opera houses had only narrow access doors and stairs - there was
no actual foyer - whereas the huge public areas of the Grand Opera House in Paris were
impressive. The theatre fire in Vienna, in 1881, resulted in fundamental changes. Self-
contained emergency stairs, separate for each level, were now required for the audience.
Such a requirement in principle still applies today.

In the traditional theatre, the foyers are subdivided into the actual foyer, restaurant
(buffet) and a smoking foyer. An area of foyer 0.8-2.0m2//spectator and 0.6-
0.8m2/spectator, respectively,is realistic. The function of the foyer has changed today. It
may be supplemented with displays, performances and other activities.Theatre
performances must be taken into account during planning: room height, wall, ceiling and
floor configuration. (Neufert, 2000)

5.9.8 - Cloakrooms

Minimum: 4m per 100 visitors. Nowadays, cloakrooms often have lockers: 1 locker per 4
visitors. The foyer is also the waiting and queuing area. WCs are installed with respect to
the foyer in the normal ratio (i.e. 1 WC/100 people: 1/3 men, 2/3 women): there must be
at least one men's and one ladies' toilet. The entrance hall (lobby) contains the day and
evening ticket offices, which should be opposite each other. (Neufert, 2000)

ARCH-436 Page 50
5.9.9 - External access and emergency routes

These are needed in accordance with local requirements and will depend on the location:

- Prestigious location in an urban square

- Location in a park or on a main street (Neufert, 2000)

6- Program
This program is derived from the benchmarks & from Neufert standards & the
questionnaire where the area of the outdoor concert court & outdoor park which act like
touristic avenues and social gathering areas.

The program is designed for 2600 user (excluding users of the outdoor concert court and
the outdoor park) with 2 stages (one big & one small auditorium & stage)

6.1-

Number of Area/person Total Number of Total Area

Zones Spaces Notes
rooms m² Users m²

Main
1 0.8 1800 _ 1500
Auditorium
Small
1 0.8 800 _ 640
Auditorium
Audience Open
Zone Outdoor 1 0.8 1000 _ 1000
Theatre
Multi-
Purpose 1 _ _ _ 400
Hall
Main Stage 1 _ _ 80m x 45m 3600
Small
1 _ _ 40mx25m 1000
Stage
Scenery
1 _ _ 38mx25m 950
Assembly
Costume
2 2.75 12 _ 66
Performance Change l
zones Storages 8 _ - _ 3600
Solo
Dressing 5 5 3 15mx2m 150
Room
Secondary
Dressing 3 2 20 35mx4m 140
Room

ARCH-436 Page 51
 Ballet
Changing 2 4 30 _ 120
Room
Sound &
Lighting
2 _ _ _ 200
control
room
Make-Up
2 _ _ 6x6 72
Room
Music
Rehearsal 2 1.4 40 _ 112
room
Dancing
and acting
2 _ _ _ 1600
rehearsal
room
Foyer 2 0.8 2600 2100
Entrance
Public Zone 1 _ _ _ 200
Lobby
VIP
1 _ _ _ 40
Lounge
Music
3 _ - _ 150
Educational Classroom
Zone Dancing
3 10 20 _ 600
Classroom
Recreational Restaurant 1 0.9 400 _ 360
Zone Cafeteria 1 0.9 600 _ 540
Offices 6 _ _ _ 135
Administration Conference 2 _ _ _ 60
Zone Rooms
Ticketing
1 _ 4 _ 16
booth
Kitchen 2 0.4 350 _ 140
Men Cloak
2 _ _ _ 40
Room
Women
Services Cloak 2 _ - _ 80
Room
Technical
Rooms
2 _ - _ 200
(Mech.&
Elect)
Total Area Without outdoor Concert Court & Park (Built Area) 19811
Outdoor
Concert 1 0.5 20000 _ 40000
Outdoor
Court
Spaces
Outdoor
1 _ _ _ 10000
Park
Total Area With outdoor Concert Court & Park 69811
Figure 42 Table showing the program and the space requirements for the opera house spaces and will result as a
conclusion in the zoning and bubble diagram

ARCH-436 Page 52
 6.2 – Bubble & Zoning Diagrams

The bubble Diagram shows the special relations and the connections between the
spaces

Figure 43 Bubble Diagram

ARCH-436 Page 53
 The zoning diagram that visualize the spaces and their relations and how are they
connected and this stage is before forming the plans of the Opera complex.

Figure 44 Zoning Diagram

ARCH-436 Page 54
Bibliography
(n.d.). Retrieved May 5, 2016, from Google Earth: https://earth.google.com/

ArchDaily, published daily by Plataforma Networks. (2011, October 28). Retrieved from ArchDaily:
www.archdaily.com

ArchDaily, published daily by Plataforma Networks. (2014, April 2015). Retrieved from ArchDaily:
www.archdaily.com

(2015). Retrieved from World Weather and Climate Information.: https://weather-and-climate.com

ArchDaily, published daily by Plataforma Networks. (2015, December 16). Retrieved from ArchDaily:
www.archdaily.com

(2016). Retrieved May 5, 2016, from Google Earth: https://earth.google.com/

Allison, John (ed.). (2003). Great Opera Houses of the World. supplement to Opera Magazine.

Karlson, C. (2011, October 28). Rotch Study. Retrieved from http://www.ckarlson.com/

Livingston, D. L. (2008). Sects & Cinema in Lebanon. New York: Columbia University.

Mearig, T. (1997). Site selection criteria and evaluation handbook. Juneau, AK: Dept. of Education.

Neufert, E. a. (2000). Ernst and Peter Neufert Architects' Data - Third Edition. Oxford.

Saieh, N. (2010 , August 25). ArchDaily, published daily by Plataforma Networks. Retrieved from
ArchDaily: www.archdaily.com

ARCH-436 Page 55