Dorobanti Tower by Zaha Hadid Architects
Zaha Hadid Architects have produced a design for the Dorobanti Tower in Bucharest, Romania.
The 200 metre building contains a 5-star hotel, convention centre, and luxury apartments.
From Zaha Hadid:
The Dorobanti Tower was designed to establish an iconic presence in the heart of Bucharest. The new tower is a unique mix of a distinctive form, ingenious structure, and spatial qualities of sky-high living. The purity of its form – a chamfered diamond like structure – will be a timeless, elegant landmark in the centre of Bucharest. Zaha Hadid Architect’s design concept is a synthesis of architecture and engineering, which integrates a dis-tinct meandering structural mesh frame and naturally expresses the changing programme of hotel, amenities, and residential apartments.
The site is located in the centre of Bucharest, to the west of Piaza Romana, and approximately 6km south of the international airport. The brief called for a 100,000 square metre mixed-use development at the junction of Calea Dorobanti and St. Mihail Eminescu. The project comprises 34,000 square metres of a 5-star hotel (including restaurants and a convention centre) and 35,000 square metres of luxury apartments. Additionally, the scheme offers lower level retail areas of 4,600 square metres and it delivers a generous allocation of public realm. This public area will be unlike anything else in Bucharest, representing a major attraction within the dense urban character of the City, offering an important new meeting space and urban plaza.
Visit Zaha Hadid’s website – here.






Urban parameters, site constraints and the building programme generate the building’s elegant tapering profile. The unique building geometry responds to the urban structure of the city and creates a counterpart to the angular developments of the communist past of Bucharest. The new tower establishes a distinctive identity while avoiding sterile repetition through its dynamically changing appearance. The chamfered diamond shape tapers from the centre towards the top and the bottom. On top of the structure, the recess assures more sunlight and views for the surrounding neighbourhoods, while the offset at ground level creates public realm and an appropriate entrance plaza in front of the tower.
Concrete filled steel profiles follow in sinus waves from the ground level to the top of the tower, creating a distinctive identity and complementing the tower design. The concrete filling will give additional strength to the structure and it will provide fire protection to the steel profiles. The facade structure adjusts to the building programme and to the structural forces. At the bottom, the façade grid has denser amplitudes according to the structural requirements for a tower of this height, providing the required load bearing capacity and stiffness to the structure. At the technical and recreation levels, the structure condenses creating almost solid knots. Additionally, the secondary structure supports the main steel frames. It also gives the 200m tower a human scale as the grid of the secondary frame structure reflects the floor heights. Furthermore, the secondary structure could be utilized to support additional glass panels as a shading device.
Visit Zaha Hadid’s website – here.

sasha on 28 Jan 2009 at 11:06 am #
lol in the centre of Bucharest!
)
sasha on 28 Jan 2009 at 11:27 am #
i live there!!!
romanian rchitect on 28 Jan 2009 at 3:21 pm #
For sure Mrs.Zaha Hadid never visited Bucharest to understand how stupid and with no relation with the existing structure of Bucharest downtow her proposal is. I hardly believe a so celbrated architect, with a solid and serious background can produce such a horor. Mrs.Zaha Hadd, please be so kind to do the minimal effort to understand that Bucharest is not a desert, Romania is not Abu Dhabi and we are not leaving in trees. The cente of Bucharest is probably one of the most interesting urban structures entirely built in the period between the 2 world wars and such very high building are from another movie. Do you think your proposal would fit the center of London, for instance ? I;m sure your answer is NO. The same for Paris, the same for Barcelona. Why do you think it is a good proposal for Bucharest ? You have to feel ashamed, believe me. I am waiting you to say: Sorry Bucharest ! You still have time for that. Kind Regards, without respect. Dan Agent – romanian architect.
Andrew Menil on 28 Jan 2009 at 7:30 pm #
The height of a building is the decision of the developers, because they’re the people who have to pay for it. The developer probably approached Zaha Hadid and asked for a building this large, so Zaha Hadid designed one for them.
In most cities, the height of a building is also the decision of the local city council. They either approve it or not.
If you don’t approve of the height of the building, blame the developer, not the architect. And if the city of Bucharest approves the building, then you can blame them too.
A-ionic on 28 Jan 2009 at 9:07 pm #
That’s something new for Zaha, aside from her typical ‘Z’-shaped and diagonal futuristic buildings, this one looks interesting.
But with the controversies about Romania and her building, that should be discussed on the tables. The thing is, if most of the people of Bucharest loved the building, especially the critics, then green light’s on.
Cris on 29 Jan 2009 at 12:17 am #
I live in Bucharest, I am Romanian, and please understand, what you designed is great for any other country, but horrible for my city! I totally agree with mister Agent.
Cosmin on 29 Jan 2009 at 2:22 am #
and of course a project witch will remain a project. Not for Romania!
Hadidian Splendour. on 29 Jan 2009 at 3:09 am #
WHO MOVED MY CHEESE!
Don’t you think the people in Bucharest felt the same way about the first building to top 6 storeys? Don’t you think that the edifices that you are now clamouring to ‘preserve the integrity of’ once faced such similar opposition.
Hadid, seems, from what we can tell from a few artists impressions to have answered the brief set her by the developers.
Yes it isn’t a mock-traditional-safe project…. but then why go to Zaha Hadid for a safe mock traditional project…. oh, wait. they didn’t. They went to Zaha Hadid for something contemporary, new and fit for purpose.
Deal with it and embrace the future… it’ll be the past soon enough.
Salt on 29 Jan 2009 at 4:59 am #
I too agree with Mr. Agent. This building has no place in downtown Bucharest. Had anyone asked the people who live there – not the city council, mind you! – I am sure the majority would say no to such a horror.
josef on 29 Jan 2009 at 5:23 am #
I for one, think it’s a beautiful building. I love Zaha’s work and I think (though I’ve never been to Bucharest, much less live there) it’s high time we as a species move beyond paltry holdings-on to the past. Seriously. Progress and pragmatism is phenomenal. You can’t expect to go on building short, stout, brick-and-mortar traditional buildings and keep up on the fast paced global stage.
Level Bucharest and fill it with buildings by Hadid, Liebeskind, Pelli, and Koolhaas.
Peter Shaw on 29 Jan 2009 at 5:38 am #
I think this is a great looking building, but I do agree that it’s just way out of scale for Bucharest. Unless the City of Bucharest has plans to build many more like this, does it?
Eric on 29 Jan 2009 at 8:31 am #
Yeah…that doesn’t look out of place or anything…
Claudia on 29 Jan 2009 at 9:42 am #
Level Bucharest and fill it with buildings of such and such? This sentence is outrageous and insulting on so many levels that it is staggering at this point in time. Have you ever been to Bucharest? Do you know its history? Do you have any idea about urban design and development in order to utter such nonsense? Can you even place it on a map, you … (fill in with adjectives)?
Bucharest is my home. Although I can appreciate the architectural beauty of the building presented here, it has no place in the center of Bucharest, throwing everything out of balance. And I highly doubt it will be built, in the end.
Elie on 30 Jan 2009 at 5:46 am #
I live in Bucharest although I’m not from there (Lebanese). It’s a beautiful city (with a lot of angry people though
) and “leveling it” is a very ignorant statement (or just a stunt to say “i can recite the names of a couple of famous architects”). How would you like me to visit your town with a couple of dozers ey?
The building does seem to stand out of place though, since the architecture in DT Bucharest is pittoresque and gives the city a harmony which you can’t find anywhere else. So get educated before you utter any nonsense!
And those who think that Dubai and Abudhabi ppl are camels or monkeys should get with the program as well. Dubai is one of the most impressive cities I’ve ever lived in. No need to call anyone names if you feel frustrated.
Cheers!
Oana - Arch. from Bucharest on 30 Jan 2009 at 7:02 am #
I like this building but i guess Zaha never been here to see the site which is surrounded by old beautiful houses, except for the taller buildings(max 30m) from the main street from which you can’t access the site. You can access this site from a street only 12 meters wide, parking included. The traffic is deadly in this area, you can even spend 30 min on a 15 m long street. So how can she imagine this will be functional? I understand that the developer can establish the height and the placement of a building, but as a respected architect i would refuse such a horrible idea, it would ruin my reputation. There is no way this building will be functional, unless we’ll demolish all the center area. It should be placed on a less crowded site, with a better access and less old houses. There are a lot of empty sites with such description, so good luck with the next project ’cause this one will get the approval from the city hall only over many dead bodies! We’re sorry that the first very well known architect is doing a proposal like this for our city. We’re waiting for a better project!
Madalin N. on 30 Jan 2009 at 3:35 pm #
This building designed by Mrs. Hadid is obviously a structural shape with no interest for the surroundings. It was a minimal effort from her to make the diagonal rounded (?!) pattern and apply it to the building. I see from the project that there was no interest to study the zone. Put this awkward shaped building in to the real context ( not white boxes ), and the result it will disappoint the eyes. I know the site very well. It is a highly dense build zone whit great architecture. And none of them tries to stand up so much from the crowd. Sorry to say that, but this building screams at you.
I saw o similar shaped building from Rem Koolhaas (TORRE BICENTENARIO in Mexico City), but much more well designed and studied. This is a great arhitecture, not what Mrs. Hadid proposed for Bucharest.
I observed that Mrs. Hadid mostly does projects for different contest whit no preocupation for a real building. So this is how it works: think of a curious spectacular shape, get 2 or 3 guys that work very good in 3d ( 3ds max + vray from what i see ) and, in 3 days you got a good ( but not well thought ) idea for a building.
This is arhitecture? Frank O. Ghery studies forms for several year before realesing the final shape.
So let’s take this project for Bucharest as a study, nothing more, but perhaps less. Maybe a 10 in Spiru Haret, but maybe 7 or 8 in my University, Ion Mincu, Bucuresti, as a teacher from this school would say.
Sorry guys, but let’s face it, Mrs. Hadid can do so much more for my city.
se_cris on 31 Jan 2009 at 3:46 pm #
wow…first time when ppl doesnt confuse Bucharest with Budapest. Or they did???
This “spectacle” is no more hillarious but became quite funny.
l wonder what would be usefull for another extra-large 5 stars hotel in same city, except to flater how much money some developers can spend while the others scratch the cheese???
Deffintely the architect is less responsable for an asked service than a sick system that could induce such a stupid client-request.
It’s said that “time heals”, so let’s see what will happen and “what the doctor will say”
romanian rchitect on 31 Jan 2009 at 11:34 pm #
Dear Elle. My comment seems to be wrongly interpreted by you. I didn’t intended to say anything wrong about Dubai. I only said two things with no relation of each other: 1. Bucharest is not Abu Dabi (if Abu Dabi is a place for such buildings and I think they are good there and I like how Abu Dabi looks like, being a very new sructure with practically no past, Bucharest is an European capital, very powefully structured by its traditions and such a building will destroy it for sure) and 2. We Romanians we are not living in trees wich wanted to be a metaphor for people without power to decide themselves their future and what is good for them. I want also to thank you for the words about marvelous Bucharest: sometimes people coming from other countries, like you, are able to “see” better the beauties of Bucharest. Thank you.
no on 01 Feb 2009 at 1:18 pm #
What does a diamond mean in a field of shit?Whould you bend and pick it up?A question for anybody who does think a little above the contextual reality of Bucharest…or to rephrase-it, why don’t we allow a landmark in a town with no rules?Anybody builds any way they want, stupid architecture everywhere, nobody said anything, only silent and poor voices lost in the mist, and now…one of the best architects in the world wants to build something remarcable…and the only mistake made here is that she did request a public opinion.
Ordener on 01 Feb 2009 at 2:09 pm #
Amazingly retarded commments from Romanian architects. After having lived in Bucharest for several years I was wondering why there’s no effort to improve such a drab city. I see that one of the causes is this attitude of misplaced respect for a built environment that clearly doesn’t deserve it. It’s pretty obvious why modern Romanian architecture is nonexistent.
Get another job, guys and gals, and leave architecture to people who know their trade.
iolanda costide (stranescu) on 02 Feb 2009 at 11:34 am #
Pity this city, defaced by Ceausescu, wild development, approved by corrupt officials, in the past 15 years, and lack of funding to refurbish the historic architecture, spanning from medieval times to wonderful modern movement examples (the latter the object of an exhibition at the RIBA!) Please design a building with reference to the context, as I know you can. From a former colleague at the AA
Bogdan Udrescu on 06 Feb 2009 at 5:04 am #
I think the comments from outside romania are indeed in lack of information.
It’s a very nice project. VERY NICE INDEED. BUT!!!!!! You CAN NOT put something this huge in a place where you can’t dissipate the amount of cars that the funtion will atract. U can’t and it’s unwise to place it there.
First of all u must understant that the roads of Bucharest are already full of cars that make around 1.30 hours for a simple trip from a part of Bucharest in diagonal… At least! U must understant that the explosion of owned cars on the roads of this city is the biggest problem u have to deal with in the first place. Then the amount of people that will work in there. And the amount of people that will visit the place.
I appreciate that the flux of humans/day will be around 10.000. In this small intersection… IT’S TOO MUCH. How many cars u’ll have because of this? around 1000? Coming and going. At least. Where are u gonna park them? Bucharest has almost no parking buildings in the downtown. And anywhere else. The romanians have discovered the automobile and the accesibility to it in the last 5 years. Since the banks have loosened the loans.
If someone wants to build something this representative, he/she must see also the downsides that are coming with it.
I love the image, since i’m a person with some education. Yeah, i’m an architect. Romanian. And i’m thrilled that Zaha Hadid & comp has a project for this town / country. Thou i think she/them must think more the placement of this. Ask the local people. Ask us, the architects from here what we think it’s better for this town. And WHERE. Ask the local authorities. They have some people that know their job. Ask the Architecture University too. They surely know better then anyone else.
Many thanks! We love your work. And we gladly welcome you here! We want to learn from you and the other important architects around the globe.
Have fun!
romanian rchitect on 09 Feb 2009 at 3:27 pm #
Perfectly agree with you dear colleague Bogdan Udrescu. The problem is in fact the fit of this architectural object with the place it was presented to be put in. It’s like putting the Koh-I-Noor diamond on a wedding ring. Koh-I-Noor is beautifull, agree, but it is not auitable for a wedding ring. And this is not because the ring is a peace of sheet, like some kind Bucharest visitors wrote above, but because it is a obvious misfit of scale. Polish architects are trying to cover the Culture Palace in the center of Warsaw by tall buildings. Maybe it will be a good idea to put around the Parliament House of Ceausescu some very tall buildings, I don’t know … But the diamond-like building of Mrs.Zaha Hadid wants itself to be THE ONE, to become eventually the icon of Bucharest. Russians gave to Bucharest as a gift, in the fifties, as an ultimate expression of their new revolutionary spirit, the “Casa Scanteii” building. Does Bucharest need a new expression of the ultimate architecture of the moment, through the Dorobantzi Tower of Mrs Hadid, as a gift of the new masters ? I really think that Bucharest can receive without problem tall buildings, but not anywhere, anyhow. There exists an altimetry survey which establish very clear where and how much it is good to built high buildings in Bucharest. Why obscure investors try to built without observing Bucharest urban rules, why architects as Zaha Hadid now and few months ago Helmuth Jahn propose structres without any links wth the existing Bucharest structures ? Why still the adminisration of Bucharest didn’t found the way to offer to investors ways to make money observing in the same time the public interest of Bucharest ? No answers for the moment. What is sure: Bucharest is a beautiful city, with a dramatic history and which needs a very attentive treatment from the architects from anywhere.
arch on 10 Feb 2009 at 1:39 am #
When I think that once I really appreciated the the way Zaha Hadid aproaches a project… When I think that I considered that the romanian architects “prostitute” themselves for the money of the investors… hmmm, it seems they are not the only ones, it also happens where you wouldn’t expect… the only difference would be the nicer skin (and still, Zaha Hadid wasn’t famous for the special skin of her buildings)…
nice architectural object to enrich the portfolio… not nice the impact of this Gulliver building in the land of the midgets of a charming and well defined urban tissue.
I wonder if the investors would pay for some new trains for the subway sistem, trains to bring to work and than back home the huge amount of people who would come to work.
action generates reaction. let’s make an exercise and imagine the reaction generated by this diamond without a ring…
PS:I totally disagree Ordener.
Ordener on 13 Feb 2009 at 11:57 am #
so, if zaha’s project is not good enough why don’t you come up with a better one? in our part of the world architecture is judged mainly by the products, rather than the words of the architects. i suppose that is not the case in bucharest, where there are, as it seems, lots of architects who talk too much and build nothing.
also, mr romanian (a)rchitect and arch, i would like you to point me to a major architectural practice in romania, one that has a portofolio outside of bucharest.
best regards
Bogdan Udrescu on 14 Feb 2009 at 1:51 pm #
Ordener – you are out of topic for sure!
You realy can’t get the little idea that WE DO LIKE THE BIG D@#$. Even us, the retarded romanians like a nice falus, wraped in a great material. We are too sick of cubes and stupid shapes.
But the big one it’s missplaced. I’ve made a little analisys there and pinpointed some major flaws in the utilisation of the great building in that specifical spot.
It is an old and protected area where u don’t build as u are on a great plain with nothing around. The buildings there have history and can and will be not affected, both functional and visual by such a falic image. The nice d#$@ should be built in some other area of Bucharest. There are some that can and will allow it to grow and flourish with no affect on the vecinity. And where streets have more then 1 band per direction. Where parkings can be built without any problem – like demolishing buildings 100-150 years old.
Understant that: we like our old building and we do not agree all the time with the idea of demolishing for the new and clean things. Past is important and we embrasse it. History is made of bricks too.
corvin on 16 Feb 2009 at 2:28 pm #
These days some architects achieve similar status to rock stars and it is not for the best of Architecture. In the age of marketing, Fame and True Value don’t go together necessarily anymore and the simple fact that one architect is in his field as famous as Paris Hilton or Britney are, makes me fear it is the same kind of striking aggressive self promoting skills that brought him(or her) there and not the skills required to create beautiful livable cities… Sounds a little harsh but the “Dorobanti Tower” only deepens my worries. To my taste it is so far to timeless architecture as Britney is to true music. A glitzy carcase.
What’s the meaning of the arabian-like screen on the facade? A left-over from an unbuilt project in the Emirates? Let’s just fly it over to Bucharest!
It is true that the city hall in the first place shouldn’t have let the developer even think of such a possibility but, as it is obvious, in Bucharest, greed, corruption and lack of culture are the job description of city planners and authorities… still, this doesn’t mean a big name in architecture has to be greedy and build whatever on historical sites just because the lack of authority transformed poor old Bucharest into a no man’s land. There are plenty of other places in Bucharest to build even higher, not in a charming neighborhood.
Really sorry for the non academic sound of my reply but I also happens to live here and I love and hate Bucharest but the parts I love are exactly the ones that projects like Mrs. Hadid’s are taking away. I used to come from far just to walk in that neighborhood. It would be quite sad not to have where to come to.
Highest regards to all, including the ones who enjoy a different point of view.
Ordener on 17 Feb 2009 at 10:29 am #
to be honest, i’m not a big fan of mrs. hadid’s architecture (with a few exceptions). however, compared to the gaudy and akwardly proportioned recent buildings in bucharest, this is a very interesting proposal.
i’m also not familiar with the exact location of this building and must accept mr. udrescu’s analysis of the traffic situation. however, this problem is too complex to solve just by moving the tower in a less crowded part of the city. you are probably thinking la defense in paris or the city in london, which in my oppinion
Ordener on 17 Feb 2009 at 10:39 am #
sorry for the tipo.
to continue:
… in my opinion are not the most succesful approaches. there are some fine examples of mixing old and new (skyscraped included) in europe. my point is that this proposal has potential and could work with some refinements.
i must apologize for my words in previous posts. just recently i have encountered a somewhat similar situation in my work, and the frustration got the better of me.
as for my view on romanian architecture in europe i stand by my opinion: it is completely absent.
Dude from Bucharest on 17 Feb 2009 at 2:47 pm #
Just see the location for yourselves:
http://maps.live.com/default.aspx?v=2&FORM=LMLTCP&cp=rd74wsk57jyn&style=b&lvl=2&tilt=-90&dir=0&alt=-1000&scene=42762378&phx=0&phy=0&phscl=1&where1=bucuresti&encType=1
“Show me the money” first, architecture after…
Sure, it’s such a great shape, we’ll love it from the other part of the city.
You can’t call yourself an architect and say: “Ok, this is right”.
Sorry
corvin on 20 Feb 2009 at 7:18 am #
for further aknowlegements, please visit:
http://www.plural-magazine.com/article_a_century_of_our_past_and_our_european_identity.html
romanian architect on 10 Apr 2009 at 9:44 pm #
@ordener
You are partially right in being critic to the Romanian architectural contemporary production. I don’t want to try to explain you what it must be obvious for a more attentive look, which it is not your case your for sure. I say partially because the “visible” architecture, to use Alvaro Siza words, is still too much “economically standard”, as it was in most big citied of the world in post-war period – and we are now in a kind of post-war period; this can be seen in all post-comunist countries with very few exceptions. If you could be in contact with the “non-visible” Romanian architecture you could find out a lot of examples of “best architecture”, this is for sure.
But as the Americans bombed Belgrad and said, after the crime, sorry for not knowing very well the local situation, I understand people who consider Bucharest existing structures as pieces of shit are ready to bomb the Romanian capital with any kind of architecture icons and ready to say after sorry as a formal excuse, only because it is polite.
I invite you to come in our beautiful city and I will show you a lot of things you cannot see anywhere in the world.
If you accept Globalization as a fatal reality we have to accept in the same time the principle of subsidiarity, all of us. This means the respect of local particularities, and if you are an architect who respect yourself and respect what you do, you have to be contextual, as most part of today “stars” are – I am thinking to Renzo Piano in particular. My critic position to Mrs.Zaha Hadid proposal was that: no relation with the context of the city. And in direct relation with that the fact an architect of so “dimension” could do a proposal without taking in consideration this context. Architecture is not something which can be put anywhere. Do you think Corbu’s Chapelle in other place than Ronchamp ? or Louis Kahn House of Parliament in other place than Dacca ? Or do you think Mrs. Zaha Hadid proposal would be well placed near the Piccadilly Circus, not just in the plaza but a little “near” it ?
But you said already “sorry” so I say also “sorry” and keep my invitation.: Come to Bucharest and after a cup of Turkish coffee I will accompany you in a beautiful trip around the city. Friendly arch.Dan Agent
corvin on 28 Apr 2009 at 12:31 pm #
Cameron Sinclair quoted by ICON Magazine: ” Inviting Zaha Hadid to talk about ethics in architecture, he said, was like getting Robert Mugabe to discuss human rights. Her practice’s architecture, he explained, was the worst sort of top-down, starchitect offering imposed by the powerful on the powerless.”
More:
“the soft-spoken Sean Griffiths moved in for the kill. Arrogance, he said, was not necessarily a bad thing; the problem with the Hadid projects was their “banality”, the fact that they were “bad work”. ”
Totally agree.
http://www.iconeye.com/index.php?view=article&catid=1%3Alatest-news&layout=news&id=3716%3Athe-barbican-debate-can-good-design-change-the-world&option=com_content&Itemid=18
Toy on 28 Jun 2009 at 6:08 am #
amazing!..Super tare!!