carlisle pier shortlist

All are dissapointing

Postby stripey avenger » Fri Jan 30, 2004 5:50 pm

All of the submissions are disappointing. The brief is very open and i am concerned that this is the best that can be come with.

The STW proposal is really boring, and is all the more so as Michael Scotts own house an interesting peice of 1950s is across the bay. Not much of an epitaph. The HP scheme has real merit but does not understand the site. From the top down it looks great, but it is slab like from both side and as such will look huge and dominating so it's a right off. The SOM design is again a large unbroken slab albeit pointy at one end. The DL proposal is the best but again lacks real vision, and is quite gimmicky.

I have read all the conversations about Dun Laoghaire, and for any of you that know it. It was a hole up until recently, and now it is expressing the confidence in itself to become perhaps a great centre for architectural and urban heritage in Ireland. So roll on imaginative and good architecture.

The one comment i would make is that Dun Laoghaire is a town dominated by spires, and hence it's skyscape is really relevant. I would have like to have seen a building that had greater points of height. I hardly dare say it but why not something like sails aka Utzon Sydney Opera house but brought up to date.
stripey avenger
Member
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Jan 30, 2004 5:40 pm
Location: Dun Laoghaire

Postby emf » Fri Jan 30, 2004 7:09 pm

I think that the area just outside the entrance to the Stena terminal always seems very empty and unused. Nobody seems to use the seating area.
I also think that the town seems very devoid of life at night. It reminds me of the IFSC once the office workers have left!
emf
Member
 
Posts: 155
Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2002 4:03 pm
Location: Dublin

Postby Zap » Fri Jan 30, 2004 7:30 pm

Just a note about the visuals contained on the site - I think Scott Tallon Walker is best because it looks more realistic. Not that I'm an actual fan of the building they've come up with - but the vosual is more grounded in reality than the others.

The others are very cartoony and I don't think provide a goob visual basis with which to judge them.
Zap
Member
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Mon Mar 10, 2003 5:57 pm
Location: Madrid, España

Postby PVC King » Sun Feb 01, 2004 9:24 pm

That revised Heneghen.peng image is stunning. Why did they submit the other rendering it bears no relation to the latest.

Liebskind's looks very user freindly if not a little gimmacky in the second rendering. I am dissapointed by the aditional angles supplied by SOM as they don't clarify many of the questions raised in the first rendering. It is still a great design although HP has closed the gap a lot. STW still in the blocks I'm afraid for me.
PVC King
 

Postby Trigger » Mon Feb 02, 2004 11:33 am

Originally posted by Diaspora

Dunlaoirghe is the real winner


Having lived in the Borough for the last twenty odd years, it still gets under my skin when people refer incorrectly to Dún Laoghaire. I commend you Diaspora for coming up with a version combing Bearlachas and bad spelling that I have not seen before.

Reminds me a couple of foreigners coming off the boat mystified at the road signage. "How the fuck did the get Done Leary out of that?"
Trigger
Member
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 11:22 am

Postby notjim » Mon Feb 02, 2004 11:56 am

tigger, never confuse bad spelling with ignorance.
notjim
 
Posts: 1708
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2001 1:00 am
Location: Dublin

Postby phil » Mon Feb 02, 2004 12:13 pm

Relax a little Trigger it is still better than Kingstown!!;), I have lived there for 25 years, and I too prefer the proper spelling but as I am a terrible speller myself I find I can never give out about it too much.

I quite like the Libskind design and the Henegen.Peng design. They both seem to give real open public space as part of their proposal. My only problem is that when I was looking at the Libskind design I noticed that one of the buildings within it is called 'the sail'. For some reason this really bothers me. The only problem with the Henegen.Peng design for me is that it seems to ignore the existance of the seafront road as it makes its link to Moran Park. The Libeskind design seems to be the only one which as really thought about this link in a realistic manner by the use of a bridge. I think, however that the extra building within the Park takes away from the Libskind design a little.
phil
Old Master
 
Posts: 1467
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 12:32 pm

Postby notjim » Mon Feb 02, 2004 12:38 pm

phil, i couldn't see from the pictures where the libskind provided open public space, have you seen the models? how does public space work out for the libskind design.
notjim
 
Posts: 1708
Joined: Tue Mar 06, 2001 1:00 am
Location: Dublin

Postby phil » Mon Feb 02, 2004 12:45 pm

Yeah, Notjim I went to look at the models the other day. The pictures don't give a realistic vision of what the projects look like. I thought, for example, that the Libskind and SOM projects looked quite similar until I saw the models. The Libskind one is made up of a few separate structures with open space in between them, where as the SOM one is a large scale structure with public access to the roof!
phil
Old Master
 
Posts: 1467
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 12:32 pm

carlisle pier

Postby pragmatist » Mon Feb 02, 2004 1:39 pm

The Carlisle Pier competition is a DEVELOPMENT competition as opposed to a purely architectural one. The winning scheme will have to be financially viable while giving an income stream to the harbour authority as well as keeping the public happy - I exclude Richard Boyd Barrett and his mates from 'the public' as they wont be happy unless a shrine to marxist ideology is placed on the pier.

Here are a few issues worthy of debate above and beyond the aesthetic ping-pong that this board loves indulging in...

1.
the SOM scheme appears to be twice as dense as the others. Do the supporters of this scheme want to write a blank cheque to the developers? We might get a funky rooftop walkway but it looks like the developers get about 300 apartments which would likely retail for half a mil each - you do the math...

2.
has anyone noticed that the Liebeskind scheme extends way beyond the development 'red line' and is nearly twice as wide as the other schemes? Remember, the reason for the baths debacle was as a result of the winning scheme ignoring the site boundary hence allowing the losing shemes to threaten legal actions. Also, is it a coincidence that this is the only scheme without a contractor on board? Landmarks are great except when you have to pay for them (Scottish Parliament for eg) and the harbour company need to be really really sure that the scheme can be built for the budget proposed. Finally, can anyone see a 'diaspora museum' attracting sufficient numbers to be self financing? Again the harbour company want a viable cultural attraction, not an albatross around their necks.

3.
The STW scheme is indeed boring but you can bet your last euro that its eminently 'buildable'. The development mix seems appropriate also.

4.
The HP scheme also has a sensible development mix and is a more attractive building than the STW scheme although i think the design needs some more development. I like the permeability of the scheme - its the only one that allows the pier to remain a pier.

just to re-iterate, the Liebeskind and SOM schemes (and to a lesser extent HP's design) will no doubt appeal visually to the people visiting the exhibition but he decision is not going to be based principally on design. The current public consultation is potentially cosmetic to a large extent as the assessors will be making a decision based on commercial considerations in the main. If Im right its a straight decision between the STW and HP schemes and if all other things are equal the HP design will win out cos its more attractive.

The real world is a harsh place.....
pragmatist
Member
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 1:00 pm

Postby phil » Mon Feb 02, 2004 1:51 pm

Pragmatist, that is a good point you make about the Diaspora Museum. I too have doubts about its viability. With regards to the public consultation being cosmetic, I am not sure if the outcome would be either of the two you mentioned. Just remember who they originally had to draw up plans!

Are the developers with Libskind not called Heritage Properties?
phil
Old Master
 
Posts: 1467
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 12:32 pm

Postby pragmatist » Mon Feb 02, 2004 2:06 pm

Phil,

the harbour company didnt have Liebeskind draw up the original plans - heritage properties 'took a punt' and made a proposal to the harbour company which ultimately triggered the competition. Heritage have not built anything of this scale before and are best known as the developer of smithfield apartments. At least there is some cetainty that Laing O'Rourke, Pierse and Sisk can deliver the other schemes and are sure to have seriously scrutinised the costs/programmes involved. Heritage cannot be said to have the same capability as the above contractors and if I was on the assessment panel I would be worried about this given that theirs is easily the most complex scheme from a construction point of view.
pragmatist
Member
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 1:00 pm

Postby phil » Mon Feb 02, 2004 2:07 pm

That's fair enough Pragmatist. I was under the impression that the board sought after the proposal originally. I stand corrected.
phil
Old Master
 
Posts: 1467
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 12:32 pm

Postby phil » Mon Feb 02, 2004 3:52 pm

The link below, and the link which follows from it, seems quite relevant to the Carlisle Pier.

http://canada.archiseek.com/news/2004/000044.html
phil
Old Master
 
Posts: 1467
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 12:32 pm

Has anyone else been to the exhibition?

Postby Ocean33 » Mon Feb 02, 2004 3:55 pm

I went along to view the entries on Saturday and have a few comments:

1. The so called cultural component of each entry is nearly farcical!! diaspora museum, centre for irish culture and rehousing the maritime museum. In my opinion none of these would attract significant numbers into the developments leaving the private offices and hotel to the money paying customers! (just as the developers would want!!)

2. The scale of the STW and HP entries is far too large and would only serve to split the seafront, destroying the view out over the bay for most of dunlaoghaire.

3. The amount of public spaces in each was dissapointing, the Liebeskind and SOM have integrated good usable spaces into their designs and linked them back to Morans park across Queens Road, ideal for (small) concerts etc.

4. the STW entry was as as innovative as any five story box down the IFSC! time to think outside the box lads!! On this basis I would disagree that some of the entries do not reflect the style of the area. Dunlaoughaire hasnt got any predominant style through it - its a mish mash of bad planning and unimaginative architecture!

Has anyone else visited the exhibition and seen the full presentations? BTW the foreign entries had far superior presentations and models, which may sway the public opinion.
Ocean33
Member
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2002 10:20 pm

Postby phil » Mon Feb 02, 2004 4:04 pm

Originally posted by Ocean33
Dunlaoughaire hasnt got any predominant style through it - its a mish mash of bad planning and unimaginative architecture!



Although there are some significanly terrible pieces of and unimaginative examples of architecture such as the shopping centre, the town itself is well layed out. There are also some excellent examples of architecture in the town such as:

The original Railway terminal (Presently Restaurant Na Mara), Royal Irish Yacht Club, the original Town Hall building and the extension to the town hall building.

I agree with you that the foreign presentations and models are alot better. At the time that I was there I noticed how few people seemed to be looking at the STW submission.
phil
Old Master
 
Posts: 1467
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 12:32 pm

Postby FIN » Mon Feb 02, 2004 6:04 pm

i think people are getting sick of seeing boxes. i know i am.
FIN
Senior Member
 
Posts: 826
Joined: Thu Aug 30, 2001 12:00 am
Location: dublin

Postby emf » Mon Feb 02, 2004 7:19 pm

I stood at the STW model for a while on Saturday and the first word out of the mouths of a lot who passed was 'boring. In fact one person even apologetically said, "I'm sorry but this is boring!"
emf
Member
 
Posts: 155
Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2002 4:03 pm
Location: Dublin

Postby PVC King » Mon Feb 02, 2004 7:25 pm

Isn't that some progress for the Country to be able to class that design as boring.

I agree that the STW design is the most muted of the four, and is against the other three 'boring'.

But if someone proposed that before thye competition I wonder how many people would have said no you can't build that its boring.

Honest and unambitous would be fairer I think.
PVC King
 

Postby emf » Mon Feb 02, 2004 7:32 pm

Just a question on the SOM proposal. Will the sloped public area on the roof not be extremely dangerous?

I can just see people careering all over this in wet or icy weather. And what about access for the disabled? This would be almost totally inaccessable for a wheelchair bound person. (I know I wouldn't like to be perched at the high end with bad brakes.)
This was actually my favourite design. I liked the ideas but I don't know how they will work in reality.

The STW was like a shoebox and the internal layout of the apartments and hotel bedrooms looked as if it was an effort to squeeze in as many as possible. They are all box shaped and exactly the same.

Overall I was disappointed that car parking was allowed in the scheme.
For a second when I saw the SOM proposal I thought it was a glorified multi-storey carpark.
I think with the DART so close by they should promote that for access to the centre
emf
Member
 
Posts: 155
Joined: Fri Aug 09, 2002 4:03 pm
Location: Dublin

Postby phil » Mon Feb 02, 2004 7:41 pm

emf, I was also thinking that. I went to see the exhibition on Saturday when it was blowing a force 9 gale in Dun Laoghaire. I emmedietly started to think about that. It is difficult not to get blown away on the seafront in Dun Laoghaire sometimes as it is, so with people elevated that high in the air they will be completely exposed to the wind no matter what its direction is. A good indication of the force of the wind in Dun Laoghaire at times is the shape of some of the trees on the seafront; in the area around the east pier they have all bent towards the town because of northerly winds over the years.

Technichally speaking, it would have been possible until recently to bring the Dart in to what ever project got the go ahead. However the tunnel from the Railway line to the Carlisle Pier is half blocked now because of strenghtening work. It probably would have been too big an aspect of the project to have been worth it anyway, considering how close the station is.
phil
Old Master
 
Posts: 1467
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 12:32 pm

Postby garethace » Mon Feb 02, 2004 10:46 pm

Just another bad example of what computer are likely to generate as designs. Sort of like radio friendly tunes in music - sometimes computers images are very seductive.

http://www.nikclark.com/uploader/uploads/cubist.jpg
garethace
 
Posts: 1579
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 9:01 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Postby shadow » Tue Feb 03, 2004 10:31 am

To quote Radiohead "Just because you feel it doesn't mean it's there".
shadow
Member
 
Posts: 313
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2001 1:00 am

Postby garethace » Tue Feb 03, 2004 5:30 pm

Ah a music head! :)

Young architects are often major big into their music, and despite being around architects for a large portion of my life - i am tone deaf - meaning this world of music is something I know nothing about.
garethace
 
Posts: 1579
Joined: Wed May 14, 2003 9:01 pm
Location: Dublin, Ireland

Postby phil » Tue Feb 03, 2004 8:06 pm

Although the Poll is showing Henegen.Peng and Libeskind as clear favourites amongst people who view this site, what do people think is the most likely scheme to get the go ahead? I personally think that realistically speaking the Libeskind design will be chosen. I think this because he is presently, whether we like it or not, a 'household name' of architecture. the design brief sets out that the building has to be an "exceptional landmark building of international architectural quality that regenerates and enlivens the waterfront."
I think that the fact that it aims for the building to be internationally recognised indicates that it will chose an international hard hitter. Don't get me wrong, I am not saying it should win, I am just trying to see exactly what it is that they are looking for. The other way of looking at it is that Henegen.Peng are presently building a strong international reputation and the Harbour Company might decide that it would be a good idea to promote their work. I also realise, as Pragmatist pointed out, that the Libeskind design goes over the specified limit by widening the pier, so is likely to come under scrutiny from the public and other areas. The reality of it though is that which ever project is chosen is likely to be very controversial.
phil
Old Master
 
Posts: 1467
Joined: Wed Mar 26, 2003 12:32 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Ireland