I wish you had posted your . . .
reddy wrote:examples of beautiful cities with beautiful skylines which have nothing to do with tall buildings, but topography, punctuation, and the historical overlay of layers in the city's development. There's an art to creating a quiet, ordinary building.
. . . yesterday, you could have saved me a lot of time last night in trying to suppress my rage enough to get down a few sentences.
Others will argue that the absence of any topography east of Parliament Street and the pretty shallow historical layers out that direction justify a big brash splash down in the Docklands, but I don't agree. I think the set-piece of the quays themselves provide all the framework we need to work up a new area of the city that has a real legible connection to the existing character of the city.
It comes back to that question of whether we want to replace Dublin with something else, a different image, a different vision, or whether we actually love Dublin, despite all it's faults, and we want to repair and reinvigorate it.
If you see the quay walls as a plinth, the scale of the river front buildings suggest themselves at the six to eight storeys that they've been using to date. At this scale, even the boring buildings perform a valuable function as the setting for the better ones, the public buildings, the corporate headquarters, the feature towers. At this scale the the landmark towers, the Calatrava bridges, the tilted drums, work as punctuation points. Punctuation doesn't work if someone's been scribbling on the page, which is what these geniuses are now at.
To the extent that darkman and cgcsb see something attractive in this scheme, I can only attribute this to the skill of the 3D guys who have excelled themselves once again and set up a superb colour contrast with the redbrick hotel. I would suggest that Hawkins House, cut and pasted into that view, would look stunning!