Ireland’s Best Architectural Practice
- This topic has 31 replies, 12 voices, and was last updated 21 years, 5 months ago by
.
- Posts
Don’t get this wrong – this thread isn’t claiming or out to claim which is or which isn’t the best architectural in Ireland – but is merely interested in pointing out firms with an individualistic edge, and is out to push the bar just that little higher.
Undoubtedly, each person will vary in taste and preference, so suggested firms don’t neccessarily have to be in agreeance with the opinions of others, but it’ll still be interesting to see what is considered ‘edgy’ by each person’s proposal.
Below are links to firm website’s which I find interesting – I would be glad to hear the opinions of others on this, and perhaps maybe if they could forward their opinions.
A special emphasis should be placed on the ‘up-and-coming’ — but it’s not exclusive.
who are dg architects? the second link is busted, and yes, i did have the sense to add .com to the end.
@lexington wrote:
There! Problem solved. 🙂 Sorry bout that.
Lexington – like you say, this forum isn’t likely to meet consensus, but …..!
Anyway, Keep an eye on a practice called Hackett and Hall – http://www.hackett-hall.com. I’ve worked with both of them and, given the right Client, they’ll do some great stuff.
I’ve seen that building in Cahirsiveen…. it’s just missing a kitchen sink… how about… http://www.architectstm.com/
@Rockflanders wrote:
Gotta love that – “given the right client”.
Any chance of an elaboration?
Serious question!If architects don’t fund the projects themselves – in itself a very rare occurence – they are dependent on a Client, of which there are many types. Money alone will not guarantee a nice building. Architecture alone does not guarantee it either. Some of the best buildings around are produced by talented architects, not necessarily in control of a large budget. I think my definition of an ideal client is one who is able to impart a detailed and comprehensive brief to the architect at the outset. The Architect must then have the skill to analyse this brief and, if you like, become the client and to agree a budget that will achieve everyone’s goal. The Client needs to feel that they can take a step back while the architect needs to impart a confidence in a client that they will get what they essentially want – there is nothing worse than a meddling, indecisive client. Similarly, there is nothing worse than an arrogant, diffident or lazy architect. The crux of the matter is good designs result where client and the architect are on the same wavelength when it comes to style, flair and the desire to produce something different. These clients are very difficult to find, epecially when you’re starting out on your career , and more so for the small scale projects you will inevitably be doing.
For domestic work in Dublin,
http://www.box.ieWhat does anyone else think?
That is very good work
Agreed. Their projects look vey nice indeed.
@burge_eye wrote:
Anyway, Keep an eye on a practice called Hackett and Hall – http://www.hackett-hall.com. I’ve worked with both of them and, given the right Client, they’ll do some great stuff.
I agree. The possibility of a young and free-thinking small practice to break out of the same shitty N.I. rut looks strongest with H+H right now.
*j*
and these guys too are producing some good quality norther irish arch… 😮
@burge_eye wrote:
If architects don’t fund the projects themselves – in itself a very rare occurence – they are dependent on a Client, of which there are many types. Money alone will not guarantee a nice building. Architecture alone does not guarantee it either. Some of the best buildings around are produced by talented architects, not necessarily in control of a large budget. I think my definition of an ideal client is one who is able to impart a detailed and comprehensive brief to the architect at the outset. The Architect must then have the skill to analyse this brief and, if you like, become the client and to agree a budget that will achieve everyone’s goal. The Client needs to feel that they can take a step back while the architect needs to impart a confidence in a client that they will get what they essentially want – there is nothing worse than a meddling, indecisive client. Similarly, there is nothing worse than an arrogant, diffident or lazy architect. The crux of the matter is good designs result where client and the architect are on the same wavelength when it comes to style, flair and the desire to produce something different. These clients are very difficult to find, epecially when you’re starting out on your career , and more so for the small scale projects you will inevitably be doing.
I very much agree, however i find that the right architects are very hard to find. At the end of the day it is the Architect providing the service for payment. The client is not getting paid for the work, he is spending a lot of money in fact and if he wants to be lazy, indecisive, arrogant then so be it. I think a lot of Architects today think they are the client as you mentioned above which leads to difficulties. If this happened in any other service industry it would not be acceptable. Can you imagine a waitress telling you that you should like the food even if you dont?!!
@Rockflanders wrote:
I very much agree, however i find that the right architects are very hard to find. At the end of the day it is the Architect providing the service for payment. The client is not getting paid for the work, he is spending a lot of money in fact and if he wants to be lazy, indecisive, arrogant then so be it. I think a lot of Architects today think they are the client as you mentioned above which leads to difficulties. If this happened in any other service industry it would not be acceptable. Can you imagine a waitress telling you that you should like the food even if you dont?!!
hmmmmmmmmmm. food analogy time. ok then. Are you an architect by the way? just wondering as, if you are, you’ll know that to use the phrase “any other service industry” is fraught with danger as “any other service industry” would not provide such a large amount of service “on spec”. but
to make things fair, let’s assume this “restaurant” is a weird one where there’s no menu. The Client has to describe to the waitress what they want. Let’s assume they do so.
Let’s assume the waitress brings the order exactly as the client requires. The client doesn’t like it – too many peas. They have a chat and the waitress brings the new dish. The same thing happens. The process is repeated for about, say, 2 years. Eventually the client may get the dinner he requires, or he may have left without paying. The waitress may have ignored the wishes and brought any old crap, in which case the client is justified. If, however, the waitress has done everything they can, the restaurant has probably gone bust.
If we’re going to move this into other service industries, let me ask you a question. How many solicitors do you know who accept the following proposition:
“I want you to draft me a letter, based on what I tell you. I’ll continue to get you to redraft the letter, even though I have no legal training whatsoever. When I think the letter is right, regardless of whatever advice you give me, then I’ll allow you to lodge this with the other party. If we win, I’ll pay you.”
@burge_eye wrote:
If we’re going to move this into other service industries, let me ask you a question. How many solicitors do you know who accept the following proposition:
“I want you to draft me a letter, based on what I tell you. I’ll continue to get you to redraft the letter, even though I have no legal training whatsoever. When I think the letter is right, regardless of whatever advice you give me, then I’ll allow you to lodge this with the other party. If we win, I’ll pay you.”
Very very very well said. Great analogy.
Only quibble I would have is with you comparing architects to solicitors …..at all…..in any way shape or formyour analogy above seems to be referring to a competition. (If we win, I’ll pay you),
Surely then it is the competition authority that gives the brief, not the client?
My point was about architects who refuse to stick to the brief, need to be constantly reined in, always know better than the judges what will win, and wont work no foal no fee. And lose.And by the way i only know two solicitors who will do a letter like that. 😉
Rockflanders wrote:your analogy above seems to be referring to a competition. (If we win, I’ll pay you),
Surely then it is the competition authority that gives the brief, not the client?
My point was about architects who refuse to stick to the brief, need to be constantly reined in, always know better than the judges what will win, and wont work no foal no fee. And lose.And by the way i only know two solicitors who will do a letter like that. ]
Not really – it was a legal “win”. I was referring to the increasing willingness for architects to accept the client paying “on receipt of a successful planning application” – Clients who repeatedly change the brief, need to be constantly badgered for money and always know better than the architect – the Lawrence Llewelyn Bowen effect – are equally infuriating
Anyway, my original point was that good clients and good architects will produce good buildings. If one or other is crap, then the building will probably be crap too. So you’re right, I’m right, we all win a prize
Tungstentee – Funnily enough, I also worked with Alan, albeit briefly ( I was a bit of a mercenary in my youth) and you’re right, he’s top drawer. His time with Hopkins served him well.
@Rockflanders wrote:
your analogy above seems to be referring to a competition. (If we win, I’ll pay you)
Depending on the project, I will strike an accord with the architect involved where a basic fee is alloted to them for the design work, with a subsequent ‘bonus’ or ‘fuller fee’ is provided on successful grant of planning. If I win, I pay. 😀
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
