Kevin Roche

Sure God love the poor crathur… and sure he never meant a bit of harm to no one, god bless his soul…. etc., etc., etc.

Personally I don’t feel a bit sorry for him… he has had an EXTREMELY successful professional career.

The Ford Foundation in NYC by Roche is now within easy reach of many with low transatlantic fares. That is a good building, if very generous with space.

Now the thing in the Docks is another thing entirely. So my suggestion is go to New York for the conferences, use the Javits Centre there, admire the Ford and leave the docks for something else, a little more in scale.

P.S. There is a perfectly good Conference Centre in the Waterfront Hall in Belfast, within easy reach, if Ireland wants a conference centre.

Kevin Roche March 21st, RTÉ 1, 9.30 p.m.

A documentary about the architect Kevin Roche, responsible for the design of the Spencer Dock Project

The program last night raised some interesting issues in the way Roche dealt with past projects.
The Cummins Engine Company HQ in Columbus was introduced with the narrator saying roughly ” a 3 block city centre site could have been designed with high rise blocks… instead Roche has made a low rise 2 storey courtyard building within internal gardens open to the public..” Clearly there is an understanding of the usefulness of open space here and the relationship of density and height, this seems to be absent in the Spencer Dock proposal.

Roche himself said that the most conservative client is the client who is investing with a string of banks backing him. This is basically the Spencer Dock developer profile.

While they will advocate it is a daring project it is in fact very conservative in that it is really an example of the worst excesses of the high-rise commercial development models of America. The only thing that is different and hence in their words innovative is that it is being built in Ireland.

Finally watched the doco last night.

Although it was very much an advertisment or corporate video for Roche Dinkeloo, I was impressed. It was much easier to watch and more interesting than the Nation Building series. At least it was linear, which makes for good documentaries.

The buildings illustrated looked very well included the aforementioned Cummins Engine Company HQ.

The documentary on Kevin Roche was indeed a corporate PR video (with a narration by Dick Moran from Glenroe fact fiends!) What I found interesting was that Frank Gehry was struggling with his superlatives when commenting on Roche. He seems to be held in high regard and treated with alot of respect in the States and at the tribunal, so perhaps he could treat the citizens of Dublin less arrogantly…because lets be honest – he came across as a right arrogant son of a bitch even claiming that with each project he tries to experiment.Excuse me! what was that about!?? Think I better stop…I’m beginning to foam at the mouth!

Dear Sickened

Get over it! This man has had a very successful career in his chosen field. He’s so successful that I’m sure that he really doesn’t care two taps for what begrudgers like you think.

Please try to get a life. It would make you a much more contented and well-integrated person.

Dear Not Sickened…

Kevin Roche has had a very successful career simply because he has pandered to what corporate america wants in terms of architecture… bland, soulless and severely unimaginitive office blocks. Granted he has had a number of fine buildings, Oakland Museum and The Ford Foundation to name two, but these are in the minority.

The issue here is what the people, who are going to have to look at his monstrosities out at Spencer Dock, think of Kevin Roche, not what Kevin Roche will think of our opinions. Success does not equate with quality. I suggest that you think your argument through properly before you start insulting people on this forum because right now it looks like it’s you who should “get a life”.

Dear BTH

What I find offensive in “Sickened”‘s comment is the personal nature of his attack on Kevin Roche. Roche has every right to be arrogant, nice, friendly, mean… whatever the hell he wants to be. Using his alleged arrogance as ammunition to diss his work is a fairly weak way to attack the Spencer Dock project.

Regarding your comments: “pandered to what corporate America wants” and “bland, soulless and severely unimaginative office blocks”…. says who? How do You know this? Please substantiate. It sounds to me like you’re just shooting the breeze here with your own personal opinions.

When I look at his work and compare it with the typical office block dross which has been built across the United States and the world, I’d say that his work tries in a very real way to humanise the 20th century office environment.

Let’s face it, the problem at Spencer Dock, as is almost always the case, is homegrown, not produced in “Corporate America”. The Government wants this NCC to be self-financing… the only way to do this is to cram as much office space as possible on to the site. No architect can make beef out of a muttony brief.

Can we focus on the real issues please and stop picking (as usual) the easy target? Roche will be remembered for a long time as a good architect, particularly of office buildings and spaces, not because of some conspiracy by “Corporate America” (another simplistic, easy target for personal gripes), but because his work is really actually quite good!!

Well, it’s quite obvious that Mr Roche has at least one fan! I recognise what you are saying. I agree that Roche is very good at designing bland office buildings. He’s probably the best in the world at it today. And fair play to him for that. He can also produce extraordinarily good architecture when given the chance, but it’s been quite a while since he has had that chance.

Look at the pictures in the “Convention Centre” forum http://www.archeire.com/forums/NonCGI/Forum1/HTML/000012.html particularly the fantastic perspective of the view towards the scheme from an adjacent street. Can anyone honestly say that this will be good for Dublin. THAT is the real issue, not the matter of opinions on Kevin Roche’s general qualities as a designer. Now maybe these buildings will be a model of good internal organisation and a fabulous place in which to work, which is the general consensus on most of Roche’s offices. But the simple fact is that the Spencer Dock buildings are, externally, devoid of interest, aside from the initial impact of their sheer scale and bravado. There seems to me to be no attention paid to proportion, materials, colour – any of the things that can make modern architecture transcend the simple issues of cost and floorspace. Sunless canyons of streets between glassy slabs (maybe with stuck on po-mo pastiche to add “humanity” if we are really lucky) will not be a valuable addition to Dublin by any stretch of the imagination. Too true, is is just about as “muttony” a Brief you can get, but you can’t palm off of the blame for the results on the developers (only about 99%!).

Look at the Convention Centre’s canalside elevation. Was Kevin having an off day or something??? It looks as though the designer thought that something else was going to be built right next to it so it wouldnt be seen! In fact there’s a thought! Are the spencer Dock Development Company going to fill in the canal and build more office space?!? Probably, if they could get away with it!

[This message has been edited by BTH (edited 31 March 2000).]

[This message has been edited by BTH (edited 31 March 2000).]

I would’nt get too upset. I think they are only preliminary sketches/illustrations.It’s not fully resolved,so you can’t really fully comment on it.According to the programme Roche said he had done 30 different versions of layout.It’s still very much a blueprint.
Besides, since when has office blocks become generally exciting.What do you think of the new developments in Berlin?

Just to add, if you look at the two drawings you supply they don’t correspond. QED

With regard to Bonzo’s open question about the wave of new office building in Berlin: there seems to me to be an essential difference between, say the Renzo Piano master plan for the Potsdamer Platz area in Berlin, and the Roche proposals (so far revealed)for Spencer Dock in Dublin.

First: Piano worked with several other architects to produce buildings by many hands – Richard Rogers, Arata Isosaki, Helmut Jahn, Hans Kolhoff, Rafael Moneo. He contributed several buildings himself but by no means hogged the lot. So there’s a variety.

Second: the individual buildings are subservient to the ensemble effect. What works for me about Potsdamer Platz is its sense of place. The public realm is thoughtfully considered as an entity in its own right – not just the space left over between buildings.

At first I disliked Piano’s plan because it seemed to consist of largely dull buildings. Then I went there and realised that he is playing a quite different game: making a piece of convivial city rather than competing individual landmarks.

So what do we think of the Roche proposals? Is he involving other architects? Is he doing more than make a one-line landmark statement? Is he making a real piece of city? Does he, in short, pass the Piano test?

Hugh.

Hmmmmm, We may just have to wait and see. Initially we may not like it but it may grow on us.

Actually if Roche weas providing a master plan for the area, simply designing key buildings and having the rest designed by other firms, we would end up with a mucj more interesting area. Roche can design good buildings, he’s proven that in the past. But they were smaller projects (one building or a small group) rather that what amounts to several city blocks.

I’d prefer to see him concetrate on the Convention Centre and the masterplan and allow other architects of note design individual buildings. That way, we could have an are that we could be proud of architecturally.

In response the point that a variety of architects lead to a more diversified environment, could I mention that Canary Wharf employed many a reputable architect,ie Skidmore Owings & Merrill (provided the masterplan),Pei Cobb Freed, Cezar Pelli,Kohn Pederson Fox and Aldo Rossi. It’s construction has led to much controversy and is seen by many as unfavourable.
I would assert the case made by ‘not sickened’ that the quality of the development finally produced depends very much on what is required at the onset.
(If your given a muttony brief etc……..and your to bow to the demands of capitalism)