U2 studio entries

have them send an image to post in the unbuilt – no need to identify them any differently than the others.

just the image and their text….and a copy of the cashed check to ddda if they got one….;0

so, is it the roll of the drums and crack-a-jack pencils at the ready? I would suggest, the jury are invited to reveal their original choice ( by identifying the “picture”) in a closed session to Paul Clerkin who is on-line in a chat-room scenario with the “anonomous winner” who then sends their picture. That way all is revealed or not, Jury can come out of their oxygen tent , the prodigal winner is enstated if they are the winner and the DDDA must then compensate the “other winners” for the mistake – say 12,000.00 euro. If it’s all wrong then nobody gets hurt and the winner stays at it is and it doesn’t have to be made public unless the winner is truly identified. However IF the story is correct anyway……..the winner should be found. So…..get the dark brown overcoats on and play that banjo……..crack anyone?

Originally posted by colinsky

see, that founds much more far-fetched to me than the idea that someone at the DDA misplaced the entry details.

Whatever…………… it still does not discount the possible preferred project………..which did not have a name. If this was so, it shouldn’t have been put before the Jury in the first place….so who’s fooling who here! DDDA did reject some entries , and I presume for not complying with entry requirements . i.e no fee and/or no entry form etc etc. ( obvious and normal reasons) so if there was a set of panels in front of the Jury without the correct credentials then they screwed it up at the beginning. Its all speculation at the moment and I’m sure some wise chappies are seeking a clever statement to shape all this……….it they are not then they should be!

Maybe this is too simple:

How was an entry, which was in technical breach of the competition regulations, presented to the jury for evaluation? This is one of the most fundamental aspects of competitions. The DDDA went to great effort to ensure that material not requested (images etc.. ) would not be shown to the jury. Yet on this fundamental level, if this is true, it seems an entry that did not comply to other regulations got through. I think that the rules (all rules) should be applied evenly. If however, the entry was technically complete (A4 report, fee etc..) subject to proof, then the whole competition should be suspended and re-run. However due to the sheer number of images published this is now impossible.

What a pickle?????

send this out this morning to the 28,000 subscribers of the architectural competitions list – i have also send it to other architecture competition listings sites worldwide….

Did you enter the U2 Landmark Tower competition for Dublin, Ireland?
Then Irish-architecture.com wants to hear from you.

Why?
Read the following news clippings:

Revealed: winner that lost U2 tower prize
The Sunday Times
A mystery architectural firm was the original winner of the prestigious contest to design a studio for U2 in Dublin’s docklands. The design, a rectangular building from which emerges an elegant tower, was the first choice of the seven-man jury that included Adam Clayton, the rock band’s bass player. The contest was jointly sponsored by the Dublin Docklands Development Authority and U2. However the jurors were forced to abandon their initial choice because they could not identify its author.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2091-824761,00.html

With or without you
The Sunday Times
The competition for the U2 tower in Dublin’s docklands turned into the most lurid farce in Irish architecture for 50 years. It was simple and distinctive, a rectangular building with an elegant tower emerging from it. The design, the understanding of the site’s topography and the materials chosen indicated an intimate knowledge of Dublin on the part of its anonymous architect. It was, decided the jury of seven, the winner of the international competition for a landmark tower and studio for U2 in Dublin’s docklands.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2101-821354,00.html

Did U2 really get the tower it was looking for?
The Irish Times
Apart from The Spire, no major project in Dublin has generated as much heated debate in architectural circles as the U2 tower for Dublin’s docklands. Few would disagree that the “twisting tower” which won the architectural competition for a landmark building in Dublin docklands has a dynamic quality. What’s at issue is whether it really was head and shoulders above more than 500 other entries from around the world. The fact that it was co-designed by Felim Dunne, a brother-in-law of U2’s Paul McGuinness, raised eyebrows – and some hackles

It is likely that a substantial chunk of the €500,000-plus in entry fees raised by this competition went to PriceWaterhouseCoopers, who were called in to carry out a “due diligence” exercise after some of the leading contenders could not be identified, including – incredibly – the one that the jury had picked as the winner.

As part of this exercise, all of the entrants were requested to submit digital versions of their schemes, to aid efforts to match drawings with names in the mountain of material that the competition generated. But even this stratagem did not resolve the issue because no entry form could be found for the one chosen by the jury.

To this day, nobody can say for certain who the original winner was – so some architect, somewhere in the world, has missed out on a prestige commission due to incompetence on the part of the organisers. And Dublin will never know what might have been erected at the end of Sir John Rogerson’s Quay.

http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/property/2003/0904/2141241465RPU2TOWER.html

Specifically we want to hear from you if:

– You were not contacted by the organisers for exhibition
– You were never contacted by PriceWaterhouseCoopers the auditors of the competition
– You were contacted by PriceWaterhouseCoopers and didn’t respond to their queries.

We are also interested in exhibiting ALL entries at http://www.archeire.com/unbuilt_ireland/dublin/u2_tower/index.html

You can contact Irish-architecture.com by email at info@archeire.com
Send us entry illustrations (JPG) and the supporting text (Word Doc)

paul is the man, thanks and stay on them.
anyone seen the exhibit yet?

Just added another 5 entries to the selection… more to come….

After checking only a third of the entries i cant believe they picked a twisting liberty hall!

We received the competition shortlist via internet today!

Regarding how the competition has been organised until now, we were in fact quite surprised to see any information at all.

However, on closer examination a curious fact comes to light! From the 60 or so architects who submitted their work to the Archeire site, only 8 have been chosen for the exhibition to take place in Dublin this month and just for information almost all come from the anglo-world.

Funny little fact wouldn’t you agree!!

Another point which I would like to mention again in connection to the Shortlist is the amazing reoccurrance of certain offices again and again. I think I saw one office with 4 entries !

If competitions are to be run fairly then to allow an office, usually one with substancial monetary clout who can afford to pay the entrance fee a number of times ( win or lose )
is really contrary to fair play !

A a middle-large office we take part regularly in international competitions and until now have never experienced that an office send more than one entry. It is simply not allowed.

At the Dublin Tower Competition because absolutely nothing except it seems the acceptance of the entry fee, was professionally organised, an office could have theoretically entered a thousand times! What an absurd fact ! Imagine even further that an office manages to win all the prizes available !
A suffocatingly embarrassing situation !

Actually it is quite beyond my comprehension to imagine how an architect can submit more than one design for any competition. Surely he tries to submit the concept/idea that he believes to be the most suited to that particular brief. Is then his second or third entry his second or third best idea? If so then why does he bother to hand in the second or third at all. I mean if an architect has a style or design philosophy then surely if the jury does not like his first entry then how can he hope that they will suddenly elevate his fifth choice entry to the winning position ?

Obviously some architects did, without a thought or notion as to what such a behaviour communicates, both professionally and to a wider audience.

The List ……………..oh the List……..well if it exists then let’s see it……………air brush marks and all! Is it possible?