U2 studio entries

I’m hoping to publish quite a few on archeire when the judging is over

the sunday times one is great, but not permissable.

Some of them are a bit conventional and some are a bit whacky …..but I suppose a whacky one would be the option to catch the eye and enliven this new dull area of the city.

Any idea when the results are out for this and what is the delay?

9 June I think….

Is that Italian one a serious entry?????
Anyway generally the “out-there” ones aren’t too bad, at least there interesting. That first one is not worth the link!

The first one is *yawn*….so boring.
the italian entry does nothing for me. i like the one that was publishd in the Sunday Times, but i’d be very surprised if it won.

the mongelli one is certainly interesting, and would be a great landmark building, but i would like something a little more substantial, a bit taller for the U2 Tower.

at 60metres though, i think the design is going to have to be a bit radical for it to remain a “landmark building”. while 60m may be tall for Dublin, it certainly isn’t in world terms, and that height alone will not justify it’s landmark title.

60m is a crap height, especially for the dreary area the “tower” is going up in and since there’s planning permission around the corner for a 90 odd metre building the “landmark” tag will be hard to live up to – unless they go for some totally wild design, that is.

Any news on the results…was 9th June the decision date?

The U2 Landmark Tower Competition is in all respects an anonymous competition and if therefore an architect decides to publish his work premature to the decision of the competition jury, he of course has given up his anonymous position and clearly must be disqualified.

Absolutely… i am promising anyone who wishes to supply their entry to Archeire that they will not be published prior to the results being announced…

With all this clandestine stuff the winning entry better be good……..bleedin bloody good.

Thanks lads, cue email from one architect with fragile ego

“Earlier today, I sent you images for your website as you requested. However, I have just read some of the discussion threads posted on your website and am rather offended by the comments about our submission to the Landmark Tower / U2 competition. Therefore, I formally request that you do not publish any of the images or text from our submission.”

I was listening to Samy talk about the Calatrava documentary this morning on radio. I have never, ever seen one architect do a really good criticism of another.

Where is the Eamon Dunphy of good architectural journalistic criticism? Someone who is just so naive, they say things that everyone else is just too scared S******* to say? Or will there ever be a time in Ireland when someone like that can speak up about anything?

I respect the attitude you have shown Paul, and your motivation to make information available – even if 90% will always be kept under wraps.

what’s going on? It’s already late June. no results, not even an explanation on the their website.

Update on DDDA website today…

“Due to the unprecedented response to the competition with over 500 entries, the assessment process has taken longer than originally anticipated. However, the jury is continuing its work and when it makes its decision, the result will be published and posted here on our website. “

I can’t say I’m surprised they had to revise their date.

Well, let’s not judge the judges too harshly, at least until we see which one they go for :).

This has been a very high profile competition – I know of at least two of the better Canadian firms who were considering entering, not sure if they went through with it. It’s quite possible they’ve got a large number of compelling schemes to assess.

I agree, I’d prefer if they spent more time at it and made the right decision then rush at it now.

Less of the begrudgery please…..

I think the judges took less time to decide the winning entries for the replacement of the World Trade Centre.
The result of the U2 competition here better be good.

Originally posted by GregF
I think the judges took less time to decide the winning entries for the replacement of the World Trade Centre.

Once they had it down to the shortlist of five, yes. Kind of my point 🙂

i can’t wait to see the end result myself.

If we are not badly mistaken, there was a site from these architects by the name of Doonan from somewhere in the US.

Is this the architect who was obviously offended by some comments on his Tower entry and who formally requested that his work should not be published anymore or is there another reason for this sudden disapperance of his Tower ?

Irrelevant of the reason however I still believe,
and indeed this belief is legally supported, that any architects who publish their competition entries prior to a jury decision, clearly must be disqualified

Mistake !!

“the jury has commenced its deliberations and it is expected that a decision will be taken before the end of the summer”

for the docklands news, delivered free to houses in the ddda area.

If you entered the U2 competition, please contact us at info@irish-architecture.com. We will not publish your entry before the winner is announced thus protecting your anonimity during the judging process.

Should get a balance and well considered proposal that complements and enhances its surrroundings then!

Anyone familiar with the issue of a large international auditing company in connection with the competition assessment process?

The question is: are we talking “Smoke and Mirrors” OR “Cloak and Daggers”! or is it just another Chinese whisper. …..maybe there’s a song there!…….and probably more profitable than entering Architectural competitions. After all it’s only Rockn’Roll, but as usual the suits of establishment underestimate the influence of such frivolity………still in their ivory towers of “respectability” with an overstated R.

Let’s face it ………..DDDA have seriously gone “walk-abouts” on this and now seek external corporate stability to bolster their inadequate abilities. Poor show chaps and chapesses………….

If you know what I’m talking about please enlighten me!

http://www.crannog-software.com/ad/u2.jpg

I think this is a cracking entry. I hope it is something as innovative challenging and brave as this. i’d love to see the georgian society members dig this

Why does it look like this concept has just come out of a wastepaper basket?

The power of Photoshop!

I quite like that…. but whats the squiggly thing suspended from the top section?

i know of a team that was contacted by the

large international auditing company

. apparently they were asked to email a digital version of their competition report. dont know why though. dont know if anyone else had to do it either.
the plot thickens…..

we were contacted by Price Waterhouse and asked to resubmit our written report to them. they were very persistent, contacted us two days in a row. said that they were contacting all entrants and that they had no other information. this was two weeks ago. go figure???

with over 500 entries that is a lot of phone calls.
i heard the price waterhouse inbox was only 10mb so they are pretty optimistic if they think 500 pdfs are going to fit.
it all sounds pretty wacky.

I do 😉 cos we’ve got the details for the site. Will look it up later.

Why are Price Waterhouse now involved with this competition?

i can only guess the ddda are preemptively covering their asses.

because of the anonymity controversy at the beginning of the process, they have called in a heavyweight auditing company to ensure the process was anonymous, therefore if someone threatens court action after the result they can wave their big fat audit in the air and say ‘not guilty and we have the papers to prove it, ha ha!’

Originally posted by cajual
i can only guess the ddda are preemptively covering their asses.

because of the anonymity controversy at the beginning of the process, they have called in a heavyweight auditing company to ensure the process was anonymous, therefore if someone threatens court action after the result they can wave their big fat audit in the air and say ‘not guilty and we have the papers to prove it, ha ha!’

That’s what I thought too! which implies………FG may be the winner! What a surprise!

Hopefully it doesn’t happen. FG is repeating his curved metal piece everywhere right now which is very sad.

6 months ago, this u2 competition had it all : client, site, open entry. As today … ? Can it be any worse? Let alone the Gerhy scandal, the time process or the program; they reportedly hired Pricewaterhouse coopers to contact some of the competitors. Here is why : they apparently lost the connexion between some of the sealed enveloppe and the presentation boards. How many is not known.
So, they sent out the problematic ‘sealed enveloppes’ out to be opened by pwhc (remenber they got 600*100 euros – 12000 = 48000 euros pocket money). Pwhc then contacted the competitors asking them to submit a email copy of their writting report.
Isn’t it that weird? Why not asking for an image to quickly link the competitors to the panels?
The second theory is much more appealing to the contacted ones, pwhc is gathering information for a larger report and as the competition process takes ages, they asked the docklands for a short list.

of course the above are just possiblities.
I just can’t imagine docklands hiring pwhc to make 500 phone calls. Pwhc doesn’t come cheap.

sorry for the monologue.
The main question for me right now is why asking to resubmit the presentation sheet?
Can’t they just send out all the sealed enveloppes to pwhc, choose someone, call pwhc saying we go for number xxx, pwhc opens the enveloppe and here is the winner.

What they have done now is opening the letters, finding out who’s who. Doesn’t sound very anonymous competition friendly.
If what they are trying to get is credibility following the anonymity controversy , weird thinking.
THEY HAVE OPENED THE SEALED ENVELOPPES!

the only proof of anonymity.
Please can someone explain me this?

well, i would assume by giving the envelopes to a third party (pwc) they maintain the process of anonymity- which is the reason they don’t carry out this audit themselves and they hire someone independent.

as for asking for an image to identify the project, i would say most offices would be very reluctant to email images to someone in case they are abused in some way- leaked to the press, copyright infringement etc… so asking for the report is like asking for the least sensitive document of the submission.

however, i agree that what started as a great opportunity for all parties has degenerated into a bit of a mess. the ddda are absolutely not fit to carry out an architectural competition of any size, let alone one this big. starting from the provision of a half-assed brief, the awarding of ONE prize which is one sixth of the entry fees, the lack of two-stages, no association with the RIAI (i think), complete confusion as to how to pay the entry fee (they told me to send cash in an envelope!!), then the complete lack of a deadline for the results, and now the hiring of an independent auditing company to verify the process….

well, lets hope it’s worthwhile, and they pick a winner that is in the spirit of an open architectural competition- something new, interesting, and not dependent on reputation…

i should also add that the Great Egyptian Museum competition was run incredibly smoothly, with 1600 competitiors, and because of it’s openness and fairness it gives a talented ‘unknown’ the opportunity to shine- lets hope the DDDA do the same….

If all this PWC issue is true then it makes for an interesting jury scenario- Architecture Competion judged by accountants….mmmmm I always know really that Architecture is but a toy to many who become instant experts ……..a frail truth of the profession I’m afraid. What are they auditing ? how many words or colours were used or quantities of lines or different shapes……..maybe how many cliches have been employed! And anyway who are the Jury? So many questions , so many scenarios………..and above all so much confusion! surely something PCW are familiar with in their dealing with suspect clients around the globe (did I mention Aurther Andersons?) Money for old rope……….and that’s what Architecture is right now….old rope!

the same question remains:

1) Why did they have to open the enveloppes for?

2) The enveloppes opened, whydoes pwhc need a document to identify us?

3) 6 months after submission, can there still be 500 competitors to choose from (shortlist)?

4) Has everybody been contacted by pwhc?

from what i hear PWHC were not ready to make 500 phone calls or recieve 500 emails.

it is ridiculous to think that after 4 months of jury deliberation they are still dealing with 500 entries.

either the teams contacted are in some sort of shortlist(positive or negative) , or have been choosen at random for some sort of verification process.

what this means i dont know.

It’s not winning that matters but taking part — and paying €100

Sue continually scans the skyline but can see no sign of work beginning on the proposed €60m studio for U2 in Dublin docklands. Last November the Dublin Docklands Development Authority (DDDA) announced a “global” competition to find an architectural design for the Fab Four’s new quarters. The winner was to be announced in June . . . and then it all went awry.
First it emerged that a member of the band had been seen leaving the Santa Monica studio of Frank Gehry, a world-renowned architect and competition entrant. As another member of U2 is on the judging panel, other competitors cried foul.

Price Waterhouse Coopers has now been called in to oversee the judging process. According to the DDDA this is to meet “European regulations”. But Sue has heard that envelopes containing the competitors’ identities were accidentally opened, threatening the golden rule of anonymity.

There’s no fear of the DDDA losing money on the affair. It has already earned €50,000, with 500 entrants paying €100 each. They say the winner will be announced “within the next three months”. Sue’s money is still on Gehry.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2091-757731,00.html

From the Sunday Tribune:

DDDA still hasn’t found what it’s looking for

SHANE COLEMAN

The Dublin Docklands Development Authority (DDDA) has taken the unusual step of hiring consultants to undertake a “due diligence validation exercise” on each of the 500 entries for the architectural competition to design a 60-metre landmark tower on the Liffey, which will include an exclusive recording studio for rock band U2. Competitors – which are understood to include some of the top names in world architecture – were asked to submit the entry form in a separate envelope from their designs to ensure the judging panel were unaware of the architect behind the designs they were assessing.

Now the DDDA has brought in Pricewaterhouse consultants to double-check the designs submitted correspond to the separate competition entry form. This is despite the fact that the regulations stated that the DDDA, on opening each submission, would place a number on each of the enclosed documents and the same number in the envelope containing the offi- cial competition entry form.

Despite rumours in the architecture world that there was a mix-up and the authority was unaware of the identity of certain designs – including the design chosen as the winner – a spokesman for the DDDA said he “categorically denied” this was the case. “The authority has not misplaced any application forms. This is simply an exercise designed to ensure that everything is correct. It is not unusu- al. The DDDA has never had a response of this level before. It’s a huge exercise,” the spokesman said.

He rejected the suggestion that it would have been more efficient and logical for the DDDA to simply contact the top 10 designs to confirm their identity. Emphasising the impotance of the competition, the spokesman said that the process of verification was almost complete but said a winner had not yet been selected.

The DDDA should publish a book containing ALL of the entries, good or bad!

I think that it would be an essential item in every practices library, giving a great insight into how architects approach competitions, from the famous to the unknown.

We could make our own minds up on the outcome of the competition.

The 500 page glossy coffee table book would also be a nice little earner for the DDDA considering the hits and interest on this thread.

There is noe more competition entry to be published in the web: http://www.fsck.it/html/radrob/works/curricula/competitions.html

Should the DDDA wait still a little with its decision, I wouldn´t wonder when all competition entries will be by than public.

that one sort of looks like a cancun hotel to me:
http://www.veloso.com/Imagens/park%20royal%20cancun.jpg

AND THE WINNER IS…

This was indeed a kind of quint-essence of what the DDA had in mind as they wrote out the competition.

And in the tower sits Bono-Rapunzel with wailing hairs.

Good one Power…hee hee…. no doubt
this would meet An Taisces, The Green Party , The Locals and the DDAs requirements.

Brilliant. Still probably a bit too modern for Dublin though !

There is a lengthy insider-article about the competition on archinect, pretty old from April, but till now unsurpassed in its detail knowledge.

http://www.archinect.com/discuss_cgi/groups/2052.html

I can quote a couple of sentences:

Among the 500 entries are several innovative designs including one in the shape of a large sail and another whose gentle sloping form resembles a wave.

There are also less professional entrants. One fan from Spain has entered a building in the shape of a harp, which has been described as “amateur in the extreme”.

Jennifer Boyer, an American architect based in Dublin, said the designs show the changes in architectural taste following the destruction of the twin towers. “There has been a huge rethink of the concept of tower building,” she said. “There has been a new thinking to get beyond sheer height which is evident in the designs both to replace the twin towers and here.”

Does anybody know more?

http://www.city.annaka.gunma.jp/htm/forum/en/index.html

annaka forum competition – boards due in japan july 31st (postmarked july 24th) – first round jury on august 1st and 2nd – announced august 2nd……oh yeah, and they had 392 boards to deal with?

seems hopeless on the quay.

Well at leasy Gehry isn’t letting the U2 debacle stop him from fiding other commissions (from skyscrapers.com:

***News: Brighton set for Gehry towers

Brighton: A design competition to redevelop the King Alfred Leisure Centre on Brighton seafront, southern England, has been won by a consortium led by Gehry Partners.

The winning scheme involves the construction of four skyscrapers, up to a height of 38 storeys, on a 4.2-acre site. It aims to provide 438 flats, 60,000sq ft of retail and offices and a 160,000sq ft leisure centre.

Also involved in the consortium are Karis Developments, ING Real Estate, HOK Sports and CZWG Architects, which will now progress as joint venture partners for the scheme with Brighton & Hove Council. ***

Brighton incidentally, a town with a population less than that of Cork City and no high rises to speak of other than a Ballymun style relic, and a proposal like this just sails through – the mind boggles.

unfortunately the Gehry project in Brighton is really, really, really, really awful…..

Never really sure what Architects are expected to do in these circumstances. Competitions are , as I’ve have raised before, a catch 22 for the aspiring and established ego. We must hope, pray even for some sort of result which places one on the map, but when that decision is delayed, unclear or forgotten about the Architect becomes a hostage to their own intellectual neurosis. A terrible pain for some and just plan pain in the ass for most! Come on chaps, put us all out of our misery and release us from that burden of expectation. That 50,000 € must have been well dented now in fees to the auditors and salaries of the DDDA employees involved in the competition, not to mention the jury. So I assume it is in their interest now to conclude this matter before it becomes really expensive, or is the DDDA a public funded mission with a flexible budget.

In all seriousness though it questions the legality of such competition processes which do generate funds, real cash , and is not as must be remembered the only cost the Architects have to carry. Cost of tendering is always an issue in the construction market be it a Contractor or Designer/Consultant. Many offices do not do competitions simply because of the expense which personally I think is a bit dull, but understandable. The input for this particular competition was perhaps not enormous but nonetheless demanded on the Architect to spend time with their intellectual property which I presume is what the Investor/ developer is paying for.

This Knowledge Capital has different value obviously depending on the experience and track-record and of course “good ideas” of the Architect but if you equate this into 500 entries also it creates enormous investment in the competition process and one which should be more carefully handled.

So, DDDA, a decison?………………good idea, yes?

and the Winner is…………….

http://www.unison.ie/breakingnews/index.php3?ca=9&si=40497

http://www.ddda.ie/cold_fusion/features.cfm?counter=54

Burdon Dunne Architects/Craig Henry Architects of Blackrock, Co. Dublin has today been announced the winner of the Docklands Authority’s Architectural Competition to design a landmark tower development at Britain Quay in Dublin’s Docklands. The winning design featuring a unique twisting tower was selected from well over 500 entries from across the globe. The proposed tower is to include an exclusive recording studio for U2 on its top two floors.

Designed as a symbolic landmark at the end of Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, the architects intended the building to be a new interface between the solidity of the docklands area and the ever-moving landscape of the tidal Liffey and Dodder rivers.

Peter Coyne, Chief Executive of the Docklands Authority, said today “the winning design provides a unique and remarkable landmark for the city. Overall, we were delighted with the response to the competition, not only in terms of the huge number of entries, but particularly by the impressive quality of the work received.”

The Docklands Authority will now be reviewing development options for the proposed concept design and it is hoped that the tower would be developed during 2004/2005. In the meantime, the winning entry along with over 100 entries shortlisted by the judges will be on view at an exhibition in September (date and venue to be announced).

The jury specially commended a further four entries as follows:

· Simon Innes and Stephen Barton, architects, London, United Kingdom
· Thomas P. Mont Alto, Mont Alto Architecture Inc., Ohio, USA
· Niall Scott, architect, Scott Tallon Walker Architects, Dublin, Ireland
· Hervé Tordjman, HTA – Architecture. H. Tordjman & Partners, Paris, France

Some other entries….
http://www.irish-architecture.com/unbuilt_ireland/dublin/u2_tower/index.html

Canary Wharf with a twist

(aka Canada House)

……eh!

Wait and see, don’t be so quick to judge. I should have the images from the architects shortly.

The detailing is nothing like Canary Wharf

how many stories?

Nice design, what’s the height in storeys? Hard to make it out

better views here
http://www.irish-architecture.com/unbuilt_ireland/dublin/u2_tower/bdacha/index.html

Estimating I reckon around the same as Liberty Hall – look at the height of the ‘pink’ structure here which is a low two storey structure
http://www.irish-architecture.com/unbuilt_ireland/dublin/u2_tower/bdacha/view1_lge.html

Burdon Dunne Architects…would that be Felim Dunne, brother-in-law of Paul McGuinness…???

It’s not bad. I’d like a bit taller, but…

Personally, I’m concerned that, despite the twist, it’s a bit too vertically rectangular. Remember, most people will be viewing it along the river from town, so it will be visually set next to the Poolbeg chimneys. Something with a bit of an odder shap would, in my opinion, set off a bit more of a contrast there.

Personally, I’d have liked something a bit more oddly shaped, like the gherkin in london or the bank of china building in hong kong.

Or even that nice building rejected for the Dun Laoghaire baths. That design would look really nice on this site.

…..a pyramid roof in one image and a Birch tree on the roof in another image……wea hey!

A tree on the roof of a ‘skyscraper’

Looks shit I think. Probably the finished article will look nothing like it either.

Oh for the love of GOD!!!!

‘Unique twisted design’?????

It the same concept as the Turning Torso. It performs the same function and is situated on a similar site. (And that building is a monstrosity)

….and that’s supposed to be a unique landmark for Dublin city……..F**king Hell!

Oops I forgot …It’s ties in with the other shite they’re building down there.

That said…..the IDN entry looked v. nice. Pity the judges didn’t have more guts, the Twisting Tower (snigger) is very coporate looking.

The IDN entry feels very industrial, in a way that would merge nicely with the cranes, bridges, and rusty hardware still down in the docklands area. I’m not sure if would fit in quite as when all the other hardware is finally removed.

Originally posted by doozer
Oh for the love of GOD!!!!

‘Unique twisted design’?????

It the same concept as the Turning Torso. It performs the same function and is situated on a similar site. (And that building is a monstrosity)

have you a picture?

I like the design. If I’m reading the article right the overall height of the building will be 78.4 metres. Correct me if i’m wrong, but that’s considerably higher than liberty hall at 59 metres.
78 metres is a nice height but i’d like it to be taller

I’ll say it again…

Does nobody think it odd that the winning team of architects includes the brother-in-law of U2 manager Paul McGuinness…???!!!

It is odd, but I’m sure it is co-incidence. To say otherwise without evidence to backup your claim is libel.

Let’s not all rush to the drawer marked irish begrudgery – lets congratulate them on winning. It will be easier to dissect the design at planning stage.

Originally posted by d_d_dallas
Well at leasy Gehry isn’t letting the U2 debacle stop him from fiding other commissions (from skyscrapers.com:

***News: Brighton set for Gehry towers

Read this weeks “Nooks and Corners” (Architecture Column) in Private Eye magazine for a review of this building – from the sounds of it is truely awful and the CGI does it no favours. My favorite quote from it “The landmark element proposed is a wobbly 38-storey tower which promises to loom over the surrounding three- or four-storey stuccoed terraces like a Terry Gilliam monster in a Monty Python cartoon”.

I think its quite interesting, I like the way its city & bay facades are completely different … As far as I can make out too, the max height of the structure is 78.4 metres, the last inhabitable floor, U2’s studio, is at 60m.

Having waited, as everyone else has, for an unexceptably long time, one gets the feeling that it was unfortunately not really worth waiting for at all.

After seeing the first images of this competition winner, which I admit are of a relatively small scale and therefore difficult to read, I cannot help but thinking that Dublin has squandered an opportunity in providing the city with a world class building.

I find that nothing about this building image displays any contextual or indeed Landmark merits. Such a quality of building one usually expects to find in some investors development portfolio and indeed this tower appears as if it could be built anywhere and unfortunately is in many cities and towns throughout the world.
The fact that each storey seems to have been treated similarly, raises the question as to where is the music studio? I find it relatively hard to believe that it is contained in this ‘hat-like’ structure on the roof of the building which seems to have taken its inspiration from the ‘Messeturm’ in Frankfurt am Main, Germany,
also a featureless example of 80’s American Highrise Architecture. This building has in the mean time been christened by the people of Frankfurt as the ‘Pencil’. A wonderful and inspiring name for a Highrise Tower as I am sure everyone will agree !

And it is about inspiration and a sense of belonging to a place that must be , I feel, some of the most important design criteria for a Landmark Tower in a European capital city.
This competition winning entry does not seem to fill this Landmark role and seems also not to react in any significant way to industrial surrounds or to, and probably most importantly, the river which guides ships into the city and for this one needs a gate or marker or beacon.

I am very dissapointed that such an entry was chosen as the best and i am fully convinced that after such an object is build that it will receive little if any international recognision.

I would be very interested to know who indeed was on the jury and what particular qualifications they possesed to judge such an important building for Dublin. Which architects were involved or were there any at all ? Any internationally renowned or even foreign architects or designers in the panel ? These factors which I cannot seem to find are the fundamentals of a well organised and high quality competition, essential to a good result.
A result that in this case seems to leave alot to be desired.

I suggest that this new building should be named the ‘ Dublin Tower ‘ because the only element that makes it any way ‘ Landmark’ is its height, which simply structurally is, and its prominent location which was existing. A ‘Landmark’ Tower it is not.

It’s quite intriguing that the architect (Felim Dunne) who designed U2’s first studio is the winning architect. Coincidences do happen …

Was the DDDA required to hold a competition for this project? Or, was it a publicity act? As an American, I am unfamiliar with your rules in Ireland. Was this a complete waste of 599 firms’/architects’ (including those whose entries were thrown out) time?

As a general question to anyone, or in particular to anyone who has served on a jury, does “anonymous” mean anything to anybody?

Kudos to U2 – you certainly didn’t go down without a fight!

http://u2log.com/archive/001402.shtml

January 9, 2002
Hanover Quay not ‘pleasant’
The Irish Independent reports on the ongoing battle over the planned demolition of U2’s Hanover Quay studios.

The DDDA (Dublin Docklands Development Authority) have said the buildings were not particularly pleasant looking. Paul McGuinness says: ‘This is a fully equipped state-of-the-art recording studio and also a rather interesting modern building. It does not look much from the outside but the interior was designed by the (award winning) architect Felim Dunne.”

U2, who have been recording on the premises since 1994, have said they won’t go down without a fight.

A Planning Board oral hearing on the matter will take place at the Gresham Hotel in Dublin in two weeks time.

Please let us and anyone else out there know if a protest is coming, we will gladly sign any petition to reverse this travesty.

We could call this wonderfull erect building the Dublin Campenile.

It has at the same time the splendid erectile quality of Italian architecture as well as the twist to keep it fashionable.

Very nice prototype of a certain object, but too big to allow handling.

protest is right. this building is a joke

I guess I’m in the minority here. I like the winning entry. I can’t say if it was the best choice of all the entries, but I do like it. I don’t know how else you could make a ‘slim point block’ much more interesting in fairness.

I really hope the dunloe ewart tower is built next to it though, the two together would look well on the quays, in an otherwise boring, and exceptionally monotonous environment.

So, there we have it, a result which at least puts the stress back in the cupboard for the architects till the next competition! But…………. mmmmmmm…….indeed, a disappointing result. Not because of the associations which other draw with regards to the design, its authors relationship with U2 etc, etc but the complete lack of confident qualities which such a structure must provide. It was to be the Totem under which the divided could unite, the Vision which would brush away the differences of the conservatives , conservationists, and bigots. It has done perhaps quite the opposite and revived all these rather banal and negative tendencies without offering a Vision.

Surely it will be the landmark, as its scale will prevail in this attribute but not, perhaps, one which can in anyway be comparable to that of Calatrava’s tower in Malmo which is delivering this spirit of the totem. Pelli’s Canary wharf tower, well of course shapes are shapes are this is similar shape but so what, the critical issue is- the shape is not compatible with the gyroscopic kinetic which the twist is supposed to suggest. Or maybe we can refer to the metabolic structures of Kurokawa as a sauce(sic) for reference. But as I inferred before this is just hot air as the issue of Vision and Totem have not, in my opinion, been met.

It is interesting the identity of the jury were never published. In all competitions, one of the main issues an architect examines is the Jury list, to determine the leanings the judging might have. This was not possible here, and in many ways the competitors entered with a key component undeclared.

But , the “Jury” have announced the winner……………..and that’s that. A lost opportunity.

I think maybe it’s a good idea to post other entries here since I don’t see they are gonna make a book of all entries.

I like it. I think it’s interesting. I also hope this is the first of many similar buildings in terms of height and modernity in this area. And, many of you may laugh when I suggest this, but with enough tastefull landmark buildings and leisure amenities another Darling Harbour (Sydney) could be created here.

its pretty good; modern, interesting and stylish.

i just hope to god the carlisle pier development is a hell of a lot better

yawn…..

if the ddda wanted a boring commercial tower they should have just looked at commisioning a boring commercial irish architect.

instead they have wasted everyones time by holding this competition under the false premise that they were looking for something new and interesting.

does anybody now where to find the list of the 100 shortlisted schemes that are being exhibited. international entrants obviously dont have access to the exhibition.

Don’t think it’ll be another Darling Harbour. Apart from the Dunloe Ewart tower which was granted planning permission on appeal, no other tall ‘landmark’ buildings may be allowed in this area. Lets face it guys, this will be as good as it gets!

Wasn’t 60 meters the maximun allowed height ? What about the 8,500 sqm minimum?
This option : ‘ only one tower and the podium’ wasn’t even possible according to those requirements and the stupid slenderness ratio.

Once again, what are the rules for if the one who wins the competition doesn’t take them into account?

I am also unfamiliar with competitions in Ireland so i have got this question : Would dda have been allowed to only hire a developper and an architect for this project without doing a competition?

This is quite disappointing and i don’t see where the huge rethinking in tower buildings is.

DDA wrote that there will be a exhibition with the “shortlisted” (100 !), do you know where we can find the list? Have teams been informed if they are in or out?

I have to say this is the worst competition I have ever seen, poorly organized.
I have the same problem of the min. 9500 sqm and slenderness requirement. I don’t see all the entries they selected have a solution. Those requirement was a joke!!!

but 15 x 15 is 225, and 225 over 20 storeys is 4 and a half thousand square metres in the tower. how big is the remainder of the site? surely it would fit over 5 or 6 storeys right?

if they insist on such a dense building on such a small and awkward site, then its no wonder they werent actively looking for interesting proposals. whoevers in charge here imagined the matchbox building of time past, maybe these competitors sniffed that out and gave them what they want. then got a little fancy with crazy screwy woo woo tower (not)

bow ring

Added some more entries to
http://www.irish-architecture.com/unbuilt_ireland/dublin/u2_tower/index.html

The “tower” is perfect – it perfectly represents the Dublin Docklands – as bland as it gets and a total wasted opportunity, like everything else in the area on both sides of the liffey. I think I’ll be avoiding the exhibition on the 100 or so selected runner up entires – It’ll only depress me at what might have been…

what a shame.. a poor choice….

also- around november i was told that it was a certain Mr. Dunne who wrote the brief for this competition. i must stress that this is only hearsay but makes you wonder… i mean even competitions on the back of a cornflakes box state that you can’t enter if you have relations etc. attached to the organising company…

I think you’re being a little hasty. Based on what I’ve seen of the other entries, this is not the best. Thankfully however, it is not too bad, and certaintly isn’t either the worst nor the most boring.

I’d like some more info on it before making my mind up fully. The two images are so different that I think the CGI stuff is not telling the whole story. I havn’t seen plans yet but I’m sure they’ll be about soon.

If I understand it, the impact of the building will be dependent on the architectural planting. This has not been done on this scale in Dublin before and so should be very interesting. I hope it works and planting becomes more the norm in Dublin. Tree tennants anyone?

On a less positive note I’ve never seen “Anti-glare louvres” enhance a building or indeed function correctly. So that could be interesting too. If they don’t work then at least half the building can be written off.

Its inevitable with Architectural & Beauty competitions that any winner will be subjected to criticism rather than praise….its the fragility of the egos involved I guess. What doesnt help at all in this particular scenario is the scent of possible nepotism involved in the process….it is all to familiar in our politics and the way we do things here. Enough!…if suggestions aired on this site pertaining to Mr. Dunne are true, the probability of co incidence is beyond credibility, and the process and result should be brought into question or defended with substantiation.
It is a poor reflection on the lack of professionalism in this country that we cannot seem to progress any significant project without controversy, petty political manouevering or cronyism.

i reckon a slightly refined version of nicola mongellis entry would have been much better. a little vision people please 🙂

if anyone finds out about the 100 entries exhibit pls post details

if you haven’t looked in a few days, we currently have the following entries online… am expecting a few more at the moment also….

Burdon Dunne Architects / Craig Henry Architects Ireland Winner
Architecture Project, Malta
Box Architecture, Ireland
deegan + goodrich
Hofman Dujardin Architecten, Netherlands
IDN Integral Design Network
I/O Interdisciplinary Office + Menkès Shooner Dagenais architects, Quebec
Nicola Mongelli, USA
Macarie O’Looney and Schneider Architects, Germany
Metastudio, Germany
Metronometric Architects, Ireland
NJB Architects, Ireland
The Naked Architects, Belgium
Tower 151 Architects, Croatia

Jesus Christ…you would swear most people here were losing entrants…what is this? O’Nuallain and his battle with the spire all over again…?

The tower looks very well – better than most of the other bizarre structures which were put forward.

Just think of a giant piece of lime floating in the centre of it, and imagine how cool and refreshing the tower will be on a sunny day down on the docks…

First, congratulations to the architects on winning.

It’s not the most exciting concept in the world but it could have been far worse. Remember as well that the design will probably change drastically between now and planning permission. At least they are trying to break away from the cuboid design of many of the entrants.

BTW, does it look like something from Anne Summers or is that just me? 😉

Aye, sure maybe it’s not that bad afterall. Would be good it they were to build that Dunloe Ewart proposal beside it too. We could have a nice collection and variation of buildings here as a focal point.

Some striking stuff going on in England and Liverpool aka European City of Culture in 200?,………..

http://images.google.ie/imgres?imgurl=www.bbc.co.uk/liverpool/features/2002/08/fourth_grace/rogers.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.bbc.co.uk/liverpool/features/2002/08/fourth_grace/feature.shtml&h=270&w=150&prev=/images%3Fq%3DRichard%2BRogers%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26sa%3DG

Originally posted by MG

BTW, does it look like something from Anne Summers or is that just me? 😉

Its just you!

I don’t think that the material point here is that the dsign is bad per se.
I know that is not the issue for me.
This competition was introduced as an attempt to bring innovative new design into the heart of Irish culture. it was billed as an international event and managed to raise expectations in relation to the scope and impact of the design.
The winning entry does not fulfill these expectatins. To put it mildly, although it tips a lazy nod to the international community ( by doing what has already been done better else where), it is, in essence, yet another example of’a local job for local people’ cronyism.
I’m sorry I think we could have done better.
Its not a bad design -its just not good enough.

hear hear

i’m sure craig henry architects and felim dunne are perfectly acceptable as architects and would be capable of producing a decent design and finished building. but the whole idea of this competition has been undermined. shame on those responsible. i say make the whole process transparent so we casn gain useful hindsight and maybe prevent this happening again

if it was an anonymous contest then it isn’t their fault the winner was local, and isn’t a bad thing.

Bring back Frank Gehry……………all is forgiven! ooops sorry……………not in the spirit of camaraderie which is emerging here….all very Empire building stuff, eh what fellas! pat on the head for the Johnny Architect and a C+ for the effort…….really……….come on ……..this is utter nonsense. ….I agree it is not fair to shoot the messengers ( the winners , who naturally must be given a reward ) but look at those who have perpetrated the whole event.

It’s a question of whether one is historical or hysterical. Quite frankly I prefer the latter against the failure on the former. I thought this was rock’n’roll but sadly K-tel have taken over here. Where is the madness, the utter contempt , the sheer glory in being wild and expansive ( and expensive). Are we all in the serious brogues of creating sensible things, such a shame…………….

OK, a little over boiled there but it does make the veins expand when one thinks of how nice it would be to re-visit the age of risk! Now there’s history for you.

Now I have been faithfully monitoring this site, but have been quiet till now since I had entered the competition. Now that it is over, I am free to say some things.

As to all the concern regarding this entry, do not worry this scheme will never be built. The more significant problem is a much worse version of it probably will.

I work for one of the preeminent high-rise Architects, and I have done several REAL high-rises myself. So I know a few things about how buildings like this are done.

If some of you are not aware, the tower portion of the World Trade Center Competition will not be designed any further by Libeskind. It will be done by David Childs of SOM. The original tower design just did not meet financial requirements, plus Libeskind’s office is in no way capable of developing a tower.

The “Landmark Tower” winning entry cannot be built as designed with its 15M x 15M floorplate. By the time you put in two fire stairs, a minimum of two elevators, plus U2’s elevators, shafts, corridors, etc. there is very little floor area left.

One significant flaw (of the many) in the presentation was that the required plans , and in particular the ONE “typical” tower plan, was way too small a scale to determine if the design was feasible (there was no leeway in the scale presented).

Even the DDDA themselves answered one of the competitor’s question by saying that it was assumed that a “dissagregated block” would be required to do the scheme. This would mean a floorplate of 15M x 30M was possible, assuming that the skin of the building was broken up vertically.

Design is a very subjective issue, Building codes, practicality and financial performance are not.

Also keep in mind that the winner of the competition was to be given 12,000 Euro and ….

“If the project proceeds, the winning participant, will be invited to execute a commission for architectural services to Planning Permission stage”

This does not guarantee that this design will get built or that even that the “winning” Architect will be involved any further in the process.

Oh what a great “profession” Architecture has become.

the winning project, as usual, doesn’t comply with the competition brief which is really disappointing (height, gross area) because it was one of the difficulties of the brief (which was stupid).

Why does it always go this way?

They should have told us : here are the rules, but hey don’t bother….

Clearly it is disappointing to everyone who didn’t win and it is even more disappointing that the winning entry isn’t inspirational.

In addition, many people are also frustrated with the state of architecture. There is a lot about which to be frustrated. Most buildings that go up are lost opportunities for good design. People say they want ‘Landmark” yet they are unwilling to think outside of the developer box. Not following rules can sometimes lead to better solutions and results, though, not in this case.

The biggest disappointment is that a competition was held and it appears that there was no need for most of us to have put forth any effort because the results were already predetermined. It is incredibly easy for a juror to “catch a glimpse” of their crony’s design and to pick it out during the judging period. This is not the first instance nor is it the last. Yet, I still can’t help feeling cheated. I suppose it is the optimist in me that expects people to have some integrity in what they do but apparently, integrity is lacking where it counts.

……So in other words when they attempt to build it, that twisty effect will be dropped then…and just another run of the mill building will materialize.

Just like the Spire and everything else that’s promised, the finished articles are never the same as what’s originally proposed.

Any images of Gehry’s proposal?

Great stuff proposed for England …..aka Richard Rogers & Co…..Slick images too of whats proposed.
http://images.google.ie/imgres?imgurl=www.bbc.co.uk/liverpool/features/2002/08/fourth_grace/rogers.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.bbc.co.uk/liverpool/features/2002/08/fourth_grace/feature.shtml&h=270&w=150&prev=/%20images%3Fq%3DRichard%2BRogers%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3D
en%26lr%3D%26ie%3DUTF-8%26oe%3DUTF-8%26sa%3DG

Added some new entries this morning… some more still to come….

A lot of those entries look more stylish than the winning entry I think.
Check out that proposal from the English firm of architects Lewis & Hickey. Would have been quite landmarkish.
Nice form/shape from NJB architects, even though the presentation is very plain….however the red brick concoction from the Dutch firm looks a bit yucky.

Others proposals by Deegan & Goodrich, Metronometric, Box architecture, That Croation firm, Goldsmicht & Graf, I/O, J O’ Neill, IDN, etc…..all look reasonably good in comparison.

The more I see the other entries the more depressed I become.

In my opinion , the people empowered to make planning decisons are ruining our city.

Its so frustrating that decisions such as these are constantly made on all our behalfs and there’s nothing that can be done about it.

Every exciting proposal that is ever considered for this city is automatically shot down.

I guess I’ll have to resort to the fact that things will never change in Dublin, at least maybe not until I’m an old man. This place will always have probably one of the most boring skylines in the world, due to an inherent ‘fear of anything new, tall or exciting’ in the psyche of many Irish people.

Lets all live in the stone age.

I think I’ll take up train spotting or something else more exciting than tracking Dublin’s architectural progress instead.

What’s all this about a competition for a U2 Tower? When are the entries due?

I believe there is a general disapointnent to be interpreted if one reads the postings on this web page and that few if any people seem to express a positive attitude towards this tower project.

I particularly find the realistic criticism from the gentleman in Santa Monica,whom has quite rightly pointed out that this building is very much uneconomical in its conception, a very constructive observation!

I also find however that to simply accept the results of such an appallingly organised international competition without a single word of protest is from our perspective another lost opportunity.The winning selection is one matter but I strongly believe that an attempt should be made to contact city newspapers and to find a way to reveal to people the scope of events, with delays and lack of transparency, especially regarding the jury membership. I have been involved with over 20 international competittions and have as of yet never experienced that the jury members and their professional positions was withheld from the participants and until now never revealed. Why should this be a secret ?
Why was there such a delay in announcing a winner ? How and where and on what date did the jury meet ? Did they meet as a group or as said to me on the telephone on one particular occasion did they visit the entries individually and sometimes together ?
Why was this internationally renouned company engaged at the very close of the competition and why were participants asked to send their entries a second time, when all competitions normally ask for one example of the work ?

I am sure there are many more questions to be asked but I feel that to remain silent at this point and on such an important subject would be a grave error !

the ddda is contacting entrants regarding the shortlisted projects that will be included in the september show….recieved an email notification today.

it reminds me of pisa’s leaning tower, well from one side anyway. i’ll tell ye one thing, it’s different alright. it could work though.

Originally posted by text goes here
it reminds me of pisa’s leaning tower, well from one side anyway. i’ll tell ye one thing, it’s different alright. it could work though.

I think the crux of people’s irritation is that this building is not different in the least.

what is it similar to?

The Turning Torso, Malmo…….Canary Wharf…..etc..etc

Originally posted by MOL

I also find however that to simply accept the results of such an appallingly organised international competition without a single word of protest is from our perspective another lost opportunity…………

A critic of the “winning” proposal is, as I think most agree, not the main issue here, but the method and protocol which was employed to make the “decision” does require some scrutiny.

Many competitions publish a Jury report which describes in some cases the procedure, the time, and in some cases the minutes of the meetings. It certainly should record the people involved. As the competition Jury involved the Royal Institute of Architects of Ireland then surely there must be some “rules” that should have been administered and referred to.

The issue of anonymity is clearly questionable by the fact that a, as yet undeclared, set of persons contacted, apparently, all participants before the end of the competition, revealing therefore the fact that the envelope contacting the authors had been opened. In addition the fact that the same people asked for data of the submissions from the authors concludes that anonymity was broken.

Reference was made to competitions “on the back of Cornflakes packets” before and this is perhaps how the organisers view such event, with the “competitors” having no rights and entry into the competition is with all risks. Indeed competitors do entry at their own financial risk and this is always the gamble which many architects have to adopt. Competitions are by their nature speculation for the architect, especially open ones such as this, but do serve to sharpen architects approach into the market place. It is however an open bazaar after submission but with the conditions that A- the jury are professional and B the procedure is taken on as published in the brief.

Given a payment made a type of contract is made between the Organiser and the Competitor on the understanding that the conditions of the brief are met by BOTH parties.

In would appear that in this competition this meeting of conditions is in some doubt.

I must stress this is not some sort of sour eggs or whatever the saying is!….but a necessary observation as such events are likely to be continued, and if to be in anyway a professional and fair way to award contracts or infer awarding of contracts, must be more carefully and legally controlled.

Has anyone else noticed how strangely similar the Winkers (Germany) and Metronometric (Ireland) entries are??

Some of the others are miles ahead of the winner. Particularly the cool Lewis & Hickey one…

What a sad, sorry mess this competition turned out to be.

Just added a few more entries to the gallery. Getting lots of interest from firms. Except Irish firms of course, must be afraid of annoying the DDDA.

Has anyone else noticed how strangely similar the Winkers (Germany) and Metronometric (Ireland) entries are??

I though the same thing…. perhaps its a nod to the docklands cranes?

Ithink there are a couple of much better choices than the winning entry which I agree looks very Canary Wharf-like. I wonder how long the roof-top garden will last once its realised how much office space its taking up (Mr Leibeskind could advise)

Judging by people’s strong replies, there is a lot of disapppointment and anger at what is seen as a comlete shambles of a competition by some and something verging on nepotism by others.

I suggest that some enterprising soul should officially request that the DDDA shows their policies and procedures using the Freedom of Information act as a legal platform.

If the judge ruled in your favour, then the DDDA and other authorities may think twice the next time they botch up.

Originally posted by doozer

I think the crux of people’s irritation is that this building is not different in the least.

it is only my opinion which i am entitled to have. it is different compared to the likes of apollo house, liberty hall, hawkins house and some of the other older buildings we have. where else in “ireland” is there a similar building to the proposed u2 tower right now? from that angle it is different. that is what i meant. it is hard to tell though when only looking at a picture.

🙂

a skyscraper with trees on top in “ireland”
that’s a first.

a partly slanted/leaning skyscraper in “ireland”
that’s a first.

the same could be said for the height. if they do build it to the 70m (ish) height, it will be taller than any of the other buildings we have in ireland right now. that too is a first.

these things all mean it is different. there is no other building similar to the one proposed in ireland to my knowledge.

cheers.

In response to to MOC in Frankfurt and Dogson
Fire2,
…YES all these questions should be answerable through the Freedom of Info Act as the DDDA are a government sponsored body….Hopefully some journalist out there will check it out and let us all know what has happened!

(personally I think, at this stage since the competition seems to be a bit of a joke, The Glendalough entry should also be debated !)

PS
I designed it with the help of a few dead monks.
(I wasn’t related to them or anything like that, I just took some inspiration from them)

Text goes here ….if ye look up the quays toward Tara Street, you’ll see seven towers with pyramidal type roofs as well, which were just recently added to the city scape.

Besides, I think the winning entry is rather cumbersome and a hotch potch of recent styles. The poor old roof garden will be rather battered too in such a windswept area.
I hope the architects know their plants and planting too as well as their architecture.

Me …I would have definitely gone with the Lewis Hickey design…..but build it taller too. What a great landmark it might have been for Dublin, very striking indeed.

i am aware of one george’s quay plaza. it has rectangular/square towers with pyramids on top. it has no roof garden and no twisted/leaning effect. it is also smaller than the proposed u2 tower, so in my opinion it is different. it is in no way the exact same as what we have now! i like it, some don’t but if we all had the same opinion on this topic there would be no point in having this discussion forum. i am not trying to offend anyone.

🙂

oh and by the way… yes they could have done better but they also could have done worse.

some of the other entries are fantastic looking. you never know it could be the start to having some taller buildings and lots of them in this area. the proposed tower looks taller than any of the other buildings we have at present. i am not counting the spire/chimneys as these are not buildings.

🙂

I agree……..in that it is the discussion that prevails from such events which is valuable. It’s a shame the chaps in DDDA didn’t have a bit of think before they launched this “thing”. But Ok 500 or more egocentric souls put pen to paper and in that it almost authenticates the competition. If architects had been at all bothered by the rules then clearly this could have been reflected in A: number of entries and the B: Questions. BUT this does not excuse the Authorities (notice the big A) who have a clear responsibility to lead the merry troupe in a legal and clear pathway, especially AFTER all submissions have been submitted. This is their elected responsibility be it as competition Organisers or Jury.

As was said before there is some doubt this pathway was taken and therefore requires examination.

As to differences, shapes, height, tress and twists……………well I’ve always maintain that most structures still carry Gustav Semper’s notion of the Caribbean hut. Its shelter still, but in a different “style”; and not particularly “rub–a-dub” in this case!

Lewis & Hickey Ltd entry is definitely the best of the ones I’ve seen so far. Looks amazing.

i too like the winning entry. could have done better though!

Being a Yank, and not being familiar with Building codes in Ireland, can anyone answer my question?

In a high-rise building are two means of egress required or just one?

If you look at the plans of the winning entry on the DDDA site, the winning entry only has a single fire stair in the tower.

Even if the current codes alow it, it is a really bad idea to only have one way out of a tower, especially after what happened at the WTC. Here in the USA there is a great debate over whether to require even more exit width or even number of exits.

Plus we are getting closer and closer to an International Building Code, that Ireland could adopt in the future. And I am pretty sure that will require two ways out.

I thought so too.

If so, how could this have been missed? Just looked at the plans on the DDDA website and it does look as if there’s only one staircase in the tower.

Don’t think i’d buy one of those apartments, even if could afford to!!

If there was a fire in the tower and the staircase was blocked, it looks as if the only thing you would be able to do would be to run up to that roof garden and kiss your arse goodbye.

Just uploaded another four or five entries… and still more to come (I’ve been promised some others)….

I would say that the slenderness ratio is just ridiculous. 60m is the highest for Dublin. what if a tower with 40m high? the tower is only 10mx10m and we still need to put 2 elevators and stairs and some circulation space?
Besides the north side of this u2 tower is just water, it’s not gonna cast any shadow on any buildings. what kind of sense to have a stupid slenderness ratio?

Still intrigued about the fire escape issue in the tower. Does anyone know if it is legal to only have one fire escape / stairway in the tower? I know there’s an issue with distance to a fire escape so you don’t have to run too far in the event of a fire, but it seems really odd that the proposed building only has one staircase.

If a fire started somewhere on the stairway, or if the stairway was filled with smoke, then everyone above would have no secondary means of escape, apart from elevators which might probably fail in the event of a fire.

Just read in skyscrapers.com that the tower will be 25 storeys high if built.

but 60 over twenty five is 2.4m i know bono is short but thats ridiculous

Wouldnt pass any remarks on anything you read onm skyscrapers.com. At one stage they had Clarion Quay as the tallest building in Ireland. And they’re a bit free and easy with lifting photographs and then charging to see them.

almost all of the entries as it seems to me tried to be amzing and ” wow look at how bautifull is” but i think they have forgoten to create some space and a place where people would like to stay not just to visit. From this point of view i like the one from Macedonia.

So is there any link where i can get a bit more familiar with the Macedonian entrant or an e-mail address.

Just added a few more this morning including two different approaches from Murray O’Laoire

If ye were to mix together the proposals by Winkens Architekten and Metronometics ye’d get Murray O Laoire’s first proposal.

Great minds think a like…..

Threr also seems to be alot of variations of the tower with ‘bow-shaped’ river facade as well.

Hello everyone —

I’m a non-architect who has been fascinated by this discussion, which I’ve been reading for the past week or two. My interest lies in the fact that I’m a U2 fan, and that I manage one of the most well-known unofficial U2 sites on the web: http://www.atu2.com. We have a staff of nearly two dozen fans around the world, and we produce a great deal of original content, including investigative news, features, reviews and opinion pieces, and satire/humor (at the band’s expense). We’re not a site that refuses to challenge or be critical of U2 when it’s deserved.

After reading this discussion, I believe there’s an interesting story to be written. I’m not interested in writing an article filled with sour grapes from entrants who did not make the shortlist, although that may certainly be a small part of the overall story. I am interested most in your reactions to the winning entry in specific, as well as the process the DDDA went through in general to choose that winner.

I’m willing to allow interviewees to not have your name used in return for candor.

If you’re willing to answer some questions for possible use in a story like I’ve described above, please use my subscriber profile to send me an email or a private message. I will respond as promptly as possible.

Thanks for your time.

Matt

One more thing — if I didn’t make it clear, I’m interested in hearing from both those who like the winning entry and those who don’t. Gotta present both sides of the reaction.

I’m also interested in speaking with those of you who have mentioned issues regarding the practical issues raised by the winning design — the fire escapes, the likelihood of this design ever being built as shown, etc.

Thanks again.

has anyone been contacted yet about who has made the final shortlist of 100 that will compose the exhibition. i thought the DDDA was supposed to email people but somewhat predictably they havent.

Yeah, I’ve heard of people who have received email from the DDDA

I’m still none the wiser in relation to fire escapes in high rises. Can anyone tell me how many fire escapes / stairways must be provided by law in high rise buildings in Ireland ? Thanks

Regarding fire escapes. All buildings are required to meet Part B of the Irish Building Rgulations. Part B in turn refers to a number of British Standards mainly BS 5588 (various parts) relating to specific building uses.
A number of people have identified that travel distance as an issue in respect of number and location of fire stairs, this is complicated also by density (number of people). Because a high rise has a cascading effect on numbers normally 2 stairs (minimum) are required (<45 degrees apart),one usually doubling as a fire fighting stair (fireman's stair). A building may also be engineered to a different standard but there is not a lot of high rise fire engineered buildings in Ireland to prove the viability of a single stair high rise. A single stair medium rise residential (low density) building is possibile but alternatives such as zones of refuge must be provided. Hope this helps..

Thanks shadow

To examine the technical details based on the actual submission material is perhaps falling short of what was intended by this competition. It was(is) an “ideas competition which seeks to find an “idea” or “concept” which can be developed with an investor’s participation and actual hands-on engineering.
Therefore detail compliance with any Regulation is not viable at this stage. This does not excuse a blatant avoidance of regulations but provides the window through which both the competition organisers and indeed the authors can climb in any claim at this stage that the project does not comply with a building regulation. Therefore we must examine the “concept” to find what intentions the authors had/have in addressing any such issues; and indeed the concept was in the most part to be one of “visual” impact ( hence the mandatory 3D images). Without a jury report it is very diffiult to see how a decision was reached, what was the discussion, the main criteria and the main protagonists in this discourse. Still, as has been said before, the main issue here is, did DDDA act within the bounderies of the Competition Rules or not in the actual process of the Jury. Clearly the “Jury” were impressed by this entry and made a decision which is fine, but all the other’s want to know is, who was/is the Jury and what process was engaged here ( including the mysterious Audit !).

What is the value of an idea if it cannot be executed?

The objective of the competition was I believe to achieve a point block that complied to very specific requirements such as slenderness ratios and density of use.

There was an obvious conflict between achieving the densities required while holding onto the ratio.

The use of comparative images from the same angle was certainly a step in the right direction for comparative assesment, but this should have been carried further to include a technical 3d rendering (axon, iso). A lot of the CGI images look out of scale to the surroundings or patently unreal (hyper-real?).

A discussion Supramanism and all matters of the expressive zeitgeist would be interesting! but perhaps a little lengthy and certainly in my opinion not with this project as a vehicle!
I do agree that not to be able to execute the idea would be unfortunate, but to say that the contents of 2 A1 panels represents the end- game on “do-ability ” is a rather benign point I think and again represents the clumsiness of the competition process. But , yes, I agree, if the said proposal clearly flaunts the regulations then off with its head! If one is to be critical of the winner then I can but say it lacks the lustre which makes one jump up and say “hey……now I don’t what exactly going on here but it has something…….a presence!” – call me simple but that’s the real mark of a good totem, not whether its staircases work which in this day and age one would expect from any architect worth their salt. I do not belittle the technical discussion but must understand such a project on the level it is presented and question those values in the context of the do-ability. If it doesn’t go out to intellectually challenge then quite frankly I don’t care if the staircases have triple treads and double risers! I would however expect that the authors of a stimulating project would also have the same acumen to achieve the technical issue of execution. That is not to say that all doodles are works of genius and therefore as I opened with, I am not at all sure this situation merits such a hiatus. If this is the norm in Dublin then fine……….onwards and be happy.

The number of fire stairs is NOT a technical detail. It is a basic building component!

This competition was not an “open” competition for concepts. It was a competition open to Architects who should know the basic design components of a building.

My point about questioning this issue in the first place was based in concept. My first concept was to do a slender 4 to 1 tower, but I had to abandon it since I could not get it to realistically work.

If you add a stair to the winning scheme, with its 15m x 15m floorplate, it will not leave enough room for usable area. It therefore will not work. If you use a larger footprint, it will not only change the proportions of the tower, it will violate the Master Plan.

This being a real commission the winner should be evaluated for its ability to be built.

Intermission:
FYI: I added another 3 entries late last night
/ Intermision

If the tower is 15 x 15 metres the total area (including circulation) for the tower will be in the region of 3500 sqm, a long way from the density guidelines indicated in the brief……

And assuming 100% usage over 4 stories (for the “podium”) adds another approximately 3,200 sq m gives a total of 6,700 sqm…… still short and this does not even discount stairs lifts etc. Is this the case….?:

so any news on when/where the exhibit of competitiors will be held?

Did U2 really get the tower it was looking for?

Architectural Competition

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, writes Frank McDonald, Environment Editor

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. Several of the dozens of e-mails to a discussion forum on the Irish architecture website, http://www.archeire.com, were so libellous that they had to be suppressed.

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

“Several of the dozens of e-mails to a discussion forum on the Irish architecture website, http://www.archeire.com, were so libellous that they had to be suppressed.”

this quote has pissed me off – i never suppressed any discussion on this subject… frank is suggesting that there was libellous remarks that i removed…. i’m going to take advice on this….

what an illiterate. surely he means posts to a discussion forum, or entries, or opinions expressed. e-mail? thats so 2002 man.

dont mind advice paul, go kick his editorial ass

I have no argument with Joe the Architect, it is shameful that an Architect is chosen that clearly has not satisfied the rules, and as I said before…………..”off with his head” …but this is now perhaps too late, as the great ones have sent the white smoke and pronounced the result. I do however still further the issue that it was a concept that was required here and one which, raised the spirits, created enigma and set out to challenge ( the rules even!). For me anyhow there is nothing here in this proposal with these 3 attributes; so if it can not satisfy the technical attributes in tandem then it represents very poor judgement and the investor should think about who represents them on a jury for such occasions.

As to debate, hmmmmmmmmmmm perhaps I will stop doing this now, as I do not wish to continue adding to the possibility of making this project any more infamous than it already is.

This entire debacle doesnt merit the debate of whether it has been an ideas or technically based “competition”.
It has been a farcical excercise in incompetance from start to finish, and a humiliation for the DDDA, the architectural profession and its representatives in this country.
There has been justifiable outrage amongst compeditors internationally to discover the “co incidental” Dunne/McGuinness connection, but this has been further exacerbated by the latest revelation that the REAL winner couldnt be traced because the DDDA had lost their details!
This is becoming a very bad Irish joke……..

Must read ALL posts before posting new post.
Sorry for posting that again.
I’m off to make cane myself.

Contradick I don’t think your allowed to post a whole article….it breeches copyright or something.

just tied that up for you contradick

An ideas competition is a competition where the organiser seeks ideas in relation to a project (or issue), whose terms are not finalised, but may be finalised depending on the ideas that the competition identify. From which point a new competition or commission is organised based on those ideas.

An architectural competition (other than ideas) is one where the ideas have been properly formulated and the terms and references for the Brief clearly stated. In this instance certain criteria are identified which must be fulfilled.

In relation to this “competition” (U2) it was presented in a fashion much closer to the latter. It had clear terms of reference for use, density, height (parapet height – usually meaning the last usable floor+balcony/parapet rail), set backs etc..)

There have been too many competitions where the basic premise or conditions of the brief have been ignored or rewritten during the judging process.

For instance during the judging for the “Spire” the jury changed from considering all possibilities (brief) to consider only those that had no access, (climbing, lift, stairs etc.). One of the jury members, in the offical report, indicated that since people had access to “ryanair” there was no need to climb the “tower” to see the city. If that was a basic premise of the competition perhaps there would be a more unified and higher quality response to the problem. Not to mention this change ignored the wonderful opportunites that an occupied tower might have had for the city centre and the ability of its citizens to possess in real terms the public realm.

While “real” comptetitions contain ideas (obviously very important) they are measured by the basis upon which they are judged.

i’m confused….is it being stated ( in the article) that the winning entry has no formal entrance information associated with it? Was it (entrance information) lost by the DDDA, what exactly is he saying?

As a competitor I feel totally naive for not having listened to myself when I wondered why such a prestigous competition did not have a defined jury or a defined process outlined for selecting a winner. Should have seen it coming.

I hope that all you locals can organize some sort of presence when and if they have the exhibit…be nice to have the collective voice heard outside the forum.

Truly a confused result on many levels.

When I first read Contradicts message (several before) I misread it to read, “I’m off to cane myself” !…and I thought, how apt in this singular masochistic scenario ! well, it would beat entering the competition! and indeed echoes that of the last message from b.ray. Truly those that entered the competition have been led a merry dance, by the pied piper( aka DDDA) and if there is some truth to the proposition that another project was actually selected for the winner then , what are we waiting for……..call the lawyers! But who dares to?!

hey you never know : the winning entry form they lost might be Gehry’s

They obviously don’t like his type around here! Anyhow, we have to ask ourselves a global question as architects. Do we wish to continue collecting named architects around the world like Rem Koolhaas, or Gehry now. So we can just say, that is our duty to the city done and dusted. . . A Calatrava at one end, and a Gehry at the other, with an Ian Ritchie in between. This has happened in Europe and the United States, all too often. To the detriment of architecture in general.

The major impulse of the architectural profession seems to be quite similar to the dynamics of media-hyped ‘stars’ now. Like the David Beckam needing the media, and the media needing him.

Just added another five entries to the online gallery…..
http://www.archeire.com/unbuilt_ireland/dublin/u2_tower/index.html

Hearing that the name of the original winner’s were lost and could be not matched to the entry….this whole competition definitely reeks of something fishy………especially when there is a bit of nepotism involved in the end.
Bunch of f*cking monkeys who ran the competition. Have a banana……..

hold on…

so what was portrayed to use as the winner of the contest was not actually the winner of the contest?

this whole deal is sounding less and less reputable every day.

YES…..

“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.

Thus, Felim Dunne’s practice, Burdon Dunne Architects, together with Craig Henry Architects – both based in Blackrock, Co Dublin – emerged as the winners by default. Had the competition been left in the hands of the RIAI, which knows how to organise these things, we would be looking at a different result.” Source: The Irish Times

…….and that’s quoted (I kinda remember) from Frank Mc….is’nt it in the Irish Times.

If what Paul Cherkin writes is «actual» then surely this raises the main question again. Did the organisers comply with the Competition rules or not?
If a «seconded» proposal was selected..how was this achieved?…….it is not however as Paul Cherkin writes ,by default if the mechanism for such a situation is not clearly regulated in the first place by the competition rules.

Can DDDA and/or the reputable Price waterhouse Coopers provide a clear and unambiguous statement to explain this? Surely this is their legal responsibility. Further to this what is RIAI thinking on this issue, do they think on this issue, do they care about this issue ? and if so what is their statement.

Cards on the table, face up please. Perhaps rather optimistic to expect such behaviour but one would think that the fee paying members of the RIAI would seek some lobby. After all it’s there professional body and their right! Or this is to , how do I put it, academic! Probably, but a damn shame !

my apologies Paul…………. for mis-spelling your name!….its Paul Clerkin!

will they at least exhibit the “unknown” winner in mid-september? doubt it, probably lost all the exhibits by now!

what a disgraceful event it was.

This is going to run and run…..
My business partner used to work with frank in the Irish Times and said that Frank was the most meticulous journo in there – very little subbing / correcting of facts to be carried out on his pieces…

today out of interest I asked the DDDA what their position was on the allegations of the lost winner….. from Peter Coyne:

“We are in touch with the Irish Times in connection with the article.
I can say, without equivocation, that there was no administrative or other error on the part of the Authority which affected the outcome of the competition and specifically we did not lose any application forms as suggested. I want to stress that the winning consortium is the true and valid winner and that they won it “fair and square”. I would request that the issues raised erroneously were not given any further airing at all as they are damaging, not only to the Authority, but to the winning architects who deserve congratulations not innuendo.”

So what is the current status? Have the Irish Times retracted their statement or are they standing by it?

The Sunday Times has entered the mix…

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.

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

According to The Sunday Times: “Sources close to the authority confirmed that an early design had been selected but was disqualified because it was invalid.” So much for the Jesuitical DDDA denial to Paul’s enquiry!

For additional details, see With or without you – The competition for the U2 tower in Dublin’s docklands turned into the most lurid farce in Irish architecture for 50 years, writes Shane O’Toole: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2101-821354,00.html

this article also mentioned that the ddda had parted company with benson and forsythe, that’s disappointing, i hadn’t heard and was assuming that this building was going ahead. do they have a replacement design?

Bearing in mind how many international entries there were, and no doubt they havent read this info, I think I’m going to synopsis the articles and post them to the competitions list I maintain…. only 28,000 subscribers 🙂

I think foreign architects who entered need to know….

Also going to email the DDDA for another statement – insert very evil grin here

can someone hook me up with the articles…..I can’t get them from here without a monthly fee. And seeing as I already paid cash to the ddda, I don’t feel like wasting anymore money on this debacle.

many thanks

In reading the summary of the statement from DDDA by Paul Clerkin; such suggestions that the poor lambs who “won” the competition will be “damaged” and the sticks are pointing towards their voodoo doll is a poor attempt to defuse the situation and distract the attention away from the responsibility of the DDDA. IF the DDDA really want to become the innocent party then they must present a FULL disclosure of A: how the jury acted ( in the form of a formal Jury Report/diary signed by all members of the Jury) B: a clear unambiguous explanation of why Price Waterhouse were involved unannounced and late and C: last but not least a complete list of entries, the short-listed projects and a catalogue of the exhibition. Whilst this would not necessarily vindicate the outcome it would at least provide the sceptics that there had been fair play (and on a legal level!)

I just read the article on U2’s site – LOL!!
http://www.atu2.com/news/article.src?ID=3153

so can anyone get their hands on the image of the true winner? Love to see what they really wanted to build.

poor sap forgot to enter, enclose all the required A4 entry information, and pay his entrance fee…. but somehow produced the winning entry, packaged it up and sent it in on time to be judged!!!!
very cinderella – glass slipper anyone?

this is getting really good! keep it coming.

question is will they (ddda) have the guts to show it at the
exhibition (or has it reverted back to a pumpkin) – we haven’t heard much about that event recently, have we.

anyone know when or where this exhibition is to be held?

Between 1.15 and 1.17pm on 23rd October in a secret location by invite only 😉

Somehow I don’t think that any of us will get invites 😉

Ah fuck the cu*ts …..sure I bet the final yoke aka building will fall way short of what was proposed. I hope I am wrong for the sake of Dublin and the docks.

At least the whole business has drummed up a bit of interest!!!,
??Who is the real mystery winner??,
We’ll probably still be discussing it in 30 years time.
We’ll gaze on the twisted tower, just like we do on Liberty Hall now, lamenting what was lost!!! Sigh!!

just thought it might disappear – maybe that’s a good thing?

Emporers new clothes with a twist! with DDDA as the court jester! It’s incredible that the RIAI haven’t made some noises on this issue. Come on chaps , I’m sure your members pay you well to represent issues, yes/no? As to the the DDDA, what a display of arrogance and disgrace. I suppose the jury is sworn to secrecy, but I suspect feel a little guilty ..well they should do!.a shame of an affair and one not good for the profession or the competition as a vehicle for appointing an architect.

Overnight I received a lengthy email from an anonymous source who thinks that they may be the original winner. They had not been contacted by PriceWaterHouseCooper and in some way are in a position to check via an intermediary if the original entry was theirs…

watch this space…..

Oh wow – this is taking on Watergate proportions.

overnight eh? smacks of being a foreignist. anybody placing bets? where’s paddy power?

EL ARCHITINO’s press office has relesed the following statement:

EL ARCHITINO is 84% sure that his was the original winner. the unquestionable beauty of a 600m solid platinum statue of EL ARCHITINO containing no programme and held up using pile foundations (each cut from a 200,000carat rose diomand) is sure to have moved the judges as much as it did EL ARCHITINO.

not forgetting U2 and the little people EL ARCHITINO’s design response to these issues was to put the recording studio below ground and create a viewing platform for the people at the feet of the statue. binoculars would be provided so that EL ARCHITINO’s grace and might may be observed.

the attatched render shows it in context:

EL ARCHITINO’s press office would also like to note that the fact that no one has yet discovered a 200000carat rose diomand shows that like leonardo, he is ahead of his time.

OK, what’s the crack with EL ARCHITINO?

he’s on crack i think…

anyways got another email from the “u2 winner?” – really dunno what to make of this… as a hoaxer I get very paranoid about stuff like this, thinking that people are maybe getting back at me…

this seems authentic enough to me

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

ps. thank you architino!

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 b.ray
poor sap forgot to enter, enclose all the required A4 entry information, and pay his entrance fee…. but somehow produced the winning entry, packaged it up and sent it in on time to be judged!!!!

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

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!

this (see below) was posted on archinect – anyone out there got any clues? seems like a good cause.

what was the nature of their disqualification?

Regarding hopeless in Dublin.
Original U2 Tower winner Disqualified!
If you care.
AND IF ANYONE ELSE DOES
Then please email these people and voice your concerns/opinions/requests for information.
This is a big cover up (within) the architectural community, and the city of Dublin, but ultimately means that U2 will not get the building or Studios that were the first choice of the Jury (including adam clayton) and that the real winner may never be identified.
The Dublin Docklands Development Authority DDDA Who organised and ran the competition (general information)
info@dublindocklands.ie
The DDDA’s appointed Press Agents (White(man?) Associates)
paul@whitepr.net PAUL WHITE
The DDDA’s Lawyers (who advised the jury on this matter) A&L Goodbody
law@algoodbody.ie
The Jury Themeselves.
F.A.O Dr Arthur Gibney (Chairman of the jury)
C/o murphy.p@royalhibernianacademy.com
F.A.O Jim Barrett (Dublin City Architect)
C/o press@dublincorp.ie
PETER COYNE (The Chairman/Chief Executive of the DDDA)
pcoyne@dublindocklands.ie
F.A.O Donall Curtin (Jury Member)
donall@bck.ie
F.A.O Adam Clayton (Jury member)
C/o U2/Principle Management propaganda@numb.ie
F.A.O Joan O’connor (Jury Member) Interactive Project Management Ltd
C/o info@dublindocklands.ie
F.A.O Terry Durney (Jury Member) DDDA
C/o info@dublindocklands.ie
The Royal Institute of the Architects of Ireland
info@riai.ie
Irish Architecture
info@archeire.com
cut and paste into email message.
To
info@dublindocklands.ie, pcoyne@dublindocklands.ie, esmyth@dublindocklands.ie, paul@whitepr.net, law@algoodbody.ie, murphy.p@royalhibernianacademy.com, press@dublincorp.ie, donall@bck.ie, propaganda@numb.ie, info@dublindocklands.ie, info@dublindocklands.ie, info@riai.ie, info@archeire.com
Subject: U2 Tower Dublin Docklands Competition Real Winner.
Message Contents:
I/We demand a fully and published public enquiry into the organisation and running of the Dublin Docklands Development Association competition for a Landmark Tower and U2 studio.
Specific attention should be paid to identifying and revealing the identity of the Original Winner as selected by the Jury. We demand that this entry be published on the DDDA website, and receives the same press attention as the Subsequent Winner (Burdon Dunne/Craig Henry Scheme).And insist that the original winner is included in the Public Exhibition planned to be held in Dublin in Spetember/October 2003.
Signed.
(your name)
Thank you for your help in this.
Please forward this to anyone you feel might be interested, whether they are involved in Architecture or Design, are a Resident of Dublin, Have or will visit Dublin in the Future, Or are simply a U2 fan.

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?????

Surely this is the type of issue members pay the Royal Institute of Architects to sort out? It’s in their interests to ensure professional protocol is maintained and its members represented. Ok, that the academic line and perhaps a little naive to expect but what then are we all doing here? I agree that to lobby all relevant parties is a good one…..perhaps this notice and text ( aka quoted by b.ray) should be published more widely to allow ALL interested parties to participate.

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)

Maybe you should Greg Pallast in to sort this one out!

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

Originally posted by Paul Clerkin
really dunno what to make of this… as a hoaxer I get very paranoid about stuff like this, thinking that people are maybe getting back at me…

this seems authentic enough to me

That Frank McDonald eh? what a prankster.

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

Some interesting entries overall — most of which seem more interesting than the winner.

http://www.irish-architecture.com/unbuilt_ireland/dublin/u2_tower/nmn/index.html
Is more Gotham than Dublin.

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

The request has now been posted to several other sites on the net

Israel
http://www.archijob.co.il/archijob_news/one_news.asp?IDNews=505

Belgium
http://www.nav.be/Archguide/AG_Article.asp?section=article&code=54

Colombia
http://www.arquicol.com/noticias5.htm

The Netherlands
http://www.architectenwerk.nl/box/

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.

please share the list wit us if you can mol
many thanks

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

………..and yes-Paul Clerkin is right….the DDDA have that air of superiority which often surrounds such establishments as it is this air which they consider the bedrock of the establishment. What a shame and disappointing really that such attitudes still exist. There was always something which my mother used to say………. something about virtue……….not here I fear!

The short list is a bit mysterious since it does not appear on the DDDA web site. What is the progeny of the list? And yes, post it…..

I have received illustrations which I believe to be the original design that they selected – I have contacted the jury for comments (early this morning) – no denials or comments forthcoming….

watch this space

and btw if you haven’t visited the online expo recently, we now have over seventy concepts on display… still more to come..

Exhibition of U2 Entries
9-19 October 2003
Excise Walk North Wall Quay IFSC
Mon-Sat 11.00-5.00
Sun 12.00 -5.00

Ok.
so is it public or is it invite only.
Are all entrants invited.
are they going to reveal the “mystery winner”?
If they dont comment, are people prepared to protest.
There was an article in bd yesterday by charlie gates.

dont think its online.

but email cgates@cmpinformation if you want a copy of it/dont get the magazine in ireland?

where did you get this information?

i cant find anything on the DDDA website??

have you been invited?

Received a picture post card with details of the exhibit on the back in the post today

Shadow

Were you an entrant?
Is there a private view/opening party?

No information about an opening party or launch indicated in the envelope or on the card. Yes I was an entrant in the competition.

Somehow I’m fairly certain I won’t get invited to taste the DDDA’s wine selection 😉
Great that the exhibition is finally happening though.

Paul maybe an official invitee could get you in as their partner???

can you guys print up t-shirts with the “winning” scheme and attend – it would be a great! They could have the words ” got screwed ” above the rendering and then the back could be large letters that say ” U2? “

i like collaborating – that works too, and is much better with the insertion of local context/culture…..can we keep the back of the tee spare and questioning?

“U2 Brute”

EL ARCHITINO has considered the idea of a witty comment on a t-shirt and has come to the conclusion that this is a vulgar approach to the situation.

EL ARCHITINO proposes an alternative and perhaps more subtle way of expressing the dismay of the architectural comunity to the DDDA. the entire area of dublin docklands should be carpet bombed repeatedly until it is a pile of dust. then we will acquire as many signatures from the public to put pressure on the DDDA to reveal the real winner (which is of course EL ARCHITINO).

EL ARCHITINO has amassed a formidable fleet of B52 bombers and eurofighter jets in case this situation ever arose.

b ray

collaborate away

If paul has the images of the winner and posts them on the boards then people can download it and make their own iron on patch and make their own t shirt with their own slogan.
Or just add it on with marker pen

we could do keyrings aswell!

a couple of hundred people doing this would definitely make an impact at the opening night.

But i guess they are keeping that highsecurity and invited guests only as no doubt the band members will be there?????

Whens the grand opening?

On the thursday?

could make an interesting evening

el architino – vulgar, yes I agree. but it would be elevated to the heights of couture style beneath your white suede suit – please reconsider.

Thats funny
But what makes you think you can change your status to saying “the real u2 tower winner”

i think you should offer some proof or get to the back of the queue!

do not pass go and do not collect EURO 12,000

or your EURO 100 entry fee refund!

Is Paul the infamous elarchitino.

If so

I really like your biro designs/cartoons

you should try and get a weekly strip in an architecture/design magazine

reason i suspect this is i have tried to change my “status” and have not been able to:
It seems you need an administrator to do this.

And i dont believe that he is “the real u2 tower winner”

but he does not accept emails
or personal messages

and he only joined the forum in September!

Nope…. i’m not elarchitino, I don’t have the time… and since I discovered computers, I’ve lost the ability to draw freehand.. elarchitino is a very welcome breath of fresh air…

i’ll post how to change your status

https://archiseek.com/content/showthread.php?s=&postid=16538#post16538

thanks paul
but now i only have nine posts!

ok
so now i should be able to get promoted from a junior member!
coming of age

i
am
a
senior
member
nah
nah
na
naaaah
na

Just added some more entries this morning to the online gallery.

I believe that The Sunday Times is publishing another piece tomorrow on the competition and the design which we think was the entry that the DDDA was trying to determine the authorship of.

101 Entries Shortlisted for Exhibition

Whatever happened the Gehry submission?

No idea, but if it was described as “experimental” they probably didn’t want it exhibited… or it was worse than 101 entries….

edit – hadn’t read the list when i posted this….

Sounds like these guys are from/work for FOG???

No. 168
Edwin Chan & Graig Webb
Gehry Partners, LLP
Los Angeles
U.S.A.

Whats the deal with the missing box/entry. between no 57a and no 61. could be nothing. BUt it doesnt make sense that its there?

How many of these entries do you have on line in the gallery?

after seeing the commended designs……do i want to see the “mystery winner”? anyone who thinks they’ve seen
it let me know what you think of it.

apparently its one of the ones that has been exhibited in the gallery!

you will just have to wait for the times article tommorrow.

or take your pick

not sure if ithas taken it down though????

it seems there should be something on the times website tommorow though

can someone with access to the times give us less fortunate souls a taste of the article tomorrow….many thanks

patience is a virtue, and i think you will just have to wait.

not sure if it comes online at midnight or in the early morning

go do something esle for a couple of hours.

play frisbee
have dinner
walk your dog

Some really dire entries in there too…..some lost architects out there as well.
Some presentations are really horrible with overly dramatic skies with acidic sunsets or stormy clouds, sail boats, seagulls and all sorts trying to add to or camouflage the basically shite designs.

https://archiseek.com/content/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2385

I’m getting used to looking at the winning entry…..however I wish that they remodel the roof and cap the building off more strikingly.
I think it does n’t look good at the mo.