U2 studio entries

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.

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.

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

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.

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 !

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.

what is it similar to?

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.

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.

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.