sw101
Forum Replies Created
- Posts
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
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
i was speaking something-itacally. what i meant was similar to bluefoams point. they were aware of the unique situation in this development, and went ahead and bought anyway. they made a conscience decision to join this community and now they’ve realised the reality of it and are whingeing.
we all wish the world was full of considerate, easy-going people, but then we’ve all lived in dublin so reality has bitten at this stage. maybe they deluded themselves or fell for the developers spiel before buying. but i think its def a valid point, how are they going to sell the things now?
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
what did the private buyers expect exactly? to buy a fancy pad on a council estate and then all of a sudden their distuinguished prescence would bring all the poor peons up to there level where they would teach their kids to play nice and be good?
i’m bit baffled by the whole excercise. social inclusion is a strange buzzword flying about. anyone know who was the instigator?designer?
what a bunch of pricks. telling five year olds to fuck off and play across the road. none of this should ever be an issue. all the rubbish architects spout about being able to solve social issues and alleviating the stresses of social division means nothing when a simple thing thing like children at play isnt accounted for
europe eh? didnt realise that . wasnt very old back then. the riai did definitely threaten to remove accreditaation. maybe just meaning they wouldnt accept a dip arch from dit as a valid part 2, which would be terrible.
dunno whether you’ve been in bolton street recently but study isnt a huge part of anyones life in the years preceeding thesis year. subjects like the defunct civilisation studies and urbanism are a joke. no benefit to anyone except the full time lecture who can spout the same shit and get paid.
thing like design technology and sustainable design are beginning to be integrated to studio proper, giving a more well rounded finish to the students academic experience
i attend bolton street and the riai quintennial review is ther only reason any effort is made by senior staff to improve the standard even slightly. massive classes, poor lecturing, lack of facilities, entrenched permanent staff with no ability to relate to modern architecture and young people, coupled with the fact that its a job for life where one is completely unaccountable. d.i.t is like c.i.e in that it needs a good kick up the hole and some money.
god bless the riai in that respect because they threatened to withdraw approval of the course if things didnt improve.this was too much for eddie and jim and god bless em they pulled the finger out, for about five minutes. incapable leadership and institutionalisation has degraded the course far below its esteemed position of times past.
sorry, hobbyhorse of mine because i’m affected by it.
the riai do a job well, clearly defining there boundaries and governing their small domain in this country. like i said, its a hundred people a year out of two colleges and the riai are doing ok.
i agree that a degree in architecture has so much potential. personally, i have aspirations to law after my degree. lawyerkiteck i will be. and i can walk into any course in the land with my degree if i choose. this degree will merely be a stepping stone to wherever i want to go. the riai provide one choice, facilitation to progress and be examined and awarded with their approval. if i choose to become an abstract sculptor of steel at a massive scale like i wanted to do in school, thats open to me aswell.
given that architecture is such a wide subject with so many varied fields i dont think its fair to blame the riai for pigeon-holing people.
the challenge of improving architects in ireland is going to be left to the riai for a while as far as i can see. the colleges dont seem interested, handing it to the government seems like a terrifying option, and the riai has been doing it for 164 years, why stop now?
nah nah na nah nah!!
what defines membership and senior membership? i was a junior member til recently. now i just feel downright slightly important.
with regards ur comment bluefoam, you’re right to draw comparisons. the solutions can be equated also. so long as consideration to impact is given, adequate provision is made for them, and people are willing to accept their necessity, mass transport and mass housing can both thrive.
dont get me started on the rail network. i was waiting for 45 minutes at mallow the other day for the engine to disconnect, chug up to the other end of the track, and pull us in the other direction towards tralee. during this time there were three guys standing on the platform with gloves and shiny jackets on chatting. the entire time!! had they nothing else to do in a broken down station where fwek all seems to work and nothing runs on time. these guys are the reason it wud cost me 58 euro, i’ll say it again 58 EURO!!! to get to dublin and back if i didnt have my usit card. these are the ppl who do shag all all day then claim overtime because they didnt get to finish all there outstanding work. these guys are the reason coras iompar eireann should be ripped apart and do the chaff wheat thing, then reassemble an efficient progressive body with enthusiastic and capable workers who do a fair days work. get michael o’leary in charge if needs be.
as for big trucks, in this era of environmental conscience it makes good sense to send two guys in two trucks 1000 miles rather than three guys in three trucks 1000 miles. modern supertrucks are relatively efficient with fuel and efforts are always being made to make them cleaner and more eco-friendly. using power under braking etcetera. i dont think “we’ve managed alright so far” is going to get us anywhere. if it aint broke dont fix it is fine but if it aint broke i dont think we should hold back from tinkering with it and tweaking it into a competitive machine (where have all the metaphors gone?)
i’m not arguing with that. there should be input and some controlling power from people in law, construction, insurance, etc, just to give them some input. but these are pretty self-contained areas themselves. if there was to be a controlling body it would be criminal to not appoint established architects as well as ppl outside the profession to its new positions. inevitably these ppl would be riai affiliated, and would serve only to spread the base of power and weaken the positions of authority already in place for architects. the riai’s charter is quite clear and defined. clarification might just be refining the actions of the body in disputes and awarding etc., for example more stringent reviews of college courses which are the generators of good architects, and the first point at whcih standards can be policed, which i would welcome. they make no bones about their protection of architects, an inevitably clients, contractors etcetera will come in second to that.
who are these ppl who cant work within the riai view as it is? i dont mean to demean anyones position but there are clearly established structures as to how one can progress in architecture in ireland. if there are fundamental flaws in the degree or part three procedures then these should be revised of course. but if its just a matter of not liking the riai because it doesnt suit you i’m not sure thats a falid arguement.
i welcome the discussion though
doesnt this country realise that bertie is a gormless idiot that is doing us harm over good? i’ve heard him quoted as saying “i dont want those huge things in my constituency” with regard supertrucks that are coming into ireland with trade goods and above all else money. solution a la bertie and co? build a tunnel to let them mole it out of the city (surprisingly good idea), but build it too small so that the super super trucks cant use it (bad idea), thereby forcing them onto the roads of north dublin city again. solution a la bertie and co? propose to limit the height of trucks enterring this country all together. limiting trade, excluding certain markets, importers, suppliers, and sending this lucrative rolling stock and its trade to britain, where ppl are clever enough to accept it.
bertie
shortsighted
clumsy
bad leader
(sorry, my dads in the truck trade and i had to listen to his rant, so now you do too :))i know its off the point but who else finds the whole georgina ahern and fuckhead nicky thing a bit annoying. leave them go to france, do what the hell they want. the little guy can well afford it and i’d rather he stayed there and sang his rubbish tunes to destroy french egos forever!!
but the riai could be a government appointed accrediting body surely? royal charter. self sustained and progressive, unlike most institutions. there for the good of its members. i dont think handing over the reins to a bertie appointed committee would be a good idea. for a country with fewer than 100 new architects qualifying per annum and a decent level of education among them, i dont see why we cant be a self governening profession.
i’m not clear exactly what sort of structure you’re talking about. diversity may just lead to a fall in standards and a breakup of the profession. some ppl see fit to stick to riai, some decide to go to the newly appointed GBFTAWTD (government boys for telling architects what to do). gdla contracts become limited to one membership. ppl kick up stink. standards vary and diminish. i’m open to any ideas to make the practice methods and certification of architects in this country more uniform and consistent, but i’m not sure the riai are doing such a bad job. and i do think think its a shame their members dont enjoy more exclusivity and recognition
as far as i know any gdla contract (government department local something or other) can only be made with a member of the riai. i think this is only fair seeing as membership isnt overly difficult to achieve for a competent architect, and major projects for national bodies should be excecuted to a high degree of excellence because in most cases trhe buildings can be large, on important sites, and can affect the lives of people more so than little suburban buildings.
also on that point, i dont think its correct that any old joe can design and certify a building with little or no relevant experience or qualifications. i had the misfortune to get a job with an “architect” who was qualified as a corporate surveyor and sfa else. as you can imagine there wasnt a lot of discussion on conceptual development or detailed analysis of the brief when a job came in. god help me.
i think in a lot of countries its illegal to advertise as an architect without the proper accreditation, like you said. shady on details here but as a general principal i think its only right. compare it to the medical profession, where a job must be done right by the correct personnel or the implications are serious. you cant have a nurses station full of people calling themselves doctor cause they feel like it and can demand higher fees.
ok. i lay down in my clinical white box which i built atop the rubble of some georgian kip that used to site here. damn it was inspiring. what ever happened to naz? at least he was amusing
exactly. why? listing isnt an obstacle to growth and expression. you quoted scotland as an example. take edinburgh. buildings on princes street have been gutted and facaded retained for good reasons. the character of the city should be retained. all that fabulous stone with centuries of weathering creating a great patina on the stone faces of all those buildings. would you like to see scotts memorial destroyed so that some wanker can stick up a 120metre spike in its place? in that same city, by the queens house (holyrood) the new contreversy-ridden parliament building is under construction. behind that is the dynamic earth pavilion with its great tensile structure. these buildings are inventive, creative, and add to the character of the city, but should never be used as an excuse to rip away centuries of accumulated urban fabric (pardon the buzzword).
ireland is a little island with a hell of a lot of green fields. in a few of these fields are big old houses which used to have rich silly english ppl in them, poking oirish yokels with sticks. if there is a possibility that these buildings may add to the country, preserve much needed cultural heritage, and make a few quid out of fat stupid american pockets, then consideration must be given to keeping them.
curse duchas and an taisce all you like but they are simply expressing a point of view that many ppl in this country hold. more power to them (maybe not, and less power to planners too. why arent architects in government?)
