Madam, – Who advised the ESB in drawing up the parameters for an international architectural competition which includes an entry threshold based on turnover and an adjudication process which totally misunderstands the fundamentals of the design process? (“Architects may complain to Brussels over design contest”, June 2nd).
If the ESB is looking for competently designed buildings to replace its building stock in Fitzwilliam Street, there are well-established processes in place eg advertising seeking competent firms to undertake such work, selecting a firm following interviews, short-listing etc. Under any of these processes, the ESB would get from the architectural profession a reasonable and efficient building, and there are buildings all over Ireland that are testimony to this.
However, as your report states, the ESB has decided (on advice, presumably) that an international competition is the way to go. This would be wonderful were it not for the selective criteria it has applied and the aberrant adjudication process it has conceived. The entry requirement of an annual turnover of €2.5 million is not only downright exclusionary but it also fails to understand what an open competition can achieve.
In the adjudication process, the ESB has decided that there could be up to three winners, with provision for the ESB (in its wisdom) to pick parts of each winning design to be included in the overall building. To my knowledge this has never occurred before, and one wonders how much does the ESB understand about the design process and the making of buildings. The judgment of Solomon comes to mind.
Should design quality and excellence depend on a company’s turnover? If yes, then the following buildings – all products of open architectural competitions – would never have seen the light of day: Sydney Opera House, Pompidou Centre (Paris), La Grande Arche (Paris), the Great Library of Alexandria (Egypt), the Grand Egyptian Museum (Cairo) and the extension to the National Library in Stockholm. Incidentally, the Egyptian museum project was won by a young dynamic architectural practice from Dublin. And there are many more examples.
This is a pivotal time in the re-making of our country. Times are tough for everybody and my profession is no different than any other. This was surely an opportunity for the ESB to show vision and foresight, another “Ardnacrusha moment” for a new departure for architecture in this sensitive area of Dublin. It would appear that this is not to be and that the ESB has gone the route of mediocrity. – Yours, etc,