ArchDaily | Broadcasting Architecture Worldwidethe world's most visited architecture website
i

Sign up now and start saving and organizing your favorite architecture projects and photos

i

Find the most inspiring products for your projects in our Product Catalog.

i

Get the ArchDaily Chrome Extension and be inspired with every new tab. Install here »

h

Nominate now the Building of the Year 2017 »

All
Projects
Products
Events
Competitions
  1. ArchDaily
  2. Projects
  3. Houses
  4. Ireland
  5. O’Connor + Shanahan architects
  6. House 656 / O’Connor + Shanahan architects

House 656 / O’Connor + Shanahan architects

  • 01:00 - 7 June, 2009
House 656 / O’Connor + Shanahan architects
House 656 / O’Connor + Shanahan architects

House 656 / O’Connor + Shanahan architects House 656 / O’Connor + Shanahan architects House 656 / O’Connor + Shanahan architects House 656 / O’Connor + Shanahan architects +8

From the architect. Michael O'Connor sent us this single family house designed by Garry Miley for a rural site in Tipperary, Ireland. O'Connor + Shanahan architects prepared the detail drawings, brought the project to Tender and onto site for the clients due to Garry's commitments at the time.

The concept of the house was quite simple with a regular pitched roof form building to the roadside which housed the sleeping areas of the dwelling. Behind this building is placed another simple timber clad box structure which provides the living areas for the family taking in the fantastic views afforded by the site.

Cite: "House 656 / O’Connor + Shanahan architects" 07 Jun 2009. ArchDaily. Accessed . <http://www.archdaily.com/21152/house-656-o%25e2%2580%2599connor-shanahan-architects/>
Read comments

37 Comments

bathroom remodeling contractor · March 25, 2014

Excellent goods from you, man. I've be aware your stuff prior to and you're simply extremely great.

I really like what you have obtained right here, certainly like what you are stating and the best way in which
you are saying it. You are making it enjoyable and
you continue to care for to stay it smart.
I cant wait to learn much more from you. That is actually a
great web site.

sTEO · August 14, 2009

Just doesn't work as a scheme........

Ito · June 14, 2009

well I think it happens everywhere

panamArq · June 13, 2009

please please please dont call this irish architecture....irish architects are much better than this

JKA · June 13, 2009

I think its understated but , better than a lot of you appreciate. Because your use to arbitary designs from Zaha etc and think thats real architecture , when all it's just messing about on a computer ! Clearly you need to look at more Irish Architecture !

PanamArq · June 12, 2009

hey, at least it is better than the brazil pavilion!
I think the last image is hilarious, the side elevation....its on a hill? really??

IP freely · June 12, 2009

some of the comments on this have been disappointing. it might be better to analysis the project, rather than defend it.

NevilleNeville · June 10, 2009

I am a regular visitor to this site and am amazed at the incensed comments that have resulted from the
posting of this inoffensive domestic project from Ireland. The project might not be architecturally astounding but it certainly has architectural sensibility in its design and also seems to be a worthy interpretation of a client’s brief. Whether the architect had a concept has been questioned, when this couldn’t be clearer from the information posted, a solid traditional block houses the sleeping areas with a simple single space timber box providing the living areas. The solution is understated and though it may not be everyone’s cup of tea certainly seems undeserving of adjectives such as ‘muck’, ‘trash’, ‘monstrosity’. I agree with Katsudon that the material presented doesn’t do it any favours.

The choice that all readers of the site have is to move onto the next post on the site and onto another project that appeals to them . The best analogy I can make is that the site is like a box of chocolates and one will generally choose a chocolate they like from the box and enjoy it as opposed to complaining that the chocolate that they dislike shouldn’t be in the box.

dingdangdong · June 10, 2009

Unfortunately this kind of muck is all too common in the Irish countryside. Its interesting that its provoked such a hostile response and such a pity that the planning authority didn't take a similar view. If you think this is bad do not go to Ireland - there are approx half a million of these monstrocities lurking about.

Katsudon · June 09, 2009

The project isn't bad actually! I don't understand that the negative comments focus on the project quality! Any small studio that is able to complete this (i don't mean technically but getting the project from a client and complete it) should be proud to run its business without doing crappy projects that most of us need to do to survive. Yes this is also architecture and it's a face of the job that exist and when it's correctly done, why to be so snobbish? This said, i think that if the architect (?) had provided better material about the project it would be considered with better eyes maybe? Those pictures and super compressed jpg floor plan really don't serve the project!!

Sadia Hayat · June 09, 2009

thoroughly impressed by the number of comments this trash has recieved................ hey whats happening ........

David Basulto [tricky] · June 09, 2009

Dear Terry,

Of course we edit this :)

I think that ArchDaily should also feature architecture that is not considered "astonishing". These buildings can also teach something. Maybe not to you, but i´m very sure that it will to someone.

As you said, a printed publication might not feature this. But we are not a printed magazine, or a magazine turned into a website. We are a community of architects discussing and sharing. I've had enough praising HdM/OMA/etc on the printed magazines attracting dust in my room. And i think you are also tired of that.

JuanLuisBurke · June 09, 2009

Well Terry, no, you don't get it straight, I believe that one thing is to edit the content of the web page, which is not your job or mine, and another very different is to project bashing. It's all too easy to do the latter, as you well know, but is that the purpose of this website? If you do not want to see "mediocre" projects, then why don't you propose yourself as editor of the website?
In the meantime I think that ridiculing the work of a fellow architect, as mediocre as it may be, is just too easy, but how many of us have the courage to display our work in here?

Terry Glenn Phipps · June 09, 2009

Juan, let me see if I can get this straight. You say that projects that commentators don't like attract negative commentary from those self-same commentators who don't like those projects? You're right, that is just appalling. We all must of just never thought of it that way before. Thank you for waving the wand of enlightenment.

In the future we should all confine our praise for mediocrity and save the ire for that which happens to be anything other. That is innovative thinking.

Here I was foolishly thinking that the equitable and kind proposition was to not just publish projects willy nilly but rather to actually edit the content of the site. Thus you would be less inclined to have to avert your eyes from the uninformed sans experience of kitchen remodeling.

JuanLuisBurke · June 09, 2009

It's becoming common practice in this website to shred to pieces projects that do not enjoy a lot of popularity among the commentators. I think it sucks. While I do not think this project is spectacular, I do hate the pretentious and overly critical shreds of "wisdom" coming from architectural students who have never even done a kitchen remodeling.

This is a decent project and we can all learn a thing or two from practically any project showcased in this website.

Lukasz Prazuch · June 09, 2009

I would like to comment, but it would be outrageous to kick the lying person, so instead I would like to ask you T.G. Phipps to share the tuna casserole recipe, as its not Gourmet magazine.

Terry Glenn Phipps · June 08, 2009

No one said anything about celebrity. It is equally narrow minded to dismiss the work of Charles Gwathmey because he is famous as it would be to dismiss the work of XYZ architect because he or she is not. The discussion ought to revolve around architecture not fame, not budget, and not place.

This project is home remodeling. It may have been done by a licensed architect, but the scope of the project is not really architectural in any way. That is not a judgement about size because a bus shelter can be spectacular architecture. For lack of a better definition I suppose the point revolves around the aspirations of the architect and the client. Is this a collaboration in the interest of defining new spaces or is it enclosing the garage to make create a boudoir for the missus?

If this were a print magazine about architecture the odds of this project being included would be astronomical. The owners would exercise some degree of editorial control and try to provide content of interest to their readers. The rules of the internet seem different, but they aren't. Posting this kind of material is a losing proposition.

Finally, it has to be awfully painful for anyone to have posted this and then read the subsequent commentary; nearly universally brutal. It is no kindness to publish material that might have an audience in a home remodeling blog on a site with serious architectural pretensions. What exactly is the expected result?

God forbid my recipe for trailer-park tuna casserole should ever make it into Gourmet magazine. Tuna casserole is a guilty pleasure best enjoyed with people who appreciate it for what it is.

2MACoff · June 08, 2009

?? ??????? ????? ???????...

sander · June 08, 2009

i can't say i really like the project;
not very spatial, not very beautiful.
BUT
i can say that i still like it more then the main topic on archdaily, because it's SIMPLE.
no star-architecture, based on artificial koolhaaslike-concepts
just appreciating the most basic and essential thing; dwelling (or wonen in dutch)
of course there are way more inspiring and beautiful houses that still celebrate 'the living' instead of their author star architect
my tip: mjvanhee.be

greets
Sander

BROSALIN · June 07, 2009

?????? ? ???????. ????????

IP freely · June 07, 2009

i think you can get this as a flatpack from ikea...... excluding all the furniture obviously....

INawe · June 07, 2009

Uh... symmetrical box of boring-ness. i bet we could all build this one in a weekend. :P

Lucas Gray · June 07, 2009

To me its the floor plan that doesn't make sense. There are 5 bedrooms and not a single one has an en suite bathroom. What looks to be the master bedroom has a door that opens directly into a tight are with a corner of the closets sticking out. It is across the main circulation space from the only bathroom with a shower (perhaps the strange walk in closet off the top of the room is meant to be a bathroom but they never finished the drawings?).

I actually don't mind the exterior aesthetics. It is definitely nothing profound or remarkable but it is simple and understated. The interiors on the other hand are horridly plain and boring.

In defense of Archdaily...all architecture should be shown here, not just projects by starchitects. There are plenty of hidden gems that could be interesting to some people even if many others think the design is worthless.

heaven · June 07, 2009

The bad made wooden extension sits the old ugly house excactly in front of the nose! Unbelievable - what did the architect think? A concept could have been to make the extension looking same ugly (instead of wood in plaster) as the excisting part!

IP freely · June 07, 2009

i thought that i would never say something like this, but here goes. in ireland they say about 50% of architects are now unemployed. well, maybe this practice should join them. sorry guys.
harsh!

IP freely · June 07, 2009

have a look at the forth picture down. you can see the kitchen sink waste pipe. where's the detailing????? ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!

moma · June 07, 2009

that wooden box looks like the architect did what the client needed to have....no ambiance at all! a pitty

mrd · June 07, 2009

How can you build a terrasse with a bannister around if the garden sits allmost on the same level??? what bad "archtecture" !

IP freely · June 07, 2009

This is bad! Very Bad! This website is loosing it's grip on quality control.
Somebody do us all a favour, and remove this. I thought that Irish architecture was a growing skill that we have evolved over the last couple of decades. Now it looks like it's back to the stone age....

blc · June 07, 2009

the extension looks about the same boring as the excisting part....what was the concept of the extension?

Design Metafeed · June 07, 2009

#architecture House 656 / O’Connor + Shanahan architects:
Michael O’Connor sent us this sing.. http://bit.ly/SX2Uk

fran · June 07, 2009

I understand not everything is zaha hadid and her boring fluid shapes, or Zumthor and his excellent silence, but this? this is a remodelling that anyone could have done...

Terry Glenn Phipps · June 07, 2009

I don't get it at all. Is anyone editing these postings? This is a quick road to losing a following of people genuinely interested in architecture. This may be perfectly nice and make some family happy, but it is pedestrian remodeling and absolutely nothing more. May we please return to architecture?

roadkill · June 07, 2009

i guess for Tipperary it is quite exciting building... the photos are not fantastic so could do with maybe more detail drawings?

JW · June 07, 2009

more or less boring? nothing special?

mauro · June 07, 2009

???

thomas foral · June 07, 2009

House 656 / O’Connor + Shanahan architects http://bit.ly/xDruB (via @archdaily)

···

Comments are closed

Read comments

House 656 / O’Connor + Shanahan architects