It is ironic that Bord Pleanala's decision to reject the high-rise scheme for George's Quay in Dublin was made on the closing date for tenders from consultants for a skyline study to establish what locations in the city could take highrise buildings.
The fact that it is the appeals board's third successive rejection of schemes for the Docklands area on grounds of height and bulk should send a powerful message to the development lobby that skyscraper projects are premature, pending the outcome of the study.
Though the massive scheme for Spencer Dock, including the National Conference Centre, is currently under appeal and now falls to be determined by Bord Pleanala, its George's Quay decision sets a clear marker for Dublin Corporation's skyline study.
Because what this study should do is to lay out a level playing field on which the whole issue of height in urban design terms can be judged. This is of particular importance in relation to the impact on historic buildings and precincts, as well as residential areas.
There was an extraordinary consensus in the George's Quay planning appeal that the objectors were not opposed to high buildings per se; it was the location, so close to the Custom House, Trinity College and the city centre that was the real problem with this scheme.
As An Taisce has said, the board's decision vindicates the stance taken by the corporation's chief planning officer, Mr Pat McDonnell, and can simultaneously be seen as a rebuke for city architect, Mr Jim Barrett, who recommended permission be granted.
It is also an endorsement of the more conservative approach of the Dublin Docklands Development Authority (DDDA) 1997 master plan was cited by the appeals board in its decision. The DDDA's view was the height of the scheme would be "extremely disruptive".
The Cosgrave Property Group is said to have been shocked by the board's decision, though nobody was available for comment yesterday. It had been counting on the dramatic design by Skidmore Owings and Merill (SOM) to carry the day.
To some extent, it may also call the developer's bluff. It had argued that SOM's "towers of light" were preferable to the "portals of darkness" of an earlier scheme for the site by Keane Murphy Duff, which was granted in 1991 with a 10-year validity.
Given the changing needs of the office market, as well as the passage of time, it seems improbable that it will simply start building the 1991 scheme, which would provide a cluster of seven office blocks in the middle of the site and two more on its Moss Street perimeter.
If it is a case of "back to the drawing boards", it should be possible to devise a low-rise, high-density scheme for the site to provide a more appropriate urban design "fit". Whether SOM would be interested in taking on this challenge is an open question at this stage.
Certainly, the project architect, Mr Roger Duffy, who is based in New York, was taken aback by the level and ferocity of the opposition to his high-rise proposal at Bord Pleanala's four-day oral hearing last month. "This would never have happened in the US," he said.
Ms Mary Bryan of the Irish Georgian Society said the George's Quay case had underlined the need for Dublin Corporation to adopt a strategic height policy as soon as possible. If this was done with full public consultation, it might even be possible to make it stick.
In the meantime, the next battleground is Spencer Dock.