Let me add a comment from Joe Gill of Goodbody Stockbrokers from this mornings Examiner (a very good article). You'll note he's not saying it's not a nice building, just that for the money involved it could have been better (definition of better in this case: something that will be productive and fit for purpose for many years to come, not something nice to look at)
"We have previously argued the new terminal at Cork Airport was a poor use of capital. New low cost terminals are being built in the US (by GE) and Europe, that can manage larger passenger volumes at least 50% cheaper than the cost of the new Cork cathedal".
To be clear, so I don't get mugged, I'm not saying the terminal shouldn't have been nicely designed, or a pleasure to look at. Just that they didn't get the balance of priorities right between function and form.