Reply to comment

On sports and competitions

A talk between Atanas Tosev – Deputy Chair of the Chamber of Architects and author of the Regulation on Architectural Competitions, approved by the Parliament; Martin Zaimov – Deputy Chair of the Sofia Municipal Council; Ivaylo Petkov from Studio Deset; and Peter Torniov from Abitare

Abitare Sports and architectural competitions share some common characteristics. They teach a spirit of emulation and usually winner becomes the person who plays by the rules and gives the best result. At the end of 2008, the Ministry of Physical Education and Sports (back then, it was a State Agency) announced an architectural competition on the basis of the Public Procurement Act which was in force back then – the competition concerned a new multifunctional sports hall in Sofia and was severely criticized by both the Chamber of Architects and the Union of Architects in Bulgaria, and by architects in general. How the competition was held, who were the participants and what are the results?
Ivaylo Petkov The participants are Orion Insaat Decoracio Limited – Istanbul, Interproject MAA Ltd. and an association between Studio Deset Ltd – Sofia and Hok Sport limited – London. We, from Studio Deset, registered an association with the prominent design company Hok Sport in Sofia and London. We were forced to do that because of the enormous requirements which the participants in the competition had to meet. In practice, the criteria prevented Bulgarian designers from participating without the help of a big international company.

…………………………………

Atanas Tosev I do not know what that is called but restricting the access of participation in a competition is the most important issue. Whether one would pose requirements which make participation impossible, or one would set deadlines which make preparing a design impossible, whether one would set an impossible price, or whether some special engineering is done, some procedures circumvented – that is a problem.
MZ I agree, but because I have also been on the other side of the barrier, I could tell you that there are projects for which it is rational, I do not say just, but rational, to restrict people. This might seem strange to you, but by restricting people one increases competition and quality. I have organized competitions in Public Administration here, knowing that there were four significant competitors and it was rational to organize a high-quality competition between the four of them, by discussing with them the details for months on end, instead of just saying: Everybody can come and participate...

…………………………………………………….

AT The previous Parliament added article 94, paragraph 3 in the Act stating that the competitions in investment design and spatial planning will be conducted in compliance with a special Regulation of the Council of Ministers. This Regulation was announced last year through Decree 75 but cannot be enforced for a single reason – that the Public Procurement Agency does not want to develop an announcement form because they do not like the Regulation. Art. 94, par. 3 of the PPA states that competitions for spatial planning and investment design are only organized under the Regulation. The Act makes a reference to the Regulation. The regulation was developed on that basis. The Public Procurement Agency does not like the contents of the Regulation and obviously they do not want us to organize competitions according to it, that is why an announcement has not been prepared yet. I have also sent letters to Minister Traykov and Minister Plevnaliev about this issue because they were among the people who initiated the change.
MZ I see, but our conversation, as well as all the important conversations in our society, would only be meaningful if it leads to the answer of an issue in general, and not if it quotes some particular court or administrative decrees or the lack of a given form. There seems to be a fundamental issue here. All the time, whenever a public issue is discussed, many absurd explanations occur. I am trying to figure out what the fundamental issue is? Does it lie in the circle of architects, in the Members of Parliament, or in the Minister?