Anna Bondar: "Architectural competitions are competitions for projects of our future"

Honored architect of Ukraine Anna Bondar, who is the coordinator of the "Coordinating Center for Cooperation with the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine", is currently actively working with a team of Ukrainian competition organizers on proposals to introduce changes to the legislation governing the conduct of architectural competitions. Last year, she published the book "Architectural Competitions and Territorial Development Competitions: Democracy in Action", in which she described the results of more than 30 architectural competitions held in Ukraine in the period 2007-2017.

In an interview with PRAGMATIKA.MEDIA, Anna Bondar answered in detail questions that naturally arise after scandals that accompany the process and results of architectural competitions, or scandals that were provoked by the very fact of the absence of a competitive procedure.

PRAGMATIKA.MEDIA: When we were preparing an article about the EXPO 2020 national pavilion project, we, of course, turned to the Ministry of Economic Development with a request for an interview. But the employees of the Ministry limited themselves to a written official response, in which they report that, in addition to the first tenders, two more tenders will be held - for the design and for the creation of the interior design, and it is still not clear whether these will be open tenders or a competition. Is it normal that the design of the pavilion takes place in several rounds, is this a common practice?

Anna Bondar: No, this is not normal practice. Ukrainian legislation determines that the process must be supervised by a certified architect, the main project architect (GAP), who is responsible for all stages of the design. In legislation, this function is called "general designer". He is obliged to ensure a complete and continuous process from the moment of creation of the concept to the moment when the working documentation is fully ready. The design process is divided into lots, especially not even by stages, but by sections (architectural solution and interior design) - this cannot be done, succession must be observed and the architect's copyright must be taken into account. But judging by the response from the Ministry, this is exactly what they intend to do.

"Stone, Flower, Water" is a project submitted to the international competition of ideas for the development of the "Babiy Yar" park at the request of the Ukrainian Jewish Encounter, 2016. Authors: Ieva Baranauskaite, Yang Wang, Denmark

Ideally, the customer should have held an architectural competition, since it is a project of national importance, but he went down the path of holding open tenders. It is not clear who was appointed as the general designer. "Promfininvest" company has developed a conceptual vision, but who is responsible for managing the project, who will take it to the examination (and this will have to be done, because the financing is budget)?

Formally, the fact that the customer chose to hold open tenders, rather than an architectural competition, is not a violation of the law. Since the Law "On Architectural Activities" and the Cabinet of Ministers' resolutions regulating the procedure oblige to hold an architectural competition only when it comes to valuable territories and publicly significant objects located on the territory of Ukraine. But the normative base does not say anything about the situation when Ukraine builds something in another country with its budget money. Although the representative pavilion at EXPO 2020 is an unambiguously socially significant object.

PM: The World Exhibition is held every few years, and we hope that Ukraine will take part not only in the exhibition in Dubai, but also in Buenos Aires, then in Osaka... And somehow I would like to approach such events more prepared. So, we have to fill the lacuna in the legislation?

A.B.: It is necessary to supplement the Law "On Architectural Activities" and the Cabinet of Ministers' resolutions. Open opportunities for the future. But I must warn you: these documents are quite helpless themselves. There is no mention of responsibility for their violation, and they are violated everywhere. According to my research, since 2015, when the Law of Ukraine "On Implementation of Public Procurement" came into force, there have been only 8 negotiation procedures based on the results of architectural competitions. From several hundreds of thousands of public procurement procedures in the field of architectural design! This is not even 1 percent. That is, the priority procedure of public procurement still remains open tenders, where the designer who offers the lowest price wins.

Architectural design is a field of high intellectual level

This causes confusion, because architectural design is a field of high intellectual level, and if the architect evaluates himself low, then the quality of the product will be lower. But budget money is spent on public needs. But with this approach, the quality of the most important public facilities will become lower and lower. And the level of happiness and life satisfaction in society will decrease if we are consumers of low-quality architecture and low-quality environment. This is the main conflict between public procurement legislation and common sense.

According to international standards of professionalism in architectural practice, if the government disposes of taxpayer funds, it is obliged to provide its community with the most effective use of them. Effective does not mean the cheapest, often the opposite. Will we make the cheapest park in which it is impossible to walk? Or will we make a park that will attract a large number of people? For us, the priority criterion is the price.

PM: It is very unfortunate, because this factor leaves us no chance for the emergence of high-quality modern Ukrainian architecture. Quite recently, Viktor Zotov presented the reconstruction project of the Ivan Honchar Museum and himself warned that the chances of winning the auction are slim. Is this price criterion rigidly fixed by the law on public procurement, or can the customer enter something else in the "criterion" column?

A.B.: The Law of Ukraine "On Public Procurement" provides for three procedures - open tenders, competitive dialogue and negotiation procedure based on the results of the competition. This is what concerns our sphere. In open tenders, the percentage share of the "price" criterion cannot be less than 70%, and 30% goes to the design time, the experience of similar contracts.

"Park of Remembrance and Reconciliation" is a project submitted to the international competition of ideas for the development of the "Babiy Yar" park by order of the Ukrainian Jewish Encounter, 2016. Authors: Valentin Uvarov, Dmitry Kazakov, Evgenia Kolmakova, Irina Chaus, Kyiv, Ukraine

PM: Well, in the tender documents for EXPO 2020, one criterion is price. That is, they didn't even want to take the experience into account...

A.B.: A very common situation. I emphasize: "experience of similar contracts" is not even a portfolio. The quality of the solution, functionality, aesthetics, constructive literacy - none of this is evaluated by the tender committee.

But the second procedure - "competitive dialogue" - is also not a competition, but bidding, but it takes place in two stages. Qualifications compete at the first stage, price competes at the second stage. Well, it would seem that you don't want a long, complicated competition - let's at least use "competitive dialogue"! But the Law says that "competitive dialogue" can be used to select lawyers, consultants, builders, and software developers. But not architects. That is, architects are denied the right to participate in the "competitive dialogue". But at this stage, it would be possible to ask the applicants for a portfolio. And there would be no dumping... Because dumping in open auctions is very common.

The third procedure is negotiations based on the results of the architectural competition. And then the question immediately arises: why do customers not want to hold a competition? They are afraid They are afraid of the "cat in the bag". The only way to avoid this is to conduct the competition qualitatively. And since they are rarely held in our country, the organizing specialists in Ukraine can be counted on the fingers of one hand. Well, I can only count three.

PM: Isn't CANactions ripe enough to take a leading position in the field of organizing and holding architectural competitions?

A.B.: They are very good. They were the first to start this process, back in 2010-2011, they organized an international competition for the order of the city, and they already have a good experience. But there are really few of them. CANactions can manage to hold one or two contests per hour and that's it. Because they still have school and a festival. And we don't have an organizer with international experience.

PM: Then it is logical that [phase eins]. is already holding the third (the first — Mystetskyi Arsenal, 2007, the second — Memorial of the Heroes of the Heavenly Hundred — Museum of the Revolution of Dignity, 2017—2018. — Note A. B.) competition. Organizing competition for the project of the "Babiy Yar" Memorial Center, [phase eins]. It is based on UNESCO's "Standards for the Regulation of International Architectural Competitions and City Planning Competitions" and "Rules for Conducting Design Competitions in the Field of Architecture and Adjacent Regions" from 2017, published by the International Union of Architects. But to what extent do international and Ukrainian legislation correspond to each other?

A.B.: First, our terminology is the vocabulary of the late 90s. Even the term "architectural competition" does not correspond to the term Design competitions, which are used in international practice. Design competitions are an umbrella uniting a whole range of competitions. We do not have a developed topic related to copyright, and there is no interpretation of anonymity in the legislation, namely anonymity is one of the most important conditions of the competition. Therefore, first of all, we need to bring the terminology into line, compile a glossary with explanations. So that we speak one language with peace. Secondly, our competition is a kind of procedure that is in itself, and it is not clear at what stage the ego conducts it in general. A frequent situation is that the competition was held, thanks to everyone, everyone is free, and some court architect will design it. All this needs to be shaken.

Why do customers not want to hold a competition? They are afraid of the "cat in the bag"

PM: That is, preparing and adopting new laws?

A.B.: And laws too. It is also necessary to make changes to by-laws and regulations, resolutions, orders of the Cabinet, state building regulations...

There are a lot of pitfalls and imperfections in the rules for conducting a public procurement tender. Yes, the law gives us the right to hold a competition and negotiation procedure based on our results. But if the winner of the competition is the author's collective, which is common in international practice, then in our legal field there is no possibility to conclude a contract with the author's collective. There is no mechanism. The author's collective is a set of natural persons. The customer cannot conclude a contract with the author's team or with a specific individual in its composition. Only with a legal entity. And this severely limits the rights of young architects and grossly contradicts international legislation. Let's say we explain this situation to the architect and suggest: register officially with the bureau, company and submit an application from them... And if it's a foreign architectural bureau? Then a non-resident needs to open either a subsidiary or a representative office with us.

PM: It turns out that if the competition is state-run, then foreign architects, top stars, world-renowned stars are not allowed to enter?

A.B.: They can take part in the competition. And what then? The logical requirement is that they must then find themselves a Ukrainian partner with certification and the right to build, he will be the general designer, and you will have the author's supervision. The whole world works like that. But the law on public procurement does not give such an opportunity.

PM: And if we are talking about the non-state budget? Doesn't this untie everyone's hands? Or, implementing the competition for the Babiy Yar Holocaust Memorial Center project, do the customers also risk encountering pitfalls already at the stage of the implementation of the project itself?

A.B.: There are risks of the second kind, connected with a large territory. The Memorial Center will have to connect the results of the competition with the vision and interests of all who are balance holders of the territory around the design site. Yes, it is much easier for them to conduct the international competition itself. They are not public, but private customers.

The project for the renovation of the "Ukrainian House" and the surrounding territory, submitted to the "Territory of Dignity" competition, 2014-2015. Authors: BURØ architects

The international rules, in particular the ones referred to by [phase eins], are the most up-to-date. Of course, not the UN and UNESCO standards themselves, but their interpretation, which is handled by the International Union of Architects. They prefer not to make changes to the main document, but to issue clarifications on how to read and interpret this or that point today, and give examples of best international practices. And we focus on the legislation of 1999, which also refers us to the International UN standards, but only if they do not contradict Ukrainian legislation. And if they contradict? And so begins walking in the circles of hell, agreements, legal consultations and so on.

PM: As I understand it, the seminar that you organized recently was devoted to the identification of such collisions, contradictions and the development of proposals for bringing Ukrainian legislation into line with international ones?

A.B.: This was a project seminar that we, the "Coordinating Center for Interaction with the Cabinet", together with the Ministry of Culture and the Ministry of Regional Development held at the beginning of February. We have developed a whole package of cases, which I am now preparing in the form of a presentation in order to make publicly available.

Benjamin Hossbach, co-founder and director of the [phase eins] company, was the mentor. He cited a lot of interesting examples from world practice, including conflicting ones that we discussed.

PM: Even in international practice, can there still be conflict situations with their legislation?

A.B.: Often. Here, in particular, when the results of the competition for the construction of the theater were summed up in Gdańsk, it turned out that the building, the project that won the competition, exceeded the zoning requirements in height by 60 cm. A scandal broke out. Opinions were divided. Someone defended the position that an accent building can stand out from the rest, and it is an accent. Others argued that this was unacceptable. So, the project must either be removed from the competition, or the height of the object should be corrected. But if you correct the project, the proportions of the building will change and the quality of this architecture will change. Benjamin uttered such an interesting phrase: "Competitions exist, among other things, to justify changes in the grad documentation." That is, it is a kind of provocation that allows you to revise the existing zoning. In Germany, they believe that a tall building of high-quality architecture is better than a low, low-quality one.

"Revival of the Khreshchatyk River" is a project submitted to the "Territory of Dignity" competition, 2014-2015. Authors: Semen Polomany, Viktor Bylous, Kyiv, Ukraine

PM: But did the participants of this discussion use the criterion of "quality of architecture"? But in our country, this criterion simply does not exist.

A.B.: Yes. Therefore, we discussed this example for a long time at the seminar, but decided that in our conditions, when there is distrust in the authorities, in the organizers of the competition, in the customers, similar proposals for changing the norms are too crude. In our country, this can immediately turn into a tool, a reason for sticking another high-rise in the historical center.

A representative of the National Union of Artists came to us and gave a monologue about his approach to the design of monuments and monuments. And he believes that the final decision on the choice of the winner of the architectural competition should be made by the artistic expert councils of the Ministry of Culture and the Town Planning Council. That is, after the competition, the project must go through two more stages to be approved. And Hossbach explained that the meaning of the competition is a direct path from the discussion of goals and intentions to the conclusion of a contract with the winner. If additional agreements appear, the path ceases to be direct, which negates the advantages of the competitive procedure.

Competitions exist, among other things, in order to justify changes in graduation documents

Why does our older generation of sculptors and artists show intolerance to what is happening in the modern urban environment? Because they are not in demand now. Nobody orders anything from them. And here is another tip from Hossbach: in Germany, every public customer who operates with money from the city or state budget is obliged to allocate up to 10% of the funds for capital expenditures to works of art - these can be decorations, mosaics, frescoes, sculptures, installations. A separate art competition is held there - after the architectural competition, when the winner has already been chosen, and the design stage is underway. This is mandatory practice.

Hossbach's story about rethinking the approach to the memorialization of historical figures is also interesting. In 2017, a competition was held in Berlin for the design of a monument to the initiator of the Reformation, Martin Luther. The classical monument of the XNUMXth century rose above the square on a huge pedestal. It was destroyed during World War II, only the statue itself survived. The joint project of the sculptor Albert Weiss and the architectural studio Zeller & Moye won. They proposed an inversion: the statue was lowered below ground level, you can go down to it on concrete steps, and opposite the original monument there was another reflection sculpture - a figure of Luther made of mirror-polished aluminum. The new memorial does not rise above the crowd, but invites passers-by to dialogue to show that Christianity is developing and also passing its way together with humanity, that traditions should not be dogma.

The project of the monument to Martin Luther in Berlin, developed by the sculptor Albert Weiss and the architectural bureau Zeller & Moye. Image source: © Zeller & Moye

PM: That is, have we reached the stage of combining a traditional monument with a counter-monument in one object? Can this also be considered an innovation?

A.B.: Competitions are always our view of the future. Competitive practice in the world is one of the important subjects of research — as a separate branch of architectural science. In America, researchers believe that an architectural competition is always a political process. Not in the sense of the struggle for power, but in the sense of shaping the politics of the future. Competitive projects are often provocative, innovative, they open a new picture of the world. And researchers in 100 years will judge us largely based on the results of competitions. How and what will we agree on in our city? Do we need a square or a house? Embankment or square? All this is demonstrated by competitive projects. I compared the projects of three contests on the development of Khreshchatyk — 1944, 2000, when a shopping center appeared near the Maidan, and the 2014-2015 contest. "Territory of Dignity". And on the last one, one of the designers proposed to open the river in the middle of Khreshchatyk - absolutely beautiful green terraces, people walk on the bridges. Yes, this is a fantasy, but it shows an aspiration to the future, how young architects see the city of tomorrow. Khreshchatyk in 1944 — an empire, Khreshchatyk in 2000 — commerce, capitalization, Khreshchatyk in 2015 — a humanistic vision of young architects. So architectural competitions are always politics.