What’s wrong with competition?

By Temple Ligon

 

In 448 BC there was an architectural design competition for what became the Acropolis in Greece. Every building project of significant scale since then, if not already determined by way of an architectural design competition, probably could have used competition to find a better design. Today national government policy in both France and Germany requires an architectural design competition for public buildings budgeted for more than a certain amount.

City, county or state building projects here in Columbia have never benefitted from an architectural design competition.  It shows.

Since the Athens Acropolis, choosing a winning design from a competition has always been available as a means to find the best design. Many churches in the Renaissance came about that way – or even part of a church such as Brunelleschi’s dome on the cathedral in Florence. And not just buildings can be the result of an architectural design competition. The Spanish Steps in Rome, 1717, surfaced as the winner of its competition.

A massive collection of buildings can be more successfully put in configuration with the help of competition. Architect Renzo Piano’s Potsdammer Platz in Berlin 30 years ago showed the way. His addition to the High Museum in Atlanta, by the way, should keep us Southerners alert to the need to invite real talent to the table, albeit chosen by committee in this case, not by design competition.

Beginning in the 19C, we’re in a time famous for determining the winning designs in competition. For example:

1860, Paris Opera House, 171 designs; architect: Garnier

1872, Reichstag (Berlin)

1889, World Exhibition Tower (Paris); architect: Eiffel

1922, Chicago Tribune Tower, 260 designs; architect: Hood

1955, Sydney Opera House, 233 designs; architect: Utzon

1971, Centre Georges Pompidou (Paris), 681 designs; architect: Piano and Rogers

1983, Opera Bastille (Paris), 750 designs; architect: Ott

1990, Bibliotheque Nationale de France (Paris), 244 designs; architect: Perrault

2011, Philharmonie de Paris, 98 designs; architect: Nouvel

In every case and in many more around the world, the best design got built. On a few occasions the winning design turned out to be wildly expensive. Utzon’s Sydney Opera House was supposed to cost seven million Australian dollars, and it cost more than one hundred million Australian dollars.

But look at it now. It is a symbol for a city, a country and a continent. And – rats – the opera house never did work very well.

Running an architectural design competition can be a real pain, particularly if those running it are new to the game. The American Institute of Architects has put together a list of requirements in its AIA Handbook of Architectural Design Competitions:

• conscientious sponsor
• competent professional advisor
• thoroughly and carefully written program
• complete graphic and other illustrative materials
• fair and precise rules governing the competition
• clear submission requirements
• realistic schedule
• qualified jury
• appropriate prizes and stipends
• arrangements for publicizing the winning design

And even with all that, eggs get laid. Not every competition results in a roaring success.

Still, now that we have the medical school coming into the Bull Street property, an architectural design competition might be just the ticket.