Architect Nikolay Parpov has filed an objection to the holding of the last competition for chief architect of Sofia. As is known, "We continue the change" also requested that a new competition be held and emphasized that arch. Bogdana Panayotova does not have the qualities and integrity for this position. The PP attacked both the procedure, the organization of which caused criticism, and the announced winner arch. Panayotova because of her participation in "projects with a high corruption risk". How did the competition go… Architect Nikolay Parpov speaks to FACTI.
- Architect Parpov, the competition for chief architect of Sofia has passed. You eliminated five candidates in the test, but what is your impression of how the entire procedure was organized?
- As an organization, I cannot complain. It was normally organized, but it was, in my opinion, incorrectly approached as an overall concept of the competition, because the chief architect is not an ordinary administrator, a civil servant. On the contrary, he is a visionary who must think about how to develop the city, how to make it more beautiful. In general, his competence includes many issues related to the city itself. For me, the competition was not properly organized as a concept, and that is why I filed an objection. The chief architect is not just an employee, he is a person who must think about the development of the entire city, organize the work of the direction “Architecture and Urban Planning“ and precisely with the idea of how to develop and how the city can become better.
- Did each of you manage to present your concept for the development of Sofia before it came to the test?
- No one wanted such a thing as a concept. I am a participant in the third competition for the chief architect of Sofia.
- And if we rank them, which of them was the best and most reasonably conducted?
- During my first participation in the competition, when they selected architect Petar Dikov as the chief architect of Sofia, then “Open Society“ organized a meeting of the candidates with citizens and journalists. This was very positive, so that everyone could get an idea of what each candidate thinks, how he plans to solve the city's problems, and so on. The second competition was also interesting, when they selected architect Zdravko Zdravkov. Then, at the initiative of the Dutch ambassador to Sofia, in the building of the European Community and under the leadership of Solomon Passy, there was also a meeting with the candidates, where people asked us questions specifically related to the development of the city. Interestingly, in both meetings that I am talking about, the candidates who elected them were not present. But that does not matter.
- And now there was simply not even a debate…
- Yes, now there was nothing. That is why I also raised an objection, because, I will say again, the role of the chief architect is not to be an obedient administrator of the mayor of Sofia. On the contrary, he should be his advisor, he should be a person who, on all issues related to spatial planning, construction and so on, helps the mayor of Sofia to develop the city.
- Do you know the other colleagues with whom you entered the competition. Should we expect another objection…
- I know two or three people. We met the others on site, literally before the test.
- And before the test, did they gather you at least in one place to discuss things?
- No. Our gathering was in front of the hall, before we entered the test. Then they drew which of the three options would fall and that was it. We had a break after everyone had completed the test, and during it we discussed some questions with the mayor, with some of the candidates and that was all.
- “We continue the change“ also want this competition to be declared invalid and a new competition to be held. Can this be done?
- I have been an architect since 1979. At that time I worked at “Sofproekt“ - the company that was involved in the design of the city. Since then, but not only because I am a native Sofian, I have always been interested in this problem with the development of the capital. It is no coincidence that 6-7 years ago I was a frequent guest of your colleague on a television station and we discussed the problems of the city. And so far this has interested me and I want our city to develop in a better direction in some way.
- But can't this happen, for example, through the Union of Architects, through the Chamber of Architects with proposals…
- It can happen through many things, but we don't see it happening. I already think that in all competitions they have chosen the person in advance, and the competitions themselves are held absolutely formally. Without being interested in a concept for the city, ideas and so on. I will give you an example of what happened in the first competition in which I participated. After my application, four or five television stations had invited me and then I was a guest at Mr. Koritarov's, and the next day they threw me off the list of candidates and announced that they could not have media appearances either. This is what raises doubts in all these competitions. Apparently, the people who manage the city, and not only, say “… here it will be - and that's it“. They are not interested in either concepts or the ideas of the people that anyone can propose. Look, the chief architect of a city is not just a position. His role is not just that of an administrator. Starting work in such a position, then you must massively use the advice of the Union of Architects, the Chamber of Architects, the Chamber of Builders, the Chamber of Investors, in order to build a concept of how the city should develop in accordance with everyone's wishes. Seven years ago, when there was a competition for the chief architect, I contacted an American company through acquaintances to make a digital model of the entire city with an accuracy of up to 5 cm. This digital model, or let's say a model, cost a lot of money, but it would have given us the opportunity to look at all kinds of new buildings, where and what is best to build, how to build it, for specialists and citizens to give their opinions, and then a building permit would be issued. And not like it is now, Mr. So-and-so bought a place and a skyscraper will stand and then he wants a skyscraper.
- And how do you imagine the work of the chief architect. What were the main points in your concept?
- During my second participation in the competition, I proposed a plan for the organization of the work itself. Then I proposed a system - and I continue to stick to it, based on the experience of private companies and firms in Europe for daily control of the work of the administration. Who did what, what they did, how they did it. What is the responsibility of each person in the chain. We must also take into account that everyone must bear their own responsibility for their work and decisions. And not, as is the case now, when there is an inspection by the DNSK or the court issues a decision, the municipality should pay the fine. No, this fine should be taken from their pocket. It is also important that the members of the expert councils themselves, who make very important decisions, also bear material and any responsibility for their decision. And we know that in Bulgaria no one is holding all these collective bodies accountable.
- Because that's how it's most convenient, when responsibility is transferred and everyone washes their hands of the other…
- Well, it's high time this stopped and such accountability was sought.
------------------------------------
Arch. Nikolay Parpov has worked for 12 years in the Directorate of "Architecture and Urban Planning" of the Sofia Municipality. He is the winner of first prize in the "Building of the Year" competition for 2013 for the "Nadezhda" hospital. His projects have been awarded in India and Sweden. He is the author of projects for hotels throughout the country, office buildings. In addition to our country, he has also worked in Albania.