N.Z.I.A.

Progress, Volume XVI, Issue 10, 1 June 1921, Page 228

N.Z.I.A.

REGULATING COMPETITIONS.

A new or revised set of “ Regulations for the Conduct of Architectural Competitions ” is now before members for consideration, the period of study commencing on May 23rd and ending on June 23rd, 1921.

Tne alterations suggested in the new Conditions consist mainly in a re-arrangement and/or wording of clauses, a better definition of the conditions under which competitions should be held, and the setting out of the various steps as they should occur.

The chief alteration is the substitution of a “ jury of award ” in place of the single assessor. This does not mean that a single assessor must not be appointed, but rather chat ir preferred a “jury,” representative of the interests involved, may be appointed. If this jury consists of not more than three persons then two should , and at least one must , be a practicing architect. Should the jury, consist of more than three persons then the architectural representatives must be proportionately increased. The object of this very necessary provision is to prevent flooding the jury with persons unskilled in the reading of plans or otherwise unskilled in judging the highly technical issues involved.

In view of what has transpired in connection with a recent competition, it is evident that two important amendments must be made to the draft submitted. They are:—

(1) In the third paragraph, Ist page, 7th line, alter the words “ it is therefore desirable ”

to “it is therefore necessary”; and at the end of the sentence add the words, “ No

member of the Institute is permitted to enter any competition, without such approval being first obtained and printed on the face of the Conditions.”

(2) In the section relating to the “ Professional Adviser ” (page 2), sub-section (b) should have the following words added to it: “ The ‘ instructions ’ or ‘ conditions ’ must state

clearly the date of the closing of the competition, and this date shall not be extended without the written consent of the assessor, and in no case shall any extension be

granted within 14 days of a date already fixed.

This will put a stop to the pernicious practice of promoters extending dates without reference to the assessor or the Institute, and making an extension so close to the last advertised closing date as to exclude the majority of the competitors from the benefit of the extension by reason of the fact of their designs being either already sent in or en route.

The success of any competition rests solely upon the competitors. If they loyally abide by the

Institute’s Conditions (specially framed for their protection) and refuse to enter any competition which has not obtained the approval of the Council, then all the existing evils and troubles will be done away with at once. The whole matter is really one of “ self-preservation,” which is a “ first law.”