A GLASGOW architect claims the tender of the Glasgow School of Art (GSA) rebuild “favours the cheapest over the most suitable bid”.
Paul Stallan, co-founder of Stallan Brand, made the claim in the Architects’ Journal in April.
The GSA hasn’t yet found an architect to lead the £62 million revamp of the iconic Charles Rennie Mackintosh design after it was devasted by fires in 2014 and then again in 2018 after a £35m restoration. However, a search is ongoing.
The overall renovation of the building is expected to be completed by 2028 and will be done over 7 stages. The first was to stabilise the building and the second, which will build a structure to reinstate the Mackintosh building, is hoped to be completed by 2024.
READ MORE: Tories and Labour accused of covering up coalition in West Lothian on Wikipedia
The group that wins the tendering process in question will be in charge of delivering stages 2 to 7.
Writing in the Architect’s Journal, Stallan said he believed the search for an architect is prioritising cost over the best bid. He further argued that reconsideration of the assessment criteria for architects being looked at by the GSA is required.
Stallan says the GSA’s 60:40 quality to cost rationale for the tendering process “is not going to deliver the answer it thinks it wants”.
He wrote: "We need to look a bit closer at the tender assessment criteria for architects being applied by the Glasgow School of Art for the procurement of services to help in the reinstatement of Charles Rennie Mackintosh’s fire-ravaged landmark.
"The reason: to highlight a phenomenon that other country’s across Europe have figured out but one which those in Scotland, as in Scottish Government’s civil service together with Scottish Futures Trust, Local Authorities, RIAS, RICS etc, have not.
"The issue: the application of a relative quality price assessment methodology, sometimes known as the 60:40 (quality: cost) method, which GSA is applying in its selection process is not going to deliver the answer it thinks it wants."
According to Glasgow Live, GSA responded to Stallan’s article by claiming they have ensured that the tender process is "robust and transparent" and will be "assessed rigorously and fairly" so that the rebuild is done by the best team possible.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel