The procedures being used to select architects for the national stadium and sports campus at Abbotstown, Co Dublin, have been described as "very incongruous" by the chief executive of the Dublin International Sports Council.
Mr Jonathan Irwin was particularly critical of the decision by Campus and Stadium Ireland Development Ltd (CSID) to select panels of architects for the elements of the £500 million project when most of the prospective bidders for the contract already had their own.
"Each and every one of the consortiums who have progressed to outline bid stage have retained their own architects, all of whom have international reputations and have designed international sports stadiums around the world", Mr Irwin told The Irish Times.
"Why on earth would any of these bidders now want to employ a second firm of architects, many of whom have no experience of stadium design and, indeed, how are they expected to even assess the merits of these firms, many of whom they will be totally unfamiliar with?"
Altogether, 13 firms of architects, mainly international, were selected for two sub-panels to design the stadium and multipurpose arena, while a further 19, mainly Irish, were chosen for another panel to design the remaining facilities on the 500acre site.
The selections, made by a jury assembled by the Royal Institute of the Architects of Ireland, led to a row within the architectural profession after it was revealed that 34 Irish firms had been excluded. Several of them have sought explanations from CSID.
"The whole process is degenerating into a shambles, which is of particular concern given the level of investment involved," said one of these architects, who did not wish to be identified.
The Office of Public Works, which recently resigned as project manager after differences with CSID, said it had also pointed out that the six consortiums in the contest "would themselves, of necessity, already have architectural expertise as part of their bid".
As a result, the OPW advised that there was "potential for confusion and conflict" in selecting panels of architects. However, after CSID decided to proceed with the selection, "in the interest of ensuring architectural excellence" the OPW agreed to be represented on the jury.
"We emphasised that CSID should make it clear to bidders that there would be no obligation whatsoever on any bidder to commission any of the architectural practices selected on the three panels and that bidders were free to contract whomever they wished."
The OPW said it should also be made clear to the six consortiums bidding to design, build, finance, operate and maintain the stadium and other facilities that they "would not be discriminated against if they used practices other than those on the CSID panels".
It is understood that this was made clear in the bid documentation issued last week by CSID to the rival groups, which include several major British and European consortiums. The bids are due to be submitted by May 31st, after which a final decision will be made.
A spokesperson for CSID yesterday defended its decision to set up the panels even though none of the prospective developers could be compelled to choose architects from the approved lists.
Some weeks ago, CSID wrote to the various consortiums urging them to consider selecting architects from its panels. "More than half of the bidders have chosen from the panels and it's working extremely well."
