In this section, we answer frequently asked questions from local authorities, associations, the public and our clients. We will gradually explore different parts of the field and briefly explain key terms and fundamental issues. If you are unsure about something, you can also contact us with your question.

What is an architectural design competition, which projects is it suitable for, and when is another selection method preferable?

A competition compares several proposals according to rules announced in advance and through professional evaluation. It is suitable for important or complex projects where exploring alternative solutions offers significant value.

How much does a competition cost, how long does it take to prepare, and what savings or benefits can it bring to the contracting authority?

Costs include preparation, prizes, the jury and organisation, but they represent only a small share of the total investment. A better choice can reduce mistakes and increase long-term value.

What is the difference between an open, restricted and invited competition, and how should the right type be chosen?

An open competition allows the broadest participation, a restricted competition selects a shortlist of teams, and an invited competition involves a limited group. The choice depends on the project’s scope, timetable and required experience.

What should a high-quality competition brief contain, and who should prepare the conditions, background materials and expected outputs?

The brief should clearly describe the objectives, programme, site, budget and evaluation criteria. It should be prepared with specialists, users and those responsible for the building’s future operation.

How should a balanced jury be assembled, and what roles should independent experts, politicians, officials and future users have?

The jury should combine an independent professional majority with knowledge of the client and future operation. Members’ roles must be clear in advance and conflicts of interest excluded.

How can the public be involved in preparing a competition without turning professional evaluation into a popularity poll?

The public can help define needs and understand the outcome after the competition. The evaluation itself, however, must remain professional and be based on the approved criteria.

Which criteria should be used to assess proposals, and why should the initial price not be the sole measure of quality?

Urban design, operation, architecture, sustainability, feasibility and costs should all be assessed. The initial price is only one component of value over the full life cycle.

What happens after a competition ends, and how may the winning proposal change during subsequent design development?

The competition is followed by negotiations with the winner and further development of the proposal. Changes are normal, but they must preserve the principal qualities of the design and respond to verified facts.

How can the quality of the winning proposal be maintained through permitting, cost reductions, contractor selection and construction?

Continuity through a contract with the winning team, clear quality principles and architectural supervision all help. Savings should be found collaboratively, not through unilateral simplification.

How can the competition result be explained clearly to the public, and how can contracting authorities avoid the most common mistakes?

The contracting authority should publish the jury report, the proposals and the reasons for its decision. The most common mistakes result from an unclear brief, inadequate background information and an unprepared follow-up phase.

How can architectural and design services be procured on the basis of quality rather than the lowest bid alone?

Price should be only one criterion alongside the quality of the team, its methodology and its understanding of the task. The weighting must reflect the risk and importance of the service.

How can a clear brief be prepared, the cost of the work estimated realistically and sufficient room left for a high-quality solution?

The brief should clearly describe the objectives, scope, outputs, client cooperation and quality criteria. The fee estimate should reflect the disciplines, time and responsibility required.

How should evaluation criteria be set for experience, team composition, methodology, understanding of the brief and price?

The criteria must be verifiable and allow meaningful distinctions between bids. The methodology assessment should focus on the specific approach proposed for the project.

What should a contract with the design team contain, and how should responsibility for changes, deadlines and coordination between disciplines be defined?

The contract should define scope, deadlines, price, the change process, coordination, licences and liability. It should also address the client’s cooperation and subsequent project phases.

How can high-quality architectural and technical supervision be secured without breaking the chain of responsibility between design and construction?

Supervisors should be selected according to their experience and capacity and involved early. The powers of the designer, supervisors, contractor and client must be separate and easy to understand.

When should a traditional process, Design and Build, or another contractual model be used, and what benefits and risks does each option involve?

The traditional model separates design and construction, while Design and Build places combined responsibility with the contractor. The choice depends on how well the brief has been prepared, the risks involved and the client’s ability to safeguard quality.

How can architectural and user quality be maintained during contractor selection, cost optimisation and changes made during construction?

Quality must be defined through performance requirements, materials, samples and inspection points. Optimisation should be assessed together with the designer and with regard to its long-term impact.

How should an abnormally low bid, bidders’ references, the quality of the delivery team and proposed materials be assessed?

A low price should be checked through a cost breakdown and evidence of genuine capacity. References should be comparable, and the key team must actually be available for the contract.

How can contractor selection be communicated transparently and uncontrolled additional work and disputes prevented?

The evaluation, contract and changes should be traceable and clearly justified. Additional work must follow a predefined process and be accompanied by continuous budget control.

How can public procurement requirements remain proportionate to the size of a project, and how can municipalities share experience and model procedures?

Requirements should not be more complex than the contract’s risk warrants. Shared templates and experience save capacity, but they must always be adapted to the specific project.

What is participatory planning, when is it useful, and at what stage should public involvement begin?

Participation involves affected people in understanding the problem and searching for solutions. It provides the greatest value before fundamental decisions have been finalised, not only when a completed proposal is presented.

What can citizens genuinely decide, and how can clear, realistic expectations be established in advance?

The extent of their influence must be announced beforehand. People should know what is open to discussion, what is determined by law, budget or professional constraints, and who will make the final decision.

How can people who do not attend public meetings be reached, including children, older people, foreign nationals and disadvantaged groups?

Engagement must take place where people already are, use different times and formats, and remove language and physical barriers. A single public meeting cannot provide representative participation.

How can local businesses, associations, non-profit organisations, property owners and other important stakeholders be involved?

Stakeholders should be mapped according to their relationship to the place and the project’s impact on them. The process should distinguish between information, consultation, collaboration and genuine shared decision-making.

How should a public meeting be facilitated so that it is not dominated by the loudest participants and different views have room to be heard?

The meeting needs independent facilitation, clear rules and work in smaller groups. Its output must capture both the frequency of views and the reasons behind them, not merely the volume of individual speakers.

When should interviews, walks, workshops, questionnaires, perception maps or online platforms be used?

The tool should reflect the objective: an interview reveals experience, a walk explores the place, a workshop develops alternatives and a questionnaire captures broader attitudes. Combining methods provides a more reliable picture.

How can in-person and digital tools be combined while explaining technical, legal and financial constraints clearly?

Online tools broaden the reach, while in-person formats enable deeper dialogue. Constraints are best explained through maps, budgets and concrete examples.

How should conflicting demands and disputes between groups with different claims on a place be addressed?

The conflict should first be broken down into underlying needs rather than fixed positions. The design can seek compromises in time, space or operation while openly identifying contradictions that cannot be resolved.

How can it be shown which suggestions were incorporated, which were not and why, and what should happen when the public does not agree?

The final report should explain how each issue was addressed and why any suggestion was rejected. Disagreement should be referred to the decision-making body together with an overview of the alternatives and their impacts.

How can the quality of participation be evaluated and the process prevented from becoming a mere procedural formality?

The diversity of participants, timing, transparency, influence on the proposal and quality of feedback should all be assessed. Token participation collects comments without offering any genuine opportunity to change the outcome.

What makes a well-functioning neighbourhood, and how can urban design and architecture support everyday encounters?

A successful neighbourhood creates opportunities for both spontaneous and planned encounters while respecting privacy. Shared entrances, active ground floors, parks and pedestrian streets all help.

Where do natural meeting places emerge, and how can a neighbourhood be enlivened without major investment?

Meeting places emerge around everyday destinations such as schools, shops, public transport stops or shaded areas. Revitalisation often begins with seating, a small event and support for local initiators.

How can a municipality support neighbourhood initiatives, local associations and non-profit organisations without excessive administration?

A municipality can offer small grants, spaces, equipment and a simple point of contact. Support should be predictable and proportionate to the size of the initiative.

How can a community centre be established, and how can the spaces, services and activities that local people genuinely lack be identified?

The need should first be tested through a temporary programme and shared space. A permanent centre needs a manager, an operating model, a budget and an open programme.

How can shared places be created for children, teenagers, adults and older people while preventing conflict between generations?

The space should combine quiet and active areas and allow different programmes at different times. Rules should be developed together with users.

How can tension between long-standing residents and newcomers be prevented and the identity of a new residential neighbourhood built?

Early communication, shared projects and places where groups meet naturally all help. Local institutions, stories and shared rituals build the identity of a new neighbourhood.

How can residents be involved in caring for public space and community gardens and in organising neighbourhood events?

Participation must have clear boundaries, support from the responsible manager and accessible tools. Voluntary care complements but does not replace the owner’s fundamental responsibility.

How can vacant premises, local shops and small services strengthen community life?

Temporary use of vacant premises can provide affordable facilities. Local shops and services generate regular activity and informal social contact.

How can deteriorating relationships between neighbours, social isolation and loneliness be recognised early?

Warning signs include declining activity, conflicts, vacant ground-floor premises and a weak sense of belonging. Combining data with interviews and outreach work helps.

How should community projects be structured so that they have responsible managers, stable funding and long-term durability?

A project needs a specific manager, a realistic operating budget and a plan for transferring responsibility. Long-term continuity cannot depend on a single enthusiastic individual.

What belongs to social infrastructure, and how can a municipality identify which services are missing locally or in a specific neighbourhood?

Social infrastructure includes education, healthcare, care services, culture, sport and community services. Needs are identified through demographic data, accessibility, capacity and residents’ experiences.

How can schools, nurseries, healthcare, social services, culture, sport and community activities be planned together?

A joint plan reveals opportunities for shared spaces, spatial connections and capacity conflicts. Services should be assessed as a network rather than as isolated buildings belonging to separate municipal departments.

How can a demographic forecast be used to determine the future capacity of schools, care facilities and other public services?

The forecast should consider age, migration, development and catchment areas. Several scenarios should be used, with capacity adjusted regularly in response to actual data.

How can services remain accessible in peripheral parts of a city, small municipalities and areas with limited public transport?

Mobile and shared services, good transport connections and multi-purpose local centres all help. Accessibility should be assessed in terms of travel time, cost and barrier-free access.

How can public buildings share space and connect a school, library, cultural venue or community centre?

Sharing reduces costs and increases use, provided that operations and responsibilities are clearly separated. Shared facilities can also support collaboration between sectors.

How should services for an ageing population be planned while also encouraging intergenerational encounters?

Services should support independence and be distributed throughout ordinary neighbourhoods. Shared gardens, dining areas and programmes enable natural contact between generations.

How can spatial exclusion be prevented and accessible contact points for social services designed?

A contact point should be accessible, discreet and close to everyday services. Mixed housing and dispersed support help prevent concentrations of exclusion.

How can schools and libraries serve as open neighbourhood centres outside their normal operating hours?

Spaces should be designed with separable entrances and a simple booking system. Use outside normal hours must have a clearly designated manager and budget.

How can non-profit organisations, service providers and private investors be involved in joint planning?

Partners can contribute knowledge of needs and operational capacity. The municipality, however, must retain shared data, an accessibility standard and responsibility for the long-term network.

Which services must be delivered alongside new housing, and how can their accessibility and quality be evaluated over time?

The required capacity of schools, care services, transport and public spaces should be determined before development is approved. Their accessibility and quality should then be measured regularly.

What is tactical urbanism, and when is a temporary intervention preferable to an immediate permanent reconstruction?

Tactical urbanism tests change quickly and inexpensively under real-life operating conditions. It is appropriate when there is uncertainty, when public experience is needed or ahead of a planned permanent reconstruction.

Which changes to transport, parking, places to stay, greenery or programming can be tested safely in a real space?

Lane widths, crossings, cycle lanes, seating, greenery and programming can all be tested. An intervention must be reversible, legible and safe.

How can a new street layout be tested inexpensively or several parking spaces transformed into a place for people?

Markings, movable elements, paint, planters and temporary furniture can be used. The intervention must reproduce the key spatial relationships of the future solution.

Which permits, safety measures and responsibilities are required for a temporary intervention?

Requirements depend on the location and type of intervention and must be verified with the relevant authorities. The project needs a manager, regular inspection and a plan for rapid repair or removal.

How can residents, local businesses and associations be involved in the design, implementation and care of a pilot project?

Local people can help identify the problem, shape the programme and provide care. The professional team, however, remains responsible for safety, accessibility and evaluation.

How long should an experiment last, and what data must be collected before, during and after it?

The duration must capture normal operation and ideally different seasons or periods. Objectives, baseline data, monitoring methods and the decision to follow the test should all be defined in advance.

How can the transport, recreational and economic impacts of a temporary solution be evaluated while accounting for differing feedback?

The same indicators should be compared before and after the change and supplemented by users’ experiences. Differing feedback should be classified according to underlying needs and actual impacts.

How should resistance or an unsuccessful pilot be addressed, and how can the public be shown that an experiment may be modified or ended?

Resistance is a reason to verify the data and adjust the project, not automatically to terminate it. What is being tested, for how long and how the final decision will be made should all be communicated openly.

When should a temporary solution be made permanent, and how can a provisional intervention be prevented from becoming a neglected standard?

A permanent solution is appropriate once the objectives have been met and identified weaknesses resolved. The temporary scheme should have a predetermined date for removal or transformation.

Which materials and maintenance methods should be chosen, and how can tactical urbanism also be used in small municipalities?

Materials should be durable, repairable and safe while remaining recognisably temporary. A small municipality can use the same approach to test changes to a village green, the area around a school or parking arrangements.

How can a suitable grant be found, and how can a municipality determine whether the supported project reflects its genuine priorities?

The project need should come first and the suitable grant programme second. A funding call should be assessed according to its alignment with objectives, costs, timetable and future operation.

Which costs will a grant cover, what must the municipality finance itself, and how can the required co-financing be secured?

Eligible and ineligible costs, contingency and cash flow must be distinguished. Co-financing should be included in the multi-year budget before an application is submitted.

How can a project pipeline be prepared so that a municipality can respond to a suitable funding call without inventing investments merely to fit it?

The pipeline should contain projects at different stages of preparation, together with their benefits, costs and permits. A funding call can then accelerate a priority rather than change the strategy.

How can a long-term investment plan be prepared and projects prioritised according to benefit, readiness, cost and risk?

Priority should be determined through a transparent scoring of benefits, urgency, readiness, risk and operating costs. The plan should be updated annually.

How can operating costs, asset renewal and obligations after a grant’s sustainability period be included in decision-making?

The budget must include staffing, energy, maintenance, renewal and the funding provider’s conditions. The municipality should know how the facility will be financed throughout its entire life.

How can the construction of unnecessary or oversized facilities be prevented when a grant happens to be available for them?

Every proposal must demonstrate need, appropriate capacity and viable long-term operation even without the grant. Funding should not justify a project that would otherwise make no sense.

How can grant programmes, own resources, loans, revolving funds and phased project delivery be combined?

Combining funding sources requires careful checks of their conditions and timing. Each phase must function independently without preventing completion of the project as a whole.

When is a public-private partnership appropriate, and how can the public interest be protected?

A partnership is appropriate when it allocates risks clearly and delivers better value than conventional procurement. The public sector must retain control over service standards and long-term commitments.

How can development agreements and developer contributions finance schools, transport, greenery and public spaces?

Contributions should reflect the impact of the development and follow rules known in advance. The agreement should define financial and in-kind contributions, deadlines, quality and responsibility.

How can the total cost of a project be explained transparently and its social, environmental and economic benefits quantified?

Communication should set out the capital investment, operating costs, financing, risks and non-financial benefits. Benefits should be quantified using a consistent methodology and must not be overstated.