©2011 magyarmuzeumok.hu Minden jog fenntartva.

Everything is clear

Last Monday Eszter Götz went to the Museum of Fine Arts to learn about the international tender for the architectural design of the new museum complex.

”It has been 100 years since an international tender for a public building at such scale was announced in Hungary.” These were the introductory words of László Baán, the director of the Museum of Fine Arts, in the press conference held about the project which is going to house 5 museums in and around the city park (Városliget). It was also revealed that registration for the tender is free and several hundreds of tenderers are expected.

So far, so good. However, some controversial news was also shared: most notably about financing. Zoltán Balog, the Minister responsible for culture in the government, said that, on the contrary to previous hopes, most probably, EU financing would not be available for the project. Presently, EU resources only cover the costs of the tender procedure, and Hungarian tax payers will have to foot the rest of the staggering 150bn HUF (500m EURO) bill. Despite the foggy financial prospects expectations are high: the building design will have to meet the highest standards of contemporary architecture offering lasting experience for visitors. The buildings are supposed to become landmarks and to provide a flexible and visitor friendly environment. The aim is clear: attracting as many tourists as possible while saving the historical face and values of the park. Answering the question how many trees will fall victim to the construction work the minister promised that the proportion of green space would definitely exceed the current 60% in the park. However, this does not reassure many stakeholders (green organisations, urbanists, urban activists and local residents) who believe that the 60% plus trick is only a sleight of hand with the numbers.

Another question elicited from Mr. Baán, the project leader, a commitment to sustainability, to buildings with zero emission and to exploiting the thermal water which is available in abundance in the area. Further efforts to protect the environment were promised to be made, although at this stage their nature was not specified.

A question regarding the ”family friendly theme park” concept of the development was largely dismissed by pointing out that the park has been indeed a family friendly theme park for the last one hundred years due to the Zoo, the National Circus and the Ice rink. As for the circus: this art form is currently enjoying a revival on the continent which, in itself, would justify an ambitious renewal project of the circus building, one of the four permanent circus constructs in Europe. The giant museum project might bring some additional benefits like reorganizing the traffic links of the area, most notably removing a busy road that presently cuts through the park. Nevertheless, for many, all these improvements seem to be feasible without an additional 5 new museum buildings and a 150 bn HUF price tag.

Doubts and questions have been surfacing since the planning started. In spite of this, a proper public debate has not been carried out yet, although public hearings are in the pipeline, at least according to Mr. Baán. To this, critics mention that the present government has an impressive track record of futile and rather showcase public discussions of different projects and proposals from the past four years. As for something more tangible: instead of offering studious impact assessments to the journalist asking about the predicted effects of the megaproject, Mr. Baán cited the example of the popular „rom kocsma” area. Nobody invested in assessment studies before these establishments drenched mostly the inner part of the 7th district of the capital. Still, he went on arguing, they attract tens of thousands of visitors every year, only to forget to add that, besides the bitter conflicts with local residents, ruin pubs do not use astronomical sums of public money and, for any reasonable assumption, they are a temporary phenomenon, unlike a museum building, let alone five.

Mr. Baán claimed that the impact assessment is being prepared now and will be ready by the end of the tender procedure. Whether it is worth spending tens of millions on buying architectural design plans for a project that might finally be deemed unreasonable by the impact assessment is one of the many unanswered questions.

With all these worries in the background, it did not come as a surprise that the press conference, originally called because of the architectural tender of the project, hardly touched upon architecture. The head of the Chamber of Hungarian Architects did not or did not want to understand the question concerning those of his colleagues who are publicly critical with the plans. He said architects are to be delighted when a public tender is announced and are not to question the foundations of the decision. Good news is that the beautiful Olof Plame building (the old Kunsthalle) in the middle of the park is going to be renovated, but its future function is still not determined.

While it remains to be seen whether the new museum district will be an asset or a liability for the capital, there is room for hope that some outstanding architectural design will emerge at the end of the tender procedure. The jury, which includes, among others, Paul Cadima from AA School in London and Henry Loyrette, a former director of the Louvre, is at least a guarantee for selecting genuine quality. The issue is then not of architectural character, but it is the effects of this enterprise on the development of the entire city. Hence the importance of the still missing impact assessments and that is what could turn this ambitious project into a predicament for Budapest.

Photo: MTI