Development of construction design documentation for 'Renovation of the facade of the old building part of Sabile Culture House'

This tender exhibits significant procedural flaws, particularly regarding transparency and fairness due to restricted document access and missing evaluation criteria, despite clear technical requirements. While basic information is present, critical details for competitive bidding are absent.

The tender defines the procedure type and CPV code clearly, and the submission period is reasonable. There are no reported disputes. However, 'Restricted document access' and the undisclosed estimated value raise transparency concerns. The correction of a missing annex without extending the deadline, though the deadline was ample, indicates a minor procedural oversight.

The project description and AI-extracted requirements are generally clear and detailed, especially regarding technical aspects and cultural heritage. However, the critical absence of specified evaluation criteria significantly hinders clarity for bidders. The presence of two versions of 'Iepirkuma priekšmeta prasības' could also lead to minor confusion.

Basic information, deadlines, and duration are provided, and a comprehensive set of documents is available. Nevertheless, the tender lacks the estimated value and, more importantly, explicit evaluation criteria, which are crucial for a complete tender package.

This category is significantly impacted by the 'Restricted document access' and the complete absence of evaluation criteria, which are major barriers to fair competition. The undisclosed estimated value further reduces transparency and equal opportunity for bidders. Requirements do not appear overtly tailored.

While 'E-Procurement' is stated, the automated check flags 'No e-submission,' creating a critical contradiction. 'Restricted document access' also impedes practical access. The lack of a specific contract start date and financing details further reduces practicality for planning.

A significant inconsistency exists between the 'E-Procurement' characteristic and the 'No e-submission' issue flagged by automated checks. The estimated value is also missing, contributing to data gaps. Dates are logical and consistent.

The project inherently contributes to cultural sustainability by preserving a historical building. However, the tender does not explicitly integrate broader green procurement, social, or innovation criteria, which are standard in modern sustainable procurement practices.