The awards judges assess each project in terms of the following:

The relationship of the building to its site, context and presence

The degree of consistency and completeness in expressing the relationship between concept, form and structure

Light, colour, texture and spatial qualities

Structure, construction, materials and issues of durability and detail

Environmental performance

User satisfaction, value to the client and acceptability of solutions to the brief

Contribution to the advancement of architecture as a discipline and the enhancement of the human spirit

It seems like there's a panel of jurors that visit the sites as well as meeting with the architects and clients

[–] Dave 2 points 8 months ago (2 children)

Thanks! I'm not sure I quite understand architecture enough, but many of the entries seem boring to me 😆. Though it can be hard to judge from one photo.

[–] liv 2 points 8 months ago (1 children)

I don't know that much about it but it's an interesting discipline because it's about usefulness and art all at once.

I'm guessing sometimes if it gets too exciting it either loses functionality or the clients hate it/won't build it. But yeah I think you'd have to walk around in them to judge them.

[–] Dave 2 points 8 months ago

Yeah, I just look at these photos and think sure, that's a nice looking BNZ building. But is it nicer than the one right next to it in the photo, or is it just a standard office building? Some of the houses just look like a house (without eaves, popular during the leaky home period 😆), some are large developments that just look like any other.

Sorry, I think this stuff is lost on me. Maybe when the winner is announced there will be a nice description of everything and then I'll understand better why it's well architected.