 |
Conditions of entry
Each year the Dutch institutions offering Master's programmes in architecture, urban design and/or landscape architecture select their best graduation projects and submit them to Archiprix. The institutions make their selection in accordance with the conditions of entry and selection criteria set down by Archiprix. The conditions of entry set a maximum to the number of submitted projects, proportionate to the size of each institution. So for Delft the maximum is 9, for Amsterdam 4, Eindhoven 4, Rotterdam 3, Tilburg 2, Wageningen 2, Arnhem 1, Groningen 1 and Maastricht 1, giving a total of 27 projects. All the institutions submitted their maximum number to Archiprix 2009. Besides these formal regulations, the conditions of entry contain the criteria underlying both the selection of projects by the institutions and the adjudication. The quintessential requirements are: that the outcome of the entry is an architectural, urban or landscape design; that this has an explicitly stated issue or issues as its basic premise; and that there is a detailed account of how, working from the above issues, the project was arrived at. When judging the projects the following elements are successively taken into account: the analysis of the brief; the project's conceptual strength; the spatial quality of the design together with a sensitive deployment of resources; an account of the project in words and images; and lastly the cohesion enjoyed by these elements. This cohesion is of major importance as it serves to demonstrate the entrant's mastery of the entire process insofar as this translates the issue raised by the brief into an appropriate three-dimensional solution.
The jury
Each year Archiprix's executive board assembles a new independent jury of experts. In the interests of fairness, no persons directly connected with preparing a submitted project or directly related to a designer of such, may sit on the jury. The jury's task is to assess the projects on their own merits and briefly comment on the substance of each. In addition it has to select the best entries and divide the prize money among them accordingly. There are five members of the jury, four experts in the three disciplines concerned and a cultural philosopher. The line-up of the jury that judged the final-year projects of Archiprix 2009 is as follows:
- Haiko Meijer, architecture
- Arjen Oosterman, theory
- Miranda Reitsma, urban design
- Ronald Rietveld, landscape architecture
- Max Risselada, architecture
Secretary to the jury is Henk van der Veen of Archiprix.
Adjudication
The entries were judged on January 15th and 20th 2009 in Delft. Before those dates the jury received for each project a text composed by the designer giving the essence of his or her entry. The jury studied these written explanations in the period between the two judging sessions. It assessed each project individually in terms of its qualities, proceeding from the criteria established by Archiprix and stated in the conditions of entry.
Statistics
The institutions teaching architecture, landscape architecture and urban design in the Netherlands selected 27 final-year projects for inclusion in Archiprix 2009. Of the 27 projects 22 were by students majoring in architecture. Following an upturn in the number of urban design projects in the previous Archiprix the figure has since slunk from four in 2008 to just one in 2009. This year sees four projects designed by graduates in landscape architecture. Eight projects are located abroad. The percentage of female participants is substantially lower than the percentage of female students. Although almost half the student population is female, there are only seven among the 28 participants this year.
|
General remarks
It is striking that it is principally the landscape architecture entries that broach issues relevant today. This continues a tradition that has figured for some time now among Archiprix entries, namely that projects at the macro scale focus on community issues. These projects are far more strongly related to context than the architecture entries. In spatial terms and with a focus on the future, this is partly in the nature of the field of study but less so where current relevance is concerned. The architecture projects comparatively speaking have a much stronger focus on the end result and less on research.
Broad design skills are essential for the architect's field of study and position. It is no longer enough to develop a strong concept. Hence final-year students who try to master all aspects of the profession are on the right track. Fortunately there are examples to be found in this year's Archiprix. Evidently the institutes are thinking in terms of developing their students' professional skills, which is an admirable thing. In addition, exploring possibilities is conspicuous as a trend among the current batch. This attitude will come in handy when facing another current challenge, one not targeted in this year's Archiprix as it happens, namely the decline in both economy and population.
|
Prizes
The jury selected three projects for a prize and one for a special mention. All four are utterly different and at the same time thoroughly convincing in their richness and complexity.
Marlnutrition, designed by Dingeman Deijs
AvB Amsterdam, majoring in architecture
This superb project is informed by a groundbreaking exploratory stance. With a few deft interventions the planning area is primed for a new duty, with a mastery revealed through self-limitation. The fact remains that the area needs the architecture to survive. This compelling project exploits the potentials of the brief by unlocking a new and as yet unknown world.Spaces, Poetics and Voids, designed by Simone Pizzagalli
TU Delft, majoring in architecture
This design is loath to reveal its exceptional qualities at first glance. Yet it intrigues from that moment on. The project makes the very best use of the possibilities education has on offer to act as a laboratory. It explores the different positions designers can adopt within their field, opening new perspectives in the process. The demonstrated approach makes a strong case for the designer to take an autonomous tack. In the followed method the programme is transformed through associative research into a series of spatial treatments. Critiquing the discipline, the scheme is an intriguing response to commercialization of the image and the attendant image-making in architecture.
Carthusian monastery: a psychodyslepticum, designed by Servie Boetzkes
TU Eindhoven, majoring in architecture
This well-wrought project exhibits the hand of a capable designer. He has succeeded in intelligently rendering his
theoretical premises into an elegant, thoughtfully crafted design.
The Resonator, designed by Derk van der Velden
AvB Amsterdam, majoring in landscape architecture
The strength of this landscape design lies in the brilliant principal intervention which unerringly solves the identified problem of discharging water from IJsselmeer given the expected rise in sea level. The project presents a solution that has been overlooked in the various studies done on this topic. It unfurls a varied landscape where local tourist and ecological potentials can be tapped.
|