Jury Overview How do degrees of localness – state, region, city, town, suburb, block, street – find expression in built form? The extra burden of pursuing a national or regional identity seems unnecessary when there are abundant riches to be found by engaging with the situation at hand. All of the buildings that stood out this year were exemplary in this way: whether previously unoccupied or defined by historic remnants, their design uncovered the latent qualities within and around the site. They exhibited an ease of fit between an existing set of conditions and a new set of demands. As well, there was demonstrable compatibility between the architecture and its occupants.
     Kerstin Thompson (chair)

Jury Overview NSW had a record 156 entries this year. There was disappointing quality in the “Urban Design” and “Public” categories but compensating for this was a seemingly endless array of beautiful and amazing houses, both new and altered. This year, an award in either of the single residential categories is an award indeed. Inevitably, there are many really good buildings that have not received awards. The “Sustainable Architecture” and “Heritage” categories both caused dilemmas – should sustainable be a separate category or an expected feature of every project, and how do you compare a painstaking restoration with an inventive work that respects the old yet gives a new lease of life? Keith Cottier (chair)

Overview These awards are taking place in the shadow of climate change, a water crisis and resource depletion. The challenge for architects is to inspire the community to change the way we create places through the power of environmentally responsive design. Our actions should speak louder than words. It would seem logical, then, that we conduct the process of submitting and judging material electronically.
     For the fi rst time in years we waived the requirement that juries visit all projects. It is incumbent on us, both as a profession and as a professional body, to reduce our environmental footprint by whatever means we can.
Francesco Bonato (awards director)

Jury Overview Each year we hope that a plethora of submissions will emerge to test the jury and the professional competitive spirit. This year we received ten projects for consideration for eight categories. It is disappointing that some prominent city projects were not submitted to swell this number and provide a wider spread of typology and idea.
     However, the considered excellence of this year’s projects provided the jury with a lively and engaging dialogue.
     A range of scales and approaches responded to the demands of the Northern Territory climate and its character, from Alice Springs to Croker Island and Darwin.
Bob Nation (chair)

Jury Overview One aim of the RAIA awards is to let our communities know that good design can be found at many scales and with constraints of time and cost. We were encouraged this year by an eclectic list of nominations showing clarity in problem solving and architectural expression. At various levels, they celebrated all the things that architects are supposed to handle with panache – concern for the immediate and larger environment, and thoughtful understanding of construction and technology, the fragile connections between people and buildings, the role of decoration and the pleasures of craftsmanship.
     There was a heartening depth of judgement, inventiveness, professionalism and perseverance.
Roger Pegrum (chair)