What characterizes a good project?
Where do we stand with the sustainability of projects?
What are the current trends in architecture and design?

I would like to explore these questions in this article and shed light on them from my personal perspective. In the month of May, I studied and evaluated about 120 international project submissions for the renowned FRAME Magazine and, with the support of co-jurors of various nationalities, selected the best five projects from among all the submissions.

Architectural projects of various types and sizes were submitted, from small cafés to renowned cultural buildings, interior design projects as well as industrial designs of building products and furniture innovations.

What are the lessons learned from working with an international jury?

Already after the evaluation of the first 20 projects by the jury in the course of the first days, an interesting finding became apparent. In order to be independent of the influences of other jury members, I evaluated the projects as directly as possible after they had been published by the editorial team, and documented my results in a separate file. Contrary to my initial expectations, I discovered after looking at the evaluations of other jurors that the majority of the jury, which consisted of a truly international group of architecture and design experts, had come to very similar project evaluations. Now, there are basically two possible explanations for this: Either building professionals in all countries are now so comprehensively informed thanks to the Internet and international architecture and design platforms such as FRAME that evaluation principles for good design have largely converged, or there is something universal that distinguishes good projects. Personally, I think both assumptions are true. This is undoubtedly a very valuable and encouraging insight in these politically and economically very turbulent times, in which mainly differences are constantly being discussed in the media. But such fundamental commonalities are unfortunately all too often lost in the hectic pace of international crises. Accordingly, in our globalized world, at least in the discipline of architecture and design, there are many commonalities and great overlaps in the way we want to work and live on this planet. The quality and attractiveness of a project immediately stood out to me, too, regardless of the cultural area in which it was created. But the quality of architecture should not be confused with uniformity in design. On the contrary, good projects followed a credible local context in which they were created.

So what is it that makes a good project?

To come straight to the point: The most important thing is a stringent idea that has made it from concept to realization without any major frictional losses. Like a pebble, so to speak, that has made it all the way down the river from the foot of the mountain to the mouth of the river without grinding off all its edges. So it’s almost an impossibility. How can you achieve this result in a project? To stick with the analogy: Of course, the easiest way is if the course of the river from source to mouth is very short. Smaller projects with manageable budgets and open minded clients bring this with them. Here you have to focus a lot. Now, one could say that large complex projects are therefore structurally at a disadvantage. It’s just that a big idea can’t be so much in the foreground. But shouldn’t our actions and decisions be based much more on human standards and parameters? In large projects, the idea also counts, but it is much more difficult to implement because the requirements are more complex. But that should be an incentive for us. To bring an interesting idea to the finish line and not to round it off in endless loops to the point where there is hardly anything left at the end that distinguishes the project and makes it special. Among the projects submitted, there were quite a few examples in which this was impressively achieved. Another solution is to divide a large project into several smaller, more comprehensible, units. Of course, it is immensely important for any project or product design to have a high level of functionality. Admittedly, it was very difficult for us as a jury to evaluate this characteristic without reference to the physical project or product.

And what about sustainability?

Are we already well on the way to achieving the 2 degree target in 2050, which requires the existing building stock to be climate-neutral? For reasons of efficiency in the use of raw materials in construction projects, it must be assumed that buildings constructed today will still be standing in 2050. However, building owners and planners often do not seem to have really faced up to this reality yet, at least judging by the small sample of projects we had to decide on. Too few projects were able to convince us as a jury. Sustainability is not a simple matter. Both in terms of complexity and in combination with existing requirements in terms of functionality and design, achieving a sustainable result is the greatest challenge that we as builders have had to master in the recent past. By means of modern computer-aided planning methods, however, this is in principle also a feasible challenge. But: When in history has man ever not simply taken the resources he or she could get hold of with his technical and financial possibilities? We have to ask ourselves whether we do have the right mix of instruments and regulations. We are still too slow, too sluggish, in setting the optimal course for truly and structurally sustainable projects. At least, some projects were already very exemplary in this respect and were able to convince us as a jury.

Current trends

Now we come to trends – an aspect that will probably interest most readers, because one tries to be on the cutting edge when it comes to our own projects. Is there anything we can glean from studying the projects in depth? The coffee grounds of current design, so to speak?I would like to highlight my findings on this via the following theses:

Good projects are authentic.

A lot of idea, little resource. That’s perhaps the best way to sum it up. Sustainable as well as easy to grasp. It is not without reason that one of the simplest and at the same time most sustainable projects was awarded first place in our May overview with the Jabakei Tunnel Hotel.

Good projects are sustainable.

Good projects are structurally and integrally sustainable. True sustainability cannot be defined and superficially solved only at the end of planning as an additional task, but defines the entire approach from planning to execution. To work with less in a better way.

Good projects care about materiality and a stringent color concept.

Higher-quality, more sustainable materials that can later be separated by type make a project better. In addition, materiality is also gaining more space again in the facade design of buildings for the benefit of our built environment. A good example of this is the award-winning TIC Art Center project by Domani Architectural Concepts. The use of color is always a delicate issue. Too little, too timid, and it quickly becomes bland. Too much and the project quickly tips over into the ordinary. Good projects generally show a very consistent and bold use of color and material.

Using technology for the sake of technology fails.

Simplicity is what counts in projects. Technology should work and simplify our lives. Projects in which technology is showcased to document progress are definitely passé. Fortunately for all users, I would comment at this point!

The idea counts.

The stringent idea beats almost everything. Like the queen in chess. Without it, hardly anything goes, the game can hardly be won. Great projects with stringent concepts were, for example, the Birdie Cup Coffee Shop by F.O.G. Architecture and the Chamber Church by Ziyu Zhuang Architects.

Click here to view the official FRAME article about the winning projects in May for further study.