Feature

Juries for professional design awards are an unpredictable lot. Sometimes they take an aesthetic stand, as an ASLA jury several years ago apparently did when it bestowed numerous awards on just two firms. Sometimes they take the pulse of the profession, diplomatically choosing projects that reflect a range of concerns and dimensions of practice.

This year's ASLA jury did a bit of both. This was not an ideological group, comprised of ecowarriors or devotees of a particular design outlook. Rather, it was an exacting group, issuing no presidential awards and fewer honor awards than permitted. Jurors took a firm position on the standards of practice to which the profession should aspire, while conscientiously considering the multiple strands of landscape architecture practice.

The design jurors sought excellence from top to bottom, beginning to end-a solid concept, sound plan, creative design, and rigorous execution, each layer informing the others. "Does the thinking flow through from the ideas, to the design at different scales, to the construction details?" jury chair Joseph Brown, FASLA, asked. "We were looking for real continuity, all of the details, every step of the way, being pulled together," juror Patricia O'Donnell, FASLA, explained.

The planning jury measured projects across several dimensions, seeking plans that articulated a clear vision, expressed unique values, employed innovative methodologies, connected to an implementation strategy, and conveyed a sense of marketability or public excitement. Jurors recognized that these considerations would play out differently in every case: "We had to understand where the projects were in the process, and consider whether they had an appropriate level of detail and communication to take them to the next level," juror Joe A. Porter, FASLA, explained.

…To read the entire article, subscribe to LAM!