Good quote, though why stop at passing cyclists…in an ideal world such a philosophy would apply to everything! Indeed if I ever had single genie’s wish (and I couldn’t wish for additional wishes or magical powers), that’d be pretty close to what I’d go with.

...] Kong, a city of 6787 people per sq km. By comparison, Melbourne’s population density is around 1600 people per sq km and according to the World Bank, Australia’s overall national population density is a teeny 3 [...

http://www.macdow.com.au/news/north-melbourne-station-upgrade-wins-ccf-award

http://www.ptua.org.au/2012/01/23/potd-north-melb-stn-shelter/

Conflict speaks to a lack of education in general about how cyclists should and do behave. There is little to no knowledge of cycling required to pass a drivers test and there is absolutely no knowledge of the road rules/etiquette required to cycle on the road. I’d prefer to see cyclists have to get a license (note license NOT registration) if only to make sharing the road with cyclists part of a standard driver’s test. Though there are other benefits (form of ID, official recognition of road rights).

I hate it when I’m driving toward an intersection, at which there have been no cars for ages, and am stopped because a cyclist has pressed that damn button so they could have a green light to cross with.

Certainly not advocating Awards in specific categories like “client satisfaction”!!! No, I’m arguing that considerations like user satisfaction should be part of the assessment process, even using existing categories. The use of a building is still its key justification (otherwise it would be sculpture). Good architecture achieves excellence in use and does it in a way that looks and feels good. Either one by itself doesn’t amount to much.

While I believe that judging panels do include some assessment of client satisfaction (they have usually been finished at least for a while), and by extension its functionality, cost effectiveness etc. it is really mostly about an aesthetic appreciation. Its about architecture as an art.

Of course buildings are more than art, and architects have to try to serve practical ends as well as aesthetic ones, but the sort of assessments you are talking about can only be done after a good period of time, and dont sound very exiting – ‘best value for money ‘, or ‘highest client satisfaction’, ‘most low maintenance’ – worthy, but not the sort of thing someone who sees themselves as an artist would covet.

Actually maybe it would be a useful exercise, so that the big firms who do the most commercially driven work, which is usually bland, could get some awards too !

Hovercraft offer some solutions but more challenges.

“Remember when we had traffic lights, ha, ha!”