Alana Peddie
Key strength of the scheme: Overall form and textures work well. Nice procession and flow between the different spaces.
Most significant weakness of the scheme: The scheme remained more of a forming exercise rather than delving into rigorously developing upon your concept as architecture.
Annie Tran
Key strength of the scheme: Your scheme is formally and texturally interesting – and makes good use of the islands view corridors.
Most significant weakness of the scheme: More work could have gone into developing your scheme – especially the relationship to the environment and the programs within. More sophisticated integration into the site itself would have improved your overall grade.
Brian Lau
Key strength of the scheme: Good use of textures and interesting forms.
Most significant weakness of the scheme: More care and finesse needed in your drawings. Also you needed to carefully read the brief to ensure that you fulfill all of the submission requirements. Greater integration into the landscape needed too.
Caroline Hadchiti
Key strength of the scheme: Simple sequential progression between programs articulated well into architectural spaces.
Most significant weakness of the scheme: Much greater integration between your scheme and the site/landform needed.
Cheng Lu
Key strength of the scheme: A very bold, striking scheme. Interesting circulation solution. Good image composition and selection too.
Most significant weakness of the scheme: The ramp could have been somewhat simplified. You needed to balance out the functionality of meandering up 4 floors worth of ramps with the poetics of the ribbon like structure. Also the landform could have been manipulated to allow for greater integration with your scheme.
Cynthia Quang
Key strength of the scheme: Interesting use of colour and texture in your scheme.
Most significant weakness of the scheme: More could have been made about the context of your building. Especially in relation to how the building is affected or relates to its surrounds.
Emma Jin
Key strength of the scheme: Good tectonic development of your scheme. Nice lighting and materiality too.
Most significant weakness of the scheme: More investigation needed into how the site/landform could have been manipulated in and around your scheme. Greater integration between the two could have improved your overall grade.
Esmonde Yap
Key strength of the scheme: Interesting landscape – and together with the site and form of your scheme it showed real potential.
Most significant weakness of the scheme: Much more design development needed – you did not progress beyond the conceptual stage. Your scheme is also lacking material and textural qualities.
Ian Manhuyod
Key strength of the scheme: Good planning skills –especially the siting of the 2 laboratories.
Most significant weakness of the scheme: The ramp rather than being a separate element could have been integrated not only with your buildings but also with the site. More work needed on the relationship between built form and landscape.
Ming Zhe Woo
Key strength of the scheme: Great textures and materiality. Good compositional skills too – in relation to how you constructed your built form.
Most significant weakness of the scheme: A more reciprocal relationship between your building and its surrounding landscape would have improved your overall scheme.
Patti Bai
Key strength of the scheme: Great design sense. It’s great to see a student who is experimenting in all aspects of her submission. Beautiful graphic skills shown on your blog too!
Most significant weakness of the scheme: It became hard to read your scheme due to the intense graphic style. More development and work on your tectonic forms and their relationship to each other would have benefited your concept.
Peter Lei
Key strength of the scheme: It was interesting to see you begin to address more internal aspects of the forms as well – e.g. puncturing or penetrating some of these forms.
Most significant weakness of the scheme: Much more care and refinement needed in your drawings, renderings and textures. Too many were repetitive too. The brief called for an understanding of Boolean operations –you did not push this far enough and as a consequence you only really produced a series of isolated forms.
Rui Chen
Key strength of the scheme: Your scheme has a good relationship to its immediate site and the scale of your built form works well too.
Most significant weakness of the scheme: You need to carefully read the submission requirements in order to satisfy them –i.e. you have not rendered your drawings. Also most of your images are taken from a similar camera angle hence its difficult to read your scheme in its entirety.
Sam Whitby
Key strength of the scheme: Good textural/material qualities and tectonic exploration.
Most significant weakness of the scheme: Although the siting of your built form in your landscape works really well you could have started to articulate the underside of these forms more to allow for greater connectivity and opportunities to the site.
Sarah Sim
Key strength of the scheme: Great understanding of siting the built form in its environment. Your lighting effects work very well too. Great development throughout this project well done.
Most significant weakness of the scheme: Some of your camera angles chosen for your images were repetitious – more thought needed in regards to how you best portray your scheme.
Sunny Sunwha Chung
Key strength of the scheme: A simple and bold idea – the diagram of scheme was quote strong. Greater integration with the landscape would have benefited your overall grade.
Most significant weakness of the scheme: Your scheme needed to experiment and explore how by adding or subtracting prisms you can alter the overall tectonic built form. More needed to be done to realise your concept as habitable spaces.
T J Mundy
Key strength of the scheme: Great scheme - carefully considered relationship not only between the 2 separate spaces to each other (including the link) but also the overall built form and its relationship to the site. Well done.
Most significant weakness of the scheme: More design resolution could have illuminated how these spaces could be used. Also issues of scale (lack of openings, human inhabitation etc) made it difficult to understand some components of your scheme.
Tony Trong
Key strength of the scheme: Very powerful scheme - visually quite arresting. You have done a great job in siting these buildings – in order to maximise the key surrounding natural features. Great use of scale and textures. Well done.
Most significant weakness of the scheme: The bad news is that this is an impartial submission – where is the rest of the submission? This is very unfortunate as had you submitted all of the required work you could have gained a grade or two. Also you needed to push the design of the link between the 2 buildings much further.
Youli Choi
Key strength of the scheme: Good formal resolution and use of textures throughout your scheme. Nice interplay between positive and negative forms too.
Most significant weakness of the scheme: Although you had started to consider the natural landscape (i.e internalised courtyard spaces) a greater connection between your scheme and the site would have improved your overall grade.
Yvonne Chan
Key strength of the scheme: Your integration between the built form and the natural landforms is quite successful. Your platform/link structure works well as a common meeting space.
Most significant weakness of the scheme:The use and application of textures as a flat surface onto the prism unfortunately let down your submission. More experimentation in this component needed.
