Deliverables_Final Review

DUE:  April 29th, 2pm, Upper Core Crown Hall.  

Further details will follow, but reviews will take place the afternoon of Wednesday, April 29th, in Upper Core Crown Hall.


A term you have come to know.  But to us, more important than the quantifiable list of goods is your ABILITY TO DELIVER.  (“Delivering” means resolving and finishing the project, not just working continuously toward the deadline.)  The ability to deliver a well crafted and clearly communicative idea or proposal is almost always our highest objective, and never more so than at a final review.  Be clear of your intent and objectives as you work towards your final review, and use this list not as a checklist but as a reference tool.

 As always, the specific instructions you receive in your own studios take priority over this list, but armed with this guidance, use the next two weeks to see beyond a list of deliverables, and instead, deliver a presentation that exhibits understanding, meaning and depth using all means of technique and craft.

Neighborhood Understanding :

Areas of Interest Maps, site models, GIS mapping, site images, precedent Images, site drawings, and diagrams across multiple scales that describe your relevant research and analysis of the city, the neighborhood, the site, the program.  Ideally, your final proposal is “thick” –  aligning with the criteria developed from this process, but where there is divergence, be sure to edit/curate this work to support your project proposal.  Revisit, where necessary, and establish a wider reading of your project.

Proposal (Criteria/Agenda/Objectives/Parti):

Diagrams, sketches, drawings and study models that explain your design intent, design process and design criteria. Clearly composed, carefully edited, and titled/annotated with concise verbiage defining and supporting the big idea of your project.

Architectural Development (Plans/Site Plans/Sections/Elevations):

Developed orthographic drawings that fully describe your proposal through its various architectural systems, regulating systems and design logic(s) at scale.  Every project should have fully detailed plans and sections that describe the significant spaces and uses of your project using the detailed graphic conventions that we know and share.   Think about your project in orthographic section as a means to dissect and expose the behaviour of your building as an assembly and an actor.

Your plans should make clear the character of structure, envelope, circulation, apertures, thresholds between interior and exterior, material shifts, scale, use, building’s relationship to site, etc.  Building sections should contain parallel information and also explain connection to site and environmental context.

Additionally, all projects should present larger scale sections which show both assembly and spatial detail through several key areas. These drawings may be composites of wall sections, connection details, and vignettes.  The presentation scale should be appropriate for the presentation of technical assembly and spatial characteristics and quality.

Experiential views (Inhabitant’s Eye): 

Section perspectives, vignettes, sketches, model photographs, rendered elevations, etc. The techniques for these can be hard-lined, computer generating views, loose but carefully considered hand drawings, or an intelligent combination of media.  The type of drawings you choose should reinforce your ideas and the essence of your project as well as your methods of delivering your story.

Use the experiential views to communicate the experience of the IDEAhaus within and in relation to its place.  Consider this request carefully, and use it as a test and critique of your design.  How does the IDEAhaus (its organization, ambience, site relationships, architecture) activate or encourage new behaviors once in operation?

Situational Views (God’s Eye):

Site plans, site sections, aerial perspectives, aerial axonometrics, site history narratives, sequential  panels, etc.  These expose the project as an actor within the neighborhood situation; organizational changes; how the project reshapes, extends, or alters site conditions; a vision of new metropolitan life.

Final Models: 

  • 3/32” to 1/8” final model, with site relations.
  • 1/4” to 3/8” scale sectional/spatial competition model.
  • All relevant study and process models (See process artifacts).

The final model should include necessary site features to communicate materiality, scale, structure, frame, experience.  Think carefully about what each scale of model is able to describe and allow different scales to convey complementary information.

Process artifacts:

Although most of your sketches, working diagrams, study models, etc should be woven into the proposal, its useful to discuss how you controlled a design process, directed research into solid criteria, established project controls (drawing systems, project geometries, modeling systems), generated iterations, evaluated them and made decisions.

Include all relevant process/study work to communicate critical developments in the design process  – edited, curated, and assembled in relation to the final..

Project Description: 

Project descriptions are encouraged but not necessary deliverables.  Written text which describes the intent and condition of your project will help you more than reviewers to consolidate the essential ideas of your project.  This is not a chronological recounting of your entire process, it is a description of the essence and substance of the project in its “realized” state. Consider how this text frames your oral presentation and choreographs your presentation of your deliverables.


Please consult with your individual professors for details regarding your specific presentation instructions.  That said, your presentations should be well considered and well composed.  Composition is an ethic that is paramount to our profession and craft.   All drawings should be sequenced, not necessarily chronologically, but in an order most relevant to the appropriate reading of your proposal and with the intent of establishing the most legible and compelling presentation of your project.

Lastly, the materiality of your drawings can, and should, be as evocative as the materiality of your models, and the experience of your buildings.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s