Jury Notes:
The jury was struck by Violeta’s project for the intensity of drawings, spectacular spaces and insistence on making an architecture of “many.” | The programmatic position for a village is timely. | Behind the color palette of pink and blue hues is a sophisticated set of sections and elevations that contain a mix of both repetitive housing blocks and shared public space.

Jury Notes:
This project stood out because it reminded us of Tim Smith’s original “5 over 1” housing blocks that first originated in LA. The student doesn’t reference this housing type, but the jury sees a visual link. | By creating a series of spaces that meander through public and private, Nadthachai used these modular units to break down the concept of a monolith and create unique aggregates that address an entire housing block.

Jury Notes:
Athenna interpreted the homeless tent as the modern-day primitive hut, using observed qualities of transient shelter to drive the mixed-use low-income housing. | The quality of the drawings struck the jury on this project, as well as the relevance of the program and the depth of the narrative. | The project is unwavering in its proposal that architecture is required to cultivate dignity and self-image for the city’s vulnerable population.

Jury Notes:
Through his inspiration for set design, Daniel created a beautifully illustrated storyboard portraying how his design acts as both a gateway and beacon for the city. By grouping programs together and truly analyzing his context,  his project focused on bringing the community together in an innovative way.

Jury Notes:
This was a really interesting concept for AR application within an existing structure. Through techniques of visualization and superimposing a new layer of information, Eithar provides a way to access an exhibit any place in the world with inadmissible interiors. Very timely with our current situation.

Jury Notes:
Ezinnika’s project is beautifully conceived and drawn. The last drawing is of particular interest because of the dynamic quality as a hybrid drawing: shadow, linework, form, poche, circulation is stunning. I look forward to following this person’s work in the very near future!

Jury Notes:
Jong and Daniel’s project is typologically rigorous. JENNIFER: Andrew and Daniel’s project nicely balances between a slab building and a building that reads as aggregates. This alchemy of types also resolves the deep plan by introducing compelling voids at its center. It is clear this duo has wrestled with conceptual narrative and materiality in interesting ways.

Jury Notes:
Josh approached the adaptive reuse project by creating a modular system that significantly differed from the existing structure, altering the spatial qualities of the building. The project responds to the pandemic through modularity, which is timely.

Jury Notes:
With a strong emphasis on community, Selina explored solutions that advocate for co living in a modern world. She drew inspiration from nature and healthy environments, and was mindful of our current situation with the pandemic. By creating a safe coliving situation, even down to the specific materials chosen for surfaces, this project reimagines what a co living home should look and feel like post COVID 19.

Jury Notes:
The project has a strong relationship between the facade, form and structure. The student referenced ancestral heritage to derive the form into a compelling design that incorporates the cultural communities of the neighborhood.