Integrated Project

1. Integrated Project • A written summary of your project • Reductions or vignettes of your drawings • Must be legible

7. Integrated Project Grading Criteria Daylighting (40%) Daylighting is an important form generator in architecture.  Well designed daylighting systems enhance the livability of interior spaces and extend the sustainability of the built environment through a reduced reliance on electric lighting and thus non-renewable forms of energy known to be detrimental to the environment.

8. Daylighting AProject shows exceptional understanding of daylighting. • Project is an architecturally sensitive approach to daylighting integration where daylighting strategies have clearly helped define building form.  • Daylighting strategies are “innovative” relative to contemporary design but may also use vernacular architecture precedents. • Daylight is a celebrated part of the experience of the building.  • Visual comfort problems have been well resolved. • Over-lighting and subjective brightness issues appear to be minimal to non-existent.  • Glazing for fenestration is well suited for the task.  • Material placement to optimize daylighting is well conceived and clearly evident. • Daylighting strategies have been clearly defined and are illustrated at a level that provides an experiential quality to the drawings and model(s). • Process and inquiry are excellent.  

9. Daylighting BProject shows clear understanding of daylighting.  • Daylighting strategies are properly used and have begun to define building form.  • Daylighting strategies are in keeping with recent contemporary design philosophy but may also use vernacular architecture precedents. • Some innovation in daylighting is present but not consistently applied.  • Visual comfort problems are minimized or are reasonably resolvable.  • Daylighting strategies take into account surface reflectance, materials, depth requirements of light wells and so forth. • Glazing for fenestration is well suited for the task.  • Material placement to enhance daylighting is reasonably conceived and evident. • Drawings and models clearly illustrate the major daylighting strategies. • Process and inquiry are above average.

10. Daylighting CProject shows only a moderate awareness of daylighting that goes beyond simply admitting great quantities of uncontrolled daylight. • Daylighting strategies are minimally beyond simple fenestration systems found in conventional buildings commonly built over the past 25 years (e.g., ribbon windows, top and/or side lighting with only nominal sun control, large reliance on the VLT of glazing to control heat gain, etc.). • Visual comfort problems exist with minimal redress and resolution evident.  • Drawings and model(s) provide minimal explanation of daylighting strategies and the experience they create. • Process and inquiry are average.

11. Daylighting DProject shows little to no awareness of daylighting that goes beyond simply admitting great quantities of uncontrolled daylight.  • Daylighting strategies consist of simple fenestration and skylight systems generally common to buildings built in the past 25 years. • The strategies do not incorporate controlled daylight access other than drapes and blinds located on the interior of the building.  • There is no innovative quality to the daylighting design. • Visual comfort conditions dominate the interior spaces with no attempt to redress or resolve them. • Drawings and model(s) show little to no daylighting integration explanation. • Process and inquiry are weak.  

12. Daylighting EProject shows poor formulation of daylighting strategies. • Awareness of daylighting concepts is not shown through apertures, materials, visual comfort, and form generation.  • There is no innovative quality in the daylighting. • Daylighting strategies other than simple windows are missing or incorrectly used.  • Attention to visual comfort is not  apparent.  • Drawings and model(s) show no daylighting integration explanation.  Process and inquiry are poor.

13. Integrated Project Grading Criteria Passive Thermal Control/ HVAC/Microclimate (40%) Passive thermal control strategies act as primary systems for heating and cooling.  HVAC systems augment those strategies by using a variety of renewable and non-renewable energy resources. Microclimate strategies draw from opportunities available at the local or regional level to enhance the overall performance of a building.  Microclimate sensitivity enlivens the experiential quality of a building by implementing the elements of “earth, wind, fire, and water” common to a specific region.

14. Passive Thermal Control/HVAC AProject shows exceptional understanding of passive thermal controls integration with HVAC systems and microclimate. • Passive thermal control strategies have clearly helped define building form.  • Passive thermal control strategies are “innovative” relative to contemporary design but may also use vernacular architecture precedents. • Thermal comfort problems appear to be well resolved. • Thermal comfort issues appear minimal to non-existent. • Material placement to optimize passive thermal control usage is well conceived and clearly evident. • Mechanical spaces are directly accessible. • Building appears to meet energy codes. • Passive thermal control strategies have been clearly defined and are illustrated at a level that provides an experiential quality to drawings and model(s). • Process and inquiry are excellent.   BProject shows clear understanding of passive thermal controls and their integration with HVAC systems.  Passive thermal control strategies are properly used to aid defining building form.  Passive thermal control strategies are in keeping with contemporary design but may also use vernacular architecture precedents. Some innovation in passive thermal control is present.  Thermal comfort problems are minimal or are reasonably resolvable. Material placement to optimize passive thermal control usage is reasonably conceived and evident. Mechanical spaces are readily accessible. Building appears to meet energy codes. Drawings and model(s) clearly illustrate passive thermal control strategies. Process and inquiry are above average.   CProject shows passive thermal control strategies that are minimal beyond climatically non-adaptive systems found in conventional buildings built in the past 50 years (e.g., ribbon windows, nominal sun control, reliance on HVAC to offset thermal deficiencies). Project shows only moderate passive thermal control awareness.  Thermal comfort problems appear with minimal redress evident.  Mechanical spaces are accessible. Building appears to meet energy codes with minor modifications.  Drawings and model(s) provide minimal explanation of passive thermal control strategies. Process and inquiry are average. DProject shows little to no passive thermal control awareness.  Thermal control consists of systems common to buildings built in the past 50 years. Strategies do not incorporate controlled sunlight access other than interior shading.  There is no innovative quality to the passive thermal controls. Thermal comfort issues dominate spaces with no apparent attempt to resolve them. Mechanical spaces are marginally accessible. Building will not meet energy codes without major modifications. Drawings and model(s) show little to no passive thermal control explanation and show deficient understanding of HVAC systems.  Process and inquiry are weak.   EProject shows poor passive thermal control strategies and relies largely on HVAC systems for comfort. Awareness of passive thermal control is not shown (e.g., apertures, materials, and form generation).  Lack of HVAC awareness is shown by improperly configured mechanical spaces. Mechanical spaces are not easily accessible. Building obviously does not meet energy codes. Drawings and model(s) show no passive thermal control integration or awareness of HVAC systems needs.  Process and inquiry are poor. Microclimate/Regional Vernacular (20%) Microclimate/regional vernacular design strategies draw from opportunities available at the local or regional level to enhance the overall performance of a building.  Microclimate sensitivity enlivens the experiential quality of a building by implementing the elements of “earth, wind, fire, and water” common to a specific region. AProject shows exceptional understanding of microclimate/regional vernacular concepts and their integration with other building systems. Project is an architecturally sensitive approach to microclimate/regional vernacular strategy integration where microclimate/regional vernacular strategies (e.g., wind screens/diverters, vestibules, sun spaces, brise-soleil, water features, earth contact architecture) have clearly helped define the building form.  Microclimate/regional vernacular strategies are “innovative” with regards to contemporary design but also use vernacular architecture precedents. Thermal comfort is enhanced by their inclusion.  Comfort problems appear to be minimal or non-existent.  Strategies drawn from local vernacular precedents are well conceived and clearly evident. Microclimate/regional vernacular strategies have been clearly defined and are illustrated at a level that provides an experiential quality to the drawings and model(s). Process and inquiry are excellent.   BProject shows clear understanding of microclimate/regional vernacular strategies and their integration with other systems.  Microclimate/regional vernacular strategies are properly used and have begun to define building form.  Microclimate/ regional vernacular strategies are in keeping with contemporary design but may also use vernacular architecture precedents. Exploration in microclimate/ regional vernacular strategies is present but not consistently applied.  Thermal comfort problems are minimized or reasonably resolvable.  Strategies drawn from vernacular precedents are reasonably conceived and evident. Drawings and models clearly illustrate major microclimate/regional vernacular strategies. Process and inquiry are above average.   CProject shows only moderate microclimate/ regional vernacular concept awareness.  Micro-climate/regional vernacular strategies are minimally beyond simple and often climatically non-adaptive systems found in conventional buildings built over the past 50 years (e.g., non-operable glazing, no natural cooling, large reliance on HVAC to control offset thermal deficiencies, etc.). Thermal comfort problems appear to exist with minimal resolution evident.  Mechanical spaces are accessible for service personnel. Building appears to meet energy codes with minor modifications.  Drawings and model provide minimal explanation of microclimate/ regional vernacular strategies and the experience they create. Process and inquiry are average. DProject shows little to no awareness of microclimate/regional vernacular strategies.  There is little innovative quality to the microclimate/regional vernacular design. Thermal comfort deficiencies appear to dominate the spaces with no attempt to redress or resolve them. Drawings and model(s) show little to no microclimate/regional vernacular integration explanation and show a deficient understanding.  Process and inquiry are weak.   EProject shows poor microclimate/regional vernacular strategies or relies significantly on HVAC systems to maintain comfort. Awareness of microclimate/ regional vernacular integration is not shown through the use of traditional precedents and local climate opportunities.  There is no innovative quality in the microclimate/regional vernacular strategies. Presentation drawings and model(s) show no microclimate/regional vernacular integration.  Process and inquiry are poor. Utility Systems/Acoustics (10%) Utility systems (e.g., plumbing, telecommunications, and electrical) form the infrastructure of the building.  Improperly located or inadequately sized utility systems are a continuing source of frustration for occupants.  Similarly, poorly conceived acoustical planning can degrade the overall experience of a space.  While often overlooked when done well, lack of appropriate attention to these systems can lead to frequent complaints from building users. AProject shows exceptional understanding of utility systems and acoustical control strategies.  Utilities appear adequate for user needs. Utility spaces are clearly shown.  Acoustical planning is shown through the appropriate separation of noise generating and noise sensitive areas without unnecessary added architectural expense (e.g., not placing them adjacent to one another in the first place rather than adding double walls between them).  Project shows an understanding of common acoustical phenomena (e.g., standing waves, focal points, flanking noise) and how to avoid them. Acoustical comfort problems appear to be well resolved.  Acoustical planning strategies have been clearly illustrated in the drawings and model(s). Process and inquiry are excellent.   BProject shows clear understanding of utility systems and acoustical planning strategies.  Utilities appear adequate for user needs. Utility spaces are shown.  Acoustical planning is shown through the appropriate separation of noise generating and noise sensitive areas but may include an added architectural expense.  Project shows awareness of common acoustical phenomena and how to avoid them. Acoustical comfort problems appear to be readily resolved.  Acoustical planning strategies have been clearly illustrated in the drawings and model(s). Process and inquiry are above average.   CProject shows an awareness of utility systems and acoustical planning strategies.  Utilities appear adequate for user needs. Utility spaces are shown appropriately.  Inadequate acoustical planning is shown through the inappropriate placement of noise generating and noise sensitive areas or leaving acoustical issues unresolved.  Project shows nominal awareness of common acoustical phenomena and how to avoid them. Drawings and model provide minimal explanation of acoustical and utility systems’ planning. Process and inquiry are average. DProject shows minimal awareness of utility systems and acoustical planning strategies.  Utilities are inadequate for user needs. Utility spaces are shown inappropriately.  Inadequate acoustical planning is shown through the inappropriate placement of noise generating and noise sensitive areas or leaving acoustical issues unresolved.  Project shows minimal or no awareness of common acoustical phenomena and how to avoid them. Drawings and model provide little explanation of acoustical and utility systems’ planning. Process and inquiry are weak.   EProject shows no awareness of utility systems and acoustical planning strategies.  Utilities are inadequate for user needs. Utility spaces are not shown.  Poor acoustical planning is shown through inappropriate placement of noise generating and noise sensitive areas or leaving acoustical issues completely unresolved.  Project shows no awareness of common acoustical phenomena and how to avoid them. Drawings and model provide no explanation of acoustical and utility systems’ planning. Process and inquiry are poor.

15. Passive Thermal Control/HVAC B Project shows clear understanding of passive thermal controls and their integration with HVAC systems and microclimate.  • Passive thermal control strategies are properly used to aid defining building form.  • Passive thermal control strategies are in keeping with contemporary design but may also use vernacular architecture precedents. • Some innovation in passive thermal control is present.  • Thermal comfort problems are minimal or are reasonably resolvable. Material placement to optimize passive thermal control usage is reasonably conceived and evident. • Mechanical spaces are readily accessible. • Building appears to meet energy codes. • Drawings and model(s) clearly illustrate passive thermal control strategies. Process and inquiry are above average.  

16. Passive Thermal Control/HVAC CProject shows passive thermal control strategies that are minimal beyond climatically non-adaptive systems found in conventional buildings built in the past 50 years (e.g., ribbon windows, nominal sun control, reliance on HVAC to offset thermal deficiencies). • Project shows only moderate passive thermal control awareness.  • Thermal comfort problems appear with minimal redress evident.  • Mechanical spaces are accessible. • Building appears to meet energy codes with minor modifications.  • Drawings and model(s) provide minimal explanation of passive thermal control strategies. • Process and inquiry are average.

17. Passive Thermal Control/HVAC D Project shows little to no passive thermal control awareness.   • Thermal control consists of systems common to buildings built in the past 50 years. • Strategies do not incorporate controlled sunlight access other than interior shading.  • There is no innovative quality to the passive thermal controls. • Thermal comfort issues dominate spaces with no apparent attempt to resolve them. • Mechanical spaces are marginally accessible. • Building will not meet energy codes without major modifications. • Drawings and model(s) show little to no passive thermal control explanation and show deficient understanding of HVAC systems.  • Process and inquiry are weak.  

18. Passive Thermal Control/HVAC E Project shows poor passive thermal control strategies and relies largely on HVAC systems for comfort. • Awareness of passive thermal control is not shown (e.g., apertures, materials, and form generation).  • Lack of HVAC awareness is shown by improperly configured mechanical spaces. • Mechanical spaces are not easily accessible. • Building obviously does not meet energy codes. • Drawings and model(s) show no passive thermal control integration or awareness of HVAC systems needs.  • Process and inquiry are poor.

19. Integrated Project Grading Criteria Utility Systems/Acoustics (20%) Utility systems (e.g., plumbing, telecommunications, and electrical) form the infrastructure of the building.  Improperly located or inadequately sized utility systems are a continuing source of frustration for occupants. Similarly, poorly conceived acoustical planning can degrade the overall experience of a space.  While often overlooked when done well, lack of appropriate attention to these systems can lead to frequent complaints from building users.

20. Utility Systems/Acoustics A Project shows exceptional understanding of utility systems and acoustical control strategies.  • Utilities appear adequate for user needs. • Utility spaces are clearly shown.  • Acoustical planning is shown through the appropriate separation of noise generating and noise sensitive areas without unnecessary added architectural expense (e.g., not placing them adjacent to one another in the first place rather than adding double walls between them).  • Project shows an understanding of common acoustical phenomena (e.g., standing waves, focal points, flanking noise) and how to avoid them. • Acoustical comfort problems appear to be well resolved.  • Acoustical planning strategies have been clearly illustrated in the drawings and model(s). • Process and inquiry are excellent.  

21. Utility Systems/Acoustics B Project shows clear understanding of utility systems and acoustical planning strategies.  • Utilities appear adequate for user needs. • Utility spaces are shown.  • Acoustical planning is shown through the appropriate separation of noise generating and noise sensitive areas but may include an added architectural expense.  • Project shows awareness of common acoustical phenomena and how to avoid them. • Acoustical comfort problems appear to be readily resolved.  • Acoustical planning strategies have been clearly illustrated in the drawings and model(s). • Process and inquiry are above average.

22. Utility Systems/Acoustics C Project shows an awareness of utility systems and acoustical planning strategies.  • Utilities appear adequate for user needs. • Utility spaces are shown appropriately.  • Inadequate acoustical planning is shown through the inappropriate placement of noise generating and noise sensitive areas or leaving acoustical issues unresolved.  • Project shows nominal awareness of common acoustical phenomena and how to avoid them. • Drawings and model provide minimal explanation of acoustical and utility systems’ planning. • Process and inquiry are average.

23. Utility Systems/Acoustics D Project shows minimal awareness of utility systems and acoustical planning strategies.  • Utilities are inadequate for user needs. Utility spaces are shown inappropriately.  • Inadequate acoustical planning is shown through the inappropriate placement of noise generating and noise sensitive areas or leaving acoustical issues unresolved.  • Project shows minimal or no awareness of common acoustical phenomena and how to avoid them. • Drawings and model provide little explanation of acoustical and utility systems’ planning. • Process and inquiry are weak.  

24. Utility Systems/Acoustics E Project shows no awareness of utility systems and acoustical planning strategies.  • Utilities are inadequate for user needs. • Utility spaces are not shown.  • Poor acoustical planning is shown through inappropriate placement of noise generating and noise sensitive areas or leaving acoustical issues completely unresolved.  • Project shows no awareness of common acoustical phenomena and how to avoid them. • Drawings and model provide no explanation of acoustical and utility systems’ planning. • Process and inquiry are poor.