Criteria

The jury will evaluate each proposal based on its overall design quality, responsiveness to the competition theme, technical feasibility, and ability to create meaningful civic spaces that serve both government and the community. Entries should demonstrate a thoughtful balance between innovation, functionality, sustainability, cultural identity, and clarity of design intent.

Creativity and Innovation (25%)
• Originality and strength of the overall design concept.
• Innovative architectural solutions that reimagine the civic center as a welcoming public space.
• Creative integration of materials, technologies, and sustainable design strategies.
• Strong visual identity and harmonious integration with the site’s context.

Planning, Functionality, and Spatial Organization (20%)
• Clear and efficient planning, circulation, and accessibility.
• Logical zoning of governance, civic, and community functions.
• Flexible spaces that respond to present needs and future growth.
• Seamless connectivity and user experience throughout the civic center.

Community, Cultural Integration, and Sustainability (20%)
• Meaningful expression of local identity, culture, and heritage.
• Inclusive public spaces that encourage civic participation and social interaction.
• Climate-responsive, environmentally sustainable, and resilient design strategies.
• Appropriate use of materials and landscape that enhance long-term performance.

Functionality and Practicality (15%)
• Effective support for government services and everyday community activities.
• Efficient use of space, operational functionality, and user comfort.
• Adaptability, maintainability, and long-term usability of the proposal.

Constructability and Feasibility (10%)
• Realistic and practical design solutions.
• Appropriate construction methods, materials, and implementation strategies.
• Feasibility within reasonable technical and economic considerations.

Concept and Design Communication (10%)
• Clear presentation of the design vision and concept.
• Strong alignment with the competition theme.
• Effective communication through drawings, diagrams, renderings, and narrative.
• Cohesive storytelling that conveys the proposal’s civic value and design intent.

Progressive Screening Stages
• Initial Screening: The ArchiNEXT Team anonymizes all files, issues official Entry Numbers, and filters out basic clerical failures. Qualified files proceed to the initial jury panel.
• Pre-screening: The first batch of judges reviews and scores the pool. The highest-scoring submissions compose the official “Magic Number”, advancing to final stages.
• Final Screening & Ranking: The jury evaluates the “Magic Number” entries to distill the definitive Ten (10) Finalists and special award recipients. Finalists are notified non-sequentially.
• Live Deliberation & Defense: The Top 3 entrants must prepare a professional presentation before a live panel, followed by a standalone Q&A block. Scores are reset to zero at this stage; the live performance fully determines the ultimate Top 1, 2, and 3 ranking order.