the place to be: 2011

Just presented the final panels.
Here is an image of the notes I took whilst Natasha, Brant and Paul were speaking.

They advised me to perhaps do more diagrams of the materials used, to translate the materials, textures and aesthetic. Perhaps the modules could be compressed in size as well due to the potential waste of space. perhaps tile roofs could also be moved around resulting in changes in height and would give the building more air circulation, it could also become a possible place for putting the piping, power source etc.
An interesting idea.

They also gave me examples of similar projects: and naturally i had to look these up.

Capsule Tower - Tokyo

this is adorable. they look like tumble dryers stacked up.

habitat 67

i had no idea what this was when Paul was talking about it, and then i researched it and OF COURSE i know this!! i love how the modules don't necessarily tesselate and look quite precarious. The gaps could produce airflow, maybe an outdoor space like a courtyard? so you can manipulate the building to create indoor AND outdoor space! SO FLEXIBLE!

Infrastructure
1. Strategy (12.5%): Has the infrastructural strategy been developed and communicated well in the blog and final presentation/submission?
  Description: What is your strategy for utilising an existing or newly proposed infrastructure? How does it influence the way you design an architectural entity and how it improves the way politicians, governmental institutions and others offer and people access parliamentary and/or governmental services?
  
  strategy for improving the governmental departments of Australia and allowing the public to know that this is being done (giving the public ease of mind, as they feel separated from their government). allowing for politicians to actually focus on different strategies that are possible, whilst maintaining close to the parliament house and the university.
2. Logistics (12.5%): Has the logistics been considered and well incorporated in the design? Has the development been well documented and communicated well in the blog and final presentation / submission?
  Description: Your design is required to respond to changing needs. Whether it is an instantaneous, temporary or long-term change, it is needed to be a part of your design consideration. How is your architectural entity designed to change, move, shift, transform, adapt, interact, etc.? Where do components and/or information stored? Where are they generated or manufactured and delivered?
  
  responds to changing needs by allowing concentration in different government departments.
Tectonic Resolution
1. Purpose and Function (12.5%): Has the purpose and function of the architectural entity be chosen in response to (latent) needs? Is the design response appropriate? Has the development been well documented and communicated well in the blog and final presentation / submission?
  Description: It is imperative that your design effectively provides parliamentary and/or governmental services in response to needs. You are to creatively investigate the (latent) needs, and it is essential that your proposed architectural entity provide solutions or opportunities for people to resolve issues.
  
  the institute of parliamentary strategy provides services to the government in response to current needs.
2. Circulation and Access (12.5%): Has the use of architectural entity been studied and the circulation within and/or access to it been studied? Is it evident in the design? Has the development been well documented and communicated well in the blog and final presentation / submission?
  Description: No matter what you design, it will fail if people are not given appropriate access to, within and/or between your proposed spaces. It is very important that you provide enough evidence in your development stages and final outcome that your architectural entity has good circulation and access.
  
  space is extremely flexible and circulation is created by the users through the use of modules and flexible foundation.
3. Structural and/or Operational Integrity (12.5%): Has the structural and/or operational integrity been studied and made evident in design? Has the development been well documented and communicated well in the blog and final presentation / submission?
  Description: How believable is your proposition? It is very important that the proposal demonstrates your design decisions are informed by clear understanding of physical and practical limitations. You are required to demonstrate structural integrity of your design proposal, and/or in some cases, operational integrity to show how the distributed or virtual artefacts work as an architectural entity.
  
  all mechanisms and moveable walls use currently existing technology and the entire scheme can be implemented today. fixtures, electricity, hydraulic and wall panel details have been resolved.
Poetic Resolution
1. Presence and Identity (12.5%): Has the impact of the proposed entity's presence been considered and its identity been chosen with strong understanding of what it needs to represent and signify?
  Description: It is vital that the presence of your proposed entity is appropriate for the context and signifies the services it offers. It therefore is very important to give specific consideration to how people identify and recognise your proposed architectural entity as a whole and/or a part.
  
  the institute of parliamentary strategy was designed as a response to project one and the group project statement. we had determined that Canberra was not the place to be and that the elements were too far from each other and the public had no interest/ was against the current government system. The tram system links different cores together, as well as travelling to other parts of Canberra that create its identity. The building allows the nation to get the best strategies available to current problems, it is situated between the parliament house and the university of Canberra allowing for easy access to users and equipment required. It is also located in a very central area, next to a road, allowing the public to see that issues are being addressed, specifically in areas where they are need (evident by a larger amount of modules onto a particular core)
2. User Experience (12.5%): Has the experience of users been considered and effectively presented from the perspectives of users?
  Description: It is imperative that you made your design decisions based on the requirements of people who will experience and use (a part of) the proposed entity. You need to demonstrate not only generic appearances of spaces with people, but also construct scenarios to orchestrate how specific people in specific need experiences and utilise services offered by the proposed entity or parts.
  
  the experience of the users can be tailored to them. to the configuration of internal spaces to creating terrains with the flexible foundation.
3. Aesthetic Rigor (12.5%): Has the effort been made to pay attention to detail in your communication?
  Description: This criterion is to reward your attitude towards preparing successful architectural communication. As architects, you will spend majority of time communicating ideas to your peers, bosses, clients, engineers, contractors and/or other stakeholders. What and how you prepare and present directly influence how others evaluate the credibility of your claim. Your commitment towards visual communication during development stages (through blog entries), final presentation and in your final submission is to be assessed.
  
  3 X A1 panels have been made; displaying the information as clearly as possible in an infographic format, the blog has been consistently updated and a physical presentation has been made.