OFFICIAL COMPETITION RULES #
Missing MiddlesSacramento Three & Up Challenge™ (2026)
1.OVERVIEW
1.1.Purpose
The Sacramento Three & Up Challenge™ (“Competition“) invites designers, architects, students, and interdisciplinary teams to propose innovative missing-middle housing prototypes suited for infill and transit-oriented sites within Sacramento, California. The Competition aims to advance innovative approaches to small-scale residential design, support community-oriented housing solutions, and contribute to a broader ecosystem of civic, educational, and planning resources.
1.2.Governing Documents
These Official Competition Rules (“Rules“) must be read together with the Competition Terms & Conditions (“Terms“) and the Entrant IP License Agreement (“IP License“), which collectively govern all aspects of participation. In the event of conflict among the Competition Documents, the order of precedence stated in the Terms shall apply.
1.3.Structure
These Rules establish procedural requirements for:
•eligibility and division placement
•the two-round Competition structure
•anonymity and prohibited conduct
•submission formatting and content standards
•evaluation criteria and Jury processes
•conflict-of-interest procedures
•awards determination
Legal rights, disclaimers, enforcement mechanisms, and Sponsor authority appear in the Terms and IP License.
2.DEFINITIONS
The following terms have the meanings set forth below when used in these Rules. Capitalized terms not defined in these Rules have the meanings given in the Terms or the IP License.
2.1.“Submission Portal” or “Submission Platform”
The online submission system designated by Sponsor (e.g., Zealous), through which Entrants must register, upload, and finalize all Submission Materials.
2.2. “Competition Brief”
The document provided by Sponsor containing detailed site information, design parameters, submission specifications, and other requirements applicable to Round One. The Competition Brief forms an integral part of these Rules.
2.3.“Finalist Brief”
The supplemental instructions provided only to Finalists invited to participate in Round Two, describing additional deliverables, expanded requirements, and technical expectations.
2.4.“Anonymous Entry ID”
The unique anonymous identifier assigned to each Entrant or Team by the Submission Portal or Sponsor. The Anonymous Entry ID must be used as the sole identifier in all Submission Materials and file names unless otherwise directed by Sponsor.
2.5.“Presentation Boards”
The required A2 landscape-format design boards submitted in PDF format for Round One and Round Two, containing drawings, diagrams, narratives, feasibility signals, and other visual materials as required by these Rules and the Competition Brief.
2.6.“Finalist”
An Entrant or Team selected by the Jury after Round One to participate in Round Two and submit expanded materials.
2.7.“Winner”
An Entrant or Team selected by the Jury after Round Two to receive an Award, subject to execution of the Winner Agreement and compliance with the Terms.
2.8.“Feasibility Overview” or“Feasibility Analysis”
The written and/or diagrammatic feasibility material required for Round One and Round Two, respectively, demonstrating conceptual buildability, density logic, and other feasibility signals appropriate to each stage.
2.9.“MM Materials”Materials provided by Sponsor for use in preparing Submissions, as defined and governed by the Terms and the IP License. Nothing in these Rules alters the legal restrictions in the Terms or IP License.
2.10.“Collaboration Partner”
Any entity, organization, or individual that provides financial support, in-kind contributions, services, expertise, or other assistance to Sponsor in connection with the Competition, whether formally recognized or informally engaged.
2.11.“Professional Division” and “Student Division”
The Competition divisions described in Section 3 used to categorize Entrants and determine award eligibility.
3.DIVISIONS & ELIGIBILITY
3.1.Competition Divisions
Entrants must register in one of the following two divisions:
•Professional Division
•Student Division
Teams must select a single division for their Submission. Division assignment affects eligibility for awards but does not affect evaluation criteria.
Teams entering the Student Division must consist exclusively of eligible students or recent graduates. If any member of a Team is a practicing professional—regardless of discipline—the entire Team must enter the Professional Division. Students or recent graduates who wish to compete at the professional level may voluntarily register for the Professional Division.
3.2.Professional Division Eligibility
The Professional Division is open to:
•licensed architects
•architectural or urban design professionals
•planners, engineers, and builders
•developers, housing practitioners, fabricators, and construction professionals
•faculty, researchers, or other design and construction experts
•interdisciplinary collaborators working in professional practice
3.3.Student Division Eligibility
The Student Division is open to:
•individuals currently enrolled in accredited undergraduate or graduate programs in architecture, design, planning, engineering, or related fields
•individuals who graduated from such programs within 12 months prior to the Competition deadline
•teams composed entirely of individuals meeting the above criteria
Sponsor may require Entrants to submit proof of enrollment or graduation (e.g., student ID, transcript, registrar letter). Failure to provide documentation may result in disqualification.
3.4.Team Composition & Responsibilities
Teams may include any number of members unless otherwise specified in the Competition Brief. All members must meet eligibility requirements, accept the Terms and IP License, and be listed at registration.
Each Team must designate a Team Representative responsible for official communications, completing submissions, and administrative requirements.All Team members are jointly responsible for compliance with these Rules, the Terms, and the IP License.
3.5.General Eligibility Requirements
All Entrants must:
•be at least 18 years of age
•complete registration before submitting materials
•provide truthful information during registration
•comply with anonymity, submission, and AI rules
•meet all deadlines
•accept the Terms and IP License
Failure to satisfy eligibility requirements may result in disqualification.
3.6.Ineligible Participants
The following individuals may not participate:
•employees, officers, directors, or contractors of Sponsor
•employees, officers, contractors, or agents of Collaboration Partners involved in Competition operations
•Jury members, advisors to the Jury, or individuals involved in administering or evaluating Submissions
•immediate family or household members of individuals listed above
•individuals with early or atypical access to non-public Competition materials
•any Entrant disqualified under the Terms
Sponsor may disqualify any Entrant presenting a conflict of interest or fairness concern.
3.7.Eligibility Verification
Sponsor may require documentation verifying eligibility, including:
•proof of licensure or professional status
•proof of academic enrollment or recent graduation
•government-issued identification
•declarations regarding originality or authorship
Failure to provide requested documentation may result in disqualification.
3.8.Entry Fees
Entry fees, including any early registration discounts or pricing tiers, are listed on the Competition Website. All entry fees are non-refundable. No Submission will be reviewed until all required fees are paid.
4.COMPETITION FORMAT
4.1.Two-Round Structure
The Competition consists of two rounds of anonymous design submission. All Entrants participate in Round One. A limited number of Entrants will be selected as Finalists and invited to submit expanded materials for Round Two.
4.2.Round One — Concept Design Submission
Round One requires submission of a conceptual missing-middle housing prototype suitable for one or more representative Sacramento sites identified in the Competition Brief.
Round One Submissions shall include, at a minimum:
(a)Presentation Boards
Presentation boards illustrating the proposed design concept, massing, and site response, prepared in the format specified in the Competition Brief.
(b)Drawings and Diagrams
Drawings and/or diagrams illustrating massing, spatial organization, and site or contextual relationships, as required by the Competition Brief.
(c)Written Narrative
A written narrative describing the proposal and design approach, as outlined in the Competition Brief.
(d)Preliminary Feasibility or Development Logic
Preliminary feasibility, development logic, or other high-level considerations appropriate to a conceptual design stage, as described in the Competition Brief.
(e)Additional Materials
Any additional materials expressly required by the Competition Brief.
All Round One Submissions must comply with anonymity requirements and submission instructions set forth in these Rules and the Competition Brief.
Following evaluation of Round One Submissions, the Jury shall select a limited number of Finalists in each Division.
4.3.Round Two — Expanded Finalist Submission
Entrants selected as Finalists after Round One shall be invited to participate in Round Two and to submit additional materials in accordance with the Finalist Brief.
Round Two Submissions shall build upon the concepts presented in Round One and shall include, at a minimum:
(a)Refined Presentation Boards
Updated or expanded presentation boards further developing the proposal, prepared in the format specified in the Finalist Brief.
(b)Expanded Design Narrative
An expanded written narrative describing the proposal and its development since Round One, as outlined in the Finalist Brief.
(c)Drawings and Diagrams
Additional drawings, diagrams, plans, sections, or other visual materials, as required by the Finalist Brief.
(d)Expanded Feasibility or Development Considerations
Expanded feasibility, development logic, or related considerations appropriate to the Finalist stage, as described in the Finalist Brief.
(e)Additional Materials
Any additional materials expressly required by the Finalist Brief.
Finalist Submissions must comply with all anonymity, formatting, and submission requirements set forth in these Rules and the Finalist Brief.
Following evaluation of Round Two Submissions, the Jury shall deliberate to determine award recipients.
4.4.Minimum Technical Standards
Submissions must demonstrate technical feasibility sufficient for meaningful evaluation. Sponsor may decline to review any Submission that is infeasible, non-responsive, unreadable, incomplete, or in violation of anonymity or formatting rules.
4.5.Use of MM Materials
Entrants must comply with all restrictions on MM Materials described in the Terms and IP License.
5.ANONYMITY REQUIREMENTS
5.1.Purpose of Anonymity
The Competition is judged anonymously to ensure fairness and impartiality. Entrant identities must not be disclosed to the Jury prior to announcement of Winners.
5.2.Prohibited Identifying Content
Submissions must not include:
(a)Direct Identifiers
•personal names
•initials or monograms
•signatures
•firm, employer, or school names
•studio identifiers
•logos or branding
•watermarks or seals
(b)Indirect or Contextual Identifiers
•images of identifiable individuals
•references to geographic locations linked to Entrants
•references to office culture, instructors, employers, or institutions
•acknowledgments or personal messages
(c)Digital Identifiers
•embedded URLs or QR codes
•social media handles
•email addresses or cloud links
•AI tool watermarks or account-linked identifiers
(d)Metadata
Entrants must remove all identifying metadata, including EXIF data, author names, company fields, revision histories, comments, and identifiable layer names.
5.3.Anonymous Entry ID Requirements
Entrants must use the Anonymous Entry ID as the sole identifier, placed exactly where specified and used for all filenames and documents. No custom numbering systems or symbols may be added.
5.4.Anonymity in Round Two
Finalists must remain anonymous and must not publicly identify themselves, publish submission materials, or contact Sponsor in a way that reveals their identity.
5.5.Platform Responsibilities
The Submission Platform will assign Entry IDs, restrict Juror access to identities, and maintain separation of identity and Submission data.
5.6.Sponsor Enforcement Authority
Sponsor may correct identifiers, remove identifiers where feasible, determine if anonymity has been compromised, and disqualify Submissions for violations.
5.7.Consequences of Violations
Violations may result in disqualification, non-review, forfeiture of Finalist or Winner status, or revocation of Awards.
5.8.Entrant Responsibilities
Entrants are responsible for ensuring anonymity in all materials and file metadata and for complying with naming conventions.
6.SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS — FILE FORMAT, SIZE, AND UPLOAD SPECIFICATIONS
6.1.Compliance Obligation
All materials must comply strictly with these Rules and the Competition Brief.
6.2.Authorized Submission Method
All materials must be uploaded through the designated Submission Portal. No email, cloud links, or physical submissions will be accepted.
6.3.Presentation Board Requirements
Entrants must upload exactly four (4) presentation boards, each meeting all of the following requirements:
•Size & Orientation: A2, landscape orientation
Format: PDF format. No physical materials will be accepted.
•File Size: Maximum 10 MB per board
•Content Restrictions: No embedded media, hyperlinks, external file references, or unpermitted file formats
Boards must comply with all additional specifications in the Competition Brief.
6.4.Language, Legibility & File Integrity
All text must be in English. Entrants must ensure files are legible, complete, and readable. Corrupted or improperly formatted files may not be reviewed.
6.5.Prohibited File Types and Media
The following are strictly prohibited unless expressly authorized in Finalist instructions:
•video files;
•animated or time-based media;
•audio files;
•embedded or linked media (including hyperlinks to external content);
•any file formats not expressly permitted by these Rules or the Competition Brief.
Any Submission containing such materials, whether embedded or otherwise included, may be deemed non-compliant and subject to disqualification or non-review under the Terms.
6.6.Entrant Responsibility for Upload Completion
Entrants are solely responsible for:
•verifying that all files are successfully uploaded before the deadline;
•ensuring files meet all specifications in these Rules and the Competition Brief;
•confirming file integrity and readability.
Sponsor is not responsible for:
•bandwidth limitations;
•platform malfunctions;
•failed uploads;
•corrupted files;
•Entrant error.
Late, incomplete, or non-compliant submissions may not be reviewed (see Terms).
6.7.Sponsor Discretion Regarding Procedural Compliance
Sponsor may determine whether a Submission conforms to these procedural requirements.
6.8.Anonymous Entry Identification & File Naming Conventions
(a)Assignment of Anonymous Entry ID
Upon registration, each Entrant will receive a unique Anonymous Entry ID generated by the Submission Portal or by Sponsor. This ID must remain unchanged and be the only identifier in filenames and documents.
(b)Use of Anonymous Entry ID in All Files
The Anonymous Entry ID must appear in filenames, required metadata fields, headers, and any location otherwise requiring identification.
(c)Mandatory File Naming — Round One
Round One files must use the following naming conventions (with #### replaced by the Entrant’s Anonymous Entry ID): Round One files must use the following naming conventions (with #### replaced by the Entrant’s Anonymous Entry ID):
MM2026-####_Board01.pdf
MM2026-####_Board02.pdf
MM2026-####_Board03.pdf
MM2026-####_Board04.pdf
MM2026-####_Narrative.pdf
MM2026-####_Feasibility.pdf
No deviations, additional characters, or alternate naming conventions are permitted.
(d)Mandatory File Naming — Round Two
Round Two (Finalist) files must use the following naming conventions (with #### replaced by the Entrant’s Anonymous Entry ID):
MM2026-####_Final_Board01.pdf
MM2026-####_Final_Board02.pdf
MM2026-####_Final_Narrative.pdf
MM2026-####_Final_Feasibility.pdf
Finalist materials must use the same Anonymous Entry ID as in Round One, unless Sponsor directs otherwise.
(e)Prohibition on Identifying Metadata
Entrants must remove author names, Team names, logos, trademarks, URLs, QR codes, social media handles, identifying metadata, organization names, revision histories, geolocation data, signatures, etc.
(f)Coordination With Submission Platform
Sponsor may work with the platform to automate ID assignment and validate naming conventions.
(g)Enforcement
Deviations may result in procedural non-compliance. Legal enforcement appears in the Terms.
7.CONFLICT OF INTEREST PROCEDURES
7.1.Purpose
These Conflict-of-Interest (“COI”) procedures ensure fairness, impartiality, and credibility in the evaluation of Submissions and the determination of Awards. All Entrants involved in the Competition are subject to these requirements.
7.2.Entrant Conflicts
Entrants must disclose any relationship, affiliation, prior collaboration, mentorship, employment connection, or other interaction with:
•any Juror
•any Sponsor personnel responsible for overseeing Competition operations
•any Collaboration Partner involved in administering evaluation
or any other affiliation that would make an Entrant ineligible for the Competition under Section 3.6 of the Rules. Sponsor will determine whether a disclosed relationship constitutes a conflict requiring mitigation or disqualification.
7.3.Prohibited Conduct
Entrants may not:
•contact or attempt to influence any Juror
•attempt to identify Jurors or disclose Entrant identity
•solicit advice or assistance from Jurors
•circumvent anonymity
•communicate with Sponsor personnel to influence evaluation
7.4.Sponsor Oversight
Sponsor may implement safeguards, including reassignment of Submissions, modified deliberation structures, recusals, or replacement of Jurors. Sponsor’s determinations are final.
7.5.Ongoing Duty to Disclose
Entrants must disclose any new or evolving conflicts before Jury deliberations conclude.
7.6.Relation to Terms
Violations of COI procedures may result in disqualification, revocation of Finalist or Winner status, and other remedies in the Terms.
8.AI USE REQUIREMENTS
8.1.Purpose
These AI rules ensure genuine Entrant authorship, compliance with the IP License, and maintenance of fairness and anonymity.
8.2.Minimum Human Authorship Requirement
Human creativity must constitute the core of each Submission. AI may assist but not replace Entrant authorship.
8.3.Permitted AI Use
Entrants may use AI tools for:
•image editing or refinement
•drafting aids or diagram generation aligned with Entrant intent
•iterative concept development
•analytical or visualization tools supporting Entrant authorship
8.4.Prohibited AI Use
Entrants may not:
•submit AI-generated content lacking meaningful human authorship
•imitate styles of specific architects or firms
•fabricate false quantitative outputs
•submit AI-replicated copyrighted content
•use AI in ways that violate anonymity
8.5.AI Disclosure Statement
Entrants must submit a statement describing:
•AI tools used
•purpose of use
•scope and nature of AI-assisted content
False or incomplete disclosures may result in disqualification.
8.6.Consistency With IP License
All AI-assisted content must comply with ownership, originality, and licensing requirements in the IP License.
8.7.AI and Anonymity
AI tools must not:
•embed usernames or account identifiers
•generate stylistic signatures revealing identity
•output identifiable individuals, buildings, or school/firm branding
8.8.Inspection RightsSponsor may require Entrants to provide:
•working files
•prompts
•intermediate outputs
•process documentation
•model parameters selected by the Entrant
Failure to comply may result in disqualification.
8.9.Reverse Engineering Prohibited
Entrants may not reverse-engineer or derive training data from AI tools provided by Sponsor or the Platform.
8.10.Procedural Discretion
Sponsor may interpret or adapt these AI rules as necessary. Determinations are final.
9.JURY PROCEDURES
9.1.Composition.
Sponsor selects an independent Jury composed of qualified experts, which may include architects, designers, planners, engineers, academics, housing practitioners, civic leaders, or other professionals with relevant expertise. Sponsor may consider diversity of background, discipline, and perspective in selecting the Jury.
9.2. Independence.
The Jury operates independently. Sponsor does not participate in Jury discussions, influence scoring, shape deliberations, or review draft evaluations. Sponsor’s role is limited to administrative coordination and anonymity management as described in these Rules and the Terms.
9.3. Replacement or Recusal.
Sponsor may add, remove, or replace Jurors in the event of:
•withdrawal or unavailability;
•illness;
•the emergence of a conflict of interest;
•failure to comply with Jury instructions; or
•other circumstances requiring substitution.
Jurors must disclose real or perceived conflicts of interest at any stage. Sponsor may partially or fully recuse a Juror from evaluating specific Submissions.
9.4.Confidentiality of Deliberations.
All Jury deliberations, internal communications, comments, scoring sheets, notes, and evaluation records are strictly confidential. They will not be disclosed to Entrants under any circumstances. The confidentiality of Jury deliberations is a core procedural requirement and is essential to maintaining fairness, impartiality, and independence.
9.5. Prohibited Contact.
Jurors may not communicate with Entrants during the Competition. Entrants must not attempt to contact, identify, influence, or provide any information to Jurors, directly or indirectly. Any such attempt may result in immediate Disqualification under the Terms. Sponsor may monitor communications to enforce this requirement.
10.EVALUATION CRITERIA
10.1.General Evaluation Framework
The Jury evaluates Submissions according to the framework below, aligned with architectural and planning standards. Evaluation is qualitative, and no single criterion is dispositive.
10.2.Required Drawings
The following drawing requirements are intended to ensure uniformity, comparability, and regulatory alignment across all Submissions. These requirements reflect the general documentation structure used by the City of Sacramento for residential plan review; however, Submissions remain schematic in nature and are not required to include structural calculations, engineering sheets, Title 24 documentation, or permit-level construction details.
All scaled drawings must include a stated scale and a graphic scale bar. All calculations must correspond to dimensions shown in the scaled drawings.
Failure to comply with this Section may result in a Submission being deemed non-responsive.
(a) Site Plan Requirements
Site Plans shall be drawn at:
•1″ = 10’0″ (preferred), or 1″ = 20′-0″
The Site Plan must include:
Property and Envelope Information
•Property lines and lot dimensions (as provided in the Competition Brief)
•Required and proposed setbacks (dimensioned)
•Building footprint (fully dimensioned)
•Distance from all exterior walls to property lines (fire separation distances)
Base Building Envelope Compliance
•Graphic depiction of the provided Base Building Envelope, or
•Clear overlay demonstrating the proposed footprint remains within the allowable envelope
Access and Circulation
•Driveways and pedestrian access points
•Parking layout and count (if applicable)
•Path of travel from public sidewalk to primary entry
Open Space and Landscape Delineation
•Open space areas clearly labeled and dimensioned
•Hardscape areas differentiated from planted areas
•Identification of private versus shared open space (if applicable)
•Required open space areas must not include driveway surfaces
Submissions must indicate, diagrammatically:
•Location and type of stormwater strategy (e.g. permeable paving, bioswale, rain garden, planter infiltration zone, etc.)
•General site drainage direction
Detailed hydrology calculations, grading plans, and engineered BMP sizing are not required.
Hardscape and landscape areas must be clearly differentiated and quantified.
The Site Plan shall include:
•Total Hardscape Area (SF)
•Total Planting Area (SF)
•Total Open Space Area (SF)
•Building Footprint Area (SF)
Hardscape shall include all impervious surfaces such as driveways, patios, walkways, and paved courts.
Planting areas shall include landscape beds, lawn, permeable zones, and tree planting areas.
Areas may be summarized in a small site-area legend or table.
Stormwater & BMP Strategy (Diagrammatic Only)
Submissions must indicate, diagrammatically:
•Location and type of stormwater strategy (e.g. permeable paving, bioswale, rain garden, planter infiltration zone, etc.)
•General site drainage direction
Detailed hydrology calculations, grading plans, and engineered BMP sizing are not required.
Tree Requirements
•Required front setback tree location (minimum 15-gallon size)
•Street-side tree location for corner lots, where applicable
•Existing protected trees, if identified in the Competition Brief
Utilities (Diagrammatic Only)
•Location of water service connection (assumed or existing)
•Location of sewer lateral connection
•General drainage direction
•Utility meters at frontage, if applicable
Detailed grading plans, pipe sizing, civil sheets, drainage studies, or utility engineering drawings are not required.
Submissions should demonstrate a plausible relationship between impervious surface coverage and stormwater strategies appropriate to urban infill conditions.
That gives jurors evaluative discretion without mandating calculations.
(b) Floor Plans
Floor Plans shall be drawn at:
•1/8″ = 1′-0″ minimum
•¼” = 1′-0″ permitted
Floor Plans must include:
•All levels of the building
•Room names and functional labels
•Unit count and unit types
•Overall building dimensions
•Circulation paths and widths sufficient for usability evaluation
•Door and window locations
•Gross square footage per unit
•Total gross building area
Structural framing plans, door schedules, window schedules, and construction details are not required.
(c) Exterior Elevations
Exterior Elevations shall be drawn at:
•1/8″ = 1′-0″ minimum
All exterior elevations are required:
•Front
•Rear
•Left side
•Right side
Elevations must include:
•Overall building height (dimensioned)
•Relationship to grade
•Roof form and slope
•Exterior material zones (labeled)
•Window and door openings
Detailed construction assemblies and specifications are not required.
(d) Building Section
At least one longitudinal or transverse Building Section is required.
Sections shall be drawn at:
•1/8″ = 1′-0″ minimum
•1/4″ = 1′-0″ permitted
Sections must include:
•Floor-to-floor heights
•Overall building height
•Relationship to grade
•Roof form
•General wall thickness sufficient to understand massing
Structural calculations and framing diagrams are not required.
(e) Bulk Plane / 3D Envelope Diagram (Required)
Each Submission must include a bulk plane or 3D envelope diagram demonstrating compliance with the provided Base Building Envelope.
This may be presented as:
•A three-dimensional massing diagram showing the maximum allowable envelope relative to the proposed building; or
•A sectional envelope diagram illustrating bulk plane limits and roof slope compliance.
The diagram must demonstrate:
•Maximum permitted building height
•Side and rear bulk plane limits
•That no portion of the building exceeds the allowable envelope
Envelope derivation is not required; compliance within the provided envelope is required.
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) Calculation (Required)
Each Submission must include a FAR calculation consistent with the lot information provided in the Competition Brief.
The Compliance Summary Table shall include:
•Lot Area (SF)
•Maximum FAR (as provided)
•Maximum Allowable Building Area (SF)
•Proposed Gross Building Area (SF)
•Proposed FAR
Proposed FAR must correspond to the total gross building area shown in the Floor Plans.
(f) Open Space Calculation (Required)
Where two or more units are proposed, Submissions must demonstrate compliance with ordinance open space standards.
The Compliance Summary Table shall include:
•Required Open Space per Unit (SF)
•Total Required Open Space (SF)
•Total Provided Open Space (SF)
•Minimum dimension confirmation (e.g. 10′ x 10′ minimum)
Open space areas must be clearly delineated and dimensioned on the Site Plan.
(g) Compliance Summary Table
Each Submission must include a consolidated Compliance Summary Table identifying:
•Zoning designation (as provided)
•Allowed vs. proposed unit count
•Height limit vs. proposed height
•Required vs. provided setbacks
•Fire separation distances
•Lot Area
•FAR calculations
•Open space calculations
•Parking required vs. provided (if applicable)
All values must correspond directly to the scaled drawings.
Inconsistencies between drawings and summary tables may result in score reduction.
(h) Optional Materials
Renderings, axonometrics, perspectives, environmental performance diagrams (e.g., sun/shade studies), material diagrams, and process drawings are permitted but optional.
Optional materials may supplement but may not substitute for required scaled drawings or compliance documentation.
While not required, such materials are strongly encouraged to supplement and clarify:
•Required scaled drawings;
•Written narratives;
•Environmental and performance strategies; and
•Financial feasibility logic, including alignment with the Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM).
Optional materials should enhance clarity and coherence of the Submission but may not substitute for required scaled drawings, compliance documentation, or calculation summaries.
The Jury will evaluate optional materials only insofar as they substantively support the required criteria under Section 10.
(i) Required Architectural Perspective (“Money Shot”)
Each Submission must include at least one resolved architectural perspective illustrating the project at the human scale.
The perspective shall:
•Depict the proposed building in its street or primary open-space context;
•Demonstrate massing, material articulation, and façade logic;
•Convey the spatial and experiential intent of the project.
The perspective may be rendered, line-based, or diagrammatic in style. Photorealistic rendering is not required.
This required perspective is intended to support evaluation of Design Excellence and Visual Communication and may not substitute for required scaled drawings or compliance documentation.
(j) Visual Communication Requirements
•Architectural Perspective (“Money Shot”) — Mandatory: At least one resolved exterior perspective depicting the proposed building at human scale within its street or primary open-space context. Must clearly convey massing, façade articulation, and spatial intent. Rendering style may be photorealistic, hybrid, or line-based. Photorealism is not required.
•Supplemental Diagrams — Encouraged: Environmental performance diagrams, typology diagrams, circulation diagrams, contextual massing comparisons, accessibility diagrams, or process studies that clarify design intent and performance.
•Additional Renderings — Optional: Additional exterior or interior perspectives may be included to support clarity of livability, environmental strategy, or community integration.
•Financial Visualization — Optional: Graphics supporting the Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM), area efficiency, or feasibility logic (e.g., area breakdown charts, cost distribution diagrams).
10.3.Round One Evaluation Criteria (100-Point Scale)
Each eligible anonymous Submission is evaluated on a 100-point scale across the following principal domains:
(a) Design Excellence
The Jury evaluates:
•architectural quality and conceptual clarity;
•contextual responsiveness to Sacramento neighborhoods;
•appropriateness and innovation in massing strategies;
•control of proportion, form, façade composition, and detail;
•livability and usability of units and circulation;
•advancement of missing-middle housing typologies.
(b) Sustainability and Resilience
Evaluation includes:
•passive design strategies;
•heat-mitigation, shading, and cooling logic;
•water use and stormwater strategies;
•energy considerations and environmental performance;
•durability and longevity of materials;
•adaptability over time;
•contributions to social sustainability, equity, and neighborhood cohesion.
(c) Buildability and Feasibility
The Jury considers:
•zoning alignment and ordinance compatibility;
•plausibility of structural and construction logic;
•clarity of feasibility or cost assumptions;
•constructability for small-scale infill development;
•development realism appropriate to Round One expectations.
(d) Written and Visual Narrative
Evaluation includes:
•coherence and clarity of design intent;
•clarity of environmental strategies;
•legibility of spatial experience;
•persuasiveness and clarity of feasibility explanations;
•quality, accuracy, and communicative effectiveness of drawings, diagrams, and narrative text.
Round One Scoring Method
Jurors apply a standardized scale from “Excellent” to “Not Fulfilled”, corresponding to the submission’s resolution and compliance with the Brief. After individual scoring, the Jury deliberates privately to select Finalists.
Round Two Evaluation Criteria (100-Point Scale)
Finalist submissions are evaluated using a new 100-point scale, with heightened expectations for refinement, technical rigor, and responsiveness to Round One feedback.
(a) Architectural Refinement
The Jury examines:
•improved massing, façade coherence, and elevation quality;
•clarity and performance of unit layouts and circulation;
•open-space configuration;
•architectural precision, detailing, and resolution;
•holistic development of design intent.
(b) Buildability, Cost, and Replication Potential
Key considerations include:
•clarity and realism of updated Rough Order of Magnitude (or analogous feasibility logic);
•constructability and sequencing strategies;
•appropriateness of materials and systems;
•adaptability, scalability, and replicability across typical Sacramento infill parcels.
(c) Sustainability and Resilience — Advanced Expectations
Evaluation includes:
•embodied carbon and lifecycle considerations;
•passive cooling and ventilation strategies;
•water and stormwater performance;
•material durability and long-term maintenance;
•climate-responsive innovation tailored to Sacramento.
(d) Community, Equity, and Attainability Narrative
The Jury considers:
•clarity and appropriateness of anticipated resident profiles;
•accessibility and universal design considerations;
•neighborhood-scale impacts and community cohesion;
•pathways to affordability, attainability, and equity;
•broader social and environmental justice implications.
10.4.Round Two Scoring Method
Finalists are evaluated using the same “Excellent” to “Not Fulfilled” scale, with the expectation that Round Two Submissions show significant refinement and thoughtful response to Jury comments. After scoring, the Jury deliberates privately to determine Award recipients.
10.5.Tie-Breaking Procedures.
If two or more Submissions receive materially similar evaluations or are otherwise considered tied, the following procedures shall apply, unless Sponsor determines that a different method is necessary to ensure fairness:
•Primary Criterion Re-Weighting.
The Jury will re-evaluate tied Submissions with heightened emphasis on the primary evaluation criteria identified in the Rules. The Submission that demonstrates stronger performance against the primary criteria will be ranked higher.
•Holistic Jury Deliberation.
If a tie persists, the Jury will conduct a secondary holistic review of the tied Submissions to consider overall design excellence, innovation, clarity of intent, feasibility, and alignment with the Competition mission.
•Directed Ranking Round.
If a tie remains after holistic review, each juror will independently rank the tied Submissions. Rankings will be aggregated, and the Submission with the strongest aggregate ranking will be selected.
11.AWARDS AND RECOGNITION
11.1.Divisional Awards.
Awards are conferred separately for the Professional Division and the Student Division. Each Division is evaluated independently, and no Entrant or Team may receive awards in more than one Division. The number of awards conferred in each Division may be adjusted by Sponsor or the Jury depending on the quality and quantity of submissions. All awards are subject to the Terms and the Winner Agreement.
11.2.Professional Division Awards — $30,000 Total Prize Fund
The following constitute the official prize categories for the Professional Division:
(a)The Green Blueprint Award — $10,000
Awarded to the professional submission demonstrating exceptional advancement of sustainable, climate-responsive, and environmentally forward housing design.
(b)The Scalable Futures Award — $10,000
Awarded to the professional submission that best exemplifies replicability, development feasibility, and scalable missing-middle housing typologies suitable for Sacramento neighborhoods.
(c)The Community Catalyst Award — $10,000
Awarded to the professional submission demonstrating outstanding community benefit, neighborhood integration, equity considerations, and social impact.
11.3.Special Citations — Professional Division
The Jury may issue additional Special Citations, with or without monetary award, recognizing submissions that demonstrate exceptional merit in:
•innovation;
•affordability strategies;
•constructability and material logic;
•climate resilience;
•community engagement;
•contextual response; or
•other strengths identified by the Jury.
11.4.Student Division Awards — 5,000 Total Prize Fund
The following constitute the official prize categories for the Student Division:
(a)Gold Award — $2,500
Awarded to the highest-performing student submission.
(b)Silver Award — $1,500
Awarded to the second-highest-performing student submission.
(c)AIA | California Bronze Award — $700
Awarded in partnership with AIA California in recognition of excellence in student-level architectural design.
(d)Merit Awards — Two Awards of $150 Each
Non–First/Second/Third awards recognizing noteworthy contributions.
11.5.Additional Student Citations
The Jury may elect to issue additional non-monetary commendations recognizing conceptual rigor, innovation, or emerging-talent excellence.
11.6. Determination of Award Recipients
Award recipients are selected solely by the Jury in accordance with the evaluation procedures in Section 10. Jury deliberations, scoring, internal communications, and evaluation notes are confidential. Sponsor does not influence or participate in Jury deliberations or award determinations. The legal effect and finality of Jury decisions are governed by the Terms.
11.7.No Obligation to Proceed
Participation in the Competition does not create any obligation on the part of Sponsor to publish, exhibit, construct, commercialize, license, or otherwise implement any Submission, whether in whole or in part. Entrants acknowledge that all post-Competition decisions regarding use, modification, development, or commercialization of Submissions are entirely discretionary and may be abandoned, delayed, or pursued in alternative forms without notice. No Entrant should rely on the Competition as a basis for future engagement, compensation, or professional opportunity absent a separate written agreement.
12.ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTATION
12.1.Competition Brief
The Competition Brief, published on the Competition Website, provides detailed site parameters, deliverables, and instructions. Finalists will receive additional instructions in the Finalist Brief.
12.2.Finalist Instructions
Finalists must follow all supplemental materials provided after Round One, which may include additional analysis, formatting guidance, or narrative requirements.
12.3.Relationship to Terms & IP License
These Rules describe procedural requirements. The Terms and IP License govern Entrant rights, obligations, disqualification standards, attribution, permitted uses, ownership, and legal matters.
