The strategy began with analysis of how people move through the campus each day. Arrival sequences, pedestrian routes, drop-off areas and internal circulation paths were mapped to identify decision points, areas where information was required and relationships between different buildings.

These movement studies informed coordination with the wider design team. Rather than relying on physical signage alone, the navigation framework considered how spatial organisation, routes and environmental cues could support movement before additional information was introduced.

The campus was organised into identifiable zones based on function, destination and building identity. Each building was assigned a combination of naming, numbering and colour, providing users with several ways to recognise where they are within the wider site.

‍

‍

Building naming was developed as a flexible layer that could accommodate terminology chosen by the school, while numbering provided a more structured framework for room identification, maps and directional information.

Colour was applied consistently across physical signage, maps and selected architectural touchpoints. Each building uses a distinct colour drawn from the school’s wider identity palette, creating an additional visual reference within the navigation system.

The physical communication system uses stacked compositions of text, arrows, numbers and pictograms to create a visual language suited to the educational setting while maintaining information hierarchy and legibility.

Pedestrian directional elements take cues from the structural shading devices within the campus architecture. Messages are distributed across angled surfaces that relate to the geometry of the surrounding built environment.

Large-scale building graphics, colour-led identifiers and diagrammatic maps extend this system across the campus, connecting orientation with the school’s visual identity.

‍