Home / Product / Design Review
Design Review
Submissions, comments, actions, revisions and approvals stay connected to the drawing and the unit — so every cycle starts where the last one ended.
01
Upload
Tenant submits drawings
02
Review
Disciplines assess
03
Comments
Pinned to the drawing
04
Actions
Owners and due dates
05
Revision
Linked to comments
06
Approval
Recorded against unit
Try it
Mark each design criterion compliant or non-compliant, add comments from the library, then issue feedback to the tenant.
Mall Expansion — Phase 02 / F&B-214 Coffee concept / Detailed design · Rev C
Shopfront · 9 criteria · 0 of 9 reviewed
Design sections: Shopfront · Signage · Ceiling & Lighting · MEP
1.1 Site Verification and Demarcation
The tenant verifies site conditions, including the bulkhead, demising walls, piers and columns, and confirms the unit's limits against the lease outline drawing before setting out.
Not reviewed
1.2 Interface Transition Details
Junction details between the tenant's fit-out and the landlord's works are included in the detailed design submission, with a shadow gap at each junction.
Not reviewed
1.3 Projection
No shopfront element other than approved signage projects beyond the lease line.
Not reviewed
1.4 Structural Elements
The shopfront is self-supporting and independent of the landlord's bulkhead. Columns and walls at the lease line are finished by the tenant as part of the shopfront.
Not reviewed
1.5 Bulkhead
The bulkhead aligns with adjacent units, stays within the permitted drop and is finished in a single colour.
Not reviewed
1.6 Materials and Finishes
Samples of proposed shopfront materials and finishes are submitted for landlord approval before installation.
Not reviewed
1.7 Glazing
Shopfront glazing meets the specified glass type and panel sizes, with joints shown on the drawings.
Not reviewed
1.8 Enclosure
Shutters and posts are concealed within the shopfront, and doors open inward without crossing the lease line.
Not reviewed
1.9 Lighting and Illumination
The shopfront is well lit and consistent with the centre's overall lighting.
Not reviewed
Illustrative data
The problem
Review cycles drag because of everything around the review.
01
Repeated comments
The same issues are raised across units and review cycles.
02
Missing information
Incomplete submissions stall reviews before they start.
03
Version confusion
It is not always clear which revision is current.
04
Waiting without owners
Between reviews, nobody is sure who holds the next action.
Reviewers make the judgement; VRDnet structures the submission, the comments and the decision record.
Structured submissions
Checklists based on your design criteria make sure submissions arrive complete.
Discipline-based comments
Architecture, MEP, fire, signage — pinned to the drawing and grouped.
Action ownership
Every comment has an owner and a due date, with reminders.
Revision history
Each revision links back to the comments it responds to.
Approvals with conditions
Approve, approve with conditions or request revision — recorded against the unit.
Review audit trail
A complete history of who reviewed, commented and approved, and when.
Case study 02 · Mall expansion programme
How a landlord team brought design approvals for a new phase into one reviewable workflow.
Read Case Study →Design review, structured
See how VRDnet connects submissions, comments, revisions and approvals to the unit.