joming lau - urban planning and design portfolio

[email protected]

857 NE 67th St. #102, Seattle, WA

206.849.1864

linkedin.com/in/jominglau

@

JOMING LAU Urban Planning and Design

!

!

! !!!

! ! !!

!!! !!

!!!!!! !!!! !!! !! !

!!

! !!

!

!!!

!! ! !! !

!!!

!!!!!! !! !!!!

!!! !

! !!

!!!

!!

!

!!

!!!!

!!

! !!

!!

hg

I5 S

BI5

NB

I5 E

XPR

ESS

PINE ST

E PINE ST

8TH AVE

9TH AVE

E PIKE ST

E UNION ST

7TH AVE

BOREN AVE

12TH

AVE

PIKE ST

OLIVE WAY

STEWART S

T

6TH AVE

BRO

ADW

AY

DENNY WAY

FAIR

VIE

W A

VE N

E MADISON ST

MERCER ST

EAS

TLA

KE A

VE E 12

TH A

VE E

5TH AVE

WE

STLA

KE

AVE

N

15TH

AVE

E

E JOHN ST

BELL

EVU

E A

VE E

14TH

AVE

VIRGIN

IA ST

BRO

ADW

AY E

REPUBLICAN ST

E O

LIVE

WAY

15TH

AVE

HOWELL

ST

SENECA ST

WE

STLAKE AV

E

4TH AVE

E DENNY WAY

BELL

EVU

E A

VE

E ROY ST

I5 E

XPR

PIK

E AN

D 9

TH R

P

VALLEY ST

19TH

AVE

MERCER ST I5 NB ON RP

OLI

VE W

Y O

N R

P

HU

BBE

LL P

L

BELMONT AVE ELA

KEVI

EW B

LVD

E

3RD AVE

OLI

VE W

Y O

FF R

P

E THOMAS ST

LENORA S

T

YALE AVE

UN

IVER

SITY

ST

ON

RP

10TH

AVE

E

CO

NVE

NTI

ON

PL

MEL

RO

SE

AVE

11TH

AVE

FAIR

VIE

W A

VE

13TH AVE

I5 BUS TUNNEL RP

E ALOHA ST

Selecting a Pocket Park Site in Capitol Hill

Within southwest Capitol Hill, there are 2 parks,Plymouth Pillar Park and Cal Anderson Parkwithin 900 feet of the proposed site. While CalAnderson Park serves as a place for all residentsof Capitol Hill to enjoy green space, there is not asmall, quieter place that local residents aroundthe proposed site can use for passive,contemplative activities, or as an impromptuspace that allows for meaningful interactions tohappen.

The proposed pocket park site serves an unmetneed for green space within the Pike-Pine Districtof Capitol Hill. Tucked in between severalresidential buildings, the proposed pocket wouldalso provide a respite from the highly impervioussurfaces that characterize the area. Althoughduring the summer there is adequate canopycover from the street trees, during the winter,there is a feeling of starkness when the treeshave shed their leaves.

By taking the place of a parking lot, the proposedpocket park will satisfy the open space andrecreation needs of neighborhood residentswithin the surrounding blocks who may not beable to enjoy other park spaces slightly furtherfrom the proposed site. The site is also favorablysituated in terms of access by bicycle or bus,allowing residents to take a moment in their dailyroutine to enjoy a short break.

Pocket Parks: A Neighborhood Treasure

Pocket parks are one way to provide recreationor open space needs distinctive from other typesof park needs such as regional, community orneighborhood parks. Primarily aimed at offeringa small open-space/recreational venue of amore passive or intimate nature, servicing localresidents rather than citizens across the city (arole played by larger park types). Pocket parksmay be considered as an alternative to orreplacement of a neighborhood park whereproviding a typical neighborhood park isimpractical or not achievable.

Example: Formosa Park, West Hollywood, CA

Formosa Pocket Park in West Hollywood is a4,000 square foot park that was created forcitizens of a nearby mixed-use development.Containing a variety of plant types, a waterfountain and seating areas, the park wasdesigned out of a desire for more publicgathering spaces, and to be a recreationalhaven from the bustle of surrounding streets

SU

MM

AR

Y Joming Lau is an urban planner and designer with a keen interest in the nexus of planning, urban design and sustainability. He is a graduate of the Master of Urban Planning program at the University of Washington with a Certificate in Urban Design, and has a BSc in Environmental Sciences, and is a LEED AP. Joming brings his professional experience in project management, sustainability indicators, and research and combines it with his exceptional technical skills in Adobe Creative Suite, ArcGIS, and Microsoft Office.

First interested in the concept of sustainable communities after a visit in 2003 to Durika, a ecovillage and biological reserve in Costa Rica, where he stayed at a community that truly walked the talk of sustainability, he was inspired how its principles could be replicated elsewhere. This led to an interest in sustainability in regards to the built environment. In recognizing the large impacts that cities have on our natural environment, he became interested in how cities and urbanized spaces are planned, and how they can have a positive impact on the world.

PORTFOLIO

LPS Methodology Page 1 of 4 Project Title Vancouver Convention Center Expansion Project Methodology for Landscape Performance Benefits

� Created 1,500 linear feet of marine habitat showing marine development in 3 years comparable to a typical site of 8-10 years

Since the installation of the habitat skirt 3 years ago, monitoring of the habitat skirt and surrounding marine habitat has been done annually to fulfill Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) requirements for Fisheries Act Authorization. Monitoring by EBA Engineering Consultants Ltd. includes biannually conducting an inventory and assessment of the dominant intertidal and sub-tidal biota, and comparing biota diversity/productivity with a known and accepted reference site (Marathon) adjacent to the project. Installed 8-10 years ago as new marine habitat, the Marathon reference site was determined by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans to have achieved an acceptable marine habitat condition. In the most recent inventory and assessment conducted in March 2011 by EBA Engineering Consultants Ltd., no significant difference was observed between the Marathon reference site (8-10 years of marine development), and the habitat skirt (3 years of marine development), in terms of species richness and diversity. As well, 43 species were found on the habitat skirt, compared with 46 species at the reference site, and schools of 500 or greater of the following salmonids: Chum, Coho, and possibly Chinook were observed at the habitat skirt.1

� Reduced Stormwater Runoff by 13% or 1.29 million gallons

Based on climate normal data, the average annual rainfall in Vancouver Harbour is 1474.9mm = 58.067 inches2,

Using this information, the following equation can be used to derive annual run off:

R = P * Pj * Rv

Where: R = Annual runoff (inches) P = Annual rainfall (inches) = 58.067 Pj = Fraction of annual rainfall events that produce runoff (usually 0.9) Rv = Runoff coefficient 3

1 Marine Compensation Habitat Survey Report - Vancouver Convention Centre West 2 Vancouver Harbour climate normal data 1971-2000 http://climate.weatheroffice.gc.ca/climate_normals/results_e.html?stnID=888&lang=e&dCode=0&province=BC&provBut=&month1=0&month2=12) 3 The Simple Method to Calculate Urban Stormwater Loads. (2010, January). [Online]. Available: http://www.stormwatercenter.net/monitoring%20and%20assessment/simple%20meth/simple.htm

Capitol Hill Pocket Park Siting Project Site Selection Methodology 1Neighborhood Context 2Demographic Analysis 3

Lower Lonsdale West Waterfront Project 4Deep Energy Retrofit Case Studies 5Wedgwood Feasibility Study 6Woodinville Residential Cluster Plan 7Pike/Pine Conservation Overlay District

Sketchup Building Models 8Building Relocation Analysis 9

Admiral Unreinforced Masonry Building Survey 10 Tianzhong Village Development Scheme 11 Daping Village Inventory Mapping 12Jiaju Village Inventory Mapping 13“Parks for the People” Design Competition 14Landscape Performance Series - Case Study Briefs 15 Central Puget Sound Region Food System Assessment 16

Capitol Hill Pocket Park Siting Project

University of Washington Digital Design Practicum

May 2011

This project sought to address the unmet need for green space within the Pike/Pine District of Capitol Hill by identifying potential sites for pocket parks. The goal of this project was to provide small spaces that would allow for a space that would allow for contemplation while also facilitating the occurrence of meaningful interactions. This project also provided an opportunity to develop expertise in integrating various software programs (including ArcGIS, Photoshop, Indesign, and Sketchup) into their workflow.

My role on this project included developing a methodology and criteria for the site selection process, management of parcel data with ArcGIS and Excel, demographic analysis to support the site selection methodology, and developing 3D visualizations (using Sketchup) of the neighborhood surrounding the proposed pocket park site.

!

!

! !!!

! ! !!

!!! !!

!!!!!! !!!! !!! !! !

!!

! !!

!

!!!

!! ! !! !

!!!

!!!!!! !! !!!!

!!! !

! !!

!!!

!!

!

!!

!!!!

!!

! !!

!!

hgI5

SB

I5 N

BI5

EXP

RES

S

PINE ST

E PINE ST

8TH AVE

9TH AVE

E PIKE ST

E UNION ST

7TH AVE

BOREN AVE

12TH

AVE

PIKE ST

OLIVE WAY

STEWART S

T

6TH AVE

BRO

ADW

AY

DENNY WAY

FAIR

VIE

W A

VE N

E MADISON ST

MERCER ST

EAS

TLA

KE A

VE E 12

TH A

VE E

5TH AVE

WE

STLA

KE

AVE

N

15TH

AVE

E

E JOHN STBE

LLE

VUE

AVE

E

14TH

AVE

VIRGIN

IA ST

BRO

ADW

AY E

REPUBLICAN ST

E O

LIVE

WAY

15TH

AVE

HOWELL

ST

SENECA ST

WE

STLAKE AV

E

4TH AVE

E DENNY WAY

BELL

EVU

E A

VE

E ROY ST

I5 E

XPR

PIK

E AN

D 9

TH R

P

VALLEY ST

19TH

AVE


OLI

VE W

Y O

N R

P

HU

BBE

LL P

L

BELMONT AVE ELA

KEVI

EW B

LVD

E

3RD AVE

OLI

VE W

Y O

FF R

P

E THOMAS ST

LENORA S

T

YALE AVE

UN

IVER

SITY

ST

ON

RP

10TH

AVE

E

CO

NVE

NTI

ON

PL

MEL

RO

SE

AVE

11TH

AVE

FAIR

VIE

W A

VE

13TH AVE

I5 BUS TUNNEL RP

E ALOHA ST









!

!

! !!!

! ! !!

!!! !!

!!!!!! !!!! !!! !! !

!!

! !!

!

!!!

!! ! !! !

!!!

!!!!!! !! !!!!

!!! !

! !!

!!!

!!

!

!!

!!!!

!!

! !!

!!

hg

I5 S

BI5

NB

I5 E

XPR

ESS

PINE ST

E PINE ST

8TH AVE

9TH AVE

E PIKE ST

E UNION ST

7TH AVE

BOREN AVE

12TH

AVE

PIKE ST

OLIVE WAY

STEWART S

T

6TH AVE

BRO

ADW

AY

DENNY WAY

FAIR

VIE

W A

VE N

E MADISON ST

MERCER ST

EAS

TLA

KE A

VE E 12

TH A

VE E

5TH AVE

WE

STLA

KE

AVE

N

15TH

AVE

E

E JOHN ST

BELL

EVU

E A

VE E

14TH

AVE

VIRGIN

IA ST

BRO

ADW

AY E

REPUBLICAN ST

E O

LIVE

WAY

15TH

AVE

HOWELL

ST

SENECA ST

WE

STLAKE AV

E

4TH AVE

E DENNY WAY

BELL

EVU

E A

VE

E ROY ST

I5 E

XPR

PIK

E AN

D 9

TH R

P

VALLEY ST

19TH

AVE


OLI

VE W

Y O

N R

P

HU

BBE

LL P

L

BELMONT AVE ELA

KEVI

EW B

LVD

E

3RD AVE

OLI

VE W

Y O

FF R

P

E THOMAS ST

LENORA S

T

YALE AVE

UN

IVER

SITY

ST

ON

RP

10TH

AVE

E

CO

NVE

NTI

ON

PL

MEL

RO

SE

AVE

11TH

AVE

FAIR

VIE

W A

VE

13TH AVE

I5 BUS TUNNEL RP

E ALOHA ST









!

!

! !!!

! ! !!

!!! !!

!!!!!! !!!! !!! !! !

!!

! !!

!

!!!

!! ! !! !

!!!

!!!!!! !! !!!!

!!! !

! !!

!!!

!!

!

!!

!!!!

!!

! !!

!!

hg

I5 S

BI5

NB

I5 E

XPR

ESS

PINE ST

E PINE ST

8TH AVE

9TH AVE

E PIKE ST

E UNION ST

7TH AVE

BOREN AVE

12TH

AVE

PIKE ST

OLIVE WAY

STEWART S

T

6TH AVE

BRO

ADW

AY

DENNY WAY

FAIR

VIE

W A

VE N

E MADISON ST

MERCER ST

EAS

TLA

KE A

VE E 12

TH A

VE E

5TH AVE

WE

STLA

KE

AVE

N

15TH

AVE

E

E JOHN ST

BELL

EVU

E A

VE E

14TH

AVE

VIRGIN

IA ST

BRO

ADW

AY E

REPUBLICAN ST

E O

LIVE

WAY

15TH

AVE

HOWELL

ST

SENECA ST

WE

STLAKE AV

E

4TH AVE

E DENNY WAY

BELL

EVU

E A

VE

E ROY ST

I5 E

XPR

PIK

E AN

D 9

TH R

P

VALLEY ST

19TH

AVE


OLI

VE W

Y O

N R

P

HU

BBE

LL P

L

BELMONT AVE ELA

KEVI

EW B

LVD

E

3RD AVE

OLI

VE W

Y O

FF R

P

E THOMAS ST

LENORA S

T

YALE AVE

UN

IVER

SITY

ST

ON

RP

10TH

AVE

E

CO

NVE

NTI

ON

PL

MEL

RO

SE

AVE

11TH

AVE

FAIR

VIE

W A

VE

13TH AVE

I5 BUS TUNNEL RP

E ALOHA ST









!½

!½

!½ !½!½!½

!½ !½ !½!½

!½!½!½ !½

!½!½

!½!½!½!½!½ !½!½!½!½ !½!½!½ !½!½ !½!½

!½!½!½

!½!½

!½!½!½

!½!½ !½ !½!½!½

!½!½!½

!½!½!½!½!½!½ !½!½ !½!½!½!½

!½!½!½ !½

!½ !½!½

!½!½!½

!½!½

!½

!½!½

!½!½!½!½

!½!½

!½ !½!½

!½!½

hg

I5 S

BI5

NB

I5 E

XPR

ESS

PINE ST

E PINE ST

8TH AVE

9TH AVE

E PIKE ST

E UNION ST

7TH AVE

BOREN AVE

12TH

AVE

PIKE ST

OLIVE WAY

STEWART S

T

6TH AVE

BRO

ADW

AY

DENNY WAY

FAIR

VIE

W A

VE N

E MADISON ST

MERCER ST

EAS

TLA

KE A

VE E 12

TH A

VE E

5TH AVE

WE

STLA

KE

AVE

N

15TH

AVE

E

E JOHN ST

BELL

EVU

E A

VE E

14TH

AVE

VIRGIN

IA ST

BRO

ADW

AY E

REPUBLICAN ST

E O

LIVE

WAY

15TH

AVE

HOWELL

ST

SENECA ST

WE

STLAKE AV

E

4TH AVE

E DENNY WAY

BELL

EVU

E A

VE

E ROY ST

I5 E

XPR

PIK

E AN

D 9

TH R

P

VALLEY ST

19TH

AVE


OLI

VE W

Y O

N R

P

HU

BBE

LL P

L

BELMONT AVE ELA

KEVI

EW B

LVD

E

3RD AVE

OLI

VE W

Y O

FF R

P

E THOMAS ST

LENORA S

T

YALE AVE

UN

IVER

SITY

ST

ON

RP

10TH

AVE

E

CO

NVE

NTI

ON

PL

MEL

RO

SE

AVE

11TH

AVE

FAIR

VIE

W A

VE

13TH AVE

I5 BUS TUNNEL RP

E ALOHA ST

LegendIdentified_Potential_Sites1

Proposed Pocket Park Site

Study Area Boundary

!½ Bus Stopnm treespikepine

Existing Park

Zoning

High R

ise

Low ris

e

Mixed O

verla

y

Mid ris

e

Neighb

orhoo

d Com

mercial

¾¾½ Bicycle Route

Transit Route

Major Arterials

±Capitol Hill Green MapJoming LauURBDP 573

0 680 1,360 2,040 2,720340Feet









All lots

Raster Analysis using bike routes and bus stops

Ground-Truthing

SELECT BY ATTRIBUTES

BUFFER

CLIP ALL PARCELS CONTAINED

WITHIN

Visual Inspection to Maximize Distancefrom Existing Parks

Vacant or Parking Lot (Commercial)

Within 200 ft of a bus stop or 600 ft of a

bicycle route

Reasons to eliminate site-poor sense of enclosure-inadequate street frontage

Parcel Area5,000-10,000 sq. ft

At least 500 ft fromExisting Parks &

P-Patches

Reasons to include-area lacking street trees-high imperviousness (gathered from site visit)-complementary adjacent land uses-optimally located away from existing parks

Vacant/Parking Lot Parcels5,000 - 1000 sq ft

Vacant/Parking Lot Parcels5,000 - 1000 sq ft accessible by bus or bike and located away

from existing parks

SELECT BY ATTRIBUTES

Potential Pocket Park Sites

Proposed PocketPark Site

Site Selection Methodology

Capitol Hill Pocket Park Siting Project 1

TitleDate

ADD PROJ DESCRIPTION

ADD SKILLS

ADD ROLES

E Pike St

Boylston Ave

Belmont Ave

Proposed Pocket Park Neighborhood Context - Google Earth Massing Model

Proposed Pocket Park Immediate Context - Isometric View

Proposed Pocket Park Immediate Context - Plan View

2

Neighborhood Context

TitleDate


ADD SKILLS

ADD ROLES

I5 S

BI5

NB

I5 E

XPR

ESS

E PINE ST

E UNION ST

BOREN AVE

19TH

AVE

E

23R

D A

VE

15TH

AVE

E

E MADISON ST

E PIKE ST

BR

OA

DW

AY8TH AVE

SENECA STPIKE ST

PINE ST

FAIR

VIEW

AVE

N

6TH AVE

OLIVE WAY

SUM

MIT

AVE

EB

ELLE

VUE

AVE

E

MADISON ST

10TH

AVE

EB

RO

AD

WAY

E

DENNY WAY

23R

D A

VE E

5TH AVE

E OLIVE W

AY

15TH

AVE

STEWART ST

E THOMAS STE JOHN ST

±0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000500

Feet

0 12,000 24,000 36,000 48,0006,000

Feet

Average Household Size

Demographic Comparison

LegendProposed Pocket Park Site

Study Area Boundary

Average Household Size0 - 1.61

1.62 - 2.03

2.04 - 2.39

2.40 - 2.88

2.89 - 3.78Joming Lau

URBDP 573

Compared with the rest of the City of Seattle, the

average household size of residents living in Capitol

Hill is relatively low, and homogenous in terms of its

distribution across the neighborhood, with much of the

neighborhood in the 0-1.61 category

A similar household is observed in Downtown Seattle

as well as U-District, while medium sized households

are situated in North Seattle, and large households to

the south.

I5 S

BI5

NB

I5 E

XPR

ESS

E PINE ST

E UNION ST

BOREN AVE

19TH

AVE

E

23R

D A

VE

15TH

AVE

E

E MADISON ST

E PIKE ST

BR

OA

DW

AY8TH AVE

SENECA STPIKE ST

PINE ST

FAIR

VIEW

AVE

N

6TH AVE

OLIVE WAY

SUM

MIT

AVE

EB

ELLE

VUE

AVE

E

MADISON ST

10TH

AVE

EB

RO

AD

WAY

E

DENNY WAY

23R

D A

VE E

5TH AVE

E OLIVE W

AY

15TH

AVE

STEWART ST


±0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000500

Feet

0 12,000 24,000 36,000 48,0006,000Feet

Population DensityDemographic Comparison


Study Area Boundary

Population Density (person/acre)0 - 910 - 1819 - 3536 - 7273 - 151 Joming Lau

URBDP 573

Compared with the rest of the City of Seattle, the population densityof Capitol Hill is much higher, with population densities of 73-151near the intersection of E Olive Way and Summit Ave. There are avariety of densities throughout Capitol Hill, showing a variety ofhousing types, with greater variation than the rest of Seattle.

With such a high level of density, Capitol Hill wouldbenefit greatly from a pocket park that wouldallow for resident populations to have some accessto green space.

I5 S

BI5

NB

I5 E

XPR

ESS

E PINE ST

E UNION ST

BOREN AVE

19TH

AVE

E

23R

D A

VE

15TH

AVE

E

E MADISON ST

E PIKE ST

BR

OA

DW

AY

8TH AVE

SENECA ST

PIKE STPINE ST

FAIR

VIEW

AVE

N

6TH AVE7TH AVE

OLIVE WAY

SUM

MIT

AVE

E

BEL

LEVU

E AV

E E

9TH AVE

MADISON ST

10TH

AVE

EB

RO

AD

WAY

E

DENNY WAY

23R

D A

VE E

5TH AVE

E OLIV

E WAY

15TH

AVE

HOWELL

ST


BELMONT AVE E

±0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000500

Feet

0 12,000 24,000 36,000 48,0006,000Feet

HouseholdIncome



Study Area Boundary

Household Income0 - $35,313

$35,314 - $53,571

$53,572 - $73,125

$73,126 - $106,070

$106,071 - $200,001Joming LauURBDP 573

Compared with the rest of the City of Seattle, the household income ofresidents living in Capitol Hill appears to be relatively low (as is the restof Downtown Seattle), with more wealthy populations living to the northand connecting to Montlake to the north. One note of caution is thatthis income data is almost 10 years old, and this maps do not appear toreflect the shift in income that has happened in Capitol Hill.

In terms of what this means for the value of parcel parks, lower incomehouseholds often have less access to private green spaces such asbackyards as well as larger spaces such as neighborhood parks, andpocket parks could serve as an effective remedy to this issue.

I5 S

BI5

NB

I5 E

XPR

ESS

E PINE ST

E UNION ST

BOREN AVE

19TH

AVE

E

23R

D A

VE

15TH

AVE

E

E MADISON ST

E PIKE ST

BR

OA

DW

AY

8TH AVE

SENECA ST

PIKE STPINE ST

FAIR

VIEW

AVE

N

6TH AVE7TH AVE

OLIVE WAY

SUM

MIT

AVE

E

BEL

LEVU

E AV

E E

9TH AVE

MADISON ST

10TH

AVE

EB

RO

AD

WAY

E

DENNY WAY

23R

D A

VE E

5TH AVE

E OLIV

E WAY

15TH

AVE

HOWELL

ST


BELMONT AVE E

±0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000500

Feet

0 12,000 24,000 36,000 48,0006,000

Feet

Median Age



Study Area Boundary

Median Age17-29

29-35.3

35.4-40.9

41-51.8

51.8-78.5

Joming Lau

URBDP 573

Compared with the rest of the City of Seattle,

the median age of residents living in Capitol

Hill are relatively young, and homogenous in

terms of its age distribution, with much of the

neighborhood in the 29-35.3 age range.

A similar median age is observed in the

central portion of Seattle (U-District, Belltown,

Wallingford, etc..), while older populations are

situated to the south, and along the

shorelines.

Proposed Pocket Park Building Context

E PINE ST

E PIKE ST

BE

LL

EV

UE

AV

E

Legend

nm Street Trees

Proposed Parking Park Site

Date of Construction

0

1900-1919

1920-1939

1940-1959

1960-1979

1980-1999

After 2000

E PINE ST

E PIKE ST

BE

LL

EV

UE

AV

E

E PINE ST

E PIKE ST

BE

LL

EV

UE

AV

E

Legend

nm Street Trees


Building Condition

Good

Average/Good

Average

Low/Average

Legend

nm Street Trees


Present Use

Apartment

Condominium

Office Building

Restaurant/Lounge

Retail Store

Auto Showroom and Services

Industrial

± Joming Lau

URBDP 573

0 250 500 750 1,000125

Feet

Capitol Hill / Pike-Pine

Building Context Map

3

Demographic Analysis

Lower Lonsdale West Waterfront Project

Simon Fraser University Urban Design Certificate Program

January 2010

This illustrated site plan and the accompanying neighborhood diagrams and plans were part of a storyboard created as part of an assignment for a course on visual communication. The work here builds upon an existing urban design plan by adding several additional elements, including non-motorized mobility connections, programmatic open space along the pier and commercial corridors that warrant streetscape animation. The illustrated site plan also highlights the key aspects of the plan, including mobility, open space and attractions, as well as how the proposed design might incorporate the site’s maritime heritage into its design as a way to provide it with character and a sense of place.

My role on this project included generation of all plans and diagrams, which were first hand-drawn, and then finished using digital enhancements for specific text labels and spot vvcolor.

4

0 25 50

1: 1400 N

Neighborhood Concept Diagram

Mobility Plan

Open Space and Attractions Plan

Deep Energy Retrofit Case Studies

Preservation Green Lab/National Trust for Historic Preservation

December 2012

In furthering the discussion about high-performance historic buildings, the Preservation Green Lab set out to create a toolkit that would allow for the collection and distribution of case studies highlighting projects across five building types (single-family, multi-family, adaptive use, main street and public). These case studies weave together a narrative about the building’s history, impact, and sustainable features. Through a discussion about the lessons learned from the retrofit project, these case studies seek to demonstrate the effectiveness of deep energy retrofits in historic buildings.

My work on this project included the integration of technology (web and online surveys) and content collected through surveys and correspondence with building owners. Building performance data was gathered by working with building owners, and then entered into ENERGY STAR® Portfolio Manager. I also developed the web and InDesign templates to facilitate future case study development, and created a manual to walk through how to do so.

Project Type Energy Savings C

ost Savings

$

Overview

CASE STUDY: DEEP GREEN HISTORIC BUILDING RETROFITS

1

KEY FACTS Project Type Expected Energy Savings Expected Cost Savings

KEY FACTS

Public Building 101%102%

Location:400 Rood Avenue, Grand

Junction, CO, 81501

Year of Construction:

1918, 1939 (east addition):

2013 (targeted)

Building Size:

Historic Designation:

National Register for Historic

PlacesBuilding Cladding:

Reinforced Concrete

Building Structural: Indiana

Limestone Ashlar

Keywords: Adaptive Use,

Solar PV, Geothermal,

Second Renaissance Revival

CASE STUDY: Wayne Aspinall Federal Building and Courthouse | September 2012

acre site that houses a variety of federal tenants. The building has a place as one of the city’s most

the National Register of Historic Places.

With many of the building systems installed in the 1960s nearing the end of their useful life, the

scheduled upgrades and cosmetic renovations. The building received an American Recovery and

by the Facilities Standards for the Public Buildings Service. GSA Region 8 determined that both

sustainable design and historic preservation could be effectively coordinated for the project.

Project Impact

Working with the Grand Junction preservation council, the GSA presented the project to local

business groups and the community within the downtown area, and obtained feedback pertaining

ramp on the south facade. Located in the downtown district, the building is well connected to

public transportation and transportation alternatives. At the site level, the promotion of fuel

to neighborhood improvement and reduction of net energy impact.

Wayne Aspinall Federal

Building and Courthouse

Photo: Carlos Lazo

Summary

Building Program

Project Costs$15 million*other costs TBD, pending

project completion Jan 2013

This building houses a variety

of federal tenants with the

IRS occupying the largest

amount of space followed by

the U.S. Courts, Army Corps

of Engineers, U.S. Probation

Marshals, FBI, GSA, and the

Once complete, the Second

Renaissance Revival-style

Wayne Aspinall Federal

Building and Courthouse is

net-zero building on the

National Register of Historic

Places, with a large PV array,

and geothermal system for

heating and cooling the

building.

Project Details

better than the

national average

after incl. solar-PV

Funding Sources

American Recovery and

Reinvestment Act (ARRA)

decrease in total utility

Photo: Scott Ely, Sunsense Solar Inc.


1

KEY FACTS

Project Details

Overview

$KEY FACTS

MainStreet

TBD

TBD

Location:

Year of Construction

Building Size

Historic Designation

Building Cladding:

Building Structural:

Keywords

CASE STUDY: Mission Zero House/Grocoff Residence | September 2012

Project Impact

Mission Zero House/Grocoff

Residence

Project Type Energy Savings Cost Savings

Single family

Residential112%

primarily

through FHA 203(k) rehab

loan

better than an average

single-family residence108% reductions in total utility

$


1

KEY FACTS

Overview

Project Details


ost Savings


KEY FACTS

35%43%

Location:324 N Vermilion St., Danville, IL


1906; 1927 (southern additition)

:

2006 Building Size:

5 stories, 71,395 SF


National Register for Historic Places

(1988)Building Cladding and Structural:

Brick; timber and steel (addition)

Keywords: Multifamily, Geothermal,

Dutch Revival, Affordable

Summary

Building Program

Project CostsTotal for Project: $7.2 million

The building is dedicated to apartment-

style living, with 47 affordable

apartment units.

A winner of numerous national and

state awards for housing and historic

preservation, New Holland Apartments

is a LEED Gold project that shows

that historic preservation, green

building, and affordable housing can be

achieved on a single project.

CASE STUDY: New Holland Apartments | August 2012

Image Courtesy: Thom Pollock

Register of Historic Places.

Located on a 1.35-acre site in Danville, Illinois, near the Illinois-Indiana border, New Holland

Apartments is an ornate, red brick building with a strong feeling of Dutch Revival Architecture,

evoked by complex roof forms, stepped gables, corbels, dormers and oriels. The 5-story building

sits near the Danville Public Library and Elsworth Park, within a few blocks of senior and family

services, two blocks away from the downtown Danville business district, and within close proximity

of more than 75 percent of

the existing building, including structural, shell and interior elements. The Project includes a

tenant park and playground adjacent on the south, on the site of a former car dealership and

repair shop, with the former dealership showroom area serving as the primary park terrace and

the remainder of the site converted to landscape.

Since 2006, New Holland Apartments have provided a much needed affordable-housing option

in downtown Danville, with 47 units available to diverse tenants, including single occupants,

multiple person familiies, persons with mental illness problems, developmental disabilities,

substance abuse problems and persons who have been victims of domestic violence. When the

showing the strong demand for affordable housing that New Holland Apartments supplies.

Danville’s Mayor Scott Eisenhauer describes the effect of the New Holland Apartments on Danville:

“The building seems to be a barometer for the fortunes of the city and the outlook of our community

can be measured by the success of the New Holland Apartments. It was grand in Danville’s heyday,

but it hit bottom in the 1980’s and ‘90s and became a hulking, vacant derelict. The building itself is

so unique that even when it was vacant and in a blighted area of downtown, people looked up at it

and wondered, “When is someone going to bring it back? Will it ever come back?”, and in essence

wondered the same about the city. Both are back.”

Project Impact

New Holland Apartments

Funding Sources

IL Housing Development Authority:

HOME funds: $1.8 million

Enterprise Community Investment,

Low-income housing Tax Credit Equity

(9%): $2.86 million


Historic Tax Credits: $1.17 million

Federal Home Loan Bank of Chicago:

Affordable Housing Program: $184,000

Enterprise Green Communities Grant

$46,000 Illinois Clean Energy Community

Foundation Grant: $211,402

Illinois Donation Tax Credits (for

donation of building): $214,000 (cover

LEED design process)

City of Danville, Community

Development Block Grant: $135,000


Reserves (9%): $177,150

Crosspoint Human Services

(developer): $249,816

Equity out of Escrow (9%): $166,500

Deferred Developer Fee: $ 43,500

Multifamily

Residential

*Better than the

national average


ost Savings

Holmberg and Johnson

Blacksmith & Wagonshop

$

Overview


1

KEY FACTS

Project Details


KEY FACTS

MainStreet

67%77%

Location:


1900 :

2012 (in progress)

Building Size:


National Register for Historic

PlacesBuilding Cladding and

Structural: Reinforced brick/

masonryKeywords

Building Program

Project Costs

Total for Project: $67,500*

Historic Preservation: $61,665

Acquisition cost: $92,600

*additional costs pending

project completion in XX

This building is currently

the home of a family owned

coffee roasting company.

corrugated metal roof with an

generates enough energy

for the building to not require

natural gas for heating.

with a local source of historic

bricks and replacement of a

the same historic brick pavers.

CASE STUDY: Holmberg and Johnson Blacksmith & Wagonshop | August 2012

The interior retains the original forge, including its chimney, original ceiling fan, original sliding

raised seam roof.

Project Impact

occupied and renovated for the last four years and is considered an attractive destination in *The project was self-funded by

the building owner

better than the national

average (including savings

from solar PV)

decrease in total utility costs

average building type


$Overview


1

KEY FACTS

Project Details

Project Type Expected Energy Savings Expected Cost Savings

KEY FACTS

AdaptiveUse 47%

Location:1420 Ogden Street, Denver, COYear of Construction:

1917 (1 story Cottage Annex):

2012 Building Size:

Historic Designation: National Register for Historic Places, Local Historic LandmarkBuilding Cladding and Structural: Wood and brick/masonryKeywords:

Reuse

Summary

Building Program

Project CostsTotal for Project: $3.2 million

Historic Preservation Costs: $1.4 millionSoft Costs: $800,000Hard Costs: $2.4 millionTax Credits Awarded: $0

The former school is now

including three historic preservation related organizations.

The 20,000-sq-ft school underwent a comprehensive, $3.2-million green overhaul that included installation of a geothermal heating and cooling system, and the restoration of over 200 original window sashes. The energy saving measures are targeting energy consumption

CASE STUDY: Emerson School | September 2012

Photo: Jim Lindberg, National Trust for Historic Preservation

Emerson School is a Denver landmark owned by the National Trust for Historic Preservation (NTHP) and is the oldest surviving example of a school designed by architect Robert Roeschlaub, who was known nationally for his school plans. Notable architectural features include large central

tall windows and all original wood wainscoting and wood interior lobby doors. Some classrooms

a sundial on a Colorado building and a prominent hipped roof, pierced by two brick chimneys that provided passive ventilation for the classrooms.

The Emerson School is located on a 46,000 sf lot, just one half block south of Colfax Avenue,

grid. The Emerson School site includes 42 parking spaces to the north side of the building. The original front entrance of the building faces directly south, toward 14th Street. The south side of the property has been re-landscaped as an urban garden, with new lighting, fencing, street trees, shrubs and benches. A new “B-Cycle” bike share station is scheduled to open along the 14th street side of the property in March, 2013.

The Emerson School is a well-known neighborhood landmark. The rehabilitation of the school and the surrounding landscape has enhanced the immediate area around it and has been positively received by the neighborhood. The 60 or so tenants of the building help bring activity to the area and help support a small sandwich shop across the street. Further community impact is anticipated when a new bike share station opens on the Emerson School property. This facility will bring an estimated 80 users to the property daily, providing an alternative to auto use for building tenants, visitors and area residents.

Project Impact

Emerson School

Colorado State Historical Fund Foundation grants Private donation Loan (incl. low interest construction loan from CO Historical Foundation)

Funding Sources

better than thenational average 48% modeled reduction in total

ENERGY

Climate zone

*U.S. Climate Zones based on 2009 IECC Code

2

ENERGY

2

Project Team

Building renovation/additionTenant Improvements

Building OwnerNational Trust for Historic Preservation Jim Lindberg, Field Director

[email protected]

ArchitectSLATERPAULL Architects Inc. Gary Petri, Principal(303) [email protected]

EngineerRogers and Sons, Inc. Stacy Rogers, President(303) [email protected]

Energy or sustainability consultantWhite Box Technologies, Inc. Moncef Krarti, (303) [email protected]

Project Scope

improvements to mechanical systems (heating, ventilation and cooling, or HVAC) and the building envelope, addition of renewable energy, and attention to tenant behavior. The ground-source heat exchange system has eliminated the need for on-site fossil fuel consumption entirely.

HVACGround-source heat exchange wells are buried beneath the north parking lot, consisting of 30

heat pumps serving the Main School and Cottage School, with a 27 ton cooling load and no back

each) are available for backup heating. Ventilation incorporates two original central chimneys and

Lighting/DaylightingThere was a strong effort to open up the building to harvest daylight as much as possible. The lighting design called for 0.9 W/sf overall. Several strategies were pursued to achieve this. The

Building EnvelopeR-40 insulation was added to the unoccupied attic. All but two windows are completely restored

The tenant space that remained occupied during rehabilitation will have windows restored in a later phase. The non-historic exterior doors were replaced with new, historically appropriate doors, the original hardware and closers reused, and all exterior trim painted. In this phase of the project, masonry repairs were limited, with both buildings set to be repointed in 2013.

Controls

lighting except the egress path and stairway areas is set to a default “off” mode. There are individual, programmable HVAC controls for each heat pump unit. Offsite, online monitoring and tracking functions are included for all units.

Tenant behavior

ongoing building performance monitoring and tenant engagement.

Commissioning and Retro-commissioningCommissioning of mechanical and lighting systems was crucial to helping the owner and contractors identify issues and improve installation of heating and cooking system

lighting controls. The project team did not conduct enhanced commissioning due to budget constraints.


Cold

Whole Building EUI (Modeled Pre-Retrofit baseline + Modeled Post-Retrofit) vs. National Average

0

50

100

150

200

250

Pre

P

ost

Pre

P

ost

Pre

P

ost

Pre

P

ost

Pre

P

ost

Pre

P

ost

Pre

P

ost

Pre

P

ost

Pre

P

ost

Pre

P

ost

Pre

P

ost

Pre

P

ost

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Gas

Electricity

Baseline

National Average = 147.55

3

Historic Designation

Historic Standards Historic Tax Credits Tax Credit Awarded

StateFederal

Secretary of the Interior Standards $

KEY FACTS

Building History

3

Historic Standards Historic Tax Credits

StateFederal

Secretary of the Interior Standards

KEY FACTS

master architect, Robert Roeshlaub, a specialist in school design. In 1917, the Cottage School

public school until 1979, when it was converted to a senior center and medical clinic. In 2009, the building was donated to the National Trust for Historic Preservation, with rehabilitation work done

restoration work on all of the original windows for both the Main and Cottage Schools. The non-historic stucco around the south entrance was removed, and the original facades either restored, or replaced with matching salvaged brick. In addition, there was extensive repair work and painting of the exterior eaves, gutters, trimwork, and the porches to the basement entryways. On the Cottage School annex, the original front doors were found in a crawl space in the building and reinstalled. Also, the non historic front porch was removed and the original features repaired.

Interior preservation work included removal of most of the non-historic interior walls and dropped

stairs throughout the building.

Historic Preservation Strategies

Historic Preservation Awards

Notable as the oldest surviving example of a school designed by architect Robert

architectural features include the large central lobbies

staircase. The building has all original wood wainscoting and wood interior lobby doors, with some classrooms having the original cabinetry and chalkboards still visible. The exterior includes the

a sundial on a Colorado building and a prominent hipped roof, pierced by two brick chimneys that provided passive ventilation for the classrooms.

National Register of Historic Places

Denver Landmark Designation

Community Preservation Award - Historic Denver, Inc.


Photos Courtesy: Jim Lindberg, National Trust for Historic Preservation

Image Courtesy: Google Maps

“Older buildings like the Emerson School are sustainable because they are in the right place – in established, walkable and mixed-use neighbor-hoods with access to public parks, schools, libraries and transit.” -



4

This collection of Deep Green Historic Building case studies showcase unique buildings that successfully blend historic preservation and measured energy performance. These case studies provide inspiring stories and best practices, including detailed information about project

If you are interested in showcasing your building and contributing to our catalog of case studies, please visit the following url to submit an application: http://www.preservationnation.org/green-lab/casestudies/survey/

About the Case Studies

LESSONS

Resources

The Preservation Green Lab is a sustainability think tank and national leader in efforts to

of older and historic buildings. The Green Lab works with partners to develop innovative research, advance public policy and increase private investment to reduce demolitions and improve building performance. By providing proven solutions to policy makers and building professionals, the Green Lab works to cut carbon pollution and enhance the unique character of vibrant neighborhoods. A project of the National Trust for Historic Preservation, the Green Lab was launched in 2009 and is based in Seattle, Wash. For more information regarding this report, contact:

Preservation Green [email protected] 12th Avenue, Suite D, Seattle, WA 98122

About Preservation Green Lab


Barriers and SolutionsA major challenge in this project involved working around one tenant who stayed in the building during construction. That space was not rehabilitated. Additionally, during demolition, two structural columns were exposed within a 1980s partition wall. The columns were kept in the existing location, in the middle of the main lobby, and reconditioned. The owner says the black steel columns “actually look like they belong there”.

FinancingNTHP received the building as a donation, raised $1.7 million toward rehabilitation costs, and

cover debt service plus operating costs.

Design ProcessThe design process for the project was constantly under budget pressure as the project team worked on both fundraising and a leasing pro-forma during the design phase. The considerable time spent evaluating design and tenant scenarios allowed the project to reach completion and occupancy goals on-time and on-budget. The owner deliberated whether to pursue LEED

an energy model, in part because it is required for LEED, but the results of the model were not

strategies, including enhanced commissioning.

Building Technologies

long-term ownership plans. The previously blocked off historic ventilation chimneys were also

lights (CFLs) and a strong emphasis on daylighting. The owner plans to install photovoltaic (PV)

historic character.

Site ImprovementsThe entire property has been re-landscaped as an urban garden, with new lighting, fencing, street trees, shrubs and benches. This work has greatly improved the pedestrian experience of the surrounding block and is helping to re-knit damaged urban fabric in the area. Ten surface parking spaces were removed from the south side of building. A new “B-Cycle” bike share station will provide a transportation alternative for building tenants, visitors and neighbors.

Photos: Jim Lindberg, National Trust for Historic Preservation

Lessons Learned

Preservation NationEmerson School Building Reopens After Green RestorationPreservation Nation - Going

SchoolMountain States - Green Rehab of Historic Denver School UnveiledDenver Business Journal -

old buildings work

5

Wedgwood Feasibility Study

University of WashingtonDepartment of Urban Design & Planning

December 2010

This feasibility study was conducted for a property in the Wedgwood neighborhood of Seattle, for a hypothetical client. As part of a five member team, using the financial and timing requirements as a framework, several development scenarios were developed based on neighborhood, submarket and trade area and zoning analysis. These scenarios would provide a framework to guide future development of the site.

Based on our analysis, a mixed use development with 2 floors of residential apartments would be the optimal use option, although the final recommendation was that given market conditions in the neighborhood, an alternate location would be the most appropriate action at the time.

My role on this project included zoning, neighborhood and demographic analysis, market area delineation. I also played secondary roles verifying financial calculations and report writing.

WEDGWOOD SITE ANALYSIS REPORTDecember 9, 2010

Team 7

6

4

STATIC ATTRIBUTES

Site Context

The site is located in northeast Seattle, on the north-west corner of the intersection of 35th AVE NE and NE 95th Street. This intersection marks the point where three distinct neighbor-hoods meet: to the north is the Meadowbrook neighborhood, to the east across 35th NE is the Matthew’s Beach Neighborhood, and to the south across 95th Ave is the Wedgewood Neighbor-hood. Of the three, Wedgewood is the largest and most clearly de ned (see Exhibits 1 & 2).

The intersection of 35th Avenue NE and NE 95th Street is the site of one of a number of small commercial nodes that exist along 35th Avenue NE between NE 55th and NE 95th streets (refer to Exhibit 14). These nodes have small businesses such as gas stations, restaurants, and various of ce uses, as well as large surface parking areas and larger retail outlets (see Exhibit 3). The buildings in these commercial nodes are largely single story, though there are some newer two and three story buildings (refer to Exhibits 5). The upper levels of the newer buildings contain apartments or condominiums. The neighborhood around the site is predominantly single-family houses and occasional multi-family buildings. Northgate Mall is located about 1 mile to the west of the site.

Exhibit 1: Context Map of Seattle. Data Source: WagdaExhibit 2: Context Map of NE Seattle. Data Source: Wagda

DOWNTOWNSEATTLE

SITE

UNIVERSITYDISTRICT

LAKE CITY

I-5

I-5

6

STATIC ATTRIBUTES

Exhibit 4: Northwest Veterinary Clinic

Exhibit 5: Bird’s eye view of the site.

SITE PROFILE DATA

Location: NW corner of 35th AVE NE

& NE 95th St

Address: 9505 35th Ave NE

Parcel #: 9553200035

Zipcode: 98115

Owner: JDR Property Management LLC

Current Use: Veterinary Clinic / Parking Lot

Lot Size: .63 acres / 27,491 SF

Land Value: $1,099,600

Improvement Value: $1,000

Building Size: 4,108 SF

Parcel size:

East west dim: 180ʼ

North south dim: 152ʼ

SE corner radius: 15ʼ

Zoning:

East 110ʼ: NC1-30

West 70ʼ: SF-7000

Context Map and Market Area Delineation

Alternative Use Scenarios

13

NEIGHBORHOOD, SUB-MARKET, & TRADE AREA ANALYSIS

Development

The neighborhood consists of mainly single-family homes with a small node of commercial build-ings at the intersection of 35th Ave. NE and NE 95th Street. The commercial node occupies approximately one-half a block in each direction from each corner of the intersection, creating a total area of approximately 1 square block. The businesses currently in this commercial node are fairly diverse and consist of a development company, an animal hospital (on the site we are cur-rently analyzing), a chiropractor, a re station, a pub, a Chinese restaurant, an auto repair shop, a gas station, and a barber shop. There are several similar commercial nodes along 35th Ave. NE, the closest of which is ten blocks to the south at the cross-section of NE 85th Street, and there are other nodes every ve to ten blocks continuing south on 35th Avenue NE.

Household CharacteristicsHousehold ownership in the Wedgewood neighborhood is signi cantly higher than the rest of King County, with roughly 75% of housing units occupied by the owner, compared with just under 60% in King County. Renter occupied housing units were less common, and interestingly vacant housing units were signi cantly lower than in the rest of King County, likely indicating that there was a demand for more housing in the area. Wedgewood has an average household size of 2.29, a similar value to King County at 2.38.

HousingUnits

% of TotalHousing

Units% of Total

HousingUnits

% of Total

2010 Average Household Size 2.4 2.29 2.382010 Owner Occupied 1574 76.52% 4762 73.93% 471278 59.13%2010 Renter Occupied 484 23.53% 1679 26.07% 325778 40.87%2010 Vacant Housing Units 81 3.94% 319 4.95% 58439 7.33%Total Households (excluding vacant units) 2057 6441 797056

.5 mile ring around site Trade Area King County

Transportation PatternsIn 2000, the Census collected information regarding commuting patterns in Wedgewood and found that over 75% of trips to work were in a car/truck or van, 14% by public transportation, 3% by bicycle and 1.2% by walking. 94.8% of workers did not work at home, and their commute required on average a total of 25.9 minutes. (Refer to the Appendix - Journey to Work) this is probably the most important piece of information in this section

Tapestry Segmentation:

Based on tapestry segmentation information obtained from ESRI Business Analyst Online (BAO), the largest market segment in Wedgewood is classi ed as Wealthy Seaboard Suburb, comprising 43% of households within Wedgewood. The second largest market segment are the Metropoli-tans, making up 31.8% of households in Wedgewood and 10.2% within 0.5 miles of the site (refer to Exhibit 13).

Exhibit 12: Household Demographics. Source - ESRI

11


within walking distance of the project site. The intermediate area is de ned by the market area described above, and is comprised of the Wedgwood/View Ridge Community Reporting Area (CRA), and the northern half of the Ravenna/Bryant CRA. This area stretches from a few blocks west of the Lake Washington as the eastern boundary, Lake City Way on the west, Meadowbrook Park on the north, and NE 65th St. on the south. The largest scale of data incorporated in the analysis is King County as a whole, to show how the two smaller areas compare to the larger

region.

Neighborhood Analysis and Demographics

Population and Demographic Information

The population of the immediate project area in 2010 was 4,995 (in 2,057 households), while the larger Wedgewood neighborhood stood at 15,020 (in 6,441 households). At the largest market area described in the previous secion the population isn’t very dense. Currently, the population density is almost 3,000 people/square mile (about 4.5 people per acre). The majority of the area is single-family residential homes with several commercial nodes spread across the area. The area has seen steady growth since the year 2000 and is expected to see continued growth through the year 2015.

With a median age in the area of 43 years, residents here are generally older than in King County, where the median age is 37.8 year. Exhibit 8 shows the populations broken down into cohort segments.

Exhibit 15 indicates that the population in Wedgewood is predominately white, and more highly-educated (See Exhibit 9) than the rest of King County. Over 2/3 of Wedgewood residents have a bachelor’s degree or higher as compared with 44% in King County (see Exhibit 10). Ethnic composition is quite similar to the rest of King County, except for a lower percentage of African-Americans in Wedgewood.

0.5 mile ring around site Trade Area King County2010 Total Population 4995 15020 19368942010 Median Age 43.4 43.2 37.8

Exhibit 8: Population and Age Demographics. Source - ESRI

Ethnic Composition (%) .5 mi ring around site Trade Area King CountyCaucasian 78.44 77.48 70.05African American 2.32 1.84 6.01American Indian 0.54 0.49 0.93Asian 12.99 13.75 13.88Pacific Islander 0.12 0.13 0.61Other Race (single) 1.54 2.08 3.73Two or more Races 4.04 4.22 4.8

Exhibit 9: Ethnic Composition Demographics. Source - ESRI

12


IncomeWedgewood has a median household income above $80,000 which is higher than the rest of King County, which was about $75,700 in 2010. The slightly higher average shows the possibility for expendable income and more purchases.

Exhibit 11: Income Demographics. Source - ESRI

.5 Mile Ring around the site

Trade Area King County

2010 Per Capita Income 39372 44001 385622010 Median Household Income 80075 80677 756932010 Average Household Income 93340 101742 927402010 Aggregate HH Income $192,000,511.00 $655,521,824.00 $73,918,471,544.00

2010 Household Income.5 Mile Ring around

the siteTrade Area King County

<$10000 (%) 2.87 2.55 4.8$10000-14999 (%) 3.01 2.5 2.47$15000-19999 (%) 2.67 2.27 2.87$20000-24999 (%) 3.26 2.53 3.4$25000-29999 (%) 2.72 2.31 3.12$30000-34999 (%) 3.4 3.82 3.66$35000-39999 (%) 3.06 3.17 3.39$40000-44999 (%) 3.5 3.37 3.38$45000-49999 (%) 2.97 2.95 3.61$50000-59999 (%) 6.42 6.75 8.62$60000-74999 (%) 10.89 12.42 9.89$75000-99999 (%) 19.54 18.37 19.75$100000-124999 (%) 15.9 15.01 12.27$125000-149999 (%) 7.63 6.57 6.37$150000-199999 (%) 5.79 7.31 5.93$200000-249999 (%) 3.74 3.99 2.97$250000-499999 (%) 2.28 3.23 2.71$500000+ (%) 0.34 0.92 0.8

Education Level (% of population)

.5 mi ring around site Trade Area King County

Less than 9th Grade 0.83 0.98 3.44Some High School 1.72 1.58 4.7High School Graduate 9.92 8.5 18.26Some College 17.37 15.42 20.83Associate Degree 4.62 4.38 8.43Bachelor's Degree 35.24 36.65 28.24Graduate Degree 30.27 32.49 16.1

Exhibit 10: Education Demographics. Source - ESRI

12


IncomeWedgewood has a median household income above $80,000 which is higher than the rest of King County, which was about $75,700 in 2010. The slightly higher average shows the possibility for expendable income and more purchases.

Exhibit 11: Income Demographics. Source - ESRI

.5 Mile Ring around the site

Trade Area King County

2010 Per Capita Income 39372 44001 385622010 Median Household Income 80075 80677 756932010 Average Household Income 93340 101742 927402010 Aggregate HH Income $192,000,511.00 $655,521,824.00 $73,918,471,544.00

2010 Household Income.5 Mile Ring around

the siteTrade Area King County

<$10000 (%) 2.87 2.55 4.8$10000-14999 (%) 3.01 2.5 2.47$15000-19999 (%) 2.67 2.27 2.87$20000-24999 (%) 3.26 2.53 3.4$25000-29999 (%) 2.72 2.31 3.12$30000-34999 (%) 3.4 3.82 3.66$35000-39999 (%) 3.06 3.17 3.39$40000-44999 (%) 3.5 3.37 3.38$45000-49999 (%) 2.97 2.95 3.61$50000-59999 (%) 6.42 6.75 8.62$60000-74999 (%) 10.89 12.42 9.89$75000-99999 (%) 19.54 18.37 19.75$100000-124999 (%) 15.9 15.01 12.27$125000-149999 (%) 7.63 6.57 6.37$150000-199999 (%) 5.79 7.31 5.93$200000-249999 (%) 3.74 3.99 2.97$250000-499999 (%) 2.28 3.23 2.71$500000+ (%) 0.34 0.92 0.8

Education Level (% of population)

.5 mi ring around site Trade Area King County

Less than 9th Grade 0.83 0.98 3.44Some High School 1.72 1.58 4.7High School Graduate 9.92 8.5 18.26Some College 17.37 15.42 20.83Associate Degree 4.62 4.38 8.43Bachelor's Degree 35.24 36.65 28.24Graduate Degree 30.27 32.49 16.1

Exhibit 10: Education Demographics. Source - ESRI

Demographic Analysis

6

STATIC ATTRIBUTES

Exhibit 4: Northwest Veterinary Clinic

Exhibit 5: Bird’s eye view of the site.

SITE PROFILE DATA

Location: NW corner of 35th AVE NE

& NE 95th St

Address: 9505 35th Ave NE

Parcel #: 9553200035

Zipcode: 98115

Owner: JDR Property Management LLC

Current Use: Veterinary Clinic / Parking Lot

Lot Size: .63 acres / 27,491 SF

Land Value: $1,099,600

Improvement Value: $1,000

Building Size: 4,108 SF

Parcel size:

East west dim: 180ʼ

North south dim: 152ʼ

SE corner radius: 15ʼ

Zoning:

East 110ʼ: NC1-30

West 70ʼ: SF-7000

Site Attributes

25

Most Fitting Use Analysis

The following analysis analyzes the use components of the above 5 options to determine which is most tting on the site in question.

Key Assumptions:

- Size/Layout: There is a large tree in the middle of the property which needs to be built around.This diminishes the potential for of ce and retail complexes as it would not allow for thestripmall-esque development seen on 85th & 75th.

- Egress/Ingress: There’s an ingress that is approximately 15 ft. from a traf c light which mightmake it dif cult for retail customers to use effectively.

- Topo/Drainage: Drainage for the site is fair; however there is an approximate 3 foot downhillslope from to the street to the property.

- Public Linkages: There is a bus stop adjacent to the property. However it runs limited routes(Bus 64 & 65) and does not provide enough incoming traf c for retail or of ce projects.

- Pedestrian: The property is located in a residential neighborhood which allows people to walkto a potential retail development on the site. However, for a residential development, there islittle to walk to.

Factors/Attributes Office Retail Apartment Factors/Attributes WeightsStatic Static 40%Size, Layout 4 4 7 Environmental 30%Ingress/Egress 6 5 7 Linkages 30%Topo/Drainage 5 5 5

Subtotal 15 14 19

EnvironsLand Uses 7 5 6Quality/Value 7 6 8Safety/Security 8 6 7

Subtotal 22 17 21

Current LinkagesPublic Transit 3 4 5Vehicular 6 7 8Pedestrian 3 5 3

Subtotal 12 16 16

Weighted Total 29.76 30.08 37.84 The analysis shows that apartments are the most tting use on the site, followed by retail and of ce almost equally. Therefore, when considering the following nancial analysis, Mixed Use with residential above should be considered the optimal use option.

ALTERNATIVE USE ANALYSIS

Exhibit 28: Most Fitting Use AnalysisMost Fitting Use Analysis

5

STATIC ATTRIBUTES

Site Access

The site is bordered on two sides by minor arterial streets (as classi ed by the Seattle Comprehensive Transportation Program of 1984), and there is a traf c light at the their intersec-tion. Sidewalks are present along 35th NE, but they end at NE 96th. NE 95th has sidewalks only at the intersection. 35th Avenue NE is serviced by north-south travelling city busses, which connect the site with University Village and the University District to the south and Lake City to the north. NE 95th has no bus service but provides a direct vehicular connection to Lake City Way, about 1 mile to the west. Currently, vehicular access to the site is via one curbcut on 35th NE, one curbcut on NE 95th, and a driveway at the west end of the site off NE 95th (see Exhibit 5).

Existing Improvements

There is currently a one-story commercial structure on the site, the Northeast Veterinary Clinic. To the east and north of the building are paved driveway and parking areas. The driveway exits the site at the extreme west edge of the parcel, onto NE 95th Street. Between the existing building and the driveway on the west side of the site there is an unimproved grass / gravel area, apparently used for over ow parking. The existing building is approximately 35 years old and 4,108 SF in size (see Exhibit 4).

Exhibit 3: Site Context Map. Data Source: WagdaZoning and Land Use

Financial Analysis

23


Building Size - 17,943 SFBuilding Footprint - 5,981 SFParking - 10,739 SF - approximately 24 stalls

Exhibit 24: One Story Retail


Exhibit 25: Mixed Use - One Story Retail with Apartments Above

23



Exhibit 24: One Story Retail


Exhibit 25: Mixed Use - One Story Retail with Apartments Above22


The following section includes graphic representation of ve alternative use options Team 7 feels are worth investigating. In each case, it has been assumed that the area of the site zoned SF-7200 would be left undeveloped, for reasons explained in this document under static attributes(?). As is the case in most new development projects, a main driver of each of these alternatives is the location of on-site parking. The site’s small size and 3-story height limit will result in a small development that could not possibly generate enough income to justify the cost of locating parking below grade. For this reason, the four new-development alternatives described here have parking located in a surface parking lot. In each of the four new-develop-ment alternatives, the building is located at the street edge, with parking behind. This is es-sentially required by zoning regulations, but has the bene t of locating commercial space close to the streets, for high visibility.

The ve development options considered are:

• Leave the existing building as-is• Develop a 1-story commercial building (8,800 SF)• Develop a 3-story mixed use building with ground level commercial and residential above (17,943 SF)• Develop a 3-story mixed use building with ground level commercial and of ce above (17,943 SF)• Develop a 3-story building with ground level commercial and of ce above (21,345 SF)

These are all represented in graphic form on the following pages (Exhibits 23-27).


Exhibit 23: Keep the existing building.

24



Exhibit 26: Mixed Use - One Story Retail with Of ces Above


Exhibit 27: Three Story Of ce Building

24



Exhibit 26: Mixed Use - One Story Retail with Of ces Above


Exhibit 27: Three Story Of ce Building

§Raw land cost:o $30/sf SF-7200 o $50/sf NC1-30

§NOI existing @ $20/sf§Construction period:o 1-story @8 monthso 3-story @ 14 months

§As-is cap rate: 10%§Vacancy ratios:o 1-story 10%, 3-story 6%

§Expense ratioso 1-story 14%, 3-story 12%

§Demolition costs @ $8/sf§Parking construction @$1.70/sf§Landscaping costs @ $2.50/sf§Construction costs:o 1 story @$95/sfo 3-Story@$110/sf

§Income rates foro commercial @ $20/sfo apt @$24/sf

Below is an analysis of the predicted financial performance of each of the five alternative development scenarios described above. In each case, the following assumptions were made:

Financial feasibility of five development scenarios

ingress/ egress points

Bird’s eye view of the site

Site Analysis Market Analysis Financial/Use Analysis

Woodinville Residential Cluster Plan

University of Washington Department of Urban Design & Planning

March 2011

The objective of this project was to reimagine the southern end of Woodinville, WA adjacent to the Tourist District. Given a scenario of explosive population growth in the Puget Sound region and the designation of the site as an important urban node, this site was redesigned keeping in mind the accommodation of neighborhood amenities and transit connections. Also included was the addition of office and retail space, while meeting minimum parking requirements, and improving the site’s ecological function through management of all stormwater onsite, and replacement of the existing low-density townhouses in the floodplain of the Sammamish River with riparian habitat.

My role here included all elements of this project , from background research, calculations of lot yield and parking requirements, to the development of the urban design concept and the more detailed site design.

Sketchup Massing Model Shadow Study (4pm on March 22)

Urban Design Concept

Site Statistics

7

Detailed Design Concept

Pike/Pine Conservation Overlay District: Sketchup Building Models


May 2011

This project explored design and rendering methods using 3D modeling software. Two different approaches were used in developing Sketchup building models for each of the two buildings. For the building at 619 E Pine St., building components and materials were applied to the surfaces of the building in order to create a model that approximated the original building. The building model at 501 E Pine St took another approach, using the Photo Match function to apply textures onto the building faces. These textures were derived from actual photos taken during site visits.

All element of this project were developed on my own, except for several building components (including doors and windows) which were publicly available on Google 3D Warehouse.

North ElevationEast ElevationWest ElevationSouth Elevation

South Elevation

East Elevation West Elevation

Bird’s Eye View & Roof Line

Paige Building at 619 E Pine StreetCreated by applying components

and materials

Bird’s Eye View & Roof Line

Building at 501 E Pine Streetcreated using Photo Match to apply photo textures to building faces

North Elevation

Pike/Pine Conservation Overlay District 8

TitleDate


ADD SKILLS

ADD ROLES

Pike/Pine Conservation Overlay District: Building Relocation Analysis


April 2011

The images on the left were created as an experiment in visualizing the impact of a hypothetical relocation of the Comet Tavern building from its historical location at 922 E. Pike Street to a new location at 1422 11th Avenue.

Photographic surveying was used to document existing street and facade conditions, and Photoshop was used extensively in the creation of a photomontage, an elevation and an aerial view to simulate what such a relocation might look like.

N

Photo montage showing the Comet tavern building on the proposed site

NAerial view showing the Comet Tavern building on proposed site, and a P-Patch taking its place at its current location

N

Elevation of Comet Tavern Building in proposed location at 1422 11th Avenue

Original Building Location

9

Survey of Unreinforced Masonry Buildings (URMs) in the Admiral Neighborhood


June 2011

This final project of the Digital Design Practicum course developed a methodology for creating an inventory of URM buildings in Seattle neighborhoods. Because no municipal record of URM buildings exist, this required a combination of examining assessor’s parcel data. Working in groups of two, these results were cross-referenced against multiple lists of historic landmarks, and finally verified through site visits and photo documentation. The end product was an inventory of URM buildings for the Admiral neighborhood, ranked by priority for seismic retrofits, and shown graphically through maps and a Sketchup model of the neighborhood.

My primary role for this project included Sketchup modeling, conducting background historical research, site visits, managing large quantities of assessors data and creation of maps.

Joming Lau Virginia Werner

A Survey of Unreinforced Masonry Buildings in the Admiral Neighborhood of West Seattle

Digital Design PracticumSpring 2011

Sketchup Model Sketchup ModelGoogle Streetview Image Google Streetview Image

Admiralty House Antiques (2141 California Ave SW)Fire Station No. 29 (2139 Ferry Ave SW)

Seismic Priority Assessment Flow Chart

Remove “uncertain” and “reinforced” building construction types from URM dataset

Assign Risk Levels

Risk Level 2 Risk Level 4Risk Level 3Risk Level 1

Sort by building quality

Sort by number of

stories

Sort by historical

significance

Assign priority number 1a-1?


Sort by number of

stories

Sort by historical

significance



Sort by number of

stories

Sort by historical

significance



Sort by number of

stories

Sort by historical

significance


10

TitleDate


ADD SKILLS

ADD ROLES

Tianzhong VillageDevelopment Concepts

University of Washington and Sichuan University

July 2011

I was part of a 25 member group with backgrounds spanning planning, landscape architecture, architecture, China studies, historic preservation, real estate, engineering that went to China for a summer field study program. One month was spent at Tianzhong village in Fujian province, a region renowned for its tulou, a vernacular communal residence, developing precedent studies and conducting background research through site visits and interviews with residents and local officials. Three teams, working at regional, village and building scales explored design concepts grounded on our research. This included SWOT analysis of development opportunities that explored economic development strategies organic farming, tea cooperatives and cultural and eco-tourism.

My role on this project included co-developing a ‘full development’ concept for 120 dwelling units, and provided retail, restaurant, hotel space while retaining portions of the site for existing agricultural use. Other major tasks included GIS and GPS mapping, providing project management support for the larger team, coordination between regional and village scale teams, as well as 3D representation of design concepts in Google Sketchup.

Existing Conditions

‘Full Development’ Concept

B

A

Proposed Site Plan

Concept Diagram

Site Elevation ‘B’

Site Elevation ‘A’

11

22m

30m 30m5m42m 5m

4.8m6m 6m6m

9m

9m

Virginia Werner • Joming Lau • Zeya He College of Built Environments

University of Washington • Sichuan University 25 July 20111 Daping Village

Tongji Town, Pengzhou City, Sichuan Province, China

POST-EARTHQUAKE RECONSTRUCTION IN DAPING VILLAGE

RECONSTRUCTION ON ORIGINAL SITES

How did the reconstruction of the original village change the built and social environment?What does the village look like now?




STUDY AREA This map illustrates how most of the growth in the village clusters has occured in the second cluster in the form of new buildings being built on agricultural land and increased building heights. Also shown is a shift of the second cluster southwards, concentrating buildings there and creating a node of activity.

Most of the households in this village cluster form the members of Production Team 11, and share Xie as a family name. In clusters one and two , there are also households with the family name Liu, and cluster one also has two households with the family name Ma.

For reconstruction, the government built a few storage facilities in the village and then stocked it with building materials from harvested timber in the government-owned forest. The villagers were then able to use those materials to rebuild their houses. They are also allowed to buy sections of the forest and either farm or log there, but they pay a tax on that land.




CULTIVATION AREAThe area under cultivation by the residents of our study area extends up to the peaks of the adjacent mountains to the northeast and downhill towards the river, and includes the flatter village clusters.

On the mountainside, the areas under cultivation include: berberine, a medicinal plant that is typically gathered wild; medicinal trees; and trees for timber. Other forest products are gathered, such as blackberries and fiddlehead ferns. Our guide told us that the Department of Forestry has a policy that dictates if a tree is cut down, a replacement tree must be planted although it does not have to be the same species.

Also on the mountainside are the older mountain village houses, which are now totally abandoned. The remaining buildings are accessible only by foot or donkey, and are now used for temporary storage and resting places.

In the village area, they cultivate a variety of crops including corn, berberine, potatoes, and cucumbers.

Corn

Berberine

Logging by hand

Logging by donkey

Abandoned structure: temporary storage




CLUSTER ONEAs the northwesternmost cluster of our study area, cluster one is farthest up the mountain. At the highest point of this cluster is the mountain spring which supplies the village with about 85 percent of its water.

Number of Houses in Use: 5Number of Public Buildings: 0Number of Abandoned Buildings: 1Population: 16

Virginia Werner • Joming Lau • Zeya He

College of Built Environments

University of Washington • Sichuan University

25 July 20113

Daping VillageTongji Town, Pengzhou City, Sichuan Province, China

Our methodology involved first gaining an understanding of our site through mental

mapping. Walking around the village, we observed that buildings were generally

arranged in clusters leading us to establish a study area as being from the temple

along the road southeast from the hotel to the mountain spring to the northwest.

The next step was in using the Trimble Juno GPS handheld devices with Arcpad 7.1

installed. The GPS tracking software was used to delineate roads and trails, as

well as to collect data on locations of buildings, driveways, points of interest (e.g.

temples), trash cans, and public bathrooms.

METHODOLOGY

Shapefiles were created with associated Quickforms, which enabled quick data

entry in the field. Buildings were numbered sequentially, with each building

having information collected on number of residents, age (indicated by pre or

post-earthquake status), and building materials. This detailed information was

gathered through short informal interviews as well as through observation.

Virginia Werner • Joming Lau • Zeya He

College of Built Environments

University of Washington • Sichuan University

25 July 20114

Daping VillageTongji Town, Pengzhou City, Sichuan Province, China

METHODOLOGYResidents were also asked questions on changes to building

size and location before and after the earthquake, and

their relationship with their neighbors.

Photographs were also used to document each building,

and keyed to their location in the village.

Notebooks were also used to provide detailed notes on

buildings, with sketches of building footprints, orientation,

and number of stories. Small site maps were also drawn to

show relationships between buildings.

All the information gathered from the Trimble GPS units

was consolidated within ArcMap 10 and then exported into

a PDF basemap. Using Adobe Illustrator, the basemap was

expanded upon using the details from the field notebooks

to show building footprints and associated information.

Through contact with locals, maps were obtained showing the 11 production

brigades within Daping village as well as the village boundary. By cross-referencing

roads on this map with the one we created using GPS and low resolution Google

Earth images, as well as conversations with our hiking guide, we had hoped to

delineate the boundary of the village. However, when we tried to align the roads on

the two maps to create the village boundary, we discovered large discrepancies in

the path of the road, and consequently we were unable to use this map to define the

village boundaries and we relied on our guide’s information.

GPS defined

road

Hand-drawn

road by

locals




CLUSTER TWOCluster two is centrally located, with the public buildings near the road (as specified by the governmental earthquake reconstruction guidelines). It is a larger cluster, with the houses more spread out. The earthquake memorial covered walkway is along the road in this cluster, as well as the memorial abandoned earthquake damaged buildings. The villagers are unhappy that the public buildings were sited on arable land, as was decided by Ms. Liao. Two of the buildings, the clinic and store, were never fully functional and now are abandoned. The guesthouse is still in use and the courtyard and meeting rooms serve as public gathering space for the villagers.

Number of Houses in Use:10Number of Public Buildings:3Number of Abandoned Buildings:3Population:29




Cluster three is the southeasternmost portion of our study area, adjacent to the temple. Almost all of the buildings are oriented away from the mountain and towards the road. Due to the stepped elevation of the buildings, and the denser and taller vegetation, buildings in this cluster have an increased sense of privacy from its surrounding buildings. This cluster also has a more extensive network of paths that connect the site.

Number of Houses in Use:8Number of Public Buildings:1Number of Abandoned Buildings:1Population:27

CLUSTER THREE




CULTIVATION AREAThe area under cultivation by the residents of our study area extends up to the peaks of the adjacent mountains to the northeast and downhill towards the river, and includes the flatter village clusters.

On the mountainside, the areas under cultivation include: berberine, a medicinal plant that is typically gathered wild; medicinal trees; and trees for timber. Other forest products are gathered, such as blackberries and fiddlehead ferns. Our guide told us that the Department of Forestry has a policy that dictates if a tree is cut down, a replacement tree must be planted although it does not have to be the same species.

Also on the mountainside are the older mountain village houses, which are now totally abandoned. The remaining buildings are accessible only by foot or donkey, and are now used for temporary storage and resting places.

In the village area, they cultivate a variety of crops including corn, berberine, potatoes, and cucumbers.

Corn

Berberine

Logging by hand

Logging by donkey

Abandoned structure: temporary storage

Inventory Mapping for Post-Earthquake Reconstruction in Daping Village

University of Washingtonand Sichuan University

July 2011

As part of a 25 member group that went to China for a summer field study program, a methodology was co-developed within a three-person teamto map and inventory buildings, paths, and cultural landmarks for Daping, a rural village in the Sichuan Province of China. In addition, changes to the physical and social-spatial environments that occurred as part of the reconstruction process after the Sichuan Earthquake of 2008 were documented, with the goal of informing economic development research by the rest of the larger team.

My role on this project included developing mapping methodology, producing GIS maps and Google Earth imagery, and conducting field data collection and photographic surveys.




CONTEXT

Approximate Village boundary

Study area

Road to Tongji Town




OUR SITE

Area under cultivation by our study area

Study area

Road to Tongji Town

Geographical Context

Site Documentation

12

• Northwesternmost cluster of our study area

• Farthest up the mountain• Mountain spring is highest point of

this cluster, and supplies village with ~85% of its water

# of Houses in Use: 5# of Public Buildings: 0 # of Abandoned Buildings: 1 Population: 16

CLUSTER ONE

CLUSTER TWO• Centrally located, with the public

buildings near the road (as specified by the governmental earthquake reconstruction guidelines)

• Larger cluster, with greater spatial distribution of houses

• Villagers are unhappy that the public buildings sited on arable land

• Guesthouse still usedand the courtyard and meeting rooms used by villagers as public gathering space.

• Clinic and store buildings were never fully functional and have since been abandoned.

• The earthquake memorial located in this cluster, and includes remnants of buildings damaged by earthquake

# of Houses in Use: 10#of Public Buildings: 3# of Abandoned Buildings: 3Population: 29

• Southeasternmost portion of our study area, adjacent to the temple

• Almost all of the buildings are oriented away from the mountain and towards the road

• Stepped elevation of the buildings, and the denser and taller vegetation results in increased sense of privacy for buildings.

• Has a more extensive network of paths connecting the site.

# of Houses in Use: 8# of Public Buildings: 1# of Abandoned Buildings: 1Population: 27

CLUSTER THREE

TitleDate


ADD SKILLS

ADD ROLES

Tourism Planning and Village Mapping in Jiaju Village

University of Washington and Sichuan University

August 2011

As part of a 25 member group that went to China for a summer field study program, I was part of a three person team that developed a methodology to map and inventory buildings, paths, and other infrastructure in Jiaju, a rural village in the Sichuan Province of China. During our time there, we examined the villages three clusters, to better understand its characteristics, and evaluate its tourism capacity. Accessibility, and the quality of building, road and water infrastructure was used as criteria. Information about each cluster was gathered through a combination of detailed notes, GPS data, and interviews with local villagers.

My role on this project included developing mapping methodology, producing GIS maps and Google Earth imagery, and conducting field data collection on village infrastructure through interviews, direct observation and photographic surveys.

Virginia Werner • Joming Lau • Zeya He College of Built Environments University of Washington • Sichuan University

5 August 2011 Jiaju Village

TOURISM AND THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT IN THREE CLUSTERS IN JIAJU VILLAGE


5 August 2011

1

Jiaju Village

Chengdu成都

Jiaju Village甲居

5 mi5 km

Jiaju Village甲居

1000 ft500 m

Jiaju Village甲居

REGIONAL CONTEXT

Source: Google Maps with modification by authors

Fig. 1 Jiaju Context Maps

Located at 30°92’N 101°87’E, at an upper altitude of approximately 2610m to a lower altitude of about 2122m, Jiaju village is located in Danba County, Sichuan Province, China and comprises 3 production teams.

Jiaju Village has experienced growing numbers of tourism, especially after their designation as a Tibetan village tourism zone, and while parts of the village have prospered as a result, the tourism dollars coming into the village have not been distributed equally throughout the village, with villagers nearest to the main paved road benefitting

most, as they are the most visible to tourists, and easiest to access by tour buses. At the same time, while most villagers were welcoming and interested in interacting with us, not all villagers seemed interested in partaking in tourism; they either were not set up to accommodate tourists, or did not appreciate tourists intruding into their lives.


5 August 2011

2

Jiaju Village

Jiaju Village is divided into three parts: Jiaju 1, Jiaju 2, and Jiaju 3. We chose to study a cluster of five to seven households in each section of the village. We chose households based on their general proximity to each other, shared space and paths, and the presence of guest houses. Each cluster has its own character, which has been influenced by vehicular and pedestrian accessibility, slope of the site, where on the overall slope it is, vegetation, and the governmental designation as a mass tourist destination (resulting in more government investment into the cluster) or a “deep” tourism destination. “Deep” tourist locations are those that are not easily accessible by car or bus and do not receive the same level of governmental investment.

After defining the study area comprised of these three clusters, the next step was in using the Trimble Juno GPS handheld devices with Arcpad 7.1. The GPS tracking software was used to delineate roads and trails, as well as to collect data on locations of buildings, and other points of interest (e.g. water features, temples, etc.). A more extensive description of how this was done can be found in Appendix A: GIS/GPS Methodology. Shapefiles were created with associated Quickforms, which enabled quick data entry in the field. Buildings were numbered sequentially,

METHODOLOGY

Jiaju Village boundary

Main Road

River

River

Fig. 2 Jiaju Village

Source: Google Earth with modification by authors


5 August 2011

6

Jiaju Village

Fig 7 CLUSTER 1 - GUEST HOUSES

Cluster 1 is part of the 2006 officially designated tourist area for mass tourism, and has received governmental assistance to pave paths and generally improve the area. The households were encouraged to build additions to accommodate guests and to modernize with such luxuries as running water and toilets. According to the 2006 aerial image and the government maps, there used to be another building in the center of the cluster, where the paths converge, but it has since been demolished in the past five years. It seems like the center of the cluster would be a natural gathering or social space, but it does not function that way at all - it only has crops and the paths. The slope on this site is fairly gentle and lends itself to crop-growing. It feels quite open and welcoming.

A1

A6

A2

A8

A7

A5

A4

°

0 10 20 305Meters

LegendBuildingsUse

Guest House

Residential

Unknown

B9

B4

B1

B3

B5

B2

B6

B7

B8

°

0 10 20 305Meters

LegendBuildingsUse

Guest House

Residential

Unknown

C5

C7

C1

C2

C6

C3

C4

°

0 10 20 305Meters

LegendBuildingsUse

Guest House

Residential

Unknown

Source: authors


5 August 2011

6

Jiaju Village

Fig 7 CLUSTER 1 - GUEST HOUSES

Cluster 1 is part of the 2006 officially designated tourist area for mass tourism, and has received governmental assistance to pave paths and generally improve the area. The households were encouraged to build additions to accommodate guests and to modernize with such luxuries as running water and toilets. According to the 2006 aerial image and the government maps, there used to be another building in the center of the cluster, where the paths converge, but it has since been demolished in the past five years. It seems like the center of the cluster would be a natural gathering or social space, but it does not function that way at all - it only has crops and the paths. The slope on this site is fairly gentle and lends itself to crop-growing. It feels quite open and welcoming.

A1

A6

A2

A8

A7

A5

A4

°

0 10 20 305Meters

LegendBuildingsUse

Guest House

Residential

Unknown

B9

B4

B1

B3

B5

B2

B6

B7

B8

°

0 10 20 305Meters

LegendBuildingsUse

Guest House

Residential

Unknown

C5

C7

C1

C2

C6

C3

C4

°

0 10 20 305Meters

LegendBuildingsUse

Guest House

Residential

Unknown

Source: authors


5 August 2011

7

Jiaju Village

Fig. 8 CLUSTER 2 - GUEST HOUSES

0 10 20 305Meters

Unknown

B9

B4

B1

B3

B5

B2

B6

B7

B8

0 10 20 305Meters

LegendBuildingsUse

Guest House

Residential

Unknown

C5

C7

C1

C2

C6

C3

C4

°

0 10 20 305Meters

LegendBuildingsUse

Guest House

Residential

Unknown

Source: authors


5 August 2011

5

Jiaju Village

GENERAL CLUSTER CHARACTERISTICS

Fig. 4 Public versus Private Space

Fig. 5 Growth of Houses

Fig. 6 Familial Spatial Relationships

FIELDSSLOPE DN

LANDSLIDE AREA

SLOPE DN

The spaces that act as

public are the southern

sides of the houses, where

the entrances and paths are.

and where the latrines

are located. The interior

courtyards and rooftops

also act as a semi-public

space.

The original house is

built with the tower

oriented to the north

and the entrance

to the south. The

tower is three stories

and the rest of the

house is one or two

stories. Additions are

constructed as the family expands and with guest houses.

Most of the clusters

are related through

blood or marriage,

and will rebuild

in the same area,

outside the landslide

area, to stay near

their family.

Source: authors

Source: authors

Source: authors

To the north are the fields


5 August 2011

8

Jiaju Village


Unlike Clusters 1 and 2, Cluster 3 is not part of the 2006 officially designated tourist area for mass tourism, but part of the area for “deep” tourism. Only one household claimed to be a guest house, even though two other households had additions under construction. The roads are all dirt, but some of the paths have been paved. It is clearly less developed for tourism, and the residents were not particularly friendly towards us. It was difficult to see more than two houses at any one point in time due to the dispersed layout, the trees, and the topography. This site is hilly, but the overall slope is not very steep.

A1

A6

A2

A8

A7

A5

A4

°

0 10 20 305Meters

LegendBuildingsUse

Guest House

Residential

Unknown

B9

B4

B1

B3

B5

B2

B6

B7

B8

°

0 10 20 305Meters

LegendBuildingsUse

Guest House

Residential

Unknown

C5

C7

C1

C2

C6

C3

C4

°

0 10 20 305Meters

LegendBuildingsUse

Guest House

Residential

Unknown

Source: authors


5 August 2011

8

Jiaju Village


Unlike Clusters 1 and 2, Cluster 3 is not part of the 2006 officially designated tourist area for mass tourism, but part of the area for “deep” tourism. Only one household claimed to be a guest house, even though two other households had additions under construction. The roads are all dirt, but some of the paths have been paved. It is clearly less developed for tourism, and the residents were not particularly friendly towards us. It was difficult to see more than two houses at any one point in time due to the dispersed layout, the trees, and the topography. This site is hilly, but the overall slope is not very steep.

A1

A6

A2

A8

A7

A5

A4

°

0 10 20 305Meters

LegendBuildingsUse

Guest House

Residential

Unknown

B9

B4

B1

B3

B5

B2

B6

B7

B8

°

0 10 20 305Meters

LegendBuildingsUse

Guest House

Residential

Unknown

C5

C7

C1

C2

C6

C3

C4

°

0 10 20 305Meters

LegendBuildingsUse

Guest House

Residential

Unknown

Source: authors


5 August 2011

7

Jiaju Village


0 10 20 305Meters

Unknown

B9

B4

B1

B3

B5

B2

B6

B7

B8

0 10 20 305Meters

LegendBuildingsUse

Guest House

Residential

Unknown

C5

C7

C1

C2

C6

C3

C4

°

0 10 20 305Meters

LegendBuildingsUse

Guest House

Residential

Unknown

Source: authors

Cluster Descriptions

13

Jiaju Village, Danba County, Sichuan Province, China

Location: 30°92’N 101°87’EAltitude (upper): 2610m (approx) Altitude (lower): 2122m (approx)Production Teams: 3

Jiaju Village has experiencedgrowing numbers of tourism, especially after their designation as a Tibetan village tourism zone, and while parts of the villagehave prospered as a result, the tourism dollars coming into the village have not been distributed equally throughout the village, with villag-ers neares to the main paved road

benefiting most, as they are the most visible to tourists, and easiest to access by tour buses. At the same time, while most villagers were welcoming and interested in interacting with us, not all villagers seemed interested in partaking in tourism; they either were not set up to accommodate tourists, or did not appreciate tourists intruding into their lives.

REGIONAL CONTEXT

THE INFORMED JOURNEY | points of departure

[on] board[on] line [on] island

DIGITAL JOURNEY | information + orientation

kioskweb

mobile

[on] site

JOURNEY | connections + portals

seattle

vancouver, b.c.

anacortesferry terminal

fridayharbor

tvvv```vvv

Upload | Share your park

[ON] LINE | social networking

APPROACH | ARRIVAL | RETURN

[ON] BOARD | kiosk

[ON] ISLAND | wayfinding

[ON] SITE | mobile

[ON] SITE | mobile

[ON] RETURN | mobile

The new approach we propose is a National Park experiential journey – a digitally-informed framework – intended to engage the next generation of National Park Stewards while enhancing a reverence for place.

APPROACH ARRIVAL

RETURN

SAN JUAN ISLAND NATIONAL HISTORICAL PARK

Demographic Trends

[ON] SITE| mobile THE INFORMED JOURNEY | digital stewardship & San Juan Island National Historical Park

For those who find the way, the journey to and through San Juan Island National Historical Park is a scenic and rare opportunity to experience a rich cultural and ecological resource.

TRADITIONAL JOURNEY

Gorgeous landscape, but…

+ Lack the sense of history and personal connections to the land + No programs and activities on the site+ Single narrative throughout the park+ Isolated from the rest of the island+ Hard to share experience with the rest of the world+ Where can I find more information?

[ON] RETURN

+ Non-interactive, static interface

+ One-way flow of information

+ Updated content, but difficult to navigate

+ Not well- integrated with social media

+ SJINHP lacks presence on the island, despite strong connections in established trail networks.

+ Not a clear wayfinding strategy

+ The opportunity to connect to other local parks is not realized

+ At San Juan Island National Historical Park, the approach lacks intrigue and the anticipation of arrival

+ A long ferry ride gives riders ample time to orient and gather information about the park, but the park does not extend its reach to the ferry

+ An approach without intrigue lacks drama for those who view the park as a destination while a lack of visual presence on the ferry ride misses an opportunity to opportunistically attract visitors

[ON] BOARD[ON] LINE [ON] LINE[ON] LINE [ON] ISLAND

[ON] SITE

+ Currently, the experience ends when visitors exit SJI-NHP+ There is no opportunity for reflection or feedback on experiences+ There are no places for visitors to create and share content relating to their visit

Parks for the People Design Competition University of Washington, Van Alen Institute, and the National Park Service

March 2012

The Van Alen Institute in partnership with the National Park Service held a design competition to reimagine America’s national parks. I was part of a collaborative team of 21 students including planners, architects, landscape architects, ecologists and museologist at the University of Washington in a quarter-long studio. We worked with staff from San Juan Island National Historical Park to find ways to provide improved accessibility and interpretive opportunities for park visitors and local residents. Further refinement of studio outcomes were used in the design submission, where the University of Washington placed as one of six finalist teams.

One important element of the project included a digital strategy that looked at new ways of engaging park visitors in the historical and ecological narratives of the park, by bringing the concept of the park visitor center into the landscape itself through digital technology.

My role on this project included developing the digital strategy with five other teammates, preparing mockups, presentation and display boards (using Photoshop, Indesign, Powerpoint and Prezi), providing GIS and GPS mapping, project management, and conducting field research.

14

TitleDate


ADD SKILLS

ADD ROLES

� $4.364 million in cost savings through installing a habitat skirt c

ompared with a 5m tall sea wall

hard structure measuring 477m in length

Given that the habitat skirt measures 5m in height, the assumption is u

sed that an equivalent sea wall hard

structure would have to have the same height. The capital cost of constructing a one-meter tall seawall

structure of one-meter length is estim

ated to be $5,310, with the costs of extending the wall’s h

eight

increasingly proportionally to height6 . Therefore, a 1m length of sea wall hard structure 5m in height would

cost $5,310/m * 5m = $26,550. Given that the habitat skirt has a linear length of 477 metres, th

e estimated

capital cost of a conventional seawall providing an equal level of support, would be $12,664,350.

$26,550/m x 477m = $12,664,350

This compares to the estimated $8.3 million for the design, fabrication, and installation of the habitat skirt at

the Vancouver Convention Centre7 ,

Cost savings = Base case – Actual case = $12,664,350 - $

8,300,000 = $4.364 million

6 Wei-Shiuen Ng and Robert Mendelsohn. 2005. The impact of sea level rise

on Singapore. Environment

and Development Economics 10: 201–215

7 Marine Compensation Habitat Survey Report - Vancouver Convention Centre West

used,) only during June, July and August, with an average of 4 million gallons used per month, or 12 million

gallons of water per year for the 6 acre site.

This is achieved through the use of a drip-irrigation system that is controlled by moisture sensors, which

activate only when predetermined moisture levels are reached.

Assumptions regarding calculated irrigation cost savings:

-Use of only potable water for site irrigation in the reference case, as a baseline, meaning that all 12 million

gallons of water used would need to be paid for.

-$1 CAD = $1 USD

Cost of water is $0.0008 per litre or $0.00303/gal5

12 million gallons /year * $0.00303/gal = $36,360

Methodology for Cost Comparison

� Cost savings of $72,720 annually in water for green roof irrigation

Assumptions regarding calculating irrigation cost savings:

Use of potable water for site irrigation in the base case,

$1 CAD = $1 USD

Cost of water is $0.0008 per litre or $0.00303/gal5

Annual water consumption from irrigation

Assumptions regarding a base case of no reductions in site irrigation (see above ‘Reduced on site irrigation

by 50%’ for more details)

Base Case: $72,720

4 million gallons/month x 3 months (june/july/aug) = 12 million gallons

Base irrigation usage x 50% (0.5) = 12 million gallons

Solving the equation for ‘Base irrigation usage’,

Base irrigation usage x 0.5 / 0.5 = 12 million gallons / 0.5 = 24 million gallons / year

= 24 million gallons /year * $0.00303/gal = $72,720

Actual Case: $0.

This project uses the on-site blackwater treatment system to first use on-site treated blackwater for irrig

ation.

In the case that there is inadequate supply on-site, the blackwater treatment system is designed to receive

City sewage for treatment, after which the water can be delivered to the roof for irrigation purposes. As

such, there is no cost associated with site irrigation due to use of potable water.

Cost savings = Base case – Actual case = $72,720

5 Metro Vancouver, Tap Water Campaign. [accessed Dec 2011]. [Online]. Available:

http://www.metrovancouver.org/region/tapwater/Pages/default.aspx

The following equation represents the best fit line for the dataset (N=47, R2=0.71).

Rv=0.05+0.9Ia

Where: Ia = Impervious fraction

Rvbase = 0.05+0.9*0.85 = 0.815 inches

Rvproj = 0.05 + 0.9*0.727 = 0.7043 inches

% reductions In runoff = (0.815 inches -0.7043 inches) / 0.815 inches = 13.6%

Roof area: 261.360 square feet = 24,281.1385 square meters 4

Volume runoff reductions

1.4749m * 13.6% X 24,281.1385 m2 = 4,870.5m3 = 1,286,650 gallons

� Reduced on site irrigation by 50% resulting in cost savings of $36,360/year

LMN Architect’s description of the roof stated reductions in site irrigation by 50%. According to Bruce

Hemstock, the project’s landscape architect, once the plant community is established, the roof will be

watered (using only treated blackwater from a combination of on-site and City sewage; no potable water is

4 Bruce Hemstock, PWL Landscape Architects (personal communications, October 23, 2011)

LPS Methodology Page 1 of 4 Project Title Vancouver Convention Center Expansion Project

Methodology for Landscape Performance Benefits

� Created 1,500 linear feet of marine habitat showing marine development in 3 years

comparable to a typical site of 8-10 years

Since the installation of the habitat skirt 3 years ago, monitoring of the habitat skirt and surrounding marine

habitat has been done annually to fulfill Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) requirements for

Fisheries Act Authorization. Monitoring by EBA Engineering Consultants Ltd. includes biannually

conducting an inventory and assessment of the dominant intertidal and sub-tidal biota, and comparing biota

diversity/productivity with a known and accepted reference site (Marathon) adjacent to the project. Installed

8-10 years ago as new marine habitat, the Marathon reference site was determined by the Department of

Fisheries and Oceans to have achieved an acceptable marine habitat condition. In the most recent

inventory and assessment conducted in March 2011 by EBA Engineering Consultants Ltd., no significant

difference was observed between the Marathon reference site (8-10 years of marine development), and the

habitat skirt (3 years of marine development), in terms of species richness and diversity. As well, 43 species

were found on the habitat skirt, compared with 46 species at the reference site, and schools of 500 or

greater of the following salmonids: Chum, Coho, and possibly Chinook were observed at the habitat skirt.1

� Reduced Stormwater Runoff by 13% or 1.29 million gallons

Based on climate normal data, the average annual rainfall in Vancouver Harbour is 1474.9mm = 58.067

inches2,

Using this information, the following equation can be used to derive annual run off:

R = P * Pj * Rv

Where: R = Annual runoff (inches)

P = Annual rainfall (inches) = 58.067

Pj = Fraction of annual rainfall events that produce runoff (usually 0.9)

Rv = Runoff coefficient 3

1 Marine Compensation Habitat Survey Report - Vancouver Convention Centre West

2 Vancouver Harbour climate normal data 1971-2000

http://climate.weatheroffice.gc.ca/climate_normals/results_e.html?stnID=888&lang=e&dCode=0&province=

BC&provBut=&month1=0&month2=12) 3 The Simple Method to Calculate Urban Stormwater Loads. (2010, January). [Online]. Available:

http://www.stormwatercenter.net/monitoring%20and%20assessment/simple%20meth/simple.htm

Landscape Performance Series - Case Study Briefs

Landscape Architecture Foundation and University of Washington

December 2011

The Landscape Architecture Foundation (LAF) partnered with the University of Washington’s Sustainable Urban Landscapes class to develop a set of case study briefs featuring sustainable projects with quantified landscape benefits. Working closely with LAF staff, professional designers and other members of the project team, a set of robustly researched case studies was developed, documenting the measurable benefits of exemplary high performance landscapes that deliver ecological, social and economic benefit.

My role for this project included the developing a case study that quantified the benefits of the Vancouver Convention Center Expansion Project. In correspondence with the design team, a methodology was developed that quantified marine habitat creation, and reductions in stormwater runoff, on-site irrigation, heat gain and heat loss. A narrative describing the project was also synthesized, and additional imagery collected that would highlight the project.

15

Street Cross Sections

Simon Fraser University Urban Design Certificate Programand TechniCity Coursera (online course)

Various Dates

On the left are several examples of street cross sections that were initially created as products for visualizing streetscapes, and the allocation of streetsfcape elements. On the right, digital representations of the same street cross sections were developed using streetmix, a web-based tool created by Code for America that allows for easy creation of street cross sections.

These street sections on the right were part of an exploration of new and innovative tools that were presented through TechniCity, a Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) that looked at how technology is used to engage with the public for supporting decison-making, and tools that can be used for analyzing the city.

West Broadway Street Section

Raven Woods Drive Road Redesign

16

Central Puget Sound Food System Assessment:Food Hub Research

University of Washington and Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC)

June 2011

The project is the final product of a 20 week graduate studio that included team members from urban planning and design, architecture, landscape architecture, real estate and public affairs backgrounds.

Enlisted by PSRC’s Regional Food Policy Council, the University of Washington studio team identified and pursued research topic areas examining the regional food system. These research areas would inform the development of early action items on the Council’s work plan. Products included an initial conditions report for the food system in the central Puget Sound region, as well as a set of reports that focused on six specific topics addressing emerging issues in the food system.

My role on this project included developing, with three other students, a chapter about food hubs. In particular, I co-developed a case study on the Everett Farmers market, to derive lessons to inform future regional food hub efforts. I also assisted with report layout, GIS mapping and led the development of the studio website. This report is also listed as a resource on a section on food hubs on the USDA website.

FOOD HUBS

Source: Jenny Ngo

What are Food Hubs?

“A centrally located

facility with a business

management structure

facilitating the

aggregation, storage,

processing, distribution,

and/or marketing of

locally/regionally

produced food products.”

-USDA working definition

Food Hubs

Wholesale/Aggregation

Active

Coordination

Permanent

Facilities

FOOD HUBS

CENTRAL PUGET SOUND

FOOD SYSTEM ASSESSMENT

REGIONAL FOOD POLICY COUNCIL

& UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON

JUNE 2011

36

Volume 6: Food Hubs

Business Model: non-profit

Year Founded: Scheduled to open in 2013

Background

Snohomish County is actively trying to find ways to promote local agriculture and

maintain the economic viability of local farmers. According to Linda Neunzig, the

county’s agriculture coordinator, the county has been studying the prevalence

and strength of local farms and is beginning to develop policies and programs that

encourage agricultural sustainability. The county assembled the Snohomish County

Agricultural Economic Development Action Team and commissioned the Snohomish

County Agriculture Action Plan. At the county’s annual Focus on Farming Conference,

many participants said a major barrier to farming is inconsistent access to markets

and that a year-round farmers market would boost their ability to succeed as small to

medium-scale farmers. Snohomish County Growers Alliance, a non-profit organization

established in June 2010 and made up of local farmers, decided to pursue the creation

of this market with facilitation from Neunzig and political support from the county.

Snohomish County Growers Alliance consists of small to medium-scale farmers who

have been searching for ways to make local farming more economically viable.

Their mission is to bolster the economic vitality of agriculture in Snohomish County.76

At the time of writing, the Everett Farmers Market is still a

project in conception, but

its characteristics are exemplary of many of the necessary elements for an effective

food hub. It will be situated in downtown Everett, taking up an entire city block. It will

house not only a year-round indoor farmers market, but also an aggregation facility for

wholesale food distribution and a commercial kitchen and other processing facilities.

The entire food hub will be managed by SCGA. Carol Krause, the president of SCGA

explained that local farmers struggle to reach markets for their products. Thus, the goals

for SCGA include expanding markets, supporting local growers, raising awareness of

true costs of food as well as the benefits of local food, and creating an organization

of growers for greater political clout. Its purpose is support, represent, and provide

a voice for agriculture industry within Snohomish County. It has the potential to play

a significant role in working to improve agriculture’s economic viability, educating

consumers about the value of local food production, advocating with elected officials

on behalf of agriculture, and generally promoting local agriculture. The first action for

this private sector non-profit organization is the creation of this market.

Moreover, the proximity of the market to downtown Everett, combined with the

apartments that the developer will build above the ground floor, will contribute to

economic synergies that benefit both the market and the city.77 As an example of a

hybrid food hub (see “Typologies” side bar), the market combines elements of food

aggregation, processing, and retail, creating the potential for the market to become

a destination for consumers, wholesalers and restaurant owners from around the

central Puget Sound region.

Major Activities and Characteristics

The following activities will be the responsibility of the Snohomish County Growers

Alliance:

CASE STUDY: The Everett Farmers Market

Everett, Washington75

10

PUGET SOUND FOOD SYSTEM ASSESSMENT

• Food hubs typically have three major

components:

1. wholesale aggregation/distribution,

2. active coordination with food producers,

and

3. permanent facilities.

• Some food hubs provide additional services,

such as space for wholesale and retail vendors,

health and social service programs, community

kitchens, and community meetings.

• Key considerations in starting a food hub

include demand for locally and regionally

produced food, creativity with funding,

seamless systems for distribution and sales,

careful market analysis, and review of policies

to determine whether financial or regulatory

incentives may aid food hub development.

• The planned Everett Farmers Market in

Everett, Washington, which combines retail

and wholesale sales of agricultural products,

commercial kitchen facilities, distribution,

education, and other elements, offers lessons

for planning future regional food hub efforts.

• Two detailed case studies illustrate how food

hubs have developed in two areas that share

some of the central Puget Sound region’s

demographic and physical characteristics: the

Local Food Hub, a non-profit food aggregator,

distributor, and educational farm located

in Charlottesville, Virginia; and The Wedge,

a cooperative business with a retail store,

distribution warehouse and educational farm

located in Minneapolis, Minnesota.

• In recent years, all four counties in the central

Puget Sound region have identified various

barriers for smaller farmers, ranging from

marketing and economic development to

access to commercial kitchens to mechanisms

for garnering wholesale clients. Food hubs

may help to meet these needs while filling

demonstrated consumer demands for locally

and regionally produced food.

Core Food Hub Components:

Distribution, Warehousing and

Aggregation, Processing, and Retail Sales

17

joming lau - urban planning and design portfolio

Documents