Portfolio Alifa Putri

Portfolio

alifa putri, mup Urban + Transportation Planner

aputri@gsd.harvard.edu alifaputri.xyz

table of content

00

resume

01

urban center The New Spine of Lasnamae | Tallinn, Estonia | Studio project

04

community engagement Adapt East Boston | East Boston, MA | Studio project

06

transport planning Traversing through the Greenway | East Boston, MA, USA | Studio project

alifa putri

Ur b a n + Tr a n s p o r t a t i o n P l a n n e r

EDUCATION Master of Urban Planning Candidate Harvard Graduate School of Design Boston, 2016 — 2018 Bachelor of Business Administration Universitas Indonesia Jakarta, 2010 — 2015

achievements IHS Youth Urban Professional Award, Quito 2016

skills Adobe Illustrator Adobe InDesign Adobe Photoshop ArcGIS Rhino 3D Modeling Google Sketchup Microsoft Office

languages English Bahasa Indonesia Korean

select courses Innovative Project Delivery Public Private Development Seminar in City Form: the Future of Streets Land Use and Transportation Planning Behavior and Policy in Transportation Transportation Policy and Planning

interests Transportation planning Urban Design Public space Dancing Taekwondo

professional experience Minnesota Department of Transportation, St Paul, 2017 Policy and Investment Planning Intern - Produced case studies, visual vocabularies and infographics to clearly communicate the Minnesota Complete Streets policy for public outreach purposes - Conducted research and analyzed various trends for state-wide long-term transportation plan MinnesotaGO CycleHack Head Quarter, London, 2017 Communication Intern - Developed digital campaign for Global CycleHack event - Organized CycleHack community event in Boston, MA PetaJakarta.org, Jakarta, 2015-2016 Field Office Coordinator - Collaborated with geographers, engineers and developers to collect and analyze crowdsourced data to creata the first real-time urban flooding map - Liaised with partners and sponsors including government agencies, academic institutions and social media platforms - Supported the production of reports, grant proposals and other documents - Presented the project in various national and international conferences, including the UN Habitat III in Quito, Ecuador (2016) Office of Jakarta Governor, Jakarta, 2015 City Planning and Operation Intern - Proposed and led pilot project to introduce new engagement strategy and evaluation system for 10,500 workers at district level - Reviewed and consolidated draft budget proposed by 5 local agencies, working closely with Jakarta Regional Planning Board

community service Harvard Community Development Project, 2016-2018 Project Co-leader - Prepared a masterplan for one of the main corridors in Fitchburg, MA detailing highest and best use of lands and urban design strategies - Co-led an interdisciplinary team of 20 students from architecture, urban design and public policy program

extracullicular Harvard Urban Planning Organization, 2017-2018 American Planning Association (APA) and Community Outreach Co-chair - Organized meetings and events regarding local issues in Cambridge, MA - Liaised with local APA chapter members

01

urban center The New Spine of Lasnamae | Tallinn, Estonia | Studio project Main collaborator: Chanel Williams, MUP The district of Lasnamae is home to approximately 100,000 residents and has many opportunities for new activies and innovative projects. During the Soviet Era, planners had a grand vision of creating a channel through the center of this district.

The channel, known as Laagna Channel, was completed; however, the tram that was intended to run through the channel was never completed.

In addition to their vision for Laagna Channel, Soviet planners also envisioned a series of centers, known as microrayons, that still exist in Lasnamae today. The urban centers for some of these microrayons were completed, while others in the northern regions of Lasnamae were left unfinished. The property market filled in the ‘void’ without following the pattern that was carefully laid out by the Soviet planners.

transforming laagna

Pae

Pae Park

Smuuli

Lummu

u

center analysis This map shows that center of activities in Lasnamae are scattered with limited hierarchy. It does not have a concentration of amenities or a hierarchical structure that governs the public space and retail areas.

Most of these commercial buildings (in red) are superblocks that allow for activity indoors but limited activity in the streets of Lasnamae. The grey overlay shows the publicly owned land in Lasnamae, an indication of where cities can make investments and have new development.

framework plan Phase 1 Phase 2 Phase 3 Access City-owned Parcels

Seli Umera Mustakivi Tondiraba

Smuuli and Lummu

Based on the existing conditions in Lasnamae, our Framework Plan proposes the creation of linear centers along Laagna Channel. We propose converting streets along the channel into spaces for retail, office and residential use. We also propose transforming the green buffer in the center of Laagna Channel into a new tram route.

This tram route will be completed in three phases. The first phase will extend from Pae to Tondiraba, the section of Laagna Channel that is sunken by 8 meters. The second phase of the tram route will extend from Mustakivi to Seli, the section of Laagna Chanel that is at grade. The third phase of the tram with circle around to the northen region of Lasnamae and be built along Narva mantee. This tram will connect the northern and central parts of Lasnamae and provide Lasnamae’s residents with better access to downtown Tallinn.

As we considered development along Laagna Channel, we also considered the means of having residents and visitors access the channel.. The red dotted lines on our framework plan show our proposed new points of access. We will be focusing on the Smuuli and Lummu stops.

02

concept diagram This diagram conveys the three concepts of our proposal. These concepts are development along Laagna Channel (“Development”), additional access routes to the channel (“Access”) and multiple modes of mobility along the channel (“Multimodal”).

development Humanize the channel by bringing human-scale development.

Development will accommodate a variety of land uses: retail, office, housing and institution. Such concentration of activity will bring life to the channel.

multimodal Introduce different ways of traveling through the channel by reintroducing sidewalks, constructing tram lines and installing bike and ped path.

features: principles:

- Small parcel size - Active use at ground level - Transparent building envelope - Connection between channel and upper level - Place-based land use

access Allows movement into and along the channel by connecting adjacent streets via ramps, bridges, stairs and buildings.

criteria:

- Density - Cost - Existing landscape - Future land use

- 4 km of bike/ped linear path - 2 tracks of tram/bus lane - 2 car lanes (20 km/h speed)

street edge types

can be convertsitors can shop

These two diagrams show how the three concepts collide to create new street edge types in Lasnamae

small plaza Parking lot facing the stalls can be converted into small plaza where visitors can shop and hangout

small stalls Upper level small stalls (25 sqm) accommodates informal businesses that currently exist without protection in various micro-rayon centers

shophouse

transit stop

outdoor seating

Ground level retail/service and upper level smal residential

Platforms for transit riders located in the center of the street

In sections where there is abundant space for development, buildings can have set backs and allow for outdoor seating

streetscaping Double entrance would triggerstreetscaping along the street parallel to Laagna channel

double entrance Building should allow movement from/to the channel by having two entrances in both Laagna and the upper level

office class b and c Small size oďŹƒce space at XXX sqm to support small businesses and compliment existing supply in Ulemiste and Smuuli

qm) accommoat currently rious

small retail Shops and restaurants at ground level ensures that the building is open for the public

multi-storey car park Car parking can be shared between daily visitors and residents

03

policy framework This diagram shows the key organizations and institutions for impletmenting our proposal on Laagna Channel. This diagram also provides our strategy for phasing development along the channel so that it can continue to function as a transportation artery. This phasing includes soliting public comments, and slowluy changing the face of Laagna Channel through programming it with car free days, movie shwings and artistic spaces.

Our next phase includes open space improvement which will include a road diet that reduces car traffic to two lanes.

We will then move on to constructing the tram and creating new office, retail and residential spaces along the channel.

Money for developing the tram will be garnered through increasing land taxes in Tallinn and through the revenue gained from the phased leasing of land along the channel.

Y1

Y2

Government

Tram study and p Solicit funds from

Tallinn City Office

Tallinn Urban Planning Department

New zoning overlay for Laagna Plan new zoning overlay Identify highest and best use (HBU)

Lasnamae District Administration

New zoning overlay for Laagna Solicit public comments Tram study and planning Planning and impact study

Tallinn Transport Department

Tallinn Engineering Services

Traffic reduction Close one side of Laanga (3 car lanes) Parklet at future development site Introduce temporary bike lane

Tallinn City Property Department

Tallinn City Council

Open space improvement Develop parks and install street furnitures along the channel

T R

Phased parcel lease Split land into parcels based on HBU Price parcels based on their accessibility Offer parcels within 400m radius from sta

New zoning overlay for Laagna Authorize zoning ordinance

Private Developers

Phased parcel lease Purchase parcels along Laagna

Local Organizations Ideas for Lasnamae (Lasnaidee)

New zoning overlay for Laagna Solicit public comments Tram study and planning Planning and impact study

Estonian Urban Lab (Linnalabor)

Movie Bus (Kinobuss)

Traffic reduction Open movie nights at future development site

Center for Creative Development (Gagarin)

Family and Children Advice Center (Nouandekeskus)

external Organizations

Initial funding Provide funding for initial research of tram plan i.e. EU’s European Structural and Investment Funds, Connecting Europe Facility

stakeholder diagram local orgs Tallinn Urban Planning Department Create a masterplan for long-term infrastructure and development projects

Tallinn Engineering Services Release RFP for infrastructure construction

Lasnamae District Administration Works closely with the local community to gather inputs for the plan

Tallinn City Property Department Lease and manage city-owned property

community

private developers

government

Tallinn City Council

Tallinn Transport Department

Represent the community in passing the required legislations

Operate and maintain the multimodal transport assets

Tallinn City OďŹƒce Request for external funding mechanism from partners such as Estonian Govt and EU

external orgs

Y3

74 Transit subsidy withdrawal Begin charging residents for public transit

planning m external sources

Access improvement Create urban design guidelines for Laagna

Tram study and planning Request for proposal

y ation

Y5

Y6 Land tax increase Double the land tax revenue to 15% of total Tallinn municipality income Land tax increase Simplify the development permitting process by enforcing as-of-right zoning Business opening Relocate small businesses in periphery

Access improvement Open new access point along Laagna Tram construction Construct 8 stops along 6.5 km

Tram opening Operate Lasnamae line

Public development Develop anchor points

Anchor opening Open anchor points

Private development Develop housing/oďŹƒce/retail space

Building operating Sell/lease buildings

Anchor opening Open anchor points Anchor opening Open anchor points

04

community engagement Appendix Adapt East Boston | East Boston, MA | Studio project Main Collaborator: Rodrigo Soles English

ADAPT EAST BOSTON

NOAH’s ClimateCARE initiative is working to create a communitypowered adaptation plan for East Boston that sets goals for housing, transportation, open space, economic development, and the public realm. A major objective of this plan is to look at how increased ÅVVKPUN·MYVT JVHZ[HS ^H[LYZ HUK L_[YLTL YHPUMHSS·JH\ZLK I` JSPTH[L change is likely to impact East Boston and then make recommendations for how those impacts can be alleviated.

Resident Survey

7) Are the

1) My main connection to East Boston is (check all that apply): I own an apartment or house in East Boston I work in East Boston

I rent an apartment or house in East Boston

I visit East Boston

I own a business in East Boston

Other (Please Specify)______________________

8) East Bo HZ ÅVVKPU HɈLJ[LK I

2) If you live in East Boston, in which neighborhood do you live?

1LќYPLZ 7VPU[

Maverick

Central Square

Eagle Hill

Orient Heights

Star of the Sea

3) If you work in East Boston, in which neighborhood do you work?

1LќYPLZ 7VPU[

Maverick

Central Square

Eagle Hill

Orient Heights

Star of the Sea

,HZ[ )V HYL ^VYYPL neighborh

4) What do you like most about East Boston?

10) Is the

5) What do you like least about East Boston?

6) What improvements would you like to see in East Boston?

High Priority More jobs 4VYL HќVYKHISL OV\ZPUN Protection from weather events

Medium Priority

Low Priority

Not a Priority

Please tell us a Sex:

Male

Under

More green spaces / parks

Age:

More parking

What languag

More community / cultural spaces Better public transit More entertainment / shopping Safer / more pleasant streets Reduced crime Better access to health care More access to the coast and coastal waters

What ethnicit (ZPHU 7HJPÄJ

What is the h High School D

What is your $35,001-$50,0

Intercept

ere any other improvements you would like to see in East Boston?

oston is particularly vulnerable to weather events associated with climate change, such UN·MYVT JVHZ[HS ^H[LYZ VY L_[YLTL YHPUMHSS·HUK L_[YLTL OLH[ /H]L `V\ WLYZVUHSS` ILLU I` HU` VM [OLZL L]LU[Z& 0M ZV OV^&

VZ[VU OHZ L_WLYPLUJLK H SV[ VM UL^ KL]LSVWTLU[ V]LY [OL SHZ[ Ä]L `LHYZ :VTL MHTPSPLZ LK [OH[ [OL` ^PSS IL MVYJLK [V TV]L ILJH\ZL VM YPZPUN YLU[Z /V^ KV `V\ MLLS HIV\[ [OLZL hood changes?

ere anything else you would like to tell us about East Boston?

r 18

18-25

Other 26-35

ge do you speak at home?

36-45 English

46-55 Spanish

56-65

66+

Other: ___________________________

ty do you identify with? Black or African American Caucasian Hispanic or Latino 0ZSHUKLY 5H[P]L (TLYPJHU 4PKKSL ,HZ[LYU 6[OLY! FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF

highest level of education you have received?

Middle School Diploma / GED Some College Bachelor’s Degree

annual household income?

000 $50,000-$100,000

In order to solicit information from East Boston community stakeholders, the team conducted inperson engagement activities with members of the public on six diff erent occasions in two formats: tabling and onstreet surveying. Tabling activities included the distribution of paper surveys, a mapping activity, and a “photo reactions” activity.

The goal was to solicit responses to a paper survey designed and distributed by the Intercept team.

Through the survey we were able to engage and gather 102 responses from the residents. Our analysis on the responses resulted in a report that will be essential in determining how to work towards a better future for East Boston.

about yourself by circling one answer for each question (Optional): Female

A better understanding of East Boston begins by talking directly with residents, workers, and visitors to the neighborhood.

These users provide insights into the spatial and cultural character of East Bostonand allow us to see the neighborhood in a different light. The community’s understanding of present and historic conditions makes their insight into East Boston crucial for analysis and implementation.

Some High School Advanced Degree

Under $15,000 $15,001-$25,000 $100,001-$130,000 Over $130,001

$25,001-$35,000

05

survey analysis

This excerpt is taken from the Intercept Survey Report that was prepared by our team for our studio client Neighborhood of Affordable Housing (NOAH), a non-profit organization based in East Boston.

analyzing the Neighborhood's Priorities by Demographic Across the board, East Boston neighborhoods more consistently prioritized ‘crime reduction’ the most, with more affordable housing a close second. The ‘more jobs’ category had the greatest disparity amongst the neighborhoods. A mere 15% of Jeffries Point respondents ranked more jobs as a high priority, where as 73% of Central Square residents thought more jobs were a high priority.

More affordable housing was of least concern to Orient Heights residents, not surprising since it is one of the wealthier neighborhoods in East Boston. Only 43% of Orient Heights respondents put affordability high on their list. But, affordable housing was of high concern to both Maverick and Central Square residents, with 73% of respondents from these neighborhoods putting it as a high priority. Crime reduction was of biggest concern to Eagle Hill residents (74% ranked reducing crime a high priority) and of least concern to Jeffries Point residents (only 46% ranked this as a high priority).

The survey asked respondents to improvements they would like to see in the neighborhood and rank them by priority.

Twelve improvements were provided, with three levels of priority: high, medium, and low. The highest priority was jobs: about 65% of respondents ranked more jobs as high priority, closely followed by more affordable housing at 64%. Reduced crime was third at 61%, closely followed by more parking at 60%. Safer and more pleasant streets ranked fifth but still above 50% at 52%. Less than 50% of respondents ranked the remaining categories as high priorities. Protection from weather events was only ranked a high priority ahead of better access to health care and better public transit. After looking at these general results, we broke down the five highest ‘high priority’ rankings (more jobs, more affordable housing, reduced crime, parking, safer/more pleasant streets) by neighborhood, income, education and race to see what the priorities of specific demographics were.

priorities for neighborhood improvement More jobs More affordable housing Reduced crime More parking Safer/more pleasant street More community/cultural spaces More green spaces/parks More entertainment/shopping More access to the waterfront Protection from the weather events Better access to health care Better public transit 1

2

3

4

5

6

7

More parking was a high priority to Central Square residents, with 73% of Central Square respondents, and Jeffries Point residents cared the least at 47%. 73% of Central Square respondents thought more pleasant streets were a high priority, contrasting Jeffries Point with only 38% of respondents prioritizing this. Overall, Eagle Hill respondents care most about crime and least about jobs. Orient Heights respondents care most about affordable housing and least about more jobs. Both Maverick and Jeffries Point respondents care most about affordable housing and least about more pleasant streets. Central Square respondents care equally about prioritizing all five categories.

As for priorities by educational attainment, less educated residents cared most about affordable housing, including those with middle school, some high school, or high school diplomas. People with any kind of college experience cared more about crime than any other issue, especially those with advanced degrees. Respondents who were only educated through middle school ranked all five priorities the highest across the board, with 100% caring about affordable housing and over 67% for the remaining categories. People with some high school had the most disparity, with 88% prioritizing affordable housing but only 25% prioritizing parking. People with bachelor’s degrees cared quite equally across the board, with little deviation. 62% cared most about crime with 44% caring about more jobs, with other priorities falling in between.

Some priorities associated with income were fairly predictable. Unsurprisingly, people in lower income brackets, particularly those in households making than $35,000, prioritize affordable housing over other issues, though safer/ more pleasant streets came in second for

these groups. People in higher income brackets (50,001+) cared most about reduced crime, followed by safer/more pleasant streets. Surprisingly, people whose households make $100,001+ also cared a lot about more affordable housing, with nearly 70% of respondents prioritizing this. But 0% people in households of $130,000+ didn’t prioritize more affordable housing at all. More affordable housing and reduced crime were most consistently prioritized across income brackets.

Priorities relative to race were surprising, as minority groups didn’t agree on their priorities. Caucasian and Hispanic respondents both shared strong concern for affordable housing and crime reduction.

African Americans cared as much about affordable housing as they did about parking, with 88% of respondents put both of these as a high priority. Parking was lowest on the priority list for Hispanic respondents and jobs were the lowest priority for Caucasian respondents. Crime reduction was lowest priority for African

Top 5 Priorities by Neighborhood Jobs

Housing

Crime

Parking

Safety/More Pleasant Streets 0%

10%

20%

30%

Americans. Overall, Americans were a highAfrican priority, contrasting Jeffries Point with 38% more of respondents prioritizing this. Overall, respondentsonly cared about parking and Eagle Hill respondents care most about crime and least about jobs.

Orient Heights respondents housing than both Hispanic and Caucasian care about affordable housing and least about more respondents,most and Hispanic respondents jobs.

Both Maverick and Jeffries Point respondents mostpleasant about affordable housing cared more care about streets andand least about more pleasant streets. Central Square respondents jobs than thecare other races.

Asian equally about Note: prioritizing all five categories. and Native American races were left attainment, out As for priorities by educational less educated residents cared most about affordable because a sample size of n=1 each would housing, including those with middle school, some high school, or high school diplomas. People with skew the data significantly.

any kind of college experience cared more about crime than any other issue, especially those with advanced degrees. Respondents who were only educated through middle school ranked all five priorities the highest across the board, with 100% caring about affordable housing and over 67% for the remaining categories. People with some high school had the most disparity, with 88% prioritizing affordable housing but only 25% prioritizing parking. People with bachelor’s degrees cared quite equally across the board, with little deviation. 62% cared most about crime with 44% caring about more jobs, with other priorities falling in between.

40%

50%

Orient Heights

60%

70%

80%

Maverick

Orient Heights

Maverick

Jeffries Point

Eagle Hill Eigle Hill Central Square

CentralNot Square Applicable N/A

Top 5 Priorities by Neighborhood Jobs

Housing

Some priorities associated with income were fairly predictable. Unsurprisingly, people in lower income brackets, particularly those in households making than $35,000, prioritize affordable housing over other issues, though safer/more pleasant streets

Crime

came in second for these groups. People in higher income brackets (50,001+) cared most about reduced crime, followed by safer/more pleasant streets. Surprisingly, people whose households make $100,001+ also cared a lot about more affordable housing, with nearly 70% of respondents prioritizing this. But 0% people in households of $130,000+ didn’t prioritize more affordable housing at all. More affordable housing and reduced crime were most consistently prioritized across income brackets.

Priorities relative to race were surprising, as minority groups didn’t agree on their priorities. Caucasian and Hispanic respondents both shared strong concern for affordable housing and crime reduction. African

10 Parking

Safety/More Pleasant Streets

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

06

transport planning Traversing through the Greenway | East Boston, MA, USA | Studio project Main collaborator: Armando Sullivan, MUP Wood Island Station

East Boston Public Library

Airport Station

Maverick Station

Constitution Beach Bennington Street Cemetery

Portside at East Pier

East Boston Memorial Park proposed intervention area current end of greenway

evacuation zones

0

inundation levels

.25

.5

social vulnerability

1 Miles

East Boston, located next to the Massachusetts Bay, is home to the Logan International Airport. Its accessibility has attracted a diverse population, but the neighborhood is now facing the imminent challenge of sea level rise. MBTA’s Blue Line, the main subway line that connects East Boston to Government Center, had experienced multiple temporary suspension in the past due to “heavy flooding.”

job accessibility

15 minutes

“Traversing through the Greenway” aims to find an alternative route to compliment Blue Line’s operation. The goal is to difersivy the commuting options without major capital investment. Our project repurposes the East Boston Greenway, a linear park that was made possible by the donation of a disused rail corridor by Conrail in 1997 and the ‘Big Dig’ project in later years, and turn it into a functional bike and pedestrian path. This route promotes active transport,

but more importantly, serves as an alternative to short term travels within the neighborhood, as well as emergency route that remains operational even when the Blue Line is inundated.

Our research was informed by a robust community engagement process that includes survey, interviews and focus group discussions as discussed on page 4.

The following map sequence shows the number of jobs that East Boston residents can reach in a given commute time. The pattern ultimately mimicks the MBTA routes; however, residents cannot access a lof of job in the first 15 minutes of their travel, suggesting limited options for short travels.

30 minutes

60 minutes

MBTA routes

07

site plan To look at how we can transform the linear park into an actual active transit corridor, we chose the PortSide in East Pier as our pilot site. One of the core intervention is wayfinding; by giving people the tools to navigate through the park, the Greenway now facilitates more efficient travels and offers similar traveling experience with

traditional streets. For this project, I introduced a new typology that combines a bike rack and wayfinding board. Lastly, we proposed new permeable surface and plantings to help the Greenway absorb water more quickly.

Lewis Mall Harbor Park

Marginal St.

BIKE + NAVIGATE = THE NEW PARK AND RIDE Bike Rack encourages intermodal connection Map Wayfinding board showing direction to Greenway and other transit stations.

EAST PIER FERRY TERMINAL

GREENWAY BIKE PATH

Wayfinding and bike rack

New ferry terminal

Tree canopy

New permeable pavement similar to Greenway

Maverick Square

47’

35’

Bremen Street

180’

48’

45’

FEATURES Honey Locust relatively resistant to heat island effect and sea level rise Permeable Pavement eliminates standing water and recharges local ground water supply

GREENWAY HERE

Sumner St.

to Maverick Station and bus stops

0.2 miles to Lewis Mall Ferry Terminal

EXIT 0.1 miles

0.1 miles to Greenway bike lane

to Maverick Station and bus stops

Airport (0.7 miles) Constitution Beach (2.3 miles)

0.1 miles to Maverick Garage

GREENWAY

MAVERICK STATION

MAVERICK

0.2 miles to Lewis Mall Ferry Terminal

Wayfinding system transform the linear park into an operational bike and pedestrian route that connects transit stops to the neighborhood