Brohman Yesler Terrace Capstone

: e

r r

c a

: g n

i s ou H e ic c l ub Spa P f n o e t n t g si rgo e D o F l a e c h i t g o g ol nin c E ig e s Th De

e Y

l s

r e

e T

Bill Brohman ∙ Capstone 2013

A profesionnal paper in partial fulfillment of the Master of Landscape Architecture degree requirements for the College of Design, and Master of Urban and Regional Planning degree requirements for Hubert H. Humphrey Institure of Public Affairs University of Minnesota Bill Brohman May 30, 2013 Capstone Committee David Pitt - Professor , Department of Landscape Architecture Carissa Schively Slotterback Associate Professor, Urban and Regional Planning Program Joe Favour - Professor in Practice, Department of Landscape Architecture

2 • Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

Acknowledgements Seattle Housing Authority Nate Cormier, SvR Design Compnay Gina Ciganik, Aeon Most importantly, I want to thank my wife EmaKate Brohman for being so patient and supportive of me through this process.

Table of Contents List of Figures

Overview

Project Statement

History of Public Housing

Context

4

5

6

7

13

Objectives

17

Master Plan

21

36

38

39

Implementation

Conclustion

Bibliography

Appendix A: Seattle Green Factor Score Sheet

40

Appendix B: Enlarged Master Plan Legend

42

Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

• 3

List of Figures

11

GSI - Vegetated Swale

Park Duvalle, Louisville, KY

11

Courtyard Obliques

31

Woodbridge Estates, Detroit, MI

11

Courtyard Fountain (Mixed-Use Building)

31

13

Section of Couryard Leading Into Central Park

31

13

Upper Terrace Stairs and Ramp Oblique Diagram

33

14

Upper Terrace Section Facing West

33

15

Lower Terrace Stair Oblique Diagram

34

Photo of Yesler Terrace

15

Lower Terrace Section Facing West

34

15

Park Section Facing North

35

17

Perspective Looking Northwest Over Park

35

17

Propsed Phasing Diagram

36

Means of Travel to Work

17

Current Topography

18

Photo of Yesler Terrace

18

Photo of Yesler Terrace

19

Photo of Yesler Terrace

19

Photo of Yesler Terrace

19

Proposed Master Plan

21

Section Cut of Entire Site North to South

21

Circulation and Connections Map

23

Land Use/Spine Connection

24

Public Transportation on Site

25

Road Connections

26

Enlarged 100% Corner and Buss Stop Paln

27

Proposed Topography

28

Typical Stair Design

28

Ecosystem Services Axon

29

Seattle Green Factor Scores

30

Robert Taylor Homes, Chicago, IL

Proposed Population Proposed Units by Income Level

Context Map Site Comparison

Photo of Yesler Terrace

Percentage of School Aged Childrean Average Vehicles per Household

4 • Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

30

Overview Public Housing. How can the mere use of two innocuous words evoke such a negative reaction from people? The combination of these two words alone conjure up images of poverty, crime, blight, and downward spiraling home values. Are these images wrong? When looking at the public housing that was built from the 1930’s to the 1980’s, it is hard to argue with those perceptions.

The design of these developments range in style from towers in the park to low-rise barrack style housing. The focus of these designs were on the structures, and how to house (or help) as many people of need as possible. In the 1990’s, a new policy for public housing emerged, the HOPE VI program. With HOPE VI, the focus again was on the structure, and how it could be used to deconcentrate poverty. The main focus of these two public housing design eras was on the structures, with a secondary focus (if any at all) on the landscape that surrounds them, creating a building in space rather than space created by a building.

Public - of, relating to, or affecting all the people or the whole area of a nation or state www.meriam-webster.com

Housing - dwellings provided for people www.meriam-webster.com

Towers in the Park - high-rise residential buildings sited on large lots of open space urbanomnibus.net

HOPE VI - a program that funds the redevelopment of large public housing projects into mixed income and mixed use neighborhoods (Goetz, 2003)

This dual landscape architecture and urban planning project looks at using techniques focused on ecological design to redevelop a public housing development. The site being redeveloped is Yesler Terrace, the oldest public housing site in Seattle, WA. The opportunity that this redevelopment affords is plentiful, as there are only two current structures remaining on site The focus of the design is on a “spine” in the center of the development that contains three important areas: a mixed use apartment development, a large park space, and a connecting staircase to the retail district located just to the south. The design of the site is intended to create connection, both internal and external, deal with the topography on the site, and use components of ecosystem services in the creation of community space. The resulting design transforms a public housing development that is disconnected from itself and the surrounding neighborhood, into a highly connected space that uses nature and its topography to create a mixed income and mixed use neighborhood that people will want to move there.

Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

• 5

Project Statement This project addresses a 41-acre site in Seattle, WA known as Yesler Terrace. It is the first public housing development in Seattle, constructed in 1941. Currently, there are 561 units of housing still in use, but lacking the modern features that are needed by today’s families.

The research question that initiated this project was this: does the HOPE VI program live up to its goals of creating a safer community by improving living conditions through the revitalization of distressed public housing? However, through research of this area, and public housing in general it evolved into more of a statement: when trying to solve the issues of public housing the focus has historically been on the structure with little attention paid to the space the structure inhabits, often treating it like forgotten space.

The key component of this project is to refocus the attention on using the structures and the design of the landscape to create spaces that not only beautify the site, but also provides the opportunity for community and social connection to be made. The development of the design used three objectives. The first objective was connection. Connecting the site for internal, and external movement, within the immediate neighborhood and the greater Seattle as well. The second objective is dealing with the topography on site to create spaces, and take advantage of the sweeping views that it provides. The third objective is to use of components of ecosystem services to provide an ecological component to the design.

6 • Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

History of Public Housing Housing for the poor has had a turbulent history in the United States. It has experienced three major reform movements since the 1800’s. The first housing reform movement happened in the mid 1800’s with the Tenement Reform Act. The second movement began in the 1930’s with the National Industrial Recovery Act, which created the Public Works Administration (PWA) and the first government funded project based public housing. The third occurred in the 1990’s with the Urban Revitalization Demonstration Program (HOPE VI). These were three different programs, with differing ideas on how the nations poor should be housed, but all three had some of the same goals. They all perceived the use of design as a tool to improve the social, physical, and mental health of their inhabitants. The PWA and HOPE VI wanted to deconcentrate poverty and racial segregation. Finally, all three eras used a top down approach to solving the housing issues of the poor.

In the mid to late 1800’s, there was an influx of immigrants and blacks from the south into the major American metropolises. The majority of these minorities were unskilled laborers, who located near the factories that would hire them.

This meant settling in the city centers where hiring happened nearly every day. The combination of this and the fact that they could not own or rent housing outside of specified areas, created a number of overcrowded and segregated ghettos that were filled with poverty and deplorable living conditions. This created what can be considered one of the first forms of public housing in tenements. These tenements were created due to the need of housing that could accommodate a wide range of living arrangements. It needed to house large families, single men, and single women in the same place and as cheaply as possible.

These living areas were created by converting old warehouses, factories, and residences into multi-unit developments, and in some cases new units were built on lots of razed residences. Some of these new structures were built by philanthropists who wanted to build model new housing, however these new

Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

Public Housing

• 7

By far the largest part-eighty percent at least-of crimes against property and against the person are perpetrated by individuals who have either lost connection with home life, or never had any, or whose homes had ceased to be sufficiently separate, decent, and desirable to afford what are regarded as ordinary wholesome ingluences of home and family.

–Jacob Riis, How the Other Half LIves (1890) Photo: Family living in a one-room tenement slum, New York City, 1890. Photograph by Jacob Riis, featured in his book How the Other Half Lives (1890).

tenements still had to be profitable, and therefore built in extremely high densities and low quality.

In the 1870’s, as a group of reformers started to argue that this environment led to the demoralization of its residents. The deplorable conditions found in these tenement environments were “...the cause of every social problem” (Wright, 1993, p. 117). This was the first time that the residents living environment was used as a reason for their poverty. It was also the first mention of improving the social, mental, and physical health of the poor through improved design. It was the belief of the reformers that improving the residents environment would be a “...direct route to virtue” (Wright, 1993, p. 117). The reformers wanted to use the improvement of the tenements as way to promote a certain way of life.

The next era of public housing started with The Housing Act of 1937 (also known as the WagnerSteagall Housing Act). This act created what we know today as public housing. In the beginning, The Housing Act essentially used public housing as a large scale job builder, putting back to work the construction industry which had been hurt during the Depression. However, it was the housing reform that was introduced that cemented its place in history as one of the

8 • Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

Public Housing

countries most controversial topics.

The formation of the Housing Act of 1937 was influenced by two factors. The first being disagreements between progressive reformers and modern planners. This disagreement revolved around the direction of the policy. The reformers wanted slum clearance, and the planners wanted to build on vacant sites. The second factor was market failure justification for public housing, essentially saying that government intervention should only intervene when the private market could not meet the needs of the population. This was done so public housing would not compete with private market housing.

The reformers had been shaping the public opinion on urban slums leading up to the passage of the Housing Act, and used this influence to get what they desired from the Act. They believed that the removal of the slums would cure the social problems of the poor that inhabited them. If you left the slums and built on new suburban sites, you would still have to deal with all the health and social issues of the slums, so the only way to alleviate that problem would be to remove the slums. They also believed that the construction

“Modern Architecture died in St. Louis, Missouri on July 15, 1972 at 3.32 pm (or thereabouts) when the infamous Pruitt Igoe scheme, or rather several of its slab blocks, were given the final coup de grâce by dynamite.”– Charles Jencks Photo from: United States Geological Survey

Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space • Public Housing

• 9

“High Point is a model community on both a human and environmental scale—not only locally but globally,” says Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels. “High Point’s energy-efficiency and green building features are in line with Seattle’s climate goals.”

of well built and well designed housing would provide the poor with the tools to succeed, and create a social stability for the city.

However, in many instances, the opposite occurred.

Through the 1960’s, 1970’s, and 1980’s, a portion of project based public housing had become demoralizing and deplorable environments.

By the 1990’s, the majority of public housing had been suffering from maintenance neglect, segregation, high crime rates, and an unfavorable public opinion. It was believed that these high density developments negatively affected the quality of life for its residents.

This led into the next era of public housing. In 1993, Congress launched the HOPE VI program.

This was the single largest effort to deconcentrate poverty in the United States. HOPE VI was initially started as a program to replace distressed public housing, but evolved into one that had a broader focus and goals. These were to create economic integration, deconcentrate poverty, and revitalizing inner cities. This was accomplished by demolishing and then redeveloping the most severely distressed public housing in the nation into mixed income developments. It has been the leading policy in public housing since the early 1990’s.

10 • Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

Public Housing

Public Housing Case Studies In addition to understanding the history of public housing policies and objectives, the study of the design of the housing devlopments is needed to determine if the structure merely sits in the space or if the sturcture is used as a means of creating space.

Tower in the park The first type studied was the tower in the park design. These were high rise structures usually built in super blocks, commonly placed in fields of turf grass and parking lots. This design was the ultimate offender in the structure placed in space instead of creating space. The site that was examined was the Robert Taylor Homes of Chicago, IL. The development was opened in 1962, and consisted of 28 high rise structures that were built on 92-acres that streched along a two mile length of State street on the south side of Chicago. At the time of its constructuction, it was the largest public housing development in the country. Even though the development lacked an overall plan to design the landscape around the structures, at the very least it provided open space, all be it manicured turf grass. Unfortunately this open space was not to be used as these areas were usually fenced off, or posted for people to stay off. If you had children and they were found to be playing on these spaces, you could receive a fine (Hunt, 2009). What is being illustrated with Fig. 01 is the seperation of the building from its landscape. It is one giant structure set in a field with a large asphalt playground located in front.

Figure 01

Robert Taylor Homes, Chicago, IL

Figure 02

Park Duvalle, Louisville, KY

Barrack Style The second type of design was barrack style public housing. These were usually low rise structures that resemble rowhouse or townhomes in their layout. They again are commonly set up in super blocks. These developments were more human scale design, but were ususally positioned ackwardly in the landscape with the focus squarely on the structures. Park Duvalle in Louisville, KY was the site that was studied. This site consisted of 1500 units of public housing built on 80-acres (United States General Accounting

Figure 03

Woodbridge Estates, Detroit, MI

Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

History

• 11

Office, 2003). These low rise units were placed on a network of interior streets that cut it off from the surounding neighborhood. The buildings were so badly sited that they were cut off from each other as well, creating isolated spaces that resembled bunkers. In Fig. 02, it is showing how the space between the buildings at Park Duvalle is was being missused, and forgotten. It shows one single path leading into the space, but where is the path going, the entrance, a back door?

What is this space, and why is it not maintained or marked as what its purpose is?

The third type of design for public housing was

Hope vi HOPE VI. The Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Center for New Urbanism partnered to develop the design guidelines for the HOPE VI developments. Unlike the other two designs, HOPE VI did implement some design guidlines for the landscape, but its main focus was still on the structure and the deconcentration of poverty. The former Jefferies Projects, now known as Woodbridge Estates, in Detroit, MI was the case study for HOPE VI. The 47-acre site now consists of 112 units split between multi-unit condos and single family homes. Compared with 2100 units in 13 buildings on those same 47-acres when it was the Jefferies Projects (Emporis, 2012).

Woodbridge Estates was said to resemble a exurb in the City of Detroit, a bland design that does not create a sense of place (Lewis, 2011). The photo of Woodbridge Estates (Fig. 03) illustrates how design has not really changed since the tower in the park design. With HOPE VI the focus is still on the structures, and less how they could be placed in the landscape, used to create space.

12 • Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

Public Housing

Context

Extremely Low Income 30% ($18,200)

Very Low Income 50% ($30,350)

Low Income 80% ($38,850)

Market Rate ($60,665)

% of Population (16)

% of Population (8)

% of Population (17)

% of Population (57)

% of Units (11)

% of Units (5)

% of Units (19)

% of Units (63) Yesler Terrace FEIS/HUD 2013 Income Limits

Figure 04

source: Yesler Terrace FEIS/HUD 2003 Income Limits

Proposed Population

3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Extremely Low Income Housing

Very Low Income Housing

30% AMI

50% AMI

(561 units)

(290 units)

Low Income Housing 80% AMI

(3199 units)

(950 units)

Figure 05

To understand fully how the context and location of the site was studied, some important factors need to be reviewd first. For this project, and its intent, those factors are the proposed population of the new site, and the proposed units, broken down by income levels.

Market Rate Housing

source: Yesler Terrace FEIS Appendicies

Proposed Units by Income Level

Proposed Population & Units Currently the site has 561 units of extremely low income (ELI) residents, equating to a population of 1200 people. The site has a proposed population

Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

Context

• 13

9 8

10

7 11

6

First Hill

13

12

5

17 2 Central Area

16 1

3

4

15 Little Saigon

14

School Aged Residents

1. Yesler Terrace

6. Pike Place Market - 1.4 mi

12. Odea High School - 0.5 mi

Adult Residents

2. Choice Neighborhood Boundary

7. Victor Steinbruek Park1.5 mi 8. Lake Union Park - 2.6 mi

13. Seattle University - 0.7 mi

Interstate 5 Figure 07

Context Map

3. Bailey Gatzert Elementary - 0.3 4. Occidental Park - 0.8 mi 5. Downtown Seattle - 1.3 mi

14 • Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

Context

9. Lake Union 2.6 mi 10. Cal Anderson Park - 1.1 mi 11. Freeway Park 0.9 mi

14. Giddens School - 1.3 mi 15. Washington MS - 1.3 mi 16. Judkins Park 1.9 mi 17. Garfield High School - 1.4 mi

increase of 585% to 8,224 people in 5,000 units.

As illustrated in Figures 04 and 05, the breakdown of that population has 16% proposed to be ELI, or 1,300 people. This population will take up 11% of the units on the new site. In strict contrast to the current site, the majority of the site will consist of a market rate population, 57% in 63% of the units.

This change in population leads to a change in the way that the site is going to be designed.

This change in income demographics provides the opportunity to change the way public housing can or needs to be developed. The traditional way of developing public housing is essentially rendered null and void due to the change in income demographics on the site.

Yesler Terrace Total Site : 41 Acres Minneapolis Comparison: Nicollet Island: 42 Acres FIGURE 06

Site Comparison

SIZE COMPARISON For those in the Minneapolis community, a site size comparison was included so as to better understanding the amount of area being redeveloped. Yesler Terrace is 41-acres, and compares to Nicollet Island at 42-acres, keeping in mind this is only a size comparison, development and density is not comparable.

CONTExT MAP When examining the context of the site to the city it was important to look at how the site is bounded, what is it nearby, and elements that are important to the future design.

FIGURE 08

View of Yesler Terrace from across I-5

BOUNDARIES The boundaries for Yesler Terrace are I-5 on the west, the First Hill Neighborhood on the north, the Central Area Neighborhood on the east, and Little Saigon on the South (Fig. 07). The boundaries that are of the most importance to Yesler Terrace are the west, east, and south. The I-5 boundary on the west is a very physical and abrupt boundry, with a drop of 40 - 50 feet from the site to the road. The northern boundary offers a potential for a connection to the First Hill Neighborhood and the Harborview Hospital. The southern boundary shows the most potential for the site, as this is a thriving international neighborhood with restaurants and shops.

FIGURE 09

Photo of a backyard at Yesler Terrace

Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space • Context

• 15

Popular Sites To give a general understanding of where Yesler Terrace is located, a relationship to popular sites is provided in Fig. 07. Yesler Terrace is located east of Downtown Seattle, connected over I-5

by Yesler Way. The closest tourist attractions to Yesler Terrace are Pike Place Market, Lake Union, and Freeway Park.

Important Contextual Sites In determining the design, some sites are more important for the future objectives laid out previously. These sites are places of education and parks (Fig. 07). There are three schools within one mile of Yesler Terrace, with the closest being Bailey Gatzer Elementary School. The other two, Odea High School and Seattle University, provide a good cycle for children to go to school in their neighborhood. The closest middle school is Washington Middle School. There are only two parks within one mile of the school, with the closest being Occidental Park, which is located across I-5, and the second closest being Freeway Park. Neither of these parks are within preferred walking distance to Yesler Terrace to be considered an amenity of the site, and neither contain a large open space for children to play in.

16 • Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

Context

Objectives Key design moves in the Master Plan correspond to the project objectives of creating connections, dealing with and emphasizing topography, and the use of ecosystem services to create space on the site. To understand how they were used to design, each objective needs to be analyzed and defined.

Age: 5 - 11

Age 5 - 11: 687

27% 50%

16%

25%

Age 5 - 18: 1374

Total Population: 8,274 Age: 5 - 18

Age: 5 - 18

City of Seattle

Proposed Development This illustrates the need for new connections both internal and external in the Yesler Terrace redevelopment.

Internal connections to play spaces and Little Saigon, and external to work and school.

Connection Figure 10

Two types of connections are analyzed on the site. Internal connections, or the movement of the residents within the site, and external connections to the surrounding neighborhood and Seattle as a whole. These are measured against the connection to place of work, education, and park space. The three data sets being used to determine how well the current Yesler Terrace is connected, and then later in the design of the redevelopment are: Percentage of School Aged Children on the proposed site (Fig. 10), the Average Vehicles per Household (Fig. 11), and Means of Travel to Work (Fig. 12).

Percentage of School Aged Children

Average Car per Condo/House

City of Seattle

1.8

Average Car per Apartment Yesler Terrace

0.6

City of Seattle

1.1

source: Yesler Terrace FEIS/HUD 2003 Income Limits

Average Vehicles per Household

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

City of Seattle

The second and third data sets are used to analyze the connections of the adults on site.

The average number of vehicles per household currently on Yesler Terrace is less than one car per unit. This is further illustrated in how residents travel to work, with 38% currently walking to work and 28% use public transportation. The paths are

1.2

Yesler Terrace

Figure 11

The first data set analyzed, the Percentage of School Aged Children, is being used to measure the current connection to schools and parks. Of the proposed new population of 8,224, 16% are going to be school aged children, and of that 16%, 50% are ages 5-11. The current connections on the site for children are illustrated on the context map (Fig. 07). As can be seen, there are limited connections for children to get to the elementary school directly to the east of the site, and there are no connections, internal or external, to park space. This means an improved connection to internal spaces of play and an external connection to the elementary school is required for safe movement of the children.

source: Yesler Terrace FEIS/HUD 2003 Income Limits

Yesler Terrace

Figure 12

Proposed Development source: Yesler Terrace FEIS/HUD 2003 Income Limits

Means of Travel to Work

Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

Objectives

• 17

illustrated on the context map (Fig. 07). The two likely destinations for work are Downtown Seattle and Little Saigon. Both are walkable, but there is no direct connection to either. These connections need to be addressed as the percentage of the proposed population walking to work will increase to 68%.

Topography

Figure 13

source: YT Preliminary Plat Submittal, SvR Design

Current Topography

The biggest benefit of the site is also one of its biggest constraints. The topography provides for sweeping views, but also broken connections.

The topographic change on Yesler Terrace is both breathtaking and challenging at the same time. From the northern most point abutting Alder Street, to the southern most point the difference in elevation is 148 feet, and from the northwestern most corner to Boren Avenue the elevation change is 48 feet. Along Yesler Way there is a high point at Broadway Avenue, before sloping down again to Boren Avenue. The slope ranges from as high as 2.5 : 1, and as low as 33: 1 on sloped spaces. In many places the change in topography inhibits the movement of people through the site. An example of this is from Yesler Way to the baseball field behind the Community Center. There is a ten foot drop here, and three ways to access the site. The first is to enter the community center and go down the stairs, or walk to either of the two side streets and walk down to the next street and back behind the Community Center. Another place of disconnection is at the southern end with Little Saigon. The change in elevation in this area is 24 feet, with a slope 2.5 : 1. The only way the residents can access the restaurants and shops located there is to walk to Boren Avenue and then to Jackson Street, or by using the steps located next to I-5. Dealing with the topographic change to create spaces and direct movement is the ultimate goal.

Ecosystem Services

Figure 14

Photo looking down 8th St.

18 • Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

Ecosystem Services can be defined as “benefits people obtain from ecosystems” (USDA, 2009).

They are the natural assets that provide services to improve human health and livelihood. They are categorized into four different system headings: Provisioning Services, Regulating Service, Supporting Services, and Cultural Services. For this project the categories that are being focused on are Regulating Services, Supporting Services,

Objectives

and Cultural Services. Within these categories the focus will be narrowed down even further to hydrology, Water Quality, Habitat, and Attention Restoration Theory (ART).

Regulating Services includes the regulation of water, pollination, and climate, while Supporting Services deal with nutrient cycling, pollination and water, and Cultural Services deal with educational, aesthetic, tourism and recreation.

The sub categories fit in like this: Figure 15

Hydrology: This category is listed under the heading of Regulation Services, as it deals with the regulation of stormwater on site by collecting it in cisterns and reusing it for irrigation. Also, by collecting a portion of stormwater on site, and releasing it at a later time, helps not to stress the CSO’s during large rain events.

Photo Overlooking a community garden & I-5 towards Century Link field

Water Quality: This is listed under the Supporting Services heading. It is the use of bio-retention facilities to help with on site stormwater remediation.

Habitat: This sub category is listed under the Cultural Services heading as well as the Supporting Services heading. It will provide intellectual, aesthetic and recreational experiences, as well as, stormwater remediation.

Attention Restoration Theory: ART is the theory that “prolonged or intense cognitive effort depletes the ability to direct attention, and restorative environments assist in the recovery of directed attention” (Ouellette, Kaplan & Kaplan, 2005, pp. 175-176). ART proposes that there are two types of attention, directed and involuntary attention (Berman, Jonides, & Kaplan, 2006).

Directed attention is where a person is required to consciously pay attention to their surroundings.

This is manifested in an urban environment by avoiding traffic, shouts on the street, running kids, and loud music. Involuntary attention involves responding to inherently rich stimuli, like natural environments (Berman, Jonides, & Kaplan, 2006).

The theory revolves around the premise that experiencing nature will replenish your directed attention. This would be listed under the heading of Cultural Services.

Figure 16

Photo looking up Yesler Way

Figure 17

Photo over looking I-5 towards Downtown Seattle

Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

Objectives

• 19

The design of the site and Ecosystem Services will be measured under the metrics of the Seattle Green Factor. According to the City of Seattle’s Department of Planning and Development website, the Seattle Green Factor is a score-based code requirement that calls for the increase in the amount of landscaping for new developments.

In addition, it calls for the improvement in the quality of landscaping used for new developments as well. It functions under the premise that quality landscaping has an effect on how the developments look, and operate. The score is derived from five main categories: landscape areas, permeable pavers, plantings, community gardens, and green roofs (see Appendix A). To achieve a high score, the development must include more of the tools listed under these main headings. This in turn leads to a more attractive development, and one that funtions better socially, and ecologically. The score is calculated using a formula that takes into consideration the square footage of a planting bed, or the number of plants in the bed, which is then weighted and compared to the total square footage of the site.

The code requires that the development at Yesler Terrace achieve a score of .30 per or better per development to be approved (http://www.seattle. gov/dpd/cityplanning/completeprojectslist/ greenfactor/whatwhy/default.htm).

20 • Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

Objectives

4

1

5 2

4

3

FIGURE 18 





Proposed Master Plan









 

 









 

FIGURE 19

Section Cut of Entire Site From North to South

Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

Master Plan

• 21

Master Plan The design moves proposed in the master plan (Fig. 18) correspond to the overall project objectives, to connect the site internally and externally, dealing with and emphasizing the topography on site, and the use of ecosystem services to create space on site. These moves were emphasized along a “spine” of the site that begins with a terraced multiple courtyard space.

The courtyard space (item 1 in Fig. 18) will be considered the heart of the site. It has a central courtyard that is framed by three residential buildings and one mixed use building. The courtyard is formed by using terraces to level out the existing slope and providing a flat space for people to inhabit. Each of the four buildings will have private courtyards, that are designated by a pergola, as illustrated in the legend in Figure 18 (see enlarged legend in Appendix B), that allow the residents to have a space of their own, located amongst what essentially is a public square. These private courtyards will be delineated from the public space with the use of vegetative plantings, these plantings will form visual and physical barriers for the private spaces.

The public courtyard has the ability to be used for public events, such as weddings, reunions, or building social events.

Because of its close location to Downtown Seattle, Yesler Terrace is a prime spot for infill development. However, completing this development in a forward thinking manner is important. With the lack of public open space in the adjacent neighborhood, its inclusion will be a benefit not only for the new residents of Yesler Terrace, but for the community as a whole. To this effect, a large “central park” will be placed at the center of the development (item 2 in Fig. 18), providing equitable access to all that live on the site. This park will be universal as it will provide space for a market or festival, open space for play, a playground, and room to relax amongst the trees.

The third space (item 3 in Fig. 18) will be at the southern border of the site forming a gateway for

22 • Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

Master Plan

12th Avenue : 14,800

Broadway : 17,00

A 9th ve nu e e: nu ve nA re

Bo 00

,0 18 Yesler Way : 7,900

e

t ta rs

te

In 5 Main Street

Jackson Street : 12,800

Route 60 : 4500

Context

Bus Routes

Major Pedestrian Circulation

Entrances Into Site

New Building Footprints

Major Roads

Secondary Pedestrian Circulation

High Impact Circulation Areas

0

100

200

300

400

the Little Saigon Neighborhood. This includes the development of a stair system that physically connects the population of Yesler Terrace to the restaurants and retail that exists in Little Saigon.

To help enforce this feeling of a “gateway”, a new Vietnamese Community Center is proposed at the bottom of the stairs to promote the entrance from the Little Saigon level. At the top of the stairs, there will be a community garden (item 4 in Fig. 18) with access to a plaza and shelters for the establishment of a farmers market on site. This will establish the connection that is currently lost between the two areas.

FIGURE 20

Circulation and Connections Map

The response of the master plan to the design objectives will be considered now.

Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

Master Plan

• 23

Broadway 12th Avenue

9t h e Av e nu

Harborview Medical Center

e nu ve nA

re

Bo

Yesler Way

e

t ta rs

te

In 5 Main Street

Jackson Street

Little Saigon

Context

Multi-Family

Institutional

Neighborhood Retail

Office

Yesler Terrace

Mixed-Use

Light Industrial

Single Family

Spine

0

100

200

300

Circulation Route

400

FIGURE 21

Land Use Map/Spine Connection

CONNECTION As stated in the objective portion of the report, the need for improved connection internally and externally is needed. As can be seen in Fig. 20, a new circulation route for pedestrians has been implemented, and improves the connection both internally and externally. The connections created are not only physical attachments between place, but also experiential in nature. Trees are being used to guide people in space, marking paths, and creating corners. The use of the same permeable pavers throughout the site is creating a connection using materiality.

24 • Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

Master Plan

The internal connections created were those that create pedestrian movement throughout the site, directly connecting spaces without having to detour around the topography to reach key areas.

A connection was made between all the blocks and the park, as there needs to be direct access for the children to the park and its amenities.

There are three forms of external connections for the site. The first being a direct pathway from the north and Harborview Medical Center and Little Saigon in the South which is illustrated by Fig. 21. This path connects the spine of the design, and all the amenities along it. Those amenities can include but are not limited to restaurants, farmers markets, coffee shops, the park, the

Public Transportation on Site FIGURE 22

Broadway 12th Avenue

9th ue

en

Av e

nu

ve

nA

re

Bo Yesler Way

e

t ta rs

te

In 5 Main Street

Jackson Street

0

100

Context

Bus Routes

New Building Footprints

Street Car Route

200

300

Buss Stop

400

Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

Master Plan

• 25

Broadway 12th Avenue

9t h e Av e nu

e nu ve nA

re

Bo

Yesler Way

e

t ta rs

te

In 5 Main Street

Jackson Street

0

100

Context

Arterial Roads

Connector Streets

New Building Footprints

Green Loop

Interstate

200

300

FIGURE 23

Road Connections

400

community center, and the Hospital. From this major pathway, multiple paths splinter off, which allows one to deviate from the major path and access the residential buildings and the school.

The second external connection is the public transit system that is on the site. Yesler Terrace has an abundance of bus routes; there are eighteen bus routes that service the site (Fig 22).

This does not include the First Hill Street Car that will be operational in 2014. This provides external access to greater Seattle for those residents without a car.

The third external connection is the major road system that interacts with the site. Three of

26 • Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

Master Plan

the roads are major arterial routes (Fig. 23), with Average Daily Traffic Counts over 12,000 cars a day. These routes form the north, south, and east, west vehicular connections to the city. For a more regional connection, I-5 forms the western boundary of the site.

With this design, the internal and external connections form a 100% corner at Yesler Way and Broadway Avenue, where pedestrian, vehicular and public transit combine to form a high conflict corner (Fig. 24). For pedestrian safety, multiple traffic calming features have been implemented at the corner. First, at the northwest corner of Yesler Way and Broadway Avenue a bump out will be installed on Yesler Way. This will help slow down traffic as it approaches the stop light at this corner, and also form a pedestrian plaza for people to gather themselves after they have come down the steps from the courtyard. Secondly, multicolored pedestrian crossing pavement markers have been used, again to bring attention to the drivers as they approach the high impact corner, slowing their rate of speed.

Enlarged 100% Corner and Bus Stop Plan

Broadway Ave

Figure 24

Yesler Way

Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

Master Plan

• 27

+

Thirdly, installing plantings close to the corner, to still further enhance the smallness of the corner, bringing speed down.

T.W. 286 B.W. 276

This corner will also be the major transit hub for Yesler Terrace, with the only street car stop in the neighborhood, located in front of the community center. To further promote this as the transit hub, the only bus stops along Yesler Way in the boundaries of Yesler Terrace will be moved here.

+ T.W. 268 + B.W. 262 + T.W. 262 B.W. 256

+

242

+

244

+

246

+

248

+

250

+

252

+

+

Topography

256

+ +

240 +

256 252

+

251

+

246

+

242

Figure 25

Proposed Topography

Figure 26

To accomodate and take advantage of the topography, a series of terraces were designed on the site to create space. As seen in Fig. 25, there are three terraces formed in what is the courtyard area of the site. The first terrace has an elevation change of 10 feet, with a scissor stairs and ramps (Fig. 33 & 34). The second terrace has a total change in elevation of 18 feet, with three seperate scissor stairs (Fig. 25) with six foot drops on each (Fig. 35 & 36). Two empty out on small terraces that allow for a landing, and the third empties out onto a third terrace, or the pedestrian plaza.

The central park portion of the site contains four terraces. These provide flat open space for people to inhabit. The first terrace is located along Yesler Way, and leads into the proposed transit stop. The ground material is constructed with permeable pavers and can be used for festivals, markets or mobile eateries. It will provide a valuable asset for the Community Center. The next terrace has an elevation change of four feet, will be grass and provide open green space for children to inhabit for free play. The next terrace has an elevation change of five feet, and has an adventure play ground located on it. This play ground will connect to the traditional playground located behind the Community Center. The final terrace has a four foot elevation change that empties out onto more grass, and abuts the sidewalk (Fig 37 & 38).

Typical Stair Design on Site

Typical Stair Design

28 • Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

Ecosystem Services Ecosystem services serve multiple roles on the Yesler Terrace site. They are used to create space, control water, provide habitat, used as way finding, and provide a reprieve from the urban world.

Master Plan

G.

Ecosystem services has four categories, three of the four categories were broken down into how they could be helpful in designing the site.

Those four sub categories again are: hydrology, water quality, habitat, and ART. Elements of the design can fit into multiple categories, and provide multiple services.

F.

A breakdown of the services and the design elements are as follows: E.

A. Municipal Stormwater Infrastructure - This does not satisfy an ecosystem services category, but is a crucial system on the site. It is one that will be impacted positively with the site design.

B. Hydrology - The design for control of hydrology is in the design of the courtyards. The roofs of the buildings in the courtyard will be attached to a water feature system that will include a persian chadar type fountain, a cistern, and a green roof.

The system will collect an 1/8 inch rainfall from the roofs, after it has been filtered and absorbed by the green roofs, and then follow a path down the side of the building into a planter that will filter the water again and then direct the water down the chadar and into the cistern (Fig. 31). The water will then be held there for 30 hours, after which a portion will be released to enter the storm sewers, and the rest will be used for irrigation.

D.

C.

C. Water Quality - The improvement of the quality of water is being addressed on the site through Green Stormwater Infrastructure (GSI). GSI is the use of best managment practices “designed to reduce runoff from development using infiltration, evapotranspiration, and/or stromwater reuse” (Seattle.gov, 2013). This will be accomplished through the use of vegetated swales (Fig. 29), green roofs, bioretention planters, and rain gardens.

B.

A.

D. Trees used for Water Quality - The abundance of trees on the site will help with slowing down and reducing stormwater runoff on the site. The leaves of the trees will absorb some of the water that falls, but they also slow down the rain, thereby slowing down run off.

E. Trees for Habitat - There will be over seven hundred trees on site at full build out. This provides habitat for birds, lizards, and squirrles.

FIGURE 27

Ecosystem Services Axon

Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

Master Plan

• 29

Broadway 12th Avenue

9th ue en Av

Green Factor Score: .55 u en Av ren Bo e

Green Factor Score: .51 Green Factor Score: .64

Green Factor Score: .51

Green Factor Score: .30

Yesler Way

Green Factor Score: .51

Green Factor Score: .63

5 te sta

r te In Main Street

Green Factor Score: .71

Jackson Street

Context

Seattle Green Factor Score Areas

New Building Footprints

0

100

200

300

400

FIGURE 28

Seattle Green Factor Scores

FIGURE 29

F. Trees for Cultural Services - In the scope of the objectives, trees are involved in more than just ART for the category of Cultural Services. Trees have a vital role in the design of the site. They are used for water quality management, habitat, way finding, creating space, and evoking feelings.

Trees are planted at the top of every stair to delineate a change is going to occur here (Fig. 33-36). They are used for way finding, directing people and keeping them on the right path. Trees are also used to shield people as they sit in the buidling courtyards, providing shade and a sense of refuge.

GSI - Vegetated Swale

The courtyard area (Fig. 30) provides the best example of nature on the site, with multiple tree

30 • Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

Master Plan

types (shown in the legend Fig. 18), plantings, and shielding from the street life. Provding a place to recharge one’s directed attention.

FIGURE 30

Courtyard Oblique

G. Groundcover Cultural Services - Each building has an entrance courtyard, the ground cover creates a boundary, providing a seperation from public space, and private space. Forming a deliniation, marking off what is just for the inhabitants of the buildings to use.

In addition, the green roofs (Fig. 18) play a role in Cultural Services as well. They add private space for the residents of those buildings, helping to replace the yard that was lost with the proposed redevelopment. Green roofs provide many

FIGURE 31

Courtyard Fountain (Mixed-Use building)

FIGURE 32

Section of Courtyard Leading Into Central Park

Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

Master Plan

• 31

functions outside of water quality and hydrology, they offer a place to play, spaces to gather, start a garden, and take in the sweeping views of the site. The green roofs are an updated addition to the Attention Restoration Theory, as they will allow for a place to recharge one’s directed attention.

As it pertains to the Seattle Green Factor, Figure 28 illustrates how the site satisfies the requirements of the development code. Through the use of street trees, raingardens, green stormwater infrastructure (Fig. 29), community gardens, and green roofs, the average score for Yesler Terrace is .55, which is better than the requirement of .30.

32 • Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

Master Plan

FIGURE 33

Upper Terrace Stairs and Ramp Oblique Diagram, illustrating how trees were used to signal a change in elevation.

FIGURE 34

Upper Terrace Section Facing West, illustrating the change in elevation and the space created by the trees.

Ecological Design Master of Public Plan Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

• 33

FIGURE 35

Lower Terrace Stair Oblique Diagram, showing the use of bioretention planters to move and clean water as it is moved out of the cisterns

FIGURE 36

Lower Terrace Section facing West, illustrating the change in elevation and the multiple levels of terraces moving down.

34 • Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

Master Plan

FIGURE 37

Park Secton Facing North that shows the change in elevation from the western edge to the eastern edge of the park.

Perspective looking Northwest over the park and the playground, showing the different ground cover materials that can be used to delineate space. It also illustrates how the different terraces can be used by residents of Yesler Terrace. The taller trees on the left delineate were the active space ends and the restorative space begins.

The trees in the background are street trees.

FIGURE 38

Ecological Design Master of Public Plan Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

• 35

Implementation PHASING The implementation of this project is complicated due to the need of relocating the current residents of Yesler Terrace. The removal of public housing is as sensitive as the building of public housing, causing a multi-phased plan to be used.

Phase I

Phase 2

Phase 3

FIGURE 39

Proposed Phasing Diagram

To impact the fewest residents at a time is a goal of this phasing. The initial phase of the project is the rehab of vacant apartments directly to the east of Yesler Terrace to relocate residents of the housing that is being replaced first. In the context of this project phase one will take place with the construction of the top part of the spine. By starting here, it allows for the construction of the three apartment complexes, the rehabilitation of the steam plant, and the the construction of the central park. Thereby providing the Seattle Housing authority an ability to build replacement housing, sell land to private developers to raise funds for future development, and also start the central park. With beginning construction here, the establishment of the heart of the neighborhood will be started, creating the amenity that will draw people to Yesler Terrace.

Providing the need for the stairway to Little Saigon to be built, establishing this connection to the park will be vital during this phase.

Phase two would include more housing, but also the initiation of construction on the office towers.

Also included in this phase is the construction of community gardens, to begin to replace those that will be lost in the design of the site.

The final phase will be market driven, and built out as the demand for housing is needed. During this phase is also the building of the Vietnamese Cultural Center and the community gardens with the farmers market.

Due to the amount of trees proposed in the design, a phased planting schedule is also required.

The trees will be added when the buildings are phased in. This will create an interesting visual

36 • Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

Implementation

timeline, providing a time stamp on the progress and growth of Yesler Terrace. To implement this proposal, it is recommended that a tree nursery be started on the site to raise the future trees that will be planted here. This will offer an educational experience, allowing the children to help take care of the trees that will be planted in their neighborhood. It also offers an environmental component, having the trees closer to their site will cut down on shipping impacts later, and lowering the stress on the tree by allowing it to be out of the ground for a shorter period of time.

Stakeholders Agencies, groups,and organizations that could be involved in the implementation of this design include existing and future residents, Seattle Housing Authority, Seattle Planning Commission, First Hill Improvement Association, Harborview Medical Center, King County, International District, Neighborhood House, Seattle University, Seattle School District, Vietnamese Chamber of Commerce, Seattle Design Commission, Seattle Chinatown International District PDA, Central District Community Council, and Squire Park Community Council and Neighborhood Association.

Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

Implementation

• 37

Conclusion Yesler Terrace has a long 70 year history as public housing. It is from a time when the structure was believed to be the most important element in public housing design. Let’s look toward the future, look beyond the structures themselves, and to the land around it. This proposed design strives to bring the focus away from placing a structure in space, but using the structure and landscape around it to create space through connections, topography, and ecosystem services. Therebye changing people’s reactions to the two innocuous words, Public Housing!

38 • Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

Conclusion

Bibliography:

Berman, G., Jonides, J., Kaplan, S. (2006), The Cognitive Benefits of Interacting With Nature.

Psychological Science, 19, (12), 1207.

Cisneros, H., Engdahl, L. (2009), From Despair to Hope: HOPE VI and the Promise of Public Housing

in America’s Cities. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institute Press.

Goetz, E. (2003). Clearing the Way: Deconcentrating The Poor in Urban America. Washington, D.C.:

The Urban Institute Press.

Hunt, D. (2010). Blueprint for Disaster: The Unraveling of Chicago Public Housing. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

Plunz, R. (1990). A History of Housing in New York City. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

Preiser, F., Russell, F., Varady, D. (1998). New Directions in Public Housing. New Brunswick, NJ: Center

For Urban Policy Research.

Housing, Public. 2011. In Merrieam-Webster.com. Retrieved May 28, 2013 from www.meriam-webster.com.

Schwartz, A. (2006). Housing Policy in the United States: An Introduction. New York, NY: Routledge

Taylor and Francis Group.

Seattle Housing Authority. Final Environmental Impact Statement. Seattle: Seattle Housing Authority,

2011. Print.

SvR Design. YT prliminary plat submittal. SvR Design, 2013. Print Wright, G. (1983). Building the Dream: A Social History of Housing in America. New York, NY:

Pantheon Books.

Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

• 39

Appendix A: Seattle Green Factor Score Sheet

40 • Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

Green Factor Score Sheet

Project title:

enter sq ft of parcel Parcel size (enter this value first) * 5,000

Landscape Elements** A Landscaped areas (select one of the following for each area) 1

Landscaped areas with a soil depth of less than 24"

2

Landscaped areas with a soil depth of 24" or greater

3

Bioretention facilities

0

-

0.6

-

1.0

-

0

0.1

-

0

0.3

-

0

0.3

-

0

0.3

-

0

0.4

-

0

0.4

-

0

0.8

-

0.4

-

0.7

-

0.7

-

0.7

-

0.2

-

0.5

-

0.2

-

0.1

-

0.2

-

0.1

-

0.1

-

Green Factor numerator =

-

enter sq ft

0 0

Mulch, ground covers, or other plants less than 2' tall at maturity

2

Shrubs or perennials 2'+ at maturity - calculated at 12 sq ft per plant (typically planted no closer than 18" on center)

3

Tree canopy for "small trees" or equivalent (canopy spread 8' to 15') - calculated at 75 sq ft per tree

4

Tree canopy for "small/medium trees" or equivalent (canopy spread 16' to 20') - calculated at 150 sq ft per tree

5

Tree canopy for "medium/large trees" or equivalent (canopy spread of 21' to 25') - calculated at 250 sq ft per tree

6

Tree canopy for "large trees" or equivalent (canopy spread of 26' to 30') - calculated at 350 sq ft per tree

7

Tree canopy for preservation of large existing trees with trunks 6"+ in diameter - calculated at 20 sq ft per inch diameter

enter sq ft

enter number of plants

0

enter number of plants

0

enter number of plants

0

enter number of plants

0

enter number of plants

0

enter inches DBH

0

C Green roofs 1

Over at least 2" and less than 4" of growth medium

2

Over at least 4" of growth medium

enter sq ft

0

enter sq ft

0

enter sq ft

D Vegetated walls

0

enter sq ft

E Approved water features

0

F Permeable paving

enter sq ft

0

Permeable paving over at least 6" and less than 24" of soil or gravel

enter sq ft

0

Permeable paving over at least 24" of soil or gravel

enter sq ft

G Structural soil systems

0

sub-total of sq ft =

H Bonuses

0 enter sq ft

0

1

Drought-tolerant or native plant species

2

Landscaped areas where at least 50% of annual irrigation needs are met through the use of harvested rainwater

3

Landscaping visible to passersby from adjacent public right of way or public open spaces

4

Landscaping in food cultivation

Total

0.1

enter sq ft

1

2

Factor

enter sq ft

B Plantings (credit for plants in landscaped areas from Section A)

1

SCORE

Totals from GF worksheet

enter sq ft

0

enter sq ft

0

enter sq ft

0

* Do not count public rights-of-way in parcel size calculation. ** You may count landscape improvements in rights-of-way contiguous with the parcel. All landscaping on private and public property must comply with the Landscape Standards Director's Rule (DR 6-2009) Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

• 41

Appendix B: Enlarged Proposed Master Plan Legend

42 • Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

Ecological Design of Public Housing: Designing the Forgotten Space •

• 43



 



 





 













