The Boomer Future - Studio 811 by Savannah Greenlee

The Boomer Future Intergenerational Housing Community Proposal Kansas University Architecture Studio 811 Fall 2014

CONTENTS

Introduction

The Boomer Future Research & Goals Precedents Program

Contextual Analysis

History of Lawrence Geography & Climate Site Typologies Morphology & Density

West Lawrence Site

North Lawrence Site

Conclusions

Site Analysis Dealing With Sprawl Master Plan Renderings

Site Analysis Interlinking Grid Master Plan Renderings

Site Sustainability Intergenerational Living Strategies Acknowledgments References

INTRODUCTION The Boomer Future A change is coming in the world of senior housing. Driven by increased demand, skyrocketing healthcare costs, cuts in pensions and loss of savings and home values, a huge market for cost-effective housing and care for aging boomers is emerging. Providing for boomers cannot be accomplished by traditional development means, a new holistic approach is necessary.

In 2010, Overland Park real estate developer Lee Foster posed this question,

“What kind of residential housing and life style will Baby Boomers want when they retire?” His question was timely because 10,000 boomers tur n sixty-five every day now. Boomers, by their sheer numbers, have changed the nor m for every age they have passed through and no doubt will change the nor m for our post-career lives, too. Traditional retirement communities isolate their inhabitants from the rest of society. Since contact with younger people, especially children, can be hugely beneficial to people as they age, whatever form the care facilities take needs to include provisions for both structured and spontaneous interactions across multiple age-groups. Whether it be by mixing housing types for singles and families, or incorporating destinations, such as a kindergarten, skate park, civic center, or day care, intergenerational connections are vital to a healthy aging process and a vibrant community.

What is a Baby Boomer? A generation of adults which is defined as “a person bor n in the years following World War II, when there was a temporary marked increase in the birth rate.” This means anyone between 50 and 68 years of age. Baby Boomers are widely associated with a rejection or redefinition of traditional values. The incredible numbers paired with the diversity and proactive nature of such a large generation of individuals makes for quite a large task at hand.

Population of over 76.4 million Controls over 80% of personal financial assets Contribute to more than 50% of all consumer spending Purchases 77% of all prescription drugs Participates in 80% of all leisurely travel Average age of retirement is 67 years old

What Do They Want? Many people of age struggle with feelings of uselessness. The community should be structured in a way that asks for something other than financial contributions from its residents. Some residents may be itching for an encore career and just need a few resources, while some other residents may require more encouragement to actively participate in providing for their community. Workshops and lectures could be extremely helpful in maintaining and developing the existing human capital present in the community. More importantly, these would begin to mesh the retirement community with the general community in which it is located. Mentorships, partnerships, and friendships would be forged in this structured but open environment, and would allow service to occur between the communities. As a companion to continuing education, this community could also provide primary education. Preschools and grade-schools could be located within or adjacent to the intergenerational community, giving older members of the community the opportunity to participate in teaching or daycare. This would benefit them with a sense of purpose and legacy, and would benefit children with the collective wisdom of their teachers. Single parents would have the opportunity to learn from more experienced parents and could also benefit by having a lessened financial burden for daycare. Since aging tends to reveal and exacerbate health problems, the community must have a strong provider of care. While it might not be large enough to host a full-service healthcare facility, it could provide a place for a satellite office of a larger hospital. This local provider of medical services would be able to serve many more needs than a traditional doctors office or urgent care, since it will have access to the resources of its parent hospital. Since it will be serving its community in general, it will be more likely to resist morphing into the often stagnant medical area of a nursing home. Opportunities for research and trials are huge, since every segment of the population will be represented in the community serviced by the office. Furthermore, the community will be incredibly attractive to people just beginning their medical careers. Young doctors and nurses typically work outlandish hours, so if they have children, the opportunities for child-care and quality primary education will make that period of their lives much easier. Having young medical professionals cycle through would keep the environment fresh, since they would be up on the latest research and health care innovations.

What What What What What What What What What

They They They They They They They They They

want want want want want want want want want

is to be close to nature is walkability and good public transportation is to be close to their loved ones is affordable housing with progressive architecture is to use technology and continue lear ning is a comfortable climate is to serve their communities and mentor youth is to be able to lead sustainable lifestyles is to leave a legacy

They don’t wanAg Age segregation is what they T Being bound to their cars and homes is what they T Being too far from their loved ones is what they T Bland or uninspiring architecture is what they T Stopping lear ning and experiencing new things is what they T Limits placed on their access or activities is what they T Being left out of the community is what they T Practices that damage the environment is what they T Being forgotten is what they

don’t don’t don’t don’t don’t don’t don’t don’t don’t

want want want want want want want want want

Research & Goals Probably the most difficult challenge a continued care facility faces is the ability to offer housing and care to low-income residents. Many people that planned on retiring in the 2010’s or 2020’s lost the majority of their “nest eggs” in the 2008 financial crisis. Some are facing foreclosure on a house whose value was halved, some lost jobs and are underemployed, some lost pensions, some lost everything in the stock market. Many are dependent on medicare and social security which cannot begin to cover the costs they will face. Any community that can solve this complex financing challenge will establish a new paradigm for successful retirement communities. Since these are in many respects uncharted waters, any data gained will be invaluable. The community should act as a case study, with hundreds of metrics that are tracked over decades. Monitoring in real time the effectiveness of different strategies will provide direction both to the local community and the scientific community at once. If this “Living Lab” is one of the first structures built in the intergenerational community, the preliminary results of the research might even be able to guide the remaining phases of construction, resulting in a higher quality end-product for the users, as well as a higher-return and lower risk for investors. This is where the New Cities Initiative comes in with the vision and the research development to aid us towards the planning of an intergenerational community.

The New Cities Initiative The New Cities Initiative at the University of Kansas investigates aging and architecture through interdisciplinary research and teaching, and in cooperation with public and private entities, facilitates the design of intergenerational, technologically advanced communities to accommodate members of the Baby Boomer generation, generations Y and X, as well as members of all subsequent generations. Created by Dennis Domer, this initiative taps into the knowledge of professionals and businesses which are developing products and services at an astounding rate in response to the growing market driven by the needs and expectations of the Baby Boomer generation. They work closely with both the City of Lawrence and Douglas County towards the creation of “Campus Village”, a new intergenerational community that will not only meet Boomers’ retirement needs, but attract individuals of all ages. They also support Eastside Village Lawrence, a nonprofit organization dedicated to helping East Lawrence residents age in place with the support of neighbors.

“We are an interdisciplinary initiative on aging and the built environment at the University of Kansas” - Dennis Domer

Cheryl Lester & Donna Butts KU Associate Professor Cheryl Lester, who teaches an Aging in Film class, calls attention to the messages presented in film and television about caring for people of age. Many films explore the ways in which legacy are transferred, or “The flow of capital or resources from older adults to apprentices, employees, offspring or society at large.” About the thinking and policy surrounding aging, she says, “We are not aging in the 1930’s when Social Security was introduced, we are not aging in the 1960’s when Medicare was introduced, we are aging at a time where resources are actually being withdrawn from what we might call the public good. This affects our thinking about aging; it affects our experience of relationships and opportunities in a profound way.” As development of social programs by the US government stagnates, and as current programs continue to be stressed, these questions are on everyone’s minds “How will we take care of ourselves and one another? Who pays? Who works?” (Lester) Donna Butts, Executive Director of Generations United, has a few solutions of Best Practice from around the world. She feels that the idea of “Social Compact” should be at the front of this discussion. The debate surrounding paying for aging usually makes a few assumptions: people work for pay, some of that money is transferred to a person of age, who then pays an organization, who pays a caregiver to assist the person of age. Drawing from societal structures in other countries, she sees a more direct route that cuts down many of the costs and inefficiencies of the current system. Two age brackets of society have a huge amount of untapped utility: the elderly and adolescents. Young people are often finished with childhood, but are not yet qualified to start their adult career. She says these people are “Waiting to live.” Some people of age have retired, but have not found a purpose for their remaining years. These people are “Waiting to die.” By pairing the physical abilities of the young with the knowledge and experience of the old, many symbiotic relationships are possible. They just need to be incentivized. (Butts)

Butts does not understand why policymakers are not attempting to exploit the human capital of boomers, recounting her experience on an aging panel for the Federal Reserve. She was the only person on the panel that did not focus on how much the boomers will cost. She tried to explain the value of human capital in boomers which is lost by being improperly mobilized. Young and old do not understand each other. However, Butts observes, “You are every age you’ve ever been.” Somewhere inside every old person is the memory of the experience of being a young person. Thus, if both parties can become open to each other, satisfying and fulfilling relationships will emerge. Young and old are not naturally pitted against each other, this conflict has been artificially constructed by policy. “Turn competition into collaboration”, recaps Butts. She has observed several methods of incentivization. AARP has a program called Mentor Up that pairs young and old for the purpose of teaching proper use of technology. A School Greeter Program in Chanute, Kansas brings older adults to the doors of a school every Monday to greet children as they head to their first class; this friendliness starts the kids’ week off right and provides structure for retirees that may struggle with aimlessness. Driving Away Hunger merges “meals on wheels” with driver education; young people get to log miles, the instructors get company and meals, and the parents can write off the mileage for volunteer work. Swampscott, Massachusetts, when faced with the cost of replacing an outdated high school and senior center, decided to pool the resources of the two and build a single facility, with high school on one side, senior center on the other, and shared common areas. When the library faced budget cuts, seniors volunteered their time to keep it open. Intense engagement between generations and communities can be achieved very easily in many cases. There is a desire for this kind of connection by both parties, so sometimes all it takes is a facility in which it can happen.

“There are 76 Million boomers and on average they watch 42 hours of television every week. If a volunteer hour is valued at $20 an hour, and if 10% of boomers gave up 10% of their time watching television, that would work out to about $800 Million a year… The Federal Reserve would never let $800 Million sit dormant on some shelf and not be an active part of what keeps our country strong.” - Donna Butts

AARP defines a livable community as â&#x20AC;&#x153;One that has affordable and appropriate housing, supportive community features and services, and adequate mobility options, which together facilitate personal independence and the engagement of residents in civic and social life.â&#x20AC;? While the organization is mainly concerned with the aging population, the community they describe sounds like an idyllic location for people of any age to grow and develop. According to Scott Ball in his book, Livable Communities for Aging Populations: Urban Design for Longevity, a lifelong neighborhood concept supports the qualities on the right. Again, this describes a community that the majority of the population would love to join. If the definition of the ideal retirement community by leading researchers is the same as the definition of the ideal community by the public, the solution seems pretty obvious; engineer an ideal community using the latest ideas from architects, researchers, designers, and urban planners, and integrate the few aspects normally only found in continuing care retirement communities throughout. This sort of holistic community design is pretty rare, especially in the United States, because of the massive up-front costs involved. Instead of dividing land into tiny pieces that are each privately funded, developed, and built without any unifying principles, leadership of some sort is needed to ensure the quality of the end product. There have been a few clever examples mentioned for the integration of seniors into communities, but these are all on a tiny scale compared to what a true intergenerational community would be. There is a huge amount of latent demand for not only the physical community, but the research and data that could come out of it. It just needs to be incentivized. This is where Lawrence, Kansas really becomes relevant. The New Cities Initiative with the University of Kansas is offering to gift a Living Laboratory to any developer that can properly integrate it into a community proposal. This Living Lab would study all aspects of the process of aging, from the degradation of the physical body and mind, to the means of preserving capability and independence. The potential for this facility is huge. As if the intergenerational community theorized here would not be popular enough, its growth will be guided and partially funded by a large, capable university. Usually if something goes wrong in the development of a project, the developers try to sell it so they are no longer losing money. If this project were ever to have issues, there would be hundreds of bright graduate students, doctoral candidates, and faculty members working day and night to find a solution. Even when things are running smoothly, researchers will constantly be searching for a new means of improvement. That kind of free insurance is unprecedented.

Sound neighborhood structure Diversity of accessible and appropriate housing Convenient places to shop for daily needs Vibrant, accessible pedestrian realm Diverse social gathering spots Healthy living Dispersed wellness programming Continuous employment and volunteerism Support services and continuing care available

Currently, the results from the Request For Proposals (RFP) created by the university is seeing limited success. Typically, developers work in the short term. An RFP often comes with a large up-front gift (such as land or an interest-free loan), and support ceases after the development is finished. This RFP has a fairly low-value up-front gift (a small facility), but an extremely high amount of continuing support. This means that instead of net profit happening within a 10 year period, it may not happen until 20 or 30 years after completion which unfortunately is longer than the expected lifespan for most for-profit development. The Request For Proposals created by the university only received one response. Very few projects like the â&#x20AC;&#x153;Campus Villageâ&#x20AC;? have been constructed, so it could be that developers are just not aware of the potential for this kind of community. What the project really needs is a vision. This vision needs to be thorough, holistic, attractive, inspiring, realistic, and tied-to-place. The vision must demonstrate that this community is possible on the financial side, sustainable on the environmental side, beneficial to its host city, sensitive to the needs of its residents, responsible in terms of density, thoughtfully woven into the language and fabric of its surroundings, compassionate to its most vulnerable residents and visitors, and legal according to local codes and regulations. This is where Studio 811 comes in under the instruction of Joe Colistra and in conjunction with the New Cities Initiative and the University of Kansas to provide said vision for a proposed intergenerational community.

Continuing Care Retirement Communities

What Can We Learn From Them?

CCRCs are currently the most common method of care for people of age. These facilities typically contain several wings or levels, and sometimes clusters of smaller dwelling units. Each wing or floor contains residents with similar needs. As the needs of a person increase as they age, they move through the different departments, beginning with fairly independent living, and ending with intensive care.

CCRC’s do provide a measure of efficiency not found in other facilities. By physically dividing the residents into different care levels, they are able to staff minimally, and target expected needs of residents. CCRC’s are usually fairly large, as well. Their size often affords them the opportunity to provide a wide variety of amenities from which all residents, regardless of ability level, can benefit. This method of dividing activities for residents as well as responsibilities for staff can be utilized for optimization and studied to measure how much interaction is necessary for a healthy and happy lifestyle.

While this division has a couple of key advantages, the glaring drawback is isolation. People of age benefit greatly from interactions with different age groups. Segregation deprives many residents of the refreshing nature of intergenerational interactions. There are a few different methods of fee structures, but all of them involve a significant upfront fee followed by smaller monthly fees. “Life Care” requires the largest upfront fee, but the monthly fees that follow are constant and do not increase as the resident’s needs increase. The “Modified Life Care” model takes a smaller upfront fee, but the monthly fees increase after a certain point of care requirement. “Pay As You Go” has an even smaller buy-in, but its monthly fee increases directly with care need increases. A huge drawback to these payment models is that the initial buy-in is often ineligible for refund, or only eligible for a small refund if the resident dies prematurely or needs to move. As lifespans continue to increase, locking oneself into a location for 20 or even 30 years is becoming more and more of a gamble.

For some people, being able to stay in a specific community for the remainder of their lives is very attractive, especially if they have a family or small business nearby. The knowledge that they can age in place, no matter what happens to their health, can be very valuable to some and serve as a sort of mental incentive that can help one get through each day easier and most importantly, happier. Upon further analysis of our research and affiliation with the New Cities Initiative, a list of goals can now be made to further our vision of an intergenerational community. From those goals we can then examine precedent studies of other exemplary communities that meet our criteria and go even further as to begin forming a set program of what spaces we will need to include for this vision to be successful.

Intergenerational Community Goals Bring inhabitants and people of all ages together on common ground through both planned and spontaneous interactions. Design housing that can accommodate singles as well as families with progressive architecture based on universal design principles to enhance aging in place, visitability, and health. Provide walkable open areas and paths which lead to medical assistance, recreation, essentials shopping, natural areas, and gathering places The price ranges must be affordable for middle-income as well as low-income individuals. Implement a community-based nursing program to all inhabitants, which is integrated carefully into the local health care system through a neighbor hood health care satellite. Nurture encore careers and volunteer activities to engage the community and mentor youth. Provide opportunities for life-long lear ning ranging from pre-school through adult education and intergenerational exchanges. Connect to the outside world in physical and virtual ways like public transportation and Inter net connection while planning for future innovations in telecare and telemedicine services. Attract people from surrounding communities to participate in a range of intergenerational experiences and services. Continually evaluate and improve the community through studies, surveys, and assessments of its effectiveness.

Precedents Geos Neighborhood Michael Tavel Architects & David Kahn Studios Arvada, Colorado 2005-2009 25.3 acres Status: Planned - 265 Dwelling Unit "Net Zero Energy" Mixed-Use Urban Neighborhood. - The Geos Neighborhood combines traditional village living with the most advanced design and building practices: - Urban planning to provide solar access to almost all buildings and homes. - Innovative systems including geothermal, photovoltaics, & energy-conserving construction. - Natural systems, stormwater-fed landscapes, and civic places intertwined. - Rain and snow melt feed rain gardens, percolation parks, plazas, and community gardens. - Pedestrian lifestyle encouraged: front porches, tree-lined sidewalks, and corner stores. - Thanks to Coloradoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s unique climate, the community can utilize the sun and earth to produce as much energy as it consumes, with a total cost thatâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s equal to or less than ordinary built-to-code communities. - Symbiotic relationships between urban design, landscape architecture, and architecture are incorporated at all scales in order to achieve resource conservation. - The architecture utilizes high performance building envelopes and super efficient mechanical systems. - The overall urban design aims to foster bio-civic relationships with natural processes, neighborhood ecology, and environmental stewardship.

Tiger Place University of Missouri Columbia, Missouri 2001-2004 Status: Built - The Neighborhoods Rehabilitation & Skilled Nursing by Tiger Place is a brand-new approach to senior care. - Unlike other options for rehabilitation and post-acute conditions, expertise with a uniquely innovative spirit is offered. - Collaboration between Americare senior living services and the Mizzou Sinclair School of Nursing. - Community uses life-changing technology to create a community-wide focus on healthy living, resulting in a unique on-site care experience. - Rehabilitation That Feels More Like a Retreat - Each of the 14-room Neighborhoods is self-contained with its own restaurant, living area, spa and outdoor courtyard. - Consistent staffing in each Neighborhood ensures personalized service and gracious hospitality.

Triangle Square Calthorpe Associates Austin, Texas 1997-1999 22 acres Status: Built - Triangle Square occupies a prime site for urban infill, located at the confluence of three of Austin’s ‘Smart Growth Corridors’, two miles (3 km) from the University of Texas campus and downtown Austin. - For years the site was underutilized due to the difficulty developers and community residents were facing in achieving a mutually acceptable plan. - Through extensive citizen participation and careful planning, the Triangle Square Neighborhood Plan was created that develops the site to its full potential, with a mix of residential and neighborhood retail. - Organized around a traditional ‘main street’ with two anchor stores, al fresco dining and entertainment options, the plan features a wide range of housing options including ‘flex-space’ units to provide for a variety of incomes and household types. - The ‘main street’ is the civic focal point not only for residents of Triangle Square but also for surrounding neighborhoods. - The development of Triangle Square has helped knit together the surrounding city fabric. - To further enhance connectivity and access, the arterial streets enveloping the site are to be redesigned as pedestrian-friendly boulevards and a light rail line has been proposed adjacent to the site.

University Mall Duany Plater-Zyberk & Co. Orem, Utah 2012 - present Status: Planned - Clear delineation of blocks, connected street grid, and memorable public spaces create a pedestrian-friendly environment that transforms the Mall from a retail-only destination into a vibrant, mixed-use, urban center for the entire community of Orem. - This mixture of uses creates a synergy that reinforces each of the parts; the retail benefits from the proximity of the office and residential, while the office and residential likewise become more attractive because of the retail. - This combination results in a destination that will have a competitive advantage over other large-scale developments in the region. - The utilization of structured garage parking enables the project to achieve an urban density that is not possible with surface parking alone. - The plan integrates with the existing BRT line, local bus lines and an internal circulatory shuttle. - The main civic space has been elongated and takes the place of the previous main plaza to connect the more active retail components with the new development to the north. - The Plan incorporates additional office and retail sites along University Avenue and State Street to better incorporate the west and south sides of the Mall into the mixed-use, urban environment of the redevelopment.

Highlands Garden Village Calthorpe Associates Denver, Colorado 2002-2007 27 acres Status: Built - The community of Highlands Garden Village, located 10 minutes northwest of downtown Denver, occupies the former site of the amusement park Elitch Gardens. - The 27 acre (11 ha) site has been transformed into a mixed-use neighborhood with diverse community amenities, new open spaces, and a variety of housing opportunities. - The communityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s pedestrian-friendly design provides safe and convenient walking paths, with connectivity to primary areas of interest. - Wide range of rental and for-sale housing types help mix different income groups and family structures, fostering increased socio-economic integration and yielding a realistic balance of housing types for the balance of nearby jobs. - Single-family homes at siteâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s perimeter complement the character of neighborhoods they face. - Buildings constructed at Highlands are designed using a community-based design review process, cornerstone in soliciting public input. - Important cultural amenities at Highlands Garden Village include a school, a walkable retail village, and an historic theater renovated by a local non-profit. - A network of gardens, plazas, and open spaces creates a vibrant, friendly neighborhood with ample public meeting space. - Tree-lined streets form an attractive public armature for new development, while a restored urban creek, the preservation of mature trees, and incorporation of historic features help uphold the unique character of Highlands Garden Village.

EcoVillage Intentional Community Ithaca, New York 1991 - present 175 acres Status: Sustaining - EcoVillage currently includes two 30-home co-housing neighborhoods (FROG and SONG) with a third co-housing neighborhood, TREE under construction. - The first TREE homes are completed, with all 40 to be finished in 2014. With a total of 100 homes. - The EcoVillage in Ithaca will be the largest co-housing community in the world. - Residents will soon include about 160 adults and 80 children, living as families, singles and couples. Ranging in age from infants to octogenarians: - About a fifth of residents are retired - Another fifth are stay-at-home parents. - Over 80% of the 175 acre site is planned to remain green space, including 55 acres in a conservation easement held by the Finger Lakes Land Trust. - Three unique yet connected neighborhoods form the EcoVillage. Built sequentially over nearly 20 years, each co-housing cooperative pioneered and evolves new practices for green building and energy use.

Program The program is the compilation of building types, parking, and green spaces that make up the bone structures of our master plans. In order to choose the right program for an intergenerational community as envisioned by The New Cities Initiative, we must revisit our goals listed earlier and cross reference them with our precedent studies and research at every tur n. Knowing what our target market wants along with how to broadly categorize this information into typologies allows us to construct a simple list of necessary and desirable community infrastructural elements that can be easily quantified and calculated into a successful master plan. A list of the necessary program coupled with a bubble diagram to show relationships is an easy starting point. Based on the general guidelines of a community, we are going to need residential, commercial, civic and transportation structures but with the added caveat of health care due to the average age of our target market. As discussed in the research and goals, the residential structures must host affordable living conditions of every for m for diversity. For the community to be self sustaining and business-oriented, commercial businesses and markets must be included with retail. To stay active and vibrant, civic or public use areas will be incorporated throughout the site. And of course health care facilities and assisted living shall be available to our target market, the Baby Boomers. Transportation structures and strategies tie all the buildings together and provide means of circulation in and out of the community.

Residential: - Apartments - Single-Family Homes - Condos - Town Homes - Hotel for Rock Chalk Park Site Commercial: - Mixed Use Retail - Dining Establishments - Business Offices - Super Market Civic: - Visitorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Center - Community Center - Green Spaces - Educational Facilities Health Care: - KU Living Laboratory - Medical Satellite - Assisted Living - Phar macies Transportation: - Multi-level Parking Structures - Diagonal Street Parking - Bus Stops - Bike Paths

Hotel Single-Family Homes

Condos Town Homes

Apartments

Residential Structured Parking

KU Living Laboratory

Assisted Living

Health Care

Goal: Intergenerational Community

Accessible Parking

Medical Satellite

Civic

Visitorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Center

Green Spaces

Community Center

Diagonal Parking

Parking

Commercial

Mixed Use Retail

Dining Offices

CONTEXTUAL ANALYSIS History of Lawrence The city of Lawrence, Kansas is an ideal place for an intergenerational community to grow. It sits within an hour of Topeka, Kansas and Kansas City, Missouri, and contains two universities, a river, a mountain, forest, and plains. Lawrence was founded in 1854 by the New England Emigrant Aid Company. This Boston, Massachusetts transportation company moved immigrants to the Kansas Territory to shift the balance of power so that Kansas would enter the United States as a free state, rather than a slave state as its location would have guaranteed. This companyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s actions set Lawrence up to be the epicenter of many conflicts over the next century. Another important event in 1854 was the creation of the Kansas-Nebraska Act. This was intended to open up territory to be settled for the purpose of reaching a population density that would support a trans-continental railroad. Part of this bill repealed the Missouri Compromise, and opened the futures of Kansas and Nebraska to be voted upon by their respective populations. The votes would decide if these states were slave states or free states. Intended or not, this created a violent proxy war in Kansas between the northern free states, and the slave states to the south and east, with Missouri taking the lead role. Lawrence was founded by the North as a part of this proxy war. By adding immigrants with an anti-slavery bias in Lawrence, the New England Emigrant Aid Company was able to create eligible voters that would further the interests of the North. In this instance, slavery was not a philosophical issue, but an economic one. If Kansas became a slave state, its idyllic, fertile land would be bought by Southern wealth and farmed by slaves. Economies of scale would either force the original Kansans to move North or West, or cause them to give up their land and become employees of Southern wealth. Those that remained in Lawrence created an independent spirit that remains apart of the culture of the city to this day.

Bleeding Kansas This historical period developed between 1854 and 1861 as a series of violent political confrontations between the anti-slavery Free-Staters of Kansas also known as the “Jayhawkers” and the pro-slavery “Border Ruffians” of Missouri. It began with the Kansas-Nebraska Act, which was intended to open up territory in Kansas to be settled for the purpose of reaching a population density that would support a trans-continental railroad. Part of this bill repealed the Missouri Compromise, and opened the futures of Kansas and Nebraska to be voted upon by their respective populations. The votes would decide if these states were slave states or free states. The border ruffians from Missouri believed that every settler had the right to bring his own property, including slaves, into the Kansas territory while the Jayhawkers knew that the rich slaveholders would buy up all the good far mland and work them with black slaves, leaving little or no opportunity for non-slaveholders. The following string of conflicts between the two states proved that prohibitionists could not come to ter ms with pro-slavery supporters and it is said to have sparked the American Civil War itself in 1861.

Quantrill’s Raid The border war between Kansas and Missouri came to a horrific climax on August 21, 1863 when William Quantrill and his band of raiders rode to Lawrence and bur ned it to the ground, killing all but a few in hiding also known as the “Lawrence Massacre”. Since the American Civil War had begun in 1861, Lawrence was already a target for pro-slavery forces, having been seen as the anti-slavery stronghold in the state of Kansas and more importantly, an important staging area for Union and Jayhawker incursions into Missouri. Quantrill himself said his motivation for the attack was, “To plunder, and destroy the town in retaliation for Osceola” which was a town sacked in Missouri by the Jayhawkers two years prior, which is why defenses in Lawrence were lax at the time. Quantrill’s Raid is the seminal event in Lawrence’s history, and it is remembered in the city’s insignia, a Phoenix rising from a smoldering city.

University of Kansas

Attempts to begin a university in Kansas were first undertaken in 1855, but it was only after Kansas became a state in 1861 that those attempts saw any real traction. An institute of lear ning was proposed in 1859 as The University of Lawrence, but it never opened. The location of the University of Kansas was debated between Lawrence, Manhattan, and Emporia until legislation favored the city of Lawrence for its down payment of $10,000 and 40 acres of land to use. The University officially opened in 1866 with a starting class of 55 students. The history of the Jayhawkers pulled through into the foundation of the school as it became one of the most iconic and historically reverent mascots in all of college history; the Jayhawk. Along with the Jayhawk came the Rock Chalk Chant which was voted Americaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s best college chant by Teddy Roosevelt in 1899. The universityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s presence in Lawrence then helped to preserve and further the progressive mindset of the residents that had been transplanted from Boston, priming the city for several conflicts in the coming years.

Haskell Indian Nations University

In 1884, the United States Indian Industrial Training School was opened in Lawrence during a time when Native American boarding schools were used to under mine Tribal Nations. Boys were taught the trades of tailor making, blacksmithing, far ming and other for ms of manual labor while girls were taught cooking and homemaking. In 1887, the name was changed to the Haskell Institute, after Dudley Haskell, a legislator responsible for the school being in Lawrence. In 1993, the name was changed again to Haskell Indian Nations University and gained clout and developed as a North Central Association-accredited university that offers both associate and baccalaureate degrees. This institution enrolls 1,000 Native American students every year and now represents approximately 140 Tribal nations and Alaska Native communities throughout America.

Brown vs Board of Education In 1951, a class action lawsuit began 30 miles away in Topeka. Brown Vs Board of Education rose all the way to the Supreme Court, beginning the process of desegregation in schools. Though KU had been fully integrated since 1938, during the 1960’s, tensions rose around the development and passage of the Civil Rights Act. Black students at KU and Lawrence High School still did not feel represented in the public face of their schools. Combined with anti-war protests, conflict and tensions rose until a firebomb was ignited in the Kansas Union in the spring of 1970. In the following days, neither the cur few, nor the National Guard’s presence deterred students from demonstrating and rioting. Just as this situation was beginning to calm, students vandalized the Military Science building as a response to the shooting at Kent State. That summer, overzealous police officers shot and killed a black 19 year old, and killed a white 18 year old 4 days later. Though Lawrence did not practice segregation, the private sector had caused the city to become geographically segregated. Having separated neighbor hoods strengthened the “us vs them” mentality. Unified groups of black residents exchanged fire with police several times over the next few months, but tensions eased after the arrival of Col. William Albott, who walked among the hippies, radicals, and black protesters. During the remaining months in 1970 and the year of 1971, shootings and bombings did occur in and around campus, but not with the numbers seen in the first half of 1970. With the exception of the “February Sisters” sit-in in 1972, violence faded until the end of the Vietnam War in 1975. The violence of the early 70’s shaped the community of Lawrence by making tolerance and peace a priority for the leadership. This progressive mindset is visible to this day as Douglas County consistently shows up as a Blue dot in a very Red state.

“We conclude that, in the field of public education, the doctrine of ‘separate but equal’ has no place. Separate educational facilities are inherently unequal” - US Supreme Court 1954

Geography & Climate The city of Lawrence is located 866 feet above sea level at 38°58′18″N 95°14′7″W. It lies on the southern edge of the Dissected Till Plains, bordering the Osage Plains to the south on the prairie-forest ecotone of Eastern Kansas. A drive west leads to straight roads through fertile plains towards Denver, Colorado, while a drive east wanders through rolling hills alongside deciduous trees towards Kansas City, Missouri. The University of Kansas is perched atop Mount Oread at 1,020 feet above sea level which is one of Kansas’ few mountains. Lawrence can also be referred to by the unofficial alias “river city” as it lies between the Kansas River to the north and the Wakarusa River to the south. There are many large creeks and tributaries that flow through the city and into the rivers from Clinton Lake as well as a large wetland reservation area that is maintained by both Haskell and Baker University. Since there is so much moisture and humidity, Lawrence exists in a micro-climate that is slightly warmer than its surroundings. The US Department of Agriculture has classified it under plant hardiness zone 6b (average low -5°F to 0°F), giving it a similar climate to Wichita and Springfield, while the surrounding areas are classified as 6a (-10°F to -5°F). Lawrence is host to 54 different city parks which include community parks, neighborhood parks, trails, cemeteries and nature preserves. Community parks include South Park, Buford Watson Park, Broken Arrow Park, Riverfront Park, Holcomb Park, “Dad” Perry Park, Centennial Park and Prairie Park. Cemeteries include Oak Hill, Maple Grove and Memorial Park. The first cemetery in Lawrence, Pioneer Cemetery, is on the University of Kansas campus and is home to many Civil War veterans. The map on the right illustrates through shading just how many hills are around Lawrence and how much of the city is elevated or sank into flood plains along the Kansas and Wakarusa Rivers. As mentioned earlier, Mount Oread is placed in the middle of the city providing a refreshing contrast in elevation that provides beautiful views of nature but also plays host to the dreaded foot rout to and from the University of Kansas campus that the students have affectionately nick named “The Hill”.

Climate Charts Average Temperatures

Humidity

Wind Speed (mph)

Precipitation

Snow Fall

Cloudy Days

Sun Path Diagram

Wind Rose Diagram

N 330

NNW

30 40

8:52

12%

5:56

WNW

80 8:00

9:00

5:02

7:42 9:00 3:00 3:00

9:00

12:00

150 S

WSW

ESE

120

7:56

12:00

210

12:00

6:27

240

ENE

3:00

15%

NNE

18%

300

SE SSW

SSE

The Great Flood of 1951

Hydrology Transformation

North Lawrence’s low elevation made it exceedingly vulnerable to floodwaters. There was a community-altering flood in 1903 which wiped out a huge amount of buildings and infrastructure (including the bridge), and smaller floods occurred several times over the next fifteen years before the drought and Dust Bowl of the 1920’s and 1930’s. 1951 and 1993 brought two more major floods, and after every flood the levies were rebuilt and their size increased. All of this flooding has stunted growth north of the river. It has now been over two decades since the last major flood, so the area is poised to grow again. If Lawrence proper can rise as a Phoenix from ashes, North Lawrence can rise as an Oak from the mud.

1950

1970

1990

2010

Site Typologies Dennis Domer sees Lawrence as the ideal site for his â&#x20AC;&#x153;Campus Village.â&#x20AC;? Within Lawrence, there are two sites that he is specifically considering. These two sites are almost polar opposites, so examining both will reveal the ways in which form and function of intergenerational neighborhoods are informed by site. The first site exists on the edge of suburbia in West Lawrence. Its closest neighbor is the newly-constructed Rock Chalk Park, host of many athletic events for the several schools around the area, including the University of Kansas. Although this park has a massive parking lot, the crowds it draws regularly spill over into the streets in and around the site which drives the need for more event parking. While Rock Chalk Park dominates the area northwest of our site, single family neighborhood and multifamily housing developments expand to the east, causing a rift between building and zoning typologies on either side of the West Lawrence site. Adding to this rift even more is a new commercial development being proposed just to the west of our site which will be explained in the following pages as a typology of its own kind. The other site we are working with is in North Lawrence just across the bridges over the Kansas River and sits between a low-density strip of commercial buildings to the east, and a levy for the river to the west. The levy wraps around the south tip of our site following the river to provide a boundary from downtown Lawrence, while a railroad berm pinches the site to a conclusion to the north. The topography of this area, with the exception of the levy, is almost constant across the site. The major benefits of this site are its proximity to downtown Lawrence as well as the Lawrence Union Pacific Depot which is a railway which may hold greater value in the future if Kansas City were to ever incorporate a light-rail for public transportation services.

West Lawrence Site

Two Development Models North Lawrence Site

Within Lawrence, there are two real estate development models that are followed. The older model, started when the city was first built, is based around a pedestrian experience. The genius loci of Lawrence, Massachusetts Street (colloquially abbreviated to “Mass Street”), is the place people go to see the other members of the community, and is the place they remember when they leave. “Downtown” and “Mass” are often used interchangeably, and the general zone to which they refer is between 11th and 6th, from New Hampshire Street to Vermont Street. Downtown Lawrence hosts a very high percentage of community-defining establishments. Restaurants, bars, and small stores make up the majority of businesses, with only a few recognizable chains present. The bars are an especially important component, because of the amount of 20-somethings drawn in by the university. If there is an away KU basketball or football game, most of the bars are full long before the game begins. With victory, merriment spills into the streets and continues for several hours. If the victory is great enough, at-home viewers migrate on foot from sometimes miles away in order to enjoy the moment with the rest of the city. The Architecture of downtown Lawrence is much like that in every other medium-sized Midwest town. A wide sidewalk and angled parking divide the storefronts from the street, and midway through each block, an alley cuts through for deliveries and disposal. The building faces communicate use; retail or commercial main floors are exposed by large glass storefronts, while the second stories and above feature a more private brick facade, with smaller windows rhythmically punched through. Some of these spaces are occupied by private offices and others by residences. The density of these blocks is quite high, and parking is often a challenge. Angled or parallel parking lines almost every street, and almost every block as a surface lot or multi-level garage of some sort. Some of them are private, some require a fee, but most are free for two hours. This degree of density is only found in the downtown area. The university has a similar density and similar parking issues, but its buildings are largely single-use.

Mass Street Model Though this area is the experiential pinnacle of Lawrence, it is not without shortcomings. Most of the buildings are very old, which creates character and problems at the same time. The most worrying issue present in these old buildings, especially when used for high-volume commercial purposes, is fire control. Many of the structures lack sprinkler systems, or feature outdated systems. The City of Lawrence had a program for a few years intended to encourage renovation by assisting with the cost of sprinkler retrofits, but the program ceased after only 32 applications were filed. The cost of these systems is not insignificant; owners often pay around $3 per square foot or more for a retrofit. Dropping thousands of dollars on an expense like this does not receive the same return that a HVAC update, storefront beautification, or flooring upgrade might. Besides the cost of maintaining older buildings, the real estate prices downtown are extremely high when compared to the rest of the city. This is understandable, since nowhere else in the city or even within 30 miles has the amount of pedestrian traffic that downtown Lawrence does. A storefront on Mass Street has similar power to a billboard on a highway in terms of advertising potential. Competition can be ruthless. Turnover, especially among restaurants, is very high. A few staples have endured, especially if they have received national attention like Free State Brewery and The Burger Stand. Since the North Lawrence site is just across the river from the downtown battlefield, care must be taken to ensure that it does not compete with the downtown atmosphere, but rather provides a modern, complementary experience, almost as if Mass continued across the river for a few more blocks. Mass Street was the first development model Lawrence had. It evolved over the course of a century, and created the sometimes messy, often disorganized, but always beloved tapestry that is downtown. It has followed a few strict rules that make the different colors, materials, and scales almost invisible to those walking through it, since most of the rules focus on a unified pedestrian experience that is able to scale to as many blocks as the public desires.

Downtown Lawrence

Big Box Model

South Lawrence

The second development model could be considered an invasive species. It is based completely around the automobile, and even though Lawrence has a thorough bus system, the two are incompatible. This model manifests itself in gargantuan parking lots, surrounding large, single-story buildings, or strips of smaller single-story buildings. At this point, this model seems normal to most Midwesterners, but to be fair, this is where it started. These developments have popped up at the edge of town as the city has grown, and are now completely integrated into (or rather interrupting) the natural fabric of the city. This model is important firstly because it provides a counterpoint to the downtown model, and secondly because it will probably directly compete with the West Lawrence site. There are two main ways to access Lawrence from Kansas City and Topeka. The first is a toll road, I-70. Its 75mph speed limit certainly makes up for the cost for some travelers. The second is K-10. Currently, it converts to 23rd St and slows to 35mph within city limits. If someone is traveling to the opposite side of Lawrence from Kansas City or Topeka, I-70 looks very attractive, as it can take 15 to 20 minutes to get from one side of town to the other on 23rd St. This is all about to change with the imminent construction of the second half of the South Lawrence Trafficway. This highway will reroute K-10 south of town, where it will connect to the already existing portion that wraps around the town and passes directly by the West Lawrence Site. Traffic on that part of K-10 is already high, but when the connection is completed in 2016, it will be much higher, as the route will more directly compete with I-70. If there is one thing this development model is good for, it is profit. Developers buy cheap land, often from farmers, on the outskirts of town. They hang onto it until they have enough committed parties to their project, and then begin construction. Buildings and parking lots are constructed extremely quickly, using the simplest, fastest, and cheapest means possible. Stores often open before the grass has begun to grow. The retailersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; presence spurs growth in the surrounding area, often completed by the same developer, and the stores ride the wave as suburbia flows through. Profits are high and buildings fully leased for decades, but after a time the cheap buildings and infrastructure begin to show their age. Depending on the income levels of the surrounding community, the developers will either renovate and rebrand, or let the place slowly expire until it is empty and razed. Since this model is a fairly recent arrival, it is unclear how long it is possible for a successful development to last. Many of these begin to empty after only 10 years of use. A huge factor is the â&#x20AC;&#x153;anchor.â&#x20AC;? The commitment of a retail giant to a development is enough to lease the remaining spaces and begin construction.

Comparable Developments Comparable Developments Development

Location

Lot Size

Total Cost

GSF

Park Place

Leawood, KS

28 acres

$350 million

Prairiefire

Overland Park, KS

63 acres

City Center Lenexa

Lenexa, KS

Bayshore Town Center

Glendale, Wisconsin

Rockville Town Square Rockville, Maryland

Completion Date

Structured Parking

Financial Mechanisms in Place

In Progress

Yes, 1,600 stalls

Tax Improvement District, City Financing of at least 150 parking spots

594

In Progress, To be completed 2016

Yes, 2,100 stalls

$81 million in STAR Bonds, TID @ 1.5 for 20 yrs ($30 million), CID Bonds totaling $23.4 Million

5,192

In Progress

Yes

Department Stores

113

2007

Yes

1.70

Library, grocery store

644

2009

Yes

$88 million in public funding

Cost/ Sq Ft

FAR

Anchor(s)

Residences

1.2 Million

291.67

0.98

AMC Corporate Headquarters

120

$588 million

2 million+

294.00

1.48

Natural History Museum, Cinetopia Movie Theater

200 acres

$750 million

3 million

250.00

0.34

Perceptive Software HQ, 200,000 sq ft Civic Center

52 acres

$300 million

1.2 Million

250.00

0.53

12.5 acres

$352 Million

927,000

379.72

DU/A

$55 million for roads and utilities

Winooski Falls

Winooski, Vermont

20 acres

$180 million

631,400

285.71

0.72

student housing, public housing

531

2006

Yes

$23.5 million from TIF, $66 million in Government Grants

Southside Works

Pittsburgh, PA

37.2 acres

$385 million

1.4 Million

275.00

0.86

Corporate Headquarters, Fitness Center

735

In Progress

Yes

$25 million from TIF

South Campus Gateway

Columbus, OH

7.5 acres

$153 Million

531,000

288.14

1.63

Art Cinema, Campus Bookstore, Natural Grocer

184

2005

Yes, 1,200 stalls

Zona Rosa

Kansas City, MO

75 acres

$200 Million

1.2 million

166.67

0.37

Movie Theater, Department Stores

2010

Yes

CityCentre

Houston, TX

$500 Million

1.7 million

294.12

1.05

Event Plaza for concerts & Festivals,

961

2013

Yes, 4,000 stalls

37 acres

Government Assistance Information was unavailable for: Bayshore Town Center, South Campus Gateway, Zona Rosa, CityCentre

Our Developments Rock Chalk Park

Lawrence, KS

29 acres

$281 Million

1.4 Million

200.71

1.11

828

North Lawrence Site

Lawrence, KS

17 acres

$255 Million

1.2 Million

212.50

1.62

1,140

TBD

Yes

TBD

Yes

6th St 23,351

32,858

E 1450 Rd

Kansas River

1980

E 1450 Rd Iowa St

Kansas River

6th St 65,608

80,098

87,643

23rd St Iowa St

23rd St

1970

1990

2000

Iowa St

E 1450 Rd

1960

6th St 52,738

23rd St

Iowa St

Kansas River

45,698 23rd St

1950

6th St

23rd St

1940

Kansas River

E 1450 Rd

6th St

23rd St

Kansas River

E 1450 Rd

14,390

E 1450 Rd

Kansas River

Iowa St

6th St

E 1450 Rd

Kansas River

Iowa St

The City of Lawrence has changed much in its natures of morphology and density since it was founded. Many neighborhoods have sprawled out to the west while many businesses have encroached from the South. While the downtown district of â&#x20AC;&#x153;Mass Streetâ&#x20AC;? has maintained its historical layout and density ratios, the areas around it seem to be developing at erratic and unpredictable rates that one professor from KU has compared to the development of a cancer cell.

E 1450 Rd

Morphology & Density

2010

Activity

Attractions

Accessibility

Activity refers to the general population and how active they are within the community of Lawrence as a whole. The silhouette of Lawrence itself is used in this diagram to show the boundaries of the townâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s inhabited areas in order to give a general sense of the shape and feeling of the city.

Attractions are the social magnets which work to draw people to an area for the sake of entertainment such as water features, parks, schools, and downtown urban areas. Lawrence has a rich assortment of natural attractions as well as shops and restaurants that work to bring visitors in from all over the state.

Accessibility is how easily the town can be entered and traversed. With multiple highway and railroad entry points and interconnecting infrastructure for both your car and your bicycle, it is clear that Lawrence is very accessible and connected which makes it a prime location to travel or develop.

Successful City When we combine all the characteristics in the three â&#x20AC;&#x153;A traitsâ&#x20AC;?, a truly vibrant and livable city begins to for m in a diagrammatically simple yet beautiful way. Observing how each simple trait interacts and combines to for m a successful whole allows us to simplify our approach on master planning and development down to what really matters in order to draw people in. This simplified way of thinking in tur n allows us more creative license without pigeon holing our designs and decisions with rules or codes, allowing us to utilize the natural amenities around us while focusing on activity centers and connectivity between attractions.

Median Income Population Sample Size: Number of Households: Population Density (ppsm): Median Household Income: Unemployment Rate: Residents Below Poverty Level: Median Resident Age:

1,423 636 4,568 $67,132 1.2% 11% 41.4

West Lawrence Site Data: Population Sample Size: Number of Households: Population Density (ppsm): Median Household Income: Unemployment Rate: Residents Below Poverty Level: Median Resident Age:

4,257 1,548 1,057 $57,143 N/A 11.4% 31.8

Population Sample Size: Number of Households: Population Density (ppsm): Median Household Income: Unemployment Rate: Residents Below Poverty Level: Median Resident Age:

3,991 1,604 4,105 $90,978 2% 3.8% 39.5

$20,000

$30,000

$40,000

$50,000

$60,000

$70,000

$80,000

North Lawrence Site Data: Population Sample Size: Number of Households: Population Density (ppsm): Median Household Income: Unemployment Rate: Residents Below Poverty Level: Median Resident Age:

725 355 38 $43,313 11% 4.6% 47.9

Population Sample Size: Number of Households: Population Density (ppsm): Median Household Income: Unemployment Rate: Residents Below Poverty Level: Median Resident Age:

2,193 991 11,075 $12,538 6.2% 51.6% 21.9

Population Sample Size: Number of Households: Population Density (ppsm): Median Household Income: Unemployment Rate: Residents Below Poverty Level: Median Resident Age:

1,780 880 4,412 $36,815 1.2% 14.6% 32.1

$90,000

Population Density Population Sample Size: Number of Households: Population Density (ppsm): Median Household Income: Unemployment Rate: Residents Below Poverty Level: Median Resident Age:

1,423 636 4,568 $67,132 1.2% 11% 41.4

North Lawrence Site Data: Population Sample Size: Number of Households: Population Density (ppsm): Median Household Income: Unemployment Rate: Residents Below Poverty Level: Median Resident Age:

725 355 38 $43,313 11% 4.6% 47.9

West Lawrence Site Data: Population Sample Size: Number of Households: Population Density (ppsm): Median Household Income: Unemployment Rate: Residents Below Poverty Level: Median Resident Age:

4,257 1,548 1,057 $57,143 N/A 11.4% 31.8

Population Sample Size: Number of Households: Population Density (ppsm): Median Household Income: Unemployment Rate: Residents Below Poverty Level: Median Resident Age:

2,193 991 11,075 $12,538 6.2% 51.6% 21.9

Population Sample Size: Number of Households: Population Density (ppsm): Median Household Income: Unemployment Rate: Residents Below Poverty Level: Median Resident Age:

3,991 1,604 4,105 $90,978 2% 3.8% 39.5

Population Sample Size: Number of Households: Population Density (ppsm): Median Household Income: Unemployment Rate: Residents Below Poverty Level: Median Resident Age:

1,780 880 4,412 $36,815 1.2% 14.6% 32.1

5,000

10,000

15,000

Downtown Block Density Study Block Size: 195,000 SqFt or 4.47 Acres

t. S s

e us

hir e

St.

c a s s

Living Units: 170 Density: 170 Living Units 4.47 Acres = 38 Units Per Acre - Urban Rental Units - Bank High Rise

10t

h St

- Parking Garage

Suburban Block Density Study 3-Stories (13,100 SF) 12 Multi-Family Units 3-Stories

W 6th St.

Future 1-Story Restaurant 3-Stories Structure (19,800 SF) 18 Multi-Family Units 1-Story Pool/Recreation 3-Stories Structure (19,800 SF) 3-Stories 18 Multi-Family (13,100 SF) Units 12 Multi-Family Units

(19,800 SF) 18 Multi-Family Units

1-Story Covered Parking

Stonerid

ge Dr.

3-Stories (19,800 SF) 18 Multi-Family Units

1-Story Visitors Center

3-Stories (19,800 SF) 18 Multi-Family Units

Ove

rlan

Block Size: 740,500 SqFt or 17 Acres Living Units: 150 Density: 150 Living Units 17 Acres = 9 Units Per Acre - Multi-Family Units

d St

- Facility Structures

- Covered Parking

WEST LAWRENCE SITE Site Analysis As mentioned before, this site exists on the edge of suburbia in West Lawrence and its closest neighbor is the newly-constructed yet controversial Rock Chalk Park. The site has a fairly dramatic elevation change; the souther n edge of the site exists at an elevation of about 1060â&#x20AC;&#x2122;, sloping down to the souther n edge, with an elevation of 960â&#x20AC;&#x2122;. At its souther n edge is a pond, which acts as catchment reservoir for the neighbor hood. The West Lawrence site is a much more traditional condition for the region, and thus has the opportunity to function as a prototype to be mimicked in the area. It too focuses on creating a Mass Street experience, but on a larger scale than the North Lawrence site. Since the site and its surroundings are largely empty, more liberties can be taken with its layout and arrangement. Overland Drive and George Williams Way are the primary means of access and provide borders for its organization. Since it will be addressing some for m of mixed use development to the west, it must both be extroverted and introverted; it must draw people in from Rock Chalk Park and the Mercato while providing refuge for them once inside. Along George Williams Way, angled parking will be added, both to provide spill over parking spaces for the major events at Rock Chalk Park, and to slow traffic. If this perimeter streetscape is successful, the Mercato will be forced to provide a better response than the loading docks and dumpsters that are currently planned.

Site Amenities Since the West Lawrence Site is so detached from the central core of downtown Lawrence, not many amenities are surrounding this area. Our site is enclosed in the black dashed line while the green dashed line represents a quarter-mile radius that would take an average person around 5 minutes to walk. This means that anything outside of the third ring, or 15-minute walk zone, is usually not going to be traveled to without aid of some sort of bicycle or motor vehicle. Rock Chalk Park is the closest usable amenity to our site which could be very beneficial due to its public-access recreational and health facilities. The other close community asset could be considered the Christian Church directly to the south since Lawrence is a mainly Christian population. The only other amenity worth noting, however, would be Walmart which is just under a mile away. This means that it would take the average person over 15 minutes to travel there by foot so it would be most likely driven too anyways. To the south of Walmart, however, lies a fully developed strip of restaurants and retail such as the Six Mile Taver n, and Johny’s Taver n West. Because of our site’s limited access to existing amenities, it is vital to our intergenerational community’s success that enough attractions and activities are provided within our own boundaries. This will ensure that people have a good enough reason to live so far west and keep them there while inviting other guests and residents of Lawrence to shop and dine as well.

Rock ChalkRock ParkChalk Park Points of Interest Diagram Points of Interest Scale: 1” = 200’

Scale: 1” = 200’

Rock Chalk Park

5 Min Walk

10 Min Walk

15 Min Walk

20 Min Walk

Walmart

Burgers By Biggs Six Mile Tavern

Salty Iguana Johnny’s S Tavern West

Taco Bell

The Big Biscuit

Dillon’s

Dealing With Sprawl The LANE4 Property Group has proposed what would be the largest single instance of this second development model directly across the street on the west side of the site. They too see the potential for this site. LANE4’s development, known as “The Mercato”, has been in the works for years. The anchor for which they have designed is CostCo. CostCo has not yet committed to the project. It could be that they are waiting for the traffic data from the completed South Lawrence Trafficway. The closest CostCo is in a Kansas City suburb, 30 miles away. Topeka has one Sam’s Club on the western edge of the city, so placing a CostCo on the west side of Lawrence would be an extremely strategic move. CostCo’s commitment (and the subsequent leasing of the remaining 14 spaces) seems imminent, timing is really the only variable. These developer-driven areas are a subject of contention in Lawrence. Many locals prefer the “feel” of downtown; they appreciate a pedestrian experience. The developers, however, prefer the revenue their parking lots with buildings generate. According to tenured Urban Planning professor Kirk McClure, “The city council is bought and paid for.” Since the people of Lawrence lack a voice (or lack the will to give themselves a voice), these huge developments will continue to crop up on the edge of town and spur the expansion of roadways. Without a local example of a viable alternative that is both profitable and responsible, the current trend will continue indefinitely. The Mercato style of development is relevant to aging because it is the current method for the design of Continuing Care Retirement Communities. These are also built quickly as introverted, isolated structures on the outskirts of town and left to slowly expire. Their lists of amenities are often comically short, and the buildings are little more than low-rent single story apartments with a small staff of caretakers. Their payment models keep residents captive, giving them no reason to improve buildings or grounds, or methods for future development. The large buy-in with monthly rent also has the macabre effect of incentivizing shorter lifespans for the residents, which could be another reason why these places ignore current research on designing for a fulfilling aging experience. Domer knows Lawrence can, and should, do better. The city has a long history of stubborn rebelliousness and revolutionary ideals, and providing categorically superior models for community design and aging-in-place design would be a worthy challenge for the city to undertake.

West Lawrence 1991

West Lawrence 2004

West Lawrence 2014

The Mercado The LANE4 Property Group has proposed what would be the largest single instance of this second development model directly across the street on the west side of the site. They too see the potential for this site. LANE4’s development, known as “The Mercato”, has been in the works for years. The anchor for which they have designed is CostCo. CostCo has not yet committed to the project. It could be that they are waiting for the traffic data from the completed South Lawrence Trafficway. The closest CostCo is in a Kansas City suburb, 30 miles away. Topeka has one Sam’s Club on the western edge of the city, so placing a CostCo on the west side of Lawrence would be an extremely strategic move. CostCo’s commitment (and the subsequent leasing of the remaining 14 spaces) seems imminent, timing is really the only variable.

Rock Chalk Park Site Plan 4

These developer-driven areas are a subject of contention in Lawrence. Many locals prefer the “feel” of downtown; they appreciate a pedestrian experience. The developers, however, prefer the revenue their parking lots with buildings generate. According to tenured Urban Planning professor Kirk McClure, “The city council is bought and paid for.” Since the people of Lawrence lack a voice (or lack the will to give themselves a voice), these huge developments will continue to crop up on the edge of town and spur the expansion of roadways. Without a local example of a viable alternative that is both profitable and responsible, the current trend will continue indefinitely.

Mercado Site Plan

5 9

W 6th Street

George Williams Way

The Mercato style of development is relevant to aging because it is the current method for the design of Continuing Care Retirement Communities. These are also built quickly as introverted, isolated structures on the outskirts of town and left to slowly expire. Their lists of amenities are often comically short, and the buildings are little more than low-rent single story apartments with a small staff of caretakers. Their payment models keep residents captive, giving them no reason to improve buildings or grounds, or methods for future development. The large buy-in with monthly rent also has the macabre effect of incentivizing shorter lifespans for the residents, which could be another reason why these places ignore current research on designing for a fulfilling aging experience. Domer knows Lawrence can, and should, do better. The city has a long history of stubborn rebelliousness and revolutionary ideals, and providing categorically superior models for community design and aging-in-place design would be a worthy challenge for the city to undertake.

Rock Chalk Park Immediately north of the proposed Mercato site sits the newly constructed Rock Chalk Park. This 181,000-square-foot facility, which occupies approximately 90 acres of land, features 8 full-size basketball courts, an indoor soccer/sports arena, a 1/8-mile indoor walking/jogging track, outdoor walking/jogging trails, a cardio/weight area, outdoor lit tennis courts, and meeting rooms. While this is an excellent amenity that is in close proximity to our site, its development over the past two years was extremely controversial. It opened on the first Sunday in October of 2014, and a little more than a month later the city received the infrastructure bill of $11.59 million, which accounted for 90 percent of the costs. Bliss Sports II, the private entity led by Lawrence businessman Thomas Fritzel, will pay $145,835, about 1 percent of the costs. When Fritzel first brought the project to the city in 2012, his estimation of costs was much lower, but worked into the proposal was a no-bid clause for the construction of the facility’s infrastructure, which would be completed by a Fritzel company. The city attempted to bring competition to the deal, but ultimately only the recreation center was allowed to receive bids. Gene Fritzel Construction Co. won the low bid for the city-owned indoor recreation center. For-profit Bliss Sports II will lease the outdoor facilities to KU for the next 50 years before transferring ownership to KU, and the city will partner with KU to cover upkeep during that time. The crowds present in Rock Chalk Park every weekend seem to indicate that there is at least some hope for the success of the facility. Whether it was a long-term good move for the city or not doesn’t really matter at this point, since construction has already been completed. It is important to note, however, that the activity within the facility could easily leave to a competitor in one of Lawrence’s neighbors. Thus, the existence and success of a vibrant community a stone’s throw away is extremely important to the city and its residents. If thousands of people visited and lived in the mixed use developments to the south, the utilization of the park would see an incredible rise at all hours throughout the week, bringing the potential for many symbiotic relationships and public-private partnerships.

Rock Chalk Park

a W s

rg eo

llia i W

Master Plan Dividing the community are two pedestrian malls. One, running north-south, provides a more pedestrian-friendly version of Mass Street. Instead of a busy road and crowded parking between the buildings is a wide pedestrian thoroughfare. This is composed of cafe seating, green space, landscaping, and benches. The second is much like the first, but runs east-west, and is sheltered by glass. Two towers define the extents of the first mall and act as wayfinding devices for rest of the community.

One issue for would-be residents of this area is the nearby border for the Lawrence School District. Development has been stunted to a certain degree for this reason. This has been remedied by the addition of a school at the southern end of the site. This will allow the school district to extend, and while the imminent suburban sprawl might be undesirable in most cases, here it will have the benefit of being influenced by this responsibly created community. This development and the school that it brings will act as a seed to bring about a new form of growth once people are made aware that this sort of deliberate community is possible. The on-site school will also be able to spawn symbiotic relationships between children and seniors like the ones described earlier. The presence of the Living Lab may even be able to quantify the benefits of this degree of community interaction and experiment with different forms and new ideas. The research will turn the community into a beacon that could effect change on a larger scale by creating a model for burgeoning communities to follow.

GEORGE WILLIAMS WAY

At the very heart lies a park, descending from Overland Drive to the pond at the northern end of the site. The park contains exercise structures, a walking track, and a skate park. Since healthy integrated seniors are a goal for the project, this park is vital to the success of the community. Although not part of the site, the wooded area to the north could be used at some point to provide another level of connection to Rock Chalk Park. Trails could join both parks and create a new setting for activities in the future.

OVERLAND DRIVE

GENERAL WALKING Walking PathsPATHS Change in pavement type to create subtle barrier

GEORGE WILLIAMS WAY

HEADWATERS DRIVE

Icon Key

Large Trees for shading in warm months

OVERLAND DRIVE

Benches should be placed every 1/3 of a mile or roughly six minutes of walking

Rock Chalk Park Phasing Plan

alk Park Phasing Plan

PHASE 1 Utility and street construction $2,000,000.00 investment PHASE 1 Utility and street construction PHASE 6 $2,000,000.00 investment Living Lab/Senior Housing PHASE 2 94,247 sq ft development Mix-Use Retail/Residential PHASE 6 PHASE 1 $17,152,954 investment 99,807 sq ft development Living Lab/Senior Housing PUtility HASE 2 and street construction 94,247 sq ft development $15,873,172 investment Mix-Use Retail/Residential $2,000,000.00 investment $17,152,954 investment 99,807 sq ft development PHASE 7 PHASE 6 $15,873,172 investment Mix-Use Retail/Residential Living Lab/Senior Housing PHASE 3 PHASE 2 70,434 sq ft development HASE 7 sq ft development Mix-Use Retail/Residential P94,247 Mix-Use Retail/Residential $9,790,045 investment Retail/Residential $17,152,954 investment 205,691 sq ft development Mix-Use P99,807 HASE 3 sq ft development 70,434 sq ft development $28,590,980 investment Mix-Use Retail/Residential $15,873,172 investment $9,790,045 investment 205,691 sq ft development PHASE 8 PHASE 7 $28,590,980 investment Retail Block Mix-Use Retail/Residential PHASE 4 PHASE 3 10,722 sq ft development HASE 8 sq ft development Mix-Use Retail/Residential P70,434 Mix-Use Retail/Residential $1,844,184 investment Block investment $9,790,045 165,791 sq ft development Retail P205,691 HASE 4 sq ft development 10,722 sq ft development $23,044,948 investment Mix-Use Retail/Residential $28,590,980 investment $1,844,184 investment 165,791 sq ft development PHASE 9 PHASE 8 $23,044,948 investment Elementary School Retail Block PHASE 5 PHASE 4 50,222 sq ft development HASE 9 sq ft development Mix-Use Retail/Residential P10,722 Mix-Use Retail/Residential School $8,286,630 investment $1,844,184 investment 109,369 sq ft development Elementary P165,791 HASE 5 sq ft development 50,222 sq ft development $17,202,010 investment Mix-Use Retail/Residential $23,044,948 investment $8,286,630 investment 109,369 sq ft development PHASE 9 $17,202,010 investment Elementary School PHASE 5 50,222 sq ft development Mix-Use Retail/Residential $8,286,630 investment 109,369 sq ft development $17,202,010 investment

West Lawrence Site Phasing Plan

Rock Chalk Park Site Parcel West Lawrence SiteMatrix Parcel Matrix Existing Zoning

Zoning

Potential Use

Parcel Size Building Area (S.F.) (S.F.)

FAR

Height (ft)

No. of Units

Dwelling Unit/ Acre

Residential Mixed Use

Retail/Office/ Residential

37,962

90,255

2.38

61.96

Residential Mixed Use

Retail/Office/ Residential

45,786

47,760

1.04

26.64

Residential Commercial

Retail

22,933

5,722

0.25

Residential Mixed Use

Retail/Office/ Residential

30,421

70,434

2.32

60.14

Residential Commercial

231.77

46,101

102,450

2.22

58.08

60,407

65,614

1.09

28.39

50.02

1 - Retail 1- Ofﬁce 3 - Residential

5 - Hotel

Residential Mixed Use

Residential Mixed Use Public/ Residential Institutional

Retail/Office/ Residential Market

86,628

165,791

1.91

55,759

14,569

0.26

Library

55,759

28,875

0.52

Senior Living/ Living Lab

113,226

94,247

0.83

Elementary School

205,890

50,222

0.24

28 -

10.77 -

Average Average Total No. Average FAR Height DU/A of Units

1.31

Parcel A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9 A10 A11 A12

828

Zoning Type Key

Parking Stall Type Present Structured Surface X X X X X X X X X X X X X

1 - Retail

476

Retail/Office/ Residential

Public/ Institutional

1 - Retail 1- Ofﬁce 3 - Residential

Residential Mixed Use

Residential

1 - Retail 1- Ofﬁce 3 - Residential

2.68

A12

239,829

Residential Mixed Use

89,463

A11

Hotel Retail/Office/ Residential

A10

Standard Parking Stall Count

ADA Stall Count

181 96 11 141 480 205 131 332 29 58 188 100

6 4 1 5 9 7 5 9 4 4 6 4

Mixed Use

43.98

George Williams Way

Parcel

Parcel Key

ROCK CHALK PARK SITE PARCEL KEY

1 - Retail 1- Ofﬁce 3 - Residential

Overland Dr

A9 1 - Market

Commercial

A11

Public/Institutional

1 - Living Lab 1 - Senior Housing

A10 1 - Library

A12 1 - School

Total Standard Stall Total ADA Count Stall Count 1,952

NORTH LAWRENCE SITE Site Analysis The North Lawrence site, being somewhat of an urban infill, has some existing infrastructure present that currently serves a couple of houses and a mobile home community. The presence of roads and utilities provides a starting point and logic for the division of the site into the desired programmatic elements. Entry to the site is also a huge driver for organization. Currently, the site can only be accessed by Locust St. This presents a bit of a conundrum, because the railroad establishes a cost barrier. Either the site can be built at an extremely low density and use only Locust St for access, or it can be built to a high enough density to overcome the cost of crossing the railroad to the North. Since one goal of this development is to provide a model for a responsible use of land, the latter was chosen. Two crossings are planned for; Lyon St crosses on-grade at the north end, while Lincoln St tunnels under the railroad berm to provide midway access. For the most part, these two ordering systems lay out the division of the site Secondary organization consists of two cuts through the buildings on the river, one at Perry Street and the other at Maple Street. Broad stairs bring visitors up to levee height to provide a boardwalk experience. The stairs might also function as seating when the community is crowded with visitors, much like the iconic Spanish Steps in Rome. The light from the west is drawn through these corridors in the evening, and illuminates the beginnings of nightlife. Tertiary organization is seen in section and elevation. The structures on the perimeter of the site rise four or more stories above the street, while the interior portion of the site is limited to two stories. This change of condition happens independent of building borders. Some of the structures have both a tall perimeter condition on one side and low interior condition on the other. Since the interior streetscape is meant to be a reflection of the Mass Street experience, the modest building heights allow light and breezes to enter, just as they do on the other side of the river. The higher perimeter is used as a means to gain the density necessary without making the pedestrian experience intimidating or claustrophobic.

Site Amenities There are many amenities present in and around the North Lawrence site. Downtown Lawrence, with all of its restaurants, galleries, and civic functions is only a short bridge-crossing away. The river, and the forests that border it, provide visual appeal and the potential for nature-centric activities to start from the site. The river front property can add value to both residences and retail shops or restaurants that seek to take advantage of the iconic sense of place as well as the picturesque views. One of the most exciting components to this site, however, is the proximity of the North Lawrence train station. It is on the other side of N 2nd St from the site and has recently been renovated into a fantastic French-style leisure garden on the exterior with a large and rentable activity space on the interior. It is easily walked from our site as well since it is across the street but it can be made even more accessible with a simple pedestrian bridge. As energy prices continue to rise, and as commutes lengthen, light rail becomes more attractive for major cities such as Kansas City and an upgrade could be in the not-too-distant future that would connect Lawrence back to Kansas City. The line is currently used mostly for the transportation of coal to a nearby power plant. Coal is in its last days, however, as the price of healthier options continues to fall. When the line is freed from its coal responsibilities, it could be used to connect North Lawrence with Kansas City as well as Topeka. The ongoing expansion of programs for ride-sharing and technologies for driver-less cars will make the ownership of an automobile much less necessary in the future, and a quick, cheap connection to Lawrenceâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s neighbors that is only a short walk from the front door will make these residences extremely attractive to both professionals and retirees. This will not happen within ten years, but it is likely to happen within thirty.

2nd St.

Interlinking Grid

Locust St.

In most major cities around America, it is common for the streets to be numbered and organized in a grid that is divided into city blocks. Lawrence was founded in a similar fashion, though it did not grow into a buzzing metropolis like New York City or Chicago. When Lawrence was first founded in 1854, it was established as a settlement community that most focused on farming and developing new territory. When the city itself was actually planned, however, the streets were formed into an interlinking grid pattern for organization and convenience. The east & west streets were numbered and then the north & south streets were named after states that joined the union from right to left. An early Sanborn fire insurance map from 1883 shown on the right demonstrates how this grid system was originally laid out and how the city blocks Downtown were supposed to be used as guides to follow when modeling the streets north of the river. This allowed street names to be carried up through the river, effectively expanding the range of the city without having to label new streets and alienate the northern area. The grid also would provide opportunities for future development like bridges to connect the streets together but since it was not fully realized and North Lawrence never really thrived, only one bridge was ever built so there is only one convenient way of crossing the river today.

Mass St.

Vermont St.

Organized Grid System

Street Grid

-North LawrenceDisconnected Grid System

Reconnecting the Grid

On the far left of the page, you can observe a figure ground of North Lawrence as it stands currently and notice a few things pertaining to the density of the buildings. Downtown Lawrence, with its neatly organized grid system, has thrived into a busy dining and retail hot spot while North Lawrence has slowly morphed through the years into a spattering of single family homes and random industrial storehouses. It is clear that the somewhere along the way during the planning of the city, someone decided that south of the river should be focused on as the heart of the community, which is fine, but no thought was given into how the land north of the river would be included in that success. They got disconnected and were not ever totally able to mutually thrive and so North Lawrence grew poorer and dirtier while Downtown Lawrence grew fatter and wealthier.

owntown LawrenceOrganized Grid System

The image directly to the left further depicts how North Lawrence was left behind by circling all of the dead ends and unfinished streets that were originally planned and shown in the Sanborn fire insurance map of 1883. Observing how awkwardly traffic passes through this part of town, especially our site, allows us to understand why no business has come north of the river and succeeded even close to as well as if it were Downtown. With societyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s crippling reliance on motor vehicles to travel, North Lawrence has become a drive-through destination in which no one stops their cars to explore or would want to. A better street infrastructure needs to be established in North Lawrence if we are going to fix this problem and allow our intergenerational housing community to survive. Since the areas of North Lawrence and Downtown Lawrence were originally intended to be well connected as a whole interlinking grid system, it is our vision to fulfill that historic model by reconnecting the two areas once again by reuniting the grid system again as a whole through our master plan and begin to draw people into North Lawrence.

Master Plan The North Lawrence site is considerably more exciting than the West Lawrence Site mostly due to its proximity to the Kansas River. The idea of the views taken in from riverfront property combined with the quick access to downtown is enough to excite any prospective resident or tenant. This is why we have placed most of the residential units along the river on the west side of the site and staggered the structure of the building like saw teeth so more residential units will get the pleasant views of downtown over the river. The area between the buildings and the river will be utilized as green space for walking and biking trails with second floor entries to retail and restaurants on both sides of the building and connected via grand stair cases which perforate the long building form for convenient access. The rest of the residential units take many forms such as town-homes and single-family residences to the north and studio apartments and lofts on the east side. The main entrance to the community is the existing intersection on Locust Street but is not enough to support the large flow of traffic through the site. To support the excess traffic, a secondary main entrance is proposed to the north of the existing train bridge that would have to be built with the same condition under the train tracks. For good measure, a tertiary entrance comes over the train tracks in the very north point of the site. Parking for most of the buildings is at the core of the structure. Retail and commercial wrap the first and second stories, behind which are stacked several layers of parking. Residential units sit atop the plinth of parking and commercial, and rise a few stories more. Some of the buildings also lay a green roof over the plinth, giving residents of each building their own private lawn. The Living Lab provides a southern conclusion to the site. It faces the main entrance at Locust Street and is deliberately highlighted to resist the isolation that often accompanies this sort of facility. It is also right next to the green space which will act as a natural magnet for people to explore and learn about what the living lab has to offer. Integrated into the building are some assisted living units. These can be used for studies conducted in the Living Lab or for seniors whose needs prohibit them from living in some of the other configurations around the site.

Icon Key

Site Views

North Lawrence Phasing Plan PHASE 1 Site Demolition $600,000 investment PHASE 2

North Lawrence Site Phasing Plan $2,500,000.00 investment

wrence Phasing Plan Utility and street construction PHASE 1 Site Demolition PHASE 3 $600,000 investment Mix-Use Retail/Residential

116,000 sq ft development $26,680,000 investment

PHASE 2 Utility and street construction $2,500,000.00 investment PHASE 4

Mix-Use Retail/Residential 49,600 sq ft development PHASE 3 $10,348,800 investment Mix-Use Retail/Residential 116,000 sq ft development $26,680,000 investment PHASE 5 Mix-Use Retail/Residential 49,600 sq ft development PHASE 4 $8,348,800 investment Mix-Use Retail/Residential 49,600 sq ft development $10,348,800 investment PHASE 5 Living Lab Medical Building 23,500 sq ft development PHASE 5 $4,277,000 investment Mix-Use Retail/Residential 49,600 sq ft development $8,348,800 investment PHASE 5 Living Lab Medical Building 23,500 sq ft development $4,277,000 investment

PHASE 6 Mix-Use Retail/Residential 116,000 sq ft development $26,680,000 investment

PHASE 7 Retail Block 92,500 sq ft development PHASE 6 $17,910,000 investment Mix-Use Retail/Residential 116,000 sq ft development PHASE 8 $26,680,000 investment Mix-Use Retail/Residential 49,600 sq ft development $8,348,800 investment

PHASE 7 Retail Block PHASE 9 92,500 sq ft development Townhomes $17,910,000 investment 39,700 sq ft development $4,765,000 investment PHASE 8 Mix-Use Retail/Residential 49,600 sq ft development PHASE 10 $8,348,800 investment Single Family Lots 8,400 sq ft development PHASE 9 $1,134,000 investment Townhomes 39,700 sq ft development $4,765,000 investment PHASE 10 Single Family Lots 8,400 sq ft development $1,134,000 investment

Zoning

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5

Commercial Mixed Use Industrial Mixed Use Industrial Commercial Industrial Mixed Use Open Space Mixed Use

Open Space

B7 B8

Potential Use

Parcel Area (S.F.)

Building Area (S.F.)

FAR

No. of Height (ft) Units

Dwelling Unit/ Acre

Retail/Residential Retail/Residential Retail Retail/Residential Retail/Residential

40,153 35,729 70,874 76,829 163,426

29,000 20600 92500 93000 232,000

0.72 0.58 1.31 1.21 1.42

48 48 36 36 48

116 164 186 536

125.84 199.95 105.46 142.87

Mixed Use

Living Lab/ Assisted Living

57,967

23,500

0.41

45.84

Industrial Industrial

Resiedential Resiedential

Townhomes Townhomes

23,270 16,431

14,500 8,700

0.62 0.53

24 24

30 31

56.16 82.18

Industrial

Resiedential

Townhomes

22,849

16,500

0.72

30.50

B10 B11 B12 B13

Industrial Industrial Industrial Industrial

Resiedential Resiedential Resiedential Resiedential

Single Family Home

3,277 3,277 3,277 3,277

1,400 1,400 1,400 1,400

0.43 0.43 0.43 0.43

25 25 25 25

1 1 1 1

13.29 13.29 13.29 13.29

B14

Industrial

Resiedential

Single Family Home

3,277

1,400

0.43

13.29

B15

Industrial

Resiedential

Single Family Home

3,277

1,400

0.43

13.29

Single Family Home Single Family Home

Average Average Total No. Average FAR of Units DU/A Height

0.83

Parcel B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 B11 B12 B13 B14 B15

1,140

57.90

B7 Lincoln St

B4 1 - Retail 2 - Residential

Locust St

Zoning Type Key Stall Type Present Structured Surface X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

Standard Parking Stall Count

ADA Stall Count

164 199 130 323 1,013 117 33 34 19 2 2 2 2 2 2

6 6 5 8 21 5 2 2 1

Total Standard Stall Count

Total ADA Stall Count

2,031

Mixed Use Commercial

B3 B2

1 - Retail

1 - Retail 3 - Residential

Residential

B5 1 - Retail 3 - Residential

N 2nd St

Parking

B15 B14 B13 B12 B11 B10

Mass St

Parcel

Existing Zoning

Parcel Key

NORTH LAWRENCE SITE PARCEL KEY

N 1st St

North Lawrence SiteMatrix Parcel Matrix North Lawrence Site Parcel

1 - Retail 3 - Residential

Locust St

B6 1 - Living Lab 1 - Assisted Living

CONCLUSION Sustainability Sustainability practices are absolutely necessary in the market place of today because it seems to be the second most important factor of any project that every owner is asking about while cost will always be the first most important factor. In regards to both the North Lawrence and West Lawrence sites, we intend to utilize best practice applications of sustainability to make sure our master plans are compatible with todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s market while being helpful to the environment at the same time. Here a few simple community strategies will be mentioned that can help us to reach this goal of sustainability. When it comes to electricity, the sun is our greatest asset as the prices of photovoltaic systems gos down. This means that to mitigate energy costs, photovoltaic arrays would be located on the roofs of all buildings oriented to the south to catch the most sunlight. The sun also produces a lot of heat which can cause our energy costs to skyrocket especially with cooling during the summer. To stop the sun from driving up the cost of our interior cooling, south facing facades of the buildings will incorporate sun shading strategies to reduce solar heat gain and block direct southern exposure to stop glare. Wind is also a great source of energy so smaller applications of omni-directional wind turbines placed on the roofs of various buildings could also offset energy needs. Large arrays of wind turbines could also be included in the public park areas for both sites while geothermal strategies can be utilized under the ground for heating and cooling. Water use and wastewater treatment would be the second most important sustainability factor for our community to worry about. To lower the amount of water used, low-use plumbing fixtures will be provided to all buildings. We could even supply filtered water to the buildings through waste treatment like anaerobic reactors and retention basins. In an effort to reduce the amount of stormwater runoff, bioswales would be introduced to curbside areas of both sites. Using native grasses and plants would filter the stormwater runoff and effectively lessen the quantity of water that would enter the municipal sewer system while potentially storing it and returning it back to the community through use of cisterns. These bioswales also help to lessen the amount of non-permeable surfaces throughout our sites which can also reduce the heat island effect caused by pavement.

LEED Credit Categories Sustainable Sites

Innovation in Operations & Regional Priority

Water Efficiency

Indoor Environmental Quality

Energy & Atmosphere

Materials & Resources

Curbside Bioswales

Sunshading Systems

Curbside Boundary

Native Plants

Permeable Surface

Drainage

North Lawrence Sustainable Site Strategies Sunshading Systems

Photovoltaic Arrays

Wind Turbines

Geothermal Heating

Green Space

West Lawrence Sustainable Site Strategies Wind Turbines

Photovoltaic Arrays

Geothermal Heating

Sunshading Systems

Green Space

Intergenerational Living Strategies

PLANNED AND SPONTANEOUS INTERACTION LIFE-LONG LEARNING

COMMUNITY CENTER

The Community Center has long been a culmination of program spaces ranging from the traditional lobby to more specialized areas such as art classrooms. In order to take full advantage of an Intergernerational Community Center, programs are of vast importance. Some suggestions include an art studio, community cafeteria (which could house cooking classes), a reading room and library, and possibly a conference room to cater to encore careers. All of these elements would be integrated with the existing amenities in the community.

Art Studio

Central Atrium - natural lighting - visual connections

Conference Room

Community Garden

Community Cafeteria Cooking Classroom - community garden with elementary school program working with business incubator - market cooking classes uses some produce from community garden and has a varitey of classes for all ages Community Cafeteria

Market + Pharmacy

- cooking classes produce food that is given to lowincome families in the neighborhood

Lounge

Reading Room + Library

Emergency Contact Beacons

Block Shortening

MASSACHUSETTS - 600 FT BLOCK MASS ST -- 600STFT BLOCK

GEORGE WILLIAMS 300 FT BLOCK GEORGE WILLIAMS WAY - WAY 300 FT--BLOCK

Street Accessibility and Interactions

Entrance with Tree Surround

In order to control the flow of traffic, tree/shrub planters can be placed along the face of the building.

Setback Entrance

A typical Downtown solution to avoid clash in circulation paths.

Angled Display Entrance

To allow for more dynamism, creates a similar effect to that of the Setback Entrance.

Cafe Setback Entrance

For Restaurants this is an important marketing tool to get people into the vacinity.

Zero Threshold Entrance

Incorporates a ramping system from the street level, which transforms into cafe seating.

CAFE SEATING AND ENTRANCES

North Lawrence Site

West Lawrence Site

NORTH LAWRENCE SITE

ROCK CHALK PARK SITE

HOTEL

SINGLE FAMILY HOMES

DUPLEXES

MIXED USE APARTEMENTS + STUDIOS ROW HOUSING

APARTMENTS FOR RENT

SENIOR LIVING QUARTERS

Streetscape Design RESIDENTIAL STREET

Single Family Homes

parkway trees along street

CAFE SEATING PLAN

GENERAL RULES

29’ Road Townhouse

wide 9’ commercial district sidewalk

brick paved road to prevent speeding,

bioswale for natural water retention/ distribution

parallel parked car

two-way

front yard for kids to play and parents/ grandparents to join

COMMERCIAL STREET WITH ANGLED PARKING

60 degree parking

35’ Road

parallel parked car

two-way

POTENTIAL SIDEWALK

Retail with Residential above

wide 9’ sidewalk

landscaped area

typical asphalt surfaced road

signage for further

Retail with Residential above

COMMERCIAL STREET WITH ONE SIDE PARKING

of crosswalk

brick pavers for texture change

CAFE SEATING SECTION

lighting to emphasize sidewlak at night and provide safety Retail with Residential above

wide 9’ sidewalk

Remove parking to

increase sidewalk for cafe seating

increase in sidewalk allows for proper

raised paver similar to a speed bump

Transportation Guide

North Lawrence Site

Cycling

Key Existing Bike Routes Proposed Bike Routes Existing Bus Routes Proposed New Routes

Bus Riding

Existing Bus Stops

Proposed Bus Stops

Light Rail Commute

West Lawrence Site

Acknowledgments Studio 811:

Organizations:

Consultants/Advisors:

Guest Critics:

Professor Joe Colistra

Kansas University New Cities Initiative Campus Village Board of Directors Department of Architecture Planning Department MBA Program Special Projects

Dennis Domer KU New Cities Initiative KU Campus Village Board of Directors

John Gaunt Dean KU Department of Architecture

John Shreve KU New Cities Initiative Populous

Paola Sanguinetti Chair KU Department of Architecture Chair

Design Firms Populous BNIM Architects Paul Werner Architects Arnold Development RNL Design NSPJ Architects

Rick Renfro North Lawrence Neighborhood Association

Bill Preloger NSPJ Architects

Catherine Shenoy KU MBA Program

Paul Werner Paul Werner Architects

Kirk McClure KU Planning Department

David Carnicelli RNL Design

Paul Werner Paul Werner Architects

Kirk McClure KU Planning Department

Bill Preloger NSPJ Architects

Jonathan Arnold Arnold Development

Students Zach Brown Alli Derks Savannah Greenlee Stephen Howell Benjamin Jensen Taylor Maine Andrew Mechler Mike Rudd Tu Tran Ashley Weber

Community North Lawrence Neighborhood Association

Tom Waechter Architect KU Special Projects Sam DeJong BNIM Architects

References Ball, Scott. Livable communities for aging populations urban design for longevity. Hoboken, N.J: John Wiley & Sons, 2012. Print.

Websites https://newcities.ku.edu/ http://www.city-data.com/city/Lawrence-Kansas.html

Butts, Donna. (2014, June 6). Donna Butts: Intergenerational Communities: Unleashing the Po- tential of All Ages [Video File]. Retrieved from http://youtu.be/OI2Q_DGK00g Lester, Cheryl. (2014, May 25). Cheryl Lester- From Generation to Generation: Teaching Aging [Video file]. Retrieved from http://youtu.be/ta-iw53f5hs

http://www.gaisma.com/en/location/lawrence-kansas.html http://www.wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/wea_windrose.pl?laKLWC http://www.prb.org/Publications/Articles/2002/JustHowManyBabyBoomersAreThere.aspx

McClure, Kirk. "Analysis of Sports Complex Proposals." Lawrence City Comission 19 Feb. 2013. Web. 9 Dec. 2014. <https://www.lawrenceks.org/assets/agendas/cc/2013/02-19- 13/rcp_correspondence.pdf>.

http://www.immersionactive.com/resources/50-plus-facts-and-fiction/ http://www.kancoll.org/books/north_lawrence/text.html

North Lawrence Civic Association. Early History of North Lawrence. Lawrence, KS: Woodlawn Parent Teachers Association, 1961. (K/978.1/-D74/Pam.v.1/no. 24).

http://www.lawrenceks.org/utilities/downtown_sprinkler_program_faq http://www2.ljworld.com/news/2014/mar/18/work-build-trafficway-through-baker-wetlands-begin/ http://www.thegbi.org/green-globes/green-globes-leed-green-building-certification.shtml?gclid=CNfNpv3jzMICFWcLMgodSRgAEQ