Platform Winter 2008-2009 by UT School of Architecture

Platform The University of Texas at Austin :: School of Architecture :: Winter 2008-09 Community and Regional Planning :: Learning By Doing

INTRODUCTION A Culture of Making and Doing by Frederick R. Steiner, Dean

As I thought about how to introduce this issue, which is devoted to community engagement, I reflected on the words of our colleague, Associate Dean Kevin Alter, who advocates for architects to become more engaged in building. Professor Alter argues that a “culture of making” would advance architecture, since architects would better understand how their designs are realized. Professor Alter views architecture as arising from a culture of making rather than simply knowing how to build. “In this regard, material culture in general, and making in particular, are vast resources to which architects should look in their work, and they provide the basis for truly compelling work.” Professor Alter notes that “a building is inevitably built, but deep-rooted understanding of how making and material have meaning in the field leads to truly compelling work.” This emphasis on creating buildings within their cultural context and meaning contradicts Aaron Betsky’s declaration that “Architecture is not building. Architecture is about building.”

Frederick R. Steiner, Dean, School of Architecture, The University of Texas at Austin.

Turning to Michael Oden’s lead essay in this issue, I was struck by the complementary nature of Professor Oden’s belief that planners should “learn by doing” and Professor Alter’s “culture of making” principle. Too frequently, we dwell on the differences between architecture and planning. However, making buildings and engaging communities have much in common. Both concern reality. Both involve purposeful action. Both seek change. Both engage others besides the architect or the planner. And both invite reflection. Former M.I.T. professor Donald Schön promoted the value of reflective practice for both architecture and planning. Reflection gives meaning to making and to doing. Architects learn from making buildings, that is, through practice; planners advance their art by completing plans. Our role as academics is to advance our disciplines through research. We must go beyond learning via tangible practice. We must give meaning to what we have learned by placing it in the contexts of our fields. Through analysis and dissemination, we marry experience and knowledge. In other words, theories can emerge from reflective practice. The University of Texas at Austin is committed to a sustained culture of excellence. For architecture, planning, and the allied disciplines in the School of Architecture, such excellence can be pursued by making and doing. This approach is grounded in the long-time American tradition of pragmatism that has evolved from Benjamin Franklin through William James and John Dewey to today’s radical empiricists.

Pragmatism is deeply rooted in our school. Undergraduate architecture students take a required sound building studio, in which they must illustrate that they can design a structure that is not only functional, but also durable. Graduate architecture students have a similar technical communication studio which is now also required of students in our master of landscape architecture program. All interior design students are prepared to take the U.S. Green Building Council exam to become LEED accredited. In the School of Architecture, we offer many designbuild opportunities for our students, such as the Solar Decathlon. As illustrated in the pages that follow, we offer many community engagement possibilities for our community and regional planning graduate students. We engage communities in Texas and beyond. Our students and faculty have ongoing relationships in China and the Dominican Republic. These projects help expose students to different cultures with diverse and unique concepts about settlement and planning. Closer to home, community and regional planning students are collaborating with their architecture and sustainable design colleagues for the Austin Alley Flat Initiative. Undertaken through the school’s Center for Sustainable Development, the project “aims to increase healthy, environmentally responsible, affordable infill housing in Austin’s neighborhoods.” The Alley Flat Initiative is one of the many engagement activities undertaken by the Community and Regional Planning Program, as well as the School of Architecture at large. Recent additions to our community and regional planning faculty also bring experience from other parts of the nation to Austin. For example, Professor Talia McCray joined the school in January 2008 from Rhode Island, where she led efforts to engage urban youth in Providence’s new plan. They sought to illustrate “the types of activities teenagers engage in after school and how they perceive those spaces.” As architects refine their design abilities by purposeful engagement in construction, planners expand their skills through working with communities. We teach our students to be better designers and planners by engaging them in all aspects of their disciplines. We contribute as scholars by reflecting on those experiences. The lessons and theories derived from such reflection help advance the planning and design professionals, and thus, their professions.

Front cover: Photograph provided by students in Assistant Professor Bjorn Sletto’s spring 2008 Applied GIS class. Opposite page: Detail from Urban Land Institute Gerald D. Hines Student Urban Design Competition 2009 team entry from: Don Xu, Master of Landscape Architecture Program, team leader; Sungoo Bae, Master of Science in Urban Design Program; Hyekyung Lee, Master of Science in Urban Design Program; Regina Ramos, Master of Landscape Architecture Program; and Dana Schiffner, MBA program. First place winner of the Cogburn Family Foundation Architecture and Urbanism Prize, the school’s internal ULI-Hines competition. In combination with the generous support of Mike and Betsy Cogburn, this endowment supports our students’ participation in the national competition each year, as well as internal prizes for our top student teams. Pl at f orm • 2

Platform Published by the School of Architecture The University of Texas at Austin Community and Regional Planning :: Learning By Doing :: Winter 2008-09 Guest Editor: Michael Oden Managing Editor: Pamela Peters INTRODUCTION A Culture of Making and Doing by Frederick R. Steiner

Learning by Doing :: The Centrality of Community Engagement in Planning Research and Education by Michael Oden

INTERNATIONAL COLLABORATION AND SERVICE LEARNING Planning in Rapidly Developing Cities :: Workshops in China by Ming Zhang

Risk and Vulnerability Assessment :: Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic by Monica Bosquez and Martin Thomen

COMMUNITY DESIGN-BUILD-PLAN Austin’s Alley Flat Initiative :: Evaluating Project Success by Lynn Osgood

THE COMMUNITY CLASSROOM :: CRP CLASS INITIATIVES Affordable Housing Development :: Students Advance Local Planning Discussions by Elizabeth Mueller

Building Trust in Austin Neighborhood Planning by Patricia A. Wilson

Citizen Participation and the Urban Forest in Austin by Shannon Halley, Lee Huntoon, and Eliza Vermillion

The Value of Incorporating Youth in Local Community Planning by Talia McCray

East Austin Environmental Justice Project by Elizabeth Walsh, Scott Grantham, and Jean Niswonger

INSIDE AND OUTSIDE THE SCHOOL Alumni Connections

Alumni Profiles :: Alice Glasco, Hank Dittmar, James deGrey David, Laura Powell, and Leilah Powell

School Receives $1 Million to Tackle Urbanization Challenges

New UTSOA Endowments

UTSOA Advisory Council: Letter from the Chair

Friends of Architecture

Spring 2009 Events

The University of Texas at Austin School of Architecture 1 University Station B7500 Austin, TX 78712-0222 512.471.1922 soa.utexas.edu To our readers: We welcome any ideas, questions, or comments. Feel free to share your thoughts with Editor Pamela Peters at p.peters@mail.utexas.edu. Platform • 3

LEARNING BY DOING :: The Centrality of Community Engagement in Planning Research and Education by Michael Oden, Guest Editor

COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL PLANNING PROGRAM FACULTY Dean Almy Associate Professor Director, Graduate Program in Urban Design Kent Butler Associate Dean for Research and Operations Program Director Sarah Dooling Assistant Professor Michael Holleran Associate Professor Director, Graduate Program in Historic Preser vation Terry Kahn Associate Dean, Office of the Dean of Graduate Studies David Bruton Jr. Centennial Professor in Urban Design Ming-Chun Lee Assistant Professor Talia McCray Assistant Professor Steven Moore Bar tlett Cocke Regents Professor in Architecture Director, Graduate Program in Sustainable Design Elizabeth Mueller Director, Center for Sustainable Development Assistant Professor

Pl at f orm • 4

Planning scholarship and practice are intrinsically bound up with experience, action, and reflection in complex and contentious “real world” settings. Planning always involves some measure of “planning with”— with the community and other interest groups, with local political leaders, and with individual citizens whose lives will be directly affected by various planning interventions. The Robert Moses-style “technocratic planners,” those planners operating out of remote offices to re-engineer large swaths of urban communities, are largely mythical creatures; even Moses had to deal with intense community protest and political pressures. However, the older combination of modernist optimism, rational comprehensive planning models, and strong influence over the politics of city building was derailed by the renowned failures of urban renewal and other mega-planning projects of the 1950s and 1960s. For the past thirty years, planning theory and practice have become increasingly defined by communication and active collaboration with local communities, interest groups, and political institutions. At a minimum, plans and designs hatched in academic or professional offices constitute only the first iteration in a process where community and political actors are heavily engaged in fashioning the final product. As Hilda Blanco states, contemporary planning requires not only technical expertise, but also “cultivating community networks of liaisons and contacts, supplying technical and political information to citizens, educating citizens and community organizations about the planning process, listening to the concerns and interests of all participants, [and] ensuring access to planning information for community and neighborhood organizations.”1 Professional planning expertise remains unique and valuable, but must be both forged and tested upon a crucible of experience and practice. The communicative and practice orientation of contemporary university planning programs can create certain tensions with the broader academic identity of U.S. universities.

Barriers and Opportunities for Engaged Scholarship The higher education enterprise in the U.S. has historically been buffeted by shifting visions and academic trends. Spreading scientific and technical knowledge outside university walls has always been a primary rationale for public investment in the U.S. university system. The engagement of the university in the community was central to the higher education mission from the 1862 passage of the Morrill Act setting up the great state land grant universities, through such progressive era initiatives as the “Wisconsin Idea,” where University of Wisconsin “extension” brought university advisors to local governments, industries, and farmer and labor groups throughout the state.2 At the same time, the “Humboldt system” imported from late nineteenth century German universities had a powerful shaping influence on U.S. higher education.3 This model called for a central emphasis on Wissenschaft, or a dispassionate pursuit of truth and scientific knowledge not determined by specific demands of society or industry. Academic achievement in this model would be measured by expert peers in various academic fields, not by the immediate applicability or utility of concepts or ideas.4 Most current conflicts over academic freedom and corporate influence, the teaching and research functions of the university, and the meaning of the “intellectual commons” have their roots in these somewhat divergent framing philosophies. The “extension” of research and teaching to communities outside the university remains a central mission in the contemporary landscape. However, in our ratings crazed environment, the top of the university hierarchy is defined by student selectivity, rich resources, and faculty productivity and prominence in research. Resources and research reputation remain strongly shaped by outside connections, but the external relations that count most today are research sponsorship by large private or public institutions (most prominently, large corporations and federal defense and health agencies). Collaborations and research related to local governments, resource-poor communities, or smaller non-profit organizations do not register strongly in Carnegie higher education classifications, faculty peer recognition, or U.S. News and World Report rankings. Language favoring “research-based over practice-based” programs and faculty promotion systems that center on traditional journal and academic book publication remain fetters to a more energetic embrace of community engagement and service learning.

In this setting, it is challenging and risky for faculty to direct their teaching and research energies to community collaborations. Yet as the cases presented in this edition of Platform clearly demonstrate, successful collaboration requires special dedication and focus on the part of university faculty and students. Faculty and students must manage divergent understandings about methodological approaches and objectivity in research and teaching, academic/semester calendars that impede sustained dialogue or completion of ongoing projects, and the real time and resource commitments of the partners. While still swimming upstream, the broader public purpose of the university enterprise is reemerging as an issue and as a domain of increased activity. Over the past decade, community oriented research centers and partnerships, academic service learning projects, and community design activities have burgeoned up and down the university hierarchy, from tier-one research universities to community colleges.5 The National Science Foundation has recently amended its grant making criteria to include “the broader social impacts of the research on public understanding; policy and/or practice; educational strategies; or broader participation in the research.”6 This community engagement movement is taking off at The University of Texas at Austin. Recommendation 14 of the Commission of 125 states that, “The University should serve Texas by marshaling its expertise, programs, and people to address major issues confronting society at large. The culture of the institution should convey to students, as well as to faculty and staff members, that a commitment to service is intrinsic to a University of Texas education.” The university is building up institutional capacity and interdisciplinary networks including the Community Engagement Incubator and the Intellectual Entrepreneurship Program in the newly established office of the Vice President for Diversity and Community Engagement. President William Powers, Jr. recently established an Academic Service Learning Commendation for faculty members who teach designated service learning courses and will honor the faculty at an annual event.

Planning with the Community As we profile various community-based projects involving the Community and Regional Planning Program and other programs in the School of Architecture, it is important to understand that these are not “sideline” activities, but are fundamentally integrated in “state of the art” planning and design scholarship and practice. We profile a rich and heterogeneous set of projects tied to courses in the Commmunity and Regional Planning and Sustainable Design Programs that range from multi-semester design-build projects, to semester-long community centered partnerships and international planning collaborations, to class projects completing specific research tasks for community partners. In each of the cases a two-way flow of knowledge building and expertise is emphasized—what our community partners learned and gained from the collaboration and how participating students and faculty tested theories and burnished their ability to understand problems and work out solutions in dynamic and complex social settings. This ensemble of projects puts into relief both the tremendous value and real challenges of university-community engagement. In the eight course-related projects discussed in this issue, we emphasize the exciting content and value of collaborative learning and their centrality to current planning pedagogy. The contributors also provide valuable reflections about the successes and failures of their activities and critical knowledge and understandings gained by students, faculty, and their community partners. Notes 1. Hilda Blanco, How to Think about Social Problems: American Pragmatism and the Idea of Planning, Westport Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1994. 2. Morrill Act, July 2, 1862, Ch.130, 12, Stat.503, 7 U.S.C, 301 et.seg, Chapter CXXX, Section 4.6. In 1906, University of Wisconsin President Charles Van Hise said, "I shall never be content until the beneficent influence of the University reaches every family in the state." See “Progressivism and the Wisconsin Idea,” Wisconsin Historical Society, 200,7 http://www.wisconsinhistory.org/turningpoints/tp036/?action=more_essay, and Jennifer Washburn, University Inc. The Corporate Corruption of Higher Education, New York: Basic Books, 2005, p. 31. 3. Ibid. Washburn. 2005, p 32. 4. Ibid. p. 32. Johns Hopkins was among the first U.S. universities to adopt the Humboldt model and emphasize graduate education and joint research between students and faculty bringing together the teaching and research activities. 5. Ann Forsyth, Henry Lu, and Patricia McGirr, “Service Learning in an Urban Context: Implications for Planning and Design Education,” Journal of Architectural and Planning Research 17, 3: 236-259, 2000; and Barbara Holland, “Scholarship and Mission in the 21st Century University,” University of California Symposium, Center for Studies in Higher Education, Berkeley, June 10, 2005. 6. J.A. Ramaley, “Engagement and the Integration of Research and Education: A New Meaning of Quality,” keynote address to the Australian Universities Quality Forum, July 2005.

COMMUNITY AND REGIONAL PLANNING PROGRAM FACULTY Michael Oden Graduate Advisor Associate Professor Robert Paterson Ph.D. Program Coordinator Associate Professor Rachael Rawlins Lecturer Bjørn Sletto Assistant Professor Frederick Steiner Dean Henr y M. Rockwell Chair in Architecture Patricia Wilson Professor Ming Zhang Assistant Professor

Images It is one of the university’s central missions to extend it’s reach to the outside world. By working with various communities, students in the Community and Regional Planning Program broaden their views, and their understanding, of the world around them.

Platform • 5

Planning in Rapidly Developing Cities :: Workshops in China by Ming Zhang INTERNATIONAL COLLABORATION AND SERVICE LEARNING

After returning from a ten-day UT-HUST Planning Workshop in China during the summer of 2007, CRP student Alex Kone wrote in his study tour report: “We lack superlatives to describe the magnitude of China’s economic growth since 1978. We have yet to grasp the magnitude of the size of the country and the scale to which it must undertake the construction of its great projects, including its cities.” The workshop has taken place each summer for the past three years, jointly sponsored and organized by The University of Texas at Austin and Huazhong University of Science and Technology (HUST) in Wuhan, China. Approximately 30 UT students, 55 HUST students, and 20 local Chinese planners have participated in these collaborative study partnerships.

UT-HUST Planning Workshops Professors Ming Zhang, Kent Butler, and Robert Paterson of UT and Professors Junqing Zhou and Cheng Wang of HUST have organized and participated in the workshop. Financial support to the workshop mainly stems from the client city with additional funding from the UT Center for Sustainable Development and the HUST Center for Digital Research.

The UT-HUST Planning Workshops’ purpose is to enhance planning education at UT and HUST through international collaboration. Each year, UT and HUST faculty identify a client Chinese city and consult with local officials and planners to develop work plans to achieve the following six objectives:

• Study and prioritize issues challenging the current and future development of the client city; • Update information needed for the client city’s comprehensive plan revision through field studies and interviews with local officials and citizens; • Conduct planning case studies of international examples that are relevant and valuable to the improvement of the client city’s comprehensive plan revision; • Experience and observe transportation and related planning issues facing rapidly growing regions and cities in China; • Enhance mutual learning experiences, not only in planning education, but also in languages, tradition, and other cultural aspects; and • Explore opportunities for broad collaboration in education and research between UT and HUST in urban planning and related fields.

Student and faculty participants from UT have had the opportunity not only to personally witness China’s urban development in the era of rapid economic growth, but also to work shoulder-to-shoulder with their Chinese counterparts in seeking desirable solutions to the unique urban challenges flowing from rapid urbanization and development. It was an eye-opening experience to many of the U.S. and other foreign participants who were traveling to China for the first time. They learned about China’s history and culture through their visits to a wide range of places, from the Forbidden City in Beijing to the thousandyear-old villages in Ji’an (Jiangxi Province). Many of the UT students were impressed by the Chinese people’s entrepreneurial drive and hard work, which has been one of the largest contributors to the country’s economic boom. Some UT students commented that China’s urban development is tremendous, and that it is a great experience to work with a planning department in another city and country. Other students commented on the intense learning experience of working with local partners on their real world planning problems.

Pl at f orm • 6

Participants from HUST also benefited from the workshop. For example, from discussions with their UT teammates, they could evaluate their development plans proposed to the client city on a comparative basis. The international examples introduced by the UT participants provided the Chinese partners with references that will help improve the methods and processes that are mostly taken for granted in the common practice of urban planning in China. Both UT and HUST have international reputations for their strength in higher education and research. The workshop offers an opportunity to further promote UT and HUST internationally, but even more important is the international collaboration model developed out of the workshop. The model can be transferred to other fields and expanded to other forms of collaboration.

This international collaboration contributed to the production of high quality urban planning processes, which the client city was actively trying to develop. The UT-HUST team has delivered planning results that are above and beyond the standard list of products for comprehensive plans in China. To produce the maps and documents specified by the planning guideline issued by China’s Ministry of Construction, the UT-HUST team selected a series of pressing topics for in-depth study to better support the planning process as it unfolds. Examples of the study areas developed include: challenges to urban plan-making in the era of growing market forces; improving population projections with alternative methods; sustainable transportation strategies, planning, and policies; plan quality and plan evaluation; and experience of urban planning in other countries relevant to Chinese cities. There were several concerns expressed by the first workshop participants in 2005. Because the workshop involved a real project in the client city (from which the workshop was largely funded), the participants were quite burdened by producing deliverables in a constrained time frame. To some extent, this time constraint limited the participants’ abilities to collect detailed data, explore in-depth alternative planning strategies, and experiment with new planning methods. Furthermore, the communication and language barrier was greater than expected, making it rather difficult to have in-depth discussions and exchanges of ideas between the UT and HUST participants. To address the concerns, the UT-HUST faculty made efforts in the subsequent 2006 and 2007 workshops to identify specific planning tasks that were relatively narrow but more focused. Social events, such as slide shows for self-introduction, gift exchange, and karaoke parties, were organized to help the participants become acquainted more quickly and reduce the negative effects of language barriers.

Images 1. The HUST “Longhorns.” 2. City of Wuhan, Hubei Province. 3. UT-HUST Planning Workshop 2007 in City of Suizhou, Hubei Province. Front row, left to right: CAMPO (Austin, Texas) Transpor tation Program Manager Dr. Daniel Yang, Suizhou Mayor Hongyun Li, UT Professor Kent Butler, Suizhou Planning Director/HUST Professor Junqing Z hou, UT Professor Ming Z hang. 4. City of Ji’an, Jiangxi Province, Hubei Province (Workshop 2005). 5. City of Guangshui, Hubei Province (Workshop 2006). 6. Workshop par ticipants take a field trip on environmental analysis. 7. Workshop par ticipants visit the thousand-year-old village of MeiBi. 8. Workshop par ticipants visit real estate development in Panlong New Town, Wuhan. Front row, left to right: UT students Margaret Saunders and Patricia Boucher; Mr. Yuliang Gong, CEO of Wuhan Bao’an Real Estate; Daniel Yang, Mrs. Yang, UT student Chao-Hsing Huang. 9. Workshop par ticipants in presentation sessions. Front, left to right: UT students Mike Schofield and Julie Wilke, HUST student Lian Liu, UT student Justin Fried, and UT professor Rober t Paterson. 10. Land use analysis. Left to right: UT students Sungmin Li and Gabe Rojas.

10.

Platform • 7

Risk and Vulnerability Assessment :: Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic by Monica Bosquez and Martin Thomen In the spring semester of 2008, students in the CRP course Applied Geographic Information Systems (GIS) conducted a participatory study of risk and vulnerability associated with a flood-prone informal urban settlement in the Dominican Republic. The course was part of a new research and service-learning relationship between the city of Santo Domingo Norte, the UT Austin School of Architecture, and the Universidad Autónoma de Santo Domingo (UASD), initiated in summer 2007 by Dr. Kent Butler and CRP student Kelly Schaun, with the collaboration

of faculty in the LBJ School of Public Affairs, the Departments of Geography and Anthropology, and the Institute of Latin American Studies. The intent of the partnership is to provide technical assistance to planning institutions in Santo Domingo and opportunities for learning and field research to students concerned with development planning in Latin America. The course project took place in Los Platanitos, an informal housing settlement located on a lowlying former landfill in the municipality of Santo Domingo Norte (SDN). Following a series of meetings with community leaders in Los Platanitos, urban development agencies, and NGOs (non-governmental organizations) in the Dominican Republic, Dr. Bjorn Sletto developed a pilot project to document the social and health implications of a drainage ditch, also known as a cañada, which runs through the community. The cañada was at one time a natural creek, but in recent years has been lined with concrete and, in places, covered with a cement cap. Because of inadequate sewage and solid waste management, the former creek is now severely contaminated with garbage and blackwater. When it rains, water laced with sewage and chemicals floods the houses that line the cañada, leading to high levels of gastrointestinal disorders and respiratory diseases.

Pl at f orm • 8

The students enrolled in the course began preparing in November 2007 for the first of two trips to Santo Domingo in January 2008. The class drew on the theoretical framework of political ecology and developed a blend of research methods, including participatory mapping, architectural surveys, and ethnography to document the flooding problem in Los Platanitos. Students were organized into three teams—physical survey and ethnography, GIS and mapping, and social documentation—each working at a different scale and with different types of data to develop a comprehensive analysis of the challenges confronting the community. The physical survey and ethnography team focused on the material and cultural landscape of the 1-kilometer-long cañada itself. They meticulously documented the physical environment, including measuring channel depth and width and all the buildings lining the channel; systematically photographing every

structure. This group also conducted interviews with residents who live on the banks of the cañada. The survey drawings were transferred into maps and diagrams using AutoCAD, ArcGIS, and PhotoShop, and used in participatory workshops where community members identified areas of solid waste buildup and flooding, places where children play, and unsafe locations. The interviews were transcribed, translated, and used in a poster and a final report to better describe the history and culture of the community. The GIS mapping team worked on a larger, regional scale to better understand the context of the flooding and solid waste problem. Their goal was to draw on local knowledge to identify locations that are important for everyday life in the community, such as businesses, residences, and public places, but also features relevant for the flooding problem, such as the locations of storm drains. The GIS team also mapped important hydrological features in the watershed

upstream from the cañada and documented the development of impermeable surfaces around the community. This research showed that the accumulation of solid waste and flooding in Los Platanitos are, in large part, consequences of uncontrolled urban growth in areas outside the neighborhood.

With preliminary findings in hand, the students returned to Santo Domingo during spring break to present maps, posters, and an initial report to the residents of Los Platanitos, representatives of the municipality, scholars from UASD, and NGOs engaged in the project. Additional fieldwork was conducted to fine-tune and complement the initial findings, and a roundtable discussion was held with the various actors to foster an open dialogue about the problems facing the cañada. The roundtable discussion was a vital step in integrating the research findings, community concerns, and the perspectives of the municipality and the NGOs into a cohesive framework that could be applied to improve conditions in Los Platanitos and other cañadas. In conjunction with the roundtable discussion, students facilitated a community visioning workshop to develop a community-based plan for social and environmental improvements in Los Platanitos.

The social documentation team conducted a detailed randomsample survey to gather data on the demographic, economic, and environmental vulnerability factors in the neighborhood. The team also conducted focus groups related to problem-ranking, wellbeing indicators, and children’s perception of the environment. Survey results indicated that more than half of Los Platanitos residents have lived in the community for over a decade, with many of those reporting a length of residence over sixteen years.

Platanitos. However, the project was more than a technical exercise—it was also an opportunity to demonstrate the enthusiasm and talent of the CRP program in a real-world setting. Developing and implementing multi-disciplinary research methods in a limited time-frame was a challenging and invaluable learning experience for the students that will help them prepare for professional careers in development and international planning. Students were also able to participate in efforts to resolve a complicated planning issue and witness the very real ramifications of environmental risk.

Ph.D. student Maryam Kashani, also joined the students for both fieldwork sessions and to produce a film about the project. This open, unprecedented dialogue between residents of Los Platanitos, city officials, and NGO representatives was one of most important achievements of the class project. The students also created for the partners a valuable model for rapid assessment of cañadas that is being implemented throughout Santo Domingo, and the City of Santo Domingo Norte is developing infrastructure projects to address the serious conditions in Los

Images 1. Students at a local elementary school wait for class to begin. 2. Los Platanitos contains a range of housing types and demographic groups. 3. The student researchers documented the vibrant life of the community through photography. 4. AutoCAD renderings of the cañada and other par ts of the community were created by the student researchers. 5. The risk of flooding and other hazards continually endangers all members of the community. 6. Residents play dominoes at one of the many active street corners in the community. 7. A 3-D model of the study area produced by the student researchers.

The final class products included 2D and 3D GIS maps, architectural drawings of the cañada and the built environment, posters, photography, and life stories, which combined to paint a profound picture of the social and environmental conditions in Los Platanitos. Based on the joint efforts of the students and their local partners, the final class report also includes specific recommendations to address the environmental and social challenges facing the community. A documentary filmmaker from the Department of Anthropology,

Student participants David Baumann, Public Affairs; Monica Bosquez, CRP and Latin American Studies; Meredith Bossin, CRP and Latin American Studies; Erin E. Daley, Public Affairs and Latin American Studies; Rosa E. Donoso, CRP; Maritza Kelley, Public Affairs and Latin American Studies; Solange Muñoz, Geography; Dana Stovall, CRP and Latin American Studies; Shawn M. Strange, CRP; Martin Thomen, CRP. All are master’s degree and Ph.D. students at UT Austin.

Funding This project was made possible by funding from the Mike and Maxine K. Mebane Endowed Traveling Scholarship fund provided by the School of Architecture, with additional funding from the Department of Geography, the LBJ School of Public Affairs, and the Institute for Latin American Studies.

Platform • 9

Austin’s Alley Flat Initiative :: Evaluating Project Success by Lynn Osgood

COMMUNITY DESIGN-BUILDPLAN

own with low-income housing organizations in the city.

Alley Flats Three years, three seminars and four studios later, the Alley Flat service learning and design-build initiative has gone from conception to actualization. From its onset, the goal of the project has been to support multi-disciplinary collaborations and to create a forum for finding concise solutions to Austin’s highly complex and multi-dimensional housing and environmental problems. “Alley flats” are small, detached residential units, accessed from Austin’s extensive network of underutilized alleys that can be built by homeowners on the back of their lots to generate additional income, house family members, or locate a small home-based business. Less than 850 square feet in size, they are environmentally sustainable and provide an opportunity to create affordability and increase density without requiring changes to existing zoning regulations or causing disruptive changes to the character of existing neighborhoods.

Pl at f orm • 1 0

Because of rising house prices and development pressures (even despite a national slow-down in housing starts), this type of housing-based remedy is needed for East Austin residents who face the increased threat of gentrification. From 2000 to 2007, the median home price in Austin went from $144,000 to $239,000—an increase of 66%—while median household income has only risen by 33% from $46,000 to $61,000. At the same time, the state’s property tax-based system means that annual taxes for homeowners continue to rise, even though their incomes may not change. After three years of planning, designing, and building, the project has reached the point where it no longer resides solely within the classroom. Partnering with the Guadalupe Neighborhood Development Corporation and the Austin Community Design and Development Center, this discrete service learning project has produced actual units and has now developed into a larger initiative that has a life of its

So how do we evaluate it? As a real-world endeavor, the Alley Flat Initiative touches on issues of urban design, building materials, landscape systems, real estate, public policy, community engagement, and financing. Each of these different issues is linked to distinct methods, ideas, and values that need to be both mediated and harnessed. As the alley flats project rolls towards its first phase of completion, we are left asking: Did it work? Was it successful? By what standards? Within such diverse disciplinary frameworks, the issue of evaluation becomes a difficult and complex challenge. An initial question to ask is how the Alley Flat Initiative worked as an interdisciplinary project. In her 2001 book, Creating Interdisciplinarity: Interdisciplinary Research and Teaching among College and University Faculty,1 Lisa Lattuca identified four types of interdisciplinary frameworks of teaching and research. Informed disciplinarity starts from a specific discipline, but calls upon others to inform certain aspects of the problem. Synthetic interdisciplinarity combines the ideas and methods from different disciplines to address a specific issue, but the boundaries of each discipline remain distinct. In transdisciplinarity, such boundaries are erased in the creation of the project or course, and the methods and ideas of each contributing discipline are brought to the subject in turn. In the final category, conceptual interdisciplinarity, the different disciplines are brought in to not only

address a problem but to serve as a vehicle for critiquing the contributing disciplines. Within each of these categories we can easily see contemporary architectural and planning practices, as interdisciplinary work is inherent to both disciplines. But this basic commonality of practice that the Alley Flat Initiative shares with other architectural practices does not automatically give a framework for understanding its structure. Given Latucca’s categories, the Alley Flat Initiative can be seen as a practice of both informed disciplinarity and conceptual interdisciplinarity. The architectural studios that looked at the creation of Alley Flat prototypes stayed true to the basic form of design education, where the methods of architecture and construction framed the way in which perspectives from the other disciplines where brought in (informed disciplinarity). By contrast, the seminars, which looked at the much larger urban and infrastructural dimensions of the project, had a much broader ability to both incorporate and critique the other disciplines (conceptual interdisciplinarity). While these categories help to explain the nature of the learning project, they do not lead us directly to answer the question, “was the project successful?” If we look at the studios themselves, it might be possible to evaluate the project solely through the discipline of architecture—but would that be a right framework for a project so heavily tied to the classroom and the community? Looking for terms of evaluation from just one of the disciplines, such as architecture, landscape

architecture, planning, or business, not only becomes convoluted, but possibly harmful. This problem of evaluating interdisciplinary research and projects is surfacing in other professions as well—from art, to education, to science. In studying these efforts, Veronica Boix Mansilla and Howard Gardner of the Harvard Interdisciplinary Studies Project identify three possible categories for evaluation—consistency, balance, and effectiveness.2 At the heart of the Alley Flat Initiative lies a strong desire to find effective means for addressing local problems. Conceptually falling under the name civic environmentalism,3 the project, from its origins, worked with the various communities, interest groups, and agencies that could address the housing and environmental needs of Austin’s poorer east side residents. In this way, the idea of effectiveness was from beginning to the end, a constant measure of success. Was the project working for the neighborhood? For the clients? For the city at large? If the answer to any of these questions was ever “no,” the project shifted.

buy-in could frame design proposals for ecologically sound residential landscapes, answers to multi-pronged questions were based upon the practicality of the solution. If consistency, as a concept, was to be found in either the studios or the seminars, it could be seen within the desire to understand and continue the narrative of East Austin residents as they fought gentrification. Balance of the different disciplinary voices was also not as strong because of the design studio format where the student need for an architecture-specific pedagogy had to be met. But the interdisciplinary seminar classes, which were not under the same constraint, were able to reach a far greater level of disciplinary balance by bringing in speakers from the fields of history, planning, advocacy, and landscape architecture, to name a few. This diversity of voices created the need for a careful analysis and weighing of each viewpoint. In the end, the resolution of these

The other two categories of evaluation, consistency and balance, did not play as strong a role. Creating consistency within the discipline of origin (architecture primarily) was not an organizing principle. Focusing more on the hybrid and multi-disciplinary nature of the project, no single specific disciplinary viewpoint was called upon to inform how decisions were made. So rather than asking how ideas about urban infrastructure could frame considerations of detail and construction, or how issues of community

different viewpoints was evaluated in terms of how effective it would be in the community— again highlighting the focus for evaluation within the needs of the community as opposed to strict academic or disciplinebased needs.

The rate of change in practice and knowledge for architecture today, both technically and socially, outpaces many of our attempts to understand and harness current trends within academia. For the design and planning disciplines, our efforts to both embrace this change and sponsor its formation have left many questions. In the case of this project, we need to ask how community needs and pedagogical needs balance in a community-based initiative. For the community itself, the Alley Flat Initiative can be counted as a success, since one prototype has been built, and another unit will soon be under construction. While obviously that dimension is critical, we need to ask if this is the only criteria by which we should evaluate the project in our efforts to formulate new projects for the future. Should a disciplinary or interdisciplinary based framework be created or should a service learning project’s primary goal be to do just that— serve the community? To straddle the homes of both the community and the university, the Alley Flat Initiative itself will need a critical agenda for interdisciplinary evaluation. By calling upon many disciplines, institutions, and cultural frameworks, success will be measured by many different hands. But how will we be able to know which and when different criteria should guide projectbased decisions? In the end, it is perhaps even more critical for hybrid practices such as these to be clear from the outset about the project’s intended directions and measures of success.

Efforts to evaluate the Alley Flat Initiative highlight an essential tension of balancing academic and real-world effectiveness within service learning projects. Should the effectiveness that the project holds for the community trump efforts to achieve a “generative tension” between the disciplines on a more theoretical level? Should time be spent carefully framing the different lenses though which each discipline views the subject at hand, or should the view of the community trump such academic efforts? Would a service-learning project function better without an interdisciplinary framework, or is that even possible in the design and planning professions today?

4. Images 1. A perspective rendering of outdoor Alley Flat living. 2. Student model for the Lydia Street Alley Flat. 3. A proposed planting pallet for the Lydia Street Alley Flat. 4. One of the key components of Alley Flat design is figuring out additional parking requirements.

Notes 1. Lisa R. Lattuca, Creating Interdisciplinarity: Interdisciplinary Research and Teaching among College and University Faculty, Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press, 2001. 2. Veronica Boix Mansilla and Howard Gardner, “Assessing Interdisciplinary Work at the Frontier: An Empirical Exploration of 'Symptoms of Quality,’” available: http://www.interdisciplies.org/interdisciplinarity/papers/6, April 4, 2008. 3. William A. Shutkin, The Land That Could Be: Environmentalism and Democracy in the Twenty-First Century, Cambridge: MIT Press, 2000. Platform • 1 1

Affordable Housing Development :: Students Advance Local Planning Discussions by Elizabeth Mueller THE COMMUNITY CLASSROOM :: CRP CLASS INITIATIVES

Pl at f orm • 1 2

Affordable housing advocates and nonprofit housing developers typically lack the staff and skills needed to conduct research on the broader context for their work or on strategic options facing them. In recent years, Community and Regional Planning Program students in Elizabeth Mueller’s Affordable Housing Seminar have helped organizations struggling with issues as varied as gentrification, the changing racial and ethnic identity of their neighborhoods, and the implications of planning policies for low income, central city residents. The pedagogical goals of such projects are twofold: first, that students gain substantive knowledge of issues facing local housing organizations and second, that they learn about the organizational dynamics and capacity of such groups and the broader political context for their work. Emphasis falls strongly on the first goal, and projects are defined and negotiated by the instructor before the semester begins in order to ensure that they are feasible within a one-semester time frame, and a good match with students’ skills and with the issues covered during the semester. Finally, they must be addressed at an issue of current interest to the organization and, potentially, to local policymakers. Unlike more participatory projects carried out in other courses, in this work, student interaction with community partners is generally limited to an initial meeting to ensure a common understanding of the project and expectations for what can be accomplished, periodic meetings and communication with partners across the semester, and a final presentation to the participating organizations.

In the spring of 2007, students in my Affordable Housing Policy Seminar carried out research projects for two housing advocacy organizations. In the first project, CRP students Michelle Ng and Rosa Donoso, construction engineering student Chris Grant and social work student Sharlene Eaton focused on identifying areas of the city where aging, unsubsidized affordable apartments were most at risk of demolition and redevelopment under current planning policies. They did this work for community partner Housing Works—a non-profit organization working to address Austin’s lack of decent

affordable housing. Since forming in 2004, Housing Works campaigned to pass the city’s affordable housing bonds and is currently working to establish city policies that will preserve existing affordable housing. This project fit squarely into their current agenda. The students examined data on the location of older apartments, identifying where they were clustered in the city. Next, they identified one important area they thought most vulnerable to redevelopment that would reduce the affordable housing stock. Through interviews with a num-

ber of planning and policy experts in the city about current planning initiatives, they identified the East Riverside area as particularly vulnerable. This neighborhood includes a large number of class C (old) apartments housing a large number of low income households and was recently rezoned in accordance with its new neighborhood plan. The new zoning provides incentives for redevelopment of the older apartments. (In fact, several have already been demolished.) The students then used a proprietary dataset to develop a profile of all class C apartment properties in the area. Contrary

to expectations, current residents were not primarily students, but rather longtime, low income residents. They delivered their analysis and report to Housing Works. The students’ report has been used in the city’s research and discussions of strategies for preserving the city’s stock of affordable housing—including these unsubsidized units which form the largest stock of affordable housing in the city, but lie directly in the path of redevelopment. In the second project, CRP doctoral student Chang Yi and architecture undergraduate Ella Stelter studied access to apartments in several communities in Collin County, Texas. They did this work for the Inclusive Communities Project (ICP), a fair housing organization working in Dallas to help residents of Dallas Public Housing move to high opportunity areas in the northern suburbs. ICP’s mission is “the creation and maintenance of thriving racially and economi-

of the substantial stock of rental housing present in the community was sitting on land currently zoned for mixed uses, making it highly likely it would be redeveloped. In contrast, in Frisco, the smaller stock of apartments was more likely to be sitting on land zoned multifamily and thus more secure. Digging deeper, they discovered that in all communities examined, cities had designated most of the land currently under apartments as part of “planned development” zones, a category opening up the possibility for a wide range of development proposals. In order to gauge the likely risk of redevelopment for particular sites, they developed an innovative “index of vulnerability” to quantify

these threats, based on proximity to commercial areas. Their report helped their community partner better understand the precarious nature of the long term options facing their clients and to consider ways to spur development of affordable housing in these suburbs. Through these collaborative projects, students were able to gain a greater understanding of the ways that city planning practices can conflict with affordable housing goals. Community partners gained valuable information and evidence that they were able to use to set strategy for their organizations and in their ongoing policy work with local governments and developers.

Images 1. Existing Multifamily Area and Planned Development Z ones, Frisco, Texas. 2. Multifamily Housing by Vulnerability to Redevelopment, Frisco, Texas. 3. Map of Existing Multifamily Housing and Multifamily Housing Z ones, Frisco, Texas.

cally inclusive communities, expansion of fair and affordable housing opportunities for low income families, and redress for policies and practices that perpetuate the harmful effects of discrimination and segregation.” A centerpiece of their work is the assistance they provide to public housing residents holding vouchers created pursuant to the Consent Decree in the Walker v. HUD housing desegregation litigation. Vouchers are intended to enable residents to move to low poverty, high opportunity neighborhoods in the metropolitan region. Chang Yi and Ella Stelter studied two northern suburbs in Collin County in order to identify low poverty neighborhoods with apartments that voucher holders might occupy. Through this process, they discovered the two cities they focused on—Frisco and McKinney—differed in their approach to zoning land for apartments. In McKinney, much

4. Apar tment Fact Sheet, Austin, Texas.

Platform • 1 3

Building Trust in Austin Neighborhood Planning by Patricia A. Wilson Introduction Ten years after an enthusiastic start in 1995 with three pilot neighborhoods, neighborhood planning in Austin was suffering from battle fatigue and embitterment between city planners and neighborhood residents. The Austin Planning Commission called the neighborhood stakeholders together in December 2005 to help the commissioners identify the issues and find solutions. Neighborhood planning activists called a similar gathering in January 2006 for neighborhood planning teams. But another step was needed to transcend misunderstanding and mistrust—research-based analysis of the issues and a multi-stakeholder dialogue facilitated by neutrals. The neighborhood planning organizers asked my Participatory Planning class to research the ten-year history of neighborhood planning in Austin, then design and conduct a multistakeholder workshop on action steps to move the process forward. The project promised to give the students an excellent opportunity to learn first-hand the attitudes of the public toward planners and put their participatory skills to practice. As part of this semester-long project, we interviewed forty-two participants in neighborhood planning, including residents, business owners, neighborhood planners (current and former) and public officials. We worked with a 13-member convening committee to design and conduct the workshop. The committee included planning staff and commissioners, neighborhood planning activists, and the president of the Austin Neighborhoods Council. All results were made available on a web site now managed by the stakeholder-based convening committee, www.neighboraustin.com. Through our stakeholder interviews, we identified two fundamental issues that contributed to conflict in the process—lack of alignment around the purpose of neighborhood planning and lack of clarity about the relationship between the city and the neighborhoods, that is, the roles each should play. These two issues, purpose and roles, became central themes in the design of the neighborhood planning workshop. In April 2006, over 125 participants came to the student-facilitated workshop at Austin’s city hall titled Neighborhood Planning in Austin: Next Steps. The Event Design Challenge The planners and neighborhood representatives on the steering committee wanted the workshop to produce clear support for concrete action steps to address the most troublesome choice points. Yet as process designers, the class knew that the underlying issues had to be addressed if a consensus was to be built around action steps. The steering committee and the class developed an event design aimed at fostering mutual respect, agreement on the purpose of neighborhood planning, and clarity about the desired roles of the neighborhoods and the city planners. Then, with the air cleared, the participants would go to work on the substantive issues, all in a half-day workshop.

Aligning around Purpose Our research identified a lack of clarity and agreement about the goals and purposes in the neighborhood planning process. This situation led to frustration, unmet expectations, confrontation, and attrition among various stakeholders. The city ordinance describing the objectives of neighborhood planning was at odds with the language of the initial resolution defining neighborhood planning and the goals as understood by neighborhood participants. The main purpose for neighborhood planning identified by the city in a May 1997 resolution was to organize neighborhoods and engage them in the city processes that affect them—improvements, policy, service delivery, and development. Yet according to the ordinance, the purpose “is to allow infill development by implementing a neighborhood plan that has been adopted by the council as an amendment to the comprehensive plan.” The interest of the city in encouraging infill development and adding density to central Austin neighborhoods has been a durable source of conflict with neighborhood representatives over the course of the process. Clarity about, and alignment around, the fundamental purpose of neighborhood planning would help address many issues and stumbling blocks that Austin has encountered over ten years of neighborhood planning. Clarification of roles and responsibilities for the various stakeholders would also mitigate conflict. Clarifying Roles and Relationships The neighborhood planning process is frequently a crucible for contention and disagreement because much is at stake—property values, investments, livelihoods, and quality of life. Many of our interviewees expressed strong grievances over how the city handles the neighborhood planning process. In turn, some of the city staff expressed frustration with the barriers they felt in dealing with the neighborhoods— insufficient time and resources, incomplete information, or changing directives. Others expressed dismay at the disrespectful treatment given them by neighborhood planning participants. Clarification and agreement on the desired relationship between the city and the neighborhoods is required to establish a solid working relationship and build trust so that efforts can be aligned around a shared sense of purpose. Other relationships also require clarification—the relationships between different neighborhood associations in the same planning area; between businesses and residents; owners and renters; neighborhood planning teams and other stakeholders; and neighborhood planning teams and developers. Transparency and fluidity in these relationships are important for maintaining trust and accountability throughout the process. Choice Points Once a shared sense of purpose in neighborhood planning is achieved and well defined roles agreed upon for achieving that purpose, a number of strategic choice points can be addressed. These choice points relate to issues that have surfaced numerous times—the scope and structure of the neighborhood planning process, outreach and representation, implementation and enforcement, and the functioning of neighborhood planning or contact teams. Getting clear guidance on these choice points became the practical goal of the spring workshop on neighborhood planning.

Austin Neighborhood Planning Choice Points.

Pl at f orm • 1 4

Citizen Participation and the Urban Forest in Austin by Shannon Halley, Lee Huntoon, and Eliza Vermillion Over the past fifty years, the rapid growth of many cities has resulted in a significant loss of tree canopy. At the same time, the contribution of the urban forest to reducing many negative impacts of growth, including reducing heat island effects, mitigating ground level ozone, and generally improving the overall quality of life, have been firmly established. In January of 2006, Austin stakeholders gathered to address the need for comprehensive and coordinated management of the urban forest, and the Tree Task Force was created to review, develop, and recommend to the city council policies and procedures related to Austin Energy’s tree trimming and removal programs. During the spring of 2007, two classes in the School of Architecture, Steven Moore’s Topics in Sustainability and Bjorn Sletto’s Environmental GIS, conducted projects to analyze Austin's urban forest issues. Our final project for Patricia Wilson’s Participatory Methods course was to perform a stakeholder analysis and create a design for the first State of the Urban Forest Summit. This involved first evaluating the participatory processes leading to the task force recommendations and the work of previous classes in the school; and second, drawing from this work to design and implement the summit in order to bring stakeholders and decision makers together to engage with and comment upon the new comprehensive urban forest management plan.

experiences, resources, and the successes and challenges in meeting the objectives of his or her particular management role. Our goal was to foster lasting collaboration among stakeholders, managers, and agencies. The hope was that this collaborative spirit would emerge naturally at the summit, from the recognition of the value of partnerships and respect for the valuable contributions each person makes to the protection and preservation of this valued resource.

What was unique about the involvement of the two classes and citizen input to the Tree Task Force was that this was the first time non-managerial “voices” had entered firmly into the conversation about urban forest management. Our interviews with stakeholders revealed that lack of integration, coordination, and communication was still prevalent. We also learned that only one or two individuals with direct management responsibilities in the city were aware of the UT students’ prior contribution in these course projects. In addition, some key personnel were only vaguely aware of the recommendations of the Tree Task Force, a few of which—the revision of the 1983 tree preservation ordinances, a tree regrowth study, and a parks and street-tree inventory—have since been implemented. Our interviews with key stakeholders also indicated that their efforts toward effective management were sincere, but that no strategy for coordination had

been established to encourage broader collaboration. Therefore, we concluded that a summit would be the most effective strategy to encourage stakeholder groups to come together to encourage a creative and open exchange of ideas, as well as to provide a space for more integrated urban forest planning among dispersed stakeholders. Built into the summit mechanism were methods for facilitating the development of implementation strategies, follow-up, and evaluation. Upon conclusion of the coursework in the Participatory Methods class, participating students continued to promote the State of the Urban Forest Summit. In September 2008, we received a grant from Watershed Protection and Development Review to host the summit at the Ladybird Johnson Wildflower Center in January 2009. A variety of beneficial results were expected from this student initiative, including the opportunity for disparate individuals to share

The summit took place on January 9, with Mayor Will Wynn and Dean Fritz Steiner introducing the day. We engaged a broad cross-section of participants, including neighborhood leaders, environmental reviewers, members of the development community, UT faculty, landscape designers, and private arborists. The work accomplished at the summit has been documented, and a final report will be presented to the Urban Forestry Board, the Planning Commission, and City Council. Through our work developing this project, we learned that often the awareness by city officials that an issue has been adopted for research by the university can lend it enough weight to be more seriously considered. Our engagement with urban forest issues stimulated a rethinking of various processes. Even if funding for the summit had not been received, some processes (such as managerial coordination and site review) would have benefited directly from our inquiry.

Top, left: Live Oak canopy, Austin, Texas; photograph by Fritz Steiner. Above: Oak Hill resident, Beki Halpin; Zilker resident Gardtner Sumner; and Michael Embesi, arborist for the City of Austin discuss strategies for tree preservation at the Urban Forest Summit. Bottom: Students in Dr. Bjorn Sletto’s urban environmental analysis course assisted neighbors in Austin’s Hyde Park neighborhood in mapping trees in ArcView geographic information system modeling and mapping software.

Platform • 1 5

The Value of Incorporating Youth in Local Community Planning by Talia McCray Urban planning is concerned with how the built environment, including transportation, affects the social and economic well being of municipalities and communities. The built environment is shaped by the actions of those who work, live, and recreate in the space, including youth. However, planners often overlook the value of incorporating the voice of youth in our policy decisions. Young people want to feel safe in their urban environment and have access to quality destinations for education, employment, recreation, and social purposes. If we are to be effective planners, how do we incorporate the needs of youth in our plans and decision making processes and begin to understand and address the constraints that exist in accessing urban spaces that improve the quality of life for youth?

The City of Providence does not have dedicated school buses for high school students; therefore, students living over three miles from their respective schools receive a free bus pass from the Providence School Department. During the afternoons around 2:00 p.m., students mob the buses and Kennedy Plaza, the main bus terminal centered in the downtown business district. Youth share a set of unique cultural behaviors, including rap or hip hop music, urban dress style, and sometimes use of explicit language. For citizens who do not share this set of cultural experiences, this behavior can create an atmosphere of tension and fear. This culture clash created serious complaints from adult transit riders. RIPTA transit planners and city officials began to look at alternatives for transporting high school students, including a plan to develop a separate bus terminal which would isolate students from professionals and other individuals utilizing RIPTA to avoid traffic and the lack of available parking in downtown. My research interests are analyzing the accessibility needs of disadvantaged populations. Being aware of the RIPTA situation, I searched for a high school with a large population of low-income students, who might be dependent on public transportation. I interviewed Mr. K.C. Perry, principal of Feinstein High School, and presented my proposal to carefully analyze perceptions and travel behavior of Providence high school students. He listened intently but responded, “I like your ideas, but in order for me to let you in here, you must teach the students how to do what you do.” In other words, my research project had to involve an intensive outreach component where my team would teach and conduct research with the students along with collecting data. Key to supporting my project was providing the opportunity for the students to gain valuable computer skills by analyzing the collected data themselves. Our team was comprised of fourteen individuals—four URI professors, two URI students, four Providence Plan employees, and four nonviolence trainers. The URI Transportation Center funded the year-long project, and the TATE (Teen Activity and Transportation Enterprise) Project became a reality.

From September 2006 to May 2007, I led a team of researchers1 from the University of Rhode Island (URI) and the Providence Plan to study the activity patterns of urban youth in the City of Providence. Our goal was to gain a detailed understanding of the types of activities teenagers engage in after school and how they perceive the spaces where they carry out their activities. A major part of the study addressed their behavior in public settings, including while riding RIPTA (Rhode Island Public Transit Authority).

Pl at f orm • 1 6

One hundred and twenty-two Feinstein High School students in 9th through 12th grades took part in the TATE Project. The majority of the students were Hispanic (58%), and 53% of them reported Spanish as their primary language. The second largest group of students was African Americans (19%). Using the lunch statistics from the school department as a proxy for economic status, this population would be considered low-income, where 71% of the students receive free lunch and 14% of the students receive a reduced lunch rate. By partnering with nine Feinstein teachers, the TATE team led two semester-long, weekly, all-day sessions where students, teachers, and researchers examined students’ personal and societal perceptions of space, activity patterns, and sensitivity to various forms of violence encountered in their communities. This was accomplished by engaging students in the following set of activities.

young transit riders and to engage project participants in ways to modify behaviors that troubled adult riders. We frequently hear about how today’s media and culture desensitizes people to violence. In order to have meaningful discussions about desensitization, it is necessary to have measures of sensitivity to violence, so that variations in sensitivity (including desensitization) can be examined systematically. Developing such measures was a key aim of our project.

Exploration of the built environment and students’ perceptions of the environment Students developed lists of at least 15 activities by type of activity and location. Using a formatted excel spreadsheet, students entered their data. Researchers geocoded the activity addresses in the fall semester; however in the spring semester students were taught how to correctly identify activity locations by using Google Maps and Google Earth to geocode their own data in ESRI’s ArcGIS 9.1. Referencing maps and activity data, students discussed elements of their environment that create a sense of safety and vice versa. Same-gender groups of 4-6 students utilized large formatted city maps with streets and landmarks overlaid with 1/8 mile grid cells to color code safe and unsafe areas in relationship to the time of day. Qualitative descriptor tags were used to explain why an area was labeled safe or unsafe. Interaction with transportation professionals to better understand how decisions are made that affect the environments in which students live A major educational component of the project was exploring and better understanding the field of transportation planning and policy. Presentations were made by URI faculty and professional transportation experts covering a range of topics including planning, policy, engineering, management, and finance. These activities allowed the students to gain a deeper understanding of the purpose of the research project and the real significance of their decisions regarding their daily travel and activity patterns. The students became actively engaged in the issues and decision making processes behind real life transportation issues in the Providence area including: developing policy recommendations to make Kennedy Plaza more transit-friendly; understanding the design and construction challenges of the new Providence River Bridge for the relocation of I-195 in Providence; engaging students in a transportation needs assessment based on the 14 topic areas of the Rhode Island Transportation Plan; and participating in a case study of Elmwood Avenue where Feinstein High School is located. Develop an understanding of the vital role students can play in being peace-makers in their environment A key objective of faculty and transportation planners participating in the project was to better understand certain anti-social behavior of

Using transportation as a context, students received a series of lessons on nonviolent problem solving, based on the teachings of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Certified nonviolence trainers were brought into the school to teach a transportation centered curriculum where students confronted typical problems of daily living while riding the bus, driving, and socializing at home and in public spaces. A questionnaire was administered before and after the training in order to assess changes in knowledge and attitudes. Our study culminated in two student led end-of-the-semester policy forums at the URI Kingston campus. For many student participants, this was their first time being on a college campus. Students showcased their newly gained GIS skills by developing final projects in six areas; highway, land use, immigration, transportation, crime, and housing and demographics. These students had learned how to use spatial data from the census, RIPTA, and the Providence Plan to address problems that affect their communities and explore their proposed solutions. The students also demonstrated their research and learning skills through skits demonstrating nonviolent resolutions to conflict, and their development of interview protocols that address students’ perceptions of what they do and the value they assign to their activities.

Images Students participating in the TATE Project, Feinstein High School, Providence, Rhode Island.

Results of our study showed that a favorite student destination was Burger King, raising the question of access to healthy eating places. Our safe/unsafe mapping exercise revealed perceptions vary by time of day and by gender. Next research steps include comparing the students’ perceptions to actual crime data. Finally, the nonviolence training reveals that the training was more effective on females than males. Why, and what are some of the other cultural factors influencing the results? Researchers who focus on the built environment rarely take the time to address the “why” underlining the activity behavior, which is crucial to deeply understanding spatio-temporal behavior. In addition, there is great value in capturing the voice of difficult to reach populations, who are often missing or underrepresented in large travel data sets that inform activity models and transportation planning decisions. This study advances our understanding of youth behavior, environmental perceptions and travel activities. Learning was collaborative in a very meaningful way as the research subjects gained the skills to research and participate in transportation planning decisions.

Note 1. The author is thankful to co-investigators Farhad Atash, Charles Collyer, Donald Cunnigen, and Jim Lucht, from the Providence Plan. This project would not have been possible without the help of the Providence Plan’s GIS training team and the URI nonviolence training team. She is especially thankful to Principal K. C. Perry for giving access to the school and to the teachers from the Red and Blue teams.

Platform • 1 7

East Austin Environmental Justice Project by Elizabeth Walsh, Scott Grantham, and Jean Niswonger

Images 1. and 4. Zavala Elementary students engaged in storyboarding and mental mapping to help document their perceptions of their environment. 2. Zavala Elementary students. 3. Accompanied by adult chaperones, the children helped assess levels of safety and desireability of points in their neighborhood. 5. Map indicating the children’s perception of safety near school by point and block.

Pl at f orm • 1 8

The Applied GIS course in Commmunity and Regional Planning led by Dr. Bjorn Sletto in spring of 2007 was organized to study environmental justice theories, apply theories and research methods through fieldwork, teach data collection and GIS (Geographic Information Systems) to youth volunteers, and produce an interactive community information system for an East Austin community. This projectbased class involved several partners interested in documenting environmental health risks in East Austin including People Organized in the Defense of Earth and her Resources (PODER); Zavala Elementary, a school located adjacent to the industrial facility Pure Casting; and American YouthWorks’ (AYW) Computer Corps. The specific research objectives and strategies of the project (named the East Austin Environmental Justice Project) were largely fashioned by the students and project partners, a challenge compounded by the fact that all partners had different interests and needs. Preparing for Engagement The course began by exploring the literature on environmental justice, community-university partnerships, participatory action research, and participatory GIS. We came to understand that university-community partnerships can contribute greatly to the success of environmental justice movements. By empirically documenting the unequal distribution of environmental hazards, academics have repeatedly given weight to community environmental concerns. Community groups can leverage the social capital, political influence, and technical skills of the university to better advance their goals.

However, community-university partnerships are also complicated and subject to many pitfalls. Our literature review and reflection on previous UT-community partnerships underscored the crucial importance of collaborative goalsetting and regular, open communication between the university and the community collaborators. As we began building relationships with our partners, we drew on participatory action research (PAR) strategies focused on listening, reflecting, and embracing a commitment to flexibility. Students discussed assumptions that might be made about university participants as “outsiders,” and similar preconceptions students might hold about “East Austin,” which is typically considered a singular “community,” but which is in fact diverse and multifaceted. Students, faculty, and community partners collaboratively established goals reflecting the diverse needs of all participants: 1) to develop methods to document children’s perceptions of environmental risk, 2) to create a community information system including a website, GIS maps, and interactive GIS web-interface, and 3) to present findings to diverse audiences including children, community partners, city

officials, and scholars. The class divided into three teams to pursue our goals—the volunteer and field coordination team (dedicated to partnership building, weekly community check-ins, and logistics), the GIS team (focused on data management, analysis, and mapmaking), and the design/media team (charged with web site development, documentation, and visual representation). Research Methods: Development and Implementation Drawing from literature and recommendations from teachers at Zavala and other partners, we developed a set of age-appropriate methods to document elementary students’ perceptions of their environment. Zavala students first engaged in classroom activities to explore the meanings of “environment” and “neighborhood,” including storyboarding and mental mapping. As a homework assignment, all Zavala students traced their walking routes to school on a map of the neighborhood. This helped the students think spatially from a “bird’s eye view” and later enabled us to overlay their walking routes with potential environmental hazards identified through secondary GIS data.

Next, Zavala elementary students participated in a Saturday Community Mapping Day, where they acted as researchers, journalists, and cartographers, documenting the places in their neighborhood that each found interesting or important. Walking in groups led by adult chaperones, they also assessed each block’s safety and desirability. Age-appropriate considerations included creating “points of interest” forms phrased in language the children use, beginning the workshop with games and ice-breakers, and limiting the time spent in the field. PODER staff and UT students chaperoned the different groups of students through the neighborhood. PODER’s leaders took advantage of “teaching moments” when the group stumbled upon an environmental hazard to fulfill their role as environmental educators. As social scientists, the UT students strove to keep quiet in order to collect the “pure,” unprompted perceptions of children. These different approaches to the field mapping illustrate the need for constant and open communication between activist groups and academic institutions engaged in environmental justice projects. Analysis and Representation The GIS team was challenged to enter the qualitative field mapping data into a GIS database and combine it with secondary data to produce maps that could support PODER’s advocacy efforts and education agenda. While the management, analysis, and representation of GIS data may appear to follow logical, empirical processes that render objective truths, most decisions are laden with value judgments

“Powell” story is continued from page 25.

While at the university, Leilah served as the president of the architecture and planning student council. In that role, she also served on the university-wide council. Through it, she was introduced to various areas and programs at the university, giving her a deep sense of how important an inter-disciplinary approach to problem solving was. After graduation, Leilah joined Laura in the Alamo City. She worked in the private sector in community development, which eventually lead to a position with the City of San Antonio. While working with the city, Leilah became an assistant to Mayor Edward Garza, a position she held for three years.

and subject to significant limitations. As GIS users, we strove to make our decisions as “honest” as possible. For example, we debated for hours over the most appropriate way to record the qualitative “points of interest” data in the GIS so as to best honor the perceptions of children, both individually and collectively. We also sought to enhance the in-house GIS capacity of PODER and its AYW team, but this goal was not fully realized because of the logistical, technical, and administrative challenges of the project. Despite the challenges and limitations inherent in the process, the GIS analysis confirmed that industry remains concentrated in areas dominated by non-white and low-income residents, following a pattern of environmental racism codified in Austin’s 1928 land use plan. Similarly, schools in East Austin are more frequently located near industrial uses than in other areas of Austin. The maps of children’s perceptions show that children are more likely to negatively perceive areas with high concentrations of industry; however, in order to reach their school by foot, many children are forced to walk near industrial sites and locations they perceive as threatening. Unfortunately, with only

fifteen study participants, these results are merely initial observations, and further research is necessary. Additionally, since this investigation showed that children’s perceptions of environmental risk differ significantly from those of adults, these results are not a substitute for direct measurement of environmental health risks. Conclusion Overall, this project succeeded in meeting most objectives of the partners. A web site community information system (soa.utexas.edu /eaejp/) makes the data available to our partners, policymakers, and the public, and includes a detailed manual of methods and strategies for replicating the study. The youth interns were introduced to new technologies and research methods, while the graduate students learned from hands-on field experience and developed a greater appreciation for the challenges involved in community-university partnerships and environmental justice research. Students also honed interpersonal, GIS, and visual representation skills. Perhaps most importantly, stronger relationships were developed between the school and our community partners, including PODER, Zavala Elementary, and AYW.

“The City of San Antonio has a very weak mayor system, and there are constant issues and questions about how power is exercised. Mayor Garza wanted to strengthen his office by hiring individuals with expertise in various areas of community development and growth,” said Leilah. “I worked on public policy initiatives and did a lot of research, writing, and traveling to other communities during my time in the mayor’s office. I will be forever grateful to Mayor Garza for the opportunity he gave me.” During the time Garza was in office, San Antonio was a bastion of change. Leilah was involved with high-profile projects such as the PGA hotel and golf course and City South (which is the redevelopment of South San Antonio). For Leilah, it was a time of an increasing awareness of the volatility of the city’s future growth. “When you have a position that is up for re-election every four years, it fundamentally alters the continuity and direction a community is headed in,” said Leilah. “It is almost impossible to be truly effective in four years—it’s impossible to implement projects within that timeframe. Unfortunately, individuals normally tend to pick projects they can identify and implement within a four-year timeframe, ignoring the larger, more complex issues.”

Above: It runs in the family. Leilah and Laura Powell’s father, Boone Powell [B.Arch. '56], is also an alum of the school. After becoming a partner in the firm, Ford, Powell and Carson, he directed many landmark San Antonio projects, including the Paseo del Alamo Pedestrian Walkway and Water Garden. Photograph by Boone Powell.

Leilah currently works at the County Commissioner’s Court in San Antonio, where she is part lobbyist, part teacher. “We need to take principles of growth and apply them more effectively at the county level,” said Leilah. “Part of that is educating policy makers and the public about areas they’re not totally familiar with, such as public revenue and the creation and implication of special districts. I inform the court and its constituencies about growth and development regulations, housing codes, street standards, etc.” Although the two Powell sisters are knowledgeable in vast areas of planning and development, if you have a question they can’t answer, you can always turn to their father, Boone. Or their stepmother, Dianne Powell, who works in development and non-profits. Or Scott Day, Leilah’s husband who works in economic consulting. Planning and development is a family affair for the Powell family. And, according to Laura and Leilah, it makes for some fascinating family get-togethers. A word of warning, though. If you end up at the Powell’s for a family meal, bring a multitude of reference books. According to the sisters, the family also shares an affinity for debate. —Amy Maverick Crossette

Platform • 1 9

ALUMNI CONNECTIONS INSIDE AND OUTSIDE THE SCHOOL

As alumni of the School of Architecture, you serve as diplomats and advocates in the communities where you live and work. Your support— through volunteerism, participation, and financial contributions— helps maintain a sense of unity among alumni, students, faculty, and friends. Upcoming Alumni Events • CRP @ 50 Alumni Gathering – Friday and Saturday, February 27-28 • Class of 1959 Reunion – April 30 - May 1 • AIA Alumni Reception at the offices of EDAW|AECOM in San Francisco – Thursday, April 30 • School of Architecture 100th Anniversary Celebration – Sunday, October 10, 2010 Check out our alumni page on the UTSOA web site for event and reception details: soa.utexas.edu/alumni/intro. We also invite you to join our lectures, exhibits, and continuing education opportunities. Visit our calendar page on the School of Architecture’s web site for the latest schedule, descriptions, and more information.

Career Services The Career Services Center provides recruiting opportunities, career development resources, information, and advising to students, graduates, and alumni. More than just connecting students and alumni with job/internship openings, the aim of the Career Center is to teach and strengthen professional development skills that will serve throughout one’s career.

Images 1. Mariel Reyes [M.Arch. '07] and Scott Smith at the Houston Alumni & Friends Reception at The Grove Restaurant, February 11, 2009. 2. Alumni and friends enjoying a beautiful May evening on the Boston waterfront at the school’s alumni reception held during the 2008 AIA convention. Clockwise from left to right: Stephen Oliver [B.Arch. ’01], Sally Ann Fly, Chuck Armstrong [B.Arch. ’81], Jeffrey Kaufman [B.Arch. ’82], John Nyfeler [B.Arch. ’58], Teresa Delgado, and Rudy Delgado [B.Arch. ’84]. 3. Trey Hoffman [B.Arch. '78], Corey Credeur [B.S.A.S. '97], Fritz Steiner, and Kristy Emmrich [B.S.I.D. '07] at the Houston alumni reception. 4. Jerry Alexander [B.Arch '85] and Carrie Alexander at the Houston alumni reception.

A wide array of career services is available to students and alumni including postings of current job openings, annual career fairs, and workshops on résumé preparation, portfolio development, and job search strategies. Through the Career Services Center, students and alumni can tap into an important and constantly expanding nationwide network of professionals and employers.

Stay Connected Find out what’s happening in the School of Architecture through eNews, our semimonthly electronic newsletter. If you aren’t receiving eNews, please feel free to contact Stacy Manning to be added to our email list. Get caught up on the latest award-winning work of our students, alumni, and faculty by logging on to our eNews archive from the school’s homepage at soa.utexas.edu. The School of Architecture is continuing its effort to find and maintain the most accurate contact information for all of our alumni. We know you are doing great things, and we rely on you to not only share your stories, but also to keep us up-to-date on your contact information so we can share our stories with you. Send your news and contact updates to our Associate Director of Constituent and Alumni Relations, Stacy Manning at smanning@austin.utexas.edu.

Visit soa.utexas.edu/careerservices or contact Career Services Director Carrie O’Malley at carrie.omalley@austin.utexas.edu or 512.471.1333. Stay Involved We invite you to stay involved with your school—it’s a great way to feel connected and give back to the university that played such an important role in your life. Investing in the school is one of the most significant ways to become involved. To learn more about making a gift to UTSOA, log on to our website and click on the “Support” link in the upper right hand corner or contact Associate Director of Constituent and Alumni Relations, Stacy Manning at 512.471.0617 for more information.

5. Class of 1958 reunion attendees. From left to right: George W. Cape, Jr.; Bill Martin; Leon A. Whitney; and Jerry L. Clement, April 30–May 2, 2008.

Pl at f orm • 2 0

ALUMNA PROFILE :: Alice Glasco [MSCRP ‘84] Alice Glasco, a petite woman with an engaging smile, has an affable presence. She waits patiently to begin our interview and she responds to each question with a soft-spoken air of self-assurance. But don’t let that fool you. When Glasco talks about urban planning and building communities, she is a whirlwind of energy and vitality. Her passion obviously lies in creating livable, workable, healthy communities. And yet doing so was never one of her goals. Born and raised in Kenya, East Africa, Glasco was, in her younger years, determined to be a lawyer. She grew up in Nakuru, a city originally governed by the British. When the city was eventually granted its independence, her father was chosen by British leaders to act as city manager. Her father was then sent to

Oxford and Princeton to learn, through public and international affairs and political science and law, how to run a country.

and architects. My job is to assist developers through the land development entitlement process.” One of Glasco’s current projects is to help develop the master plan for East Avenue, a 23-acre, $750 million mixed-use redevelopment project on the site of former Concordia University. She’s working in partnership with Larry Speck, former dean of the School of Architecture.

Determined not to follow in her father’s footsteps, Glasco enrolled at The University of Texas at Austin and received a bachelor’s degree in political science in 1981. Unfortunately, her desire to enter law school was thwarted by economic realities and getting a law degree turned out to be financially unfeasible. With guidance and support from Terry Kahn, Glasco opted instead to pursue a Master of Science degree in Community and Regional Planning from the School of Architecture. With, in her own words, “no clue as to where my profession would lead me,” Glasco embarked on a journey in planning, without a plan. It was a twist of fate that’s led to limitless successes and two decades of accomplishments.

“After graduating from UT, I worked for the City of Austin for 21 years,” said Glasco. “I retired in 2006 and started Alice Glasco Consulting, an urban planning firm that provides development services to developers and individual property owners.” During her tenure with the City of Austin, Glasco directed the Neighborhood Planning and Zoning Department (where she was responsible for planning neighborhoods) and the Development Review and Inspection Department (where she directed all land development processes including zoning, subdivisions, site plans, building permits, and inspections.) “The City of Austin provided me wonderful opportunities to work my way up from an entry level planner to directing two city departments that facilitate land development in Austin,” said Glasco. “Now, as president of my company, I work closely with real estate attorneys, civil engineers,

The site, which includes 600,000 square feet of office space and 300,000 square feet of retail space, will feature Andaz, a boutique-style luxury hotel owned by Global Hyatt and a 315-unit apartment complex owned by AMLI Residential. “It never occurred to me that I would ever get to work with a former dean of my school,” said Glasco. “I was thrilled, excited and in awe when I was told I would be working with Larry Speck.”

Alice Glasco

Another of Glasco’s projects is Rathgeber Village, adjacent to the Mueller Airport Redevelopment Project, which includes a People’s Community Clinic, Austin Children’s Shelter, Family Eldercare, a dyslexia screening and learning center, and an elementary school. When not working in a professional capacity to help direct the future growth of Austin, Glasco spends her time volunteering for neighborhood planning committees and boards. Although she never fulfilled her dream of becoming a lawyer, it appears, in the end, that Glasco couldn’t have planned it better. —Amy Maverick Crossette

Images Site plan (top) and rendering (above) East Avenue, Austin, Texas; former site of Concordia University.

Platform • 2 1

ALUMNUS PROFILE :: Hank Dittmar [MSCRP ‘80] Sustainable (and traditional) Urbanist Hank Dittmar has twenty-five years of leadership experience in the fields of urban design, transportation planning, and development. An authority in the issue of new urbanism, Dittmar’s expertise transcends both conventional wisdom and modernist theory. It is, rather, a marriage of evolution and revolution. As chief executive officer of The Prince’s Foundation for the Built Environment, and former president and CEO of Reconnecting America, Dittmar’s expertise spans the Atlantic Ocean. He was chairman of the board of directors of The Congress for New Urbanism from 2004-2008, and was previously appointed to the White House Advisory Committee on Transportation and Greenhouse Gas Emissions by former President Bill Clinton.

As a lead authority in urban design, transportation planning, and development, Dittmar has provided expert testimony and advice to the international Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development, and to the United States, U.K., Australian, and New Zealand governments over the past two decades. Reflecting on common, deficient mainstream attitudes towards green building endeavors, Dittmar optimistically notes that there are propitious models of effective urbanism to be found. “If you scratch a green builder, you will find lots of enthusiasm for gadgets and very little enthusiasm for urbanism,” said Dittmar. “We are not getting the story out about the many successful, vital, walkable, mixed-use communities being built around the world, largely by new urbanists. The answer of reducing carbon emissions, combating higher fuel prices, and dealing with the squeeze in household budgets is to plan more walkable communities and connect them with transit—and if we do that we can improve, not reduce, quality of life.”

Hank Dittmar.

Pl at f orm • 2 2

In a momentous move to reduce carbon emissions, the U.K. government has, according to Dittmar, made a commitment to zero-carbon buildings by 2016 and has begun to tackle planning eco-towns as well. Dittmar believes that the standards set in the U.K. by the Building Research Establishment and in the U.S. by the U.S. Green Building Council are, at least, shifting the market. “The new LEED-ND standard developed by the United States Green Building Council with the Natural Resources Defense Council and the Congress for New Urbanism is a big step forward in recognizing that greener cities are just as important as greener buildings.” “The tools and techniques for creating sustainable communities can be cross-cultural, and the principles of walkable, mixed-use communities and legible beautiful places are universal,” said Dittmar. “Truly sustainable places derive from a connection with local identity, culture, building ethos, climate, ecology, and materials; and this local adaptation needs to be reflected in architecture and urbanism.

The Prince's Foundation for the Built Environment 1. Master plan, Cumnock Project. 2. Typical street scene, Romsey, Hampshire, United Kingdom.

“Unfortunately, for the most part, we have built places hard-wired for a world of cheap energy, limitless economic growth, and abundant resources, where we can throw things away when we are done with them, whether they are soft drink containers, major appliances, shopping centers, or entire neighborhoods. I fear that most of these places are going to fail in the next twenty years, so we must dedicate ourselves to doing better in the next fifty years.” Transportation, of course, plays a huge role in the sustainability equation and as director of the Washington-based Surface Transportation Policy Project from 1993 to 1998 Dittmar oversaw one of the nation’s leading advocates for transit policy reform. He managed the coalition’s campaign for the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, a historic movement to increase federal funding for public transit. “Transportation systems are the skeletal framework, the bones upon which regions and metropolitan areas grow. We’ve got to get the bones right; for the last fifty years, however, we’ve been getting them wrong by building roadways and channeling all traffic onto a limited set of high-volume roads. New urbanism has to be built around a viable, integrated public transportation system.” Regardless of the methodologies used to help achieve a more liveable, sustainable planet, Dittmar believes one of the crucial requisites for success is in educating architects, planners, and engineers to work in a collaborative interdisciplinary way. The Prince’s Foundation has developed new tools and templates for urban design and community engagement, offers continuing professional development, hosts workshops for practitioners, and offers both a graduate fellowship program in London and building craft apprenticeships.

3. Central blocks, Cumnock Project. 4. House types, Jazan, Saudi Arabia.

“We need to start talking about environmental issues in human and family terms,” said Dittmar. “Economic security is what pushes people’s buttons these days, and we have to begin to translate issues like air pollution, climate change, and loss of biodiversity into terms of household budgets, public health, and economic vitality.” Dittmar has a bachelor’s of science degree from Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois, and a master’s degree in community and regional planning from the School of Architecture at The University of Texas at Austin. His new book, Transport and Neighborhoods, was released in last summer by Black Dog Publishing. In May, Dittmar received the 2008 Outstanding Graduate Alumnus Award from the Graduate School at The University of Texas at Austin. —Amy Maverick Crossette

Platform • 2 3

ALUMNUS PROFILE :: James deGrey David [MSCRP ‘75] After a successful twenty-five year stint as co-owner of Gardens, a local garden and home center, James deGrey David went back to his roots two years ago. Literally. David, a native of New Orleans with an undergraduate degree from Louisiana State University and a master’s degree in community and regional planning from The University of Texas at Austin, co-founded David/Peese Design two years ago. The firm melds classical landscape design with native and exotic plants to create unique, beautiful residential gardens.

James deGrey David. Photographs this page and opposite page at bottom, views of James deGrey David’s home, © Jacob Termansen, www.termansen.com.

“My father was an avid gardener in New Orleans and I have, since childhood, been interested in both horticulture and landscape design,” said David. “I prefer to think of myself as a garden designer rather than a landscape architect, since my interests lie specifically in the arrangement and use of plants and the sequence of spaces within a garden.” After receiving his master’s degree from the university, David spent eight years working as a landscape architect with the Texas Department of Parks and Wildlife. Although he enjoyed the experience and learned a tremendous amount about landscape design and urban spaces, he was interested in opening his own business, where he could focus on using a variety of plants in creative landscape designs.

Pl at f orm • 2 4

“I am fascinated by the sense of space and setting in urban landscape designs,” said David. During the two decades that David owned Gardens, he watched the small garden shop grow into a 75-employee home center, featuring everything from furniture and tableware to a huge assortment of plants, gardening tools, and outdoor sculptures. As successful as the business was, David knew that he eventually wanted to return to his true passion—creating masterpiece gardens that complement and harmonize with the residences they encompass.

“I believe in using interesting and exotic seeds, plants, and materials in the garden,” said David. “And I believe a garden is an extension of the structural architecture around it. Kitchens, especially, are an element of the garden. The two are intimately joined together.” David has designed gardens in Mexico; Berkeley, California; and Horseshoe Bay, Texas. He’s currently working on a large tract of land in Boerne, Texas, comprised of a house, a variety of out buildings, terraces, and a swimming pool.

The beautifully landscaped twoacre headquarters of David/Peese Design is located in the Texas Hill Country and has been featured in a variety of major media including House & Garden, Metropolitan Home, Garden Design, and House Beautiful. The acreage incorporates all the principles of design that the duo espouses, housing a lush variety of native and naturalized plants, organic fruits and vegetables, a pond of koi, and fifty beloved chickens. —Amy Maverick Crossette

ALUMNAE PROFILES :: Laura Powell [MSCRP ‘95] and Leilah Powell [MSCRP ‘96] One of San Antonio’s renowned architects, Boone Powell is famous, among other things, for his work on the Riverwalk and on the Tower of the Americas in Hemisfair Park. However, as the saying goes, behind every powerful man is a strong woman. In this case, make that two strong women—Powell’s daughters, Laura and Leilah. Born just thirteen months apart, Laura and Leilah share many commonalities. Both women attended boarding schools during their high school years. Both attended Stanford University as undergraduates. Both received master’s degrees in community and regional planning from The University of Texas at Austin. Both are married and have young daughters named after their mother (one goes by Kate, the other by Catherine). And both women have focused their energy, their education, and their enthusiasm on building better communities. Laura does so through assisting institutions of higher education and non-profits to issue debt for capital projects, Leilah does so through informing and educating government officials on public policy initiatives. Laura, the elder who works for J.P. Morgan Securities Inc., has a unique insight into the world of higher education perhaps, first and foremost, because she’s intimately familiar with institutes of higher education. “At Stanford, I received an undergraduate degree in the political economy of development,” said Laura. “I designed my own major, focusing on political science, economics, and civil engineering. It was a great experience because Stanford is very supportive of undergraduate education and research.” “After graduating, I moved to Washington, D.C., to work for a few years at the Brookings Institution on The History of the World Bank project. From there, I went to UT and received my masters in planning. The Community and Regional Planning Program at UT-Austin has a wonderful interdisciplinary approach to learning, and I took numerous classes at the LBJ School in Latin American Studies and received a Fulbright Scholarship to Ecuador.” Laura spent the next few years in Ecuador, where she taught urban planning and worked with non-profits focusing on ecotourism and the environment. “The university I taught at focused primarily on business, so I had a very small class size,” said Laura. “I learned that kids in Ecuador have two disadvantages. Their primary education is lacking, and very few of them had ever been outside of their own city. I focused on urban patterns of growth, since their city was very large and had virtually no plan of development.” Upon leaving Ecuador, Laura returned to the U.S. and completed a master’s degree in business administration at Columbia University in New York City.

Finally, after years focused on education and travel, she returned to San Antonio, the city she was born and raised in, where she now focuses on helping non-profits and institutes of higher education finance public improvements. With similar interests but different ambitions, Leilah followed in her sister’s educational footsteps, but, subsequently, veered down a different career path. “My major at Stanford was classics,” said Leilah. “After graduation, I took a position at the National Gallery of Art in Washington. I was hired to manage and staff their first interactive, computer-based guest information system for something called the Greek Miracle Show, which included 400-500 years of Athenian pieces. “The museum was not keyed into technology—this was about 20 years ago—and I had a decent computer background and was able to help them envision and create the program. It was a wonderful opportunity.” During the years Leilah worked for the gallery, she also worked at the National Trust in the realm of community development. While at the trust, she realized that her true interest was in fundraising, helping communities affected by disaster, and in preservation efforts. “In the academic world, there is a fascination for ideas that are hugely relevant to people throughout millennia such as drama and classical art. You feel a sense of community, of continuity of culture. In community development, you sense that same feeling, only it’s relevant in today’s world—such as a neighborhood in inner city Baltimore or the preservation of our country’s covered bridges. These things define what people are and where they came from.”

Leilah Powell and Laura Powell.

In focusing on community development, Leilah realized there was something she had to do. She realized that she had to move back to Texas. Leilah wanted to be in a community that was meaningful to her, a community that she was familiar with and could relate to. “When I moved back to Texas and was in the planning program at UT, there was a strong emphasis on how the built environment influences the community and vise versa,” said Leilah. “It was important to me that these two were housed together with a good exchange between them.”

“Powell” story continues on page 19.

Platform • 2 5

School of Architecture Receives $1 Million to Tackle Urbanization Challenges Prominent Dallas civic leaders Deedie and Rusty Rose have donated $1 million to the School of Architecture at The University of Texas at Austin to fund two endowments in urban planning. The funds will be used to create an endowed professorship in urban planning and an endowed graduate fellowship in urban planning. Both endowments will focus on reconnecting the planning profession with the disciplines of architecture, landscape architecture, and urban design. By integrating the strengths of these disciplines, some of the twenty-first century’s greatest planning challenges, including rapid urbanization and population growth, coordination of transportation and land use, and the need to conserve energy and curb the use of greenhouse gases, can be tackled with an holistic approach. “This wonderful gift will help us to build on one of our biggest strengths here in the School of Architecture,” said Fritz Steiner, dean of the School of Architecture. “No other school in Texas, and very few in the nation, offer the rich mix of disciplines that we do.” Ideas for future development along the Trinity River Corridor. Image: The Dallas Urban Laboratory

“Deedie and Rusty have a long history of community involvement and a tremendous understanding of the issues we face as a society,” Steiner said. “The funds will enable us

to pursue transformative methods to help change the urban environments in which we live.” Deedie Rose, an alumna of Texas Christian University, is a longtime supporter of the School of Architecture and is a life member of the Architecture Advisory Council. She is honorary co-chair of the school’s capital campaign. Her long involvement with the university includes serving as a former board member for the Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center and as a founding member of the Fine Arts Council. Among her many civic contributions in Dallas is her notable leadership with the Dallas Center for the Performing Arts. Deedie Rose is a principal of two endowments in the School of Architecture, the John William Potter Endowed Fund for the Encouragement of Risk Taking and the Lawrence W. Speck Excellence Fund. Rusty Rose, a graduate in engineering science at The University of Texas at Austin, is president of Cardinal Investment Company in Dallas. He was also co-owner and co-managing director of the Texas Rangers baseball team from 1989-1998 and is chairman of Drew Industries, Inc. “It is important to see the beauty in the world around us, while at the same time, realizing that as humans, we are responsible for making the world a beautiful—and healthy—place for generations to come,” said Deedie Rose. “To renew our world, we must renew our thinking. I’m confident that with our support and the support of others, institutions like the School of Architecture at UT will help lead the way to a more sustainable, livable future.” —Amy Maverick Crossette

New UTSOA Endowments The School of Architecture is pleased to announce the following endowments that have been approved by The University of Texas Board of Regents between April 1, 2008, and February 11, 2009. Endowment Designation ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ C. William Brubaker/Perkins+Will Endowed Presidential Scholarship Undergraduate students ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Dick Clark Student Travel Fund Travel support for B.Arch. and M.Arch. students ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Excellence Fund for Topics in Sustainable Development Center for Sustainable Development ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Matthew F. Kreisle, III/Page Southerland Page Graduate Fellowship in Architecture Graduate students, M.Arch. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Claude M. Pendley, Jr. Memorial Scholarship Fund (for Graduate Fellowships) Graduate students ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Joy & Morin Scott/Sally & John Byram Graduate Fellowship Graduate students ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ Lily Rush Walker & Coulter Hoppess Endowed Presidential Scholarship in Architecture Undergraduate students, B.Arch. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

We also are happy to recognize alumnus Lex Acker, AIA Emeritus [B.Arch., ‘63], who has made a leadership gift in the form of a $25,000 charitable gift annuity that will ultimately benefit an endowed Dean’s Excellence Fund. You can learn more about establishing endowments in the School of Architecture by contacting Julie M. Hooper, CFRE, Assistant Dean for Development, at 512.471.6114 or jhooper@austin.utexas.edu.

Far left: Dick Clark [B.Arch. ‘69, BBA ‘69]. Dick’s gift was inspired by his worldwide travels as a student and architect. Left: Lex Acker [B.Arch. ‘63]. Lex retired from the UT System Office of Planning and Construction in 1999 with thirty years of service.

Pl at f orm • 2 6

UTSOA Advisory Council :: Letter from the Chair Epitome of Efficiency: Japan as Model for Urban Planning in the 21st Century Last spring, my predecessor, Mike McCall, wrote an eloquent piece for this publication on sustainability. In it, he reflected on the strengths and expertise found within the faculty and students at the School of Architecture and about how these proficiencies would help to better the future of our state, our country, and the world in which we live. This issue of Platform is about planning. I received the request to write a comment for this edition while I was in Japan, and I couldn’t help but reflect on Mike’s words. Here in the United States, we have only just begun to witness the impact expensive energy and limited resources will have on economics and urban planning, but in Japan, they have been dealing with these issues for decades. In a country with such an immense population density, landscape and architecture are defined by relative lack of resources.

NEW AWARDS SUPPORT SUSTAINABILITY TEACHING AND RESEARCH

Japan is the size of California with a population of 127 million. All oil is imported. In Tokyo, the high cost and scarcity of land (only 15% is buildable) mean efficient planning is essential. Cross under a rail line or freeway, and there are restaurants lining the space under the viaduct. Alleys become single lane streets with small or no sidewalks and are populated by business addresses. Boundaries between neighborhoods are virtually nonexistent, with the elegant offices and hotels of Maronouchi seamlessly giving way to Ginza’s department stores. On any of our forays into Tokyo or Kyoto (or traveling between the two), we noticed there were always several transportation options (albeit at different costs), and they were always well integrated into a very dense city fabric. Efficient planning due to limited resources can make great cities. Is Tokyo a great city? In an international poll ranking cities on livability, the top two spots went to cities with populations of one million (Copenhagen and Munich, respectively). Yet despite a metropolitan population between thirty and thirtyfive million, Tokyo still comes in as the third most livable city on the planet—enough said!

In Japan, efficient planning requires incorporating buildings, transit, and parks into tight spaces that must work on multiple levels (vertically and figuratively). For example, the Peninsula Hotel was built in the center of Tokyo over a major metro station located across from the Imperial Palace and its hallowed grounds. The concept of building a twenty-three story hotel over an existing subway station across the street from seventeenth-century castle moats may seem like a daunting task to some, but it is inspiring to those of us trying to shoehorn 1.5 parking spaces per one-bedroom apartment on a ten-acre site in suburban Austin or Albuquerque. With necessity being the mother of invention, Texas and the Southwest may experience similar issues over the next twenty or thirty years as land use patterns and planning traditions evolve to reflect an economy and society of increasingly limited and increasingly expensive natural resources. If you struggle with the densification of city centers and bemoan increased traffic or loss of green space, take the time to see places like Tokyo or Kyoto. I am struck by what I learned there about efficiency of space; sustainability in real life (no trash containers—nearly everything is recycled); the contrast between quiet, reflective interior space and the hectic outside world; and the incredible integration of new buildings into old landscapes and transportation systems.

The Sustainable Cities Doctoral Research Initiative will focus on integrating cutting edge research and practice in the fields of urban planning, architecture, environmental and architectural engineering, landscape architecture, urban design, community engagement, and public policy. Across these fields, scholars are rethinking current practice and working across disciplinary lines to forge new approaches to research, policy, and practice. A $500,000 grant from the UT System will support doctoral students working in three interdisciplinary teams, each tackling sustainability at a different scale. The grant will also provide teams with seed funding for the development of interdisciplinary research proposals to be submitted to federal funders such as the National Science Foundation.

Students at the School of Architecture are encouraged to experience other cities and cultures in order to expand their views of architecture and planning. As we struggle with the rapidly changing traditions and paradigms in our own built environment, we are reminded of how important this understanding is. Today’s graduates must rapidly adjust to situations that have been the norm in Japanese society for hundreds of years. By learning from the mistakes and accomplishments of other successful models, we can adapt these lessons to help solve some of the crucial issues that we now face. As chair of the school’s advisory council, I look forward to serving and learning with you. I extend my heartfelt thanks to Dean Steiner and past chair Mike McCall for all they’ve done for the school, for our council, and for me, and I look forward to many great accomplishments to come.

Kent Collins [B.Arch. ‘81], Advisory Council Chair.

Sincerely,

The Sustainable Development Education Initiative focuses on incorporating the principles of sustainable design into the core curricula of all programs in the School of Architecture. Faculty are being supported in efforts to incorporate cutting edge thinking in diverse areas of sustainability. These include topics such as the relationship between design and energy efficiency, materials and resource use, site design, land use and transportation planning, and landscape ecology. A $240,000 grant from The Meadows Foundation is supporting three annual competitions for curriculum development grants for faculty. The first awards were made in the 2008-09 academic year. Platform • 2 7

FRIENDS OF ARCHITECTURE Become a Friend Today! Friends of Architecture (FOA) is an annual giving program within the School of Architecture with a mission to increase knowledge and awareness of superior architecture, planning, and design and to advance quality education for future generations. Our members are current students, faculty, alumni, patrons, practitioners, and aficionados who believe in the significance of the built environment and are looking to take part in shaping its future by supporting excellence within the School of Architecture. How to Join As of September 1, 2007, all donors to the Annual Fund Program who direct their gifts in the amount of $50 or more to the School of Architecture automatically receive a one-year membership to Friends of Architecture. Make your gift today at www.giving.utexas.edu/supportut/annualgiving. Click on “School of Architecture” in the right-hand menu to make your donation and start receiving your FOA benefits! You may also make a contribution directly to FOA online at http://soa.utexas.edu/foa/. Log on to our web site to join online, learn about member benefits, and get information about upcoming tours and events. Making a Difference Your contribution to FOA and the Annual Fund Program makes a difference for our students and faculty every day. FOA provides broad support for the school by providing flexible funding for critical needs such as student activities, recruitment, and publications, faculty recruitment, and outreach initiatives such as Summer Academy. 1.

Making Design Accessible The Seattle tour offered some great insight into the urban development and public spaces of a dynamic and creative city. Accompanied by Seattle-based alumni, we started our tour at City Hall with Lucia Athens [M.Arch. ’93]. Recognized in 2004 by the Sustainable Industries Journal as one of the 25 most influential people in Green Building in the Northwest, Lucia led the development of the City of Seattle’s award-winning green building program and was our guide through City Hall and the adjacent Justice Center. Our next stop was in the old neighborhood of Belltown where city planner and activist Jim Diers showed us many examples of the way in which this deteriorated community has repaired and revived itself over the last decade through grass-roots efforts. The highlight was Belltown P-Patch, a beautiful community garden and haven for historic structures created and maintained by local citizens. At lunch, we toured the Olympic Sculpture Park and heard from Daniel Friedman, Dean of the College of Architecture and Urban Planning at the University of Washington. Prior to joining UW, he served as director of the School of Architecture at the University of Illinois at Chicago; and director of the School of Architecture and Interior Design at the University of Cincinnati, where he taught from 1990 to 2002. Dr. Friedman shared his recent experiences as an architect and educator in Seattle, as we enjoyed delicious food surrounded by the exceptional landscape beauty of the Olympic Sculpture Park. Professor Larry Speck led the group through an external tour of the Experience Music Project (EMP), one of the two largest museums in the country devoted to popular music. Professor Speck talked about the controversial design by renowned architect, Frank Gehry, and its impact on the Seattle community.

3. 4. Pl at f orm • 2 8

The group ended their Friday tour at the Seattle Art Museum. The expansion (by Allied Works – Brad Cloepfil) is north of the existing 1991 museum designed by Venturi Scott Brown of Philadelphia. Our group was led through the museum by Sam Miller, a Seattle-based architect with the award-winning firm LMN Architects, a participating firm in the downtown expansion of the Seattle Art Museum. Miller has over 16 years of practicing architecture and is a firm leader in the development of LMN’s sustainable design strategies. The next day we braved the hilly downtown Seattle landscape and walked to the new Seattle Public Library, where we were again led by Sam Miller. LMN Architects, in partnership with Rem Koolhaas and his Office for Metropolitan Architecture in Rotterdam were the principle components of the design team for this 11-floor, 362,987-squarefoot library. On the way to the final tour destination, the group stopped at Freeway Park, designed by Lawrence Halprin. Professor Larry Speck took us through this compelling piece of landscape architecture and Seattle green space, perched above Interstate 5 in downtown Seattle. Our last stop on this exciting tour of Seattle’s public spaces was at St. Ignatius Chapel, housed on the campus of Seattle University and designed by New York architect Steven Holl. Tom Kundig, of Olson Sundberg Kundig Allen Architects, a partnering firm on the project, led us through the conceptual design – "seven bottles of light in a stone box.” Larry Speck describes his favorite part of the tour as, “just walking around in a well-functioning American downtown and seeing these remarkable works of architecture in the context of their great city.” “It is a real treat to investigate closely the work of some of the best architects in the world like Gehry, Koolhaas, and Holl, listening to people who know about their process of conception and making intimately. But it is even more of a treat to hear from the people who are shaping the city outside those landmarks and to hear their perspectives as well.”

Images 1. Susan Marcus and FOA member Mary Bloom wait for the rest of the group outside the Experience Music Project in Seattle. 2. The group enjoys a downtown garden break at the Belltown P Patch. 3. Professor Larry Speck discusses the history and controversy of the Experience Music Project building, designed by renowned architect Frank Gehry. 4. One of the many sculptures in Seattle’s Olympic Sculpture Park, an award-winning urban green space and art display. 5. A colorful display in the gardens of Belltown P Patch. 6. FOA members Mary Bloom and Dan Shipley [B.Arch. ’79] take a break on an “eyeball bench” near Seattle’s Olympic Sculpture Park.

TO JOIN Online soa.utexas.edu/foa Phone 512.471.0617 FAX 512.471.0716 Mail

Stacy Manning Associate Director of Constituent and Alumni Relations The University of Texas at Austin School of Architecture 1 University Station B7500 Austin, TX 78712-0222

For additional information, please don’t hesitate to contact Stacy Manning at smanning@austin.utexas.edu or 512.471.0617.

7. St. Ignatius Chapel on the campus of Seattle University.

The group enjoyed fine dining and exquisite weather as they toured Seattle’s culture, history, and art against a backdrop of natural beauty. Tours in the Works Friends of Architecture invites you to join our one-of-a-kind tours of urban design and landscape, historic buildings, and private residences. We work hand-in-hand with our award-winning alumni and expert guides to take members behind the scenes of significant public masterpieces and offer exclusive access to new and amazing private spaces. FOA offers a unique environment for refining your appreciation for architecture, city planning, sustainable design, and historic preservation. Visit Friends of Architecture’s web site for more information: soa.utexas.edu/foa/.

7. 5. Platform • 2 9

FRIENDS OF ARCHITECTURE * Membership As of September 1, 2007, all donors to the Annual Fund Program who direct their unrestricted gifts in the amount of $50 or more to the School of Architecture automatically receive a one-year membership to Friends of Architecture.

Corporate Silver Members Friends of Architecture is pleased to announce that Curtis & Windham Architects of Houston and Lucifer Lighting of San Antonio are the inaugural donors to our Corporate Silver Member level. We extend our sincere thanks to both firms for their generous support. Curtis & Windham Architects is an awardwinning, inter-disciplinary firm founded in 1992 by School of Architecture Advisory Council member William Curtis [B.Arch. ‘81] and Russell Windham. In 2005, Sarah Newbery became a partner in the firm to further develop the integration of complimentary landscape design. Working from a foundation of traditional and classical architectural principles, the 30person firm of architects, interior designers, and landscape architects seeks to integrate all aspects of design. To learn more about the work of Curtis & Windham Architects, please visit their website, curtisandwindham.com. Just over a quarter century old, Lucifer Lighting (luciferlighting.com), is a family-run company widely recognized as a lighting innovator. The company develops high-end lighting fixtures favored by interior designers and architects throughout the world. Lucifer Lighting has been a longtime supporter of the School of Architecture, and CEO Gilbert Mathews serves on the School of Architecture Advisory Council as a life member.

For more information on joining Lucifer Lighting and Curtis & Windham as Corporate Silver Members of FOA, please contact Associate Director of Constituent and Alumni Relations, Stacy Manning, smanning@austin.utexas.edu or 512.471.0617.

$1000 – $2499 Susan R. Benz Melissa M. Bogusch Dick Clark III Dick Clark Architecture Cullen/Frost Bankers, Inc. Gary M. Cunningham Darrell A. Fitzgerald R. Lawrence Good Charles E. Gromatzky Royce Jay Hailey, Jr. Christopher C. Hill Kenneth H. Hughes Hughes/Mast Development, LP Alan Lauck Richard R. Lillie M/A/R/C, Inc. Dana Nearburg Judith R. Pesek Gensler Charles A. Phillips Lloyd Scott Scott + Cooner William G. Shepherd R.E.P.M.T. L.L.C. Helen L. Thompson David H. Watkins Watkins Hamilton Ross Architects Inc. Gordon L. White, M.D. $500 – $999 Peter A. Dixon Marianne M. Jones Clair E. Krizov Peter L. Pfeiffer Barley + Pfeiffer Inc. Melinda K. Poss Robert F. Smith, Jr. John P. White Fred W. Worley

$200 – $499 Carrie S. Alexander Dan Alexander Daniel Kornberg Architects Allied/CMS Inc. Pamela Beckendorff Bodron + Fruit, Inc. Scott W. Carpenter Langston S. Chu Susan E. Clark Sean S. Coney Dana S. Copp Nancy M. Dedman Winston L. Evans C. Douglas Gordon Peter J. Hurley III Robert P. Lee

Stuart G. McIlyar Joan Y. Morris Charles B. Naeve and D. Pat Brockie M. Camilo Parra Hemantkumar Patel Cynthia B. Severson Severson Studios LLC Louis H. Skidmore, Jr. Cooke & Skidmore Consulting Corporation Suzanne Smith Rommel A. Sulit Carolyn C. Tames Jay Teng, M.D. and Lily Yee Teng, R.N. Webber + Studio Jerry L. Wright

$50 – $199 Jeffrey S. Abel Thomas L. Amis, Jr. Lee A. Anderson The University of Auckland Jack T. Backus Patricia A. Bahr Miguel E. Bao James Beckman Thomas J. Bibb John T. Blake Emma R. Blick Mary W. Bloom William N. Bonham Angela S. Bordegaray Farzad Boroumand Mary S. Boster Sara Vicklund Braud Diana Bravo Gonzalez Kent I. Broyhill Fred C. Bryla Kim L. Bulleit Matthew D. Burton C.S. Neumeyer, Inc. Thomas R. Campbell Matthew C. Casey Michael J. Chirigos David M. Cochran Lawrence H. Connolly Phebe Connolly Meredith N. Contello Jeannette S. Cook Ryan B. Coover Margareth Craddock Consuelo F. Davidson Leah K. Dean Kenneth S. DeLorenzo Robert K. Dickson Deborah L. Ebersole Hazel M. Eclarinal Joanna M. Edwards John B. Everin Terese E. Ferguson Stephen E. Firgau Ted Flato Lake|Flato Architects, Inc.

* These Friends of Architecture members made gifts to the School of Architecture between March 1 and August 31, 2008.

2. Pl at f orm • 3 0

Sally A. Fly AIA Austin Norman K. Friedman Byron J. Gauthier David M. A. Gill Egan R. Gleason Michael P. Gray Daniel E. Grote Jack Guerra Remberto F. Gutierrez Robert A. Guy Steven A. Handelman David B. Hartwell Carl F. Hay Joel E. Helms Jane U. Henry Noel Hernandez H. Nic Holland Mark E. Holzbach Rhoda A. Hornaday Timothy L. Hotz Julie L. Howard Pherivong Wenny H.W. Hsu Irene C. Huang Vicki V. Interrante Jackson and McElhaney Architects, Inc. John Watson Architects, Inc. Jennifer Johnson Kenneth M. Jones Michael C. Karnowski Virginia W. Kelsey William W. Kyle Alisa C. Lane Werner X. Lang George W. Lee Martha Leipziger-Pearce Hugo D. Ley David H. Lidsky Kelly W. Mahan Susan B. Marcus E. Edward Martin, Jr. Berna L. Massingill Lisa A. Mayer Melissa J. Mayfield

Roy J. McCarroll William B. McDonald Eleanor H. McKinney Phillip G. Mead Christopher R. Means Mason A. Miller Ann Maddox Moore Matthew H. Moore Charles O. Mork Gitta L. Morris Gregory V. Musquez, Jr.

David Negrete Charles L. Nelson Charles W. Nixon Lynn L. Northrup, Jr. Bradley J. Parman Tami L. Pearson David R. Petro Jeffery R. Povero Shari K. Poynor Catherine L. Pressler Noel W. Ragin

Judy L. Ramsey W. McDonald Rawley Susan W. Raymond Jaclyn A. Rea Don R. Reimers Marcela A. Rhoads Consuelo Garza Rivera Charles R. Roman Carolyn I. Roosen Deborah E. Rosenblum Robert W. Rossi, Jr.

David B. Rothenberg William C. Schenck Martin W. Selensky James P. Sharkey Robert S. Simpson Janet H. Sisolak David W. Sloan Eddie G. Smith Jeffrey L. Smith Sandra Bearden Smith Paula J. Sodders Julie N. Steele Joanna M. Stephens John K. Sun R. Pat Sweeney Judy C. Talbot Milton W. Talbot, Jr. William B. Tamminga, Jr. Arthur R. Tatum Andrew B. Taylor Cheryl G. Taylor Toni M. Thomasson Katherine T. Thompson Billie Jo P. Thorne Laurie O. Tyler Mr. Edward B. Wallace Karen S. Walz Strategic Community Solutions Daniel P. Weber J. Anne Weigers Norman G. Weiner James E. White Paul M. Wilson, III Willis C. Winters, Jr. Erik D. Wood JoeAnn Wright Nancy S. Yahn Patti V. Zandt Gabriel R. Zavala Yifeng Zhang Eric L. Zobrist

1. FOA members examine the cistern and rainwater collection system near the Belltown P Patch in downtown Seattle. 2. UTSOA alum Stephanie Bower [B.Arch. ’81] and Career Services Director Carrie O’Malley bringing the Longhorns to Seattle. 3. The striking “Eagle” steel sculpture in Olympic Sculpture Park, overlooking Elliot Bay. 4. The group enjoying a beautiful July day in front of St. Ignatius Chapel in Seattle. 5. “Sky Landscape I,” welded aluminum sculpture at the Olympic Sculpture Park near downtown Seattle. 6. View of the Experience Music Project building. 7. A quick stop at the Pike Place Market on our way to tour the Seattle Art Museum.

7. Platform • 3 1

UTSOA Advisory Council

SPRING 2009 EVENTS

Chair Kent Collins

LECTURES 2.25 Ignacio Bunster Landscape architect & urban designer; WRT, Philadelphia

Vice Chair Bobbie J. Barker

3.02 Perry Kulper Architect, artist, professor, University of Michigan

Past Chair Michael J. McCall, AIA Executive Committee Susan Benz, AIA Bill Booziotis, FAIA Diane Cheatham Gary Cunningham, FAIA Diana Keller John Nyfeler, FAIA Dan Shipley, FAIA

3.23 Monica Ponce de Leon Architect, Office dA Dean, University of Michigan 4.06 & 4.07 Juhani Pallasmaa Pallasmaa Architects Helsinki

Faculty Representatives Elizabeth Danze, AIA Juan Miró, AIA Members Lexa M. Acker, AIA Emeritus Frank M. Aldridge, III Richard M. Archer, III, FAIA Phillip Arnold, Hon. ASLA John Avila, Jr. David B. Barrow, Jr., AIA, ASID Marvin E. Beck, AIA Emeritus Ken Bentley, AIA Myron G. Blalock, III Hal Box, FAIA Dick Clark, III, AIA Tommy N. Cowan, FAIA H. Hobson Crow, III, AIA William P. Curtis Donald R. DeBord, Jr., AIA Bibiana Bright Dykema, AIA Darrell A. Fitzgerald, FAIA Robert Lawrence Good, FAIA John Grable, FAIA Charles E. Gromatzky, AIA R. Jay Hailey, Jr. Karen Hawkins Christopher C. Hill Kenneth H. Hughes Ellen King Reed A. Kroloff, AIA David C. Lake, FAIA Charles E. Lawrence, FAIA Graham B. Luhn, FAIA Patricia R. Mast

Gilbert L. Mathews Jana McCann Laurin McCracken, AIA Donald W. Pender, AIA Judith R. Pesek, IIDA Charles A. Phillips, AIA Boone Powell, FAIA Leilah H. Powell Howard E. Rachofsky Gay Ratliff Elizabeth Chu Richter, FAIA Roland G. Roessner, Jr. Deedie Rose Lloyd Scott Cyndy Severson William Shepherd, AIA Madison Smith Lenore Sullivan Emily Summers Jerry S. Sutton, AIA Helen L. Thompson Laura L. Toups, PE Karen S. Walz, FAICP David H. Watkins, FAIA Terrance R. Wegner Michael I. Wheeler Gordon L. White, M.D. Coke Anne M. Wilcox Kathy Zarsky

4.08 Arthur Ganson Artist, Boston/Stoneham 4.13 Deborah Berke Deborah Berke & Partners Architects, New York 4.15 Keith Kaseman & Julie Beckman Landscape architects, KBAS Professors, Penn / Columbia 4.20 Christiane Muniz Una Arquitetos São Paulo

4.22 Marianne Burkhalter & Christian Sumi Burkhalter & Sumi, Zurich

CITY FORUMS 2.06 “Black History Month: Moving Forward, Looking Back”

4.27 Kristina Hill Director of Landscape Architecture, Univ. of Virginia

2.20 “Environmental and Cultural Politics of Indigenous Peoples in the Sierra Nevada de Santa Marta, Colombia”

SYMPOSIA 2.07 WEATHER PATTERNS: Climate, Culture, and Placemaking Sponsored by the Donald D. Harrington Fellows Program 4.02–03 LATITUDES: Architecture in the Americas Sponsored by the Center for American Architecture and Design EXHIBITS 2.02 – 2.27 ACROSS THE MAP: Architecture Abroad Student work from UTSOA study abroad programs 3.02 – 4.03 DRAWINGS & WORKSHOPS Perry Kulper 4.06 – 4.30 MACHINES from Arthur Ganson

2.27 “On Community and Regional Planning: Alumni Reflections on Careers, Planning Education, and the Future of the Profession” 3.13 “Regional Development in Austin: Challenges and Opportunities in the 21st Century” 3.27 “Keeping It Rural: Tradition and Innovation in a Competitive Economy” 4.10 “Equity and Access in Transportation System Planning and Delivery: It’s More Than You Think It Is” 4.17 “Environmental Justice and the Multicultural City: The Transformative Role of Urban Planning”

All lectures are at 5:00 p.m. in Goldsmith Hall 3.120, 22nd & Guadalupe Streets. Exhibits are in Goldsmith Hall Mebane Gallery, open 8:00-5:00, Monday through Friday. City Forums are noon to 1:30; check web site calendar for speakers and locations. Events subject to change. For updates, call 512.471.1922 or visit our web site, soa.utexas.edu. Funding for lectures and exhibits is provided in part by the Herbert M. Greene Centennial Lectureship, the Wolf and Janet Jessen Centennial Lectureship, the Karl Kamrath Lectureship, Edwin A. Schneider Centennial Lectureship, and Brightman/York Endowed Lecture Series in Interior Design.

The University of Texas at Austin School of Architecture 1 University Station B7500 Austin, Tx 78712-0222

Non-Profit Org. U.S. Postage Paid Austin, Texas Permit No. 391