UHCDC: Exploring Public Sector Practice

04 06

Expanding access to care Engaging communities 12 16 Designing to build Enriching urban experience 09 Visioning Freshwater Park

01 Facilitating applied learning TEACHING UHCDC: Exploring Public Sector Practice

University of Hawai�i Community Design Center 13 PRACTICE University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa | School of Architecture Setting metrics for resilience

02 Engagement Convening public agencies Research

07 CollaborationDesign Promoting design innovation Outreach

05 Driving public discourse The University of Hawai i ʻ 10 Community Design Center Exploring public private partnership (UHCDC) is a teaching practice and outreach initiative led by the UHM School of Architecture. 14 UHCDC provides a new, interdisciplinary platform Seeking indigenous wisdom for students, staff, faculty, and partnering professionals to collaborate on interdisciplinary pre- procurement *proof-of-concept* projects - public- 11 interest-driven applied research, planning, and 03 Discovering Hawaiʻi Consolidating civic services design. These projects offer service learning and workforce development opportunities for students 15 through academic instruction, internship, and post- Working toward equity graduate employment. 08 Gathering perspectives

2015 -16 2016 -17 2017-18 2018 -19 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 11 13 16 18 20 Consultation with leaders from the professional and 2016 ARCH 750 pilots the first public-interest “HIDESIGN First Responders Tech Campus Center for Workforce Excellence UH Cancer Center Annex Building Voices Symposium, Vertical School Study Waipahu TOD Collaboration Building Voices: Honolulu Connects Pop-up Intercepts Wahiawa Freshwater Park Kekaha Kai State Park Master Plan Waipahu Flood Mitigation Measures Waipahu Housing Block Study Future Hawaiʻi Dwelling South Shore Promenade and Open Space academic communities. Research on past practices. STUDIO” course, developing a culturally integrated multi- Hawai i Technology Development Corporation UH Community Colleges UH Cancer Center Competition, Exhibition Dept of Education Office of Planning Student Design Competition ARCH 750 Dept of Land & Natural Resources Dept of Land & Natural Resources Office of Planning Office of Planning ARCH 342 Network purpose gym building for Ānueue School. ʻ Senate Resolution is passed to establish a partnership April 22, 2017 City & County of Honolulu Office of Planning Instructors: Cathi Ho Schar AIA, Kyle Hamada This project looks strategically at the best and highest Faculty members from Architecture, Urban and The 2017-2019 proof-of-concept study for Kekaha Kai between the School of Architecture and the Department UHCDC gathered first responders in a planning and A multi-agency facility for Wahiawa Town explores The study presents a series of design guidelines As part of a summer academic research studio, students This project explores ways to improve the utilization, Increasing resilience to future flooding from sea level A synthesis of findings from studies by 8 faculty This third-year undergraduate studio re-imagined future programming exercise aimed at strategically locating and consolidating government offices and services into an use of the existing 36,000 sf cancer center annex responding to learnings from the vertical typology, study Regional Planning, and Public Policy coordinated and Honolulu Connects is a single-stage student design installed an exhibit in Waikīkī and invited visitors and water quality, resilience, socioeconomic benefits, and State Park conceptualizes future programming and rise, groundwater inundation, and coastal storms. members provided the framework for design possibilities for urban dwelling in Honolulu on an existing of Education to work on a project for Ke Kula Kaiapuni Oʻ Building Voices gathered over 40 speakers, 300 Catalytic project sites propose people-centric, connected, building as a community asset and future destination for sequenced 6 courses and 8 different research scopes design for a cultural education facility and campground PI: Prof. Wendy Meguro AIA considerations and design scenarios intended to frame 16-acre lot located in a future transit-oriented district, Ānuenue School. consolidating first responders services in one campus. expanded library building. attendees, and 111 competition entries to share ideas of contemporary education spaces, and physical, social, competition seeking innovative design solutions that residents to share their user experience to inform a connectivity of Wahiawa Freshwater Park by protecting amphibious waterfront conditions that decrease cancer treatment trials in Hawai i. to explore new planning and design frameworks for TOD at the Hawaiʻi Island beach park PI: Prof. Cathi Ho Schar AIA Supervisor: Kevin Miyamura AIA ʻ and perspectives on the challenges facing Hawaiʻi’s built and cultural influences. address Hawaiʻi’s unique geographic location, cultural wayfinding study and build action research skills. and enhancing the park’s ecological, social, and future Waipahu TOD development RFPs. and currently owned by the Hawaiʻi Public Housing vulnerabilities by responding to anticipated shoreline PI: Prof. Simon Bussierre ASLA PI: Brian Strawn AIA environments. PI: Prof. Karla Sierralta AIA development on state lands. richness, global visibility, and ecological diversity. The Instructor: Brian Strawn AIA cultural/historic resources and public open space PI: Prof. Cathi Ho Schar AIA Authority was reimagined. changes, flooding, and inundation, as well as issues Co-chairs: Prof. Simon Bussiere ASLA, Prof. Cathi Ho PI: Prof. Simon Bussiere ASLA, Prof. Priyam Das, Prof. competition challenged students to conceptualize and amenities for the community. Instructor: Prof. Karla Sierralta AIA related to Honolulu’s aging infrastructure. Colin Moore, Prof. Wendy Meguro AIA, Prof. Hyoung-June Schar AIA, Prof. Karla Sierralta AIA, Brian Strawn AIA UHM Campus Design Lite propose designs for three distinct locations around PI: Prof. Judith Stilgenbauer ASLA 14 PI: Prof. Judith Stilgenbauer ASLA Park, Prof. Cathi Ho Schar AIA, Prof. Suwan Shen, Prof. Thomas Square, Hawaiʻi’s oldest public urban park. 12 Decolonizing Cities Symposium 17 UHM Office of Administration Daniele Spirandelli Student Center Farm Table Co-organizers: Prof. Karla Sierralta AIA, Brian Strawn AIA The second Decolonizing Cities Symposium focused on Spirit of Liliʻuokalani 19 10 UHM practices of indigenous urbanism and placemaking. State Foundation on Culture and the Arts UHM Signage and Wayfinding 21 UHCDC begins a partnership with UH to provide in-house UH Faculty Housing P3 Study PAN PAU WOW campus design assistance on small projects. UH of Administration A 50 ft table designed and build by students, creates a PI: Prof. Cathi Ho Schar AIA, Prof. Bundit Kanisthakhon, UH Office of Land Development Design schemes aim to connect the statue and it’s gathering area for the campus. Brian Strawn AIA surroundings to the qualities and characteristics of A new bi-lingual signage and wayfinding system UHCDC partnered with AIAS to gather students from Student work explores faculty housing development PI: Prof. Bundit Kanisthakhon 15 Queen Liliʻuokalani. developed to celebrate the unique environmental, social, Architecture, Urban and Regional Planning, and scenarios for a University of Hawaiʻi-owned property Sustainability Study for Corrections PI: Prof. Joyce Noe FAIA cultural, academic, and historic contexts of Mānoa. Engineering to share their work in a Pecha-Kucha style in Kaimukī, in partnership with the UH Office of Land Dept of Public Safety PI: Brian Strawn AIA event. Development. Instructor: Prof. Pu Miao A collective of scholars and professionals working jointly to reduce recidivism and support restorative models. How kuleana transforms “CDC started in a time when a lot of us practice and students felt starved for more design leadership knowledge and purposefulness in the craft we were developing. With great enthusiasm

Kuleana is a Native Hawaiian term used and leadership, we set up shop in the to describe one’s personal sense of responsibility, privilege, accountability, bathroom breezeway. During our time at self-reliance, and implicit duty to take care of one’s family, home, and land. CDC we had to learn how to work as a This is fundamental to most of our students, native and non-native, 85% team, how to be professionals, and how to of which are from Hawai‘i. It is also fundamental to the mission of the communicate with clients and community in center. new and meaningful ways. For some reason UHCDC provides faculty, staff, and students with a way to connect to and the University kept paying people with no address their kuleana through Hawai‘i- serving projects. experience to learn all of that.”

Through UHCDC project related courses and internships that run parallel to their educational careers, “I know our past employees have left with students understand their potential for impact as their work moves from a greater sense of self confidence as they academic to applied, in the context of state governance and stewardship. venture out to begin their careers. Most of

Each opportunity instills a deeper all UHCDC has instilled in us the importance sense of purpose, belonging, and agency that provides a foundation for of self improvement, good intention, and leadership in practice and in life. knowing the impact that a collection of efforts can have on the larger community.”

-student 2016-2019, junior research associate 2019 Department of Agriculture Who we serve Animal Quarantine Facility Department of Education DOE Vertical Schools Waianae Middle School Department of Land and Natural Resources UHCDC is a community design center Comfort Stations Kekaha Kai State Park that began as a conventional public- Office Interior Renovation interest practice, and evolved into a Wahiawa Freshwater park (Lake Wilson) novel public-sector practice after three Department of Public Safety years of government alignment and $2 Strategic Planning and Sustainability Framework million of public agency work. Hawaiʻi Technology Development Corporation First Responders Tech Park Our center is partnered with the public Innovation and Manufacturing Center agencies who are responsible for Hawaiʻi Green Growth providing 100% of the population with Ala Wai Watershed Mapping public services and amenities such as Hawaiʻi Public Housing Authority public education, transportation, Future of Hawaii’s Housing infrastructure, parks, and civic spaces. Hoʻoulu ʻĀina Because of this orientation, our work Woodshop does not discriminate between the Ke Kula Kaiapuni ʻO Ānuenue rural, urban, rich, poor, young, old, Multi-purpose Gymnasium disabled, and incarcerated. Instead, State Foundation for Culture and the Arts our work embraces the complexity and Spirit of Liliuokalani Statute - Aliʻi Monument magnitude of the systems, services, State of Hawaiʻi Office of Planning South Shore Promenade and Coastal Open Space Network and environments that are designed for Waipahu Transit Oriented Development all. University of Hawaiʻi Cancer Center UH Cancer Center Annex University of Hawaiʻi Community Colleges Center for Workforce Excellence Kauai Community Colleges Housing Assessment Center for Workforce Excellence University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa Signage Wayfinding Transect Paint Institute for Astronomy Applied Research Lab Space Planning Sea Grant Dunescape Illustrations LEED Buildings Documentation STEM Pre-Academy Transect: Crosswalks Transect Kitchen Table Faculty Housing How we help the CIP process

Public agency Public agency justiﬁes hires The Center developed in alignment funds to State professional with the needs of the government CIP Legislature design team to define a Proof-of-Concept model that augments the capital improvement project (CIP) justification process.

Proof-of-Concept describes a Public agency scope of work that includes identiﬁes project idea/ stakeholder involvement, applied need research, conceptual planning and design investigation that informs public agencies ahead of annual budget requests and procurement of professionals. Public agency Public agency Proof-of-Concept services are UHCDC justiﬁes hires typically ahead of and not in lieu of funds to State professional design services provided by CIP + UHCDC Legislature design team professional consultants.

Proof of concept • Public agency • Design teams respond process assembles an informed to a well-informed and request for funds. well-deﬁned RFP based on a thorough understanding of project context, needs, goals, requirements.

• Public agency can better assess and select CIP = capital improvement justiﬁcation process design team to meet project context, needs, goals, requirements. How proof-of- concept helps the public sector

Proof-of-concept is a pre- procurement scope that increases understanding of the project context, needs, goals, and requirements.

Alignment Engagement Applied Design Prototype Output Research Options

Understand Understand Perform and Synthesize Develop Articulate design project problem context of project collaborate with research through prototypes to options, require- and needs. by learning more university the design process. test and see. ments, or issues for about the place, departments and the project based • Stakeholder people, behaviors, professionals to • Drawings on proof-of-con- engagement uses, needs. develop research • Renderings cept findings and • Literature review material applied • Models design process. • Project definition • Stakeholder to the challenges interviews of the project or • Design options • Workshops design problem. • Design criteria • Surveys • Design standards • End-user research • Urban • Presentation • Co-design • Ecological • Exhibition • User observation • Social • Prototype • Field observation • Cultural • Preliminary Costs • Programming • Political • Economic • Building Performance Modeling • Visualization • Material Research • Engineering • Social Sciences Who we work with

School of College of Architecture UNIVERSITY Schidler School Engineering Legislators GOVERNMENT of Business Government Ocials The Center provides an administrative Hawaiian Studies Department of Education and academic resource center for Department of Urban & Regional Planning Department of Public Safety multi-disciplinary collaboration. This platform is situated at the intersection Public Policy Center Department of Agriculture of the university, government, and Social Science Research Institute Hawai‘i Public Housing Authority community, bringing participatory and research-based planning and design College of Tropical Agriculture State Foundation for Culture and the Arts and Human Resources practices to top-down decision making. As project needs arise, the Sea Grant Colleges Department of Land and Natural Resources center connects public agency needs to the faculty, staff, and student Institute for Sustainability Department of Business, and Resilience Economic Development & Tourism resources within the university. Oce of Administration Oce of State Planning 2016-present C&C Honolulu Dept. of Institute for Astronomy ~70 paid student interns/GSAs Design and Construction ~20 participating faculty members UHCDC Applied Research Laboratory C&C of Honolulu 6 academic departments Oce of Land Development 23 project related courses 3 full time senior research associates Cancer Center C&C of Honolulu Mayor's Oce 10 full time junior research associates (new graduates) Outreach Colleges Ho‘oulu ‘Aina 4 professional project supervisors 12 state agency clients Hawai‘i Public Radio UH West Oahu 10 university clients Hawai‘i Community 3 city office collaborators UH Hilo 3 non-profit organizations Honolulu Community College Hawai‘i Residents

Local Business Kapiolani Community College LOCAL Hawai‘i Visitors COMMUNITY Maui Community College Community Associations Developers Neighborhood Boards Cost Nonproﬁt Organizations PROFESSIONAL estimators Cultural Architects Engineers advisors How we develop student leaders distributive leadership incremental leadership

The Center provides a professional and leadership pathway for student interns as they move through their undergraduate, graduate, and post- graduate years. They incrementally take on more responsibility and learn to mentor those behind them. The leadership model is both incremental and distributive, providing opportunities for student growth throughout. Students work closely with faculty members or practicing architects serving as project supervisors in teams of 4-10. Within this small group setting they are introduced to both research project management methods and the typical requirements contract administration of professional practice. Students have budget and schedule worked over 15,000 hours, eligible for team coordination AXP credit toward licensure, and client communication earned over $300,000 in three years technical drawings research synthesis collectively. concept development technical drawings data visualization concept development 12 programming data visualization 11 research programming 10 graphics research 9 graphics site analysis graphics 8 site analysis client meetings site analysis 7 client meetings presentations presentations 6 presentations diagramming diagramming 5 diagramming massing design massing design 4 model building model building model building

# of students# of 2019 3 precedent study precedent study precedent study 2 literature review literature review literature review 1 client meetings client meetings client meetings

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 undergraduate graduate post-graduate B.Envd D.Arch Jr. Research Associate How public sector practice is unique

We see public sector practice as a specialization within public interest and professional practice. As a government professional practice aligned practice, our scope of work public interest practice and deliverables orient toward the broader needs of government: more problem effective communication, better project decision making, citizen engagement, stakeholder organizational and fiscal efficiency. client UHCDC’s work reflects the following multi-disciplinary shifts from conventional practice. single discipline systems applied systems context public sector practice design design considerations solution alternatives decision frameworks report RFP budget pro-forma architectural infrastructural What the public sector needs Large Scale Effective Visual Collaboration on Communication Three years of work with public Catalytic Site #2 Keehi Lagoon Catalytic Site #3 Keehi Lagoon Beach Park Pearl Harbor Visitor Center Kahauiki Village Regional Richardson Field agencies reveals common requests Aiea Bay Recreation Area • Compile from across the public sector. The Projects information following selected work represents the • Align stakeholders • Establish graphic types of challenges that our work Catalytic Site #1 Ala Wai Canal consistency Ala Wai Golf Course Ala Wai Community Park • Engage addresses on top of more project Ala Wai Boulevard • Ensure public specific objectives. More details are communities legibility included on the following pages. • Assemble expertise

Master Plan Cultural Buy-in Competency

• Gather research • Connect to cultural • Align expertise stakeholders • Establish values • Visualize options • Develop guiding • Engage principles communities • Translate into • Provide soft design introduction to new ideas

Frameworks, Renovate Guidelines, New Relocate Models Re-use Re-program • Gather research • Assemble • Inventory expertise • Program • Define best • Space plan practices • Fix quickly • Visualize new models Waipahu Transit-Oriented Development South Shore Promenade and Collaboration Coastal Open Space Network

CLIENT CLIENT State of Hawai‘i Office of Planning The Waipahu TOD area acts a State of Hawai‘i Office of Planning pilot region to establish an applied PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS research, planning, and design Catalytic Site #2 Simon Bussiere ASLA, Assistant Professor Keehi Lagoon PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR Catalytic Site #3 Keehi Lagoon Beach Park Pearl Harbor Visitor Center Kahauiki Village Priyam Das PhD, Associate Professor framework that supports a macro to Richardson Field Judith Stilgenbauer, ASLA, Aiea Bay Recreation Area Wendy Meguro AIA, Assistant Professor micro level systems-based approach Associate Professor Colin Moore PhD, Associate Professor, to inform the funding of state-owned Hyoung-June Park PhD, Associate Professor Cathi Ho Schar AIA, Assistant Professor TOD projects moving forward. The STAFF Hayley McCann, Suwan Shen PhD, Assistant Professor Department of Urban and Regional Senior Research Associate, Daniele Spirandelli PhD, Assistant Professor Catalytic Site #1 Ala Wai Canal Planning, School of Architecture, Ala Wai Golf Course Diane Moore, Ala Wai Community Park and Public Policy Center worked Ala Wai Boulevard Research Associate COLLABORATORS • Hawai‘i Housing and Finance Development together to provide the Office of Corporation Planning with a strategic sequence STUDENTS • Hawai‘i Public Housing Authority Jonathan Quach, Matthew Higa, of academic courses and contracted • Department of Accounting and Calvin Bulan, Valerie Ribao, General Services work that includes community Jay Moorman (2018), • Department of Education engagement, multi-agency interviews, Diane Moore (2018) • City & County TOD site planning, urban planning, • City & County Office of Climate Change ecological hazards study, ecological This project investigates past, present, and planned shoreline RELATED UH COURSE Sustainability & Resilience Spring 2018 ARCH 743 • AIA Housing Committee conditions study, infrastructure conditions in urban Honolulu from Diamond Head to Pearl

study, flood mitigation measures, Harbor. It advocates for the anticipation of inevitable KEY CONSIDERATIONS • RELATED UH COURSES digital optimization models, housing climate-change-related challenges through the • climate-change resilience Spring 2017 ARCH 743 • ecological performance needs, block typologies, and strategic development of innovative urban ecological design Fall 2017 PLAN 678, 620 • urban ecological design Spring 2018 PLAN 751, 642 planning sessions. proposals that embrace dynamic conditions rather than • placemaking Summer 2018 PLAN 628 preventing them. By challenging conventional wisdom and • adaptive urban waterfront Spring 2019 ARCH 478 pushing beyond the status quo, the proposed design development • sea level rise research intends to broaden the contemporary local and • economic development global discourse on climate-change-resilient, adaptive urban waterfront development.

Proof-of-concept designs for catalytic project sites will propose people-centric, connected, amphibious waterfront conditions that decrease vulnerabilities by responding to anticipated shoreline changes, flooding, inundation as well as issues related to Honolulu’s aging conventional infrastructure. These catalytic sites will act as soft defense mechanisms against sea level rise, allow for indeterminacy, increase biodiversity, provide ecosystem services, and at the same time, create livable and accessible urban waterfront and place amenities for all people. Wahiawa Freshwater Park Kekaha Kai State Park Master Plan

CLIENT Department of Land and Natural Resources

AHUA EN UKON D State Parks Division K KA AR H FOR AL G NORT OTANIC A B NOR IAW TH C AH ANE S W PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS TREE ROSE S T TR EET Simon Bussiere ASLA, Assistant Professor

VENUE KILANI A VENUE A A ORNI CALIF STAFF Zachary Streitz, Research Associate,

SOUTH FORK KAUKONAHUA Michael Honyak, Project Designer WALKER AVENUE

WAHIAWA FRESHWATER PARK STUDENTS Moises Focjoi Lio Can

RELATED UH COURSE ARCH 342 Fall 2017

K AMEHAMEHA H

KEY CONSIDERATIONS

IG • coastal and ecological resilience HW A • eco-tourism CLIENT TheY UHCDC will provide an analysis and master plan for State of Hawai‘i Department • cultural heritage sites of Land and Natural Resources, the Wahiawa Freshwater State Recreation Area (Freshwa- • recreation and resource management State Parks Division ter Park) in its Lake Wilson watershed and Wahiawa town context. Further, the team will develop programming and The 2017-2019 proof-of-concept PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS proof-of-concept design documents for proposed built study for Kekaha Kai State Park Judith Stilgenbauer ASLA, Associate Professor environment interventions at the actual park site. conceptualizes future programming and design for a cultural education STAFF In its existing state, Freshwater Park seems underutilized, facility and campground at the Hawai′i Hayley McCann, Senior Research impacted by water-quality, environmental, and socio- Island beach park. The UHCDC team’s Associate, Diane Moore, Re- search Associate economic issues, and lacking in resilience and connectivity. focus is aimed at providing a balance This applied design research project seeks to contribute between ecological design and GRADUATES & STUDENTS to protecting and enhancing the park’s ecological, social, resource protection with Jonathan Quach, Matthew Higa, and cultural/historic resources and public open space contemporary placemaking through Valerie Ribao, Calvin Bulan, Mark Lombawa (2018), amenities for the community and future generations of low-impact recreational activities and Michael Honyak (2018), park users. The proposed redesign of the park’s facilities local-appropriate lodging. Diane Moore (2018) will focus on ecological, water-sensitive design, resource protection, placemaking, recreational activities, applied RELATED UH COURSE Arch 415 Fall 2017 research, conceptual planning and design investigation, and initial costs that assist with future capital improvement

KEY CONSIDERATIONS program justification and project definition. • watershed planning • sustainable park programming • connectivity analysis • urban stormwater treatment FACILITIES

WCCC HYCF

FACILITIES FACILITIES

WCCC HYCF DepartmentOCCC of Public Safety WCCC State Parks Division HYCF HCF A Strategic Sustainability Framework for Comfort Station Design Guidelines and Corrections FACILITIES Proof-of-Concept Designs

OCCC HCF WCCC OCCC HYCF KCCC HCF CLIENT This sustainability study looks at reducing recidivism Department of Public Safety and the impact of incarceration on the social, cultural, ecological, and economicWCF health of our community. TheFACILITIES PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS Cathi Ho Schar AIA, project team includes faculty from architecture, social Assistant Professor, science, and engineering to provide a cultural design Michael Endres PhD, SSRI KCCC resource andOCCC process framework, recidivism study and WCCC Roger Babcock PhD, ProfessorMCCC HYCF HCF Graduate Chair College of KCCCsocial enterprise assessment, and waste stream Engineering, Civil Engineering analysis and recommendations for the Department of Public Safety.WCF STAFF WCF Jill Axelson, Project Specialist, FACILITIES Mark Lombawa, Research FACILITIES Associate, MCCC Nicole Biewenga, Research HCCC OCCCFED PRISION MCCC KCCCWCCC HCF Associate,HYCF Elaine Nicholas, Project Coordinator WCCC HYCF HCCC MCCC KCCC OCCC Hilo Kahului Lihue Honolulu 500’ 2000’ N STUDENTS SCALE WCF CLIENT Hiu Ki Au, Kaylen Daquioag,FACILITIES 1000’ FACILITIES Department of Land and Natural Kelsy Jorgenson, Connie Kwan, Resources State Parks Division Derrick Pang, Shane Matsunaga, Gladys Razos, Ivy Tejada,HCCC FED PRISION HCCC MCCC FED PRISION PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS Sho OCCCTetsutani (2018), WCCC KCCC WCCC HYCF HYCF HCF Lance Walters NCARB, Associate KristynOCCC Yamamotoya HCF Professor 500’ 2000’ N SCALE COLLABORATORS HYCF 500’ WCCC 2000’ NHCF Federal Detention 1000’ WCF STAFF College of Engineering, Social SCALEKailua Kailua Aiea Center 1000’ Honolulu Zachary Streitz, Research Sciences Research Institute, Associate Professional AE team

HCCC MCCC FED PRISION STUDENTS RELATED UH COURSE Currently, there are no standard designs for comfort OCCC OCCC Sarah Hyun, Christopher Lomboy Fall 2017KCCC ARCH 415 HCF HCF station facilities serving the DLNR Division of State Parks' KCCC Moises Focjoi Lio Can, Rollin statewide park system. The primary objective of this Ritter KEY CONSIDERATIONS 500’ 2000’ N SCALE project is to provide State Parks with guidance on design • redefining sustainability 1000’ • reducing recidivism WCF standards and concepts for new and replacement comfort RELATED UH COURSE WCF • building cultural competence stations. New facilities and the replacement of older Spring 2018 ARCH 235 • reducing waste WCF Waipahu facilities typically require consultants to produce new • developing social enterprise HCCC FED PRISION KEY CONSIDERATIONS opportunitiesMCCC designs rather than utilizing pre-design prototypes that KCCC KCCC • site planning MCCC can be replicated as needed. Through the development of • waste and resource management 500’ 2000’ N design guidelines and proof-of-concept studies, the SCALE • ecologically-sensitive design 1000’ UHCDC will test ideas for comfort station typologies in WCF WCF coastal, ridge, and valley-stream environments.

MCCC HCCC MCCC FED PRISION HCCC FED PRISION

500’ 2000’ N SCALE 500’ 2000’ N SCALE 1000’ 1000’

HCCC HCCCFED PRISION FED PRISION

500’ 2000’ N 500’ 2000’ N SCALE SCALE 1000’ 1000’ Airport Animal Quarantine Department of Land & Natural Resources Holding Facility State Parks Division Space Planning Study Interior Office Optimization Study

CLIENT Department of Agriculture, Animal Industries Division

STAFF Willa Trimble, AIA, Project Supervisor, Nicole Biewenga, Research Associate, Rebecca Ogi Denzer, Research Associate, Glenn Grande, Project Designer

CABIN ANIMAL PUBLIC RR CARGO ANIMAL KEY CONSIDERATIONS RECEPTION (UNISX) RECEPTION • space planning CLIENT • work flow analysis Department of Land and Natural E )

I V Resources State Parks Division • phasing T COMPANION DOG C A (

EXAM

S E A L E

E STAFF R With an increasing Glenn Grande, Project Designer, demand for services at OFFICE Christopher Gaydosh, Project the Airport Animal Designer Quarantine Holding PAPER STORAGE PRIVATE KEY CONSIDERATIONS OFFICE Facility, the existing BREAK ROOM BATHROOMS • efficient space planning facility required a space

planning study to simplify circulation and to This interiors study anticipate operation for developed a streamlined required program during use of existing furniture and

(3) EXOTIC HOLD its expansion. The new CAT HOLD office space to enhance the layout focuses on ISOLATION )

E functionality of the existing increasing security, A S I V P

( State Parks Division office.

G expanding the existing EXEMPT I N HOLDING office, and designating H O L D spaces designed for CRATE STORAGE quarantine processing, HOLDING W/ EXAM STATIONS examination, holding, and OTHER STORAGE isolation.

(17) DOG RUNS ) E V T I C A N ( O I (2) EXAM T ROOMS N A M I (3) LARGE A E X RUNS Ala Wai Watershed Dune Restoration Manual Illustrations Mapping Project

CLIENT • Hawai‘i Green Growth Initiative • Ala Wai Watershed Collaboration

COLLABORATORS Makena Coffman, PhD, Professor, DURP Director Institute for Sustainability and Resilience

STAFF Rebecca Ogi Denzer, Research Associate

STUDENTS Rubinson Intong

KEY CONSIDERATIONS • site specific hazards and assets • watershed management • community organization • information sharing

In support of the goals of the Ala Wai Watershed Collaboration, and in partnership with the Institute for CLIENT Sustainability and Resilience, UHCDC Sea Grant College produced a series of maps of the Ala Wai watershed that compiled a range PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR of data from average annual rainfall, Dolan Ebersole, Coordinator Sea Grant College Program electoral districts, sea level rise, to stream care and restoration. These STAFF Glenn Grande, Project Designer maps aim at establishing a base line of information to share with KEY CONSIDERATIONS stakeholders and the public. • coastal resilience

UHCDC generated illustrations for a Dune Restoration Manual being developed by Sea Grant Colleges. The manual aims at educating and empowering land owners with restoration and stabilization strategies to restore eroding shoreline areas. Spirit of Lili‘uokalani Statue Ke Kula Kaiapuni ʻO Ānuenue New Multi-Purpose Gym Building

CLIENT This project looks at alternative locations for UH COURSE State Foundation for Culture and the Arts placing the Queen Lili‘uokalani Statue currently ARCH 750 Summer 2016 located between the Hawai‘i State Capitol and COLLABORATORS ‘Iolani Palace. Important factors in deciding INSTRUCTOR Ali‘i Task Force potential locations include cultural prominence, Cathi Ho Schar AIA, Assistant Professor

PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR public viewing and public interaction. Two CLIENT/COLLABORATORS Joyce Noe FAIA, Associate Professor preselected sites in Honolulu's Historic District Department of Education, Ke Kula Kaiapuni ʻO were studied in this project. Each site and Ānuenue School STAFF scheme aims to connect the statue and its Kai Hawaii (Structural) Glenn Grande, Project Designer J. Uno & Associates (Cost Estimating) Kirstie Maeshiro-Takiguchi, Project Designer surroundings to the qualities and characteristics Malia Ka’aihue (Cultural consultant) of Queen Lili‘uokalani. Students designed a multi-purpose STUDENTS gymnasium building for Ke Kula Kaiapuni KEY CONSIDERATIONS Janica Domingo, Angus Lin, Richard Robinson O nuenue, the only K-12 Hawaiian • Native Hawaiian values and world view ʻ Ā • cultural tectonics language immersion program on Oʻahu. • low cost long span structures RELATED UH COURSE ARCH 201 Spring 2018 STUDENT WORK BY Michael Honyak & Rollin Ritter KEY CONSIDERATIONS • integrating cultural history in civic spaces How UHCDC impacts teaching

Faculty members have incorporated Community Multi-Departmental UHCDC projects into 23 academic Engaged Design Teaching courses over three years in four different Processes departments: Architecture, Urban & • Planning + Architecture Regional Planning, Engineering, and • Community • Architecture + Sociology. Within Architecture, these workshops Engineering public sector projects have impacted • Public teaching in a number of ways: increased presentations community engagement in the design • Action research studio, faculty research related coursework, multi-departmental teaching, and public-private partnership driven studios. These courses have inspired new teaching methodologies and introduced new skill sets for students.

ARCH 743 Architecture Design Studio ARCH 415 Concentration Design Studio Integrated Faculty Housing Development Scenarios UH Athletics Lower Campus Public-Private Coursework + Live Work Play Redevelopment Partnership

CLIENT University of Hawai‘i Athletics

RELATED UH COURSE Research Arch 415 Fall 2016 Driven KEY CONSIDERATIONS • revenue generation • return on investment • mixed-use development • athletics and amusement urban design anchors • Academic courses • Studios explore incubate research revenue models

Inflation Factor 3.0% Rent @ 100% PRO FORMA AND REVENUE Forecast Units 90% of Mkt Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 CLIENT AMI Rental Housing Income RETURN ON INVESTMENT A1 4 $ 3,111 $ 2,800 $ 134,400 $ 138,432.00 $ 142,584.96 $ 146,862.51 $ 151,268.38 $ 155,806.44 $ 160,480.63 $ 165,295.05 $ 170,253.90 $ 175,361.52 $ 180,622.36 A2 2 $ 3,194 $ 2,875 $ 69,000 $ 71,070.00 $ 73,202.10 $ 75,398.16 $ 77,660.11 $ 79,989.91 $ 82,389.61 $ 84,861.30 $ 87,407.14 $ 90,029.35 $ 92,730.23 University of Hawai‘i Office of Land Development A3a 1 $ 2,111 $ 1,900 $ 22,800 $ 23,484.00 $ 24,188.52 $ 24,914.18 $ 25,661.60 $ 26,431.45 $ 27,224.39 $ 28,041.12 $ 28,882.36 $ 29,748.83 $ 30,641.29 A3b 1 $ 3,167 $ 2,850 $ 34,200 $ 35,226.00 $ 36,282.78 $ 37,371.26 $ 38,492.40 $ 39,647.17 $ 40,836.59 $ 42,061.69 $ 43,323.54 $ 44,623.24 $ 45,961.94 B1 6 $ 3,194 $ 2,875 $ 207,000 $ 213,210.00 $ 219,606.30 $ 226,194.49 $ 232,980.32 $ 239,969.73 $ 247,168.83 $ 254,583.89 $ 262,221.41 $ 270,088.05 $ 278,190.69 B2a 1 $ 2,556 $ 2,300 $ 27,600 $ 28,428.00 $ 29,280.84 $ 30,159.27 $ 31,064.04 $ 31,995.96 $ 32,955.84 $ 33,944.52 $ 34,962.85 $ 36,011.74 $ 37,092.09 B2b 1 $ 3,278 $ 2,950 $ 35,400 $ 36,462.00 $ 37,555.86 $ 38,682.54 $ 39,843.01 $ 41,038.30 $ 42,269.45 $ 43,537.53 $ 44,843.66 $ 46,188.97 $ 47,574.64 B3 4 $ 3,444 $ 3,100 $ 148,800 $ 153,264.00 $ 157,861.92 $ 162,597.78 $ 167,475.71 $ 172,499.98 $ 177,674.98 $ 183,005.23 $ 188,495.39 $ 194,150.25 $ 199,974.76 PROJECT SUMMARY C1a 2 $ 3,333 $ 3,000 $ 72,000 $ 74,160.00 $ 76,384.80 $ 78,676.34 $ 81,036.63 $ 83,467.73 $ 85,971.77 $ 88,550.92 $ 91,207.45 $ 93,943.67 $ 96,761.98 projects C1b 2 $ 3,167 $ 2,850 $ 68,400 $ 70,452.00 $ 72,565.56 $ 74,742.53 $ 76,984.80 $ 79,294.35 $ 81,673.18 $ 84,123.37 $ 86,647.07 $ 89,246.49 $ 91,923.88 • Developer engaged COLLABORATIORS C2a 1 $ 2,444 $ 2,200 $ 26,400 $ 27,192 $ 28,008 $ 28,848 $ 29,713 $ 30,605 $ 31,523 $ 32,469 $ 33,443 $ 34,446 $ 35,479 Budget % TPC C2b 1 $ 3,278 $ 2,950 $ 35,400 $ 36,462 $ 37,556 $ 38,683 $ 39,843 $ 41,038 $ 42,269 $ 43,538 $ 44,844 $ 46,189 $ 47,575 C3a 1 $ 3,389 $ 3,050 $ 36,600 $ 37,698 $ 38,829 $ 39,994 $ 41,194 $ 42,429 $ 43,702 $ 45,013 $ 46,364 $ 47,755 $ 49,187 LAND COSTS C3b 1 $ 3,167 $ 2,850 $ 34,200 $ 35,226 $ 36,283 $ 37,371 $ 38,492 $ 39,647 $ 40,837 $ 42,062 $ 43,324 $ 44,623 $ 45,962 Stanford Carr Development 28 Total $ 918,000 $ 945,540 $ 973,906 $ 1,003,123 $ 1,033,217 $ 1,064,214 $ 1,096,140 $ 1,129,024 $ 1,162,895 $ 1,197,782 $ 1,233,715 Raw Land Cost $750,000 4.5% Vacancy Factor @ 5% (45,900) (47,277) (48,695) (50,156) (51,661) (53,211) (54,807) (56,451) (58,145) (59,889) (61,686) TOTAL REVENUE $ 872,100 $ 898,263 $ 925,211 $ 952,967 $ 981,556 $ 1,011,003 $ 1,041,333 $ 1,072,573 $ 1,104,750 $ 1,137,893 $ 1,172,029 Processing/Diligence $142,500 0.9% Inflation Factor 3.0% Fees $301,738 1.8% Expense Forecast Per Unit Per Month Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Staff - Payroll $ 250 $ 84,000 $ 86,520 $ 89,116 $ 91,789 $ 94,543 $ 97,379 $ 100,300 $ 103,309 $ 106,409 $ 109,601 $ 112,889 Land Improvements $1,706,160 10.2% Utitilies $ 160 $ 53,760 $ 55,373 $ 57,034 $ 58,745 $ 60,507 $ 62,323 $ 64,192 $ 66,118 $ 68,102 $ 70,145 $ 72,249 RELATED UH COURSE Serivce Contracts (i.e trash, etc.) $ 125 $ 42,000 $ 43,260 $ 44,558 $ 45,895 $ 47,271 $ 48,690 $ 50,150 $ 51,655 $ 53,204 $ 54,800 $ 56,444 Common Landscaping $0 0.0% Repairs and Maintenance $ 30 $ 10,080 $ 10,382 $ 10,694 $ 11,015 $ 11,345 $ 11,685 $ 12,036 $ 12,397 $ 12,769 $ 13,152 $ 13,547 FF&Es (Furniture, Fix, Equp) $ 20 $ 6,720 $ 6,922 $ 7,129 $ 7,343 $ 7,563 $ 7,790 $ 8,024 $ 8,265 $ 8,513 $ 8,768 $ 9,031 Real Estate Taxes $0 0.0% Insurance $ 40 $ 13,440 $ 13,843 $ 14,258 $ 14,686 $ 15,127 $ 15,581 $ 16,048 $ 16,530 $ 17,025 $ 17,536 $ 18,062 ARCH 743 Architecture Design Studio GET Tax $ 117 $ 39,245 $ 40,422 $ 41,634 $ 42,884 $ 44,170 $ 45,495 $ 46,860 $ 48,266 $ 49,714 $ 51,205 $ 52,741 Total $2,900,398 17.4% Property Tax $ 174 $ 58,457 $ 60,211 $ 62,017 $ 63,877 $ 65,794 $ 67,767 $ 69,800 $ 71,895 $ 74,051 $ 76,273 $ 78,561 Reserves $ 100 $ 33,600 $ 34,608 $ 35,646 $ 36,716 $ 37,817 $ 38,952 $ 40,120 $ 41,324 $ 42,563 $ 43,840 $ 45,156 General $ 15 $ 5,040 $ 5,191 $ 5,347 $ 5,507 $ 5,673 $ 5,843 $ 6,018 $ 6,199 $ 6,385 $ 6,576 $ 6,773 • Students work TOTAL EXPENSES $ 1,031 $ 346,341 $ 356,732 $ 367,434 $ 378,457 $ 389,810 $ 401,505 $ 413,550 $ 425,956 $ 438,735 $ 451,897 $ 465,454 • Introduction to pro DIRECT CONSTRUCTION COSTS Production $9,736,099 58.3% Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 KEY CONSIDERATIONS Net Operating Cash Flow $ 525,759 $ 541,531 $ 557,777 $ 574,511 $ 591,746 $ 609,498 $ 627,783 $ 646,617 $ 666,015 $ 685,996 $ 706,576 Front Yard Landscaping $0 0.0% Accumulated Students$ 525,759 $ 1,067,290 $ 1,625,068 worked$ 2,199,578 $ 2,791,324 $ 3,400,823with $ 4,028,606 UH$ 4,675,223 Athletics$ 5,341,238 $ 6,027,234 $ 6,733,810 to reenvision a • Public Private Partnership feasibility Total $9,736,099 58.3% Total Project Cost $16,701,947 Annual Capitalization Rate 3.1% 3.2% 3.3% 3.4% 3.5% 3.6% 3.8% 3.9% 4.0% 4.1% 4.2% Total Return on Investment redeveloped3.1% 6.4% 9.7% 13.2% lower 16.7% 20.4%campus 24.1% 28.0% live- 32.0% 36.1% work- 40.3% play area that • Pro forma work , ROI, unit counts INDIRECT COSTS Building Permit / Review Fees $60,000 0.4% Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15 Year 16 Year 17 Year 18 Year 19 Year 20 Year 21 Year 22 Year 23 Indirect Construction $926,805 5.5% connected new sports and recreation facilities to housing, $ 186,041.03 $ 191,622.26 $ 197,370.93 $ 203,292.06 $ 209,390.82 $ 215,672.55 $ 222,142.72 $ 228,807.00 $ 235,671.21 $ 242,741.35 $ 250,023.59 $ 257,524.30 Insurance $194,722 1.2% $ 95,512.14 $ 98,377.50 $ 101,328.83 $ 104,368.69 $ 107,499.75 $ 110,724.74 $ 114,046.49 $ 117,467.88 $ 120,991.92 $ 124,621.68 $ 128,360.33 $ 132,211.14 $ 31,560.53 $ 32,507.35 $ 33,482.57 $ 34,487.05 $ 35,521.66 $ 36,587.31 $ 37,684.93 $ 38,815.47 $ 39,979.94 $ 41,179.34 $ 42,414.72 $ 43,687.16 Standford Carr Development $ 65,530.74 Builder Overhead $1,250,000 7.5% $ 47,340.80 $ 48,761.02 $ 50,223.85 $ 51,730.57 $ 53,282.49 $ 54,880.96 $ 56,527.39 $ 58,223.21 $ 59,969.91 $ 61,769.00 $ 63,622.07 This project explores possible faculty $ 286,536.41 $ 295,132.50 $ 303,986.48 $ 313,106.07 commercial,$ 322,499.26 $ 332,174.23 $ 342,139.46 $ 352,403.64 and$ 362,975.75 $ 373,865.03amusement$ 385,080.98 $ 396,633.41 supplied amenities.the class with a proto- Students $ 38,204.85 $ 39,351.00 $ 40,531.53 $ 41,747.48 $ 42,999.90 $ 44,289.90 $ 45,618.59 $ 46,987.15 $ 48,396.77 $ 49,848.67 $ 51,344.13 $ 52,884.45 Marketing Costs $15,000 0.1% $ 49,001.88 $ 50,471.94 $ 51,986.09 $ 53,545.68 $ 55,152.05 $ 56,806.61 $ 58,510.81 $ 60,266.13 $ 62,074.11 $ 63,936.34 $ 65,854.43 $ 67,830.06 typical Pro Forma they use for alongside research $ 205,974.00 $ 212,153.22 $ 218,517.82 $ 225,073.35 $ 231,825.55 $ 238,780.32 $ 245,943.73 $ 253,322.04 $ 260,921.70 $ 268,749.35 $ 276,811.83 $ 285,116.19 forma work Holding Costs $48,000 0.3% $ 99,664.84 $ 102,654.78 $ 105,734.43 $ 108,906.46 $ 112,173.65 $ 115,538.86 $ 119,005.03 $ 122,575.18 $ 126,252.44 $ 130,040.01 $ 133,941.21 $ 137,959.45 some of their projects to project housing development scenarios for a $ 94,681.60 $ 97,522.04 $ 100,447.71 $ 103,461.14 developed$ 106,564.97 $ 109,761.92 $ 113,054.78 $ 116,446.42pro$ 119,939.81 formas$ 123,538.01 $ 127,244.15 alongside$ 131,061.47 potential project theircosts and prof -design work to Contingency $850,101 5.1% $ 36,544 $ 37,640 $ 38,769 $ 39,932 $ 41,130 $ 42,364 $ 43,635 $ 44,944 $ 46,293 $ 47,681 $ 49,112 $ 50,585 $ 49,002 $ 50,472 $ 51,986 $ 53,546 $ 55,152 $ 56,807 $ 58,511 $ 60,266 $ 62,074 $ 63,936 $ 65,854 $ 67,830 its. By adjusting the pro forma Total $3,344,628 20.0% $ 50,663 $ 52,183 $ 53,748 $ 55,361 $ 57,022 $ 58,732 $ 60,494 $ 62,309 $ 64,178 $ 66,104 $ 68,087 $ 70,129 $ 47,341 $ 48,761 $ 50,224 $ 51,731 $ 53,282 $ 54,881 $ 56,527 $ 58,223 $ 59,970 $ 61,769 $ 63,622 $ 65,531 to our own project, the follow- University of Hawai‘i owned property in TOTAL DEVELOPMENT COSTS (TDC) $15,981,125 95.7% $ 1,270,727 $ 1,308,848 $ 1,348,114 $ 1,388,557 explore$ 1,430,214 $ 1,473,121 $ 1,517,314 revenue$ 1,562,834 $ 1,609,719 $ generating 1,658,010 $ 1,707,750 $ 1,758,983 opportunities for a public (63,536) (65,442) (67,406) (69,428) (71,511) (73,656) (75,866) (78,142) (80,486) (82,901) (85,388) (87,949) ing was found: $ 1,207,190 $ 1,243,406 $ 1,280,708 $ 1,319,129 $ 1,358,703 $ 1,399,464 $ 1,441,448 $ 1,484,692 $ 1,529,233 $ 1,575,110 $ 1,622,363 $ 1,671,034 Kaimuki in partnership with the UH Office of FINANCING COSTS private partnership. -Total Cost of Development: Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15 Year 16 Year 17 Year 18 Year 19 Year 20 Year 21 Year 22 Year 23 $16,701,947 Land Acquisition Fees $0 0.0% $ 116,276 $ 119,764 $ 123,357 $ 127,058 $ 130,869 $ 134,795 $ 138,839 $ 143,004 $ 147,295 $ 151,713 $ 156,265 $ 160,953 $ 74,416 $ 76,649 $ 78,948 $ 81,317 $ 83,756 $ 86,269 $ 88,857 $ 91,523 $ 94,268 $ 97,097 $ 100,009 $ 103,010 Construction Loan Fees/Closing $0 0.0% $ 58,138 $ 59,882 $ 61,678 $ 63,529 $ 65,435 $ 67,398 $ 69,420 $ 71,502 $ 73,647 $ 75,857 $ 78,132 $ 80,476 Land Development. The criteria for this $ 13,953 $ 14,372 $ 14,803 $ 15,247 $ 15,704 $ 16,175 $ 16,661 $ 17,161 $ 17,675 $ 18,206 $ 18,752 $ 19,314 -Total Cost Per Unit: Loan Administration $0 0.0% $ 9,302 $ 9,581 $ 9,869 $ 10,165 $ 10,470 $ 10,784 $ 11,107 $ 11,440 $ 11,784 $ 12,137 $ 12,501 $ 12,876 $ 18,604 $ 19,162 $ 19,737 $ 20,329 $ 20,939 $ 21,567 $ 22,214 $ 22,881 $ 23,567 $ 24,274 $ 25,002 $ 25,752 $596,498 Loan Interest $720,822 4.3% $ 54,324 $ 55,953 $ 57,632 $ 59,361 $ 61,142 $ 62,976 $ 64,865 $ 66,811 $ 68,815 $ 70,880 $ 73,006 $ 75,197 $ 80,918 $ 83,345 $ 85,846 $ 88,421 $ 91,074 $ 93,806 $ 96,620 $ 99,519 $ 102,504 $ 105,580 $ 108,747 $ 112,009 project integrates design with financial Total $720,822 4.3% $ 46,510 $ 47,906 $ 49,343 $ 50,823 $ 52,348 $ 53,918 $ 55,536 $ 57,202 $ 58,918 $ 60,685 $ 62,506 $ 64,381 -Year of 100% Return on teams $ 6,977 $ 7,186 $ 7,401 $ 7,623 $ 7,852 $ 8,088 $ 8,330 $ 8,580 $ 8,838 $ 9,103 $ 9,376 $ 9,657 TOTAL PROJECT COST $16,701,947 100.0% $ 479,417 $ 493,800 $ 508,614 $ 523,872 $ 539,588 $ 555,776 $ 572,449 $ 589,623 $ 607,312 $ 625,531 $ 644,297 $ 663,626 Investment: profitability, regulatory restrictions, possible TOTAL COST PER UNIT $596,498 Year 23 of Project Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15 Year 16 Year 17 Year 18 Year 19 Year 20 Year 21 Year 22 Year 23 $ 727,773 $ 749,606 $ 772,094 $ 795,257 $ 819,115 $ 843,688 $ 868,999 $ 895,069 $ 921,921 $ 949,579 $ 978,066 1,007,408 $ 7,461,583 $ 8,211,189 $ 8,983,283 $ Page:9,778,540 1/1 $ 10,597,655 $ 11,441,344 $ 12,310,343 $ 13,205,412 $ 14,127,333 $ 15,076,911 $ 16,054,977 17,062,385 Printed: 5/1/2018, 8:09 PM land use variances, and the land owner’s File: Leahi Faculty Housing - Pro Forma, Summary 4.4% 4.5% 4.6% 4.8% 4.9% 5.1% 5.2% 5.4% 5.5% 5.7% 5.9% 6.0% • Students join development priorities. 44.7% 49.2% 53.8% 58.5% 63.5% 68.5% 73.7% 79.1% 84.6% 90.3% 96.1% 102.2% research teams that build on studio explorations ARCH 750 Architecture Studio ARCH 745 UH Mˉanoa Wayfinding Advanced Professional Practice 901 River Street

COLLABORATORS City & County of Honolulu Office of Land Development

INSTRUCTOR Cathi Ho Schar AIA, Assistant Professor

UH COURSE ARCH 745 Fall 2018

KEY CONSIDERATIONS • underutilized interior space • community engagement • transit oriented development

901 River Street is a city-owned building adjacent to a future transit station with vacant retail space on its first two floors. ARCH 745 students hosted a community workshop in the

COLLABORATORS Chinese Cultural Plaza to gather input University of Hawai‘i at Mˉanoa on desired uses for the space and for Office of the Vice President for This research-focused capstone design studio partnered Administration with the UHM Office of the Vice President for Administration improved urban and transit connectivity. to conduct a multi-pronged research effort into the unique INSTRUCTOR contexts of the Mˉanoa campus. Students learned a variety Brian Strawn AIA, Senior Research Associate of research skills including how to conduct interviews with content experts, end users, and how to collect quantitative data from the general public. Speculative design projects UH COURSE ARCH 750G, Summer 2018 were developed based directly upon the analysis and synthesis of this research. KEY CONSIDERATIONS • indigenous and multi-cultural campus • wayfinding • identity ARCH 342 Hawai‘i Public Housing Authority Intermediate Design Studio Future of Hawai‘i’s Housing Future Hawai‘i Dwelling Studio

CLIENT Hawai‘i Public Housing Authority

PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR Brian Strawn AIA, Senior Research Associate, Karla Sierralta AIA, Assistant Professor

RELATED UH COURSE Arch 342 Spring 2019

KEY CONSIDERATIONS • TOD-oriented neighborhoods • affordable housing • walkable communities • passive, sustainable design

CLIENT Hawai‘i Public Housing Authority This third-year undergraduate studio explored future possibilities for urban dwellings in Honolulu. An existing INSTRUCTOR Karla Sierralta AIA, 16-acre lot located in a future transit-oriented development Assistant Professor district, and currently owned by the Hawai‘i Public Housing Authority was reimagined. Investigations included site UH COURSE analysis, precedents, typologies, density studies, and Arch 342 Spring 2019 numerous massing iterations of low, medium, and high- density alternatives. Final designs promoted healthy living, KEY CONSIDERATIONS • urban dwelling sustainability, outdoor connections, cultural traditions and • density proposed a diversity of innovative living spaces at a variety • TOD neighborhoods of urban scales. The state of Hawai‘i is facing a critical shortage of affordable housing. The Hawai‘i Public Housing Authority is in the unique position to build walkable, sustainable, and equitable communities, both through new mixed-use, economically diverse, TOD-oriented projects and through the redevelopment of existing HPHA properties. This bottom-up project started with in-home interviews with residents across Oahu, Molokai, Hawai‘i, Maui, and Kauai. Qualitative data is being used to develop guiding principles and design guidelines for all future HPHA projects. ARCH 201 Beginning Design Studio PLAN 620 Environmental Planning and CEE 490 Senior Design Project Policy, PLAN 642 Urban Infrastructure, Kualaka‘i Transit Station Area PLAN 678 Site Planning, PLAN 751 Architecture and Engineering Study Planning Practicum, ARCH 743, ARCH 478 COLLABORATORS • Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation • UHM College of Engineering

INSTRUCTORS Cathi Ho Schar AIA, Assistant Professor (ARCH 201) Roger Babcock PhD, Professor (CEE 490)

UH COURSES Arch 201 Spring 2019 CEE 490 Spring 2019

KEY CONSIDERATIONS • infrastructure as architecture • place-based design approaches • cultural tectonics • circulation as public experience

The Waipahu TOD Collaboration project gathered 8UNIVERSITY CLIENT OF HAWAI‘I AT MANOA faculty members from Architecture, Urban and DEPARTMENTOffice of Planning OF URBAN AND REGIONAL PLANNING Regional Planning, Public Policy, and Sea Grant INSTRUCTORS Colleges who coordinated work that was integrated Simon Bussiere ASLA, Assistant into 6 academic courses and 8 research projects. ASSESSINGProfessor TRANSIT- The horizontal and vertical integration of the Priyam Das PhD, Associate Professor Wendy Meguro AIA, Assistant Professor planning courses: PLAN 620, 642, 678, 751 offers a Colin Moore PhD, Associate Professor, replicable model for course collaboration on Cathi Ho Schar AIA, Assistant Professor ORIENTEDSuwan Shen PhD, Assistant Professor complex urban projects. The cross departmental logo Daniele Spirandelli PhD, Assistant collaboration offered students exposure to other Professor In partnership with add Honolulu Authority on Rapid disciplines, strengths, and skill sets, and a chance to DEVELOPMENT IN Transportation (HART), ARCH 201 students worked in work together to host a community workshop. UH COURSES parallel to Civil Engineering Senior Project Teams on ARCH 742 Spring 2017 Plan 620 Fall 2017 designs for a pedestrian bridge, entry building, parking, Plan 678 Fall 2017 WAIPAHU,Plan 642 Spring 2018 HAWAI‘I and transit hub connecting the Kualaka‘i transit station to future UHWO developments. ARCH and ENG students Plan 751 Spring 2018 MAYARCH 2018 478 Fall 2018 exchanged and reviewed each others’ work at major

benchmarks. KEY CONSIDERATIONS • urbanization • transportation • infrastructure • density • community development ARCH 743 Architecture Design Studio ARCH 415 Concentration Design Studio Faculty Housing Development Scenarios UH Athletics Lower Campus Live Work Play Redevelopment

CLIENT University of Hawai‘i Athletics

INSTRUCTOR Christopher Hong AIA

STUDENT WORK BY: Rydan Higashihara, Shirley Hong, Cong Cong Huang, Christopher Lomboy, Khoa Nguyen

KEY CONSIDERATIONS • live, work, play • revenue generation • mixed-use development • athletics and amusement urban design anchors

Inflation Factor 3.0% Rent @ 100% PRO FORMA AND REVENUE Forecast Units 90% of Mkt Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 CLIENT AMI Rental Housing Income RETURN ON INVESTMENT A1 4 $ 3,111 $ 2,800 $ 134,400 $ 138,432.00 $ 142,584.96 $ 146,862.51 $ 151,268.38 $ 155,806.44 $ 160,480.63 $ 165,295.05 $ 170,253.90 $ 175,361.52 $ 180,622.36 A2 2 $ 3,194 $ 2,875 $ 69,000 $ 71,070.00 $ 73,202.10 $ 75,398.16 $ 77,660.11 $ 79,989.91 $ 82,389.61 $ 84,861.30 $ 87,407.14 $ 90,029.35 $ 92,730.23 University of Hawai‘i Office of Land Development A3a 1 $ 2,111 $ 1,900 $ 22,800 $ 23,484.00 $ 24,188.52 $ 24,914.18 $ 25,661.60 $ 26,431.45 $ 27,224.39 $ 28,041.12 $ 28,882.36 $ 29,748.83 $ 30,641.29 A3b 1 $ 3,167 $ 2,850 $ 34,200 $ 35,226.00 $ 36,282.78 $ 37,371.26 $ 38,492.40 $ 39,647.17 $ 40,836.59 $ 42,061.69 $ 43,323.54 $ 44,623.24 $ 45,961.94 B1 6 $ 3,194 $ 2,875 $ 207,000 $ 213,210.00 $ 219,606.30 $ 226,194.49 $ 232,980.32 $ 239,969.73 $ 247,168.83 $ 254,583.89 $ 262,221.41 $ 270,088.05 $ 278,190.69 B2a 1 $ 2,556 $ 2,300 $ 27,600 $ 28,428.00 $ 29,280.84 $ 30,159.27 $ 31,064.04 $ 31,995.96 $ 32,955.84 $ 33,944.52 $ 34,962.85 $ 36,011.74 $ 37,092.09 B2b 1 $ 3,278 $ 2,950 $ 35,400 $ 36,462.00 $ 37,555.86 $ 38,682.54 $ 39,843.01 $ 41,038.30 $ 42,269.45 $ 43,537.53 $ 44,843.66 $ 46,188.97 $ 47,574.64 B3 4 $ 3,444 $ 3,100 $ 148,800 $ 153,264.00 $ 157,861.92 $ 162,597.78 $ 167,475.71 $ 172,499.98 $ 177,674.98 $ 183,005.23 $ 188,495.39 $ 194,150.25 $ 199,974.76 PROJECT SUMMARY C1a 2 $ 3,333 $ 3,000 $ 72,000 $ 74,160.00 $ 76,384.80 $ 78,676.34 $ 81,036.63 $ 83,467.73 $ 85,971.77 $ 88,550.92 $ 91,207.45 $ 93,943.67 $ 96,761.98 C1b 2 $ 3,167 $ 2,850 $ 68,400 $ 70,452.00 $ 72,565.56 $ 74,742.53 $ 76,984.80 $ 79,294.35 $ 81,673.18 $ 84,123.37 $ 86,647.07 $ 89,246.49 $ 91,923.88 INSTRUCTOR C2a 1 $ 2,444 $ 2,200 $ 26,400 $ 27,192 $ 28,008 $ 28,848 $ 29,713 $ 30,605 $ 31,523 $ 32,469 $ 33,443 $ 34,446 $ 35,479 Budget % TPC C2b 1 $ 3,278 $ 2,950 $ 35,400 $ 36,462 $ 37,556 $ 38,683 $ 39,843 $ 41,038 $ 42,269 $ 43,538 $ 44,844 $ 46,189 $ 47,575 C3a 1 $ 3,389 $ 3,050 $ 36,600 $ 37,698 $ 38,829 $ 39,994 $ 41,194 $ 42,429 $ 43,702 $ 45,013 $ 46,364 $ 47,755 $ 49,187 LAND COSTS C3b 1 $ 3,167 $ 2,850 $ 34,200 $ 35,226 $ 36,283 $ 37,371 $ 38,492 $ 39,647 $ 40,837 $ 42,062 $ 43,324 $ 44,623 $ 45,962 Pu Miao PhD, Professor 28 Total $ 918,000 $ 945,540 $ 973,906 $ 1,003,123 $ 1,033,217 $ 1,064,214 $ 1,096,140 $ 1,129,024 $ 1,162,895 $ 1,197,782 $ 1,233,715 Raw Land Cost $750,000 4.5% Vacancy Factor @ 5% (45,900) (47,277) (48,695) (50,156) (51,661) (53,211) (54,807) (56,451) (58,145) (59,889) (61,686) TOTAL REVENUE $ 872,100 $ 898,263 $ 925,211 $ 952,967 $ 981,556 $ 1,011,003 $ 1,041,333 $ 1,072,573 $ 1,104,750 $ 1,137,893 $ 1,172,029 Processing/Diligence $142,500 0.9% Inflation Factor 3.0% Fees $301,738 1.8% Expense Forecast Per Unit Per Month Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Staff - Payroll $ 250 $ 84,000 $ 86,520 $ 89,116 $ 91,789 $ 94,543 $ 97,379 $ 100,300 $ 103,309 $ 106,409 $ 109,601 $ 112,889 Land Improvements $1,706,160 10.2% Utitilies $ 160 $ 53,760 $ 55,373 $ 57,034 $ 58,745 $ 60,507 $ 62,323 $ 64,192 $ 66,118 $ 68,102 $ 70,145 $ 72,249 Serivce Contracts (i.e trash, etc.) $ 125 $ 42,000 $ 43,260 $ 44,558 $ 45,895 $ 47,271 $ 48,690 $ 50,150 $ 51,655 $ 53,204 $ 54,800 $ 56,444 COLLABORATORS Common Landscaping $0 0.0% Repairs and Maintenance $ 30 $ 10,080 $ 10,382 $ 10,694 $ 11,015 $ 11,345 $ 11,685 $ 12,036 $ 12,397 $ 12,769 $ 13,152 $ 13,547 FF&Es (Furniture, Fix, Equp) $ 20 $ 6,720 $ 6,922 $ 7,129 $ 7,343 $ 7,563 $ 7,790 $ 8,024 $ 8,265 $ 8,513 $ 8,768 $ 9,031 Real Estate Taxes $0 0.0% Insurance $ 40 $ 13,440 $ 13,843 $ 14,258 $ 14,686 $ 15,127 $ 15,581 $ 16,048 $ 16,530 $ 17,025 $ 17,536 $ 18,062 GET Tax $ 117 $ 39,245 $ 40,422 $ 41,634 $ 42,884 $ 44,170 $ 45,495 $ 46,860 $ 48,266 $ 49,714 $ 51,205 $ 52,741 Stanford Carr Development Total $2,900,398 17.4% Property Tax $ 174 $ 58,457 $ 60,211 $ 62,017 $ 63,877 $ 65,794 $ 67,767 $ 69,800 $ 71,895 $ 74,051 $ 76,273 $ 78,561 Reserves $ 100 $ 33,600 $ 34,608 $ 35,646 $ 36,716 $ 37,817 $ 38,952 $ 40,120 $ 41,324 $ 42,563 $ 43,840 $ 45,156 General $ 15 $ 5,040 $ 5,191 $ 5,347 $ 5,507 $ 5,673 $ 5,843 $ 6,018 $ 6,199 $ 6,385 $ 6,576 $ 6,773 TOTAL EXPENSES $ 1,031 $ 346,341 $ 356,732 $ 367,434 $ 378,457 $ 389,810 $ 401,505 $ 413,550 $ 425,956 $ 438,735 $ 451,897 $ 465,454 DIRECT CONSTRUCTION COSTS Production $9,736,099 58.3% Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Net Operating Cash Flow $ 525,759 $ 541,531 $ 557,777 $ 574,511 $ 591,746 $ 609,498 $ 627,783 $ 646,617 $ 666,015 $ 685,996 $ 706,576 STUDENT WORK BY Front Yard Landscaping $0 0.0% Accumulated $ 525,759 $ 1,067,290 $ 1,625,068 $ 2,199,578 $ 2,791,324 $ 3,400,823 $ 4,028,606 $ 4,675,223 $ 5,341,238 $ 6,027,234 $ 6,733,810 Total $9,736,099 58.3% Total Project Cost $16,701,947 Jason Hashimoto, Kris Jugueta, John Quindara Annual Capitalization Rate 3.1% 3.2% 3.3% 3.4% 3.5% 3.6% 3.8% 3.9% 4.0% 4.1% 4.2% Total Return on Investment Students3.1% 6.4% 9.7%worked 13.2% 16.7% with 20.4% 24.1%UH 28.0% Athletics 32.0% 36.1% 40.3% to re-envision a INDIRECT COSTS Building Permit / Review Fees $60,000 0.4% Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15redeveloped Year 16 Year 17 Year 18 Year 19 lower Year 20 Year 21 campus Year 22 Year 23 live- work- play area that Indirect Construction $926,805 5.5% $ 186,041.03 $ 191,622.26 $ 197,370.93 $ 203,292.06 $ 209,390.82 $ 215,672.55 $ 222,142.72 $ 228,807.00 $ 235,671.21 $ 242,741.35 $ 250,023.59 $ 257,524.30 KEY CONSIDERATIONS Insurance $194,722 1.2% $ 95,512.14 $ 98,377.50 $ 101,328.83 $ 104,368.69 $ 107,499.75 $ 110,724.74 $ 114,046.49 $ 117,467.88 $ 120,991.92 $ 124,621.68 $ 128,360.33 $ 132,211.14 $ 31,560.53 $ 32,507.35 $ 33,482.57 $ 34,487.05 $ 35,521.66 $ 36,587.31 $ 37,684.93 $ 38,815.47 $ 39,979.94 $ 41,179.34 $ 42,414.72 $ 43,687.16 Standford Carr Development $ 47,340.80 $ 48,761.02 $ 50,223.85 $ 51,730.57 $ 53,282.49 $ 54,880.96 $ 56,527.39 $ 58,223.21 $ 59,969.91 $ 61,769.00 $ 63,622.07 $ 65,530.74 Builder Overhead $1,250,000 7.5% $ 286,536.41 $ 295,132.50 $ 303,986.48 $ 313,106.07 connected$ 322,499.26 $ 332,174.23 $ 342,139.46 $ 352,403.64 new$ 362,975.75 sports$ 373,865.03 $ 385,080.98 $ and 396,633.41 supplied recreation the class with a proto- facilities to housing, • affordable housing $ 38,204.85 $ 39,351.00 $ 40,531.53 $ 41,747.48 $ 42,999.90 $ 44,289.90 $ 45,618.59 $ 46,987.15 $ 48,396.77 $ 49,848.67 $ 51,344.13 $ 52,884.45 Marketing Costs $15,000 0.1% $ 49,001.88 $ 50,471.94 $ 51,986.09 $ 53,545.68 $ 55,152.05 $ 56,806.61 $ 58,510.81 $ 60,266.13 $ 62,074.11 $ 63,936.34 $ 65,854.43 $ 67,830.06 typical Pro Forma they use for $ 205,974.00 $ 212,153.22 $ 218,517.82 $ 225,073.35 $ 231,825.55 $ 238,780.32 $ 245,943.73 $ 253,322.04 $ 260,921.70 $ 268,749.35 $ 276,811.83 $ 285,116.19 Holding Costs $48,000 0.3% $ 99,664.84 $ 102,654.78 $ 105,734.43 $ 108,906.46 $ 112,173.65 $ 115,538.86 $ 119,005.03 $ 122,575.18 $ 126,252.44 $ 130,040.01 $ 133,941.21 $ 137,959.45 some of their projects to project • regulatory context $ 94,681.60 $ 97,522.04 $ 100,447.71 $ 103,461.14 commercial,$ 106,564.97 $ 109,761.92 $ 113,054.78 $ 116,446.42 and$ 119,939.81 $ 123,538.01amusement$ 127,244.15 $ 131,061.47 potential amenities. project costs and prof- Students Contingency $850,101 5.1% $ 36,544 $ 37,640 $ 38,769 $ 39,932 $ 41,130 $ 42,364 $ 43,635 $ 44,944 $ 46,293 $ 47,681 $ 49,112 $ 50,585 $ 49,002 $ 50,472 $ 51,986 $ 53,546 $ 55,152 $ 56,807 $ 58,511 $ 60,266 $ 62,074 $ 63,936 $ 65,854 $ 67,830 its. By adjusting the pro forma • Public Private Partnership feasibility Total $3,344,628 20.0% $ 50,663 $ 52,183 $ 53,748 $ 55,361 $ 57,022 $ 58,732 $ 60,494 $ 62,309 $ 64,178 $ 66,104 $ 68,087 $ 70,129 $ 65,531 to our own project, the follow- $ 47,341 $ 48,761 $ 50,224 $ 51,731 developed$ 53,282 $ 54,881 $ 56,527 $ pro 58,223 $ 59,970formas$ 61,769 $ 63,622 alongside their design work to TOTAL DEVELOPMENT COSTS (TDC) $15,981,125 95.7% $ 1,270,727 $ 1,308,848 $ 1,348,114 $ 1,388,557 $ 1,430,214 $ 1,473,121 $ 1,517,314 $ 1,562,834 $ 1,609,719 $ 1,658,010 $ 1,707,750 $ 1,758,983 (63,536) (65,442) (67,406) (69,428) (71,511) (73,656) (75,866) (78,142) (80,486) (82,901) (85,388) (87,949) ing was found: $ 1,207,190 $ 1,243,406 $ 1,280,708 $ 1,319,129 $ 1,358,703 $ 1,399,464 $ 1,441,448 $ 1,484,692 $ 1,529,233 $ 1,575,110 $ 1,622,363 $ 1,671,034 FINANCING COSTS explore revenue generating-Total opportunities Cost of Development: for a public Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15 Year 16 Year 17 Year 18 Year 19 Year 20 Year 21 Year 22 Year 23 Land Acquisition Fees $0 0.0% $16,701,947 This project explores faculty housing $ 116,276 $ 119,764 $ 123,357 $ 127,058 $ 130,869 $ 134,795 $ 138,839 $ 143,004 $ 147,295 $ 151,713 $ 156,265 $ 160,953 $ 74,416 $ 76,649 $ 78,948 $ 81,317 $ 83,756 $ 86,269 $ 88,857 $ 91,523 $ 94,268 $ 97,097 $ 100,009 $ 103,010 Construction Loan Fees/Closing $0 0.0% $ 58,138 $ 59,882 $ 61,678 $ 63,529 $ 65,435 $ 67,398 $ 69,420 $ 71,502 $ 73,647 $ 75,857 $ 78,132 $ 80,476 $ 13,953 $ 14,372 $ 14,803 $ 15,247 private$ 15,704 $ 16,175 $ partnership. 16,661 $ 17,161 $ 17,675 $ 18,206 $ 18,752 $ 19,314 -Total Cost Per Unit: Loan Administration $0 0.0% $ 9,302 $ 9,581 $ 9,869 $ 10,165 $ 10,470 $ 10,784 $ 11,107 $ 11,440 $ 11,784 $ 12,137 $ 12,501 $ 12,876 $596,498 development scenarios for a University of $ 18,604 $ 19,162 $ 19,737 $ 20,329 $ 20,939 $ 21,567 $ 22,214 $ 22,881 $ 23,567 $ 24,274 $ 25,002 $ 25,752 Loan Interest $720,822 4.3% $ 54,324 $ 55,953 $ 57,632 $ 59,361 $ 61,142 $ 62,976 $ 64,865 $ 66,811 $ 68,815 $ 70,880 $ 73,006 $ 75,197 $ 80,918 $ 83,345 $ 85,846 $ 88,421 $ 91,074 $ 93,806 $ 96,620 $ 99,519 $ 102,504 $ 105,580 $ 108,747 $ 112,009 Total $720,822 4.3% $ 46,510 $ 47,906 $ 49,343 $ 50,823 $ 52,348 $ 53,918 $ 55,536 $ 57,202 $ 58,918 $ 60,685 $ 62,506 $ 64,381 -Year of 100% Return on $ 6,977 $ 7,186 $ 7,401 $ 7,623 $ 7,852 $ 8,088 $ 8,330 $ 8,580 $ 8,838 $ 9,103 $ 9,376 $ 9,657 Hawai‘i owned property in Kaimuki in TOTAL PROJECT COST $16,701,947 100.0% $ 479,417 $ 493,800 $ 508,614 $ 523,872 $ 539,588 $ 555,776 $ 572,449 $ 589,623 $ 607,312 $ 625,531 $ 644,297 $ 663,626 Investment: TOTAL COST PER UNIT $596,498 Year 23 of Project Year 12 Year 13 Year 14 Year 15 Year 16 Year 17 Year 18 Year 19 Year 20 Year 21 Year 22 Year 23 $ 727,773 $ 749,606 $ 772,094 $ 795,257 $ 819,115 $ 843,688 $ 868,999 $ 895,069 $ 921,921 $ 949,579 $ 978,066 1,007,408 partnership with the UH Office of Land $ 7,461,583 $ 8,211,189 $ 8,983,283 $ Page:9,778,540 1/1 $ 10,597,655 $ 11,441,344 $ 12,310,343 $ 13,205,412 $ 14,127,333 $ 15,076,911 $ 16,054,977 17,062,385 Printed: 5/1/2018, 8:09 PM File: Leahi Faculty Housing - Pro Forma, Summary

4.4% 4.5% 4.6% 4.8% 4.9% 5.1% 5.2% 5.4% 5.5% 5.7% 5.9% 6.0% Development. 44.7% 49.2% 53.8% 58.5% 63.5% 68.5% 73.7% 79.1% 84.6% 90.3% 96.1% 102.2% How UHCDC leads public and professional discourse

July 2018 PROOF-OF-CONCEPT: PUBLIC-PUBLIC PARTNERSHIPS AT WORK UHCDC hosted a half day visit and Paper February 19, 2019 Design Challenge for high school students Hawai‘i State Capitol participating in the Honolulu Community

College Summer Engineering Academy A presentation and exhibition of University program of Hawai‘i Community Design Center work

in service to the state.

WAHIAWA FRESHWATER PARK COMMUNITY MEETING PAN: PAU WOW

July 2018 April 12, 2019

UHM School of Architecture 2017 BUILDING VOICES DESIGN FESTIVAL 2018 BUILDING VOICES HONOLULU CONNECTS STUDENT DESIGN DESIGN SYMPOSIUM WAHIAWA FRESHWATER PARK COMPETITION AND PRESENTATION AIAS and UHCDC partnered on a PAN event DESIGN COMPETITION COMMUNITY CHARRETTE November 14, 2018, which gathered students from DESIGN EXHIBITION October 2018 Hawai‘i Convention Center Architecture, Urban and Regional Planning, April 20-22 2017 and Engineering. HONOLULU CONNECTS: Culture and The School of Architecture and UHCDC A NEW PLATFORM FOR COMMUNITY DESIGN gathered over 40 local and global experts IN HAWAI‘I: APA MONTHLY MEETING Performing Arts Corridor is the second BOWLING WITH BOSSES W/AIA YAF across disciplines for 3 days of conversation November 7, 2018 iteration of the Building Voices Design June 13, 2019 featuring an international design competition, AIA Honolulu Center for Architecture Competition. Honolulu Connects is a single- exhibition, and full day symposium at the state stage student design competition seeking capitol. innovative design solutions that address UHCDC panelists joined APA membership Hawai‘i’s unique for monthly meeting to share projects and practices that reflect the ways that Hawai’i’s geographic location, cultural richness, global 2019 visibility, and ecological diversity. Students BUILDING VOICES context has shaped a unique proof-of-concept SYMPOSIUM SUSTAINABLE CITIES INITIATIVE: PANEL model for community design. projects and winners were presented and February 21, 2018 recognized by Mayor Kirk Caldwell at the HOUSING

2018 DECOLONIZING CITIES SYMPOSIUM 2018 CSI Pacific Trade Expo. This panel invited the co-founder of the FOR ALL November 9-10, 2018 September 30th, 2019 October 1st, 2019 UHM School of Architecture Hawaiʻi Convention Center University of Oregon’s Sustainable Cities 2410 Campus Road 1801 Kalakua Avenue Room 205, Auditorium Conference Room 314

initiative and collaborators from the University FOREST TO FRAME: The second Decolonizing Cities symposium of Hawaii to discuss models for university- INNOVATIONS IN MASS TIMBER focuses on practices of indigenous urbanism, presented by UHCDC wide collaboration. November 14, 2018 and how the urban is and should be an arena Hawai‘i Convention Center for indigenous placemaking. 2019 BUILDING VOICES: HOUSING FOR ALL This symposium is co-sponsored by September 30 - October 1 2019 Owner and Principal Ben Kaiser, of Kaiser WAIPAHU TALK STORY Department of Urban & Regional Planning, Group and PATH Architecture April 12, 2018 the University of Hawai‘i Community Design Housing for All gathers Christopher Center and the UH Kamakakˉuokalani Hawthorne, David Baker FAIA, Marsha Community members, state and city Center for Hawaiian Studies. TIMBER IN HAWAI‘I Maytum FAIA, Marc Alexander, representatives, and neighborhood November 29, 2018 Councilmember Carol Fukunaga, Hakim organizations were invited to share ideas and UHM School of Architecture Ouansafi, Kevin Auger, Kevin Miyamura AIA, information on the development of the state 901 RIVER STREET IDEAS SHARING EVENT Andrew Neuman, Victoria Takamine, Jonathan parcels surrounding the Pouhala rail station November 16, 2018 This talk-story event gathered Ethan Martin, Lee AIA, Karla Sierralta AIA, and Brian Strawn Regional Director, Woodworks, Timothy AIA to discuss tools that advance access to ARCH 745 students hosted a public workshop Schuler, editor, and Philipp LaHeala Walter, housing. HONOLULU COMMUNITY COLLEGE to gather ideas on the re-programming of DLNR, in a discussion moderated by Kevin SUMMER ENGINEERING ACADEMY— vacant commercial space located near the VISIT AND WORKSHOP Miyamura to discuss innovation in mass timber Chinatown rail station. construction,

Team 2016–present

DIRECTOR FOUNDING BOARD UNDERGRADUATE STUDENT GRADUATE STUDENT PROJECT ASSISTANTS (SOA) PROJECT ASSISTANTS (SOA) Cathi Ho Schar AIA LEED-AP, Assistant Professor (SoA) Senator Donovan Dela Cruz Hiu Ki Au Keola Annino Daniel Friedman PhD FAIA Mason Chow Calvin Bulan PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATORS Spencer Leinweber (in memoriam) Jon “Eiwa” Colburn IX Janica Domingo Simon Bussiere ASLA, Assistant Professor (SoA) Dwight Mitsunaga FAIA Kaylen Daquioag Jason Hashimoto Jennifer Darrah-Okike, PhD Assistant Professor (Sociology) Celeste Guarin Matthew Higa Priyam Das PhD, Associate Professor, Chair (DURP) Kenneth Guillen Christina Holcom Dolan Ebersole, Coordinator (Sea Grant) Sarah Hyun Rubinson Intong Philip Garboden, PhD Assistant Professor (DURP) ADVISORY BOARD Renz Laforteza Kelsy Jorgenson Bundit Kanisthakhon, Assistant Professor (SoA) Beau Nakatori Kristoffer Jugueta Michael Bruno, PhD Wendy Meguro AIA, Assistant Professor (SoA, Sea Grant) Rand Oshiro Catherine Kenjo Provost UH Mˉanoa Colin Moore PhD, Associate Professor, Director (CPP) Katherine Pananganan Keli'i Tammy Kapali Warren Haruki Joyce Noe FAIA Associate Professor (SoA) Derrick Pang Connie Kwan President, CEO Grove Farms, Hyoung June Park PhD, Associate Professor (SoA) Poutasi Seiuli Gabriella Lapinig Maui Land & Pineapple Suwan Shen PhD, Assistant Professor (DURP) Thomason Takata Angus Lin Joel Kurokawa ASLA Karla Sierralta AIA, Assistant Professor (SoA) Kaimana Tuazon Moises Lio Can President, Ki Concepts Daniele Spirandelli PhD, Assistant Professor (DURP, Sea Grant) Kaya Troye Christopher Lomboy Luis Salaveria, Judith Stilgenbauer ASLA Associate Professor (SoA) Griffin Ward Kirstie Maeshiro-Takiguchi Dir. of Gov Affairs, Ashford & Wriston Brian Strawn AIA NCARB, Senior Research Associate (UHCDC) Hunter Wells Shane Matsunaga Kathy Sokugawa Lance Walters NCARB, Associate Professor (SoA) Jay Moorman Acting Director C&C DPP Melise Nekoba Kalbert Young, Khoa Nguyen UHCDC STAFF VP for Budget and Finance, Jonathan Quach UH System Brian Strawn AIA NCARB, Senior Research Associate John Quindara Hayley McCann, Senior Research Associate Gladys Razos Zachary Streitz, Research Associate Valerie Ribao SUBCONSULTANTS Nicole Biewenga, Research Associate Rollin Ritter Mark Lombawa, Research Associate J. Uno & Associates Richard Robinson Diane Moore, Research Associate Roth Ecological Design Int. LLC Siraj Sheriff Rebecca Ogi Denzer, Research Associate Engineering Partners Ltd Ivy Tejada Mike Poscablo, Research Associate SSFM International, Inc My Tran Christopher Songvilay, Research Associate Joern Vallesteros Sho Tetsutani, Project Designer Kristyn Yamamotoya Christopher Gaydosh, Project Designer Glenn Grande, Project Designer Michael Honyak, Project Designer GRADUATE STUDENT ASSISTANTS/ STAFF HIRED BY OTHER DEPARTMENTS Elliot Lazo, Project Designer Noelle Yempuku, Project Designer Imelda Carlos Jill Axelson, Graphic Designer Sarah Doermann Kevin Miyamura AIA, Project Supervisor Yusraa Tadj Willa Trimble AIA, Project Supervisor Kenna Stormogipson Jason Selley, Project Designer Joy Agner Emily Gillmar AIA, Visiting Professional

COLLABORATING FACULTY Pu Miao PhD, Professor (SoA) Roger Babcock PhD, Professor, Chair (CoE) Makena Coffman PhD, Professor (DURP), Director (ISR)