Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Nci workshop brazil1

767 views

Published on

Published in: Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Nci workshop brazil1

  1. 1. AGENDAI. Introductions.II. Overview of the NCI Charrette System. a. What is the nature of the problem? b. What is a charrette? c. What is the NCI charrette system? d. How do charrettes work?III. Tools & Techniques for Collaborative Solutions. a. How do we know if a project is ready for a successful charrette? b. Project assessment and team organization: “Project start-up intensive.” c. Designing the process: making meetings work. d. Stakeholder analysis. e. Stakeholder outreach, education and communication strategies.IV. Hands-on Exercise.V. Discussion.
  2. 2. The National Charrette Institute• The National Charrette Institute (NCI) is an IRS 501(c)(3) nonprofit educational institution• We teach professionals and community leaders the NCI Charrette System™, a design-based, accelerated, collaborative project management system that harnesses the talents and energies of all interested parties to create and support a feasible plan• We advance the fields of community planning and public involvement through research, publications and facilitation
  3. 3. 20 years of healthy communitytransformation Design + Codes + Process = Transformation Downcity, Providence, RI
  4. 4. NCI Charrette SystemNCI Management & Facilitation• Portland, DC, Harvard, Miami, Vancouver BC, UK• Also available on-site for your organization
  5. 5. NCI Training History• 1st public training offered in 2002• NCI Training Certificates: 2,194Data through 12/11
  6. 6. NCI Charrette System CourseDay One: Day Three:• Three phases of the NCI Charrette • Project Organization System – Charrette system road map• Practice public “hands-on” – Charrette ready plan meeting exercises – Team formation – Charrette scheduleDay Two: • Plan Implementation• Case studies presentations • Lessons learned• Project assessment exercises – Guiding principles – Objectives & measures – Stakeholder analysis – Charrette purpose and products – Project complexity
  7. 7. NCI Charrette Management and FacilitationCourseDay One: Day Two:• General charrette management • Charrette design decision process• Studio set-up & management • Charrette team design pin-up• Public gallery management simulation• Communications and the press • Production and presentation• Public meeting facilitation skill management building exercise
  8. 8. The Situation in a Nutshell Forbes Magazine
  9. 9. The general situation.• Fear of growth, in spite of economic dependence on its continuation.• Fear reinforced by environmental rhetoric that emphasizes the damage.• Bad democracy: emphasis on quantity and not quality or functioning of public participation.
  10. 10. The politics of planning...• Citizen intervention focused on technical and procedural means to stop projects.• Technical discussions become politically charged, political decisions become technically obscure.• Political paralysis reinforces “business as usual” development patterns.• Pervasive fear among developers of “meeting the neighbors.”• Breakdown of faith in democratic process on all sides.
  11. 11. The ironic results of misunderstandingdemocracy.• In the name of procedural fairness and democracy, we’ve created an unreliable process that undermines civic capacity and leads to reactionary politics (NIMBY).• Public involvement has become part of the problem, not part of the solution.
  12. 12. Change is hard for everyone
  13. 13. The community development system resiststransformative change • Outdated codes and standards • Narrow financing conventions • Public fear of new development • Lack of a shared community vision
  14. 14. The work of specialists• Solving each problem, one at a time, with technical skill and precision.• Each “solution,” dictated by its own “necessity,” creates new problems.
  15. 15. The problem with a system of experts• Diane Vaughn, The Challenger Launch Decision.• The best technical knowledge often produces well- supported decisions that add up to disaster.
  16. 16. Complex projects and problems requirecollaborative solutions.• Create an exemplary plan that leads to implementation• Create positive ongoing working relationships• Save time and money: good government• Build community trust in government• Complex problems require collaboration
  17. 17. Goals of a collaborative planning process• Create an exemplary plan• Stakeholders own and support the plan• Avoid costly rework• Implement the plan
  18. 18. Why is collaboration so difficult?• History of bad process, endless unproductive meetings• The “trained incapacity” of specialists.• Diversity of viewpoints.• Pervasive suspicion of full collaboration.• Fear of unbridled democracy– the rule of “the mob.”• Requires good leadership, process, facilitation with the resources to make it happen
  19. 19. Strategies and tools for collaborationHolistic Collaborative Process•Inclusive, cross-disciplinary, transparent, timely – Tools: ex. NCI Charrette System, Integrated DesignCollaborative Project Start•Commitment to robust inclusive process – Tool: Project start-up intensive – Tools: Guiding principles, objectives and measures, stakeholder analysis, project roadmapWell-run Public Meetings•Input with potential for impact – Tools: Skilled facilitation of hands-on workshops
  20. 20. Each puzzle piece protects its domain. engineering zoning residential transit construction marketing open space transportation environmental utilities retail public politics pub involvement li c sp ace architecture affordability density sales p a rk cing ing f i nan
  21. 21. When each piece sees it’s place in thewhole… engineering zoning residential transit construction marketing open space transportation environmental utilities retail public space public politics involvement architecture affordability financing density parking sales
  22. 22. A coherent vision is supported … engineering residential zoning transit construction marketing open space transportation environmental utilities retail public space public politics involvement architecture affordability financing density parking sales
  23. 23. … and the community is transformed. engineering residential zoning transit construction marketing open space transportation environmental utilities retail public space public politics involvement architecture affordability financing density parking sales
  24. 24. How can resistance turn into collaboration andpositive community transformation?
  25. 25. The NCI Charrette System
  26. 26. Pleasant Hill Bart Station, 2000 • 25-year deadlock • Organized citizen opposition controlling the press • Challenging deal (developer, County, BART) • Boycott of charrette threatened
  27. 27. Pleasant Hill Bart Station, 2005 • Unanimous adoption with no opposition • Design maintained with new architect • Head NIMBY chairs Urban Advantage committee • Survived 5-year lag • Construction begins Lennertz Coyle & Assoc.
  28. 28. 75% Completion, 2010
  29. 29. Observed problems with charrettes.• Highly variable in form, content, and success.• Lack of clarity with respect to public expectations.• Difficulty with follow-through to implementation.• The need to cultivate local champions, not always achieved by out-of-town consultants.• Disappointment and disillusionment, often proportional to the excitement of the charrette itself.• Weak preparation.
  30. 30. The NCI Charrette System™• What is the NCI Charrette System?• What is a NCI Charrette?• Charrette System Tools and Techniques• Nine Charrette System Strategies
  31. 31. The NCI Charrette System
  32. 32. The Charrette System Phasesresearch, education, plancharrette preparation charrette implementation 1 1-9 months 2 2-4 months 3Project Assessment and Organization, Education, Project StatusOrganization Vision CommunicationsStakeholder Research, Alternative Concepts Product RefinementEducation, Involvement Development Presentation andBase Data Research and Preferred Plan Synthesis Product FinalizationAnalysis Plan DevelopmentFeasibility Studies andResearch Production and PresentationCharrette Logistics
  33. 33. Strengths of the Charrette System Support • Mobilizes the collective energy of all interested parties Feasibility • Addresses all aspects of feasibility concurrently Time and Money • Reduces project timeline, increases productivity, reduces costly rework Sustainability and Design • Seeks the best sustainable solution, not the lowest common denominatorLCA Town Planning and Architecture
  34. 34. Charrettes accelerate timelines
  35. 35. NCI Charrette System Core ValuesSustainable Community Planning• Holistic planning solutions support socially, economically and environmentally sustainable communities.Collaboration•Each individual’s unique contribution supports the best outcome.Transparency•Clarity in rules, process and roles is essential to collaboration.Shared Learning•Including all viewpoints assures reduced rework and facilitatesimplementation.Direct, Honest, Timely Communication•Respectful communication fosters an environment of trust andreduces rework.
  36. 36. What is a NCI Charrette?• The NCI charrette is a multi-day collaborative planning event that engages all affected parties to create and support a feasible plan that represents transformative community change Drawn for The Washington Post, 1988, by Roger K. Lewis, FAIA, Professor, U. Maryland School of Architecture
  37. 37. Origin of the term “charrette” • At the École des Beaux Arts in Paris during the 19th century, proctors circulated a cart, or “charrette,” to collect final drawings while the students frantically put finishing touches on their work La Charrette, by Alexis Lemaistre c.1889
  38. 38. Misconceptions about the term “charrette”A NCI charrette is not:• A one-day workshop• A multi-day marathon meeting involving everyone all the time (stakeholders participate at key moments)• A “visioning session” without an action plan and implementation strategy
  39. 39. When should you use a charrette?Charrettes are best for:• High stakes projects• Volatile, yet workable, political environments• Complex design problems• Projects that include imminent development
  40. 40. What can a charrette do?Charrettes result in feasible plans for:• Revitalization and infill• Sustainable communities• Economic development• Regional visions and plans Kendall, FL• Comprehensive plans• Form-based codes• New neighborhoods• TOD plans Hillsborough Co., FL Kentlands, MD
  41. 41. In-house Charrettes• A charrette is not necessarily a public event if all stakeholders are “in-house”• The public-at-large does not have to be involved in a project when the public is not an “affected party” Examples: – LEED building design – Military construction – Hi-tech manufacturing
  42. 42. Charrette TrendsGovernment agencies requiring charrettes:• Baltimore County, MD• Davidson, NC• Belmont, NC• Sarasota County, FLRecent RFPs requiring charrettes:• Renaissance Project, Baltimore, MD• Columbia Town Center, Columbia, MD• City Center Housing, Santa Monica, CA• Spokane Valley, WA• Providence, RI• Chico, CA• Montgomery County, MD• Surfside, FL• Takoma Park, MD
  43. 43. Charrette Request for Proposal TemplateA complete framework forspecifying a NCI charretteprocess in a RFPFree for download at:charretteinstitute.org
  44. 44. NCI Charrette SystemTools and Techniques
  45. 45. The NCI Charrette System
  46. 46. The Charrette System Phasesresearch, education, plancharrette preparation charrette implementation 1 1-9 months 2 2-4 months 3Project Assessment and Organization, Education, Project StatusOrganization Vision CommunicationsStakeholder Research, Alternative Concepts Product RefinementEducation, Involvement Development Presentation andBase Data Research and Preferred Plan Synthesis Product FinalizationAnalysis Plan DevelopmentFeasibility Studies andResearch Production and PresentationCharrette Logistics
  47. 47. The NCI Charrette SystemPhase One: Charrette Preparation
  48. 48. Research, Education, Charrette Preparation Tools and Techniquesresearch, education, plancharrette preparation charrette implementation 1 2 3Project Assessment andOrganizationStakeholder Research,Education, InvolvementBase Data Research andAnalysisFeasibility Studies andResearchCharrette Logistics
  49. 49. 1.1 Project Assessment and Organization Tools and Techniques project set-upand organization stakeholder base feasibility charrette involvement information studies logistics 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 Guiding Principles Objectives, Measures, Strategies Draft Stakeholder Analysis Charrette Purpose and Products Complexity Analysis Charrette System Road Map Charrette Ready Plan
  50. 50. Charrette System Road Map
  51. 51. Charrette Ready Plan Schedule
  52. 52. 1.2 Stakeholder Research, Education, and Involvement Plan Tools and Techniques project set-upand organization stakeholder base feasibility charrette involvement information studies logistics 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 Outreach and Engagement Engagement and Information Exchange Secondary Stakeholder Analysis Educational Events
  53. 53. Stakeholders’ unique contributions Fire Chief Transportation engineers Developer Business ownersElected officials Environmentalists Neighbors Urban designers
  54. 54. 1.2 Stakeholder Research, Education andInvolvement PlanTool: Educational EventsPurpose: To establish a description of a future state based on shared community values that acts as a guide for the project decision making process surveysProcess: One or a number of efforts including educational lectures, workshops, neighborhood walks, and preference surveys
  55. 55. 1.3 Base Data Research and Analysis Tools and Techniques project set-upand organization stakeholder base feasibility charrette involvement information studies logistics 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 Base Data Research and Gathering SWOT Analysis
  56. 56. 1.4 Feasibility Studies Tools and Techniques project set-upand organization stakeholder base feasibility charrette involvement information studies logistics 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 Conceptual Sketching and Testing Pre-charrette Project Brief
  57. 57. 1.5 Charrette Logistics Tools and Techniques project set-upand organization stakeholder base feasibility charrette involvement information studies logistics 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 Studio Logistics and Set-up Charrette Team Formation Charrette Scheduling Meeting Planning Pre-charrette Logistics Summary
  58. 58. 1.5 Charrette LogisticsTool: Studio Logistics and Set-upPurpose: To provide a functional space for charrette team work and public participation Charrette galleryProcess: The charrette manager works with local staff to organize all charrette logistics to support a sustained, focused effort Charrette studio
  59. 59. 1.5 Charrette LogisticsTool: Charrette Team FormationPurpose: The assembly of a cross- disciplinary charrette team is informed by the skills required to complete the desired products, and to assure holistic, diverse feedbackProcess: Based on the project complexity analysis and the charrette products list, the charrette manager appoints a diverse team of specialists
  60. 60. The Charrette
  61. 61. Charrette Roles and ProcessCharrette Team• The multidisciplinary charrette team works uninterrupted to produce the plan at the charrette studio
  62. 62. Charrette Roles and Process The Stakeholder’s Role • Stakeholders provide vision, input and review at key moments during scheduled and impromptu, meetings • They are not there all the time! Dover Kohl LCA Town Planners Urban Design AssociatesStakeholder meeting Public meetings Drop by the studio(Scheduled) (Scheduled) (Unscheduled)
  63. 63. Charrette PhasesThe Five Phases of the Charrette
  64. 64. Charrette Phases
  65. 65. Charrette Work Cyclespublic meeting public meeting open house public meeting vision review review confirmation alternative preferred plan concepts plan development
  66. 66. Charrette Stakeholder Meetings
  67. 67. 2.1 Organization, Education, Vision Tools and Techniquesorganization, alternative preferred plan production and education, concepts synthesis plan presentation vision development development 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5Start-up TeamMeetingCharrette TeamTourPrimaryStakeholderMeetingsCharrette PublicMeeting #1
  68. 68. 2.1 Organization, Education, Vision Toolsand Techniques
  69. 69. 2.1 Organization, Education, VisionTool: Start-up Team MeetingPurpose: To orient and introduce team membersProcess: Base data debrief and review of schedule, roles, and responsibilities
  70. 70. 2.1 Organization, Education, VisionTool: Charrette Team TourPurpose: To assess, document and measure the project site and contextProcess: The team and stakeholders tour the site, the surrounding area and local examples of smart development
  71. 71. 2.1 Organization, Education, VisionPrimary Stakeholder Meetings
  72. 72. 2.1 Organization, Education, VisionTool: Primary Stakeholder MeetingsPurpose: Check in with important people before the first public meeting to assure that they will attend and to gather last minute adviceProcess: The charrette manager sets up meetings based on the stakeholder analysis typically with elected officials, landowners and community leaders
  73. 73. 2.1 Organization, Education, VisionPublic Meeting #1
  74. 74. 2.1 Organization, Education, VisionTool:• Charrette Public Meeting #1Purpose:• Explain the project and process• Introduce the charrette team• Provide the technical background• Teach basic good planning principles• Solicit a project vision from the public• Inspire a sense of “a historic moment”Process:• Brief presentation by team• Small table public workshop• Report back
  75. 75. Charrette Public Meeting #1:Hands-on Exercise• Groups work on visioning exercises at tables
  76. 76. 2.2 Alternative Concepts Development Tools and Techniquesorganization, alternative preferred plan production and education, concepts synthesis plan presentation vision development development 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 Concepts Team Meeting Alternative Concepts Development Initial Stakeholder Reviews Alternative Concepts Refinement Public Meeting #2 or Open House
  77. 77. 2.2 Alternative Concepts Development Toolsand Techniques
  78. 78. 2.2 Alternative Concepts DevelopmentTool: Concepts Team MeetingPurpose: Distill the prominent themes for development into conceptsProcess: Review of hands-on drawings and flip charts from public meeting
  79. 79. Charrette Public Meeting #1:Hands-on Exercise Results
  80. 80. 2.2 Alternative Concepts DevelopmentTool: Alternative Concepts DevelopmentPurpose: Create a large set of plan options that reflect all the input gathered to dateProcess: The charrette team begins concept development based on team meeting direction
  81. 81. Alternative Concepts Development
  82. 82. 2.2 Alternative ConceptsInitial Stakeholder Reviews
  83. 83. 2.2 Alternative Concepts DevelopmentTool: Alternative Concepts RefinementPurpose: Reduce the alternative concepts to a manageable numberProcess: The charrette team identifies the strengths and weaknesses of each alternative with the aim of merging good ideas, eliminating bad ones, and developing new ideas
  84. 84. 2.2 Alternative ConceptsPublic Meeting #2
  85. 85. 2.2 Alternative Concepts DevelopmentTool: Public Meeting #2 or Open HousePurpose: Present the design alternatives and solicit participant feedback for incorporation into the next round of revisionsProcess: Evening publicmeeting wherein the teampresents the work to dateand receives feedback
  86. 86. 2.3 Preferred Plan Synthesis Tools and Techniquesorganization, alternative preferred plan production and education, concepts synthesis plan presentation vision development development 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 Plan Synthesis Team Meeting Concept Synthesis Into Preferred Plan Intermediate Stakeholder Reviews Public Open House
  87. 87. 2.3 Preferred Plan SynthesisTools and Techniques
  88. 88. 2.3 Preferred Plan SynthesisTool: Concept Synthesis Into Preferred PlanPurpose: Synthesize the alternative concepts into a preferred planProcess: The charrette team arrives at a preferred plan by considering the project constraints as well as accumulated stakeholder input
  89. 89. 2.3 Preferred Plan SynthesisSustainability Stakeholder Surveys The Preferred Plan reflects multiple viewpointsTransportation Objectives & Measures
  90. 90. 2.3 Preferred PlanIntermediate Stakeholder Reviews
  91. 91. 2.4 Plan Development Tools and Techniquesorganization, alternative preferred plan production and education, concepts synthesis plan presentation vision development development 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 Plan Development Team Meeting Plan Development and Refinement Intermediate Stakeholder Reviews
  92. 92. 2.4 Plan DevelopmentTools and Techniques
  93. 93. 2.4 Plan DevelopmentTool: Plan Development and RefinementPurpose: To perform design studies on the preferred plan that address issues essential to its advancementProcess: Each design team member performs detailed design studies of the preferred plan
  94. 94. Plan Development StudiesExisting condition Proposed infill plan
  95. 95. Plan Development StudiesUrban design rendering
  96. 96. Plan Development StudiesExisting condition Proposed infill plan
  97. 97. 2.4 Plan DevelopmentIntermediate Stakeholder Reviews
  98. 98. 2.5 Production and Presentation Tools and Techniquesorganization, alternative preferred plan production and education, concepts synthesis plan presentation vision development development 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 Production Team Meeting Final Stakeholder Reviews Production Final Charrette Public Meeting
  99. 99. 2.5 Production and PresentationTools and Techniques
  100. 100. 2.5 Production and PresentationTool: ProductionPurpose: To complete the assigneddrawings and documents to arefined level capable of informingand inspiring the publicProcess: The charrette managercarefully orchestrates theproduction to allow time forrehearsal and final review by theclient
  101. 101. 2.5 Production and PresentationFinal Charrette Public Meeting
  102. 102. 2.5 Production and PresentationTool: Final Charrette Public MeetingPurpose: Illustrate and explain thecomplete plan drawings and supportivedata, inform and inspire all participantsto support their planProcess:• Charrette team presentation – project summary, charrette log, evolution of plan, final plan• Q&A and public input• Open house
  103. 103. Example Charrette Products
  104. 104. Example Charrette Products
  105. 105. Example Charrette Products
  106. 106. Example Charrette Products Sustainability – Local Food
  107. 107. Example Charrette ProductsSustainability – Rainwater Treatment
  108. 108. Example Charrette Products Existing open spaces Proposed open spaces
  109. 109. Example Charrette Products
  110. 110. Example Charrette Products
  111. 111. Example Charrette ProductsMaking it Happen:• Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA)• Comprehensive Plan• Land Development Code• Tax Increment Financing• Code Enforcement• Enterprise Zone• Brownfields• Future Rail Transportation
  112. 112. Phase Three: Plan Implementation
  113. 113. 3.0 Plan Implementation Tools and Techniquesresearch, education, plancharrette preparation charrette implementation 1 2 3 Project Status Communications Product Refinement Presentation and Product Finalization
  114. 114. 3.0 Plan Implementation Tools and Techniques 4-6 weeks max.Charrette begins with input session, then design begins Review & Final Revise Review
  115. 115. 3.1 Information and Relationship StrategyTools and Techniques presentation project status product and productcommunications refinement finalization 3.1 3.2 3.3Project ManagementTeam DebriefingPublicCommunications
  116. 116. 3.1 Project Status CommunicationsTool: Public CommunicationsPurpose: Continue to inform the key stakeholders and public on the outcome of the charrette, the next steps, and how they can be involvedProcess: Disseminate information though e-mails, websites, and publications such as The Town Paper
  117. 117. 3.2 Product Refinement Tools andTechniques presentation project status product and productcommunications refinement finalization 3.1 3.2 3.3 Document Review and Feedback Document Revision
  118. 118. 3.2 Product RefinementGoal• Ensure that the Charrette Plan is feasibleTools• Document Review and Feedback• Document Revision
  119. 119. 3.3 Presentation and Product FinalizationTools and Techniques presentation project status product and productcommunications refinement finalization 3.1 3.2 3.3 Final Project Public Meeting Project Closeout
  120. 120. 3.3 Presentation and Product FinalizationGoals• Solicit a final round of public input• Complete the full set of charrette drawings and documentsTools• Final Project Public Meeting• Project Closeout
  121. 121. 3.3 Presentation and Product FinalizationTool: Project CloseoutPurpose: Complete the charrette report and code documents required for a feasible planProcess: The charrette manager directs the completion and distribution of documents
  122. 122. Principles of theNCI Charrette System
  123. 123. Charrette System Strategies1. Work collaboratively2. Design cross-functionally3. Compress work sessions4. Communicate in short feedback loops5. Study the details and the whole6. Produce a feasible plan7. Use design to achieve a shared vision and create holistic solutions8. Conduct a multiple day charrette9. Hold the charrette on or near the site
  124. 124. Charrette System Strategies1. Work collaboratively• Collaboration is based on valuing each individual’s unique contribution• Anyone who might build, use, sell, approve, or attempt to block the project is involved before the start of design and throughout the project
  125. 125. Risks of not working collaboratively• Conventional processes involve people after the planning has started, resulting in a loss of trust from which it is very hard to recover
  126. 126. Charrette System Strategies2. Design cross-functionally• A multi-disciplinary team method results in decisions that are realistic avoiding costly rework• Teams typically include planning, architecture, environmental, transportation, economics
  127. 127. Risks of segregating work according tospecialty• When a key specialty is left out of the planning and design process, there is risk of major rework or project failure
  128. 128. Charrette System Strategies3. Compress work sessions• Time compression facilitates creative problem-solving by accelerating decision-making and reducing unconstructive negotiation tactics• Compressed work sessions promote “out-of-the-box” thinking Apollo 13
  129. 129. Charrette System Strategies4. Communicate in short feedback loops• Regular stakeholder reviews quickly build trust in the process and foster true understanding and support of the product Dover Kohl
  130. 130. Charrette Feedback CyclesParticipants work in a series of short feedback loops public reviewconcepts alternatives refinement plan public review public review
  131. 131. Charrette System Strategies5. Study the details and the whole• Designs at varying scales inform each other and reduce the likelihood that a fatal flaw will be overlooked that could result in costly rework
  132. 132. Risks of not studying the details• Conventional planning limited to “bubble” scale study may not deliver the desired community vision
  133. 133. Charrette System Strategies6. Produce a feasible plan Summary Sheet Escalator Year 1 Stabilized Year Income Proforma (Year 3)• To create a feasible plan, every Leased Uses At Net Rents Period Square Feet Efficiency Rent/SF Rent Leasable SF Restaurant/Ent 3 - 100% $ 17.00 Restaurant/Ent NNN - $ - Office 3 61,000 85% $ 22.00 Office FS 51,850 $ 1,140,700 Rental Residential 1 - 87% $ 12.00 Rental ResidentialFS - $ - Townhouses 1 48,000 NA NA Townhouses $ - decision point must be fully Retail/Storefront 3 16,000 95% $ 17.00 Retail/Storefront NNN 15,200 $ 258,400 Other Uses 3 - 100% $ 17.00 Other Uses NNN - $ - 125,000 Parking Revenue 156 $ 59,931 Income Escalator 3.0% Target Return Rate 12% Gross Income $ 1,459,031 informed, especially by the legal, Stabilized Year Net Income $ 1,193,161 Plus CAM Charges 12% of NNN Comml $ 167,892 Capitalized Value at 9.0% 13,257,000 Less Vacancy/Credit Loss5% $ (81,346) Total Loan Amount Available at 75% $ 9,942,750 Effective Gross Income $ 1,545,576 Project Cost Less General Partner Exp 3.5% $ (54,095) financial, and engineering Land 150,000 $ 10 $ 1,500,000 Less Office Expenses $ 5.50 per SF $ (270,916) Construction Parking Expenses $ 176 per Space $ (27,404) Demolition 37,500 $ 6 $ 225,000 Less Residential Expenses 34% $ - Sitework Outside of Building - $ 4 $ - Plaza - $ 15 $ - disciplines Landscaping 44,000 $ 7.00 $ 308,000 Net Operating Income $ 1,193,161 Streetlighting & Signal - $ 5,000 $ 200,000 Plus Startup Reserve 69,955 Street Sidewalks 3,000 $ 7 $ 21,000 Less Debt $ (793,800) Restaurant/Ent - $ 95 $ - Office 61,000 $ 95 $ 5,795,000 Cash Flow Before Tax $ 469,316 Office Tenant Improvements 51,850 $ 25 $ 1,296,250• The focus on feasibility brings a Rental Residential - $ 90 $ - Stabilized Cash on Cash Return 15.5% Townhouses 48,000 $ 95 $ 4,560,000 Retail/Storefront 16,000 $ 75 $ 1,200,000 Retail Tenant Improvements 5,200 1 $ 25 $ 380,000 Other Uses - $ 75 $ - Features - $ 50 $ - level of seriousness and rigor to On Grade Pkg 36,000 $ 8 $ 288,000 Parking Structures 32,000 $ 38 $ 1,216,000 Below Grade Pkg Structure - $ 47 $ - Construction Subtotal $ 15,489,250 Soft Costs 27% $ 4,162,736 the process for everyone Construction Contingency 7.5% 1,161,694 Total Project Cost With Land125,000 $ 179 $ 22,313,679 Less Residential Sales 215 $ (10,320,000) Plus Residential Brokerage Fees 6% $ 619,200 involved Less Energy Systems Equity Plus Startup Cost $ 349,775 Credit Enhancement/TIF $ - Adjusted Total Project Cost $ 12,962,654 Less Allowable Debt $ (9,942,750) Cash/Equity Required $ 3,019,904 Loan Rate (current CMBS rate) 7.00% Loan Term in Years 30 Annual Debt Service $ (793,800) Financial feasibility analysis
  134. 134. Charrette System Strategies7. Use design to achieve a shared vision and create holistic solutions• Design illustrates the complexity of the problem and can be used to resolve conflict by proposing previously unexplored solutions that represent win/win outcomes Urban AdvantageExisting Condition Proposal - Computer Simulation
  135. 135. Charrette System Strategies8. Conduct a multiple day charrette• Most charrettes require more than four days, allowing for three feedback loops Urban Design Associates
  136. 136. Risks of charrettes that are too short• When feedback loops are too far apart, there is a risk that misunderstandings and concerns cannot be addressed in a timely fashion• People can become set in their negative opinions and become obstructive
  137. 137. Charrette System Strategies9. Hold the charrette on or near the site• Working on site fosters the charrette teams understanding of local values and traditions, and provides the necessary easy access to stakeholders and information LCA Town Planning and Architecture
  138. 138. Risks of not working on site• High stakes projects require frequent discussions with stakeholders which can be made difficult if the charrette is not on or near the site.
  139. 139. Charrette System Strategies1. Work collaboratively2. Design cross-functionally3. Compress work sessions4. Communicate in short feedback loops5. Study the details and the whole6. Produce a feasible plan7. Use design to achieve a shared vision and create holistic solutions8. Conduct multiple day charrette9. Hold the charrette on or near the site
  140. 140. Available at NCI Website
  141. 141. Are you ready for a charrette?
  142. 142. Key Factors in Charrette Readiness• Will the key stakeholders participate in a charrette fully and in good faith?• Are there political and/or relationship issues that must be solved before a charrette can begin?• Where does a charrette fit into a broader process? – It is important to be clear about the goals and purpose of the charrette in relation to the overall project.
  143. 143. Current CBISituation Assessment: Charrette Charrette •Initiate •Gather •Analyze •Design Consensus Consensus Charrette Charrette Implementation Implementation •Share Building Building Consensus Consensus Building Building
  144. 144. Top Reasons Projects Fail1. Unclear project mission• The project sponsor does not have, and/or does not communicate, a clear project mission, guiding principles and desired outcomes. – Project team dysfunction – Stakeholders/community members undermine the project
  145. 145. Top Reasons Projects Fail2. Insufficient community organizing and outreach• Without the resources for conducting effective outreach and relationship building, it is difficult to achieve a cross- section of stakeholder participation 3. Poor Data• Design is based on incomplete or incorrect data• Data arrives late resulting in design changes
  146. 146. Top Reasons Projects Fail4. Time• Project takes years to complete• New players lack project understanding often requiring project restart• Project loses momentum• Meeting fatigue
  147. 147. Focus: Four elements in preparation forsuccessful charrettes.• Project assessment and team organization. – “Project start-up intensive.”• Designing the process: making meetings work.• Stakeholder analysis. – Assessment of current issues and conflicts for “charrette readiness.”• Stakeholder education. – Outreach and communication strategies based on stakeholder analysis.
  148. 148. Research, Education, Charrette Preparationresearch, education, plancharrette preparation charrette implementation 1 2 3 Project Assessment and Organization Stakeholder Research, Education, Involvement Base Data Research and Analysis Project Feasibility Studies and Research Charrette Logistics
  149. 149. Preventing project failure.Collaborative project start-up:• Project partners share values and understand and own the project process• Project process map is informed by all relevant viewpoints• It is best to do this before setting the schedule and budget
  150. 150. Project start-up “intensive.”Key factors for success• Leadership supports the start-up process• Decision makers attend along with key staff• No primary partner is left out – All key partners – Includes decision makers – Multi-disciplinary
  151. 151. Project start-up “intensive.”Process• Establish understanding of roles• Create project purpose elements• Co-author guiding principles, objectives and measures• Agree on involvement plan – Conduct stakeholder analysis• Agree on project process – Co-author project roadmap
  152. 152. Guiding Principles• Guiding principles keep the project team and charrette participants on task, are used to resolve conflicts of opinion and help avoid costly rework and unnecessary effort that stems from following tangents to the core purpose of the project
  153. 153. Objectives & Measures DraftObjective MeasureImprove pedestrian, bicycle and Traffic speedsvehicular safety, especially in relation Pedestrian crossing distancesto pedestrian/vehicle interactionsTreat storm water on site Acreage of natural filtering areaProvide for affordable housing Housing prices as percent of median incomeEconomic feasibility Project proforma, ROI (return on investment)Provide easy, safe access to the Number of connections to trailregional trail system Distance to trail from housing and commercial
  154. 154. Holistic Planning Process ChecklistEducation and Research  The stakeholder involvement effort is properly funded  Project partners commit to early and frequent stakeholder involvement Stakeholder involvement plan is aimed at broad demographic representation Advisory committee members commit to being informed project champions Base data research is cross-functional, collaborative and strategic
  155. 155. Designing the process(making meetings work)
  156. 156. NCI Collaborative Design System
  157. 157. Charrette Stakeholder Meetings
  158. 158. Charrette Ready Plan Schedule
  159. 159. Top Reasons Public Meetings Fail• Poor attendance• Imbalanced community representation• Decision makers are not in attendance• Participants lack knowledge to make informed decisions• Poor meeting facilitation
  160. 160. Meeting Facilitation: Preventions• Preventions = things to do to keep the meeting on track• Examples: – Meeting planning – Meeting “start-ups” – Check agreement throughout – Next steps – Meeting evaluation (+/∆)
  161. 161. Meeting Purpose and Outcomes.Why meet?• Be clear on the purpose of the meeting before you start planning• Communicate the meeting purpose in meeting invitations and up front at the beginning of every meeting
  162. 162. Facilitator Goals• Protect the people and the process• Create an atmosphere of trust and respect• Establish a safe environment for everyone to participate – no one person or group dominates• Help people feel that it was worth their time to participate because – they had a chance to provide meaningful input – their input has potential to make an impact – the meeting was well-run – and, the FOOD was great
  163. 163. What type of meeting do you need?It depends! Type of Decision Stakeholder Characteristics Phase of the Project
  164. 164. Framework of Engagement presentation One-way newsletter speech marketing open house Two-way Q&A conversation survey focus group Multi-way deliberative dialogue collaborative activity workshops dialogue charrettes
  165. 165. Type of Decision Routine ControversialTechnical Decision Values-Based Decision Known, accepted Values in conflict values
  166. 166. Decision Phase / Implementation Issues Decision already Decision needs to be made made Single entity can Implementation requires implement multi-party collaboration Implementation Goal Setting, Idea Stage Generation, Selection of Alternatives People agree Legitimacy of sponsorsponsor has right to action is in question act Sponsor has legal Sponsor needs others to authority to make take legal action decision
  167. 167. Decision-making Method(s)• Top down: Leader decides and announces.• Consultative: Leader solicits input and decides.• Consensus. “It may not be my top choice, but I am willing to support and help implement the solution.”• Always have a “fall-back” option.
  168. 168. Stakeholder Identification and Analysis
  169. 169. Stakeholders’ unique contributions Fire Chief Transportation engineers Developer Business ownersElected officials Environmentalists Neighbors Urban designers
  170. 170. Stakeholder Analysis• The Stakeholder Analysis lists the relevant viewpoints to be represented, the people, their affiliation, what a “win” is for each, and the level of engagement required for holistic, diverse feedback. This is the basis of the public involvement process.Who are stakeholders?• Decision makers• People who may supply valuable information• People who will be affected by the outcome• People who have power to promote the project• People who have power to block the project
  171. 171. Stakeholder Levels of Involvement vo s d in les lve vo e d in mor lve Primary Stakeholders Secondary StakeholdersAll are involved at Generalkey decision points Stakeholders
  172. 172. Stakeholder Levels of InvolvementStakeholder Level Example Positions Suggested InvolvementPrimary Elected and appointed officials Interviews before the charrette, (city council, planning meetings during the charrette, should commissioners, steering attend all public events, may drop into committee members), agency the studio anytime staff (departments of transportation, EPA, transit authorities), site property ownersSecondary Non-governmental Interviews before the charrette, possible organizations (historic and art meetings during the charrette, should groups, churches, attend all public events, may synagogues), individuals with businesses or residences directly affectedGeneral Community members Should attend all public events, may drop into the studio anytime Source: The Charrette Handbook p.38
  173. 173. Sample Stakeholder AnalysisViewpoint Person / Issues Win Level Outreach Charrette Affiliation Strategy ParticipationElected Official Lucinda Wallis, 25 years of A plan and codes agreed Primary Email, phone Daily Team Capital County controversy, with upon by the developer, Meetings nothing to show. and the neighborhood. A Wallis is the project bulletproof public “champion.” process. A national exemplar project.Elected Official Percival Concerned about A project that can be Primary Email, phone Public Meetings Moccasin, Capital project costs. approved and supported County Interested in a non- by neighbors. controversial outcome.Neighborhood Carrie Snodgras, Deep distrust of Minimal traffic impacts, Secondary Emails, Separate MeetingActivists Kris Tal, Terry County Supervisors maximum housing, low letters Jensen, Medford and staff. Traffic, buildings across from District visual impacts, neighborhood, pedestrian Improvement property values, access, local retail only, Association safety. no increase in transit parking. The County must keep its promise and build the regional trail.Neighboring Katrina Workers have limited Compatible uses with Secondary Emails, Separate MeetingCommercial Moskawitz, local services. existing business, lettersOwners Hollywood amenities for office Boosters workers, traffic management.Developer Tom Bates, Dick Last development Economic and market Primary Email, phone Daily Team Bernard, Big Sky proposal failed. feasible plan. Meetings Development and Reviews
  174. 174. Stakeholder Characteristics Known, easy to Unknown, hard to identify identify Small number Large number Homogenous Diverse Equal power and Unbalanced power and resources resources Important Important stakeholdersstakeholders have outside power structure power
  175. 175. 1.2 Stakeholder Research, Education, and Involvement Plan Tools and Techniques project set-up base data feasibilityand organization stakeholder research and studies and charrette involvement analysis research logistics 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 Outreach Engagement and Information Exchange Secondary Stakeholder Analysis Educational Events
  176. 176. Keys to Successful Public Participation• Commit to collaboration and relationship building• Commit sufficient resources• Use people with local on-the-ground knowledge• Dig deep into the community• Engage the community before starting design• Work at three levels – Person to person – Group meetings – Community-wide meetings
  177. 177. Advisory Committees as Champions• Represent a cross-section of the community• All relevant viewpoints represented• Geographical and demographic representation• Advisory only• Fully educated on the project issues• Project champions committed to outreach and education
  178. 178. Stakeholder Outreach and EngagementMethodsOutreach:• Phone calls• Faxes, e-mails• Web notices• One-on-one meetings• Confidential Interviews• Mailings• Signs• Newsletter announcementsEngagement:• Neighborhood meetings• Meetings at churches and local organizations• “Living room coffees”
  179. 179. 1.2 Stakeholder Research, Education andInvolvement PlanTool: Educational EventsPurpose: To establish shared vision or base of understanding among key stakeholders prior to the charretteProcess: One or a number ofefforts including educationallectures, workshops,neighborhood walks, andpreference surveys
  180. 180. Educational EventsEducational Events• Lectures, presentations and workshops by experts covering key subjects, e.g. sustainable design, traffic calming, affordable housing
  181. 181. Educational EventsStakeholder Tours• Project site tour• Examples of sustainable development tools in practice
  182. 182. Educational EventsNeighborhood Walks• Groups of no more than eight• Mapped route• Group leader• Note taker• Renderer City of Portland, Oregon Bureau of Planning
  183. 183. Low-tech Outreach and EngagementMethods
  184. 184. High-tech Tools for Outreach and Engagement
  185. 185. Thin vs. Thick Communication
  186. 186. Social Media and OutreachOpportunities Challenges• Allows organizations to • Better for dissemination of broadcast real-time updates on information, not brainstorming events, programs, meetings or discussion• Supports rapid dissemination of • Potential problems with digital information; good for outreach divide• Enables two-way dialogue • Not a replacement for face-to- between organizers & face communication stakeholders, and between • Must be carefully managed as community members part of a holistic• Can be cost-effective and communications strategy widely accessible
  187. 187. PdxPlan.com • 384,527 hits in the last 12 months • Prominent links to various social media networks
  188. 188. Facebook.com/pdxplanCurrently1,912 “likes”
  189. 189. Portland Plan Phase One Campaign Results• 8,000+ completed surveys• 1,000 workshop attendees• Dozens of community group meetings• New participants: 31 percent of workshop attendees reported they were not “public participation regulars”• Social Media: 1,363 FB fans and 690 of Twitter followers• PdxPlan.com: 134,000 hits over past 12 months with spikes in November (28,000) and December (40,000)
  190. 190. City of Ashland: Open City Hall• Open City Hall has generated a number of useful ideas from the public, and has shifted the overall tone of the discussion
  191. 191. Open Town Hallby Peak Democracywww.peakdemocracy.com/
  192. 192. City of El Paso: MindMixer• The planning team talked to more than 1,200 participants• More than 35,000 people followed the project on its website
  193. 193. City of El Paso: MindMixer• Participants viewed and critiqued the charrette team’s plans, contributed ideas, and voted on ideas they liked• Real names and addresses held participants accountable• Local input led to greater context- sensitivity on the part of the planners
  194. 194. MindMixerwww.mindmixer.com
  195. 195. OMI Neighborhood, City and County of SanFrancisco: Crowdbrite Case Study
  196. 196. Crowdbritewww.crowdbrite.com
  197. 197. Distance ParticipationOpportunities Challenges• Broader opportunities for • Potential problems with citizen engagement digital divide• Provides forum for • Not a good standalone disenfranchised stakeholders solution• May reach audiences who • Requires some degree of don’t typically participate- education about local single parents, the elderly, issues for valuable etc. contribution• Lack of anonymity can discourage negative, heated, and one-sided discussion
  198. 198. Key characteristics of the charrette process..• Collaborative and dynamic work process, integrating multiple points of view in a defined and compressed time frame.• Short-feedback loops (short in time and space).• Cross-disciplinary design (from the big picture to the details).• Feasible, action-oriented outcome.
  199. 199. Making it work for you.• The collaborators need to understand (and trust) the framework of collaboration.• This is the work of long-term education, building social relationships and an enduring culture of responsible participation.• Key starting points: participants prepared to own the process, experts prepared to support it, leaders prepared to help lead it.• There are tools and techniques to support this work.
  200. 200. Hands-on Workshop Exercise
  201. 201. Meeting Start-ups• Welcome by Official(the following should be posted hard copy in the front of the room)• Meeting Purpose and Desired Outcomes• Agenda• Roles• Ground Rules• Parking Lot
  202. 202. Ground RulesGround Rules:• Present a set of ground rules as a means to keep the meeting on track and to assure that everyone has a chance to participate.• Ask if anyone has additional ground rules.• Ask for permission to be the “traffic cop/ground rule enforcer.”
  203. 203. Ground RulesExample Ground Rules:• Listen actively and respectfully• Be respectful and constructive• No one dominates• Be concise and stay on topic• Avoid cross-talking• No personal attacks• Silence your cell phones• Talk with your pen (for workshops)
  204. 204. The Parking Lot / Commons / Bike Rack • Use a flip chart • “Park” off-topic ideas • Resolve or decide how to defer before end of meeting
  205. 205. Charrette Public Meeting #1:“Food for thought” lectureSustainable Smart Growth Principles:• Walkable streets• Local food• Stormwater treatment• Mix of uses• Choices of housing• Transportation options• Safe and convenient neighborhood parks and open space• History of sustainable performance in the region
  206. 206. Charrette Public Meeting #1:Hands-on Exercise• Groups work on visioning exercises at tables
  207. 207. Charrette Public Meeting #1:Hands-on Exercise• Participants, not staff, from each table report back to the group
  208. 208. Charrette Public Meeting #1:Report Backs Dover Kohl
  209. 209. Charrette Public Meeting #1:Hands-on Exercise
  210. 210. • Visit www.charretteinstitute.org for more informationDavid Brain, Ph.d.National Charrette InstituteNew College of FloridaCollaborative Community Design, LLCEmail: david@charretteinstitute.org

×