ALANA ARMSTRONGLEED AP, NCIDQ

SEEKING Local, International or District Scale Real Estate Development Opportunities Retail and Commercial or Mixed- use Project Types Feasibility and Market Analysis, Planning or Design + Construction Management

EDUCATION Grad Certificate in Real Estate Development, Portland State University, ongoing M. Architecture, University of Oregon, 2009-2011 Franco Americain Studio, L’Ecole d’Architecture La Villette (Paris), 2003-2004 B.S. Architecture, Georgia Institute of Technology, 1999-2004

PROFESSIONAL Real Estate Design Scope Consultant [Real Estate Development], current Sustainable Building Consultant [Real Estate Development], Fall 2010 Sustainable Building Coordinator [Real Estate Development], Summer 2010 Assistant Operations/Assistant Project Manager/Estimator, 6/2009 - 6/2010 Architectural Designer/Project Architect/Interior Designer, 9/2004 - 8/2008 Architectural or Design Internships, Summers 2001 - 2004

SKILLSET Design, Project, and Construction Management Client Relations and Presentations Integrated Sustainable Design & Systems Thinking - LEED Gold and Silver Google Earth & ArcGIS Adobe CS Suite/Wordpress & Blogging BIM software (Archicad)/ Sketchup/ CAD

Atlanta, GeorgiaParis, FrancePortland, OregonPortland, Oregon

Williams & Dame Development - Portland, OregonAtlantic Investors - Portland, OregonAtlantic Investors - Panama City, PanamaGlen / Mar Construction - Portland, OregonCollins Cooper Carusi Architects - Atlanta, GeorgiaVarious - Atlanta, Georgia

Contact: alanae@gmail.com - 404.822.8816 - http://www.linkedin.com/in/alanaarmstrong ideas to continue the conversationmeans to continue the sustainable conversation

espalier.applesgrapes

raised planter beds

rainwater cistern

greywater collection

rainwater collection

mutualism

hedgerows

greywater wetlands

Natural Riparian Habitat

mutualism

provide habitat

GRESHAM YARDSMixed Use Multifamily Courtyard HousingWinter 2010. Micro-Ecologies Studio Smart building systems creates habitat and supports urban agriculture

Project BriefMixed use multi-family residential development in downtown Gresham. Con-nections are provided rail commuter transit, pedestrian cooridors, community spaces through a plaza market , on-site brewery, and courtyard gardens. Aspects of solar exposure and water collection and flow were considered to supply areas of gardening for residents while sustaining habitat on-site through building supported measures, both built and living systems.

holistic development thinking

courtyard perspectivestreet perspective

section through habitat corridors: courtyard to constructed wetland

BUILDING SYSTEMS: Design supports Placemaking & Habitat

facade screen system supports habitat

prepared by Alana Armstrong09.15.2010!! The following report compiles research and analysis gathered on building systems during the Summer of 2010 to establish a baseline of design guidelines for Kalu Yala. All relevant sustainable building systems and opportunities are analyzed per current presence in Panama, Kalu Yala field work and site analysis, evaluation of optimal solutions whether for social, environmental, economical, and human comfort, and current observation of Panamanian labor markets and existing quality of craft.

! The main goal is to reiterate principles of sustainable building are valuable given the practicality and economic feasibility. Many of the basic principles applicable to Kalu Yala are based on centuries of design which many modern architects and engineers do not operate or design by today:

! 1. Optimize Site Potential! 2. Optimize Energy Use! 3. Enhance Indoor Environmental Quality (Human comfort)! 4. Optimize Operational and Maintenance practices

! Many of these design principles can be achieved through the following strategies:

! 1. Bioclimatic response & Passive Design Strategies: ! ! - Compiling site analysis

- Site optimization- Orientation (solar & wind)- Human comfort optimization

! 2. Site Specific Resource Management- Documenting site specific building resources"for infrastructure

! 3. Sustainable Building Systems Engineering! ! -Ideal considering stock, cost, value and payback.! 4. Sourcing experience and craft or training the proper skillset for labor practices

! Main recommendations to Kalu Yala are:

! 1. To evaluate and identify optimal materials and conduct a feasibility study documenting cost ! and implementation! 2. To continue to expand on this baseline of design guidelines to further outline and develop the ! holistic design of Kalu Yala within all aspects: land planning, resource management, ! infrastructure, transit, urbanism, architecture, agriculture, and tourism. [see Exhibit A]

! Note: This report has been assembled with “duty of care” but is structured to provide a baseline of design direction to further assess site-specific resources and a design response both for urban studies, land planning and architecture. This report does not detail nor direct the fundamental aspects of structural integrity with proper cladding and wall cavity detailing for waterproofing, insulation, or moisture management which are essential to building in the tropics. Further research must be implemented within these areas of structure, insulation and mechanical systems for proper building enclosures in Panama.!

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. Site AnalysisA. LocationB. Site HistoryC. Site Context

1. Topography/Geotechnical/Soil profiles2. Drainage/Watersheds3. Natural Resources to harvest/preserve4. Climate/Weather/Wind/Solar Paths!5. Natural Boundaries6. Natural Vegetation/Microclimates7. Features/Views! 8. Existing Access/Infrastructure

II. Building Design GuidelinesA. Design Objectives: Vision & Principals B. Sustainability Principles

1. Overall Bioclimatic Design Strategies2. Specific Passive Design Strategies3. Site Specific Resource Management for Building Practices4. Storm water Management for Building Practices5. Sustainable Construction Systems Engineering

C. Site Infrastructure Construction1. Stormwater Management2. Roads3. Utilities 4. Sanitation/Sewer

D. Building Typology 1. Use2. Building Construction Typology3. Specifics

E. Optimal Construction Systems1. Bamboo2. Native Hardwoods3. Earthbuilding

a) Adobeb) Cobc) Pise de Terre/Rammed Earthd) Quinchae) Earthbag

4. Stone5. Palmas & Thatch

F. Ideal Construction Details for the tropics1. Floor2. Wall3. Ceiling

G. Ideal FinishesH. Design Specifications

III. AppendixIV. Works Cited

BIOCLIMATIC DESIGN & CONSULTINGSustainable Tropical Design & Passive Design for hot-humid PanamaFall 2010. Consulting for Kalu YalaNatural Design Guidelines and Vision Planning of Base Camp

PROJECT SCOPE DEVELOPMENTSite Planning/Project Development/Development CostsSummer 2011. Contracting for Williams & Dame DevelopmentProject Coordination/Program Analysis/Proforma

DESIGN CONCEPT & DEVELOPMENT

This brand hotel is the well established in Eu-rope, Asia and Africa. Currently, in the United States, only 1 built brand exists for this hotel corporation with 1 other location on the design boards. To initiate the design schematics, the typical floor plan layout was considered as a conceptual start but formulated to fit the site area.

Design and development analysis continued into program calculations and evaluations based on an 80% ratio of the original prototype and FAR transfer allowed for the Los Angeles site proposal.

The podium design was driven by site context and parking allowance considering the court-yard approach. Building approach and relating func-tions drove the program layout within the podium.

Napkin Sketch Program Run by Floor

4-18 = 13,000 GR 3 = 18,000 GR + 5k Pool/Fitness 2 = 25,000 Meeting 1 = 25,000 Lobby/Restaurant/BOH P1 = 25,000 Parking/BOH P2 = 25,000 Parking--------------------------------------------------- 313,000 GSF

TYPICAL TOWER FLOOR OF PROTOTYPE CONSIDERED

TOWER ADJUSTED TO SITE DIMENSIONS

FAR Analysis based on prototype considering IDS site

Program Analysis based on 80% reduction

Public Space Summary

BOH Summary with exclusions (MEP)

Public & BOH Circulation with exclusions

Guestroom Floors with exclusions

Total GSF of Program

SF for FAR exclusions

FAR exclusions percentage

GSF of program with exclusions

MOA GSF IBS GSF

61,046 48,837

21,106 16,885

20,441 16,353

246,269 197,015

365,029 279,090

6,481 5,185

2% 2%

348,862 279,090

Initial Program Analysis based on prototype considering IDS siteInitial Program Analysis based on prototype considering IDS siteInitial Program Analysis based on prototype considering IDS siteInitial Program Analysis based on prototype considering IDS siteInitial Program Analysis based on prototype considering IDS siteInitial Program Analysis based on prototype considering IDS site

Penthouse Floor13 4-Module Concierge Lounge 1,624 (2) Mod SuiteTyp Floors: 25 Guestrms (2 Jr Stes, 9 K, 14 QQ)Third FloorPool/WP/Toilets/Pool Mech/Pool Stor. 4,216Exercise 1,716Spa & Spa Storage 3,689 Dirty Linen 255Clean Linen/Housekeeping 1,892 Junior Ballroom 4,361 2, 4 Prefunction 1,868)2, 4 Meeting Rooms 2,3972, 4 Board Rooms/PDRs 830 Public Restrooms 474Second FloorMain Ballroom 10,180Prefunction (7,467 Meeting Rooms (3,205Board Rooms/PDRs (1,071 Public Restrooms (2,183 2 Employee Lockers & Dining 2,432 Ground FloorEntry Lobby/Vestibule 4,399Main Lobby (and Front Desk) 5,295Bar/Restaurant 5,606Sundries 109Coats 356Public Restrooms (474) Front Office (PBX/Work/Res./G.S. Mgr 691Administration/BOH 3,733Human Resources 507Luggage Storage 392 Kitchen/Food Storage 3,823 Maintenance/Engineering 812

MOA Program GSF LA Program GSF LA Total GSF Site Constraints

23,436 13,02021,698 17,358 21,698

26,538 21,230 26,538

26,197 20,958 26,197 26,250

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Portland Oregon Sustainability Institute (PoSI) character-izes the EcoDistricts Initiative as, “a comprehensive strat-egy to accelerate sustainable development at the neigh-borhood scale by integrating building and infrastructure projects with community and individual action.” A collective undertaking, currently led by PoSI, is formulating the ideas, qualities, and workings of an EcoDistrict. PoSI has identi-fied nine performance areas within an EcoDistrict: equita-ble development, placemaking, social cohesion, air quality and carbon, energy, access and mobility, water, habitat and ecosystem function, and materials management. Each of these performance areas are to be assessed individually but work together in unison within the district. POSI’s current action plan has identified goals and targets within each of these areas. Currently underway, the next step is to create applied strategies to later track progress and assess initial goals while moving towards launching the EcoDistrict Pilot Programs.

For this study, the research team identified one of the nine performance areas: materials management, where metrics were the least developed. Materials man-agement includes materials and waste associated with a building’s life cycle, including initial construction, post-occupancy waste, and improvements or demolition. This report proposes suggested methods to apply metrics with supporting data sources, and in some cases, offers recom-mendations which support currently identified goals and targets.

The methodology proposed for materials management is designed for integration within other performance areas in terms of suggested strategies with limited recommenda-tions, data collection, and analysis applied, despite this re-port only considering one performance area. The research questions identified are based on a mixture of literature reviews, interviews, current industry or regulating practic-es, and existing supporting infrastructure to further PoSI’s objectives to establish EcoDistricts. The district scale, illustrated by the EcoDistrict idea, guides all of the meth-ods and strategies proposed in this report. The district scale allows for data collection at multiple scales, whether blocks, lots, or households with supporting strategies while reflecting unique characteristics present to each district. While specific strategies will vary district to district based on various factors such as size, scale, and mix of land-use and resources, the methodologies suggested within this report are general enough to remain broadly applicable to all current EcoDistrict Pilot Programs.

graphic courtesy of Mithun

PLANNING METHODS & METRICS Research conducted for PSU: Portland’s Pilot Program of EcodistrictsFall 2010. Environmental Land Planning MethodsMethodology and Measurement of Performance for Sustainable District Planning

ABSTRACT

A methodology proposed for Materials Management, one of the nine performance areas of an Ecodistrict. Both waste streams are considered: construction materials waste and post-occupancy consumer waste. This next step for implementation of Ecodistricts programs builds upon current studies published on identified goals and targets and proposes applied strategies to track progress and assess initial goals.

Collection of data Establish baseline conditions Interventions applied Metrics via data sources Analysis applied

LITERATURE REVIEW & INTERVIEWS

Portland Sustainability Institute Reports via Oregon DEQ Reports via EPA Waste NAHB Research Center Biocycle Shawn Wood, City of Portland Oregon Metro

Figure 2: EcoDistrict Construction Waste Flow Blue arrows represent building waste entering the EcoDis-trict. Green category boxes represent various pathways building waste might take. Gold arrows show desirable means by which construction waste might be reclaimed to reduce resource demand, embodied energy, and GHG. The farthest right column represents the general process by which building materials exits the district or is reclaimed. Red exit processes are generally undesirable, while green exit processes and gold reclamation processes are in line with EcoDistrict Goals and inform recommended strategies.

Figure 1: EcoDistrict Materials Management Flow Blue arrows represent materials entering the district. Green category boxes represent various pathways materials might travel while in the district. Gold arrows show desirable means by which materials might be reclaimed to reduce resource extraction. The farthest right column represents the general process by which materials exit the district or is reclaimed or recov-ered. Figures represent waste flows from the Portland Metro area, displaying waste flows "as is" (Office of Sustainable Development).

ceilings

mdf wall panels

porcelain tile

storefront glazing

reception desk

walk off mat

DES

IGN

CO

NC

EPTS

/ APP

LIC

ATIO

N

exterior approach

Inspirational concept images

LOBBY PALETTE

DESIGN PRACTICE Collins Cooper Carusi Architects2006-2007. Summit Family YMCA (Metro Atlanta YMCA)Newnan, Georgia

Interior Architecture Client Presentation3D Rendering Conceptualization with Project RendererInterior Architecture DocumentsInteriors Palette: Color selection/Materials coordinationInterior Construction Administration & Submittal ReviewLEED correspondence

“wave” pool tilecedar siding

locker room finishes

full paint palette

walk off tile

NATATORIUM/ LOCKER ROOMS PALETTE

Wellness

YMCA PROGRAM PALETTE

Gym/Running

Pre-Teens/ Teens/ Babysitting

Administration/ Office

DES

IGN

CO

NC

EPTS

/ APP

LIC

ATIO

N

View at Main Entrance by 3D Project Renderer View at bottom of Stairs by 3D Project Renderer Interior Lobby Views

First Floor Finish Plan

Second Floor Finish Plan

Gym

Pre-teens/Teens

Toddlers

NatatoriumLockers

Lobby

Running Track

Wellness

AerobicsAdmin

NatatoriumBelow

MAT

ERIA

L C

OO

RD

INAT

ION

/ APP

LIC

ATIO

N

natatorium

lobby/ teen center