Patrick Sisson - Writer, Journalist, Cultural Documentarian, Music Lover

Portfolio

Vox

November 2018

Staring down a seemingly endless aisle of products, including an entire grocery store-within-a-store, it seems like the shopping never ends at Walmart’s Santa Clarita Supercenter, 30 miles north of downtown Los Angeles. Inside, through an entryway wedged between freezer cases full of seafood, past employee locker rooms, behind a door with a frosted glass logo — a Walmart icon superimposed on a graduate’s cap and tassel —one version of computerized commerce never stops.

This space attached to the retail floor is one of Walmart’s roughly 200 training academies, part of a two-year-old initiative to improve and expand training of the company’s roughly 1.2 million employee associates, the front-line workforce that meets, greets, and checks out customers. Contrary to many people’s perception of the low-cost leader, this training effort is very high-tech. Last year, the academies began offering lessons in virtual reality.

Designed by a Silicon Valley startup, these lessons showcase the value Walmart places in employee education, and the shifting fortunes of virtual reality. The largest corporate investment in the nascent VR industry, which will see 17,000 Oculus Go headsets sent to the company’s 4,700 US stores, offers a vision of the technological changes altering the retail landscape. It’s also an uncanny valley of grocery shopping.

After slipping on an Oculus headset and tightening the velcro straps around my temple, I’m greeted by a boot screen, basically a white expanse in every direction, punctuated by black dots to form a grid. There’s a vibe of Neo and Morpheus in The Matrix, but instead of trading martial arts moves or leaping off buildings, I’m transported to the center of a busy intersection inside a Walmart store during Black Friday.

It’s a bit claustrophobic, with customers streaming past me in every direction. Spinning my head, I see a family pushing a cart filled with emoji slippers, then a man rushing past with a haul of electronics, and finally, a team of associates giving directions to lost shoppers.

As I circle around, the facilitator guiding me through the simulation can pause the action, allowing us to discuss, digest, and learn from what I’m seeing. I’m told the passing customers, who all seem to be casting glances at me, are doing so on purpose; the simulation is meant to put employees on the spot, letting them adjust to the pressure, noise, and expectations of Black Friday shoppers to gain situational awareness before the big day.

Retail’s survival of the fittest will be fought in stores, not just online

As the retail world continues to be rocked by changing consumer habits, Walmart’s massive bet on virtual reality may seem like a peculiar part of the company’s technology portfolio. After all, Walmart bought retail site Jet.com for $3.3 billion in a bid to bolster its e-commerce offerings and counter Amazon’s rise.

But the company’s VR play, and plans to bring virtual reality training to every associate, shows the world’s largest company is still investing in human resources and the in-store experience. Sometimes derided as a futuristic folly, or feared as another tech tool that will divorce us from reality, VR training, as Walmart executives and retail analysts see it, symbolizes the importance of the human element.

“The biggest advantage for us at Walmart is our associates,” says Brock McKeel, the company’s senior director of digital operations, and one of the executives who helped spearhead the VR push. “Anything we can do to make our associates better, and help them take care of their customers, is an advantage for us.”

Brick-and-mortar retail isn’t going extinct. Amazon’s $13.7 billion purchase of Whole Foods last year was a move to gain a physical footprint in high-income neighborhoods across the country. But it will be survival of the fittest, determined in large part by technology.

“If you think about the overall marketplace today, pure-play e-commerce isn’t as competitive today as it was in the past,” says Robert Hetu, vice president and retail analyst at Gartner, a consumer research firm. “Almost everybody has good e-commerce. The store environment is where you can create differentiation. Walmart sees VR as a way to efficiently provide an elevated shopping experience.”

Walmart’s own research has found that VR learning improves employee retention of new information by 10 to 15 percent compared to the typical combination of videos, online demos, and classroom work. Scale that across thousands of stores, and those headsets suddenly seem like a shrewd investment. And as far as the VR industry sees it, Walmart’s huge purchase is a bellwether of how the technology will alter the corporate educational market. After capturing the low-hanging fruit of gaming, the technology is becoming more of an enterprise solution.

“When you consider their scale, it’s immeasurable,” says Andy Mathis, head of partnerships at Oculus for Business. “It’s that classic moment where a new technology has truly been discovered in a meaningful way. It’s a significant statement on not only the possibilities of VR in the future, but the possibilities right now. It’s ready today for impactful training for corporations, health care, and education.”

How a virtual Black Friday started on college football Saturday

Walmart’s path to virtual Black Friday simulations began in a locker room. At the company’s Bentonville, Arkansas, headquarters, home state pride for the University of Arkansas Razorbacks football team, which competes in the storied SEC and has a stadium in nearby Fayetteville, runs deep.

Like many college football teams, the Razorbacks have been investing in training facilities to give their players and team an edge. In 2015, the team became one of the first to buy into a new virtual reality training program for quarterbacks developed by a Silicon Valley startup named STRIVR (Sports Training in Virtual Reality). Derek Belch, formerly a coaching assistant at Stanford, came up with the technology. It uses 360-degree video to create simulated game scenarios, letting players hone their ability to make snap decisions in with less risk of injury.

Repetition without risk is the core value of VR training, according to Logan Mulvey, the company’s chief customer officer. STRIVR boils it down to the acronym RIDE: VR lets you train for rare, impossible, dangerous, or expensive scenarios, over and over again.

“Training a quarterback is the same as training a BMW employee on the factory floor,” Mulvey says. “They both need to quickly assess their options and make a decision.”

Walmart’s McKeel, who was then building out the Training Academy program, had been looking at virtual reality as a potential training tool, but none of the the programs he’d come across struck him as particularly useful to Walmart. After hearing about STRIVR, he decided to investigate, and tested out the technology after a Razorbacks game in the fall of 2016.

“Seeing a scenario where quarterbacks can do repetitions in a safe environment to better prepare them for the game made a light bulb go off,” he says. “They were getting memorable experiences that prepared them for when things actually happened on the field. I thought this would be a great format for the Academies.”

The modules STRIVR designed for Walmart focus on in-store customer service. The produce simulation, for example, the first lesson ever built, presented managerial trainees with a disorganized “wet wall,” the row of fresh vegetables topped with misters and plastic bag dispensers.

During training in the academies, a two-week program for managers, one trainee goes through the simulation, tasked with identifying all 14 errors in 45 seconds. A facilitator asks questions and occasionally pauses the simulation, inviting the other trainees, who are watching the experience on a large screen in the classroom, to comment.

A Socratic method of sorts for shopping, this group learning experience allows for more interactive feedback and discussion. It also allows the company to standardize training across its expansive network of stores, and train large groups on picking up spills, or re-organizing the produce section, without having to shut down busy, revenue-generation parts of the store (20 to 30 percent of company sales comes from growing fresh food offerings). Mulvey said STRIVR has even created an active shooter drill for the company, giving employees guidance on how to handle such an unforeseen emergency.

McKeel says the VR training, done in four- or five-minute segments, cuts down training time, increases engagement, and improves employees test scores. It’s one thing to tell a new manager that Black Friday is insanely busy. It’s another thing to drop them in the middle of a packed store floor, or behind the counter at the electronics section as customers rush for discounted flat screens.

“We underestimated the classroom impact of VR,” says McKeel. “You don’t get this kind of engagement in normal, classroom-style learning.”

The program also allows employees to learn about, and even master, new services or technologies before they arrive at the store. Walmart has been rolling out the “16-foot-tall vending machines” they call pickup towers across the country, aiming to have them in 700 stores by the end of the year. With virtual reality, they can practice using the towers before they even arrive.

The coming age of retail augmentation

Walmart’s VR push represents how the traditional calculus around retail employees has changed, according to Gartner’s Hetu. It signals an age of retail augmentation, not retail obsolescence, as many have predicted. As more companies embrace unified commerce —tying together online and offline shopping to gain additional consumer insight and deliver a better experience — in-person customer service becomes more important.

“Five or six years ago, companies like Best Buy were seeing that customers came into stores with more knowledge than the associates,” Hetu says. “Now, they’ve turned things around, in part using technology to give employees more information. They’re investing in things that provide associates with more data and intelligence.”

Over the long run, Hetu predicts some retail staff will be eliminated, but mostly positions, like cashiers, that are easily mechanized and not focused on customer service. Corporations will focus on the critical human element in shopping, and invest heavily in tracking technology and robotics to help employees help customers — new technology, coincidentally, that can be learned in virtual reality simulations.

Dreama Lovett, 53, works in online grocery for a Walmart in Jacksonville, Florida, a service line targeted by the company’s virtual reality training initiative. While Lovett has yet to try out the Oculus headset, she says technology, such as the new pickup tower her store will receive in January, is becoming a bigger and bigger part of the job.

A Walmart employee tries out a VR headset.

“What I do for a living with Walmart is going to be the new way of life,” she says. “All stores are going to be focused on online pickup and delivery. It’s the new way, part of the evolution and transition of the company.”

Walmart itself is investing in other technology to make associates more efficient, including a robot assistant from Bossa Nova Robotics that scans stores looking for out-of-stock items and shortages and alerts associates, as well as a mobile scheduling app to make staffing more efficient.

All this technology is an investment in improving service, and eliminating bumps in performance as new employees get up to speed, or when retail brings on huge numbers of temporary employees during the seasonal rush. Now that Walmart has “kicked the tires” and shown the works, says Ramon Llamas, a tech and VR analyst for IDC, he predicts companies such as Home Depot and Lowe’s will see VR training as a best practice.

While more, better, and faster retail workers would please any large corporation, in a tight labor market with low unemployment — The Wall Street Journal predicts a shortage of seasonal employees this year — new technology can also be seen as a recruiting tool.

Babs Ryan, a vice president and consulting director at Forrester Research covering consumer and retail, says retail faces a labor crisis. Beyond seasonal shortages, it’s harder and harder to find and retain good talent. Technology can help keep talent engaged and excited.

“It’s not about employees earning another dollar an hour,” Ryan says. “It’s making you want to wake up and do your job every day. The big thing is human interaction, or lack thereof. It’s about better on-boarding, a better experience, and using technology to bring in the human element.”

Ryan views the shift toward retail augmentation less about relentless efficiency, and more about relieving employees of boring, burdensome, rote work while giving them the tools and confidence to have better interactions with customers. Ryan believes this retail tech push will eventually aim to turn more and more employees into style guides and curators.

She points to companies like Stitch Fix, the online clothing subscription service, as a model; customer data and tech provide employees with the information to make recommendations and relate to customers. Walmart, in fact, has been working on its own variation of the concept, launching a personal shopping service called Jetblack.

“These virtual assistants seem way out there, but think about the important aspect that ties them together,” she says. “Employees don’t feel alone. Someone has my back, and someone is there when I need them.”

A new way to learn from employees

Walmart is far from alone when it comes to investing in virtual reality. Farmers Insurance has used VR for corporate training, helping adjustors learn how to evaluate accidents. STRIVR also lists Chipotle and Lowe’s as clients.

Tech firms hope more corporations embrace the technology as it evolves. According to Mulvey, STRIVR customers now have more data about their employee behavior than ever before. By training staff in an immersive environment, companies can track every single movement and use this information to study efficiency, improve processes, and even alter the layout of stores and facilities.

Companies will also be more nimble; new processes and technology can be rolled out faster and faster, with employee feedback and iterative improvement available before customers see a single change on a store floor.

“This technology gives you total certainty of what employees are doing,” says Mulvey. “We’ve given companies the ability to take a deeper look at the way that their employees behave.”

While the idea of tracking movements can invoke Big Brother comparisons, it can also make work safer. IDC’s Llamas foresees a future where workers train on virtual forklifts, taking the multi-million dollar pieces of machinery for a spin in VR, with no risk of injury or accidents. Costly mistakes, for both the company and workers, can be avoided.

As training modules evolve to tackle even more complex interactions and experiences, VR may become a means to improve soft skills and build confidence. STRIVR sees a future with more crisp visuals, and branching technology, a choose-your-own-adventure update which will allow virtual customers or employees in these simulations to not only interact more, but change their responses, and the module’s storyline, based on how the learner interacts.

According to Oculus’s Mathis, the company’s forthcoming Quest headset, set to launch in the first half of 2019, is their first all-in-one VR system that will track hands and allow free movement, and improve engagement and interaction.“

“It opens the floodgates for highly technical and advanced programs,” he says.

These advances will continue to change how employees learn. It’s a phenomenon that Walmart’s McKeel has already observed. During some of the classroom feedback at Walmart training academies, learners are shown videos of how they’re performing, in effect, judging themselves.

“You don’t realize your mannerisms, that you’re slouching in the chair, that you don’t make eye contact, and all these little things mean a lot,” he says.

In an interactive world, you can, in the language of an athlete, get the reps, and make learning more interactive. Virtual reality’s growing role in education shows a truism of technology’s evolution. It’s can be more fantastical, all-encompassing, and ultimately, prosaic, than science fiction might imagine.

Vox

January 2020

When YouTube stars and fashion influencers Jeffree Star and Shane Dawson announced a limited-edition makeup collaboration in fall 2019, the potential for the sale to set records wasn’t hyperbole. Helmed by internet personalities with a combined 40 million-plus subscribers on the video platform and roughly 50 million more followers on other social media networks, then breathlessly promoted with nearly five hours of videos that drew more than 90 million viewers, the flash sale planned for the afternoon of November 1 was inevitably going to be massive.

Organizers recognized that it would be an event, and that it was going to need Shopify. The Canadian-born e-commerce platform has become one of the most influential players in online retail. Currently more than 1 million merchants around the globe use the company’s technology to open their own digital storefronts and sell goods on the internet, creating a constellation of independent, and decentralized, stores (unlike marketplaces like eBay or Etsy). Even its massive infrastructure strained and temporarily broke under the weight of such a sale, however. Loren Padelford, head of Shopify Plus, the division that deals with larger merchants, called it “a perfect storm of pressure.”

During the first few hours, when many frantic shoppers received error messages during their purchase attempts — Jeffree Star said that the incredible demand “broke the front end, it broke the back end, everything is fucked” — millions of people across the world were on the same website clicking on the same button at the same moment (the stars claimed to have sold 1 million palettes that day alone). Padelford said “there were more people on their website, that one single website, the moment that product dropped, then there were on Amazon at the same time. It was the biggest drop sale in the history of the internet, as far as we can tell.”

“I’m excited and terrified of the scale some of these people are building to, they’re getting to the level where they’re going to break the internet,” says Padelford. And Shopify is determined to help them break it.

Shopify has worked to position itself as the online commerce solution with the experience and size to support fast-growing, digitally native brands — the company’s tech has powered direct-to-consumer staples such as Allbirds and Brooklinen — as well as those like Star and Dawson, who are on the larger end of what Padelford calls social influencer selling. Think brands like fitness apparel creators Gymshark, or personalities such as Kylie Jenner who can tap their networks to instantly bring “high quality, low volume goods” into the world. The physics of the internet, Padelford says, make this kind of influencer-driven commerce a bigger selling channel by the day.

But what really has made the Shopify platform a bit of a juggernaut is its comprehensiveness. Launched in 2006 by three friends who couldn’t find an e-commerce solution for their nascent snowboard company, Snowdevil, and decided to build their own platform, it’s grown into a one-stop shop for aspiring merchants and makers. Currently, 1.4 million full-time jobs globally are supported by companies using Shopify. A basic subscription plan costs $29 a month, and lets a seller set up a simple web store, which can then be customized with tools to do marketing, manage social media, and keep track of inventory and shipping. There’s an entire ecosystem of app designers as well as marketing agencies who custom build stores on Shopify. Last year, the company announced plans to invest $1 billion over five years on warehouse space and robotics to build out a fulfillment network so Shopify can also deliver your packages.

“The simple answer is, Shopify has made it super easy to get into the ecommerce game as a small player and stand out on your own merit,” says Paul Munford, editor-in-chief of Lean Luxe, a newsletter focused on the modern luxury marketplace.“

It’s now a world in itself, a very profitable one that makes money off software subscriptions, payment processing, and other merchant services. The company expects to see roughly $1.5 billion in revenue in 2019, a 50 percent jump from the previous year, and continues to see strong growth in subscription revenue. This past Black Friday/Cyber Monday weekend, the company saw $2.9 billion in total sales; during its peak, Shopify software was processing $1.5 million in sales and 16,000 checkouts a minute.

Padelford and other company executives will tell you Shopify is “arming the rebels,” both a boast about the company’s focus on small, independent business, and a dig at Amazon, the truly dominant force in online shopping, which boasts a marketplace with more than 8 million sellers and captures a third of all e-commerce sales. Shopify argues that by creating a merchant-first software product and constantly adapting to fast-moving changes in how we shop online, it helps support more entrepreneurship and new business, which ends up benefitting the consumer in the long run.

As Padelford would tell merchants, “Amazon is like a mall owner who will open an identical store next to you, sell all of your products at a cheaper price, and try to convince consumers it’s the same thing. That’s not actually a mall owner, that’s a competitor masquerading as a mall owner.” He doesn’t see Shopify as the Amazon competitor; the software company’s customers are in the real fight, he’s just one of the arms dealers.

Vox/Recode contributor and digital marketing expert Scott Galloway puts it more bluntly: “Amazon partners with companies the way a virus partners with a host.”


Part of the reason Shopify has maintained its trajectory and relevance is due to a focus on adaptation in tandem with shopping. Take the company’s current focus on in-store shopping, which may seem an unorthodox avenue for a software company. According to Craig Miller, the company’s Chief Product Officer, Shopify’s new point-of-sale technology, including hardware to use in store, came after a realization that brick-and-mortar and online shopping were blurring, especially at a time when direct-to-consumer brands were seeking to open physical retail stores en masse.

Think of a buyer who tries something on in the store and wants it shipped to their house, or someone who sees a dress they like online and wants to see if they can try it on in the store. Because Shopify already provides many merchants with payment, inventory, and shipping services, adding new POS terminals in stores to accommodate this kind of behavior is relatively easy.

“Some of these tools have been available to very large retailers, but for small retailers, they often have multiple systems they need to coordinate,” says Miller.

Most of the new initiatives Miller is currently focused on have this same idea in mind, leveraging Shopify’s size to provide crucial technology to small merchants to level the playing field. An initiative to simplify shipping, exchange rates, and international sales to make it easier for small businesses to sell globally is “creating more opportunity for merchants.” Miller and his team are even working on augmented reality. By helping merchants create 3D models of their goods that, in the near future, may be used with smartphone apps to virtually view how a product looks in physical space before purchasing, Miller believes he can help smaller sellers keep up with tech trends, as well as improve conversion rates and cut down on returns.

That’s one of the main reasons Shopify has moved into fulfillment. Today’s shopping standard is clicking “buy” and seeing an Amazon Prime box on your doorstep the next day. Shopify wants to use its size to set up a fulfillment network that small merchants can take advantage of, and offer similarly fast shipping (two-day delivery across 99 percent of the United States).

“We’re able to offer those services to startups as if they were a multibillion dollar retailer, all within their first few months of being open,” says Miller.

Shopify’s plan is to lease warehouse space, and utilize robotics technology from a company called 6 River Systems, which they purchased in October for $450 million. Shopify will also use the vast amounts of data they have collected on sales and shipping, as well as machine learning, to optimize the logistics network and pre-positioning of goods for quicker shipping. Companies that sign up for the program can even have their own logo stamped on the box, unlike Amazon third-party sellers, which end up advertising Bezos’s latest project.

Trying to take on Amazon and its fulfillment network is a daunting task. That $1 billion investment Shopify is making may sound massive, but Amazon plans to spend $64 billion on logistics and shipping alone in 2019. And fulfillment means warehouses and a different labor force, a complication Shopify hasn’t dealt with before. When asked what would make a Shopify warehouse better than an Amazon warehouse, in terms of pay and labor standards and environmental impact, Miller didn’t provide specifics, but did say that “while we were inspired by the idea of someone getting an item as fast as possible, we would not repeat the terrible warehouse conditions that allow it to happen.” That means strict guidelines as to which warehouses they’d work with, and potentially using carbon neutral or compostable packaging.

The Shopify logo, often unseen by commerce customers.

It’s a big investment and gamble for Shopify, one that’s uncertain to pay off. Munford believes it’s something the company needs to do. Web Smith, editor of 2PM, a newsletter that covers media and commerce, sees it as more of a long-term play.

“When the time comes for Shopify to be a complete, holistic ecosystem from start to finish, they’ll have touchpoints around the country to help you get packages from point A to B as efficiently as possible,” he says. “A lot of people don’t see what they’re doing, but that’ll be the end result.”

The build-out of a nationwide logistics and fulfillment network plays into the Shopify versus Amazon narrative. But perhaps those aren’t the only players to worry about. Success in e-commerce often comes down to friction, and the lack thereof, and many new players see opportunities to shake things up.

Instagram has recently pushed into commerce, launching a sales feature in April that makes it possible for the influencer seller to market and monetize their audience directly from the platform. Both Miller and Padelford will tell you that’s actually to Shopify’s advantage; merchants may find new platforms to sell, but they still need a system that can tie everything in together, and Shopify still offers that at an affordable price. There’s also the threat of new platforms launching.

“I feel like a new wave of companies is coming, and whoever makes it easier for companies to take their stores to market will capture them in a big way,” says Lean Luxe’s Munford.

One of those upstart platforms he’s keeping an eye on is Elliot, a new shopping marketplace launched in Brooklyn last October that now boasts 1,300 merchants from 86 countries. Marco Marandiz, one of the three co-founders, boasts the merchants can go live more quickly than they can on Shopify, again using a no-code approach, and the only cost is a 1 percent fee for every sale. That’s why merchants like Brittany Chavez chose Elliot. She founded ShopLatinX, a curated Instagram feed showcasing Latinx makers and merchants, in 2016, and when she decided to turn it into a store last fall, she found Shopify too complicated, and struggled to get apps from third-party developers to work.

“Shopify built the tech that we take for granted,” Marandiz says. “We allow people to set up and do it in a day. We’re moving with the trends of people building audiences and coming upon celebrity overnight.”

Smith says that’s he’s always believed that the Shopify ecosystem — whether its Unite, the partnerships, or Twitter evangelists in the tech world — is the X factor. But when you have an outside company like Elliot trying to do the same thing in a guerilla fashion, it’s both a validation, and may, down the road, be a threat. It’s hard to be a billion-dollar upstart.

Curbed

January 2018

In 1969, William H. “Holly” Whyte decided to analyze, and eventually decode, New York City’s rambunctious street life. A famed author, Whyte, along with a handful of collaborators, was recruited by the city’s planning commission to set up cameras and surreptitiously track human activity.


Whyte and his team spent countless afternoons filming parks, plazas, and crosswalks, and even more time counting, crossing out, analyzing, and quantifying footage. Notations were made for how people met and shook hands. Pedestrian movement was mapped on pads of graph paper. To get accurate assessments of activity at a street corner, Whyte’s researchers manually screened people caught waiting for lights to change. Imagine how much time it took to figure out that at the garden of St. Bartholomew’s Church, the average density at lunch time is 12 to 14 people per 1,000 square feet.

Observe a city street corner, crosswalk, or plaza long enough, and eventually, energy and entropy give way to understanding. The public greeted Whyte’s work with curiosity and amusement. “One thing he has discovered is where people schmooze,” deadpanned a 1974 New York Times article. “The other thing he has discovered is that they like it.”

Whyte’s Street Life Project was a revelation. Whyte offered nuggets not of gold, but of actionable data, which helped shape city policy: peak versus off-peak activity, average densities, walking patterns. Called “one of America’s most influential observers of the city,” Whyte’s insights and hard-earned wisdom informed New York’s 1969 city plan, helped revise its zoning code, and turned once-squalid Bryant Park into a prized public space.

Read more…

Curbed

February 2018

LOS ANGELES, CA – NOVEMBER 19: Rebecca Ruggles, Environments Interior Design Lead, Airbnb, speaks onstage during Interior Design Tips at The Theatre at Ace Hotel during Airbnb Open LA – Day 3 on November 19, 2016 in Los Angeles, California. (Photo by Todd Williamson/Getty Images for Airbnb)

Ask Harvey Hernandez about his upcoming real estate project in Kissimmee, Florida, and he’ll respond with the easy charm and outsized boasts endemic to his industry. The 324-unit complex near central Florida’s Disney World, the first of a string of tourism-related developments springing up across the U.S. under the Niido brand name, will merely “change the way people live.”

“It’s the reason we get up in the morning,” says Hernandez, who once used a Tesla X as the sweetener in a deal to sell his multimillion-dollar Brickell condo.


“People will imitate it, see the value we provide, and come up with their own iterations,” he says. “And guess what? Nobody else is doing this. That makes us very, very excited.”

Boutique hotels and glitzy apartment buildings come and go. What makes Hernandez so excited is the project’s advisor, Airbnb.

Set to open this spring, Niido represents the first of what many tourism analysts believe will be a popular real estate play: buildings customized for home-sharing sites. Each one-, two-, or three-bedroom unit, ranging from 750 to 1,200 square feet, will be located within a garden-style complex featuring keyless entry, run by master hosts who will take care of maintenance and cleaning. Tenants will be able to rent, and then share, their units in a “seamless, open, convenient, and safe way” for up to 180 nights a year.

Niido is also an example of the increased professionalization of Airbnb, which makes it easier for larger landlords and property owners to prosper. There may always be a market for cheap lodging in someone’s spare room, but increasingly, Airbnb and the services that have sprung up around it are set up to favor property owners with more real estate and greater resources.

Read more…

Curbed

December 2017

Hyatt Regency Atlanta; 1989

It’s fair to say Andrew Young understands the South, and the city of Atlanta, better than most. A longtime politician, pastor, activist, author, and ambassador, Young successfully ran for mayor at the behest of Coretta Scott King in 1981, earning the right to boast that he led a city that had once put him in jail for civil disobedience. With such a deep background in politics and civil rights, he knows exactly how far Atlanta, especially the downtown, has come since the ‘60s. “When I moved to Atlanta in 1961, the tallest building was about 20 stories,” he said. “There was almost nothing downtown. It was as if the city still hadn’t quite recovered from Sherman burning it down.”

A decade later, parts of downtown were beginning to buzz again, he says, thanks in part to the work of a maverick architect and developer named John Portman, Jr. In an era which saw Americans flee cities towards the endless sprawl of safe, ready-built suburban housing, Portman placed bold bets on urban revitalization. “Architecture is about life, and it all comes back to people,” he said. Decades before the urban exodus flipped into today’s mad rush for downtown real estate, the designer chose to redevelop in neighborhoods others had written off.

His urban projects were megastructures, massive developments, shopping centers and hotels such as the Peachtree Center, Merchandise Mart, Peachtree Plaza, and the revolutionary Hyatt Regency Atlanta. Opened in 1967, the stunning space blew apart (and blew open) previous notions of boxy, rectanlinear hotel design. The huge, open 22-story atrium was something very different, a blend of Italian piazza, neofuturist monumentality, and soaring balconies lined with ivy. Guests in the ‘60s lined up by the hundreds just to ride the glorious glass elevators—at $35,000 per cab, the custom systems were the most expensive in the world.

Portman Hyatt Regency Atlanta
Hyatt Regency Atlanta, interior, atrium, lobby, public spaces and Le Parasol Lounge, 1967
 © Alexandre Georges, 1967, courtesy The Portman Archives, LLC

Famous hotelier Conrad Hilton, who rejected an opportunity to partner on the project, said Portman’s idea was “a concrete monster that wouldn’t fly.” But for guests, the trip up the glass elevator was absolutely thrilling. According to a New York Times article about the hotel’s opening, the ride “gives one the feeling, at least the first time around, that he is an astronaut soaring up a gantry at Cape Canaveral, if not already in the first stage after blast off.”

John Portman
John C. Portman, Jr. on podium roof of Atlanta Marriott Marquis with Peachtree Center in background, 1988
 © Flip Chalfant, 1988 courtesy The Portman Archives, LLC

Before Portman, “we had no downtown Atlanta,” says Young. “There was very little street life, very few restaurants. Now the Polaris Restaurant, the blue dome that sits atop the Hyatt, has become a symbol of a new Atlanta.”

John Portman’s work from the ‘60s, ‘70s, and ‘80s can be found across the country, but the common denominator is how the mixed-use projects sought to bring energy back to cities at a time when many were turning their backs. Portman and his firm would go on to create a series of projects with massive atria, public art, and thrilling interiors, including the Renaissance Center in Detroit, a city-within-a-city on the riverfront (1977) and the Hyatt Regency San Francisco (1973) and the sprawling Embarcadero Center in the Bay Area.

Years later, Portman’s work often gets criticized for the way these grand interiors wall themselves off from the rest of the city, turning their back on the sidewalk. One critic called one of Portman’s project “a temple of hermetic urbanism” and “self-contained sci-fi,” a somewhat fitting comment, since so many of his buildings have provided futuristic backdrops for films.

Peachtree Plaza
Peachtree Center; 1967, with Gas Light (North) Tower construction almost complete
 © Clyde May, 1967, courtesy The Portman Archives, LLC

But Portman didn’t set out to shut people out. He spoke of decongesting the city, creating new town squares and meeting places, and bringing people together, all at a time when the stereotype of urban America could be summarized in the bombed out, Bronx-is-burning hyperbole played up in the press. He looked at his Marriott Marquis project in New York’s Times Square, developed when the area was still considered seedy, as a sort of “urban lung” in the midst of a crowded, hectic neighborhood.

“Sometimes, I’m not sure where the idea of his project having an inward focus comes from,” says Mack Scogin, a principal at Mack Scogin Merrill Elam Architects and teacher at the Harvard Graduate School of Design. “His ideas are all about enriching the urban environment, of contributing to and even re-inventing the urban fabric.”

Hyatt San Francisco
Hyatt Regency San Francisco, Embarcadero Center, interior, atrium, sculpture ‘Eclipse’ by Charles O. Perry, 1973
 © Alexandre Georges, 1973, courtesy The Portman Archives, LLC

Portman’s vision for the future may be singular, but it always looked at the city with optimism.  A.J. Robinson, a former President of Portman Holdings who currently works for Central Atlanta Progress, says his boss believed in revitalization.

“He thinks of the central core as being the heart of the city, and if the heart functions well, and circulates its energy out to the rest of the city, it’s doing its job,” he says. “They older city centers didn’t quite need a transfusion, but needed to be enhanced.”

Portman changed the look of Atlanta, and other cities around the world, by doing things a little differently. After serving in the Navy and graduating from Georgia Tech in 1950, Portman was drawn towards architecture, and started his own firm in 1953, John Portman and Associates (it’s now part of the Portman Family of Companies, which also includes Portman Holdings). He quickly came to the conclusion that that the best way to make an impact was to be both an architect and developer, as well as a self-starter.

Beginning with his Merchandise Mart (now AmericasMart) in 1961 and Peachtree Center in 1965, he began reshaping a vast swath of downtown Atlanta; Peachtree Center now encompasses 10 buildings and 19.6 million square feet, including skyways. Architects at the time were displeased that he was operating as both developer and designer, creator and client, and the AIA and other organizations gave him a cold shoulder.

Portman SketchWestin Peachtree Plaza rendering 1972. © Dan Harmon The Portman Archives, LLC

But Portman, an “artist and architect,” felt the unique arrangement allowed him to pursue a progressive view of Atlanta and take risks, building projects that others couldn’t. Decades later, architecture critic Paul Goldberger agrees with Portman’s assessment, noting in the film John Portman: A Life of Building that his work and success encouraged developers to be more risky, and champion more unique buildings.

“He pulled himself into the development business,” says Young. “Nobody gave him $100 million to get started. He scrambled his way up the ladder.”

As Portman began creating some of the big developments and megastructures that would define his career, a side project for the local public housing authority provided a template for some of his most revolutionary work. Commissioned to build the Antoine Graves senior center for the city of Atlanta in 1965, Portman developed a people-centric approach to design. Residents expressed interest in adding a porch, which they treasured as a space for socialization. Portman took the outside in and added a massive atrium to the core of the structure, preserving a space for interaction, with the added benefit of increasing shade and air circulation. This project became a model for the Hyatt Hotel.

“The front porch was the lifeblood of seniors in that area,” says Young. “I liked the sensitivity he showed with that project.”

This concept would be central to Portman’s expanding body of work, including the Hyatt Regency San Francisco, an inverted pyramid that still stands as the world’s largest hotel lobby, The Westin Bonaventure in Los Angeles, and the Renaissance Center in Detroit, filled with vast, cylindrical common spaces more futurist than anything coming off the assembly line of the city’s carmakers.

Portman, an architect as well as an artist, whose sculptures occasionally decorated his buildings, had a unique vision of cinematic interiors. Blending the monumentality of Louis Kahn, the organic shapes of Frank Lloyd Wright, as well as a healthy appreciation for the European model of a town square, he created interiors that still stand as some of the best physical examples of what could be called a retro-futurist aesthetic (this forward-thinking vision explains why, beginning in the ‘80s, the Portman firm has had such great success in budding metropolises in China and Asia).

Portman SketchAtlanta Marriott Marquis rendering © Dan Harmon, 1979, Portman Archives, LLC

What sets his projects apart is a focus on movement. When he was asked by the New York Times to define his early influences, he named Tivoli Gardens, the Champs-Élysées, and Alhambra, public spaces and palaces built with flow and progression in mind.

“Buildings serve the human being, not the other way around,” he told The Atlantic. “I don’t think architects have spent enough time thinking holistically about how architecture affects people.”

In 1976, Portman wrote “The Architect as Developer,” discussing how modern city planning had failed, and how the architect needs to re-engage the public. Many have said his buildings don’t quite living up to this vision, and create distinct, privately controlled space. The Renaissance Center stands apart and separate from the surroundings. The Bonaventure in Los Angeles and its series of skyways can be a maze to navigate. In New York City, his Marriott Marquis in Times Square, which was completed in 1985, towers above the square without truly connecting, with a lobby and bar suspended on the 8th floor. However, some critics, including Goldberger, who severely criticized it when it opened, have noted that the momentum for redevelopment that has now led to increased investment in the pedestrian experience around the neighborhood only happened after the Marquis opened.

While Portman’s architecture has been influential—he basically invented the atrium hotel, and his firm currently works on projects around the globe—his impact on city planning and urbanism can perhaps best be understood as an optimistic vision for its time. When others were walking away from downtowns, Portman said that we don’t have to ditch them, we can rebuild them.

“His buildings were designed to make people secure and comfortable, but they were also inspirational,” says Young.

The lobbies, atria, and megaprojects Portman created were cities within cities, stunning versions of a new type of town square. In some ways, his work can be appreciated for delivering an early preview of the urban future, though all too often in self-contained episodes.

Read more…

Curbed

January 2018

For cities starved of new housing, staring down an affordability crisis, and desperate for density, the opportunity to inexpensively add housing units seems to good to be true. But that’s the promise made by proponents of accessory dwelling units, or ADUs: small structures, typically totaling under 1,000 square feet, built on the property of existing homeowners.

“There’s lots of free land out there,” says Ira Belgrade, who has become an advocate and consultant for ADU construction in Los Angeles and runs the site YimbyLA. “And it’s in people’s backyards. But people have this mindset of ‘not in my backyard, or my neighbor’s backyard, or even my block.’”

One of the few housing types that’s primarily completed and developed by amateurs—and, until recently, often constructed off the books—ADUs, small backyard housing units also known as granny flats, have seen a recent boom. The affordable housing shortage has spurred increased advocacy for ADUs, especially in California, where detached single-family homes make up 56.4 percent of the overall housing stock. Recent legislation in the state created a sharp rise in their construction. In Los Angeles, the number of applications for ADU construction rose from 80 in 2016 to 1,980 through November 1, 2017.

“The affordable housing crisis across the U.S. is going to propel the movement forward,” says Kol Peterson, a Portland-based ADU expert and author of a new book, Backdoor Revolutiona guide to ADU development.

Read more…

Curbed

January 2018

In the run-up to the Super Bowl, Minneapolis’s new billion-dollar stadium, a glass-fronted warship docked in a developing part of downtown, will be the subject of broadcast profiles and b-roll. But move the cameras a few blocks in any direction, and viewers would see why boosters believe the stadium’s benefits go well beyond the big game.

U.S. Bank Stadium is just one feature of the city’s ongoing Big Build initiative, a public-private project bringing $2 billion in investment to a 120-square-block area called East Town. By anchoring the stadium downtown as opposed to in a sea of suburban parking lots, the pitch goes, it’s not just another sports arena: It’s a catalyst for infill, affordable housing, riverfront development, and new transit hubs.

It’s the newest twist on the debate over sports stadiums and economic development. Can a new stadium not just generate development, but actually be a good deal for the city? The best case study may be on the West Coast. In Sacramento, where the NBA’s Kings and their tech-savvy owner Vivek Ranadivé just constructed the league’s most advanced arena, the solar-powered Golden 1 Center, new economic-impact reports suggest the stadium has been a boon to California’s capital.

Ever since breaking ground in 2014, the Kings’s new home and the world’s first LEED-Platinum indoor sports stadium has attracted development, dollars, and economic activity to what’s now being branded as DoCo, or Downtown Commons. According to a recent analysis by the Downtown Sacramento Partnership (DSP), in just its first year the arena hosted 1.6 million guests, who spent more than $71 million. Employment downtown has grown 38 percent since arena construction began. It’s also at the center of a constellation of new construction, surrounded by 32 new projects, part of nearly “$2 billion in urban investments in the region’s core since 2015,” reads the DSP report.

Read more…

Curbed

February 2018

Are economic development megadeals worth the price—and the risk? With cities trying to outbid each other for Amazon’s new headquarters, it’s worth examining potential cautionary tales.

Analysts say the recent Foxconn deal in Wisconsin, a blockbuster, multibillion-dollar investment in bringing more manufacturing to the state, is indicative of the sad state of big-ticket economic development deals, and even more tragic in light of the cheaper, more effective options available.

“Cities feel like there’s no alternative,” says Greg LeRoy, executive director of Good Jobs First, a Washington, D.C., policy center that promotes accountability in economic development. “They’ve grown up in a corporate dominated site-selection system, where public officials are playing poker with a weak hand. Their role is to wait for companies to come and knock on the door, and put as much money on the table as possible. We think HQ2 is a teachable moment to crawl inside the beast and show people how it works.”

Part of farmland planned to be replaced with Foxconn Technology Group’s $10 billion facility is shown in the village of Mount Pleasant, Wisconsin, Wednesday, October 4, 2017.
 AP/Teresa Crawford

Wisconsin bets big on Foxconn

Gordon Hintz grew up around manufacturing. The six-term Democratic state representative for Oshkosh, Wisconsin, is a native of the city, and has spent his career advocating on behalf of an area with one of the highest concentrations of manufacturing jobs in the country (paper mills and factories form the backbone of the regional economy). So when Hintz questions a deal to bring thousands of manufacturing jobs to Wisconsin, it’s notable.

The state and local incentive Wisconsin politicians put together for Foxconn was billed by Gov. Scott Walker as a $3 billion investment in the future. The third-largest such deal in U.S. history, the package enticed the Taiwanese multinational to break ground on a $10 billion plant that will eventually employ 13,000 to assemble liquid crystal displays.

It turns out those figures are a little off, in Foxconn’s favor. Last month, Hintz helped publicize a memocompiled by the state’s nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau that found the real cost to state and local governments was $4.5 billion. As Hintz told Curbed last week, the new numbers underline the big risk of shelling out public funds for jobs, the opportunity costs. The growing tab the state faces will use money that could be going to education and public schools, infrastructure, and other benefits.

“People want to see more manufacturing jobs,” Hintz says, “but they’ve also had enough of giving taxpayer money to billionaires. Why are we giving billions to a foreign company instead of investing in our own paper mills?”

Promoted vigorously by Walker, as well as area Congressman Paul Ryan and President Donald Trump, the Foxconn deal, its backers argue, will provide a jolt to the state and southeast Wisconsin region. During a meeting with Trump earlier this month, Walker said the factory, expected to open its doors in 2020, would result in 13,000 direct jobs, 22,000 indirect jobs, and 10,000 construction jobs.

The resulting infrastructure investments needed to support the massive manufacturing facility—expected to cover 20 million square feet of office space over 1.56 square miles—will update roads, electrical systems, fiber-optic networks, and water distribution across the region. An upgrade of Interstate 94, connecting Milwaukee to Chicago, was fast-tracked due to Foxconn’s expected arrival.

Officials representing municipalities near the factory expect additional dividends. Madison, the state capital, may be the site of a Foxconn-funded “hospital of the future.” A spokesperson for the local project team says the deal is a safe, conservative investment for the city and county, structured in a way that’ll guarantee investment in local infrastructure doesn’t come from existing city funds. Over time, the build-out will attract an ecosystem of more than a hundred new businesses to the area.

“We will have to develop an entirely new supply chain,” Mount Pleasant Village President Dave DeGroot told the Wisconsin State Journal. “The impact on this community is unprecedented.”

Early infrastructure work near the future site of the Foxconn campus in Mount Pleasent

How local government helps pay for multinational companies

It’s a potentially transformative investment. But Hintz, LeRoy, and other analysts caution that local government is the one footing the bill in the long run.

Putting state resources into a single place to benefit a single employer is a risky deal, says LeRoy. In a state like Wisconsin, where austerity measures imposed by the governor and the legislature have already short-changed education and infrastructure spending, diverting resources to one employer means diverting money from already-thin budgets.

The infrastructure improvements for the Foxconn plant will come out of local budgets, specifically Mount Pleasant and Racine County. Foxconn will be part of what’s called a Tax-Increment Finance District, known as a TIF. This tax structure is meant to capture the additional value the company’s presence creates, then funnel that value to subsidize the promised infrastructure investments that attracted Foxconn in the first place.

The costs are substantial, including $160 million for water and wastewater and $116 million in public safety spending. This TIF has much more favorable terms than similar financing deals, and guarantees the city will be fully reimbursed for all infrastructure spending.

This is where opponents and supporters diverge. One one hand, it’s a better, safer bet; the city is guaranteed not to lose out on infrastructure spending. But it’s still a bet that this is theopportunity worth pursuing, and it still creates additional costs down the line.

“In terms of structuring a deal where the local community has some pretty solid protection that the investment will be repaid, this deal goes a long way,” says Rob Henken, president of the Wisconsin Policy Forum, a nonpartisan research group. “Where you could never hope to have appropriate protection is what happens after that.”

But Foxconn’s presence means property tax in the region will go up, and add more to the city’s coffers, correct? Not immediately: The estimated $31 million in additional annual tax revenue generated by Foxconn’s presence will be used to pay for $764 million in infrastructure investments needed to support the plant and surrounding campus.

“It’s like the company taking money out of its front pocket and putting it in its back pocket,” says LeRoy. “All or most of the money will be spent on public infrastructure, but most of it will benefit Foxconn.”

What about all those jobs? According to Tim Bartik, an economist at the W.E. Upjohn Institute for Employment Research who specializes in the impact of subsidies, most of the employment figures thrown around for these types of deals don’t take into account the people migrating to town for work. Not only do new arrivals, attracted to the opportunities, often take most of the jobs, says Bartik, but their presence means more expenses for local governments.

New residents mean more education costs, health care spending, and infrastructure improvements, all potentially coming from the same budget line items that have been diverted for Foxconn-related expenses. The Foxconn TIF covers police and fire costs, but that’s just a part of expected increases in city spending. Bartik found that for many of these incentive deals, 20 percent of the jobs go to unemployed locals, and the other 80 percent go to people who lived elsewhere.

“I don’t think the state of Wisconsin will ever make money on this deal,” he says. “Once you account for public spending needs due to an increased population, [the state will] never break even.”

How TIF funds from the Foxconn development will be distributed.

Even if you discount local expense, the state is grossly overpaying for jobs, according to Bartik’s research. He’s created a subsidy database, and found that Wisconsin is paying $230,000 per job, 10 times more per job than the national average. LeRoy says at that rate, the deal can only be described as “a transfer of wealth from Wisconsin taxpayers to Foxconn shareholders.”

It also means the state will be playing a weaker hand when bidding for future economic development opportunities.

“If some company comes and says they want to create a factory and hire people in Milwaukee, and asks for the same per-job subsidy Foxconn received,” says Bartik, “how does the state say no to that?”

Development deals favor big companies, not local startups

Local economic development subsidies have come a long way since they were pioneered in Mississippi in the 1930s, according to LeRoy. Then, the Balance Agriculture With Industry program would guarantee factory construction fees for northern firms willing to relocate. It was a modest affair. At the program’s outset, the small town of Columbia, Mississippi, held a public meeting where locals signed promissory notes to pay for the cost of relocation. These were then used to guarantee a larger bank loan.

Even in the ’50s and ’60s, when a roaring economy meant new corporate headquarters and expanded manufacturing across the country, subsidies weren’t anything like the state versus state race to the bottom they’ve become today. LeRoy’s research has shown that this “great game” to land new headquarters and shiny manufacturing plants costs states and cities $70 billion a year.

What may seem extra puzzling, considering the huge investment and undersized return, is that many signs point to the most cost-effective solutions to catalyze Wisconsin’s economy. Slow, incremental small-business growth doesn’t capture public attention the way a big corporate opening does—Bartik joked that he’s talked about Amazon and Foxconn to numerous reporters, but no journalists ever ask him about manufacturing extension programs or small-business development centers—but it works. In addition to funding infrastructure and education to create a region of highly skilled, mobile employees, simply giving existing entrepreneurs more support can make a crucial difference.

“Investing in a 4-year-old’s preschool is the best you can do for future job development, but I don’t know if it resonates with the public as much as seeing a factory,” says Hintz.

Hintz emphasizes the importance of supporting small businesses, especially since the state is lagging behind in many measures of new business formation. There’s no reason this can’t include manufacturing, which has seen an upswing in the U.S. in recent years. It’s just an issue of giving smaller, more nimble companies some of the attention lavished on the big conglomerates.

“If a fraction of what was made available to Foxconn went to nurturing small-business opportunities, especially with the capabilities of our research university, you’d have much better outcomes,” Hintz says. “Foxconn amounts to trying to buy economic development, and that’s not how it works.”

It’s one of the tricky narrative needles to thread in American politics, Hintz says. Politicians chase things people can identify with, such as old-school manufacturing jobs, even though a return to robust small-business formation would be just as much in line with the U.S. economy of yesteryear.

“So much of what drives political rhetoric is identifying job development that people can identify with and understand,” says Hintz. “The future always loses to the past, especially if you’re someone who’s been negatively impacted by the transforming economy.”

Business formation has been a problem across the country, but cities like Pittsburgh, which have invested in education to spur innovative research and entrepreneurship, have seen big returns. In Madison,Wisconsin’s capital, a burgeoning tech scene has become a huge economic catalyst; funding incubators and educational initiatives could pay great dividends across a range of industries.

According to LeRoy’s research, in an analysis of economic development incentives, 70 percent of the deals and 90 percent of the funding went to large businesses.

“There’s been a long-term academic consensus that entrepreneurship is in trouble in the United States,” LeRoy says. “The numbers of startups that thrive is down. The two trends [rise in economic-development megadeals and declining startup survival rates] are parallel.”

Wisconsin’s Foxconn deal ends up looking more like a poker player going all in. Instead of placing many small, nimble bets on local companies, it’s backing one big deal. In today’s economy, that makes even less sense, says Hintz.

“In 2005, would we have been excited by a Blackberry factory?” Hintz asks. “And more importantly, would we have gotten our money back in 25 years?”

Curbed

February 2018

The South Merrill Community Garden on Chicago’s South Side fills a literal hole in its community. Slipped between between two brick apartment buildings, the small plot was established in the 1980s by neighborhood residents in the predominantly black part of town, who created a small flower garden using bricks from a demolished building. In 2010, area students took over, using the garden to memorialize Troy Law, a local child killed as a result of domestic abuse.

The garden fell into disuse a few years later, weeds overrunning the soil. In 2012, shots rang out as someone was chased through the overgrowth. No one was hurt, but the errant fire galvanized a group of residents to get rid of the eyesore.

Frustrated by the violence in the surrounding South Shore neighborhood, and in the city at large, neighbors reclaimed the land, laying down stone paths and sowing flower and vegetable seeds.

Last summer, this small garden also became a testing ground for an experiment in crime prevention. Thanks to the Chicago Safe and Peaceful Communities Fund, a “rapid-response” charitable initiative giving seed money to communities suffering disproportionately from crime, the garden received a small stipend to run a Saturday program for kids, Planting and Playing Summer Garden Arts. One of 121 small grants, the funds provided an entire summer of Saturday activities for neighborhood kids.

“We’re helping to establish a bit of well-being,” says Natalie Perkins, the gardening group’s education coordinator. “It doesn’t mean that everything stopped, or people won’t be shot.”

Read more…

Curbed

March 2018

In the midst of the #MeToo movement, consider the following scenario: sexual harassment accusations against a powerful man, reinforced by an investigation and internal deliberation at his place of employment, leading to a widespread petition from his colleagues demanding action. But instead of resignation or prompt disciplinary action, the accused remains employed, salaried, and facing an unknown fate, as the proceedings taking place against him are conducted out of the public eye.

And while sexual harassment in the workplace has come to the forefront—following a reinvigorated discussion around reporting sexual misconduct on college campuses—that this particular scenario has been unfolding at a college known as a liberal, progressive bastion may come as a surprise. But here we are, in the architecture department at the University of California at Berkeley.

In March of 2016, Ph.D. student Eva Hagberg Fisher accused Nezar AlSayyad, a tenured architecture professor in the UC Berkeley College of Environmental Design—and her former faculty advisor—of sexual harassment and misconduct.

university-funded investigation of AlSayyad, released in November 2016, found numerous incidents of inappropriate behavior between 2012 to 2014 that echo Hagberg Fisher’s claims. A settlement reached between Berkeley and Hagberg Fisher in December 2017 led to the school paying her a settlement of $80,000.

AlSayyad has consistently denied all allegations, recently saying that those involved are “inadvertently supporting a smear campaign,” and a coalition students recently published a letter in the student newspaper defending him (five co-signed the letter, and the rest chose to remain anonymous). Via his lawyer, Dan Siegel, AlSayyad has denied to Curbed the claims that he manipulated or made inappropriate advances towards any students, including Hagberg Fisher, or that he violated the Berkeley Code of Conduct.

Read more…