►
Description
Students from Carnegie Mellon University's Heinz College and the University of Pittsburgh's GSPIA program collaborated with the City of Pittsburgh on various projects throughout the fall semester and presented their findings to City stakeholders as well as other invited guests.
A
Hello:
everyone
welcome
to
the
2014
fall
semester
graduate
projects
we
and
the
city
of
Pittsburgh
have
been
really
fortunate
to
have
a
really
strong
partnership
with
the
University
of
Pittsburgh
and
Carnegie
Mellon
University
they've
been
pivotal
in
terms
of
providing
a
lot
of
good
research
and
information
to
support
a
lot
of
our
projects
and
we'll
have
three
presentations
here
this
morning
and
we'll
have
a
short
introduction
before
each
presentation,
but
really
thank
you
very
much
to
Carnegie
Mellon
University.
Thank
you
to
the
University
of
Pittsburgh
for
making
this
happen.
B
Thanks
director
lamb
appreciate
the
introduction,
my
name
is
Grand
Irv
and
I
serve
as
a
sustainability
manager
for
the
city
of
pittsburgh,
and
it
is
my
pleasure
to
introduce
our
first
presentation
today
the
cleantech
visions
for
a
new
Pittsburgh
economy.
This
team
was
led
by
dr.
Sylvia
boryczewski
from
Carnegie
Mellon
University
and
the
hind
school.
It
is
really
kind
of
an
initiative
that
was
led
from
an
earlier
round
table
that
we
hosted
in
the
summer
on
the
clean
technology
sector
in
Pittsburgh.
B
What
the
students
have
done
for
us
is
really
set
forth
a
foundation
with
regards
to
a
new
and
emerging
sector
in
Pittsburgh
with
regards
to
technologies
that
are
cleaning
and
improving
our
environment.
Everything
from
the
building
sector,
building
improvement.
Excuse
me:
Building,
Performance,
clean
energy
as
well
as
software
technologies
that
are
being
advanced
right
here
in
the
city
of
Pittsburgh.
So
we're
really
excited
today
to
hear
from
the
team
which
is
beginning
to
be
led
by
Kenny,
Barry
and
Mollie
Brennan,
so
Kenny
and
mall.
C
Good
afternoon
I'm
Mollie
Brennan,
this
is
kenny,
barry
and
we're
going
to
speak
about
clean
technology
in
pittsburgh.
First,
we're
going
to
introduce
our
team,
then
I'm
going
to
we're
going
to
talk
about
what
clean
technology
means
and
specifically
what
it
means
for
Pittsburgh.
Then
we're
going
to
talk
about
the
sector
here
and
our
recommendations
that
we
have
for
the
city.
So
we
had
a
six
person
team.
C
Two
of
our
other
team
members
are
here
today,
Meredith
in
the
back
and
Tristan,
and
our
faculty
advisor
is
Sylvia
over
here
and,
of
course,
we've
been
thankful
to
work
with
grant
on
this
project.
We
found
that
there
are
four
main
recommendations
that
we
have
for
the
city
after
our
research.
First,
we
we
recommend
that
the
city
sits
down
and
really
considers
what
kind
of
scope
they
want
to
have
on
clean
technology,
what
they
want
to
focus
on
how
big
they
want.
C
This
focus
to
be
second,
create
an
office
of
strategic
investment
which
we'll
talk
in
detail
about
all
these.
At
the
end
of
the
presentation.
Third
support
Pittsburgh,
clean
technology,
greenhouse
and
forth,
create
local
markets
here
in
Pittsburgh
to
create
more
demand
for
clean
technology
products
and
services.
Okay,
good.
D
Right
Thanks,
so
do
is
start
off.
One
of
the
first
things
that
we
did
early
on
in
the
semester
was
defining
what
clean
technology
really
was.
Other
cities
and
regions
have
different
definitions
that
fit
with
what
their
strengths
are
and
what
MIT,
what
makes
sense
for
their
region,
and
in
Pittsburgh
we
looked
for
first
at
a
bureau
of
labels,
Labor
Statistics
definition
OECD
and
the
Brookings
Institution
to
see
what
they
had.
D
What
sort
of
framework
they
laid
out
for
us,
and
essentially
all
those
definitions,
are
saying
the
same
thing
that
these
are
technologies
that
help
create
a
cleaner
environment
and
in
Pittsburgh
those
three
government
slide
by
slide
here.
So
the
first
one
is
water
technologies,
lot
of
products
and
services
and
those
are
essentially
technologies
that
create
improved
water,
quality
or
efficiency.
D
The
second
is
energy
efficient
building
technologies,
so
any
technology
used
in
building
new
or
retrofitted,
that
optimizes
energy
use,
and
the
third
is
renewable
energy
and
pollution
control
and
with
each
of
these
sub
sectors
of
clean
technology.
Here
in
Pittsburgh,
we
found
that
there's
an
existing
base
of
companies,
organizations
and
programs
in
place,
but
there
is
certainly
potential
for
better
coordination
between
these
between
these
stakeholders
in
these
sub
sectors
and
our
recommendations
help
address
those
so
now,
I'll
talk
about
the
research
and
methodologies
that
we
used
to
arrive
at
those
recommendations.
D
Here
in
Pittsburgh,
second,
was
seeing
what
was
written
about
in
literature
review
through
social
science
research
and
finally,
we
looked
at
three
cities
in
detail:
Milwaukee,
Cincinnati
and
Portland
on
strategies
that
they
had
employed
and
seeing
which
of
those
were
transferable
to
Pittsburgh
and
those
are
reflected
in
the
recommendations
as
well,
and
our
framework
started
off.
It's
twofold
I'll
be
talking
about
our
supply
side,
recommendations
and
those
are
your
traditional
economic
development
strategies
and
then
the
demand
side
of
the
equation,
which
Molly
will
be
talking
about
at
the
end.
D
Some
of
those
are
a
little
bit
more
exciting
and
possibly
easier
to
implement
in
the
short
term
and
on
the
top,
the
traditional
economic
tilton
ones,
again:
firm
attraction,
expansion
and
creation.
How
can
what
is
the
world
public
policy
and
incentivizing
these
and
at
the
bottom?
What
sort
of
requirements
or
incentives
can
the
city
put
in
place
to
help
create
markets
for
these
products?
D
The
second
part
of
it
is
to
take
a
regional
perspective,
none
of
the
cities
that
we
looked
at
we're
successful,
unilateral
at
erally
in
implementing
their
initiatives.
In
nearly
all
case,
there
are
they're
working
with
county
or
regional
stakeholders,
I
mean
in
many
cases
add
federal
partners
that
were
assisting
in
the
implementation
of
this
and
third
is
to
leverage
ongoing
initiatives
and
what
the
other
priorities
are
for
the
city
and
how
those
can
be
paired
with
a
sector
based
economic
development
strategy.
D
Our
second
recommendation,
so
the
second
and
third
recommendation
are
two
alternatives.
Organizational
recommendations
for
what
the
city
could
do
in
the
first
one
is
a
two-phase
scalable
sector
based
strategy
housed
within
the
mayor's
office
on
that
also
addresses
broader
gaps
and
Economic
Development
functions
within
the
city,
and
the
second
is
a
more
distinct
member
based
organization.
That's
coordinated
by
the
city
but
not
operated
by
the
city
and
I'll
talk
about
that
in
a
minute,
so
creating
an
office
of
strategic
investment.
D
Currently
there's
no
city
counterpart
to
regional
and
county
level.
Economic
development
functions.
But
the
city
has
recognized
need
for
this
and
creating
a
liaison
to
these
groups
within
the
URA.
But
more
could
be
done
and
key
responsibilities
within
this
would
be
ensuring
that
the
city
is
closely
connected
with
site
selectors.
D
The
the
conference
and
the
state
on
going
the
extra
mile
that
sometimes
necessary
to
connect
business
attraction
decisions
with
the
city,
and
the
second
is
that
this
office
enables
gives,
gives
the
city
of
the
capacity
to
implement
cluster
based
strategies
like
clean
technology
and
a
part
of
this
is
being
able
to
assess
within
the
existing
industry
clusters,
meaning
the
water
economy
network,
the
green
building
Alliance
and
the
energy
alliance
of
Greater
Pittsburgh,
where
the
interest
is
and
some
key
responsibilities
within
this
would
be
branding
the
Pittsburgh
clean
technology.
Sub-Sector.
D
Whichever
one
shows
the
most
interest
and
a
key
part
of
this
as
well,
is
that
it's
scalable
to
include
other
cluster
based
strategies,
software
health
care,
whatever
it
might
be.
So
if
one
sub
sector
becomes
fading
or
if
new
ones
emerge
that
it
can
adapt
to
those.
And
finally,
it
gives
the
the
city
of
the
ability
to
create
and
see,
create
and
seek
investment
in
funding
opportunities.
Whether
it's
lobbying
state
and
federal
organizations
for
Pittsburgh,
which
a
lot
of
other
cities
have
been
successful
in
or
just
working
with.
D
D
Third,
advocating
for
cleantech
priorities
and
working
to
implement
some
of
the
demand
side,
recommendations
that
will
have
advocating
for
cleantech
sorry
marketing
the
clean
tech
cluster
I'm.
An
important
part
of
this
is
getting
stakeholders
together
to
be
using
the
same
branding
language
for
whatever
this
sub-sector
is
measuring
the
magnitude
and
progress
of
the
region's
clean
tech
cluster
through
an
industry
database
and
then
supporting
startup
and
member
companies
through
consulting
and
accelerator
services
and
potentially
engaging
with
universities
for
innovation
challenges.
D
But
one
key
obstacle
with
an
organization
like
this
is
that
they
are
expensive.
Typically,
they
operate
with
an
annual
budget
in
excess
of
a
million
dollars,
and
most
of
these
successful
organizations
have
had
a
diversity
of
funding.
That's
been
available
to
them,
but
once
the
city
is
able
to
secure
that
funding,
it
seems
like
the
infrastructure
is
here
to
move
forward
with
a
greenhouse
thanks.
C
C
Second
idea
is
to
revamp
the
city's
RFP
procurement
and
choice
process.
So
this
is
two
ideas
in
11
idea
was
recently
implemented
in
Philadelphia
and
I.
Think
and
our
team
thinks
that
it's
a
good
idea
and
should
we
should
consider
it
here
and
that's
called
an
improvement
RFP.
So
they
say
we
have
a
social
problem
and
we
know
that
there
are
technologies
out
there
that
can
help
this
problem,
but
we
don't
necessarily
know
what
those
technologies
are
yet
so
we're
going
to
put
out
an
RFP
that
says
this
is
our
problem.
C
This
is
the
general
idea
of
what
we're
looking
for
and
then
see
what
kind
of
bids
you
get
back
and
go
from
there.
The
second
part
of
revamping
RFP
process
would
be
to
reconsider
the
characteristics
and
weights
or
importance
given
to
the
characteristics
when
choosing
which
contractor
to
go
with
so
right
now
the
city
heavily
ways
the
age
of
the
contractor
and
like
the
agent
experience
and
their
experience
working
with
the
city
in
the
past,
and
although
those
are
definitely
good
characteristics,
it
might
leave
out
newer,
innovative
companies
that
could
add
value
to
the
city.
C
Third
idea,
it
would
be
to
coordinate
some
kind
of
local
contractor
training
for
local
contractors
to
learn
about
the
newest
best
local
green
technologies.
So,
right
now
there
are
a
lot
of
resources
being
put
into
energy
efficiency
in
the
city,
either
through
auditing
programs
or
energy
efficiency,
loan
programs,
but
we're
missing
part
of
that
supply
chain
by
not
getting
those
local
contractors
in
on
this
because
they're,
the
ones
who
are
in
people's
homes,
everyday
they're,
the
ones
commending
what
products
people
should
be
putting
in
their
homes.
C
We
think
the
city
should
require
utilities
to
share
aggregate
neighborhood
level,
data
on
water,
consumption
and
energy
consumption
on
a
regular
basis,
and
this
data
is
useful
for
two
main
reasons.
First,
like
I
said
there
are
a
lot
of
resources
being
put
into
energy
efficiency
efforts
and
if
we
know
where
people
are
using
the
most
energy
and
the
most
water,
those
resources
can
be
very
targeted
and
have
the
most
bang
for
the
buck
and
then,
second,
that
data
is
really
important
because
we
could
create
a
neighborhood
competition.
C
Five
demand
side
strategies,
but
overall,
our
recommendations
are
two
for
the
city
to
be
introspective
and
say
how
much
effort
do
we
want
to
put
into
focusing
on
clean
technology
how
much
resources
do
we
have
for
this
right
now
create
an
internal
office
of
strategic
investment
or
support
a
separate
industry,
membership
organization,
the
Pittsburgh,
clean
technology
greenhouse
and
then
also,
in
addition,
use
some
of
these
demand-side
ideas
to
create
local
markets
here.
Thank
you.
A
E
Hi
I'm
letran
de
Leonard,
the
deputy
chief
of
operations
and
administration
here
in
the
city
just
want
to
let
you
know
that
I'm
a
resource
for
you
anything.
You
need
contact.
City
I
have
some
cards
here.
Our
deputy
director
and
director
of
public
works
are
also
here
we're
very
supportive
of
your
work.
So
let
me
know
if
you
need
anything
and
I
have
some
cards
I'll
leave
with
terror
or
Debra.
Thank.
A
F
You
make
any
evaluation
of
which
did
you
go
any
further
in
terms
of
evaluation
about
which
parts
of
cleantech
might
be.
You
noted
that
some
other
municipalities
had
had
taken
a
particular
piece
of
cleantech
as
their
focus,
and
you
recommended
that
we
have
a
focus,
but
did
you
actually
go
to
the
next
stage
and
actually
think
about
what
area
of
cleantech
was
seemed
most
likely
for
Pittsburgh?
The.
D
Clean
energy
part
of
the
equation
seems
to
be
more
complex
than
the
other
two
interviews.
It
was
identified
several
times
that
it's
difficult
to
divorce,
clean
energy
from
a
broader
energy
strategy
that
their
voice
might
get
drowned
out
by
everything
else.
That's
going
on
pittsburgh
region,
so
it
seems
like
that
sort
of
strategy
would
have
to
be
implemented
very
differently
than
a
building
technologies
or
water
economy
strategy.
F
Interested
in
this
is
a
lot
you
know.
I
know
that
from
a
health
perspective,
there's
in
terms
of
getting
that
neighborhood
aggregate
data
there's
privacy
concerns
which
limit
the
information
data
you
can
get
for
health,
I,
actually
don't
know
that
would
be
the
same.
Are
there
any
issues
like
that
to
the
best
of
your
knowledge,
visa,
V,
energy
demand
and
so
forth?
Because
when
you
take
a
group
as
small
as
a
thousand,
is
there
any
question
about
privacy
for
energy
use
and
that
kind
of
stuff
not.
F
A
You
thank
you
and
obviously
at
this
group
is
around
for
any
follow-up
questions
and
we'll
be
working
with
this
group
and
all
the
group's
later
on
in
terms
of
follow-up
work,
you
might
have
noticed
that
some
of
these
recommendations
will
probably
also
be
revealed
in
our
next
capstone
project.
So
with
that
I'll.
B
Thanks
again
and
thanks
for
the
Carnegie
Mellon
class,
the
next
group
that
we
have
is
assessing
city-owned
properties
in
Pittsburgh.
This
group
was
led
by
dr.
David
Miller
from
the
Graduate
School
of
Public
and
International
Affairs
and
spearheaded
here
within
our
department
by
our
colleague,
Laura
Mike
cyl.
So
with
that,
this
group
has
taken
a
look
at
a
city,
a
variety
of
city,
property
information
that
currently
resides
in
a
variety
of
different
departments
and
what
the
team
has
been
able
to
do
is
to
aggregate
that
information
into
a
synthesized
database.
B
That
is
easier
to
view
and
also
has
provided
some
really
significant
recommendations
for
us
to
consider
as
department
leadership's
with
regards
to
how
we
manage
data
going
forward.
So
with
that
I'd
like
to
invite
up,
excuse
me
Rick,
Hopkinson
and
Ellie
Newman
to
present
the
assessing
city-owned
properties
in
Pittsburgh,
so
Rick
Kelly.
G
So
where
are
we?
Where
only
started?
The
city
had
a
very
fragmented
and
sort
of
decentralized
system
for
managing
its
buildings?
So
you
know:
different
departments
had
different
spreadsheets
or
websites
where
they
kept
various
information,
but
if
something
changed
in
one
department
spreadsheet,
that
information
was
not
updated
across
the
whole
city,
and
so
they
realized
that
this
was
really
holding
them
back
as
far
as
you
know,
seeing
how
they
could
reduce
energy
use,
seeing
how
they
could
operate
more
efficiently
and
things
like
that.
G
So
that's
where
we
came
in
so
our
goal
was
to
take
this
very
fragmented
system
and
create
a
integrated,
integrated
database
that
would
synthesize
all
of
that
information.
So
the
deliverables
that
we
came
up
with
one
was
the
database.
We
also
did
a
codebook
and
database
manual.
We
created
a
GIS
map
layer
and
then
we
also
did
some
preliminary
energy
analysis
and
benchmarking
report.
G
So
this
is
a
screenshot
of
my
laptop
when
I
opened
everything
that
we
got
at
the
very
beginning.
So,
as
you
can
see,
some
of
these
spreadsheets
one
of
them
just
had
fire
houses
and
the
years
that
they
were
built.
One
of
them
had
some
energy
information
and
addresses,
and
some
had
energy
information
on
a
website.
So
it
was
really
all
kind
of
you
know
all
over
the
place
really,
and
so
we
went
from
this
to
this
new
database
system.
So
this
is
just
a
snapshot
of
what
the
database
looks
like
this.
G
Here
is
one
of
the
police
headquarters
and
you
can
see
that
we
have
a
photograph.
We
actually
had
a
team
of
students
that
drove
all
around
Pittsburgh
and
took
photographs
of
all
the
buildings
that
they
could
find
so
I
think
we
have
pictures
for
something
like
150
buildings
and
then
there's
different
tabs
within
this.
So
one
of
them
has
building
usage.
So
what
departments
use
the
building?
How
many
square
feet
things
like
that?
Another
one
is
energy
information.
We
got
energy
information
from
the
city's
portfolio
manager,
energy
benchmarking
website
for
the
year
2013.
G
G
We
created
a
code
book
that
goes
variable
x,
variable
and
explains
how
we
got
the
data
where
it
came
from
any
flaws
or
any
problems
with
collecting
the
information
and
then
the
manual
piece
of
it
explains
how
to
use
it.
So
if
someone
isn't
as
comfortable
with
access
and
they
want
to
just
have
a
spreadsheet,
you
can
easily
export
just
the
fields
that
you
want
and
take
it
from
there.
If
you
decide,
you
want
to
add
more
fields
or
things
like
that,
the
manual
explains
exactly
how
to
do
that
with.
H
The
energy
data
that
the
city
has
through
portfolio
manager,
which
is
a
way
to
record
their
their
energy
usage
through
their
energy
bills.
They
create
what
they
call
on
energy
usage
intensity
and
that
is
normalized
by
the
square
footage
of
the
building.
So
it
makes
it
comparable-
and
this
is
just
a
shot
of
the
different
energy
surge
intensities
of
the
different
buildings
in
the
city
of
Pittsburgh.
H
And
then
we
also
create
a
GIS
map
that
sort
of
plots
the
highest
and
lowest
energy
efficient
buildings
in
the
city,
so
notice
up
here,
the
medic
10,
that's
pretty
high
I
think
we
put
on
the
top
5
the
top
five
biggest
energy
consumers.
We
actually
labeled
on
the
map.
All
over
bath
house,
I'm
shanley
park
skating
rink
go
ahead
in
like
le
alluded
to
most
of
our
time
spent
with
this
project
was
really
creating
this
database
and
creating
three
unique
identifiers
that
the
departments
can
use
to
search
for
buildings
and
compare
across
departments.
H
So
you
have
the
building
code,
you
have
the
parcel
ID
number
and
the
lawton
block
number,
but
we
also
want
to
provide
the
city
with
some
recommendations
on
what
they
can
do
to
move
forward
to.
You
know,
increase
their
energy
efficiency.
So
that's
where
sort
of
some
of
the
bench
Morgan
came
in,
so
we
looked
at
some
different
cities
across
the
United
States
who
have
already
passed
energy,
benchmarking,
disclosure
ordinances,
and
we
also
looked
at
a
couple
international
cities.
H
What
we
found
was
a
lot
of
the
cities
in
the
United
States,
although
they
have
really
ambitious
goals
that
are
admirable,
so
a
lot
of
them
want
to
reduce
their
greenhouse
gas
emissions
by,
let's
say,
eighty
percent
by
2050.
There
was
really
no
clear
path
on
how
to
accomplish
that.
So
that's
why
we
looked
at
the
Toronto
report.
We
found
the
Toronto
report
being
the
most
interesting
they
created
in
2014
and
that
actually
they
use
what
they
term
performance-based
conservation.
H
So
what
they
do
is
they
divide
all
their
different,
publicly
owned
buildings
by
type,
so
they
classify
them.
So,
like
you
see
right
here,
these
are
all
the
poles
and
pull
buildings
on
this
is
for
the
city
of
Pittsburgh
and
why
they
create
these
use
classic
classifications,
because
some
of
these
buildings
I
mean
they're,
apparently
different
right.
You
know
the
poles
aren't
going
to
use
the
same
amount
of
have
the
same
type
of
uses,
let's
say
fire
halls
or
even
an
administration
building,
so
this
allows
them
to
sort
of
benchmark
these
buildings
against
each
other.
H
H
4.6
eui
in
the
National
is
150
4.4,
so
extremely
close
and
City
Pittsburgh
student,
very
well
with
their
arm
fire
houses.
But
you
do
have
these
buildings
down
here
that
are
basically
consuming
more
energy
than
you
know.
They
probably
should
so
the
next
slide,
so
what
Toronto
does
and
the
city
can
decide?
How
exactly
do
you
want
to
benchmark?
We
do
recommend.
H
You
know
these
different
use
classification,
but
Toronto
benchmarks
to
their
top
25%
of
energy
performers,
so
what
Toronto
would
want
to
do
and
with
the
city
of
Pittsburgh
might
want
to
adopt
its
try
to
get
all
of
these
fire
houses
to
that
112
eui
that
last
that
last
building
over
there,
so
mainly
to
summarize
our
findings.
So
we
highly
recommend
this
performance-based
conservation,
because
for
us
it's
a
really
meaningful
way
to
benchmark
the
buildings.
It's
also
important
to
ensure
all
the
data
is
accurate.
H
You
want
to
get
them
up
to
speed
first
and
you
save
some
dollars
and
then
that
could
possibly
be
you
know
the
those
monies
can
be
segregated
into
like
a
special
revenues
fund.
The
savings
can
be
transferred
from
the
general
funds
and
that
could
possibly
fund
future
initiatives.
So
as
far
as
the
next
steps
go
for
the
city,
so
if
the
city
was
going
to
do
a
capstone
with
the
University
of
Pittsburgh
again,
we
would
recommend,
maybe
creating
a
team
to
take
a
little
bit
deeper
into
some
of
these
used
classification.
H
So
again,
I'm
going
to
talk
about
you
know
fire
houses
or
maybe
even
police
stations.
You
might
want
to
get
a
team
to
actually
go
out
and
visit
some
of
these
buildings
and
see
what
are
some
characteristics
of
the
lowest
performers
and
the
highest
performers.
You
know
you
might
find
that
the
low
performers
are
in
need
of
some
capital
improvements
or
you
might
find
that
it's
actually
behavior
or
call
to
a
modification
so
dislike.
H
Turning
out
the
lights
or
maybe
switching
to
LED
or
something
like
that,
and
then
I
think
it
would
be
a
nice
pilot
before
they
do
their
full
launch
and
a
good
learning
experience
to
pick
one
department.
So
we
want
to
thank
the
city
for
the
opportunity
to
work
on
this
project
and
we
are
happy
to
answer
any
questions
that
anyone
may
have.
I
G
I
mean
the
database
is
your
tool,
so
anything
that
you
think
is
useful.
You
can
add
it's
helpful
if
you
can
add
fields
that
have
building
codes
already
attached,
because
that's
kind
of
the
the
one
thing
that
was
constant
across
all
of
these
fields,
so
we
had
2013
total
energy
use
and
energy
costs
for
the
full
year.
So
if
you
wanted
to
do
a
monthly
average
or
if
you
wanted
to
add
historical
energy
data,
that's
something
that
can
easily
be
done
in
just
a
few
minutes.
I.
J
Am
Kaz
Pellegrini
project
manager
of
the
architecture?
Division
in
public
works.
I
just
want
to
compliment
you
guys
on
your
project
because
of
what
I
saw
several
weeks
ago.
I
was
really
nervous
about
what
you
might
come
up
with,
because
I
thought
I
was
going
to
get
plastered
with
lots
and
lots
of
data,
but
you
did
an
excellent
job
and
making
it
visual
too,
and
it
makes
a
really
easy
job
of
my
group
pinpointing
and
Henry
kafar
DS
group.
J
J
K
Thank
everybody
for
coming
out
today.
My
name
is
Daniel
Robinson
I'm,
a
network
analyst
34,
Department
innovation
of
performance
and
I.
Had
the
pleasure
of
working
with
this
fine
group
here
from
the
Carnegie
Mellon
Heinz
College.
The
project
that
they're
working
on
was
pittsburgh
public
Wi-Fi
projects.
K
What
that
project
did
was
explored
the
feasibility
of
having
free,
citywide
Wi-Fi
for
the
different
neighborhoods
within
the
city
we
have
today
who
spearheaded
it
was
Professor,
secure
yourself
sitting
right
there
we
have
lindsay's
parham,
we
have
Terry
Gibbs
and
we
have
Katya
Nalla
Balu.
So
without
further
ado,
I
wouldn't
have
Lindy
Lindsay
come
up
and
she'll
explain
some
things
to
you.
L
Thank
you
so
much
for
for
coming
to
view
our
project
on
the
hybrid
Wi-Fi
framework.
Thank
you
again
to
Dana
Robinson.
He
was
invaluable
throughout
this
entire
semester
and
helping
us
prepare
this
this
presentation.
As
you
know,
we
were
working
with
the
city
of
Pittsburgh's
Department
of
innovation
in
performance
and
they
came
to
us
at
the
beginning
of
the
semester
saying
we
really
want
to
look
into
the
feasibility
of
municipal
wide
Wi-Fi.
L
So
the
agenda
for
today
we're
going
to
talk
a
little
bit
about
problems
with
the
municipal
Wi-Fi
model,
then
we're
going
to
discuss
our
solution
to
those
problems
are
hybrid
model
framework
I'm,
going
to
touch
a
little
bit
on
each
of
the
frameworks
that
comprise
the
entire
hybrid
model
solution,
which
is
cost
analysis,
asset
mapping,
network
design
and
security.
Then
we're
going
to
go
into
some
of
the
potential
issues
with
implementing
this
particular
model
and
then
some
next
steps
in
solution
of
next
steps
and
recommendations
for
the
city.
L
So
we
spent
the
initial
part
of
the
semester
discovering
problems
with
municipal
Wi-Fi
models,
so
these
red
triangles
represent
all
the
failed
municipal,
large-scale
municipal
Wi-Fi
implementations
over
the
past
15
years.
What
we
found
is
by
and
large,
these
models,
these
Wi-Fi
implementations
fail
and
they
fail
because
they're
usually
supported
by
one
or
two
initial
stakeholders
the
demand
for
that
is
very,
very
low.
They
anticipate
the
initial
demand
for
a
municipal
or
free
Wi-Fi
network
to
be
about
thirty
to
fifty
percent
of
the
population,
so
they
anticipated
thirty
to
fifty
percent
of
the
population.
L
Would
log
on
to
this
free
Wi-Fi
in
actuality?
We
discovered
that
about
two
to
three
percent
of
the
population
will
actually
log
on
to
the
Wi-Fi,
but
the
cost
of
this
municipal
Wi-Fi
is
still
the
same
really
if,
regardless
of
whether
you
have
100,000
users
or
a
hundred
users,
because
the
equipment
class
will
be
same
so
the
investors
backed
out
of
these
municipal
Wi-Fi
implementations,
because
the
the
demand
just
was
not
there
I'm
going
to
the
next
slide.
But
what
we
did
notice
was
small
community
and
neighborhood.
L
Wi-Fi
models
have
been
successful
all
over
the
country,
and
so
we
we
did
case
studies
of
why
they
were
successful
and
we
came
up
with
three
main
traits
why
three
main
traits
of
successful
community
implementations.
So
all
successful
community
implementations
have
a
clear
objective.
They
have
appropriate
demand,
they've
already
calculated
that
the
demand
will
be
there
to
support
the
network
and
they
start
really
small
at
particularly
in
a
pilot
area.
So
a
clear
objective.
L
A
lot
of
the
objectives
example
objectives
would
be
economic
development
or
social
social
good,
and
then
they
determine
the
demand
by
youth
by
a
needs
assessment.
The
demand
usually
in
these
small
community
models,
the
demand
drives
the
network,
so
the
demand
or
the
problem
is
there
and
then
the
network
X
is
the
solution
and
then,
additionally,
they
don't
start
on
a
large
scale.
L
Municipal
Wi-Fi
networks
fail
because
they
try
to
cover
the
entire
city,
the
entire
city,
and
that's
just
that's
too
expensive.
It
doesn't
give
them
it
doesn't
allow
for
time
to
test
or
for
time
to
do
it
to
improve
the
network
plan.
So
community
community
networks
are
very
small
and
they
start
on
the
small
scale.
L
Okay,
so
we
came
up
with
a
hybrid
model,
which
is
a
combination
of
both
the
community
networks
and
the
municipal
Wi-Fi
network.
It's
a
brand
new
idea
that
we
that
we
we
thought
of
to
both
combined
this
community
network,
but
then
also
the
needs
of
the
city,
because
the
city
does
have
an
invested
interest
in
getting
Wi-Fi
access
across
the
entire
across
the
entire
district.
So
a
community
model,
as
I
said
before,
is
a
community-owned
and
funded
Wi-Fi
implementation
that
the
city
provides
resources
to
so
the
city.
L
Whatever
resources
the
city
has
available
to
them,
they
make
available
to
the
community
networks.
So
it's
a
series
of
small
scale
and
neighborhood
implementations
that
are
combined
together
cover
the
majority
of
the
city
of
Pittsburgh.
So
we
we
decided
that
these
these
implementations
should
use
mesh
network
technology
and
we
decided
on
match
after
looking
carefully
at
multiple
other
other
implementations.
Mesh
is
great
because
it's
affordable,
it's
easy
to
use
and
maintain,
and,
most
importantly,
it's
scalable.
Our
hybrid
model
relies
on
both
bandwidth
sharing
and
the
traditional
purchase.
L
Okay,
so
why
this
model
is
great
for
the
city.
First,
I
should
talk
about
a
little
bit
of
the
constraints
and
requirements
that
the
city
city
had
initially.
First
of
all,
the
city
is
constrained
by
a
very
limited
budget.
Additionally,
the
city
would
prefer
to
outsource
the
maintenance
and
the
maintenance
of
this
network
to
a
third
party.
The
city
was
also
very
clear
that
it
had
to
be
scalable.
Even
if
we
start
in
a
small
area,
we
need
to
be
able
to
scale
this
network
out
to
reach
all
the
residents.
L
Security
is
also
a
very
important
concern
in
order
for
the
city
to
put
its
name
on
something
it
has
to
have
a
minimum
security
standard.
Also
legal,
they
didn't
want
to
do
anything
illegal.
How
we
needed
to
look
into
the
legality
of
implementing
a
Wi-Fi
system
and-
and
it's
funny
to
think
about,
but
actually
a
good
portion
of
our
present
of
our
hour
of
our
research
was
focused
on
this
particular
law
that
that
was
unclear.
L
Whether
or
not
the
city
was
even
legally
allowed
to
open
up
a
municipal,
Wi-Fi
implementation,
a
lot
of
other
cities
get
sued
and
there
they
invest
tens
of
millions
of
dollars
into
a
network.
Just
to
have
incumbent
ISP
providers
take
them
to
court,
so
it
was
a
huge
consideration
so
why
our
model
fits
all
those
requirements
and
constraints
is
the
community
funds
this
model,
the
community?
The
owners
of
the
community
network
will
be.
L
The
primary
fund
would
provide
the
primary
funds
and
finances
for
this
model,
but
the
city
will
help
them
identify
grants
and
identify
grants
that
meet
their
objective.
To
offset
some
of
the
costs,
the
maintenance
of
the
model
would
also
be
on
the
network
owners.
Does
the
scalability
it
really?
We've
really
created
a
flexible
framework
that
that
can
be
applied
to
not
just
one
area
but
the
entirety
of
of
Pittsburgh's
individual
neighborhoods.
L
The
security
we've
set
a
standard
baseline
security
model
that
all
networks
would
have
to
comply
to
if
they
were
trying
to
utilize
city
resources
and
we
looked
into
the
legality
of
it
and
we
are
fairly
cut.
We
were
really
confident
that
we're
not
overstepping
any
federal
or
state
laws
and
also
since
the
community
would
own
the
community
network
owners
would
on
the
model.
The
city
would
not
be
held
liable.
L
Ok,
so
we're
community
models
are
already
working.
So
these
are
not
examples
of
hybrid
models,
but
there
are
examples
of
public
access
Wi-Fi
throughout
Pittsburgh.
So
it's
not
a
big
stretch
to
think
that
more
communities
would
be
interested
in
implementing
their
own
Wi-Fi
implementations.
We
have
wireless
shadyside
olive
Walnut.
Street
is
connected
in
shadyside,
with
free
Wi-Fi,
hosted
by
a
hotel
on
the
downtown
Pittsburgh.
Partnership,
as
you
know,
provides
limited
access,
Wi-Fi
and
then
wireless
waterways
provides
what
access
to
access
at
the
waterfront.
L
Ok.
So
what
did
we
deliver?
We
we
delivered
what
I
call
a
a
hybrid
Wi-Fi
framework
and
within
that
big
framework,
are
smaller
templates
and
frameworks
that
give
give
you
all
the
tools
you
need
to
create
and
implement
a
Wi-Fi
model,
this
particular
wife
Wi-Fi
model.
Those
frameworks
include
a
needs
assessment,
asset
mapping,
cost
analysis,
network
planning,
security
and
operation
standards
yeah.
So
those
are
the
individual
frameworks
and
during
this
presentation,
I'm
going
to
talk
particularly
about
cost
analysis
and
asset
mapping.
L
Ok,
so,
like
I,
said
before
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
municipal
Wi-Fi
networks
fail
because
they
start
two
large.
We
applied
our
framework
to
a
small
pilot
area
of
east
liberty.
Just
to
show
that
this
this
is
a
feasible,
a
feasible
model
that
can
actually
be
applied
to
neighborhoods
in
in
Pittsburgh.
So
we
chose
these
Liberty
as
our
pilot
area
for
because
I
have
a
lot
of
economic
development
opportunities,
particularly
I,
think
of
the
target
project.
What
I
think
of
economic
development
opportunities?
The
city
is
already
invested
in
this
area.
L
So
having
that
that,
on
that
strong
pull
is
really
great
for
the
sustainability
of
a
network
there's
also
it's
rich
in
resources
and
businesses.
We
looked
at
the
city
of
commerce
website
and
there
are
hundreds
of
businesses
located
within
East
Liberty.
Those
businesses
can
act
as
access
points
for
internet,
so
it
was
important
that
there
are
businesses,
it's
a
manageable
size,
it's
about
a
half
a
square
mile
and
it
has
6,000
6,000
residents
as
well
as
people
coming
in
and
out
to
take
advantage
of
retail
and
shopping.
L
And
then
there
are
a
lot
of
nonprofits
and
social
social
groups
there.
So
it's
a
it's
rich
in
its
rich
in
assets
and
that's
why
we
chose
it
as
our
pirate
area
so
asset
mapping.
The
idea
of
asset
mapping
is
identifying
the
large
business
stakeholders
in
the
area,
both
large
businesses,
small
businesses,
nonprofits
and
public
services.
So
these
green
dots
represent
the
businesses
we
took.
L
We
use
the
ArcGIS
and
some
of
the
GIS
data
from
the
city
of
Pittsburgh
website,
but
then
we
had
to
add
additional
additional
entities
onto
this
map
upload
it
and
we
have
identified
we've
identified
them
here.
So
this
is
just
a
cutout
of
East
Liberty.
Oh,
go
ahead,
all
right,
so
this
is.
We
took
the
access
points.
L
We
identified
these
businesses
and
these
are
the
access
points
where
we
would
set
up
mesh
network
mesh
network
equipment
and
the
circles
represent
the
buffer
zone,
and
so
these
yellow
dots
here
would
be
where
we
would
have
our
internet
gateway.
So
this
is
where
you're
getting
the
ISP.
These
represent
large
businesses
that
would
most
likely
share
bandwidth
to
this
network.
L
Each
small
businesses
and
city
light
posts
will
host
nodes.
Those
nodes
will
provide
internet
access
points
and,
as
you
can
see,
we're
covering
the
majority
of
East
Liberty
up
to
their
towards
the
north
of
Jay
towards
the
north
is
mostly
residential
and
because
the
objective
of
this
was
economic
development,
we
were
not
able
to
cover
that
area
with
bandwidth
shared
resources.
L
So
then
we
talked
about
funding
options.
Funding
is
obviously
a
huge
huge
component
of
of
a
municipal
Wi-Fi
network.
We
would
work
with
the
city
to
have.
We
worked
with
with
the
city
to
identify
grants
and
donations
and
crowd
funding
sources
for
this
network.
So
it
wouldn't
just
be
the
Community
Network
footing
the
bill.
They
could
rely
on
grants,
donations
from
this
businesses
in
the
area
and
then
a
crowdfunding.
It
is
a
new
popular
way
of
getting
of
getting
money
for
an
initiative.
We
ought
so.
L
We
took
an
example:
we
plugged
in
east
liberty
to
our
cost
analysis
framework,
and
we
decided
that
about
it
would
cost
113
thousand
dollars
to
create
a
mesh
network
in
East
Liberty,
90,000
of
which
would
be
dedicated
towards
labor.
So
if
the
city
was
somehow
able
to
offset
that
labor
cause,
it
would
be
much
more
feasible
to
start
this
network
at
a
lower
at
a
lower
price.
L
Okay,
so
some
potential
issues
and
then
the
next
step.
So
the
biggest
issues
with
this
particular
model
is
incentivizing
stakeholders
to
invest
so
part
of
the
majority
of
the
way
we
get
our
bandwidth
in
order
to
lower
the
cost
is
by
bandwidth
sharing,
particularly
through
hospitals,
universities,
big
retailers
like
Target.
They
would
have
to
share
their
bandwidth
to
offset
that
bandwidth.
Cost
incentivizing
them
to
do,
though,
do
so
could
be
an
issue
also.
We
picked
East
Liberty
because
it
was
really
rich
in
resources.
Some
areas
don't
have
as
many
resources.
L
L
So
the
city
of
Pittsburgh's
role,
I
talked
about
a
little
bit
about
what
the
city
of
Pittsburgh
could
do
throughout
this
throughout
this
initiative,
but,
most
of
but
most
importantly,
I
think
they
need
to
act
as
a
congregation
point
for
information.
There
are
so
many
rich
resources
out
there
on
the
web
that
aren't
that
could
help.
L
Each
of
these
networks
really
lay
out
a
framework
for
how
how
they
can
implement
and
at
what
cost
and
what's
worked
and
what
hasn't
worked,
but
it's
not
together
in
one
point,
so
if
the
city
could
perhaps
create
a
website
that
brings
all
those
resources
together,
that
would
be
the
most
important
thing
that
they
could
do
as
I
said
before.
Next
steps
create
a
website,
and
then
we've
also
we've
also
done
all
the
legwork
for
creating
a
municipal,
Wi-Fi
implementation
in
East
Liberty.
L
F
Actually,
maybe
you
explain
this,
but
I
actually
am
not
clear
on
the
demand
side
for
this,
because
with
the
example
of
the
the
failed
municipal
ones
where
you
anticipated,
it
was
25
to
40
percent
or
something
like
that,
and
it
actually
was
two
to
three
percent,
and
I'm
wondering
whether
I
have
some
ideas
about
why
that
was.
But
but
I'm
wondering
whether
this
is
in
it.
Whether
there
actually
is
demand
say
any
celebrity.
If
you
looked
at
you
know
the
anticipated
users
and
so
forth,
part.
L
Of
our
framework
is
doing
a
needs
assessment,
which
is
one
of
the
very
first
things
that
you
should
do,
because
a
lot
of
municipal
Wi-Fi
networks
did
fail
because
of
that
demand
peace,
a
lot
of
the
community
networks
they're
built,
because
the
demand
already
exists.
A
lot
of
grassroots
movements
happen
be
organically
because
of
the
demand,
and
the
problem
is
already
there.
This
would
just
be
kind
of
a
different
way
of
helping
those
networks
along
and.
M
We
would
we
want
to
base
these
community
models
off
of
different
purposes,
so
the
demand
would
be
based
on
the
purpose.
So
if
we
in
Sadie's
Liberty,
the
purpose
was
economic
development,
we
would
assume
that
the
businesses
would
rather
share
their
bandwidth
and
reduce
their
costs
than
paying
for
their
own
internet.
And
if
the
purpose
was
education
in
a
certain
community,
then
the
schools
could
lower
their
costs.
By
doing
this,.
N
I,
like
your
approach
and
I,
think
it
has
great
merit.
Have
you
ever
thought
about
its
kind
of
switching
the
model
from
areas
that
have
a
relatively
high
demand,
like
you
know,
airs
that
are
developing
economically,
like
East
Liberty,
for
example,
where
users
there
may
our
be
high
demand
relatively
high
demand?
Have
you
thought
about
focusing
on
areas
where
there's
little
or
no
demand
yeah,
but
the
value
could
be
that
much
more
exponential
in
its
value,
yeah.
N
For
new
communities
like
or
new
older
communities,
like
a
community
like
larmer,
for
example,
that's
adjacent
Janice
Liberty
we're
used
to
have
16,000
families
there.
Now
you
have
1600,
maybe,
but
the
community
is
coming
back
and
developing.
Would
it
be
a
wonderful
kind
of
driver
and
an
amenity
to
have
Wi-Fi
for
the
community
even
before
its
kind
of
fully
formed?
So.
L
That
that's
actually
one
of
the
biggest
hurdles
from
our
presentation
when
we
were
just
trying
to
decide
wide
municipal
Wi-Fi
failed
was
failing
across
the
board
and
we
decided
it
was
because
low
demand.
We
had
to
look
at
why
why
the
demand
was
so
low
and
it
was
because
people
had
a
lot.
The
majority
of
people
have
ready
access
to
bandwidth
in
their
home
or
at
work,
and
they
also
have
cellphone
data
plans,
and
so
we
said
we
decided
well.
How
do
you?
L
L
Those
areas
are
also
the
poorest
areas
within
Pittsburgh,
and
so,
if
you
were
to
put
Wi-Fi
in
communities
that
were
had
low
employment
rates,
high
high
school
dropout
rates,
single
single-mother
household,
you
would
get
the
highest
demand
because
they
just
don't
have
access
to
broadband
in
any
other
way,
with
the
model
that
working
under
the
constraints
of
it
has
to
be.
It
has
to
be
low
cost.
You
have
to
also
consider
okay
consider
who's
going
to
pay
for
it.
M
L
L
We
actually
came
up
with
a.
We
came
up
with
a
map
that
showed
these
target
areas
were
turned
out
to
be
some
of
the
poorest
areas
in
Pittsburgh.
But
then
they
don't
have
the
cell
phone
to
connect
to
the
data
then
I'll
her
to
the
internet.
They
don't
have
the
laptop
to
connect
to
the
internet
and
it
brought
up
a
whole
nother
issue
where
you
would
have
to
get
them
the
device
to
connect
to
your
product,
but.
N
No
I
think
it's
a
great
I
mean
your
approach,
I
think,
is
valid,
but
again
the
one
institution
that
has
kind
of
universal
appeal
and
is
geographically
distributed
throughout
the
cities.
Our
parks,
though,
and
I
know,
there's
no
community
their
lives
in
the
park,
but
the
about
ninety
percent
of
people
in
the
city,
pittsburgh
use
parks
over
the
course
of
a
year
or
three
know
a
few
months,
and
it
might
be
an
interesting
point
to
think
about.
That
is
almost
a
public
utility
because
it's
becoming
that
way.
E
L
F
It
because
it
does
think
there
is
a
sweet
spot
for
need,
which
is
actually
communities
actually
have
the
portable
devices.
But
in
fact
you
know,
but
are
operating
them
on
the
type
of
plans
that
don't
have
a
cellular
data
plan
and
I.
Think
that
in
that
that's,
where
they're
sort
of
like
there's
no
opportunity
to
get
to
the
actual
to
the
internet
without
a
broadband.
Without
this
kind
of
Wi-Fi
thing
or
you
know,
or
the
or
business
that
has
it
and
so-
and
that
seems
like
where
you'd
have
a
really
intense
kind
of
demand.
L
E
E
L
F
F
M
F
A
F
A
So
you
can
see
we
we
were
able
to
sponsor
a
pretty
diverse
set
of
capstone
systems,
projects
and
and
obviously
behind
each
of
these
students
projects
is
a
really
strong
faculty
sponsor
faculty
administrators.
Oh
I'll
be
remiss
without
thanking
them.
So
will
you
all
stand
up
please
and
allow
us
to
thank
you
dr.
Miller.
A
A
A
This
is,
this
is
really
important.
Work
I
think
I
spoke
to
all
of
you
and
said
you
know.
The
work
that
you
are
doing
in
terms
of
research
has
real-world
implications
to
what
we're
seeing
in
the
city,
from
public
works,
to
city
planning,
to
city
parks,
to
innovation
and
performance,
very
valuable
thinking,
and
you
can
see
from
each
of
the
directors
questions
they're
really
thinking
about
how
to
apply
it
in
terms
of
their
practice
and
policies.
A
We
in
terms
of
next
steps,
do
you
see
a
continuation
of
this
part
of
these
projects
and
these
works
towards
next
semester
in
terms
of
how
we
can
actually
take
some
of
these
recommendations
and
deliver?
So
these
recommendations
have
been
really
valuable
to
us
and
we
really
couldn't
do
this
without
each
of
your
efforts
and
your
work.
So
thank
you
so
much.
Thank
you
and
I
think
that
closes
everything
so.