2021 Landscape Architecture Portfolio by Katelyn Nimic

K AT E LY N M . N I M I C LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE PORTFOLIO Selected Works | 2021

KATELYN M. NIMIC Attending the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, I will graduate with a Bachelorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s of Landscape Architecture in May 2021. I have 2 years of experience as an intern & landscape designer where I practiced interdisciplinary design of numerous commercial, municipal, & residential projects. Looking to create innovative & engaging designs that build upon my existing experience in the landscape architecture field.

CONTENTS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE PORTFOLIO Selected Works |2021 | K. Nimic

01 02

An Investigation into Feminine Language

W O R D P L AY

04 - 15

ORCHARD HILL Urban Regeneration

16 - 21

Enhancing the Identity of Gering

AUTOSCAPE

22 - 31

Campus Plaza Design

CONTINUUM

32 - 37

A SHIFTING LANDSCAPE

38 - 57

Rethinking the Past, Present, & Future of Glacial Landscapes

W O R D P L AY AN INVESTIGATION INTO FEMININE LANGUAGE Academic Work | 2020 | F. Folsom & C. Allen

This studio is situated within the idea of the “backloop”, in which the front loop represents societal growth and exploitation which ultimately leads to the stability of a city. Then there is a catastrophic event in the form of a natural disaster, a war, or a pandemic. Events like these send the system into the backloop, a time of restructuring and reorganization. Throughout history these backloops have consistently restructured perceptions of women. Before the Black Plague, women were only acknowledged in society by their marital status: maiden, matron, and widow, but after the plague new ideas developed including the more complex concepts of womanhood and femininity. Before the American Revolution, women were seen as morally corruptible things that needed to be kept in check by their fathers or their husbands but after, public perception flipped and they instead became the moral and virtuous backbones of the family. World War II is well known for a major shift in women’s lives as they played a vital role in the war effort working on the home front and filling a void men had previously occupied. If all of these backloops were able to transform perceptions of women, then why not now?

The premise of this project was to investigate American society’s tendency to devalue femininity in favor of masculinity and to explore the manifestation of these ideas in space. In order to tell the story of feminine language, Wordplay had to acknowledge the negative nomenclature of femininity, words such as bossy or fragile. These terms act as a reminder of the current devaluation of feminine traits and set up the journey of the user through the site. As the negative rhetoric is left behind, positive feminine language is brought to light with words such as compassion and empowered. Amplifying this narrative is the engaging decision to reformat these positive words into play equipment. The childhood experience is all about learning and play. As children age they too begin to learn the gender biases and divisions that society promotes. Wordplay asks the adult to revisit the childhood experience of learning through play. By redesigning the typical playground structure into an educational commentary on feminine language, adults can reflect and engage with the message of this project in the most hands on way imaginable through play.

Full Story Read Along: https://unl.box.com/s/4761ocqb9dgysnecu5muz4iytg8fkrwn

LINCOLN NEBRASKA

9th & O Street Parking Garage

Early Iterations of Words as Structure

Negative Language Bossy Bitch

Feminine Score 233 178

Positive Language Compassion Brave

Feminine Score 77 16

Fragile Ditsy

51 316

Witty Surmount

42 46

Building Without Bias To distinguish between masculine and feminine words, this project utilized the website “Building Without Bias” which assigns a masculine or feminine score based on how the word is used in writing and media. | 1. Hannah Rozenberg, “Building Without Bias,” 2018, http://building-without-bias.o.uk/?utm_ medium=website&utm_source=archdaily.com.

Street Perspective

Wordplay: Hero’s Journey “Hero had never noticed this parking garage before. She started reading the words on the outside. All of the words on the bottom seemed kind of nasty but the words at the top were different. ‘WordPlay....’ Hero peered into the parking garage. ‘Well just a peek wouldn’t hurt!’”

Graphic Anatomy Section

Wordplay: Hero’s Journey “Hero didn’t want to look at these words anymore. It was then she noticed what looked like a doorway in the big loop of words at the center of the garage. She wanted to know where it went. Once inside the letters, Hero realized it was... an obstacle course? How strange! But why was it here? Hero started climbing through it. To her surprise she found herself climbing up as well as around.”

Site Isometric

Wordplay: Hero’s Journey “Hero emerged from the obstacle course at the top of the parking garage. ‘WOW!’ Hero looked around. Everywhere she looked there were people playing on these huge words. It was a bit like downstairs... but these words were different. While those words seemed to bring her down, these words made her smile. Hero wanted to join in!”

Wordplay: Hero’s Journey “Hero CONNECTED...” “...and REFLECTED...” “...and PLAYED!”

The Making of Wordplay The letters themselves are constructed with metal frames concealed by steel veneers with various color & safety coatings. A few of the words on the top floor light up and glow at night. Those words are constructed out of the same metal frame but the veneer is devised of a translucent heavy plastic.

ORCHARD HILL URBAN REGENERATION Academic Work | 2018 | B. Zambrano & I. Mertlik

The Omaha Municipal Land Bank or (OMLB) has a large inventory of vacant lots in Northeast Omaha. As this urban area has shrunk, the fringes of Omaha have grown. The OMLB’s mission is to “serve as a catalyst for transforming distressed properties in the community assets”. Our class partnered with OMLB to propose temporary installations for 3 sites along Hamilton Street in Omaha to explore land uses for vacant lots before development. Our class was divided into teams of 3, each member designing the layout of one of the three sites within a coordinated strategy. Each site had a budget of $5,000-$7,500, with site 1 lasting 3 years and sites 2 & 3 existing for 1 year. These projects were designed for reuse, disassembly, flexibility, and temporality. After visiting the site’s conditions and meeting with OMLB our group researched what was available to this neighborhood and what amenities

they were lacking. Spatially mapping food, art, and recreation revealed a neighborhood lacking these basic amenities. From this information our group chose to designate a site for food, a site for art, and site for recreation. These spaces could become community hotspots and offer opportunities for residents through partnerships with local organizations. Site one, being the largest and longest design installation offers the most opportunities for food and performances. Two lots over would feature an art based design installation on site two. Lastly, site three would cover the need for public recreation within this neighborhood because of its proximity to nearby schools. These sites would be programmed to interact with the community’s needs, encourage involvement, and hopefully implement a bottom-up strategy in attracting new development.

OMAHA NEBRASKA

Omaha Land Bank Vacant Lot

Walk Score The walkability score analyzes amenities within a 1 mile radius and assigns a score based on how accessible these amenities are to ones location. The three vacant lots in Orchard Hill all had a low walkability score, indicating that there was a lack of accessible amenities in this area.

Context Map | Existing Site Conditions

Partnership & Programming Web

Proposed User Spatial Sequences To address the lack of amenities within the Orchard Hill neighborhood each of the three vacant lots would feature a pop-up amenity. These amenities food, art, & recreation would boost community interaction and engagement as well as attract potential developers.

AUTOSCAPE ENHANCING THE IDENTITY OF GERING Academic Work | 2018 | B. Zambrano & K. Heckman

The City of Gering, Nebraska & PADD were stakeholders in a concept driven design proposal for the redevelopment of a main corridor in the heart of Gering, Nebraska. Our class formed teams of three to tackle the revitalization of a derelict streetscape with two adjacent vacant brownfield sites on either end. The project had a budget of $1,000,000 and needed to accommodate a minimum ADT of 12,000. The biggest priority for this project was to improve the aesthetic of the corridor and increase accessibility for pedestrians in this area. The 10th Street Corridor in Gering, Nebraska is a highly industrialized area with many businesses that revolve around the auto-industry. Our group felt it was necessary to emphasize 10th Streetâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s identity through events, material choice, and through the relationship between cars, people, and their environment. Our project Autoscape achieves the goal through the incorporation of multi-use landscapes that can accommodate the vast variety of auto-related events in Gering, Nebraska. The goals of this project is to repurpose wasted materials from existing buildings, invoke emotions through artfully designed structures, and reinterpret any unpleasant

sights, smells, or sounds. The final design will create a more inviting space through use of a grand entrance and pocket spaces as well as increased safety with lighting, crosswalks, and creating a curfew. The private North Lot of the project was designed to increase recreational activities and business along the corridor. Featuring a micro-brewery & attached multi-use court, auto-themed paintball course, and public patio space this North Lot will help make the corridor more pedestrian conscious. The site is convertible throughout the seasons for a variety of events that will appeal to different users in the community. The South Lot was split between private and public land. The private sector of the lot features food oriented businesses to attract more users to the site. A gridded plaza space offers a variety of seating, canopy, and active space. Food trucks are able to pull on site further emphasizing the auto-related culture of Gering. The public space also follows the gridded ground cover but contrasts the private hard-scape with open green space showcasing repurposed car parts. The tree canopy condenses towards the railroad tracks to block any noise.

City Limits

Lakes

Project Site

Schools

GERING NEBRASKA Context Map

Parks

NORTH LOT: MULTI-USE SPACE -Microbrewery -Patio -Open Court -Paintball Arena

SOUTH LOT: PRIVATE -Outdoor Cafe -Food Truck/ Vendor Parking -Activity Space

SOUTH LOT: PUBLIC -Green Space -Trees buffer sound from railway -Carbon sequestration -Provide canopy

Site Plan

PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY CROSSWALKS -Reduced crossing time -Increased visibility

STREET REDUCTION & PEDESTRIAN EXPANSION -Travel lanes reduced from 13ft to 10ft. -Sidewalk width increased from 10ft to 14ft. -Increased stormwater management.

ROAD DIET -Right turn only, merge left

Seating Street Trees Roads & Drives View of National Monument

Sidewalk Planting Bed Rain Garden

Streetscape Zoom-In

3. Rain Garden

2. Planting Bed

1. Pavement

Exploded Street Isometric

Street Removal

11,193.4 sq. yds.

$447,736.00

Curb Removal

6,686 LF

$26,744.00

Curb Installation

6,686 LF

$200,580.00

Sidewalk Removal

3,424 sq. yds.

$68,480.00

Sidewalk Installation

7,666.44 sq. yds.

$268,325.40

South Lot Paving

1,511.25 sq. yds.

$75,562.50

Landscape Installation

7,553 sq. ft.

$75,530.00

Tree Installation

91 Trees

$13,650.00

Grand Total

$1,176,607.90

Budget

$1,834,010.00

Street Visualization | Cost Estimation

3. Winter Condition

2. Summer Condition

1. Development

Seasonal Activation 1. Development of a microbrewery will attract citizens to this street while providing year-round activation | 2. Gering lacks diverse recreational opportunities so a multi-purpose court and paintball field add fun new alternatives| 3. In winter the courts can be converted into an ice rink, while snowball fights and sledding take over the paintball field.

Street Perspectives

Parking off side street

Bakery Cafe Food truck parking & vendor space Plaza Space -lifesize chess/checkers -outdoor seating -sculpture park Organization grid distinguishes land use Public Lot -green space -repurposed car parts Canopy density buffers sound from railway

Red warning stripe painted across roadway brings attention to railroad crossing

South Lots Site Plan

South Lot Plaza Perspectives

CONTINUUM CAMPUS PLAZA DESIGN Academic Work | 2018 | S. Karle

For this project our class partnered with the University of Nebraska-Lincoln Campus facilities & Campus Landscape Architect Emily Casper to redesign the plaza in front of Avery Hall on City Campus. Our class began the project by conducting an inventory & analysis of the site. Our research showed that the site sloped South to North with the Eastern side having a steeper slope than the west. There were drainage issues that would require regrading & storm water needed to be managed on site to avoid overflowing into the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s water system. Other constraints included a steam tunnel & other utilities that run under the plaza preventing construction of heavy structures. The site required vehicle access to a parking lot between Old Father & Burnett Hall and the mall would have to have a loading strength that could support emergency vehicles. A number of specimen trees were identified on site including a sweet birch, Amur maple, and a white pine. This project focused on the physical and perceptual connection between a building, our invention, and its connection to the campus. Emphasis

was to be placed on the space-making qualities of ground manipulations, planting, and circulation in an urban context. The concept for this design was continuum: a continuous sequence in which adjacent elements are not perceptibly different from each other; although the extremes are quiet different. Along the 12th Street Mall are gathering spaces equal in size and dimension. From downtown Lincoln to the Kissing Columns, 12th Street Mall connects these landmarks through spaces laid out on a continuum ranging from hard-scape community spaces to expanses of soft-scape programmed for individual use. The goal of this project was to create view corridors connecting buildings along the mall towards Memorial Stadium. Change paving to direct circulation & distribute flow of people, bikes, and vehicles. Create distinct atmosphere between plaza, study spaces, and malls. Provide space for programs such as food trucks, vendors, and booths. Lastly to maintain as much existing vegetation as possible while regrading the site to solve drainage issues.

AV E R Y H A L L P L A Z A LINCOLN

Organizational Structure

Site Plan

3. Vegetation

2. Seating

1. Bikes & Paving

Exploded Isometric 1. While bike racks distribute circulation around entrances, pavers work to define space, direct traffic, & drain water on site. | 2. Picnic tables offer a community environment, mall benches allow rest between commutes, & study benches offer quiet individual space encouraging various activities within the plaza. | 3. A canopy of swamp white oaks provides shade while smaller crabapples line view corridors.

Avery Hall & 12th Street Mall Perspectives | Elevation

15" DEEP. REINF W/ 2 BARS & 1 VERT BAR. PROVIDE 3/4" CHAMFER ON TOP EDGES & TOOL JOINTS

1/8" SAND FILLED JOINTS 8" x 4" x 2 1/4" PINE HALL BRICK PAVERS

A3 BALLED AND BURLA NOT TO SCALE

1" SAND BEDDING COURSE 8" CRUSHED GRAVEL AGGREGATE SUBGRADE

UNDERDRAIN GRAVEL BLA 1-1.5" DOUBLE WASHED STON WASHED RIVER RUN PEA GR STORAGE SIZE DETERMINES D

1 4"- 2"

30" PLANTING DEPTH WITH WELL BLENDE 50-60% HOMOGENOUS CONSTRUCTION 20-30% ORGANIC LEAF COM 20-30% NATIVE TO GRASS PRE-TREATMENT STRIP UNDISTURBED, UNCOMPACTED INSITU SOIL

A1 BRICK PAVER ADJACENT TO CURB NOT TO SCALE

LIMESTONE SLAB BENCH

2" DIA x 12" LONG STAINLESS STEEL DOWEL W/ 6" EMBED. INTO STONE/CONCR IN EPOXY GROUT ON CONC END ONLY, TYP OF 6 MIN PER STONE (STAGGERED EQUALLY SPACED)

1 " 2

HORIZONTAL MORTAR JOINTS

A5 BIORETENTION FACI NOT TO SCALE

RECESSED LED LIGHTING STRIP

3'-4"

UNIT PAVERS

CENTRAL LEADER

TRUNK CALIER MEET ANSI Z60 CURRENT EDITION FOR ROOT BALL SIZE ROOT BALL MODIFIED AS REQUIRED

CONCRETE GRADE BEAM, REINF W/ 2-#4'S TOP & BOTTOM #4 STIRRUPS @ 24" O.C.

1. Stone Bench Along Mall 1'

A5 DECIDUOUS TREE W

A2 STONE BENCH ADJACENT TO TURF

NOT TO SCALE

PRODUCED BY AN AUTODESK STUDENT VERSION

COMPACTED SUBGRADE

1. 12th Street Mall

Planting Bed

Seating Detail & Section

Study Space

A SHIFTING LANDSCAPE RETHINKING THE PAST, PRESENT, & FUTURE OF GLACIAL LANDSCAPES

Academic Work | 2019 | S. Karle

Landscapes are constantly shifting; the sights, sounds, and feeling of a place will never be the same twice which is why humans insist on documenting their journey. Following the concept of a travel journal, the “Framing History” installation documents the past histories and experiences at Grinnell and Boulder Glacier. The medium provided by the repeat photography project allows this design to add another dimension to the hiking experience along Grinnell. Not only do visitors get a glimpse of what generations before them experienced at the park, but a series of these moments communicates the sequence of change and the speed of acceleration at which the glacier retreated. While the landscape will continue to shift, “Framing History” will have captured a part of the glacier’s journey conjuring up feelings of nostalgia for anyone who had the chance to see this beautiful landscape feature before it vanished. The installation itself is made up of a 7’6” tall by 5’ wide corten steel frame that is 6” around, serving to align the perspective with the landscape and orient the user. The frame is placed in a natural stone footing so that the materials complement the natural

environment in which it is placed. The corten steel weathers alongside the landscape and the natural stone footing blends in with moraine left behind by the retreating glacier. The frame holds a durable, double-paned glass with a UV coating. The historic photograph is etched onto the transparent surface and accompanied by text about the photograph, experience, and information on the glacier. The installation is sited to align each photo with its backdrop in order to communicate an accurate perspective of the experience. While this installation uses materials reminiscent of the landscape, its size is enough to catch the eye of a passerby and direct them towards an intentional view while disturbing little of the landscape. These installations allow us to revisit the past experiences had at Glacier National Park. Much like a travel journal, they can remind us of the beautiful moments that have happened, but they leave room for us to document more as the landscape is never stagnant and always shifting. As “Framing History” lets us revisit the past and reinterpret the present, it also initiates a conversation about conservation, sustainability, and our future.

G L A C I E R N A T I O N A L PA R K MONTANA

Morton Elrod, â&#x20AC;&#x153;Grinnell Glacier Overlookâ&#x20AC;?, 1910, Digital Image, Northern Rocky Mountain Science Center. https://www.usgs.gov/centers/norock/science/grinnell-glacieroverlook-portrait?qt-science_center_objects=0#qt-science_ center_objects

1. Increased Wildfires: Montana now sees 134,000 more acres burned by wildfires each a year. Average spring and summer temperatures in Montana have increased 1.37 degrees F since the 1970s.

2. Vegetative Succession: As temperatures in alpine areas continue to increase, areas covered by ice and snow will retreat leaving behind bare rock soon to be replaced by new vegetation. One concern is that this succession will happen too quickly for animals to adapt to the changing habitat, resulting in mass loss of species.

Effects of Climate Change & Glacial Retreat in Montana 1. Climate Central, 2012: The Age of Western Wildfires. Princeton, NJ. http:// www.climatecentral.org/wgts/wildfires/Wildfires2012.pd | 2. Edwin A. Arnfield. â&#x20AC;&#x153;Ecological Succession in the Pleistocene in Glacier National Park, Montana, in Relation to Current Successional Stages in the Western Mountains of the U.S.â&#x20AC;? The American Biology Teacher 53, no. 2 (1991): 85-90. doi:10.2307/4449227.

3. Loss of Alpine Aquatic Biota: Glacial runoff creates a continuous flow of cold water throughout the dry season feeding the streams that flow out of the park. Changes in peak flow time and amount threaten the aquatic species in this environment.

4. Periods of Flooding & Drought: As glacial meltwater increases due to rising temperatures, flooding will increase. As the source of the meltwater is reduced, the flow of water will also decrease leading to periods of drought during the dry season. When sudden rainfall occurs, dry rivers will flood unable to support the increased water supply.

Effects of Climate Change & Glacial Retreat in Montana 3. Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks. “Bull Trout Counts Steady In The Flathead, Up In The South Fork, Down In The Swan.” Montana.gov. http://fwp.mt.gov/news/ newsReleases/fishing/nr_0624.html | 4. Crown of the Continent Research Learning Center. “Climate Change Fact Sheet”. National Park Service U.S. Department of Interior. http://npshistory.com/publications/glac/cc-fact-sheet.pdf

A Disappearing Landscape In 1850 there were 150 documented glaciers in Glacier National Park which formed during the Little Ice Age. Currently only 26 out of those original 150 glaciers remain in the park. Climate projections estimate that all glaciers will disappear from Glacier National Park by 2030 and the remaining perennial ice masses will be gone by 2080.

1940

1945

1950

1955

1960

1970

1965

1975

1985

1980

1990

1995

2000

2005

2010

2015

3.2 M

2.8 M

1,009 Camping Sites

6 Lakes Permit Year Round Boating Lake Fishing

Cross Country 734 mi Skiing of Trails to Hike in Apgar

2.6 M

2.4 M

2.2 M

3,321,319 Visitors

1.8 M

1.6 M

Bike or Drive Going-to-the-Sun Road

1.4 M

1.2 M

800 K

600 K

400 K

200 K

Monthly Visitation: Peaks in August Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

500 K

100 K

10 K

Visitation Analysis 5. National Park Service Visitor Use Statistics. 2019. National Park Service. Accessed May. 2019. <www.nps.gov>

Agassiz

Sperry

Jackson

Glacier National Park

Glacier National Park R e t213 r e a t acres o f t h e G(54%) laciers Lost

Retreat of the Glaciers

Lost 133 acres (40%)

Grinnell

Lost 129 acres (41%)

Lost 113 acres (45%)

Glacier National Park Retreat of the Glaciers

Glacier National Park

Kintla

Retreat of the Glaciers

Legend

0.15

0.3

Rainbow

2015 Glaciers

2005 Glaciers

Lost 107 acres N (33%)

0.15

0.3

Lost 98 acres (19%)

2015 Glaciers 2005 Glaciers

Harrison N

Legend

Two Ocean

Glacier National Park RLost e t r e a 93 t o f acres t h e G l a(26%) ciers

0.6 Miles

1998 Glaciers

0.6 Miles

1966 Glaciers

Lost 87 acres (82%)

1998 Glaciers 1966 Glaciers

Legend 2015 Glaciers

2005 Glaciers

0.15

0.3

0.6 Miles

1998 Glaciers

Legend 2015 Glaciers

2005 Glaciers

0.15

0.3

1966 Glaciers

Glacier National Park

0.6 Miles

Legend

1998 Glaciers

Logan

Lost 83 acres (18%)

2005 Glaciers

Retreat of the Glaciers

Blackfoot

Retreat of the Glaciers

2015 Glaciers

Glacier National Park

1966 Glaciers

0.15

0.3

0.6 Miles

Stanton

1966 Glaciers

Lost 70 acres (56%)

Chaney

Lost 65 acres (49%)

Lost 57 acres (41%)

Legend 2015 Glaciers

Legend

2005 Glaciers

2015 Glaciers 2005 Glaciers

0.15

0.3

0.6 Miles

1998 Glaciers

0.15

0.3

0.6 Miles

1966 Glaciers

1998 Glaciers

Glacier National Park Retreat of the Glaciers

1966 Glaciers

Glacier National Park

Boulder

2005 Glaciers

0.15

0.3

0.6 Miles

1966 Glaciers

Retreat of the Glaciers

Herbst

Lost 34 acres (81%)

2005 Glaciers

Lost 34 acres (57%)

Legend

2015 Glaciers

2015 Glaciers 2005 Glaciers

0.15

0.3

0.6 Miles

1998 Glaciers

2005 Glaciers

0.15

1998 Glaciers 1966 Glaciers

1966 Glaciers

Ipasha

0.3

0.6 Miles

2015 Glaciers 2005 Glaciers

0.15

0.3

0.6 Miles

Glacier National Park 1998 Glaciers 1966 Glaciers

Carter

Lost 33 acres (41%)

Retreat of the Glaciers

Harris

Lost 32 acres (37%)

Lost 28 acres (77%)

Legend

Legend 2015 Glaciers

Whitecrow

Lost 41 acres (57%)

Legend 0

1998 Glaciers

Glacier National Park

Retreat of the Glaciers

Dixon

Lost 44 acres (72%)

Legend

Glacier National Park

Retreat of the Glaciers

Shepard

Lost 48 acres (85%)

2015 Glaciers

Glacier National Park

Retreat of the Glaciers

2015 Glaciers

0.15

0.3

0.6 Miles

2005 Glaciers 1998 Glaciers

1998 Glaciers

1966 Glaciers

50 Years of Glacial Retreat

0.15

0.3

0.6 Miles

Glacier National Park Retreat of the Glaciers

Vulture

Pumpelly

Glacier National Park Retreat of the Glaciers

Lost 27 acres (27%)

Glacier National Park Retreat of the Glaciers

Miche Wabun

Lost 26 acres (10%)

Sexton

Lost 25 acres (49%)

Lost 25 acres (25%)

Legend 2015 Glaciers

Siyeh

2005 Glaciers

0.15

0.3

0.15

0.3

0.6 Miles

Glacier National Park

0.6 Miles

Lost 25 acres (33%)

Lost 20 acres (19%)

0.15

0.3

0.6 Miles

Red Eagle

Glacier National Park t r eacres a t o f t h (53%) e Glaciers LostR e18

Lost 19 acres (13%)

Legend

1966 Glaciers

Ahern

Retreat of the Glaciers

1966 Glaciers

1998 Glaciers

Retreat of the Glaciers

Old Sun

1998 Glaciers

2015 Glaciers 2005 Glaciers

1998 Glaciers 1966 Glaciers

Retreat of the Glaciers

2015 Glaciers

Legend

2005 Glaciers

Glacier National Park

Legend

2015 Glaciers

2005 Glaciers

0.15

0.3

0.6 Miles

2015 Glaciers

Legend 2015 Glaciers

1966 Glaciers

2005 Glaciers

0.15

0.3

Lost 17 acres (20%)

0.3

0.6 Miles

1966 Glaciers

Retreat of the Glaciers

N Salamander

2015 Glaciers

2005 Glaciers

0.15

0.3

0.15

0.3

0.6 Miles

Glacier National Park 1966 Glaciers

0.3

Lost 13 acres (23%)

1998 Glaciers

2015 Glaciers

0.15

1966 Glaciers

Legend

Retreat of the Glaciers

Legend

2005 Glaciers

2005 Glaciers 1998 Glaciers

Lost 13 acres (42%)

Lost 14 acres (10%)

Glacier National Park

Legend

Lupfer

Weasel Collar

Retreat of the Glaciers

0.15

Glacier National Park

1998 Glaciers

Glacier National Park

1998 Glaciers

0.6 Miles

1966 Glaciers

Grant

2005 Glaciers

1998 Glaciers

0.6 Miles

Retreat of the Glaciers

Glacier National Park

1998 Glaciers

Swiftcurrent

Baby

Lost 13 acres (23%)

Glacier National Park Retreat of the Glaciers

Hudson

Retreat of the Glaciers

1966 Glaciers

Lost 10 acres (36%)

Piegan

Lost 9 acres (42%)

Lost 9 acres (13%)

Legend 2015 Glaciers

2005 Glaciers

0.15

0.3

0.6 Miles

1998 Glaciers 1966 Glaciers

Legend

Glacier National Park Retreat of the Glaciers

Legend

2015 Glaciers

Legend

N. Swiftcurrent

2005 Glaciers 1998 Glaciers 1966 Glaciers

0.15

0.3

1966 Glaciers

Lost 7 acres (21%)

Lost 8 acres (26%)

0.15

0.3

2015 Glaciers

0.6 Miles

2005 Glaciers

1998 Glaciers

0.6 Miles

Thunderbird Retreat of the Glaciers

2005 Glaciers

Glacier National Park

2015 Glaciers

0.15

0.3

0.6 Miles

1998 Glaciers

Gem

Lost 2 acres (24%)

Glacial Retreat 1966 Glaciers

Over the Past 50 Years 1966

0 .15 .3

1998

2005

2015

1.2 Miles

Legend 2015 Glaciers 2005 Glaciers

0.15

0.3

0.6 Miles

Legend 2015 Glaciers

1998 Glaciers

2005 Glaciers

1966 Glaciers

1998 Glaciers

0.15

0.3

0.6 Miles

1966 Glaciers

50 Years of Glacial Retreat 6. Fagre, D.B., McKeon, L.A., Dick, K.A., and Fountain, A.G., 2017, Glacier margin time series (1966, 1998, 2005, 2015) of the named glaciers of Glacier National Park, MT, USA: U.S. Geological Survey data release, https://doi.org/10.5066/F7P26WB1.

Framing History Installation Framing History proposes to install large, steel frames along the trails in Glacier National Park. These frames will not only draw hikers to a location with a beautiful vista, but the glass enclosed by the frame will show them a completely different landscape than what is currently surrounding them.

Framing History Detail These glass panes will reveal what the glaciers used to look like, dating back to 1888. As time passes and the glaciers continue to retreat, having these interpretive elements along the trail will amply the conversation surrounding climate change as well as reveal how previous generations experienced the park.

Coating Corten Steel 1â&#x20AC;? Continuous Frame Grout Corten Steel Frame Unfinished Rock Exterior

Unfinished Concrete Rock Exterior Footing Unfinished Rock Exterior Concrete Footing

Concrete Footing

g the images from ct documents the Park. By etching n the steel frame, e landscape has g the images from ct documents the Park. By etching n the steel frame, e landscape has g the images from ct documents the Park. By etching n the steel frame, e landscape has

The Garden Wall Trail

Grinnell Glacier Trail

The Garden Wall Trail

Grinnell Glacier Trail

The Garden Wall Trail

Grinnell Glacier Trail

Scope of V iew

Scope i ewof View fV o pe

iew

1 1 1

o pe

iew

V of

Gri

ell

Gri

ell

e landscape will with properties of Overtime this steel t, complimenting

ell

Gla

cie

Gla

cie

Gla

cie

he landscape will with properties of Overtime this steel t, complimenting

Grinnell Glacier Trail

Distance: 9.7

he landscape will with properties of Overtime this steel t, complimenting

Grinnell Glacier Trail

Distance: 9.7

1 Grinnell Glacier Trail The Garden Wall Trail

Distance: 9.7 Distance: 14

2 The Garden Wall Trail

Distance: 14

The Garden Wall Trail

Distance: 14

atural rock base. d away to match are often placed look as if it grew

atural rock base. d away to match are often placed d look as if it grew

Trail Mapping

7 miles round trip

Elevation Gain: 2040 feet

7 miles round trip

Elevation Gain: 2040 feet

7 miles round trip 4.7 miles round trip

Elevation Gain: 2040 feet Elevation Gain: 3507 feet

4.7 miles round trip

Elevation Gain: 3507 feet

4.7 miles round trip

Elevation Gain: 3507 feet

Grinnell Glacier The most visited glacier in Glacier National park. This glacier has views from three surrounding peaks and holds the largest collection of repeat photography from the USGS study. Terminating in a Lake, this Glacier provides ample recreation for the future.

Perspective

Grinnell Glacier Overlook â&#x20AC;&#x153;From the camp we rode westward up the valley along the lower slope of Wilbur Mountain, with Grinnell Mountain on the south, following the river closely and passing one by one the shining lakes of the Swift Current chain, hollows formed by some glacier but now brimming with blue water and reflecting the beauties of their shores.â&#x20AC;? ~Mathilde Edith Holtz (Glacier National Park Its Trails and Treasures, 1917, p. 76-77)

Legend

Miche Wabun Lost 25 acres (49%)

Sexton 2015 Glaciers

Glacier National Park 2005 Glaciers

0.15

R e t r e a t o f t h e1966GGlaciers laciers

Lost 25 acres (25%)

0.3

0.6 Miles

Glacier

1998 Glaciers

Retreat of the Glaciers

Siyeh National Park

Legend

Pumpelly

Miche Wabun

Sexton

Lost 26 acres (10%)

Lost 25 acres (49%)

Lost 25 acres (25%)

2015 Glaciers

2005 Glaciers

0.15

0.3

0.6 Miles

1998 Glaciers

Pa N G l a c i e r N a t i o n a l Lost Lost 20 acres (19%) 0

2005 Glaciers

Siyeh

0.15

0.3

0.6 Miles

Retreat of the Glaciers

1998 Glaciers 1966 Glaciers

Legend

Old Sun

2015 Glaciers

N Lost 20 acres (19%)

Lost 25 acres (33%)

1966 Glaciers

2015 Glaciers

Retreat of the Glaciers

Lost 25 acres (33%)

Retreat of the Glaciers

Legend

Old Sun

Glacier National Park

2005 Glaciers

0.15

0.3

0.6 Miles

1998 Glaciers 1966 Glaciers

Legend 2015 Glaciers 2005 Glaciers 1998 Glaciers 1966 Glaciers

Legend

Legend 0

0.15

0.3

0.6 Miles

Legend 2015 Glaciers 2005 Glaciers

2005 Glaciers

Legen

2015 Glaciers

0.15

0.3

0.6 Miles

2005 Glaciers

1966 Glaciers

1998 Glaciers

0.15

0.3

0.6 Miles

Legend

1998 Glaciers

2015 Glaciers

1966 Glaciers

2015 Glaciers

1998 Glaciers

2005 Glaciers

0.6 Miles

Legend

1998 Glaciers 1966 Glaciers

0.3

0.6 Miles

2005 Glaciers 1998 Glaciers

2015 Glaciers

0.15

0.3

2005 Glaciers 1998 Glaciers

0.6 Miles

1966 Glaciers

Legend

2015 Glaciers 2005 Glaciers

1966 Glaciers

0.15

0.3

0.6 Miles

0.15

0.3

1998 Glaciers 1966 Glaciers

Miles

ments

7’6”

continues to shift hat this scenery e change set in. the experiences roposes to install er National Park. location with a y the frame will cape than what panes will reveal back to 1888. As retreat, having l will amply the as well as reveal park.

1” x 1.5” Filler (Setting Block)

Boulder Pass Trail

Distance: 23

Boulder Pass Trail

Distance: 23.9 mi

Double Paned Glass with UV Coating 1” Continuous Grout Corten Steel Frame

Trail Mapping Unfinished Rock Exterior

Concrete Footing

The Garden Wall Trail

Grinnell Glacier Trail

hern

2015 Glaciers

Glacier NatN ional 0

2005 Glaciers

k acres (13%) R e t r e a t tr19 1998 Glaciers

0.15

0.3

of the Glaciers

1966 Glaciers

RedG lEagle acier National Park

Legend

0.6 Miles

Weasel Collar N

Ahern

2005 Glaciers

Lost 14 acres (10%)

2005 Glaciers

0.15

0.3

0.6 Miles

1998 Glaciers 1966 Glaciers

RedG lEagle acier National

Weasel Collar

Park

Retreat of the Glaciers

Retreat of the Lost 18 acres (53%)

Lost 19 acres (13%)

Lupfer

2015 Glaciers

Retreat of the Glaciers

Lost 18 acres (53%)

Legend

Park

0.15

0.3

0.6 Miles

Glacier National Park

1998 Glaciers

Lost 13 acres R e t r e(42%) at of the

1966 Glaciers

Glaciers

Lupfer

Lost 14 acres (10%)

2005 Glaciers

Lost 13 acres (23%)

0.15

0.3

0.6 Miles

1998 Glaciers

Legend

1966 Glaciers

2015 Glaciers

2005 Glaciers

2015 Glaciers

2005 Glaciers

0.15

0.3

0.15

0.3

0.6 Miles

1966 Glaciers

2015 Glaciers

Legend

1998 Glaciers

2005 Glaciers

2015 Glaciers

1966 Glaciers

2005 Glaciers

0.15

0.3

1998 Glaciers

0.6 Miles

Legend

1998 Glaciers

0.6 Miles

0.15

2015 Glaciers

1966 Glaciers

2005 Glaciers

2015 Glaciers

1966 Glaciers

2005 Glaciers 1998 Glaciers 1966 Glaciers

Legend 2015 Glaciers 2005 Glaciers

0.15

0.3

0.15

0.3

1998 Glaciers

0.6 Miles

1966 Glaciers

0.6 Miles

1998 Glaciers 1966 Glaciers

Boulder Pass Trail

ew Vi View f o of e

op pe Sc Sco

1 Scope of View Scop e of View

lde

uld

lac

Gla

cie

ier

3.9 miles round trip

iles round trip

0.3

0.6 Miles

Legend 1998 Glaciers

Legend

Elevation Gain: 4616 feet

Boulder Glacier Holding the record for most mass lost, Boulder Glacier has retreated more than 48 acres accounting for 85% of its original mass. This glacier is in the Northern section of the park and is readily accessible by trail.

Lost 13 acres (23%)

Salamander

Lost 13 acres (42%)

Legend 2015 Glaciers

Salamander

0.3

0.6 Miles

Perspective

Boulder Glacier â&#x20AC;&#x153;In the past 100 years, Boulder Glacier has been reduced to a small sliver of ice in the shadow of Boulder Peak. At the former terminus, small trees and other vegetation have become established where once there was only rock and ice.â&#x20AC;? ~Lisa McKeon (Boulder Glacier Terminus, 1913-2012, Repeat Photography Project) .

The Garden Wall Trail

Distance: 14.7 miles round trip

A Shifting Landscape

Global Land Use Planning

With the relatively smaller size of the glaciers at Glacier National Park coupled with the increased warming in that area, Glacier National Park will be one of the first places to see its glacier disappear. For this reason, the research and documentation of the landscape conditions is imperative and has the ability to help inform other areas with glacial landscapes. Although most of the glaciers in Montana are under wildness protection, they can still set a precedent for dealing with this changing landscape.

World Glacier Map

Elevation Gain: 3507 feet

Global Temperature

1.9

ºF Since 1880

Arctic Ice

12.8

percent per decade

Ice Sheets

413

gigatonnes per year

Sea Level

3.3

milimeters per year

Legend Glaciers

Annual Mean Temperature Increase 36.1ºC

-21.1ºC

Reference: Global Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet. Earth Science Communications Team. March 28, 2019. California Institute of Technology. https:// climate.nasa.gov/

Learning from Glacier National Park With carbon emissions increasing, so is the global temperature. This is causing a decrease in arctic ice & glaciers while increasing sea level rise. This map illustrates the location of the world’s glaciers along side the area’s annual mean temperature. As temperatures continue to rise and cause glacial retreat, we will have to have innovative scientists, planners, and designers rethink the use of these landscapes.

Katelyn Nimic nimic.katelyn@gmail.com 402 617 9993 .