2022–2023 Civic tech

Land access for Chicago growers

I researched, designed, and built a live directory helping Chicago growers compare land providers and understand how to apply.

The project

I researched, designed, and built Chicago Land Access Pathways (CLAP) to help urban growers find a suitable institution and understand its land-application process.

My role

UX Engineer

Status

Live

Find the institutions that can help with land access

Our research identified the lack of stable, long-term land access as a major obstacle for urban growers. Institutions held useful information, but their eligibility rules, land-use conditions, and application processes were scattered across different sources.

The design challenge was to make those pathways understandable before a grower invested time in contacting an institution.

Regional land-access reports and community presentations beside a photograph of Chicago growers — Regional reports and public presentations from the desk research.

Turn institution requirements into useful filters

We interviewed more than 10 local land-providing institutions and consolidated their requirements into a spreadsheet. The useful structure was not a list of organizations alone: it was a way to compare where they operate, who they work with, and how land can be accessed.

Geographic coverage

Grower’s question

Where do I need land?
Product decision

Location filter
Rental, sale, or partnership

Grower’s question

How can I access it?
Product decision

Access-method filter
Applicant eligibility

Grower’s question

Who can apply?
Product decision

Applicant-type filter
Application timing

Grower’s question

How long does the process take?
Product decision

Application-duration filter

From source information to a filtering question
Institutional information	Grower’s question	Product decision
Geographic coverage	Where do I need land?	Location filter
Rental, sale, or partnership	How can I access it?	Access-method filter
Applicant eligibility	Who can apply?	Applicant-type filter
Application timing	How long does the process take?	Application-duration filter

Application duration is separate from the length of a lease.

Spreadsheet comparing land-providing institutions and their application requirements — The interview comparison sheet.

Find a relevant institution, then check its conditions

The platform helps people identify an institution to work with. It does not promise an available parcel or make an eligibility decision. A short route from requirements to an institution’s details keeps that purpose clear.

The path to an informed first contact

- Location & applicant
- Access & timing
- Review institutions
- Read requirements
- Contact the institution

↩ Understand the terms → Set requirements (Adjust the requirements)

Screen/action
Start/end

A match starts a conversation; it is not a land offer.

Inspect the page structure

Find an institution: location, access method, applicant type, and application duration.

Agency details: general information, land use and finances, application process, timing, and contact.

Help along the way: three-step guidance, term explanations, and other resources.

Core decision

Directory before geography

Choose a directory to compare institutional requirements

We explored embedded lists, visual diagrams, a map-based website, and a separate filter-and-detail experience. The central task was comparing institutional conditions. We chose a directory that could expose those conditions without the build cost of a map.

Directory wireframe with institution filters above list rows — Directory wireframe

High-fidelity CLAP directory with Chicago and Individuals filters selected beside agency cards — High-fidelity interface

Carry the matching question from the wireframe into the interface.

The working interface retains the wireframe’s filter-and-detail structure.

Map-based website

Useful for

Exploring geographic coverage
Constraint

Higher build cost; geography alone does not explain eligibility
Filters + agency details · chosen

Useful for

Narrowing options, then reading requirements
Constraint

Needs clear labels and guidance for first-time visitors

The interaction options
Approach	Useful for	Constraint
Map-based website	Exploring geographic coverage	Higher build cost; geography alone does not explain eligibility
Filters + agency details · chosen	Narrowing options, then reading requirements	Needs clear labels and guidance for first-time visitors

Qualitative trade-offs, not scores.

The two other approaches

Embedded list: a simple addition to an existing webpage, but long, structured answers become difficult to scan.

Visual diagram: useful for showing relationships at a glance, but detailed agency information still needs a reading view.

Keep the requirements beside the results

Narrow the agency list, then open an institution’s conditions. Selecting an agency shows its requirements and application information in one place, so the next step is grounded in the institution’s own process.

Five agencies matching City of Chicago and Individuals, with the active requirements beside the results

Explore the working product · Visit CLAP

First-time visitors needed a clearer way in

We invited local growers, institutional representatives, and interaction experts to try the prototype. New visitors struggled to understand what the platform would do, how to use the filters, and what unfamiliar terms meant. Those findings shifted the iteration toward explanation at the point of use.

Prototype annotated with three usability findings — Three findings from the prototype test.

Unclear purpose on arrival

Design response

A short, three-step tour
Intended benefit

Set expectations before searching
Filters were difficult to understand

Design response

A labeled side panel
Intended benefit

Give each filter group room to explain itself
Unfamiliar institutional language

Design response

Explanations beside the terms
Intended benefit

Read definitions without abandoning the application guide

Each finding changed a specific part of the experience
Observed problem	Design response	Intended benefit
Unclear purpose on arrival	A short, three-step tour	Set expectations before searching
Filters were difficult to understand	A labeled side panel	Give each filter group room to explain itself
Unfamiliar institutional language	Explanations beside the terms	Read definitions without abandoning the application guide

Prototype-test findings and the corresponding design changes.

Explain filters and terms where people use them

The tour introduces the three steps: filter requirements, choose an institution, then read its details. The revised side panel turns filter headings into questions, while term explanations help readers interpret institutional language.

Three-step CLAP welcome guide — Three steps in the working product: orient, narrow, understand.

Agency results filtered by location and applicant type — Three steps in the working product: orient, narrow, understand.

Support the same task on a phone

Desktop access could not be a prerequisite. On a phone, filtering becomes a separate sheet, the agency list stays readable, and details open in a focused view. The sequence remains the same: set requirements, review a match, understand the process.

Phone filter sheet with location, access method, applicant type, and duration — Set location, access, and applicant requirements in their own sheet.

Set location, access, and applicant requirements in their own sheet.

Keep filters, cards, and guidance consistent

Noto Sans, a restrained green accent, and simple surfaces keep the directory legible. The working specimens below show the small decisions that carry the task: filter labels, selected states, agency cards, and guidance.

COMPONENTS / 03

One connected task

Open product ↗

Try a filter, open an agency, or start the guidance.

Inspect color and type foundations

COLOR STUDY / 01

Land & paper

LAND & PAPER / Brand · #567D48

TYPE STUDY / 02

Noto Sans

Aa—Zz
0123456789

Tap the letters.

Aa, filled

Typography, color and working controls from the product. Agency information is a demonstration snapshot.

The content had to stay maintainable after launch

Working with a director and researcher at the Chicago Food Policy Action Council, I also developed the frontend. HTML, CSS, and JavaScript implement the responsive interface; jQuery drives filtering and overlays, and Contentful keeps institutional information separate from its presentation.

From institutional information to the interface

Source

Research and updates

Institutional requirements

Content

Contentful

Structured agency entries

Interface

HTML · CSS · JavaScript

Filters & results
Details & guidance

The demo runs on a snapshot of the Chicago Food Policy Action Council’s content.

Code editor showing the guidance and filter scripts — Guidance and filter code in the editor.

Launched; usage and land placements were not measured

The platform launched around spring 2023. Completed land placements were not measured.

CLAP guidance shared with partner institutions before launch — Pre-launch walkthrough with partner institutions.

What remained open: the launch-time analytics snapshot did not provide meaningful usage data. The team wanted to understand whether people would return to the platform or use it once.

I love the user-friendly nature of it, terrific job!

Emy · The Conservation Fund

More case studies

All work