[reDEFINING CENTER] ::creating community through democratic architecture::

Fig: 1. MP 2 Final Process

[reDEFINING CENTER] ::creating community through democratic architecture::

Compiling the work of a terminal research and design project presented to the Graduate School of Architecture + Community Design at The University of South Florida.

Documented by:Jonathon Anderson

Project ChairVikas Mehta PhD Professor of Architecture and Urban DesignUniversity of South Florida | Tampa, FL

Committee Jan Wampler FAIAProfessor of Architecture, Distinguished Professor, ASCAM.I.T. | Cambridge, MA _University of South Florida | Tampa, FL

“A good name is to be more desired that great riches, favor is better than silver or gold.”Psalms 22:1

I would like to dedicate to document to the influential people of my life that have shaped and guided me along the way, without these people I would not have successfully made it this far. First and for most my parents Paul and Melinda for always pushing me to be the best at everything that I set out to accomplish. They gave me the love and support to be anything that I wanted to in life, and I am grate-ful for that everyday. Robert Joyce for being such a great educator early on in my dream of pursing and architectural career, spurring my interests in architecture, and teaching me skills that I still use today. Coach Rick Darlington for not only coaching me in the game of football but in life. The Christian values and moral characteristics that he has instilled in me and every person he coaches will stay with us as we progress in life. Lastly, I would like to thank all of the friends and colleagues that I have made while attending The University of South Florida School of Architecture + Community Design. The hard things in life are always easier to enjoy when you’re surrounded by good friends and family.

Dedication

Abstract

In modern day American cities there is a significant social construct missing from the core of the community. In Colonial times, cities were planned around a town square, a place where pub-lic life breathed throughout the city. Markets, musical events, political assemblies, and many oth-er events took place here on a regular basis. It was a place to see and a place to be seen, but in our new age of urban planning we have lost this entity, this place where a community comes together to interact on a social level. This begs the questions: How can we change this? What can we as creators of public life, do to challenge the view of what a city center is and does for its community? Just how accessible is the community to the public figures that represent them? How can the activity and architecture of the place create a more engaging social landscape?

There were two building types that were historically typical to the location of the town square, the original courthouse and city hall. I feel that through investigating these two building types, I will discover which one will best suit my intentions of redeveloping the civic programs of the building type to incor-porate more community oriented functions while linking to the public space which is the town square. I think architectural design can play a crucial role in allowing opportunities of social interaction to take place in a setting that has, for much of the 20th century, only served as a seat of local government.

[reDEFINING CENTER] ::creating community through democratic architecture::

It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and short-coming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat.

THEODORE ROOSEVELT

Table of Contents

10_331220242630

34_41363840

42_49444648

50_59525458

60_836268

84_85

86_89

90_91

Investigative Research on Defensive Architecture Medieval Castles Castillo de San Marcos | St. Augustine, FL Fort Pickens | Pensacola, FL Defensive Spatial Construct Manifestation of Relevant Terms

Initial Case Studies London City Hall The Reichstag Seattle Public Library

Supplemental Case Studies Seville 24/7 Center Proposal Amstel River Pedestrian Bridge Waitakere’s Civic Centre

Introduction of the Site / Analysis Tampa City Hall Old City Hall / Tampa Municipal Office Building Site Photographs

Design Solution Process Final Product

Personal Critique of Design Solution

List of Figures

Bibliography

10

Investigative Research on Defensive Architecture

Fig: 2. Spis Castle, Slovakia

11

Fig: 3.Caerlaverock Castle, Scotland

Fig: 4. Spis Castle, Slovakia

12

Abraham Lincoln once stated in his Gettysburg Address, “...government of the people, by the people, for the people...” which is about the most basic definition of democracy one could think of. A government formed of people, chosen by their peers to represent their best interests, but is this always the case? How interactive are people allowed to be in their representation? Since the early colonization of America, cities and towns have been developed with aspects of urban design in the overall master plans. One space that played a key role in society during that time was the town square which was typically located adjacent to a courthouse or town hall that the community would hold events like mar-kets and political gatherings. As we have progressed through time I believe that this social construct has slipped away from our society and local governments have become more and more internalized from the community that they govern. This may be due to some political and violent acts that have lead us to focusing on the aspect of security as it relates to the accessibility of those representing us.

This thinking motivated me to research defensive architecture and investigate the techniques that were used during different time periods to both protect and defend the government and its people. Beginning with the notion of secure architecture, I searched for something I could relate my thoughts and ideas to and what came to light were castles. Castles were used for hundreds if not thousands of years to protect strong holds, ports, rivers, crossings, lands, and borders that were controlled by their monarchy. Although thousand of castles that were once scattered all across Europe and the United Kingdom have been dismantled over the years, there are still a few great examples which remain standing and give us a glimpse at what life was like in these monolithic structures.

13

Fig: 5. Eilean Donan Castle, Scotland

Fig: 6. Eilean Donan Castle, Scotland

14

In an article titled “An Assessment of Castles and Landownership in Late Medieval North Do-negal”, the author Máire Ní Loingsigh provides great insight as to many defensive features and tactics that castles in Northwestern Ireland used. “The most distinctive feature of the castles is the over-whelming incidence of siting with access to the sea or to a navigable river.”6 This is a very important fact when you consider the only modes of transportation then were by foot, horse, and especially by boat since it was a much faster way to travel. “This maritime connection also was a means of contact with the outside world, a link with the rest of Ireland and with other countries.”6 With easy access to wa-terways, trading of supplies, as well as movement of military forces and aid were much more realistic, most notably beneficial in times of war when the enemy was most likely to arrive by sea. Water played another role in the design, for most castles three if not four sides were surrounded by water in the form of moats which made it harder for any enemy trying to wage war with the occupants (Fig: 3.). With only one way in and out of the castle it practically forced the opposition to attack from one direction which could prove to be both more challenging to breach and easier to breach with all of the focus on that one point of entry. The Eilean Donan Castle in Scotland (Fig: 5, 6.) is a very nice example of this, notice that it is built on a small rocky island with one bridge giving access to the island while surrounded on all sides with water.

The siting of a castle proved to be one of the most important factors in how it operated. “The castles are generally in the areas of better land within the underlordships, often in the fertile coastal strip, and are thus well placed to maximize the resources of both land and sea.”6 Being close to the coast, the land surrounding the castles produced a greater yield of crops for the inhabitants of the land, a necessity for survival. Those not located in a position not surrounded by water were strategi-cally placed atop a hill (Fig: 4.) where they would have a higher vantage point verse anyone that would challenge the castle.

“The protective features at the remaining castles, both natural and architectural, indicate that defense was an important factor in the choice of a site and in the building of many castles. In some instances this defense may well have been of a passive nature [while] internal and external defense features may have been protective rather than offensive.”6 To elaborate on the previous sentence, I think the use of natural defensive measure was just as important to whoever was building and de-signing the castle for its intended use. Nature has proven itself to be useful in many years of war, for example, whoever has the higher ground typically has the upper hand and advantage over the other just as the saying goes, you’re fighting an uphill battle. It’s much more difficult. It also states that the internal and external defense features were for protection rather than offensive, but I think that can be argued either way.

15

Castles weren’t just built as a defensive measure, they were very much a political statement of the ruler of the kingdom. “They were instruments of his policy towards his neighbors and were used as fortresses [and] have been used throughout history: to protect exposed frontier areas and hold down conquests. But their importance was not confined to the borders. The commander of a castle and its garrison was master of the surrounding district and had means continuously at his disposal to meet any challenge to his authority.”11 Here Smail iterates the importance of having these entities at the ready to defend the front lines of the land under the rulers control and having the ability to enforce his laws at will over the people in his control.

He continues, “Wherever they stood, fortified buildings provided a base from which power could be exercised, and within which it could be protected and preserved. As a consequence castles are found serving not only as nuclei for urban growth or bases of colonization, but most frequently as centers of feudal government, from which administrative and judicial powers were exercised over the inhabitants of the neighborhood.”11 As much as they presented themselves as an external force, the internal society was just as important to protect, the way of life. I found this to be one of the most solid pieces that I encountered in the research for the relation of a castle as a center piece of the govern-ment, a nucleolus for urban growth. To me it represented a city or town hall which in essence is the head of the local government, representing a community of people but maybe fall under the another larger governing entity. Also interesting to me is the relation to a neighborhood, because it shows us that life inside the walls of these large castles is similar to a micro or small city.

Taking a closer look at the individual castles, the Caerlaverock castle (Fig: 3.) has some dis-tinctive characteristics. Built sometime in the 13th century, it was constructed in a triangular form and surrounded by a moat. Its site, as Turner points out, was selected with a masterful eye. “With the sea in front and an impassable moss-bog behind, the castle was really impregnable, and became the key to southwest Scotland.”12 As we can see in the photograph, sections of this castle were demolished over the centuries as it changed hands a number of times. This castle is a good example of the layers of defensive strategy used in the design and site selection of these fortifications.

16

Fig: 7. Edinburgh Castle, Scotland

Fig: 8. Dunluce Castle, United Kingdom

17

The Spiš castle (Fig: 4.) located in eastern Slovakia was built on the site of an earlier castle in the 12th century and is one of the largest castles in all of eastern Europe in area at 41,426 m2. “It was the political, administrative, economic and cultural centre of Szepes (Spiš) County of the Kingdom of Hungary.”10 Located on top of a mountainous area, the castle overlooks a town and village, as well as vastly out over the surrounding landscape that makes spotting anyone approaching a much easier task.

Eilean Donan (Fig: 5, 6.) is the next castle that I became interested in for a few reasons, mostly with its distinct site. Located on a very small island in the western Highlands of Scotland, this castle is completely surrounded by water and only accessible by bridge or boat. Founded in the 13th cen-tury, the original castle only lasted five centuries until in the early 18th century when government ships destroyed most of it. What is seen now is the result of a reconstruction that took place in the early 20th

century. When constructed, the castle had a wall surrounding the entire island from the waterline up making this a hard place to attack by water.

The Scottish Edinburg castle is possibly one of the most intact surviving castles that I came across. Perched high above Edinburg’s Old Town on the volcanic Castle Rock, it is naturally defended by sheer cliffs from the north and south, and a steep ascent from the west giving the only easy ap-proach from the east through the town.7 Built in the 12th century, the Edinburg castle played key roles in many conflicts such as the Wars of Scottish Independence. With only one easy approach to the castle much of the defensive walls and gates faced this direction as the site continues uphill in a stepped manor. In figure 7 we can see exactly how close in proximity the castle is to the town as well as how rugged the surrounding terrain is below the castle.

Since all of these defensive structures are located in Europe, I began to look for something equivalent that existed in the United States that I would be able to visit and fortunately, there exist more than a few forts in the state of Florida that were within driving distance and/or that I have had experi-ence with in the past. Growing up in Florida, there are a couple of places that every student in public school gets to take field trips to, and in the fourth grade we made the journey to St. Augustine, Florida. The bus ride seemed to take an eternity, when you’re a young kid you haven’t quite developed a good sense of time, but when we finally arrived it proved to be quite the memorable experience. More than fifteen years later I got the opportunity to return for school once again, only this time a little more im-portant.

18

Fig: 9. Caernarvon Castle, United Kingdom

Fig: 10.Beaumaris Castle, Wales

19

Castillo de San Marcos is the oldest masonry fort in the United States, built during the late 1600’s. Being that old, it is one of the best preserved forts, and provided a great opportunity to ex-perience the techniques of defense first hand, that I found in the medieval European castles. Upon arriving at the fort, the first thing that I observed was how it was situated into the landscape. Large berms conceal 70-80% of the exterior walls until you get closer to the entry bridges. Although the moat was filled in at some point in the history of the fort, it is very distinctive in its form and allows to imagination to form an image of what it may have looked like. Entering the Castillo de San Mar-cos, there is an entry node located in between two draw bridges that provides an extra look out spot or meeting place. Approaching the main gate, it had the typical woven steel door that cranks up and down to keep intruders out. Inside, the thick walls protect double height interior spaces that allow the natural sunlight to flood in. What also allows this to happen is the organization of the plan. Surrounding an open square courtyard, every room opens up to this green space and this is also where a majority of the circulation takes place. Up the grand stair, I arrived on the gun deck which was a large area that provided views out to sea for miles. At three corners there was a gar-rita, which is a small space that protected the scouts looking out for enemy soldiers. In the north-east corner resides a bell tower which proved to be an interesting space, I can only assume that the bell could have been used to warn the towns people or other soldiers of impending danger.

Another Florida fort that I was able to visit was Fort Pickens in Pensacola Beach, Florida. Com-pleted in 1834, Fort Pickens is over two and a half times the size of Castillo de San Marcos. Built after the War of 1812, it was part of a group of forts designed to protect the Pensacola Harbor. Being that it was 200 years newer than Castillo de San Marcos, there was quite a different appeal to this fort, much of it was buried in the ground and had a very large moat. Since this wasn’t the oldest fort in America, we had a little more freedom as guests to really explore the ins and outs of Fort Pickens. There were tons of small tunnels that appeared to have filled up with sand over the years making it difficult to see where they all lead. The northwestern corner of the fort suffered some pretty heavy damage at some point and that is still evident in how it is surviving today. In similar aspects, it was designed with some of the same principals, like the central courtyard and vaulted ceilings that allow greater loads above.

20

Fig: 11. Castillo de San Marcos Elevation Fig: 12. Castillo de San Marcos Moat

Fig: 14. Castillo de San Marcos MoatFig: 13. Castillo de San Marcos Lift Detail

21

Fig: 15. Castillo de San Marcos Watch Tower Fig: 16. Castillo de San Marcos Watch Tower Fig: 17. Castillo de San Marcos Inner Wall

22

Fig: 18. Castillo de San Marcos Garrita Fig: 19. Castillo de San Marcos Garrita Fig: 20. Castillo de San Marcos Moat and Exterior Wall

23

Fig: 21. Fort Pickens Arch Detail Fig: 22. Fort Pickens Exterior Wall Detail Fig: 23. Fort Pickens Interior Vault Perspective

24

Fig: 24. Fort Pickens Inner Courtyard Fig: 25. Fort Pickens Wall Detail

Fig: 27. Fort Pickens Gun Pivot DetailFig: 26. Fort Pickens Cannon Window

25

Fig: 29. Defensive Spatial ConstructFig: 28. Defensive Spatial Construct

26

Fig: 30. Defensive Spatial Construct

After returning from Castillo de San Marcos, I wanted to quantify my experiences into a spatial construct that spoke to the experience. Though the design process, I began to find characteristics from both the castle studies and my experiential studies that I could pull together to fortify a space. With the use of materials and the layering of structure, I was able to combine aspects of defensive strategy from both the castles and the forts I studied. From this construct and the research, I was able to manifest a series of terms that related to the research but also had potential to help or inform me later on in the design process.

27

Fig: 31. Defensive Spatial Construct28

Fig: 32. Defensive Spatial Construct

29

lay·erverb \’la-er, ‘ler\

transitive verb

1: to propagate (a plant) by means of layers

2 a : to place as a layer b : to place a layer on top of c : to form or arrange in layers

intransitive verb

1 a : to separate into layers b : to form out of superimposed layers

view noun \’vyü\

1 : extent or range of vision : sight 2 : the act of seeing or examining : inspection; also : survey 3 a : a mode or manner of looking at or regarding something b : an opinion or judgment colored by the feeling or bias of its holder 4: scene, prospect 5: the foreseeable future 6: a pictorial representation— in view of: in regard to : in consideration of— on view: open to public inspection : on exhibition— with a view to: with the object of

Fig: 33. Layering Graphic

Fig: 35. View Graphic

Fig: 34. Layering Drawdle

Fig: 36. View Drawdle30

par·tic·i·pa·tion noun \ pär-,ti-se-’pa-shen

1 : the act of participating

2 : the state of being related to a larger whole

trans·par·en·cy noun \tran(t)s-’per-en(t)-se\

1 : something transparent; especially : a picture (as on film) viewed by light shining through it or by projection2 : the quality or state of being transparent

ac·cess noun - verb\’ak-,ses also ik-’ses\

1 a : permission, liberty, or ability to enter, approach, or pass to and from a place or to approach or communicate with a person or thing b : freedom or ability to obtain or make use of something c : a way or means of access d : the act or an instance of accessing2 : an increase by addition3 : (verb) to get at; gain access to

Fig: 37. Transparency + Access Graphic

Fig: 39. Participation Graphic

Fig: 38. Transparency + Access Drawdle

Fig: 40. Participation Drawdle 31

con·nec·tiv·i·ty noun \(,)kä-,nek-’ti-ve-tee, ke-\

: the quality, state, or capability of being connective or con-nected <connectivity of a surface>; especially : the ability to connect to or communicate (with another computer or com-puter system)

Fig: 41. Connectivity Graphic Fig: 42. Connectivity Drawdle

The terms were divided into two groups. One being terms that should be part of my design, layering, view, transparency, access, and participation; and the other being term that I wanted to avoid in the design, centrality, enclosure, and connectivity. After defining each term I made a diagram of each term as it related to the whole. Further exploring the diagrams, I began to construct graphical models which incorporated informational drawings of Castillo de San Marcos overlaying them onto the earlier diagrams. The layering of the fort and castle walls, moats, and other defensive measures was something that I felt needed to relate in the design at a later point in time. Transparency, access, and participation also stood out to me as potential ideas from which my design could develop from.

32

en·clo·sure noun \in-’klo-zher

1 : the act or action of enclosing : the quality or state of being enclosed

2 : something that encloses

3 : something enclosed

cen·tral·i·ty noun \sen-’tra-le-tee\

1 : the quality or state of being central

2 : central situation

3 : tendency to remain in or at the center

Fig: 43. Enclosure Graphic

Fig: 45. Centrality Graphic

Fig: 44. Enclosure Drawdle

Fig: 46. Centrality Drawdle 33

34

Initial Case Studies

Fig: 47. London City Hall Interior Fig: 48. Reichstag Interior Fig: 49. Seattle Public Library Interior

35

London City HallFOSTER + PARTNERS 1998-2002

Page 39Fig: 50. (Left)London City Hall SectionFig: 51. (Right) London City Hall Elevation PhotographFig: 52. (Left)London City Hall SketchesFig: 53. (Middle)London City Hall AerialFig: 54. (Right)London City Hall Interior

“Located on the south bank of the Thames, alongside the new More London development, it is one of the capital’s most symbolically important new projects. Advancing themes explored earlier in the Reichstag, it expresses the transparency and accessibility of the democratic process and demonstrates the potential for a sustainable, virtually non-polluting public building.”2

“The chamber faces north across the river to the Tower of London, its glass enclosure al-lowing Londoners to see the Assembly at work. Members of the public are also invited to share in the life of the building. At its base, opening on to a piazza is a café overlooking the river; and from the entrance foyer, gentle ramps allow visitors to move up through the building. A flexible public space on the top floor - ‘London’s Living Room’ - can be used for exhibitions or functions, while its riverside terrace allows visitors to enjoy unparalleled views out across the city.”2 I found this particular project to be of interest to me because it began to skim the surface of what I thought this project could become. Norman Foster puts the circulation of the public and the proceedings of city council on display to the city and I think that begins to relay a message of openness and ac-cessibility that I feel is needed in a local government setting whose purpose is to serve the public.

36

37

Reichstag : New German ParliamentFOSTER + PARTNERS 1992-1999

Another one of Norman Forster’s projects, the Reichstag New German Parliament building rebuilds a government building that was partially destroyed in World War II, replacing the dome with a lighter glass dome which illuminates the interior. This building separates the people from the government all the while giving the illusion that it is more open to the people. There is only a visual connection between the people and the government because the dome is actually closed off from the parliament chamber. With the lack of access and no audible connection between the government and the people it stands for and represents, I think this project is not very successful in the over scheme.

“The Reichstag’s transformation is rooted in four issues: the Bundestag’s significance as a democratic forum, a commitment to public accessibility, a sensitivity to history, and a rigorous environmental agenda. The reconstruction takes cues from the old Reichstag - the original piano nobile and courtyards have been reinstated - but it is a complete departure. Within its masonry shell it is transparent, opening up the interior to light and views and placing its activities on view. Public and politicians enter together through the reopened formal entrance. The public realm continues on the roof and in the cupola - a new Berlin landmark - where helical ramps lead to an observation platform, allowing the people to ascend above the heads of their political representa-tives in the chamber below.”2

“At its core a ‘light sculptor’ reflects light into the chamber, with a moveable sun-shield blocking solar gain and glare. As night falls, this process is reversed. The cupola becomes a beacon, signalling the vigor of the German democratic process.”2

38

Fig: 55. (Top Left) Reichstag Parliment Chamber InteriorFig: 56. (Top Right) Reichstag DomeFig: 57. (Middle) Reichstag Dome InteriorFig: 58. (Bottem Left) Reichstag Section Drawing

Fig: 59. (Bottem Right) Reichstag Sketches

39

Seattle Public LibraryOMA / LMN 1998-2004

Page 43Fig: 61. (Top Left) Seattle Public Library Exterior

Fig: 64. (Bottom Left) Seattle Public Library Social Programs

Fig: 62. (Top Middle) Seattle Public Library Interior Workspace

Fig: 65. (Bottom Right) Seattle Public Library Section Drawing

Fig: 63. (Top Right) Seattle Public Library Program Charts

Page 42Fig: 60. (Below) SeattlePublic Library Programatic Section

The Seattle Public Library is very similar programmatically to the thoughts and ideas that I have about what a local government should be doing to aid and provide different kinds of as-sistance to the people in their community. The way that OMA / LMN have arranged the program throughout the library works very well. Having had the opportunity to visit the Seattle Public Li-brary, I was quite impressed by the circulation of the people, workers, and even the books.

“Our ambition is to redefine the Library as an institution no longer exclusively dedicated to the book, but as an information store where all potent forms of media - new and old - are presented equally and legibly. In an age where information can be accessed anywhere, it is the simultaneity of all media and, more importantly, the curatorship of their contents that will make the Library vital. Our first operation was to “comb” and consolidate the library’s apparently ungovernable prolif-eration of program and media. By combining like with like, we identified a set of programmatic clusters - five of stability, four of instability. Each of the five “stable” platforms is a programmatic cluster that is architecturally defined and equipped for maximum, dedicated performance. Be-cause each platform is designed for a different purpose, their size, flexibility, circulation, structure and materials vary. The four “unstable” spaces in between the platforms function as trading floors where librarians inform and stimulate, where the interface between the different platforms is orga-nized - spaces for work, interaction, and play.”5

“The mixing chamber is an area of maximum librarian-patron interaction, a trading floor for information orchestrated to fulfill an essential (and currently neglected) need for expert, interdis-ciplinary help.”5

40

41

42

Supplemental Case Studies

Fig: 66. Seville 24/7 Proposal Perspective Rendering Fig: 67. Amstel River Pedestrian Bridge Aerial Rendering Fig: 68. Waitakere Civic Centre City Council Chambers

43

Seville 24/7 Center ProposalAYRAT KHUSNUTDINOV & ZHANG LIHENG 2012

Fig: 69. (Above)Seville 24/7 Proposal Activity IsometricFig: 70. (Below)Seville 24/7 Proposal Aerial Rendering

The Seville 24/7 center, proposed by Ayrat Khusnutdinov & Zhang Liheng, adopts the famous Spanish traditions of street life. Their project would create a retreat from the harsh sun of Andalucia, Spain and extend the street life to 24 hours of the day and 7 days of the week. Seville 24/7 is not only about holiday or cultural side of Seville, but more importantly, everyday human interaction. More images and architects’ description after the break.3

People would come here to visit a children playground, library, grocery store, night club, eat tapas, meet friends, etc. Our proposal would manifest the vibrancy of civic life in the city: it would be a stage that exposes the most interesting thing – life. The sinuous surfaces of the bridge create waves which would invite people to sit on them and watch passersby. In this way we propose spaces that would encourage different behavioral patterns – watch and be watched. As in the theory of human social interaction in physics particles with opposite charges attract each other and create a magnet – here these two patterns would create a magnet for people. 3

The different characters of the bridge’s two layers reflect its wide appeal. The green layer above creates a heaven from the noise in the city – a piece of nature in the city’s context. The thick layer of earth with grass and bushes on it would radiate freshness under it, providing a generous shadow for the layer under it. The cafes, shopping areas, and exhibition spaces inside of this layer provide additional facets to the wide palette of activities of the project. The lower layer of the bridge is a bustling hub with nonstop street performances, street vendors, ca-fes and everything a public street of a modern city can offer. 3

The bridge is anchored by two major public hubs on the both sides of the river. The building of the médiathèque is one of them, its cantilevering structure signals the presence of this public venue in the city. The existing building of the tobacco factory is the other anchor, we propose to renovate and reconfigure it, creating a generous ground level piazza and introducing a 450 seats auditorium into the building. Integrating the existing building into our program we create a mix of old and new urban fabrics, which is characteristic of this area where medieval and modern Seville meets. 3

44

Fig: 71. (Above)Seville 24/7 Proposal Ground Level Plan Fig: 73. (Above)Seville 24/7 Proposal Third Level PlanFig: 72. (Below)Seville 24/7 Proposal Perspective Rendering Fig: 74. (Below)Seville 24/7 Proposal Master Plan

45

Amstel River Pedestrian Bridge ProposalMARIANA POPESCU, MIHAELA RADESCU, OVIDIU STANCIU, DIMITRIE STEFANESCU 2012

Page 48Fig: 75. (Below) Amstel River Pedestrian Bridge Aerial RenderingPage 49Fig: 76. (Top Left) Amstel River Pedestrian Bridge Plan View RenderingFig: 77. (Top Middle) Amstel River Pedestrian Bridge RenderingFig: 78. (Top Right) Amstel River Pedestrian Bridge Perspective RenderingFig: 79. (Middle Right) Amstel River Pedestrian Bridge Day RenderingFig: 80. (Bottom Right) Amstel River Pedestrian Bridge Night Rendering

Looking at the interaction of the bridge and the water, this proj-ect caught my attention and interest by the way it brings people into contact with boats and the water. Designed for the [AMSTERDAM] Iconic Pedestrian Bridge Competition, the project offers more than just a possibility of crossing the Amstel river. Branching into several pe-destrian trajectories, the bridge prioritizes on being an extension of the public space in front of the Hermitage Museum. In order to prolong the experience of being on water, the bridge comprises several routes that create a public promenade with small docking areas for the local houseboats. The iconic nature of the project is seen by the design team (Mariana Popescu, Mihaela Radescu, Ovidiu Stanciu, Dimitrie Stefanescu) as an emergent feature resulting from both the geome-try of the bridge as well as the socially enabled functional potential.

46

47

Waitakere’s Civic CentreARCHITECTUS / ATHFIELD ARCHITECTS 2006

Fig: 81. Waitakere’s Civic Center Perspective

Fig: 82. Waitakere’s Civic Center Grand Staircase

“Designed by Architectus in association with Athfield Architects the Waitakere Civic Centre in Henderson seeks to optimize the City’s sustainable design objectives by integrat-ing new energy efficient Council facilities with a new trans-port interchange. Sited adjacent to the North Auckland Rail Line the new Civic Centre comprises three main elements - the Civic Wing containing the Council Chamber, Councillor’s facilities and the Directorate; the Administration Wing con-taining public interface facilities and open-plan office space for council staff and the Link element which forms the main public access and pedestrian connection to the new rail sta-tion and Henderson CBD.

Proximity to good public transport and good amenities for staff were important considerations for the selection of the site for the new centre. Energy efficiency has been achieved with measures such as extensive sun screening, high levels of thermal insulation, integrated air floors and extensive use of natural day lighting. Materials have been carefully chosen from sustainable and recyclable sources. Water use has been minimized and storm water is treated on site through a Green Roof and Rain Gardens prior to entering the public system.

Within the Administration Wing a grand staircase connects the staff areas across a five storey void discouraging lift us-age and promoting staff interaction and socialization. Local cultural heritage is expressed in particular in the Council Chamber, the form of which reflects that of a gourd, a signifi-cant artefact for local Iwi.”13

48

Fig: 83. Waitakere’s Civic Center Entry / City Council Chambers Perspective

Fig: 84. Waitakere’s Civic Center City Council Chambers

Fig: 85. (Above) Waitakere’s Civic Center Fifth Floor Plan

Fig: 87. (Above) Waitakere’s Civic Center Longitudinal Section

Fig: 86. (Below) Waitakere’s Civic Center Ground Floor Plan

Fig: 88. (Below) Waitakere’s Civic Center Cross Section

49

50

Introduction of the Site / Analysis

Fig: 89. Old City Hall Building | Downtown Tampa

51

“center city”

channelside district

u of tampa

south tampa

tampa heights

ybor

Fig: 90. Tampa Districts / Neighborhoods Diagram

52

project sitetampa city hall &adajacent block

Fig: 91. “Center City” / Downtown Tampa Map

When the project began, I was unaware of how it exactly would come to a conclusion, but as I progressed through it became evident that City Hall would just the building typology that I was looking for. Although the program itself that I developed doesn’t particularly require a site, I used the city of Tampa as an example to see just how it could be applied. The current City Hall site is located at the corner of Kennedy Boulevard and Florida Avenue and has two structures situated on it. The Old City Hall Building, which I decided to keep in order to preserve a somewhat historically significant building and give myself something on the site to work with. Also existing on the site is an eight story municipal office build-ing which is very bunker like and uninviting, as well as a public plaza in between the two that never gets used. Across Florida Avenue to the east is an empty lot used for parking, which I will combine with the current site to have two city blocks to work with.

In late 2012, Mayor Bob Buckhorn reviled the ten year plan for the city of Tampa in which he gave the core area of downtown a nickname of the “center city” similar to cities of much larger size. Surrounding the “cen-ter city” are the neighborhood districts of South Tampa, Tampa Heights, University of Tampa, Channelside, and Ybor. Building off some of his strat-egies, I began to evaluate the use of space already existing to see what would be the minimum requirements of space before additional programs were added. One issue that I discover right away was the size and loca-tion of the City Council Chamber. Located on the third floor of the Old City Hall Building, the City Council was grossly undersized and in a terrible location for ease of access.

53

Fig: 92. Tampa City Hall Existing Site Plan

54

Fig: 93. Tampa City Hall Existing Section / Elevation / Program Diagram

After carefully evaluating the site and the existing program and square footages, I began to ask myself the question, What can City Hall become? Some of the answers I came to were, a place where residents come to voice their opinions to city officials and participate in the processes of local government, Art Exhibits & Galleries, Information Cen-ter for seniors, a Small music venue for musicians or hob-byist to perform, Technology Help Center, Places of interac-tion with local government officials (i.e. restaurant or coffee shop), Medical Clinic, Public forum spaces (i.e. Town Hall meetings, Announcement or Press Conference / Releases), Voter Registration / Information, Adult Education, Handi-capped Services, Training for the Disadvantaged, Work-stations, Discussion Groups / Community Support Groups, Increased community prominence through programs that support residents of the community, Increased City Coun-cil Chambers, something that represents the people and should also work for the people, as well as, allow for the participation of the people.

55

Fig: 94. Tampa City Hall Existing First Floor Plan Fig: 95. Tampa City Hall Existing Second Floor Plan Fig: 96. Tampa City Hall Existing Third Floor Plan

Fig: 100. Tampa Municipal Office Building Existing First Floor Plan Fig: 101. Tampa Municipal Office Building Existing Typical Floor Plan

56

Existing ProgramTampa Municipal Office Building

Mayor’s Office & StaffOffice SpaceMail Room / PublicationsBreak Room TMOB Total Usable Space

Old City Hall BuildingOffice SpaceStorageBreak RoomLaw LibraryVault SpacesCity Council Chambers* OCH Total Usable Space*Needs greatly exceed current space

Combined TotalsOffice SpaceMayor’s Office & StaffMail Room / PublicationsBreak Room / Lounge SpaceStorage (not including mechanical)Law LibraryVault SpacesCity Council Chambers Total Combined Usable Space

2500 sq.ft.63,700 sq.ft.

4900 sq.ft. 4900 sq.ft.

78,400 sq.ft.

16,230 sq.ft.1000 sq.ft.150 sq.ft.470 sq.ft.200 sq.ft.

1200 sq.ft.20,535 sq.ft.~5000 sq.ft.

79,930 sq.ft.2500 sq.ft4900 sq.ft.5050 sq.ft.1000 sq.ft.470 sq.ft.200 sq.ft.

1200 sq.ft.98,935 sq.ft.

What Can City Hall Become?:: A place where residents come to voice their opinions to city officials and participate in the processes of local government.:: Art Exhibits & Galleries:: Information Center for seniors:: Small music venue for musicians or hobbyist to perform:: Technology Help Center:: Places of interaction with local government officials (i.e. restaurant or coffee shop):: Public forum spaces (i.e. Town Hall meetings, Announcement or Press Conference / Releases):: Voter Registration / Information:: Adult Education :: Handicapped Services:: Training for the Disadvantaged:: Workstations:: Discussion Groups / Community Support Groups :: Increased community prominence through programs that support residents of the community:: Increased City Council Chambers (currently undersized and on the 3rd floor, needs to be on the ground level for ease of access and visibility to the community):: A building that represents the people should also work for the people as well as allow for the participation of the people

Fig: 97. Tampa City Hall Existing Fourth Floor Plan

Fig: 98. Tampa City Hall Existing Fifth/Sixth Floor PlanFig: 99. Tampa City Hall Existing Seventh/Eighth Floor Plan

57

Page 60Fig: 102. (Top) Perspective of Kennedy Blvd. Looking East

Page 61Fig: 105. (Top Left) Night Perspective of Tampa City Hall and Tampa Municipal Office Building Fig: 106. (Top Right) Tampa City Hall Bell TowerFig: 107. (Middle Right) Tampa City Hall, View From Florida Ave. Looking WestFig: 108. (Bottom Left) Tampa City Hall PlazaFig: 109. (Bottom Right) Tampa City Hall, View From Adjacent Parking Lot

Fig: 103. (Bottom Left) Per-spective of Tampa City Hall and Tampa Municipal Office BuildingFig: 104. (Bottom Right) Perspective of Kennedy Blvd. Looking West

58

59

60

Design Solution

Fig: 110. Final Model

61

Fig: 111. Process Model One

Fig: 112. Process Model Two

Fig: 113. Process Model Three

In the beginning, the project posed to be quite a challenge. With nothing but the Old City Hall building to relate to on the site. So I began looking at a few strategies to working with the site and developed three models of how I was arranging programs and spaces within the site. In all three of these models I was using the buildings to sculpt the public space and circulation through the site. These proved to be quite opposite in design approach than what my program called for. The protective and defensive nature of the forms was counterproductive to the where the project should have been going.

Taking a step back, I began to look at the circulation paths that someone could possibly use to maneuver though the site and using that to create the public space. Once the public space is designed the build-ing forms would reveal themselves. Using the site edges, I began to look at where people would move through the site and how I could manipulate that path. Having two city blocks, I wanted to design something to con-nect them fluently, as well as, create something that would draw attention to it and become a place people meet at. “Hey come meet me for lunch at that cool elevated park!” An iconic piece of architecture that functionally connected the buildings on the site through circulation on multiple levels.In the next stage of the design process, took a sketch of the site move-ment and circulation and built an elevation study model that began to help me get out my ideas of an inhabitable bridge structure that connected all areas of the site. It allowed me to figure out a lot of the ground interaction of the site, as well as, define some of the edges of the public space and in turn expose the footprints of the surrounding structures that will house a lot of the program.

62

Fig: 114. Process Model One Plan View

Fig: 117. Process Model One In Context

Fig: 115. Process Model Two Plan View

Fig: 118. Process Model Two In Context

Fig: 116. Process Model Three Plan View

Fig: 119. Process Model Three In Context

63

Fig: 120. Process Sketch / Programming

Fig: 121. Process Sketch, Circulation Paths Creating Regulating Lines

64

Fig: 123. Process Model Four

Fig: 122. Process Model Four Plan View

65

Fig: 124. Process Model Five In Context66

Fig: 125. Process Model Five Plan View67

The newly relocated City Council Chamber on the west side of the Old City Hall building pro-vides over three times the area of its predecessor. The building is set into the ground giving a low profile appearance but quite larger once inside. The exterior walls are almost all entirely glass curtain walls giving it as much visibility as possible and connected to the City Council Chamber is the indi-vidual council members offices. Also located on the west side of the site is the outdoor amphitheater which faces the Old City Hall building and provides a public space for music event, or larger political rallies. On the eastern part of the site, most of the programmed spaces occur on the first three floors of the buildings to make them more accessible to the public. On the northern edge of the site is a small park / boardwalk and water features to provide another variation of public space.

68

Fig: 126. Final Site Plan

69

Fig: 127. Section Study A 1” = 10’- 0” Fig: 128. Section Study B 1” = 10’- 0”

70

Fig: 129. Section Study C 1” = 10’- 0” Fig: 130. Section Study D 1” = 10’- 0”

71

Fig: 131. Section Study E 1” = 10’- 0”

72

Fig: 132. Section Study F / G 1” = 20’- 0”

73

Ground Floor Plan

0’

5’

15’

35’ 105’

55’

1

2

3

4

5 6

7

8

9

Fig: 133. Ground Floor Plan 1” = 20’-0”

1 City Council Meeting Hall2 City Council Chambers3 Outdoor Amphitheater4 Existing Old City Hall Building5 Technology Help Center6 Community Medical Clinic7 Cafe / Art Gallery8 Reflecting Pools9 Florida Ave. Park and Boardwalk

74

Fig: 134. Second Floor Plan 1” = 20’-0”

1 City Council Green Roof2 Community Rooftop Garden3 Public Walking Path4 Existing Old City Hall Building5 Open Air Pavilion6 Training For The Disadvantaged7 Community Discussion Groups8 Art Exhibit

Second Floor Plan0’

5’15’

35’ 105’55’

1

2

33

4

5

6 7

8

75

Fig: 135. Third Floor Plan 1” = 20’-0”

1 Public Walking Path2 Existing Old City Hall Building3 Coffee Shop / Cafe4 Green Space5 Information / Work Stations6 Municipal City Offices

Third Floor Plan0’

5’15’

35’ 105’55’

11

1

2

3

4

4

4

5

6

76

Fig: 136. Final Model Plan View

77

Fig: 137. Final Model West Elevation

Fig: 139. Final Model East Elevation

78

Fig: 138. Final Model South Elevation

Fig: 140. Final Model North Elevation

79

Fig: 141. Final Model Aerial Perspective80

Fig: 142. Final Model Amphitheater Perspective

Fig: 143. Final Model Southeast Entrance / Art Exhibit Entrance 81

Fig: 144. Final Model Northeast Entrance / Florida Ave. Park 82

Fig: 145. Final Model Southwest Entrance / Amphitheater / City Council

Fig: 146. Final Model Perspective View of Florida Ave. Park 83

84

Although a masters project has an end result, it is by no means entirely compete, and this project in particular can have many iterations on this program that it is hard to say where one could be exponentially better than another. From where I was at the midterm of this project, I think I made a tremendous leap into a much more successful design than the route I was beginning to take. It is very hard to be critical of one’s own work, especially after spending an enormous amount of time, energy, effort, and pouring your heart and soul into the project, but once you get a chance to breathe a little and step back for a minute and really look what you accomplished, I think it becomes easier.

In this instance I think that had there been more time, I could have produced another model or two and really get to develop my design. Getting lost in the project seemed to be quite an issue with me figuring out what I was trying to tackle here. It seems like only once you get to a finishing point, can you really step back and see the whole picture. Some points brought up in my final presentation of the project were mostly about how independent the circulatory bridge felt, where as it really should have been completely dependent on the buildings around it for support and sculpting its form and path. Smaller things like how it ended next to the City Council Chamber rather than into it, where it would physically deliver the people to the City Council and become something like a balcony. I found it rather amusing when that particularly was brought up in the jury because it was one of my forethoughts but for whatever reason wasn’t something that made it into the design at this stage. Many of the critiques that I received during the presentation I one hundred percent agreed with and I honestly feel that if I was able to produce a few more iterations of the project, I could have resolved.

Overall, I think the project was quite successful in the way I was able to design the public space. Designing the public life that happens in the space is one of the more challenging things in architecture. It’s providing an opportunity for activity to occur in a place that people have the ability to make a difference in the world around them.

Personal Critique of the Design Solution

85

List of Figures

Cover: Tampa City Hall circa 1927 | http://www.tampachanging.com/gallery/city-hall-ii/Fig: 1. MP 2 Final ProcessFig: 2. Spis Castle, Slovakia | http://www.worldfortravel.com/2013/04/14/the-spis-castle-slovakia/Fig: 3. Caerlaverock Castle, Scotland | http://johnmckenna.deviantart.com/art/Caerlaverock-Castle-Scotland-197898024Fig: 4. Spis Castle, Slovakia | http://citydestinations.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Slovakia-Spis-Castle-Levoca-Presov-Slovakia.jpgFig: 5. Eilean Donan Castle, Scotland | http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/67/Eilean_Donan_Castle,_Scotland_-_Jan_2011.jpgFig: 6. Eilean Donan Castle, Scotland | http://www.travlang.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/eilean-donan-castle_09.jpgFig: 7. Edinburgh Castle, Scotland | http://www.webbaviation.co.uk/scotland/EdinburghCastle.jpgFig: 8. Dunluce Castle, United Kingdom | http://007nab.deviantart.com/art/Dunluce-Castle-145688004Fig: 9. Caernarvon Castle, United Kingdom | http://www.webbaviation.co.uk/n-wales/caernarfon-castle.jpgFig: 10. Beaumaris Castle, Wales | http://education.gtj.org.uk/storage/Components/5/597_2.JPGFig: 11. Castillo de San Marco Elevation | St. Augustine, FLFig: 12. Castillo de San Marco Moat | St. Augustine, FLFig: 13. Castillo de San Marco Lift Detail | St. Augustine, FLFig: 14. Castillo de San Marco Moat | St. Augustine, FLFig: 15. Castillo de San Marcos Watch Tower | St. Augustine, FLFig: 16. Castillo de San Marcos Watch Tower | St. Augustine, FLFig: 17. Castillo de San Marcos Inner Wall | St. Augustine, FLFig: 18. Castillo de San Marcos Garrita | St. Augustine, FLFig: 19. Castillo de San Marcos Garrita | St. Augustine, FLFig: 20. Castillo de San Marcos Moat and Exterior Wall | St. Augustine, FLFig: 21. Fort Pickens Arch Detail | Pensacola, FLFig: 22. Fort Pickens Exterior Wall Detail | Pensacola, FL Fig: 23. Fort Pickens Interior Wall Perspective | Pensacola, FLFig: 24. Fort Pickens Inner Courtyard | Pensacola, FLFig: 25. Fort Pickens Wall Detail | Pensacola, FLFig: 26. Fort Pickens Cannon Window | Pensacola, FLFig: 27. Fort Pickens Gun Pivot Detail | Pensacola, FLFig: 28. Defensive Spatial ConstructFig: 29. Defensive Spatial ConstructFig: 30. Defensive Spatial ConstructFig: 31. Defensive Spatial ConstructFig: 32. Defensive Spatial ConstructFig: 33. Layering GraphicFig: 34. Layering DrawdleFig: 35. View GraphicFig: 36. View DrawdleFig: 37. Transparency + Access GraphicFig: 38. Transparency + Access Drawdle

86

Fig: 39. Participation GraphicFig: 40. Participation DrawdleFig: 41. Connectivity GraphicFig: 42. Connectivity DrawdleFig: 43. Enclosure GraphicFig: 44. Enclosure DrawdleFig: 45. Centrality GraphicFig: 46. Centrality DrawdleFig: 47. London City Hall Interior | http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:London_City_Hall_Helical_staircase_-_Oct_2008.jpgFig: 48. Reichstag Interior | http://fineartamerica.com/featured/looking-down-the-reichstag-berlin-kevin-callahan.htmlFig: 49. Seattle Public Library Interior | http://lmnarchitects.com/work/seattle_public_libraryFig: 50. London City Hall Section |Fig: 51. London City Hall Elevation Photograph |Fig: 52. London City Hall Sketched |Fig: 53. London City Hall Aerial |Fig: 54. London City Hall Interior |Fig: 55. Reichstag Parliment Chamber Interior |Fig: 56. Reichstag Dome |Fig: 57. Reichstag Dome Interior |Fig: 58. Reichstag Section Drawing |Fig: 59. Reichstag Sketches |Fig: 60. Seattle Public Library Programatic Section |Fig: 61. Seattle Public Library Exterior |Fig: 62. Seattle Public Library Interior Workspace |Fig: 63. Seattle Public Library Program Charts |Fig: 64. Seattle Public Library Socail Programs |Fig: 65. Seattle Public Library Section Drawing |Fig: 66. Seville 24/7 Center Proposal Perspective Rendering | http://www.archdaily.com/302077Fig: 67. Amstel River Pedestrian Bridge Aerial Rendering | http://www.evolo.us/architecture/pedestrian-bridge-intensifies-tourist-local-interactions-in-amsterdam/Fig: 68. Waitakere Civic Center City Council Chambers | http://www.architectus.com.au/projects/waitakere-civic-centreFig: 69. Seville 24/7 Center Proposal Activity Isometric | http://www.archdaily.com/302077Fig: 70. Seville 24/7 Center Proposal Aerial Rendering | http://www.archdaily.com/302077Fig: 71. Seville 24/7 Center Proposal Ground Level Plan | http://www.archdaily.com/302077Fig: 72. Seville 24/7 Center Proposal Perspective Rendering | http://www.archdaily.com/302077Fig: 73. Seville 24/7 Center Proposal Third Level Plan | http://www.archdaily.com/302077Fig: 74. Seville 24/7 Center Proposal Master Plan | http://www.archdaily.com/302077Fig: 75. Amstel River Pedestrian Bridge Aerial Rendering | http://www.evolo.us/architecture/pedestrian-bridge-intensifies-tourist-local-interactions-in-amsterdam/Fig: 76. Amstel River Pedestrian Bridge Plan View Rendering | http://www.evolo.us/architecture/pedestrian-bridge-intensifies-tourist-local-interactions-in-amsterdam/Fig: 77. Amstel River Pedestrian Bridge Rendering | http://www.evolo.us/architecture/pedestrian-bridge-intensifies-tourist-local-interactions-in-amsterdam/

87

Fig: 78. Amstel River Pedestrian Bridge Perspective Rendering | http://www.evolo.us/architecture/pedestrian-bridge-intensifies-tourist-local-interactions-in-amsterdam/Fig: 79. Amstel River Pedestrian Bridge Day Rendering | http://www.evolo.us/architecture/pedestrian-bridge-intensifies-tourist-local-interactions-in-amsterdam/Fig: 80. Amstel River Pedestrian Bridge Night Rendering | http://www.evolo.us/architecture/pedestrian-bridge-intensifies-tourist-local-interactions-in-amsterdam/Fig: 81. Waitakere Civic Center Perspective | http://www.architectus.com.au/projects/waitakere-civic-centreFig: 82. Waitakere Civic Center Grand Staircase | http://www.architectus.com.au/projects/waitakere-civic-centreFig: 83. Waitakere Civic Center Entry / City Council Chambers Perspective | http://www.architectus.com.au/projects/waitakere-civic-centreFig: 84. Waitakere Civic Center City Council Chambers | http://www.architectus.com.au/projects/waitakere-civic-centreFig: 85. Waitakere Civic Center Fifth Floor Plan | http://www.architectus.com.au/projects/waitakere-civic-centreFig: 86. Waitakere Civic Center Ground Floor Plan | http://www.architectus.com.au/projects/waitakere-civic-centreFig: 87. Waitakere Civic Center Longitudinal Section | http://www.architectus.com.au/projects/waitakere-civic-centreFig: 88. Waitakere Civic Center Cross Section | http://www.architectus.com.au/projects/waitakere-civic-centreFig: 89. Old City Hall Building | Downtown Tampa, FLFig: 90. Tampa Districts / Neighborhoods Diagram | Tampa, FLFig: 91. “Center City” / Downtown Tampa Map | Downtown Tampa, FLFig: 92. Tampa City Hall Existing Site Plan | Courtesy of the City of Tampa Office of Planning and Developement Fig: 93. Tampa City Hall Existing Section / Elevation / Program Diagram | Courtesy of the City of Tampa Office of Planning and DevelopementFig: 94. Tampa City Hall Existing First Floor Plan | Courtesy of the City of Tampa Office of Planning and Developement Fig: 95. Tampa City Hall Existing Second Floor Plan | Courtesy of the City of Tampa Office of Planning and Developement Fig: 96. Tampa City Hall Existing Third Floor Plan | Courtesy of the City of Tampa Office of Planning and Developement Fig: 97. Tampa City Hall Existing Fourth Floor Plan | Courtesy of the City of Tampa Office of Planning and DevelopementFig: 98. Tampa City Hall Existing Fifth / Sixth Floor Plan | Courtesy of the City of Tampa Office of Planning and DevelopementFig: 99. Tampa City Hall Existing Seventh / Eighth Floor Plan | Courtesy of the City of Tampa Office of Planning and DevelopementFig: 100. Tampa Municipal Office Building Existing First Floor Plan | Courtesy of the City of Tampa Office of Planning and DevelopementFig: 101. Tampa Municipal Office Building Existing Typical Floor Plan | Courtesy of the City of Tampa Office of Planning and DevelopementFig: 102. Perspective of Kennedy Blvd. Looking East | Downtown Tampa, FLFig: 103. Perspective of Tampa City Hall and Tampa Municipal Office Building | Downtown Tampa, FLFig: 104. Perspective of Kennedy Blvd. Looking West | Downtown Tampa, FLFig: 105. Night Perspective of Tampa City Hall and Tampa Municipal Ofice Building | http://floridaphotomatt.com/wp-content/photos/2012/08/Old-City-Hall.jpgFig: 106. Tampa City Hall Bell Tower | Downtown Tampa, FLFig: 107. Tampa City Hall, View From Florida Ave. Looking West | Downtown Tampa, FLFig: 108. Tampa City Hall Plaza | Downtown Tampa, FLFig: 109. Tampa City Hall, View From Adjacent Parking Lot | Downtown Tampa, FLFig: 110. Final ModelFig: 111. Process Model OneFig: 112. Process Model TwoFig: 113. Process Model ThreeFig: 114. Process Model One Plan ViewFig: 115. Process Model Two Plan ViewFig: 116. Process Model Three Plan View

88

Fig: 117. Process Model One Plan In ContextFig: 118. Process Model Two Plan In ContextFig: 119. Process Model Three Plan In ContextFig: 120. Process Sketch / ProgrammingFig: 121. Process Sketch, Circulation Paths Creating Regulating LinesFig: 122. Process Model Four Plan ViewFig: 123. Process Model FourFig: 124. Process Model Five In ContextFig: 125. Process Model Five Plan ViewFig: 126. Final Site Plan Fig: 127. Section Study A 1” = 10’ - 0”Fig: 128. Section Study B 1” = 10’ - 0”Fig: 129. Section Study C 1” = 10’ - 0”Fig: 130. Section Study D 1” = 10’ - 0”Fig: 131. Section Study E 1” = 10’ - 0”Fig: 132. Section Study F / G 1” = 20’ - 0”Fig: 133. Ground Floor Plan 1” = 20’ - 0” Fig: 134. Second Floor Plan 1” = 20’ - 0”Fig: 135. Third Floor Plan 1” = 20’ - 0”Fig: 136. Final Model Plan ViewFig: 137. Final Model West ElevationFig: 138. Final Model South ElevationFig: 139. Final Model East ElevationFig: 140. Final Model North ElevationFig: 141. Final Model Aerial PerspectiveFig: 142. Final Model Amphitheater PerspectiveFig: 143. Final Model Southeast Entrance / Art Exhibit EntranceFig: 144. Final Model Northeast Entrance / Florida Ave. ParkFig: 145. Final Model Southwest Entrance / Amphitheater / City Council Fig: 146. Final Model Perspective View of Florida Ave. Park

89

Abbott, James R. “Louis Sullivan, Architectural Modernism, And The Creation Of Democratic Space.” The American Soci-ologist 1 (2000): 62-85. JSTOR Arts & Sciences IX. Web. 1 September 2012.

Foster, Norman. Foster : Catalogue 2001 / [Editing, David Jenkins ... Et Al.]. n.p.: Munich ; New York : Prestel, c2001., 2001. University of South Florida Libraries Catalog. Web. 10 October 2012.

Furuto , Alison. “Seville 24/7 Center Proposal / Ayrat Khusnutdinov & Zhang Liheng” 12 Dec 2012.ArchDaily. Accessed 26 Apr 2013. <http://www.archdaily.com/302077>

Gans, Herbert J. “How Can Architecture Be Democratic?.” Dissent (00123846) 59.1 (2012): 119. Academic Search Pre-mier. Web. 16 Oct. 2012.

Kubo, M. and Prat, R. “Seattle Public Library, OMA/LMN.” Actar, 2005.

Loingsigh, Máire Ní. “An Assessment Of Castles And Landownership In Late Medieval North Donegal.” Ulster Journal Of Archaeology (1994): 145-158. JSTOR Ireland. Web. 12 September 2012.

Maclvor, Iain. “Edinburgh Castle.” B T Batsford Ltd (December 1993) , pp.136–138. Accessed 25 September 2013.

OCKMAN, JOAN. “What Is Democratic Architecture?: The Public Life Of Buildings.” Dissent (00123846) 58.4 (2011): 65-72. Academic Search Premier. Web. 16 Oct. 2012.

O’Keeffe, Tadhg. “Rathnageeragh And Ballyloo: A Study Of Stone Castles Of Probable 14Th To Early 15Th Century Date In County Carlow.” The Journal Of The Royal Society Of Antiquaries Of Ireland (1987): 28-49. JSTOR Ireland. Web. 30 August 2012.

Setton, Kenneth M. The Papacy And The Levant, 1204-1571 [Electronic Resource] / Kenneth M. Setton. n.p.: Philadelphia : American Philosophical Society, 1976-1984., 1976.University of South Florida Libraries Catalog. P.315.Web. 12 September 2012.

Bibliography

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

90

Smail, R. C. “Crusaders’ Castles Of The Twelfth Century.” Cambridge Historical Journal 2 (1951): 133-149. JSTOR Arts & Sciences II. Web. 12 September 2012

Turner, Charles. “Some Scotch Castles And Their Stories.” The Monthly Illustrator 14 (1895): 277-282. JSTOR Arts & Sci-ences VIII. Web. 12 September 2012

“Waitakere Civic Centre / Architectus, Athfield Architects” 11 Apr 2011. ArchDaily. Accessed 26 Feb 2013. http://www.archdaily.com/124974

Westropp, Thomas Johnson. “The Principal Ancient Castles Of The County Limerick.” The Journal Of The Royal Society Of Antiquaries Of Ireland 1 (1907): 24-40. JSTOR Ireland. Web. 28 August 2012.

11

12

13

14

91