Czech Tech Studio Booklet

Jihlava Town Square Portfolio

By Ashley Brunton, Michela Castellari, Angel Llanes

1

2

Table of Contents

Team 7-15 Inventory...........................................................

Analysis...........................................................16-59

Ashley’s Proposal 62 Vision...................................................................

63 Goals...................................................................

64-65 Alternatives.....................................................

66-69

Proposal Development...................................

Michela’s Proposal 72 Vision...................................................................

73 Goals...................................................................

74-75 Alternatives.....................................................

76-81

Proposal Development...................................

Angel’s Proposal

84 Vision...................................................................

85-89 Four Critical Elements....................................

90-91 Additional Spacial Elements...........................

92-95 Proposal Development...................................

3

4

ASHLEY BRUNTON

ASHLEY IS A 5TH YEAR GRADUATE STUDENT AT KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY STUDYING ARCHITECTURE. PRAGUE. SHE IS FROM MANKATO, MINNESOTA. SHE CHOSE PRAGUE BECAUSE SHE WAS INTERESTED IN BAROQUE ARCHITECTURE AND CZECH CULTURE. WITH THIS, SHE WANTED TO LEARN ABOUT CZECH ARCHITECTURE IN RELATION TO DESIGN.

MICHELA CASTELLARI

MICHELA. IS FROM IMOLA, A SMALL CITY IN THE NORTH-EST OF ITALY. SHE IS ATTENDING THE FOURTH YEAR OF ARCHITECTURE. SHE DECIDED TO SPEND A SEMESTER AT THE FACULTY OF ARCHITECTURE IN PRAGUE BECAUSE SHE THINKS IT IS A VALUABLE EXPERIENCE BOTH IN TERMS OF TRAINING AND PERSONAL.

ANGEL LLANES

GRADUATE STUDENT AT KANSAS STATE UNIVERSITY STUDYING ARCHITECTURE. PRAGUE HAS ALWAYS BEEN A FASCINATING PLACE TO ME. THE CZECH REPUBLIC IS A UNIQUE PLACE SINCE ITS HISTORY HAS SURVIVED MANY CONFLICTS. THE RICH HISTORY AND ARCHITECTURE MAKES PRAGUE EXCELLENT FOR MY STUDIES.

5

6

Inventory

7

8

9

10

Site Visit / Observation

11

PRIOR BUILDING AND THE SQUARE

12

13

PEOPLE INTERACTING WITH THE SQUARE

14

15

16

JIHLAVA TOWN SQUARE ANALYSIS

BY ASHLEY BRUNTON, MICHELA CASTELLARI, ANGEL LLANES, MERTA MATYÁŠ, AND ANNA ZACHARIASOVA

17

WHY THE TOWN SQUARE? SIZE

18

VEGETATION AND SEATING

SEATING IS GENERALLY PLACED NEAR VEGETATION TO PROVIDE SHADE FOR THE HOT SUMMER MONTHS. VEGETATION, MUCH LIKE SEATING, IS PLACED ON EDGES.

19

OLD TOWN SQUARE Prague, Czech Republic 85 m x 115 m

20

THE SIZE OF THE TOWN SQUARE IS CONSIDERABLE WHEN COMPARED TO OTHER NOTABLE SQUARES. THIS IS BENEFICIAL TO THE TOWN BECAUSE IT HOST A RANGE OF FUNCTIONS. HOWEVER, IT IS ALSO UNFAVORABLE FOR THE SQUARE BECAUSE OF THE LIMITED AMOUNT OF DAILY USERS.

1

INDIVIDUAL SPACIAL DIVISION

1

3 2 1 4

21

1

1

3

4 2

1 2

4

3

1

22

INDIVIDUAL SPACIAL DIVISION

1

INDIVIDUAL SPACIAL DIVISION

1

1

3 2

4

23

1

1

3

4 2

1 2

4

3

Jihlava Town Square

Imola Town Square Imola, Italy Population: 69,600 40 m x 80 m

24

Jihlava, Czech Republic Population: 50,521 (as of 2015) 1

100 m x 325 m

INDIVIDUAL SPACIAL DIVISION

1

INDIVIDUAL SPACIAL DIVISION

1

3

4 2

1 2

4

3

Jihlava Town Square

Castle Square with Baroque Column Teplice, Czech Republic Population: 50,079 40 m x 80 m

1

Jihlava, Czech Republic Population: 50,521 100 m x 325 m

25

JIHLAVA SQUARE SPACIAL DIVISION CURRENT SQUARE DIVISION 1

TWO SEPERATED SQUARES 1

INDIVIDUAL SPACIAL DIVISION

SINGLE LARGE SQUARE 1

INDIVIDUAL SPACIAL DIVISION

INDIVIDUAL SPACIAL DIVISION

1

1

3

1

2

2

4

SECONDARY SPACE

PEOPLE PUSHED TO PERIMETER

CONNECTION BETWEEN SPACE

1

1

INDIVIDUAL SPACIAL DIVISION

1

MAIN SQUARE

MAIN SQUARE

1

1

3 1

2

4

26

MAINTAINS SPACIAL REALTIONSHIPS WHILE VISUALLY SCALING OVERALL SQUARE TO COMFORTABLE AMBIANCE FOR USERS

PARKING LOT

SINGULAR MAIN SQUARE IDENTIFIED WHILE SEPERATE SQUARE BECOMES SURROGATE SPACE FOR SUPPORT FUNCTIONS

OVERWHELMING AMOUNT OF OPEN SPACE DISCONNECTS INDIVIDUALS FROM THE SQUARE COMPLETELY PUSHING USERS TO THE PERIMETER

WHY THE TOWN SQUARE? SIZE LACK OF WELL DEFINED PEDESTRIAN ROUTES

27

OPEN SQUARE

STRUCTURE

STREET

SIDEWALK

GARDEN

SIDEWALK WALL

THE CENTRAL SQUARE FUNCTIONS AS A NODE FOR THE CITY. THE ELEVATION CHANGE AND FORTIFICATION WALL SURROUNDING IT CREATES THIS EMPHASIS. ALL PEDESTRIAN AND TRAFFIC FLOWS HEAVILY RELATE TO THE CENTRAL NODE.

ROAD

CITY ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE

THE SIDEWALKS ARE THE ONLY DESIGNATED WALKING PATHS. ALL OF THOSE PATHS ARE ALONG THE EDGE. THIS IS INCONSISTENT WITH PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC.

FORTIFICATION WALL PRIVATE TRAFFIC FLOW PUBLIC TRANSIT FLOW

28

PEDESTRIAN FLOW

TION WALL

1 SIDEWALK WALL

ROAD

2

2

STRUCTURE

TRAFFIC FLOWS FORTIFICATION WALL

3

RIVER

GREEN SPACE

STREET WALL SIDEWALK

STRUCTURE

SIDEWALK

STREET

OPEN SQUARE

SIDEWALK OPEN SQUARESTREET

STREET

SIDEWALK

STRUCTURE GARDEN

GARDEN

SIDEWALK WALL

ROAD

STRUCTURE

STREET w/ SIDEWALK

STRUCTURE

STREET w/ SIDEWALK

STRUCTURE

SIDEWALK

STREET

OPEN SQUARE

STREET

OPEN SQUARE

STREET

SIDEWALK

STRUCTURE

GARDEN

SIDEWALK WALL

ROAD

1 3

PRIVATE TRAFFIC FLOW

FORTIFICATION WALL

PEDESTRIAN FLOW

PUBLIC TRANSIT FLOW

29

AXIAL MOVEMENT AND INTERSECTING NODES WITHIN THE SQUARE NODE AXIAL MOVEMENT

FOCUL NODES IN THE CENTER OF THE SQUARE INDICATE WHERE A MAJORITY OF PATHS CROSS. DESIGN RELATIONSHIPS SHOULD STRONGLY CORRELATE TO THESE POINTS TO REACH THE MAJORITY OF USERS IN THE SQUARE.

30

WHY THE TOWN SQUARE? SIZE LACK OF WELL DEFINED PEDESTRIAN ROUTES DOESN’T HOLD PEOPLES ATTENTION

31

TRANSIT FLOW AND PEOPLE GATHERING

GROUPS OF PEOPLE MAIN TRANSIT LINE

MAIN TRANSIT LINE RETAINS SMALL GROUPS OF PEOPLE. MAIN SQUARE WITHOUT STRUCTURE BREAKING UP SPACE, RESULTS IN FEW DIFFERENCES IN GROUPS GATHERING IN THE OPEN. FEW PEOPLE LINGER IN THE SQUARE UNLESS THEY ARE WAITING FOR TRANSIT OR GETTING SOMETHING QUICK TO EAT. THIS ALSO SHOWS HOW IRRELEVANT PRIOR IS AS A GATHERING POINT.

32

WITH PRIOR

WITHOUT PRIOR

CLUSTERS OF PEOPLE AND FEELING MAP (HEALTHY CITY DATA) MAP (HEALTHY CITY) [DATA COLLECTED BY THE CITY OF JIHLAVA] POSITIVE / BEAUTIFUL ENVIRONMENT, GREENERY, EQUIPMENT POSITIVE / WHERE I SPEND FREE TIME, I GO OUT TO HAVE FUN, I FEEL GOOD NEGATIVE / NEGLECTED ENVIRONMENT NEGATIVE / WHERE I FEEL BAD, WHERE I FEEL DANGER 3+ PEOPLE LINGERING TRANSIT LINE

THE OVERLAY OF THE FEELING MAP INDICATES HOW POOR THE SQUARE’S AMBIANCE REFLECTS ON THE USERS OF THE SQUARE. THE RELATIONSHIP OF CLUSTERS OF PEOPLE AND THE FEELINGS EVOKED FROM THE SPACES ARE SURPRISINGLY DIFFERENT. IN ONLY ONE CASE HERE THAT THE REFLECTION OF THE SPACE CORRELATES WITH THE CLUSTER OF PEOPLE. THE SQUARE APPEARS TO LEND ITSELF AS A NEED RATHER THAN A CASUAL USE FOR THE PEOPLE

33

CLUSTERS OF PEOPLE AND FEELING MAP (YOUTH FORUM) MAP (YOUTH FORUM) [DATA COLLECTED BY THE CITY OF JIHLAVA] POSITIVE / BEAUTIFUL ENVIRONMENT, GREENERY, EQUIPMENT POSITIVE / WHERE I SPEND FREE TIME, I GO OUT TO HAVE FUN, I FEEL GOOD NEGATIVE / NEGLECTED ENVIRONMENT NEGATIVE / WHERE I FEEL BAD, WHERE I FEEL DANGER

3+ PEOPLE LINGERING TRANSIT LINE

SIMILAR TO THE FIRST MAP, THE CORRELATION BETWEEN FEELINGS IN SPACE AND CLUSTERS OF PEOPLE DIFFERS SURPRISINGLY. THE SQUARE APPEARS TO LEND ITSELF AS A NEED RATHER THAN A CASUAL USE FOR THE PEOPLE

34

CLUSTERS OF PEOPLE AND FEELING MAP (YOUTH FORUM) MAP (JIHLAVA FORUM) [DATA COLLECTED BY THE CITY OF JIHLAVA] POSITIVE / BEAUTIFUL ENVIRONMENT (ARCHITECTURE, GREENERY, EQUIPMENT) POSITIVE / QUIET, SAFETY POSITIVE / SOCIAL LIFE NEGATIVE / NEGLECTED ENVIRONMENT NEGATIVE / UNREST, DANGER NEGATIVE / POOR TRAFFIC SITUATION 3+ PEOPLE LINGERING TRANSIT LINE

SIMILAR TO THE FIRST TWO MAPS, THE CORRELATION BETWEEN FEELINGS IN SPACE AND CLUSTERS OF PEOPLE STILL DIFFERS. HOWEFER, IN THIS MAP THERE ARE MORE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN CLUSTERS OF PEOPLE AND POSITIVE FEELINGS SUCH AS NEAR THE MONUMENT AT THE TOP OF THE SQUARE. THE SQUARE STILL APPEARS TO LEND ITSELF AS A NEED RATHER THAN A CASUAL USE FOR THE PEOPLE

35

WHY THE TOWN SQUARE? SIZE LACK OF WELL DEFINED PEDESTRIAN ROUTES DOESN’T HOLD PEOPLES ATTENTION PAVEMENTS AREN’T COMFORTABLE TO WALK ON

36

37

38

WHY THE TOWN SQUARE? SIZE LACK OF WELL DEFINED PEDESTRIAN ROUTES DOESN’T HOLD PEOPLES ATTENTION PAVEMENTS AREN’T COMFORTABLE TO WALK ON GRADE CHANGE

39

40

ELEVATION CHANGE ACROSS THE SQUARE

SLOPES RANGE ANYWHERE FROM 1% TO 10%. ANY SLOPE ABOVE AN 8% WOULD BE DIFFICULT FOR THE DISABLED TO USE.

41

WHY THE TOWN SQUARE? SIZE LACK OF WELL DEFINED PEDESTRIAN ROUTES DOESN’T HOLD PEOPLES ATTENTION PAVEMENTS AREN’T COMFORTABLE TO WALK ON DRASTIC GRADE CHANGE MINIMAL REFUGE FROM SUN AND SEATING

42

SHADOWS MORNING SHADOWS

HOUR - 08:00

SHADOWS EVENING

HOUR - 17:00

SHADOWS NOON

HOUR - 11:00

SHADOWS AFTERNOON

HOUR - 14:00

SHADOWS NIGHT

HOUR - 20:00

ALL DAY SHADOWS OCCUR AROUND THE SOUTHERN AREA OF THE SQUARE AND THE MAJORITY OF THE PERIMETER DUE TO THE HEAVY SOUTHERN SUN EXPOSURE THROUGHOUT THE YEAR.

43

NIGHT LIGHTING

44

FACADES / PEOPLE / SHADOWS / TRANSIT FACADE ENTRY AND USE / PEOPLE / SHADOWS/ TRANSIT

PEOPLE TEND TO GROUP ALONG THE TRANSIT LINES, HOWEVER THEY ALSO TEND TO GATHER NEAR SIGNIFICANT ENTRYWAYS TO STRUCTURES. THEY ALSO TEND TO BE STRUCTURES AT THE TOP OF THE SQUARE.

45

46

WHY THE TOWN SQUARE? SIZE LACK OF WELL DEFINED PEDESTRIAN ROUTES DOESN’T HOLD PEOPLES ATTENTION PAVEMENTS AREN’T COMFORTABLE TO WALK ON DRASTIC GRADE CHANGE MINIMAL REFUGE FROM SUN AND SEATING THE PRIOR BUILDING

47

48

Street that connects main square with Jihlava culture house.

Provides wide view of the northern part of square and allows us to see the landscape around Jihlava

Biggest shopping street around the square.Mostly used by pedistrians and connects Gustav Mahler Park with the square. It has st. Ignac church at the terminus of the axis. .

49

50

Street that connects square and medieval town gate. It is oriented right into the town hall. This axis forms a theoreticall border between upper and middle part of the square

Street just for pedistrians. The only street that allows us to see Prior and church together. This view demonstrates how big visual barrier the supply ramps are.

Street that is mostly used by car drivers. Allows us to see the southern part of the square, especially parking lot and big public transport road.

51

Street that connects square and the City park. Provides wide view up to the square and allows us to see the whole Prior. This street brings the public transport to the square, but is frequently used by pedestrians. The size of sidewalks does not reflect the amount of people who walk there.

MOST IMPORTANT VIEW

52

Street that connects the square with the zoo. This view demonstrates how big role parking lots play in the lower part of the square.

53

Street that connects the square and st. Vojtěch church. Provides the best view to the lower part of the square. Allows us to see the variety of facades and we have good overview of the public space around the fontain.

54

View from this street show the non-interacting facade and parter of the Prior.

55

56

Street that brings the public transport to the square. Provides a wide view to the upper part of the square and allows us to see the most frequently used public space on the whole square. From this point the terrain elevation that goes through the square is visible very clearly.

57

58

CONCLUSION CURRENTLY PRIOR BUILDING IS FAILING TO ESTABLISH A DIALOGUE WITH THE SQUARE AND FACADES ALONG THE PERIMETER OF THE SQUARE. THIS IS EVIDENT BASED ON THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE USERS IN THE SQUARE. MOST CLUSTERS OF PEOPLE GATHER ALONG THE TRANSIT LINE OR AROUND THE PERIMETER NEAR SHOPS AND CAFES. FURTHERMORE, THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE FACADES OF PRIOR REJECT PUBLIC INTERACTION. THE SIZE AND LOCATION OF PRIOR IS BENEFICIAL TO SQUARE BY BREAKING DOWN THE SCALE OF THE SPACE WITHIN THE SQUARE. A REORGANIZATION OF PRIOR OR NEW STRUCTURE OF A SIMILAR SCALE IS NECESSARY TO RE-ENGAGE THE SQUARE AND ITS USERS. IN CONJUNCTION WITH PRIOR, A REORGANIZATION OF THE SQUARE WOULD ALSO FACILITATE A GREATER NUMBER OF USERS THROUGH THE USE OF SURFACE MATERIALS, VEGETATION, AND SEATING AREAS. 59

60

Ashley’s Proposal

61

Vision

62

Goals To increase usage by providing: Shading Seating

Purpose

A Family Friendly Environment

Uses at Night

Lighting for Safety

Places to Relax

Emphasized Entry to Prior

63

Alternatives 1

64

The Underground Provides Purpose New Entry to Underground Visitors Center Illuminated Elevator to Emphasize Connection Use Slope for Vehicular Access to Basement Use Slope to sit on for movies in the square Divides square into upper and lower: Loud vs. Quiet Emphasizes pedestrian route through square Problems: Not Flexible Will people sit on slope?

Exposing Underground Destroys its Magic

2 Stream

Connect fountains Water = Excitement Different Seating Axis from Prior Entry Bridge Problems: Axis to nothing Organic Shapes

4 Modern Fountain / Pavilion Restaurant Seating Emphasize Entry Modern Fountain Asymmetrical

Problems: Axis to nothing Grade Changes

3 Art Park

Restaurant Seating Flexible Space Axis from Prior Concession Node Problems: Axis to nothing Grade Changes Traditional Fountain Symmetrical

65

Proposal Development

Views from Streets to Prior Entry

Lights to Increase Security

66

Floor Plan

Connections of Spaces

Ideas This concept stemmed from the idea of creating a modern fountain in front of the prior to emphasize the entry and bring people into Prior. The fountain is an extension of the windows above the entry. The fountain is interactive for children to play in. A pavilion was added to house public bathrooms, storage, and concessions. This pavilion also acts as a beer garden.

The overall space is used to get away from sun and relax.

Aerial View

67

View to Pavilion From Prior Entry

68

View to Beer Garden from Fountain

View to Prior Entry from Side Street

Cross Section Through Beer Garden

Longitudinal Section Through Pavilion

Cross Section Through Pavilion to Prior Entry

69

70

Michela’s Proposal

71

Vision

Vision

72

Goals

Goals

73

Alternatives

Alternatives

74

Proposal Development

75

Proposal Development

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

Angel’s Proposal

83

VISION

THE PRIOR BUILDING, VISUALLY, IS A MAIN FOCUS WITHIN THE SQUARE, BUT IT FAILS TO MEET THE NECESSARY DESIGN DETAILS TO FUNCTION AS SUCH. THE MAIN FOCUS OF THIS PROJECT IS TO RECONNECT THE SQUARE WITH THE BUILDING AND GIVE THE PEOPLE A SPACE TO MEET, INTERACT, AND ENJOY EVERYDAY. THE DESIGN IS INTENDED TO BE OPEN TO THE SQUARE AND WELCOMING TO CREATE A STRONGER CONNECTION BETWEEN PRIOR AND THE SURROUNDING CONTEXT. MULTIPLE DESIGN FLAWS ARE ADDRESSED THROUGH THE DESIGN THAT WOULD HELP CREATE A STRONGER DIALOGUE WITH PRIOR AND THE TOWN. THESE DESIGN FLAWS THAT WILL BE ADDRESSED WILL STRENGTHEN INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR SPACES, AS WELL AS RELATIONSHIPS TO IMPORTANT ELEMENTS IN THE SQUARE SUCH AS THE TRANSIT LINES.

84

EXISTING PRIOR BUILDING

PROPOSED DESIGN

FOUR ELEMENTS

FOUR CRITICAL ELEMENTS ARE IMPLEMENTED IN THIS DESIGN TO RECONNECT THE BUILDING TO THE TOWN AND ITS MAIN SQUARE. - PERMEABILITY OF LIGHT - INTERIOR / EXTERIOR CONNECTIONS - MASS TRANSIT RELATIONSHIP - FUNCTION OF SPACES.

ROOFTOP CAFE OF PROPOSED DESIGN

85

PERMEABILITY OF LIGHT

A MAJOR FLAW IN THE EXISTING PRIOR BUILDING IS THE LACK OF NATURAL LIGHT FILLING INTERIOR SPACES. THE LIMITED GLAZING PREVENTS NATURAL LIGHT FROM REACHING CRITICAL INTERIOR AREAS. THE REDESIGNED STRUCTURE HAS INCREASED THE GLAZING AREA BY 225%

FROM THE EXISTING BUILDING. THIS ALLOWS FOR NATURAL LIGHT TO PENETRATE INTO CRITICAL SPACES.

EXISTING NORTH FACADE

86

FACADE PERMEABILITY OF PROPOSED DESIGN

INTERIOR EXTERIOR CONNECTIONS

PERHAPS PRIOR’S GREATEST FLAW IS THE LACK OF VISUAL AND ENTRY/EXIT PERMEABILITY. THE LACK OF STOREFRONT AND SOCIAL SPACES INTERCONNECTING BETWEEN THE SQUARE AND PRIOR IS EXTREMELY LIMITED. THE DESIGN FOCUSES HEAVILY ON THIS ISSUE BY ADDING MORE STOREFRONT CONDITIONS ON THE WEST FACADE TO CREATE A STRONGER CONNECTION WITH THE SQUARE AND THE STRUCTURE. THESE SPACES COULD HOUSE CAFE’S OR RESTAURANTS THAT COULD THEN UTILIZE THE SPACE IN THE SQUARE. THIS IS INTENDED TO ACTIVATE THE URBAN SPACE IN THE SQUARE.

CROSS SECTION OF PROPOSED DESIGN

INTERIOR / EXTERIOR CONNECTIONS PROPOSED DESIGN

87

MASS TRANSIT RELATIONSHIP

THE ONLY ADDITION TO THE STRUCTURE WITH THIS DESIGN IS THE MASS TRANSIT STATION. THE CONNECTION OF THE SQUARE AND THE TOWN IS CENTERED ON THE TRANSIT STOPS IN THE SQUARE. THE STATION CONNECTS PRIOR WITH THE MAIN TRANSIT LINE AND PROVIDES SHELTER FOR USERS.

88

MASS TRANSIT STATION ADDITION MASS TRANSIT STATION OF PROPOSED DESIGN

FUNCTION OF SPACES

THE EXISTING PRIOR STRUCTURE HOUSES MANY COMMERCIAL OFFICES, HOWEVER THEY REMAIN VACANT AND EXTREMELY UNDERUSED. THE RETURN OF MIXED USE TO THE STRUCTURE WOULD PROVIDE PROPER FUNCTION FOR THE UPPER LEVELS OF PRIOR WHILE COMMERCIAL SHOPPING AND EATING SPACES ACTIVATE THE LOWER LEVELS. SITE PLAN (DESIGN IN CONJUNCTION WITH MERTA MATYAS)

SPACIAL ORGINZATION WITHIN PRIOR

PUBLIC GALLERY / ROOFTOP GARDEN COMMUNAL SPACE FOR RESIDENCE RESIDENCES COMMERCIAL CAFE/SHOPS SUPPORT / STORAGE

LONGITUDINAL SECTION OF PROPOSED DESIGN

SPACIAL ORGANIZATION

89

ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS

THE DESIGN ADDS MULTIPLE ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS TO ACTIVATE THE PUBLIC SPACE AROUND THE STRUCTURE IN THE SQUARE. FORMAL PUBLIC SPACES ON THE NORTH AND WEST SIDE PROVIDE OPPORTUNITIES FOR GATHERINGS AND SPECIAL EVENTS OR CASUAL DAY TO DAY SEATING AND MEETING AREAS.

EXISTING NORTH FACADE

90

FORMAL PUBLIC SPACES

MAIN PARKING AREAS THAT EXISTED ON THE SQUARE HAVE BEEN MOVED BELOW GROUND FOR THE LOWER SQUARE TO BE OCCUPIED BY PEOPLE. THE PARKING RESIDES UNERNEATH THE SQUARE CONNECTED TO PRIOR FOR PEOPLE TO EASILY ACCESS THE STRUCTURE OR THE MAIN SQUARE.

NEW PARKING AREA

LONGITUDINAL SECTION OF NEW PARKING STRUCTURE

91

PROPOSAL DEVELOPMENT

EARLY SKETCH VISUALIZATIONS OF REFORMED PRIOR

92

93

94

95