This thesis document outlines Hamza A. Ibrahim's proposal for an integrated mixed-use development called "The Lantern". The Lantern aims to address issues in the existing area such as a lack of cohesiveness, connectivity, and vibrancy. It proposes residential, office, and retail spaces totaling 290,000 square feet. Concepts like place-making, circulation, and socio-economic sustainability were considered in the design. Site plans, sections, and perspectives of the project are presented to show how it would create a sense of place and encourage human interaction within the community.

1. THE CATHOLIC UNIVERSITY OF AMERICA
Integration and Interaction:
Solving the Disjunction that Exists Within a Mixed-Use Environment.
By:
Hamza A. Ibrahim
A THESIS
Submitted to the Faculty of the
School of Architecture and Planning
Of The Catholic University of America
In Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree:
Master of Architecture
January 2011
1 | P a g e

2. This thesis by Hamza A. Ibrahim fulfills the thesis requirement for the Masters Degree in
Architecture approved by Mathew L. Geiss, M.Arch, as Director, and by Kent Abraham,
M.Arch, as Advocate, Lavinia Fici Pasquina, M.Arch, as Foundation Group, and Rauzia
Ally, M.Arch, as Individual Advisor.
2 | P a g e

3.
00Contents
01Acknowledgements
02Thesis Introduction
02.1: Thesis Statement
02.2: Thesis Summary
02.3: Thesis Abstract
02.4: Thesis Goals
03Concept Development
03.1: Space + Place
03.2: Urban Revitalization
03.3: Economic Development + Tax Revenues
03.4: Place-Making + Destination
03.5: Circulation + Orientation
03.6: Socio-Economic Sustainability
04Project Proposal
04.1: Vision
04.2: The Lantern
04.3: Program Uses
05Project Development
05.1: Site Plans
05.2: Sections
05.3: Perspectives
05.4: Vignettes
06Project Finance
3 | P a g e

4. 07Final Statement
08Appendix
08.1: Thesis Presentation Boards
08.2: Existing Massing Site Model
08.3: Proposed Massing Site Model
08.4: 1/16th Scale Building Model
08.5: Thesis Research Submission
4 | P a g e

5. 02Thesis Introduction
02.1: Thesis Statement
“Can the conversion of space into place and the integration of uses be the solution for the
lack of interaction amongst people and for the disjunction that exists within a mixed-use
environment?”
02.2: Thesis Summary
I am proposing that the solution for the disjunction that exists within a mixed-use
environment is an integrated urban space that encourages human interaction, as well as
interaction with their environment. The lack of vibrancy within mixed-use development
projects may be as a result of a low level of integration achieved in that particular project.
The level of integration between program uses and circulation should be established at
the birth of any project.
This thesis will strive to reignite the human interaction and engagement that can be
evident from the creation of a sense of place by means of architecture and design.
02.3: Thesis Abstract
The ordering of functions within a mixed-use development is in essence about the
ordering of relations between users. A properly arranged mixed-use development can
create vibrancy particularly when a high level of integration among its program uses and
users is achieved. This is due to the fact that users travel between program uses, and if the
connections are not established as a place of interaction it reduces the chances of users
interacting and as such exhibits a low vibrancy. Discouraging factors can be remedied by
eradicating physical barriers such as solid walls, merging pedestrian circulation paths,
and by encouraging visually oriented pedestrian circulation in order to encourage
interaction.
In the communal place and in the interpersonal space of a mixed-use development alike,
the focus is on the interaction and engagement among users, seen as a performance, in the
proposed environment. Architecture will be used as a tool in developing a sense of place
that has a new and enlightening approach to encouraging interaction by first designing a
5 | P a g e

6. place with a low familiarity and a high preference index; an unusual space yet appealing
to users.
The introduction of an engaging urban open space heightens the level of integration in
most mixed-use developments. It does this by first serving as an anchor for the project. It
also creates a space in which gathering, and subsequently interaction, is encouraged. It
serves as a point of reference for its users and the program uses that help shape its edges.
Urban open spaces, such as squares or green fields, have assisted in the promotion of a
sense of place to which users may give value and may as well give cause for a
development’s successful branding.
In conclusion, understanding the synergy that exists between program uses is an efficient
and better attempt at integrating a project. There is much to learn from the symbiotic
relationships that exist in nature that can be applied to real estate development and the
programming of space. Creating enough synergy amongst program uses on a site is the
initial attempt at successfully taking a closer step to this thesis’ goals in creating a more
vibrant and engaging mixed-use environment that encourages human interaction, and
therefore mediating the felt disjunction that exists between users and program uses.
02.4: Thesis Goals
This thesis project will seek to diminish the divide that exists within a mixed-use
environment by:
• Creating a sense of place in which others will attest value.
• Designing a more engaging urban open space.
• Encouraging human interaction.
• Creating a more vibrant environment by employing principles of synergy.
• Encouraging a high level of integration of program uses and physical
form.
• Promoting socio-economic sustainability, as a product of live-work-play,
open space, and accessibility.
6 | P a g e

7. 03Concept Development
03.1: Space + Place
The distinction between space and place has long been debated. The difference between
space and place is solely based on the value we place on them.
Space is more abstract than place, and is more experienced by the senses and the volume
it exists in. It may be regarded as a sense of freedom and the distance experienced
between and within planes; an impersonal dimension. Place, on the other hand, is space
with added value; we feel the need to protect and identify with it.
In terms of urban planning principles, space and place may be divided into:
- the personal space of body
- the exclusive space of property
- the intimate place of the home
- the interpersonal space of sociability
- the communal place of neighborhood.
From an urban perspective, the focus of this project is indeed on the interpersonal space
of sociability, which deals with face-to-face interaction among strangers in a space; and
on the communal place of neighborhood that gives added value to a place one can
identify with.
03.2: Urban Revitalization
Many downtown and other urban or suburban districts suffer from multiple problems -
underused or blighted areas, crime, aging infrastructure, and sterile office districts that
are deserted at night, a lack of vibrant retail space, and/or lack of attractive public spaces
for people.
7 | P a g e

8. Mixed-use developments can address these problems by bringing retail, hotel, residential,
cultural, restaurant, or entertainment uses to an area that can help to revitalize and enliven
blighted areas, or underused sites so prevalent in many urban and suburban districts.
Even in strong districts, mixed-use developments offer the opportunity to bring uses to
the area and to shape attractive public open spaces that can further enliven and add a
sense of place to a downtown setting. And by virtue of scale, character, and impact,
mixed-use projects can turn around blighted neighborhoods, stimulating additional new
development. Many projects have been the initial and major force in revitalizing
declining areas by creating exciting new, attractive, large-scale physical environments.
Revitalization through mixed-use development is a goal in cities throughout the world.
03.3: Economic Development + Tax Revenues
The desire to foster economic development and increase tax revenues is an important
consideration when implementing a mixed-use development project. Mixed-use projects
can stimulate the economy, generate jobs, and increase the tax base. For example, new
office space can attract new office jobs to the area while also boosting the property tax
base. And new retail space can increase retail employment, the property tax base, and
retail sales taxes.
Mixed land uses can convey substantial fiscal and economic benefits. Commercial uses in
close proximity to residential areas are often reflected in higher property values and
therefore help raise local tax receipts. Businesses recognize the benefits associated with
areas able to attract more people, as there is increased economic activity when there are
more people in the area to shop.
In today’s service economy, communities find that by mixing land uses, they make their
neighborhoods attractive to workers who increasingly balance quality of life criteria with
salary to determine where they will settle.
8 | P a g e

9. 03.4: Place-Making + Destination
The inherent value that is evident in or among a series of spaces is what gives a place a
Sense of Identity. Place-making can also be seen as the “branding” for real estate
development projects.
It is important that people not only relate to your project but also be attracted to it. The
norm among mixed-use developments is simply to insert a town center; however, there
are a series of ways to go about branding a development that encourages both a literal and
symbolic sense of identity.
Branding a real estate development project also has another advantage. It makes your
project more marketable by creating a niche that appeals to both homebuyers and their
lifestyles. It can simultaneously be addressed with the idea of creating a strong
destination that attracts homebuyers and other users to the lifestyle they want to live,
work, and even shop in.
It will be important for this thesis project to establish and design an urban space that will
serve as a cohesive element, promote integration among program users, and encourage
interaction among people.
03.5: Circulation + Orientation
Context is a key factor in determining the character of the design concept. The use of an
enclosed plan and/or an inward orientation versus a more open plan is often driven by
context and location. The suburbs often have little in the surrounding landscape with
which to connect, and thus a certain internal focus often prevails.
The positioning of uses to optimize internal relationships must take into account the
identity and security of individual components, the importance of links between the
various components, and any central space around which the components will be
arranged. Because the relationship between uses is such an important aspect of a mixed-
use development, the design of the project must reflect and promote the interconnections
that can occur yet maintain an identity for each use as well as strong connections to the
surrounding environment.
9 | P a g e

10. Strong visual connections and sight lines can be achieved by well-designed central open
spaces that facilitate spatial orientation. In a well-designed mixed-use project, it should
be easy to find the center of the project and then identify all or most of the major
components.
03.6: Socio-Economic Sustainability
Sustainability is a concept that cuts across varying disciplines. Appealing to real estate
development, socio-economic sustainability can be achieved on various levels, by
providing for a majority of the needs of its inhabitants within the project’s vicinity.
Sites near one or more forms of transit offer relatively better access and density. It also
permits and can support a variety of uses. A real estate development project located at a
transit site becomes a node along transit paths.
There is a concept of transit-oriented development along with fostering density that has
been adapted highly by Smart Growth in its principles. More importantly, are other
principles adopted such as promoting walkable neighborhoods, building a strong sense of
place, mixed land uses etc
Sustainability in this setting also supports the notion of synergy; which refers to the
compatibility of various uses that support each other, and if there is enough demand for
each use then it is possible to assume that a project may be self-sustaining, a live-work-
play environment.
10 | P a g e

11. 04Project Proposal
04.1: Vision
To create a mixed-use Town Center which promotes a sense of place in which others will
attest value by designing a more engaging urban open space that encourages human
interaction in a live-work-play setting.
The Lantern will be a lively and active place for residents, workers, and visitors alike.
The Lantern will also provide broad options of housing types to diversify the already
existing array of ages, incomes, and interests.
04.2: The Lantern
This real estate development project has been coined “The Lantern” for two main
reasons. Firstly, the project serves as an anchor in the urban milieu; this is the only
mixed-use development project within a 1,500ft radius of the town center. Secondly, its
architecture is designed as a glass box that permits light to shine out from within; this
makes it an attractive destination, even at night, for viewers.
Located in Old Town Kensington, Maryland, the ultimate intent of the project is to serve
as a solution to a series existing problems. The Lantern strived to address a majority of
the problems using architecture as the medium. Below are a list of the few issued deemed
problematic that were addressed.
• Lack of Cohesiveness: The town’s urban planning was of a Distributory
nature (Urban Association of ABCD Types) with a similar characteristic
to a peripheral development typically found in sub-urban areas. The
Lantern introduced and compounded on a “Town Center” model that
served as a cohesive and central focus.
• Lack of Connectivity: A Marc railroad runs through the middle of the
town and borders on the south-west edge of the property. Due to the
topography there exists a ridge 30feet deep in which the rail tracks have
been placed, this serves as a physical barrier. To solve this disjunction
between both sides of the track, and also the community, a bridge
11 | P a g e

12. connecting both sides of the track was an important addition to the
feasibility of the project.
• Lack of Vibrancy: The key to most successful retail projects is vibrancy.
Currently the existing retail establishments are dispersed and as such
limiting visitor and customer traffic. The Lantern addresses this issue by
concentrating the retail in the core of the proposed town center project to
encourage traffic.
04.3: Program Uses
The Lantern is comprised of three (3) main uses or functions: residential, office, and
retail. From precedents and studies conducted, Synergy was an important factor in
determining the amount and relation of building functions and uses. Although Synergy
served as both a constraint and an opportunity to maximize efficiency, zoning was the
initial constraint on the size determinant of the program uses. Below is a Table that
summarizes the square footage breakdown of the program uses.
Category Uses Number of Units Square Feet % of Development
Residential
Block A 135 rooms 90,000 31.04
Block B 135 rooms 90,000 31.04
Sub-Total 180,000sqft 62.08%
Office
Office Uses 90,000 31.04
Sub-Total 90,000sqft 31.04%
Retail
Shopping and Restaurant 20,000 1.03
Kiosk 70 -
Sub-Total 20,000sqft 6.9%
Total Development 290,000sqft 100%
(Gross)
12 | P a g e

13.
13 | P a g e

14. 05Project Development
05.1: Site Plans
Figure 1‐ Existing Site Plan
Figure 2‐ Proposed Site Plan
14 | P a g e

15.
Figure 3‐ Aerial Site Plan
15 | P a g e

16.
Figure 4‐ Architectural Site Plan
16 | P a g e

17. 05.2: Sections
Figure 5‐ East Elevation
Figure 6‐ West Elevation
Figure 7‐ Transverse Section1
Figure 8‐ Transverse Section2
17 | P a g e

18.
Figure 9‐ Longitudinal Section (Partial)
05.3: Perspectives
Figure 10‐ Approach1 Figure 11‐ Approach2
Figure 12‐ Approach3 Figure 13‐ Approach4
18 | P a g e

19. Figure 14‐ Connection1 Figure 15‐ Connection2
Figure 16‐ Connection3 Figure 17‐ Connection4
Figure 18‐ Destination1 Figure 19‐ Destination2
Figure 20‐ Destination3 Figure 21‐ Destination4
19 | P a g e

20. Figure 22‐ Social1 Figure 23‐ Social2
Figure 24‐ Social3 Figure 25‐ Social4
20 | P a g e

21. 05.4: Vignettes
Figure 26‐ Vignette1
Figure 27‐ Vignette2
21 | P a g e

22. Figure 28‐ Vignette3
Figure 29‐ Vignette4
22 | P a g e

23. 06Project Finance
23 | P a g e

24. 24 | P a g e

25. 25 | P a g e

26. 26 | P a g e

27. 27 | P a g e

28. 28 | P a g e

29. 07Final Statement
Most urban design challenges including the design of mixed-use developments have all
attempted to create a successful “place.” Its intention has been to introduce a focal point
in the project that is inviting to the visitor as well as encouraging interaction among
visitors. Whether or not a project is successful can only be realized by firsthand
experience gained from visiting the project. It is difficult to place the blame of an
unsuccessful project on just one factor alone; as such it assumed in this thesis that the
integral factor to any mixed-use project is its level of integration among program uses
and subsequently among users.
The physical configuration of uses serves as the initial step in achieving a fully integrated
project. This builds on the synergy being established among these various program uses
and as such begins to influence a more vibrant space for users to interact. It is also
important for all projects including mixed-use developments to adopt socio-economic
sustainable aspects. These socio-economic sustainable aspects are centered on dense
developments that provide most of its inhabitants needs within the vicinity. The
development should also be accessible to potential and current users by means of mass
transit.
It is also important to mediate any obstructions to integration and interaction that may
exist in a development. Physical barriers such as solid walls should be minimized and
converted into more transparent and porous surfaces that will allow for users to interact
with uses and users behind walls. Interaction should also be encouraged by merging and
fusing pedestrian circulation paths within a development. A development can also engage
a user or visitor by creating destinations through visually oriented vistas along pedestrian
circulation paths.
If these factors are included in the initial design phases of any project, there will be a
higher possibility of creating a more vibrant development, and as such an integrated place
that encourages interaction. In such a well planned scenario it is easier for users to attach
value to the development which would eventually create a sense of place or community,
which is much needed in branding any development.
29 | P a g e

30. 08Appendix
08.1: Thesis Presentation Boards
30 | P a g e

31. 31 | P a g e

32. 08.2: Existing Massing Site Model
08.3: Proposed Massing Site Model
32 | P a g e

33. 08.4: 1/16th Scale Building Model
33 | P a g e

34. 34 | P a g e

35. 35 | P a g e

36. 36 | P a g e

37. 37 | P a g e

38. 38 | P a g e

39. 39 | P a g e

40. 08Thesis Reseearch
00Contents
01Acknowledgements
02Abstract
02.1: Thesis Statement | Abstract
02.2: Thesis Goals
03Thesis Article
03.1: Introduction | Space + Place
03.2: Cognition + Environment
03.3: Place-Making + Destination
03.4: Mixed-Use Development Historical Evolution of Scale
03.5: Integration | Physical Configuration of Mixed-Use Developments
03.6: Synergy
03.7: Socio-Economic Sustainability
03.8: Connectivity + Interaction
03.9: Final Statement
04Precedence and Case Studies
04.1: Canal City | Jerde Partnership
04.2: Sony Center am Potsdamer Platz | Murphy/Jahn
04.3: Downtown Silver Spring | RTKL Associates
04.4: The Gateway | Jerde Partnership
05Site Selection
05.1: Old Town Kensington, Maryland
05.2: Site Analysis
05.3: Program Analysis
3 | P a g e

41. 02Abstract
02.1: Thesis Statement | Abstract
I am proposing that the solution for the disjunction that exists within a mixed-use
environment is an integrated urban space that encourages human interaction, as well as
interaction with their environment. The lack of vibrancy within mixed-use developments
may be as a result of a low level of integration achieved in that particular project. The
level of integration between program uses and circulation should be established at the
birth of any project.
The ordering of functions within a mixed-use development is in essence about the
ordering of relations between users. A properly arranged mixed-use development can
create vibrancy particularly when a high level of integration among its program uses and
users is achieved. This is due to the fact that users travel between program uses, and if the
connections are not established as a place of interaction it reduces the chances of users
interacting and as such exhibits a low vibrancy. Discouraging factors can be remedied by
eradicating physical barriers such as solid walls, merging pedestrian circulation paths,
and by encouraging visually oriented pedestrian circulation in order to encourage
interaction.
In the communal place and in the interpersonal space of a mixed-use development alike,
the focus is on the interaction and engagement among users, seen as a performance, in the
4 | P a g e

42. proposed environment. Architecture will be used as a tool in developing a sense of place
that has a new and enlightening approach to encouraging interaction by first designing a
place with a low familiarity and a high preference index; an unusual space yet appealing
to users.
The introduction of an engaging urban open space heightens the level of integration in
most mixed-use developments. It does this by first serving as an anchor for the project. It
also creates a space in which gathering, and subsequently interaction, is encouraged. It
serves as a point of reference for its users and the program uses that help shape its edges.
Urban open spaces, such as squares or green fields, have assisted in the promotion of a
sense of place to which users may give value and may as well give cause for a
development’s successful branding.
In conclusion, understanding the synergy that exists between program uses is an efficient
and better attempt at integrating a project. There is much to learn from the symbiotic
relationships that exist in nature that can be applied to real estate development and the
programming of space. Creating enough synergy amongst program uses on a site is the
initial attempt at successfully taking a closer step to this thesis’ goals in creating a more
vibrant and engaging mixed-use environment that encourages human interaction, and
therefore mediating the felt disjunction that exists between users and program uses.
02.2: Thesis Goals
5 | P a g e

43. This thesis project will seek to diminish the divide that exists within a mixed-use
environment by:
 Creating a sense of place in which others will attest value.
 Designing a more engaging urban open space.
 Encouraging human interaction.
 Creating a more vibrant environment by employing principles of synergy.
 Encouraging a high level of integration of program uses and physical form.
 Promoting socio-economic sustainability, as a product of live-work-play, open
space and accessibility.
03Thesis Article
6 | P a g e

44. “Can the conversion of space into place and the integration of uses be the solution
for the lack of interaction amongst people and for the disjunction that exists within
a mixed-use environment?”
03.1: Introduction | Space + Place
The distinction between space and place has been long debated. The difference between
space and place is solely based on the value we place on them. Space is more abstract
than place, and is more experienced by the senses and the volume it exists in. It may be
regarded as a sense of freedom and the distance experienced between and within planes;
an impersonal dimension. Place, on the other hand, is space with added value; we feel the
need to protect and identify with it (Tuan 1977). According to Yi-Fu Tuan:
“Places are centers of felt value where biological needs, such as those for food, water,
rest, and procreation, are satisfied (Tuan 1977).”
In other words:
7 | P a g e

45. “Place is a special kind of object. It is a concretion of value, though not a valued thing
that can be handled or carried about easily; it is an object in which one can dwell (Tuan
1977).”
In terms of urban planning principles, space and place may be divided into the personal
space of the body; the exclusive space of the property; intimate place of the home;
interpersonal space of sociability; communal place of neighborhood; and the impersonal
space of the city (Madanipour 2003). From an urban perspective, the focus of this project
is indeed on the interpersonal space of sociability, which deals with face-to-face
interaction among strangers in a space; and on the communal place of neighborhood that
gives added value to a place one can identify with. This thesis will strive to reignite the
human interaction and engagement that can be evident from the creation of a sense of
place by means of architecture and design.
03.2: Cognition + Environment
The 5 senses, in addition to human cognition, play an important role in how people
perceive the environment. Along with cognition comes a sense of comprehension and the
human ability to draw on past events that influence the decision-making ability (Kaplan
1982). The decision-making ability is also influenced by past events, since human beings
tend to draw on gained experience to help them make decisions. In an urban context this
pool of cognitive inquiry is what leads to representation (object) and familiarity (space or
place) (Kaplan 1982).
8 | P a g e

46. According to Stephen Kaplan, there are four (4) aspects that leave their “mark” on
perception (Kaplan 1982) as a form of recognized patterns:
 Simplicity; the representation of a recognized form as a simple or basic pattern
does not leave a lasting impression, and as such information is forgotten easily.
 Essence; the representation of a recognized form as a stereotypical pattern allows
the information to be regarded as reliable or characteristic of that representation.
 Discreteness; the representation of a recognized form as an element that stands
out, for example a landmark, that tends to brake the continuity of experience.
 Unity; the representation of a recognized form that acts as a collection of patterns
instead of single patterns. It enables the observer distinguish recognized patterns
as a system and to cope with dissimilarities in the environment.
These four aspects, now properties, contribute to the recognition of objects (patterns) and
how we view and remember our experiences in the environment; it helps in the
construction of a cognitive map (Kaplan 1982). These properties all work simultaneously
to enlighten the experience of the human and built environment. Associations between
learned or observed patterns are merely as a result of a chain-of-events experienced
(Kaplan 1982).
As mentioned above, familiarity also plays an important role in cognition. Most people
prefer and are more comfortable around things or spaces they are familiar with. However,
9 | P a g e

47. these same people get tired of the same things, spaces, or chain-of-events that they are
highly familiar with and subsequently would rather enrich their experiences. In such a
situation, one can only comprehend how to deal with this paradox by understanding the
relationship that exists between familiarity and preference, as noted in the Familiarity X
Preference Matrix (Kaplan 1982) below.
Low Preference High Preference
Low Familiarity That’s weird I’ve never seen anything
like that before! Wow!
That’s neat!
High Familiarity That old stuff again No place like home
Table 1 – Familiarity X Preference Matrix
This thesis project will strive to accomplish a place of felt value by introducing design
that seeks a low familiarity threshold and a high preference threshold. In other words, the
thesis project will seek to introduce a “wow factor” into the design of the built
environment by introducing the low familiarity and high preference built design
threshold; this would encourage and challenge the visitor to be more mentally involved
and engaged in the project.
03.3: Place-Making + Destination
The inherent value that is evident in or among a series of spaces is what gives a place a
Sense of Identity. Place-making can also be seen as the “branding” for real estate
development projects. It is important that people be able to not only relate to your project
10 | P a g e

48. but also be attracted to it. The norm among mixed-use developments is simply to insert a
town center; however there are a series of ways to go about branding a development that
encourage both a literal and symbolic sense of identity.
Branding a real estate development project also has another advantage. It makes your
project more marketable by creating a niche that appeals to both homebuyers and their
lifestyles. It can simultaneously be addressed with the idea of creating a strong
destination that attracts homebuyers and other users to the lifestyle they want to live,
work, and even shop in. These two concepts can be achieved through developing
alongside changing trends, preferences and tastes such as (Bohl 2002):
 Evolving Retail Realms
 New Workplace Environments
 Advancing Leisure and Entertainment Concepts
 Smart Growth, Sustainable Development, and Livable Communities
It will be important for this thesis project to establish and design an urban open space that
will serve as a cohesive element, promote integration among program uses, and
encourage interaction among people. Typologies that have been explored include urban
open spaces that occur at two scales; community urban open spaces (Zucker 1959) and
individual urban open spaces:
11 | P a g e

49.  Community Urban Open Space
- Closed square
Characteristics of a Closed Square
- The layout is self evident and imposingly strong
- There exists a strong repetition among the buildings and
building types
- Buildings face the square and therefore enclose it
- Dominated square
Characteristics of a Dominated Square
- Originated from the closed square
- One focal point toward which the space is directed such
as a building or sculpture at the center
- Buildings relate to this dominated square be it a church, palace, or town hall
- Nuclear square
Characteristics of a Nuclear Square
- Originated from a dominated square
- Openness is encouraged along with a central focal point such as a sculpture
- Invincible or implied boundaries are used to complete space
- Grouped square
Characteristics of a Grouped Square
12 | P a g e

50. - “Individuation and Unity” (Zucker 1959)
- Relation of successive or sequential squares
- There could exist a non-axial organization; different
shapes; or different organizations
- Sequential squares could have an indirect physical connection
- Amorphous square
Characteristics of an Amorphous Square
- Takes on the qualities of other squares
- Typically formless and unorganized
- Naturally occurring and is usually unplanned
 Individual Urban Open Space
- Balconies
- Terraces
- Patios
- Roof gardens
03.4: Mixed-Use Development Historical Evolution of Scale
The concept of mixed-use development has always been present yet unobserved through
the history of human settlements and the growth of these settlements. Settlements have
always formed the nucleus for human activity and as such a variety of these activities,
13 | P a g e

51. evident of needs, had to be present within reasonable proximity. Mixed-use developments
were also applicable in old settlements such as medieval towns that built defensive walls
or forts around themselves for protection; as such the necessary mix of uses and functions
had to be within these enclosures in order for a settlement to sustain itself.
Mixed-Use Developments according to the Urban Land Institute are portrayed by three
(3) different characteristics (Schwanke 2003):
 Three or more significant revenue-producing uses that are mutually supporting;
 Significant physical and functional integration of project components, including
uninterrupted pedestrian connections; and
 Development in conformance with a coherent plan, typology, scale of uses, and
densities.
This idea of a mixed-use development as a dense and sustained settlement has faded
away over time due to the advent of the auto-mobile, as well as, zoning laws that
diminish density. This has led to dispersed but concentrated nucleates of mixed-use
developments across America and the developed world at large. As such, a Mixed-Use
Development may be defined as any development that possesses three or more integrated
revenue-producing uses within a set area that results in an intensive use of land
(Schwanke 2003).
14 | P a g e

52. The scale of mixed-use developments has evolved over its history; from intimate urban
villages to impersonal “hardscaped” towers. It is important to understand the evolution of
the varying scales in order to be able to match different scales to different site-specific
contexts. Listed below are a chain of evolutions that introduce scale:
 1900s to 1969s | Small to medium density
This ranges from early 20th century mixed-use developments such as Market
Square in Lake Forest, Illinois, to early downtown complexes such as the
Rockefeller Center in New York.
 1970s to 1989s | Medium to large density
This ranges from internally oriented mixed-use developments such as the old
World Trade Center that was in New York, and postmodern more open
developments such as Water Tower Place in downtown Chicago.
 1990s to 2000s | A return to medium density
This includes a return to less denser developments including town centers and
urban villages such as Reston Town Center in Virginia.
03.5: Integration | Physical Configuration of Mixed-Use Developments
The physical and structural configurations of mixed-use developments fall within three
(3) major models; mixed-use towers, integrated multi-tower structures, and mixed-use
town centers, urban villages, and districts (Schwanke 2003). The configurations are more
of a response to context than design, and as such density is a key difference in stipulating
which configuration to be used and in what context.
15 | P a g e

53. However, a more important typology that can be generated when dealing with the
physical configurations of mixed-use developments, are their level of integration.
Integration is synonymous with amalgamation, assimilation, combination, fusion,
knitting, harmonization, incorporation, and unification. All these synonyms give rise to
the varying forms of integration that exist within a mixed-use development which occurs
over two broad spectrums; vertical and horizontal integration. Vertical integration occurs
commonly in mixed-use towers while horizontal integration frequently occurs in town
centers and urban villages.
It will be extremely important to thoroughly integrate this mixed-use development project
at all levels and for all program uses in order for the project to work coherently as one.
This thesis project will seek to properly integrate conflicting elements in order to make
the proposed project act as an organism with all its integral parts working cohesively
together and fitting into its environment.
03.6: Synergy
The word “synergy” is to real estate, as “symbiosis” is to biology. A symbiotic
relationship is evident in nature, in which dissimilar organisms that live together benefit
from their co-existence. There are two major types of symbiotic relationships. The first is
Mutualistic; both dissimilar organisms positively benefit from each other. A very good
16 | P a g e

54. example is the relationship between a clownfish and tentacles of sea anemones. The
second is Commensal in nature; a relationship where only one benefits from the other
provided the other is not significantly disadvantaged. An example of this would be
between a hermit crab which uses gastropod shells to protect its body.
There is much to learn from this biological relationship because it gives some in-site into
the relationships existing among dissimilar functions and program uses within a mixed
use development, called synergy. Synergy is defined as “a mutually advantageous
conjunction or compatibility of distinct business participants or elements, as resources or
efforts” (Mirriam-Webster Online 2009). For synergy in a mixed-use development to
occur there has to be more than one element; there has to be combined effort, support, as
well as compatibility. The three (3) major types of synergy that can be achieved are
addressed below (Schwanke 2003):
 Direct support; dependent on direct economic support from other functions or
programs. In this case, the function or program use itself generates a demand for
other functions or program uses. An example would be office workers or hotel
guests supporting a nearby restaurant use but not vice versa.
 Indirect support; dependent on the indirect benefit of functions or program uses as
amenities for other functions or program uses, therefore making the other function
or program more desirable. An example would be a parking garage that does not
generate revenue for office workers or hotel guests, but serves as an amenity and
makes the location more desirable.
17 | P a g e

55.  Place-making synergy; dependent on the activity and interaction that exists
between varying functions or program uses that creates a sense of place. This is
very important as it is one of the focuses of this thesis. Place-making synergy can
be used to uplift the character of a neighborhood, blighted or not.
The importance of market synergy cannot be over-emphasized enough. It is important
that these varying functions, programs, and uses be able to support themselves and each
other. This interaction allows for vibrant mixed-use projects to develop that encourages
both interaction among its users as well as its uses. Below is a Framework for Estimating
On-Site Synergy (Schwanke 2003):
Degree of Synergy
OFFICE USE:
Residential ▲▲
Hotel ▲▲▲▲▲
Retail/Entertainment ▲▲▲▲
Cultural/Civic/Recreation ▲▲▲
RESIDENTIAL USE:
Office ▲▲▲
Hotel ▲▲▲
Retail/Entertainment ▲▲▲▲
Cultural/Civic/Recreation ▲▲▲▲▲
HOTEL USE:
Office ▲▲▲▲▲
Residential ▲▲▲
Retail/Entertainment ▲▲▲▲
Cultural/Civic/Recreation ▲▲▲▲
RETAIL/ENTERTAINMENT USE:
Office ▲▲▲▲▲
Residential ▲▲▲▲▲
Hotel ▲▲▲▲▲
Cultural/Civic/Recreation ▲▲▲▲
CULTURAL/CIVIC/RECREATION USE:
18 | P a g e

56. Office ▲▲▲▲
Residential ▲▲▲▲▲
Hotel ▲▲▲▲▲
Retail/Entertainment ▲▲▲
Table 2 – Framework for Estimating On‐Site Synergy (Schwanke 2003)
Weak ▲
Very Strong ▲▲▲▲▲
03.7: Socio-Economic Sustainability
Sustainability is a concept that cuts across varying disciplines. For architects it signals
sustainability on a building scale defined by the U.S. Green Building Council. However,
socio-economic sustainability exists on a much larger scale. Appealing to real estate
development, socio-economic sustainability can be achieved on various levels as
explained below.
Sites near one or more forms of transit offer relatively better access and density. It also
permits and can support a variety of uses. This is because it is easier for users to access
the site through a variety of ways either by automobile, bus, or rail. A real estate
development project located at a transit site becomes a node along transit paths, almost
interrupting people’s journeys, and because the transit modes are on a fixed path they
therefore have to pass through the node to get to where they are going. The density often
associated with transit stops also promotes the right amount of users for the uses,
therefore matching supply with demand, and therefore making it sustainable.
19 | P a g e

57. There is a concept of transit oriented development along with fostering density that has
been adapted highly by Smart Growth in its principles (Smart Growth 2009). More
importantly, are other principles adopted by Smart Growth that address issues such as
design, economics, environment, health, housing, quality of life, and transportation
(Smart Growth 2009). Principles adopted include promoting walkable neighborhoods,
building a strong sense of place, mixed land uses, preservation of the natural
environment, compact building design e.t.c. (Smart Growth 2009).
Sustainability in this setting also supports the notion of synergy. As previously discussed
synergy refers to the compatibility of various uses that support each other, and if there is
enough demand for each use then it is possible to assume that a project may be self-
sustaining, a live-work-play environment. On a much smaller scale, an example of this
would be the Sony Center am Potsdamer Platz which is an office-residential-retail and
entertainment complex built in 2001 located in Berlin; some of its inhabitants/users are
able work, live and shop within the same complex.
03.8: Connectivity + Interaction
Establishing a connection within a mixed-use environment is the first step to encouraging
interaction among users. Human interaction can be encouraged when paths are crossed. A
good example would be a market place; interaction is self-evident between the buyers
and sellers and possibly between sellers and sellers (familiarity), but how does a
successful project begin to explore the buyer-buyer interaction? There is definitely a need
20 | P a g e

58. to “return to the agora” (Whyte 1988) as an attempt to reestablish public spaces where
users, visitors, or buyers can “meet and talk” in order to create a sense of place (Whyte
1988).
The approach this thesis project will take would be to introduce gathering places, streets
and pathways that intersect. It will also adopt the use of interactive surfaces and thus
interactive spaces, and visual oriented pedestrian circulation. An attempt will be made to
mediate the divide that exists in an environment by braking down physical barriers such
as walls, merging pedestrian circulation paths, and by encouraging visually oriented
pedestrian circulation to encourage interaction. Visually oriented pedestrian circulation
will be paths directed and shaped by transparent or translucent materials to engage and
connect both sides of the project’s walls. It would also include pedestrian circulation
guided by changing vistas of the “projectscape.”
Gathering places such as town centers can be traced back to earlier ceremonial, religious,
military, trade, and administrative centers of preindustrial settlements (Bohl 2002). Over
the course of history successful gathering places such as Piazza del Campidoglio in Rome
have stood out, and as much as it has been studied it is important to realize that its
successfulness cannot be replicated because the conditions for which it exists in cannot
be reproduced or duplicated. However, attempts will be made to include proportions,
ratios, and the human scale into the project.
21 | P a g e

59. Ratio Picture Comment
Rural 1:6 No sense of pedestrian enclosure.
Difficult pedestrian crossings.
Suburban 1:3 More sense of enclosure.
Easier pedestrian crossings.
City 3:1 Most sense of enclosure however too
overbearing.
Relatively easier pedestrian crossing due to
shorter streets.
Desired? 1:1 Open to discussion.
May be applicable in all settings i.e. rural,
suburban, city.
Table 3 – Building Height to Street Width Proportions
Successful streets and pathways also offer enclosure and a relation to human scale as do
successful gathering places. It is important to understand the ratio of the height of the
bordering buildings to the width of the streets or alleys (see Table 3). This ratio gives a
sense of density and enclosure, and can be applied to various settings; larger heights and
smaller widths are evident in dense cities while shorter heights and relatively longer
widths are evident in suburban to rural settings. Different ratios have their different
advantages and disadvantages, however it is important to establish a sense of enclosure
and human scale at all times.
Type Example Pattern Typical Location Frontages Transport Era
22 | P a g e

60. A-type Alstadt Historic core Built frontages Era of pedestrian and
horseback
B-type Bilateral Gridiron (central, or Built frontages Era of horse and
extension, or citywide) carriage
C-type Anywhere; including Built frontages or Any Era of public
Characteristic/Conjoint individual villages or building set back in transport; car
suburban extentions: space (pavilions)
often astride arterial
routes
D-Type Distributory Peripheral Buildings set back in Era of the car
development: off-line space, access only to
pods or superblock minor roads
infill
Table 4 – Urban Association of ABCD Types (Marshall 2004)
The ABCD Typology adopted by Stephen Marshall in his book, “Streets & Patterns,” seeks to
reduce the multitude of street patterns into four basic categories. It has been ordered from
Type A to Type D as though relating to the evolving street arrangements at different stages of
growth from cities to towns (See Table 4). This typology encompasses the centers or cores of
cities and their development along a route into the fringes of typically a suburban layout, but
could include a rural layout. Composition and configuration are also important aspects to grasp
when studying the typologies of street patterns (Marshall 2004):
“In terms of composition, we can distinguish between the narrow crooked streets of the A‐type,
the straight orthogonal streets of the B‐type and the sprawling curvilinear patterns of the D‐type
(Marshall 2004).”
23 | P a g e

61. And:
“Alternatively, in terms of configuration, we could draw a distinction between the connective
properties of the B‐type versus the tributary properties of the D‐type (Marshall 2004).”
Composition Configuration
A-type
Irregular, fine scale angular, streets mostly Mixture of configurational properties,
short or crooked, varying in width, going some cul-de-sac; moderate connectivity.
in all directions.
B-type
Regular, orthogonal, rectilinear, streets of Mainly grid with crossroads; high
consistent width, going in two directions connectivity. Continuity of cross routes.
C-type
Mixture of regularity and irregularity, Mixtures of configurational properties,
streets typically of consistent width; some cols-de-sac; moderate connectivity.
curved or rectilinear formations, meeting
at right angles.
D-type
Based on consistent road geometry. Loop roads with many branching routes in
Curvilinear or rectilinear formations, tree-like configurations, mainly culs-de-
mostly meeting at right angles. sac; low connectivity.
Table 5 – ABCD Composition and Configuration (Marshall 2004)
In other perspectives, Table 5 begins to communicate an idea of permeability.
Permeability serves as a synonym for connectivity and integration, and can begin to shed
24 | P a g e

62. light on how accessible a street pattern may be as well as how different routes connect to
form a network.
03.9: Final Statement
Most urban design challenges including the design of mixed-use developments have all
attempted to create a successful “place.” Its intention has been to introduce a focal point
in the project that is inviting to the visitor as well as encouraging interaction among
visitors. Whether or not a project is successful can only be realized by firsthand
experience gained from visiting the project. It is difficult to place the blame of an
unsuccessful project on just one factor alone; as such it assumed in this thesis that the
integral factor to any mixed-use project is its level of integration among program uses
and subsequently among users.
The physical configuration of uses serves as the initial step in achieving a fully integrated
project. This builds on the synergy being established among these various program uses
and as such begins to influence a more vibrant space for users to interact. It is also
important for all projects including mixed-use developments to adopt socio-economic
sustainable aspects. These socio-economic sustainable aspects are centered on dense
developments that provide most of its inhabitants needs within the vicinity. The
development should also be accessible to potential and current users by means of mass
transit.
25 | P a g e

63. It is also important to mediate any obstructions to integration and interaction that may
exist in a development. Physical barriers such as solid walls should be minimized and
converted into more transparent and porous surfaces that will allow for users to interact
with uses and users behind walls. Interaction should also be encouraged by merging and
fusing pedestrian circulation paths within a development. A development can also engage
a user or visitor by creating destinations through visually oriented vistas along pedestrian
circulation paths.
If these factors are included in the initial design phases of any project, there will be a
higher possibility of creating a more vibrant development, and as such an integrated place
that encourages interaction. In such a well planned scenario it is easier for users to attach
value to the development which would eventually create a sense of place or community,
which is much needed in branding any development.
26 | P a g e

64. 04Precedence and Case Studies
04.1: Canal City | Jerde Partnership
Location: Fukuoka City, Japan
Completed: April 20, 1996
Total Cost: $1.4 Billion
Site Area: 9 Acres
Figure 1 ‐ Canal Acrobats (Jerde Partnership)
Gross Building Area: 2,583,000 SqFt
Cost Per SqFt: $542
Summary:
Canal City Hakata serves as the largest, privately developed and financed project in
Japan’s history (Jerde Partnership). Due to the presence of a great number of people and a
dying shopping district, Canal City served as a catalyst for redevelopment and economic
growth in the commercial market. It has won several awards, but what it is most notable
for and its relevance to this thesis, is serving as a successful example of a public space.
The circulation through Canal City occurs along its inner edges that are anchored by a
series of open spaces and engaging landscaping. Its most successful space is the Neg
Sphere (Figure 1.) which serves as a space for performances and gatherings.
27 | P a g e

65. Apart from the successful open space realized in this project, the ratios of the varying
functions or uses is important to grasp in order to understand the interaction and synergy
that exists between functions and possibly users of these functions. This mixed-use
development has 4 functions – entertainment, hotel, office, and retail. Retail serves as its
core function followed by hotel, office and then entertainment functions (see Tables 6, 7,
8). With retail as its core function, the ratio of retail-to-entertainment is 2.05; for every
square foot of entertainment there exists 2 square feet of retail functions. The ratio of
retail-to-hotel is 0.99; which means that for every square foot of hotel there is an almost
equal square footage of retail to serve it. Also, the ratio of retail-to-office space is 1.43;
which means that for every square foot of office there are one and a half times as many
retail square feet to serve its users.
Category Uses Number of Units Square Feet % of Development
Entertainment
Theater Uses 91,490 4.55
Cinema Uses 113,000 5.61
Other Entertainment Uses 102,300 5.08
Sub-Total 306,790sqft 15.24%
Hotel
Luxury Hotel Uses 400 rooms 505,900 25.13
Business Hotel Uses 420 rooms 129,200 6.42
Sub-Total 635,100sqft 31.55%
Office
Office Uses 441,300 21.93
Sub-Total 441,300sqft 21.93%
Retail
Commercial Showroom Uses 75,350 3.74
Restaurant Uses 80,730 4.01
Shopping Retail Uses 473,600 23.53
Sub-Total 629,680sqft 31.28%
Total Development 2,012,870sqft 100%
(Net)
Table 6 ‐ Canal City Summary of Uses
28 | P a g e

66.
TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE (thousands) 700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Entertainment Hotel Office Retail
CATEGORIES
Table 7 ‐ Canal City Uses
2500
TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE(thousands)
2000
1500 Net Total
Retail
1000 Entertainment
Hotel
500 Office
0
Comp. 1 Comp. 2 Comp. 3
CATEGORIES
Table 8 – Canal City Comparison Uses
29 | P a g e

67. CATEGORIES Entertai
nment
15%
Retail
(31.28%)
31%
Hotel
Office 32%
22%
Figure 2 – Percentage of Canal City Uses
04.2: Sony Center am Potsdamer Platz | Murphy/Jahn
Location: Berlin, Germany
Completed: June 14, 2000
Total Cost: $900 Million
Site Area: 6.5 Acres
Gross Building Area: 1,425,700 SqFt
Cost Per SqFt: $631
Figure 3 – Sony Center Atrium (Murphy 2001)
Summary:
The Sony Center served as a catalyst for redevelopment of Potsdamer Platz after World
War II. Its goal was to re-instate and encourage the sense of place of Potsdamer Platz as a
30 | P a g e

68. shopping, entertainment, and cultural destination. This Sony Center is an example of a
modernist downtown mixed-use development planned around an enclosed public space
(Schwanke 2003). The public space at the center of this development was made highly
accessible through open-air passage ways. This interactive core of an open public space is
called the Forum (Figure 3.), and is shaped in an elliptical fashion. The Forum is
interactive and engaging, with a fountain in the center, and also serves as a theater and
performance space.
This mixed-use development has 4 functions – entertainment, office, residential, and
retail. Office serves as its core function followed by residential, entertainment, and then
retail functions (see Table 9, 10, 11). With office as its core function, the ratio of office-
to-entertainment is 4.01; for every square foot of entertainment there exists four times the
square feet of office function. The ratio of office-to-residential is 2.57; which means that
for every square foot of residential there is two and a half times the square footage of
office that may serve the same users. Also, the ratio of office-to-retail space is 8.41;
which means that for every square foot of retail there is eight and a half times as many
office uses. According to Figure 2 – Framework for Estimating On-Site Synergy, out of
all these relationships at Potsdamer Platz the best synergy exists between the Office
functions and the Retail and Entertainment functions; a synergy rating of 4 out of 5
(Table 2.). A lesser synergy also exists between its other functions; the next would be the
synergy between Office uses and Residential uses which has a synergy rating of 2 out of
5 (Table 2.). Although this may seem too low to have been considered, understanding
that this low rating makes up for the synergy relationship between Residential uses and
31 | P a g e

69. Retail and Entertainment uses which is marked as a synergy rating as either 4 out of 5 or
5 out of 5 (Table 2.) depending on which function placed as the core function.
Category Uses Number of Units Square Feet % of Development
Entertainment
Cinema Uses 182,920 14.2
Sub-Total 182,920sqft 14.2%
Office
Office Uses 733,000 56.9
Sub-Total 733,000sqft 56.9%
Residential
Residential Uses 26,500 285,140 22.13
Sub-Total 285,140sqft 22.13%
Retail
Shopping Retail Uses 87,160 6.77
Sub-Total 87,160sqft 6.77%
Total Development 1,288,220sqft 100%
(Net)
Table 9 ‐ Sony Center Summary of Uses
800
TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE(thousands)
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Entertainment Office ResidenXal Retail
CATEGORIES
Table 10 ‐ Sony Center Uses (Bar Chart)
32 | P a g e

70. 1400
TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE(thousands) 1200
1000
800 Net Total
Office
600
Entertainment
400 ResidenXal
Retail
200
0
Comp. 1 Comp. 2 Comp. 3
CATEGORIES
Table 11 ‐ Sony Center Comparison Uses
Retail
7% CATEGORIES Entertai
nment
14%
Residen
Xal
22%
Office
57%
Figure 4 ‐ Sony Center (Pie Chart)
33 | P a g e

71. 04.3: Downtown Silver Spring | RTKL Associates
Location: Maryland, USA
Completed: October 18, 2000
Total Cost: $320 Million
Site Area: 22 Acres
Gross Building Area: N/A
Cost Per SqFt: $216 Figure 5 ‐ Downtown Silver Spring
Summary:
Unfortunately, relevant information as to the square footage break down of downtown
Silver Spring was unavailable. There was only information on the office and retail
functions’ square footages, and only unit quantifications to the cinema and hotel uses
(Table 12). The sense of place experienced at this mixed-use development is more
important to discuss than the synergy and amount of square footage per uses. Although
this great atmosphere experienced in its open space is directly influenced by synergy
between uses, it is as well influenced by scale and good architectural design. The open
space in downtown Silver Spring primarily exists as a major pedestrian circulation artery,
although performances and events may occur along this path. Downtown Silver Spring
serves as a great example of shaping a sense of place and its successful qualities will be
emulated in this thesis.
34 | P a g e

72. Category Uses Number of Units Square Feet % of Development
Entertainment
Cinema Uses 14 screens N/A N/A
Sub-Total
Office
Office Uses 185,000 N/A
Sub-Total 185,000sqft
Hotel
Hotel Uses 179 units N/A N/A
Sub-Total
Retail
Shopping Retail Uses 444,000 N/A
Sub-Total 444,000sqft
Total Development 1,476,134sqft 100%
(Net)
Table 12 ‐ Downtown Silver Spring Summary of Uses
04.4: The Gateway | Jerde Partnership
Location: Utah, USA
Completed: November 1, 2001
Total Cost: $375 Million
Site Area: 30 Acres
Gross Building Area: 1,517,711SqFt
Figure 6 ‐ The Gateway (Jerde Partnership)
Cost Per SqFt: $247
Summary:
The Gateway served as an urban redevelopment project to revive the Salt Lake City’s
downtown core. The Gateway is a mixed-use development that is sensitive to the public
realm as an urban street lined with housing and office functions above two levels of
35 | P a g e

73. retail, entertainment and cultural facilities. Its anchor open public space is located at one
of the entrances and serves as a gathering space all year round. Although at too large a
scale, this case study is admired for its contextualism, response to scale, and successful
implementation of an open public space.
In observing Tables 13, 14, and 15, it is plain to see the relationships between its varying
uses – cultural, office, residential, and retail. Its core function is retail which constitutes
33.9% (Figure 7.) of its total square footage. The synergy that exists between retail and
cultural uses has a rating of 4 out of 5 (Table 2.) and with a ratio of 4.09. The ratio of
retail-to-office is 1.36 and the synergy rating is 5 out of 5 (Table 2.). Lastly, the ratio of
retail-to-residential is 0.96 and the synergy rating is an obvious 5 out of 5 (Table 2.).
Category Uses Number of Units Square Feet % of Development
Cultural
Cultural Uses 118,403 8.09
Sub-Total 118,403sqft 8.09%
Office
Office Uses 355,209 24.26
Sub-Total 355,209sqft 24.26%
Residential
Residential Uses 500 505,904 34.56
Sub-Total 505,904sqft 34.56%
Retail
Shopping Retail Uses 484,375 33.09
Sub-Total 484,375sqft 33.09%
Total Development 1,463,891sqft 100%
(Net)
Table 13‐ The Gateway Summary of Uses
36 | P a g e

74. 600
TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE(thousands) 500
400
300
200
100
0
Cultural Office ResidenXal Retail
CATEGORIES
Table 14 ‐ The Gateway Uses (Bar Chart)
1600
TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE(thousands)
1400
1200
1000
Net Total
800 Retail
600 Cultural
Office
400
ResidenXal
200
0
Comp. 1 Comp. 2 Comp. 3
CATEGORIES
Table 15 ‐ The Gateway Comparison Uses
37 | P a g e

75. Cultural
CATEGORIES 8%
Retail
33%
Residen
Xal
35%
Office
24%
Figure 7 ‐ The Gateway (Pie Chart)
38 | P a g e

76. 05Site Selection
05.1: Old Town Kensington, Maryland
Kensington is an old “Victorian-era garden suburban”
town (Town of Kensington 2007) rich with history.
Before Kensington, the land on which it sits and its
surrounding neighborhood once existed as a land
grant which was purchased, subdivided and sold off
to farmers by Daniel Carroll; who was a signer of the
Declaration of Independence (Town of Kensington Figure 8 – Montgomery County, MD
(Montgomery County Planning Department
2008)
2007). A notable farmer that purchased a parcel was George Knowles whose farm
property was bisected by the Baltimore & Ohio Railroad in 1873. In 1891, Knowles
Station was coined in commemoration of George Knowles, since the rail station was
located on his property. This metropolitan branch line connected Washington, D.C. to
Point of Rocks in Maryland and facilitated commerce to George Knowles and other
farmers within the vicinity.
The name “Kensington” was not used until 1894, and the town (then village) was then
referred to as “Village of Knowles Station.” It was in 1894 that a bill was passed into
Maryland’s legislature to create the municipality known today as the “Town of
Kensington.” The Kensington Park Subdivision was created when Brainard Warner
purchased property just south of the station. Brainard Warner built a home there for
summer getaways from the city of Washington, D.C. and eventually sold parcels to
39 | P a g e

77. friends in order to build and re-create a “garden suburban” after his favored Kensington
in England (Town of Kensington 2007).
Although the name “Kensington” was not crowned
till around 1894 it retains a lot of its character,
Kensington is still referred to as the Town where “the
train still stops and the citizens still walk” (Town of
Kensington 2007). The Town of Kensington
measures 0.5 square miles in area and as of the 2000
U.S. Census had a population of about 1,873 (Table
Figure 9 ‐ Sector Plan Boundary
(Montgomery County Planning Department
16). Kensington is transected by Connecticut Avenue, University Boulevard West and
2008)
Knowles Avenue (Figure 10, 16.). Kensington has had a lot of developments take place
around its Town and fortunately remains equidistant to two Metrorail Red Line Stations –
Wheaton Station and Grosvenor-Strathmore Station; it is also sustained by Knowles
Station, a MARC commuter rail that connects it to Washington, D.C. and Silver Spring.
Currently, the West Howard Antique District is reason for the town’s status as a specialty
retail destination; however there is not enough activity present to sustain its shops.
Kensington is located of Connecticut Avenue, a road that serves an average of 43,000-
55,000 commuter vehicles/day in comparison to (Urban Land Institute 2008):
 Rockville Pike north of Strathmore which carries 54,900 vehicles/day
 Georgia Avenue in Silver Spring which carries 43,000 vehicles/day
 Wisconsin Avenue in Bethesda which carries less than 40,000 vehicles/day.
40 | P a g e

78. There has been relatively little development in the Town of Kensington since 1978 when
the Sector Plan was approved. Between 1978 and
1990, the Planning Board approved just over
225,000 square feet of non-residential space –
shared between Kaiser Permanente medical facility
located on Connecticut Avenue and the Bakery,
Confectionary, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers
International Union headquarters also on
Connecticut Avenue (Montgomery County Planning
Department 2008). By June 2008, Kensington had
been picked as a location to put a Safeway store,
this now serves as Kensington’s main grocery store
and has provided a significant amount of jobs for
the Town of Kensington. Minor residential square
footage has also been developed occurring as small
subdivisions – 20 townhouses at Kensington
Crossing and 23 single-family detached houses at
Kensington Orchids, both located on Plyers Mill
Road (Montgomery County Planning Department 2008).
41 | P a g e

79. Visiting Kensington helps one realize the
significance of its historic shopping district. Its
history is evident in fading store signages (ghost
signs), to benches and light poles, including the
architectural language of the place. It is obvious that
Old Town Kensington has a “sense of place.” The
goal of this thesis would be to capitalize on this rich
history and sense of place and, connect it to a new
and responsive architecture that will encourage
interaction and catalyze the historic shopping
district as a vibrant shopping and gathering
destination.
The Goals of the Sector Plan are as follows
(Montgomery County Planning Department 2008):
 Enliven the town center
 Promote sustainability
 Connect Kensington’s neighborhood to a
revitalized town center
 Continue to accommodate regional traffic
passing through Kensington
 Explore regulatory methods for retaining the
scale and character of Kensington.
42 | P a g e

80. Town of Kensington Maryland
Land Area 0.5 sq mi 9,802 sq mi
Population 1,873 5,296,486
Households 729 1,980,859
Persons per Household 2.6 2.6
Jobs (2005) 10,268 2,608,457
Median Income $76,716 $52,868
Density (2005) 3,666/sq mi 540/sq mi
YEAR 2000 CENSUS DATA
Age:
Under 18 440 (23.5%) 1,492,965 (20.0%)
18‐65 1,055 (56.3%) 3,204,214 (67.8%)
Over 65 378 (20.2%) 603,799 (11.4%)
Below Poverty Level 39 (2.1%) 1,350,604 (25.5%)
Racial Composition:
White 1,686 (90.0%) 3,391,308 (64.0%)
Black 47 (2.5%) 1,477,411 (27.9%)
Hispanic 86 (4.6%) 277,916 (4.3%)
Tenure:
Owner Households 4,735 (80.6%) 1,341,751 (67.7%)
Renter Households 1,142 (19.4%) 639,108 (32.3%)
43 | P a g e

81. Vacancy Rate 227 (3.7%) 164,424 (7.7%)
Table 16 – Kensington/Maryland Demographics, 2000 U.S. Census
Table 16: Kensington/Maryland Demographics Comparison (Kensington, MD; City-Data
2008).
 Median household income significantly above state average.
 Median house value significantly above state average.
 Unemployed percentage significantly below state average.
 Black race population percentage significantly below state average.
 Hispanic race population percentage above state average.
 Median age significantly above state average.
 Foreign-born population percentage significantly above state average.
 Number of rooms per house above state average.
 House age significantly above state average.
 Number of college students below state average.
 Percentage of population with a bachelor's degree or higher significantly above
state average.
05.2: Site Analysis
Included in the site analysis is information relevant to grasping the specifity of the
location in which this thesis will be located; that is Kensington, MD. Fortunately, due to
the density and ratio at the site there exists a sense of enclosure which frequently is hard
44 | P a g e

82. to find in a suburban setting. As much as this town is known for its scale, history, and
Figure 10 ‐ Border of the Town of Kensington, Maryland (Map from USGS)
45 | P a g e

83. feel, it still lacks the dimensions for a friendly walkable community along West Howard
District’s shop frontage. The presence of a rail road track serves as a man-made barrier to
connecting the north-bound
side of the historic shopping
district. Also, Connecticut
Avenue with 45,000 to
55,000 daily commuters
(Urban Land Institute 2008)
in vehicles creates a serious Figure 11 ‐ (Kensington, MD; City‐Data 2008)
problem for pedestrians to
cross over to the west-bound
area of Kensington.
Kensington’s climate is stable
in comparison to U.S. or
Maryland’s averages (see
Figures 11, 12, 13, 14, 15), Figure 13 ‐ (Kensington, MD; City‐Data 2008)
therefore the design of this
thesis project would be
considered with good design
principles in mind in reference
to the climate.
Figure 12 ‐ (Kensington, MD; City‐Data 2008)
46 | P a g e

84.
The obstruction posed by these
two man‐made barriers – the
railroad track and Connecticut
Avenue, has influenced the site
selection chosen for the new
proposed development.
Connecticut Avenue divides the Figure 14 ‐ (Kensington, MD; City‐Data 2008)
development into two
considerations for possible
sites. Figure 10 shows the
primary and secondary site
areas for the development to
occur; either to the east or
Figure 15 ‐ (Kensington, MD; City‐Data 2008)
west of Connecticut Avenue. Figure 16 goes more in‐depth about the ranking and specifies the
boundaries in which the development is to occur. The primary sites are labeled 1 through 3 in
Figure 16, while the secondary sites are labeled sites 4 and 5. It is important that sites 1 through
3 be the main drivers because they are opposite the West Howard Shopping District as well as
Knowles Station, and a design could mediate the two disjoined areas of both sides of the
railroad tracks.
47 | P a g e

85.
Figure 16 ‐ Analyses of Site; Possible Sites Considered Within Kensington (Map from USGS)
48 | P a g e

86.
Figure 17 ‐ Drainage and Sun Analysis, Topography Overlay (Map from USGS)
49 | P a g e

87. From the site analysis, site visits, and reports, these are the challenges and key issues that
need to be addressed:
 Few Linkages across the Railroad Tracks (Between Antique Row and West Howard
Antiques District)
 Dispersed Retail
 No Town Center or Focal Point
 Traffic
 Zoning Disincentives
 Older, Existing Buildings and Shopping Centers
 Poor Signage and Town Branding
 Build‐to‐Line and Defining Street Edge
50 | P a g e

88.
Figure 18 ‐ Existing Land Use, Kensington,MD (Montgomery County Planning Department 2008)
51 | P a g e