THE PUBLIC FRAMEWORK:
Some Thoughts About Public, Semi-Public Spaces and Their Interrelationship,
Private pcsadTerItreainhp
Social
So As to Encourage Spatial Interaction
Communal
by
Peter Nicholas ilton
B. A. Syracuse University
1967
M.B.A. Indiana University
1969
SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF ARCHITECTURE AT THE
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
FEBRUARY, 1977
Signature
of Author
Department of Architecture
February 10, 1977
Certified by
Jan Wampler
Thesis Supervisor
Accepted by
Wayne Andersen, Chairman
Depjrtmental Committee for Graduate Students
Archives
(MAR 1 11977
ABSTRACT
THE PUBLIC FRAMEWORK: Some Thoughts About Public, Semi-pPurbie Spaces and
Social
Their Interrelationship, So As To Encourage Spatial Interaction by
Communal
Peter Nicholas Elton.
SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE ON 10 FEBRUARY 1977 IN PARTIAL
FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARCHITECTURE.
This thesis concerns itself with an investigation and formal exploration
, and public exterior spaces found in hcommunty
into the range of semi-prv
public5comnt
design. Reference and personal observations have been recorded in a
partial catalogue and some conclusions were applied to a "public framework"
design for a rural site in Northboro, Massachusetts. Much of this process
has been recorded in drawings, diagrams, and photos.
Thesis Supervisor: Jan Wampler
Title: Associate Professor of Arc itecture
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ...................
HYPOTHESIS..................
CONCLUSIONS.................
..6
CATALOGUE...................
DOCUMENTATION
SITE BACKGROUND INFORMATION.........
.11
SITE PLAN AND SECTIONS..............
.13
SITE DIAGRAMS.......................
.17
SMALLER PIECE DIAGRAMS AND DESIGN...
BIBLIOGRAPHY........................
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS....................
HYPOTHESIS
The topic of this thesis resulted form an interest in the housing problem
more specifically the "mass housing" problem.
It seems that group, mass
or conglomerate housing is and will be an increasing phenomenon in the
U.S.
The prototypical single family dwelling, in the past and present
held as the American ideal is less economically viable to build, maintain and heat for a large segment of the population, than during much
of the first two thirds of the 20th century. Additional consequences
of such single family development is resulting in large scale suburban
sprawl; an ineffective land use pattern that does not allow for a
sufficient range of land uses and densities.
Many housing schemes and new communities built in the U.S. do not seem
to deal with the variety of spaces between the extreme public and private.
It appears that people require the fullest range possible to meet their
personal needs, and to enable social interaction.
This range incorporates a series of spaces, of differing form, use
and density and might be referred to as a hierarchy of spaces.
This
hierarchy allows a designer to incorporate certain necessary variety
of places into identifiable sub-communities.
PROCESS
In order to understand the existence of such a hierarchyan attempt was
made at cataloguing the variety and types of conditions seen as favorable
qualities, from the references and from personal observations.
Table 1).
(See
The categories are split into "linear" and "place" divisions.
These titles refer to the form and movement patterns found in differing
types of exterior spaces.
It appears that a strongly directional,
open ended location, such as a path, street, etc. (linear) exhibits
very different use patterns from an enclosed space with little or no
directionality, such as a square, plaza, green, etc.(place).
There is,
naturally, much overlap and combining of these two categories.
Among
the characteristics considered in the catalogue were:number of people
and/or units associated with space; way in which it is used; sociological and psychological needs to which it responds; images or references
to which it corresponds; and general form, dimension, and closure
conclusions.
The order in which these topics were placed was based
upon the quantity of people associated with particular space, because
it seems important that such identification occur at all scales of
density.
In the site planning stage, decisions were made so as to make identifiable
sub-communities. Some of this is shown in sub-community diagram
(Fig. 1
). This drawing shows clusters of housing from three to
twenty units.
Often times a unit will be part of a sub-cluster as
well as a larger group.
Frequently, these clusters include some
specific piece of hierarchical public framework acting as a focus.
In the hierarchical diagram (Fig.lt ), such focii are indicated,
commonly occuring more than once within a cluster, or conversely
6
outside any specific group.
The labeling on this diagram uses the
letters LH (linear hierarchy) and PH (place hierarchy) plus a number
which corresponds to numbers in the catalogue.
This notation system,
which pushes to illustrate the application of the hierarchy system
to the scheme, might help to understand many design decisions.
Site and program selection centered around finding
that
itainht
creating a situation
would best facilitate the public framework idea in a design. The
program was based on one developed by T.A.C. (The Architect's Collaborative) for a Quaker community that it is designing.
This has been
combined with a site that offers sufficient variety in form and scale
to accommodate the density deemed necessary to "accomplish" necessary
formal and social results.
The owner of the site additionally has
added a program of a similar philosophical nature. These two
combined and altered make up the present program.
Once basic site plan was laid out, five areas were chosen as prototype
situations as well as being exemplary of a particular category found
in hierarchy catalogue.
At this point, several diagram alternatives
were generated of each of these five areas (Figs.
,9,)
and one was selected from each as a final scheme. This one was worked
into physical form (Figs.
).
It was the original intention to then work some of the other diagrams
for the same five locations, into physical form.
However, instead
development of entire site plan into physical form was pursued.
In this
case, for any given area no alternate diagrams were produced, in fact,
some areas were only links to nodal points set in the first five sections.
In addition to illustrating attempted use of hierarchy catalogue in
design process, an effort was made to produce an identifiable pedestrian
network which might not always coincide with vehicular uses (Figs. 7 4 & ).
Finally, an attitude adopted towards this project was one of integration
of uses as well as segments alloted more strictly to commercialresidential, etc. activities alone (Fig.
'0
CONCLUSION
Upon looking at the scheme in its present state it would appear that the
public framework is, in fact, overly rich and designed.
It is important,
however, to remember that the Quaker program stresses a strong sense of
community and places for communal activities.
Furthermore, there is an
optimistic mix of "communal living buildings" and individual units.
Once again, we must look to a program which stresses the integration of
elderly into the community and pushes for their non-isolation.
It
is true that the choice of a Quaker community as an example might not be
prototypical for the U.S., but it seems that much of Europe's rural
settlements have a coherent recognizable framework with the street as
a place "to be", for social interaction and identity.
Conversely, in
suburban settlements in the U.S., the street is something to go through
in order to arrive at a more private activity area.
Finally, in many of the references used in the catalogue, some strong
social order is prevalent, such as the church, during the creation and
use of such communities which probably contributes significantly to
the use patterns.
Cottage City, Martha's Vineyard, Mass., also,
was created and based on a strong social order of a religious sect.
Much of that has now been removed, however, and the people seem to
find the physical form an enabler, no
,
in fact, an encourager of
social intergration and individual identification with the community.
It is this that is seen as a positive attribute to a community design
and one which should be aspired towards.
PARTIAL HIERARCHY OF SPACE CATALOGUE
Number of
People
Units
Uses and Sociological
Justification
Need
Relation in
Public Chain
Private
Image/Reference
Title Name
Public
Private
Category
Plan
Forr;- Section
Linear Hierarchies
Semi -pri vate
2-5 unit
15-20 people
-Access
Relates to:
Private
-Very directional
-Can go up or down
contour
-Two sided closure
-Double open ended
- Very tight
-Light well
-Limited Use
-Usually has
control point
-Usually defensible
territory
-Paris/Italian tight
alley ways
-Short cut passages
-Pass through in English
garden community developments.
-Pedestrian distribution
Relates to:
Private
-Stepped Italian hillside
pedestrian paths
-Side street around Harvard
Square
-Shaver Lane,
Cambridge, MA.
-Very directional
-Can go up or down
-Simple plan form
-Two sided closure
-Double open ended
-8 to 14 feet
depending whether
for vehicles.
-Italian and South American
Streets
-Still very directional
-Can accommodate some
non-directional form
-Starts to be more
complex in plan
-Largely two sided
closure
-Double open-ended
-Directional/relates to
car
-Closure, however,
less noticeable
Semi- Private
Public
15-20 units
Private
Semi- Public
Public
Semi-Public
Public
7~et
± 50 units
Sub-Community
Dimension
4 or 5 feet
Public
Private
SemiSm-Publ
ic
Semi-Public
Public
Closure
Scale of Surrounding
Buildings
-Can serve as use place
not intended for
-Social organizer
-Pedestrian access
Relates to:
-Serve as sub-community
focus
-Link to sub-community
use place(s)
-Vehi cul ar/pedestrian
Relates to:
Private
Semi- Public
Public
. Private
SemiPublic
Public
-Japanese village
-Larger alleys
-Streets that often run
parallel to Main Street
-Larger dimension
-30+ feet
PARTIAL HIERARCHY OF SPACE CATALOGUE
Time Name
Place Hierarchy
(Similar to place
hierarchy #3)
74
Publ i c
Private
Category
Number of
People
Units
Uses and Sociological
Justification
Need
-Serves often as alternative to town
square
-Vehicle scale, however,
often used by vehicles
in pedestrian fashion
(cruising)
Relation in
Public
Chain
Pri vate
Image/Reference
Form-Plan
Section
Publ ic
Larger community
Semi-Private
2-5 units
2-12 people
-Communal front yard
-Entrance cluster
-Highly developed
-Occasional cars
-"Built out door living
room"
-Smallest possible cluster
above private unit
Semi-Private
SeiPublic
±20 units
25-60 people
-Large communal entrances
-Daily communal uses:
laundry, mail, trash,
parks, gardens
Relates to:
Private and public
-Generally directional
-Spanish hacienda court
N.Y.
Gardens,
-Sunnyside
-More complex form in
-Forest close, Forest HillsN.Y. both plan and section
-Shaver Lane, Cambridge, MA.
Semi-Public
Public
±50 units
60-125 people
-Serve as focus and use
place for sub-community
-Give sense of sub-community
Relates to:
Public and
Semi-public
-Complexes of buildings
-Housing projects
-Built sub-divisions of cities
Public
±100 units
-Major community use
-School, etc.
-Large "open air" market
-Larger vehicular uses
-Not actual major town centerbut serves as "community
center"
Relates to:
Public and
Semi-public
-Medieval town square
-Arcade
-Shopping center
120-275 people
-Relates to:
-Semi-Public
-Public
Relates to:
. Public
Semi-Private
American Main Street
-Paris apartment courtyard
-South American interior
court
-English Garden
Closure
Scale of Surrounding
Buildings
-Larger dimension
500 feet
-Directionality less
noticeable
-Sometimes bends around
corner
-Usually slightly directional
-Usually single level
-Natural shapes of larger
landscape (i.e.,in the
valley
-Identifiable piece of landscape
-Identifiable large scale
urban piece
-Usually happens on level
site
Dimension
-Usually fairly enclosed
on at least 2 or 3 sides
-1 to 3 stories, building
heights not to exceed
space's plan dimension
-Fairly small
20'-40'
-Usually open only on I
or 2 sides
Large
-Can have closure on
several sides but varies
Large
PARTIAL HIERARCHY OF SPACE CATALOGUE
Public
Title Name
Private
Category
Number of
People
Units
Uses and Sociological
Justification
Need
Relation in
Public Chain
Image/Reference
Related to:
-Village green
tloan
ormFomSecti on
Pri vatehan
Closure
Scale of Surrounding
Buildings
Dimension
Place Hierarchies
Public
+250 people
-Major whole community
focus
-Minor interaction point
with "outside world"
Public
-Squares in Somerville
-Shopping plaza's and
malls
-Center pavilion in
Cottage City
7,A
I
-Identifiable large
scale
-Usually on level
site
-Large
V
\
/
Aoro
CONTEXT
CENTfRAL
. I
MASSACHUSETTS
REGIONAL
PLANNING
COMMISSION
Z
4
-
4.'
-
4',
4~
1-~
)
1.
.y
rI
'op
-
I..
\IDPIT
0
3
-
III
...
\~t?*'~
4**44*
.4\.-
-
~~
-y
-*9
44T
or
-t
-
-K..-i
flQ
hrr!-e
17
A
I..
TI
"4.4
-
.4
c~
*144
4 '.4.
~~1
-.
-.
3
"OI
1~
-Apll
A
.7o
-
pq 4'
~d
4.
~
mom
r 7<
A
-Vi,
j*l'*
'I
4
~1 ~iiiim
I1
1
,,Toll
19
%I
SITE SECTIONS
/O. 6
I
r
-p
WORKING MODEL
m1plompieww"
NW-W
-4--,
-A.-
EI~
~
-,..
.3
I2
'Ij
71
LF$
F
-14
.a~I
*
~~1
*A.
-
4d
-
-. '.
g
U-
.4.
I
4
Ii
A-
Vi
~
C-1-1
*401
-- Fr~~i
~
* -,A
PEW
r--J!L
j~i~
A-
c-I
-4
IL.
14
,1
v
1~~
V
\i
IARCJ~
A-f
7
Ae4
A-Alp
0,
PEDESTRIAN NETWORK
...........
ww
WW
I
-
E41
V
Id
"II.-
A
i..,
-.
2
I-
* .4
* I
~'~~1.
*1*~
r7~
.Ii
--
rn~
.-.
-;
~tqw~
N
6,
,-~~r't ~
F
I Ii
4,.".
wNN
,--
#7
I,
VEHICULAR
I
rif. 0
(
.'-
NETWORK
-
4K.Wo 7w
i4
Y
A
-A
I.
~'
'1
-ZI%
ik9
d*
q
$-t
OIL?
*-,
.1~
,4b.4.
MUM-
I;
/1
ii
vf~dd~.'
E&I
PARKING
AA
NETWORK
-
:.oM
R 0
-
"paw4
U'Amlr
PA 64 P-4 A. L.6A 10.21 P-J
DIAGRAM
Fif /a
MaEaM
-
.
'.'
-~p
i
.NA
J
1~
"L
,~,..
.-
PT,
At
.%
IAR
z
F14.4.
**r
IICAL DIAGRAM
ALTERNATE DIAGRAMS
". A1 4
4L
I
8-
e al/koD/Alt4
" 4 e-f
//N
.47
-
fAA' 'A4'7 f
6i4/PPfAP 1
4/f
-
~J-1DI
WORKING ELEMENTS
kA
A
-kI
Mh
CCU
0-M4b'4
rj4pM0A1Orrac
-M MkQd-tf
I
H:5t*-j
zte
-
rx. &5rcer
a4s Ar6er
w40
A-L-4L kN
4. ca06b
WPAw
ov.:rMtt
. orE ger
-PIlCr1t4'46~ A5
FINAL DIAGRAM
I
4
Z.
OAL- toD4 4 ANaT NAL, Aj~A6
0021 f77cN'5 4,PAkA/4f~
3. uss F
MAuf
MorA/4)/ru4IF (Ajk
'.
6
AK4 &s~X71' FA/41 A* p A.t/N(hiB '7
dAs*-> Disi
6.
Am-Csur~
-
AIon5
As rg/st,&44A.
A
"4'
p.-'
I
U.. ~
-5
'(I
~
-L..~
I.
4
~
-c
.. '
'II-
':.
/
,T
74,4
4.
.1~
-'
1-I
&
AsA a
'
~.
N'
~
'.1
~jAI,.
{ti
*
~ I,
it.
'rnr'1
'4-
*
*
'U,>'
-'I
i~LJJ
ti.Li4A4.s.~h6-~4
AI
C5
L~fr
I.....
'
I
*1
4
~
?,
*~
A
I
*
I
I.
'Ii
1<)*
ii
1
* t-
*
I
'dd&t
F
t
1
'
t
kC{
4~1L.
*
c~4.
:111
I~
'4
I,
'~1
t-
+
1
-
.
{
4
r
-%
etj-
3
-w
---
4-
;
p
-+......*.--
/y-
-26
--
I--;
- %*
r1/5
--
-/
4,
--
ALTERNATE
DIAGRAMS
U
-S
'~
AL
:I
TO NvO M-
I
V~c
A."A;
k
m-r.owbr
1WO 9A444 A A&M
3.
M.
: DiFFast6rjTW
ttlOW--"410MY 0 'P
~' I
L~j
9w- V A 04.-I P4 ,
ooioM.-4+wst5';iz&-.ctNoro*
WORKING ELEMENTS
2, fN%'td
9.'.
//
'~Vt~11064
-
tMufitw
u4r'A'%ets4r
b', MA~
A-A.
s*M
f
.:
-a
FINAL DIAGRAM
4
9..----
*-
~---.,.
~
V4,-
1-~~
~t
p0h44
r'R4N4owlt,)t
.~ 1&gnM(- dmPpc4VA
r
or:A Nor4H
-4--'
.-
,-
L
rue'u
ownto
rn+
r
MS- CS
1d.
(
ofA
'
r
.v/
ier
OMfTAe'A6A A/4
, 9.St1p...in~ ?- 1.NAT
am4
boeH-su
AjL.,ko
VJ)
Ila
LFf-
I
'J7~z
ILL
)
44
\3
MIf,"
I
4'Jill,
I
4
it~j
946-
4-
49
It'
K
C. '~'v
I
fr-,
44
-9
4
-4
27
Vt
p
-
-,.-..
I
-
.'Y~'
A
I.,.
44~.
* .44,4,
*44*
ij
.4
V.'
4 '<"'
-
,Orf*. *a
*
*
r4,
.
4
4
/I4~
I'
/
I
'~
i..,~
~
zs
ALTERNATE
DIAGRAMS
6iAPL 110
ri4A6koM54&.Af-p
WORKING
ELEMENTS
4.
*~tn? 1.A4
wc
94
S-1mJop l> MAK" OfX
AgotfD Mb/fA44
f.
FINAL DIAGRAM
1.L.
6. av:Y
-ro 4a6:r- ?W.s
AmoesATX-~i iercr
wrops
A'*Cr*TJ
l4wosesol-1"-
F
(r-T
A6Aos5 erRAT W/ r'
emF
' ",
-o
M Jhlfrtzi
4. twc.i6#
6
,,,c
If,/
~
Post'
PAfn
-- A&
41V
m
0 44%'40.4M64-/
1eAr'rs
ms
'I
ONJ.'
4'
.4N+4
.9..
L4
.ed0j~z'
qvor
4Ii's
Ffft
44
''.t
ALTERNATE DIAGRAMS
64
L_ AMD
. C ,6/
4/
A
.4r'
'.
H
W4i5Atrivry Na' strC
Oiq;At-rY I
o4,
j
I)
r
WORKING
P(Prvi'
-4
4~TI)(
06 *:t4Mr
1-10/PA4
~j
J
ELEMENTS
$
%SixN4
IX
e ir
-~4~L1
t
I
4,
cagt
&
6
/4tt
oe
0
'.4A -4
2:
FINAL DIAGRAM
-4
.
--
j
-4
OA
4.
.4/,jt
4
;e.
Z oj
/As4~tr'v
AAVC
of
M/-/N/'
a~xi
A tyA&#f XT '
Nan)t.
A-.
.Arurry%t
*-4AltiAiA- 9-0-ic,
44>aA
nu r 4>F lTh~rP
4.:e u.4ARz\/iz4.M.~
4s?~4 6gpp2.T~bg
4 ,4>kZ
1
.?'1
(46-PU0I4A~ nVt/r'
r ''
VW%
cQ
ILI
4
11
'-I
-f
K'
-I
p..
p.,.-
Ll
4
'
TTFfITF~~
o~d
5--
I
~I
inmaamhffmhuaq~.~im.smi
I"
t'-Aq ..".t,
'~
ii
tsaw
I
4
SHil
I
;'T''
irrr I
* '~
-0
* 4ji
~
lAP
It
LLmm
1.
1
4
rl
In
-.-
4..4
P"1
i
-
1
.----.-
- e
4
a....-:.
ii
.1
I
~
I
-
1L
.
.
i
/
1
.5
4.
4.
2..,
a*Ih
9
N
-I,
I
I
sq..
mow-7
-
A
.jT7::i7x~f
.ta
T= n
;~II~7T2~
~
P
/
(
I
.1
~
fr~*j~V~
~
I'
,*'.1I
/
~i4
u--
-
-
z-
/
r
4
it
-6-
-
'F*
a.
-
kk
Now,
407
(r
ALTERNATE DIAGRAMS
0
H
U
*L4w MAof-- Nc'r
H4.
MOr -
4Tza &tC.e4,ga , a k t
Nio Muwpii'-vg"g - ioJ,
Arit
?h4
1.,
~J~W~h
z
WORKING ELEMENTS
is
i
.N
011,
-
i-vt
F
i MpA.
A.5A
A
I I- U
M
A6
£PNy
Ir / 4Com M ..eP
e'
-4tr
i
Ak
M
A
4trtk
C.4P~#
z
-J A
-~
9grlmr! NoT Matr1%#V/.
.L ~~CV
'
4.olmcNo
4o1L40&
% 1T6..00
- 'lfjkk
Atg.
6.
/9. 6
U
FINAL DIAGRAM
I
~1T
.
0
.
ER
- 160GAA.
~
TO 40MMJ.N
No,1t6 ALE Pj'LKJ'a / .<#$4A
aa e
P-s
ARg.
'40.L
9
lop
114
IPIT
-~f
I
',lo
A*4
f1
I-I-
Aid
'A/
Ole
F/f V
01 ,'
~
"14,
f
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Boesch, Hans, and Hofer, Paul, Flugbild Der Schweizer Stadt, Kummerly and
Frey, Bern, Switzerland, 1963.
Burke, Gerald, L., The Making of Dutch Towns, Cleaver-HumePress,
Ltd., London, 1956.
Chermayeff, Sergius, and Alexander, Christopher, Community and privacy,
Double Day, Garden City, New York, 1963.
Cullen, Gordon, The Concise Townscape, Van Nostrand Reinhold Company,
London, 1961.
De Carlo, Giancarlo, Urbino, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1970.
Doust, Richard and Fowle, Geoffrey, Design Memorandum on the Use of
Fences, Central Electricity Generating Board, London, 1966.
, Friends Community,
The Architects Collaborative, Cambridge,
MA, 1975, (unpublished manuscript).
Futagawa, Yukio, Villages and Towns,
Italy I, A.D.A. Edita, Tokyo, 1975.
Gay, Godwin, Eco-Community, Cambridge, MA, 1974 (unpublished manuscript).
Hayden, Dolores, Seven American Utopias, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1976.
Hooker, Katharine and Marian, and Hunt, Myron, Farm Houses and Small
Provincial Buildings in Southern Italy, Architectural Book Publishing
Com., Inc., New York, 1925.
Knight, Christopher and Zimring, John, Physical Environment and Its
Influence Towards Normalization, University of Massachusetts, Amherst,
MA, 1976 (unpublished manuscript).
Le Baron, The Camp Meeting at Martha's Vineyard, The Martha's Vineyard
Camp Meeting Association, Oak Bluffs, MA, 1958.
Miao, Andrew, Open Space in Housing, MIT Arch. Department, Cambridge,
MA, 1976, (unpublished M.Arch. Thesis).
Moore, Charles, Allen, Gerald, Lyndon, Donlyn, The Place of Houses,
Holt, Reinholt, and Winston, New York, 1974.
Muratori, Saverio, Studi Per Una Operante Storia Urbana Di Venezia,
Instituto Poligrafico Dello Stato, Rome, 1959.
Pillinato, Luigi, Studi Urbanistici, Sperling and Kupfer, Milan, 1960.
Pressouyre, Sylvia, Rome Au Fil Du Temps, Editions Joel Clienot,
Boulogne, 1973.
Rotondi, Pasquale, The Dual Palace of Urbino, Alec Tiranti, Ltd.,
London, 1969.
Rudofsky, Bernard, Streets for People, Double Day, and Com.,
New York, 1964.
Inc.,
Schoenauer, Norbert and Seeman, Stanley, The Court-Garden House,
McGill University Press, Montreal, 1962.
Scully, Vincent, American Architecture and Urbanism, Praeger, New
York, 1969.
Sekler, Eduard F., Historic Urban Spaces, Grad. School of Design,
Harvard Univ., Cambridge, MA. 1962 (unpublished manuscript).
Sekler, Eduard F., Historic Urban Spaces, Grad. School of Design,
Harvard Univ., Cambridge, MA, 1966 (unpublished manuscript).
, Student's Village, Progressive Architecture, Reinhold
Publication, New York, 1975.
, Jan Wampler Northboro Studio Solutions, MIT Department
of Architecture, Cambridge, MA, 1975 (unpublished document).
Wampler, Jan, Study of the Growth Form of New England Towns, Cambridge,
MA, 1976 (unpublished manuscript).
Zucker, Paul, Town and Square, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1959.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Deepest thanks to Jan Wampler for his patient guidance and support and
inspiration without which my architectural education would have been
a less complete experience.
Many thanks to the readers and consultants, Maurice Smith, Bob Slattery,
Mike Underhill and Imre Halasz.
Thanks to The Architects
Collaborative for the use of their program
and Mr. and Mrs. Godwin Gay for allowing me to use and explore their
land.
Thanks to Bonnie Blanchard and Judy Tully for their pleasant manner
and skillful typing fingers.
Thanks to Nancy Angney, Richard Perlstein, Bill Brownstein, Diane
Georgopulos for their helping hands and non-critical support.
Thanks to Doug Mahone for the use of his fancy machines and beautiful
books.
Very special thanks to Joan Leung, and Kay Barned for their comments
and support, and to Judy Bowen for her silent support and fabulous help.
Thanks to Margo Jones for her distant support and for telling me that
it would end...
And of course greatest appreciation goes to David Mullman who made
...
the experience bearable and the time pass more quickly.
44*A" IM,
-
c'-.~
-
e-
-iv
4
rn-ic
r~04
-A,
ir
-p
Iv
"!J.
-
~.
S
fr~
'W-
'N
(
7AN
I
-
F
9
W
'~F'F
'F,'
F~F
t. ~r
$~F.
I
~7
La
I'm
~
*~F
F.'.',.
-j
9A
r4~
4-
~~
'-C.;
"4':
'S
f
L..
.4
J
-A
V~!1
I
I''
V
*
~
*.
'.~
F,
1~
1'
4'-
7
~
~
~F4
'~"F
(4
;~
.~
~<
'4,
Ft
-~
K..
VLr~Li
*0
Se