Masters Research Project - Grayson Silver (2013) by Frank M. Bosworth PhD, AIA

GATEWAY TAMPA

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT by Grayson T. Silver A research project presented to the University of Florida, School of Architecture in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Masters of Architecture University of Florida 2014 Faculty Advisors: Frank Maling Bosworth III, Ph.D., AIA - Chair Peter E. Prugh, AIA, APT - Co-Chair

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Thank You To Dr. Frank Bosworth, for his insight and guidance throughout this project and for the knowledge he has shared with me throughout my graduate studies. To Professor Peter Prugh, for his enthusiasm and guidance with this project. To my review committee, Director Martin Gold and Professor John Maze, for pushing me to do more and for helping make this project something special. Finally, I would like to thank my wife, Natalia, for all of her support and advice, but most of all, for her love and patience and to my daughter, Sibelle, for giving me perspective and inspiration.

III

TABLE OF CONTENTS List of Figures

VII - XV

Abstract XVII Introduction

1-2

1 - Project Goals

3-4

2 - The Erosion of Tampaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Urban Space

5-10

3 - Location

11-24

4 - Application Tampa

25-38

5 - Gateway Tampa

39-58

6 - Conclusion

59-60

Bibliography

61-62

Images

63-67 V

LIST OF FIGURES fig. 1 – Regional Map Showing Tampa Bay Communities Serviced By New Ferry

fig. 2 – HMS Ferry Inc. Proposed Ferry Routes

fig. 3 – Proposed Ferry Routes Reconfigured

fig. 4 – Tampa’s First Ferry Crossing The Hillsborough River

fig. 5 - Street Car In Ybor City

fig. 6 - Historical Street Car Map – Tampa

fig. 7 - Tampa City Limits 1950 (Blue) Tampa City Limits Present (Orange)

fig. 8 - Vacant Land Between The Central Business District And The Port

fig. 9 - Typical Building Frontage Along Waterfront

fig. 10 - Typical Street, Gateway District

fig. 11 - Tampa Convention Center

fig. 12 - Transit Oriented Design Philosophy Diagram

fig. 13 - Tampa Parking Options W/ Proposed Project Site

fig. 14 - Tampa Segregated From Bay By Highway

fig. 15 - Downtown Tampa Venues –Tampa Bay Times Arena (Top/Left), Channelside (Top/Right)

fig. 16 - Hart Bus Line Routes

fig. 17 - TECO Street car Routes

fig. 18 - In-Town Trolley Routes

fig. 19 - TECO Street Car Pavilion fig. 20 - Marion Street Transportation Center

15 15

VII

VIII

LIST OF FIGURES fig. 21 - Seattle Central Waterfront Redevelopment Master Plan & Conceptual Rendering

fig. 22 - Tampa Riverwalk Districts & Current Condition Photo

fig. 23 - Pier Head Ferry Terminal. Liverpool, England

fig. 24 - Three Graces, Liverpool, England

fig. 25 - Museum of Liverpool, Liverpool, England

fig. 26 - Tampa Waterfront Districts

fig. 27 - Hillsborough Bay

fig. 28 - Seddon Channel

fig. 29 - Sparkman Channel

fig. 30 - Hillsborough River

fig. 31 - Davis Island (Above) Harbour Island (Below)

fig. 32 - Tampa Convention Center

fig. 33 - Sparkman Channel Industrial Ports

fig. 34 - Channel District, Tampa

fig. 35 - Tampa Convention Center Area Existing Condition

fig. 36 - Â˝ Mile & 1 Mile Radius @ Convention Center Area

fig. 37 - Â˝ Mile & 1 Mile Radius @ Channelside Area

fig. 38 - Accessible Open Land @ Convention Center

fig. 39 - Gateway District Aerial

fig. 40 - Tampa City Center Master Plan

fig. 41 - Proposed Site East Of Tampa Convention Center

27 IX

LIST OF FIGURES fig. 42 - Existing Downtown Transit System

fig. 43 - Pedestrian Priority Streets & Proposed Site

fig. 44 - Special Pedestrian Streets & Proposed Site

fig. 45 - Transit & Mobility Streets & Proposed Site

fig. 46 - Tampa Parking Options & Proposed Site

fig. 47 - Existing & Historic Street Car Routes

fig. 48 - Franklin Street Observations

fig. 49 - Tampa Riverwalk Area

fig. 50 - Existing Open Green Space

fig. 51 - Existing Riverwalk Condition @ Proposed Site

fig. 52 - Seattle Central Waterfront Project Area

fig. 53 - Seattle Central Waterfront Redevelopment Conceptual Rendering

fig. 54 - Seattle Central Waterfront Redevelopment Conceptual Rendering

fig. 55 - Seattle Central Waterfront Redevelopment Conceptual Rendering

fig. 56 - Seattle Waterfront Transit Connections

fig. 57 - Seattle Waterfront Street Reconfiguration

fig. 58 - Washington DC Southwest Waterfront Master Plan

fig. 59 - Existing Water Street (Above) New Development Based On Street Reconfiguration (Below)

fig. 60 - City Pier Conceptual Rendering (Left) Wharf Pier Conceptual Rendering (Right)

fig. 61 - Reconfigured District Vehicle Access

36 XI

XII

LIST OF FIGURES fig. 62 - Proposed Mixed-Use Ferry Building

fig. 63 - Proposed Gateway District Redevelopment Master Plan

fig. 64 - Proposed Mixed-Use Ferry Terminal First Floor Plan

fig. 65 - Shared Transit Terminal Diagram

fig. 66 - Proposed Terminal Connection Diagram & Proposed Retail Diagram

fig. 67 - Proposed Mixed-Use Ferry Terminal North Faรงade

fig. 68 - Common Plaza Between The Existing Convention Center & New Ferry Terminal Buildings

fig. 69 - Proposed Market Place Along Tampa Riverwalk

fig. 70 - Proposed Mixed-Use Ferry Terminal Second Floor

fig. 71 - Gateway District Proposed Site Plan

fig. 72 - Gateway District Context

fig. 73 - Gateway District Parking, Vacant Land & Existing Venue Capacity

fig. 74 - American Cities W/ Population Densities Equal To Tampa Gateway Venue Capacities

fig. 75 - Street Closure (Left) Street car Reconfiguration (Right)

fig. 76 - Existing Street Condition (Left) Proposed Street Condition (Right)

fig. 77 - New District Street Configuration

fig. 78 - Street Car Expansion By Phases

fig. 79 - Gateway District Street Car Configuration

fig. 80 - Gateway District Express Bus Loop

fig. 81 - New District Square W/ Street Car Transit To Its West & Bus Transit To Its East

56 XIII

XIV

LIST OF FIGURES

fig. 82 - Existing Condition @ Proposed Pedestrian Mall (Left) Pedestrian Mall Conceptual Rendering (Right)

fig. 83 - Gateway District Redevelopment Pedestrian Path & Gathering Areas

fig. 84 - Gateway District Redevelopment Circulation Network

XVI

ABSTRACT The Hillsborough County Metropolitan Planning Commission and HMS Ferry, Inc. have proposed a new waterborne ferry transit system, scheduled to begin in 2016, which will connect the commercial and cultural districts of Downtown Tampa and St. Petersburg with the surrounding communities of Tampa Bay. The feasibility report conducted by HMS Ferry, Inc. has proposed a series of viable ferry routes which include 8 routes dedicated to Downtown St. Petersburg and only two routes dedicated to Downtown Tampa. Exploration of the existing conditions of both Downtown Tampa and St. Petersburg has indicated that Tampa’s waterfront does not currently possess the type of programming that promotes urban residential densities or sustain ridership of off-peak hour and tourist users. While this research and the proposed project does not avail itself to resolving all the deficiencies of Tampa’s waterfront development, it does attempt to address key aspects for successful urban waterfronts

and transit oriented development goals in defining the role of a new, mixed-use ferry terminal building and its ability to act as a catalyst for district wide redevelopment Research for this project focuses on the city’s unique history; the de-urbanization of the area caused by suburban sprawl and the de-industrialization of the core; the role of the new terminal as both a “node” within the regional transit context and its sense of “place” in creating a vibrant, accessible space along the waterfront; the programmatic needs of the proposed transit plan; and the sustainable economic and architectural practices that will lead to the new ferry terminal’s success and viability. The culmination of this research, along with exploration of the city’s fabric informs the design decisions related to site, scale, form, civic responsibility, and capability to act as a catalyst for district redevelopemnt.

XVII

GATEWAY TAMPA

fig. 1 - Regional Map Showing Tampa Bay Communities Serviced By New Ferry (Top) Downtown Tampa District Map With Proposed Project Site In Red

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT Introduction

The best examples of urban waterfronts capture the aspiration and imagination of their regions by creating energetic, mixed-use districts that extend the experience of the urban core to the waterfront. While Tampa’s central waterfront has historically played a diverse role as frontage for industrial and commercial industries, a means of transport and transportation, a scenic view for residences, and an area of recreational use, it has not served as a particularly inviting waterfront for its citizens. Tampa and the Tampa Bay region’s history is one that includes the recognition and importance of water access in bringing trade and commerce to the Tampa Bay area. It has been both a gateway into the region and a barrier between communities. Currently, the Hillsborough County Planning Commission and HMS Ferry, Inc. have entered into a joint venture, public/private waterborne transit project that will connect the business and cultural districts of Downtown Tampa and Downtown St. Petersburg with other surrounding Tampa Bay communities (fig. 1) These entities have developed a feasibility study to evaluate the viability of waterborne passenger service as alternate transit that would serve as part of the current and future transportation system of the county and region. The feasibility study established potential ferry ridership numbers and has proposed a network of proposed ferry routes. It is important to note that the study indicated that there are 8 potential ferry connections associated with Downtown St. Petersburg and only 2 potential ferry connections associated with Downtown Tampa. (fig. 2) These proposed routes indicate that there is a deficiency in programming and

interest in Tampa especially during off peak hours. If the stated goals of the current project are to affect the levels of individual automobile traffic, which represents the greatest burden on local roadways, while also creating a stable, repetitive market for waterborne commuter service, then the deficiencies of Tampa’s waterfront must be addressed. In recognition of the bay area’s need and vision for new local waterborne transit, this project explores the design potential of a new Downtown Tampa Ferry Terminal and the redevelopment of the Gateway District as a vibrant mixeduse transit oriented community. The existing feasibility study and local context mapping has been used to determine the appropriate site location. A series of case studies such as; Seattle’s waterfront redevelopment and ferry system, San Francisco’s Downtown Ferry Building, and Washington DC’s “Wharf” redevelopment were utilized to determine the projects programming needs, economic sustainability, and accessibility. Finally, the existing Downtown Tampa area’s current and future master plans, supporting transit options, and downtown amenities were analyzed in an effort to determine the new terminal and district’s needs and cultural impacts. The final proposal for this project represents an iconic gateway into the city that defines the city’s characteristics and commitment to fostering a strong relationship with its shoreline while developing the existing Gateway District as a livable community connected locally and regionally through transit oriented design that will increase the areas density and ridership viability. (fig. 3)

fig. 2 - HMS Ferry Inc. Proposed Ferry Routes

fig. 3 - Proposed Ferry Routes Reconfigured

GATEWAY TAMPA

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT

1 - PROJECT GOALS These guiding principles have been developed to advance the goals and objectives that will shape the creation of new public space along Tampa’s central waterfront and gateway district. They capture the civic spirit of a new transit oriented development that will redefine the relationship between the city, it’s southern district, and the water’s edge. They expand on established principles of urban design, as well as, the long-term vision of city policies and civic efforts.

1.1 Create a Waterfront District That Belongs to Everyone

1.4 Improve Access And Mobility To The Waterfront.

The waterfront must engage the entire community. It will attract local residents plus tourist and visitors from other surrounding communities. This is a place that will be welcoming to visitors, invite exploration of the urban environment, and expand the urban core’s districts to the boundaries of the water’s edge and beyond.

If the waterfront is currently cut off from the city and it’s inhabitants, this project will reopen access by providing improved mobility for pedestrians, bicyclist, and waterborne transportation. An understanding that only through collaborative transit efforts; bus, rail, and ferry can the people be connected to the city and region entirely.

1.2 Place Connectivity At The Forefront.

1.5 Create a Vision that Promotes Growth Along the Water’s Edge.

Connecting people with places is imperative to the growth and livability of the city’s core. People will be allowed to experience the region’s most important asset, the bay, in a manner that preserves and promotes the area’s maritime activities. This project will define a commitment from the city to develop the Gateway District as both a means to enter the city, as well as, a device for filtering it’s users throughout the community. 1.3 Connect The City With Tampa Bay. The water will become the gateway into the heart of the city, recognizable by those who live and play here but also by those around the world. This gateway will act in a manner that funnels residents and visitors alike to the city’s activity nodes and destinations, along with establishing a means to explore region wide amenities.

As this is a bold step in the direction of redefining the relationship between the city, the Gateway District and the water, the process will pay close attention to the possibility of future expansion of the city to the water’s edge. This project will clearly be transforming the characteristics of the city persona while setting in place key elements that will lead to future successes within the city. 1.6 Embrace The City’s Past, Present, & Future. Water has always been the prism through which the region and the city are viewed. The natural history and human development/redevelopment of the place, in addition to, recognition of the maritime, industrial, and recreational activities of today will create a footprint for understanding how the future should be envisioned. The redevelopment of the Gateway District will embrace these stories in a way that is authentic to the development of the city and region. 4

GATEWAY TAMPA 2 – The Erosion of Tampa’s Urban Space Successful urban spaces depend heavily on an efficient and reliable mass transit system, as well as, a population density that will support the diverse characteristics that form the urban context. While pedestrian traffic is a core essential for a livable city, a pedestrian or cyclist can only travel so far via foot or bicycle. Any new transit development within Tampa’s urban fabric must be respectful of the city’s history, address the need to produce quality urban space, and support existing and future urban amenities.

2.1 – The City’s Origin Along The Waterfront

2.2 – The Growth of The City Industry and immigration played an integral role in the growth of Tampa. Contributions by Henry R. Plant and Don Vicente Martinez Ybor lead to an unprecedented growth for the city and contributed to its blue collar, melting pot reputation. The 1880s and the industrial revolution reshaped the course of Tampa. The arrival of Henry B. Plant and his railroad line redefined Tampa’s economy, urban space, scale, and population. 3 D.B. McKay of the Pioneer Post (1959) believed “Tampa owes everything to its God given bay, one of the world’s great sheltered waters – and to Henry Bradley Plant.” 4

Although the Hillsborough River basin has been a source of life and settlement dating as far back as 8,000 BC and has been inhabited by a myriad of cultures from the Paleo Indians, Seminole Indians, Spanish explorers, and European settlers, the origins of the modern City of Tampa began in the early 1800’s.1 Tampa was an important military outpost for both the United States during the Seminole Wars and the south during the Civil War, but its development along the Hillsborough River basin resulted in large part due to the harvesting of cypress trees by the lumber industry which used the river and it’s basin as a means for transporting these materials to shipping lanes and railroad lines needed for mass distribution. The use of the Hillsborough River as a natural means of transport resulted in development along both sides of the river which led to the areas first ferry system connecting the east and west sides of Tampa.2 (fig. 4) 5

fig. 4 - Tampa’s First ferry Crossing The Hillsborough River

In fact, Henry Plant himself boasted that his railroad would turn “the sand heap (known as Tampa) into a Champs-Elysees, the Hillsborough into a Seine.” The introduction of the railroad and mass transit to the area resulted in an unprecedented population boom. In 1887, 5 years after the railroad was completed, Tampa’s population had increased five fold. The railroad brought increased access and manufacturing to the city and resulted in a population boom led by immigrants looking to do business, live and work in the bustling waterfront town. Tampa originated as a manufacturing town but developed into a diverse industrial, recreational and residential urban settlement.

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT Urban neighborhoods such as, Ybor City and Tampa Heights were well-planned, walkable urban spaces. Ybor City, the vision of Don Vicente Martinez Ybor, was particularly instrumental in the development of Tampa as a viable urban context. 5 The neighborhood was modeled after the European urban center, a place where residents could live, work and play. Residential units were interspersed between open public space and brick cathedrals dedicated to the booming cigar industry. The streetcar and the connecting lines between Downtown Tampa and its greatest neighborhood, Ybor City, played an integral role in the expansion of Tampa. (fig. 5) The streetcar trolley was a windfall for the urban environment. Neighborhoods developed between the two thriving cores and along the Hillsborough River creating a continuous network of diverse urban space.

fig. 5 - Street Car In Ybor City

Tampaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s streetcar had over 50 miles of track and 190 vehicles servicing the community. The system reached its peak in the 1920s with over 24 million riders in 1924. (fig. 6) As the automobile grew in popularity, the use of the streetcar declined.

fig. 6 - Historical Street Car Map - Tampa

GATEWAY TAMPA 2.3 – The City vs. Suburbanization The last streetcar in Tampa ran on August 11th, 1946. Since then, any attempt to create a widely used mass transit system within the urban core has been met with resistance from the public due in part to its love affair with the automobile and the lure of cheap property in low-density suburban developments. Today, suburbia plagues the city’s economy, built environment, and culture while ironically, the means of transportation that made suburbia feasible has become economically burdensome to the individual. 6 The impact of suburbia on Tampa and other major city is easily recognizable. Tampa began to grow out rather then up. (fig. 7) The urban scale of Downtown Tampa became diminished as industry began to relocate along the interstate highways promising easy access to residents along the periphery. In the 1960s, urban renewal attempts demolished much of Ybor City and Tampa leaving vacant lots that dis

joined the two urban cores, as well as, createda wasteland of sprawl between Tampa’s core and port. 7 (fig. 8) New highway developments through the historic Ybor neighborhood and along Tampa’s southern exposure only served to disconnect the urban fabric from the waterfront even more. Like much of the nation, the suburbanization of Tampa has resulted in little population growth within the urban core, approximately 20% over the past 50 years, and diminished the expansion of quality urban spaces. At the same time, areas along the city’s periphery and surrounding Hillsborough County have seen a population growth that has tripled with neighboring counties such as Pinellas experiencing a population growth of 10 times. The Census Bureau currently ranks the Tampa, St. Petersburg and Clearwater Metropolitan area as the 17th most populous region in the United States with over 4.2 million residents. However, the Tampa Bay region is not even in the top 100 for population density.8

fig. 7 - Tampa City Limits 1950 (Blue) Tampa City Limits Present (Orange)

fig. 8 - Vacant Land Between Central Business Distriict & Port

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT 2.4 – How Waterborne Transit Can Help Restructure The Urban Space & Be A Catalyst For The Gateway District Redevelopment Tampa has made a number of poor development decisions along the river’s edge and along the bay frontage. High-rise or dense developments without public ground floor activities are noticeably out of place and have essentially created a physical wall separating the city core from its water’s edge. (fig. 9) Developments like a new mixed-use ferry terminal district will boost activity in the public realm with seamless interaction between the outdoors and the built environment and will create new connections between the city center and its greatest resource, the bay. It is understood that a regional system of open spaces that is augmented by a convenient transit choices and complemented by pedestrian friendly land-use patterns can be instrumental

in the revitalization of an urban district and the city as a whole.9 Transient developments such as hotels and public venues currently comprise the land use of the Gateway District. The area is currently subdivided by wide four lane streets and open parking lots. (fig. 10) A regional public transit system such as the newly proposed water ferry will only increase the amount of pedestrians foot traffic. While introducing constant new users to the district will boost its economic potential, creating the proper permanent population density will ensure the district’s sustainability. As a result, the new ferry terminal building must take advantage of its waterfront location by providing a residential component and marketing itself as Tampa’s first downtown waterfront residential development. In addition to promoting permanent residency in the district , programmed activities will promote year round use needed to create a sustainable economic and cultural impact. Currently, Tampa has diminished the year round use of the waterfront by placing an 800,000 square foot

fig. 9 - Typical Building Frontage Along Waterfront

GATEWAY TAMPA convention center along the most prestigious waterfront property. (fig. 11) A new ferry transit terminal and accompanying mixed-use program typologies will help to activate this public space throughout the year, while increasing the value of the existing convention center. While providing new year-round programming is essential to rebuilding the urban space along the waterfront, this space also needs to be flexible and able to adapt to annual and special events. Open gathering spaces located along continuous pedestrian paths help to form a network of flexible spaces.10 Local identity must be at the forefront of the Gateway District redevelopment. A city as unique as Tampa with its Spanish & blue-collar influences should allow its water’s edge to speak to those identities. Respect for the city’s past and people will make the shoreline more inviting thus creating an environment that the community as a whole will want to activate. The waterfront flourishes when it is activated. The best urban waterfronts are accessed as often by boat and other waterborne vessels as they are by land. Pedestrian and bicycle access are each a crucial element, as well as, public transit to the success of any public space. People are inherently more at ease when they are not overwhelmed with traffic lanes and parking lots.11 Finally, an iconic building that is memorable and reflects the human scale without detracting from Tampa’s surrounding environment will help to create a sustainable economic footprint that will promote proper future waterfront developments.

fig. 10 - Typical Street, Gateway District

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT

fig. 11 - Tampa Convention Center

GATEWAY TAMPA 3 – Location Many of the values of transit oriented development (TOD) can be utilized when determining the proper site selection for a new ferry terminal within an existing context. These values are intended to be applied to new developments located near an existing terminal, but can be recalculated to provide insight when infusing new transit into an existing urban context. Think of it as development or density oriented transit rather then transit oriented development. Transit oriented development (TOD) goals center around the idea of creating land use patterns that facilitate transportation options that can compete as a flexible alternative to the individual automobile. This is an important step towards developing a livable city, as there are many concerns about the sustainability of current urban mobility trends. The philosophy behind many TOD projects is to concentrate urban design around stations or terminals in an effort to support mass transit use and to develop a network of connections between existing and planned concentrations of density.12 (fig. 12) To apply these fundamentals to a new ferry terminal is simple. One only needs to understand what is the function of the commuter ferry in order to determine the area(s) that would be best served and the location of the station to maximize the transit’s potential. In addition, when dealing with a commuter ferry terminal it must be understood that this means of transit is transporting individuals into and out of the city not through the city, so special considerations should be made to connect to existing modes of transport within the downtown area.

fig. 12 - Transit Oriented Design Philosophy Diagram

Terminal areas need to invoke the notion of both “Node” and “Place”. A well-planned terminal area will become a “node” for not only transportation use but non-transportation activities as well, such as, lifestyle, business, and consumption. At the same time, the terminal area should be identified as a “place”, both temporarily and permanently inhabited within the context of the city.13 The new ferry terminal will need to be flexible with the ability to attract users to do more then enter and leave the city. It must also be considered a destination for users who just want to enjoy the space’s amenities and characteristics. 14

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT 3.1 Goals of Tampaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Regional Commuter Ferry Terminal & the Gateway District The existing mix of uses within Downtown Tampa is currently segregated and difficult for the pedestrian to access due to wide streets and roads that make walking paths less desirable. Tampaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s reputation as a commuter city is deserved and is evident in the emphasis it places on providing abundant and cheap automobile options. The city has developed as much around providing parking options (fig. 13) as it has access from surrounding communities through regional highway system. (fig. 14) The key to successful transit oriented design is not to eliminate the personal automobile but to balance the use of the street and urban space between the automobile user and the pedestrian. The proposed ferry terminal development must help to organize growth within the city to become compact and more transit supportive. Policies guiding the district redevelopment should place commercial, housing, civic centers, and parks and recreation within walking distance by affecting the pedestrian network. Public space should be the focus of redevelopment, which will preserve the interface between land and water. Additionally, infill of unused or underused properties should be encouraged in accordance with the principles of the Gateway District principles.

fig. 13 - Tampa Parking Options W/ Proposed Project Site

fig. 14 - Tampa Segregated From Bay By Highway

GATEWAY TAMPA

fig. 15 - Downtown Tampa Venues - Tampa Bay Times Arena (Top/Left), Channelside (Top/Right), Tampa Theater (Bottom/Left), Straz Performing Arts (Bottom/Right)

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT 3.1.1 Accessibility/Location Efficiency Key components to accessibility and location efficiency center around three major factors; density, intermodal transit opportunities, and pedestrian friendliness. These components provide a framework for determining transportation patterns or travel behaviors, therefore site location is a key to defining successful transit oriented developments.15 Density factors create a sufficient customer base that in turn helps to create a sustainable business model for the transit type. In the case of Tampa, there is very little residential density within the downtown area, there are approximately 6,784 residents (expected to rise to 15,000 by 2016), but there is a high level of professional and work force densities, approximately 78,000 persons employed.16 As previously stated, it is important to recognize that this proposed form of transit is designed to bring people in and out of the city rather then to move them through the city, so site considerations should be made to affect the highest level of transient commuters. Although it can be assumed that the ridership during peak hours will come from professionals and employed downtown workers thus the central business district must be addressed; it will be important to recognize that the large number of non peak riders will be entering the city to enjoy the cultural and entertainment districts and access to these areas will play a key role in creating a vibrant evening hours city. (fig. 15) Intermodal transit connections will provide the means in which those entering the city via the new ferry transit system will be dispersed throughout the city. Therefore, the new ferry terminal and associated programming should be located within easy walking distance to an

fig. 16 - Hart Bus Line Routes

existing means of mass transit. Tampa currently employs three different modes of transport connecting the urban core with Historic Ybor City, the International Airport, and the inland suburban neighborhoods, These transit means include, the Hart Bus Line (fig. 16), The TECO Line Street Trolley (fig. 17) and the In-Town Trolley (fig. 18) which connects the TECO Line Street Trolley Central Terminal (fig. 19) with the Hart Bus Line Central Terminal. (fig. 20) Tampa has placed an emphasis on connecting the areaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s transit options in an effort to create ease of use and to promote ridership thus the new ferry terminal will need to fall within this practice specifically since the ferry transit system is designed to bring transient ridership into the city.

fig. 17 - TECO Street Car Routes

fig. 18 - In-Town Trolley Routes

GATEWAY TAMPA

fig. 19 - TECO Street Car Pavillion

fig. 20 - Marion Street Transportation Center

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT

Cruise Ship Terminal

ELLIOTT BAY

Bell Harbor t Ba y Tr

ALASKA

Half-Mile Promenade Pier Slip

Amphitheater

Ell iot

Railroad Way

Stadium Plaza

The North End

Pier Slip

Ellio

tt Bay

l Trai

Olympic Sculpture Park

N WAY

Vine St. Bridge

Bell Harbor Roof

ELLIOTT

AVE.

ail

Bell St. Bridge Concession

Festival Pier

Barge Pool Colman Dock Ferry Terminal

Pier 56 Walk Pier 54 Walk

Ferry Deck

Washington St. Boat Landing Pioneer Square Beach

Tideline Promenade

WAY

CenturyLink Field

NT AL

Overlook Walk

Tideline Promenade

Columbia St. Transit Plaza

Seneca St. Walk

Marion St. Pedestrian Bridge

ST.

Y ST. CLA

. 3RD AVE

Bell St. Park

AR ST.

. 2ND AVE

Pike Place Market

Union St. Escalator + Elevator

VINE

Blanchard Square

CED

WAY

Pike St. Hillclimb

Occidental Park

1ST AVE.

AVE.

. 1ST AVE

ST.

ELLIOTT

Belltown Balcony

WALL

2 ND

King Street Station

BNSF Overlook

Development Opportunities

Victor Steinbrueck Park

Union St. Escalator + Elevator

WESTERN AVE.

Seneca St. Escalator+ Elevator

TERN

Blanchard Overlook Lenora St. Bridge

Aquarium Plaza

ALASKAN WAY

ST .

Bell St. Park Extension

Pier 62/63

Seattle Aquarium Union St. Pier

Pier Slips Colman Retail Gallery

1 ST

Aquarium Expansion Area

Argosy Tours

Firehouse Slip

WES

AD ST.

Bell Harbor Boardwalk

BRO

Ferris Wheel

SEATTLE CENTRAL WATERFRONT LONG-TERM PROJECTS

PINE ST.

PIKE ST.

UNION ST.

UNIVERSITY ST.

SPRING ST.

SENECA ST.

MADISON ST.

MARION ST.

JAMES ST.

CHERRY ST.

COLUMBIA ST.

ST . N NG TO

ER SL

WAS

ST . N MAI

Y ST.

L ST.

ST.

WAY

ST .

SEAWALL PROJECT

TER

PARTNER PROJECTS

BAT

BEL

ARD

LONG-TERM PROJECTS

NCH

BLA

ST.

CORE PROJECTS

ORA

Benaroya Hall

LEN

2ND AVE.

IA ST.

JULY 2012

Seattle Art Museum

Smith Tower

VIRGIN

Seattle, Washington is currently exploring ways to redevelop their waterfront districts and pedestrian friendly pathways have become one of the driving forces in their plans. They have proposed, among other things, a continuous waterfront network that includes new surface streets, pedestrian promenades, and bike paths overlaid on an urban fabric that incorporates open spaces ranging in size and intimacy intended to draw visitors to the water’s edge for special events and activities, as well as, simple daily relaxation excursions.17 (fig. 21). While this project does not pretend to affect an entire water’s edge in the same vein as that of Seattle’s Waterfront Master Plan, it should take in consideration the opportunity it has to improve the pedestrian experience along Tampa’s own Riverwalk (Fig. 22) and promote the use of the area directly associated with the new ferry terminal as a place to enjoy for both riders and local residents.

Lake-to-Bay Square Pier Slip

Port of Seattle

T ST. STEWAR

In terms of transit orient development, a network of pedestrian friendly pathways scaled to the appropriate needs for walking and bicycling is an essential core element to creating a livable city. In respect to development/density oriented transit, it can be determined that location of the ferry terminal should consider the same factors as they pertain to the terminal accessibility and connections to other means of transit but also to the characteristics of the place that is the ferry terminal.

SCALE: 1” = 100’ N

50’

100’

200’

400’

fig. 21 - Seattle Central Waterfront Redevelopment Master Plan & Conceptual Rendering

fig. 22 - Tampa Riverwalk Current Condition Photo

GATEWAY TAMPA 3.1.2 Place Making Trips in and out of the city of Tampa should be both easily navigated by the pedestrian and be a delightful experience for the rider. If the new terminal ferry is inserted into a pedestrian friendly environment, then there is a high likelihood that those who frequent the area via foot or bicycle will become a present or future rider. However, if the new ferry terminal is not convenient, located in a non-frequented area or not connected to desired destinations then the transit-oriented aspect of the project will fail.18 Mass transit projects require public funding so they inherently require a lot of public support. The cost of new buildings, infrastructure, open space, and innovative design bring public projects such as the proposed ferry terminal into the political arena. As a result, quality of design has become one of the most important factors in gaining public and political support. The first element of quality of design in a project such as this is the site selection.19 In making a new place within the context of an existing

fig. 24 - Pier Head Ferry Terminal, Liverpool, England

A city’s waterfront is the most recognizable and precious commodity that the community has. There are examples, such as Liverpool’s new 9.5 million euro ferry terminal (fig. 23) by Belfast based Hamilton Architects in which site selection played a key role in much of the negative criticism the design received. The three story, modern terminal building which sits along the River Mersey may have been more at home nestled in the arts and entertainment waterfront district but instead, developers and designers elected to place the “quirky”, folded angled building directly in front of the cities historic Three Graces. (fig. 24) This led to the designer of the critically acclaimed Museum of Liverpool (fig. 25), located along the same waterfront, architect Kim Herforth of the Danish practice 3XN to make the following comments.

“I cannot find the words to describe my disappointment that any architect could do such an amateurish look-alike next to our building. And how could they get the planning permission, when I know how much effort it took to get the museum design through the planning process, on this very sensitive UNESCO heritage site?”20

fig. 25 - Three Graces, Liverpool, England

fig. 25 - Museum of Liverpool, Liverpool, England

Much like the Liverpool Pier Head Ferry Terminal, Tampa’s new ferry terminal will be affecting an existing built environment. Considerations for place preserving will be equally as important as place making. It will be necessary for the selected site to interact with the existing context in a way that takes advantage of, and supplements, existing land uses, scale of the waterfront, and increases accessibility to the water’s edge. environment it is important that the new place does not destroy an existing place, especially if the community reveres the original place and its context.

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT 3.1.3 Resolution of the Tension Between Node and Place When addressing the tension between node and place it is important to understand that there is a role for the new terminal as both a “stop” or node within the greater context of the regional transit system and as a place within the immediate context of the neighborhood or district it services. A node, as defined by Kevin Lynch in “The Image of The City” (1960) “are points, the strategic spots in a city into which an observer can enter, and which are intensive foci to and from which he is traveling. They may be primary junctions, places of a break in transportation, a crossing or convergence of paths, moments of shift from one structure to another. Or the nodes a be simply concentrations, which gain their importance from being the condensation of some use or physical character, as a street-corner hangout or an enclosed square.”20

role as an access point for people arriving on foot, bicycle, train, car, or other transit means in an effort to be transported beyond the nonmotorized boundaries of ½ - 1 mile radius and the role of the station within its own context as a “vibrant, pleasant livable place”.23 In the case of Tampa, the commuter ferry terminal will start by serving the central business district, as there is not currently a large residential population density. However, the placement of a “vibrant, pleasant livable place” can help the area evolve into a 24-hour destination, allowing business and entertainment to lead the way and have multi-family, live-work developments follow, paving the way for Tampa to become a more viable live-work urban environment.

Transit terminals are a generator of travel, a means to disperse people to from a specific area. As a result, they become a desirable place for business activities, leisure, and residents. At the same time, it becomes a point of interchange within a greater network of transit that serves a specific function within a regional network.22 Dutch professors, Luca Bertolini and Tejo Spit address the distinctions between node and place in their book “Cities on Rails”. They state; “The unique challenge of the development of node-places is the need to deal, at the same time, with both transport and urban development issues.” They argue that tension exist between node and place resulting from the stations

GATEWAY TAMPA 3.2 A Place in Tampa Tampa’s urban waterfront currently consists of five major components; the Channel District, the Convention Center, Harbour Island, the Cultural Arts District, and the Riverfront District or Central Business District. (fig. 26) Each of these districts has its own unique characteristics and when taken as a whole, they provide a diverse range of activities to be enjoyed. Tampa’s Riverwalk project provides a continuous pathway at the water’s edge linking these districts along the Hillsborough River and Garrison Channel. The new commuter ferry terminal building must play an active role in fortifying these relationships while also improving the accessibility and place making of the area.

fig. 26 - Tampa Waterfront Districts

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT 3.2.1 Waterway Access Waterway access to and from Downtown Tampa is comprised of the four components; The Hillsborough Bay, which makes up the largest waterway connected to the downtown core and whose shoreline forms popular Bayshore Drive and its active pathway into the heart of downtown (fig. 27); Seddon Channel which divides Davis Island, a single & multifamily residential development and Harbour Island, an urban mixed-use development (fig. 28); Sparkman Channel which divides Harbour Island and the heavy industrial complexes to the east (fig. 29); and The Hillsborough River which provides access from the north and spills into the bay creating a confluence of Seddon Channel, Garrison Channel, and Hillsborough Bay. (fig. 30) The bridges of Tampa, their height restrictions and configurations, play a major role in determining an appropriate location for the terminalâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s pick-up/drop-off locations. The downtown area is accessed via six, shortspan, low bridges that make navigating the Hillsborough River towards the Central Business District difficult if not impossible for the high-speed catamaran vessels that will be used as ferries. In addition, low bridges connecting South Tampa with Davis Island complicate access from the Hillsborough Bay.

fig. 27 - Hillsborough Bay

fig. 28 - Seddon Channel

fig. 29 - Sparkman Channel

fig. 30 - Hillsborough River

Based on the existing infrastructure, access for the proposed vessels will be limited to Seddon Channel and Sparkman Channel each of which has value in their convenience, presence as an urban gateway, and city connectivity.

GATEWAY TAMPA Seddon Channel offers a deep waterway that passes through two of the most densely populated residential areas immediately associated with the downtown core. Davis Island and Harbour Island provide unique and attractive passageway shorelines with mixeduse development waterfronts that will be enjoyed by riders, both local and visiting, while entering the downtown complex. (fig. 31) It meets the downtown waterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s edge at the confluence of the Hillsborough River and Garrison Channel at the site of the Tampa Convention Center. (fig. 32) The area is conveniently located in respect to the Central Business District but is currently cut off from the downtown core by the massive 800,000 sq. ft. convention center.

fig. 31 - Davis Island (Above) Harbour Island (Below)

fig. 33 - Sparkman Channel Industrial Ports

fig. 32 - Tampa Convention Center

fig. 34 - Channel District, Tampa

Sparkman Channel is already being utilized by the Tampa Port Authority for cruise line vessels and heavy industrial cargo (fig. 33) and while there is an attractive and active shoreline to the west in Harbour Island, the industrial complexes to the east are less than attractive when attempting to create an iconic gateway into the core of the city. However, Sparkman Channel does provide great access to the Channel District (fig. 34) and this area is undergoing redevelopment with some existing and planned mixed-use multi-family developments. In addition, this channel is connected to the Ybor Channel which extends north to Historic Ybor City and could play a vital role in future expansion of the ferry system providing greater local connections via Tampaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s waterways.

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT 3.2.2 Intermodal Connections As discussed previously, a new ferry transit system in Tampa will primarily be used to bring people in and out of the city rather then dispersing them through the inland portions of the urban core. As a result, the new terminal needs to be located so that a pedestrian or bicyclist can access the core through nonmotorized means or access additional transit options conveniently. The two areas discussed, the Tampa Convention Center area and The Channel District provide immediate access to Teco Line Street Trolley stops. However, the Tampa Convention Center area is associated with the Teco Line Street Trolley Central Terminal that has an intermodal component already built-in. (fig. 35) The trolley terminal is a connection axis that ties the Teco Trolley, the In-Town Trolley, and the Hart Bus Line together giving riders additional transit options making the ferry system a more attractive and sustainable solution. In addition, the convention center area falls within the necessary Â˝ mile radius of the Central Business District, Harbour Island, and parts of Hyde Park making pedestrian access favorable and well within the 1 mile radius of these areas even incorporating the Channel District and Cultural Arts District making access to bicyclist convenient. (fig. 36) While the Channel District provides great amenities such as; an existing port authority; entertainment facilities (Arena, Channelside Complex, Aquarium); and a developing multifamily neighborhood, it lacks the immediate connection to intermodal transportation. Additionally, the Â˝ mile and 1 mile radii surrounding the Channel District are currently comprised of vacant lots disconnecting the area

from the Central Business District to the west and heavy industrial areas to the east. (fig. 37) Of course this does not mean the Channel District area should not be considered, but most pragmatist would agree this is an area that the ferry system should grow into rather then be the nexus of the systems birth.

fig. 35 - Tampa Convention Center Area Existing Condition

fig. 36 - 1/2 Mile & 1 Mile Radius @ Convention Center Area

fig. 37 - 1/2 Mile & 1 Mile Radius @ Channelside Area

GATEWAY TAMPA 3.2.3 The Gateway District While it has been established that the convention center area is the practical “node” location for both regional and local transit as it pertains to the new commuter ferry transit system, the final piece of the site puzzle will be considering the area as a “place”. The Channel District fell outside of the guiding principals of accessibility but far exceeds the convention area as a sense of place. The success of Channelside as an entertainment development can and has been debated within Tampa, but there are existing amenities that would make this site an attractive location: Restaurants, Shops, Theater, Aquarium. Meanwhile, there can be no debate, the Tampa Convention Center is void of activity due to the absence of usable daily programming such as retail and hospitality . This area is in need of

an injection of life. It encompasses over 1,200 linear feet of prime waterfront real estate along the Hillsborough River and Seddon/Garrison Channels. In essence, it slams the door closed on the waterfront gateway into Tampa. Even worse, it is the centrally located along Tampa’s Riverwalk creating a zone between the entertainment Channel District and the Central Business District that is underused and less secure. In addition, there is not much available buildable land along the water associated with this site. The parcels of land, one to the east of the convention center along Garrison Channel and one to the west along the Historic Hillsborough River, offer areas no greater then 225 linear feet of shoreline or 4,200 sq. ft. footprints on which to construct. (fig. 38) Both parcels of land are located along major thoroughfares which is an

obvious plus and the convention center itself has a 465 space parking garage that accepts daily parking and not monthly which the ferry terminal can utilize. Although this site has its inherent difficulties, through smart programming and innovative design, this space can be transformed into a vibrant, culturally rich waterfront destination. The Gateway District offers plenty of available land for expansion and can create the type of urban infill that will connect the Central Business District with the Channelside District and the waterfront.(fig. 39) Mixed-use applications, pedestrian friendly amenities, and transit friendly accessibility can once again make this portion of Tampa’s waterfront the preferred gateway into the city.

fig. 38 - Accessible Open Land @ Convention Center

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT

fig. 39 - Gateway District Aerial

GATEWAY TAMPA 4 – Application Tampa

4.1 Tampa As A Walkable City

At the onset of this project a series of project goals were established. They consisted of creating a waterfront district that belonged to everyone, placing connectivity at the forefront of design, connecting the city of Tampa with its waterfront, improving access and mobility to the waterfront, creating a vision that promotes growth along the waterfront, and embracing the city’s past, present, and future. This section takes the research previously compiled as it relates to the city’s development, current transit options, and principles of transit oriented design and applies this knowledge to the existing urban fabric of Tampa. In particular, it discusses the needs of the current Gateway District and the selected site for the new ferry terminal building in comparison to the city’s master plan efforts and case studies from other successful waterfront communities or plans.

The current initiative by Tampa to develop the existing city context from an automotive dominated landscape into a pedestrian friendly, livable community fits directly into the stated goals of this project. The Mayor’s office, the Metropolitan Planning Commission, and Downtown Partnership have teamed with the Urban Land Institute to develop a master plan for Tampa that will place the pedestrian experience at the forefront rather then continuing to develop around the needs of the individual automobile. Their plan is called “The Tampa Center City Plan – Connecting Our Neighborhoods and Our River For The Future.” (fig. 40) It focuses on 5 major components; The Hillsborough River & Waterfront, the Center City Neighborhood, Tampa’s Downtown Core, Livable Streets & Community Linkages, and Transit.

While the report touches on concepts that are important to the community as a whole, it generally applies these principles to the Central Business District and neighborhoods that are related to I-275, the highway to the north of downtown. One exception is the redevelopment of the existing streets. The city’s plan seeks to create pedestrian friendly streets that connect the city’s existing network from north/south and east/west. The pedestrian experience study is important to the introduction of a new regional transit system, that will be providing access to the city from the south, an area not currently part of the City Center Master Plan.

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT

fig. 40 - Tampa City Center Master Plan

GATEWAY TAMPA It has been determined that the new ferry system will be serving the city via the Gateway District. We have established that the best location for a new mixed-use ferry building is the under-used site immediately to the east of the convention center. (fig. 41). This site was chosen for its accessibility by water via Seddon & Garrison Channels, its proximity to the Central Business District, its location along the Tampa Riverwalk and the need to create activity along Tampaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s most prestigious waterfront, and its connection to existing transit options. (fig. 42) The site selection is further bolstered when comparing it with the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s street redevelopment master plan. The City Center Plan sets forth three pedestrian friendly street typologies; Pedestrian Priority Streets (fig. 43), Special Pedestrian Streets (fig. 44), and Transit Mobility Streets (fig. 45). In all three cases, the selected ferry terminal site fits within Tampaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s plan for creating connectivity by advantageously located itself within the proposed network of walkable areas.

fig. 41 - Proposed Site East Of Tampa Convention Center

Addressing the potential of the new ferry terminal and the redevelopment of the Gateway District as it pertains to the proposed pedestrian improvements of the city required personal investigation of the current condition of the primary thoroughfares that will serve as a means of pedestrian connection between the new terminal, the district, and the city center. A catalog of the existing transit and pedestrian options uncovered the following observations:

fig. 42 - Existing Downtown Transit System

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT

fig. 43 - Pedestrian Priority Streets & Proposed Site

fig. 44 - Special Pedestrian Streets & Proposed Site

fig. 45 - Transit & Mobility Streets & Proposed Site

GATEWAY TAMPA Transit Experience Observations: - There is a strong local belief that Tampa needs local & regional transit to serve the downtown core (business, cultural venues, tourism & residential) - Tampa needs more places of density/activity to support transit - Too many inexpensive parking options, development should replace open parking (fig.46) - The Marion Central Station is isolated, needs more capacity - The streetcar functions more as a tourist attraction and does not serve the transit needs local population - New regional transit, such as the ferry system, must be supported by reliable inexpensive local transit Opportunities: - A new mixed-use ferry terminal building will provide an place for exchange of ideas, merchandise & transit options) - An expanded streetcar system will provide a reliable, inexpensive transit connection with the ferry while re-establishing a lost historical transit character of the city (fig. 47)

fig. 46 - Tampa Parking Options & Proposed Site

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT

Pedestrian Experience Observations: - Tampa has a very connected systems of streets & blocks - Streets seem congested and hostile to pedestrians & bikes with the exception of North Franklin Street & East Channelside Drive - Places that are actually close by feel far away because of harsh walking environments - Large overpasses and ramps isolate key properties properties such as the Straz Center, the convention center, the Tampa Bay Forum, & Channelside - Tampa needs to balance the need for regional access with local circulation

Franklin Street is the obvious pedestrian thoroughfare despite large intersections at Channelside Drive and Borean Avenue due to the nature of North Franklin Street. North Franklin Street provides a direct path from the chosen site and the existing street already creates pedestrian zones. The street temporarily terminates at the City Center Plaza creating a pedestrian only zone that encompasses two city blocks and narrows to one lane each way, brick paved and tree lined, for 6 linear street blocks in the Historic District of Downtown Tampa. These pedestrian friendly streetscapes are in the heart of downtown and provide precedents when establishing South Franklin Street as a pedestrian zone. (fig. 48)

Opportunities: - Embrace transit oriented design when developing the new ferry terminal system - Create a walkable district that is connected to the water and cultural or commerce driven entities - Use the new ferry terminal building to drive development and increase density

fig. 47 - Existing & Historic Street Car Routes

GATEWAY TAMPA

fig. 48 - Franklin Street Observations

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT 4.2 A Place Along The Riverwalk In addition to the efforts being made to create a more pedestrian friendly environment within the city core, Tampa is currently developing a continuous path along the water’s edge called The Tampa Riverwalk. (fig. 49) This project is currently under construction however the portion associated with the gateway District is considered complete.(fig. 50) In examining the Riverwalk Master Plan, the lack of new and diverse programming is absent. The Riverwalk plan provides a continuous path along the water’s edge that connects a network of open green spaces (fig.51); however, it does not provide new revenue generating programming such as retail, hospitality, or new transit connections. The selected site has great potential in providing the needed injection of programming the Riverwalk project would need. Located centrally along the Riverwalk, this site has the opportunity to develop a “node” along the waterfront that interrupts its continuality and provides a sense of pause and interaction along an otherwise single-use path. The transit component of the project will act as the primary node created but the mix of uses, a combination of permanent and transient users, and open spaces shared by waterfront buildings will provide the sense of “place” that will activate the section of the path and encourage new and existing developments to rethink their association with the water.

fig. 49 - Tampa Riverwalk Area

fig. 50 - Existing Open Green Spaces

fig. 51 - Existing Riverwalk Condition @ Proposed Site

GATEWAY TAMPA 4.3 Comparing Seattle’s Waterfront Redevelopment With Tampa’s The central waterfront redevelopment plan currently being implemented in Seattle, WA seeks to improve the 2 mile stretch of urban water frontage that extends from the Stadium District to Olympic Sculpture & Myrtle-Edwards Parks. (fig. 52) The goal of the project, as in Tampa, is to create pedestrian & transit connections from the waterfront into the city core, placing a heavy emphasis on creating friendly pedestrian zones that develop or revitalize waterfront districts. (fig. 53)24 Unlike Tampa’s current plan, Seattle proposes increasing the amount of revenue generating programming while also providing incentives for existing land owners to renovate in order to expand their water side presence. (fig. 54) Seattle and Tampa both provide ample access to open green space but Seattle’s plan calls for what it calls “continuous elements” along the path in order to promote variety. a sense of promenade, pedestrian density, and yearround use.(fig. 55) In addition, they placed a big emphasis on connecting regional transit with local transit in an effort to connect urban neighborhoods with the water and beyond while allowing access to their neighborhoods from regional transient visitors.(fig, 56) They approach the goal of creating pedestrian friendly connections from the city core to the water by reconfiguring the existing thoroughfare that separates the city and water, Alaskan Way. (fig. 57) The plan provides for the busy street to expand and contract based on district needs and slows traffic in pedestrian zones by regulating speed, widening pedestrian and bicycle paths, and providing a tree lined median.

Tampa’s current city and waterfront plans attempt to develop a pedestrian friendly, walkable city; however, the current Riverwalk plan does not create enough “continuous elements” to activate the path properly and the City Center Plan does not address the connection between the city and water or develops a plan for the Gateway District which is the logical area for the city’s core to develop and expand.

fig. 52 - Seattle Central Waterfront Project Area

fig. 53 - Seattle Waterfront Redevelopment Conceptual Rendering

fig. 54 - Seattle Waterfront Redevelopment Conceptual Rendering

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT

fig. 55 - Seattle Waterfront Redevelopment Conceptual Rendering

fig. 57 - Seattle Waterfront Street Reconfiguration

fig. 56 - Seattle Waterfront Redevelopment Transit Connections

GATEWAY TAMPA 4.3 Washington DC’s Southwest Waterfront District Redevelopment The Wharf, Washington DC’s southwest waterfront district is currently undergoing an extensive redevelopment that will increase the district’s resident density by 1,200 units while creating over 300,000 sq. ft. of new retail, hospitality, and tenant space.(fig. 58)25 The project goals are to create public access lined by cafes and restaurants with active public spaces used for annual and weekly events. It will improve access to existing cultural landmarks while “socially integrating” residences, commercial offices, hotels, and an “array of destinations and neighborhood oriented retail.” The project’s bold move is closing Water Street. Water Street currently runs parallel to the shoreline and acts as a barrier between the water and the district. By closing Water Street and redirecting its traffic to the north (fig. 59) the Wharf District is able to create a rich, continuous pedestrian zone. New development along the water is bolstered by new regional transit in the form of expanded ferry service as well as expanded local transit with extended street car routes that service redeveloped open urban spaces such as “City Pier” and “The Wharf Pier”. (fig. 60) Although the plan calls for the removal of Water Street, it strategically plans for appropriate auto access to provide necessary services. By reducing the individual automobiles access, the plan discourages the use without eliminating it. In addition, it creates the appropriate scale between auto and pedestrian that does not alienate either user. (fig. 61)

fig. 58 - Washington DC Southwest Waterfront Master Plan

fig. 59 - Existing Water Street (Above), New Development Based On Street Reconfigurat (Below)

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT

fig. 60 - City Pier Conceptual Rendering (Left), Wharf Pier Conceptual Rendering (Right)

fig. 61 - Reconfigured District Vehicle Access

GATEWAY TAMPA 4.4 Tampaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Opportunity As Tampa prepares to introduce new regional transit into the city, it must consider the possibility of using this opportunity as a catalyst for waterfront and district redevelopment. Transit oriented design studies have shown that development tends to occur around major transit hubs. The Gateway District provides both a central location along the accessible waterfront and plenty of vacant or under-used land opportunities for new growth The District possesses regional and local transit transfer opportunities. With the introduction of the new ferry system to the district combined with the existing Hartline Bus, In-Town Trolley and Teco Street Car options, the gateway District has the opportunity to become an intermodal transit exchange district. This creates an environment that is poised for an economic diversity that can only be created through a mixture a dense permanent and transient populations. The existing district already possesses transient programming through hotels, an arena, and convention center but lacks the necessary permanent or residential population. By following examples such as The Wharf redevelopment, the Gateway District and Tampaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s southern waterfront can create a pedestrian and transit oriented district that will promote permanent and sustainable residential and economic markets.

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT

GATEWAY TAMPA

fig. 62 - Proposed Mixed-Use Ferry Building

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT 5 Gateway Tampa Gateway Tampa is a two-part design solution that uses the introduction of a new regional transit system as a catalyst for redeveloping the Gateway District along Tampaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s southern waterfront. Phase I of the project is to develop a new mixed-use ferry terminal building that will act as an the signature landmark of the district and will serve as the portal into Tampa from its southern waterways. (fig. 62). The components of this building will promote permanent density

in an otherwise transient district and will help to redefine how Tampa views connecting people with places. Phase II of the project is the redevelopment of the Gateway District in an effort to create a pedestrian friendly zone along the waterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s edge. (fig. 63) The reconfiguring of streets, town squares, and accessible paths will provide an area that is primed for infill development that will take advantage of the existing amenities in the area.

fig. 63 - Proposed Gateway District Redevelopment Master Plan

GATEWAY TAMPA

CONVIENCE STORE

fig. 64 - Proposed Mixed Use Ferry Terminal First Floor Plan

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT 5.1 Phase I â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Mixed-Use Ferry Terminal Phase I, the mixed-use ferry terminal building is the new portal from which visitors will enter the city from the south. Its components consist of a 20 story, 80 unit, residential tower with 20,000 sq. ft. of new market style retail space and a central station shared by the new ferry system and the expanded local street car system with an additional 26,000 sq. ft. of market retail, two cafes, a waterfront second floor restaurant and a waterfront lounge. (fig.64)

fig. 65 - Shared Transit Terminal Diagram

The terminal building is set up to allow pedestrian circulation and transit connections to happen through the core of the station or along its periphery which promotes the use of the retail stores. The terminal slips are positioned along Garrison Channel perpendicular to the shoreline in an effort to minimize interruptions along the Riverwalk path. Fig.65) The buildings split along the central core of the property in an effort to open the waterfront to as many users as

possible but also in an effort to provide a means for service and drop off needs to be centrally located without becoming the focal point of the north faĂ§ade. (fig. 66) The buildings are sited in a way that creates a shared plaza between themselves and the convention center to the west developing an important, flexible space that can be utilized for annual and weekly events. Simultaneously, the

fig. 66 - Proposed Transit Connection Diagram & Proposed Retail Diagram

GATEWAY TAMPA

fig. 67 - Proposed Mixed Use Ferry Terminal North Facade

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT positioning of the building allows for the existing street car lines to be reconfigured and extended from an open square to the terminals north into the site itself creating a multimodal design solution. This move also allows the square to the north to be redesigned to become a district square and creates yet another flexible, usable pedestrian space. (fig.67) While the first floor of both the terminal building and residential tower bring daily retail use to the site and waterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s edge, (fig.68) it is the terminal buildingâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s second floor that brings life to the Riverwalk at night. The second floor promenade is enough to entice people to the water in order to enjoy the sunset or live music but the building also offers a 10,000 sq. ft. waterfront restaurant and a 3,000 sq. ft. waterfront lounge. These help to ensure that the place is activated at night and visited by people of all ages. (fig.69) This phase of the project serves as a means to activate the Riverwalk path with shops, restaurants, lounge, and transit. Its job is to create a vibrant place along the water for Tampa residents and visitors to enjoy while also providing the critical transit node that will help reshape the Gateway Districts redevelopment.

fig. 68 - Common Plaza Between The Existing Convention Center & New Ferry Terminal Buildings

GATEWAY TAMPA

fig. 69 - Proposed Market Place Along Tampa Riverwalk

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT

RESTROOM

fig. 70 - Proposed Mixed Use Ferry Terminal Second Floor Plan

GATEWAY TAMPA

fig. 69 - Gateway District Proposed Site Plan

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT 5.2 Phase II â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Gateway District Redevelopment Phase II of the project is the redevelopment of the Gateway District (fig. 70) along the southern waterfront of Downtown Tampa. The goals of the redevelopment are to create a pedestrian friendly neighborhood that is well connected both internally through pedestrian paths and externally through local and regional transit. The districtâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s land use is currently comprised of three hotels, the Tampa Convention Center, and the Tampa Bay Times Forum. (fig.71)

GATEWAY TAMPA Understanding the scale of the district helps to determine the appropriate interventions that will reshape the area. The existing transient uses have a potential of bringing up to 50,000 new people into the area while the new Ferry system is estimated to make up to 20 trips a day averaging 50 riders per trip. If the infill efforts spur the development of Âą200 new residential units then the district could be looking at a population density of up to 55,000 people. (fig. 72) To put that into perspective, that is the population density of many of Americaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s cities. (fig.73) As a result, it is important to place an emphasis on accessibility and variety of land uses.

fig. 72 - Gateway District Context

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT

fig. 73 - Gateway District Parking, Vacant/Under-used Land & Existing Venue Capacities

fig. 74 - American Cities W/ Population Densities Equal To Tampa Gateway District Venue Capacities

GATEWAY TAMPA The cornerstone of the district redevelopment is the partial closure of South Franklin Street between Channelside Drive and Old Water Street. (fig.74) This action creates an unimpeded pedestrian path along the districts north/south axis, allows the reconfiguration of the street car tracks to become part of the new terminal building, and allows the current street car station to become a new district square providing needed open public space.

fig. 75 - Street Closure (left) Street Car Reconfiguration (Right)

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT The district redevelopment centers around transforming the districtâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s transportation and pedestrian network. The streets have been narrowed and new paths for busses and cyclist have been developed. (fig.75/76) The street narrowing helps to promote pedestrian activities and as a result, helps to create a sustainable economic market for new street side retail and hospitality.

fig. 76 - Existing Street Condition (Left) Proposed Street Condition (Right)

fig. 77 - New District Street Configuration

GATEWAY TAMPA The expanded street car system is not only a benefit to the district but the city as a whole. (fig. 77) With the advent of the new ferry system and the construction of a new multimodal terminal building other amenities such as entertainment and cultural venues can be accessed by transient visitors. The streetcar expansion plan would be phased based

fig. 78 - Street Car Expansion By Phase

on the construction of the terminal and redevelopment of the district. In phase I of the project the streetcar is aligned with the terminal and the street car routes extended to service the shoreline of the Hillsborough River and the cultural and entertainment venues along this route. As the district begins to be redeveloped and additional vacant

land to the districts north becomes more profitable to developers, the street car routes can be expanded to services these neighborhoods and provide Tampa residents the ability to quickly and conveniently explore the characteristics and amenities of these new places within the city. (fig. 78)

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT

fig. 79 - Gateway District Street Car Configuration

GATEWAY TAMPA By creating an express bus loop with its own dedicated lane, the flow of traffic will not be impeded even though the streets have been narrowed. (fig. 79) This form of public transit helps to bolster the districtâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s regional footprint. In the same vein that the new ferry system will allow people from other areas of Tampa Bay to access the city, the bus system will still be a key component for allowing access from landlocked communities

fig. 80 - Gateway District Express Bus Loop

in surrounding areas. By placing the bus loop station on the eastern side of the newly developed district square, the square becomes a point of connection and exchange making it a prime area for flexible programming. In addition, it promotes the development of the vacant parking lot to the east which encloses the district square making it the true heart of the district. (Fig. 80)

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT

fig. 81 - New District Square W/ Street Car Transit To Its West & Bus Transit To Its East

GATEWAY TAMPA Wide pedestrian corridors and open public spaces allows the district to have the appropriate urban density without feeling over crowded. Promenades for shopping and entertainment connect programming, in particular the arena with the convention center, hotels, and ferry terminal.(fig. 81/82) These spaces help to foster development and tenant leasing creating an economically sustainable market that is associated with Tampaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Riverwalk, entertainment venues, and ultimately the people that will inhabit the district.

fig. 82 - Existing Condition @ Proposed Pedestrian Mall (Left) Pedestrian Mall Conceptual Rendering (Right)

The plan incorporates each of these ideas and goals into a viable solution that increases the flow of both pedestrian and vehicular traffic while connecting Tampaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Gateway District with the city, the region, and itself. (fig. 83)

fig. 83 - Gateway District Redeveloped Pedestrian Path & Gathering Areas

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT

fig. 84 - Gateway District Redevelopment Circulation Network

GATEWAY TAMPA 6 Conclusion In conclusion, this project was an exercise in understanding how new regional transit impacts the City of Tampa. Specifically, the project explored the role of the new regional transit terminal, its responsibility to bring new programming to underserved areas and the potential for redeveloping a sparse district as a result of the new intervention. Although this project encompassed a wide scope of work, terminal design, district design, transit oriented development, pedestrian pathways, venue connections, local and regional transit working in conjunction there are many more possibilities for further development in Downtown Tampa. This project should act as the beginning not the completion of Tampaâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Downtown. The city needs to explore the possibility of continuing to develop the Riverwalk with the appropriate type of programming to foster an environment of diversity along the water. The Franklin Street connection between downtown and the Gateway District needs to be further developed. Finally, infill efforts between the Central Business District and the Channelside District needs to follow the principles that have been set forth in this project.

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT

GATEWAY TAMPA Endnotes 1

“River History Fact Sheet.” Hillsborough.wateratlas.usf.edu. School District of Hillsborough County, 2000. Web. 11 Jan. 2014. <http://www.hillsborough.wateratlas. usf.edu/upload/documents/ HillsRiverFactSheet.pdf>. Jones, Lucy D. Tampa’s Lafayette Street Bridge: Building a New South City. Thesis. University of South Florida, 2006. N.p.: n.p., n.d.Http://scholarcommons. usf.edu/cgi/viewcontent. cgi?article=3573&context=etd. Scholar Commons/University of South Florida, 1 June 2006. Web. 10 Jan. 2014. Mormino, Gary Ross, and Anthony P. Pizzo. Tampa, the Treasure City. Tulsa, OK: Continental Heritage, 1983. Print. Pg. 76

McKay, Donald Brenham. Pioneer Florida. Tampa, FL: Southern Pub., 1959. Print.

Lastra, Frank Trebín, and Richard Mathews. Ybor City: The Making of a Landmark Town. Tampa: University of Tampa, 2006. Print. Pgs. 59-61

“At the Helm of the Public Realm: An Urban Design Blog.” At the Helm of the Public Realm An Urban Design Blog. N.p., 24 Sept. 2013. Web. 14 Jan. 2014. <http:// helmofthepublicrealm.com/?s=tampa>.

“Growth Management Index.” City of Tampa, Sept. 2006. Web. 29 Dec. 2013. <http://www.tampagov.net/ dept_land_development/files/pdf_files/ long_range/gmindex_v01.pdf>.

Lastra, Frank Trebín, and Richard Mathews. Ybor City: The Making of a Landmark Town. Tampa: University of Tampa, 2006. Print. Pgs. 12

Calthorpe, Peter. The Next American Metropolis: Ecology, Community, and the American Dream. New York: Princeton Architectural, 1993. Print.

“10 Qualities of a Great Waterfront Destination.” Project for Public Spaces. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Jan. 2014. <http://www.pps.org/reference/10_ qualities_of_a_great_waterfront/>.

Curtis, Carey, John L. Renne, and Luca Bertolini. Transit Oriented Development: Making It Happen. Farnham, Surrey, England: Ashgate, 2009. Print. Pg 78

Dittmar, Hank, and Gloria Ohland. The New Transit Town: Best Practices in Transit-oriented Development. Washington, DC: Island, 2004. Print. Pg.23

“How to Transform a Waterfront.” Project for Public Spaces. N.p., n.d. Web. 24 Jan. 2014. <http://www.pps.org/ reference/turnwaterfrontaround/>.

Curtis, Carey, John L. Renne, and Luca Bertolini. Transit Oriented Development: Making It Happen. Farnham, Surrey, England: Ashgate, 2009. Print. Pg 52

Kamm, Grayson. “Changes Coming to Tampa’s Skyline; 153 Stories in the Works.” Wtsp.com. News Channel 10, n.d. Web. 24 Jan. 2014. <http://www. wtsp.com/news/local/story.aspx?story

Shop Architects, The Seattle Department of Transportation, Department of Planning and Development, and Department of Parks and Recreation. Design Summary: Concept Design and Framework Plan for Seattle’s Central Waterfront. New York: FO, James Corner Field Operations, 2012. Print. Pg. 3

Dittmar, Hank, and Gloria Ohland. The New Transit Town: Best Practices in Transit-oriented Development. Washington, DC: Island, 2004. Print. Pg. 35

Dittmar, Hank, and Gloria Ohland. The New Transit Town: Best Practices in Transit-oriented Development. Washington, DC: Island, 2004. Print. Pg. 48

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT

Wright, India. “Beauty or Beast: New Liverpool Pier Head Ferry Terminal.” Architects’ Journal. N.p., 03 July 2009. Web. 11 Nov. 2013. <http://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/daily-news/ beauty-or-beast-new-liverpool-pierhead-ferry-terminal/5204487.article>.

Lynch, Kevin. The Image of the City. Cambridge, MA: MIT, 1960. Print.

Dittmar, Hank, and Gloria Ohland. The New Transit Town: Best Practices in Transit-oriented Development. Washington, DC: Island, 2004. Print.Pg. 18

Bertolini, Luca, and Tejo Spit. Cities on Rails: The Redevelopment of Railway Station Areas. London: E & FN Spon, 1998. Print.

“The Wharf - Washington, DC.” The Wharf - Washington, DC. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Apr. 2014.

GATEWAY TAMPA Figures fig. 1 – Regional Map Showing Tampa Bay Communities Serviced By New Ferry Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District

fig. 8 - Vacant Land Between The Central Business District And The Port Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District

fig. 2 – HMS Ferry Inc. Proposed Ferry Routes Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District

fig. 9 - Typical Building Frontage Along Waterfront Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District

fig. 3 – Proposed Ferry Routes Reconfigured Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District

fig. 10 - Typical Street, Gateway District Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District

fig. 4 – Tampa’s First Ferry Crossing The Hillsborough River Jones, Lucy D. “Kennedy / Lafayette St. Bridge History, Tampa - Part 1.” Kennedy / Lafayette St. Bridge History, Tampa - Part 1. University of South Florida, n.d. Web. 26 Apr. 2014. <http://tampapix.com/lafayette1.htm>.

fig. 11 - Tampa Convention Center “Tampa Skyline And Convention Center Photograph by Bill Cobb - Tampa Skyline And Convention Center Fine Art Prints and Posters for Sale.” Fine Art America. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Apr. 2014. <http://fineartamerica.com/featured/tampa-skyline-andconvention-center-bill-cobb.html>.

fig. 5 - Street Car In Ybor City Tampa-Hillsborough County Public Library. “Street Car #34 in Front of El Pasaje Hotel and Restaurant, 1316-1320 9th Avenue: Tampa, Fla. :: Burgert Brothers Photographic Collection.” Street Car #34 in Front of El Pasaje Hotel and Restaurant, 1316-1320 9th Avenue: Tampa, Fla. :: Burgert Brothers Photographic Collection. Burgert Brothers Photographic Collection, n.d. Web. 26 Apr. 2014. http:// digitalcollections.hcplc.org/cdm/singleitem/collection/ p15391coll1/id/1857/rec/5 fig. 6 -

Historical Street Car Map – Tampa “Tampa Bay History Center.” Tampa Bay History Center. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Apr. 2014. <http:// tampabayhistorycenter.blogspot.com/>.

fig. 7 - Tampa City Limits 1950 (Blue) Tampa City Limits Present (Orange) “Why Your Gas Tank Matters: An Alternate View to Public Transportation.” RSS. Sustainable Cities Collective, 7 Dec. 2012. Web. 26 Apr. 2014. <http://sustainablecitiescollective. com/erinchantry/98396/why-your-gas-tank-matters-alternateview-public-transportation>. 63

fig. 12 - Transit Oriented Design Philosophy Diagram Dittmar, Hank, and Gloria Ohland. The New Transit Town: Best Practices in Transit-oriented Development. Washington, DC: Island, 2004. Print. pg. 48 fig. 13 - Tampa Parking Options W/ Proposed Project Site EDAW.Inc. The Tampa Riverwalk Master Plan. N.p.: City of Tampa, n.d. Print. pg. 25 fig. 14 - Tampa Segregated From Bay By Highway AECOM. The Tampa Center City Plan: Connecting Our Neighborhood and Our River for Our Future. N.p.: City of Tampa, n.d. Print. pg. 50 fig. 15 - Downtown Tampa Venues –Tampa Bay Times Arena (Top/ Left), Channelside (Top/Right) Tampa Theater (Bottom/Left), Straz Performing Arts (Bottom/Right) “Tampa Bay’s Top 20 Concert Venues.” Creative Loafing Tampa. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Apr. 2014. <http://cltampa.com/tampa/ tampa-bays-top-20-concert-venues/Content?oid=2033359#. U1wOChbqLzI>.

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT

fig. 16 - Hart Bus Line Routes “HART Bus Service Tampa - CityExplorer.mobi.” CityExplorermobi. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Apr. 2014. <http:// cityexplorer.mobi/hart-line-tampa/>.

fig. 24 - Three Graces, Liverpool, England “Pier Head Ferry Terminal.” OpenBuildings. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Apr. 2014. <http://openbuildings.com/buildings/pier-head-ferryterminal-profile-2436/media>.

fig. 17 - TECO Street Car Routes “Www.nycsubway.org.” Www.nycsubway.org. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Apr. 2014. <http://www.nycsubway.org/wiki/Tampa%2C_ Florida_TECO_Trolley>.

fig. 25 - Museum of Liverpool, Liverpool, England “Pier Head Ferry Terminal.” OpenBuildings. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Apr. 2014. <http://openbuildings.com/buildings/pier-head-ferryterminal-profile-2436/media>.

fig. 18 - In-Town Trolley Routes “HART Bus Service Tampa - CityExplorer.mobi.” CityExplorermobi. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Apr. 2014. <http:// cityexplorer.mobi/hart-line-tampa/>.

fig. 26 - Tampa Waterfront Districts EDAW.Inc. The Tampa Riverwalk Master Plan. N.p.: City of Tampa, n.d. Print. pg. 42

fig. 19 - TECO Street Car Pavilion Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, Connecting People With Places fig. 20 - Marion Street Transportation Center Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, Connecting People With Places fig. 21 - Seattle Central Waterfront Redevelopment Master Plan & Conceptual Rendering Shop Architects, The Seattle Department of Transportation, Department of Planning and Development, and Department of Parks and Recreation. Design Summary: Concept Design and Framework Plan for Seattle’s Central Waterfront. New York: FO, James Corner Field Operations, 2012. Print. pgs. 19&22

fig. 27 - Hillsborough Bay “Urban Sanctuaries/Tampa: Placid Surroundings with a View of Downtown.” | VisitFlorida.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Apr. 2014. <http://www.visitflorida.com/en-us/trails/articles/2011/ september/urban-sanctuariestampa-placid-surroundings-witha-view-of-downtown.html>. fig. 28 - Seddon Channel “Seddon Channel North Inlet, Tampa, Florida, United States.” Seddon Channel North Inlet, Tampa, Florida, United States. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Apr. 2014. <http://marinas.com/view/ inlet/523_Seddon_Channel_North_Inlet_Tampa_FL_United_ States>.

fig. 22 - Tampa Riverwalk Districts & Current Condition Photo Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, Connecting People With Places

fig. 29 - Sparkman Channel “Gov. Rick Scott Warns Port Shutdowns Not an Option for Florida Families | Wtsp.com.” Wtsp.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Apr. 2014. <http://www.wtsp.com/news/article/288990/19/GovRick-Scott-warns-port-shutdowns-not-an-option-for-Floridafamilies>.

fig. 23 - Pier Head Ferry Terminal. Liverpool, England “Pier Head Ferry Terminal.” OpenBuildings. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Apr. 2014. <http://openbuildings.com/buildings/pier-head-ferryterminal-profile-2436/media>.

fig. 30 - Hillsborough River “Downtown Tampa along the Hillsborough River.” Flickr. Yahoo!, n.d. Web. 27 Apr. 2014. <https://www.flickr.com/ photos/49394874%40N08/5124716507/>. 64

GATEWAY TAMPA fig. 31 - Davis Island (Above) Harbour Island (Below) “Davis Island-Tampa, Florida.” Flickr. Yahoo!, n.d. Web. 27 Apr. 2014. <http://www.flickr.com/ photos/48325441%40N05/7789681264/>. fig. 32 - Tampa Convention Center “Tampa Skyline And Convention Center Photograph by Bill Cobb - Tampa Skyline And Convention Center Fine Art Prints and Posters for Sale.” Fine Art America. N.p., n.d. Web. 26 Apr. 2014. <http://fineartamerica.com/featured/tampa-skylineand-convention-center-bill-cobb.html>. fig. 33 - Saprkman Channel Industrial Ports

“Sparkman Channel Inlet, Tampa, Florida, United States.” Sparkman Channel Inlet, Tampa, Florida, United States. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Apr. 2014. <http://marinas.com/view/inlet/534_Sparkman_Channel_Inlet_ Tampa_FL_United_States>.

fig. 34 - Channel District, Tampa “Channel District CRA Photo Gallery.” Channel District CRA Photo Gallery. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Apr. 2014. <http://www. tampagov.net/dept_economic_and_urban_development/ programs_and_services/Community_redevelopment_areas/ Channel_District/Photo_Gallery.asp>. fig. 35 - Tampa Convention Center area Existing Condition Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District fig. 36 - ½ Mile & 1 Mile Radius @ Convention Center Area EDAW.Inc. The Tampa Riverwalk Master Plan. N.p.: City of Tampa, n.d. Print. pg. 20 Revised by Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District fig. 37 - ½ Mile & 1 Mile Radius @ Channelside Area EDAW.Inc. The Tampa Riverwalk Master Plan. N.p.: City of Tampa, n.d. Print. pg. 20 Revised by Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District

fig. 38 - Accessible Open Land @ Convention Center Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District fig. 39 - Gateway District Aerial Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District fig. 40 - Tampa City Center Master Plan AECOM. The Tampa Center City Plan: Connecting Our Neighborhood and Our River for Our Future. N.p.: City of Tampa, n.d. Print. pg. 74 fig. 41 - Proposed Site east Of Tampa Convention Center Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District fig. 42 - Existing Downtown Transit System Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District fig. 43 - Pedestrian Priority Streets & Proposed Site AECOM. The Tampa Center City Plan: Connecting Our Neighborhood and Our River for Our Future. N.p.: City of Tampa, n.d. Print. pg. 76 Revised by Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District fig. 44 - Special Pedestrian Streets & Proposed Site AECOM. The Tampa Center City Plan: Connecting Our Neighborhood and Our River for Our Future. N.p.: City of Tampa, n.d. Print. pg. 76 Revised by Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District fig. 45 - Transit & Mobility Streets & Proposed Site AECOM. The Tampa Center City Plan: Connecting Our Neighborhood and Our River for Our Future. N.p.: City of Tampa, n.d. Print. pg. 76 Revised by Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT fig. 46 - Tampa Parking Options & Proposed Site EDAW.Inc. The Tampa Riverwalk Master Plan. N.p.: City of Tampa, n.d. Print. pg. 25 Revised by Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District

fig. 55 - Seattle Central Waterfront Redevelopment Conceptual Rendering AECOM. The Tampa Center City Plan: Connecting Our Neighborhood and Our River for Our Future. N.p.: City of Tampa, n.d. Print. pg. 22

fig. 47 - Existing & Historic Street Car Routes Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District

fig. 56 - Seattle Waterfront Transit Connections AECOM. The Tampa Center City Plan: Connecting Our Neighborhood and Our River for Our Future. N.p.: City of Tampa, n.d. Print. pg. 47

fig. 48 - Franklin Street Observations Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District fig. 49 - Tampa Riverwalk Area EDAW.Inc. The Tampa Riverwalk Master Plan. N.p.: City of Tampa, n.d. Print. pg. 9 fig. 50 - Existing Open Green Space EDAW.Inc. The Tampa Riverwalk Master Plan. N.p.: City of Tampa, n.d. Print. pg. 22 fig. 51 - Existing Riverwalk Condition @ Proposed Site Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District fig. 52 - Seattle Central Waterfront Project Area AECOM. The Tampa Center City Plan: Connecting Our Neighborhood and Our River for Our Future. N.p.: City of Tampa, n.d. Print. pg. 6 fig. 53 - Seattle Central Waterfront Redevelopment Conceptual Rendering AECOM. The Tampa Center City Plan: Connecting Our Neighborhood and Our River for Our Future. N.p.: City of Tampa, n.d. Print. pg. 29 fig. 54 - Seattle Central Waterfront Redevelopment Conceptual Rendering AECOM. The Tampa Center City Plan: Connecting Our Neighborhood and Our River for Our Future. N.p.: City of Tampa, n.d. Print. pg. 35

fig. 57 - Seattle Waterfront Street Reconfiguration AECOM. The Tampa Center City Plan: Connecting Our Neighborhood and Our River for Our Future. N.p.: City of Tampa, n.d. Print. pg. 48 fig. 58 - Washington DC Southwest Waterfront Master Plan “The Wharf - Washington, DC.” The Wharf - Washington, DC. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Apr. 2014. <http://www.swdcwaterfront.com/ index.htm>. fig. 59 - Existing Water Street (Above) New Development Based On Street Reconfiguration (Below) “The Wharf - Washington, DC.” The Wharf - Washington, DC. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Apr. 2014. <http://www.swdcwaterfront.com/ index.htm>. fig. 60 - City Pier Conceptual Rendering (Left) Wharf Pier Conceptual Rendering (Right) “The Wharf - Washington, DC.” The Wharf - Washington, DC. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Apr. 2014. <http://www.swdcwaterfront.com/ index.htm>. fig. 61 - Reconfigured District Vehicle Access “The Wharf - Washington, DC.” The Wharf - Washington, DC. N.p., n.d. Web. 27 Apr. 2014. <http://www.swdcwaterfront.com/ index.htm>.

GATEWAY TAMPA fig. 62 - Proposed Mixed-Use Ferry Building Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District fig. 63 - Proposed Gateway District Redevelopment Master Plan Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District fig. 64 - Proposed Mixed-Use Ferry Terminal First Floor Plan Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District fig. 65 - Shared Transit Terminal Diagram Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, Connecting People With Places fig. 66 - Proposed Terminal Connection Diagram & Proposed retail Diagram Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District fig. 67 - Proposed Mixed-Use Ferry Terminal North Faรงade Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District fig. 68 - Common Plaza Between The Existing Convention Center & New Ferry Terminal Buildings Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District fig. 69 - Proposed Market Place Along Tampa Riverwalk Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District fig. 70 - Proposed Mixed-Use Ferry Terminal Second Floor Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District fig. 71 - gateway District Proposed Site Plan Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District

fig. 74 - American Cities W/ Population Densities Equal To Tampa Gateway Venue Capacities Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District fig. 75 - Street Closure (Left) Street Car Reconfiguration (Right) Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District fig. 76 - Existing Street Condition (Left) Proposed Street Condition (Right) Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, Connecting People With Places fig. 77 - New District Street Configuration Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District fig. 78 - Street Car Expansion By Phases Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District fig. 79 - Gateway District Street Car Configuration Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District fig. 80 - Gateway District Express Bus Loop Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District fig. 81 - New District Square W/ Street Car Transit To Its West & Bus Transit To Its East Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District fig. 82 - Existing Condition @ Proposed Pedestrian Mall (Left) Pedestrian Mall Conceptual Rendering (Right) Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District

fig. 72 - Gateway District Context Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District

fig. 83 - Gateway District Redevelopment Pedestrian Path & Gathering Areas Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District

fig. 73 - Gateway District Parking, Vacant Land & Existing Venue Capacity Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District

fig. 84 - Gateway District Redevelopment Circulation Network Silver, Grayson Gateway Tampa, A Transit Oriented District

A TRANSIT ORIENTED DISTRICT