Opportunities in Liminality

Opportunities in Liminality: An Inquiry into Museum Narratives and Structures as Catalysts for Culture

A thesis submitted to the Division of Research and Advanced Studies of the University of Cincinnati in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARCHITECTURE in the School of Architecture and Interior Design of the College of Design, Art, Architecture, and Planning 2021

LAUREN L. MEISTER Bachelor of Arts in Architecture, Miami University, 2015

Committee Chair: Prof. Elizabeth Riorden Committee Co-Chair: Prof. Michael McInturf

i

0.1 Abstract Museums as learning institutions have been around for centuries, originating as personal collections within private homes and extending to open exhibitions that anyone may attend. The ritual of attending a museum, similar in manner to other ceremonial activities, is parallel to that of a reverential experience with an additional facet of learning. But how will the postmodern museum look and function? What are strategies developed by museums and cultural centers that will best heighten the overall experience and perspectives gained by visitors? While there are various models of learning and identities that help define typical museum visitors and why they visit, there needs to be a more modern lens applied to this methodology to understand guests in the 21st century, especially in light of recent events including the Covid-19 pandemic.

Such places need to be more resilient and flexible to respond to issues presently or imminently existing and not simply to preserve previous moments in time.

By reflecting on previous practices and understanding the present need of institutions such as these, this thesis will explore scenarios in which a modern museum is combined with an academic complex and community cultural center serving a variety of demographics. The goal of having such a place as a one-stop destination would be to create a large overall snapshot of the University of Cincinnati, Clifton Heights, and greater Cincinnati area communities, engaging diverse groups of people at various levels. A building and surrounding urban design layout are envisioned in proximity to UC’s campus, presented in models and drawings, and described in an in-depth essay extrapolated primarily from research on the narrative experience and relevance of physical museums. The physical nature of the museum will challenge preconceived notions of what these buildings should offer, showing a holistic perspective of what they can grow to be. The investigation also shows how a postmodern museum/cultural center can be associated with other institutions (such as universities) to encourage community conversations. As a result of this thesis project, UC and the Clifton Heights Community Urban Redevelopment Corporation will have a set of contemporary, critical, architectural images which reflect the opportunities available by creating a public learning center that encourages community dialogues while celebrating artifacts and research collected by the University throughout the years. Also, architects, museum curators, exhibition designers, and people associated in other related disciplines will have access to this methodology for making museums and similar cultural centers more participatory and meaningful for the users, locally and globally.

ii

iii

0.2 Preamble To understand my interests regarding the impact that museums have on people of all ages, I need to disclose a portion of my background on the subject of immersive learning. During my grade school education, I went through a Montessori learning program. This scholastic style is focused on multisensory learning and passionate individual inquiry. As students, we could self-select work at our own pace which led to intrinsic motivation and sustained attention. We were able to experiment to understand the world, using hands-on learning tools and studying topics that most piqued our interest. In the third grade, when I considered a career as a movie director, I was given support to put together a play based on our history lessons about the timeline of humankind. I made a script, provided props and costumes, and led my classmates to perform their best in their roles. While I later pursued other creative endeavors that helped forge my professional pathway, I still look back at moments like these and am thankful that the Montessori program provided flexible spaces for us to explore our interests and learn in innovative ways.

Supplementing this early educational process, I enjoyed growing up with access to a variety of museums in Ohio and northern Kentucky. These included but were not limited to: Union Terminal’s Cincinnati Museum Center, the Cincinnati Zoo and Botanical Garden, the Contemporary Arts Center, the Cincinnati Art Museum, the Newport Aquarium, the National Underground Railroad Freedom Center, and the Center of Science and Industry (CoSI). Through field trips and personal visits, I have been more excited to learn new subjects in these institutions than would have occurred solely from reading textbooks. The visual threedimensional context of these histories and topics brought to life the stories that could be expressed only so far in typical school materials.

Museums open up a world of imagination and exploration, giving visitors a strong foundation for intellectual growth and understanding different perspectives.

Finally, I have gotten a better grasp of global perspectives by visiting museums across the United States and internationally. In particular, the catalyst for me pursuing a degree in architecture came after visiting the church of La Sagrada Familia in Barcelona, Spain, during high school.

iv

The basilica facility, by itself, is a feat of architectural marvel, still under construction after many decades to complete its design as Antoni Gaudi (as the chief architect) imagined. But the museum associated with the church also had many artifacts that piqued my interests: scale models, test carvings, period photographs, and even an active model workshop. I was drawn in by the hanging chain model that was the inverted shape of the basilica and its spires. I wanted to learn more about how Gaudi was led to this idea, and it changed my lens for how I viewed architectural designs and the overall built environment.

Museums and spaces that encourage hands-on learning have the potential to bring to life topics of study that may fall flat if solely presented on paper. By being immersed in the context of a subject visually and through active participation, adults and children can view windows to the past and imagine interpretations for the future. Like myself, they may even come away from these experiences with a heightened passion to pursue these fields of study professionally or through volunteer efforts. I would not be who I am today as a creative individual if I did not have support from the Montessori program, access to local museums and related institutions, and commencement into the field of architecture inspired by an exhibition in Spain. Through my design work, I want to create spaces that spur such excitement for potential transformation and connect people together to collaborate on ideas for creating better communities.

Acknowledgements In 2018, I restarted my higher education learning at UC, excited and exhilarated by what the next three years had in store. It became quite an experience of personal growth, not only through the course-loads and internships but also in light of the Covid-19 pandemic. This unprecedented situation challenged me, more greatly than I had anticipated, as I went through the process of creating this thesis document and design proposal to finish my M.Arch degree program, along with my Museum Studies Graduate Certificate program. I would like to thank everyone who has supported me along the way, including my close friends and family, my University of Cincinnati graduate professors, my Miami University undergraduate professors, my previous teachers at the Summit Country Day School and Mercy Montessori Center, and my M.Arch 2021 cohort as we all went through this final process virtually together. As we graduate this spring of 2021, I look forward to seeing what the future has in store for me as I continue pursuing my architectural career.

v

Contents Introductory Sections 0

i 0.1 Abstract................................i 0.2 Preamble...........................iii 0.3 Contents.............................v 0.4 Figures Cited......................vi

Design Principles 1

1 1.1 Contrast...............................1 1.2 Plasticity...............................3 1.3 Immersion............................4

Precedent Studies 2

6 2.1 Kunsthal..............................7 2.2 MO......................................8 2.3 Princeton Art Museum.........9 2.2 Burke Museum...................10 2.3 Carpenter Center................11

Narrative 3

12 3.1 TRIP Model.......................12 3.2 Interactive Experience........14 3.3 Learning Identities.............16

Site Analysis 4

19 4.1 Block 1 near Old St. George...21 4.2 College of Law...................22 4.3 Deaconess Hospital............23 4.4 Crosley Tower....................24 4.5 Summary of Site Analysis..25

Project Proposal 5

26 5.1 Schematic Design...............26 5.2 Exterior Development........32 5.3 Interior Development.........35 5.4 Supporting Renderings.......42 5.5 Summary of Design...........44

Bibliography

50

vi

0.4 Figures Cited 1.1.1: Quiccheberg, Samuel, Mark A. Meadow, and Bruce Robertson.

The First Treatise on Museums: Samuel Quiccheberg’s Inscriptiones, 1565. Los Angeles: Getty Research Institute, 2014. Page 26.

1.1.2: https://www.studiogardere.com/en/projects/museum/v-a-here-east/.

Accessed January 8, 2021.

1.1.3: Dion, Mark, Colleen Josephine Sheehy, and Frederick R. Weisman Art Museum. Cabinet of Curiosities: Mark Dion and the University as Installation.

Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2006. Page 24.

1.1.4: https://www.uc.edu/news/articles/2019/09/n20860590.html. Accessed January 8, 2021.

2.1.1 - 2.1.4: https://oma.eu/projects/kunsthal. Accessed November 21, 2020.

2.1.5: https://www.nonarchitecture.eu/portfolio/kunsthal/. Accessed January 30, 2021.

2.2.1 - 2.2.5: https://miesarch.com/work/3817. Accessed November 21, 2020.

2.3.1 - 2.3.4: https://www.architecturaldigest.com/story/david-adjayeprinceton-university-art-museum. Accessed November 21, 2020.

2.3.5: https://www.dezeen.com/2020/09/24/princeton-university-artmuseum-adjaye-associates/. Accessed November 21, 2020.

2.4.1 - 2.4.5: https://www.architecturalrecord.com/articles/14402-burkemuseum-of-natural-history-and-culture-by-olson-kundig. Accessed November 21, 2020.

2.5.1 - 2.5.5: https://www.archdaily.com/119384/ad-classics-carpentercenter-for-the-visual-arts-le-corbusier. Accessed November 21, 2020.

3.2.1: Falk, John H. and Lynn D. Dierking. The Museum Experience.

Washington, D.C: Whalesback Books, 1992. Page 5.

vii

3.3.1: Knell, Simon J., Suzanne Macleod, and Sheila E. R. Watson.

Museum Revolutions: How Museums and Change and are Changed. New York: Routledge, 2007. Page 286.

4.1.1 – 4.1.3: Meister, Lauren. “Photographs of Block 1.” 2020. JPEG files.

4.1.4: Meister, Lauren. “Diagram of Site Context: Block 1.” 2020.

Illustrator to JPEG File.

4.1.5: Meister, Lauren. “Sketch of Potential Massing: Block 1.” 2020.

Illustrator to JPEG File.

4.2.1 – 4.2.3: Meister, Lauren. “Photographs of College of Law.” 2020.

JPEG files.

4.2.4: Meister, Lauren. “Diagram of Site Context: College of Law.” 2020.

Illustrator to JPEG File.

4.2.5: Meister, Lauren. “Sketch of Potential Massing: College of Law.” 2020. Illustrator to JPEG File.

4.3.1 – 4.3.3: Meister, Lauren. “Photographs of Deaconess Hospital (Site).” 2020. JPEG files.

4.3.4: Meister, Lauren. “Diagram of Site Context: Deaconess Hospital (Site).” 2020. Illustrator to JPEG File.

4.3.5: Meister, Lauren. “Sketch of Potential Massing: Deaconess Hospital (Site).” 2020. Illustrator to JPEG File.

4.4.1 – 4.4.3: Meister, Lauren. “Photographs of Crosley Tower.” 2020.

JPEG files.

4.4.4: Meister, Lauren. “Diagram of Site Context: Crosley Tower.” 2020.

Illustrator to JPEG File.

4.4.5: Meister, Lauren. “Sketch of Potential Massing: Crosley Tower.”

2020. Illustrator to JPEG File.

4.5.1: Meister, Lauren. “Site Plan of the University of Cincinnati Campus.” 2020. Illustrator to JPEG file.

4.5.2 - 4.5.5: Meister, Lauren. “Axonometric Site Context of Potential Locations for Design Proposal.” 2020. Illustrator to JPEG files.

viii

5.1.1 – 5.1.8: Meister, Lauren. “Visual Site Comparison Diagrams.”

2020. Illustrator to JPEG files.

5.1.9: Meister, Lauren. “Axonometric View of Block 1.” 2020. Photoshop to JPEG file.

5.1.10: Meister, Lauren. “Diagrams of Potential Massing on Block 1.”

2020. Illustrator to JPEG file.

5.2.1: Meister, Lauren. “North Elevation.” 2021. Revit to Illustrator to Photoshop.

5.2.2: Meister, Lauren. “South Elevation.” 2021. Revit to Illustrator to Photoshop.

5.2.3: Meister, Lauren. “West and East Elevations.” 2021. Revit to Illustrator to Photoshop.

5.2.4: Meister, Lauren. “Site Plan.” 2021. Revit to Illustrator to Photoshop.

5.2.5: Meister, Lauren. “Axon Perspective.” 2021. Revit to Illustrator to Photoshop.

5.3.1: Meister, Lauren. “Section Perspective Through Museum.” 2021.

Revit to Illustrator to Photoshop.

5.3.2: Meister, Lauren. “Section Perspective Through Community Center.”

2021. Revit to Illustrator to Photoshop.

5.3.3 – 5.3.9: Meister, Lauren. “Project Floor Plans.” 2021. Revit to Illustrator.

5.4.1 – 5.4.4: Meister, Lauren. “Rendered Perspectives of Project Proposal.” 2021. Revit to Illustrator to Photoshop.

Design Principles

When creating my set of underlying design principles, I wanted to engage with terminology that not only worked at the level of the exhibitions but more critically to how I would approach the architecture.

1 1.1 Contrast..............................1 1.2 Plasticity..............................3 1.3 Immersion...........................4

1.1 Contrast Museums did not originate as public institutions where diverse groups could gather. Instead, objects were accumulated by the elite for their personal musings. The art of collecting dates back many centuries, starting with Cabinets of Curiosities or Wunderkammers. In 1565, Samuel Quiccheberg published the first known treatise on museums, suggesting an order of objects in collections and spaces that should surround such assemblages. In the attached chart, a list prepared by Quiccheberg surprisingly relates well to what modern museums today look like, with accompanying spaces that include a library, workshops, tool rooms, gardens, a music room [or performance space], and a variety of galleries. Quiccheberg, in his treatise, made the argument that “the Wunderkammer serves not only as a place of amusement for the aristocracy and political showcase for princely magnificence but also as a practical research center working directly at the service of the state’s economy, defense, religion, and culture.”1

“Ostensibly displaying research objects, these installations [in university collections] habitually gain their force through what have become relatively widespread Wunderkammer strategies for exhibition: weird or startling juxtapositions, extreme disparities of scale and material, or simple grotesquerie.”

Quiccheberg, The First Treatise on Museums: Samuel Quiccheberg’s Inscriptiones 1565, vii.

1. Quiccheberg. 5.

Figure 1.1.1: Chart of Quiccheberg’s System for Organizing Collections

1 Design Principles

While the audience for museums today is much more wide-reaching, the notion of having active research within their walls shows a level of practicality by having all of these spaces under one roof. For the most part, museums have put these research spaces behind the scenes, but more museums today are incorporating public vignettes or glimpses into the work carried out by researchers and staff. At the Broad Museum in Los Angeles, visitors have views of the larger archives through windows along the staircase leading to the upper gallery. The Victoria and Albert Museum is creating an addition to its building called the Collection and Research Centre, which will take this notion of showcasing research to the extreme by providing a public display of the museum’s vast collection and active research being conducted by the staff. These prestigious institutions are particularly pleasing to visitors who want to be immersed in collections and understand how exhibits are being curated.

To a somewhat smaller degree, some universities have also responded to this desire by creating their own cabinets of curiosities. Professor Mark Dion, along with his students at the University of Minnesota, published in 2006 their steps and reflections for creating exhibits surrounding different themes of objects. He described their compiled collections as a “microcosm of nature, culture, and history found in modern universities and museums reflect[ing] the worldliness of these institutions”2, showing the applicability of cabinets of curiosities hundreds of years after they were more traditionally put together. In a similar way, the University of Cincinnati presented in 2019 (for its biennial) an exhibition featuring “200 Years of Curation”, with compilations from five separate archives and collections at the university. With the success and reception that this exhibition received, this realization could lead to other interdisciplinary collaboration in the future to curate mixed displays of objects and artifacts. These examples help showcase the value Wunderkammers can provide when implemented with care and why they are still relevant as a medium for showcasing collections.

In conjunction to Quiccheberg’s function of a museum, George Brown Goode summarized what the museum should be held responsible for: the advancement of learning; a recording of artifacts; an adjunct to the classroom; a conveyance of special information; and the culture of the public.3 Although these functions serve contrasting purposes, it is the unity of all of these elements together that creates a meaningful museum experience. These types of spaces should be thoughtfully considered when designing an institution, not only in regard to their intended use but also for the purposes of working well together to form an overall narrative experience.

2

Figure 1.1.2: Victoria and Albert Museum - Collection and Research Centre

Figure 1.1.3: University of Minnesota Explorations in Wunderkammers 2. Dion, 26.

Figure 1.1.4: University of Cincinnati “200 Years of Curations” Exhibition Poster 3. Genoways. Museum Origins. 116

1 Design Principles

3

1.2 Plasticity While museums tend to have steadfast values that frame the focus of their exhibitions, they should also have the flexibility to reflect modern societal desires and principles. Janes defines resilience in “Museums in a Troubled World” “as the ability to recover from or adjust easily to misfortune or change”, suggesting a frame of mind that is not bound by traditional practices.4 Traditionally in museums, there are dedicated gallery spaces, intended solely for permanent and temporary exhibitions.

While there generally are auxiliary spaces (for back-of-house storage and preservation, a gift shop, a restaurant, offices, and study rooms), such spaces that usually support the functions of the galleries have dedicated programming that would be difficult to transition to another use within a short time frame. Some institutions incorporate multi-purpose rooms or lecture halls, frequently of a large scale. Greater consideration for making available transitional spaces, with a greater variety of scales, may support more individuals and groups who seek to utilize space surrounded by the remarkable museum collections.

The size and impact of the museum’s economic footprint (not just its physical footprint) reveal how the health and vibrancy of our cities and communities are closely tied to the fate of museums. A national report issued in 2017 by the American Alliance of Museums describes the significant financial contributions that museums and similar cultural centers bring to cities, not only for the health of the cities but for the provision of jobs at such institutions. Museums not only generate $12 billion in tax revenue, they contribute more than $50 billion to the GDP. Advertising, marketing, and general intrigue of museums in the United States bring in 2.5 times the population of the nation each year.5 Due to this high popularity, internationally and locally, museums were able to provide over 725,000 jobs in various fields of study, which was over double that of the professional sports industry -- that is, until our nation and the world experienced an unprecedented pandemic.

The phrase “museums in a troubled world” takes on even more meaning after 2020, based on all the events that have unfolded due to the Covid-19 pandemic. When countries were closing public businesses to protect people from extensive outbreaks, almost 90% of museums (approximately 85,000) had to shut down at least temporarily; one eighth of the locations that closed may never reopen due to associated loss in revenue.6 When museums reopened in various phases, it was mainly to cater to local communities rather than to national or international tourism. It may be months or years until museums and other leisure/learning centers return to full capacity, either due to local mandates or the comfort levels of visitors.

4. Janes [2009], 141.

“Resilience also means that there is no one solution or strategy for successful adaption and institutional success. ... Museums will increasingly need to operate on multiple fronts, conceding attention to marketplace revenues while embracing initiatives.”

Janes. Museums in a Troubled World. 142.

5. American Alliance of Museums. 2017.

6. Associated Press.

1 Design Principles

4

With this in mind, it is critical that museums/cultural centers moving forward have built-in flexibility when considering programming, especially when their missions take pride in making connections to various community groups. When museums closed, buildings were left as empty shells to be predominantly unoccupied for months. Looking back, it would have been helpful if there had been spaces available to operate as distribution centers, workspaces for students, or facilities for other community-serving purposes. These kinds of outreach efforts would not only have activated the buildings again; they could have brought greater attention to institutions, potentially garnering donations from individuals wanting to support the efforts.

“All museums have the responsibility and the opportunity to become synthesizers, and foster an understanding of the interconnectedness of the problems we face, both environmental and social. A mindful museum can empower and honor all people in the search for a sustainable and just world - by creating a mission that focuses on the interconnectedness of our world and its challenges, and promotes the integration of disparate perspectives.”

For my proposed building complex, I have considered programmatic elements that could transition depending on the climate and needs of society. Most spaces would be dedicated to a sole purpose unless they need to be converted for special or critical events. Depending on where the complex would be located near or on campus, the programmatic elements incorporated may need to change. In summary, the idea of plasticity in museums is encapsulated by the following commentary: “Resilience also means that there is no one solution or strategy for successful adaption or institutional success. … Museums will increasingly need to operate on multiple fronts, conceding attention to marketplace revenues while embracing initiatives”.7

“Like a library, a museum is a resource that should serve a broad base of interested and informed users. Like a piazza, it is a place that should sustain the broadest possible range of activities related to the experience and enjoyment of the museum’s collections.”

Janes. Museums in a Troubled World. xv.

Bradburne. “The Future of Museums.”

7. Janes [2009], 142.

1.3 Immersion Considerations of immersion will also be critical in creating a complex that will be engaging for visitors, within the exhibitions as well as the surrounding urban context. In “Museums in a Troubled World”, Janes implores museum staff to tackle how their collections and events handle critical elements including: addressing vital and relevant needs/issues within the community; engaging a diverse public; acting as a catalyst for action; stimulating intergenerational interactions; linking existing community groups to one another; initiating or enhancing long term collaborative interactions; creating partnerships that empower community groups; and resulting in products/processes that have tangible impacts on the community.8 Within their walls, the type of cultural center I envision should provide spaces that support most, if not all, of these elements.

Long-term interactions help to invite guests to repeatedly return to a museum, rather than visiting it once and checking it off a “bucket list.”

When a community views an institution as making a consistent effort to engage with various neighborhood and city groups, greater value should be realized for supporting the institution.

8. Janes [2009], 124.

1 Design Principles

The audience can become immersed in the dramatic narrative of the museum when elements of transaction, ritual, identity, and power are balanced within the mission of the space. The visitor performance experience tied to gallery experiences can be utilized to enhance the narrative dedicated to public engagement.

By being outwardly immersed within a community, a museum can engage with elements and people directly outside its walls. Within the context of a neighborhood and an academic community, this structure should not be some monolithic composition that seems inviting only to credentialed individuals. My goal is for the property to encourage outdoor green space usage, while incorporating façade elements that will inspire passersby to explore inside, utilizing one or more of the programmatic elements advertised for this complex. Students looking for another place to study or research physical collections should feel comfortable walking into this place regardless of their major, ready to independently work or collaborate with classmates. People exiting at the bus stops may be intrigued to dip into the gift shop or café before going to work or class. If this place is to be a representative one-stop destination to give glimpses of the different colleges on campus, then it should feel welcoming enough that anyone familiar or unfamiliar with the University of Cincinnati (UC) heritage could enter to learn about the various collections.

Besides physical elements of immersion, another element should be used to highlight an aesthetic experience associated with museums: liminality.

Victor Turner describes this element as a mode of consciousness “betwixt-and-between the normal, day to day cultural and social states and processes of getting and spending”.9 This type of ritual experience suspends reality for a time when you enter the front doors; it encourages visitors to look at the world in a new or different perspective. For however long guests are walking through galleries in museums, they are in a state of detached contemplation as they jump from time period to time period, from art into nature. While this idea is a type of experience sought after by most individuals (similar to when they attend theaters or movies), contemporary museums have the responsibility to conclude the narrative experience with a transition back into reality. There needs to be a winding-down process that provides takeaways for guests that can be applied back into their own lives, impressing upon them that they should not forget the lessons or perspectives showcased within the walls of the museums. These spaces are not solely sacred spaces preserving artifacts for momentary evaluation; they are impressing stories into our memories, to share with friends and family and to possibly change the way people interact with the world around them. The liminal experience can be so attention grabbing that it challenges visitors to immerse in themselves and others the lessons learned within a set of galleries.

5

“Museums need to be understood not as institutions which represent communities and cultures - which create a ‘place for all of us’ but as institutions which actually produce the very notion of community and culture.”

Witcomb. Re-Imagining the Museum: Beyond the Mausoleum. 80.

“As people access a large and varied range of places when learning takes place, museums need to position themselves as unique and accessible learning settings where visitors can experience the real and be together in an enjoyable, safe environment. ... Through access to objects and information visitors see reflections of themselves and their culture in ways that encourage new connections, meaning-making and changes to their learning identity.”

Knell (quoting Lynda Kelly in “Visitors and Learning”). Museum Revolutions: How Museums Change and Are Changed. 287.

9. Duncan, 80.

“To help the public re-establish this common ground and learn to build bridges rather than breed division, many believe that museums have a role to play in giving us perspective – be it through intellectual exercises or merely holding up mistakes of the past as evidence of where such behaviour will lead us once more.”

Carlsson. “Why we need museums now more than ever.”

Precedent Studies

After compacting elements of museum functions into three core design principles, these elements needed to be tested for their applicability on various building precedent examples. While I have compiled a more extensive list at the end of this text that highlights notable museum centers I reviewed for inspiration and direction, for the sake of analyzing the pertinence of the design principles I have chosen five specific precedents that have scale, programming, and site conditions that would be similar to those applicable for my envisioned cultural center. By observing conditions from each of these sites (within the United States and abroad), I was able to make conclusions based on their design elements that would help me move forward with my own building proposal. The following pages provide fact sheets for each of the buildings to show comparable results for each of the categories of Contrast, Plasticity, and Immersion.

From those studies, I narrowed my results to these statements: Contrast Galleries that have spaces that are dynamically and architecturally different from one another to help to signify to audiences that their mindsets should be adjusted from room to room. Consideration of materiality and texture must occur when trying to highlight destination points or have them recede into the background so the collection can speak for itself. Sneak peeks of objects along adjacent paths can create intrigue and encourage further investigation.

Plasticity Open floor plans in defined enclosures create flexible programming opportunities for curators or event planners. Spaces that serve as casual gathering areas most of the time can be easily transformed into private areas for special occasions. Even the interstitial spaces can be utilized for various purposes.

Immersion While the museum footprint itself takes space away from pedestrians, designed green spaces and plazas can provide more amenities to the public. By taking note of what is directly surrounding the site, we can preserve or create pathways to serve pedestrians while they also act as marketing corridors for the center. Spaces that reflect the history of the area can cater in particular to repeat local visitors.

2 2.1 Kunsthal...............................7 2.2 MO.......................................8 2.3 Princeton Art Museum..........9 2.4 Burke Museum....................10 2.5 Carpenter Center..................11

2 Precedent Studies

2.1 Kunsthal

7

Full Name: The Kunsthal

Architect: Rem Koolhaas Location: Rotterdam, Netherlands Footprint: 75,000 sq ft Year Constructed: 1991 Focus: Metropolitan Museum

Figure 2.1.1

Figure 2.1.2

Figure 2.1.3

Description The Kunsthal’s mission is to fulfill a leading role in the museum sector, generating a greater and new audience by presenting a program that is rich in contrast, is an attractive venue for additional shows, and has opportunities to actively involve the audience, local and tourist-based.

Figure 2.1.1: Exterior Perspective Figure 2.1.2: Interior Lecture Hall Figure 2.1.3: Exterior Path

Contrast Designed as a volumetric study rather than with a planometric strategy, the spaces become one cohesive system through the spatial juxtaposition and the orientation of each space. Ramps and interchanges connect all of these dynamic spaces.

Plasticity Without a fixed collection tied to the museum, each of the galleries and halls are open enough to provide large footprints for rotating exhibitions. The intersections between the main spaces act as programmatic placeholders and visual connections to support the exhibits.

Immersion The building acts as a metropolitan connector as well as a museum. There are paths that connect the busy expressway and the museum park, making the structure act as a bridge as well as gallery space.

Figure 2.1.4: Upper Level Elevation

Figure 2.1.5: Road Level Plan

NTS

2 Precedent Studies

2.2 MO

8

Full Name: MO- Modern Art Museum

Architect: Daniel Libeskind Location: Vilnius, Lithuania Footprint: 43,600 sq ft Year Constructed: 2018 Focus: Lithuanian Modern Art Museum

Figure 2.2.1

Figure 2.2.2

Figure 2.2.3

Description Designed to be a cultural gateway for the medieval city of Vilnius, Libeskind wanted to create a museum for the people of Lithuania and give this collection a hub for international and local audiences. This collection supports the cultural and historical legacy of the country in a modern designed complex.

Figure 2.2.1: Exterior Perspective Figure 2.2.2: Upper Level Plaza Figure 2.2.3: Interior Circulation

Contrast The dramatic open stair, leading to an upper plaza, cuts through the facade in a stark manner. While giving the initial appearance of a solid volume, elements are carved away to provide plenty of outdoor areas to supplement the interior exhibition space.

Plasticity The upper terrace acts as an informal space for reflection or can host large gatherings for film screenings. The large open floor plans create flexibility for curators to determine how different elements of the collection should be showcased.

Immersion Located in a dense urban setting, Libeskind created generous public spaces (hard surface and green) that are available to all visitors. Dedicated to showcasing local art and how it connects at a global level, the collection now has a venue that both local and international audiences will want to explore.

Figure 2.2.4: Building Section

NTS

Figure 2.2.5: Floor Plan

NTS

2 Precedent Studies

2.3 Princeton Art Museum

9

Full Name: Princeton University Art Museum

Architect: Sir David Adjaye Location: Princeton, New Jersey Footprint: 150,000 sq ft* Year Constructed: 2024 (expected) Focus: University Collections Museum *Includes addition from the previous structure Figure 2.3.1

Figure 2.3.2

Figure 2.3.3

Description The design embodies the museum’s commitment to serve as a hub and a gathering place, that affords encounters with cultures past and present from around the world and seeks to foster stronger citizenship among its university, local, and global communities.

Figure 2.3.1: Grand Hall Figure 2.3.2: Exterior Rendering Figure 2.3.3: Entrance Hall & Grand Stair

Contrast As passersby, visitors can get glimpses of the collection while passing through the art walk corridor. For people perusing the galleries, each of the pavilions will be dedicated to a specific subset of the collection and have a layout distinctly different from one another.

Plasticity The Grand Hall, centrally located in the renovated addition, creates not only a formal location for guest lectures and special events, but on most days will provide an assembly area to students who wish to meet up or study in a unique setting on campus.

Immersion Integrating within an existing campus plan attached to the previous museum structure, Sir David Adjaye worked within the fabric of existing paths and views of the campus while also carrying out his own architectural style consistent with the newer era of buildings being constructed for the university.

Figure 2.3.4: Building Elevation (Rendered)

Figure 2.3.5: Axon of Gallery Floor Plan

2 Precedent Studies

2.4 Burke Museum

10

Full Name: Burke Museum of Natural

History and Culture Architect: Olson Kundig Location: Seattle, Washington Footprint: 105,000 sq ft Year Constructed: 2019 Focus: Natural History Museum

Figure 2.4.1

Figure 2.4.2

Figure 2.4.3

Description Throughout the warehouse-style building’s three levels, the display rooms intertwine with research laboratories, workrooms, and interactive learning alcoves. All of these features give visitors visual access to the preservation process and encourage a more accessible learning environment that sets itself apart from traditional natural history museums.

Figure 2.4.1: Entrance Elevation Figure 2.4.2: Interior Gallery Perspective Figure 2.4.3: Interior Circulation Perspective

Contrast Workshop spaces and visible storage allow visitors to see different ways to investigate collections, while also having traditional exhibitions with objects embedded in curated context.

Plasticity Classrooms that support their education program provide hands-on experiences for visitors using multiple senses to learn about objects. These classrooms are embedded throughout the museum so more people can see the range of activities available within the museum.

Immersion While also creating a building for the museum collection, the site surrounding the complex was just as important -- e.g., by framing hardscape plazas and greenscape expanses that support the surrounding community as well as visitors to the museum.

Figure 2.4.4: Building Elevation

Figure 2.4.5: Level 1 Floor Plan

NTS

2 Precedent Studies

2.5 Carpenter Center

11

Full Name: The Carpenter Center for the

Visual Arts Architect: Le Corbusier Location: Cambridge, Massachusetts Footprint: 57,000 sq ft Year Constructed: 1963 Focus: Department of Visual and Environmental Studies University Building

Figure 2.5.1

Figure 2.5.2

Figure 2.5.3

Description Le Corbusier maintained large open floor plates, which allow for students to have visual access to surrounding classrooms and to operate in open studio environments. Corbusier used the curvilinear wall layout to characterize the interior volume’s boundary and to emphasize the intersecting promenade.

Figure 2.5.1: Exterior Circulation Figure 2.5.2: Exterior Perspective Figure 2.5.3: Gallery View from Ramp

Contrast Rectilinear forms create the main studio spaces, while curvilinear walls frame the path of the central promenade that cuts through the building.

The angled window orientation in some of the large spaces creates a contrast of conditions, where it appears as if you are either looking at a blank wall with no penetrations or an open view of the campus.

Plasticity Open workshop floor plates allow for flexible configurations to accommodate student work showcases, film screenings, and other events in the building. The imagery showcased to passersby on the promenade changes depending on the class programming.

Immersion Rather than cutting access to existing pathways on campus, Corbusier embraced the corridor as a highlighted architecture feature, giving people a glimpse of interior activities to help encourage them to explore further the spaces inside.

Figure 2.5.4: Buidling Section

NTS

Figure 2.5.5: Floor Plan

NTS

Narrative

While looking at the museum as the archetype for my thesis proposal, my vision is for something more than a typical first impression of a museum (many galleries displaying “stuff ”) by including programmatic elements that take on a life of their own, which could be separate from the narrative of the gallery spaces.

3 3.1 TRIP Model........................12 3.2 Interactive Experience..........14 3.3 Learning Identities...............16

3.1 TRIP Model In understanding how the facilities that hold collections operate, I think the TRIP (Transaction, Ritual, Identity, Power) model10 that I found could be a way to frame a narrative experience as one moves throughout my design. This idea revolves around the notion that meaning-making in museums can take on the metaphor as a visitor-driven performance. By engaging consciously with the following ideas, museums can progressively become places which enable individual visitors to grow in understanding of each other (through their similarities as well as their differences) and to reflect on themselves and their values the growing societies in which they live and interact within.

Transaction How visitors relate to the museum environment and the displays within these complexes is very important. The premise of most museums (that people are interested in looking at objects) suggests that those objects which most correlate with emotions are those which are the most meaningful and in which we invest the most to our individual personalities. In the text, How to Visit an Art Museum, Idema suggested alternative ways to navigate throughout a museum space and, through this changed mindset, how we interpret the “transaction” of viewing artifacts. At one point, she suggests that “art isn’t the object that hangs on the wall, but only happens in confrontation with its beholder.”11 The lens that curators create when focusing our attention on certain artifacts and the perception that is acknowledged by the viewer is more critical than simply showing an artifact for the sake of displaying it.

Ritual A ritual can provide continuity for the way of life and traditions of a specific populace. Ritual experiences can also provide the potential for a change of status or identity, as with a rite of passage. Visitors both serve as fellow members of the audience for other visitors and at the same time perform roles in the social drama with their companions and museum staff.

Visitors engage with the ritual, respond to the script, and perform both for themselves and for other people in the museum, as they make meaning.

“Narrative interventions no longer [rely] on ‘filling’ the receptacle of space with fragments of a story; space [is] itself made narrative.”

Lonsway. Making Leisure Work. 30 10. Knell. (Referencing Jenn Fraser’s chapter “Museums - Drama, Ritual, and Power.”) 291-301.

11. Idema, “On the Value of Watching People Look.”

“The museum is really an impresario,... neither actor nor audience, but the controlling intermediary who sets the scene, induces a receptive mood in the spectator, then bids the actors take the stage and be their best artistic selves.”

Duncan. (Quoting Philip Rhys Adams, previous director of the Cincinnati Art.) “The Art Museum as Ritual.” 81.

3 Narrative

Identity An encounter between a visitor and a museum is personal. Visitors muse over objects they are familiar with; they try to make connections with the new artifacts or new information about the objects in respect to their own personal viewpoints, either positively or negatively. These learning identities can be broken down into five categories for further investigation - person, people, place, purpose, and process (this issue will be expanded upon in section 3.3 Learning Identities)12.

Power Recognition of the museum for its covert authority and legitimacy is impactful. The acknowledgement of the active mind of a visitor is accompanied by admitting how his or her meaning-making capacity can have a progressive effect on the displays and the rooms they are passing through and learning from. Previously, the narrative power presented in museums was primarily based on views and desires of the museum owners and donors that supported such institutions. “But exhibitions today commonly reflect the interest groups that are ideologically different from those previously in control - groups that are only recently flexing their muscle, having just elbowed their way into the cultural spotlight.”13 These new viewpoints are changing the perspective lens that exhibits were traditionally curated in, opening the conversation up for more audiences to connect with.

All of these issues will predominate a museum and it is my role as a designer to help formulate how these elements could play out. In the context of my proposal, I will need to evaluate throughout the design process how these elements are emphasized in the spaces I create.

The inception of this idea to create an academic focused museum/cultural center sprung from the limited visibility of great works and artifacts (available within UC’s collection) for the public, or at least the barriers created to access them easily. Each of the colleges’ collections owned by UC are stored in separate buildings, rather than a unified facility where the transaction of viewing artifacts could be easier to accomplish. The identity created throughout the galleries of such a museum would provide representative glimpses of what the balance of the University has available.

By allocating an entire building and surrounding grounds for the benefit of an authentic museum experience, I can curate a ceremonial experience that takes visitors out of their normal routine and transports them into this new environment. From the moment they leave the public sidewalk, meander through the paths leading to the building, and eventually enter its front doors, people will perceive that the ritual has started for this reflective experience.

12. Knell, 279.

13. Alexander, 249.

13

3 Narrative

14

Whether people are part of the university community, the greater Cincinnati area, or even parts further away, the objects shown in the various temporary and longstanding exhibitions will be showcased in a manner that provide deeper meaning. There will be pieces that speak to some part of a visitor’s identity, to provide a sense of fulfillment from learning in this immersive environment.

This place will not only have the power to reflect on past artifacts collected, but the ability to encourage dialogue as to current events so we can learn how to best collectively shape our futures. There is more energy surrounding objects when they are put into a meaningful context and spur thoughtful conversation. Lecture halls and workshop spaces available to encourage dialogues will offset the passive spaces throughout the rest of the complex.

These TRIP model elements have greatly helped me to discover ways to create an authentic museum experience with Cincinnati as a backdrop.

3.2 Interactive Experience Besides the performance experience that can occur when moving throughout a museum, the visitors’ perspectives while they are going through this experience are also critical to keep in mind. There are various reasons why a visitor or a group of visitors makes the decision to attend an exhibition and how they will remember that experience after the fact. These can mainly be grouped into (1) social recreational reasons; (2) educational reasons; and (3) reverential reasons.14 Based on each of these rationales, there are different outlooks that frame the interactive experience throughout a visit.

Figure 3.2.1: Museum Experience Model 14. Falk, 14.

Personal Context The personal interest of a visitor more relates to an individual experience rather than a group mindset. Based on previous experiences with various types of learning centers, people walk into museums with preconceived notions of what to expect and, frequently, personal agendas of what they hope to get out of the experience. This preference could entail only seeing one specific artist’s work, finding interactive attractions that hold their attention, viewing items for research purposes, or collecting imagery of their time at the museum to share with friends or on social media.

Successful exhibits are able to create personal connections to an audience rather than creating hindrances that prevent connections from being made.

Outside of their goals for going to a museum, visitors also personalize a museum’s message to conform to their own understanding and experiences.15

“The works of art in such a museum contribute... when by stimulating inquisitive looking, sharpening perception, raising intelligence, widening perspectives, bringing out new connections and contrasts, and marking off neglected significant kinds, they participate in the organization and reorganization of experience and thus in the making and remaking of our worlds” Weil (quoting Nelson Goodman). A Cabinet of Curiosities. 119.

15. Falk, 138.

3 Narrative

When a hundred people see an exhibition regarding sustainability, for example, they likely have different takeaways after walking through each of the sections.

Someone with a political background may see the significance that a policy has in driving sustainable efforts throughout a country. A designer may appreciate all of the inventive ways in which objects have been displayed, and may replicate such design ideas in their own creations. Students may see how local efforts can effect change and may be driven to start their own environmental club at their school to discuss sustainable improvements in their community. The same information may have been presented, but the outcome after attaining new knowledge can have endless implications in a person’s life. Fruitful exhibit designs (and their museum layouts) must take into greater consideration how a visitor might use the knowledge presented, rather than thinking solely about what objects to showcase and how.

Social Context Even if an individual has a personal agenda while going to a museum, most of the time, an outing is shared with others. Conversations are sparked as a couple whisper to each other about the significance of a certain installation in the context of the rest of the gallery. Children are eager to experience a world outside of what is most familiar to them, as they see staged exhibits with model animals, shouting out which ones they recognize or asking their parents for information on the ones they do not recognize. Tours may be led to share the insight of docents telling a group how the historical significance of a certain piece of work inspired the rest of the collection. Not all exhibits will work for all social scenarios, but it is important to consider how different types of groups may interact with objects and information on display (even if there are disparities on which types of groups interact with items more than others).

These variations in behavior exemplify the spectrum of social interactions that can exist simultaneously; the breadth of such scenarios should be kept in mind when designing a gallery experience so that the space is not limited to one type of social context.

Physical Context Directly tying into the focus of this thesis: the physical settings that frame the museum determine the feel of the building and the objects contained. There is an inviting and intriguing sensation when visitors enter the initial museum spaces, encouraging them to drift further in to learn what else is available.

Again, the “liminality” effect of museums can take visitors out of the normal context of their everyday lives and present information in a new way. People decide to go to museums to “look”, but the museum and curated gallery experience drive how people look. The sensory experience and comfort offered during their visit can help ingrain certain memories while lessening the “museum fatigue” that can occur from endlessly walking for hours. The hierarchy or purpose for which objects are showcased also determine in what order or with what lens these artifacts should be viewed.

15

“We picture, in our minds’ eyes, a child’s life being transformed by passion for a single work of art or a meaningful interaction with museum staff, and we see opportunity and possibility.”

Holo (quoting Cherise Smith and Gary Matthews Jr. in “What is the Relevance of Museums? Can You Imagine a World Without Them?”).

Beyond the Turnstile. 45.

“Museums serve as one of the ‘cosmopolitan canopies’... . Those canopies offer public spaces for diverse people to gather. While we may see much of American life as segregated, these urban spaces bring people together, sometimes in ordinary, sometimes in remarkable ways. ... In the end, simply bringing us together, whether to marvel at art or explore questions of science, may be more precious than anything we come to see.”

Conn. Do Museums Still Need Objects? 232.

“As a living form of memory, the museum should not simply content itself with just archiving these things, however; it must instead address the question as to how the experiences contained in them can be useable for us, and even more, how the present can be measured against that which is timeless.”

Naredi-Rainer. A Design Manual: Museum Buildings. 17.

3 Narrative

In a perfect situation, visitors would be able to explore every attraction available in a museum. However, guests more likely will prioritize exhibits or shows that pique their interest the most, following up with the balance if they have time during their visit. Exhibits do not necessarily need “bells and whistles” to draw people in; more often than not, intellectually engaging exhibits can be successful without all the flair and actually engage with the audience more when there is more meaning behind each exhibit.16 While interactivity and immersiveness are being integrated more these days into how people may acquire knowledge, through hands-on learning, there needs to be thoughtful meaning behind these “gadgets” for visitors to actually learn from them.

Orientation is also a critical component when guests decide which areas to explore.

Whatever exhibit is closest to the front door or on the first floor will inevitably have the most exposure and the most foot traffic compared to objects in other spaces.

It is the first place that grabs their attention and may set the tone for the rest of the museum. Within the remaining spaces, the other exhibits cannot be designed independently or in a vacuum; while they may share distinct information within their space, they are still adjacent to the next exhibit that may encompass a whole different subject matter. The transition from gallery to gallery is an important bridging experience that needs to be detailed thoughtfully when framing the perspective of visitors. In general, people do not want to be overwhelmed or confused when deciding how to navigate from gallery to gallery. There need to be clues of “what to look for” and “how to do” the museum17, either based on normal practices of other museums or with designed visual/physical indicators incorporated along their paths. Being comfortable with the orientation of a facility will set a better tone and create a more meaningful experience than if a visitor is unsure where to go next or how to get back to the beginning.

16. Falk, 149.

“The museum - physically, architecturally, and institutionally - has a story to tell. Only recently has there been an acknowledgement of multiple viewpoints, understandings, and ‘truths’ in the ways such narratives unfold on site, and an interest in working with the subjectivity inherent in visitor response.”

Macleod. Museum Making: Narratives, Architectures, Exhibitions. 81.

17. Falk, 150.

All these perspectives tied together comprise the overall interactive experience that occurs while visiting a museum or similar institution. One particular perspective may have more importance than the other two, but they each have a role to play. By comparing how each of these contexts creates a holistic visitor experience, I began to consider how this aspect can enrichen the spaces I envision for the proposed museum/cultural center.

3.3 Learning Identities Another aspect of how people interact with museums (besides the contextual perspective) relates to the identities developed or recognized during a visit, either explicitly or implicitly. While this category overlaps somewhat with those of the previous section (regarding personal, social, and physical contexts), Lynda Kelly in her essay, “Visitors and Learning,” provides the 5P model of museum learning18, with each of the categories shown to have an interconnected relationship with each other.

16

18. Knell, 279.

3 Narrative

17

Figure 3.3.1: 5P Model of Museum Learning and Their Implications

Person Tying back into the ideas of identity and personal context: person encompasses the individual learning process and how previous experiences can frame future learning. “Learning [is] described as making sense of something in order to draw conclusions and reach new understandings.”19 The active process of meaning-making shows the advantages of learning from museums in a different sense than learning from textbooks by reading.

People Groups of individuals can learn with and through each other when conversations are fostered. Many museums have a difficult time engaging in this type of dialogue unless it is focused on a scheduled event or is prompted as a point of reflection at the end of a tour. Seeing the objects from another person’s perspective adds another layer of learning separate from the individual experience. Museums should find creative ways to assist in conversation starters, creating opportunities for more collective ways of learning.

Process There is not a universally accepted best way of learning. Depending on the person, one may respond better to reading label descriptions on a wall versus others who need to actively engage in a hands-on activity to impress the knowledge into their minds. Exhibitions need to have diversity in the way information is presented, not only to engage with different learning processes but also to provide visually-distinguished sections of the galleries to differentiate from each other.

19. Knell, 280.

3 Narrative

Purpose “Purpose includes the motivation behind learning that includes a person’s general interests, enjoyment and fun, choosing learning and learning for change.”20 People generally make the active choice to visit museums (other than for school field trips), which suggests they have a specific purpose for visiting such a place. This provides a sizeable difference between learning and being taught or told to do something in an educational sense. There is more freedom for individuals to determine what and how they want to learn, with the museum providing various options to learn through objects or conversations with staff.

Place Going back to the physical context: place discusses the importance of where learning is happening -- in this case, at museums. While there are school environments and virtual spaces (e.g., the internet) for people to learn, museums are still highly regarded as an immersive environment for sharing information about various specific subject matters. The physical environment and the state of mind created for museums make them unique institutions for visitors to gain new knowledge. These spaces create out-of-time experiences that allow people to look at objects in a new light, especially when such objects are less able to be represented in a text book or on a computer screen.

When reflecting on the strategies provided in all three of these models (the TRIP Model, the Museum Experience Model, and the 5P Model of Museum Learning), we see that all provide different perspectives on how to mold successful narrative experiences within museums. While there are areas of overlap in regard to personal, social, and physical experiences, each of these models allows one to put on a different hat when analyzing the successful or lacking elements while envisioning a cultural center complex. Learning from experts in the field and other auxiliary information helps to define various ways people may respond to the museum space, especially depending on the programming and the types of exhibits available. This narrative process helps to move forward, to visualize what the external experience leading up to the building should encapsulate, including which site would be most fruitful to contemplate for this project vis-a-vis UC’s existing campuses.

20. Knell, 282.

18

Site Analysis

When considering the location of a cultural center, I am interested in the collaboration that schools and communities can undertake when they work together. Having grown up in Cincinnati and participating in my first internship with Turner Construction when DAAP was being renovated and U-Square was being developed, I have chosen to focus on a site that fits within the context of the University of Cincinnati’s (UC) campus plan. While looking at this type of location, I have made conjectures about how similarly-situated cultural centers operate using comparable design and programming tactics.

I reached out to the Clifton Heights Community Urban Redevelopment Corporation to understand the progress and draw backs of the Urban Renewal Plan released in 200121 relating to the site I found most attractive for my proposal. I learned the group had several notions of what idealized Calhoun and W. McMillan corridors would look like in regard to retail, entertainment, and housing distribution. Some of these ideas have come to fruition while others gave way to different ideas by the university and developers.

Initially looking at suitable sites available, I had mapped out critical paths, bus stops, parking garages, and dorms as a first step to choosing a site. I narrowed my scope to four locations, involving empty lots or buildings which are likely to be demolished. These include the open block across from Old St. George (currently Crossroads Church’s Uptown site), the College of Law building scheduled to be vacated soon, the site of the former Deaconess Hospital (demolished recently), and Crosley Tower (which is set for future demolition due to structural instability). These sites have the most significant footprints for the programming of a multi-use museum, my preferred spot currently being at the empty block (referenced as “Block 1” by UC and other owners) across from Old St. George. During this initial step, I investigated driving factors that are critical for a museum site selection to determine the strength of each area. The context surrounding each of these areas will influence the functionality of the complex and help predict the most-expected audience.

From the text Manual of Museum Planning, I learned strategies to help with site selection specific to the needs of a museum complex. The Manual offers a methodology using a table template to numerically evaluate the value of each location, rather than solely relying on instinct.22 By picking criteria specific to my design proposal, I came up with an interpretive table that includes data from each of the following categories23:

4 4.1 Block 1 near Old St. George..21 4.2 Law School.........................22 4.3 Deaconess Hospital.............23 4.4 Crosley Tower.....................24 4.5 Summary of Site Analysis...25

21. CHCURC

“The experience of your site is the first impression by visitors, so organizing your site for the types of visitors and addressing the challenge of supporting peak visitation will have an impact on visitor experience.”

Crimm. Planning Successful Museum Building Projects. 110.

22. Lord, 549-555.

23. For the sake of this thesis proposal, I removed criteria that were suggested in regard to: implications for capital funding support, implications for operating revenues, and implications for staffing and other operating expenses. As I am not investigating the marketing and funding implications of a cultural center, I focused on the more physical qualities surrounding each of the sites.

4 Site Analysis

• • • • • • • • • • •

20

Capacity: size of land available and/or the capacity for future expansion; Buildability: considerations of geology, topography, and environmental concerns; Compatibility: consistency this site would have with nearby land use; Amenities: public transportation, bus stops, and outdoor options in the area; Collections Care: security, conservation, and related issues for artifacts; Visibility: views from transportation routes and pedestrian paths; Access: various modes of entry that are available; Cost of Parking: expense to park nearby or with a validation system; Market Appeal: attractiveness of this location for diverse demographics; Synergy of Land Use: extent of mutual benefits for nearby land uses; Identity of Museum: extent to which the site will be self- distinguishing.

With each of these criteria, I assigned each of the categories a weighting factor, knowing that some elements had stronger merits than others in the context of picking a site specific to a university campus. After this table was finalized, I walked each of the sites to visualize in person the positive and negative factors of each location rather than relying on what I was able to observe through online maps and images. Through this investigation, I reached the following conclusions which I tabulated: TABLE 4.0 Site Evaluation 24, 25 Criteria w/ Weighting Factor (1-4) I. Physical Planning Criteria A. Capacity B. Buildability C. Compatibility D. Amenities E. Collections Care II. Market Economic Criteria A. Visibility B. Access C. Cost of Parking D. Capital Costs E. Market Appeal F. Land Use Synergy G. Museum Identity Total

4 2 3 4 1 3 4 2 3 4 2 2

1

2

3

4

20 4 12 20 2

12 8 12 8 5

20 10 12 12 4

8 6 15 16 5

15 16 10 9 20 6 10

15 12 4 9 20 10 8

9 20 10 15 16 4 8

6 12 4 9 8 8 6

144

123

140

103

The following pages summarize my analysis specific to each site, fleshing out observations I made and explaining why I designated certain scores to different factors. While it would have been less biased if I had collected scores from a team of designers and stakeholders for such a museum, I made strong efforts to justify each of my decisions that maintained consistent reasoning across each of the locations.

24. Site Numbering: 1 - Block 1 near Old St. George 2 - College of Law 3 - Deaconess Hospital 4 - Crosley Tower

25. The Weighting Factor is multiplied by scores I gave for each criteria at each site. Ex. Site 1 with Criteria A received a score of 5, multiplied by the weighting factor of 4, which leads to that score being listed as 20. This process is repeated throughout the table.

3 Site Analysis

4.1 Block 1 near Old St. George

21

Table Score: 144 Estimated Footprint: 70,000 sq ft Room for Expansion: Minimally Parking Distance: 300 ft Bus Stops at Site: 5 On Retail Corridor: Yes Topography: Moderate Incline Demolition Required: No Strong Appeal: Pedestrians; UC Community

Figure 4.1.1

Figure 4.1.2

Figure 4.1.3

Description Previously the site of fast-food businesses and small shops, this block across from the Old St. George Church (now occupied by Crossroads Church) has not been converted into residential and commercial mixed use properties in comparison to the rest of Calhoun, purportedly due to the topographical height changes across the block.

Figure 4.1.1: Vine St. Perspective Figure 4.1.2: Scioto Ln. Perspective Figure 4.1.3: W. McMillan St. Perspective

Positive Factors • Land available provides plenty of space for programming needed, with adjacent lot potentially available for expansion.

• Within walking distance to the retail corridor of Uptown/Clifton, providing plenty of visibility for nearby pedestrian traffic.

• Has a strong market appeal potential not only for the UC population but for other schools and residents within Cincinnati.

Negative Factors • Due to the steep incline, topographic hurdles will need to be resolved.

• Need to rely on parking provided by Uptown or through the University, with extra validation options for guests.

• While guest access has the potential to be very high, back-of-house deliveries to support collections care may be harder to integrate without further option exploration.

Figure 4.1.4: Site Context

600 ft

Figure 4.1.5: Sketch of Potential Massing

3 Site Analysis

4.2 College of Law

22

Table Score: 123 Estimated Footprint: 50,000 sq ft Room for Expansion: No Parking Distance: 1300 ft Bus Stops at Site: 4 On Retail Corridor: Yes Topography: Flat Demolition Required: Likely Strong Appeal: UC Community; Pedestrians

Figure 4.2.1

Figure 4.2.2

Figure 4.2.3

Description As the UC College of Law building use will be moving across Western Campus into a new structure, new programming will become an option at this southwest corner of campus. Based on the age of the building, traditional classrooms would not be compatible for a retrofit, but a museum might be.

Figure 4.2.1: Calhoun Sr. Perspective 1 Figure 4.2.2: Calhoun St. Perspective 2 Figure 4.2.3: Clifton St. Perspective 3

Positive Factors • Adjacent to nearby collections already on campus and has access already to loading dock below the site for deliveries and other back-of-house operations.

• Very visible by being located at the southwest corner of the Western Campus at a major street intersection.

• Land use as a university related building has synergy with other nearby buildings.

Negative Factors • Not easily accessible to parking; need to walk the furthest out of the four sites to get to the structure.

• Have to demolish the existing structure or work within constraints of the shell of the current building if preservation is required.

• Land capacity is tight without much room for future expansion without breaking synergy between adjacent buildings and open green spaces.

Figure 4.2.4: Site Context

600 ft

Figure 4.2.5: Sketch of Potential Massing

4 Site Analysis

4.3 Deaconess Hospital

23

Table Score: 140 Estimated Footprint: 75,000 sq ft Room for Expansion: Yes Parking Distance: 100 ft Bus Stops at Site: 3 On Retail Corridor: Not Currently Topography: Flat Demolition Required: No Strong Appeal: Hughes HS; UC Community

Figure 4.3.1

Figure 4.3.2

Figure 4.3.3

Description Since the Deaconess Hospital was demolished in 2019, this vast and flat plot of land is available for new programming to be implemented at this site, with the flexibility to reflect University and/or community goals and usage.26

Figure 4.3.1: Straight St. Perspective 1 Figure 4.3.2: Straight St. Perspective 2 Figure 4.3.3: Clifton St. Perspective

Positive Factors • Land capacity is immense with plenty of opportunities to create an outdoor plaza and/or park, and with plenty of room for expansion. An • already demolished site, minimal excavation is needed for foundation purposes on a flat terrain before building.

• Accessibility is easily attainable and visibility is strong along Clifton Avenue, with a personal identity that can be connected to and/or independent from UC, as desired.

Negative Factors

26. After I began analyzing the site, Cincinnati Business Courier released an update regarding this site, publishing renderings and expectations of this site by developers to create an extensive residential and commercial district that would span not only this vacant site but two other adjacent blocks as well. This persuaded me to not pursue this site for my design proposal, even though it had almost as high a score as Site 1 on Table 4.1.

• Across the street from campus, and not directly along a pedestrian route to the retail corridor (although it is visible).

• Farther away from other amenities that the university provides; potentially would need to be more self-sufficient, providing amenities for different sectors.

• May look more connected to Hughes High School (HS) adjacent to the museum site, rather than connected to UC.

Figure 4.3.4: Site Context

600 ft

Figure 4.3.5: Sketch of Potential Massing

4 Site Analysis

4.4 Crosley Tower

24

Table Score: 103 Estimated Footprint: 250,000 sq ft Room for Expansion: Yes Parking Distance: 20 ft Bus Stops at Site: 1 On Retail Corridor: No Topography: Flat Demolition Required: Yes (Heavy) Strong Appeal: UC Community

Figure 4.4.1

Figure 4.4.2

Figure 4.4.3

Description Once considered an engineering wonder by creating a pour-in-place concrete tower, this building is now destined for demolition (when a safe solution to tear it down has been determined).

Figure 4.4.1: Clifton Ct. Perspective Figure 4.4.2: Martin Luther King Dr. W.

Perspective 1 Figure 4.4.3: Martin Luther King Dr. W.

Perspective 2

Positive Factors • Directly connected to DAAP and Langsam Library for easy researching access to physical collections.

• Adjacent to existing collections on campus for easy transfer and care between buildings.

• Near central student and faculty amenities.

• Opportunity to overlook the green landscape provided by Burnett Woods.

Negative Factors • Major cost to demolish existing building and footprint is not very large for programming or expansion without building upward, similar to the current tower.

• While easily accessible for UC students and faculty, this site does not provide a lot of visibility or access primarily to non-university visitors (nor are retail establishments nearby); would become more of a destination museum for visitors to find in advance.

• Parking only available on campus, with parking capacity usually designated primarily for semester passes unless renegotiated.

Figure 4.4.4: Site Context

600 ft

Figure 4.4.5: Sketch of Potential Massing

4 Site Analysis

25

4.5 Summary of Site Analysis

(4)

Figure 4.5.2: Site of Block 1

(3) (2)

(1)

Figure 4.5.3: Site of College of Law

Figure 4.5.1: Site Plan of the University of Cincinnati Campus Based on these results, the outcome of that study confirmed what I previously believed would be the strongest site, the empty block across from old St. George Church. While the topographical issues create challenges for building on this site, the visibility and accessibility factors that make this area a strong contender gave me motivation to pursue this specific area even more as I investigatde a design proposal for a cultural center. While the rest of the Calhoun retail corridor has been reestablished with new housing and commercial buildings, this block has not been utilized similarly, leaning into the notion that developers have been avoiding this site based on the topographical circumstances.

Potentially with a complex that would challenge the traditional strategies used in other buildings in this district, this site could truly be activated and be an anchor for the University of Cincinnati campus. Based on these evaluations, I decided to move forward focusing my efforts on designing for this site versus the other three.

Figure 4.5.4: Site of Deaconess Hospital

Figure 4.5.5: Site of Crosley Tower

Project Proposal

After concluding my early investigations into museum design theory, precedent studies, and site selection (or pre-design), I moved forward into developing my museum complex near campus, in a manner that would support programming for a cultural center for community and university engagement. This involved a series of exercises going through the typical phases of architectural design: schematic design, design development, and foundational construction document detail drawings. All of these, with the inclusion of renderings, showcase my design proposal for an academic based museum/cultural center.

5 5.1 Schematic Design................26 5.2 Exterior Development.........32 5.3 Interior Development..........37 5.4 Supporting Renderings........42 5.5 Summary of Design............47

5.1 Schematic Design Visual Site Comparison Exercise Moving forward with the site location of Block 1 near the Old St. George Church (currently operated by Crossroads), I initially grappled with understanding the scale of this site; utilizing the entire block for the use of one super complex seemed (to some) to be an overreach for the size of programming required for a large public university institution. To help visualize the footprint usage appropriate for this location, I compared how other notable museums fit within the confines of similarly-sized spaces (including some that I previously investigated for my precedent case study chapter). By implanting floor plans at the same scale to my site plan, I could see that many of the museums fit roughly within half of the site (at least in regard to their ground floor engagement). As shown on the following pages, the museums included in this visual study exercise were27: 1. The Guggenheim Museum in New York City, New York.

2. The National Underground Railroad Freedom Center in Cincinnati, Ohio.

3. The MO Modern Art Museum in Lithuania. (See page 8) 4. The Carpenter Center in Cambridge, Massachusetts. (See page 11) 5. The Burke Natural History Museum in Seattle, Washington. (See page 10) 6. The Kunsthal in Rotterdam, Netherlands. (See page 7) 7. The Broad Museum in Los Angeles, California.

8. The Contemporary Art Center (CAC) in Cincinnati, Ohio.

Out of this sampling, the only one that fit completely on the site was the Freedom Center, located next to the Ohio River. Taking all of this in consideration, I gained a better grasp of the best portions of the Block I should allocate for a physical structure versus what I could designate for outdoor use or other leasable space.

27. While I had previously investigated the Princeton Art Museum in my Precedent Studies chapter, this design is still in development with Sir David Adjaye’s architecture firm. While I was able to collect and review imagery in support of this proposed addition, there was not a true floor plan available at scale to include in this visual comparison exercise.

5 Project Proposal

27

Figure 5.1.1: Guggenheim Footprint

Figure 5.1.2: National Underground Railroad Freedom Center

Figure 5.1.3: MO Museum Footprint

Figure 5.1.4: Carpenter Center Footprint

5 Project Proposal

28

Figure 5.1.5: Burke Museum Footprint

Figure 5.1.6: Kunsthal Footprint

Figure 5.1.7: Broad Museum Footprint

Figure 5.1.8: CAC Footprint

5 Project Proposal

Massing Model Exercise While this visual comparison exercise was helpful to evaluate potential footprint usage for this particular neighborhood block, it was also necessary to investigate massing options that may be relevant to integrate as part of the programming requirements. To not limit the possibilities available for this scheme, a plethora of massing options were created to explore their viability when proceeding with a narrowed-down design proposal. Starting with a primary form or path, secondary/supporting structures were then added on to the driving idea in various orientations and quantities. After contemplating ten initial drivers, 60 subsequent diagrams were generated, with the variations organized in an array to be explored for their validity within the context of the Clifton neighborhood and proximity to the University of Cincinnati’s (UC) campus.

In this exercise the initial massing drivers were separated into the following categories: 1. North Loaded Complex Calhoun Street is known for being a dense retail corridor, with significant pedestrian traffic occurring along the north edge of the Block. With most of the structural elements of the complex fronted on this side, there would be immediate visibility available as well as quick access to the galleries.

2. South Loaded Complex The south edge of the Block along McMillan Street is lower in topography, creating unique opportunities for a higher structure above ground than the north edge. An outdoor buffer zone could be easily established between the pedestrian footpaths and the main facility.

3. West Loaded Complex With more buildings designated for the western edge of the Block, this arrangement would allow for a gradual progression from green space to structures, leading into the rest of the retail corridor.

4. East Loaded Complex Placing a greater proportion of the buildings near the east edge of the Block toward a major corner intersection of campus (West McMillan at Vine) would create the most visibility for both pedestrian and vehicular traffic (if identity is a primary concern).

5. Centrally Located (Form) While not on a traditionally flat plane that would most easily accommodate construction, a centrally-located facility within the Block would provide ample flexibility for auxiliary structures and green spaces to lead to main programs.

29

5 Project Proposal

30

Figure 5.1.9: Axonometric View of

Block 1

Figure 5.1.10: Diagrams of Potential

Massing on Block 1

5 Project Proposal

6. Centrally Located (Plaza) An enclosed plaza as a respite from campus and the activities in the neighborhood is missing in this area; having a set of buildings frame a large courtyard could provide a more interesting space for other programs to take place.

7. Direct Diagonal Path To help traverse the topographical height difference from corner to corner, a direct diagonal path may be helpful for pedestrians to navigate this area while being nearly surrounded by the buildings constituting the complex.

8. Indirect Path If a direct diagonal access is not ideal, there may still be a way to create a ramp promenade that bisects an unconventional path through the site, similar to how the Carpenter Center is oriented at Harvard’s campus.

9. Bisected Path Because there is such a drastic topographical change from the north to south sides of the Block, separating these sections into distinct zones may be necessary to tackle the height changes with less difficulty.

10. Corner Monument While a monument may be beneficial as a marker for the critical road intersection on the northeast corner of the Block, this would also create flexibility for other supporting structures to be scattered in different formations within the rest of the Block.

While associated massing diagrams are rather abstract (i.e., they do not determine outright programming or ground floor engagement), they do help visualize the various strategies that can be implemented on this site. As the building program became more clear, some of these massing diagrams were discarded or reconsidered to create a suitable solution for the cultural center’s needs.

The main drivers considered important moving forward included: maintaining open air space for programmed events or natural conditions; dedicating pedestrian access to the north side of the block along Calhoun Street and transportation access to the south side of the block along McMillan Street; visually creating an intrigue to entry from the east corners of the Block (where the main pedestrian and vehicular traffic occurs); having separate auxiliary structures rather than one super complex that fills the block; and providing paths that not only improve ease of access across the topography but also create opportunities to visually attract passersby to learn more about the complex’s internal programming.

31

5 Project Proposal

32

5.2 Exterior Development The following configurations reflect my project proposal for creating a museum and supporting community center where students and others in the community can reserve space to study or meet with clubs or community groups. The west structure is the museum-focused venue, with enclosed galleries offset by opportunities to look out toward downtown Cincinnati on one side, and out toward the new plaza, adjacent church, and rest of the Clifton Heights neighborhood on the other. This museum can support gallery exhibitions in roughly 25,000 square feet, while holding objects behind the scene in 10,000 combined square feet of storage space (about one third of the space currently dedicated at an off campus warehouse for all of the university’s collections). The sloping glass facade on the north side highlights the main entrance for the museum, and takes advantage of having daylighting available without the risk of receiving too much direct glare.

Because most of the University libraries and public study spaces are generally dedicated to the opposite side of campus, I wanted to create a supporting community center a) where students could study or work on projects and b) local groups can rent out spaces to host events or meet with members. There are various programmable breakout rooms, meeting areas, and classrooms that could accomodate the flexibility needed to host various groups without sharing one large open floor plan.

Figure 5.2.4: Site Plan

Figure 5.2.1: North Elevation

Figure 5.2.2: South Elevation

Figure 5.2.3: West and East Elevations

5 Project Proposal

Figure 5.2.5: Axon Perspective

33

5 Project Proposal

There are paths that allow passersby to meander around each of these complexes and through a sculpture garden on the south side.

If people prefer a quicker route to navigate across the block, a direct path from the lower southeast corner directly to the north end of the central plaza is available via a terraced staircase. To avoid the sloping topography being a hurdle to climb, landings throughout the ascent provide opportunities to pause, study, or converse in outdoor areas. By having this direct path intersect the two main complexes, pedestrians may enjoy glimpses of events and programs going on around them, hopefully piquing their interest in returning at a future time to explore the surroundings more thoroughly, outside and inside.

While, on the surface, it may appear that the main programming is above the Calhoun Street level, I took advantage of the topography to create spaces underground as well to support museum initiatives.

To maintain plenty of green spaces available on the site (rather than taking away most or all of them), I propose integrating green roofs on the museum and the community center, accessible for people to enjoy these spaces during the warmer seasons. The slanted roof oriented downhill at the block I propose will also have solar panels to collect energy for the site overall.

The plazas proposed provide a mix of vegetative surfaces and paved areas, providing flexible use for events to be hosted on this block.

Paved portions can support temporary bandstands, mobile food trucks, and outdoor friendly exhibitions that cater to the casual or invited audience passing through. With the sculpture garden being designated in the southwest corner of the block away from the main flow of pedestrian traffic, this tranquil patch takes advantage of a large plane available above the loading dock below that is accessible at McMillan Street (this layout will be explored more in the next section regarding interior navigation).

Overall, the facility in this configuration offers around 180,000 square footage dedicated to the pursuits of learning through investigating exhibitions, collaborating with people focused on similar topics, and enjoying leisure by utilizing all of the public spaces available to guests who seek a retreat. The following imagery in Section 5.3 will showcase the interior conditions and programming which support all of these initiatives.

34

5 Project Proposal

5.3 Interior Development Delving into some of the views of this proposed site, this section perspective reveals how I have delineated functions for each of the floors.

Parking and museum behind the scenes operations are allocated to the lower two levels, where natural daylighting is not required. Parking for 75 vehicles accomodates not only groups visiting the museum or supporting the community center but also people seeking to browse the retail corridor, attend events hosted by UC, visit other nearby facilities, etc.

The first main floor provides for several public engagement opportunities that can be separated or connected to the overall museum experience.

Present are many traditional amenities such as a gift shop, expansive lobby, a restaurant, and kitchen, with the added bonus of spots for temporary exhibitions that allow visitors to have an immediate impression about the museum’s mission to support various types of learning.

The next three upper levels focus on exhibition spaces and an auditorium venue, with executive offices available on the top floor. Although similar white cube layouts are available on Levels 2, 3, and 4, flexibility exists for curators to creatively select the best ways to display specific objects (extracted from UC’s collections or provided through traveling exhibitions).

With this section perspective, you can see how the staircase path and terraces tie into the topography of the site, providing moments of rest or reflection.

Passersby are surrounded by a combination of natural elements and manmade ones as they make the ascent toward the main plaza level.

STORAGE CIRCULATION SPINE

PARKING RESTAURANT

OFFICES

LOBBY EXHIBITION GALLERY EXECUTIVE OFFICES

Figure 5.3.1: Section Perspective Through Museum

KITCHEN AUDITORIUM

35

36

5 Project Proposal

While the previous view focused on the museum complex, this section perspective for the north side of the block shows the distribution of space for the community center complex. With a smaller café available to serve small bites and drinks for people working inside the building as well as passersby who want a grab-and-go option, this space overlooks outside paths and a terraced landscape. This building has ample space to provide meeting rooms or workshop spaces that can be reserved, with the inward sloping glass facade adjacent to a public stair to navigate between the two lower floors.

The west end of the community center has a double height multi-purpose space that can be reserved either for an entirely-indoor gathering or with the flexibility to have open-air access that spills into the plaza, with views overlooking the adjacent museum center.

Beneath the central outdoor plaza, the section perspective shows how the two main structures will be tied together via underground areas, with museum work rooms (including a woodshop, exhibition creation space, clean and dirty shop rooms, photography and marketing spaces, etc.) that connect to the overall collections storage on the far west end of Level B2 (see Figure 5.3.3.).

Each of the circulation cores (one of which is cut through) has outdoor opportunities for murals to be applied (for example, to create markers as you are walking throughout the block). Internally, these circulation cores allow for easy transitions throughout the two facilities.

CLASSROOMS

OUTDOOR PATIO CAFE SEATING MEETING ROOM

MULTI-PURPOSE EVENT LEVEL KITCHEN AUDITORIUM

Figure 5.3.2: Section Perspective Through Community Center

STORAGE CIRCULATION SPINE CENTRAL PLAZA WORKSHOPS PARKING

5 Project Proposal

37

Figure 5.3.3: Level B2 Floor Plan

Level B2

Level B2

Floor Square Footage: 50,000

The next few pages and figures reflect a further breakdown of the floor plans, beginning with the lower level usage below Calhoun Street (the higher-elevated street of the two running east and west). I have provided parking facilities that would accomodate visitors to the museum/cultural center complexes as well as people visiting Clifton in general, allocating 75 spots. Using a common driveway, deliveries can be made through a loading dock that leads directly to the onsite storage collections; above this expansive, secure loading and unloading space is the sculpture garden seen on the main site plan (see Figure 5.2.4).

1. Loading Dock 2. Collections Storage 3. Temporary Holding 4. Underground Parking - 75 Spots 5. Breakout Rooms 6. Large Meeting Spaces

The main collections storage is supplied with moveable compact shelving units designed to store artifacts in a publicly-visible manner. Being dedicated solely to museum usage, the storage facilities are located on the side of the parking lot opposite from the lowest level of the community center. Two larger meeting spaces are available to accomodate a range of activities -- e.g., public gatherings to learn about community endeavors or more casual guest speaker events. There is also a variety of breakout rooms and open work spaces where people can congregate, depending on the type of studying or collaborating environments that best serve their needs.

A man-made terrace branches off the outdoor staircase that aligns with this level, providing secondary paths to the adjacent bus stop currently existing at the northeast corner of the block. People exiting buses (or entering the site from this corner) have options to navigate to the site from the public sidewalks, or walk over to the outdoor staircase and be surrounded by this sloped nature corridor.

5 Project Proposal

Figure 5.3.4: Level B1 Floor Plan

Level B1

Level B1

Floor Square Footage: 50,000

The storage collections space has a staricase and upper landing that leads up to the main working level for museum staff and students engaged with museum studies. As mentioned above in Section 5.2 there are workshop spaces available for artifacts to be preserved and prepared for exhibiting.

These spaces need to be as close to the collections storage as practicable so that transport paths are minimized. While more active rooms are designated for the north end of the floor, an office suite for facilities and collections managers and staff supports the ongoing research and operations, with a conference room and lounge available on the east end for coworkers to connect and brainstorm together.

7. Cafe/Lounge Area 8. Breakout Rooms 9. Office Suite 10. Exercise Room 11. Workshop Spaces 12. Storage Upper Landing

The museum operations on this floor have a secure entrance to the adjacent community center, which provides additional open or enclosed spaces to study or meet. The cafe/lounge area provides an additional eatery option separate from the main museum restaurant. In the public working and eating areas, small enclosures for incidental exhibitions are provided, hinting that this overall space is in support of a greater institution of learning.

Approximately half of the programming square footage is found in these two lower levels, justifiable by taking into account: the amount of parking designed to support onsite and offsite access; the extensive behind-thescenes operations necessary to run a museum seamlessly while preserving individual artifacts and combined collections; and the availability of breakout rooms that can function well without natural daylighting (especially given all the options available on the upper levels of the community center).

38

5 Project Proposal

Figure 5.3.5: Level 1 Floor Plan

Level 1

Level 1

Floor Square Footage: 22,500

Within the more public levels, visitors have the ability to walk through the central plaza or traverse the main staircase to reach the entrance lobby underneath the sloping glass overhang. Guests are immediately immersed, entering a temporary exhibition area that gives a glimpse of what the upper levels have to offer. People can browse through the gift shop available on the west end, or eat at the restaurant with views looking out toward the sculpture garden. These ground floor amentities are available to patrons of the museums and casual visitors looking for shorter interactions. The overall desire is to entice people to explore the first floor amenities, at a minimum, with the hope that they will feel enticed to navigate up through the gallery floors (even if their original intention was not to do so).

13. Lobby 14. Gift Shop 15. Check-In 16. Temporary Exhibitions 17. Restaurant 18. Kitchen 19. Central Plaza 20. Sculpture Garden 21. Secondary Plaza 22. Multi-Purpose Space 23. Meeting Rooms

The community center, on the other hand, is designed for people intent on using the spaces primarily for pre-scheduled purposes. These spaces can be marketed to anyone within the region who needs space to host member meetings or provide workshop space for activities to be conducted on-site here. The northwest and southeast corners of the main Levels 1 and 2 have views overlooking the outdoor plazas.

39

5 Project Proposal

Figure 5.3.6: Level 2 Floor Plan

Level 2

Level 2

Floor Square Footage: 25,500

Once people check in and are ready to visit the rest of the galleries, visitors can navigate using the circulation spine located in the museum’s north facade, which provides a view of the Old St. George Church and glimpses of the UC campus as visitors move up the staircase. Apart from the traditional gallery spaces, there are lounge areas for people to pause, rest, converse or reflect upon what they have seen - a bridge between the museum and the community center is also found at this level, to help students and others reach classrooms in the center.

24. Exhibition Gallery 25. Gallery Lounge 26. Museum Classrooms 27. Lower Auditorium 28. Backstage 29. Connecting Bridge

Figure 5.3.7: Level 3 Floor Plan

Level 3

Level 3

Floor Square Footage: 17,000

The upper levels have similar intentions, with the third floor having the added programmatic elements of the auditorium access and an observation deck. This long expansive deck allows for a breathtaking landscape view toward the Ohio River valley, creating a panorama opportunity that takes advantage of this block’s location on top of a hill. The auditorium can support events with up to 200 individuals, experiencing themed conversations geared around exhibits or classes taken throughout the school year.

30. Exhibition Gallery 31. Gallery Lounge 32. Upper Auditorium 33. AV Room 34. Double Height Gallery Space 35. Observation Deck

40

5 Project Proposal

Figure 5.3.8: Level 4 Floor Plan

Level 4

Level 4

Floor Square Footage: 12,000

Within the final gallery level, space can be reserved for more innovative showcases on the south side. This area could also serve as a testing ground for museum studies or art-affiliated students to practice curating a space based on a specific theme.

36. Exhibition Gallery 37. Executive Staff Office 38. Office Lounge

On the north side of this level is a set of executive offices to supplement the collections office suites located on Level B1. These Level 4 offices have views that overlook the restored Old St. George Church as well as the University campus to the northwest. An office lounge is also found on the innermost section of this floor.

Figure 5.3.9: Level 5 Floor Plan

Level 5

Level 5

Floor Square Footage: 4,000

The conference room on this level has a prime location to reflect on the goals of the University, while individual offices overlook downtown Cincinnati to the south. For coworkers who want the highest elevation for respite, a campus-facing overlook space is available here as well.

39. Conference Room 40. Executive Offices 41. Storage Nook 42. Landing Overlook

41

5 Project Proposal

5.4 Supporting Renderings The following images capture panoramic views from vantage points, as a supplement to the previous floor plans and section perspectives. Critical access points and public plazas are displayed in these renderings, which also show how this topographically-challenged block (empty for the past 20 years) can best be used to engage UC and surrounding communities.

While the previous images show the technical elements found within the museum and community center, the views presented here highlight the architectural features designed to attract visitors for decades and complement the amazing structures located throughout UC’s eastern and western campuses.

Figure 5.4.1: Northwest Entrance Rendering of Plaza and Complexes

Figure 5.4.2: Southeast Staircase Perspective Showing Incline Toward the Complexes

42

5 Project Proposal

Figure 5.4.3: East Aerial Perspective Highlighting Secondary Plaza

Figure 5.4.4: Night Rendering Along Main Retail Corridor

43

5 Project Proposal

44

5.5 Summary of Design Through this investigative process of challenging preconceived notions of a modern museum, my design proposal shows a potential realization of connecting an academic collection of objects with a community based concept at the urban and architectural level. By providing ample space to support research of artifacts and spaces of dialogues, this museum becomes a more activated facility that engages with demographics on a variety of levels.

As part of a site specific inquiry, this abandoned block across from the Old St. George Church needed a revitalized purpose that could be fulfilled by the integration of a community center. An Urban Renewal Plan released in 2001 proposed to use this block as hotel/housing in support of an entertainment district, but that plan has never come to fruition. Whether it is due to the location at the opposite end of a retail corridor or the challenges of finding a programmatic solution that takes advantage of the steep topography, my hope is that this design proposal will encourage conversations between University of Cincinnati and Clifton affiliated groups to discuss optimal building solutions for this site moving forward with neighborhood development.

If the Covid-19 pandemic has instigated anything, one outcome that occurred through this crisis was the reevaluation of societal operations that people take for granted; this includes the functionality of museums and how they can be multifunctional to serve various programmatic elements besides simply hosting curated exhibits. Institutions like museums should anticipate a variety of events or scenarios which museums may need to support in some capacity, either from an individul standpoint or a community based obligation.

Visitors are looking for more immersive and thoughtful ways in which they may learn from exhibitions, besides the passive approach looking from object to label on repeat. Providing opportunities for visitors to engage in this liminal space through encouraged dialogue and reflection enhances the potential for guests to apply their own perspectives onto what they are seeing, as well as the reverse effect of having the objects highlight messages that could be applied to a visitor’s lifetsyle outside museum walls. Overall, my hope is that this design proposal provokes thoughtful conversations about the future of physical museum facilities and how they can promote active cultural engagement in regard to the events of today to supplement the stimulating exhibits being curated and showcase the collection of objects provided by an institution of this caliber.28

28. I am still working on this design concept, refining the details, and further exploring the immersive experience that could exist within the neighborhood the complexes are placed as well as within the gallery navigation.

To follow my extended research and other design work, my portfolio is available at: https://issuu.com/laurenmeister.

Bibliography

Alexander, Edward P., Mary Alexander, and American Association for State and Local History. Museums in Motion: An Introduction to the History and Functions of Museums. 2nd ed. Lanham: AltaMira Press, 2008.

American Alliance of Museums. Museums as Economic Engines: A National Report.

New York, NY: Oxford Economists, December 2017. https://www.aam-us. org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/American-Alliance-of-Museums-web.pdf.

Associated Press. “Ninety Percent of the World’s Museums Were Closed by the Coronavirus Pandemic, and One in Eight May Never Reopen.” MarketWatch.

MarketWatch, May 19, 2020. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/ninetypercent-of-the-worlds-museums-were-closed-by-the-coronavirus-pandemic-andone-in-eight-may-never-reopen-2020-05-19.

Bradburne, James. “The Future of Museums.” American Alliance of Museums.

June 2, 2015. https://www.aam-us.org/2015/06/02/the-future-of-museums/.

Carlsson, Rebecca. “Why We Need Museums Now More than Ever,” Museum Next, March 14, 2020. https://www.museumnext.com/article/why-we-needmuseums-now-more-than-ever/.

The Clifton Heights Community Urban Redevelopment Corporation, (CHCURC). The Clifton Heights/UC Joint Urban Renewal Plan. Cincinnati, Ohio: CHCURC, University of Cincinnati, and City of Cincinnati Department of Economic Development, April 2001. http://www.cliftonheights.org/wpcontent/uploads/2016/05/Clifton-Heights-UC-Joint-Urban-Renewal-Plan.pdf Conn, Steven. Do Museums Still Need Objects? Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2010.

Crimm, Walter L., Martha Morris, and L. Carole Wharton. Planning Successful Museum Building Projects. Lanham: AltaMira Press, 2009.

Darragh, Joan and James S. Snyder. Museum Design: Planning and Building for Art. New York: Oxford University Press in association with the American Federation of Arts, 1993. [design phase] Dion, Mark, Colleen Josephine Sheehy, and Frederick R. Weisman Art Museum. Cabinet of Curiosities: Mark Dion and the University as Installation.

Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2006.

Duncan, C. (1995). “The Art Museum as Ritual.” In G. Corsane, Heritage, Museums and Galleries: An Introductory Reader. London: Routledge. 2010.

Bibliography

Falk, John H. and Lynn D. Dierking. The Museum Experience. Washington, D.C: Whalesback Books, 1992.

Genoways, Hugh H. and Mary Anne Andrei. Museum Origins: Readings in Early Museum History and Philosophy. Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press, 2008.

Holo, Selma and Mari-Tere Alvarez. Beyond the Turnstile: Making the Case for Museums and Sustainable Values. Lanham, Md: AltaMira Press, 2009.

Idema, Johan. How to Visit an Art Museum: Tips for a Truly Rewarding Visit.

Amsterdam: BIS Publishers, 2014.

Janes, Robert R., Gerald T. Conaty, and Museums Association of Saskatchewan. Looking Reality in the Eye: Museums and Social Responsibility.

Calgary: University of Calgary Press, 2005.

Janes, Robert R. Museums in a Troubled World: Renewal, Irrelevance Or Collapse? New York: Routledge, 2009.

Knell, Simon J., Suzanne Macleod, and Sheila E. R. Watson. Museum Revolutions: How Museums and Change and are Changed. New York: Routledge, 2007.

Lord, Barry, et al. Manual of Museum Planning: Sustainable Space, Facilities, and Operations. AltaMira Press, 2012.

Macleod, Suzanne, Laura Hourston Hanks, Jonathan Hale. Reshaping Museum Space: Narratives, Architectures, Exhibitions. New York: Routledge, 2012.

Naredi-Rainer, Paul V. Museum Buildings: A Design Manual.

Birkhauser, Publishers for Architecture. 2004.

Boston:

Quiccheberg, Samuel, Mark A. Meadow, and Bruce Robertson. The First Treatise on Museums: Samuel Quiccheberg’s Inscriptiones, 1565. Los Angeles: Getty Research Institute, 2014.

Weil, Stephen E. A Cabinet of Curiosities: Inquiries into Museums and their Prospects. Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1995.

Witcomb, Andrea. Re-Imagining the Museum: Beyond the Mausoleum. New York: Routledge, 2003.

46

47