THE WILLAMETTE DISCOVERY CENTERAssunta Cicalese

Professor Gerry GastUniversity of Oregon

Undergraduate Thesis

Table of Contents

Thesis Statement 1

Design Concept 3

Client 5

Program 7

Context 9

Site 19

Building 29

Tectonics and Sustainability 43

Appendix A: Existing Building Images 49

Appendix B: Precedents 57

Bibliography 65

As Portland’s industrial waterfronts sit unused, they call out for new uses and new life. Although they are

no longer used for their original purpose, many of Portland’s industrial buildings are worth saving. The Carton

Service site is located on Northwest Front Avenue and is a visually dynamic collection of three attached industrial

buildings. The Willamette Discovery Center project will adapt these buildings into an interactive museum that

will engage the public and bring new life to the waterfront, while preserving the character of the buildings and

educating the public about the area’s history.

The Willamette Discovery Center will be an interactive education hub focused on the culture surronding

the city’s relationship with the Willamette River. There will be two main components to the educational space:

a historical gallery focusing on the past and present uses of the Willamette River as well as Portland’s industrial

history, and an environmental education gallery focusing on the current environmental state of the river and

strategies for improvement. The historical program will also include a research library for visitors who would like to

learn more outside of the museum.

THESIS STATEMENT1

The Willamette Discovery Center tells the story of Portland and the Willamette River through the gradual unfolding of the space from small to large. A loop of interactive exhibits direct the viewer from the museum to the river and back again. And the interweaving of historic and scientific installations tell of the river’s past uses, its current condition, and its hope for the future.

DESIGN CONCEPT3

CLIENT

The client for this project is the Willamette River Initiative. Their goal is to educate and engage the public in improving the health of the Willamette River. To do this, they want to create an educational center with interactive exhibits that will be memorable and hold people’s inter-est, especially those people who would not often visit a traditional museum.

5

PROGRAM

Program Area Area (SF) Occupancy DescriptionECS

RequirementsSpatial

RelationshipsMuseum Spaces

Entry/Reception Space 100

Historical Gallery Exhibition Space

14,950

Research Library 7,000

River Science Gallery

14,950

Museum Staff Offices

5,000

Conference Rooms 3,000

Leasable Offices 5,000

Rentable Studio Space

4,000

Storage (Basement) 8,500

Restrooms 1,000

Unassigned Mechanical, Electrical, Circulation

River Dock

Total SF= 70,000

Office Spaces

Support Spaces

Outdoor Spaces

Reception desk and some seating. Entry point for Museum

2 @230 SF each in museum space, 4 @ 135 SF each in office and studio spaces

Water quality lab and interactive river exhibits.

25 offices for museum staff @ 200 SF each.

3 rooms @ 1,000 SF each. For use by museum staff of for classes.

A dock for launching small boats. Also a small outdoor social space.1,000

Climate controlled storage for museum artifacts.

10,500

25 offices @ 200 SF each. To be leased to local businesses.

20 studios @ 200 SF each. To be rented to local artists.

Sources for further historical and environmental study of Portland and

the Willamette River.

Permanent and revolving exhibits on Portland’s industrial history and the

history of the site.

Indirect Daylighting consistent climate

control.

Indirect Daylighting consistent climate

control.Indirect Daylighting

consistent climate control.

Indirect Daylighting consistent climate

control.

Ventilated, indirect daylighting.

Mixed direct/indirect daylighting, operable

windows

Mixed direct/indirect daylighting, operable

windowsMixed direct/indirect daylighting, operable

windowsMixed direct/indirect daylighting, operable

windows

Consistent climate control, artificial

light

Shares Large space with other museum elements

Shares Large space with other museum elements

Adjacent to museum spaces

Shares Large space with other museum elements

Basement

Adjacent to the river, across the street from

the building

Adjacent to museum space and offices

Semi-private, with access from Museum

Semi-private, with access from Museum

Semi-private, adjacent to museum offices

Semi-private, adjacent to museum offices

Museum Café Daylighting, operable windows

Adjacent to Museum3,000

5

50

150

50

50

40

100

200

200

Café for museum guests and staff

7

RIVER SCIENCE GALLERY14,950 SF

HISTORIC GALLERY14,950 SF

CAFE3,000 SF SMALL

BOAT DOCK

LIBRARY7,000 sF

OFFICES200 SF each

STUDIO SPACES200 SF Each

CONFERENCE ROOMS

1,000 SF Each

PEDESTRIAN CROSSING

STREET

OUTDOOR ART

MARKET

RECEPTION

COURTYARD

Adjacency Diagram8

CONTEXTWATER QUALITY

The Willamette River has long been a key part of Portland’s industry. over the years it has been contaminated with agricultural runoff, municipal wastewater, sewage, and industrial toxins.

It has recently been declared safe to swim in as long as there has been no sewer overflow within the past 48 hours. toxin levels are currently too low to affect humans. However, the levels of pollution and toxins that still exist in the Willamette are high enough to harm fish, macro invertebrates, and birds. This means that there is still more to be done to restore the river’s ecosystem and protect it once it is restored.

9

River Cleanup

Willamette Riverkeeper is planning the clean up of roughly ten miles of contaminated river sediment. This starts with analysing the pollutants to identify the extent and type of contamination. The next step is to propose cleanup options and evaluate them. After that, the technical options for cleanup are designed in greater detail. Lastly, a course of action must be developed and implemented.

Parties responsible for the cleanup are companies that either contributed to the pollution or bought polluted land and inherited the responsivility. The public also has a stake in the cleanup and is encouraged to get involved.

Willamette Riverkeeper’s role is to evaluate each step of the process and make sure that the cleanup is effecient and successful.

10

River Edge Conditions11

a. Green represents natural edges and yellow represents places where people can get to the water.

b. The turquoise area represents the 1996 flood plane. The speckled areas are the 100 year flood plane.

PROPOSED REGIONAL PLAN

The focus area of the regional vision is the Willamette River within the city of Portland. The regional vision aims to preserve existing wetlands and habitats and to create more of them in existing flood plains. The intention behind preserving and creating wetlands is to improve the quality of life for native species, prevent flooding of the built environment, and filter rainwater before it runs back into the Willamette River. Another goal for the region is to turn unused industrial yards into gathering spaces with bicycle and pedestrian access to the river. The study focuses on industrial sites without much existing green space or public access to the water.

13

St. Johns14

Additional parks similar to this one in Washington DC would help continue and augment the success of the St. Johns waterfront. This success has already begun with Cathedral Park.

Northwest Portland15

Northwest Portland would be ideal for developing a mix of natural habitat and human use. The numerous existing coves in this area provide shelter for fish as well as boats.

Downtown East Side16

The east side of downtown Portland would benefit from more opportunities for people to access the river. The Milwaukee Riverwalk would be a good precedent for developing this edge.

Ross Island17

Ross Island is in the process of being restored as a wetland with native vegetation.

SITE2211 NW Front Ave, Portland, OR

19

This site and other nearby properties are zoned as Heavy Industrial. This designation allows all kinds of industrial development, but is very limiting for commercial and recreational uses. However, there is a large residential zone directly across the street from the site, and a Central Employment zone nearby. The presence of these other zones makes it easier to re-zone the site. It would be best to re-zone this site for Central Employment, a flexible designation designed to complement an industrial district and allow for mixed use.

Residential

Heavy Industrial

General IndustrialCentral Employment

The Site

Zoning20

Site History

The three connectedwarehouse buildings on the site were built from 1910 and 1940. The first documented owner was Rosenberg Bros. and Co, which was the largest prune processing plant in the world during the 1920s. The site was then taken over by the U.S, Navy during World War II for use as a combination boat-building enterprise and naval hospital. Following the war, the Waltuck family purchased the property in 1960 and it became the Standard Steel Co. They installed three overhead cranes in the shipbuilding bays that had been constructed during the war and sold used and recycled steel. In 1990 the Standard Steel Co. Found a new home, and the Unkeles family purchased the building to make it Carton Service. Now the 45,000 square foot first floor is used for their business of selling and recycling cardboard boxes. The upper floors, formerly used for prune and filbert sorting facilities, are now used as offices and rented out as studio spaces for local artists.

21

Neighborhood Context

Neighborhood: Northwest District

Total Population: 13, 399

Density: 13 People per acre

Average Household Size 1.42 people

The Northwest District is a trendy neighborhood that is desirable for residential and mixed-use. The demographic is primarily young couples without children. A majority of about 70% of these families rent their homes rather than owning. Males and females are equally represented. Industrial sites at the edge of the neighborhood are quickly being snapped up for redevelopment.

Northwest Distric Riverfront Apartments

Northwest DistrictNeighborood map

Site

22

Transit

The site is best accessed by car, although one bus line runs along Front Avenue. The neighborhood also has several bike routes, but Front Avenue is not particularly bike friendly. There are no official bike lanes and sidewalks are very narrow. The closest streetcar line in the neighborhood is on NW Lovejoy, which is quite far from the site. There is an off-street pedestrian path across the road from the site along the river. At this time, Portland’s Transportation System Plan does not show any new projects planned for this neighborhood, although it would be beneficial to increase transit and bike access.

Transit Map Courtesy of Portland Maps

Site

Closest Northbound bus stop, 0.3 miles away

Street next to Site

Site

Site

23

Environmental Issues

As strategies are implemented to clean up the Willamette River, it is as important as ever to educate the public about the cleanup effort. Helping people understand the causes of river pollution, what is being done to remove this pollution, and how they can help, is key. Most Portland residents have heard that the Willamette River is dirty, but few know what the pollution levels actually are or how to reduce them.

This project will be an interactive river museum that educates people on the river’s past and empowers them to have a positive impact on its future.

24

SITE PLAN

100 200 400

25

Site Organization

The site is accessible by a bicycle and pedestrian path along the river, as well as a bus that stops at the open-air market across the street, and by car, with a small parking lot to the side of the building. The building itself is accessed by a hardscape courtyard that also functions as an outdoor assembly space. The courtyard paving pattern extends across the street, giving drivers a visual and textural cue to keep an eye out for pedestrians, and connects with the open air market and the bicycle and pedestrian path. The market is a place for local artists to share their work, similar to Portland’s Saturday market but with more focus on the river. The majority of the site next to the river will be restored to a wetland with native vegetation. A small part of the riverfront will be reserved for a small dock for research boats, which are part of the museum’s program.

26

12

34

56

78

910

1112

1314

1516

1718

1920

2122

12

34

56

78

910

1112

1314

Pedestrian Bicycle Bus Car

Site Circulation Diagram27

BUILDINGAdaptive Reuse Goals

• Preserve the warehouse building and office building, both of which have been determined to be ideal to accommodate the new program

• Existing buildings and new additions will be differentiated by a contrast between heavy and light feeling created by material choice

• Exterior facades and roofs will reflect interior spaces• Materials from dismantled sections will be repurposed in new

construction• The center building will be disassembled in favor of a new space

that will better achieve the following:• A connection between the two end buildings• A pleasant and usable outdoor space immediately connected to

the building• Engage the street

29

Proposed Addition30

Courtyard Entrance31

Building Spatial Organization

12

34

56

78

910

1112

1314

1516

1718

1920

2122

12

34

56

78

910

1112

1314

Offices and leasible

artist studios

Museum

Reception, café, retail, events space, and research

library

The building is organized with the entrance near the center. Visitors enter from the courtyard into the reception area, which includes an introductory exhibit to the museum, a café, and a grand stair leading to the research library above. The stair and the introductory exhibit are in a double-height space that creates views between the exibit and the library, and includes a skylight to illuminate both with daylight.To one side of the reception space there is a large assembly space, a museum store, and offices for museum staff. These offices are contained in the smaller existing building, the upper levels of which contain rentable studio spaces for local artists.On the other side of the reception space is the main museum gallery. This is the large existing warehouse building. Exhibits are laid out on the first level in a circular pattern, which then leads guests to a spiraling ramp that surrounds a large focus piece at the center of the space. The ramp itself is also lined with displays. At the top of the ramp is a mezzanine level with more exhibits and a connection to the research library. A second ramp with more displays and different views into the main space below, leads guests back down to the main level.

32

1 enrty courtyard2 main entrance3 café4 stairs to research library5 interactive exhibit6 main museum space7 focus exhibit8 other exhibits

9 ramp to mezzanine gallery and second floor10 storage11 assembly space12 museum retail13 offices14 mechanical systems15 parking E elevator

FIRST FLOOR PLAN

12

34

56

78

910

1112

1314

1516

1718

1920

2122

12

34

56

78

910

1112

1314

#DrgID

#LayID

#DrgID

#LayID

#DrgID

#LayID

#DrgID#LayID

#DrgID#LayID

1A-202

1A-201

1

2

3 4

5

7

8

9

10

10

10

11

12

13

14

15

E

E

Existing

New

BUS STOP

6

First Floor Plan33

Second Floor Plan36

Northeast Elevation35

North-South Section36

East-West Section37

Museum View from Lower Gallery38

Museum Space39

Museum View from Mezzanine40

Physical Building Model41

TECTONICS AND SUSTAINABILITY43

Sustainability Strategy

The main sustainability strategy of this project is the rehabilitation of existing buildings and the repurposing of existing materials from a deconstructed building. This produces much less waste and greatly decreases the use of virgin materials compared with all-new construction. Permeable paving in the courtyard and parking allow rainwater to soak into the ground, reducing unwanted water accumulation, and helping to filter the water before it flows back into the river. The wetland restoration will also contribute to rainwater filtration, create a new habitat for native species, and provide a buffer zone against flooding, without the need for a hard boundary like a sea wall.

44

The existing large building is constructed of heavy timber framing with corrugated metal siding. The existing small building is brick. In order to create a contrast with the heavy feel of the two older buildings and to mark the new building as the clear entrance, it has a much lighter feel. It will be constructed of thin wood members with a light-colored finish. A glass curtain wall on the main façade will help achieve this light feel.

Existing Materials and Structure45

Tectonics Precedents46

Library Curtain Wall Section47

Library Roof Structure48

APPENDIX A: EXISTING BUILDINGS

Site Panorama

Building Adjacency to Water Inside the Center Building Retail Space

49

Spindles and HandrailWear on Steps

Office building, formerly Rosenberg Bros. and Co

Third Building Clerestory Grafitti on Concrete Wall

50

First Building Ceiling

Original Wainsoting in First Building

Exterior Stair Addition made from Repurposed Boards

Historic Machinery in Third Building

Entrance to Carton Service Retail

Office Addition

51

Second Floor Offices in Building One View to Downtown Portland from Second Floor

View of INdustrial Yard and Train TracksThird Building Roof STructure

52

Existing 1st Floor Plan

4 x 7 1/2" = 2'-6 1/2"

1234

4 x 6 3/4" = 2'-3 1/4"

1234

21 x 6 3/4" = 12'-0"

12345678910

11

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

1A

-203

1A

-202

1A

-201

1A

-204

SCAL

E: 1

/16’

’= 1

’-0’’

FIRS

T FL

OO

R PL

AN

ELEV

ATO

R

1

1

22

33

53

8 x

6 3

/4" =

4'-6

3/4

"

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

20 x 6 1/2" = 11'-0 1/4"

1234567891011121314151617181920

12 x 6 1/2" = 6'-7 1/4"

123456789101112

20 x 5 1/2" = 9'-2 1/4"

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

9 x

6 3

/4" =

5'-1

1/4

"

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1A

-203

1A

-202

1A

-201

1A

-204

SCAL

E: 1

/16’

’= 1

’-0’’

SECO

ND

FLO

OR

PLA

N

ELEV

ATO

R

OPE

N T

O B

ELO

W

Existing 2nd Floor Plan54

SCALE: 1/16’’= 1’-0’’EAST ELEVATION

SCALE: 1/16’’= 1’-0’’SOUTH ELEVATION

SCALE: 1/16’’= 1’-0’’WEST ELEVATION

SCALE: 1/16’’= 1’-0’’NORTH ELEVATION

Existing Elevations

Northeast Elevation

Southeast Elevation

Southwest Elevation

Northwest Elevation

55

SCALE: 1/16’’= 1’-0’’LONGITUDINAL SECTION

SCALE: 1/16’’= 1’-0’’TRANSVERSE SECTION WAREHOUSE

Existing Sections

North-South Section

East-West Section through Warehouse

58

APPENDIX B: PRECEDENTSThe Exploratorium: The Museum of Science, Art, and Human Perception The Exploratorium was founded by Frank and Jackie Oppenheimer in 1969. Frank Oppenheimer believed that science was fundamentally beneficial to humankind, and his goal was to share his love of science with others. The original site was the Palace of Fine Arts, located by a lagoon at the foot of the Golden Gate Bridge. In April 2013, it was relocated to San Francisco’s Pier 15. The new venue has preserved most of the exhibits from the original location, and has been able to add to the collection thanks to the larger size of the new space.

One of the main goals of the Exploratorium was to present science as a continuity of past, present, and future, rather than as a set of accomplishments that have already been achieved. The Oppenheimers designed their museum as a teaching laboratory in which visitors could learn about science and technology by exploring the procedures and tools of scientific study. The exhibits are designed to be playful and thought-provoking in order to encourage visitors to explore, operate, and interact with each exhibit. In some exhibits, visitors can manipulate the scientific equipment in order to understand its practical application. Other exhibits are designed to alter human perception, and teach visitors about how the human brain works.

Exploratortium Entrance

Palace of Fine Art

57

Plan of Original Building

Palace of Fine Art Interior

Palace of Fine Art Aerial View

The Exploratorium from the Water

New Building Plan

The Exploratorium has six galleries, each focused on a different area of exploration. These galleries allow experimentation with media such as: thoughts, feelings, and social behavior in the Human Phenomena Gallery; or light, color, and sound in the Seeing and Listening gallery. The Tinkering gallery allows visitors to experience the exhibits through touch. These kinds of exhibits engage people’s imaginations and curiosity in a way that a traditional “hands-off” museum cannot hope to, although traditional museums still have value for cultural and historical learning.

58

MASS MoCA: Massachusetts Museum of Contemporary Art The mill site of MASS MoCA was used for manufacturing since 1862. In 1986 the staff at Williams College Museum of Art were looking for a space to exhibit large contemporary art installations that would not fit in other galleries, and saw the site as ideal. MASS MoCA is also close to several cultural centers, making its location excellent for attracting visitors. Regional businesses and politicians, as well as the community, strongly supported the project for its historical significance.

The MASS MoCA project aimed for non-interference with the unique architectural characteristics of the buildings. It did not just preserve for preservation’s sake, but saved the significant and unique elements and remained open to making changes if necessary to accommodate the new program. Another significant decision was the choice to leave the plan open and to define circulation through elegant sightlines rather that rigid paths, thereby leaving lines of travel up to the inhabitants. The decision to design large open spaces for displaying art also allowed the space to be responsive to the exhibits that it hosted. MASS MoCA is now the largest center for contemporary arts in the world and is a “responsive and open art space” according to the director.

MASS MoCA has also been described as “a gateway to regional economic recovery.” Leasable commercial space creates high-paying positions and rent offsets the operating costs. This kind of economic success is an excellent goal for similar adaptive reuse projects in the future.

MASS MoCA

Site Plan

59

During Rehabilitation

After Rehabilitation

Castelvecchio

The castle that houses the Castelvecchio Museum was built in Verona between 1354 and 1356 by the della Scala family. It was built for defense and for quick escape from the city if necessary. It served exclusively military purposes until 1923, when it first became a museum under director Antonio Aven and architect Ferdinando Forlati. At this time, late Gothic and Renaissance style decorative elements were added in an attempt to make the castle look as if it had originally been designed to be more lavish and less utilitarian than it had been in reality. In 1958, architect Carlo Scarpa was entrusted with restoring the value of the historic castle as well as the artistic additions.

Scarpa’s revitalization of the castle favored authenticity, calling attention to the difference between the original fabric and the 1920s renovation. His goal was to tell the entire story of Castelvecchio without exaggerating one particular part of its history; allowing all stages of development their own authenticity. Scarpa used modern materials to expressively differentiate between the original “bones” of the castle and the renovation. He pulled doors and windows back from the recreated façade, making it appear like a theater set and showing that it is not original. The museum objects are placed on floating planes in order to show that they, too, are separate additions to the building.

Scarpa did selectively demolish some elements to expose others. For example, a Napoleonic staircase was demolished, revealing a Roman moat and foundations below. He believed that new design offers a reinterpretation of the value of the monument. Scarpa’s interpretation of the value of Castelvecchio is shown by the elements he chose to demolish or highlight.

Original Castle Entrance

61

Ground Floor and Second Floor Plan

Blend of Old and New

Scarpa’s Stairs

Roof materials pulled back to show different phases

“Floating” Platforms

62

C Mine Cultural Center, Genk, Belgium The C-Mine Cultural Center is the post-industrial Adaptive reuse of the powerhouse buildings of a former coalmining complex. It is located in Genk, one of the most important industrial centers in Belgium until its last mine closed in 1988. At this time, the question of the complex’s post-industrial future came into play. An economic void was left by the mine closing. The community wanted to fill this economic void with a new use, without sacrificing the buildings that linked Genk to its industrial history.

The new program includes multipurpose auditoria, meeting rooms, spaces for flexible cultural programming, and accommodation for technical support and administration. The C-Mine plan superimposed the new program over the existing building, turning the T-shaped plan into a rectangle. This creates a spatially active exchange between the site’s industrial heritage and its new cultural program. The ground floor is densely occupied by all the programmatic elements of the cultural center. In contrast, the upper floor is very open, and with very little program and can be rented out for events.

The New Complements the Old

Ground Floor of the Old Building

63

All of the old and new spaces are carefully connected using borrowed light and sequential views. All spaces are accessed from the former machine hall on the ground floor, which serves as a unifying center for all of the other spaces. The old and new spaces are very visually different; the red brick industrial building is contrasted and complemented by the very modern addition of glass, concrete, and steel. While the new building makes no pretense of being part of the old power building, the two are physically and visually tied together by multi-level terraces, which are paved with the same red and white tiles as the machine hall. A terra-cotta tinted concrete wall around the addition also unites it visually with the red brick of the old building.

Ground Floor of the New Building

Terrace Between the two Buildings Unprogrammed Second Floor

Groung Floor Plan OldNew

64

BibliographyAntón, Marta G. “Lugo Interactive Museum of History: Nieto Sobejano Arquitectos.” C3 Korea 325 (2011): 44-61. Avery Index. Web. 1 Dec. 2013. Article about an Interactive History museum in Lugo, Spain.

Austin, Richard L., David G. Woodcock, W. Cecil. Steward, and R. Alan. Forrester. Adaptive Reuse: Issues and Case Studies in Building Preservation. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1988. Print. Explains reasons for and approaches to adaptive reuse. Contains several case studies on adaptive reuse projects.

“Authenticity: Scarpa’s Castelvecchio.” Web log post. Rethinking Preservation. CUBE Design, n.d. Web. 3 Dec. 2013. Describes Carlo Scarpa’s unique preservation and adaptation strategies for Castelvecchio.

Baker, Joan P., David W. Hulse, Stanley V. Gregory, Denis White, John Van Sickle, Patricia A. Berger, David Dole, and Nathan H. Schumaker. “Alternative Futures For The Willamette River Basin, Oregon.” Ecological Applications 14.2 (2004): 313-24. Print.

Berg Costa, Lorenzo. “Centro Cultural En Queilén [isla De Chiloé]: Refugio De Navegantes.” CA: Revista Oficial Del Colegio De Arqhitectos De Chile 97 (1999): 34-35. Avery Index. Web. 1 Dec. 2013. <http://web.ebscohost.com.libproxy.uoregon.edu/ehost/detail?vid=5&sid=3f44b221-9f58-41c3-8e38-ccc8711baa62%40sessionmgr112&hid=108&bdata=JmxvZ2luLmFzcCZzaXRlPWVob3N0LWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#db=bvh&AN=433772>. Discusses the adaptive reuse of waterfront buildings into cultural centers.

Blalock, Barney. Portland’s Lost Waterfront: Tall Ships, Steam Mills, and Sailor’s Boardinghouses. Charleston, SC: History, 2012. Print.

“Carton Service Buildings.” Personal interview. 30 Oct. 2013. A brief history of the Carton Service buildings from the current owner. The history included a tour of the buildings and explanation of how the spaces are currently being used.

“Carton Service Studios.” Portland Art Studios: A Guide to Portland’s Creative Spaces. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Oct. 2013. A brief history of the Carton Services buildings at 2211 NW Front Ave, including the other uses it has accommodated over the years.

65

Churchill, George W. “The Story of a Great River.” Parks and Recreation (1972): n. pag. Web. 13 Nov. 2013.

“The City of Portland, Oregon.” Willamette Watershed RSS. N.p., n.d. Web. 21 Oct. 2013. Croft, Virginia. Recycled as Restaurants: Case Studies in Adaptive Reuse. New York: Whitney Library of Design, 1991. Print. Adaptive reuse case studies with detailed plans and photography. Gavin, Francesca. “Science, Museums, and Interaction.” Blueprint 219 (2004): 82+. Avery Index. Web. 1 Dec. 2013. Photographs, elevations, and computer drawings of interactive museum displays.

Gibson, Eric. “Play: Will Interactive Electronic Technology save the Art Museum?” Metropolis 14.5 (1994): 82-84. Avery Inex. Web. 1 Dec. 2013. Photographs of interactive museum media.

Ground and Second Floor Plan. Digital image. Precendents. Web. 3 Dec. 2013.

Hein, Hilde S. The Exploratorium: The Museum as Laboratory. Washington: Smithsonian Institution, 1990. Print.

Holbrook, Tom. “Kraftwerk: C-Mine Cultural Centre, Genk, Belgium by 51N4E.” The Architectural Review (n.d.): n. pag. ArchitecturalReview.com. Web. 11 Dec. 2013.

Hope, B. K. “A Mass Budget for Mercury in the Willamette River Basin, Oregon, USA.” Water, Air, and Soil Pollution 121.1-4 (2005): 365-82. AGRICOLA. Web. 13 Nov. 2013.

Kerri, Kenneth D. “An Economic Approach to Water Quality Control.” Water Pollution Control Federation 38.12 (1966): 1883-897. JSTOR. Web. 13 Nov. 2013.

Konsoulis, Mary. “Doing Adaptive Use.” Urban Land (207): 122-25. Avery Index. Web. 1 Dec. 2013. \An analysis of the rewards, risks, and incentives inherent in adaptive reuse projects.

Metzger, Abby P. Meander Scars: Reflections on Healing the Willamette River. Corvallis: Oregon State UP, 2013. Print.

“Museo Di Castelvecchio - Homepage.” Museo Di Castelvecchio - Homepage.Web. 13 Dec. 2013. Castelvecchio’s official website, with a brief architectural history of the building.

Pearman, Hugh. “Dock Therapy.” World Architecture 87 (2000): 26-27. Avery Index. Web. 1 Dec. 2013. Discussion of demolishing or converting waterfront buildings for use as cultural centers.

“PortlandMaps.” PortlandMaps. N.p., n.d. Web. 15 Oct. 2013. Property information including address, owner, zoning, permits, and tax information.

Profita, Cassandra. “How Dirty Is the Willamette, Really?” » News » OPB. OPB, 29 July 2011. Web. 12 Dec. 2013. Explanation of current river pollution levels and their affect on fish and wildlife vs. humans. Rab, Samia. Carlo Scarpa’s Re-design of Castelvecchio in Verona, Italy. Academia.edu. University of Hawaii at Manoa, n.d. Web. 10 Dec. 2013. A scholarly analysis of Castelvecchio.

Ryder, Mark. “Brief Encounter.” RIBA Journal 115.6 (2008): 12. Web. An interview with Mark Ryder, discussing the British Waterways Board and their sustainable to development approach to reusing waterfront properties.

Seward, Aaron. “Re-tailoring Retail.” Texas Architect 63.2 (2013): 50-57. Avery Index. Web. 1 Dec. 2013. Photographs and plans of three conversion projects.

Sokol, David. “Fantastic Duo: Two Young Architects in a Red Camper Take on Norway’s Architectural Ills.” Metropolis 27.5 (2007): 86. Avery Index to Architectural Periodicals. Web. 13 Nov. 2013.

Tange, Toshiaki. “Interactive Museum about Humans.” JA 12 (1994): 107-14. Avery Index. Web. 1 Dec. 2013. Elevations, illustrations, models, photographs, plans, sections, site plans, sketches of the Domus Science museum in La Coruña Spain.

Teresa. “Verona and Vicenza.” Never Lost, Just Wandering. N.p., n.d. Web. 10 Dec. 2013. Photographic documentation of Castelvecchio.

Thompson, Jennifer Trainer., Nicholas Whitman, and Joseph Thompson. MASS MoCA: From Mill to Museum. North Adams, MA: MASS MoCA Publications, 2000. Print. Explains the history of the MASS MoCA site all the way to being redesigned as a museum. Describes both the design and preservation objectives and how they were carried out.

“: Willamette Riverkeeper :.” : Willamette Riverkeeper :. N.p., n.d. Web. 21 Oct. 2013. “Willamette Riverkeeper.” Programs. N.p., n.d. Web. 12 Dec. 2013.