Higher Education in Small Towns: The Case of New Philadelphia’s Town and Gown Relations A thesis submitted to the Graduate School of the University of Cincinnati in partial fulfillment of the requirements to the degree of Master of Architecture In the Department of Architecture of the College of Design, Art, Architecture, and Planning By Amanda Fortman B.S. The Ohio State University May 2015 Committee Chair: Michael McInturf & Aarti Kanekar ABSTRACT Higher Education in Small Towns: The Case of New Philadelphia’s Town and Gown Relations explores the Midwest town of New Philadelphia, Ohio and analyzes the history, context, culture, benefactors and failures to better understand the classification of small towns and how they thrive in today’s global society. The emphasis of this thesis will focus on the town and gown relationship New Philadelphia has with Kent State Tuscarawas Campus and primarily, the student housing crisis that many small towns face when they have any higher education presence in their town. Tasked with revitalizing the downtown of New Philadelphia, this thesis proposes a new approach to the student housing required of the Kent State Tuscarawas Campus; and that is to insert the students into the downtown. Unique challenges present themselves with this new approach, and the city and university will have a unique way in which they marry infrastructural, physical, social, and visual systems so as to create a holistic towngown presence, rather than the separation of town and gown. iii © AMANDA FORTMAN Copyright, March 2018 Acknowledgements MY FAMILY – For the endless support, guidance, reassurance, and faith in my talents and goals. I would not have made it through the seven years of architecture school without all of you. MY FRIENDS – Thank you for the understanding and support throughout the years that you have all given me. I’m awestruck having gotten to watch all of us succeed and achieve the goals we had set out to accomplish seven years ago. TARAN BOHNHOFF – Thank you for your endless patience, reassurance, and helping hand when it comes to schoolwork. I (and my physical models) would not have made it without you. MY PROFESSORS – The breadth of knowledge that you all have – From OSU to UC – is amazing, and I’m honored to have been your student. I hope to understand architecture as well as you all do someday. Thank you for sharing your passion with me. MYSELF – For seeing my dreams and aspirations come to life, and never giving up on my passion for architecture. v TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract iii Acknowledgements v Figures & Illustrations vii Introduction 01 New Philadelphia 03 Kent State Tuscarawas 09 Town & Gown Precedents 16 Transformation: Towngown 23 Conclusion 31 Bibliography 32 FIGURES & ILLUSTRATIONS IMAGE 01 – IMAGE 04 REPRODUCTION: Fortman, Amanda. 2018. Map of New Philadelphia. ORIGINALS: All vector linework came from the City of New Philadelphia IMAGE 05 – IMAGE 14 REPRODUCTION: Fortman, Amanda. 2018. Kent State Tuscarawas Housing Survey. ORIGINALS: Kent State Tuscarawas Campus. May 2016. Housing Survey 2016. IMAGE 15 REPRODUCTION: Fortman, Amanda. 2018. Kent State Stark Campus. ORIGINALS: All vector linework was purchased from CAD MAPPER https://cadmapper.com/ IMAGE 16 REPRODUCTION: Fortman, Amanda. 2018. OSU Lima Branch Campus. ORIGINALS: All vector linework was purchased from CAD MAPPER https://cadmapper.com/ IMAGE 17 REPRODUCTION: Fortman, Amanda. 2018. Map of New Philadelphia. ORIGINALS: All vector linework came from the City of New Philadelphia IMAGE 18 – IMAGE 19 Fortman, Amanda. 2018. Public vs. Private Diagrams. vii FIGURES & ILLUSTRATIONS IMAGE 20 MVRDV. Digital image. Crystal Houses. Accessed February 03, 2018. https://www.mvrdv.nl/en/projects/crystal-houses. IMAGE 21 Ro, Lauren. "U.K.'s Royal Institute of British Architects Announces 2016 London Regional Awards Winners." Curbed. May 09, 2016. Accessed March 29, 2018. https://www.curbed.com/platform/amp/2016/5/9/11639172/best-architecture-in-london-riba- awards. IMAGE 21 Fortman, Amanda. 2018. Facade. viii New Philadelphia encapsulates the very idea and picture of what “Midwest Small Towns” are described as: tranquil, historic architecture, farm town where the highest point in the town would be the church, the courthouse, or the grain mill, and a place where time slows down. As Wiebe describes small towns: “Those who stayed behind – and small town culture was pervaded from that time to now with an awareness that residents had chosen to ‘stay behind’ – tried to forge new social identities. This effort would create the core notion of what was considered ‘small-town life’ during the early twentieth century. The small town was the place many city residents had left behind; it became metropolitan America’s ‘hometown.’ There residents maintained the old ways and lived more cohesive lives, even as they balanced limited local economic opportunities with a desire to modernize somewhat apace with the city. Small-town boosterism now heralded the values of smallness and modest growth. People living in a small society were more organically connected to each other and thus had stronger senses of identity, social responsibility, and morality. From the 1870s through the 1910s small-town life was mostly portrayed in this positive light. But many felt differently. To detractors small towns were provincial islands, out of touch with modern life. They were places in which residents lived frustrated and limited social, cultural, and intellectual lives. Indeed, many small-town colleges, academies, museums, hospitals, and government services struggled to remain competitive and eventually settled for being just viable”1 “This dichotomy between positive and negative, rooted in the experience of residents past and present, was the framework in which most people understood small towns in the twentieth-century America”2 This dichotomy encompasses what small towns represent however, does it represent small cities? New Philadelphia after all is a “town” of 17,000 and has a total square area of 8.23 miles, placing it into the “city” category. While New Philadelphia has all the characteristics described in the positive light of small towns, I believe it is capable of stepping above the negative characteristics of a small town. New 1 Robert H. Wiebe, The Search for Order, 1877–1920 (New York, 1967), 4; Dwight Hoover, "Social Science Looks at the Small American Town," in The Small Town in America: A Multidisciplinary Revisit, eds. Hans Bertens and Theo D'haen (Amsterdam, 1995), 19-29. 2 Mahoney, Timothy R. "The Small City in American History." Indiana Magazine of History99, no. 4 (2003): 311-30. 01 Philadelphia is the county seat, which means it has a level of government and employment that other towns in Tuscarawas County do not have. It shares Union Hospital, which is currently undergoing the transfer of ownership to Cleveland Clinic, which will ultimately bring more people into the city for treatment. It has the Kent State Tuscarawas Campus, which enrolls 2,000 students and brings a large number of younger demographics to the area. Lastly, it has a retail commerce that draws people from surrounding areas. One key aspect is that New Philadelphia is the largest city in terms of land and population this far South and East in Ohio; anything South of New Philadelphia is small due to the hills and mountains, and the largest city East of New Philadelphia is Pittsburgh. This allows New Philadelphia to be an anchor and center of commerce and activity for these Eastern and Southernmost towns and areas. If New Philadelphia can “rethink their approach and look for ways to capitalize on these assets”3, they can navigate away from the negative commendation of small towns and create a place that has the diversity of social, intellectual, and cultural that metropolis have, while maintaining its historical, agricultural, and “smallness” which makes these towns unique and tranquil. 3 Campoli, Julie, Elizabeth Humstone, and Alex S. MacLean. Above and Beyond: Visualizing Change in Small Towns and Rural Areas. Chicago, IL: Planners Press, American Planning Association, 2002. 02 Founded in 1804 by John Knisely, New Philadelphia came to fruition due to “natural resources, beautiful plains, fertile river bottomlands, and the fine stand of oak timber in the Tuscarawas River Valley.”4 Together with surveyor John Wells, New Philadelphia was laid out to form a cohesive, grid plan which was extremely relatable to it’s predecessor, Philadelphia. Wells and Knisely’s plan for New Philadelphia called for a centralized pattern with the Greek decumanus and cardo main streets, which today are High Street and Broadway Street. The crossing of these two axes create the main square for the city, and to replicate what Philadelphia, PA has done, smaller squares are located around the main square. While Philadelphia’s intent was to create green public spaces for the surrounding city blocks with these squares, New Philadelphia deployed these squares as a smaller square for the surrounding blocks. With the centralized pattern comes a hierarchy spatial organization, “a central area that is the focus of the community surrounded by peripheral districts and neighborhoods.”5 The main square sees its building pattern to be denser than areas surrounding it, and a secondary street system that creates the grid allows for an interconnectedness between blocks. Much like Fair Haven, Vermont, “green space is shared by buildings around it; it doesn’t separate structures and activities, it brings them together.”6 Building footprints at the main square consists of small building footprints and find square footage vertically. These low-lying buildings create a more diverse street façade and bring a human scale to the space. 4 Knisely, Charles. "Founding of New Philadelphia." The Founding of New Philadelphia. Accessed March 19, 2018. http://www.newphilaoh.com/Founding-of-New-Phila. 5 Campoli, Julie, Elizabeth Humstone, and Alex S. MacLean. Above and Beyond: Visualizing Change in Small Towns and Rural Areas.