NOTES


[1] The team was assembled as the Pompeii Forum Project directed by John Dobbins of the University of Virginia and funded by various sources including the National Endowment for the Humanities and the University of Virginia. For the work of this project see the web site: http:///

[2] This work, conducted in 1997 and 1998, was underwritten by a Dean's Forum Grant from the School of Architecture at the University of Virginia and by funds from the National Endowment for the Humanities. It has benefited from presentations at the University of Virginia, University of Notre Dame, and College of Charleston.

[3] I gratefully acknowledge the assistance of the helpful city officials and others in Santa Barbara (Mary Louise Days, Carol Berg, and David Postada) and Savannah (John R. Locke) for their assistance in providing information and base maps.

[4] See especially Architectural Principles in the Age of Historicism, with Robert Jan van Pelt, New Haven and London (Yale University Press), 1991; paperback edition, 1993; "Renewing the American City," in Urban Renaissance, Gabriele Tagliaventi, ed., International Conference on Innovative Urban and Architectural Policies: A Vision of Europe/University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy, catalogue published Bologna (Vision of Europe: 1996), pp. 52-69 (text in English, Italian, and French); and "The True American City," in The New City: The American City, University of Miami School of Architecture, II (1993-94), pp. 8-25.

[5] Seventeenth century modifications which extended the arcade across the interruption on the long side and removed the stairs cancelled the emphasis on the castle while a new facade for the cathedral stressed its presence on a piazza which was now more conspicuously an outdoor civic room. See Wolfgang Lotz, "The Piazza Ducale in Vigevano: A Princely Forum in the Late Fifteenth Century," Studies in Italian Renaissance Architecture, Cambridge, Mass., and London (MIT Press: 1977), 117-139. Note that his plan C is inaccurate in showing only two rather than the three bays actually extant in front of the original city hall.

[6] 1826: c.200 students; 1998: 18,000+ students, with an equal number of faculty, support staff, and other personnel.

[7] Not all of what one sees now is what Jefferson intended; for a history of the complex's physical character and reputation, see Richard Guy Wilson, editor, Thomas Jefferson's Academical Village: The Creation of an Architectural Masterpiece, Charlottesville (Bayly Art Museum of the University of Virginia, and University Press of Virginia: 1993).

[8] Ms Frank's unpublished work was presented at the symposium of the University of Virginia's Department of Architectural History in October, 1997. I am grateful for her permission to include the map she prepared. Note that the locations of the structures were established by written references and have not been confirmed by physical evidence.

[9] 1990: 158,045 metro area population; 137,560, city population.

[10] For an analysis of the plan and discussion of its sources, see now Stanford Anderson, "Savannah and the Issue of Precedent: City Plan as Resource," in Ralph Bennett, ed., Settlements in the Americas: Cross-Cultural Perspectives, Newark; London and Toronto (University of Delaware Press; Associated University Presses: 1993)110-144. See also Sylvia Doughty Fries, The Urban Idea in Colonial America, Philadelphia (Temple University Press: 1977), ch. 5: "Savannah: The City in the Country."

[11] 1990: 369,608 metro population; 173,242 city population.

[12] "Any really great work has within it seminal forces capable of influencing subsequent development around it, and often in ways unconceived of by its creator. . . . it is the second man who determines whether the creation of the first man will be carried forward or destroyed." Design of Cities, New York (Viking Press: 1967), pp. 94-95.

[13] For an explanation about why commerce found a home here and some of the effects this had on Savannah as a whole, see the article by Stanford Anderson cited above, pp. 112-14.

[14] The grass laid down on the north end of the forum in Pompeii in 1996 has no connection with antiquity; it does not prosper.

[15] The spatial structure within which Pompeii was built is quite different from the one within which we work. I discuss these differences and the urban design of Pompeii at some length in the Final Report on Urbanism in the Pompeii Forum Website.

[16] This element is not shown in the Eschebach map which has only a single line where there should be a pair to show the two rises. It does appear on the opposite, western side, however. The stylobate level on the east side was rebuilt; see by James G. Cooper, Sarah Butler, and John J. Dobbins, "Observations on the forum Colonnades," PFP, 1995 Report.

[17] Not resolved is the disruption caused by the major traffic arteries inserted into the complex system, for example in the blocks east and west of Bull Street. Their location there is understandable since these streets form boundaries and back streets to the wards focused on the squares. But the result has been to turn them into unpleasant, inhospitable, unfriendly traffic arteries that have caused the deterioration of old buildings and invited the architects of new ones to disregard any attempt to contribute to the city's civility and urbanity.

[18] For additional comments on this complex, see Appendix I.

[19] But note: This is also a characteristic of Chesapeake urbanism from the earliest period of European colonization in North America and helps account for the dispersed settlements of American cities. See my "Renewing the American City," cited above.

[20] The data about buildings is taken from Herb Andree et al, Santa Barbara Architecture: From Spanish Colonial to Modern, 3rd ed., Santa Barbara (Capra Press: 1995).

[21] The city's grid is oriented diagonally to the cardinal points; used here is a convention that puts the waterfront on the south and makes the main artery, State Street, a north-south street.

[22] A number of earlier schemes leading to this design are available in David Gebhard, Santa Barbara-the Creation of a New Spain in America: an Exhibition Organized for The University Art Museum, University of California, Santa Barbara, 3 November through 12 December 1982, Santa Barbara, (University Art Museum, 1982).

[23] This statement needs a slight modification since there are three other examples of a similar condition. One is across De La Guerra Street from the City Hall where five wooden posts rise from the sidewalk near the curb to support the sloping tile roof of an older building; this portico on a private structure forms a distinctive contrast to the City Hall's substantial, finished arcade. Another is a building from 1927 which present a four-arched arcaded portico to the sidewalk, but not over it: the Southern California Gas Company building by Edwards, Plunkett, and Howell; Marston and Van Pelt, subsequently altered, at 1036 Anacapa. The third is several blocks north of the central area at 1600-04 State Street from 1995. Here a portico projecting from a commercial part of a mixed use building over the sidewalk to the curb provides a bus stop shelter. The upper level is not useable, its construction was apparently mandated by the planning commissioner, and if it were to be adjudged an intrusion, it could be removed without disturbing the structural integrity of the building.

[24] Reginald Johnson, 1937.

[25] Oscar Winderoth and Francis W. Wilson, 1914; remodelled David Adler, 1940; additions 1960-61.

[26] Others involved in the early stages were Bernhard Hoffmann who designed the "Street in Spain," Mary Craig, and Carleton Winslow Sr.; Lutah Maria Riggs is credited with the 1965 court connecting to State Street.

[27] My photographs from December, 1991 show that this area was being renovated with the "Street" blocked off and the bed next to the sidewalk lacked foliage. It makes no difference whether the condition in June, 1997 reproduces that of 1922-23; the point is that in 1997 this area worked as a telling detail and that either as replacement or new installation, the foliage reveals the work of the second architect and the importance of a reciprocity between landscape and architecture.

[28] For another example, see Appendix II.

[29] It is called Downtown Lot no. 6.

[30] The church, quite appropriately, provides the richest display between the architectural and the urban and is therefore worth a closer examination. The gray granite sanctuary building is clearly the heart of the complex. Its Doric order carries a wooden entablature with a low architrave, a frieze with ornamented metopes, and a cornice with an Ionic dentil course and a very thin, far-projecting corona with mutules holding 36 guttae. That dentilated, guttae-studded cornice is repeated as the pediment's raking cornice, and within the festigium is a folded sunburst motif popular during the Federal period. The rough-textured, scored plaster Sunday School Building follows suit but in a manner that is both appropriately diluted and more orthodox. Gone are the Ionic dentils, metope ornament, and inventive corona, although the triglyph-metope frieze following the raking cornice's course and crowning the subdued version of the church's festigium seems to acknowledge its neighbor's bravura. I wish to acknowledge the assistance of David Gobel of the Savannah College of Art and Design for confirming some details about this complex.

[31] Two more observations about this complex are in order. 1. The north side of the sanctuary and the church annex (Ralph Adams Cram, 1928) projecting behind it to the west provide side walls to Oglethorpe Avenue thereby reinforcing the superiority of Bull to Oglethorpe. The opposite relationship is established by residences at other intersections; they allow Oglethorpe to dominate. Thus, once again, Bull Street and public use trump intersecting streets and private uses. 2. Facing the church is the Chatham Academy, a red brick and limestone building from the turn of the century, apparently by Henry Urban. The lane between Oglethorpe and Hull was abandoned so that it could occupy the entire frontage. Its tetrastyle propylaea is centered on the lane between the church and Sunday school, but it lacks a forecourt with the steps leading to the portico beginning almost at the sidewalk. The effect is to allow a balanced parity and clear distinction between the two buildings serving very different public purposes.