MEETING OF THE CIVIC DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
OF THE SAN FRANCISCO ARTS COMMISSION

Monday, June 19, 2017
2:00 p.m.
401 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 125

 

Minutes

 

Committee Chair Kimberlee Stryker called the meeting to order at 2:09 p.m.

1. Roll Call
   Commissioners Present
   Kimberlee Stryker, Chair
   Dorka Keehn
   Lydia So
   Paul Woolford
   
   
   Commissioners Absent
   Abby Sadin Schnair
   
   
   Staff Present
   Jill Manton, Director, Public Art Trust and Special Initiatives
   Aleta Lee, Program Associate, Public Art Trust and Special Initiatives
    
2. Public Comment
   There was no public comment. 
    
3. Consent Calendar
   1. Motion to approve Phases 2 and 3 of the San Francisco Airport (“SFO”) Long-Term Parking Garage #2.
       
   2. Motion to approve Phase 3 of the Treasure Island Waterfront Plaza Public Restrooms Project.
      
       
4. Tad’s Steakhouse Project: Phase #1
   Roddy Creedon, Project Designer and Architect, Allied Pro
   
   The design team presented that the existing Tad’s Steak House on Powell Street would soon be relocated to the ground floor of the Ellis O’Farrell parking garage. They presented the current views of the location, the project site, and a floor plan of the restaurant. They also provided line drawings and renderings of the proposed elevation of the storefront, which indicated the application of their current signage with an additional new sign and awnings. Lastly, the team showed the material and color palette for the project.
   
   The Committee suggested that the team consider dropping the horizontal bar on the right windows of the storefront, as they had done for the left side, to create more transparency and openness to the restaurant. They suggested that the team reduce the number of mullions to achieve this as well. They asked the team to consider how to "capture eyes" at the street level with signage, whether it be architectural alternatives for the awnings, a different application of the sign, and/or giving the sign more dimension. Additionally, they suggested having the new hanging sign have one side with a contemporary aesthetic, and the other side have a more historical feel. They asked that the team come back for an informal.
   
   There was no further public comment.
    
5. Francisco Reservoir Project: Conceptual Review
   Richard Parker, Project Designer and Architect, 450 Architects
   Anne Baskerville, Project Manager, Rec & Park
   Ron Lutsko, Landscape Architect, Lutsko Associates
   
   The design team presented the project, indicating the park context and views of the existing site and existing section. They reported on the project challenges and opportunities, such as typography, historic preservation, accessibility, safety, and maintenance. They indicated the project goals include accessibility, sustainability, connectivity, education, safety, and easy maintenance. In regards to community outreach, the team held four public meetings, small focus groups, collected 900+ responses from an online design survey. The team then provided their design inspiration and concept design for the park. The concept design included three sections: Bay Street, the Main Lawn, and View Terraces. The team also presented a planting palette, site possibilities for art enrichment and ideas for education on the history of the reservoir, and renderings of the park.
   
   The Committee appreciated the strong design moves of the park; however, they commented that the vestiges looked odd in comparison to the rest of the fluid and organic curves that moved throughout the park. They suggested having the restrooms closer to the children’s playground and to address highlighting the history of the reservoir in an artful manner, instead of literally. Lastly, the Committee asked that more sections of drawings were provided to see the intricate issues of the topography of the steeping park.
   
   There was no further public comment.
    
6. OneWater Pavilion – Visitor Center Project: Phase #1
   Alejandro Pimentel, Project Designer, Public Works
   Shelby Campbell, Project Manager, SFPUC
   Michael Pierron, Architect, Public Works
   
   The design team presented the overview of the project, including the project site, site views, site analysis, and precedent images. They then showed studies of different designs imagined for the visitor’s center, expanding on a circular form attached to an L shaped building. The circular pavilion could act as an event and workshop space, lecture hall, and exhibition venue. The L shaped building would hold the restrooms, storage, kitchenette, and work space. Renderings of the building and elevations were also presented, which also showcased the materials suggested for the design like perforated metal and full glass storefront. The team then presented the landscape plan, as well as presenting options for building entry and relationship of street to the building. Lastly, they showcased the proposed metal panel fencing, providing studies of metal panel patterns and renderings of the fence.
   
   The Committee asked that the team clarify if the building was to be permanent or temporary as this would affect the design and prominence of the structure. They thought the concept of the cylindrical shape made sense to the narrative of the water recycling plant, but seemed too similar to the other forms on site. If the structure were to be a prominent outfacing part of the campus, the Committee agreed the structure needed more of its own identity. It was suggested that if the structure were to be temporary, that it would be setback behind the fence. The Committee felt there were too many contingencies and asked the team to come back for an informal. The was no motion. 
   
   There was no further public comment.
    
7. SEP Power Feed and Primary Switchgear Upgrades – Building 032 Project: Phase #2
   Tiffany Gong and Fara Perez, Project Designer, Public Works
   Roland Sun and Jignesh Desai, Project Manager, SFPUC
   Fara Perez and Michael Pierron, Architect, Public Works
   Lizzy Hirsch, Landscape Architect, Public Works
   
   The design team presented the updated design of the building, providing an updated site plan, landscape planting plan, and planting palette. The proposed planting palette included scented plants to offset smells coming from the building. The team then presented the floor plans, building sections, precedent images, and renderings of the new design of the building. The design updates included adding a metal detail to the rim of the cutouts on the southeast side of the building, moving the building numbers to the south facade, and removing the circular vents on the north façade. The team then presented to options for the cantilever stair, providing two options for the stair enclosure. Lastly, the team showcased their color and material palette for the building.
   
   The Committee expressed that it was a beautiful building and streamlined since the project’s last review. They appreciated the thoughtfulness in adding scented plants to the landscape palette. The Committee preferred the option #2 of the stair enclosure which boxed in the stairs, stating that the design was more consistent to the language of the rest of the campus. They asked that the door be shifted to the side of the box enclosure. The Committee also suggested adding a metal detail to the roof of the building to balance the metal detail added to the cutouts.
   
   There was no further public comment.
   
   Motion to approve Phase 2 of the Southeast Plant (“SEP”) Power Feed and Primary Switchgear Upgrades—Building 032 Project, contingent upon: 1) exploring option #2 for the stair enclosure of the building, 2) moving the entrance door on the main façade of the pop-out to the side panel, and 3) exploring the use of a flash metal detail on the roof of the building.
    
8. Mariposa Pump Station Project: Phase #1
   Malinda Yu and Tiffany Gong, Project Designer, Public Works
   Bessie Tam, Project Manager, SFPUC
   Michael Pierron, Architect, Public Works
   Koa Pickering/ Rob Tidmore, Landscape Architect, Public Works
   
   The design team presented the proposed site plan, floor plans, building sections, and 3D diagram of the building. They presented planting typologies of coastal meadow and coastal scrub, along with varying plant palettes for the frontage and blue greenway planting. The team suggested the use of flat bar fencing that is more linear and would obscure views of the interior at different angles. The team then went on to address the updates of their design. This included narrowing the width of the right wall of the front of the building and making them equal dimensions on all sides. Furthermore, they provided a view of the new fencing and its effect from different perspectives. Lastly, the team presented the material palette of the building.
   
   The Committee felt the design of the building was nicely done and endorsed the project team’s request to approve phase #1and #2 of the project. Phase #2 will be voted upon at the following Full Commission meeting. They encouraged the team to paint the building with an anti-graffiti coat with matte finish and to adjust the joint size and line breaks of the building to avoid cracking.
   
   There was no further public comment.
   
   Motion to approve Phases #1 of the Mariposa Pump Station Project.
    
9. Maxine Hall Health Center Project: Phase #1
   Greta Jones, Project Designer, Public Works
   Joe Chin, Project Manager, Public Works
   Kay Kim, Architect, Public Works
   Edward Chin, Landscape Architect, Public Works
   
   The design team presented the project as a renovation and seismic upgrade for Maxine Hall Health Center. The project description, project site, street views, existing conditions were presented. Diagrams were exhibited to show where the building would add shotcrete walls throughout the facades of the building. The outward facing south and east facades were provided options to address the shotcrete walls. For the south elevation they proposed two options. Option #1 proposed a textured wall of vertical tile, reminiscent of the current rippled walls on the façade. Option #2 proposed a graphic wall, which used elements of building’s public art attached to ground level of the building. For the east elevation they again suggested option #1 of the vertical tiles or another option of smooth stucco. As for the landscape, they shared that the tree in front of the south elevation and lower planters of the east elevation would be removed.
   
   The Committee asked that the team consider repainting the entire building, if the budget would allow. The thought the graphic wall was a good solution to the new shotcrete walls. However, they thought the form of the shotcrete wall on the east façade should be revisited. Lastly, the Committee asked that the trees be cleared as to not obstruct the graphics on the walls.
   
   There was no further public comment.
   
   Motion to approve Phase 1 of the Maxine Hall Health Center Project, contingent upon: 1) continued exploration of the graphic Trespa solution on the east and south façade, 2) revisiting shotcrete wall form and fenestration placement on east façade, 3) seeing if the building can be painted with an appropriate color that does not compete with the artwork, and 4) ensuring the landscaping and trees do not obscure the added graphics.
    
10. Castro Mission Health Center Project: Phase #1
    Ruairi O’Connell, Project Designer, MEI Architects
    Steven Juergens, Project Manager, MEI Architects
    Mei Mei Chan, Architect, MEI Architects
    Jessica Perez, Landscape Architect, Public Works
    
    The design team presented project as a seismic upgrade for the Castro Mission Health Center. The project goals included to protect human life, maintain operations, and preserve fenestration and entry plaza. The team provided views of the site, photos of existing conditions, and the diagram of walls that needed shotcrete additions. The team provided five options for façade enhancement, which include a trowel finish shotcrete, a cement plaster with bays, a thin set abstract homage, a cast in place concrete with reveals, or a cast in place concrete with relief.
    
    The Committee felt that since a large percentage of the building was being upgraded that the whole building should be painted to keep consistency. They suggested a plaster skin coat over the whole structure that may give a modern take to this building. They also inquired about a landscape design that may go with the upgrade. The Committee asked the team return for an informal to better understand the vision for the renovation. The was no motion.
    
    There was no further public comment.
     
11. SFFD Ambulance Deployment Facility Project: Informational Review
    Ruairi O’Connell, Project Designer, MEI Architects
    Michael Wang, Project Manager, MEI Architects
    Mei Mei Chan, Architect, MEI Architects
    Cliff Lowe, Landscape Architect, Cliff Lowe Associates
    
    The design team presented the new design to the SFFD Ambulance Deployment Facility. Due to budget, the building would be reducing its footprint of the facility and parking garage to reduce costs. They showed the previous site plan of the old design and the updated proposed site plan. The proposed parking structure and ambulance deployment facility would now sit next to each other, side by side. The updated elevations showed a parapet angled to conceal a stair tower and additional enlarged fenestration for work spaces. The team also highlighted planting opportunities, using mesh screen planters, wire trellis, and egress drive planting. They provided renderings of the new design, along with showcasing material palette options, such as metal panels and patterns.
    
    The Committee felt this was an improvement from the last design. However, they shared that the top and the bottom half of the facility looked like different buildings. The recommended refining the bottom half of the building to be more simple and reductive, along with refining the landscape. They also suggested coming up with a holistic approach for the plinth and working on the fenestration so that they would more unifying instead of disparate.
    
    There was no further public comment.
     
12. Visual Arts Committee Update
    
    Commissioner Dorka Keehn updated the Committee on several artworks currently being reviewed at the Visual Arts Committee. This includes the kinetic artwork at Oak Plaza, the 3D piece “Modrad Meets the Beatles” by EZAWA at the San Francisco Airport International Gate Room, the temporary mural by Jason Jagel at Terminal 1 of the airport, and Cliff Garten’s piece at Bayview Gateway. She also commented that they are in the final rounds of the selection process for hanging artworks at the airport.
    
    Additionally, she shared information about the release of the Treasure Island Arts Master Plan and the RFQs that would soon be released.
    
    There was no further public comment.
     
13. Staff Report
    Jill Manton expressed that as July’s Civic Design Review is completely booked, and that projects could also be reviewed during the informal process and if acceptable to the Commissioners, approved at the August Full Commission meeting.
    
    There was no further public comment.
     
14. New Business and Announcements
    Commissioner Kim Stryker discussed having a small reception in late November that would invite colleagues to the SFAC gallery to get better acquainted and create a more congenial atmosphere between peers and design professionals. This opportunity would also provide the chance for colleagues to view the gallery and have a short presentation of the exemplary Civic Design Review projects and reasons for its approval.
    
    There was no further public comment.
     
15. Adjournment 
    There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:32 p.m.
    posted 6/30/17, 6:00 p.m., akl
    posted 7/6/17, 4:42 p.m., akl
    approved 7/10/17

Language Accessibility

Translated written materials and interpretation services are available to you at no cost. For assistance, please notify Director of Special Projects and Civic Design Review Program Manager Jill Manton, 415-252-2226, jill.manton@sfgov.org.

我們將為閣下提供免費的書面翻譯資料和口譯服務。如需協助，Director of Special Projects and Civic Design Review Program Manager Jill Manton, 415-252-2226, jill.manton@sfgov.org.

Materiales traducidos y servicios de interpretación están disponibles para usted de manera gratuita. Para asistencia, notifique a Director of Special Projects and Civic Design Review Program Manager Jill Manton, 415-252-2226, jill.manton@sfgov.org.

Ang mga materyales na nakasalin sa ibang wika at ang mga serbisyong tagapagsalin sa wika ay walang bayad. Para sa tulong, maaring i-contact si Director of Special Projects and Civic Design Review Program Manager Jill Manton, 415-252-2226, jill.manton@sfgov.org.