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

Monday, June 17, 2019
2:30 p.m.
401 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 125

Minutes

Commissioner Kimberlee Stryker called the meeting to order at 2:35 p.m.
 

1. Roll Call
   Commissioners Present
   Dorka Keehn
   Linda Parker Pennington
   Abby Schnair
   Barbara Sklar
   Lydia So
   Kimberlee Stryker
   Paul Woolford
   
   Commissioners Absent
   N/A
   
   
   Staff Present
   Aleta Lee, Program Associate, Public Art Trust & Special Initiatives
    
2. Public Comment
   N/A
    
3. SFPL Mission Branch Library Renovation Project: Phase #1
   Andrew Sohn, Project Designer, Project Manager, and Architect, Public Works
   Anthony Esterbrooks, Landscape Architect, Public Works
   
   The project team presented a site analysis, site context, building analysis of historical pictures and floor plans, and the deficiencies and needs that developed the project scope. The project scope proposed a restoration of the original entrance and main stairway, a new community room, additional restrooms, consolidated service points, replacement of mechanical systems, and an increase of square footage with additions. The team went on to present the proposed design, proposed floor plans, design precedent images, and studies of the new addition, along with elevations of each option. For landscaping, the team presented a site plan, materials palette, and options for the active entry space patio on Bartlett Street.
   
   The Committee commented that the three addition options presented looked the same. They suggested that the team not use a simulacrum of the original plinth of the historical building, but make a clearly modern counterpoint. Furthermore, the Committee recommended the team remove the southwest corner architecture of the second level to create a more defined and pure plinth. For the Bartlett Street entry space, the Committee suggested adjusting the fence height to follow the datum of the building architecture. For landscaping, the Committee discouraged the use of metal railing around landscape and suggested that if there was planned planting then it should be subtle and pulled back from the entry. In addition, they suggested embellishing the Bartlett Street entry space with greenery. There was no public comment and the motion was unanimously approved as follows.
    
   Motion to approve Phase 1 of the SFPL Mission Branch Library Renovation Project contingent upon: 1) exploring the window pattern of the new addition; 2) exploring landscape planting; 3) exploring the fence detail height of the Bartlett Street entry space; 4) creating a more planar and more modernistic counterpoint to the existing building rather than using a simulacrum of the historic building’s plinth; 5) investigating honest materials like natural concrete; and 6) removing the southwest corner of level two so the plinth is a pure defining element.
    
4. Daly City Vista Grande Drainage Basin Improvements Project: Phase #2 and Phase #3
   Shawn Spreng, Project Designer, McMillen Jacobs Associates
   Thomas Piccolotti, Project Manager, City of Daly City
   Greg Robley, Architect, MWA Architects
   Andrew Dawson, Landscape Architect, WRT Design
    
   The project team presented the vicinity map, site plan, existing views, and proposed view with renderings. They then showcased the building plan, building section, elevations, material palette, design precedents, and plant palette. The team provided design updates based on the comments from their last review. The updates included matching the cladding inside the door reveal to zinc standing seam cladding on the exterior, aligning the door heights, making the west façade vertical, and adding taller plants along John Muir Drive to further obscure the building.
   
   The Committee liked the new design and the project team’s design rigor to do something remarkable. They hoped this project could inspire other city departments that worked on projects at a similar scale. The new Commissioners also commented their appreciation of comparing the previous review comments and old and new design in a clear manner. There was no public comment and the motion was unanimously approved as follows.
    
   Motion to approve Phase #2 and Phase #3 of the Daly City Vista Grande Drainage Basin Improvements Project.
    
5. Francisco Reservoir Park Project: Phase #2 and Phase #3
   Brendan McDevitt, Project Manager, MCK
   Richard Parker, Architect, 450 Architects
   Larry Foster, Landscape Architect, BFS Landscape Architect
    
   Commission Chair Kimberlee Stryker commented that Francisco Reservoir Park project was already at 90% construction documents and inquired to the Committee if it was worth the time to review given that their comments would most likely not be integrated into the design.
   
   The new Rec and Park project manager, Kelly Rednick, explained that a previous project manager had made a mistake by not following through with the Civic Design Review process required for the project.
   
   The Committee agreed that they would not review this project given that they would not be able to add anything or make any input that would be useful. Moreover, they stated that without review they would not take responsibility for the final design.
   
   Public Comment:
   
   Bruce Keene, a representative of the Francisco Park Conservancy, apologized on behalf of the Conservancy for not following protocol and not having the benefit of the Committee’s input prior to this time. He wanted to make clear that the conservancy did not learn about needing to return for review until ten days before the meeting, but did not want to preclude any of the Committee’s comments.
   
   The Committee took a break at 3:45pm and restarted the meeting at 3:51pm.
    
6. Better Market Street Project: Phase #2
   Ophelia Lau, Project Designer, Public Works
   Cristina Olea, Project Manager, Public Works
   John Dennis, Landscape Architect, Public Works
   
   The project team presented updates to the project specific to the paving, greening, site furnishings, lighting, and public art. For paving, the team provided a section of the street, updates of the design for nexus intersection plazas, enlargements of the proposed paving design with street detail and intersection details, and a large life size print out of the pavement for scale reference. For the nexus of intersections, the team proposed a different shade pavers where two colors meet together. The team also provided color and finish samples of proposed materials of pavers. For greening, the team selected six trees including the Quercus, Lophostemon, Magnolia, Ginkgo, Ulmus, and Plantanus species. For the proposed layout, the team designated evergreen trees in the triangle nexus intersections. For site furnishing, the team showcased proposals for permanent seating. They shared that feedback from past community meetings was for seating to serve a variety of flexible uses, which would have some include backs and all having armrests. It was also suggested that the permanent seating could reuse some granite curbs that would tie the design together. For bus shelters, the project team thought this would be an neighborhood identity opportunity by using historical photographs that reflect the history of the specific site. For the Path of Gold lighting, the team said they were working with the Arts Commission staff in developing a strategy regarding the removal or replacement of the image on the base of the sculpture. Lastly, the team showed a video that showed an overview of the corridor.  
    
   The Committee thought the team needed to refine the pavement plan, specifically regarding the paver colors, bike lane, and intersections. The Committee was concerned about the monolithic gray color and asked for more varied granularity in the pavers. For the bike lane, the Committee suggested using pavers instead of asphalt. In regards to the intersections, the Committee thought the proposed triangle form should reinforce the O’farrell grid and have a more resolved and holistic design. The Committee thought the bus shelter photo images would be a great public art component opportunity that could be part of the art enrichment budget. They encouraged the team to consider historical public figures and sites.
   
   Public Comment:
   
   Ron Miguel, previous President of the Planning Commission and chair of the citizens working group of Market Street, shared that the public is very interested and involved in this process. He wanted to comment that the general public and stakeholders of Market Street have been very involved and continue to be involved in the project. He appreciated the Committee for everything they are putting into this project and would report back to working group.
   
   Motion to approve Phase #2 of the Better Market Street Project contingent upon 1) studying pavers in the bike lane, 2) narrowing the color range of the concrete pavers and adding granularity to shades while avoiding monolithic color casting, 3) resolving the design form of the triangle intersection grid to have a more holistic approach, and 4) ensuring the suggested art opportunities on the bus shelters reflects historical public figures and places.
   
    
7. India Basin Project: Conceptual Review
   Victoria Lehman, Project Manager, BUILD SF
   Oscar Hernandez-Gomez, Architect, SOM
   Karthik Kumar, Landscape Architect, Bionic Landscape Architects
   
   The project team presented the site context, aerial views, existing conditions of the shoreline, and a summary of the development program. The team then discussed the design drivers and guiding principles, form drivers, and biodiversity of the area. For the conceptual design, the team provided an overview of the site plan, public realm, trail and bike network, and current design scheme with hardscape and planting areas. Lastly, the team presented different site experiences and the design’s sea level rise adaptations.
    
   The Committee thought the design was handsome and thoughtful, and was excited to see the development of the project. The Committee commended the team for its community engagement efforts so far, and appreciated their involvement with the current community to be represented and a part of the conversation. The Committee was glad to see a proposed Bus Rapid Transit system to access the area. They were in favor of pulling the building as far back as possible and encouraged authentic connectivity.
   
   Commissioner Barbara Sklar left the meeting at 5:15pm.
   
   Commissioner Linda Parker Pennington left the meeting at 5:20pm.
    
8. SFO T3 West Modernization Project: Phase #1
   Brad White, Project Designer and Architect, Gensler & TEF
   Tania Gharechedaghy, Project Manager, SFO
   
   The project team reviewed their project goals, project site, existing conditions, proposed plan and massing, solar and daylight analysis, and design concept. The team then presented their new design, emphasizing the reinterpretation of terminal 3 east elements to the exterior of terminal 3 west for a consistent design. The updates included integrated skylights, a tower scheme design, and the use of electrochromic glass that adjusted in shading depending on the intensity of the sun.
    
   The Committee was happy to see the next steps of development for the project. Regarding the tower scheme, the Committee asked if the towers could be made distinct in a different way to be more architecturally interesting and talk about the mechanics that were happening with the form. Moreover, the Committee asked how the tower forms could register eith the horizontal datum of the building instead having it look like a grey box attached to the façade. Lastly, they asked the team to come back with samples of the electrochromic glass at the next review. There was no public comment and the motion was unanimously approved as follows.
   
   Motion to approve Phase #1 of the SFO T3 West Modernization Project contingent upon 1) studying the necessity of the fins, 2) studying the horizontal panels that break up the verticality of the glass fenestration, 3) studying the expression of the towers in greater detail, and 4) bringing in electrochromic glass samples to see if it fits with the skin materials.
   
   Commissioner Paul Woolford recused himself from the meeting due to conflict of interest as the following item was a project his firm is involved with to design.
    
9. SFO Courtyard 3 Connector Project: Phase #1
   Alan Bright, Project Designer, HOK
   Kris Opbroek, Project Manager, SFO
   Bart van Vliet, Architect, HOK
   
   The project team presented the site and context, previous comments from past reviews, the design vision and concept, the façade patterning, renderings, and material palette. Currently, the team was considering different material and color palettes and refining the best option for the project.
   
   The Committee acknowledged the difficulty in integrating an office building in the middle of airport terminals, but thought the team did a good job in moving the project forward. The Committee felt that the team still needed to refine tying the datum of the two terminals together with the building design. They Committee questioned how the team would be able to put a color palette together since the dynamic glass material they were using would change to four different colors depending on the intensity of the sun. They thought it would be helpful to see the color palette of materials with the four different stages of the dynamic glass. They asked the team to bring glass and photovoltaic samples to the next review. Additionally, they asked the team to perform studies and renderings that depicted the color change. Lastly, the Committee asked that the team move the antennas on the roof to the airside of the building. There was no public comment and the motion was unanimously approved as follows.
   
   Motion to approve Phase #1 of the SFO Courtyard 3 Connector Project contingent upon 1) studying the move of the balcony inset several stories down or canting it two more levels, 2) studying the continuum datum of the second floor and its connection to the top of terminal 2 and the artwork, 3) providing renderings and samples that provide a complete picture and understanding of the materials and changing colors, and 4) moving the antennas to the airside of the building.
    
10. Visual Arts Committee Update
    There was no Visual Arts Committee Update.
     
11. Staff Report
    There was no staff report.
     
12. New Business and Announcements
    Commissioner Stryker wanted to thank all the Commissioners who have participated in the recent informals for their time and dedication to the Civic Design Review Committee.
13. Adjournment 
    There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 6:29 p.m.
    posted  6/28/19, 7:05 p.m., akl
    updated 7/31/19
    ​approved 8/5/19
     

Language Accessibility

Translated written materials and interpretation services are available to you at no cost. For assistance, please notify Special Projects and Civic Design Review Program Associate Aleta Lee, 415-252-2251, aleta.lee@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，Special Projects and Civic Design Review Program Associate Aleta Lee, 415-252-2251, aleta.lee@sfgov.org.

Materiales traducidos y servicios de interpretación están disponibles para usted de manera gratuita. Para asistencia, notifique a Special Projects and Civic Design Review Program Associate Aleta Lee, 415-252-2251, aleta.lee@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 Special Projects and Civic Design Review Program Associate Aleta Lee, 415-252-2251, aleta.lee@sfgov.org.