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

Monday, March 18, 2019
2:30 p.m.
401 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 125

Minutes

 

Commissioner Kimberlee Stryker called the meeting to order at 2:30 p.m.

1. Roll Call
   Commissioners Present
   Linda Parker Pennington
   Abby Schnair
   Barbara Sklar
   Lydia So
   Kimberlee Stryker
   Paul Woolford
   
   
   Commissioners Absent
   Dorka Keehn
   
   
   Staff Present
   Aleta Lee, Program Associate, Public Art Trust & Special Initiatives
   Tom DeCaigny, Director of Cultural Affairs
   Mary Chou, Senior Project Manager, Public Art
    
2. Public Comment
   N/A
   
    
3. Midtown Park Apartment Project: Phase #1
   Ben Harth, Project Designer, Pyatok Architects
   Michael Simmons, Project Manager, MSPDI
   A. Steichen, Architect, Pyatok Architects
   J. Miller, Landscape Architect, Miller Company Landscape Architects
   
   
   The team presented the background of the project, providing a vicinity map, site photographs, and description of the structure. It was stated that the project was the only affordable housing owned by the city. The reconstruction plan included increasing accessibility by adding an elevator shaft to building one, erecting a new community building for the apartments, and replacing balconies. The team presented a site plan, landscape plan, and proposed plantings. The team went on to show elevations and perspective renderings of the proposed new design. Lastly, the team shared their ideas of a mural or perforated metal art railings to fulfill the art enrichment requirement.
   
   The Committee appreciated the design of the new community building, but wanted to see all elevations and section drawings. They thought the landscape planting looked attractive, and also suggested a lighting plan that integrated into the landscape. They Committee also emphasized having the spaces between the community building well lit, and asked the team to further explore articulating the entry area of the community building through dimension, materiality, and lighting. Additionally, the Committee asked the team to research different materials for the railing and metal panels.
   
   There was no public comment and the motion was approved unanimously as follows.
   
   Motion to approve Phase 1 of the Midtown Park Apartment Project contingent upon: 1) providing more section and elevation drawings; 2) proposing different railing material for the elevator tower and ADA ramp; 3) providing a lighting plan; 4) studying different metal panel materials; 5) providing photos and drawings of the courtyard planting; 6) developing the patio design with details; and 7) providing a material list for the community building.
   
    
4. SFO T3 Wests Modernization Project: Conceptual Review
   Brad White, Project Designer and Architect, Gensler & TEF
   Tania Gharechedaghy, Project Manager, SFO
   
   The team presented the project as a seismic retrofit for Terminal 3 of the airport. The goals of the project also included upgrading systems, increasing international operational flexibility, and developing passenger experience and revenue generation through a concessions program. The team presented the project site, surrounding architecture, existing conditions, and proposed plan. Additionally, the team provided a conceptual section of the new building and proposed massing which emphasized a new mechanical penthouse that paralleled the current mechanical penthouse on the east side of the terminal. Lastly, the team provided a solar analysis of the site.
   
   The Committee appreciated the team for the clarity in their presentation. In terms of design, the Committee liked the fenestration and its verticality, the articulations of the metal cladding, the color palette, and the integration of the parallel mechanical penthouse as a symmetrical bookend design to Terminal 3. Additionally, they liked the idea of expanding the concession area. The Committee asked the team what the airport was planning in regards to sea level rise. The team expressed that there was an ongoing in-house study at the airport and that a holistic approach was being considered.
   
   There was no public comment.
   
   
   The Committee took a five minute break at 3:35pm, and recommenced the public meeting at 3:39pm.
   
   Commissioner Paul Woolford arrived to the meeting at 3:36pm.
    
5. Better Market Street Project: Phase #1
   Ophelia Lau, Project Designer, Public Works
   Cristina Olea, Project Manager, Public Works
   John Dennis, Landscape Architect, Public Works
   
   The team presented the Better Market Street project, beginning with project goals, timeline, funding information, and community engagement. They then presented on key urban design elements to the project, including paving, greening, neighborhood identity, lighting, and public art. For pavement, the team showcased four options – linear, diamond, hexagonal, and brick. For greening, the team presented four planting alternatives, biodiversity, and proposed site furnishing. For neighborhood identity, the team showed the five neighborhoods the project encompassed and proposed identification through street railings. For lighting, the team provided information on revamping the Path of Gold with larger poles and recast bases and additional supplemental lighting throughout Market Street. For public art, the team addressed existing monuments and new proposed sites for public art opportunities.
   
   The Committee thought the team did a wonderful job in taking a holistic approach to this complex project. In regards to paving, the Committee expressed that keeping the pavement simple would be best. They did not prefer the preservation option of brick pavement. They thought the best options for landscaping were either having evergreen trees on the corners or by transit stops. The Committee asked that the team further consider the ideas of permanent seating, color of pavement, neighborhood identity through historical names and/or graphics in the pavement, and upgrading the Path of Gold. The Committee asked that the team bring mock ups and material samples to the next phase of review.
   
   There was no public comment and the motion was approved unanimously as follows.
   
   Motion to approve Phase 1 of the Better Market Street Project contingent upon: 1) keeping the paving pattern and railing system design simple; 2) making the tree wells congruous with the paving materials; 3) planting the evergreen trees at the corner or transit stops, to be decided by the project team; 4) exploring permanent seating options; 5) bringing mock-ups and materials to the next phase review; 6) exploring the option of embedding historical figures’ names in the pavement and branding/iconic graphics to highlight different neighborhood identities; 7) continuing dialogue on lighting and the recasting of the light pole bases; 8) eliminating paving pattern option 4, “Brick (Preservation Option)”; and 9) studying sidewalk area paving patterns at a large scale.
   
   Commissioner Barbara Sklar left the meeting at 4:30pm.
6. Staff Report
   No images were chosen to showcase at the next Full Commission meeting. However, the Committee suggested inquiring with Julia Laue of Public Works to get images of completed projects that have gone through Civic Design Review to show.
    
7. New Business and Announcements
   Commissioner Stryker wanted to confirm the start time of Civic Design Review public meetings and the frequency of the Civic Design Review reception. It was agreed upon that the start time of the Civic Design public meeting will be 2:30pm. It was also decided that the reception would occur every two years.
   
   It was also discussed that a joint meeting between Civic Design Review and Historical Preservation Committee will be held on Monday, May 20^th , 2019 to discuss the Civic Center Public Realm project and potentially the Better Market Street project.
    
8. Adjournment 
   There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 5:05 p.m.
   posted  3/29/19, 2:58 p.m., akl
   approved 5/6/19
    

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.