Inspired by an article that John King wrote for the San Francisco Chronicle, we decided to do a Decade in Review article to identify the 10 best buildings representing Fresno architecture. Our parameters were that the buildings be in Fresno County with construction completed between 2000 and 2009. The reviewers were Joe Moore, president of the Downtown Association, Shaunt Yemenjian, principal of spacio|design, and Kiel Famellos-Schmidt, curator of archop.

What we found in making this list, is that Fresno has a collection of high quality, well designed buildings that have significantly improved the built environment of an important metropolitan area. We had no trouble pulling together a shortlist of 20 exceptional buildings. Below you will find our top 10 list organized chronologically.

Building: UCSF – Fresno
Client: University of California Medical Center, San Francsico
Architect: Fong & Chan Architects
Year Built: 2002
Photo: UCSF
Description:

As Northern and Southern California continue to spread energies into the Central Valley, good design has come with the territory. The UCSF Medical Building anchors a prominent corner of the Community Medical Center Campus. The med‐student facility features a rotunda lobby with three‐story tall metal fins that are angled rhythmically as a nod to the notion of pages turning in a book. The rounded exterior walls along the street façade also set a rhythm in motion that gives the building an interesting street presence. The carefully designed sun shades which also embrace the curved streetwall provide shading from the summer sub for the space within. The exterior space created by the inward facing portion of the arc is designed as a pleasant semi‐public gathering space that can accommodate multiple social functions.

Building: Fresno Yosemite International
Airport Terminal
Client: City of Fresno
Architect: AECOM
Year Built: 2002
Photo: Bing.com

Description:

While the decade before brought us the internationally recognized Fresno City Hall – this decade brought about its younger cousin: The Fresno Yosemite International Airport Terminal. Equally progressive in its form and structure, the curved glass facade floods the entire Terminal with natural light. The exposed steel framing transcends the human scale enough to draw your attention and inspire awe yet is detailed and finished in such a way that does not make it feel overbearing. The reverse angle of the curtain wall gives the Terminal’s rounded fascia a form that begins to mimic the profile of an object in flight.

Building: Woodward Park Library
Client: County of Fresno
Architect: DSJ Architects
Year Built: 2004
Photo: DSJ
Description:

Embraced by the sweeping concrete surfaces that seemingly nurture the space within, your imagination is stimulated by the forms and surfaces even before picking up a book. Exceptional natural lighting on the inside with very little direct light make the interiors highly conducive to reading, studying and focusing your attention. With the circulation cleanly arranged around an entry foyer, the flow of circulation is comfortable yet interesting. A ‘Friends of the Library suite that is open after‐hours allows for the building to remain active through the evening as community space.

Building: Sante Fe Depot
Client: City of Fresno
Architect: Johnson Architecture
Year Built: 2005
Photo: Joe Moore
Description:

The historic Santa Fe Depot is a shining example of historic preservation in Fresno. Built in 1899 by the San Joaquin Valley Railroad (later to be acquired by Santa Fe) , the depot is listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The building was originally designed by W.B. Story, and the 2004 / 2005 historic preservation project was led by Fresno based firm Johnson Architecture. Before its renovation, the building had suffered from years of neglect. It was last used as a passenger facility in 1966, was converted into a railroad communications center, and eventually sat vacant for decades. The building is typical of the Mission Revival style, with clay roof tiles and beige stucco walls. A small porte-cochere and clock tower, with a large wrought iron clock face, dominate the Santa Fe Avenue elevation of the building. The $7 million renovation removed decades of insensitive patchwork additions to the building, and restored the building’s historic appearance and functionality as a working passenger rail station. It now serves Fresno passengers on Amtrak’s popular San Joaquin line. The project received the prestigious Governor’s Historic Preservation Award, an Award of Excellence from the AIA San Joaquin, and a Preservation Design Award from the California Preservation Foundation.

Building: Coyle Federal Courthouse
Client: US General Services Administration
Architect: Moore Ruble Yudell Architects with Gruen Associates
Year Built: 2005
Photo: Clark Pacific
Description:

The later part of the 1990’s into the beginning of the 2000’s we saw substantial investment from the GSA on well designed federal buildings throughout the country. Fresno received that investment in design with the new Federal Courthouse. The building’s massing and intricate concrete paneled façade draws inspiration from rock formations in Yosemite National Park. The lobby is awe inspiring. The floor combines smooth and rough stones punctuated with granite boulders cut in half to form seating. Beyond the lobby the way finding, courtrooms, law library, and roof terraces all are well thought out, detailed and accentuated by local art.

Building: Unitarian Universalist Church
Client: Unitarian Universalist Church of Fresno
Architect: McCamant & Durrett Architects
Year Built: 2007
Photo: McCamant & Durrett Architects
Description:

Unitarian Universalist Church of Fresno is first and foremost distinguished by their commitment to sustainability and community. Those commitments are masterfully combined in a building that pays equal attention to interior and exterior spaces. The roof lines, material choices and color palate give the building a contemporary and earthy feel that sets it apart from other churches. This was Fresno County’s first LEED Certified building. The sustainable strategies range from drought tolerant landscaping, natural lighting and low water plumbing.

Building: Clovis Fire Station No. 5
Client: City of Clovis
Architect: Don Dommer Associates
Year Built: 2007
Photo: Terry O’Rourke
Description:

Clovis Fire Station No 5 opened in 2007 at 790 N. Temperance Avenue, just north of Highway 168, in the Clovis Research and Technology Park. It was designed by the Oakland, CA based firm Don Dommer Associates, The building uses a mix of industrial materials such as corrugated steel and concrete block in a contemporary context. The three bay garage area is highlighted by an open truss roof system supporting a gently arching steel roof. Clerestory windows provide natural light to the garage bays during the day, and at night creative up lighting highlights the exposed roof structure and interior in dramatic fashion.

Building: H Street Lofts
Client: Reza Assemi
Architect: Taylor Teter Partnership
Year Built: 2008
Photo: RSM Studio
Description:

H Street Lofts demonstrates an awareness of its context, and uses the adjacent railroad as inspiration for the façade. It also shows a curiosity and willingness to test new ideas and use materials in untraditional ways. The varying sizes, placement and treatment of the windows creates the feeling of moving boxcar. The building wraps around a courtyard to foster interaction of neighbors and includes a memorial mound landscaped with native plants to commemorate the property’s former life as an army induction center. In the past decade Reza Assemi has become synonymous urban living in Fresno. Of all the multifamily housing built in Fresno County during the decade, H Street Lofts stands out as the most authentic to the region.

Building: Clovis North High School
Performing Arts Center
Client: Clovis Unified School District
Architect: Darden Architects
Year Built: 2008
Photo: Tomas Ovalle
Description:

Home of the Paul Shaghoian Concert Hall and the Dan Pasesano Theatre is one of the finest high school performing arts facilities in the nation, rivaling many collegiate and professional concert venues. The Shaghoian Concert Hall seats 750 on one level, in a traditional box configuration, featuring a stage that sits within the main body of the theatre, with no proscenium arch. The stunning interior of the Concert Hall is known for its superb acoustics, with wood paneled walls, and a 50 foot ceiling. Above the stage sits a a fully automated “acoustic cloud” structure that adapts to change the acoustic properties of the room. Additional adaptive acoustic treatments are designed in the upper levels of the hall, allowing the venue to be customized for performances ranging from choirs to orchestras to jazz ensembles. Adjacent to the Concert Hall sits the Paesano Theatre, a 150 seat “black box” theatre performance space. Both venues are shared by programs from throughout the school district. The exterior of the Performing Arts Center is constructed largely of concrete block and steel. Massive steel columns support the entrance to the lobby, a visual reference to the steel framed agricultural packing houses that still function nearby.

Building: New Harvest Church
Client: New Harvest Church
Architect: Anthony C. Pings & Associates
Year Built: 2008
Photo: Shaunt Yemenjian
Description:

The balance and careful treatment of every surface of the building are enough to have made Christian Dior jealous. Built as an adaptive re-use of a fruit packing plant, the tapered planes spread outward in a way that resembles the opened husk of a fruit. With so many 20th century buildings addressing a single façade (dismissing the notion that buildings have context and multiple vantage points), the New Harvest Church campus captures your attention up front and sustains your interest as you move about. One can also appreciate use of modern technology in the CNC cut signage carved away from the webs of steel I-beams throughout.

Are we on the mark? Do you feel we missed any? Share your comments with us below.

We have been working in collaboration with graphic designer Floyd Sanchez of Anti Laboratories. The goal being the development of archop park wayfinding and place making signage.

Above is the conceptual design of monument signage that we propose locating at the major entries to the park. The form is inspired by the gateway signage to Kearney Boulevard. The gateway was built in 1933 designed by architect Charles Franklin.
Signage and sense of entry are powerfully tools in evoking a sense of place and community. These new gateway signs will provide park users with that.

Additionally, this for this design we draw on our experience working with sheet metal, specifically stainless steel on the art & architecture installation. The design of the fin shown would be stainless steel formed using a plasma cutter. While a striking design move with interesting shadow play, it also has an important purpose. Signage is often a magnet for graffiti and vandalism. By the words being voids, no spray paint can cover up the meaning. Also stainless steel is a rigid material with various options for cleaning.

Other signage throughout the park denoting spaces and uses, will employ a similar graffiti and vandalism resistant strategy. It is our hope that this strategy will have minimal maintenance costs and stand the test of time.

Comments are welcome.

It was another warm Saturday morning in Fresno. Tower District residents walked, biked, and drove to a 3rd in a string of community meetings. The purpose of these meetings is to craft a Streetscape Master Plan that will guide City of Fresno infrastructure investment in the district.

Meeting #1

Saturday, July 25, 10:00 am – 2:00 pm: Visioning Workshop to develop design alternatives

Video & Critique

Meeting #2

Tuesday, July 28, 7:00 – 9:00 p.m: Workshop to develop the design concepts

Designs, critique, discussions (1, 2)

Meeting #3

Saturday, September 27, 11:00am-1:00pm: Workshop on specific elements and details

When I arrived to The Landmark at 11am, I locked my bike the the patio railing because there was no bike rack nearby. As I walked in the meeting was calling to order. Many of the faces were familiar from previous meetings and daily life in the neighborhood.

I settled into a table near the back, joined by friends Travis, Ed and Adam. We were ready to get to work and start a collaborative design process. All we needed was a brief update about the latest design, outline of the meetings goals, and some instructions of the task at hand. 15-20 minutes would have been a reasonable time for that.

However, was not the case. From 11 until several minutes after 12 the group was talked to. Those that held the mic included: Director of Tower District Marketing Committee, Bill Kuebler; Council member Blong Xiong; consulting architect and planner, Mark Steele; City of Fresno traffic engineer, Brian Jones; and consulting architect and planner, Diego Velasco. Everyone at our table was frustrated by the slow start and several escaped to the Landmark bar for a drink to kill the time.

The most informative of the 5 speakers was Brian Jones, traffic engineer with the City of Fresno. He spoke about the narrowing Wishon to 2 lanes and using narrowed lanes and sidewalk bulb outs to make divers feel less safe driving fast. In other words using design and drivers’ natural reactions in order to create more bicycle and pedestrian friendly traffic patterns. Very cool stuff, but some residents had a hard time believing that bikes and cars could use the same lane.

The important items to know about the updated design is that the much discussed traffic circles have been removed and the pilot project to implement the design has been selected as the strip of Olive between Wishon and Maroa.

design workshop

Our task for the meeting was to select preferences in street furniture. We were given a matrix of furniture to select. This included: paving, bike racks, seating, planters, trash cans, lighting, kiosks, etc.

Our table often circled one option that best fit our preference but wrote out notes that they should be commissioned from local artists and designers. Other than some of the photos of the existing, nothing seemed to call out as authentic to the Tower.

In the few minutes we had left we noted on the plan where we believed this street furniture should be placed. If more than 35-40 minutes had been devoted to the design workshop, we would have been able to make more thorough design decisions.

I had also expected that we as a group would have some part in selecting what the first pilot project would be. It seems that decision was made between the Tower District Market and the city. Work on the pilot project is expected to begin as early as January of 2010.

While I have been frustrated with the process, I see that there has been a lot of hard work going into the Tower District Streetscape Master Pland. And it is comforting to see that the design is improving and that the pilot project will actually get built.

other outcomes

One encouraging outcome from these meeting is that a group of residents has organized to repair the lights strung over olive. They are taking $10 donations for lightbulbs and selling $25 t-shirts with a cool design.

So if you’d like to see Tower shine a little brighter, then pitch in at least $10. I’m sure Flo will comment here and let you know how to donate and where to buy t-shirts.

A third community meeting will be held this Saturday for the Tower District Streetscape Master Plan project.

Visioning Workshop to develop design alternatives
Saturday, September 26th
11:00 am – 1:00 pm
The Landmark Restaurant

The first meeting involved a series of group visioning and design exercises led by Mark Steele and Diego Velasco. CSUF professor and practicing design anthropologist Hank Delcore PhD and I, co-wrote a critique of the methods used by M.W. Steele Group.

A few days later was the second meeting M.W. Steele Group presented the conceptual design of the new streetscape. There where strong design moves such as reinforcing an existing pedestrian corridor from Fern between the Post Office and Dollar Tree to the Restaurants on the North end of Fulton. However, what got the most attention and passionate debate were two proposed traffic circles at Wishon & Olive and Van Ness & Olive.

It was Fresno’s Blogosphere that this discussion took place. Find those discussions here:
The Anthro Guys, Gustav’s Groupie, Fresno Beehive, Business Street Online, The Fresnan

From the amount of contentious attention among the community and emails between a Tower committee led by Bill Kuebler, I predict the traffic circles will not be in this second draft of the plan. However, I have not seen any updated designs yet.

Below is the announcement of the 3rd meeting that was emailed out to everyone that had attended one or both of the other meetings.

Now, come see the results of everyone’s efforts and join us in discussions relative to the draft conceptual plan as we focus our attention on the specific elements and details contributing to the creation of an overall final streetscape plan and… implementation!

Saturday, September 26th
11:00 am – 1:00 pm:
Visioning Workshop to develop design alternatives

NEW MEETING LOCATION!
Meeting will take place at The Landmark Restaurant (644 E. Olive Avenue) Located on the southwest corner of the intersection of East Olive Avenue and North Broadway).

For more information,
call 497-8362

The City of Fresno contact for this endeavor is:
Will Tackett, Planner III
Planning and Development Dept.
(559) 621-8063

I encourage all Tower residents and regular visitors to attend this meeting. Your input is valuable. I’m not sure what the format will be this time. However, make sure you focus on the details. What happens at each corner? How is the street furniture placed? How will the proposed changes alter the way you experience the street (i.e. walking, driving, biking, sitting, dining, entertainment)? Look at the boundaries of the project area, how does it connect with the rest of the Tower District? How can the design be improved?

Also the city will be moving forward with a pilot project from this streetscape master plan. Surveying of Olive’s topography has already begun. Be sure to voice what you feel is the best place to start, whether it is the most prototypical and/or will make the greatest impact.

And please report back here for discussion.

update 09-29-2009

The owner of the Helm and Newman Homes, One By One Leadership, presented to the Historic Preservation Commission their new plan to move forward with restoration of both homes. They also provided a letter of intent for a $500,000 loan from the Housing Authority to help make it possible.

While the jury is still out on the Newman home, the damage is not as severe as some had feared. Or better put – there is a good possibility it could be saved. The roof collapsed in the fire mentioned below, but the 1st floor, 2nd floor and walls maintained much of their integrity.

Friday night September 18th ABC 30 reported that the fire destroyed historic home at L Street and Divisadero in downtown Fresno.

Fresno Fire Department has not yet discovered the cause of the blaze.

Newman Home at 1743 L Street was built in 1911 in a Colonial Revival style. It is on the Local Register of Historic Resources. Via Historic Fresno website.

View Larger Map

While searching for a news article from the Fresno Bee, I stumbled upon an amazing resource. It was a webpage called Super Signage Fresno, CA. I’ve had a little obsession about signage for the past couple of months.

Unfortunately, THE FRESNAN stole my thunder and posted this early today. He pulled it from my twitter feed when I discovered the site yesterday. Mike has become an archop groupie giving the site his Bloggiest Moment of the Week for two weeks in a row. With lots of link love, I’ll let this one pass. But Mike, remember, the built environment is the realm of archop, stray too far and we will school you.

Now that that little blog warfare is out of the way… Digging deeper into the site called www.agilitynut.com, we see that Deborah Jane has collected an amazing inventory of Roadside Architecture from across the country. You can search type and even browse signage by place. There are even a sampling some of my favorite architectural styles including Art Deco and Mid-Century. I have not read much about the author yet. So, I’m wondering what is her method is for collecting all of this data. But one thing is sure, we’ll continue to use it at a resource.

In the sampling of Art Deco architecture. I saw this building. While slurping some Pho you may have noticed this architectural gem called the Ivory Tower. “The Ivory Tower stands in the parking lot of the Mayfair Shopping Center. The shopping center was built in 1945 and has since been remodeled. This remaining structure was used as the Administration Building and might also have contained a clothes shop.”

Take some time exploring the site. I’m sure it not comprehensive, so what are your favorites? What was missed?

I’m amazing in how much articulation there used to be in signage. It was part of the architecture not just the lighted boxed with replaceable copy that is so prevalent today. How do we get back to that? Where are the missed opportunities?

For those of you unable to attend, M. W. Steele Group presented the following 1st draft of the Tower District streetscape master plan to the community meeting Tuesday night for feed back. Click on the images to zoom in.

I’ve decided just to post the plans here and not issue an opinion. Feel free to discuss here and I’ll try to answer any questions you have. On a side note, there is an essay I wrote about the Tower District and public space in 2005 that was a finalist for the Berkeley Prize. The full version isn’t online but check out the abstract.

For opinions and discussions focused mainly on the proposed traffic circles see:

The Anthro Guys
Gustav’s Groupie
Fresno Beehive

Related posts:
Tower District Streetscape Plan
Q & A with Diego Velasco
Tower District Streetscape charrette video
Critique: Tower District Streetscape Design Charrette

Hank Delcore, Ph.D., and Kiel Famellos-Schmidt
also found at http://theanthroguys.com

Saturday from 10am to 2pm, about a hundred Tower District residents and business owners gathered for a design charrette put on by the City of Fresno planning department and MW Steele Group. Steele has the contract for planning a redesigned Tower District streetscape as part of the Tower District Specific Plan. Saturday’s event was a day of community input, with Steele returning this Tuesday night to present some design alternatives.

We laud City Councilman Blong Xiong, the city, various Tower District advocates, and the Steele Group for putting on this event. Mark Steele and his team listened, took some hard questions, and were willing to engage in some good give and take.

As professionals in participatory design and community design methods, we also noted some things about the program that can inhibit the quality of community input and seriously limit the degree of real community participation in the design process. This critique is intended to increase the quality of design charrettes and community input in Fresno as well as raise awareness about the potential of participatory design.

Expert focus of the event
The organizers stated that the day was all about the participants, but in practice, the more consistent emphasis was on the expert status of the architects/planners vis a vis the participants. After an introductory presentation on the distinctiveness of the Tower by two long-time Tower advocates, Mark Steele took the stage and talked mostly about his firm and their approach to the project. He presented his goals for the project, despite acknowledging that the day was about understanding our goals and aspirations. His associate, Diego Velasco, followed with the firm’s views of the strengths and challenges of the Tower District – again, topics that the charrette was supposed to probe. Expert statements are not the best way to begin an event meant to foster community participation in the planning and design process.

It wasn’t until 11:15am that the twelve tables of participants were unleashed on the first design drill. By that time, some participants had already turned their attention away from the stage and were fingering the maps, stickers and other supplies on the tables. An hour is too long for facilitators to dominate the stage at a four hour event. The long lead-in both cut down the time for participants by a quarter, and set a strong expert-focused – not participant-focused – tone.

Diversity
The tower district is a very diverse place. It is called home by many including: African American, Asian, Caucasian, Latino, young and old, the progressive community, and the GBLTQ community. Economically, there is a mix of home owners and renters, working class through upper class and even homeless. As well, Tower is a destination for those throughout Fresno and beyond in search of unique cultural, entertainment and dining experiences.

The participants at the charrette were overwhelmingly white and weighted toward local property and business owners; the average age looked to be about 50. Conspicuously absent were youths and Latinos, two large and important resident/user groups in the Tower. Tower visitors from other neighborhoods were also missing. Those who attended are important, but they are already the most likely people to have their voices and preferences heard in this process, and they have a partial view of issues at stake in the streetscape. For example, there were probably relatively fewer public transportation users among the participants than some other Tower constituencies, an important point when it comes to redesigning bus stops and associated features like sidewalks and bike racks.

Tight format, short time
For each design drill, the participants had 15 minutes to work through complex issues, like recommending placement of street furniture and other features all across the Tower District business core. Each exercise time was followed by 30 minutes of often repetitive presentations from each table to the entire group. The design charrette had us wrestling with important and potentially highly creative design issues, but the format was too tight.
-

Constrained approach to community participation
Finally, with the design alternatives meeting coming up Tuesday, we wonder how much of Saturday’s charrette can really be incorporated into the process. Again, we agree that Mark Steele and his colleagues (and by extension the city) are sincerely trying to listen. But it’s hard to believe that Steele and company didn’t already have some designs in mind or drawn up before the charrette. If not, then they would have to work day and night from Saturday afternoon till Tuesday night to synthesize ideas from a hundred participants and come up with some design alternative to present – and even then, this time frame is probably too tight. Surely they are working with the charrette data right now, but they also probably had some designs already laid on and ready for their return to Fresno Tuesday night. This raises the question: how much community input can really be incorporated when the goals, strengths, challenges and preliminary design work have all already been done before the community is consulted? (In fairness, Mark has said that the design alternatives they will present Tuesday night will not be very detailed; we’re sincerely curious about the firm’s process for analyzing charrette data and incorporating it into their designs.)

What We Would Do
In our experience, facilitating dozens of participatory design charrettes, as well as observation of other charrettes and research of best practices, here’s how a truly participatory design charrette might look:

Participant focus
At one point Saturday, Mark Steele said, “today we’re gonna make you into streetscape designers.” In other words, the experts were ready to teach us how to do something of what they do. But a community design event shouldn’t be about transferring knowledge about design practice from experts to community members. Instead, we start from the principle that everyone is a designer already, without expert help. In other words, we all have design ideas and practices related to our surroundings, including our streetscapes. A community design charrette should be aimed at unlocking the design insights we already have (or could have, in the right context), and making those insights available to professional designers. Professional designers apply their experience and expertise to produce the actual design, inspired by community input.

In practice, a participant focus means that you deemphasize the role of expert or facilitator. No long and potentially intimidating statements of who has what degree or affiliation or expertise; instead, you dive right into the participatory design exercises and maximize the time that the participants have at center stage.

Recruitment means diversity
If you open the event up to “concerned citizens and business owners,” you tend to get a self-selected group of the usual suspects, as we saw on Saturday. Instead, we recommend targeted recruitment among all user groups to ensure a diversity of participants in the design process. This of course takes more work upfront in recruiting and screening. The result is much more useful data that can more accurately influence the design process.

Loosen up the format, take your time
Getting true participation takes time and flexibility. We would have recommended a series of three participatory design charrettes, with smaller yet more diverse participants, and more creative exercises involving, perhaps, larger scale prototyping and methods drawn from theatre and the arts — this is after all the Tower! (Diego said that they considered a skit-making exercise but time constraints precluded it.) Participants could act out common Tower interactions with streetscape props. Examples we bounced around included: the bus stop, the sidewalk café, the tower rat hangout, bar hopping, Rogue, etc. This would give the designers data about our culture and spatial needs. Using audio and visual recording, can capture both the data and the process through which it was produced for later analysis.

Another method we thought would be useful is to have different tables focus on different areas of the project area. With twelve tables of participants at the event all focused on the same design drills never more focused than the entire project area, a lot of redundant results were produced. The area is easily broken into six overlapping parts. Each area is then worked on by two tables. This would get all of the project area equal focus. At Hank’s table and the three tables Kiel facilitated, we noticed input was light at the edges. Also at the 1”=30’ scale aerial photo that was the last of the design drills, it was hard to definitively place streetscape elements and furniture represented by stickers in our tool pallet that included: sidewalk cafes, potted plants, streetlights, handicap ramps, benches, bike racks, etc.

Some of these measures would increase costs at the event level. However, we have Fresno-area expertise to accomplish participatory design and planning work and the savings from keeping the work local would more than pay for the changes we suggest.

True participation
Let’s face it, whenever we create something, we become wedded to it: we want to defend it, sometimes not even consciously. From talking with Mark, and Diego, observing how the community was prompted, and the tight timeline, it seems much of the design is already in place. Community consultation should take place before any designer digs into a project or puts pencil to paper.

While we value and honor the expertise of MW Steele Group and the work done by the City of Fresno and the Tower community, this is our honest assessment of the design charrette process and how it could be improved upon. Please attend the next meeting Tuesday, July 28th 7-9pm at Roger Rocka’s Dinner Theatre, where the design alternatives will be presented.

Related posts
Tower District Streetscape Plan
Q & A with Diego Velasco
Tower District Streetscape charrette video
Bored in Fresno? Become an Anthropologist
ArcHop Construction Proceeds

Video courtesy of Business Street Online.

related posts: Tower District Streetscape Plan and Q&A with Diego Velasco

This Saturday 10am – 2pm at Roger Rockas Dinner Theatre there is a community design charrette for the Tower District Streetscape Plan. The architecture and planning firm coordinating the design charrette is M. W. Steele Group along with assistance from members of the Tower District Marketing Committee, Tower District Design Review Committee and City of Fresno Planning Department.

Diego Velasco Assoc. AIA, LEED AP with the M. W. Steele Group will be conducting the process tomorrow. Below he answers our questions regarding the upcoming community design charrette:

KS: What can community members expect at the community meeting? I assume this is a design charrette type setup. What kind of activities will we be doing?

DV: Folks can expect to have a fun time. We have prepared a series of “design drills” to help engage participants and walk them through the steps that we, as designers, often take in the design process. We will start the workshop with a powerpoint presentation that will highlight the fundamentals of streetscape design and key streetscape elements. Our first exercise will be a classic brainstorming session to get the juices flowing and give folks an opportunity to express their ideas, visions, and concerns. The next “drill” will be a mapping of the tower district, where we will ask everyone to identify some of the key existing conditions of the area, and finally, in the last exercise we will roll up our sleeves and get to work, proposing ideas and potential designs for the three streets we have been asked to consider: olive, fern and wishon. To assist stakeholders in this, we have prepared a series of icon stickers that depict streetscape elements (such as benches, trees, waste bins, etc.) and some cutouts of potential streetscape designs (such as bike lanes, sidewalk cafes, pop-outs, etc.). We will also have color markers and trace paper for the more adventurous, and plenty of opportunities for folks to write comments or ideas (if they prefer more anonymity).

KS: What are your goals for the outcome of the meeting? What would make it a success?

DV: We often say that as the urban design consultant we are really only the conductor, and the stakeholders are the orchestra. The quality of the music that results is highly dependent on the energy and efforts of the orchestra. We do not approach a project as an opportunity to impose our ideas, but rather, believe our role is primarily to demonstrate to folks the range of possibilities and common practices, so that they can decide what works best in their neighborhood. Our hope is that people will come out of this feeling energized and enthusiastic about the future potential of the Tower and ready to implement some of the good ideas.

KS: What is the time line after the meeting?

DV: We will take all the information gathered at the first workshop and synthesize it into a set of guiding principles, which we will use to guide our design proposals. We then will return to the community on Tuesday evening for a second workshop, where we will show some design alternatives and get deeper into the specifics of the streetscape elements and design. We hope to get a good direction as to a preferred alternative or a combination of preferred options, and will take that back to our office and develop the design in greater detail. We have tentatively scheduled a third workshop at the end of August, beginning of September, to come back to the public and present a draft streetscape design plan for comment. Beyond that, the schedule is in the hands of the City of Fresno Planning Department.

KS: Being from San Diego, what strategies will you use to ensure the final design is authentic to Fresno?

DV: The most important strategy is always to listen, listen, listen. We have several projects in our portfolio that are outside of San Diego (including the El Dorado Park Plan here in Fresno). We have found that the best way to ensure authenticity and preserve a local flavor is to research as much as possible about the area, engage meaningfully with the community, and be willing to make revisions when we don’t get it right. One idea we have come away with is that we need to engage the local arts community to help incorporate public art in the streetscape design. This may be a good way to highlight the unique “funkiness” of the Tower.

KS: What is the product that you’ll be delivering to the City of Fresno?

DV: We never fully know what the product will be until we have completed the workshops. However, in general we will complete a streetscape plan that will include a summary of the ideas and concerns expressed in the workshops, a design plan for each of the three street segments in our project area, a series of perspective “vignettes” or renderings depicting the key concepts, a palette of streetscape elements appropriate for the area, some discussion about streetscape best practices and references.

KS: What are some projects in your resume that are similar to the Tower District Streetscape Plan?

DV: We have designed some major avenues in the City of National City, we also prepared streetscape designs for the San Diego Naval Training Center Reuse and Precise Plan and for the Yokohl Ranch Town Center Design Guidelines.

Like Diego said , so please attend the workshop Saturday, July 25, 10:00 am – 2:00 pm at Roger Rockas Dinner Theatre (1226 N. Wishon just North of Olive Ave.) Bring your energy, bring your ideas.

Diego’s bio from http://mwsteele.com:

Diego brings a broad view of architecture to MW Steele Group since joining the firm in 2007. With degrees in city planning and urban planning, he approaches design as an all inclusive process. As an integral part of our urban design and planning practice, he has opportunity to include architecture, urban design, landscape architecture and planning to some degree in each project. This connective way of thinking makes him flexible, and diverse in his skills. Diego’s ability to conceptualize projects, whether detailed and technical or more broad in nature makes him an asset to any project team.

Diego has worked in private practice as well as with municipal planning and development agencies, giving him an understanding of both sides of the planning process. He is technically adept with graphic software programs as well as being an exceptional artist in hand drawing. Diego’s talents have been recognized with several honors and design awards.

Diego Graduated from the University of Washington with a Master’s degree in Urban Design in 2006 and the University of California, Berkeley with a Bachelor’s degree in Architecture in 1999.

Dear Archop Nation,

I was intrigued by the recent ‘Theory Thursday’ post concerning the concept of authenticity. Below is my attempt to further the discussion.

The notion of authenticity has in it the idea of a pure, genuine original, a sort of Platonic ideal – ‘this is an authentic 1952 Tops Mickey Mantle Rookie card, all others are copies, replicas, or fakes’. A thing’s authenticity is a measure of its faithfulness to the original; and its value is measured by the degree to which it approximates the original. The authentic rookie baseball card is a far greater prize than the re-issued anniversary edition.

Applying this model of authenticity to the built environment sheds light on a notion of authenticity that enables us to assess the building’s value. If an exact replica of the Eiffel tower were erected today in Buenos Aires, it is doubtful that it would become the same symbol of national identity and pride for Argentinians that it has for Parisians.

If the London bridge was removed from its original location and reconstructed in Lake Havasu City, Arizona –then it would be an abhorrent grafting that stripped a historic structure of any meaningful contextual significance.

Rootedness

What is clear from the above examples is that the measure of a building’s authenticity is inseparably wed to its time, its place, its people, its cultural milieu. It is not so much the degree of faithfulness to the original that matters, but, rather, the degree to which a building is faithful to the environment in which it exists. It is this notion of “rootedness” that provides us with a meaningful tool for assessing the value of authenticity for a built work.

Perhaps no living architect embodies this notion of “rootedness” better than the Australian architect Glenn Murcutt. When asked what idea he is most concerned with communicating to his students, Mercut replied:

They must think that every project they do is worthy of being. Their work has to speak about place, technology, climate, structure, materials. They must work honestly, with heart and mind, rather than structuring what is a visual delight alone. Their work has to have roots. I think what we admire
most about architecture of all periods is rootedness, authenticity. We recognize authenticity, and we recognize the five-minute flash. The authentic lives on; the flash quickly dies.

Almost all of Mercutt’s work has been done in his native geographic region. He does not have a single high rise, flashy concert hall or show piece museum on his resume, yet he has received the two highest professional honors that can be bestowed upon an architect – the AIA Gold Medal and the Pritzker Prize. What he has left is a trail of thoughtful, progressive, sustainable ‘gifts’ to his clients and fellow Australians. I offer his Marie Short House, built in Kempsey in 1975, as a model of an authentic building rooted in its environment. A May 2007 New York Times article entitled “The Native Builder” features the building.

Our challenge as designers will be two-fold. First, we must study, comprehend and recognize what is unique to our culture, our area, our people. Second, we must share and celebrate these findings in the public forum that is our local built environment. Beauty will have no choice but to follow; and we will all have reason to smile. I will be listening with open eyes and mind.

Humbly,

Michael Pinheiro

Today an announcement was made regarding the future of the Tower District Streetscape and upcoming community design charrette.

The announcement was posted on the Tower Exchange by Will Tackett with the City of Fresno Planning and Development Department. A mailer was also sent to all residences and businesses within the Tower Districts boundaries (Shields to 180, Fruit to Blackstone). The announcement is below:

Community Charrette – Tower District Streetscape Capital Improvement

We’re renovating Olive Avenue and neighboring streets, and we need your input!

The City has allocated funds for the creation of a Streetscape Plan for the commercial area of the Tower District. The plan will include improvements such as
• New Sidewalks
• Bike Racks
• Lighting
• Trees
• Public Art
….and anything else we come up with!

Our plan will be developed by everyone attending the community meetings, and we want to include your opinions and ideas, so please put these dates on your calendar.

Let’s get together and create a great community plan!

Saturday, July 25, 10:00 am – 2:00 pm: Visioning Workshop to develop design alternatives
Tuesday, July 28, 7:00 – 9:00 p.m: Workshop to select a preferred alternative and develop the design concepts

Both meetings will take place at Roger Rocka’s Dinner Theatre (1226 N. Wishon).

For more information,
call 497-8362

M. W. Steele Group is the architecture and planning firm from San Diego that was selected for the project through an RFP process in September of 2008. They will be coordinating the design charrette along with members of the Tower District Marketing Committee and Tower District Design Review Committee.

All available Tower residents and regulars should attend this meeting and give your input. This post will be updated with experiences at the meeting.

disclaimer: I am a Tower District resident, property owner and membe of the Tower District Design Review Committee.

Today is the City of Fresno Historic Preservation Commission meeting. There are several interesting items on the agenda, but I’d like to focus on one. Darius Assemi of Granville Homes has asked to meet with the Commission to present a conceptual plan for a mixed-use project at the corner of L Street and San Joaquin Avenue in downtown.

click for larger image

The report to the Commission states that Assemi is seeking Commission and public input prior to incurring additional research and expense. If you are not familiar with the Assemi family and Granville Homes, they have made substantial investments in Downtown, specifically in the Cultural Arts District.

I believe we are at a point in development in downtown Fresno that the question is no longer “development or no development?” The question now is “How do we measure successful development?”

Last week I posted theory thursday: authenticity alluding to some projects that do not evoke authenticity. I believe that this project falls into that category. Some of the things that triggered this is that the proposal included two styles which remind me much more of tract home models than that historic Art & Crafts and Italianate which they are named for. Below are the renderings included in the proposal.

Arts & Crafts

Italianate

While this neighborhood has many vacant even severely damaged buildings, several are historic. And the common style represented is Colonial Revival of various forms. Beyond missing the mark historically, I’m of the philosophy that building faux historic buildings near real historic buildings is actually detrimental to the built environment.

There are several reasons I believe this: The level of craftsmanship of the historic resources is unmatched by the economics of and process building today; the history a neighborhood should be a patchwork of different eras leading to today’s contemporary buildings. This should be easily read. By building cheap knock offs of yesterdays buildings today with foam details once hand carved out of solid wood history become very muddy for the passerby.

A contemporary building in this location should take cues from its surroundings. What is the scale of its neighboring buildings? Is there a rhythm set by how the land was parceled? What are the materials used? How do the buildings address the street? All of these elements can help a new building fit into the context of its surrounding without trying to mimic the past.

Beyond style, the planning of the project should be such it builds community. Street life is essential as is pedestrian focus. The plan proposed feels much more like a gated apartment complex. That does not fit the downtown context.

In summery, I encourage Granville Home to continue investing Downtown, however this proposed project marks a turn in the wrong direction.

UPDATE 6-23-09

The Historic Preservation Commission meeting was interesting. I was surprised how willing the commission was to accept the fact that the 3 historic buildings on the site of the Granville proposal would most likely be demolished. They were more interested in preserving the buildings on the West side of the street that were outside the bounds of the proposal.

I found some glimmer of hope in a comment made by architect and commissioner, Chris Johnson AIA “This is not the Historic DemolishionCommission.”

To Mr Assemi’s credit he was open to all input about the design. Comments from the public including a member of the Fulton/Lowell Design Review Committee, a former HPC Commissioner Cam Maloy, and even Historic Preservation project manager, Karana Hattersly-Drayton, were in favor of a third alternative not shown above.

The third design broke the long building in two with a pedestrian walkway and each building used detail elements pulled from different styles. Most notably was a center building that quoted the parapet detail from the Helm Home on the west side of the street. Granville is also planning to renovate the Helm Home.

I spoke publicly about some of the design concerns that I had that are listed above. My comments focused around authenticity, trying to preserve at least one of the building as an anchor to the project and some of the urban planning issues that needed to be addressed regarding activating the street with entry porches activating the street.

The Commission formed a subcommittee that will further advise Granville Homes about the design

Authenticity is something we strongly believe in for Fresno’s built environment.

What does Authenticity mean?

Authentic architecture is unique to a place, it seems to fit. The building fits in both it’s geographic place as well as it’s place in time. Olive Avenue in the Tower District is authentic. Our old brick buildings downtown are authentic. Fresno’s version of Mid Century Modern is authentic. I could go on.

What is not authentic?

A new building that poorly mimics historic Fresno architecture is not authentic. It actually does harm to the historic integrity of a neighborhood. Suburban buildings in downtown are inauthentic. Covering up an original facade is inauthentic. Examples will follow in later posts.

I’d like to make an analogy here. I’m sure you’re all familiar with CliffsNotes. These are pamphlets that summarize a book and give a student everything they need to write a shortcut book report for English class. They don’t read the book and they don’t have an original thought. That used to fly. English teachers however, have gotten hip to this and other internet shortcut sources. So if they’re on there game they’ll flunk the student’s shortcut paper.

I feel like development in Fresno, specifically downtown can be linked to this scenario. It seems as if some developers working downtown read the CliffsNotes about historic Fresno architecture and contemporary urban architecture and are trying to pass off some bad buildings on the Fresno public.

Unfortunately, the Fresno public is not yet hip to this. We’re like old teachers that don’t know how to use the internet. We are allowing this inauthentic shortcut architecture in our downtown. These buildings even get praise at times. Perhaps because we don’t know better or are afraid no developer will turn in their paper.

So this sounds serious right? Damage to the authenticity of our built environment is being done. And buildings are pretty permanent.

What do we do?

Well it starts here. We need to first determine what is authentic for us. Then we need to start grading these building designs being proposed. And we can’t be afraid the flunk some designs. Some may get their feelings hurt. But it will be a lesson to start doing their homework.

Specific examples of this idea will follow. In the meantime, what do you imagine authentic contemporary Fresno architecture looks like? What does it pull from the past? How does it respond to our climate? Where do it’s inspiration and concepts come from?

For more about authenticity see the Mayor’s Creative Economy Council report