The use of Art in reclaiming the Public Realm

Columbus Avenue, San Francisco.

The Use of Art in Reclaiming the Public Realm

Copyright 2008

by

Berta Lázaro Corcuera

Columbus Avenue, San Francisco

The Use of Art in reclaiming the Public Realm

by


Bachelor of Architecture Universidad de Navarra 2002

A thesis submitted in partial satisfaction of

the requirement for the degree of

Master of Urban Design

in the

Graduation of Division

of the

University of California, Berkeley

Committee in Charge:

Professor Peter C. Bosselmann, ChairProfessor Marcia McNally

Professor Anthony DubovskyProfessor Walter Hood

Spring 2009

The thesis of Berta Lázaro Corcuera is approved:

Chair ________________________________________ Date

________________________________________ Date

________________________________________ Date

________________________________________ Date

University of California, Berkeley

Spring 2009

Columbus Avenue, San Francisco.

The Use of Art in Reclaiming the Public Realm

Copyright 2008

by


“Art is the only possibility for evolution.”

--Joseph Beuys 1974

“I don’t believe in art. I believe in artists”

--Marcel Duchamp 1923

“Just the experience of Art is already a social function”

--Richard Serra

“Everything directly experienced has become a representation”

--Guy Debord. La Societe de l´Espectacle 1967

“Art is a cultural phenomenon. It’s not autonomous,

isolated from the contemporary world”

--Francisco Jarauta. Philosophy Professor Murcia University

i

ABSTRACT

This thesis presents an argument about the importance of public art in urban design. The

relevance of public art in public spaces, in the context of building new infrastructures,

might be overwhelmed by the engineering project, but the inclusion of art is required by

law and should address elements of the living culture within cities. Art must connect to and

reflect human needs, and it is challenged by dealing with the ephemeral and unpredicted

in cities: aspects of Life in cities.

This project explores the practice of art and design in urban public spaces, and considers

integration of art and design in the process of urban transformation. It will demonstrate

how to enact a collaborative plan for the art process with a revitalization of the street; how

to reclaim public spaces for pedestrians; how to enhance vitality and culture in the public

realm; and how to propose and envision San Francisco as a creative and diverse North

American city.

This research project considers the urban transformation of an important cultural and

vibrant San Francisco neighbourhood -- Columbus Avenue.

ii

ACKNOLEDGMENTS

This research about Columbus Avenue has taken me many different places that I would

never have visit. A lot of them were in my mind, in my struggle to write about things I

believe in. In this almost 2 years of my learning process, I’ve been really lucky to walk

with some people. Now it’s time to tell them they’ve been important. Most of them, I hope

they know already:

Thank you Caja Madrid for investing in my professional and personal career. I promise I

won’t misuse it.

Thank you to Skype to bring my Family close enough to keep me going, without them I will

have to learn how to walk again.

Thank you Marcia for your dedication, support and never ending encouragement. Thank

you Rod and Renew SF for sharing your ideas, and transmitting the passion for your

community with me. Thank you John Kriken for making me believe in the relevance of this

work. Thank you Tony for letting me visit your world. Thank you Stephan for your always

kind and intelligent guide. Thank you Peter for your academic support.

Thank you Julian, Janey and Nina for your immense patience with my “foreign-hood”;

your friendship has made me English improve (now I can make jokes). Thank you MUD

class mates for making this experience beautiful and unforgettable, Eric and Yeon Tae for

supporting me even when they didn’t know what I was doing.

Thank you to all my friends and family (any kind of format). I feel lucky, I have a long list,

close and far away, but always with me…

Thank you to the Hearst Pool, my sacred refuge.

iii

INDEX

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION1.1. What is Public Art?1.2. Why is related to Urban Design?1.3. Why is Columbus Avenue a design research example?1.4. Proposal Objectives and significance

CHAPTER 2: METHODS2.1. General Methodology2.2. Literature Review2.3. San Francisco Regulatory Analysis

2.3.1. San Francisco Art Policy2.3.2. San Francisco Urban Design Plan

2.4. Case Study Analysis2.4.1. Diagonal Urban Form2.4.2. City Public Art Program and Art Institutions

2.5. Site Selection: Columbus Avenue San Francisco2.6. Site Analysis2.7. Citizen Involvement and Public Participation

2.7.1. Interview nº12.7.2. Interview nº22.7.3. Street Game2.7.4. Vessel Game2.7.5. Widening of the sidewalks demonstration

2.8. Design and Public Art Program

CHAPTER 3: PUBLIC ART3.1. Definitions3.2. History: Cultural Evolution of Art3.3. Economic Benefits. Limitation and Social Potential of Public Art.3.4. Public Art Public Policies3.5. Typology3.6. Fusing Art with Urban Design3.7. Conclusions

CHAPTER 4: PRECEDENT OF ART4.1. Planning the Art 4.2. History of Community Development for the Arts4.3. Artivism: Reclaim Public Space through Art. Parking Day4.4. Conclusions

CHAPTER 5: THE SITE ANALYSIS5.1. Site Research

5.1.1. Social History5.1.2. Demographics5.1.3. Zoning5.1.4. Transportation5.1.5. Public Art

p.3p.4p.5p.6

p.7p.8p.9p.9p.11p.12p.13p.13p.17p.18p.20p.22p.23p.24p.25p.27p.28

p.50p.31p.33p.35p.39p.41p.47

p.50p.52p.54p.57

p.59p.62p.62p.64p.66p.67p.69

iv

5.2. Site Analysis5.2.1. Urban Vitality Analysis5.2.2. Urban Form Analysis5.2.3. Identity Analysis5.2.4. Power Map

5.3. Conclusion

CHAPTER 6: GOALS AND STRATEGY 6.1. Reclaim public space for Pedestrians6.2. Connect Natural systems and social networks6.3. Enhance Culture in the Public Realm6.4. Phasing of the Project6.5. Site Strategies and Conclusions

CHAPTER 7: DESIGN PROPOSAL 7.1. Green Connectors and Activity Connectors 7.2. Sidewalks 7.3. Flex Use 7.4. Mid-block Crosswalk7.5. Landscape and Tree Planting Implementation Plan 7.6. Specific Study Areas7.7. Conclusions

CHAPTER 8: THE BANQUET, PUBLIC ART PROGRAM 8.1. Methodology: Toolkit8.2. Who is coming? INVITATION8.3. What to eat? MENU8.4. How to eat? RECIPE8.5. The Vessel8.6. Application8.7. Actions8.8. Conclusion: Programming the Unexpected

CHAPTER 9: CONCLUSION

BIBLIOGRAPHY

p.72p.72p.81p.84p.85p.86

p.88p.90p.92p.93p.94p.96

p.97p.106p.107p.109p.113p.115p.115p.127

p.128p.130p.134p.136p.138p.139p.141p.146p.150

p.151

p.154

v

LIST OF FIGURES

CHAPTER 1:

1.1 Figure: Columbus Avenue Perspective

1.2 Figure: Columbus Avenue and Broadway Intersection. Condor Club.

1.3 Figure: Mark Jenkins Installation (no localisation)

1.4 Figure: “Hearts in San Francisco” at Union Square

1.5 Figure: Jack Kerouac Alley

1.6 Figure: “Language of the Birds” by Brian Gogging Opening. Photograph by Lea Suzuki from “The

Chronicle”.

1.7 Figure: “Stravinsky Fountain” by Niki Phalle and Jean Tinguely in Paris

1.8 Figure: “Cloud Gate” by Anish Kapoor in Millennium Park, Chicago

1.9 Figure: “Third Line Project” View Dogpatch District, San Francisco

1.10 Figure: Columbus Avenue Perspective

1.11 Figure: Columbus Avenue sidewalk

1.12 Figure: San Francisco’s Fisherman’s Wharf Aerial View

1.13 Figure: Street Art by Ari Kletzky

1.14 Figure: UrBanquet website Logo

CHAPTER 2:

2.1 Figure: Washington Monument by Dusk Jan in Washington D.C, USA

2.2 Figure: “Dream Seeds” by Kyota Takahashi in Awara city, Fukui, Japan, 2005

2.3 Figure: Fête de la Lumière in Lyon, France 2008

2.4 Figure: “Boston’s Women’s Memorial” featuring Abigail Adams, Lucy Stone and Phillis Wheatley, by

Meredith Bergmann in Commonwealth Avenue, Boston

2.5 Figure: “Fluids” by Allan Kaprow at theTate Modern Museum, London,1967

2.6 Figure: Quote on “The Abraham Lincoln Brigade Memorial” by Ann Chamberlain and Walter Hood in San

Francisco, 2008

2.7 Figure: Vaillancourt Fountain by Armand Vaillancourt in San Francisco, 1971

2.8 Figure: Clarion Alley Mural, Mission District, San Francisco. Photo by Ingrid Taylar

2.9 Figure: Critical Mass, San Franciscovi

2.10 Figure: Telegraph Hill View from the San Francisco Art Institute

2.11 Figure: Filbert Street View from Telegraph Hill, San Francisco

2.12 Figure: Downtown View from Telegraph Hill, San Francisco

2.13 Figure: Urban Form Geometry Case Studies

2.14 Figure: Representation of Working Zones and Systems of Public Art Program Phoenix by William R.

Morrish

2.15 Figure: ”#2 Arizona Double Headed Fossil” Michael Maglich, 1992

2.16 Figure: Hollywood Highland Station by Dworsky Associated architects and artist Sheila Klein

2.17 Figure: Los Angeles Metro ArtWalk

2.18 Figure: Central Subway Public Art Program, San Francisco

2.19 Figure: “I shop the line” Campaign for Cambie Street, Vancouver, Canada

2.20-0 Figure: Bird Eye View Drawing of Columbus Avenue from Fishermann’s Wharf to Financial District.

2.20 Figure: Street Game Localisation Map, Columbus Avenue

2.21 Figure: Maia Garcia doing surveys in the street

2.22 Figure: Transportation Workshop with Nelson Nynegaard

2.23 Figure: Interview nº1. Appendix A

2.24 Figure: Interview nº2. Appendix A

2.25 Figure: Street Game Hand Out. Appendix A

2.26 Figure: Walking Tour Hand Out. Appendix A

2.27 Figure: Vessel Game. Plate. Appendix A

2.28 Figure: Vessel Game. Glass. Appendix A

2.29 Figure: Vessel Game. Knife. Appendix A

2.30 Figure: Vessel Game. Spoon. Appendix A

2.31 Figure: WCCTAC Program in Urban Design. Students from the Richmond High School. Professors:

Alissa Kronovet and Berta Lázaro.

2.32 Figure: Widening of the Sidewalk Design. Café Puccini. Columbus Avenue 401.

2.33 Figure: Widening of the Sidewalk Photomontage. Café Puccini.

vii

CHAPTER 3:

3.1 Figure: “Esto no es Arte” Street Stencil. Madrid. Spain

3.2 Figure: Lincoln Memorial, Washington D.C, 1922

3.3 Figure: Vietnam Memorial by Maya Lin, Washington D.C, 1982

3.4 Figure: Happening in Allan Kaprow’s Yard, 1961

3.5 Figure: “Real Life is Here” Street Stencil. London. United Kingdom.

3.6 Figure: Cow Parade, Chicago, 1999

3.7 Figure: “Apples” De Young Museum outdoor Sculpture, San Francisco

3.8 Figure: Sunday Outdoor Event, Golden Gate Park, San Francisco

3.9 Figure: Hayes Street View, Bay to Breakers Race, San Francisco, 2008

3.10 Figure: “Illusions”, Mission Cultural Center, San Francisco, 2008.

Photo by Carlos B. Cordova.

3.11 Figure: Factors of Continuity during Urban Transformation. Banquet Proposal.

3.12 Figure: Chalk Art Competition, Columbus Avenue, 2008

3.13 Figure: Spontaneous Performance, Columbus Avenue, 2007

3.14 Figure: “Gazebo” for the Irene Hixon Whitney Bridge by Siah Armajani, Loring Park, Minneapolis, 1993

3.15 Figure: “Crouching Spider” by Louise Bourgeois,

Embarcadero Waterfront San Francisco, 2007

3.16 Figure: Kevin Haurman, London Festival of Architecture, 2008

3.17 Figure: “The Suitcase Pavilion” by Virginia Tech undergrads students, London Festival of Architecture,

2008

3.18 Figure: Photomontage of Washington Square, San Francisco, 2008

3.19 Figure: Matrix: Public Art purposes relation with Urban Design Goals.

Columbus Avenue Proposal

3.20 Figure: Street Art by Joshua Callaghan

3.21 Figure: “Beukelsblauw” by Florentijn Hofman, Rotterdam, 2004-2006

3.22 Figure: “Defenestration” by Brian Goggin, Howard Street, San Francisco

3.23 Figure: Street Sharon Arts Studio, San Francisco

3.24 Figure: “Gateway Arch Riverfront” by Eero Saarinen, St Louis, Missouri, 1965

viii

3.25 Figure: Barbary Coast Emblem embedded in the sidewalks of the District, San Francisco.

3.26 Figure: “Skipwaste Project” by Oliver Bishop-Young,

Goldsmiths University England, 2008

3.27 Figure: Installation by Krystian Czaplicki alias TruthTag, Polland, 2007

3.28 Figure: Street Art, Anonymous, London, 2008

3.29 Figure: “Flamingo” by Alexander Calder, Federal Plaza, Chicago, 1974

3.30 Figure: “Titled Arc” by Richard Serra, Federal Plaza, New York, 1981

3.31 Figure: Project of “Foot” by Buster Simpson for the Rincon Park Embarcadero Waterfront, San Francisco,

2002

3.32 Figure: “Repas Hongrois” by Daniel Spoerri, 1963

3.33 Figure: Wayne Thiebaud- Hill Street, 1987

CHAPTER 4:

5.1. Figure: “Mes etoiles” by Hernando Barragan, Andres Aitken, DesignBoom, 2008

5.2. Figure: “Mes etoiles” by Hernando Barragan, Andres Aitken, DesignBoom, 2008

5.3. Figure: “Eskalera Caracola” Center, Lavapiés, Madrid, Spain

5.4. Figure: “La Casa Encendida”, Lavapiés, Madrid, Spain

5.5. Figure: “Natividad” by Guillermo Vargas Habacuc,2007

5.6. Figure: “I dream of love” by Daniel A. Norman in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, 2007

5.7. Figure: Community Film shortage, Lavapiés, Madrid

5.8. Figure: “The New York City Waterfalls” by Olafur Eliasson, 2008

5.9. Figure: Personal fi ndings I: Painted Wall, Columbus Avenue, San Francisco

5.10. Figure: “Monumento a los muertos de la Guerra Civil”, Bilbao, Spain, 2008

5.11. Figure: Marcus Ortner, at West Bank Barrier, in Bethlehem, Palestine

5.12. Figure: Mark Jenkins Installation

5.13. Figure: Park(ing) Day 2007, Valencia Street, San Francisco

ix

CHAPTER 5:

5.1. Figure: Google Earth aerial image from the study area: Columbus Avenue.

5.2. Figure: City of San Francisco and its Vicinity Map. U.S. Coast Survey 1853

5.3. Figure: Columbus Avenue 1930. California Archive. Circa.

5.4. Figure: Historic Shoreline Diagram of the North East Waterfront, San Francisco.

5.5. Figure: Topography Diagram of the creation of Columbus Avenue between hills.

5.5.1 Figure: Topography District Map

5.5.2 Figure: Urban Form Avenue Map

5.6. Figure: Montgomery Avenue: land condemned, buildings destroyed, and frontage of each block to

be assessed to build Columbus Avenue corridor.

5.7. Figure: Calzone Italian Restaurant, touristic Italian cuisine in Columbus Avenue.

5.8. Figure: The Beat Generation. Larry Keenan’s picture of Michael McClure, Bob Dylan, Allen Ginsberg,

North Beach, San Francisco, 1965.

5.9. Figure: Grant Avenue going through Chinatown District.

5.10. Figure: “The Store with beautiful things”. This Chinatown Mural expresses the Commercial Zoning

of the CBD.

5.11. Figure: Chinatown Commercial District Community.

5.12. Figure: “Sourdough in stream panning for gold skinner” Alaska State Library (photo-pca-44-3-15).

5.13. Figure: Fisherman’s Wharf District symbolic Logo.

5.14. Figure: General Demographics Statistics, Census 2000. Source: RenewSF.

5.15. Figure: Compiled Demographics Data: Asian Population, White Population, Median Age Population,

Below Poverty and Median Travel Time data. 2008.

5.16. Figure: Zoning Map of the City and County of San Francisco, 2008.

5.17. Figure: Journey to Work Statistics, Census 2000. Source: RenewSF.

5.17.1 Figure: Public Transit District Diagram.

5.18. Figure: Public Art and its Design Settings Analysis. Columbus Avenue.

5.19. Figure: “The Language of the Birds” Brian Goggin sculpture. Lea Suzuki photo.



5.22. Figure: Interaction around Goggin´s sculpture at Broadway and Columbus.x

5.23. Figure: Washington Square perspective drawing.

5.24. Figure: User Type District Diagrams (parts)

5.25. Figure: User Type District Diagram

5.26. Figure: Time Use District Diagram: 12am-12pm

5.27. Figure: Time Use District Diagram: 12pm-12am

5.28. Figure: Time Use District Diagram: 24 hours

5.29. Figure: Activity Type District Diagram (parts)

5.30. Figure: Activity Type District Diagram

5.31. Figure: Business Type District Diagram and Lighting District Diagram

5.32. Figure: -

5.33. Figure: Green and Stockton Intersection Perspective Drawing

5.34. Figure: Broadway, Grant and Columbus Avenue Axonometric Drawing

5.35. Figure: Existent Section Types Drawing

5.36. Figure: Sidewalk Sketch

5.37. Figure: Geometry Study

5.38. Figure: Correspondence of Building Façades Calculus

5.39. Figure: Correspondence of Building Façades Diagram

5.40. Figure: Intersection Geometry Types

5.41. Figure: Block between Broadway and Vallejo Street Axonometric Drawing.

5.42. Figure: Block between Green and Vallejo Street Façade Diagram

5.43. Figure: Street Correspondence Diagram

5.44. Figure: Photograph Intersection Broadway and Columbus Avenue looking West.

5.45. Figure: Identity District Analysis

5.46. Figure: Power District Map

5.47. Figure: Photograph Stockton and Vallejo Street, Chinatown District.

5.48. Figure: Photograph East Façade. Block Green and Union Street.

xi

CHAPTER 6:

6.1. Figure: Google Earth aerial image from the study area: Columbus Avenue.

6.2. Figure: Continuity Diagram through Urban Transformation

6.3. Figure: Parcelazation and Topography District Map

6.4. Figure: Photograph Columbus Avenue (crowded) Sidewalk Cafés

6.5. Figure: Jan Gehl’s Activity in Pubic Spaces Diagram

6.6. Figure: Green Connectors District Map.

6.7. Figure: Pedestrian versus Cars Diagram

6.8. Figure: Landmarks Connectors District Map.

6.9. Figure: Community Diversity Diagram. The Brocheta.

6.10. Figure: Temporariness District Map.

6.11. Figure: Urban Form Strategy

6.12. Figure: Vitality Strategy

6.13. Figure: Identity Strategy

6.14. Figure: “District Living Room”. Proposed Performance in Washington Square.

CHAPTER 7:

7.1. Figure: Central Rail Corridor. Future Proposal.

7.2. Figure: SFCTA Prop K Five-Year Prioritization Program.

7.3. Figure: Section Type Reference Map

7.4. Figure: Section Type 1. From Montgomery Street to Broadway

7.5. Figure: Section Type 2. From Broadway to Union Street

7.6. Figure: Section Type 3. From Union Street to Filbert Street

7.7. Figure: Section Type 4. From Greenwich Street to Mason Street

7.8. Figure: Section Type 5. From Mason Street to Taylor Street

7.9. Figure: Section Type 6. From Taylor Street to Beach Street.

7.10. Figure: Green Connectors and Open Space Proposal District Map

7.11. Figure: District Proposal Map

7.12. Figure: Horizontal Multilayered Section Diagram

7.13. Figure: Columbus Day. Street Photographxii

7.14. Figure: Columbus Day. Sidewalk Photograph

7.15. Figure: Corner Typologies in Columbus Avenue Diagram

7.16. Figure: Columbus Day Parade.

7.17. Figure: Belden Place. Downtown San Francisco

7.18. Figure: Temporary Terrace. Commercial Street. Downtown San Francisco

7.19. Figure: Temporary Terrace. Commercial Street. Downtown San Francisco

7.20. Figure: Columbus Day. Parking Space Terrace.

7.21. Figure: Circulation Proposal District Map

7.22. Figure: Photograph. Mountain View Sidewalk Cafés. Corner Detail

7.23. Figure: Photograph. Mountain View Sidewalk Cafés.

7.24. Figure: Plan Typology. Mountain View Sidewalk Cafés.

7.25. Figure: Section Type. Mountain View Sidewalk Cafés.

7.26. Figure: Commercial Visibility Perspective Diagrams

7.27. Figure: Mid-crosswalk Goals Analysis

7.28. Figure: Mid-crosswalk Plan Detail. Block between Vallejo and Green Street.

7.29. Figure: Mid-crosswalk Analysis. Axonometric.

7.30. Figure: Diversity and Discontinuity Vegetation Diagram

7.31. Figure: -

7.32. Figure: Proposal Plan I

7.33. Figure: Proposal Plan II

7.34. Figure: Proposal Plan III

7.35. Figure: Proposal Plan IV

7.36. Figure: Proposal Plan V

7.37. Figure: Proposal Plan VI

7.38. Figure: Proposal Plan VII

7.39. Figure: Proposal Plan VIII

7.40. Figure: Phasing Proposal District Map

7.41. Figure: East Longitudinal Section I

7.42. Figure: East Longitudinal Section II

7.43. Figure: East Longitudinal Section IIIxiii

7.44. Figure: East Longitudinal Section IV

7.45. Figure: East Longitudinal Section V

7.46. Figure: East Longitudinal Section VI

7.47. Figure: East Longitudinal Section VII

7.48. Figure: East Longitudinal Section VIII

7.49. Figure: Perspective Montage of Flex-use area. Columbus Avenue

CHAPTER 8:

8.1. Figure: “The Rolling Stones’ Beggars Banquet Album” by Michael Joseph, 1968.

8.2. Figure: Painting Series “Electoral Cycle” Scene: The Banquet, by Hogarth William. Rococo

Period.

8.3. Figure: “The banquet Hall in King Sahla Sellases palace” Photograph from J.M.

8.4. Figure: Clan Mcauliffe Rally Photo Archive 2000.

8.5. Figure: “The Banquet”.

8.6. Figure: Interaction dimensions Diagram

8.7. Figure: Perception dimensions Diagram

8.8. Figure: Columbus Perspective Background Diagram

8.9. Figure: Columbus Perspective Background Map and Diagram

8.10. Figure: Art Opportunity Sites District Map`

8.11. Figure: UrBanquet Invitation Layout

8.12. Figure: UrBanquet Menu Layout

8.13. Figure: UrBanquet Recipe Layout

8.14. Figure: Photograph Joseph Conrad Square

8.14.1 Figure: Triangular Geometry Diagram

8.15. Figure: Human Interaction and Perception Radius Diagram

8.16. Figure: Triangular Street shapes Analysis

8.17. Figure: Public Art Program

8.18. Figure: Art Program for February 2nd 2020.

8.19. Figure: Relationship: Art and Institutions Diagram

8.20. Figure: Plan View I: February 2nd 2020.xiv

8.21. Figure: Plan View II: February 2nd 2020.

8.22. Figure: Plan View III: February 2nd 2020.

8.23. Figure: Plan View VI: February 2nd 2020.

8.24. Figure: Plan View V: February 2nd 2020.

8.25. Figure: Plan View VI: February 2nd 2020.

8.26. Figure: Plan View VII: February 2nd 2020.

8.27. Figure: Plan View VIII: February 2nd 2020.

8.28. Figure: West Longitudinal Section I: February 2nd 2020.

8.29. Figure: West Longitudinal Section II: February 2nd 2020.

8.30. Figure: West Longitudinal Section III: February 2nd 2020.

8.31. Figure: West Longitudinal Section IV: February 2nd 2020.

8.32. Figure: Construction Phase Montage

8.33. Figure: Plate Installation

8.34. Figure: Participatory Public Action

8.35. Figure: Fork Installation

8.36. Figure: Asphalt Doll: Greenwich and Mason Street

8.37. Figure: Asphalt Doll: Broadway and Columbus Avenue. Looking North West.

8.38. Figure: Asphalt Doll: Broadway and Columbus Avenue. Looking South West.

8.39. Figure: Asphalt Doll: Filbert and Columbus Avenue

xv

Chapter 1: Introduction 1

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

“The aim of life is to live, and to live means to be aware, joyously, drunkenly, serenely,

divinely aware.” Henry Miller

Cities are shaped by people who live and lived in them. They are written by History, by

stories, and by relationships. They are made of complexity, of overlapped layers of time

and life in space.

The sociologist Henri LeFebvre says: “one thing

is the city and another thing is the urban”. The

city is a stable structure than can be designed,

but it is also constituted by a set of relationships

that establish our way of living in the urban

environment, those are unstable and ephemeral.

Manuel Delgado uses the term “Practiced City”

(La ciudad practicada), or “The City without its

architecture” (la ciudad menos su arquitectura),

the city that exists unpredictably.

This thesis focuses on the challenge that urban

design has in influencing the inner tissue of

cities, LIFE. This thesis is intended to examine

how art and the urban design process enhance

public space. I will investigate which properties

of the art-making process can be used to solve

problems of urban experience, and the types of

art that could be used for that purpose.

My research includes a methodology to identify

and locate places where art will help with site-

specific urban design goals.

Currently, the City of San Francisco approves art

projects through a public review process. Public

figure 1.1

figure 1.2

figure 1.3


and private sponsors of projects are required to justify their processes and projects. Artists

are commissioned to produce art for designated locations. The Civic Arts Commission

reviews the proposals via public hearings. Comments from the public are heard and

discussed. After a decision is rendered, the project sponsor is free to implement the art

project. The current process deals with art on a case-to-

case basis, no comprehensive plan exists that

addresses public art on an urban district or city-

wide scale. If such a plan were to exist it would

address public art as a way to strengthen the

identity of places and increase the vitality of urban

districts. The intention for such a comprehensive

Civic Art Plan might exist but the current case-to-

case review process does not link together the

various art projects, nor does the current process

allow urban design to guide the projects toward

specific locations and content.

This thesis has proposed a Public Action Plan. It

seeks to develop an objective Program for Public

Art and a tool for applying with the minimum

number of constraints, with the ultimate goal

of building the meaning of a place that also

maintains the expressive intensions of the artist.

This first chapter provides an overview of the

project. The second chapter describes the

project methodology and the researcher’s

personal involvement in the project. Chapters 3

and 4 present the theoretical context in which the

figure 1.4

figure 1.5

figure 1.6


proposal is included and from which it takes its understanding on current issues. Chapter

5 is the interpretative written analysis of the site data and exploration. It sets the goals,

strategies and principles for Chapter 6. The next two chapters explain the proposal in two

parts (respective to the two disciplines examined): urban design in Chapter 7, and the

public art in Chapter 8. This work concludes in Chapter 9 with a discussion of the findings

of the research along with the implications and recommendations to the field of art practice

and design in public spaces.

1.1 WHAT IS PUBLIC ART?

One of my first memories travelling with my parents was the Stravinsky Fountain situated

in front of the centre Georges Pompidou in Paris. This piece, completed by Niki de Saint-

Phalle and Jean Tinguely in 1982, presents 16 mobile gargoyles dancing to the sound of

the homage “Le Sacre du Printemps” Ballet. I was 7 years old and was unable to move

from the Stravinsky Plaza for 4 hours (as were my parents and sisters).

Through the years, as a citizen or a visitor

exploring cities, art has proven to me that it

enriches the experience of environment. I have

come to believe that art is one with life, and life´s

everyday events.

As urban designers who shape the environment,

we know that public space is at a premium in most

cities. It is thus increasingly important that we use

it well -- that we bring together and manipulate

both the physical and symbolic image of the city

for their human qualities, for the people.

“Art brings a spiritual dimension to the discipline

because art seeks meaning in everyday life”

Peter Bosselman, 2008

figure 1.7

figure 1.8


This thesis expresses the importance of the practice of art in designing public space. It

stays in the general topic of public art and raises the questions of Art FOR the public? Art

OF the public? Art BY the public? Such questions are concerned with the ownership of

the space, the quality of urban places, and the relationship between public art and public

policies, urban growth, and public infrastructure.

1.2 WHY IS IT RELATED WITH URBAN

DESIGN?

The study of Art and Urban Design are inextricable.

The urban form is increasingly linked to culture:

urban developments are connected to cultural

programs to promote the image of cities.

The great challenge of Urban Design is to increase

the potential of cities to create liveable, walkable,

healthy and sustainable communities. Our work

in public spaces of cities and villages (streets,

roads, parks, plazas, waterfronts and commercial

districts) is mainly important to support, build and

inspire identity of communities.

This proposal established the possibility of the

coexistence of a macro infrastructural project

of a regional scale (the North Shore Subway

Line), an urbanization project in a urban scale

(Columbus Avenue Revitalization Project), and a

public art project of a social scale (The Banquet

Public Art Program for Columbus Avenue), all

taking place within the city of San Francisco.

figure 1.9

figure 1.10

figure 1.11


1.3 WHY COLUMBUS AVENUE AS A DESIGN RESEARCH EXAMPLE?

Columbus Avenue is been the example, the experimental case in which I have applied my

methodology. This street is normally associated with the North Beach Neighborhood, but

Columbus Avenue is a 1.2 mile diagonal that goes from the Financial District in downtown

to the Fisherman’s Wharf slicing through San Francisco’s rectangular grid. North Beach

is but one of the neighbourhoods through which this street runs. Chinatown, with the

highest population density in San Francisco; the Barbary Coast, with the oldest nightclubs

of the City; the valley that holds the San Francisco Art Institute and the iconic Lombard

Street; and Fisherman’s Wharf, these are all communities identify neighborhoods and that

landmark this street as a tourist attraction famous for its beauty, culture, creativity, and

social authenticity.

On the other hand, the affluence of sub-districts adjacent to Columbus Avenue and the

important role of the city’s transportation system relate to a critical debate: car-oriented

streets versus humanizing and pedestrianizing streetscapes.

figure 1.12


The opportunity that Columbus Avenue has to rethink its role in the city’s transportation

system and proposed a pedestrian system to improve its neighbours and visitors urban

experience is the potential of this location to introduce art as a major constituent element

of the process and the future project.

1.4 PROPOSAL OBJECTIVES AND SIGNIFICANCE

This thesis highlights the major importance that art has on the urban environment and

relates it to the Urban Design and Planning processes, providing art with a key role in linking

the urban process: the continuity of the space, time and life over urban transformation.

The proposed Banquet Public Art Master Plan combined with the Urban Design Plan

for Columbus Avenue addresses infrastructural, urban design issues that are also

elevated into cultural and social issues. It combines transportation, urban design and

public art interventions and builds a citywide cultural setting and a “new” public realm.

It reconceptualises the process, by changing the order of public art in the urban design

and construction process, it will become a

constituent part of the space both physically and

psychologically, instead of a cosmetic addition.

Both plans consider the overall process of design

construction and completion in the phasing

proposal, from the analysis of the site to the

final product, to engage citizens of the City and

the community in decision-making processes

of their future public spaces. This Public

Action Comprehensive Plan research creates

dialogues about the urban transformation of

neighbourhoods.

figure 1.13

figure 1.14

Chapter 2: Methods 7

figure 2.1

figure 2.2

figure 2.3

CHAPTER 2: METHODS

This chapter explores the integration of the practice of public art and design in public

spaces. It considers what has been written, what is already been done, how it could

be applied to a specific site, and what could be done next. I first review the literature on

Public Art and its relationship to design in public spaces. The review explores each of the

main points introduced later in this thesis: that Public Art is an important feature of the

streetscape of the City; that it can engage citizens to give places a meaningful character

and vitality; that it should be programmed in a

comprehensive way in order to take advantage of

its unique features; and contributes to achieving

coherence for the pieces of artwork that exist

within cities.

2.1 GENERAL METHODOLOGY

The primary way in which I have gathered the

data underlying this project has been to generate

it through firsthand activities -- through direct

observation of the site, my research of both

theory and the site itself, personal surveys, and

shared, interactive experiences with the site and

people passing through the site.

The secondary data used in the thesis came

from various sources (see bibliography): the

UCB Library, the GIS SF Maps, targeted Internet

searches, and consultations with professionals

in the field. Some of the sources and links

come from a blog created for the thesis. (http://

columbusavenuesfo.blogspot.com/). This blog

tool has become a forum in which professors,


figure 2.4

figure 2.5

classmates, and other interested users could share their opinion on the updated findings.

It may also become a future tool during the continuation of the real (non-virtual) project

on Columbus Avenue. These twenty-first century’s diaries are increasingly part of the

new format and dialog for public and democratic participation, and as a researcher I’m

interested in testing them too.

Within the umbrella topic of “Public Art” there are numerous subfields worth exploring.

There are many different fields in which the theoretical context and actual issues are

explained: Art (Sculpture, New Media…), Community Development, Culture, Sociology,

Anthropology, Philosophy, Urbanism, Architecture, and Landscape Architecture…

My intention was to review all the disciplines, all the references to related them all in

this thesis in order to justify the need for comprehensive Public Art Program: beautiful,

meaningful, creative and coherent (with the urban environment and the community around

it).

2.2 LITERATURE REVIEW

This bibliographical review explores a range of

topics, including: the ownership of public spaces,

the democratic generation of public space,

and controversies within public art… These

sources can be classified according to medium

(libraries, magazines, journals, websites, blogs)

and content (general theory sources and site

research sources).

The general theory is divided in four parts

related to the different disciplines that I focus on:

Urban Design, Urban Planning, Public Art, and

Community Design. The Site context resources

are classified according to: Social and Cultural

History; Urban Design History; previous studies

(the vegetation survey, the transportation report


and the surveys conducted by the SF Transportation Department); institutions and

programs involved in the site area; and the community groups that could give the everyday

street users a voice on the proposal.

A number of references, while not quoted directly in this manuscript, have been a clear

inspiration through the writing process. They will be also useful for future research, data

updates, and citizen feedback on the topic and the site. They include literature review in

various disciplines that is really interesting for a broader understanding of the topic but

don’t fit in the speech of this thesis.

2.3 SAN FRANCISCO REGULATORY ANALYSIS

2.3.1 SAN FRANCISCO ARTS POLICY

To establish the regulatory context of the site, I provide a brief background on the political,

economic and cultural legislation of San Francisco.

I have studied the arts policy for the City and County of San Francisco that was adopted in

the Master Plan [what master plan is this? The arts master plan?] in May 1991 by the Arts

Commission and the Planning Commission. The quoted objectives below demonstrate

local support for the arts through city leadership, and explain the relevance of the arts

in the essence and character of San Francisco, a city nationally and internationally

acclaimed as a cultural centre, as said in goal I of the Arts Elements: “Recognize the arts

as necessary to the quality of life for all segments of San Francisco, as noted by the

National League of Cities:

The arts are a critical element in the survival of cities. If we are to achieve an improved

quality of life for the nation’s urban population, all levels of government must recognize the

arts as an essential service. All men, women, and children should have the opportunity

to experience the arts in their daily lives. Within the urban environment every citizen

should have available accessible avenues of cultural development, expression and

involvement.”

The master plan goals also underscore the intentions of this thesis in that they match my

first intuitions about the importance of arts in quality of life in the city:


figure 2.6

figure 2.7

figure 2.8

figure 2.9

“Goal I: Support and nurture the arts through city

Leadership.

Goal II: Recognize and sustain the diversity of

the cultural expressions of art in San Francisco.

Goal III: Recognize and support individual artists

and arts organizations, a combination that is vital

to a thriving arts environment.

Goal IV: Increase opportunities for quality arts

education

Goal V: Increase funding support for the arts in

SF

Goal VI: Enhance, develop, and protect

the physical environment of the arts in San

Francisco.”

In Chapter VI, the master plan describes the

public art programs designed to preserve

and expand arts facilities throughout the City.

“There are four public art programs in the City

of San Francisco, the Art in Public Places

program administered by the Arts Commission,

the Percent for Art programs of the Planning

Commission and Redevelopment Agency, and

the public art program of the Airports Commission.

Those programs function independently, each

responsible for a specific jurisdiction - the Arts

Commission to projects on or adjacent to the site

of public construction including the Airport; the

Airports Commission program which deals solely

with rotating exhibitions on the airport premises;


figure 2.10

the Redevelopment Agency, to art in major private development in redevelopment areas;

and the Planning Department, whose public art program is restricted to the downtown

area.”

All this legal support for the arts in San Francisco sets the base for choosing this City to

address art as a possible solution to create a vibrant community environment along urban

transformation.

2.3.1 SAN FRANCISCO URBAN DESIGN PLAN

The Urban Design Plan of San Francisco is a mayor achievement of the professionals

in the Planning Department of San Francisco FOR the citizens of San Francisco. It will

be studied in Chapter 6 to compare and highlight its goals with the proposed ones for

Columbus Avenue.

To understand the effect of the current planning tools that the city has, it is interesting to read

Allan Jacobs’ comments on the role of the San Francisco’s Department of City Planning

in his book Making City Planning Worka. As Jacobs notes, there is a disconnect between

mandate and reality, “[the department] has a charter mandate to secure understanding

and a systematic effectuation of the master plan…but it has few direct powers that would

enable it to carry out the plans it produces…the department has difficulty “making things

happen”.

Yet in this same book, Jacobs points out where the San Francisco’s Urban Beautification

program has an exemplary case in which the City Planning Department was effective within


figure 2.11

figure 2.12

governmental context. “The Department used its knowledge of government, its informal

powers, and the interests of its staff to help carry out a plan and to deal successfully

with community issues. (…)It shows that one program with modest objectives can help

address other, more significant problems. It also suggests that local government can

usually adapt its organizational structure to take advantage of federal programs that it

considers desirable (…).”

The case of the Urban Beautification Program is for me a hopeful example to explain the

possibility of local government to use the current legal structures to address the arts. The

Public Art program proposed in this thesis is based in a federal program, the percent-

for-art;. It is based on the idea of reconceptualising the order of the economic support

of art in urban projects. It believes in the power that a simple move in addressing the

questions about urban issues to citizens will make great changes in community identity,

neighbourhood vitality and the City quality of Life.

2.4 CASE STUDY ANALYSIS

This section focuses on precedent examples

that have informed the conceptual design of the

Urban Design project and Public Art Program

along Columbus Avenue, San Francisco. ((They

haven’t been explored in detail so I will just

mention them for future deeper research)). I

will categorize and analyze the case studies -

- first those that consider Columbus Avenue a

diagonal feature to study the geometry in a city

urban form; and then those that study specific

locations and programs to examine the process

and implementation strategies of public art

programs.


figure 2.13

2.4.1 Diagonal Urban Form

The first three examples are studies of designed

diagonal streets as transportation connectors:

L´Avinguda Diagonal in the Barcelona’s 1859

rationalist grid, l’ Exaimple, created by the urban

planner Ildefons Cerdá; Baron Haussmann’s

Plan for Paris in 1852, and finally, Washington

DC [the whole city?] that Pierre Charles L’Enfant

designed in 1791 for President Washington

using baroque influences that later were

influential in City Beautiful design, which used

street dimensions as a social control device and

a health solution.

These examples becomes the base for the urban

form analysis, solutions for diagonal corners in

the city grid, they established a reference that

investigates what other cities have done with

triangular blocks, lots and islands.

2.4.2 City Public art Program and Arts

Institutions

Arizona Public Art Plan.

The most compelling case study for this thesis

would be the innovative William Moorish’sb

urban design plan for the City of Phoenix, the

Arizona’s public art plan which unites artists

and public work engineers in the transformation

of city utilities. The plan recommends how to

place and integrate public art into the design

of urban infrastructure, to enhance Phoenix’s


figure 2.14

figure 2.15

sense of place and identity.

In 1987, using the Phoenix Arts Commission plan

as a modelc, the Arizona Commission on the Arts

initiated a state-wide program called “Arizona:

The Look of Communities”. This program looked

at community-wide planning that would include

strategies for art placement and landscaping,

parks, open spaces, streetscapes and gateways.

These were visual quality master plans.

To enact this Master Plan they put together a

Team to prepare the base map for the potential

art sites; to develop criteria to select the sites; and

to review the municipal properties to be acquired

for those sites. This Team was made of two

urban designers consultants, William R. Moorish

and the late Catherine R. Brown, experienced in

public sector urban planning and design, and an

artist, Grover Mouton, to consider the “correct”

(from an artist’s point of view) placement of

artwork in public spaces.

Metropolitan Transportation Authority Metro Art Department.

The MTA Metro Artd is a department of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA)

for Los Angeles County. Established in 1989, it is in charge of administering the art

program that has become an integral part of every transit project it builds. As a result the

County has managed to unite transit and art in its new system, including the Metro Rail

and Metro Bus systems.

Metro Art commissions artists to incorporate art into a wide array of projects. From bus


figure 2.16

figure 2.17

figure 2.18

stops to rail stations, streetscapes to bus interiors,

construction fences to poetry works, art creates

a sense of place and engages transit riders. This

program has been described as one of the most

imaginative public art programs in the country by

the media.

Among the projects, the Metro Walk Project

included in the construction of the Golden Line

Extension and directed by Diego Cardoso and

James Rojas is a great example of a public art

projects relate to transportation, by applying

artistic ideas in functional transit systems for a

unique representation of each community and

station, and adding a walk tour through the

artwork when finished to help the community

ego and economy.

The Central Subway Line Public Art Program,

San Francisco. California.

This program is the most current and directly

related program to the project in Columbus

Avenue. As proposed, it will enliven San Francisco’s new transit corridor with a vital public

art collection and, during the nine year design and construction phase of the project,

involve temporary art projects and community programs.

The Central Subway will provide a range of opportunities for public art and related arts

programming in adjacent neighbourhoods. The Arts Commission will be working with local

communities, including local arts and other community-based organizations, and the San

Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency, to develop a Central Subway Arts Master

Plan over the end of 2008. It is responsible for management of the public art funding


generated by each eligible city capital improvement project. As with all new City and

County capital improvement projects, the city allocates 2% of the eligible construction

costs for public art programming directly associated with the Central Subway Project, as

required by the City’s Administrative Codee.

The Department of Neighborhoods. Seattle. Washington.

As an example of Public Initiatives in Community Design using Cultural and Artistic

Proposals, I examined Seattle’s innovative Department of Neighborhoods guided by

Jim Diersf. As a city staff member Diers pushed for neighbourhood empowerment against

ill-conceived development projects asking for community feedback regarding approaches

to updating plans. This institutional department structure added to the “Office of Arts and

Cultural Affairs” has created a government based funding model that has made the non-

profit arts and culture a significant industry in Seattle.

The Intersection for the Arts. San Francisco. California.

San Francisco’s oldest alternative non-profit art space (est. 1965) Intersection

for the Artsg has a long history of presenting new and experimental work in the

fields of literature, theatre, music and the visual arts, and also in nurturing and

supporting the Bay Area’s cultural community through service, technical support,

and mentorship programs. “Intersection provides a place where provocative

ideas, diverse art forms, artists, and audiences can intersect with one another.”

Intersection for the Arts is an example of community research process that explores

experimentation and risk, debate and critical inquiry, the essential role of community, the

democratization of resources and experience, and how today’s issues are thrashed about

in the heat and immediacy of live art.

“By blurring the boundaries between art and life, and bringing the neighbourhood of the

outlying Mission District community into the gallery year-round, Intersection fulfils its

populist mission as well as anyone.” – Artweek Magazine.


figure 2.19

“I shop the line” campaign for Cambie Street,

Vancouver, Canada.

This case studyh does not easily fit into any clear

category but provides a justification for the need

to think about the economic and cultural issues

that an urbanization project can provoke in an

urban area.

Cambie Street in Vancouver is a living experience of how a business community suffering

from an urban transformation project has been able, through a publicity campaign, to

survive the chaos induced by construction. The street was torn apart for the future Light

Train and the businesses along the strip were suffering from economic inactivity due to the

lingering presence of unsightly, hulking construction equipment. The business community

developed a public announcement campaign to make the citizens aware that the street

was still operating, that the shops were still open. The “I shop the line” campaign received

big investments from the government, from businesses, and from the community-. This

example illustrates the potential for social damage in liveability, comfort, and interaction in

the construction phase of any public project.

2.5 SITE SELECTION: COLUMBUS AVENUE, SAN FRANCISCO.

The introduction of the Arts Policy for San Francisco underscores the reason for focusing

my thesis on San Francisco:

“San Francisco is nationally and internationally acclaimed as a cultural center where the

arts are central to the essence and character of the City. It hosts a flourishing cultural

environment in which a profusion of art is created, performed and exhibited in adventure

some, creative and often ground breaking ways. The breadth of artistic achievement in

San Francisco encompasses many disciplines, cultures, individuals and organizations of

all sizes.”

This famous creative character of the city attracts numerous tourists, many of whom flock

to Columbus Avenue, which is the spine of North Beach and Chinatown. Because both of

these neighbourhoods have a culturally iconic history, my proposed project for Columbus


which deals with the link between them, is a great opportunity to rethink the role of arts

in the city. Furthermore, these communities could benefit greatly from a better civic and

open space network.

For that matter, the Columbus Avenue Revitalization Master Plan was born to study

the opportunity for the street to play a major role in the city transportation system. The

recommendations contemplated in it address transit connections, streetscape improvements

and economic growth initiatives that art to be developed with the participation of residents,

merchants, local organizations and government agencies. They will be led by Renew SF,

a coalition of concerned citizens committed to the planning and implementing of programs

for the improvement of the North East sector of the city. This influential group has been

an enormous help in my thesis. They have shared their insights about the area, helping to

make the proposal a desirable future project (to be revaluated). Their passion has always

been a motivation for me.

2.6 SITE ANALYSIS

Columbus Avenue is a diagonal that was planned in 1872 to be a collector diagonal. The

historical maps that I used for this thesis come from the Map Library of the University of

California, Berkeley. The maps showing topography, zoning, land use, building bulk and

height information were downloaded from the San Francisco Government website so as

to have consistent base data. All the analysis diagrams related to either the city, district

or block scales (Built Form, Topography, Circulation Networks, Pedestrian Transit Access

Systems, Land Use, Open Space Natural Systems, and Demographic Data.) are based

on those official sources.

The site analysis parts of this thesis are based primarily on my experience of the site:

my notes, pictures, and own perceptions of the space. The Vitality Analysis was created

by repeated working visits to the site, and it is divided into: economic (related to physical

features) and the social (studying social behaviours) analyses. I marked the types of

activities, the types of users, the types of business, their activity (vacant or occupied) and

their shop fronts (transparent or opaque). I followed human interaction activities in the

different spaces: open spaces, corners, sidewalks, and intersections.


figure 2.20-0 .Sketch Bird Eye View from Fisherman’s Wharf to Financial District.


figure 2.20

2.7 CITIZEN INVOLVEMENT AND PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

This research thesis focuses on the characteristics of public art to make

meaningful places, to make community-building places, and to make places

that are attractive to all people.

The great challenge of urban design is to develop the potential of cities

to create liveable, walkable, healthy and sustainable communities. This

discipline works in public spaces (streets, roads, parks, plazas, waterfronts

and commercial districts) and is important to support, build and inspire the

identity of communities.

William R. Morrish’s explanation for his project in Phoenix can be applied to

this proposed thesis project. “The project seeks to approach infrastructure

as a cultural landscape, the connective safety net that knits citizens, public

spaces, social institutions, cultural expression and the natural environment

into multi-operational urban landscape networks.” The need to incorporate

people in our projects as urban designers is critical.

Humanity, known as much for its capacity for construction as its ability to

manipulate objects and its extensive use of non metabolic energy, has

initiated its own evolution, characterised by an intense reorganization of its

natural environment. This accelerated and excessive encroachment of the

environment, along with a great change in the structure and values of present-

day society, has motivated a necessary evolution in the theoretical definition

of some disciplines like architecture, science, art, culture and technology.

Professor Randy Hester combines concepts from different fields in the title of

his new book Design for Ecological Democracy to explain “the best possible life

we can achieve. … it (ecological democracy) offers a path for a long journey…

democracy is government by the people. It is exercised directly through active

involvement in a locality and indirectly through elections, following principles

of equality and attending to individuals’ needs and broader community goods.

Ecology is a science of the relationships between organisms, including our


figure 2.21

figure 2.22

environments and us. It encompasses the

study of natural processes, ecosystems, and

interactions of humans with each other, other

species, and the cities we occupy. It includes

principles of social and environmental function

and interconnection. It is also a comprehensive

long-term way to think creatively.” i

In this way, my participatory design proposal

is an on-going creative process that will need

to be revaluated. This thesis sets a theoretical

frame for a dialogue to happen in the real world.

The theoretical, academic part of the thesis will

inform the practical, future design. This context

permits the use of some participatory tools as

surveys, questionnaires, personal interviews, and group discussions, in this phase: the

analysis of the study area.

In the first phase of the project, there were two groups of important subjects that informed

the research: the government officials, advocates and professionals; and peers and citizens

who were anonymous users of public space. The first group was a panel of knowledgeable

informants, people who were uniquely able to be informative because they are privileged

witnesses of current studies and processes related to the planning and design of the

corridor. They included representatives of Renew SF and SFCTA (San Francisco City

Transportation Authority).

The second group consisted of the people who live along Columbus Avenue, people who

walk on the avenue, and those who visit the places along the avenue. They are the ones

affected by changes in transportation and urban design. Those participants of the process

were approached and interviewed on site. They were asked their opinion about their

perception of and feelings on the streets’ design settings.

Interview nº1.


figure 2.23

For the participatory part of this project I

conducted two surveys, designed two analysis

games and a standard walk tour, and proposed

an action to test the space (see Appendix A).

On the 27th April 2008, I conducted the first survey

by distributing an anonymous questionnaire

(see Appendix 1) in a UC Berkeley classroom,

LA 252A. This questionnaire focused on getting

an idea of what designers-in-training think about

public art: what are the characteristics of the arts

that help the public realm, what are the qualities

that could enhance public projects, what are the

virtues of a collaborative process with artists, and

envisioning ideals for public twenty-first century monuments.

I learned from their feedback that some of their impressions were simple opinions as

streets users: “Public Art encourages thoughts in mundane life” or “Public Art is anything

that makes me pause. Take consideration. Stop and Think.” I mostly shared their point

of view; the purpose for the arts in public spaces is to increase mental awareness with

the environment; to link individuals with the present, the space and the collective; and to

put people in time, place and social milieu. Their input also opened the discussion to the

breadth of the term when someone wrote poetically “The spectrum of Art is from big to

small; muted to loud, short to tall”. Another one contributes to the discussion by giving the

arts great power and a major social role in his/her definition: “Public Art is a civic and

democratic expression in the urban fabric”.

From the outset the collaborative idea of the application of arts in this thesis was the main

issue. The big question has been how to bring the artist to the urban design process, how

to make an effective design team with reciprocal relationships between the members, and

how to synchronize the discipline into a cohesive process. Hearing a statement such as

“We need them to get an unorthodox interpretation of space” from a colleague underscores


figure 2.24

the relevance of this common belief.

Interview nº2.

The second interview was conducted on the

4th May of 2008 along Columbus Avenue. (see

Apendix 2). Two persons, Maia Garcia Vergniory

and I, started that Sunday walking from

Washington Square on opposite sides of the

avenue. Maia went south to the Financial District

and I went north to the Fisherman’s Wharf. We

needed to cover the whole strip to gain a better

understanding of the streetscape but we were

primarily interested in who uses the avenue. We spoke to passers-by to find out the type

of users in a range of age and gender, but we were particularly interested in their origin

-- if they were neighbours (from the district), locals (from San Francisco), or tourists, either

national or international. The selection of people was random -- whoever we passed -- this

way we captured a more diverse population and therefore obtained more balanced results

from these interviews. As one worker in the area put it: “Columbus Avenue: It’s a perfect

mixed of locals and tourists”.

The quest to understand the uniqueness of a place is important for any design; we want

to avoid designing for stereotypes. To that end we observed the activity patterns of the

street users which I then developed into a classification of street users: “Users”; who use

the space and people, the pedestrians and park enjoyers; versus “Consumers,” or people

who consume the space, the shoppers, and the café “seaters”.

In answering questions about personal routines (rituals) or space preferences we found that

80% of users come to the street with someone, with whom they talk about the restaurants,

or cafés; 30% of users mentioned City Lights Bookstore as a symbol of art and culture.

One person responded, “It feels like I’m on vacation. It’s the closest feeling of being in Italy

but in SF.” This level of social interaction is an attraction that makes this area one of the

most vibrant neighbourhoods in San Francisco.


figure 2.25

The transportation questions revealed a set of

important findings on the massive use of the

street – indeed what is intended as a transit

corridor becomes a pedestrian strip. Our data

suggests that at most of the intersections the

pedestrian flow is larger than the vehicular

flow (4 times more in the Green and Stockton

intersection). Notably, the problems addressed

in the interviews involved pedestrian safety

and comfort: “less cars, more accessible for

pedestrians”. On the other hand, some people

also want “more parking facilities, more car space”. Designers have to create a proposal

that deals with human needs, but also makes a statement about the change that this

car-oriented society will undergo. This future can flourish with “landscaping, building

reparation…” even though there are nostalgic souls that “wouldn’t change anything,” a

challenge for innovative solutions and those who promote change.

Street Game.

This type of interview was folded into the Street Game I designed for this project. The

game was a playful tool intended to locate users on a space, at a specific time. The game

participants had to choose a coloured dot indicating of where they were from: yellow =

neighbourhood, blue = Bay Area, green = US, or red = abroad. Each subject also had

to write a number describing their activity: 1 = working, 2 = shopping, 3 = tourism or 4

= other activities. Those marks were placed on a printed map and a day schedule that

located the type of users, their activities and the times and space in which they developed

such actions. The combination of all data created a unique map, a visual, fun and easy

measurement of these four urban variables.

It was a very successful experience. The great revelation was to find that Columbus

Avenue served as both a neighbourhood street and a citywide main street – and to

observe that most of the people did not think about it as just one isolated element. A


figure 2.26

figure 2.27

figure 2.28

simple answer like “I’m going here and here,

and later I will go there” (pointing at the boards)

suggests a pedestrian flow along the different

landmarks. Pedestrians normally program their

routes through the neighbourhood, walking

along Columbus Avenue, but many more cross

it transversally.

The Vessel Game.

This game was also played with students from

the Richmond High School for the WCCTAC

Program in Urban Design. The purpose of this

game was to educate the students about how

to look at the street, in addition to serving as

a research device to better understand the

characteristics of a place.

Each student was asked to place a vessel in

different location that associated spatial elements

with sensory factors, and then take a creative

photograph that could later be incorporated into

his or her art portfolio. They each had a plate to

place on a textured surface, a fork on a colored

surface, a spoon in a smelly space, a knife in a

symbolic space, and a glass in a noisy space.

The selected location was to relate to a sense:

touch, sight, smell, hearing, and the perception

of culture in the city. The outcome was a set of

photographs that were divided depending on

the vessel element that they were using to find

the physical features related to the perception


figure 2.29

figure 2.30

figure 2.31

sense. Even though they were confused at the

beginning by the abstract assignment, while

playing they figure out that they knew how to do

it, they jus had to be more aware, very awake.

It is always an amazing experience to work

with teenagers, walk with them and know what

they look at; how they look at the world not as a

juvenile, but as an ”outsider,” as someone who

has never been in San Francisco before. They

studied the small scale details of the Columbus

corridor, at the margin limits of streets, and they

had an intuitive understanding about the issues

of the street, such as the noise of cars, and

the dirtiness of some corners. Those corners

and sites that they pointed at will be explored

as potential opportunity sites for art, social

interaction, or points of mental awareness.


figure 2.32

Widening of the Sidewalks Demonstration with Community

In order to demonstrate that public art can be a tool to engage citizens and incorporate

their opinion in urban design processes, Renew SF and I were planning to do a widening

of the sidewalk demonstration.

The appropriation of the parking space was planned in front of the Café Puccini on

Columbus Avenue nº405. By displaying three more tables in each parking spaces and

create temporary terraces, pedestrians would test the decongestion of the sidewalk, the

possibility of stopping; and district businesses will be convinced about the economic

benefits of the street improvement.

This event has not happened yet. The reasons why are a manifestation of the businesses

engagement (minimum) in the modification of the street –most of them are tenants. I

couldn’t agree about the details of the action with the owner of the café in which we were

planning it. The strong sense of ownership of the restaurants for the parking spaces and

pieces of sidewalk in front of their business is a tested problem in the street. It raises the


figure 2.33

questions of how public is the space if we have to pay to sit in it?

This demonstration will happen, and will be the first banquet of the Public art Program

proposed in this thesis. It will be the first dialogue, a moment for a participatory charette

on the future steps of the project (if we finally can obtain the participation of the restaurant

owners, the city, and the area’s police officers).

2.8 DESIGN AND PUBLIC ART PROGRAM

The final method of this thesis was to make a combined proposal: an Urban Design Plan

and a Public Art Program for Columbus Avenue. It is a first proposal for the street design,

community involvement, phasing and implementation method for the project. It has been

developed with the help of professionals and community members that are currently

involved in the ongoing studies.


NOTES CHAPTER 2 1 Chapter 4. pº79 “Making City Planning Work” Allan B. Jacobs, 1978

American Society of Planning Officials, Chicago.

2 William Morrish [email protected]

3 “Public Art Works: The Arizona Models” Phoenix Arts Commission 1992

4 http://www.metro.net/about_us/metroart/default.htm

Marc Pally. Director of Art in Public Places Program for Los Angeles. mpally@earthlink.

net

Alan Nakagawa, Senior Public Art Officer, Metro Art, LA MTA. [email protected]

http://www.metrogoldline.org/art/index.html

Diego Cardoso and James Rojas from Los Angeles Metro Walk Project. cardosod@

mta.net, [email protected]

5 www.sfartscommission.org/pubart

San Francisco Arts Commission Public Art Project Manager: who managed the Central

Subway and Third Street Light Rail public art programs: [email protected]

6 http://www.seattle.gov/neighborhoods/npi/

“Neighbor Power: Building community the Seattle Way” Jim Diers 2004

7 www.theintersection.org

8 http://www.shoptheline.ca

9 Pag.4. “Design for Ecological Democracy” Randy T. Hester. MIT Press 2006

Chapter 3: Public Art 30

CHAPTER 3: PUBLIC ART

In this chapter, I will introduce the topic of Public Art from definitions and typologies to the

theoretical context, the relationship with urban design; and the current debate that this

type of art arises in cities.

3.1 DEFINITIONS

Taken together the above list constitutes my definition of Public Art and Culture. These

terms are very broad. By giving them meaning together, I state some of the key points of

this thesis.

Culture

Culture generally refers to patterns of human activity and the symbolic structures that

give such activities significance and importance. Cultures can be understood as “systems

of symbols and meanings that even their creators contest, that lack fixed boundaries,

that are constantly in flux, and that interact and compete with one another.”1 Culture has

been called “the way of life for an entire society”. Culture also can be defined as “the arts

collectively: Art, music, literature, and related intellectual activities”, or the “Knowledge,

Enlightenment and Sophistication acquired through education and exposure to the arts”.2

Public Art

The term “public art”3 properly refers to works of art in any media that have been

planned and executed with the specific intention of being sited or staged in the public

domain, usually outside and accessible to all. The term is especially significant within

the art world, amongst curators, commissioning

bodies and practitioners of public art. It

signifies a particular working practice, often

with implications of site specific, community

involvement and collaboration.

The broadest use of the word art, then, is that

“All art is public,” or that art which is dedicated

to a public. What is Public Art? This question figure 3.1


could have an unending answer. Suffice to say it is a matter of multitudinous disciplines:

Anthropology, Sociology, Art, Psychology, Sculpture, Urban Design, Planning. The

abstract and open-endedness of the word art, with the adjective “public” affixed to it,

provides this thesis an intellectual challenge with infinite possibilities of application in the

public realm.

3.2 HISTORY: CULTURAL EVOLUTION OF PUBLIC ART

The first questions raised were about the synergy between art and society, between artistic

processes and social processes. These raise another set of questions:

How can or could art have been the transmitter of knowledge, today or i n a historic

period?

How can art reflect the sensibility and the interpretation of a particular reality?

Can art contribute to the growth of the societies that create it?

Can art enhance quality of life?

To what extent was or can art be a transforming element, in a historic period or today?

Public Art was easily defined before the 1960’s: It was commonly called “civic art” in the

days of Beaux Arts architecture, when architects designed pediments to be filled with

allegory, architraves to be punctuated with reliefs, and plazas to boast uplifting symbols

perched high atop pedestals. Art in architecture was considered de rigeur, indispensable.

It was associated with Monuments, Memorials, Murals and Mimes located in public spaces

for in praise of a common cause. There were two causes that expanded the public

practice of art in the United States, one related to

artists and the other related to public policies that

supported artists and their work. In the 1970’s

artists moved out of the studios and expanded

their creative expressions out of the museums

and galleries. With the city as a gallery, the

different programs, commissions and CETA figure 3.2


(Comprehensive Employment Training Act – a remake of the WPA job program in which

artists were put to work in the community), the circumstances were ideal for the emerging

community-arts movement.

Arising from the same time period was the notion of “site-specific” art. As part of the New

Deal Roosevelt’s policy, works were designed for a particular place, taking into account

the site’s physical surroundings as well as other environmental or social factors. They

began to consider the context for their work, incorporating the wind, the sun, the change

of seasons, the audience demographics, the history of the site, and all the social forces

that can shape a place.

An example of powerful and expressive place-making was the “Vietnam Veteran’s

Memorial” by Maya Lin in Washington, D.C that liberated memorials from the monoliths

or personage.

This new interest in artists creating outside their studios not only bound them to the practice

of design of places for people, but it grounded art in the daily environment. Allan Kaprow

coined the term “Un-art”, “the Art that can’t be

Art” to describe this new fusion. He saw Art as

Life blurring the separation between life and art,

artist and audience. Suddenly the daily became

a valued guideline that broke the impermeable

sequence between author-object-museum-

spectator, therefore the artist was a citizen, and

the citizen was an artist. “[Kaprow’s] Happenings

remove people from the illusory world which,

swathed in abstractions, is their everyday life, and

put people into the actual world through devices

which freshen perception.”d The ha ppenings

linked people to the space, to the physical

environment providing them the opportunity to

exchange experience and their implications.

figure 3.3

figure 3.4


By incorporating this type of art in pubic programs,

the world will become a living laboratory in which

individuals assumed roles and responsibilities

with a common creative goal. The artistic process

will become a living theatre, and therefore: the

art will be a knowledge and communication tool,

a transforming process of reality.

3.3 THE ECONOMICS BENEFITS, LIMITATIONS AND SOCIAL POTENTIAL OF

PUBLIC ART

Public Art is a discipline in which the money invested in it has both direct economic and

social benefits. With one source of money you can reinforce two main urban objectives:

cultural diversity and social creativity (Identity) on the one hand, and economy improvement

on the other.

Public Art provides access to the creative process and cultural resources for all

neighbourhoods, cultural communities, and segments of the city and its population.

“An average of 55 million viewers experience public art firsthand every day, approximately

1000 times the audience experiencing art galleries, museums and theatres combined.

For example, the Vietnam Memorial alone is visited by more than 10,000 people daily, and

artworks in airports or subways are seen daily by over five million travellers. An average

public art project provides 50 times the economic impact of arts events in traditional venues,

yet the cost to the public for public art is less than 50 cents per taxpayer per year, based

on the amount of public funding used to fund public art. The case of Chicago’s “Cows on

Parade” generated more than $200 million for that city, and no taxpayer’s dollars were

used.” e

San Francisco embodies these statistics – it has one of the largest concentrated

populations of artists in the country and a per capita audience attendance at art events

that far surpasses the national average. Local multicultural artists and arts organizations

play a major role in promoting cross-cultural fertilization. In San Francisco, the arts are a

major industry, with a significant impact on the city’s economy. They generate tax revenues

figure 3.5


and a wide variety of jobs, goods, and services.

The arts bring visitors and tourists and visitor

spending to San Francisco.

But is this enough? There are more ways in which

San Francisco’s public art program could benefit

the city and its citizens. Public funds raised by

the Public Art Programs could be a solution to

community-design in forgotten low-income urban

areas where there is no private investment. It

seems possible to apply public art programs

to urban revitalization, and community- arts

projects to blighted urban areas that fail to attract

private investment, since public art programs are

normally applied, via the percent-for-art national

program, to urban growth and public construction

(buildings, infrastructure, or parks) and low-

income communities are not targets for urban

reconstruction. Thus the initial concept for public

art, i.e. cosmetic addition to urban development,

limits our thinking about its potential and prevents

us from thinking about public art being a rooted

tool to help communities’ revitalization physically

and sociologically.

The mistake is the belief that one does not need

the other -- that low-income urban areas do not

need public art, and that wealthy communities do

not need community art. This thesis stands in the

faith that “poor people” need beauty and “wealthy

people” need community/ common identity (and

figure 3.6

figure 3.7

figure 3.8

figure 3.9


not merely a common economic value).

To that end the public art program proposed in

this research seeks a comprehensive, large scale

program that will link diverse communities’ to the

site, link the different development projects to the

communities; and link the art projects throughout

the transformation of the city (See Chapter 6).

3.4 PUBLIC ART PUBLIC POLICIES

Percent for Art Program

The tipping point in the history of public art was in the 1970’s. It was provoked by the

appearance of public policies that emphasized the role of the art in public space and the

need to give citizens a major, public, creative and engaging experience in order to create

a better public realm.

Starting in Philadelphia in 1959, percent-for-art programs in the United States proliferated

rapidly in the 1970’s and now include 30 states and 300 cities. The National Percent for Art

program, which locally often became a city ordinance, was a fee, usually some percentage

of the project cost, placed on large scale development projects in order to fund and install

public art. Today the details of such programs vary from area-to-area. Similar programs,

such as Art in Public Places, attempt to achieve like goals by requiring that public art be

part of a project, yet they often allow developers to pay in-lieu fees to a public art fund as

an alternative. They are used to fund public art where private or specialized funding of

public art is unavailable.

As John Wetenhall describes in his article “A Brief History of Percent-for-Art in

America,” this program dates back to the New Deal and the Treasury Department’s

Section of Painting and Sculpture (established in 1934). The program set aside one

percent of the cost of a federal building’s for artistic decoration. Artists were chosen

by anonymous competition. The main intention was to encourage and publicize

the development of American art, following the European tradition of patronage.

On the other hand, this selection of artists instead of architects made the big difference in

figure 3.10


the future evolution of the art, separating art from the architectural language and given it

the freedom of expression that it has today.

During the Depression Era, the Treasury Section expanded their interests beyond high

quality of art in public buildings and began to commit to stimulating public art appreciation

writ large. The Treasury sponsored competitions that were given a specific narrative theme

to assure that the final work would please the local community. This practice led juries to

favour styles of “contemporary realism”. In concentrating on recognizable, local themes,

the Treasury hoped to inspire an essentially “democratic” appreciation of fine art at the

grass-roots level. As stated in the definition of murals: “a mural painting which immortalizes

a portion of the history of the community in which the building stands, or work of sculpture

which delights the eye and does not interfere with the general architectural scheme.”

San Francisco Public Art Program

The hope of the Art in Public Places program for the City of San Francisco was that it

would articulate the city-wide vision for public art and provide guidance to the various

public art programs. The enabling legislation did not affect the autonomy of existing

programs, but rather enabled each program to draw guidance from policy statements

regarding, for example, the desired mix of media, or whether or how many projects should

be undertaken by Bay Area artists. In particular, the plan indicated opportunities for

collaborative projects.

San Francisco’s Public Art Program was one of the first in the country. It was established by

City ordinance in 1969. The public art ordinance, included in the San Francisco Administrative

Code, Section 3.19, is titled “Appropriation for Art. It calls for the enrichment of proposed

public buildings, above-ground structures, parks and transportation improvements projects”,

and it sets aside two percent of the construction cost of civic buildings, transportation

improvement projects, new parks, and other above-ground structures such as bridges for

public art. It also provides an allowance for artwork conservation funds and allows for the

pooling of art enrichment funds for interdepartmental projects. Circumstances that would

allow construction projects to be exempt from public art allocations are also defined.

The goals of the plan are set in the belief expressed in the 1991 Arts Policy (Objective


VI-2) that states: “Public art enhances a city’s visual aesthetic, provides citizens with

the opportunity to experience creative expressions and beauty; provides cities and

neighbourhoods with identity and focus; provokes and promotes community dialogue;

brings economic benefits in the form of tourism; provides jobs for artists, fabricators,

shippers, suppliers; and changes attitudes about places and visual environment.” The

Arts Policy is created to increase opportunities throughout the city, and demands the

encouragement of a diversity of art forms to ensure that art in public places truly represents

all segments of the public.

Today San Francisco’s Public Art Program seeks to promote a diverse and stimulating

cultural environment to enrich the lives of the city’s residents, visitors and employees.

The Program “encourages the creative interaction of artists, designers, city staff, officials

and community members during the design of City projects, in order to develop public art

that is specific and meaningful to the site and to the community. Public art is developed

and implemented in conjunction with the overall design and construction of each project.

Each project’s life span from the design phase through completion of construction is

approximately three to seven years.”

The Banquet Public Art Program is based on this existent public policy. It proposes that

an urban design project, a larger scale project could be attached to a public art program

and then create a compelling comprehensive process, along the Project (place), the

Process (time) and the Community (people).

Factors of Continuity during Urban Transformation. Banquet Public Art Program Proposal.figure 3.11

b

a

CA

TALO

GU

E O

F A

RT

IN P

UB

LIC

SPA

CE

Tit

le.

Au

tho

r. D

ate

:

Loca

tion

Proj

ect

Initia

tive

:

Med

ium

:

Dim

ensi

ons:

“Fla

min

go”.

Ale

xand

er C

alde

r. 19

72.

Post

off

ice.

Chi

cago

. U

SA.

% o

f th

e po

st o

ffic

e bu

ildin

g. r

equi

red

in t

he p

ublic

art

pro

gram

of

chic

ago

city

.sp

onta

neou

s “a

mat

eur”

/ in

stitut

iona

l com

issi

oned

/ ar

tist

initia

tive

/ el

itis

t

stee

l pai

nted

in r

ed,

and

asse

mbl

ed e

ith

torn

illos

and

sol

dadu

ra.

Spa

ce R

efer

ence

:

“The

Bea

r an

d th

e dr

inki

ng m

an”

Spa

ce O

wne

rshi

p:Pr

ivat

e sp

ace

give

n to

the

pub

lic.

situ

ated

in t

he m

iddl

eeas

t od

f th

e pl

aza.

exc

entr

ic t

o th

e m

ain

entr

ance

of t

he p

ost

offic

e.

Tim

e:

Ep

him

eral

Perm

anen

t

Cate

go

riza

tio

n:

leg

ibil

ity:

phys

ical

so

cial

po

litic

al

cultur

al

Ob

serv

ati

on

:P

hen

om

en

olo

gy

“Fla

min

go”.

Ale

xand

er C

alde

r. 19

72.

baba

lbal

balb

alba

lbal

blab

labl

abal

babl

abla

bala

blab

labl

abal

balb

alba

lbal

aba

balb

alba

lbal

balb

albl

abla

blab

alba

blab

laba

labl

abla

blab

alba

lbal

balb

ala

baba

lbal

balb

alba

lbal

blab

labl

abal

babl

abla

bala

blab

labl

abal

balb

alba

lbal

aba

balb

alba

lbal

balb

albl

abla

blab

alba

blab

laba

labl

abla

blab

alba

lbal

balb

ala

baba

lbal

balb

alba

lbal

blab

labl

abal

babl

abla

bala

blab

labl

abal

balb

alba

lbal

aba

balb

alba

lbal

balb

albl

abla

blab

alba

blab

laba

labl

abla

blab

alba

lbal

balb

ala

baba

lbal

balb

alba

lbal

blab

labl

abal

babl

abla

bala

blab

labl

abal

balb

alba

lbal

aba

balb

alba

lbal

balb

albl

abla

blab

alba

blab

laba

labl

abla

blab

alba

lbal

balb

ala

baba

lbal

balb

alba

lbal

blab

labl

abal

babl

abla

bala

blab

labl

abal

balb

alba

lbal

aba

balb

alba

lbal

balb

albl

abla

blab

alba

blab

laba

labl

abla

blab

alba

lbal

balb

ala

blab

laba

labl

abla

blab

alba

lbal

balb

ala

baba

lbal

balb

alba

lbal

blab

labl

abal

babl

abla

bala

blab

labl

abal

balb

alba

lbal

aba

balb

alba

lbal

balb

albl

abla

blab

alba

s.01

Mov

emen

t:

Es

that

ic

M

ovile

Publ

ic:

Act

ive

Pa

ssiv

e

Piec

e of

wor

k

Sca

le:

H

uman

City

W

orld

Sen

se r

equi

red:

vi

ew

e

ar

sm

ell

to

uch

t

aste

Desi

gn

sett

ing

s:sc

ale

refe

renc

e to

the

pub

lic

so

cial

inte

ract

ion

vita

lity

:so

cial

ec

onom

ical

cultur

alm

em

ory

: c

olle

ctiv

e in

divi

dual

hi

stor

ical

pr

esen

t

refle

xion

of

futu

reid

en

tity

:

com

mun

ity

no

t pa

rtic

ipat

ory

dia

log

ue:

ye

s

no

s.01

= s

culp

ture

m.0

1= m

ural

p.01

= p

aint

ings

i.01=

inst

alla

tion

sa.

01=

act

ions



3.5 TYPOLOGY

This thesis develops a template that helps describe and classify a catalogue of artwork in

public spaces. It is meant to clarify with examples the enormous range of possibilities for

deploying public art in cities. The research focuses on the characteristics of public art to

make meaningful places, to make community-building places, and to make places that are

attractive to all people. In this way, the factors of categorizing the art are not only related to

perception, to physical tangible factors related to

the art object, time, space, and people, but also

to the policies attached to the existence of the art

and the purposes for which they are located.

This typology of public art, if you will, helps relate

the physical features and the design settings of

the artwork in any public space.

The typology lays out as follows:

Medium: Sculpture, Paintings, Installations,

Actions/ Happenings/ Performances, Urban

Furniture and Decoration Design;

Location: Street Art, Media Art, Site-specific Art

(versus Plop Art), Environmental Art;

Time: Of the Temporary Ephemeral or Permanent.

Temporary that becomes permanent, accepted,

beloved;

Scale: Related to dimension, but also with the

scope of the art -- “small” being considered human

scale, one that can be experienced in person,

“medium” being the city-scale intervention, and

large the regional or world-wide scale projects.

Artistic Purpose: Purpose is spontaneous; it

describes innate social creativity and the human

figure 3.12

figure 3.13

figure 3.14


need to express oneself. It has no abstract or

heroic purpose, it is about daily space.

Funding Purpose: Commissioned art involves a

long process led by public institutions, non-profit

organizations, and/or the artist’s own initiative.

The artist’s purpose and funding method are a

function of the artist’s aesthetic, the functional or

political intent of the piece and the degree the

artist’s construction supervision. Purposes can

sometimes be related to whether the piece is for

fee or for free. If a piece is paid for by public

money, it has to be agreed upon by some body

other than the artist, the result often being more

“mainstream” depending on the time period and

culture of its context. Conversely, unpaid art

tends to be more political and freer of economic

chains. It assists with the reflection of urban

circumstances.

Movement: The artwork can be static or dynamic.

The performance of the piece is related to the

interactions around it, either with the piece or

among the audience.

The Public: There can be no public to consume this art; there can be a passive audience

or an interactive public; or the audience can be the maker of the art. The audience can

perform as a receptor, it may need to interact with the art in order for it to perform as

intended, or the audience may be the maker/creator of the piece of art. This exists primarily

in performance and actions in pubic spaces.

figure 3.15

figure 3.16

figure 3.17


3.6 FUSING ART WITH URBAN DESIGN

Although this is not an art thesis, I must be clear about the assumptions I make as

a designer in the art field. Like the critic Patricia Phillips I believe in the utility of art. I

believe in the taboo among artists that art is “useful”. I believe that “Public Art needs to

pursue and support strategies that encourage artists, critics, and audiences to accept the

instrumentality of art”. In the public realm, the artwork is not an object anymore but an

instrument.

Urban design connects people and places physically. In Chapter 2.3.2, the 1972 Urban

Design Master Plan for San Francisco describes the discipline almost defensively: “Urban

Design is not just an academic discipline or a pastime for visionary planners and architects.

Neither is it coldly oriented to physical things rather than people and their experience. It

has to do, above all, with the visual and other environment, with their feeling of time and

place and their sense of well-being...Urban Design is a response to Human Needs. It is

part of the process of defining quality of environment, and quality for based upon human

needs.”

Whereas art connects people emotionally, psychologically and philosophically, as well

as in other ways, urban design deals with the arrangement, appearance and functionality

of towns and cities; in particular, the shaping and uses of urban public space. For this

purpose and for the purpose of fitting both disciplines together, I use this next section to

formulate a list of physical factors that inform the setting of the artwork in public spaces;

the purposes in so doing; and explain some issues that artwork confronts in the public

urban context.

figure 3.18


3.6.1 MATRIX OF ART

As described in the first section of this chapter, artwork in public space can be classified

in the following typology: medium, location, scale, artistic purpose, funding purpose,

movement, and the public.

These features are related to a specific type of art medium but they can also be related

to physical variables, to dimensions: distances of perception and distances of human

interaction. In this project I established a set of fundamental purposes for which art can

be placed in urban spaces. These are things that can already be found in our cities,

whether they were put there intentionally or not: 1-Beautification; 2-Legibility of urban

context; 3-Increase Vitality; 4- Memory; 5- Identity- Cultural Diversity; 6- Dialogue; and

7- Happiness.

1. BEAUTIFICATION.

The aesthetics artworks are used to improve the built environment, to envision a place,

typically visually. The artist becomes involved with the site or the community to design

the streetscape, the public realm. We typically associate artwork with the experience of

figure 3.19


beauty, such as in sculpture, but in public art

our experience should be extended to functional

way-finding systems, signage, urban furniture

and lighting, and community markers… It sparks

beauty (for some) in the urban ugliness of the

asphalt.

2. LEGIBILITY OF THE URBAN CONTEXT.

“To see what is in front of one’s nose needs a

constant struggle”f

Knowing about the complexity of cities and

the difficulty people have in understanding the

environment that they inhabit, I believe that art

plays a major role in the awareness of people. It

places them in their context, in their surrounding

physical, social, cultural, political or economical

circumstances. Art plays a critical role in the

expression of tension. It signals the problems that

have been defining the world‘s transformations:

from the cultural identity or difference, power

expressions or uses, emergencies and conflicts.

It causes viewers to reflect and becomes a critical

contribution to society. As Bosselman notes, “…

the mutual reinforcement between detailed observation and the knowledge of causes, the

influence art as a form of seeing, expressing, interpreting…”

3. URBAN VITALITY:

“The question of financing art in new construction is not a matter of can we afford the

expense of art in our new buildings, but rather can we afford not to finance art…It is art

in the form of sculpture, paintings, mosaics, fountains and the like, that turns sterile new

buildings into living things that attract people. People, in turn, are what a city needs to

figure 3.20

figure 3.21

figure 3.22


live.” g

Art has a strong capacity to attract the public

and create vibrant and interactive spaces and

experiences. I called this value “social vitality”

because it increases social interaction. There is

also economic vitality which can be enhanced

by increasing social vitality. Increasing social

life in the public realm can increase the value

of the private land. It becomes an economic

attraction for private investments. Indeed art

has sometimes been a major instrument for

gentrification in unrecalled areas.

4. MEMORY:

“Memory is the possibility to be in the future”

Art captures history. It creates collective

memory. Every city has a story to tell, whether

it is a story of evolving industrial, geological,

social or demographic history. Working with

artists, musicians and writers is an excellent way

to explore that history and make it part of the

community’s visual identity. This is mainly used

for preservation strategies of districts, and for building monuments and memorials.

5. IDENTITY:

Art can gather broad communities together. It can create a cultural space where people

come together to look at issues in different ways; they can voice opinions and contribute

to make a statement that is connected with a time period. (even though there is art that is

timeless).

Public art efforts offer many rewards and give meaning to art that reaches the hearts

figure 3.23

figure 3.24

figure 3.25


and minds of people where they live, work or

play. In this matter, the youth are one of the

great underused resources in our society.

Involving them in art projects, historical research,

performance and creation of art projects is an

excellent way to promote cross-generational

communication and help young people feel like

respected members of a community. Being part

of the process, they will always be rooted to the

place.

6. DIALOGUE

“Art is a potent tool of communication

and communication can cross all sorts of

boundaries.”h

Cross-cultural and cross-generational

communications will open the door for community

dialogue on a variety of social issues relating to

urban processes. Public art is as much about the

dialogue that occurs among those engaged in a

process as it is about the finished product.

7. RICHNESS OF EXPERIENCE, SOCIAL HAPPINESS

“Happiness is contagious: The happiness of an individual is associated with the happiness

of people up to three degrees removed in the social network. Happiness, in other words,

is not merely a function of individual experience or individual choice but is also a property

of groups of people.”i

Art refreshes people’s life from their tedious (hopefully not always) routines. It makes them

happy. It makes them feel alive.

figure 3.26

figure 3.27

figure 3.28


3.6.2 PUBLIC ART ISSUES IN URBAN

CONTEXT: Timeless Appeal, Public

Acceptance and Temporariness

“The primacy of style over substance is what

contemporary society is all about”.

Public art has to endure not just physically but

also in its appeal. The public needs to want to

maintain it after 20 years. In traditional societies,

public art imagery was used to invoke perpetuity.

Today, style speaks to a society in continual

search for something new. Style has always

been an elitist idea. The answer to finding

timelessness lies in appealing to popular taste.

This will likely never happen, and I do not believe

it is necessary. The public’s acceptance and the

art critic’s opinion can differ. The renowned first

modern commissioned sculpture “Flamingo”

by Alexander Calder was originally ridiculed by

Chicagoans, who called it “The Mosquito”. But

I believe the nature of art is to be controversial,

to be ambiguous, and to be (for some)

incomprehensible. I do not think that all art in

public spaces needs always to be understood by consensus.

There is a need for residents to like the art pieces of the city every day; a perfect example

of where this did not happen was with “Titled Arc” in New York when workers of the

Federal Building after eight years removed at great expense the 112-foot curved steel arc

sculpture of Richard Serra. I believe in the power of people to disagree. It is thrilling when

it happens and people can actually practice the ownership of the space, but it is a shame

also when the artist’s creativity is stopped by the public process, like Buster Simpson’s

figure 3.29

figure 3.30

figure 3.31


18 foot high art piece for the Embarcadero that was voted against unanimously. The

controversy is all set: public plus art equals controversy.

On the other hand, controversy could be resolved with the understanding that art in public

places may be temporary, it can be tested. People seemed more amenable to a piece of

art when they do not fear that it will be with them forever. This characteristic of art plays

a major role in this proposal. I work with movable, nomadic, or ephemeral installations to

deal with the unpredictable and movable pieces of cities, people, and life.

3.7 CONCLUSIONS

In his book An Anecdoted Topography of Chance Daniel Spoerri mapped every object

located on his kitchen table, describing each with his personal recollections evoked by

the object. It is the analogy of his “snare-pictures” which are a type of assemblage or

object of art in which he captures a group of objects, such as the remains of meals eaten

by individuals, including the plates, silverware and glasses, all of which are fixed to the

table or board, which is then displayed on a wall. It is a perfect illustrative example in how

art can be a way of explaining complexity, by an apparently simple action of freezing a

particular moment in time and place.

figure 3.32


When I look at cities, I like to read them, to listen to storytellers in the form of people,

maps, buildings, drawings, conversations, and songs. I like to know their public stories

and their private secrets (which ultimately are nearly always related). In these wonderful

trips exploring the city, I understood that in reality there is no frame; that the world is a

continuous system the one depicted in Powers of Ten by Charles and Ray Eames, which

evolves through scales, and in each scale, in each frame there is a distinct yet linked

narrative.

This isolation of frames, of layers is always used in design to understand the systems that

create cities. We make diagrams that simply explain the physical configuration of space to

be able to understand the interrelationship between them.

In the same way, this thesis is trying to explain two different disciplines to understand the

issues they share, the hierarchy hidden in the socio-political system of their institutional

structures, and their competences, ultimately to recombine them in this proposal.

I conclude this section with an example. One method that succeeded in the public art

program for Phoenix was to conceive of those disciplines in one project with a creation

of a interdisciplinary design team. It seems that we have to give a reason for why we,

designers, would include artists in the urban

design process. Artists take away the figure

ground, they take away the territory, they don’t

have boundaries, they don’t have parameters,

they don’t have a specific medium, they can think

purely in aesthetics, and create a united concept

that decreases the complexity of the city. They

can bring a performative aspect, as opposed to

urban design, which is largely animated. They

don’t think about fixing or solving, they can think

in more temporary structures or installations

in public spaces.We need the arts to let us

understand the complexity of a City.figure 3.33


NOTES CHAPTER 3:1 Wikipedia.org definition.2 (Encarta. World English dictionary. Ed Bloomsbury)

3 Wikipedia.org definition.

4 “Beyond Brecht: The Happenings” (1966), Lee Baxandall

5 “Public Art’s Cultural Evolution” Article by Jack Becker

6 George Orwell

7 Document “% for Art,” p. 29 (NEA Library, Art in Public Places notebook #2).

8 “Dialogues in Public Art” Tom Finkelpearl MIT Press

9 Karen Kaplan. Los Angeles Times. 5th December 2008.

Chapter 4: Precedents 50

CHAPTER 4: PRECEDENT

“The limits between art and architecture blur

when attitudes and objectives converge. Mutual

respect and similar aspirations have started a

debate about the boundaries in the discipline.

There is a need for collaboration between them,

because both are united by their fundamentally

creative function, and their commitment to

society.”1

This overlapping of disciplines makes institutional

work complex. There are problems of hierarchy

and overlapping competencies that need to be

clarified when discussing public art.

To understand the application of theory and

public policies, I divided the study in the three

ways that describe how art intervenes in public spaces, depending on which institutions

are involved (or commissioning the art): the case when the City forms a partnership with

private development to create an art district; non-profit arts organization involvement in

community development strategies; and individual spontaneous initiatives by artists and

one-day artists (known as citizens).

4.1 PLANNING THE ART

This thesis believes in the capacity for the arts and the artists to increase vitality in a

neighbourhood and therefore to provide value to a space but both social, cultural,

aesthethical and economic value. The government also know about this virtue of the arts,

and take advantage of it. They play with these ideas within their cities: they detect isolated

or abandoned districts in the urban form and by planning its “artistic” character, they arts

to make them become vibrant neighborhoods.

In their work for the Center for Community Innovation, Anja Wodsak and Kimberly

figure 4.1

figure 4.2


Suczynski explained two types of arts districts

related to neighborhood change: unplanned

and planned. Both relied on the fact that arts

organizations have an enormous economic

impact on nation-wide activity. Both involve the

same historical pattern: investments raise land

values, which increase tax revenues, and cause

the displacement of the previous population.

This mobilisation has serious consequences for

neighbourhood character and identity, and often

results in gentrification.

The difference is the starting point. Abandoned

urban areas, low-value lands and disinvested

neighbourhoods are the target of urban growth

lead by city policy and public investment.

Designated art districts in neighbourhoods often come under the banner of revitalisation.

One type of art district is based in cultural tourism. It uses cultural institutions as “bait”

for developers, designers and planners. Esther Leslie says that: “Culture has been

instrumentalized because of its effects in generating of value. To maximise and exploit

the benefits of this production it is important that culture is produced industrially.” In post

industrial cities this production of culture has been the biggest cause for “famous” 21st

century “gentrification”.

This fact is what I like to name the “sacralisation of culture”, the untouchable nature of

culture attached to the strongest values of our societies. Because it is conceptually “right”,

private developers and politicians can hide behind it to enact inequitable development.

On the other hand, there is an interesting thing about artists: they normally violate the

objective settings. But sometimes they go too far and do things in the name of art and

culture. Then, we have to be aware, and critical. An extreme example was Guillermo

Vargas Habacuc. In August 2007, he tied a dog to a chain in an art gallery and let him

figure 4.3

figure 4.4


die of starvation. Artists and visitors watched

emotionlessly during days the dog’s agony until

he eventually died. The artist defended himself by

saying in an interview, ”Nobody in the exposition

did anything to actually free or feed Natividad,

the dog.”

Another type of art district, comes about

organically, often when artists occupy the

abandoned urban spaces in blighted communities.

The newly vibrant community creates a

microcosm of cultural and economic activity in

the neighbourhood, such as the now rehabilitated

Kent Avenue Building in Williamsburg, New

York state, where an estimated of $15 million in

annual revenue was generated. But at the end,

all the creative professionals -- photographers, architects, writers, musicians, sculptors,

filmmakers, designers, painters, and printmakers -- are at risk of being a victim of their

success, their displacement leaving behind a situation in which there tension between

the community and newly-attracted developers. The planning new terminology calls this

phenomenon “cracks in the city”. It address spaces where tensions are generated from

urban transformation in relation to social and cultural needs.

4.2 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FOR THE ARTS

“We need to emphasize the creative process.” Deborah Cullinan. 2007.

Tom Finkelpearl explains in his book Dialogues in Public Art that, “Community- oriented

public art is dedicated to a group of people who live in the same local area or share a

common interest.” The art is defined as “public” in this case as opposed to the word

“private” that is associated with privilege. It is art that includes people from the lower

classes in its creation and consumption. This does not mean that the upper classes are

figure 4.5

figure 4.6


excluded from participating in the project as well

-- only that they are not the exclusive audience.

The creation of this type of art is a reaction to the

long association of art with the upper classes,

at least in terms of those who consume it, a

condition that is not so common anymore. Now

art “seeks creative ways to reinvigorate the

public life that is slowly eroding in the wake of

increased privatisation and commercialisation of

public spaces and services by interpreting the

experience of places and communities through

artwork:”. 2

Community development art marks the site from

the inside. It is based in social creativity, all the

energy, ideas and daily experiences that come

from citizens. It visualizes conflict reinforcing the feeling of belonging to a community,

making the creation of alternatives possible and feasible. It is necessary to value and

support these initiatives affirming their role in the city’s construction and transformation.

Taking root in communities and using the voices of a variety of people, community-art

ensures a diversity of art, letting the world express itself in its own diverse and complex

way. It explores the profound nature of art, the creative expressions of all segments of

societies.

This topic leads to the debate about how artists can involve citizens in creating participatory

spaces, and what is their role in communities when actually the art created is made by

non-artists. This last issue became a big internal debate in the art scene, an ethical and

theoretical dilemma: High art versus Low art, artwork quality versus social engagement,

exploitation versus authenticity, and commissioned versus spontaneous. Even as a

tangential art debate it needs to be mentioned since it seems to be a major obstacle for

this type of art to be recognized in the (“high”) artist community.

figure 4.7

figure 4.8


Thus community art is attached conceptually to low income communities. But why?

Because they need to be heard? Maybe because they do not have the power or money

to claim attention. But community art is not just about dialogue; it is also about creating

a group identity. Is it that wealthy communities don’t need a group identity -- they do not

need to know each other because they already share their status condition? I think there

should be a reconceptualising of the terminology to reconceptualise the different ways of

producing both Art and Community.

4.3 ARTIVISM: RECLAIMING PUBLIC SPACE THROUGH ART

According to Maria Perez, an theorist blogger, the modern city has abandoned the status

of a geographic entity or an administrative unit to become a space for economic and

political speculation. In many cases, cities grow without any ideologically pattern. The

“ideology” applied are business and strategic plans, which lead to geographic expansion

by economic means. But what happened to the humanistic city?

Many people have studied the transformation

phenomenon and the new concept of cities.

Sociologists, architects and the citizen movement

have been critics of this view. Visual arts also

deals with this debate -- even their own work

methods and reflection constitute strategies

of collective positioning against the economic

power derived from legal or media control.

Public plus Art by itself implies controversy but it is

an opportunity to stem the trend of placenessness

induced by speculation. The question remains,

however, who is the real audience of the artwork

in the public space? Who should decide what

has to happen in the public realm? Who is the

final owner of the space and of the piece of art?

figure 4.9

figure 4.10


Official institutions fear having the artist community involved in programs because of

artists’ freedom to voice their opinions and their power to communicate the discomfort of

situations. This fear causes institutions to keep artists away from a lot of urban projects

--and raise the question about whether the artist wants to be involved in urban projects.

Nonetheless, the critical artist occupies an important position in politics and works freely

in public spaces to give citizens not just an aesthetic experience, but a socio-political point

of view.

The research in this field is very new and it is difficult to integrate in the context of current

academic work. However when I used internet resources to search for “artivism” I could

navigate forever from blog to blog, websites, journals, wiki spaces and so on. Interestingly,

many new contemporary “street terms” appeared as I conducted the search. I will give a

couple definitions of the two terms that I found compelling.

“Artivist: is a portmanteau word combining ‘art’ and ‘activist’. Artivism developed in recent

years while the anti-globalization and antiwar protests emerged and proliferated. In most

of the cases artivists attempt to push political

agendas by the means of art. Yet this is not

political art as it was know before, in the sense

of artworks being political. The artivist is often

involved in Streetart, or Urban Art, Adbusting

or Subvertising. Often the acts of artivists can

be refereed to as part of the larger concept of

Culture jamming.

Culture jamming: is an individualistic turning away

from all forms of herd mentality (including that of

social movements), by definition is generally not

treated as a movement. It is not defined by any

specific political position or message, or even

by any specific cultural position or message.

The common thread is mainly an urge to poke

figure 4.11

figure 4.12


fun at the homogeneous nature of popular culture, often means guerrilla communication

(communication unsanctioned or opposed by government or other powers-that-be).”3

My opinion is that this new field of “un-doctrine” art brings fresh air to the arts; it brings

the unexpected to the citizen and the freedom of self-expression to the artist. I have not

researched further whether they have an economic independency from government public

money (which is my guess), but I wonder if this is how artists keep their work authentic,

free, rooted, fun and fresh. This art is starting to create “style”, and therefore you can see

“incoherent” art projects, projects that take advantage of the society’s need to renovate

itself, a society starving of new ideas, to actually promote anti-government positioning with

public money. This is the example of PARK[ing] Day in San Francisco, which started as an

artist collective proclaiming the need for green spaces in the city, and now it has spread to

become an international day of reclaiming public spaces by citizens, one-day designers,

promoted, in some cases, by the city planning departments.

figure 4.13


4.4 CONCLUSIONS

“Any important artwork can be considered as an historical event or like a challenged solution

to a problem. It is irrelevant now if the event was original or conventional, accidental or

volunteer, clumsy or agile. The question is that any solution indicates the existence of

any problem for which there has been other solutions, and it is very probable that other

solution will be invented for the same problem. But while solutions accumulates, problems

changes. Anyhow, the chain of solutions revealed the problem.” 4

Art has a long history of addressing creatively urban issues. It is a critical tool to engage

citizens in urban processes sometimes sharing methods of Consensus, Citizen Involvement,

Community Design, Community Participation and Community Art Programs.

The three sections described in this chapter City-developer partnerships in art districts;

non-profit involvement in community development; and individual spontaneous initiatives

or artivism. I believe that if these types of art were included in the budget of an urban

project -- which I think they should because they deal with urban issues (equity, social

environment, community, vacant and abandoned space) -- they would be supported by

public policies (such as percent-for-the-art). This would provide the same level of funding

provided for the project, the difference being in the allocation of that money over time,

during the urban process: the participation process, the design, the construction, and the

evaluation… This approach would reduce the challenge that the Arts and the community

confront in attracting investment for social issues from private investors, and would provide

a consistent funding stream.

This thesis proposes this approach – a comprehensive program public art in, the right-of-

way of Columbus Avenue. The form of the intervention is a Banquet Public Art Program

which would create a significant impact in the city’s economy and provide income in

addition to a wide variety of jobs, goods, and services by engaging the community in the

process and avoiding population displacement and social neighbourhood change.


NOTES

“Art and Architecture” Julia Schulz-Dornburg 2002. Ed. Gustavo Gili.

2 “Dialogues in Public Art” Tom Finkelpearl

3 Wikipedia.org

4 “ La configuracion del tiempo” G. Kubler, 1988

Chapter 5: Site Analysis 59

CHAPTER 5: THE SITE: COLUMBUS AVENUE

In 1972, the Urban Design Plan of San Francisco pointed to Columbus Avenue as one of

the most significant streets in San Francisco. It addressed its importance not just for its

function of carrying traffic, but also for the perception of the city pattern, since “it makes

visible the city’s outstanding features and its points of orientation.1”

Columbus Avenue draws a 1.20 mile diagonal from the Financial District in downtown

to the Fisherman’s Wharf. It connects the Transamerica Building at the intersection of

Montgomery and Washington Street to the Cannery Building at Beach Street. The road

was not in the city’s original street grid and was designed and built in the late 19th century

as one of two major avenues emanating from downtown. Its original purpose was to

provide a link between the commercial district, now Jackson Square, and the north east

waterfront fishing industry, and further to the northern highway that connected from North

to Sausalito.

Originating in the horse-drawn-cart era, Columbus Avenue was designed to present

the lowest gradient roadway between adjacent hillside residential neighbourhoods on

figure 5.1


Telegraph and Russian Hills. Today those

neighbourhoods are determined by the Urban

Design Plan as areas of Unique Composition

because of “the individual buildings that have a

special character worthy of preservation. These

areas have an unusually fortunate relationship

of building scale, landscaping, topography and

other attributes that makes them indispensable

to San Francisco’s image”.2

The Columbus Avenue “collector-diagonal”

intercepts the city’s street grid providing a direct

route through its northeast sector. It has become

a major link in the city’s transportation network

with significant through-traffic and frequent

transit service.

Along the way, the avenue passes through

the heart of the North Beach commercial

neighbourhood. It experiences the Italian

life in its small retail stores, cafes, and

restaurants; it contains the picturesque spots

for residents around Washington Square Park; it

accommodates all the uses that the high density

population of adjacent Chinatown needs.

All these unique communities, the Italian, the

Chinese, the Beat Generation, the Barbary

Coast, the Valley, Russian Hill, Telegraph Hill

and Fisherman’s Wharf give Columbus Avenue

the uniqueness of a vibrant street, not just

because of a strong commercial economy and

figure 5.2

figure 5.3

figure 5.4

figure 5.5


figure 5.5.1 figure 5.5 .2


figure 5.6

activity, but also because of a daily domestic residential character and a powerful cultural

and social history.

The strategic location of the Avenue between the financial district and central waterfront

to the northern waterfront and the Golden Gate Bridge makes it also an important tourist

destination. Its cultural activities, public life and commercial uses increase the interest

of exterior visitors (foreigners, US Americans, or SF citizens), and provoke a dense

pedestrian use along the street, that combined with the Avenue envisioned as a Rapid

Transit corridor3 becomes one of the biggest issues in this thesis’s project area.

5.1 SITE RESEARCH

As explained in the methods chapter, the site research was conducted by direct

observation and the interpretative analysis of maps and graphics, historical and current

data and documents. For the purposes of this project I isolated five topics: Social History,

Demographics, Zoning and Land Use, Transportation System, and Public Art.

5.1.1 Social History

The social history of the different parts of the neighborhood explains the interest that

attracts tourist from all parts of the world to this area. The mixed and rich legends around

the neighbourhood give the character that makes it a favourite for both tourists and

residents.

North Beach, Italian Neighborhood: It was designated one of the American Planning

Association’s top 10 Great Neighborhoods for 2007. Its European-style has evolved into

one of the city’s most unique and authentic communities. Helped by planning and zoning


tools, it has managed to preserve its essential

character: a mix of tolerance and tradition in

both the built and social environments. It has an

international reputation due to the genesis of the

The Beat generation, which is a term used to

describe a group of American writers inform the

1950s who described the cultural phenomena

that they wrote about and inspired: a rejection of

mainstream American values, experimentation

with drugs and alternate forms of sexuality, and

an interest in Eastern spirituality. Almost all the

figures of the original Beat Generation ended up

in San Francisco, where they created a poetry

scene around the City Lights Bookstore, run by

Lawrence Ferlinghetti. They and their literary

meetings and routines in the neighbourhood

developed a reputation as new bohemian

hedonists, they celebrated non-conformity and

spontaneous creativity. This attitude has stayed

alive in the area, and has given the creative

critical character to some spots along Columbus

Avenue: Jack Kerouac Alley, Vesubio Café, Café

Trieste, and the Swat.

Chinatown: As a port city, San Francisco’s

Chinatown business district, the largest in North

America, formed in the 1850s and served as a

gateway for incoming immigrants who arrived

during the California gold rush and construction

of the transcontinental railroads of the wild

figure 5.7

figure 5.8

figure 5.9

figure 5.10


western United States. Chinatown was later

reconceptualised as a tourist attraction in the

1910s. Once a community of predominantly

Taishanese Chinese-speaking inhabitants, it has

remained the preeminent Chinese center in the

United States.

Barbary Coast now overlaps with Chinatown,

North Beach and the Financial District, nine

blocks roughly bounded by Montgomery Street,

Washington Street, and Broadway. Particularly

notorious was Pacific Avenue, historically a

pleasure quarter in the old port of San Francisco,

which came close in before land fill created the

Embarcadero shoreline. The neighbourhood

quickly acquired a seedy character during the

California Gold Rush (1848-1858). It was known

for gambling, prostitution and crime. Today clubs

still light the night in the area around Broadway

Avenue. It is the focus point for international

tourist and suburban kids that want to experience

the flavour of “a night in San Francisco”.

figure 5.11

figure 5.12

figure 5.13

Fisherman’s Wharf encompasses the northern waterfront of San Francisco from

Ghirardelli Square or Van Ness Avenue, to Pier 35 or Kearny Street. It is the second most

visisted tourist attraction in the United States of America after Disneyworld.

5.1.2 Demographics4

At roughly one square mile in size, the neighborhoods directly adjacent to the Columbus

Avenue corridor form one of the densest areas in the state of California. Approximately four

percent of the city’s population lives within roughly two percent of its land area. Roughly


half of the residents are of Asian descent as compared with 30% in the city as a whole.

Fewer people under the age of 25 live here than in the rest of the city, while the share of

residents over the age of 65 is 50% higher. This describes a neighborhood that is aging

and not producing as many young families as other parts of the city.

The gap between the “haves and have-nots” is larger here than in the rest of the city.

The share of households with incomes below $25,000 is twice as high within the corridor

as can be found for the city as a whole. At the same time, the share of households with

incomes over $75,000 is slightly higher here than in the rest of San Francisco. There is

also a very wide range in income levels within different census tracts.

The neighborhood is particularly transit-dependent. Almost one half of the households

along the Columbus Avenue corridor do not have access to an automobile, a rate that is

almost twice as high as the rest of the city. The share of households with one automobile is

figure 5.14


similar to that of the city as a whole, but multiple-

car households occur here at a much lower rate.

It is not surprising to see that residents drive

alone to work at a rate that is one-third lower

than the rest of the city. In an area with such

low auto ownership, however, one would expect

to see a much higher rate of transit usage. The

answer lies in the share of residents who walk to

work, a value that is three times higher than for

the city as a whole.

5.1.3 Zoning

The City and County of San Francisco Municipal

Code revised the official zoning maps and

ordinances in May 2006. To locate any parcel

I looked at the Use District Map and Height and

Bulk District Map, and checked in Special District,

Preservation District, Coastal Zone or Special

Sign District. (See SF Planning Department

Website).

figure 5.15 figure 5.16


5.1.4 Transportation Systems 5

Twenty-one percent of the total daily trips within North Beach and Russian Hill are local

trips, with both an origin and destination in the neighborhood. Concerns have been

expressed about many potential right-of-way changes to the corridor by North Bay

commuters who use Columbus Avenue to access downtown. While only 2% of the total

trips that end in North Beach/Russian Hill originated in the North Bay, it is safe to assume

that a much higher proportion of trips along the corridor simply pass through the study

area. Some other interesting figures emerge from the tables that help to describe travel

patterns in the northeast sector of the city. Fifteen percent of trips bound for the study area

begin downtown. This may be due to people transferring from BART or MUNI Metro trains

on Market Street. When looking at just transit trips, fully 14% of all transit riders bound

for North Beach originated in the East Bay. The fact that the highest rate of transit mode-

share to North Beach is from the East Bay - with almost 35% of total trips being made on

transit – illustrates that visitors to the area are already using transit in high numbers. As

a whole, approximately 20% of all trips bound for North Beach/Russian Hill are made on

transit, as compared to an average of 5.4% for the city as a whole.

San Francisco’s Transit First Policy is the basis for MUNI’s planning “Four major corridors”.

The City’s Board of Supervisors adopted the policy in 1974 to prioritize transit improvements,

figure 5.17 Table 2- Journey to Work Statistics, 2000


such as designated transit lanes and streets and

improved signalization, to expedite the movement

of public transit vehicles. Furthermore, the policy

states that new transportation investment should

be allocated to meet the demand for public transit

generated by new public and private commercial

and residential development. MUNI published

A Vision for Rapid Transit in San Francisco

in 2002 which proposed a vision for moving

people in San Francisco along major corridors

included in a Transit Priority Network. The Vision

Plan lists 12 major transit corridors – of which

the 30-Stockton line is included - that have

high volumes of riders, but suffer from chronic

capacity and reliability problems. The aim is to

make improvements in all of the corridors to

bring each one up to a minimum level of speed

and reliability. The improvements range from

relatively low-cost Transit Preferential Streets

(TPS) treatments to more expensive submerged

light rail. The 30-Stockton line is planned for

upgrade to TPS.

figure 5.17-1


5.1.5 Public Art 6

San Francisco is renowned for its beauty and

culture. The artworks and monuments which

adorn the streets and public buildings contribute

to the city’s international appeal. The City and

County of San Francisco is very proud of its

public art, and the Arts Commission is striving to

protect and preserve the history and richness of

this collection. Along the Columbus Avenue there

are three artworks that belong to this collection.

Centred in Washington Square Park, between

Columbus Avenue, Stockton, Filbert, and

Union Streets, a cast iron life-size figure of the

revolutionary statesman, philosopher, inventor

and printer, Benjamin Franklin is placed. It was

given to the city in 1879 by Henry D. Cogswelll,

an excentric who made his fortune during the

gold rush. It was originally located at Kearny and

Market but moved to its present location in 1904.

It is the earliest San Francisco monument still in

existence. It is in the middle of the square facing

west and is embraced by 5 tall trees that set of

the stage for his performance. It is 15 feet tall so

it can be seen from a distance of at 30 feet. The

statue is the entrance from Columbus Avenue to

the Square, but it is also in the axis of the entrance

of the St Peter’s Church. This lateral view of the

semi-circle protected the statue and gives the

center privilege location an odd crossed view.figure 5.18


In the northwest corner of the park, in a clearing of a dense green trees area, a heroic-

size group of three firemen, one holding a supine woman, one kneeling with hose

and one pointing with outstretched arm, stand on a stone pedestal with a plaque that

commemorates the Volunteer Fire Department of San Francisco,1849-66. It was made

in 1932 by Haig Patigian and it is 14 feet tall. This height is in proportion with the shorter

distance from which you see it (walking along Columbus Avenue between Filbert and

Union Street), makes a respectful looking-up gesture whenever you pass through it. It is

also more perceptible since the clearing permits light at certain moments of the day, just

surrounding the artwork.

The third piece is Man drinking water, a bronze work from 1902 by M. Earl Cummings. It is

an over-life-size nude, bearded man crouching and drinking water from his hands, which

serves as a fountain to a lagoon at his feet. It is approximately 32 ½’’h x 15’’w x 26’’d. The

fanciful legend about this statue is that the model for the piece also posed for St. John

the Baptistby Auguste Rodin. This statue is also located in Washington Square, but in the

triangle opposite to the park, on Columbus Avenue between Union and Powell Streets.

It is now a fenced area that is not used and that actually caused the man to be hidden

among the tall bushes.

Other than the artwork around Washington Square Park that creates a social gathering

spot where all the sculpture seems to be located, there is one more “creative” point:

the intersection of Broadway and Columbus. The proximity of the City Lights bookstore

associates the place with the Beat Generation. Artist Bill Weber illustrated it so in the

wraparound two-sided mural speaks to both the history of North Beach and Chinatown

with icons, like Emperor Norton, jazz musicians, Italian fishermen, the Imperial Dragon

and Herb Caen depicted.

The Language of the Birds flying sculpture by Brian Goggin and Dorka Keehn was

unveiled in November 2008, confirming that the neighborhood is continuously renovating

and innovating. The 23 powered tomes that appeared to have let words in English, Italian

and Chinese fallen from their pages, have been a innovative collaborative work of the

Department of Public Works, private neighbour funding and the artists.


Thanks to the closure of the right turn lane from

Columbus to Broadway, the street gained space

for pedestrians in this island transformed in to a

plaza. This street design triggered the piece of

permanent artwork over pedestrian heads. It was

a consequence of the percent-for-art ordinance,

but the innovative aspect of this project is that

“it’s the first time that performance art has been

part of public art”7. This example is been a great

impulse for me to. I now believe that the proposal

of this thesis can be feasible, can be pushed

forward by a community full of life and willing to

stand out for its culture and creativity.

During the site research I have also accumulated

names and references of institutions,

organizations, communities, associations and

members that are now listed in my personal

blog in the Internet. They could be consulted for

further information about their shared objectives

and competences in the project along Columbus

Avenue to set a strategy for collaboration.

figure 5.19

figure 5.20



5.2 SITE ANALYSIS

As I mentioned in Chapter 2, the sources of this thesis were gather by myself through

interviews, and direct observation, added to the data collected from Renew SF that

generously shared all the Columbus Avenue Studies and current Information. Next I will

discuss the methodology I created to find urban design problems and allocate art, the

analysis is divided in three categories: Vitality Analysis, Urban Form Analysis, and Identity

Analysis.

URBAN VITALITY ANALYSIS:

The Analysis of Urban Vitality is based on street interviews, the street game discussed

in Chapter 2 and street notes documented by Maia Garcia and myself. It is divided in the

detection of Social Vitality and Physical Vitality.

The first one is divided by Types of Users depending on their origin, whether they come

from the neighborhood, the Bay Area, elsewhere in the U.S., or abroad; the time that the

user was found in the space; and the type of activity that they developed in the space.

This third one is related with the Physical Analysis in a diagram that overlaps also: Types of

businesses differentiating between: restaurants, shops, and vacant lots; the transparency

or opacity of the frontage of the retail and the street lighting.

URBAN FORM ANALYSIS:

We already know that Columbus Avenue is a diagonal collector in the San Francisco urban

grid. This straight line route is a very legible footprint of history; we can easily understand

that it was meant to connect the Financial District and Fisherman’s Wharf.

Columbus Avenue is explained by transportation engineers as a very complex street

figure 5.23


figure 5.24

Figure 5.24: User Types:

This diagram explains the categorisation for the users of the space about their origin. “Where do they come

from” inform the type of transportation used to come to the district (as shown in Nelson Nynegaard Study),

and their destination.

Chinatown is the densest neighbourhood in San Francisco and due to the culture, the use of outdoors is

extremely important. The italian and North Beach Community are more related to the café outdoors. They are

more attached to the consumption of space (here is where the demographic data is extremely relevant).

Bay Area users come to Columbus Avenue for shopping and eating in the European style restaurants.

National tourists do the same but they actually also visit the landmarks, monuments or institutional buildings

and areas: the “purely San Francisco” locations St Peter’s Church, Lombard Street and Coit Tower.

The have-to spots are more evident for International tourist. You can fi nd them everywhere drifting around the

neighbourhood, mostly in North Beach looking for the recommendations of their day-tour guides.


figure 5.25

Figure 5.25: User Type: total:

We have understood from the data collected that normally,

the different types of users “schedule” their walk around

the district, around the neighbourhood, from landmark,

to landmark, from shop to shop and from restaurants to

restaurants.

For international destination, as refl ected in the Power

Map (fi gure 5.46) for the infl uential radius of places or

businesses, the walk will always include: Fishermann’s

Wharf, Coit Tower, Washington Square, City Lights and

the Beat Museum, and the Transamerican Tower. In the

way, of course, all the North Beach shops and restaurants

that characterised the area entertain the users with their

transparent street level windows.


figure 5.26

Figure 5.26: Time Use. 12am-12pm

The zoning of North Beach and Barbary Coast allows commerce in the ground level of the buildings. This

regulation infl uences the vitality pattern of the whole Columbus Avenue project.

At night, the locals host parties, performances and entertainments shows. They are a great “bait” for the

suburban population that come looking for outdoor free activities that will escape them from their boring low

density, single family communities.

In the morning we have the activity that support all this parties, that will clean their waste and will feed

and serve them. Delivery time brings a lot of trucks and middle size vans to the sidewalks, to the storage

underneath them.


figure 5.27

Figure 5.27: Time Use. 12pm-12am

For a neighbourhood that is mainly restaurants at the street level, it seems obvious that noon is the highlight

time. People come to North Beach to eat. Foods are served all day long: breakfast (that can last for hours),

lunch, late lunch, dinner and late dinner again. Since a lot of the visitors are international tourists, the eating

time window last all day. The shifts last until the restaurants overlap with night activities and live music bars,

making this part of Columbus Avenue, an active “20 hours” Street.


figure 5.28

Figure 5.28: Time Use Total:

The neighbourhood has demonstrated to be an active

neighbourhood. The activity happens mainly around the

businesses (restaurants and shops); and some of the

isolated venues scattered in the Avenue (Bimbo´s…)

Fisherman’s Wharf is no doubt a daily destination; probably

because of its association with the beach and the water

(you don’t go see the sea lions at midnight). However, this

also represents the decay, lack of maintenance or not well

programmed Pier 39 venues, as well as the limited and

insuffi cient street lighting in this area.


Figure 5.29: Activity Type:

The activity type is obviously linked to the land use of the area.

Resting areas or passive activities areas are occupying the Parks and open spaces.

The shopping and window shopping need a retail land use at the ground level.

The tourism is always considering the monuments, landmarks and cultural institutions where

they gather. This landmarks and their walking between them around the neighbourhood

establish the main “shopping corridors”.

figure 5.29


figure 5.30

Figure 5.30: Activity Type Total:

The Activity Type diagram is a clear representation of the

Zoning plan for San Francisco (see fi gure 5.16).

Looking at these directional activity areas, it is interesting to

notice the “activity corridors” that are created when following

the route patterns of the space (see fi gure 6.7). The most

popular would be the ones that are also connections of

cultural destinations.


Figure 5.31: Business Type: Street Lighting:

In a fi rst analysis, and based in the urban study that students

from --- made for Renew SF. The mapping of different

businesses along the Avenue will be very descriptive of the

activity type in it.

What was more revealing is the observation data that we

collected is the number of vacant businesses (most of them

for rent. They break the continuity of the economic vitality

leaving gaps in some blocks. The most relevant is called

the Valley and it’s also a consequence of the existent land

use.

The lighting analysis was meant (just started) to relate the

night life of the streets with the actual physical features of it.

It will trace street lighting: private (from the business- heat

lamps, façade lights and neon advertisements) and public

(from the City –street traffi c lamps on the median or the

sidewalk).

figure 5.31


“because all the intersections are different”.

The diagonal intersects the City’s rectangular

pattern in a forty degree angle (with the east-

west direction of the street grid, the long side of

the rectangle). From this analysis, it is beautiful

to realize (at least for those who love geometry

like me) that even though they seem different –

because of the car flows- the geometry marks a

strict rhythm that repeats along the street. It starts

in the Transamerica Building block, since it was

the drawing origin of the diagonal. The modular

rhythm is constituted by seven cut blocks that

make seven intersections. It starts and finishes

with an “x” intersection, and determines two

different types of intersections, depending if the

diagonal intersect the South-North or the East-

West streets.

The frequency of the intersections of the street is

fairly high: in 1.2miles there are 21 intersections.

This leads to the study of the correspondence

on Columbus Avenue which is much smaller

than a common San Francisco street – while

figure 5.33

figure 5.34

figure 5.35

figure 5.36


in the later, the blocks occupy the 83% of the

street, in Columbus the block experience and

the intersection experience is almost the same,

the 50% of the street is in an intersection. The

amount of space for cars in these intersections

is higher due to the diagonal shape. The

openness of the street in the intersection in a

diagonal shape is probably the reason for the

disorientation of pedestrian along the corridor.

This discontinuity of the street, of the pedestrian

space is an example in how the car commands

the space in cities, and aggravates pedestrian

safety, provokes fear and causes discomfort.

The first historical map of Columbus Avenue

shows the land condemned and buildings

destroyed to execute the street. The cut through

figure 5.37

figure 5.38

figure 5.39

figure 5.40

figure 5.41


the small properties explain the small frontage of some of the business in Columbus

Avenue. This led to not-homogenous lengths of the frontage buildings that cause a diverse

and vibrant experience in the street. In contrast, the larger blocks in “the Valley”, in which

unique owners can execute one unique development in one block, the richness of the

street experience and social vitality along those blocks decreases.

figure 5.42



IDENTITY ANALYSIS:

This map identifies the communities along

Columbus Avenue. The boundaries of those

communities are always invisible, blurry. The

Planning Department has established North

Beach and Chinatown as Neighbourhood

Commercial Districts in their zoning district

Index, but other than land use and ordinances

differentiation the identity of a place is not

physically visible in the space. Normally urban

design guidelines (signage, trees…) show up

the identitarian features of neighbourhoods. The

North Beach Neighborhood Commercial District

(NBD), The Chinatown Community District

(CCD) and Chinatown Residential Neighborhood

Commercial (CND) have particular urban features

that identify the district.

North Beach spread its Italian flags painted in the

street lighting poles along the street all the way

to Fisherman’s Wharf (even though the district

doesn’t extend all the way there). The CBD and

CND have a gateway to the district where Grant

Avenue meets Bush Street, and they are now

starting the process of designing a “Chinatown

North Gate” that will welcome citizens coming

from the North in the opposite side, where Grant

Avenue hits Columbus Avenue.

The communities are attached to the site by

History. They are delimited by some historical figure 5.45


landmarks that gather an identity around them,

and vice versa: Downtown Financial District

around the office skyscrapers; Barbary Coast

around the historic night clubs; North Beach

around the restaurant frontage; Chinatown

around Porthsmouth Square and the oldest

Chinese Community in North America; North

Beach around the Italian community with its

restaurant district with great European “flavour”;

and Fisherman’s Wharf along the piers. By

contrast, it is interesting to notice that even though

the San Francisco Art Institute is the oldest and

most prestigious school of higher education in

contemporary art, founded in 1871, it hasn’t

influenced nor spread an artistic character to the

neighbourhood that holds it: the Valley. Maybe

it’s due to the location up in the hill?

The Power Map was assembled with the

assistance of Rod Freebairn-Smith and lists all

the influential people, business or communities

along Columbus Avenue. They are evaluated

for the scope of its influence whether it is local,

city-wide or international recognition. This

consideration comes from the interviews on the

street and from Renew SF members.

This map also locates the on-going planning

(active or proposed), and urban or architectural

projects in the area. It highlights the need to

coordinate them all to establish the common figure 5.46


points of interests along Columbus Avenue. Whenever the Public Art Program for

Columbus Avenue detect the opportunity sites for art, it will point at those projects, people

or institutions to get them involved in the urban process.

5.3 CONCLUSION

After the analysis it becomes evident that there is a void of identity or community life

in the part of the street called “The Valley” because of the topographic condition going

down Telegraph Hill, between Greenwich Street and Bay Street. This gap is a challenge

that needs to be addressed in order to assure the continuity of meaningful places along

Columbus Avenue. For this purpose the already mentioned Art Institute is an opportunity,

a powerful starting point to generate a vibrant street life.

The biggest challenge will be to make a proposal for the Avenue that brings all the diversity

of communities, meaning identities, all together. Lets them be authentically unique in a

shared public space, in the same area of the City.

figure 5.47

figure 5.48


NOTES

Urban Design Plan. San Francisco. Planning Department. 1972. (p50).

2 Urban Design Plan. San Francisco. Planning Department. 1972. (p49).

3 MUNI Vision Plan- San Francisco Transit Priority Network. 2002. published in the Columbus

Avenue Revitalization Master Plan. P5. Fig 4

4 Analysis used from Renew SF Columbus Revitalization Plan

5 Analysis used from Renew SF Columbus Revitalization Plan

6 The source for this section is the Arts Commission Collection Guide.

7 San Francisco Chronicle Article.

Chapter 6: Goals and Strategy 88

CHAPTER 6: GOALS AND STRATEGY

Establishing the primary goals for this thesis has been like setting the principles for my

future career as an urban designer. My own experience as an “urban creature” got my

attention in terms of the urban issues treated, and has made me emphasize them in this

research.

As any urban area that is going through a major transformation, Columbus Avenue needs

to address these goals. This thesis will be an example of how to accomplish them by

applying some specific strategies and principles that will be explained further on.

1. Reclaim and “Free” public space. Obviously cars (in movement or still) are

invading our public space, taking space away from the pedestrian traffic. Reflecting on

the domination of private vehicles will be the starting point to rethink our public space and

increase walkability in our neighbourhoods.

Cities have a major relationship with commercial uses. Commerce has a primary economic

role but still, streets and open spaces need to offer free space for citizens to live, rest and

enjoy. The City needs to be balanced and focus on both Users and Consumers.

2. Participatory Design. Cities are pure complexity, just a reflection of our more

and more complex society. Designers are serving this society. They need to get involved

with the people to know what the real needs of a site are; to detect the opportunities and

constraints that they will be facing.

figure 6.1


3. Alive Urbanism. Modern urban structures, patterns, and planning models are

making landscapes similar and homogeneous. There is a great need in today’s society

for urban design to be mind catching, to react to the world’s apathy and make places that

increase the dynamic of people, individually and collectively. In this context, art, creativity,

and self expression need to be encouraged from communities, institutions or individuals.

Columbus Avenue is facing a major change; physical (North Shore Line) and therefore

sociological. This thesis identifies the social frame in which the Subway proposal is landing.

It is based on belief in the importance of this analysis to diagnose the social problems that

the urban project may encounter; to assure the continuity (not disruption) of vitality in

space, time and users of the neighbourhoods transformed.

The thesis focuses in the importance of linking infrastructural projects throughout scales:

from the city scale projects, to the social reality of neighbourhoods and the experience

of their citizens. It reveals the relevance of the construction phase in urban projects to

maintain and enhance the life in communities: their character and vitality throughout urban

processes. The combination of an urban design and a public art program in this thesis

proposal is based in the need of citizens to understand the transformation of their habitats;

to raise their awareness of the urban transformation process; to mitigate and soften the

uncomfortable steps of an urban change.

figure 6.2


6.1 RECLAIM PUBLIC SPACE FOR

PEDESTRIANS

The 1.2miles of Columbus Avenue have no

homogeneous sidewalks. The dimensions of

them vary along the Avenue. The communities

served have different densities and habits in the

public space.

The Columbus Avenue sidewalk used to be 15’

wide. It was narrowed to 8’-10’ for the allocation

of street parking areas. This decision combined

with the policies that allowed renting street

surface for cafés terraces in the day time are

the main reasons for the pedestrian congestion

along Columbus Avenue. It is provoked by the

different set of obstacles (street furniture, mobile

elements or persons) in the sidewalks. It is more

problematic when the Avenue runs through the

North Beach District. The sidewalk terraces

take 5’ from pedestrian flow leaving a path of a

minimum of 4´ (tree conditions) and a maximum

figure 6.4

figure 6.3


of 8’ in Lowest Columbus, the so called “The Valley”.

The intersection of Green Street and Stockton Avenue is the most crowded pedestrian

point. The counts in the bus stop on Stockton scream that 24.000 persons per day pass by

or gather at this intersection. These data is relevant to understand the existent conditions

of the street.

In order to give back space for pedestrians.

• Balance the activities, moving, gathering, sitting and chilling areas;

• Balance the space given to Consumers versus Users;

• Study the needs of vehicular traffic to make decisions about sidewalk widening

and bulbout dimension, street closure (permanent or temporary pedestrianization),

and flex-use parking spaces.

Jan Gehl uses a diagram that explains the changes of the activities in a place. Reinterpreting

this diagram for this specific process will define the statements to follow in the thesis:

minimize the traffic flow and the car invasion; increase pedestrian urban spaces (temporary

or permanent); balance the passive and active recreation, and beautify and implement the

features for the perfect function of the necessary activities.

figure 6.5


figure 6.6

6.2 CONNECT NATURAL SYSTEMS AND

SOCIAL NETWORKS

Open spaces define and identify hills, districts and

recreation with their green pattern landscapes.

This pattern makes people understand the City,

its logic and its mean of cohesion. They help

people find their way, without inconvenience or

lost time, letting them see the routes to be taken.

Travel congestion is reduced if the best routes

are easily found and safety is increased.

The goals are providing the connectivity of natural

systems in the City; these green connectors can

overlap with the activity corridors and will create a

network of vitality throughout the neighbourhood

in order to allow an ecological network for a

diverse natural (and human) community.

figure 6.7


figure 6.8

6.3 ENHANCE CULTURE IN THE PUBLIC

REALM

The Vitality Analysis explained in Chapter 5

relies knowing who is in the space, who owns it,

what is the character of the space given by the

people occupying it.

The chart in Appendix B presents the “social

cost” of the different phases of the Columbus

Avenue Project. It establishes the cost in hours

of the affected users of the space during the

construction of the Avenue. This tool will allow

a better solution for enhancing the public realm

(preserve or improve).

The diversity of the communities that this project

faces are the basis of the goal of the thesis:

Preserve the identity of the neighbourhoods,

by detecting their character, their uniqueness,

and suggesting visualizing their history, creating

physical symbolism in the community. I always

use the metaphor of the brochette, Columbus

Avenue skews the different communities but it

figure 6.9


figure 6.10

has to remain a unique and solid street.

For this specific goal, arts will play a major

role: Art as a social practice, where the

work “takes social interaction as its primary

medium of manufacture or investigation”. The

“social” most commonly includes people: their

relations to one another, their relations to

their surroundings, and their relations to the

structures that constitute their surroundings and

themselves.

The challenge as it is explained in the Policy

3 of the Arts Elements of the San Francisco

General Plan, “is to bring these two elements-

the arts and the general population- together,

so that all people may create and enjoy the

arts.”

The same challenge will stimulate public

participation: a transparent process, citizenship

involved in the decision-making process. Those

differences in the design prevent opposition in

the communities by engaging and empowering

them in the project.

6.4 PHASING OF THE URBAN DESIGN

PROJECT

The phasing of urban design projects is probably

one of the most important pieces of the discipline.


figure 6.13figure 6.11 figure 6.12

Captions: Figure 6.11-13: In Chapter 5, the vitality, identity and urban form analysis framed the set of

goals described before; it defi ned the specifi c strategies for the Columbus Avenue Project.

The areas in which vitality needs to be enhanced, maintained or created (reinvented) – see fi gure 6.12; in

which identity needs to be enhanced, maintained (visualized) or create (fostered) – see fi gure 6.13 ; and the

areas in which the openness and the enclosure of the street will allowed larger or smaller public spaces design

proposals – see fi gure 6.11. In Chapter 7, the principles used in the proposal will address these intentional

strategies.


figure 6.14

It is done to fit the current circumstances of the city, physical and social, with the future

proposals for them. This plan prioritizes the needs of different areas for social, technical

but mainly for economic reasons. It needs to assure an equitable urban development

avoiding uncomfortable and unfair mobilization of the population.

In this specific case, since we are focused in the public right of way the most important

goal is to avoid a negative economic impact on the business and restaurants along the

Avenue.

The fact that phasing is a major goal in this thesis emphasizes the need of urban design to

give temporal solutions to different spaces in different phases of urban transformation.

In this scenario art can also be tested in public spaces to confirm that it “fits” in the space

and the community. This could be a new tool of approving public art so that artists will

have the freedom to create without being stop by the consensus process.

6.5 CONCLUSIONS

Columbus Avenue is the only diagonal street inserted in the original grid of San Francisco.

Its original character is meant to be preserved; the uniqueness of the district that surrounds

the Avenue forces any proposal to promote the diversity of both people and spaces. Its

urban shape also allows great opportunities to allocate art.

The challenging goal of this thesis will be to build (again?)a City as an outdoors museum;

a City as an outdoor living room for the citizens (as it is currently: where everybody can

enjoy, display and share their individual creativity.

Chapter 7: Design Proposal 97

CHAPTER 7: THE DESIGN PROPOSAL

All the research in this thesis seems to agree with the Better Street Plan of San Francisco

that “seeks to balance the needs of all street users, with a particular focus on the

pedestrian environment and how streets can be used as public space. The Plan will

reflect the understanding that the pedestrian environment is about much more than just

transportation – that streets serve a multitude of social, recreational and ecological needs

that must be considered when deciding on the most appropriate design.”

The Plan defines the term Pedestrian Environment as “the areas of the street where people

walk, shop, sit, play, or interact –outside of moving vehicles”, and gives a set of “advices”

on how to design its own categorization of streets.

If Columbus Avenue applies the Better Street Concepts, it could fit into the categorization

of a Commercial Street, a Residential Street; it could even be a multi-way Boulevard

and determine a Green connector. It could be established as a major through street that

carries traffic for considerable distances between districts, but it would be related to local

streets that serve only adjacent properties. It could. It could. It could. As seem, now, IS a

great opportunity to prove the potential of Columbus Avenue and its exemplary role in the

challenge of improving the City pedestrian environment.

The San Francisco County Transportation Authority and Renew SF started in 2005 the

Community- Based Transportation Plan for

improvements to the Columbus Avenue corridor.

It was based in the Prioritization Program

of SFCTA (figure 7.2). They started to show

the interest in rethinking the major role of the

avenue in the city’s system and the economic

growth that will occur if the Plan takes place.

They’ve come up with the questions about the

transportations demands, the liveability of the

streets as civic open spaces, the difficult (in

terms of searching solutions for such opposite figure 7.1


purposes) traffic and pedestrian congestions, and the challenge in treating different and

proximate districts/neighborhood with such different transportation and such different

economic and recreational issues. This last challenge is a key point for the project: keep

the neighborhood character and give adequate solutions to the many different needs along

Columbus Avenue.

A more controversial debate has been to include in the project the City’s proposal for the

North Shore Line Subway. This specific topic has raised a loud debate among officials,

professionals and citizens due to the social consequences of the transformation of the

space (a possible lack of ground level activity due to an underground infrastructure; or a

high density future land use in then neighborhood –now only 40feet height limitation-) and

the concepts of public transit (improved MUNI bus transportation system versus a brand

new light train underground system).

This research isn’t taking a position in the debate. Nevertheless, it assumes the future

North Shore Line Subway will come to the neighborhood. It gives alternatives and studies

the consequences in the urban ground level environment. It makes the statement that if it

figure 7.2


has to exist (since it’s already part of the future

infrastructure project of the City, and it’s been

a subject of different transportation studies) it

should be treated as an urban design and social

issue; it should produce the least amount of

inconvenience for residents and visitors, in the

future and during the construction; and it should fit

in the existing physical and social environment.

The cross sections described next are the

solutions proposed for the multiple transportation

systems along the Avenue: pedestrians,

bicycles, private cars, taxis, MUNI, cable cars,

underground subway, upgraded Light Rail Train

and all sort of random touristic tours transports

(such as wheeled boats, electric mini-car) that

need to be incorporated in this corridor.

After a good understanding of the different

sections types, the overall proposal (figure

7.4- 7.9) will be explained next by the common

principles applied along the Avenue. In Section

7.6, the project is divided by study areas,

describing the specific details of the blocks and

streets.

figure 7.3


figure 7.4

Figure 7.4: Street Type 1: From Montgomery Street to Broadway Avenue:

The Avenue has 13´sidewalk on both sides. The 8´parking spaces will share the space temporarily with café

terraces. The total sidewalk in these cases will be 21´ wide. A 6´bike lane runs on the side of an 11´shared

vehicular traffi c lane (public transit –MUNI- and private cars). The median will be a 4´ wide discontinuous

planter that “hides” the storm water treatment features.

“Good shape” trees will remain 9´away from the façades. The other trees (that the survey allows to move)

will be replaced at 11´apart, at 20´ from the façades. Located in between parking spaces, they will help

decongesting the pedestrian fl ow on the sidewalk.

The median will be planted with low bushes in concrete planters. The topography in this section of the Avenue,

allows looking at the Transamerican Tower from the bottom to the top. Improving this view is the reason to

maintain a non-planted (vertical vegetated layer).


figure 7.5

Figure 7.5: Street Type 2: From Broadway to Union Street:

The North Shore Line will enter Columbus Avenue at Stockton Street. It will maintain an

almost constant depth at 50 feet until the Green/Stockton Station. It is planned to be a

single tunnel with 2 platforms on the side. It will occupy the whole block avoiding the curve

on Green Street, and will have 4 exits on both side of the tracks, and the block.

The section continues with the same dimension as in Street Type I. The one difference will

be the median tree planting every 50 feet (half of the tree’s sidewalks rhythm) to allow the

turns of emergency firemen trucks.

This portion of the street belongs to North Beach. The land use on the street level is

commercial, so the character of the awnings and flex-use terraces has an outdoors Italian

flavour.


figure 7.6Figure 7.6: Street Type 3: From Union Street to Filbert Street:

This short piece of the Avenue is the one of the urban treasures of the City. It belongs to

the open space block of the original San Francisco grid. When the diagonal breaks the

rectangle in two pieces, it left aside a small triangle with a difficult recreational use (in

terms of the dimensions). This cut modified the visual “weight” of Saint Peters’ Church in

the overall design of the park.

Washington Square Park is not only a City park, but a crowded neighbourhood park.

The proposal avoids a major station in this area since the dramatic construction hole will

last at least 4 years; the gap in the community will be huge, and there will be technical

difficulties in allocating the station in a 15% slope.

Instead, the station in the previous block and the upgraded stop in the next one (from

south to the north) will still make this plaza the epicentre of the District.


figure 7.7

Figure 7.7: Street Type 4: Section from Greenwich Street to Mason Street:

The portal of the North Shore Line will be located in this block. It barely has any shop

or restaurants and the descendent slope of the topography permits that the length of it

shorten to 125´ (instead of the 175´of the actual alternative).

The sidewalk will be 11´ on each side (same as current dimension) but the tables will

be allowed only between the new vegetation edges. The shared lane is 16´ to allow a

possible cyclist or delivery vehicle and to prevent accidents.

The 26´portal “hole” will be a great opportunity to do something unique an arch, a gate

or any suggestive creative idea, to assure the pedestrian safety and beautify the urban

element. It will have great visual presence since it’s the downhill side of the street to the

Bay.


figure 7.8

Figure 7.8: Street Type 5: From Mason Street to Taylor Street:

The old cable car and the new Light Train will run parallel in this section, just for 2 blocks.

They will have a shared 12´ tracks´ green spaces. This green strip will have a clear signage

to indicate the street users the different landmarks and destinations.

The continuous unique pavement will not be disturbed by accidental height in curb levels.

It will only be supported by the correct signage to permit pedestrians and to prevent

accidents. This way, the green strip besides the paved sidewalk could be invaded by the

pedestrian flow (not gathering), making it a usable public spaces.

The shared lane will be 13´ for bicycles, MUNI and cars. The median still make a

continuous 4´line from Broadway to this point. The median tree will be planted every 50´

(like elsewhere). This Tree Implementation Plan will consolidate the section while the

façades of the buildings correspond and will not “colonise” intersections to allow more

temporary elements at these points.


figure 7.9

Figure 7.9: Street Type 6: From Taylor Street to Beach Street:

The proposed North Shore Line stops and the cable car stops in Fisherman’s Wharf. The

Light Train will run peacefully upgraded from the portal until the final destination (waiting

for more decisions to be made for future continuation of the Line to the Golden Gate

Bridge).The final section type of Columbus Avenue allows a wider 13´sidewalk on the side

of 8´ flex-use parking space. The residential character of this portion area will determine

that the flex-use could become an effective small park, or a gathering and seating area

for the neighbours to enjoy (and not have to go up hill or down to the bay to enjoy open

space)

The shared lane comes back to a 16´ dimension to fit bicycles, public transportation and

private cars. With the actual land use, delivery spaces are not needed but the 16´ space

could always avoid illegal parking on the side.

The focal end of the Avenue is Joseph Conrad Square a full pedestrianised triangular

park, symbolic and essential for the final completion of the Columbus Avenue Project.


7.1 GREEN CONNECTORS AND ACTIVITY

CONNECTORS

From the very first day that I walked on Columbus

Avenue, I experience the massive pedestrian

congestion of the sidewalk. I didn’t really like it,

I felt uncomfortable with people pushing me to

walk their way through the sidewalk while on the

other side people were comfortably seated in

the terrace tables drinking and eating meals and

coffees that I couldn’t afford.

My personal experience intuitively confirmed

what the analysis has expressed, and the

goals and strategies focused on: pedestrian

safety and comfort. By addressing the

necessity of a better pedestrian network along

Columbus Avenue that will connect the different

interest points (landmarks, local and visitors

attractions, historical architecture) through the

neighborhoods, the proposal changes its scale

and becomes a district solution.

Columbus Avenue will be a diagonal corridor for

pedestrians and public transportation crossed

transversally by green streets that connect

the existing open spaces in the adjacent

neighborhoods and that direct users to the

civic recreational and cultural landmarks. It

will no longer be a straight vehicular line. It will

draw a more complex set of routes within the

neighborhood, and between the neighborhoods.figure 7.10


7.2 THE SIDEWALK

A sidewalk refers to the area between the

property line and the curb, and the crossing areas

at intersections. Columbus Avenue sidewalks

vary along the length of the street from 8´ to 11´.

Consequently, the activity that sidewalks hold

varies too; sometimes there are crowded spots

with 8 people standing for 10 minutes, and others

will not be occupied by anyone for hours.

This proposal varies the sidewalk dimensions

along the street to accommodate the needs of

pedestrians and solve the congestion of people

in some points, the pedestrian flood along the

street going through the North Beach District,

the access to private buildings, the underground

restaurant storage (with determining delivery

access), the valet parking use for restaurants

appropriating parking spaces at night, and for

sure, the transportation need for the street: bike

lanes, bus lanes, shared lanes, upgraded light

train, and the historical cable car.

The number of pedestrian floods on the sidewalks

varies at different hours of the day (figure 5.28).

The flow stops and chaos reigns. Some people

like it –they think that the bump-into-each-other

experience is the charm of the European style

District-- but it is actually a safety and accessibility

issue for the users of the sidewalk --they have

to jump to the parking space to cross a couple figure 7.11


holding hands (no more than 3 persons in a row

fit in an empty sidewalk and no more than one if

there is a tree and a café table).

The 12th of October each year, Columbus Day,

North Beach hosts a parade in the Avenue that

helps demonstrate the capacity of the street to

be a fully pedestrianized area. Sidewalks purely

receive the movement of citizens and parking

spaces are colonized by packed 12 person

tables. Suddenly the sense of the Avenue has

another dimension, a human dimension versus

a vehicle scale. I am aware of the specificity of

this temporal event, but it should be a practical

example for the City to be convinced about the

opportunities along Columbus Avenue (also the

rest of the year).

Even though this thesis deals with the design

of the right-of-way and does not propose land

uses changes that the Subway will produce. The

proposal section types (Figures 7.4-7.9) reveal

figure 7.12

figure 7.15

figure 7.13

figure 7.14


the different character of the sidewalk moving along the street depending on the zoning

attached to it.

The goal established in Chapter 6 articulate the intention of stretching the vitality in

the Columbus Avenue core, North Beach, along the whole street to prevent the lack of

activity elsewhere whom causes the disorientation of users, and the lost of Columbus as a

boulevard that goes all the way from Fisherman’s Wharf to the Financial District.

7.3 FLEX-USE

The piece of Columbus Avenue that goes through North Beach is mainly occupied by

Italian restaurants, cafés and shops. The sidewalks adjacent to those businesses have

tables for customers to sit down outdoors. It is a public space that can be privately rented

to serve more customers. It is no doubt a recognizable feature of the District and a great

economic policy for the businesses, but it is the main cause of the pedestrian congestion,

and the non-free public spaces in the street.

figure 7.16


figure 7.17

figure 7.18

figure 7.19

figure 7.20

Figure 7.17: Belden Place Reference:

This is a small pedestrian alley is between Pine Street

and Bush Street in the middle of the fi nancial District. It

only allows delivery and private vehicular traffi c for the

restaurants of the street. It functions with mobile structures

that fold and unfold or roll and unroll to make the “eating”

scene and convert the alley into a charming between block

terrace.

Figure 7.18-19: Downtown Alley Cafés:

In weekdays, Commercial Street in Downtown San

Francisco closes temporarily to vehicular traffi c. Aligned

with the core of the Embarcadero Centre, it establishes a

pedestrian corridor and entertainment axis in the middle of

a city block during lunch time, from 12pm to 2pm.

This alternative is already supported by the City’s law that

allows for a rental fee putting out tables for businesses. It

just needs a simple, mobile, and temporary feature to notify

the modifi cation of the “normal” use of the street: a sign

and a chain.

Figure 7.20: Columbus Day Parking Space:

12th October, Columbus Day, is a great demonstration of

the power of people (versus cars) on the Avenue. Cars are

prohibited. Just a wide line for the parade is habilitated. The

rest is packed of people and food.

The restaurants are allowed to place tables

outside in the parking spaces. No barriers are

needed to prevent accidents. The space given to

the customers become a wide, familiar new type

of public space to enjoy the day.


This thesis proposed to wide the sidewalks,

as I explained in the paragraph above, and to

occupy the parking lanes with terraces for the

cafés and temporary parks for citizens that will

give the flow of users along Columbus Avenue

room to breathe, and will give back some public

spaces to locals and visitors. Those spots should

be placed all along the street with a policy that

supports the strategy needed.

The reference for this design setting of the

proposal has been Mountain View, where those

appropriations of the parking lanes are called

sidewalk cafés. They are outdoor areas located

and maintained in the “Flexible Zone” of Castro

Street or in the sidewalk of any commercial street

of Mountain View by an adjoining restaurant for

the sale of food and beverages.

The Flexible Zone concept is applied to an area

generally defined by the edge of the building face

to the lip of the paved parking lane next to the

street. It is comprised of two basis areas: Area 1.

which extends from the edge of the building face

to the edge of the step curb (sidewalk) and Area

2 which extends from the edge of the step curb

to the lip of the paved area adjacent to the street

(parking lane).

Although this proposal will be a major

decongestion tool for the sidewalks, as we can

see in the example of Mountain View (figure figure 7.21


figure 7.22

figure 7.23

figure 7.24

figure 7.25

7.22-7.25). The challenge will be to distribute

this flex-use type spaces along the avenue. The

massive concentration of restaurants will leave

no street parking in front of the business if we

are not fully aware of the occupation percentage

of this new typology of public spaces. Renting

the space yearly (around 600$ in the Mountain

View example) creates exponential benefits to

the café owners since it allows locating 20 people

(5 tables) in each parking space. The policy that

will lead this design along Columbus Avenue will

have to be responsible for the result of the space

and equitable with the businesses.

Furthermore, the real problem is the renting

situation of most of the business. The renters

discourage long-term investments that will stop

their present economic activity for a short term

(for a non-defined period of time).


7.4 MID-BLOCK CROSSWALK

The triangular geometry of Columbus Avenue

produces a 50% (Figure 5.43) of space given to

the intersections, mainly given to cars.

The project proposes midblock crosswalks in the

blocks that are large enough to allocate them.

There are 7 of them in the overall project. The

more frequent rupture of traffic will slow down

the traffic and will increase pedestrian safety

without considering withdrawing vehicular lanes

out of the Avenue.

This perpendicular path that measures

80´(versus the 103´ of the diagonal cut) permit

the pedestrian to shorten his other routes in the

neighborhood. This orientation of the crossing

points will also optimize the commercial visibility

(therefore consumption, therefore economic

vitality).

figure 7.26

figure 7.27

figure 7.28


figure 7.29

Urban Life: People and

Mobile Elements

Vegetation Elements

AXONOMETRIC THEORETICAL PROPOSAL

Main Features + Commercial signage


7.5 LANDSCAPE AND TREE PLANTING

IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

On both sides of the avenue there are ficus

trees. They are static and shady. They are on

average 9’ to 15’ height tall trees, planted at 9’

from the façades of the building they constitute

a major visual barrier for the low apartments that

face the streets (most of the street frontage is 2

story-buildings).

The median trees are deciduous. They are

visually more permeable even though they create

a middle axis, a vertical layer between the street

façades. That effect is successful according to

the existent street section, the enclosure that

they provide in the transversal section is helpful

for the sense of the Avenue itself.

The existent tree pattern of Columbus Avenue

is discontinuous. The implementation plan

for the greenery will vary with the width of the

sections, as explained previously. The storm

water treatment will follow the tree axis and will

promote ecologically beneficial landscaping, as

shown in the section types figures (Figures 7.4-

7.9).

7.6 SPECIFIC STUDY AREAS

The description of the specific study areas will

follow in figures 7.32 to 7.39.

figure 7.30


figure 7.32

Figure 7.32: Proposal Plan I:

• Joseph Conrad Square Design. The end of the 1,2

miles diagonal. A great opportunity for identity and

memory art and design.

• Final stop of the North Shore Line at Hyde Street.

• Pedestrian connection with Jan Gehl’s “Jefferson

street Pedestrianisation Project” highlighting

Bay views by tearing down the fi shing industrial

building at the end of Leavenworth Street.

• Private owned Opportunity parcel in the corner of

Leavenworth Street and North Point Street.


figure 7.33

Figure 7.33: Proposal Plan II:

• Enlarged triangle opportunity at North Point and

Columbus Avenue reduces Jones Street to a one

way street going opposite direction from Columbus

Avenue.

• Mid-crosswalk in block between Bay Street and

North Point Street, matching it up with the current

hotel entrance.

• Green scattered fl ex-use (approved by the

community) in this residential portion of the

Avenue.

• Private property opportunity for a symbolic building

(40´to 60´) with an Median Canvas welcoming

commuters entering the City through the Bay

Corridor (old Tower Records building)

• Private owned parking lot opportunity.


figure 7.34

Figure 7.34: Proposal Plan III:

• Joe Di Maggio Playground Extension closes

Mason Street permanently to traffi c between

Lombard Street and Columbus Avenue.

• Mid-crosswalk in block between Lombard Street

and Chestnut Street.

• Mid-crosswalk in block between Chestnut Street

and Francisco Street as a continuation of Houston

Street to Jones Street, and the Bimbo’s Plaza.

• Mid-crosswalk in block between Greenwich Street

and Lombard Street connecting the commercial

ground level of the buildings.

• Lombard Street Green Connector that aligns

Telegraph Hill, the Joe Di Maggio Playground and

the well know steepest road of the word.

• Corner privately own property connecting with a

non-end alley at Lombard Street and Columbus

Avenue intersection.


figure 7.35

Figure 7.35: Proposal Plan IV:

• Joe Di Maggio Playground Extension closes

Mason Street permanently to traffi c between

Lombard Street and Columbus Avenue.

• Triangular public space in front of Public Library

(with immediate crosswalk access) for outdoors

exposition or performances.

• Pedestrian Improvements in Jansen Street.

• North Shore Line Portal. Centered in the street

section type it will become a symbol of the City.

• Private parking lot opportunity at Filbert Street

and Powel. It will enlarge the space in front of

the portal and communicate Columbus Avenue

directly through the alley to the Greenwich

Pedestrianisation.

• Greenwich Street Pedestrianisation.between

Powell Street and Columbus Avenue besides Joe

Di Maggio Playground.

• Mid-crosswalk in block between Greenwich Street

and Lombard Street connecting the commercial

ground level of the buildings.


figure 7.36

Figure 7.36: Proposal Plan V:

• Private parking lot opportunity at Filbert Street and

Columbus intersection. In front of the enlarged

triangular piece of the park. Ideal for outdoors

performances (it could be a stage or a seating

courtyard).

• Pedestrianisation of Powell Street from Columbus

Avenue to Union Street as a exterior hall for the

Pagoda Theatre Cultural Centre.

• Mid-crosswalk in Washington Square Park

• Mid-crosswalk in block between Green Street and

Union Street connecting the commercial ground

level of the buildings.

• Four subway exits of the Green/Stockton Station

platform 2 at each side of the sidewalk in each

side of the block.


figure 7.37

Figure 7.37: Proposal Plan VI:

• Green and Stockton enlargement of corner bulbs

allocate Subway exits

• Gathering free public spaces at the corners of the

Intersection with bulbouts and specifi c designed

details.

• Green Street Connector starting at the Beach

Blanket Babylon Boulevard Project of temporary

closure for street outdoors terraces.

• Mid-crosswalk in block between Green Street and

Vallejo Street connecting the commercial ground

level of the buildings.

• Vallejo Street Green Connector; Saint Francis

Church Plaza (between Columbus Avenue and

Grant Avenue.)

• Pacifi c Avenue and Broadway that will link

Jack Kerouac Alley with the Alley in the building

opposite façade.


figure 7.38

Figure 7.38: Proposal Plan VII:

• Temporary Pedestrianisation of Upper Grant

Avenue with some permanent street features

and a policy of temporary closure both daily and

eventual. Chinatown and Upper Grant Gateway

opportunity.

• Broadway and Grant Avenue Intersection. The

Language of the Birds sculpture. .

• Mid-crosswalk in block between Pacifi c Avenue

and Broadway that will link Jack Kerouac Alley

with the Alley in the building opposite façade.

• Kearny Street Green Corridor Street and the

Kearny Plaza (between Broadway and Vallejo

Street). It could be a neighbourhood plaza; the

steepest park or greenway in San Francisco. It will

be a great viewpoint of Portsmouth Square and

Kearny Street down to the Financial District.


figure 7.39

Figure 7.39: Proposal Plan VIII:

• Base of Transamerican Tower with Washington

Street, Montgomery Street and Columbus Avenue

intersection.

• The old isolated tree in the corner is a icon at the

very end (or start) of the Avenue.

• Privately owned property that links Columbus with

Washington Street enlarging the existing crossing

alleys, and providing an interesting space between

60’ tall buildings.

• Mid-crosswalk in block between Washington

Street and Jackson Street.

• Mid-crosswalk in block between Jackson Street

and Pacifi c Avenue.

PHASEAND PROJECTS

2008

DURATION OF THE CONSTRUCTION DAYS PER PHASE(days)

PHASE 1.0 PHASE 2.1 PHASE 2.2 PHASE 3.0

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

PHASE 1.0

PHASE 2.1

PHASE 2.2

PHASE 3.0

2021

EXTERNAL PROJECTS

REDWOOD PARKTRANSAMERICAN BLDG

GRANT AVENUE ( NORTH)PEDESTRIANISATION

FILBERT STREET (EAST)PEDESTRIANISATION

GREEN STREETPEDESTRIANISATION

CHESNUT STREETPEDESTRIANISATION

JEFFERSON STREETPEDESTRIANISATION

GRANT AVENUE (SOUTH)PEDESTRIANISATION

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

PUBLIC ART PROGRAMCOLUMBUS AVENUE

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

CENTRAL SUBWAY NORTH LINE

2920 2190 1825 2555

SHORT TERM MEDIUM TERM LONG TERM


7.7 PROPOSAL PHASING

The Phasing proposal is done “theoretically” based

on the Timing chart that the Columbus Avenue

will have. It serves mainly a social matter: the

need for the project to fit into the neighborhood’s

willing and current circumstances. It focus in the

construction phase of the overall project since

it could be the reason of a major crash in the

economy of the district (if a lot of the businesses

will have to close for some years, they will never

recover –like in Market street).

The areas are divided after a traffic study of

the possible closure that the Avenue will allow:

Broadway, Taylor Street and Joseph Conrad

Square.

The main characteristic of this plan is that

business within phases will have the right to

occupy the vacant (private) lots adjacent to the

other phases to avoid closing down the economic

vitality (therefore social) of the Avenue.

figure 7.40 figure 7.40-1


figure 7.41

figure 7.42

figure 7.43

figure 7.44


figure 7.45

figure 7.46

figure 7.47

figure 7.48


This strategy will help to create vitality in some of

the areas that suffer a major social void, to make

them become vibrant spots that will develop

their own character among the rest of Columbus

Avenue.

The longitudinal section in 7.41-7.48 describes a

state of the construction in phase 2.1.

7.8 CONCLUSIONS

Again, the innovative aspect of this proposal

is that the project doesn’t rely in a final static

solution for a street, but it accepts the flexibility

of the project in time and in space.

The Phasing study (figure 7.40) through the

process of “building up” the new street is able

to absorb the obstacles and surprises that the

completion could bring; the physical urban

features (like the ones shown in the Mountain

View example figure 7.22) support the temporality

of use in streets (their enclosure and openness

for cars and pedestrians indistinctively); and

the public art program accompanied with

public policies or civic laws will manage the

complexity and allowed for both of them to get

accomplished.

figure 7.49

Chapter 8: Public Art Program, “The Banquet” 128

CHAPTER 8: THE BANQUET: PUBLIC ART PROGRAM

“Why, sometimes I’ve believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast.”

“Through the looking glass”. Lewis Carrol. 1872.

Having justified the importance of art in human life in the context of the public realm, the

last step is to explain how to create a comprehensive Public Art Program that could go

hand-in-hand with an urban design process.

The idea started with finding arguments for previous research about the importance of art

for human creativity. Looking for good arguments I found myself thinking that I need art to

survive. I am an art consumer, a creativity addict. This visceral belief sparked the idea of

the metaphor of art as food. Our body needs food to survive, our mind needs art. This was

the origin of creating a BANQUET OF ART; a set of spaces, of moments that will “feed”

citizens in unexpected no charge situations. The Banquet Public Art Program will bring

people to the table. It will create a series of banquets along the urban design process that

will facilitate the discussion around this great topic that we are dealing with: Cities.

In the same way that Plato created a dialogue about love around a table in his book The

Banquet (Plato, 175 b.c) . The Banquet of Art would be a conversation between artist,

professionals coming from different disciplines and backgrounds, politicians, and citizens

in which a facilitator (not an actual player) would provide themes related to the urban

figure 8.1


transformation of Columbus Avenue, much as

the poet Agaton once did.

The proposal might sound humorous and

philosophical but it would be mainly a practical

tool of production and reflection of public

places. Those “banquets” would be a set of

actions that would occur in different spots in

the neighbourhood at different times of the

urban design process in order to maintain life.

These actions would allow the area to grow and

transform, maintain their structures and respond

to their different environmental and socio-political

circumstances.

figure 8.2

figure 8.3

figure 8.4

figure 8.5


8.1 METHODOLOGY- TOOLKIT

The criteria that The Hidden Dimension (Edward

T. Hall p113) established in its chapter about “the

distances of man” for the distances of perception

and interaction sets the base to draw the radius

in which art can happen. To identify those

distances or opportunity sites for the street, I

used urban features analysis: vitality analysis:

the identification of users and activities in public

spaces; urban form analysis: the description of

the urban form; and identity and power analysis:

the classification of communities, and the

localization of the social and economic power-

structures. This step helped relate the physical

to the character of space, giving a better

understanding of the social conditions of the

space.

This methodology led to the final proposal for

this project. It demonstrates the use of art in the

urban process, but it is a premature solution: it

explains the procedure that would need to be

undertaken, but it lacks an important part: the

collaborative design of the street.

As an academic work, I made the decision of move

forward in the design proposal to demonstrate

the theoretical application of the proposed public

art program. Even though it is contradictory, it

was more relevant and innovative if chose to

expose the idea of how to execute the design

figure 8.6

figure 8.7

figure 8.8


project in parallel with the art program through

the construction transformation, better than how

to get to the design project itself

, and that is what I did.

In a real case scenario, the Banquet of Art

phasing would incorporate art pieces created in

the present to highlight urban issues, to engage

the community in an urban project about to

happen, to undertake a real analysis for the

future design, and to create the on-going design

with a participatory design strategy, as I already

started with the game and survey tools.

figure 8.9

figure 8.9-1


figure 8.10

Figure 8.10: Art Opportunity Sites:

The theoretical frame for human perception and interaction

that it’s been studied has helped develop an Art Opportunity

Site Map. This map draws the dimensions that could be

taken for the artwork. It categorises the temporary sites

(blue dots), and the permanent ones (red dots).

The fi rst one will be situated in the way of vehicular traffi c

fl ow. These spots could be temporary closed for events,

performances, or static installations. The permanent places

are normally allocated in the pedestrian realm, in the

sidewalks, bulbs, crosswalks, medians, plazas and open

spaces.

COMMUNITY:

PROJECT: COSA MARAVILLOSA

VENUE:cualquier lugar es buenoDATE:cualquier hora es adecuada 00:00am

CITY SUPERVISORS:

COMMISSIONS:

PROFESSIONALS: TECHNICIANS

DEVELOPERS

ARTIST

EXTERIOR PEOPLE

INVITATION nº0


figure 8.11


8.2 WHO IS COMING? THE INVITATION

“`I didn’t know it was your table,’ said Alice; `it’s

laid for a great many more than three.”’

Lewis Carrol 1872

The Banquet contains several tools: the

Invitation, the Menu and the Recipe. The process

begins with the Invitation. Most of the decisions

in cities are made in small tables, by a small

group of people. This toolkit wants to address

the importance of having all the urban agents at

the table of the proposed “banquet-tool”.

For that purpose, an invitation layout has been

designed to invite to each “dialogue” to the

people influenced by the project. In the table we

will always have to invite:

the community organizations, the City

Supervisors and other politicians involved, the

commissions in charge of the different aspects

and areas in which the project will be located,

the professionals that lead projects in the area,

the developers private or public that are investing

in the area, the merchants and business district

organizations that work in the area, the artist that

has a vision for the place, the citizens or visitors

who want to join the dialogue, and the art project

itself.

MENU nº1289

1

Joseph Conrad StatueBronze sculpture, stone pedestal

1.

2

Santa Maria Caravela BoatMastiles y velas clavadas en el suelo directamente en el césped. Free entrance.

2.

4

6

5

8

910

7

11

12

13

14

3Bullit Median.Homage to steve Mac Queen and his famousscene in the San Francisco Hills.

3.

Bay/ Taylor StreetTemporary CanvasSF Art Institute Awards for “Timeless Art”

4.

Street Cinema.Night projections on Bimbo’s Club building.City Entertainment. (12pm)

5.

Jenga bus stop StationWooden mobile and interactive structure to acco-modate public transportation passengers.

6.

North Line Portal.Permanent Sculpture by Eero Saarinen.

7.

Weekly Event in Washington SQ.“Loco Brusca” Performance in the Subway stationof the North Line.

8.

Benjamin FranklinPermanent stone statue over pedestal.SF Art Commission Collection.

9.

The Bears.Collection of plastic California Bears filled by the Construction soil and given to other cities to evoke the consciousnessof C. in Recycling Art.

10.

Red Balloon.Inflable ball for the ventilaion infraestructure of the North Line Subway.

11.

“Flying Books” by Brian GogginPermanent sculpture over the Broadway Intersection funded by ...

12.

“The Thinking Chair” by MarkA lighting urban furniture for creative minds.Temporary and movable in the avenue.

13.

Social Filipino Center.Temporary Architecture Structure for CitizenParticipation.

14.

12-19th August 2020

Kissing Performance.Monthly SFO Event in the Intimate Triangles of Columbus Avenue.

15.

MENU nº128912-19th August 2020


figure 8.12


8.3 WHAT TO EAT? THE MENU

The Menu-tool answers the question of what is

going to be served and where and when, so it

serves two different phases of the project. One

phase is the moment in which “the guests,” or

stakeholders, meet. In this case, this tool is

relevant to know what they are going to “eat,”

what they are going discuss, the project, the site,

the purpose for locating it The information to make these decisions would come from the

phasing of the public art program in relation with the urban design plan, and the specificity

of the site.

The other phase in which we would use this layout would be all along the way of the

process to inform citizens and visitors what program is proposed for the street in each

moment, at the time and in the future. This program would be determined by looking at the

physical opportunities and the socio-political circumstances of the space.

The first phase application would come from the possible types of art that the space could

hold; and the other would come from the study of the phasing schedule in figure 7.40.

In both tools the unresolved question is who is deciding which people to call to the banquet,

what are the discussion topics, what are the priorities; how does the outcome fit the integral

project in the street. Who is the facilitator? Who are the organisers of these “banquets”?

My first guess is that the City Planning Department and the Arts Commission should be

involved in this initiative, but we should be able to create a team with artists and citizens

on boards to assure public interests are covered.

RECIPE collection

ARTIST:

desired location: (mark on the map)

INGREDIENTS and TOOLS:Explain the material needed for the art to happen and the machineryto make it.

26 th August 2008

RECRUITMENT:Express who will develop the art, and how the process of selection of the artist,artists, or particpants should be done.

Name of the Proposal:

PROCEDURE/ STEPS:What are the steps that should be followed to make it.

ADDITIONAL SOCIAL INFORMATION per serving:Specify any preferences or constraint.

RESULT:Give a description of the final result. The effects that you want the artwork to pursue.

PORTIONS:How would it have to work and who would be the “best” public.

drawing.

Please contact the cooker with your proposal:[email protected]


figure 8.13


8.4 HOW TO EAT? THE RECIPE

“`Not the same thing a bit!’ said the Hatter. `You

might just as well say that “I see what I eat” is

the same thing as “I eat what I see”! ‘You might

just as well say,’ added the March Hare, `that “I

like what I get” is the same thing as “I get what

I like”!’

`You might just as well say,’ added the Dormouse, who seemed to be talking in his sleep,

`that “I breathe when I sleep” is the same thing as “I sleep when I breathe”!’”

Lewis Carrol. 1872.

This quote underscores what I have emphasized in this thesis all along, the importance

of the order of things. This recipe-tool gives an idea of when and how can the art be

deployed, and how to make it happen. Deployment requires that all the elements and

circumstances are optimum, the timing in the process of doing the art it’s optimum.

The layout is created to explain the idea of the artwork, the final product, the procedure

and steps that should be followed to make it, and it specifies additional constraints and

preferences to “serve” the art, the favourite audience, and the materials and machinery

needed to create and locate it.

The methodology followed is meant to be applicable in any number of urban cases. This

recipe-tool could be distributed and filled by anybody (artist or citizen) in a not-yet-designed

workshop to gather opinions about future artwork for the Columbus Avenue Banquet

Program. In the case that is not the artist that proposes its artwork, there is a need to point

who will develop the art, and how the selection for artists or participants should be done.

In both cases the recipe works as a survey with two applications: one would be used as

a layout if everyone is present at the table and the project is underway; and the other one

will be an open-ended survey.

On October 2008 I tested the recipe tool at the University of California, Berkeley with

students in Anthony Dubovsky’s Visual Studies course VS280 course. I presented these

tools and asked the students to fill in the recipe layout. I haven’t heard form them yet.


8.5 THE VESSEL

From this recipe tool and its recommendations, we could think of a future starting point

to create a VESSEL for the setting of public art in public spaces. Designing this physical

elements (auxiliary or not, for preparation or maintenance) to locate different art could be

a beautiful project that the City could apply elsewhere.

This thesis has come out with strategical sites along Columbus Avenue. It proposes a

special program attached to repeated urban features. Around these areas, art could

happen all the time. It will actually fade with everyday life.

8.5.1 THE TRIANGULAR INTIMACY

The diagonal form of Columbus Avenue cuts the rectangular San Francisco grid. That

angle triangulates the intersections. These “left-over” spaces spread along the street are

used depending on their architectural dimension, if they are large enough they “hold”

building (2-4 stories housing, apartments, or public buildings); if not they are not, they

figure 8.14-1

normally become isolated minimal public spaces,

pedestrian islands for pedestrian castaways.

The urban form analysis and the detection of

opportunity sites for art have treated these

islands as both a mayor problem and chance of

the street form. They are a fair amount of the

unused spaces that needs to be addressed.

Currently, the triangular corners are solved in

many different ways, as shown in figure 7.13.

There is a series of different solutions when

the ground floor interacts with the built form:

ineffective turns, restaurant terraces, gathering

points...

This proposal studies the possibilities of

interaction in them. The personal distances of

figure 8.14-0


one another (figure 8.17) gives us a clue of what

actions could happen in them. A larger diameter

of larger social events fit into the central triangle

geometry. At the corners, the geometry only

allows the most intimate distance to happen. It is

ironic that the smallest dimensioned spaces will

be surrounded by the vehicles traffic therefore

they become the most dangerous spots. What

I’ve called the Triangular Intimacy is a strategy to

program private gathering in those critical points,

by designing safety urban features and devices

that will guarantee safety to citizens.

8.5.2 SEE AND BE SEEN

Among the chaos of Columbus Avenue, people

are both spectators and protagonists of the scene.

If you are seated you don’t have to talk, you feel

like just watching. If you are walking you watch

too, but you are mainly part of the scene. The

multidirectional stage that this Avenue provides

is one of its beautiful unique characteristics.

figure 8.15

figure 8.16


8.6 APPLICATION

The Columbus Avenue Banquet Public Art Program would be funded by the one percent of

architectural and infrastructural projects along the Avenue. It would commission, purchase

and install artworks in a variety of settings, along the length of the street, and along the

duration of the urban transformation, to provide opportunities for individuals to encounter

art in parks, islands, crosswalks, sidewalks, pavements, walls, lighting, furniture, shop

frontage and other public venues. It would also be used for art installations while the street

was under construction, as it came on line, and in its new configuration. The program

would work in tandem with the urban design phasing proposal to describe the different

forms, purposes and locations of art along Columbus Avenue.

Artworks would be commissioned through a public process. Teams of artists along with

community and city representatives would evaluate the artist applicants. That said, this

figure 8.17


figure 8.19

figure 8.18

Figure 8.18: 2nd February 2020:

To give an example of the program procedure I made a

theoretical program for the Columbus Avenue Project.

Following the timeline that this thesis has envisioned

(fi gure 7.40-1), the 2nd February 2020 the street will be

going through Phase 3.0. The North Shore Line will still

be in construction, fi nishing the stations; the Grant Avenue

South Pedestrianisation will be starting; and Green Street

Pedestrianisation will be half way trough.

In this phase 3.0, the business and shops (not many in

the present, but probably more in a couple years) could

be allocated in a temporary architecture in the vacant lot

between Washington St. and Pacifi c Av.

The art opportunity sites will be fi lled in this period of time

with art serving different purposes as shown in fi gure 3.19:

beautifi cation, legibility, vitality, identity, memory, dialogue

and social happiness.

The application of this program it’s described in the Plan

fi gures 8.20-8.27; the designed situation is a moment on

time; on the day that the menu (fi gure 8.12) will be also

hand out.


figure 8.20

figure 8.21

figure 8.22

figure 8.23


figure 8.24

figure 8.25

figure 8.26

figure 8.27


figure 8.31

figure 8.30

figure 8.29

figure 8.28


Banquet needs to find ways to evolve beyond commissioned artwork. It needs to ask

artists what they want to do to in the public realm and how they wish to develop their

public-art careers. It needs to combine the professional satisfaction for artists and the

learning opportunities for audiences. It needs more experimentation between and among

artists so that that there are more effective means of delivering creative expressions or

social messages with greater emotional impact and cost effectiveness.

The resulting collection of artwork would have permanently sited and integrated pieces

that would appear at a certain moment of the process; temporary pieces that would test a

specific public space; and portable works that would move along the Avenue, the city (or

even the world) and constitute the “Nomad Gallery” for Columbus.

8.7 ACTIONS

The timing for this proposal always seemed really convenient. The North Shore Line

project is now being studied by the City; by Renew SF and MCTA; by the University of

Berkeley Studio class Spring 2009 led by Peter Bosselmann. All this thoughts around this

figure 8.32


figure 8.33

figure 8.32

figure 8.32

area will capture attention and will soon raise

the awareness of the rest of the community.

This “intellectual movement” is the reflection that

project don’t just exit n the future, they exist in

the present, that’s were they start “baking”.

To prove the possibilities for art to happen in

the present, to start the phasing from today, I’ve

collaborated in some actions and installations in

the street that want to bring this proposal out of

the academic world.

Figure 8.33: Plate Installation:

The Richmond High School students and I covered the

closed façade of the Pagoda Theatre with plates leaving

human shapes among them to raise the awareness about


figure 8.33

figure 8.33

figure 8.33

the abandoned cultural space that could be a mayor

destination for wonderful performances.

We worked as outsiders in this project, which is never a

desirable situation. Nevertheless the context of the Urban

Design Workshop gave another purpose for this action:

prove the ownership of space. The street is everybody’s.

Figure 8.34: Fork Installation:

Washington Square has a great large lawn that is a great

canvas for any art display. In this case, we draw a fork out

of forks. The purpose was just the beautifi cation of the park.

We use the forks to have similar simbology of the banquet

so that maybe it could be used as a logo or a defi ne for the

urban banquet.


figure 8.34

figure 8.35

figure 8.36

figure 8.37

Figure 8.35-38: Asphalt Doll Performance:

Jorge Lastra, Unchung Na and I performed in a pedestrian

run over, in 8 intersection of Columbus Avenue. We wanted

to refl ect the lack of pedestrian safety. The photographs

express the invasion of the car in the shared space at the

crosswalks. They also set up the urban stage with the urban

structure scenario in the back. It is really powerful to see

the geometry of the diagonal in the building disposition.

For the action, we needed a bag of mandarins, a camera,

and a shoe. We had to study carefully the timing of each of

the traffi c light, and it was really revealing to feel the fear

of Jorge’s safety in the middle of the road. We had to talk

and warn pedestrians, and we found that people are scared

and rushed by traffi c. It was a good street experience.

Different.


8.8 PROGRAMMING THE UNEXPECTED

“Ideally it should be possible to do a mail-order Happening. But responsibility for its proper

execution still remains. Someone has to be in charge…”

It’s been very helpful to read this quote from Allan Kaprow (1965) while writing this thesis.

He was the pioneer in establishing concepts of performance art, and he evolved later to

practice into what he called “Activities”, intimately-scaled pieces for one or several players

that were devoted to the examination of everyday behaviours and habits in a way nearly

indistinguishable form ordinary life.

Even though his proposals were fresh and somehow unexpected, the key elements of

those “happenings” were planned, but artists retain room for improvisation. It has been very

relieving to figure out that the unexpected art that I champion can happen in the context of

programming art in public spaces. The unexpected is unexpected for the people, but still

is planned by the artist.

This should always be the attitude in a Planning process; we shouldn’t be afraid of

improvisation (we already do it everyday) if we build up the framework of the process in

which we move.

Chapter 9: Conclusions 151

CHAPTER 9: CONCLUSION

“With language itself, the city remains man’s greatest work of Art”

Lewis Mumford, The Culture of Cities, 1934.

In 1972, the Urban Design Plan of San Francisco was born from the conflicts over individual

building projects, because of their size, their shape or dimension, but mainly because of

the nature and pace of new development. City professionals and city staff alike felt the

need to write a comprehensive plan that would preserve the physical image of the City.

Just like the physical image of cities is changing rapidly, the symbolic image of the city is

too. The fact that our cities are going through an accelerated process of transformation

causes a general sense of loss, or placelessness, in other words, the perception of the

gradual weakening of the identity of the sites, to the point that they not only become

ubiquitous, but also transmit the same sensations and offer the same poverty of possibilities

for experiences.

The character of our cities, our places, our communities is transformed incredibly in a

over the course of one’s life. Knowing that the place where we grow up become symbols

of ourselves, this development shows the importance of other social values: the value of

historic and cultural patrimony; the aesthetic value; the value of environmental quality;

and the value of quality of life and experience. It shows the importance of preserving the

uniqueness of every site that we (urban designers) work on.

We cannot “trust” blindly the Urban Design Plan and wait to see at the end of the day the

result tells us that it “worked”. Instead we could make our own project, one that did not

have to be led just by urban design, but rather led by a creative community.

We cannot let occasional budgets for public art that derive from public and private

development take away the essence of the street, the people. We could find a tool that

links together all the art projects and brings together artists’ visions and the community’s

values, projects that will not be about any finished product but about the dialogue that

occurs among those engaged in a process.


We cannot let the planning of Art District generate land value and attractive creative city

points just to displace population. We can, by programming the art in the

public space right-of-way, expect the same economic and cultural benefits using public

money, in public land, and INMEDIATELY with the existing community, without waiting to

agree with private investors (which takes forever).

This thesis proposed a comprehensive PUBLIC ART PROGRAM that constitutes a PUBLIC

ACTION PLAN for Columbus Avenue to complement the URBAN DESIGN PLAN for the

area. An Art Program that will be consider exemplary for its integration of the artworks

and the ideas of artists into a variety of public settings, through the transformation process

of the Urban Design Project to create and enhance a cultural center for innovation and

creativity in Columbus Avenue, San Francisco.

In thinking all the values of art, its aesthetical capacity, its power to call out loud the beauty

of everyday objects I came to the conclusion that we have to demystify the author of the

art, we have to change the focus from the object of art to the process of generating art.

This PROCESS is the most relevant statement of this thesis.

The initial idea was to change the order in which art appears in the urban design process,

to make the cosmetic-addition-type art into a constituent part of the process. Now, I believe

that is not just about the order of things, but the way of doing them. Sometimes “bad” or

thoughtless routines are the ones that destroy us silently. There is a need to frequently

rethink our disciplines, and sharing concepts with other fields is a good way of doing it.

In this way this thesis proposed a future reflection on how we do urban design (from the

analysis, to the design, the construction and the implementation of ideas); how we could

let the art BE the process, and then proposed an ARTFUL WAY OF BUILDING A

CITY.


Staying with the analogy of food and art, I want to finish with a quote of one great literary

discovery; Alice Water speech’s The Delicious Revolution (January 2005) in which she says

that “eating is a political act, but in the way the ancient Greeks used the word ’political’—

not just to mean having to do with voting in an election, but to mean of, or pertaining to, all

our interactions with other people—from the family to the school, to the neighbourhood,

the nation, and the world. Every single choice we make about food matters, at every level.

The right choice saves the world.” This statement amplifies my belief in what public art

can do for the public realm – the right choice in electing art in public spaces will also

save the world.

THE END/FIN

Bibliography 154

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Public Art Topic:

“Proposed Arts Policy for the City and County of San Francisco” Proposal for Adoption

May 1991- N8845 S3 S3 1991 v-1 ENVI

“Art, Space and the City” Public art and urban futures. Malcolm Miles. 1997. Ed. Routledge.

N8825 M565 1997 ENVI.

“Public Art by the book” Barbara Goldstein 2005. Ed. City of Seattle Mayor’s Office of Arts

& Cultural Affairs. N8835 P83 2005 ENVI.

“Art in the public interest” Arlene Raven. 1989. UMI Research. N8835 A78 1989 ENVI

“Arte y Arquitectura” Julia Schulz-Dornburg. 2002. Editorial Gustavo Gili.

“Allan Kaprow: arts as life” Edited by Eva Meyer-Hermann, Andrew Perchuck, and

Stephanie Rosenthal. 2008. Los Angeles: Getty Research Institute. NX 512.K37A45.

“Art Along the Waterfront: A guide to Opportunities for Public Artists and Public Art on the

Embarcadero of San Francisco” UCB N8845 S3 A78 1991 ENVI

New York City’s Percent for Art Program. N8845 N7 P71 1988 ENVI

“Dialogues in Public Art” Tom Finkelpearl MIT Press

“Visual Shock: A History of Art Controversies”. Michael Kammen

“Visual Thinking” Rudolph Arheim. 1969. Berkeley. University of California Press.

ISBN 9780520242265

“Going Public: A field guide to developments in art in public places” Cruikshank, Jeffrey L.

and Korza, Pam., Arts Extension Service, Division of Continuing Education, University of

Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, 1988

“The Architect as artist.” Level and Richardson. 1984. NA 2750 L494 ENVI

“Analysis of Built Form: A collection of analytical drawings.” Working Paper Urban Design

1975. Lars Lerup.Department of Architecture. UCB – NA 2750 L45 cop.5 ENVI

“Building the Unfinished- Architecture and Human Action”. Lars Lerup. Ed Sage Publications

1977. UCB NA 2542 .4 L471 C.5 ENVI

“Creating Architectural Theory. The role of the Behavorial Sciences in Environmental

Bibliography 155

Design.” Jon Lang. Ed. Library of Congress Cataloguing-in Publication Data NA 2750

L361 1987 cop.2 ENVI

“Design for Ecological Democracy”. Randy Hester.

“Everyday urbanism”. Margaret Crawford

Urban Planning

“Pedestrian Planning and Design” John J. Fruin 1971. New York: Metropolitan Association

of Urban Designers and Environmental Planners (UCB ENVI TE279.5.F78)

“Going Public: A field guide to developments in art in public spaces” Cruikshank, Jeffrey

L. and Korza, Pam. Arts Extension Service, Division of Continuing Education, university of

Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, 1988.

“Pedestrian, planning and design” John J. Fruin, PHD

“Life between buildings: Using public spaces” Jan Gehl. 1987. Ed. Van Nostrand

Reinhold.

“The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces” William H. Whyte 1980 Ed. The Conservation

Foundation Washington D.C: UCB HT 153 W49 ENVI

The Site: Columbus Avenue, San Francisco

“Making City Planning work” Allan B. Jacobs. 1978. American Society of Planning Officials.

HT 168 S4 J2 cop.10 ENVI (chapter 8- p189)

“Heights Limits in North-eastern San Francisco”. San Francisco Department of City

Planning. October 1963. UCB HT 168 S4 A288 cop.2

“Improvement plan for recreation and open space.” The comprehensive Plan for San

Francisco. 1972. UCB HT 168 S4 A29 cop.3

“Recreation and Open Spaces Programs. Recommendations for implementing the

recreation and open space element of the comprehensive plan of San Francisco.”

Department of City Planning. July 1973. UCB HT 168 S4 A296 ENVI

“Northern Waterfront. Traffic and Transportation Study.” City and County of San Francisco.

DKS Associates. March 1987. HT 168 S4 D57 1987 ENVI

Bibliography 156

“The Urban Design Plan for the comprehensive Plan of San Francisco. May 1971.”

Department of City Planning. HT 168 S4 A3 copy 7 ENVI

The History of the Site: Columbus Avenue, San Francisco

“The Italians of San Francisco 1850-1930” Deanna Paoli Gumina. Center of Migration

Studies, NY 1978, 1985, 1999.

“San Francisco: Civic Art Collection. A guided Tour to publicly owned Art of the city and

County of San Francisco”. 1989. The Arts Comission of San Francisco.

“North Beach: The Italian Heart of San Francisco” Richard Dillon. 1985. Photographs by

J. B. Monaco (1856-1938). Editor Lynn L. Davis.

Website for Social Innovation

Public Art on the Net: www.zpub.com/public

“A Brief History of Percent-for-Art in America” John Wetenhall

“Public Art’s Cultural Evolution” Jack Becker

“The Artmaker as Active Agent: Six Portraits” Professional Studies Master’s Thesis of

Graduate School of Cornell University of Susan Moragan

“Bridging Art and Research: An Interview with Susan Monagas” Article in the Community

Arts Network

“Citizen as Artist” Suzanne Lazy

“The Art/Life Experiment” Linda Frye Burnham

“The Artist as Activist” Linda Frye Burnham

“The Artist as Citizen” Linda Frye Burnham

“The Artist as Citizen” Guillermo Gomez Pena, Judith Baca, Felipe Ehrenberg, David

Avalos, Emily HIcks

Researcher’s blog: http://columbusavenuesfo.blogspot.com/

The use of Art in reclaiming the Public Realm

Documents

Transcript of The use of Art in reclaiming the Public Realm