201213 MUD Thesis - Lingyue Anne CHEN

MUD Thesis

Japantown For A More Resilient Tomorrow Lingyue ANNE Chen

Revitalizing Japantown For A More Resilient Tomorrow By Lingyue Chen A thesis submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Master of Urban Design in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley

Committee in charge: Professor Peter Bosselmann, Chair Professor Renee Chow Professor John Kriken Fall 2013

The thesis of Lingyue Chen, titled Revitalizing Japantown For A More Resilient Tomorrow, is approved:

Chair: Professor Peter Bosselmann

Date

Professor Renee Chow

Date

Professor John Kriken

Date

University of California, Berkeley

i |

Acknowledgments I was lucky to receive tremendous help from these incredibly kind people, to them I wish to express my highest gratitude:

Peter Bosselmann

Sam Johnson

Kushal Modi

Anna Ying Li

Renee Chow

Winnie Yingyi Wu

Alana Sanders

Jimmy Jie Chen

John Kriken

Alexis Wei Xiang

Maria Sitzoglou

Stefan Pellegrini

Antonin Yuji Maeno

Ariel Utz Wirnsberger

Naoaki Furukawa

Armelle Le MouĂŤllic

Ned Reifenstien

Shigeru Satoh

Yuki Uchida

Aziz Khalid Albarrak

Margaret Crawford

Kazunori Yama

Qingbo Liu

Harrison Fraker

Keisuke Sugano

Casto Vocal

| ii

Contents Acknowledgments

Chapter 3 CASE STUDIES i

Preface

iii

Introduction

vii

3.1 Methodology

078

3.2 Hillside Terrace

081

Chapter 4 INTERVENTION FRAMEWORK

087

4.1 Strength and Opportunities

088

4.2 Weakness and Challenges

094

4.3 Objectives and Principles

099

4.4 6 Approaches to Group Form

103

Chapter 1 QUALITY OF URBAN SPACE AND COLLECTIVE FORM

001

1.1 What makes a good city form?

002

1.2 Urban structure and urban form

006

1.3 Group form and the Japanese city

021

Chapter 5

1.4 Proposition

035

DESIGN OF THE CORE AREA

Chapter 2 AN OVERVIEW OF JAPANTOWN

035

2.1 Context and Planning Background

036

2.2 A Brief History of Japantown

042

2.3 Layers of Japantown

051

077

105

5.1 Re-envisioning Infrastructure

109

5.2 Framework of Communication Space

115

5.3 Orchestrating Forms and Activities

119

5.4 Implementing and Evolving the Framework Plan

121

Bibliography

127

iii |

Preface

I clearly remember the first time I

the people I have talked to), and how

conditions in Japantown. My goal was

visited Japantown. I was in a car

Japantown has become the place it is.

to tie both together to find solutions

slowly going east along Post Street.

A difficult starting point for my thesis:

for the future. Two questions in

The blank wall that goes on and on,

in order to make Japantown better,

particular interest me:

the stucco buildings of modernist

I would have to understand what is

style, the Disney-like outdoor mall,

fundamentally not GOOD enough

the empty streets and beautiful

about Japantown.

signage, the handsome pagoda and the plaza that faces on Post Street only: it was such a strange place. It was to me a place that tried to be Japantown but was not doing it quite right. I have tried hard to find out and explain in a structured way why it is strange to me (and to most of

1/ What is wrong with massive scale of the Japan Center as opposed to fine grain? The historic towns and

I have always been interested in

villages that we like are characterized

the way historic towns and villages

by their fine grain texture. But the

organize themselves and enable

scale and built form of Japan Center

changes through time. Starting

was the result of decision made

from there I try to find guidance in

during the urban renewal period of

Fumihiko Maki’s group form. The

massive land assembly. A process

study ran parallel to the analysis of

that resulted in racial and social

| iv

segregation. Also highly suspect

the possibility to tie Japan Town’s

2/ It is relatively easy to understand

was the decision to abandon the

transformation to necessary

how the misfit of the massive scale

public realm and put all the function

infrastructure improvement of

of Japan Center and the inhospitable

within a sealed envelope of a mall

the adjacent Geary Boulevard

pedestrian frontage can be a negative

type development. But the Japan

expressway. If we need and

factor in the neighborhood. But the

Center has been in the neighborhood

appreciate the substantial modern

Buchanan Mall is of a much more

for more than 40 years, to replace it

infrastructures needed to transform

intimate scale, and it actually fits the

would require very strong reasons. I

an express way into a multi-transit-

criterion of collective form. Also it has

tried listing some of the benefits that

mode boulevard and a new BART line,

undergone 40 years of wearing, here

fine grain urban texture brings, which

why would it not be appropriate to

a reconfiguration could add some

include human scale and capacity

maintain the scale of a large structure

live to the entire context around the

for change, and that it enables the

as an intermediate layer between the

Japan Center. Why does Buchanan

replacement of components while

transformed expressway and the fine

Mall today still feel lack of life and

still maintaining the character of

grain texture of the neighborhood?

theme park like?

the place. But I am also facing

v |

I found Alexander’s description of the

quality without a name. He stated in the book that good places should have the character of nature. This has shed light on the puzzle.

“When a place is lifeless or unreal, there is almost always a mastermind behind it. It is so filled with the will of its maker that there is no room for its own nature.”

(Christopher Alexander, 1979, The Timeless Way of Building, P38)

However this is not the answer to my questions, it is rather a hint that leads to more questions: What is a place’s own nature? If a city grow spontaneously, is it true to its own nature? If we were to plan a city, how do we make “room” for the city’s nature? How do we permit changes over time? What does that ask of the urban structure and urban form? Is there a generative form?...

I tried to answer those questions in the first chapter of the thesis.

And what I have found lead me

| vi

back to group form, fortunately.

concern for humanity and history,

The design proposal is in turn, an

resilience, and embracement of

attempt to apply those findings in

transience and plurality.

an complex urban context. It is still very preliminary and cries out for further development in terms of implementation of ideas generated from the findings. A lot of work still needs to be done at the architectural scale and with regard to policy and guidelines. But by setting up a framework for the urban space in

Interestingly I came across Maki’s acceptance speech given at the Pritzker Prize ceremony in 1993 and Maki closed the speech by a remark of the basis for the difference between GOOD architecture and BAD architecture. I shall quote it here in comparison with Alexander’s notion:

“...as an ever-present guide to the thoughts of the designer, sensitivity to other human beings and human situations—or its lack—will be evident in the resulting architecture and will certainly influence whether it will be deemed good or bad.”

Japantown, the proposal hopes to

(Fumihiko Maki, 1993, Fumihiko

touch upon these key messages:

Maki Acceptance Speech, P3)

vii |

Introduction This thesis examined the spatial

diversity, at a level that could not

strategy of group form, a dynamic

be offered by single use large

equilibrium of generative elements

structures. At the same time,

linked by revealing clues of

recognizing the need of modern-day

relationships to provide a sensed

developments that often require

inherent order, as an approach

maximizing investment return by

to construct a framework for

consolidating parcels and reaching

development that encourages and

higher density, the thesis attempts

facilitates movement and maximizes

to adapt the approach of group form

interface between uses, so as to

to accommodate higher density and

activate urban places and permit

embed a framework for different

changes. With the social, economic

scenarios of development opportunity

and environmental concerns as

and property ownership. The first

premises, the hypothesis is that

chapter of the thesis discusses

interconnected fine grain texture

some of the key issues concerned.

of mixed uses, generated by the

To list some of the key words: urban

principles of group form, enables

structure, movement, interface,

interaction, resilience, and vivid

interaction, mixed use and urban

phenomena, and resilience.

The site chosen for the topic is Japantown in San Francisco. Largely a product of the urban renewal that took place in 1940s–1970s, the predominant buildings in Japantown are single use large structures that are now in need of renewal or replacement because of years in service and seismic hazard.

Furthermore, given the strength and resources that Japantown has, various discussions have taken place in the pass 20 years about the future plan for Japantown. This thesis hopes to add to the discussion an alternative approach.

| viii

STARTING POINT 1 : THEORY STUDY

STARTING POINT 2 : SITE STUDY

RELATED TO THE MORE OBVIOUS PROBLEMS

The planning and design proposal is presented

THEORETICAL STUDY OF URBAN STRUCTURE AND COLLECTIVE FORM

in the second half of the thesis, which includes a strength and weakness analysis of the site, the intervention framework, the general ANALYTICAL METHODS TO LOCATE THE PROBLEMS

approaches and detailed design of the core area and key elements.

As a part of both theory study and site study,

THEORY STUDY

case studies were carried out from the two

CASE STUDY SET A : GROUP FORM

HOPEFULLY

starting points. The cases are chosen as CASE STUDY SET B : GOOD MIX-USE DISTRICT AND OTHER ETHNOPOLIS

precedents of either group form, fine grain commercial developments or ethnic enclaves.

They offer different sets of design criteria that should be taken into consideration. Given the special cultural characters and identity of Japantown, research on the urban structure and urban form of Japanese city was carried

DESIGN METHODS

out. The findings are included in the first 0.1 Thesis work flow

chapter.

001 |

CHAPTER 1 QUALITY OF URBAN SPACE AND COLLECTIVE FORM

Quality of Urban Space and Collective Form | 002

1.1 What Makes a Good City Form?

Starting the thesis by asking what makes a good city form may be too ambitious. But it is such an intriguing question and possibly one of the ultimate questions of urban design. Unlike math and physics, there is no absolute way to tell if a design would be “good” unless it’s built and used by people. We cannot prove a design would be the best solution possible by equations and deductions. Unlike art and music either, that even after a piece of art or music is made and meets the public, it is still difficult to judge if it is “good”. It remains largely a matter of acceptance. And if the piece conveys meaning to even a small group of people, we perhaps may call it successful. And as Kevin Lynch puts it, the artist’s creations “are enjoyed for themselves, and not solely as means to other ends.” Urban design on the other hand deals with too many factors.

“…It must manipulate things and activities that are connected over extensive spans of space and time, and that are formed and managed by numbers of actors. It operates through intervening abstractions: policies, programs, guidelines, specifications, reviews, incentives, institutions, prototypes, regulations, spatial allotments, and the like.

Through all this clutter, it seeks to influence the daily experience of a bewildering variety of people…”

(Kevin Lynch, The Immature Arts of City Design, 1984)

003 |

Nevertheless, we recognize a good city place when we see it: everything seems to work in harmony; it agrees with and facilitate the local way of living; it seems so self-sustaining that it is difficult for us to picture it otherwise. Christopher Alexander calls this quality “the quality without a name” and describes it with 7 words: alive, whole, comfortable,

free, exact, egoless, and eternal.

“the quality without a name”

“…A system has this quality when it is at one with itself; it lacks it when it is divided.

It has it when it is true to its own inner forces; lacks it when it is untrue to its own inner forces.

It has it when it is at peace with itself; and lacks it when it is at war with itself…”

(Christopher Alexander, 1979, The Timeless Way of Building, P26)

“exact”

For the word exact, Alexander gives an example of designing a table for birds:

“Suppose that I am trying to make a table for the blackbirds in my garden. In winter, when the snow is on the ground, and the blackbirds are short of food, I will put food out for them on the table. So I build the table; and dream about the clusters of blackbirds which will come flocking to the table in the snow.

But it is not so easy to build a table that will really work. The birds follow their own laws;

Quality of Urban Space and Collective Form | 004

and if I don’t understand them, they just won’t come. If I put the table too low, the birds won’t fly down to it, because they don’t like to swoop too close to the ground. If it is too high in the air, or too exposed, the wind won’t let them settle on it. If it is near a laundry line, blowing in the wind, they will be frightened by the moving line. Most of the places where I put the table actually don’t work. I slowly learn that blackbirds have a million subtle forces guiding them in their behavior. If I don’t understand these forces, there is simply nothing I can do to make the table come to life.”

(Christopher Alexander, 1979, The Timeless Way of Building, P35)

a good city form should be above all human-centered

This thought rises naturally: since urban design is for people and to accommodate people’s activities, should we not start from the pattern of people’s behavior and make the urban structure true to the social structure? It may sound very obvious and straightforward. But very often we find modern planned cities trying to suggest otherwise. The concepts behind them are of linear hierarchy. They are about categorizing uses and locating the similar together. They are about subdividing and stereotyping, about simplifying relations and creating discipline. In the worst cases, the living reality is not reflected and cannot find its place in such planned systems.

I remember well the example given by Prof. Bosselmann and McDonald about the

005 |

infamous cul-de-sac in the American suburbia. Suppose a kid lives in house A at the end of a cul-de-sac. His friend’s house is right adjacent to his, back to back; but this house B is accessed by another cul-de-sac and structurally belongs to another subset of houses.

If the kid wishes to visit his friend, he would have to walk to the main street and find his way into the other cul-de sac even though his friend is geographically one fence away.

That is if this kid is lucky. There are chances that his parents would have to drive him to get to the other neighborhood to finally enter that other cul-de-sac where house B is.

Similar examples can be found in the concepts behind the urban redevelopment project that changed completely the Western Addition and Japantown neighborhoods. They do, you might argue, arise from the system of land subdivision and property ownership, and facilitate management. But by prioritizing those elements, these plans result in a lack of structural complexity and thus fail to correspond to social realities.

Quality of Urban Space and Collective Form | 006

1.2 Urban Structure and Urban Form

I was overwhelmed by the number of different analogies I found when researching about social structure and urban structure: the machine (Team X, 1960s), the language (Rolande Barthes, 1975), the organism (Metabolism, 1960s), the rhizome (Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, 1976), the semilattice (Christopher Alexander, 1965), the brain (Nikos Salingaros, 2005), the Golgi structures (Fumihiko Maki, 1965), the quantum physics (Ayssar Arida, 2002), etc. Among them three ideas interest me the most.

The first is the emphasis on the complexity of today’s social structure. It is 1.2.1 Social Structure and Urban Structure

asymmetrical, sometimes non-hierarchical, overlapping, ambiguous. We are witnessing the highest level of mobility, the disassembling of nuclear family, the fundamental impact of the Internet, etc. We may say that today’s society is more fragmented than ever in history in terms of basic structuring unit, and more inter-connected than ever in terms of the thicker and more complex fabric of connections worldwide. If we look at the city as a large collection of many small systems goes to make up a large and complex system, those smaller systems are more overlapping than ever. And it goes hand-inhand with the increase of connections.

007 |

If we are to provide physical receptacle for such a social structure, so as to make the urban structure what it “ought to be�, how do we correspond to the fragmented, interconnected, and overlapping nature of it? I certainly do not have an affirmable answer.

But there are things that come to mind in light of ideas drawn from scholars who advocated urban structure of such characters:

initial ideas set 1

Increase connections (for example smaller street blocks or more streets and alleys), and improve opportunities for movement across multiple scales (from escalators and short narrow alleys of local significance to broad avenues that traverse many districts); more mixed activities and other locally mixed phenomena (such as working schedules and building conditions).

Quality of Urban Space and Collective Form | 008

The second idea that stands out is the importance of movement. A majority of the 1.2.2 Movement and the Generation of Activity

more recent analogies, whether it be the rhizome, the semilattice, the brain, or the quantum physics, emphasis on the connections as a vital part of the structure and key to the interaction of activities. With the virtual world that we have today, a great portion of the connections do not have and do not need physical presence. For the sake of distinguishing those connections that require physical receptacle, I shall call them physical connections or movement. We have learnt, from the example of the kid who lives at the end of the cul-de-sac, how over-simplified street network of linear hierarchy can hinder interaction. We recognize too the importance of physical connections in today’s urban structure. So how can those complex patterns of movement be materialized? An example of the gradual transformation of a gridded Roman colony into an Islamic city in the book The City Shaped tells us how it happened historically.

“the spontaneous city”

When we think about how a city “ought to be”, we tend to trace back to the unplanned city, or “the spontaneous city.” Spiro Kostof defines it as “presumed to develop without benefit of designers, subject to no master plan but the passage of time, the lay of the land, and the daily life of the citizens” (Spiro Kostof, 1991, The City Shaped, P43). And thus it is presumably true to “ its inner forces”. More often than not, the premeditated

009 |

and spontaneous coexist, or in some cases they metamorphosed. The examples of the once regular grid plan morphed into an irregular, non-geometric, “organic” form is of particular interest to me, as in each step of the process, the major force at play was almost singled out and results displayed. In this particular example given in the book, given the background of post-Roman Europe, the first changes that took place is that the solidly framed Roman grid was appropriated by the new users to suit the pattern of movement.

an example of urban form shaped by movement

“...the freeing of movement from geometric order... …With the impairment of municipal controls in the post-Roman city, natural movement soon carved short-cuts through the large rigid blocks of the grid. Tracks skirting or crossing the ruins of those public buildings for which there was no longer any use also crystallized into new street.

At the same time, the circulation pattern relating to the central market, which sometimes coincided with the old Roman forum, was rationalized to suit the new urban conditions…”

(Spiro Kostof, 1991, The City Shaped, P48)

Quality of Urban Space and Collective Form | 010

1-1 Transformation diagrams from “The City Shaped” (Spiro Kostof, 1991, The City Shaped, P49)

011 |

This example reveals how the movement shaped the urban form. The pattern of movement in effect here was a combination of the basic pattern of human movement and the most advantageous circulation layout from the shopkeeper and artisan’s point of view. Irrefutably today’s pattern of movement is far more complex than that in the example. Nevertheless it is immensely helpful to the understanding of how an urban form can be an honest and direct response to the pattern of people’s behavior and social structure.

movement — a concept that implies more than connections

On the topic of movement, another question came to mind. When we think about connections, we tend to think of them as ways to connect the nodes; they are means to an end. But when we think of movement, many a factor comes to mind: how fast the movement is, in what way people mobilize themselves, what would happen alongside, etc. It is perfectly reasonable to strip the idea of physical connections down to lines that connect dots when we are trying to conceptualize urban structure. While translating that idea into physical form would require us to think of it more as movement and take into consideration what would actually happen.

Quality of Urban Space and Collective Form | 012

movement and interactions

We have learnt from numerous previous studies that a great amount of human activities and interactions are generated around pedestrian movement. People stop to talk to their friends and neighbors who they meet on the way. Also they would very often like to keep that interaction as a part of the movement: they would stand in the middle of the street or at the porch till the conversation is over and then go their separate ways, or, walk together and talk. People love people-watching and especially watching different people come and go. Parisians for example love it so much that they would prefer sitting and eating along a crowded sidewalk instead of an indoor area. If given a small piece of comfortable space by the sidewalk, people would stay there for a while and rest. Bypassing a row of shops can be seen as being presented with opportunities to participate in commercial activities. If a very pleasant smell were coming out of the bakery, why wouldn’t you go in and grab a piece of pastry? Of course it means, equally, opportunities for the shops to have people bypassing their establishments.

criticism of Japan Center set 1

Examples like these are inexhaustible. Looking at these patterns of human behavior we can come up with criticism of the Japan Center, which is, now, essentially a very closed-off shopping mall. Access into the mall is limited. People who go into the mall either have time to navigate around or know what is in the mall that they are looking for.

013 |

Movement relating to the shops is entirely contained in the mall. The blank faรงades does not inform pedestrian on the street exactly what businesses they would find in the mall (except for the names of a few of them listed on signs outside of the mall). As a result, the Japan Center may have brought visitors to Japantown but it does not contribute to the generation of activities in the neighborhood. Instead it keeps the pedestrian flow that it has generated away from the streets, and the closed-off blank faรงades worsen the streets into an unpleasant pedestrian environment. For the businesses inside the mall, the opportunities of having people pass by and be attracted are eliminated. They are dependent entirely on the visitors who come to visit Japan Center. In the case of a multistory mall that would be justified for it offers the shops on the upper levels exposure to visitors that would not be otherwise possible because of their lack of street level presence. But if we keep in mind that Japan Center is a single story of shops above a parking lot, a better configuration than the current one is clearly possible and favorable.

initial ideas set 2

If we value movement and the activities that are generated by and in the radiating field of movement, shall we not respect and celebrate that in our designs? On the pedestrian scale, we can envision sidewalks and alley as a transitional zone that not only accommodate the flow of people, but also offer room for spontaneous and varied

Quality of Urban Space and Collective Form | 014

activities.

This network of movement should then of course link the existing important urban open spaces. The linear zone might as well enlarge into new nodes of urban open space at strategic locations.

So instead of centering the design of our environment around the composition of buildings and try to make the residue space work, we could perhaps consider the local connections together with the built form, and let the movement and pertaining activities carve out the blocks and post a demand on the building design to not only serve its own purposes but also provide a backdrop for the urban activities.

Within the buildings, the movement network would continue at a different scale. In cases like Japan Center, where pubic access is a vital part of the building, we can picture the zone of movement dominating both inside and outside the buildings as communicating space that holds the functional space of more static uses. Boundary between indoor space and outdoor space can then be blurred through arcades and courtyards; the building volumes themselves become permeable too. By doing this we are maximizing interface between different uses and encouraging interaction.

015 |

Resilience 1.2.3 Urban Form and Resilience

: the ability to become strong, healthy, or successful again after something bad happens (an ability to recover from or adjust easily to misfortune or change) : the ability of something to return to its original shape after it has been pulled, stretched, pressed, bent, etc. (the capability of a strained body to recover its size and shape after deformation caused especially by compressive stress) (Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary)

resilience and its definition

Resilience is such fascinating word. If we start from the definition given above, we can at least picture two different modes how resilience would present itself. Take the example of a tree, when a breeze comb through the branches, the branches would bend; a counterforce to the force of wind is generated in the system of a tree. When the wind stops, that tree is still whole and complete. The tree is resilient in a sense that it is selfmaintaining, able to withstand (remain undamaged or unaffected by) external forces.

In another case, when a storm hits the tree and breaks its branches (to a certain extent that is still within the capacity of a tree to stay alive), the tree would be damaged. But branches will re-grow after the storm, abiding by the same structural principles of the tree before the storm. This is also a case of resilience. To some extent, the system of the

Quality of Urban Space and Collective Form | 016

tree has the quality of self-regenerating.

Looking at resilience of an urban structure and urban form, in the examples of transformation of cities and towns throughout history, we found “characteristics that have permitted the unexpected to occur;” and conditions within which users “have been able to interact in a positive way with their own environment” (Anne Vernez Moudon, 1986, Built for Change, P157). It is a quality of self-sustaining, rather a combination of the two modes mentioned above. There have been discussions on resilience in both urban structure and urban space.

resilience in urban structure

On the urban structure level, I may again take the analogies of ideal urban structures of today as reference for they respond to the unprecedented rapid and extensive transformations in the physical structure of the society. By advocating multi-level connections and overlapping of the sub-systems, they have made the parts and clusters of parts (elements and sets) potentially autonomous. Single or multiple elements or sets can be taken away or added without destroying the evident governing structure of the system in its totality. Two of the models that represent extremes in cities are the “rhizome” and the “tree” structure.

017 |

“rhizome” and “tree”

“A rhizome is an interwoven complex of heterogeneous parts that is centre-less, dynamic and ever changing. It is a cluster of connected yet autonomous parts that is vigorous and can extend in any direction, according to conditions and need.”

“Whereas the tree is of linear hierarchy, where “underground roots branch successively into finer strands, and the boughs, branches, twigs, etc do likewise above. If a major artery is cut then its extensions will wither.”

(Barrrie Shelton,1999, Learning from the Japanese City, P127) Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari first used the metaphor of “rhizome” to propose “a condition where the taproot for ideology has been aborted in favor of the shifting layers and boundless interconnectivities of the rhizome” (Martin Pearce and Maggie Toy, The

Education of Architects, 1995). Deleuze and Guattari describe it as a model which “has no beginning or end; it is always in the middle, between things, interbeing, intermezzo” (Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, 1972/1980, Capitalism and Schizophrenia, P25).

Kisho Kurokawa takes the reference of “rhizome” and “tree” for the Japanese and Western cities (Kisho Kurokawa, 1994, The Philosophy of Symbiosis, P64). Although we may not find an exact example of a city of rhizome model (with the Japanese city being the closest to it), if we acknowledge our urban society as a dynamic field of interrelated

Quality of Urban Space and Collective Form | 018

forces, the rhizome does seem like an ideal model, and shall we conclude that resilience is more embedded in the rhizome structure than in the tree structure?

resilience in urban space

As for resilience of urban space, Anne Vernez Moudon defines it as “the ability of space to assume a variety of functions as well as meanings, to be owned and inhabited in variety of ways without major disruption to the principles of the structure of that place” (Anne Vernez Moudon, 1986, Built for Change, P157). She also concluded two basic attitudes toward building resilience as “flexibility”, that physical space must be able to undergo substantial alteration to accommodate changes in the requirements of social space (the social events that may take place within the physical structure); and “adaptability”, that variety and change can, to a large extent, be accommodated without major disruption of the physical space (Anne Vernez Moudon, 1986, Built for Change, P178).

initial ideas set 3

If we see architecture as one single entity/volume, an element in the system, we may find resilience in the versatility of how a system organizes its elements and adaptability in terms of an individual architecture in the system. What if we look at architecture not as an element but an assemblage of elements? Would that at least add one

019 |

extra stratum between architecture and the city? The elements could take on different program and should each be adaptable to change. The movement network at the architectural scale could be a part of the rhizome structure of the city and an organizing communication space (or transitional space) that connects the elements.

This would mean the resilience embedded in the system could be extended to the architectural scale, and architecture might contribute more profoundly towards the formation of more diverse and fertile urban environments. Of course it is not a universal solution: it would be very difficult to imagine, say, a hospital as a cluster of small buildings, or how a skyscraper can be broken down when the communication space within a skyscraper is in nature primarily vertical and also takes up a large portion of the construction cost. But it is a possibility when we are dealing with projects that access and connectivity is inherent in the program.

criticism of Japan Center set 2

Let me again take the Japan Center, the centerpiece of Japantown, as an example.

We could probably say that it has the quality of adaptability. It was designed to accommodate large cooperate showrooms and therefore the span of the structure made it relative easy to be subdivided into smaller shops and restaurants and become the mall that we know today. But the tree structure of access and organization of space is so

Quality of Urban Space and Collective Form | 020

dominating in its structure that it lacks the resilience to permit the unexpected to occur.

On the upper level of the West Mall and Kinokuniya Building which are linked by the Webster Street Bridge and occupy one and a half city block, 57 of the total 58 shops and restaurants share only one main entrance on the street level. If any construction were to happen at the Peace Plaza where this single main street level entrance is, it would have been devastating to the businesses inside Japan Center. Two of the three volumes (East Mall and West Mall) sit on a parking structure that spans across two city blocks; the other one (Kinokuniya Building ) is above another parking structure shared by the Kabuki Theatre. The parking structures are now under structural examination which will convey the scope of repairs that may be necessary for seismic improvements and maintenance.

Depending on the results of the structural survey, significant and time-consuming reconstruction of the garages may be necessary, in which case the total reconstruction of the Japan Center will be inevitable. Not to mention the businesses inside the buildings have no control over the street level presence of their businesses and it would be very difficult for them to “interact in a positive way� with the set of buildings.

021 |

1.3 Group Form and the Japanese City

In the previous sections, some of the findings and ideas in bold could potentially lead to a design proposal for an urban space of which public access would be a vital part, like Japantown. To conclude these initial ideas that have been discussed above: ›› Increase connections and improve opportunities for movement across multiple scales; ›› More mixed activities and other locally mixed phenomena; ›› Envision the physical receptacle of pedestrian movement as communication space/ transitional zone that not only accommodate the flow of people, but also offer room

initial ideas recap

for spontaneous and varied activities and encourage interaction between different uses across all urban scale; the city blocks should be permeable when possible; ›› It would also continue at the architectural scale as a dominating framework that organizes and links the functional space of more static uses, both inside and outside the buildings; ›› Boundary between indoor and outdoor space can then be blurred; the building volumes themselves become permeable too.

We can then start to imagine an interconnected fine grain urban texture with a diverse mix of uses and urban phenomena. But how about the built form and the composition of the basic elements? And that lead me to the study of Maki’s Collective Form.

Quality of Urban Space and Collective Form | 022

Before we elaborate on the topic of group form, it is important that we first look at 1.3.1 Learning from the Japanese City

the characters of Japanese cities, where Maki spent his childhood and youth and the experience “strongly conditioned his thinking and provided a lasting basis for his spatial constructs in architecture” (Jennifer Taylor, 2003, The Architecture of Fumihiko Maki, p.18).

qualities and characteristics of Japanese urban form

Shelton summarized the “tangible aspects” of Japanese urban pattern and form set against the backcloth of his experience of Western cities, urban theory and design as follows: ›› The primacy of land plot and machi/cho* over building and street — patchwork rather than network. ›› The floating floor was preferred to the foundation wall — temporary versus permanent. ›› The spreading ground-peering roof was favored over the sky-aspiring dome, spire or

* Chome, an aerial unit approximates to a Western street block or collections of small blocks and may be of a regular or irregular shape.

Machi, a larger areal unit in which a collection of chome nest.

(Barrrie Shelton, 1999, Learning from the Japanese City, P32)

tower — horizontal more than vertical. ›› Temporary and changeable space (singular) was more common than formed and fixed spaces (plural) — flexible more than fixed. ›› In the broader sweep of the city, signs, services and activities have prevailed as place-

023 |

makers vis a vis buildings — content against physical context. ›› Important functions or activities have been scattered across city space (rather than grouped around a formal center) to offer a decentralized experience — once loosely about bridges (now often about stations) rather than concentrated about a wellformed square or plaza.

(Barrrie Shelton, 1999, Learning from the Japanese City, P129) Understanding Japanese urban pattern and form is of significance, not only in a way that it represents a set of tendencies that is in the opposite direction of those of the West, which can be traced far back as thick threads through time; but also, the Japanese city offers a working model to deal with the fragmentation, fracture, de-centering, scattering, layering, superimposition and collage in the context of today’s chaotic and fast-changing world and the cultural background of instant information and rapid international exchange. We find in Japanese cities a wider range of characteristics reflecting more closely the more recent views in the field of physics, philosophy and sociology, than in their Western counterparts. Shelton closes the chapter of Learning from the Japanese City in his book by stating that:

Quality of Urban Space and Collective Form | 024

significance of understanding Japanese urban form

“As a final note, I should remind readers that the West has a record of ignoring (or worse, denigrating) the design characteristics and qualities of Japanese built forms until such times as these may be used in support of some ‘new’ theory, sensibility or model of its own ... Now, it is the city’s turn and I am one of the growing band of urban designers who are increasingly ‘looking east’.”

(Barrrie Shelton, 1999, Learning from the Japanese City, P137)

increasing interest in group form

Along the same line, approximately 50 years after the idea of group form was first presented, it continues to be a subject of interest to many. Maki believed that one reason for this is that “as relationships of social phenomena in contemporary cities become more complex, a structure (in which a loose connection exists between the whole and the parts) that can adapt to various conditions, including the passing of time, seems more realistic than a structure in which the relationship between the whole and the parts is clearly hierarchical” (Fumihiko Maki, 2010, 50 Years Since Group Form) The book Investigations in Collective Form (first published in 1962) was reissued in 2004.

The journal of Japan Architect issued an edition titled Redefining Collectivity in summer 2010, featuring the work of 14 Japanese architects in the recent 10 years. It is through this issue that I was introduced to the notion of collective form and group form.

025 |

The study of collective form* was described as an investigation of the morphological 1.3.2 Group Form /Sequential Approach

resultants of forces present in cities. In Maki’s book Investigations in Collective Form, he defined collective form as “a collection of buildings that have reasons to be together, and concluded the possible ordering means as:

›› “Compositional form/compositional approach”, a collection of often individually

three paradigm of collective form

tailored buildings of which “proper functional, visual, and spatial (sometimes symbolic) relationship would be establish on a two-dimension plane; with examples such as Rockefeller Center, Chandigarh Government Center and Brazilia; ›› “Mega-structure/structural approach”, “a large frame in which all the functions of a city or part of a city are housed”; with examples such as study for Boston Harbor and Tokyo Bay Proposal by Kenzo Tange; ›› And “group form/sequential approach”, “form that evolves from a system of generative elements in space”, which “have their own built-in link, whether expressed or latent,

*The notion of group form was first published in an article called “Group-Form” in the first issue of “Metabolism” (Fumihiko Maki, Masato Ohtaka, 1960), 4 years before the publication of Collective Form.

so that they may grow in a system”.

(Fumihiko Maki, Masato Ohtaka, 1964, Collective Form—Three Paradigm)

Quality of Urban Space and Collective Form | 026

group form

Maki leant clearly in favor of “group form”. His thinking towards group form had evolved from his reading of the traditional and vernacular settlements such as Japanese villages and Italian hilltowns. Maki’s group form “provides for an overriding cohesiveness brought about by the amalgamation of loose parts linked by revealing clues of relationships to provide a sensed, rather than a material, order” (Jennifer Taylor, 2003,

The Architecture of Fumihiko Maki, P23).

“master-program” and “master-form”

Group form developed as a critique of the static nature of “master planning”. For the “master-plan” they substituted the “master-program”, which was conceived as involving a temporal dimension. The key lies in the possibility of open-ended and evolving planning. The term “master-form” was also introduced as an “ideal” which “can move into ever-states of equilibrium and yet maintain visual consistency and a sense of continuing order in the long run … The vital image derives from a dynamic equilibrium of generative elements, not a composition of stylised and finished objects” (Fumihiko Maki, 1964, The Future of Urban Environment). The equilibrium of “master-form” was to be sustained by the elements present at any given time. Heather Cass commented on the approach as the attempt “to reconcile the deterministic object-oriented tradition of the West with the indeterminate evolution-orientated tradition of Japan” (Heather Willson Cass, 1976, Architecture as Human Experience).

027 |

1-2 Form diagram from “Notes on collective form�

Quality of Urban Space and Collective Form | 028

Compositional Form

1-3 Aerial view of the Forbidden City, Beijing, China. (The Beijing Report.)

Mega-Structure

1-4 Kisho Kurokawa, Agricultural City. (Metabolism.)

1-5 Kenzo Tange, masterplan for Tokyo. (Metabolism.)

Group Form

1-6 San Francisco. (Image courtesy of Philip Hyde.)

1-7 Fubao, Sichuan, China.

029 |

The Japanese culture and view of the world was also embedded in the earlier collective 1.3.3 Group Form and Resilience

effort of the Metabolism group which Maki was a part of. The central declaration of Metabolism is that “the city would be regenerated by a continuous replacement of parts on a ‘metabolic cycle’, as in nature” (Jennifer Taylor, 2003, The Architecture of Fumihiko

the origin of Japanese world view

Maki, P42). Fawcett claimed that “it was this plateau of cultural agreement on which Metabolism was based, lending credibility to its vision of an environment as a sort of living plasma of demountable settings, a multi-strategy architecture of indeterminacy …” (Chris Fawcett, 1980, The New Japanese House, P17).

It is in accord with the Buddhist notion of the world-in-transformation where phenomena are viewed as transitory states rather than as fixed object, which also ties closely with the Shinto vision of nature as a cycle as renewal. This thinking was compatible with the existing situation in the Japanese city, which constantly changes according to

the transient

the natural patterns of decay and renewal. It also applies to the Japanese traditional modular buildings such as machiya (townhouses) as a set of exchangeable and transferable parts.

Quality of Urban Space and Collective Form | 030

the concept of “oku”

“A place (in Japan) is originally defined as an empty place into which anything may be brought. The way of integration is not that the centre holds everything together, but rather only that there exists coordination at some point but with nothing inside it.”

(Yujiro Nakamura, 1984, Process Architecture, P62)

the concept of “linkage” and “equilibrium”

The equilibrium of group form was rooted in this way of seeing the balance of space.

Maki’s formal/spatial strategy is that wherein external space or space “between” is an implied linkage. It rose in response to Maki’s concerns for the urban society as “a dynamic field of interrelated force. It is a set of mutually independent variables in a rapidly expanding infinite series. Any order introduced within the pattern of forces contributes to a state of dynamic equilibrium — an equilibrium that will change in character as time passes.” (Fumihiko Maki, Masato Ohtaka, 1964, Collective Form— Three Paradigm)

the incomplete

As the elements in the equilibrium are constantly evolving and renewing, and that one or more elements should be added or taken out of the system without breaking the state of equilibrium, there is no “complete” or “finished” state of the group form. It is forever changing and always in balance. “The conceptual openness of the compositions

031 |

provides for multiple penetrations and an acceptance of and responsiveness to uncertainty.” (Jennifer Taylor, 2003, The Architecture of Fumihiko Maki, P23)

another perspective of resilience

The embrace of the incomplete and the transient is fundamentally a new view of resilience; and the notion of equilibrium offers a new possibility besides the resilience in the nature of the structure and adaptability of the basic elements, which is in the composition of elements.

The notion of group form was inspired by and can be best understood as the informal 1.3.4 Group Form and Density

cohesion of vernacular settlements. For this particular reason, use of the term often raises questions about the building scale and density. Maki’s work deploying group form as a formal/spatial strategy, however, involves organizing physical fabrics, urban and rural, large and small. His exploration of group form as a means of handling large and complex assemblages and units evolved through projects such as the proposal for Shinjuku, 1960, Rissho University, 1968, and the Hillside Terraces, 1969, to the large “cloud” complexes, including the gymnasiums and exhibition buildings of the 1990s.

Quality of Urban Space and Collective Form | 032

dealing with bigness

Taylor described the approach as “seek to humanise bigness, when bigness is inherent in the program … the designs are based on a policy of accepting and accommodating the large by means of strategies of uncontainment and incompleteness” (Jennifer Taylor, 2003, The Architecture of Fumihiko Maki, P23).

the floating floor over the foundation wall

What I found coherent and interesting in these projects, is the preference of the floating floor over the foundation wall, which is exactly in accord with the Japanese value presented in the traditional Japanese architecture and urban form. That liberates the concept of “element” in group form from individual volume or even functional room to horizontal activity plane. Space is defined by setting these planes at different heights, and the partition between them are either permeable or transparent. Both public and private space, indoor and outdoor space are treated in more or less the same way

layering of space and permeable volume

(which enables the concept of Maki’s “city rooms” —interior “outdoor” space). That also results in a very vibrant and rich layering of space. Thus however big a “functional room” might be, there is at least a layer of “communication space” at human scale and relates to a more graspable experience of space through out the set of buildings. And the “largeness” of a high-density building is broken down into a fluid composition of activity planes.

033 |

1.4 Proposition

Starting by asking what is good city form, the thesis builds itself on a series of hypothesis: ›› A good city form should be above all human-centered, which means it should reflect the social realities, the pattern of human behavior, and permit changes over time.

recap and hypothesis

›› The urban structure of today in correspondence to the urban society should be more like a rhizome than a tree: dynamic, interconnected at different levels with overlapping sub-systems and autonomous parts. ›› Connections and overlaps are key to such a structure. The network of movement combined with space for spontaneous activities can be conceptualized as interface between different uses and zone of interaction. ›› Instead of one complete entity, architecture can be seen an assemblage of elements with interwoven system of movement and thus be a part of the rhizome structure. ›› The assemblage of elements should be a dynamic equilibrium of generative elements.

This conceptual openness of the compositions would provide for multiple penetrations and an acceptance of and responsiveness to uncertainty.

Quality of Urban Space and Collective Form | 034

›› Each element can be regarded as a horizontal activity plane, which enables rich layering of space both indoor and outdoor, functional or communicational, and thus offer an intimate human scale to large and high-density set of buildings.

proposition

The proposition is then derived from the hypothesis, study of Maki’s group form and projects in terms of architectural approaches, and analytical study of Japantown: To revitalize Japantown in San Francisco and to sew Japantown back into its context, I propose to replace the low-density, mega-scale, single-use structures incrementally with interconnected fine grain texture of mixed uses, generated by the principles of group form, which enables interaction, resilience, and vivid diversity, improving connectivity across a wide range of urban scales and increasing density at the same time.

035 |

CHAPTER 2 AN OVERVIEW OF JAPANTOWN

An Overview of Japantown | 036

2.1 Context and Planning Background

Japantown as we know it today is located

Western Addition together. It is also where

along Geary Boulevard, with the Fillmore

future developments are more likely to take

District to the west, Western Addition

place.

to the south, and Cathedral Hill to the east. The thesis takes reference from numerous previous planning efforts and adopts the boundary of the planning area for the Japantown Better Neighborhood Plan (May 2009, San Francisco Planning Department) as the boundary of its study area. The study area is bounded by Steiner, California, Gough, and O’Farrell streets so as to include the numerous cultural and historic resources of the community. An area of 9 blocks along Geary Boulevard is chosen as the core design area. The design area is of strategic importance to stitch Japantown, the Fillmore District and

Looking at Japantown in the context of San Francisco, it is adjacent to the downtown area of highest building and population density (figure 2-1 a and b). Located at the middle of a saddle, the northern part of Japantown has a view towards southeast, of the Twin Peaks, Noe Valley and Mission District (figure 2-1 h). Noticeably in the lot sizes map (figure 2-1 d), the city lots around Japantown and Western Addition are significantly larger than the typical San Francisco city lots, as a result of the consolidation of parcels in those areas during urban renewal.

037 |

2-1 Japantown in the context of San Francisco

a

b

c

BUILDING HEIGHT

DENSITY OF EMPLOYED POPULATION

DENSITY OF HOUSEHOLDS

e

f

g

LAND COVER

ASPECT

SLOPE

d

LOT SIZES

h

HILLSHADE

An Overview of Japantown | 038

2-2 Study area and core design area.

STREET

Numerous discussions have taken place

PARK

in the passed 20 years about the future plan of Japantown. To name a few: the Fillmore Jazz Preservation District Plan 1994, Japantown Community Planning Process Status Report 1999, Japantown Community Plan 2000, Senate Bill 307 Neighborhood Cultural Preservation Report for San Francisco’s Japantown 2005, Japantown Neighborhood Pedestrian Safety and Traffic Community Plan 2006.

The 3 most recent and influential ones are:

Japantown Better Neighborhood Plan 2009 In March 2007, Mayor Newsom, Supervisor Mirkarimi and the San Francisco Planning

039 |

Department initiated the Japantown Better Japantown Cultural Heritage and Economic Neighborhood Plan (the Plan) at a town hall community meeting. The Plan was initiated BETTER NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN

to address imminent new development in DRAFT FOR PUBLIC REVIEW MAY 2009 SAN FRANCISCO PLANNING DEPARTMENT

SACRAMENTO

JAPANTOWN BETTER NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN

Japantown; provide support for existing community-based organizations and

ST

Proposed Project Area PERINE

PL

ST

PROJECT

Kintetsu Mall

Peace Plaza

Miyako Hotel

ZAMPA LN

Feet

SHORE

LN

GALILEE

LN

QUICKSTEP

LN

ST

0

HOLLIS

ST

I

ST

1000

1481 Post Street

Rosa Parks Elementary School

locally-owned businesses; improve the neighborhood’s circulation, streetscape,

Miyako (Hotel Kabuki) Mall

INCA LN

SCOTT

OFARRELL

Kimochi Home

ST

A I

WESTERN

Redevelopment Area (A-2) Expires 01-01-09

ST

RT GEARY B

BLVD

Properties Within Japantown BNP Area

ST

Kabuki/ Kinokuniya Sundance Mall Theater

ST

GEARY

HEMLOCK

Mall

POST ST

Sokoji Temple

Buchanan

ROW

ST

AVERY

Hamilton Playground

Christ United Presbyterian Church

Former YWCA Nihonmachi Little Friends

JPOP Center SUTTER

OCTAVIA

COTTAGE

JCCCNC/Japanese American History Archives

ST

Kokoro

Konko Church of San Francisco

ST

ST BUSH ST

AUSTIN

ST

ST

Kinmon Gakuen

ST

BUCHANAN

WEBSTER

FILLMORE

ST

ST

PIERCE

STEINER

WILMOT

LAGUNA

PL

PINE ST

GOUGH

Buddhist Church of San Francisco

ORBEN

CALIFORNIA

WILLOW

CT CLEARY

ELLIS ST

ST

open spaces, and connections across Geary Boulevard to the Fillmore District;

japantown_poster.pdf - mwebster - April 10, 2008

2-3 Japantown Better Neighborhood Plan. Released 2009.

(Courtesy of San Francisco Planning Department)

and preserve the special character, culture and history of the neighborhood. The final version of the draft was released for public review in 2009. The plan proposed land use changes and increases in allowable building heights, and changes in the public realm.

Sustainability Strategy 2013 After the Japantown BNP draft was released, feedback from the Japantown community proved the Plan controversial in terms of the additional growth that it proposes. In 2009 the Planning Commission directed the Department and community to revisit these issues. In 2012 the Japantown Organizing Committee, Office of Economic and Workforce Development and Planning Department have tentatively agreed to “re-brand” the Japantown Better Neighborhood Plan as a “Japantown Economic and Social Heritage Strategy”. This Strategy builds off the Better Neighborhood Plan and

FINAL DRAFT / JULY 10, 2013

An Overview of Japantown | 040

TOWN JAPAN and RITAGE RAL HE BILITY CULTU STAINA SU IC M ECONO GY STRATE

S JCHES

incorporates many of its recommendations

San Francisco. Over 50,000 daily transit

and strategies. However as the name

riders rely on Geary bus service, but the

implies, the Japantown Economic and

route is often unreliable and crowded.

Social Heritage Strategy is focused

To improve travel times, reliability and

specifically on Japantown’s cultural

the user experience, the San Francisco

heritage and economic sustainability. The

County Transportation Authority (SFCTA),

Planning Department recognizes that the

in partnership with the San Francisco

JAPANTOWN ORGANIZING COMMITTEE

2-4 Japantown Cultural Heritage and Economic Sustainability Strategy. Released 2013.

(Courtesy of San Francisco Planning Department)

centralized location and rich transit service Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA), make portions of Japantown reasonable

is evaluating the implementation of a

for consideration of increased development bus rapid transit (BRT) system for the potential. However the important land use

Geary corridor. The Project is currently

and growth-related issues are being tabled

undergoing an environmental review.

for future community planning efforts.

Upon certification of the Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental

Geary Corridor Bus Rapid Transit Project

Impact Report, the Project will enter the preliminary engineering and design

Geary Boulevard is the most heavily used

phase (estimated in 2014), which will be

transit corridor in the northern part of

followed by construction and mitigation

041 |

2-5 Geary Corridor Bus Rapid Transit Project. Scheduled to finish by 2020.

(Courtesy of SFMTA)

GEARY CORRIDOR BUS RAPID TRANSIT

Conceptual Engineering and Environmental Analysis

(estimated 2017). Features of Geary BRT

BRT corridors also typically benefit from

include: dedicated transit lane and new

investment in street beautification and

stations, transit signal priority and traffic

pedestrian amenities, and in some cases,

signal optimization, pedestrian safety

have prompted new investment and

enhancements and all-door boarding and

increased economic activity in commercial

low-floor vehicles which would result in

districts they serve. Base on the case

reduced travel times.

studies carried out by the San Francisco

Cities in the US, such as Los Angeles, Project Update June 2012

Boston, Cleveland, and Eugene, Oregon, www.gearybrt.org

have implemented BRT systems as a costeffective way to improve transit service.

These projects have brought significant improvements in transit travel times and reliability, with strong gains in ridership.

38R Geary Rapid 38

42nd Ave

25th Ave

Fort Miley

43

6th Ave

Stockton

Tenderloin/Lower Nob Hill

Japantown/Fillmore

Union Square

GEARY

8X, 30, 45 (NB)

Kearny

10, 11

Richmond

Inner Richmond/Roosevelt MS

Kaiser/Mt. Zion Hospitals

28, 28L

33

24

Park Presidio

18

Connections to Metro Stations & Other Muni Lines |

Arguello

Divisadero

Mission St/SOMA

Battery

FINANCIAL DISTRICT

GEARY

33rd Ave

Transbay Transit Center

MARKET O’FARRELL

Cathedral Hill

Union Square

19, 47R, 49R Golden Gate Transit

Cable Car

Van Ness

Powell

Grant 8X, 30, 45

Montgomery/ New Montgomery Station in Transitway

BART Stations | Regional Bus Lines

4th & King N, T, E, 12, 30, 45, 108

Mission Bay

11, 14, 14L

11th St/Bryant

South Van Ness & Mission

13th ST

S VAN NESS

9, 9L

SOMA/Mission

TOWNSEND

Eugene Emx) can be expected in the first year. As one of the special nodes and major stations of the Project, the Fillmore station will certainly bring changes to Japantown. It is necessary to envision

5, 5L

38, 38R

McAllister

SOMA

O’Farrell/Geary

Civic Center/Hayes Valley

1, Cable Car

Golden Gate Transit 41, 45

Polk Gulch/Nob Hill

Cow Hollow/Russian Hill

Sacramento

Cathedral Hill

Stop on Sidewalk

11

Union

North Point Aquatic Park

VAN NESS

VAN NESS

DIVISION

Showplace Square

SOMA/Mission

19

27

8th St

Connections to Metro Stations & Other Muni Lines |

Folsom

Mid-Market

Tenderloin

6, 71, 71L, F Van Ness J, K, L, M, N, T

31

Market

Caltrain Stations | Regional Bus Lines

49R Van Ness-Mission Rapid

Eddy

Polk Gulch

Polk Gulch/Pacific Heights

2

10

Sutter

Jackson

Galileo HS/Marina

Chestnut 30

Station in Transitway

development to ensure that they happen

108 AC Transit, SamTrans

F Montgomery J, K, L, M, N, T Montgomery

47R Van Ness-Townsend Rapid 4th & Townsend

Angeles Orange Line) to 90% (case of

8X, 30, 45 (SB)

Leavenworth/Jones

Fillmore

Raoul Wallenberg HS

GEARY

Washington HS

GEARY

27

22

Masonic

Kaiser French Campus/Clement St

Outer Richmond

PT LOBOS AVE

Cliff House

ridership increase of 51% (case of Los

and plan for the changes and future 44

29

48th Ave

County Transportation Authority, a

Stop on Sidewalk

within an healthy framework.

An Overview of Japantown | 042

2.2 A Brief History of Japantown

San Francisco’s Japantown was originally

to Japan but many settled to establish

known as Nihonjin Machi–“Japanese

shops, hotels, restaurants and rooming

people’s town.” It is the oldest of its kind

houses. From 1900 to 1909, Japanese

in the continental United States and one

businesses quickly grew from 90 to 545

of only three remaining Japantowns in the

establishments in San Francisco. They

United States. Numerous social, economic initially settled on the edge of the city’s and political organizations originated

Chinatown, and in the working-class

in the city, including schools, religious

South of Market district, until the 1906

institutions and civic organizations.

earthquake devastated these areas. The Western Addition remained untouched by

San Francisco’s Early Japanese Communities

the fire and provided a haven for the bulk of San Francisco’s burned-out population.

The first Japanese immigrants sailed

Tent villages were hastily erected in

into San Francisco Bay in 1896. This

nearby parks to provide emergency

first generation, known as the Issei, was

accommodations for homeless families.

small in number and consisted mainly of

Later these families crowded into small

young men. These early immigrants had

apartments which Western Addition

the intention to earn money and return

homeowners had built into the attics,

043 |

basements, and wings of their homes.

San Francisco’s Japantowns

Many property owners raised their houses

E C AR MB (1870sto1940s)

GEARY ET

RK

MA

H 6T

 

and placed stores beneath them, and

Chinatown

additional commercial buildings were



D 3R

(1906 to today)

VAN NESS

GEARY

FILLMORE

 

Western Addition Japantown

O ER AD

BROADWAY

PRESIDIO

GRANT

LOMBARD

 South Park (1906-1930s)

constructed alongside homes. Thus began the mixed land use which later brought

MISSION

Richmond District  South of Market (1950s to today) (1880s to 1906)  G O L D E N G AT E PA R K   1906 fire Sunset District (1950s to today)     2-6 Historic Locations of Japantown       

restaurants, theaters, saloons, and hotels  

 

to the area. The Japanese community relocated to the present Japantown area in the Western Addition, with another smaller concentration in the South Park (south of Market, between Second and Third Streets and Brannan and Townsend).



 



 2-7 Japantown Businesses along Geary Street, 1910s.   (Collection of National Japanese American Historical Society)







By then, San Francisco was the chief U.S.

  Fillmore Street looking north

2-8 port of entry for Asian immigration with the toward Sutter Street, ca. 1916.  (Collection of the San Francisco Public   Library) largest Nikkei (Japanese) population of any 

    mainland                       



American city.

n ba ur

in te r

19

0

6

nm

re

en t

ne

w

al

An Overview of Japantown | 044

2-9 Time line of Japantown History 1937 Aerial View. (David Rumsey Historical Map Collection) 1956-2005 Building footprint map. (Data from Japantown Atlas) 2013 Aerial View. (Google Map)

 

 

 

  045 |      

 

 

 

                              

2-10 Mikado Hotel and Cafeteria on Post Street, 1930s. (Reproduced in Generations)

Growth Of Nihonmachi

Internment and Japantown Without Nikkei

By the time of the 1910 census, the core

After the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor

area near Post and Buchanan Streets

in December 1941, the neighborhood

was home to more than 50 Japanese-

experienced Kristallnacht type attacks on

owned commercial establishments, and

residences and businesses. In February

to most of the 4,700 Japanese residents

1942, President Franklin Roosevelt signed

residing in the city. The neighborhood

Executive Order 9066 that forced all

took on a very Japanese character and

Japanese of birth or descent in the United

before long became a miniature Ginza.

States interned. By August 1942, the entire

             

 



The community prospered through the

Japanese community of San Francisco was

1920s and 1930s. By 1940, the Japanese

shipped out to one of the ten concentration

population of Japantown, although by

camps located away from the West

then second in size to Little Tokyo in Los

Coast. By 1943 many large sections of the

 

Angeles, numbered over 5,000, with more

neighborhood remained vacant due to the

than 200 Japanese-owned businesses.

forced internment. The void was quickly

Long-established Issei-owned businesses

filled by thousands of African Americans

were joined by emerging Nisei (second

who had left the South to find wartime

generation) entrepreneurs.

industrial jobs in California as part of the





 2-11 Japantown residents registering at Kinmon Gakuen, 1942.   (Collection of Bancroft Library)

  

 

  

 

 

 

 

        

 

 

An Overview of Japantown | 046

Great Migration. With the in-migration

settled in other parts of the city. Starting

of African Americans, the quiet Nihonjin

over was a particular hardship for most

Machi quickly turned into a vibrant, loud

Japanese American families returning

and crowded Fillmore District. From the

from the camps. Temporary housing in

1940s to the 1950s, the Fillmore flourished

the district -– sometimes in church social

with nightlife and music, and famous jazz

halls or former military housing – was often

musicians flocked to San Francisco from

full. Reentry into society, from finding work

all over the country to play on the stages

to attending school, was often met with

of Fillmore, earning the neighborhood the

hostility and mistrust. By the 1950 census,

name of “Harlem of the West.”

although Japanese numbers in Japantown

 

                2-13 Pine Street Laundry, 1946.    (Reproduced in Generations)                  



area were nearly back to their prewar

 

 

 



Resettlement

 

 



2-12 Jimbo’s Bop City and Uoki  Sakai Co. on Post Street. (Collection Following   of National Japanese American  Historical Society)  

the war, some Japanese

levels, both whites and African Americans far outnumbered them. Japanese property

Americans returned, followed by

ownership initially rebounded following the

new Japanese immigrants as well as

war. By 1950, 148 parcels were Japanese





    

 

  

investment from the Japanese Government owned. This number dropped to 18 by

 

and Japanese companies, many did not

1962, the end of the initial round of urban

return to the neighborhood and instead

condemnations.

 

 

 

 



                        

 

047 |

Urban Renewal in the Western Addition In 1948, 27 blocks of San Francisco’s Western Addition, including much of Japantown, was selected as one of the





 

2-14 Graphic argument for public health as



 

2-16 Demolition for the Geary Expressway, 1960.

   an urban renewal issue, 1947.

(Collection of San Francisco Public Library)     (Courtesy of San Francisco Public Library)                  

 



 

 

  





  

 

  

 

first large-scale urban renewal projects in the nation. In order to address the “urban blight”, this quickly expanded to two project areas, A-1 (south of Post Street, 27 blocks) and A-2 (north of Post Street, 43 blocks), and involved the mass clearance of the neighborhood including a large number of residences and small businesses. The San Francisco Redevelopment Agency mandated “improvements,” but allowed the Japanese American community to hire their own architects and planners to reshape the

2-15 Demolition of the A-1 area, 1961.

(Courtesy of San Francisco Public Library)

2-17 Western Addition Redevelopment project areas A-1 and A-2.

(Courtesy of San Francisco Redevelopment Agency)

area between Post and Bush Streets—four blocks of the larger 43-block project.

                                            

 

 

 

 

An Overview of Japantown | 048

With the urban renewal projects, came

 

 

 

the investments and construction of the

Miyako Hotel and the Japanese Trade    Center malls (opened in 1968), and the   Peace Pagoda, a five-tiered concrete stupa      designed by Japanese architect Yoshiro            2-18 St. Francis Square 2-19 Miyako Hotel from Peace Plaza.

2-20 Buchanan Mall Looking      Taniguchi and presented to San Francisco  Co-operative Apartments.

Completed in 1968. toward Japan Center.        Occupied by 1964.

(Collection of San Francisco Public Library) Completed in 1976.        (Rudy Bruner Award for  (Collection of San Francisco   by the people of Osaka, Japan. Most of   Agency)  Urban Excellence Digital  Redevelopment         Archive)       the Japanese American businesses were          relocated to be concentrated on Post       



 



 

Street (between Fillmore and Laguna)



    

 

  

and Buchanan Mall. Buchanan Street was further redesigned into a landscaped

 

pedestrian mall completed with landscape fixtures designed by Japanese landscape architect and planner Rai Okamoto and

 

2-21 Relocating a 19th century house in the Western Addition.

(Courtesy of San Francisco  Redevelopment Agency)

    

artist Ruth Asawa, such as “River of Cobblestones,” origami fountains and the

049 |

Buchanan Mall Gate. Together they formed a more diverse and pan-Asian population, the new focal point of Japantown.

and Nisei retirements led to the closure of long-time businesses ranging from manga

Preserving Culture & Reinforcing Identity

alleys, community energies have focused

World War II internment, post-war

on the question of what is essential to

redevelopment, and the assimilation of

Nihonmachi.

Japanese Americans into the broader 2-22  New People Center. Built 2009.

(Courtesy of Kwan Henmi Architecture Planning)

shops to markets, bookstores to bowling

social fabric has meant that Japantown is no longer the site of a highly concentrated residential population of Nikkei. By 1990, more than 90 percent of Japanese Americans in San Francisco lived outside of Japantown. In addition, more than half of the Nikkei population of California is of mixed ethnic heritage, further complicating the issue of cultural identity. As the neighborhood’s demographics shifted to

Cultural pride and celebrations remain the core to San Francisco’s Japantown.

The two largest public events, the Cherry Blossom Festival held in the spring and the Nihonmachi Street Fair held each August, attracts thousands each year. Other Events, organizations and demonstrations focused on Nikkei heritage contributes to an ongoing way of life. The Sansei (thirdgeneration Japanese Americans) formed

An Overview of Japantown | 050

many grassroots organizations based in Japantown to serve the needs of both Japantown residents and the extended Japanese American community.

These changes show an important 2-25 Japantown JPOP Summit Festival, August 2012.

transition in Japantown’s identity—instead of the enclave of Japanese migrants and descents, it is becoming increasingly an ethnic cultural and social center and heart of connections for not only the Japan town residents but also the Japanese and Japanese Americans that have dispersed elsewhere in the region.

2-23 The parade at Japantown Cherry Blossom Festival, May 2013.

2-24 Closing down of Post Street for pedestrians at Japantown Cherry Blossom Festival, May 2013.

Sources: Graves, Donna. San Francisco Japantown Historic Context Statement. Rep. N.p., May 2011. Web. Laguerre, Michel S. The Global Ethnopolis: Chinatown, Japantown, and Manilatown in American Society. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Macmillan, 2000. Print.

Nikkei Heritage. Vol. 7-4/8-1. San Francisco: National Japanese American Historical Society, 2000/2001. Print.

051 |

2.3 Layers of Japantown

The following part of Chapter 2 will unfold layers of Japantown and introduce the neighborhood’s existing conditions. The analysis mainly focuses on the study area while keeping the regional context in perspective. It includes the following elements: topography and watersheds, demographics, street network and connections, land use and zoning, built form, public space, historic and cultural properties.

2.3.1 Topography and Watersheds

2-26  Mission Creek Watershed (Ramirez-Herrera, M.T., Sowers, J.M., and Richard, C.M., 2006, Creek and Watershed Map of San Francisco: Oakland Museum of California, Oakland, CA, 1:25,800 scale.)

An Overview of Japantown | 052

Japantown is located at the middle of the saddle between Pacific Heights and Western Addition. It is in the upper half of the Mission Creek watershed. With Geary Boulevard crossing the low point of the saddle, there has been flooding issues at the tunneled part of Geary Boulevard.

The saddle landform indicates that storm water from a relatively large area will be gathered towards the lowest central valley and follow the alignment of Hayes Creek (figure 2-26) into the Mission Bay. It poses requirement for future developments to cope with the amount of street runoff. In the meantime it can be regarded as an opportunity to take advantage of the gathering of the storm water for storm water treatment.

2-27 5ft contour map of Japantown and its context area.

2-28 Flooding record in year 2011.

053 |

2.3.2 Demographics

As discussed above, Japantown

of residents of Japanese ancestry remains

has remained an ethnically varied

relatively low (5%).

neighborhood at the turn of the 21-century.

By the 2000 census, 53% of the 20,598 total population of Japantown areaare white, 21% Asian, and 19% African American. Although the number of Asians in Japantown has remained stable, the population of Japanese and Japanese Americans is consistently declining over the pass 3 decades. The 2000 census shows that the total percentage of Asians living in the Japantown area has increased by 1% in the past 10 years,

Looking at the demographics of the Bay Area in the 2010 census (figure 2-30), the Japanese and Japanese American population is mainly distributed around south bay. Within San Francisco, Japantown still is the center for the Japanese and Japanese American population with the highest ethic group density. And the area that Japantown is in, including its surrounding neighborhoods, remains a very ethnically diverse area.

while the Japanese and Japanese descent

The income data shows a very sharp

population has declined as much as 11%.

contrast between the area north of and

In the 2010 census, the Asian population

south of Geary Boulevard (figure 2-29) .

has increased to 33%. But the population

An Overview of Japantown | 054

A. PEOPLE

Table 4.1 RESIDENTS OF JAPANTOWN: A STATISTICAL SNAPSHOT*

As discussed in Chapter 2 – Historic Overview, Japantown has been the primary hub for the city and the region’s Japanese American community for over a century, which always maintained a diverse mix of residents and businesses. As shown in Table 4.1, the current residents of Japantown have a diverse ethnicity, age, income, and education. The population of residents of Japanese ancestry is relatively low (5%), meaning that many Japanese Americans and others who see Japantown as their cultural center reside outside of the neighborhood. Nonetheless, its institutions and businesses make Japantown a regional as well as local community center.

Total Residents Age UNDER 18

Meters

40

76

1,400

2,800

4,200

40-64

25%

OVER 65

27%

7%

HMONG

4%

INDIAN

4%

JAPANESE

5%

KOREAN

2%

OTHER ASIAN

LATINO

8%

WHITE

47%

NONE OF THE ABOVE

Median Household Income

70,000 Meters

2-29 Mean income (data from the 2010 Decennial Census)

°

10%

HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA

11%

SOME COLLEGE/ASSOCIATES DEGREE

19%

BACHELOR’S DEGREE

31%

MASTERS, PROFESSIONAL, OR DOCTORATE DEGREE

29%

3

0

-1 11 65 -8 5 46 -6 4 29 -4 5 14 -2 8 0 -1 3

86

Meters

17,500

35,000

52,500

70,000

Meters

30

$35,600

* Data on total residents, age, and race/ethnicity from the 2010 Decennial Census. Data on income and education are estimates from the 2011 American Community Survey.

1

-1

40

76

-1

8,750

$53,900

SOUTH OF GEARY BOULEVARD

70,000

11 2

1

0

$62,800

SUTTER STREET TO GEARY BOULEVARD

LESS THAN A HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA

-1

48

-2

17

0

48

-2

-4 9

7

17

24

64

00

°

14

1 33

3 -4

23

26

9

77 -2

10

72

64

27

20

96

25

-2

06

40

4

52,500

AREA OF CONCERN

$53,900

Education

7

-4 24

9

-4 4 26 35,000

16

14

36

50

-1

69

62

9

43

64

3

2

64

71

22

-1

-1

44 26

13 17,500

12

66

03

-8

-1 5

61

86

10

69

51

5 8,750

37

14

14

6 95 -6 2 0

A.3. Lack of Collaboration for Cultural Preservation. Preserving and supporting Japantown’s cultural and social resources requires collaboration and compromise within the community, within City government, and between the community and City. There is concern within the community that the importance of collaboration necessary to realize 2-30 Density of Japanese/Japanese American the JCHESS’s goals may not be sufficiently appreciated. population (data from the 2010 Decennial Census) 00

33 1

9

63 72

23

4

9

3

2

4

4

01 22

-6

-5

2

37

20 01

54

52 22

-5

37

20

54

52

°

LEGEND

Meters

4%

Meters

LEGEND

70,000

8%

5,600

A.2. Not All Age Groups Have an Equal Stake in the Community. Currently, Japantown has substantial resources for children from pre-K through elementary school, and for seniors, as well as businesses and activities that serve older adults. There is concern that young adults and youth outside of formal programs and organizations lack facilities where they can participate fully given their limited economic resources, and that they need to be integrated into the community’s decision-making processes.

°

5%

BLACK OR AFRICAN AMERICAN

AREA OF CONCERN

LEGEND

5%

FILIPINO

NORTH OF SUTTER STREET

LEGEND

33%

CHINESE

-1 11 65 -8 5 46 -6 4 29 -4 5 14 -2 8 0 -1 3

48

700

42%

ASIAN

A.1. It is Difficult to Sustain Japantown’s Critical Mass as a Community Hub. The displacements caused by internment and redevelopment (as discussed in Chapter 2) means that the great majority of the region’s Japanese Americans do not live in Japantown.

Additionally, there is limited in-migration of Japanese to the United States, compared to other ethnic groups.

There is concern that this makes it more difficult to sustain the critical mass necessary to support the businesses and institutions that make Japantown the hub of the city and region’s Japanese and Japanese American community.

86

-1

0

°

5,600

-1

11 2

4,200

-2

00 2,800

1

-4 1,400

7

9 700

14

0

17

24

°

7%

18-39

Race / Ethnicity:

AREA OF CONCERN

LEGEND

11,228

2-31 Data from Japantown Cultural Heritage And Economic Sustainability Strategy (2013)

J a pa n to W n C u Lt u r a L h e r I taG e & e C o n o M I C S u S ta I n a B I L I t Y S t r at e G Y

055 |

2.3.3 Street Network and Connections

As a direct consequence of the urban renewal, Geary Boulevard and Webster Street widen significantly within the Project Area A-1 and A-2. The design of Geary Boulevard along Japantown, especially the tunneled section at the intersection with Fillmore Street, encourages vehicles to speed through and thus result in a very hostile environment for pedestrians. The width of Geary Boulevard is at its widest between Scott Street and Gough Street, reaching 147ft in width and over 10 lanes;

STREET NETWORK

2-32 

An Overview of Japantown | 056

BICYCLE ROUTE AND TRANSIT SYSTEMS

BICYCLE ROUTE MUNI NETWORK

2-33

PEDESTRIAN VOLUME ANNUAL PEDEST RIAN CROSSINGS

2-34

057 |

the tunneled section reaching 168ft

runs along Geary Boulevard ranks #1

Several bicycle routes intersect in the

in width with 12 lanes. Study of the

in the Top 10 Bus Routes by Average

Japantown neighborhood. With the

traffic count along Geary in the past

Weekday Boarding in the Bay Area,

transit resources Japantown has right

50 years shows that the amount of

FY 2007-08, with SF Muni 1 ranking

now and will have in the foreseeable

traffic passing through Japantown

#6, and SF Muni 22 reaching #9. The

future, combining public transit

area is in fact less than other sections

ongoing Geary Corridor Bus Rapid

with better integrated bicycle routes

of Geary with a parcel-line-to-parcel-

Transit Project brings forward several

and stations will be a reasonable

line width of 125ft. Study of the

design schemes for the special BRT

move and will set forth a more

traffic count along Webster Street

node at Fillmore Street, one of which

environmental friendly transit model.

shows similar results and provides

is to cover up the tunnel in order to

support for the narrowing of Webster

have a continuous bus designated

Street between Bush Street and

line in the middle of the boulevard. It

Golden Gate Avenue.

would be one of the most common

Japantown is served by high density of bus lines with some of the busiest bus transit lines in the bay area.

Among them, SF Muni 38/38L that

and efficient settings of a BRT route.

Multiple bus lines intersecting at Fillmore and Geary also calls for a comprehensive BRT station design.

The popular pedestrian destination and routes can be identified in the map of pedestrian volume at intersections. The map also reveals the particular routes that pedestrians tend to avoid, which marks the inhospitable street frontage and sequential low energy of the street.

An Overview of Japantown | 058 2-35 Traffic count in relation to street width along Geary Boulevard. (data from the SFCTA traffic count data.)

ffic Way Tra o w T d Measure 24-Hour

6955 40067 4

61408

125’ PL to PL

8’ 147’ 16

147’

68’4”

059 |

2-36  View of Geary Boulevard at Fillmore Street Tunnel looking east.

An Overview of Japantown | 060

2-37  View of Webster Street at Geary

061 |

2.3.4 Land Use and Zoing

Japantown is comprised of a mix of land uses, including purely residential blocks, blocks combining a mixture of residential, institutional and commercial uses, and blocks entirely made up of commercial uses Japantown contains about 7,150 housing units. Residential uses predominate in

RETAIL DENSITY

2-38 

SQ FEET PER ACRE 2743 - 4254

the area north of Bush, consisting mostly

0 - 692

4254 - 6507

of fine-grained, single- and two-family

692 - 1586

6507 - 11173

1586 - 2743

11173 - 21782

homes, typically not wider than 25 feet,

An Overview of Japantown | 062

WEBSTER ST

2-39 Japantown land use map. (Japantown Cultural Heritage And Economic Sustainability Strategy, 2013)

POST ST

WESTERN SHORE LN

INCA LN

HOLLIS ST

OFARRELL ST

CLEARY CT

QUICKSTEP LN

ELLIS ST

ELLIS ST

Figure 4.1 Japantown JAPANTOWN Figure 4.1 LAND LandUSES Uses

GOUGH ST

ZAMPA LN

LAGUNA ST

FILLMORE ST

GEARY BLVD

Mixed Use (Residential) Mixed Use (No Residential) Residential Office

Cultural, Institutional, Educational Open Space Production, Distribution, Repair Retail, Entertainment

Hotel, Visitor Services Medical Vacant No Data

1,000 Feet

063 |

and less than 40 feet in height.

Japantown contains over 700

limits, with the height limit being 40

Residential uses south of Bush Street

businesses utilizing over 2 million

feet to the north. To the south, the

include a number of apartment

square feet of space. Many of these

predominant height limits are 40 and

buildings that contain anywhere from

are home businesses and other small

50 feet, although there are several

four to fifty residential units, although

offices. Many of the businesses are

blocks with notably higher height

a few large-scale, apartment

typically retail in nature, including

limits, up to 240 feet.

buildings containing upward of one

many restaurants.

hundred residential units also exist.

The Draft Better Neighborhoods

In terms of zoning, Japantown

Plan (2009) proposed increases to

Japantown contains over 200

includes ten existing zoning districts,

allowed heights at the Japan Center

institutional uses, including

most of which are Residential,

Malls, including three potential

community centers, schools, civic

Mixed Residential or Neighborhood

towers of 200 – 250 feet, as well as

organizations, business associations,

Commercial zones. Bush Street

another tower further east nearer

and religious institutions. These uses

is a noticeable east-west division

to Gough Street, and proposed

are largely interspersed throughout

between residential zones to the

increased height limits along Geary

the community.

north and mixed residential and

Boulevard. The preponderance of

commercial zones to the south. Bush

vocal community views opposed these

Street is also a dividing line for height

proposals on the ground that, in their

An Overview of Japantown | 064

PUBLIC P

PUBLIC

NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS NC-2

SMALL-SCALE (2 COMMERCIAL STORIES)

NC-3

MODERATE-SCALE (3+ COMMERCIAL STORIES)

NC-S

SHOPPING CENTER (2 COMMERCIAL STORIES)

NCD

INDIVIDUAL (NAMED, CONTROLS VARY)

RESIDENTIAL, HOUSE CHARACTER DISTRICTS RH-2

TWO UNITS PER LOT

RH-3

THREE UNITS PER LOT

RESIDENTIAL, MIXED (HOUSES & APARTMENTS) DISTRICTS

ZONING PATTERNS

RM-1

LOW DENSITY (1 UNIT PER 800 SF)

RM-2

MODERATE DENSITY (1 UNIT PER 60 SF)

RM-3

MEDIUM DENSITY (1 UNIT PER 400 SF)

RM-4

HIGH DENSITY (1 UNIT PER 200 SF)

2-40

perspective, the proposals were inconsistent with preserving Japantown’s cultural legacy and remaining small-scale neighborhood character. This opposition was a significant reason that the Better Neighborhoods Plan process evolved into the JCHESS.

065 |

2.3.5 Built Form

Based on the scale and architectural style, the buildings in Japantown can be roughly categorized into 3 types.

Most of the single-family dwellings within Japantown date back to the late 19th and early 20th centuries and most adhere to Victorian-era architectural styles.

The most common form of single-family residence in the Japantown neighborhood is the Italianate or Stick style row house.

They are typically constructed on smaller

BUILDING FOOTPRINT

2-41 

An Overview of Japantown | 066

BUILDING HEIGHT

2-42

BUILT FORM & TOPOGRAPHY

2-43

067 |

parcels (18–45ft in width), built to the

buildings within redeveloped areas

scaled interfaces between the uses

property line with entrances spaced

were constructed in the 1960s and

and the street. The commercial

less than 30 feet apart. They provide

1970s and most often exhibit a

core of Japantown now is the

a pedestrian-scaled environment

Japanese-inspired Modernist style.

Japan Center, a set of large-scale,

with consistent street walls and

On the blocks where parcels were

commercial buildings constructed

an interesting variety of building

consolidated to allow for larger

during the urban renewal era between

façades. The fine grain texture

developments, the design of the

Post Street and Geary Boulevard. The

and building typology also enabled

buildings were focused on vehicular

three buildings that make up Japan

transitions of the ground floor use

access and circulation rather than

Center are two stories in height with

from residential to retail during the

pedestrian experiences. Several of

massive footprints stretching through

primetime of Japantown by simply

the blocks along Geary Boulevard

three city blocks. The set of buildings,

opening up the ground floor façades

and Post Street are the most obvious

originally named Japan Trade Center,

to become transparent storefronts;

examples of this. The large buildings

was designed to accommodate large

and some of them from retail back

on these blocks are comprised of

showrooms for the first tenants such

to residential again by shielding the

blank walls, with few or no openings,

as: Hitachi, Nissan and Mitsubishi,

indoor area away from public view.

and lack interest at the ground floor

who introduced Japanese electronics

that might otherwise be provided by

and cars to the American market. As

active ground floor uses with human-

a result the Japan Center is “fortress-

Conversely, the commercial

An Overview of Japantown | 068

2-44 Topography and some of the higher heights along Geary Boulevard in Japantown

069 |

like”, as described by the community.

scale” quality. The central plaza was

and maintenance. Depending on

It contains all the commercial uses

framed by two-story commercial

the results of the structural survey,

and activities in a blank envelope, and

structures that tried to incorporate

significant and time-consuming

thus takes all the life away from the

“ethnic character” in modernist form.

reconstruction of the garages may

surrounding streets, and along with

But it also exhibits theme-park-like

be necessary, which would affect the

Geary Boulevard, poses as a major

characters partly because of its

Japan Center and Japantown as well.

barrier between the Japantown and

generic architectural language.

Western Addition neighborhoods.

As mentioned before, many of

After witnessing the massive scale

buildings within redeveloped

of Japan Center and its erasure

areas are reaching the end of their

of historic Japantown, the local

functional lifespan. SFMTA recently

community expressed wishes for

initiated a structural examination

an environment characterized by

of all of the City’s garages. The

an “intimate scale of buildings and

ongoing structural examination of the

spaces.” As a result, Buchanan Mall,

Japan Center’s garages will convey

the central component of the A-2

the scope of repairs that may be

phase, reflected a more “village-

necessary for seismic improvements

An Overview of Japantown | 070

PLAN VIEW

1"=20'

AXONOMETRIC VIEW

2-45  Uoki K Sakai Co., founded just after the 1906 earthquake by a fishmonger named Kitaichi Sakai. One of the most important landmarks of San Francisco's Japantown. The two large symbols can be literally translated as "fish joy".

1"=10'

071 |

2-46  View of the Peace Plaza looking west.

An Overview of Japantown | 072

2-47  View of the Buchanan Mall looking north.

073 |

2.3.6 Public Space

Japantown and its surrounding

Street, improvements on accessibility and

neighborhoods have a good variety of

integrity of the open space network are

public spaces. Japantown’s public

needed. Some recent additions, such as

plazas, Peace Plaza and Buchanan Mall,

the Japantown History Walk interpretive

are the geographic and cultural heart of

signs are useful prototypes. Linking the

the neighborhood. These plazas serve as

destinations in and around Japantown

gathering spaces and location of festivals.

would also improve the clarity of the image

Cottage Row is a lovely example of mid-

of Japantown.

block alley and mini-park. Its intimate scale and sensitive details attract not only the local residents but also visitors.

Japantown is adjacent to two large green spaces: the Hamilton Recreation Center Playground and Pool, and the Raymond Kimbell Playground. However, partly due to the lack of street life and pedestrian scale along Geary Boulevard and Webster Street, also along some portions of Post

In 7 city blocks around Japan Center and Buchanan mall, large areas (mid-block space or along Geary Boulevard) are currently utilized as community-owned parking lots. Some of these spaces serve as public open spaces such as beer gardens or markets during festivals. They have great potential as sites for either future development or open space.

An Overview of Japantown | 074

PUBLIC SPACE & OTHER OPEN SPACE

2-48

PUBLIC SCHOOL PUBLIC SPACE & BUILDING

PRIVATE SCHOOL

PARK & PLAZA

STREET

2-49 Buchanan Mall on a usual day and during Cherry Blossom Festival

075 |

2.3.7 Historic and Cultural Properties

Japantown has a rich network of community-serving organizations and institutions. These organizations and

HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PROPERTIES

2-50

institutions provide a range of services and benefits to the local community, as well as to Japanese Americans from around the region.

DESIGNATED PROPERTIES WITH JAPANESE AMERICAN ASSOCIATIONS

HISTORIC PROPERTIES WITH JAPANESE AMERICAN ASSOCIATIONS

PROPERTIES WITH HISTORIC DESIGNATIONS

NON-HISTORIC PROPERTIES WITH JAPANESE AMERICAN ASSOCIATIONS

An Overview of Japantown | 076

2-51  View of Japan Center and Peace Pagoda looking east.

077 |

CHAPTER 3 CASE STUDIES

Case Studies | 078

As shown in the work flow chart in the introduction section, research and study 3.1 Methodology

was carried out from two starting points — theory study and site study, as the two corresponding lines of research continuously provide feedback to each other. 4 sets of case studies were chosen which offer different sets of design criteria that should be taken into consideration in the case of redesigning Japantown.

Searching for an architectural language of group form.

set1: “group form”

Cases cited in urban design and architecture literature as examples of good practice that deployed the principles of group form. They share in common the cohesion of loose parts linked by movement and access, dynamic composition of generative elements, and a unifying expression by the use of material and color. ›› Hillside Terrace, Tokyo, Japan. Architects: Fumihiko Maki. ›› Rissho University, Kumagaya, Japan. Architects: Fumihiko Maki. ›› Spiral, Tokyo, Japan. Architects: Fumihiko Maki. ›› Sarugaku, Tokyo, Japan. Architects: Akihisa Hirata.

Generative systems that resulted in a basic set of architectural language and a

079 |

set2: generative systems

framework of how they might be amalgamated. They all provide a setting within which the occupants could easily adapt the space to their particular needs and desires. ›› Traditional row houses in San Francisco, USA. ›› Traditional Machiya (townhouses) in Kyoto, Japan. ›› PREVI (Programa Experimental de Vivienda), Lima, Peru. ›› Urban Hybrid Housing winning proposal, Emmen, Switzerland. Architects: MVRDV. Searching for a development model that enables mixed uses of fine grain texture and adaptation of individual users.

set3: fine grain developments

Given the development pattern of today that often requires maximizing investment return by consolidating parcels and reaching higher density, cases are chosen based on the criterion that they are sizable groups of buildings of intimate scale and developed by a single developer, preferably developed in phases through a period of time. They are successful precedents that show how a development of such nature and be commercially feasible. ›› Farmers Market master plan, Los Angeles, USA. Architects: Koning Eizenberg Architecture.

Case Studies | 080

›› Sanlitun Village, Beijing, China. Architects: Kengo Kuma. ›› Daning Plaza, Shanghai, China. Architects: RTKL, SLA. Searching for a new identity for Japantown.

set4: “ethopoles”

As Japantown is no longer an ethic enclave with high concentration of residents of Japanese ancestry, it changes to what Michael Laguerre termed a global ethnopole, a node in a network of sites linking the ethopole to the homeland of its residents and to other diasporic sites (Michael Laguerre, 2000, The Global Ethnopolis). It therefore becomes a milieu of cultural characters and entrepreneurship that is strongly intertwined with the mainstream economy of the host society. The two remaining Japanese ethopoles in the US besides Japantown are studied. ›› Japantown, San Jose.

›› Little Tokyo, Los Angeles.

Lessons learnt from these 4 sets of case studies are incorporated into the strategies and goals in chapter 4. The Hillside Terraces project is selected to be further illustrated, as it is both successful application of group form, and fine grain mix use development developed by a single developer over time, with a changing but coherent set of architectural language.

081 |

3.2 Selected case study: Hillside Terrace in Tokyo

* The full list was Hillside Stage I, 1967-69; Hillside Stage II, 1971-73; Hillside Stage III, 1975-77; Hillside Stage IV (by Makoto Motokura who previously worked in Maki’s office), 1985; Hillside Stage V, 87; and Hillside Stage VI, 1992.

The Hillside Terraces project, which

grew out of, yet differed from, the previous

continued to grow after the commissioning

solution, reflecting variations in building

of the first increment in 1967, provides a

regulations, and the shifting character

remarkable example of Maki’s “sequential

of the external context as the street was

group form” whereby the group form logic

transformed from a quiet area into a

is sustained in a grouping emerging over

bustling and noisy thoroughfare. Taylor

time*. Stretching down both sides of a

described the project as “responding

fashionable street of the Daikanyama

with each new addition to the changing

district of Tokyo, the development is an

structure and significance of the street,

ongoing private commission primarily of

to the lessons learnt from the preceding

mixed residential and commercial and

segments, to the changing spirit and

cultural uses. Although it wasn’t originally

possibilities of architecture, and to the

conceived as a profit-making venture, the

developing ideas of its designer” (Jennifer

economic success of Hillside Terrace has

Taylor, 2003, The Architecture of Fumihiko

brought the development an unexpected

Maki, P26).

degree of popularity, which has changed the scope of the owners’ aspirations for later phases. Each stage of the design

Despite the changes in planning and construction, several themes have

Case Studies | 082

remained consistent throughout the various phases. Maki listed 3 major concerns that unified the various phases of the complex.

The first concern has been to maintain an intimate scale for the interior and exterior spaces.

Second, much attention has been given to the interaction of the façade and street, conceptualizing the pavement as a place of activity. The broad and varying paths, platforms and stairs in this zone give Hillside Terrace the spacious and dynamic character that Tokyo residents might associate with its Western name. Common pedestrian areas

3-1  Hillside Terrace ground floor plan.

(Fumihiko Maki, 2009, Fumihiko Maki, P179)

083 |

3 principles

serve as transitional passages to the shops and rules offers further insight into such grouped around them. At the same time a

architectural language for group form.

concern for the privacy and individuality of

In light of these studies, I shall make an

single apartments on the upper levels has

attempt to describe the application of

been essential in preserving the character

the principles of group form in the case of

of the Daikanyama site. (Fumihiko Maki,

Hillside Terrace.

2009, Fumihiko Maki, P178)

›› Looped routes and penetrating public

Teruyuki Monnai, a Japanese scholar specialized in the study of traditional townscape, commented on the Hillside Terrace project as representing “a process of reexamination of the meaning of individual building design from the

architectural language of group form

perspective of urban design, as well as the creation of a new architectural language for the construction of group form”. His interpretation of the vocabulary

spaces within the development.

Throughout Hillside Terrace, the pavement is extended into the hidden or revealed pockets of public and semi-public spaces that compose the cinematic sequences of courts and corridors winding in and out of the buildings along the sloping road.

Alternative choice of paths is always offered.

Case Studies | 084

›› Use of views to form a spatial network.

The establishment of a most careful series of visual relationships between buildings and landscape resulted in a remarkable cohesion in the grouping.

The elements appear to physically acknowledge one another and engage in dialogue across the intervening space. ›› Carefully engineered height differences. Elements are organized at different levels responding sensitively to micro topography and to differentiate subtly different spaces.

3-2 Aerial view from phase I to phase VI. (Fumihiko Maki, 2009, Fumihiko Maki, P181)

085 |

›› Producing oku by layering of space.

phase, to introduce individuality. Maki

A sense of spatial depth composed

wrote, “For each part to be meaningful

of layers (which screen but do not

in relation to the whole, for the whole to

entirely conceal what lies beyond

regulate its component parts, and for

them) is created by the configuration

tension to exist between the two, can be

of height differences, courtyards and

called ideal conditions for architecture.”

arcades, setbacks, use of trees, and

(Fumihiko Maki, 1973, An environmental

transparency.

approach to architecture.)

›› Consistency and variation. An architectural vocabulary such as the 3-3 View along the street from Building A to Building B. 3-4 Transparent facade and height differences both indoor and outdoor in Building A. 3-5 View from Building H towards the courtyard.

3-6 View from the stairs of Building C along the street.

3-7 Corner plaza of Building A 3-8 View along the street from Building A to Building B. (3-5,6,7,8, Fumihiko Maki, 2009, Fumihiko Maki, P186,190)

corner entrance,, round column and human scale, is repeated used to endow the group form with continuity. The expression is modified to suit the varying circumstances. Different materials, colors and details are incorporated, sometimes deliberately within the same

Some of these findings are incorporated into chapter 4, the 6 approaches to group form.

Case Studies | 086

3-3

3-4

3-5

3-6

3-7

3-8

087 |

CHAPTER 4 INTERVENTION FRAMEWORK

Intervention Framework | 088

4.1 Strength and Opportunities

1/ A good variety of culturally

2/ Rich network of community

distinct customer-oriented

serving organizations and

businesses

institutions

The strength and opportunities listed are conclusions of the analysis of site condition, planning documents, and voices from the local community.

Item 1 to 3 are important resources of Japantown that should be preserved and celebrated. Item 4 is an existing planning policy that can be used as an aid to both attracting future developments and to establishing planning controls for these

4-1 

4-2 

developments at the heart of Japantown.

Item 5 is the ongoing pubic transit project and various discussions on the

Japantown has nearly 250 customer-oriented

Japantown contains over 200 institutional

topic that could be revisited to envision

businesses. These businesses are relatively

uses, including community centers, schools,

a broader future for Japantown in the

small, averaging less than six employees and

civic organizations, business associations,

context of a growing city in the long term.

under 3,000 square feet.

and religious institutions.

089 |

3/ Events and festivals

4/ Japantown Special Use District

4-1 Customer-oriented businesses.

4-2 Organizations and institutions.

(4-1,2 Data from JCHESS) 4-3 Open space used in time of events and festivals.

4-4 Japantown Special Use District boundary.

4-5 Bus lines and average weekday boardings, financial year 2007-08.

(Data from AC Transit, SF Muni, VTA)

4-4 

4-3 

The Japanese community is renowned for

During some of the largest festival, portions

Established in 2006;

its array of annual festivals, including the

of Post and Webster Street are closed off for

its specific aim is to the protect cultural

Obon (celebration of ancestors) Festival,

pedestrian access; along with the mid-block

character of a specific community.

Nihonmachi (Japantown) Street Fair, Aki

parking spaces on both sides of Buchanan

Matsuri (Fall Festival), JPOP Festival, and the

Mall, they are used as temporary public

Cherry Blossom Festival (Sakura Matsuri).

spaces such as beer garden and market.

Intervention Framework | 090

5-A/ Geary BRT Project Top 10 Bus Routes by Average Weekday Boardings, FY 2007-08 Rank

Route

1

SF Muni: 38 Geary

52,800 (estimated 60,000 now)

2

SF Muni: 9 San Bruno

48,000

3

SF Muni: 14 Mission

42,200

4

SF Muni: 30 Stockton

32,900

5

SF Muni: 49 Van Ness-Mission

29,800

6

SF Muni: 1 California

7

AC Transit: 1/1R Telegraph/International/E/ 14th

21,600

8

SF Muni: 9 San Bruno

48,000

9

SF Muni: 22 Filmore

Average Weekday Boardings

27,900

18,400

BRT Cities22 Eastridge - Palo Alto - Menlo Park 10 in OtherVTA:

4-6

The ongoing Geary Corridor Bus Rapid Transit Project will certainly bring changes

BRT systems in other US cities have attracted new riders with faster, more reliable transit service

to Japantown. The possibility of a BART line

Location/Transit line

that runs from San Mateo to Marina, along

Project Characteristics

Geary and connects to downtown was also brought up and discussed.

16,700

Cities in the US, such as Los Angeles, Boston, Cleveland, and Eugene, Oregon, have implemented BRT systems as a costeffective way to improve transit service. These projects have brought significant improvements in transit travel times and BRT corridors alsoPittsburg/Bay typically benefit from Point investment in street beautification57,100 and reliability, with strong gains in ridership.

REF: San Francisco East Bay (BART) Line pedestrian amenities, and in some cases, have prompted new investment and increased economic activity in commercial districts they serve.

Sources: AC Transit, SF Muni, Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) With its success around the country and abroad, BRT is a key component of San Francisco’s strategy to retain existing and attract new transit riders through improved operating performance. In fact, several other major bus corridors in the Bay Area have already been slated for BRT improvements, including Van Ness Avenue in San Francisco, International Boulevard in Alameda County, and Santa RockFact in Santa Clara County.

4-5 Geary Corridor BusClara-Alum Rapid Transit Sheet (2013)

BOSTON Silver Line (Washington St.)

CLEVELAND Healthline

EUGENE, OR EmX

LOS ANGELES Orange Line

Dedicated side-lane BRT Signal priority (implemented later)

Dedicated lane, configuration varies Signal priority at some locations

Partial dedicated lane, configuration varies Signal priority at some locations

Off-street dedicated right-of-way Signal priority

Travel Time Reduction (opening year)

25% 1

22% 2

4% 3

22% 4

Ridership Increase (first year)

70% 1

31% (after 3 years) 2

90% 3

51% 4

1. Schimek et al, 2005. Boston Silver Line Washington Street BRT Demonstration Project Evaluation, FTA Report.

2. FTA, 2012. Before-and-After Studies of New Starts Projects, Report to Congress 3. Thole et al, 2009. The EmX Franklin Corridor BRT Project Evaluation, FTA Report.

SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY TRANSP

Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental Impact Report

Geary Corridor B

Geary Boulevard is the most heavily used transit corridor in th of San Francisco. Over 50,000 daily transit riders rely on Geary the route is often unreliable and crowded. To improve travel tim and the user experience, the San Francisco County Transportat (Authority), in partnership with the San Francisco Municipal T Agency (SFMTA), is evaluating the implementation of a bus rap system for the Geary corridor.

The Geary BRT project’s goals are to:

• Improve transit travel times and reliability on the Geary corridor.

• Attract new riders to stem and reverse the citywide trend toward share loss.

• Re-balance the street to better serve transit riders and non-moto managing traffic impacts.

• Improve pedestrian safety and access to transit service.

• Enhance neighborhood livability and community vitality.

• Improve consistency with local plans and policies.

• Improve the cost effectiveness of transit operations in the corrid

4. Flynn et al, 2011. Metro Orange Line BRT Project Evaluation, FTA Report.

Features of Geary BRT Include:

Project Timeline Environmental Analysis

Construction and Mitigation

091 |

5-B/ Vision Geary Transit Corridor

which would greatly increase its

4-7  San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit System Plan (1961)

As one of the major bus lines

service load capacity and improve

that serve the increasingly dense

on-time performance. It would also

Richmond district, which is the only

mean that Geary Boulevard will

district in the city of San Francisco

be a transit corridor of increasing

that is not connected by rail transit,

importance to the city; the Fillmore

38 Geary has around the same

station, currently an important node

average weekday boarding as the

of the bus transit system and bike

BART Pittsburg/Bay Point line. Taking

path network, will take on a more

a long-term perspective on the public

crucial role in the future as a multi-

transit system in the region, it is

transit-mode station and contribute

reasonable to project that the future

greatly towards promoting lower-

Geary BRT line could and should be

impact modes of travel in Japantown

later developed into a light rail line,

and its surrounding neighborhoods.

Design of the Core Area | 092

4-8

4-9

CURRENT RAIL AND FERRY TRANSIT

GEARY TRANSIT CORRIDOR (Proposed)

POPULATION DENSITY

SHORT TERM: MID TERM: LONG TERM:

Geary BRT Geary Muni Metro Light Rail connects to Central Subway Extension to Marin County connects to SMART train

by 2020 (SFMTA) by 2050 (proposed) distant future?

093 |

6/ Tourism potential

The bus 38, as the major way to get to Japantown from downtown San Francisco, runs at 14mph and has one of the worst on-time performance. As painful to get to as Japantown is today, it still is one of the most popular tourist destinations in the Bay Area.

This shows enormous tourism potential of Japantown when the transit conditions will be improved. The local community has also expresses wishes to extend the cable car line further west to attract tourists.

Extending the cable car line along California Street from the current terminal at Van Ness Ave to Fillmore street will improve the connectivity of future integrated Fillmore– Japantown retail district.

LOCALS AND TOURISTS MAP

BY Eric Fisher (2010) 4-10 “Blue pictures are by locals. Red pictures are by tourist.

Yellow pictures might be by either.” (Courtesy of Eric Fisher.)

Intervention Framework | 094

4.2 Weakness and Challenges

between Japantown and Fillmore Street is

1/ Lack of affordable housing +

also an area of concern. The future Fillmore

lack of space for organizations +

transit station will be an opportunity to link

limited space for cultural

the two strong retail areas together. Item

activities +

3 emphasizes on the consequences of the

under utilized land

The weakness and challenges listed

urban renewal project. Geary Boulevard and

are some of the main issues found in

the city blocks along Geary with massive

the site analysis combined with the call

buildings form a physical and psychological

of local community and consideration

dividing line between the African American

for regional urban growth. Item 1 is the

community to the south, where public

conflict between need for various spaces

housing projects intended for low-income

and under utilized land. It shows that

populations were built, and the more affluent

even by the current demand and under

communities of European ancestry to the

the current zoning requirements, there

north, with Japanese Americans located at

is development capacity and potential

the “grey area in the middle”. 50 years after

in Japantown. Item 2 is focusing on

the urban renewal, changes are already

the interfaces between businesses

taking place spontaneously. Some of the

and the public realm. Either to make

apartments and condominiums built south

Japantown a more attractive urban place

of Geary (utilizing the height limits that is

The map shows the parcels that are under

or to increase its economic viability and

a legacy of the Redevelopment era), are

utilized even by the current zoning control

sustainability, it would require future

targeting at a higher income population.

of 40–50ft. They are either occupied by

developments to be better integrated

Retail uses along Fillmore Street are also

buildings less than 3 story high or currently

with the public realm. The disconnection

extending beyond Geary to the south.

partly used as parking lots.

4-11

095 |

2/ Single-use large parcels + lack of pedestrian scale + unfriendly segments of pedestrian frontage + concerns about attractiveness of shopping district

SCALE OF COMMERCIAL AND PUBLIC USES

4-13

COMMERCIAL AND PUBLIC BUILDINGS

4-14

ORIENTATIONS AND STREET FRONTAGE ALONG FILLMORE, POST AND BUCHANAN

4-15

Intervention Framework | 096

3/ Man-made barriers between neighborhoods

NORTH-SOUTH STREETS

4-16

EAST-WEST STREETS

4-17

BUILDING FOOTPRINT

4-18

097 |

4/ Conflicts of interests

Go ugh Oc

Go

ugh

Oc

tav

Lag

tav

ia Lag ia rn

os t

us

r

t

Fil

er

os

lm

P

ry

ry

ore

ore

Ste

G

ea

ea G

bst

B

er

lm

P

We S ut te

S

ut te r

B

cha

in e

n

h

us h

na

bst

Fil

Bu P

in e P

We

un

a al if o

or al if C

cha

C

n ia

un

Bu

ine

ine

r

NORTH-SOUTH SECTIONS

Ste

4-19

STREET GRID (FILLMORE TUNNEL NOT SHOWN)

r

4-20

na

n

a

ia

Intervention Framework | 098

The Draft Better Neighborhoods Plan (2009) proposed increases to allowed heights at the Japan Center Malls, including three potential towers of 200 – 250 feet, as well as another tower further east nearer to Gough Street, and proposed increased height limits along Geary Boulevard. Both at that time and over the ensuing course of community review, the preponderance of local community views opposed these proposals on the ground that, in their perspective, the proposals were Ca er

lifo

in

Pin

rnia

inconsistent with preserving Japantown’s

S

te

e

or

e

Bu

F ill

m

sh

er

Su

W

eb st

tte

an an

Po ary

La

gu

n

a

B

uc h

st

Ge gh

O’F is

O

ct

av

ia

G

ou

arr

Ell

ell

r

cultural legacy and remaining small scale neighborhood character. It is also recorded that the community in Pacific Heights oppose the proposals with concerns that the new developments will block their view to the south.

Therefore the existing land form and building

EAST-WEST SECTIONS

4-21

heights are studied to understand the current condition and to find out height limits that may be more acceptable to the local communities.

099 |

4.3 Objectives and Principles

1/ Maximizing infrastructure investment value (transit, streets, storm water management)

The construction of Geary BRT as a

bicycle lanes and a bike station, a new

piece of transit infrastructure would

park and an important piece of the

require a different configuration of

storm water management system.

Geary. To maximize the benefits

The extension of the cable car line

arising from investment made for the

on California Street will supplement

Geary Boulevard, the Proposal will

the plan and bring tourists to the new

integrate the BRT project with the

Fillmore-Japantown retail area. The

transformation of Geary streetscape

Proposal will ensure the investment in

and installation of street side bio-

infrastructure and landscape act as a

swales. The transformation of

catalyst for regeneration throughout

Webster Street on both sides of Geary

the Japantown and its surrounding

will also be a part of the infrastructure

neighborhoods.

plan to provide new designated

Intervention Framework | 100

2/ Increasing integration

Targeting at the existing

and south side of Geary, and integrate

disconnections and segregation, the

Japantown commercial areas with

Proposal will build on the new Geary

the neighboring Fillmore Street

Boulevard and California Street

commercial corridor. It will seek to

transit connections and develop new

create compact neighborhoods with

local links to integrate Japantown

an open, legible network of local

with its surrounding neighborhoods.

walking, cycling and public transport

The proposed land use and building

routes to enable a radical shift

heights will encourage transit-

towards lower-impact modes of travel

oriented developments around

and maximize access to the area’s

the Fillmore transit station. Both

amenities and cultural resources for

commercial and recreational

all residents, workers and visitors.

connections will reconnect the north

101 |

3/ To restore mixed communities with vibrant cultural scene

be provided to satisfy the need for spaces of various organizations and cultural activities. New office spaces are proposed to attract employment opportunities with the

The Proposal will seek to restore

advantages of transit resources

mixed communities while ensuring

and proximity to downtown.

the distinctive characters of

The Proposal will adopt the

Japantown. A range of housing

recommendation in JCHESS of

types will be provided to enable

creating a “named� Japantown

Japanese/Japanese American

Neighborhood Commercial District

population who have long wished

to enable more fine-tuned controls

to move back to Japantown to

over commercial uses, physical

resettle in the neighborhoods. The

building characteristics, and

variety of affordable units will also

other important considerations,

enable people who work in the local

which could reflect the particular

businesses to live closer to their work

characteristics of the neighborhood

location. Spaces of smaller scale will

and community goals.

Intervention Framework | 102

4/ Developing closely interconnected public and private spaces of pedestrian scale

5/ Evolve the framework plan

As an important part of the thesis

The Proposal will take a long-term

proposition, the Proposal seeks to

perspective for the development

activate the neighborhoods with a

of the site and will actively engage

broad mix of uses and articulated

with the resulting challenges. The

interfaces between uses by the

Japantown neighborhoods will allow

specifications of parcelization,

for managed, longterm regeneration

detailed zoning guidelines and a set

over several development cycles,

of architectural language generated

ensure buildings are designed to

from the principles of group form.

encourage the evolution of more

The goal is to create humane

diverse, flexible patterns of use and

environments and conceptualize the

are adaptable to changing workplace,

common pedestrian areas as place of

retail and housing trends to support

activities and transitional passages.

long-term regeneration.

103 |

3/ Developing public and private spaces that would be closely interconnected

4.4 6 Approaches to Group Form

The interaction between the street frontage and street 1/ Response to elevation changes Terraced massing to emphasis landform

Utilizing micro topography

2/ Maintain an intimate scale for both the interior and exterior spaces

Looped pedestrian routes made up of varying walkways, platforms and stairs

Intervention Framework | 104

4/ Inbuilt capacity for change

5/ Use of views to form a spatial network

Allow for different interpretations and uses of space

Borrowed view/created view

6/ Subtle layering of space by

Transparency Elevation changes Interplay with trees Ambiguous boundary between indoor and outdoor space

Provide a basic skeleton within which the occupants could easily adapt the space to their needs

Prospect-refuge theory

105 |

CHAPTER 5 DESIGN OF THE CORE AREA

Design of the Core Area | 106

Public Office Residential-condominium Retail/dining/leisure Residential-large unit Mix-use (residential/commercial) Organization/institution or residential Organization/institution or retail Parking

107 |

* Illustrative Masterplan

The core area is chosen based on

The area shaded in pink strips are

adjacency to the future transit

proposed communication space

stations along Geary Boulevard,

which includes the sidewalk area, the

currently under utilized parcels,

Buchanan pedestrian axis, and other

and significance towards linking the

patches of public and semi-public

disconnected pieces together. The

space. Together they serve as a

resulted area of design includes

basic skeleton for the composition of

roughly 10 city blocks and their

buildings and a network of movement

surrounding streets. The streets

that connects the existing and

shaded in gray in the illustrative

proposed open spaces, commercial

masterplan are the key connector

areas, cultural resources, and

streets in the neighborhoods and

amenities.

will take on different roles and characters.

Design of the Core Area | 108

Raymond Kimbell Playground

109 |

1/ A long-term perspective on public transit

5.1 Re-envisioning Infrastructure

Recognizing the strategic importance of the Fillmore station as a future MUNI Rail station and the development potential in its radius, the Plan propose to concentrate new developments of higher density around the station.

le car C

n of cab

extensio

line

Design of the Core Area | 110

2/ Optimizing street configuration and incorporating storm water management

The proposed reconfiguration of Geary Boulevard and Webster Street frees up spaces for developments, pedestrian activities, bike facilities and bio-swales that will be able to treat street runoff from a large area shown in the map below.

PL to PL

125’

111 |

Reconfigured Geary Boulevard

Reconfigured Webster Street

A standard configuration of Geary

space will be reserved for both

40ft of space along the east side

Boulevard will have an central

sidewalk extension and linear green

of the widened section of Webster

boarding platform/planting island of

space made up of planting areas and

Street (as a result of the urban

20ft, 12ft of BRT designated lanes

bio-swales. On both side of Geary, an

redevelopment project) from Bush

on both side of the island which will

additional 8ft of street side parking

to Hayes Street, will be reclaimed

enable it to be transformed into a

between sidewalks and traffic lanes

for either future development (on

light rail line in the future, and 4

will be spaced by curb extensions that

the block between Bush and Sutter

lanes of traffic. Along the currently

are framed by bio-swales, to raise

Street), public open space (on the

tunneled section (parcel line to parcel

awareness of pedestrian crossing

block between Post Street and Geary

line 168ft), 20ft of Geary Boulevard

points and shorten the crossing

Boulevard, or to accommodate bike

will be reclaimed and joined to the

distance. The reconfigured Geary will

facility (on the block between Sutter

existing parcels as developable land.

have the same curb to curb width as it

and Post Street), with at least 5ft wide

On north side of Geary between Scott

is now west of Scott Street, 100ft.

of bio-swales and two 6ft wide bicycle

Street and Gough Street (street width

(See section on next spread)

designated lanes.

147ft PL to PL), 36ft wide of sidewalk

Webster Street

Design of the Core Area | 112

Post Street

250ft

113 | Utilizing micro topography

Looped pedestrian routes made up of varying walkways, platforms and stairs

Provide a basic skeleton within which the occupants could easily adapt the space to their needs

AMPHITHEATER

PLAZA / PLAYGROUND AT YMCA

GEARY BOULEVARD

JAPANTOWN PLAZA

Prospect-refuge theory

MUSEUM (GF) AN PERFORMANCE (rehearsal space

Interplay with trees Ambiguity boundary between inside and outside

outes walkways, s

Provide a basic skeleton within which the occupants could easily adapt the space to their needs

MODIFIED PARCELIZATION Prospect-refuge theory

maintained existing mid-block connection partitioned Japan Center parcels based on current ownership partitioned current mid-block parking space to better utilize land

MID-BLOCK CONNECTION / BUILD-TO LINE

TOWER SET-BACK LINE

height of podium should be enough to ensure clear height for shops along northsouth alleys, typically 15-25 feet

identify the mid-block connection zone width: 8-12 feet establish build-to zone for all ground floor building frontage

on top of podium, towers should be setback from major courtyards and alleys, typically 8-12 feet

CHERRY WALK AMPHITHEATER

ZA

Design of the Core Area | 114

CHERRY WALK MID-BLOCK CONNECTION (modified)

MUSEUM (GF) AND PERFORMANCE CENTER (B) (rehearsal space)

POST STREET

BUCHANAN MALL

0

10

20

115 |

5.2 Framework of Communication Space

1/ Establishing the pedestrian connections Key connector streets are identified as commercial connections (shown in salmon) and recreational connections (shown in jade green). Secondary pedestrian connections are proposed based on current parcelization and location of mid-block open space and alleys (commercial connections in red, recreational connections in orange). They reestablish connections across Geary Boulevard, sew together the Fillmore Street retail and Japantown retail, and ensure connectivity of the area to transit resources.

Design of the Core Area | 116

2/ Curving the blocks

3/ Composing the courtyards

Perimeter street wall is proposed to create strong

At the intersections of commercial and recreational

commercial frontage. The network of communication

connections, the communication space is slightly enlarged

space curves through the blocks and informs the

to provide open spaces for interaction and activities.

maximum footprint of the buildings, which is subject to

Because of the micro topography of the site, most of

change but generally allows larger developments to line

them are gifted with a scenic view towards east and south

Geary Boulevard and smaller buildings to line Post Street.

through the mid-block alleys.

117 |

4/ Redesigning the Peace Plaza blocks

views from different perspectives. The Peace Plaza is redesigned into an amphitheater with a grand set of

The communication space in the two blocks along Peace

steps embracing the Peace Pagoda and the stage, leading

Plaza is designed in detail to demonstrate the overall

pedestrians down to Geary. To make use of the parking

quality that the Proposal endeavors to achieve. The height

space below, a performance center is proposed, together

difference between Post Street and Geary Boulevard is

with the new museum on the west side of the Plaza

broken down by a series of activity platforms at different

serving as an entrance to the underground performance

levels, connected by stairs, ramps, stepped alleys and

center, making the Plaza a new cultural focal point of

terraces along the sloping terrain. Changes of level and

Japantown. Openings are made in the Plaza at Post street

direction contribute to the laying of space and shifting

level to let in natural light. (See section on P115-116)

Design of the Core Area | 118

119 |

5.3 Orchestrating Forms and Activities

1/ Proportioning density to transit resources, sun and shadow, topography, views, and sense of scale Composition of the built form is based on the following principles: › Higher density around future light rail stations. › Buildings step down to the Peace Plaza to form a visual corridor and activity spine. › Building heights and locations are coordinated with the existing higher heights to minimize impact on views. › Terrace massing to emphasis landform when possible. › Maintain a human scale by tower set back and podiums less than 35ft high.

Design of the Core Area | 120

2/ Overlapping activities and permitting changes

Uses and access on lower levels are generally determined by the type of connections they frame (commercial/recreational). Uses

ROOF USE green roof private garden public roof garden

in the smaller buildings are given a degree of flexibility to permit changes. A mix of different unit types and office space is placed in the towers to enable mix communities and ensure the neighborhood is active through out the day. Parking structures with ground floor commercial uses are proposed to free up open space currently used for parking.

BUILDING USE public office residential-condominium retail/dining/leisure residential-large unit mix-use (residential/commercial) organization/institution or R organization/institution or C parking

121 |

5.4 Implementing and Evolving the Framework Plan

MODIFIED PARCELIZATION Maintain existing mid-block connection.

Partition Japan Center parcels based on current ownership.

Partition current mid-block parking space to better utilize land.

1/ Principles for guidelines

MID-BLOCK CONNECTION / BUILD-TO LINE Identify the mid-block connection zone.

Width: 8-12 feet.

Establish build-to zone for all street level building frontage.

TOWER SET-BACK LINE Height of podium should be enough to ensure clear height for shops and restaurants along sloping north-south alleys, typically 15-25 feet.

On top of podium, towers should be set back from courtyards and alleys, typically 8-12 feet.

Design of the Core Area | 122

2/ Parcelization and phasing Current parcelization is modified according to current land and property ownership to incorporate spaces reclaimed along Geary and Webster, utilize midblock open space, and to ensure the establishment of some of the mid-block connections. Phase 1 of the project will be the rebuilt of Japan Center and PARCELIZATION modified parcel / new parcel rebuild on existing parcel newly build on current parking lot 11 blocks project area

Kabuki Theatre as they are reaching the end of their functional lifespan. The development on Safeway site on the current parking lot is also in phase 1. Rebuild and renovation of the buildings along Buchanan Mall will be encouraged, within the confine of current parcelizaion, in order to maintain its fine grain texture.

EXISTING BULDINGS AND PHASING phase 1 - replace phase 2 - replace phase 3 - consolidate parcels renew / renovation

Blocks around the Fillmore station will be developed in the last phase, as the consolidation of parcels would more likely to be accomplished when the BRT/ MUNI Rail project is in place, which will also justify the higher density on those blocks.

123 |

2/ Cultural and economic strategies The Proposal adopts some of the valuable recommendations in JCHESS in terms of cultural and economic strategies to facilitate the implementation of the Proposal. ›› Leverage the Japantown Special Use District to Cultivate and Attract New Businesses Appropriate to Japantown. ›› Negotiate Benefits Agreements with Major New Developments.

›› Utilize Funds from San Francisco Grants for the Arts. ›› Utilize Japan Center Garages’ Capital Improvement Funds. ›› Create a Japantown Neighborhood Commercial District. ›› Create Japantown Design Guidelines.

›› Create a Japantown Community Benefit District.

(San Francisco Planning Department. Japantown Cultural

Heritage and Economic Sustainability Strategy, draft. July 2013.)

Design of the Core Area | 124

125 |

Appendix - Posters for the Final Design Review

Bibliography | 126

127 |

Bibliography General References Alexander, Christopher, Sara Ishikawa, and Murray Silverstein. A Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings, Construction.

New York: Oxford UP, 1977. Print.

Alexander, Christopher. The Timeless Way of Building. New York: Oxford UP, 1979. Print.

Allen, Stan. Points + Lines: Diagrams and Projects for the City. New York: Princeton Architectural, 1999. Print.

Anderson, Stanford, and Martha D. Pollak. The Education of the Architect: Historiography, Urbanism, and the Growth of

Architectural Knowledge : Essays Presented to Stanford Anderson. Cambridge, MA: MIT, 1997. Print.

Ballantyne, Andrew. Deleuze and Guattari for Architects. London: Routledge, 2007. Print.

Bosselmann, Peter. Representation of Places: Reality and Realism in City Design. Berkeley: University of California, 1998. Print.

Chow, Renee Y. Suburban Space: The Fabric of Dwelling. Berkeley: University of California, 2002. Print.

Contextual Algorithms. Japanese Architect. Vol.77. Tokyo: Shinkenchiku-sha, 2010. Print.

Bibliography | 128

Deleuze, Gilles, and Félix Guattari. Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 1983. Print.

Deleuze, Gilles, and Félix Guattari. A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, 1987. Print.

Fawcett, Chris. The New Japanese House: Ritual and Anti-ritual Patterns of Dwelling. New York: Harper & Row, 1980.

Print.

Focillon, Henri, Charles Beecher Hogan, and S. Lane Faison. The Life of Forms in Art. New York: Wittenborn, Schultz, 1948. Print.

Form+Code in Design, Art, and Architecture. New York: Princeton Architectural, 2010. Print.

Futagawa, Yukio, and Teiji Ito. Traditional Japanese Houses. New York: Rizzoli, 1983. Print.

García-Huidobro, Fernando, Torriti Diego Torres, and Nicolás Tugas. ¡El Tiempo Construye!: El Proyecto Experimental

De Vivienda (PREVI) De Lima : Génesis Y Desenlace = Time Builds : The Experimental Housing Project (PREVI), Lima : Genesis and Outcome. Barcelona: Gustavo Gili, 2008. Print.

129 |

Gehl, Jan. Life between Buildings: Using Public Space. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1987. Print.

Hall, Edward T. The Hidden Dimension. Garden City, NY: Anchor, 1969. Print.

Ishigami, Junya. Small Images. Tokyo: Inax, 2008. Print.

Koolhaas, Rem, Hans-Ulrich Obrist, Kayoko Ota, and James Westcott. Project Japan: Metabolism Talks. KĂśln: TASCHEN GmbH, 2011. Print.

Kostof, Spiro. The City Shaped: Urban Patterns and Meanings through History. Boston: Little, Brown, 1991. Print.

Kurokawa, Kisho. The Philosophy of Symbiosis. London: Academy Editions, 1994. Print.

Kyo Machiya No Saisei. Kyoto: Mitsumura Suiko Shoin, 2009. Print.

Laguerre, Michel S. The Global Ethnopolis: Chinatown, Japantown, and Manilatown in American Society. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Macmillan, 2000. Print.

Ligtelijn, Vincent. Aldo Van Eyck: Works. Basel: Birkhäuser, 1999. Print.

Bibliography | 130

Lynch, Kevin, Tridib Banerjee, and Michael Southworth. City Sense and City Design: Writings and Projects of Kevin

Lynch. Cambridge, MA: MIT, 1990. Print.

Maki, Fumihiko. Investigations in Collective Form. St. Louis: School of Architecture, Washington University, 1964. Print.

Maki, Fumihiko. Fumihiko Maki. London: Phaidon, 2009. Print.

Moudon, Anne Vernez. Built for Change: Neighborhood Architecture in San Francisco. Cambridge, MA: MIT, 1986. Print.

Nakagawa, Takeshi. The Japanese House: In Space, Memory, and Language. Tokyo, Japan: International House of Japan, 2005. Print.

Nikkei Heritage. Vol. 7-4/8-1. San Francisco: National Japanese American Historical Society, 2000/2001. Print.

Redefining Collectivity. Japanese Architect. Vol. 78. Tokyo: Shinkenchiku-sha, 2010. Print.

San Francisco’s Japantown. Charleston, SC: Arcadia, 2005. Print.

Sandoval, Gerardo. Immigrants and the Revitalization of Los Angeles: Development and Change in MacArthur Park.

Amherst, NY: Cambria, 2010. Print.

131 |

Shelton, Barrie. Learning from the Japanese City: Looking East in Urban Design. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, 2012. Print.

Shimizu, Hajime, Minoru Shibata, and Hiroshi Fukawa. Kyo No Minka. [Kyoto]: Tanko Shinsha, 1962. Print.

Taylor, Jennifer, Fumihiko Maki, and James Conner. The Architecture of Fumihiko Maki: Space, City, Order, and Making.

Basel: Birkh채user-Publishers for Architecture, 2003. Print.

Thackara, John, ed. Design after Modernism: Beyond the Object. New York, NY: Thames and Hudson, 1988. Print.

Windows: Innovative Mediation. Japanese Architect. Vol. 74. Tokyo, Japan: Shinkenchiku-Sha, 2009. Print.

Yanagi, Soetsu, Bernard Leach, and Shoji Hamada. The Unknown Craftsman. Tokyo: [s.n.], 1972. Print.

Yearbook 2008: Japanese Architectural Scene in Japan 2008. Japanese Architect. Vol. 72. Tokyo: Shinkenchiku-sha, 2009. Print.

Bibliography | 132

San Francisco Urban Design and Planning San Francisco Planning Department. Japantown Better Neighborhood Plan, draft. May 2009.

San Francisco Planning Department. Update on the Japantown Planning Process, memorandum. Octorber 2012.

San Francisco Planning Department. Japantown Cultural Heritage and Economic Sustainability Strategy, draft. July 2013.

Graves, Donna. San Francisco Japantown Historic Context Statement. Rep. N.p., May 2011. Web. San Francisco County Transportation Authority. Geary Corridor Bus Rapid Transit Fact Sheet. February 2013.

San Francisco County Transportation Authority. Geary Corridor Bus Rapid Transit Conceptual Engineering and

Environmental Analysis, project update. June 2012.

San Francisco County Transportation Authority. Traffic count data.

Transportation Research Board. Reinventing the Urban Interstate: A New Paradigm for Multimodal Corridors. 2011.