Boosters Meeting 11/27/12 Mission Bay Development Block 40

[Richard Tsai]

The presentation made by the Mission Bay development for the building(s) to occur on Block 40 represents a very antiquated approach to architecture and design (and really the rest of Mission Bay) that continually fuels my frustration with the profession and its slow pace towards revising itself.
Initial comments pointed towards the box-like nature of the building mass ("Refrigerators with nice handles" as I recall one description) and a desire for more adventurous shapes given the odd shape of the lot. The conversation then drifted towards the lack of "green" elements i.e. use of solar and wind power, green roofs. The Mission Bay development representative didn't comment so much on the box-like aspect but seemed quick to dismiss the criticism of the lack of "green" elements as preemptive and details that they would deal with at a later stage in the process. Instead we looked at different paint colors. I think the gentleman missed the point entirely.
While I don't think that curvilinear shapes or non-orthogonal sculptural volumes results in a better building, had they taken a different approach to design by placing sustainable / green issues at the forefront and a a primary driver for design, I think that would have resulted in a more interesting building the community can support. A few examples include performing basic solar / wind studies to inform building orientation and mass so that passive strategies for heating and cooling the building can be adopted (reduces energy load and need for massive mechanical equipment that make up the roofscape). Air quality data can be utilized to calibrate vegetated "green" facades to clean and filter the local air (the building site is adjacent to I-280).
We are approaching 2013 and it still seems that we still speak of green architecture as a sub-category when really ALL architecture should be green at this stage.