The cyclist is next to the temporary left turn arrow, but the marks on the right that you can see a part of are indecipherable.
Click to expand
I think they’re going to put shrubbery on the right side of the lane – we’ll see…
They’ve made some progress the past five months:
Click to expand
Mike Billings has the deets:
“Toddlers climbed all over the smaller River Play Area, which is designed for kids 6 months to 2 years old, while gaggles of older children scaled the nearby Polar Zone’s white structures, built for kids ages 2 through 5, and climbed through the Banyan Tree structure, constructed for kids ages 5 through 12.”
I defy you to visit and photograph this place well – sure is hard to show what it looks like. But Mark Simmons gets the job done here, with drawings.
Click to expand
So what you do is check the place out on Free Day (free for San Francisco residents, that is – the next one is January 8th, 2014) and then decide if it’s worth it for you and the fam to get an annual Family Membership for $115.
If you all live close enough, it very well could be worth getting a membership just for the new playground.
See you there!
“After several years of fundraising, planning, and design, and over one year of construction, the Elinor Friend Playground at the San Francisco Zoo is ready for its grand re-opening. As part of The Americas Campaign capital campaign chaired by Dianne Taube, this $3.2 million project has been made possible in large part by the Friend Family and other generous donors. Additional naming rights within the Playground are still available at this time, totaling approximately $1 million (see the form below to help with this important project). This 36,000-square-foot, state-of-the art project is sure to ignite the imaginations of the 300,000 children of all ages and abilities who visit the Zoo each year.
The new playground is modeled after three distinct bio-regions, which take their themes from specific ecosystems and appeal to distinct age groups: a River Play Area for toddlers (6 months-2 years), a Polar Zone exploration space for pre-schoolers (2-5 years), and a Banyan Tree climbing structure for pre-teens (5-12 years). Along with striking natural forms, the architecture integrates a wide range of materials and textures in glorious detail that mimic those found in nature and encourage curiosity among young explorers. As an example, a charming frog sculpture in the River Play Area acts as a symbol of the Zoo’s mission to connect people with wildlife, inspire caring for nature, and advance conservation action. In support of this mission, a portion of the funds raised for the playground will go toward the Zoo’s Sierra Nevada Yellow Legged Frog Conservation Program. Click here for more information about this program.
Crawling through a beaver dam, sliding down an iceberg, or swinging through a tree, all children share opportunities for unique wildlife adventures, take age-appropriate risks, and immerse themselves in naturalistic environments. Each of the play structures is built with fully compliant ADA accessibility features to accommodate children with physical and mental disabilities, with a strong emphasis on exploration and adventure encouraged for all.
In partnership with the Mayor’s Office on Disability, the unique design of the Playground is the work of Scientific Art Studio, a multi-faceted design and fabrication facility located in Richmond, California. Led by Founder and Creative Director Ron Holthuysen, the Zoo’s Playground team includes artists and skilled craftspeople with experience in every material and technique imaginable, in particular reclaimed redwood tree trunks, sculptural cement composite on steel frames, woven rope, and even living vegetation. The contracting work on the project was done by Rudolph Commercial Interiors, Inc. (RCI), located in Emeryville, California.
Near the entrance to the Fisher Family Children’s Zoo and adjacent to the expansive Playfield Lawn, the Playground is located at the historic heart of the San Francisco Zoo. A natural extension of the Zoo’s Wellness Initiative, which focuses on the quality of life for all Zoo animals and visitors, the Playground will encourage movement and creativity for its guests and provide an excellent value to Zoo Members, who receive free admission each day of the year. Join today!
“The massive crane is expected to be used during construction of the New Tappan Zee Bridge, a replacement for the Tappan Zee Bridge across the Hudson River in New York State by Tappan Zee Constructors, a consortium of companies that includes American Bridge Company.”
As she appeared last week:
Click to expand
Here it is, from just last week:
“We walked away from the logo itself in part because we knew that our broader communications strategy and the other elements of the visual identity system could advance without it. Being able to move on with other elements of our work and the rest of the visual system is actually a tribute to the symbol’s success and our overall strategy.”
To review, this was the reaction at the time.
Anyway, since the new logo got ashcanned, its proponents have gone on the road to sing its praises. Why? I don’t know. How does this sort of thing benefit UC?
Now, here’s the reaction from the designerly community. First from CCullen:
I don’t buy the false narrative. This was a brand exercise that overreached and was as a result a complete failure. The notion that this design can be celebrated when not embraced has no understanding of the goal of branding in the university ecosphere–engagement is the sine qua non of a university brand, and in this case a university system brand. This is an Oscar nomination for a film that has never been released. The video was perfectly prescriptive–the traditional seal was doomed, and the rest is back tracking and hindsight. When it lives, celebrate it, until then just know it was an epic failure and a waste of scarce public funds.
I agree with CCullen. I attended the UC affinity session at the AIGA conference in Minneapolis and it was one of the most uncomfortable experiences I have had in the design world. What should have been a presentation about why the logo works for what their goals were turned into an hour long passive-aggressive temper tantrum that only fueled the fire of controversy. I will admit that the identity system as a whole is certainly successful. The promotional materials and such that went along with it were beautiful but I simply cannot get past the ridiculous logo.
You see this sign? It’s the one you see as you exit TJ’s #100 on Masonic near Geary, assuming you’re not driving or riding.
It was put in as a response to all those shoppers who jaywalk to their cars on the other side of Masonic.
Click to expand
People still jaywalk of course, owing to the ease of parking on the northbound side of Masonic and the difficulty encountered trying to park in the TJ’s lot. (There’s a lot of history here on this example of bad planning.)
Did I call for this sign? Yes I did. So it’s good that it’s there now. It wasn’t there a couple of years ago, so good on you, SFGov.
But can SFGov and TJ’s do more? Sure. Hey, why don’t the Powers That Be take the opportunity revisit this whole situation before others kill themselves?
Right? I mean I’m not talking politically, ’cause the politics part of getting a new gro sto here is already done. But, you know, morally.
Now here’s an example of people actually taking the several minutes required to get back to their cars by walking down to Geary and waiting for the four-way signal.
This gal here broke from her shopping group to jaywalk while her friends did things the legal way.
(Until this, I’ve never noticed a person not jaywalking,)
So here she is, sitting pretty whilst waiting for her friends, exulting in her ability to not get hit by a car on this occasion:
I don’t notice this kind of scene as much these days so that’s good.
That’s the update.
Now I’ll tell you, I have no idea as to why a building literally made in San Francisco would market itself as being “MADE IN SAN FRANCISCO.”
And yet, that’s what we have now with NeMa, the “New Market” building.
Can somebody explain what AMENITIES, NOT ENEMIES means? What’s the relationship between these two things? Do they somehow comprise, you know, a dramaturgical dyad and I just don’t get it?
Now, let’s hear how real San Franciscans are reacting to slogans such as “TECH SAVVY, NOT SHABBY”
On It Goes…