The exhibit designers were chosen because they are the only ones who do this type of work (animal exhibits). Portico did the original master plan. It was updated by CLR in 1998.

O?Brien Kreitzberg is construction management. They are the ?professional client.?

There are three clients: O?Brien K., the city, and the Zoological Society. Day to day FP deals with O?Brien Kreitz. They were hired by the Zoological Society to represent the zoo. The City of SF owns the land, and the Zoological society manages the zoo under an extended contract with the city. The Zoological Society has a board of 50 people, however, there duties are mostly fundraising.

There were two rounds of budget reduction/value engineering. Much was lost due to the two year delay (i.e. inflation, etc.). The snack bar, which was part of the original design, was one of the casualties of this process.

The funding:
$70,000,000 from the bond. This is primarily for infrastructural improvements
$25,000,000 from private funds.

The infrastructural improvements include water, electrical, etc. There will be a new tertiary water(?) plant built under the new parking lot (Steve jokes, ?As soon as our project is done, they?re going to tear it right up?). There is a secondary plant just to the southeast of the zoo. If the tert. plant is built, it will be able to provide potable drinking water? The infrastructural work was almost complete when FP came on the job.

FP has periodic interaction with zoo board (reviews?) Their primary contact is John Aiken of the Zoological Society has been FP?s day to day contact. He has been acting as liason between zoo staff (mostly curators and designers) and FP.

Back to value engineering. The review process is usually informal, but there has been some formal peer review (dealing with other zoo projects?). FP has consistenly come in over budget. All players are working together to reduce budget. The following are changes that had to be made in this process:

?The look? of the project was prescribed in original master plan as ?California Coastal.? Since this term is very squishy, FP took the opportunity to define for themselves. The first iteration was most Arts&Crafts influences, like Julia Morgan?s Sulimar(???). After budget reassessment, the look is more like Bolinas, Sea Ranch, or ?national park.? Steve showed us the presentation board of style precedents. It included the aformentioned Morgan project, Fernau/Hartman UC Santa Cruz project, and Sea Ranch buidings. Steve comments that the look is now more like the barns than the highly decorated Arts&Crafts projects.

The biggest change due to value engineering was to the Panorama Café. In the original design it was two stories (the banquet room was on a mezzanine above main dining area). Now the space is single story, and Steve thinks this actually works better! The programmable space is the same; most space regained had been vertical circulation. This reduced the budget by about $700,000 or $800,000 - a large chunk of the $4,000,000(?????) project. The only big loss associated with making the café single story was the bridge to the primate center. Side note: the Café is being built over an outdoor seating area.

Looking at the site plan: The old entrance to the zoo will be closed. It was not handicapped accessible. The south entrance is only open on free days. There will be an accessible sidewalk built from the free parking to the new zoo entrance.

Discussion of ADA considerations in FP design. The path from zoo street to carousel is presently 8%. FP will regrade to a hair under 5%. This is good for both people in wheelchairs and people with strollers. (One of the main features of the entrance court is a stroller rental service.) There is also a great deal of attention to access in the animal exhibits. Jones and Jones are even working on making the lemur exhibit employee accessible, even though this is under a separate code (???). There is an elevator in the barn of the children?s zoo. The new meerkat and prarie dog exhibit is completely accessible (there was more detail on this, but I did?t write it down).

Answer to question of why not wait until the cost of building would be cheaper (i.e. a recession) is that the zoo made a promise to the electorate that the project would be completed quickly. Zoo construction is also timed with seasonal attendance in mind. The projects usually are completed right before the high season for visitors (summer). The exhibit architects like to have a very long lead time. In fact, they usually plant first and then build around so the habitats look more complete when the exhibits are opened.

Discussion of animal exhibits. The USDA inspects all animal exhibits, and the American Zoo Association has some guidelines for proper design. Example of warthog exhibit; the paradox of keeping the animals happy (warthogs like to roll in mud) vs. keeping the animals healthy (the pools of mud breed disease). Steve discusses how zoos have changed a lot in the last 100 years. They went from the idea of a menagerie to the idea of a natural habitat. Zoos now consider themselves as ?lifeboats? protecting genetic diversity. Thus, the exhibits have changed to a more activity based design. Through the design, visitors are encouraged to relate to the animals? experience. The animals are often moved from place to place within the zoo in order to provide some change in their environment. It?s stressful, but it?s a good kind of stress. David Anderson (director of zoo) is a lemur expert? Steve?s anecdote of his experience in a bear exhibit (by Jones and Jones).

Back to the site plan: you can still see the vestiges of the old Beaux Arts plan. Some of the old buildings are Art Moderne.

The players: FP was originally going in with RHAA, but the zoo would prefer not to work with them. FP suggests(?) Michael Pinter(? worked on the Great Highway?) or Ken Kay ( had worked on some other aspect of the zoo???). The zoo picks Ken Kay. This works well because his office is right upstairs from FP. Olivia Chen (CE) had the advantage because they had done a lot of work in the immediate area. The Zoo also had diversity goals; they strive to hire minority and woman-owned firms. Gayner (Mech. Engineer) is also minority owned. Oppenheim and Lewis is a second cost consultant - the zoo/O.K. chose them. There is a difference in cost estimates from the two firms.

In regards to sustainable design: FP is trying to ?bid add alternates?? for sustainable wood and flyash concrete. There may actually be a cost savings in using the flyash concrete. They have hired a UC professor to consult on the sustainable aspects. Steve says they are trying to push the envelope with sustainable design, but they are not having much luck.

Word on contracts: FP would have no more control over coordination even if the other firms were under the same contract (all are presently under different contracts).

Even though the firms are under separate contracts, they are bidding three projects (zoo street, lemur forest, and ???) together. This is in hopes that they will get a better contractor. The drawings are bound together, but not interleaved. This process is difficult because for three projects they have one contract for contruction and thus only one spec!

Notes on art project. Artists are Judd and Barbara Fine? Planned near carousel. It will be a ?split mound? like pangea. Inside the canyons will be inscriptions of the ?zooetta stone.?

Final note: the buildings such as Panorama Café will be unrated construction???