conclusions

Was this a truly alternative design?

Did the community get what it wanted?

Suggested areas for further research

Was this a truly alternative design?

While MDG challenged WSI to consider radically different exterior appearances for this store, the fact remains that this Pottery Barn looks no different than any other freestanding Pottery Barn, in the Bay Area or elsewhere. Perhaps this resulted fromWSI's interest in maintaining a clear brand identity, despite the various dialogues that WSI held with the community and the city. Nonetheless, our team found it regretful that some of the more ambitious design approaches entertained by MDG weren't pursued further by the client.

To be fair to WSI, their decision to explore the use of sustainable materials and revise their design guidelines was quite notable. Thus, w hile this store won't break any new aesthetic ground, it will behave in a more environmentally sensitive manner and offer some guidance for future designs that similarly incorporate various sustainable technologies and techniques.

Did the community get what it wanted?

The community response to and participation in the store's design process was for the most part successful. On one hand, the client and architect were both forced to consider the neighborhood's stated desires and adjust their standard operating procedure accordingly. On the other, the main concessions to the community - an on-site ATM, and an off-site community room - had surprising little impact on the store's final physical form and appearance.

Due to their role as judge and arbiter for the project's approval, the SF city planning department had significantly greater impact on the store’s eventual appearance than the community. Had the city granted the Castro neighborhood groups' request for discretionary review, the neighborhood would have secured dramatically more leverage to force the client's hand and perhaps modify the store's design towards their hoped for direction - primarily a variegated scale building that housed additional uses and tenants than Pottery Barn's single commercial tenancy.

One wonders whether opposition to the design was tempered by the number of Pottery Barn and Williams-Sonoma customers living in the Castro, and by the visual improvement that the new design, however commercialized and conventional, offered in comparison to the previous building. As some local journalists noted, many residents, activists or otherwise, accept that chain stores, Banana Republic, Pottery Barn or otherwise, have already entered the Castro and provided considerable economic benefit to the neighborhood, and will most likely continue to do so. The question that remains is how vigilant the neighborhood will remain in providing a critical voice to test the developer's and chain store's least noble whims and desires.

Areas for further research
Further research could focus specifically on the communications loop between McCall Design and Williams Sonoma and how this helped or hindered this project. Furthermore, it would be valuable to look at the contractual agreements and contracts themselves between WSI and MDG and WSI and all of its other subcontractors and wether the structure of these agreements enable WSI to minimize uncertainty surrounding the design process and help secure the final product that it desires and ultimately receives.

Another area to research would be to follow up on the green design initiatives suggested by the ENSAR Group and McCall Design, and document the practices that will survive this project and how they influence future Pottery Barn and Williams-Sonoma designs and design guidelines.
background
timeline
process
conclusions
related links
credits