My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
AgdaPkt 2003-04-14
RedwoodCity
>
City Clerk
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000-2009 partial
>
2003
>
AgdaPkt 2003-04-14
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/2/2011 2:33:19 PM
Creation date
4/10/2003 11:58:04 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC Index
CC Index - Document Type
Agenda Packet
Agency Type
City Council
Date
4/14/2003
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
165
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
4 .15 - <br />Memorandum <br />Watry Proposal <br />_ opened. In our case, cars and trucks driving along Broadway or Theatre Way could generate <br />substantial vibrations that will most likely be felt within the theaters, creating an extremely <br />annoying distraction. <br />3. Long span structure- lack of flexibility: The current column layout has given Century some <br />flexibility in the layout of the movie theaters. Adopting a long -span structural solution would <br />mean laying out a new theater plan, in order to adjust auditorium sizes to correspond to the new <br />column locations. This will have a likely negative impact on the number of seats that can be <br />provided, since the long -span arrangement cannot easily be adjusted to accommodate any <br />theater requirements. In addition, first floor exit stairs and elevators serving the theaters would <br />necessitate additional columns at the basement, as would the location of the building itself. For <br />example, unless significant transfer beams were introduced (which would necessitate a deeper <br />structure and therefore further excavation), there would need to be a row of columns at Grid Line <br />"B" in the basement, resulting in the loss of about 25 spaces. This would offset whatever <br />efficiencies were achieved by going to long span. Also, if the structure has to be post tensioned <br />this will severely limit the flexibility of restaurant space layout along Theatre Way, due to the <br />limitations on slab penetrations imposed by this kind of structure. <br />4. Long-span structure— impact on architectural expression of building: The lack of flexibility <br />` of the long -span layout will in effect lead to the straightening out of all the building perimeter <br />walls, which may limit the amount of architectural expression we are trying to achieve. <br />5. Angled versus perpendicular parking: Mr Watry suggested that perpendicular parking was <br />not generally used in retail projects. In fact, both these types of parking are commonly used in <br />retail, with perpendicular parking often being the preferred option in urban locations, due to its <br />greater efficiency. Perpendicular parking does necessitate a wider aisle in order to <br />accommodate the larger vehicular turn movement, but is generally more efficient in terms of <br />square feet per space than angled parking. <br />6. Cost of Additional Slab on Grade: extending the below -grade structure out to Broadway (and <br />potentially Jefferson, in order to get the required number of spaces) will come at great expense, <br />due to utility relocation and the need to design the structure to accommodate added loading <br />requirements. This will likely increase the floor -to -floor depth, resulting in a greater volume of <br />excavation than the current proposed scheme. These added costs will need to be carefully <br />considered. <br />7. Relocated Entrance — overall traffic impact: Rather than rely on an "instinctual" response, this <br />is something that should be evaluated by a traffic engineer. <br />8. Relocated Entrance — impact on outdoor dining: Relocating the entrance as per Mr. Watry's <br />proposal would potentially compromise the ability to have outdoor dining at the Southern end of <br />Theatre Way, due to the large number of vehicles entering and exiting in that location. This <br />would be at odds with the "placemaking" approach adopted by Freedman Tung and Bottomley. <br />9. Relocated Entrance — Impact on Future Use of adjacent site ( "lot 2 "): One of the reasons <br />for creating a sub - surface parking garage was to save lot 2 for future use. The location of the <br />vehicular ramp at that location will severely compromise the use of that site, as well as take up <br />land that will have added value due to the On Broadway project. <br />10. Landscaping: the proposal seeks to compensate for the potential elimination of landscaping all <br />around the building due to the expanded footprint of the alternative scheme by adding 4' -0" deep <br />tree wells. A carefully selected 30" box tree will grow in these conditions, so the issue therefore <br />is not so much whether this will work, but what cost will it add to the project — approximately 40 <br />of these would be required, and they would all need drainage and irrigation, as well as a fertilizer <br />injector system. They may also impact the number of spaces, or cause additional excavation in <br />order to get required headroom below. " <br />11. Additional issues: these would include costs associated with increased scope of culvert <br />relocation; garage ventilation, with the vent stacks on other side of Broadway as proposed in Mr <br />L® <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.