AgdaPkt 2012-03-05 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

8.A. - Page 3 Staff has recommended this project as a means to expedite the development of Block 2, as it enables construction of the buildings at a faster pace. The building designs can go through the Planning and Building Permit process at the same time the culvert is being relocated. At this stage, staff anticipates the culvert relocation to cost approximately $2,000,000. In addition to compressing the project timeline, it is also expected that this investment will enhance the City's land value significantly as it will reduce a developer's site development costs. Creek Daylighting At the request of the Council, staff has also studied the possibility of opening up the relocated culvert to create a water feature for the area. There are potentially many benefits to this concept. Water features are often popular amenities, and daylighted creeks and other flowing bodies of water have proven to be successful attractions in Downtowns such as Providence, Rhode Island; San Antonio, Texas; and San Luis Obispo, California. Such a feature in Redwood City might be an additional lure to Downtown, and could help to stimulate further development in the area. Unfortunately, the challenges to creating such a feature in this location are numerous. There is usually very little water in the culvert and this section of the creek. The creek is a typical California creek, in that it is seasonal and dependent upon the vagaries of the rainy season. In addition, the water in the culvert is about 10'/ feet below grade. To create the sense of a flowing creek, water would need to be pumped up to the surface in order to be visible. This appears to create some engineering issues in order to balance a reasonable continual flow in the surface channel, but also have a system capable of handling flood conditions. It is likely that a parallel culvert would be required to carry flood water. In the alternative, to accommodate flooding conditions as well as the normal low flow condition, the channel would be deep and wide, with fencing to preclude public access to the water. An example of this sort of channel is in Little River Park near the SamTrans bus station. In addition, space for an open creek is limited. The Middlefield Road right-of-way is particularly narrow at this point at 60 feet. Staff evaluated both the necessary width and depth of the channel, and found that to fit an open creek and walkways in the street would require the elimination of other important components of the street, such as travel lanes, parking, or sidewalk width. A daylighted creek cannot remain on the project site because it will shrink the size of the development, thereby creating an economically infeasible project. Because of the constraints of the required depth of the channel and the required size to contain high flows, both issues staff was able to evaluate without outside consulting assistance, staff did not undertake a detailed engineering analysis of this option. The cost of third party engineering analysis was not warranted given the in house technical expertise. Attachment 1 shows two possible configurations.