Minutes 10/23/1984 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

277 October 23, 1984 Ayes: Beamer, Corprew, Gray, Lucas, Webb, Whitlow, Holley Nays: None Councilman Beamer expressed appreciation for services that the CAC had rendered to the City over the years. 84-405 _ Neil Abramson, 2501 Locks Road, Chesapeake, requesting additional time.to speak Motion of Mrs.~Webbrto~xtend~the t~m~Mrs:'Webb'~withdreW the,~motion as.he wag requesZ additionat~me in ~xecu~i~e session. Mr. Abramson made.the following presentatisn concerning the Seaboard Railway Building: "The Seaboard Railway Building is one of the preeminent examples of 19th Century American architecture and should be preserved and made to appear as it did in 1914 when 2 floors were addedto the original 3 story building. It was built by men who built the railroad and by one of the railroads that built America, men who were immensely proud of what they had done. They were so full of pride in their works that they determined ~o build a monument to their industry and the Seaboard Airline Railway Building is that monument. People looking at this building wonder how it came to pass that such an odd configuratio~ could come to be built. Perhaps there were other structures interferring with the construc- tion of a more economical building. Perhaps somethin~ went awry. Neither of these are the case. The building was designed with a purpose, one born in immense pride and that pride should no~ be permitted to be erased by the proposal presently adopted by Council £or the re-use of the building. What the b~ilders of this structure erected was, very simply stated, a locomotive. The indentations in the long straight walls of the building are where the wheels spin today. The round front end of the building ~s the front of the engine and the ten arches at the street level of the round end of the building are the cow catcher. This building should be returned to it's 1914 glory and the proposal presented to this City and PRHA by me will do just that. The proposal will return the building to an exterior condition that is better than the condition in which the building was in, in 1914. For those of you who may not be familiar with the details of how this is to be accomplished, an execu- tive session would be appropriate as I shall not publicly state these details. Although John Paul Hanbury knows. The proposal adopted by Council in which gohn Paul Hanbury has performed as the archite~ should be rejected on several grounds. These are: a) That John Paul Hanbury was a member of the 1981 ad hoc committee formed by Council and had my proposal and others in his hands, thus constituting a conflict of interest on his part. The Virginia Conflict of Interests Act provides for recision of contracts involving a conflict of interest. b) I ~formally object to the selection of the present proposal for the building on these grounds and ask that the agreement made be rescinded by Council. The parking requirements of the proposal have been grossly understated. Danny Cruce states that the Hanbury proposal suggest that the two floor "restaurant" will provide for 300 to 400 occupants. The Boca Building Code provides that 1 person may be permitted for eadh 15 square feet of seating space and 1 person for each 7.5 feet of bar area. If this 20,000 square foot operation is broken down with 60% of the area for customer service, 12,000 square feet will be available for this purpose. If all 12,000 feet are dining area at 15 feet per person, the result will be an 800 seat operation. If the 12,000 feet is divided into 50% seating and 50% bar area, the result will be a 1,200 seat operation. This would require parking of from 200 to 300 cars. The one floor of office space will require 50 parking spaces. 71~TLe ~0~re~ta~ o~don~omini~m[nnits~.r~quire 50 more spaces which are not enough as most affluent ~amilies have 2 cars and visiting friends. The result is that 300 to 400 parking spaces will be needed. The block across the garage which will provide floors of that garage for street is planned as per the PAP progrm to be 3 thirds parking about 100 spaces per floor. This one building will require 3 to 4 itself, and construction of that garage is not yet in view. I would like to take this opportunity to amend my proposal to call for the establishment of a greatly increased children's museum, to handle 200 in the entire ground floor of the building with 40 apartments above. One hundred parking s~aces would suffice. The staff at the Chi~dz~n's Museum state that the space comld be a~ll~/ utilized. The Art Museum at the 1846 Courthouse could then occupy the entire courthouse as was originally planned. The Art Museum is too small. The maximum parking available on the block across the street, today, is about 160 with 122 available under the current leyout. Please save the architectural integrity of this building.,'