Gensler/Michael Willis/Kwan Henmi
600 California Street, Floor 1100
San Francisco, CA 94108
415. 433. 3700




Memorandum


To:     Ivan Romero

From:   Clonia Cautis

Date:   September 22, 1998


Subject:  To do items
                 Moscone Center Expansion Project II, Project 01.6250.000
As per today's meeting, the following items need to be done:

  1. Plot updated drawings with updated structural column information received electronically from SDE ( priority one). If the plots look reasonable, updated backgrounds need to be transmitted to our consultants. The mechanical and plumbing engineer have a tremendous coordination effort to do, therefore let's keep them going with the most updated information. It will be very important to indicate all the structural bracing in all the floor plans. This will help coordinate your work, as well as it will be of great help to our consultants.

  2. Plotting, updated drawings: As a reminder we have asked the entire team to plot what we transmit to consultants. This is important in any project, especially something so complicated as this project.. We have also asked your team to plot the drawings on a regular drawings as revisions occur. If new drawings are plotted the will become the table set, to be used by the entire team, and also at our weekly (Tuesday) coordination meeting. It is also important to have the latest drawings when we meet with our consultants. As a reminder, since the 25% set, there has been no progress drawing issued for the table set.

  3. West end of the building: We all agreed that attention to the west end is important. Restrooms need to be sorted out. (priority one) Access to west mechanical mezzanines needs to be resolved (priority one). Air shaft at column line A dimension needs to be revised. (this is a small item) It will be best if this revision is done before backgrounds are sent to consultants. Grease duct needs to be resolved vertically as well as plan.

  4. Structural/mechanical coordination at column line B: This exercise will be a good start for your new team member that started today. It will start to involve him with the mechanical/structural coordination at line B. Steven H. and I started to look at column line B again today.. We have big problems!!! One major problem is the fact that the mechanical engineer did not understand the structural drawings. To their defense, I am not so sure that our entire team understood the framing plans and the connections to the braced frame: column line B and E.5. For sure this understanding is not reflected on the interior elevations/sections. Furthermore the mechanical consult did not understand the movable walls and their supports that interfere with the ductwork. Steven met today with the mechanical consultant at their office to discuss column line B coordination. Based on this the structural engineer transmitted to our office the floor truss elevations (this was transmitted to you today). I is my understanding, that KH team will take over this coordination effort. (this is part of the interior effort).

  5. Reflected ceiling plans to revisit the DD ceilings once again: the DD reflected ceiling plans indicate a pattern of lighting fixtures spaced at 8' x 10' oc apart., exception at four gypsum board soffits where the spacing is 14' oc. The electrical engineer criteria given to us, to your team was 12' x 12' maximum. As we all know we do have a very limited budget! ( no new news) It is a reasonable request to analyze the ceiling with a pattern that will accommodate less lights. At DD, within a meeting room we provided 32 light fixtures. I have asked Robert again and again to look at a lighting pattern that will utilize the least, not the most fixtures. As of this morning, he did not have one for discussion. I believe that by the end of the day he created a layouts with a pattern of lights fit 10' x 12' oc This new pattern that is still less than the maximum spacing of 12 x 12, reduced the number of lighting fixtures from the DD # of 32 to 24 (25% reduction). The overall savings may be more.! Translate this into Construction Cost, (fixture, wiring, dimming, etc) and it will most likely translate into Construction Cost savings.

  6. Reflected ceilings and hang points: In an effort to reduce Construction Cost, (mandated by our Client), and in concert with the structural consultant and your team, we offered the City to provide a hang point grid spaced at 11'3' x 11'3' oc.. What does this mean? I asked Robert to try to look at this new, structurally logical pattern of squares 11'3" square grid and come up with a ceiling grid that takes into account item 5 (lighting criteria) above and this new, agreed upon hang point distribution. of 11'3" oc. It is this structural obstruction placed in a square that we have problems with: if the elements (lighting, mechanical, speakers are placed in a geometrical pattern inside the 11'3" grid, it mat create something that may work. Trying to maintain the DD patterns that do not work and cost unnecessary $s may not be an ideal situation for us and our client. How can we make progress on this one? Please advise.

  7. Updated Movable wall layouts: I do not recall if updated movable wall background have been sent to all movable wall manufacturers: Advanced Equipment is preparing new layouts based on a 5' wide panel. I am not so sure if they have the latest movable wall backgrounds, including the latest revisions addition/ deletion of movable walls on the second and third floor. Since I do not believe they do, can you please direct your team to transmit the information via E-mail plus a hard print. Also background need to be transmitted to Modernfold. Transmittal copy and a Print needs to go to Angelica for our project file record.

  8. Coordination with MEPS wall elements at interior elevations: You asked about the placement of additional Class III fire valves (memo from John B. (A&P). My comment was that you need to look at the entire interior wall/elevation picture: indicate revised structural braces on the interior elevations and plans ( Steven plotted today the column B line), check on E5, 1.5, 5, lines, find the layout of 150' FHC and spray coverage (if you can not find it is OK to use the 150' spray radius and redo/ this check. The Basis of Design Fire dept./ DBI booklet indicates the request for equivaleny, therefore the criteria used. I am at home so I do not have the book handy)There is already a conflict between the structural brace on column line E5 and the location of FHC. (the updated layout you gave to Bolivar to re do.). I have not verified all the interior perimeter walls facing the Exhibit Hall, however start with the radius criteria above. Once this is done, verify all other elements that need to be placed on the walls: take a look at the electrical drawing, there are large wall panels that are identified on the electrical drawings. They need to be placed on the interior elevations and coordinated with FHC and new valve location. Also please check on the elevation the location of the operable walls: do they coincide with the floor plans? Check all the exit door widths as indicated on the exiting plans which are part of the Basis of Design, FD/ BDI submittal. Start this check on plans then on the interior elevations.

  9. Since Michael (I do not know if I spelled the name right) will be doing the west end development, coordination I would suggest to start looking at all plumbing, fire protection, large electrical conduit risers. Since our architectural backgrounds have been quite fluid for quite a while, the plumbing drawings especially indicate risers in doorways, etc. Please have somebody on your team look, review, redmark the MEP drawings if there are conflicts and indicate on the architectural backgrounds if need be. This coordination will affect thickness of walls, bumps in walls, etc.

  10. I suggested to you and Michael that we also need to start an accurate interior wall section at column line B. The Section now used for the interior elevation is not reflective of the updated structural elements. If the information transferred from the key building section was used at DD phase, due to lack of time, it is not OK for the contract documents to use this. And again, there is no reason why you can not draft the sections by hand. I strongly believe that it will save time in the long run.
I know it is a lot of staff, however it all affects our consultants and our deadlines.




This file is not on project data base, produced on Clonia's home computer