Title
Certificate of Approval - PLN14-0059 - 1501 Buena Vista Avenue - TL Partners I, LP. Public hearing to consider a revision to an approved Certificate of Approval for replacement windows and an alternate design for a new roof canopy as part of the restoration of the Del Monte Warehouse Historic Monument. The Environmental Impact Report for the Northern Waterfront General Plan Amendment and subsequent Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Del Monte Warehouse Project satisfies environmental review requirements for this project under the California Environmental Quality Act.
Body
To: Honorable Chair and
Members of the Historical Advisory Board
From: Andrew Thomas,
Assistant Community Development Director
BACKGROUND
On June 3, 2014, the HAB approved a Certificate of Approval to allow structural alterations to a designated City Historical Monument to support adaptive reuse of the 1927 Del Monte Warehouse for a residential mixed use proposal. Located at 1501 Buena Vista Avenue, the unique brick warehouse was constructed in 1927 for the California Packing Company, now known as the Del Monte Company. Del Monte ceased use of the cannery/warehouse building in the 1960s. Since the 1960s, the building has been used by trucking and distribution businesses. In December 2014, the City Council approved the project, which in addition to the preservation of the warehouse, included construction of a major portion of the Clement Avenue extension, a $2 million contribution to the construction of Jean Sweeney Open Space Park and other public benefits.
With five acres of existing floor area, the rehabilitation of the Del Monte Building is an extremely large, complex, and expensive undertaking. With a construction cost of approximately $120 million, the effort is the most expensive construction project of a single building in the history of Alameda. To demolish the building and build 350 new residential units on the site would probably cost closer to $90 million. Just since the December 2014 Council meeting, the applicants have spent over $14 million developing the construction drawing and negotiating the purchase the necessary land behind the building to construct the Clement extension. The Del Monte construction drawings required a laser scan of the entire building in order to produce an accurate 3D model for the architects and structural engineers to use in their plans and drawings. It also meant doing extensive testing of the brickwork and existing wood trusses to determine what was needed to retrofit the existing structure, and to understand how they could support and work with the new construction. In addition, an environmental study was performed which revealed high levels of lead in the window frames.
Although unique in scale and complexity, the planning and building process for the Del Monte Building has not differed significantly from other smaller rehabilitation projects around the City. It is very common for the project designers to discover construction problems after approval of the initial plans by the Planning Board and/or Historical Advisory Board. These problems sometimes require that the building plans submitted for the building differ from the plans submitted for initial approval to the Planning Board or Historical Advisory Board. Sometimes, staff determines that the changes are minor and do not warrant an official modification of the permits. In other cases staff determines that the changes warrant a review by the Planning Board or Historical Advisory Board.
The Del Monte building plans are currently in building plan check review. Given the size and complexity of the project, the applicant’s project team discovered the need to make two changes to the design plans that were approved by the Historical Advisory Board in June 2014.
The following analysis describes the two changes that are being requested.
ANALYSIS
A. Proposed Modifications to Windows
The 2014 design plans and staff report stated that:
“The steel industrial windows on the exterior of the building, as well as the monitor roof, appear to require moderate-to-extensive repairs. The steel sashes themselves would be retained and repaired. Where the deterioration is too severe to be repaired, the steel sashes would be replaced using a metal counterpart that matches the original design, material, color, and molding profile.”
Existing Window Condition: Since 2014, the project team has discovered that the existing windows on the exterior of the building and the monitor roof pose some additional problems not foreseen in 2016. Many of the windows have deteriorated significantly more than originally thought and will need to be replaced. Many of the frames are severely warped, damaged and out of plane, which makes repair of the steel frames or replacing the glazing very difficult. Sections of windows are also heavily corroded beyond the point of repair, and replacing the windows is the only remaining option. The poor condition of the existing frames also creates waterproofing issues. There is a high risk of leaks and damage due to water intrusion if the existing windows were to remain.
In addition, the existing windows are fixed windows, which limits opportunities to naturally ventilate residential units. In some cases (along the third floor of the existing building which is not visible from the street), the units will require windows that can be opened to allow for fire exiting.
For these reasons, the applicant’s project team is recommending that all of the existing windows be replaced with new windows designed to replicate the character defining features of the original windows. Furthermore, the project team hopes to match the new windows and doors (“storefront system”) to be cut into the brick building façade to provide access to the individual residential units, which were part of the original 2014 design plans.
The applicant is proposing a replacement window manufactured by Graham, a company that specializes in replacing historic building windows with a successful track record on preservation projects carried out by the National Park Service.
Window Details: The existing window bays located on the second floor within the brick facade are approximately five feet high and six feet long. Each bay contains 18 single panes with three panes on the vertical axis and six panes on the horizontal axis. Each pane is approximately 12 inches wide and 20 inches high. The mullions dividing the panes are approximately one inch wide and one half inch deep. The existing windows are recessed approximately four inches from the exterior walls (seven inches from the existing sill and eight inches from the existing head). The replacement window replicates all of the above characteristics, except that the mullion is 1-1/8 inch instead of 1 inch in width. In addition, to allow two of the panes to be opened for ventilation, the mullion around two of the panes will be 2-1/6 inch in width. (See Exhibit 1 for more details and dimensions.)
The existing windows in the third floor monitor roof (not visible from the street) are a continuous strip of windows comprised of individual units that measure approximately five feet high and five feet long. Each unit contains 15 single panes with three panes on the vertical axis and five panes on the horizontal axis. The pane and mullion dimensions are the same as the windows on the second floor described above. The replacement windows are separated by sections of solid wall with vertical joints to match the spacing of the mullions. Each replacement window measures either five feet three inches high by five feet long or five feet three inches high by four feet long with 15 double panes in each window separated by a mullion that is 1 and 1/8 inches wide. The replacement panes are approximately the same size as the existing panes. The replacement windows will be recessed approximately four inches from the exterior walls, to match the existing window recess. The mullions dividing the panes are approximately one inch wide and one half inch deep to match the existing windows.
Consistency with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards: Staff believes that the replacement windows are consistent with the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for the Rehabilitation of Historic Structures. Staff also believes that the new windows will improve safety in the building, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions and energy use generated by the need to heat the housing units in the winter months and cool the units in the summer months. For these reasons, staff is recommending approval of the replacement windows. Exhibit 1 also includes an analysis of the proposed replacement window by preservation consultant Christopher VerPlanck. Mr. VerPlanck’s assessment finds that the proposed replacement window will comply with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards.
To assist HAB review of the proposal, the applicant will bring a sample of the proposed window type to the Board meeting.
B. Proposed Modifications to Sky Canopy Design
The original 2014 Plans proposed a custom-made sky canopy over the central court yards over two of the building’s four bays. Although the sky canopy is evident in the design drawings, it is important to note that due to the width of the building and the 60 foot setback of the monitor from the brick façade and 110 feet from the sidewalk, the sky canopy is not visible from the public right of way. It is also important to note that the sky canopy proposed in 2014 is not an original feature to the building. It was a proposed new design feature for the project.
Since 2014, the project team has discovered some problems with the original design. The original design requires significant amounts of new structural steel which would add cost to the project and would adversely impact the appearance of the internal spaces. To reduce the amount of new steel that would need to be incorporated into the interior public spaces of the building, the modified design uses standard sized panels. The revised orientation of the panels takes advantage of the existing wood columns and bracing, eliminating the need for the additional structural steel. The existing wood columns and braces are still a focal point of the space and they appear to integrate well with the glass canopy, while still providing generous levels of natural light to this space. The re-configuration also allows for more airflow into the space than the original design
Mr. VerPlanck’s agrees with the staff conclusion that the modified canopy design will comply with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. Staff believes that the modified design meets the original design intent of the Sky Canopy and will comply with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The project is subject to the California Environmental Quality Act. In 2008, the City of Alameda certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Northern Waterfront General Plan Amendment. The City of Alameda released a Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration on April 29, 2014, for this Master Plan, which is designed to implement the Northern Waterfront General Plan Element. The project, if approved, will be required to implement all of the mitigation measures in both the Northern Waterfront General Plan EIR and the Supplemental Mitigated Negative Declaration. The historic resources evaluation for this project made findings that the proposal is consistent with the Secretary of Interior Standards and would not result in a significant impact to historic or cultural resources. These findings were incorporated into the final environmental document prior to final action by the HAB on the Certificate of Approval on June 3, 2014.
PUBLIC NOTICE
This agenda item was advertised in the Alameda Journal and notices were also mailed to residents and property owners within 300 feet of the project location.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Historical Advisory Board review and approve by motion the revised window and sky canopy designs shown in Exhibit 1.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED BY:
____________________________
Andrew Thomas,
Assistant Community Development Director
Exhibits:
1. Project Plans and VerPlanck Assessment