Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolution No. 5166RESOLUTION NO. 5166 A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE SIGNING OF A LEASE OR AGREEMENT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL HEREBY RESOLVES as follows: The MAYOR and CITY CLERK are authorized to execute, on behalf the City of San Rafael a lease or agreement with Charles Hall Page & Associates, Inc. for Historical_ Survey A copy of which is hereby attached and by this reference made a part hereof. I, MARION A. GRADY, City Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the foregoing resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City held on Monday the 16th _ day of August 19 76 , by the following vote, to wit: AYES: COUNCILMEN: Jensen, Miskimen, Mulryan, Nixon and Mayor Bettini NOES: COUNCILMEN: None ABSENT: COUNCILMEN: None MARION A. GRADY - City Cle �Rlrl�!RL D R A F T HAC:em 7-12-76 AnVWrMVMM THIS AGREEMENT made and entered into this day of July, 1976, by and between the City of San Rafael, Marin County, California, hereinafter called "City" and Charles Hall Page and Associates, Inc., hereinafter called "Company". WITNESSETH That for and in consideration of mutual covenants and agreements hereinafter contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Background Research - Task I - Company agrees to con- duct background research to provide informat=.gin as to the physical development of the City from its beginning t:: b940, with par=icular emphasis on those factors which influenced and reflected ur-a- de- velopment such as: public transportation, growth of park= cacols, churches, and large landholdings. Said data and informer' -:_-)r -r-D provide an overview of the cultural and physical developmen'-. ,F the ,: - a - necessary by the volunteer workers to be assigned by the City to this project. Local volunteer participation will be solicited to the greatest extent possible. 3. Data and Information - Company will acquire the following data and information: For each inventoried structure (as available): Street Address; Present Owner; Current Occupants; Adjacent Land Uses; Building Type; Building Material; $tyle; Architectural Analysis; Historical Informai,t;on: Date Qf Constrgction, Additions and Alterations, Builder/Architect, Original Owner and Original Use. 4. Survey Criteria - The criteria used by the Company for evaluating structures, sites, and areas will be drawn, for the most part, directly from those developed previously by Company for their survey work in Santa Cruz and Sacramento. These, in turn, are largely based upon the guidelines of the National r"rust for Historic Preservation as outlined in the leaflet "Criteria for Evaluating Historic Sites and Buildings." The criteria the Company will use are presented in anno- tated outline form below as the different categories will appear in the Evaluation Box on the Historical/Architectural Survey form (see Exhibit "A"). The categories are drawn from a number of sources including Historic Savannah, the Vieux Carre Historic District Demonstration Study: Technical Report on the Environmental Survey, and the Georgetown Waterfront Feasibility Study, (see Exhibit "B") 5. Recognition of Historic/Cultural Significance - Structures or sites which the broad cultural, political, economic, social civic, or military history of the city, the state, or the nation is exemplified. Structures or areas that are identified with the ' -'.VE F '.Df historic personages or wish important events in the city, tIe :tate, or the nation. Sites and groups -of structures representing historic de- velopment patterns (urbanization patterns, railroads, agricultural settlements, canals, park p�an-t,--istr, etc.) . . Rankings: Exceptional - The highest evaluation, reserved for structures or areas of national or pre-eminent local or State importance. Major - Association with persons or events of local and/or State importance and/or with major patterns of development of the City. Contributing - Association with minor development patterns. Non-contributing - Unimportant and modern structures which will not be evaluated. 6. Recognition of Architectural Significance - Structures or areas that embody the distinguishing characteristics of an architectur type, period, method of construction or architectural development in a city. Notable works of a master builder, designer or architect whose style influenced the City's architectural development, or structures showing the evolution of an architect's style or the evo- lution of the styles of the City. Rare structures displaying a building type, style, design or indigenous building form. features. Structures which embody special architectural and design Rankings: Exce ptional - Buildings of national or pre- eminent local importance, as meritorious works of the best architects or outstanding examples of an architectural style or illustrating stylistic development of architecture in the United States. Major - Important examples of architectural styles that retain a high measure of integrity of design. Contributing - Buildings that themselves may not be dis- tinguished but which relate to the character of a potential preserva- tion area in scale, materials, proportion and other factors. Non -Contributing - Buildings which detract from the character of a potential preservation area. 7. Recognition of Environmental Significance - The re- lationship of the structure of place to its environment. Envrion- mental significance is not merely the contribution of the structure to its environment, but its environment's relation to it. Unique structures or places that act as focal or pivotal points important as a key to the character of visual quality of an area. - 4 - Rankings: Exceptional - A building facing a square would be such a structure. Major - A structure or place that helps to give a definition to a grouping, such as a Queen Anne house with a corner tower at the end of a row of Eastlake houses. In a good row, the houses in the row would also be of major significance. Contributing - Structures or places that contribute to the overall character of an area or form compatible but undistinguished parts of finer groupings. Non-contributing - Structures or places which detract from the character of the area. 8. Alterations in Design Integrity - Few buildings before 1940 have had no exterior modifications. Rankings: None or little - Buildings with no exterior modi- fications or such minor ones that the appearance of the building is entirely in its original character. Moderate - Buildings with bad signs, exterior fire escapes or other superficial modifications that are inappropriate but not irreversible. Considerable - Extensive or permanent changes to the ori- ginal design. Inappropriate additions, extensive removal of archi- tectural details and resurfacing wooden facades in asbestos or stucco are examples. 9. Visual Inspection of Physical Condition - This is based on a visual check and can only serve as a rought guide to the con- dition of structures. (The information derived will not influence the evaluation of the structure.) Rankings: Good Condition, or In Need of Minor Repairs - The building appears to be sound and in need of no more serious maintenance than painting or restoration of non-structural archi- tectural details. In Need of Major Repairs - Rotting wood may be visible, the roof may need re -shingling, or a sagging porch may need replacement. Delapidated - Serious structural. problems of the building are evident from the outside. - 5 - Inventory - Inclusion, Evaluation and Use - 10./ The inventory will include those side structures, buildings, and areas judged by preliminary field evaluation and previous historical research to have potential architectural, historical and/or cultural interest. The inventory will be used for the survey evaluation under Task 3 "Evaluation of Survey" and as raw data for further study by the Cultural Affairs Commission, and also to serve as an educational resource for local libraries and lending institutions. The above inventory is to be evaluated by the Planning Staff of San Rafael and the Cultural Affairs Commission. 11. Evaluation of Survey - Task 3 - Those sites, structures, buildings, and areas identified as possessing potential architectural historic, and/or cultural significance will be evaluated with regard to their degree of importance in each of several categories, as de- termined by the criteria developed in Task 2 and scored to delineate the relative significance of each within the context of the City, the State of California, and the Nation. Composite Evaluation of Buildings - 12. / The Company will prepare a composite evaluation after the buildings have been evaluated pursuant to the criteria described above, combining each of the categories, based on the following per- centages: Historic/Cultural Significance 35% Architectural Significance 35% Environmental Significance 20% Design Integrity 10% The composite point totals will result in four final presenta- tion categories, as follows: Exceptional S:ffucture.s: (over 70 pts.) Buildings in tris have group would be considered"-({.rrepiziceab e arl chitecturallyand%historical value. Major Structures: (50 to 70 pts.) These wouyd be buildings which should be protected unless unusual and compeliina requ4rements dictate replacement. Contributing Structures: (35 to 50 uts.� in this group are not essential but any replacement should be of nigher quality. Non -Contributing St-ructures: (less than 35 pzs.) Eligible for removal. Task 3 will be evaluated by the City Planning Staff and the . l .i. .,- 1 T FF . 4 — 0/ _Mi rc_ i nn - 6 - 13. Documentation - Task 4 - Company will prepare a pre- liminary report document, which will comprise the evaluated survey findings and serve as a working document, pending a decision regarding a final report. 'This preliminary report document will provide a basis for decision making by the City and the Redevelopment Agency regarding land use and development proposals, and serve as a basis for future work by the Cultural Affairs Commission. Volunteer Assistance - 14. /City will provide a minimum of three volunteers to assist in the first three phases of the performance of this Contract. Supervision of the volunteers will be done by the City Staff or the Cultural Affairs Commission. 15. Schedules - Company agrees to commence work on Task 1, Background Research, on August 15, 1976 and to complete said Background Research by August 31, 1976. Company agrees to commence Task 2, Resource Inventory, on September 1, 1976 and complete said Resource Inventory on or before September 30, 1976. Company agrees to commence Task 3, Evaluation of Survey, on or before October 1, 1976 and to complete said Evaluation on or before October 15, 1976. Company further agrees to commence work on Task 4, Documentation, by starting this task on or before October 15, 1976 and completing it by November l;, 1976. _Compensation Scale - 16./ The City will pay the Company for the services per- formed by the Company as abo-z --described, based on hourly personnel charges, as follows: Principles - $ 30 1r. Associates - $25/hr. Architectural $20/hr. Tyle maximum payable -ande- the Contract. r_eTardless of the hours pe, --formed by principl; s . a�; ?� _rtes, or architectural histo- rians is: $5,000.00. Payment Schedule 17./ City will pay Companj 75% of the monies due based on the hourly rates quoted in the preceding paragraph; payments to be made within. 30 days from the date of statement. Final payment shall be made within 15 days of the City's acceptance of the work performed by the Company. - T - Termination Provision - 18. /This Agreement may be terminated by either party upon written notice to the other party in the event of a substantial failure of performance by either such party, or if the project should be abandoned or indefinitely postponed. Interpretation of Agreement - 19 /This is the entire Agreement between the parties and there are no agreements or representations between the parties except as expressed herein. CHARLES HALL PAGE & ASSOCIATES, INC. By Charles Hall Page, President "Company" CITY OF SAN RAFAEL By C. Paul Bettini, Mayor "City" Attest: MARION A. GRADY, City Cler Approved as to Form: HARRY A _ CONNICK, City Attorney L;XtI rl;7�r "All C HAI:Ll S FOAL PAGE & ASSOC IATLS �, l.Jrh.rn \ t n. irunnu�ril,rl I'I.rnnin}� & L)etii};n -�.`r 400 Nluntg; )nrr•r� `,trvel . San Fr.rnc ru u. C ulrtr�rnr.r `1.1 IU i 13 1 `�l 102-5154 HIS FORICAL/ARCHITECT URAL SURVEY FORM Street Address: File Number: Date of Construction: Name of Structure: I I•ti�toricaI/CI,IturaI S;gnificance Building Type: Present Owner: Ma or Contributing — Building Material: Original Owner: I ArCiliteCtUral Sic -niflcance — Builder: Present Use: j Major Original Use: Architect: Occupjnt(s): Style: Additions 6 Al;i�rations: Significant Architectural Features: Ancillary Sr uct.ures: I EVALUATION Adjacent Laid Uses: I I•ti�toricaI/CI,IturaI S;gnificance Exceptional — Intrusion n Neighborhood?: Ma or Contributing — Non -Contributing — I ArCiliteCtUral Sic -niflcance — Exceptional _ j Major {I Contributing = Non -Contributing _ Ervironmental Significance Exceptional _ Major _ Contributing Ph�_to I Non -Contributing = I Design Integr'ty: Alterations None or Little Mouerate — Considerable _ ,I } Phys =cel .ondition f Gjod, or Mir -or Repairs_ — Na; or Repa i r -s _ r);'apidated _ ^ate: By: rhr( kr c: Mapped: s Ar,-hiLCCLur-aI Ar.aIY-i�,: Historical Information: Present Zoning: Assessed Value - Land: Improvements: Total: Lot Size: Additional Comments: jr 2/75 k EXHIBIT "B" Co,ti1t'\1L11�1.t'. WURK IN 111ST(mZIC PidiSFIAIK'loN Ri-SEARCH, PLANNING AND \lZ;a � 1 1'la"l'Ukli Sac raluCnto "old City" llistoric Building Inventory, for the City OF Sacraiiiento, to identify, prioritize and document the City's signllicant. StrUCtllreS for protection under a newly -adopted preservat.Lon ordinance. Rehabilitation Design Manual, for the City of Santa Cruz, to establish guidelines for the appropriate rehabilitation of nineteenth and early twentieth century structures in the City's historic areas. Santa Cruz Historic Building Survey, for the City of Santa Cruz, com,pris-ing a city-wide survey at the City's historic, architectural and cultural resources. ' Parkway Plaza Historic Preservation Study (Part II), for the City of Napa, comprising detailed research and analysis on two nineteenth century commercial buildings in the Center of the City alid their- relationship to a proposed riverfront park. Biedeman Place Historic District, planning consultation in the relocation and restoration of fifteen,nineteenth century houses; Western Addition Project Area, San Francisco. Architectural services on the restoration of two houses. Parl,way Plaza Historic Preservation Study (Part I), for the ,Napa Community 12edevelopment Agency, including in-depth research and analysis on the Napa opera House. FU-reka Comp-rehensive Building Inventory - A city-wide inventory of historically and architecturally significant buildings and structures within the City or lalrtka, to form the hasis for an urban conservation/ historic preserva-ioll for the City. Jessie Street SUh­,tat.ion restoration and adaptive Use plan, as part of a grouping of historic buildings along the pedestrian mall and hark i inkill! the Yerba Buena Center project in San Francisco. Dollar fistate Pear;ib; Tity Study, for the :';its' of San Rafael and Marin Heritage, lnc., culminating in the establislument of the Falkirk Cultural Center. Sall Francisco Civic Centel-, historical ruid architectural research for City Lancbmtrk District and National historic Landmark District. Conversion and ►Zehabilitation of Telegraph Hill Apartments - Recycling of a small city apartment house to better utilize the allowable zoning envelope, crg7ital ize upon the location -ind views and convert the roof to u�ablc; open ;Pace. I iiaas/Lilienthal HOL se, architectural services for the restoration au►d adaptive Ilse of San Francisco's finest surviving Queen Anne mansion. various and numerous projects for the Foundation for San Francisco's Architectural Heritage, including applications for the listings on the , National Register of Historic Places. Special emphasis on research, public education, and property conservation projects.