HomeMy WebLinkAbout16 APPROVE PAGE AND TURNBULL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENTAgenda Item 16
Reviewed:
AGENDA REPORT City Manager
Finance Director;
MEETING DATE: JUNE 17, 2014
TO: JEFFREY C. PARKER, CITY MANAGER
FROM: CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE
SUBJECT: CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT WITH PAGE AND TURNBULL,
INC. TO PERFORM BUILDING RE -USE AND STRUCTURAL
ASSESSMENTS FOR HANGAR 2 (BUILDING 29) AT THE FORMER
MARINE CORPS AIR STATION (MCAS) TUSTIN
SUMMARY
City Council approval is requested of a Consultant Services Agreement with Page and
Turnbull, Inc. to provide professional architecture and engineering services to perform
building re -use assessments for the Hangar 2 (Building 29) located at the former Marine
Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin.
RECOMMENDATION
It recommended that the City Council:
1. Authorize the City Manager to execute a Consultant Services Agreement with
Page and Turnbull, Inc. provide professional architecture and engineering services
to perform building re -use assessments for the Hangar 2 (Building 29) located at
the former Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin, subject to any non -
substantive modifications as may be deemed necessary by the City Attorney
prior to execution of the Agreements.
2. Approve an appropriation in an amount not to exceed $368,968 from the
unappropriated reserves of the Land Held for Resale Fund (Fund 189) for Fiscal
Year 2013 -2014 to fund Phase 1 of the Scope of Services in the Consultant
Services Agreement with Page and Turnbull, Inc.
FISCAL IMPACT:
An amount not to exceed $368,968 from the Land Held for Resale Fund (189- 80 -00-
6010); in the event it is determined necessary to proceed with the Phase 2 services
City Council Report
Hangar 2 E valuation (Page and Turnbull, Inc.)
June 17, 2014
Page 2
identified in the Scope of Services the C1y will request a fund appropriation from the
City Council in the future for the costs of the Phase 2 work.
BACKGROUND:
Hangar 2 (aka Building 29 aka the "South Hangar") is one of the two 71 -year old,
300,000 square -foot former Lighter- Than -Air (LTA) blimp hangars at the former Marine
Corps Air Station (MCAS) Tustin.
Hangar 2, along with Hangar 1 (aka Building 28), were both completed in 1943 to house
military blimps for the purpose of patrolling the coastline during World War II before the
base's evolution to a phmar -ly helicopter operation. Out of the original seventeen LTA
hangars built during World War II, Tustin Hangars 1 and 2 ore two of the seven that
remain today.
On April 3, 1975 the hangars were entered into the National Register, both for their
historic connection with World War tl and other conflicts and their status as two of the
largest wood structures .n the world standing 178 feet tall with a footpr,nt covering 6.9
acres (1,088 feet long by 297 feet wide). The self- supporting wood structures are
supported with timber arches set on 20 -foot centers covering a large concrete floor set
atop 1,600 poured concrete piles.
City Council Report
Hangar 2 Evaluation (Page and Turnbull, Inc.)
June 17, 2014
Page 3
Ownership and Development Status
The County of Orange is the intended recipient of the Hangar 1 for the ultimate
development of a County Regional Park. The County does not yet lease the facility
from the Navy; however, the County has been proceeding with a park planning
process, which includes the proposed reuse of the hangar, in anticipation of ultimate
conveyance from the Navy. The County made progress developing a master park
plan in 2013 up until Hangar 1 suffered a partial roof collapse on October 7, 2013.
The Navy immediately
identified the building un-
safe for entry as it began
to evaluate and make it artial Pw-of CoNpw
-- nd Trmpotary Supports
safe for entry. The Navy's
contractor is continuing to
perform certain interm
stabilization efforts and ,
has yet to release the
forensic findings revealing
the cause of the collapse.
The roof collapse has -
delayed the County's park View of Hangar 1 Showing Roof Collapse
planning efforts. (Photo Date June 11, 2014)
+ Hangar 2 and surrounding property is currently owned by the Department of Navy
due to the ongoing presence of a military operation - related contaminated
groundwater plume located beneath the hangar. The Navy has completed and
installed the required containment/treatment system intended to prevent plume
migration until such time that the contaminants naturally biodegrade or are
sufficiently removed to cease all further remediation efforts.
• Hangar 2 was leased
from the Navy to the
City in 2002 in a "moth-
balled" condition, and
remains in this condition
to this day. All utilities
to the site have been
severed and many of
the utility systems within
the structure are not re-
useable; some systems
no longer work, have
been vandali.?ed or
have been removed.
Hangar 2 Interior
City Council Report
Hangar 2 Evaluation (Page and Turnbull, Inc.)
June 17, 2014
Page 4
• Routine maintenance of the hangar has
been deferred, presumably since the
announcement of closure in 1991.
Since the City commenced leasing
Hangar 2 in 2002, the structure has
remained secured with only repairs
occurring on a case -by -case basis
primarily associated with vandalism.
• Hangar 2, along with Hangar 1, has
been the subject of extensive _
investigation, review and evaluation by a
variety of professionals. These reports Hangar 2 Exterior
have concluded that the structures
require significant upgrade prior to civilian reuse; however, there helve been no
studies conducted on Hangar 2 since before the base closed in 1999.
Historical Status
Prior to reuse and conveyance of historic properties at former MCAS Tustin the
Department of the Navy was responsible for complying wth the National Historic
Preservation Act in an effort to find ways to reduce, avoid or mitigate the potential
adverse impact or loss of these historic buildings and properties. As part of this
process, the Navy consulted with the State Office of Historic Preservation (SHPO), the
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the City of Tustin, the County of Orange, and
the National Park Service (Department of Interior) and developed in 1999 a
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) which Included mandatory steps to be followed in
the marketing of each historic hangar.
Mandatory steps in the process included each governmental agency (the City and
County) soliciting Requests for Expressions of Interest/Request for Proposals
(REI /RFP) from the public to identify developers and future tenants that might bring
forward economically viable reuse and renovation proposals for the hangars. The
County completed its process with the Federal Government and State in early 2006.
As part of the mandatory steps imposed under the 1999 MOA on the City for Hangar 2,
the City issued a Request for Expressions of Interest/Request for Proposal and
marketing plan for the Hangar 29 Complex (the southerly hangar) after its approval by
the Navy and SHPO in January of 2005. This was done in concert with the City's
former master developer, Tustin Legacy Community Partners (TLCP), for the former
MCAS Tustin (now known as "Tustin Legacy").
At the completion of the REI /RFP process in 2007, the City received notice from both
the Navy and State Historic Preservation Office that the C:ty's marketing efforts were
performed consistent with the mandatory steps defined by the MOA. The Navy and
City Council Report
Hangar 2 Evaluation (Page and Turnbull, Inc.)
June 17, 2014
Page 5
SHPO concurred with the City's findings that an economically viable adaptive reuse of
Hangar 2 was not substantiated during the REI /RFP process and that no further
marketing was necessary. By 2009 the City and County also completed all mitigation
required under the MCA as follows:
• A written history of MCAS Tustin with emphasis on the air station and its lighter
than air operations (available for viewing at www.tustinca.org).
• An illustrated interpretive exhibit with emphasis on the initial construction of the
air station and the lighter than air operations (available for viewing at Tustin City
Hall).
An interpretive video, which combines still photographs, film footage, oral
interviews, narration and music documenting each hangar (available for viewing
at www.tustinca.org)
Adaptive Reuse
Adaptive reuse of Hangar 2 is part of a greater redevelopment effort planned at the
Tustin Legacy and has yet to be determined; however, by completing the required
mitigation measures, the City (and County) may pursue development options that may
include retention, modification, or complete removal of the hangars.
As the City Council is aware, the City has been working on updating the master plan for
Tustin Legacy (former MCAS Tustin) that contemplates the reuse of Hangar 2. In
addition, the City has also been entertaining a number of proposals for interim use of
the facility, including filming activities, blimp - related activities, special events, etc. The
City has been prudent in considering these types of requests given we have yet to
comprehensively evaluate the current condition of building, as well as, to evaluate code
requirements pertaining to health and safety for modern uses within a 71 year old
structure.
Since there has been no significant structural, architectural, engineering, or reuse
evaluation of Tustin's Hangar 2, the City is now proposing to engage consultant with the
experience and expertise to complete a comprehensive study of the building. The City
is proposing to engage Page & Turnbull, Inc. who has been. providing architecture and
historic architecture services at the two of the remaining seven LTA Hangars at Moffett
Field since 2004 and is intimately familiar with the building type and unique hangar
construction.
Page & Turnbull is also negotiating with the County to provide a similar assessment and
feasibility services for Tustin Hangar 1 as part of their long -term planning effort and
more importantly as a result of the roof collapse. The City and County staff have
collaborated on developing the respective scopes of work and are in agreement that
Page & Tumbull is the most qualified company to undertake this endeavor. While
City Council Report
Hangar 2 Evaluation (Page and Turnbull, Inc.)
June 17, 2014
Page 6
developing the scope of work and contemplating the various disciplines that need to be
involved, it was clear it would need to be a comprehensive, multi - disciplinary team
approach. Contracting with a single discipline would not be practical. Given the
uniqueness of the Tustin Hangars, and the fact that Page and Turnbull has a team in
place with the needed multi - disciplinary expertise, and the fact that they have actually
performed these activities on two other LTA hangars, Staff believes that soliciting
alternative proposals for these unique services would be an inefficient use of City time
and resources.
Consultant Expertise
Page and Turnbull and Anthony and Associates are currently providing the same
services for two of the remaining historic wood hangars, as part of a long -term leasing
agreement from the federal government by a private entity. The other assessment is
moving at an accelerated pace and is approximately 3 months of ahead of the Tustin
efforts and the project is moving from Phase 1 to Phase 2 efforts. Also a part of the
Tustin team, Degenkolb Engineers, provided structural and seismic assessment of the
hangars, as part of a Page & Turnbull team in 2006.
In addition to conditions assessment, Page and Turnbull is preparing Schematic Design
documents for the other hangars and is facilitating Section 106 (of the National Historic
Preservation act) review of the whole site with the federal agencies. While the work is
bound by a confidentially agreement, Page and Turnbull's client has agreed it is
mutually beneficial to share information and is willing to share. assessment data with the
Tustin Hangar team.
Ron Anthony (Anthony and Associates) has pioneered the use of non - destructive
evaluation and testing methods for historic timber structures. Anthony is widely
regarded as a leader in the field of Wood Science and has developed the techniques
being proposed for Hangar No. 1, including species identification; visual grading;
resistance drilling; and strength loss due to fire - retardant treatment. Anthony has,
published numerous articles on non - destructive evaluation techniques for peer- reviewed
scientific journals. Anthony & Associates has prepared the scoping documents for a
similar uncompleted survey of the historic extant hangars at Lakehurst, New Jersey and
are currently working on two of the remaining historic wood hangars with Page &
Turnbull.
Structural and Reuse Evaluation
The services will include: architecture, historic architecture, structural engineering, wood
science, fire engineering, cost estimation, difficult access assistance, and mechanical,
electrical, plumbing (MEP) engineering. It is critical to the City at this point in our
planning process to perform thorough analysis of the facility to determine with a high
level of confidence what the integrity of the facility is and what types of interim and long-
term uses could be accommodated based upon health and safety code requirements.
City Council Report
Hangar 2 Evaluation (Page and Turnbull, Inc.)
June 17, 2014
Page 7
The proposed study is organized into two phases. Each phase has multiple tasks, each
of which builds upon prior efforts. This "stepped" approach allows the design team
flexibility to focus on critical items identified early in the study, while adding sufficient
detail to obtain effective cost estimates. The proposal was developed conservatively to
include all anticipated costs (with the exception of hazardous materials / bird dropping
abatement). The first phase includes both an initial general visual assessment of the
Hangar 2, followed by a partial "hands -on" survey of select elements, laboratory testing,
inspection openings, and programming / planning for hangar reuse.
The objectives of Phase 1 are to:
• Assess the extant condition of the Hangar 2 construction.
• Determine probable building uses for the immediate, interim and long term.
• Develop treatment recommendations for 1) stabilization of the hangar (if
necessary) and 2) repairs /upgrades for the proposed future use of the hangar.
• Develop preliminary estimated costs for the treatment recommendations.
These services include review of earlier studies; current conditions assessment;
evaluation of building envelope, structural, MEP, and fire /life- safety systems;
recommendations for repair, interim, and long -term use; and limited cost estimation.
The proposed scope of services is presented in more detail in the Scope of Services
included in the attached Consultant Services Agreement.
A second, optional phase includes a "hands -on" inspection of each truss; as well as,
more comprehensive documentation and testing of the hangar. It is anticipated that
should Phase 2 be needed, the scope of services and resulting fees would be reviewed
and adjusted (reduced) prior to start of work. If needed, a separate request for Phase 2
would return to the City Council in the future for consideration.
Fees, expenses, and project duration are summarized as follows:
Phase 1, Conditions Assessment & Reuse Study, Fees $301,215
Phase 1, Conditions Assessment & Reuse Study, Reimbursable Items $67,753
Subtotal Phase 1 Fees and Reimbursable Items $368,968
PHASE 1 DURATION: 24 Weeks
Option Phase (If Determined Necessary in the future)
Phase 2, Detailed Truss Inspection, Estimated Fees $393,000
Phase 2, Detailed Truss Inspection, Estimated Reimbursable Items $137,000
PHASE 2 DURATION: Estimated at 4 to 5 months
Subtotal Phase 2 Estimated Fees and Reimbursable Items $530,000
TOTAL, BOTH PHASES $898,968
City Council Report
Hangar 2 Evaluation (Page and Turnbull, Inc.)
June 17, 2014
Page 8
CONCLUSION
The proposed Phase 1 study of Hangar 2 by Page and Turnbull, Inc. is critically
necessary for the City in making important decisions over the next year for both the fate
of Hangar 2 and the overall Tustin Legacy master plan. A thorough analysis of the
facility will determine with a high level of confidence what the integrity of the facility is
and what types of interim and long -term uses could be accommodated based upon
health and safety code requirements, and Page and Turnbull has the direct experience
evaluating these types of LTA hangars to complete the evaluation.
Staff will be available to answer any questions the City Council may have.
4
Management Analyst
Attachments: Consultant Services Agreement with Page and Turnbull, Inc.
CONSULTANT SERVICES AGREEMENT
This Agreement for Consultant Services (herein "Agreement'), is made and entered
into by and between the CITY OF TUSTIN, a municipal corporation ( "City "), and PAGE &
TURNBULL, Inc., a California corporation ( "Consultant').
WHEREAS, Consultant desires to perform and assume responsibility for the
provision of certain professional architecture and engineering services required by City, on
the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, to perform building re -use
assessments for the historic blimp hangar number 2 located at the former Tustin Marine
Corps Air Station; and
WHEREAS, Consultant is qualified to provide the necessary services and has
agreed to provide such services; and
WHEREAS, Consultant has submitted to City a proposal, dated June 5, 2014, a
copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by this reference
( "Proposal'); and
WHEREAS, City desires to engage Consultant to render the services required by
the City on the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and mutual agreements
contained herein, City agrees to employ and does hereby employ Consultant and
Consultant agrees to provide consulting services as follows:
1. SERVICES OF CONSULTANT
1.1 Scope of Services. In compliance with all the terms and conditions of
this Agreement, Consultant shall provide those services identified in the Proposal as
"Phase 1 — General Conditions Assessment and Reuse Study", attached hereto as Exhibit
"A" (the "services" or the "work "). Consultant warrants that all services will be performed
using a degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised under similar conditions practicing in
same field. In the event of any inconsistency between the terms contained in Exhibit "A"
and the terms set forth in the main body of this Agreement, the terms set forth in the main
body of this Agreement shall govern.
1.2 Compliance with Law. All services rendered hereunder shall be
provided in accordance with all applicable laws, ordinances, resolutions, statutes, rules,
and regulations of the City of Tustin and of any federal, state or local governmental agency
of competent jurisdiction.
1008541.1
1.3 Licenses and Permits. Consultant shall obtain at its sole cost and
expense such licenses, permits and approvals as may be required by law for the
performance of the services required by this Agreement.
1.4 Familiarity with Work. By executing this Contract, Consultant
warrants that Consultant (a) has thoroughly investigated and considered the work to be
performed, (b) has investigated the site of the work and become fully acquainted with the
conditions there existing, (c) has carefully considered how the work should be performed,
and (d) fully understands the facilities, difficulties and restrictions attending performance of
the work under this Agreement. Should the Consultant discover any latent or unknown
conditions materially differing from those inherent in the work or as represented by the
City, Consultant shall immediately inform City -of such fact and shall not proceed with any
work except at Consultant's risk until written instructions are received from the Contract
Officer.
1.5 Care of Work. Consultant shall adopt and follow reasonable
procedures and methods during the term of the Agreement to prevent loss or damage to
materials, papers or other components of the work, and shall be responsible for all such
damage until acceptance of the work by City, except such loss or damages as may be
caused by City's own negligence.
1.6 Additional Services. Consultant shall perform services in addition to
those specified in Exhibit "A" when directed to do so in writing by the Contract Officer,
provided that Consultant shall not be required to perform any additional services without
compensation. Any additional compensation not exceeding ten percent (10 %) of the
original Contract sum must be approved in writing by the Contract Officer. Any greater
increase must be approved in writing by the City Manager.
2. COMPENSATION
2.1 Compensation of Consultant. For the services rendered pursuant to
this Agreement, Consultant shall be compensated only such amounts as are prescribed in
Exhibit "A ", in an amount not to exceed $301,215 (Three Hundred One Thousand Two
Hundred Fifteen)( "Contract Maximum "). If the Contract Maximum is reached before
Consultant's services under this Agreement are completed, Consultant will nevertheless
complete the services without liability on the City's part for further payment beyond the
Contract Maximum.
2.2 Reimbursable Expenses. Consultant may be reimbursed for
reasonable incidental expenses, in such amounts as may be approved in writing by the
Contract Officer. Said reimbursable expenses will be billed in addition to the Contract
Maximum, but shall not exceed $67,753 (Sixty Seven Thousand Seven Hundred Fifty
Three dollars) in aggregate ( "Reimbursement Maximum ").
2.3 Method of Payment. In any month in which Consultant wishes to
receive payment, Consultant shall no later than the first working day of such month, submit
2
1008541.1
to City in the form approved by City's Director of Finance, an invoice for services rendered
or reimbursable expenses prior to the date of the invoice. City shall pay Consultant for all
expenses stated thereon which are approved by City consistent with this Agreement, no
later than the last working day of said month.
2.4 Changes. In the event any change or changes in the work is
requested by City, the parties hereto shall execute an addendum to this Agreement,
setting forth with particularity all terms of such addendum, including, but not limited to, any
additional Consultant's fees. Addenda may be entered into:
A. To provide for revisions or modifications to documents or other
work product or work when documents or other work product or work is required by the
enactment or revision of law subsequent to the preparation of any documents, other work
product or work;
B. To provide for additional services not included in this
Agreement or not customarily furnished in accordance with generally accepted practice in
Consultant's profession.
3. PERFORMANCE SCHEDULE
3.1 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence in the performance of this
Agreement. Consultant will perform their services as expeditiously as is consistent with
professional skill and care and the orderly progress of a project of this scope.
3.2 Schedule of Performance. All services rendered pursuant to this
Agreement shall be performed within the time periods prescribed in the Proposal, attached
hereto as Exhibit "A ". The extension of the time periods specified in Exhibit "A" must be
approved in writing by the Contract Officer.
3.3 Force Maieure. The time for performance of services to be rendered
pursuant to this Agreement may be extended because of any delays due to unforeseeable
causes beyond the control and without the fault or negligence of the Consultant, including,
but not restricted to, acts of God or of a public enemy, acts of the government, fires,
earthquakes, floods, epidemic, quarantine restrictions, riots, strikes, freight embargoes,
and unusually severe weather if the Consultant shall within ten (10) days of the
commencement of such condition notify the Contract Officer who shall thereupon ascertain
the facts and the extent of any necessary delay, and extend the time for performing the
services for the period of the enforced delay when and if in the Contract Officer's judgment
such delay is justified, and the Contract Officer's determination shall be final and
conclusive upon the parties to this Agreement.
3.4 Term. Unless earlier terminated in accordance with Section 7.6 of
this Agreement, this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect until satisfactory
1008541.1
completion of the services but not exceeding one (1) year from the date hereof, unless
extended by mutual written agreement of the parties.
4. COORDINATION OF WORK
4.1 Representative of Consultant. The following Principal of the
Consultant is hereby designated as being the principal and representative of Consultant
authorized to act in its behalf with respect to the work specified herein and make all
decisions in connection therewith: John D. Lesak.
It is expressly understood that the experience, knowledge, capability
and reputation of the foregoing Principal is a substantial inducement for City to enter into
this Agreement. Therefore, the foregoing Principal shall be responsible during the term of
this Agreement for directing all activities of Consultant and devoting sufficient time to
personally supervise the services hereunder. The foregoing Principal may not be changed
by Consultant without the express written approval of City.
4.2 Contract Officer. The City Contract Officer shall be John Buchanan,
Deputy Director of Economic Development, unless otherwise designated in writing by the
City Manager. It shall be the Consultant's responsibility to keep the Contract Officer fully
informed of the progress of the performance of the services and Consultant shall refer any
decisions which must be made by City to the Contract Officer. Unless otherwise specified
herein, any approval of City required hereunder shall mean the approval of the Contract
Officer.
4.3 Prohibition Against Subcontracting or Assignment. The experience,
knowledge, capability and reputation of Consultant, its principals, employees, and
Subconsultants identified in Exhibit "A" were a substantial inducement for the City to enter
into this Agreement. Therefore, Consultant shall not contract with any other entity to
perform in whole or in part the services required hereunder without the express written
approval of the City. In addition, neither this Agreement nor any interest herein may be
assigned or transferred, voluntarily or by operation of law, without the prior written
approval of City.
4.4 Independent Contractor. Neither the City nor any of its employees
shall have any control over the manner, mode or means by which Consultant, its agents or
employees perform the services required herein, except as otherwise set forth herein.
Consultant shall perform all services required herein as an independent contractor of City
and shall remain at all times as to City a wholly independent contractor with only such
obligations as are consistent with that role. Consultant shall not at any time or in any
manner represent that it or any of its agents or employees are agents or employees of
City. Consultant shall be solely responsible for compliance with State and Federal Law
with respect to the wages, hours, benefits, and working conditions of its employees,
including requirement for payroll deductions for taxes. Employees or independent
contractors of Consultant are not City employees.
4
1008541.!
5. INSURANCE / INDEMNIFICATION
5.1 Insurance.
A. Consultant shall maintain in full force and effect during the
term of these Agreement policies of commercial general liability and automobile liability
insurance (each of which shall include property damage and bodily injury) and each with
limits of at least $1,000,000 combined single limit coverage per occurrence.
B. Consultant shall maintain in full force and effect during the
term of this Agreement a policy of professional liability insurance coverage with limits of at
least $1,000,000 combined single limit coverage per claim or per occurrence. If Consultant
provides claims made professional liability insurance, Consultant shall also agree in writing
either (1) to purchase tail insurance in the amount required by this Agreement or to cover
claims made within five (5) years of the completion of Consultant's service under this
Agreement, or (2) to maintain professional liability insurance coverage with the same
carrier in the amount required by this Agreement for at least five (5) years after completion
of Consultant's services under this Agreement. Consultant shall also provide evidence to
the City of the purchase of the required tail insurance or continuation of the professional
liability policy by executing the attached Letter Agreement on Consultant's letterhead.
C. Consultant shall carry and pay for such workers'
compensation insurance as is required fully protect Consultant and its employees under
California Worker's Compensation Insurance Law. The insurance company shall agree to
waive all rights of subrogation against the City for losses paid under the policy, which
losses arose from the work performed by the named insured.
D. Other applicable insurance requirements are: (1) Name the
City and the Department of the Navy, its officials and employees as an additional insured
on the commercial, general and automobile policies. (2) The insurance shall be issued by
a company authorized by the Insurance Department of the State of California and rated A,
VII or better (if an admitted carrier) or A -, X (if offered, by a surplus line broker), by the
latest edition of Best's Key Rating Guide, except that the City will accept workers'
compensation insurance rated B -VIII or better or from the State Compensation Fund. (3)
The Insurance shall not be cancelled, except after thirty (30) days written prior notice to
the City; and (4) The commercial general and automobile liability insurance shall each be
primary as respects the City, and any other insurance maintained by the City shall be in
excess of this insurance and not contribute to it.
E. Upon execution of this Agreement, Consultant shall provide to
City certificates of insurance and insurer endorsements evidencing the required insurance
signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. Insurer
endorsements (or a copy of the policy binder if applicable) shall be provided as evidence
of meeting the requirements of Subsections (1), (3) and (4) of Section D above and the
5
1008541.1
waiver of subrogation 'requirement in Section C above. If self- insured for worker's
compensation, Consultant shall submit to City a copy of its certification, of self- insurance
issued by the Department of Industrial Relations.
5.2 Indemnification. The Consultant shall defend, indemnify and hold
harmless the City and the U.S. Nary their officers, employees and agents, from and
against any and all actions, suits, proceedings, claims, demands, losses, costs, and
expenses, including legal costs and reasonable attorneys' fees, for injury to or death of
person or persons, for damage to property, including property owned by City, arising from
the negligent acts, errors and omissions of Consultant, its officers, employees and agents,
and arising out of or related to Consultant's performance under this Agreement, except for
such loss as may be caused by City's or the U.S. Navy's sole negligence or that of their
officers, employees or agents.
The Consultant shall also defend, indemnify and hold the City
harmless from any claims or liability for City health and welfare, retirement benefits, or any
other benefits of part-time or fulltime City employment sought by Consultant's officers,
employees, or independent contractors, whether legal action, administrative proceeding or
pursuant to State statue.
6. RECORDS AND REPORTS
6.1 Reports. Consultant shall periodically prepare and submit to the
Contract Officer such reports concerning the performance of the services required by this
Agreement as the Contract Officer shall require.
6.2 Records. Consultant shall keep such books and records as shall be
necessary to properly perform the services required by this Agreement and enable the
Contract Officer to evaluate the performance of such services. The Contract Officer shall
have full and free access to such books and records at all reasonable times, including the
right to inspect, copy, audit and make records and transcripts from such records.
6.3 Ownership of Documents. All drawings, specifications, reports,
records, documents and other materials prepared by Consultant in the performance of this
Agreement shall be the property of City and shall be delivered to City upon request of the
Contract Officer or upon the termination of this Agreement, and Consultant shall have no
claim for further employment or additional compensation as a result of the exercise by City
of its full rights or ownership of the documents and materials hereunder. Consultant may
retain copies of such documents for its own use. Consultant shall have an unrestricted
right to use the concepts embodied therein.
6.4 Release of Documents. All drawings, specifications, reports, records,
documents and other materials prepared by Consultant in the performance of services
under this Agreement shall not be released publicly without the prior written approval of
the Contract Officer.
s
1008541.1
7. ENFORCEMENT OF AGREEMENT
7.1 California Law. This Agreement shall be construed and interpreted
both as to validity and to performance of the parties in accordance with the laws of the
State of California. Legal actions concerning any dispute, claim or matter arising out of or
in relation to this Agreement shall be instituted in the Superior Court of the County of
Orange, State of California, or any other appropriate court in such county, and Consultant
covenants and agrees to submit to the personal jurisdiction of such court in the event of
such action.
7.2 Disputes. In the event of any dispute arising under this Agreement,
the injured party shall notify the injuring party in writing of its contentions by submitting a
claim therefor. The injured party shall continue performing its obligations hereunder so
long as the injuring party cures any default within ninety (90) days after service of the
notice, or if the cure of the default is commenced within thirty (30) days after service .of
said notice and is cured within a reasonable time after commencement; provided that if the
default is an immediate danger to the health, safety and general welfare, the City may take
immediate action under Section 7.6 of this Agreement. Compliance with the provisions of
this Section shall be a condition precedent to any legal action, and such compliance shall
not be a waiver of any party's right to take legal action in the event that the dispute is not
cured.
7.3 Waiver. No delay or omission in the exercise of any right or remedy
of a non - defaulting party on any default shall impair such right or remedy or be construed
as a waiver. No consent or approval of City shall be deemed to waive or render
unnecessary City's consent to or approval of any subsequent act of Consultant. Any
waiver by either party of any default must be in writing and shall not be a waiver of any
other default concerning the same or any other provision of this Agreement.
7.4 Rights and Remedies are Cumulative. Except with respect to rights
and remedies expressly declared to be exclusive in this Agreement, the rights and
remedies of the parties are cumulative and the exercise by either party of one or more of
such rights or remedies shall not preclude the exercise by it, at the same or different times,
of any other rights or remedies for the same default or any other default by the other party.
7.5 Legal Action. In addition to any other rights or remedies, either party
may take legal action, in law or in equity, to cure, correct or remedy any default, to recover
damages for any default, to compel specific performance of this Agreement, to obtain
injunctive relief, a declaratory judgment or any other remedy consistent with the purposes
of this Agreement.
7.6 Termination Prior to Expiration of Term. The City reserves the right
to terminate this Agreement at any time, with or without cause, upon thirty (30) days
written notice to Consultant, except that where termination is due to the fault of the
7
1008541.1
Consultant and constitutes an immediate danger to health, safety and general welfare, the
period of notice shall be such shorter time as may be appropriate. Upon receipt of the
notice of termination, Consultant shall immediately cease all services hereunder except
such as may be specifically approved by the Contract Officer. Consultant shall be entitled
to compensation for all services rendered prior to receipt of the notice of termination and
for any services authorized by the Contract Officer thereafter.
7.7 Termination for Default of Consultant. If termination is due to the
failure of the Consultant to fulfill its obligations under this Agreement, City may take over
the work and prosecute the same to completion by contract or otherwise, and the
Consultant shall be liable to the extent that the total cost for completion of the services
required hereunder exceeds the compensation herein stipulated, provided that the City
shall use reasonable efforts to mitigate damages, and City may withhold any payments to
the Consultant for the purpose of set -off or partial payment of the amounts owed to City.
8. CITY OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES; NON - DISCRIMINATION
8.1 Non - Liability of City Officers and Employees. No officer or employee
of City shall be personally liable to the Consultant, or any successor -in- interest, in the
event of any default or breach by the City or for any amount which may become due to the
Consultant or its successor, or for breach of any obligation of the terms of this Agreement.
8.2 Covenant Against Discrimination. Consultant covenants that, by and
for itself, its heirs, executors, assigns, and all persons claiming under or through them, that
there shall be no discrimination or segregation in the performance of or in connection with
this Agreement regarding any person or group of persons on account of race, color, creed,
religion, sex, marital status, national origin, or ancestry. Consultant shall take affirmative
action to insure that applicants and employees are treated without regard to their race,
color, creed, religion, sex, marital status, national origin, or ancestry.
9. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
9.1 Notice. Any notice, demand, request, consent, approval, or
communication either party desires or is to give to the other party or any other person shall
be in writing and either served personally or sent by pre -paid, first -class mail to the
address set forth below. Either party may change its address by notifying the other party
of the change of address in writing. Notice shall be deemed communicated forty -eight (48)
hours from the time of mailing if mailed as provided in this Section.
To City:
CITY OF TUSTIN
300 Centennial Way
Tustin, CA 92780
Attention: Jeffrey C. Parker
1008541.1
To Consultant:.
PAGE & TURNBULL
417 South Hill Street, Suite 211
Los Angeles, CA 90013
Attention: John D. Lesak
P
9.2 Integrated Agreement. This Agreement contains all of the
agreements of the parties and cannot be amended or modified except by written
agreement.
9.3 Amendment. This Agreement may be amended at any time by the
mutual consent of the parties by an instrument in writing.
9.4 Severability. In the event that any one or more of the phrases,
sentences, clauses, paragraphs, or sections contained in this Agreement shall be declared
invalid or unenforceable by valid judgment or decree of a court of competent jurisdiction,
such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect any of the remaining phrases, sentences,
clauses, paragraphs, or sections of this Agreement, which shall be interpreted to carry out
the intent of the parties hereunder.
9.5 Corporate Authority. The persons executing this Agreement on
behalf of the parties hereto warrant that they are duly authorized to execute this
Agreement on behalf of said parties and that by so executing this Agreement the parties
hereto are formally bound to the provisions of this Agreement.
s
iooas41A
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the dates
stated below.
"City"
Dated: CITY OF TUSTIN, a municipal
corporation
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
David E. Kendig,
City Attorney
M
Jeffrey C. Parker
City Manager
"Consultant"
PAGE & TURNBULL, Inc.,
a California corporation
0
M
10
1008541.1
EXHIBIT "A"
PROPOSAL, SCOPE OF SERVICES, and SCHEDULE AND COMPENSATION
11
PAGE & TURNBULL
Imagining chCnge In hishxic snvironments Ihrovgh design, re>earct +, and lechnoloay
June 5, 2014
Mr. John Buchanan
Deputy Director of Economic Development
City of Tustin
275 Centennial Way, Suite 104
Tustin. California 92780
ibuchanan@tustinca.org
Re: Proposal for Re -use Study of the Historic South Hangar
at the former Tustin Marine Corps Air Station [P1 3243A]
Dear John,
Page & Turnbull is pleased to provide this proposal to provide professional architecture and
engineering services to perform building re -use assessments for the historic blimp Hangar number 2
located at the former Tustin Marine Corps Air Station [MCAS] in the City of Tustin, California. The
blimp Hangars are situated on property bounded by Valencia Avenue to the north, Tustin Ranch
Road to the east, Barranca Parkway to the south, and Red Hill Avenue to the west.
It is our understanding that the Hangars, constructed circa 1942, are currently owned by the U.S.
Navy. Following the remediation of the site, the northern Hangar, known by the Marine Corps as
Lighter- Than -Air [LTA] Ship Hangar 1 or Building 28, would be turned over to Orange County and
the southern Hangar, LTA Ship Hangar 2 (Building 29), would become property of the City of Tustin.
Both buildings are currently unoccupied.
As you know, Page & Turnbull has a long history with the two sister Hangars, Hangars 2 and 3, at
the NASA Ames Research Center at Moffett Field in Mountain View, California. Our proposed team
for the Tustin effort includes the same structural engineer, Degenkolb Engineering, that we worked
with on re -use of Hangars 2 and 3 at Moffett Field. Page & Turnbull has a 40 -year history of leading
multi - disciplinary. teams in the historic preservation, programming, planning, and sustainable
rehabilitation design of some of the most important historic buildings in the country, such as the
Ferry Building in San Francisco and NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, as well as the
buildings at the Grand Canyon, Yosemite National Park, the Golden Gate National Recreation Area,
Presidio of San Francisco, and Death Valley National Monument.
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING & RESEARCH
PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY
417 South Hill Skeet, Suiie 211. 1 oS Angeles, Cnliternio 10013 1 r 213.221. i 200 F 21..5221.1209 1 . wv:.page- Iurnhulf.com
Proposal for Condition Assessment & Feasibility Analysis at the Tustin WAS South Hangar [P13243A]
Page 2
As we have discussed, the proposed study is organized into two phases. Each phase has multiple
tasks, each of which builds upon prior efforts. This "stepped" approach allows the design team
flexibility to focus on critical items identified early in the study, while adding sufficient detail to obtain
effective cost estimates. The proposal was developed conservatively to include all anticipated costs
(with the exception of hazardous materials / bird dropping abatement). The first phase includes both
an initial general visual assessment of the South Hangar, followed by a partial "hands -on" survey of
select elements, laboratory testing, inspection openings, and programming / planning for hangar re-
use. These services include review of earlier studies; current conditions assessment; evaluation of
building envelope, structural, MEP, and fire /life- safety systems; recommendations for repair, interim,
and long -term use; and limited cost estimation. Our proposed scope of services is presented in more
detail in Exhibit A.
A second, optional phase includes a "hands -on" inspection of each truss; as well as, more
comprehensive documentation and testing of the hangar. We anticipate that should the City elect to
proceed with Phase 2, the scope of services and resulting fees would be reviewed and adjusted
(reduced) prior to start of work.
Fees and expenses are summarized as follows:
Phase 1, Conditions Assessment & Reuse Study, Fees ............. :......................... $301,215
Phase 1, Conditions Assessment & Reuse Study, Reimbursable Items .................$67,753
Subtotal Phase 1 Fees and Reimbursable Items ............. ............................... $368,968
Phase 2, Detailed Truss Inspection, Estimated Fees ............. ............................... $393,000
Phase 2, Detailed Truss Inspection, Estimated Reimbursable Items .................... $137,000
Subtotal Phase 2 Estimated Fees and Reimbursable Items ........................... $530,000
TOTAL, BASE FEE AND REIMBURSABLE ITEMS, BOTH PHASES ................$898,968
Additional fee breakdown can be sound in Exhibit B.
The following attachments are included in this proposal:
Exhibit A — Scope of Services
Exhibit B — Cost Breakdown and Preliminary Timeline
Exhibit C — Project Team
Exhibit D — Preliminary Re -use Study Table of Contents
Exhibit E — Existing Materials and Assemblies
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING & RESEARCH
PAGE & T U R N B U L L PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY
417 South Hill Street, Suite 211, Los Angeles. Colifo:nio 90013 1 12 13.221.1200 F 2) 3.221.1209 1 s•:.vx :ocgeEUrnbul6com
Proposal for Condition Assessment & Feasibility Analysis at the Tustin MCAS South Hangar [P 13243.4]
Page 3
Attachment 1 – Fee Summary
Attachment 2 – Proposed Schedule, Phase 1
Attachment 3 – Schedule of Fees
We appreciate the opportunity to collaborate with you. I will be the main contact for this effort. If you
have any questions regarding this proposal, please contact me at lesak @page - turnbull.com /
213.221.1203.
PAGE & TURNBULL
John D!Lesak. AIANEED -AP. FAPT
[cipal —
ifornia Architecture License C26607
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING & RESEARCH
PAGE & T U R N B U_L L PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY
417 South dill St:eet. Suite 211, Les Angeles, Culifarnio 90013 1 1 2IM21.1200 F 213.221.1209 1 w w.pege -turn LulLCOrn
Proposal for Condition Assesstnenl & Feasibility Analysis at the Tustin MCAS South Hangar [P13243A]
Page 4
EXHIBIT A I SCOPE OF SERVICES
Page & Turnbull and our consultants have broken our scope of architectural and engineering
services into 2 phases:
Phase 1 Conditions Assessment and Reuse Feasibility Study
Phase 2 Detailed Truss. Inspection
Our scope of services is based upon the following understanding:
• A detailed work plan for Phase 1, Task E (Conditions Assessment, Laboratory Analysis and
Inspection Openings) will be developed during Phase 1, Task C (Visual Assessment).
• The extent of Phase 2 services are dependent upon the results of Phase 1. Phase 2
services may be eliminated, reduced, or deferred until a later date.
PHASE I - CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT AND REUSE STUDY
The objectives of Phase 1 are to:
1. Assess the extant condition of the Hangar 2 construction.
2. Determine probable building uses for the immediate, interim and long term.
3. Develop treatment recommendations for 1) stabilization of the hangar and 2)
repairs /upgrades for the proposed future use of the hangar.
4. Develop preliminary estimated costs for the treatment recommendations.
Phase 1 will include the collection of a limited number of wood and concrete samples to perform
laboratory testing. The testing is intended to assess deterioration and decay levels within wood
members and to verify design values. Non - destructive testing methods will also be used to expose
deterioration of wood members and metal connectors in -situ. A hydraulic lift will be used to gain
access to structural members. Fire and Life Safety modeling is also included in Phase 1.
A. KICK -OFF MEETING
A.1 The assessment team will attend a kick -off meeting to review scope and schedule,
work -plan, team organization, site access, and other logistics.
Deliverables: Electronic copies of meeting agenda, work -plan narrative, project directory,
and meeting minutes (within 3 -days of meeting).
PAGE &TURNBULL
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING & RESEARCH
PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY
417 South Hill Street, Suila 211, Los Angelev, Colifomio 90013 1 f 213.221.1206 F 273.221,1209 I w.,•.c.picgt urn bull.corn
Proposal for Condition Assess in ant & Feasibility Analysis at the Tustin MCAS South Hangar iP13243A1
Page 5
B: PREPARATION AND RESEARCH
B.1 Document Review: The assessment team will review documents provided by the client.
This includes original drawings and specifications, as well as, previously prepared
studies and drawings. We assume digital copies of documents will be provided.
B.2 Preparation: The assessment team will prepare for the on -site work, including (but not
limited to), copying drawings on which to record field notes, creating survey forms for
recording information, and gathering and packing relevant equipment for use in the field.
C: VISUAL CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT
CA Visual Assessment: The assessment team will visually inspect the extant Hangar
construction (refer to Exhibit E for list of elements). This assessment will be made from
grade and safe, accessible areas within the hangar such as the roof, tops of sheds,
stairways, etc. Binoculars and spotting scopes will be used. Conditions will be
recorded with digital photographs, hand - written notes, and sketches. We assume the
assessment will occur over a 1 week period. The team will attempt to determine if
recommended repairs from the 1997 structural evaluation by Becker and Pritchett were
installed. Due to possible environmental and safety hazards, catwalks and suspended
walkways will not be utilized during the visual assessment. Survey forms will be
completed to document the conditions.
C.2 Field Report: Within 3 -days of completion of visual assessment, Page & Turnbull will
issue a summary field report.
C.3 Work Plan for Additional Testing: The assessment team will develop a work plan for
materials testing and inspection openings to be conducted during Task E. The testing
and inspection openings will be used to confirm design values and as -built conditions
assumed during the Visual Assessment.
CA Meeting: P &T will participate in a meeting with the Client to review findings of the
visual assessment and the work plan for Task E and update the project work plan and
schedule as required.
D: PROGRAMMING / BUILDING REUSE
D.1 Repair / Reuse Criteria: The assessment team will determine variables that may affect
stabilization and repair recommendations, such as, anticipated service life of the
building, occupant loads, expected performance levels, and applicability of codes
(existing building code and historic building code). The team will discuss with the Client
and City Code Enforcement Officials via teleconference.
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING & RESEARCH
PAGE & T U RN_B U I. L PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY
417 South Hilt Stgeel, Su":te 211, Los Angeles. Colifo;nio 90C 13 1 T 213,221.1200 F 213.221.1209 1 o.. w ;ucge•t urn lwll.wm
Proposal for Condition Assessment & Feasibility Analysis at the Tustin MCAS South Hangar IP13243AI
Page 6
D.2 Feasibility Study: Page & Turnbull will work with the City of Tustin to determine probable
building uses for the immediate, interim and long term. The feasibility study will include
building code analysis with the CBC and CHBC. Disabled access will also be studied.
D.3 Drawings and Diagrams: Schematic -level architectural plans will be prepared to
illustrate the 2 to 3 reuse options.
DA Teleconference: P &T will participate in a teleconference /web meeting with the Client to
discuss and determine building re -use options for pricing.
E: CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT, LABORATORY ANALYSIS AND INSPECTION OPENINGS
EA "Hands -On" Conditions Assessment: The assessment team will perform an up -close
visual inspection of the extant Hangar construction (refer to Exhibit E for list of
elements) from a truck - mounted hydraulic platform lift with a boom of 180 feet.
Conditions will be recorded with digital photographs, hand - written notes, and sketches.
We assume Subtasks E.1 and E.2 will occur over a 2 week period.
During the hands -on inspection, Anthony & Associates will conduct in -situ visual
grading of a representative sample of various structural members in the trusses, based
on discussions about load requirements with the project team. Identifying wood species
makes it possible to determine material properties for conducting a structural analysis
and to identify compatible material for repairs. Wood species will be identified by
removing small samples from 4 -6 members in various locations throughout the Hangar
from which the species or species group can be determined under microscopic
examination. Grading will be conducted in accordance with procedures promulgated by
one of several forest products industry associations, such as the Western Wood
Products Association. Survey forms will be completed to document the conditions.
E.2 In -Situ Testing of Materials and Assemblies: Non - Destructive Evaluation (NDE) testing
of the structure may include, but not be limited to, the following:
• Control -point Laser Scanning: Through control -point laser scanning of the interior of
the hangar (not including the side sheds); GBG will identify differential deformation in
the structure to identify structural issues requiring additional evaluation. Inside
temperature and outside wind levels will be monitored and recorded during the
control -point laser scanning.
• Infrared (IR) Thermography Pilot Study: GBG's survey team will spend 1 day on site
using infrared photography, in order to determine the efficacy of using the method on
a larger scale. A long wave infrared thermal camera will be used to assess thermal
variations over the soffit and truss assemblies within the hangar. Variations in surface
temperature can be attributed to a number of different factors such as active leakage
and retained moisture. More subtle variations in heat signature can be used to identify
variations in material integrity and thus serve as an indicator of material deterioration.
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING & RESEARCH
PAGE & T U R N B U L L PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY
417 South fill Sheet, Suite 21 1, Los Angeles, California 90013 1 1 213.221.1200 F 213.221.1209 1 vr.v.v.pegedurnbu9.com
Proposal for Condition Assessment 8 Feasibility Analysis at the Tustin MCAS South Hangar [P 13243A)
Page 7
Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) Pilot Study: GPR provides a method for the internal
assessment of a wide variety of materials. It is particularly appropriate for identifying
the general arrangement of shallow buried objects (such as steel reinforcing) and the
internal elements of concrete, asphalt and masonry structures. The key advantage of
this technique lies in the rapidity with which data can be gathered without the need for
extensive opening up, and the small spaces within which it can be operated. In
concert with the IR pilot study, GBG's survey team will spend 1 day on site using
infrared photography, in order to determine the efficacy of using the method on a
larger scale.
• A borescope will be used to inspect the condition of wood at removed bolts /
connectors or in locations otherwise inaccessible.
• Resistance drilling will be used to evaluate wood strength at posts and timbers.
• A moisture meter will be used to assess wood moisture content.
• Metal detectors will be used to locate nails and screws.
E.3 Laboratory Analysis: The following materials will be collected in limited quantities to
perform laboratory testing. Removal of materials will be done under the supervision of
the structural engineer by a qualified contractor who can install replacement material to
stabilize the structure.
• Wood Strength: Six to ten wood members, approximately 3 feet in length, will be
removed to determine bending strength and to test the strength loss due to fire
retardant treatment. Bending tests will determine current wood strength for
comparison to historical strength values (to assess a possible reduction in strength)
will be done in accordance with ASTM D143 "Standard Test Methods for Small Clear
Specimens of Timber ".
• Treated Wood Fire Resistance: Fire tests will be based on needs determined during
the re -use evaluation, and will be conducted to satisfy code requirements and
understand anticipated fire behavior. The tests will be conducted in accordance with
ASTM E84 "Standard Test Method for Surface Burning Characteristics of Building
Materials" and E2768 "Standard Test Method for Extended Duration Surface Burning
Characteristics of Building Materials (30 min Tunnel Test)" to determine flame spread
rating and smoke index, and ASTM E119 "Standard Test Methods for Fire Tests of
Building Construction and Materials" or Ell 321 "Standard Test Method for Determining
Material Ignition and Flame Spread Properties" to determine char rate.
• Concrete Petrography and Carbonation: Up to five concrete cores will be taken for
petrographic (microscopic) examination and to measure the depth of carbonation
within the concrete. The testing will provide information on the ability of the cement to
protect steel reinforcement from corrosion. Testing will be performed following ASTM
C856 Standard Practice for Examination of Hardened Concrete.
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING & RESEARCH
PAGE & T U R _N_B U L L PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY
417 South Hill Sl:eel, Suite 211, Los Angeles. Colifornia 90013 1 T 213.221.1200 F 213.221.1209 1 �•i'•� "•'•peg turnLuli.e�im
Proposal for Condition Assessment & Feasibility Analysis at the Tustin MCAS South Hangar (P13243A1
Page 8
EA Inspection Openings: Inspection openings will be made to determine as -built condition
of roofing and cladding (location and extent of openings to be determined — coordinated
by design team and executed where necessary with the assistance of a third -party
contractor). Openings will be documented through digital photography, handwritten field
notes, and sketches.
E.5 Meeting: P &T will participate in a meeting with City of Tustin to review findings of the
Conditions Assessment, Laboratory Analysis and Inspection Openings.
Deliverables:
• Laser - scanning data and analysis:
• One copy of the point -cloud [the raw data of each separate scan developed in
Cyclone®], registered using the control data points into a single unified
registered point cloud.
• Control data: X and Y coordinates and Z elevation level values of all ground
monuments, scan targets and points of detail.
• 2D Truss sections showing deformation.
o Annotated contour plot showing overall truss deformation.
• Field report showing results of IR and GPR pilot studies in electronic format.
• Electronic copies of agenda and meeting minutes (within 3 days following meeting)
for Conditions Assessment, Laboratory Analysis and Inspection Openings.
• Summary field report: within 3 days of completion of hands -on inspection, in -situ
testing of materials, and creation of inspection openings investigation, Page &
Turnbull will issue a summary field report in electronic format.
Laboratory testing reports in electronic format.
FIRE AND LIFE SAFETY MODELING
Hughes Associates will provide fire and life safety analysis
• FDS Modeling: Fire Dynamics Simulator (FDS) modeling of different fire scenarios
based on anticipated fire loads. The fire and life safety features of the existing
structure will be evaluated and a report outlining any observed deficiencies will be
provided. The analysis will also include FDS modeling of different fire scenarios based
on anticipated fire loads.
• Egress Modeling: Egress modeling to simulate the evacuation of the building during a
fire.
Summary Report: Hughes Associates will prepare a written summary of the testing
results.
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING & RESEARCH
PAGE &TURNBULL _ PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY
4 17 South Hill St:eet. Suite 211. Los Angeles. Cotifornia 90013 I T 213.221 . 1200 F 213.221.1209 1 w.cw.pege turnbull.com
Proposal for Condition Assessment & Feasibility Analysis at the Tustin MCAS South Hangar [P13243 A]
Page 9
G: TREATMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
G.1: Using information acquired during Tasks C, D, and E the assessment team will
analyze the hangar and develop treatment recommendations to address immediate,
interim, and long -term use.
• Wood Condition: Anthony and Associates will provide a general opinion on the
condition and anticipated performance of levels of the existing wood members based
on the visual determination of the grade of truss and bracing members.
• Structural Engineering: Degenkolb Engineers will evaluate the capacity of the
existing structure, including seismic and wind loading. The structural performance
level of the building will be contingent on the Hangar to be deemed a "Qualified
Historic Building." If they are deemed as Historic and accepted by the Building Official
to not have a distinct risk to life, the 2013 California Historic Building Code (CHBC)
will govern the performance level. If they do not meet these requirements and since
the occupancy is being increased enough to change the Risk Category the building
will be triggered to meet current code equivalence per the 2013 California Building
Code (CBC). Due to the vintage and complexity of these structures, Degenkolb
proposes using the following standards to meet the performance level set by these
codes:
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) 41 -13, Seismic Evaluation and
Retrofit of Existing Buildings would be used for seismic analysis.
ASCE 7 -10, Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures would be
used for the wind and gravity demands in the load combinations.
If required to meet the CBC we would use the Alternate Compliance section noted
in the CBC Section 3401.6 which allows the use of 2013 International Existing
Building Code which includes ASCE 41 as a reference standard. If under the CHBC,
we follow the requirements of Section 8 -7 for loading and 8 -8 to define the material
properties in combination with ASCE 41 for the analysis procedures and acceptance
criteria as agreed upon through coordination with the State Historic Building Safety
Board (SHBSB) and the local Building Official.
Degenkolb Engineers will provide a Structural Evaluation Report. The report will
include site documentation, screening checklists, structural analysis results from Wind
and Seismic assessments, and recommended mitigation steps for any noted
deficiencies.
• Fire and Life Safety: Hughes Associates will evaluate the fire and life safety features
of the existing structure and provide a report outlining any observed deficiencies and
recommended fire suppression and egress strategies.
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING & RESEARCII
PAGE &TURNBULL _ _ _ ___ _ PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY
4 i
7 Sootii Nill Steel, ,uite 217, toy ?ngelez. Ge!ifo;nin 90 1? f 213.221,1200 1`213.221.120? rrc:r.pcg iumlx9.co.n
Proposal for Condition Assessment & Feasibility Analysis at the Tustin MCAS South Hangar [P13243A]
Page 10
• Mechanical, Electrical, and Plumbing Engineering: Design West Engineering will
evaluate the MEP systems currently present within the Hangar. Additionally, a
specialty contractor will be brought in to assess the large Hangar door motors and
mechanisms.
• Architectural: Page & Turnbull will coordinate the other disciplines and evaluate the
building envelope (roofing, cladding, windows, and doors); occupancy classification
and loads; and disabled access.
• Preliminary Repair Recommendations: The assessment team will prepare treatment
recommendations to 1) stabilize the building, 2) repair and upgrade the hangar for
interim use, and 3) rehabilitate the hangar for long -term use. Options may be
provided, if necessary to understand cost implications, and treatment
recommendations will be presented as a written narrative supplemented with drawings
and sketches as required to convey the scope of repairs to the cost estimator.
G.2 Review Meeting: Meet with City of Tustin to review Preliminary Treatment
Recommendations.
Deliverables: Electronic copies of agenda and meeting minutes (within 3 days following
meeting) for Repair Criteria teleconference.
H. PRELIMINARY COST ESTIMATE
Using the preliminary repair recommendations, AECOM will prepare a detailed estimate of
probable cost for the treatment options developed in Task G.
7S% DRAFT CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT REPORT, INCLUDING PROBABLE COSTS
1.1 Draft Report Preparation: The assessment team will prepare and submit a 75- percent
draft report. A preliminary Table of Contents for the report is included in Appendix D.
1.2 Review Meeting: Following a review period, the assessment team will meet with the
City of Tustin to review the report and respond to questions and comments.
Deliverables: Electronic copies of 75- percent draft report, meeting agenda and meeting
minutes (within 3 days following meeting).
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING & RESEARCH
PAGE &TURNBULL PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY
417 South Hill Street. Suile 21 1, Los Angeles. California 90013 1 1 213.221.1200 F 213.221.1209 I wv :•.vAGge.furnbua.COm
Proposal for Condition Assess inent & Feasibility Analysis at the Tustin MCAS South Hangar IP13243A)
Page 11
FINAL CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT REPORT, INCLUDING PROBABLE COSTS
J.1 Final Report: The assessment team will prepare and submit a final report. The report
will incorporate relevant comments on the 90- percent draft from the Client. Should the
assessment team have a differing opinion regarding a comment; a written response will
be provided.
Deliverables: 3 hard copies and 1 electronic copy of the final report.
K. MEETINGS
Meetings are described within the subtask narrative above and listed below
• Bi- monthly conference call check -in to review progress and schedule (P &T only)
• Kickoff meeting at site
• Meeting to review findings from visual condition assessment and to review the work plan
for materials testing and inspection openings
• Meeting to review findings from condition assessment, laboratory analysis and inspection
openings
• Meeting to review preliminary repair recommendations
• 75% Draft meeting
L. PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Phase 1 project management tasks include:
• Mobilization
• Contracting
• Coordination of assessment team.
• Coordination of site access.
• Tracking and reconciliation of scope and fee.
• Scheduling updates.
• Weekly project update reports (via email) to the City of Tustin.
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING & RESEARCH
PAGE & T U R N B U L L _ PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY
417 South Hill Street. Suite 211, Los Angeles. Colifornia 00M ! 1 213.221.1200 f 213.221.1204 1 w. w.pcg_lurnbuli.corn
Proposal for Condition Assessment & Feasibility Analysis at the Tustin MCAS South Hangar IP13243A)
Page 12
PHASE 2 — DETAILED TRUSS -BY -TRUSS CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT
(OPTIONAL)
As requested by the City of Tustin, the Phase 2 Scope of Services description below has been
developed conservatively to illustrate a detailed truss -by -truss assessment of the existing hangar
prior to initiation of traditional design services (Schematic Design, Design Development, and
Construction Documents). The assessment will also include the box -beam truss and clam -shell roof
structure. The Phase 2 assessment is based upon the 1997 structural evaluation by Becker and
Pritchett, which recommended that inspection and repair of wood trusses occur every 10 years.
The Phase 2 work also completes measured building survey (MBS) and NDE begun in Phase 1
MBS includes laser scanning of the building exterior and the interior of the side "sheds ". The laser
scan data will be processed into 2- dimensional plan, section, and elevation drawings in AutoCAD
format for recordation of the truss inspection information. Additionally, the Phase 2 proposal includes
a comprehensive photogrammetric survey of the hangar interior, which provides measurable and
scalable photographs for data collection.
Phase 2 NDE work includes the costs to complete IR thermography and GPR assessments should
the pilot studies performed in Phase 1 prove successful.
Until the Phase 1 assessments are performed, it is difficult to predict the exact level of detailed
assessment that is required for Phase 2. Following completion of Phase 1 services, the assessment
team will revisit the scope with the City of Tustin to identify Tasks that may be omitted, reduced, or
deferred to a later date.
Phase 2 work is broken down into the following tasks and subtasks.
A. PHASE 2 KICK -OFF MEETING
The assessment team will attend a Phase 2 kick -off meeting to review scope and schedule,
work -plan, site access, and other logistics.
Deliverables: Electronic copies of meeting agenda, work -plan narrative, and meeting
minutes (within 3 -days of meeting).
B. MBS LASER SCANNING
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING & RESEARCH
PAGE cis TU_R_N_B_U_L_L_ PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY
417 South Hill Slreel 30e 211,'Lo$ A.nceles Coltomm 90013 I T 219 221.1200 f 21 3.22 1.1209 1w nhu!Lc�m
Proposal for Condition Assessment & Feasibility Analysis at the Tustin f•4CAS South Hangar IP13243AI
Page 13
B.1 GBG's survey team will laser scan the building exterior and side shed interiors. To
control costs, it is anticipated that survey work should be performed from ground level or
any other stable platforms available — interior roofs, etc. Due to geometry of the
structure, the top of the parabolic- shaped hangar and monitor will not be scanned, but
will be accounted for through visual observation and interior information.
B.2 Collected data will be processed and 2D drawings produced for the detailed truss
survey.
Deliverables:
• One copy of the pointcloud [the raw data of each separate scan developed in Cyclone ®],
registered using the control data points into a single unified registered point cloud.
• Control data: X and Y coordinates and Z elevation level values of all ground monuments,
scan targets and points of detail.
• 2D Box girder sections / elevations showing deformation from design.
• 2D CAD Plans: Floor plan, including partial site plan where possible, reflected ceiling plan
• 2D CAD Elevations: North, South, East and West elevations, including exterior stairs,
ramps and terrain profiles.
C. MBS PHOTOGRAMMETRIC SURVEY
CA Through digital photography, GBG's survey team will perform a photogrammetric survey
of the hangar's main interior.
C.2 Collected photographs will be processed and "flattened" into 2D scalable images to be
used for detailed inspection of the hangar decking and skylights.
Deliverables: Rectified photographs (reflected ceiling plans and interior elevations) of the
hangar's main interior.
D. INFRARED THERMOGRAPHY SCAN
Provided trials of infrared scanning are successful (refer to Phase 1, Subtask E.1), perform
infrared scan of the underside of the entire main hangar bay.
Deliverables: Electronic copy of the infrared scan and summary report.
E. WOOD INSPECTION - SCOPING
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING & RESEARCH
PAGE & TT UR_N B U L L _ PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY
417 So ath Nill 3t:er t, 3uAe 2 11, l�s r,nyelc„ C: v'uf o:niu ` +0013 T 21.5.221, I ?Q —0—F-1 21 221.120 w- ,—,,9uge•i w n6u!Lrum
Proposal for Condition Assessment & Feasibility Analysis at the Tustin MCAS South Hangar [P13243AI
Page 14
E.1 The assessment team plans to collect the detailed truss assessment data using the
Tablet PC Annotation System (TPASTM 1). Truss condition information will be provided
in AutoCAD and excel format and through a web portal. The system will be tested and
refined during this task.
E.2 Anthony & Associates, in consultation with Degenkolb Engineers, will identify and
tag wood samples to be removed for comprehensive testing (50 -60 samples).
E.3 Anthony & Associates will perform up -close examination of previous failure
mechanisms.
EA Determine field logistics.
Deliverables: Field report including list of wood samples to be removed. Updated work -plan.
ENHANCED WOOD LABORATORY ANALYSIS
F.1 Third party contractors will remove and temporarily repair members for testing (this will
be treated as a reimbursable expense).
F.2 Laboratory testing to determine long -term effect of fire - retardant treatment on wood
strength.
F.3 Laboratory testing to determine efficacy of fire - retardant treatment for code compliance.
Deliverables: Electronic copy of the testing and survey results with a summary report.
G. TRUSS -BY- TRUSS, BOX BEAM, AND CLAM -SHELL ROOF FRAMING INSPECTION
GA Anthony & Associates, working off lifts and with industrial access specialists, will
conduct a detailed wood condition assessment (wood deterioration, splits, failed
members, connection issues, etc.).
G.2 Findings will be documented using TPASTM. Using MBS output for background
drawings.
G.3 Anthony & Associates will establish allowable structural grade based on sampling of
all members.
Deliverables: Inspection results will be provided digitally in AutoCAD format (with links to
digital photographs), summarized excel format and through a project - customized web portal.
Electronic copy of a summary report on the detailed structural analysis.
' For more information goto http: /Avww .vertical- access.com/tpas.html
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING & RESEARCH
PAGE &TURNBUI.L PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY
417 South Hill St:ecl. Suite 211, Los Angeles, California 90013 1 T 21 "3.221.1200 F 213.221.1209 1 ,.,c,. .aage•turnbulLCOm
Proposal for Condition Assessment & Feasibility Analysis at the Tustin MCAS South Hangar F1 3243A]
Page 15
H. GPRSURVEY
Provided trials of GPR scanning are successful (refer to Phase 1, Subtask E.1), perform GPR
scan of the concrete floor slab.
Deliverables: Electronic copy of the GPR scan and summary report.
75% DRAFT UP -DATED CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT REPORT, INCLUDING PROBABLE
COSTS
1.1 Draft Report Preparation: The assessment team will incorporate findings from the
detailed study and will prepare a 75- percent draft updated Conditions Assessment
Report. Phase 2 studies will be included as appendices to the updated report.
1.2 Up -dated Cost Estimate: Prior to submitting the updated report to the client, AECOM
will update probable costs for stabilization and repair.
1.3 Submit Report for review by the Client.
1.4 Review Meeting: Following a review period, the assessment team will meet with the
Client to review the report and respond to questions and comments.
Deliverables: Electronic copies of 75- percent draft report, meeting agenda and meeting
minutes (within 3 days following meeting).
J. FINAL UPDATED CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT REPORT, INCLUDING PROBABLE COSTS
Final Repo t: The assessment team will prepare and submit a final report. The report will
incorporate relevant comments on the 90- percent draft from the Client. Should the
assessment team have a differing opinion regarding a comment; a written response will be
provided.
Deliverables: 3 hard copies and 1 electronic copy of the final report.
K. MEETINGS
Meetings are described within the subtask narrative above and listed below
• Kickoff meeting at site visit
• Eli- monthly conference call check -in to review progress and schedule (P &T only)
• Meeting to review wood member removal and temporary repair.
• 75% Draft meeting
Final Issue (P &T only)
PAGE & TURNBULL
-0I? South Hill Sheet, Suite 211, Los Angeles. Eli fnrnia
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING & RESEARCH
PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY
T 213.221.1260 F211221.)20? ( .v:•nvgcgP- •furnL'u{LCVtn
Proposal for Condition Assessment & Feasibility Analysis at the Tustin MCAS South Hangar (P 13243AI
Page 16
L. PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Phase 3 project management tasks include:
• Coordination of assessment team and site access.
Coordination of removal, shipping, and handling of wood members for testing.
• Bi- weekly project update reports (via email) to the Client, including scheduling updates.
ASSUMPTIONS AND EXCLUSIONS
The Scope of Work outlined above is based upon Page & Turnbull's understanding of City of
Tustin's needs and requirements, as well as the design team's experience producing similar
documents for large unique structures on behalf of other clients.
ASSUMPTIONS
• Our assessment will start at "points of connection" for the building, study of sitework and
utilities coming into the Hangar are not included.
• Bird droppings were observed on catwalks and trusses during a walkthrough of Hangar 2 in
March 2014. Our proposal includes use of a 180 -foot lift to limit direct (climbing through)
exposure to the bird droppings. No abatement / removal of bird droppings is included in this
proposal.
• Our proposal assumes previous soils testing and reports are sufficient to evaluate the
structures and prepare recommendations for repair /upgrade. No soils testing is included in
our scope of services.
• Our proposal assumes previous hazardous materials studies are sufficient to assess costs
associated with abatement / encapsulation. Hazardous materials survey, testing, or
abatement recommendations are not included in our scope of services. Should an updated
analysis be desired, we recommend OC Parks retain an independent consultant to test for
hazardous materials and recommend abatement procedures.
This scope does not include the following tasks:
• Illustrative renderings or presentation level graphic material.
• Attendance at public meetings or hearings.
PAGE &TURNBULL
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING & RESEARCH
PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY
4 17 South Hill Street, Suile 211, Los .Angeles. CuliFO:nio 90C I3 1 T 213,221,1200 F 213.221.1269 1 w•.cx,pcgedurnbull.com
Proposal for Condition Assessment & Feasibility Analysis at the Tustin MCAS South Hangar (P 13243A1
Page 17
EXHIBIT B I FEE BREAKDOWN AND TIMELINE
PROFESSIONAL FEES
Refer to the attached spreadsheet (Attachments 1) for further detail. The compensation for the
Scope of Services outlined above, will be billed on a percent complete basis.
To summarize total professional fees:
Phase 1 — Conditions Assessment and Reuse Study ..... ............................... $301,215
Phase 2 — Detailed Truss Inspection .... ............................... ...........................$393 000
Total................................................................................. ............................... $694,215
REIMBURSABLE ITEMS
Reimbursable Items will be billed in addition to the contract maximum. For budgeting purposes, we
estimated expenses to be 5- percent of the prime consultant fee and 2- percent of consultant fees for
ground transportation, meals, incidentals and materials.
Phase1 .............................................................................. ............................... $67,753
Includes 2 -weeks of 180 -foot lift rental and operator; 1 -week contractor
assistance with inspection opening; removal and temporary repair, shipping,
and laboratory testing of wood members and concrete samples; mechanic to
evaluate hangar door motors; measured building and non - destructive
evaluation equipment fees; and printing
Phase2 ............................................................................ ............................... $137,000
Includes lift rental; industrial rope access, removal and temporary repair,
shipping, and laboratory testing of wood members; and printing
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING & RESEARCH
PAGE & T U R N B U L L PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY
417 South Rill Sheet, Suite 211, Los Angeles, Colifwnk; 9013 1 f 213.221.1200 F 2)3.221.1204 1 www,pcge- turnbull.com
Proposal for Condition Assessment & Feasibility Analysis at the Tustin MCAS South Hangar IP13243AI
Page 18
PRELIMINARY SCHEDULE
Refer to Attachment 2 for a task -by -task schedule for Phase 1
We anticipate initiating services within 2 weeks of receipt of a signed contract.
The preliminary project schedule is summarized as follows:
Phase 1
Total Duration: 24 weeks
Preliminary Repair Recommendations delivered 15 weeks from kick -off
75- Percent Draft Report delivered 20 weeks from kick -off
We estimate Phase 2 will take 4 to 5 months.
This schedule is dependent upon site accessibility, availability of equipment, availability of
staff, and other factors, including response from the City of Tustin.
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING & RESEARC11
PAGE & T U R_N B U L L ___ _ PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY
4 17 South Hill Street, Suite 21 I, Los Angeles. Califo:nio 4oG. I 1 213,2T 20o F 213.221.1209 I :w.vw,pCge•f urribu!LCem
Proposal for Condition Assessment & Feasibility Analysis at the Tustin MCAS South Hangar [P13243A]
Page 19
EXHIBIT C I PROPOSED PROJECT TEAM
ARCHITECT / PRESERVATION ARCHITECT
John Lesak, Principal
Page & Turnbull lesak @page- turnbull.com
417 South Hill Street — Suite 211 213.221.1203 (o) 323.945.5204 (c)
Los Angeles, CA 90013
p: 213.221.1200 Andrew Gorski, Architect
www.page- turnbull.com gorski @page- turnbull.com
213.221.1206 (o) 860.899.7127 (c)
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS
Degenkolb Engineers
300 South Grand Avenue - Suite 1115
Los Angeles, CA 90071
p: 213.596.5000
www.degenkolb.com
FIRE PROTECTION
Hughes Associates
6 Centerpointe Drive - Suite 760
La Palma, CA 90623
www.haifire.com
WOOD SCIENCE
Anthony & Associates, Inc.
P.O. Box 271400
Fort Collins, CO 80527
MEASURED BUILDING SURVEY AND NON-
DESTRUCTIVE EVALUATION
GBG Geotechnics
417 South Hill Street — Suite 211
Los Angeles, CA 9b013
hftp://www.gbg-us.com
Matt Barnard, Associate Principal
mbarnard @degenkolb.com
213.596.5010 (o) 213.453.7571 (c)
Michael Braund, Associate Principal
mbraund @degenkolb.com
619.814.7008 (o) 619.206.7373 (c)
Timothy LaRose, P.E.
tlarose @haifire
714.739.3870 (o) 401.935.6320 (c)
Ron Anthony
woodguy@anthony-associates.com
970.377.2453 (o) 970.481.3254 (c)
Alan White, Director of Operations (LA)
awhite @gbg- us.com
213.593.8100 (o) 917.297.0513 (c)
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING & RESEARCH
PAGE & TU R N $ U L L _ PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY
417 South rUl Sbeet. Suite 211, Los qn yele s. Colifo;,la 4001;. 1 T 21 1,221.1200 F 219.221.1209 1 w-- ,..pc£1e- 1urribu!Lcorn
Proposal for Condition Assessment & Feasibility Analysis at the Tustin MCAS South Hangar IP13243A)
Page 20
MEP ENGINEERS
Design West Engineering
275 W. Hospitality Lane, Suite 100
San Bernardino, CA 92408
p: 909.890.3700
http://www.designwesteng.com
COST ESTIMATING
AECOM
515 South Flower Street,
8th Floor
Los Angeles, CA, 90071
Steven Johnson, P.E. Mechanical
siohnson(aDdesig nweste ng.com
909 - 890 -3700 ext. 223 909.210.6357 (c)
Leo Maya, P.E. Electrical
Imaya@designwesteng.com
909.890.3700 ext. 212 909.915.9711 (c)
Andrew Hurley, POS, AssocRICS
Andrew. H urley @aecom.com
213.593.8029 (o) 310.569.7975 (c)
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING & RESEARCH
PAGE & TU R N B U L L PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY
417 Soalh Hill Street, Suile 211, Los Angeles, Collfomlc 9001 3 J T 213,221.) 200 F 213.221.1209 1 e.,w.pcge•lurn Lu!I.com
Proposal for Condition Assessment & Feasibility Analysis at the Tustin MCAS South Hangar (Pt 3243A1
Page 21
EXHIBIT D I PRELIMINARY RE -USE STUDY TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction and Background
A. Description
B. Summary of previous studies
C. Historic status and preservation goals
D. Historic significance diagrams
II. Assessment of Condition
A. Visual Condition Survey
a. Exterior skin
b. Windows and Doors
c. Roofing and roofing underlayment
d. Interior spatial elements
e. Interior stairs, elevators
f. Structural wood trusses, connections, bents
g. Structural slab, foundation
h. MEP systems
i. Electrical, lighting, emergency lighting, alarm
B. Recommendations for further investigation, survey, testing and monitoring
III.. Structural Systems Study
A. Description and structural systems
a. Lateral force resisting system
b. Original design criteria
c. Material specifications
d. Previous evaluations of structural integrity and repairs
B. Seismic Hazard
a. Seismic geologic hazards
b. Applicable seismic standards
c. Previous seismic evaluations and strengthening concepts
d. Recommended additional seismic evaluation studies
C. Wind Hazard
a. Wind review procedure
b. Wind performance
c. Recommended additional wind evaluation studies
PAGE &TURNBULL
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING & RESEARCH
PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY
417 South Hill Sl:eel, Suite 211, Loi Angeles, Colifornic 90013 1 T 213,221.1200 F 213.22 1.1 20Y I •,,vv,pcge -t um bu!I.com
Proposal for Condition Assessment & Feasibility Analysis at the Tustin MCAS South Hangar [PI3243A]
Page 22
D. Performance during earthquake
E. Performance during strong winds
F. Long -term maintenance
IV. Building Use/ Programming
A.
Probable building uses short, interim and long term
B.
Code Considerations
C.
Recommended design improvements short term
D.
Recommended design improvements interim period
E.
Planning and marketing considerations
V. Fire and Life Safety Program
A. Current fire & life safety conditions based upon review per 2013 CBC and CHBC
B. Design for immediate life safety improvements
C. Design for interim term program
D. Fire safety strategy for hangars
VI. Implementation Plan and Probable Costs
A. Outline recommended implementation tasks
B. Estimate of probable costs (short and interim design)
VII. Appendices
A. Bibliography
B. Historic plans and photographs
C. Current plans, elevations, sections (existing documents)
D. Current photographs
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING & RESEARCH
PAGE & T U R_N B U L L _ PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY
417 South sill Sheet, Suite 211, Los Angeles, Culifo:nia 0013 j T 2!3.221.1200 F 213.221.1209 .w•v .v.pGL]e -lurN: u!LC:am
Proposal for Condition Assessment & Feasibility Analysis at the Tustin MCAS South Hangar [P 13243A]
Page 23
EXHIBIT E I EXISTING MATERIALS AND ASSEMBLIES
STRUCTURE
Concrete "Raymond" piles, steel shells filled with unreinforced concrete. Piles are 65 feet deep
Concrete foundations and portal frames to 24 feet above floor.
Timber x- bracing between portal frames, vertical and horizontal. Spacing appears random
5" thick unreinforced concrete floor slabs, 400 square feet each, arranged in a checkerboard pattern
51 trusses at 20' on- center (Top of truss is 173' above finish floor)
3" x 12" purlins, laid horizontally, at panel points
3" x 12" sub - purlins, laid parallel to trusses, at 6' -8" on- center,
2" x 8" tongue & groove roof sheathing, straight laid, attached to sub purlins
X- bracing at bottom chord
Tie wires and rods
Glu -lam "strongback" repairs
Wooden box -beam girder truss (20' x 20' x 200') above hangar doors.
Cantilevered ends
Cement - asbestos cladding
Built -up roof
Tapered concrete towers
Interior tower ladders
Tar & gravel tower roof
EXTERIOR
Corrugated aluminum roof panels over composition felt.
Translucent corrugated fiberglass panels at skylights
Roof monitor at top of trusses
PAGE & TURNBULL
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING & RESEARCH
PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY
417 South Hill Sheel, Suite 211, Los Angeles, Celifwnio 90013 1 i 213.221.1200 F 213.221.1209 1 w,,.pcge- Iumbull.Com
Proposal for Condition Assessrnent & Feasibility Analysis at the Tustin MCAS South Hangar 1P13243AI
Page 24
Built -up roof
Fire hose rooms, wood framed with asphalt shingles
Aluminum sash windows
Wood windows
Cement asbestos panels over wood framing
Concrete base (painted)
Office /Shop protrusions, 2 stories in height, at long sides of hangar
Wood framed roof and soffits
Steel entry and service doors
Roll -up doors
Wall vents and roof exhaust
Steel girt and wood framed, flat -leaf hangar doors.
6 panels per opening. Each panel is 120' high and 37' wide and 5' thick.
3 panels open in each direction
Guiderails in concrete slab and at box beam
Door Machinery at base of doors
Painted plywood cladding
Band of wood windows
Wood and concrete door bumper stops
Clam shell dome above box beam
Aluminum standing seam roof
INTERIOR
Catwalks (wood) near top of trusses
Steel trolley beam parallel to catwalks
Steel stairs, replaced original wood stairs in late 1980s
PAGE &TURNBULL
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING & RESEARCH
PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY
417 South Hill Slxet. Suite 211, Los Angeles. Calilomiu 90013 1 T 213.221,1200 F 213.221.1209 1 www.oage4urnbu!l.com
Proposal for Condition Assessment & Feasibility Analysis at the Tustin MCAS South Hangar [P13243A]
Page 25
Asphalt strip down length of hangar
Floor drains
Steel tie -down rings in concrete slab
Doors and windows to office /shops, both sides
Wood frame walls clad with painted plywood or gyp board
Interior windows- 6 lite wood pivot; pivot over fixed lites. Wire glass
Doors -2 panel wood, solid and glazed; hollow core wood; aluminum; sliders
Office /Shops interiors
2nd level uncapped, open to above
Wood staircases
Bath and toilet rooms with vestibules
Acoustical tile dropped ceilings
Vinyl tile
Bumped -out rooms from more recent uses
Concrete block
Galvanized corrugated sheet metal cladding
Steel casement windows
SYSTEMS
Electrical, fed underground, to transformer vaults
Originally, had 480 volt service, stepped down to 220 and 110 for use at shops and offices
Lighting (interior and exterior)
HVAC
Plumbing
Fire sprinklers
PAGE &TURNBUI.L
417 South NIII Street. Suite 21 I, Los Angeles, <
ARCHITECTURE
PLANNING & RESEARCH
PRESERVATION TECHNOLOGY
`�OGi3 i 1 213.221.1200 F 213.221.1209 1 &,w.pcge.tumt u!I.com