Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHANGAR 2 CONDITIONS ASSESSMENT PRESENTATION - 9.19.17Hangar 2 Conditions Assessment and Reuse Study SEPTEMBER 19, 2017 Introduction Hangar 2 (A.K.A. Building 29, South Hangar) is one of the two 74-year old former Lighter-Than-Air (LTA) blimp hangars Currently leased to the City from the Department of the Navy City leases out Hangar 2 on a semi- regular basis for various temporary uses Routine maintenance has been deferred, presumably since the early 1990’s No studies performed on the building since base closure in 1999 Hangar 1 Hangar 2 Introduction Data and preliminary analysis was needed to support and decisions regarding the current and future options for Hangar 2 July 2014: City Council engages Page & Turnbull to perform a Conditions Assessment & Reuse Study to: Provide a physical assessment of the building’s current condition Recommend immediate work and associated costs to enhance current temporary uses Develop preliminary anticipated scope(s) of work and associated costs to rehabilitate Hangar 2 in compliance and not in compliance with historic preservation standards Page & Turnbull selected for extensive experience with other LTA hangars and historic structures Conditions Assessment and Reuse Study Tustin Hangar No. 2 Presentation to Tustin City Council September 19, 2017 AGENDA I.Study Overview II.Key Findings III.Maintenance Recommendations IV.Preliminary Reuse Concepts Study Overview 3D Laser Scanning Infrared Thermography X-Ray Material Testing Visual Grading of Wood Key Findings Size and Scale Code ConsiderationsHistoric Preservation Hazardous Materials Maintenance Recommendations ▪Restrict Access to Unsafe Areas (Catwalk, Roof) ▪Remove Fall Hazards (Loose Blocking, Incipient Concrete Spalls, Misc. Exterior Fall Hazards) ▪Repair Hangar Door Rail Lateral Support / Make Operational ▪Remove Interior Steel Stairs Stressing Trusses / Strengthen and Repair Damage from Stairs Split Blocking Concrete Spall Hangar Door Rails Hangar Door Operability Cat Walk ▪Provide Additional Egress through Side Sheds ▪Limited Infrastructure Improvements (Electrical for Hangar Doors, Limited Interior and Exterior Power and Lighting) ▪New Fire Detection and Notification System ▪Repair Roof Deck and Install New Roof Membrane at Monitor Roof ▪Disabled Access, including parking ▪Budget –Approximately 11 Million Construction Cost ▪Schedule –9 Months for Additional Investigation and Design Monitor Roof Deck and MembraneEgress at Sheds Monitor Roof Deck and MembraneFire Detection and Alarm Future Reuse Concepts Future Reuse Concept 1 -Rehabilitation ▪Good Candidate for 20% Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit ▪Public assembly occupant loads (16,000 people) ▪“Repair and Retrofit” Approach within State Historic Building Code –Risk Category 3 Future Reuse Concept 2 -Renovation ▪More radical approach ▪“Buildings within Building” ▪Exterior shell opens to adjacent uses ▪Structural Towers within Current Code –Risk Category 3 Exploratorium Glendale Masonic Temple Truss Strengthening Restore Original Openings Portal Frame Strengthening Future Reuse Concept 1 -Rehabilitation Cladding & Skylights New Restrooms & Utilities Shed Spaces Future Reuse Concept 2 -Renovation Professional Services Agreement with Page & Turnbull SEPTEMBER 19, 2017 Overview Page & Turnbull proposed a “Maintenance Recommendations” scope of work in the 2017 Hangar 2 Assessment and Reuse Study to support ongoing temporary uses Recommendations, not requirements Maintenance Recommendations project will: Increase safety Increase license revenue Attract larger temporary uses Support rehabilitation and renovation options Cost Estimated construction cost: $11.1 million Does not include needed additional assessment, design costs, contingency, escalation etc. Page & Turnbull submitted a proposal for $1 million to complete additional assessment work and construction design in August 2017 Page & Turnbull Proposal Scope of Work (2 phases) Phase 1: Predesign Subtask: Additional Investigation Closer inspection of hangar door components Site specific wind modeling Personal Protection Equipment (PPE) protocols Subtask: Historic Preservation Consultation Phase 2: Design Subtask: Schematic Design Subtask: Design Development Subtask: Construction Documents Page & Turnbull Proposal Fees Not-to-exceed contract total of $1,004,710 Includes fees and reimbursables Council approved a $5 million appropriation as part of the budget for Hangar 2 design work Timeline Estimate is 8-9 months after delivery of boom lift Selection Page & Turnbull is being recommended for this work due to: Unique knowledge & experience with Hangar 2 Knowledge and experience for two other hangars in the bay area Use of other consultants would require a duplication of services, additional costs and further delays Recommendations Receive and File the Conditions Assessment and Reuse Study Authorize City Manager to execute Agreement with Page & Turnbull to Perform additional Architectural and Engineering Services