Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout33- Development Services CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO - REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION From: Michael E. Hays Subject: Approval of the Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse Plan for the San Dept: Development Services Bernardino Santa Fe Depot located at 1170 W. 3rd Street Date: February 15, 2000 P1 r R It OR1011VAL MCC Date: March 6, 2000 Synopsis of Previous Council Action: 06/07/99 Council awarded the Agreement for Professional Services to Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA, Inc., to prepare preliminary plans, specifications, and estimates for the rehabilitation, seismic retrofit, and adaptive reuse of the San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot. 02/15/99 Council authorized an amendment to the Cooperative Agreement with SANBAG and the Economic Development Agency to include City as owner for restoration of the San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot and the Commuter Rail Station. Recommended Motion: Adopt the Resolution. Michael E.4-lays Contact person: Deborah Woldruff Phone: 5057 Supporting data attached: Staff Report and Resolution Ward: 1 FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: N/A Source: N/A (Acct. No.) (Acct. Description) Finance: Council Notes: 3/(P/AODO Agenda Item No. 33 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO — REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION Staff Report SUBJECT Adoption of the Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse Plan for the San Bernardino Santa Depot Mayor and Common Council Meeting of March 6,2000 The Development Services Department is requesting approval of a plan to rehabilitate,restore, and adaptively reuse the Santa Fe Depot consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's standards for adaptive reuse. The Depot Project has been divided into three phases, as follows: 1) Phase I, Preliminary Planning; 2) Phase II, Final Engineering; and, 3) Phase III, Construction. As part of Phase I, the adaptive reuse analysis of the building has been completed. The 3.0-acre project site is located at 1170 West 3'd Street in the III, Industrial Heavy, land use district. (See Exhibit 1, Site Location Map) BACKGROUND The City of San Bernardino, the Economic Development Agency (EDA), and the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) are the current owners of the San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot. In February 1999, the City assumed responsibility for this project from SANBAG. Since that time, staff hired a consultant and moved the project forward in an effort to obligate the transportation funding. The process for this project included the preparation of a number of studies on the building (i.e., environmental and historic review, geotechnical and seismic retrofit analysis, aerial survey and utilities information, economic feasibility, personal interviews, case studies of five other depots, and a Metrolink passenger survey). In addition, staff and the consultant conducted a series of public workshops, meetings and hearings throughout the fall and winter that were designed to inform the public and receive public input on the project. Most recently, the Planning Commission reviewed the Draft Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse Plan in a public hearing on February 8, 2000 and forwarded the project to the Mayor and Common Council. Detailed background information for this project is contained in the Planning Commission Staff Report (Exhibit 2), and Status Report to SANBAG, (Exhibit 2, Attachment B). REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE PLAN Based on the analysis of all of the project components, the rehabilitation and adaptive reuse plan provides for a mix of uses, as follows: multi-modal transportation (rail, commuter rail, bus, shuttle, vans, taxis, etc.); government and transportation agency offices; employment offices and services; conference and banquet facilities; vocational and continuing education facilities; commercial retail uses; and, museum/archive facility. A copy of the Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse Study is contained in Exhibit 3, Attachment A. San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot Rehabilitation&Adaptive Reuse Plan Mayor and Common Council Meeting of March 6,2000 Page 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION The Planning Commission reviewed the project on February 8, 2000 and voted unanimously to recommend that the Mayor and Common Council approve the Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse Plan for the Santa Fe Depot Rehabilitation Project. FINANCIAL IMPACTS The engineering, plan check and construction costs associated with the Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse Plan are estimated at$13,000,000. The City and SANBAG have been awarded a mix of Federal transportation grants totaling $10,950,176. The total match required for these grants is in the amount of $1,192,216. SANBAG is providing a portion of the match in the amount of$412,588. The City's share of the match is $779,628. A $400,000 State Parks grant will be used to cover a portion of the City's match. The funding source for the remaining local match of$379,628 has not yet been identified. Final costs for the project will be determined in Phase II, Final Engineering and construction will be phased according to the availability of funding. The Grant funding and local match requirements for the project are summarized below. Depot Grant Funding As of February 15,2000 Grant Amount SANBAG Match City Match Total 1.TEA - 1,300,000 168,926 1,468,926 2. TEA-21" 2625000 243,662 412,588 3,281,250 3. TEA(federal appropriation (To be 10/99) 3,000,000 determined 3,000,000 4.TEA(11/99) 2,832,960 367,040 3,200,000 Total 1 $ 9,757,9601 $ 412,588 $ 779,6281 $ 10,950,176 "A$400,000 state grant(7/99)will be used towards the City's match requirement of$412,588. City/Agency Funds required for grant matches: TEA-21 match 412,588 TEA(11/99)match 367,040 Minus state grant funds (400.000) Match funds needed: $ 379,628 San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot Rehabilitation&Adaptive Reuse Plan Mayor and Common Council Meeting of March 6,2000 Page 3 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Mayor and Common Council adopt the Resolution that approves the Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse Plan for the San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot. EXHMITS 1. Site Location Map(San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot) 2. Planning Commission Staff Report(February 8,2000)* Attachments: A Site Location Map B Status Report to SANBAG C Rehabilitation&Adaptive Reuse Study 3. Resolution Attachments: A San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot,Rehabilitation&Adaptive Reuse Study* * Distributed under separate cover February 28,2000. EXHIBIT "1" CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AGENDA AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT Rem# CASE Santa Fe:Depot HEARING Project LOCATION HEARING DATE 5TH ST. 66 r-- ROJECT SITE W — J Q 2ND ST' Q � 215 o Y - 22 RIALTO AVE. > a°F..w r sou F A ii PAGE I OF f lam) EXHIBIT "2" SUMMARY CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION CASE: San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot Rehabilitation Project AGENDAITEM: 3 HEARING DATE: February 8, 2000 WARD: 1 APPLICANT: HISTORIC ARCHITECT: City of San Bernardino Wayne Donaldson Development Services Department Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA. Inc. 300 North"D" Street 530 Sixth Avenue San Bernardino, CA 92418 San Diego, CA 92101 REQUEST/LOCATION: A proposal to rehabilitate,restore, and adaptively reuse the Santa Fe Depot consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's standards for adaptive reuse. The Depot Project has been divided into three phases, as follows: 1) Phase I, Preliminary Planning; 2) Phase II, Final Engineering; and, 3) Phase III, Construction. As part of Phase I, the adaptive reuse analysis of the building has been completed. The 3.0 acre project site is located at 1170 West Street in the IH, Industrial Heavy land use district. CONSTRAINTS/OVERLAYS: Proposed Santa Fe Railroad Historic District ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS: :i Not Applicable o Exempt from CEQA, Section 15331 Categorical Exemption/Exclusion from NEPA zi No Significant Effects ❑ Potential Effects, Mitigation Measures and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Plan STAFF RECOMMENDATION: a Approval ❑ Conditions • Denial • Continuance to: .�_. San Brr dino Santa Fe Depot Rehab Project Meeting Date: February 8, 2000 Page 2 REOUEST AND LOCATION Request and Location The City requests approval of a plan to rehabilitate,restore, and adaptively reuse the Santa Fe Depot consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's standards for adaptive reuse. The Depot Project has been divided into three phases, as follows: 1) Phase I, Preliminary Planning; 2) Phase II, Final Engineering; and, 3) Phase III, Construction. As part of Phase I, the adaptive reuse analysis of the building has been completed, culminating in the adaptive reuse plan. The 3.0 acre project site is located at 1170 West Street in the IH, Industrial Heavy General Plan land use designation. (See Attachment A, Site Location Map) BACKGROUND The City of San Bernardino,the Economic Development Agency (EDA), and the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) are the current owners of the San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot, located at 1170 West 3rd Street, San Bernardino (City and County). The site is in the IH, Industrial Heavy General Plan land use designation(see Exhibit A, Site Location Map). The Depot, constructed in 1918,has been identified as an important historic resource of the City (California Point of Historical Interest—CPI-H-53; General Plan,Table 17; and,City of San Bernardino Historic Resources Reconnaissance Survey, 1991). In the early 1990's, the Depot was acquired by SANBAG as part of the acquisition of rights-of- way for the Metrolink system. Since that time, SANBAG has successfully secured $3.9 million in Federal transportation funds for the restoration of the Depot, and committed significant funds for a portion of the local match required for those grants. SANBAG has provided the entire local match required for the first Federal Transportation Enhancement Activities (TEA) grant. Additionally, SANBAG in 1993 under the terms of the initial Cooperative Agreement between the Economic Development Agency (EDA) and SANBAG constructed the adjacent Metrolink station. In order to expedite the Depot restoration project, Mayor Valles began discussions with SANBAG to establish the City as the lead agency for the restoration and development of the facility into a multi-modal regional transportation hub. After several months of negotiations, the Mayor and Common Council approved an amended Agreement between SANBAG, EDA, and the City in February 1999. Following approval of the amended agreement, Development Services staff prepared a Request for Qualifications(RFQ)which was released on February 9, 1999. The consultant selection process that culminated in the selection of the consultant team,Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA, Inc. on April 19, 1999. The City Council approved in concept the Agreement for Professional Services on June 7, 1999. Execution of the Agreement was deferred,pending completion of the Caltrans Pre-Award Audit. San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot Rehab Project Meeting Date: February 8, 1000 Page 3 On April 28, 1999, the City requested that Caltrans begin the required Pre-Award Audit evaluation of the selected consultant. The Caltrans Audits and Investigations Division on August 25, 1999 completed the audit. The Pre-Award Audit resulted in revisions to the Agreement that required some negotiation between the City and the consultant team. Once the issues were resolved, the Agreement was executed on September 24, 1999. To initiate Phase I of the project, the City held a project kickoff meeting on September 9, 1999. Representatives from SANBAG, Caltrans District 8, City and EDA staff and the consultant team attended the meeting. The consultant team presented its approach to the project followed by an open discussion of the project schedule. The meeting resulted in the adjustment of the project schedule to meet the CTC submittal date, and the setting of fixed milestone dates for stakeholders meetings, workshops, and project meetings. During October and November 1999, the City held several workshops to inform the public about the project and, more importantly,to get public input on how the community would like to see the Depot reused. On October 22, 1999,the first workshop was conducted with a group of Stakeholders that were asked by the Mayor to participate. The Stakeholders Group Committee includes representatives of business and organizations such as Metrolink, Onmitrans,Amtrak, Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway Company, the North Mt. Vernon PAC, and others. A complete listing of the Stakeholders Group Committee is contained in Appendix C. A second workshop was held on the same day for the North Mt. Vernon PAC, and a week later on October 29, 1999, the Mayor and Common Council also participated in a workshop. All of the early workshops were held on-site—in the Depot. On November 20, 1999, a large public workshop was also held in the Depot and about 70 people attended. In December 1999, SANBAG requested that project status reports be submitted to SANBAG on January 14, 2000 for projects that have TEA funding. Planning staff prepared and submitted the required report by the deadline. The report is very detailed and includes the following information: 1) project background and description; 2) activity to date; 3) issues or problems encountered; and, 4) project schedule. Two additional workshops were held on January 14th and January 26th with the Stakeholders Group Committee to finalize the final rehabilitation and adaptive reuse plan. The North Mt. Vernon PAC participated in the workshop on January 26`h. For further information on the project background and activity to date,please refer to Attachment B, Status Report to SANBAG. SETTING/SITE CHARACTERISTICS In general, the site is in the shape of a triangle with the narrow end oriented in an easterly direction. The two-story, 55,000 square foot Mission Revival depot building occupies the western half of the site. The Depot presently is used as a rail station for Amtrak passenger service. A Metrolink commuter rail passenger station, managed by the Southern California Regional Rail Authority, is separate but adjacent to the Depot. A temporary crew quarters facility and tracks support the Metrolink station. oan aernararno.wrna re uapar Acnaa rrOJeat Meeting Date:February 8. 2000 Page 4 Immediately in front of the depot are parking spaces for Amtrak customers, and a bus/van loading and unloading area. A temporary modular building (which houses the crew quarters for Metrolink) is located in front of the depot's west wing. The east side of the site is developed with a little-used parking lot. The north side of the site is developed with a Metrolink and Amtrak platforms, and tracks. There is very little landscaping on the site or around the building. The project site is located in an area developed with industrial and transportation related uses. Commercial retail and service uses and residential uses are located beyond the industrial area. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND FUNDING Due to the amount of work involved, the Depot project will be phased, as follows: Phase I, Preliminary Planning The City is in the midst of completing Phase I which involves the preparation of preliminary plans, structural evaluations, and estimates for the rehabilitation, and adaptive reuse of the San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot for its current use as a passenger rail station, and for future transportation related uses. The final reuse strategy for the building was determined through an adaptive reuse analysis and public workshops process conducted by the City and the Consultant Team. However, due to the size of the building, there is ample room for complementary commercial retail, office and service uses in the Depot. Phase II, Final Engineering The second phase of the project will involve the preparation of the bid document and will include final construction plans, specifications and cost estimates. Phase III, Construction The third phase will involve the actual construction of the rehabilitation project. Project Funding Federal Transportation Enhancement Activities (TEA) grants are being utilized for this project. The use of Federal funds requires the preparation of documents for compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended. The Section 106 compliance process ensures that the restoration and rehabilitation for adaptive reuse will not impair the architectural integrity or historic value of the Depot. The project must move forward quickly so that the first TEA grant can be encumbered by June 2000. There are no extensions available for this funding and the grant will be lost if it is not encumbered by the date specified. San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot Rehab Project Meeting Date:February 8. 2000 Page 5 ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS A preliminary agreement made with Caltrans on behalf of Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has resulted in a determination that this project will qualify for a Categorical Exemption/Exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act(NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA). The specific exemption class under CEQA is a Class 31 Categorical Exemption for the restoration of historic structures(CEQA Guidelines §15331). The City has been designated as the responsible agency for the environmental review. Toward that end, the Consultant Team is preparing the environmental assessments, including the documentation for compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA). The draft Section 106 compliance documents are currently under review by Caltrans District 8, Cultural Studies Section. When the Caltrans review is complete the documents will be forwarded to the FHWA and the State Historic Preservation Officer. REHABILITATION & ADAPTIVE REUSE ANALYSIS An in-depth Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse Study was prepared for this project. The study is based on input received in the workshops with the Stakeholders' Group Committee,North Mt. Vernon PAC, Mayor and Common Council, and the public, an economic feasibility and marketing study, case studies of five other depots in southern California, and a survey of Metrolink riders. A number of technical studies and documents have also been prepared for the project, as follows: Area of Potential Effect(APE) Map* Historic Property Report (HPSR)* Historic Architectural Survey Evaluation(HASE)* Finding of Effect(FOE)* California Department of Parks & Recreation(DPR) 523 Form* National Register of Historic Places Nomination Economic Feasibility and Marketing Study Stakeholder Interviews Geotechnical Investigation Aerial Survey and Utility Information Study • Indicates the studies and documents prepared for Section 106 compliance. DEVELOPMENT/ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (D/ERC) Staff presented the rehabilitation and adaptive reuse plan to the D/ERC on February 3, 2000. The Committee members were very supportive and look forward to the implementation of the project. The D/ERC is comprised of members from Building Plan Check, Planning, Public Works/Engineering, Water Department, Public Services, Economic Development Agency, Parks, Recreation & Community Services, Fire Department, and Police Department. San 6f<:r etardino Santa Fe Depot Rehab Project Meeting Date. February 8, 1000 Page 6 CONCLUSION Through the analysis, a rehabilitation and adaptive reuse plan has been developed that provides for a mix of uses to include: multi-modal transportation (rail, commuter rail, bus, shuttle, vans, taxis, etc.); government and transportation agency offices; employment offices and services; conference and banquet facilities; vocational and continuing education facilities; commercial retail uses; and, museum/archive facility. A copy of the Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse Study is attached. (Refer to Attachment C) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the Mayor and Common Council the approval of the rehabilitation and adaptive reuse plan for the San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot. Respectfully Submitted, � >y M ays Director of Development Services e or ah Woldruff a4 % V , Associate Planner Attachment A Location Map Attachment B Status Report to SANBAG Attachment C Rehabilitation& Adaptive Reuse Study ATTACHMENT A CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AGENDA AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT �7EM x CASE Santa Fe Depot Rehab LOCATION Project HEARING DATE 5TH ST. 66 RROJEGT SITE W a Q �•"ems'° 2ND C ) TYa c) j 215 — rY RI LTO AVE. � > I rLA"n ►.a¢,cc, 1,OR 0ERWAR D�'/b ATTACHMENT B _ G C I T Y O F , V # J an bernardino ED IN O F F I C E O F T H E C I T Y A 0 Y I N 1 S T R A T O R F R E D A W I L S O N C I T Y A 0 M I N I S T R A T C R January 13, 2000 Mr. Norman R. King, Executive Director San Bernardino Associated Governments 472 North Arrowhead Avenue San Bernardino, California 92401-1421 RE: San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot Rehabilitation Project—Status Report Dear Mr. King: City staff has prepared a status report for the above referenced project, which is partially funded by a $1.3 million ISTEA Transportation Enhancement Activities (TEA) grant. The City assumed the responsibility for the project in February 1999 upon approval of an amendment to the Cooperative Agreement between the City and SANBAG. Since that time, the City has worked diligently to move the project forward so that the ISTEA TEA funding can be obligated by the September 2000 deadline. The project would not be as far along without the cooperation the City has received from SANBAG staff and Caltrans District 8, Local Assistance Office and Environmental Review staff. Project Background and Description The Depot presently is used as a rail station for Amtrak passenger service. A Metrolink commuter rail passenger station, managed by the Southern California Regional Rail Authority, is separate but adjacent to the Depot. A temporary crew quarters facility and tracks support the Metrolink station. The City proposes to rehabilitate, restore, and adaptively reuse lie Santa Fe Depot consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's standards ti;! adaptive reuse. Toward that goal, the project has been divided into three phasr,, as follows: Phase The City is in the midst of completing Phase I which involves th(, preparation of preliminary plans, structural evaluations, and estimates forth€, habilitation, and adaptive reuse of the San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot for its ci (-,nt use as a passenger rail station, to future transportation related uses. 0 0 0 N O R T H 0 S T R E E T . S A N R E R N A N 0 1 N 0 . C A L I F 9 2 1 1 1 - 0 0 0 1 ( 9 0 9) 1 0 4.1 1 1 1 • F A I (0 0 9 1 IV 4.9 5 F 0 Mr. Norman R. King—Status Report San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot Rehabilitation Project January 13, 2000 Page 2 The reuse strategy for the building is being determined through an adaptive reuse analysis and public meeting process conducted by the City and the consultant. Consideration is being given to the building's future use as a public transportation center which could include suE:h elements as a full service Amtrak passenger station, permanent crew facilities for Metrolink, and a bus travel terminal. Phase II The second phase of the project will involve the preparation of the bid document and will include final construction plans, specifications and cost estimates. Phase III The third phase will be the actual construction of the rehabilitation project. Activity To Date The following provides an outline of the project activity to date, and highlight the progress we have made towards completion A Phase I, and obtaining a second vote by the CTC in June 2000. Consultant Selection Process. In early February 1999, the City initiated a consultant selection process that culminated in the selection of the consultant team, Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA, Inc. on April 19, 1999. The City Council approved in concept the Agreement for Professional Services on June 7, 1999. Execution of the Agreement was defer c,(1, pending completion of the Caltrans Pre-Award Audit. Caltrans Pre-Award Audit. On April 28, 19c,19, the City requested that Caltrans begin the required Pre-Award Audit evaluatioi, of the selected consultant. The audit was completed by the Caltrans Audits end Investigations Division on August 25, 1999. Execution of Agreement for Professional Services. The Pre-Award Audit resulted in revisions to the Agreement that requiredac)me negotiation between the City and the consultant team. Once the issues were resolved, the Agreement was executed on September 24, 1999. Commencement of Project, Phase I. On September 29, 1999, the City held a project kickoff meeting that was attended by representatives from SANBAG, Caltrans District 8, City staff, and the consultant team. The consultant team presented its approach to the project followed by an open discussion of the project schedule. The meeting resulted in thc; ,adjustment of the project schedule to meet the CTC submittal date, and the setting of fixed milestone dates for stakeholders meetings, workshops, and project i-neetings. Mr. Norman R. King—Status [�cl �n l San Bernardino Santa Fe Depw RehuLilitation Project January 13, 2000 Page 3 Section 106. The site survey, topographic map, area of potential effects (APE) map and identification of historic resources within the APE were completed on October 5, 1999. The draft Historic Property Survey Report (HPSR), Historic Architectural Survey Evaluation (HASE) and DPR 523 forms have been completed and were submitted to Caltrans for their review on January 7, 2000. The Finding of Effect document will be completed and submitted to Caltrans pending acceptance of the final design by the City. This will not impact the Section 106 compliance or the determination of the eligibility of the project. National Register Nomination This element of the project is not required as part of the Section 106 review; however, the City views this step as a necessary part of our efforts to rehabilitate and restore this historic structure. To date, the consultant has completed the historical research, site investigation and photography of the structure. The consultant is in the process of preparing the nomination form, which is about 45% complete. City staff anticipates receiving a draft of the nomination for review by January 21, 2000. Submission to the State Historic Preservation Officer will occur by February 1, 2000 to meet the submittal deadline for the April 13, 2000 State Historical Resources Commission meeting. The nomination application will not affect the Section 106 or the Feasibility Study schedule since the historic resource is already considered eligible for listing on the National Register. Selection of Stakeholders Group Committee During preliminary discussions between the City and SANBAG, it was identified that certain businesses and organizations would be directly affected by the project. These businesses and organizations were considered to be project stakeholders. On October 18, 1999, the Mayor invited representatives from the businesses and organizations identified to participate on a Stakeholders Group Committee. Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse Analysis The City and consultant team have conducted several workshops in an effort to inform the public about the project, and receive input from the Stakeholders Group Committee, business groups, and the public. The first Stakeholders Group Committee and Mt. Vernon Project Area Committee workshops were held on October 22, 1999. A workshop with the City Council was held a week later on October 29, 1999. About 70 people attended a large public workshop that was held by the City on November 20, 1999. Since November 16, 1999, the consultant team has conducted a series of meetings and interviews with individual stakeholders. As another component of the adaptive reuse analysis, the City and SANBAG staff conducted a survey of Metrolink passengers on January 6, 2000. About 294 surveys were distributed to the morning commuters to Los Angeles and Orange County. Commuters were asked to complete the one page document, place it in the postage-paid envelope, and rnturn it to the City via the U.S. Postal Service. Mr. Norman R. King—Status Report San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot Rehabilitation Project January 13, 2000 Page 4 The various workshops, meetings, and survey were conducted as part of the Section 106 compliance efforts; however, these public participation events have also provided valuable information for the adaptive reuse analysis. The consultant team has nearly completed an economic analysis of similar facilities. On November 18, 1999, the preliminary working papers were submitted for the City and consultant team review and comment. City staff and the consultant team are scheduled to tour the case study stations used in the economic analysis on January 11th through 13th. A geotechnical investigation report was completed and was submitted to the City on December 27, 1999 for review and comment. Comments are due by Thursday, January 20, 2000. The report determines the geological setting for the project, and specifies site soils conditions. The preliminary seismic retrofit analysis, completed on January 7, 2000, identifies how the existing conditions affect the building and determines the building's anticipated lateral capacities. An aerial survey and utility information study, completed on December 27, 1999, was used to develop a more current site plan, and to identify the locations of existing utilities to the building. To date, available plans and historic photographs have been copied and distributed to the consultant team. The civil, structural, mechanical, electrical and geotechnical engineers have completed all necessary field investigations. Selection of Preferred Adaptive Reuse Alternative Preparation of two adaptive reuse alternatives (in the form of schematic plans) is underway and will be presented to the Stakeholders Group on January 14, 2000. The Stakeholda:r Group will select the preferred alternative for further development by the Consultant Team. Schematic cost estimates and final schematic plans with an outline speci5caf �:: will be submitted to the City on January 21, 2000. The final adaptive reuse alternative and schematic plan will be presented to the Stakeholders Group on January 26, 2000. Based on input from the Stakeholders Group Committee, the final adaptive reuse alternative will be forwarded to the City's Development Review Committee, Planning Commission, and Mayor and Common Council. Issues Or Problems Encountered As a result of the required Caltrans Pre-Award Audit, the City lost 4 months of time during which the consultant team could have been working on the project. The Agreement for Professional Services could not be executed until the audit process was completed. The City requested that Caltrans begin the review in late April 1999. According to the Caltrans Local Assistance Office (and Handbook), the process should have been completed within a 60-day timeframe; however, the audit was not completed until 4 months later on August 25, 1999. mi. nonnan K. King—Status Report San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot Rehabilitation Project January 13, 2000 Page 5 An apparent reason for the delay was that the Caltrans Audits and Investigations Division staff are not familiar with fixed cost (or "lump sum") Agreements for Professional Services. The majority of the agreements and7or contracts they review are for construction projects for which costs are based on time and materials. The criteria used for their review was based in part upon certain federal regulations that pertain to construction contracts that are not applicable to fixed cost agreements. -" Project Schedule To California Transportation Commission (CTC) Of necessity, the project schedule is extremely aggressive. The following provides a highlight of key dates that need to be met in order for the City to obligate the ISTEA TEA funding. 01/14/2000 Stakeholders Group Committee Meeting - staff and the consultant team will present 2 draft adaptive reuse alternatives. The committee will select the preferred alternative for further development by the consultant team. 01/21/2000 Draft National Register Nomination - consultant team will submit the document to the City for staff review 01/26/2000 Stakeholders Group Committee Meeting - staff and the consultant team will present the final version of the draft, preferred alternative. The committee will make a recommendation regarding the preferred alternative to the Planning Commission and Mayor and Common Council. 01/27/2000 Development Review Committee - staff will present an overview of the project, the draft, preferred alternative, and the Section 106 review. 02/01/2000 National Register Nomination - consultant team will submit the nomination to the State Historic Preservation Office for an April 13, 2000 State Historical Resources Commission meeting. 02/08/2000 Planning Commission - staff and the consultant team will present an overview of the project, the draft, preferred adaptive reuse alternative, and Section 106 review, and request that the Planning Commission recommend the approval of the preferred alternative to the Mayor and Common Council. 03/06/2000 Mayor and Common ,ouncil - staff and the consultant team will present an overvi€w of the project, the draft, preferred rt. nmg—araius Keport San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot Rehabilitation Project January 13, 2000 Page 6 adaptive reuse alternative, and Section 106 review, and request that the Mayor and Common Council approve the -- preferred alternative for the project. 03/15/2000 Adaptive Reuse Scheme and Section 106 — consultant team will submit the final documents to Caltrans District 8. Environmental Review staff. Caltrans staff wilrforward the document to the State Office of Historic Preservation and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) for their review. Because the Depot is proposed for rehabilitation pursuant to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards, a "Finding of No Adverse Effect" is anticipated. 04/05/2000 Request for Allocation of Funding — City staff will submit the vt/Z b/Lb0a request and supporting documentation to Caltrans District 8, Local Assistance Office for submittal to the California Transportation Commission (CTC) for the June 2000 agenda. 04/14/2000 Submittal to CTC — Caltrans District 8, Local Assistance Office staff will submit the City's request for Allocation of Funding to the CTC for the ,lune 10' and 15th Agenda. 04/20/2000 Request for Qualifications (RFQ) — City staff will release an RFQ to architectural and/or engineering consultant firms for the bid document that will include final construction plans, specifications and cost estimates (Phase II). City staff will also release an RFQ to environmental and/or construction firms for the I aration of a study that identifies the type and ex' )f hazardous materials located in the building and on the s ;, and outlines a plan for remediation and/or removal o the hazardous material(s). 06/01/2000 Request for Proposal (RFP)-- Based on the RFQ process, City staff will release an RFQ to the top 5 candidate firms for proposals to prepare the bid document that will include final construction plans, specific =tions and cost estimates (Phase 11). Based on the RFQ process, City staff will release an RFP to the top 5 candidate firms ft7i proposals to prepare the hazardous materials study, :~:mediation plan. The selected firm will also perform the rei iediation work. Mr. Norman R. King—Status Report San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot Rehabilitation Project January 13, 2000 Page 7 06/14 & 15/2000 CTC Meeting —The City's Request for Allocation of Funding V!,V/ of the project and supporting documentation are reviewed by pAec,p I the CTC for a second allocation vote. Zl f30 08/21/2000 Agreement for Professional Services — The Mayor and Common Council will award Ule Agreement/Contract to a qualified architectural and/or engineering firm to prepare the bid document that will include final construction plans, specifications and cost estimates (Phase 11). The Mayor and Common Council will award the Agreement/Contract for the hazardous materials study, remediation plan, and performance of the remediation work to a qualified environmental and/or construction firm. 08/22/2000 Commencement of Phase II Prid all work related to the study and remediation of hazardous materials in the building and on the site. Note: Actual construction of the project (Phase III) is anticipated to begin within 6 inonths of Phase IL As you can see, City staff and the consultant team are working diligently to move this project forward and to meet all timeframes required to obligate the ISTEA TEA funding. I hope that the information in this report addresses all of the issues and concerns that the SANBAG Board of Directors might have about the project. Please feel free to contact Lori Sassoon of my staff at (909) 384-b 122, or Deborah Woldruff, Project Manager at (909) 384-5057. SincVerr ell'yy,, red /iIW son City Administrator cc: Judith Valles, Mayor Michael Hays, Director of Development Services RESOLUTION NO. 2 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO APPROVING THE 3 REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE PLAN FOR THE SAN BERNARDINO 4 SANTA FE DEPOT LOCATED AT 1170 WEST 3RD STREET IN THE IH, INDUSTRIAL HEAVY, LAND USE DESIGNATION. 5 BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY 6 OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS: 7 SECTION 1. Recitals 8 9 (a) WHEREAS, the General Plan for the City of San Bernardino, adopted by the 10 Mayor and Common Council by Resolution No. 89-159 on June 2, 1989, contains goals, 11 objectives, and policies relating to the future use of the Santa Fe Depot. 12 (b) WHEREAS, a federal Transportation Enhancement Activities grant and other 13 sources of funding are being utilized for this project, and the use of Federal funds requires 14 15 preparation of documents for compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic 16 Preservation Act (NHPA), as amended. 17 (c) WHEREAS, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), with oversight 18 provided by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), is the lead agency for 19 approval of the environmental document; and, the FHWA and Caltrans have determined that 20 21 the Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse Plan, which proposes to restore, rehabilitate, and 22 adaptively reuse a historic transportation building, qualifies for a Categorical 23 Exemption/Exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the California 24 Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). 25 26 (d) WHEREAS, the City, as the agency responsible for completing the necessary 27 documentation for compliance with Section 106, has forwarded the required documentation to 28 the FHWA, and the State Historic Preservation Officer for approval. 0 3 1 ���� 1 � (e) WHEREAS, a Stakeholders Group Committee was appointed to provide review and 2 input on the Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse Plan for the San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot, 3 4 which is described as the "Preferred Alternative" in Section VI of the San Bernardino Santa Fe i 5 Depot Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse Study, attached as Exhibit A and incorporated herein 6 by reference. A series of stakeholders and public workshops, meetings, and hearings were 7 conducted from October 1999 through February 2000 to inform the public and to receive 8 9 public input and comments on the Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse Plan. 10 (f) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a noticed public hearing on 11 February 8, 2000 in order to receive public testimony and written and oral comments on the 12 Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse Plan for the San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot and fully 13 reviewed and considered the Planning Division staff report and the recommendation of the 14 Stakeholders Group Committee. 15 16 (g) WHEREAS, the Mayor and Common Council held a noticed public hearing on 17 March 6, 2000 and fully reviewed and considered the proposed Rehabilitation and Adaptive 18 Reuse Plan for the Santa Fe Depot and the Planning Commission and Stakeholders Group 19 Committee recommendations and the Planning Division Staff Report. 20 21 (h) WHEREAS, the proposed Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse Plan for the San 22 Bernardino Santa Fe Depot is intemally consistent with the General Plan in that it meets 23 Objective 3.5 and Policy 3.5-1 to "Encourage the preservation, maintenance, enhancement and 24 reuse of existing buildings in redevelopment and commercial areas," and Policy 1.40.11 to 25 "Permit the continuation and expansion of railroad, other transportation, and ancillary uses at 26 27 the Santa Fe Railroad yard site." 28 2 1 SECTION 2. Approval e 2 3 BE IT RESOLVED by the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino 4 that: 5 Because the restoration and reuse of the Santa Fe Depot as a transportation center is 6 key to the redevelopment of the City's west-side and downtown districts, the Santa Fe Depot 7 Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse Plan is hereby approved. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 1 RESOLUTION . . . APPROVING THE REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE 2 REUSE PLAN FOR THE SAN BERNARDINO SANTA FE DEPOT LOCATED AT 1170 3 WEST 3"D STREET IN THE III, INDUSTRIAL HEAVY, LAND USE DESIGNATION. 4 1 I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted by the Mayor and 5 Common Council of the City of San Bernardino at a meeting thereof, 6 held on the day of 2000, by the following vote, to wit: 7 Council Members AYES NAYS ABSTAIN ABSENT 8 ESTRADA 9 10 LIEN 11 MCGINNIS 12 SCHNETZ 13 SUAREZ 14 15 ANDERSON 16 MILLER 17 18 City Clerk 19 20 The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this day of 2000. 21 22 JUDITH VALLES, Mayor City of San Bernardino 23 Approved as to form 24 and legal content: 25 JAMES F. PENMAN jy ryA orney 26 27 . 211 4 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT- PLANNING DIVISION interoffice memo Date: February 28, 2000 To: Mayor and Common ouncil From: Deborah Woldruff, Associate Planner ' Through: Michael E. Hays, Director `1 . Re: Santa Fe Depot Rehabilitation Project - Advance Routing of Selected Exhibits to March 6, 2000 Staff Report cc: James F. Penman, City Attorney; Rachel Clark, City Clerk; Fred Wilson, City Administrator; and, File The San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot Rehabilitation Project is scheduled for the March 6, 2000 Mayor and Common Council Meeting. Because the Santa Fe Depot Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse Study is quite detailed and lengthy, we are forwarding the document to you in advance of the Staff Report. A copy of the Planning Commission Staff Report is also attached to provide background information on the project. Please feel free to contact me at #5057 if you have any questions or concerns about either of the attached documents. ATTACHMENTS Exhibit 2. Planning Commission Staff Report (February 8, 2000) Attachments: A Site Location Map B Status Report to SANBAG C Rehabilitation & Adaptive Reuse Study Exhibit 3. Resolution (Not included) Attachment A San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot, Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse Study EXMBrr nZn SUMMARY CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING DIVISION CASE: San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot Rehabilitation Project AGENDA ITEM: 3 HEARING DATE: February 8, 2000 WARD: I APPLICANT: HISTORIC ARCHITECT: City of San Bernardino Wayne Donaldson Development Services Department Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA. Inc. 300 North"D" Street 530 Sixth Avenue San Bernardino, CA 92418 San Diego, CA 92101 REQUEST/LOCATION: A proposal to rehabilitate,restore, and adaptively reuse the Santa Fe Depot consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's standards for adaptive reuse.The Depot Project has been divided into three phases, as follows: 1) Phase I, Preliminary Planning; 2)Phase II, Final Engineering; and, 3) Phase III, Construction. As part of Phase I, the adaptive reuse analysis of the building has been completed. The 3.0 acre project site is located at 1170 West Street in the IH, Industrial Heavy land use district. CONSTRAINTS/OVERLAYS: Proposed Santa Fe Railroad Historic District ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS: :; Not Applicable o Exempt from CEQA, Section 1533 L Categorical Exemption/Excfusion from NEPA ❑ No Significant Effects ❑ Potential Effects, Mitigation Measures and Mitigation Monitoring/Reporting Plan STAFF RECOMMENDATION: a Approval ❑ Conditions ❑ Denial ❑ Continuance to: t SM B07Wndino Smug Fe Depot ReJC6 MeetiwgDare:Fehnwr a 2000 page 2 REQUEST AND LOCATION Request and Location The City requests approval of a plan to rehabilitate, restore, and adaptively reuse the Santa Fe Depot consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's standards for adaptive reuse. The Depot Project has been divided into three phases, as follows: 1) Phase I, Preliminary Planning; 2) Phase II, Final Engineering; and, 3) Phase III, Construction. As part of Phase I, the adaptive reuse analysis of the building has been completed, culminating in the adaptive reuse plan. The 3.0 acre project site is located at 1170 West Street in the IH, Industrial Heavy General Plan land use designation. (See Attachment A, Site Location Map) BACKGROUND The City of San Bernardino, the Economic Development Agency (EDA), and the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) are the current owners of the San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot, located at 1170 West 3rd Street, San Bernardino (City and County). The site is in the IH, Industrial Heavy General Plan land use designation(see Exhibit A, Site Location Map). The Depot, constructed in 1918, has been identified as an important historic resource of the City (California Point of Historical Interest—CPHI-53; General Plan, Table 17; and, City of San Bernardino Historic Resources Reconnaissance Survey, 1991). In the early 1990's, the Depot was acquired by SANBAG as part of the acquisition of rights-of- way for the Metrolink system. Since that time, SANBAG has successfully secured $3.9 million in Federal transportation funds for the restoration of the Depot, and committed significant funds for a portion of the local match required for those grants. SANBAG has provided the entire local match required for the first Federal Transportation Enhancement Activities (TEA) grant. Additionally, SANBAG in 1993 under the terms of the initial Cooperative Agreement between the Economic Development Agency (EDA) and SANBAG constructed the adjacent Metrolink station. In order to expedite the Depot restoration project, Mayor Valles began discussions with SANBAG to establish the City as the lead agency for the restoration and development of the facility into a multi-modal regional transportation hub. After several months of negotiations, the Mayor and Common Council approved an amended Agreement between SANBAG, EDA, and the City in February 1999. Following approval of the amended agreement, Development Services staff prepared a Request for Qualifications (RFQ) which was released on February 9, 1999. The consultant selection process that culminated in the selection of the consultant team, Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIR, Inc. on April 19, 1999. The City Council approved in concept the Agreement for Professional Services on June 7, 1999. Execution of the Agreement was deferred,pending completion of the Caltrans Pre-Award Audit. San Bernmdino Smna Fe Depot Rebob pra e;Y •y-;;,- 1.. �i} . Meeting Date:February a Ippp"?�` ' P*3 On April 28, 1999, the City requested that Caltrans begin the required Pre-Award Audit evaluation of the selected consultant. The Caltrans Audits and Investigations Division on August 25, 1999 completed the audit. The Pre-Award Audit resulted in revisions to the Agreement that required some negotiation between the City and the consultant team. Once the issues were resolved,the Agreement was executed on September 24, 1999. To initiate,Phase I of the project, the City held a project kickoff meeting on September 9, 1999. Representatives from SANBAG, Caltrans District 8, City and EDA staff and the consultant team attended the meeting. The consultant team presented its approach to the project followed by an open discussion of the project schedule. The meeting resulted in the adjustment of the project schedule to meet the CTC submittal date, and the setting of fixed milestone dates for stakeholders meetings, workshops, and project meetings. During October and November 1999, the City held several workshops to inform the public about the project and, more importantly,to get public input on how the community would like to see the Depot reused. On October 22, 1999, the first workshop was conducted with a group of Stakeholders that were asked by the Mayor to participate. The Stakeholders Group Committee includes representatives of business and organizations such as Metrolink, Onmitrans,Amtrak, Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) Railway Company, the North Mt. Vernon PAC, and others. A complete listing of the Stakeholders Group Committee is contained in Appendix C. A second workshop was held on the same day for the North Mt. Vernon PAC, and a week later on October 29, 1999, the Mayor and Common Council also participated in a workshop. All of the early workshops were held on-site—in the Depot. On November 20, 1999, a large public workshop was also held in the Depot and about 70 people attended. QIn December 1999, SANBAG requested that project status reports be submitted to SANBAG on January 14, 2000 for projects that have TEA funding. Planning staff prepared and submitted the required report by the deadline. The report is very detailed and includes the following information: 1) project background and description; 2) activity to date; 3) issues or problems °ncountered; and. 4) project schedule. Two additional workshops were held on January 14`h and January 26`h with the Stakeholders Group Committee to finalize the final rehabilitation and adaptive reuse plan. The North Mt. Vernon PAC participated in the workshop on January 26h. For further information on the project background and activity to date,please refer to Attachment B, Status Report to SANBAG. SETTING/SITE CHARACTERISTICS In general, the site is in the shape of a triangle with the narrow end oriented in an easterly direction. The two-story, 55,000 square foot Mission Revival decot building cccupies the western half of the site. The Depot presently is used as a rail sta:` :,n for Amtrak passenger service. A Metrolink commuter rail passenger station, managed by the Southern California Regional Rail Authority, is separate but adjacent to the Depot. A. tNmporary crew quarters facility and tracks support the Metrolink station. Meetfng Date.Febrrrmy'°�VIOMV W. Page q Immediately in front of the depot are parking spaces for Amtrak customers, and a bus/van loading and unloading area. A temporary modular building(which houses the crew quarters for Metrolink) is located in front of the depot's west wing. The east side of the site is developed with a little-used parking lot. The north side of the site is developed with a Metrolink and Amtrak platforms, and tracks. There is very little landscaping on the site or around the building. The project site is located in an area developed with industrial and transportation related uses. Commercial retail and service uses and residential uses are located beyond the industrial area. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND FUNDING Due to the amount of work involved, the Depot project will be phased, as follows: Phase I, Preliminary Planning The City is in the midst of completing Phase I which involves the preparation of preliminary plans, structural evaluations, and estimates for the rehabilitation, and adaptive reuse of the San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot for its current use as a passenger rail station, and for future transportation related uses. The final reuse strategy for the building was determined through an adaptive reuse analysis and public workshops process conducted by the City and the Consultant Team. However, due to the size of the building, there is ample room for complementary commercial retail, office and service uses in the Depot. Phase II, Final Engineering The second phase of the project will involve the preparation of the bid document and will include final construction plans, specifications and cost estimates. Phase III, Construction The third phase will involve the actual construction of the rehabilitation project. Project Funding Federal Transportation Enhancement Activities (TEA) grants are being utilized for this project. The use of Federal funds requires the preparation of documents for compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended. The Section 106 compliance process ensures that the restoration and rehabilitation for adaptive reuse will not impair the architectural integrity or historic value of the Depot. The project must move forward quickly so that the first TEA grant can be encumbered by June 2000. There are no extensions available for this funding and the grant will be lost if it is not encumbered by the date specified. San B Santa Fe Depot Meetft Date.Fsb>�my�IOOp�' Page S ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS A preliminary agreement made with Caltrans on behalf of Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has resulted in a determination that this project will qualify for a Categorical Exemption/Exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act(NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA). The specific exemption class trader CEQA is a Class 31 Categorical Exemption for the restoration of historic structures (CEQA Guidelines §15331). The City has been designated as the responsible agency for the environmental review. Toward that end, the Consultant Team is preparing the environmental assessments, including the documentation for compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA). The draft Section 106 compliance documents are currently under review by Caltrans District 8, Cultural Studies Section. When the Caltr ns review is complete the documents will be forwarded to the FHWA and the State Historic Preservation Officer. REHABILITATION & ADAPTIVE REUSE ANALYSIS An in-depth Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse Study was prepared for this project. The study is based on input received in the workshops with the Stakeholders' Group Committee,North Mt. Vernon PAC, Mayor and Common Council, and the public, an economic feasibility and marketing study, case studies of five other depots in southern California, and a survey of Metrolink riders. A number of technical studies and documents have also been prepared for the project, as follows: Area of Potential Effect (APE) Map* Historic Property Report (HPSR)* Historic Architectural Survey Evaluation (HASE)* Finding of Effect(FOE)* California Department of Parks & Recreation (DPR) 523 Form* National Register of Historic Places Nomination Economic Feasibility and Marketing Study Stakeholder Interviews Geo tec hnic al Investigation Aerial Survey and utility Information Study • Indicates the studies and documents prepared for Section 106 compliance. DEVELOPMENT/ENVIRONNI TENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (D/ERCI Staff presented the rehabilitation and adaptive reuse plan to the D/ERC on February 3, 2000. The Committee members were very supportive and look forward to the implementation of the project. The D/ERC is comprised of members from Building Plan Check, Planning, Public Works/Engineering, Water Department, Public Services, Economic Development Agency, Parks, Recreation & Community Services, Fire Department, and Police Department. s'm+Bwiwk0o Smug Fe DepotRe-*' Meeting Date:FebrZ;8:45 ' Page 6 CONC--UION Through the analysis, a rehabilitation and adaptive reuse plan has been developed that provides for a mix of uses to include:multi-modal transportation(tail, commuter rail, bus, shuttle,vans,s; taxis, etc.); government and transportation agency offices; employment offices and service conference and banquet facilities; vocational and continuing education facilities; commercial retail uses; and, museum/archive facility. A copy of the Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse Study is attached. (Refer to Attachment C) RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the Mayor and Common Council the approval of the rehabilitation and adaptive reuse plan for the San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot. Respectfully Submitted, ��.>� � ivfichael E. Hays Director of Development Services e or Woldruif Associate Planner Attachment A Location Map Attachment B Status Report to SANBAG Attachment C Rehabilitation & Adaptive Reuse Study ATTACM"NT CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PLANNING AND BUILDING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AGENDA CASE Santa Fe Depot Rehab LOCATION Fro e H U EAAW(3 DATE j 5TH ST. I 66 I PROJECT SITE Lu �I 5TW < U) �I 215 L Z YI Y p I i_ RI LTO VE. RA"ll /AWSOil w" ATTACHM NVIE c O C I T Y O F �Oi�1.DFD iN `Q`OJ San Bernardino O F F I C E O F T H E C I T Y A 0 N I N 1 3 T R A T 0 R _F R E D I A W I L S O N C I T Y A 0 M I N 1 5 T R A T 0 R January 13, 2000 Mr. Norman R. King, Executive Director San Bernardino Associated Governments 472 North Arrowhead Avenue San Bernardino, California 92401-1421 RE: San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot Rehabilitation Project—Status Report Dear Mr. King: City staff has prepared a status report for the above referenced project, which is partially funded by a $1.3 million ISTEA Transportation Enhancement Activities (TEA) grant. The City assumed the responsibility for the project in February 1999 upon approval of an amendment to the Cooperative Agreement between the City and SANBAG. Since that time, the City has worked diligently to move the project forward so that the ISTEA TEA funding can be obligated by the September 2000 deadline. The project would not be as far along without the cooperation the City has received from SANBAG staff and Caltrans District 8, Local Assistance Office and Environmental Review staff. Project Background and Description The Depot presently is used as a rail station for Amtrak passenger service. A Metrolink commuter rail passenger station, managed by the Southern California Regional Rail Authority, is separate but adjacent to the Depot. A temporary crew quarters facility and tracks support the Metrolink station. The City proposes to rehabilitate, restore, and adaptively reuse the Santa Fe Depot consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's standards for adaptive reuse. Toward that goal, the project has been divided into three phases, as follows: Phase I The City is in the midst of completing Phase I which involves the preparation of preliminary plans, structural evaluations, and estimates for the rehabilitation, and adaptive reuse of the San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot for its current use as a passenger rail station, to future transportation related uses. 0 0 0 N 0 R T N 0 S T R E E T , S A N B E R N A A 0 1 N 0 , C A L I F 9 2 1 1 3 0 0 0 1 f t 0 11 1 1 1 ./ 1 1 1 • PAX (1 0 0) 3 3 4.6 1 3 1 Mr. NOfrt18f1 K King—Status..q.w. San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot Rehabilitation Project ~- January 13, 2000 Page 2 The reuse strategy for the building is being determined through an adaptive reuse analysis and public meeting process conducted by the City and the consultant. Consideration is being given to the building's future use as a public transportation center which could include such elements as a full service Amtrak passenger station, permanent crew facilities for Metrolink, and a bus travel terminal. Phase II The second phase of the project will involve the preparation of the bid document and will include final construction plans, specifications and cost estimates. Phase III The third phase will be the actual construction of the rehabilitation nroject. Activity To Date The following provides an outline of the project activity to date, and highlight the progress we have made towards completion of Phase I, and obtaining a second vote by the CTC in June 2000. Consultant Selection Process. In early February 1999, the City initiated a consultant selection process that culminated in the selection of the consultant team, Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA, Inc. on April 19, 1999. The City Council approved in concept the Agreement for Professional Services on June 7, 1999. Execution of the Agreement was deferred, pending completion of the Caltrans Pre-Award Audit. Caltrans Pre-Award Audit. On April 28, 1911<', f`Ze City requested that Caltrans begin the required Pre-Award Audit evalua'L o;i of the selected consultant. The audit was completed by the Caltrans Audits . nd Investigations Division on August 25, 1999. Execution of Agreement for Professional Services. The Pre-Award Audit resulted in revisions to the Agreement that required some negotiation between the City and the consultant team. Once the issues were resolved, the Agreement was executed on September 24, 1999. Commencement of Project, Phase I. On September 29, 1999, the City held a project kickoff meeting that was attended by representatives from SANBAG, Caltrans District 8, City staff, and the consultant team. The consultant team presented its approach to the project followed by an open discussion of the project schedule. The meeting resulted in the adjustment of the project schedule to meet the CTC submittal date, and the setf:ing of fixed milestone dates for stakeholders meetings, workshops, and projeci meetings. rtepart ?. San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot Rehabilitation Project .. January 13, 2000 Page 3 Section 106. The site survey, topographic map, area of potential effects (APE) map and identification of historic resources within the APE were completed on October 5, 1999. The draft Historic Property Survey Report (HPSR), Historic Architectural Survey Evaluation (HASE) and DPR 523 forms have been completed and were submitted to Caltrans for their review on January 7, 2000. The Finding of Effect document will be completed and submitted to Caltrans pending acceptance of the final design by the City. This will not impact the Section 106 compliance or the determination of the eligibility of the project. National Register Nomination This element of the project is not required as part of the Section 106 review; however, the City views this step as a necessary part of our efforts to rehabilitate and restore this historic structure. To date, the consultant has completed the historical research, site investigation and photography of the structure. The consultant is in the process of preparing the nomination form, which is about 45% complete. City staff anticipates receiving a draft of the nomination for review by January 21, 2000. Submission to the State Historic Preservation Officer will occur by February 1, 2000 to meet the submittal deadline for the April 13, 2000 State Historical Resources Commission meeting. The nomination application will not affect the Section 106 or the Feasibility Study schedule since the historic resource is already considered eligible for listing on the National Register. Selection of Stakeholders Group Committee During preliminary discussions between the City and SANBAG, it was identified that certain businesses and organizations would be directly affected by the project. These businesses and organizations were considered to be project stakeholders. On October 18, 1999, the Mayor invited representatives from the businesses and organizations identified to participate on a Stakeholders Group Committee. Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse Analysis The City and consultant team have conducted several workshops in an effort to inform the public about the project, and receive input from the Stakeholders Group Committee, business groups, and the public. The first Stakeholders Group Committee and Mt. Vernon Project Area Committee workshops were held on October 22, 1999. A workshop with the City Council was held a week later on October 29, 1999. About 70 people attended a large public workshop that was held by the City on November 20, 1999. Since November 16, 1999, the consultant team has conducted a series of meetings and interviews with individual stakeholders. As another component of the adaptive reuse analysis, the City and SANBAG staff conducted a survey of Metrolink passengers on January 6, 2000. About 294 surveys were distributed to the moming commuters to Los Angeles and Orange County. Commuters were asked to complete the one page document, place it in the postage-paid envelope, and return it to the City via the U.S. Postal Service. San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot Rehabilitation Project January 13, 2000 Page 4 The various workshops, meetings, and survey were conducted as part of the Section 106 compliance efforts; however, these public participat!on events have also provided valuable information for the adaptive reuse analysis. The consultant team has nearly completed an economic analysis of similar facilities. On November 18, 1999, the preliminary working papers were submitted for the City and consultant team review and comment. City staff and the consultant team are scheduled to tour the case study stations used in the economic analysis on January 11th through 13th. A geotechnical investigation report was completed and was submitted to the City on December 27, 1999 for review and comment. Comments are due by Thursday, January 20, 2000. The report determines the geological setting for the project, and specifies site soils conditions. The preliminary seismic retrofit analysis, completed on January 7, 2000, identifies how the existing conditions affect the building and determines the building's anticipated lateral capacities. An aerial survey and utility information study, completed on December 27, 1999, was used to develop a more current site plan,and to identify the locations of existing utilities to the building. To date, available plans and historic photographs have been copied and distributed to the consultant team. The civil, structural, mechanical, electrical and geotechnical engineers have completed all necessary field investigations. Selection of Preferred Adaptive Reuse Alternative Preparation of two adaptive reuse alternatives (in the form of schematic plans) is underway and will be presented to the Stakeholders Group on January 14, 2000. The Stakeholde„ Group will select the preferred alternative for further development by the Consultant Team. Schematic cost estimates and final schematic plans with an outline specification will be submitted to the City on January 21, 2000. The final adaptive reuse alternative and schematic plan will be presented to the Stakeholders Group on January 26, 2000. Based on input from the Stakeholders Group Committee, the final adaptive reuse alternative will be forwarded to the City's Development Review Committee, Planning Commission, and Mayor and Common Council. Issues Or Problems Encountered As a result of the required Caltrans Pre-Award Audit, the City lost 4 months of time during which the consultant team could have been working on the project. The Agreement for Professional Services could not be executed until the audit process was completed. The City requested that Caltrans begin the review in late April 1999. According to the Caltrans Local Assistance Office (and Handbook), the process should have been completed within a 60-day timeframe; however, the audit was not completed until 4 months later on August 25, 1999. _ : . ' San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot Rehabilitation project January 13,2000 Page 6 An apparent reason for the delay was that the Caltrans Audits and Investigations Division staff are not familiar with fixed cost (or "lump sum") Agreements for Professional Services. The majority of the agreements and7or contracts they review are for construction projects for which costs are based on time and materials. The criteria used for their review was based in part upon certain federal regulations that pertain to construction contracts that are not applicable to fixed cost agreements. - Project Schedule To California Transportation Commission (CTC) Of necessity, the project schedule is extremely aggressive. The following provides a highlight of key dates that need to be met in order for the City to obligate the ISTEA TEA funding. 01/14/2000 Stakeholders Group Committee Meeting — staff and the consultant team will present 2 draft adaptive reuse alternatives. The committee will select the preferred alternative for further development by the consultant team. 01/21/2000 Draft National Register Nomination — consultant team will submit the document to the City for staff review 01/26/2000 Stakeholders Group Committee Meeting — staff and the consultant team will present the final version of the draft, preferred alternative. The committee will make a recommendation regarding the preferred alternative to the Planning Commission and Mayor and Common Council. 01/27/2000 Development Review Committee — staff will present an overview of the project, the draft, preferred alternative, and the Section 106 review. 02/01/2000 National Register Nomination — consultant team will submit the nomination to the State Historic Preservation Office for an April 13, 2000 State Historical Resources Commission meeting. 02/08/2000 Planning Commission — staff and the consultant team will present an overview of the project, the draft, preferred adaptive reuse alternative, and Section 106 review, and request that the Planning Commission recommend the approval of the preferred alternative to the Mayor and Common Council. 03/06/2000 Mayor and Common Council —staff and the consultant team will present an overview of the project, the draft, preferred o 4"om Santa Fe Depot Rehabilitation projed January 13, 2000 Page 0 adaptive reuse alternative, and Section 106 review, and request that the Mayor and Common Council approve the -- preferred alternative for the project. 03/1512000 Adaptive Reuse Scheme and Section 106 — consultant team will submit the final documents to Caltrans District 8. Environmental Review staff. Caltrans staff will-forward the document to the State Office of Historic Preservation and Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) for their review. Because the Depot is proposed for rehabilitation pursuant to the Secretary of the Interior's Standards, a "Finding of No Adverse Effect" is anticipated. 04/05/2000 Request for Allocation of Funding— City staff will submit the d 111 010o0i request and supporting documentation to Caltrans District 8, Local Assistance Office for submittal to the California Transportation Commission (CTC) for the June 2000 agenda. 04/14/2000 Submittal to CTC — Caltrans District 8, Local Assistance Office staff will submit the City's request for Allocation of Funding to the CTC for the June 14'" and 15'^ Agenda. 04/20/2000 Request for Qualifications (RFQ)— City staff will release an RFQ to architectural and/or engineering consultant firms for the bid document that will include final construction plans, specifications and cost estimates (Phase II). City staff will also release an RFQ to environmental and/or construction firms for the p aration of a study that identifies the type and ext- . of hazardous materials located in the building and on the s. , and outlines a plan for remediation, and/or removal of the hazardous material(s). 06/01/2000 Request for Proposal (RFP) — Based on the RFQ process, City staff will release an R:7'� to the top 5 candidate firms for proposals to prepare the bid docume,a that will include final construction plans, specific::=.tions and cost estimates (Phase 11). Based on the RFQ process, City sti `:=gill release an RFP to the top 5 candidate firms fc. ?roposals to prepare the hazardous materials study, , rnediat'r,:n plan. The selected firm will also perform the net .t!diatic!i !ork. man 8emanftno Santa Fe Depot Rehabilitation Project January 13, 20W Page 7 06/14 & 15/2000 CTC Meeting —The City's Request for Allocation of Funding VCN� of the project and supporting documentation are reviewed by �faClf I the CTC for a second allocation vote. 2�' f3a 08/21/2000 Agreement for Professional Services —The Mayor and Common Council will award the Agreement/Contract to a qualified architectural and/or engineering firm to prepare the bid document that will include final construction plans, specifications and cost estimates (Phase II). The Mayor and Common Council will award the Agreement/Contract for the hazardous materials study, remediation plan, and performance of the remediation work to a qualified environmental and/or construction firm. 08/22/2000 Commencement of Phase II and all work related to the study and remediation of hazardous materials in the building and on the site. Note: Actual construction of the project (Phase III) is anticipated to begin within 6 months of Phase II. As you can see, City staff and the consultant team are working diligently to move this project forward and to meet all timeframes required to obligate the ISTEA TEA funding. I hope that the information in this report addresses all of the issues and concerns that the SANBAG Board of Directors might have about the project. Please feel free to contact Lori Sassoon of my staff at (909) 384-5122, or Deborah Woldruff, Project Manager at (909) 384-5057. Sincerely, Are 4l son City Administrator cc: Judith Valles, Mayor Michael Hays, Director of Development Services CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT- PLANNING DTAISWA PQ ;(1q interoffice memo Date: February 28, 2000 To: Mayor and Common ouncil From: Deborah Woldruff, Associate Planner Through: Michael E. Hays, Director VVVV`1.,�� � Re: Santa Fe Depot Rehabilitation Project - Advance Routing of Selected Exhibits to March 6, 2000 Staff Report cc: James F. Penman, City Attorney; Rachel Clark, City Clerk; Fred Wilson, City Administrator; and, Filt: The San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot Rehabilitation Project is scheduled for the March 6, 2000 Mayor and Common Council Meeting. Because the Santa Fe Depot Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse Study is quite detailed and lengthy, we are forwarding the document to you in advance of the Staff Report. A copy of the Planning Commission Staff Report is also attached to provide background information on the project. Please feel free to contact me at #5057 if you have any questions or concerns about either of the attached documents. ATTACHMENTS Exhibit 2. Planning Commission Staff Report (February 8, 2000) Attachments: A Site Location Map B Status Report to SANBAG C Rehabilitation & Adaptive Reuse Study Exhibit 3. Resolution (Not included) Attachment A San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot, Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse Study rim 4900049 q33 na A/. /e', 3161 # 33 1 1 p . .. W y f 1 y 1 _ 1 R � 3 w"iGY4{stCh fro z � r };ffi 3 w { 1, JIM vn,�ogiapn tonnes or s� rmam nr.m np uusnnrs - _ aT L`1fJ�. a SAN BERNARDINO SANTA FE DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY r Prepared by: Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA Prepared for: The City of San Bernardino March 6, 2000 ft SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Table of Contents Page i ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ® MAYOR Judith Valles CITY COUNCIL ' Esther R. Estrada,First Ward Susan Lien, Second Ward Gordon McGinnis,Third Ward Frank E. Schnetz,Fourth Ward ' "Joe"V.C. Suarez,Jr.,Fifth Ward Betty Dean Anderson, Sixth Ward Norine Miller, Seventh Ward CLIENT TEAM 1 City of San Bernardino,Development Services Department Deborah Woldruff,Associate Planner•T. Jarb Thaipejr, Senior Civil Engineer City of San Bernardino,City Administrator's Office Lori Sassoon,Assistant to the City Administrator City of San Bernardino,Economic Development Agency(EDA) Ronald E. Winkler,Director of Development Department• Sue Morales,Assistant Project Manager San Bernardino Associated Governments(SANBAG) Mike Bair, Director of Transit&Rail Programs •Victoria Baker,Transportation Transit Specialist ' Caltrans David Bricker,Associate Environmental Planner/Architectural Historian Stephen Hammond,Associate Environmental Planner/Heritage Resources Coordinator CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO San Bernardino Mayor's Office ' Theresa Rubi, Chief of Staff•June Durr,Marketing and Public Affairs Director San Bernardino City Attorney ' lames F. Penman t Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Table of Contents Page ii CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO Lee Ann Adams, Planning Commissioner Ken Durr, Planning Commissioner Alfredo Encico,Planning Commissioner Ernest Garcia, Planner Commissioner Evelyn Lockett,Planning Commissioner Carol Thrasher,Planning Commissioner Stan Welch, Planning Commissioner STAKEHOLDERS Omnitrans Rohan Kuruppu• Michelle Campbell•Durand Rall Metrolink Sam Mansour• Roger Mowrey• Ron Mathieu•David Solow Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Robert Brendza National Rail Passenger Corporation (Amtrak) Darrell Johnson • Darrell Johnson• Dominic Spaethling State Historic Preservation Office(SHPO)/San Bernardino County Museum Robin Laska Mount Vernon Project Area Committee(PAC) Sylvia Arias• Ernie Vasquez•Alfredo Encico• Trinidad Padilla• Edgar Ramos Jose Gomez•Esther Mats San Bernardino Convention & Visitors Bureau Steve Henthom California State University San Bernardino Clifford Young•Albert Kamig San Bernardino Valley College Sharon Caballero San Bernardino Historical Society Penny Holcomb-Thelma Press•Nick Cataldo San Bernardino Railroad Historical Society Eugene Wood•Chuck Tobin Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Table of Contents Page iii Pioneer Fire Museum,San Bernardino Allen Bone CONSULTANT TEAM Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA/Preservation Architect Wayne Donaldson,FAIR•Greg Roberson,AIA Eileen Magno• Stuart Sawasaki• David Marshall• Curtis Drake tCarmen Pauli •Joy Guevara• Sylvia Liscum Krakower& Associates/Structural Engineering Michael Krakower Van Bunten Kimper Engineering/Electrical Engineering Paul Ericson Bechard Long& Associates/Mechanical& Plumbing Engineering ' Alan Wilson• Karl Petroff JN Beeler& Associates/Civil Engineering ' Joe Beeler Ivy Landscape Architects,Inc. Woody Dike Ian Davidson Landscape Architect(IDLA) Ian Davidson ' Leverton &Associates LLC/Cost Estimating Ian Leverton Kleinfelder,Inc./Geotechnical& Environmental Engineering Allen Evans• Mariusz Sieradzki Myra Frank&Associates/Section 106&Environmental Consulting Richard Starzak• Gail Miller•Barbara Delvac Economics Research Associates/Marketing David Bergman •Amitabh Barthakur Korve Engineering,Inc./Traffic&Transportation Engineering Dan O'Rourke Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIR•530 Sixth Avenue,San Diego, CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABHITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Table of Contents Page v TABLE OF CONTENTS IN Section P,^ee .. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i TABLEOF CONTENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1 A. Background B. Opportunities and Constraints C. Understanding the Site ' D. Stakeholders' Meetings E. Market and Demographic Study F. Case Studies G. Development of a Preferred Alternative Scheme H. Costs and Funding Responsibilities I. Conclusion I II. BACKGROUND . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1 A. Project Description t B. Purpose of this Study C. Project Location D. Study Organization III. EXISTING CONDITIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1 A. Depot Description B. Land Use and Planning Context ' C. Adaptive Reuse Opportunities and Constraints IV. CASE STUDIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1 ' A. Glendale Transportation Center B. Claremont Santa Fe Depot C. Chatsworth Transit Center and Child Care Center ' D. Fullerton Santa Fe Depot E. Santa Ana Transportation Center F. Conclusions and Observations V. ADAPTIVE USES AND ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-1 A. Overview B. Terminology and Definitions C. List of Stakeholders D. Evaluation of Potential Uses ' E. Organizing Uses within the Depot F. Description of Schemes 1 and 2 G. Development of Site Plans 1 Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA•530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Table of Contents Page vi Section Page VI. APPROPRIATE USE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-1 A. Description of Preferred Alternative B. Project Phasing C. Cost Projection Summary VII. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7-1 VIII. BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-1 APPENDICES Appendix A Workshop Notes Appendix B Metrolink Survey Appendix C Code Research Study Appendix D Cost Estimates Appendix E Outline Specifications Appendix F ERA Report Appendix G Seismic Analysis Appendix H Geotechnical Report Appendix I HVAC Life Cycle Cost Analysis Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION ANDADAPTrvE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Table of Contents Page vii LIST OF FIGURES Section PM II. BACKGROUND 2AAerial View . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . ... . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-5 ' 2B Location Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-7 2C Area of Potential Effects Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-9 2D Study Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-11 III. EXISTING CONDITIONS 3A Historical Photographs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-3 3B Current Photographs . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-7 3CSite Context . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-13 3D Councilmanic Wards . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-15 ' 3E Surrounding Projects . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . 3-19 3F Site Location . . . . 3-31 3G Population Distribution . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-39 3H Population Aged 25-44 Years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-41 3I Population Aged 25-44 Years as a Percent of Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 3-43 3JIncome Distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-45 3K Employees Per Business Establishment . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 347 3L Selected Retail Type Locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . 3-49 3M Selected Service Type Locations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-51 ' IV. CASE STUDIES 4A Case Studies Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 4-3 ' 4B Glendale Southern Pacific Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-7 4C Claremont Santa Fe Depot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . 4-13 4D Chatsworth Transit Center and Child Care Center . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-19 4E Fullerton Santa Fe Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-25 r 4F Santa Ana Regional Transportation Center . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 4-31 4G Santa Ana Regional Transportation Center . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . 4-33 ' V. ADAPTIVE USES AND ANALYSIS 5A Public Workshops and Tours . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-3 5BScheme 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-17 t 5C Scheme 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 5-21 SD Site Plan 1 . . 5-25 5E Site Plan 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-27 ' VI. APPROPRIATE USE 6A Preferred Alternative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-1 6B Preferred Alternative . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-3 6C Transportation Museum and Public Lobby . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-9 6D West End Services and Farmer's Market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-I1 6E Appropriate Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-15 6F Project Phasing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-17 Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIR•530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Table of Contents Page viii LIST OF TABLES Section Page III. EXISTING CONDITIONS 3A Population and Household Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-33 3B Income Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-34 3C Employment Growth: Riverside San Bernardino PMSA vs.City of San Bernardino. 3-35 3D Non-Farm Employment Trends by Major Occupational Groups in Riverside-San Bernardino PMSA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-36 3E Employment Projections: Riverside-San Bernardino PMSA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-37 3F Taxable Sales in the City of San Bernardino(Current Dollars) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-38 IV. CASE STUDIES 4A Glendale Southern Pacific Station . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-6 4BClaremont Santa Fe Depot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-11 ' 4C Chatsworth Transit Center and Child Care Center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-18 4D Fullerton Santa Fe Depot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-24 4E Santa Ana Transportation Center . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-30 V. ADAPTIVE USES AND ANALYSIS SA Scheme 1: Square Footages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . 5-15 5B Scheme 2: Square Footages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-20 VI. APPROPRIATE USE 6A Preferred Alternative Square Footages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-13 6B Construction Cost Estimate Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . .. 6-22 6C Construction Cost Estimate: Stabilization . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-23 6D Construction Cost Estimate: Station Rehabilitation . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-25 Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIR• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILlTATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Table of Contents Page ix LIST OF ACRONYMS ACHP Advisory Council on Historic Preservation ADA Americans with Disabilities Act ' APE Area of Potential Effect BID Business Improvement District BNSF Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Caltrans California Department of Transportation A CCR California Code of Regulations or California Building Standards Code CEQA California Environmental Quality Act CG-2 Commercial General-Baseline/Mt.Vernon District CG-4 Commercial General-Theme Center(s)District CH Commercial Heavy District City City of San Bernardino DOT United States Department of Transportation EDD California Employment Development Department ERA Economic Research Associates FAIA Fellow,American Institute of Architects FHWA Federal Highway Administration ' FRPA Fullerton Railway Plaza Association HVAC Heating,Ventilating, and Air Conditioning ` IH Industrial Heavy District ISTEA Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act Of 1991 LACTC Los Angeles County Transportation Commission LADOT Los Angeles Department of Transportation LAMTA Los Angeles Metropolitan Transit Authority MTA Metropolitan Transit Authority Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Table of Contents Page x NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NHPA National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 OCTA Orange County Transit Authority PAC Project Area Committee PMSA Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area SANBAG San Bernardino Associated Governments SF Square Foot SHBC State Historical Building Code SHPO State Historic Preservation Officer STP Surface Transporation Program TCI California State Transportation Capital Improvement Grant TMA Transportation Management Agency USC United States Code WORK Santa Ana Work, Opportunity,Resources, Knowledge Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIR• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 1 ,r 1 SECTION 1 Executive Summary 1 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STODY March 6,2000 Section I-Executive Summary Page 1-1 I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A. BACKGROUND The present San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot site is located on land donated to the Atchison,Topeka and the Santa Fe by the City of San Bernardino in 1886. San Bernardino was chosen by Santa Fe as the site for its massive Pacific Coast Locomotive Works which was also designated as a division point for the railroad. This depot was a two-story wooden building that succumbed to fire in 1916. For its replacement,Depot constructed in 1918,the City Fathers asked the railroad to design and build a new depot that would befit the city image as the"Gateway to Southern California." Constructed as the headquarters of Santa Fe's transcontinental line on the West Coast,the Mission Revival style San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot housed the railroad's general offices and remained in use until 1989 when it was vacated by Santa Fe. In 1992,the San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG)purchased the Depot and a track from the Santa Fe Railway to make way for Metrolink commuter trains. Today, the Depot's Lobby and Baggage Room are used as a rail station for Amtrak passenger service. The remaining part of the Depot remains unoccupied. In September, 1999,the City of San Bernardino, acting as an agent for SANBAG,contracted with a consultant team led by Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA to prepare a rehabilitation and adaptive reuse study for the San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot. The study focuses at developing a schematic reuse strategy to meeting the City's goals for rehabilitating, seismically retrofitting and adaptively reusing the Depot,and will serve as a guide for building and site renovation and identifying a potential tenant mix.The plan provides for phased development over a fifteen to twenty year period.The initial rehabilitation cost is estimated to be approximately$11.2 million dollars. B. OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS The 1918 Depot and site present a wonderful opportunity to re-utilize one of the most significant Santa Fe stations in California. Second in size only to Los Angeles' Union Station,the Depot has a long standing image within San Bernardino. Built in the Santa Fe tradition,the reinforced concrete structure was designed to accommodate moderate to heavy floor loads,and has shown its resistance to seismic activity. Since the 1921 remodel and addition to the Harvey House dining and dormitory facilities on the east end,few alterations have been made over the life of the building, and much of the historic materials and features remain today. The Depot presently is a California Point of Historical Interest,number SBR- 053,and is also listed on the California Historical Resources Information System.Nomination to the National Register of Historic Places is currently being sought by the City of San Bernardino. Because the federal Transportation Equity Act for the 21"Century(TEA-21)grant will be utilized on this project,this cultural resource study is subject to the procedures and review of the State of California Department of Transportation(Caltrans)and the Federal Highway Administration(FHWA).The Section 106 study provides information necessary to satisfy legal requirements for environmental documents under the National Environmental Policy Act(NEPA),for consultation with the State Historic Preservation Officer(SHPO)and complying with the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA). All work will follow the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation.Additionally, appropriate Preservation Briefs,the State Historical Building Code,and Title 24 accessibility standards will guide the work.By using Federal TEA-21 funds,potential uses will need to be transit related. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIR• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT ' REHAEIIATATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 ' Section I-Executive Summary Page 1-2 C. UNDERSTANDING THE SITE An Area of Potential Effects(APE)was established by the Caltrans District 8 Environmental Planning Division during a field investigation of the site on October 5, 1999. The APE defines the areas in and surrounding the Depot that are subject to development within the scope of this project. The APE for the proposed project has been delineated to include the property on which the Depot is sited and is bounded by the centerline of Third Street to the south,a line between the west end of the Depot and the Metrolink platforms,a line measuring 25 feet south from the Amtrak line(third line),and a line to the east connecting the northern boundary to Third Street. An aerial and ground survey of the site was made to establish existing conditions and help locate site improvements and utilities,as well as identify grade differentials that will need to be addressed in making the site fully accessible to persons with disabilities.Existing landscaping was examined for " variety,historic location,present health and potential use within the rehabilitation. -. The Depot building and systems were examined for current condition, and potential for reuse. Character defining features on the building exterior and primary spaces were noted.The existing structural system was studied from record drawings,previous structural reports and field investigation. Preliminary computations were then made to identify demands and capacities of major structural elements for potential reuse occupancies and seismic effects. The Depot's foundation system was also investigated in a similar manner. Geotechnical testing was conducted to explore and evaluate the subsurface soil conditions and provide design-level geotechnical recommendations for the project. The study also addressed the anticipated seismic shaking at the site,groundwater levels and earthwork considerations. Existing plumbing,mechanical and electrical systems were examined and determined to be insufficient to a address the needs for contemporary use. Potential locations for utility service entrys,and routing of new distribution systems were identified and later incorporated into the preferred development alternative. ■ A detailed code investigation was conducted to identify applicable building codes,reviewing agencies, potential occupancy classifications,fire resistive requirements, required means of egress and accessability requirements. The Depot building was found to be constructed in a manner that is conducive to the adaptive reuse options that are being recommended. Structurally the building is solid,with substantial primary foundations, and sufficient components to support floor loading and to provide reasonable lateral ' resistance. Strengthening can be accomplished in a manner that will have no visual impact on historic materials and features within the primary spaces.Plumbing,mechanical and electrical systems can generally be distributed in existing attic and basement spaces. The Depot site,however,is relatively small for the building and will present challenges for circulation and vehicle parking. D. STAKEHOLDERS' MEETINGS A group of Stakeholders' was identified to provide valuable insight to potential uses for the Depot.The Stakeholders Group was comprised of City and SANBAG representatives,potential users, local agencies and businesses,historical societies,transportation service providers,area colleges and universities and local residents.The City and consultant team have conducted a series of workshops, interviews and public meetings with this group which also helped inform the public about the project. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIR• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section I-Executive Summary Page 1-3 The first Stakeholders' Meeting and Mt.Vernon Project Area Committee(PAC)workshops were held on October 22, 1999. The project's purpose, schedule,area and potential scope was outlined and discussed. On October 29, 1999 a similar workshop was conducted with the City's Mayor and Common Council. Interviews with several of the individual Stakeholder representatives were conducted during the week of November 15, 1999. The City of San Bernardino, SANBAG,and the consultant team held a joint Stakeholders' and Public workshop on November 20, 1999,to discuss the proposed project and encourage public involvement during the early phases of the project development. The Depot's historical setting, opportunity and constraints were presented,and a tour was given of the Depot.After the tour,a brainstorming workshop was conducted and potential uses for the Depot were identified and presented by the participants. The workshop was attended by approximately seventy people, all of whom were also asked to fill out a survey form. The survey included questions about the perceived significance of the Depot to the community and gave the participants a further opportunity to submit their opinions on the types of uses they would like to see at the Depot. Information gathered from the Stakeholders' and Public Workshops and surveys was evaluated along with demographic,market and case study information to develop two alternative use schemes. The two alternative schemes were presented and discussed with the Stakeholders' on January 14, 2000, and a Preferred Alternative was selected. The Preferred Alternative was further developed and then presented back to the Stakeholders' Group on January 26,2000. The group,as a whole,felt that the Preferred Alternative represented the best potential uses for the Depot. The Stakeholders' input and acceptance of the process has been critical through all phases for the development of the Preferred Alternative. E. MARKET AND DEMOGRAPHIC STUDY An analysis of population, income,employment and economic characteristics in the potential market areas that surround the Depot was conducted. The demographic analysis examined critical variables that illustrate the type of consumer base that is present in the market areas and could be potential users of the Depot.Multiple market segments including transit users,area residents and area employees were examined. The primary market area, lying within a five minute drive time of the Depot, is signified by a high concentration of low to very low income households,relatively high numbers of Hispanic and African American population and a large number of young people within the 18-24 years age group.Both population and growth in this area has occurred at a relatively slower rate compared to the region as a whole. Conditions improve comparatively in the secondary and tertiary market areas. Though there are a few large employers located within the primary market area(in the downtown area),most of these are not within walking distance of the Depot. Creating uses in the Depot that are aimed at job placement and training,or help create transportation links to the surrounding region would most closely respond to the primary market as identified. With discretionary incomes low or non-existent and a relatively low number of transit created traffic,retail and destination restaurant uses do not appear to be a good match for the initial tenant mix. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIR• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND-ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 ° Section I-Executive Summary Page 14 F. CASE STUDIES Case studies of other similar transit facilities in Southern California were conducted and provided a valuable insight into the successes and failures of developing economically and socially strong and lasting facilities. Five transit stations were selected,three historic stations and two new developments. Site visits were made with key people familiar with the development and current operators of the similar ,. transit facilities.Information was gathered on the development process,current use mix and location context for each depot. Lessons learned from these transit facilities helped in the evaluation of the proposed uses for the San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot gathered during the Stakeholders' Workshops. ° The importance of making careful initial decisions on the tenant mix were highlighted by the failure of some of the cast studies to successfully attract or retain retail and restaurant uses initially developed for serving the commuters.With Metrolink parking and platforms generally located such that busy commuters do not need to enter the other transit facilities,tenants that relied on capturing significant numbers of those users found little support. The level of improvements to lease spaces during the initial rehabilitation project was also a factor in attracting potential tenants.Each of the depot rehabilitation projects have shown the need for a long term commitment by the cities to allow the projects to evolve. Selecting tenants that create user traffic, even if subsidized rents are needed initially,was important in generating the activity and vibrance to attract other tenants capable of paying market rate rents. However, sufficient income from rents, from the projects onset was necessary for the ongoing operational costs of the other transit facilities. Maintaining an onsite presence for security and maintenance needs is valuable for retaining the tenants and creating a sense of security that will attract further public use. Creating a tenant mix of complementary uses was found to be a valuable component of a successful project. Special events,such as jazz concerts and political fund raisers were also helpful to extend recognition of the facility and to generate additional income. ' The Glendale,Chatsworth and Claremont depots underline some of the challenges faced by these facilities.The Fullerton Depot exhibits the necessity to integrate into the surrounding land uses not only ' by means of physical and visual linkages,but more importantly,by complimentary uses serving both the transit users and the local community. The Santa Ana Transportation Center was found to be the best model. It is a comparable size facility, it is located in a demographic neighborhood not dissimilar to San Bemardino's,and is isolated from downtown Santa Ana. The Santa Ana transportation center is also,by far,the most successful depot within the study in terms of activity and rent generation for the City and provides us with valuable clues to a favorable development approach, ideal tenant mix and effective operation methods. Located in a industrial area with considerable amounts of surrounding vacant land,the Santa Ana depot is the facility that is most comparable to San Bernardino. Small historic housing stock with low and moderate income households are located about one quarter mile away.The Depot is also located about one half mile or more from the downtown area. The Santa Ana depot shows activity on many levels that respond directly to it's primary market area such as, local and regional transportation links including routes to Mexico,job assistance,testing and training, meeting and event spaces.Retail spaces are appropriately scaled to the other activities and make up a rather small percentage of the overall space utilization. From the onset,the project has sought uses that would bring in a large volume of people and by placing high activity uses on the ground floor created a sense of vibrance.The space initially conceived for a restaurant found a larger user response as a Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Section I-Executive Summary Page 1-5 privately operated banquet space that focused its attention to the primary market. Active on-site property management has provided for quick response to security,maintenance and tenant needs. G. DEVELOPMENT OF A PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE SCHEME The Preferred Alternative was formulated after Schemes 1 and 2 were presented and discussed with the Stakeholders.' Final program uses were established with an emphasis on the long-term economic viability of the Depot. The Preferred Alternative scheme,which includes Transit Offices,Public and Government Offices, Vocational Education,Transit Services, Transportation Museum, Banquet Facilities and a Farmer's Market responds to information gathered from market and demographic studies of similar facilities. The Depot's rehabilitation would incorporate new code-complying features like elevators,additional r means of egress,wheelchair lifts, fire sprinklers and fire alarms and accommodations for persons with disabilities all designed to reduce the impact to historic fabric.There would also be a new heating, ventilating and air conditioning(HVAC) system provided for the public spaces that could be expanded to serve the individual tenants. Dedicated, unoccupied space that could eventually become expansions to the Banquet area, Transportation Museum or the Farmer's Market are also included in the Preferred Alternative scheme. H. COSTS AND FUNDING RESPONSIBILITIES In 2002 dollars,capital construction is estimated to cost between $11 and$12 million. This sum is comprised of three major components; stabilization,station restoration,and tenant improvement allowances. During stabilization,the interior of the structure is cleaned,portions of the lead-based paint is abated,plant overgrowth is removed, roof and window repairs are made to protect interior finishes and minor improvements of painting and lighting are done, leaving an unfinished but clean environment. ' Station restoration is the bulk of the work which includes exterior, historic interiors and site improvements with new utilities.Amtrak and Metrolink facilities would be restored,but the remainder of the spaces would remain unfinished with mechanical,plumbing and electrical systems stubbed into each area. Included will be seismic augmentation and access enhancements for persons with disabilities utilizing elevators. At the end of restoration the entire Depot and grounds will appear well-preserved, will represent the period of historical significance and will comply with The Secretary oflnterior's Standardsfor Rehabilitation of Historic Structures.Finally,approximate tenant improvement allowances f are included that would provide incentives for potential tenants by helping offset initial improvement costs. I. CONCLUSION The San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot is a landmark structure with a rich history and significant potential. The Depot,although currently undernsed and in disrepair, retains a much of its original historic appearance and is one of the finest examples of Mission-style architecture in the region. Investigation of the existing Depot facility and the study of similar transportation buildings in the area served as valuable case studies and proved that the rehabilitation and adaptive reuse of the Depot is feasible.A great deal of input was received though a series of community and stakeholders' workshops and presentations which helped to define the Preferred Alternative scheme.Federal Transportation Equity Act for the 21'Century(TEA-21)grants can be utilized for the San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIR• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Section I-Executive Summary Page 1-6 because the Preferred Alternative scheme incorporates the required surface transportation uses. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation will be followed for restoration work on the Depot as is compatible with the new proposed uses. The recommendations outlined in this Study aim to restore the San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot to its rightful place as a focus of pride for the citizens of San Bernardino. The rehabilitated Depot can serve as a model for integrating 21"Century needs into a valuable historic resource and can become the catalyst for economic revitalization. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Section D-Background Page 2-1 II. BACKGROUND .. A. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Federal Highway Administration allocated a Transportation Enhancement Activities grant to the City of San Bernardino for the development of a Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse Study and plans for the architectural rehabilitation of the San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot(Depot). The Depot is located at the center of the City of San Bernardino, in the County of San Bernardino at 1170 West 3'd Street. The San Bernardino City Council(City) and the San Bernardino Associated Governments(SANBAG) endorsed the rehabilitation and adaptive reuse analysis of the Depot for its current use as a passenger rail station and future transportation related uses. The Depot presently is used as a rail station for Amtrak passenger service. Only one cultural resource,the historic Depot, has been recorded within the designated Area of Potential Effect. The Area of Potential Effect has been determined by Caltrans District 8 and defines the boundaries of the area within which the proposed project might either directly or indirectly affect the historic Depot. A National Register of Historic Places application is part of the project and will be submitted to the State Historic Preservation Officer. The Depot appears to be eligible for inclusion on the National Register under Criterion A. The Depot served as Santa Fe's Los Angeles Division headquarters, and therefore has an important association with the history and development of the Santa Fe Railway,now merged with Burlington Northern Santa Fe. It is also significant under Criterion C, as an excellent example of the Mission Revival style of architecture. The Depot is listed in the California Historical Resources Information System maintained by the State Office of Historic Preservation, and is also a California Point of Historical Interest,Number SBR-053. B. PURPOSE OF THIS STUDY The purpose of the Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse Study(Study)is to determine the best approach for adaptively reusing the Depot as an multimodal surface transportation facility and to develop an opinion of probable costs.This Study examines potential uses,code, life safety, accessibility, technical and economic issues that will need to be resolved for the successful rehabilitation of the Depot.A future Master Plan will outline the requirements to enhance the Depot as a community focal point and economic stimulus for cultural and economic growth.An estimate of probable costs has been completed based on the preliminary program requirements and anticipated user needs. Several field surveys have been conducted to assess the existing condition of the Depot and a series of design options have been investigated.Historical documentation, such as original drawings, historic newspaper articles, historic nominations and historic photographs have been examined. A detailed code study has analyzed issues of life-safety,access for persons with disabilities and options available through the use of The State Historical Building Code(SHI3Q. To solicit input from members of the community and interested organizations,a continuing program of Public and Stakeholders' Workshops have been conducted at the Depot.These workshops allow interested parties, such as concerned citizens,business owners,and potential users to contribute ideas for the new uses within the restored Depot. The two preliminary schemes described in this Study incorporate suggestions made in the workshops. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section H-Background Page 2-2 The preliminary conclusions and recommendations outlined in this Study are intended to be a starting point for the Depot rehabilitation project. The next step in the process will be to further develop the concepts presented here by conducting more thorough investigations of the building, additional Stakeholder's Workshops as well as meeting with building code officials to discuss solutions to code- related issues. A future phase can outline the process and criteria to search for and select potential developers for the Depot. This alternate approach may provide other opportunities for adaptively reusing the Depot. C. PROJECT LOCATION The San Bernardino Depot is located on 3rd Street in the central portion of the City of San Bernardino, California. The Depot is generally bounded by rail lines to the north, 3r° Street to the south,Metrolink platforms and the Mt.Vernon Bridge to the west and K Street to the east. The Area of Potential Effects(APE),which is the basis of the Study contains the Depot as the only major resource and its ancillary features. The ancillary features include two sets of railroad tracks to the north of the Depot identifiable by their original brick passenger loading platforms now covered with asphalt, mature landscape elements at the eastern end of the property, street furniture, and a pedestrian tunnel that runs under the track from north to south. D. STUDY ORGANIZATION This document has been organized to reflect the process by which the adaptive reuse alternatives for the historic Depot were conceived, screened,refined,and evaluated. An illustration showing the general process used to develop and evaluate alternatives is shown. The process was initiated by determining the APE and examining the existing condition of the Depot to provide the planning,regulatory,economic and operational context for this study. The Depot was evaluated from the perspective of the APE and the potential for the structure to physically accommodate reuses. After examination of the existing conditions,four broad evaluation goals were developed to screen adaptive reuse alternatives. These goals include: • maintaining historic integrity, • consistency with major public policies, • market and economic viability, • compatibility with rail operations(TEA-21 funding obligation). Within these goals, specific criteria were developed,including,but not limited to the Depot's integrity, reuse potential,market demand, and economic impact. The development of potential alternatives for adaptive reuse of the historic properties involved several steps,including an evaluation of current tenant use,market and demographic analysis,conducting several Stakeholders' meetings,examination of similar transit facilities as case studies, and the consideration of other alternatives from a market context. The reuse schemes that warranted further study from this initial screening were then comparatively evaluated against each other. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA • 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT 1 REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Section D-Background Page 2-3 IThis process yielded the appropriate use scheme that received further evaluation and consideration. As part of this evaluation,a detailed building and economic program was developed for the preferred scheme in order to test the conceptual viability of the adaptive use. The Summary and Recommendations portion of this study summarizes the key conclusions regarding ' feasibility of the adaptive reuse schemes and recommends the adoption and implementation of the preferred alternative. 1 1 1 1 Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIR • 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 1 L Y J � 1 r W w n i w sw N _ za � t ' w I z OC n W Q i m = w 4 Z � v z 1 w J Z S C M_ L a - - SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Section II-Background Page 2-7 Figure 2B LOCATION MAP 5TH ST. 66 PROJECT SITE T 1 J W Q 2ND STY a 215 O Y -' RI LTO AVE. ' S SAN BERNARDINO SANTA FE DEPOT REHABILITATION & ADAPTIVE REUSE dA N N � 133815 71 V � �� L V \� u •� e W I w I a L6 W u - I � II - II � w cu 4 LU ce zl IH Il¶ IPI i w. a L ? I Z. SAN 1 I • DEPOT tlt Section I • u r e 2 1 1 Y P R • APE Determined Existing Conditions Develop Evaluation Criteria Develop ��^ City of San Opportunities and lliRw Develop Two Alternatives for Adaptive Reuse F\:Jua�e:Wcnuiticc� Prclirmd V�crna�i�c Aduptod 10-5c SAN 1 • SANTA FIE DEPOT REHABILITATION & ADAPTIVE REUSE e m SECTION III Existing Conditions ^ SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT _ REHABIMTATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section III-Existing Conditions Page 3-1 r M. EXISTING CONDITIONS rr Developing and assessing the range of a potentially feasible adaptive reuse program for the historic San ^ Bernardino Depot requires full consideration of the uniqueness of the building,regulatory,economic,and r operational conditions which surround the historic site. Further, an understanding of the current condition of the historic Depot is necessary to assess whether the Depot can now accommodate or be ^ modified to accommodate uses which are compatible with the rail operations and the surrounding r community. A survey of the Depot's existing conditions and its surrounding context plays a critical role in making responsible decisions about treating and interpreting the San Bernardino Depot. The survey lays the foundation for the rehabilitation and adaptive reuse of the Depot by protecting and preserving the ' materials and features that convey the significant history of the Depot. It also provides a clear contextual understanding of the Depot's location in order to develop and determine viable uses. A. DEPOT DESCRIPTION 1. Historical Context The present depot site is located on land donated to the Atchison,Topeka and the Santa Fe by the City of San Bernardino in 1886. It is located approximately two blocks from the first depot in San Bernardino; a converted boxcar used by the California Southern Railroad,which extended its lines from San Diego to San Bernardino in 1883. In 1886, San Bernardino was chosen by Santa Fe as the site for its massive Pacific Coast Locomotive Works and was also designated as a division point for the railroad. The depot was thus designed to serve not only rail passengers,but also to house the divisional administration and freight offices. This depot was a two-story wooden building that also contained a Harvey House Restaurant. During the night and morning of November 16 and 17, 1916 this massive wooden depot was completed destroyed by fire. In its replacement,the City Fathers asked the railroad to design and build a new depot that would befit the city image as the"Gateway to Southern California." tr It is the finest structure of its kind on the entire Santa Fe Coast Lines ' and a credit to San Bernardino, and is significant of the importance of the Gate City as a Transportation Center. ' The Atchison,Topeka and Santa Fe Passenger Railway Depot was opened to the public on July 15, 1918, after approximately one-and-a-half years of construction at a cost of over$800,000. The resulting structure,designed by W.A.Mohr,a Los Angeles architect employed by the Santa Fe for this project, ' was Mission Revival style architecture with Moorish influence created by the four massive domes to the four towers on the main structure. When the Depot was completed in 1918, it was second only in size in all of California to Southern Pacific's Los Angeles Depot. Built in the heyday of railroad travel, an era ' when railroads designed depots as"cathedrals to themselves,"this depot was unique in its design throughout the Santa Fe System. Other depots elsewhere along the Santa Fe were mostly Carpenter Gothic in style. 1 ' Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 1 ` I a � r W w C c w t - W C �?".` W w Q O 1 Q r � r G Z Q n y < ' -OP J s ! I Z Ci 10 ,w Q IM LL U W m < ce 0 m Q N - w Z a � o N o � v: m v. C O - Q > - 0. - G 0 a < _ m = USA: ' SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABHRIATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section M-Existing Conditions Page 3-5 Constructed as the headquarters of the Santa Fe's transcontinental line on the West Coast,the Depot housed the railroad's general offices. The selling of tickets,receiving of goods and baggage were located on the first floor,while on the second floor were the offices of the superintendent and other officers of the Santa Fe's West Coast operations. The Depot also contained a Harvey House dining facility,which quickly became a community gathering point for Sunday dinner in its east wing. The development of the City of San Bernardino since the late nineteenth century has been associated with the development of the Atchison,Topeka,and the Santa Fe Railway. In 1886,the railway linking San Bernardino to the east via the Cajon Pass was completed. This line greatly increased the City's importance as a transportation center,shipping thousands of carloads of oranges to the east from all parts of the Inland Empire as well as passenger traffic from all of Southern California. ' Since San Bernardino was the first city seen by tourists and immigrants alike as they entered southern California from points east,the depot was designed to impress upon the traveler the importance of California to the growing nation. As the Santa Fe grew in importance,so did its importance to the City. w In the early 1900s, over 60%of the workers in the City gained their livelihood from the railroad. ' By 1989,the Santa Fe moved their offices out of the Depot. In 1992,the San Bernardino Associated Governments(SANBAG)purchased the Depot and a track from the Santa Fe Railway to make way for Metrolink commuter trains. Today,the Depot's Lobby and Baggage Room are used as a rail station for Amtrak passenger service. The remaining part of the Depot remains unoccupied. 2. Architectural Description a. Exterior The San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot is a three-story,concrete structure surfaced with cement stucco. The Depot measures three hundred and eighty feet long and one hundred feet wide. Rectangular in shape,the Mission Revival style building was constructed in 1918 to replace the original 1886 Carpenter-Gothic •+ wood depot which was destroyed in the 1916 fire. The building served as a combination passenger station and administrative headquarters of the Santa Fe Railroad on the West Coast. The building,which has undergone minimal alterations over the years,was well maintained while occupied. In 1989,with the departing of the Santa Fe,the building has since suffered from neglected maintenance and has fallen into disrepair. The building does,however,retain a high degree of architectural integrity in terms of location,design,materials and workmanship. The Depot's historical ambiance and association remains,as the building is sited in its original location, adjacent to the Santa Fe railway. The property is bounded by the tracks of the Santa Fe Railroad on the north and V Street on the south. The Metrolink Station's northern platform constructed in 1993 and the southern platforms and storage tracks constructed in 1995,are located directly to the west of the Depot. ' The railway site,which still serves as a center for the shipment of freight,has been covered by the criss- cross of tracks, a freight shop,repair shops, a round house and a smoke stack. The shops and roundhouse have recently been demolished. The tall,stately Depot can be seen for miles and its presence on the west site of the City of San Bernardino conveys a constant visual reminder of the influential history of the Santa Fe Railroad. 1 Typical of the Mission Revival style is the Depot's scalloped parapets,red tile roofing,deep overhanging eaves, square piers,and long arcades.The wall surfaces are a heavy textured dashed-concrete finish. ' Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 N � U r n I r CL W Q W 66 W M O t Z Q Z z � Q w � ~ W } 0 F S y♦ le , q cV s� 0 Q W� o W W m c a . exe77 � mC. r� SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section III-Existing Conditions Page 3-9 Direct representation of the architectural forms found at the Depot are derived from California mission facades and bell towers. As originally sited,the Depot's north facade opens to the platform area which provides access to trains located on the adjacent railroad tracks. The north facade features a vine-covered 300-foot-long arcade which extends past the Depot's two-story, asymmetrical wings. Only remnants of r the words, "San Bernardino,"which identified the Depot's location to incoming passengers,can be seen beyond the vines. Other elements are the four domed towers above the main three-story structure. Pale green double-hung wood framed windows,some with arched-topped transoms,are characteristic r throughout. Santa Fe logos are found on roof supports on the south facade and on false balcony tailings. A steel marquee is located just above the main entryway on the south facade. ., There are few architectural changes to the Depot within the recommended period of significance of 1918-1989. The 1921 Harvey House expansion,comprising a two-story office area addition and remodel of the original restaurant and kitchen,and east arcade are indications of early alterations to the Depot. Other changes include the early 1920s addition of the two small entry wind locks to the north entrances of the waiting area and Harvey House. The greatest impact to the Depot's original historic fabric, *� however, are the 1960s infill of most of the windows on the south and west facades at the office area on the second floor. b. Interior A large portion of the original fabric remains in the interior including ceramic tiles in shades of brown, tan and gray which have been used in the wainscoting of the three waiting rooms(general, ladies' lounge and men's smoking room); light fixtures;wooden benches with high-gloss finish; and an original scale located in the baggage room,doors,transoms,windows,wall and ceiling finishes. A newer 8"x8" quarry tile floor replaced the original 6"x6"quarry file floor in the 1970s. The Harvey House dining and lunch rooms are on the Depot's east end next to the office/dorm building With living quarters above. The design of the interior is reminiscence of a California Mission with terra- cotta tiles, large wood beams with finish and wood plank ceiling all stained a dark-brown. Portions of the Harvey House have been altered to accommodate office space with partitioned walls and a suspended acoustical ceiling which covers the original wood ceiling. Baggage and express are handled from the west end,with the former division headquarters on the second floor and tower. The Depot's original amenities include a tube system by which telegrams could be distributed among the main offices(without need of a messenger boy)and state-of-the-art telephone system for dispatching trains. The was a weather station for the dispatching of local weather conditions. 3. Structural System a. Central Building Reinforced Portland cement plaster domes occupy each comer of the central building. Straight wooden sheathing on radial wood joists support the plaster domes. The walls of the domes below the arch spring lines are metal studs with plaster.A reinforced concrete slab and steel beams support these walls.There is a large opening at the middle of the slab to allow access into each dome. The main gable roof between the domes consists of two-inch wood sheathing,wood beams and steel Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA•530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 w SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section III-Existing Conditions Page 3-10 trusses. Steel columns support all of the steel framing.The columns are encased in concrete for fire protection. Reinforced concrete walls around the perimeter of the central tower are filled in between the columns.The steel columns stop near grade and are supported by concrete columns on deep concrete footings. Shallow reinforced concrete grade beams span between the deep footings to support the north and south perimeter concrete walls.The foundation plans do not indicate the presence of grade beams between the deep footings on the east and west sides of the central building. Concrete encased steel beams support the second floor concrete slab. Concrete encased steel columns support the floor framing. The steel columns are founded at grade on concrete columns with deep concrete footings.There is an offset in the second floor slab between the waiting room and entry hall. r The first floor appears to be a concrete slab on grade. Reinforced concrete utility tunnels are located on the north and south sides under the slab on grade. Interior non-bearing tile partition walls are founded on the slab on grade without footings below the walls. The original 1917 drawings do no show footings under these partitions and it is believed that the lack of foundation footings has caused settling. Further investigation is required to verify the extent of soil problems under these partition walls. 40 b. East and West Wings Two-inch wood roof sheathing spans between wood beams spaced four feet apart. Steel trusses support A the wood beams.Reinforced concrete columns support the steel trusses.Reinforced concrete roof beams continue around the perimeter of the buildings between the exterior columns.Interior concrete columns also continue up to the roof framing to support the steel trusses. The second floor framing consists of reinforced concrete slabs spanning between reinforced concrete beams and girders. Reinforced concrete columns support the girders.Vertical offsets in the second floor elevation occur at the intersection of the central building and the east and west wings. There is also an offset in the east wing second floor along its length in the east/west direction. The first floor framing contains a combination of slab on grade and structural framing similar to the •- second floor over basement areas.Foundations below the columns are reinforced square concrete pad footings.Continuous concrete footings are located below all the exterior concrete walls. Perforated reinforced concrete walls are cast between the perimeter concrete columns around the entire exterior at .. the first and second floor. Interior partitions on the first and second floor are non-load bearing.No footings are shown beneath the interior non-bearing partitions on the original 1917 drawings. • C. East End Annex • Two-story Building ,r Two-inch thick wood sheathing spans between light gage steel framing spaced five feet apart at the roof. Perforated hollow clay tile walls support the roof framing. The second floor is constructed with a 2-1/2 inch reinforced concrete slab spanning over light gage steel joists. These joists are supported by interior r partitions and perforated exterior brick walls. The hollow clay tile and brick walls do not contain reinforcing steel. Continuous reinforced concrete footings support the brick walls.The bottom of the footing is located on top of old paving according to record drawings.A concrete slab on grade was constructed over imported fill material placed on top of the original paving. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIR• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Section III-Existing Conditions Page 3-11 • One-story Building Light gage steel joists support a 2-1/2 inch reinforced concrete roof slab.Concrete encased steel beams support the joists. Concrete encased steel columns support the beams in the interior.The exterior walls are brick without reinforcing steel. These brick walls support the ends of the steel beams. 4. Mechanical The existing Depot has several heating,ventilation,and air conditioning(HVAC)systems that were installed at different times. There is a steam boiler system,portions of which date back to the original 1918 construction. There are also some oil-fired heating and ventilation units and air conditioning units which were installed over twenty years ago and are not operational for future uses of the Depot. Duct and piping openings through the roof,walls and floors should be patched and repaired. 5. Electrical rr The existing electrical systems were installed in 1918 and have been added to and revised as necessary during the ensuing years. New panels were added with the office remodels on the second floor and a new r,• 1,200 ampere,480/277 volt service has been added on the west end. This service has only one, 100 ampere circuit breaker in it. The original service vault is located just west of the main entrance and y ' serves as a main switchgear and service room under the south end. This service is still in use for the 120/208 volt needs of the Depot. B. LAND USE AND PLANNING CONTEXT 1. Site Context This section focuses on providing an overview of the land use and environmental context of the San Bernardino Depot and includes discussions of: r • Site Overview. Pasco La Placitas Specific Plan for the Mt.Vernon Corridor(Mt.Vernon Corridor). Vision 20/20 Projects(Lakes and Streams). • Mt.Vernon Avenue Bridge Project including the future Metrolink Parking Lot. • Anita's Tortilla Factory Expansion. Santa Fe Railroad Historic District. • Proposed Santa Fe Railroad Worker's Overlay Zone. a. Site Overview The San Bernardino Depot is currently in Ward 1 of the City of San Bernardino just west of Interstate 215 and downtown. The construction of Interstate 215 in 1961 separated the Depot site from what had been traditionally considered a part of downtown San Bernardino. The Santa Fe Railroad railway system 1 and Historic Route 66 have been instrumental in the development of the San Bernardino Valley and Southern California and both connected the east and west sides of the valley. Because of the division that has been created by Interstate 215,the Santa Fe area is now considered a part of the west side. The physical division represents economic boundaries as well. 1 Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 M O _ M O � Y i � a A a o w v m _ vF 14 •, r All pz, 6W 6 > X u° � V wf Z a oil OC W z. m y Q r r m T Q x- tz C oa _ - Z - 3 o =;� Gp s p a9� 3 ;° o ' < . 9m Z x u SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REnABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section III-Existing Conditions Page 3-15 Figure 3D COUNCILMANIC WARDS w 4 w i _ Q Q 0 e!"` �. ARItOALE r po�,i 330 4 0 t _ v 9 u o - 3 HIGHLAND : /; I V1/:I d uwo j 41A-LM . - BASELINE euxe rJ geQ FOOTHELLL RIALTO wxro - - MILL I o irl � � NIIYI r REDL S i 1 WE KTT S Map courlesy of the ON of San Bernardino. SAN BERNARDINO SANTA FE DEPOT Aia 1 REHABILITATION & ADAPTIVE REUSE r SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section III-Existing Conditions Page 3-17 The Depot is located within a largely heavy industriallwarehousing and low intensity commercial land use area. There are a substantial number of vacant lots in the neighborhood and the environment is dominated by rail and freight related uses. The residential neighborhoods appear to be occupied by low to moderate income Hispanic households. The housing stock appears to be of historic value,displaying a variety of Craftsman and Queen Anne styles. The neighboring residential area is part of the proposed Santa Fe Railroad Worker's Overlay Zone. The intermodal yard located directly north of the Depot is one of the largest on the west coast. The yard physically and psychologically separates the Depot site from the neighborhoods to the north. b. Pasco Las Placitas Specific Plan for the Mt.Vernon Corridor The Pasco Las Placitas Specific Plan was adopted by the City of San Bernardino for the Mt.Vernon Corridor on April 20, 1992. The Plan contains a vision and practical implementation program to create an appealing shopping,dining,entertainment and community facilities environment for the southwest San Bernardino. The plan incorporates the area from 4'Street to 8'Street along Mt.Vernon Avenue. The Paseo Las Placitas Specific Plan features a unique streetscape and courtyard environment within the City and region and also incorporates an arts district with artist-designed fountains,murals,sculpture and street furniture. The goals and objectives are as follows: • and Use To create a shopping,dining,entertainment and services district which serves residents of southwest San Bernardino. • To create a regional destination which will attract visitors from the Southern ' California region. Urban Design • To create a unique environment that is appealing to all citizens while reflecting the Hispanic ethnic background of the Mt.Vernon vicinity. ' • To create a harmonious relationship with the adjacent residential neighborhoods by buffering with streets,alleys or setbacks,providing an adequate supply of parking and minimizing parking access on residential streets. It also includes I developing selected streets such as cul-de-sacs to minimize retail related auto traffic on neighborhood streets. • Circulation and Parking • To create a pedestrian-oriented environment. • To provide a balanced transportation system to conserve energy and reduce air pollution. 1 To create accessibility linkages to downtown via 5' Street shuttle,the Southern California region via I-215 freeway,a commuter rail stop at the Santa Fe Depot, and adjacent neighborhoods via pedestrian streets that connect to Mt.Vernon ' Avenue with cul-de-sac/walkways. • To provide an adequate supply of parking. • Implementation • To upgrade the residential neighborhoods adjacent to Pasco Las Placitas. • To coordinate public and private investments to achieve the maximum change in the environment at reasonable cost. To support physical change with a well-coordinated and funded maintenance, promotion and security program for the entire Paseo area. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA•530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 1 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REn"n.rTATioN AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Section III-Existing Conditions Page 3-19 Figure 3E SURROUNDING PROJECTS ST 3th St E ca to 16 m I —'Par �(- IL��11 h _ B 10 9 I I_ 11 a e �Plaz �_ �� ❑ �� Park ur syo c �p 0 - p — — I B • L� " � ' ® 1066 via uct G� u1 u h # RIALTO ■ LIE BIp1L Fire 7 G gi ig¢n • • -.� ■ — LEGEND —J=-- ■ ■Proposed SFRR Workers Overlay Zone ��••• i `- — —BNSF Intermodal Yard Mt.Vemon Bridge Replacement i 4V 15 • • •Proposed SFRR Historic District REEK T■ —� CPARK, Pase0 Las Placttas Spacitic Plan --r / Metroink Hrst Mlle ,lfsusstatio a —Metrolink Service Yard S —Emansion Anita's Tortilla Factory x 073 ——BM MILL El Tigre Market — , � ■ rte: x--irk .� SAN BERNARDINO SANTA FE DEPOT REHABILITATION & ADAPTIVE REUSE SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section ID-Existing Conditions Page 3-21 The project will essentially affect the Depot and the vicinity surrounding the Depot through the development of its Neighborhood Enhancement which includes: • a long term process to create a Regional Employment Center in the vicinity of the Santa Fe railroad yards. • a near-term effort to establish a Downtown Shuttle to connect Paseo Las Placitas with downtown office workers and hotel visitors. This shuttle would pass by the Depot as part of its route. • a long term process to create a Regional Transportation and Recreation District in the P vicinity of the Santa Fe Depot. r a near-term effort to upgrade the S" Street Entry Corridor to Paseo Las Placitas. In 1994,the Specific Plan was given a column in the Development Code's permitted use table and has V recently been amended to be more business friendly. C. Vision 20/20 Projects(Lakes and Streams) The Vision 20/20 Projects(Lakes and Streams)has been developed to determine the most beneficial method of alleviating the high ground water problems prevalent in a substantial portion of the City of San Bernardino.In 1997,the San Bernardino Valley Municipal Water District proposed the development of a large water project and subsequently,a joint-powers authority was formed. The project affects the historic San Bernardino Depot in that it lists the Depot as part of the Santa Fe District Sub-Area. The sub-areas have been identified to address priorities in areas where improvements have been proposed and how they could benefit from inclusion with the water plan.Vision 20120 states that"the [San Bernardino Depot] property,as well as adjacent parcels can be associated with the waterfront redevelopment. They ' can provide opportunities for a retail mix,having a unique,historic identity or theme." Currently the San Bernardino Regional Water Resource Authority is seeking a professional consulting firm to assist then in an independent marketing and financial feasibility analysis of the project prior to implementation. The Iplan offers opportunities for the future development of the Depot's surrounding properties. d. Anita's Tortilla Factory Expansion 1 Anita's Tortilla Factory has acquired additional property on 41h Street and Mt.Vernon Avenue and is currently expanding their shops. The expansion is anticipated to increase the number of consumers to the area and will directly impact traffic on 0 Street. e. Mt.Vernon Avenue Bridge and Future Metrolink Parking The Mt.Vernon Bridge is scheduled to be reconstructed in order to meet current Caltrans and seismic regulations. The staging area for the bridge project, located at the northeast corner of Viaduct Boulevard and Mt. Vernon Avenue,will be developed for additional Metrolink parking. L Proposed Santa Fe Railroad Historic District Located immediately to the west of the Historic Business District,and extending from I Street to Mt. Vernon Street, and from Second Street to Fifth Street,the Santa Fe Railroad District was developed in three major phases,dating from the mid-1880s,the 1890s and the 1920s. The Railroad comprised the principal industry in the City of San Bernardino,contributing to the City's economic growth and physical Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Section III-Existing Conditions Page 3-22 development. This potential district contains one historical resource,the Santa Fe Depot, located at the southern boundary of the rail yards. The historic roundhouse and shops were abandoned by the railroad .. in the late 1980s and demolished in 1996-1997. The effects of a designation of a property or district are as follows: • Tax incentives, in some cases,for rehabilitation of depreciable structures. • Tax deduction available for donation of preservation easement. r • Local building inspector must grant code alternatives provided under The State Historical Building Code. • Local assessor may enter into contract with property owner for property tax reduction w (Mills Act). • Consideration in federally funded or licensed undertakings(Section 106,National Historic Preservation Act). • Limited protection: environmental review may be required under the California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)if property is threatened by a project. • Automatic listing in the California Register of Historical Resources. • Owner may place a plaque or marker at the resource site. " g. Proposed Santa Fe Railroad Worker's Overlay Zone Overlay Zones are those which are overlaid on the existing zoning designation to recognize special historic areas and provide for their review and special permit process. The overlay zone designation applies to the historic buildings in the neighborhood as well as to any new construction and provides for review of demolition and rehabilitation plans. The proposed Santa Fe Railroad Worker's Overlay Zone is located between Mill Street to the south and 3rd Street to the north,which is at the southern boundary of the historic Depot location. Any improvement projects occurring on properties along 2"d Street,such as the El Tigre shopping center,could potentially affect the Depot. 2. Land Use Plans and Regulatory Context ... The key land use and regulatory documents pertaining to the reuse of the San Bernardino Depot include: r • TEA-21 Grant • City of San Bernardino General Plan ■I • City of San Bernardino Development Code • Historic Resource Regulations:National Historic Preservation Act 4 a. TEA-21 On June 9, 1998,President Clinton signed into law the Transportation Equity Act for the 21°Century (TEA-21). This legislation updates Titles 23 and 49 of the United States Code(U.S.C.)and builds on the major changes made to Federal transportation policy and programs addressed in the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA). The legislation includes numerous provisions that address improvements and changes to the implementation of transportation enhancement activities. r Federal transportation policy,as reflected in the strategic goals of the U.S.Department of Transportation (DOT),the Federal Highway Administration(FHWA), and its Environmental Policy Statement, Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIR• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section III-Existing Conditions Page 3-23 continues to stress mobility,protection of the human and natural environment,and community preservation, sustainability and livability. The achievement of these goals and objectives remains a high priority for the DOT. TEA-21 continues the opportunities to achieve these priority efforts through the further expansion and funding of transportation enhancement program activities initiated under the ISTEA. Transportation enhancement activities are a sub-component of the Surface Transportation Program (STP). The policy and procedural requirements that apply to the STP program also apply to the provisions for funding and implementation of transportation enhancement activities. The laws governing traditional Federal-aid projects funded under Chapter 1 of Title 23 U.S.C.,such as the National Environmental Policy Act(NEPA)and related laws,apply to transportation enhancements as well, except where the Congress expressly provided additional streamlining provisions, innovative finance, and cost sharing provisions solely for transportation enhancement activities. Through the transportation enhancement activities, Congress provided innovative opportunities to enhance and contribute to the transportation system. This is being carried out in a non-traditional fashion through implementation of a specific list of transportation enhancement activities. The focus of these actions is to improve the transportation experience in and through local communities. The FHWA seeks to broaden transportation enhancement program participation,and the rates of implementation of transportation and community enhancing projects. Therefore, it is the policy of the FHWA to foster and encourage partnerships with State and local officials and public interest groups to improve the delivery of these valuable transportation enhancements. Qualifying Activities The list of qualifying transportation enhancement projects are as follows(those in italics are new provisions under TEA-21): Provision of facilities for pedestrian and bicycles. Provision ofsafety and educational activities for pedestrians and bicyclists. • Acquisition of scenic easements and scenic or historic sites. • Scenic or historic highway programs (including provision of tourist and welcome center facilities). • Landscaping and other scenic beautification. ' Historic preservation. Rehabilitation and operation of historic transportation buildings,structures,or facilities (including historic railroad facilities and canals). I Preservation of abandoned railway corridors(including the conversion and use thereof for pedestrian or bicycle trails). • Control and removal of outdoor advertising. Archaeological planning and research. Environmental mitigation to address water pollution due to highway runoff or reduce vehicle-caused wildlife mortality while maintaining habitat connectively. 1 Establishment of transportation museums. • Transportation Museums established using TEA fimds must meet the following definition of a museum. The facility must: (I) be a legally organized not-for- profit institution or part of a not-for-profit institution or government-entity; (2) be essentially educational in nature; (3)have a formally stated mission; (4) have Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIR•530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT I REHABILITATION AND ADAPTrvE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section III-Existing Conditions Page 3-24 r one f ll-time paid professional staff member who has museum knowledge and 41 experience and is delegated authority and allocated financial resources sufficient to operate the museum effectively; (S)present regular scheduled programs and exhibits that use and interpret objects for the public according to accepted standards; (6) have a formal and appropriate program of documentation, care, and use of collections and/or tangible objects; and(7) have a formal and appropriate program of presentations and maintenance of exhibits. • Establishment of transportation museums is interpreted to mean fording of capital improvements. The finds are not intended to reconstruct, refurbish, or rehabilitate existing museums, nor portions of museums, that are not for transportation purposes. It does not cover operations or maintenance of the facility. The museum is interpreted to include the costs of the structure and the purchase of artifacts necessary for the creation and operation of the facility. Displays, segments of buildings, or objects not directly related to transportation should not be fimded with transportation enhancement activity f nds. do Transportation enhancement activity finds may be used to build a new facility, add on a transportation wing to an existing facility, or convert an existing building for use as a transportation museum. • The museum must be open to the public and run by a public, non-profit or not- for-profit organization meeting the definition of museums stated above in this section. If entrance fees are charged for the museum a portion of the fee should be provided for the long term maintenance and operation of the facility. • The legislation governing the transportation enhancement activity program specifically refers to transportation enhancement activities "relating to surface transportation." Therefore, transportation enhancement activity funds are not to be used to preserve aircraft or create an airport or air museum. Objects or structures related to aviation are not normally eligible for transportation enhancement activity fads. Landscaping and other eligible transportation !A enhancement activities may be appropriate for consideration for the road leading to an aviation facility. b. City of San Bernardino General Plan The Land Use section of the City of San Bernardino's General Plan states that specific opportunities to continue and strengthen San Bernardino's region-serving role include: "F. Reuse of the Santa Fe railroad depot and adjacent properties as a high- intensity mixed-use center, incorporating specialty commercial, industrial,transportation,and related uses and establishment of a linkage to the downtown area." The General Plan also states that the City's objective for the historic Depot is to"facilitate the reuse of ` the railroad depot and adjacent properties for retail/specialty commercial and similar uses." Under this statement the following design guidelines have been determined: w Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Section DI-Existing Conditions Page 3-25 I,. Formulate a specific plan for the reuse of the railroad depot and revitalization of adjacent sites; defining development and design requirements for all uses(siting of structures, architectural treatment, landscape, signage,etc.). ' Require that the area be developed as a unified center. Promote the development of a limited access street or pedestrian mall perpendicular to the entrance to the railroad station, extending from 2nd Street, along which specialty r commercial uses and extensive streetscape improvements would be implemented. Require that the railroad station be renovated in a style and using materials and colors consistent with its original design character. Pursue the designation of the railroad on the National Register of Historic Places. Implement streetscape improvements along 1d and 3'd Streets as a linkage to downtown; including street trees, landscape, lighting, street furniture; signage, and other amenities. rC. City of San Bernardino Development Code The purpose of the Development Code is to promote the public health, safety, general welfare and preserve and enhance the aesthetic quality of the City by providing regulations to ensure an appropriate mix use of land uses in an orderly manner. The Development Code is the primary tool for implementing the goals, objectives, and policies of the San Bernardino General Plan. The following zoning districts have been established: • Residential Estate District(RE) Commercial General-University Public Facility District(PF) Village District(CG-3) Residential Low District(RL) Commercial General-Theme Centers) Public Flood Control District(PFC) District(CG-4) Residential Urban District(RU-1) Commercial Regional-Malls District Public Park District(PP) (CR-1) Residential Urban District(RU-2) Commercial Regional-Downtown Specific Plan District(SP) -- District(CR-2) I Residential Medium District(RM) Commercial Regional-Tri-City/Club Airport Overlay District(A) District(CR-3) Residential Medium-High District Commercial Regional-Auto Plaza Central City South District(CCS) (RMH) District(CR-4) Residential High District(RH) Commercial Heavy District(CH) Freeway Corridor Overlay District (FC) Commercial Neighborhood District Office Industrial Park District(OIP) Foothill Fire Zones Overlay District (CN) (FF) Commercial Office District(CO-]) Industrial Light District(IL) Flood Plan Overlay District(FP) r Commercial Office-Conversion District Industrial Heavy District(IH) Hillside Management Overlay District (CO-2) (HM) Commercial General District(CG-1) Industrial Extractive District(IE) Historic Preservation Overlay District (HP) Commercial General-Base Line/Mt. Public/Commercial Recreation District Main Street Overlay District(MS) Vernon District(CG-2) (PCR) Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 r SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section III-Existing Conditions Page 3-26 .r The Depot is currently located within a Heavy Industrial Zone(IH)with immediate adjacent properties located within commercial districts. The Industrial Land Use District Standards are as follows: .. • All uses shall be subject to the approval of a Development Permit or a Conditional Use Permit. • Retail sales and service incidental to a principally permitted use are allowable provided that the .� following standards are met: The operations are contained with in the main structure which houses the primary use; w • Retail sales occupy no more than 15%of the total building square footage; Id • No retail sales or display of merchandise occur(s)outside the structure(s);and All products offered for retail sales on the site are manufactured,warehoused, or assembled on the premises. • Outside storage shall be confined to the rear of the principal structure(s)or the rear two-thirds of the site,whichever is the more restrictive,and screened from public view from any adjoining .. properties and public rights-of-way by appropriate walls,fencing and landscaping. • An intensity bonus of up to 12 SF for each one square foot of permanent space for properly designed and administered day care facilities may be approved by the review authority. Every parcel with a structure shall have a trash receptacle on the premises. The trash receptacle shall comply with adopted Public Works Department standards and be of sufficient size to accommodate the trash generated. The La Tigre shopping center just south of the Depot is located within a Commercial General-Theme Center(s)District(CG-4). This district is intended to promote the upgrading and enhancement of Mt. Vernon Avenue,between 4'and 9'Streets,by establishing an ethnic-themed specialty commercial center, including retail,restaurant,entertainment,gift shops and similar uses. This district will also r facilitate the reuse of the Depot and adjacent properties for retail/specialty commercial and similar uses. The area immediately north of the rail yards and south of 5' Street is considered to be a Commercial r Heavy District(CH). This district intends to accommodate automobile and truck sales and repair facilities, lumberyards, and related hardware sales,plant nurseries,light industrial manufacturing and storage facilities,and similar uses requiring extensive outdoor or indoor space for their sales, service, and ,. storage,excluding neighborhood commercial uses. Just north of 5' Street is the Commercial General-Baseline/Mt. Vernon District(CG-2). This district is intended to enhance the economic activity of the Baseline Street and Mt.Vernon Avenue,and other appropriate commercial corridors; infilling and intesifying existing development,establishing new key activity centers and nodes, allowing for the development of medium and medium high residential density r as alternative uses. d. National Historic Preservation Act The National Historic Preservation Act(NHPA)is the primary Federal Statute governing historic resources. Section 106 of the NHPA(16 U.S.C.470f)requires that federal agencies take into account the effects of their undertakings on historic properties,identify ways to avoid and/or reduce adverse effects, and give the State Historic Preservation Officer(SHPO)and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation(ACHP)a reasonable opportunity to comment on any undertakings. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 r SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTrvE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section ID-Existing Conditions Page 3-27 .. The ACHP's regulations,"Protection of Historic Properties,"(36 CFR Part 800)implements the to requirements set forth in Section 106.In summary, Section 106 requires that the following steps be completed for federal actions which may affect historic resources: Identify and evaluate historic properties; Assess the effects to these properties of the proposed action; Consult with SHPO; Consult with the ACHP if the project will have an adverse effect on a historic property; and Obtain concurrence on the undertaking and any proposed mitigation of adverse effects to historic resources. Section 110 of the NHPA(16 U.S.C. S470h-2) is not applicable to the project. Section 110 directs federal agencies with jurisdiction over historic properties to consider alternatives for integrating such resources into their programs and planning efforts. r Status of Compliance r Congruent with the Adaptive Reuse Study,the City has prepared three technical studies,the Historic Property Survey Report, the Historic Architectural Survey and Evaluation document, and the Final Finding of Effect report,related to the cultural resource. These studies are being conducted in compliance with Sections 106 of the NHPA. As a result of these studies,the historic Depot has been identified,proposed for, and is pending its determination to be eligible for listing on the National " Register of Historic Places. The historic Depot contains architectural and landscaping features which offer historic significance based on their strong association with a significant historical event and its unique architectural significance. Rehabilitation Requirements for Historic Reuse .. The Secretary of the Interior is responsible for establishing standards for all programs under departmental authority and for advising federal agencies on the preservation of historic properties listed on or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places.Historic rehabilitation guidelines are intended to heighten the awareness of both designers and tenants to historically significant features,and to .. emphasize the importance of making attempt to preserve and maintain those features when making alterations,additions or maintenance to the Historic District. The criteria presented in the guidelines will be used by the National Park Service(NPS)to evaluate the impact of a proposed reuse on a structure's character, details,and materials. o" The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties have been developed to guide work undertaken on historic buildings. There are separate standards for acquisition, protection, stabilization,preservation rehabilitation,restoration,and reconstruction. The Standards for Rehabilitation(codified in 36 CFR 67) comprise that section of the overall preservation project standards and address the most prevalent treatment. "Rehabilitation" is defined as"the process of returning a property to a state of utility,through repair or alteration,which makes possible an efficient contemporary use while preserving those portions and features of the property which are significant to its historic, architectural,and cultural values." tArchitect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTtvE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section III-Existing Conditions Page 3-28 r Initially developed by the Secretary of the Interior to determine the appropriateness of proposed project ■ work on registered properties the Historic Preservation Fund grant-in-aid program, The Standards for r" Rehabilitation (The Standards) have been widely used over the years-particularly to determine if a rehabilitation qualifies as a Certified Rehabilitation for federal purposes. In addition, The Standards have guided both federal agencies in carrying out their historic preservation responsibilities for properties in federal ownership or control and state and local officials in reviewing both federal and non-federal rehabilitation proposals. The Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings (The Guidelines)were initially developed in 1995 IN to help property owners, developers,and federal managers apply The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation during the project planning stage by providing general design and technical `r recommendations. Unlike The Standards, The Guidelines are not codified as program requirements. Together with The Standards,they provide a model process for owners,developers, and federal agency managers to follow. r The Guidelines pertain to the buildings located at the historic San Bernardino Depot and to original interior and exterior work, as well as,new exterior additions. Those approaches,treatments,and techniques that are consistent with The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation are listed under"Recommended;"those approaches,treatments, and techniques that could adversely affect a building's historic character are listed under"Not Recommended." 3. Market and Demographic Analysis In November, 1999, a preliminary analysis was conducted regarding the population, income,employment to and economic characteristics of the potential market areas available for the proposed reuse of the San Bernardino Depot.The demographic analysis discusses a number of critical variables which illustrates the type of consumer base that is present in each one of the defined market areas. w a. Market Area Definition The proposed San Bernardino Depot redevelopment program will potentially include components that will draw from multiple market segments that will include transit users,area residents and area employees. The analysis breaks these broad categories into sub-markets. • Resident Market Segments: Three resident markets have been delineated for the Depot site. Factors such as competitive advantages/disadvantages of the location,regional freeway access, 6 potential uses and available space, and geographic and psychological barriers were considered in defining the individual market areas.The resulting markets are primarily based on drive times. The area covered by a 0-5 minute drive time from the site is defined as the primary market, a 5- 10 minute drive time from the site is defined as the secondary market and a 10-20 minute drive time from the site is defined as the tertiary market. These market areas are illustrated in Figure 3K. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIR• 530 Sixth Avenue,San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 W SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Section III-Existing Conditions Page 3-29 • Daytime Employment Market: It is expected that local employees who might visit the project during lunch time or after working hours,would be limited to the area covered by the 0-5 minute drive time from site.An examination of the size of business establishments and potential daytime ' employment within this area will be included in the study. Potential capture of daytime employees within"walking distance,"by examining the market in a 1/4 mile-1/2 mile distance from the site will also be addressed. • Transit Users: The volume and profile of rail passenger traffic passing through the depot arising from Metrolink usage will be examined. b. Population,Household and Income Characteristics The population and household characteristics of the area are summarized in Table 3A, and the income characteristics are summarized in Table 313. These two tables display the counts and percentage distribution for the primary, secondary and tertiary markets and the market area as a whole.These figures can also be compared to the same values for the Riverside-San Bernardino Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area(PMSA)as a whole. The PMSA is a federal designation of a geographical region based on population and economic factors. PMSAs are published in the federal register. A second column r shows each of the three market areas and the market area total expressed as a percentage of the total PMSA value. This allows for the comparison of the market areas to the conditions in the broader regional context.In the instances where the variables are expressed as a percentage,the analysis of the market area as a percent of the PMSA totals can be read like a cross tabulation figure.In other words,the instances where values are at 100%indicate that the characteristic is present at the same levels that it is throughout the PMSA. Any value above a 100%indicates an over representation and any value below a r 100% represents an under representation. C. Regional Employment Characteristics r Historic employment(by place of residence)trends reported by the California Employment Development Department(EDD), show that the post recession recovery in the region started after 1993, and employment growth has been strong ever since.However as seen in Table 3C, the City of San Bernardino has been experiencing a slower rate of employment growth compared to the PMSA as a whole. The City also experienced a steady decline in its share of regional employment between 1990 and (y 1996, but is beginning to show some signs of stability in the past three years. Current estimates show that the City of San Bernardino has a labor force of 79,090 residents of which 73,700 are employed resulting in an unemployment rate of approximately 6.8%.This is higher than the PMSA unemployment rate of approximately 5.3%. Table 3D displays historical non-farm employment trends in the PMSA by major industry groups.It should be kept in mind that this is employment by `place of work.' Historically the region has experienced strongest growth in the areas of wholesale trade and services related employment followed A by the transportation communication and utilities sector and the retail trade sector.It is important to note W that most of these sectors are often associated with low skill jobs with relatively lower wages.The manufacturing sector grew at an average annual rate of 2.9%between 1988 and 1998,while the finance, insurance and real estate sector grew at an average annual growth rate of 1.5%. Sectoral employment(by Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Section III-Existing Conditions Page 3-30 place of work)projections in the PMSA,by the EDD for the 1995-2002 period are exhibited in Table 3E. i According to these projections,construction related employment,followed by services and manufacturing are expected experience the strongest growth in the near future. Daytime Employment Base Figure 3M illustrates the distribution of business establishments in the primary market area with respect to the number of employees. It is apparent that even though numerous large business establishments with 250 employees or more,(located in downtown San Bernardino)are well within the primary market,they are not exactly within a walking distance from the site(within 1/2 mile or 1/4 mile of street service area).There are a few small to medium sized business establishments that are located within a 1/4 mile distance from the site Retail Sales Activity Following a similar trend as in employment growth in relationship to regional post-recession recovery,taxable retail sales in the City ` of San Bernardino have started a positive growth trend since 1993.Taxable sales trends in the City between 1990 and 1997 are shown in Table 3F.Though the compounded annual growth rates for the entire 1990-97 period appear to be negative,most sectors have experience positive growth during the 1993-97 period.During this period the fastest growing sector was `other retail,' which usually includes .. all specialty retail items not included in the broader categories. This was followed by auto dealers and auto supplies. The sales trends demonstrate the fact that the retail economy is still in transition and continuous shifts can be expected in terms of regional retail dynamics. The declines in sales from apparel stores and home furnishings stores is probably the result of a combined effect of sales leakage as well as slow economic growth. w d. Transit User Characteristics r According to Metrolink's 1999 estimates the average daily ridership on the San Bernardino line is 8,161 riders and the Inland Empire/Orange County line is 1,804 riders.Hence,the total ridership on the two Metrolink lines serving San Bernardino is 9,965.Assuming that all of the riders are roundtrip commuters, this can translated into 4,983 persons(50%of total ridership).Metrolink also estimates that approximately 9.58%of the total ridership originate in San Bernardino,which means the average daily traffic through the station is 477 persons.This means that on an average 477 persons board and alight Metrolink trains at the San Bernardino station each day(the total traffic would be 954, but assuming they are the same people,we only account for half of the traffic).Hence the average annual persons using Metrolink from the San Bernardino is a little over 174,000+.It should be kept in mind that this number could vary greatly depending on the margins of the assumptions stated and the accuracy of Metrolink's statistics, but it gives a fairly good idea about the approximate volume of transit users in the station. , Amtrak usage is not included in this calculation.Metrolink estimates that approximately 53%of the passengers using the San Bernardino line belong to minority ethnic groups(Hispanic,Asian,African American,Other). ^ Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA • 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 W SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REDAEDdTA'n0N AND ADAPTR'E REDSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section III-Ezisting Conditions Page 3-31 Figure 3F SITE LOCATION r L:• r, 10 mm . mm • ry _ e 1 ' N , a b(Ua_ ., SAN BERNARDINO SANTA FE DEPOT REHABILITATION & ADAPTIVE REUSE SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Section III-Existing Conditions Page 3-33 TABLE 3A POPULATION AND HOUSEHOLD CHARACTERISTICS M kn Arta COUnV MuknAm•c ePncmpge MPMSA TpW M Mime Drive 5.10 Mmu%Dme 10-20 MmuR Di MVkn Ama TOW PMSA TOW MMinu¢Dme 5.10 Mink Dnv<I0.M Minute Drive MVkn Ar TO 5� Tout P9puhmn 1939 45,963 236,161 328,N8 610.M 3,169.9T1 1A% 7.4% 104% 193% 20" 48,n1 249,974 352,656 650,851 3,451,498 14% 72% 10.2% 18.9% A Race(non-IBapmic)md Ednieiry,1999 K ik 20,"3 137M0 20SX4 366517 2,2man om 6.2% 9.4% 166% Amon AnVlnm 5,987 32,950 30,"2 69379 209,742 2.9% 15.7% 11.5% 311% N4tive Amuiunlndien 474 ;139 3,"I83 5,185 28,874 1,6% 74% 9.6% 18.6% AuenRrifieltl"dc 1.281 11,027 22,307 34,615 157JW D.8% )O% 14.3% n0% M. 17,580 5;415 ",082 135,07) 565,784 3.1% 93% 11.5% 73.9% BEgmic 11,986 97,457 127,756 257,199 IAN,620 23X 8.9% 11.6% 33,4% 11re I"mmsPmm)and E 6,y.1999(P.1) Wltik ".9% 58.3% 633% MA% 69.7% ".5% "m 90.9% 86.1% Af.Anvial I3.VA 14.6% 93% 12.4% 66% 1%.9X 2109% 1399% I7L6% Nedve AV Vim InAm Im 0.9Y. 0.8X 0.9% 0.9% 113.2% "m 929% M.8% Ad4NP41ifclilmdn ECA 4TrA 6.8X 5m 5.0% 56.3% 94.1% I36Ri II4.M Oda 383% n2% 198% 321% 171% 214.3% IM4X II0.9% 1Mm IGf ie 69.6% 41.1% 388% 42.1% 34.7% 200.6% 119.D% 113.0:6 1214% Sakl ISOVtlwld 1939 13,6TL ]t]36 IOS,UB 197,396 1.066."9 1.3% 7.1X 9.91: IB.S% 3001 I4,J" 83,435 1MM 210,756 1,163,917 1.2X 73X 9]X LLI% Population By Age(IM) 0-17 17.655 8069 114,510 213.531 1,013.M 1]X 75% 11.3% 216% I&24 5,001 n393 30,099 57,493 371,115 IM/ &3% ILI% 21.2% n-P 6,610 35.459 33,511 95.790 "8,542 1.5% 7.6% 11.4% 201% 3514 5,798 N,587 55,121 95,5" 499350 1S 6.9% 1 I.VA 191% 4154 3(170 n,T31 33,886 61,427 338,951 1.1% 7m I&M 18.1% 35 2531 15.415 18,395 36,361 215,711 1.2% 71% 8.5% 16.9% 654 4,3n 24,170 21326 51,869 36;868 13X 67% 6,4% 103% FWWd mBy Age 87P 1ofTo (1999) 0.17 3LP 34.0% 34.g% Um 33.0% 1201% 1W.4% 108.9% 108.8% �, 1834 10.95'. 9.5% %m 94% L6% 1273% 110.9% 107.0% 1100% 25-31 14.8% 15.0% I6.3X Mm 14.8% 1003% 101.6% 110.1% I.A% 3511 12.6% 14.6% 16MA 116% 15.7% 80.1% 93m IM4% 933% 0V 45-N 83% 10.1% 103% 10.1% 10.' 767% WA% %.4% %m 55 $.6% 6.5% 5.m 6.0% 6.8X 81.6% 95.TA MrA 87.5% 6A 95% 103% 7.1% i.1% 114% 93.1% 89.4% 62 UA A.3X Smme:CACI Inc and E-n .Ra"rtAAmrim Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT ' REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section III-Existing Conditions Page 3-34 YY TABLE 3B INCOME CHARACTERISTICS Mvkm Arcs Cam¢ Muka Arta 6s ll'vmmmge ofPlf$ATOW 0.5 Min9m Dnw 5-10 Lbn.Dnw 10.20Mm.Dnw MUka Arta TOW PMSA TOW 0.5 Mo mDnw 5-10 Mbmm DOve 10-20 Min.D-.M .A TOW Median H-6.1d In- Y 1999 M147 333,885 542,669 1],542 560,911 516% 212% 106.3% 92.$% 2006 530,151 543.558 $53,652 $ 8.056 551,5]8 58.54 54.3% 106.0% 93336 AvuaBe Housdold Snwme ' 1999 $27,037 540,668 369.060 wI03 551,033 53.0% ]93% %.1% 86,6% 3006 335,149 553,429 555,156 $58,695 540.915 51.6% ]334 94.516 35.1% Hcus 1A byk-(I M) ' 65,000 581 2,1% 3,27 6,719 29,933 2.5% 0.2 1004 213% $400659,92 2656 ],1% 6,095 1&739 %,310 5.5% 1.11% 0.6% 323% $10,20.511,92 1,859 M337 411 15,6% 69,%1 274 9.1% LI% 19.16 315,261492 2,149 1261 12,0]0 27,016 161.399 I.4% 8.2% 0.34 19.1% ' 535,%U516,999 ],1% 13330 1('155 '2361 151,611 I.m 8.3% 9.3% 193% 535,26549,92 I1 14267 X"I 6423 22,910 1.04 77% 10.2% 19.14 550,000.51492 1An 1426 36,11 64131 222369 0.6% 634 11.3% 18.1% x13.02 632 732 14171 23,933 171,555 0.5% 43% 9.6% 16.0% Hwvdel6sbylemeebyM Am(1999) Q5,02 6.4% 3.614 29% 3.4% 28% 239.6% 127.3% 101.]% In^ 551DA .m ILO% 9.1% 5.315 LO% 6.6% 271.114 13.1% 37.7% iw..6% 510,000.311,999 13.9% LO% 5.3% 6.9% 6154 210.1% 132935 1.0% 123% 3)3,261492 17.9% 15.9% 11.5% 133% 130% 135.1% 119]% 1.614 1033% ' 3]5,00611.29 154% 1534 11.1% 16.t% 1134 100.6% 1103% 2.1% 1063% 15,006549,999 13.14 20.716 213% 10.74 19.74 2.'14 12.24 12.2% 12.0% 10.0 ,1.999 9.34 17.16 21m 203% 30.9% 0.4% 0.4% 113.3% 2.636 �"S92 3.54 9.3% 15.6% 12.1% 16.1% 21936 57.64 95.'M 75.1% Swrtc GCI NC.xtlF'o R..""-v AV6ec•w ' r Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIR• 530 Sixth Avenue,San Diego,CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 V SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTivE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Section M-Existing Conditions - Page 3-35 TABLE 3C EMPLOYMENT GROWTH: RIVERSIDE SAN BERNARDINO PMSA vs. CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO ' Year Riverside-San San Bernardino City as% Bernardino PMSA City of PMSA ' 1990 1,128,700 63,930 5.66% 1991 1,113,000 62,830 5.65% 1992 1,124,600 64,370 5.720/. 1993 1,143,300 62,870 5.50% 1994 1,159,500 64,230 5.54% 1995 1,180,800 65,030 5.51% 1996 1,201,900 66,040 5.49% 1997 1,259,000 68,860 5.470/. 1998 1,297,300 70,950 5.47% 1999 1,349,510 73,700 5.46%° CAGR* 2.01% 1,59% aa°usm PAfSA 5 �os.o gSg �i 3' ao r E ss° ' Ym ' ]4000 ]a,CW ®Sn BaevEUn ];0.0 ]O,OW ttiryuXM S S,PA q PA6A � 36XX� w,00° a $ Zm tax a asro $ ttiaoo tsX S E Y. *CAGR:Compounded Annual Growth Rate Source: California.Employment Development Departmmt and Beonomics Research Associaw Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA•530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 w SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT w REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section III-Existing Conditions Page 3-36 r TABLE 3D NON-FARM EMPLOYMENT TRENDS BY MAJOR OCCUPATIONAL GROUPS IN RIVERSIDE-SAN BERNARDINO PMSA agxsmg,xs� a �gxses � sas ssesPaxsasx�xs„� axsrs - - s es. g� S� $ xgssmse�m�ms �s „ axses „s� s� �psxsa � s ' � a t�sx� a �s� ses axs „s,xs� QQ >• s$� gTgmsms �B� gX$XBXS s m sasmsxsxsxsxs �sxs „ s _ xs0sxsasxexsxsxsxsxs g s s s s s s s s c E e u .- w —°�wEE 5vi .wEw ,vicEF3 Em Eeim 3 � i2z3 z° zzu�z= z� z ` i � � u w Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 r Sp gpARD@ogPOI Rm&BILITATION_ADAPTm REUSE STUDY 2_&z, Section m-Existing c__ Page w7 . IABi a EMPLOYMENT PROJECTIONS: RIVERSIDE-SAN am_moPMR j' -!!;! ■!!r! !§§1, ;,;;,:_; � ` �!I§rr„§!!■ . . . ■\E\%(k�■,4# . . � !��l,lk\�■\� //lk/\#(\\k( , -92 94 RS; j(j()\§_(\} 0 ............ ' | ,!!,! � �# | . . §•!!lE=. !_ ■<! _ . q/&J51 Rlit lr.•_ ;=;,,�■! � ,| . . !! �``` Arcct Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA. s Sixth Avenue, s mac mm . @mays SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section ID-Existing Conditions Page 3-38 TABLE H TAXABLE SALES IN THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO 1995 2002 CAGR* Mining Employment 1,100 900 -2.8% Manufacturing Employment 94,400 119,300 3.4% Finance,Insurance and Real Estate Employment 29,400 31,800 1.1% Construction Employment 43,100 58,800 4.5% Transportation,Communication and Utilities 40,800 51,100 3.3% Retail Trade Employment 170,000 196,000 2.1% Wholesale Trade Employment 35,900 44,200 3.0% Services Employment 202,600 260,900 3.7% Government Employment 162,600 192,400 2.4% Total Nonfarm Employment 779,900 955,400 2.9% 300,000 250,000 200,000 d 150,000 ®1995 w ■2002 100,000 50,000 Lt ii-d m v c ap u C W N d C Y V o ° N — o m E o E o rN � V T � � V q ° y ° o w gtE gc a Uw °5 � - ctiw o E t7m e g w C E 5 9 w a o U Employment Group •CAGR: Compounded Annual Growth Rate Source: California State Board of Equalization and Economics Research Associates Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT w REHABHdTATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6. 2000 Section III-Existing Conditions Page 3-39 Figure 3G POPULATION DISTRIBUTION R � MYl C� fad: AM M wmin son 3u 1 San Bmwdw Depot n Popu <8, Eet�Baa) K$O00 .. 8,000-14-999 N Is,OW-24,999 >25.000 4 0 4 Miles `. So Ecuwoon BemwhA iaus.ESRIInc ad CACIIvl • 1 SAN BERNARDINO SANTA FE DEPOT REHABILITATION & ADAPTIVE REUSE r 1 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Section ID-Existing Conditions Page 341 Figure 3H POPULATION AGED 25 - 44 YEARS fi 1 awn '-'Wd�Ni 25-44 Ym(1999 Bctim") 2.000-3.999 - 9,999 >10,O N �>tgooe 0 Z 9 Mils ' r Smme- Pcmc®u Raw ch Am dam,HSRI Inc.mtl CACI % ! SAN BERNARDINO SANTA FE DEPOT REHABILITATION & ADAPTIVE REUSE . - r 1 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT ' REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY Marcb 6, 2000 Section III-Existing Conditions Page 343 Figure 31 POPULATION AGED 25 - 44 YEARS AS A PERCENT OF TOTAL /." fo 1 ~y _ 91 7� - ■ Depot ' N 25-44 Yrs.age group as a%of total(1499 Eslilnei2s T G 30% —' 300/i-34'°�o =40/.-59-/6 2 0 2 4 Miles ' : :' .__.. Aa =>60% a Somco:Boonoeia ann2h AS.oeiaMf,ESAl lae.am CAClbec. SAN BERNARDINO SANTA FE DEPOT '�- REHABILITATION & ADAPTIVE REUSE « 1 1 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT 1 REBAEBATATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Section III-Existing Conditions Page 345 1 Figure 3J INCOME DISTRIBUTION ( 1 hql L �.f 1 le An 1 Sim IL a I -- - �? RV 1 3 ]1 1 - 91 _ I 1 fir. - -- sm Bmmdiro Depot � I Mrdian booms(1999 nom) <525,000 ~ 535,000-$49,999 1 _ >550,000 "s -- 2 0 2 4 Asks 1 Sm�oe: }<a .RaelrtLnmd.ms-kSM lve.and CAA Lie. SAN BERNARDINO SANTA FE DEPOT REHABILITATION & ADAPTIVE REUSE � 1 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT 1 REnABn.rrATION AND ADAPrIYE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Section III-Existing Conditions Page 347 1 Figure 3K EMPLOYEES PER BUSINESS ESTABLISHMENT • r I: . ' o • mil" AFL • .:_ f ' . . - ' 9amcE®aBoudA®doq ENW toe.adCAClloe r •`► SAN BERNARDINO SANTA FE DEPOT REHABILITATION & ADAPTIVE REUSE 1 i SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT i REHABILITATION Arm ADAPTIVE REusE SruDY March 6,2000 Section III-Existing Conditions Page 3-49 i Figure 3L SELECTED RETAIL TYPE LOCATIONS i ♦ - iA A A A AA - -- mmo... A MAY . u ♦ ■ — a - - Special Retail CaLagarea _. to Meat/Fish Markets ~♦♦ ,�+ r O Fruit/Vegetable Ma&etsoo r A ® a Eating Places B San Bernardino DDepot epm any SO■l!:Raaatte RO0artl Alen',ENID fee.md0la Tnc ! •'_ U 1 Aloe '. SAN BERNARDINO SANTA FE DEPOT iREHABILITATION & ADAPTIVE REUSE SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABndTATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Section III-Ezisf3ng Conditions Page 3-51 Figure 3M SELECTED SERVICE TYPE LOCATIONS ------------- _ - o 1 - 49 o ' i 511fni o • o 1 o o — G _ 7 Special Services Categories — o Child Day Can ■ Iaundry4arrnent Svc. o Misc.Personal Svc. •••• A Video Rental �Nr ® ® Q' San Bernardino Depot - Sasce Emim®ct RoacL ASOtiArs,Ea9l h.mlGClhc- - . ..•._ D i b77w - . SAN BERNARDINO SANTA FE DEPOT 1 REHABILITATION & ADAPTIVE REUSE ' SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 �! Section III-Existing Conditions Page 3-53 C. OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS Following the initial investigation of the Depot,the various technical opportunities and constraints have been determined. 1. Opportunities General 1 The State Historical Building Code, allows performance oriented criteria to be used to solve code- complying issues rather than prescriptive regular code regulations. Structural • Arrest settlement of tower at south side. • The sub-surface condition for support of future structures is known. Existing foundation access is • good. Concrete floors have capacity to support any reuse option. • Localized heavy usage can be accommodated by strengthening of columns,beams and slabs. Additional floors probably can be added in main tower attic. This floor would be beneficial to reduce slenderness of exterior concrete walls for seismic. • Walls and floors built of concrete can be selectively perforated to accommodate new openings. -- Existing cracks in the concrete can be repaired by epoxy injection to arrest corrosion. Concrete floors have higher natural frequencies(stiffness)which is good for dissipating vibration from equipment or external sources. • Additional shear walls, if required,can be easily introduced. • Anchorage of roof diaphragm displacement horizontally is easily accessible. • The Depot structural systems generally have excess capacity allowing for a high occupant load. Transportation • Multimodal bus connections. Amtrak freight service,perhaps express mail/guaranteed delivery cargo. Eventual extension of Metrolink to Redlands and points east. • Metrolink Parking expansion could partially serve site. 1 Potential narrowing of 3"tl Street and realignment of Viaduct Street to nearly 90 degree intersection in favor of both Metrolink and the Depot site to expand parking,provide bus lanes, freight truck access, and urban landscape corridor. Reconfiguration of 3' Street access for entry central to the building. Potential expansion of parking/pedestrian linkages to south,onto El Tigre market commercial property. Development of the Depot site will be a catalyst for adjacent commercial land development. Site has reasonable pedestrian linkage from all directions,except north. Heating. Ventilation. and Air Conditioning(HVAC) • The existing roof structure has flat areas that are not visible from adjacent ground level that were used for HVAC equipment and fans for the original Harvey House Restaurant. This same area could be reused for HVAC equipment for the kitchen of a new restaurant. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section III-Existing Conditions Page 3-54 Y • The roof turret areas and roof elevation changes provide discreet locations for louvers used for outside air intakes,relief air openings and exhaust fans for toilet rooms. • The size of the building is a nominal 55,000 SF,which will equate to a 200 to 250 ton total cooling load. • A high efficiency cooling and heating system can be provided from several existing mechanical ■ rooms in the building.This will provide a flexible HVAC system for future tenants. • The tunnel system running the length of the building could provide a possible route for piping and control systems. • The concrete structure of the building provides a good basis for insulation for energy efficiency. • The building HVAC control system can be configured to provide remote monitoring. This will allow fault diagnosis from remote locations and will save on routine maintenance procedures. Plumbing • The original building has a reasonable number of toilet rooms located on the first floor. If these same locations can be reused,the need for floor cutting can be reduced. • Existing roof penetrations can be reused for sanitary vents. • Existing roof penetrations for domestic hot water boilers can be reused. • Infrared sensor automatic hand wash faucets and plumbing fixtures can be utilized to save water, increase user comfort and improve sanitary operation. • High efficiency hot water heaters can be utilized. • 2. Constraints General • The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation may limit the reconfiguration of existing interior spaces and the addition of new exterior structures or modifications to the existing openings of the historic Depot. • TEA-21 Funds limits uses to transportation-related services. • Accessibility issues will require new elevators,restrooms,paths of travel and other code-complying elements. Structural r • There are areas under the existing historic Lobby and Restrooms' walls that are settling. These areas •• will require partial removal of the floors and installation of new sub-base materials under the walls. Transportation • Parking requirements cannot be met on-site. • Ridership on Metrolink and Amtrak must increase to help support services. • Lack of site room to accommodate increased bus traffic(along with other uses). • Lack of truck access/loading areas for freight handling. .. • Historical locomotive exhibit is both opportunity and constraint for this project,due to impact on parking and development of the site. • Lack of pedestrian linkage to proposed Santa Fe Railroad Historical District to north, (except Mt. r Vernon Avenue Bridge which may have accessibility issues due to slope of sidewalk). • Traditionally,Metrolink and Amtrak riders do not use facilities(retail or commercial enterprises) Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA•530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section III-Existing Conditions Page 3-55 1 within the transportation centers. Heating. Ventilation. and Air Conditioning(HVAC) • The location of HVAC equipment may impact historical building criteria. • The weight of HVAC equipment and seismic anchoring requirements will impact the seismic retrofit design. • The HVAC electrical requirements will require upgraded electrical services • The need to provide exhaust fans, duct chases for the first floor,will require shaft areas through the second floor,reducing leasable space. • The kitchen area locations may be limited to under flat roof areas for locating exhaust fans and makeup air systems. 1 • None of the existing HVAC systems can be reused. Plumbin • All of the existing potable water piping,gas piping,above grade sewer and vent piping,and storm drains should be removed and replaced. • Existing below grade sewer piping should be surveyed with camera equipment to determine its condition and need for replacement. • The existing water service piping below grade should be replaced with a new properly sized water service. ' A restaurant(banquet kitchen installation will require a new grease separator system and separate sewer line with backflow preventor. 1 Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA • 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 • (619) 239-7888 fit SECTION IV Case Studies SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABHdTATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section IV-Case Studies Page 4-1 IV. CASE STUDIES To gain a further understanding of the economic,physical and social factors that affect similar rail facilities in Southern California,a group of five recently developed transit depots have been carefully studied. The selected case studies demonstrate two primary approaches adopted in developing transit facilities,which are: �. Restoration and reuse of existing historic station facilities: In the context of Southern California, such efforts became easier to realize only in the later part of the 1980s and the early 1990s,when a greater emphasis was being put by the federal, state and regional governments to promote rail transit. After the inception of Southern California Regional Rail Authority in 1991,whose job was to administer and operate the regional rail system, Metrolink, such restoration and reuse of train ` stations into multimodal transit centers became even more popular with availability various funding • sources. • Development of New Transit Stations: This is especially true in cases where transit centers are developed to promote and accommodate potential increases in transit(especially multimodal)uses. It is also true in cases where existing historic facilities are beyond repair,and the costs of restoration ., and rehabilitation are prohibitive keeping in mind the contemporary functions and space requirements. The transit depots selected for the study are a combination of restored historic depots, namely,Fullerton, ` Claremont, and Glendale, and two new developments, namely, Chatsworth and Santa Ana. Each of the depots are serviced by both Metrolink and Amtrak,although in variant capacities. Site visits and interviews were made at each depot by David Bergman and Amitabh Barthakur with Economic Research Associates(ERA),Wayne Donaldson and Greg Roberson of Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA and Deborah Woldruff with the City of San Bernardino. The case studies will examine each of the depots in the context of • The development process. This would include timeline,costs and funding sources. It would also include an examination of the primary stakeholders of the project. • The current use mix. This will look into the allocation of space and use within the project and examine the nature of activity mix within the stations. The case studies will emphasize the mix of public uses versus income producing commercial uses. 1 Locational context. This will look at the above two issues in relation to the location and activities of the areas surrounding the stations,and will examine how the stations succeed or fail to tie into the locational context or overcome locational challenges. 1 1 Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY Much 6, 2000 .... Section IV-Case Studies Page 4-3 Figure 4A CASE STUDIES MAP CHATSSWORTH tENDALE CLAREMONT SAN BERNARDINO LOS m AMTS s \� FULLERTON 1 y{,�\ SANTA ANA 1 SAN BERNARDINO SANTA FE DEPOT { REHABILITATION & ADAPTIVE REUSE �� SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Section IV-Case Studies Page 4-5 OR A. GLENDALE TRANSPORTATION CENTER it The City of Glendale,located to the north of Downtown Los Angeles at the foot of the Verdugo Hills, was incorporated as a City in 1887. The first railroad depot in the City was built in 1883, in the western part of .. the City, after Southern Pacific Railroad laid the tracks connecting Glendale to Los Angeles. After forty years of service,this building was replaced in 1823 by the present structure built adjacent to it. The strategic location of the Glendale Depot as an important station between Los Angeles, Hollywood,Burbank and the W San Fernando Valley allowed for almost eight daily passenger trains to stop here during its peak years. This period also saw the Depot being used a backdrop for numerous Hollywood movies. The building was FM constructed in a Spanish Colonial Revival style with grand arched entrances and high ceiling waiting areas. r The City acquired the Depot from Southern Pacific Railroad Company in 1989 and the Depot was entered in the National Register of Historic Places in 1997. The Depot was rededicated and reopened on September 15, 1999 as the new Glendale Transportation Center. The restored building exhibits stenciled patterns on the beams, replicated wooden doors at the north and south portals, replicated scored concrete floor in the waiting room and a fully restored ticket window. The center is currently served by Metrolink and Amtrak „ train services. In addition, it is served by Greyhound, Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA), Glendale Beeline(City Transportation),Glendale Express Shuttle and employees only shuttles for Kaiser Permanente and Paramount Studios employees. 1. Development Process r It was nine years after the building was purchased by the City of Glendale that actual renovation and construction work was started. The total cost to the City for acquisition of the site, the structure and construction and rehabilitation was approximately$23.5 million. Of this about$5.3 million was the cost of construction and rehabilitation. The building is located in an irregular site measuring more than six acres in size. The City received over$8.1 million in state and federal grants including Proposition 108 funds and ' Transit Capital Improvement funds. In addition to the restored Depot, the new Transportation Center includes a platform for Metrolink passengers,a covered outdoor waiting area for Greyhound passengers and a surface parking lot for about two hundred cars. 1 2. Current Use Mix The restored Depot measures about 6,000 SF. This includes the core building with the internal waiting area, a semi-open pergola for outdoor waiting, a restroom building for persons with disabilities, offices and baggage storage. The new platform and Greyhound waiting areas are in excess of this square footage. During the early stages of the construction and development,the restoration began under the assumption that Amtrak would be one of the anchors of the building and would use the main ticketing area and the indoor waiting area. In the meantime,Amtrak decided to limit their manned ticketing services at Depot as a cost reduction method and to push their interests in promoting`on-board'ticketing and tickets via mail and the Internet. This resulted in the loss of a major anchor for the Depot. Currently the Depot is occupied by only two tenants. The main ticket booth area is occupied by the local Transportation Management Agency(TMA) while another office space is used by Greyhound for ticketing. Greyhound is using a portion of the baggage areas. The current space allocation includes 420 SF of office space, 1,200 SF of waiting area, 500 SF of Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 ■ SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REBABI1dTATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Section IV-Case Studies Page 4-6 restrooms and 1,700 SF of storage/warehouse area. 3. Location Context w The Glendale Transportation Center is located on the western part of the City west of Cerritos Boulevard, along Gardena. In the immediate vicinity of the Depot are primarily light industrial warehouses. The Depot parking lot surrounds an existing industrial building, which is currently occupied by a video and film production company. To the east of the Depot across Gardena, most of the buildings are occupied light manufacturing and some service related offices such as label making companies, warehousing, and equipment rental. There are a few single-family residential units along El Bonito the east. There is a large w long term storage and warehousing facility to the west of the tracks. San Fernando Road, one block east of the Depot shows fairly high intensity of economic activity in terms of retail and office uses as well as traffic volume. Overall the area appears to be fairly economically stable,with reasonably good levels of occupancy and physical conditions, but the land use mix in the immediate vicinity is oriented more towards low .. intensity industrial and service uses. The use mix in the Depot is oriented towards transportation and transit,with a combination of regional and ' national transportation elements like Greyhound and Amtrak, along with local transit services like MTA, Metrolink and the Glendale Beeline. The multimodal mix generates moderate amounts of daytime traffic to the Center. Since the Center opened less than a year ago, it is still very early to comment on its performance and use mix, but absence of the Amtrak as an anchor tenant seems to have posed some challenges. The large indoor waiting area is currently inaccessible to the public,and there are no retail or ' food, beverage services. In summary,the Center appears to be emerging as a true multimodal center with a complementary mix of local regional and national bus and rail transportation. TABLE 4A: GLENDALE SOUTHERN PACIFIC STATION City owned since 1989. Restoration finished 1999,6,000 SF. Amtrak left the Station in 1997. Eight stops per day. Metrolink ticket machines. 450 parking spaces. No retail,surrounding area light industrial/warehousing. Greyhound has small office for tickets,no baggage or freight. Local Model Railroad Society will be placing a display case in the 1,200 SF lobby. The only tenant,"Glendale Transportation Management Associates"offer travel tickets. r Lobby can be used for small community events. Exterior accessible restrooms for persons with disabilities. "Glendale Transportation Center." Glendale Beeline,Glendale Express Shuttle, Greyhound Bus. $5,300,000 rehabilitation costs,six-acre site. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 � z - \ ` - e LA u z . ^ ) ) § | \ ## k\ \ k% j 7 6 | )� �# |§ 2 ; !&a§ « \ ) (! ® & ke�ef « _ / j \ ; ( 5% / 2 §® \\k` = u E_! 7= » OO- H ° \ @ 2 = !(� |§ \ !ZNWo\ ? c /§§��a! o ; _ - )kkk! 2§§ &!§\ )k / g ^ ~ \ } » z ° � � 2y§( §E= �- - o- -z §+ § §« ) ; }2R Z ! . . . . . . . . . . . . . \ 6 � ; LLJ § ! ] ! - - . . . . 5 � § j { fik @ w SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 w Section IV- Case Studies Page 4-9 B. CLAREMONT SANTA FE DEPOT so The community of Claremont was originally founded by the Pacific Land Improvement Company and its parent company the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad, in the year 1887. It was eventually .,, incorporated into a City in 1907. Claremont was one of about thirty town sites laid out between San Bernardino and Los Angeles in anticipation of a population explosion resulting from the arrival of the railroad. This`explosion' was very short lived and the town would have become one of the many railroad `ghost towns' if it was not for the decision of the local land company to transfer its Hotel Claremont and 260 vacant lots to the recently-founded Pomona College in 1888. The eventual expansion of the Claremont Colleges and the growth of trade spurred by the citrus ranches helped Claremont evolve into an extremely desirable community. OR The railroad's original wooden, Gothic depot was replaced by the existing Spanish Colonial Revival structure in 1927. The exterior of the passenger waiting room features highly ornate Churrigueresque'trim combined with doors that are carved with Santa Fe's cross and circle logo of the 1920s. The Depot stopped •- functioning in 1967 and remained vacant until it was acquired by the City of Claremont in 1989. The Depot was then adapted to serve as a transit center in 1992. The structure was entered into the National Register of Historic Places in 1982. Currently the only passenger rail service to the Claremont station is by Metrolink. In addition,the station serves as a stop for the Amtrak Thruway Bus Service connecting Amtrak passengers and is also served by a number of Foothill Transit bus lines. 1. Development Process The City of Claremont acquired the Santa Fe Depot in 1989,about a year and a half before the formation of Metrolink. The Depot is located on V Street and is adjacent to a part of the Claremont Village redevelopment project area. The Claremont Village redevelopment project is the City's oldest redevelopment project established in 1973 and encompasses two non-contiguous and irregular areas totaling 214 acres. The area adjacent to the north of the Depot along I"Street,includes the Claremont Village,which has a number of retail,dining and personal service establishments in a village setting. The Depot is also two blocks south of the Claremont Colleges, and is within a block of the City Hall, Post Office, Community Center and Public Library. The.parcel containing the Depot is situated between two large officelcommercial buildings and was privately owned before its acquisition by the City. The City acquired the Depot by paying approximately$500,000, when it was inevitable that the private owner would demolish the structure. The Depot restoration and renovation was completed in 1992. By October of 1992,the San Bernardino Metrolink line was in service ' The total cost of the development project was approximately$2.5 million. The primary source of funding to the City for property acquisition, design and renovation was through Proposition A and Proposition C funds(sales tax appropriations for transportation use). The City received numerous loans and grants from ' the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission(LACTC,now known as the Los Angeles Metropolitan Transit Authority(LAMTA)which was a part of the joint powers authority that formed Metrolink. This 'After Spanish architect Jose Benito Churriguera. It describes late 17th and early 18th century Spanish architecture,marked by extravagance of design and use of Renaissance motifs.Its influence was important in the missions of Spanish colonial North America. ' Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619) 239-7888 A SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Section IV-Case Studies Page 4-10 included a $600,000 loan and a $30,000 grant for a public art program in the platforms. In addition to various other smaller competitive grants, the City also received a $234,000 State Transportation Capital Improvement(TCI)grant. The parcel size is approximately 0.8 acres,with most of the vacant land in the front(north)of the Depot, between the building an 1"Street. Limitations in size and configuration of the parcel did not allow for any on site parking to be accommodated, hence the City had to resort to locating parking off-site but within walking distance of the Depot. A parcel of land on the east side of the depot at the corner of 1"Street and College avenue,that was owned by LACTC as part of their right of way,was acquired by the City in lieu of$1.00 annual rent. This parcel was developed as a surface parking lot for commuters and a shaded bus turnout for Foothill Transit buses serving the multimodal component of the Depot. The City leased additional parking spaces from one of the adjacent office buildings that owned a parking structure. The surface parking accommodates approximately 275 spaces,while the structure accommodates an additional �* 125 spaces. The parking related improvements were primarily funded through a Proposition C discretionary grant of$184,000. A part of this amount was also spent on constructing a landscaped median along 1" Street. ,. The space in the front of the Depot is restored as a landscaped public plaza, reminiscent of the Spanish Colonial style. The platform includes a permanent high quality public art installation. The City has an annual maintenance budget of approximately$68,000 of which approximately$20,000 is spent for providing security to the off-site parking. r 2. Current Use Mix r The approximate size of the Depot is about 2,700 SF. Of this,approximately 2,000 SF is leasable space. Currently the fully restored waiting area of the Depot is used as a public space and is occasionally rented out for public functions and activities. The only permanently occupied space in the building is a 400 SF Transit Store that offers transit related services and information to Southern California transit users. The City does not collect any rent from the store in order to promote it as an appropriate use for the building. The remaining 1,600 SF of the Depot has been vacant for the past seven years following its restoration. The vacant space is in the form of two separate rooms on split-levels,approximately 800 SF in size each. None of the interior surfaces are finished and the burden of any interior improvements would be on the tenant. The rooms open into a wooden patio in the front. Various prospective tenants ranging from personal service establishments to fast food services have expressed interest in the space over time, but have eventually backed out after considering the limitations in size,configuration,access and visibility. Many of the tenants would agree to take up the space under the condition that they are allowed to extend parts of the building into the plaza in order to get direct frontage along 1"Street. But the City would not allow this as it goes against their commitment towards preserving the surrounding open spaces. 3. Location Context Even though the Depot is physically close to the relatively economically vibrant Claremont Village and is only two blocks from the colleges, it faces various limitations in terms of visibility and access. The relatively fast traffic along 1"Street along with its tree lined median proves to be a considerable physical as well as visual barrier between the depot and the Village/Civic Center. The development process adopted by the City of Claremont deals with the Depot as a stand alone facility Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 r SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section IV-Case Studies Page 4-11 primarily serving the transit using public. Lack of a conscious effort to integrate the facility to the adjacent Village,the Civic Center and the Colleges during the initial stages of the project has proven to be a bigger challenge over the long term in terms of finding an appropriate use mix for the building. In addition,the size of available space limits its usage by a smaller user and usually smaller retail or personal service establishments are unlikely to locate in a stand-alone facility unless they are close to a larger retail anchor or a cluster of similar establishments. This is especially true in the case of the Claremont Depot, as the building is immediately adjacent on the east and west side to approximately 150,000 SF of commercial and professional office space. All of the daytime employees, however,walk across the street to the cluster of restaurants in the village. The size of the space also limits the use of the facility as a full service restaurant or dining establishment. The average transit user does not usually want to patronize any businesses at the Depot as they are still in the middle of their commute when they board or alight from a Metrolink train. In addition, limited train traffic combined with possible access from the parking lots to the platforms without actually entering the building,considerably limits the amount of people passing through the Depot. The City is realizing some of these shortfalls and is taking some preliminary steps towards increasing the visibility of the building. One of these is to modify the landscaping along the median to enhance visual connections across 10 Street. The City is also promoting the depot by organizing weekend events like jazz concerts and musical events in the plaza. The Claremont Depot is a wonderful example of a good historic preservation project,the building and the Depot compound is impeccably restored and maintained. At the same time, however, this project teaches a valuable lesson highlighting the need for such projects to be integrated to other secondary markets and local land uses besides a primary transit use. TABLE 4B: CLAREMONT SANTA FE DEPOT Spanish Colonial Revival Depot built in 1927,restored 1992 Only Metrolink services Claremont Depot is used for the Amtrak Thruway Bus Service Total cost for restoration $2,500,000 2,700 SF. Approximately 2,000 SF is leasable Unleased since 1992 except for 400 SF Transit Store(pays no rent) None of the interior spaces are finished. Split-level inside. ! Adjacent to the V illage/Civic Center Downtown East and west sides of the site contain 150,000 SF of commercial and professional office space Not integrated to other secondary markets. Not used by Metrolink passengers Summer Jazz Festival in front of Depot,300 persons 1 ' Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 • (6 19) 239-7888 o � cU A G t r 5 E : � Y1 r O d u, W r Q D W C g N u r l.L! TT Z IA aqy ICY N y r L •/� /N� Hg �ZN 8N OC �y6y�uLV� y i v• eh, yOQ¢WG��ryjjj yV(J ~ 11''�I�IOjJjJ W K O Z Q� V F W V I U O 4 O N? Z C •— I— �� � $ oVQIKYFa � r LL Z � qRq� �O � Gj od < gzZ:Z!; - Q _ Z J 3� � N�j zZ�Z�ag OC m tJJ Zz° �g^Z¢ OSC'¢ W E � °moo b' : :DBz a giF m `, f 1 i F A °a e C � U 1 � > � a e 9 T' SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTrvE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section IV- Case Studies Page 4-15 D. CHATSW ORTH TRANSIT CENTER AND CHU D CARE CENTER to Located in the northwest comer of the San Fernando Valley in the City of Los Angeles, the community of ' Chatsworth has always been an important transportation node connecting Los Angeles to northern California. r A stagecoach relay station was established here seventeen years after it was passed from Mexico to the United States, in 1867, connecting Los Angeles and Santa Barbara via the Santa Susana Pass. It was homesteaded by pioneers in 1870, and was voted by residents to become a part of the City of Los Angeles Ya in 1915, primarily with the incentive of being able to obtain water from the Owens River for agricultural purposes. r Pacific Electric began rail service from Hollywood to Van Nuys in 1911, which was extended to Canoga Park by the next year,allowing citizens of Los Angeles easy access to the San Fernando Valley. The rugged ' terrain and proximity to the growing Hollywood film industry soon made Chatsworth an attractive outdoor 6 film location.The first Chatsworth Southern Pacific Depot was built in 1893, in the Chatsworth Park town center, near the intersection of what is now Marilla and Topanga Canyon Boulevard. The Depot was ^ destroyed by fire in 1917. The second Chatsworth Railroad Depot,was built in 1917, on the west side of ., the tracks between Lassen and Devonshire. The second Depot was what was known as a combination depot, serving both passengers and freight,with the town's telegraph office. This particular Depot was built in what ° is called the No.222 style. These buildings were simple wood frame buildings,with minimal ornamentation and could be assembled in a few days. Hundreds of these were built between the 1890s and the 1920s. The second Depot was demolished by the Southern Pacific Railroad in 1963. The current location of the transit center is on the east side of the tracks, approximately opposite of the second historic Depot,on the Old Depot Road which connects Lassen and Devonshire. The present transit center building was dedicated in April 20, 1996. Although the present building is entirely new,it is designed to look like the traditional Southern Pacific No.222 building. The center is served primarily by Amtrak and Metrolink service, with transit connections through Metropolitan Transit Authority, the Los Angeles ' Department of Transportation(LADOT)Commuter Express and Simi Valley Route C. The center is used by approximately 220 daily Metrolink passengers and 18,000 annual Amtrak passengers. 1. Development Process The.Chatsworth Transit Center was developed under a joint venture between the City of Los Angeles and ' the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission (now LAMTA), with the intention of both parties sharing development costs as well as use of the facilities. The Los Angeles City Council voted to appropriate $5 million in 1991,which provided the City's share of the $17 million cost of buying the thirteen acre site ' from Southern Pacific Railroad and building the new center. It was agreed by the City Council and the County Commission to pay the remaining$12 million of the total cost from county and state transit funds. A ten-member citizens committee was formed to develop a plan for the entire parcel. By means of various workshops and focus groups,the committee identified a range of appropriate uses for the proposed center, ' including a day care center,dry cleaner,grocery store,and restaurant. Eventually these ideas were further developed by the appointed architect to come up with the final development plan. By the end of 1992 the Depot was opened with a simple platform and parking primarily for the use of Metrolink service. The plans tfor the rest of the building were finalized by 1994 and the building was completed in 1996. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section IV- Case Studies Page 416 The development cost for the Depot was approximately $1.7 million. Based on the joint venture development,the City would own the main building including the main lobby and adjoining offices with a ,.. total of about 6,000 SF,while an additional 6,000 SF is owned by the LAMTA,who in turn leases the Depot to a Child Care Center in view of consistency of the overall uses. The surface parking lot accommodates approximately 380 spaces and is shared by both users. The overall site is maintained by the City of Los Angeles. The City incurs a total of approximately$200,000 annually for operations and maintenance of the facility. Of this,about$150,000 is spent on landscaping and general maintenance,while the remainder is spent on providing on-site security between 5:30 a.m.to 8:00 p.m.The primary source of these funds are through Proposition C and Proposition A,which are MTA funds tied to sales tax in the county. 2. Current Use Mix The total leasable area of the facility is approximately 12,000 SF. Half of the building is occupied by a Child Care Center, in an effort by the LAMTA to promote the location of specific service facilities in transit stations which can help promote transit usage by neighboring residents. The remaining 6,000 SF of the building owned by the City is primarily divided into public/waiting areas,exhibition areas,retail uses and offices. The following table summarizes the distribution of areas and uses within the building: r • LAMTA Owned Transit Tots West(Day Care Center) 6,000 SF plus 7,200 SF(exterior play area) • City of Los Angeles Owned Lobby/Waiting Area/Rail Museum 1,600 SF Chamber of Commerce/Community Meeting Room 1,500 SF Bike Stop(now vacant) 700 SF Transportation Management Association(Office) 700 SF Whistle Stop Cafe(Kiosk) 150 SF Vacant Kiosk 150 SF Vacant Office Space 1.200 SF Total 12,000 SF Most of the public uses in the Depot are centered around the entry lobby and waiting area,about a half of - which functions as a permanent exhibit chronicling the history of Chatsworth and its relationship to the railroad and Hollywood. The functioning coffee shop is also located in the lobby along with the space for an additional kiosk. The other offices and are independently accessible from outside. The community rooms located in the Chamber of Commerce premises,as well as the main lobby area are often used for community functions and City related meetings. Though the primary intention of locating the Child Care Center is to attract more transit dependent users, it seems to exhibit minimal impact from its location in the transit center. ,. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA- 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section IV-Case Studies Page 4-17 i The Child Care Center demonstrates reasonable amount of enrollment, but less than five percent of the enrolled children are wards of transit-using parents. The Child Care Center also requires an exterior play area. For each child, 75 SF of exterior space is required. For the 6,000 SF Child Care Center,an outdoor play area of 72,000 SF is required. The City collects$640 per month from the Chamber of Commerce as rent while all other retail and office users are charged$I.00/SF per month. The Transportation Management Association is offered the space for free in view of their function. The first set of tenants came in under the lease terms that put the burden of tenant improvements on the tenant in lieu of prolonged free or reduced rent or other forms of capital assistance. 4 3. Location Context an The Chatsworth Transit Center is located south of Devonshire Street about 1/4 mile east of Topanga Canyon to Boulevard and 1/4 mile west of De Soto Street. Though the center is technically located on Devonshire Street,which is one of the busiest commercial streets in the area,one has to travel almost 1/8 mile from the OR main street to access the actual building. The establishment of proper linkages between the transit center rr and the nearby commercial street has proved to be a considerable challenge and has shown visible impacts on its performance and use. Besides the visual and psychological barrier,the center site also faces certain n physical barriers preventing alternative access points. Access from the west is prevented by the presence Yr of the tracks and private property, while access from the east is prevented by the Browns Canyon Wash channel and Canoga Avenue running below grade. This leaves the only two access points from Devonshire p, Street on the north and Lassen Street on the South. High-speed traffic on both these streets makes it difficult L to see the access road without proper signage or directions. Most of the visible land uses to the east of the Transit Center are light industrial in nature,while the parcel to the west of the tracks is lying vacant, local business owners believe that it is likely to be developed as a hu light industrial park. Devonshire Road has most of the area's local service and retail concentration. The areas west of Topanga Canyon and Desoto Street are primarily residential, exhibiting a concentration of i middle income housing including apartments and higher density single family homes. As one moves northwards towards the hills,one can see considerably lower density and higher value homes. ' In summary, though the immediate vicinity of the transit center is somewhat marginal economically, its primary area of influence includes an existing commercial corridor as well as a thriving residential community. The challenge has been to tap into the location advantages of the site and look beyond the i primary transit users. The primary tenants like the Chamber of Commerce and the TMA office do not generate enough foot traffic to support any more retail space than what already exists. The Child Care Center is trying to penetrate the non-transit using resident market,but the lack of visibility and access related i issues have posed challenges. The recently approved Business Improvement District (BID) along Devonshire Road,would be an important tool in helping the center overcome some of the challenges related to visibility and access and could help to integrate the center with the rest of the area. The coffee shop i located in the center has opted to join the merchant's BID. The Chatsworth Transit Center is facing challenges that are not uncommon to other such facilities that have aimed their use-mix primarily at transit related users. The facility is only four-years-old and may take up to 10-20 years for such facilities to mature. 1 i iArchitect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 A SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section IV-Case Studies Page 4-18 TABLE 4C: CHATSWORTH TRANSIT CENTER AND CHILD CARE CENTER A w 6,000 SF New Station,completed 1996 for$17,000,000 Child Care Center,5,400 SF with outside play area 7,200 SF A Small coffee shop, 145 SF No Amtrak facilities,4 stops/day Metrolink, 18 stops/day, 18,000 annual passengers r Transportation Management Association and Bike Shop now vacant Chamber of Commerce, 1,540 SF,30 persons meeting room A Small display of train related artifacts in the lobby space ,. Depot in a light industrial area,mostly vacant land surrounds the Depot Parking area use for Park and Ride,Hollywood Bowl,MTA Whistle Stop Cafe(Kiosk) ■ Y A • �Y Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA•530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 � EI . { \ LU / ? > ce z o % 7// § z 66 0 22 t5 \ Z \ §§§ } 6m \ 522 k` j f (22®%!\� $§ `! ! & a - K_ L) e z!§ ! |{§ |! � } \f�§\ [// \/§: « 0 �2 � § ! & !! _ . . . . . - w< �A S - � c 3 . < 044 Ln � Z � � < . � . ) k ) _ § ) } � � SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT _ REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section IV-Case Studies Page 4-21 D. FULLERTON SANTA FE DEPOT The City of Fullerton was started as a depot for the Santa Fe Railroad.George H.Fullerton,a land agent for ' the railroad, re-routed the railroad through this city, which was originally planned to be bypassed. The existing Depot was built in 1930 slightly east of the original Victorian style depot,which was constructed in 1888(this building no longer exists). It is a poured-in-place concrete structure,about 256 feet long with ' a 150 feet long covered platform,designed in a Spanish Colonial style.The linear building displays arches of varying profiles and staggered gable and shed roofs with Mission tiles. The building is fully developed stylistically, with an extensive use of detailing, such as quatrefoil windows, wooden shutters, concrete ' grillwork and a Monterey style balcony. Over forty Amtrak and Metrolink passenger trains currently serve the recently restored Fullerton Santa Fe ' Depot each day. The Amtrak San Diegans stop at the Depot almost hourly and provide rail transportation up and down the California coast.The Fullerton Depot is also served daily by the Amtrak Southwest Chief which follows the route of the historic Santa Fe Trail east to Chicago. It is estimated that a total of 300,000 w visitors pass through the Depot annually. The Depot is located at the intersection of Santa Fe Avenue and r Harbor Boulevard,one block south of Commonwealth Avenue. 1. Development Process The City of Fullerton adopted one its first redevelopment project areas in 1974. The project area was centered at the intersection of Harbor and Commonwealth,often described as the City's historic downtown .. core. It extended to the north for some distance along the Harbor `commercial corridor' and to the south it included the Santa Fe Depot complex. The first six years after the adoption of the project area was spent on 'y designing a detailed phased development program for the entire area, focusing on a comprehensive downtown revitalization strategy. In 1980, the first phase of the project was initiated by a downtown reconstruction program,which concentrated on rehabilitating retail and commercial space along Harbor and Commonwealth. This was accompanied by implementing a design and landscaping program, unifying pedestrian access and the existing parking stock as well as providing an unifying theme. The second phase of the program,focused on developing the Santa Fe Depot and its surrounding areas south of Commonwealth and east of Harbor as a Transportation Center,combining transit uses with the retaillcwmmercial edges along iCommonwealth and Harbor. Though the City started implementing the Transportation Center concept in 1983, it was not until 1991, when the City acquired the existing Depot,that this concept actually started taking shape. In 1980,the City had already acquired the Union Pacific Depot located to the south and had ' moved the building next to the Santa Fe Depot. The restoration of the Santa Fe Depot was carried out during 1994-95, while the Union Pacific Building, was leased out to The Old Spaghetti Factory restaurant who completely restored the building into 500 seat restaurant in 1987-88. Re-emergence of downtown retail combined with the success of the Spaghetti Factory was already bringing about significant change to the 1 area. With the decision to operate the Metrolink Orange County line through Fullerton,this project received considerable boost in the early 1990s not only from the City's perspective, but also from Caltrans and the Orange County Transportation Authority(OCTA),to turn it into a model project for the region. The city constructed a 290 space parking structure to accommodate multimodal transit uses and OCTA located a transit terminal and bus turnout within the transportation center. The City also consolidated most of the vacant land facing the depot building and constructed a large surface parking lot. The total number of ' parking spaces including structured and surface lots is approximately nine hundred. By 1995,the Depot was restored, a third main line was added, new north and south platforms with a bridge connecting them was constructed and all the surface and structured parking was in place. A rough breakup of project costs is shown below. Caltrans funded approximately 75%of this total,while Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA•530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 I SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section IV- Case Studies Page 4-22 the rest was a combination of redevelopment,Amtrak and other State and Federal funds. r Rough Project Costs: 1. Depot(Acquisition) $1,000,000 2. Depot(Restoration of Amtrak part only) $250,000 (140,000 was the City's contribution, the remainder was contributed by Amtrak and Caltrans) 3. North Platform $500,000 t! 4. South Platform(Including south side surface parking) $1,000,000 .3 5. Bridge $1,000,000 6. 3'Main Line $10,000,000- $12,000,000 7. Parking Structure $2,500,000 w 8. Surface Parking $750,000- $1,000,000 Note: The City only restored the interior of the space leased to Amtrak. All of the exterior restoration and interior tenant improvements of the remainder of the building was carried out by the only other tenant in lieu of reduced rent. r 2. Current Use Mix The total area of the Santa Fe Depot is approximately 7,000 SF and the total area of the Union Pacific Depot is approximately 12,000 SF As mentioned earlier,the Union Pacific Depot is entirely leased out to the Old Spaghetti Factory. The City's lease agreement with the Spaghetti Factory is on a percentage of gross receipts basis,which is annually adjusted for inflation. The current agreement obligates the Spaghetti Factory to pay approximately five percent of gross receipts to the City. Current annual receipts of the Spaghetti factory are approximately$2.8-$3.0 million. The City has leased the Santa Fe Depot to two primary tenants. The first of these is Amtrak,who occupies the single largest space in the Santa Fe Depot taking up approximately 2,500 SF Amtrak's space includes a fully restored lobby and sitting area,ticket counter, rest rooms and baggage area. Amtrak pays a rent of approximately$31,000 annually to the City(which is adjusted for inflation). The remaining space is leased to a single tenant,with whom the City entered into a special agreement to _ provide the space at reduced rent and the option of subleasing, in lieu of carrying out the restoration of the depot exterior. As a result the remaining space has been subleased to four additional tenants. These tenants are Express Caf6,Trainsweb.com,Fullerton Railway Plaza Association Inc.,and an English learning center. Express Cafe is a food service/gift shop,with indoor and outdoor seating and a beer bar, which primarily caters to Metrolink and Amtrak passengers. Business activity in the cafe is tied to the train schedules and most of the activity is during the early morning and late aftemoon/evening. Even though the cafe is close to the downtown offices and retail,the impact of downtown customers is minimal. This is primarily due to lack of good visibility and due to the perception that the establishment is oriented towards transit users rather that the daytime employees. They do get some daytime business from regular train enthusiasts who spend time at the depot observing and documenting passing trains. Trainweb.com is a rail enthusiast web site who Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA•530 Sixth Avenue,San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 .� Section IV-Case Studies Page 4-23 i provides internet resources on trains on train travel. They have also set up`web-cams',or intemet accessible rr live cameras at the Fullerton depot to be accessed by train-watchers all over the world. Trainweb was attracted to Fullerton for two primary reasons. The historical context of the restored Depot was one,while •' the second reason was access to high-speed intemet infrastructure which enable them to set up all of their servers and web-cams. Fullerton Railway Plaza Association (FRPA) is also regional a rail enthusiast organization that is dedicated to the preservation of the railroad heritage of Southern California through the creation of a large Interactive Railroad Attraction in the City of Fullerton. FRPA is currently involved in fundraising activities to attract independent developers who will undertake development of such an attraction at Fullerton. The location of the FRPA offices at the Santa Fe Depot is a perfect fit in view of their work and vision. The Depot also houses an English language center. The center intends to cater to new immigrant workers who are also likely transit users,making it relevant for them to locate at the depot. The City plans to rehabilitate another additional 1,600 SF in an existing shed attached to the Depot. This space will be leased to a travel agency who specializes in train travel and organizes train tours. The City rents all of the remaining space to the primary tenant for a discounted rent of approximately ' $1.80/SF annually. The subleases are worked out by the primary tenant at an average rent of approximately $12.00/SF annually. The new space for the travel agency will be leased at approximately $13.44/SF annually. The rent from the Old Spaghetti Factory is annually earmarked to be spent for maintenance and operation of transportation center. The approximate annual expenditure for operations and maintenance is at least$75,000. ' 3. Location Context As described above,the development of the Fullerton Transportation Center which includes the Santa Fe Depot, has been a very long term process and is part of a larger community development plan. After the inception of the downtown redevelopment project area and the decision to develop a multimodal Transportation Center adjacent to downtown, it was decided that the integration of the existing stock of historic buildings to contemporary commercial,retail and transit needs would be key to the success of the new development. ' The project started in the early 1980s with rehabilitation of buildings and attraction of businesses to downtown. The second phase of development which included the transportation center,was centered around three existing historic buildings, 1)the Santa Fe Depot,2)the Union Pacific Depot which was moved to this location in 1980 and 3)the station for the Pacific Electric inter-city trolley car system, located at the comer of Commonwealth and Pomona (with one side facing Downtown and the other facing the Depot). The Redevelopment Agency took an active role in providing the necessary physical infrastructure like ' landscaping,parking and other thematic design elements,but concentrated on attracting a complementary set of tenants and users to the Center keeping in mind the long term success and sustainability of the project. After almost 20 years since the beginning of the project, it has shown considerable level of maturity. Moderate to high-end community serving retailidining establishments and professional offices occupies most of the buildings in the Downtown historic core(including the Pacific Electric building). The Transportation Center complements this with its own share of retail/dining and transit dependent services The Old Spaghetti Factory is considered extremely successful,and it is not uncommon to see long lines of dinner guests waiting for seats in the evenings. It should be kept in mind that the evolution of the Downtown and the Transportation Center is attributed not only to the efforts of the City but also to a great extent to the commitment and cooperation of the various business owners. In summary,the Santa Fe Depot's proximity to Downtown was a great asset,which was realized by the City,who in turn used this to its advantage in .� Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section IV- Case Studies Page 4-24 coming up with a successful development plan. As a next phase of development, the City proposes to attract a private developer to develop a train based themed attraction along with supporting retail and dining facilities in an area adjacent to the existing Santa Fe Depot. FRPA is already working with some preliminary design and feasibility studies with the help of State grants. The proposed facility is expected to include permanent train displays, virtual reality rides, outdoor recreation areas,restaurants and shops. The City is also involved in organizing the annual `Railroad Days' festival at the Transportation Center, which attracts approximately 15,000 residents and train enthusiasts. The festival includes train related educational/recreation activities, exhibits, and various information booths. TABLE 4D: FULLERTON SANTA FE DEPOT Development begin 1976/initial planning Construction since 1980, $15,800,000 Area surrounded by successful commercial businesses:Old Spaghetti Factory, Knowlwood 22 Amtrak stops,20-25 Metrolink stops,300,000 visitors 290 Space parking structure, site plus 600 more Amtrak,2,500 SF, other spaces leased to private family,small cafe, www.trainweb.com Orange County Transit Authority main connection hub City installed two spur lines for Fullerton Railway Plaza Days; 15,000 people.Travel agency facilities, 1,600 SF Future"Interactive Railroad Attraction"with shopping area. Expand parking by 250 spaces in 3 -5 years No transient problems,moved out State Social Security Office. Problems with students. Police foot patrol,24 hours Over pass pedestrian bridge works well,used as a"viewing platform" Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 � � o 0 2 Lu < r # § f§) !m / � £ � ` \! ; - 2l� ( : / \\jtt )\\\j�;; aga! m!f !e |& ; m � 2 \ z z / ` / \\)klf2G (£ }§ @§ « ` K)| | y , °; � \kfl � Z j ®� (/ � k (\\ \ } . � \ : _ � - . - § § ] - « ± - . � OU ■ ■ � § � } � . . SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section IV-Case Studies Page 4-27 E. SANTA ANA TRANSPORTATION CENTER The Santa Ana Regional Transportation Center is a new facility constructed by the City of Santa Ana to fulfill it's multimodal transportation needs as well as larger community development needs. The three-story building is not historic, but is built in a typical Spanish Mission style with great emphasis on details,high quality finishes and a traditional California station ambience. The building includes various thematic * elements like a five-story tower, a rear courtyard forming an outdoor waiting area,with sweeping Spanish steps on either side leading to open terraces above. Current multimodal transportation providers include Amtrak,Metrolink, Greyhound,Orange County Transportation Authority,Tres Estrellas de Oro,Turimex International/Transportes Intercalifomias, and Coast Yellow Cab. The current estimated annual patronage to the Center is approximately 1,000,000 persons. 1. Development Process The City of Santa Ana started the project as a part of the Inter City Commuter Station Redevelopment Project area which was established in 1982. The construction of the building was started in 1983 and the building -» was completed in 1985. The seven-acre site is located on 1000 East Santa Boulevard and is situated within largely light industrial/warehousing type land uses. The project was conceived much before Metrolink arrived,at a time when the City realized the importance of Santa Ana as a mid point in the rail route between Los Angeles and San Diego. The City decided to develop the transportation center as a regional landmark building and at the same as a facility that serves some of the key community needs. The project was I envisioned to become a truly multimodal transportation center serving the passengers who use buses and trains. It was realized that a large component of the passenger profile comprised of residents and workers of the region who used multimodal means to travel between Mexico and Southern California and then 1 perhaps make connections to the rest of the United States. In spite of the considerable amount of risk involved in terms of actually realizing the long term goals of the project,the City went ahead to invest$18.0 million in the 47,000 SF facility. The entire project was developed in a single phase with funds from various sources,with the largest portion coming from redevelopment tax increment financing. A break down of funding amounts and sources are as follows: Redevelopment Agency Bonds $ 6,200,000. California State Department of Transportation Grants $ 4,540,000. General Revenue Sharing Funds $ 2,198,000. iUrban Mass Transit Administration Grants(Section 9) $ 2,020,000. State Gasoline Tax Funds $ 455,000. Other Local Funds $ 2.587,000. Total Range of Costs $18,000,000. ' The center includes 427 surface parking spaces,approximately 250 of which are on site and the remainder are on an off site location across Santa Ana Boulevard. The number of parking spaces eventually proved to be inadequate based on the size and passenger traffic at the center, which has led the City to build an additional on-site structured parking facility accommodating 435 spaces, at a cost of$4.5 million. The parking structure is expected to open at the end of November 1999. The City is also constructing new bus bays to accommodate the increased bus traffic in addition to the two existing bus stalls. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section IV-Case Studies Page 4-28 A security officer patrols the facility 24 hours a day, seven days a week. The cost of providing security is approximately$100,000 annually. The City has sub-contracted the general maintenance of the facility to .� a private service provider for an annual fee of approximately $75,000. In addition the City spends approximately $50,000 on landscaping costs annually. The City has also contracted a number of other !I electrical, lighting and mechanical service providers on a retainer basis. 2. Current Use Mix During its 15 years of existence,the Center has gone through various public and private tenant turnovers, but it's current tenant mix is probably the most ideal one in view of the long term goals of the project. The Center accommodates a range of national and international bus and train service providers,focusing on links with Mexico. Until recently the local cable television provider occupied a large portion of the building. After completion of their own facilities, the cable provider left making a large portion of the building ,t available for lease. The City took this opportunity to bring in the local Private Industry Council's job „ training center, called the Santa Ana W.O.R.K.(Work, Opportunity,Resources,Knowledge)center. This use fit perfectly with some of the existing transit uses as well as other job training and employment development related uses. Currently the building includes a California Employment Development Department Job Resource Center, which facilitates job search through an Internet center as well has information booths. There is a Cal-Works welfare to work center,which helps welfare dependents to find r jobs in the region through referrals and training. The W.O.R.K. center offers various vocational training r programs in conjunction with the California Employment Development Department and Santa Ana College in the various classroom spaces located in the building. The Center also includes various retail and public uses. The Casa Santa Fe banquet facility is operated by a local restaurateur, and is often rented for various parties and weddings,including ethnic cultural events. ., A cafe and a gift shop are located near the passenger waiting areas. In addition,the building has two meeting rooms for public/City use.The current tenant profile and space distributions are as follows: • Transit Related Tenants .. Amtrak 2,135 SF Greyhound 1,180 SF Tres Estrellas De Oro 150 SF Turimex International/Transportes Intercalifomias 313 SF OCTA 2 bus stalls Coast Yellow Cab 5 cab spaces • Other Tenants Casa Santa Fe(banquet Hall) 5,497 SF Caf6 Express 1,100 SF K.Lee Gift Shop 916 SF Santa Ana W.O.R.K Center 6,314 SF Employment Resource Center 7,393 SF A Cal Works 6,354 SF The current rents range from$1.00/SF to$1.45/SF,depending on size and function of the tenant. *+ Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section IV-Case Studies Page 4-29 3. Location Context The location of the Santa Ana Transportation Center is probably most comparable to the San Bernardino 1 Depot. The Center is located within an industrial area,with considerable amount of vacant land. It is about 1/4 mile away from the nearest residential area(which has a historic housing stock with moderate-income residents)and Downtown Santa Ana is about 1/2 mile or more from the station site. It is obvious that the use mix in the project had to be carefully worked out achieve the desired results. Considering the fact that the City's population is more that 70% Hispanic,with an overall median annual household income under $35,000 and a median age of 26.5 years,the City took the right decision in the beginning to concentrate the transit component towards establishing linkages with Mexico and the other uses towards job-training and employment generation goals. But the results and impacts of the project are barely showing themselves now, after almost 15 years after the project was built. One of the apparent results is the fact that the Center is fully occupied with tenants who generate considerable activity in the building throughout the day(irrespective of transit schedules). The Center's multimodal function works perfectly,with Mexican passengers from neighboring regions taking the Greyhound or Amtrak to Santa Ana and then transferring to one of the PS international bus lines to Mexico(or vice versa). The local population actively uses and benefits from the job training,job referral and welfare to work programs. It should be kept in mind that many of the patrons of these programs are also potential transit users. In terms of impacts on local real estate as catalyst to local �.. development,the signs are weak but are beginning to show. A large lot across the street to the east of the _ Center has just been sold and is being developed into a industrial park/business center. Many of the surrounding vacant lots were being used as junkyards,but they have been gradually phased out and the lots 1 are being put up for sale, indicating increased potential value. Overall,the Santa Ana Transportation Center is showing signs of success,but even after 15 years, it is still i evolving. In terms of use mix and local impacts,the projects provides and excellent example for the San Bernardino Depot. The key lesson is however in the fact that all projects of this nature take considerable amount of time to evolve and produce the desired results. i I i 1 1 1 1 1 Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Section IV-Case Studies Page 4-30 TABLE 4E: SANTA ANA TRANSPORTATION CENTER • 47,000 SF New"Mediterranean Style"facility • 1,000,000 Travelers,facility still evolving ` • 777 Long and short term parking spaces • $18,000,000 in 1985 to construct,7-acre site • 24 hour/seven days a week security/facility and grounds • Wedding receptions,Mayor's luncheons,250-300 persons,demand has been as high as 500 persons • Heritage Room:Orange County Railroad Historical Society • Metrolink patrons do not use the facility • Facility has ATM,mail boxes,info TV,newsrack,brochures,bus routes • High maintenance facility • Large hispanic patronage • Industrial,low-income hispanic neighborhood,warehouses • Downtown one-half mile away from facility Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 @ � ER \ � @ _ � � � \ e - � � < z - . _ o \ \ \k ) \ ! L6 \ � § � §f$/£§§7 _ z ! ! !�s |� �# §§ f} . )` Ez w o [ / < \ ^ \ (� 6l :/( !\ : ; IA . \ \ _ _ _ / !\k �£;|§/ \� z\ - _ -§/ M-g =2- P _ \� \2 ) §\)| s \ / » ? 7 _ � g « y : - . , . . . . . . . . . . . . . � . _ z _ @ ix � « � < - ) z ~ ^ ~ ` ■ < ! i ! ! � & = E ■ § ( ) ) { � N � GI w s a W V .:x Z ;y � r - O _ W w 0000 0 00000a W ICJ ' o N Li > r z zo p Z ¢ Q Q 6 Y 01 z Z '''��� � F• _ �j� � rb m sOO �z LL ? Q F- LL W ¢ m = w W Z � � Z � `1 off. F �i � yl U I I � o , x � WI z r ?I z < -- � cC SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section IV-Case Studies Page 4-35 F. CONCLUSIONS AND OBSERVATIONS These case studies have provided valuable lessons on the challenges and successes of similar transit redevelopment projects in the Southern California region.Each of the depots provide specific examples of areas requiring consideration and when creating a redevelopment plan for the San Bernardino Depot. W. 1. Glendale Transportation Center It is important to understand and work with current tenant's needs, as the rehabilitation process gives the 1 opportunity to expand the types of services offered. Greyhound currently has a passenger ticket office,but is considering expanding into the existing unused baggage area and offering package shipping.Provisions made for a loading dock during design and construction will help make this use feasible. Even though the space for the Amtrak office and ticket window was designed and constructed to Amtrak's requirements, they decided not to handle ticketing services within the depot prior to the station opening. Obtaining a written commitment from existing tenants for a specific term would be beneficial to both the City and the tenant for planning. Absent an anchor tenant within the lobby, the depot lacks a sense of vitality despite the well executed restoration.As with most of the depots studied,the Metrolink platforms are situated in a manner that riders will have minimal interaction with the depot building. Providing adequate long term and short term parking is crucial.The east parking lot contains 180 spaces and is primarily used for Amtrak riders.The central lot provides 80 spaces for short term use,and the west lot contains another 180 spaces for Metrolink riders. Connection with the local bus service,MTA, is handled at newly constructed bus shelters directly in front and complimentary to the depot. 2. Claremont Santa Fe Depot While the main lobby tends to be a vacant,underutilized space,the adjacent transit store area receives daily I use, brings activity into the depot, and assists travelers in making connections with the various transit services. The transit store employees also serve as an unofficial onsite property manager and help keep an eye on the building and its immediate surroundings. The City conceived the historic baggage area as a restaurant, but has been unable to attract a tenant for that space since the Depot's rehabilitation in 1992. Despite a pedestrian friendly neighborhood,the `roughness' of the space, lack of utilities, finishes and an awkward configuration, have contributed to the space's ' continued vacancy. The City is now planning on trying to make the space more visible to the adjacent village' and to lessen the burden of tenant improvements in the hope to fill the building. The Metrolink platforms and parking are located to the east of the depot building and do not serve to encourage the rail commuters to interact with the historic depot.As a result retail oriented tenants also have not been attracted to the building. The City is also promoting the Depot by organizing weekend and evening events like jazz concerts and musical events in the plaza,and public functions in the main lobby.These events can serve to help potential users become familiar with the facility and provide an alternate source of income for the Depot. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 ■ SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 A Section IV-Case Studies Page 4-36 r Choosing not to offer subsidized rents, other than to the transit store,and maintaining strict guidelines on how the historic structure may be altered have also proven to be additional stumbling blocks in attracting "I tenants. It is important to make a conscious effort early in the planning process to integrate the Depot's 'a redevelopment with the needs of the surrounding neighborhood in addition to the primary transit uses. Lacking this approach,the Claremont depot has found a greater long term challenge in attracting tenants. 3. Chatsworth Transit Center and Child Care Center The visual separation of the Depot from the streets and surrounding neighborhood by vacant land, the rail .. lines, and a large drainage canal, has isolated the building to the extent that attracting and keeping retail tenants has been difficult. Finding initial uses that help potential users become aware of the facility and creating better visual links to the active retail corridor to the north will be essential to attracting future retail r or restaurant tenants. ■ The large child care center,which targeted the substantial Metrolink commuter traffic the depot sees each day, has found that few of the children are associated with the rail commuters. The student population is currently at about 50% capacity, and is made up almost exclusively of children from the surrounding w neighborhoods.The City also found that they could have avoided many difficulties developing the child care center if they would have given that task to a private developer. The Chamber of Commerce office and specifically the Hal Bemson community meeting room have helped filled a need of the surrounding community and receive a reasonable amount of regular use. Within the Depot's main lobby there is a modest railroad model and history display.The display serves as a pleasant diversion for those waiting for the next train,but is insufficient to attract people to the Depot. we The surface parking lots can accommodate up to 380 cars and is used to capacity on most weekdays.The lots also serve for auxiliary parking for Hollywood Bowl events. Shuttle service to special events,as well as local commuter bus services are provided for with well developed bus stop areas. 4. Fullerton Santa Fe Depot The redevelopment and revitalization of the City's transportation center,of which the Depot's rehabilitation was the last phase,has been a long term process which started in 1976.The adjacent Union Pacific building •^ was moved,and converted into a`Old Spaghetti Factory' restaurant and served as an anchor business prior to the restoration of the Santa Fe Depot building. Approximately sixty-five percent of the depot building has been leased to a single tenant,with whom the City w entered into a special agreement to provide the space at a reduced rent and the option of subleasing. The single tenant would in-tum handle the building's restoration and ongoing upkeep.This has become a decision the City has come to regret.The current tenants are now paying market rate rents,however the City still only receives rents at the reduced rate.Additionally the City has lost some control of the quality and quantity of maintenance the building receives. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA • 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Section IV- Case Studies Page 4-37 With the exception of the `Express Cafe' the current tenant make-up is of businesses that complement the transportation uses, without looking to rail users for their primary support. The Depot capitalizes on it's Historic significance and image to attract large crowds for special events, specifically it's `Railroad Days'celebration in May.Future development will include a railroad based theme attraction and will utilize the two dedicated spur lines already in-place. 5. Santa Ana Transportation Center Conceived as a true multi-modal transportation center,an early realization was that a large component of the passenger profile was comprised of residents and workers of the region who used public transportation to travel between Mexico and Southern California and then made connections to other portions of the region. The City has an on-site property manager that has served the essential role of providing timely response to security and maintenance issues and responding to tenant needs. The current tenant mix has proven to be an ideal match to the needs of the Depot's primary market,and relies on those users rather than rail generated traffic. This realization has contributed to the vitality and financial success of this project. The training and employment development related uses, privately operated banquet facility,which occupies 1 the space originally conceived for a restaurant,and public meeting rooms serve the community and overcome the building's less than ideal location. The transportation center is in a industrial area, removed from the City's downtown core, with considerable amounts of vacant land, and is the site most comparable to San Bemardino's. The current tenant mix is a result of an ongoing evolution that has been occurring over the last fifteen years. ' It is important to look at the revitalization of an area as a long term process. What emerges from these case studies are the following observations and conclusions that should be considered when planning the uses and site development needed to create a project that is successful in terms ' of generating sufficient income to support itself and to take it's role in the revitalization of southwest San Bernardino. ' Integration with a larger community development plan is essential. The context of the depot site in relation to the Mt.Vernon Corridor Specific Plan or Downtown,could be a crucial issue with respect to the long tern sustainability and success of the project. The rehabilitation process could take two approaches.The City could either rehabilitate both the exterior and interior (tenant improvements) of the building in return for higher rents, or the burden of interior improvements could be left to the tenant in lieu of discounted rent. • Operations and maintenance costs for such facilities could be substantial. Effective cost recovery techniques and alternative long-tern operation and maintenance funding sources might need to be identified. A sense of security is created by activity,and a comprehensive maintenance program. When issues arise that require law enforcement,timely response and action is necessary.Having the owner's onsite presence acting as both property manager and leasing agent can create the mechanism that provides active oversight. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 i SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section IV- Case Studies Page 4-38 Partnerships with Amtrak and Metrolink and assessment of their long-term plans would be essential. Looking beyond the transit users and addressing the needs of the primary and secondary markets is necessary to create a successful use mix. Other users and markets in addition to primary rail transit users have to be attracted for the project to sustain itself. This might include other modes of transit users, area residents. daytime employees and visitors. Public and community serving tenants are often considered in comparable projects. These could be local government related,community service related. vocational education related.Private industry job councils and non-City government tenants could provide stable long term rents. Transit or rail related non-profit groups, clubs, enthusiast organizations usually prefer to locate in such facilities. The project horizon could be long term and may take 15 to 20 years before the desired results in terms of it becoming a catalyst for local economic development are actually seen. Long distance Bus service providers connecting San Bernardino to other parts of the region or Mexico could be considered. This would make sense if the bus service complements the train service and a multi-modal use facility becomes feasible. Providing adequate parking and situating it to serve both the Metrolink platforms and the depot building is essential and will help encourage interaction with businesses offering goods or services within the Depot and provide greater flexibility for special events uses. Due to the San Bernardino Depot's relatively small site, offsite parking will be required. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 yam_ �t i tlk SECTION V Adaptive Uses and Analysis SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Section V-Adaptive Uses and Analysis Page 5-1 V. ADAPTIVE USES & ANALYSIS A. OVERVIEW The Public and Stakeholder's Workshops for the adaptive reuse of the historic San Bernardino Depot were held on October 22, 1999,November 20, 1999 and January 14,2000.The Workshops resulted in a broad list of suggested potential uses for the building and site. The items in this section are the recommended by people who attended the Workshops.These proposed uses are organized into general categories and their feasibility and appropriateness for incorporation into the final program are assessed. The following two guidelines are important factors in assessing potential architectural uses: 1) The primary uses of the rehabilitated San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot should"relate to r. surface transportation"in compliance with Transportation Equity Act for the 21° Century(TEA-21)funding requirements."Activities which are not explicitly on the [Qualifying Activities] list may qualify if they are an integral part of a larger qualifying .. activity,,, 2) The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation requires that"A property shall be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment" �- Additional criteria for the evaluation of potential uses are: to Is the use feasible within the physical constraints of the Depot? • Is the use appropriate for the Depot? ' Is the use needed by the community? • Is the use compatible with other Depot uses? • Is the use economically viable? ' Will the use increase the awareness of the Depot and the history of the region? • Does the use compliment the proposed land use and environmental planning policies of the City of San Bernardino? While no potential use can meet every criteria,this method of analysis results in a logical and balanced screening process. B. TERMINOLOGY AND DEFE41TIONS Some of the common terms used to analyze potential adaptive uses are: "feasible,""appropriate," ' "potential"and"viable."These terms,and how they relate to this report are explained below: 1. FEASIBLE `Possible.Logical, Capable of being accomplished" Suggested building uses were carefully analyzed and their feasibility was determined based on existing physical constraints, financial implications,potential historic impacts and user needs.A use that could not be executed would be infeasible. ' Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue,San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 1 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section V-Adaptive Uses and Analysis Page 5-3 Figure 5A PUBLIC WORKSHOPS AND TOURS I 1 r -�40 C r 1 1 = , SAN BERNARDINO SANTA FE DEPOT 1 REHABILITATION & ADAPTIVE REUSE 1 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section V-Adaptive Uses and Analysis Page 5-5 2. APPROPRIATE 'Fitting. Suitable fora particular place or condition." Suggested uses were also examined to determine whether they were appropriate for the Depot. Appropriateness depended upon the size, special needs and advantages and disadvantages associated with each potential use. The historic integrity of the Depot could be sacrificed by an inappropriate use. 3. POTENTIAL 'latent. Capable of being, but not yet in existence. Having a capacity to grow." Does the suggested use have the ability to be successful with the Depot building? 4. VIABLE 'Capable of success or effectiveness.Able to develop under favorable conditions." If the suggested use is implemented properly,can it succeed within the Depot?Can the use function in the current and future economic environment of the region? C. LIST OF STAKEHOLDERS 1. Omnitrans ' Omnitrans is the public bus transit agency serving the San Bernardino valley. Founded in 1976 through a joint powers agreement,Omni trans carries over 15 million passengers each year throughout its 480 square mile service area. 2. Metrolink n Metrolink is the regional rail system including commuter and other passenger services linking communities to employment and activity center. 3. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway(BNSF)is one of the largest railroad networks in North America with 33,500 route miles covering 28 states and two Canadian provinces. BNSF provides freight services through the San Bernardino area. ' 4. National Rail Passenger Corporation(Amtrak) Amtrak provides passenger,baggage and freight services for the San Bernardino area. Amtrak occupies ' a portion of the San Bernardino Depot for use as passenger ticketing and baggage check-in. 5. State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO)/San Bernardino County Museum ' San Bernardino County Museum, in Redlands, is a regional museum with exhibits and collections in cultural and natural history. Special exhibits, a hands-on Discovery Hall,extensive research collections, ' and public programs for adults, families, students and children are all a part of the Museum experience. The San Bernardino County Museum is also home to the local State Historic Preservation Office Information Center. The Information Center provides archaeological and historical resources information to local government and individuals with responsibilities under the National Environmental Policy Act(NEPA),the National Historic Preservation Act(NI-IPA)and the California Environmental Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT RERABILTTATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section V-Adaptive Uses and Analysis Page 5-6 Quality Act(CEQA). 6. Mount Vernon Project Area Committee(PAC) Local stakeholder group for the Paseo Las Placitas Specific Plan for the Mt.Vernon Corridor. IN 7. San Bernardino Convention &Visitors Bureau w The San Bernardino Convention&Visitors Bureau provides assistance and information about the community and surrounding area. A 8. California State University San Bernardino ■ California State University at San Bernardino is part of the California State University system consisting of a 23-campuses of comprehensive and polytechnic universities and the California Maritime Academy. r The CSU awards bachelor and master's degrees in more than 200 subject areas. 9. San Bernardino Valley College San Bernardino Valley College has serviced the community of San Bernardino for over 70 years. The college provides general education,transfer,vocational/technical and community service education for W the City of San Bernardino. 10. San Bernardino Historical Society +il The San Bernardino Historical Society is an educational and cultural institution dedicated to preserving and sharing historical collections and extensive archives of San Bernardino. 11. San Bernardino Railroad Historical Society The purpose for the San Bernardino Railroad Historical Society is to bring to life the soul and spirit of days gone by through the preservation of and education about railroad heritage. • r 12. - Westside Business Association San Bernardino's local business association. r Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619) 239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 4 Section V-Adaptive Uses and Analysis Page 5-7 r D. EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL USES an 1. Transportation The following uses were suggested at the Workshops: • Amtrak(train) pM 0 Metrolink(commuter train) �r Greyhound(bus) • Omnitrans(local bus) • Other Bus Lines • Freight Facility • Shuttle Service • Car Rental • Trolley •• The above list of surface transportation-related uses have widely varying programmatic needs.Amtrak and Metrolink currently occupy portions of the site and will require office space as well as ticketing and waiting areas. Shuttle services may only require a dedicated pick-up and drop-off zone and they could serve as a useful means of transportation between the Depot and Downtown San Bernardino or provide connections to areas not accessible by rail. A taxicab zone should also be provided. Bus related services would benefit the Depot and bring more users into the building, but the Depot can be successful even without full bus services. There are many bus lines that serve San Bernardino and the r Depot would be a logical location for their offices. ' A railroad freight facility has been suggested,but the requirements for such an elaborate facility are far more extensive than the Depot site and adjacent yard will allow.A freight facility would also conflict ' with the passenger uses of the Depot.An on-site car rental business is not a feasible use for the Depot, due to the lack of parking spaces necessary for a rental car lot. ' 2. Office Uses The following uses were suggested at the Workshops: • Professional Office Area • Quality Office Spaces(Large Corporation) ' Offices that support surface transportation businesses like Amtrak,Metrolink and bus services are ideal users for the rehabilitated Depot.Administrative offices would likely be located on the second floor, although Amtrak's offices should remain on the ground level adjacent to their ticketing counter and baggage areas. Metrolink currently occupies a temporary building adjacent to the Depot that will be ' removed as part of the rehabilitation project. Metrolink has indicated a desire to use approximately 4,000 SF of space,preferably located on the second floor,west end. ' Office uses by the local government,public agencies and private business would also be appropriate. Non-profit organizations and clubs are often good initial tenants within redeveloped projects, although at reduced rents.An executive suite office arrangement could be provided so small businesses could share the resources of a single reception desk and support areas. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section V-Adaptive Uses and Analysis Page 5-8 3. Conference/Meeting Facilities The following uses were suggested at the Workshops: • Conference Rooms • General Meeting Rooms • Conference"Kick-off'Area • Convention Center .w • Wedding Reception Area Conference and meeting uses are both feasible and appropriate within the Depot. The main public waiting and lobby area could easily accommodate meetings and banquets for over 275 people. However, r the poor acoustics,without some modifications to the main lobby,may limit the effectiveness of the space for lectures and performances. Other spaces on both the first and second floors could be used as conference and meeting rooms.The meeting rooms should be designed so that they allow for flexibility _ to handle small groups of up to ten persons with the ability to be expanded for larger meetings.Adjacent office tenants within the building could create an additional demand for meeting spaces. The suggested use of the Depot as a true"convention center" is not feasible due to many factors, including the limited space for assembly and no ability to exhibit large objects such as sales booths and product displays. However, "kick-off'conference meetings, special assemblies,such as wedding receptions,banquets,and parties, are compatible uses. Events that require beverage services or catering would be benefitted by on-site kitchen and bar areas,alleviating the need for outside catering services and providing a more desirable facility for potential users. 4. Educational w. The following uses were suggested at the Workshops: • Evening Adult Education • Vocational/Job Training School • Private Testing Facility • Employment Resource Center Educational uses are feasible and appropriate within the Depot and would occupy the same types of spaces as the offices. Classrooms could be located on the second floor and possibly some locations on the ground floor. Evening Adult Education classes, such as extension courses offered by a local community colleges and universities, are the most feasible type of educational use because the •• programmatic requirements are modest and the number of classrooms required can be flexible. Vocational training classes would also be a possibility.However,a traditional K through 12 school would not be feasible(not allowed by code)or appropriate within the Depot. 5. Government Services The following uses were suggested at the Workshops: • Chamber of Commerce/Visitor Information • Emergency Clinic • Police Substation Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 �„ SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT _ REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Section V-Adaptive Uses and Analysis Page 5-9 City and County government service uses,such as transportation offices,an employment/training center, tourist information and welfare-to-work offices are appropriate uses similar to the Office Uses noted previously. These types of government uses are service-oriented and require continuous public interaction, so accessibility from the main lobby or another primary entrance is important. Government ii tenants can provide a level of stability and flexibility that is important to redevelopment projects of this type,especially within the first five to ten years. Medical uses,like a suggested emergency clinic,are not appropriate for the rehabilitated Depot because of their unique programmatic and utility needs and the increased seismic standards and stand-alone ' emergency utility services required for a"Essential Services Facility." Currently,a police substation facility on the comer of 5'Street and Mount Vernon Avenue serves the surrounding neighborhood. Relocating the substation would be an appropriate new use and could help establish a sense of security. Other law enforcement agencies could also occupy space within the Depot, such as the County Sheriff or California Highway Patrol. ' 6. Consumer Services The following uses were suggested at the Workshops: ' • Auto Repair Service • Barber Shop/Shoe Shine • Laundry/Dry Cleaners e • Reprographics/Copy Center • Child Care Facility • Travel Agent • Bank/ATM There were many suggestions to provide consumer service uses for the commuters who frequent the ' Depot.Although,through research of similar transportation facilities, it is clear that daily commuters rarely, if ever, use Depot facilities, such as Clairemont,Fullerton,Chatsworth,Glendale or Santa Ana. Some consumer services, like a dry cleaner or a copy center,are both feasible and appropriate.Other service-related uses, such as child care centers and auto repair shops,are not as readily feasible as part of the rehabilitated San Bernardino Depot. A child care facility would be feasible,but is limited by many factors.Child care centers in California are licensed by the Department of Social Services.Licensing is intended to insure a minimum standard of health and safety for the children. One of the requirements is that 75 SF of outdoor activity space be provided per child, including a shaded rest area. The outdoor activity space also needs to be enclosed by ' a four foot high fence. The likely location for an outdoor activity area would be on the south,or front,of the Depot. That orientation would make the playground a high profile addition to the building that would disrupt the historic integrity of the Depot.Noise and other negative byproducts of the industrial site are not agreeable with child care uses.The severely limited site area and the need for vehicular circulation would be incompatible with the safety needs of the children. ' An on-site auto repair shop is not feasible or appropriate, but it would be possible to provide for a check- in desk where commuters could have their cars taken to an off-site repair garage while they are at work. A travel agency,barber shop, laundry,dry cleaner and copy center could easily be incorporated as first ' floor retail areas,but their use at other transportation facilities have typically failed due to lack of ' Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA•530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section V-Adaptive Uses and Analysis Page 5-10 customer support.A full-service bank is not feasible,however a small bank storefront and/or a well- placed ATM could be beneficial for the Depot's patrons. ., 7. Retail/sales related A .r r The following uses were suggested at the Workshops: • Gift Shop • Hobby/Craft Shops • Antique Shops • Weekend Swap Meet • Farmer's Market r • Gourmet/Ethnic Food Shops Retail sales and commercial uses are both feasible and appropriate uses for the ground floor of the Depot, _ however,retail uses are one of the uses that is not"related to surface transportation"per the Transportation Equity Act(TEA). Retail tenants can occupy small to large spaces and can be located on either the northwest,southwest or west portions of the building.It should be noted that traditional retail uses have not had success in similar train facilities, especially in the early years of newly restored buildings. Swap meets and/or a farmer's market are feasible and could be supported in the first floor of the Depot, in an area like the baggage room. A market that focuses on specialty fruits,vegetables, bottled and IN preserved foods would be a welcome addition to the area. The former baggage room location allows for the market to be expanded to the exterior for weekends and/or special events. This use may be of interest to commuters if the event occurs only once or twice a week. 8. Restaurant/Food&Beverage The following uses were suggested at the Workshops: A • Restaurant/Patio Garden • First-Class Restaurant • Cafe/Restored Harvey House • Coffee Shop in Lobby •■ • Banquet&Catering Facilities • Cocktails • Wine Tasting Center Restaurant and food service uses would be an appropriate and valuable component to the rehabilitated Depot. A coffeehouse,diner or first-class restaurant would be a useful amenity for residents within the greater San Bernardino area,but would be destination oriented. A banquet facility,which might incorporate a railroad theme,could also support catering functions needed for the meeting and conference uses. Banquet facilities appear to be successful and would cater primarily to the immediate area. If a banquet facility is incorporated, it should obtain a liquor license allowing the serving of alcohol at special events like weddings and receptions. Occasional wine tasting functions could also be supported at the Depot. At the very least,a small coffee bar or kiosk could be part of the final program to serve morning commuters. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section V-Adaptive Uses and Analysis Page 5-11 There is a great deal of interest in resurrecting a Harvey House-type restaurant,similar to the restaurant which once occupied the east end of the Depot's ground level.A family-oriented restaurant in that original location could also take advantage of the open-air courtyard east of the dining room for outdoor dining,however the restaurant would be destination oriented. Restaurants at the other transit center case r studies were not successful, however,the banquet facilities at the Santa Ana Transportation Center is economically viable. r 9. Residential/Hotel The following uses were suggested at the Workshops: • Bed&Breakfast • Hotel/Motel • Restore Railroad Housing(Second Floor"Harvey Girls"Lodging) Residential uses within the Depot building are not appropriate for several reasons, including: 1) w Residential uses are not"related to surface transportation" per the Transportation Equity Act(TEA) to funding requirements,2) The Depot property is zoned Industrial Heavy (III) not residential,3)The layout of the Depot does not lend itself to residential uses,4)Parking is limited and 5)Noise and other •. negative byproducts of the Depot's industrial uses are not compatible with hotels or housing. Y• 10. Cultural/Museum/Tourist The following uses were suggested at the Workshops: San Bernardino Railroad Historical Society Museum • Museum to the East of the Depot • Two Tracks for Engine 3751,a restored steam locamotive built in San Bernardino. • Route 66 Museum • Library • Memorabilia Area"Sell San Bernardino" • Firehouse Museum According to the criteria listed in the TEA guide,"Transportation Museums"qualify for funding as long as they are not-for-profit,are open to the public,educational in nature, have a formally stated mission, ' have at least one full-time paid professional staff member,present regularly scheduled programs and exhibits,have a formal and appropriate program of documentation, care and use of collections and have a formal and appropriate program of presentations and maintenance of exhibits. The Railroad Museum and Firehouse Museum concepts are both feasible for the San Bernardino Depot. A railroad museum is appropriate and could incorporate interior and exterior exhibits, including a preserved train engine on spur tracks adjacent to the Depot. A railroad-related library and/or gift shop t could also work within the museum program. The Firehouse Museum may not be appropriate due to locations available in the Depot and inadequate space to house fire-fighting equipment and fire trucks. The existing doorways may not be large enough to allow fire truck to enter. In addition,most visitors to a Firehouse Museum would expect the museum to be placed in an historic Firestation. t ' Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT r REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section V-Adaptive Uses and Analysis Page 5-12 r 11. Amusement/Entertainment • The following uses were suggested at the Workshops: • Video Arcade M • Model Railroad Club&Activities Other tourist-related uses suggested in the Workshops are listed below.Amusement and entertainment m uses could be useful in generating increased pedestrian traffic in the rehabilitated Depot and broadening the user base by attracting entire families.A video arcade is a feasible use, as long as it can be monitored and not disruptive to the other Depot uses. A working model railroad exhibit would be an appropriate use and could be incorporated into the Transportation Museum area. W 12. On-site Improvements The following uses were suggested at the Workshops: • Landscaping/Lighting • Outside Seating • Water Features • Improve Historic Courtyard According to the criteria listed in the TEA guide, `Eligible Transit Enhancements" include"Landscaping and other scenic beautification, including tables,benches,trash receptacles,and street lights...and public M art."All exterior improvements should be sympathetic to the historical rehabilitation of the Depot and shall comply with The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. 13. Area Development Off-site The following uses were suggested at the Workshops: m • One or Two-Story Parking Structure(to the South) • Close-off 3rd Street • Fountain/Lakes/Streams • Mini Railroad Ride for Kids • Overhead Pedestrian Bridge • Pedestrian Access to Mt.Vernon • Improve Open Plaza with Shops and Restaurants at El Tigre Site • Recreation Areas • Service& Gasoline Station The success of the Depot's rehabilitation and ability to act as a catalyst for the redevelopment of the local area will be largely dependant upon how well the program addresses the surrounding neighborhood and the City's involvement in the promotion of the recommended uses. While the items listed above fall outside the boundaries of the Area of Potential Effect(APE)and are not subject to development with the existing funding,they are listed here for consideration.These items should be addressed during the formation of a comprehensive Master Plan. E. ORGANIZING USES WITHIN THE DEPOT Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 " SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section V-Adaptive Uses and Analysis Page 5-13 After determining which potential uses would be most appropriate for the San Bernardino Santa Fe it Depot,the building was analyzed to assess which areas within the Depot were the best fit for each use. The Depot consists of a wide range of varying public and private spaces. Factors such as; room size, configuration,partitioning, ceiling height,existing historic fabric,number of exits,window locations, distance from the main entry and adjacencies are variables that help establish appropriate uses within the existing building spaces. Uses within the building were organized --or zoned-- based upon related and/or complimentary functions. For instance,transportation-related offices are grouped together and immediately adjacent to the ticketing functions and train platforms,public and private spaces are separated from each other and ,. food-related uses are combined into one area of the Depot. The San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot is a large, predominantly rectangular building with two floors of space that can be occupied. The first floor is approximately 30,000 SF and the second floor is approximately 25,000 SF for a gross total of approximately 55,000 SF.The Depot is oriented with its long facades facing the tracks and platform to the north and the entry and parking to the south.The main public space and the heart of the building is the centrally located Lobby and Waiting Room with its ornate tiled surfaces and high ceiling. The main entrance of the Depot leads directly into the Lobby and Waiting Room and west end of the space is where train tickets have always been sold. Immediately behind the ticketing counter are the railroad offices and large baggage/freight room. The Lobby and Waiting Room is flanked by the large public restrooms and dedicated smoking lounges.Another unique first floor space is the former restaurant area on the east end of the building. A Harvey House restaurant _ once occupied this space,which is part of an addition to the original Depot. !, The second floor of the Depot consists of spaces that were historically used as railroad-related offices. There was no public access to the second floor. Two enclosed stairs and one exterior stair served the main second floor areas and there were no elevators.The second floor of the restaurant wing was once a lodging space occupied by the "Harvey Girls"who worked in the restaurant below. This area is isolated _ from the rest of the second floor and has its own stairway. F. DESCRIPTION OF SCHEMES 1 AND 2 ' The Depot's potential uses and building data were organized and eventually evolved into two different schemes; "Scheme V and"Scheme 2."Both schemes have similar elements and uses, but approximately 45%of the Depot has different uses for Scheme 1 versus Scheme 2. Refer to the attached floor plans and square footage tables. 1. Scheme 1 This scheme is focused on five primary uses: 1)Transportation&Government Offices,2)Catering& ' Banquet Facilities,3)Adult Education,4)Transportation Museum and 5)Retail&Farmer's Market. a. First Floor The Lobby and Waiting Room would be fully restored to its historic appearance and would continue to provide areas to wait for trains or buses,purchase tickets and check baggage. Because of the large size of ' the Lobby and Waiting Room the space would also be used as a Public Banquet and Meeting Room.The ' Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section V-Adaptive Uses and Analysis Page 5-14 Lobby and Waiting Room could accommodate functions for over 250 people.However, as noted earlier, the poor acoustics of the main lobby limit the effectiveness of the space for lectures and performances _ and modifications to this area to provide an useable space would need to be implemented. Adjacent to the Lobby are the Men's and Women's Public Restrooms and dedicated Smoking Lounges. The Lounges are larger than necessary for the proposed uses and would be unused space in the rehabilitated Depot. Scheme I proposes that the Women's Restroom and Lounge be remodeled to w accommodate both the new Men's and Women's Restroom uses.The new restrooms would incorporate historic detailing while being fully accessible for persons with disabilities.The former Men's Restroom and Lounge would become a needed Conference/Banquet Support space.A new stairwell and elevator + that are accessible from the Lobby area are proposed on the east side of the lobby and waiting room. Immediately east of the elevator lobby and stairwell would be the Banquet, Catering and Food Service + areas. This is a large space that would be divided among a Catering Kitchen,Assembly Rooms and Banquet Room as needed.The adjacent former Harvey House restaurant would be a flexible space that could function as either and extension to the Banquet,Catering and Food Service area or additional .. exhibit space for the Transportation Museum to the south.A Delivery and Service area would be located south of the Food Service area and would allow for truck access from the south parking lot. The open-air courtyard on the northeast comer of the Depot could be used for outdoor dining and events. d The west end of the first floor would consist of the Amtrak Ticket Counter and Offices with the abbreviated Baggage Area to the rear,similar to the way the station currently functions. The remaining 80%of the former Baggage Area would be used as a Farmer's Market. The Market would sell locally- produced fruits and vegetables and possibly flowers and other goods. The westem-most portion of the Depot,which once served as railroad offices,would be converted into Government Office and Retail use.The Government Offices would occupy the south 75%of the space and the Retail portion would be in the north part. The Retail uses are proposed to be a Transit Store and/or a Cafe and Newsstand.The retail functions would be located immediately adjacent to the Metrolink platform and could cater to daily commuters,Amtrak passengers and office users. There would also be new disabled compliant restrooms added. b. Second Floor The former office spaces directly above the Lobby and Waiting Room would be used as a Public Banquet,Conference and Meeting Rooms,similar to the first floor spaces. The southwest portion of the Banquet area would have new restroom facilities to replace the small, existing restrooms. The new restrooms would be fully accessible for persons with disabilities. The space east of the Banquet,Conference and Meeting area,which once served as railroad offices, would be converted into a Vocational and Job Training Center. The area is currently divided into a series of offices of various sizes and the intent is to adaptively reuse the historic partitions,doors and finishes with minimal modifications. The new east elevator and stair core would serve this space. The second floor of the Transportation Museum does not have an elevator for disabled access compliance, so it would be used for Museum Archives and possible future expansion for storage and staff offices. There would be no public use of the second floor. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 r SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section V-Adaptive Uses and Analysis Page 5-15 o The west portion of the Depot's second floor was also used for railroad offices and would be used for Government and Public Agency Offices. This area currently has a non-historic open office configuration with low workstation partitions and its reuse is not as restrictive as the east wing.The Government and Public Agency Office area could be used for one large office,or several smaller office suites that share �y reception and conference uses.The last portion of the second floor is the western block above the Government Offices and the Retail area.This part of the rehabilitated Depot would be dedicated for Metrolink Offices and Crew Quarters.This part of the building would overlook the Metrolink trains once the windows are restored to their historic appearance.A dedicated stairwell may also be added. A new elevator would also be added to the existing entrance lobby to serve the second floor and would be located next to the existing stairwell. TABLE 5A SCHEME 1 SQUARE FOOTAGES Amtrak 2,500 SF r Metrolink 4,550 SF r Retail/Sales 1,300 SF r Government Offices/Community Services 9,750 SF 1 Educational/Vocational 4,600 SF Cultural/Museum 3,000 SF ' Catering/Food Service 5,600 SF Conference/Meeting/Banquet Facilities 8,875 SF ' Farmer's Market 4,950 SF Delivery/Service 850 SF Restrooms/Circulation 9,025 SF Grand Total 55,000 SF 1 1 ' Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 . . ��s E \ \ . . . / z R : q ¥® 02 . \{ \z \ /a /\ _ \ < Z\ LM° k - - - _ ? e u ( . \ 0 ; y z \ < ¥- � � % } � tA 2a a / § / } \ _ ! , . . w . . . E z - ; ƒ ] $ SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section V-Adaptive Uses and Analysis Page 5-19 2. Scheme 2 This scheme is focused on five primary uses: • Transportation, Government&Private Offices Catering&Banquet Facilities • Transportation Museum 1 Retail Sales& Services • Child Care 1 Many of the proposed uses in Scheme 1 are also incorporated in Scheme 2. Refer to the attached floor plans and square footage tables. The following section outlines where Scheme 2 differs: 1 a. First Floor The first area of the ground floor that deviates from Scheme 1 is the Transportation Museum at the east 1 end of the Depot. The Museum would occupy the entire east portion of the building, including the Harvey House restaurant space. The restaurant space would be built-out as a flexible gallery area that could occasionally be used for special banquet functions from the adjacent Banquet, Catering and Food Service areas. Y In place of the previously proposed Farmer's Market, Scheme 2 would provide flexible retail space that 1 could be used by two or three medium-sized shops or four to six small shops. The western-most portion of the Depot,which once served as railroad offices,would be converted into Retail Services and a Child Care Center. The Child Care Center would occupy the south half of the space and the Retail portion 1 would be in the north part. The Retail uses are proposed to be service oriented, like Dry Cleaning or a Copy Center. The retail functions would be adjacent to the Metrolink platform and would serve the daily commuter. 1 The Child Care Center would also need an Outdoor Activity Area to provide the 75 SF per child outdoor space required by law. The Outdoor Activity Area would need to be located on the south side of the 1 Depot and would be approximately 2,800 SF. b. Second Floor 1 The upper floor of Scheme 2 differs from Scheme 1 in only one area. The east wing,which once served as railroad offices,would be converted into Professional Offices instead of a Vocational and Job Training Center. The area is currently divided into a series of offices of various sizes that would be 1 adaptively reused as Office Suites. The new east elevator and stair core would serve this space. i 1 , r Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 ■ SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section V-Adaptive Uses and Analysis Page 5-20 TABLE 5B SCHEME 2 SQUARE FOOTAGES Amtrak 2,500 SF _ Metrolink 4,550 SF Retail/Sales/Service 7,850 SF ' Government Offices/Community Services 6,900 SF ' Professional Offices 4,600 SF Cultural/Museum 6,250 SF Catering/Food Service 3,925 SF Conference/Meeting/Banquet Facilities 8,875 SF Child Care Center 2,100 SF Restrooms/Circulation 7,450 SF Grand Total 55,000 SF Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue,San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 o — o <v cv s y O� _ Z r O N� �w c ry W C Z U N ao ~ Lf) allo Z Q W tx Q C "4 Wig �m Rf 0I u W N p of Zw Q r uLL n ZIJ �u ��P mlx E° Iw o� Z H' Y p a q 04< N W m a c' °OCR Z Z r" Z Z ry N<p ry J � c z : � - ate SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section V-Adaptive Uses and Analysis Page 5-23 G. DEVELOPMENT OF SITE PLANS The area of the development of land within the Area of Potential Effects(APE)is approximately 3.3 acres. This area is covered by the Santa Fe Depot,tracks for Metrolink and the loading platforms. The actual available land for development of parking and landscaping is approximately 1.78 acres. As compared to other multimodal case studies of six to eight acres,the San Bernardino Depot site will not meet the development demand for parking,improved landscaping,bus,taxi and shuttle services,Amtrak freight service and future track expansion and museum for the San Bernardino Railroad Historical Society. Therefore,two conceptual site plans have been developed to focus on visually improving the aesthetics of the site through landscaping and hardscape for pedestrians,allowing passenger drop-off and pick-up, service delivery and an area for the future railroad museum expansion. Parking for the new proposed uses will need to be shared with the Metrolink sites or new areas developed for on-street parking or to the site south of the Depot at the El Tigre shopping area. 1. Site Plan 1 The east end of the site is currently planned by the San Bernardino Railroad Historical Society to receive two railroad spur tracks for permanent display of Engine 3751. The design as received from a representative of the Society shows the spurs swinging well into the site from the Amtrak line. This arrangement limits the site's potential for adding a future railroad museum. The remainder of the east end of the site can accommodate approximately 44 parking spaces including spaces for persons with disabilities. The parking lot is one-way traffic. A small Service/Delivery "off-hours"area south of the east end of the Depot is provided to service the banquet space and museum activities. r At the south main facade of the Depot,a formal entryway out to the curb at 3`d Street. Amtrak and other buses have loading/unloading area along 3rd Street. This area could provide three spaces for buses. The b Omnitrans bus stop and waiting area would be at its original location to the west of the APE. The west end has approximately 24 parking spaces including spaces for persons with disabilities. The parking lot is one-way traffic that flows into the Metrolink parking area. The total available parking spaces on-site would be approximately 68. Landscaping consisting of palms and light-airy tree canopies exist on all perimeters of the Depot. A canopy of dwarf citrus trees would be introduced at entryway to the Depot. ' 2. Site Plan 2 Site Plan 2 is similar to Site Plan 1 in the landscaping concept and development of the main entry to the Depot and the parking area for 24 automobiles at the west end of the Depot and the Service/Delivery area. The future railroad museum track spurs have been relocated adjacent to the existing Metrolink tracks allowing the construction of a future railroad museum to the east of the Depot. Five spaces for bus loading/unloading along with parking for approximately nine automobiles would occur just south of the future railroad museum. The total available parking spaces on-site would be approximately 33. No Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 1 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT • REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section V-Adaptive Uses and Analysis Page 5-24 parking would occur along 3'Street. Site Plan 2 offers a greater area for the development of the site but severely decreases the availability of on-site parking. ri I � r i9 ad I Yi W Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 r o �n O N O N N N I r. W In 44II LV w Z J Of W Cc K i I I J YO O I z K QI 0 I i ��' II I I I i pG cd � � � � � ` " t I • f1 �' I � Y d � m o z - � zv� r rl �a ' !1 I I 1 rlID� • 1 1 I xt a G: r ti� w a ' 1 1 1 1 1 1 i � .�t� ��l �_•. 1 11 i I i r I 11 � 1 1 1 I 1 i I I I 1 1 I d a — ill i e } :b E} f SECTION VI Appropriate Use °o `o N N r p o:� p as F a P c :qigCo Q W 1 -1 1=9 Q' o 'O W ^O g ® Z Z J � p On Z mg — W �E'c$ a r °� �rc ❑ X11.oa " m w Zak r:w m LE , it F - �•.� _ m w W 4 ay. D� d1 qj ffin b O •ooz Q OG fj o� . Q g L Flo: 90 zz zo � a Lb lal� �J�Q v •%% pCalg� °'6 0 z z � mcev� o � 0 N N � A 'Ty N 133815 A i w wi W W Q LL W CL z 1 1 'L i `4 III m °Cr1� u r N Z Q LU a ary Q O w cc W Co 7 5 a zn v 7 w A a. m i i � �l • •�� ��—� I it IA Q i i e i WQ � � II ! f{ I 't �" tt � li� ° ,� fti•I� •�II > i 11.� ':I in 4 C c a Wd � a � SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT _ RERABILrrATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section VI-Appropriate Use Page 6-5 VI. APPROPRIATE USE A. DESCRIPTION OF PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE The Preferred Alternative presented in this section was formulated after Schemes 1 and 2 were presented and discussed at the Stakeholders' Meeting held on January 21,2000.Final program uses were further defined by extensive analysis of the long-term economic viability of the Depot. W The Preferred Alternative scheme is focused on seven primary uses: 1) Transit Offices, 2) Public and Government Offices,3)Vocational Education,4)Transit Services, 5)Transportation Museum, 6)Banquet Facilities and 7)Farmer's Market.Uses within the building are zoned into areas based upon related and/or complimentary functions.Public and private uses are also segregated from each other. Fire sprinklers and fire alarms would be provided throughout the Depot. In addition,there would be a new heating,ventilating and air conditioning(HVAC)system provided in the public spaces and the individual r tenant spaces would have the ability to connect into the system. r The historic purpose of the San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot,as a place to purchase tickets and travel by rail, would remain as its primary use. Amtrak and Metrolink would occupy the rehabilitated Depot in various locations. Amtrak would continue to occupy the Ticketing Counter on the west end of the main Lobby Waiting Room as well as provide areas to wait for trains and check baggage.Metrolink tickets would still be purchased from the automated ticket machines on the platform, but may also be available from the Transit Store proposed for the northwest comer of the Depot. In addition to providing passenger services, Amtrak and Metrolink would be office tenants in the rehabilitated Depot. Amtrak would continue to occupy the first floor offices immediately behind the Ticketing Counter, as well as the reduced Baggage Area. Amtrak's new spaces would comprise approximately 2,375 SF.Metrolink's Offices and Crew Quarters would consist of approximately 4,200 SF on the west end of the second floor.This part of the rehabilitated Depot would overlook the Metrolink trains once the currently in-filled windows are re-opened and restored to their historic appearance.The second floor ' location of the Metrolink areas also helps to separate Metrolink's Offices and Crew Quarters from walk-in customers. Other potential transportation-related office tenants are local and regional bus lines, shuttles and/or taxi companies. A dedicated stairwell would be added to this second floor office area as a required means of egress. The main Lobby/Waiting Room would be fully restored to its historic appearance,including floor and wall tile, light fixtures,doors,windows,hardware and furnishings.The space would continue to function as an area for passengers and other persons waiting for transportation on a daily basis, however,the rehabilitated Lobby/Waiting Room would also be used as a multi-purpose assembly space for special events.Uses could include: convention kick-off events,receptions,presentations, seminars, limited entertainment and dining for special events. The 3,300 SF Lobby/Waiting Room, with 21-foot high ceiling, could accommodate functions for over 275 people.A portable stage would be available for special events and would be located in front of the Amtrak Ticket Counter. The current poor acoustics of the main lobby would limit the effectiveness of the space, so the Lobby would need to be modified to help improve its acoustical performance following the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. i ' Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section VI-Appropriate Use Page 6-6 A large Entry Vestibule to the south of the Lobby/Waiting Room is the only current public access to the Depot. The Entry is centered on the building's south facade and has two pairs of wood and glass doors.This r entry will be preserved and restored as part of the Depot's rehabilitation. The importance of the entry will be strengthened by improving paving and landscaping elements in front of the Depot. r South of the Lobby are the Men's and Women's Public Restrooms and dedicated Lounges. The Lounges are large rooms,each with a central built-in bench and quarry tile floor and ceramic tile wall surfaces. Since the Lounges are currently undemsed, the Preferred Alternative proposes reusing the spaces as support spaces for the main Lobby/Waiting Room.Day-today functions would consist of areas to display complementary train and bus schedules,maps and tourist information. One of the Lounges might also be the ideal location for the On-Site Manager's Office.During special events,the lounges could be used to locate beverage and snack tables or as reception and check-in areas. The Women's and Men's Restrooms would be restored and modified to accommodate use for persons with disabilities required by the American's with Disabilities Act(ADA).The accessible areas of the restrooms would be immediately adjacent to the historic restrooms,to reduce the impacts to historic fabric.The historic marble toilet partitions and ceramic tile surfaces would be cleaned and reused. The former railroad office spaces directly above the Lobby and Waiting Room would be adaptively reused as Multi-Purpose Conference and Meeting Spaces. This second floor area of the Depot consists of spaces that were historically used as railroad-related offices. The new conference uses would incorporate historic partitions and doors. The southwest portion of the Multi-Purpose area would have new restroom facilities to replace the undersized,existing restrooms. The new restrooms would be fully accessible for persons with disabilities. • The north portion of the Multi-Purpose area is raised approximately seven feet higher than the south part, due to the higher ceiling of the Lobby and Waiting Room below. This level change creates accessability ' problems for persons with disabilities which would be solved by adding a ramp to the southeast comer and w a new double-sided elevator on the east wall.An existing hall,which runs east-west,would be modified for circulation between the east and west wings. Historically there was no public access to the second floor. For the Multi-Purpose areas to function effectively, there would need to be access provided directly from the ground floor Lobby. A new code- required stairwell and elevator located on the east side of the Lobby area are proposed is this scheme.The new elevators and stairwells would be located in secondary spaces to avoid impacts to existing historic fabric.The first floor Lobby and Waiting Room could be used as an overflow Multi-Purpose Conference and Meeting Spaces if required,so the enhanced interconnection between floors becomes a critical component. The west portion of the Depot's second floor was also used for railroad offices and would be used for Government/Public Agency/Transportation Offices. This area currently has a non-historic open office configuration with low partitions.The Government Office spaces could be used as one large office,or as several smaller office suites that share reception, circulation and conference areas.Non-historic features would be removed and historic windows would be restored.Two small accessible restrooms would be added to serve the office tenants. An existing stairwell on the north side would be modified and a passenger elevator would be added as part of a new circulation core. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 r SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT RERABILTTATION ANDADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section VI-Appropriate Use Page 6-7 Another area for Government/Public Agency/Transportation Office would be located on the southwest comer of the first floor. The Offices would occupy the south 75% of the space and small accessible restrooms would be added to the east side. The Government Office's on the first floor would easily accommodate public uses because of the availability of walk-in access. r The second floor space east of the Multi-Purpose Conference and Meeting area, which once served as railroad offices,would be converted into a Vocational Education and Training Center.Other transportation facilities,especially the Santa Ana Regional Transportation Center, have shown that uses like Vocational Training,Internet Job Resource Centers and Welfare-to-Work programs are ideal tenants which would help flt serve the community and bring people to the Depot. Another possible use for this area of the Depot is for to Adult Education extension courses conducted by nearby colleges or universities. on The space proposed for the Vocational Education and Training Center is currently divided into a series of various sized offices which would adaptively reuse the historic partitions,doors and finishes with minimal modifications. A new wheelchair lift would be added to accommodate access where there is a floor level change in this area. The new east elevator and stair core would also serve this space. The northwest comer of the first floor of the Depot,which also once served as railroad offices,would be converted into Transit Service uses. A single, 1,300 square foot space would accommodate a small Cafe, Newsstand and Transit Store that would be located immediately adjacent to the Metrolink platform and would cater to the daily commuter.The Transit Store would provide schedules, information and sell tickets for buses and Metrolink trains. The extreme eastern portion of the Depot would be adaptively reused as a 1,500 SF Transportation Museum. Transportation Museums qualify for TEA funding as long as they are not-for-profit,are open to the public, and educational in nature. Such a museum could incorporate interior and exterior exhibits, including a ." preserved train engine on spur tracks adjacent to the Depot.A railroad-related library and/or gift shop could also be included as part of the Museum. r The 1,500 SF second floor of the Museum was once a lodging space occupied by the"Harvey Girls"who worked in the restaurant.This area is isolated from the rest of the second floor and has its own stairway,but does not have an elevator for compliance with accessibility standards.This area could be used for Museum archives and storage without public access. The first floor portion of the Depot east of the main Lobby would contain Banquet Facilities with a 120- person Dining Room and a dedicated Catering Kitchen.Additional outdoor dining would be possible under the north arcade. The Banquet Catering Kitchen could also serve functions in the main Lobby or the other assembly spaces in the Depot. And non-dining overflow events from the Lobby could expand into the Banquet Room if the need arose,allowing up to 120 persons to be served.Banquet Facilities similar to this have been very successful in the Santa Ana Regional Transportation Center. The former Harvey House restaurant initially would become an unoccupied space that could eventually function as either an extension to the Banquet / Catering area or as additional exhibit space for the ' Transportation Museum to the south. A Delivery and Service area would be located east of the Catering Kitchen and would allow for truck access and loading from the south parking lot. ' Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 o , r = L ti S �a L r w C � H6Z m LLEz z6Ez� W w z 9g � m = oOgg >t5 '6ufc Q — �o z Z Q � Ov < ° CL ova \ Q J In Z Z ss Q�Q z z m 6N � �ca W Q Q Q �56 com w G O 1 o < �. F a m � C r V � 4 � - r fr fy � t ' � c i v_ _ - SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section VI-Appropriate Use Page 6-13 The west portion of the former Baggage Area,that would no longer be used by Amtrak,would become a 2,175 SF Farmer's Market. The Market would sell locally-produced fruits and vegetables and possibly flowers and other goods. The Farmer's Market would not be a full-time establishment,but would function as a one-day-a-week produce bazaar.The former baggage area,with its high ceiling,exposed structure and rustic materials would be ideal for this use.The large historic baggage doors would allow for the produce to be displayed and sold outside as well.The west half of the former Baggage Area(2,950 SF)would initially 4A be an unoccupied space that would be available for the future expansion of the Farmer's Market. rr TABLE 6A: PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE SQUARE FOOTAGES TRANSIT OFFICES 6,700 SF PUBLIC&GOVERNMENT OFFICES 16,600 SF VOCATIONAL EDUCATION 3,400 SF TRANSIT SERVICES 1,300 SF TRANSPORTATION MUSEUM 3,000 SF BANQUET FACILITIES 5,600 SF FARMER'S MARKET 5,125 SF RESTROOMS/CIRCULATION/SUPPORT 13,275 SF GRAND TOTAL: 55 000 F eB. PROJECT PHASING Large rehabilitation projects like the San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot are often divided into several phases. ' Phasing allows for a more deliberate distribution of construction funds and deals with critical items fast, like hazardous materials removal.Phasing would also help the project to resolve immediate program needs first, like-transportation uses, while future uses like the expansion Museum and Farmer's Market, would be ' developed at a later date. The following Tentative Project Phasing Plan outlines one potential phasing scenario. ' 1. First Phase Items related to public health and safety are the most important elements and corresponding work should be performed as part of the First Phase. Hazardous materials abatement of items like asbestos and lead- containing paint should be dealt with immediately.The seismic(earthquake)stabilization of the Depot walls is a critical early phase item as well. ' Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 - \\ \ } 2 - _ 6IJ » LU � ■ _ - - LLJ c LLJ 0 / CL � c mg[ \ - - / - < - _ wi_ g ) q . �- , \ § ! ) ( / § ( § 5 - . $ -)| k |4)| ) /h . \ / i ( \ & ® E $ ) }� . � o � � m � a W G J r u i � A n ° v pw c =1 E v o c y h E n > a2 c � LLc v cE '�' cn ° E o ° a o o w o a LL Y S w O! `O d 0 H 0 0 0 b 661 V: Q Tp H C y y R W L W L .N. L 0>/ x 0 0 0 y V N O N > Q Z ¢ O CL ,. N ¢ H z ■ onv ? c ■ - w p : � ¢ ° z J CL Y� 09 O] i W ¢ PO 11 Z D y F _-eryl N 1 Q C W L O Q a < a F C. fC s o' SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Section VI-Appropriate Use Page 6-19 2. Second Phase This Phase would include the restoration of the entire Depot building. In addition,the Second Phase would include the build-out of all of the tenant spaces, including Transportation Offices, Meeting Rooms,Banquet �. Facilities and the Transit Store. This phase also would include the initial portions of the Transportation Museum and the Farmer's Market. Site work within the Area of Potential Effect(APE)would be completed as part of the Second Phase as well. 3. Third Phase The Third Phase is when off-site improvements would be made, such as construction of a new parking structure to serve the Depot.This phase also would include additions to the Transportation Museum and the Farmer's Market,as well as the expansion of the Banquet/Catering Facility into the adjacent unoccupied r spaces. C. COST PROJECTION SUMMARY The schematic cost estimate has been developed into three main components; Stabilization, Station Restoration,and Tenant Improvement allowances. The work in each category is to follow the guidelines set forth in The Secretory of the Interior's Standards for the Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings and the State Historical Building Code(SHBC)as is described as follows: 1. Stabilization The initial phase of work will be to take steps to protect the public from environmental hazards and prevention of further structural deterioration from moisture intrusion. Localized structural hazards such as the deteriorated decking and beams over the arcade continue to decay requiring emergency shoring. Stabilization will include removal of the failing roof members and installation of temporary supports,decking &roofing membrane. Abatement of asbestos and lead-based paints at the exterior and interior portions of the building will remove environmental hazards such as lead paint peeling from the walls and ceilings and presence of pigeon and rodent droppings which are both unsightly and potentially hazardous. Protection from moisture intrusion such as covering the leaking skylights is very important to arrest the extent of damages to interior ceilings and walls. Covering the skylights with acrylic panels will maintain the light quality in the lease able areas and protect the interior finishes. In an effort to remedy the above unstable conditions and also to enhance the appearance of the spaces, spot piaster repairs, fog coat of paint on ceilings,walls and floor surfaces, installation of inexpensive fluorescent fixtures, and opening of a single west facing window in the second level will enable prospective tenants to visualize the space as it will be ' in the future. 2. Station Restoration ' The bulk of the work will restore the building and site to the condition of a well cared for historic building complying with The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings. Structural work will remediate the current settlement,protect the structure from further settling and augment the seismic resistance to reduce the hazard of risk in the event of an earthquake. In this phase, all exterior finishes including clay roof tiles, roofing, walls, windows, and doors are cleaned and restored. Historic interior finishes that include ceramic tile, plaster, architectural woodwork, ceilings, and light fixtures will be conserved. All windows and exterior doors previously closed will be opened and missing doors and windows Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA•530 Sixth Avenue,San Diego,CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABHxrATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Section VI-Appropriate Use Page 6-20 will be replicated. New utilities,mechanical,plumbing,and electrical systems are provided throughout the building.All historic light fixtures will be preserved and restored to working order.The project will comply with Title 24 California building code as modified by the SHBC. Providing access to all building areas through the use of new elevators, lifts, and upgrades of the toilet facilities. The site will be redesigned to enhance the historic quality of the building and provide amenities needed for the multi-modal aspects of the project. Finishes at the leaseable spaces except for the areas utilized by Amtrak(e.g. The Main Lobby and Waiting Room,Ticket Office,and the Baggage area) will be left unfinished to be as flexible as possible to accommodate the needs of potential tenants. 3. Tenant Improvements Certain types of tenants are proposed and each use has potential costs to prepare the space for occupancy. The estimate concludes with probable costs for expected uses. Allowances for tenant improvements will so include floor,wall, and ceiling finishes,mechanical,plumbing,and electrical services and systems. 4. Cost Estimates Notes a. Estimate Format The estimate provided is in the CSI format estimate of construction cost for the San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot Restoration, San Bernardino,California. b. Project Details The estimate includes costs for stabilization and Depot site work restoration. Tenant,improvement allowances are provided on the estimate summary. Costs for the future railroad museum and spur tracks are excluded. C. Estimate Opinion of Cost An Opinion of cost shall be construed as an indefinite evaluation of cost based upon historical cost data derived from similar projects, produced from written or drawn information provided during design stages of a project. Since there is no control over:the cost of labor,materials or equipment;or over the contractor's method of determining his prices; or over competitive bidding or market conditions,there is no guarantee for the accuracy of such opinions as compared to contractor bids. Allowances as appropriate are included for items of work which are not indicated, provided that the Estimator is made aware of them,or which in the judgement of the Estimator are required for completion of the work. There is no responsibility for inclusion of items or work of which information was not provided. d. Project Scope The user is cautioned that significant changes in the project scope after completion of the Cost Estimate, can cause major cost changes. In these circumstances, Leverton & Associates should be notified, and an appropriate adjustment made to the Cost Estimate. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 -(619) 239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section VI-Appropriate Use Page 6-21 e. Competitive Bids and Labor Rates The estimate is based on competitive bid situations,with a minimum of five general contractor bids. Labor rates are based on Prevailing Wage contract. 1 Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 ■ SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Section VI-Appropriate Use Page 6-22 r LEVERTON&ASSOCIATES LLC CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY rA r San Bernardino Santa Fe Station ITEM I DESCRIPTION TOTAL COST 41 A STABILIZATION - 1,063,840 B STATION RESTORATION 9.037.127 r TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST 10100,967 a C TENANT IMPROVEMENT ALLOWANCES Including Floor&ceiling finishes, interior partitions&finishes, casework&tenant finish mechanical, plumbing&electrical. Excluding food service equipment&restaurant fixtures. Restaurant/Meebn_q.Rooms 5,925 SF 36.00 213,300 ». Museum/Archives 4,250 SF 1 31.00 131,750 .w Offices/AMTRAK IMetrolink 26,675 SF . 28.001 746,900 Caf6/Newsstand 1,300 SF 28.00 36,400 Farmers Market 5,400 SF 18.00 97,200 �- TENANT IMPROVEMENTS(including Contrsctofs OH&P,Gen Req. &Bonds 1,225,550 ,. TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT CONSTRUCTION COST 11 328,517 .. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIR+530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 r SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section VI-Appropriate Use Page 6-23 LEVERTON aASSOCIATES D-C w CSI DAASION FORMAT 1 CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE 1� PROJECT: San Bemardina Santa Fe Station FILE NO: I 245.1 LOCATION: San Bernardino,California PREP.BY: 1.-G4 tE, STATUS: Schematic DATE: 2N/00 OESC: Stablliration JAREA GSF: 1 58,000 &GENERAL TOTAL GK C REQUIREMENTS 10.00% 74,132ION&CLE AN-UP 736,323 NG 5,000 L DIRECT COST 815,455 TOR'S OVERHEAD&PROFIT 8.00% 65,236 r SUB-TOTAL 1 880,692 11 15.18 042 BONDS 1 1.00%1 8,807 1 0.151 1 SUB-TOTAL I i 889,499 15.34 W D43 IDESIGN CONTINGENCY. I 15.00% 133,425 1 2.30 Eel construction contingency SUB-TOTAL 1 1 1,022.9231 17.641 1 044 JESCALATION TO MID-POINT - _4.-00%1 40.917 1 0.71 112 coos to construct mid-point TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST 1,063 840 1 8.34 Excl A&E fees,Permits&fees r r • w >w Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 • (619) 239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT RERABIO.ITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section VI-Appropriate Use Page 6-24 LEVERTON&ASSOCIATES LLC CSI DIVISION FORMAT ii CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE FILE NO: 245-1 DATE: 2/1/00 ITEM EST. INI UNIT TOTAL NO. DESCRIPTION QTY COST COST 010 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 1 General Re uirements 10.00% 1 74,132.30 74,132 SUB-TOTAL ITEM#010 74,132 020 STABILIZATION&CLEAN-UP - 1Cut back the vines from over all ars ets rowin u under the deckin alon the arcades 1 L7,500.00 7,500 2 Remove all dam a ed/rotten deckin &beams over the arcade,fAmn clAnking P. rnnfimn i 1,939 SF 7.00 13,573 3 Eliminate ests,dirt, dust&insects from all interior locations 58.000!8F 0.30 17,400 4 Lead based aint abatement-int walls,cl &trim 50,700 SF 12.00 808,400 5 Remove pi eon dro ins 25,000 SF 1.50 37,500 a 6 Remove all loose paper trash,f imiturs from unused s aces 1 LS 2,500.00 2,500 .� 7 Make repairs to clay file roofs as needed to Ovate roof 620 SF 10.00 6,200 8 Re air Flat roofs to wale roof 500 SF 7.50 3,750 9 Construct a He covers to cover each s li ht 4 h 4 600.00 2,400 10 Re air or board all broken lazed o enin s& other o nin as"—,-*-- i eons or--dents to enter, includin the central attic 1 LS 7,500.00 7,500 11 Repair the hi h south lobb windows at least sufficient to retain the glazing 1 LS 1,500.00 1,500 12 Provide door,frame&hdwe to vaults ace 1 EA 1,000.00 1,000 13 0 n unite infili&provide temporary window 1 EA 850.00 850 a 14 Fog coat,white, interior walls 75,000 SF 0.25 16,750 15 Additional temporary lighting, interior 50 EA 150.00 7,500 N TAL ITEM#030 736,323 RING end eriodic build*- walk around n :entrances,windows for broken anes, vandalism,transient& st intrusion 1 LS Owner Cost a wall monted li ht fatures with Ii ht over entrance locations&other semi- ed sheltered areas 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 endspecial inspections following significant seismic events 1 Iff Owner Cost SUB-TOTAL ITEM#030 5,000 Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIR• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT .. REHABILITATION AND.ADAYrIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section VI-Appropriate Use Page 6-25 .. LEVERTON aASSOCIATES LLC _ CSI DIVISION FORMAT „a CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE PROJECT: San Bernardino Santa Fe Station I FILE NO: 1 245-2 LOCATION: ISan Bernardino,California - PREP.BY: 1 I.Leverton STATUS: Schematic DATE: 2/1/00 DESC: Station Rehabilitation AREA GSF: 58,000 DN. I TOTAL GSF NOTES NO. COST GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 1 10.00% 777,326 13.40 10% lus line items r detail 020 ISITEWORK 1 1 1.548.0301 26.69 $1554 I ETE 225,734 3.89 RY 23,250 0.40 r S 43,700 0.75 AND PLASTICS 222284 3.83 AL AND MOISTURE PROTECTION 247.998 4.28 ANDWINDOWS 649550 11.20 ES 734381 1266 LTIES 65,815 1.13 ENT HINGS L CONSTRUCTION 186 829 3.22 FIM Protection YING SYSTEMS 110,000 1.90 PLUMBING 182684 I 3.15 157 JHVAC 792,000 13.66 ' 160 ELECTRICAL 861!00 14.84 SUB-TOTAL DIRECT COST 6,670,581 115.01 171. CONTRACTOR'S OVERHEAD&PROFIT 1 8.00%1 533848 9.20 SUB-TOTAL 7.204 227 124.21 172 BONDS 1 1.00%1 72.0421 1.24 I ISUB-TOTAL 7,276,269 12545 .. 173 DESIGN CONTINGENCY 1 15.00% 1,091,440 18.a2 Exd construclJon contingency ar SUB-TOTAL 1 1 8,367.710 1 144.27 1 174 ESCALATION TO MID-POINT 8.00% 669,417 I 11.54 124 mos to construct mid int d TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST 1 9,037.127 1 166.81 Exd A&E fees,permits&fees as 411 Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA+ 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT ` RE9ABELITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY - March 6,2000 Section VI-Appropriate Use Page 6-26 LEVERTON&ASSOCIATES LLC CSI DIVISION FORMAT CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE FILE NO: -F-245-2 DATE: 1 2/1/00 JIGeneral EST. UNIT UNIT TOTAL DESCRIPTION - QTY COST COST w RAL REQUIREMENTS .� Re uirements 1000% 1 LS 589,325.52 112.000 89,328 din w/on&off exterior Allow 12 mos. 40,000 SF 1.85 74,000 se ra Facilities sales trailer - 1 EA . 9,000.00 9,000 trailer for AMTRAK . 1 EA 9,000.00. 9,000 5 Lounge Trailer 1 EA 9,000.00 9,000 _ - 6 Toilet facilities trailer 1 EA 12,000.00 ... 7 1 Storage container 1 2 JEA 1 3,500.00 1 7,000 8ITemporary hdcp ramps 1 ILS I 5,000.00 1 5,000 w 9ITemporarysignage 1 1 ILS 1 3,000.00 1 3,000 10 Temporary utility connections 1 1 ILS 1 10,000.00 1 10,000 Restoration of Historic Features 11 Conservator 1 1 ILS 1 50,000.00 1 50,000 +■ SUB-TOTAL DIV.1201000 777,326 ` 02000 SITE WORK 02060 BUILDING DEMOLITION 1 Remove exstg Metrolink relocatable structure 1 LS 1 5.000.001 5,000 02070 1 SELECTIVE DEMOLITION&DISPOSAL Hazardous Materials Abatement Asbestos Abatement 1 Pi a la in &elbows - 4,500 LF 20.00 90,000 t 2 Floor tile&mastic 3,300 Sf 4.00 13,200 3 Roofing material 10,000 SF 4:00 40,000 4 Transits board: 100 SF 12.00 1,200 Lead Based Paint - , 5 Exterior-windows/doors/Vim 9,300 SF 12.00 111,600 PCB LI ht Ballasts 61 Remove PCB light ballasts 775 1 EA 1 15.00 1 11,625 Non-Historic Demolition 7 Basement interior demolition&clean-up 6,000 SF 1 2.50 1 15,000 81 Rem exstg oonc SOG @ area to be replaced 2,230 SF 1 7.50 1 16,725 9 Sawcut&rem SOG for new footin s 642 SF 10.00 6,420 - 10 Remove exstg vinyl file flooring&prep slab 30.00018F 0.95 28,500 =Remexst exs carpet 5,000 SF 0.75 3,750 a raised flooring 1,050S 1.75 1,838 xs acoustic calling 20,000 SF - 0.85 17,000 laster ceilin for shotcrete access 750 SF 2.00 1,500 xs interior artitions 600 LF 40.00 24,000 xs interior low partitions 500 LF 15.00 7,500 �. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA•530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section VI-Appropriate Use Page 6-27 « LEVERTON&ASSOCIATES LLC CSI DIVISION FORMAT ` CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE FILE NO: 245-2 DATE: 2/1/00 r DIV. EST. UNI r UNIT TOTAL NO. DESCRIPTION CITY COST COST 17 Remove exs unite window inflll 1,100 SF 10.00 11,000 18 Remove exst boarded window!broken lazin 3008 7.50 2,250 19 Remove exs ceramic floor tile&base 2,980 SF 1.50 4,470 20 Remove exs ceramic wall file 250 SF 2.50 625 21 Remove ex-On toilet accessories 1 L8 1,000.00 1,000 22 Remove exst heat boiler P.ca 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 23 Rem exs lumbin - i in -waste/service 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 24 Mechanical demolition, incl piping in tunnels 1 LS 20,000.00 20,000 25J Electrical demolition 1 LS 12,000.00 12,000 26 1 Remove exstq arcade rafters&decldng 1 3.651 ISF 2.50 9,128 ' 27 Misc demolition, cut 8 atch 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 Removal 8,Salva a of Historic Materials 28 Remove exs clay file roofing/store 31,000 SF 2.00 62,000 29 Remove exs marble toilet partitions 1 201 Fro 150.00 3,000 30 1 Rem lobby seatin /store,clean&reinstall 1 LS 3,000.00 3,000 31 Remove exs plumbing fixtures/ca 40 EA 250.00 10,000 02116 SITE CLEARING _ 1 Remove exs asphalt paying 45,500 SF 0.85 38,875 2 Remove exstg concrete paving 1 41 - 1.50 60,750 3 Remove exs raised concrete slab 1,225 SF 2.00 2,450 4 Remove exstg brick/unit pavers,store I 9,500 SF 1.75 16,625 *2Excav'ate ve en utilities as required 1 LS 7,500.00 7,500 ove exs A/C enclosure 1 LS 2,500.00 _2,500 - ve exs landsca in &iM afion 10,000 SF 0.75 7,500 site demolition 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 ' RPINNING - in walls at en 50 CY 1,500.00 75,000 HWORK site radio as re uired 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 ate S-0"of fill&recom act 450 CY 25.00 11,250 31 Grout s oil injection 1 LS 1 10,000.00 1 10,000 02510 ASPHALTIC CONCRETE PAVING ' 1 AC avin &base C future Railroad Museum I 30,000 SF 1 1.30.1 39,000 2 AC paying&base adjacent building 13,000 SF 2.50 32,500 3 Patch street paving utilities 1 LS 7,500.06 7,500 02520 SITEWORKCONCRETE I I - 1 CoI vin Parking 25,000 SF 3.50 87,500 2 Co , colored&stamped 5,000 SF 5.00 25,000 3 Codewalk 10,000 SF 4.00 40,000 ' 4 Corb ram 3 EA 80000 5 Corb& tte 1,200 LF 12.50 - 15,000 02530 PA1 Reck vers&base @ 1,744 SF 7.50 13,080 2 Reck avers&base @ arcade 1 7,755 SF 1 7.50 1 58170 Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Section VI-Appropriate Use Page 6-28 r LEVERTON&ASSOCIATES LLC w CSI DIVISION FORMAT CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE FILE NO: 2482 DATE: 211/00 >A tlFiftered EST. UNIT UNIT TOTAL r DESCRIPTION QTY COST COST cete misstn /new brick avers&base 3,000 SF 15.00 45,000 MENT MARKING r n parking stall 50 EA 10.00 500 Inc. hdc &s mbol 6 EA 500.00 3,000 A DATION DRAINAGE SYSTEM d fabric 5,000 SF 1.50 7,500 rated i e.4' PVC I 1,100 LF 9.50 10,450 02710 PIPED UTILITIES 1 Domes Bc water piping 1006 40.00 4,000 2 1 Fire water Pipina 100 LF 45.00 4,500 3 Connections to 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 4 Double detector check&PIV 1 LS 15,000.00 15,000 5 Gas service&connection 1 LS 7,500.00 7,500 02720 STORM DRAIN SYSTEMS 1 Storm drains a 400 LF 50.00 20,000 2 Storm drain manhole 1 EA 2,500.00 2,500 3 Connect toe ublic storm drain I 1 LS 1 3,000.00 3,000 02730 SANITARY DRAIN SYSTEM 1 ISanitary drain PiDing 200 LF 40.00 8,000 2 1 Sanitary manhole 1 2 EA 2,000.00 4,000 .. 3 Connect toe public sewer 1 LS 3,000.00 - 3,000 02800 MISC SITE IMPROVEMENTS 1 Site si na e/hdcp si na e 1 ILS 1 7,500.00 7,500 2 Site fumishin s I i LS 1 10,000.00 - 10,000 3 Fla ole 1 1 JEA 1 3,500.00 1 3,500 4 Mechanical enclosure I 1 LS 1 15,000.00 1 15,000 5 Bus shelter I 3 EA 1 15,000.00 j 45,000 02900 LANDSCAPING&IRRIGATION - 1 Ini a5on I 15,000 SF 1 2.00 1 30,000 2 Shrubs/lawn 15,000 SF 4.50 67,500 3 Palms I 76 EA 1 950.00 1 72,200 W. 4 Trees,24"box 42 EA 300.00 12,600 5 Tree rates I 37 EA 1 450.00 1 16,650 JSUB-TOTAL DIV.#02000 1,548,030 03300 CONCRETE CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE Concrete foobn s 40 CY 350.00 14,000 Concrete slab on rade 2,872 SF 5.00 14,360 Patch Conc slab on rade as r uired 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 Conc shear wall, 12"w/#4 @ 16"oc ea face 1,386 SF 25.00 34,650 Conc shear wall,8"w/rebar 348 SF 1 20.00 8,960 Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA•530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section VI-Appropriate Use Page 6-29 LEVERTON&ASSOCIATES LLC CSI DIVISfON FORMAT CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE FILE NO: 245.2 DATE: 2/1/00 . DIV. I EST. UNI UNIT TOTAL NO. DESCRIPTION QTY COST COST 1 6 Dowel shear walls to exist cols&hdrs 200 FA 25.00 5,000 7 Sven then 1st floor slab o/basement allow 6,000 SF 2.00 12,000 then 2nd floor slab ........ 24,082 SF 2.00 48,164 slab,2"w/6 x 6,w 4 x 4 mesh o/roof an 6,000 SF 2.75 16,500 CRETE te,4",an 12"oc ea - 2,955 SF 15.00 44,325 shtcrte to brk;#3 12"ea in e o resin 2,955 SF 5.00 14,775 0 FIBER REINFOED CONCRETE -ate broken/missin column ornaments 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 OTAL DIV.#03000 225,7341 04000 MASONRY 04200 UNIT MASONRY 1 Patch&re air exsta brick floor 8,250 SF 1.00 8,250 04450 CUT STONE VENEER 1 Re it I reinstall marble anel toilet n.rtNo n 20 EA - 500.00 10,000 2 Re lace marble panel as wired 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 SUB-TOTAL DIV.#04000 23,250 05000 METALS 05120 STRUCTURAL STEEL 1 Misc re air ieces/seismic 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 2 Additional brecfn at k:-k roof 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 05400 LIGHT GAUGE FRAMING 1 Metal stud wall framin miscwalls/elevator 5,000 SF 3.50 17,500 05500 METAL FABRICATIONS _ 1 Re air/re lace access ladders/channel dr frame I 1 LS 7,500.00 1 7,500 2 Misc metals 1 58.00011 SF 1 0.15 8,700 SUB-TOTAL DIV.#05000 43,700 06000 WOOD AND PLASTICS 06100 ROUGH CARPENTRY 1 P od roof sheathing, pitched 31,000 SF 1.50 46,500 2 P od roof sheathing flat 2,000 SF 1.50 3,000 3 PI d roof sheathin ,arcade&cano ies 9,056 SF 7.50 13,564 4 Crickets flat roofs 2,750 SF 1.00 2,750 5 Custom milled T&G 1 10 DF deckin ,arcade 5,500 SF 2.50 13,750 6 Rafters,6"x 10",arcade 50% 1 LS 10,000.00 10,Do0 Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 a(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section VI-Appropriate Use Page 6-30 LEVERTON&ASSOCIATES LLC CSI DIVISION FORMAT CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE . FILE NO: 245-2 DATE: 2/1100 DIV. EST. UNI UNIT TOTAL NO. DESCRIPTION QTY COST COST 7 Solid blocking betty beams,contin arcade 900 LF 5.00 4,500 8 Replace deteriorated roof/eaves framin 1 ALW 30,000.00 30,000 9 Re lace deteriorated canoes framin 1 ALW 2,500.00 2,500 _ 10 Slaolllze wood louvers 1 IS 1,000.00 1,000 11 Strai ht sheathin , 1 x int walls of domes 6,000 SF 1.95 11,700 12 E anch, 3/4"at base of dome wall,4'oc to cone base thru steel an Is 100 EA 100.00 10,000 s 13 E o anch,3/4" erim of wood roof framin to cone walls,4'oc 150 EA 100.00 15,000 "' 14 E anch, 3/4" rim of wood arcade roof framin to cone walls,4'oc 225 EA 100.00 22,500 e 15 Wood ram 2nd floor 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 06200 FINISH CARPENTRY 1 Re lirate oust wd cl anels @ Harve Hse Dinin 1,500 SF 10.00 15,000 2 Re air/re fiesta custom wood trim - 1 ALW 51000.00 5,000 06410 CASEWORK 1 Re air/restore AMTRAK Lobb casework 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 K 2 wl=custom race casework 1 LS 3,500.00 3,500 06650 SOLID POLYMER FABRICATIONS 1 Misc con an countertop @ new casework 1 LS 2,000.00 2,000 SUB-TOTAL 0IV.#06000 222,284 �+ 07000 THERMAL AND MOISTURE PROTECTION 1 .. 07200 INSULATION *� 1 Batt insulation, R-30 attics ace 28,035 Be 0.65 18,223 _ 2 Batt insulation, int wall,sound 5,000 SF 0.55 2,750 07320 CLAY TILE ROOFING 1 Clean&reinstall historic roof tiles w/st s8 wire ties 31,000 SF 3.50 108,500 2 Add to re lieste missin /dama ed clav tiles I 1,550 SF 5.00 7,750 ^- 3 Felt,30# 31,000 SF 0.20 6,200 07500 MEMBRANE ROOFING 1 4- 1 memb roofing w/min can sheet,flat roof/ arcade/cano lea 11,056 11 SF 2.50 27,640 07620 METAL FLASHING&TRIM 1 Re airexs i 1,600 LF 1 5.50 8,800 A 2 Flashin , eaves drip.copper 1,250 LF 7.50 9,375 - r 3 New flashin s,--r I 9Annlh LIr I 10.75 1 25,800 4 Gutter&downs ut, re air/replace I 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 JOIN 5 Misc eo r flashin /coping/drips/re lets 1 LS 1 5,000.00 5,000 07800 SKYLIGHTS 1 Re licate metals li ht frames,4'-n"x 8'-O" 4 EA 1 2,500.00 10,000 2 Claw&reinstall glazing 20.00 Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue,San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABQITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section VI-Appropriate Use Page 6-31 r. .� LEVERTON&ASSOCIATES LLC CSI DIVISION FORMAT CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE FILE NO: 245-2 nATM- 211/00 DIV. 'EST. UNIT UNIT TOTAL ,., NO. DESCRIPTION QTY COST COST 07900 JOINT SEALERS 1 Caulkin &sealants - 1 LS 10,400.00 10,400 SUB-TOTAL DIV.#07000 247,998 06000 DOORS AND WINDOWS 06100 METAL DOORS&FRAMES 1 Metal door&frame,s I, utility bsmt 5 E4 500.00 2,500 08210 WOOD DOORS 1 Restore/reinstall an /lobby do ext 5 EA 2,500.00 12,500 2 Restore/reinstall Sliding wood doors.&hdwe 5 EA 3,000.00 15,000 3 Restore exs wood door&frame, exterior 15 EA 750,00 11,250 .. 4 Restore exs wood door&frame,interior 75 EA 500.00 37,500 m 5 Custom re licated anel style doors, interior 50 EA 900.00 45,000 6 Restore/re licate restroom stall door 20 EA 400.00 8,000 08300 SPECIAL DOORS 1 Stainless steel access doors 3 EA 3,000.00 9,000 08610 WOOD WINDOWS - 1 Re licated wood windows/hdwe 1,250 SF 50.00 62,500 2 Restore exs wood windows/hdwe 5,250 SF 40.00 250,000 08720 DOOR HARDWARE 1 Rem/dean/re air&reinstall exstg dr hdwe,ext 12 EA 650.00 7,800 2 Rem/clean/re air&reinstall exst dr hdwe, int 50 EA 400.00 20,000 3 Re licated hardware,.exterior 18 EA 750.00 13,500 4 Re licated hardware, interior 75 EA 500.00 37,500 5 Restroom stall hardware 20 EA . 250.00 5,000 08800 GLAZING - 1 Glazin n restored/re licated wdws,s I lazed 5,625 SF - 20.00 112,500 SUB-TOTAL DIV.#08000 649,550 09000 FINISHES - 09210 GYPSUM PLASTER&LATH ' 1 G taster&lath, 3 coat, smooth finish,wall - 10,000 SF 4.75 47,500 2 Patch exstg sum taster walls 88,320 SF 1.50 132,480 3 Patch exs sum laster ceilin s 24,500S- 20 49,000 ' 092 CEMENT PLASTER - 1 Repair damaged exterior Easter, Conc s0 ple fin 1 LS 15,000.00 15,000 2 I Replace damaged ornamental details 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 09300 HISTORIC REPLICATION TILE 1 Re licated floor file to match exs -restroom I 1,200 SF 40.00 48,000 Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue,San Diego, CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 w SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT r REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section VI-Appropriate Use Page 6-32 Ar ■ LEVERTON&ASSOCIATES LLC ' CSI DIVISION FORMAT - - CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE FILE NO: 245-2 DATE: - 2/1/00 DN. EST. UNI UNIT TOTAL NO. DESCRIPTION CITY COST COST t• 2 Re licated wall file to match exst -lobb 500 SF 35.00 17,500 3 Re licated wall file to match exs -restroom 1,000 SF 30.00 30,000 4 Re air/restore exstg floor file to remain-lobb 4,560 SF 20.00 91,200 5 Re air/restore exs floor file to remain-rstrm 1,200S 20.00 24,D00 6 Re air/restore exs wall file to remain-lobb 2,800S 15.00 42,000 r 7 Re air/restore exst wall file to remain-rstrrn 1,000S 15.00 15,000 8 Re air/restore exterior tile inset details 1 LS 2,000.00 2,000 09665 LINOLEUM SHEET FLOORING 1 Misc resilient flooring 500 SF 4.00 2,000 09678 RESILIENT SHEET FLOORING ACCESSORIES 1 Misc resilient base 200 LF 3.00 600 2 Resilient stair accessories 1 LS 1,000.00 1,000 09679 CARPET Y 1 Misc ca efin 500 SF 5.00 2,500 09860 SPECIAL COATINGS ■ 1 Semi loss epo coatin marble artitions 1,000 SF 2.50 2,500 09900 PAINTING PREPARE, PRIME&PAINT) M 1 Low ressure water wash,exterior wall&arcade 52,900 SF 0.45 .23,805 2 Stain exterior wall surfaces 40,000 SF 0.85 34,000 3 Stain/ int exterior arcade surfaces 12,900 SF 0.85 10,985 11 " 4 Stain/varnish wood doors, ext 25.EA 100.00 2,500 5 Stain/ aint slidin2 wood doors - 5 EA 250.00 1,250 6 Paint metal doors&frames 5 EA 75.00 375 7 Stain ext/vamish int,wood windows 7,500 SF 4.00 30,000 .. 8 Paint exterior metals-stairs/rails 1 LS 2,500.00 2,500 9Paint cano fascia/soffit 1,300 SF 1.50 1,950 10 Stain/ aint a sea wood deck/rafters,arcade 7,756 SF 0.90 6,980 11 Stain/ aint ex osed wood roof eaves/soffit 5,000 SF 0.90 4,500 12 Misc exterior aintin 1 LS. 5,000.00 5,000 . 13 Paint plaster wets, interior 98,320 SF 0.45 44,244 14 Paint lasterceilin s 24,500 SF 1 0.50 12,250 15 Stain/varnish wood doors, int 125 EA 100.00 12,500 16 Seal file floors I 6,9608F 11 0.45 3,132 17 Seal file walls I 5,300 SF I 0.50 2,650 18 Stain/ aint I 20 EA 1 50.00 1,000 19 Paint Interior metals-stairs/rails I 1 LS 2,500.00 2,500 ,+ 20 Misc interior 1 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 SUB-TOTAL DI V.#09000 734,381 _. 10000 SPECIALTIES 10425 SIGNS - 1 JADA si na e-toilet/exifin 1111-3 1,000.00 Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Section VI-Appropriate Use Page 6-33 r ' LEVERTON&ASSOCIATES LLC - - CSI DIVISION FORMAT CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE FILE NO: 245-2 DATE: 2/1/00 'DIV. EST. UNI UNIT TOTAL ' NO. DESCRIPTION QTY COST COST 2 Misc custom si na e 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 10522 FIRE EXTINGUISHERS 1 Fire extin uishers&cabinets, recessed 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 ' 10800 TOILET ACCESSORIES - 1 Paper towel dis ensAm/waste 8 EA 300.00 2,400 2 Toilet a r dis ------ 25 EA 100.00 2,500 3 Seat cover dis ensers 25 EA 110.00 2,750 ' 4 Grab bars,2-way 8 EA 205.00 1,640 5 Mirrors 16 EA 150.00 2,400 6 S dis ensers 16 EA 135.00 2,160 7 Bab than in station 4 EA 650.00 2,600 8 Clothes hooks 25 EA 35.00 875 9 Fern napkin dispenser 2 EA 475.00 950 10 Fern napkin disposal 14 EA 110.00 1,540 10900 MISC SPECIALTIES 1 Awnin s,small 50 EA 500.00 25,000 2 Amin s, large 5 EA 1,000.00 5,000 SUB-TOTAL DIV.#10000 65,815 ' 13000 SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION 13916 FIRE PROTECTION 1 Fire sprinklers, bui1dIn2&arcade 65,756 SF 2.75 180,829 2 Alarm valve riser 2 EA 3,000.00 6,000 - SUB-TOTAL DIV.#13000 166,828 14000 CONVEYING SYSTEMS 14200 ELEVATORS 1 H draulic elevator, holeless,9-.m. assen er 2 EA 40,000.00 80,000 ' 2 Cab interior-oak nanAl walls&ceilin 2 EA 15,000.00 30,000 14300 LIFTS 1 Wheelchair lift 1 EA 10,000.00 10,000 ' SUB-TOTAL DIV.#14000 - 110,000 15400 PLUMBING E ui ment 1 Water heaters/circulation 1 LS 7,500.00 7,500 Fixtures, replicate/restore inn[re lace i in 2 Water closet 25 EA 2,300.00 57,500 Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 • (619) 239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 A Section VI-Appropriate Use Page 6-34 0 LEVERTON&ASSOCIATES LLC CSI DIVISION FORMAT CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE FILE NO: 245-2 DATE: 2/1/00 DIV. EST. UNI. UNIT TOTAL NO. DESCRIPTION QTY COST COST 3 Urinal 10 EA 2,100.00 21,000 4 Lavato ,wall hung 16 EA 11900.00 30,400 w 5 Service sink 2 EA 2,800.00 5,600 6 Drinkin fountain, dual 2 EA 3,700.00 7,400 7 Misc-floor drains/cleanouts 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 8 as distribution 58,000 SF 0.40 23;200 9 Clean/re it roof drains 11,056 SF 1.50 16,584 10 Hose bibbs-interior 2iping 1 LS 8,500.00 8,500 SUB-TOTAL DIV.#15400 182,684 r ■ 15763 HVAC r 1 HVAC system-fan coil units, chiller,boiler,coolin 58,000 SF 13.00 764,000 tower,fan coil tsm Excludes branch distrbuton in tenant area 2 Exhaust fans&duct 10 EA 3,800.00 38,000 SUB-TOTAL DN.#15763 792,000 16000 ELECTRICAL Bulldin Excluding tenant areas 1 E ui ment-main/su anels 58,000 SF 4.00 232,000 2 Power 58,000 SF 1.50 87,000 3 Li htin 58,000 SF 2.75 159,500 4 Remove, Restore,clean&reinstall historic fixtures - 1 LS 20,000.00 20,000 5 Exterior buildin , roof&arcade li htin 1 LS 50,000.00 50,000 6 Communications/data 58,000 SF 1.50 87,000 Site 7 Fire al irrn 58,000 SF 2.25 130,S0D 8 Site feeders&transformer ad 1 LS 40,000.00 40,000 9 Site communications conduit I 1 LS 25,000.00 25,000 10 Site Ii htin 1 1 ILS 30,000.00 30,000 SUB-TOTAL DIV.#16000 861,000 w w w Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIR•530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 w n 7 r SECTION VII Conclusions and Recommendations SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT .. REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6 2000 Section VII-Conclusions and Recommendations Page 7-1 VII. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS The San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot has the potential to regain its historic prominence and viability as a vital transportation hub for the Inland Empire. The restoration of the Depot,when successfully combined with - related development projects such as the Paseo Las Placitas Specific Plan, can also help serve as a catalyst for the economic recovery of southwest San Bernardino County and the City. 1r Integration with a larger community development plan is essential.Creating pedestrian,transportation,visual and informational links to the Mt.Vernon corridor and downtown San Bernardino are critical to the long- term sustainability and the success of the project.It is important to view the rehabilitation of the depot as a component of the larger redevelopment plan. Examination of similar projects has shown that the full re-utilization of the depot should be looked at as an evolving process. The project horizon could be long-term and may take 15 to 20 years before the desired results, in terms of becoming a catalyst for local economic recovery, are fully realized. The case studies of similar transit facilities in Southern California provided a valuable insight into past successes and failures in attempts to develop economically and socially viable and lasting facilities. The Glendale, Chatsworth and Claremont depots underline some of the challenges these kind of facilities are in often faced with such as lack of visibility,over estimation of retail users,loss of primary tenants,and reliance on commuter traffic to support uses.The Fullerton Depot exhibits the need to integrate into the surrounding land uses not only by means of physical and visual linkages but, more importantly, by providing complementary uses that serve both the transit users and the local community.The Santa Ana Transportation Center was found to be the best model. With 47,000 square feet, it is a comparable size facility to the 55,000 SF San Bernardino Depot. The Santa Ana Center is located in a neighborhood not dissimilar to San Bernardino's and the users of the depot are demographically quite similar. The Santa Ana Center is by far the most successful depot within the study in terms of activity and rent generation for the City and provides valuable clues for a favorable development approach, ideal tenant mix and effective operation methods. The tenant make-up of the depot should directly address the needs of the primary market,the surrounding areas located within a 5 minute drive time from the San Bernardino Depot,and secondary market,those areas • within a 5-10 minute drive.The market and demographic analysis has shown that the local neighborhood is largely comprised of young,Hispanic and African American, low-income families and individuals. Services that provide vocational training and job placement are likely to generate considerable use and traffic in the Depot. Metrolink riders currently number between 400 and 450 during typical weekdays,and may increase as the lines are expanded. Transit users,as a group,may help support services,but as other case studies showed, a, should not be heavily relied upon to support businesses within the Depot. The uses within the Depot should be complementary to one another. To create an active multimodal transit hub, it is important to provide for Amtrak,Metrolink, local,regional and possibly international bus service and taxi services. The Santa Ana Center showed that by providing bus service to Mexico, it responded 10 directly to a need of the local community. Impacts by other projects that may dissipate transit activities should be carefully considered. Gathering and meeting spaces need to be linked to one another to provide further flexibility in addressing the needs of the local community and San Bernardino as a whole. IArchitect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6 2000 Section VII-Conclusions and Recommendations Page 7-2 r Other users and markets, in addition to primary rail transit users,have to be attracted for the project to sustain itself This might include area residents,daytime employees, other transit users and tourists. The Depot building has been found to have a structural system that will allow for relatively high floor loads and accommodate a wide variety of uses. Settlement is generally non-structural in nature and can be repaired during the renovation work.Seismic strengthening can be handled in most instances within new features such as stairwells and elevator shafts and allow original window areas to be re-opened. The initial rehabilitation of the tenant spaces should provide for easy access and connection to new building utilities such as electrical,telephone, data,heating, air conditioning and plumbing systems. It is advisable that the internal restoration of leasable space is carried out to a `rough finish' level,with the burden of tenant improvements being put on the lessee,in return for rental incentives. Operations and maintenance costs for the facilities should be identified and addressed.While these costs may be covered by tenant rents,examining �+ effective cost recovery techniques and alternative long-term plans will be essential. Partnerships with the two current rail service providers, Amtrak and Metrolink, and assessment of their long-term plans is important. Addressing current Metrolink parking deficits and parking needs generated by the Depot is essential to attract and keep users. The location of the off-site parking lots should be carefully examined to maximize access to the Depot and the Metrolink platforms. Entering into a subsidized lease agreement that would allow sub-leasing may not be beneficial to the long- term development and returns to the City.Drafting of lease agreements will need to be carefully carried out in order to ensure positive evolution in terms of the use mix and a positive growth in rental revenues. Creating an onsite management presence to oversee security, maintenance and tenant needs will be an important factor in the long term success of the project. Allowing for flexibility in the tenant make-up is important.The types and number of users and tenants of the Depot will evolve over time. The City of San Bernardino and appropriate organizations that completed the •< Stakeholders' should be prepared to bear the cost of subsidizing the initial group of catalytic tenants and pay operating costs in order to allow the project sufficient time to build long-term sustainability. With these factors in mind, the Depot may be developed to once again become the"Gateway to Southern California." Few communities have such a remarkable historic resource available to provide for the linking of its citizens and providing opportunities for area growth and revitalization.There is ample evidence from public meetings,workshops, interviews and local surveys that the Depot is highly regarded by those that come in contact with it, and there is an overwhelming desire to see the building restored and reused as an active,vital site for the community. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 m rgqrf r ". t N: SECTION VIII Bibliography SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Section VIII-Bibliography Page 1 VIII. BIBLIOGRAPHY Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIR. City of San Bernardino Historic Resource Reconnaissance Survey. May, 1991. Brasher,Laurence J.,ed. The Iron Horse:First Annual Publication of the Apprentices of All Crafts of the Mechanical Department Santa Fe Railroad System. 1926. Bryant,Keith L.Jr. History of the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1974. California Building Standards Commission. "State Historical Building Code."California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part S. Whittier: International Conference of Building Officials, 1998. City of San Bernardino. Development Code Title 19 City of San Bernardino Municipal Code. City of San Bernardino. City of San Bernardino General Plan. June 2, 1989. City of San Bernardino. Paseo Las Placitas Specific Plan and EIR for the Mt. Vernon Corridor. April 20, 1992. Converse Environmental West. Final Asbestos, PCB Flurorescent Light Ballast and Lead Based Paint Survey Report. August 25, 1993. Drilling and Remediation Technology,Inc. Emergency Response Activity Report:AT&SF San Bernardino Depot Amtrak Station Area San Bernardino California. March 12, 1993. Glischinski, Steve. Santa Fe Railway. Osceola, WI: Motorbooks International Publishers& Wholesalers, 1997. Hall-Kimbrell Environmental Services, Inc. Santa Fe Railroad Asbestos Assessment Study. April 1990. Hillman Biddison&Loevenguth. Investigation Modification for Seismic Integrity For San Bernardino Railroad Depot. March 14, 1986. Myra F. Frank&Associates. Historic Property Survey Report for the San Bernardino Santa Fe Station Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse Project San Bernardino County, California. February, 2000. Peironnet, David R. Santa Fe's Last Dining Car Service Instructions. Kansas City: D. Peironnet, Books, 1999. Potter,Janet Greenstein. Great American Railroad Stations. New York: Preservation Press, 1996. Remedial Action Corporation. Phase I Pre-Acquisition Site Assessment and Non-Invasive Asbestos Survey,AT&SF San Bernardino Railyard, Depot Building, San Bernardino California. February 9, 1993. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Section VIII-Bibliography Page 2 "Fire Sweeps Santa Fe Plant." San Bernardino Sun. November 17, 1916. "Destruction of Depot and Offices Follows Shop Fire Quickly Causing a Panic;Men Have Narrow Escapes." San Bernardino Sun. November 17, 1916. "Bail Chief in Statement of Plans for Depot." San Bernardino Sun. November 19, 1916. "Reveal Santa Fe Depot and Shop Plans." San Bernardino Sun. November 23, 1916. "Santa Fe's New Station to Open: Finest in West" San Bernardino Sun. July 14, 1918. Vision 20/20 San Bernardino. November 15, 1999. Weeks,Kay D.and Anne E. Grimmer. "Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings." The Secretary of the Interiors Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring and Reconstructing Historic Buildings. Washington D.C.:National Park Service, 1995. Weitze,Karen J. California's Mission Revival. Los Angeles: Hennessey&Ingalls,Inc., 1984. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA•530 Sixth Avenue,San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 v APPENDICES SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Appendices APPENDICES Appendix A Workshop Notes Appendix B Metrolink Survey Appendix C Code Research Study Appendix D Cost Estimates Appendix E Outline Specifications Appendix F ERA Report Appendix G Seismic Analysis Appendix H Geotechnical Report Appendix I HVAC Life Cycle Cost Analysis Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIR• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILrrAT1ON AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Appendices r r r Appendix A Workshop Notes s Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA•530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 r r SAN BERNARDINO SANTA FE STATION ^ r STAKEHOLDERS COMMITTEE ORIENTATION MEETING AND NEIGHBORHOOD WALK-THOUGH AGENDA r October 22, 1999 9:00- 11:00 a.m. r r I. Introduction r 2. Site Walk-through - 3. Scope of Work and Schedule a. 4. History Overview 5. Break r 6. Opportunities and Constraints Q 7. Group Discussion ■ 8. Closing Statements V A � a 4 M P Oo _t M �p N M O a r N rl Vo o � � `�' In N N E•+ � U U Q ,.. N au o y4�u ai Q Q J� / v •, ��O a z ` O O B x x (r_ G � z ` o PL a ar N 2 J j 2 2 if Cy c z s N1 E U V1 In v UU ¢ a V1 M\ KA N G� SZ S 1 z G Y e ` S , ARCHITECT MILFORD WAYNE DONALDSON,FAIR,INC. 530 SIXTH AVENUE,SAN DIEGO,CALIFORNIA 92101 PHONE: (619)239-7888•FAX: (619)234-6286•E-MAIL:MWD@ARCHMWD.COM SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT Stakeholders Meeting Notes November 5, 1999 The following is a synopsis of the discussions that took place at the Stakeholders meeting on October 22, 1999. A copy of the attendance sheet and agendas have been attached. Stakeholders Meeting, October 22. 1999.9:00-11:00 a.m. 1. Amtrak expressed their intention to continue to staff the station. 2. Amtrak will investigate on the possibility to expand the freight service at the depot. 3. Depot to be used as a kick-off area for local conferences or conventions. This generates great revenue and will pose as a good anchor for the City that the City of Riverside has been successful in with the Mission Inn. • The lobby could be used as a banquet area and if there is a restaurant use,the restaurant can tr cater to the various events. 4. There needs to be an architectural continuity that ties the surrounding area, especially the bridge,to the Station. This can be done through lighting,banners, and street furniture. MWD will need to meet with the architect on the bridge(Parsons-Brinckerholf?). 5. The San Bernardino Railroad Historical Society is interested in occupying the east parking area for their Engine. 6. Attractions needed in the area to bring people in such as"Southern California wine tasting." 7. The area to the south should be developed such as hotel,malls, and theaters. 8. The Fedco retail area, Second Street, and the market area should be included within the study to make the project work. 9. Potential new architectural buildings that will be built should be low structures so that the view and focus will continue to be the depot. • Lantana(gold&red),green grass and palms were the usual landscape. 10. Education: • The second floor should be used for classroom space to provide technical training for the railway system. • Include the depot with the California History program for fourth graders. This means they will need an area to congregate and possibly watch some videos. • Tie-in the Governor's Service Learning Program. 11. Provide a parking study. 12. Possible formal gardens to the south of the depot. 13. Metrolink expressed interest in occupying the second floor. 14. Retail shops on the ground floor. unww.pioimnvmx sa•newm.��we,msmato-ueo-zs-w I SAN BERNARDINO SANTA FE STATION MT.VERNON PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE(PAC) ORIENTATION MEETING WALK-THOUGH AGENDA October 22, 1999 1:00- 3:00 p.m. 1. Introduction 2. Site Walk-through 3. Scope of Work and Schedule 4. History Overview 5. Break 6. Opportunities and Constraints 7. Group Discussion 8. Closing Statements e= a _ 12:21 _ e v a m�m , e S__,_ FACE w, § j % e a � . \ \ L I } a k « ¥ � � z \ \ « % z \ \ \ a , � • el y o a � / \ ARCHITECT MILFORD WAVNE DoNALDsoN,FAIA,INC. 530 SIXTH AVENUE,SAN DIEGO,CALIFORNIA 92101 PHONE: (619)239-7888•FAX: (619)234-6286•E-MAIL:MWD @ARCHMWD.COM SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT Mt.Vernon Project Area Committee Meeting October 22, 1999 The following is a synopsis of the discussions that took place at the Mt. Vernon Project Area Committee meeting on October 22, 1999. A copy of the attendance sheet and agendas have been attached. Mt.Vernon PAC Meeting- October 22. 1999, 1-00-3.00 p.m. 1. MWD should meet with the architectural designers of the Mt.Vernon bridge to make sure that the 1920s open parapet design continues. • The architecture of the bride should complement the g p depot including period lighting. This help the bridge to become a bridge of interest and not another freeway overpass. •+ • Provide pedestrian walkways and bike lanes. 2. Provide a mix use. 3. Tie-in the water project. It helps visitors"feel'cooler and also draws in children.MWD to take a look at the Fort Worth Water Gardens project. 4. Need to provide services to help attract people to the area such as museum,theaters,dining, retail or the sports stadium. This can link other transportation vendors to include the area as a major stop. g 5. Tie-in Mt.Vernon to the depot: • Landscape and handscape. ., • Powerful signage from the freeway to help draw the visitor through Mt.Vernon to the depot. • Night lighting of the depot with a palm frame and various graphics through Mt.Vernon adds to the drama. 6. Use pedicabs system to assist with parking and transportation. 7. Use the depot as a conference kick-off arena. 8. MWD to do background research on the realignment of Hwy 215. 9. Share parking with Metrolink. 10. Major entry ways to the depot should be through Mt.Vernon via south or north, Pepper/Foothill to the west and Fourth Street to the east. �✓B PRVISPo3 S4pc\wmkJrq YmNrcetip6 me6e I0.EI @ 10.E9A9 L SAN BERNARDINO SANTA FE STATION ® MAYORAL& COMMON COUNCIL ORIENTATION MEETING AND WALK-THROUGH AGENDA October 29, 1999 2:00—4:00 p.m. 1. Arrival/Sign-in 2. Introductions Deborah Woldruff/Wayne Donaldson 3. History Overview Eileen Magno 4. Site Walk-through Wayne Donaldson 5. Break 6. Scope ofWork/Schedule Greg Roberson 7. Opportunities and Constraints Ian Davidson(Wayne Donaldson 8. Group Discussion All 9. Closing Statements Deborah Woldruff 1 Eik.rn wd-Mjemst9902 saa b.task 11maYma1 mtg 10-29-99 1 ARCHITECT MILFORD WAYNE DONALDSON,FAIA,INC. 530 SDCM AVENUE,SAN DIEGO,CALIFORNIA 92101 PHONE: (619)239-7888•FAx: (619)234-6286•E-MAIL:MWD @ARCHMWD.COM ■ ■ r SAN BERNARDiNo DEPOT ■ City Council Meeting ` October 29 1999 r The following is a synopsis of the discussions that took place at the City Council meeting on October 29, 1999. A copy of the attendance sheet and agendas have been attached. City Council Meeting.October 29, 1999 2.00-4.00 p.m. 1. There should be a comprehensive traffic study for the area proposed. 2. Economic Research Associates (ERA), as part of the MWD team, is doing a study on the economic/market viability of the neighborhood. 3. There is a confirmation from Amtrak that they will continue to staff the station. r 4. The design should be consistent with the bridge including landscape and hardscape. 5. Bring downtown to the depot. There should be a continuous link for the visitors between the two areas. wt 6. Should the surrounding areas continue with the"feeling"of the Santa Fe housing(1910-1920s)? 7. The greatest concerns for the stakeholders is that the improvements will not stop with the depot but +� should incorporate the surround areas in order for the project to be a success. r r r A r MR in c�..apo�mvsox sayax,�mmv�.w.xws�m, o-zzn iaxcw January 4,2000 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO Fax No.: (909) 384-5080 Development Services Department 300 North"D" Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 1 Attention: Ms. Deborah Woldmff ' Subject: San Bernardino Depot Stakeholder's Interview tte d e Robin Laska San Bernardino County Museum 909/307-2669 x 255 Wayne Donaldson Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA 619/239-7888 x 211 IGreg Roberson Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA 619/239-7888 x 201 A meeting was held on November 16, 1999 at the San Bernardino Museum to discuss the following. _ A list of questions were developed,sent to the interviewee and discussed at this meeting. The questions were: 1. Why did you or your organization choose to become involved in this project? 2. How do you think the rehabilitation of the depot might start further revitalization of the surrounding " neighborhood? 3. What do you think is the most important factor that must be satisfied to ensure the revitalization succeeds? 4. What in your opinion has hampered the full use of the depot previously? 5. What would help integrate the depot site into the neighborhood? 6. Do you interface with the depot currently? 7. Do you have a desire to run an operation at the depot? r 8. What other uses would complement your potential use? 9. What other uses would detract from your potential use? 10. Is there anything we should be aware of that might have an impact on reusing this facility? The responses were as follows: • Became involved as part of the SHPO requirement. • Reuse shouldn't create traffic patterns that disrupt the neighborhood. There are lots of kids. • Mill Street is a main artery f San Bernardino County Museum STAKEHOLDER'S INTERVIEW January 4,2000 Page 2 • One vehicle families. • El Tigre could become a park to encourage the gathering place. There is a similar gathering place in Victorville just below Victor Valley Hospital. ` • Area to north is psychologically and physically separated by the railroad tracks which creates a we/them dynamic. • A restaurant would enhance the use of park and possibly keep the metro link station from dying after the Redlands station is constructed. _ • A Conference Center or use that allows coming and going without needing a car would be beneficial. Something unique that's not at Rialto or Redlands metro stations. • SHPO hot buttons: Secretary of Interiors Standards. w Notes prepare by Greg Roberson,Architect. cc: All attendees do a • • r January 4,2000 A CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO Fax No.: (909) 384-5080 Development Services Department 300 North"D" Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 Attention: Ms. Deborah Woldruff Subject: San Bernardino DWot Stakeholder's Interview Attendees Bob Brendza Burlington Northern Santa Fe 909/386-4042 Wayne Donaldson Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA 619/239-7888 x 211 Greg Roberson Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA 619/239-7888 x 201 A meeting was held on November 16, 1999 at the San Bernardino Museum to discuss the following. A list of questions were developed,sent to the interviewee and discussed at this meeting. The questions were: 1. Why did you or your organization choose to become involved in this project? 2. How do you think the rehabilitation of the depot might start further revitalization of the surrounding neighborhood? 3. What do you think is the most important factor that must be satisfied to ensure the revitalization succeeds? -- 4. What in your opinion has hampered the full use of the depot previously? 5. What would help integrate the depot site into the neighborhood? 6. Do you interface with the depot currently? 7. Do you have a desire to run an operation at the depot? 8. What other uses would complement your potential use? y 9. What other uses would detract from your potential use? 10. Is there anything we should be aware of that might have an impact on reusing this facility? y The responses were as follows: • Multi-Model Yards • "A"Yard(directly north of depot) intermodal - freight 1,000 lifts/day 1/3 Long Beach 400,00/year. i Burlington Northern Santa Fe STAKEHOLDER'S INTERVIEW January 4,2000 Page 2 • `B"Yard(couple of blocks away)-GM Facility-Not at capacity- looking at expansion. • One of the largest intermodal yards in the nation. • An existing puzzle switch would allow the historic engine to cross the other tracks. • Don't see any use other than intermodal at San Bernardino Depot. • Yellow freight will take up the yard expansion area to the west. • The main entry to the intermodal yard is on 4th Street. . • The primary interface concern is to keep depot users off the tracks. Metrolink already has taken over the area directly west of the depot. Amtrak uses all the tracks in front of the depot. The third track receives the primary use followed by the fourth and fifth tracks.The tracks north of the fifth line are used during unloading. • Adding barriers to keep people off the tracks would be a good idea. • There is an active local Santa Fe retirement association. • County museum has HABS/HAER analysis of the North yard done by Myra Frank. All historical data is at the County museum or Topeka Kansas. • The original smokestack remains. • City owns and operates the historic whistle(used to call the employees to work). • Barstow- slightly similar. • The office spaces would be ideal for an eclectic consultant,or architectural or engineering firms. • Any entertainment facilities will complete with Hospitality Lane. • Does not see a Starbucks or Spaghetti Factory occupying the depot. • SANBAG should take some of the space. • Union Depot created a deli in the station.A similar use could occur at this depot. • City departments that are currently housed outside City Hall should move into this facility. • Depot will probably remain an island for a period of time. • Does not see that creating a tie to the Carrousel mall is worth while. The mall is on the edge of failing itself. Inland center was just rebuilt and is the"local"mall. w • Harvy House,ticket office leased out at Union station. • As a transcontinental mainline Amtrak can't switch boxcars on line(increased freight use)this line goes to Chicago. • San Bernardino enticed Santa Fe to build station originally Redondo Junction in Los Angeles(Santa Fe&Washington)has one of the last remaining roundhouses. Notes prepare by Greg Roberson,Architect. •• cc: All attendees s r V January 4,2000 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO Fax No.: (909)384-5080 Development Services Department 300 North"D" Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 Attention: Ms. Deborah Woldruff Subject: San Bernardino Dermot Stakeholder's Interview Attendees Dr Clifford Young California State University San Bernardino 909/880-5002 Wayne Donaldson Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA 619/239-7888 x 211 Greg Roberson Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA 619/239-7888 x 201 •meeting was held on November 16, 1999 at the San Bernardino Museum to discuss the following. •list of questions were developed,sent to the interviewee and discussed at this meeting. The questions were: 1. Why did you or your organization choose to become involved in this project? 2. How do you think the rehabilitation of the depot might start further revitalization of the surrounding neighborhood? 3. What do you think is the most important factor that must be satisfied to ensure the revitalization succeeds? 4. What in your opinion has hampered the full use of the depot previously? 5. What would help integrate the depot site into the neighborhood? 6. Do you interface with the depot currently? 7. Do you have a desire to run an operation at the depot? 8. What other uses would complement your potential use? 9. What other uses would detract from your potential use? 10. Is there anything we should be aware of that might have an impact on reusing this facility? The responses were as follows: • San Bernardino is on the verge of an economic collapse. Resident of San Bernardino. The university is interested in improvement of the City, and wants to be a positive force in the development. The University,Country Club,and Hospitality Lane are the only nice areas in San Bernardino.The University would like to see another area such as the Depot added to the list. California State University San Bernardino STAKEHOLDER'S INTERVIEW January 4, 2000 Page 2 The Depot could be an ideal showplace to tour for the national conference. • Creating a shuttle service between the Depot and the University is an important element that needs to be addressed. • San Bernardino needs areas for conference attendees to stay.Accommodations for 700-900 people would be useful. • The university has held conferences at the Red Lion Inn in Ontario in the past since there were no facilities available in San Bernardino.The problem is that conference attendees never got to the campus. • If the redeveloped Depot had a reception area for 100-200 people the University would be willing to •" try using the facility,but would probably prefer to get people to the campus as soon as possible. • An offsite education program is currently in planning. Offsite courses at the Depot are a possibility but technology must be"right"for all classrooms.The campus is usually better suited for conducting classes. • Station may offer an opportunity for evening classes for people from Los Angeles riding the Metrolink. �. • Security would be a concern and must be addressed. • CSUSB uses regional satellite teaching facilities to fill their required task to service all San Bernardino County. A new teaching facility just opened Coachella. • CSUSB is not ready for an EDA partnership. Loma Linda may be in a position.UCR is probably not. Notes prepare by Greg Roberson,Architect. cc: All attendees •. • ,.,�.,.�E.,�.n.,• ,.m .. w. r A: January 4,2000 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO Fax No.: (909)384-5080 ' Development Services Department 300 North"D" Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 ' Attention: Ms. Deborah Woldruff Subject: San Bernardino Depot Stakeholder's Interview r Attendees Penny Holcomb San Bernardino Historical Society 909/862-3332 Thelma Press San Bernardino Historical Society Wayne Donaldson Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA 619/239-7888 Greg Roberson Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA 619/239-7888 r A meeting was held on November 16, 1999 at the San Bernardino Museum to discuss the following. A list of questions were developed, sent to the interviewee and discussed at this meeting. The questions were: r 1. Why did you or your organization choose to become involved in this project? 2. - How do you think the rehabilitation of the depot might start fiuther revitalization of the surrounding neighborhood? 3. _ What do you think is the most important factor that must be satisfied to ensure the revitalization succeeds? 4. What in your opinion has hampered the full use of the depot previously? 5. What would help integrate the depot site into the neighborhood? r 6. Do you interface with the depot currently? 7. Do you have a desire to mn an operation at the depot? 8. What other uses would complement your potential use? r 9. What other uses would detract from your potential use? 10. Is there anything we should be aware of that might have an impact on reusing this facility? The responses were as follows: • Anything that will enhance the area to bring visitors from outside to inside will benefit San Bernardino. Cultural tourism • Need a facility that showcases local heritage for kick-off area for conventions.The Orange show r r 1 San Bernardino Historical Society STAKEHOLDER'S INTERVIEW January 4,2000 Page 2 grounds have a 1300 SF convention center. w • Facility should be able to handle 300-400 people for kick off events. • Existing convention facility could handle a convention of 500-800 people.Normal conventions have " ±200 people and occur 10-12 times per year. Riverside and Ontario both have convention facilities. Riverside has renovated Raincross Square. • San Bernardino tourism is more event driven than convention based currently due to lack of space ie: Route 66 can show four day classic car ralley. • Need to create events for convention. ft • A Railroad Museum could be a huge event generator. •� • Auto/Train/Plane(transportation) is a major part of the local heritage. Motorcycles-Palm Springs Harley event. • There is no lodging in the neighborhood by the depot.New low rise(I or 2 story)lodging facilities could be added across from the depot. Start with 100-200 room lodging. • A Low rider(auto)event could be started. A • El Tigre functions like the local plaza. ,. • Albert Okura,who owns the Juan Pollo restaurants, now owns the original McDonalds. • Could do festivals around the depot. Bring in classic locomotives similar to Sacramento. Music, eu vendor booths,carnival. Family oriented event. • Hispanic market is primary the market area. The Hispanic community tends to spend more money having fun and spending time with family than gathering material wealth. •. • Redlands has a large bike event in March. • The train yard to the north of the depot could be cleaned up and used for another function. The Kaiser Plant in Ontario was cleaned up and made into a racetrack. • Inland Empire economic partnership-Teri Ooms(909)890-1090. Notes prepare by Greg Roberson,Architect. cc: All attendees r r� L January 4,2000 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO Fax No.: (909) 384-5080 Development Services Department 300 North"D" Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 ' Attention: Ms. Deborah Woldruff Subject: San Bernardino Depot Stakeholder's Interview Attendees Rohan Kuruppu Omnitrans 909/379-7251 Michelle Campbell Omnitrans Wayne Donaldson Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA 619/239-7888 x 211 Greg Roberson Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA 619/239-7888 x 201 A meeting was held on November 16, 1999 at the San Bernardino Museum to discuss the following. A list of questions were developed, sent to the interviewee and discussed at this meeting. The questions were: 1. Why did you or your organization choose to become involved in this project? 2. How do you think the rehabilitation of the depot might start further revitalization of the surrounding neighborhood? 3. What do you think is the most important factor that must be satisfied to ensure the revitalization �• succeeds? 4. What in your opinion has hampered the full use of the depot previously? 5. What would help integrate the depot site into the neighborhood? 6. Do you interface with the depot currently? 7. Do you have a desire to run an operation at the depot? 8. What other uses would complement your potential use? 9. What other uses would detract from your potential use? 10. Is there anything we should be aware of that might have an impact on reusing this facility? The responses were as follows: r Omnitrans is the primary public transportation provider. There are two high frequency routes through that area. "Transit friendly area"(high ridership). • Many of riders use the bus to get to the metrolink station. • The Metrolink parking lot is full by 6:OOam. After the lot is full,people park in the dirt lot and on the street. r I Omnitrans a STAKEHOLDER'S INTERVIEW January 3,2000 ' Page 2 • Current Feasibility Study for Redlands station will determine the number of people from Redlands that are currently using the San Bernardino depot busses and ADA services. • Greyhound does not service the station. • There is no special arrangement for connections from Omnitrans to connect with Greyhound • Omnitrans is involved in E and Rialto intermodal study(busses and trains only not park and ride). The proposed station is more central to other city transit. • There is not enough land for busses and parking to use the depot for an intermodal facility. • The main place to pick-up the bus will move from 4"and E to Rialto and E . • New intermodal will attract those from the east(Redlands). The San Bernardino depot will continue to r attract those coming from the west. • Not sure if Redlands will be sufficient to develop demand to extend the metro line. • Could move bus route to 2nd street(from 3'a) if there was a good pedestrian link to the station. • The level change to the neighborhood creates a barrier between it and the station. • The station will appear to turns it back on the neighborhood if the project is just an historic preservation of the depot. • The neighborhood has much more activity now than four years ago. • Public transportation has a stigma. This project could change that attitude. • An important key is improving pedestrian visibility of the station. .. • The most important factor is connecting to the downtown convention center and meeting rooms. • City Hall currently has several annexes and they may want to use office space • The Omnitrans office facility is currently at capacity. May be able to use office space in depot • The improvements should be reflecting of the community needs. • A continuity from downtown needs to be created.Pedestrian safety,trees, lighting should connect downtown to depot. Eliminate the wrong side of the tracks(215 Freeway)feeling • The Carousel mall's in trouble. • Most ridership is work related(1.2 million) 18-25 year-old. The welfare to work program is spurning growth. Lots of night use. • Omnitrans could have a travel agency or transit store in the depot. May partner with someone. • 14 million on regular ridership. Im • All busses have bike racks(free fare)and get lots of use. • _ Need medium and low income housing similar to Pasadena located possibly to the south of the station on the vacant lots • Small park,recreation,water feature development where El Tigre is currently. so • Downtown has improved a lot. • Busses run from 4:00 am until 10:00 pm. Omnitrans is planning to further expand hours. • 3 to 4%marketshare for ridership • Omnitrans is under a JPA.Fifteen cities make up the board of directors(20 members total) • Omnitrans is 70%subsidized • The Communities back is to the station currently. • Other possible improvements are daycare,links with educational facility or have an educational facility at the station. Satellite school offices? • Omniuws has a zip code study of student attendance. Notes prepare by Greg Roberson,Architect. cc: All attendees • .. ..m . January 4,2000 CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO Fax No.: (909) 384-5080 Development Services Department 300 North"D" Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 Attention: Ms. Deborah Woldruff Subject: San Bernardino Dew Stakeholder's Interview Attendees Steve Henthom San Bernardino Convention&Visitors Bureau 800/867-8366 Wayne Donaldson Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA 619/239-7888 x 211 Greg Roberson Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA 619/239-7888 x 201 •meeting was held on November 16, 1999 at the San Bernardino Museum to discuss the following. •list of questions were developed,sent to the interviewee and discussed at this meeting. The questions were: 1. Why did you or your organization choose to become involved in this project? 2. How do you think the rehabilitation of the depot might start further revitalization of the surrounding neighborhood? 3. What do you think is the most important factor that must be satisfied to ensure the revitalization succeeds? 4. What in your opinion has hampered the full use of the depot previously? 5. What would help integrate the depot site into the neighborhood? 6. Do you interface with the depot currently? 7. Do you have a desire to run an operation at the depot? 8. What other uses would complement your potential use? 9. What other uses would detract from your potential use? 10. Is there anything we should be aware of that might have an impact on reusing this facility? The responses were as follows: ' Anything that will enhance the area to bring visitors from outside to inside will benefit San Bernardino. • Cultural tourism San Bernardino Convention&Visitors Bureau 1 STAKEHOLDER'S INTERVIEW January 4,2000 Page 2 • Need a facility that showcases local heritage for kick-off area for conventions. The Orange show grounds have a 1300 SF convention center. • Facility should be able to handle 300-400 people for kick off events. • Existing convention facility could handle a convention of 500-800 people.Normal conventions have ±200 people and occur 10-12 times per year. Riverside and Ontario both have convention facilities. Riverside has renovated Raincross Square. • San Bernardino tourism is more event driven than convention based currently due to lack of space ie: Route 66 can show four day classic car ralley. • Need to create events for convention. • A Railroad Museum could be a huge event generator. • Auto/Train/Plane(transportation) is a major part of the local heritage. Motorcycles-Palm Springs Harley event. ++ • There is no lodging in the neighborhood by the depot.New low rise(1 or 2 story) lodging facilities could be added across from the depot. Start with 100-200 room lodging. • A Low rider(auto)event could be started. • El Tigre functions like the local plaza. • Albert Okura,who owns the Juan Pollo restaurants, now owns the original McDonalds. • Could do festivals around the depot. Bring in classic locomotives similar to Sacramento. Music, vendor booths, carnival. Family oriented event. • Hispanic market is primary the market area. The Hispanic community tends to spend more money having fun and spending time with family than gathering material wealth. • Redlands has a large bike event in March. The train yard to the north of the depot could be cleaned up and used for another function. The Kaiser Plant in Ontario was cleaned up and made into a racetrack. i • Inland Empire economic partnership-Teri Ooms(909) 890-1090. w Notes prepare by Greg Roberson,Architect. cc: - All attendees • SAN BERNARDINO SANTA FE DEPOT REHABILITATION PROJECT PUBLIC WORKSHOP Saturday,November 20, 1999 OVERALL GROUP NOTES: Group 1 (Willard) • Rail Development • Amtrak Continued ' Museum Park by Mt.Vernon • Park Structure South Landscaping/Lighting Convention Center • Restaurant/Patio Garden • San Bernardino Museum Group 2 (Don) • Park&Lake Car Rental • Barber Shop/Shoe Shine • Hobbie/Craft Shops r, • Conference Rooms • Bed&Breakfast on Second Floor • Dry Cleaners • First Class Restaurant(Coffee Cactus) • Coffee Shop in Lobby Group (Ralph) Transportation Oriented • Greyhounds • Omnitrans • Metrolink • Amtrak • Kinkos Coffee Shop • Child Care Facility Casino Wedding Reception • Restaurant • Outside Seating "Car Shop" • First Floor-Retail • Second Floor-Adult Educational • Professional Office Area • South of Third Street-"turned inside-out' ' Level with Parking Structure Meeting Place- Saturday Bazaar" • Water features ' Engine 3751/Museum on the East "Morning commuters" • "Evening Adult Education" ' Page 1 of 3 SAN BERNARDINO SANTA FE DEPOT REHABILITATION PROJECT PUBLIC WORKSHOP Saturday,November 20, 1999 OVERALL GROUP NOTES: Group 4 (Jim) • Draw to people • Bed&Breakfast • Cafe/Restored Harvey House • Training School • General Meeting Rooms • Existing Metrolink • Additional Parking • Engine/Museum • Fountain/Lake • Overhead Walkway • Antique Shops • Mini Railway for kids • Weekend Swap Meet • draw tourist • Two tracks from San Bernardino Railroad Historical Society • Model Railroad Club • (Second Floor/Tower) Groin 5 (Carol) • Pedestrian access from the bridge to tie Mt. Vernon • City Programs to be drawn to the area • Shuttle Service to and from Downtown • Museum-Railway Related 4 • Route 66 Museum • Restaurant • Mix of Commercial&Residential •� • Day Care • Dry Cleaners • Police Substation Grou^n 66 (Esther) • Day Care Center • Barber Shop • Bank • Travel Agent • Gift Shop • Restaurant • Video Arcade • Classrooms(Second) • Office(Second) ■ • Recreation/Park • Mini Railroad Ride • Museum/Library • Pedestrian Bridge • Hotel/Motel Page 2 of 3 SAN BERNARDINO SANTA FE DEPOT REHABILITATION PROJECT ' PUBLIC WORKSHOP Saturday,November 20, 1999 OVERALL GROUP NOTES: Group 6 fcont'dl • Stream/Lake • Bus Service/CarAentaUShuttle to Events • Chamber of Commerce • Emergency Clinic '- Group 7 (Steve) - • Round Seating Area in Lobby • Harvey House • Fountain in Courtyard Ir • Day Care • Dry Cleaning • Memorabilia Area"Sell San Bernardino" • Starbucks • Quality Office Spaces on Second Floor(Large Corporation) • Meeting Area • Conference Kic - ff Area • Bus Drop j ' • Cocktails Close Off Third street(Second Street Main Corridor • Rail Museum&Model Railroad Hotel(Second Story-Mirror Image) Waterfall and Lake • Landscaping ' . Two Story Parking Structures Trolley Open Plaza with Retail Shops and Restaurants • Restore Railroad Housing ' Need Lodging Festivals(i.e. Sacramento) General Comments • Service Station/Gasoline Page 3 of 3 SAN BERNARDINO SANTA FE DEPOT STAKEHOLDERS PRESENTATION&DISCUSSION AGENDA January 14, 2000 10:00 am- 12:00 pm PURPOSE OF THE MEETING Present alternate schemes for adaptive reuse and determine the best and highest use of the Santa Fe Depot within the boundaries of the Area of Potential Effects. • Submission Schedule • January 26, 2000 Final Scheme/Stakeholders • February g, 2000 Planning Commission • February 22, 2000 City Council PUBLIC WORKSHOPS INPUT: POTENTIAL ADAPTIVE USES SITE CONTEXTUAL ISSUES CASE STUDIES • Claremont Santa Fe Depot ' Glendale Southern Pacific Station Chatsworth Transit Center/Child Care Center • Fullerton Santa Fe Station • Santa Ana Regional Transportation Center ERA STUDY ' Figure I Site Location • Figure II Population Distribution Figure V Income Distribution Figure VI Employees Per Business Establishment Figure VII Selected Retail Type Locations Figure VIII Selected Service Type Locations DESIGN SCHEMES • Comparison of Potential Uses t Floor Plans Scheme 2 • Scheme 1 ' Site Plans 9 ARCHITECT MILFORD WAYNE DONALDSON,FAIA,INC. ■ 530 SIXTH AVENUE,SAN DIEGO,CALIFORNIA 92101 PHONE: (619)239-7888•FAX: (619)234-6286•E-MAm:MWDQARCHMWD.COM ■ ■ r SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT Stakeholders Meeting Notes January 14,2000 M The following is a synopsis of the discussions that took place at the Stakeholders meeting on January 14, 2000. A copy of the agenda has been attached. Attendance '■ Phil Merkley San Bernardino Railroad Historical Society 909/862-5015 Gene Wood San Bernardino Railroad Historical Society 909/882-2485 Judi Battey San Bernardino County Supervisor's Office 909/387-4565 Roger Mowrey Metrolink 213/452-0315 Penny Holcomb San Bernardino Historical Society 909/862-3332 Sylvia Arias Mt. Vernon Business Association 909/885-2049 "r Sue Morales City of San Bernardino EDA 909/663-1044 Rohan Kuruppu Omnitrans 909/379-7251 Steve Henthom San Bernardino Convention&Visitors Bureau 909/889-3980 Allen Bone San Bernardino Fireman's Museum 909/792-3827 Bob Brendza Burlington Northern Santa Fe 909/3864042 Deborah Woldruff City of San Bernardino Development Services 909/384-5057 Jorge Carlos San Bernardino City Council Office 909/384-5188 Wayne Donaldson Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIR 619/239-7888 x 211 1O Greg Roberson Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA 619/239-7888 x 201 r. 1. Concern expressed that a railroad museum might compete with the one being developed at the Fullerton Depot. The museum in San Bernardino should be a transportation museum highlighting all of the aspects of ground travel that make up San Bernardino's history. 2. A farmer's market was tried in downtown San Bernardino and failed. The farmer's market in the _ depot should be held only once or twice a week. 3. Amtrak parking will still be available for the depot. 4. Concern that the proposed uses could be placed in any building and detract from the historic preservation of the Depot.The stakeholder envisions the station as a destination of experience, like Olivera Street. Wants to see uses that capitalize on the historic character of the depot. Claremont, Redlands,and Riverside have created a renaissance by reusing their historic buildings. 5. Attractions targeted for kids also bring an increased number of adults. 6. Connection to the community on several levels was deemed important. It was expressed that you can't change demographics.Uses need to fit current community needs. e 7. The Depot's uses will change and evolve over time. It is important to create user traffic first. 8. Development of the area to the south of the site is necessary. The creation of a master plan, and • ARCHITECT MILFORD WAYNE DONALDSON,FAIR,INC. 530 SIXTH AVENUE,SAN DIEGO,CALIFORNIA 92101 PHONE: (619)239-7888•FAX: (619)234-6286•&MAIL:MWD@ARCHMWD.COM n I` locating a developer will be necessary first steps to improving the neighborhood to the south. 9. It has been found that Metrolink passengers don't use the depots. The Metrolink rider survey did, however,reflect an interest in having a place to get coffee,and more parking. 10. Rents are needed,as are connections to downtown and the Mt. Vernon corridor. 11. Suggestion of adding a Fire Engine display in the existing baggage area was made. It was noted, however, that locating equipment so that it could be operational for an interactive display is important to the success of this type of use. Similar displays at Perris and Campo require large outdoor areas. 12. The desire to incorporate public bus service into the use mix was expressed. 13. The majority of the group expressed support of the potential uses shown in Scheme 1,and the site ' development shown in Site Plan 2.These schemes will be further developed and brought back to the stakeholders on January 26,2000. 1 1 SAN BERNARDINO SANTA FE DEPOT REHABILITATION & ADAPTIVE REUSE ' AGENDA January 26, 2000 PURPOSE OF THE MEETING r Present preferred alternate scheme for adaptive reuse of the Santa Fe Depot within the boundaries of the Area of Potential Effects. r • Submission Schedule • January 28,2000 Incorporate Final Scheme into Section 106 Finding of Effect(FOE)Documentation • February 8,2000 Planning Commission March 6,2000 City Council SITE CONTEXTUAL ISSUES CASE STUDIES • Claremont Santa Fe Depot • Glendale Southern Pacific Station • Chatsworth Transit Center/Child Care Center • Fullerton Santa Fe Station • Santa Ana Regional Transportation Center ECONOMIC SETTING • Figure I Site Location • Figure II Population Distribution r • Figure V Income Distribution • Figure VI Employees Per Business Establishment • • Figure VII Selected Retail Type Locations • Figure VIII Selected Service Type Locations DESIGN SCHEME • Floor Plans • Site Plan w PHASING •• r ARCHITECr MILFORD WAYNE DONALDSON,FAIA ' 530 SIXTH AVENUE,SAN DIEGO,CALIFORNIA 92101 PHONE: (619)239-7888•FAX: (619)2346286•E-MAIL: MWD@ARCHMWD.COM ' SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT Stakeholders Meeting Notes January 26, 2000 The following is a synopsis of the discussions that took place at the Stakeholders meeting on January 26, 2000. A copy of the agenda has been attached. Attendance r Esther Mata Mt.Vernon Project Area Committee Alfredo Encico Mt.Vernon Project Area Committee Ernest Vasquez Mt.Vernon Project Area Committee Melvin Elliott Mt. Vernon Project Area Committee Sylvia Arias Mt. Vernon Project Area Committee Trinidad Padilla Mt. Vernon Project Area Committee Bob Brendza Burlington Northern Santa Fe Sue Morales City of San Bernardino EDA Carmen Quiroga Mt.Vernon Project Area Committee Teresa Encin Mt.Vernon Project Area Committee Jose Gomez Mt. Vernon Project Area Committee Esther Estrada San Bernardino City Council Phil Merkley San Bernardino Railroad Historical Society Gene Wood San Bernardino Railroad Historical Society Victoria Baker SANBAG Mike Bair SANBAG Jarb Thaipejr City of San Bernardino Development Services Durand Rall Omnitrans Steve Henthom San Bernardino Convention&Visitors Bureau June Durr City of San Bernardino Mayor's Office Randy Wyatt Mt. Vernon Project Area Committee Deborah Woldruff City of San Bernardino Development Services Ron Winkler City of San Bernardino EDA Nick Catalde San Bernardino Historical and Pioneer Society Amitabh Barthakur ERA Michael Krakower Krakower&Associates Dan O'Rourke Korve Engineering Woody Dike Ivy Landscape Architects Wayne Donaldson Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIR Greg Roberson Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA ARCHITECT MILFORD WAYNE DONALDSON,FAIA rt 530 SIXTH AVENUE,SAN DIEGO,CALIFORNIA 92101 PHONE: (619)239-7888•FAX: (619)234-6286•E-MAIL:MWD @ARCHMWD.COM 1. Question raised if Amtrak was planning or already has left the Depot.Amtrak has committed to remaining in the depot for another six months. S a regular practice,Amtrak reviews their situation each six months,but they have expressed a long-term intention for staying in the depot. 2. Question raised on the connection of the lakes and streams and this project. The vision 2020 (lakes and streams)project considers a site very near the depot where a lake could occur. The City is working on securing funding to do an area plan that would coordinate the Depot redevelopment, lakes and streams,Mt. Vernon corridor projects. 3. Question raised if the Mt.Vernon Bridge and Depot projects will work together.Jarb Thaipejr is the city engineer that is handling both projects,and will help bring continuity. The bridge is being replaced for seismic reasons and will have four lanes similar to the current bridge. There will be turning lanes at 2'and 0 streets.Currently the bridge project is working through the environmental review process,which will take about one year. The next step will be to design the structure.Public meetings will be held to discuss the bridges image and relationship with the -� Depot. That process will take approximatly six months. Construction will take about one year to complete. The bridge and Depot could possibly be under construction at the same time. 4. It was observed that training functions should be helpful for the community. r 5. The Santa Ana transit center had a good feel and was very active with links to the community with jobs,with events,and with transit. 6. The group expressed that there was a general comfort with the research and uses proposed for the a San Bemadino depot. The uses shown appear to be realistic. 7. The stakeholders would like to see other things happen in the neighborhood surrounding the �^ Depot at the same time the Depot is being rehabilitated. The City's area plan would deal with how ties could be made. 8. It was observed that 3rd Street seems excessive for the current traffic and should be examined for potential closure or providing additional parking for the Depot.Eliminating the street could make a stronger tie to developments to the south.An Area plan could look at these issues. 9. It is critical for the project's success to bring in uses and tenants that will generate sufficient rents to maintain the building. Similar projects that do not create a financial burdon to the City. The project needs to create sufficient long-term support to allow it's uses to evolve. 10. It was expressed that a key to the success of this project will be in developing neighboring uses to bring in more businesses to the area.A question was raised on what types of businesses could come into the street side of the Depot that would be attractive to low income families.If successful,this project could change land values in as little as five years and attract low to moderate end retailers.Retailers generally look for the proximity of potential customers while manufacturers look for available labor. 11. The observation has been made that very few of the weekday Metrolink riders live in the neighborhood,but the demographic tends to shift on the weekends. Most Metrolink riders appear to be focused on their commute and do not use businesses or services offered in the depots. 12. An interest in developing a miniture train around the depot. The relatively small site area, it was pointed out,would make adding this type of attraction extreemly difficult,but could be r incorporated into a larger area development. 13. International bus service is currently offered close by but the facility is very conjested. u ARCH1TECr MILFORD WAYNE DONALDSON,FAIA _. 530 S=AVENUE,SAN DIEGO,CALIFORNIA 92101 PHONE: (619)239-7888•FAX: (619)234-6286•E-MAIL: MWD @ARCHMWD.COM r 14. Question raised if there is anything tied to this study where someone could start seeking a developer to put businesses into the building.The City's Economic Development Agency is the entity that would do the marketing for tenants.Fullerton made an early decision to enter into a subsidized lease agreement with a developer who now receives market rents.The City does not benefit from the growth of rents,and is additionally burdoned with handling many of the repairs and ongoing maintenance. 15. There was interest in seeing this study on a City web site.The study is too large to post,however, it will be available for review at the City's planning office. Interested parties can contact ' Deborah Woldruff. 1 1 r SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT .. REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Appendices r Appendix B Met rolink Survey Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIR• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 METROLINK PASSENGER SURVEY EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Metrolink Passenger Survey was conducted by City of San Bernardino and San Bernardino Associated Governments (SANBAG) staff on Thursday, January 6, 2000. The purpose of the Survey was to provide the Metrolink Passengers an opportunity to participate in the San Bernardino Santa Fe Depot Rehabilitation Project. Of the 296 survey forms distributed, the City received 136 responses - a 45.9% response rate. A copy of the Survey Form is contained in Attachment A. The responses indicate that the Metrolink Passengers who use the San Bernardino Metrolink Station come from all over the Inland Empire; however, the majority appear to be from the San Bernardino-Redlands-Highland (or East Valley) area. It is also apparent that most of the passengers arrive at the Station via automobiles. Written comments about the current parking situation and on- site security tend to corroborate this fact. The majority of passengers use the Metrolink train as their primary mode of transportation to and from work. The responses to Questions 4 through 6 indicate that most of the Metrolink passengers are in favor of the establishment of commercial and transportation related uses at the Santa Fe Depot. Many felt that a coffee shop or restaurant in the vicinity of the Depot or the Metrolink Station is needed. Other types of commercial services also received positive responses. Similarly, the establishment of related transportation uses such as additional bus services also received positive responses. r Many of the comments showed a high level of concern about the physical condition of the Depot, Metrolink Station, and surrounding areas. Concerns about the safety and security of Metrolink passengers and their vehicles were expressed as a common theme. Due to the nature of these comments, copies of the surveys and this summary have been forwarded to SANBAG, City of San Bernardino Administration, City of San Bernardino Economic Development Agency, and Metrolink/SCRRA. The survey responses provided valuable information that was used as an additional element in the Rehabilitation and Adaptive Reuse Study for the Santa Fe Depot Project. The survey responses and comments are summarized below. SANTA FE DEPOT REHABILITATION PROJECT METROLINK PASSENGER SURVEY 1. City of Residence: Name (Optional): Mailing Address (Optional): 2. How did you arrive at this Metrolink Station? • Car ❑ CarNan Pool ❑ Dropped Off ❑ Bus • Other 3. How frequently do you use Metrolink? ❑ Infrequently ❑ 1 or 2 days/week ❑ 3 or more days/week ❑ 10 or more days/month 4. The City's goal is to rehabilitate and adaptively reuse the Santa Fe Depot. From the following list, please select the types of commercial retail uses and services you would like to see established in the Depot: • Retail shops • Coffee shop/restaurants • Cyber cafe • Meeting rooms • Dry cleaner(drop off/pickup only) ❑ Travel/tourism services • Professional offices • Government offices ❑ Meeting/event rooms • Education/vocational classes • Child day care center ❑ Auto valet • Other • No commercial retail uses and services Would you be likely to patronize these types of uses if they were established in the depot? ❑ Yes ❑No City of San Bernardino, 300 North "D"Street,San Bernardino, California 92418-0001 5. The rehabilitation of the Depot may offer opportunities to establish a transportation hub. From the following list, please select the types of transportation uses you would like to see established in the Depot: ❑ Local bus services (OMNITRANS) ❑ Commuter bus services ❑ Long distance bus service (Greyhound, Trailways) ❑ Commuter rail services (Metrolink, office/counter) ❑ Taxi services ❑ Airport shuttle services ❑ Vehicle rental outlets ❑ Other ❑ No transportation related uses 6. Are there any other uses and/or services that you would like to see available at the Santa Fe Depot? Please mail your completed survey to the City of San Bernardino by January 10, 2000 in the postage paid envelope that has been provided, or fax to Deborah Woldruff, Project Manager, at (909) 384-5080. City of San Bernardino,300 North "D"Street,San Bernardino, California 92418-0001 METROLINK PASSENGER SURVEY Responses & Comments Question No. 1: This question asked for the respondent's City of Residence, Name (Optional), and Address (Optional). The following is a tabular summary of the responses to Question No. 1: LOCATION RESPONSES Adelanto 1 Angelus Oaks 1 Banning 1 Beaumont 3 Big Bear 1 Cherry Valley 1 Colton 4 Crestline 2 Desert Hot Springs 1 Devore 1 Forest Falls 2 Grand Terrace 3 Green Lake Valley 1 Highland 8 Homeland 1 Lake Arrowhead 7 Lake Gregory 1 Loma Linda 3 Long Beach 1 Los Angeles 1 Mentone 2 Moreno Valley 4 No Response 25 Redlands 13 Reseda 1 Rialto 1 Riverside 2 Running Springs 4 San Bernardino 32 San Jacinto 1 Victorville 2 Yucaipa 5 TOTAL 136 2 METROLINK PASSENGER SURVEY Responses & Comments As shown in the table, persons using the San Bernardino Metrolink Station come from all over the Inland Empire region, and a few come from outside of the area. However, the majority of riders are from the San Bernardino-Redlands-Highland area. Question No. 2: How did you arrive at this Metrolink Station? (Text Boxes: Car; Car/Van Pool; Dropped Off; Bus; Other. Text Fields: Other) The following is a tabular summary of the responses to Question No. 2: CATEGORY RESPONSES Car 112 Car/Van 2 Pool Dropped Off 21 Bus 7 Other 5 As indicated, the majority of persons who responded arrived at the Metrolink Station by car. The following comments represent the responses to the "Other" category. The actual survey form from which each comment is derived is identified on the left (i.e., S-9 represents Survey No. 9). S-9. On foot S-19. Friends S-51. Usually by car S-91. Mom S-101. Sometimes bus Question No. 3: How frequently do you use Metrolink? (Text Boxes: (Infrequently; 1 or 2 days/week; 3 or more days/week; 10 or more days/month. Text fields: None) The following is a tabular summary of the responses to Question No. 3: CATEGORY RESPONSES Infrequently 7 1 or 2 days/week 7 3 or more days/week 61 10 or more days/month 60 3 METROLINK PASSENGER SURVEY Responses & Comments As indicated, the majority of the respondents use the Metrolink Train as their primary mode of travel to and from work. The respondents as further clarification of their response wrote the following comments on the Survey forms. S-2. Daily, M-F S-65. Daily S-68. Every working day - Monthly Pass S-71. Everyday! S-78. 5 days per week S-85. (20 Days) S-135. Everyday to go to work Question No. 4a: The City's goal is to rehabilitate and adaptively reuse the Santa Fe Depot. From the following list, please select the types of commercial retail uses and services you would like to see established in the Depot: (Text Boxes: Retail Shops; Coffee shop/restaurants; Cyber cafe; Meeting Rooms; Dry cleaner; Travel/tourism services, Professional offices, Governmental offices, Meeting/event rooms, Education/vocational classes, Child day care center; Auto valet; Other; No commercial retail uses and services. Text Fields: Other) The following is a tabular summary of the responses to Question No. 4a: CATEGORY RESPONSES Retail Shops 56 Coffee Shop/Restaurants 122 Cyber Cafe 31 Meeting Rooms 10 Dry Cleaner (drop off/pickup, only) 46 Travel/Tourism Services 37 Professional Offices 10 Governmental Offices 18 Meeting/Event Rooms 14 Education/Vocational Services 16 Child Day Care Center 36 Auto Valet 5 Other 29 No Commercial Retail Uses & Services 4 No Response 3 From the responses, it is apparent that many of the respondents would like to see a coffee shop or restaurant established in the Santa Fe Depot. There was also some interest in the establishment of retail shops, a drop off/pickup dry 4 METROLINK PASSENGER SURVEY Responses & Comments cleaning service, travel/tourism related services, and a day care center. Interest in the other categories of commercial retail and services uses appears to be luke warm or marginal. The write-in responses to the "Other" category, and additional comments are listed below. S-2. Coffee shop/restaurants - Metrolink Riders would like refreshments. S-4. Other - Clean-up Trash S-13. Other - Bar S-17. Cyber cafe - ? S-22. All w/ ability to contact by online services S-24. Dry cleaner- Very useful for me S-29. Other - More parking spaces S-31. Other - Banking S-33. Other - Bank, ATM S-35. Other - Post office sub-station, shoe repair S-36. Coffee shop/restaurants - (i.e. - Starbucks) Other - Snack bar w/ newspapers (local & national) S-37. Coffee shop/restaurants - Please!!! S-38. Other - Super cuts or other low-cost hair salon/barber S-41. Other - Micro-Brewery S-45. Other - Additional Parking S-47. Coffee shop/restaurants - coffee shop, only Other - Bar open from 4-10 S49. Other - Additional parking, more lights, (more) alert security guards S-51. Travel/tourism services - at least a rack offering brochures and pamphlets of nearby city and county tourist sites and services Other - Copy/fax service; mini museum of Station History S-54. Other - Chamber of Commerce S-55. Other - Historic Museum S-58. Only if adequate parking remains, include overnight parking S-68. Other - Restrooms, drinking water facilities, mail box S-79. Other- Don't care S-81. Other - Signage to help seniors and disabled S-89. Note: Model the renovations after L.A.'s Olivera Street S-93. Other - Wells Fargo ATM, Grocery store S-96. Do not tear old building down! Just needs a facelift; some care & maintenance. Other - More parking & more security S-97. Coffee shop/restaurants - coffee shop S-98. Other -A place where we can be inside when weather is inclement S-105. Other - Mini convenient store S-107. Dry cleaner - And why not include laundry shop Other - police station S-112. Other - car wash/detail S-117. Coffee shop/restaurants - Other Metrolink stops have them, there isn't anything close by 5 METROLINK PASSENGER SURVEY Responses & Comments S-118. Other - More parking/more seating around the Depot S-119. Other - Exercise classes/yoga S-122. Coffee shop/restaurants - Old Spaghetti Factory? Education/vocational classes - Continuing Ed type classes from Cal State? S-123. Other - Restroom S-126. Other - Post Office outlet S-130. Other - Restrooms S-135. I think when we make Income Tax Form - we can use Proff of using - metro to go to work. Coffee shop/restaurants - waiting room - before train coming to station, sometimes is too windy & cold. 1 Question No. 4b: Would you be likely to patronize these types of uses if they were established in the Depot? (Text Boxes: Yes, No. Text Fields: None) The following is a tabular summary of the responses to Question No. 4b: CATEGORY RESPONSES Yes 126 No 8 ' No Response 2 The responses to this question were very positive, indicating that the majority of respondents would be likely to patronize commercial retail and services uses at the depot. Written comments in response to this question also indicate an 1 interest in commercial services with some qualifications, as follows: S-26. But what ever you do, you must improve parking not only for the station but for the Metrolink passengers. S-46. (Except I personally would not use day care center.) S-71. My kids are in high school now, but if I had pre-school age kids, I like the idea of having child-care right at the station. S-91. Questionable S-93. Hours would need to be extensive S-97. Only as marked above (Coffee shop) S-107. I'm looking forward for the success of this project. I SALUTE your very enthusiastic concern for the benefit of the people. GOD BLESS. Question No. 5: The rehabilitation of the Depot may offer opportunities to establish a transportation hub. From the following list, please select the types of transportation uses you would like to see established in the Depot: (Text Boxes: Local bus services (Omnitrans); Commuter bus services; Long 6 METROLINK PASSENGER SURVEY Responses & Comments distance bus service (Greyhound, Trailways); Commuter rail services (Metrolink, office/counter); Taxi services; Airport shuttle services; Vehicle rental outlets, Other, No transportation related uses. Text Fields: Other) The following is a tabular summary of the responses to Question No. 5: CATEGORY RESPONSES Local Bus Services (Omnitrans) 67 Commuter Bus Services 54 Long Distance Bus Service (Greyhound, Trailways) 32 Commuter Rail Services 86 Taxi Services 45 Airport Shuttle Services 44 Vehicle Rental Outlets 32 Other 7 No Transportation Related Uses 4 No Response 21 The responses to Question 5 indicate that most of the respondents are interested in not only commuter rail services, but also other types of transportation uses. However, the written comments provide some qualification for the establishment of additional transportation uses, and also indicate some concerns about the physical condition of the Santa Fe Depot, Metrolink Station, and surrounding area. There is also concern about safety and security for passengers and their automobiles, and the need to communicate directly with Metrolink via a Metrolink presence at the depot (i.e., customer service counter or office). S-2. No transportation related uses - (shows arrows to Question No. 6 responses) S-20. Other - Marta S-22. Local bus services (Omnitrans) - so it can look like Montclair in 5 years time? Rundown, transients? S-26. Local bus services (Omnitrans) - from Redlands, Yucaipa, Banning, etc. Commuter rail services (Metrolink, office/counter) - No. Too far from present platform. S-38. Other - Marta S-39. Until the last train arrived (Local bus, commuter bus, and taxi services) S-44. Local bus services (Omnitrans) - more buses going to Loma Linda S-46. There are a lot of issues, which must be considered with these options. Remember that the major demographic of Metrolink riders is daily commuters, not the occasional mid-day or evening rider who uses the train for pleasure. The services which would likely be used by commuters are very different (except maybe a coffee METROLINK PASSENGER SURVEY Responses & Comments stand) from those which might be used by customers of a long distance bus service. If the businesses occupying the depot are those that cater to commuters, they will only get business between 4:00 and 6:30 a.m. and between 5:30-7:30 p.m. government and professional offices could add traffic/business during weekday i hours, but then parking becomes a major problem. All the current parking is filled by train riders and van pools by about 7:00 a.m. now. If a transportation hub that includes long distance bus and airport shuttle services opened, where would these customers park? Currently, there is no overnight parking permitted in the 1 Metrolink Station. The best solution is probably a combination - some business that would met the needs of commuters - coffee stand, day care center, dry cleaner- and others that might bring people in during the day to offices. If there are people working in offices during the day, it opens up other business possibilities - a florist or restaurant, for example. If a transportation hub is j established that caters to long distance (bus/airport shuttle), then the long term, overnight parking problem must be addressed, but other business possibilities may open - a small sundries/snack shop, for example. S-55. Local bus services (Omnitrans) - especially from Redlands to/from train station S-65. Local bus services (Omnitrans) - Local bus services (Omnitrans) S-75. Other - Restrooms S-79. Other— See below, Mall Shuttles S-87. Other- MTA S-98. Other-All of the above services provided. S-135. Local bus services (Omnitrans) - Need mini buses for Metrolink 1 services Commuter rail services (Metrolink, office/counter) - We need information not by phone. Sometimes in person, also - to buy tickets. Sometimes the machine not working - appropriately. Other- Discounts for people who work out - far & buy the train tickets —every month Question No. 6: Are there any other uses and/or services that you would like to see available at the Santa Fe Depot? (Text Boxes: None. Text Fields: All) The following responses to Question No. 6 indicate that while many of the respondents are favorable to the rehabilitation of the Santa Fe Depot and the provision of commercial and transportation related uses, they have concerns and/or reservations. Many are concerned that parking for Metrolink passengers is short, and that the establishment of additional uses at the Depot will further impact the parking shortage. A common theme that runs through the comments 8 METROLINK PASSENGER SURVEY Responses & Comments is about the condition of the Santa Fe Depot, Metrolink Station, and surrounding area. Safety and security for Metrolink passengers and their vehicles is of major concern. The comments also provide qualifiers with regard to the potential establishment of additional services. S-2. No, because there's not enough parking as it is now! The lot is full around 7:00 a.m. daily. And, the security is terrible. There are many break-ins of cars in the parking lot. It's not safe anymore for the Metrolink customers. And, the City should clean up the weeds and brush that cover the dirt areas. It looks abandoned!!! S-3. None S-6. Jobs S-10. Need more parking! S-14. Catering truck in morning to provide coffee and food for train riders. S-16. Additional parking spaces S-17. Please consider upgrading and/or include more efficient parking near station. S-18. Yes, clean up the Metrolink Station before you renovate the Depot. Quite often the station trash containers are over-flowing for weeks. Power wash concrete in station area by ticket machines. People spill things, vomit, and sleep there. Take care of what you've got before you expand. S-22. Bookstore/coffee shop combo 5-23. 1.) Due to the explosive increase in housing, Metro train extension to the Redlands/Yucaipa area. 2.) More secure parking. 3.) More parking. S-24. Because I live in Lake Arrowhead and leave early and come home late, dry cleaning is a major problem for me. I would need the drop- off service open at 5:00 a.m. and pickup open until 8:30 p.m. S-26. You must improve the light signals on Third and Second Streets. Encourage commercial growth in area. Improve street lights. S-29. More parking spaces & security guards. S-31. Local History Museum for Santa Fe Depot and surrounding area. S-32. Ticket outlet for local movie/theater/concerts, etc. S-33. Small Rail Road Museum S-36. 1.) Larger more secure parking. I've been a Metrolink commuter for years primarily from Oceanside. Upon moving 1 1/2 years ago to Lake Arrowhead, I continued commuting from San Bernardino. Within the first six months, my car was vandalized 3 times. There should be a fenced perimeter, more security guards, and better lighting. If retail shops are added, more parking will be necessary. As it is, there is insufficient parking. 2.) Enclosed waiting area. Metrolink users have little protection against the rain, winds and summer heat. Several of the stations along the route to Los Angeles have enclosed waiting areas. 3.) Rehabilitation of the Depot is a great idea. Currently it is not an attractive establishment. 9 METROLINK PASSENGER SURVEY Responses & Comments The other stations along the route to Los Angeles are pleasing to the eyes & well maintained unlike San Bernardino. S-39. Information/ticketing counters. Security Officers S-44. Better lighting in the parking lot S-46. (Refer to response to Question No. 5) S-47. Night time security - it would be best if officers were to be in the Depot since most Metrolink passengers would only stop for a cup of coffee or a drink after work. S-48. I would prefer to catch the Metrolink train in Redlands. Spend the money or improvements to the rail line and extend the route to Redlands. My daily commute is 2.5 hours, so I don't have time to patronize businesses at the S.B. Depot. S-49. Upgrade the facility w/ cleaner & nicer restrooms, office spaces, additional lights and parking spaces, more alert security guards (rampant vandalism of cars - some were stolen from parking lots) S-51. Outdoor eating areas; due to its strategic location and historical and contemporary importance, San Bernardino and its once and potentially again magnificent train depot should be considered for a regional transportation hub, even if only on a small scale. At a minimum, the train depot and its grounds need to be cleaned up, painted and landscaped to fully reflect its former glory. For potential ideas for expanded retail and transportation services, look to stations at Fullerton, Santa Ana, and Oxnard. The greater San Bernardino area is rich in historical heritage and, as the oldest and largest population center in the continuously and rapidly growing Inland Empire area, the City needs to lead the way in preserving its historical heritage and, where possible, providing incentives to the private sector to aid in the revitalization of older areas, which need not necessarily become synonymous with less desirable areas. Those responsible for the "historic site" signs which have been placed throughout the downtown area have done a fine job. However, I was unable to easily locate (if one exists) a brochure which comprehensively lists all of the sites. S-57. Newsstand S-58. Overnight parking being available, increased security presence. Create small SB police substation S-62. It's a neat looking building - how about making it a rail museum? Other than that, maybe you should tear it down and make more parking available. S-63. More parking S-64. Comments? see below - To truly rehabilitate the Depot and install attractions that would entice people to frequent them is truly a challenge. (Perceptive huh!) One thing that you might take into consideration is that those of us that use Metrolink to get back and forth to work may not have spare time to stop and visit the sites. What you really want to attract are those that don't use Metrolink 10 METROLINK PASSENGER SURVEY Responses & Comments but are looking for a good dinner, shopping opportunities and convenience. They will also want to feel safe and protected and want to go to these attractions. Has anyone evaluated the % traffic that visits the mall? Its just across the freeway. This could give a second gauge on the feasibility of your effort. S-66. Restroom; visitor information. I have lived in Redlands for 33 years. I would primarily like to see an aesthetic improvement to the Metrolink/Santa Fe Depot - Amtrak included. It is a shame to see such a piece of history and an architectural site be in the ruins that it currently is in. Please do something if it is in your jurisdiction! S-67. Anything that would lend itself to urban renewal, landscaping improvements, etc. would be a welcome change. S-68. It has a wonderful historical building & excellent location. It could be converted into a hubbing centre for cultural, transportation, tourism & government county/city offices such as EDD, Transport/Tourism Dept, etc. Roads are bad, lights not working, no lawns, dirty parking lot and no shade even to wait in summer, winter or rainy season. See any other Metrolink rail station such as Riverside, W. Corona, La Sierra, Santa Ana & Irvine. Please learn from other cities. Establish strong coordination with poor San Bernardino City. When Metrolink train moves out of San Bernardino, both sides of railway track are beautiful, well maintained. And see in San Bernardino - dirt all around. Need cleanliness and security of cars parked. I can keep my car in parking lot of Santa Ana for three days but at San Bernardino - not one overnight. We know all this. But where is commitment for improvement. May I hope for Improvements?? S-69. Some type of access or info for towing or emergency car service S-70. Bus services to the local mountain area. S-71. I don't feel comfortable in that neighborhood, but I'd hate to see that beautiful old building go to waste. S-73. Restrooms S-74. ATM Machine, Restrooms S-77. Better lighting in the parking lot/at the trains S-78. I am very pleased to see that wonderful old building being restored. I am pleased with any activity that will make this happen. Your efforts are good for the City. Thanks. S-79. If you want to turn this into a transportation hub there will be people waiting around a lot. You may want to set up shuttles to both nearby malls to enable people to do something useful with their time (and help local commerce as well). S-81. Needs for the seniors and disabled. S-82. Better lighting. Better security. Additional parking. S-84. I'd like to see this beautiful old building refurbished as a catalyst to revitalize the downtown area. We need a better image in the Inland Empire. Establishments like those on Hospitality Row would really help. Use part of the Depot for an Old Spaghetti Factory. u METROLINK PASSENGER SURVEY Responses & Comments S-85. No. S-87. I would also like to see the Metrolink Station maintained in a better condition than it is or has been in the past. I know that is really not the issue, but since it is used most often & is directly adjacent to the depot, I am concerned. There has been trash, spilled over into the walkway & near the driveway, the trees have grown over the curb where you can't see cars coming out when you're going in. The Depot would be more beautiful if you refurbish it & also keep the surrounding are neat & clean for residents and visitors to enjoy. Thank you! S-89. The S.B. S/F Depot has a great history, unfortunately it is the "eye- sore" of the entire route! S-94. A newspaper stand. A information stand about the Metrolink. S-95. A safer facility. Cars are broken into & stolen. My car has been hit 3 times in the last month. More lights are needed. Lot needs to be patrolled more often. S-96. Whatever you put in the Depot needs to be open after 5 pm on weekdays S-97. The Santa Fe Depot has a waiting room & restrooms but they are far from the boarding gate for Metrolink Passengers....At the Metrolink Gate the passengers could use more comfortable seating and protection from the weather extremes Re: wind, cold, heat, rain, etc. Perhaps the board area can be changed to the older Depot building which can also have a coffeeshop in the western en of the building. S-98. I would like to see Santa Fe Depot also used as a place where school children and adults and others can learn about the origin of trains such as the Museum of trains. The Metrolink sign is covered by the miniature palm trees, you miss the driveway. Need to be wider, there is no visible sign to Metrolink Stn. there are no bicycle stalls. No restroom facilities. The Metrolink Facade where the security guard is stationed is dirty. I hope this survey is read and each thought is discussed among the council members with open minds. I don't know if any council members have ever gone to the Santa Fe Depot, but it is I feel, a land mark building which can be upgraded to meet the needs of the weary traveler. Thank you for your time. S-99. ATM Machine (BofA) S-100. N/A S-101. Local Bus Service extended to last until last train arrives in the event of car trouble. Towing service (low cost). S-105. More restrooms. More parking spaces. Additional lighting. Additional guard. S-107. Please put up more phones" S-109. No. 12 METROLINK PASSENGER SURVEY Responses & Comments S-113. I buy monthly passes to Covina & sometimes we like to go to LA & I have to buy a round trip ticket from here. Can there be upgrades made available for monthly pass holders(?). S-114. Your list seems comprehensive. S-115. Versateller Machine (A.T.M.) S-121. A place where you can grab a bite to eat & get something to drink in the morning & evening. Some where you can go to sit & wait for trains & not freeze or roast you self. I wish for it to look better most of all. Some vending machines & somewhere to eat. S-123. A warm safe place to wait for your train or your ride home. The use of restrooms would be great. This station or breeze way as we like to call it is windy & cold if you have to wait for a ride. Also a smoke free area to wait. Here people smoke so much you can't breath even if it is outside. Even though there are signs posted no smoking in station. They think because it is outside this does not apply. S-124. More/better parking S-126. Improvement of surrounding areas & businesses, better or more lighting, landscaping, more parking spaces, professional securities for late night travel. S-127. More lighting, landscaping, more parking spaces, improvement of surrounding areas and businesses. S-133. I would like to use my company transit check to purchase my monthly pass or ten (101 trip) ticket. As it stands transit checks can only be applied toward purchase at Union Station and I belief at Claremont Station. This is and inconvenience. S-135. I would like to see more light in the entrance or exit. Big sign, most of the people I know the complaint about the station is to dark. They can see San Bernardino Depot. Mini buses for station for every 15 mts. Drops/pickups. Give info in person, also to buy monthly passes in stores - sometimes the machines not work well. People get so stress because the train coming. This is my opinion. PS - Need a big parking space, also every morning I go to the train, they do not have parking space. Thank you. I hope you have a great year 2000 & improve the City of San Bernardino. Good Luck. 13 Question No. 2: How did you arrive at this Metrolink Station? (Text Boxes: Car; CarNan Pool; Dropped Off; Bus; Other. Text Fields: Other) S-9. On foot S-19. Friends S-51. Usually by car S-91. Mom S-101. Sometimes bus 1 1 1 1 METROLINK PASSENGER SURVEY Question No. 3, Comments Question No. 3: How frequently do you use Metrolink? (Text Boxes: (Infrequently; 1 or 2 days/week; 3 or more days/week; 10 or more days/month. Text fields: None) S-2. Daily, M-F S-65. Daily S-68. Every working day - Monthly Pass S-71. Everyday! S-78. 5 days per week S-85. (20 Days) S-135. Everyday to go to work METROLINK PASSENGER SURVEY Question No. 4a, Comments Question No. 4a: The City's goal is to rehabilitate and adaptively reuse the Santa Fe Depot. From the following list, please select the types of commercial retail uses and services you would like to see established in the Depot: (Text Boxes: Retail Shops; Coffee shop/restaurants; Cyber cafe, Meeting Rooms; Dry cleaner; Travel/tourism services; Professional offices, Governmental offices, Meeting/event rooms, Education/vocational classes; Child day care center; Auto valet, Other; No commercial retail uses and services. Text Fields: Other) S-2. Coffee shop/restaurants - Metrolink Riders would like refreshments. S-4. Other - Clean-up Trash S-13. Other - Bar S-17. Cyber cafe - ? S-22. All w/ ability to contact by online services S-24. Dry cleaner - Very useful for me S-29. Other - More parking spaces 5-31. Other - Banking S-33. Other - Bank, ATM S-35. Other - Post office sub-station, shoe repair S-36. Coffee shop/restaurants - (i.e. - Starbucks) r, Other - Snack bar w/ newspapers (local & national) S-37. Coffee shop/restaurants - Please!!! S-38. Other- Super cuts or other low-cost hair salon/barber S-41. Other - Micro-Brewery S-45. Other - Additional Parking S-47. Coffee shop/restaurants - coffee shop, only Other - Bar open from 4-10 S-49. Other-Additional parking, more lights, (more) alert security guards 1 S-51. Travel/tourism services - at least a rack offering brochures and pamphlets of nearby city and county tourist sites and services Other - Copy/fax service; mini museum of Station History S-54. Other - Chamber of Commerce S-55. Other- Historic Museum S-58. Only if adequate parking remains, include overnight parking S-68. Other - Restrooms, drinking water facilities, mail box S-79. Other - Don't care S-81. Other - Signage to help seniors and disabled ' S-89. Note: Model the renovations after L.A.'s Olivera Street S-93. Other - Wells Fargo ATM, Grocery store S-96. Do not tear old building down! Just needs a facelift; some care & maintenance. Other - More parking & more security S-97. Coffee shop/restaurants - coffee shop S-98. Other - A place where we can be inside when weather is inclement S-105. Other - Mini convenient store S-107. Dry cleaner - And why not include laundry shop METROLINK PASSENGER SURVEY ' Question No. 4a, Comments Other- police station S-112. Other - car wash/detail S-117. Coffee shop/restaurants - Other Metrolink stops have them, there isn't anything close by S-118. Other - More parking/more seating around the Depot S-119. Other- Exercise classes/yoga S-122. Coffee shop/restaurants - Old Spaghetti Factory? Education/vocational classes - Continuing Ed type classes from Cal State? S-123. Other - Restroom S-126. Other- Post Office outlet S-130. Other - Restrooms S-135. I think when we make Income Tax Form - we can use Proff of using - metro to go to work. Coffee shop/restaurants - waiting room - before train coming to station, sometimes is too windy & cold. METROLINK PASSENGER SURVEY Question No. 4b, Comments Question No. 4b: Would you be likely to patronize these types of uses if they were established in the Depot? (Text Boxes: Yes; No. Text Fields: None) S-26. But what ever you do, you must improve parking not only for the station but for the Metrolink passengers. S-46. (Except I personally would not use day care center.) S-71. My kids are in high school now, but if I had pre-school age kids, I like the idea of having child-care right at the station. S-91. Questionable S-93. Hours would need to be extensive S-97. Only as marked above (Coffee shop) S-107. I'm looking forward for the success of this project. I SALUTE your very enthusiastic concern for the benefit of the people. GOD BLESS. t 1 1 METROLINK PASSENGER SURVEY Question No. 5, Comments Question No. 5: The rehabilitation of the Depot may offer opportunities to establish a transportation hub. From the following list, please select the types of transportation uses you would like to see established in the Depot: (Text Boxes: Local bus services (Omnitrans); Commuter bus services; Long distance bus service (Greyhound, Trailways); Commuter rail services (Metrolink, office/counter); Taxi services, Airport shuttle services; Vehicle rental outlets; Other; No transportation related uses. Text Fields: Other) S-2. No transportation related uses - (shows arrows to Question No. 6 responses) S-20. Other - Marta S-22. Local bus services (Omnitrans) - so it can look like Montclair in 5 years time? Rundown, transients? S-26. Local bus services (Omnitrans) - from Redlands, Yucaipa, Banning, etc. Commuter rail services (Metrolink, office/counter) - No. Too far from present platform. S-38. Other - Marta S-39. Until the last train arrived (Local bus, commuter bus, and taxi services) S-44. Local bus services (Omnitrans) - more buses going to Loma Linda S-46. There are a lot of issues, which must be considered with these options. Remember that the major demographic of Metrolink riders is daily commuters, not the occasional mid-day or evening rider who uses the train for pleasure. The services which would likely be used by commuters are very different (except maybe a coffee stand) from those which might be used by customers of a long distance bus service. If the businesses occupying the depot are those that cater to commuters, they will only get business between 4:00 and 6:30 a.m. and between 5:30-7:30 p.m. government and professional offices could add traffic/business during weekday hours, but then parking becomes a major problem. All the current parking is filled by train riders and van pools by about 7:00 a.m. now. If a transportation hub that includes long distance bus and airport shuttle services opened, where would these customers park? Currently, there is no overnight parking permitted in the Metrolink Station. The best solution is probably a combination - some business that would met the needs of commuters - coffee stand, day care center, dry cleaner - and others that might bring people in during the day to offices. If there are people working in offices during the day, it opens up other business possibilities - a florist or restaurant, for example. If a transportation hub is established that caters to long distance (bus/airport shuttle), then the long term, overnight parking problem must be addressed, but other business possibilities may open - a small sundries/snack shop, for example. METROLINK PASSENGER SURVEY Question No. 5, Comments S-55. Local bus services (Omnitrans) - especially from Redlands to/from train station S-65. Local bus services (Omnitrans) - Local bus services (Omnitrans) S-75. Other - Restrooms S-79. Other— See below, Mall Shuttles S-87. Other- MTA S-98. Other - All of the above services provided. S-135. Local bus services (Omnitrans) - Need mini buses for Metrolink services Commuter rail services (Metrolink, office/counter) - We need information not by phone. Sometimes in person, also - to buy tickets. Sometimes the machine not working - appropriately. Other- Discounts for people who work out -far & buy the train tickets—every month W 1 I METROLINK PASSENGER SURVEY Question No. 6, Comments Question No. 6: Are there any other uses and/or services that you would like to see available at the Santa Fe Depot? (Text Boxes: None. Text Fields: All) S-2. No, because there's not enough parking as it is now! The lot is full around 7:00 a.m. daily. And, the security is terrible. There are many break-ins of cars in the parking lot. It's not safe anymore for the Metrolink customers. And, the City should clean up the weeds and brush that cover the dirt areas. It looks abandoned!!! S-3. None S-6. Jobs S-10. Need more parking! S-14. Catering truck in morning to provide coffee and food for train riders. S-16. Additional parking spaces S-17. Please consider upgrading and/or include more efficient parking near station. S-18. Yes, clean up the Metrolink Station before you renovate the Depot. Quite often the station trash containers are over-flowing for weeks. Power wash concrete in station area by ticket machines. People spill things, vomit, and sleep there. Take care of what you've got before you expand. S-22. Bookstore/coffee shop combo S-23. 1.) Due to the explosive increase in housing, Metro train extension to the Redlands/Yucaipa area. 2.) More secure parking. 3.) More parking. S-24. Because I live in Lake Arrowhead and leave early and come home late, dry cleaning is a major problem for me. I would need the drop-off service open at 5:00 a.m. and pickup open until 8:30 p.m. S-26. You must improve the light signals on Third and Second Streets. Encourage commercial growth in area. Improve street lights. S-29. More parking spaces & security guards. S-31. Local History Museum for Santa Fe Depot and surrounding area. S-32. Ticket outlet for local movie/theater/ concerts, etc. S-33. Small Rail Road Museum S-36. 1.) Larger more secure parking. I've been a Metrolink commuter for years primarily from Oceanside. Upon moving 1 1/2 years ago to Lake Arrowhead, I continued commuting from San Bernardino. Within the first six months, my car was vandalized 3 times. There should be a fenced perimeter, more security guards, and better lighting. If retail shops are added, more parking will be necessary. As it is, there is insufficient parking. 2.) Enclosed waiting area. Metrolink users have little protection against the rain, winds and summer heat. Several of the stations along the route to Los Angeles have enclosed waiting areas. 3.) Rehabilitation of the Depot is a great idea. Currently it is not an attractive establishment. The other stations along the route to Los Angeles are pleasing to the eyes & well maintained unlike San Bernardino. S-39. Information/ticketing counters. Security Officers S-44. Better lighting in the parking lot S-46. (Refer to response to Question No. 5) S-47. Night time security - it would be best if officers were to be in the Depot since most Metrolink passengers would only stop for a cup of coffee or a drink after work. METROLINK PASSENGER SURVEY Question No. 6, Comments S-48. I would prefer to catch the Metrolink train in Redlands. Spend the money or improvements to the rail line and extend the route to Redlands. My daily commute is 2.5 hours, so I don't have time to patronize businesses at the S.B. Depot. S-49. Upgrade the facility w/ cleaner & nicer restrooms, office spaces, additional lights and parking spaces, more alert security guards (rampant vandalism of cars - some were stolen from parking lots) S-51. Outdoor eating areas, due to its strategic location and historical and contemporary importance, San Bernardino and its once and potentially again magnificent train depot should be considered for a regional transportation hub, even if only on a small scale. At a minimum, the train depot and its grounds need to be cleaned up, painted and landscaped to fully reflect its former glory. For potential ideas for expanded retail and transportation services, look to stations at Fullerton, Santa Ana, and Oxnard. The greater San Bernardino area is rich in historical heritage and, as the oldest and largest population center in the continuously and rapidly growing Inland Empire area, the City needs to lead the way in preserving its historical heritage and, where possible, providing incentives to the private sector to aid in the revitalization of older areas, which need not necessarily become synonymous with less desirable areas. Those responsible for the "historic site" signs which have been placed throughout the downtown area have done a fine job. However, I was unable to easily locate (if one exists) a brochure which comprehensively lists all of the sites. S-57. Newsstand C S-58. Overnight parking being available, increased security presence. Create small SB police substation S-62. It's a neat looking building - how about making it a rail museum? Other than that, maybe you should tear it down and make more parking available. S-63. More parking S-64. Comments? see below - To truly rehabilitate the Depot and install attractions ' that would entice people to frequent them is truly a challenge. (Perceptive huh!) One thing that you might take into consideration is that those of us that use Metrolink to get back and forth to work may not have spare time to stop ' and visit the sites. What you really want to attract are those that don't use Metrolink but are looking for a good dinner, shopping opportunities and convenience. They will also want to feel safe and protected and want to go to these attractions. Has anyone evaluated the % traffic that visits the mall? Its just across the freeway. This could give a second gauge on the feasibility of your effort. S-66. Restroom; visitor information. I have lived in Redlands for 33 years. I would primarily like to see an aesthetic improvement to the Metrolink/Santa Fe Depot - Amtrak included. It is a shame to see such a piece of history and an architectural site be in the ruins that it currently is in. Please do something if it is in your jurisdiction! S-67. Anything that would lend itself to urban renewal, landscaping improvements, n etc. would be a welcome change. METROLINK PASSENGER SURVEY Question No. 6, Comments S-68. It has a wonderful historical building & excellent location. It could be converted into a hubbing centre for cultural, transportation, tourism & government county/city offices such as EDD, Transport/Tourism Dept, etc. Roads are bad, lights not working, no lawns, dirty parking lot and no shade even to wait in summer, winter or rainy season. See any other Metrolink rail station such as Riverside, W. Corona, La Sierra, Santa Ana & Irvine. Please learn from other cities. Establish strong coordination with poor San Bernardino City. When Metrolink train moves out of San Bernardino, both sides of railway track are beautiful, well maintained. And see in San Bernardino - dirt all around. Need cleanliness and security of cars parked. I can keep my car in parking lot of Santa Ana for three days but at San Bernardino - not one overnight. We know all this. But where is commitment for improvement. May I hope for Improvements?? S-69. Some type of access or info for towing or emergency car service S-70. Bus services to the local mountain area. S-71. I don't feel comfortable in that neighborhood, but I'd hate to see that beautiful old building go to waste. S-73. Restrooms S-74. ATM Machine, Restrooms S-77. Better lighting in the parking lot/at the trains S-78. I am very pleased to see that wonderful old building being restored. I am pleased with any activity that will make this happen. Your efforts are good for the City. Thanks. S-79. If you want to turn this into a transportation hub there will be people waiting around a lot. You may want to set up shuttles to both nearby malls to enable people to do something useful with their time (and help local commerce as well). S-81. Needs for the seniors and disabled. S-82. Better lighting. Better security. Additional parking. S-84. I'd like to see this beautiful old building refurbished as a catalyst to revitalize the downtown area. We need a better image in the Inland Empire. Establishments like those on Hospitality Row would really help. Use part of the Depot for an Old Spaghetti Factory. S-85. No. S-87. I would also like to see the Metrolink Station maintained in a better condition than it is or has been in the past. I know that is really not the issue, but since it is used most often & is directly adjacent to the depot, I am concerned. There has been trash, spilled over into the walkway & near the driveway, the trees have grown over the curb where you can't see cars coming out when you're going in. The Depot would be more beautiful if you refurbish it & also keep the surrounding are neat & clean for residents and visitors to enjoy. Thank you! S-89. The S.B. S/F Depot has a great history, unfortunately it is the "eye-sore" of the entire route! S-94. A newspaper stand. A information stand about the Metrolink. S-95. A safer facility. Cars are broken into & stolen. My car has been hit 3 times in the last month. More lights are needed. Lot needs to be patrolled more often. METROLINK PASSENGER SURVEY Question No. 6, Comments S-96. Whatever you put in the Depot needs to be open after 5 pm on weekdays S-97. The Santa Fe Depot has a waiting room & restrooms but they are far from the boarding gate for Metrolink Passengers....At the Metrolink Gate the passengers could use more comfortable seating and protection from the weather extremes Re: wind, cold, heat, rain, etc. Perhaps the board area can be changed to the older Depot building which can also have a coffeeshop in the western en of the building. S-98. 1 would like to see Santa Fe Depot also used as a place where school children and adults and others can learn about the origin of trains such as the Museum of trains. The Metrolink sign is covered by the miniature palm trees, you miss the driveway. Need to be wider, there is no visible sign to Metrolink Stn. there are no bicycle stalls. No restroom facilities. The Metrolink Facade where the security guard is stationed is dirty. I hope this survey is read and each thought is discussed among the council members with open minds. I don't know if any council members have ever gone to the Santa Fe Depot, but it is I feel, a land mark building which can be upgraded to meet the needs of the weary traveler. Thank you for your time. S-99. ATM Machine (BofA) S-100. N/A S-101. Local Bus Service extended to last until last train arrives in the event of car trouble. Towing service (low cost). S-105. More restrooms. More parking spaces. Additional lighting. Additional guard. S-107. Please put up more phonesll S-109. No. ' S-113. I buy monthly passes to Covina & sometimes we like to go to LA & I have to buy a round trip ticket from here. Can there be upgrades made available for monthly pass holders(?). S-114. Your list seems comprehensive. S-115. Versateller Machine (A.T.M.) S-121. A place where you can grab a bite to eat & get something to drink in the morning & evening. Some where you can go to sit & wait for trains & not freeze or roast you self. I wish for it to look better most of all. Some vending machines & somewhere to eat. S-123. A warm safe place to wait for your train or your ride home. The use of restrooms would be great. This station or breeze way as we like to call it is windy & cold if you have to wait for a ride. Also a smoke free area to wait. Here people smoke so much you can't breath even if it is outside. Even though there are signs posted no smoking in station. They think because it is outside this does not apply. S-124. More/better parking S-126. Improvement of surrounding areas & businesses, better or more lighting, landscaping, more parking spaces, professional securities for late night travel. S-127. More lighting, landscaping, more parking spaces, improvement of surrounding areas and businesses. S-133. I would like to use my company transit check to purchase my monthly pass or ten (101 trip) ticket. As it stands transit checks can only be applied toward METROLINK PASSENGER SURVEY Question No. 6, Comments purchase at Union Station and I belief at Claremont Station. This is and inconvenience. S-135. I would like to see more light in the entrance or exit. Big sign, most of the people I know the complaint about the station is to dark. They can see San Bernardino Depot. Mini buses for station for every 15 mts. Drops/pickups. Give info in person, also to buy monthly passes in stores - sometimes the machines not work well. People get so stress because the train coming. This is my opinion. PS - Need a big parking space, also every morning I go to the train, they do not have parking space. Thank you. I hope you have a great year 2000 & improve the City of San Bernardino. Good Luck. SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Appendices Appendix C Code Research Study 1 Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIR• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Appendix C-Code Research Study Code Attachment 1 TABLE 3-A—DESCRIPTION OF OCCUPANCIES BY GROUP AND DIVISION GROUP SECTION DESCRIPTION OF OCCUPANCY AND DIVISION A-1 A building or portion of a building having an assembly room with an occupant load of 1,000 or more and a legitimate stage. A-2 A building or portion of a building having an assembly room with an occupant load of less than 1,000 and a legitimate stage. A-2. I A building or portion of a building having an assembly room with an occupant load of 303.1.1 300 or more without a legitimate stage, including such buildings used for educational purposes and not classed as a Group E or Group B Occupancy. A-3 Any building or portion of a building having an assembly room with an occupant load of less than 300 without a legitimate stage,including such buildings used for educational purposes and not classed as a Group E or Group B Occupancy. A-4 Stadiums,reviewing stands and amusement park structures not included within other ' Group A Occupancies. B 304 1 A building or structure,or a portion thereof,for office,professional or service-type transactions,including storage of records and accounts;eating and drinking establishments with an occupant load of less than 50. E-1 Any building used for educational purposes through the 12th grade by 50 or more persons for more than 12 hours per week or four hours in any one day. 305.1 E-2 Any building used for educational purposes through the 12th grade by less than 50 persons for more than 12 hours per week or four hours in any one day. E-3 Any building or portion thereof used for daycare purposes for more than six persons. F-I Moderate-hazard factory and industrial occupancies include factory and industrial uses not classified as Group F,Division 2 Occupancies. 306 1 Low-hazard factory and industrial occupancies include facilities producing F-2 noncombustible or nonexplosive materials that during finishing,packing or processing do not involve a significant fire hazard. H-I Occupancies with a quantity of material in the building in excess of those listed in Table 3-D that present a high explosion hazard as listed in Section 307.1.1. H-2 Occupancies with a quantity of material in the building in excess of those listed in Table 307.1 3-D that present a moderate explosion hazard or a hazard from accelerated burning as listed in Section 307.1.1. H-3 Occupancies with a quantity of material in the building in excess of those listed in Table 3-D that present a high fire or physical hazard as listed in Section 307.1.1. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA • 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 • (619) 239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Appendix C -Code Research Study Code Attachment 1 GROUP SECTION DESCRIPTION OF OCCUPANCY AND DIVISION H4 Repair garages not classified as Group S,Division 3 Occupancies. H-5 Aircraft repair hangars not classified as Group S, Division 5 Occupancies and heliports. H-6 307.1 Semiconductor fabrication facilities and comparable research and development areas and when the facilities in which hazardous production materials are used,and the aggregate 307.11 quantity of material is in excess of those listed in Table 3-Dor3-E. H-7 3071 Occupancies having quantities of materials in excess of those listed in Table 3-E that are health hazards as listed in Section 307.1.1. I-1.1 Nurseries for the full-time care of children under the age of six(each accommodating more than five children),hospitals,sanitariums,nursing homes with nonambulatory patients and similar buildings(each accommodating more than five patients). I-1.2 Health-care centers for ambulatory patients receiving outpatient medical care which may 308.1 render the patient incapable of unassisted self-preservation(each tenant space accommodating more than five such patients). I-2 Nursing homes for ambulatory patients,homes for children six years of age or over (each accommodating more than five persons). I-3 Mental hospitals,mental sanitariums,jails,prisons,reformatories and buildings where personal liberties of inmates are similarly restrained. M 309.1 A building or structure,or a portion thereof,for the display and sale of merchandise, and involving stocks of goods,wares or merchandise,incidental to such purposes and accessible to the public. R- 1 Hotels and apartment houses,congregate residences(each accommodating more than 10 persons). R-2. I Residential care facilities for the elderly(each accommodating more than six nonambulatory clients). R-2.2 310 1 Residential care facilities for the elderly(each accommodating more than six ambulatory clients). R-2. 1.1 Residential care facilities for the elderly(each accommodating six or less nonambulatory clients). R-2.2.I Residential care facilities for the elderly(each accommodating six or less ambulatory clients). R-3 Dwellings, lodging houses,congregate residences(each accommodating 10 or fewer personal. S-1 311.1 Moderate hazard storage occupancies including buildings or portions of buildings used for storage of combustible materials not classified as Group S,Division 2 or Group H Occupancies. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIR • 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 • (619) 239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Appendix C -Code Research Study Code Attachment 1 GROUP SECTION DESCRIPTION OF OCCUPANCY AND DIVISION S-2 Low-hazard storage occupancies including buildings or portions of buildings used for storage of noncombustible materials. S-3 Repair garages where work is limited to exchange of parts and maintenance not requiring open flame or welding, and parking garages not classified as Group S, Division 4 Occupancies. S4 I Open parking garages. S-5 Aircraft hangars and helistops. 1 Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA • 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 (619) 239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Appendix C-Code Research Study Code Attachment 1 1898 CALIFORNU BUILDING CODE TABLE a-B TABLE 3 C TABLE 3 NEOUIRED SEPARATION IN BUILDINGS OF NDIED OCCUPANCYI(HOURS) ■ A-1 A4 A4.1 N A-4 B E F-0 F2 X-Y Hd H-411 fi 148, Nd I M R-1 R-3 8-1 &2 S-0 83 U.1 k1 N N N N 3 N 3 3 1 4 0 4 3 3 3 1 1 3 3 1 4 3 1 Yi A3 N N N 1 N I 1 0 4 4 4 3 3 1 1 I 1 I 3 1 I A4.1 N N 1 N 1 1 4 1 4 1 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 C w A-0 N N N N N 1 1 0 3 / 2 N' 1 I N N 3 '1 1 ' M 1 N 1 1 < 4 4 6 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 r E 1 1 a 4 1 3 2 1 1 I 1 1 1 3 1 1 F-2 1 2 1 F3 2 1 1 1 ! 3 1 1 1 N N 1 1 1 I . 141 NOT PERMII2ED Dl AfLV£DOGCOpANCRS.Sf£SECf10N 30'128 YB H-2 1 1 2 2 4 2 4 4 2 2 2 2 1 NJ 1 3 1 2 2 1 1 2 2 4 37- 1 , B 1 1 1 1 Y 1 1 1 R-1 I N 3 1 3 1 1 114 4 1 1 1 1 1 Y1 8-0 ■ N OPEN PARKDIO GARAGES ARE EX QUDE DEXC8P1'AS pkOVIDSDDI SBCF10N 3112 N N--NO mtuirtmnvfa fim msemme. �8 �Fmdwikd requirmnu and exapuaw,sce Sebgv 302.4. 1FOr Ww builld w.i amxic nivedNS,t¢do FUe Cotle 1FOr sgnahural NUNinp,an also AppeoNa Ohaps4r 3. ■ sax 3snon 309.3.3 fwwmpdn. aFm GS F.Divivool r44dwarkivg mmb&W1so.wiW mom Wao 2S fWIn"m2,,We arculupry uPmadon slWI be®hom. W W TABLE 9-C—HEQUINED SEPARATION OF SPECIFIOUSE AREAS IN GROUP DIVISION 1.1 HOSPITAL AND NURSING HONES aF8tNR41 9ttTP41p.T F6'11Yflpx 1. EmPluym lPrYC Swm Naov 2 GiRAemil rhope � Nav 3. Hmdivafl stops NPIX 0. RiM Novc � 5 thetwAid woWd n�meaNassifirmroo usaGmupNOCnpaury� On<how � 6. Laundries p®tn WV100 squx f.(9.3 mI)� Ouc MUs T, P o[shoyscmpkpughav,dgw mbsmcw and nutuielaW ququp Iea dm NU wltihw du clmfir n a GmupH Oa Fow 8. Phpiml plmr maiwmenn Arop Ow hour 9. Soilm ie..o Onc how 10. nmbw 4orsgc morm 100 uFUrt fix(9.3 m2)mins ie ema P M ribkmnedil NP R. Slo�glrooms nwm qaa 100 stout fi (9.3 m1)ftn mmb bk N.. Onehow 12. Tms4rollemaP Spgmsl Ow hour IlirsphNSh and lien NP¢ICmiaadon saoms.see SemwT115. , 105 4 Table 3-B—Required Separation in Buildings of Mixed Occupancy(Hours)and Table 3-C—Required Separation of Specific Use Areas Source: 1998 Uniform Building Code with California Amendments Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIR • 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 (619) 239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT ..N REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Appendix C-Code Research Study Code Attachment 1 1190 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE TABLE 5-B r y TABLE S-B-BASIC ALLO FOP BURDININ ONES RA N IB,1;PALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA ■ TYPES Of CONSiRVCNGN nl N v FA I F.N. I 6Mllan N Onrnwr N KT. QtMWr N Y••YnumNWNII••N )L Iu.mm) Ilv v?mm) (n Temml Ov vtiwn> tla»�i mm) (o viz mml (15.-) rya+nmml ux Oreuo wq.vuee Nmmlm NNyetbtnle 1-ts"s- o-o.)I...vor A-1 A U1. 294 Not Petmitled w A-2.2.1 H lIL 4 2 NP 2 NP 2 2 NP A UL 29,900 13.500 NP 135W NP 13.500 -10.500 NP r, A-3.4 A UL 29.900 13.500 9.100 13.500 9100 135W . 10500 6,000 S-1. H UL 12 4 2 4 2 4 3 2 S3.SS A IJL 39,90) 18.000 12,000 18,000 12.000 18.000 14.000 8.000 M 51.2 H W 4 2 1 2 1 2 2 1 A lll. 052A) 20,200 13500 .2W 13-0W 20100 IS.T00 9.100 r 9.2.S2 H Ill, l2 4 2 4 2 4 3 2 A U1. 59.900 2-/.000 18.000 27100 18.000 2).000 21.00) 120W 1 1 Not PemtiICE-H I H-I A 15.000 12.400 5.6)0' 3.700 X-2 A 1SA00 12.100 5.600 3.700 5.600 3.'11110 L600 4.400 25W r H UL 5 2 t 2 1 2 2 1 N-3,0. A la. 20.8W 11100 730() 11.200 7.500 II.2W 8.80) 5.100 2 3 2 3 3 94.7 A 111- 39.900 1d.W0 12000 18.000 12.000 18.000 14AW 8.000. !'. H-8 N U 3 3 2 3 2 3 3 1 4 r A UL 39.900 IA000 I200D 183 1200) !&000 14.3 8,000 RC 1-1.1.1. H UL 3 1 N1, 1 NP 1 I NP ' A Ill 15.100 6.800 NP 6.80) NP Q80) 5100 NP NP 2 NP 2 2 NP 12 A UL 15.1w 6.800 NP 6.800 NP 6.800 5.200 NP 13 A IOD Not Psoees,7 R-1 H UI. 12 4 2 4 2 4 J 2 A UL 29.900 13500 9.100• 13300 9AW 13500 10500 6,000• R-2l N UL 12 2 NP 2 NP NP 2 M A UL 29.900. 13.300 NP 13500 NP NP 10.300 NP R-21.1.22 N UL 12 4 21 4 1 2 4 3 2 2.21 A OL 29.900 Jr."! 1 9.100• 13.300 9./00• 13.300 IO.J00 QOOW R-3 X Ul. 3 3 1 3 1 3 1 3 3 3 3 H See Table 3-H A U. H Sec Chaise,3 A ' A--Bm,lisig sees is xisses fen. N-NO rt9uiteloYaK for lue+eaiatvvcc. H--Building height in soother of sesioS. FR.-Freeznifdve. H.T.-tluvy permirtctimber. llt^UNImivA. NP-NOt tl. 1Fbr ttmltiz hoUdings,zee Section 5042. 21 O lusitatuse evil exceptions.set Section 3032. YPor open perkio,8a s,si,tie Section 311.9. 1 4Sx Section 305.2.3. SSee S tzoia •Sx Section 308.21 for exception b the allowable New and number of atone in ho:mmis,nussin8 homes and hnalN-cve rmbm. TSee Section 308.2.2.2. gP aeriwhntsl hoildings,see also Appendix Chspmr 3. •For limimtioNS W esoepttons,see Section 3102. 1 iot-T[of Getup 1.Mission issim egis,of(loup 1.Dived 1n I5i (13'1[6 is imitd to 75 feet(22 8W mm).For Type If.O -how consnuctioq the mssurv= 1�56 _ 0111 r Table 5-B-Basic Allowable Building Heights and Basic Allowable Floor Area Source: 1998 Uniform Building Code with California Amendments Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAlA • 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 • (619) 239-7888 r Appendix C - SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT - Code Research Study Topics Requirements Sections Remarks rwsron 1. Description of Work Seismic Retrofit Restore the Building Exterior Rehabilitate Amtrak Offices Hazardous Materials Abatement as req'd. Exiting &ADA Access Installation of a new mechanical, plumbing, and electrical systems Sitework adjacent to the Station. 2. Applicable Codes Uniform Building Code (UBC) 1997 Edition California Building Code, Title 24, CBC 1998 Edition part 2 with supplements Califomia Health& Safety Code CCR 1998 Edition State Historical Building Code(SHBC) 1998 Edition Uniform Plumbing Code 1998 Edition Uniform Mechanical Code 1998 Edition Uniform Electrical Code 1998 Edition Uniform Fire Code 1998 Edition 3. Reviewing Agencies San Bernardino County Building Department Historic Resources Board San Bernardino RR is being nominated to be on the National Register of Historic Places, It is currently listed on the California Point of Historical Interest list site# SBR-053. State Historic Preservation Office SHPO will review to approve Part 2 Preservation Plan and Part 3 Final Comparison City of San Bernardino Fire City review required, San Department Bernardino Fire Department will do annual inspections. County of San Bernardino Required for all food services. Environmental Health National Park Service Federal Investment Tax Credit 1.C:\MWD-PROJECTS\9902-SanBernardino\SanBem-code-portrait.wb3, January 26, 2000 Appendix C - SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT - Code Research Study Topics Requirements Sections Remarks a egory o All historical--M-in-o-r—cliange in use to SHBL; lable This—Fable re la es 15 alternafives tor Historical equal or less intensive occupancy- 8-13-2 entry, doors, toilet rooms, and Preservation Limited services. floors and levels. Division I General Requirements 1. Actual Floor First Floor Areas Amtrak Office & Lobby-4,600 s.f. Lobby Toilets Men/Women-2,200 s.f. Baggage Room & Storage-8,300 s.f. Far West Annex-4,500 s.f. Traffic Room -2,190 s.f. Harvey House &Annex-6,300 s.f. Second Floor Central Area-5,800 s.f. West Offices- 12,000 s.f. East Offices-4,900 s.f. Upper Harvey House- 1,500 s.f. Total Floor Area square footage of 52,300 s.f. Floor Area is defined in UBC all floors section 207 to be the inside of exterior walls as building area is commonly defined by the building department. Arcade Area 7,750 s.f. Area to the exterior edge of the overhangs. 2. Occupancy Classification Group A Anytime 50 or more occupants gather Sec 303.1.1 Restaurants and Amtrak waiting fit Occupancies for civic, social or religious functions, in this category if over 50 recreation, education, food or drink occupants. See table 5-B for consumption, or awaiting construction limitations. See table transportation 3-A for occupancies defined. Group A Division 1 Occupant load 1,000 or more and a Sec 303.1.1 legitimate stage Group A-1 is not permitted in a Type III Table 5-B Not permitted in this building must -One-hour structure. be Type I -Fire Resistive construction Group A Division 2 Occupant load less than 1,000 and a Sec 303.1.1 Acceptable Use, An assembly legitimate stage room between 2,100 s.f. and 7,000 s.f. 2,C:\MWD-PROJECTS\9902-SanBernardino\SanBern-code-portrait.wb3, January 26, 2000 Appendix C - SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT -Code Research Study Topics Requirements Sections Remarks may be on either floor because Type III -one hour construction. Group A Division 2.1 Occupant load of 300 or more without Sec 303.1.1 Acceptable Use, Second floor a legitimate stage, including buildings exiting could be a significant used for education purposes not problem. classed as B or E. Group A Division 3 Occupant load less than 300 without a Acceptable Use, Likely legitimate stage, including buildings classification of seminar rooms, used for education purposes not larger restaurants. classed as B or E. Group A Division 4 Stadiums, reviewing stands, Structure does not serve these amusement park structures type occupancies. Group B Group B -Offices, professional or Sec. 304.1 Acceptable Use, Likely service type transactions. Eating & classification. drinking establishments less than 50 occupants. Area of any one or two story building of Sec. 505.2 Additional structures should be 1 Groups B, F1 or F2, M, S1-S5, an H5 less than 60'from the main may be unlimited if provided with an structure or construct it a minimum approved automatic sprinkler system of type III one-hour, max two and surrounded by public ways or stories. If the above code yards not less than 60'wide. exception is used their is no option to use the space as assembly use. Use allowable area increases to determine occupancies. See section 304.1 for some business 1 listed. Group E, Division 1 Education K-12 > 50occ Sec 305 Not recommended with current exiting layout. Group E, Division 2 Education K-12 <50occ Sec 305 Acceptable use, however, no K-2 grades above the first floor. Group E, Division 3 Day Care Facility Sec 305 Shall not be located above or below Sec 305.2.3 Acceptable use, no day care above the first story unless automatic exceptions the first floor. sprinkler system is installed and two exits provided. Group F1 - Factory and Industrial uses fabricating Sec 306.1 One-hour separation required from Moderate Hazard to include: Electronics assembly, "A'occupancies and generally no Factory motion picture making, many other separation required from"B" products. occupancies. 3,C:\MWD-PROJECTS\9902-SanBernardino\SanBerncode-portrait.wb3, January 26, 2000 Appendix C -SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT - Code Research Study Topics Requirements Sections Remarks os roup uses are no appropriate with office, restaurant, or assembly uses. Group H Hazardous materials production or Sec 307.1 Group H occupancies require 4 hr Occupancies storage. Group H1 not allowed with separation from assembly uses, other occupancies, Group H2 through not even possible in this structure. 8 allowed but not recommended. Group H2 not allowed in two story Table 5-B building Group I Division 1.2 Health care centers for more than 5 Sec 308.1 Division 1 - Hospitals, Division 2- ambulatory patients incapable of self Nursing homes, Division 3 - Mental preservation receiving outpatient &Jails are not appropriate or medical care permitted in this type of structure. Any 1 occupancy will require 3 hour Table 3-13 Not practical in this building, due to separation from "A"occupancies and 2 roof construction used. hour separation from "B"occupancies. Outpatient clinics with less than five Sec 304.1 (8) Acceptable use. patients incapable of self preservation are Occupancy"B", see above. Group M- Display and sale of merchandise Section 309.1 Building allowable area Merchandising involving stocks of goods, wares and requirements match type B uses, merchandise, incidental and accessible see Table 3-B. to the public. Includes: Department stores, Drug The entire building could be"M" stores, Markets, paint stores, Shopping occupancy or shared with A or B Centers, Sales Rooms, Wholesale and occupancies. retail stores. One hour separation from A2,A2.1, Table 3-B Appropriate to this structure and E uses, No separation from A3 or B uses Group R1 -Hotels Occupancies over ten (10) people Adequate exiting issues from the and apartments second floor. Limits allowable area to 13,500 sf Table 5-B This is same as A2.1 and A3 occupancies, so they could be implemented without penalty. Group R3- Occupancies less than ten (10) people Table 3-B Dwellings, lodging Limits allowable area to 13,500 sf houses, congregate residences. 4,C:\MWD-PROJECTS\9902-San6emardino\SanBem-code-portrait.wb3, January 26, 2000 Appendix C - SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT - Code Research Study Topics Requirements Sections Remarks 4. ype o ype - ne- our Table 6-A Hillman biddison & LoeveFguth Construction Report, Structural Engineers, Report 1996 classified the building as Type III-One Hour, MWD Concurs with this determination. Reinforced concrete construction Hollow Clay filler walls 5. Building Height Height for"B, F-1, M, S-1, S-3, S-5 are Table 5-B If we have 'A-3"occupancies, limited to 4 stories, Type"A-3"is does the old blueprint room in the limited to two stories. southwest tower considered another story? Probably not, and the SHBC would allow it to remain. a* Unlimited if it matches existing height. SHBC 8-406 The SHBC would make the building comply with A-3 6.Allowable Floor 18,000 s.f. base area allowed For Table 5-13 Area Groups: "B, F-1, M, S-1, S-3, S-5" 20,200 s.f. base area allowed for E-1 Table 5-13 1 13,500 s.f. base area allowed for A-3 Table 5-B Most restrictive, use this number to calculate the allowable areas. >A. Allowance for 100% increase allowed for the two sec. 504.2 Allowable area now 27,000 s.f. Multi-story stories. >B. Separation on 3 100% increase allowed with no one sec. 505.1 Allowable area now 54,000 s.f. sides floor exceeding the allowable area. >C. Sprinkler subst Required occupancy separation more SHBC 8-302.3 Sprinkler system will qualify as for rating than 1-hr may be reduced to 1-hr with and SHBC automatic, however we do not openings protected by not less than 8-302.4 intend to use the sprinkler to 3/4-hr assemblies. Area in floor area reduce the required rating. may be unlimited without fire resistive However UBC section 505.3 will separation walls. allow a 100% increase for a two story building.This will allow a building of 108,000 s.f. 7. Mixed No separation for A-3 to B Table 3-B Occupancies When a building houses more than sec. 504.3 If the calculations are"worst case" one occupancy, the area of the building single occupancy, than any shall be such that the sum of the ratios combination of lesser occupancies of the actual area for each separate will work. occupancy divided by the total allowable area for each occupancy shall not exceed 1. 5,C:\MWD-PROJECTS\9902-SanBemardino\SanBern-code-portrait.wb3, January 26, 2000 i Appendix C - SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT - Code Research Study • Topics _ Requirements Sections Remarks 8. Fire Resistive or ype - ne Four sec. Reqm'ts >A. Exterior Bearing 4 hours required, see section 604.3.1 Table 6-A, Concrete Frame OK, Infll clay tile Walls UCBC has is archaic material and depending special fire on lay-up performance rarely resistive exceeds 1 hour per wythe. allowances The fire-resistive requirement for SHBC 8-402.1 New supervised automatic fire exterior walls and existing opening sprinkler system to be installed. protection may be satisfied when an automatic fire-extinguishing system designed for exposure protection is installed. >B. Interior Bearing 1 hour Table 6-A existing conc or hct walls. Verify Walls structural >C. Non-Bearing 1 hour, see section 603.3.1 Table 6-A N/A Walls Ext >D. Structural 1 hour Table 6-A Frame >E. Partitions 1 hour Table 6-A Existing Walls are plaster on wood -permanent framing and have transoms. SHBC 8-104 Closing the transoms and/or wall rating would adversely affect the historical integrity. Upgrading an existing qualified historic SHBC 8-402.2 building or property to 1-hr fire-resistive construction or 1-hr corridors shall not be required regardless of construction or occupancy when a sprinkler system is installed, or an approved life-safety evaluation, or other alternative measures are approved. >F. Shaft 1 hour see sections 304.6&711 Table 6-A Exist'g vert. shaft need not be Enclosures enclosed SHBC 8-809 when solid blocked min. 27 or sprinklered >G. Floors/Floor 1 hour Table 6-A Reinforced Concrete floor Ceilings systems., OK >H. Roofs/Roof 1 hour Table 6-A Pitched roofs are steel truss Ceilings supporting wood frame w/plaster protection below Firestop any new penetrations. Arcade roofs are all wood framing. 6,C:\MWD-PROJECTS\9902-SanBernardino\SanBern-code-portrait.wb3, January 26, 2000 Appendix C - SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT- Code Research Study Topics Requirements Sections Remarks occ Not permitted ess than Table 5-A Verity any openings in Assam y portion A occ Protected less than 20' Table 5-A Same as above >J. Stairway SHBC allows existing stair to remain, SHBC 8-407 Stairs to remain as historic Construction Approved automatic sprinkler system and SHBC existing. or other solutions may be considered 8-502 on a case-by-case basis in lieu of exception. 3. enclosure of vertical shafts and stairwells. May be constructed of any material if Sec 604.4 All new shafts will comply. serving less than three stories >K. Parapets Top 18" minimum must have recd sec. 504.6.5 Existing parapets to remain & rating both sides comply. 9. Existing High Rise Buildings with a habitable floor surface Sec 403.11.1 The domes of this building are 73' . above 75'above the ground floor are The second floor is under 25' considered high rise above the first floor. therefore not a high rise. 10.Area Separation If required for area or multi-use Walls 11. Protected If required for yards. Not an issue for this building. Openings Public yards all around the building. 12. Glazed transoms Prevailing code would no longer allow SHBC 6-104 Closing transoms harms historical the glazed transoms. character Into Corridors 13. Openings in No openings within 5' of separation sec 504.6.4 Roofs wall. 14. Roof Covering Class B minimum Table 15-A 15. Termination of May terminate at underside of roof slab sec. 504.6.4 area wall if it is 2-hr. construction. 16. Existing Vertical Code requires 2-hr shafts Table 6-A Shafts 7.C:\MWD-PROJECTS\9902SanBernardino\SanBern-code-oortrait.wb3, January 26. 2000 Appendix C - SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT -Cade Research Study Topics Requirements Sections Remarks a ows exis ing s it o remain, Approved automatic sprinkler system or other solutions may be considered on a case-by-case basis in lieu of enclosure of vertical shafts and stairwells. 17. Fire-Protection Systems >A. Sprinkler Supervised Automatic Sprinkler system Smoke detectors will be required in System required in this building all interior spaces >B. Standpipe No requirement for occupancy groups Table 9-A Standpipe may be combined with Classification I, H, B, S, M, F. Type II required for the automatic fire system. group A2.1 >C. Hose No requirement for occupancy groups Table 9-A Existing hose cabinets will be Requirement I, H, B, S, M, F. Hose required for abandoned. group A2.1 >D. Fire As required by Fire Marshal Size, quantity, location to be Extinguishers determined by City Fire Marshal. >E. Location of Risers not in enclosed stairway or sec 904.5.3 Standpipes pressurized enclosure need not be in a exc#1 protected shaft. >F. Roof outlet One roof outlet required. sec. 904.5.3 New riser will include a roof outlet. 18. Means of Egress Chapter 10 >A. Occupant Load Occupant loads depend on the type of Table 10-A Factor occupancies or mixture of occupancies We need not aggregate floor loads sec. No cascading effect of occupant 1003.2.3.4 loads, or exits. Accessory uses occupant load need sec. not be calculated into the occupant 1003.2.2.2.1 load >B. Number of Exits Minimum 2 exits depends on the Table 10-A Verify occupancy type. Required occupancy. Minimum 2 exits when day care is over 7, offices&storage over 30, assembly&stores over 50. Minimum 3 exits required when sec 1004.2.3.4 occupant load is 501 to 1000 occupants 8,C:\MWD-PROJECTS\9902-SanBemardino\SanBem-code-portrait.wb3, January 26, 2000 Appendix C - SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT -Code Research Study Topics Requirements Sections Remarks >C. Width of Exits sec. 1003.2 Use minimum of 44" per 1006.2 >> Main Floor >> Main Entry Main exit to accommodate %the total sec. 1007.2.1 occupant load. >D. Arrangement of Exits shall be placed distance apart sec. 1003.3 Second floor of west office area exits over half the the length of the diagonal. must be a single space to avoid a dead end condition. Enforcing agency shall grant SHBC 8-704 reasonable exceptions to specific Exceptions provisions >E. Travel Distance Maximum 200' sec. 1003.4 >F. Corridor Width Minimum 44"wide sec. 1005 Maintain minimum width. >G. Doors Minimum 32" clear sec. 1004 Minimum Height 6-8" Min strike 24" pull side of exterior CBC Fig 10-2 doors. 48"between doors or door swings CBC Fig 10-5B 19. Elevators If>10occ provide a elevator lobby at sec. 1005.8.2 Lobby at new elevator will comply. each floor containing such a corridor. The lobby will separate the elevator from the corridor from smoke and draft. Elevator Lobbies to comply with 3002 sec. 3002 New elevator lobby will comply requires one exit. 20. Stairways _ >A. Width Minimum 44"wide sec. 1006.2 occ load of 101 doesn't exceed 44" min. width. >B. Handrails Handrails may project 3 1/2"from each sec. 1006.2 Stairwell width is adequate for 44" side of a stairway. Stringers and/or width plus framing. projections'trim' may project 1 1/2" on each side. >C. Rise and Run Rise max. 7", Run min. 11" sec. 1006.3 Existing is not to current code. SHBC 8-502.1 Existing stairways having risers exception 3 and treads at variance with the specified rise and run for the occupant load and use are allowed. >D. Landings Not less than width of stairway. sec. 1006.7 9,C:\MWD-PROJECTS\9902-SanBemardino\SanBemcode-portrait.wb3, January 26, 2000 Appendix C -SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT - Code Research Study Topics Requirements Sections Remarks Pe ve ica y e een an ings. sec. >E. Handrails between 34" and 38"above stair nose. sec. 1006.9 12" past top nosings sec. 1006.9 12" plus tread past bottom nosing. CBC Fig 10-10 Terminate railings to wall or newel sec. 1006.9 posts Handrail grip 1 1/4"to 1 1/2" sec. 3307.e.1 >F. Stairway to roof One stair must go to the roof or sec. 1006.14 Access to flat roof through a Hatch min 16 sq. ft. 24"wide min. sec. 1006.12 No access required to sloped roof. >G. Striping at nose 2"wide contrast at top&bottom CBC1133B.4. interior 4 2"wide contrast at all treads exterior >H. Stair Enclosures Interior stairways shall be constructed sec. Approved automatic sprinkler based on type of construction require 1003.3.3.9 systems or other solutions may be -ments as specified in section 603.4 SHBC 8-407 considered on a case-by-case basis, in lieu of enclosure of vertical shafts and stairwells. 21. Guardrails Redd. at stairs, landings, ramps >30" sec 509.1 above grade, required. >A. Height 42"tall min. stair& landing sec. 509.2 >B. Opening in rail Such that a 4"sphere cannot pass sec. 509.3 through Existing stairways having risers and SHBC 8-502.1 treads at variance with the specified exception 3 rise and run for the occupant load and use are allowed. 22. Exit Walls without openings, min. 1-hr. fire Passageways resistance. 24. Light Occupied portions shall be provided CBC 1202.1 with natural light by means of exterior glazed openings not less than 1110 of the floor area, or shall be provided with artificial light. 25. Yards and Not applicable CBC 1203.4 Courts 10,C:WWD-PROJECTS\9902-SanBemardino\SanBem-code-portrait.wb3, January 26, 2000 iAppendix C- SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT- Code Research Study iTopics Requirements Sections Remarks 26.Ventilation Occupied portions shall be provided CBC 1203.3 with natural ventilation by means of exterior openings not less than 1/20 of the floor area, or shall be provided with a mechanically operated ventilation system. i i 1 i i i 1 1 i1 1,C:\MWD-PROJECTS\9902-San Bernardino\SanBerncode-portrait.wb3, January 26, 2000 Appendix C - SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT -Code Research Study Topics Requirements Sections Remarks _10—m—isionir ACCOSSMIMY 1. Accessability All existing buildings and facilities, 11346.1 Required when alterations are made to such buildings. >A. For Existing r Buildings Shall comply to Division I-New Buildings, Division II-Site Accessibility, Division SHBC table Accessible primary entry existing. 111- 8-13-2 Accessibility for Entrances. One set of entry doors will be fitted Applies only to specific area of 11348.2 and approved automatic opener. alteration and shall include the 113482.1 following additional areas and facilities, Primary\entrance to building, access route, restroom, telephones, drinking fountains >B. For Historic Qualified Historic Buildings shall 11358 See Guidelines to Alternative r Buildings comply with the State Historical Access Standards SHBC Table Building Code. 8-13-1 I Part 8, Title 24, of the California Code of Regulations SHBC 8-1303 Unless compliance damages the historic fabric or historical aspects 2.. Assembly Areas Group A occupancies shall be CBC1105A for Accessible seating locations will be accessible HCD 1 uniformly distributed in the seating area. CBC 1107A.20 >A. Hearing Assisted Listening Devices in Impaired assembly areas are required. >B. Areas of Refuge Areas for evacuation assistance are CBC1108A.1. Existing stairways do not provide required in buildings or facilities not 1 and areas of refuge or communication having a supervised automatic CBC1114A.2. devices. Exception 2 eliminates sprinkler system. 1 requirement in alterations of Elevators are rec'd. to be accessed by sec 11 D4.1.3 The building will have a an area of refuge or a horizontal exit in supervised sprinkler system, thus a non-sprinklered building.. no need for areas of refuge. >C. Elevator Required to be accessible. CBC1116B The new elevator(s) planned will comply with ADA guidelines. 12,C:\MWD-PROJECTS\9902-SanBernardino\SanBemcode-portrait.wb3, January 26, 2000 Appendix C - SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT - Code Research Study ' Topics Requirements Sections Remarks ear inside dim x wa o oor sec. a new a eva ors panne wi required comply with ADA guidelines. 3. Drinking When D.F. is provided, it must be in a Existing non-compliant D.F. may Fountains 32: w x 18"d alcove or otherwise remain as is. New installations will position out of the pedestrian path. comply. W.C. accessible fountain required and one normal height 4. Telephone 30"x 48"clear space, may overlap No existing telephones knee space, top of instrument 48" forward reach. Text Telephone TDD if 4 or more New installations shall comply interior phones are provided, Sign required and volume controls on each bank of phones. White on Blue unless ok with agency if letters, 3"min san-serif with braille. Pictural images min. 6" • B. Entrance Signs All accessible entrances shall be signed •C. Mounting Latch side wall at 60", if no wall then Location nearest wall adj. away from door swing where required. > D. Toilet Facilities New facilities must be accessible 1105.1 6. Doors Historic Doors Existing doors and frames may remain.Add smoke seals and closers at doors normally requiring rating. Door width must be 32"clear opening SHBC Table Exterior doors-may be 30"width 8-13-2 of clear opening operable by single motion.' Interior doors- same as exterior or useable 29 1/2"clear opening operable with single motion. >A. Hardware Door hardware mounted 30"-44"a.f.f. 11338.2.2.4 >D. Landing Landing 44"as measured at right 11338.2.4 angles to the door in R's closed position. >E. Clearance 13,C:XMWD-PROJECTS\9902-SanBemardino\SanBem-code-portrait.wb3, January 26, 2000 Appendix C - SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT - Code Research Study Topics Requirements Sections Remarks interior door s ri a on puli side 24"exterior door strike on pull side. >F. Opening Effort 51b force interior doors 11338.2.5 1 8% lb force exterior doors. 15 lb at fire doors. >G. Bottom of Door Bottom 10"of door to have smooth 11338.2.6 Historic Doors to remain may uninterrupted surface. remain as is and may not comply. 1 8. Hallways >A. Doors Impact 44" perpendicular on both sides of the 11338.3.2 Existing historic doors and swings door may remain. 9. Doors onto stair Must not diminish landing width to less 11338.3.2 Existing historic doors and swings landings than 22"clearance may remain. iEND OF CODE SEARCH 1 1 14.C*\MWD-PROJECTS\9902-SanBemardino\SanBern-code-portrait wb3. January 26 2000 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Appendices Appendix D Cost Estimates Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIR• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 1 SCHEMATIC COST ESTIMATE 1tL&A NO. 99-245-1R1 I' SAN BERNARDINO SANTA FE STATION REHABILITATION & ADAPTIVE REUSE SAN BERNARDINO, CALIFORNIA FEBRUARY 1, 2000 I� ' Prepared for: Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA Prepared by: Leverton & Associates LLC (800) 803-2479 ESTIMATE NOTES A ESTIMATE FORMAT & PROJECT DETAILS • ESTIMATE FORMAT: CSI format estimate of construction cost for San Bernardino Santa Fe Station Restoration, San Bernardino, California. .� • PROJECT DETAILS: The estimate includes costs for stabilization and station and site work .. restoration. Tenant improvement allowances are provided on the estimate summary. Costs for the future railroad museum and spur tracks are excluded. M B ESTIMATE—OPINION OF COST & PROJECT SCOPE • ESTIMATE - OPINION OF COST: An Opinion of Cost shall be construed as an indefinite evaluation of cost based upon historical cost data derived from similar projects, produced • from written or drawn information provided during design stages of a project. Since we have no control over: the cost of labor, materials or equipment; or over the contractor's method of determining his prices: or over competitive bidding or market conditions, we do not guarantee the accuracy of such opinions as compared to contractor bids. Allowances as appropriate are included for items of work which are not indicated, provided that the Estimator is made aware of them, or which in the judgement of the Estimator are required for completion of the work. We cannot, however, be responsible for inclusion of items or work of which we have not been informed. • PROJECT SCOPE: The user is cautioned that significant changes in the project scope after completion of the Cost Estimate, can cause major cost changes. In these circumstances, we should be notified, and an appropriate adjustment made to the Cost Estimate. A C COMPETITIVE BIDS & LABOR RATES NUMBER OF BIDS & LABOR RATES: The estimate is based on competitive bid situations, with a minimum of 5 (five) General Contractor bids. Labor rates are based on a Prevailing Wage contract. LEVERTON&ASSOCIATES LLC CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE SUMMARY San Bernardino Santa Fe Station ITEM DESCRIPTION TOTAL COST A STABILIZATION 1,063,840 B STATION RESTORATION 9,037,127 ' TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST 10,100,967 C TENANT IMPROVEMENT ALLOWANCES Including floor&ceiling finishes, interior partitions&finishes, casework&tenant finish mechanical, plumbing&electrical. Excluding food service a uipment&restaurant fixtures. Restaurant/Meeting Rooms 5,925 SF 36.00 213,300 Museum/Archives 4,250 SF 31.00 131,750 Offices/AMTRAK/Metrolink 26,675 SF 28.00 746,900 Cafe/Newsstand 1,300 SF 26.00 36,400 1 Farmers Market 5,400 SF 18.00 97,200 TENANT IMPROVEMENTS(including Contractors OH& P, Gen Re q. &Bonds 1,225,550 1 TOTAL ESTIMATED PROJECT CONSTRUCTION COST 11,326,517 Page 1 of 1 i LEVERTON 8 ASSOCIATES LLC CSI DIVISION FORMAT CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE PROJECT: San Bernardino Santa Fe Station FILE NO: 245-1 LOCATION: San Bernardino,California PREP. BY: I. Leverton STATUS: Schematic DATE: 1 211/00 DESC: Stabilization IAREA GSF: 58,000 ITEM TOTAL GSF NOTES NO. COST 1 010 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 10.00% 74,132 1.28 020 STABILIZATION&CLEAN-UP 736,323 12.70 030 MONITORING 5,000 0.09 SUB-TOTAL DIRECT COST 815,455 14.06 041 CONTRACTOR'S OVERHEAD&PROFIT 8.00% 65,236 1.12 SUB-TOTAL 880,692 15.18 042 BONDS 1.00% 8,607 0.15 SUB-TOTAL 889,499 15.34 043 DESIGN CONTINGENCY 15.00% 133,425 2.30 Excl consWdion contin en Y SUB-TOTAL 1,022,923 1764 044 ESCALATION TO MID-POINT 4.00% 40,917 0.71 112 mos to construct mid-point A L TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST I J 7,063 840 I 18.31 j Excl A&E fees,permits&fees Page 1 LEVERTON&ASSOCIATES LLC CSI DIVISION FORMAT CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE FILE NO: 245-1 DATE: 2/1/00 ITEM EST. UNIT UNIT TOTAL NO. DESCRIPTION QTY COST COST 010 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS t 1 General Requirements( 10.00%) 1 LS 74,132.30 74,132 SUB-TOTAL ITEM#010 74,132 020 STABILIZATION&CLEAN-UP 1 Cutback the vines from overall parapets&vines growing up under the decking along the arcades 1 LS 7,500.00 7,500 2 Remove all damaged/rotten decking&beams - over the arcade, temp decking &roofing 1,939 SF 7.00 13,573 3 Eliminate pests, dirt, dust&insects from all - interior locations 58,000 SF 0.30 17,400 4 Lead based paint abatement-int walls, cl &trim 50,700 SF 12.00 608,400 ' 5 Remove pigeon droppings 25,000 SF 1.50 37,500 6 Remove all loose paper, trash, furniture from - unused spaces 1 LS 2,500.00 2,500 ' 7 Make repairs to clay tile roofs as needed to - waterproof 620 SF 10.00 6,200 8 Repair flat roofs to waterproof 500 SF 7.50 3,750 9 Construct acrylic covers to cover each skylight 4 EA 600.00 2,400 10 Repair or board all broken glazed openings& other openings allowing I - enter, including the central attic 1 LS 7,500.00 7,500 11 Repair the high south lobby windows at least - sufficient to retain the lazin 1 LS 1,500.00 1,500 12 Provide door, frame& hdwe to vault space 1 EA 1,000.00 1,000 ' 13 Open gunite infill&provide temporary window 1 EA 850.00 850 114.Fog coat,white, interior walls 75,000 SF 0.25 18,750 15 Additional tempos lighting, interior 50 EA 150.00 7,500 SUB-TOTAL ITEM#030 736,323 030 MONITORING 1 Recommend periodic building walk around checking: entrances,windows for broken panes, raffiti, vandalism, transient&pest intrusion 1 LS Owner Cost 2 Temporary wall mounted light fixtures with light o sensors over entrance locations&other semi- enclosed sheltered areas 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 3 Recommend special inspections followin significant seismic events 1 LS Owner Cost SUB-TOTAL ITEM#030 5,000 Page 2 A i I ' LEVERTON&ASSOCIATES LLC CSI DNISION FORMAT CONSTR ,—,,COST ESTIMATE PROJECT: San Bemardino Santa Fe Station FILE NO: 245-2 LOCATION: San Bernardino,Cal'domia PREP. BY: I. Leverton STATUS: iSchematic DATE: 211/00 DESC: Station Rehabilitation AREA GSF: 58.000 DIV. TOTAL GSF NOTES NO. COST 010 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 10.00% 777,325 13.40 10°4 plus line items per detail 020 SITE WORK 1,548,030 26.69 030 CONCRETE 225,734 3.89 040 MASONRY 23,250 0.40 050 METALS 43,700 0.75 060 WOOD AND PLASTICS 222,284 383 070 THERMAL AND MOISTURE PROTECTION 247,998 4.28 080 DOORSANDWINDOWS 649,550 11.20 090 FINISHES 734,381 12.66 100 SPECIALTIES 65,815 1.13 110 EQUIPMENT 120 FURNISHINGS 130 JSPECIAL CONSTRUCTION 186,829 3.22 Fire Protection 140 CONVEYING SYSTEMS 110,000 1.90 154 PLUMBING 182,684 3.15 157 HVAC 792,000 13.66 160 ELECTRICAL 861,000 1484 SUB-TOTAL DIRECT COST 1 6,670,581 115.01 171 CONTRACTOR'S OVERHEAD 8 PROFIT 8.00%1 533,646 1 9.20 SUB-TOTAL 7,204,227 124.21 172 BONDS 1.00% 72,042 1.24 SUB-TOTAL 7,276,269 125.45 173 DESIGN CONTINGENCY 15.00% 1,091,440 18.82 Excl construction mangency SUB-TOTAL 8,367,710 144.27 174 ESCALATION TO MID-POINT 8.00% 669,417 11.54 24 mos to construct mid-point TOTAL ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COST 9,037,127 165.81 Excl A&E fees,pennits&fees Page 1 LEVERTON&ASSOC WTES LLC CSI DIVISION FORMAT CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE ' FILE N0: 245-2 DATE: 211100 DIV. EST. UNIT UNIT TOTAL r NO. DESCRIPTION QTY COST COST 01000 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS M 1 General Requirements( 10.00%) 1 LS 589,325.52 589,326 2 Scaffolding w/on&off, exterior(Allow 12 mos.) 40,000 SF 1.85 74,000 1 Temporary Facilities - 3 Ticket sales trailer 1 EA 9,000.00 9,000 4 Offices trailer for AMTRAK 1 JEA 9,000.00 9,000 5 Lounge Trailer 1 EA 1 9,000.00 9,000 6 Toilet facilities trailer 1 EA 12,000.00 12,000 7 Storage container 2 EA 3,500.00 7,000 8 Temporary hdcp ramps 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 9 Temporary signage 1 LS 3,000.00 3,000 10 Temporary utility connections 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 Restoration of Historic Features 11 Conservator 1 LS 50,000.00 50,000 SUB-TOTAL DIV.#01000 777,326 1 02000 SITE WORK 02060 BUILDING DEMOLITION - ' 1 Remove exstg Metrolink relocatable structure 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 02070 SELECTIVE DEMOLITION & DISPOSAL Hazardous Materials Abatement Asbestos Abatement - 1 Pipe lagging &elbows 4,500 LF 20.00 90,000 2 Floor tile& mastic 3,300 1 SF 4.00 13,200 3 Roofing material 07075 SF 4.00 40,000 4 Transite board SF 12.00 1,200 Lead Based Paint 5 Exterior-windows/doors/Vim SF 12.00 111,600 PCB Light Ballasts M2.5015,000 r 6 Remove PCB light ballasts EA 25 Non-Historic Demolition -7 Basement interior demolition &clean-up SF 00 8 Rem exst conc SOG @ area to be replaced 2,230 SF 725 9 Sawcut& rem SOG for new footings 642 SF 420 10 Remove exstg vinyl the flooring&prep slab 30,000 SF 500 11 Remove exst carpet 5,000 SF 750 12 Remove exst raised flooring 1,050 SF . 838 0 13 Remove exst acoustic ceiling 20,000 SF 0.85 17,000 14 Rem exstg plaster ceiling for shotcrete access 750 SF 2.00 1,500 15 Remove exstq interior partitions 600 LF 40.00 24,000 16 Remove exstg interior low partitions 500 LF 15.00 7,500 e Page 2 LEVERTON&ASSOCIATES LLC ' CSI DIVISION FORMAT CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE FILE NO: 245-2 DATE: 2/1/00 ' DIV. EST. UNIT UNIT TOTAL NO. DESCRIPTION QTY COST COST 1 17 Remove exst gunite w ndow infill 1,100 SF 10.00 11,000 18 Remove exs boarded window/broken glazing 300 SF 7.50 2,250 19 Remove exstg ceamic floor file& base 2,980 SF 1.50 4,470 20 Remove exst ceramic wall tile 250 SF 2.50 625 21 Remove exst toilet accessories 1 LS 1,000.00 1,000 22 Remove exstg heat boiler&cap 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 23 Rem exst lumbing pipin -waste/service 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 1 24 Mechanical demolition, incl pipin g in tunnels 1 LS 20,000.00 20,000 25 Electrical demolifion 1 LS 12,000.00 12,000 26 Remove exstg arcade rafters&decking 3,651 SF 2.50 9,128 27 Misc demolition, cut&patch 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 Removal&Salvage of Historic Materials 28 Remove exst clay file roofin /store 31,000 SF 2.00 62,000 29 Remove exstg marble toilet partitions 20 EA 150.00 3,000 30 Rem lobby seating/store, clean & reinstall 1 LS 3,000.00 3,000 31 Remove exstg plumbing fixtures/cap 40 EA 250.00 10,000 02110 SITE CLEARING 1 Remove exstg asphalt paving 45,500 SF 0.85 38,675 2 Remove exst concrete pavin 40,500 SF 1.50 60,750 3 Remove exstg raised concrete slab 1,225 SF 2.00 2,450 4 Remove exstg brick/unit pavers, store 9,500 SF 1.75 16,625 5 Remove exstg utilities as required 1 LS 7,500.00 7,500 6 Remove exstg A/C enclosure 1 LS 2,500.00 2,500 7 Remove exstg landscaping&irri afion 10,000 SF 0.75 7,500 8 Misc site demolition 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 02160 UNDERPINNING 1 Underpin walls at entry 50 CY 1,500.00 75,000 02200 EARTHWORK 1 Misc site radio as required 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 2 Excavate 5'-0"of fill &recompact 450 CY 25.00 11,250 3 Grout soil injection 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 02510 ASPHALTIC CONCRETE PAVING 1 AC paving&base @ future Railroad Museum 30,000 SF 1.30 39,000 2 AC paving&base adjacent building 13,000 SF 2.50 32,500 3 Patch street paving utilities 1 LS 7,500.00 7,500 02520 SITEWORK CONCRETE 1 Concrete paving parking 25,000 SF 3.50 87,500 2 Conc paving, colored &stamped 5,000 SF 5.00 25,000 3 Concrete sidewalk 10,000 SF 4.00 40,000 4 Concrete curb ramp 3 EA 600.00 1,800 5 Concrete curb &nuffer 1,200 LF 12.50 15,000 02530 PAVERS 1 Reinstall brick pavers& base @ ent 1,744 SF 7.50 13,080 2 Reinstall brick pavers&base @ arcade 7,756 SF 7.50 58,170 Page 3 LEVERTON&ASSOCIATES LLC CSI DIVISION FORMAT , CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE FILE NO: 245-2 DATE: 2/l/00 DIV. EST. UNIT UNIT TOTAL NO. DESCRIPTION QTY COST COST 3 Replicate missing/new brick pavers& base 3,000 SF 15.00 45,000 ' 02580 PAVEMENT MARKING - 1 Striping, parking stall 50 EA 10.00 500 2 Striping, hdcp&symbol 6 EA 500.00 3,000 1 02712 FOUNDATION DRAINAGE SYSTEM - 1 Filtered fabric 5,000 SF 1.50 7,500 2 Perforated pipe, 4" pvc 1,100 LF 9.50 10,450 02710 PIPED UTILITIES - ' 1 Domestic water piping 100 LF 40.00 4,000 2 Fire water piping 100 LF 45.00 4,500 3 Connections to exstg 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 4 Double detector check&PIV 1 LS 15,000.00 15,000 5 Gas service&connection 1 LS 7,500.00 7,500 02720 STORM DRAIN SYSTEMS - 1 Storm drainage 4001 LF 50.00 20,000 2 Storm drain manhole 1 EA 2,500.00 2,500 3 Connect to exstg public storm drain 1 LS 3,000.00 3,000 02730 SANITARY DRAIN SYSTEM - 1 Sanitary drain piping 200 LF 40.00 8,000 2 Sanitary manhole 2 EA 2,000.00 4,000 3 Connect to exstg public sewer 1 LS 3,000.00 3,000 02800 MISC SITE IMPROVEMENTS - 1 Site si na e/hdcp si nage 1 LS 7,500.00 7,500 2 Site furnishings 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 +* 3 Fiag pole 1 EA 3,500.00 3,500 4 Mechanical enclosure 1 LS 15,000.00 15,000 5 Bus shelter 3 EA 15,000.00 45,000 02900 LANDSCAPING& IRRIGATION - 1 Irrigation 15,000 SF 2.00 30,000 2 Shrubs/lawn 15,000 SF 4.50 67,500 3 Palms 76 EA 950.00 72,200 5 1 Trees, 24" box 42 EA 300.00 12,600 Tree grates 371 EA 450.00 16,650 SUB-TOTAL DIV.#02000 1,548,030 03000 CONCRETE 03300 CAST-IN-PLACE CONCRETE 1 Concrete footings 40 CY 350.00 14,000 2 Concrete slab on grade 2,872 SF 5.00 14,360 3 Patch conc slab on grade as required 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 4 Coc shear wall, 12"w!#4 @ 16"oc ea face 1,386 SF 25.00 34,650 5 Cog shear wall, 8"w/rebar 348 SF 2000. 6,960 Page 4 1 LEVERTON&ASSOCIATES LLC ' CSI DIVISION FORMAT CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE FILE NO: 245-2 DATE: 2/1/00 ' DIV. EST. 'UNIT I UNIT TOTAL NO. DESCRIPTION QTY COST COST 6 Dowel shear walls to exstg cols& hdrs 200 EA 25.00 5,000 7 Strengthen 1st floor slab o/basement(allow) 6,000 SF 2.00 12,000 8 Sven then 2nd Floor slab (allow) 24,082 SF 2.00 48,164 9 Conc slab, 2"w/6 x 6,w 4 x 4 mesh o/ of shtg 6,000 SF 2.75 16,500 03360 SHOTCRETE 1 Shotcrete, 4",#3 @ 12"oc ea wy 2,955 SF 15.00 44,325 2 Dowel shtcrte to brk,#3 12"ea wy in epo resin 2,955 SF 5.00 14,775 03456 GLASS FIBER REINFORCED CONCRETE 1 Replicate broken/missing column ornaments 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 ■+ SUB-TOTAL DIV.#03000 225,734 r ,. 04000 MASONRY 04200 UNIT MASONRY 1 Patch & repair exstg brick floor 8,250 SF 1.00 8,250 04450 CUT STONE VENEER 1 Repair/reinstall marble panel toilet partition 20 EA 500.00 10,000 �+ 2 Re lace marble panel as required 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 SUB-TOTAL DIV.#04000 23,250 05000 METALS 05120 STRUCTURAL STEEL 1 Misc repair pieces/seismic 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 2 Additional bracing at high roof 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 05400 LIGHT GAUGE FRAMING 1 Metal stud wall framing (mist walls/elevator 5,000 SF 3.50 17,500 05500 METAL FABRICATIONS 1 Re air/re face access ladders/channel dr frame 1 LS 7,500.00 7,500 2 Misc metals 58,000 SF 0.15 8,700 SUB-TOTAL DIV.#05000 43,700 06000 WOOD AND PLASTICS 06100 ROUGH CARPENTRY 1 Plywood roof sheathing, pitched 31,000 SF 1.50 46,500 2 P od roof sheathing, flat 2,000 SF 1.50 3,000 3 PI d roof sheathing, arcade&canopies 9,056 SF 1.50 13,584 4 Crickets @ flat roofs 2,750 SF 1.00 2,750 5 Custom milled T&G 1 1/2" DF deckin , arcade 5,500 SF 2.50 13,750 6 Rafters, 6"x 10", arcade 50% 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 Page 5 LEVERTON&ASSOCIATES LLC CSI DIVISION FORMAT CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE FILE NO: 245-2 DATE: 2/1/00 DIV. EST. UNIT UNIT TOTAL NO. DESCRIPTION QTY 9 COST COST 7 Solid blocking betty beams, contin @arcade 00 LF 5.00 4,500 8 Replace deteriorated roof/eaves framing 1 ALW 30,000.00 30,000 9 Replace deteriorated canopy framing 1 ALW 2,500.00 2,500 10 Stabilize wood louvers 1 LS 1 1,000.00 1,000 , 11 Straight sheathing, 1 x @ int walls of domes 6,000 SF 1.95 11,700 12 Epoxy anch, 3/4"at base of dome wall, 4'oc to - conc base thru steel angle 100 EA 100.00 10,000 13 Epoxy anch, 3/4" @ Perim of wood roof framing - ' to conc walls,4'oc 150 EA 100.00 15,000 14 Epoxy anch, 3/4" @ Perim of wood arcade roof - framing to conc walls, 4'oc 225 EA 100.00 22,500 ' 15 Wood ramp @ 2nd floor 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 06200 FINISH CARPENTRY - 1 Replicate cust wd clg panels @ Harvey Hse Dining 1,500 SF 10.00 15,000 2 Repair/replicate custom wood Vim 1 ALW 5,000.00 5,000 06410 CASEWORK - 1 Repair/restore AMTRAK Lobby casework 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 ' 2 Misc custom grade casework 1 LS 3,500.00 3,500 06650 SOLID POLYMER FABRICATIONS - 1 Misc corian countertop @ new casework 1 LS 2,000.00 2,000 SUB-TOTAL DIV. #06000 222,284 1 07000 THERMAL AND MOISTURE PROTECTION 07200 INSULATION - 1 Batt insulation, R-30 attic space 28,035 SF 0.65 18,223 ' 2 Batt insulation, int wall, sound 5,000 SF 0.55 2,750 07320 CLAY TILE ROOFING - 1 Clean &reinstall historic roof tiles w/st stl wire ties 31,000 SF 3.50 108,500 2 Add to replicate missing/damaged clay tiles 1,550 SF 5.00 7,750 ' 3 Felt, 30# 31,000 SF 0.20 6,200 07500 MEMBRANE ROOFING 1 4-ply memb roofing w/min cap sheet,flat roof/ arcade/canopies 11,056 SF 2.50 27,640 07620 METAL FLASHING &TRIM - 1 Repair exstgflashings 1,600 LF 5.50 8,800 2 Flashing, eaves drip, copper 1,250 LF 7.50 9,375 3 New flashin s, copper 2,400 LF 10.75 25,800 4 Gutter&downspout, repair/replace 1 LS 5,000.00 51000 5 Misc co Pper flashing/coping/drips/re lets 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 07800 SKYLIGHTS 1 Replicate metals light frames,4'-0"x 8'-0" 4 EA 2,500.00 10,000 2 Clean &reinstall glazing 128 SF 1 20.00 2,560 Page 6 0 1 ' LEVERTON&ASSOCIATES LLC CSI DIVISION FORMAT 1 CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE FILE NO: 245.2 DATE: 2/1/00 DIV. EST. UNIT UNIT TOTAL NO. DESCRIPTION CITY COST COST ' 07900 JOINT SEALERS 1 Caulkin &sealants 1 LS 10,400.00 10,400 SUB-TOTAL DIV.#07000 247,998 08000 DOORS AND WINDOWS 08100 METAL DOORS& FRAMES 1 Metal door&frame, s I, utility/bsmt 5 EA 500.00 2,500 ' 08210 WOOD DOORS 1 Restore/reinstall entry/lobby doors, pr, ext 5 EA 2,500.00 12,500 2 Restore/reinstall sliding wood doors& hdwe 5 EA 3,000.00 15,000 3 Restore exst wood door&frame, exterior 15 EA 750.00 11,250 4 Restore exstg wood door&frame, interior 75 EA 500.00 37,500 5 Custom replicated panel style doors, interior 50 EA 900.00 45,000 6 Restore/replicate restroom stall door 20 EA 400.00 8,000 ,. 08300 SPECIAL DOORS +. 1 Stainless steel access doors 3 EA 3,000.00 9,000 08610 WOOD WINDOWS 1 Replicated wood windows/hdwe 1,250 SF 50.00 62,500 2 Restore exs wood windows/hdwe 6,250 SF 40.00 250,000 08720 DOOR HARDWARE 1 Rem/clean/repair P. reinstall ­tg dr hdwe, ext 12 EA 650.00 7,800 2 Rem/clean/repair& reinstall exstg dr hdwe, int 50 EA 400.00 20,000 3 Re licated hardware, exterior 18 EA 750.00 13,500 4 Replicated hardware, interior 75 EA 500.00 37,500 5 Restroom stall hardware 20 EA 250.00 5,000 08800 GLAZING r. I Gl zing @ restored/replicated wdws, sgl glazed 5,625 SF 20.00 112,500 r SUB-TOTAL DIV.#08000 649,550 09000 FINISHES 09210 GYPSUM PLASTER& LATH 1 G p plaster&lath, 3 coat, smooth finish,wall 10,000 SF 4.75 47,500 2 Patch exs sum plaster walls 88,320 SF 1.50 132,480 3 Patch exst psum plaster ceilin s 24,500 SF 2.00 J 49,000 09220 CEMENT PLASTER 1 Re air damaged exterior plaster, conc stipple fin 1 LS 15,000.00 15,000 2 Replace damaged ornamental details 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 09300 HISTORIC REPLICATION TILE 1 Replicated floor tile to match exst -restroom 1,200 SF 40.00 48,000 Page 7 LEVERTON&ASSOCIATES LLC , CSI DIVISION FORMAT CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE , FILE N0: 245.2 DATE: 2/1/00 DIV. EST. IUNITI UNIT TOTAL ' NO. DESCRIPTION QTY i I COST COST 2 Replicated wall tile to match exstg-lobby 500 SF 1 35.00 17,500 ' 3 Replicated wall file to match exstg-restroom 1,000 SF 1 30.00 30,000 4 Repair/restore exst floor tile to remain-lobby 4,560 1 SF 20.00 91,200 5 Repair/restore exstg floor file to remain-rstrm 1,200 SF 20.00 24,000 ' 6 Repair/restore exstg wall tile to remain-lobby 2,800 SF 15.00 42,000 7 Repair/restore exstg wall tile to remain-rstrm 1,000 SF 15.00 15,000 8 Repair/ restore exterior tile inset details 1 LS 2,000.00 2,000 09665 LINOLEUM SHEET FLOORING - ' 1 Misc resilient flooring 500 SF 4.00 2,000 09678 RESILIENT SHEET FLOORING ACCESSORIES - 1 Misc resilient base 200 LF 3.00 600 ' 2 Resilient stair accessories 1 LS 1,000.00 1,000 09679 CARPET - 1 Misc carpeting 500 SF 5.00 2,500 09860 SPECIAL COATINGS 1 Semi gloss epoxy coating @ marble partitions 1,000 SF 2.50 2,500 09900 PAINTING (PREPARE, PRIME& PAINT) - ' 1 Low pressure water wash, exterior wall&arcade 52,900 SF 0.45 23,805 2 Stain exterior wall surfaces 40,000 SF 0.85 34,000 3 Stain/paint exterior arcade surfaces 12,900 SF 0.85 10,965 4 Stain/varnish wood doors, ext 25 EA 100.00 2,500 ' 5 Stain/paint sliding wood doors 5 EA 250.00 1,250 6 Paint metal doors&frames 5 EA 75.00 1 375 7 Stain ext/varnish int,wood windows 7,500 SF 4.00 30,000 ' 8 Paint exterior metals-stairs/rails 1 LS 2,500.00 2,500 9 Paint canopy fascia/soffit 1,300 SF 1.50 1,950 10 Stain/paint exposed wood deck/rafters, arcade 7,756 SF 0.90 6,980 11 Stain/paint exposed wood roof eaves/soffit 5,000 SF 0.90 4,500 12 Misc exterior paintin2 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 13 Paint plaster walls, interior 98,320 SF 0.45 44,244 14 Paint plaster ceilings 24,500 SF 0.50 12,250 15 Stain/varnish wood doors, int 1251 100.00 12,500 16 Seal tile floors 6,960 SF 0.45 3,132 17 Seal file walls 5,300 SF 0.50 2,650 A 18 Stain/paint toilet partition doors 20 EA 50.00 1,000 19 Paint interior metals-stairs/rails 1 LS 2,500.00 2,500 20 Misc interior painting 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 SUB-TOTAL DIV.#09000 734,381 r 10000 SPECIALTIES I 10425 SIGNS -tilet exiting 1000 1 ADA si na a Page 8 ! 1 ' LEVERTON&ASSOCIATES LLC CSI DIVISION FORMAT ' CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE FILE NO: 245-2 DATE: 2/1100 ' DIV. EST. UNIT UNIT TOTAL NO. DESCRIPTION QTY COST I COST 2 Misc custom si nage 1 LS 10,000.00 10,000 10522 FIRE EXTINGUISHERS 1 Fire extin uishers"c abinets, recessed 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 ' 10800 TOILETACCESSORIES 1 Paper towel dispensers/waste 8 EA 300.00 2,400 2 Toilet paper dispensers 25 EA 100.00 2,500 3 Seat cover dispensers 25 EA 110.00 2,750 ' 4 Grab bars, 2-way 8 EA 205.00 1,640 5 Mirrors 16 EA 150.00 2,400 6 Soap dispensers 16 EA 135.00 2,160 7 Baby changin station 4 EA 650.00 2,600 8 Clothes hooks 25 EA 35.00 875 9 Fem napkin dispenser 2 EA 475.00 950 ' 10 Fern napkin disposal 14 EA 110.00 1,540 10900 MISC SPECIALTIES 1 Awnings, small 50 EA 500.00 25,000 2 Awnin s, la e 5 EA 1,000.00 5,000 SUB-TOTAL DN.#10000 65,815 13000 SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION 13916 FIRE PROTECTION 1 Fire sprinklers, building &arcade 65,756 SF 2.75 180,829 2 Alarm valve riser 2 EA 3,000.00 6,000 SUB-TOTAL DIV.#13000 186,829 iY 14000 CONVEYING SYSTEMS ' 14200 ELEVATORS 1 H draulic elevator, holeless, 2-stop, passen er 2 EA 40,000.00 80,000 2 Cab interior-oak panel walls &ceilin 2 EA 15,000.00 30,000 14300 LIFTS 1 Wheelchair lift 1 EA 10,000.00 10,000 SUB-TOTAL DIV.#14000 110,000 15400 PLUMBING E uipment 1 Water heaters/circulation 1 LS 7,500.00 7,500 Fixtures, replicate/re store incl replace piping - 2 Water closet 25 EA 2,300.00 57,500 Page 9 1 LEVERTON 8 ASSOCIATES LLC CSI DIVISION FORMAT ' CONSTRUCTION COST ESTIMATE FILE NO: 245-2 DATE: 2/1/00 DIV. EST. UNITI UNIT TOTAL r+ NO. DESCRIPTION CITY COST COST 3 Urinal 10 EA 2,100.00 21,000 4 Lavatory, wall hung 18 EA 1,900.00 30,400 5 Service sink 2 EA 2,800.00 5,600 6 Drinking fountain, dual 2 EA 3,700.00 7,400 7 Misc-floor drains/cleanouts 1 LS 5,000.00 5,000 8 Gas distribution 58,000 SF 0.40 23,200 9 Clean/repair roof drains 11,056 SF 1.50 16,584 ' 10 Hose bibbs-interior piping 1 LS 8,500.00 8,500 SUB-TOTAL DIV.# 15400 182,684 15763 HVAC 1 HVAC system -fan coil units, chiller, boiler, cooling 58,000 SF 13.00 754,000 ' tower, fan ooil system - Excludes branch distribubon in tenant areas 2 Exhaust fans&duct 10 EA 3,800.00 38,000 SUB-TOTAL DIV.#15763 792,000 16000 ELECTRICAL Building(Excluding tenant areas) 1 Equipment-main/sub-panels 58,000 SF 4.00 232,000 ' 2 Power 58,000 SF 1.50 87,000 3 Lighfing 58,000 SF 2.75 159,500 4 Remove, Restore, clean &reinstall historic fixtures 1 LS 20,000.00 20,000 ' 5 Exterior building, roof&arcade lighting 1 LS 50,000.00 50,000 6 Communications/data 58,000 SF 1.50 67,000 7 Fire alarm 58,000 SF 2.25 130,500 Site - 8 Site feeders&transformer pad 1 LS 40,000.00 40,000 9 Site communications conduit 1 LS 25,000.00 25,000 10 Site lighting 1 LS 30,000.00 30,000 SUB-TOTAL DIV.# 16000 861,000 Page 10 I SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Appendices 1 Appendix E Outline Specifications Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIR•530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT ' DRAFr REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Appendix E-Outline Specifications Page 1 ' DIVISION 1 -GENERAL REQUIREMENTS ' 01010 Summary of Work-The work under this Contract necessary for and incidental to the execution and completion of all work in the Construction Documents for the rehabilitation of the building shell, sitework,restoration of historic features as noted in specification section 01611,tenant improvements for Amtrak and Metrolink. All new mechanical,plumbing, and electrical systems to point of connections. The project will comply with prevailing wage requirements. Complete hazardous materials(ie lead, Asbestos, and PCB)abatement. 01300 Submittals& Schedules -Normal submittal procedures. GANTT type charts with critical path clearly identified. Schedule of values reqired. 01400 Tests and Inspections-Normal testing procedures determined by the structural engineer. Tests paid as defined in the"Greenbook". r ., 01500 Temporary Facilities-Complete jobsite facilities and utilities. Provide temporary facilities for AMTRAK; Four(4)trailers,to include: Ticket sales trailer, Offices Trailer for AMTRAK offices, Trailer for Lounge,Trailer for Toilet Facilities. Also provide two (2) storage units for AMTRAK. All facilities to be A.D.A. accessible. 01610 Historical Salvage and Protection A. Work Included: Historical salvage and protection as listed and as specified herein, including but not necessarily limited to the following: 1. Contractor responsibilities. 2. Catalog, Storage and Retrieval. 3. Protection and Installation. B. The Contractor's responsibilities shall include but are not necessarily limited to r" the following: io 1. Accept the site as it exists on the first day of work under the contract. It shall be the Contractor's responsibility to visit the site prior to bidding the *• work and determine for himself the condition of the site, the exact nature +10 and amount of work to be done, and conditions that affect his work. 2. Dismantle and salvage all historical building features indicated by the Drawings and as directed by the Engineer or the Architect or otherwise required by conditions of the contract. 3. Carefully handle, catalog and package all salvaged historic building features in an approved manner and as deemed appropriate by " conservation practices to prevent damage,deterioration, loss or other adverse effects. 4. Contractor shall transport such salvaged features with care and store in a protected area until such features are ready for restoration or return to the site for installation, as indicated by the Contract Documents. 5. All salvaged items shall be stored by the Contractor for the duration of the Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIR•530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT DRAFT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Appendix E- Outline Specifications Page 2 Contract. The Contractor is responsible to transport back all salvaged items that were not reinstalled from the Contractor's storage to a place (within the City limits of San Bernardino)to be determined by the City at a later date. 6. Contractor shall document his work by photographs prior to dismantling and after reinstallation. 01611 Restoration of Historic Features A. The Contractor shall engage the services of a Conservator as part of the base bid. Under the guidance of his Conservator, Contractor shall provide labor, materials, equipment and services to perform operations required for the restoration of Salvaged Historic Features and the related scope of work as indicated on the drawings and as may be required by conditions of the contract. B. Specific Features Restoration: Clay Tile Roofing Wood Windows Wood Doors Architectural Woodwork Historical Finish Hardware Portland Cement Plaster Gypsum Plaster Ceramic Wall and Floor Tile Light Fixtures Marble Partitions 01700 Project Closeout-Normal project closeout procedures. ' DIVISION 2- SITEWORK& DEMOLITION ' 02060 Building Demolition(Total Building) -Removal of the Metrolink relocatable structure. 02070 Selective Demolition(Interiors) 1. Removal of non-historic materials and interior partitions. 2. Removal and salvage of historic materials per spec section 01610. 3. Removal of hazardous materials; i.e. asbestos, lead, pcb's. 02110 Site Clearing-Removal of the following: 1. Paving& Curbs 2. Trees, shrubs, vine material, irrigation 3. Buried Tanks -None currently discovered. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIR•530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT ' DRAFT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Appendix E- Outline Specifications Page 3 02200 Earthwork - Prepare the existing sub-grade for new foundations and slabs on grade. Compact existing soil. Import and compact new fill materials. Excavate for new foundations including shear walls, elevators, stairways and utility trenches. 02225 Trenching (Exterior Utilities) for Storm, Gas, Sewer, Water, Fire Sprinkler System, and Communications. 02510 Asphaltic Concrete Paving-New paving on prepared base, patching, Seal coating. 02518 Unit Pavers - Provide brick pavers to replace missing or damaged pavers, to match the existing pavers at the exterior of the station. Brick pavers are installed over a compacted soil and base. Match the size,hardness, and color exactly. Record in drawings and photographs patterns and joint alignments prior to removal of historic pavers. 02520 Sitework Concrete - Sidewalks and street(parking)reinforced paving, colored and stamped paving, light standard bases, flagpole base, formed exterior stairs &ramps, and curb ramps. 02580 Pavement Marking- Single line, disabled persons stalls, and miscellaneous traffic markings. 02710 Gas Service - Repairs and replacement of gas service systems to the point of connection to a public system adjacent to the site. 02712 Foundation Drainage Systems - Trenching and filtered fabric, 4" perforated PVC pipe. 02720 Storm Drain Systems - Repairs and replacement of site storm drain systems to the point of connection to a public system adjacent to the site, include one new manhole. 02730 Sanitary Drain Systems- Repairs and replacement of site sanitary drain systems to the point of connection to a public system under the street, include two new manholes. 02810 Landscape Irrigation-Provide new irrigation systems throughout for all landscaped areas. 02880 Site Furnishings- Benches, Waste receptacles. 02950 Trees. Plants and Ground Cover- Provide new planting in most landscaped areas,trim existing trees to remain. .DIVISION 3 - CONCRETE 03300 Cast-In-Place Concrete -Reinforced cast-in-place concrete walls, floors, sidewalks, foundations, underpinning, elevatprs, and repairs. Includes forming,placement Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego, CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT DRAFT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Appendix E-Outline Specifications Page 4 accessories, consolidating, leveling,troweling, and curing. Modify existing framing for new openings. Repair deteriorated framing. 03360 Shotcrete - Reinforced pneumatically applied concrete. Provide wet or dry mix design that gives good compaction and low percentage of rebound, is stiff enough not to sag with compressive strength of 3000 psi. 03456 Glass Fiber Reinforced Concrete - Replicate broken or missing column ornaments. (Moonlight) 03732 Concrete Injection and Repair- Preparation of concrete and application of repair materials. Restoration of concrete surfaces and repair of concrete internal reinforcement. Crack repair by epoxy resin injection. .DIVISION 4 -MASONRY 04200 Cement Masonry Units - Standard masonry units for miscellaneous site constructions. 04450 Cut Stone Veneer- Replacement repair marble thresholds and panels in toilet partitions. .DIVISION 5 -METALS 05120 Structural Steel - Provide miscellaneous steel used in reinforcement of new foundations, ' slabs, walls, and other framing. Provide new structural steel to strengthen central building roof diaphragm. Repair deteriorated steel roof trusses. 05500 Metal Fabrications -Vertical access and elevator shaft ladders, Bollards 6 inch, Channel Door frames, Grates and Frames. 05520 Handrails and Railines - Ornamental steel railings at new sitework(Blum), wall brackets, ' sleeves. 05531 Grating and Floor Plates - Tree grates and miscellaneous drainage grates. • .DIVISION 6-WOOD & PLASTIC 06100 Rough Carve ntry-Miscellaneous Repairs of damaged walls, roof sheathing, and rafters I (beams)with custom milled products. Seismic augmentation of domes. Replace all wood components in-kind size, shape, and species. Provide treated wood in locations attached to concrete and in damp locations. Provide plywood sheathing over entire roof surface f directly on T&G decking. Apply new crickets at roofs as needed. Provide epoxy resin anchors and rough hardware to anchor wood roofs to concrete walls. I Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIR• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT DRAFT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 ' Appendix E- Outline Specifications Page 5 06200 Finish Carpentry - Hang wood doors,trim. Replicate with custom milled wood panels to replace ceiling panels missing(Approx. 1500 s.f.) at the former Harvey House Dining ' Room. 06410 Casework- W.I.C. standards custom grade casework. Hardware of doors, windows, and ' casework finish to be oil rubbed bronze. 06650 Solid Polymer Fabrications - Countertops to be Corian using standard colors. .DIVISION 7-THERMAL & MOISTURE CONTROL 07200 Insulation- (Thermal and Sound) Insulate all attic spaces R-30 batt insulation. Provide sound insulation at all interior walls opened and around all toilet rooms. 07320 Clay Roofing Tiles- Remove existing clay tiles, custom replicate new field,ridge,and hip clay tiles to replace damaged or missing clay roofing tiles. Replications to match historic tiles exactly. Clean all historic roof tiles with soap and water using brushes. W Pallet tiles for storage until reinstallation. Provide new 304 felt over the entire roof. Install tiles using a 10 gauge stainless steel twisted wire tie system acceptable with the Department of the State Architect(DSA). 07500 Membrane Roofing -Provide 4-ply membrane roofing with mineral surface cap sheet over new plywood sheathing on T&G deck. 07620 Metal Flashing & Trim- All new flashing & sheet metal to be 16 oz. Copper. Repair existing flashings in good condition with compatible materials. Provide roof eave drips, copings, door head drips, reglets,gutters, scuppers, downspouts, and equipment curb flashing. Replicate all roof drain basins with copper to match the historic basins. Replicate the metal skylight frames at all of the metal skylights. Reinstall undamaged and cleaned glazing in new frames. 07900 Joint Sealers - Appropriate to materials being sealed. .DIVISION 8 -DOORS AND WINDOWS 08110 Steel Door Frames- Welded frames at all rated doors. Rated, field painted, located in plaster finished walls. Provide rated doors where required for fire resistance. Factory prime, field paint. 08115 Steel Doors—Provide steel doors as noted on the plans Provide rated doors where required for fire resistance. Doors to be factory primed and field painted. 08210 Wood Doors-Custom replicated panel and style doors to match existing in style, wood Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIR• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 w SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT DRAFT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 .. Appendix E-Outline Specifications Page 6 •w species, and finishes. Glazing in wood doors to be tempered. Provide rated doors where required for fire resistance. Provide stain and varnish finishes. ■ 08610 Wood Windows—Provide replicated wood windows to match style,wood species, and finishes. Provide restoration glass as required in the glazing portion of these specifications. Wood windows will be finished to match historic windows believed to be stained on the exterior and varnished on interior side. Existing windows will be restored unless otherwise noted on the window schedule. Replicated windows will be provided for missing or non-salvageable windows. Provide hardware to replace missing or at replicated windows. Provide glazing in the appropriate thickness for application. 08712 Door Hardware—Remove, clean and make all existing door hardware operational. Replace salvaged hardware that is operational and matches existing historic hardware is encouraged. Replicated or reproduction hardware is acceptable as produced by Ball & Ball Restoration Hardware, Cirecast Restoration Hardware, or equal. Finish shall match historic finishes believed to be oil rubbed bronze. Provide three hinges minimum on exterior doors and two hinges minimum on interior doors unless existing conditions show otherwise. Hinges shall be ball tipped and non-removable pin at exterior locations. 08800 Glazin —Provide glazing for all missing,damaged, and replicated openings. Glazing shall be thickness appropriate to the size of the pane per code. All hazardous impact locations as defined by the code shall be glazed with safety glass. Typical non-tempered glazing shall be clear restoration glass. All windows are to be single glazed unless noted otherwise. The following glazing types are to be provided: -Glass Type T—Float Glass, fully tempered,clear. -Glass Type RG—Restoration Glass, ''/d'thick,uneven surfaces and small air bubbles. -Glass Type LM—Laminated glass, Tempered laminated safety glass, clear. -Glass Type W—Wire Glass, 1/4"thick,pattern rough,wire 1/2" square pattern. -Glass Type FG—Float Glass, thickness as required. -Glass Type PG—Patterned glass,translucent pressed glass to match existing in similar locations. This type of glass to include Flemish and ribbed patterns. .DIVISION 9-FINISHES 09210 Gypsum Plaster—New interior finishes shall typically be gypsum plaster such as hardwall by USG or equal. Application shall be a three coat plaster process with double back on the third coat for a smooth finish. Plaster shall match the color and texture of original finishes. Walls shall be applied over diamond mesh lath 3.4 pounds per square yard and galvanized. Ceilings and soffit plaster shall be applied over galvanized ribbed lath. I Apply additional 4" strip lath at corners. . Mock-up panels will be required to verify acceptable limits in variation in texture,color, and workmanship. Historic interior locations where interior plaster used was Portland Cement or keenes cement, new plaster I Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIR• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 I SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT DRAFT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Appendix E- Outline Specifications Page 7 shall match the historic type. 09220 Cement Plaster—Exterior finishes shall be cement plaster three coat process. Generally 4- all existing plaster shall be low pressure washed with Prosoco cleaners and remain in place unless damaged or required to be removed by the plans. Plaster shall match the color and texture of original finishes. Repaired plaster will be over concrete subsurface. Ceilings and soffit plaster shall be applied over galvanized ribbed lath. Apply additional 4"strip lath at corners. Prepare the concrete subsurface as follows: (1)Remove paint and plaster in areas required by the drawings. (2)Low pressure water wash all walls with removed plaster. (3)Apply a bonding agent such as"Weldcrete"as manufactured by Larson Products. (4)Fill voids over 3/8"deep with a plaster coat prior to finishing with the three-coat system. Mock-up panels will be required to verify acceptable limits in " variation in texture, color,and workmanship. Historic interior locations where interior plaster used was Portland Cement or keenes cement, new plaster shall match the historic type. 09300 Historic Replication Tile—This section includes historic: unglazed ceramic floor tile, glazed wall tile, quarry tile, and grout. All types of ceramic tile applications will include custom manufacturing of replication tile to match the historic tile exactly in size, hardness, and color. There are no known sources of stocked material that match the historic tile in this project. In general, tile found to be well adhered to the substrate may remain in place unless removal and replacement is required for structural augmentation or as called for in the plans. All historic tile shall be cleaned and all tile shall be sealed. A representative from the manufacturer,responsible for formulating the tile shall visit the site and samples shall be required of each tile type prior to manufacturing. Provide grout to match the color of adjacent historic grouts. Grout hardness shall be less than the tile hardness. Multiple samples of the tile shall be expected. 09671 Linoleum Sheet Flooring—In historic locations where linoleum is found,every effort shall be made to match the color and pattern to the historic linoleum. When quantities exceed 5,000 square feet, custom fabrication of linoleum to match the historic color shall be required. Otherwise a similar color from stocked standard and custom(premium) product lines shall be acceptable. The substrate shall be clean, smooth,and compatible for the installation. 09680 Resilient Sheet Flooring Accessories—Section includes resilient base and resilient stair accessories. Provide new base in all locations receiving new resilient or carpet coverings. Color to be selected from manufacturers custom color line. 09686 Carnet—Provide carpet in areas shown on plans. Carpet shall be of a commercial grade ,. with a minimum pile face weight of 26 oz per square yard and a total minimum weight of 77 oz per square yard. The backing shall be polypropylene with a unibond backing. Provide a cushion with a minimum weight 50 oz per square yard and a thickness of 1/4 Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA•530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT DRAFT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Appendix E- Outline Specifications Page 8 inch. Carpet to comply with code required smoke and flame limitations. 09800 Special Coatings—This section shall include special coatings for over marble partitions. At cleaned marble surfaces provide a semi-gloss water based epoxy coating. 09900 Painting—Provide paint products compatible with prepared surfaces. Check pH levels and moisture levels on all surfaces prior to application of paint coatings. Paint products shall be Sherwin-Williams or equal. Exterior plaster surfaces and trim shall be painted with a latex primer and two coats of latex paint. Interior finishes shall include: Semi- gloss alkyd paint at trim scheduled for paint, Surfaces scheduled for stain and varnish receive three (3) coats of spar varnish on new wood surfaces. In general, stained and varnished surfaces shall be cleaned, not stripped, and through the use of tinted varnish, original colors are blended. Polyurethanes are not acceptable as a"varnish". Existing polyurethanes shall be removed with appropriate solvents. Other paints shall include primers and enamels on exterior metals. .DIVISION 10 - SPECIALTIES 10425 Signs—This section shall include signs for toilet, exiting, and site parking facilities that comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Signage for exiting and toilets will be fabricated to be raised copy machine cut mat finished opaque sheet with Braille and contrasting custom colors as selected by the Architect not necessarily the international blue and white schemes. Interpretive signs shall be cast bronze 24"x 36" with a concrete base. Also included will be one (1) custom sign for identifying AMTRAK as a tenant to be designed and located by the Architect. 10522 Fire Extinguishers -This section includes: Portable fire extinguishers, Fire extinguisher cabinets, Fire extinguisher mounting brackets. Cabinets to be Medallion Series as manufactured by Larson's Manufacturing Company or equal. The finish to be oil rubbed bronze. 10800 Toilet Accessories—Provide bronze accessories as manufactured by Bobrick Washroom Equipment, American Specialties Inc., or equal. This section includes the following accessories: • Electric Hand Dryers • Toilet paper dispensers • Combination towel dispensers/waste receptacles • Grab bars • Seat cover dispensers • Minors • Baby changing stations • Clothes hooks Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT DRAFT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Appendix E-Outline Specifications Page 9 .DIVISION 13 - SPECIAL CONSTRUCTION 13916 Fire suppression Sprinklers - Wet pipe sprinkler system for the building and wooden arcade areas. 13200 Custom Bus Shelters- Provide three (3) custom designed and fabricated bus shelters that are harmonious with the design of the depot. Shelters will include a bench(s) and a roof to protect riders from sun and rain. .DIVISION 14 - CONVEYING SYSTEMS 14000 Elevators and Lifts—This section includes a holeless hydraulic elevator and a indoor access lift. A. The elevator shall be a holeless hydraulic elevator as manufactured by Otis, Montgomery, Dover or equal. The cab interior is to be finished in oak stile and panel and the ceiling oak panels with miniature downlights with a historic appearance. The elevator will have adequate size to enable the use of a stretcher and utilize A.D.A. compliant controls. B. The lift designed for interior use will be oak trimmed unit as manufactured by Cheney Lift Company or equal. .DIVISION 15 -MECHANICAL 15050 Basic Mechanical Materials and Methods - Mechanical materials and methods of construction common to more than one Division 15 Section. 15060 Hangers and Supports-Materials and methods for supporting piping and equipment. 15071 Mechanical Vibration and Seismic controls- Spring and rubber vibration isolation devices to 1 prevent equipment vibration from entering building structure. Seismic restraints to meet earthquake zone requirements. 15080 Mechanical Insulation-Insulation materials for hot and cold water piping,ductwork,and equipment. 15110 Valves-Valves for piping,gate,globe,butterfly,ball,and check valves. 15122 Meters and Gages-Equipment necessary to measure pressure,temperature,and flow. 15150 Plumbing Piping-Piping materials,fittings and valves for hot and cold potable water piping, sanitary waste and vent piping, natural gas piping and storm water piping within the building. 15181 Hvdronic Pipine-Piping materials and fittings for heating water, condenser water and chilled Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIR• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT DRAFT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Appendix E -Outline Specifications Page 10 water piping. 15189 HVAC Water Treatment-Chemicals and equipment for cleaning hydronic piping after installation, and treating water systems in closed loop piping and cooling towers to reduce corrosion and fouling. 15400 Plumbine-All plumbing fixtures required such as toilets,urinals,water heaters, lavatories, service sinks,mop sinks, sump pumps, electric drinking fountains, floor drains and roof drains. ADA compliant fixtures as required. 15440 Pumps-Centrifugal in-line,end suction and vertical pumps for heating hot water,chilled water, and condenser water systems. This equipment will be located outside the building in the equipment yard. 15500 Heating boilers oilers-Copper finned water tube boilers and accessories for heating hot water. This equipment will be located outside the building in the equipment yard. 15628 Reciprocating Water Chillers- Water cooled or evaporative air-cooled chillers. This equipment will be located outside the building in a new equipment yard. 15640 Cooling Towers-Induced draft or blow through,open or closed tower to reject heat from the air conditioning system. This equipment will be located outside the building in the equipment yard. 15745 Water Source Heat Pumps-Air conditioning unit with blower fan, air filter, heating hot water coil and chilled water coil. Requires heating hot water system and chilled water system.Units are located inside the building. 15763 Fan Coil Units-Air conditioning unit with blower fan,air filter,heating hot water coil and chilled water coil. Requires heating hot water system and chilled water system. Units are located inside the building. 15815 Metal Ducts-Rectangular and round galvanized steel ductwork, 15830 Fans-Roof, in-line,and ceiling mounted fans for exhaust air from toilet rooms,janitor closets, food areas, elevator equipment rooms,and electrical rooms. 15855 Diffusers. Resisters and Grilles-Ceiling and wall-mounted for supply air,return air and exhaust air. 15900 HVAC Controls-Electronic direct digital control system for heating and air conditioning equipment. 15990 Testing,Adjusting,and Balancing-Water and air flow quantities are measured and adjusted to match the engineering design. DIVISION 16-ELECTRICAL Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA • 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 • (619)239-7888 ...... .... ...... . SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT DRAFT REHABILITATION AND ADAP 7VE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Appendix E-Outline Specifications Page 11 16011 General Requirements.Electrical -Definitions, Drawings& Specifications, Coordination with Division 15 and all other Divisions, conform to applicable codes including the National Electrical Code (NEC) and all local codes and ordinances. Provide extended warranties on switchgear, transformers, panelboards, circuit breakers and motor starters and provide operation and maintenance manuals and record drawings. Provide new utility services; power, telephone and cable. Test and provide reports on all equipment. 16150 Basic Electrical Materials and Methods-Provide nameplates,tags and labels for all electrical equipment. Fire stopping of penetrations. Provide all equipment necessary for a complete job and install in a neat and orderly manner. All equipment shall be cleaned at the end of the project, inside and out. 16110 Raceways and Fittings-Provide all conduit and fittings as required for a complete and operating project. All conduits to be concealed where possible. Some historic conduit and wiring may be left in place(or removed and replaced)as identified by the Architect. All underground conduits shall be PVC in a minimum of 6 of sand above and below and shall be encased in conduit under roads and heavy traffic areas. Provide warning tape on all underground conduits and pullropes in all empty conduits for telephone and cable systems. Provide rigid metal conduit where exposed to weather. Minimum conduit size ' to be 3/4 inch. All conduit supports shall be seismically braced. 16112 Manholes Utility Boxes. Pads and Vaults- Provide pre-cast utility transformer pad and all associated drainage and grounding. Provide pre-cast handholes and vaults as needed with all accessories as needed including grounding,set level with grade. 16114 Cable Trays- Provide cable trays above accessible ceilings for management of wiring for telephone, data,cable TV and other low voltage systems as required by the tenants. 16120 Wire and Cable (600 Volt and Below) - Provide all wire and cable as require for a complete and operable project. All conductors shall be copper. All wiring shall be color ' coded. Splices for#8 wire and below shall use insulated, solderless connectors. Epoxy splice kits shall be used for all splices made below grade or in wet locations. All wire shall be field tested. 16130 Outlet Pull and Junction Boxes - Provide all outlet,pull and junction boxes as required i for a complete and operable project. All boxes shall be sized at least to code minimum. 16140 Wiring Devices-Provide all switches,receptacles, cover plates and wall box dimmers as required. All devices shall be specification grade,back wired and rated for 20 amperes minimum. All cover plates shall be nylon and ivory in color. Device color to match. 16420 Service Entrance and Metering Equipment- Provide switchboard to include utility pull and metering sections,main building disconnect and distribution as needed for project. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIR•530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT DRAFT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Appendix E -Outline Specifications Page 12 All busing shall be copper. Switchboard to be rated for utility AIC and shall be installed on a housekeeping pad. 16425 Distribution Switchboards - Provide additional switchboards as necessary throughout the project. All bussing shall be copper. Provide housekeeping pad. Shall be the same manufacturer as the service entrance equipment. 16440 Disconnects - Provide disconnects as required by code and on all mechanical equipment. 16450 Groundine - Provide a complete grounding system as required by code. In addition, provide an equipment grounding conductor in all feeders rated 100 amperes and above. Provide for the testing of the grounding system. 16460 Transformers- Provide dry type transformers, sized as required for project. Transformers shall comply with NEMA TRI specifications as a minimum. All winding shall be copper. Provide with a 220 degree C. insulation system, 150 deg. C rise, with a nominal impedance of 4.5%. All transformers serving office loads shall be rated K-4 minimum and shall have 200% neutral conductors to the served panel or load. 16470 Panelboards - Provide panelboards of the voltage rating, ampere rating and number of poles as required for the project. All bussing shall be copper. Panelboards serving office loads shall have 200% rated neutrals. Panelboards shall be of the same manufacturer as the service entrance equipment. All panelboards shall have door-in-door trims fully hinged to the cabinet. 16475 Overcurrent Protective Devices - Provide circuit breakers and fuses as required for the project. Circuit breakers shall be of the same manufacturer as the equipment in which the circuit breaker is installed. Provide coordination curves for all devices provided. Provide spare fuses for each size used on the project. 16480 Motor Starters,Motor Controllers and Motor Control Centers -Provide motor starters and controllers, either individually mounted or in a control center as required for the project. Starters shall have, as a minimum, an HOA switch, a red running light, a green stop light and an integrally mounted control transformer. 16510 Liehting. Ballasts and Accessories- Provide all lighting equipment as required for the project including luminaires, lamps, ballasts, lenses, seismic restraints and hangers. All ballasts shall be fully electronic,parallel wired with a five year minimum full product and labor warranty. Harmonics shall be no more than 20%and the minimum ballast factor shall be 0.88. Ballasts shall be manufactured by Magnetek, Motorola, Osram/Sylvania, Energy Savings,Inc.,Linton or Advance. No others shall be allowed. Lamps shall be by General Electric, Osram/Sylvania or Philips. No others shall be allowed. Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT DRAFT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Appendix E-Outline Specifications Page 13 _- 16520 Exterior Luminaires-Provide poles, luminaires,bracket arms,photocontrols and timeclocks and concrete bases as required for the project. All exterior luminaires shall be rated for wet location use. All hardware shall be stainless steel or bronze. 16540 Historic Luminaires -All existing historic luminaires to remain on the project shall be removed, disassembled, cleaned,repaired and refurbished as necessary to restore back to `original'condition. Where possible, new energy efficient technologies shall be incorporated into the original design,where the outward appearance of the luminaire will not be changed. The final restored luminaires shall be re-installed in the project. 16721 Fire Alarm System-Provide a complete fire alarm system as required by the local jurisdiction. 16915 Lighting Control System-Provide a complete building wide lighting control system to control all common areas,via time scheduling and local override switched to comply with Title-24 requirements and to conserve energy within the building. System shall include M^ relay style lighting control panels, occupancy sensors,timers, daylight sensors as required and programming and startup from the manufacturer. 16950 Acceptance Testing of Electrical Power Distribution FAuinment- Provide acceptance testing by an independent testing agency or company for all major electrical components including 600 volt wire, switchboards,panelboards,grounding systems,transformers and circuit breakers. Provide a protective device coordination study and set all circuit breakers accordingly. ' Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT .. REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Appendices Y w -m Appendix F ERA Report 1 i 1 i 1 i i i i i 1 Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA•530 Sixth Avenue,San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 MEMORANDUM TO: Greg Roberson Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA Inc. 530 Sixth Ave., San Diego, CA 92101 FROM: Amitabh Barthakur,David Bergman Economics Research Associates DATE: January 20, 2000 SUBJECT: San Bernardino Depot Study(Final Draft) ERA Project No. 13362 INTRODUCTION Economics Research Associates was retained by Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson (MWD) to assist in its formulation of a historic preservation and reuse program for the San Bernardino Santa Fe Station Building located at Mt. Vernon Avenue and Second Street in the City of San Bernardino. ERA is submitting this memorandum to MWD documenting the preliminary analysis of the study area demographics and case studies. The final section of this memorandum puts forth a conceptual development scenario based on the preliminary demographic analyses and examination of the case studies. SITE CONDITIONS ERA conducted a site visit to the station and carried out a physical inspection of the station site and its surrounding areas. Following are some of the key observations concerning the physical attributes of the site and surroundings: The Depot building is an extremely impressive historic structure that clearly dominates the surrounding built environment. Even though the building is in the need of extensive restoration and maintenance, it is a 1 great asset for the City and could become a potential catalyst for development. y EcononUes Research A.swdates San aernasdnu Depot Suady ERA No.13362 page-1 - Amtrak and Metrolink are the only two current users of the site. - Amtrak occupies an impressive waiting area, ticket counter, restrooms, offices and baggage area. Though, it is possible that they currently occupy a much larger space than is justified by actual passenger traffic. For example the baggage area was almost empty and was being used as employee parking. - The Metrolink boarding area is about 70-100 yards to the west of the depot with direct access from the surface parking. This prevents Metrolink passengers from actually entering the depot building. Metrolink also has a small office (prefabricated structure) adjacent to the depot. - The space previously occupied by the `Harvey House' restaurant, including the semi-open space on the west side of the building could provide opportunities for themed dining or other similar destination attractions. - Preliminary observations suggest that the total usable space in the depot building after complete restoration might prove to be fairly larger than potential supportable space in the area (calling for a phased development). This could be offset by careful concept development and tenant mix considerations. - The site is located within largely light industrial/warehousing and low intensity commercial land uses. There are a substantial number of vacant lots in the neighborhood and the environment is dominated by rail and freight related uses. - There are a few residential neighborhoods within walking distance of the site that mostly appear to be occupied by low to moderate income Hispanic households. The housing stock however appears to be of historic value, displaying a variety of Craftsman and Victorian styles. This could eventually prove to be an asset, if potential residential rehabilitation and other economic development programs are promoted in the community. - The ethnic supermarket across the site could provide some potential clues to the future use mix. Ecoaomiu Research Associates sua aenmdi,m Depot sftwY ERA No.13362 Page 2 - There are some limitations of access and freeway visibility, but proper signage and thematic elements could minimize this. - Though the site is not far from downtown San Bernardino, it is not within walking distance. This limits the depot from serving the downtown daytime employees with retail or dining services. In addition the 215 freeway creates a further physical barrier between the site and Downtown. - The proximity of the Depot site to the Mt. Vernon Corridor specific plan area to the north east, often referred to as the `Paseo Las Placitas', could be an asset if linkages with the site are carefully planned. MARKET AND DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS ERA has carried out a preliminary analysis of population, income, employment and economic characteristics in the potential market areas available for the proposed reuse of the San Bernardino Depot. The demographic analysis will discuss a number of critical variables, which will illustrate the type of consumer base that is present in each one of the market areas. The market areas available to the project will also be defined. Market Area Definition The proposed San Bernardino Depot redevelopment program will potentially include components that will draw from multiple market segments that will include transit users, area residents and area employees. The analysis breaks these broad categories into sub-markets. In all ERA has defined the following distinct market segments. • Resident Market Segments: ERA has delineated three resident markets for the Depot site. Factors such as competitive advantages/disadvantages of the location, regional freeway access, potential uses and available space, and geographic and psychological barriers were considered in defining the individual market areas. The resulting markets are primarily based on drive times. The area covered by a 0-5 minute drive time from the site is defined as Fm omia Research Assodstm sort Bernardino Depot study ERA No.13362 Pag '3 the primary market, a 5-10 minute drive time from the site is defined as the secondary market and a 10-20 minute drive time from the site is defined as the tertiary market. These market areas are illustrated in Figure I. • Daytime Employment Market ERA expects that local employees who might visit the project during lunch time or after working hours, would be limited to the area covered by the 0-5 minute drive time from site. ERA will examine the size of business establishments and potential daytime employment within this area. ERA will also look into the potential capture of daytime employees within `walking distance', by examining the market in a 1/ mile-1/2 mile distance from the site. • Transit Users: ERA will look at the volume and profile of rail passenger traffic passing through the depot arising from Metrolink usage. Economics Research Associate San Bemw&no Depot Study ERA No.13362 pages Figure I Site Location San Bernardino Depot WROEmiloll IVIII r �F fN �■■•�� . r RM 'G.� ' •,P.�3�3-! r s YaS-� � .YC rilra-�r�arnrzza_ •'���■' a '?sfe n ii•-.�� Y 1�-.>:L.'� � _mill � ���'��� .if3J1 �1V !I'T NN 81.1'.'. N • _� NN aN TiFkf�_ L, . �. ,i�■p1116■�Jr ■. �nCi11� i1t•"=�1EL��� ` _- � �x�s ... ::.'� ._..a--.- tiaf1M .9 ie�1Y'-In11.n L\ •n21I11�-4R / �fl�•N �..rOO.Ry.,, AAM Rr Rap p�4 � •�.�r �.-�� Y•^S y'�"�.'�s. �■ ��n•�i`�.76N� u3a �, � '� may-N `` _�-•�� 1..� 116.1 �1 We MEN 1■I■iwl tl1 � e _■ � _ 1111■: W 1�Eia�i COME, IWRCM Population,Household and Income Characteristics The population and household characteristics of the area are summarized in Table I, and the income characteristics are summarized in Table II. These two tables display the counts and percentage distribution for the primary, secondary and tertiary markets and the market area as a whole. These figures can also be compared to the same values for the Riverside-San Bernardino Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area (PMSA) as a whole. A second column shows each of the three market areas and the market area total expressed as a percentage of the total PMSA value. This allows for the comparison of the market areas to the conditions in the broader regional context. In the instances where the variables are expressed as a percentage, the analysis of the market area as a percent of the PMSA totals can be read like a cross tabulation figure. In other words, the instances where values are at 100 percent indicate that the characteristic is present at the same levels that it is throughout the PMSA. Any value above a 100 percent indicates an over representation and any value below a 100 percent represents an under representation. • Total Po ulP atiOn: 1999 estimates show that approximately 46,000 people (45,963) live in the primary market area. This is approximately 1.4 percent of the total PMSA population. The secondary market is estimated to contain approximately 236,000 people (236,161) and the tertiary market is estimated to contain 329,000 people (328,848). The total market area (all three markets combined) contains almost 611,000 people (610,972), representing a 19.3 percent share of the PMSA totals. It is evident that the primary market share is relatively weak compared to the secondary and tertiary market shares due to it's relative size. 2004 projections show that the market areas will experience considerably slower population growth compared to the PMSA totals. The total PMSA population is expected to grow by approximately 8.9 percent between 1999 and 2004, while the total market area population is expected to grow by only 6.5 percent to a total of about 651,000 people (650,851). The primary market is expected to experience the slowest growth of only 4.9 percent by the year 2004, and is expected to have a total population of a little over 48,000 people. The secondary and tertiary markets will experience stronger growth, Economics Research Associates son Benmr&w Depot Shdy ERA No.13362 Page-6 but the rate of growth would still be lower than the regional trends. Figure II illustrates regional population distribution by census tract. • Race and Ethnicity: The primary market is overwhelmingly made up of persons of multiple non-white ethnicity. The largest ethnic group in the primary market is of Hispanic origin (both white and non-white). Comprising 69.6 percent of the total population, their share is more than double the PMSA averages. The African American population closely follows this. The ethnic white population represents about 45 percent of the total primary market. The secondary market has a larger than average share of African Americans followed by Hispanics. Though other ethnic groups are slightly under-represented, they are relatively close to PMSA averages. The tertiary market also displays a large share of African American population, closely followed by ethnic Asians. Hispanic population is slightly over-represented while the White population is slightly under-represented, relative to PMSA averages. The overall market area demonstrates significant over-representation of African Americans, followed by 1 Hispanics and Asians. • Total Households: 1999 estimates show that the primary market area contains more than 13,000 households with an average household size of 3.3 persons. 1 The secondary market is estimated to have more than 78,000 households in 1999, with an average of 2.9 persons per household. The tertiary market is estimated to contain 105,000 households, which yields 3.1 persons per Ihousehold. 1999 estimates for the total market area show that it contains more than 197,000 households and represents a 18.5 percent share of the PMSA total. I • Population by Age: 1999 estimates show that there is significant over- I, representation of three distinct population cohorts. The primary and secondary markets show an over-representation of the 18-24 year old population, followed by persons aged 0-17 years and 25-34 years, relative to PMSA totals. In terms ' of absolute share across all market segments including the PMSA totals, there appears to be a large concentration of teen and pre-teen age groups 1 (representing 30 to 35 percent of the total), followed by persons aged 25-34 years and 18-24 years. Figures III and IV illustrates the distribution of persons 1 aged 25-44 years in the regional context by census tract. This age group Economic Reuartb Assodates San Bernardino Depot Study ERA No.13M2 Pne•7 usually represents a life stage with relatively high potential income generating and spending capacity. As seen in the illustrations and from the above observations, the average density of this age group is relatively moderate across all market segments, this is especially true for the primary market and secondary market areas. • Household Income: The estimated 1999 median household income in the primary market area at $22,147 is considerably lower (almost 50 percent) of the PMSA median of $40,711. The secondary market has a higher median household income at $33,885, but is still lower than the PMSA averages. The tertiary market's median household income is 104.3 percent of the PMSA's median at $42,469, signifying a concentration of higher income households. It is also important to compare the median household income to the average income, as the magnitude of positive or negative differential between the two indicates the skews in the income distribution pattern. For example a significantly larger average income compared to the median indicates a positive skew in the income distribution and means that there are some significantly wealthy households in the area. Households by income analysis show that there are significantly high proportions of `very low income' (< $10,000) households in the primary and secondary market areas. The tertiary market area is comparable to the PMSA averages in terms of households by income distribution, and is positively skewed towards moderate to high-income households. Figure V illustrates the median household income distribution by census tract across all market segments. Regional Employment Characteristics Historic employment (by place of residence) trends reported by the California Employment Development Department (EDD), show that the post recession recovery in the region started after 1993, and employment growth has been strong ever since. However as seen in Table III, the City of San Bernardino has been experiencing a slower rate of employment growth compared to the PMSA as a whole. The City also experienced a steady decline in it's share of regional employment between 1990 and 1996, but is beginning to show some signs of stability in the past three years. Current estimates show that the City of San Economics Research Assodates San B..,&no Depot Sduly ERA No.13362 page.g Bernardino has a labor force of 79,090 residents of which 73,700 are employed resulting in an unemployment rate of approximately 6.8 percent. This is higher than the PMSA unemployment rate of approximately 5.3 percent. Table IV displays historical non-farm employment trends in the PMSA by major industry groups. It should be kept in mind that this is employment by `place of work'. Historically the region has experienced strongest growth in the areas of wholesale trade and services related employment followed by the transportation communication and utilities sector and the retail trade sector. It is important to note that most of these sectors are often associated with low skill jobs with relatively lower wages. The manufacturing sector grew at an average annual rate of 2.9 percent between 1988 and 1998, while the fmance, insurance and real estate sector grew at an average annual growth rate of 1.5 percent. Sectoral employment (by place of work) projections in the PMSA, by the EDD for the 1995-2002 period are exhibited in Table V. According to these projections, construction related employment, followed by services and manufacturing are expected experience the strongest growth in the near future. Daytime Employment Base 1 Figure VI illustrates the distribution of business establishments in the primary market area with respect to the number of employees. It is apparent that even though numerous large business establishments with 250 employees or more, (located in downtown San Bernardino) are well within the primary market, they are not exactly within a walking distance from the site (within r/2 mile or 1/4 mile of street service area). There are a few small to medium sized business establishments that are located within a '/n mile distance from the site ' Retail Sales Activity Following a similar trend as in employment growth in relationship to regional post-recession recovery, taxable retail sales in the City of San Bernardino have started a positive growth trend since 1993. Taxable sales trends in the City between 1990 and 1997 are shown in Table VI. Though the compounded annual ' growth rates for the entire 1990-97 period appear to be negative, most sectors have Emaomies Research Assodates San Bernardino Depot Study ERA No.13362 Page•9 i 1 r A experienced positive growth during the 1993-97 period. During this period the r fastest growing sector was 'other retail', which usually includes all specialty retail items not included in the broader categories. This was followed by auto delaers ■ and auto supplies. The sales trends demonstrate the fact that the retail economy is still in transition and continuous shifts can be expected in terms of regional retail ■ dynamics. The declines in sales from apparel stores and home furnishings stores is probably the result of a combined effect of sales leakage as well as slow economic ■ growth. Transit User Characteristics According to Metrolink's 1999 estimates the average daily ridership on the ■ San Bernardino line is 8,161 riders and the Inland Empire/Orange County line is 1,804 riders. Hence, the total ridership on the two Metrolink lines serving San Bernardino is 9,965. Assuming that all of the riders are roundtrip commuters, this can translated into 4,983 persons (50 percent of total ridership). Metrolink also estimates that approximately 9.58 percent of the total ridership originate in San Bernardino, which means the average daily traffic through the station is 477 persons. This means that on an average 477 persons board and alight Metrolink ■ trains at the San Bernardino station each day (the total traffic would be 954, but assuming they are the same people, we only account for half of the traffic). Hence the average annual persons using Metrolink from the San Bernardino is a little over 174,000±. It should be kept in mind that this number could vary greatly depending on the margins of the assumptions stated and the accuracy of Metrolink's statistics, but it gives a fairly good idea about the approximate volume of transit users in the station. Amtrak usage is not included in this calculation. Metrolink estimates that �* approximately 53 percent of the passengers using the San Bernardino line belong to w minority ethnic groups(Hispanic, Asian,African American, Other). r ar Economics Research Assn ates San Benmr&ao Depot SM* ERA No.13362 Page-10 Q T641 Pe9We0m mbHwBW CTenthe60a Mvke6Arte Cauna Mv4rAmr4lYtemmge ofPMSA TOW 0.5MVwm Drive 5-10Mi D6i% 1020 Minute Dave M eA TOW PMSA T9 M D cS-10 Mire Drive 10.20 Miimm lXw Make Are Tad TOW POP0186M 1999 45,%3 236,161 328.M8 610,912 3,16998 14% 7..4% 104% 193% ZWf NMl 249,974 352.656 650,851 3,451,490 14% 7.3% 10.2% ls.W pre(Om-Hispmicl m6 E6 6 .1999 Whim 20,643 137,660 200.234 366.511 2.MM O.M 6.2% 9.4% 16.6% 4� Atri"n Ammiem 5,981 32,950 30,"2 69.3'39 20,742 15% 15.'1% 14.5% 33.1% N.Americolvdim 474 2.129 2,782 5.383 28,614 IM 7.4% 9.0M IB.M A91 j4ficbcl 1381 II.M7 233M M,615 1513M O.M TM 14.2% 22.0% •r gM1V 17,580 52,415 65,082 13S,M3 54]" 3.1% 9.3% 11.5% 13.9% lHgwuc 31,986 97,457 Ir,756 237,199 1,099.620 1M pM 11.6% M.4% Rre(eon-Hupmic)vW E6 dti .1999(P-J) 590im ".M 583% O.M 60.0% 693% 64.5% 83.1% 90.9% 863% Afrim Amvicm 110% 14M 93% 11.4% 6.M 1%.955 210.958 139.9% 1716% Ne0ve Amvim Mdim 1.M O.M oM 0.959 O.M 113.M %.M 92.M 93.8% .r AvmvP9cECWmdr LM 4.M a8% S.M S.M S63% %.I% lx 114.3% ftr 381% R2Ye 19.M 111% 111% 214.3% IMA% 110.9% 123.9% 106pmic 69.6% 413% AM 411% 34.M 2M.M 119.0% 112.0% 121.4% .s TOW HOmdolde 1999 13AM 78,86 1M,I88 10.3% 1.064489 13% 7.M 9.9% 18.5% er 20d 141" 83.435 112953 210,7% 1,10.937 11% 73% 9.M 183% _ RgW®ee HY ABe(1999) 0.11 17.05 89369 114110 2MS34 1,013.83 1.M 7.M ILM 2LM 1624 5,001 33393 30,099 57,493 271,115 I.M.9 8.3% M.I% 21.M E-M 6810 33,49 53,511 95.80 4 M2 1.M 7.6% 11.4% M.4% 35-" 3,9% M,587 55,121 95,5% 4%350 IS% 6.9% Jim 19.1% ,r 45-54 3,710 21.'81 33,46 61,427 330.954 1.1% 7.M 103% 18.1% 554' 2551 15.413 11195 36)61 313,711 1S% 71% 113% 16.9% 0+ 4,38 34.170 213% 51869 361868 11% aM aM 143% POpJ43m HY A8e r Ib6m3 O8T9ml(1999) .us o-n 38.4x 34.M 34.1% 34.M 310% M.lx IM..4% Ia.M IM.1% Mu IoM 9.M 93% 9.4% I.M 127.2% 110.9% 1M.M 110.0% 25-34 M.M JIM 16.3% 15.M I4.M 1003% 101.6% Ilo.l% I%.IX 3516 116% MM I6.M 1s.M IS.M w.1% %.M9 106.4% %.3% 4534 2.2% 10.1% 10.3% 103% 10M %.M %.1% %M %.M SY" S.M aM S.M aM aM 0.M 951056 81.1% O.M ' bH 9.5% 103% 7.1% 1314 11.4% 0.1% 04% 61M 743% lama:CACI Hm MEwmWa RCrN Awam 1 1 T"11 Name LbanuBUv Mukn MU CbINE Marks ArunaPercmug<OSPMSA TOW PS MNm Dave 3'105fmom Sfine10.O0M DdwM Ar T9 PMSATI 0.5Minm Ddw S-IoWnm Oriv410.30 MNUm Ddw Mmkn Atu Tpml M .Ha¢eb91d Nmme 1999 523,117 O1,895 42p69 #),611 510,]11 N/X tlifi 10/.1% 92.5% 2026 00,121 .43,559 553,653 FS.M6 551,5]5 5u% 4.5% 101.0% 933% AvmµeFiousrb9ltl Nwme ' 1999 #),03) N0,16S (19.010 SN.103 #1.033 550% ]9.3% %I% S6.4% 2001 535,569 553,929 565,156 #5,695 M,935 51.6% 711 X 91.571 85.1% ibu W rdds by Nwme(i 9991 65.000 41 ;til 3.07 6,7 29,932 2.9% 9^ 10.3% 35,000.59,9% 21454 7,190 6.095 15.719 )0510 3.5X 10.2% S.6% 323% f10,WLLf14.993 1,859 637 5,574 13,690 69,001 27% 9.1% 0.1% 19.8% SI5,000521,999 21"9 1 249) 1;070 17,016 141,399 1.931 8.8X 1.5% 19.1% #5,000314,999 ;106 1 2350 14,795 MS/I ISI,NI IM L3% 9.9X 19.3% #5,000.N9,999 ;1/6 16,267 Wm /0,991 209,910 1.0% 7.R lom 19.4% 530,000.37/,999 1,293 1/,014 26,851 40158 222369 0.6% 6.3% IS3X IB.I% >575,000 492 ),299 16,1'n 33,958 171,555 0.3% 4.3% I. 19.0% fiwsN9ldfbylnamebyM ket Area[1999) -- 6 4% 3.6% 29% 371% 28X Mm 1273% 101.26 1#71% ' SS,MQ59,M ILO% 9.1% 5.1% 8.0% 6.6X V1.4% 138.1% 879% 1306% 510,000.51/,999 1371% S.O% 5.3% 6.9% 6.5% 2101% 1229% lam 10)3% 513,26034,999 1).9% MM 4.0% 13,M 13.3% 13SA% IM 966% 1033% #;000.#/,999 15.4% 15,M 4.1% 14.M 11.2% IW^ 110.5% 99.1% 10/.3% ' #5,000.49,939 157% 20.9% 21.3% 20.5% 19]% A.]% 105.0% IN.^ 1050% f50,000.54,999 9.5% 17.8% 23.5 20.3% Mm 43.26 854% 113.5% 99.6% >t73,000 3.5% 93% 15./% 12.1% 16.1% 219% 51.6% 95.754 7571% Sarc: CAC1 NC mtlEmmmies RmenL Ambamm ' 1 A r Table III Employment Growth: Riverside San Bernardino PMSA Vs.City of San Bernardino Year Riverside-San San Bernardino City as% Bernardino PMSA City of PMSA 1990 1,128,700 63,930 5.66% 1991 1,113,000 62,830 5.65% 1992 1,124,600 64,370 5.72% 1993 1,143,300 62,870 5.50% 1994 1,159,500 64,230 5.54% 1995 1,180,800 65,030 5.51% •— 1996 1,201,900 66,040 5.49% 1997 1,259,000 68,860 5.47% 1998 1,297,300 70,950 5.47% 1999 1,349,510 73,700 5.46% CAGR* 2.01% 1.59% ��; Iw.o �fumiao-s.9 Y � B.,oairo PMSA 115.0 • � �S69 Bvnvamo ciy 6 110.0 � F I- 6 105.0 � 5 .� r E 100.0 E W 950 Y. rQON 5 N. 74M r 'SJSm Bamairo Ciry ]2.000 5.2% s 70.000 PNSA 2 ICON 8 6Q9N s.6•r. 2 ON a 3! IC 60.000 w r S6,ON ej sQON <% Ym 'CAGR:Compounded Annual Growth Rate Source: California Employment Development Department and Economics Research Associates a e° I °\M Q O O � .6 bkr N P N ° W ° . ^ r T o b e V b q r C O a N N r Q N Q Y1 O ^ h Q P O 9 N T N N b N r ^ W N W Q Q Q h N r O V1 21 q 9 ^ j T_ N b O v001 e N C r < N P P b b O O C O b ^ , Q C N ^ N r 6 q y G O ^ W 6 q O a p e p e P e p e p o p e p e O e O Q N W ^ r o `e P N r 9 u �o °ervb Q r3q rv � .c°' e° rb � E O CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 CO O O W 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 E m O e O e O a O e O e p e VOO' v O e � 0 O O P W � b v01 O O N O 'CO E O N Mil N Q N N N I-Uaoldm3—.I-oozy IMgt E O 6 Z C D TC 5 v°ro e � � E E E E = E E E E E m r E m 'E u o o _ _ E o $ _$ e aE cu m =uEi uEa ruEa Em EE '2= E ced E E6 cw E c € �j € 3 € y € E on mn. 4 � n � a Ev. 'na o� EEO cE n o s o c o Z Z — 4 ° Z Z m Z X m Z v Z E `e0 Esi, � si. 'a mUrti� f vLiC vsi3 mri vLiU vii r° Table V Employment Projections: Riverside San-Bernardino PMSA 1995 2002 CAGR' Mining Employment 1,100 900 -2.8% Manufacturing Employment 94,400 119,300 3.4% Finance,Insurance and Real Estate Employment 29,400 31,800 1.1% Construction Employment 43,100 58,800 4.5% Transportation,Communication and Utilities 40,800 51,100 3.3% Retail Trade Employment 170,000 196,000 2.1% Wholesale Trade Employment 35,900 44,200 3.0% Services Employment 202,600 260,900 3.7% Government Employment 162,600 192,400 2.4% Total Nonfarm Employment 779,900 955,400 2.9% 300,000 I 250,000 200,000 c r 150,000 ® � 102002 100,000 50,000 I Am e e v c G C V O C 0 V m O C .E o n r ' i E 3 �' o o E' E. E' v ° E E E o ° _ = r 2 . E%W 2 g.s`e E V m „ � 7 tern e E uEi Uw g � U Employment Group •CAGR: Compounded Annual Growth Rate Source: California State Board of Equalization and Economics Research Associates r Q P b OO OO � �C OO nl � O r eel fV e P r P P m N eh N a N a 0 o 9 o ? b . C7 = ric eoc r = 4 Q b a b O eZ ON N Q I� N H H H y y H H H H H H n N �: °n nomnm vl°Pq ^M H H H H H H H H H y y b N n a b n r U V PI W P a N P N M n N m a n ' Hra Anna°O - on noe 9661 C y in - - N _ rvlen � W - - = N N H H H H y - H - H H 5661 ' 0661 ' m P ma a b n b O m VI W pj vi N n vl n P V N F `o PG � mN mNN _ — rmjryv U E661 t y H y H H H y H H H H H e — bmb — mmaNPnb s E661 m nm pNq T b b N O P C N W s F 1661 W H y y y y H H H H H y y U F O V P P V N Hf Q V p P n 11 L 0661 u y H H H H H y y H H y y O O O pO O O O 8 E O ery b m ('1 O b e�1 P O O O w O O O O N O n T N P N � q � 0 Oh mN N C pepg� n b O b N a O O ! b H y y H M y y H y q C mII°Q luaunD3°s000 W ° ?j C CT y 'n O � W� ti Q � m° m lL 9 N ° E .°c E Y ` m ° ° v 'u oa E n — 's m C o = 5 0 E y f Y c E n 0 0 U U i E .0 9 'Z ': O . O Q OaiilS M 0 OC < F h ' Figure II Population Distribution San Bernardino Depot Study A. t t • t . � •• • •• • • 20 MIA • •• �'• • t• • • ' • . • •'• t• r' f'�o'•;� ,:of ,C• .r. +;'mod�.`•!✓2,y,•�(;C`,..y S Min ••' S • rt w C w' • h • � tf.�l•='•MV '• •d' .�1-��.}�'wt. t _ •� � YL �l •:•:• 5 :•t����•i' •- M1 i• • ', ._•� 1 . It�t: S+i• ? ;�ci h�'a :.ter: i, y C ! r J;a•:a_. •. J• jS ••�ttt:-f�:ws. •••1•�••'•'",�vl •t� [.eyf,�74Kt,''tw V fit:"'�� • .. t•• �'4' l'• •'Yhl•.•tt:'•�xl."j;+^'.•t ,yam. • San Bemardino Depot t .:. t •'� +kti' ^P i `: • . Population(1999 Estimates) { d • ;q�fyt• X2'7.'+ :ice �:: i::, A I Dot= 75 { i•• • t ••i• •.sue • •t � \ .•• L•L Figure III I Population Aged 25-44 Yrs. ' San Bernardino Depot Study ••i 20 Min Z ♦• • • !.: j • Mum • t',• ' • i r•'+r •; ;•` Shin i{�xdr r'.' • . }�f•j � f -.•ire. ° � .� + ,;j her. t.+�� .{�, ~••� ••• •_•�•4•• • t ll �•�. . IIIrJ•• • ' • � ` ,�;•. .♦ •.• i .t�. �• ••iii •' 'r�M• ..t. t•. ,�. •'•,•. x • � . �wty, .. • t`\ � * San Bernardino Depot r ♦J/ •, . •t • Population aged 2544 m.(1999 estimates) f . .• +f� •rr.•• +• ! 1 Dot=75 ' .•-w v•---�. ••' t•rt 2 Mies Figure IV Population g . , Yrs. Percent of r San Bernardino Depot r s FT IM yr dt '' ' m - vi. ..... 331r�-- s. Y�� ''� 3n ��H� ors -wa4s S �_ - '• s 9X r. �433�� K .q ✓.P �,J 4y`y � TV 2 6SYia.:� 3''+m' •$`a5 Y 1 "g. l i >rv..tae.>_. .., �+N 31,11 ^x.-t �f 3 ice` i �� c (�-. z dK n.-'osc- v 21.._.r •- YxA i"L'sP MWO� iw �VI�2�.3._ ..IC Yw � 13�a96Rwd '+�{�: >`�' GA`�•' z F a n EM�GI sr Lrti J � a x ..x--Y MI RAW!ss ' .A ME ?,I I San: l �S � J��va3a�^r .•. v Bernardino Depot ` 25-44 yrs.,;' 0 , 0 F Income Figure V Distribution San Bernardino Depo r � 4 F _ \ r C _ " J �i / 2 / :� Gar% ,. ✓6 £ 1. .. �J iY a?` r f = s� grin: San Bernardino Depot Median Income(1999 Estimates) 000 00 •v• 000 E �1 . !l�Iiii■NIii1R� .4■Ifl�liiiilNNN '���aisii■lI�INIIti� mayy__ o:i■■rJiii!■/NII ii �= �- - 'Mm N�� NMI m oil lrA MIA Ow JIM ON OWN=I Moral vow Mud MA'A INN, 1,41, Zlp PU M�'� ��8�� arnN�ii■Ii1N� - � rr ► iw■■�7 N N■■�/�', �i■■7J/�.'7:�N■iiw i:1if"T.��yw17�'""'�\ wwr�— fin- R.7irsa�w - CASE STUDIES ERA has reviewed case studies of selected recently developed transit stations in cities within the Southern California area. ERA has primarily focused on stations that are serviced by Metrolink. The selected case studies demonstrate two primary approaches adopted in developing transit facilities, which are: 1. Restoration and reuse of existing historic station facilities: In the context of Southern California, such efforts became easier to realize only in the later part of the 80s and the early 90s, when a greater emphasis was being put by the federal, state and regional governments to promote rail transit. After the inception of Southern California Regional Rail Authority in 1991, whose job was to administer and operate the regional rail system, Metrolink, such restoration and reuse of train stations into multi-modal transit centers became even more popular with availability various funding sources. 2. Development of New Transit Stations: This is especially true in cases where transit centers are developed to promote and accommodate potential increases in transit (especially multi-modal) uses. It is also true in cases where existing historic facilities are beyond repair, and the costs of restoration and rehabilitation are prohibitive keeping in mind the contemporary functions and space requirements. In view of the above issues, ERA has selected two historic restoration approaches, namely, Fullerton, and Claremont, and one new development, namely Santa Ana. The case studies will examine each of the stations in the context of: — The development process. This would include timeline, costs and funding sources. It would also include an examination of the primary stakeholders of the project. — The current use mix. This will look into the allocation of space and use within the project and examine the nature of activity mix within the stations. The case studies will emphasize on the mix of public uses versus income producing commercial uses. Emnomia Research Asmdates San Bernasd no Depot Study ERA No.13362 Paw 22 — L.ocational context. This will look at the above two issues in relation to the location and activities of the areas surrounding the stations, and will examine how the stations succeed or fail to tie into the locational context or overcome locational challenges. Fullerton Santa Fe Depot The City of Fullerton was started as a station for the Santa Fe Railroad. George H. Fullerton, a land agent for the railroad, re-routed the railroad through this city, which was originally planned to be bypassed. The existing depot building was built in 1930 slightly east of the original Victorian style depot, which was constructed in 1888 (this building no longer exists). It is a poured-in-place concrete structure, about 256 feet long with a 150 feet long covered platform, designed in a Spanish Colonial style. The linear building displays arches of varying profiles and staggered gable and shed roofs with Mission tiles. The building is fully developed stylistically, with an extensive use of detailing, such as quatrefoil windows, wooden shutters,concrete grillwork and a Monterey style balcony. Over 40 Amtrak and Metrolink passenger trains currently serve the recently restored Fullerton Santa Fe Depot each day. The Amtrak San Diegans stop at the ' station almost hourly and provide rail transportation up and down the California coast. The Fullerton Depot is also served daily by the Amtrak Southwest Chief which follows the route of the historic Santa Fe Trail east to Chicago. It is ' estimated that a total of 300,000 visitors pass through the depot annually. The depot is located at the intersection of Santa Fe Ave. and Harbor Blvd., one block ' south of Commonwealth Ave. .. Development Process: The City of Fullerton adopted one its first redevelopment project areas in 1974. The project area was centered at the intersection of Harbor and Commonwealth, often described as the City's historic downtown core. It ' extended to the north for some distance along the Harbor `commercial corridor' and to the south it included the Santa Fe depot complex. The first six years after the adoption of the project area was spent on designing a detailed phased development program for the entire area, focusing on a comprehensive downtown revitalization strategy. In 1980, the first phase of the project was initiated by a downtown Rcmomis Research Associate San Bern &w Depot Study ERA No.13M2 Page-23 M reconstruction program, which concentrated on rehabilitating retail and commercial space along Harbor and Commonwealth. This was accompanied by implementing a design and landscaping program, unifying pedestrian access and the existing Parking stock as well as providing an unifying theme. The second phase of the Program, focused on developing the Santa Fe Depot and its surrounding areas south of Commonwealth and east of Harbor as a `Transportation Center', combining transit uses with the retail/commercial edges along Commonwealth and Harbor. Though the City started implementing the `Transportation Center' concept in 1983, it wasn't until 1991, when the City acquired the existing depot building, that this concept actually started taking shape. In 1980, the City had already acquired the Union Pacific depot located to the south and had moved the building next to the Santa Fe depot. The restoration of the Santa Fe depot building was carried out during 1994-95, while the Union Pacific Building, was leased out to `The Old Spaghetti Factory' restaurant who completely restored the building into 500 seat restaurant in 1987-88. Re-emergence of downtown retail combined with the success of the Spaghetti Factory was already bringing about significant change to the area. With the decision to operate the Metrolink Orange County line through Fullerton, this project received considerable boost in the early 90s not only from the City's perspective, but also from Caltrans and the Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), to turn it into a model project for the region. The city constructed a 290 space parking structure to accommodate multi-modal transit uses and OCTA located a transit terminal and bus turnout within the transportation center. The City also consolidated most of the vacant land facing the depot building and constructed a large surface parking lot. The total number of parking spaces including structured and surface lots is approximately 900. By 1995, the depot building was restored, a third main line was added, new north and south platforms with a bridge connecting them was constructed and all the surface and structured parking was in place. A rough breakup of project costs is shown below. Caltrans funded approximately 75% of this total, while the rest was a combination of redevelopment, Amtrak and other State and Federal funds. EPA No.13362 arcL Aswua(es Sa Benta,&w De Po+Study Page-?A Rough Project Costs: 1. Depot (Acquisition) $1,000,000 2. Depot(Restoration of Amtrak part only) $250,000 (140,000 was the City's contribution, the remainder was contributed by Amtrak and Caltrans) 3. North Platform $500,000 4. South Platform (Including south side surface parking) $1,000,000 5. Bridge $1,000,000 6. 3rd Main Line $10,000,000 ' $12,000,000 7. Parking Structure $2,500,000 8. Surface Parking $750,000 - $1,000,000 ' Note: The City only restored the interior of the space leased to Amtrak. All of the exterior restoration and interior tenant improvements of the remainder of the building was carried out by the only other tenant in lieu of reduced rent. Current Use Mix: The total area of the Santa Fe depot building is approximately r 7,000 s.f. and the total area of the Union Pacific building is approximately 12,000 s.f. As mentioned earlier, the Union Pacific building is entirely leased out to the Old Spaghetti Factory. The City's lease agreement with the Spaghetti Factory is on a percentage of gross receipts basis, which is annually adjusted for inflation. The current agreement obligates the Spaghetti Factory to pay approximately 5 percent of gross receipts to the City. Current annual receipts of the Spaghetti factory are approximately$2.8 - $3.0 million. The City has leased the Santa Fe depot building to two primary tenants. The first of these is Amtrak, who occupies the single largest space in the Santa Fe Depot building taking up approximately 2,500 s.f. Amtrak's space includes a fully restored lobby and sitting area, ticket counter, rest rooms and baggage area. Economics Research As&mates San Benmdno Depot Shdy ERA Na.13362 Page 25 IN Amtrak pays a rent of approximately $31,000 annually to the City (which is adjusted for inflation). The remaining space is leased to a single tenant, with whom the City entered into a special agreement to provide the space at reduced rent and the option of subleasing, in lieu of carrying out the restoration of the depot exterior. As a result the remaining space has been subleased to four additional tenants. These tenants are Express Cafe, Trainsweb.com, Fullerton Railway Plaza Association Inc., and an English learning center. Express Cafe is a food service/gift shop, with indoor and outdoor seating and a beer bar, which primarily caters to Metrolink and Amtrak passengers. Business activity in the cafe is tied to the train schedules and most of the activity is during the early morning and late aftemoon/evening. Even though the cafe is close to the downtown offices and retail, the impact of downtown customers is minimal. This is primarily due to lack of good visibility and due to the perception that the establishment is oriented towards transit users rather that the daytime employees. They do get some daytime business from regular train enthusiasts who spend time at the depot observing and documenting passing trains. Trainweb.com is a rail enthusiast web site who provides Internet resources on trains on train travel. They have also set up `web-cams', or Internet accessible live cameras at the Fullerton depot to be accessed by train-watchers all over the world. Trainweb was attracted to Fullerton for two primary reasons. The historical context of the restored depot building was one, while the second reason was access to high- speed Internet infrastructure which enable them to set up all of their servers and web-cams. Fullerton Railway Plaza Association (FRPA) is also regional a rail enthusiast organization that is dedicated to the preservation of the railroad heritage of Southern California through the creation of a large Interactive Railroad Attraction in the City of Fullerton. FRPA is currently involved in fundraising activities to attract independent developers who will undertake development of such an attraction at Fullerton. The location of the FRPA offices at the Santa Fe depot building is a perfect fit in view of their work and vision. The depot also houses an English language center. The center intends to cater to new immigrant workers who are also likely transit users, making it relevant for them to locate at the depot. The City plans to rehabilitate another additional 1,600s.f. in an existing shed attached to the depot building. This space will be leased to a travel agency who specializes in train travel and organizes train tours. Econom Research Associates Sari Bernardino Depot Sody ERA No.13362 Page-26 The City rents all of the remaining space to the primary tenant for a discounted rent of approximately$1.80/s.f. annually. The subleases are worked out by the primary tenant at an average rent of approximately$12.00/s.f. annually. The new space for the travel agency will be leased at approximately $13.44/s.f. annually. The rent from the Old Spaghetti Factory is annually earmarked to be spent for maintenance and operation of transportation center. The approximate annual expenditure for operations and maintenance is at least$75,000. Location Context: As described above, the development of the Fullerton Transportation Center which includes the Santa Fe depot,has been a very long term process and is part of a larger community development plan. After the inception of the downtown redevelopment project area and the decision to develop a multi modal Transportation Center adjacent to downtown, it was decided that the integration of the existing stock of historic buildings to contemporary commercial, retail and transit needs would be key to the success of the new development. The project started in the early 80's with rehabilitation of buildings and attraction of businesses to downtown. The second phase of development which included the transportation center, was centered around three existing historic buildings, 1) the Santa Fe depot building, 2) the Union Pacific depot building which was moved to this location in 1980 and 3) the station for the Pacific Electric inter-city trolley car system, located at the comer of Commonwealth and Pomona (with one side facing Downtown and the other facing the depot). The Redevelopment Agency took an active role in providing the necessary physical infrastructure like landscaping, parking and other thematic design elements, but concentrated on attracting a complementary set of tenants and users to the Center keeping in mind the long term success and sustainability of the project. After almost 20 years since the beginning of the project, it has shown considerable level of maturity. Moderate to high-end community serving retail/dining establishments and professional offices occupies most of the buildings in the Downtown historic core (including the Pacific Electric building). The Transportation Center complements this with its own share of retail/dining and transit dependent services The Old Spaghetti Factory is considered extremely successful, and it is not uncommon to see long lines of dinner guests waiting for seats in the evenings. It should be kept in mind that the evolution of the Downtown and the Transportation Eeoaomi Research Asmdates San Bernwdno Depot SWdy ERA No.L3362 Pago-27 Center is attributed not only to the efforts of the City but also to a great extent to the commitment and cooperation of the various business owners. In summary, the Santa Fe Depot's proximity to Downtown was a great asset, which was realized by the City, who in turn used this to its advantage in coming up with a successful development plan. As a next phase of development, the City proposes to attract a private developer to develop a train based themed attraction along with supporting retail and dining facilities in an area adjacent to the existing Santa Fe depot. FRPA is already working with some preliminary design and feasibility studies with the help of State grants. The proposed facility is expected to include permanent train displays, virtual reality rides, outdoor recreation areas, restaurants and shops. The City is also involved in organizing the annual `Railroad Days' festival at the Transportation Center, which attracts approximately 15,000 residents and train enthusiasts. The festival includes train related educational/recreation activities, exhibits, and various information booths. Claremont Santa Fe Depot The community of Claremont was originally founded by the Pacific Land Improvement Co. and it's parent company the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad in the year 1887. It was eventually incorporated into a City in 1907. Claremont was one of about thirty town sites laid out between San Bernardino and Los Angeles in anticipation of a population explosion resulting from the arrival of the railroad. This `explosion' was very short lived and the town would have become one of the many railroad `ghost towns' if it wasn't for the decision of the local land company to transfer its Hotel Claremont and 260 vacant lots to the recently-founded Pomona College in 1888. The eventual expansion of the Claremont Colleges and the growth of trade spurred by the citrus ranches helped Claremont evolve into an extremely desirable community. The railroad's original wooden, Gothic depot was replaced by the existing Spanish Colonial Revival structure in 1927. The exterior of the passenger waiting Economics Research Associate San Bernardino Depot Study ERA No.13362 Psg-28 room features and extremely omate Churrigueresquet trim combined with doors that are carved with Santa Fe's cross and circle logo of the 1920s. The depot stopped functioning in 1967 and remained vacant until it was acquired by the City of Claremont in 1989 and adapted to serve as a Transit center in 1992. The structure was entered into the National Register of Historic Places 1982. Currently the only passenger rail service to the Claremont station is by Metrolink. In addition, the station serves as a stop for the Amtrak Thruway bus service connecting Amtrak passengers and is also served by a number of Foothill Transit bus lines. Development Process: The City of Claremont acquired the Santa Fe Depot in 1989, about a year and a half before Metrolink was going to be formed. The depot is located on I" street and is adjacent to a part of the Claremont Village redevelopment project area. The Claremont Village redevelopment project is the City's oldest redevelopment project established in 1973 and encompasses two non- contiguous and irregular areas totaling 214 acres. The area adjacent to the north of the depot along I" street, includes the `Claremont Village', which has a number of retail, dining and personal service establishments in a `village' setting. The depot is also two blocks south of the Claremont Colleges, and is within a block of the City Hall,Post Office, Community Center and Public Library. The parcel containing the depot building is situated between two large office/commercial buildings and was privately owned before its acquisition by the .. City. The City acquired the building by paying approximately $500,000, when it was inevitable that the private owner would demolish the structure. The building I restoration and renovation was completed in 1992. By October of 1992 the San Bernardino Metrolink line was already in service The total cost of the development project was approximately $2.5 million. The primary source of funding to the City for property acquisition, design and renovation was through Proposition A and Proposition C funds (sales tax appropriations for Transportation use). The City received numerous loans and t After Spanish architect Jose Benito Chutriguera. It describes late 17th and early 18th century Spanish architecture,marked by extravagance of design and use of Renaissance motifs.Its influence was important in the missions of Spanish colonial North America. Rmaoaucs Research Associates San Bernardino Depot Shdy ERA No.13362 page-29 grants from the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission (LACTC, now known as LAMTA) which was a part of the joint powers authority that formed Metrolink. This included a $600,000 loan and a $30,000 grant for a public art program in the platforms. In addition to various other smaller competitive grants, the City also received a $234,000 State Transportation Capital Improvement (TCI) grant. The parcel size is approximately 0.8 acres, with most of the vacant land in the front(north) of the depot, between the building an 1" street. Limitations in size and configuration of the parcel did not allow for any on site parking to be accommodated, hence the City had to resort to locating parking off-site but within walking distance of the depot building. A parcel of land on the east side of the depot at the corner of I" Street and College avenue, that was owned by LACTC as part of their right of way, was acquired by the City in lieu of $1.00 annual rent. This parcel was developed as a surface parking lot for commuters and a shaded bus turnout for Foothill Transit buses serving the multi-modal component of the depot. The City leased additional parking spaces from one of the adjacent office buildings that owned a parking structure. The surface parking accommodates approximately 275 spaces, while the structure accommodates an additional 125 spaces. The parking related improvements were primarily funded through a Proposition C discretionary grant of $184,000. A part of this amount was also spent on constructing a landscaped median along Is`Street. The space in the front of the depot is restored as a landscaped public plaza, reminiscent of the Spanish Colonial style. The platform includes a permanent high quality public art installation. The City has an annual maintenance budget of approximately $68,000 of which approximately $20,000 is spent for providing security to the off-site parking. Current Use Mix: The approximate size of the depot building is about 2,700s.f. Of this approximately 2,000 s.f. is leasable space. Currently the fully restored waiting area of the depot is used as a public space and is occasionally rented out for public functions and activities. The only permanently occupied space in he building is a 400s.f. Transit Store that offers transit related services and information to Southern California transit users. The City does not collect any rent from the store in order Eoononus Research Associates San Bernardino Depot study ERA No.13362 Page-30 to promote it as an appropriate use for the building. The remaining 1,600s.f. of the building has been vacant for the past 7 years. The vacant space is in the form of two separate rooms on split-levels, approximately 800s.f. in size each. None of the interior surfaces are finished and the burden of any tenant improvement would be on the tenant. The rooms open into a wooden patio in the front. Various prospective tenants ranging from personal service establishments to fast food services have expressed interest in the space over time, but have eventually backed out after considering the limitations in size, configuration, access and visibility. Many of the tenants would agree to take up the space under the condition that they ' are allowed to extend parts of the building into the plaza in order to get direct frontage along I' street. But the City would not allow this as it goes against their ecommitment towards preserving the surrounding open spaces. ' Location Context: Even though the depot is physically close to the relatively vibrant Claremont Village and is only two blocks from the colleges, it faces various limitations in terms of visibility and access. The relatively fast traffic along 1" Street along with its tree lined median proves to be a considerable physical as well as visual barrier between the depot and the Village/Civic Center. In contrast to the approach taken in Fullerton, the development process adopted by the City of Claremont deals with the depot more like a stand alone facility primarily serving the transit using public. Lack of a conscious effort to integrate the facility to the adjacent Village, the Civic Center and the Colleges during the initial stages of the project has proved to be a bigger challenge over the long term in terms of finding an appropriate use mix for the building. It should also be kept in mind that the size of available space limits its usage by a smaller user and usually smaller retail or personal service establishments are unlikely to locate in a stand-alone facility unless they are close to a larger retail anchor or a cluster of similar establishments. This is especially true in the case of the Claremont Depot, as the building is immediately adjacent on the east and west side to approximately 150,000s.f. of commercial and professional office space. But all of the daytime employees walk across the street to the cluster of restaurants in the village. The space size also limits the use of the facility as a full service restaurant or dining establishment, which can attract its own market. The average transit user does not usually want to patronize any businesses at the depot as they are still in the middle Economics Research Associates San Bernardino Depot Study ERA No.13362 Page-31 of their `commute' when they board or alight from a Metrolink train. In addition, limited train traffic combined with possible access from the parking lots to the platforms without actually entering the building, considerably limits the amount of people passing through the depot. The City is realizing some of these shortfalls and is taking some preliminary steps towards increasing the visibility of the building. One of these is to modify the landscaping along the median to enhance visual connections across I't Street. The City is also promoting the depot by organizing weekend events like Jazz concerts and musical events in the plaza. The Claremont Depot is a wonderful example of a good historic preservation project, the building and the depot compound is impeccably restored and maintained, but at the same time this project teaches a valuable lesson highlighting the need for such projects to be integrated to other secondary markets and local land uses besides a primary transit use. Santa Ana Transportation Center The Santa Ana Regional Transportation Center is a new facility constructed by the City of Santa Ana to fulfill it's multi-modal transportation needs as well as larger community development needs. The 3-story building is not historic, but is built in a typical Spanish Mission style with great emphasis on details, high quality finishes and a traditional California station ambience. The building includes various thematic elements like a five-story tower, a rear courtyard forming an outdoor waiting area, with sweeping Spanish steps on either side leading to open terraces above. Current multi modal transportation providers include Amtrak, Metrolink, Greyhound, Orange County Transportation Authority, Tres Estrellas de Oro, Turimex Intemational/Transportes Intercalifomias, and Coast Yellow Cab. The current estimated annual patronage to the Center is approximately 1,000,000 persons. Development Process: The City of Santa Ana started the project as a part of the Inter City Commuter Station Redevelopment Project area which was established in 1982. The construction of the building was started in 1983 and the building was completed in 1985. The 7-acre site is located on 1000 East Santa Boulevard and is situated within largely light industrial/warehousing type land uses. The project was Economics Research Associates San Bernm%ino Depo Scw4 ERA No.L3362 Page,32 conceived much before Metrolink arrived, at a time when the City realized the importance of Santa Ana as a mid point in the rail route between Los Angeles and San Diego. The City decided to develop the transportation center as a regional landmark building and at the same as a facility that serves some of the key community needs. The project was envisioned to become a truly multi-modal �. transportation center serving the passengers who use buses and trains. It was ' realized that a large component of the passenger profile comprised of residents and workers of the region who used multi-modal means to travel between Mexico and Southern California and then perhaps make connections to the rest of the United States. In spite of the considerable amount of risk involved in terms of actually realizing the long term goals of the project, the City went ahead to invest $18.0 ' million in the 47,OOOs.f. facility. The entire project was developed in a single phase with funds from various sources, with the largest portion coming from redevelopment tax increment financing. A break up of funding amounts and ' sources are as follows: ' Redevelopment Agency Bonds $6,200,000 California State Department of Transportation Grants $4,540,000 ' General Revenue Sharing Funds $2,198,000 Urban Mass Transit Administration Grants (Section 9) $2,020,000 ' State Gasoline Tax Funds $ 455,000 ' Other Local Funds $2.587.000 TOTAL $18,000,000 The center includes 427 surface parking spaces, approximately 250 of which are on site and the remainder are on an off site location across Santa Ana Boulevard. The number of parking spaces eventually proved to be inadequate based on the size and passenger traffic at the center, which has led the City to build an additional on-site structured parking facility accommodating 435 spaces, at a cost of $4.5 million. The parking structure is expected to open at the end of November 1999. The City is also constructing new bus bays to accommodate the increased bus traffic in addition to the two existing bus stalls. Economics Research Assodate San Bernardino Depot Study ERA No.13M2 Page 33 A security officer patrols the facility 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. The cost of providing security is approximately $100,000 annually. The city has sub- contracted the general maintenance of the facility to a private service provider for an annual fee of approximately$75,000. In addition the City spends approximately $50,000 on landscaping costs annually. The City has also contracted a number of other electrical, lighting and mechanical service providers on a retainer basis. Current Use Mix: During its 15 years of existence, the Center has gone through various public and private tenant turnovers, but it's current tenant mix is probably the most ideal one in view of the long term goals of the project. The Center accommodates a range of national and international bus and train service providers, focusing on links with Mexico. Until recently the local cable television provider occupied a large portion of the building. After completion of their own facilities, the cable provider left making a large portion of the building available for lease. The City took this opportunity to bring in the local Private Industry Council's job training center, called the Santa Ana W.O.R.K. (Work, Opportunity, Resources, Knowledge) center. This use fit perfectly with some of the existing transit uses as well as other job training and employment development related uses. Currently the building includes a California Employment Development Department Job Resource Center, which facilitates job search through an Internet center as well has information booths. There is a Cal-Works welfare to work center, which helps welfare dependents to find jobs in the region through referrals and training. The W.O.R.K. center offers various vocational training programs in conjunction with the California EDD and Santa Ana College in the various classroom spaces located in the building. The Center also includes various retail and public uses. The Casa Santa Fe banquet facility is operated by a local restaurateur, and is often rented for various parties and weddings, including ethnic cultural events. A cafe and a gift shop are located near the passenger waiting areas. In addition the building has two meeting rooms for public/City use. The current tenant profile and space distributions are as follows: Transit Related Tenants Economics Research Associates San Bernardina Depot study ERA No.13362 page-34 Amtrak 2,135 s.f. Greyhound 1,180 .s.f. Tres Estrellas De Oro 150 s.f. Turimex International/Transportes Intercalifomias 313 s.f. OCTA 2 bus stalls r. Coast Yellow Cab 5 cab spaces ' Other Tenants Casa Santa Fe(banquet Hall) 5,497 s.f. Caf6 Express 1,100 s.f. K.Lee Gift Shop 916 s.f. Santa Ana W.O.R.K Center 6314 s.f. ' Employment Resource Center 7,393 s.f. ' Cal Works 6,354 s.f. The current rents range from $1.00/s.f. to $1.45/s.f., depending on size and ' function of the tenant. Location Context: The location of the Santa Ana Transportation Center is probably most comparable to the San Bernardino Depot. The Center is located within an industrial area, with considerable amount of vacant land. It is about 1/4 mile away from the nearest residential area(which has a historic housing stock with moderate- income residents) and Downtown Santa Ana is about 1/2 mile or more from the station site. It is obvious that the use mix in the project had to be carefully worked out achieve the desired results. Considering the fact that the City's population is more that 70 percent Hispanic, with an overall median annual household income under $35,000 and a median age of 26.5 years, the City took the right decision in the beginning to concentrate the transit component towards establishing linkages with Mexico and the other uses towards job-training and employment generation goals. But the results and impacts of the project are barely showing themselves now, after almost 15 years after the project was built. One of the apparent results is the fact that the Center is fully occupied with tenants who generate considerable activity in the building throughout the day (irrespective of transit schedules). The Economics Research Assodates San Bernardino Depot Swdy ERA No.13362 Psg&35 Center's multi-modal function works perfectly, with Mexican passengers from neighboring regions taking the Greyhound or Amtrak to Santa Ana and then transferring to one of the international bus lines to Mexico (or vice versa). The local population actively uses and benefits from the job training, job referral and welfare to work programs. It should be kept in mind that many of the patrons of these programs are also potential transit users. In terms of impacts on local real estate as catalyst to local development, the signs are weak but are beginning to show. A large lot across the street to the east of the Center has just been sold and is being developed into a industrial park business center. Many of the surrounding vacant lots were being used as junkyards, but they have been gradually phased out and the lots are being put up for sale, indicating increased potential value. Overall, the Santa Ana Transportation Center is showing signs of success, but even after 15 years, it is still evolving. In terms of use mix and local impacts, the projects provides and excellent example for the San Bernardino Depot. The key lesson is however in the fact that all projects of this nature take considerable amount of time to evolve and produce the desired results. Chatsworth Transit Center and Child Care Center Located in the northwest corner of the San Fernando Valley in the City of Los Angeles, the community of Chatsworth has always been an important transportation node connecting Los Angeles to northern California. 17 years after it was passed from Mexico to the United States, in 1867, a stagecoach relay station was established here, connecting Los Angeles and Santa Barbara via the Santa Susana Pass. It was homesteaded by pioneers in 1870, and was voted by residents to become a part of the City of Los Angeles in 1915,primarily with the incentive of being able to obtain water from the Owens River for agricultural purposes. Pacific Electric began rail service from Hollywood to Van Nuys in 1911, which was extended to Canoga Park by the next year, allowing citizens of Los Angeles easy access to the San Fernando Valley. The tugged terrain and proximity to the growing Hollywood film industry soon made Chatsworth an attractive outdoor film location. The first Chatsworth Southern Pacific depot was built in 1893, in the Chatsworth Park town center, near the intersection of what is now Emaomus Research Associate San Renmd7no Depot Study ERA No.13362 Page-36 Marilla and Topanga Cyn. Blvd. The depot burned down in 1917. The second Chatsworth Railroad Depot, was built in 1917, on the west side of the tracks between Lassen and Devonshire. The second depot was what was known as a `combination depot', serving both passengers and freight, with the town's telegraph office. This particular depot was built in what is called the No. 222 style. These buildings were simple wood frame buildings, with minimal ornamentation and could be assembled in a few days. Hundreds of these were built between the 1890s and the 1920s. The second depot was tom down by the Southern Pacific Railroad in 1963. The current location of the transit center is on the east side of the tracks, approximately opposite of the second historic depot, on the Old Depot Road which connects Lassen and Devonshire. The present transit center building was dedicated in April 20, 1996. Although the present building is entirely new, it is designed to look like the traditional Southern Pacific No. 222 building. The center is served primarily by Amtrak and Metrolink service, with transit connections through MTA, ' LADOT Commuter Express and Simi Valley Route C. The center is used by approximately 220 daily Metrolink passengers and 18,000 annual Amtrak ' passengers. Development Process: The Chatsworth Transit Center was developed under a joint venture between the City of Los Angeles and the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission (now MTA), with the intention of both parties sharing development costs as well as use of the facilities. The Los Angeles City Council voted to appropriate$5 million in mid 1991, which provided the City's share of the $17 million cost of buying the 13 acre site from Southern Pacific Railroad and building the new center. It was agreed by the City Council and the County Commission to pay the remaining $12 million of the total cost from county and state transit funds. A 10 member citizens committee was formed to develop a plan for the entire parcel. By means of various workshops and focus groups, the committee identified a range of appropriate uses for the proposed center, including a day care center, dry cleaner, grocery store, restaurant etc. Eventually these ideas were further developed by the appointed architect to come up with the final development Economics Research Associates San Rernmdino Depot Sa,4 ERA No.13362 Page-37 plan. By the end of 1992 the station was opened with a simple platform and parking primarily for the use of Metrolink service. The plans for the rest of the building were finalized by 1994 and the building was completed in 1996. The development cost for the station building was approximately $1.7 million. Based on the joint venture development, the City would own the main building including the main lobby and adjoining offices with a total of about 6,000 s.f., while an additional 6,000 s.f. is owned by the MTA, who in turn leases the building to a child care center in view of consistency of the overall uses. The surface parking lot accommodates approximately 380 spaces and is shared by both users. The overall site is maintained by the City of Los Angeles. The City incurs a total of approximately $200,000 annually for operations and maintenance of the facility. Of this, about $150,000 is spent on landscaping and general maintenance, while the remainder is spent on providing on-site security between 5:30AM to 8:OOPM. The primary source of these funds are through Proposition C and Proposition A, which are MTA funds tied to sales tax in the county. Current Use Mix: The total leasable area of the facility is approximately 12,000 s.f. Half of the building is occupied by a Child Care Center, in an effort by the MTA to promote the location of specific service facilities in transit stations which can help promote transit usage by neighboring residents. The remaining 6,000 s.f. of the building owned by the City is primarily divided into public/waiting areas, exhibition areas, retail uses and offices. The following table summarizes the distribution of areas and uses within the building: MTA Owned Transit Tots West(Day Care Center) 6,000 s.f. City of Los Angeles Owned Lobby/Waiting Area/Rail Museum 1,600 s.f. Chamber of Commerce/Community Meeting Room 1,500 s.f. Economics Research Aso mates San Bernardino Depot Study ERA No.13362 Page-38 Bike Stop(Bicycle Repair) 700 s.f. Transportation Management Assoc. (office) 700 s.f. Whistle Stop Cafe (Kiosk) 150 s.f. Vacant Kiosk 150 s.f. Vacant Office Space 1.200 s.f. ' Total 12,000 s.f. Most of the public uses in the building are centered around the entry lobby and waiting area, about a half of which functions as a permanent exhibit ' chronicling the history of Chatsworth and its relationship to the railroad and Hollywood. The functioning coffee shop is also located in the lobby along with the ' space for an additional kiosk. The other offices and are independently accessible from outside. The community rooms located in the Chamber of Commerce premises, as well as the main lobby area are often used for community functions and City related meetings. Though the primary intention of locating the Day Care Center is to attract more transit dependent users, it seems to exhibit minimal impact ' from its location in the transit center. The center demonstrates reasonable amount of enrollment,but only a fraction of the enrolled children are wards of transit using ' parents. The City collects $640 per month from the Chamber of Commerce as rent while all other retail and office users are charged $1.00/s.f. per month. The Transportation Management Association is offered the space for free in view of their function. The fast set of tenants came in under the lease terms that put the burden of tenant improvements on the tenant in lieu of prolonged free or reduced - rent or other forms of capital assistance. Location Context: The Chatsworth Transit Center is located south of Devonshire St. about 1/4 mile east of Topanga Canyon Blvd. and 1/4 mile west of De Soto St. Though the center is technically located on Devonshire St., which is one of the busiest commercial streets in the area, one has to travel almost 1/8 mile from the main street to access the actual building. Once again the establishment of proper linkages between the transit center and the nearby commercial street has proved to Economics Research As tes San Bernardino Depot Study ERA No.13362 pug-39 be a considerable challenge and has shown visible impacts on its performance and use. Besides the visual and psychological barrier, the center site also faces certain physical barriers preventing alternative access points. Access from the west is prevented by the presence of the tracks and private property, while access from the east is prevented by the Browns Cyn. Wash channel and Canoga Ave. running below grade. This leaves the only two access points from Devonshire St. on the north and Lassen St. on the South. High-speed traffic on both these streets makes it difficult to see the access road without proper signage or directions. Most of the visible land uses to the east of the Transit Center are light industrial in nature, while the parcel to the west of the tracks is lying vacant, local business owners believe that it is likely to be developed as a light industrial park. Devonshire Rd. has most of the area's local service and retail concentration. The areas west of Topanga Cyn. And Desoto St. are primarily residential, exhibiting a concentration of middle income housing including apartments and higher density single family homes. As one moves northwards towards the hills, one can see considerably lower density and higher value homes. hi summary, though the immediate vicinity of the transit center is somewhat marginal economically, its primary area of influence includes an existing commercial corridor as well as a thriving residential community. The challenge has been to tap into the location advantages of the site and look beyond the primary transit users. The primary tenants like the Chamber of Commerce and the TMA office do not generate enough foot traffic to support any more retail space than what already exists. The child care center is trying to penetrate the non-transit using resident market,but the lack of visibility and access related issues have posed challenges. The recently approved Business Improvement District (BID) along Devonshire Rd., would be an important tool in helping the center overcome some of the challenges related to visibility and access and could help to integrate the center with the rest of the area. The coffee shop located in the center has opted to join the merchant's BID. In conclusion, one can see that the Chatsworth Transit Center is facing challenges that are not uncommon to other such facilities that have aimed there use mix primarily transit related users. But, it should be noted that the facility is only 4 years old, and as seen in other examples, it can take upto 10-20 Economics Research Assodates San Bernardino Depot study ERA No.13362 page.gp years for such facilities to mature. Hence, the current low occupancies and rents in the facility could be mere short-term challenges. Glendale Transportation Center The City of Glendale, located to the north of Downtown Los Angeles at the foot of the Verdugo Hills, was incorporated as a City in 1887. The first railroad depot in the City was built in 1883, in the western part of the City, after Southern Pacific Railroad laid the tracks connecting Glendale to Los Angeles. After 40 years of service, this building was replaced in 1823, by the present structure built adjacent to it. The strategic location of the Glendale Depot as an important station between Los Angeles, Hollywood, Burbank and the San Fernando Valley allowed -- for almost 8 daily passenger trains to stop here during its peak years. This period ' also saw the station being used a backdrop for numerous Hollywood movies. The building was constructed in a Spanish Colonial Revival style with grand arched entrances and high ceiling waiting areas. The City acquired the depot building from Southern Pacific Railroad ' Company in 1989 and the building was entered in the National Register of Historic Places in 1997. The depot was rededicated and reopened on September 15, 1999 as the new Glendale Transportation Center. The restored building exhibits stenciled patterns on the beams, replicated wooden doors at the north and south portals, replicated scored concrete floor in the waiting room and a fully restored ticket ' window. The center is currently served by Metrolink and Amtrak train services. In addition it is also served by Greyhound, MTA, Glendale Beeline (City Transportation), Glendale Express Shuttle and employees only shuttles for Kaiser Permanente and Paramount Studios employees. ' Development Process: It was 9 years after the building was purchased by the City of Glendale that actual renovation and construction work was started. The total cost to the City for acquisition of the site, the structure and construction and rehabilitation was approximately $23.5 million. Of this about $5.3 million was the cost of construction and rehabilitation. The building is located in an irregular site measuring more than 6 acres in size. The City received over $8.1 million in state Economics Research Associates San Bernardino Depm Study ERA No.13362 Page-01 i and federal grants including Proposition 108 funds and Transit Capital Improvement funds. In addition to the restored depot building, the new Transportation Center includes a platform for Metrolink passengers, a covered outdoor waiting area for Greyhound passengers and a surface parking lot for about 200 cars. Current Use Mix: The restored depot building measures about 6,000s.f. in area. This includes the core building with the internal waiting area, a semi-open pergola for outdoor waiting, a restroom block, offices and baggage storage. The new platform and Greyhound waiting areas are in excess of this square footage. During the early stages of the construction and development phase, the restoration began under the assumption that Amtrak would be one of the anchors of ' the building and would use the main ticketing area and the indoor waiting area. In the meantime Amtrak decided to cut down on their manned ticketing services at stations as a cost cutting method and to push their interests in promoting `on-board' ticketing and tickets via mail and the Internet. This resulted in the loss of a major anchor for the Depot. Currently the depot is occupied by only two major tenants. The main ticket booth area is occupied by the local Transportation Management Agency (TMA) while another office space is used by Greyhound for ticketing. Greyhound is using some of the baggage areas. The current space allocation calls for about 420s.f. of office space, about 1,200s.f. of waiting area, about 500s.f. of restrooms and about 1,700s.f. of storage/warehouse area. Location Context: The Glendale Transportation Center is located on the western part of the City on the western edge of Cerritos Blvd., along Gardena. The immediate vicinity of the depot building is primarily light industrial in nature. The depot parking lot wraps around an existing industrial building, which is currently occupied by a video and film production company. To the east of the depot building across Gardena, most of the buildings are occupied light manufacturing and some service related offices such as label making companies, warehousing, equipment rental etc. There are a few single-family residential units along El Bonito the east. The west side of the tracks is occupied by a large long term storage and warehousing facility. San Fernando Rd., one block east of the depot Fs nornscs Research Associates San Bernardino Depot Sndy ERA No.13362 Page42 shows fairly high intensity of economic activity in terms of retail activity and office space as well as traffic volume. Overall the area appears to be fairly economically stable, with reasonably good levels of occupancy and physical conditions, but the land use mix in the immediate vicinity is oriented more towards low intensity industrial and service uses. The use mix in the depot itself is currently more oriented towards transportation and transit, with a combination of regional and national transportation elements like Greyhound and Amtrak, along with local transit services like MTA, Metrolink and the Glendale Beeline. The multi-modal mix generates moderate amounts of daytime traffic to the center. Since the center opened less than a year ago, it is still very early to comment on its performance and use mix, but absence of Amtrak as an anchor seems to have posed some challenges. ' The large indoor waiting area is currently inaccessible to the public, and there is an absence of any retail or food beverage tenant. Future addition of an anchor in the space originally designated for Amtrak would probably be of great benefit to the ' center. In summary the center appears to be emerging as a true multi-modal center with a complementary mix of local regional and national bus and rail ' transportation. 1 1 ' Eeoaoa Research Assodata San Rernar&w Depot study ERA No.13362 Pa4e43 PRELIMINARY CONCLUSIONS AND OBSERVATIONS Development Approach • The project horizon could be long term and may take 15 to 20 years before the desired results in terns of it becoming a catalyst for local economic development are actually seen. • Integration with a larger community development plan is essential. The context of the depot site in relation to the Mt. Vernon Corridor Specific Plan or Downtown, could be a crucial issue with respect to the long term sustainability and success of the project. • The rehabilitation process could take two approaches. The City could either rehabilitate both the exterior and interior (tenant improvements) of the building in return for higher rents, or the burden of interior improvements could be left to the tenant in lieu of discounted rent. • Operations and maintenance costs for such facilities could be substantial. Effective cost recovery techniques and alternative long-term operation and maintenance funding sources might need to be identified. • Partnerships with Amtrak and Metrohnk and assessment of their long-term plans would be essential. • Other users and markets in addition to primary rail transit users have to be attracted for the project to sustain itself. This might include other modes of transit users, area residents, daytime employees and visitors. Use-Mix Considerations • Public and community serving tenants are often considered in comparable projects. These could be local government related, community service related, vocational education related • Transit or rail related non-profit groups, clubs, enthusiast organizations usually prefer to locate in such facilities. Economics Research Associates San Bernardno Depot Study ERA No.13362 Pages P r • Bus service providers connecting San Bernardino to other parts of the region or Mexico could be considered. This would make sense if the bus service complements the train service and a multi-modal use facility becomes feasible. • Transit related retail and services,that can tap into both the transit using market as well as the resident market could be considered. Some of the obvious examples are, day care centers, laundry,p y dry, cafes and restaurants, video rentals or outdoor uses like farmers markets etc. Figures VII and VIII illustrates the presence of retail clusters and the competitive position of the site with respect to a few such retail and service uses in the primary market. .. • Rail based attractions such as museums, or themed retail, dining and entertainment uses could be explored. 1 Emnomia Research Associates San Bernardino Depot Study ERA No.13362 Page45 i �1 . i���■�■n��■�1-III iino iii ��ll immins VEM MM OZONE■■ CAI 1 WORMIN �,.��Jn■■■ i ■■-■■■■■ allmmnmp IF Molo ■ter n■:-:�e�� �I�a■■o-�1������� ���F,.w1�►r ,, „�� + � ■►fir - ww-�~'rrr�..�w �� ��Eii - N■■■■■■I�■■■■■� ■MEN N---- ��■■N■■■INN■ ���■NI■■■■■■■INN■ ' loom 1101111mi ��■N�-r■�■.N�1l�N[q■ � 1� 1 --- •_ ME /::: . :a_,� _ - .:11=0_1 LOSE '�1�®��pgH�li;�1�111111�JI�I�I�IoI z .■■ ■ ■ ■■m__■■■_ --�� 11�..._.__.-..� t==1■1MEN ==C.z.ME m IN - ---��M■■■■■ N■_w NIEWEEM `J 1 own PM San Bemardino Depot sun �n:■II �U�ii�.!N4 Special Services Categories 9 Child Day Care e Laundry/Garment Svc. 9 Misc. Personal Svc. Video Rental E•jr1 //1•.�/� /// /� SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT .. REHABILITATION AND ADAPTR'E REUSE STUDY March 6,2000 Appendices r r w. 6- Appendix G Seismic Analysis Yi E wn L e Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIR• 530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 krakower & associates 160 white oak drive 626 355-6086 structural engineers arcadia, ca 91006 fax 626 355-9394 REPORT OF STRUCTURAL SURVEY SAN BERNARDINO SANTA FE STATION SAN BERNARDINO, CA Prepared by KRAKOWER & ASSOCIATES STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS ARCADIA, CA JANUARY 2000 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Analysis of the as found conditions and record structural drawings indicated the structural systems are capable of accommodating a wide range of re-use alternatives. Obvious visual evidence of deferred maintenance is generally associated with non-structural elements and is not indicative of distress to the structural system. Elements of the structural system were evaluated individually ' to assess the capacity of the building to resist demands from future probable ground shaking from earthquakes. The analysis identified alternative methods to reduce future seismic damage to the elements that are compatible with the Secretary of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings and that - comply with the current building code. INTRODUCTION Preparation of this report included review of several documents. Record structural drawings dated April 1917 were examined. A 1986 structural report by Hillman, Biddison & Loevenguth, Structural Engineers, was referred to. The t Report of Geotechnical Investigation, dated December 16, 1999, prepared by Kleinfelder, has been reviewed. Recent as found architectural floor plans developed by Architect M.W. Donaldson have been obtained. Estimates of demands and capacities of certain elements of the structural system have been made for future seismic effects and different reuse occupancies. A site visit has been made to corroborate the written documents in accessible spaces. Laboratory testing of the materials of construction of the structural system has not been done with this phase. Strengths of materials used in the analysis are representative of material properties commonly used in the era of construction of the depot. 1 i Construction of buildings using reinforced concrete began around 1900 as I Portland cement became commercially available and more individuals became familiar with its characteristics. Early reinforced concrete buildings were designed ' for heavier floor loads. Other early railroad depots we have been involved with used good quality materials of construction. _ The first page of the structural computations in the Appendix has a key plan of the zones of the depot described below. CENTRAL BUILDING Structural System Reinforced Portland cement plaster domes occupy each comer of the central building. Straight wooden sheathing on radial wood joists support the plaster domes. The walls of the domes below the spring lines are metal studs with plaster. A reinforced concrete slab and steel beams support these walls. There is a large opening at the middle of the slab to allow access into each dome. The main gable roof between the domes consists of two-inch wood sheathing, wood beams and steel trusses. Steel columns support all of the steel framing. The columns are encased in concrete for fire protection. Reinforced concrete walls around the perimeter of the central tower are filled in between the columns. The steel columns stop near grade and are supported by concrete columns down to deep concrete footings. Shallow reinforced concrete grade beams span between the deep footings to support the north and south perimeter concrete walls. The foundation plans do not indicate the presence of grade beams between the deep footings on the east and west sides of the central building. Concrete encased steel beams support the second floor concrete slab. Concrete encased steel columns support the floor framing. The steel columns are founded at grade on concrete columns with deep concrete footings. There is an offset in the second floor slab between the waiting room and entry hall. The first floor appears to be a concrete slab on grade. Reinforced concrete utility tunnels are located on the north and south sides under the slab on grade. Interior non-bearing tile partition walls are founded on the slab on grade without footings below the walls. 2 Results of the Analysis The second floor supports two kinds of demands. Dead loads are the weights of the permanent elements such as the floor, ceiling, beams and girders. Live loads are transient conditions such as people, partitions, furniture, temporary construction loads during tenant improvements and storage. The live load capacity of the floor determines the different kinds of future occupancies (reuses) that the floor can accommodate. Each element of the floor structural system has a live load capacity that can be estimated. For the central building, the 3-112 inch slab has a live load capacity exceeding 100 pounds per square foot (psf). The preliminary computations assumed a minimum ultimate concrete compressive strength of 2,000 pounds per square inch (psi) at 28 days. Reinforcing steel was evaluated with the minimum yield strength of 50,000 psi assuming billet or rail type steel of ASTM grade A15 and Grade A16 available around 1917. Steel beams and girders encased in concrete have capacities in excess of 100 psf. The analysis assumed an expected tensile strength of 60,000 psi with the expected yield strength of one half the tensile strength. Structural steel of this era conformed to ASTM grade A9. The proposed reuse for conferences and meetings requires a capacity of 100 psf. The first floor partitions in the bathrooms and entry area on the south side of the central building exhibit cracking. There is also cracking in the utility tunnel below this area. The distress can be attributed to settlement of poorly compacted fill soils directly under the slab and lack of foundations below the interior masonry partitions. Poorly compacted fill material is subject to consolidation by seismic shaking or introduction of inadvertent moisture sources. The recent soil report indicates very competent native material below the deep footings. The observed damage is therefore non-structural. Repair of this area requires removal of the slab on grade, correction of the underlying fill material and reconstruction of the slab on grade and utility tunnel. e For future seismic demands, the domes and high roof were the first area of interest. The bases of the domes create large openings in each comer of the main gable roof structural system. These openings reduce the capacity of the roof to resist seismic demands from the perimeter concrete walls, domes and the roof. Strengthening of the roof is required and the Spanish tile has to remain. Horizontal steel trussed bracing has to be added near the base of the domes in the attic to strengthen the roof. The walls of the domes only utilize plaster to resist seismic demands from the dome weights and should be strengthened with wood sheathing. Connection of the dome walls to the concrete base should be improved. 3 I Anchorage between the main gable roof and the perimeter concrete walls will require improvement for future seismic demands. Additional reinforced concrete shear walls with foundations are required between the first and second floor. The location of these walls would be the east and west sides of the central building filled in between the existing columns. These new walls can be perforated with openings for doors and windows. The offset of the second floor above the north edge of the bathrooms creates an irregularity in the seismic resisting system. A proposed elevator and stair shaft just east of the banquet support room as shown on the architect's drawings can be made from reinforced concrete walls to strengthen the area. EAST AND WEST WINGS Structural System Two-inch wood roof sheathing spans between wood beams spaced four feet apart. Steel trusses support the wood beams. Reinforced concrete columns support the steel trusses. Reinforced concrete roof beams continue around the perimeter of the buildings between the exterior columns. Interior concrete columns also continue up to the roof framing to support the steel trusses. The second floor framing consists of reinforced concrete slabs spanning between reinforced concrete beams and girders. Reinforced concrete columns support the girders. Vertical offsets in the second floor elevation occur at the intersection of the central building and the east and west wings. There is also an offset in the east wing second floor along its length in the easttwest direction. The first floor framing contains a combination of slab on grade and structural framing similar to the second floor over basement areas. Foundations below the columns are reinforced square concrete pad footings. Continuous concrete footings are located below all the exterior concrete walls. Perforated reinforced concrete walls are cast between the perimeter concrete columns around the entire exterior at the first and second floor. Interior partitions on the first and second floor are non-load bearing. No footings are shown beneath the interior non-bearing partitions. Results of the Analysis The reinforced concrete slabs in the west and east wings have load capacities greater than 100 pounds per square foot. The proposed reuse of office on the second floor only requires 50 psf live load and 20 psf partition load. Live load capacity of the first floor framing above the basements is similar to the second floor. The proposed reuse of assembly on the first floor requires 100 psf live load. 4 For future seismic demands, the roofs were the first areas of interest. In the north/south direction, the two-inch straight sheathing does not have adequate capacity to span between existing concrete walls. Remove all existing tiles and overlay the straight sheathing with new plywood. Investigate and correct deteriorated roof framing. Reinstall original tiles that can be reused. It is important to keep the interior spaces free from interior shear walls for maximum future reuse flexibility. Anchorage of the roof framing to the perimeter concrete frame was the second area of interest. Along the eaves, the perimeter reinforced concrete beams can span horizontally between the steel trusses to distribute seismic demands of the walls to the roof. The trusses are well anchored to the beams according to the - record drawings. The gable ends of the concrete walls require anchorage to the roof framing. The historic door and window openings in the perimeter concrete walls are the third area of interest. These highly perforated walls are the primary shear walls presently. The analysis indicates the demands to walls between the second floors and roofs are much less than the demands to the walls between the ' second and first floors. A preliminary check of the in-plane shear capacities of the south wall piers of the west wing was made. The concrete pier capacities of the second and first floor were adequate. Wall reinforcing steel patterns, if any, were not shown on the record drawings. Reinforcing steel would add more capacity. If additional capacity was required in the final reuse configuration, one correction L method involves filling in some openings with reinforced concrete. This method is only viable in areas that are not visually important. A second method would thicken existing concrete piers between windows and doors with reinforced concrete. A third method would add interior reinforced concrete shear walls parallel to the original walls to reduce demands to the exterior. These added walls would be coordinated with future reuse wall layouts. Additional foundation work is anticipated with any of the methods. 1 1 5 i s EAST END ANNEX Structural Systems Two-story Building Two-inch thick wood sheathing spans between light gage steel framing spaced five feet apart at the roof. Perforated hollow clay tile walls support the roof framing. The second floor is constructed with a 2-1/2 inch reinforced concrete slab spanning over light gage steel joists. These joists are supported by interior partitions and perforated exterior brick walls. The tile and brick walls do not contain reinforcing steel. Continuous reinforced concrete footings support the brick walls. The bottom of the footing is located on top of old paving according to record drawings. A concrete slab on grade was constructed over imported fill material placed on top of the original paving. One-story Building Light gage steel joists support a 2-1/2 inch reinforced concrete roof slab. Concrete encased steel beams support the joists. Concrete encased steel columns support the beams in the interior. The exterior walls are brick without reinforcing steel. These brick walls support the ends of the steel beams. Results of the Analysis Tyro-story Building The live load capacity of the second floor is 81 pounds per square foot controlled by the composite strength of the light gage steel joists and slab. Interior bearing elements are required where the existing interior bearing partitions occur. A future reuse of museum archival storage or exhibit requires at least 100 psf. The floor framing should be strengthened. For seismic demands, the exterior masonry walls were the first areas of interest. Future damage to these walls could compromise the vertical load carrying capacity because there are no apparent exterior columns. Addition of a reinforced concrete wall on the interior surface of the masonry would provide support for the second floor and roof framing and strengthen the existing masonry for future seismic demands. An alternative method would remove and replace the exterior masonry walls with properly reinforced masonry. Shoring of the interior framing would be required with the wall replacement. Either method would allow historic windows and doors to remain. Either method requires new foundations. 6 The second area of interest is the anchorage of the second floor and roof to the exterior masonry walls. Additional anchorage is required between the steel roof joists and the top of the existing tile and new concrete walls. Additional anchorage is required between the second floor steel joists and exterior walls- One-story Building The ends of the any concrete encased steel roof beams that bear on unreinforced masonry should be shored with steel columns or concrete piers. Reinforced concrete walls should be added to the inside surface of the tile and brick walls around the restaurant and transportation museum spaces shown on the architect's drawings. The original arched windows need to be maintained. An alternative to the reinforced concrete would be removal and replacement of the existing masonry with reinforced masonry. New foundations are required with either scheme. ARCADES Structural System ' The central and eastern portions of the arcade roof along the railroad tracks are framed with two-inch straight roof sheathing and wood beams. Reinforced concrete walls support the wood framing. The concrete walls are perforated with large arched openings. An arcade on the eastern side of the depot was added at the time of the annex construction. Two-inch straight wood roof sheathing spans between wood beams. Reinforced concrete walls support the beams. These L walls are hollow in their center rather than solid as found along the north side. The western end of the arcade roof along the railroad tracks is an extension of the reinforced concrete second floor framing over the baggage room. Reinforced concrete beams support a 3-1/2 inch thick reinforced concrete slab. Reinforced concrete walls support the beams. The walls have arched openings Results of the Analysis Some zones of the arcade roof are damaged on the north side and areas have restricted access in place. Some elements are missing on the eastern end. Replacement of the damaged and missing elements is required. For seismic demands, the first area of interest is the anchorage of the wooden roof to the concrete walls. Anchorage is required to the arched arcade walls and the building walls at each end of the roof framing. 7 CONCLUSIONS Rehabilitation of the San Bernardino Santa Fe Station is feasible. The concrete floors have adequate capacity for a wide variety of reuses. Strengthening of the floors is also feasible for localized heavier or vibration sensitive loading conditions which may be required by future service requirements. Risk from future earthquakes cannot be made zero and some future damage is to be expected. The rehabilitated depot should be able to resist a minor level of earthquake ground motion without damage to non-structural or structural elements. Some non-structural damage without structural damage is anticipated for moderate levels of earthquake ground motion. Structural and non-structural damage is anticipated for major levels of earthquake ground motion with intensities previously experienced or forecast for the site. The damage is expected to be repairable without collapse. The level of damage depends on a number of factors including the intensity and duration of shaking, structure configuration, type of lateral force resisting system, materials of construction, construction workmanship and inspection. There are many available alternative construction techniques that can reduce future seismic damage and protect the historic fabric. Implementation of the recommendations in the later construction document phase will comply with present code and greatly reduce threats to life safety. Older buildings with deferred maintenance are more susceptible to future earthquake damage than well-maintained structures. An earthquake hazard reduction program is an important maintenance program that will extend the service life of the facility. 8 SAN BERNARDINO DEPOT REHABILITATION AND ADAPTIVE REUSE STUDY March 6, 2000 Appendices W Appendix H Geotechnical Report 1 Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA•530 Sixth Avenue, San Diego,CA 92101 •(619)239-7888 t KLEINFELDER An employee owned rompany December 16, 1999 File No: 58-9285-01 Mr. Greg Roberson Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson,FAIA, Inc. 530 Sixth Avenue San Diego, California 92101 w. Subject: Report of Geotechnical Investigation r San Bernardino Santa Fe Station Rehabilitation San Bernardino, California Dear Mr. Roberson: ^ Kleinfelder, Inc. (Kleinfelder), is pleased to present this report summarizing our geotechnical r investigation performed for the subject project. The site is located at 1170 West 3`" Street in San Bernardino, California. The results of our geotechnical investigation, and our preliminary conclusions A and recommendations for geotechnical design of the project,are presented in the attached report. In summary, it is our opinion the project is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint, provided the trecommendations presented in the attached report are incorporated into design and construction. A The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are contingent on the provisions outlined in the Additional Services and Limitations Sections of this report. The project owner should become familiar with these provisions in order to assess further involvement by Kleinfelder, and other potential impacts to the proposed project site. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. If you have any questions or require additional information,please do not hesitate to contact our office at(909)793-2691. Respectfully submitted, KLEINFELDER,INC. QAOFESS/OA A a„Q�OJS3"P" S/Fyq�F 2 NO-C56925x m / 0Aaiu Mariusz P. Sieradzki,Ph t ��e Allen D. Evans,P.E., G.E. Project Manager Of CAUE�F Area Manager ' 58-9285-01/5829R338 Page ii of iv December 16, 1999 Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder,Inc. ' KLEIN F E L D E R 1940 Orange Tree Lane, Redlands, CA 92374 (909)793-2691 (909)792-1704 fax KLEINFELDER W A TABLE OF CONTENTS r Section Pace r 1. INTRODUCTION..............................................................................................................1 1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE.........................................................................................1 1.2 Proposed Project......................................................................................................3 2. SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS...........».......................................................4 2.1 SITE DESCRIPTION..............................................................................................4 2.2 SUBSURFACE SOIL CONDITIONS ....................................................................4 2.2.1 General....................................................................................................4 2.2.2 Fill Deposits...................................:........................................................4 2.2.3 Alluvium.................................................................................................5 2.3 GROUNDWATER CONDITI ONS...............................................:.........................5 3. GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS......................................................»....................................6 3.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGY.........................................................................................6 3.2 FAULTING AND SEISMICTTY ............................................................................6 4. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS...........................................................9 4.1 GENERAL...............................................................................................................9 4.2 SEISMIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS..............................................................9 4.2.1 Ground Shaking......................................................................................9 4.2.2 Liquefaction..........................................................................................10 ' 4.2.3 Other Seismic Considerations...............................................................10 4.3 EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL CAUSES OF SETTLEMENT CRACKING.10 4.4 POTENTIAL REMEDIATION ALTERNATIVES..............................................12 ' 4.5. CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS.............................................................13 4.5.1 General..................................................................................................13 4.5.2 Subgrade Preparation............................................................................13 ' 4.5.3 Excavation Conditions..........................................................................13 4.6 TEMPORARY EXCAVATIONS .........................................................................14 4.6.1 General..................................................................................................14 ' 4.6.2 Excavations and Slopes.........................................................................14 4.6.3 Construction Considerations.................................................................14 1 4.7 ENGINEERED FILL.............................................................................................15 4.7.1 Materials................................................................................................15 4.7.2 Compaction Criteria..............................................................................15 4.8 DRAINAGE AND LANDSCAPING....................................................................15 4.9 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS...............................................................................16 4.9.1 Allowable Bearing Pressures................................................................16 4.9.2 Estimated Settlements...........................................................................16 4.9.3 Lateral Resistance .................................................................................17 4.9.4 Construction/Design Considerations.....................................................17 58-9285-01/58298338 Page iii of iv December 16,1999 Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder,Inc. A■ KLEINFELDER 4.10 CONCRETE SLABS SUPPORTED ON GRADES .............................................17 4.11 LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES........................................................................18 4.12 EXPANSIVE SOILS .............................................................................................18 4.13 CORROSIVITY.....................................................................................................19 5. ADDITIONAL SERVICES ............................................................................................20 5.1 PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS REVIEW........................................................20 5.2 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION AND TESTING........................................20 6. LIMITATIONS................................................................................................................21 7. REFERENCES.................................................................................................................22 PLATES Plate 1 - Site Location Map Plate 2 -Boring Location Map APPENDICES Appendix A -Field Exploration Appendix B - Laboratory Testing 58-9285-01/58298338 Page iv of iv December 16, 1999 Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder,Inc. h" K EINE E L D ER 1. INTRODUCTION Kleinfelder, Inc. (Kleinfelder), was retained by Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson, FAIA, Inc. to conduct a geotechnical investigation for the proposed rehabilitation of the Santa Fe station. The site is located at 1170 West 3rd Street in the City of San Bernardino, California. The location of the site is illustrated in Plate 1, Site Location Map. The scope of our services was presented in a proposal entitled "Revised Scope of Work for Geotechnical Investigation, San Bernardino Santa Fe Station Rehabilitation, San Bernardino, California," dated October 23, 1999. 1.1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of this geotechnical investigation was to explore and evaluate the subsurface soil conditions at the project site and provide design-level geotechnical recommendations for the project. This investigation also addresses the anticipated seismic shaking at the site, groundwater levels and earthwork construction considerations. A description of the scope of work performed is presented below. n Task 1 —Literature Review/Utility Clearance. We reviewed published and unpublished geologic literature in our files including publications prepared by the California Division of Mines and Geology and the U.S. Geological Survey. We reviewed available appropriate seismic and faulting information including designated earthquake fault zones and our in-house database of ' faulting in the general site vicinity. Each of our proposed boring locations was cleared for known existing utility lines and with the participating utility companies through Underground Service Alert (USA). ' Task 2 - Field Exploration. A total of three hollow-stem auger borings ranging in depth from 30 feet to 45 feet were advanced in the vicinity of the station at the following locations. South side of the tower area(Boring B-1). Southwest of the building(Boring B-2). East area beyond the arcade and Harvey House(Boring B-3). 58-9285-01/5829R338 Page 1 of 23 December 16, 1999 Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder,Inc. k4 KL E I N FE L D E R An engineer supervised the field operations and logged the borings. Selected bulk, disturbed and drive samples were retrieved, sealed and transported to our laboratory for further evaluation. Our typical sampling interval was 5 feet. The number of blows necessary to drive both a Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampler and a California-type sampler were recorded. A description of the field exploration and a Legend to the Logs of Borings are presented in Appendix A. The locations of the borings are shown on the Boring Location Map,presented in Plate 2. Task 3 - Laboratory Testing. Laboratory testing was performed on representative bulk, relatively undisturbed and disturbed samples to substantiate field classifications and to provide engineering parameters for geotechnical design. Testing consisted of. in situ moisture and density, gain size distribution, plasticity index, direct shear, collapse potential, maximum dry density/optimum moisture content, expansion potential, and corrosion/consolidation tests. The test results are presented in Appendix B. Task 4 - Geotechnical Analyses and Renort Preparation. This report presents the data obtained during field exploration and laboratory testing, as well as conclusions and recommendations pertaining to the following. • Discussion of the subsurface materials encountered and anticipated excavation characteristics of the materials. • Regional geologic setting, discussion of geologic features and geologic hazards including the potential for liquefaction, ground rupture due to surface faulting, and seismically induced settlement. • Soil bearing values for vertical and lateral loads and anticipated future settlement. • Expansion potential. • Corrosion potential. • Guidelines for earthwork construction including recommendations for site preparation and fill placement and compaction. • Preliminary evaluation of the potential causes of the reported tower foundation settlement and alternative recommendations for long-term remediation. The report contains a site map, logs of the borings, and laboratory test results. 58-9285-01/58298338 Page 2 of 23 December 16, 1999 Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder,Inc. A ' KLEINFELDER r s 1.2 Proposed Project It is our understanding that the City of San Bernardino desires to rehabilitate, seismically retrofit, and adaptively reuse the San Bernardino Santa Fe Station building for its continued use as a passenger rail station and other future transportation-related uses. The existing building is W designated as a California Point of Historical Interest, and identified as a local landmark in the City's General Plan. r. ., The project will include stabilization of the existing foundation for the structure. We understand ,. that reported settlement of the existing tower foundation has resulted in distress to the structure. _ The extent of settlement and associated distress was not fully known at the time our report was r prepared. For further understanding of the project, we have reviewed Foundation Record Drawings, dated April 24, 1917 and provided by Mr. Michael Krakower of Krakower and Associates. The foundation drawings reviewed indicate that the structure is supported by a series of isolated square footings ranging in width between 5 and 10.5 feet, and by exterior, 3-foot wide continuous wall footings. The exterior wall footings are founded 7 feet below the existing grade. Two rows of the isolated footings on the southern portion of the tower are founded at about 21 feet,while the remaining footings are about 13 feet below the ground surface. 1 .. 58-9285-01/5829R338 Page 3 of 23 December 16, 1999 Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder,Inc. KLEINFELDER I 2. SITE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 2.1 SITE DESCRIPTION The project site is located within the existing San Bernardino Santa Fe railroad station at 1170 West 3rd Street. At the time of our investigation, the topography of the site was generally flat with an elevation of about 1075 feet above mean sea level. Existing asphalt concrete pavement is located on the eastern, western and southern portions of the site. Railroad tracks are located immediately north of the station building. Several cracks up to %2-inch wide were observed in the building walls, generally along the southeast and east side of the building. These cracks have been assumed by others to result from foundation settlement. 22 SUBSURFACE SOIL CONDITIONS 2.2.1 General All of the borings encountered a layer of fill material underlain by an alluvium deposit. Two of our borings located southwest (boring B-2) and east (boring B-3) of the existing structure within the parking areas encountered a surface layer of asphaltic concrete and aggregate base material with a thickness of about 3 inches and 4 inches,respectively. .s 2.2.2 Fill Deposits The fill deposit encountered at the site during our field investigation was generally composed of _ silty sand. The depth of fill in our exploratory borings varied from about 12 to 18 feet below the existing grades. The SPT blow counts varied from 7 to greater than 50, indicating loose to very r dense conditions. Dry densities measured on drive samples varied from about 88 to 120 pounds per cubic foot (pcf), at water contents varying between 9.6 and 29.2 percent. Grain size ■ distribution tests performed on selected samples indicated a fines content up to 42 percent. One direct shear test performed on a soil sample remolded to 90 percent of the laboratory maximum dry density indicated an effective friction angle of 31 degrees and an apparent effective cohesion of 140 pounds per square foot (psf). Additional tests performed on near-surface soil samples indicated a low potential for collapse and expansion, and low to moderate potential for corrosion. 58-9285-0115829R338 Page 4 of 23 December 16, 1999 Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder,Inc. k'9 KLEINFELDER 2.2.3 Alluvium The native soil deposits encountered at the site during our investigation were alluvial deposits generally comprised of sand with silt, silty sand, and sandy silt. Standard penetration (SPT) blow counts in fine-grained soil vaned from 24 to 27 blows per foot, indicating very stiff conditions. SPT blow counts in coarse-grained soils varied from 26 to greater than 50 blows per foot, indicating medium dense to very dense conditions. Dry densities measured on drive soil samples varied from about 90 to 105 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) at water contents varying between 12.4 and 19.8 percent. A plasticity index of 7 was obtained for one selected fine-grained soil sample, indicating soil of low plasticity. Additional tests performed on a selected soil sample indicated a low potential for collapse. Detailed descriptions of the subsurface conditions encountered during our field investigation are presented on the Logs of Borings in Appendix A and laboratory test results in Appendix B. 2.3 GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS Based on the visual observation of the soils retrieved from our borings, groundwater was not encountered in borings at the time of our investigation. A review of available published information indicates that the groundwater level is currently reported at a depth of approximately 70 feet below the ground surface. Recent groundwater measurements from a well located approximately '/z mile east of the site indicates that water levels are at 70.2 feet below ground surface and were as high as 42 feet below ground surface in 1998 due to recharge of the aquifers from seasonal rains. Fluctuations of the groundwater level, localized zones of perched water, and soil moisture content should be anticipated during and following the rainy season. Irrigation of landscaped areas can also cause a fluctuation of local groundwater levels. Based on the present groundwater levels, groundwater should not adversely impact the design or construction of this project. 58-9285-01/58298338 Page 5 of 23 December 16, 1999 Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder,Inc. k' ■ KLEINFELDER 3. GEOLOGIC CONDITIONS ii 3.1 REGIONAL GEOLOGY r The site is located on the San Bernardino Valley portion of the upper Santa Ana River Drainage ■ of the San Jacinto Mountain Block, within the Peninsular Ranges geomorphic province of California. Locally, this area lies near the transition zone between the Transverse Ranges geomorphic province to the north and the Peninsular Ranges geomorphic province to the south. ■ The Peninsular Ranges are a northwest-southeast oriented complex of mountain ranges and ` valleys. This province is characterized by sub-unit blocks that are separated by similarly +U trending strike slip faults. The site is contained within an area exhibiting characteristics of both provinces, the compression folding and thrust faulting and the northwest trending strike-slip faults separating the intra-basin blocks. The site has been regionally mapped to be underlain by younger (Holocene age) lower alluvial fan deposits. These alluvial fan deposits include materials locally derived from the San Bernardino Mountains to the north via Lytle Creek. The fan deposits consist of mixtures of unconsolidated sands, silty sands and gravelly silty sands with cobbles. Beneath the younger alluvial fan deposits are older alluvial fan materials. These deposits are estimated to have a a� combined thickness of least 900 feet. r 3.2 FAULTING AND SEISMICITY r We consider the most significant geologic hazard to the project to be the potential for severe seismic shaking that is likely to occur during the design life of the project. The project site is located in the highly seismic Southern California region within the influence of several fault 'I systems that are considered to be active or potentially active. An active fault is defined by the State of California as a "sufficiently active and well defined fault that has exhibited surface a displacement within Holocene time (about the last 11,000 years)." A potentially active fault is defined by the State as a fault "with a history of movement within Pleistocene time (between 11,000 and 1.6 million years ago)." These active and potentially active faults are capable of producing potentially damaging seismic shaking at the site. It is anticipated that the project site will periodically experience ground acceleration as the result of moderate to high magnitude A earthquakes. Other active faults without surface expression (blind faults) that are capable of 58-9285.01/582912338 Page 6 of 23 December 16, 1999 Copyright 1999 KleinWer,Inc. a in KLEINFELDER r r. generating an earthquake, or other potentially active seismic sources may exist that are not currently zoned. In addition to the determination of fault activity, faults are also type classified as A, B, or C for Near-Source Zone ground motion (Na and Nv) by the both State and ICBO (in the UBC, Table 16-U)according to parameters of known slip rate and maximum earthquake magnitude. A "Type .. A" fault has a magnitude M>7.0 and slip rate SR>5mm/yr. A "Type B" has a magnitude M>7.0 ar and SR<5mm/yr., or M<7.0 and SR>2mm/yr., or M>6.5 and SR<2mm/yr. A "Type C' has a magnitude M<6.5 and a slip rate of<2mm/yr, or is unrated under the current knowledge. Faults identified by the State as being either active or potentially active are not known to be present on-site. The buried inferred trace of the Loma Linda fault is located approximately 0.25 miles northeast of the site(Fife, et al., 1976). This buried fault acts locally as a groundwater '^ barrier and trends parallel to the San Jacinto fault, connecting with the Glen Helen fault to the i• northwest. The site is not located within a State of California designated Earthquake Fault Zone �. for ground rupture (Hart and Bryant, 1997). However, the site is located within a seismic risk ,■ zone as designated by both the City and County of San Bernardino for the Loma Linda fault. The site is also located within a currently designated County of San Bernardino Liquefaction Susceptibility Zone. The site is located just outside the 2km boundary of the Active Fault Y• Near-Source (Seismic) Zone for the San Jacinto fault and within the 101am zone for the San Andreas fault. The San Jacinto fault is a Type B fault and the San Andreas fault is a Type A fault as designated by the UBC (ICBO 1998). .■ We have performed a computer-aided search of the known active and potentially active faults within a 62-mile (100 kilometer) radius of the site, and researched available literature to assess the maximum credible earthquakes expected to be generated on each fault. Table 1 summarizes these parameters for 5 of the 32 known active and potentially active faults within the searched radius of the site that in our opinion will have the greatest impact upon the site. Selection of the faults was based on their proximity to the site and their potential to generate strong ground motion on the site. Table 1 was generated using, in part, the EQFAULT computer program '■ (version 2.01) developed by Blake (1993) as modified using the fault parameters from DMG Open File Report 96-08 and the 1997 UBC fault maps. This table does not identify the �■ probability of reactivation or the onsite effects from earthquakes occurring on any of the other faults in the region. The site is located on the USGS San Bernardino South, California 7q ,.. Quadrangle Map, at Latitude 34.1029°N and Longitude 117.3085°W, at approximately the 1075 feet elevation(MSL). 58-9285-01/5829R338 Page 7 of 23 December 16, 1999 Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder,Inc. R■ KLEINFELDER TABLE 1 SIGNIFICANT FAULTS Fault Approximate Maximum Credible Fault Seismic Name Distance from Event (Moment Source Type Site km (mi) Magnitude) San Jacinto (San Bernardino segment) 1 (0.75) 6.7 B San Andreas (San Bernardino segment) 8 (5.0) 7.4 A Cucamonga 13 (8.0) 7.0 A North Frontal Fault Zone 18 (11.0) 6.5 B San Andreas (Mojave segment) 23 (15.0) 7.8 A A number of moderate earthquakes have occurred in the vicinity of the project site in the past years. The parameters used to define the limits of the historical earthquake search used in the EQ Search Program (Blake) include geographical limits (within 62 mi. of the site), dates (1800 through 1999), and magnitude (magnitudes above M 4). The results of the historical search are presented below. Time period (1800 to 1999) 200 years Maximum Magnitude within 62 mi (100 km)radius (December 16, 1858) 7.0 Approximate distance to nearest historical earthquake,>M4.0 1 mile Number of events exceeding magnitude 4 within the search area 638 Under the current understanding of regional seismo-tectonics, the largest maximum credible event to impact the site may be generated by faults related to the San Jacinto fault having moment magnitude of M6.7 or the San Andreas fault having a moment magnitude of M7.4. The Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Map (Petersen, 1999) indicates a 10 percent probability in 50 years for an acceleration of 0.9g for soils within the project site. The site is located in Seismic Zone 4 of the latest edition of the Uniform Building Code (UBC). Structures should be designed in accordance with the values and parameters given within the UBC. 58-9285-01158298338 Page 8 of 23 December 16, 1999 Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder,Inc. k" K EINF E L DER 4. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 GENERAL Based on our field exploration, laboratory testing and geotechnical analyses conducted for this study, it is our opinion that it is geotechnically feasible to construct the project as planned, provided the recommendations presented in this report are incorporated into project design and construction. Our recommendations regarding the geotechnical aspects of project design and construction are presented in the following sections. 4.2 SEISMIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS The project site is located in a seismically active region and can be expected to be subjected to strong seismically-induced ground shaking during its design life. Potential seismic hazards include ground shaking, liquefaction, and seismically-induced settlement (seismic settlement). The following sections discuss these potential seismic hazards with respect to this site. 4.2.1 Ground Shaking The site is located in the seismically active Southern California region. As such, strong ground shaking can be expected during the life of the proposed improvements. We recommend that, at a minimum, the proposed Santa Fe Station improvements be designed in accordance with the requirements of the latest edition of the Uniform Building Code (UBC) for Seismic Zone 4. We recommend using the following seismic parameters for the UBC design procedure, as shown in Table 2. 58-9285-01/58298338 Page 9 of 23 December 16, 1999 Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder,Inc. W91( LEIN FEL DER TABLE 2 SEISMIC DESIGN PARAMETERS Seismic Zone Factor(Table 16-I) 0.40 Soil Profile Type (Table 16-.1) Sp Seismic Source Type (Table 16-U) B Near Source Factor—Na(Table 16-S) 1.25 Near Source Factor—N„(Table 16-T) 1.55 Seismic Coefficient C.(Table 16-Q) 0.55 Seismic Coefficient C,(Table 16-Q) 0.99 4.2.2 Liquefaction The project site is generally underlain by medium dense to very dense coarse-grained deposits and occasionally by very stiff, fine-gained soils. The groundwater level is expected to be below 70 feet at the proposed project site. Based on the depth of groundwater at the site, consistency of underlying soil layers and the anticipated seismic shaking, it is our opinion that the potential for liquefaction of the underlying soils is low. 4.2.3 Other Seismic Considerations We have found no evidence that any known faults trend toward or traverse the site. The site is not located within a designated earthquake fault zone for active or potentially active faults. Therefore, the likelihood of ground surface rupture due to known faulting is considered to be low. The anticipated ground accelerations are expected to induce some seismic settlement of the soil layers. Total seismic settlement resulting from the anticipated ground acceleration is expected to be on the order of about r/4 inch. Due to the remoteness of the site from large landlocked bodies of water and the Pacific Ocean, we do not feel that seismic seiches or tsunamis are a concern. 4.3 EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL CAUSES OF SETTLEMENT CRACKING Based on our review of available data and the results of our field and laboratory programs, we have evaluated the following potential causes of settlement cracking observed along the southern and southeastern portion of the building. 58-9285-01/5829R338 Page 10 of 23 December 16, 1999 Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder,Inc. ~ KLEINFELDER r. M� rr • Bearing capacity failure of the existing,isolated footings. • No continuous footings between deep exterior and interior isolated footings. 01 • Poor quality foundation subgrade. r� • Swell/collapse of the underlying soils. M� Bearing Canacitv. Based on the results of our field investigation, the existing native fine and coarse-grained soil deposits are very stiff, and dense to very dense, respectively. A conservative estimate of the allowable bearing capacity of the native soils is 2,500 psf, which includes a factor •�• of safety of 3. In our opinion, a bearing capacity failure would appear to be unlikely as the cause r. of the observed distress. �• No Continuous Footings. Observation and investigation of subgrade soils beneath the existing building was not possible at the time of our investigation. The foundation plans provided for our review do not indicate the presence of footings below interior walls. If interior walls are founded •+ only on the slab-on-grade, settlement of the slab and underlying subgrade may have occurred. However,no structural slab distress was noted during our investigation. Subgrade Quality. The extent to which poor construction quality is attributed to the observed distress is difficult to ascertain. It is possible that the upper fill soil within the building pad was poorly compacted and/or does not meet current requirements for structural engineered fill. Further evaluation would require cutting or coring through the concrete floor slab and performing density tests of the underlying subgrade soils. Swell/Collaose. Laboratory test results indicate swell/collapse potential less than 0.5 percent. Based on the observed distress and the absence of any groundwater levels over time in the upper •r 40-foot layer, it does not appear that swelling or collapse of the soils underlying the building was .. a contributing factor. In summary, based on our evaluation, it appears that the principal cause of the observed distress is possibly the result of lack of continuous interior wall footings and possibly low relative •� compaction of the fill soils underlying the slab. Our recommendations for potential long-term remediation measures, and our geotechnical recommendations for the design and construction of the project, are presented in the sections below. •r 58-9285.01/5829R338 Page 11 of 23 December 16, 1999 Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder,Inc. �r in K E IN EL DER 4.4 POTENTIAL REMEDIATION ALTERNATIVES Three remediation alternatives, including compaction grouting, underpinning the existing footings and structural modifications to the existing structure, have been selected for further evaluation based on the potential causes of the observed distress. • Comnaction Grouting. Compaction grouting can be used to improve the conditions of the upper fill soil within the building pad. A very viscous (low mobility), aggregate grout is pumped in stages to displace and densify the surrounding soils. The extent and intensity of soil densification depends on the injection point configurations, the depth of the injections, the grout mix, and the amount of grout injected. Further testing should be performed to evaluate the degree and extent of poor subgrade conditions. A specialty pressure grout contractor should be consulted to determine an appropriate grouting methodology. • Undeminning the footings. Several methods of underpinning are commonly employed. Two of the more common methods include the installation of a supportive grade beam and the use of a foundation bracket system. The grade beam may be designed to directly support the foundations on the recompacted underlying fill soils. Underpinning should be performed with a carefully planned sequence of operations. Prior to any excavation for underpinning, the structure should be reviewed by the contractor's engineer for indications of settlement or weakness that may be accentuated during underpinning. The load on the wall or foundation should be reduced, if possible, before excavation. The underpinning work should be completed in stages so that any excavation width is limited to 5 feet or less at any time. Temporary support of the structure over the excavation may be required. Load bearing surfaces should be kept in close contact with each other by use of wedges of jacks. If footings or grade beams are used to underpin the structure, the foundation width should be at least 18 inches for continuous footings and 24 inches for isolated column footings. • Structural modifications. This alternative should be further reviewed by a structural engineer and would involve structural modifications to the existing structure to compensate for the stresses and strains imposed by the footing settlements. The costs for this alternative are unknown at this time, and are best evaluated by a structural engineer. 58-9285-01158298338 Page 12 of 23 December 16, 1999 Copyright 1999 Kleinfeldcr,Inc. k4 KL E N F E L DER 4.5 CONSTRUCTION CONSIDERATIONS 4.5.1 General Site preparation and earthwork operations should be performed in accordance with applicable codes. All references to maximum dry density are established in accordance with ASTM Standard Test Method D-1557-91. 4.5.2 Subgrade Preparation Surficial vegetation, organic, inert and oversized materials (greater than 3 inches in maximum dimension) should be stripped and isolated prior to removal of reusable soils. Areas to receive fill should be stripped of existing fill and any loose or soft earth materials until a firm, unyielding native subgrade is exposed, as evaluated by the geotechnical engineer. At the time of this report, site-specific development plans have not been developed. Once these plans have been prepared, it may be possible to adjust these recommendations based on the proposed site improvement. Prior to the placement of engineered fill, after site preparation, processing of the approved excavation bottom should be performed by scarifying to a minimum depth of 8 inches, moisture conditioning to near optimum moisture content and compacting to a minimum of 90 percent of the maximum dry density. The removal and stripping operations must expose a firm, non-yielding subgrade that is free of significant voids and organics. The subgrade soils exposed at the bottom of each excavation should be observed by a geotechnical engineer or geologist from our office prior to the placement of any fill. Additional removals may be required as a result of observation and testing of the exposed subgrade soils. 4.5.3 Excavation Conditions The borings advanced at the site were advanced using a truck-mounted, hollow-stem auger drill rig. Drilling was completed with little to moderate effort through the existing soils. Conventional excavation equipment is expected to be capable of performing the excavations required for site development. 58-9285-01/58298338 Page 13 of 23 December 16, 1999 Copyright 1999 KleinMder,Inc. KL EINFE L DER 4.6 TEMPORARY EXCAVATIONS 4.6.1 General All excavations must comply with applicable local, state, and federal safety regulations including the current OSHA Excavation and Trench Safety Standards. Construction site safety generally is the sole responsibility of the Contractor, who shall also be solely responsible for the means, methods, and sequencing of construction operations. We are providing the information below solely as a service to our client. Under no circumstances should the information provided be interpreted to mean that Kleinfelder is assuming responsibility for construction site safety or the Contractor's activities; such responsibility is not being implied and should not be inferred. 4.6.2 Excavations and Slopes The Contractor should be aware that slope height, slope inclination, or excavation depths (including utility trench excavations) should in no case exceed those specified in local, state, and/or federal safety regulations (e.g., OSHA Health and Safety Standards for Excavations, 29 CFR Part 1926, or successor regulations). 4.6.3 Construction Considerations Due to the potential for local trench wall instability, we recommend that temporary cut slopes be constructed at inclinations no steeper than 1HAV in the existing soils. Heavy construction equipment, building materials, excavated soil, and vehicular traffic should not be allowed within 1/3 the slope height from the top of any excavation. Where the stability of adjoining buildings, walls, or other structures is endangered by excavation operations, support systems such as shoring, bracing, or underpinning will be required to provide structural stability and to protect personnel working within the excavation. Shoring, bracing, or underpinning required for the project should be designed by a professional engineer registered in the State of California. During wet weather, earthen berms or other methods should be used to prevent runoff water from entering all excavations. All runoff water and/or groundwater encountered within excavations should be collected and disposed of outside the construction limits. 58-9285-01/58298338 Page 14 of 23 December 16, 1999 I Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder,Inc. I r In KLEINFELDER 4.7 ENGINEERED FILL 4.7.1 Materials The on-site soils encountered during our investigation, excluding debris and/or other deleterious materials, are considered suitable for use as engineered fill. When adequately compacted at an appropriate moisture content, these materials can be expected to possess suitable bearing and settlement characteristics for the proposed construction. Import fill soils, if necessary, should be free of organic or other deleterious debris, essentially non-plastic, and irreducible particles less than 3 inches in maximum dimension. In general, well-graded mixtures of gravel, sand, non-plastic silt, and small quantities of cobbles, rock fragments, and/or clay are acceptable for use as engineered fill. Imported soils should be sampled, evaluated and approved by the project Geotechnical Engineer prior to being transported to the site. 4.7.2 Compaction Criteria All fill soils, either native or imported, required to bring the site to final grade should be compacted as engineered fill. Engineered fill should be uniformly moisture-conditioned to near optimum moisture content, placed in horizontal lifts less than 8 inches in loose thickness, and compacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction. Additional fill lifts should not be placed if the previous lift did not meet the minimum required relative compaction or if soil conditions are not stable. 4.8 DRAINAGE AND LANDSCAPING It is important that positive surface drainage be provided to prevent ponding and/or saturation of the soils in the vicinity of foundations, concrete slabs-on-grade, or pavements. We recommend that the site be graded to carry surface water away from the improvements and that positive measures be implemented to carry away roof runoff. Poor perimeter or surface drainage could allow migration of water beneath the building or pavement areas which may result in distress to project improvements. If planted areas adjacent to the structure are desired, we suggest that care be taken not to over-irrigate and to maintain a leak-free sprinkler piping system. In addition, it is recommended that planter areas next to buildings have a minimum of 5 percent positive fall away from building perimeters to a distance of at least 5 feet. Drain spouts should be extended 58-9285-01/58298338 Page 15 of 23 December 16, 1999 Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder,Inc. in KLEINFELDER ■ to discharge a minimum of 5 feet from the building, or some other method should be utilized to prevent water from accumulating in planters. Landscaping after construction should not promote pending of water adjacent to structures. 4.9 SHALLOW FOUNDATIONS 4.9.1 Allowable Bearing Pressures Continuous and isolated spread footings should have minimum widths of 18 and 24 inches, respectively, be embedded at least 18 inches below the lowest final adjacent subgrade, and be founded on at least 24 inches of engineered fill prepared as discussed in Section 4.7 of this report. Footings to be placed in near surface fill soils may be designed using an allowable bearing pressure of 2,000 pounds per square foot (psf) for dead plus sustained live loading. The conditions exposed in foundation excavation should be observed and possibly tested to verify that this allowable bearing pressure is appropriate. The allowable bearing pressure provided above is a net value; therefore, the weight of the foundation (which extends below grade) may be neglected when computing dead loads. The allowable bearing pressure may be increased by 1/3 for short-term loading due to wind or seismic forces. Footings may experience an overall loss in bearing capacity or an increased potential to settle where located in close proximity to existing or future utility trenches. Furthermore, stresses imposed by the footings on the utility lines may cause cracking, collapse and/or a loss of serviceability. To reduce this risk, footings should extend below a 1:1 plane projected upward from the closest bottom comer of the trench. 4.9.2 Estimated Settlements Total settlement of an individual foundation will vary depending on the plan dimensions of the foundation and the actual load supported. Based on anticipated foundation dimensions and loads, it is our opinion that the total and differential settlement between similarly loaded adjacent footings, including seismic settlement, should not exceed 1 inch and 1/4 inch,respectively. Static settlement of all foundations is expected to be primarily elastic and should be essentially completed shortly after initial application of structural loads. ' 58-9285-01/5829R338 Page 16 of 23 December 16, 1999 - Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder,Inc. r�I KLEINFELDER Wei Mn! w. 4.9.3 Lateral Resistance Resistance to lateral loads (including those due to wind or seismic forces) may be provided by frictional resistance between the bottom of concrete foundations and the underlying soil, and by passive soil pressure against the sides of the foundations. A coefficient of friction of 0.35 may be used between cast-in-place concrete foundations and the underlying soil. Passive pressure available in engineered fill or undisturbed native soil may be taken as equivalent to the pressure exerted by a fluid weighing 275 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). The passive resistance of the subgrade soils will diminish or be non-existent if trench sidewalls slough, cave or are overwidened during or following excavations. If this condition is r encountered, our firm should be notified to review the condition and provide remedial recommendations,if necessary. 4.9.4 Construction/Design Considerations Prior to placing steel or concrete, footing excavations should be cleaned of all debris, loose or soft soil, and water. Footing excavations should be observed by the project Geotechnical ,. Engineer just prior to placing steel or concrete to verify the recommendations contained herein "^ are implemented during construction. The structural engineer should evaluate footing configurations and reinforcement requirements to account for loading, shrinkage and temperature stresses. w. ^ 4.10 CONCRETE SLABS SUPPORTED ON GRADES r Concrete slab-on-grade floors may be used for the proposed building improvements. The �. slab-on-grade should be placed on at least 24 inches of engineered fill, prepared as described in Section 4.7 of this report. We recommend that a vapor barrier be placed below the floor slab in areas where moisture sensitive flooring materials are planned. In addition, the barrier should be covered with 2 inches of clean sand and should be underlain by a layer of 1 inch of clean sand to protect the barrier during construction, act as a capillary break and aid in the proper curing of the concrete slab. All areas adjacent to buildings, including planters, should be designed to drain away from the structure to avoid accumulation of water beneath the slab or footings. All slabs should be designed for any specific loading conditions by the structural engineer. A modulus of subgrade reaction of 150 pounds per cubic inch may be used for design. 58-9285-01/58298338 Page 17 of 23 December 16, 1999 Copyright 1999 KleinRlder,Inc. R■ KLEINFELDER 4.11 LATERAL EARTH PRESSURES We recommend that soil pressure values for calculating active lateral earth pressures developed r from horizontal backfills on dock-high walls that are free to rotate at least 0.1 percent of the wall height use an equivalent fluid pressure of 40 pounds per cubic foot (pcf). Walls which are restrained against movement or rotation at the top should be designed for an at-rest equivalent r fluid pressure of 60 pc£ The above values are applicable if the on-site soils are used for level ON backfill behind the walls. The recommended values do not include compaction or truck-induced r wall pressures. Care must be taken during the compaction operations not to overstress the walls. a Heavy construction equipment should be maintained a distance of at least 3 feet away from the ■ walls while the backfill soils are being placed. Hand operated compaction equipment should be r used to compact the backfill soils within a 3-foot wide zone adjacent to the walls. Kleinfelder a should be contacted when development plans are finalized so we can review wall and backfill conditions on a case-by-case basis. r The recommended lateral earth pressures assume that drainage is provided behind the walls to prevent accumulation of hydrostatic pressures. Walls should be provided with backdrains to reduce the potential for the accumulation of hydrostatic pressures. Backdrains may consist of a r 2-foot wide zone of Caltrans Class 2 permeable material located immediately behind the wall, extending to within 1 foot of the ground surface. Weep holes should be provided or a perforated r pipe (Schedule 40 PVC) should be installed at the base of the backdrain and sloped to discharge to a suitable collection facility. r Additional loads on retaining walls may be imposed by surcharge. An additional horizontal wall load equal to 50 percent of the surcharge load should be applied uniformly over the entire height r of the wall. This additional load should also be applied to loading dock walls for forklift loads. 4.12 EXPANSIVE SOILS • Expansive soils are characterized by their ability to undergo significant volume change(shrink or swell) due to variations in moisture content. Changes in soil moisture content can result from rainfall, landscape irrigation, utility leakage, roof drainage, perched groundwater, drought, or other factors and may cause unacceptable settlement or heave of structures, concrete slabs supported-on-grade, or pavements supported over these materials. Depending on the extent and • location below finished subgrade, these soils could have a detrimental effect on the proposed construction. One expansion index test was performed on a near surface soil sample to evaluate ■ 58-9285-O1/5829R338 Page 18 of 23 December 16, 1999 Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder,Inc. R k■ KL E I N F E L D ER susceptibility to expansion in the presence of water. The results of this test indicates an expansion index of 20 which indicates a "very low" potential for expansion, in accordance with UBC test method. Based on these results, no specific recommendations for expansion potential are required. Testing of the final subgrade soils should be conducted to evaluate their expansion potential and confirm or modify the recommendations presented herein. 4.13 CORROSIVITY One sample of the near-surface soils was tested for potential corrosion to concrete and reinforcing steel. A sample of the material was sent to AP Engineering and Testing, Inc. for testing of pH, resistivity, soluble sulfates and soluble chlorides. The sample was tested in general accordance with California Test Methods 643, 422, and 417 for pH and resistivity, soluble chlorides, and soluble sulfates,respectively. The test results are as follows: Depth Resistivity Water Soluble Water Soluble Boring t. Ohm-Cm Ph Sulfates(P pm) Chlorides m B-3 3-7 4,600 7.5 51 144 We have provided the above corrosion tests as requested by the client. These tests are only an indicator of soil corrosivity for the sample tested. Other soils found on site may be more, less, or of a similar corrosive nature. Although Kleinfelder does not practice corrosion engineering, the corrosion values from the soil tested are normally considered moderately corrosive to buried metals, and less corrosive to concrete. We recommend that a competent corrosion engineer be retained to evaluate the corrosion potential of the site to proposed project, to recommend further testing as required, and to provide specific corrosion mitigation methods appropriate for the project. i 1 58-9285-01/58298338 Page 19 of 23 December 16, 1999 Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder,Inc. KLEINFELDER 5. ADDITIONAL SERVICES f 5.1 PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS REVIEW V We recommend that Kleinfelder conduct a general review of final plans and specifications to evaluate that our earthwork and foundation recommendations have been properly interpreted and implemented during design. In the event Kleinfelder is not retained to perform this recommended review, we will assume no responsibility for misinterpretation of our recommendations. 5.2 CONSTRUCTION OBSERVATION AND TESTING w We recommend that all earthwork during construction be monitored by a representative from Kleinfelder, including site preparation, placement of all engineered fill and trench backfill, w construction of slab and roadway subgrades, and all foundation excavations. The purpose of these services would be to provide Kleinfelder the opportunity to observe the soil conditions encountered during construction, evaluate the applicability of the recommendations presented in w this report to the soil conditions encountered, and recommend appropriate changes in design or construction procedures if conditions differ from those described herein. w 58-9285-01/5829R338 Page 20 of 23 December 16, 1999 Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder,Inc. In KLEINFELDER 6. LIMITATIONS This preliminary report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Architect Milford Wayne Donaldson and their agents for specific application to the proposed San Bernardino Santa Fe Rehabilitation Project in San Bernardino, California. The findings, conclusions and recommendations presented in this report were prepared in accordance with generally accepted geotechnicai engineering practice. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. The scope of our geotechnical services did not include any environmental site assessment for the presence or absence of hazardous/toxic materials in the soil, surface water, groundwater or atmosphere, or the presence of wetlands. The client has the responsibility to see that all parties to the project, including the designer, contractor, subcontractors, etc., are made aware of this report in its entirety. This report contains information which may be useful in the preparation of contract specifications. However, the report is not designed as a specification document and may not contain sufficient information for this use without proper modification. This report may be used only by the client and only for the purposes stated, within a reasonable time from its issuance. Land use, site conditions (both on site and off site) or other factors may change over time, and additional work may be required with the passage of time. Based on the intended use of this report and the nature of the new project, Kleinfelder may require that additional work be performed and that an updated report be issued. Non-compliance with any of these requirements by the client or anyone else will release Kleinfelder from any liability resulting from the use of this report by any unauthorized party. 58-9285-01/5829R338 Page 21 of 23 December 16, 1999 Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder,Inc. k%J KLEINF ELDER 7. REFERENCES Blake, Thomas F., 1993, EQFAULT and EQSEARCH, Computer Programs for calculating the site to fault distances, Deterministic peak horizontal ground accelerations for a Maximum Magnitude Earthquake, and historic seismicity for an area from selected known faults in the southern California region (Rev. 1999). Carson, Scott E., and Matti, Jonathan C., 1985, Contour Map Showing Minimum Depth to Groundwater, Upper Santa Ana River Valley, California 1973 - 1979, USGS, Map MF- 1802. Design Manual 7.01 and 7.02, (1986),Naval Facilities Engineered Command. FEMA/ESRI Hazard Information and Awareness (web site). Fife, D.L., Rodgers, D.A., Chase, G.W., Chapman, R.H., Sprotte, E.C., 1976, Geologic Hazards in Southwestern San Bernardino County, California, California Division of Mines and Geology, Special Report 113. Hart, Earl W., and Bryant William A., 1997, Fault Rupture Hazard Zones in California, Division of Mines and Geology, Special Publication 42. International Conference of Building Officials, 1997, Uniform Building Code, Volume 2. International Conference of Building Officials, 1998, Maps of Known Active Fault Near-Source Zones in California and Adjacent Portions of Nevada for the 1997 Uniform Building Code. Jennings, Charles W., 1994, Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas with Locations and Ages of Recent Volcanic Eruptions, California Division of Mines and Geology, Geologic Data Map No. 6. Jennings, Charles W., 1994, Fault Activity Map of California and Adjacent Areas, California Division of Mines and Geology, Geologic Data Map No. 6. Occupational Safety and Health Standards—Excavations, Final Pub., 1989. Petersen, Mark D., et al., 1996, Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment for the State of California, 1996, California Division of Mines and Geology, Open File Report, 96-08. Petersen, Mark D., et al., 1999, Seismic Shaking Hazard Maps of California, California Division of Mines and Geology,Map Sheet 48. 58-9285-01/58298338 Page 22 of 23 December 16, 1999 Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder,Inc. - KLEINFELDER W Rrl San Bernardino City General Plan,adopted June 2, 1989. San Bernardino County Consolidated General Plan and Implementation System, adopted June 1979. USGS, 1999,National Seismic Hazard Mapping Project(web site). Western Municipal Water District, Cooperative Well Measurement Program, Upper Santa Ana River Watershed, San Jacinto Watershed and Santa Margarita Watershed, Fall 1998. (Well No. 1S4WO9JOlS) Ziony,Joseph I., and Jones,Lucile M., 1989, Map Showing Late Quaternary Faults and 1978-84 Seismicity of the Los Angeles Region, California, USGS Miscellaneous Field Map MF- 1964. i 1. r r .• V W r Y W �w W (W PM V r 58-9285-01/5829R338 Page 23 of 23 December 16, 1999 Copyright 1999 KleinRlder,Inc. •n ................. �I,J -7-7 lik 3 -q 1 . N - ------- NONE= San Bernardino, California Project : 58 - 9285 - 01 KLEINFELDER rw APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION r The subsurface exploration program for the proposed project consisted of the drilling and logging a total of three hollow-stem auger borings. The borings ranged in depth from 30 to 45 feet below existing grades. Plate 2 presents the location of the borings. iThe Logs of Borings are presented as Plates A-2 through A-4. An explanation to the logs is ' presented as Plate A-1. The Logs of Borings describe the earth materials encountered, samples obtained and show field and laboratory tests performed. The logs also show the location, boring number, drilling date and the name of the logger and drilling subcontractor. The borings were logged by an engineer using the Unified Soil Classification System. The boundaries between soil types shown on the logs are approximate because the transition between different soil layers ' may be gradual. Bulk and drive samples of representative earth materials were obtained from the borings at maximum intervals of about 5 feet. tAll borings were backfilled using the soil from cuttings and tamped when the drilling was completed. A California sampler was used to obtain drive samples of the soil encountered. This sampler consists of a 3-inch O.D., 2.4-inch I.D. split barrel shaft that is pushed or driven a total of 12 inches into the soil at the bottom of the boring. The soil was retained in six 1-inch brass rings for laboratory testing. An additional 2-inches of soil from each drive remained in the cutting ' shoe and was usually discarded after visually classifying the soil. The sampler was driven using a 140 pound hammer falling 30-inches. The total number of hammer blows required to drive the sampler the 12-inches is termed blow count and is recorded on the Logs of Borings. Samples were also obtained using a Standard Penetration Sampler (SPT). This sampler consists of a 2-inch O.D., 1-inch I.D. split barrel shaft that is advanced into the soils at the bottom of the drill hole a total of 18-inches. The sampler was driven using a 140 pound hammer falling 30-inches. The total number of hammer blows required to drive the sampler the final 12 inches is termed the blow count (1) and is recorded on the Logs of Borings. The procedures we e employed in the field are generally consistent with those described in ASTM Standard Test Method D-1586-84. Bulk samples of the surface soils were retrieved directly from the auger blades. i 9285-01/58298338 A-1 December 16, 1999 I1 Copyright 1999 Kleinftlder,Inc. EN s llll 3 c I 8 0 3 s a 0 A n I i w r_ x EllI � o �J 5 x o � z LL 9 I a z = m I I I 6m I I I UNIFIED SOIL CLASSIFICATION SYSTEM MAJOR DIVISION LTR ID DESCRIPTION MAJOR DIVISION LTR ID DESCRIPTION WNlFgqraded pnvs4, I=1e sllb and very fins Giv • o pnv.}..m manrns SILTS ML sands, mck Hour, ally or GRAVEL y clayey fine sands AND GP I pr°Oavand mhtbrrp AND Inorganic clays of low to it CLAYS medium pind ; gpravelly vW, CL clays sltty c4y*,wrdy cleya, GRAVELLY GM pnvNau daltt m(mn• LL < W �^ SOILS Organle giro and organic COARSE Clayey pnv= FINE OL ! sltti4ys of low plasticity GC gnwbaM-cleY mhdurea GRAINED GRAINED • micaceous or SOILS SIN .. Wg�n�ia�� SOILS SILTS MH dl�a4maceow fins •ads AND or *Ills elastic gilts SAND Poorly-graded sands of InorgV clays of medium AND SP and gravelly sands n high plasticity rganic clays of medium SANDY 9N Salem mbdm to high p�cSOILS Pest muck and other Pt SC tP Y m—bl hlflldl' organic •014 1 Approximate water level observed In boring following drilling _ SOIL SAMPLE ADDITIONAL TESTS Bulk Sample MAX - Maximum Dry Density .,� SIEVE - Grain Size Distribution Drive Sample - California Sample WASH - Wash Sieve PI - Plasticity index Shelby Tubs Sample p - Expaanslon Index CP - Collapse Potential Test! s= Standard Penetration Test (SPI) Sample SHEAR - Direct Shear ON - Consolidation Test CHEM - Corrosion Test RV R-Value NOTES SE - Sand Equivalent Blow counts represents the number of blows of a 1413-pound hammer failing 90 Inches required to drive a sampler through the last 12 Inches of an 18nch Penetration, unless odwrwlse noted. The The lintas transition abate ong� ralmenntt approximate boundaries only. of soil strata between borings. Logs represents me, sell section observed continuity at the boring location on the date of drilling only. SANTA FE RAILROAD STATION REHABILITATION PLATE San Bernardino, CalNonia LEGEND TO LOGS A-1 KLEINFELDER Project No.: 58 - 9285 - 01 Date Drilled: 11/17/99 Water Depth: > 46.5 feet Drilled By: Cal Pac Drilling Date Measured: 11/17/99 Drilling Method: HSA 8" Reference Elevation: 1074 1 Logged By: Scott Lawson Dattun: MSL T 1 C Z §�� GEOTECEMCAL DESCRIPTION N w" C A + C OI W U 3 L AND d 7 C -° C t y t N > a+ a s 3 o a CLASSIFICATION 0 1 v � W , N G m L L U - C 9 N W " P N N m" U O EU Q1-U- 1 PH.L: SILTY SAND(SM), brown, moist, medium dense, fine to medium ' 2 28 grained 101 9.6 MAX,El, SHEAR 1070 5 3 16 SIEVE,WASH 4 18 trace of fine gravel up to 3/4" in size 103 14.4 CP 1065 10 5 11 some gravel up to 1.5" in size, irregular with rough surface SIEVE,WASH , 6 38 1060 15 7 24 dark brown ALLUVIUM: 1055 SANDY SILT(ML), gray brown, moist, very stiff; sand fine grained 20 8 33 90 19.8 91EVE,WASH, CP SILTY SAND(SM),brown, moist, dense, fuze to coarse grained 1050 25 9. 38 1045 SAND with SILT(SP-SM), gray brown, moist, very dense, fine to coarse grained 30 10 72 1040 k" KLEINFELDER SANTA FE RAILROAD STATION REHABILITATION PLAT San Bernardino, California Pi-2a PROJECT NO. 58-9285-01 LOG OF BORING B-1 Legend To Logs On Plate A-1 +� O T _ o z° w GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION N y + .. w w UN AND a) � C o ' O r + d t N d W d E E O 0 m CLASSIFICATION a u c v in w I o to N m m Continued From Previous Pa e _ 11 52 PF 1035 SANDY SILT(AD.), gray brown, [Hoist, very stiff; sand fine grained 40—PF 12 27 1030 45 SAND with SILT(SP-SIB, gray brown, moist, very dense, fine to 13 90 coarse grained Boring terminated at 46.5 feet Groundwater was not encountered Hole backfilled and tamped using soil from cuttings 1 � in M SANTKLEINFELDER A FE RAILROAD STATION REHABILITATION PLATE ' San Bernardino, California A-2b PROJECT NO. 58-9285-01 LOG OF BORING B-1 ' Legend To Logs On Plate A-1 Date Drilled: 11/17/99 Water Depth: > 31.5 feet Drilled By: Cal Pac Drilling Date Measured: 11/17/99 Drilling Method: HSA 8" Reference Elevation: 1073 Logged By: Scott Lawson Datum: MSL C O C+ J v o_ z w GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION + .. m m U N u AND v c ° N + L - - 3 L O n + y + N > w + a 0. 3 0 0. CLASSIFICATION Wv W N N Om L 31 U — C 'O N W 0 71 U) CD 0 O L U ¢ H ASPHALTIC CONCRErE, — Much thick AGGREGATE BASE, — 4-inch thick FILL: 1070 1 17 SILTY SAND(SM), brown, moist, medium dense, fine to medium grained 2 5 3 46 gray, dense 111 13.8 1065 4 7 loose, fine to coarse grained with trace of fine gravel up to 1/2" in size SIEVE, WASH 10 5 50 M dense 120 10.5 1060 6 24 ALLUVIUM: PI SANDY SILT(ML), gray, moist, very stiff; sand fine grained 15 7 70 SILTY SAND(SM), gray brown, moist, very dense, fine to medium grained 1055 20 8 5016" 1050 SANDY SILT(ML), gray, moist, very stiff; sand fine grained 25 9 26 1045 SAND with SILT(SP-SM), gray brown, moist, very dense, fine to coarse grained 301 10 58 Boring terminated at 31.5 feet Groundwater was not encountered Hole backfilled and tamped using soil from cuttings k" KLEINFELDER SANTA FE RAILROAD STATION REHABILITATION pLATE San Bernardino, California A-3 PROJECT NO. 58-9285-01 LOG OF BORING B-2 Legend To Logs On Plate A-1 Date Drilled: 11/17/99 Water Depth: > 31.5 feet Drilled By: Cal Pac Drilling Date Measured: 11/17/99 Drilling Method: HSA 8" Reference Elevation: 1076 Logged By: Scott Lawson Datum: MSL 1 T - c z E w a -j GEOTECHNICAL DESCRIPTION to c + ^ a s U N LJ AND d 7 C > ry+ n o. 3 O 4 a CLASSFCATION a a E E a n 4 u—N+c ++a — W a a o— L W " o N N my N OvEU IE ASPHALTIC CONCRETE, — 3-inch thick 1075 AGGREGATE BASE, — 4-inch thick FILL: 1 14 SILTY SAND(SM),brown, moist, medium dense, fine to medium CHEM grained 5 2 21 gray brown 88 29.2 CP 1070 3 r 4 26 10 5 70 very dense 104 13.7 1065 6 75 IS ALLUVIUM. 7 5016• SILTY SAND(SM), brown, moist, very dense, fine to medium 1060 grained 20 8 57 1055 SAND with SILT(SP-SNO gray brown, moist, dense, fine to coarse grained 25 SANDY SILT(ML),gray brown, moist, very stiff, sand fine grained 9, 29 1050 SILTY SAND(SM), brown to gray brown, moist, very dense, fine to medium grained i30 Ip 10 62 1045 Boring temumated at 31.5 feet Groundwater was not encountered Hole backfilled and tamped using soil from cuttings kq BLEINFELDER SANTA FE RAILROAD STATION REHABILITATION PLATE San Bernardino, California A-4 PROJECT NO. 58-9285-01 LOG OF BORING B-3 Legend To Logs On Plate A-1 - 1H KLEINFELDER APPENDIX B LABORATORY TESTING Laboratory tests were performed on representative relatively undisturbed and bulk soil samples to estimate engineering characteristics of the various earth materials encountered. Testing was performed in accordance with one of the following references: 1. Lambe, T. William, Soil Testing for Engineers, Wiley,New York, 1951 2. Laboratory Soils Testing, U.S. Army, Office of the Chief of Engineers, Engineering Manual No. 1110-2-1906,November 30, 1970 3. ASTM Standards for Soil Testing, latest revisions 4. State of California Department of Transportation, Standard Test Methods, latest revisions. LABORATORY MOISTURE AND DENSITY Natural moisture content and dry density tests were performed on selected samples collected. Moisture content was evaluated in general accordance with ASTM Test Method D 2216; dry unit weight was evaluated using procedures similar to ASTM Test Method D 2937. The results are presented on the Logs of Borings and are summarized in Table B-1. GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION The grain size distribution of selected soil samples was performed by mechanical and wash sieving in general accordance with ASTM Standard Test Method D422-63. The test results are presented on Plates B-1 through B-4 and in Table B-2. PLASTICITY INDEX A plasticity index test was performed to aid in soil classification and to evaluate the plasticity characteristics of the material. The test was performed in general accordance with ASTM Test Method D 4318. The results are presented in Plate B-5. 9285-01/58298338 B-1. December 16, 1999 Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder,Inc. k4 KLEI NEEL DER DIRECT SHEAR A direct shear test was performed on one remolded sample to evaluate the drained shear strength of the onsite soils. The sample was tested in a near-saturated condition in general accordance with ASTM Test Method D 3080 (consolidated, drained). Results of this test are presented on Plate B-6. COLLAPSE POTENTIAL Collapse potential tests were performed on selected drive soil samples to evaluate the settlement potential of the soil when subjected to typical foundation loads and wetting. The tests were performed in accordance with ASTM Standard Test Method D-5333. The test results are presented in Plates B-7 through B-9. EXPANSION INDEX One sample of the near-surface native soil was subjected to an evaluation of the expansion index in accordance with UBC Standard 18-2 (1997 edition). The results of this test are presented in Table B-3. MAXIMUM DENSITY/OPTIMUM MOISTURE TEST One maximum density/optimum moisture test was performed on selected bulk samples of the on- site soils to determine compaction characteristics. The test was performed in accordance with ASTM Standard Test Method D-1557-91. The test results are presented in Table B-4. CORROSIVITY TESTS A series of chemical tests were performed on a selected sample of the near-surface soils to estimate pH,resistivity and sulfate and chloride contents. Test results may be used by a qualified corrosion engineer to evaluate the general corrosion potential with respect to construction materials. The test results are presented in Section 4.13 of this report. 9285-01/58298338 B-2. December 16, 1999 Copyright 1999 Kleinfelder,Inc. Table B-1 Labor ato Moisture Content and Dr Density Test Results Boring De th ft Moisture Content % Dry Density cf) 2.5 9.6 101 B-1 7.5 14.4 103 20.0 19.8 90 B-2 5.0 13.8 111 10.0 10.5 120 B-3 5.0 29.2 88 10.0 13.7 104 Table B-2 Wash Sieve Test Results Boring Depth ft Percent Passing# 200 0.075 mm 5.0 42.3 B-1 10.0 37.8 20.0 84.0 B-2 7.5 32.1 Table B-3 Ex anion Index Test Results Boring De th ft Expansion Index B-1 0- 5 20 Table B4 Maximum Density/Optimum Moisture Content Test Results Boring Depth (ft) Optimum Moisture Maximum Dry Content % Density c B-1 I 0- 5 1 11.0 126 KLEINFELDER LABORATORY TEST RESULTS SANTA FE RAILROAD STATION REHABILITATION PROJECT NO. 58 - 9285 - 01 San Bernardino, California i SIEVE ANALYSIS HYDROMETER U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES 3" 1.5" 3/4" 318" #4 #10 #20 #40 #100 #200 100 0 90 10 80 20 70 30 o r z 60 40 z H H VI 6 w r a 50 50 0: w 40 60 w a a J J F 30 70 F 20 80 10 90 0 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE (mm) GRAVEL SAND SILT CLAY coarse I fine Icoarsel medium I fine Symbol Sample Depth (ft) Description Classification • B1-3 5.0 SILTY SAND SM k" KLEINFELDER SANTA FE RAILROAD STATION REHABILITATION PLATE ' San Bernardino, California GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION B'1 ' PROJECT NO. 58-9285-01 SIEVE ANALYSIS HYDROMETER U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES 3" 1.5" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #100 #200 100 0 90 1- 10 80 20 70 30 0 z 60 40 z H H N ¢ N F ¢ W a 50 50 � z z w w U U w 40 60 w a a J J ¢ ¢ F 30 70 F 20 80 10 90 0 L H -. 111 � � � � - E I I I I I 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE (mm) GRAVEL SAND coarse fine coarse medium fine SILT CLAY Symbol Sample Depth (ft) Description Classification • 131-5 10.0 SILTY SAND SM SANTA FE RAILROAD STATION REHABILITATION PLATE KLEINFELDER San Bernardino, California GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION B-2 PROJECT NO. 58-9285-01 SIEVE ANALYSIS HYDROMETER U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES 3" 1.5" 3/4" 318" #4 #10 #20 #40 #100 #200 r 100 0 r 90 10 r so 20 w r 70 30 ' 0 z 60 40 H N W ' C 50 50 a w Lu w 40 60 a Cc a J ' 0 30 0 20 80 ' 10 O 0 '10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE (mm) GRAVEL SAND SILT CLAY coarse fine 1coarsel medium fine 1 Symbol Sample Depth (ft) Description Classification ■ • B1-8 20.0 SANDY SILT ML SANTA FE RAILROAD STATION REHABILITATION PLATE ' KLEINFELDER San Bernardino, California GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION B-3 PROJECT NO. 58-9285-01 A 4w r SIEVE ANALYSIS HYDROMETER 6 U.S. STANDARD SIEVE SIZES w 3" 1.5" 3/4" 3/8" #4 #10 #20 #40 #100 #200 to 100 0 90 10 80 20 70 30 W z 60 40 w H Q till W a 50 50 w z z w w go w 40 60 w a J J 6 as F 30 70 F w. w 20 80 w loll I I I 90 0 w 10 1 0.1 0.01 0.001 GRAIN SIZE (mm) w GRAVEL SAND medium coarse fine coarse fine SILT CLAY Symbol Sample Depth (ft) Description Classiftcatlon e 132-4 7.5 SILTY SAND SM SANTA FE RAILROAD STATION REHABILITATION PLATE �� KLEINFELDER San Bernardino, California GRAIN SIZE DISTRIBUTION B-4 PROJECT NO. 58-9285-01 60 C 50 H H a_ K 40 a CL z H 30 H U H F N a 20 MR W OH 10 im ' 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 LIQUID LIMIT (LL) ' Sample I Depth (ft) ILL (°k) PL (°k) PI (%) LI (-) Description • B2-6 12.5 1 38 31 7 SANDY SILT LL-Liquid Limit PI -Plasticity Index PL- Plasticity Limit LI -Liquidity Index Unified Soil Classification FSne-Grained Soil Groups ILL< 50 LL > 50 Inorganic silts to very tine sands Inorgauic silts and clayey silts MI. of sh t Plasticity MH of hl lash« CLmedium Inorgaoic lasu«of l clays ow to CH Inorganic clays of high plasticity Organic silts and organic silty clays of Organic clays of medium to OL low Plasticity OH hi h lastictt organic silts SANTA FE RAILROAD STATION REHABILITATION PLATE k" KLEINFELDER San Bernardino, California PLASTICITY CHART B"5 PROJECT NO. 58-9285-01 4 3 w N Y y 2 N W K r w x 1 0 0 1 2 3 4 NORMAL STRESS - ksf Sample Remolded to 90% Sample B1-2 Maximum Dry Density Depth (ft) 0-5 Friction Angle-deg 31 Cohesion (ksf) 0.14 Moisture Content(%) 7.1 Dry Density(pcf) 113 Description SILTY SAND Classification SM SANTA FE RAILROAD STATION REHABILITATION PLATE k" KLEINFELDER San Bernardino, California DIRECT SHEAR TEST B-6 PROJECT NO. 58-9285-01 0 1 2 ' z 3 H Q fA 4 r 5 6 0.1 1 10 PRESSURE - ksf Sample 131-4 Depth (ft) 7.5 Description SILTY SAND Classification SM Moisture Content(%) 14.4 Dry Density (pcf) 103 k" KLEINFELDER SANTA FE RAILROAD STATION REHABILITATION PLATE ' San Bernardino, California COLLAPSE POTENTIAL TEST B-7 PROJECT NO. 5 8-9285-07