m-group a new design on urban planning
policy planning urban design environmental review historic preservation community engagement staffing solutions m-group.us campbell santa rosa berkeley
MEMORANDUM
Date: June 25, 2024
To: Timothy Rood, Community Development Director, City of Hercules
From: Heather Hines, Principal
Olivia Ervin, Principal
Isabel Castellano, Historic Preservation Specialist
Subject: Building 54 / Queen Anne – CEQA Scope for potential Demolition
This memorandum (memo) concerns the Hercules Powder Works Building 54, also referred to as the “Queen Anne,” built circa 1905, and originally located on Pinole Street within the Hercules Village Historic District. At the request of the City, this memo includes scoping details to help inform the City Council’s dis cussion about potential demolition of the existing Queen Anne and necessary steps regarding appropriate analysis for consistency with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
The structure was one of thirty buildings included within the Hercules Powder Company listing within the National Register of Historic Places and was identified as a contributing structure in 1980. Building 54 was taken off its foundations and moved to a location slightly west of its original site by the Bixby Company during between 2001 and 2002. In 2010 Building 54 was later cut into two pieces and moved by the City of Hercules to the city-owned corporate yard, approximately one-half mile from its original location and outside of the District boundaries . M-Group was retained in 2017 to prepare historical and environmental documentation , including a Historic Resource Evaluation (HRE), to evaluate potential impacts related to relocating the building.
The HRE prepared in 2018 looked at the historic significance of the building and determined that the structure had lost its integrity as a contributor to the Hercules Village Historic District based on its relocation outside of the boundaries of the district. However, the HRE found that the Queen Anne had individual significance based on its association with former Hercules Mayor Woodfield and at the time of the evaluation the building still retained integrity to convey that significance and therefore was considered a historic resource for the purposes of CEQA.
The Queen Anne was never relocated from the City Corp Yard and no repair s or habitation of the building appears to have occurred since the analysis was completed in 2018. Recent photographs provided by the City demonstrate that Building 54 continues to deteriorate and is currently in a state of neglect. It is our understanding that more recently sections of the roof have been removed and a tarp is the only protection from the elements.
City staff contacted M-Group in June 2024 in an effort to gather information to facilitate discussion about potential demolition of the Queen Anne with the City Council. Staff has requested a summary to provide a n overview of necessary scope, tasks, timelines, and approximate budget for the City m-group.us 1275 Fourth Street, #265, Santa Rosa, CA 95404 707.540.0723 Council’s consideration of the demolition of Building 54 in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and in acknowledgement of the building’s significance as a historic structure per the 2018 HRE. Because the demolition of a historic building is considered a significant and unavoidable impact under the CEQA, the evaluation of the building’s historic significance is essential to understand the necessary analysis under CEQA.
Evaluating the integrity of the Queen Anne in its current condition is the essential first step to determine whether Building 54 retains its historic significance based on its association with former Hercules Mayor Woodfield. Should this evaluation determine that the building continues to retain integrity to convey that significance, then a focused Environmental Impact Report (EIR) would be required to evaluate the impact of the proposed demolition of a historic resource and statements of overriding considerations would need to be adopted along with certification of the EIR before demolition could be permitted.
If the Historic Resource Integrity Evaluation determines the building has lost its integrity and therefore no longer retains significance as a historic resource the demolition would no longer be considered a project under CEQA and no further analysis would be warranted.
As requested, the information below provides a general estimate of cost and timeline associated with preparation of a Historic Resource Integrity Evaluation of the Queen Anne and if determined necessary, preparation of a focused EIR. This information is provided as an estimate and is not a full scope or proposal based on the limited information available. At the request of the City M-Group can provide a full proposal for review and consideration.
Historic Resource Integrity Evaluation
As previously stated in this memo, c ompletion of a Historic Resource Integrity Evaluation is the essential first step to determine whether Building 54 in its current condition retains its historic significance. M-Group would complete a historic resource integrity evaluation with a scope that includes a site visit, review of the subject property, as built drawings, and the proposed project scope, and review of available resources for any other change in condition that could impact the evaluation.
M-Group would provide a draft and final evaluation report, and consult with planning staff as needed. • Timeline: 4 weeks following a Notice to Proceed from the City and access to the building and site
• Budget: Approximately $5,500
Focused Environmental Impact Report
In the event that the Integrity Evaluation finds that the Queen Anne retains integrity and therefore retains significance as a historic resource, preparation of an EIR would be warranted to evaluate the impact of the demolition on the resource. As previously mentioned, demolition of a significant historic resource is considered a significant and unavailable impact and th erefore preparation and certification of an EIR with adoption of overriding considerations by the City Council would be required prior to permitting of the demolition. The first step in the process of preparing an EIR is preparation m-group.us 1275 Fourth Street, #265, Santa Rosa, CA 95404 707.540.0723 of an Initial Study to evaluate environmental impacts from the proposed demolition. It is expected that the Initial Study will find that all environmental topics other than Historic Resources would result in no impact. A Notice of Preparation of an EIR would be prepared and circulated stating the City’s intent to prepare a Focused EIR to evaluate demolition of a Historic Resource. A scoping meeting may be conducted but is not required during the 30-day NOP comment period.
M-Group would prepare an Admin Draft EIR for the City’s review and comment and once input is fully addressed a Public DEIR would be circulated for a 45-day public comment period. Comments received would be assembled and responded to in the Final EIR. As there is no feasible mitigation to reduce impacts due to demolition of a Historic Resource, M -Group would prepare a Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Consideration as part of the EIR certification process. M-Group would assist the City in fulfilling all procedural and substantive requirements of CEQA. • Timeline: 6 – 9 months from kick off to adoption hearing • Budget: Approximately $50,000