STAFF REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
DATE: Regular Meeting of July 9, 2024
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
VIA: Dante Hall, City Manager
SUBMITTED BY: Timothy Rood, AICP, Community Development Director SUBJECT: Queen Anne House Disposition
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Receive an informational update from staff; authorize staff to obtain an updated Historic Resource Evaluation (HRE) using existing funding from the Facility Maintenance fund; and provide any desired additional direction to staff regarding the disposition of the structure following completion of the HRE.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The house mover who entered into an agreement with the City to relocate and rehabilitate the historic Queen Anne house currently located at the City’s corporation yard has withdrawn from the project. The bill of sale is void if the structure is not removed, so the structure still belongs to the City. The house was part of the Hercules Village historic district placed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1980. Staff is seeking direction regarding next steps, which could include a new offering for relocation and rehabilitation at no cost to the City, or pursuing demolition, which would require additional steps for environmental clearance.
After consulting with CEQA professionals, staff recommends that as a first step, an updated historic resource evaluation be prepared to determine if the twice-relocated and now partially disassembled structure retains sufficient integrity to continue to qualify as a historic resource under CEQA. Funding for this purpose is available in the Facility Maintenance Fund. If the structure is still significant, demolition would require the City to prepare and certify a focused Environmental Impact report. Demolition would likely constitute a Significant and Unavoidable Impact under CEQA and require the Council to adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations. Conversely, if the structure is determined to no longer retain any significance, its demolition would not be considered a project under CEQA, and demolition could proceed without further environmental review.
BACKGROUND:
Built in about 1905, Building 54 is a two-story, wood frame residential building, originally with a brick foundation and basement. Its architecture is in the Queen Anne style. Figure 1 is an undated photo of the house on its original site and foundation.
Fig. 1. Building 54 at 2 Kings St. (Undated, courtesy of Hercules Historical Society) Building 54 was used as housing, probably for a company official, and later for office functions. Its original address was 2 Kings Street, a site just northwest of Building 8103, the “Clubhouse”. It was part of the complex of administrative, technical and social buildings known as “The Hill”.
Figure 2 shows the Queen Anne’s original location within the Plant Village, near the Administration Building and Clubhouse structures, which are still in their original locations.
Building 54
original locationClubhouseAdministration
BuildingBuilding 54
original locationClubhouseAdministration
Building
Building 54
original location
Clubhouse
Administration
Building
Building 54
original location
Clubhouse
Administration
Building
Fig. 2. Map showing original location
Historic Designation
The Queen Anne house was identified as a contributor to the “Hercules Village” Historic District — a worker village associated with the Hercules Powder Company — which is listed on the National Register of Historic Places (NR8000079). The Hercules Village was associated with the Hercules Powder Works, which came to be one of the most significant explosives and chemical factories in the west. The factory comprised nine square miles of the Refugio Creek watershed, with two piers extending to the San Pablo Bay and an extensive internal railroad system powered by compressed-air locomotives.
The explosives plant operated from about 1890s into the 1940s after which time it transitioned to manufacturing fertilizer. Beginning in 1972 the former plant was subdivided and transformed into residential suburbs. Today about 27 buildings associated with the former use remain in existence, including approximately 20 houses on Bay and Pinole Streets that were moved and/or restored in the mid-1980s, the Civic Arts building that houses Leila by the Bay, and six other vacant buildings, including the Queen Anne.
According to the National Register nomination, the Hercules Village District is significant as one of the last company towns in America. Its significance, therefore, is largely derived from what remains of the cohesiveness of original village fabric. Under Federal law, structures in a National Register District that are moved lose their District-level significance unless the new site is known and a state/federal notification and approval process for the new location is followed. However, individual structures may also have their own historical significance under CEQA, for example if they are associated with a notable individual, as with the Queen Anne.
The City Council discussed the Queen Anne extensively, including on September 27, 2016; November 9, 2016; September 12, 2017; and February 26, 2019.
Prior Relocations and Disassembly
In 2002, to accommodate site grading, the Bixby Company removed Building 54 from its foundation and relocated it about one hundred feet west of its original site. In 2010, the City of Hercules acquired Building 54 from Oso Trabuco, its owner, and moved it about a half mile south to the City’s corporation yard. This relocation required cutting the building in two.
Ideas for the structure at that time included its relocation to Duck Pond Park and rehabilitation into a historical museum and rental venue to be managed by the City. However, this option was determined not to be financially viable given the condition of the structure, and the park site was developed with restrooms and a basketball half-court instead.
Solicitation for Removal
In September 2016, the City Council directed staff to market the “Queen Anne” house to interested buyers that intended to rehabilitate and use the structure either in the City or in another community. The City subsequently issued an RFP to determine the level of public interest in purchasing, moving, and rehabilitating the Queen Anne house. A flyer (Attachment 1) was sent to the Board of Realtors, City Council, Planning Commission, all Hercules Homeowner’s Associations, and the Hercules Historic Society and posted on the City’s website. Staff asked all groups in receipt of the flyer to forward the information to all of their social networks to try to market the building. In addition, staff was interviewed for an article published November 3, 2016 by Realtor.com to help spread the news to potential parties that might be interested. The article noted that the structure needed a new roof, windows, electrical, paint and plaster, along with graffiti removal.
Only one bid was received in response to the outreach effort. At the November 9, 2016 City Council meeting, Rockhead and Quarry, LLC was selected to purchase the home for $1 with the intent to relocate the structure to a then-unknown site outside of the City and rehabilitate it for residential use. Rockhead and Quarry’s proposal indicated they had experience completing at least five house moves and restorations in Berkeley and San Francisco. During 2017 and 2018, the City pursued environmental clearance for the relocation, as discussed below.
A bill of sale to Rockhead and Quarry, LLC (Attachment 2) was executed on January 31, 2022. Paragraph 3 of the sales agreement states: “This Bill of Sale becomes effective upon issuance of the City Encroachment Permit. If Buyer fails to relocate the Queen Anne House pursuant to the terms of the City Encroachment Permit, this Bill of Sale shall be null and void.” Historic Resource Evaluation
In December 2017, City Council directed staff to retain a consultant to prepare the environmental documentation needed to address the environmental consequences under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) of moving the Queen Anne house, with the intent of facilitating its future sale, relocation, and renovation by a third party.
In February 2018, the City obtained a Historic Resource Evaluation of the house from M-Group (Attachment 3). This evaluation was prepared to confirm the type of significance, determine the level of integrity that remained, and to inform the requisite CEQA review.
Given that the resource had been removed from the original setting and removed from its former associations, the evaluation determined it no longer retained the ability to convey its significance associated with the Hercules Village. According to the report, the only historic significance that would be retained by the structure once moved and renovated would be that the structure was once occupied by Eugene (Gene) Woodfield, who served as mayor from 1962-1975 and was “instrumental in crafting the City’s first General Plan and creating a blueprint for how the City would evolve following the closure of the Hercules Plant” and for whom the first City park was named.
In May 2018, the Planning Commission approved Resolution 18-11, finding that a Categorial Exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section 15331 – Historical Resource Restoration/Rehabilitation was adequate to address the environmental consequences of relocation and rehabilitation of the Queen Anne house, provided it was done in a manner consistent with the U.S. Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.
Rockhead and Quarry eventually secured a suitable receiver site in Pinole (2525 Brandt Street) and pursued the necessary encroachment and building permits from the Cities of Pinole and Hercules during 2022 and 2023.
Disassembly for Relocation
In preparation for moving the structure to Pinole, Rockhead and Quarry indicated that they commissioned detailed architectural drawings of the building’s roof rafters and supporting studs, which have been provided to the City for reference. These drawings provided a schema for numbering the old growth Douglas Fir lumber and trim stocks as part of a careful deconstruction of the roof. Roofing shingles were recycled. Deconstruction of the roof and front gable was required to move the two halves of the building under PG&E electric wires, AT&T cables and fiber optic lines en route to Pinole. The numbered roofing lumber stock, per the architectural drawings, has been stored inside the cottage, which has been securely wrapped in tarps to prevent intrusion from rain. The front shingled gable was unable to fit inside and is stored outdoors, on the ground and exposed to the elements. (Fig. 3) Fig. 3. Exposed porch flooring and roof gable (June 2024) To lower the weight of the two halves, interior wall plaster has been removed, but the original lath has been left in place, and cross-sectional supports have been added to provide structural support during the move. In October 2021, Phil Joy Housemoving added additional steel I-beams and wood cribbing to support the house and remove the sagging that had been occurring from the prior (2010) temporary shoring equipment put in place by Trost Jacking and Heavy Moving, Inc. Both house movers will need to be notified if and when the house is moved from the corporation yard so that they can retrieve their steel beams from beneath it.
ANALYSIS:
For over 20 years, the City has sought the rehabilitation and adaptive reuse of the historic Queen Anne house it bought in 2002 and relocated in 2010. A 2016 solicitation process for the structure’s removal at no cost to the City resulted in the selection of a house mover, Rockhead and Quarry, with whom a Bill of Sale was executed in 2022. The project cleared for CEQA was the relocation and rehabilitation of the structure per the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Buildings.
Rockhead and Quarry notified the City on May 22, 2024 that they were withdrawing from the project. (Attachment 4). As noted above, the bill of sale is void if the structure is not removed, so it is staff’s conclusion that the structure still belongs to the City.
The City has received complaints from area residents over the years about the appearance of the dilapidated structure. While the Queen Anne is fenced, secured from vandalism, and partially tarped, it is not fully protected from further deterioration, as described above.
Staff is seeking direction on which of two potential courses of action the Council wishes to pursue:
Option 1. New Offering for Relocation and Restoration
The Council may wish to offer the structure once again for removal at no cost to the City, provided it is relocated to a new site and restored to the Secretary of the Interior’s standards. This option would not require new CEQA review.
However, it is staff’s opinion that the structure in its current condition is very unlikely to be attractive as a business proposition for relocation and restoration, particularly given the rapid escalation in construction costs in recent years that made the rehabilitation prohibitive for Rockhead and Quarry. It is also likely that the structure has further deteriorated since the 2016 solicitation, particularly after the roof was removed. In addition, if the offering was not successful or if relocation did not occur before the next rainy season, the City would need to take additional action to protect the structure from further deterioration.
Option 2. Demolition
The City could choose to demolish the remaining structure, but certain actions would first be required to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The 2018 CEQA exemption for the proposed relocation and rehabilitation of the Queen Anne relied on a CEQA exemption for rehabilitation of historic structures, so it does not cover demolition of the structure. A new CEQA document would need to be prepared if the structure is to be demolished.
After consulting with two consulting firms on the City’s prequalified vendor list for historic resources, staff recommends as a first step the preparation of an updated Historic Resource Evaluation, in order to determine if the structure in its current disassembled state retains sufficient integrity to continue to qualify as a historic resource under CEQA Section 15064.5. If it does, a Focused Environmental Impact Report would need to be prepared to fully document the environmental impact of demolition. Demolition of the historic resource would likely constitute a Significant and Unavoidable Impact under CEQA and require the Council to adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations. If the structure is determined not to retain its historic status under CEQA Guidelines due to loss of integrity, the City could file a Notice of Exemption from CEQA and pursue demolition.
Based on past City Attorney analysis, demolition would likely be a public project subject to procurement requirements under the Public Contract Code and prevailing wage requirements under the Labor Code. The procurement would also need to comply with the City's policy and procedures for contracts. Demolition debris would need to be processed in accordance with the City’s franchise agreement with Republic Services and applicable regulations.
Staff requested informal cost estimates for an updated HRE from two prequalified historic resources consultants on the City’s on-call list, M-Group and Rincon Consulting. M-Group prepared the 2018 HRE for relocation, and their estimate was approximately $5,500 (Attachment 5). Rincon Consulting provided a full proposal for $9,909 (Attachment 6).
Staff recommends obtaining a full proposal from M-Group, given that both firms are well qualified but M-Group’s cost is considerably lower. M-Group estimates a 4-week timeline to complete the HRE following a notice to proceed and access to the site.
If the Council chooses to proceed with the updated HRE, staff will return when the evaluation has been completed to seek further direction.
FISCAL IMPACT:
An updated Historic Resource Evaluation has been estimated to cost approximately $5,500. Staff recommends a project budget of $6,000 to provide a modest contingency. Funds are available and will be appropriated in the Facility Maintenance Fund for this expenditure if the Council chooses to proceed. Final scope and budget within the authorized limit will be negotiated with the consultant selected.
Expenditure account:
Account Number
Amount
Facility Maintenance
470-5433-611.90-00
$ 6,000
$ 6,000
Additional funding would be required for a Focused EIR and for demolition. M-Group estimated the cost of a Focused EIR at approximately $50,000. In 2016, staff estimated the potential cost of demolition at approximately $25,000, assuming hazardous material such as asbestos were not present. The cost would be considerably higher today due to general construction cost inflation of nearly 50% between 2016 and 2024, per the California Construction Cost Index published by the Department of Finance.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attach 1 – Flyer Offering Queen Anne for Removal (2016) Attach 2 – Bill of Sale (2022)
Attach 3 – Historic Resource Evaluation (2018)
Attach 4 – Email from Rockhead and Quarry, LLC
Attach 5 – Memo from M-Group
Attach 6 – Proposal from Rincon Consulting