Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
l-13125-261-hamilton-fhsr_final
prepared for City of Palo Alto prepared by Architectural Resources Group San Francisco, California March 4, 2014 Focused Historic Structure Report 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Focused Historic Structure Report (FHSR) 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA March 4, 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................... 1 2. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS .......................................................................................................................................... 2 3. SITE AND BUILDING DESCRIPTION ........................................................................................................................ 3 3.1 Site Description ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 3 3.2 Building Description ................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 4. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT .......................................................................................................... 6 4.1 Palo Alto ....................................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 4.2 Birge Clark ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 5. BUILDING CHRONOLOGY & DEVELOPMENT OF USE ............................................................................................ 7 5.1 Building Chronology .................................................................................................................................................................................. 7 5.2 Development of Use ................................................................................................................................................................................... 8 6. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE AND EVALUATION OF INTEGRITY ....................................................................... 9 6.1 Statement of Significance ........................................................................................................................................................................... 9 6.2 Character-Defining Features .................................................................................................................................................................... 10 6.3 Evaluation of Integrity.............................................................................................................................................................................. 12 7. PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION & CONFORMANCE WITH THE SECRETARY’S STANDARDS ....................... 14 7.1 Project Description .................................................................................................................................................................................... 14 7.2 Assessment for Conformance with the Secretary’s Standards ............................................................................................................ 15 7.3 Recommendations ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 20 8. BIBLIOGRAPHY ....................................................................................................................................................... 21 APPENDICES Appendix A: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation Appendix B: Existing Conditions Photographs of 261 Hamilton Avenue Appendix C: Historic Photographs of 261 Hamilton Avenue Appendix D: DPR 523A and 523B Forms Appendix E: Drawings of Proposed Project (provided by Cody Anderson Wasney Architects) ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc. Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Page 1 of 22 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc. 1. INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY Architectural Resources Group, Inc. (ARG) has completed this Focused Historic Structure Report (FHSR) for the proposed rehabilitation of the property at 261 Hamilton Avenue in Palo Alto. This report includes a summary of past historic evaluations of the property, a historical summary of the property and its surroundings, and an assessment of the proposed project’s consistency with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation. The building at 261 Hamilton Avenue was designed by the prominent architect Birge Clark, who was responsible for designing hundreds of buildings in Palo Alto and the surrounding area during the first half of the 20th century. For many years, the building was referred to as the Medico-Dental Building, since many doctors and dentists had offices on the upper floors. The U.S. Post Office operated out of the ground floor of 261 Hamilton Avenue until 1933, when the stand-alone Post Office building at 380 Hamilton Ave, also designed by Birge Clark, was completed. Palo Alto’s first drive-in parking garage was also located below the building at 261 Hamilton Avenue. The former Medico-Dental Building is now known as the Hamilton Building. It is recognized as a Category 3 structure on Palo Alto’s Historic Inventory and is listed as a contributor to the National Register-listed Ramona Street Architectural District. The proposed rehabilitation of 261 Hamilton Avenue entails constructing a new three-to-four-story portion at the northwest corner of the building. The existing portion’s interior will be rehabilitated and non-historic exterior elements will be replaced with historically-compatible elements. (A more detailed project description is included below in Section 7.1.) To complete the FHSR for 261 Hamilton Avenue, ARG: • Conducted a site visit to examine and photograph the project area and its surroundings on November 13, 2013; • Reviewed existing historic evaluations of 261 Hamilton Avenue; • Conducted additional research as necessary to supplement the existing record, including permit research at the Palo Alto Development Center and archival research at the Palo Alto Historical Association; and • Reviewed proposed project drawings prepared by Cody Anderson Wasney Architects, dated October 18, 2013. Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Page 2 of 22 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc. 2. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS As a contributor to the National Register-listed Ramona Street Architectural District, the property at 261 Hamilton Avenue is an identified historic resource. It is also recognized as a Category 3 building on the City of Palo Alto’s Historic Inventory. A Category 3 building is described as follows: A "Contributing Building"…is a good local example of an architectural style and relates to the character of a neighborhood grouping in scale, materials, proportion or other factors. A contributing building may have had extensive or permanent changes made to the original design, such as inappropriate additions, extensive removal of architectural details, or wooden facades resurfaced in asbestos or stucco.1 Although the building retains a great deal of its original architectural elements and materials, some of the openings at ground level have undergone alterations, most notably to the east (Hamilton Avenue) elevation, over the years to accommodate different businesses. However, ARG believes the building retains sufficient integrity to convey its historic significance. Additionally, in ARG’s professional opinion, specific components of the proposed project are not in conformance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, and therefore the project is not compliant overall. 1 Historic Inventory Category Information, http://www.cityofpaloalto.org/news/displaynews.asp?NewsID=539&TargetID=127 (Accessed December 12, 2013). Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Page 3 of 22 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc. 3. SITE AND BUILDING DESCRIPTION 3.1 Site Description The building at 261 Hamilton Avenue is located within Downtown Palo Alto on the northern corner of the Hamilton Avenue and Ramona Street intersection. The building is within the National Register-listed Ramona Street Architectural District, which includes the buildings along the south side of Ramona Street and the two adjacent buildings west of the subject property on the north side of Ramona Street (See Figure 1). Figure 1. Map of Ramona Street Architectural District (Source: National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form) Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Page 4 of 22 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc. 3.2 Building Description Figure 2. 261 Hamilton Avenue, south (Ramona Street) and east (Hamilton Avenue) elevations Figure 3. 261 Hamilton Avenue, east and north (Centennial Way) elevations The property at 261 Hamilton Avenue sits at the northern corner of Ramona Street and Hamilton Avenue and consists of a stucco-clad, four-story building with a basement and mezzanine level. The building’s footprint is generally square in plan; however, the two main façades – the south (Ramona Street) and east (Hamilton Avenue) – rise an additional three floors above the ground floor and mezzanine, thus creating an L-shape along those elevations. At the ground level on both primary elevations, the openings typically consist of large, non-historic aluminum windows and doors. Some of the original tile and transom details at these openings remain. At the upper levels, fenestration mainly consists of divided-light metal casement windows. The overall style is Spanish Colonial Revival and retains numerous original elements, including red-tile roof, elaborate ironwork, and decorative tile. The gabled roof varies slightly in height and pitch to create the illusion that the building comprises different elements constructed over time. The building’s south elevation faces Ramona Street and was designed to appear as if it were two separate buildings, with the left (west) section slightly lower than the right (east) section. At ground level, the portion to the left features two pointed-arch entryways. The right portion has four openings consisting of two central openings with oblong-arched transoms flanked on either side by an opening with a rectangular transom with ogee-shaped corners. The opening to the center right contains a recessed shop entry decorated with tile. At the second and third floors, the portion to the left (west) consists of four bays of metal, divided-light windows, while the portion on the right consists of eight bays. Both portions feature a small decorative iron balcony. Both sections feature arched colonnades with different column styles at the fourth floor. An iron balcony with an arched base wraps around the south and east façades between the first and second floors. The varying roof pitches on the Hamilton Avenue façade also create the illusion of three separate buildings. The left (south) portion features two large windows with transom flanking a smaller doorway at the ground floor. Fenestration at the upper floors is identical to the east portion of the Ramona Street façade, but this section contains five bays instead of eight. The gable end features an opening covered with a decorative iron grille. The narrow central section consists of an arched entry at ground level and two bays of windows on the upper floors. The rectangular widows on the second floor are covered with an ornately-decorated, birdcage-like covering. This narrow portion also features a slightly shallower- pitched roof than the flanking portions. The northernmost section features two pointed arches with metal windows flanking a central doorway at the ground floor and six bays of windows on the second and Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Page 5 of 22 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc. third floors. Below all six windows on the second floor and the two central windows on the third floor are decorative iron balconies. The top floor features an arched colonnade flanked on either side by a casement window covered by an iron grille. At the ground floor, the north elevation along Centennial Way consists of a four-story portion to the east and a two-story portion to the west. The eastern portion features a large arched opening with metal window on the ground floor. The second and third floors contain four bays of windows, the center two at the third floor featuring a decorative iron balcony. The fourth floor has six bays of arched divided-light casement windows and a rectangular divided light one on each end. An opening in the gable features a decorative iron grille with scroll motif. The upper-floor elevations facing north and west that make up the interior of the L-shape consist of divided-light casement windows and are minimally decorated since they are not easily visible from street level. The building’s ground floor on the west elevation abuts against the adjacent building; however, the three floors above ground level feature metal casement windows at the second and third floors. Arched casement windows at the top floor mimic the arched colonnades on the primary façades. Metal casement windows flank the faux colonnade. The gable contains an opening covered with a metal grille. Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Page 6 of 22 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc. 4. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT 4.1 Palo Alto Although the land was once occupied by the Ohlone and later part of vast Spanish land grants, modern- day Palo Alto was formed in the late 1800s by Leland and Jane Stanford, the founders of Stanford University. The Stanfords “decided that the new university should have an accompanying college town to provide a clean-living place for student housing and other services.”2 After both the neighboring towns of Menlo Park and Mayfield refused to stop serving alcohol, Stanford decided to create his own dry town and called it University Park. In contemporary advertisements, the area was described as “a tract of beautiful oak-park land, immediately opposite and adjoining the grounds of the Leland Stanford Junior University.”3 The land was “subdivided into villa blocks, comprising about five acres each… in the most artistic manner, with broad avenues intersecting each other at picturesque angles.”4 University Park officially became Palo Alto in 1892. By the turn of the twentieth century, Palo Alto was a developing town that “had solved many of the basic problems of survival by installing an efficient water system, paving the roads, establishing schools, developing sewage management, and other municipal functions.”5 Sanborn Maps dating to the 1890s indicate the area directly surrounding the subject property consisted of empty lots and largely remained that way until the early 1900s, when some lots were occupied by single- family dwellings. The main commercial area was one block west on University Avenue, between High and Emerson Streets. By 1924, University and Hamilton Avenues and the streets between them were becoming more developed with businesses and offices, including automobile services, bakeries, clothing stores, restaurants, printers, and numerous others. The Palo Alto Improvement Company, which was formed to “expand downtown in the vicinity of Hamilton, Ramona, and Bryant streets,” envisioned a downtown area close to the railroad station. The Palo Alto Improvement Company constructed the Cardinal Hotel in 1924 as the anchor for subsequent development in that part of Downtown.6 During this period in Palo Alto’s history, “the Palo Alto Improvement Company appears to have played a major role in the development of this new area.”7 Prior to the construction of the Medico-Dental Building in 1927, the lot was owned by prominent local contractor E.A. Hettinger and was occupied by two single-family dwellings. The Palo Alto Improvement Company purchased the property and commissioned architect Birge Clark to design the building at 261 Hamilton Avenue.8 Upon its completion, the Medico-Dental Building was “the first substantial building of its type [professional offices] in Palo Alto,” since many professional medical offices in Palo Alto were located in private homes up until this time.9 2 Pamela Gullard and Nancy Lund, History of Palo Alto: The Early Years, (San Francisco: Scottwall Associates, 1989), 83. 3 Ibid., 85. 4 Ibid. 5 Ibid., 137. 6 Michael Corbett and Denise Bradley, “Final Survey Report, Palo Alto Historical Survey Update, August 1997-August 2000,” (February 2001), 1-8. 7 Ibid., 4-10. 8 Historic Resources Board, Historic Resource Inventory (DPR 523) Form, 1981-1985. 9 Corbett, 6-99. Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Page 7 of 22 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc. 4.2 Birge Clark The son of Arthur B. Clark – a noted architect in his own right – and Grace Clark, Birge was born on April 16, 1893 in San Francisco. His parents had moved to Palo Alto the year before when Arthur began a professorship at Stanford University teaching architecture and art. Birge himself studied architecture at Stanford University and later at Columbia University. He earned a Silver Star for gallantry in World War I, after which he returned home to Palo Alto, where he enjoyed a successful career in architecture. Birge resided in Palo Alto until his death on April 30, 1989. Over the course of his prolific career, Birge Clark was considered by many to be the “man who built Palo Alto.” When he opened his practice in 1922, Birge was only one of two licensed architects between San Jose and San Francisco.10 His early works include the Lou Henry and Herbert Hoover House (1920) at Stanford University, for which his father Arthur was the head architect, and several cottages on the school’s campus. In addition to the building at 261 Hamilton Avenue, Birge also designed many of the buildings on Ramona Street that are now contributors to the National Register-listed Ramona Street Architectural District. Birge also received the commission for the U.S. Post Office in Palo Alto, which was completed in 1933. Many of Birge’s designs are in the “Early California” style – his term for Spanish Colonial Revival. Birge Clark’s architectural contributions to Palo Alto cannot be understated, having designed over four hundred residential and commercial buildings in Palo Alto and the surrounding area. 5. BUILDING CHRONOLOGY & DEVELOPMENT OF USE 5.1 Building Chronology Construction History City building permits indicate that the building at 261 Hamilton Avenue has undergone numerous alterations over the years. Most of the changes, however, have been to the building’s interior and typically included demolishing existing partitions and remodeling, likely to accommodate changing tenants. Most significantly, the entire ground floor was reconfigured in 1967 to accommodate the expansion of the University Art store into the existing retail spaces. Although there are few permits to indicate exactly what work was performed on the exterior, a visual investigation and limited building permit records indicate that there have been some alterations to the ground floor windows and storefronts over the years. Building permits indicate that in July of 1968 there was a fire at the shop within the building located at 581 Ramona Street, but the building appears to have sustained only interior damage. Historic photographs (see Appendix B) show changes were made before the late 1970s. The Palo Alto Development Center only retains building permits from as early as the 1960s, so formulating a complete building history is not possible. Permits indicating alterations to the building’s exterior are listed below: Permit #24498 1/13/65 Remodel storefront; int. remodel and alter 10 Dave Weinstein, Signature Architects of the San Francisco Bay Area (Layton, UT: Gibbs Smith, 2006), 70. Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Page 8 of 22 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc. Permit #A31165 9/18/72 Install glass window display and close off partitions of lobby as per plan 5.2 Development of Use The building at 261 Hamilton Avenue was known historically as the Medico-Dental Building. In the first few decades after the building first opened, tenants on the upper-floor offices typically included physicians, dentists, and medical laboratories, with a few lawyers and other professionals. In more recent decades, the tenants in the upper floors varied from doctors, lawyers, architects, and real estate brokers to Christian Science practitioners, telephone answering services, and bail bondsmen. The ground floor has been used for commercial purposes since the building’s construction. A branch of the Jenkel-Davidson Optical Co. and a pharmacy operated from the storefronts along Ramona Street (571- 581 Ramona Street) for many years. The storefront on the ground floor at 265-267 Hamilton Avenue included the U.S. Post Office, which remained there until 1933, when it moved to a stand-alone building further north on Hamilton Avenue. After the Post Office relocated, the space was used by various furniture and interior décor shops, including the Littlefield Furniture Co. and Henriques. University Art, an artists’ supply store, has occupied the space since 1964; the store eventually expanded to include the shops along Ramona Street and now occupies the entire ground floor. Palo Alto’s first drive-in parking garage operated below the building at 261 Hamilton Avenue. An advertisement on the cover of the 1932 City Directory described the garage as “absolutely fireproof” and providing services such as “washing – storage – polishing” and “oiling and greasing – 24 Hour Service.” According to the City Directory, the underground garage operated at the site from 1928 to 1965. Currently, the garage space is used for tenant storage. Figure 4. Palo Alto City Directory Advertisement, 1932 (Source: Palo Alto Historical Association) Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Page 9 of 22 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc. 6. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE AND EVALUATION OF INTEGRITY 6.1 Statement of Significance Statement of Significance The building at 261 Hamilton Avenue has already been evaluated for its historic significance. It recognized as a Category 3 building on Palo Alto’s Historic Inventory. It is also a contributor to the Ramona Street Architectural District, which was listed on the National Register in 1986. The National Register Nomination Form states the significance of the district as follows: The significance of the Ramona Street Architectural District is that it represents an architecturally unified area of buildings which were built during a particular period (1924-1938). The buildings in the district remain largely unaltered, and the architectural district contains no intrusions. The total absence of intrusions in a district characterized by a single predominant architectural style makes this area quite unique. Not only are the individual structures attractive in their own right, their relationship with one another established the character of the street. The architecture of this street is reminiscent of an architecturally untutored Spanish village. Excellent examples of Monterey Colonial, Spanish Colonial Revival, and to a lesser extent, Craftsman Style architecture, line both sides of the tree-lined street…. These taller structures [the Cardinal Hotel and 261 Hamilton Avenue] at the corner of Ramona Street and Hamilton Avenue complete the form of the street which is otherwise composed of one- to three-story structures. A simple palette of materials, carefully executed details, comfortable massing, and inviting plans with interior courts of the various buildings give this area its friendly human-scale quality. Thick stucco walls with recessed openings, carved wood, wrought iron, ceramic tile, and tile roofing are composed in a variety of forms which gives diversity to this visually unified area. The relatively few alterations done to the buildings over the years have been sensitively handled and in no way detract from their original character.11 Period of Significance The period of significance is the span of time in which a property attained its historic significance. 261 Hamilton Avenue is architecturally significant as a good representative example of the Spanish Colonial Revival Style and is part of the architecturally cohesive Ramona Street Architectural District. The period of significance for the buildings at 261 Hamilton Avenue is the year of the building’s construction in 1927. As a contributor to the Ramona Street Architectural District, the building’s period of significance extends from 1927 to 1938.12 11 National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form, Ramona Street Architectural District, prepared by Carolyn George, May 21, 1985. 12 The period of significance for the Ramona Street Architectural District identified in the National Register nomination extends from 1924 when the first contributor to the district was constructed to 1938 when the last one was constructed. Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Page 10 of 22 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc. 6.2 Character-Defining Features This section identifies the exterior character-defining features of 261 Hamilton Avenue. A character- defining feature is an aspect of a building’s design, construction, or detail that is representative of the building’s function, type, or architectural style. Generally, character-defining features include specific building systems, architectural ornament, construction details, massing, materials, craftsmanship, site characteristics, and landscaping within the period of significance. In order for an important historic resource to retain its significance, its character-defining features must be retained to the greatest extent possible. An understanding of a building’s character-defining features is a crucial step in developing a rehabilitation plan that incorporates an appropriate level of restoration, rehabilitation, maintenance, and protection. Exterior Character-Defining Features of the 261 Hamilton Avenue include: • Red-tile roof • Varied roof heights • Four-story height • Stucco finish • Arched openings at ground level • Transoms at ground floor windows and entryways • Tile work at ground floor windows and storefronts • Original entrance lobby with beamed ceiling, floor tile, staircase, and light fixture • Ironwork, including balcony railings, grilles, and birdcage-style window covering • Colonnades at top floor • Metal casement windows • Wraparound balcony with arched base • Minimal eave overhang See Table 1 below for an illustrated list of character-defining features. Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Page 11 of 22 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc. TABLE 1. Illustrated Table of Character-Defining Features Varied roof heights, Ramona Street elevation Birdcage-style iron window covering, east elevation Varied roof heights and four-story height, Hamilton Avenue (east) elevation Colonnade at top floor and iron balconies, east elevation Transom above ground floor windows, south elevation Wraparound balcony with arched base, east elevation Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Page 12 of 22 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc. TABLE 1. Illustrated Table of Character-Defining Features (continued) Metal casement windows, ironwork, and minimal eave overhang, east elevation Decorative tile at Ramona Street storefront, south elevation Original entrance lobby with beamed ceiling, floor tile, staircase, and light fixture Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Page 13 of 22 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc. 6.3 Evaluation of Integrity Integrity is the authenticity of a historical resource’s physical identity evidenced by the survival of characteristics that existed during the resource’s period of significance. Integrity involves several aspects including location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. These aspects closely relate to the building’s significance and must be primarily intact for eligibility. Location Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred. 261 Hamilton Avenue has not been moved from its original location. Therefore, its integrity of location is high. Design Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property. The building at 261 Hamilton Avenue retains high integrity of design. Historic photographs of the building reveal that the building appears to have retained its original architectural features, overall massing, form, and Spanish Colonial Revival design elements. Despite some changes to the ground level openings, the exterior has not been significantly altered. Most of the alterations to the building have been performed on the interior. Thus, the building strongly conveys its original design intent on the exterior. Setting Setting is the physical environment of a historic property, constituting topographic features, vegetation, manmade features, and relationships between buildings or open space. The building at 261 Hamilton Avenue retains good integrity of setting. At the time of the building’s construction, this area of Palo Alto was becoming increasingly commercial. The adjacent buildings on Ramona Street, which were built in the 1920s and 1930s, were designed by three architects: Birge Clark, Pedro de Lemos, and William H. Weeks. Today, those buildings still stand and, along with the subject property, are contributors to the Ramona Street Architectural District. The building directly adjacent to the north and the Palo Alto City Hall building across Hamilton Avenue to the east are later additions to the neighborhood. Materials Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property. The building at 261 Hamilton Avenue retains high integrity of materials. Apart from replaced windows and altered openings at the ground level, the exterior retains many of its original exterior materials, including ironwork, steal sash windows, tile work, tile roof, and stucco cladding. Workmanship Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture, people, or artisan during any given period in history or pre-history. The building at 261 Hamilton Avenue retains high integrity of workmanship associated with its Spanish Colonial Revival-style detailing on the exterior. Feeling Feeling is a property’s expression of the aesthetic or historical sense of a particular period of time. The building at 261 Hamilton Avenue retains high integrity of feeling. The building displays strong characteristics of a 1920s commercial building and conveys its relationship to Ramona Street and the adjacent buildings through its coherent stylistic elements. Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Page 14 of 22 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc. Association Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property. The building at 261 Hamilton Avenue retains high integrity of association. It is most closely associated with the architect Birge Clark and still retains many of its original architectural elements and materials that link it to Birge’s trademark Spanish Colonial Revival style. In summary, the building has retained a significant amount of its historic features since it was first constructed. The changes made to the building to accommodate different tenants resulted in interior modifications that have been fairly minor. The only significant exterior modifications have been to the ground-floor storefronts. Thus, considering all aspects together, the building retains sufficient integrity to communicate its historic significance. 7. PROPOSED PROJECT DESCRIPTION & CONFORMANCE WITH THE SECRETARY’S STANDARDS 7.1 Project Description The following project description is excerpted from a letter dated October 18, 2013 to the City of Palo Alto and provided by CAW Architects: This proposed renovation project will significantly improve several existing deficiencies within the building. A new continuous exit stair will be added to the building to provide code compliant exiting throughout all floors. Currently only one open stairwell located in the center of the building serves the upper floor tenants. Other key proposed improvements will include a new automatic fire sprinkler system, fire alarm system, and a seismic upgrade. The small existing elevator lift will be replaced with a code compliant, gurney-sized elevator serving all floors. Wholesale mechanical and electrical systems will be replaced. Every effort to install and replace major building systems to enhance the life safety and usability will be implemented with extreme care to preserve key defining historic fabric within the building. The project will seek to restore deteriorating features of the building. The ground floor storefronts will be revitalized to improve the retail experience along Ramona Street and Hamilton Street by restoring the ground floor portion of the façade canopies and windows. The existing basement currently houses basement office space. The project will convert the basement back to underground parking and increase the parking available on the site. At the northwest corner of the site along Centennial Walk, a new three-story addition will be constructed to transfer the existing office space from the basement to the second and third floors of the building. The proposed design increases the parking count to the site and decreases the assess[ed] gross floor area of the building as noted on the drawings. The new addition at the rear of the building takes its clues from Birge Clark’s original design. The addition steps in slightly to honor the original historic building before extending out again to align with the original facade in much the same way as Clark stepped in the structure on other facades to break down the mass of this large four-story building. Simple materials such as stucco, metal, wood and terra-cotta are the primary materials of Clark’s design and are the same materials proposed in the new addition. The new addition has been designed to be compatible Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Page 15 of 22 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc. with the historic building with some contemporary details primarily through window sizes and mullion patterns. Overall the exterior design of the new addition is compatible with the National Standards for Rehabilitation. The addition, while providing additional office space on the upper floors, also drives significant upgrades to the building including improved life-safety, seismic retrofit, sprinklers, new utilities and ADA access throughout. It provides additional vehicle parking in the downtown and rehabilitates key architectural features that have been lost over time. 7.2 Assessment for Conformance with the Secretary’s Standards This section provides an analysis of the project drawings prepared by Cody Anderson Wasney Architects and dated October 18, 2013 and the proposed project’s compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation. (See Appendix C for an overview of the Secretary’s Standards.) Where the project does not meet the Standards, recommendations to bring the project to compliance are provided in Section 7.3. 1. 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. The building at 261 Hamilton Avenue will continue to serve commercial purposes at the ground level and house offices on the upper floors. This property is architecturally significant as an example of the Spanish Colonial Revival style and as a contributor to the National Register-listed Ramona Street Architectural District. The plans for the project call for the removal of the “existing one-story building construction, including but not limited to the floor slab, foundation, columns, beams, exterior walls, parapet, roofing system, roof slab, beams, and joists” at the building’s north corner. This north corner is along the building’s secondary elevation and contains no character-defining features. As such, the proposed project is compliant with Standard 1. 2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. In general, the proposed project will retain and preserve the majority of the character-defining features identified above in Section 6.2, including the original ironwork, storefront window detailing, entrance lobby off Hamilton Avenue, stucco cladding, and overall form. The roof tiles will be removed, numbered, and salvaged for reinstallation in their original locations. According to the Architect, removal and replacement is necessary to properly wire-tie the clay tiles.13 Though most character defining features will remain, all original steel sash windows are proposed for removal and replacement. The historic windows are a significant building element and are character- defining features. While the plans propose to replace the original windows with modern replicas, removal of the historic windows would constitute a significant loss of original material could greatly compromise the historic character of the property. Additionally, modern windows, even if designed to replicate the historic, many times do not completely capture the character of the original windows and 13 Email correspondence with Brent McClure, AIA at Cody Anderson Wasney Architects, November 26, 2013. Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Page 16 of 22 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc. can notably alter the look and feel of a historic building. As such, the proposed window removal is not compliant with this Standard (also see discussion under Standard 5 and 6 below). 3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken. The proposed project includes the recreation of the Post Office lettering on the existing historic sign located above the northernmost doorway on the east elevation. The architect proposes to use the original drawings to recreate the incised lettering. Though the historic drawings provide information on the original design intent of the post office signage, we do not feel that the existing information provides sufficient information on the original “as-built” conditions of the signage. When replicating an architectural feature, the National Park Service calls for “adequate historical, pictorial, and physical documentation…so that the feature may be accurately reproduced.”14 While Birge Clark’s design intent is represented in the original drawings, a craftsperson would have completed the work and there is no documentation to show how the lettering actually looked originally (size or depth of the letters, stylistic qualities of the lettering). Without historical photographs of the sign as originally constructed, this proposed alteration could present a false representation of the signage, and is therefore not compliant with this Standard. New iron gate enclosures are proposed for the three door openings on the east elevation. They are of a simplified design and are appropriate in material. The finish and color of the new gates are not specified, but should be compatible with that of the existing metalwork. As shown on Sheet 4.2 of the proposed plans, a new decorative iron grill is proposed for installation above the former Post Office entrance. In the drawings, the design of this element is very similar to the existing original ironwork in the balcony above. The use of such a similar design risks presenting a false sense of historical development and is not compatible with this Standard. Overall, the proposed project is not compliant with Standard 3. 4. Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. Alterations to the building over time have primarily focused on the building interior and on the storefront areas at street level. Research did not indicate that any of these alterations have attained significance over time. Therefore, the proposed project is compliant with Standard 4. 5. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property shall be preserved. The proposed project will retain and preserve most of the distinctive exterior features that characterize the property at 261 Hamilton Avenue, including: 14 “Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Structures,” at http://www.nps.gov/hps/tps/standguide/rehab/rehab_approach.htm (accessed 11 December 2013). Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Page 17 of 22 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc. • Red-tile roof • Colonnades at top floor • Ironwork, including balcony railings, grilles, and birdcage-style window covering • Original tile work at ground floor windows and storefronts • Arched cornice with iron railing • Stucco cladding • Turned wood spindles at ground floor transoms • Entrance lobby: stair and stair rail, floor tile, light fixture, and elevator shaft The treatment of the above-listed features is compliant with this Standard. However, as discussed under Standard 2 above (and Standard 6 below), the project proposes to remove and replace all original windows, a change which will remove distinctive features of the property and which is not compliant with Standard 5. 6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. The project drawings dated October 18, 2013 indicate that some historic materials, such as the roof, decorative ironwork, and wood transoms, will be repaired and where materials are too deteriorated, replaced in kind. According to the project architect, the wood detailing and transoms: …along the ground floor that are found in sound condition will remain. These elements will receive refinishing only, matching the original colors. Where damaged historic detailing occurs, these will be replaced and/or recreated following the original Birge Clark drawings. Non-historic features at the ground floor, such as aluminum transoms and window systems will be removed. Overall at the ground floor level, we will attempt maintain and preserve the original historic fabric where possible and then recreate damaged or missing features.15 Building plans indicate the roof tiles will removed and salvaged for reuse. In order to properly wire-tie the clay tiles, all existing clay roof tiles will be numbered, removed, and then reinstalled in the original pattern. Reinstallation of the original roof tiles is compliant with Standard 6. Where damaged tiles require replacement, new tiles should match the existing in material, color, texture, and other visual qualities. Missing features to be replaced include the decorative tile at selected storefronts of the south and east elevations. The original project drawings indicate where tile was located historically and some of the original tile remains in place. According to the Architect: The ceramic tile bases and insets along the street level elevations will be recreated with a pattern of clay tile manufactured by Fireclay tile. The tile manufactured by Fireclay highly resembles the original tile in its texture, glaze, size, color and detailing. The new insets will attempt to replicate the original installation by use of this material.16 15 Email correspondence with Brent McClure, AIA at Cody Anderson Wasney Architects, December 2, 2013. 16 Email correspondence with Brent McClure, AIA at Cody Anderson Wasney Architects, November 26, 2013. Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Page 18 of 22 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc. ARG reviewed examples of the tile proposed for installation at the previously altered storefronts and finds that the design and other aesthetic qualities do not sufficiently match that of the original tile. The specific qualities of the original hand painted tile will be difficult to replicate, and a more compatible yet differentiated tile is suggested for the rehabilitated storefronts on the historic building (see discussion under Standard 9 below). For the reasons discussed above, the proposed new tile work is not compatible with this Standard. As previously discussed, the proposed plans call for removal and replacement of all multi-pane steel casement windows. The historic windows are a significant building element and are character-defining features. A comprehensive window survey to identify the full extent of damage to the original windows has not been conducted, and the existing conditions photos presented to ARG for review do not demonstrate that the windows are deteriorated to a degree that rehabilitation is not an option. The photos show surface corrosion, which is an expected condition in older steel windows, but the existing steel windows appear to be in generally sound condition. As such, the proposed replacement of the multi-pane steel sash windows is not compliant with this Standard. As discussed under Standard 3 above, the recreation of the Post Office signage is not based on sufficient documentary or pictorial evidence and the proposed replication is not compatible with this Standard. In summary, the treatment of the roof tiles as discussed above is compliant with this Standard. However, the use of proposed decorative tile work, multi-pane steel window replacement, and post office sign replication are not compliant with this Standard. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. In a memo dated December 10, 2013, the architect has specified that the: …textured painted stucco will the cleaned using a low-pressure water wash, supplemented by scrubbing with soft natural bristle brushes and non-ionic detergents as recommended by the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards Preservation Brief 22, Preservation and Repair of Historic Stucco. This proposed cleaning approach is sensitive to the historic fabric and is compliant with Standard 7. 8. Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. An archeological evaluation is beyond the scope of this analysis. However, should materials be found during the demolition or construction process, a qualified archeologist should be consulted for assessment and mitigation recommendations. 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. The project plans call for the removal of the “existing one-story building construction, including but not limited to the floor slab, foundation, columns, beams, exterior walls, parapet, roofing system, roof slab, Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Page 19 of 22 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc. beams, and joists” at the building’s north corner. This portion of the building is less detailed, and more utilitarian in nature than the two prominent street-facing facades (along Hamilton and Ramona), and does not play a major role in defining the character of the building. Therefore, replacement of this portion of the building with a new addition will not affect the building’s ability to convey its historic significance. The proposed addition’s proportions and design do not overwhelm or compete with the historic building’s size and Spanish Colonial Revival styling. The addition is smaller in height than the original building, and its rooflines will not be visible from either of the principal street frontages. It is set back from the face of the existing building where it connects on the north elevation, and a recessed hyphen connects the two buildings on the west elevation. Stylistically, the new addition is designed for compatibility with the characteristics of the Spanish Colonial Revival style, but the building reads as a modern interpretation of this historical style. The windows and metal balcony railing will be simplified in design from the same features on the historic building, and are compatible in size, scale, and materials. Furthermore, the exterior finish of the addition will be differentiated from the historic building, which has a “painted, medium textured, cement plaster finish.” The addition with feature “a smooth, steel trowel integral colored cement plaster stucco.”17 According to the project architect, the addition’s roof “will not attempt to replicate the original clay tile roof. The color will be a historically compatible color with some variation within the tile.”18 For the reasons discussed above, the proposed addition appears compliant with Standard 9. The proposed project calls for restoration of the historic storefront configurations along the east, north, and south elevations. The proposed Fireclay tile (specifically the Cuerda Seca series tiles) is not a precise enough match to be considered a suitable replication of the original tile, but is also not differentiated enough from the existing original tile to be compatible and differentiated. Though the original tile does have a weathered patina, the proposed Cuerda Seca tiles are designed to imitate historic tiles, and will not provide a sufficient level of visual differentiation when applied to the historic building. As such, the proposed Cuerda Seca tiles do not appear to be compliant with this Standard. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. Proposed alterations have been designed in such a manner that they will be perceived as clearly additive to the existing building and can be removed in the future without negatively impacting the building’s historic materials or overall significance. Although the proposed addition requires removal of the northernmost portion of the building, it is not a primary elevation and it does not contain character- defining features. Conclusion Based on the above analysis, ARG concludes that the though several aspects of the proposed project are in keeping with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, the proposed project is not compliant overall. The primary modifications found not to be compliant with the Standards include the comprehensive replacement of the original steel multi-pane windows, the proposed Cuerda Seca tile work at the storefront windows, and the proposed replication of the Post Office Signage. 17 Email correspondence with Brent McClure, AIA at Cody Anderson Wasney Architects, December 2, 2013. 18 Email correspondence with Brent McClure, AIA at Cody Anderson Wasney Architects, November 26, 2013. Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Page 20 of 22 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc. 7.3 Recommendations To bring the proposed project into full compliance with the Standards, ARG recommends the following: • Retain, repair, and restore the original steel multi-pane casement windows throughout. Replace in kind only when the condition is deteriorated to a state where repair is not feasible. • Use simplified compatible tile at the restored storefronts. The plain tiles in the Fireclay Debris Series would be appropriate. • Retain the post office signage as is, with no attempt to replicate the lettering. • Design new decorative grille features as compatible yet differentiated replacements using a simplified design and similar color and finish treatments. Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Page 21 of 22 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc. 8. BIBLIOGRAPHY . California Register and National Register: A Comparison, Technical Assistance Series 6. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Parks and Recreation, 2001. . User’s Guide to the California Historical Resource Status Codes & Historic Resources Inventory Directory, Technical Assistance Bulletin 8. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Parks and Recreation, 2004. California Office of Historic Preservation. California Register of Historical Resources: The Listing Process, Technical Assistance Series 5. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Parks and Recreation, n.d. California Office of Historic Preservation. California Register and National Register: A Comparison, Technical Assistance Series 6. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Parks and Recreation, 2001. California Office of Historic Preservation. User’s Guide to the California Historical Resource Status Codes & Historic Resources Inventory Directory, Technical Assistance Bulletin 8.Sacramento, CA: California Department of Parks and Recreation, 2004. Clark, Birge. An Architect Grows Up in Palo Alto, Memoirs of Birge M. Clark, F.A.I.A. September 1982. Corbett, Michael and Denise Bradley. “Final Survey Report, Palo Alto Historical Survey Update, August 1997-August 2000.” February 2001. George, Carolyn. National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form. Ramona Street Architectural District Nomination Form. May 1985. http://pdfhost.focus.nps.gov/docs/NRHP/Text/86000592.pdf (Accessed November 25, 2013) Gullard, Pamela and Nancy Lund. History of Palo Alto: The Early Years. San Francisco: Scottwall Associates, 1989. Hamilton Building, Historic Resources Inventory Form (DPR 523). Prepared by the Historic Resources Board; Palo Alto Historical Association. 1981, 1985. Historic Environment Consultants. “Historical and Architectural Resources of the City of Palo Alto.” Prepared by Paula Boghosian and John Beach. February 1979. Pacific Coast Architecture Database. https://digital.lib.washington.edu/architect/architects/759/ (Accessed November 11, 20130) Palo Alto Times. “New P.O. Building Sketched: Style of New Structure To Stress Spanish Note; Work to Begin In July.” May 14, 1927. National Park Service. How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation, National Register Bulletin 15. Washington, DC: United States Department of the Interior, 1997. Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Page 22 of 22 ARCHITECTURAL RESOURCES GROUP Architects, Planners & Conservators, Inc. National Park Service. How to Complete the National Register Registration Form, National Register Bulletin 16A. Washington, DC: United States Department of the Interior, 1997. Sanborn Map Company Fire Insurance Maps for the City of Palo Alto Weinstein, Dave. Signature Architects of the San Francisco Bay Area. Layton, UT: Gibbs Smith, 2006. Appendix A: The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Focused Historic Structure Report Architectural Resources Group Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Appendix A A-1 APPENDIX A: THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR’S STANDARDS FOR REHABILITATION 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 in or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. The Standards for Rehabilitation (codified in 36 CFR 67 for use in the Federal Historic Preservation Tax Incentives program) 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.” Initially developed by the Secretary of the Interior to determine the appropriateness of proposed project work on registered properties within the Historic Preservation Fund grant-in-aid program, the Standards for Rehabilitation (the Standards) have been widely used over the years—particularly to determine if a rehabilitation qualifies as a Certified Rehabilitation for Federal tax purposes. In addition, the Standards have guided 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 nonfederal rehabilitation proposals. They have also been adopted by historic district and planning commissions across the country. The intent of the Standards is to assist the long-term preservation of a property’s significance through the preservation of historic materials and features. The Standards pertain to historic buildings of all materials, construction types, sizes, and occupancy and encompass the exterior and interior of the buildings. They also encompass related landscape features and the building’s site and environment, as well as attached, adjacent, or related new construction. To be certified for Federal tax purposes, a rehabilitation project must be determined by the Secretary of the Interior to be consistent with the historic character of the structure(s), and where applicable, the district in which it is located. The Standards are to be applied to specific rehabilitation projects in a reasonable manner, taking into consideration economic and technical feasibility. The ten Standards are: 1. 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. 2. The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. 3. Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken. 4. Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right shall be retained and preserved. 5. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property shall be preserved. Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Appendix A A-2 6. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features shall be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence. 7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. 8. Significant archeological resources affected by a project shall be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures shall be undertaken. 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. Appendix B: Existing Conditions Photographs of 261 Hamilton Avenue 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Focused Historic Structure Report Architectural Resources Group Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Appendix B – Existing Conditions B-1 Ramona Street, view looking southeast (Architectural Resources Group, November 2013) South side of Ramona Street, view looking southeast toward Hamilton Avenue (Architectural Resources Group, November 2013) Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Appendix B – Existing Conditions B-2 261 Hamilton Avenue, south (Ramona Street) façade (Architectural Resources Group, November 2013) South (Ramona Street) and east (Hamilton Avenue) elevations (Architectural Resources Group, November 2013) Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Appendix B – Existing Conditions B-3 Corner of Hamilton Avenue and Ramona Street, view looking north (Architectural Resources Group, November 2013) South (Ramona Street) and east (Hamilton Avenue) elevations (Architectural Resources Group, November 2013) Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Appendix B – Existing Conditions B-4 Lobby entrance at 261 Hamilton Avenue (Architectural Resources Group, November 2013) Lobby interior (Architectural Resources Group, November 2013) Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Appendix B – Existing Conditions B-5 East (Hamilton Avenue) and north (Centennial Way) elevations (Architectural Resources Group, November 2013) North (Centennial Way) elevation (Architectural Resources Group, November 2013) Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Appendix B – Existing Conditions B-6 North elevations (Architectural Resources Group, November 2013) North elevations, view looking southeast along Centennial Walk (Architectural Resources Group, November 2013) Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Appendix B – Existing Conditions B-7 Centennial Way, view looking southeast (Architectural Resources Group, November 2013) Appendix C: Historic Photographs of 261 Hamilton Avenue 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Focused Historic Structure Report Architectural Resources Group Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Appendix C – Historic Photographs C-1 Artist’s rendering of 261 Hamilton Avenue before its completion, 1927 Notice the building’s design is different than what was actually constructed (Source: Palo Alto Times, May 14, 1927, Palo Alto Historical Association) View of Hamilton Avenue including the Medico-Dental Building (at center), c. 1928 (Source: Palo Alto Historical Association) Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Appendix C – Historic Photographs C-2 Ramona Street, with Medico-Dental building at the corner (right), c. 1930 (Source: Palo Alto Historical Association) The Cardinal Hotel on Hamilton Avenue with the Medico-Dental Building in the background, c. 1944 (Source: Palo Alto Historical Association) Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Appendix C – Historic Photographs C-3 The Medico-Dental Building, c. 1930 (Source: Palo Alto Historical Association) A view of the University Arts storefront from Ramona Street across a municipal parking lot, c. 1960s (Source: Palo Alto Historical Association) Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Appendix C – Historic Photographs C-4 Birge Clark with 261 Hamilton Avenue in the background, c. 1978 (Source: Palo Alto Times, February 2, 1978, Palo Alto Historical Association) Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Appendix C – Historic Photographs C-5 261 Hamilton Avenue, c. 1978 (Source: Historic Resources Inventory (DPR 523) Form) East and north façades, 1989 (Source: Peninsula Times Tribune, April 26, 1989, Palo Alto Historical Association) Focused Historic Structure Report March 2014 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Appendix C – Historic Photographs C-6 East façade, c. 1995 (Source: Tile Heritage, Vol. 11, No. 1, Palo Alto Historical Association) East façade, 1999 (Source: Palo Alto Historical Association) Appendix D: DPR 523A and 523B Forms for 261 Hamilton Avenue 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Focused Historic Structure Report Architectural Resources Group State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI # PRIMARY RECORD Trinomial NRHP Status Code 1D Other Listings Review Code Reviewer Date DPR 523A (1/95) *Required information Page 1 of 6 *Resource Name or #: 261 Hamilton Avenue P1. Other Identifier: Medico-Dental Building; Hamilton Building; University Art Center *P2. Location: Not for Publication Unrestricted *a. County: Santa Clara and (P2b and P2c or P2d. Attach a Location Map as necessary.) *b. USGS 7.5' Quad: Date: T ; R ; ¼ of ¼ of Sec ; M.D. B.M c. Address: 261 Hamilton Avenue City: Palo Alto Zip: 94301 d. UTM: Zone: 10 ; mE/ mN (G.P.S.) e. Other Locational Data: (e.g., parcel #, directions to resource, elevation, etc., as appropriate) APN: 120-26-065 *P3a. Description: (Describe resource and its major elements. Include design, materials, condition, alterations, size, setting, and boundaries) The property at 261 Hamilton Avenue sits at the northern corner of Ramona Street and Hamilton Avenue and consists of a stucco-clad, four-story building with a basement and mezzanine level. The building’s footprint is generally square in plan; however, the two main façades – the south (Ramona Street) and east (Hamilton Avenue) – rise an additional three floors above the ground floor and mezzanine, thus creating an L-shape along those elevations. At the ground level on both primary elevations, the openings typically consist of large, non-historic aluminum windows and doors. Some of the original tile and transom details at these openings remain. At the upper levels, fenestration mainly consists of divided-light metal casement windows. The overall style is Spanish Colonial Revival and retains numerous original elements, including red-tile roof, elaborate ironwork, and decorative tile. The gabled roof varies slightly in height and pitch to create the illusion that the building comprises different elements constructed over time. *P3b. Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) HP7. 3+ story commercial building *P4. Resources Present: Building Structure Object Site District Element of District Other (Isolates, etc.) P5b. Description of Photo: (View, date, accession #) South and east elevations, view looking north; November 13, 2013 *P6. Date Constructed/Age and Sources: Historic Prehistoric Both 1927/Ramona Street Architectural District National Register Nomination Form *P7. Owner and Address: *P8. Recorded by: (Name, affiliation, and address) Architectural Resources Group Pier 9, The Embarcadero San Francisco, CA 94111 *P9. Date Recorded: November 13, 2013 *P10. Survey Type: (Describe) Intensive *P11. Report Citation: (Cite survey report and other sources, or enter "none.") Ramona Street Architectural District National Register Nomination Form (1985); DPR 523 form (1981, 1985) *Attachments: NONE Location Map Sketch Map Continuation Sheet Building, Structure, and Object Record Archaeological Record District Record Linear Feature Record Milling Station Record Rock Art Record Artifact Record Photograph Record Other (List): P5a. Photo or Drawing (Photo required for buildings, structures, and objects.) State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# BUILDING, STRUCTURE, AND OBJECT RECORD Page 2 of 6 *NRHP Status Code 1D *Resource Name or # (Assigned by recorder) 261 Hamilton Avenue DPR 523B (1/95) *Required information B1. Historic Name: Medico-Dental Building B2. Common Name: Hamilton Building; University Art Center B3. Original Use: B4. Present Use: *B5. Architectural Style: Spanish Colonial Revival *B6. Construction History: (Construction date, alterations, and date of alterations) See Continuation Sheet, p. # *B7. Moved? No Yes Unknown Date: Original Location: *B8. Related Features: None B9a. Architect: Birge Clark b. Builder: Wells P. Goodenough *B10. Significance: Architecture Theme: Spanish Colonial Revival Area: Period of Significance: 1927 Property Type: Commercial Applicable Criteria: C/3 (Discuss importance in terms of historical or architectural context as defined by theme, period, and geographic scope. Also address integrity.) The DPR 523 form prepared by the Palo Alto Historic Resources Board in 1981-1985 states the building’s significance as follows: A prominent visual landmark which performs major urban design functions, this building was planned by the important local architect, Birge Clark, for the owner, the Palo Alto Improvement Co. On the Ramona Street frontage, a definite effort was made to make it appear as though it consisted of several buildings buit at different periods of time. The first story of the northern portion on Hamilton Avenue housed the post office, 1928-1933, and the Ciyt’s first drive-in auto parking area was in the basemetn. Prior to purchase by T.N. Fuller for the Improvement Co. the site had been owned by E.A. Hettinger, prominent local contractor, and was occupied by two houses. B11. Additional Resource Attributes: (List attributes and codes) *B12. References: See Continuation Sheet, p. # B13. Remarks: *B14. Evaluator: Architectural Resources Group Pier 9, The Embarcadero San Francisco, CA 94111 *Date of Evaluation: November 13, 2013 (Sketch Map with north arrow required.) (This space reserved for official comments.) State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 3 of 6 *Resource Name or # 261 Hamilton Avenue DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information *P3a. Description (continued from page 1) The building’s south elevation faces Ramona Street and was designed to appear as if it were two separate buildings, with the left (west) section slightly lower than the right (east) section. At ground level, the portion to the left features two pointed-arch entryways. The right portion has four openings consisting of two central openings with oblong-arched transoms flanked on either side by an opening with a rectangular transom with ogee-shaped corners. The opening to the center right contains a recessed shop entry decorated with tile. At the second and third floors, the portion to the left (west) consists of four bays of metal, divided- light windows, while the portion on the right consists of eight bays. Both portions feature a small decorative iron balcony. Both sections feature arched colonnades with different column styles at the fourth floor. An iron balcony with an arched base wraps around the south and east façades between the first and second floors. The varying roof pitches on the Hamilton Avenue façade also create the illusion of three separate buildings. The left (south) portion features two large windows with transom flanking a smaller doorway at the ground floor. Fenestration at the upper floors is identical to the east portion of the Ramona Street façade, but this section contains five bays instead of eight. The gable end features an opening covered with a decorative iron grille. The narrow central section consists of an arched entry at ground level and two bays of windows on the upper floors. The rectangular widows on the second floor are covered with an ornately-decorated, birdcage-like covering. This narrow portion also features a slightly shallower-pitched roof than the flanking portions. The northernmost section features two pointed arches with metal windows flanking a central doorway at the ground floor and six bays of windows on the second and third floors. Below all six windows on the second floor and the two central windows on the third floor are decorative iron balconies. The top floor features an arched colonnade flanked on either side by a casement window covered by an iron grille. At the ground floor, the north elevation along Centennial Way consists of a four-story portion to the east and a two-story portion to the west. The eastern portion features a large arched opening with metal window on the ground floor. The second and third floors contain four bays of windows, the center two at the third floor featuring a decorative iron balcony. The fourth floor has six bays of arched divided-light casement windows and a rectangular divided light one on each end. An opening in the gable features a decorative iron grille with scroll motif. The upper-floor elevations facing north and west that make up the interior of the L-shape consist of divided-light casement windows and are minimally decorated since they are not easily visible from street level. The building’s ground floor on the west elevation abuts against the adjacent building; however, the three floors above ground level feature metal casement windows at the second and third floors. Arched casement windows at the top floor mimic the arched colonnades on the primary façades. Metal casement windows flank the faux colonnade. The gable contains an opening covered with a metal grille. B6. Construction History (continued from page 2)1 Construction History City building permits indicate that the building at 261 Hamilton Avenue has undergone numerous alterations over the years. Most of the changes, however, have been to the building’s interior and typically included demolishing existing partitions and remodeling, likely to accommodate changing tenants. Most significantly, the entire ground floor was reconfigured in 1967 to accommodate the expansion of the University Art store into the existing retail spaces. Although there are few permits to indicate exactly what work was performed on the exterior, a visual investigation and limited building permit records indicate that there have been some alterations to the ground floor windows and storefronts over the years. Building permits indicate that in July of 1968 there was a fire at the shop within the building located at 581 Ramona Street, but the building appears to have sustained only interior damage. Historic photographs (see Appendix B) show changes were made before the late 1970s. The Palo Alto Development Center only retains building permits from as early as the 1960s, so formulating a complete building history is not possible. Permits indicating alterations to the building’s exterior are listed below: Permit #24498 1/13/65 Remodel storefront; int. remodel and alter Permit #A31165 9/18/72 Install glass window display and close off partitions of lobby as per plan 1 Compiled from building permits, courtesy of the Palo Alto Development Center State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 4 of 6 *Resource Name or # 261 Hamilton Avenue DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information B10. Significance (continued from page 2) Integrity Analysis Location 261 Hamilton Avenue has not been moved from its original location. Therefore, its integrity of location is high. Design The building at 261 Hamilton Avenue retains high integrity of design. Historic photographs of the building reveal that the building appears to have retained its original architectural features, overall massing, form, and Spanish Colonial Revival design elements. Despite some changes to the ground level openings to accommodate different businesses over time, the exterior has not been significantly altered. Most of the alterations to the building have been performed on the interior. Thus, the building strongly conveys its original design intent on the exterior. Setting The building at 261 Hamilton Avenue retains good integrity of setting. At the time of the building’s construction, this area of Palo Alto was becoming increasingly commercial. The adjacent buildings on Ramona Street, which were built in the 1920s and 1930s, were designed by three architects: Birge Clark, Pedro de Lemos, and William H. Weeks. Today, those buildings still stand and, along with the subject property, are contributors to the Ramona Street Architectural District. The building directly adjacent to the north and the Palo Alto City Hall building across Hamilton Avenue to the east are later additions to the neighborhood. Materials The building at 261 Hamilton Avenue retains high integrity of materials. Apart from replaced windows and altered openings at the ground level, the exterior retains many of its original exterior materials, including ironwork, steal sash windows, tile work, tile roof, and stucco cladding. Workmanship The building at 261 Hamilton Avenue retains high integrity of workmanship associated with its Spanish Colonial Revival-style detailing on the exterior. Feeling The building at 261 Hamilton Avenue retains high integrity of feeling. The building displays character of a 1920s commercial building and conveys its relationship to Ramona Street and the adjacent buildings through its coherent stylistic elements. Association The building at 261 Hamilton Avenue retains high integrity of association. It is most closely associated with the architect Birge Clark and still retains many of its original architectural elements and materials that link it to Birge’s trademark Spanish Colonial Revival style. Statement of Significance The building at 261 Hamilton Avenue has already been evaluated for its historic significance. It recognized as a Category 3 building on Palo Alto’s Historic Inventory. It is also a contributor to the Ramona Street Architectural District, which was listed on the National Register in 1986. The National Register Nomination Form states the significance of the district as follows: The significance of the Ramona Street Architectural District is that it represents an architecturally unified area of buildings which were built during a particular period (1924-1938). The buildings in the district remain largely unaltered, and the architectural district contains no intrusions. The total absence of intrusions in a district characterized by a single predominant architectural style makes this area quite unique. Not only are the individual structures attractive in their own right, their relationship with one another established the character of the street. The architecture of this street is reminiscent of an architecturally untutored Spanish village. Excellent examples of Monterey Colonial, Spanish Colonial Revival, and to a lesser extent, Craftsman Style architecture, line both sides of the tree-lined street…. These taller structures [the Cardinal Hotel and 261 Hamilton Avenue] at the corner of Ramona Street and Hamilton Avenue complete the form of the street which is otherwise composed of one- to three-story structures. A simple palette of materials, carefully executed details, comfortable massing, and inviting plans with interior courts of the various buildings give this area its friendly human-scale quality. Thick stucco walls with recessed openings, carved wood, wrought iron, ceramic tile, and tile roofing are composed in a variety of forms which gives diversity to this visually unified State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 5 of 6 *Resource Name or # 261 Hamilton Avenue DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information area. The relatively few alterations done to the buildings over the years have been sensitively handled and in no way detract from their original character.2 Period of Significance The period of significance is the span of time in which a property attained its historic significance. 261 Hamilton Avenue is architecturally significant as a good representative example of the Spanish Colonial Revival Style and is part of the architecturally cohesive Ramona Street Architectural District. The period of significance for the buildings at 261 Hamilton Avenue is the year of the building’s construction in 1927. As a contributor to the Ramona Street Architectural District, the building’s period of significance extends from 1927 to 1938.3 B12. References: (continued from page 2) Clark, Birge. An Architect Grows Up in Palo Alto, Memoirs of Birge M. Clark, F.A.I.A.. September 1982. Corbett, Michael and Denise Bradley. “Final Survey Report, Palo Alto Historical Survey Update, August 1997-August 2000.” February 2001. George, Carolyn. National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form. Ramona Street Architectural District Nomination Form. May 1985. http://pdfhost.focus.nps.gov/docs/NRHP/Text/86000592.pdf (Accessed November 25, 2013) Gullard, Pamela and Nancy Lund. History of Palo Alto: The Early Years. San Francisco: Scottwall Associates, 1989. Hamilton Building, DPR 523 Historic Resources Inventory Form. Prepared by the Historic Resources Board; Palo Alto Historical Association. 1981, 1985. Historic Environment Consultants. “Historical and Architectural Resources of the City of Palo Alto.” Prepared by Paula Boghosian and John Beach. February 1979. Pacific Coast Architecture Database. https://digital.lib.washington.edu/architect/architects/759/ (Accessed November 11, 20130) Palo Alto Times. “New P.O. Building Sketched: Style of New Structure To Stress Spanish Note; Work to Begin In July.” May 14, 1927. Palo Alto Building Permits Palo Alto City Directories Sanborn Map Company Fire Insurance Maps for the City of Palo Alto Weinstein, Dave. Signature Architects of the San Francisco Bay Area. Layton, UT: Gibbs Smith, 2006. 2 National Register of Historic Places Inventory Nomination Form, Ramona Street Architectural District, prepared by Carolyn George, May 21, 1985. 3 The period of significance for the Ramona Street Architectural District identified in the National Register nomination extends from 1924 when the first contributor to the district was constructed to 1938 when the last one was constructed. State of California The Resources Agency Primary # DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION HRI# CONTINUATION SHEET Trinomial Page 6 of 6 *Resource Name or # 261 Hamilton Avenue DPR 523L (1/95) *Required information South façade, upper floors of east end (Architectural Resources Group, November 2013) East façade (Architectural Resources Group, November 2013) West and south façades (Architectural Resources Group, November 2013) Detail of ironwork, east façade (Architectural Resources Group, November 2013) North façade (Architectural Resources Group, November 2013) Storefront with original tile along south façade (Architectural Resources Group, November 2013) Appendix E: Drawings of Proposed Project Provided by Cody Anderson Wasney Architects 261 Hamilton Avenue Palo Alto, CA Focused Historic Structure Report Architectural Resources Group ARCHITECTURAL A0.0 COVER SHEET A0.1 EXISTING CODE ANALYSIS A0.2 PROPOSED CODE ANALYSIS A0.3 NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT A0.4 SITE PLAN A1.0 DEMOLITION BASEMENT & FIRST FLOOR PLAN A1.1 DEMOLITION MEZZANINE & SECOND FLOOR PLAN A1.2 DEMOLITION THIRD & FOURTH FLOOR PLAN A2.0 PROPOSED BASEMENT & FIRST FLOOR PLAN A2.1 PROPOSED MEZZANINE & SECOND FLOOR PLAN A2.2 PROPOSED THIRD & FOURTH FLOOR PLAN A4.1 SOUTH ELEVATION - RAMONA STREET A4.2 EAST ELEVATION - HAMILTON STREET A4.3 NORTH ELEVATION - CENTENNIAL WALK A4.4 WEST ELEVATION A5.0 RENDERINGS A5.1 CENTENNIAL PLAQUE RELOCATION T-1 TREE PROTECTION A0.0 COVER SHEET Client/Owner Name/Title Email Ventana Property Services 975 High Street Roxy Rapp roxy@roxyrapp.com Palo Alto, CA 94301 Joe Martignetti JMartignetti@ventanaps.com Jerry Evans jevans1206@aol.com650.847.2000 Architect Cody Anderson Wasney Architects 455 Lambert Avenue Monty Anderson Principal mea@cawarchitects.com Palo Alto, CA 94041 Daniel Pho Project Manager dpho@cawarchitects.com Caroline Lebar clebar@cawarchitects.com 650.328.1888 Structural EngineerSEI (Structural Engineers Incorporated)4970 El Camino Real Samuel Koerper Principal skoerper@structuralengineersinc.comSuite 100 Stephen Lord Project Manager SLord@structuralengineersinc.comLos Altos, CA 94022 650.938.2200 Mechanical EngineerEncon801 East Charleston Road Robert Trifunovic Principal bobencon.comSuite A Vy Truong Project Manager vytruong@encon.comPalo Alto, CA 94303 650.433.4900 Geotechnical EngineerRomig Engineers, Inc1390 El Camino Real Richard Woodard Principal dick@romigengineers.comSecond Floor Coleman Ng Project Manager coleman@romigengineers.com San Carlos, CA 94070 650.591.5224 W-1 F-1 C-1 B-1 1 A5.0D B C A 1 A6.0 1 A4.1 1 A4.0 REHABILITATION & ADDITION TO261 HAMILTON BUILDING 261 HAMILTON AVENUEPALO ALTO, CA 94301 VICINITY MAP GENERAL NOTES ABBREVIATIONS PROJECT DIRECTORY WORK, CONTROL, OR DATUM POINT SEE LEGEND ON DRAWINGSFOR EXPLANATION OF EACH NOTE KEYNOTE DETAIL NUMBER DETAIL SECTION SECTION NUMBER ELEVATION NUMBER INTERIOR ELEVATION ROOM NAME ROOM IDENTIFICATION DIMENSION @ FACE OF STUD,MASONRY OR FRAMING (U.O.N.) DIMENSION @ CENTERLINE DIMENSION @ FACE OF FINISH PROPERTY LINE NEW OR FINISHED CONTOURS EXISTING CONTOURS "CLOUD" INDICATES REVISEDAREA ON DRAWINGS REVISION NUMBER COLUMN LINE DOOR ID DOOR MARK OR SEQUENCE NUMBER WINDOW ID PLUMBING ID APPLIANCE ID CHANGE IN FLOOR FINISHES ALIGN FACE OF FINISH WALL TYPE ID A-1 P-1 A 1 1 SHEET WHERE DETAIL IS DRAWN SHEET WHERE SECTION IS DRAWN ROOM NUMBER SHEET WHERE ELEVATION IS DRAWN CEILING MATERIAL FLOOR MATERIAL BASE/TRIM MATERIAL WALL MATERIAL WINDOW MARK OR SEQUENCE NUMBER ROOM FINISH ID ELEVATION ELEVATION NUMBER SHEET WHERE ELEVATION IS DRAWN (E) CONSTRUCTION (N) CONSTRUCTION (E) CONSTRUCTION TO BE REMOVED SYMBOLS HRB/ARB RESUBMITTAL SET THE CONTRACTOR IS SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CONSTRUCTION MEANS, METHODS, TECHNIQUES, SEQUENCES AND PROCEDURE AND FOR ALL SAFETY PROGRAMS AND PRECAUTIONS IN CONNECTION WITH THE PROJECT. NEITHER THE OWNER NOR THE ARCHITECT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CONTRACTOR'S FAILURE TO FOLLOW PROPER SAFETY PROCEDURES. ALL CODES HAVING JURISDICTION ARE HEREBY MADE A PART OF THIS DOCUMENT AND ARE TO BE STRICTLY OBSERVED BY THE CONTRACTOR IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROJECT. IN THE EVENT OF CONFLICT BETWEEN THESE DOCUMENTS AND THE CODE, THE CODE SHALL PREVAIL. ANY CONFLICT OR DISCREPANCY SHALL IMMEDIATELY BE BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE ARCHITECT. ALL WORK, TO BE ACCEPTABLE, MUST BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THESE DRAWINGS AND SPECIFICATIONS, AND MUST BE OF A QUALITY EQUAL OR BETTER THAN THE STANDARD OF THE TRADE. FINISHED WORK SHALL BE FIRM, WELL-ANCHORED, IN TRUE ALIGNMENT, PLUMB, LEVEL, WITH SMOOTH, CLEAN, UNIFORM APPEARANCE. CONTRACTOR SHALL AT ALL TIMES PROVIDE PROTECTION AGAINST WEATHER, RAIN, WINDSTORMS, OR HEAT SO AS TO MAINTAIN ALL WORK, MATERIALS, EQUIPMENT AND APPARATUS FREE FROM INJURY OR DAMAGE. CONTRACTOR SHALL VISIT THE SITE OF THE PROJECT, EXAMINE FOR HIMSELF/HERSELF THE NATURE OF THE EXISTING CONDITIONS AND ALL OTHER CONDITIONS RELEVANT TO THE SATISFACTORY COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT. SUBMISSION OF A BID FOR CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE CONSIDERED EVIDENCE OF SUCH EXAMINATION BY THE CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR SHALL REMOVE FROM SITE ALL EXISTING CONSTRUCTION AND IMPROVEMENTS NECESSARY FOR COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT, PROTECT FROM DAMAGE OR INJURY ALL EXISTING TREES, LANDSCAPING AND IMPROVEMENTS INDICATED BY THE ARCHITECT. ALL WORK SHALL CONFORM TO THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS, WHICH INCLUDE THE PROJECT MANUAL WITH SPECIFICATIONS, THE ADDENDA AND MODIFICATIONS ISSUED BY THE ARCHITECT. ALL WORK NOTED "BY OTHERS" OR "N.I.C." SHALL BE PROVIDED BY THE OWNER UNDER SEPARATE CONTRACT. INCLUDE SCHEDULE REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS "OTHER" WORK IN CONSTRUCTION PROGRESS SCHEDULES AND COORDINATE AS REQUIRED TO ASSURE ORDERLY SEQUENCE OF INSTALLATION. DO NOT SCALE DRAWINGS COLUMN CENTER LINES (OR GRID LINES) ARE SHOWN FOR REFERENCE ONLY. IN CASE OF CONFLICT OR DISCREPANCIES IN CONTRACT DOCUMENTS, CONTRACTOR SHALL NOTIFY THE ARCHITECT IN WRITING PRIOR TO PROCEEDING. PRIOR TO BEGINNING WORK, CONTRACTOR SHALL VERIFY ALL DIMENSIONS AND ENSURE THAT ALL WORK IS BUILDABLE AS SHOWN. CONDITIONS THAT ARE NOT REFLECTIVE OF THAT WHICH IS SHOWN SHALL BE REPORTED TO THE ARCHITECT IN WRITING PRIOR TO COMMENCING CONSTRUCTION. "TYPICAL" OR "TYP." SHALL MEAN THAT THE CONDITION IS REPRESENTATIVE FOR SIMILAR CONDITIONS THROUGHOUT, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED (U.O.N.). DETAILS ARE USUALLY KEYED AND NOTED "TYP." ONLY ONCE, WHEN THEY FIRST APPEAR. "ALIGN" SHALL MEAN TO ACCURATELY LOCATE FINISH FACES IN THE SAME PLANE "SIMILAR OR "SIM." MEANS COMPARABLE CHARACTERISTICS FOR THE CONDITIONS NOTED. VERIFY DIMENSIONS AND ORIENTATION ON PLANS AND ELEVATIONS. FEATURES OF CONSTRUCTION NOT FULLY SHOWN SHALL BE OF THE SAME CHARACTER AS SHOWN FOR SIMILAR CONDITIONS. ALL DIMENSIONS MARKED "CLEAR" SHALL BE MAINTAINED AND SHALL ALLOW FOR THICKNESS OF ALL FINISHES. SEE 'ABBREVIATIONS & SYMBOLS' ON THIS SHEET FOR GRAPHIC CONVENTIONS OF NEW VERSUS EXISTING CONSTRUCTION. IN ALL NOTES ON ALL DRAWINGS ALL WORK SHALL BE NEW WORK UNLESS SPECIFICALLY LABELED AS EXISTING (E). CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE BLOCKING AND/OR BACKING PLATES AT ALL WALL HUNG OR WALL BRACED DEVICES. COORDINATE AND COOPERATE WITH OWNER REGARDING ACCESS ROUTE AND SCHEDULING OF MATERIAL DELIVERIES. COORDINATE ALL WORK OCCURRING IN OCCUPIED AREAS WITH OWNER. SCHEDULE WORK AS REQUIRED. SCHEDULE AND COORDINATE ACTIVITIES BY OWNER. ALL ACTIVITIES MUST BE ACCOMMODATED WITHIN THE CONTRACT TIME. ALL INFORMATION SHOWN ON THE DRAWINGS RELATIVE TO EXISTING CONDITIONS IS GIVEN WITH THE BEST PRESENT KNOWLEDGE. WHERE ACTUAL CONDITIONS CONFLICT WITH THE DRAWINGS, THEY SHALL BE REPORTED TO THE ARCHITECT IN WRITING, SO THE PROPER REVISIONS CAN BE MADE. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. REGULATORY STANDARDS 1 A 1" 1" 1" 1 1 NAME ## Da t e : 10 / 1 7 / 1 3 Tim e : 11:2 5 : 2 2 A M File na m e : 120 0 9 _ A 0 .0 _ C o v e r .vw x ADJ.A.F.F. APPROX.ARCH. BLDG.BLKG.BM. CAB.C.J.CLG.CLO.CLR. C.M.U.C.O.COL.CONC.C.T.C.W. DBL.DEPT.DET.D.F. DIA.DIM.DN.DS.DWDWG.DRAWING EA.E.J.ELECT./ELEC.ENCL.E.O.S.EQ.EQUIP./EQPT.EXST or (E) ANDATDIAMETER or ROUNDACOUSTICALADJUSTABLEABOVE FINISHED FLOOR APPROXIMATEARCHITECTURAL BUILDINGBLOCKINGBEAM CABINETCONTROL JOINTCEILINGCLOSETCLEAR CONCRETE MASONRY UNITCLEANOUT or CASED OPENINGCOLUMNCONCRETECOLLAR TIECOLD WATER DOUBLEDEPARTMENTDETAILDOUGLAS FIR or DRINKING FOUNTAINDIAMETERDIMENSIONDOWNDOWNSPOUTDISHWASHER EACHEXPANSION JOINTELECTRICALENCLOSUREEDGE OF SLABEQUALEQUIPMENTEXISTING GYPSUM BOARD/GYPSUMGALVANIZED SHEET METAL MAX.MECH.MEZZ.MFR.MIN.MISC.MTL./MET. N.(N) or NEW N.I.C.NO. or #N.T.S. o/O.C.O.D.OPNG. P.E.N.PERF. PL.P.LAM.PLYWD.PREFAB.PTD. P.D.F. I.D. IN. or (") INSUL.INT. JAN.JST. KIT. LAM.LAV. HT./HGT.HTR.H.W.HDWD. MAXIMUMMECHANICALMEZZANINEMANUFACTURERMINIMUMMISCELLANEOUSMETAL NORTHNEWNOT IN CONTRACTNUMBERNOT TO SCALE OVERON CENTEROUTSIDE DIAMETEROPENING PLYWOOD EDGE NAILINGPERFORATED PLATE OR PROPERTY LINEPLASTIC LAMINATEPLYWOODPREFABRICATEDPAINTED INSIDE DIAMETER (DIM.)INCH OR INCHES INSULATIONINTERIOR JANITORJOIST KITCHEN LAMINATELAVATORY HEIGHTHEATERHOT WATERHARDWOOD POWDER DRIVEN FASTENER PRESSURE TREATEDP.T. w/WITHw/o WITHOUTW.C.WATER CLOSETWD.WOODW.H.WATER HEATERWP.WATERPROOFW.W.F.WELDED WIRE FABRIC SPEC.SPECIFICATION(S)SQ.SQUARES.ST.STAINLESS STEELS.S.D.SEE STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS STL.STEELSTOR.STORAGESTRUCT./STRL.STRUCTURALSUSP.SUSPENDSYM.SYMBOL or SYMMETRICAL T.&B.TOP AND BOTTOMT.&G.TONGUE AND GROOVET.TREADTEL.TELEPHONETHRUTHROUGHT.O.C.TOP OF CURBT.O.P./TP TOP OF PAVEMENTT.O.W./TW TOP OF WALLT.P.H.TOILET PAPER HOLDERT.P.D.TOILET PAPER DISPENSERTV.TELEVISIONTYP.TYPICAL U.L.UNDERWRITERS LABORATORIESU.O.N.UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED VERT.VERTICALV.I.F.VERIFY IN FIELD RISERRAD.RADIUSR.D.ROOF DRAINREF.REFERENCEREINF.REINFORCEREQ'D REQUIREDR.O.ROUGH OPENINGRWD.REDWOODR.W.L.RAIN WATER LEADER S.4.S. SURFACED 4 SIDESS.C.SOLID CORESCHED.SCHEDULES.D.SOAP DISPENSER or SMOKE DETECTOR SEL.SELECTSHT.SHEETSIM.SIMILAR STD.STANDARD GYP. BD./GYP.G.S.M. &@øACOUS. FIRE RETARDANT TREATEDFRT H.C.HDWR./HDWE. H.M.HORIZ. H.B.HOLLOW COREHARDWARE HOLLOW METALHORIZONTAL HOSE BIB R. V.G.VERTICAL GRAIN PROJECT SUMMARY INDEX PROJECT DESCRIPTION: CITY OF PALO ALTO ZONING ORDINANCE, TITLE 18 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE 2010 CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE (CBC) PART 2, CBSC 2010 CALIFORNIA HISTORICAL BUILDING CODE (CHBC) PART 8, CBSC 1. 2. 3. REHABILITATION AND ADDITION OF A CATEGORY 3 HISTORICAL MIXED-USE BUILDING DESIGNED BY BIRGE CLARK AND CONSTRUCTED BY WELLS GOODENOUGH IN 1926. THE PROJECT SCOPE INCLUDES: - DEMOLITION OF 1 STORY MASSING ALONG CENTENNIAL WALK FOR A COMPATIBLE 3 STORY ADDITION. - CODE COMPLIANT EXIT STAIR - VOLUNTARY SEISMIC RETROFIT. - RESTORATION OF EXISTING HISTORIC STOREFRONT, METAL BALCONY & ORNAMENTAL IRONWORK. - NEW MECHNICAL, ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, FIRE ALARM, & SPRINKLER. - RETROFIT ELEVATOR WITH NEW GURNEY SIZED ELEVATOR. - NEW STEEL FRAMED WINDOWS TO MATCH EXISTING HISTORIC WINDOWS. -NEW PARKING AND BIKE FACILITY APN:120-26-065 ZONE DISTRICT:CD-C (GF)(P) PARKING DISTRICT:UNIVERSITY AVENUE HISTORICAL DESIGNATION:CATEGORY 3, RAMONA STREET HISTORIC DISTRICT FLOOD PLAIN:NONE EASEMENTS: NONE SETBACKS:7' HAMILTON AVE. SPECIAL SETBACK OCCUPANCY TYPE:MERCANTILE (M), OFFICES (B), AND STORAGE (S-2) NUMBER OF STORIES: 4-STORIES & 1 STORY BASEMENT- BASEMENT (COMMERCIAL/STORAGE)- 1ST FLOOR (COMMERCIAL)- MEZZANINE (OFFICE)- 2ND - 4TH FLOOR (OFFICE) CONSTRUCTION TYPE:II FIRE PROTECTION:NONE, EXISTING Copyright © 2012 by CODY ANDERSON WASNEY ARCHITECTS, INC. C o d y A n d e r s o n W a s n e y A r c h i t e c t s, I n c. 455 L a m b e r t A v e n u e • P a l o A l t o, CA 94306 6 5 0 . 3 2 8 . 1 8 1 8 • F a x 3 2 8 . 1 8 8 8 STAMP CONSULTANTS REVISION DATE PROJECT NAME SHEET TITLE SHEET REHABILITATION & ADDITION TO PROJECT NO. DRAWN BY CHECKED BY 12009 6/18/13HRB/ARB SUBMITTAL File na m e : Un t i t l e d 6 261 HAMILTON BUILDING 261 HAMILTON PALO ALTO, CA, 94301 E. MERLINO / C. LEBAR M. ANDERSON/ D. PHO 8/7/13 HRB/ARB PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS1 10/16/13HRB/ARB RESUBMITTAL2 1 1 2 2 A0.1 EXISTING CODE ANALYSIS N TRUE NORTH 14'- 0 " 10' - 3 " 10'-3 3/4" 35'-8 5/8" 9'- 0 " 1'-7 " (E) MEZZANINE FLOOR 4,535 SF 2'-3" 2'- 1 0 " 55'-0 1/2" 15' - 0 " 15' - 8 1/ 2 " 19'-5 1/2" 865 SF 99'-5" 60 ' - 9 1/ 2 " 32 ' - 0 " 10'-4" 100'-0" 10 ' - 3 " 3,181 SF 6,079 SF 331SF 1,025 SF 46'-7 1/2" 48 ' - 6 1/ 2 " 96'-7" 9'- 4 " 31' - 7 1/2 " 32'-7" 2,263 SF 3,054 SF 304 SF 9'-10" 24'-6"49'-11 1/2" 16 ' - 1 0 " 749 SF412 SF 15'-10 1/2"24'-3 1/2" 15 ' - 1 1/ 2 " 8'-9" 11'- 7 1/ 2 " 9'- 7 1/ 2 " 7'-7 1/2" 27 ' - 0 1/ 2 " 429SF367 SF 102SF 73SF 3'-4 1/2" 3'- 4 " 3'-9" 100'-0" 1,616 SF 822 SF 3,492 SF 336 SF 17'- 3 " 17'-5 1/2"49'-5 1/2" 4,220 SF 2'-5" 3'-4" 3'- 3 1/ 2 " 7'- 8 1/2 " 9'-11"31'-4"10'-8" 12' - 8 1/ 2 " 3'- 9 " 697SF 70 ' - 1 1 " 113 SF 63 SF 140 SF 43 SF 39 SF 49 SF 50'-0" 32 ' - 4 " 16 ' - 3 1/ 2 " 9'- 4 " 34 ' - 1 1 " 35'-11 1/2" 50'-5 1/2" 97'-8" 100'-0" 13 SF 48 SF 26 SF 35 SF103 SF33 SF 97'-0" 22'-4 1/2" 43 ' - 2 1/ 2 " 46 ' - 1 0 " 100'-0" 1,616 SF 822 SF 3,492 SF 336 SF 50'-0" 32 ' - 4 " 16 ' - 3 1/ 2 " 9'- 4 " 34 ' - 1 1 " 35'-11 1/2" 50'-5 1/2" 46 ' - 1 0 " 3'- 3 1/ 2 " 4EXISTING BASEMENT PLAN SCALE: 1/16" = 1-0'1EXISTING SECOND FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/16" = 1-0' 5EXISTING FIRST FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/16" = 1-0' 2EXISTING THIRD FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/16" = 1-0' 6EXISTING MEZZANINE PLAN SCALE: 1/16" = 1-0'3EXISTING FOURTH FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/16" = 1-0' GROSS FLOOR AREA LOT COVERAGE EXISTING COVERAGE: EXISTING LOT SIZE: LOT SIZE = 100'-0" X 100'-0" COVERAGE PERCENTAGE: 9,202 SF / 10,000 SF = 0.9202 TOTAL ALLOWABLE: PER CPA 18.18.60 TABLE 2 NO RESTRICTIONS 9,202 SF 10,000 SF EXISTING: BASEMENT FLOOR: FIRST FLOOR: (MEZZANINE: SECOND FLOOR: THIRD FLOOR: FOURTH FLOOR: TOTAL: 92% 11,313 SF 9,202 SF 2,997 SF ** 6,266 SF 6,266 SF 5,879 SF 38,926 SF VEHICLE & BIKE PARKING REQUIREMENTS PARKING ASSESSMENT RECORDS DESIGNATE THAT THERE ARE 7 EXISTING PARKING SPACES. TOTAL ALLOWABLE: PER CPA 18.18.60 TABLE 2 30,000 SF * M / S B / M B / S) B B B Copyright © 2012 by CODY ANDERSON WASNEY ARCHITECTS, INC. C o d y A n d e r s o n W a s n e y A r c h i t e c t s, I n c. 455 L a m b e r t A v e n u e • P a l o A l t o, CA 94306 6 5 0 . 3 2 8 . 1 8 1 8 • F a x 3 2 8 . 1 8 8 8 STAMP CONSULTANTS REVISION DATE PROJECT NAME SHEET TITLE SHEET REHABILITATION & ADDITION TO PROJECT NO. DRAWN BY CHECKED BY 12009 6/18/13HRB/ARB SUBMITTAL File na m e : Un t i t l e d 6 261 HAMILTON BUILDING 261 HAMILTON PALO ALTO, CA, 94301 E. MERLINO / C. LEBAR M. ANDERSON/ D. PHO 8/7/13 HRB/ARB PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS1 10/16/13HRB/ARB RESUBMITTAL2 * (E) HISTORIC BUILDING WAS CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO CPA ZONING ORDINANCE AND EXCEEDS CURRENT FAR REQUIREMENTS. EXISTING AND PROPOSED CONDITIONS WILL REMAIN (E) NON-CONFORMING. ** ORIGINAL MEZZANINE CONSTRUCTION WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE GROSS FLOOR AREA AS EXPECTED BY THE PARKING ASSESSMENT RECORDS. USE: ASSESSED: 1 1 ASSESSED: (E) BASEMENT IS UTILIZED AS USABLE AREA FOR RETAIL TENANT ON GROUND FLOOR AND DOES NOT CURRENTLY CONTAIN ANY PARKING. THE 7 ASSESSED PARKING SPACES ARE LOCATED ON THE ADJACENT PROPERTY, AT 541 RAMONA, WHICH SHARES A DRIVEWAY TO THE PROPERTY. BIKE FACILITIES ARE NOT PROVIDED AS PART OF (E) BUILDING. (E) HISTORIC BUILDING WAS CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO CITY OF PALO ALTO ZONING ORDINANCE & PRECEDED THESE REQUIREMENTS. EXISTING: TOTAL:37,800 SF DN 22 risers @6.54" UP UP DN 22 risers @6.54" DN UPDN 19 risers @6.57" UP 19 risers @6.73" 14'- 0 " 10'- 3 " 10'-3 3/4" 35'-8 5/8" 9'- 0 " 1'-7 " UPDN 19 risers @6.52" 10 ' - 1 1 " 2'-3" 2'- 1 0 " 17'- 3 " 17'-5 1/2"49'-5 1/2" 32 ' - 1 " 2'-5" 10 ' - 1 1 " 9'- 6 " 6'- 7 " 94'-0" 3'-0" 43 ' - 3 1/ 2 " 46 ' - 9 1/ 2 " 19 ' - 3 " 99'-5" 60 ' - 9 1/ 2 " 32 ' - 0 " 100'-0" 50'-0" 50'-6" 46'-4 1/2" 20 ' - 0 " 3'-7 1/2" 85 SF 49'-5" 34 ' - 1 1 " 32 ' - 4 " 16 ' - 3 1/ 2 " 3,057 SF 56 SF (N) 135 SF 6" SECOND FLOOR BUILDING ADDITION: 2,888 SF FOURTH FLOOR BUILDING ADDITION: 135 SF MEZZANINE USABLE FLOOR AREA: 1,196 SF BASEMENT USABLE FLOOR AREA: 3,010 SF 3'-0" (N) 989 SF (N) 1,764 SF 37 ' - 1 1 1/2 " 20 ' - 0 " 46'-5" 15' - 6 1/ 2 " 7'-9" 31'-10" 9'- 8 " 20'-8" 25'-0"18' - 7 1/ 2 " 308 SF 407 SF 1,763 SF 822 SF 336 SF (N) 135 SF 1,616 SF 3,492 SF 9'- 4 " 34 ' - 1 1 " 100'-0" 14'-6 1/2" 50'-0" 50'-6"49'-5" 34 ' - 1 1 " 32 ' - 4 " 16 ' - 3 1/ 2 " 3,057 SF THIRD FLOOR BUILDING ADDITION: 2,888 SF 37 ' - 1 1 1/ 2 " 20 ' - 0 " 46'-5" 822 SF 336 SF 1,616 SF 3,492 SF 9'- 4 " 34 ' - 1 1 " 100'-0" 14'-6 1/2" (N) 989 SF (N) 1,764 SF (N) 135 SF 46'-7 1/2" 48 ' - 6 1/ 2 " 9'- 4 " 31 ' - 7 1/ 2 " 2,263 SF 3,054 SF 304 SF 3'-4 1/2" 3'- 4 " 3'-9" 3'-4" 3'- 3 1/ 2 " 7'- 8 1/ 2 " 9'-11"31'-4"10'-8" 12'- 7 1/ 2 " 3'- 9 " 13 SF 48 SF 26 SF 35 SF103 SF33 SF 14'-6 1/2" 35'-11" 927 SF 25 ' - 9 " 532 SF 22'-4 1/2" 26 SF 23 SF 16 SF 63 SF140 SF 43 SF 39 SF 49 SF 4,398 SF 4,069 SF 96 SF 33 SF 128 SF 94'-7 1/2" 7'-9" 11'- 0 " 16 ' - 7 1/ 2 " 3'-0" 2171 SF 772 SF 729 SF 2193 SF 396 SF 16 ' - 2 1/ 2 " 24'-3 1/2" 22 ' - 5 1/ 2 " 67'-7" 29'-11 1/2"17'-5 1/2" 3'-0" A0.24PROPOSED BASEMENT PLAN SCALE: 1/16" = 1-0'1PROPOSED SECOND FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/16" = 1-0' 5PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/16" = 1-0'2PROPOSED THIRD FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/16" = 1-0' 6PROPOSED MEZZANINE PLAN SCALE: 1/16" = 1-0'3PROPOSED FOURTH FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/16" = 1-0' LOT COVERAGE EXISTING COVERAGE: EXISTING LOT SIZE: LOT SIZE = 100'-0" X 100'-0" COVERAGE PERCENTAGE: 9,202 SF / 10,000 SF = 0.9202 TOTAL ALLOWABLE: PER CPA 18.18.60 TABLE 2 NO RESTRICTIONS 9,202 SF 10,000 SF 92% PROPOSED COVERAGE: PROPOSED LOT SIZE: LOT SIZE = 100'-0" X 100'-0" PROPOSED COVERAGE PERCENTAGE: 9,001 SF / 10,000 SF = 0.9001 8,995 SF 10,000 SF BASEMENT FLOOR: FIRST FLOOR: MEZZANINE: SECOND FLOOR: THIRD FLOOR: FOURTH FLOOR: TOTAL: 90% 3,010 SF 8,995 SF 1,196 SF 9,154 SF 9,154 SF 6,014 SF 37,523 SF S B / M B B B B PROPOSED CODE ANALYSIS THE TRANSFER OF USABLE FLOOR AREA FROM THE BASEMENT TO THE NEW ADDITION WILL ALLOW FOR PARKING AND BIKE ACCOMMODATIONS TO BE PROVIDED IN THE BUILDING. THE BASEMENT WILL CONTAIN 7 EXISTING PARKING SPACES AT 541 RAMONA, 9 NEW PARKING SPACES (8 STANDARD AND 1 ACCESSIBLE), AND 10 BIKE STORAGE LOCKERS. PROPOSED: Copyright © 2012 by CODY ANDERSON WASNEY ARCHITECTS, INC. C o d y A n d e r s o n W a s n e y A r c h i t e c t s, I n c. 455 L a m b e r t A v e n u e • P a l o A l t o, CA 94306 6 5 0 . 3 2 8 . 1 8 1 8 • F a x 3 2 8 . 1 8 8 8 STAMP CONSULTANTS REVISION DATE PROJECT NAME SHEET TITLE SHEET REHABILITATION & ADDITION TO PROJECT NO. DRAWN BY CHECKED BY 12009 6/18/13HRB/ARB SUBMITTAL File na m e : Un t i t l e d 6 261 HAMILTON BUILDING 261 HAMILTON PALO ALTO, CA, 94301 E. MERLINO / C. LEBAR M. ANDERSON/ D. PHO 8/7/13 HRB/ARB PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS1 10/16/13HRB/ARB RESUBMITTAL2 N TRUE NORTH GROSS FLOOR AREA EXISTING: BASEMENT FLOOR: FIRST FLOOR: (MEZZANINE: SECOND FLOOR: THIRD FLOOR: FOURTH FLOOR: TOTAL: 11,313 SF 9,202 SF 2,997 SF ** 6,266 SF 6,266 SF 5,879 SF 38,926 SF VEHICLE & BIKE PARKING REQUIREMENTS PARKING ASSESSMENT RECORDS DESIGNATE THAT THERE ARE 7 EXISTING PARKING SPACES. TOTAL ALLOWABLE: PER CPA 18.18.60 TABLE 2 30,000 SF * M / S B / M B / S) B B B * (E) HISTORIC BUILDING WAS CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO CPA ZONING ORDINANCE AND EXCEEDS CURRENT FAR REQUIREMENTS. EXISTING AND PROPOSED CONDITIONS WILL REMAIN (E) NON-CONFORMING. ** ORIGINAL MEZZANINE CONSTRUCTION WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE GROSS FLOOR AREA AS EXPECTED BY THE PARKING ASSESSMENT RECORDS. USE: ASSESSED: 1 1 ASSESSED: (E) BASEMENT IS UTILIZED AS USABLE AREA FOR RETAIL TENANT ON GROUND FLOOR AND DOES NOT CURRENTLY CONTAIN ANY PARKING. THE 7 ASSESSED PARKING SPACES ARE LOCATED ON THE ADJACENT PROPERTY, AT 541 RAMONA, WHICH SHARES A DRIVEWAY TO THE PROPERTY. BIKE FACILITIES ARE NOT PROVIDED AS PART OF (E) BUILDING. (E) HISTORIC BUILDING WAS CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO CITY OF PALO ALTO ZONING ORDINANCE & PRECEDED THESE REQUIREMENTS. EXISTING: TOTAL:37,800 SF PROPOSED:USE: 2 RAM O N A STR E E T HAM I L T O N ST R E E T CEN T E N N I A L WAL K Copyright © 2012 by CODY ANDERSON WASNEY ARCHITECTS, INC. C o d y A n d e r s o n W a s n e y A r c h i t e c t s, I n c. 455 L a m b e r t A v e n u e • P a l o A l t o, CA 94306 6 5 0 . 3 2 8 . 1 8 1 8 • F a x 3 2 8 . 1 8 8 8 STAMP CONSULTANTS REVISION DATE PROJECT NAME SHEET TITLE SHEET REHABILITATION & ADDITION TO PROJECT NO. DRAWN BY CHECKED BY 12009 6/18/13HRB/ARB SUBMITTAL File na m e : Un t i t l e d 6 261 HAMILTON BUILDING 261 HAMILTON PALO ALTO, CA, 94301 E. MERLINO / C. LEBAR M. ANDERSON/ D. PHO 8/7/13 HRB/ARB PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS1 10/16/13HRB/ARB RESUBMITTAL2 1AERIAL VIEW SCALE: NTS A0.3 NEIGHBORHOOD CONTEXT 4RAMONA STREET SCALE: NTS 3HAMILTON STREET SCALE: NTS 2CENTENNIAL WALK SCALE: NTS SUBJECT PROPERTY SUBJECT PROPERTY SUBJECT PROPERTY GO O G L E EA R T H 20 1 3 N TRUE NORTH SITE PLAN SCALE: 1/16" = 1-0'1 A0.4 SITE PLAN UPDN 19 risers @6.57" 285 HAMILTON 235 HAMILTON 533-535 RAMONA 533-535 RAMONA 528-530 RAMONA 540 BRYANT 530-536 BRYANT 518-526 BRYANT HAMILTON AVE. BR Y A N T ST . RA M O N A ST . CE N T E N N I A L W A L K E G W G W W WW 1 E W 538-542 RAMONA 536-532 RAMONA 45 3 541-545 RAMONA SSSS W G SS E E SUBJECT PROPERTY261 HAMILTON G E W E W G G W SS 6 2 92 ' - 9 " 12' - 1 1 " RIG H T O F W A Y 11'-10" RIGHT OF WAY 100'-0"10'-1"10'-1" HAMILTON SPECIAL SETBACK7'- 0 " LEGEND PROPERTY LINE EXISTING STREET TREES THAT WILL REQUIRE TREE PROTECTION PER SHEET T-1 & PER CITY OF PALO ALTO'S TREE PROTECTION MANUAL (E) FIRE HYDRANT EXISTING STREET TREES SPECIAL SETBACK LINE - HAMILTON AVE. KEYNOTES 1 (E) FIRE STANDPIPE TO REMAIN 2 FIRE SEPARATION DISTANCE TO CENTER LINE OF ALLEY 3 (E) MAIL BOXES ON SIDE WALK TO REMAIN 4 5 (E) TRASH BIN AND NEWSPAPER RACK ON SIDEWALK TO REMAIN. (E) BENCH ON SIDEWALK TO REMAIN. 6 (E) RAMP ACCESS TO BUILDING BASEMENT. PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY FROM CENTENNIAL WALK. Copyright © 2012 by CODY ANDERSON WASNEY ARCHITECTS, INC. C o d y A n d e r s o n W a s n e y A r c h i t e c t s, I n c. 455 L a m b e r t A v e n u e • P a l o A l t o, CA 94306 6 5 0 . 3 2 8 . 1 8 1 8 • F a x 3 2 8 . 1 8 8 8 STAMP CONSULTANTS REVISION DATE PROJECT NAME SHEET TITLE SHEET REHABILITATION & ADDITION TO PROJECT NO. DRAWN BY CHECKED BY 12009 6/18/13HRB/ARB SUBMITTAL File na m e : Un t i t l e d 6 261 HAMILTON BUILDING 261 HAMILTON PALO ALTO, CA, 94301 E. MERLINO / C. LEBAR M. ANDERSON/ D. PHO 8/7/13 HRB/ARB PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS1 10/16/13HRB/ARB RESUBMITTAL2 1 N TRUE NORTH 2 Copyright © 2012 by CODY ANDERSON WASNEY ARCHITECTS, INC. C o d y A n d e r s o n W a s n e y A r c h i t e c t s, I n c. 455 L a m b e r t A v e n u e • P a l o A l t o, CA 94306 6 5 0 . 3 2 8 . 1 8 1 8 • F a x 3 2 8 . 1 8 8 8 STAMP CONSULTANTS REVISION DATE PROJECT NAME SHEET TITLE SHEET REHABILITATION & ADDITION TO PROJECT NO. DRAWN BY CHECKED BY 12009 6/18/13HRB/ARB SUBMITTAL File na m e : Un t i t l e d 6 261 HAMILTON BUILDING 261 HAMILTON PALO ALTO, CA, 94301 E. MERLINO / C. LEBAR M. ANDERSON/ D. PHO 8/7/13 HRB/ARB PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS1 10/16/13HRB/ARB RESUBMITTAL2 A1.0 DEMOLITION BASEMENT PLAN DEMOLITION FIRST FLOOR PLAN 14' - 0 " 1 9 10 ' - 3 " PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY UNDER SIDEWALK 10'-3 3/4" 2 3 ELEV DN 35'-8 5/8" 3'- 8 " 9'- 0 " 9'- 1 0 " 9'- 0 " 7'- 6 " 9'- 0 " 1'-7 " 9'-7 3/4"18'-0"18'-0"18'-8 1/8" 9'-0" 2'-1 3/4" STANDARD 9' X 18' STANDARD 9' X 18' STANDARD 9' X 18' STANDARD 9' X 18' STANDARD 9' X 18' STANDARD 9' X 18' STANDARD 9' X 18' 9" APPROX. SLOPE: 3:12 UP FSR SD SUMP AND SEWER SWITCH GEAR/ METERS FURNACE BOILER TEL/DATA (E) STORAGE (E) STORAGE (E) GARAGE(ADJACENT PROPERTY)SPACES: 7 (E) STORAGE(ADJACENT PROPERTY) (E) OPEN STORAGESPACE/ RETAILTENANT WORK AREA PU B L I C R I G H T O F W A Y U N D E R SI D E W A L K (E) UTILITYROOM TYP. 123 4 5 6 7 1 A 2 3 25'-10 1/2" 4 12'-4"12'-10 1/2" 4.4 5 B D 34 ' - 1 1 " D.1 C 15' - 6 1/ 2 " 8'- 2 1/ 2 " 10 ' - 8 " 10 ' - 3 " E F 15' - 1 1 " 12' - 3 1/ 2 " G H 2.3 9'-1"14'-6" F.6 20 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 3 " 3.1 49'-11 1/2" 37 ' - 1 1 1/ 2 " 49'-5 1/2" 6"24'-3" 6" 3'- 9 " 2(E) FIRST PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" 3 2 6 5 4 TYP. TYP. 7 7 7 7 8 8 7 7 7 7 88 (E) RETAIL (E) RETAIL (E) RETAIL (E) RETAIL ELEV (E) KITCHEN (E) NON-ACCESSIBLERESTROOM FA (E) FOYER 7 TYP. OF 3 TYP. OF 3 10 7 UP 1 A 2 3 25'-10 1/2" 4 12'-4"12'-10 1/2" 4.4 5 B D 34 ' - 1 1 " D.1 C 15' - 6 1/ 2 " 8'- 2 1/ 2 " 10 ' - 8 " 10 ' - 3 " E F 15' - 1 1 " 12' - 3 1/ 2 " G H 2.3 9'-1"14'-6" F.6 20 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 3 " 3.1 49'-11 1/2" 37 ' - 1 1 1/ 2 " 49'-5 1/2" 6"24'-3" 6" 3'- 9 " 1(E) BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" 1 2 3 KEYNOTES REMOVE (E) SHEET METAL STORM WATER COLLECTION SYSTEMS IN ITS ENTIRETY. PREPARE SPACE UNDER SIDEWALK FOR CITY STREET INFILL CONSTRUCTION AND BASEMENT WALL INFILL CONSTRUCTION. REMOVE (E) CABLE ELEVATOR. PREPARE SHAFT FOR NEW CODE COMPLIANT ELEVATOR SYSTEM. ELEVATOR SHAFT SHALL REMAIN. REMOVE AND REBUILD STUD WALLS AS REQUIRED TO FIT NEW ELEVATOR. REMOVE (E) 1-STORY BUILDING CONSTRUCTION SHOWN SHADED INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO FLOOR SLAB, FOUNDATION, COLUMNS, BEAMS, EXTERIOR WALLS, ETC. (E) HISTORIC FOYER & STAIR TO REMAIN. REMOVE AND SALVAGE THREE CENTENNIAL PLAQUES FOR RE-LOCATION. THREE (E) CENTENNIAL PLAQUES TO REMAIN. REMOVE NON-HISTORIC ALUMINUM STOREFRONT WIINDOW SYSTEM. PREPARE OPENING FOR NEW STEEL STOREFRONT WINDOWS. REMOVE (E) MEZZANINE AND SOFFIT CONSTRUCTION. (E) RAMP TO REMAIN. RAMP TO OCCURS ON ON ADJACENT PROPERTY REMOVE (E) FURRED OUT CONDUIT CHASE. SALVAGE CENTENNIAL WALK LETTERING FOR RE-USE LEGEND (E) CONSTRUCTION TO REMAIN DEMO (E) CONSTUCTION GENERAL NOTES 1. 2. 3. 4. ALL HISTORIC FEATURES ON THE BUILDING EXTERIOR INCLUDING AND NOT LIMITED TO THE FOYER AND HISTORIC STAIRS SHALL REMAIN AND BE PROTECTED FROM DAMAGE DURING CONSTRUCTION. TERRACOTTA ROOF TILES SHALL BE REMOVED AND SALVAGED FOR RE-USE. DOCUMENT EXACT LOCATION OF TILES REMOVED FOR RE-INSTALLATION. A PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETING SHALL BE HELD BETWEEN THE OWNER, ARCHITECT AND CONTRACTOR TO REVIEW REHABILITATION SCOPE. REMOVE AND REPLACE MECHANICAL, ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, TELECOM, FIRE ALARM AND SPRINKLER SYSTEM FOR THE BUILDING, TYPICAL. SURVEY IF (E) FIRE ALARM AND TELECOM SYSTEMS CAN BE SALVAGED FOR RE-USE. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 N TRUE NORTH 2 Copyright © 2012 by CODY ANDERSON WASNEY ARCHITECTS, INC. C o d y A n d e r s o n W a s n e y A r c h i t e c t s, I n c. 455 L a m b e r t A v e n u e • P a l o A l t o, CA 94306 6 5 0 . 3 2 8 . 1 8 1 8 • F a x 3 2 8 . 1 8 8 8 STAMP CONSULTANTS REVISION DATE PROJECT NAME SHEET TITLE SHEET REHABILITATION & ADDITION TO PROJECT NO. DRAWN BY CHECKED BY 12009 6/18/13HRB/ARB SUBMITTAL File na m e : Un t i t l e d 6 261 HAMILTON BUILDING 261 HAMILTON PALO ALTO, CA, 94301 E. MERLINO / C. LEBAR M. ANDERSON/ D. PHO 8/7/13 HRB/ARB PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS1 10/16/13HRB/ARB RESUBMITTAL2 1(E) MEZZANINE FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2(E) SECOND FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"A1.1 DEMOLITION MEZZANINE PLAN DEMOLITION SECOND FLOOR PLAN UP 3 4 ELEV 1 1 (E) OFFICE(E) WORK ROOM (E) OFFICE(E) OFFICE(E) STORAGE UP EXHAUST 1 A 2 3 25'-10 1/2" 4 12'-4"12'-10 1/2" 4.4 5 B D 34 ' - 1 1 " D.1 C 15' - 6 1/ 2 " 8'- 2 1/ 2 " 10 ' - 8 " 10 ' - 3 " E F 15' - 1 1 " 12' - 3 1/ 2 " G H 2.3 9'-1"14'-6" F.6 20 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 3 " 3.1 49'-11 1/2" 37 ' - 1 1 1/ 2 " 49'-5 1/2" 6"24'-3" 6" 3'- 9 " (E) OFFICES(E) CORRIDOR (E) OPEN OFFICE 2 34 ELEV 5 5 5 5 6 8 6 TYP. TYP. 7 UP UP FLU DN 1 A 2 3 25'-10 1/2" 4 12'-4"12'-10 1/2" 4.4 5 B D 34 ' - 1 1 " D.1 C 15' - 6 1/ 2 " 8'- 2 1/ 2 " 10 ' - 8 " 10 ' - 3 " E F 15' - 1 1 " 12' - 3 1/ 2 " G H 2.3 9'-1"14'-6" F.6 20 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 3 " 3.1 49'-11 1/2" 37 ' - 1 1 1/ 2 " 49'-5 1/2" 6"24'-3" 6" 3'- 9 " 1 2 3 KEYNOTES REMOVE (E) MEZZANINE CONSTRUCTION SHOWN SHADED REMOVE (E) EMERGENCY ESCAPE STAIR REMOVE (E) CABLE ELEVATOR. PREPARE SHAFT FOR NEW CODE COMPLIANT ELEVATOR SYSTEM. ELEVATOR SHAFT SHALL REMAIN. REMOVE AND REBUILD STUD WALLS AS REQUIRED TO FIT NEW ELEVATOR. (E) HISTORIC STAIR TO REMAIN REMOVE (E) SKYLIGHTS REMOVE (E) ROOFTOP MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT REMOVE (E) 1-STORY CONSTRUCTION SHOWN SHADED BUT NOT LIMITED TO PARAPET, ROOFING SYSTEM, ROOF SLAB, BEAMS, JOISTS, ETC REMOVE (E) UTILITY CHASE LEGEND (E) CONSTRUCTION TO REMAIN DEMOLISH (E) CONSTRUCTION GENERAL NOTES (SEE A1.0 FOR ADDITIONAL NOTES) 4 5 6 7 8 1. ALL FACILITIES ON THE SECOND, THIRD AND FOURTH FLOOR ARE DESIGNATED AND USED AS OFFICE N TRUE NORTH Copyright © 2012 by CODY ANDERSON WASNEY ARCHITECTS, INC. C o d y A n d e r s o n W a s n e y A r c h i t e c t s, I n c. 455 L a m b e r t A v e n u e • P a l o A l t o, CA 94306 6 5 0 . 3 2 8 . 1 8 1 8 • F a x 3 2 8 . 1 8 8 8 STAMP CONSULTANTS REVISION DATE PROJECT NAME SHEET TITLE SHEET REHABILITATION & ADDITION TO PROJECT NO. DRAWN BY CHECKED BY 12009 6/18/13HRB/ARB SUBMITTAL File na m e : Un t i t l e d 6 261 HAMILTON BUILDING 261 HAMILTON PALO ALTO, CA, 94301 E. MERLINO / C. LEBAR M. ANDERSON/ D. PHO 8/7/13 HRB/ARB PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS1 10/16/13HRB/ARB RESUBMITTAL2 2(E) FOURTH FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1(E) THIRD FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"A1.2 DEMOLITION THIRD FLOOR PLAN DEMOLITION FOURTH FLOOR PLAN 34 2 ELEV (E) OFFICE (E) OFFICE (E) OFFICES (E) OFFICE (E) CORRIDOR (E)NON-ACCESSIBLERESTROOM DN DN FLU 1 A 2 3 25'-10 1/2" 4 12'-4"12'-10 1/2" 4.4 5 B D 34 ' - 1 1 " D.1 C 15' - 6 1/ 2 " 8'- 2 1/ 2 " 10 ' - 8 " 10 ' - 3 " E F 15' - 1 1 " 12' - 3 1/ 2 " G H 2.3 9'-1"14'-6" F.6 20 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 3 " 3.1 49'-11 1/2" 37 ' - 1 1 1/ 2 " 49'-5 1/2" 6"24'-3" 6" 3'- 9 " ELEV CAB (E) CORRIDOR (E) OFFICES (E) OFFICES ELEV CAB 34 2 (E) OFFICES (E) OFFICES TYP.TYP. (E) NON-ACCESSIBLERESTROOM (E) OFFICES DN UP FLU UP UP FLU UP UP FLU 1 A 2 3 25'-10 1/2" 4 12'-4"12'-10 1/2" 4.4 5 B D 34 ' - 1 1 " D.1 C 15' - 6 1/ 2 " 8'- 2 1/ 2 " 10 ' - 8 " 10 ' - 3 " E F 15' - 1 1 " 12' - 3 1/ 2 " G H 2.3 9'-1"14'-6" F.6 20 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 3 " 3.1 49'-11 1/2" 37 ' - 1 1 1/ 2 " 49'-5 1/2" 6"24'-3" 6" 3'- 9 " 1 2 3 KEYNOTES NOT USED REMOVE (E) EMERGENCY ESCAPE STAIR REMOVE (E) CABLE ELEVATOR. PREPARE SHAFT FOR NEW CODE COMPLIANT ELEVATOR SYSTEM. ELEVATOR SHAFT SHALL REMAIN. REMOVE AND REBUILD STUD WALLS AS REQUIRED TO FIT NEW ELEVATOR. (E) HISTORIC STAIR TO REMAIN LEGEND (E) CONSTRUCTION TO REMAIN DEMOLISH (E) CONSTRUCTION GENERAL NOTES (SEE A1.0 FOR ADDITIONAL NOTES) 4 1. ALL FACILITIES ON THE SECOND, THIRD AND FOURTH FLOOR ARE DESIGNATED AND USED AS OFFICE N TRUE NORTH UP 19 risers @6.73" 14' - 0 " 5 8'-7" 10 ' - 3 " 10'-3 3/4" ELEV CAB 2 4 4 GARAGE(ADJACENT PROPERTY) SPACES: 7 STORAGE(ADJACENT PROPERTY) DN 8 TYP. 9 9'- 0 " 5'- 0 " 18'-0"7'-0 1/2" 13 10 6'- 3 " 9'- 0 " 9'- 0 " 3'- 9 " 9'- 0 " 9'- 0 " 9'- 9 " 3'- 9 " 6'- 1 " 4'- 0 " 35'-8 5/8" 123 4 5 6 7 3'- 8 " 9'- 0 " 9'- 1 0 " 9'- 0 " 7'- 6 " 9'- 0 " 1'-7 " 9'-7 3/4"18'-0"18'-0"18'-8 1/8" 9'-0" 2'-1 3/4" 9" STANDARD 9' X 18' STANDARD 9' X 18' STANDARD 9' X 18' STANDARD 9' X 18' STANDARD 9' X 18' STANDARD 9' X 18' STANDARD 9' X 18' 21'-6" 22'-8 1/2" 2 APPROX. SLOPE: 3:12 STANDARD 9'X18' STANDARD ACCESSIBLE SUMP PUMP 1 6 7 PARKINGSPACES: 9 STAIR CORE MEP 3 4 BICYCLE STORAGE SPACES: 10 (2'-6"X 6') 2 5 SHOWER/LOCKERS CORRIDORSTORAGE STORAGE STANDARD STANDARD STANDARD STANDARD 1 TRASH HOLDINGAREA 1 1 STANDARD 8 STANDARD 9'X18' 9 1 1 2 3 25'-10 1/2" 4 12'-4"12'-10 1/2" 4.4 5 34 ' - 1 1 " 15' - 6 1/ 2 " 8'- 2 1/ 2 " 10 ' - 8 " 10 ' - 3 " 15' - 1 1 " 12' - 3 1/ 2 " 2.3 9'-1"14'-6" 20 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 3 " 3.1 49'-11 1/2" 37 ' - 1 1 1/ 2 " 49'-5 1/2" 6"24'-3" 6" 3'- 9 " Copyright © 2012 by CODY ANDERSON WASNEY ARCHITECTS, INC. C o d y A n d e r s o n W a s n e y A r c h i t e c t s, I n c. 455 L a m b e r t A v e n u e • P a l o A l t o, CA 94306 6 5 0 . 3 2 8 . 1 8 1 8 • F a x 3 2 8 . 1 8 8 8 STAMP CONSULTANTS REVISION DATE PROJECT NAME SHEET TITLE SHEET REHABILITATION & ADDITION TO PROJECT NO. DRAWN BY CHECKED BY 12009 6/18/13HRB/ARB SUBMITTAL File na m e : Un t i t l e d 6 261 HAMILTON BUILDING 261 HAMILTON PALO ALTO, CA, 94301 E. MERLINO / C. LEBAR M. ANDERSON/ D. PHO 8/7/13 HRB/ARB PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS1 10/16/13HRB/ARB RESUBMITTAL2 RETAIL TENANT 2 OFFICE SPACE RETAIL TENANT 3RETAIL TENANT 1 BATHROOM STORAGE CORRIDOR UPDN 19 risers @6.57"SHAFT STAIR CORE 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 ELEV CAB 22 3 5'- 0 " 5'-0" 6 5'-0" 11 4'- 1 " TELECOMELEC. CLOSET SHAFT 12 1 77 1 UTILITYSHAFT 9 FOYER TYP. 7 7 TYP. TYP. 1 14 1 2 1 A 2 3 25'-10 1/2" 4 12'-4"12'-10 1/2" 4.4 5 B D 34 ' - 1 1 " D.1 C 15' - 6 1/ 2 " 8'- 2 1/ 2 " 10 ' - 8 " 10 ' - 3 " E F 15' - 1 1 " 12' - 3 1/ 2 " G H 2.3 9'-1"14'-6" F.6 20 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 3 " 3.1 49'-11 1/2" 37 ' - 1 1 1/ 2 " 49'-5 1/2" 6"24'-3" 6" 3'- 9 " 2PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1PROPOSED BASEMENT PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"A2.0 PROPOSED BASEMENT PLAN PROPOSED FIRST FLOOR PLAN 1 2 3 KEYNOTES NEW COMPATIBLE STEEL STOREFRONT SYSTEM. SEE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS CODE COMPLIANT ELEVATOR ACCESSIBLE RESTROOM FACILITIES SIDEWALK INFILL CONSTRUCTION COORDINATE WITH CPA PUBLIC WORKS. GARAGE DOOR WITH FUSABLE LINK ACCESSIBLE HI-LOW DRINKING FOUNTAIN SHOTCRETE RETROFIT TO INTERIOR WALLS TO BRACE SOFTSTORY CONDITION ON 1ST FLOOR (*8 THICK WALL) (E) RAMP TO BASEMENT THROUGH ADJACENT PROPERTY (E) HISTORIC STAIRS TO REMAIN ELECTRICAL LOCKER MEZZANINE ABOVE CENTENNIAL PLAQUES TO REMAIN, SEE SHEET A5.1 FOR PLAQUE RELOCATION PLAN HANDICAP PARKING SIGNAGE METAL CANOPY ABOVE LEGEND 4 (E) CONSTRUCTION TO REMAIN (N) CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION (N) STUD WALL CONSTRUCTION 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 N TRUE NORTH 214 2 OPENOFFICE SPACE STAIR CORE BATHROOM UP DN 22 risers @6.54" JANITORSCLOSET ELEC/ TELECOMCLOSET ELEV CAB 2 3 4" SHAFT TY P . 3'-0" 6 6 3 4 SHAFT SHAFT UPDN 1 CL EQ . EQ . 1'-6 " TY P . 6'-0" 2 3'-0" 7 1 A 2 3 25'-10 1/2" 4 12'-4"12'-10 1/2" 4.4 5 B D 34 ' - 1 1 " D.1 C 15' - 6 1/ 2 " 8'- 2 1/ 2 " 10 ' - 8 " 10 ' - 3 " E F 15' - 1 1 " 12' - 3 1/ 2 " G H 2.3 9'-1"14'-6" F.6 20 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 3 " 3.1 49'-11 1/2" 37 ' - 1 1 1/ 2 " 49'-5 1/2" 6"24'-3" 6" 3'- 9 " MEZZANINE STAIRCORE OPEN TO BELOW OPEN TO BELOW OPEN TO BELOW UPDN 19 risers @6.52" OPEN TOBELOW ELEV CAB 2 TELECOM/ELEC.CLOSET SHAFT UPDN 1 5 OPEN TO BELOW 1 2 8 1 A 2 3 25'-10 1/2" 4 12'-4"12'-10 1/2" 4.4 5 B D 34 ' - 1 1 " D.1 C 15' - 6 1/ 2 " 8'- 2 1/ 2 " 10 ' - 8 " 10 ' - 3 " E F 15' - 1 1 " 12' - 3 1/ 2 " G H 2.3 9'-1"14'-6" F.6 20 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 3 " 3.1 49'-11 1/2" 37 ' - 1 1 1/ 2 " 49'-5 1/2" 6"24'-3" 6" 3'- 9 " Copyright © 2012 by CODY ANDERSON WASNEY ARCHITECTS, INC. C o d y A n d e r s o n W a s n e y A r c h i t e c t s, I n c. 455 L a m b e r t A v e n u e • P a l o A l t o, CA 94306 6 5 0 . 3 2 8 . 1 8 1 8 • F a x 3 2 8 . 1 8 8 8 STAMP CONSULTANTS REVISION DATE PROJECT NAME SHEET TITLE SHEET REHABILITATION & ADDITION TO PROJECT NO. DRAWN BY CHECKED BY 12009 6/18/13HRB/ARB SUBMITTAL File na m e : Un t i t l e d 6 261 HAMILTON BUILDING 261 HAMILTON PALO ALTO, CA, 94301 E. MERLINO / C. LEBAR M. ANDERSON/ D. PHO 8/7/13 HRB/ARB PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS1 10/16/13HRB/ARB RESUBMITTAL2 2PROPOSED SECOND FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1PROPOSED MEZZANINE FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"A2.1 PROPOSED MEZZANINE PLAN PROPOSED SECOND FLOOR PLAN 1 2 3 PLAN KEYNOTES (E) HISTORIC STAIRS TO REMAIN CODE COMPLIANT ELEVATOR ACCESSIBLE RESTROOM FACILITIES ACCESSIBLE HI-LOW DRINKING FOUNTAIN GUARDRAIL FOR MEZZANINE MAINTAIN (E) CONCRETE BULKHEAD HEADER WOOD BALCONY WITH METAL GUARDRAIL METAL CANOPY LEGEND 4 (E) CONSTRUCTION TO REMAIN (N) CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION (N) STUD WALL CONSTRUCTION 5 N TRUE NORTH 6 2 7 8 Copyright © 2012 by CODY ANDERSON WASNEY ARCHITECTS, INC. C o d y A n d e r s o n W a s n e y A r c h i t e c t s, I n c. 455 L a m b e r t A v e n u e • P a l o A l t o, CA 94306 6 5 0 . 3 2 8 . 1 8 1 8 • F a x 3 2 8 . 1 8 8 8 STAMP CONSULTANTS REVISION DATE PROJECT NAME SHEET TITLE SHEET REHABILITATION & ADDITION TO PROJECT NO. DRAWN BY CHECKED BY 12009 6/18/13HRB/ARB SUBMITTAL File na m e : Un t i t l e d 6 261 HAMILTON BUILDING 261 HAMILTON PALO ALTO, CA, 94301 E. MERLINO / C. LEBAR M. ANDERSON/ D. PHO 8/7/13 HRB/ARB PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS1 10/16/13HRB/ARB RESUBMITTAL2DN ROOF GARDEN OPENOFFICE SPACE MECHANICAL BATHROOM STAIR TO 3RD FLOOR JANITORSCLOSET STORAGEROOM ELEV CAB 2 3 1 TYP. SHAFT 11 10 10 10 7 SHAFT SHAFT DN. 9 OPENOFFICE SPACE 6 6 13 2 1 A 2 3 25'-10 1/2" 4 12'-4"12'-10 1/2" 4.4 5 B D 34 ' - 1 1 " D.1 C 15' - 6 1/ 2 " 8'- 2 1/ 2 " 10 ' - 8 " 10 ' - 3 " E F 15' - 1 1 " 12' - 3 1/ 2 " G H 2.3 9'-1"14'-6" F.6 20 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 3 " 3.1 49'-11 1/2" 37 ' - 1 1 1/ 2 " 49'-5 1/2" 6"24'-3" 6" 3'- 9 " ELEV CAB OFFICE SPACE STAIR TO 4TH FLOOR UTILITYSHAFT BATHROOM DN 22 risers @6.54" JANITORSCLOSET STORAGE UP STORAGEROOM ELEV CAB ELEV CAB 2 3 5 10 10 10 5 8 BATHROOM 3 1 TYP. UTILITYSHAFT TELECOM/ ELEC.CLOSET CL EQ . EQ . 12 UPUPUP 3'-0" 1'-6 " TY P . 6'-0" 2 3'-0" CL EQ . EQ . 1 A 2 3 25'-10 1/2" 4 12'-4"12'-10 1/2" 4.4 5 B D 34 ' - 1 1 " D.1 C 15' - 6 1/ 2 " 8'- 2 1/ 2 " 10 ' - 8 " 10 ' - 3 " E F 15' - 1 1 " 12' - 3 1/ 2 " G H 2.3 9'-1"14'-6" F.6 20 ' - 0 " 16 ' - 3 " 3.1 49'-11 1/2" 37 ' - 1 1 1/ 2 " 49'-5 1/2" 6"24'-3" 6" 3'- 9 " 2PROPOSED FOURTH FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1PROPOSED THIRD FLOOR PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"A2.2 PROPOSED THIRD FLOOR PLAN PROPOSED FOURTH FLOOR PLAN 1 2 3 PLAN KEYNOTES (E) HISTORIC STAIRS TO REMAIN CODE COMPLIANT ELEVATOR ACCESSIBLE RESTROOM FACILITIES NOT USED MAINTAIN (E) CONCRETE BULKHEAD HEADER PARAPET WALL MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT ROOFTOP SHAFT HI-LOW DRINKING FOUNTAIN SKYLIGHTS GRAVITY RELIEF VENT ON ROOFTOP WOOD BALCONY AND METAL GUARDRAIL LINE OF CLAY TILE ROOF OVER MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT WELL ABOVE LEGEND 4 (E) CONSTRUCTION TO REMAIN (N) CONCRETE CONSTRUCTION (N) STUD WALL CONSTRUCTION 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 N TRUE NORTH 2 2 13 NON-HISTORIC ALUMINUM STOREFRONT WINDOW SILL AND TRANSOM HEADER, TYP ORIGINAL TILED WINDOWSILL AND STEELSTOREFRONT NON-HISTORIC ALUMINUMSTOREFRONT ENTRANCE WOOD DETAILINGMISSING TRANSOM WINDOWRE-PURPOSED FOREXHAUST AIR VENTING (E) FIRE STANDPIPES LOCATION TO REMAIN.University Art CenterUniversity Art CenterUniversity Art Center A4.1 REPAIR WROUGHT IRON BALCONY TO PREVENT FURTHER DETERIORATION NEW HISTORICALLY COMPATIBLE STOREFRONT & AWNING (WINDOW SYSTEM, TILE & TRANSOM) REPAIR AND RESTORE EXISTING ROOF TILES NEW HISTORICALLY COMPATIBLESTOREFRONT & RETRACTABLEAWNING (WINDOW SYSTEM,TILE & TRANSOM) REPAIR WROUGHT IRONBALCONY TO PREVENTFURTHER DETERIORATION (E) STOREFRONT TO REMAIN,REPLACE (E) AWNING WITH NEWHISTORICALLY COMPATIBLE AWNING CLEAN BUILDING FACADE,REPAIR STUCCO WHEREDAMAGED. MEZZANINE 10'-5" THIRD FLOOR 29'-11 1/2" HEIGHT LIMIT 50'-0" FIRST FLOOR 0'-0" FOUTH FLOOR 40'-11 1/2" BASEMENT -9'-9 1/2" SECOND FLOOR 18'-11 1/2" 66 ' - 1 0 " 64 ' - 1 1 " 64 ' - 2 " 68 ' - 1 " PROPOSED - SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" ORIGINAL - SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" (E) CONDITIONS - SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" Copyright © 2012 by CODY ANDERSON WASNEY ARCHITECTS, INC. C o d y A n d e r s o n W a s n e y A r c h i t e c t s, I n c. 455 L a m b e r t A v e n u e • P a l o A l t o, CA 94306 6 5 0 . 3 2 8 . 1 8 1 8 • F a x 3 2 8 . 1 8 8 8 STAMP CONSULTANTS REVISION DATE PROJECT NAME SHEET TITLE SHEET REHABILITATION & ADDITION TO PROJECT NO. DRAWN BY CHECKED BY 12009 6/18/13HRB/ARB SUBMITTAL File na m e : Un t i t l e d 6 261 HAMILTON BUILDING 261 HAMILTON PALO ALTO, CA, 94301 E. MERLINO / C. LEBAR M. ANDERSON/ D. PHO 8/7/13 HRB/ARB PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS1 10/16/13HRB/ARB RESUBMITTAL232 1 SOUTH ELEVATION RAMONA STREET MEZZANINE 10'-5" THIRD FLOOR 29'-11 1/2" HEIGHT LIMIT 50'-0" FIRST FLOOR 0'-0" FOUTH FLOOR 40'-11 1/2" BASEMENT -9'-9 1/2" SECOND FLOOR 18'-11 1/2" NEW HISTORICALLY COMPATIBLE STOREFRONT & AWNING (WINDOW SYSTEM, TILE & TRANSOM) REPAIR WROUGHT IRON BALCONY TO PREVENT FURTHER DETERIORATION NEW HISTORICALLY COMPATIBLE STEEL WINDOWS TYP. (E) STORE FRONT TO REMAIN, REPLACE (E) AWNING WITH NEW HISTORICALLY COMPATIBLE AWNING NEW HISTORICALLYCOMPATIBLE IRON GATE,DECORATIVE GRILL & U.S.POSTAL OFFICE SIGNAGE NEW HISTORICALLY COMPATIBLE IRON GATE & ACCENT TILE AT BUILDING ENTRY U.S. POST OFFICE PALO ALTO CALIFORNIA REPAIR AND RESTORE EXISTING ROOF TILES NEW HISTORICALLY COMPATIBLESTOREFRONT & AWNING (WINDOWSYSTEM, TILE & TRANSOM) CLEAN BUILDING FACADE,REPAIR STUCCO WHEREDAMAGED. 64 ' - 2 " 61 ' - 2 " 68 ' - 1 " A4.2 Copyright © 2012 by CODY ANDERSON WASNEY ARCHITECTS, INC. C o d y A n d e r s o n W a s n e y A r c h i t e c t s, I n c. 455 L a m b e r t A v e n u e • P a l o A l t o, CA 94306 6 5 0 . 3 2 8 . 1 8 1 8 • F a x 3 2 8 . 1 8 8 8 STAMP CONSULTANTS REVISION DATE PROJECT NAME SHEET TITLE SHEET REHABILITATION & ADDITION TO PROJECT NO. DRAWN BY CHECKED BY 12009 6/18/13HRB/ARB SUBMITTAL File na m e : Un t i t l e d 6 261 HAMILTON BUILDING 261 HAMILTON PALO ALTO, CA, 94301 E. MERLINO / C. LEBAR M. ANDERSON/ D. PHO 8/7/13 HRB/ARB PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS1 10/16/13HRB/ARB RESUBMITTAL2 EAST ELEVATION HAMILTON STREET NON-HISTORIC ALUMINUM STOREFRONT NON-HISTORIC STOREFRONT SHAPE WOOD DETAILING MISSING NON-HISTORICSTOREFRONTSYSTEM ANDWINDOW SILL NON-HISTORICALUMINUMENTRANCESYSTEM STEEL RAILINGDETERIORATION University Art Center University Art261 Hamilton PROPOSED - EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" ORIGINAL - EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" (E) CONDITIONS - EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"3 2 1 (E) WINDOWMOUNTED AIRCONDITIONERS (E) ELECTRICALPANELS & CONDUIT (E) CONDUIT CUTSINTO WINDOWS NON-HISTORIC STOREFRONT SYSTEM AND WINDOW SILL (E) CENTENNIAL WALK PLAQUES (E) NON-HISTORICAL METAL GATE (E) METAL FIRE ESCAPE (E) EXPOSED METAL FIRE EXHAUST (N) MECHANICALEQUIPMENTSHOWN DOTTED REPAIR WROUGHT IRON BALCONY AS NEEDED TO PREVENT FURTHER DETERIORATION NEW HISTORICALLY COMPATIBLE STOREFRONT & AWNING (WINDOW SYSTEM, TILE & TRANSOM) NEW HISTORICALLY COMPATIBLE STEEL WINDOWS TYP. REPAIR AND RESTORE EXISTING ROOF TILES MEZZANINE 10'-5" THIRD FLOOR 29'-11 1/2" HEIGHT LIMIT 50'-0" FIRST FLOOR 0'-0" FOUTH FLOOR 40'-11 1/2" BASEMENT -9'-9 1/2" SECOND FLOOR 18'-11 1/2" CLEAN BUILDING FACADE, REPAIR STUCCO WHERE DAMAGED. (E) CENTENNIAL PLAQUES STUCCO METAL GUARDRAIL CLAY TILE ROOF 52 ' - 8 " 61 ' - 2 " DECORATIVE METALGRILLE METALSTOREFRONT WOOD BALCONY LIGHT FIXTURE STUCCO METAL CANOPY METAL STOREFRONT 44 ' - 6 " Copyright © 2012 by CODY ANDERSON WASNEY ARCHITECTS, INC. C o d y A n d e r s o n W a s n e y A r c h i t e c t s, I n c. 455 L a m b e r t A v e n u e • P a l o A l t o, CA 94306 6 5 0 . 3 2 8 . 1 8 1 8 • F a x 3 2 8 . 1 8 8 8 STAMP CONSULTANTS REVISION DATE PROJECT NAME SHEET TITLE SHEET REHABILITATION & ADDITION TO PROJECT NO. DRAWN BY CHECKED BY 12009 6/18/13HRB/ARB SUBMITTAL File na m e : Un t i t l e d 6 261 HAMILTON BUILDING 261 HAMILTON PALO ALTO, CA, 94301 E. MERLINO / C. LEBAR M. ANDERSON/ D. PHO 8/7/13 HRB/ARB PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS1 10/16/13HRB/ARB RESUBMITTAL2 A4.3 NORTH ELEVATION CENTENNIAL WALK PROPOSED - NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" ORIGINAL - NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" (E) CONDITIONS - NORTH ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"3 2 1 2 (E) WINDOW MOUNTED AIR CONDITIONERS (E) CONDUIT BOXES OUTLINE OF ADJACENTPROPERTY 541-545HAMILTON 20 ' - 7 1/ 2 " REPAIR WROUGHT IRONBALCONY AS NEEDED TOPREVENT FURTHERDETERIORATION NEW HISTORICALLYCOMPATIBLE STEELWINDOWS TYP. REPAIR AND RESTOREEXISTING ROOF TILES CLEAN BUILDING FACADE,REPAIR STUCCO WHEREDAMAGED. (N) MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT SHOWN DOTTED OUTLINE OF ADJACENTPROPERTY 541-545HAMILTON MEZZANINE 10'-5" THIRD FLOOR 29'-11 1/2" HEIGHT LIMIT 50'-0" FIRST FLOOR 0'-0" FOUTH FLOOR 40'-11 1/2" BASEMENT -9'-9 1/2" SECOND FLOOR 18'-11 1/2" STUCCO 64 ' - 1 1 " CLAY TILE ROOF WOOD RAFTERS METAL GUARDRAIL WOOD BALCONY METAL CANOPY Copyright © 2012 by CODY ANDERSON WASNEY ARCHITECTS, INC. C o d y A n d e r s o n W a s n e y A r c h i t e c t s, I n c. 455 L a m b e r t A v e n u e • P a l o A l t o, CA 94306 6 5 0 . 3 2 8 . 1 8 1 8 • F a x 3 2 8 . 1 8 8 8 STAMP CONSULTANTS REVISION DATE PROJECT NAME SHEET TITLE SHEET REHABILITATION & ADDITION TO PROJECT NO. DRAWN BY CHECKED BY 12009 6/18/13HRB/ARB SUBMITTAL File na m e : Un t i t l e d 6 261 HAMILTON BUILDING 261 HAMILTON PALO ALTO, CA, 94301 E. MERLINO / C. LEBAR M. ANDERSON/ D. PHO 8/7/13 HRB/ARB PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS1 10/16/13HRB/ARB RESUBMITTAL2 A4.4 WEST ELEVATION PROPOSED - WEST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" ORIGINAL - WEST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" (E) CONDITIONS - WEST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"3 2 1 2 Copyright © 2012 by CODY ANDERSON WASNEY ARCHITECTS, INC. C o d y A n d e r s o n W a s n e y A r c h i t e c t s, I n c. 455 L a m b e r t A v e n u e • P a l o A l t o, CA 94306 6 5 0 . 3 2 8 . 1 8 1 8 • F a x 3 2 8 . 1 8 8 8 STAMP CONSULTANTS REVISION DATE PROJECT NAME SHEET TITLE SHEET REHABILITATION & ADDITION TO PROJECT NO. DRAWN BY CHECKED BY 12009 6/18/13HRB/ARB SUBMITTAL File na m e : Un t i t l e d 6 261 HAMILTON BUILDING 261 HAMILTON PALO ALTO, CA, 94301 E. MERLINO / C. LEBAR M. ANDERSON/ D. PHO 8/7/13 HRB/ARB PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS1 10/16/13HRB/ARB RESUBMITTAL2 1261 HAMILTON RENDERINGS SCALE: NTS A5.0 RENDERINGS VIEW FROM ADJACENT BUILDING: 285 HAMILTON AXONOMETRIC VIEW EXISTING AERIAL VIEW VIEW FROM HAMILTON STREETVIEW TOWARDS HAMILTON STREET 2 Copyright © 2012 by CODY ANDERSON WASNEY ARCHITECTS, INC. C o d y A n d e r s o n W a s n e y A r c h i t e c t s, I n c. 455 L a m b e r t A v e n u e • P a l o A l t o, CA 94306 6 5 0 . 3 2 8 . 1 8 1 8 • F a x 3 2 8 . 1 8 8 8 STAMP CONSULTANTS REVISION DATE PROJECT NAME SHEET TITLE SHEET REHABILITATION & ADDITION TO PROJECT NO. DRAWN BY CHECKED BY 12009 6/18/13HRB/ARB SUBMITTAL File na m e : Un t i t l e d 6 261 HAMILTON BUILDING 261 HAMILTON PALO ALTO, CA, 94301 E. MERLINO / C. LEBAR M. ANDERSON/ D. PHO 8/7/13 HRB/ARB PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS1 10/16/13HRB/ARB RESUBMITTAL2 1CENTENNIAL PLAQUE RELOCATION SCALE: NTS A5.1 CENTENNIAL PLAQUE RELOCATION VIEW TOWARDS HAMILTON STREET VIEW TOWARDS UNIVERSITY AVENUE CENTENNIAL PLAQUE CENTENNIAL WALK POTENTIAL PLAQUE LOCATIONS BIRGE CLARK &PEDRO DE LEMOSPLAQUES- RAMONA STREETHISTORIC DISTRICT Copyright © 2012 by CODY ANDERSON WASNEY ARCHITECTS, INC. C o d y A n d e r s o n W a s n e y A r c h i t e c t s, I n c. 455 L a m b e r t A v e n u e • P a l o A l t o, CA 94306 6 5 0 . 3 2 8 . 1 8 1 8 • F a x 3 2 8 . 1 8 8 8 STAMP CONSULTANTS REVISION DATE PROJECT NAME SHEET TITLE SHEET REHABILITATION & ADDITION TO PROJECT NO. DRAWN BY CHECKED BY 12009 6/18/13HRB/ARB SUBMITTAL File na m e : Un t i t l e d 6 261 HAMILTON BUILDING 261 HAMILTON PALO ALTO, CA, 94301 E. MERLINO / C. LEBAR M. ANDERSON/ D. PHO 8/7/13 HRB/ARB PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS1 10/16/13HRB/ARB RESUBMITTAL2 T-1 TREE PROTECTION PLAN