APPENDIX G. Shadow Memo

Transcription

1 APPENDIX G Shadow Memo BSMC Summit Campus Seismic Upgrade and G-1 ESA / Master Plan Project Draft EIR December 2009

2 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK G-2

3 225 Bush Street Suite 1700 San Francisco, CA phone fax memorandum date October 8, 2009 to from subject Gary Patton, Planning Director Scott Gregory, Contract Planner Brad Brewster; Jonathan Carey, Charles Bennett Alta Bates Summit Medical Center Proposed Patient Care Pavilion Shadow Impacts on Parks Chapel A.M.E. Church (476 34th Street) Summary This memo discusses the potential shadow impacts of the proposed Alta Bates Summit Medical Center (ABSMC) Master Plan, which includes construction of a new patient care pavilion in the location of the existing Samuel Merritt University Bechtel Hall at 350 Hawthorne Avenue. As described below, it is the professional opinion of Environmental Science Associates (ESA) that the shadow cast by the patient care pavilion would result in a lessthan-significant shadow impact to the historic significance of the Parks Chapel A.M.E. Church. Historical Significance Located outside of the ABSMC project area, but immediately adjacent to it, is the Parks Chapel A.M.E Church (formerly the Second Church of Christ, Scientist) at th Street near the corner of Elm Street. This Beaux- Arts style church building was built in 1917 and designed by prominent local architect, William Arthur Newman. The brick church is two stories in height with a cruciform plan, a cross-gabled roof, arched windows with leaded stained glass, and a monumental entrance portico with two-story-high Corinthian columns. Exterior walls are light cream-colored pressed brick with terra cotta detailing, and a multi-gable roof clad in slate. The interior has a 1,200-seat auditorium (sanctuary) with a ceiling that is 40 feet high, with large round stained glass skylight, and large arched and rectangular windows of stained glass in subdued colors. The Parks Chapel A.M.E. Church was designated City of Oakland Landmark # 46 in 1981 (please see Attachment A). This building was evaluated during 1994 city-wide survey of unreinforced masonry buildings (URM survey), when the Oakland Cultural Heritage Survey (OCHS) assigned it with a National Register status code of 3S on DPR form 523 B, which indicates that it is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places (please see Attachment B). In terms of its local historical rating, the OCHS assigned the building with a rating G-3

4 of B+3 (B, major importance, landmark quality, not located in a district). 1 From visual inspection by ESA in March, 2009, the property appears unchanged from when it was originally evaluated, and therefore would retain its 3S and B+3 ratings. As an Oakland City Landmark and one which is eligible for the National Register, the Parks Chapel A.M.E. Church is an historical resource for CEQA purposes. Defining Characteristics As stated on the Department of Parks and Recreation form 523 A, recorded by OCHS in 1994, the Parks Chapel A.M.E. Church is a Beaux Arts derivative church building. The DPR 523 form A states that the major architectural elements of the resource are the slate roof, light cream pressed brick and terra cotta exterior walls, large arched windows, monumental portico, extensive stained glass, and classical ornament. The form also states that the 1,200-seat auditorium is a major interior element, noting that it is uninterrupted by columns due to the truss roof. The form states that the auditorium s large windows are stained glass in a subdued color, and that each window is made up of small square panes with diagonal latticing. Photos of the 1,200-seat auditorium and eastern façade windows are provided in Attachment C. The DPR form states that the building is in excellent condition and that its integrity is excellent. From visual inspection by ESA in March, 2009, the property currently maintains a level of high integrity. DPR form 523 B discusses the building s historical importance. The form states that the building reflects Oakland s social history, architecture, and its African-American community. The form also notes the building s rich materials, workmanship, and classical detailing that make the building one of Oakland s many outstanding religious buildings. Given that DPR form identifies the uninterrupted 1,200-seat auditorium, large arched stained-glass windows, exterior walls, monumental portico, slate roof, and classical ornament, it is presumed that these architectural features are the defining characteristics that convey its historical significance and justify its inclusion in the local register of historical resources. In addition, the LPAB case file for Landmark (LM) and Ordinance Number designating the church as an Oakland Landmark states the following about the auditorium, The auditorium is especially free from the usual treatment of church interiors. Effort was made to avoid ornamentation of an elaborate type while retaining the refinement of the desired atmosphere; soft, rich, peaceful quiet pervading the whole interior. The large room is approximately 94 feet in width and 148 feet in length. The subtly cross-vaulted ceiling is approximately forty feet high, crowned by a large round skylight of stained and frosted glass, featuring botanical designs in the center and around the outer rim. The large arched windows, above the portico and on either side, are of small rectangular panels of stained glass in subdued colors. Let There Be Light, the words inscribed over the main entrance, reflect a thought carried out, as far as possible for a church, throughout the interior. 1 The Oakland Cultural Heritage Survey uses a five-tier rating system for individual properties, ranging from A (highest importance) and B (major importance) to E (of no particular interest). The letter rating is the Individual Property Rating of the building and is based on Visual Quality/Design, History/Associated, Context, and Integrity and Reversibility. 2 G-4

5 Project Shadow The proposed ABSMC Master Plan would include the demolition of several existing buildings and construction of a 7-story parking garage, an 11-story patient care pavilion tower, a 5-story medical office building, and a 4-story building for use by Samuel Merritt University. Through preliminary plan view (overhead) shadow simulations prepared by the project architect, it was determined that the new patient care pavilion tower could cast a shadow on the Parks Chapel A.M.E. Church during the morning hours on (and around) December 21st, when the days are shortest. 2 The project architect prepared detailed shadow simulations to compare existing and future (with-project) conditions to determine the specific extent of shadow that would be cast by the patient care tower onto the Parks Chapel A.M.E. Church. This analysis showed the shadows on December 21st, as well as March 21st and September 21st (Attachment D). No shadow analysis was completed for June 21st, as it was determined there would be no project shadows in the direction of the Church during this time of the year. As such, Attachment D does not include a detailed shadow analysis for June. ESA did not peer-review these studies, but assumed, based on general review by one of ESA s in-house technical shadow analysts, that they are essentially correct and appear representative of the shadow conditions that would exist. As shown in these diagrams, shadow from the patient care pavilion would not fall on the church on (and around) March 21st or September 21st. 3 On December 21st, from approximately 8:45 a.m. to 9:45 a.m., new shadow from the patient care pavilion would reach the church and would fall on the church s large stained glass windows on its eastern façade. The project architect also prepared further detailed shadow simulations of the eastern façade of the church, including both the large arched window (Window #1) and the smaller rectangular window (Window #2). These images show future (with-project) conditions and they incorporate calculations of the percentage area of window that would be shaded during the duration of impact, from 8:45 a.m. to 9:45 a.m. (Attachment E). As shown in the calculations, Window #1 is 441 square feet in area, and Window #2 is 83 square feet. The table below shows the percent of window that would be shaded at each 15-minute interval. Time Interval December 21st Window #1 Window #2 Area Shaded (sq. ft.) Percentage Shaded Area Shaded (sq. ft.) Percentage Shaded 8:45 a.m. 0 0 % % 9:00 a.m % % 9:15 a.m % % 9:30 a.m % % 9:45 a.m. 0 0 % 0 0 % Source: Devenney Group 2 December 21 is the winter solstice and one of the four calendar dates that the City of Oakland requires in its standard shadow analysis methodology for EIRs. 3 March 21st is the spring equinox and September 21st is the fall equinox, and they are two of the four calendar dates that the City of Oakland requires in its standard shadow analysis methodology for EIRs. 3 G-5

6 As shown in Attachments D and E, as well as the table above, with the proposed project, on December 21st, Window #1 would be more than 50 percent shaded from some time between 9:00 a.m. and 9:15 a.m. until some time between 9:30 a.m. and 9:45 a.m., or for about half-an-hour. Window #2 would be 100 percent shaded from some time between 8:30 a.m. and 8:45 a.m. until some time between 9:15 a.m. and 9:30 a.m. At 9:30 a.m., Window #2 would be 96 percent shaded, and by 9:45 a.m. neither window would be shaded. Therefore, under the worst case scenario, on December 21st when the days are shortest, new shadow would cover at least some portions of these two windows from 8:45 a.m. to 9:30 a.m. The project architect also estimated that new shading of at least some (lesser) portion of these windows would occur daily during the interval from November 17th to January 23rd. 4 Impact Determination To determine whether the shadow cast by the proposed ABSMC patient care pavilion tower would result in a significant shadow impact, the City of Oakland must make a determination whether the proposed patient care pavilion crosses a City of Oakland Threshold of Significance. In other words, the City must determine whether the shadow cast by the proposed patient care pavilion would result in material impairment of the historic resource and jeopardize the church s integrity as a historical resource. According to CEQA Section , the significance of an historical resource is materially impaired when a project: (A) Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of a historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify its inclusion in, or eligibility for, inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources; or (B) Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics that account for its inclusion in a local register of historical resources pursuant to section (k) of the Public Resources Code or its identification in an historical resources survey meeting the requirements of section (g) of the Public Resources Code, unless the public agency reviewing the effects of the project establishes by a preponderance of evidence that the resource is not historically or culturally significant; or (C) Demolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of a historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify its eligibility for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources as determined by a lead agency for purposes of CEQA. As the building is considered historically significant primarily for its Beaux Arts style of architecture and its associations with architect William Newman, it is presumed that the high-ceiling auditorium (sanctuary) and the stained glass windows which illuminate this space are at least some of the physical characteristics that convey its historical significance and which justify its inclusion in the local register of historical resources [CEQA Section (B)]. 4 Personal communication, Travis Smith, Devenney Group Architects, with Brad Brewster, ESA, September 14, G-6

7 The proposed project would add new shadow to a portion of these windows on winter mornings when the day is shortest and shadows are long (December 21st), reducing the amount of available light into the sanctuary. As such, project shadows would alter some of the physical characteristics that are presumed to justify its inclusion in a local register of historical resources; the large, stained glass windows on its east-facing façade, as well as the amount of light penetrating the interior sanctuary space through these windows. Other physical characteristics which convey its historical significance and which are presumed to justify its inclusion in the local register of historical resources, including the slate roof, light cream pressed brick and terra cotta exterior walls, monumental portico, classical ornament, and other north-, south, and west-facing windows, would remain unaltered by the proposed project. While the impairment would be permanent, it would not damage or destroy an architectural feature of the historic building; a type of change that would be noticeable at all times. In this case, the impairment would occur for a relatively limited period of time during the day (from 8:45 a.m. to 9:30 a.m.), and for a limited time during the year (from November 17th to January 23rd). Also, while the project would obscure direct sunlight for a limited time during morning hours in winter, it would not prevent all light from entering the windows, because ambient light from the sky as well as light reflected from other building surfaces would continue to illuminate the window and sanctuary. As such, the impact would be much less than covering the windows or building a new structure immediately adjacent to the church. 5 Finally, according to the Church website, worship services are held on Sundays at 10:00 a.m. 6 It is assumed that the church would have the greatest number of attendees from 10:00 a.m. until the completion of worship services; the period of time considered the most sensitive for shadow effects. Since project shadows would be eliminated from the east-facing sanctuary windows by 9:45 a.m., there would be no shadow during the building s most sensitive time period, its highest period of use. It is ESA s professional opinion based on the information gathered that the proposed project would have a lessthan-significant shadow impact on the historic significance of the Parks Chapel A.M.E. Church. 5 Note that nearby existing trees on the church property already shade portions of the windows from direct sun and they also partially block ambient sky light from reaching those windows at other times of the day. Because trees are not permanent structures, this shadow impairment is not permanent, as would be the shadowing effect from the physical structure of the ABSMC Master Plan. 6 Accessed September 14, G-7

8 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK G-8

9 Attachment A Landmarks Ordinance Listing the Parks Chapel A.M.E. Church as a City of Oakland Landmark G-9

10 G-10

11 G-11

12 G-12

13 G-13

14 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK G-14

15 Attachment B DPR Forms G-15

16 G-16

17 G-17

18 G-18

19 G-19

20 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK G-20

21 Attachment C Window Photos G-21

22 G-22 Interior: Eastern Sanctuary Arched Window 1

23 G-23 Interior: Eastern Sanctuary Arched Window and Rectangular Window 2

24 G-24 Exterior: Eastern Sanctuary Arched Window from Neighboring Property 3

25 G-25 Exterior: Eastern Sanctuary Arched Window from Andover Street 4

26 G-26 Exterior: Eastern Sanctuary Rectangular Window (Eastern Classroom Window Below) 5

27 Attachment D Detailed Shadow Simulations December, March, September G-27

28 12-218:00am -Existing :00am -Future G-28

29 12-218:15am -Existing :15am -Future G-29

30 12-218:30am -Existing :30am -Future G-30

31 12-218:45am -Existing :45am -Future G-31

32 12-219:00am -Existing :00am -Future G-32

33 12-219:15am -Existing :15am -Future G-33

34 12-219:30am -Existing :30am -Future G-34

35 12-219:45am -Existing :45am -Future G-35

36 :00am -Existing :00am -Future G-36

37 3-218:00am -Existing 3-218:00am -Future G-37

38 3-218:15am -Existing 3-218:15am -Future G-38

39 3-218:30am -Existing 3-218:30am -Future G-39

40 3-218:45am -Existing 3-218:45am -Future G-40

41 3-219:00am -Existing 3-219:00am -Future G-41

42 3-219:15am -Existing 3-219:15am -Future G-42

43 3-219:30am -Existing 3-219:30am -Future G-43

44 3-219:45am -Existing 3-219:45am -Future G-44

45 3-2110:00am -Existing :00am -Future G-45

46 9-218:00am -Existing 9-218:00am -Future G-46

47 9-218:15am -Existing 9-218:15am -Future G-47

48 9-218:30am -Existing 9-218:30am -Future G-48

49 9-218:45am -Existing 9-218:45am -Future G-49

50 9-219:00am -Existing 9-219:00am -Future G-50

51 9-219:15am -Existing 9-219:15am -Future G-51

52 9-219:30am -Existing 9-219:30am -Future G-52

53 9-219:45am -Existing 9-219:45am -Future G-53

54 9-2110:00am -Existing :00am -Future G-54

55 Attachment E Calculations of Area Shaded G-55

56 :45 am - Future This graphic represents the time between December 21 st from 8:45am to 9:45am and the percentage of two sanctuary windows that are affected by the tower shadow during this time period. Window #1 (arched window) Overall window square footage = 441 sqft. 441 sqft sunlight 100% Sunlight Osqft shadow 0% shadow Window #2 (rectangular window) G-56 Overall window square footage = 83sqft. Osqft sunlight 0% Sunlight 83sqft shadow 100% shadow ([)

57 :00 am - Future This graphic represents the time between December 21 st from 8:45am to 9:45am and the percentage of two sanctuary windows that are affected by the tower shadow during this time period. Window #1 (arched window) Overall window square footage = 441 sqft. 329sqft sunlight 75% Sunlight 112sqft shadow 25% shadow Window #2 (rectangular window) G-57 Overall window square footage = 83sqft. Osqft sunlight 0% Sunlight 83sqft shadow 100% shadow ([)

58 :15 am - Future This graphic represents the time between December 21 st from 8:45am to 9:45am and the percentage of two sanctuary windows that are affected by the tower shadow during this time period. Window #1 (arched window) Overall window square footage = 441 sqft. 98sqft sunlight 23% Sunlight 343sqft shadow 77% shadow Window #2 (rectangular window) G-58 Overall window square footage = 83sqft. Osqft sunlight 0% Sunlight 100sqft shadow 100% shadow ([)

59 :30 am - Future This graphic represents the time between December 21 st from 8:45am to 9:45am and the percentage of two sanctuary windows that are affected by the tower shadow during this time period. Window #1 (arched window) Overall window square footage = 441 sqft. 124sqft sunlight 29% Sunlight 317sqft shadow 71% shadow Window #2 (rectangular window) G-59 Overall window square footage = 83sqft. 3sqft sunlight 4% Sunlight 80sqft shadow 96% shadow ([)

60 :45 am - Future This graphic represents the time between December 21 st from 8:45am to 9:45am and the percentage of two sanctuary windows that are affected by the tower shadow during this time period. Window #1 (arched window) Overall window square footage = 441 sqft. 441 sqft sunlight 100% Sunlight Osqft shadow 0% shadow Window #2 (rectangular window) G-60 Overall window square footage = 83sqft. 83sqft sunlight 100% Sunlight Osqft shadow 0% shadow ([)