Rehabilitation Plan for the Pigeon Point Lighthouse
Pescadero, California
prepared for
California State Parks Foundation
California State Parks
prepared by
Architectural Resources Group
San Francisco, California
December 2008
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1
INTRODUCTION 2
METHODOLOGY 2
PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION 3
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND 6
EXISTING CONDITIONS 8
Material Conditions: Lighthouse 10
Material Conditions: Oil House 13
REHABILITATION PLAN 17
Immediate Repairs 21
Project Element #1: Upper Lighthouse Tower 24
Project Element #2: Lower Lighthouse Tower 27
Project Element #3: Oil House 28
COST PROJECTIONS 30
PROJECT TEAM 31
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Architectural Drawings
Appendix B: Existing Condition Photographs
Appendix C: Structural Report
Appendix D: Hazardous Materials Report
Appendix E: International Chimney Report
Appendix F: Assessment of Fresnel Lens
Appendix G: 2002 Condition Assessment
Appendix H: Conceptual Cost Estimate
page i
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Built in 1871, the Pigeon Point Lighthouse is the tallest lighthouse on the West Coast. It is listed on
the National Register of Historic Places, and it is an important landmark on the coast. Now a
California State Historic Park, the Pigeon Point Lighthouse and its accompanying site were
transferred from United States Coast Guard ownership to California State Parks in 2005. The
Lighthouse was well-designed and well-maintained through much of its life, but decreased
maintenance along with the severe coastal environment has caused an accelerating deterioration of the
cast iron elements of its upper structure. Currently cast iron feature failure and the resulting water
intrusion into the building are causing it to be structurally unsound. Recent installations of tension
cables around the cast iron brackets and belt courses are not adequate to stabilize conditions.
Due to the complex composite iron and masonry construction system at the top of the Lighthouse,
there are no simple interim measures available to stabilize the structure. A comprehensive
rehabilitation of the building is recommended. This rehabilitation will include the dismantling,
inspection and restoration or replacement of most of the cast iron elements of the upper tower. The
rehabilitation process will also repair and conserve the masonry and curtain wall elements of the
tower and provide additional seismic reinforcing to the upper tower, the lower tower and the Oil
House.
Although the lower tower and the Oil House are in much better condition, the project would be
accomplished most efficiently and cost-effectively if all of the project elements occur at the same
time. All work will be detailed to meet the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation.
The resulting structure will be in maintainable condition, and with a well-conceived program of
cyclical maintenance should last another 100 years.
Conceptual cost estimates for the rehabilitation of the Lighthouse and Oil House have been
developed. Including construction costs, architect and engineering fees and other soft costs, and
California State Parks overhead and management costs, the conceptual budget for the project is
7.6 million in current dollars.
page 1
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
INTRODUCTION
Architectural Resources Group has been tasked by the California State Parks Foundation to develop a
Rehabilitation Plan for the Pigeon Point Lighthouse and Oil House. The building has been closed to
the public since the end of 2001, when two sections of the cast iron belt course near the top of the
tower failed. In 2005, California State Parks took control of the Light Station from the United States
Coast Guard (USCG) and continues to manage the site as one of California’s State Historic Parks.
The Lighthouse and Oil House remain closed to the public however, due to structural concerns for the
building. This Rehabilitation Plan will serve to provide an understanding of the scope of the work
and budget that is necessary for the building to be restored to a structurally sound and maintainable
condition.
METHODOLOGY
Archival Research
Prior to fieldwork, research was conducted to locate historic documents, drawings, and photographs
of the Light Station. Materials were obtained from the following repositories and organizations: the
Historic American Building Survey (HABS); the National Archives and Records Administration
(NARA), Pacific Region; and California State Parks. In addition, International Chimney Corporation
(ICC) provided their Condition Assessment report from 2002 and historic drawings of the Lighthouse
that had been collected at that time. Compiling these resources aids in understanding the significance
of the Light Station and its associated structures. The archival materials also help to establish the
configuration and appearance of the buildings over time, providing a context for preservation
planning efforts.
Conditions Survey
A visual survey of the Lighthouse and Oil House was carried out to identify building materials and
various conditions affecting the structures, for the purpose of prioritizing emergency repairs and
future rehabilitation work. Historic drawings from HABS and ICC were printed, and locations of
deterioration such as cracks, efflorescence and rust staining were marked on the drawings. The
exterior survey was mainly conducted from the ground aided by binoculars, but a scaffold and safety
lines rigged by ICC allowed for close-up inspection of the belt course and brackets as well as the
Gallery Deck. All of the rooms of the Oil House and Lighthouse interior were accessible for survey;
the Oil House attic space received a brief visual inspection from a ladder placed in the hall. An
independent inspection by engineers from Kellco-Macs was conducted to locate and document
hazardous materials in or around the building (see Appendix D for Hazardous Materials report).
page 2
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
PHYSICAL DESCRIPTION
Site
The Pigeon Point Light Station is located 20 miles south of Half Moon Bay along State Route 1. It
occupies a rocky point of land approximately 50 feet above sea level. This report is limited to the
Lighthouse and Oil House, but several other buildings are also part of the Light Station site. The
Lighthouse sits in the southern part of the site with the Fog Signal Building and Carpenter’s Shop to
the west. An oil bunker, now used for interpretative purposes, is located to the east. The four
buildings that are the former keepers’ residence occupy the area to the north and northeast of the
Lighthouse and are now used as a hostel. A small gravel parking lot for the site is located between
the hostel buildings and the road.
Lighthouse
At 115 feet, the Pigeon Point Lighthouse is the tallest lighthouse on the West Coast and one of the
tallest in the country. Battered brick walls rise in a cylinder from an octagonal brick base that
features two cast iron belt courses (see Figure 1 for identification of building elements). The main
body of the tower is simply ornamented with three windows openings that feature carved granite
surrounds. Approximately 80 feet from the ground, another cast iron belt course marks the beginning
of a composite structural system that combines masonry walls and an iron frame formed with cast
iron elements at the Service Room and Watch Room levels. At the Service Room level, decorative
cast iron brackets support the Gallery Deck above. At the Lantern Room level, the first-order Fresnel
lens is enclosed by a glass curtain wall system and surmounted by a copper roof. A narrow deck
circumscribes the tower at Lantern Room level as well.
The interior of the main section of the Lighthouse is simple, with painted exposed brick walls, an iron
spiral stair that wraps to semi-circular landings and periodic window openings. The Watch Room is
dominated by the base of the Fresnel lens above. It is also differentiated from the tower below by
painted metal-clad wall surfaces at the exterior and a portion of the interior. An iron door at this level
leads out to the Gallery Deck, and a short interior stair leads to the Lantern Room and Deck located at
the top of the tower. One of the windows in the curtain wall of the Lantern Room provides access to
the automated beacon and the expanded deck area installed to support it.
Oil House
The Oil House is a modest one-story brick building with a gable roof. The main façade of the
building features a granite entry stair with a gabled pediment above. The eaves of the gable roof are
supported with decorative wood brackets. The building contains two rooms on either side of a central
hallway that provides the entrance to the Lighthouse tower (see Figure 2 for the ground floor building
plan). Windows in the Oil House are located on the north and south elevations, with two windows
lighting each room, and one on either side of the hallway leading to the tower. The southern room
was a Work Room for the lighthouse keeper, and it currently contains modest interpretive exhibits
about the Lighthouse. The northern room was the Oil Room, but most of the original architectural
features in the room have been removed in order to accommodate navigational equipment belonging
to the USCG. Both rooms retain their brick fireplaces with marble mantels.
page 3
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
page 4
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
page 5
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
The Pigeon Point Lighthouse was constructed in 1871-72 using a design that was similar to the Cape
Hatteras Lighthouse and several others that were built around the same time. Pigeon Point is named
after the clipper ship, the Carrier Pigeon, which wrecked there in 1853. The Lighthouse has been in
operation since November 15, 1872. The Lantern Room contains a first-order Fresnel lens that was
installed when the Lighthouse was built. It was originally lit by lard oil and later by other fuels, but it
was finally converted to an electric light source in 1926. The Fresnel lens and associated lamp are
still operational, but they are only used for ceremonial purposes once a year. Under USCG control,
the Light Station was continually upgraded, and several rehabilitation campaigns have occurred at the
Lighthouse more recently. A. summary of the building chronology is included for reference below.
1870 Purchase of 19.5 acres by the U.S. Government, including 1.5 acres at Pigeon Point
for the Pigeon Light Station.
1871-1872 Construction of the Pigeon Point Light Station, including the Lighthouse and Oil
House and original Keepers’ Residence.
1926 Electrification of the lens in the Lighthouse.
1939 Control of Light Station transferred from United States Lighthouse Board to USCG.
1962 Demolition of the original Keepers’ Residence.
Construction of new Keepers’ Residences (now used as a Hostel).
1965-1968 Installation of drive shaft at main light.
1967 Installation of new Fog Signal and 375mm Lantern (both later removed) and
associated modifications for equipment and ventilation.
1971-1973 Installation of steel reinforcing cables at the Gallery Deck bracket level.
Installation of cantilever platform at Lantern level and automated 24-inch aero
beacon and 300mm emergency lantern.
Removal of original railings and installation of replacement railings at Gallery and
Lantern levels.
Installation of wire mesh screens at the Oil House.
1974 Documentation of the Lighthouse by the Historic American Building Survey.
1977 Lighthouse listed on the National Register of Historic Places.
1981 Rehabilitation campaign including installation of new asphalt roof, new shutters, new
screens and a new door at the entrance to the Oil House.
Replacement of the cornice at Lantern roof with steel, repair of cracked and spalled
brick masonry at Service Room level.
page 6
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
1988 Installation of halon fire suppression system in Oil Room.
1991 Abatement of asbestos.
1992-1994 Rehabilitation campaign including installation of structural steel bracing at Gallery
level, including a circumferential steel tube ring under the Gallery Deck
Installation of stainless steel decking at Galley Deck.
Replacement of light fixtures at Oil House.
Installation of resilient flooring and new casework in Work Room.
2001 Failure of two sections of cast iron belt course at the base of the brackets supporting
the Gallery Deck. The building is closed to the public.
2002 Inspection by ICC and installation of temporary cables above and below the upper
belt course with additional vertical cables adjacent to the sections that fell from the
building.
2005 Control of Light Station transferred from the U.S. Coast Guard to California State
Parks.
2008 Many of the windows replaced in kind by California State Parks.
2008 Inspection by ARG, Degenkolb Engineers, Kellco-Macs, ICC and Fresnel lens
specialist James Dunlap.
Installation of additional cables at the upper belt course by ICC.
page 7
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
EXISTING CONDITIONS
This section summarizes the description and existing conditions of the materials and features of the
Lighthouse and Oil House. In addition to this architectural evaluation, a structural assessment and a
hazardous materials survey were included as part of this project. The structural report by Degenkolb
Engineers is included in Appendix C, and the Hazardous Materials report by Kellco-Macs Services
comprises Appendix D. In addition, the recommendations of the lighthouse preservation specialist
International Chimney Corporation (ICC) can be found in Appendix E and the assessment of the
Fresnel lens by James Dunlap is included in Appendix F. In 2002, ICC performed a conditions
assessment after the failure of the upper belt course. ICC’s 2002 report is included for reference
purposes in Appendix G. The findings and recommendations of these reports are integrated into the
rehabilitation plan which follows this section.
A description of the Pigeon Point Lighthouse can be broken down into three main areas: the
foundation, the body of the tower, and the rooms associated with the lantern at the top of the tower.
The building sits on an octagonal foundation of brick and concrete that in turn rests on bedrock. This
massive solid masonry foundation transitions to a cylindrical tower through the use of a cast iron belt
course at the first floor level of the building. The tapered brick walls of the body of the tower are also
massive, but they are constructed with a cavity space that provides insulative properties and
additional protection against water infiltration. The upper floors of the Lighthouse above the fifth
landing level are constructed with a composite iron frame with masonry infill (see Figure 3 on the
following page for original construction detail).
The solid foundation and masonry walls are in overall good condition, but the cast iron elements have
suffered greatly from the extreme marine environment, as indicated by the extensive corrosion of the
metal elements and the spalling of brick in the vicinity of the corroded cast iron belt courses. The
majority of the tower is in relatively good condition, but the upper levels (at the upper belt course and
above) are in critical condition. The rehabilitation needs in this area are urgent.
The Oil House is a simple one-story, gable-roofed brick building located adjacent to the tower. With
the exception of the extreme marine environment and seismic considerations for the structure, the
rehabilitation needs of the Oil House are relatively simple. The foundation of the building is brick,
and the floor and roof framing is wood. These materials are in good condition where the protective
coatings have been maintained. Where water has gotten into the walls or roofing materials,
efflorescence, rotted wood or corrosion of metal elements has been the result. The interior finish
materials have deteriorated through heavy use over time, and some have been replaced with more
recent materials.
page 8
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
page 9
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
MATERIAL CONDITIONS: LIGHTHOUSE
The following section evaluates the conditions of each material in the Lighthouse. For additional
information, annotated photographs of the existing conditions are located in Appendix B.
Masonry
Brick
The walls of the Lighthouse are constructed of fired red bricks laid in Portland cement mortar. The
tower walls are thickest at the base and taper towards the top of the structure. The brickwork
incorporates a cavity to provide insulation and to slow water penetration. Generally, the brick is in
good condition; deterioration is associated with structural metal failures in the iron belt course,
brackets, and base, the most visible sign being rust staining at these areas. Horizontal and vertical
cracks in the brickwork at the top of the tower may be attributed to stresses related to the ongoing
corrosion and expansion of iron elements and resulting failure of the sections of the belt course. The
resulting water penetration is causing widespread paint failure and salt crystallization on the interior.
At the octagonal tower base, differential loading of the masonry is manifesting as diagonal cracks at
the corners adjacent to the rusting iron. The brickwork has a thick coating of multiple finishes
applied over the lifetime of the structure. These coatings probably include whitewash and lead-
containing paints, the accumulation of which has impeded the evaporation of intruding moisture.
Granite
Window sills and ornamental window surrounds are executed in carved granite. Generally these
features are in good condition, with the exception of the southwest window header that was struck by
the falling piece of iron belt course in 2001. As a result, one corner of this header has broken off; it is
currently stored inside the Oil House.
Concrete
Concrete was used at the foundation to level areas of bedrock and build up the grade at the octagonal
base. Concrete visible at the base is weathered and eroded, with a few areas of cracking. Concrete
poured over the original clay tile floor surface of the tower appears to be in good condition, though
the paint covering it shows some wear.
Metals
Iron
Cast and wrought iron elements of the Lighthouse include the belt courses, the Gallery Deck brackets
and framing, the Lantern Deck and Gallery Deck railings, the roofing and framing elements of the
Lantern, sheet iron walls of the Gallery, window frames in the Service Room, the door to the Gallery
Deck, spiral stairway carriers, stringers, rails and newels, and the two belt courses of the octagonal
base. All the exterior iron is corroding to differing degrees, despite frequent applications of paint.
page 10
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
The detachment and loss of two fragments of the belt course at the southwest quadrant occurred at the
end of a wide, longitudinal crack on the apron spanning between brackets 10 and 12 (see plan
below). Sections of the belt course to either side of this loss are detached and in danger of falling.
The brackets and the belt course are in generally poor condition, with corrosion causing failures due
to rust-jacking (the process of extreme volume expansion of iron as it corrodes). Brackets at the north
quadrant are also cracked and deformed at the top portion. A fragment of the original Gallery Deck at
the south quadrant has detached and should be removed as a safeguard. Painted surfaces adjacent to
the belt course and brackets exhibit extensive rust staining. The paint covering the iron is
compromised by pinhole corrosion and biological growth.
Figure 4: Fifth Landing Floor Plan
Iron wall and roof framing in the Lantern Room, including posts, struts, rafters, cornice, and the
crown piece, are painted. Most elements are in fair condition with moderate corrosion, but fasteners
are corroded where they are in contact with bronze sashes. Rusting and expansion of an iron post in
the northeast quadrant is the probable cause of glass breakage there.
Interior iron beams, deck plates and stair carriers are generally in good condition, but some rusting is
occurring at fastening bolts. The stairway treads and landings are in good condition, with only minor
corrosion where paint is worn away from foot traffic. Exterior structural elements and railings of the
Gallery and Lantern Decks are moderately to severely corroded.
The iron door jamb leading from the Watch Room to the Gallery Deck is corroding. The plate iron
door leading to the Gallery Deck is corroding at the base and where a vertical strap is detached on the
interior. The lower hinge pin is broken.
Iron windows above the Fifth Landing are corroding from water intrusion, and the sill on the north
quadrant has a diagonal crack where a corner is detaching.
At the octagonal base, the iron belt courses is cracked, jacking, and detaching. The upper of the two
belt courses is cracked and broken where it was struck by falling belt course fragments. Paint is
weathered and peeling.
page 11
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Steel
Exterior steel radial and ring support beams added under the Gallery Deck in 1992 exhibit moderate
to severe corrosion. The replacement steel decking at the Gallery and Lantern Decks is also
moderately corroded.
Bronze
Bronze window sashes and floor grates at the Lantern Room show moderate corrosion where paint
layers have weathered or worn away. Bronze door hardware is in good condition. The Gallery Deck
door handle is lightly corroded but operable.
Brass
Brass hardware on replacement windows is in good condition. The brass fittings of the Fresnel lens
also appear to be in good condition.
Copper
The roof of the Lantern Room is covered in sheet copper. The ventilation ball is also copper, attached
to which is a bronze pinnacle with a platinum point. The exterior of the copper roof was not visually
accessible, but paint is peeling from the underside. No corrosion staining was visible on adjacent
materials, indicating that the roof is sound. However, the copper roofing and ventilator should be
closely inspected when access permits.
Wood
Painted wood elements include original as well as replacement window sashes, window frames and
sills, in addition to two doors at the Gallery. Storage features in the Gallery include a stained built-in
desk, a painted floor cupboard, and a small painted shelf, all in good condition.
Three recently replaced casement window sashes and transoms on the East and West Elevations are in
good condition. Paint on these jambs and sills is in fair condition, with the sill between the Third and
Fourth Landing exhibiting “alligatoring” deterioration as a result of paint build-up. A repair on the
East Elevation sill, carried out in painter’s putty, is unpainted.
At the Fifth Landing, four original wood sashes are situated in the window openings between
Brackets 1 and 16 (north), 4 and 5 (east), 8 and 9 (south), and 12 and 13 (west). A sheet of Plexiglas
covers the south window at the interior.
Glass
With the exception of the broken pane at the northeast quadrant, the windows of the Lantern Room
are intact and in good condition. The circular ports in the Lantern Room floor originally held
prismatic glass lights, but these have been filled with steel elements. The glass lenses in the Fresnel
lens appear to be in good condition, with limited chips at the edge of some of the lenses. The putty
holding the lenses in place should be investigated however, since its age put the material near the end
of its useful life (see Appendix F for lens assessment).
page 12
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
MATERIAL CONDITIONS: OIL HOUSE
The following section assesses the conditions of each material in the Oil House. For additional
information, annotated photographs of the existing conditions can be found in Appendix B.
Masonry
Brick
The walls of the Oil House are constructed of fired red brick laid in Portland cement mortar. The
brickwork is constructed in two withes with an inner cavity. Two brick chimneys are at the north and
south ends of the building in the Oil Room and Work Room, respectively.
Generally, the brick masonry is in good condition, with moderate moisture damage in the form of
paint failure and efflorescence (salt crystallization) at window openings. Many of these issues may
have been resolved with the recent replacement of windows. Efflorescence is more severe on the
north interior wall of the Oil Room and indicates possible roof leaks. Similar waterproofing problems
are evident in the hall between the Oil House and the Lighthouse, where step cracking and
efflorescence are visible on the walls near the top and bottom of the stairs. Horizontal cracking in the
interior brickwork of the east walls indicates building movement or settling but may also be resulting
from the corrosion and expansion of iron anchors connecting the masonry walls to the roof joists.
Granite
Carved granite features include exterior window and door surrounds, chimney caps, a keystone above
the door carved with the construction date, a rectangular pillar site marker (possibly moved from its
original location), and the treads and cheek walls of the front steps. Painted window, door, and
chimney elements are in good condition, though the paint on the chimney caps is worn. Moderate
soiling and biological growth are evident on the unpainted features.
Concrete
The stairs leading to the Lighthouse are concrete. Paint on the treads and risers is worn from foot
traffic, but the steps are in good condition. Concrete at the grade level is weathered and eroded, with
no major cracking visible. A sidewalk leading from the granite steps is in good condition.
Clay Tile
Clay tile pavers cover the floor in the hall leading to the Lighthouse. Paint covering the tiles is worn
from foot traffic, but the pavers are generally in good condition with only isolated areas of previous
repairs executed in concrete.
Marble
Fireplace mantel shelves in the Oil Room and Work Room are white marble. The marble appears to
have been treated with a wax or oil that has darkened the stone, but otherwise it is in fair condition
with moderate scuffing.
page 13
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Metals
Iron
Iron is used for door jambs and hardware as well as a conduit on the north side of the building.
Hidden iron elements identified in the original drawings include three-foot long spear anchors tying
the brick walls to the roof joists at four foot intervals, in addition to door threshold saddles.
Hinges on the door between the Oil House and the Lighthouse are severely corroded. The cast iron
frame of the front door is heavily corroded, as are the hinges. On the exterior, iron fasteners behind
replacement shutters and on carved wood brackets and trim are corroding. The painted conduit is
corroding at the pipe joints.
Steel
Fasteners for the most recent roof covering are probably galvanized steel nails. These fasteners are
corroding where they protrude from wood eaves and where they are exposed by failing asphalt
shingles.
Bronze
Two bronze plaques commemorating the Light Station’s status as a California Historical and Civil
Engineering Landmark are hung on the exterior to either side of the entrance. These plaques are
corroded and lightly soiled. The plaque on the north side has a large gap between it and the wall.
Brass
Brass window and door hardware on the interior is tarnished, but in good condition. Fasteners
connecting the replacement shutters to the walls are probably brass and appear to be in good
condition beneath the paint layer.
Copper
Copper flashing is installed at the eaves and gables, chimney penetrations, and at the connection to
the Lighthouse. Originally, lead flashing was used at these locations. At the south chimney, flashing
on the east side is detached and lifting. Ferrous fasteners on both chimney flashings are corroding.
Wood
Painted wood elements in the Oil House include original as well as replacement window sashes,
window frames and sills, in addition to both interior and exterior doors, interior and exterior trim, and
ceiling boards in all three rooms. The three windows on the south side of the Oil House were
replaced in kind in 2008 and are in good condition. The three windows on the north side of the
building were not replaced this year as they are in good condition, indicating that they may have been
replaced in the past.
Exterior woodwork, including eave brackets, trim and exposed sheathing, is in fair condition. A small
amount of the trim is missing, although the missing bracket was located within the Oil House. The
wood shutters appear to have been replaced with slightly larger shutters than were originally installed.
One of what appears to be an original shutter is also stored in the Oil House. Some of the wood trim
around the entrance door is also missing, and the door itself is in fair condition.
page 14
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Interior woodwork, including doors, ceiling boards, and wall trim, is typically in good condition.
The unpainted wood framing at the floor and roof appears to be in fairly good condition, although
some dry rot is to be expected.
Glass
Glass panes in windows, doors, and transoms are in good condition with the exception of one transom
panel that was removed completely to allow pipes to pass through the window frame.
Roof and Floor Coverings
Asphalt
The Oil House roof is covered with plywood sheathing, tar paper, and asphalt shingles. Shingles have
blown off all sections of the roof, and torn tar paper exposes plywood sheathing on the north side of
the building adjacent to the Lighthouse.
Vinyl Tile
The wood floorboards in the Work Room are covered in square vinyl tile units laid over fiberboard.
The tiles are in fair condition overall, but several are cracked or missing near the southwest corner of
the room. Both the tile and mastic were confirmed to contain asbestos (see Appendix E for
Hazardous Materials report).
Rubber
Wood floorboards in the Oil Room are covered with rubber sheet flooring textured to resemble
diamond plate. The flooring is obscured by equipment and furnishings, but appears to be in good
condition.
page 15
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
page 16
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
REHABILITATION PLAN
As described in the previous section and in the supporting documents, the top levels of the Lighthouse
are in poor condition due to the extensive corrosion of the cast iron structural elements. Without
intervention, this corrosion will continue to accelerate cracking in the masonry, increased water
intrusion into the building, and ultimately structural instability of the Lighthouse. The steel tube
structural elements installed below the Watch Room and Main Gallery circa 1992 are themselves
corroding and have also caused significant failures at the cast iron brackets. In any event, the steel
tube intervention is not a comprehensive solution to the long-term preservation of the Lighthouse.
Cables installed in 2002 and 2008 serve the purpose of holding corroded members on the building,
but they do not add any structural capacity.
Early discussions for this project suggested that there would be need to be a long-term restoration
plan and an interim stabilization campaign developed. The idea of this approach would be to
stabilize and preserve the building while funds are being raised for the more extensive restoration of
the building and site. The challenge of doing a stabilization plan is how to limit the work only to that
which is needed and to detail it in conjunction with the overall plan in order to avoid repeat work.
However, based on our findings of conditions on site, on the complex composite nature of the cast
iron elements embedded in the masonry, on the challenging work environment, and on the
significance of the building, we do not believe that a short-term repair campaign would be a useful
approach. Our recommendation is to approach the rehabilitation project comprehensively from the
outset, developing a single repair/rehabilitation strategy with a maximum life and limited (although
regular) maintenance requirements. This “do it once” approach will be by far the most cost effective
and will focus the urgency of the problem into one cycle of fund-raising. The elements of this
approach are outlined below and in the supporting structural and lighthouse engineering consultant
reports (see Appendices C and E).
We recognize that the comprehensive rehabilitation project may not happen immediately however,
due to financial considerations. In the interim, we recommend making limited critical repairs to
reduce further deterioration of the building before the full project begins. These immediate repair
measures are covered in more detail later in this chapter.
The comprehensive rehabilitation of most of the Lighthouse and Oil House are fairly straightforward
and are outlined later in this report. The repair and structural strengthening of the upper levels of the
Lighthouse are more complex and involve an interaction of structural strengthening detailing
requirements, considerations for the treatment of historic materials, construction methodology, and
long term maintenance considerations. The following is a brief discussion of these issues.
Structural Design
The extensive corrosion of the cast iron structural elements including the belt course tension ring at
the fifth landing level, the sixteen cast iron brackets supporting the Main Gallery, and the connections
between the lantern structure and the top of the masonry walls at the Watch Room level have resulted
in a significant loss of structural capacity at the top of the tower. The steel tube beams and ring beam
page 17
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
installed in 1992 below the Watch Room level provided support for the failing cast iron brackets but
did not enhance the overall structural system and appear to be causing reverse deflection in the
original beams.
In order to replace the tensile capacity lost by the corrosion of the cast iron ring beams, to improve
the seismic performance of the tower, and to reestablish the connections throughout the upper levels
of the structure, three new ring beams with associated connections are proposed for the structure:
At the 5th landing level, the cast iron belt course would be removed and replaced with a
reinforced concrete bond beam inserted in the existing masonry. The exterior of the bond
beam would be clad with new cast iron finish elements that match the appearance of the
original elements but which have been detailed and constructed with space to
accommodate small amounts of corrosion without causing a catastrophic failure and
would no longer serve an essential structural function.
At the Main Gallery level (at the top of the existing brackets), a continuous tension ring
would be installed. This new structural element will augment the original cast iron
members connecting the top of the sixteen cantilevered cast iron brackets. This ring
beam would be constructed of stainless steel, and the exact detailing will require further
study. It will serve both as a tension ring and as a support for new outriggers supporting
the Main Gallery deck. The original cast iron brackets will be removed and replaced with
composite brackets to match the original. The replacement brackets could either be
designed to support the main gallery deck or be detailed as non-structural elements. As
part of the work at this level, new support for the interior steel beams below the Watch
Room level will be provided. These new supports can be either exposed on the inside
surface of the wall or concealed within the wall.
At the Lantern level, at the top of the masonry wall another tension ring is recommended,
to provide further wall stability and to enhance the connections to the upper lantern
structure. This structural element would be either a reinforced concrete bond beam
pocketed into the masonry or a stainless steel structural ring beam applied to the exterior.
This detail will also require further study.
These interventions have been developed with the philosophy of enhancing the original structural
concepts and features of the original building. They would be designed and installed in concert with
a program of replacing the corroded existing materials in kind.
In addition to these primary structural interventions, improved connection of the lens assembly to the
existing steel structure may be necessary. A more comprehensive evaluation of the existing
connections can only be made when the lens and pedestal covers are removed or if detailed drawings
of the connections are found which describe the connection.
page 18
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Treatment of Historic Materials
The overall guideline for the treatment of historic materials will be the Secretary of the Interior’s
Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. These standards require that historic materials be
repaired in place rather than replaced. If replacement is necessary, the replacement elements should
match the original in all respects. While this standard is completely applicable to the overall project,
at the top of the Lighthouse, due to the severe environment, difficult working access, and future
maintenance challenges, it may be necessary to consider more replacement of cast iron elements than
on a more straightforward project. Inspection of the cast iron brackets, for example, suggests that
approximately 25% of them are not yet so corroded that replacement is the only option. However, if
a percentage are conserved in place, a different, more frequent, maintenance cycle will be required
which considering the access challenges will be very difficult. Thus, in this case, a more
comprehensive replacement of the brackets may be justified.
This consideration applies to all of the cast iron elements at the top of the Lighthouse. We
recommend a more comprehensive replacement in kind for the belt course, railings, decks and
brackets using new cast iron elements or stainless steel coated to match the appearance of the original
iron.
Construction Methodology
The structural work proposed for the top of the Lighthouse will be challenging in terms of
construction logistics. Removal of the belt course and the outrigger brackets will require removal and
reconstruction of the masonry walls, and installation of the new ring beams will entail a similar
reworking of the entire masonry perimeter wall. This work can be done in one of two methods:
a) Removal of the Lantern: This method would shore and protect the upper lantern
structure, then remove it in one piece to a safe storage location on the ground, this would
then allow for complete access to the upper walls for disassembly, installation of the new
structural and architectural elements, and restoration of the upper walls and galleries.
The lantern would be restored on the ground then craned back into place. This may be
the most efficient method. It has the added advantage of being able to restore the roof
and glazing of the lantern in more convenient working conditions.
b) Work with the Lantern in place: This method would involve removal and replacement of
the brackets and installation of the ring beams in an incremental manner, while providing
temporary moveable shoring to support the lantern above while the bracket is removed.
This process will be slower to execute and will probably be more expensive. It will be
more complex in terms of shoring and working conditions and could endanger the
stability of the Fresnel lens.
In both approaches, the Fresnel lens will need to be protected. Our recommendation is that it be
removed and stored securely off-site during the construction process. Though the Fresnel lens
appears to be in relatively good condition, its location in the structurally vulnerable Lighthouse
jeopardizes its integrity. Further deterioration of the iron belt course and brackets could destabilize
structural beams that support the base and lens, potentially resulting in severe damage or destruction
page 19
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
of these components. Furthermore, structural analysis indicates the need to improve the connection
of the lens base to the structure. To protect the lens, it is recommended that it be disassembled and
temporarily removed from the Lighthouse until the iron and masonry supporting the Gallery and
Lantern are repaired.
Removal of the Fresnel lens should be undertaken with the stated goal of conserving it and returning
it to the lantern room. Removal presents an opportunity to conduct a detailed assessment of the lens,
and would facilitate maintenance and conservation treatments. The conservation of the lens could be
a stand-alone project that resonates with the local community, potentially attracting private donors.
The scope of the conservation work should include the reinstatement of the lens in the Lighthouse.
The light at Pigeon Point is one of a shrinking number of First Order Fresnel lenses that remains in its
original position, as opposed to being installed in a museum as an exhibit. If the lens were to be
permanently removed, the historical and engineering significance of the Pigeon Point Light Station
would be greatly diminished. Community support of the Light Station, enhanced by a yearly lighting
ceremony attended by thousands, would also be weakened.
Maintenance Considerations
The Lighthouse will have significant on-going maintenance needs regardless of the exact approach to
its preservation. The preservation plan needs to consider materials and methods that will minimize
the extent of maintenance required. In addition, in the course of detailing the rehabilitation work
providing improved access, establishing processes for future exterior repairs and inspections, and
creating a cyclical maintenance plan should all be part of the work. California State Parks should
consider establishing an endowment or some form of maintenance funding which is not subject to
fluctuations in State Parks funding and which can assure that the on-going maintenance needs of the
building are addressed consistently. On-going maintenance is the cheapest and best type of
preservation.
Recommended maintenance includes the following regularly scheduled items:
Visual inspection of building materials for evidence of deterioration (annually)
Comprehensive inspection of building materials (every 3-5 years)
Repainting of exterior iron elements (every 2-3 years)
Repainting of masonry exterior (every 5 years)
Repainting of wood windows (every 2-3 years)
Repainting of interior surfaces (every 10 years)
Masonry repairs and repointing (as necessary based on inspection reports)
page 20
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Rehabilitation Scope of Work
The following pages outline the scope of work for rehabilitation of the Lighthouse, comprised of
three project elements: the rehabilitation of the Upper Lighthouse Tower, the rehabilitation of the
Lower Lighthouse Tower, and the rehabilitation of the Oil House. The three project elements would
be most efficiently and cost-effectively accomplished concurrently, but it could be possible to split
the project into three discrete phases based on the project elements. If the full rehabilitation plan will
not occur in the very near future, we recommend that the following immediate repairs be
implemented as soon as possible.
PROJECT ELEMENT #1: Removal of Fresnel Lens and Interim Stabilization
Stabilize, remove and securely store Fresnel lens.
Repair work at Lantern:
o Disassemble bay of Lantern curtain wall where window cracked.
o At cracked window, remove and reset: glazing bars, receiver bars and glass to bare
stile; restore stile, isolate and reassemble with new glass.
o Cut out existing exterior sealant (without disassembly of curtain wall) from
remainder of exterior of Lantern curtain wall and install new sealant.
Repair work at Gallery brackets and belt course:
o After testing pressure levels, pressure wash Gallery brackets using minimum
pressure. Spot wire brush. Apply rust converter to all exposed and rusting metal and
cable at that elevation.
o Install sealants/backer rod/spray foam insulation at open cracks/gaps around
gallery bracket members.
o Install blockade at Gallery door to prevent opening into missing deck plates.
o Install cement wash over exposed masonry at missing belt course segments.
o Lightly wire brush, clean and apply sealant to all remaining cracks in the upper belt
course.
o Install debris netting around belt course for full circumference.
Repair work at lower belt courses:
o Using minimum pressure, pressure wash and lightly wire brush lower belt courses.
o Apply rust converter to lower belt courses.
o Apply sealant at all gaps at lower belt courses.
o Install bond breaker (poly plastic) into bottom of broken area (hole) at upper belt
course segment. Apply mortar wash over the level of the broken cast iron.
page 21
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
page 22
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
PROJECT ELEMENT #2: Rehabilitation of the Upper Lighthouse Tower
(upper levels, 5th landing and above)
Selective demolition scope and sequence:
Evaluate the condition of the Fresnel lens for disassembly and remove lens assembly, if this
has not already occurred
Investigative demolition at Gallery level:
o Match mark all fabric to be removed
o Remove all loose portions of belt course
o Temporarily stabilize existing wall plates and brackets with additional
cabling/bracing
o Remove steel ring tube and cut off ends of radial tube beams at wall for use as
temporary support during investigation
o Remove one of the windows and surrounding brick at Service Room level in order to
investigate the condition of imbedded ironwork associated with brackets (base bid
assumes that extensive failure at window cheek wall and tie-rods is found, see
alternate for less extensive failure)
o Remove brickwork on opposite side of same bracket to investigate tie-rod connection
Remove auxiliary beacon from Lantern level and turn over to USCG
o Coordinate beacon substitute or temporary outage with USCG for duration of
construction
Remove and dispose of deck extension and support for auxiliary beacon at Lantern level
Field measure, document and match mark all Lantern components prior to removal
Remove and salvage vent ball from top of roof
Remove and salvage roof system from top of Lantern by crane
Match mark and disassemble Lantern curtain wall and salvage all elements for reinstallation
Remove exterior Lantern Deck and replacement railings:
o Field measure, document and match mark all deck components prior to removal
o Separate exterior Lantern Deck from interior deck at curtain wall
o Remove exterior Lantern Deck and salvage for use in replicating new decking to
match
o Remove and salvage interior deck for reinstallation
o Dispose of railings & non-historic rain hood at cornice
Remove stairs at Lantern and Gallery levels and salvage for reinstallation
Remove exterior cast iron wall plates at Gallery level, salvage interior wall plates for
reinstallation
Selective demolition at Gallery level:
o Remove non-historic diamond plate decking and replacement railings
o Salvage original decking for use in replicating new decking to match
o Remove and dispose of steel tube assembly
o Match mark and disassemble wall lintel plates for potential salvage or pattern.
o Field measure, match-mark brackets and remove for repair/replacement
page 23
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
o Remove and dispose of belt course (salvage one sections for use in replicating new
pieces to match)
o Match mark, dismantle and salvage Service Room windows & components.
o Dismantle brick and iron wall down to belt course, salvage brick as possible for
reinstallation
o Remove back-up brick as needed to install reinforced concrete beam
Reinstallation scope and sequence:
Belt course:
o Install new concrete ring beam at level of belt course (incorporate support for bracket
foot into pour)
o Install new cast iron belt course with expansion detail to allow for some corrosion
without failure of the ring. (Alternate: form & pour shape with a castable concrete
or set precast concrete shapes with profile to match existing)
Brackets:
o Repair/replace brackets:
Fabricate new interior flange made of stainless steel for all brackets
Bolt original exterior portion of bracket to new interior flange
o Cast new brackets to match for those too deteriorated to retain (assume 2 brackets to
be recast, to be verified in field)
o Reinstall repaired/replaced brackets with new stainless steel tie-rods and fasteners to
match existing (existing 6’ and 8’ vertical bolts to remain in wall if possible)
o Rebuild all cylinder hardware in kind including acorn nuts and connecting rods.
Cast and install new deck (including cornice to mach original molding) and railings at
Gallery level to match original
Reinstall rebuilt Service Room windows.
Rebuild masonry infill wall at Gallery and Service Room levels
o Install composite stainless steel ring beam at top of Service Room wall
o Install reinforced concrete ring beam at the top of the Watch Room wall per
structural report
Replace the exterior wall plates at Gallery level with stainless steel plates and paint to match
original in appearance
Reinstall repaired interior wall plates at Gallery level
Reinstall cast iron stairs from Gallery level up to Lantern
o Sandblast, prime and repaint stair system before reinstallation
o Install new Lantern Deck to match existing. (Alternate: cast new exterior decking to
match original, reinstall original interior decking with splice plate connection to
exterior deck)
o Install new railings at Lantern level to match original
Reinstall curtain wall:
o Chemically strip paint from all bronze elements
o Replace ferrous mullion fasteners with heavy duty stainless steel fasteners and Teflon
washers or tape for isolation where iron stiles come in contact with bronze mullions
page 24
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
o Install all new nominal 1/4” laminated safety glazing with neoprene setting blocks
and layers of structural grade sealant
o Replace ferrous lintel at top of curtain wall with stainless steel to match, isolate iron
roof structure from top of curtain wall with Teflon
Prep and repaint metal roof system, including repaired vent ball
o Reinstall roof system by crane
o Replace/repair iron ladder rods and brackets at exterior of Lantern cornice in kind
Install new railings at Lantern level to match original
o Coordinate installation of new smaller beacon at railing with USCG
Reinstall lens pedestal, chariot wheel drive and Fresnel lens
Repair and tension Spiral Staircase system and prepare for painting.
Prepare and paint all ironwork with a three-coat moisture-cured urethane paint system
Apply appropriate quality sealant between all metal-metal and metal –masonry mating pieces
Other Elements:
Doors and Windows:
o Cast and install new window frames for all 4 window openings
o Repair/replace and repaint service room window sash (3 repair, 1 replace)
o Repair metal door at Gallery level, replace existing hardware with more historically
compatible hardware
o Paint ironwork with moisture-cured urethane paint system
Interior Doors:
o Scrape loose paint from wood doors (2 total), prep and repaint
o Replace missing hardware with historically compatible replicas
o Replace cracked metal frame at door in Watch Room
page 25
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
page 26
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
PROJECT ELEMENT #3: Rehabilitation of the Lower Lighthouse Tower
(lower levels, up to 5th landing)
Lighthouse – exterior
Masonry Walls:
Test Hydrochem process to determine that coatings can be removed without damaging
masonry and set limits on pressures/develop procedures
Remove existing paint using Hydrochem process (assume hazardous material disposal
required)
Repair and repoint masonry (assume +/-20% repointing of lower levels of tower)
Repaint masonry surfaces with Keim mineral paint (three-coat process)
Tower Base:
Remove cast iron belt courses
Repair cracked or damaged masonry behind
Install new cast iron belt courses to match original
Paint ironwork with moisture-cured urethane paint system
Doors and Windows:
Clean and repoint joints of granite window surrounds of tower windows (3)
Repair broken granite window lintel at west elevation with stainless steel pin/epoxy repair
Prep and repaint tower windows and surrounds
Lighthouse – interior
Masonry Walls:
Remove existing paint using Hydrochem process (assume hazardous material disposal
required)
Repair and repoint masonry (assume +/-15% repointing of lower levels of tower)
Repaint masonry surfaces with Keim mineral paint when moisture content of the wall is at a
level that will support the application of new paint (this may take several years)
Cast Iron Stairs and Landings:
Sandblast, prime and repaint cast iron stair system including railings, landings and support
beams
Repair and tension Spiral Staircase system and prepare for painting.
Prepare and paint all ironwork with a three-coat moisture-cured urethane paint system
Apply appropriate quality sealant between all metal-metal and metal –masonry mating pieces.
Floor at Tower Base:
Scrape loose paint from concrete floor surface, prep and repaint
page 27
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
PROJECT ELEMENT #4: Rehabilitation of the Oil House
Oil House – exterior
Masonry Walls:
Remove existing paint using Hydrochem process (assume hazardous material disposal
required)
Repoint limited areas of masonry (assume +/- 20% of surface area)
Repaint masonry surfaces with Keim mineral paint
Masonry Steps:
Clean granite steps and cheek walls
Wood Trim:
Repair and reinstall broken bracket (currently stored in Oil House)
Replace missing barge board on East elevation
Scrape loose paint from all wood surfaces, spot prime and repaint
Replace fasteners with stainless steel fasteners
Roof:
Remove existing roofing to existing sheathing
Replace rafters compromised by dryrot
Install concealed stainless steel wall anchors and blocking between rafters and above all
masonry walls
Install new plywood sheathing and ventilation mat (Cedar breather or similar)
Install new wood shingles with fire-retardant treatment
Install new copper flashing and edge strips
Chimneys:
o Remove paint
o Repoint masonry
o Install reinforced concrete seismic strengthening in existing chimney flues with
anchors into roof sheathing and at ceiling level
o Replace copper flashing in kind
Doors and Windows:
Prep and repaint recently replaced windows (3 of 6)
Repair and repaint older windows (3 of 6)
Repair and reinstall missing shutter (currently stored in Oil House)
Entry Door:
o Replace corroded door frame at entry with new to match
o Repair top rail of wood entry door, prep and repaint
o Replace missing wood trim at entry door (right jamb)
page 28
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
o Replace transom to match original design (6-lite instead of 3-lite)
o Remove expanded mesh screen from transom
Other Elements:
Rebuild crawl space vents in kind (4 total)
Repair light fixture at entrance
Oil House – interior
Walls:
Remove existing paint using Hydrochem process (assume hazardous material disposal
required)
Repoint limited areas of masonry (assume +/- 20% of surface area)
Replace fasteners with stainless steel fasteners
Repaint masonry surfaces with Keim mineral paint
Install horizontal steel tubes on the room-side of the corridor walls, connect to wall and
framing above
Install stainless steel floor-to-wall seismic anchors below floor level.
Investigate historic paint colors and repaint
Ceilings:
Scrape loose paint from tongue-and-groove bead board surfaces, prep and repaint
Floors:
Hallway: Scrape loose paint from clay tile floors, prep and repaint
Oil and Work Rooms: Remove VAT floor tiles, repair tongue-and-groove flooring below for
finish surface
Interior Doors:
Scrape loose paint from wood doors (3 total), prep and repaint
Other Elements:
Electrical and communication equipment in Oil Room:
o Coordinate protection and if necessary, continued use by USCG during construction
page 29
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
COST PROJECTIONS
A detailed estimate of the project costs necessary to execute the rehabilitation plan outlined in the
preceding section is provided in Appendix H. Because of the complexity of the project and the
potential for additional discovery as conditions are uncovered, the estimate has been developed as a
potential range of costs. In addition to the hard construction cost, the estimate includes a budget for
soft costs, such as investigation, architect and engineer fees, project management, and administrative
and compliance costs for California State Parks.
The proposed summary budget for the project to be completed in one phase is:
Construction Cost: $3,681,000 – 4,976,000
Owner Soft Costs: $2,940,000 – 3,700,000
Total Project Range: $6,621,000 – 8,676,000
Minimum Recommended Budget (average): $7,650,000
Due to fundraising considerations, cost estimates were also developed for each project element
independently. The separation of the construction activities into discrete phases of work has a
significant impact on the overall cost of the project, as indicated by the phased costs below. More
detailed summaries of the phased estimates are included in Appendix H.
Project Element #1: Lens Removal $ 343,659 – 416,238
Project Element #2: Upper Tower Rehabilitation $4,901,356 – 6,361,974
Project Element #3: Lower Tower Rehabilitation $1,907,115 – 2,261,373
Project Element #4: Oil House Rehabilitation $1,051,940 – 1,244,950
Total Project Range: $8,204,070 – 10,284,535
Minimum Recommended Budget for a phased project (average): $9,244,302
These estimates assume that the project is delivered in the conventional design-bid-build method of
California State Parks. While it is possible to deliver the project in this manner, a more integrated
process such as a negotiated bid or design-build process would have great advantages due to the
difficulties of access for investigation and the risks and challenges associated with the construction
means and methods of this very specialized type of project. These alternative project delivery
methods would integrate the design and construction team and would facilitate the coordination of
investigation and construction methodologies into the design process. In this particular project, these
methods of project delivery may produce a better project at a lower cost. We recommend that
California State Parks give further consideration to alternative methods of project delivery for this
project.
page 30
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
PROJECT TEAM
Client
California State Parks Foundation
50 Francisco, Suite 110
San Francisco, California 94133
Sara Feldman, Vice President, Programs
Cecille Caterson, Project Manager
California State Parks
95 Kelly Avenue
Half Moon Bay, California 94019-1697
Paul Keel, Acting Sector Superintendent, San Mateo Coast Sector
Cynthia Spencer, Park Maintenance Chief, San Mateo Coast Sector
Don Bybee, Senior Architect, California State Parks
Consultants
Architect
Architectural Resources Group
Pier 9, The Embarcadero
San Francisco, California 94111
Stephen J. Farneth, FAIA, Project Principal
David Wessel, Principal in Charge of Conservation
Kitty Vieth, Project Manager and Project Architect
Mary Slater, Conservator
Consulting Engineer
International Chimney Corporation
P. O. Box 260
Buffalo, New York 14231
Joseph J. Jakubik, Project Manager
James Dunlap, Lens Specialist (subconsultant)
Structural Engineer
Degenkolb Engineers
235 Montgomery Street, Suite 500
San Francisco, California 94104
Loring Wyllie, Project Principal
Arne Halterman, Project Engineer
Hazardous Materials Consultant
Kellco-Macs Services, Inc.
3137 Diablo Avenue
Hayward, California 94545
Tim C. Cannard, Senior Project Manager
Cost Estimating
P. H. Waszink
P. O. Box 1538
Mill Valley, California 94942
Paul Waszink, Principal
page 31
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Appendix A:
Architectural Drawings
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Appendix B:
Existing Condition Photographs
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Pigeon Point Lighthouse east elevation, with Oil House in front.
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Pigeon Point Lighthouse west elevation.
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Brick masonry at the octagonal base is damaged and stained by adjacent corroding
metal. Differential loading is causing diagonal cracks at the corners.
Below the belt course, deterioration of the iron is transferring stresses to the brick
walls and depositing corrosion stains on the surface.
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Water intrusion resulting from damaged
and missing exterior cast iron features
leads to salt crystallization in the masonry
pores. The expansion of salt crystals
disintegrates mortar and causes surface
finishes to spall off the walls.
Moisture damage continues down the Lighthouse tower interior,
resulting in blistering and peeling paint as well as powdering mortar.
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Granite features are generally in good condition; however, part of this
window surround was struck by a falling section of the belt course.
The concrete pavement at the base of the
lighthouse is eroded and has minor cracking.
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
View from the ground of broken belt course and previous temporary cable supports.
The belt course below bracket #10 is separating from the wall.
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
A wide crack in the belt course extends from bracket #12 (pictured) leftward to
bracket #14.
Belt course point of detachment at bracket #12 (mislabeled here as “B11”).
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Cracking at the belt course joints below bracket #1 likely reflects the deterioration
mechanisms that led to the detachment of the sections below brackets #10 –#12.
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Cast iron elements including brackets and the Gallery Deck supports exhibit
corrosion and biological growth. This bracket is cracked where it was fastened
to the Gallery Deck.
Detail of bracket, showing through-cracking, deformation, and breakage of the
metal and shearing of the bolt.
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Expansion (jacking) of cast iron features.
A fragment of the original Gallery Deck, detached and hanging.
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Painted iron framing of the Lantern walls and roof are generally in good
condition.
Exterior elements show moderate to severe corrosion.
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Iron deck supports and stair carriers show isolated corrosion near fasteners.
Exterior iron elements at the Gallery and Lantern Decks are moderately to
severely corroded.
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
The plate iron door leading to the
Gallery Deck is moderately corroded.
This iron window sill is cracked and detaching.
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
The plinth of the octagonal base is cracked and deformed below the peeling
paint.
The octagonal base cornice is broken where it was struck by a belt course
fragment. The detached belt course sections lie on the ground.
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Steel stair landings are moderately corroded where the paint has been worn
away by foot traffic.
Replacement steel decks and railings show moderate to severe corrosion.
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Worn finishes in the Lantern Room show lightly corroded bronze sashes.
Bronze floor vents in the Lantern Room are moderately corroded.
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Copper roofing on the Lighthouse was not accessible, but should be closely
inspected when it is feasible.
Peeling paint on the underside of the Lighthouse roof could indicate
deterioration of the copper roof covering.
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Paint on windowsills shows patterned cracking known as “alligatoring.”
Wood windows between the brackets
are moderately weathered. This
window is missing a muntin.
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
With the exception of this broken pane in the Lantern Room, the glass
in the Lighthouse is in good condition.
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
East elevation of the Oil House.
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Efflorescence in the mortar joints above this Equipment Room window could
indicate roof leaks.
Efflorescence at the stairway to the Lighthouse indicates water intrusion of
the masonry.
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
The granite chimney caps have biological growth on weathered painted
surfaces, but are in good condition.
The granite date marker above the entrance has deposits of red and green
biological growth.
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
The ceramic tile floor paving has worn paint
and a few incompatible repairs executed in
concrete, but is in good condition.
The marble fireplace mantels of the Work
Room and Equipment Room are in good
condition, with moderate staining and
scuffing.
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
The hinges on the door between the Oil House
and Lighthouse are severely corroded.
The iron door jamb at the entrance is severely
corroded.
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Rusting fasteners stain woodwork and
masonry.
Bronze plaques on the front wall are moderately corroded. The gap at
the top of this plaque allows water to flow between it and the wall.
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Paint on eaves and carved wood brackets is peeling.
Roof framing is separating from the wall,
possibly indicating movement of structural
elements.
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
The fascia board has become detached from rafter tails on the east elevation.
The eave on the northeast corner has heavy biological growth and peeling paint.
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Oil House roof: asphalt shingles have blown off, revealing underlayment and plywood roof
sheathing (lower left).
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Detail of roof and torn asphalt covering.
Deteriorated vinyl tile flooring in the Work Room.
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Appendix C:
Structural Report
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Appendix D:
Hazardous Materials Report
A Creative Joint Venture For Better Environmental Solutions
Pigeon Point Lighthouse
210 Pigeon Point Road
Pescadero, CA 94060
KELLCO-MACS Job #0808-08
Pre-Restoration
Asbestos and Lead Inspection Report
for
Architectural Resources Group
Pier 9 The Embarcadero
Suite #107
San Francisco, CA 94111
October 9, 2008
REVISED
3137 Diablo Avenue Hayward, CA 94545-2701 (510) 786-9751 fax (510) 786-9625
http://www.kellcomacs.com email: mailbox3137@kellcomacs.com
A Creative Joint Venture For Better Environmental Solutions
Pre-Restoration
Asbestos and Lead Paint Inspection Report
Date: October 9, 2008
KELLCO-MACS Job #: 0808-08
Client: Architectural Resources Group
Pier 9 The Embarcadero
Suite #107
San Francisco, CA 94111
Location: Pigeon Point Lighthouse
210 Pigeon Point Road
Pescadero, CA 94060
Date of Inspection: August 12, 2008
Inspectors: Tim Cannard CAC #94-1395, DHS Lead #796
Derrik Quach SST #02-3214, DHS Lead #2280
Description Of The The inspection was conducted on the interior and exterior of
Inspected Area: the Lighthouse and roofing debris located on the ground. The
interior of the Lighthouse is comprised of wood walls and
ceilings. The workroom has brick on the walls with a wood
ceiling structure and two layers of 12x12 vinyl floor tile. The
attic has visual debris of transite on the wooden floor with
possible asbestos wire. The tower of this structure is
comprised of brick walls with metal flooring and ceiling. The
Lighthouse is sitting on a concrete foundation.
Background
This is a pre-restoration asbestos and lead inspection at the above referenced location.
3137 Diablo Avenue Hayward, CA 94545-2701 (510) 786-9751 fax (510) 786-9625
http://www.kellcomacs.com email: mailbox3137@kellcomacs.com
Synopsis
Asbestos was found in the following materials;
Blue 12x12 Vinyl Floor Tile and Mastic – First Floor Workroom
Grey Ceramic Transite Material – Exterior Debris Located on the Ground & Attic Space
Lead paint was found in the following tested materials;
Green Paint on Metal – Inside the Lamp
Red / Gray Paint on Metal – Window Frame, Top Floor of Tower
Orange / White Paint on Metal – Window Frame, Door Frame on Top Floor
Red Paint on Metal – Stairwell and Landing
Red / Grey / White Paint on Wood – Window Sill
Red Paint on Concrete – First Floor, The Base of the Tower
Black / Green Paint on Wood – Exterior Wall
White / Grey Window Putty – South Side of Tower
White Paint on Wood – Under Eve North Side of Tower
Soil on the Exterior of the Tower – North, South, East & West Side of the Tower
Fluorescent lights and thermostats may contain PCB’s and mercury.
About the Inspection
The inspection performed was both visual and tactile. Samples were taken of suspect materials located
at the interior and exterior of the survey area.
The inspection was a reasonable attempt to find suspect materials that were hidden within walls, behind
structures, in vertical shafts or in areas not normally accessible. If any non-sampled materials are
uncovered, these should be submitted for asbestos and/or lead paint analysis.
The following numbering convention was used for this inspection:
LETTER STANDS FOR EXAMPLE MEANING
PPL Building DESIGNATION PPL Pigeon Point Lighthouse
based on information provided
on drawings provided to us
prior to inspection
Y & Optional EITHER building SYSTEM PPL-W Pigeon Point Lighthouse –
W (W: wall; F: Flooring; C: Wall Sample
Ceiling; T: TSI; M: Misc) OR
Further designation of sample
location as Unit # within
building
01 Sample type PPL-W-01 Pigeon Point Lighthouse –
Wall Sample – First
Sample
Pre-Restoration Asbestos and Lead Inspection Report REVISED
Job #0808-08, Pigeon Point Lighthouse
October 10, 2008 - Page 2
KELLCO-MACS
Asbestos Findings
Asbestos samples were analyzed in the KELLCO-MACS laboratory, by Polarized Light Microscopy,
the EPA's recommended method. Copies of the full laboratory reports are attached. These valuable
reports can be utilized as future reference to determine if a particular material was tested.
Photographs of sampled materials are included. Sample locations are noted on the attached not-to-scale
drawing.
The determination of a material to be Asbestos Containing Material (ACM) was made either by direct
sampling or by homogeneity with at least one positive sample of the same material.
Materials that tested positive for asbestos are:
Lab Sample # Field Sample # Field Description Asbestos %
L180537-20 PPL-F-16 First floor work room - blue 12x12 VFT 4% Chrysotile
& mastic
L180537-21 PPL-F-16a Mastic 8% Chrysotile
L180537-40 PPL-D-30 North east yard debris - grey ceramic 18% Chrysotile
material - transite
L180537-51 PPL-D-39 Attic space debris - grey ceramic 18% Chrysotile
material - transite
Samples that have less than 10% asbestos can be submitted for further analysis by the Point
Count method as described elsewhere in this document. If the Point Count method determines
that the material contains less than 1% asbestos, these materials can be disposed of as non-
hazardous asbestos containing construction waste.
Tested materials that were none detected for asbestos are:
Lab Sample # Field Sample # Field Description
L180537-1 PPL-W-01 At the top of the tower - white paint & compound - window
frame
L180537-2 PPL-W-02 At the top of the tower - white paint & compound - window
frame
L180537-3 PPL-W-03 Mechanical-room - white paint & compound
L180537-4 PPL-W-04 Stairwell - white / brown paint & mortar
L180537-5 PPL-W-04a Mortar
L180537-6 PPL-W-05 Interior wall - red / white brick / mortar
L180537-7 PPL-W-06 Interior wall - red / white brick / mortar
L180537-8 PPL-W-07 Interior wall - white paint & compound
L180537-9 PPL-W-07a Plaster aggregate
L180537-10 PPL-W-08 Window sill - white / red paint
L180537-11 PPL-F-09 First floor - red paint
Pre-Restoration Asbestos and Lead Inspection Report REVISED
Job #0808-08, Pigeon Point Lighthouse
October 10, 2008 - Page 3
KELLCO-MACS
Lab Sample # Field Sample # Field Description
L180537-12 PPL-D-10 First floor - debris - red / white brick / leveling compound
L180537-13 PPL-D-10a Leveling compound
L180537-14 PPL-F-11 1st floor - hallway - grey / red mortar / paint
L180537-15 PPL-F-11a mortar
L180537-16 PPL-W-12 1st floor - hallway - white compound
L180537-17 PPL-F-13 1st floor - hallway - red / grey paint / compound
L180537-18 PPL-F-14 1st floor - hallway - grey grout
L180537-19 PPL-F-15 1st floor work room - cream 12x12 VFT
L180537-22 PPL-W-17 1st floor work room - cream mortar - fireplace
L180537-23 PPL-W-18 1st floor work room - grey / red mortar / brick
L180537-24 PPL-W-19 1st floor - oil room - cream mortar
L180537-25 PPL-F-20 1st floor - oil room - 12x12 VFT - possible 2nd layer (blue
12x12)
L180537-26 PPL-F-20a Mastic
L180537-27 PPL-W-21 Exterior wall - grey / black paint - south side
L180537-28 PPL-D-22 South side - debris - white putty
L180537-29 PPL-B-23 Base of tower - red / black / cream paint / compound
L180537-30 PPL-B-23a Compound
L180537-31 PPL-D-24 South west side - debris red / cream brick / mortar
L180537-32 PPL-B-25 Base of tower - red / black paint / compound
L180537-33 PPL-B-25a Compound
L180537-34 PPL-W-26 Base of tower - cream paint / compound
L180537-35 PPL-W-26a Compound
L180537-36 PPL-W-27 West side of tower - white / red compound / brick
L180537-37 PPL-W-27a Compound
L180537-38 PPL-W-28 North West of the base - brown compound
L180537-39 PPL-W-29 North East of the base - brown compound
L180537-41 PPL-D-31 NE yard - debris - black shingle / felt paper
L180537-42 PPL-D-31a 2nd roofing layer
L180537-43 PPL-R-32 NE roof - black felt paper
L180537-44 PPL-P-33 NE eve - white paint
L180537-45 PPL-B-34 NE of the base - black / red / white paint / compound
L180537-46 PPL-B-34a Compound
L180537-47 PPL-W-35 NE tower wall-white pound
L180537-48 PPL-D-36 NE window - white putty
L180537-49 PPL-D-37 Attic space - debris - white paper
L180537-50 PPL-D-38 Attic space - wire - white wire - @to
Pre-Restoration Asbestos and Lead Inspection Report REVISED
Job #0808-08, Pigeon Point Lighthouse
October 10, 2008 - Page 4
KELLCO-MACS
Paint Findings
Lead samples were analyzed by Atomic Absorption in the KELLCO-MACS laboratory. OSHA
requires protection of workers from exposure to any lead. Paint should be considered as containing
lead if it is the same color as any positive tested material, unless it has specifically been tested and
shown to be none detected for lead.
The following materials tested positive for lead:
Lab Sample # Field Sample # Field Description PPM Wt %
P180545-1 PPL-Pb-01 Inside the lamp - grey / green 50,700 5.07
paint on metal
P180545-2 PPL-Pb-02 Window frame - red / grey 88,400 8.84
paint on metal
P180545-3 PPL-Pb-03 Top floor of the tower - yell / 97,300 9.73
grey / red paint on metal
P180545-4 PPL-Pb-04 Window frame - white paint 123,000 12.3
on metal
P180545-5 PPL-Pb-05 Door frame on top floor - org 299,000 29.9
/ white paint on metal
P180545-6 PPL-Pb-06 Stairwell & landing - grey / 28,700 2.87
red paint on metal
P180545-7 PPL-Pb-07 Window sill - red / grey / 36,200 3.62
white paint on wood
P180545-8 PPL-Pb-08 First floor - red paint on 3,510 0.351
concrete
P180545-9 PPL-Pb-09 Exterior wall - black & green 135,000 13.5
paint on wood
P180545-10 PPL-Pb-10 Window putty - white / grey 18,700 1.87
putty - south side
P180545-11 PPL-Pb-11 The base of the tower - red pt 256 0.0256
on concrete
P180545-12 PPL-Pb-12 Under the eve - white pt on 1,070 0.107
wood - north side
P180559-1 PPL-Pb-13 East side of the tower - soil 298 0.0298
P180559-2 PPL-Pb-14 South side of the tower - soil 1,160 0.116
P180559-3 PPL-Pb-15 North side of the tower - soil 5,160 0.516
P180559-4 PPL-Pb-16 West side of the tower - soil 1,570 0.157
Paint of the same color as the above samples should be considered positive unless proven
otherwise by direct sampling with results of “None Detected.”
The following are materials for which the lead was none detected: NONE
Pre-Restoration Asbestos and Lead Inspection Report REVISED
Job #0808-08, Pigeon Point Lighthouse
October 10, 2008 - Page 5
KELLCO-MACS
Other Hazardous Materials
The building contains light fixtures with fluorescent bulbs and ballasts that may contain PCB’s. These
should be handled in accordance with regulations.
It is also anticipated that the fluorescent light tubes may contain mercury. If they are to be removed, they
should be recycled properly
Thermostats were observed throughout the building to be of the mercury type.
Transite and Asbestos wire were noted at the subject location by the inspector.
Regulatory Requirements
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) defines Asbestos Containing Material as any material
that contains greater than 1% asbestos. Materials containing greater than 1% asbestos must be removed
prior to demolition or renovation.
Friable asbestos containing material is any material that can be crushed or pulverized by hand pressure
when dry, or materials that can be rendered to a crumbled, pulverized, or powdered state when dry by
crushing, sanding, sawing, shot blasting, or through demolition or renovation activities.
As stated by NESHAP regulations, any material that contains less than 10% asbestos using the visual
estimation method can be point counted with gravimetric reduction. The Point Counting method is a
much more accurate analytical method for determining the percent of asbestos in a particular material.
If the Point Count method determines that the material contains less than 1% asbestos, the material
being analyzed can be disposed of as a non-hazardous asbestos containing construction waste.
Removal or disturbance of material with any detectable amount of asbestos must be handled in
accordance with OSHA regulations. Cal-OSHA registration is required if the material contains more
than .1% asbestos (1/10th of a percent). If there is more than 100 feet (linear or square) of an asbestos
containing material that will be abated or disturbed, a California State registered and licensed asbestos
abatement contractor must perform the work. If there is less than 100 feet, the work does not require a
licensed asbestos abatement contractor, but must still conform to Cal-OSHA regulations.
Removal or disturbance of any amount of lead paint requires adherence to the Cal-OSHA and DHS
regulations, including proper training and certification for workers and supervisors
The OSHA lead (1532) regulations require that a Negative Initial Determination for lead exposure be
made with paint that contains greater than 0.06% (600 ppm) of lead. Paint with less than 0.06% lead
should still be treated within the OSHA guidelines, but with reasonable work practices should not
generate OSHA action levels of lead exposure.
Pre-Restoration Asbestos and Lead Inspection Report REVISED
Job #0808-08, Pigeon Point Lighthouse
October 10, 2008 - Page 6
KELLCO-MACS
Building components with intact lead paint and no other hazardous materials can be disposed of as non-
hazardous construction waste. Paint chips and debris must be disposed of as lead containing hazardous
waste.
Comment Regarding All Asbestos Containing Materials:
Asbestos containing materials in good condition do not necessarily need to be
removed; they should however be respected.
Employees, contract workers and others should be advised not to drill, saw, scrape or
otherwise disturb this material without taking precautionary measures appropriate to
asbestos containing material.
Asbestos containing materials must be removed prior to the renovation or demolition.
Comment Regarding All Lead Containing Materials:
Lead is a known health hazard. Lead containing materials in good condition do not
necessarily need to be removed if they are not disturbed; they should however be
respected.
Painted surfaces that contain lead should be made known to contractors who may
disturb them during their work. OSHA guidelines for workers in contact with lead
paint apply if ANY detectable lead is found.
Anyone coming in contact with leaded paint should be advised not to disturb it
without taking precautionary measures appropriate to avoid lead contamination or
lead exposure.
Areas Needing Immediate Corrective Action
Asbestos (in any condition) and chipping and peeling lead paint should be removed prior to renovation
or demolition of the survey site.
Analytical Procedures
POLARIZED LIGHT MICROSCOPY (PLM)
Bulk samples were analyzed in accordance with U.S. EPA "Test Method for Determination of
Asbestos in Bulk Building Materials, 1993," with inclusion of area percent estimates of the
sample components. The use of the McCrone Color Dispersion Staining Technique
supplements the analysis when considered useful by the analyst. The samples are prepared with
refractive immersion oil and are examined under Polarized Light Microscopy (PLM). The
accuracy of the visual estimate method is 1%.
Pre-Restoration Asbestos and Lead Inspection Report REVISED
Job #0808-08, Pigeon Point Lighthouse
October 10, 2008 - Page 7
KELLCO-MACS
As per the standard "...The accuracy in the determination of the presence or absence of asbestos
of greater than 1 area percent asbestos is greater than 99%." ASTM Committee D22.05,
1/18/88, Standard Method of Testing for Asbestos Containing Materials by Polarized Light
Microscopy. If the sample matrix is reduced to minimize non-asbestos components, the
detection limit can be mathematically enhanced, based on the amount of material remaining
after matrix reduction. This method is called gravimetric reduction. This method involves
ashing and chemical dissolution of the sample.
POINT COUNTING
The Point Counting method is a much more accurate analytical method for determining the
percent of asbestos in a particular material. KELLCO-MACS uses a muffle furnace to ash the
sample and remove organic compounds. Hydrochloric acid is used to dissolve some of the non-
asbestos minerals. Under this method a minimum of 125 points are counted from each of 8
different slide preparations of the same sample (total of 1000 points min.) If the Point Count
Method determines that the material contains less than 1% asbestos, the material being
analyzed can be treated as non-hazardous asbestos containing construction waste. Note: ONLY
the Point Count Method can be used for this determination.
ATOMIC ABSORPTION FOR LEAD
Paint samples were collected for atomic absorption (AA) analysis. The detection limit for each
sample depends upon many factors including the sensitivity of the instrument and the sample
size. In the KELLCO-MACS laboratory utilizing flame AA, the detection limit is normally
.01% or 100 parts per million (ppm).
KELLCO-MACS Qualifications
KELLCO-MACS is a creative joint venture offering hazardous materials and AIHA laboratory
analyses. Our credentials include:
The KELLCO-MACS asbestos inspector is licensed with the State of California Department of
Occupational Safety and Health (CAL-OSHA).
The KELLCO-MACS lead inspector is licensed by the Department of Health Services (DHS).
The laboratory accreditations include:
o NVLAP PLM for Asbestos: NIST National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation
Program certificate of accreditation for bulk asbestos analysis by polarized light
microscopy (Accreditation #101948-1).
o AIHA Accreditation for Industrial Hygiene Analytical Laboratory for PCM, and AA
for lead (Accreditation #101786).
o AIHA Analyst Proficiency (NIOSH PAT) (Accreditation # 11172)
o AIHA ELLAP Accreditation for Lead: Accreditation for the Environmental Lead
Laboratory recognized by the EPA as meeting the requirements of the National Lead
Laboratory Accreditation Program established under Title X (Lab ID #11109).
Pre-Restoration Asbestos and Lead Inspection Report REVISED
Job #0808-08, Pigeon Point Lighthouse
October 10, 2008 - Page 8
KELLCO-MACS
o ELAP PLM for Asbestos: California Department of Health Services, Environmental
Laboratory Accreditation Program, certificate for bulk asbestos analysis (Certificate
#2027)
o USDA Soil permit #39484
The following supporting documents are attached to this report:
Laboratory analytical reports
Photographs of sample locations
Floor plan or sketch showing sample locations
Please call KELLCO if there are any questions and/or clarifications regarding this report. We look
forward to working with you in the future.
Sincerely,
KELLCO-MACS
Tim C. Cannard CAC #94-1395, DHS Lead #764
Senior Project Manager
Pre-Restoration Asbestos and Lead Inspection Report REVISED
Job #0808-08, Pigeon Point Lighthouse
October 10, 2008 - Page 9
KELLCO-MACS
Asbestos Definitions and Classifications
ACM (Asbestos Containing Material) - Material containing more than 1% asbestos. ACM must be
disposed as hazardous waste. Note: Federal OSHA and Cal-OSHA control materials
containing any amount of asbestos.
ACBM (Asbestos Containing Building Material) – AHERA/ASHARA term for material containing
more than 1% asbestos in or on interior structural members or other structural components.
Exceptions: Covered walkways, porticos and exterior HVAC TSI.
ACCM (Asbestos Containing Construction Material) – California term for a manufactured
construction material containing greater than .1% (one tenth of one percent) asbestos.
PACM (Presumed Asbestos Containing Material) OSHA considers all TSI and surfacing materials
installed prior to1980 to be ACM unless proven otherwise.
Friable Asbestos Containing Material that can be crumbled pulverized or reduced to powder by hand
pressure when dry.
Categories of Asbestos Used BY EPA AHERA/ASHARA and OSHA/Cal-OSHA
TSI (Thermal System Insulation) - “Thermal system insulation (TSI)” means ACM applied to
pipes, fittings, boilers, breeching, tanks, ducts or other structural components to prevent heat
loss or gain. “Thermal system insulation ACM” is thermal system insulation which contains
more than 1% asbestos.
SURFACING “Surfacing material” means material that is sprayed, troweled-on or otherwise applied to
surfaces (such as acoustical plaster on ceilings and fireproofing materials on structural
members, or other materials on surfaces for acoustical, fireproofing, and other purposes).
“Surfacing ACM” means surfacing material which contains more than 1% asbestos. NOTE:
OSHA/Cal-OSHA do not classify taping mud, floor tile mastic, stucco, leveling compound,
and hard wall plasters or wall texturing as surfacing.
MISC. All other ACM, including classify taping mud, floor tile mastic, stucco, leveling compound,
and hard wall plasters or wall texturing as surfacing.
NESHAPS Categories for Asbestos (used by Air Quality Management Districts)
Category I Cat I Non-friable Asbestos Containing Material refers to asbestos containing packing,
gaskets, resilient floor covering, and asphalt roofing products containing more than 1%
asbestos.
Category II Cat II Non-friable Asbestos-Containing Material is any material that is not Cat I that contains
greater than 1% asbestos.
RACM “Regulated Asbestos-Containing Material.” – Friable asbestos material (ACM) or a Category
I non-friable ACM that has become friable OR a Category I non-friable ACM that will be or
has been subjected to sanding, grinding, cutting or abrading OR Category II non-friable ACM
that has a high probability of becoming or has become crumbled, pulverized, or reduced to
powder by the forces expected to act on the material in the course of demolition or renovation
operations. RACM should be removed prior to renovation or demolition.
Pre-Restoration Asbestos and Lead Inspection Report REVISED
Job #0808-08, Pigeon Point Lighthouse
October 10, 2008 - Page 10
KELLCO-MACS
Characterization of Asbestos Containing Materials
Surfacing
Estimated
Material
RACM
Quantity
Cat II
Cat 1
Misc
TSI
Blue 12x12 Vinyl Floor Tile &
360 sq/ft X X
Mastic – Workroom
Ceramic Transite Material – Debris
X X
Attic & Debris Pile Scattered
Pre-Restoration Asbestos and Lead Inspection Report REVISED
Job #0808-08, Pigeon Point Lighthouse
October 10, 2008 - Page 11
KELLCO-MACS
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Appendix E:
International Chimney Report
INTERNATIONAL CHIMNEY CORPORATION
Engineers & Contractors Since 1927
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, New York 14221
P.O. Box 260, Buffalo, New York 14231
Tel: 716-634-3967 www.internationalchimney.com Fax: 716-634-3983
Dated: October 28, 2008
Our File: CH-38106-C
Architectural Resources Group
Pier 9, The Embarcadero
San Francisco, CA 94111
Attention: Mr. Steven Farneth, AIA
Subject: Inspection & Assessment
Pigeon Point Lighthouse
Pescadero, CA
Dear Mr. Farneth:
Attached herewith please find our report on the Pigeon Point Lighthouse, which supplements your
report, focusing on problems at the Gallery and Lantern area.
We appreciate the opportunity to be of service and apologize for any inconvenience caused by our late
submittal of this report.
Please feel free to contact the writer at 800-828-1446, extension 327, should you have any questions or
require any additional information.
Sincerely: International Chimney Corporation
By: Joseph J. Jakubik
Joseph J. Jakubik, Manager,
Historical Preservation Division
Page 1 of 14 International Chimney Corporation Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadero, CA CH-38106-C
International Chimney Corporation
Inspection & Assessment
Pigeon Point Lighthouse
Pescadero, CA
Introduction:
The intent of this report is to supplement the report generated by Architectural Resources Group,
utilizing our experience specific to lighthouse preservation and restoration work. In 2002,
International Chimney Corporation was part of an inspection/evaluation team on this same lighthouse
for the USCG. The majority of the observations in that report remain valid, however the condition of
the lighthouse has deteriorated significantly.
On Wednesday August 20, 2008 we installed a light duty repair bracket scaffold on the exterior of the
lighthouse underneath the Gallery Deck to inspect the condition of the Belt Course, Brackets and Deck
plates. Representatives from the Architectural Resources Group led by Ms. Kitty Vieth performed a
joint inspection, accessing the scaffolding thru one of the windows at the Watch level.
Photographs were taken of almost all aspects of the lighthouse, however for the sake of brevity we
include some representative photos of repetitive conditions, such as found under the Gallery Deck.
As the condition of the Belt Course had deteriorated, our cables installed in 2002 were found to be
rusting freely, however as some were under pressure they were not released. Instead, we installed
supplementary cabling to help to hold the belt course. Again this is a band-aid, stopgap measure, not
intended as even stabilization.
The pressure is most likely caused by rust jacking; a condition where rust expands the size of a ferrous
metal up to 5 times its normal size. This creates pressure, which can crack brickwork.
Page 2 of 14 International Chimney Corporation Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadero, CA CH-38106-C
International Chimney Corporation
Figure 1. Pigeon Point Lighthouse – Glossery of Terms
LPS Point
Vent Ball
Curtain Wall
Copper Roof / Spider
Lantern Room
Lantern Cornice / Vents
Lantern Deck / Handrail
Upper Wall Plate
Watch Room Caisson or Drum
Gallery Deck / Handrail
Bracket
Service Room
Belt Course
(4) Service
Room Windows
Brick Column Brick Liner
Tower Window
4th landing
3rd. landing
2nd landing
Spiral Staircase
1st.landing
Tower
Weight Well Entrance Stair
Floor
Oil House
Lower Belt Course(s)
International Chimney Corporation
Inspection & Assessment
Pigeon Point Lighthouse
Pescadero, CA
A. GENERAL OBSERVATIONS:
Temporary fencing currently surrounds
the lighthouse, limiting visitors from
coming directly underneath the immediate
drop zone from the Gallery area above.
Several belt course segments lie below the
lighthouse where they fell in 2001,
evidencing the need to limit visitor access.
The immediate impression of the structure
is that much of the painted masonry is rust
stained in numerous areas, especially
under the Gallery Deck. The majority of
the noticeable staining is resultant of the
temporary cables installed to hold the belt
course and Gallery brackets together during the inspection of 2002. With the exception of the rust
staining, the general appearance of the masonry coating, though worn appears intact, with localized
exceptions.
Exterior Masonry:
The tower masonry shows few signs of obvious flaws except at the top
where damage is caused by rust jacking pressures associated with the
Gallery Deck system and Belt Course and at the location of the lower
belt courses where the same rust-jacking pressures are at work. The
result is cracked and eventually sheared sections of masonry. On the
East and West elevations there are signs of previous repair.
Many previous coats of paint have been applied to the exterior surface
forming a build up of different layers, which tend to entrap moisture
within the structure. Masonry must “breathe” in order to expel moisture,
otherwise the mortar begins to break down and loose strength.
Effervescence, or chloride seeping from masonry can indicate a moisture
problem and was evident on the interior masonry.
The granite trim on the landing window exteriors appears intact except for the SW window where a
piece of granite was knocked off by a falling belt course section in 2001.
Page 3 of 14 International Chimney Corporation Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadero, CA CH-38106-C
Lower Belt Courses:
Considered as part of the masonry, the (2)
belt courses near the base of the column
serve as a transition from the octagonal base
to the round column above. Both cast iron
belt courses are severely rusted and starting
to rust jack against the masonry. The top of
the higher belt course was damaged by the
falling (Gallery level) belt course segment in
2001. Several other segments are cracked
from rust jacking.
Vestibule:
The condition of the exterior of the entry
vestibule has deteriorated over the last
(6) years. The roof is missing shingles
and down to wood in at least one area.
The chimneys are intact, however if
viewed from above appear weathered
and may require some minor repair. The
condition of the chimney flashing is
unknown, as the roof was not accessed
during the inspection.
The entrance doorframe is in poor
condition, with a portion of the right
jamb molding missing and the base of
the frame almost rusted out completely.
The transom appears to be retrofit, with
non-original screening installed.
Many of the iron inserts holding the gingerbread-type roof brackets and shutters have rusted and are
staining the exterior. The majority of wood trim requires paint.
Page 4 of 14 International Chimney Corporation Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadero, CA CH-38106-C
International Chimney Corporation
Figure 2. Pigeon Point Lighthouse - Section
(2) Lower C.I. Belt Courses (rusted,
cracked and impact damage)
Octagonal Brick Base
Radial Brick Column
Spiral Staircase
Location of Weight
Well (filled in)
Tile Floor (covered with concrete)
Tower Entry Steps
Substantial Effervescence
Noted on Wall and Floor
Hallway Windows (south
window has wood rot on sill NORTH
and jamb)
Wood rot on windowsill
Suspected asbestos tile
under modern floor tile
Exhibits in Work Room
USCG Equipment in former
Oil Room
Non- original window sash (s)
Cracked Cheek Wall on
Entry Steps
C.I. Door frame – no sealant
and badly rusted
Figure 3. Pigeon Point Lighthouse - Section
Roof shingles
missing (to North)
Gaps in flashing noted
2 nd C.I. belt course is
rusted, cracked, not sealed
at brickwork and damaged
from upper belt course
segment falling from Under eves require
above. stripping and paint.
All knee braces are
1 st C.I. belt course is rusting freely & staining
rusted, cracked and not brickwork below.
sealed at brickwork.
Top of concrete
foundation is spalled.
Shutter missing from window South side vent cover is missing
on North side. (not shown). All current vent
covers are not original.
International Chimney Corporation
Figure 5. Pigeon Point Lighthouse – Lower Belt Courses
2nd C.I. Belt Course – Severe rust stains here indicate
heavy corrosion on the portion laid into brick wall.
On the W. side, the cast iron top has been holed /
damaged by the fallen piece of the upper belt course.
Severe rust
stains indicate
heavy corrosion
on portion laid
into wall.
Severe rust stains here indicate heavy corrosion on
portion laid into brick wall. On the W. side, a
crack/gap has opened between C.I. and brickwork.
1st C.I. belt course – Radial cracking observed
parallel to flanged seams indicates severe rust
jacking on the underside. NW, W SW.
Flanged seam
Severe rust stains here indicate heavy
corrosion on portion laid into wall. Rusted
through holes are suspected.
Cracks parallel Impact damage
to flanged seams from fallen piece.
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
01. Pigeon Point Lighthouse approach from the South..JPG 02. East Elevation.JPG
03. Conditions at the base.JPG 04. Entrance. Trim needs paint, missing shingles..JPG
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Lighthouse, General Photos"
- Page 1 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
05. Missing shingles on roof, rust stains on masonry.JPG 06. Missing shingles on roof of vestibule..jpg
07. A 1871 dated stone..jpg 08. Intreptive plaque..jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Lighthouse, General Photos"
- Page 2 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
09. Rust stains on vestibule..jpg 10. Rusted Transom & door frame.JPG
11. Missing molding on Rt. door jamb.JPG 12. Corrosion at entry.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Lighthouse, General Photos"
- Page 3 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
13. East side. Note rusting cables & stains..JPG 14. Repaired cracks on E Elev..jpg
15. Installing the scaffold for the inspection.jpg 16. Repair bracket scaffold on lightouse.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Lighthouse, General Photos"
- Page 4 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
17. West elev. note rusted cables & stains.jpg 18. West elev. note rusted cables & stains.JPG
19. Previously repaired brickwork on W elev..JPG 20. Close up of rusted reinforcing cables @2002.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Lighthouse, General Photos"
- Page 5 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
21. Close up of West El. DCB 36 aux light & platform.jpg 22. Rusted & damaged belt courses at base.JPG
23. Rusted & damaged belt courses at base.JPG 24. Sheared segment of Gallery level belt course..JPG
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Lighthouse, General Photos"
- Page 6 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
25. Sheared segment of Gallery level belt course..JPG 26. Sheared segment of Gallery level belt course..JPG
27. Damaged lower belt course.JPG 28. Impact damaged (fr. sheared pc.) belt course..JPG
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Lighthouse, General Photos"
- Page 7 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
39. Corrosion cracks in drum.jpg 40. Corrosion on drum..jpg
41. Corrosion on upper drum.jpg 42. Corrosion on upper drum seam.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Lighthouse, General Photos"
- Page 8 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
43. Corrosion under lantern rain cov..jpg 44. Corrosion under lantern rain cover.jpg
45. Crack Corrosion in drum.jpg 46. Crack in drum.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Lighthouse, General Photos"
- Page 9 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
47. Galery Deck non original handrail and diamond pl..jpg 48. Gap, raised seam in diamond plate.jpg
49. Modern diamond pl. covers original.jpg 50. Note non-original posts & deck plate..jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Lighthouse, General Photos"
- Page 10 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
51. Middle stiffener appears buckled.jpg 52. Non orig. HR post..jpg
53. Crack in Gallery door frame.jpg 54. Continuing crack in frame.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Lighthouse, General Photos"
- Page 11 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
55. Non original Gallery door rusting at welds.jpg 56. Modern catch for Gallery door.jpg
57. Loose stiffner on door.jpg 58. Lifted seam on diamond pl.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Lighthouse, General Photos"
- Page 12 of 12 -
Interior:
On the interior of the vestibule, some damage was noted to the flooring in the Work Room, as were
rusting iron inserts in the brickwork.
The doors and transoms to the Oil Room and Work Room appear to be intact replicas, based on the
sharp lines of the wood and clear and uniform (no flow lines) condition of the glass transoms.
A series of stone steps lead up from the vestibule hallway to the base of the tower. The walls adjacent
to the stair show signs of moisture-related deterioration. The tower floor appears to be tile, painted
over several times in red. The red paint continues up the stairs to the base of the tower. This is
starting to fail and peel.
The spiral staircase appears intact at the lower elevations, however noticeably deteriorating as you
climb. The uppermost section of staircase has a drip ring pattern of deterioration where you can see on
each stair where water from above lands and pools on the stair, causing rust. The coatings on this
section of stair have been worn down with little left to protect the now bare metal. Detail of the steps
in these areas is being lost to corrosion. This will soon lead to cross section loss on the iron.
All iron features on the lighthouse are beginning to rapidly deteriorate due to moisture infiltration.
Any chip in the paint forms a rust blemish. This can be readily seen on the support beams below
landing decks where spot patterns of rusting are noted. The landing support beams are laid into the
masonry walls and the condition of the beam ends are of concern for the future. Typically, rust jacking
can occur here and break masonry out of the pocket. There is some evidence of repairs in these areas,
but nothing recent.
The condition of the interior masonry also deteriorates rapidly in the upper elevations of the structure.
As you climb the stairs, you start to see a smattering of exposed mortar joints, some on the radial wall,
but some also on the alcoves. The brickwork directly below the Service Room has lost much of its
coating and the deterioration is evident.
In the Service room, the condition of the masonry and
ironwork is poor and linked by numerous factors:
• Moisture infiltration from the Lantern Room
and Watch level above and from leaks and
exposure at the belt course and brackets allow
running water into the wall, causing
significant deterioration.
• In this area the masonry walls of the liner and
column come together to form one wall
without an air space.
• The entire load of the lens bears on (2) main
beams attached to pockets in (4) outside
brackets situated opposite each other. Evidence suggests that the bracket verticals have failed,
transferring load to masonry and elements of the Service Room windows. Masonry has cracked
and lintel, jambs and sills of the windows directly underneath the main support beams have
cracked and are failing.
Page 5 of 14 International Chimney Corporation Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadero, CA CH-38106-C
• The 1970s improvements included the installation of a cantilevered (on the masonry) set of box
beams installed radial to the center and under the main support beams. The box beams
penetrate the masonry, which then serves as a fulcrum to support the exterior modifications
installed. These include a heavy-duty channel installed on the perimeter of the deck, a diamond
plate deck installed over the original cast iron deck and support for an auxiliary lens platform
installed at the lantern level.
• The action of the cantilevered box beams against the main beams can be seen where the Watch
Room deck above rests on the main beams. A reverse deflection in the main beams is noted
against the plane of the Watch Room deck plate above.
• Iron inserts in the Service Room masonry wall, including (16) bracket flange anchors and inner
wall bracket ties, iron elements from (4) cast iron window frames, (2) main beams, (4) box
beams and (16) upper wall plates from the Gallery deck system are all exposed to moisture,
rusting freely and in some areas, rust jacking against the masonry.
• The entire load of the top of the lighthouse, including the Watch Room, Gallery Deck, Lantern
Room and all modifications from the 1970 (s) is placed on this unreinforced masonry
• The belt course section (on the exterior below this wall) is failing with (2) sections of the belt
course and associated brickwork sheared and several others restrained from falling only by
cable. The Belt Course in effect, serves as the foundation for the Service Room masonry wall
above.
• Most cracks in this wall fit the pattern of step cracks at 45-degrees or so to openings, however
there is one horizontal crack to the North, which is of greater concern as it does not fit the
normal pattern of support-related cracking.
Page 6 of 14 International Chimney Corporation Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadero, CA CH-38106-C
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
01. Int. frames, transoms appear intact..JPG 02. Damaged flooring at base.jpg
03. Iron inserts in interior wall rusting freely.JPG 04. Rusting metal inserts.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Interior Photos"
- Page 1 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
05. Int. vestibule doors appear to be replacements.JPG 06. Int. steps to lighthouse tower.jpg
07. Entry stairway masonry damage.jpg 08. Painted over tile at base.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Interior Photos"
- Page 2 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
09. Minor rust on beam pocket.jpg 10. Typical repaired landing beam pocket.jpg
11. Previously repaired area.jpg 12. Minor rust on beam pocket.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Interior Photos"
- Page 3 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
13. Typical landing window sill.jpg 14. Rust starting on landing support beam..jpg
15. Replacement landing windows being installed.JPG 16. Moisture damaged masonry on window alcove.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Interior Photos"
- Page 4 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
17. Moisture damaged masonry near top.jpg 18. Close up of damage.jpg
19. Peeling paint & effervescence.JPG 20. Adj. moisture damaged masonry under stress.JPG
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Interior Photos"
- Page 5 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
21. E. window sill damage..JPG 22. Crack after 3 months appears more noticable..jpg
23.Deteriorating Masonry.JPG 24. SR Masonry, coatings damage.JPG
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Interior Photos"
- Page 6 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
25. Deteriorating mortar joints.JPG 26. Follow the stress crack from W. window.jpg
27.Overall view of support beams & modifications.jpg 28. Overall view of support beams & modifications.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Interior Photos"
- Page 7 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
29. Retrofitted Gallery suport beams.JPG 30. Retrofit Gallery suport beams cause deflection..JPG
31. Gap shows rev deflection of support beam.1.JPG 32. Gap shows rev. deflection of support beam..JPG
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Interior Photos"
- Page 8 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
33. Orig. support beam connect. Note bent head on bolt.jpg 34. Orig. Support beams for lens, note masonry damage.JPG
35. Repaired masonry above main beam.JPG 36. Moisture damage at Watch level door.JPG
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Interior Photos"
- Page 9 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
37. N. Window masonry damage.JPG 38. N. Window sill masonry damage.JPG
39. Stress crack under sill, window.JPG 40. Crack in window cheek wall.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Interior Photos"
- Page 10 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
41. Stress & load transfer to window jamb.JPG 42. Stress & load transfer to window jamb.JPG
43. Stress & load transfer to window jamb.JPG 44. USCG era stiffner is rusting.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Interior Photos"
- Page 11 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
45. 2nd door, damage to jamb.JPG 46. Missing door knob.JPG
47. 2nd door moisture damage to jamb.JPG
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Interior Photos"
- Page 12 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
01. Closeup of floor at tower base.jpg 02. Staircase base has surface rust.JPG
03. Profile of staircase base.jpg 04. 1st set of stairs, landing beam appear intact.JPG
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Stairway Photos"
- Page 1 of 4 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
05. Closeup of underside of steps.jpg 06. Landing to landing base step detail.jpg
07. Looking up at the landings.jpg 08. Mid span support rod near top.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Stairway Photos"
- Page 2 of 4 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
09. Rusted landiing near top.jpg 10. Water damaged steps on upper landing.jpg
11. Stair rust at drip line near top.jpg 12. Showing detail of handrail - stantion attachment.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Stairway Photos"
- Page 3 of 4 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
13. Detail of inner striinger- brackets of staircase.jpg 14. Cracked Tread repaired with splice Pl.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Stairway Photos"
- Page 4 of 4 -
Gallery Belt Course:
The Gallery Belt Course is located at the
foot of the Gallery Deck Brackets and
serves as a transition from the dual wall
masonry below to the (thinner) single wall
masonry above. Many of the Gallery Deck
and Gallery Belt Course problems are
related to interior problems:
• Including loading and moisture
issues.
• (2) Segments of the Belt course fell
to the ground in 2001. Our report
from 2002 details the reasons for the
failure, which include rust jacking
against masonry to crack off cast
iron elements.
• Examination of the section view photo (See right) reveals that a substantial amount of grout
was used to seal the masonry against the cast iron. The brick in both fallen sections remain
intact within the ironwork after a drop of a hundred feet. This is indicative of how tight the
grout is against the iron.
• Possible rust jacking against the grouted portion served to shear thru the brickwork
• A crack in the casting and rust line is noted at the majority of all of (16) belt course sections,
an indication of additional rust jacking.
• There are many areas in the belt course, which are open and allow water infiltration.
• Cables installed in 2002 and in 2008 are intended to attempt to restrain or snare segments if
they break loose before they can fall and do additional damage. They cannot prevent the
sections from dislodging.
• At present the damage is so severe that repair, reinforcing or stabilization are not
considerations. A rebuild or re-design is the only viable option.
• As a complication to the system, the foot of each of (16) Gallery Brackets rests on or between
sections of the Gallery Belt Course. The brackets are under load and problematic (see below)
and may be introducing additional stresses into the belt course.
• The strength of the belt course is in the integrity of the circle to which all segments are
connected. The integrity of the circle is broken with the missing segments. The remaining
segments are free to spread out.
Page 7 of 14 International Chimney Corporation Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadero, CA CH-38106-C
Gallery Deck System:
The Gallery Deck system consists of (16)
Gallery Brackets imbedded into the masonry
and connected to each other with stringers,
built into the wall; (16) upper bracket lintels,
connected to the brackets which serve as an
ornamental spacer under the deck plates; (16)
cast iron deck plates; (16) upper wall plates
(installed against the masonry and between
the brackets); (16) outside stringers (missing)
between deck plates on the outside edge; (16)
handrail posts (missing) complete with acorn
nuts and connecting rods thru the brackets’
cylinders to the posts (still there).
The (4) Service Room windows may be considered part of the system, in that the jamb sections/cheek
walls are attached to brackets and are structurally impacted by present conditions.
Additional modifications to the Gallery Deck System include the addition of (4) radial beams
protruding thru and cantilevered atop the masonry wall, which support: a heavy channel, rolled to the
perimeter of the deck and bolted to the deck; diamond deck plate, installed atop the original cast iron
deck plate and anchored thru it to the brackets and a support for the DCB 224 auxiliary lens on the
Lantern deck above.
Cables installed in 2001 and reinforced with cables installed during this mobilization serve to “snug”
the vertical leg of the Gallery Deck Brackets to the masonry wall in the event of failure. We note:
• The diamond plated installed above the existing cast iron deck plate is bolted thru the cast iron
plate to the brackets and to the perimeter channel. At the majority of the bolted connections to
the bracket, the upper lintel portion of the bracket flange is broken. At some of these areas the
lintels are cracked thru the entire lintel area.
• The original cast iron deck plates are not salvageable as holes were burned thru all to make
connections and the majority of the plates are cracked.
• The brackets nearest the main beam locations (Main beams on the interior of the Service
Room) have cracks in the vertical legs of the bracket, indicating that the vertical legs were
taking load. Typically the vertical leg of the bracket takes very little load, however in this
case, the load is caused by the main beams being attached to and supported by the brackets’
embedded portion within the masonry.
• The western most ironwork is severely rusted where as the easternmost ironwork appears in
marginally better condition.
• Several of the wall lintel plates (against the brickwork and between the brackets) are cracked,
indicating that the integrity of the inner circle connecting the brackets is broken. The cracks
also allow water infiltration.
Page 8 of 14 International Chimney Corporation Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadero, CA CH-38106-C
• All original handrail posts were severed above the deck plate and new handrail fitted at
different locations. The original posts are anchored to the brackets with a rod thru a cylinder
on the bracket to an acorn nut on the underside. Several of the cylinders were cracked and at
least one, open to the elements, exposing the rod to corrosion. Based on what we’ve found on
other locations, we believe that as many of half of the acorn nuts are held in place by rust and
could be easily dislodged.
• As some movement could be observed in the brackets, indicating that the inter wall bracket
stringers could be broken, cable was again installed on the hoop portion to hold the vertical
legs to the masonry.
• The perimeter channel installed in the 1970s is rusting feely.
Page 9 of 14 International Chimney Corporation Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadero, CA CH-38106-C
International Chimney Corporation
Threaded rod from
Figure 4. Pigeon Point Lighthouse – Gallery Bracket handrail post above.
These may be
severely rusted.
Lintel between Deck
Upper flange of lintel is brackets Plate
cracked at bolthole for Deck
connection to 1972-deck Plate
plate. Cornice
Lintel area of bracket
Upper
Angled bosses for bracket Cylinder
ties imbedded in brickwk Lower
Movement detected Cylinder
in brackets.
Many of these “+”
sections are split
lengthwise.
Acorn Nut
Bracket is imbedded in
brickwork to this point
1972 cable was installed here
Belt course is cracked here.
The movement in the
brackets suggests that this
anchor may have rusted
out in some locations.
These bolts were rusted
out in the sections that had
fallen. We suspect similar
conditions in all sections.
Rust jacking against this point is
the probable cause of the cracking.
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
01. Gallery bracket upper flanged pulled off.jpg 02. Gallery bracket upper flanged pulled off.jpg
03. Gallery bracket upper flanged pulled off.jpg 04. Gallery bracket upper flanged pulled off.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Brackets Belt Course Photos"
- Page 1 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
05. Gallery bracket upper flanged pulled off.jpg 06. Gallery bracket upper flanged pulled off.jpg
07. Crack thru bracket lintel.jpg 08. Crack thru bracket lintel.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Brackets Belt Course Photos"
- Page 2 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
09. Crack thru bracket lintel.jpg 10. Damaged cylinder & upper flange.jpg
11. Rusted Gallery Bracket.jpg 12. Sheared brickwork.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Brackets Belt Course Photos"
- Page 3 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
13. Sheared adj. segment held by cables.jpg 14. Cables holding belt course remnants together.jpg
15. Remnent of belt course segment.jpg 16. Adj t to prev. fallen piece is also sheared.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Brackets Belt Course Photos"
- Page 4 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
17. Facia portion is sheared from wall.jpg 18. Facia portion split & loose.jpg
19. Bracket base bears on sheared masonry.jpg 20. Bracket bears on sheared masonry.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Brackets Belt Course Photos"
- Page 5 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
21. Bracket bears on sheared masonry.jpg 22. Rust marks int. broken connection flange.jpg
23. Rust marks int. broken connection flange.jpg 24. Rust marks int. broken connection flange.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Brackets Belt Course Photos"
- Page 6 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
25. Rust marks int. broken connection flange.jpg 26. Rust marks int. broken connection flange.jpg
27. Rust marks int. broken connection flange.jpg 28. Rust marks int. broken connection flange.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Brackets Belt Course Photos"
- Page 7 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
29. Rust marks int. broken connection flange.jpg 30. Rust marks int. broken connection flange.jpg
31. Segment cracked at bracket line & loose.jpg 32. Segment cracked at bracket line & loose.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Brackets Belt Course Photos"
- Page 8 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
33. Belt course rust jacking & cracking brick.jpg 34. Belt course rust jacking & cracking brick.jpg
35. Belt course rust jacking & cracking brick.jpg 36. hanging iron.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Brackets Belt Course Photos"
- Page 9 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
37.Hanging iron was removed.jpg 38. Looking at orig. deck pl. Diamond pl. is above.jpg
39. Between bkts, channel (top) & T were added later.jpg 40. Attachment made by burning thru CI.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Brackets Belt Course Photos"
- Page 10 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
41. And bolting to adj. bkt upper flange.jpg 42. Added box beam fr int. cantilevers on masonry.jpg
43. Wall lintel is cracked at bracket.jpg 44. Wall lintel is cracked at bracket.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Brackets Belt Course Photos"
- Page 11 of 12 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
45. Wall lintel is cracked at bracket.jpg 46. Wall lintel is cracked at bracket.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Brackets Belt Course Photos"
- Page 12 of 12 -
Lantern Area:
The Lantern consists of: the iron-
framed copper roof; the (16) sided
curtain wall; the interior and exterior
deck and handrail, curtain wall vent
system; (16) ladder support rod and
bracket assemblies (on the roof
cornice); the recently added auxiliary
lens platform and Fresnel lens. We
note:
• In general, the lantern room is
severely leaking and exposing
the Fresnel lens to significant
moisture.
• The vent ball appears blocked
by insect nests.
• At the roofline, the iron roof frame is beginning to rust and corrode at the attachment points
to the copper roof skin. Where the dissimilar metals are in contact, a cathode-like reaction
takes place, where the iron is sacrificed to the copper.
• This reaction is also noted at the top of the curtain wall where a line of rust at the roof is
indicates the problem.
• The curtain wall also is affected by cathode-like reactions as a line of rust can be seen
approximately ¼” inside the glass, where the bronze glazing bars/receiver bars are mounted
to the (16) cast iron styles. One location is rust jacked to the point where the glass cracked
due to the pressure.
• On the exterior there are several areas where deformation of the bronze glazing bars can be
observed.
• The interior Lantern deck has surface rust. Under the deck at this area rust blooms are
visible at the masonry juncture.
• Integral to the lantern deck are curtain wall sills and vents (alternating sill/vent each bay).
The cornice underneath the deck on the exterior serves as an intake for the vent system.
The original cornice was removed and a retaining cable installed in its place. Fiberglass
was also placed as fill in and the cornice area covered with a fabricated rain hood. The
ventilation to the curtain wall is restricted.
• On the inside of the curtain wall, some of the sill areas are rusted under locations of leaks
in the curtain wall.
• The exterior lantern deck is corroded and cracked in areas. In addition to the removed
cornice, the original handrail and posts were removed and a frame handrail installed off
center of the original location, bolted to the deck plate. The new handrail is now severely
corroded.
• The First Order Fresnel Lens is still in place and intact, with minor blemishes, however
portions of the lens glazing (Litharge, or white lead putty mixed with boiled linseed oil) are
dry and powdery, indicating that it is reaching its anticipated life span.
Page 10 of 14 International Chimney Corporation Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadero, CA CH-38106-C
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
01. Addit rust bleed thru under lantern deck.jpg 02. Non orig. grating providing fall protection by lens.jpg
03. Chariot Wheel driven lens rotation.jpg 04. Fresnel Lens.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Lantern Photos"
- Page 1 of 10 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
05. Lens litharge putty at end of usable life.jpg 06. Peeling paint above lens..jpg
07. Wagon wheel & roof framing.jpg 08. Insect shield to vent ball is plugged.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Lantern Photos"
- Page 2 of 10 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
09. Roof tensioning frame begining to rust.jpg 10. Insects, bird droppings & rust on wagon wheel.jpg
11. Dissimilar metal corrosion between copper & iron.jpg 12. Int. roof framing iron is sacrificial.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Lantern Photos"
- Page 3 of 10 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
13. Paint is peeling against copper roof.jpg 14. Curtain wall vent.JPG
15. Leaks cause rust stained curtain wall sill.JPG 16. Close up of sill corrosion.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Lantern Photos"
- Page 4 of 10 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
17. Line of corrosion between dissimilar metals.JPG 18. Reaction between brass and iron.JPG
19. Dissimilar cathode reaction broke this pannel..JPG 20. Vertical CI style is rusting.JPG
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Lantern Photos"
- Page 5 of 10 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
21. Top view of fall protection grating around lens.jpg 22. Water damaged int. lantern deck.jpg
23. Lantern. heavily corroded rail & ladder brackets at cornice.jpg 24. Dissimilar metal corrosion at top of curtain wall..jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Lantern Photos"
- Page 6 of 10 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
25. Broken glass caused by rust jacked glaz bars.jpg 26. Note raised glaz. bar & no sealant.jpg
27. Dissimilar metal corrosion at base of curtain wall.jpg 28. Rust & gaps at lantern deck-curtain wall.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Lantern Photos"
- Page 7 of 10 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
29. Corrosion at curtain wall base.jpg 30. Rust Jacked bars, corrosion.jpg
31. Rusted & leaking door panel.jpg 32. Rusted door to lantern.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Lantern Photos"
- Page 8 of 10 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
33. Aux platform & DCB 24 lens.jpg 34. Corroded structural & handrail at Aux light deck.jpg
35. Severe rust on handrail & deck.jpg 36. Non-orig rain cover hides LR vents, reinf cable.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Lantern Photos"
- Page 9 of 10 -
For: Architectural Resources Group
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadaro, CA
37. Showing original handrail post locations.jpg 38. Looking down at Gallery deck door.jpg
International Chimney Corp. ICC Job No. CH-38106-C
55 South Long Street, Williamsville, NY 14221 "Pigeon Point Lantern Photos"
- Page 10 of 10 -
B. CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS:
The following is organized in a list fashion and not intended to specify means and methods:
Masonry:
The majority of the column appears intact, however the many layers of paint could hide numerous
defects. The many layers of paint are limiting the ability of the masonry to expel moisture, entrapping
it within the structure. The entrapped moisture is fed additional moisture by the open conditions at the
top, accelerating the deterioration of masonry and ironwork.
• Deteriorated masonry on the exterior and interior must be repaired in accordance with the
Secretary of the Interior’s “Standards”.
• Once the structure is weather tight, the masonry should be stripped to nearly bare brickwork,
masonry repairs performed and coated with a superior quality masonry coating such as
manufactured by Keim Mineral Systems.
• While this part of the report does not deal with environmental issues, it is probable that some
of the coatings contain lead. We have successfully used the Hydrochem method of removal to
safely remove lead coatings and provide adequate prep for the Keim Mineral Systems
products.
• The exterior belt courses at ground level should be removed, the revealed masonry repaired
and new belt courses installed constructed from other materials such as castable concrete
formed, poured and painted black to look like the original.
• While the buildup of paint on the interior walls should be removed to facilitate breathability,
due to the extensive moisture in the structure, the interior masonry should not be painted until
the moisture content in the wall will support the application of new paint. This may take
several years.
• Treatment should address effervescence within the structure and mold and mildew on the
exterior. Products such as Chlor Rid can be mixed with pressure washer water and used to treat
both situations.
• At the belt course, the masonry is severely damaged and cannot be easily repaired. The
damage is being caused by rust jacking and possibly overloading the masonry at critical points.
See Gallery Belt Course below.
• Above the belt course the Service Room masonry is also severely damaged and not easily
repaired. Similarly, the damaged is caused by rust jacking and possibly overloading the
masonry at critical points. See Gallery Deck System below.
Page 11 of 14 International Chimney Corporation Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadero, CA CH-38106-C
Vestibule:
Specific recommendations for the vestibule include:
• All 2002 recommendations.
• Repair crawl space vents and inspect the underside of the floor.
• Provide new roof and flashings.
• Remove ferrous fasteners/anchors and replace with stainless steel.
• Perform masonry repairs associated with the above.
• Scrape, prep and paint all wood trim and gingerbread brackets.
• Remove entry doorframe and components and replace with replica.
• Re-glaze entry transom.
• Remove paint from tile, assess damage and repair tile floor.
• After the moisture on the inside is reduced, re-pint interior trim and wall furnishings.
Interior:
Excluding the masonry mentioned above:
• All landing windows have been replace this year, however the (4) service room windows need
repair and replacement.
• At all landings, the condition of the dry-pack supporting the decks should be checked and
repaired as necessary.
• Remove the linoleum tile floor in the vestibule and restore the original flooring.
• Under the assumption that some length of time will be required to secure funding and engineer
a set of specifications, we recommend the entire spiral staircase system and landing system be
sand blasted and recoated with a durable moisture cured system. If the work were to be done
this year, the lower half of the stairway could possibly be wire brushed, solvent cleaned, spot
primed and top coated.
• Spot wire brush, Solvent clean, spot prime and topcoat all landing cast iron cheek walls,
jambs, sills and lintels.
Service Room:
Assuming work on the Gallery Belt course, Gallery Deck and Lantern are accomplished:
• Remove and salvage Service room hardware including windows, jambs, cheek walls, sills
and lintels. Replace cracked pieces.
Upper Portion of the Lighthouse:
Structurally, it appears as if the top of the lighthouse is in a state of failure. The modifications
performed in the 1970s have changed the dynamics of the structure both for the better and for the
worse. We believe the original intent was to functionally, supplement and reinforce the design by
shifting load away from the weak areas of the masonry wall, offering independent support (box beams)
to the additional layer of diamond deck plate, perimeter channel and support for the auxiliary lens
platform. Initially, this appears to have worked, but in addition to rendering the original deck plates
and handrail system un-repairable, long term damage has been caused to the Gallery brackets as rust
jacking has cracked most of the Bracket lintels. As the base of the bracket lies on bosses on the belt
course, the additional loading may have had some effect on the belt course also.
Page 12 of 14 International Chimney Corporation Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadero, CA CH-38106-C
Individually, items can be addressed and fixed, however viewed collectively; the long term viable
option is to dismantle the lighthouse to below the belt course and rebuild, utilizing existing elements to
the greatest degree possible. One issue that has to be reviewed before starting work is the condition
and status of the lens and if it can be temporarily removed while work is being performed.
Determination of its exact condition is a specialty discipline, which should be accomplished prior to
making decisions involving dismantling. Additionally, there may be political decisions that bear
directly on the lens’s status, such as who owns it and can assurances be made that if removed from the
lighthouse, can it be remain with the light station?
Ignoring the political side we make the following recommendations:
.
Gallery Deck System: (Sequence with Gallery Belt Course)
• Remove the Auxiliary Lens deck and support.
• Perform removals on the Gallery Belt Course.
• Sequence temporary bracing and shoring on the Gallery deck to facilitate additional
removals.
• Remove the handrail and diamond plate installed in the 1970s.
• Remove the channel and original deck plates. Salvage deck plates for patterns.
• Stabilize existing wall plates and brackets with additional cabling.
• Shorten the cantilevered box beams on the exterior and use the interior portion of the box
beams to provide temporary shoring to the main beams.
• Perform a probe to remove a window opening entirely between and below the main beam.
The probe will focus on determination of the condition of interior components of the
Gallery Brackets to determine how many might be salvaged and how much of the masonry
need be removed and rebuilt. If the probe indicates extensive failure within the wall
dismantling must continue to the belt course. Otherwise rebuilding the wall and Gallery
bracket repair/replacement may be possible in pie shaped sections of the wall.
• Replace or repair elements in kind. Brackets (new and rebuild) can be fastened thru the
masonry to interior stainless steel band-type reinforcing integrated into and connecting the
Service Window frames, the goal being to reduce the amount of ferrous embedment in the
masonry wall and make anchorage accessible for monitoring.
• Replace or repair the wall plate lintels.
• Recreate and reinstall new deck plates, handrails and deck plate cornice.
Page 13 of 14 International Chimney Corporation Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadero, CA CH-38106-C
Gallery Belt Course: (Sequence with Gallery Deck System)
The Gallery Belt Course system is not repairable:
• Remove all loose portions of the belt course, leaving the bracket foot intact. Perform
removal work on the Gallery Deck.
• Incorporating seismic upgrades, cast a new belt course with similar contours constructed
from cast-in-place, reinforced concrete. Key to existing masonry.
• Stain concrete black.
• Provide reinforced points for bracket feet.
Lantern Area: (Sequence with the above work at the Gallery Belt Course and Gallery Deck)
The majority of this work can be done in place if a rebuild were not performed, however would
require extensive lens protection. Given the amount of work to be performed under this point,
logistically it would be beneficial to:
• Remove the lantern and upper wall plates from roof to Gallery Deck:
• Salvage all elements and evaluate for replacement.
• Replace the upper wall plates with stainless steel (above the Gallery Deck) and build new
brick infill.
• Replace or reinstall interior sheathing and Watch Room furnishing.
• Repair and reinstall interior Watch Room hardware including lens pedestal and chariot wheel
drive.
• Recast all Lantern Deck sections.
• Refurbish with titanium putty and reinstall cast iron styles, mullions, and etc. comprising the
curtain wall, providing Teflon isolation where in contact with ferrous metal.
• Re-glaze with safety glass.
• Straighten and install bronze receivers and glazing bars, providing Teflon isolation where in
contact with ferrous metal.
• Replace ferrous lintel (against roof frame and bronze astragal) with stainless steel and isolate.
• Repair and isolate where possible contact points between the iron roof frame and copper
sheathing.
• Reinstall repaired roof.
Perform corollary repairs associated with the above.
Please feel free to contact the writer at 800-828-1446 should you have any questions or require
additional information.
Sincerely: International Chimney Corporation
By: Joseph J. Jakubik
Joseph J. Jakubik, Manager,
Historical Preservation Division
Page 14 of 14 International Chimney Corporation Pigeon Point Lighthouse Pescadero, CA CH-38106-C
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Appendix F:
Assessment of Fresnel Lens
EVALATION OF THE PIGEON POINT LIGHTHOUSE LENS
On Thursday, Nov. 20, 2008, James Dunlap examined the Pigeon Point Lighthouse lens for
International Chimney Corp. The purpose of the examination was to evaluate the condition of
the lens to see if it can be moved safely, and if not, what repairs must be done in order to move
the lens.
Description: The Pigeon Pt. Lens is a 24-panel rotating Fresnel lens of the first-order,
manufactured by Henry-Lapaute, of Paris, France about mid-19th century. There are 24 flash
panels, 12 upper catadioptric panels, and 12 lower catadioptric panels. The lens rotates on
Chariot wheels powered by an electric motor. The lens is not in operation, and is run
approximately 1 hour per year for an annual lighting ceremony. It is my understanding that the
State of California owns the lens, so no Coast Guard notification and permission is required for
work or movement of the lens.
Condition: The lens is in overall good condition. At the time of the evaluation, it was clean and
dry. There are no missing or broken prisms, though there are the typical chips and scratches that
are normally found on lenses of this age. There are no missing screws, bolts or other hardware,
and the metal of the lens appears to be in good condition. The lens putty is very hard and dry,
owing to its age, but is largely complete. The pedestal was clean and showing no signs of
corrosion or deterioration except for the rotation assembly, which has been encased behind a
plexiglass shield, and therefore out of reach for cleaning. The machine surfaces of the bearing
races and top side of the upper race were covered with surface rust, grease and dust. The races,
however appeared in good condition, with no grooving evident. Upon energizing the lens motor,
the lens turned smoothly, although noisily. The noise is likely due to a low level of oil in the
gearbox.
Condition of Lantern: The lighthouse lantern is in very poor condition. Structural elements
have already broken loose due to heavy corrosion. Further loss of structural elements could
cause an unstable condition in the lantern room that could be disastrous to the lens.
Recommendation: It is recommended the lens be removed from the lighthouse and the
lighthouse tower and lantern room and tower be repaired.
Suitability to move: The lens can be safely moved at this point. There are no repairs that need
to be done to the lens to make it safe to disassemble and move. Due to the hardness of the putty,
some will crack and dislodge from the lens when the panels are removed, a natural occurrence
when these old lenses are moved. Though this doesn’t usually present a problem, if enough
putty is dislodged to affect stability of the prisms, the prisms will be taped in place for the
remainder of the move.
Methodology of removal: My team will remove the panels and pedestal of the lens using block
and tackle and chain hoists for the larger pieces of the pedestal. An electric hoist can also be
used, if available. If the panels and pedestal parts can be passed through openings created by
removing lantern windows and lowered to the ground, then my team will crate the panels once
the panels are on the ground. Crates will be made of 2X10 and 2X6 with ½” plywood sides, and
the panels will be lined with Styrofoam sheets. Unless the storage site is within range of the
hoisting equipment, a cart will be needed to transport the panels and pedestal pieces to storage.
Storage requirements: 250 to 300 square feet of storage space is needed for the lens and
pedestal. The space should be enclosed, dry, and secure (lockable). An approximately 10’ x 10’
oil storage house is located on site, but is not large enough for both the lens panel crates and the
pieces of the pedestal.
Restoration work: It is estimated that approximately two days of restoration work will be
required, and consist of putty repair and cleaning the gears, races, wheels and gearbox of the
rotation assembly. Other than the top of the upper race, the pedestal is in fairly presentable
shape. As an option, the state may want to consider removing the paint from the pedestal and
priming and painting it with the correct color. This would be best done between the removal and
reinstallation phases, and is not covered in the costs below.
Costs
Removal and restoration work: [Seven days] $37,015
Reinstallation [Six Days] $30,800
Notes:
(1) These proposals assume ICC will provide crane/trolley services to lower the lens from the
lighthouse during the removal phase and hoist it back to the top during the reinstallation phase.
(2) Paul Keel, Supervising Ranger said that they could likely provide on-site quarters for crew
lodging. If this is the case, please deduct $2400 from the removal phase and $2100 from the
reinstallation phase.
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Appendix G:
2002 Condition Assessment
Pigeon Point Lighthouse Rehabilitation Plan Pescadero, California
Architectural Resources Group December 2008
Appendix H:
Schematic Cost Estimate
Rehabilitation of the Pigeon Point Lighthouse
Summary of Conceptual Budget Estimates
Unphased Scenario Phased Scenario Estimated Estimated
Phases of Work: (10‐12 months construction duration) (all phases complete by 2021) completion construction
Low Average High Low Average High date duration
Phase 1: Pre‐Construction Project Tasks: Lens Removal 2‐3 months for
and Interim Building Stabilization $ 332,535 $ 377,333 $ 422,131 $ 343,659 $ 379,949 $ 416,238 2010 removal
1‐2 months for
reinstallation
Phase 2: Rehabilitation of the Lighthouse Tower
(upper levels, 5th landing and above) $
3,868,625 $
4,571,282 5,273,939
$ $
4,901,356 $
5,631,665 $ 6,361,974 2011 8‐10 months
Phase 3: Rehabilitation of the Lighthouse Tower
(lower levels, up to 5th landing) 1,633,834
$ 1,824,062
$ 2,014,291
$ $
1,907,115 2,084,244
$ $ 2,261,373 2016 4‐5 months
Phase 4: Rehabilitation of the Oil House
$ 786,314 $ 876,095 $ 965,877 1,051,940
$ $
1,148,445 $ 1,244,950 2021 3‐4 months
Total Project Cost 6,621,308
$ 7,648,773
$ $
8,676,237 8,204,070
$ 9,244,302
$ 10,284,535
$
Draft 06 PIGEON POINT LIGHT STATION REHABILITATION PROJECT: CONCEPTUAL BUDGET UNPHASED SUMMARY
11 Feb. 2009 1 of 4
-- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group --
CS CT CU CV CW CX CY CZ DA DB DC DD DE DF DG DH DI DJ DK DL DM DN DO DP DQ
3
4
5
6
UNPHASED SCENARIO "CONVENTIONAL DELIVERY METHOD" BUDGET SUMMARY -- Draft Cost Opinion Based on A.R.G.'S Project Data
7
8
9 Distribution (in High Range):
10 I. SUBTOTAL FORWARD, AS-CALCULATED PROBABLE COST OF WORK IN TRADES -- SET INTO RANGE:
11 Distribution (in Low LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE Distribution (in High
12
13 Range): Range):
14 PROJECT ELEMENT #1 Pre-Construction Project Tasks: Lens Removal & Interim Bldg. Stabilization BASE SCOPE:
15 I. Fresnel Lens Dismantling, Packing & Removal + Interim Stabilization Allocation 5.0% $70,000 $78,750 $87,500 4.9%
16
17 SUBTOTALS: $70,000 $78,750 $87,500
18
19 PROJECT ELEMENT #2 Rehabilitation of the Lighthouse Tower (upper levels, 5th landing and above): BASE SCOPE:
20 I. Selective demolition scope and sequence: $188,425 $221,399 $254,374
21 II. Reinstallation scope and sequence: 58.4% $594,938 $699,052 $803,166 60.8%
22 III. Other Elements: $31,000 $33,325 $35,650
23 SUBTOTALS: $814,363 $953,776 $1,093,190
24
25 PROJECT ELEMENT #3 Rehabilitation of the Lighthouse Tower (lower levels, up to 5th landing): BASE SCOPE:
26 I. Lighthouse – exterior $220,065 $247,573 $275,081
24.7% 23.2%
27 II. Lighthouse – interior $123,864 $133,154 $142,444
28 SUBTOTALS: $343,929 $380,727 $417,525
29
30 PROJECT ELEMENT #4 Rehabilitation of the Oil House: BASE SCOPE:
31 I. Oil House – exterior $98,573 $110,894 $123,216
11.9% 11.1%
32 II. Oil House – interior $66,950 $71,971 $76,993
33 SUBTOTALS: $165,523 $182,865 $200,208
34
35
36 A As-Calculated Subtotals from Supporting Trade Cost Estimate Sections (OR: Net Capacity for Raw Trade Costs): 100.0% $1,393,815 $1,596,119 $1,798,423 100.0%
37
38 Note Developed Low Range & High Range Factors: 100.0% 114.5% 129.0% Factors
39
40 II. INTEGRAL PROJECT CONSTRUCTION FACTORS (RE: Prime Builder / General Contractor Role)
41
42 II. A Conceptual Budget Phase Design / Program & Estimating Contingencies on Trade Scope 20.0% $278,763 $319,224 $359,685 20.0%
43
44 SUBTOTALS, ADJUSTED TRADE SCOPE RANGE: $1,672,578 $1,915,343 $2,158,108
45
46 II. B Allow for Bonding on Selected Subs (Subguard) 1.50% $25,089 $28,730 $32,372 1.50%
47 II. C DIV. 1 -- Basic General Contractor's General Conditions + Location Premium Costs (Overall Schedule T.B.D.) 20.0% $334,516 $383,069 $431,622 20.0%
48 II. D DIV. 1 -- Specialized Provisions: Crane, Hoisting, Work Platforms, Safety Systems & Procedures, Housing & Per Diem Costs 30.0% $501,773 $574,603 $647,432 30.0%
49 II. E Supplementary Conditions (Includes Cost Impacts / Premiums RE: Client Procedural Requirements, etc.) 5.0% $69,691 $79,806 $89,921 5.0%
50 II. F Gross Receipts Tax Assume N / A 0.00% $0 $0 $0 0.00%
51 SUBTOTALS, ADJUSTED TRADE SCOPE + CONTRACTR FACTORS PRIOR TO O.H.&P. ASSESSMENT, IN RANGE: $2,603,646 $2,981,550 $3,359,454
52 II. G Prime / General Contractor's Home Office Overhead & Insurance 20.0% $520,729 $596,310 $671,891 20.0%
53 II. H Prime / General Contractor's Profit + Risk Factor 12.0% $312,437 $357,786 $403,135 12.0%
54
55 CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTALS RANGE: $3,436,812 $3,935,646 $4,434,480
56 Apply Other Factors:
57
58 II. I Construction Operational Requirements / Phasing & Schedule Compression Cost Impacts to Builder Assume N / A 0.0% $0 $0 $0 0.0%
59 II. J 100% Payment & Performance Bond (Assume Required for Prime / General Contractor) 2.00% $68,736 $78,713 $88,690 2.00%
60
61 CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL RANGE BEFORE ESCALATION & BIDDING CLIMATE FACTOR: $3,505,549 $4,014,359 $4,523,169
62
63 Proceed to Completion of Integral Project Construction Factors Section, Below:
File No. revSUMMARY UNPHASED Draft6 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 9:23 AM printing P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, CA Tel. 415.389.0305
Draft 06 PIGEON POINT LIGHT STATION REHABILITATION PROJECT: CONCEPTUAL BUDGET UNPHASED SUMMARY
11 Feb. 2009 2 of 4
-- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group --
CS CT CU CV CW CX CY CZ DA DB DC DD DE DF DG DH DI DJ DK DL DM DN DO DP DQ
3
4
5
6
UNPHASED SCENARIO "CONVENTIONAL DELIVERY METHOD" BUDGET SUMMARY -- Draft Cost Opinion Based on A.R.G.'S Project Data
7
64
65
66 REPEAT SUBTOTAL AFTER II.: CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL RANGE BEFORE ESCALATION & BIDDING CLIMATE FACTOR: $3,505,549 $4,014,359 $4,523,169
67
68 III. NOTED CONDITIONING FACTORS RE: CONSTRUCTION MARKETPLACE: Factor: Factor:
69
70 III. A Interim Cost Escalation Factor -- General Allowance (Assume Midpoint of Constr. Phase = Approx. 18-24 Mos. Out) 10.0% $350,555 $401,436 $452,317 10.0%
71
72
73 PROJECT POINT-OF-AWARD CONSTRUCTION TOTALS: LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE
74 14.5% 12.7%
75 ANTICIPATED POINT-OF-AWARD CONSTRUCTION TOTAL RANGE WITHOUT BIDDING CLIMATE FACTOR: $3,856,103 $559,691 $4,415,795 $559,691 $4,975,486
76
77 Note Gross Project Factors at This Point of Cost Development (Point-of-Award Construction Cost Divided by Raw Trade Cost) 276.7% 276.7% 276.7%
78
79
80 III. NOTED CONDITIONING FACTORS RE: CONSTRUCTION MARKETPLACE: Factor: Factor:
81
82 III. B Bidding Climate Factor Reserve
83 Construction Marketplace Volatility / "Cost Spike" & Under-Bid Exposures Require Cushioning Factors -5.0% ($175,277) ($87,639) $0 0.0%
84
85 ANTICIPATED POINT-OF-AWARD CONSTRUCTION TOTAL RANGE WITH BIDDING CLIMATE FACTOR: LOW RANGE 17.6% Averaged 15.0% HIGH RANGE
86 Note: This Subtotal Serves as Basis for Assessment of Item V.D. Below: DESIGN PHASE Owner-Direct Costs) $3,680,826 $647,330 $4,328,156 $647,330 $4,975,486
87
88 Note Gross Project Factors at This Point of Cost Development (Point-of-Award Construction Cost Divided by Raw Trade Cost) 264.1% 271.2% 276.7%
89
90
91 Proceed to Owner-Direct Factors Section, Below; Additional Assumptions, Qualifications & Exclusions Incorporated into Estimate Detail Section:
92
File No. revSUMMARY UNPHASED Draft6 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 9:23 AM printing P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, CA Tel. 415.389.0305
Draft 06 PIGEON POINT LIGHT STATION REHABILITATION PROJECT: CONCEPTUAL BUDGET UNPHASED SUMMARY
11 Feb. 2009 3 of 4
-- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group --
CS CT CU CV CW CX CY CZ DA DB DC DD DE DF DG DH DI DJ DK DL DM DN DO DP DQ
3
4
5
6
UNPHASED SCENARIO "CONVENTIONAL DELIVERY METHOD" BUDGET SUMMARY -- Draft Cost Opinion Based on A.R.G.'S Project Data
7
93
94 REPEAT FROM PREVIOUS PAGE: ANTICIPATED POINT-OF-AWARD CONSTRUCTION TOTAL RANGE WITH BIDDING CLIMATE FACTOR: $3,680,826 $4,328,156 $4,975,486
95
LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE
96 IV. ADD NOTED OWNER-PAID THIRD-PARTY (G.C.) PROJECT COST ALLOCATIONS, IN RANGE:
97 Owner-Controlled Course-of-Construction Reserves for Construction Contract: Factors Factors
98
99 A Change Order Contingency -- Plan Check Impacts on Scope & Costs (Exclude Code Change Impacts) 3.0% $110,425 $129,845 $149,265 3.0%
100 B Change Order Contingency -- For Implementation of Final Construction Documents (REHAB EXISTING) 10.0% $368,083 $432,816 $497,549 10.0%
101 C Change Order Contingency -- For Owner's Discretionary Scope Changes Identified During Construction 1.0% $36,808 $43,282 $49,755 1.0%
102 Owner-Controlled Course-of-Construction Reserves for Construction Contract: $515,316 17.6% $605,942 15.0% $696,568
103
104 ANTICIPATED CONSTRUCTION TOTAL INCLUDING OWNER-DIRECT / CHANGE ORDER RESERVES RANGE: $4,196,142 $737,956 $4,934,098 $737,956 $5,672,055
105
106 V. ADD NOTED OWNER-PAID THIRD-PARTY PROJECT COST ALLOCATIONS, IN RANGE:
107 Owner-Direct Project Non-Construction "Soft" Costs: Factors Factors
108
109 D * DESIGN PHASE Destructive Investigation, Architecture & Engineering + All Technical Disciplines + Preconstruction "Soft" Costs 15.0% $552,124 $649,223 $746,323 15.0%
110
111 E ** CONSTRUCTION PHASE A / E Contract Admin., + Project Management & Balance of All Other "Soft" Costs 11.0% $461,576 $542,751 $623,926 11.0%
112
113 G General Allocation for Hazardous Materials Issues -- Assumed to be Non-Contractor Costs Say: L.S. $75,000 $75,000 $75,000 L.S.
114 H Furniture, Fixtures & Equipment Cost Allocations (Minimal) Say: L.S. $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 L.S.
115 I Temporary Facilities, Relocation, Storage, Moving & Placement Costs (Minimal) Say: L.S. $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 L.S.
116 J Contingency on the Above Owner-Direct Project Elements (Minimal) Say: 10.0% $110,870 16.1% $128,697 13.9% $146,525 10.0%
117
118 V. ADD NOTED OWNER-PAID THIRD-PARTY PROJECT COST ALLOCATIONS, IN RANGE: $1,219,569 $196,102 $1,415,672 $196,102 $1,611,774
119
120 29.1% 28.7% 28.4%
121
122
123
124 SUBTOTAL PROJECT COSTS RANGE: CONSTRUCTION & OWNER-DIRECT $5,415,711 $6,349,770 $7,283,828
125 TOTAL WITH ALL FACTORS: LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE
126
127 Note Gross Project Factors at This Point of Cost Development (Total Project Cost Divided by Raw Trade Cost) 388.6% 397.8% 405.0%
128
129
130 VI. ADD STATE DEPT. of PARKS & RECREATION DIRECT / INTERNAL PROJECT COSTS:
131 Allocations for Owner-Direct / Internal Project Non-Construction / "Soft" Costs: Factors Factors
132
133 X STATE DEPT. of PARKS & RECEREATION DIRECT INTERNAL PROJECT / SOFT COSTS
134 X.1 C.E.Q.A., Cultural Heritage & Natural Heritage L.S. $100,000 $100,000 $100,000 L.S.
135 X.2 Construction Management, Project Management & Inspection 9.0% L.S. $485,660 $485,660 $485,660 L.S.
136 X.3 Office Administration, Bid Administration, Travels & Other Expenses, Coastal Permit L.S. $18,000 $18,000 $18,000 L.S.
137 REF. SUBTOTALS for Calc.: $6,019,371 $6,953,430 $7,887,488
138
139 X.4 State Parks Standard Allocation for Internal Project Admin. / Management Costs (10% x All-In Project Total) 10.0% $601,937 $695,343 $788,749 10.0%
140
141 Y STATE PARKS FOUNDATION DIRECT INTERNAL PROJECT / SOFT COSTS
142 Y.1 State Parks Foundation Allocation for Internal Project Admin. / Management Costs -- Carried Separate from This Budget 0.0% Excluded Excluded Excluded 0.0%
143
144 VI. ADD STATE DEPT. of PARKS & RECREATION DIRECT / INTERNAL PROJECT COSTS: 22.3% $1,205,597 $1,299,003 $1,392,409 19.1%
145
146
147 15.5% 13.4%
148 TOTAL PROJECT PROBABLE-COSTS RANGE: CONSTRUCTION & OWNER-
149 DIRECT TOTAL WITH ALL FACTORS: $6,621,308 $1,027,464 $7,648,773 $1,027,464 $8,676,237
150 LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE
151 (Project Total / Raw Trade (Project Total / Raw Trade
152 Note Gross Project Factors at This Point of Cost Development (Total Project Cost Divided by Raw Trade Cost) Costs) 475.0% 479.2% 482.4% Costs)
153
154
File No. revSUMMARY UNPHASED Draft6 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 9:23 AM printing P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, CA Tel. 415.389.0305
Draft 06 PIGEON POINT LIGHT STATION REHABILITATION PROJECT: CONCEPTUAL BUDGET UNPHASED SUMMARY
11 Feb. 2009 4 of 4
-- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group --
CS CT CU CV CW CX CY CZ DA DB DC DD DE DF DG DH DI DJ DK DL DM DN DO DP DQ
3
4
5
6
UNPHASED SCENARIO "CONVENTIONAL DELIVERY METHOD" BUDGET SUMMARY -- Draft Cost Opinion Based on A.R.G.'S Project Data
7
155
156
157
COMPARISON: UNPHASED 2010-11 PROJECT UNPHASED 2010-11 PROJECT PHASED 2010-21 PROGRAM
158 SCENARIO v. PROGRAM IN 4 PHASES 2010-2021:
159
LOW
160 SUMMARY ALL-IN COSTS BREAKDOWNS BY PROJECT HIGH RANGE LOW RANGE HIGH RANGE
161 RANGE Averaged Averaged
ELEMENT:
162
163
164 PROJECT ELEMENT #1 Pre-Construction Project Tasks: Lens Removal & Interim Bldg. Stabilization $332,535 $377,333 $422,131 $343,659 $379,949 $416,238
165 (Includes 100% of
166 PROJECT ELEMENT #2 Rehabilitation of the Lighthouse Tower (upper levels, 5th landing and above): $3,868,625 $4,571,282 $5,273,939 Program Design) $4,901,356 $5,631,665 $6,361,974
167
168 PROJECT ELEMENT #3 Rehabilitation of the Lighthouse Tower (lower levels, up to 5th landing): $1,633,834 $1,824,062 $2,014,291 $1,907,115 $2,084,244 $2,261,373
169
170 PROJECT ELEMENT #4 Rehabilitation of the Oil House: $786,314 $876,095 $965,877 $1,051,940 $1,148,445 $1,244,950
171
172
173 $6,621,308 $7,648,773 $8,676,237 $8,204,070 $9,244,302 $10,284,535
174 LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183 V. ASSUMPTIONS & QUALIFICATIONS TEXT SECTION:
184
185 A BASIS: Drawings, Correspondence, Reports, Photodocumentation and Misc. Documents Furnished by Architectural Resources ("A.R.G."), San Francisco, and A.R.G.'s Subconsultants / Resources.
186 B ASSUME (for This Base Scope Study) Work of All Trades Will be Fully-Designed / Exclude Design-Build Trade Work & Costs.
NOTE: Based on Highly Specialized / Rarefied Project Scope Recommend Consideration Be Given to Design-Build Approach; Competitive Proposals to Respond to Carefully Developed Criteria to Screen Out Unqualified Design-Build Vendors.
187
188
189 C ASSUME Work to be Bid by, Awarded to and Performed by a Single, Prime Builder (Compressed Schedule May Drive Shift Work / Premium Cost Allocations Currently Included -- See Summary).
190 D ASSUME All Work Can be Completed Under a "Normal" Construction Schedule, Therefore Limited Shift Work Premiums Are Not Contemplated & Excluded.
191 E ASSUME No Substantive Change in Project Scope & Detailing Subsequent to this Status of Design / Construction Documents.
192 F EXCLUDE Any and All Site Improvements Scope, Unless Specifically Named and Quantified Herein.
193 G EXCLUDE A.D.A. Compliance / Accessibility Scope.
194 H EXCLUDE Hazardous Materials Issues Scope or Costs of Any Kind Beyond Any Limited Capacity Set Forth Herein.
195 I EXCLUDE Any New Project / Program Non-Fixed Furniture, Fixtures & Equipment Scope or Costs.
196 J EXCLUDE Dealing with Existing Non-Fixed Furnishings, Contents, etc., Except As Provided for in Summary; Ditto Move-Outs / Storage / Move-Ins, Temporary Facilities Costs, etc.
197 K EXCLUDE Any Cost Allocations Associated with Impacts of Code Updates Becoming Applicable Due to Overall Phasing of Program Through 2021.
198
199 * DESIGN PHASE Destructive Investigation, Architecture & Engineering + All Technical Disciplines + Preconstruction "Soft" Costs
200 ** CONSTRUCTION PHASE A / E Contract Admin., + Project Management & Balance of All Other "Soft" Costs
201
Program Indirect (Non-Construction Contract) Costs RE: Goods & Services Essential to Planning, Design, Documentation, Facilitation & Controls / Admin. of the Total Program. Includes: Fundraising; Architecture & Engineering +
Contract Admin.; Local & State Permits, Fees & Inspection; Testing & Inspection; Project Management / Owner Representation; Utilities Fees; Legal Fees; Project Insurances, Financing Costs, Accounting, Misc. Administrative, ETC.
202
203
204
File No. revSUMMARY UNPHASED Draft6 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 9:23 AM printing P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, CA Tel. 415.389.0305
Draft 07 PIGEON POINT LIGHT STATION REHABILITATION PROJECT: CONCEPTUAL BUDGET PHASED
11 Feb. 2009 -- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group -- SCENARIOS
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X
3
4
5
6
PHASE 1 SCENARIO: Fresnel Lens Removal & Interim Stabilization -- "CONVENTIONAL DELIVERY METHOD" BUDGET SUMMARY
7
8 Phase 1: S-1 of 4
9
10
11 I. SUBTOTAL FORWARD, AS-CALCULATED PROBABLE COST OF WORK IN TRADES -- SET INTO RANGE:
12 Distribution (in LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE Distribution (in
13
14 Low Range): High Range):
15 PROJECT ELEMENT #1 Pre-Construction Project Tasks: Lens Removal & Interim Bldg. Stabilization BASE SCOPE:
16 I. Fresnel Lens Dismantling, Packing & Removal + Interim Stabilization Allocation 100.0% $70,000 $78,750 $87,500 100.0%
17
18 SUBTOTALS: $70,000 $78,750 $87,500
19
20 PROJECT ELEMENT #2 Rehabilitation of the Lighthouse Tower (upper levels, 5th landing and above): BASE SCOPE:
21 I. Selective demolition scope and sequence: $0 $0 $0
22 II. Reinstallation scope and sequence: N/A $0 $0 $0 N/A
23 III. Other Elements: $0 $0 $0
24 SUBTOTALS: $0 $0 $0
25
26 PROJECT ELEMENT #3 Rehabilitation of the Lighthouse Tower (lower levels, up to 5th landing): BASE SCOPE:
27 I. Lighthouse – exterior $0 $0 $0
N/A N/A
28 II. Lighthouse – interior $0 $0 $0
29 SUBTOTALS: $0 $0 $0
30
31 PROJECT ELEMENT #4 Rehabilitation of the Oil House: BASE SCOPE:
32 I. Oil House – exterior $0 $0 $0
N/A N/A
33 II. Oil House – interior $0 $0 $0
34 SUBTOTALS: $0 $0 $0
35
36
37 A As-Calculated Subtotals from Supporting Trade Cost Estimate Sections (OR: Net Capacity for Raw Trade Costs): 100.0% $70,000 $78,750 $87,500 100.0%
38
39 Note Developed Low Range & High Range Factors: 100.0% 112.5% 125.0% Factors
40
41 II. INTEGRAL PROJECT CONSTRUCTION FACTORS (RE: Prime Builder / General Contractor Role)
42
43 II. A Conceptual Budget Phase Design / Program & Estimating Contingencies on Trade Scope 10.0% $7,000 $7,875 $8,750 10.0%
44
45 SUBTOTALS, ADJUSTED TRADE SCOPE RANGE: $77,000 $86,625 $96,250
46
47 II. B Allow for Bonding on Selected Subs (Subguard) 1.50% $1,155 $1,299 $1,444 1.50%
48 II. C DIV. 1 -- Basic General Contractor's General Conditions + Location Premium Costs (Overall Schedule T.B.D.) 20.0% $15,400 $17,325 $19,250 20.0%
49 II. D DIV. 1 -- Specialized Provisions: Crane, Hoisting, Work Platforms, Safety Systems & Procedures, Housing & Per Diem Costs 30.0% $23,100 $25,988 $28,875 30.0%
50 II. E Supplementary Conditions (Includes Cost Impacts / Premiums RE: Client Procedural Requirements, etc.) 5.0% $3,500 $3,938 $4,375 5.0%
51 II. F Gross Receipts Tax Assume N / A 0.00% $0 $0 $0 0.00%
52 SUBTOTALS, ADJUSTED TRADE SCOPE + CONTRACTR FACTORS PRIOR TO O.H.&P. ASSESSMENT, IN RANGE: $120,155 $135,174 $150,194
53 II. G Prime / General Contractor's Home Office Overhead & Insurance 20.0% $24,031 $27,035 $30,039 20.0%
54 II. H Prime / General Contractor's Profit + Risk Factor 15.0% $18,023 $20,276 $22,529 15.0%
55
56 CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTALS RANGE: $162,209 $182,485 $202,762
57 Apply Other Factors:
58
59 II. I Construction Operational Requirements / Phasing & Schedule Compression Cost Impacts to Builder Assume N / A 0.0% $0 $0 $0 0.0%
60 II. J 100% Payment & Performance Bond (Assume Required for Prime / General Contractor) 2.00% $3,244 $3,650 $4,055 2.00%
61
62 CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL RANGE BEFORE ESCALATION & BIDDING CLIMATE FACTOR: $165,453 $186,135 $206,817
63
64 Proceed to Completion of Integral Project Construction Factors Section, Below:
File No. revSUMMARIES PHASED Draft7 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 10:12 AM printing P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, CA Tel. 415.389.0305
Draft 07 PIGEON POINT LIGHT STATION REHABILITATION PROJECT: CONCEPTUAL BUDGET PHASED
11 Feb. 2009 -- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group -- SCENARIOS
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X
3
4
5
6
PHASE 1 SCENARIO: Fresnel Lens Removal & Interim Stabilization -- "CONVENTIONAL DELIVERY METHOD" BUDGET SUMMARY
65
66 Phase 1: S-2 of 4
67
68
69
70 REPEAT SUBTOTAL AFTER II.: CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL RANGE BEFORE ESCALATION & BIDDING CLIMATE FACTOR: $165,453 $186,135 $206,817
71
72 III. NOTED CONDITIONING FACTORS RE: CONSTRUCTION MARKETPLACE: Factor: Factor:
73
74 III. A Interim Cost Escalation Factor -- General Allowance (Assume Midpoint of Constr. Phase = Approx. 12 Mos. Out) 5.0% $8,273 $9,307 $10,341 5.0%
75
76
77 PROJECT POINT-OF-AWARD CONSTRUCTION TOTALS: LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE
78 12.5% 11.1%
79 ANTICIPATED POINT-OF-AWARD CONSTRUCTION TOTAL RANGE WITHOUT BIDDING CLIMATE FACTOR: $173,726 $21,716 $195,442 $21,716 $217,158
80
81 Note Gross Project Factors at This Point of Cost Development (Point-of-Award Construction Cost Divided by Raw Trade Cost) 248.2% 248.2% 248.2%
82
83
84 III. NOTED CONDITIONING FACTORS RE: CONSTRUCTION MARKETPLACE: Factor: Factor:
85
86 III. B Bidding Climate Factor Reserve T.B.D. T.B.D. T.B.D.
87 Construction Marketplace Volatility / "Cost Spike" & Under-Bid Exposures Require Cushioning Factors 0.0% $0 $0 $0 0.0%
88
89 ANTICIPATED POINT-OF-AWARD CONSTRUCTION TOTAL RANGE, PENDING: BIDDING CLIMATE FACTOR: LOW RANGE 12.5% Averaged 11.1% HIGH RANGE
90 Note: This Subtotal Serves as Basis for Assessment of Item V.D. Below: DESIGN PHASE Owner-Direct Costs) $173,726 $21,716 $195,442 $21,716 $217,158
91
92 Note Gross Project Factors at This Point of Cost Development (Point-of-Award Construction Cost Divided by Raw Trade Cost) 248.2% 248.2% 248.2%
93
94
95 Proceed to Owner-Direct Factors Section, Below; Additional Assumptions, Qualifications & Exclusions Incorporated into Estimate Detail Section:
96
File No. revSUMMARIES PHASED Draft7 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 10:12 AM printing P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, CA Tel. 415.389.0305
Draft 07 PIGEON POINT LIGHT STATION REHABILITATION PROJECT: CONCEPTUAL BUDGET PHASED
11 Feb. 2009 -- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group -- SCENARIOS
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X
3
4
5
6
PHASE 1 SCENARIO: Fresnel Lens Removal & Interim Stabilization -- "CONVENTIONAL DELIVERY METHOD" BUDGET SUMMARY
97
98 Phase 1: S-3 of 4
99
100
101 REPEAT FROM PREVIOUS PAGE: ANTICIPATED POINT-OF-AWARD CONSTRUCTION TOTAL RANGE WITH BIDDING CLIMATE FACTOR: $173,726 $195,442 $217,158
102
LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE
103 IV. ADD NOTED OWNER-PAID THIRD-PARTY (G.C.) PROJECT COST ALLOCATIONS, IN RANGE:
104 Owner-Controlled Course-of-Construction Reserves for Construction Contract: Factors Factors
105
106 A Change Order Contingency -- Plan Check Impacts on Scope & Costs (Exclude Code Change Impacts) 1.0% $1,737 $1,954 $2,172 1.0%
107 B Change Order Contingency -- For Implementation of Final Construction Documents (REHAB EXISTING) 10.0% $17,373 $19,544 $21,716 10.0%
108 C Change Order Contingency -- For Owner's Discretionary Scope Changes Identified During Construction 0.0% $0 $0 $0 0.0%
109 Owner-Controlled Course-of-Construction Reserves for Construction Contract: $19,110 12.5% $21,499 11.1% $23,887
110
111 ANTICIPATED CONSTRUCTION TOTAL INCLUDING OWNER-DIRECT / CHANGE ORDER RESERVES RANGE: $192,836 $24,105 $216,940 $24,105 $241,045
112
113 V. ADD NOTED OWNER-PAID THIRD-PARTY PROJECT COST ALLOCATIONS, IN RANGE:
114 Owner-Direct Project Non-Construction "Soft" Costs: Factors Factors
115
116 D * DESIGN PHASE -- Allow for Phase 1 Design & Engineering &Balance of Preconstruction "Soft" Costs Only 15.0% $26,059 $29,316 $32,574 15.0%
117
118 E ** CONSTRUCTION PHASE A / E Contract Admin., + Project Management & Balance of All Other "Soft" Costs 20.0% $38,567 $43,388 $48,209 20.0%
119
120 G General Allocation for Hazardous Materials Issues -- Assumed to be Non-Contractor Costs Say: L.S. $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 L.S.
121 H Furniture, Fixtures & Equipment Cost Allocations (Minimal) Say: L.S. $0 $0 $0 L.S.
122 I Temporary Facilities, Relocation, Moving & Placement Costs (Minimal) Say: L.S. $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 L.S.
123 J Contingency on the Above Owner-Direct Project Elements (Minimal) Say: 10.0% $7,463 10.8% $8,270 9.8% $9,078 10.0%
124
125 V. ADD NOTED OWNER-PAID THIRD-PARTY PROJECT COST ALLOCATIONS, IN RANGE: $82,089 $8,886 $90,975 $8,886 $99,861
126
127 42.6% 41.9% 41.4%
128
129
130
131 SUBTOTAL PROJECT COSTS RANGE: CONSTRUCTION & OWNER-DIRECT $274,925 $307,915 $340,906
132 TOTAL WITH ALL FACTORS: LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE
133
134 Note Gross Project Factors at This Point of Cost Development (Total Project Cost Divided by Raw Trade Cost) 392.7% 391.0% 389.6%
135
136
137 VI. ADD STATE DEPT. of PARKS & RECREATION DIRECT / INTERNAL PROJECT COSTS:
138 Allocations for Owner-Direct / Internal Project Non-Construction / "Soft" Costs: Factors Factors
139
140 X STATE DEPT. of PARKS & RECEREATION DIRECT INTERNAL PROJECT / SOFT COSTS
141 X.1 C.E.Q.A., Cultural Heritage & Natural Heritage (=$100,000) L.S. $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 L.S.
142 X.2 Construction Management, Project Management & Inspection 10.0% $27,492 $27,492 $27,492 8.1%
143 X.3 Office Administration, Bid Administration, Travels & Other Expenses, Coastal Permits L.S. $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 L.S.
144 REF. SUBTOTALS for Calc.: $312,417 $345,408 $378,398
145
146 X.4 State Parks Standard Allocation for Internal Project Admin. / Management Costs (10% x All-In Project Total) 10.0% $31,242 $34,541 $37,840 10.0%
147
148 Y STATE PARKS FOUNDATION DIRECT INTERNAL PROJECT / SOFT COSTS
149 Y.1 State Parks Foundation Allocation for Internal Project Admin. / Management Costs -- Carried Separate from This Budget 0.0% Excluded Excluded Excluded 0.0%
150
151 VI. ADD STATE DEPT. of PARKS & RECREATION DIRECT / INTERNAL PROJECT COSTS: 25.0% $68,734 $72,033 $75,332 22.1%
152
153
154 10.6% 9.6%
155 TOTAL PROJECT PROBABLE-COSTS RANGE: CONSTRUCTION & OWNER-
156 DIRECT TOTAL WITH ALL FACTORS: $343,659 $36,290 $379,949 $36,290 $416,238
157 LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE
158 (Project Total / Raw (Project Total / Raw
159 Note Gross Project Factors at This Point of Cost Development (Total Project Cost Divided by Raw Trade Cost) Trade Costs) 490.9% 482.5% 475.7% Trade Costs)
160
161
File No. revSUMMARIES PHASED Draft7 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 10:12 AM printing P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, CA Tel. 415.389.0305
Draft 07 PIGEON POINT LIGHT STATION REHABILITATION PROJECT: CONCEPTUAL BUDGET PHASED
11 Feb. 2009 -- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group -- SCENARIOS
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X
3
4
5
6
PHASE 1 SCENARIO: Fresnel Lens Removal & Interim Stabilization -- "CONVENTIONAL DELIVERY METHOD" BUDGET SUMMARY
162
163 Phase 1: S-4 of 4
164
165
166
167 PHASED PROJECT SCENARIO: SUMMARY ALL-IN COSTS BREAKDOWN
168
169 BY PROJECT ELEMENT: LOW RANGE HIGH RANGE
170
Averaged
171
172
173 PROJECT ELEMENT #1 Pre-Construction Project Tasks: Lens Removal & Interim Bldg. Stabilization $343,659 $379,949 $416,238
174
175 PROJECT ELEMENT #2 Rehabilitation of the Lighthouse Tower (upper levels, 5th landing and above): $0 $0 $0
176
177 PROJECT ELEMENT #3 Rehabilitation of the Lighthouse Tower (lower levels, up to 5th landing): $0 $0 $0
178
179 PROJECT ELEMENT #4 Rehabilitation of the Oil House: $0 $0 $0
180
181
182 $343,659 $379,949 $416,238
183 LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192 V. ASSUMPTIONS & QUALIFICATIONS TEXT SECTION:
193
194 A BASIS: Drawings, Correspondence, Reports, Photodocumentation and Misc. Documents Furnished by Architectural Resources ("A.R.G."), San Francisco, and A.R.G.'s Subconsultants / Resources.
195 B ASSUME (for This Base Scope Study) Work of All Trades Will be Fully-Designed / Exclude Design-Build Trade Work & Costs.
196
197
NOTE: Based on Highly Specialized / Rarefied Project Scope Recommend Consideration Be Given to Design-Build Approach; Competitive Proposals to Respond to Carefully Developed Criteria to Screen Out Unqualified Design-Build Vendors.
198 C ASSUME Work to be Bid by, Awarded to and Performed by a Single, Prime Builder (Compressed Schedule May Drive Shift Work / Premium Cost Allocations Currently Included -- See Summary).
199 D ASSUME All Work Can be Completed Under a "Normal" Construction Schedule, Therefore Limited Shift Work Premiums Are Not Contemplated & Excluded.
200 E ASSUME No Substantive Change in Project Scope & Detailing Subsequent to this Status of Design / Construction Documents.
201 F EXCLUDE Any and All Site Improvements Scope, Unless Specifically Named and Quantified Herein.
202 G EXCLUDE A.D.A. Compliance / Accessibility Scope.
203 H EXCLUDE Hazardous Materials Issues Scope or Costs of Any Kind Beyond Any Limited Capacity Set Forth Herein.
204 I EXCLUDE Any New Project / Program Non-Fixed Furniture, Fixtures & Equipment Scope or Costs.
205 J EXCLUDE Dealing with Existing Non-Fixed Furnishings, Contents, etc., Except As Provided for in Summary; Ditto Move-Outs / Storage / Move-Ins, Temporary Facilities Costs, etc.
206 K EXCLUDE Any Cost Allocations Associated with Impacts of Code Updates Becoming Applicable Due to Overall Phasing of Program Through 2021.
207 L EXCLUSION RE: Factor III.B., Bidding Climate Factor Reserve -- Exclude Any Cost Allocations Intended to "Cushion" or Otherwise Offset Construction Bidding / Marketplace Condition & Related Impacts During Overall Phased
208 Implementation of Program 2009 Through 2021. Routine Escalation Factor Applied May Be Inadequate to Cover The Vagaries of the Marketplace -- Periodic Detailed Reviews and Updates of All Budget Data and Factor Settings Over the
209 Life of This Construction Program Are Highly Recommended.
210
211 * DESIGN PHASE -- Allow for Phase 1 Design & Engineering &Balance of Preconstruction "Soft" Costs Only
212 ** CONSTRUCTION PHASE A / E Contract Admin., + Project Management & Balance of All Other "Soft" Costs
213
Program Indirect (Non-Construction Contract) Costs RE: Goods & Services Essential to Planning, Design, Documentation, Facilitation & Controls / Admin. of the Total Program. Includes: Fundraising; Architecture &
Engineering + Contract Admin.; Local & State Permits, Fees & Inspection; Testing & Inspection; Project Management / Owner Representation; Utilities Fees; Legal Fees; Project Insurances, Financing Costs, Accounting,
214 Misc. Administrative, ETC.
215
216
File No. revSUMMARIES PHASED Draft7 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 10:12 AM printing P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, CA Tel. 415.389.0305
Draft 07 PIGEON POINT LIGHT STATION REHABILITATION PROJECT: CONCEPTUAL BUDGET PHASED
11 Feb. 2009 -- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group -- SCENARIOS
Y Z AA AB AC AD AE AF AG AH AI AJ AK AL AM AN AO AP AQ AR AS AT AU AV
3
4
5
6
PHASE 2 SCENARIO: Rehabilitation of Upper Lighthouse Tower -- "CONVENTIONAL DELIVERY METHOD" BUDGET SUMMARY
7
8 Phase 2: S-1 of 4
9
10
11 I. SUBTOTAL FORWARD, AS-CALCULATED PROBABLE COST OF WORK IN TRADES -- SET INTO RANGE:
12 Distribution (in LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE Distribution (in
13
14 Low Range): High Range):
15 PROJECT ELEMENT #1 Pre-Construction Project Tasks: Lens Removal & Interim Bldg. Stabilization BASE SCOPE:
16 I. Fresnel Lens Dismantling, Packing & Removal + Interim Stabilization Allocation N/A $0 $0 $0 N/A
17
18 SUBTOTALS: $0 $0 $0
19
20 PROJECT ELEMENT #2 Rehabilitation of the Lighthouse Tower (upper levels, 5th landing and above): BASE SCOPE:
21 I. Selective demolition scope and sequence: $188,425 $221,399 $254,374
22 II. Reinstallation scope and sequence: 100.0% $594,938 $699,052 $803,166 100.0%
23 III. Other Elements: $31,000 $33,325 $35,650
24 SUBTOTALS: $814,363 $953,776 $1,093,190
25
26 PROJECT ELEMENT #3 Rehabilitation of the Lighthouse Tower (lower levels, up to 5th landing): BASE SCOPE:
27 I. Lighthouse – exterior $0 $0 $0
N/A N/A
28 II. Lighthouse – interior $0 $0 $0
29 SUBTOTALS: $0 $0 $0
30
31 PROJECT ELEMENT #4 Rehabilitation of the Oil House: BASE SCOPE:
32 I. Oil House – exterior $0 $0 $0
N/A N/A
33 II. Oil House – interior $0 $0 $0
34 SUBTOTALS: $0 $0 $0
35
36
37 A As-Calculated Subtotals from Supporting Trade Cost Estimate Sections (OR: Net Capacity for Raw Trade Costs): 100.0% $814,363 $953,776 $1,093,190 100.0%
38
39 Note Developed Low Range & High Range Factors: 100.0% 117.1% 134.2% Factors
40
41 II. INTEGRAL PROJECT CONSTRUCTION FACTORS (RE: Prime Builder / General Contractor Role)
42
43 II. A Conceptual Budget Phase Design / Program & Estimating Contingencies on Trade Scope 25.0% $203,591 $238,444 $273,297 25.0%
44
45 SUBTOTALS, ADJUSTED TRADE SCOPE RANGE: $1,017,953 $1,192,220 $1,366,487
46
47 II. B Allow for Bonding on Selected Subs (Subguard) 1.50% $15,269 $17,883 $20,497 1.50%
48 II. C DIV. 1 -- Basic General Contractor's General Conditions + Location Premium Costs (Overall Schedule T.B.D.) 25.0% $254,488 $298,055 $341,622 25.0%
49 II. D DIV. 1 -- Specialized Provisions: Crane, Hoisting, Work Platforms, Safety Systems & Procedures, Housing & Per Diem Costs 30.0% $305,386 $357,666 $409,946 30.0%
50 II. E Supplementary Conditions (Includes Cost Impacts / Premiums RE: Client Procedural Requirements, etc.) 5.0% $40,718 $47,689 $54,659 5.0%
51 II. F Gross Receipts Tax Assume N / A 0.00% $0 $0 $0 0.00%
52 SUBTOTALS, ADJUSTED TRADE SCOPE + CONTRACTR FACTORS PRIOR TO O.H.&P. ASSESSMENT, IN RANGE: $1,633,815 $1,913,514 $2,193,212
53 II. G Prime / General Contractor's Home Office Overhead & Insurance 20.0% $326,763 $382,703 $438,642 20.0%
54 II. H Prime / General Contractor's Profit + Risk Factor 15.0% $245,072 $287,027 $328,982 15.0%
55
56 CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTALS RANGE: $2,205,651 $2,583,243 $2,960,836
57 Apply Other Factors:
58
59 II. I Construction Operational Requirements / Phasing & Schedule Compression Cost Impacts to Builder Assume N / A 0.0% $0 $0 $0 0.0%
60 II. J 100% Payment & Performance Bond (Assume Required for Prime / General Contractor) 2.00% $44,113 $51,665 $59,217 2.00%
61
62 CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL RANGE BEFORE ESCALATION & BIDDING CLIMATE FACTOR: $2,249,764 $2,634,908 $3,020,053
63
64 Proceed to Completion of Integral Project Construction Factors Section, Below:
File No. revSUMMARIES PHASED Draft7 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 10:12 AM printing P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, CA Tel. 415.389.0305
Draft 07 PIGEON POINT LIGHT STATION REHABILITATION PROJECT: CONCEPTUAL BUDGET PHASED
11 Feb. 2009 -- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group -- SCENARIOS
Y Z AA AB AC AD AE AF AG AH AI AJ AK AL AM AN AO AP AQ AR AS AT AU AV
3
4
5
6
PHASE 2 SCENARIO: Rehabilitation of Upper Lighthouse Tower -- "CONVENTIONAL DELIVERY METHOD" BUDGET SUMMARY
65
66 Phase 2: S-2 of 4
67
68
69
70 REPEAT SUBTOTAL AFTER II.: CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL RANGE BEFORE ESCALATION & BIDDING CLIMATE FACTOR: $2,249,764 $2,634,908 $3,020,053
71
72 III. NOTED CONDITIONING FACTORS RE: CONSTRUCTION MARKETPLACE: Factor: Factor:
73
74 III. A Interim Cost Escalation Factor -- General Allowance (Assume Midpoint of Constr. Phase = Approx. 24 Mos. Out) 10.0% $224,976 $263,491 $302,005 10.0%
75
76
77 PROJECT POINT-OF-AWARD CONSTRUCTION TOTALS: LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE
78 17.1% 14.6%
79 ANTICIPATED POINT-OF-AWARD CONSTRUCTION TOTAL RANGE WITHOUT BIDDING CLIMATE FACTOR: $2,474,740 $423,659 $2,898,399 $423,659 $3,322,058
80
81 Note Gross Project Factors at This Point of Cost Development (Point-of-Award Construction Cost Divided by Raw Trade Cost) 303.9% 303.9% 303.9%
82
83
84 III. NOTED CONDITIONING FACTORS RE: CONSTRUCTION MARKETPLACE: Factor: Factor:
85
86 III. B Bidding Climate Factor Reserve T.B.D. T.B.D. T.B.D.
87 Construction Marketplace Volatility / "Cost Spike" & Under-Bid Exposures Require Cushioning Factors 0.0% $0 $0 $0 0.0%
88
89 ANTICIPATED POINT-OF-AWARD CONSTRUCTION TOTAL RANGE, PENDING: BIDDING CLIMATE FACTOR: LOW RANGE 17.1% Averaged 14.6% HIGH RANGE
90 Note: This Subtotal Serves as Basis for Assessment of Item V.D. Below: DESIGN PHASE Owner-Direct Costs) $2,474,740 $423,659 $2,898,399 $423,659 $3,322,058
91
92 Note Gross Project Factors at This Point of Cost Development (Point-of-Award Construction Cost Divided by Raw Trade Cost) 303.9% 303.9% 303.9%
93
94
95 Proceed to Owner-Direct Factors Section, Below; Additional Assumptions, Qualifications & Exclusions Incorporated into Estimate Detail Section:
96
File No. revSUMMARIES PHASED Draft7 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 10:12 AM printing P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, CA Tel. 415.389.0305
Draft 07 PIGEON POINT LIGHT STATION REHABILITATION PROJECT: CONCEPTUAL BUDGET PHASED
11 Feb. 2009 -- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group -- SCENARIOS
Y Z AA AB AC AD AE AF AG AH AI AJ AK AL AM AN AO AP AQ AR AS AT AU AV
3
4
5
6
PHASE 2 SCENARIO: Rehabilitation of Upper Lighthouse Tower -- "CONVENTIONAL DELIVERY METHOD" BUDGET SUMMARY
97
98 Phase 2: S-3 of 4
99
100
101 REPEAT FROM PREVIOUS PAGE: ANTICIPATED POINT-OF-AWARD CONSTRUCTION TOTAL RANGE WITH BIDDING CLIMATE FACTOR: $2,474,740 $2,898,399 $3,322,058
102
LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE
103 IV. ADD NOTED OWNER-PAID THIRD-PARTY (G.C.) PROJECT COST ALLOCATIONS, IN RANGE:
104 Owner-Controlled Course-of-Construction Reserves for Construction Contract: Factors Factors
105
106 A Change Order Contingency -- Plan Check Impacts on Scope & Costs (Exclude Code Change Impacts) 3.0% $74,242 $86,952 $99,662 3.0%
107 B Change Order Contingency -- For Implementation of Final Construction Documents (REHAB EXISTING) 12.5% $309,342 $362,300 $415,257 12.5%
108 C Change Order Contingency -- For Owner's Discretionary Scope Changes Identified During Construction 0.0% $0 $0 $0 0.0%
109 Owner-Controlled Course-of-Construction Reserves for Construction Contract: $383,585 17.1% $449,252 14.6% $514,919
110
111 ANTICIPATED CONSTRUCTION TOTAL INCLUDING OWNER-DIRECT / CHANGE ORDER RESERVES RANGE: $2,858,325 $489,326 $3,347,651 $489,326 $3,836,977
112
113 V. ADD NOTED OWNER-PAID THIRD-PARTY PROJECT COST ALLOCATIONS, IN RANGE:
114 Owner-Direct Project Non-Construction "Soft" Costs: Factors NOTE: Full Program (ALL PHASES) Design Costs Included in Phase 2 Factors
115
116 D * FULL PROGRAM DESIGN PHASE : Destructive Investigation, Architecture & Engineering + All Technical Disciplines + Preconstruction L.S. $550,000 $650,000 $750,000 L.S.
117
118 E ** CONSTRUCTION PHASE A / E Contract Admin., + Project Management & Balance of All Other "Soft" Costs 12.0% $342,999 $401,718 $460,437 12.0%
119
120 G General Allocation for Hazardous Materials Issues -- Assumed to be Non-Contractor Costs Say: L.S. $40,000 $40,000 $40,000 L.S.
121 H Furniture, Fixtures & Equipment Cost Allocations (Minimal) Say: L.S. $0 $0 $0 L.S.
122 I Temporary Facilities, Relocation, Moving & Placement Costs (Minimal) Say: L.S. $0 $0 $0 L.S.
123 J Contingency on the Above Owner-Direct Project Elements (Minimal) Say: 10.0% $93,300 17.0% $109,172 14.5% $125,044 10.0%
124
125 V. ADD NOTED OWNER-PAID THIRD-PARTY PROJECT COST ALLOCATIONS, IN RANGE: $1,026,299 $174,591 $1,200,890 $174,591 $1,375,481
126
127 35.9% 35.9% 35.8%
128
129
130
131 SUBTOTAL PROJECT COSTS RANGE: CONSTRUCTION & OWNER-DIRECT $3,884,624 $4,548,541 $5,212,458
132 TOTAL WITH ALL FACTORS: LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE
133
134 Note Gross Project Factors at This Point of Cost Development (Total Project Cost Divided by Raw Trade Cost) 477.0% 476.9% 476.8%
135
136
137 VI. ADD STATE DEPT. of PARKS & RECREATION DIRECT / INTERNAL PROJECT COSTS:
138 Allocations for Owner-Direct / Internal Project Non-Construction / "Soft" Costs: Factors Factors
139
140 X STATE DEPT. of PARKS & RECEREATION DIRECT INTERNAL PROJECT / SOFT COSTS
141 X.1 C.E.Q.A., Cultural Heritage & Natural Heritage (=$100,000) L.S. $95,000 $95,000 $95,000 L.S.
142 X.2 Construction Management, Project Management & Inspection 12.0% $466,155 $466,155 $466,155 8.9%
143 X.3 Office Administration, Bid Administration, Travels & Other Expenses, Coastal Permits L.S. $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 L.S.
144 REF. SUBTOTALS for Calc.: $4,455,778 $5,119,696 $5,783,613
145
146 X.4 State Parks Standard Allocation for Internal Project Admin. / Management Costs (10% x All-In Project Total) 10.0% $445,578 $511,970 $578,361 10.0%
147
148 Y STATE PARKS FOUNDATION DIRECT INTERNAL PROJECT / SOFT COSTS
149 Y.1 State Parks Foundation Allocation for Internal Project Admin. / Management Costs -- Carried Separate from This Budget 0.0% Excluded Excluded Excluded 0.0%
150
151 VI. ADD STATE DEPT. of PARKS & RECREATION DIRECT / INTERNAL PROJECT COSTS: 26.2% $1,016,733 $1,083,124 $1,149,516 22.1%
152
153
154 14.9% 13.0%
155 TOTAL PROJECT PROBABLE-COSTS RANGE: CONSTRUCTION & OWNER-
156 DIRECT TOTAL WITH ALL FACTORS: $4,901,356 $730,309 $5,631,665 $730,309 $6,361,974
157 LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE
158 (Project Total / Raw (Project Total / Raw
159 Note Gross Project Factors at This Point of Cost Development (Total Project Cost Divided by Raw Trade Cost) Trade Costs) 601.9% 590.5% 582.0% Trade Costs)
160
161
File No. revSUMMARIES PHASED Draft7 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 10:12 AM printing P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, CA Tel. 415.389.0305
Draft 07 PIGEON POINT LIGHT STATION REHABILITATION PROJECT: CONCEPTUAL BUDGET PHASED
11 Feb. 2009 -- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group -- SCENARIOS
Y Z AA AB AC AD AE AF AG AH AI AJ AK AL AM AN AO AP AQ AR AS AT AU AV
3
4
5
6
PHASE 2 SCENARIO: Rehabilitation of Upper Lighthouse Tower -- "CONVENTIONAL DELIVERY METHOD" BUDGET SUMMARY
162
163 Phase 2: S-4 of 4
164
165
166
167 PHASED PROJECT SCENARIO: SUMMARY ALL-IN COSTS BREAKDOWN
168
169 BY PROJECT ELEMENT: LOW RANGE HIGH RANGE
170
Averaged
171
172
173 PROJECT ELEMENT #1 Pre-Construction Project Tasks: Lens Removal & Interim Bldg. Stabilization $0 $0 $0
174
175 PROJECT ELEMENT #2 Rehabilitation of the Lighthouse Tower (upper levels, 5th landing and above): $4,901,356 $5,631,665 $6,361,974
176
177 PROJECT ELEMENT #3 Rehabilitation of the Lighthouse Tower (lower levels, up to 5th landing): $0 $0 $0
178
179 PROJECT ELEMENT #4 Rehabilitation of the Oil House: $0 $0 $0
180
181
182 $4,901,356 $5,631,665 $6,361,974
183 LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192 V. ASSUMPTIONS & QUALIFICATIONS TEXT SECTION:
193
194 A BASIS: Drawings, Correspondence, Reports, Photodocumentation and Misc. Documents Furnished by Architectural Resources ("A.R.G."), San Francisco, and A.R.G.'s Subconsultants / Resources.
195 B ASSUME (for This Base Scope Study) Work of All Trades Will be Fully-Designed / Exclude Design-Build Trade Work & Costs.
196
197
NOTE: Based on Highly Specialized / Rarefied Project Scope Recommend Consideration Be Given to Design-Build Approach; Competitive Proposals to Respond to Carefully Developed Criteria to Screen Out Unqualified Design-Build Vendors.
198 C ASSUME Work to be Bid by, Awarded to and Performed by a Single, Prime Builder (Compressed Schedule May Drive Shift Work / Premium Cost Allocations Currently Included -- See Summary).
199 D ASSUME All Work Can be Completed Under a "Normal" Construction Schedule, Therefore Limited Shift Work Premiums Are Not Contemplated & Excluded.
200 E ASSUME No Substantive Change in Project Scope & Detailing Subsequent to this Status of Design / Construction Documents.
201 F EXCLUDE Any and All Site Improvements Scope, Unless Specifically Named and Quantified Herein.
202 G EXCLUDE A.D.A. Compliance / Accessibility Scope.
203 H EXCLUDE Hazardous Materials Issues Scope or Costs of Any Kind Beyond Any Limited Capacity Set Forth Herein.
204 I EXCLUDE Any New Project / Program Non-Fixed Furniture, Fixtures & Equipment Scope or Costs.
205 J EXCLUDE Dealing with Existing Non-Fixed Furnishings, Contents, etc., Except As Provided for in Summary; Ditto Move-Outs / Storage / Move-Ins, Temporary Facilities Costs, etc.
206 K EXCLUDE Any Cost Allocations Associated with Impacts of Code Updates Becoming Applicable Due to Overall Phasing of Program Through 2021.
207 L EXCLUSION RE: Factor III.B., Bidding Climate Factor Reserve -- Exclude Any Cost Allocations Intended to "Cushion" or Otherwise Offset Construction Bidding / Marketplace Condition & Related Impacts During Overall Phased
208 Implementation of Program 2009 Through 2021. Routine Escalation Factor Applied May Be Inadequate to Cover The Vagaries of the Marketplace -- Periodic Detailed Reviews and Updates of All Budget Data and Factor Settings Over the
209 Life of This Construction Program Are Highly Recommended.
210
211 * FULL PROGRAM DESIGN PHASE : Destructive Investigation, Architecture & Engineering + All Technical Disciplines + Preconstruction "Soft" Costs
212 ** CONSTRUCTION PHASE A / E Contract Admin., + Project Management & Balance of All Other "Soft" Costs
213
Program Indirect (Non-Construction Contract) Costs RE: Goods & Services Essential to Planning, Design, Documentation, Facilitation & Controls / Admin. of the Total Program. Includes: Fundraising; Architecture &
Engineering + Contract Admin.; Local & State Permits, Fees & Inspection; Testing & Inspection; Project Management / Owner Representation; Utilities Fees; Legal Fees; Project Insurances, Financing Costs, Accounting,
214 Misc. Administrative, ETC.
215
216
File No. revSUMMARIES PHASED Draft7 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 10:12 AM printing P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, CA Tel. 415.389.0305
Draft 07 PIGEON POINT LIGHT STATION REHABILITATION PROJECT: CONCEPTUAL BUDGET PHASED
11 Feb. 2009 -- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group -- SCENARIOS
AW AX AY AZ BA BB BC BD BE BF BG BH BI BJ BK BL BM BN BO BP BQ BR BS BT
3
4
5
6
PHASE 3 SCENARIO: Rehabilitation of Lower Lighthouse Tower -- "CONVENTIONAL DELIVERY METHOD" BUDGET SUMMARY
7
8 Phase 3: S-1 of 4
9
10
11 I. SUBTOTAL FORWARD, AS-CALCULATED PROBABLE COST OF WORK IN TRADES -- SET INTO RANGE:
12 Distribution (in LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE Distribution (in
13
14 Low Range): High Range):
15 PROJECT ELEMENT #1 Pre-Construction Project Tasks: Lens Removal & Interim Bldg. Stabilization BASE SCOPE:
16 I. Fresnel Lens Dismantling, Packing & Removal + Interim Stabilization Allocation N/A $0 $0 $0 N/A
17
18 SUBTOTALS: $0 $0 $0
19
20 PROJECT ELEMENT #2 Rehabilitation of the Lighthouse Tower (upper levels, 5th landing and above): BASE SCOPE:
21 I. Selective demolition scope and sequence: $0 $0 $0
22 II. Reinstallation scope and sequence: N/A $0 $0 $0 N/A
23 III. Other Elements: $0 $0 $0
24 SUBTOTALS: $0 $0 $0
25
26 PROJECT ELEMENT #3 Rehabilitation of the Lighthouse Tower (lower levels, up to 5th landing): BASE SCOPE:
27 I. Lighthouse – exterior $220,065 $247,573 $275,081
100.0% 100.0%
28 II. Lighthouse – interior $123,864 $133,154 $142,444
29 SUBTOTALS: $343,929 $380,727 $417,525
30
31 PROJECT ELEMENT #4 Rehabilitation of the Oil House: BASE SCOPE:
32 I. Oil House – exterior $0 $0 $0
N/A N/A
33 II. Oil House – interior $0 $0 $0
34 SUBTOTALS: $0 $0 $0
35
36
37 A As-Calculated Subtotals from Supporting Trade Cost Estimate Sections (OR: Net Capacity for Raw Trade Costs): 100.0% $343,929 $380,727 $417,525 100.0%
38
39 Note Developed Low Range & High Range Factors: 100.0% 110.7% 121.4% Factors
40
41 II. INTEGRAL PROJECT CONSTRUCTION FACTORS (RE: Prime Builder / General Contractor Role)
42
43 II. A Conceptual Budget Phase Design / Program & Estimating Contingencies on Trade Scope 15.0% $51,589 $57,109 $62,629 15.0%
44
45 SUBTOTALS, ADJUSTED TRADE SCOPE RANGE: $395,519 $437,836 $480,154
46
47 II. B Allow for Bonding on Selected Subs (Subguard) 1.50% $5,933 $6,568 $7,202 1.50%
48 II. C DIV. 1 -- Basic General Contractor's General Conditions + Location Premium Costs (Overall Schedule T.B.D.) 20.0% $79,104 $87,567 $96,031 20.0%
49 II. D DIV. 1 -- Specialized Provisions: Crane, Hoisting, Work Platforms, Safety Systems & Procedures, Housing & Per Diem Costs 20.0% $79,104 $87,567 $96,031 20.0%
50 II. E Supplementary Conditions (Includes Cost Impacts / Premiums RE: Client Procedural Requirements, etc.) 5.0% $17,196 $19,036 $20,876 5.0%
51 II. F Gross Receipts Tax Assume N / A 0.00% $0 $0 $0 0.00%
52 SUBTOTALS, ADJUSTED TRADE SCOPE + CONTRACTR FACTORS PRIOR TO O.H.&P. ASSESSMENT, IN RANGE: $576,855 $638,575 $700,294
53 II. G Prime / General Contractor's Home Office Overhead & Insurance 20.0% $115,371 $127,715 $140,059 20.0%
54 II. H Prime / General Contractor's Profit + Risk Factor 12.0% $69,223 $76,629 $84,035 12.0%
55
56 CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTALS RANGE: $761,449 $842,919 $924,388
57 Apply Other Factors:
58
59 II. I Construction Operational Requirements / Phasing & Schedule Compression Cost Impacts to Builder Assume N / A 0.0% $0 $0 $0 0.0%
60 II. J 100% Payment & Performance Bond (Assume Required for Prime / General Contractor) 2.00% $15,229 $16,858 $18,488 2.00%
61
62 CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL RANGE BEFORE ESCALATION & BIDDING CLIMATE FACTOR: $776,678 $859,777 $942,876
63
64 Proceed to Completion of Integral Project Construction Factors Section, Below:
File No. revSUMMARIES PHASED Draft7 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 10:12 AM printing P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, CA Tel. 415.389.0305
Draft 07 PIGEON POINT LIGHT STATION REHABILITATION PROJECT: CONCEPTUAL BUDGET PHASED
11 Feb. 2009 -- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group -- SCENARIOS
AW AX AY AZ BA BB BC BD BE BF BG BH BI BJ BK BL BM BN BO BP BQ BR BS BT
3
4
5
6
PHASE 3 SCENARIO: Rehabilitation of Lower Lighthouse Tower -- "CONVENTIONAL DELIVERY METHOD" BUDGET SUMMARY
65
66 Phase 3: S-2 of 4
67
68
69
70 REPEAT SUBTOTAL AFTER II.: CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL RANGE BEFORE ESCALATION & BIDDING CLIMATE FACTOR: $776,678 $859,777 $942,876
71
72 III. NOTED CONDITIONING FACTORS RE: CONSTRUCTION MARKETPLACE: Factor: Factor:
73
74 III. A Interim Cost Escalation Factor -- General Allowance (Assume Midpoint of Constr. Phase = Approx. 7 Years Out) 48.0% $372,805 $412,693 $452,580 48.0%
75
76
77 PROJECT POINT-OF-AWARD CONSTRUCTION TOTALS: LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE
78 10.7% 9.7%
79 ANTICIPATED POINT-OF-AWARD CONSTRUCTION TOTAL RANGE WITHOUT BIDDING CLIMATE FACTOR: $1,149,483 $122,986 $1,272,470 $122,986 $1,395,456
80
81 Note Gross Project Factors at This Point of Cost Development (Point-of-Award Construction Cost Divided by Raw Trade Cost) 334.2% 334.2% 334.2%
82
83
84 III. NOTED CONDITIONING FACTORS RE: CONSTRUCTION MARKETPLACE: Factor: Factor:
85
86 III. B Bidding Climate Factor Reserve T.B.D. T.B.D. T.B.D.
87 Construction Marketplace Volatility / "Cost Spike" & Under-Bid Exposures Require Cushioning Factors 0.0% $0 $0 $0 0.0%
88
89 ANTICIPATED POINT-OF-AWARD CONSTRUCTION TOTAL RANGE, PENDING: BIDDING CLIMATE FACTOR: LOW RANGE 10.7% Averaged 9.7% HIGH RANGE
90 Note: This Subtotal Serves as Basis for Assessment of Item V.D. Below: DESIGN PHASE Owner-Direct Costs) $1,149,483 $122,986 $1,272,470 $122,986 $1,395,456
91
92 Note Gross Project Factors at This Point of Cost Development (Point-of-Award Construction Cost Divided by Raw Trade Cost) 334.2% 334.2% 334.2%
93
94
95 Proceed to Owner-Direct Factors Section, Below; Additional Assumptions, Qualifications & Exclusions Incorporated into Estimate Detail Section:
96
File No. revSUMMARIES PHASED Draft7 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 10:12 AM printing P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, CA Tel. 415.389.0305
Draft 07 PIGEON POINT LIGHT STATION REHABILITATION PROJECT: CONCEPTUAL BUDGET PHASED
11 Feb. 2009 -- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group -- SCENARIOS
AW AX AY AZ BA BB BC BD BE BF BG BH BI BJ BK BL BM BN BO BP BQ BR BS BT
3
4
5
6
PHASE 3 SCENARIO: Rehabilitation of Lower Lighthouse Tower -- "CONVENTIONAL DELIVERY METHOD" BUDGET SUMMARY
97
98 Phase 3: S-3 of 4
99
100
101 REPEAT FROM PREVIOUS PAGE: ANTICIPATED POINT-OF-AWARD CONSTRUCTION TOTAL RANGE WITH BIDDING CLIMATE FACTOR: $1,149,483 $1,272,470 $1,395,456
102
LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE
103 IV. ADD NOTED OWNER-PAID THIRD-PARTY (G.C.) PROJECT COST ALLOCATIONS, IN RANGE:
104 Owner-Controlled Course-of-Construction Reserves for Construction Contract: Factors Factors
105
106 A Change Order Contingency -- Plan Check Impacts on Scope & Costs (Exclude Code Change Impacts) 3.0% $34,485 $38,174 $41,864 3.0%
107 B Change Order Contingency -- For Implementation of Final Construction Documents (REHAB EXISTING) 10.0% $114,948 $127,247 $139,546 10.0%
108 C Change Order Contingency -- For Owner's Discretionary Scope Changes Identified During Construction 0.0% $0 $0 $0 0.0%
109 Owner-Controlled Course-of-Construction Reserves for Construction Contract: $149,433 10.7% $165,421 9.7% $181,409
110
111 ANTICIPATED CONSTRUCTION TOTAL INCLUDING OWNER-DIRECT / CHANGE ORDER RESERVES RANGE: $1,298,916 $138,975 $1,437,891 $138,975 $1,576,866
112
113 V. ADD NOTED OWNER-PAID THIRD-PARTY PROJECT COST ALLOCATIONS, IN RANGE:
114 Owner-Direct Project Non-Construction "Soft" Costs: Factors Factors
115
116 D * DESIGN PHASE -- Allow for Comprehensive Minor Adjustments to Preconstruction "Soft" Costs 5.0% $57,474 $63,623 $69,773 5.0%
117
118 E ** CONSTRUCTION PHASE A / E Contract Admin., + Project Management & Balance of All Other "Soft" Costs 10.0% $129,892 $143,789 $157,687 10.0%
119
120 G General Allocation for Hazardous Materials Issues -- Assumed to be Non-Contractor Costs Say: L.S. $25,000 $25,000 $25,000 L.S.
121 H Furniture, Fixtures & Equipment Cost Allocations (Minimal) Say: L.S. $0 $0 $0 L.S.
122 I Temporary Facilities, Relocation, Moving & Placement Costs (Minimal) Say: L.S. $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 L.S.
123 J Contingency on the Above Owner-Direct Project Elements (Minimal) Say: 10.0% $22,237 9.0% $24,241 8.3% $26,246 10.0%
124
125 V. ADD NOTED OWNER-PAID THIRD-PARTY PROJECT COST ALLOCATIONS, IN RANGE: $244,602 $22,051 $266,654 $22,051 $288,705
126
127 18.8% 18.5% 18.3%
128
129
130
131 SUBTOTAL PROJECT COSTS RANGE: CONSTRUCTION & OWNER-DIRECT $1,543,519 $1,704,545 $1,865,571
132 TOTAL WITH ALL FACTORS: LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE
133
134 Note Gross Project Factors at This Point of Cost Development (Total Project Cost Divided by Raw Trade Cost) 448.8% 447.7% 446.8%
135
136
137 VI. ADD STATE DEPT. of PARKS & RECREATION DIRECT / INTERNAL PROJECT COSTS:
138 Allocations for Owner-Direct / Internal Project Non-Construction / "Soft" Costs: Factors Factors
139
140 X STATE DEPT. of PARKS & RECEREATION DIRECT INTERNAL PROJECT / SOFT COSTS
141 X.1 C.E.Q.A., Cultural Heritage & Natural Heritage (=$100,000) L.S. $0 $0 $0 L.S.
142 X.2 Construction Management, Project Management & Inspection 12.0% $185,222 $185,222 $185,222 9.9%
143 X.3 Office Administration, Bid Administration, Travels & Other Expenses, Coastal Permits L.S. $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 L.S.
144 REF. SUBTOTALS for Calc.: $1,733,741 $1,894,767 $2,055,793
145
146 X.4 State Parks Standard Allocation for Internal Project Admin. / Management Costs (10% x All-In Project Total) 10.0% $173,374 $189,477 $205,579 10.0%
147
148 Y STATE PARKS FOUNDATION DIRECT INTERNAL PROJECT / SOFT COSTS
149 Y.1 State Parks Foundation Allocation for Internal Project Admin. / Management Costs -- Carried Separate from This Budget 0.0% Excluded Excluded Excluded 0.0%
150
151 VI. ADD STATE DEPT. of PARKS & RECREATION DIRECT / INTERNAL PROJECT COSTS: 23.6% $363,596 $379,699 $395,802 21.2%
152
153
154 9.3% 8.5%
155 TOTAL PROJECT PROBABLE-COSTS RANGE: CONSTRUCTION & OWNER-
156 DIRECT TOTAL WITH ALL FACTORS: $1,907,115 $177,129 $2,084,244 $177,129 $2,261,373
157 LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE
158 (Project Total / Raw (Project Total / Raw
159 Note Gross Project Factors at This Point of Cost Development (Total Project Cost Divided by Raw Trade Cost) Trade Costs) 554.5% 547.4% 541.6% Trade Costs)
160
161
File No. revSUMMARIES PHASED Draft7 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 10:12 AM printing P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, CA Tel. 415.389.0305
Draft 07 PIGEON POINT LIGHT STATION REHABILITATION PROJECT: CONCEPTUAL BUDGET PHASED
11 Feb. 2009 -- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group -- SCENARIOS
AW AX AY AZ BA BB BC BD BE BF BG BH BI BJ BK BL BM BN BO BP BQ BR BS BT
3
4
5
6
PHASE 3 SCENARIO: Rehabilitation of Lower Lighthouse Tower -- "CONVENTIONAL DELIVERY METHOD" BUDGET SUMMARY
162
163 Phase 3: S-4 of 4
164
165
166
167 PHASED PROJECT SCENARIO: SUMMARY ALL-IN COSTS BREAKDOWN
168
169 BY PROJECT ELEMENT: LOW RANGE HIGH RANGE
170
Averaged
171
172
173 PROJECT ELEMENT #1 Pre-Construction Project Tasks: Lens Removal & Interim Bldg. Stabilization $0 $0 $0
174
175 PROJECT ELEMENT #2 Rehabilitation of the Lighthouse Tower (upper levels, 5th landing and above): $0 $0 $0
176
177 PROJECT ELEMENT #3 Rehabilitation of the Lighthouse Tower (lower levels, up to 5th landing): $1,907,115 $2,084,244 $2,261,373
178
179 PROJECT ELEMENT #4 Rehabilitation of the Oil House: $0 $0 $0
180
181
182 $1,907,115 $2,084,244 $2,261,373
183 LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192 V. ASSUMPTIONS & QUALIFICATIONS TEXT SECTION:
193
194 A BASIS: Drawings, Correspondence, Reports, Photodocumentation and Misc. Documents Furnished by Architectural Resources ("A.R.G."), San Francisco, and A.R.G.'s Subconsultants / Resources.
195 B ASSUME (for This Base Scope Study) Work of All Trades Will be Fully-Designed / Exclude Design-Build Trade Work & Costs.
196
197
NOTE: Based on Highly Specialized / Rarefied Project Scope Recommend Consideration Be Given to Design-Build Approach; Competitive Proposals to Respond to Carefully Developed Criteria to Screen Out Unqualified Design-Build Vendors.
198 C ASSUME Work to be Bid by, Awarded to and Performed by a Single, Prime Builder (Compressed Schedule May Drive Shift Work / Premium Cost Allocations Currently Included -- See Summary).
199 D ASSUME All Work Can be Completed Under a "Normal" Construction Schedule, Therefore Limited Shift Work Premiums Are Not Contemplated & Excluded.
200 E ASSUME No Substantive Change in Project Scope & Detailing Subsequent to this Status of Design / Construction Documents.
201 F EXCLUDE Any and All Site Improvements Scope, Unless Specifically Named and Quantified Herein.
202 G EXCLUDE A.D.A. Compliance / Accessibility Scope.
203 H EXCLUDE Hazardous Materials Issues Scope or Costs of Any Kind Beyond Any Limited Capacity Set Forth Herein.
204 I EXCLUDE Any New Project / Program Non-Fixed Furniture, Fixtures & Equipment Scope or Costs.
205 J EXCLUDE Dealing with Existing Non-Fixed Furnishings, Contents, etc., Except As Provided for in Summary; Ditto Move-Outs / Storage / Move-Ins, Temporary Facilities Costs, etc.
206 K EXCLUDE Any Cost Allocations Associated with Impacts of Code Updates Becoming Applicable Due to Overall Phasing of Program Through 2021.
207 L EXCLUSION RE: Factor III.B., Bidding Climate Factor Reserve -- Exclude Any Cost Allocations Intended to "Cushion" or Otherwise Offset Construction Bidding / Marketplace Condition & Related Impacts During Overall Phased
208 Implementation of Program 2009 Through 2021. Routine Escalation Factor Applied May Be Inadequate to Cover The Vagaries of the Marketplace -- Periodic Detailed Reviews and Updates of All Budget Data and Factor Settings Over the
209 Life of This Construction Program Are Highly Recommended.
210
211 * DESIGN PHASE -- Allow for Comprehensive Minor Adjustments to Preconstruction "Soft" Costs
212 ** CONSTRUCTION PHASE A / E Contract Admin., + Project Management & Balance of All Other "Soft" Costs
213
Program Indirect (Non-Construction Contract) Costs RE: Goods & Services Essential to Planning, Design, Documentation, Facilitation & Controls / Admin. of the Total Program. Includes: Fundraising; Architecture &
Engineering + Contract Admin.; Local & State Permits, Fees & Inspection; Testing & Inspection; Project Management / Owner Representation; Utilities Fees; Legal Fees; Project Insurances, Financing Costs, Accounting,
214 Misc. Administrative, ETC.
215
216
File No. revSUMMARIES PHASED Draft7 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 10:12 AM printing P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, CA Tel. 415.389.0305
Draft 07 PIGEON POINT LIGHT STATION REHABILITATION PROJECT: CONCEPTUAL BUDGET PHASED
11 Feb. 2009 -- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group -- SCENARIOS
BU BV BW BX BY BZ CA CB CC CD CE CF CG CH CI CJ CK CL CM CN CO CP CQ CR
3
4
5
6
PHASE 4 SCENARIO: Rehabilitation of Oil House -- "CONVENTIONAL DELIVERY METHOD" BUDGET SUMMARY
7
8 Phase 4: S-1 of 4
9
10
11 I. SUBTOTAL FORWARD, AS-CALCULATED PROBABLE COST OF WORK IN TRADES -- SET INTO RANGE:
12 Distribution (in LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE Distribution (in
13
14 Low Range): High Range):
15 PROJECT ELEMENT #1 Pre-Construction Project Tasks: Lens Removal & Interim Bldg. Stabilization BASE SCOPE:
16 I. Fresnel Lens Dismantling, Packing & Removal + Interim Stabilization Allocation N/A $0 $0 $0 N/A
17
18 SUBTOTALS: $0 $0 $0
19
20 PROJECT ELEMENT #2 Rehabilitation of the Lighthouse Tower (upper levels, 5th landing and above): BASE SCOPE:
21 I. Selective demolition scope and sequence: $0 $0 $0
22 II. Reinstallation scope and sequence: N/A $0 $0 $0 N/A
23 III. Other Elements: $0 $0 $0
24 SUBTOTALS: $0 $0 $0
25
26 PROJECT ELEMENT #3 Rehabilitation of the Lighthouse Tower (lower levels, up to 5th landing): BASE SCOPE:
27 I. Lighthouse – exterior $0 $0 $0
N/A N/A
28 II. Lighthouse – interior $0 $0 $0
29 SUBTOTALS: $0 $0 $0
30
31 PROJECT ELEMENT #4 Rehabilitation of the Oil House: BASE SCOPE:
32 I. Oil House – exterior $98,573 $110,894 $123,216
100.0% 100.0%
33 II. Oil House – interior $66,950 $71,971 $76,993
34 SUBTOTALS: $165,523 $182,865 $200,208
35
36
37 A As-Calculated Subtotals from Supporting Trade Cost Estimate Sections (OR: Net Capacity for Raw Trade Costs): 100.0% $165,523 $182,865 $200,208 100.0%
38
39 Note Developed Low Range & High Range Factors: 100.0% 110.5% 121.0% Factors
40
41 II. INTEGRAL PROJECT CONSTRUCTION FACTORS (RE: Prime Builder / General Contractor Role)
42
43 II. A Conceptual Budget Phase Design / Program & Estimating Contingencies on Trade Scope 15.0% $24,828 $27,430 $30,031 15.0%
44
45 SUBTOTALS, ADJUSTED TRADE SCOPE RANGE: $190,351 $210,295 $230,240
46
47 II. B Allow for Bonding on Selected Subs (Subguard) 1.50% $2,855 $3,154 $3,454 1.50%
48 II. C DIV. 1 -- Basic General Contractor's General Conditions + Location Premium Costs (Overall Schedule T.B.D.) 20.0% $38,070 $42,059 $46,048 20.0%
49 II. D DIV. 1 -- Specialized Provisions: Crane, Hoisting, Work Platforms, Safety Systems & Procedures, Housing & Per Diem Costs 10.0% $19,035 $21,030 $23,024 10.0%
50 II. E Supplementary Conditions (Includes Cost Impacts / Premiums RE: Client Procedural Requirements, etc.) 5.0% $8,276 $9,143 $10,010 5.0%
51 II. F Gross Receipts Tax Assume N / A 0.00% $0 $0 $0 0.00%
52 SUBTOTALS, ADJUSTED TRADE SCOPE + CONTRACTR FACTORS PRIOR TO O.H.&P. ASSESSMENT, IN RANGE: $258,588 $285,682 $312,775
53 II. G Prime / General Contractor's Home Office Overhead & Insurance 15.0% $38,788 $42,852 $46,916 15.0%
54 II. H Prime / General Contractor's Profit + Risk Factor 10.0% $25,859 $28,568 $31,278 10.0%
55
56 CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTALS RANGE: $323,235 $357,102 $390,969
57 Apply Other Factors:
58
59 II. I Construction Operational Requirements / Phasing & Schedule Compression Cost Impacts to Builder Assume N / A 0.0% $0 $0 $0 0.0%
60 II. J 100% Payment & Performance Bond (Assume Required for Prime / General Contractor) 1.50% $4,849 $5,357 $5,865 1.50%
61
62 CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL RANGE BEFORE ESCALATION & BIDDING CLIMATE FACTOR: $328,083 $362,459 $396,834
63
64 Proceed to Completion of Integral Project Construction Factors Section, Below:
File No. revSUMMARIES PHASED Draft7 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 10:12 AM printing P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, CA Tel. 415.389.0305
Draft 07 PIGEON POINT LIGHT STATION REHABILITATION PROJECT: CONCEPTUAL BUDGET PHASED
11 Feb. 2009 -- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group -- SCENARIOS
BU BV BW BX BY BZ CA CB CC CD CE CF CG CH CI CJ CK CL CM CN CO CP CQ CR
3
4
5
6
PHASE 4 SCENARIO: Rehabilitation of Oil House -- "CONVENTIONAL DELIVERY METHOD" BUDGET SUMMARY
65
66 Phase 4: S-2 of 4
67
68
69
70 REPEAT SUBTOTAL AFTER II.: CONSTRUCTION SUBTOTAL RANGE BEFORE ESCALATION & BIDDING CLIMATE FACTOR: $328,083 $362,459 $396,834
71
72 III. NOTED CONDITIONING FACTORS RE: CONSTRUCTION MARKETPLACE: Factor: Factor:
73
74 III. A Interim Cost Escalation Factor -- General Allowance (Assume Midpoint of Constr. Phase = Approx. 12 Years Out) 87.0% $285,432 $315,339 $345,245 87.0%
75
76
77 PROJECT POINT-OF-AWARD CONSTRUCTION TOTALS: LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE
78 10.5% 9.5%
79 ANTICIPATED POINT-OF-AWARD CONSTRUCTION TOTAL RANGE WITHOUT BIDDING CLIMATE FACTOR: $613,516 $64,282 $677,797 $64,282 $742,079
80
81 Note Gross Project Factors at This Point of Cost Development (Point-of-Award Construction Cost Divided by Raw Trade Cost) 370.7% 370.7% 370.7%
82
83
84 III. NOTED CONDITIONING FACTORS RE: CONSTRUCTION MARKETPLACE: Factor: Factor:
85
86 III. B Bidding Climate Factor Reserve T.B.D. T.B.D. T.B.D.
87 Construction Marketplace Volatility / "Cost Spike" & Under-Bid Exposures Require Cushioning Factors 0.0% $0 $0 $0 0.0%
88
89 ANTICIPATED POINT-OF-AWARD CONSTRUCTION TOTAL RANGE, PENDING: BIDDING CLIMATE FACTOR: LOW RANGE 10.5% Averaged 9.5% HIGH RANGE
90 Note: This Subtotal Serves as Basis for Assessment of Item V.D. Below: DESIGN PHASE Owner-Direct Costs) $613,516 $64,282 $677,797 $64,282 $742,079
91
92 Note Gross Project Factors at This Point of Cost Development (Point-of-Award Construction Cost Divided by Raw Trade Cost) 370.7% 370.7% 370.7%
93
94
95 Proceed to Owner-Direct Factors Section, Below; Additional Assumptions, Qualifications & Exclusions Incorporated into Estimate Detail Section:
96
File No. revSUMMARIES PHASED Draft7 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 10:12 AM printing P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, CA Tel. 415.389.0305
Draft 07 PIGEON POINT LIGHT STATION REHABILITATION PROJECT: CONCEPTUAL BUDGET PHASED
11 Feb. 2009 -- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group -- SCENARIOS
BU BV BW BX BY BZ CA CB CC CD CE CF CG CH CI CJ CK CL CM CN CO CP CQ CR
3
4
5
6
PHASE 4 SCENARIO: Rehabilitation of Oil House -- "CONVENTIONAL DELIVERY METHOD" BUDGET SUMMARY
97
98 Phase 4: S-3 of 4
99
100
101 REPEAT FROM PREVIOUS PAGE: ANTICIPATED POINT-OF-AWARD CONSTRUCTION TOTAL RANGE WITH BIDDING CLIMATE FACTOR: $613,516 $677,797 $742,079
102
LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE
103 IV. ADD NOTED OWNER-PAID THIRD-PARTY (G.C.) PROJECT COST ALLOCATIONS, IN RANGE:
104 Owner-Controlled Course-of-Construction Reserves for Construction Contract: Factors Factors
105
106 A Change Order Contingency -- Plan Check Impacts on Scope & Costs (Exclude Code Change Impacts) 3.0% $18,405 $20,334 $22,262 3.0%
107 B Change Order Contingency -- For Implementation of Final Construction Documents (REHAB EXISTING) 10.0% $61,352 $67,780 $74,208 10.0%
108 C Change Order Contingency -- For Owner's Discretionary Scope Changes Identified During Construction 5.0% $30,676 $33,890 $37,104 5.0%
109 Owner-Controlled Course-of-Construction Reserves for Construction Contract: $110,433 10.5% $122,004 9.5% $133,574
110
111 ANTICIPATED CONSTRUCTION TOTAL INCLUDING OWNER-DIRECT / CHANGE ORDER RESERVES RANGE: $723,948 $75,853 $799,801 $75,853 $875,654
112
113 V. ADD NOTED OWNER-PAID THIRD-PARTY PROJECT COST ALLOCATIONS, IN RANGE:
114 Owner-Direct Project Non-Construction "Soft" Costs: Factors Factors
115
116 D * DESIGN PHASE -- Allow for Comprehensive Minor Adjustments to Preconstruction "Soft" Costs 5.0% $30,676 $33,890 $37,104 5.0%
117
118 E ** CONSTRUCTION PHASE A / E Contract Admin., + Project Management & Balance of All Other "Soft" Costs 10.0% $72,395 $79,980 $87,565 10.0%
119
120 G General Allocation for Hazardous Materials Issues -- Assumed to be Non-Contractor Costs Say: L.S. $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 L.S.
121 H Furniture, Fixtures & Equipment Cost Allocations (Minimal) Say: L.S. $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 L.S.
122 I Temporary Facilities, Relocation, Moving & Placement Costs (Minimal) Say: L.S. $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 L.S.
123 J Contingency on the Above Owner-Direct Project Elements (Minimal) Say: 10.0% $12,807 8.4% $13,887 7.8% $14,967 10.0%
124
125 V. ADD NOTED OWNER-PAID THIRD-PARTY PROJECT COST ALLOCATIONS, IN RANGE: $140,878 $11,879 $152,757 $11,879 $164,636
126
127 19.5% 19.1% 18.8%
128
129
130
131 SUBTOTAL PROJECT COSTS RANGE: CONSTRUCTION & OWNER-DIRECT $864,826 $952,558 $1,040,290
132 TOTAL WITH ALL FACTORS: LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE
133
134 Note Gross Project Factors at This Point of Cost Development (Total Project Cost Divided by Raw Trade Cost) 522.5% 520.9% 519.6%
135
136
137 VI. ADD STATE DEPT. of PARKS & RECREATION DIRECT / INTERNAL PROJECT COSTS:
138 Allocations for Owner-Direct / Internal Project Non-Construction / "Soft" Costs: Factors Factors
139
140 X STATE DEPT. of PARKS & RECEREATION DIRECT INTERNAL PROJECT / SOFT COSTS
141 X.1 C.E.Q.A., Cultural Heritage & Natural Heritage (=$100,000) L.S. $0 $0 $0 L.S.
142 X.2 Construction Management, Project Management & Inspection 10.0% $86,483 $86,483 $86,483 8.3%
143 X.3 Office Administration, Bid Administration, Travels & Other Expenses, Coastal Permits L.S. $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 L.S.
144 REF. SUBTOTALS for Calc.: $956,309 $1,044,041 $1,131,772
145
146 X.4 State Parks Standard Allocation for Internal Project Admin. / Management Costs (10% x All-In Project Total) 10.0% $95,631 $104,404 $113,177 10.0%
147
148 Y STATE PARKS FOUNDATION DIRECT INTERNAL PROJECT / SOFT COSTS
149 Y.1 State Parks Foundation Allocation for Internal Project Admin. / Management Costs -- Carried Separate from This Budget 0.0% Excluded Excluded Excluded 0.0%
150
151 VI. ADD STATE DEPT. of PARKS & RECREATION DIRECT / INTERNAL PROJECT COSTS: 21.6% $187,113 $195,887 $204,660 19.7%
152
153
154 9.2% 8.4%
155 TOTAL PROJECT PROBABLE-COSTS RANGE: CONSTRUCTION & OWNER-
156 DIRECT TOTAL WITH ALL FACTORS: $1,051,940 $96,505 $1,148,445 $96,505 $1,244,950
157 LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE
158 (Project Total / Raw (Project Total / Raw
159 Note Gross Project Factors at This Point of Cost Development (Total Project Cost Divided by Raw Trade Cost) Trade Costs) 635.5% 628.0% 621.8% Trade Costs)
160
161
File No. revSUMMARIES PHASED Draft7 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 10:12 AM printing P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, CA Tel. 415.389.0305
Draft 07 PIGEON POINT LIGHT STATION REHABILITATION PROJECT: CONCEPTUAL BUDGET PHASED
11 Feb. 2009 -- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group -- SCENARIOS
BU BV BW BX BY BZ CA CB CC CD CE CF CG CH CI CJ CK CL CM CN CO CP CQ CR
3
4
5
6
PHASE 4 SCENARIO: Rehabilitation of Oil House -- "CONVENTIONAL DELIVERY METHOD" BUDGET SUMMARY
162
163 Phase 4: S-4 of 4
164
165
166
167 PHASED PROJECT SCENARIO: SUMMARY ALL-IN COSTS BREAKDOWN
168
169 BY PROJECT ELEMENT: LOW RANGE HIGH RANGE
170
Averaged
171
172
173 PROJECT ELEMENT #1 Pre-Construction Project Tasks: Lens Removal & Interim Bldg. Stabilization $0 $0 $0
174
175 PROJECT ELEMENT #2 Rehabilitation of the Lighthouse Tower (upper levels, 5th landing and above): $0 $0 $0
176
177 PROJECT ELEMENT #3 Rehabilitation of the Lighthouse Tower (lower levels, up to 5th landing): $0 $0 $0
178
179 PROJECT ELEMENT #4 Rehabilitation of the Oil House: $1,051,940 $1,148,445 $1,244,950
180
181
182 $1,051,940 $1,148,445 $1,244,950
183 LOW RANGE Averaged HIGH RANGE
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192 V. ASSUMPTIONS & QUALIFICATIONS TEXT SECTION:
193
194 A BASIS: Drawings, Correspondence, Reports, Photodocumentation and Misc. Documents Furnished by Architectural Resources ("A.R.G."), San Francisco, and A.R.G.'s Subconsultants / Resources.
195 B ASSUME (for This Base Scope Study) Work of All Trades Will be Fully-Designed / Exclude Design-Build Trade Work & Costs.
196
197
NOTE: Based on Highly Specialized / Rarefied Project Scope Recommend Consideration Be Given to Design-Build Approach; Competitive Proposals to Respond to Carefully Developed Criteria to Screen Out Unqualified Design-Build Vendors.
198 C ASSUME Work to be Bid by, Awarded to and Performed by a Single, Prime Builder (Compressed Schedule May Drive Shift Work / Premium Cost Allocations Currently Included -- See Summary).
199 D ASSUME All Work Can be Completed Under a "Normal" Construction Schedule, Therefore Limited Shift Work Premiums Are Not Contemplated & Excluded.
200 E ASSUME No Substantive Change in Project Scope & Detailing Subsequent to this Status of Design / Construction Documents.
201 F EXCLUDE Any and All Site Improvements Scope, Unless Specifically Named and Quantified Herein.
202 G EXCLUDE A.D.A. Compliance / Accessibility Scope.
203 H EXCLUDE Hazardous Materials Issues Scope or Costs of Any Kind Beyond Any Limited Capacity Set Forth Herein.
204 I EXCLUDE Any New Project / Program Non-Fixed Furniture, Fixtures & Equipment Scope or Costs.
205 J EXCLUDE Dealing with Existing Non-Fixed Furnishings, Contents, etc., Except As Provided for in Summary; Ditto Move-Outs / Storage / Move-Ins, Temporary Facilities Costs, etc.
206 K EXCLUDE Any Cost Allocations Associated with Impacts of Code Updates Becoming Applicable Due to Overall Phasing of Program Through 2021.
207 L EXCLUSION RE: Factor III.B., Bidding Climate Factor Reserve -- Exclude Any Cost Allocations Intended to "Cushion" or Otherwise Offset Construction Bidding / Marketplace Condition & Related Impacts During Overall Phased
208 Implementation of Program 2009 Through 2021. Routine Escalation Factor Applied May Be Inadequate to Cover The Vagaries of the Marketplace -- Periodic Detailed Reviews and Updates of All Budget Data and Factor Settings Over the
209 Life of This Construction Program Are Highly Recommended.
210
211 * DESIGN PHASE -- Allow for Comprehensive Minor Adjustments to Preconstruction "Soft" Costs
212 ** CONSTRUCTION PHASE A / E Contract Admin., + Project Management & Balance of All Other "Soft" Costs
213
Program Indirect (Non-Construction Contract) Costs RE: Goods & Services Essential to Planning, Design, Documentation, Facilitation & Controls / Admin. of the Total Program. Includes: Fundraising; Architecture &
Engineering + Contract Admin.; Local & State Permits, Fees & Inspection; Testing & Inspection; Project Management / Owner Representation; Utilities Fees; Legal Fees; Project Insurances, Financing Costs, Accounting,
214 Misc. Administrative, ETC.
215
216
File No. revSUMMARIES PHASED Draft7 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 10:12 AM printing P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, CA Tel. 415.389.0305
Draft 06 Pigeon Point Light Station Rehabilitation: Conceptual Budget 2009 Est. Detail - 1 of 13
11 Feb. 2009 -- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group, San Francisco --
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S
1
2 Budgeted Trade Costs
3
DETAILED ESTIMATE SECTIONS: UNPHASED TRADE SCOPE & COSTS ONLY Grouped Trade Cost Subtotals:
Misc. Supporting
Calculations & Estimating Line Item Trade High Range
Scope Elements / Descriptions Comments Units Trade Cost Rates LOW RANGE HIGH RANGE
4 Quantities Costs Factors:
5
6
7 PROJECT ELEMENT #1:
8 Pre-Construction Project Tasks: Lens Removal & Interim Bldg. Stabilization
9
10 I. Fresnel Lens Removal and Reinstallation
11
Remove Fresnel lens assembly from tower for protection during
construction; return to reinstall / reassemble; includes all hoisting, 1 Week 1 Allow $27,500.00 $27,500
12 tagging, packing & unpacking
13 Allow for Removal Access / Curtain Wall Coordination Issues 1 Allow $7,500.00 $7,500
14 Note: Any Cost Allocation for Lens Components Storage Excluded
15
16 SUBTOTAL: I. Fresnel Lens Removal and Reinstallation $35,000 20% $42,000
17
18 II. Interim Stabilization Procedures
19 General Allowance for All Potential Tasks (Requires Further Study) 1 Allow $35,000.00 $35,000
20
21 SUBTOTAL: II. Interim Stabilization Procedures $35,000 30% $45,500
22
23 TOTAL PROJECT ELEMENT #1: Pre-Construction Project Tasks: Lens Removal & Interim Bldg. Stabilization $70,000 25% $87,500
24
25
File No. EST TRADE COSTS Draft6 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 9:15 AM P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, 415.389.0305
Draft 06 Pigeon Point Light Station Rehabilitation: Conceptual Budget 2009 Est. Detail - 2 of 13
11 Feb. 2009 -- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group, San Francisco --
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S
1
2 Budgeted Trade Costs
DETAILED ESTIMATE SECTIONS: UNPHASED TRADE SCOPE & COSTS ONLY Grouped Trade Cost Subtotals:
3 Misc. Supporting
Calculations & Estimating Line Item Trade High Range
Scope Elements / Descriptions Comments Units Trade Cost Rates LOW RANGE HIGH RANGE
4 Quantities Costs Factors:
5
26
27 PROJECT ELEMENT #2:
28 Rehabilitation of the Lighthouse Tower (upper levels, 5th landing and above):
29
30 BASE SCOPE:
31
32 I. Selective demolition scope and sequence:
33
34 Evaluate the condition of the Fresnel lens for disassembly. 1 LS $0.00 See Proj. Element #1
Remove Fresnel lens assembly from tower for protection during
A 1 Week 1 LS $0.00 See Proj. Element #1
35 construction
36
37 B Investigative demolition at gallery level:
38 Match mark all fabric to be removed. 1 LS $3,000.00 $3,000
39 1 Remove all loose portions of belt course Crane in Div. 1 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000
40
Temporarily stabilize existing wall plates and brackets with additional
2 1 LS $7,500.00 $7,500
41 cabling / bracing
Remove steel ring (tube or channel?) and cut off ends of radial tube beams
3 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000
42 at wall for use as temporary support during investigation
Remove one of the windows and surrounding brick at Service Room level
in order to investigate the condition of embedded ironwork associated with
4 1 Loc $7,000.00 $7,000
brackets (base bid assumes that extensive failure at window cheek wall and
tie-rods is found, see alternate for less extensive failure)
43
44 Remove brickwork on opposite side of same bracket to investigate tie rod connection 1 LS $800.00 $800
45
C Remove auxiliary beacon from lantern level and turn over to USCG
46
Coordinate beacon substitute or temporary outage with USCG for duration
1 1 LS $2,500.00 $2,500
47 of construction
48
Remove and dispose of deck extension and support for auxiliary beacon
D 1 LS $3,000.00 $3,000
49 at lantern level
50 Field measure, document and match mark all lantern components prior to removal. 1 LS $1,200.00 $1,200
51
52 E Remove and salvage vent ball from top of roof 1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500
53
File No. EST TRADE COSTS Draft6 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 9:15 AM P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, 415.389.0305
Draft 06 Pigeon Point Light Station Rehabilitation: Conceptual Budget 2009 Est. Detail - 3 of 13
11 Feb. 2009 -- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group, San Francisco --
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S
1
2 Budgeted Trade Costs
DETAILED ESTIMATE SECTIONS: UNPHASED TRADE SCOPE & COSTS ONLY Grouped Trade Cost Subtotals:
3 Misc. Supporting
Calculations & Estimating Line Item Trade High Range
Scope Elements / Descriptions Comments Units Trade Cost Rates LOW RANGE HIGH RANGE
4 Quantities Costs Factors:
5
54
55 PROJECT ELEMENT #2, Continued:
56
57 F Remove and salvage roof system from top of lantern by crane Crane in Div. 1 1 LS $15,000.00 $15,000
58
Match mark and disassemble lantern curtain wall and salvage all
G 380 CSF $20.00 $7,600
59 elements for reinstallation
60
61 H Remove exterior lantern deck and replacement railings:
62 1 Field measure, document and match mark all deck components prior to removal. 1 LS $2,000.00 $2,000
Remove lantern deck and salvage for use in replicating new decking to
2 114 SF $10.00 $1,140
63 match
64 3 Salvage deck for reinstallation 114 SF $20.00 $2,280
65 4 Dispose of railings & non-historic rain hood at cornice 52 LF $40.00 $2,080
66
If necessary, Remove stairs at lantern and gallery levels and salvage for
I 1 LS $3,000.00 $3,000
67 reinstallation
68
Remove exterior cast iron wall plates at gallery level, salvage interior
J 1 LS $15,000.00 $15,000
69 wall plates for reinstallation
70
71 K Selective demolition at gallery level:
1 Remove all non-historic diamond plate decking and replacement railings 203 SF 1 LS $10,000.00 $10,000
72
73 2 Salvage original decking for use in replicating new decking to match 203 SF $25.00 $5,075
74 3 Remove and dispose of steel tube assembly 1 LS $3,000.00 $3,000
75 Match mark and disassemble wall lintel plates for potential salvage or pattern. 1 LS $8,000.00 $8,000
4 Field measure & match-mark brackets and remove for repair/replacement 16 x $2K 1 LS $32,000.00 $32,000
76
Remove and dispose of belt course (salvage one section for use in
5 1 LS $3,000.00 $3,000
77 replicating new pieces to match)
78 6 Dismantle brick and iron wall down to belt course 705 CSF $50.00 $35,250
7 Remove back-up brick as needed to install reinforced concrete beam 1 LS $7,500.00 $7,500
79
80
81 SUBTOTAL: I. Selective demolition scope and sequence: $188,425 35% $254,374
82
File No. EST TRADE COSTS Draft6 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 9:15 AM P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, 415.389.0305
Draft 06 Pigeon Point Light Station Rehabilitation: Conceptual Budget 2009 Est. Detail - 4 of 13
11 Feb. 2009 -- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group, San Francisco --
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S
1
2 Budgeted Trade Costs
DETAILED ESTIMATE SECTIONS: UNPHASED TRADE SCOPE & COSTS ONLY Grouped Trade Cost Subtotals:
3 Misc. Supporting
Calculations & Estimating Line Item Trade High Range
Scope Elements / Descriptions Comments Units Trade Cost Rates LOW RANGE HIGH RANGE
4 Quantities Costs Factors:
5
83 PROJECT ELEMENT #2, Continued:
84
85 II. Reinstallation scope and sequence:
86
87 A Belt course:
88 1 Install new concrete ring beam at level of belt course 50 LF $900.00 $45,000
Install new cast iron belt course with expansion detail to allow for some
2 50 LF $850.00 $42,500
89 corrosion without failure of the ring
90
91 B Brackets:
92 1 Repair/replace brackets:
93 a Fabricate new interior flange made of stainless steel for all brackets 16 Ea $1,800.00 $28,800
94 b Bolt original exterior portion of bracket to new interior flange Incl. Adapt (E) 16 Ea $600.00 $9,600
c Cast new brackets to match for those too deteriorated to retain (assume 2) Incl. Pattern at $8K 2 Ea $7,500.00 $15,000
95
96 ADD If All Are Replaced: 14 Ea $3,500.00 $49,000 Incorporated Via Factor
Reinstall repaired/replaced brackets with new stainless steel tie-rods and
2 fasteners to match existing (existing 6’ and 8’ vertical bolts to remain in 16 Loc $2,500.00 $40,000
97 wall if possible)
98
Cast and install new deck (including original cornice molding) and
C Deck 203 SF $120.00 $24,360
99 railings at gallery level to match original
100 Cornice Molding 69 LF $300.00 $20,700
101 Railings 69 LF $250.00 $17,250
102 D Rebuild masonry infill wall at Gallery and Service Room levels
1 Install composite stainless steel ring beam at top of Service Room wall 38 LF $1,200.00 $45,600
103
Install reinforced concrete ring beam at the top of the Gallery Room wall
2 36 LF $900.00 $32,400
104 per structural report
105
Replace the exterior wall plates at gallery level with stainless steel plates
E 1 LS $27,000.00 $27,000
106 and paint to match original in appearance
107
108 F Reinstall interior wall plates at gallery level 1 LS $2,000.00 $2,000
109
110 G Reinstall cast iron stairs from gallery level up to lantern 1 LS $3,000.00 $3,000
111 1 Sandblast, prime and repaint stair system before reinstallation 1 LS $4,000.00 $4,000
112
File No. EST TRADE COSTS Draft6 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 9:15 AM P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, 415.389.0305
Draft 06 Pigeon Point Light Station Rehabilitation: Conceptual Budget 2009 Est. Detail - 5 of 13
11 Feb. 2009 -- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group, San Francisco --
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S
1
2 Budgeted Trade Costs
DETAILED ESTIMATE SECTIONS: UNPHASED TRADE SCOPE & COSTS ONLY Grouped Trade Cost Subtotals:
3 Misc. Supporting
Calculations & Estimating Line Item Trade High Range
Scope Elements / Descriptions Comments Units Trade Cost Rates LOW RANGE HIGH RANGE
4 Quantities Costs Factors:
5
113
114 PROJECT ELEMENT #2, Continued:
115
H Install new exterior decking and historic interior decking at lantern level
116
117 1 Cast new exterior decking at lantern level to match original 16 Plates 114 SF $325.00 $37,050
Connect new exterior decking to historic interior decking with splice plate
2 51 LF 114 SF N/A
118 below wall
119 3 Install new railings at lantern level to match original 51 LF $250.00 $12,750
120
121 I Reinstall curtain wall:
122 1 Chemically strip paint from all metal elements 1 LS $3,000.00 $3,000
Replace bronze fasteners with heavy duty stainless steel fasteners and
2 Teflon washers or tape for isolation where iron stiles come in contact with 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000
123 bronze mullions
Install all new 5/16” laminated safety glazing with neoprene setting blocks,
3 380 SF $50.00 $19,000
124 add layer of structural grade sealant
Replace ferrous lintel at top of curtain wall with stainless steel to match in
4 38 LF $125.00 $4,750
order to isolate iron roof structure from bronze mullion at top of wall
125
126
127 J Prep and repaint metal roof system , including vent ball 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000
128
129 K Reinstall roof system by crane 1 LS $7,500.00 $7,500
130
131 L Replace iron rods at exterior of lantern cornice in kind 1 LS $2,000.00 $2,000
132
133 M Install new railings at lantern level to match original 52 LF $250.00 $13,000
134
N Coordinate installation of new smaller beacon at railing with USCG 1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500
135
136
137 O Reinstall Fresnel lens 1 LS $25,000.00 $25,000
138
139 Ref. Subtotal Element #1: Apply Percentage Factor:
140 P Apply Complexity Factor $681,185 X 15% $102,178 $102,178
141
142 SUBTOTAL: II. Reinstallation scope and sequence: $594,938 35% $803,166
143
File No. EST TRADE COSTS Draft6 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 9:15 AM P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, 415.389.0305
Draft 06 Pigeon Point Light Station Rehabilitation: Conceptual Budget 2009 Est. Detail - 6 of 13
11 Feb. 2009 -- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group, San Francisco --
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S
1
2 Budgeted Trade Costs
DETAILED ESTIMATE SECTIONS: UNPHASED TRADE SCOPE & COSTS ONLY Grouped Trade Cost Subtotals:
3 Misc. Supporting
Calculations & Estimating Line Item Trade High Range
Scope Elements / Descriptions Comments Units Trade Cost Rates LOW RANGE HIGH RANGE
4 Quantities Costs Factors:
5
144
145 PROJECT ELEMENT #2, Continued:
146
147 III. Other Elements:
148
149 A Doors and Windows:
150 1 Cast and install new window frames for all 4 window openings 4 Loc $6,000.00 $24,000
151 3 Repair $800.00 $2,400
2 Repair/replace and repaint service room window sash (3 repair, 1 replace)
152 1 Replace $1,200.00 $1,200
Repair metal door at gallery level, replace existing hardware with more
3 1 LS $800.00 $800
153 historically compatible hardware
154
155 B Interior Doors:
156 1 Scrape loose paint from wood doors (2 total), prep and repaint 2 Ea $400.00 $800
157 2 Replace cracked metal frame at door in Gallery Room 1 LS $1,800.00 $1,800
158
159 SUBTOTAL: III. Other Elements: $31,000 15% $35,650
160
161 BASE SCOPE:
162
163 TOTAL PROJECT ELEMENT #2: Rehabilitation of the Lighthouse Tower (upper levels, 5th landing and above): $814,363 34% $1,093,190
164
165
File No. EST TRADE COSTS Draft6 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 9:15 AM P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, 415.389.0305
Draft 06 Pigeon Point Light Station Rehabilitation: Conceptual Budget 2009 Est. Detail - 7 of 13
11 Feb. 2009 -- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group, San Francisco --
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S
1
2 Budgeted Trade Costs
DETAILED ESTIMATE SECTIONS: UNPHASED TRADE SCOPE & COSTS ONLY Grouped Trade Cost Subtotals:
3 Misc. Supporting
Calculations & Estimating Line Item Trade High Range
Scope Elements / Descriptions Comments Units Trade Cost Rates LOW RANGE HIGH RANGE
4 Quantities Costs Factors:
5
166
167
168 ALTERNATE SCOPE for PROJECT ELEMENT #2 ONLY:
169 Averaged:
170 APPLY BASE SCOPE: SUBTOTAL $814,363 34% $1,093,190
171
172 IV Alternate for Upper Portion of Tower:
173
Install temporary bracing/shoring and protection as required to rebuild the Assume Primarily Div.
A walls in pie-shaped sections, rather than completely dismantling and 1 & Labor = Cost 1 LS ($50,000.00) ($50,000)
174 rebuilding wall Impacts
175
New embedded items to be replaced with stainless steel (assume +/-25%
B 1 LS $10,000.00 $10,000
176 replacement of anchors, etc.)
177
178 I. SUBTOTAL FORWARD, AS-CALCULATED PROBABLE COST OF WORK IN TRADES -- SET INTO RANGE: ($40,000) 34% ($53,695)
179
180 Note Gross Project Factors at This Point of Cost Development (Point-of-Award Construction Cost Divided by Raw Trade Cost) 264.1% 276.7%
181
182 $0 ($105,633) 34% ($148,553)
183
184
185
186 ALTERNATE SCOPE:
187
188 Averaged:
189 TOTAL PROJECT ELEMENT #2: w/ IV Alternate for Upper Portion of Tower: $774,363 34% $1,039,494
190
191
File No. EST TRADE COSTS Draft6 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 9:15 AM P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, 415.389.0305
Draft 06 Pigeon Point Light Station Rehabilitation: Conceptual Budget 2009 Est. Detail - 8 of 13
11 Feb. 2009 -- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group, San Francisco --
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S
1
2 Budgeted Trade Costs
DETAILED ESTIMATE SECTIONS: UNPHASED TRADE SCOPE & COSTS ONLY Grouped Trade Cost Subtotals:
3 Misc. Supporting
Calculations & Estimating Line Item Trade High Range
Scope Elements / Descriptions Comments Units Trade Cost Rates LOW RANGE HIGH RANGE
4 Quantities Costs Factors:
5
192
193 PROJECT ELEMENT #3:
194 Rehabilitation of the Lighthouse Tower (lower levels, up to 5th landing):
195
196 I Lighthouse – exterior
197
198 A Masonry Walls:
Test Hydrochem process to determine that coatings can be removed 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000
199 without damaging masonry and set limits on pressures/develop procedures.
Remove existing paint (using Hydrochem process, assume hazardous
1 4,725 CSF $12.00 $56,700
200 material disposal required) and efflorescence
Repair and repoint masonry (assume +/-20% repointing of lower levels of
2 945 CSF $30.00 $28,350
201 tower)
202 3 Repaint masonry surfaces with Keim mineral paint 4,725 CSF $9.00 $42,525
203
204 B Tower Base:
205 1 Remove cast iron belt courses 164 LF $25.00 $4,100
206 2 Repair cracked or damaged masonry behind 164 LF $50.00 $8,200
207 3 Install new cast iron belt courses to match original 164 LF $400.00 $65,600
208 4 Paint ironwork with moisture-cured urethane paint system 164 LF $10.00 $1,640
209
210 C Doors and Windows:
Clean and repoint joints of granite window surrounds of tower windows
1 3 Ea $1,750.00 $5,250
211 (3)
Repair broken granite window lintel at west elevation with stainless steel
2 1 Loc $1,200.00 $1,200
212 pin/epoxy repair
213 3 Prep and repaint tower windows and surrounds 3 Ea $500.00 $1,500
214
215 SUBTOTAL: I Lighthouse – exterior $220,065 25% $275,081
216
217 II Lighthouse – interior
218
219 A Masonry Walls:
Remove existing paint (using Hydrochem process, assume hazardous
1 2,553 CSF $12.00 $30,636
220 material disposal required) and efflorescence
Repair and repoint masonry (assume +/-15% repointing of lower levels of
2 383 CSF $35.00 $13,403
221 tower)
222
File No. EST TRADE COSTS Draft6 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 9:15 AM P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, 415.389.0305
Draft 06 Pigeon Point Light Station Rehabilitation: Conceptual Budget 2009 Est. Detail - 9 of 13
11 Feb. 2009 -- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group, San Francisco --
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S
1
2 Budgeted Trade Costs
DETAILED ESTIMATE SECTIONS: UNPHASED TRADE SCOPE & COSTS ONLY Grouped Trade Cost Subtotals:
3 Misc. Supporting
Calculations & Estimating Line Item Trade High Range
Scope Elements / Descriptions Comments Units Trade Cost Rates LOW RANGE HIGH RANGE
4 Quantities Costs Factors:
5
223
224 PROJECT ELEMENT #3, Continued:
225
226 A Masonry Walls:
Repaint masonry surfaces with Keim mineral paint when moisture content
3 of the wall is at a level that will support the application of new paint (this 2,553 CSF $9.00 $22,977
227 may take several years)
228
229 B Cast Iron Stairs and Landings:
Sandblast, prime and repaint cast iron stair system including railings,
1 (Assume In Situ ) 6 Levels $7,500.00 $45,000
230 landings and support beams
231
232 C Floor at Tower Base:
233 1 Scrape loose paint from concrete floor surface, prep and repaint 154 SF $12.00 $1,848
234
235 D Other Elements:
236 1 Electrical conduit and wiring 1 LS $10,000.00 $10,000
237 2 Mechanical – none 1 LS $0.00 Excluded
238 3 Fire protection – none 1 LS $0.00 Excluded
239
240 SUBTOTAL: II Lighthouse – interior $123,864 15% $142,444
241
242 TOTAL PROJECT ELEMENT #3: Rehabilitation of the Lighthouse Tower (lower levels, up to 5th landing): $343,929 21% $417,525
243
244
File No. EST TRADE COSTS Draft6 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 9:15 AM P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, 415.389.0305
Draft 06 Pigeon Point Light Station Rehabilitation: Conceptual Budget 2009 Est. Detail - 10 of 13
11 Feb. 2009 -- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group, San Francisco --
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S
1
2 Budgeted Trade Costs
DETAILED ESTIMATE SECTIONS: UNPHASED TRADE SCOPE & COSTS ONLY Grouped Trade Cost Subtotals:
3 Misc. Supporting
Calculations & Estimating Line Item Trade High Range
Scope Elements / Descriptions Comments Units Trade Cost Rates LOW RANGE HIGH RANGE
4 Quantities Costs Factors:
5
245
246 PROJECT ELEMENT #4:
247 Rehabilitation of the Oil House:
248
249 I Oil House – exterior
250
251 A Masonry Walls:
Remove existing paint (using Hydrochem process, assume hazardous
1 1,794 CSF $12.00 $21,527
252 material disposal required)
253 2 Repoint limited areas of masonry (assume +/- 20% of surface area) 359 CSF $30.00 $10,763
254 3 Repaint masonry surfaces with Keim mineral paint 1,794 CSF $5.00 $8,969
255
256 B Masonry Steps:
257 1 Clean granite steps and cheek walls 1 LS $1,000.00 $1,000
258
259 C Wood Trim:
260 1 Repair and reinstall broken bracket (currently stored in oil house) 1 Ea $1,200.00 $1,200
261 2 Replace missing barge board on East elevation 19 LF $20.00 $380
262 3 Scrape loose paint from all wood surfaces, spot prime and repaint 1 LS $4,000.00 $4,000
263 4 Replace fasteners with stainless steel fasteners 1 LS $2,000.00 $2,000
264
265 D Roof:
266 1 Remove existing roofing to existing sheathing 686 CSF $3.00 $2,058
267 2 Replace rafters compromised by dryrot (assume +/-10%) 4 Ea $900.00 $3,600
Install concealed stainless steel wall anchors and blocking between rafters
3 100 LF $90.00 $8,969
268 and above all masonry walls
Install new plywood sheathing and ventilation mat (Cedar breather or
4 686 CSF $13.00 $8,918
269 similar)
270 5 Install new wood shingles with fire-retardant treatment. 686 CSF $8.00 $5,488
271 6 Install new copper flashing and edge strips (assume no gutters) 110 LF $15.00 $1,650
272 7 Chimneys:
273 a Remove paint 2 Loc $750.00 $1,500
274 b Repoint masonry 1 LS $2,000.00 $2,000
Install reinforced concrete seismic strengthening in existing chimney flues
c 2 Ea $2,500.00 $5,000
275 with anchors into roof sheathing and at ceiling level
276 d Replace copper flashing in kind 2 Loc $800.00 $1,600
277
File No. EST TRADE COSTS Draft6 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 9:15 AM P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, 415.389.0305
Draft 06 Pigeon Point Light Station Rehabilitation: Conceptual Budget 2009 Est. Detail - 11 of 13
11 Feb. 2009 -- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group, San Francisco --
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S
1
2 Budgeted Trade Costs
DETAILED ESTIMATE SECTIONS: UNPHASED TRADE SCOPE & COSTS ONLY Grouped Trade Cost Subtotals:
3 Misc. Supporting
Calculations & Estimating Line Item Trade High Range
Scope Elements / Descriptions Comments Units Trade Cost Rates LOW RANGE HIGH RANGE
4 Quantities Costs Factors:
5
278
279 PROJECT ELEMENT #4, Continued:
280
281 E Doors and Windows:
282 1 Prep and repaint recently replaced windows (3 of 6) 3 Ea $250.00 $750
283 2 Repair and repaint older windows (3 of 6) 3 Ea $600.00 $1,800
284 3 Repair and reinstall missing shutter (currently stored in oil house) 1 Ea $500.00 $500
285 4 Entry Door:
286 a Replace corroded door frame at entry with new to match 1 LS $500.00 $500
287 b Repair top rail of wood entry door, prep and repaint 1 LS $300.00 $300
288 c Replace missing wood trim at entry door (right jamb) 1 LS $400.00 $400
289 d Replace transom to match original design (6-lite instead of 3-lite) 1 LS $800.00 $800
290 e Remove expanded mesh screen from transom 1 LS $100.00 $100
291
292 F Other Elements:
293 1 Rebuild crawl space vents in kind (4 total) 4 Ea $250.00 $1,000
294 2 Repair light fixture at entrance 1 LS $300.00 $300
295 3 Remove concrete pad at north elevation 1 LS $1,500.00 $1,500
296
297 SUBTOTAL: I Oil House – exterior $98,573 25% $123,216
298
299 II Oil House – interior
300
301 A Walls:
Remove existing paint (using PeelAway or similar, assume hazardous
1 150 LF x 10.25 1,538 CSF $8.00 $1,200
302 material disposal required) and efflorescence
303 2 Repoint limited areas of masonry (assume +/- 20% of surface area) 308 CSF $20.00 $6,150
304 3 Replace fasteners with stainless steel fasteners 1 LS $3,000.00 $3,000
305 4 Repaint masonry surfaces with Keim mineral paint 1,538 CSF $5.00 $7,688
Install horizontal steel tubes on the room-side of the corridor walls,
5 44 LF $125.00 $5,500
306 connect to wall and framing above
307 6 Install stainless steel floor-to-wall seismic anchors below floor level. 100 LF $50.00 $5,000
308 7 Investigate historic paint colors and repaint Walls + Ceiling 1,538 CSF $3.00 $4,613
309
310 B Ceilings:
311 1 Scrape loose paint from t&g bead board surfaces, prep and repaint 350 SF $6.00 $2,100
312
File No. EST TRADE COSTS Draft6 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 9:15 AM P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, 415.389.0305
Draft 06 Pigeon Point Light Station Rehabilitation: Conceptual Budget 2009 Est. Detail - 12 of 13
11 Feb. 2009 -- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group, San Francisco --
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S
1
2 Budgeted Trade Costs
DETAILED ESTIMATE SECTIONS: UNPHASED TRADE SCOPE & COSTS ONLY Grouped Trade Cost Subtotals:
3 Misc. Supporting
Calculations & Estimating Line Item Trade High Range
Scope Elements / Descriptions Comments Units Trade Cost Rates LOW RANGE HIGH RANGE
4 Quantities Costs Factors:
5
313
314 PROJECT ELEMENT #4, Continued:
315
316 C Floors:
317 1 Hallway: Scrape loose paint from clay tile floors, prep and repaint 200 SF $5.00 $1,000
Oil and Work Rooms: Remove VAT floor tiles, repair t&g flooring below
2 500 SF $15.00 $7,500
318 for finish surface (assume some replacement necessary)
319
320 D Interior Doors:
321 1 Scrape loose paint from wood doors (3 total), prep and repaint 3 Ea $400.00 $1,200
322
323 E Other Elements:
324 1 Lighting 1 LS $2,000.00 $2,000
325 2 Electrical conduit and wiring 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000
326 3 Electrical and communication equipment in Oil Room: 1 LS $10,000.00 $10,000
Coordinate protection and if necessary, continued use by USCG during
a 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000
327 construction
328 4 Mechanical – none 1 LS $0.00 Excluded
329 5 Fire protection – none 1 LS $0.00 Excluded
330
331 SUBTOTAL: II Oil House – interior $66,950 15% $76,993
332
333 TOTAL PROJECT ELEMENT #4: Rehabilitation of the Oil House: $165,523 21% $200,208
334
335
File No. EST TRADE COSTS Draft6 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 9:15 AM P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, 415.389.0305
Draft 06 Pigeon Point Light Station Rehabilitation: Conceptual Budget 2009 Est. Detail - 13 of 13
11 Feb. 2009 -- California State Parks Foundation -- Architectural Resources Group, San Francisco --
A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S
1
2 Budgeted Trade Costs
DETAILED ESTIMATE SECTIONS: UNPHASED TRADE SCOPE & COSTS ONLY Grouped Trade Cost Subtotals:
3 Misc. Supporting
Calculations & Estimating Line Item Trade High Range
Scope Elements / Descriptions Comments Units Trade Cost Rates LOW RANGE HIGH RANGE
4 Quantities Costs Factors:
5
336
337
338 ANTICIPATED TRADE COSTS RANGE SUMMARY:
339
340 (STUDY No. 1: CONVENTIONAL DELIVERY APPROACH -- FULLY DESIGNED / COMPETITIVELY BID)
341
342 TOTAL PROJECT ELEMENT #1: Pre-Construction Project Tasks: Lens Removal & Interim Bldg. Stabilization $70,000 25% $87,500
343
344 TOTAL PROJECT ELEMENT #2: Rehabilitation of the Lighthouse Tower (upper levels, 5th landing and above): $814,363 34% $1,093,190
345
346 TOTAL PROJECT ELEMENT #3: Rehabilitation of the Lighthouse Tower (lower levels, up to 5th landing): $343,929 21% $417,525
347
348 TOTAL PROJECT ELEMENT #4: Rehabilitation of the Oil House: $165,523 21% $200,208
349
350
351 TOTAL ALL PROJECT ELEMENTS (BASE SCOPE) TRADE COSTS ONLY: $1,393,815 29% $1,798,423
352
353
354
355
356
357
358
359
File No. EST TRADE COSTS Draft6 11Feb09 ARG PigeonPtLightSta.xls
2/12/2009 at 9:15 AM P. H. WASZINK - CONSTRUCTION CONSULTANT, Mill Valley, 415.389.0305