Eastern Market Community Advisory Committee
Minutes
Old Naval Hospital
January 14, 2009
Present: Chuck Burger, Barbara Eck, Monte Edwards, Bill Glasgow, Ken Jarboe, Donna Scheeder, Tom Kuchenberg, Angie Brunson, Richard Layman, Lisa Brooks (for Dan Tangherlini).
The meeting was convened at 7:04 PM.
1. Agenda
Motion: Mr. Kuchenberg moved/ Mr. Burger seconded a motion to approve the agenda. It passed unanimously.
2. Minutes
Motion: Mr. Burger moved/Ms. Eck seconded a motion to approve the September meeting minutes as presented. The motion passed unanimously.
3. Executive Committee
Donna Scheeder announced the beginning of the design process for the Hine development, with a meeting of some of the developers who plan to bid and community representatives. She reported on the community meeting held on December 20th to discuss the status of the RFP for Hine. Parking is still a high priority on the list of community priorities for the project. The bottom line for EMCAC is the resolution that EMCAC adopted, a copy of which is attached to these minutes.
Ms. Scheeder also announced that a joint meeting of representatives of barracks Row, CHAMPS and Market Row merchants to discuss cooperative marketing efforts is scheduled for January 23rd.
4. Presentation by DDOT
Mr. Abdullahi Mohamed, DDOT Coordinator for Wards 5 and 6, described the benefits and cooperation of the Streetscape Construction Coordination Group. At its last meeting, the Group met with DDOT’s consultants and materials suppliers to evaluate different molded brick samples for the sidewalk around the Market, as well as samples of paving materials that would differentiate the paving of 7th Street in front of the Market. Fairly flat patterns, with uniform and shallow joints have been recommended that will be compatible with foot traffic as well as strollers. A slightly raised crosswalk with a differentiated surface will also serve as a kind of speed bump. A contrasting stone, rather than paint, is recommended to mark the angle parking spaces in front of the Market. No such marking of the parallel spaces on the east side of 7th Street is recommended. A sample of the Colonial Cobble Stone street paving was shown, as well as drawings of the proposed installation. Samples of the Colonial Cobble Stone and molded brick will be installed at the north end of the Market and public comment will be invited. There were questions regarding the paving to be used on the alleys. Streetscape construction will begin on January 26th and DDOT will provide notice to nearby residents.
Mr. Burger pointed out the need for direction or Way Finding signs to Eastern Market at the bottom of the 6th Street ramp off the SE/SW Freeway.. Mr. Edwards recalled that EMCAC had asked about including the Eastern Market logo on the Eastern Market Way Finding signs. Mr. Layman pointed out that other cities use logos on their Way Finding signage and offered to provide photographic examples. Ms. Scheeder suggested that EMCAC should have a committee look at the entire signage issue and that this group include representatives from the other organizations that represent the Capitol Hill business community.
5. Office of Property Management
Mr. Margeson reported that he has assumed the duties of acting Market Manager and the transition for the East Hall has been smooth. New contracts are now in place. Some complications had to be addressed with the Farmers’ Line and Flea market vendors. He has now documented 156 exhibitors and vendors, tracked where people are and established this over 2 weekends. Team from OPM met all exhibitors and assigned locations. The first weekend was a “rent holiday” with no fees charged. Beginning the second weekend, he has had a representative from the DC Treasurer’s Office present from 7:30 to 9:30 AM. Charging a flat $30 per space, they collected $4,007 that weekend, which has been deposited in the Enterprise Fund. Money in the enterprise fund is now accessible for spending on Eastern Market-related business expenses. OPM has spending authority for $9,000 this year, and with more funds coming in, that authority will increase. After discussions with the exhibitors and vendors, he has established a new fee schedule that standardizes rental fees by space size–$25 for a small space and $40 for a large space.
Responses from the exhibitors and vendors have been favorable. He is accepting no new vendors, but is welcoming the return of vendors who previously vended at the market. Some of the merchants had been concerned about losing spaces where they had traditionally operated, but Mr. Margeson had drawn up a map of the north plaza and the 7th St. shed area and the vendors have been satisfied.
Mr. Glasgow observed that the East Hall janitorial service has improved.
There had been letters handed out to exhibitors by Market 5 indicating that they were in negotiations with OPM to continue their management of exhibitors. Ms. Scheeder has checked with OPM and this is incorrect.
Mr. Clay reported that OPM had held off work on the North Hall roof because of the holiday vending, but that work is now proceeding. The South Hall floor demolition is now complete. Plastic viewing windows will be installed on 7th Street to allow viewing of the construction. OPM has been coordinating the Minkoff roof work with the Forney general construction in terms of work on the Center Hall cornice. The air conditioning lines have been laid out and the chillers and electric switch gear have been delivered. Brownstone has been sourced and ordered from a US quarry. The contractor is having difficulty in matching the 5’ by 5’ grid pattern on the South Hall floor. The contractor can submit alternative specifications that are subject to OPM review and approval.
Mr. Glasgow asked about a plan for rat abatement, pointing out that now would be the best time to place bait in the floor and in the walls to combat the problem even before the merchants move in. He also expressed concern about whether the basement freezers will be available at the time the merchants move back into the South Hall. Mr. Kuchenberg pointed out that is only one of several issues that can disrupt the move-back. Ms. Scheeder expressed the need for a separate meeting or coordinating committee to address the move-back to the South Hall.
Mr. Layman emphasized the need for coordination of the licensing and inspection. Mr. Kuchenberg pointed out the need for expertise in facilitating a coordinated, successful move from the East Hall to the restored Market. A lengthy discussion about the importance of a coordinated move ensued. Motion: Ms. Eck moved and Mr. Kuchenberg seconded that a committee of merchants work with Mr. Kuchenberg’s Operations Subcommittee to collaborate on the move. The motion passed on a voice vote.
6. Capital Improvements
Fourth Revised Drawings
Mr. Edwards offered a report on the Fourth Revised Drawings for the Market renovation. While received on November 26th, the drawings and specifications are dated October 3 and do not reflect the final merchant stall configurations for the South Hall. OPM has acknowledged this fact, but has not yet provided drawings that reflect those final stall configurations. He said that while this Subcommittee’s resources are best utilized in reviewing actual plans, rather than interim iterations, nonetheless the Subcommittee has reviewed those drawing and offers the following comments and recommendations:
The Relocation Staging Plan.
Sheet G005 depicts a very lengthy schedule to move the Merchants from the East Hall into the restored South Hall:
· On day one, operations in the East Hall will cease.
· Two days are allowed for the Merchants to remove anything that does not move into the South hall and to clean what does move.
· Preparing the South Hall plumbing, electrical, etc. for the move-in MAY or MAY NOT occur before operations cease in the East Hall.
· 10 days are allowed to relocate equipment from the East Hall to the South Hall.
· Installing fans and lighting in the South Hall MAY or MAY NOT begin prior to the equipment move-in.
· 5 days are scheduled for Merchants to move in
· 5 days are scheduled for Health Department inspections.
The numbers provided add up to 22 days, but with the imprecise requirements on the contractor, it will likely be more than a month. The Subcommittee recommends a move-in schedule of no more than a week, that hopefully can begin on a Monday and allow the grand reopening of the Market the following Saturday.
Lighting and Fans.
Sheets A153, A154 and E 102b depict 41 42 inch ceiling fans and 4 29 inch ceiling fans.
There will be 66 fluorescent fixtures for the Merchant work areas, 85 Pendent incandescent display fixtures, and 16 200w halogens in the Market Lunch areas, all separately switch controlled by individual merchants.
The drawings only address merchant electric. The Subcommittee could find nothing about general area lighting. When EMCAC previously recommended that general area lighting be controlled by a solar dimmer system, we were told it was fluorescent and it could not be controlled by a dimmer system. EMCAC provided OPM with information concerning dimmer systems for fluorescent lighting and the cost savings and better, less “washed out”, merchant displays through use of solar control of that dimming.
Merchant Equipment.
The pottery studio will not relocate their kiln(s), but will install new electric and gas kilns.
For the South Hall merchants, OPM will own most of the equipment, ranging from refrigerated deli cases, walk-in coolers, ovens, weighing scales, slicers for cheese and meat, and a rotisserie.
Of the East Hall equipment, 5 refrigerated deli cases will be abandoned, and replaced with 5 new deli cases, plus a new display refrigerator. All will be owned by OPM.
Walk-in Coolers
Details show insulated floors for the walk-in coolers (sheets MP-2, SM-0). However, for Union Meat, there is no such detail, although the drawing (Sheet UM-1) does show ramps up into the walk-in freezer and cooler, indicating they likely will have insulated floors.
There is no detail showing insulation of the ceiling of the compressor room in the basement, which we have previously recommended because of the high temperature of that room.
The report, a copy of which is attached to the official copy of these minutes, also described the following concerns and recommendations that have been raised by EMCAC, but have not been addressed by OPM:
· The need to provide automatic control of the lighting of the flagpole to comply with federal law (4 USC 1 §6).
· The need to Insulate the bases of the walk-in refrigeration units in the South Hall.
· The need to accomplish the treatment of lightning protection on the exterior of the building in an architecturally sensitive manner.
Mr. Layman explained that the coordinating committee that Ms. Scheeder has proposed for the move-back needs to involve the various DC inspectors.
Mr. Kuchenberg pointed out that there are people that are expert in accomplishing such a move.
Mr. Clay explained that there are unique constraints that in the view of OPM will require a longer time for the move-back: a third of the equipment will be new, a third of the equipment will require modification and those things will take a lot of time.
Ms. Scheeder explained it is necessary to accomplish the move-back as quickly as possible and suggested that EMCAC approve the Report and get to OPM and begin to put together the EMCAC coordinating committee to address the move-back.
Motion: Ms. Eck moved Mr. Kuchenberg seconded a motion to approve the Report. The motion passed unanimously
Paint Finishes
Mr. Edwards presented a report concerning the proposed paint finishes . The Report addresses the drawings dated October 29th that specify the paint colors that are proposed to be used for the renovated Market as well as the August 28, 2008 “Historic Paint Finishes Report” prepared by Matthew Mosca. Some of the important recommendations from the Mosca Report are different from what is being proposed on the October 29 drawings.
· EMCAC generally supports the Mosca Report recommendations and opposes the OPM proposals that do not implement the Mosca recommendations.
· EMCAC disagrees with the Mosca recommendations and the OPM proposals for the exterior trim colors (Item 8, below) and for the North Hall interior wall color (item 9, below).
· EMCAC objects to the proposal to paint the structurally significant roof trusses the same receding white as the ceiling rather than a different color that would visually distinguish their unique design.
The Report, which includes 3 attachments, is attached to the official copy of these minutes. The body of the Report appears below:
Historic Paint Finishes Report.
The Mosca Report analyzed the historic paint finishes for the Market. The Report consists of 49 pages and the findings and recommendations of the Report are tabulated in summary form in attachments A (South Hall) and Attachment B (North Hall).
The findings in the Mosca Report are well documented and the recommendations logically flow from those findings.
OPM Proposals that Implement the Mosca Report
1. South Hall Interior Walls
The interior South Hall plaster walls were finished in a reddish color that is described as moderate red with a ferric oxide pigment (p. 15-18). The Mosca Report recommends a salmon red (p. 27). OPM’s October 29th drawings propose the same salmon red, color P03.
EMCAC agrees with the OPM proposal.
2. South Hall Interior Doors.
The interior South Hall doors were originally painted a moderate pinkish brown (p.13 ) to approximate the brownstone, and that “brownstone” color is recommended for the restoration (p. 30). The October 29 drawings propose to paint the interior South Hall doors a pinkish brown (paint chip P17) and the HVAC kiosks are proposed to be the same “brownstone” color.
EMCAC supports this proposal for the South Hall interior door color.
For the kiosks, EMCAC recommends that a color different from the interior door “brownstone” color and different from the interior trim (item 5 below) be used. The HVAC kiosks are new and should be painted a color that makes them appear less prominent.
3. North Hall Entry Door.
There is only one surviving original door for the North Hall that was not replaced during the 1970s restoration (p. 41). It was painted first white, then grayish pink, then the “brownstone” color. The Report recommends white (p. 46). The interior finishes sheet of the October 29th drawings for the North Hall indicates color P10 (an off-white) for both the north entry door and the wainscoating. However, the rendering shows a pinkish brown color for the entry door. EMCAC assumes the pinkish brown on the rendering is the “brownstone” color and the P10 designation is in error.
EMCAC recommends that color P17 (shown on the rendering and the same “brownstone” color used for the interior of the South Hall doors) be used.
4. North Hall Dado
The Masco report explains that the brick dado (chair rail)in the North Hall, originally unpainted (p. 38), was painted red, apparently during the time the Fire Department used the space (p. 45). That red (P11) is then proposed by OPM for the restored brick dado.
EMCAC points out that OPM is proposng use a later, non-original color for the dado, which may also be applicable to other areas, such the North Hall walls, discussed below (item 9). The color of the chair rail should be coordinated with the color of the North Hall walls, and both need to take into account the use of this space as an exhibit/performance/meeting space.
OPM Proposals That Do Not Implement the Mosca Report.
Some of the recommendations from the Mosca Report are different from what is being proposed on the October 29 drawings. In general, EMCAC recommends that the Mosca Report recommendations be implemented
5. Window Frames, Sash, Door Frames and Jambs.
In the South Hall these were originally faux grained with a straight oak graining, using a yellowish white ground and a moderate dark brown glaze (p.28). The Report recommends this finish be replicated, with straight oak graining, using true colors in oil, rather than universal tinting colors, and provides a recommended 1887 example (p. 29) . The October 29 drawings propose a solid orange tan color (P16) for the interior trim as well as the new HVAC kiosks.
EMCAC supports the recommendation of the Mosca Report that faux wood graining be applied to the interior trim and recommends that consideration be given to applying that same finish to the HVAC kiosks.
6. Cornices, Entablature, Chimneys and Acroteria
Originally, sand was mixed with paint to simulate the brownstone trim (p. 19). A sand finished moderate pinkish brown paint is recommended to simulate brownstone for both the South Hall (p. 30) and the North Hall (p. 46). That would be color P17 on the October 29 drawings, the “brownstone” color that is being proposed for the interior of the doors. However, that is not the color that has been applied to the new South Hall cornices and other roof trim. OPM has explained that when the South Hall roof work was completed, the paint analysis was not yet complete, but OPM understood its pre-fire color to be based on paint analysis work done by Mary Oehrlein in the 1970’s. Hence, that pre-fire color was matched with the new paint. The Mosca paint analysis identified a different color: the “brownstone” color P17 for both the the cornice and exterior doors. OPM’s October 29 drawings propose that the interior face of the doors be painted P17 and the exterior of the doors be painted P13 to match the present color of the cornice. As noted in the description of exterior doors above, P13 is a tan and does not replicate the brownstone masonry on the building.
Because a mistake was made a few months ago in the color applied to the cornices and roof trim, it makes no sense to extend that mistake to the exterior door color. When it comes time to repaint the cornices and roof trim the “brownstone” color (P17) should be applied.
EMCAC supports the proposal to paint the cornice and roof trim on the North Hall the same color as the cornice and roof trim on the South Hall and suggests this consistency also has relevance to the exterior trim color, discussed below.
7. Exterior Doors.
The exterior doors of the South Hall were originally a pinkish brown, referred to as the “brownstone” color (p. 24, 25). The Mosca Report recommends the ”brownstone” color (p. 32). There was no original paint color to analyze for the North Hall exterior doors (p. 43), but the Report recommends white (p.46).
The October 29 drawings propose the same color for both the North Hall and the South Hall exterior doors. But, as described above, it is color P13, the same tan color as the newly installed South Hall cornices, acroteria and chimney, rather than the “brownstone” color P17 that is proposed for the interior of the doors.
EMCAC recognizes the importance of the “brownstone” color (P17) in the original color palette of the Market and supports the recommendation of the Mosca Reports that all of the exterior doors be painted that color.
Areas in Which EMCAC Disagrees with the Mosca Report and the OPM Proposals.
8. Exterior Trim Colors.
A contrasting color from the color of the doors is proposed for the exterior window frames, muntins, sash, door frames and jambs (collectively “the trim”). Different trim colors are specified for the North and South Halls, with a dark green (P02) for the South Hall and white (P07) for the North and Center Halls. This is based on the paint analysis, and represents the oldest, or original layers of paint (pp. 20-23, 46), and the paint analysis, standing alone, would justify such a scheme. But the South Hall was built in 1873 and the North and Center Halls in1908. By1908, the South Hall trim paint was probably in need of being redone, and if not then, at least at some later time, was repainted to match the new white paint to the North and Center Hall trim.
The Mosca Report (page 48) offers a rationale for the differences in colors between the North and South Halls:
Historic preservation has progressed through a series of philosophies that the Eastern Market confronts. At one point in the history of the movement, the finishes of 1908 would have been used for the entire structure, since it was the most resent major change. Similar examples can be cited, but it has often resulted in the tail wagging the dog. The Eastern Market is a perfect example to present both period finishes: the South Hall should be finished with the original finishes to construction in 1873, as indicated in the report for both the interior and the exterior. The North Hall should also be finished in the original finishes, dating to 1908. This will create a dynamism that will be very evident between the two parts of the building.
EMCAC does not disagree with the historic preservation considerations expressed above; however, there is a more important consideration at this point in the evolution of the market: we are entering an era of unified management. By painting all of the exterior trim the same color, we can provide a visual cue that this is a single, unified market. Further, as is the case today, in the past, the same color was probably used for all of the exterior trim.
OPM has suggested that use of the different colors will provide a visual cue that the North and South Halls were built at different times.
EMCAC recommends that the same dark green (P02) be used for all of the exterior trim.
9. North Hall Interior Walls.
The Mosca report explains that the North Hall plaster walls were originally white washed, then oil stabilized and painted yellow enamel and at some later time painted white (p.37). The Mosca report recommends the wall be painted white (p. 44). OPM’s October 29th drawings also propose white (P10) for the walls.
Despite the fact that it was more stylish to use white in 1908 than it was in 1873, EMCAC questions the use of the bright white (P10) for most of the North Hall interior. Just as tastes informs a change in color palettes overtime (1873 to 1908), a change of use can be of even greater importance in informing a change in color preference. The 1998 legislatively required use of the interior as an exhibit/performance/meeting space did not exist when the North hall was built in 1908. The bright, reflective white that is proposed is not appropriate for this exhibit/performance/meeting space.
The first paint applied to the North Hall walls was a yellow enamel (p. 37). EMCAC recommends that yellow or some color other than the bright (P10) white would be a better color for the North Hall exhibit/performance space. The chair rail color (item 4) needs to be coordinated with whatever color is used for the walls.
Ceilings and Trusses.
The Mosca Report does not address the South Hall Roof trusses, apparently because of the fire damage. For the North Hall, the Mosca Report documents the shop applied finish (red lead, red oxide, graphite) and explains that after installation white, and later pale green were applied (p. 35), and recommends white (p. 44) for the trusses and roof deck (ceiling).
The October 29, 2008 drawings propose an off-white color (P04) for the South Hall ceiling, roof purlins and trusses, and a pale gray (P19) for the North Hall ceiling, purlins and trusses. EMCAC objects for three reasons and recommends the following:
1. EMCAC agrees that the ceilings and roof purlins should be the same color, and the colors specified are probably fine: however, the trusses should contrast with the ceiling and purlins.
2. The use of off-white or light gray for the ceiling and purlins makes sense, but on the truss elements those light colors will present a maintenance problem in terms of dust, cob web and particulate matter build-up, which would be less conspicuous if they were painted a darker contrasting color.
3. The June 2007 drawings A151a and A152 proposed a single color for the roof and purlins, and two different colors for the truss elements, which EMCAC endorsed at page 11 of its June 13, 2007 Report. EMCAC understands OPM is now proposing the single color for all of these elements because of the speed at which a single color can be applied, rather than the time it would take to apply separate colors to the ceiling, and truss elements. To exchange an opportunity to visually document the importance of the truss system for a short-term time savings is not logical.
The uniqueness of the roof truss design together with their historic relevance in the evolution of roof support systems required a competent and well thought-out plan for their restoration that has been accomplished. EMCAC has previously commended QEA and OPM for designing a restoration and replication solution that respects the historic significance of the trusses. That recognition and respect for their historic significance needs to be communicated to the public, and EMCAC has previously recommended that can be accomplished by carefully selecting the colors to paint the truss elements with a color different from the ceiling (extracts from previous descriptions and recommendations appear in attachment C to this Report).
There is the additional benefit that by painting the truss element a color other than white, discoloration from airborne particulates will be less noticeable (recall that the roof vents will be drawing air over these trusses), and the time between paintings will be extended and the expense thereby reduced (likely considerable, given the requirement for scaffolding).
EMCA is not advocating sharply contrasting colors that might be perceived as garish or “busy.” EMCAC suggests using the historic pale green for the North Hall and perhaps light gray or tan for the South Hall trusses: colors that would be muted, but would distinguish the trusses from the white ceilings.
Mr. Jarboe asked about the period of significance for the paint colors, since the South Hall was constructed in 1873 and the North and Center Halls in1908, and whether that justified different exterior trim colors for the North and South Halls.
Motion: A motion was made by Mr. Layman and seconded by Ms. Eck to amend the Report and adopt recommendations 8 and 9 of the Mosca Report and (a) paint the North Hall trim white and the South Hall trim green, and (b) paint the North Hall interior wall a bright white, rather than a color more appropriate for its use as an exhibit/ performance space. The motion failed by a vote of 2 to 7. Motion: Mr. Burger moved and Ms. Eck seconded a motion to amend the Report to recommend that the doors be painted to match the color of the existing cornice. The Motion failed by a vote of 4 to 6.
A motion was made to accept the Report without amendment. The motion passed by a vote of 8 to 1.
Streetscape
Mr. Edwards reported that all of the affected utilities, except Verizon (which has one manhole that would be affected), have now agreed to the use the manhole covers with the Eastern Market logo.
The Urban Forestry people have only recently been asked to provide recommendations about the types of trees for the North Plaza, 7th Street, and the portion of North Carolina Avenue that adjoins the North Plaza, as well as their location and protection. While DDOT is in charge of the trees, OPM has specified special event lights for the North Plaza and their locations need to be coordinated with the tree locations. There is a further need to coordinate the location of the bicycle racks, a bench and trash cans with the location of the trees and lighting. All of these elements of “street furniture” will affect outdoor vending, and a report is expected from the Tenants Council as well as Urban Forestry.
7. Tenant’s Council
The Tenant’s Council did not have a report, but Mr. Berman agreed that there is a need to coordinate the trees, the North Plaza lighting, and the street furniture.
8. Treasurer’s Report
Mr. Gallo was absent.
9. New Business
Ms. Scheeder said that the next meeting date would be February 25.
10.Adjournment
Motion: Mr. Glasgow moved/ Mr. Jarboe seconded a motion to adjourn the meeting. It passed unanimously, and the meeting was adjourned at 9:15 pm.
EXTRACT FROM FEBRUARY 27, 2008 MINUTES
Pages 6-7
There have been previous discussions about the possible closing of Hine Jr. High, its impact on Eastern market and the potential future uses for the site. It is now official that the school will be closed at the end of this school year. It is now important that EMCAC make its position known on plans for the site. ANC6B and the Capitol Hill Restoration Society have already passed resolutions concerning planning for future use. Both of their resolutions are attached to this document. I have drafted a resolution that is specific to the interests of Eastern Market but I would also ask you to consider endorsing the full range of objectives that are delineated in the CHRS resolution. Therefore I ask EMCAC to consider the following:
Motion: Ms. Opper-Weiner moved/Ms. Eck seconded the motion:
WHEREAS the Saturday and Sunday flea markets are an important part of the historic character and fabric of Eastern market and
WHEREAS, the flea markets are an important part of the overall business economy of the market and 7th street
WHEREAS, the Hine property continues to be the site of Saturday and Sunday flea market vending
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that EMCAC calls on the District government to begin a community planning process for the future use of the Hine site
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that any future use matches the scale and character of the surrounding neighborhood, especially Eastern Market and that any development proposal should include:
- One or 2 levels of underground parking for residential and commercial weekend parking at eastern Market;
- Plan for an outdoor area for craft vendors, food vendors and flea market;
- and endorses the objectives set forth by the Capitol Hill Restoration Society.
The motion passed 8-2, with Mr. Burger and Mr. Layman in opposition.
