Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApplication 071703COLLEGE STATION HISTORIC MARKER APPLICATION NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE NUMBER OF SUBMITTER: College Station Historic Preservation Committee c/o David Gerllina P.O. Box 9960 College Station. Texas 77842 -9960 ( 409 ) 1. THIS MARKER NOMINATION IS FOR A: A. ® STRUCTURE MARKER Structure is a Buildina (The Walton Medical Buildina) (Home /Building) If a home, was it formerly located on campus? (Yes /No) Address of structure: 903 Texas Avenue Colleae Station. Texas 77840 Owner's Name & Current Mailing Address & Phone Number: Thomas Walton & Mary Lou Epps 1005 Dominik Colleae Station, Texas 77840 ( 409) 894 -2435 - Thomas Walton in Navasota B. SUBJECT MARKER This nomination is for: College Station Historical Marker Application Page 2 (Event /Topic /Person /Object) The title of this subject is: Is the proposed marker to be placed on public or private property? Address where marker will be placed: College Station Historical Marker Application Page 2 11. Describe the significance of this nomination with as much detail as possible: In May. 1941, a 150' x 275' plot of land was purchased in the business section of College Hills Estates for the erection of the Colleae Medical Center on Highway 6. The 60' x 85', one -story, free - standina brick buildina was built alona the identical plans of the Bryan Medical Center, Dr. T.O. Walton, tit, a former President of A &f College as born in 1883 in Panola County, in East Texas. Dr. T.O. Walton. Jr. moved to Colleae • Station in July 1 y4 . to open his practice in cooperation with his brother Dr. T.T. Walton, and Dr, L.O. Wilkerson. He officed with his brother and Dr. Wilkerson in the Bryan Medical Center until February . 1942, when the buildina in Colleae Station was completed. Accordina to a letter from the Texas Historical Commission to the City of College Station dated Auaust 17 1993, the property at that time was eliaible for listina in the National Reaister of Historic Places under their Criteria C. "in the area of Architecture, as an excellent example of a one -story free standing commercial building with Art Deco influences. Character defining details include the polychrome brickwork, rhythmic metal casement windows. the subtle corbeled brick cornice, molded brick entries and flat ribbed canopies." P.O. BOX 12276 CURTIS TUNNELL EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TEXAS HISTORICAL COMMISSION AUSTIN, TEXAS 78711 -2276 . (TELEPHONE) 512- 463 -6100 Dear Mr. Gillies: NATIONAL REGISTER DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE August 17, 1993 Mr. Andrew Gillies Community Development Department City of College Station P.O. Box 9960 College Station, Texas 77842 -0960 Tie State Agency for Historic Preservation (FAX) 512- 463 -6095 (RELAY TX) 1 -800- 735 -2989 (TDD) TRANSMITTED VIA FAX: 409/764 -3785 Re: Rehabilitation of the Walton Medical Building as potential City office space, College Station, Brazos County, Texas (CDBG /106) Thank you for your letter concerning the subject project. The National Register Department has conducted a review of the Walton Medical Building by applying state and federal criteria for historical designation. This property is ELIGIBLE for listing in the National Register of Historic Places under criterion C in the area of Architecture as an excellent example of a 1 -story free standing commercial building with Art Deco influences. Character defining details include the polychrome brickwork, rhythmic metal casement windows, the subtle corbeled brick cornice, molded brick entries and flat ribbed canopies. The building is in excellent condition, and retains a high level of integrity. Because the building is eligible, if federal funds are spent on any part of this project our office will need to review the proposed project plans and specifications for the rehabilitation (exterior and interior work). We would like to commend the City of College Station for undertaking this planning process for use of the Walton Building. It is sometimes difficult for people to see the value in preserving architecture of the recent past. For many years, people did not appreciate or value Victorian architecture, but believed that only Greek Revival era buildings deserved preservation. During this time many significant Victorian courthouses, homes and commercial buildings were demolished. Today, many people lament the loss of these buildings. There is a realization that we must began to preserve significant historic properties as soon as possible to avoid their loss due to the accelerated speed of environmental changes. You requested that we comment on two specific areas of the rehabilitation proposal: the required number of exits and the fire- protection rating for corridor doors. In our assessment of the building we used the Uniform Building Code (UBC). At this time UBC is the only code book we have available in our office. Most codes bear similarities to each other, so if the City of College Station does not use UBC, we trust that our analysis of the project can be accepted as meeting a recognized standard code. The proposed use for the building would be as office space, or B2 occupancy under the code. It appears to us that the occupancy of the building would be thirty people or fewer. UBC states that (Sec. 3305 g) in a B2 occupancy walls of corridors serving "an occupant load of 30 or more shall be of not less that one -hour fire- resistive construction." Since fire- protection rated doors are only required in fire- resistive construction, and since fire- resistive construction would not be required by code in this case, rated doors are also not required (see enclosures). The issue of the proposed new exit door is similar to that of the corridor doors. For B2 occupancies serving thirty people or fewer, only one exit is required from the building. Since only one exit is required, the 20 -foot maximum dead end corridor requirement does not apply (see enclosures). In addition, your proposal for re -use of the building may not be considered a "change of use" under existing code, and may therefore not be required to meet the most recent code. In our opinion, that fact that the existing building would meet these elements of the UBC justifies as reasonable the acceptance of the existing exits, corridors and doors, under any code the City might use, as equivalent in safety to requirements for new construction. If the existing conditions cannot be accepted under City code, it would be possible to up- grade the existing historic doors using a fire -rated glazing and gypsum board panels on the office interior side of the door's louvers (see enclosures). It is also possible, that a new exit door could be cut into the back facade of the building. However, both of these changes would damage the architectural integrity of this historic building, and we strongly encourage the code official and/or review board to consider a variance, if necessary. The presence of asbestos in the building has also been mentioned as a concern. If the asbestos is not friable, the most recent direction from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is that it should be left in place, if possible, and not abated or removed (see enclosures). Our office would also recommend that non - friable finishes, such as floor and ceiling tile, that contribute to the architectural character of the building be preserved in place. We appreciate this opportunity to comment on this proposed project, and your interest in the use of this historic cultural resource. We look forward to reviewing project information at the next stage of development, in accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act, if the project will receive federal funding. Please feel free to contact Linda Roark at 512/463 -6094, if you have any questions or concerns about this architectural review, or Lisa Hart if you have questions about the determination of eligibility, at the same number. an Graves, AIA, DSHPO James W. Ste hL p9HPO Director irector Department of Architecture National Register Department SG/LR c: Brazos County Historical Commission ■ Considering the exception to ` 'ion 3305 (a), please • refer to the attached illustration. ,d advise me whether reception room A wou Id constitute a corridor, thereby al lowing the glass in wall A to be nonwired gF ss. We maintain that wall A constitutes the corridor boundary arfd must therefore comply with corridor construction. A contractor maintains that he has consis- tently received another interpretation elsewhere. He maintains that if the walls of reception room A are one -hour constructed, then the glass wall is permitted. Lobby B would, in our opinion, be a perfect example of the intent of this section. A ■ If room A on the sketch you submitted is, in fact, a • reception room, it is our opinion that the provisions of Subsection 3305 (a) relating to lobbies, foyers and reception rooms would be applicable as long as the walls and ceiling of the recep- tion room are constructed as require by Sections 3305 (g) and (h). Thus, the separation between the reception room A and the cor- ridor would not be required to be of fire - resistive construction or have a protected opening. However, depending upon circum- stances, the "glass wall" may require safety glazing in accordance with Section 5406. EXTERIOR /y\ ROOM B LOBBY ' ROOM A RECEPTION GLASS WALL v EXTERIOR OFFICE FLOOR PLAN DOOR, WALL AND CEILING TO MEET SECTION 3305 (g) I AND (h) REQUIREMENTS NOTE: CORRIDOR SERVES 30 OR MORE OCCUPANTS Section 3305 (d) (d) Projections. The required width of corridors shall be unob- structed. EXCEPTION: Handrails and doors, when fully opened, shall not reduce the required width by more than 7 inches. Doors in any position shall not reduce the required width by more than one half. Other non- structural projections such as trim and similar decorative features may project into the required width 11/2 inches on each side. ■ We would like an intepretation of Section 3305 (d) as it • pertains to doors that extend across the full width of a corridor. Is this permitted? C IA A ■ The purpc - )f this section is not to prohibit d¢ar4 • which, wh, dosed, could extend across the full width of a corridor. Examples would be draft -stop and smoke-stop doors in hospital corridors. These doors can be permitted, provided the provisions of Section 3304 are satisfied and particular attention has been paid to swing requirements. The purpose of Section 3305 (d) and the exception is to limit the projection of doors that open from a room into a corridor. If the door swings into the corridor through 180 degrees, then the maxi- mum projection at the 90- degree point would be one half the required width of the corridor, and at the 180 - degree point (fully opened) the maximum projection would be 7 inches into the required width of the corridor. Section 3305 (e) (e) Access to Exits. When more than one exit is required, they shall be so arranged that it is possible to go in either direction from any point in a corridor to a separate exit, except for dead ends not exceeding 20 feet in length. Q • On the plan does the nonfire -rated corridor require • exits at each end to prevent deads in excess of 20 feet? Also, does the exiting from room A through room B through the nonfire -rated corridor into the one -hour corridor provide comply- ing exiting? ■ The 20 -foot maximum dead end corridor requirement • does not apply to a corridor serving an occupant load requiring only one exit. In the example, the corridor in question serves an office tenant space approximately 90 feet by 30 feet as indicated. This corridor leads to a complying one -hour corridor. Since the tenant space has an occupant load of less than 30 the corridor that serves this tenant space requires only one exit. Accordingly, the 20 -foot dead limita- tion is not applicable. You also questioned the condition as represented on the plan where room A exits through an adjoining room B and then to the corridor serving the tenant space. Section 3303 (e) would permit this even though the corridor in question is not required to comply with Section 3305 (g). A RECEPTIONIST 90' x 30' TENANT SPACE OFFICES NONFIRE -RATED CORRIDOR { _I ASSEMBLY COMPLYI'1G ONE -HOUR CORRIDOR Sections 3305 (g) and (h) (g) Construction. Walls of corridors serving a Group R. Division 1 or Group 1 Occupancy having an occupant load of 10 or more and wal Is of corridors serving other occupancies having an occupant Toad of 30 or more shall be of not less than one -hour fire - resistive construction : ;.. it • 1; 33043305 UNIFORM BUILDING CODE Exit doors shall be so marked that they are readily distinguishable from the adjacent construction. (1) Additional Doors. When additional doors are provided for egress purposes, they shall conform to all provisions of this chapter. EXCEPTION: Approved revolving doors having leaves which will collapse under opposing pressures may be used in exit situations, provided: 1. Such doors have a minimum width of 6 feet 6 inches. 2. At least one conforming exit door is located adjacent to each revolving door. 3. The revolving door shall not be considered to provide any exit width. Corridors and Exterior Exit Balconies Sec. 3305. (a) General. This section shall apply to every corridor serving as a required exit for an occupant load of 10 or more except that Subsection (b) shall apply to all corridors. For the purposes of the section, the term "corridor" shall include "exterior exit balconies" and any covered or enclosed exit passageway, including walkways, tunnels and malls. Partitions, rails, counters and similar space dividers not over 5 feet 9 inches in height above the floor shall not be construed to form corridors. Exit corridors shall not be interrupted by intervening rooms. EXCEPTION: Foyers, lobbies or reception rooms constructed as required for corridors shall not be construed as intervening rooms. For Group I Occupancies see Section 3321 (c). (b) Width. Every corridor serving an occupant load of 10 or more shall be not less than 44 inches in width. Corridors serving an occupant load of less than 10 shall not be less than 36 inches in width. For special requirements for Groups E and 1 Occupancies, see Sections 3319 and 3321. (c) Height. Corridors and exterior exit balconies shall have a clear height of not less than 7 feet measured to the lowest projection from the ceiling. (d) Projections. The required width of corridors shall be unobstructed. EXCEPTION: Handrails and doors, when fully opened, shall not reduce the required width by more than 7 inches. Doors in any position shall not reduce the required width by more than one half. Other nonstructural projections such as trim and similar decorative features may project into the required width 11/2 inches on each side. (e) Access to Exits. When more than one exit is required, they shall be so arranged that it is possible to go in either direction from any point in a corridor to a separate exit, except for dead ends not exceeding 20 feet in length. (f) Changes in Elevation. When a corridor or exterior exit balcony is accessi- ble to the handicapped, changes in elevation of the floor shall be made by means of a ramp, except as provided for doors by Section 3304 (i). (g) Construction. Walls of corridors serving a Group R, Division I or Group I Occupancy having an occupant load of 10 or more and walls of corridors serving other occupancies having an occupant load of 30 or more shall be of not less than 642 1988 EDITION 3305 one -hour fire - resistive construction and the ceilings shall be not less than that required tor a one - hour tire- resistive floor or roof system. EXCEPTIONS: 1. One -story buildings housing Group B, Division 4 Occupan- cies. 2. Corridors more than 30 feet in width where occupancies served by such corridors have at least one exit independent from the corridor. (See Chapter 56 for covered malls.) 3. Exterior sides of exterior exit balconies. 4. In Group I, Division 3 Occupancies such as jails, prisons, reformatories and similar buildings with open -barred cells forming corridor walls, the corridors and cell doors need not be fire resistive. 5. Corridor walls and ceilings need not be of fire- resistive construction within office spaces having an occupant load of 100 or less when the entire story in which the space is located is equipped with an automatic sprinkler system throughout and smoke detectors are installed within the corridor in accordance with their listing. 6. In other than Type I or II construction, exterior exit balcony roof assemblies may be of heavy timber construction without concealed spaces. When the ceiling of the entire story is an element of a one -hour fire - resistive floor or roof system, the corridor walls may terminate at the ceiling. When the room -side fire - resistive membrane of the corridor wall is carried through to the underside of a fire - resistive floor or roof above, the corridor side of the ceiling may be protected by the use of ceiling materials as required for one -hour floor or roof system construction or the corridor ceiling may be of the same construction as the corridor walls. Ceilings of noncombustible construction may be suspended below the fire - resistive ceiling. For wall and ceiling finish requirements, see Table No. 42 -B. (h) Openings. 1. Doors. When corridor walls are required to be of one -hour fire - resistive construction by Section 3305 (g), every door opening shall be protected by a tight- fitting smoke- and draft - control assembly having a fire - protection rating of not less than 20 minutes when tested in accordance with U. B.C. Standard No. 43 -2. Said doors shall not have louvers. The door and frame shall bear an approved label or other identification showing the rating thereof, the name of the manufacturer and the identification of the service conducting the inspection of materials and workmanship at the factory during fabrication and assembly. Doors shall be maintained self- closing or shall be automatic - closing by actuation of a smoke detector in accordance with Section 4306 (b). Smoke- and draft - control door assemblies shall be provided with a gasket so installed as to provide a seal where the door meets the stop on both sides and across the top. EXCEPTIONS: 1. Viewports may be installed if they require a hole not larger than 1 inch in diameter through the door, have at least a 1/4- inch -thick glass disc and the holder is of metal which will not melt out when subject to temperatures of 1700 °F. 2. Protection of openings in the interior walls of exterior exit balconies is not required. In fully sprinklered office buildings, corridors may lead through enclosed elevator lobbies if all areas of the building have access to at least one required exit without passing through the elevator lobby. 643 1 1 3324, 33 -A UNIFORM BUILDING CODE Cross aisles located within the seating area shall be provided with guardrails not less than 26 inches high along the front edge of the aisle. EXCEPTION: When the backs of the seats in front of the cross aisle project 24 inches or more above the surface of the cross aisle, guardrails may be omitted. 664 TABLE NO. 33-A—MINIMUM EGRESS AND ACCESS REC UIREMENTS USEI MINIMUM OF TWO EXITS OTHER THAN ELEVATORS ARE REQUIRED WHERE NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS IS AT LEAST OCCU- PANT LOAD FACTOR2 (Sq. Ft.) 1. Aircraft Hangars (no repair) 10 500 Yes 2. Auction Rooms 30 7 Yes 3. Assembly Areas, Concen- trated Use (without fixed seats) 50 7 Yes' 5 Auditoriums Churches and Chapels Dance Floors Lobby Accessory to Assembly Occupancy Lodge Rooms Reviewing Stands Stadiums Waiting Area 50 3 Yes' 5 4. Assembly Areas, Less -con- centrated Use 50 15 Conference Rooms Dining Rooms Drinking Establishments Exhibit Rooms Gymnasiums Lounges Stages 5. Bowling Alley (assume no occupant load for bowling lanes) 6. Children's Homes and Homes for the Aged 7. Classrooms 8. Courtrooms 9. Dormitories 10. Dwellings 50 6 50 50 10 10 (Continued) Yes' S6 12 Yes 80 Yes' 20 Yes 40 Yes 50 Yes' 300 No ACCESS BY MEANS OF A RAMP OR AN ELEVATOR MUST BE PROVIDED FOR THE PHYSICALLY HANDICAPPED AS INDICATED3 1988 EDITION USEI 11. Exercising Rooms 12. Garage, Parking 13. Hospitals and Sanitariums — Nursing Homes 14. Hotels and Apartments 15. Kitchen — Commercial 16. Library Reading Room 17. Locker Rooms 18. Malls (see Chapter 56) 19. Manufacturing Areas 20. Mechanical Equipment Room 21. Nurseries for Children (Day care) 22. Offices 23. School Shops and Vocational Rooms 24. Skating Rinks 25. Storage and Stock Rooms 26. Stores — Retail Sales Rooms Basement Ground Floor Upper Floors 27. Swimming Pools 28. Warehouses 29. All others MINIMUM OF TWO EXITS OTHER THAN ELEVATORS ARE REQUIRED WHERE NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS IS AT LEAST 50 30 6 10 30 50 30 30 30 (Footnotes appear on page 666.) OCCU- PANT LOAD FACTOR (Sq. Ft.) 50 200 80 200 200 50 50 200 300 ACCESS BY MEANS OF A RAMP OR AN ELEVATOR MUST BE PROVIDED FOR THE PHYSICALLY HANDICAPPED AS INDICATED Yes Yes' Yes Yes No Yes' Yes Yes' No 7 35 Yes 30 100 Yes? 50 50 Yes 50 50 on Yes' the skating area; 15 on the deck 300 No 30 II 50 10 50 30 50 30 Yes 30 Yes 60 Yes 50 for Yes' the pool area; 15 on the deck 500 No 100 33 -A 665 1 II. ti F1 19'x23 Uttlity ROon M4410100011A 1 Rn13 1 / !rIrt!'i businiggietvindliititait 12'3(12' 12•x12' 12'343' q(11 1 ''n As. ono '1 96 -II • -/AVI 005 OS OOP OSt \ )‘. \- \ • . / Iti 1-M '1 Ailstrama rig* SVX3.1. 611 00 OGL 00Z OS I. 61-e 1 ----- - t -I 8— 011819 e I \ CI= • .11 •' ot—e. • CI July 15, 1993 Ms. Linda Roark Texas Historical Commission Division of Architecture P.O. Box 12276 Austin, Texas 78711 Ref: 903 Texas Avenue. College Station. (The Walton Medical Building) Dear Linda, CITY OF COLLEGE STATION Post Office Box 9960 1101 Texas Avenue College Station, Texas 77842 -0960 (409) 7643500 As we discussed on the telephone last week, the owners of 903 Texas Avenue are trying to rehabilitate and lease the building for general office space. The building was built in the early 1940's, contains approximately 3,000 square feet, and was originally used as a small private medical center (doctor's offices, examination rooms, etc.). The present owners are the children of Dr. T.O. Walton, the original builder. They want to preserve the building's original architectural identity as much as possible. Due to the change of use, the City of College Station is requiring the owners to make a few major modifications to the building before issuing a Certificate of Occupancy (C.O.). Most of the required changes to the building are acceptable to the owners. However, there are two items still to be agreed upon; the modification of the lengthy hallway, and the replacement of the original interior wooden doors. I would like your opinion as to a solution to these two items. I have enclosed photos of the exterior and interior of the building. I have also enclosed a floor plan of the building. In our phone conversation you mentioned the use of 20 minute glass in the door panels and blocking the existing door vents.I like this idea. Please send some literature on this if possible. The hallway solution is not so easy. The problem is the length of the dead end hallway (see floor plan). The owners are against extending the hallway and creating a new back point of egress. A sprinkler system is far too costly. The windows throughout the building a very high (at least 6 feet) and do not provide adequate egress. Any suggestions? The owners plan to request a variance on these two items before the College Station Construction Review Committee in Au I offered to write you and explain the situation. If you could reply with a letter of support or list of possible solutions, I would be most appreciative. Please call me if you have any questions. Home of Texas A&M University C In addition, would you please get me an official determination as to the historical significance of 903 Texas. Federal funds may be used to lease the building, and I need to complete the preliminary environmental assessment of the property. The owners don't plan to alter the exterior of the building in any way (except for the possible back egress). Please return the photos upon your review. Thanks again for all your help. It was good talking to you again. Sincerely, Andrew G. Glides Housing Programs Coordinator Community Development Department fizcor. (44471- 41 oe) .cvn ept DE. WoReT14 4tAriF6 i Pic. (u4ggr s1uvE> ditidow4-t. ,ovr, oR- Rot)tT -S LI -! 11-r- [ � | � | [ -- --�-- -- ° * IteMitgol Rn7 a^u • Di kititaidetWaitaga `r'6'.`r /3'6'.nr TO: Phil Callahan, REMAX Realty FROM: Jo Carroll, Administrator, Community Development City of College Station RE: Lease 903 Texas DATE: May 25, 1993 The City of College Station is considering the following lease terms for 903 Texas Avenue, College Station, Texas: 1. 3 -year lease at a monthly rate of $1,800, with 2 1 -year renewable options. Utilities shall be the responsibility of the City. 2. First right -of- refusal to purchase the property should the Owners offer the property for sale. 3. The lease shall terminate in the event that the City of College Station not receive its annual Community Development Block Grant entitlement. 4. Janitorial services shall be provided by the City. 5. Interior and exterior property and grounds maintenance (including replacement of defective items) shall be the responsibility of the Owners. 6. The property must be brought to certain standards determined acceptable by the City, including: a. Unit must be made Handicapped accessibile, which would necessitate an access ramp and sidewalk to a 3 -foot door (the door on the right side of the building) . Handicapped parking must also be provided as per city code. b. Bathrooms must meet Handicapped and Commercial requirements (which means separate Male and Female facilities). City staff have examined the building and prepared some suggestions for how this may be accomplished. c. Lighted exit signs must be placed as per City code. d. The central hallway exceeds acceptable length for fire safety. e. All doors that open into the central hallway have to be 20- minute fire rated doors. (The above a -e standards would have to be met if the property is leased to anyone besides a physician (a change in the occupancy useage is created), or if a building permit is pulled. The Owners do have the opportunity to appeal these standards to the City's Structural Standards Board.) In addition, the following list of items would be necessary in order to accomodate the Community Development's office needs: a. Property must be brought to city electrical code in order to provide proper service for computer and office equipment (this would possibly be required for other tenants who may wish to use the property for office space). b. A sign would be necessary to be placed in the front yard area, at the City's expense. It would be necessary to trim the large tree in the front area (Owner's expense). c. Repair or replace the front door lock (it will not lock from the inside); replace all broken windows as needed throughout the building; and repair or replace other door locks throughout the building as needed. All doors must be in good working condition. d. Remove the wall- mounted fluorescent fixtures in the front 19'x 23' reception area. Install ceiling fluorescent fixtures to provide proper illumination. e. Remove the existing fluorescent fixtures throughout the property and replace with 2x4 foot, 4 -bulb wrap -around fixtures to provide proper illumination. Ensure that all rooms have proper illumination. f. Remove the sinks and cap drain. g. In the far rear left office, cap the plumbing and electrical in the floor. h. Secure loose roof tiles. i. Place sidewalk to rear parking areas and outside storage facility. j. Install commercial grade carpet in all office areas, excluding the 19'x 23' reception area, in order to reduce noise. k. In small kitchen area at rear of building, remove existing cabinets and sink. Install door to provide access from the central hall and remove door that enters from the office on the left. Install one -wall of cabinets and sink. 1. Remove doors between offices, frame in door - openings, and finish. m. Thoroughly clean entire building and polish the floor. n. Ensure that all electrical, mechanical, and plumbing facilities are in good working order. The City is interested in maintaining the historical integrity of the building as much as feasible, while still providing a pleasant office atmosphere for staff. We would also be interested in displaying a written and /or pictorial history of the building in the front reception area if that is available. It is important to note that this is not a leasing offer. Any lease agreement would be subject to City Council approval. This is a "feasibility" study made in order to determine whether or not to make a proposal to Council.