Alameda City Council
July 7, 2026

Conceptual Cost Plan
(E) Maintenance Service Center (MSC), Remodel & Expand

ALAMEDA CITY FACILITIES MASTER PLAN
Control Quantities
(E) Maintenance Service Center (MSC), Remodel & Expand Summary Detailed
Cost Breakdown
December 8, 2025

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
Enclosed Areas Architect 's Qty height
Reuse (E) Maintenance Service Center 16,400 17.875 Subtotal o
f Enclosed Area 16,400 17.88
Site Area
Program Si
te Area 109,800
(E) Maintenance Service Center (MSC),
Remodel &
Expand Control Quantities

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
CSI UniFormat Summary 16,400 SF % $/SF $
Foundations 0% $0.00 $0
Superstructure 0% $0.00 $0
Enclosure 7% $50.00 $820,000
Roofing 2% $15.00 $246,000
Interior Construction 3% $22.87 $375,000
Stairs 0% $0.00 $0
Interior Finishes 3% $18.29 $300,000
Conveying 0% $0.00 $0
Plumbing 1% $10.67 $175,000
Heating, Ventilation, & Air Conditioning 3% $19.82 $325,000 Fire Protection 1% $3.66 $60,000
Electrical 6% $45.73 $750,000
Equipment 0% $3.05 $50,000
Furnishings 0% $3.05 $50,000
Selective Building Demolition 1% $6.10 $100,000
Subtotal - Building Construction 28% $198.23 $3,251,000 Site Preparation 4% $26.78 $ 4 39,200
Site Improvement 29% $203.84 $3,343,011
Site Mechanical Utilities 3% $20.09 $329,400
Site Electrical Utilities 4% $26.78 $439,200
Subtotal - Sitework 39% $277.4 9 $4,550,811
Total - Building and Sitework Construction 67% $475.72 $7,801,811 Project Labor Agreement (PLA) 3.50% 1% $16.65 $273,063
Builder's
Risk Insurance 1.00% 0% $4.92 $80,749
Bonds & Insurance 3.50% 2% $17.41 $285,447
General Conditions 10.00% 7% $51.47 $844,107
Contractor's Overhead & Profit 5.00% 4% $28.31 $464,259 Subtotal 83% $594.48 $9,749,435
Contingency for Design Development 20.00% 17% $118.90 $1,949,887 Co
st Escalation NIC/Excluded, See Overall Summary
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION BUDGET 100% $713.37 $11,699,322
NOTE: Inclusions and Exclusions listed in the Commentary Section. (E) Maintenance Service Center (MSC),
Remodel &
Expand Summary

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(E) Maintenance Service Center (MSC),
Remodel &
Expand Summary
CSI UniFormat Summary
Cost Escalation
Continge
ncy for Design Development
Contractor's Overhead & Profit
General Conditions
Bonds & Insurance
Builder's Risk Insurance
Project Labor Agreement (PLA)
Site Electrical Utilities
Site Mechanical Utilities
Site Improvement
Site Preparation
Furnishings
Equipment
Electrical
Fire Protection
Heating, Ventilation, & Air Conditioning
Plumbing
Conveying
Interior Finishes
Stairs
Interior Construction
Roofing
Enclosure
Superstructure
Foundations

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
No Work A
nticipated In This Section - Existing To Remain
Subtot
al For Foundations:

Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
No Work Anticipated In This Section - Existing To Remain Subtot
al For Superstructure:

Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Exterior Enclosure
Exterior W
all Finishes, Exterior doors/Frames
& Door Hardware, Exterior Windows & Exterior
Soffit (allowance for minor modification)
16,400 GSF $50.00 $820,000
Subtotal For Enclosure: $820,000
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Roof Coverings
Roofing sy
stem; including insulation, flashing
and sheet metal and parapet cap (allowance
for minor modification) 16,400 GSF $15.00 $246,000
Subtotal For Roofing: $246,000
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Interior Construction
Interior p
artitions, interior windows, interior
doors/frames & hardwares, Fittings and
Specialties (only 5,000gsf will be renovated) 5,000 GSF $75.00 $375,000 Subtotal For Interior Construction: $375,000

FOUNDATIONS

SUPERSTRUC
TURE

ENCLOSURE

ROOFING

INTERIOR CONSTRUCTION
(E) Maintenance Service Center (MSC),
Remodel &
Expand Detail

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(E) Maintenance Service Center (MSC),
Remodel &
Expand Detail
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
No Work Anticipated In This Section
Subtotal F
or Stairs:

Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Interior Finishes
Floor, Wal
l & Ceiling Finishes (only
5,000gsf will be renovated) 5,000 GSF $60.00 $300,000
Subtotal For Interior Finishes: $300,000
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
No Work Anticipated In This Section
Subtotal F
or Conveying:

Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Plumbing System
Plumbing F
ixtures and connection piping;
including domestic water, sanitary waste, vent
and service piping (only 5,000gsf will be
renovated) 5,000 GSF $35.00 $175,000
Subtotal For Plumbing: $175,000
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
HVAC
HVAC; incl
uding heat generation and chilling
equipments, pumps, piping, air handling
equipment, air distribution and return, diffusers
& return grilles, controls, exhaust ventilation,
system testing and balancing (only 5,000gsf
will be renovated) 5,000 GSF $65.00 $325,000
Subtotal For Heating, Ventilation, & Air-Conditioning: $325,000

INTERIOR FINISHES

CONVEYING
PL
UMBING

HEATING, VENTILATION, & AIR-CONDITIONING
STAIRS

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(E) Maintenance Service Center (MSC),
Remodel &
Expand Detail
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Fire Sprinkler System
Automatic
fire sprinkler system
(only 5,000gsf will be renovated) 5,000 GSF $12.00 $60,000 Subtotal For Fire Protection: $60,000
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Electrical System
Electrical
service & distribution, machine &
equipment connections, Lighting & power
specialties, lighting switching and control (only
5,000gsf will be renovated) 5,000 GSF $100.00 $500,000
Low-Voltage
Fire Alarm, Communication, Security & AV
System (only 5,000gsf will be renovated) 5,000 GSF $50.00 $250,000 Subtotal For Electrical: $750,000
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Commercial Equipments
Breakroom
equipments; including refrigerator,
microwave, dishwasher 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000
Subtotal For Equipment: $50,000
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Fixed Furnishing
Fire extin
guisher cabinets, walk-off mat,
mecho shades/window blinds (only 5,000gsf
will be renovated) 5,000 GSF $10.00 $50,000
Moveable Furnishings
FF&E Allowance NIC, OFOI
Conference/meeting tables and chairs NIC, OFOI
Office tables and chairs NIC, OFOI
Office workstation/cubicles NIC, OFOI
Subtotal For Furnishings: $50,000

FIRE PROTECTION

ELECTRICAL
E

QUIPMENT

FURNISHINGS

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(E) Maintenance Service Center (MSC),
Remodel &
Expand Detail
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Selective Demolition
Demo and r
emove (E) interior partition and
doors, floor/wall/ceiling finishes, miscellaneous
caseworks and plumbing, HVAC, electrical
trade (only 5,000gsf will be renovated) 5,000 GSF $20.00 $100,000 Subtotal For Selective Building Demolition: $100,000
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Demolition Of Building
Demo and r
emove (E) building NIC, Excluded
Site Clearing and Demolition
Site clearing & grading 109,800 SF $2.00 $219,600
Demo and remove of (E) hardscape and
landscape 109,800 SF $1.00 $109,800
Site Protective Construction
Erosion control/SWPP 109,800 SF $1.00 $109,800
Hazardous Materials Abatement NIC, Excluded
Subtotal For Site Preparation: $439,200
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Vehicular Paving
Parking &
driveway, asphalt paving 52,576 SF $15.00 $788,640
Lay Down area 17,500 SF $15.00 $262,500
Striping & pavement marking 70,076 SF $1.00 $70,076
Concrete curbs & gutter 70,076 SF $3.00 $210,228
Driveway apron/ramp 2 EA $10,000.00 $20,000
Pedestrian Paving
Pedestrian Walkway 3,436 SF $25.00 $85,900
Patio 600 SF $25.00 $15,000
Concrete pad for fuel 450 SF $25.00 $11,250

SELECTIVE BUILDING DEMOLITION

SITE PREPA
RATION

SITE IMPROVEMENT

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(E) Maintenance Service Center (MSC),
Remodel &
Expand Detail
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Landscaping & Irrigation
Planting i
ncluding trees 35,238 SF $20.00 $704,760
Premium for stormwater/bio-retention area 1,762 SF $35.00 $61,667 Automatic Irrigation 35,238 SF $5.00 $176,190
Site Structure
Trash Enclosure, covered 360 SF $450.00 $162,000
Plant nursery/equipment/4-stockpiles NIC, Owner Furnished/Owner Installed Fueling station NIC, Owner Furnished/Owner Installed
Fencing & Miscellaneous Accessories
Perimeter fence and gate, including structural
foundation 1,330 LF $500.00 $665,000
Miscellaneous site furnishing; including flag
pole, trash receptacle, bike rack, benches,
bollards, etc. 109,800 SF $1.00 $109,800
Subtotal For Site Improvement: $3,343,011
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Storm Drainage
Storm drai
n lines & area drain, including
connection to (E) 109,800 SF $3.00 $329,400
Subtotal For Site Mechanical Utilities: $329,400
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Site Lighting
Site light
ing 109,800 SF $3.00 $329,400
Site Communications and Security
Allowance 109,800 SF $1.00 $109,800
Subtotal For Site Electrical Utilities: $439,200

SITE MECHANICAL UTILITIES

SITE IMPRO
VEMENT

SITE ELECTRICAL UTILITIES

Conceptual Cost Plan
(N) Recreation & Parks Corp. Yard + Site Improv. (Combined Campus)

ALAMEDA CITY FACILITIES MASTER PLAN
Control Quantities
(N) Recreation & Parks Corp. Yard + Site Improv. (Combined Campus) Summary Detailed Cost Breakdown
December 8, 2025

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
Enclosed Areas Architect 's Qty height
(N) Recreation & Parks Corp Yard 12,987 15.17 Subtotal o
f Enclosed Area 12,987
Site Area
Program Si
te Area 129,150
(N) Recreation & Parks Corp. Yard + Site
Improv. (
Combined Campus) Control

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
CSI Unformat Summary 12,987 SF % $/SF $
Foundations 3% $50.00 $649,350
Superstructure 7% $135.00 $1,753,245
Enclosure 9% $165.00 $2,142,855
Roofing 3% $50.00 $649,350
Interior Construction 4% $75.00 $974,025
Stairs 0% $0.00 $0
Interior Finishes 3% $60.00 $779,220
Conveying 0% $0.00 $0
Plumbing 2% $35.00 $454,545
Heating, Ventilation, & Air Conditioning 4% $65.00 $844,155 Fire Protection 1% $12.00 $155,844
Electrical 8% $150.00 $1,948,050
Equipment 0% $3.85 $50,000
Furnishings 1% $10.00 $129,870
Selective Building Demolition 0% $0.00 $0
Subtotal - Building Construction 44% $810.85 $10,530,509 Site Prep
aration 2% $39.78 $5 16,600
Site Improvement 16% $283.09 $3,676,550
Site Mechanical Utilities 2% $41.38 $537,450
Site Electrical Utilities 2% $40.55 $526,600
Subtotal - Sitework 22% $404.8 0 $5,257,200
Total - Building and Sitework Construction 67% $1,215.65 $15,787,709 Project Labor Agreement (PLA) 3.50% 1% $42.55 $552,570
Builder's
Risk Insurance 1.00% 0% $12.58 $163,403
Bonds & Insurance 3.50% 2% $44.48 $577,629
General Conditions 10.00% 7% $131.53 $1,708,131
Contractor's Overhead & Profit 5.00% 4% $72.34 $939,472 Subtotal 83% $1,519. 13 $19,728,914
Contingency for Design Development 20.00% 17% $303.83 $3,945,783 Co
st Escalation NIC/Excluded, See Overall Summary
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION BUDGET 100% $1,822.95 $23,674,697
NOTE: Inclusions and Exclusions listed in the Commentary Section. (N) Recreation & Parks Corp. Yard + Site
Improv. (
Combined Campus) Summary

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(N) Recreation & Parks Corp. Yard + Site
Improv. (C
ombined Campus) Summary
CSI Unformat Summary
Cost Escalation
Contingen
cy for Design Development
Contractor's Overhead & Profit
General Conditions
Bonds & Insurance
Builder's Risk Insurance
Project Labor Agreement (PLA)
Site Electrical Utilities
Site Mechanical Utilities
Site Improvement
Site Preparation
Furnishings
Equipment
Electrical
Fire Protection
Heating, Ventilation, & Air Conditioning
Plumbing
Conveying
Interior Finishes
Stairs
Interior Construction
Roofing
Enclosure
Superstructure
Foundations

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Foundatio
n
Reinforced
concrete shallow column footings,
wall footings, grade beams 12,987 GSF $30.00 $389,610
Slab On Grade
Reinforced concrete slab on grade, over AB
subbase and water vapor barrier 12,987 GSF $20.00 $259,740 Subtotal For Foundations: $649,350
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Vertical Structure
Column & s
hearwall 12,987 GSF $35.00 $454,545
Roof Structure
Structural framing and plywood sheathing 12,987 GSF $100.00 $1,298,700 Subtotal For Superstructure: $1,753,245
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Exterior Enclosure
Exterior W
all Finishes, Exterior doors/Frames
& Door Hardware, Exterior Windows & Exterior
Soffit 12,987 GSF $165.00 $2,142,855
Subtotal For Enclosure: $2,142,855
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Roof Coverings
Roofing sy
stem; including insulation, flashing
and sheet metal and parapet cap 12,987 GSF $50.00 $649,350 Subtotal For Roofing: $649,350

FOUNDATIONS

SUPERSTRUC
TURE

ENCLOSURE

ROOFING
(N) Recreation & Parks Corp. Yard + Site
Improv. (
Combined Campus) Detail

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(N) Recreation & Parks Corp. Yard + Site
Improv. (C
ombined Campus) Detail
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Interior Construction
Interior pa
rtitions, interior windows, interior
doors/frames & hardwares, Fittings and
Specialties 12,987 GSF $75.00 $974,025
Subtotal For Interior Construction: $974,025
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
No Work Anticipated In This Section
Subtotal Fo
r Stairs:

Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Interior Finishes
Floor, Wall
& Ceiling Finishes 12,987 GSF $60.00 $779,220
Subtotal For Interior Finishes: $779,220
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
No Work Anticipated In This Section
Subtotal Fo
r Conveying:

Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Plumbing System
Plumbing Fi
xtures and connection piping;
including domestic water, sanitary waste, vent
and service piping 12,987 GSF $35.00 $454,545
Subtotal For Plumbing: $454,545

INTERIOR CONSTRUCTION
STAIRS
INTERI

OR FINISHES

CONVEYING

PLUMBING

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(N) Recreation & Parks Corp. Yard + Site
Improv. (C
ombined Campus) Detail
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
HVAC
HVAC; inclu
ding heat generation and chilling
equipments, pumps, piping, air handling
equipment, air distribution and return, diffusers
& return grilles, controls, exhaust ventilation,
system testing and balancing 12,987 GSF $65.00 $844,155 Subtotal For Heating, Ventilation, & Air-Conditioning: $844,155 Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Fire Sprinkler System
Automatic f
ire sprinkler system 12,987 GSF $12.00 $155,844
Subtotal For Fire Protection: $155,844
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Electrical System
Electrical
service & distribution, machine &
equipment connections, Lighting & power
specialties, lighting switching and control 12,987 GSF $100.00 $1,298,700 Low-Voltage
Fire Alarm, Communication, Security & AV
System 12,987 GSF $50.00 $649,350
Subtotal For Electrical: $1,948,050
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Commercial Equipments
Breakroom e
quipments; including refrigerator,
microwave, dishwasher 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000
Subtotal For Equipment: $50,000

HEATING, VENTILATION, & AIR-CONDITIONING

ELECTRICAL

EQUIPMENT
FI

RE PROTECTION

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(N) Recreation & Parks Corp. Yard + Site
Improv. (
Combined Campus) Detail
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Fixed Furnishing
Fire extin
guisher cabinets, walk-off mat,
mecho shades/window blinds 12,987 GSF $10.00 $129,870
Moveable Furnishings
FF&E Allowance NIC, OFOI
Conference/meeting tables and chairs NIC, OFOI
Office tables and chairs NIC, OFOI
Office workstation/cubicles NIC, OFOI
Subtotal For Furnishings: $129,870
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
See Building Demo under Site Preparation Section
Subtotal F
or Selective Building Demolition:

Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Demolition Of Building
Demo and r
emove (E) building NIC, Excluded
Site Clearing and Demolition
Site clearing & grading 129,150 SF $2.00 $258,300
Demo and remove of (E) hardscape and
landscape 129,150 SF $1.00 $129,150
Site Protective Construction
Erosion control/SWPP 129,150 SF $1.00 $129,150
Hazardous Materials Abatement NIC, Excluded
Subtotal For Site Preparation: $516,600

FURNISHINGS

SELECTIVE

BUILDING DEMOLITION

SITE PREPARATION

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(N) Recreation & Parks Corp. Yard + Site
Improv. (
Combined Campus) Detail
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Vehicular Paving
Parking &
driveway, asphalt paving 105,050 SF $15.00 $1,575,750
Front apron, concrete paving 2,600 SF $30.00 $78,000
Striping & pavement marking 107,650 SF $1.00 $107,650
Concrete curbs & gutter 107,650 SF $3.00 $322,950
Driveway apron/ramp 2 EA $10,000.00 $20,000
Pedestrian Paving
Pedestrian Walkway 10,600 SF $25.00 $265,000
Concrete pad for wash 300 SF $25.00 $7,500
Landscaping & Irrigation
Planting including trees 10,600 SF $20.00 $212,000
Premium for stormwater/bio-retention area 530 SF $35.00 $18,550 Automatic Irrigation 10,600 SF $5.00 $53,000
Site Structure
Trash Enclosure, covered 360 SF $450.00 $162,000
Plant nursery/equipment/4-stockpiles NIC, Owner Furnished/Owner Installed Washing station NIC, Owner Furnished/Owner Installed
Fencing & Miscellaneous Accessories
Perimeter fence and gate, including structural
foundation 1,450 LF $500.00 $725,000
Miscellaneous site furnishing; including flag
pole, trash receptacle, bike rack, benches,
bollards, etc. 129,150 SF $1.00 $129,150
Subtotal For Site Improvement: $3,676,550

SITE IMPROVEMENT

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(N) Recreation & Parks Corp. Yard + Site
Improv. (C
ombined Campus) Detail
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Domestic Water
Cold water
lines, including connection to (E) 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000 Fire Water Service
Fire water lines, including connection to (E) 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000 Sanitary Sewer
Sewer line, including connection to (E) 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000 Storm Drainage
Storm drain lines & area drain, including
connection to (E) 129,150 SF $3.00 $387,450
Subtotal For Site Mechanical Utilities: $537,450
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Electrical Service and Distribution
Connection
to existing 1 LS $10,000.00 $10,000
Site Lighting
Site lighting 129,150 SF $3.00 $387,450
Site Communications and Security
Allowance 129,150 SF $1.00 $129,150
Subtotal For Site Electrical Utilities: $526,600

SITE MECHANICAL UTILITIES

SITE ELECTR

ICAL UTILITIES

Conceptual Cost Plan
(E) Fire Station #1: Expand Into Admin Area

ALAMEDA CITY FACILITIES MASTER PLAN
Control Quantities
(E) Fire Station #1: Expand Into Admin Area Summary
Detailed Cost Breakdown
December 8, 2025

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
Enclosed Areas Architect 's Qty height
(E) Fire Station #1, Expand Into Admin Area 12,742
Subtotal of Enclosed Area 12,742 -
Site Area
Program Si
te Area 75,000
(E) Fire Station #1: Expand Into Admin Area
Control Q
uantities

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
CSI Unformat Summary 12,742 SF % $/SF $
Foundations 2% $15.00 $191,130
Superstructure 6% $35.00 $445,970
Enclosure 8% $50.00 $637,100
Roofing 2% $15.00 $191,130
Interior Construction 7% $44.39 $565,596
Stairs 0% $0.00 $0
Interior Finishes 6% $35.18 $448,260
Conveying 0% $0.00 $0
Plumbing 2% $10.00 $127,420
Heating, Ventilation, & Air Conditioning 6% $35.00 $445,970 Fire Protection 2% $12.00 $152,904
Electrical 21% $130.00 $1,656,460
Equipment 1% $6.28 $80,000
Furnishings 0% $0.00 $0
Selective Building Demolition 3% $20.00 $254,840
Subtotal - Building Construction 67% $407.85 $5,196,780 Site Preparation 0% $0.00 $0
Site
Improvement 0% $0.00 $0
Site Mechanical Utilities 0% $0.00 $0
Site Electrical Utilities 0% $0.00 $0
Subtotal - Sitework 0% $0.00 $0
Tota
l - Building and Sitework Construction 67% $407.85 $5,196,780 Project Labor Agreement (PLA) 3.50% 0% $14.27 $181,887
Builder's R
isk Insurance 1.00% 0% $4.22 $53,787
Bonds & Insurance 3.50% 2% $14.92 $190,136
General Conditions 10.00% 7% $44.13 $562,259
Contractor's Overhead & Profit 5.00% 4% $24.27 $309,242 Subtotal 83% $509.66 $ 6,494,091
Contingency for Design Development 20.00% 17% $101.93 $1,298,818 Cos
t Escalation NIC/Excluded, See Overall Summary
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION BUDGET 100% $611.59 $7,792,910
NOTE: Inclusions and Exclusions listed in the Commentary Section. (E) Fire Station #1: Expand Into Admin
Area Summa
ry

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(E) Fire Station #1: Expand Into Admin
Area Summ
ary
CSI Unformat Summary
Cost Escalation
Continge
ncy for Design Development
Contractor's Overhead & Profit
General Conditions
Bonds & Insurance
Builder's Risk Insurance
Project Labor Agreement (PLA)
Site Electrical Utilities
Site Mechanical Utilities
Site Improvement
Site Preparation
Furnishings
Equipment
Electrical
Fire Protection
Heating, Ventilation, & Air Conditioning
Plumbing
Conveying
Interior Finishes
Stairs
Interior Construction
Roofing
Enclosure
Superstructure
Foundations

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Tier 1 Sei
smic Retrofit - Voluntary
Perform geo
technical investigation to
determine soil properties of building site and
confirm if soil is liquifiable. Pending
geotechnical results, enhance existing spread
footings as required to seismic overturning
forces and bearing pressures - Allow 12,742 GSF $15.00 $191,130 Subtotal For Foundations: $191,130
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Tier 1 Seismic Retrofit - Voluntary
Seismic str
engthening; install roof-to-wall
anchors, such as steel rod hold downs at the
masonry walls or new blocking and sheet
metal clips 12,742 GSF $35.00 $445,970
Subtotal For Superstructure: $445,970
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Exterior Enclosure
Exterior Wa
ll Finishes, Exterior doors/Frames
& Door Hardware, Exterior Windows & Exterior
Soffit (allowance for minor modification)
12,742 GSF $50.00 $637,100
Subtotal For Enclosure: $637,100
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Roof Coverings
Roofing sys
tem; including insulation, flashing
and sheet metal and parapet cap (allowance
for minor modification) 12,742 GSF $15.00 $191,130
Subtotal For Roofing: $191,130

FOUNDATIONS

SUPERSTRUCT
URE

ENCLOSURE

ROOFING
(E) Fire Station #1: Expand Into Admin
Area Detai
l

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(E) Fire Station #1: Expand Into Admin
Area Deta
il
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Interior Construction
Interior p
artitions, interior windows, interior
doors/frames & hardwares, Fittings and
Specialties
Full renovation 2,200 SF $75.00 $165,000
Minor renovation 10,542 SF $38.00 $400,596
Subtotal For Interior Construction: $565,596
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
No Work Anticipated In This Section
Subtotal F
or Stairs:

Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Full renovation 2,200 SF $60 .00 $132,000
Minor renovation 10,542 SF $30.00 $316,260
Subtotal For Interior Finishes: $448,260
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
No Work Anticipated In This Section
Subtotal F
or Conveying:

Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Plumbing System
Plumbing F
ixtures and connection piping;
including domestic water, sanitary waste, vent
and service piping; Plumbing distribution and
fixtures are in working order - allow for
minimum work) 12,742 GSF $10.00 $127,420
Subtotal For Plumbing: $127,420
Floor, Wall & Ceiling Finishes

INTERIOR CONSTRUCTION
STAIRS
INTER

IOR FINISHES

CONVEYING

PLUMBING

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(E) Fire Station #1: Expand Into Admin
Area Deta
il
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
HVAC
HVAC; incl
uding heat generation and chilling
equipments, pumps, piping, air handling
equipment, air distribution and return, diffusers
& return grilles, controls, exhaust ventilation,
system testing and balancing; Exhaust
systems in the shop, turnout room, exercise
room and future medical supply-narcotics room
need replacement, exhaust fats in the kitchen
and common restroom and lockers rooms
need replacement 12,742 GSF $35.00 $445,970
Subtotal For Heating, Ventilation, & Air-Conditioning: $445,970 Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Fire Sprinkler System
Automatic
fire sprinkler system (minor
modification affected by the remodel works) 12,742 GSF $12.00 $152,904 Subtotal For Fire Protection: $152,904
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Electrical System
Electrical
service & distribution, machine &
equipment connections, Lighting & power
specialties, lighting switching and control 12,742 GSF $100.00 $1,274,200 Low-Voltage
Fire Alarm, Communication, Security & AV
System 12,742 GSF $30.00 $382,260
Subtotal For Electrical: $1,656,460

FIRE PROTECTION

HEATING, VENTILATION, & AIR-CONDITIONING

ELECTRICAL

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(E) Fire Station #1: Expand Into Admin
Area Deta
il
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Commercial Equipments
Kitchen eq
uipments; including refrigerator,
microwave, dishwasher, washer/dryer,
range/oven, etc. 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000
Fire station equipments; including extractor,
turnout gear dryer, etc. 1 LS $30,000.00 $30,000
Subtotal For Equipment: $80,000
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Fixed Furnishing
Fire extin
guisher cabinets, walk-off mat,
mecho shades/window blinds, turn-out lockers NIC, Existing To Remain Moveable Furnishings
FF&E Allowance NIC, OFOI
Conference/meeting tables and chairs NIC, OFOI
Office tables and chairs NIC, OFOI
Office workstation/cubicles NIC, OFOI
Recliner chair NIC, OFOI
Dining room table and chair NIC, OFOI
Subtotal For Furnishings:

Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Selective Demolition
Demo and r
emove (E) interior partition and
doors, floor/wall/ceiling finishes, miscellaneous
caseworks and plumbing, HVAC, electrical
trade
12,742 GSF $20.00 $254,840
Subtotal For Selective Building Demolition: $254,840

SELECTIVE BUILDING DEMOLITION

EQUIPMENT
FU

RNISHINGS

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(E) Fire Station #1: Expand Into Admin
Area Deta
il
Quantity pr Rate Total ($)
No Work Anticipated In This Section - On Existing Site
Subtotal
For Site Preparation:

Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
No Work Anticipated In This Section - On Existing Site
Subtotal
For Site Improvement:

Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
No Work Anticipated In This Section - On Existing Site
Subtotal
For Site Mechanical Utilities:

Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
No Work Anticipated In This Section - On Existing Site
Subtotal
For Site Electrical Utilities:

SITE ELECTRICAL UTILITIES

SITE PREPA
RATION

SITE IMPROVEMENT

SITE MECHANICAL UTILITIES

Conceptual Cost Plan

ALAMEDA CITY FACILITIES MASTER PLAN
Control Quantities
(N) Fire Admin Bldg.: Relocate To (N) Fire Stn.#5 Summary Detailed Cost Breakdown
December 8, 2025
(N) Fire Admin Bldg.: Relocate To (N) Fire Stn.#5

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
Enclosed Area Architect' s Qty
(N) Fire Administration Building 10,200
Subt
otal of Enclosed Area 10,200
(N) Fi
re Admin Bldg.: Relocate To (N) Fire Stn.#5
Control Qu
antities

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
CSI UniFormat Summary 10,200 SF % $/SF $,000
Foundations 4% $50.00 $510,000
Superstructure 11% $135.00 $1,377,000
Enclosure 13% $165.00 $1,683,000
Roofing 4% $50.00 $510,000
Interior Construction 6% $75.00 $765,000
Stairs 0% $0.00 $0
Interior Finishes 5% $60.00 $612,000
Conveying 0% $0.00 $0
Plumbing 3% $35.00 $357,000
Heating, Ventilation, & Air Conditioning 5% $65.00 $663,000 Fire Protection 1% $12.00 $122,400
Electrical 12% $150.00 $1,530,000
Equipment 0% $4.90 $50,000
Furnishings 1% $10.00 $102,000
Selective Building Demolition 0% $0.00 $0
Subtotal - Building Construction 65% $811.90 $8,281,400 Site Preparation 0% $0.00 $0
Sit
e Improvement 0% $0.00 $0
Site Mechanical Utilities 1% $14.71 $150,000
Site Electrical Utilities 0% $0.98 $10,000
Subtotal - Sitework 1% $15.69 $ 1 60,000
Total - Building and Sitework Construction 67% $827.59 $8,441,400 Project Labor Agreement (PLA) 3.50% 1% $28.97 $295,449
Builder's
Risk Insurance 1.00% 0% $8.57 $87,368
Bonds & Insurance 3.50% 2% $30.28 $308,848
General Conditions 10.00% 7% $89.54 $913,307
Contractor's Overhead & Profit 5.00% 4% $49.25 $502,319 Subtotal 83% $1,034. 19 $10,548,690
Contingency for Design Development 20.00% 17% $206.84 $2,109,738 Co
st Escalation NIC/Excluded, See Overall Summary
TOTAL CONSTRUCTION BUDGET 100% $1,241.02 $12,658,428
NOTE: Inclusions and Exclusions listed in the Commentary Section. (N) Fire Admin Bldg.: Relocate To (N) Fire
Stn.#5 Summary

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(N) Fire Admin Bldg.: Relocate To (N) Fire
Stn.#5 Summary
CSI UniFormat Summary
Cost Escalation
Continge
ncy for Design Development
Contractor's Overhead & Profit
General Conditions
Bonds & Insurance
Builder's Risk Insurance
Project Labor Agreement (PLA)
Site Electrical Utilities
Site Mechanical Utilities
Site Improvement
Site Preparation
Selective Building Demolition
Furnishings
Equipment
Electrical
Fire Protection
Heating, Ventilation, & Air Conditioning
Plumbing
Conveying
Interior Finishes
Stairs
Interior Construction
Roofing
Enclosure
Superstructure
Foundations

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Foundatio
n
Reinforced
concrete shallow column footings,
wall footings, grade beams 10,200 GSF $30.00 $306,000
Slab On Grade
Reinforced concrete slab on grade, over AB
subbase and water vapor barrier 10,200 GSF $20.00 $204,000 Subtotal For Foundations: $510,000
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Vertical Structure
Column & s
hearwall 10,200 GSF $35.00 $357,000
Roof Structure
Structural framing and plywood sheathing 10,200 GSF $100.00 $1,020,000 Subtotal For Superstructure: $1,377,000
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Exterior Enclosure
Exterior W
all Finishes, Exterior doors/Frames
& Door Hardware, Exterior Windows & Exterior
Soffit 10,200 GSF $165.00 $1,683,000
Subtotal For Enclosure: $1,683,000
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Roof Coverings
Roofing sy
stem; including insulation, flashing
and sheet metal and parapet cap 10,200 GSF $50.00 $510,000 Subtotal For Roofing: $510,000

FOUNDATIONS

SUPERSTRUC
TURE

ENCLOSURE

ROOFING
(N) Fire Admin Bldg.: Relocate To (N) Fire
Stn.#5 De
tail

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(N) Fire Admin Bldg.: Relocate To (N) Fire
Stn.#5 De
tail
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Interior Construction
Interior p
artitions, interior windows, interior
doors/frames & hardwares, Fittings and
Specialties 10,200 GSF $75.00 $765,000
Subtotal For Interior Construction: $765,000
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
No Work Anticipated In This Section
Subtotal F
or Stairs:

Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Interior Finishes
Floor, Wal
l & Ceiling Finishes 10,200 GSF $60.00 $612,000
Subtotal For Interior Finishes: $612,000
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
No Work Anticipated In This Section
Subtotal F
or Conveying:

Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Plumbing System
Plumbing F
ixtures and connection piping;
including domestic water, sanitary waste, vent
and service piping 10,200 GSF $35.00 $357,000
Subtotal For Plumbing: $357,000

INTERIOR CONSTRUCTION
STAIRS
INTER

IOR FINISHES

CONVEYING

PLUMBING

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(N) Fire Admin Bldg.: Relocate To (N) Fire
Stn.#5 De
tail
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
HVAC
HVAC; incl
uding heat generation and chilling
equipments, pumps, piping, air handling
equipment, air distribution and return, diffusers
& return grilles, controls, exhaust ventilation,
system testing and balancing 10,200 GSF $65.00 $663,000 Subtotal For Heating, Ventilation, & Air-Conditioning: $663,000 Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Fire Sprinkler System
Automatic
fire sprinkler system 10,200 GSF $12.00 $122,400
Subtotal For Fire Protection: $122,400
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Electrical System
Electrical
service & distribution, machine &
equipment connections, Lighting & power
specialties, lighting switching and control 10,200 GSF $100.00 $1,020,000 Low-Voltage
Fire Alarm, Communication, Security & AV
System 10,200 GSF $50.00 $510,000
Subtotal For Electrical: $1,530,000
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Commercial Equipments
Breakroom
equipments; including refrigerator,
microwave, dishwasher 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000
Subtotal For Equipment: $50,000

ELECTRICAL

EQUIPMENT
HE

ATING, VENTILATION, & AIR-CONDITIONING

FIRE PROTECTION

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(N) Fire Admin Bldg.: Relocate To (N) Fire
Stn.#5 De
tail
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Fixed Furnishing
Fire extin
guisher cabinets, walk-off mat,
mecho shades/window blinds 10,200 GSF $10.00 $102,000
Moveable Furnishings
FF&E Allowance NIC, OFOI
Conference/meeting tables and chairs NIC, OFOI
Office tables and chairs NIC, OFOI
Office workstation/cubicles NIC, OFOI
Subtotal For Furnishings: $102,000
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
See Building Demo under Site Preparation Section
Subtotal F
or Selective Building Demolition:

Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Demolition Of Building
Demo and r
emove (E) building Included In FS#5 Section
Site Clearing and Demolition
Site clearing & grading Included In FS#5 Section
Demo and remove of (E) hardscape and
landscape Included In FS#5 Section
Site Protective Construction
Erosion control/SWPP Included In FS#5 Section
Hazardous Materials Abatement NIC, Excluded
Subtotal For Site Preparation:

SITE PREPARATION

FURNISHING
S

SELECTIVE BUILDING DEMOLITION

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(N) Fire Admin Bldg.: Relocate To (N) Fire
Stn.#5 Det
ail
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Vehicular Paving Included In FS#5 Section
Pedestrian Paving Included In FS#5 Section
Landscaping & Irrigation Included In FS#5 Section
Fencing & Miscellaneous Accessories Included In FS#5 Section Subtotal For Site Improvement:

Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Domestic Water
Cold water
lines, including connection to (E) 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000 Fire Water Service
Fire water lines, including connection to (E) 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000 Sanitary Sewer
Sewer line, including connection to (E) 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000 Storm Drainage
Storm drain lines & area drain, including
connection to (E) Included In FS#5 Section
Subtotal For Site Mechanical Utilities: $150,000
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Electrical Service and Distribution
Connection
to existing 1 LS $10,000.00 $10,000
Site Lighting
Site lighting Included In FS#5 Section
Site Communications and Security
Allowance Included In FS#5 Section
Subtotal For Site Electrical Utilities: $10,000

SITE ELECTRICAL UTILITIES

SITE IMPROV
EMENT

SITE MECHANICAL UTILITIES

Conceptual Cost Plan
(E) Fire Station #2: Remodel (Without Truck)

ALAMEDA CITY FACILITIES MASTER PLAN
Control Quantities
(E) Fire Station #2: Remodel (Without Truck) Summary
Detailed Cost Breakdown
December 8, 2025

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
Enclosed Areas Architect' s Qty height
Remodel (E) Fire Station #2, without truck 11,260 15.17 Subt
otal of
Enclosed Area 11,260
Site Area
Program Sit
e Area 72,500
(E) Fire Station #2: Remodel (Without Truck) Control
Quantities

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
CSI UniFormat Summary 11,260 SF % $/SF $
Foundations 2% $15.00 $168,900
Superstructure 5% $35.00 $394,100
Enclosure 8% $50.00 $563,000
Roofing 2% $15.00 $168,900
Interior Construction 7% $45.00 $506,700
Stairs 0% $0.00 $0
Interior Finishes 7% $45.00 $506,700
Conveying 0% $0.00 $0
Plumbing 5% $30.00 $337,800
Heating, Ventilation, & Air Conditioning 5% $35.00 $394,100 Fire Protection 2% $12.00 $135,120
Electrical 20% $130.00 $1,463,800
Equipment 1% $7.10 $80,000
Furnishings 0% $0.00 $0
Selective Building Demolition 3% $20.00 $225,200
Subtotal - Building Construction 67% $439.10 $4,944,320 Site Preparation 0% $0.00 $0
Sit
e Improvement 0% $0.00 $0
Site Mechanical Utilities 0% $0.00 $0
Site Electrical Utilities 0% $0.00 $0
Subtotal - Sitework 0% $0.00 $0
Tot
al - Building and Sitework Construction 67% $439.10 $4,944,320 Project Labor Agreement (PLA) 3.50% 0% $15.37 $173,051
Builder's
Risk Insurance 1.00% 0% $4.54 $51,174
Bonds & Insurance 3.50% 2% $16.07 $180,899
General Conditions 10.00% 7% $47.51 $534,944
Contractor's Overhead & Profit 5.00% 4% $26.13 $294,219 Subtotal 83% $548.72 $6,178,607
Contingency for Design Development 20.00% 17% $109.74 $1,235,721 Co
st Escalation (to start of construction) NIC/Excluded, See Overall Summary TOTAL CONSTRUCTION BUDGET 100% $658.47 $7,414,328
NOTE: Inclusions and Exclusions listed in the Commentary Section. (E) Fire Station #2: Remodel (Without
Truck) Su
mmary

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(E) Fire Station #2: Remodel (Without
Truck) Su
mmary
CSI UniFormat Summary
Cost Escalation (to start of construction)
Continge
ncy for Design Development
Contractor's Overhead & Profit
General Conditions
Bonds & Insurance
Builder's Risk Insurance
Project Labor Agreement (PLA)
Site Electrical Utilities
Site Mechanical Utilities
Site Improvement
Site Preparation
Selective Building Demolition
Furnishings
Equipment
Electrical
Fire Protection
Heating, Ventilation, & Air Conditioning
Plumbing
Conveying
Interior Finishes
Stairs
Interior Construction
Roofing
Enclosure
Superstructure
Foundations

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Tier 1 Se
ismic Retrofit - Voluntary
Obtain geo
technical analysis of the site to
determine all soil-structure interaction
parameters including liquefaction analysis and
foundation type recommendations. If
significant liquefaction problem is present, the
mitigation will likely be extensive - Allowance 11,260 GSF $15.00 $168,900 Subtotal For Foundations: $168,900
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Tier 1 Seismic Retrofit - Voluntary
Seismic st
rengthening; If remediation or retrofit
is to be seriously considered, obtain detailed as-
built survey to determine the wood shear wall
and floor layout, sheathing type, and create as-
built plans - Allowance 11,260 GSF $35.00 $394,100
Subtotal For Superstructure: $394,100
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Exterior Enclosure
Exterior W
all Finishes, Exterior doors/Frames
& Door Hardware, Exterior Windows & Exterior
Soffit (allowance for minor modification)
11,260 GSF $50.00 $563,000
Subtotal For Enclosure: $563,000
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Roof Coverings
Roofing sy
stem; including insulation, flashing
and sheet metal and parapet cap (allowance
for minor modification) 11,260 GSF $15.00 $168,900
Subtotal For Roofing: $168,900
(E) Fire Station #2: Remodel (Without
Truck) De
tail

FOUNDATIONS

SUPERSTRU
CTURE

ENCLOSURE

ROOFING

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(E) Fire Station #2: Remodel (Without
Truck) De
tail
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Interior Construction
Interior p
artitions, interior windows, interior
doors/frames & hardwares, Fittings and
Specialties 11,260 GSF $45.00 $506,700
Subtotal For Interior Construction: $506,700
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
No Work Anticipated In This Section
Subtotal F
or Stairs:

Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Interior Finishes
Floor, Wal
l & Ceiling Finishes 11,260 GSF $45.00 $506,700
Subtotal For Interior Finishes: $506,700
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
No Work Anticipated In This Section
Subtotal F
or Conveying:

Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Plumbing System
Plumbing F
ixtures and connection piping;
including domestic water, sanitary waste, vent
and service piping; Toilet and sinks in the
large, shared restrooms need replacement,
combustion air needs to be brought up to code 11,260 GSF $30.00 $337,800 Subtotal For Plumbing: $337,800

INTERIOR CONSTRUCTION
STAIRS
INTER

IOR FINISHES

CONVEYING

PLUMBING

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(E) Fire Station #2: Remodel (Without
Truck) De
tail
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
HVAC
HVAC; incl
uding heat generation and chilling
equipments, pumps, piping, air handling
equipment, air distribution and return, diffusers
& return grilles, controls, exhaust ventilation,
system testing and balancing; the (E) ducting
in the ceiling and crawl space need
replacement, the plymovent vehicle exhaust in
the App Bay has a fan that need replacement,
exhaust system in the kitchen and restrooms
need replacement 11,260 GSF $35.00 $394,100
Subtotal For Heating, Ventilation, & Air-Conditioning: $394,100 Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Fire Sprinkler System
Automatic
fire sprinkler system (minor
modification affected by the remodel works) 11,260 GSF $12.00 $135,120 Subtotal For Fire Protection: $135,120
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Electrical System
Electrical
service & distribution, machine &
equipment connections, Lighting & power
specialties, lighting switching and control 11,260 GSF $100.00 $1,126,000 Low-Voltage
Fire Alarm, Communication, Security & AV
System 11,260 GSF $30.00 $337,800
Subtotal For Electrical: $1,463,800

HEATING, VENTILATION, & AIR-CONDITIONING

FIRE PROTECTION

ELECTRICA
L

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(E) Fire Station #2: Remodel (Without
Truck) De
tail
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Commercial Equipments
Kitchen eq
uipments; including refrigerator,
microwave, dishwasher, washer/dryer,
range/oven, etc. 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000
Fire station equipments; including extractor,
turnout gear dryer, etc. 1 LS $30,000.00 $30,000
Subtotal For Equipment: $80,000
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Fixed Furnishing
Fire extinguisher cabinets, walk-off mat, mecho
shades/window blinds, turn-out lockers NIC, Existing To Remain Moveable Furnishings
FF&E Allowance NIC, OFOI
Conference/meeting tables and chairs NIC, OFOI
Office tables and chairs NIC, OFOI
Office workstation/cubicles NIC, OFOI
Recliner chair NIC, OFOI
Dining room table and chair NIC, OFOI
Subtotal For Furnishings:

Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Selective Demolition
Demo and r
emove (E) interior partition and
doors, floor/wall/ceiling finishes, miscellaneous
caseworks and plumbing/HVAC/electrical trade 11,260 GSF $20.00 $225,200 Subtotal For Selective Building Demolition: $225,200

EQUIPMENT

FURNISHING
S

SELECTIVE BUILDING DEMOLITION

Conceptual Cost Plan
(E) Fire Station #4: Minor Repairs

ALAMEDA CITY FACILITIES MASTER PLAN
Control Quantities
(E) Fire Station #4: Minor Repairs Summary
Detailed Cost Breakdown
December 8, 2025

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
Enclosed Areas Architect 's Qty height
(E) Fire Station #4 11,234 15.17
Subtotal o
f Enclosed Area 11,234
(E) Fire Station #4: Minor Repairs Control
Quantitie
s

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
CSI UniFormat Summary 11,234 SF % $/SF $
Foundations 5% $15.00 $168,510
Superstructure 11% $35.00 $393,190
Enclosure 16% $50.00 $561,700
Roofing 5% $15.00 $168,510
Interior Construction 5% $16.69 $187,500
Stairs 0% $0.00 $0
Interior Finishes 4% $13.35 $150,000
Conveying 0% $0.00 $0
Plumbing 2% $7.79 $87,500
Heating, Ventilation, & Air Conditioning 5% $14.47 $162,500 Fire Protection 1% $2.67 $30,000
Electrical 9% $28.93 $325,000
Equipment 2% $7.12 $80,000
Furnishings 0% $1.11 $12,500
Selective Building Demolition 1% $4.45 $50,000
Subtotal - Building Construction 67% $211.58 $2,376,910 Site Preparation 0% $0.00 $0
Sit
e Improvement 0% $0.00 $0
Site Mechanical Utilities 0% $0.00 $0
Site Electrical Utilities 0% $0.00 $0
Subtotal - Sitework 0% $0.00 $0
Tot
al - Building and Sitework Construction 67% $211.58 $2,376,910 Project Labor Agreement (PLA) 3.50% 0% $7.41 $83,192
Builder's
Risk Insurance 1.00% 0% $2.19 $24,601
Bonds & Insurance 3.50% 2% $7.74 $86,965
General Conditions 10.00% 7% $22.89 $257,167
Contractor's Overhead & Profit 5.00% 4% $12.59 $141,442 Subtotal 83% $264.40 $2,970,276
Contingency for Design Development 20.00% 17% $52.88 $594,055 Cost
Escalation (to start of construction) NIC/Excluded, See Overall Summary TOTAL CONSTRUCTION BUDGET 100% $317.28 $3,564,331
NOTE: Inclusions and Exclusions listed in the Commentary Section. (E) Fire Station #4: Minor Repairs
Summary

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(E) Fire Station #4: Minor Repairs
Summary
CSI UniFormat Summary
Cost Escalation (to start of construction)
Continge
ncy for Design Development
Contractor's Overhead & Profit
General Conditions
Bonds & Insurance
Builder's Risk Insurance
Project Labor Agreement (PLA)
Site Electrical Utilities
Site Mechanical Utilities
Site Improvement
Site Preparation
Selective Building Demolition
Furnishings
Equipment
Electrical
Fire Protection
Heating, Ventilation, & Air Conditioning
Plumbing
Conveying
Interior Finishes
Stairs
Interior Construction
Roofing
Enclosure
Superstructure
Foundations

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Tier 1 Se
ismic Retrofit - Voluntary
Perform ge
otechnical investigation to
determine soil properties of building site and
confirm if soil is liquifiable - Allow 11,234 GSF $15.00 $168,510 Subtotal For Foundations: $168,510
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Tier 1 Seismic Retrofit - Voluntary
Seismic st
rengthening; install hold-downs at
the shearwalls missing hold-downs, retrofit
the beam to column connections at the steel
moment frames with additional steel plates &
welds, add flange bracing at the steel moment
frame beams , perform additional analysis of
the wood shear walls, steel moment frames
and beams 11,234 GSF $35.00 $393,190
Subtotal For Superstructure: $393,190
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Exterior Enclosure
Exterior W
all Finishes, Exterior doors/Frames
& Door Hardware, Exterior Windows &
Exterior Soffit (allowance for minor
modification) 11,234 GSF $50.00 $561,700
Subtotal For Enclosure: $561,700
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Roof Coverings
Roofing sy
stem; including insulation, flashing
and sheet metal and parapet cap (allowance
for minor modification) 11,234 GSF $15.00 $168,510
Subtotal For Roofing: $168,510
(E) Fire Station #4: Minor Repairs Detail

FOUNDATIONS

SUPERSTRU
CTURE

ENCLOSURE

ROOFING

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(E) Fire Station #4: Minor Repairs Detail
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Interior Construction
Interior p
artitions, interior windows, interior
doors/frames & hardwares, Fittings and
Specialties (only 2,500gsf will be renovated) 2,500 SF $75.00 $187,500 Subtotal For Interior Construction: $187,500
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
No Work Anticipated In This Section
Subtotal F
or Stairs:

Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Interior Finishes
Floor, Wal
l & Ceiling Finishes (only 2,500gsf
will be renovated) 2,500 SF $60.00 $150,000
Subtotal For Interior Finishes: $150,000
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
No Work Anticipated In This Section
Subtotal F
or Conveying:

Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Plumbing System
Plumbing F
ixtures and connection piping;
including domestic water, sanitary waste, vent
and service piping; Plumbing distribution and
fixtures are in working order (only 2,500gsf
will be renovated) 2,500 SF $35.00 $87,500
Subtotal For Plumbing: $87,500

INTERIOR CONSTRUCTION
STAIRS
INTER

IOR FINISHES

CONVEYING

PLUMBING

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(E) Fire Station #4: Minor Repairs Detail
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
HVAC
HVAC; incl
uding heat generation and chilling
equipments, pumps, piping, air handling
equipment, air distribution and return,
diffusers & return grilles, controls, exhaust
ventilation, system testing and balancing; (N)
exhaust fans needed on the roof for the shop
& turn-out rooms, 2-wall exhaust fans and
kitchen exhaust fan need replacement)(only
2,500gsf will be renovated) 2,500 SF $65.00 $162,500
Subtotal For Heating, Ventilation, & Air-Conditioning: $162,500 Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Fire Sprinkler System
Automatic
fire sprinkler system (minor
modification affected by the remodel
works)(only 2,500gsf will be renovated) 2,500 SF $12.00 $30,000 Subtotal For Fire Protection: $30,000
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Electrical System
Electrical
service & distribution, machine &
equipment connections, Lighting & power
specialties, lighting switching and control (only
2,500gsf will be renovated) 2,500 SF $100.00 $250,000
Low-Voltage
Fire Alarm, Communication, Security & AV
System (only 2,500gsf will be renovated) 2,500 SF $30.00 $75,000 Subtotal For Electrical: $325,000

HEATING, VENTILATION, & AIR-CONDITIONING

FIRE PROTECTION

ELECTRICA
L

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(E) Fire Station #4: Minor Repairs Detail
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Commercial Equipments
Kitchen equ
ipments; including refrigerator,
microwave, dishwasher, washer/dryer,
range/oven, etc. 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000
Fire station equipments; including extractor,
turnout gear dryer, etc. 1 LS $30,000.00 $30,000
Subtotal For Equipment: $80,000
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Fixed Furnishings
Fire exting
uisher cabinets, walk-off mat,
mecho shades/window blinds, turn-out lockers
(only 2,500gsf will be renovated) 2,500 SF $5.00 $12,500 Moveable Furnishings
FF&E Allowance NIC, OFOI
Conference/meeting tables and chairs NIC, OFOI
Office tables and chairs NIC, OFOI
Office workstation/cubicles NIC, OFOI
Recliner chair NIC, OFOI
Dining room table and chair NIC, OFOI
Subtotal For Furnishings: $12,500
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Selective Demolition
Demo and re
move (E) interior partition and
doors, floor/wall/ceiling finishes,
miscellaneous caseworks and plumbing,
HVAC, electrical trade (only 2,500gsf will be
renovated) 2,500 SF $20.00 $50,000
Subtotal For Selective Building Demolition: $50,000

EQUIPMENT

FURNISHINGS
S

ELECTIVE BUILDING DEMOLITION

Conceptual Cost Plan
(N) Fire Station #5 + Site Improvement

ALAMEDA CITY FACILITIES MASTER PLAN
Control Quantities
(N) Fire Station #5 + Site Improvement Summary
Detailed Cost Breakdown
December 8, 2025

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
Enclosed Areas Architect 's Qty height
(N) Fire Station #5 22,659 15.17
Subtotal o
f Enclosed Area 22,659
Site Area, 355' x 270' 95,850
(N) Fire Station #5 + Site Improvement Control
Quantitie
s

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
CSI UniFormat Summary 22,659 SF % $/SF $,000
Foundations 3% $50.00 $1,132,950
Superstructure 9% $135.00 $3,058,965
Enclosure 11% $165.00 $3,738,735
Roofing 3% $50.00 $1,132,950
Interior Construction 5% $75.00 $1,699,425
Stairs 0% $0.00 $0
Interior Finishes 4% $60.00 $1,359,540
Conveying 0% $0.00 $0
Plumbing 2% $35.00 $793,065
Heating, Ventilation, & Air Conditioning 4% $65.00 $1,472,835 Fire Protection 1% $12.00 $271,908
Electrical 10% $150.00 $3,398,850
Equipment 0% $3.53 $80,000
Furnishings 1% $10.00 $226,590
Selective Building Demolition 0% $0.00 $0
Subtotal - Building Construction 54% $810.53 $18,365,813 Site Prepa
ration 1% $16.92 $38 3,400
Site Improvement 9% $139.89 $3,169,719
Site Mechanical Utilities 1% $19.31 $437,550
Site Electrical Utilities 1% $17.36 $393,400
Subtotal - Sitework 13% $193.48 $ 4,384,069
Total - Building and Sitework Construction 67% $1,004.01 $22,749,882 Project Labor Agreement (PLA) 3.50% 2% $35.14 $796,246
Builder's R
isk Insurance 1.00% 1% $10.39 $235,461
Bonds & Insurance 3.50% 2% $36.73 $832,356
General Conditions 10.00% 7% $108.63 $2,461,394
Contractor's Overhead & Profit 5.00% 4% $59.75 $1,353,767 Subtotal 83% $1,254.6 5 $28,429,106
Contingency for Design Development 20.00% 17% $250.93 $5,685,821 Cos
t Escalation (to start of construction) NIC/Excluded, See Overall Summary TOTAL CONSTRUCTION BUDGET 100% $1,505.58 $34,114,927
NOTE: Inclusions and Exclusions listed in the Commentary Section. (N) Fire Station #5 + Site Improvement
Summary

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(N) Fire Station #5 + Site Improvement
Summary
CSI UniFormat Summary
Cost Escalation (to start of construction)
Continge
ncy for Design Development
Contractor's Overhead & Profit
General Conditions
Bonds & Insurance
Builder's Risk Insurance
Project Labor Agreement (PLA)
Site Electrical Utilities
Site Mechanical Utilities
Site Improvement
Site Preparation
Selective Building Demolition
Furnishings
Equipment
Electrical
Fire Protection
Heating, Ventilation, & Air Conditioning
Plumbing
Conveying
Interior Finishes
Stairs
Interior Construction
Roofing
Enclosure
Superstructure
Foundations

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Foundatio
n
Reinforced
concrete shallow column footings,
wall footings, grade beams 22,659 GSF $30.00 $679,770
Slab On Grade
Reinforced concrete slab on grade, over AB
subbase and water vapor barrier 22,659 GSF $20.00 $453,180 Subtotal For Foundations: $1,132,950
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Vertical Structure
Column & s
hearwall 22,659 GSF $35.00 $793,065
Roof Structure
Structural framing and plywood sheathing 22,659 GSF $100.00 $2,265,900 Subtotal For Superstructure: $3,058,965
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Exterior Enclosure
Exterior W
all Finishes, Exterior doors/Frames
& Door Hardware, Exterior Windows &
Exterior Soffit 22,659 GSF $165.00 $3,738,735
Subtotal For Enclosure: $3,738,735
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Roof Coverings
Roofing sy
stem; including insulation, flashing
and sheet metal and parapet cap 22,659 GSF $50.00 $1,132,950 Subtotal For Roofing: $1,132,950
(N) Fire Station #5 + Site Improvement
Detail
FOUN

DATIONS

SUPERSTRU
CTURE

ENCLOSURE

ROOFING

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(N) Fire Station #5 + Site Improvement
Detail
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Interior Construction
Interior p
artitions, interior windows, interior
doors/frames & hardwares, Fittings and
Specialties 22,659 GSF $75.00 $1,699,425
Subtotal For Interior Construction: $1,699,425
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
No Work Anticipated In This Section
Subtotal F
or Stairs:

Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Interior Finishes
Floor, Wal
l & Ceiling Finishes 22,659 GSF $60.00 $1,359,540
Subtotal For Interior Finishes: $1,359,540
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
No Work Anticipated In This Section
Subtotal F
or Conveying:

Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Plumbing System
Plumbing F
ixtures and connection piping;
including domestic water, sanitary waste, vent
and service piping 22,659 GSF $35.00 $793,065
Subtotal For Plumbing: $793,065

INTERIOR CONSTRUCTION
STAIRS
INTER

IOR FINISHES

CONVEYING

PLUMBING

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(N) Fire Station #5 + Site Improvement
Detail
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
HVAC
HVAC; incl
uding heat generation and chilling
equipments, pumps, piping, air handling
equipment, air distribution and return,
diffusers & return grilles, controls, exhaust
ventilation, system testing and balancing 22,659 GSF $65.00 $1,472,835 Subtotal For Heating, Ventilation, & Air-Conditioning: $1,472,835 Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Fire Sprinkler System
Automatic
fire sprinkler system 22,659 GSF $12.00 $271,908
Subtotal For Fire Protection: $271,908
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Electrical System
Electrical
service & distribution, machine &
equipment connections, Lighting & power
specialties, lighting switching and control 22,659 GSF $100.00 $2,265,900 Low-Voltage
Fire Alarm, Communication, Security & AV
System 22,659 GSF $50.00 $1,132,950
Subtotal For Electrical: $3,398,850
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Commercial Equipments
Kitchen eq
uipments; including refrigerator,
microwave, dishwasher, washer/dryer,
range/oven, etc. 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000
Fire station equipments; including extractor,
turnout gear dryer, etc. 1 LS $30,000.00 $30,000
Subtotal For Equipment: $80,000

HEATING, VENTILATION, & AIR-CONDITIONING

FIRE PROTECTION

ELECTRICA
L

EQUIPMENT

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(N) Fire Station #5 + Site Improvement
Detail
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Fixed Furnishing
Fire extin
guisher cabinets, walk-off mat,
mecho shades/window blinds 22,659 GSF $10.00 $226,590
Moveable Furnishings
FF&E Allowance NIC, OFOI
Conference/meeting tables and chairs NIC, OFOI
Office tables and chairs NIC, OFOI
Office workstation/cubicles NIC, OFOI
Subtotal For Furnishings: $226,590
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
See Building Demo under Site Preparation Section
Subtotal F
or Selective Building Demolition:

Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Demolition Of Building
Demo and r
emove (E) building NIC, Excluded
Site Clearing and Demolition
Site clearing & grading 95,850 SF $2.00 $191,700
Demo and remove of (E) hardscape and
landscape 95,850 SF $1.00 $95,850
Site Protective Construction
Erosion control/SWPP 95,850 SF $1.00 $95,850
Hazardous Materials Abatement NIC, Excluded
Subtotal For Site Preparation: $383,400

SITE PREPARATION

FURNISHING
S

SELECTIVE BUILDING DEMOLITION

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(N) Fire Station #5 + Site Improvement
Detail
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Vehicular Paving
Parking &
driveway, asphalt paving 38,200 SF $15.00 $573,000
Front apron, concrete paving 9,400 SF $30.00 $282,000
Striping & pavement marking 47,600 SF $1.00 $47,600
Concrete curbs & gutter 47,600 SF $3.00 $142,800
Driveway apron/ramp 2 EA $10,000.00 $20,000
Pedestrian Paving
Pedestrian Walkway 21,535 SF $25.00 $538,375
Patio 1,690 SF $25.00 $42,250
Concrete pad for generator/hose drying rack
wash 900 SF $25.00 $22,500
Landscaping & Irrigation
Planting including trees 24,125 SF $20.00 $482,500
Premium for stormwater/bio-retention area 1,206 SF $35.00 $42,219 Automatic Irrigation 24,125 SF $5.00 $120,625
Site Structure
Trash Enclosure, covered 300 SF $450.00 $135,000
Fencing & Miscellaneous Accessories
Perimeter fence and gate, including structural
foundation 1,250 LF $500.00 $625,000
Miscellaneous site furnishing; including trash
receptacle, benches, bollards, etc. 95,850 SF $1.00 $95,850 Subtotal For Site Improvement: $3,169,719

SITE IMPROVEMENT

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(N) Fire Station #5 + Site Improvement
Detail
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Domestic Water
Cold water
lines, including connection to (E) 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000 Fire Water Service
Fire water lines, including connection to (E)
1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000
Sanitary Sewer
Sewer line, including connection to (E) 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000 Storm Drainage
Storm drain lines & area drain, including
connection to (E) 95,850 SF $3.00 $287,550
Subtotal For Site Mechanical Utilities: $437,550
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Electrical Service and Distribution
Connection
to existing 1 LS $10,000.00 $10,000
Site Lighting
Site lighting 95,850 SF $3.00 $287,550
Site Communications and Security
Allowance 95,850 SF $1.00 $95,850
Subtotal For Site Electrical Utilities: $393,400

SITE ELECTRICAL UTILITIES

SITE MECHA

NICAL UTILITIES

Conceptual Cost Plan
(N) Fire Training Facility + Site Improvement

ALAMEDA CITY FACILITIES MASTER PLAN
Control Quantities
(N) Fire Training Facility + Site Improvement Summary
Detailed Cost Breakdown
December 8, 2025

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
Enclosed Areas Architect 's Qty height
(N) Fire Training Facility 18,353 15.17
Subtotal o
f Enclosed Area 18,353
Site Area, 300 x 500 150,000
Modular Fire Training Tower, 3 Stories
(N) Fire Training Facility + Site
Improveme
nt Control Quantities

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
CSI UniFormat Summary 18,353 SF % $/SF $
Foundations 3% $50.00 $917,650
Superstructure 7% $135.00 $2,477,655
Enclosure 9% $165.00 $3,028,245
Roofing 3% $50.00 $917,650
Interior Construction 4% $75.00 $1,376,475
Stairs 0% $0.00 $0
Interior Finishes 3% $60.00 $1,101,180
Conveying 0% $0.00 $0
Plumbing 2% $35.00 $642,355
Heating, Ventilation, & Air Conditioning 4% $65.00 $1,192,945 Fire Protection 1% $12.00 $220,236
Electrical 8% $150.00 $2,752,950
Equipment 0% $2.72 $50,000
Furnishings 1% $10.00 $183,530
Special Construction (Modular Training Tower) 4% $69.63 $1,278,000 Selective Building Demolition 0% $0.00 $0
Subtotal - Building Construction 48% $879.36 $16,138,871 Site Prep
aration 2% $32.69 $6 00,000
Site Improvement 12% $211.06 $3,873,675
Site Mechanical Utilities 2% $29.69 $544,941
Site Electrical Utilities 2% $32.51 $596,588
Other Site Construction 1% $27.24 $500,000
Subtotal - Sitework 18% $333.2 0 $6,115,204
Total - Building and Sitework Construction 67% $1,212.56 $22,254,075 Project Labor Agreement (PLA) 3.50% 2% $42.44 $778,893
Builder's
Risk Insurance 1.00% 1% $12.55 $230,330
Bonds & Insurance 3.50% 2% $44.36 $814,215
General Conditions 10.00% 7% $131.19 $2,407,751
Contractor's Overhead & Profit 5.00% 4% $72.16 $1,324,263 Subtotal 83% $1,515. 26 $27,809,527
Contingency for Design Development 20.0% 17% $303.05 $5,561,905 Cos
t Escalation (to start of const.) NIC/Excluded, See Overall Summary TOTAL CONSTRUCTION BUDGET 100% $1,818.31 $33,371,433
NOTE: Inclusions and Exclusions listed in the Commentary Section. (N) Fire Training Facility + Site
Improveme
nt Summary

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(N) Fire Training Facility + Site
Improvemen
t Summary
CSI UniFormat Summary
Cost Escalation (to start of const.)
Contractor's
Overhead & Profit
General Conditions
Bonds & Insurance
Builder's Risk Insurance
Project Labor Agreement (PLA)
Other Site Construction
Site Electrical Utilities
Site Mechanical Utilities
Site Improvement
Site Preparation
Selective Building Demolition
Special Construction (Modular Training Tower)
Furnishings
Equipment
Electrical
Fire Protection
Heating, Ventilation, & Air Conditioning
Plumbing
Conveying
Interior Finishes
Stairs
Interior Construction
Roofing
Enclosure
Superstructure
Foundations

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Standard
Foundations
Reinforced
concrete shallow column
footings, wall footings, grade beams 18,353 GSF $30.00 $550,590 Slab On Grade
Reinforced concrete slab on grade, over AB
subbase and water vapor barrier 18,353 GSF $20.00 $367,060 Subtotal For Foundations: $917,650
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Vertical Structure
Column & s
hearwall 18,353 GSF $35.00 $642,355
Roof Structure
Structural framing and plywood sheathing 18,353 GSF $100.00 $1,835,300 Subtotal For Superstructure: $2,477,655
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Exterior Enclosure
Exterior W
all Finishes, Exterior
doors/Frames & Door Hardware, Exterior
Windows & Exterior Soffit 18,353 GSF $165.00 $3,028,245 Subtotal For Enclosure: $3,028,245
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Roof Coverings
Roofing system; including insulation, flashing
and sheet metal and parapet cap 18,353 GSF $50.00 $917,650 Subtotal For Roofing: $917,650
(N) Fire Training Facility + Site
Improveme
nt Detail

FOUNDATIONS

SUPERSTRU
CTURE

ENCLOSURE

ROOFING

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(N) Fire Training Facility + Site
Improveme
nt Detail
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Interior Construction
Interior p
artitions, interior windows, interior
doors/frames & hardwares, Fittings and
Specialties 18,353 GSF $75.00 $1,376,475
Subtotal For Interior Construction: $1,376,475
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
No Work Anticipated In This Section
Subtotal F
or Stairs:

Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Interior Finishes
Floor, Wal
l & Ceiling Finishes 18,353 GSF $60.00 $1,101,180
Subtotal For Interior Finishes: $1,101,180
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
No Work Anticipated In This Section
Subtotal F
or Conveying:

Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Plumbing System
Plumbing F
ixtures and connection piping;
including domestic water, sanitary waste,
vent and service piping 18,353 GSF $35.00 $642,355
Subtotal For Plumbing: $642,355

INTERIOR CONSTRUCTION
STAIRS
INTER

IOR FINISHES

CONVEYING

PLUMBING

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(N) Fire Training Facility + Site
Improveme
nt Detail
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
HVAC
HVAC; incl
uding heat generation and chilling
equipments, pumps, piping, air handling
equipment, air distribution and return,
diffusers & return grilles, controls, exhaust
ventilation, system testing and balancing 18,353 GSF $65.00 $1,192,945 Subtotal For Heating, Ventilation, & Air-Conditioning: $1,192,945 Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Fire Sprinkler System
Automatic
fire sprinkler system 18,353 GSF $12.00 $220,236
Subtotal For Fire Protection: $220,236
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Electrical System
Electrical
service & distribution, machine &
equipment connections, Lighting & power
specialties, lighting switching and control 18,353 GSF $100.00 $1,835,300 Fire Alarm, Communication, Security & AV
System 18,353 GSF $50.00 $917,650
Subtotal For Electrical: $2,752,950
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Commercial Equipments
Breakroom
equipments; including
refrigerator, microwave, dishwasher 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000 Subtotal For Equipment: $50,000

HEATING, VENTILATION, & AIR-CONDITIONING

FIRE PROTECTION

ELECTRICA
L

EQUIPMENT
Low-Voltage

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(N) Fire Training Facility + Site
Improvemen
t Detail
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Fixed Furnishing
Fire exting
uisher cabinets, walk-off mat,
mecho shades/window blinds 18,353 GSF $10.00 $183,530
Moveable Furnishings
FF&E Allowance NIC, OFOI
Conference/meeting tables and chairs NIC, OFOI
Office tables and chairs NIC, OFOI
Office workstation/cubicles NIC, OFOI
Subtotal For Furnishings: $183,530
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Modular Training Tower
Custom 3-st
ories WHP training simulator -
allowance 1 LS $950,000.00 $950,000
Additional Cost By General Contractor:

Standard Foundations & Slab On-Grade 4,000 GSF $45.00 $180,000 Floor Construction (concrete fill on deck) 4,000 GSF $5.00 $20,000 Fire Protection 4,000 GSF $8.00 $32,000
Electrical System 4,000 GSF $12.00 $48,000
Communications & Security 4,000 GSF $12.00 $48,000
Subtotal For Special Construction (Custom Training Tower): $1,278,000 Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
See Building Demo under Site Preparation Section
Subtotal Fo
r Selective Building Demolition:

FURNISHINGS

SPECIAL CON

STRUCTION (CUSTOM

TRAINING TOWER)

SELECTIVE BUILDING DEMOLITION

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(N) Fire Training Facility + Site
Improveme
nt Detail
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Demolition Of Building
Demo and r
emove (E) building NIC, Excluded
Site Clearing and Demolition
Site clearing & grading 150,000 SF $2.00 $300,000
Demo and remove of (E) hardscape and
landscape 150,000 SF $1.00 $150,000
Site Protective Construction
Erosion control/SWPP 150,000 SF $1.00 $150,000
Hazardous Materials Abatement NIC, Excluded
Subtotal For Site Preparation: $600,000
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Vehicular Paving
Driving Co
urse 12,400 SF $15.00 $186,000
Parking & driveway 54,100 SF $15.00 $811,500
Striping & pavement marking 66,500 SF $1.00 $66,500
Concrete curbs & gutter 3,300 LF $50.00 $165,000
Driveway apron/ramp 2 EA $10,000.00 $20,000
Pedestrian Paving
Pedestrian Walkway 29,835 SF $25.00 $745,875
Mechanical concrete pad (for equipments,
fueling station, props, etc.) 22,800 SF $25.00 $570,000 Trainee patio / staff patio 512 SF $25.00 $12,800
Landscaping & Irrigation
Planting including trees, allow 20% 12,000 SF $20.00 $240,000 Premium for stormwater/bio-retention area 600 SF $35.00 $21,000 Automatic Irrigation 12,000 SF $5.00 $60,000
Site Structure
Trash Enclosure, covered 300 SF $450.00 $135,000
Outdoor storage / Con Ex containers on
base rock 300 SF $300.00 $90,000

SITE PREPARATION

SITE IMPRO
VEMENT

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(N) Fire Training Facility + Site
Improveme
nt Detail
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Fencing & Miscellaneous Accessories
Perimeter
security fence and gate, including
structural foundation 1,200 LF $500.00 $600,000
Miscellaneous site furnishing; including flag
pole, trash receptacle, bike rack, benches,
bollards, etc. 150,000 SF $1.00 $150,000
Subtotal For Site Improvement: $3,873,675
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Domestic Water
Cold water
lines, including connection to (E) 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000 Fire Water Service
Fire water lines, including connection to (E) 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000 Sanitary Sewer
Sewer line, including connection to (E) 1 LS $50,000.00 $50,000 Storm Drainage
Storm drain lines & area drain, including
connection to (E) 131,647 SF $3.00 $394,941
Subtotal For Site Mechanical Utilities: $544,941
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Electrical Service and Distribution
Connection
to existing 1 LS $10,000.00 $10,000
Site Lighting
Site lighting 131,647 SF $3.00 $394,941
Site Communications and Security
Allowance 131,647 SF $1.00 $131,647
EV Charging
Charging station, including conduit and
wiring - allow 4 EA $15,000.00 $60,000
Subtotal For Site Electrical Utilities: $596,588

SITE ELECTRICAL UTILITIES

SITE MECHA

NICAL UTILITIES

SITE IMPROVEMENT

Job #25902
December 8, 2025
(N) Fire Training Facility + Site
Improveme
nt Detail
Quantity Unit Rate Total ($)
Fuel Storage & Distribution
Above grou
nd fuel tank, diesel/gas 1 LS $200,000.00 $200,000
Miscellaneous Allowance
Water rescue prop/in-ground pool 1 LS $100,000.00 $100,000 Miscellaneous props 1 LS $200,000.00 $200,000
Subtotal For Other Site Construction: $500,000

OTHER SITE CONSTRUCTION

APPENDIX F

F - SEA LEVEL RISE SUMMARY OF SITES

Date: 10/23/2025

To: City of Alameda

Organization:

From: Kevin Anderson

Title: Sr. Project Engineer

Project Name: City of Alameda Facilities

Project Number: 3645-01

Topic: City of Alameda Facilities Sea Level Rise Analysis

This memo provides an assessment of sea level rise impacts and development recommendations for four key sites:
1) West Atlantic Ave & Main Street
2) Buena Vista Ave & Pacific Ave at Wilma Chan Way
3) Alameda Point
4) Viking Yard (W Ticonderoga Ave & Viking St)
The analysis considers the potential effects of Mean Higher High Water (MHHW) plus 36-inch and 77-inch sea level rise scenarios, as well as the FEMA 100-year flood zone, to evaluate the suitability of each site for development. The recommendations aim to guide planning and construction decisions by identifying areas at risk of flooding and proposing mitigation measures where necessary to ensure safe and sustainable development practices.

“MHHW” stands for Mean Higher High Water, which is the average of the higher of the two daily high tides (averaged over a standard tidal epoch) and is commonly used as the “above-ground” reference level where inundation begins. Indicating “36″ MHHW” or “77″ MHHW” represents a water surface that is 36 inches (3.0 ft) or 77 inches (6.42 ft) above the local MHHW datum. These values are commonly used as sea-level-rise planning scenarios.

A 2024 study conducted by Pathways Climate Institute, titled “A Sea Level Rise and Coastal Flood Exposure Assessment and Vulnerability Considerations for the Oakland-Alameda
Subregion” provided 10 different MHHW rise scenarios. This analysis looks at Scenario 3 and 7 to provide a reasonable range of potential sea level rise impacts to the studies properties.

1. West Atlantic Ave & Main Street
MHHW + 36” Sea Level Rise:

Note: This lege
nd is typical for all sea level rise conditions shown in this report.

MHHW + 77” Sea Level Rise:

Recommendation: This site is suitable for development and is outside of the mean high water + 36” sea level rise impact area. However, in the MHHW + 77” scenario, this site would not be suitable for development.

2. Buena Vista Ave & Pacific Ave at Wilma Chan Way
This site is outside of the impact areas for both the MHHW + 36” Sea Level Rise & MHHW + 77” Sea Level Rise. Sea level rise is not anticipated to have an impact of development.

3. Alameda Point
FEMA 100-year zone:

The eastern portion of Midway & Lexington is located within the FEMA 100-year zone.

Note: This legend is typical for all FEMA flood maps shown in this report.

MHHW + 36” Sea Level Rise:

The eastern portion of the site is also located within the MHHW + 36” Sea Level Rise zone.

MHHW + 77” Sea Level Rise zone:

Most of the site is located within the MHHW + 77” Sea Level Rise zone.

Recommendations: This site would be mostly suitable for development in the MHHW + 36” sea level rise scenario. The Midway & Lexington development and Block Z are partially within the 100-year FEMA Flood Zone and partially within the mean high water + 36” sea level rise impact area. The Midway/Lexington and Block Z developments would need to be raised approximately 2ft and a formal flooding analysis would need to be conducted prior to development. However, in the MHHW + 77” scenario, this site would not be suitable for development.

4. Viking Yard (W Ticonderoga Ave & Viking St)
Recommendations: This site is outside of the mean high water + 36” and + 77” sea level rise impact area. In addition, this site is outside of the 100-year FEMA Flood Zone impact area. This site is a good location for building.

APPENDIX G

G - PLANNING DUE DILIGENCE SITE SUMMARIES

# 3645 – Alameda City Facilities Master Plan ( Identify Alternatives & Preferred Site )
G roup 1 – West Alameda

Neptune Park College of Alameda #1 Main Street Strip West Atlantic Ave & Main Street
Grocery Outlet
APN 74-906-5-6 74-1364-2-4 74-905-23 74-1376-2 73-413-33-2 Address 2000 Webster St,
Alameda, CA 94501
Webster St, Alameda, CA
94501
200 Main St, Alameda,
CA 94501
Main St, Alameda, CA
94501
730 Buena Vista Ave,
Alameda, CA 94501
Zoning General Industrial
(Manufacturing)
District (M-2)
Residential District (R-4) Open Space (O)
Alameda Point Zoning
District – Waterfront
Town Center Sub-district
(AP-WTC)
Residential District
(R-5)
Community
Plans NA NA NA Regional Sustainable
Communities Plan NA
Overlay Districts NA NA NA NA NA
Land Use
Designation
Public Parks + Open
Space Public Institutional Public Parks + Open
Space Mixed-Use Medium-Density
Residential
Max. FAR NA 2.0 NA 0.25 – 5.0 2.0
Setbacks
Min. Front Yard 5 feet 20 feet NA See AP zoning setbacks in Group 2 Table 20 feet
Min. Side Yard None; Where a side
yard is desired,
minimum of 12 feet; 12
feet when adjacent to
R District.
5 feet; Side yard on
street side or corner lot
shall not be less than 10
feet.

NA See AP zoning setbacks
in Group 2 Table 5 feet
Min. Street Side
Yard NA NA NA See AP zoning setbacks
in Group 2 Table 10 feet
Min. Rear Yard None; 12 feet when
adjacent to R District. 20 feet NA See AP zoning setbacks in Group 2 Table 20 feet
Max. Total
Building
Coverage
(Includes
accessory
buildings)
80% 53% (Max. Main Building
Coverage) NA NA 53% (Max. Main
Building Coverage)

Group 2 – The Point

Building 5, Building 10, Building 32, Building 62 Between W. Midway Ave & W. Red Line Ave
APN 74-1367-39-2 74-1367-23-1
Address Main St, Alameda, CA 94501 Main St, Alameda, CA 94501
Zoning Alameda Point, Adaptive Reuse (AP-AR) Alameda Point, Adaptive Reuse (AP-AR)
Community Plans
Alameda Point Town Center and Waterfront Precise Plan
Alameda Point Town
Center and Waterfront
Precise Plan
Overlay Districts NA Land Use Restrictions

Land Use Designation Mixed-Use Public Parks + Open
Space
Permitted FAR 0.25 – 5.0 NA
Min. Front Yard Building front setback should be consistent with the setback of the other NAS Alameda Historic District contributing buildings on the block or the adjacent blocks to maintain the character defining features of the NAS Alameda Historic District. A smaller front yard setback may be approved if it can be found that the smaller setback supports a more pedestrian-oriented site plan.

Min. Side Yard 20 feet when abutting a public open space/residential use; The side yard abuts a public street, the side yard setback shall be sufficient to align the building with the front setback of the adjacent buildings; In the adaptive reuse sub-district, the side street facing setback should be consistent with adjacent contributing NAS Alameda Historic District structures on the side street, unless a finding can be made that the proposed setback is consistent with the character defining features of the NAS Alameda Historic District.

Min. Street Side Yard NA NA
Min. Rear Yard No rear setback is required, except where:
a. The building abuts a residential use or a public open space, a twenty (20′) foot rear setback shall be provided and the height of the rear of the building shall be designed to provide an adequate transition between the height of the building and the adjacent residential building.
b. The rear of the building faces a public street or public open space, the rear of the building shall be aligned with the rear or front setback of the existing buildings on the abutting parcels to maintain a consistent "street wall" and the character of the sub-district.

Max. Total Building
Coverage (Includes
accessory buildings)
NA NA

Group 3 – Viking Yard and Bessy Coleman Sites

Viking Yard Bessy Coleman
APN 74-1369-5-2 74-1368-18-9
Address Main St, Alameda, CA 94501 Main St, Alameda, CA 94501 Zoning Alameda Point, Enterprise-1 (AP-E1) Alameda Point, Main Street Neighborhood (AP-MS) Community Plans Alameda Point Town Center and Waterfront Precise Plan Main Street Neighborhood Specific Plan Overlay Districts NA NA
Land Use Designation Mixed-Use Mixed-Use
Permitted FAR 0.25 – 5.0 0.25 – 5.0
Min. Front Yard New buildings should be placed as close to the front property line as possible to facilitate pedestrian access. A setback of New buildings shall be aligned with the front setback of buildings on the block to maintain a consistent setback

up to twenty (20′) feet may be approved if it can be found that the setback is necessary and appropriate to create a pleasing landscaped buffer between a building over thirty (30′) feet in height and the public right-of-way or a public park.
and "street wall" along the block and maintain the
character of the sub-district.

Min. Side Yard No side yard setback shall be required in the enterprise or adaptive reuse sub-districts, except where: The side yard abuts a public street, the side yard setback shall be sufficient to align the building with the front setback of the adjacent buildings.

No side yard setback shall be required in the enterprise or adaptive reuse sub-districts, except where: The side yard abuts a public street, the side yard setback shall be sufficient to align the building with the front setback of the adjacent buildings.

Min. Street Side Yard NA NA
Min. Rear Yard No rear setback is required, except where: (a) The building abuts a residential use or a public open space, a twenty (20′) foot rear setback shall be provided and the height of the rear of the building shall be designed to provide an adequate transition between the height of the building and the
adjacent residential building. (b)The rear of the building faces a public street or public open space, the rear of the building shall be aligned with the rear or front setback of the existing buildings on the abutting parcels to maintain a consistent "street wall" and the character of the sub-district.

No rear setback is required, except where: (a) The
building abuts a residential use or a public open space, a twenty (20′) foot rear setback shall be provided and the height of the rear of the building shall be designed to provide an adequate transition between the height of the building and the adjacent residential building. (b)The rear of the building faces a public street or public open space, the rear of the building shall be aligned with the rear or front setback of the existing buildings on the abutting parcels to maintain a consistent "street wall" and the
character of the sub-district.

Max. Total Building
Coverage (Includes
accessory buildings)
NA NA

Historical Preservation
Per City of Alameda Municipal Code Section 13-21.5.a (Permit Restrictions; Notification to Board of Request), “No building, structure, group of structures, or site, including trees or plantings, that has been designated a Historical Monument shall be demolished, removed or altered without first referring the matter to the Historical Advisory Board for a certificate of approval, except where the Building Official or his/her designee determines that demolition, removal or alteration of any such building, structure or site is immediately necessary in the interest of the public health, safety or general welfare”.

C ity of Alameda Historic Monuments

Site Designated Historical Monument (Yes or No) Contributing to Historic District Neptune Park No No
College of Alameda #1 No (Former site of Union Iron Works Turbine Machine Building is shown nearby but was
demolished)
No
Main Street Strip No No
West Atlantic Ave & Main Street No No
Grocery Outlet No No
Building 5 Yes (Part of NAS Alameda Historic District) Yes Building 10 Yes (Part of NAS Alameda Historic District) Yes Building 32 Yes (Part of NAS Alameda Historic District) Not evaluated – Built After 1989 Building 62 Yes (Part of NAS Alameda Historic District) No Between W. Midway Ave & W.

Red Line Ave Yes (Part of NAS Alameda Historic District) Not eligible Viking Yard No No
Bessy Coleman No No

Buildings 5, 10, 32, 62, and the Building Between W. Midway Ave & W. Red Line Ave are subject to submit for a Certificate of Approval for any alterations to the existing buildings. New designs will be reviewed by the Historical Advisory Board and City Planning Staff in consultation with the Guide to Preserving the Character of the Naval Air Station Alameda Historic District.

APPENDIX H

H - STRUCTURAL SEISMIC SUMMARIES

RRM Design Group June 16, 2025
325 Davis Street 2025033
San Leandro, CA 94577

Attention: Michael Scott

Subject: Alameda Fire Station No. 1
2401 Encinal Avenue, Alameda, CA 94501

Dear Michael:

Biggs Cardosa Associates would like to present this Draft Tier 1 structural assessment report for the existing Alameda Fire Station No. 1. In accordance with our proposal, we have performed a structural review and assessment for the existing wood and masonry framed structure on the property.

We completed a site visit on January 23, 2025, and reviewed the available architectural and structural plans. The following report describes the findings of our structural review and conditional assessment of the buildings with retrofit recommendations.

It is recommended that ultimately all the retrofit options described are implemented but even this phased approach will improve the performance of the building. However, it is important to note that all the mitigation work described is entirely voluntary on the part of the city.

Sincerely,
BIGGS CARDOSA ASSOCIATES, INC.

Thomas L. Swayze, S.E.

Principal

Tier 1 Seismic Assessment DRAFT
The City of Alameda
June 16, 2
025
Alameda Fire St
ation No. 1
2401 Encin
al Avenue,
Alameda, CA 94501

Alameda Fire Station No. 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART 1: OVERVIEW...................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Introduction ........ .............................................................................................................................. 1

1.2 Background ........ .............................................................................................................................. 2 PART 2: SEISMIC PERFORMANCE EVALUATION ........ ............................................................................... 2

2.1 Methodology ........ ............................................................................................................................ 2

2.2 Performance Level ........ .................................................................................................................... 3

2.3 Seismic Source ........ .......................................................................................................................... 3

2.4 Liquefaction, Landslide, and other Geologic Hazards ........ ............................................................... 4 PART 3: STRUCTURAL EVALUATION ........ ................................................................................................. 4

3.1 Documentation and Site Observations ........ ..................................................................................... 4

3.2 Building Systems ........ ...................................................................................................................... 4 PART 4: STRUCTURAL CONDITION ASSESSMENT ........ ............................................................................ 7 PART 5: STRUCTURAL EVALUATION AND FINDINGS ........ ...................................................................... 7

5.1 Building Evaluation and Findings ........ ............................................................................................. 7 PART 6: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........ ......................................................................... 8

6.1 General Recommendations for Condition Assessment ........ ............................................................ 8

6.2 Seismic Retrofit Recommendations ........ .......................................................................................... 8

6.3 Recommended Mitigations ........ ...................................................................................................... 8 PART 7: LIMITATIONS AND DISCLAIMERS ........ ....................................................................................... 9 PART 8: APPENDIX ........ ............................................................................................................................ 10

8.1 Photos ............................................................................................................................................ 10

Alameda Fire Station No. 1
PART 1: OVERVIEW

1.1 Introduction
The City of Alameda has requested a structural assessment of Alameda Fire Station No. 1. This report represents the results of an ASCE 41 seismic assessment and general structural condition review of the building. Alameda Fire Station No. 1 is located at 2401 Encinal Avenue, Alameda, California. The fire station consists of a single-story apparatus bay and an office and dormitory wing with both one-story and two-story portions initially constructed in 1968. The team was not provided with any data or information regarding pending or past modernizations or retrofits for this building.

Figure 1: Aerial View of the Alameda Fire Station No. 1 A Tier 1 level ASCE 41 structural evaluation and general condition assessment was performed for the building based on a review of the available record drawings and visual observations conducted by Biggs Cardosa Associates Inc. during a site visit on January 23, 2025. This report describes the findings of our structural review and contains qualitative observations and recommendations for seismic or condition upgrades or recommended additional studies.

Alameda Fire Station No. 1

1.2 Background
With each building code cycle (approximately every 3 years) codes for new construction are modified to improve structural performance during seismic events. However, engineering standards to evaluate existing buildings have historically lagged in development. For the past several years, ASCE/SEI 41-17 Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings has been the accepted baseline standard of practice for the seismic evaluation of existing buildings. As described in that document, one of the primary goals is to include lessons learned from recent earthquakes.

The purpose of this study is to determine whether significant seismic deficiencies exist at the building, to determine the potential seismic risk of the building, and to provide general recommendations for reduction of seismic risk through mitigation. Buildings of recent construction are exempt from this type of analysis based on building type and the code enforced at the time of construction. Such buildings are identified as “benchmark buildings”. According to ASCE 41 guidelines, none of the subject buildings of this study are classified as a “benchmark building” since they were designed and constructed prior to the benchmark cutoff date (1998) for reinforced masonry buildings.

The analysis methodology of ASCE 41-17 employs a quick check methodology (Tier 1 analysis). The Tier 1 quick check uses cursory calculations appropriate for each building type and a set of checklists which contain evaluation statements that help to identify areas of concern regarding the ability of the structure to adequately transmit seismic forces to the foundation and supporting soils.

PART 2: SEISMIC PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

2.1 Methodology
The potential damage to a structure in an earthquake can be evaluated provided that, (1) seismic hazards which affect the structure and site can be estimated and (2) the vulnerability of the structure to those hazards are known or can be estimated.

Site seismicity for the Alameda Fire Station No. 1 was determined using the United States Geologic Survey (USGS) web based Seismic Hazard Curves, Response Parameters and Design Parameters program. Seismic short period S S and one second S 1 response acceleration parameters were obtained
through the ASCE 7 Hazard Tool.

Seismic evaluation of the structures was conducted using the ASCE 41-17 – Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings. ASCE 41 provides a three-tiered process for seismic evaluation of existing buildings based on building type and the level of seismicity for the building location.

The Tier 1 study is an initial checklist evaluation of structural, non-structural, and foundation/geologic hazard elements of a building and site conditions that is intended to screen for potential seismic deficiencies. Tier 2 and 3 studies include more in-depth analysis procedures for a building or component that is identified by the Tier 1 screening process as structurally deficient or that requires further study. Non-structural items were not included as those systems are generally evaluated by an architect.

This assessment of Alameda Fire Station No. 1 utilizes the Tier 1 screening procedure to identify initial deficiencies as much as possible with the information available.

Alameda Fire Station No. 1

2.2 Performance Level
ASCE 41 Tier 1 evaluation of a building can be performed for either Collapse Prevention (CP) or Immediate Occupancy (IO) performance levels. The Basic Performance Objective focuses on Collapse Prevention for buildings in Risk Category I, II, and III and on Immediate Occupancy for buildings in Risk Category IV.

ASCE 41 summarizes the two performance levels as follows:
• CP Performance Level: After an earthquake, the structure will have damaged components and continue to support gravity loads but retains no margin against collapse. Designed to prevent only the most egregious structural failures against either partial or total collapse remains.
• IO Performance Level: After an earthquake, the basic vertical and lateral force-resisting system retains nearly all its pre-earthquake strength, very limited damage to structural and non-structural components has occurred and critical parts of the building remain habitable.

The ASCE 41 Immediate Occupancy Basic Configuration checklist (Table 17-3) and Immediate Occupancy Structural Checklist for Building Types RM1 and RM2 (Table 17-35) are appropriate for this building type and are included in this report. As these buildings are considered Risk Category IV, they are evaluated under the Immediate Occupancy criteria.

2.3 Seismic Source
The general seismicity in the San Francisco Bay region is influenced by several known faults, their potential faulting length, and relative orientation. The Hayward Fault extends in the North-South direction, between the North American plate and the Pacific plate. This fault is located approximately 3.8 miles east of the building. Other known, near-source faults with recorded activity, such as the San Andreas Fault, are listed in Table 1 (From California Department of Conservation) along with the estimated moment magnitude, M W, that would occur during the Maximum Considere
d Earthquake (MCE).

Earthquakes in Southern California – namely Northridge and Wh ittier Narrows – have occurred along blind-thrust faults. These fault types do not have readily identifiable surface features and are not extensively mapped. For our project site, the potential for strong-ground motion to occur due to blind-thrust faulting is uncertain. Therefore, a moderate to large earthquake centered even closer to the site cannot be completely ruled out.

Fault Estimated MCE (MW) Distance (miles)
Hayward Fault 6.5 3.8
Calaveras Fault 6.7 12.8
San Andreas Fault 7.9 14.6
Table 1: Active Near Source Faults

Alameda Fire Station No. 1
As this Tier 1 Basis of Performance level is Immediate Occupancy, the seismic standard for an existing structure is Basic Safety Earthquake-1E (BSE-1E). The BSE-1E earthquake is also referred to as the 225-year earthquake and is based on a 20 percent probability of exceedance within a 50- year time frame.

The 225-year event peak ground acceleration (PGA) is 0.44g, or 44% gravity. The USGS defined
accelerations are based on Site Class D. Site Class D is assumed as recommended in ASCE 7-16 Section 20.1 where soil properties are not known in sufficient detail.

2.4 Liquefaction, Landslide, and other Geologic Hazards Liquefaction is the loss of bearing strength of saturated, cohesionless soils under strong ground motions. Liquefaction can cause settlement by consolidation of soils susceptible to liquefaction.

Per the “California Earthquake Hazards Zone Application Map (EQ Zapp),” the fire station is located in a moderate liquefaction susceptibility zone. EQ Zapp is an online resource by the California Department of Conservation that maps hazard zones as evaluated by California Geological Survey (CGS).

The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning (AP) Act is a state law that regulates construction in areas with close fault proximity and the potential for surface fault rupture. The AP Act was established following the 1971 San Fernando earthquake and has since been refined and revised.

This building is not located in an AP zone.

The fire station is considered not at-risk for seismically induced landslides per the EQ Zapp map.

Based on the aerial maps and our site visit, the building does not appear to be on any significant slopes.

PART 3: STRUCTURAL EVALUATION

3.1 Documentation and Site Observations
Available record or as-built drawings for the fire station include:
• Original drawings of the fire station (Sheets 1 through 12 architectural, sheets S1 through S5) dated September 1, 1967, by Treichel and Gibbs Architects.

No soils data or reports were available at this time.

Greg Tolan, SE, and Natsuki Okuda, PE, of Biggs Cardosa Associates performed a site visit on January 23, 2025. The field observation was limited to readily visible structural components; architectural finishes were not removed to expose concealed structural framing.

3.2 Building Systems
Foundation Systems
The structure is constructed continuous conventional spread footings with spread footings supporting reinforced masonry shear walls and a reinforced concrete slab-on-grade.

Alameda Fire Station No. 1
Vertical Load Resisting Systems
At the office and living quarters portion of the structure, the low roof and high roof consists of wood joists at varying spacing (16 and 12 inches) supporting plywood sheathing. The joists are supported by 2x4 interior stud walls and 8” and 12” exterior CMU walls.

For the second floor, a portion of the floor framing consists of varying sizes of floor joists at 12 inches on center supported by wide flange steel beams with ¾” plywood sheathing. The beams and joists are connected to ledgers on all sides of the diaphragm, supported by the reinforced masonry shear walls. The remaining portion of the floor is constructed of 3/4” plywood sheathing over floor joists 12 inches on center supported by the exterior CMU walls. .

The apparatus bay roof structure is constructed of flat ½” plywood overlaid over 2x tongue and groove straight sheathing spanning between purlins which are supported by glulam beams at all interior bays of framing. The exterior bays of framing are supported by wood ledgers bolted to 8” and 16” masonry walls. Plywood sheathing overlays the top of the tongue and groove sheathing.

The floor and roof framing for the storage area, located north of the of apparatus bay, are constructed of 3x10 floor joists and 2x16 roof joists at 16 inches on center supporting plywood sheathing or plywood sheathing overlaid over 2x tongue and groove straight sheathing. The floor and roof joists are supported by ledgers anchored to the exterior 8” CMU walls.

Lateral Load Resisting Systems
At the office and living quarters portion of the building, the lateral load resisting system for the low and high roof consists of wood diaphragms constructed of ½”ag plywood sheathing. The plywood sheathing delivers seismic loads to the masonry walls through the diaphragm nailing and into the ledgers, and then into the 8 or 12-inch-thick reinforced masonry walls. The seismic loads are transferred from the shear walls into the foundations through reinforcing dowels.

See Figure 2 and 3 for the typical framing to wall attachment at the low roof and high roof.

Figure 2: Diaphragm to wall attachment at Low Roof and Level 2 Floor

Alameda Fire Station No. 1

Figure 3: Diaphragm to wall attachment at High Roof

The lateral system for the apparatus bay portion of the building consists of a wood diaphragm constructed of ½” plywood sheathing over flat 2”x6” tongue and groove sheathing. The plywood diaphragm delivers seismic loads to the reinforced masonry shear walls through the diaphragm connection to the ledgers, and then to the masonry shear walls. The seismic loads are transferred from the shear walls to the foundation through reinforcing dowels. There appears to have been a minor seismic upgrade at the apparatus bay roof. Several roof to wall ties appear to not be consist with the original construction and were added at some point. There were no drawings available for this assumed upgrade. The details and adequacy of these upgrades should be evaluated.

See Figure 4 for the typical diaphragm to wall attachment at the apparatus bay as documented.

More visuals of the apparatus bay framing system can be found in the Appendix (Photos 3-6).

Figure 4: Diaphragm to wall attachment at the Apparatus Bay.

Alameda Fire Station No. 1

PART 4: STRUCTURAL CONDITION ASSESSMENT
Building
evaluations are limited by the available construction documents and the level of access possible for the observation of structural elements of the building. During the site-walk, the interior and exterior of the building was reviewed based on what could be visually observed.

Based on our review, the buildings appear to be in fair condition structurally with some areas of architectural damage and general deterioration from age. • Cracks in masonry walls [See Appendix Photos 7-8]
• Cracks at main apparatus bay slab [See Appendix Photos 9-11] Our observations indicate that existing field conditions substantially match the record drawings provided.

PART 5: STRUCTURAL EVALUATION AND FINDINGS

5.1 Buildin
g Evaluation and Findings
Based on the ASCE 41 Tier 1 review, the following items are of significance for the performance of these buildings when subjected to strong earthquake ground motions.

Positive Features:
• The structure shows an adequate vertical load path with no geometric irregularities. • The structure complies with the requirements for redundant lateral systems with at least two lines of resistance in each direction.
• Plywood diaphragms are typically connected for transfer of in-plane seismic forces to the shear wal
ls.
• Masonry wall reinforcement is typically doweled into the foundation. The dowels effectively transfer shear and moment to the foundation.
• The foundation elements/footings are tied with reinforced spread footings and a concrete slab-on-grade.
• Shear walls are appropriate height/thickness ratio and typical openings have additional trim reinforcing on all sides.

Structural Deficiencies:
• The structure is in a potential liquefaction zone and may be prone to settling. • The concentration of the seismic overturning forces in foundation elements may exceed the capacity of the soil and foundation due to the CMU walls surrounding the apparatus bay not meeting length-to-height requirements.
• The roof-to-wall anchorage connection and CMU wall anchorage for lateral support does not provide adequate strength and relies on cross-grain bending in the wood ledgers, creating an undesirable load path. The bearing walls can separate from the structure and potentially cause partial collapse of floor or roof.
• There are no continuous crossties between diaphragm chords in the direction perpendicular to the joists at the low roof, high roof and second floor framing.

Continuous crossties are required to develop out-of-plane wall forces into diaphragms.

Note that Precast concrete cornice at the high roof may be insufficiently connected and may be a falling hazard.

Alameda Fire Station No. 1

PART 6: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 General Recommendations for Condition Assessment
The buildings are generally in fair structural condition for the time of construction. No significant structural material condition issues were observed. A visual inspection of the structure reveals there are signs of cracking and architectural damage in the concrete slab and CMU walls in the apparatus bay, especially near wall openings. Any deficient conditions noted should be repaired through general maintenance. Note that the condition repairs noted below do not necessarily represent a life safety hazard and may be completed at the city’s discretion. .

6.2 Seismic Retrofit Recommendations
The following recommendations are provided to address the seismic deficiencies based on the level of analysis performed (ASCE 41 Tier 1 screening and engineering judgment). While the recommendations listed below do not represent immediate life safety concerns that warrant facility closure, they do describe building components that are non-compliant for seismic performance per the ASCE 41 Tier 1 checklist review or identified as systemic deficiencies. All seismic remediation measures noted here are considered voluntary.

The mitigations listed below are recommended for seismic safety. If upgrades are to be implemented, it should be noted that the owner has the option to choose an upgrade standard for the structural components recommended below. It is suggested that new components be designed to the current seismic code level performance criteria. Alternatively, ASCE 41 Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings can be used for the design. Our understanding is that no remediation work has been mandated for this site by governing agencies; therefore, any mitigation work undertaken is voluntary on the part of the city. Mitigations are listed in order of importance from greatest to least.

6.3 Recommended Mitigations

Seismic Strengthening
• Install additional roof-to-wall anchors, such as steel rod hold downs at the masonry walls or new blocking and sheet metal clips, to transfer the masonry wall out-of-plane forces into the wood diaphragm and prevent cross grain bending of wood ledgers. Sizing and frequency of attachments can be determined using the out-of-plane anchorage forces from the ASCE 41 existing building design criteria.
• Perform geotechnical investigation to determine soil properties of building site and confirm if soil is liquifiable. Pending geotechnical investigation results, enhance existing spread footings as required to seismic overturning forces and bearing pressures.

Structure Condition Repair
• Remove damaged finishes and inspect for any structural water damage. Replace in kind. • Chip out damaged masonry and replace in kind or fill cracks and damage with repair mortar.
• Remove damaged wood and replace in kind.
• Further evaluate precast concrete cornice attachment for stability

Alameda Fire Station No. 1

PART 7: LIMITATIONS AND DISCLAIMERS
The evalu
ation, findings, conclusions, and recommendations outlined in this report were based on available but limited information. This report has been prepared using the same degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised for this type of professional service by structural engineers practicing in this area at this time. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional advice in this report.

This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Alameda Fire Station No. 1. It may not be used by any other individual or entity without the express written approval of Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc.

Alameda Fire Station No. 1
PART 8: APPENDIX

8.1 Photos

Photo 1: Interior of Apparatus Bay

Photo 2:

Apparatus Bay Entrance

Alameda Fire Station No. 1

Photo 3: Apparatus Bay Roof Framing

Photo 4: Apparatus Bay – Beam/Ledger to Wall Connection

Alameda Fire Station No. 1

Photo 5: Apparatus Bay – Glulam to Wall Connection

Photo 6: Apparatus Bay – Roof Framing Connections

Alameda Fire Station No. 1

Photo 7:

Interior of Apparatus Bay – Cracks in CMU Wall Openings

Photo 8:

Interior of Apparatus Bay – Cracks in CMU Wall

Alameda Fire Station No. 1

Photo 9: Cracking in Main Apparatus Bay Slab

Photo 10:

Cracking in Main Apparatus Bay Slab

Alameda Fire Station No. 1
Photo 11:

Cracking in Main Apparatus Bay Slab

RRM Design Group November 6, 2025
325 Davis Street 2025033
San Leandro, CA 94577

Attention: Michael Scott

Subject: Alameda Fire Station No. 2
635 Pacific Avenue, Alameda, CA 94501

Dear Michael:

Biggs Cardosa Associates would like to present this Draft Tier 1 structural assessment report for the existing Alameda Fire Station No. 2. In accordance with our proposal, we have performed a structural review and assessment of the existing wood framed structure on the property.

We completed a site visit on October 21, 2025. No architectural and structural plans were available at the time of this report . The following report describes the findings of our structural review and conditional assessment of the buildings with retrofit recommendations.

It is recommended that ultimately all the retrofit options described are implemented but even this phased approach will improve the performance of the building . However, it is important to note that all the mitigation work described is entirely voluntary on the part of the city.

Sincerely,
BIGGS CARDOSA ASSOCIATES, INC.

Thomas L. Swayze, S.E.

Principal

Tier 1 Seismic Assessment DRAFT
The City of Alameda
November 6, 2025

Alameda Fire Station No. 2

635 Pacific Avenue,
Alameda, CA 94501

Alameda Fire Station No. 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART 1: OVERVIEW...................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Background ...................................................................................................................................... 1 PART 2: SEISMIC PERFORMANCE EVALUATION ....................................................................................... 2

2.1 Methodology .................................................................................................................................... 2

2.2 Performance Level ............................................................................................................................ 2

2.3 Seismic Source .................................................................................................................................. 3

2.4 Liquefaction, Landslide, and other Geologic Hazards ....................................................................... 3 PART 3: STRUCTURAL EVALUATION ......................................................................................................... 4

3.1 Documentation and Site Observations ............................................................................................. 4

3.2 Building Systems .............................................................................................................................. 4 PART 4: STRUCTURAL CONDITION ASSESSMENT .................................................................................... 5 PART 5: STRUCTURAL EVALUATION AND FINDINGS .............................................................................. 5

5.1 Building Evaluation and Findings ..................................................................................................... 5 PART 6: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................. 6

6.1 General Recommendations for Condition Assessment .................................................................... 6

6.2 Seismic Retrofit Recommendations .................................................................................................. 6

6.3 Recommended Mitigations .............................................................................................................. 7

6.4 Potential Strengthening Scenarios and Scope .................................................................................. 7 PART 7: LIMITATIONS AND DISCLAIMERS ............................................................................................... 8 PART 8: APPENDIX ...................................................................................................................................... 9

8.1 Photos .............................................................................................................................................. 9

Alameda Fire Station No. 2
PART 1: OVERVIEW

1.1 Introduction
The City of Alameda has requested a structural assessment of Alameda Fire Station No. 2. This report represents the results of an ASCE 41 seismic assessment and general structural condition review of the building. Alameda Fire Station No . 2 is located at 635 Pacific Avenue, Alameda, California. The fire station consists of a single-story apparatus bay and an office and dormitory wing both initially constructed in 1921. The team was not provided with any as-built data or information regarding pending or past modernizations or retrofits for this building.

Figure 1: Aerial View of the Alameda Fire Station No. 2 A Tier 1 level ASCE 41 structural evaluation and general condition assessment was performed for the building. The assessment is based on visual observations and assumed construction practices associated with the period of construction . Site observations were conducted by Biggs Cardosa Associates Inc. during a site visit on October 21, 2025. This report describes the findings of our structural review and contains observations and qualitative recommendations for seismic or condition upgrades or recommended additional studies. The garage and paint shed structures are not physically connected to the station and were not evaluated in this Tier 1 report.

1.2 Background
With each building code cycle (approximately every 3 years) codes for new construction are modified to improve structural performance during seismic events. However, engineering standards to evaluate existing buildings have historically lagged in development. For the past several years,

Alameda Fire Station No. 2
ASCE/SEI 41-17 Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings has been the accepted baseline standard of practice for the seismic evaluation of existing buildings. As described in that document, one of the primary goals is to include lessons learned from recent earthquakes.

The purpose of this study is to determine whether significant seismic deficiencies exist at the building, to determine the potential seismic risk of the building, and to provide general recommendations for reduction of seismic risk through mitigation. Buildings of recent construction are exempt from this type of analysis based on building type and the code enforced at the time of construction. Such buildings are identified as “benchmark buildings”. According to ASCE 41 guidelines, the subject building of this study is not classified as a “benchmark building” since it was designed and constructed prior to the benchmark cutoff date (1998) for wood frame, wood shear panel buildings.

The analysis methodology of ASCE 41-17 employs a quick check methodology (Tier 1 analysis). The Tier 1 quick check uses cursory calculations appropriate for each building type and a set of checklists which contain evaluation statements that help to identify areas of concern regarding the ability of the structure to adequately transmit seismic forces to the foundation and supporting soils.

PART 2: SEISMIC PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

2.1 Methodology
The potential damage to a structure in an earthquake can be evaluated provided that, (1) seismic hazards which affect the structure and site can be estimated and (2) the vulnerability of the structure to those hazards are known or can be estimated.

Site seismicity for the Alameda Fire Station No. 2 was determined using the United States Geologic Survey (USGS) web based Seismic Hazard Curves, Response Parameters and Design Parameters program. Seismic short period S S and one second S 1 response acceleration parameters were obtained through the ASCE 7 Hazard Tool.

Seismic evaluation of the structures was conducted using the ASCE 41-17 – Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings. ASCE 41 provides a three -tiered process for seismic evaluation of existing buildings based on building type and the level of seismicity for the building location. The Tier 1 study is an initial checklist evaluation of structural, non-structural, and foundation/geologic hazard elements of a building and site conditions that is intended to screen for potential seismic deficiencies. Tier 2 and 3 studies include more in -depth analysis procedures for a building or component that is identified by the Tier 1 screening process as structurally deficient or that requires further study. Non-structural items were not included as those systems are generally evaluated by an architect.

This assessment of Alameda Fire Station No. 2 utilizes the Tier 1 screening procedure to identify initial deficiencies as much as possible with the information available.

2.2 Performance Level
ASCE 41 Tier 1 evaluation of a building can be performed for either Collapse Prevention (CP) or Immediate Occupancy (IO) performance level s. The Basic Performance Objective focuses on Collapse Prevention for buildings in Risk Category I, II, and III and on Immediate Occupancy for buildings in Risk Category IV.

Alameda Fire Station No. 2
ASCE 41 summarizes the two performance levels as follows:
• CP Performance Level: After an earthquake, the structure will have damaged components and continue to support gravity loads but retains no margin against collapse. Designed to prevent only the most egregious structural failures against either partial or total collapse remains.
• IO Performance Level : After an earthquake, the basic vertical and lateral force -resisting system retains nearly all its pre-earthquake strength, very limited damage to structural and non-structural components has occurred and critical parts of the building remain habitable.

The ASCE 41 Immediate Occupancy Basic Configuration checklist (Table 17 -3) and Immediate Occupancy Structural Checklist for Building Types RM1 and RM2 (T able 17-35) are appropriate for this building type and are included in this report. As these buildings are considered Risk Category IV, they are evaluated under the Immediate Occupancy criteria.

2.3 Seismic Source
The general seismicity in the San Francisco Bay region is influenced by several known faults, their potential faulting length, and relative orientation. The Hayward Fault extends in the North-South direction, between the North American plate and the Pacific plate. This fault is located approximately 5.0 miles east of the building. Other known, near-source faults with recorded activity, such as the San Andreas Fault, are listed in Table 1 (From California Department of Conservation) along with the estimated moment magnitude, M W, that would occur during the Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE).

Earthquakes in Southern California – namely Northridge and Whittier Narrows – have occurred along blind-thrust faults. These fault types do not have readily identifiable surface features and are not extensively mapped. For our project site, the potential for strong-ground motion to occur due to blind-thrust faulting is uncertain. Therefore, a moderate to large earthquake centered even closer to the site cannot be completely ruled out.

Fault Estimated MCE (MW) Distance (miles)
Hayward Fault 6.5 5.0
Calaveras Fault 6.7 13.4
San Andreas Fault 7.9 13.8
Table 1: Active Near Source Faults
As this Tier 1 Basis of Performance level is Immediate Occupancy , the seismic standard for an existing structure is Basic Safety Earthquake-1E (BSE-1E). The BSE-1E earthquake is also referred to as the 225-year earthquake and is based on a 20 percent probability of exceedance within a 50- year time frame.

The 225-year event peak ground acceleration (PGA) is 0.64g, or 64% gravity. The USGS defined accelerations are based on Site Class D. Site Class D is assumed as recommended in ASCE 7-16 Section 20.1 where soil properties are not known in sufficient detail.

2.4 Liquefaction, Landslide, and other Geologic Hazards Liquefaction is the loss of bearing strength of saturated, cohesionless soils under strong ground motions. Liquefaction can cause settlement by consolidation of soils susceptible to liquefaction. Per

Alameda Fire Station No. 2
the “California Earthquake Hazards Zone Application Map (EQ Zapp) ,” the fire station is located in a moderate liquefaction susceptibility zone. EQ Zapp is an online resource by the California Department of Conservation that maps hazard zones as evaluated by California Geological Survey (CGS).

The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning (AP) Act is a state law that regulates construction i n areas with close fault proximity and the potential for surface fault rupture. The AP Act was established following the 1971 San Fernando earthquake and has since been refined and revised.

This building is not located in an AP zone.

The fire station is not considered at-risk for seismically induced landslide s per the EQ Zapp map.

Based on the aerial maps and our site visit, the building does not appear to be on any significant slopes.

PART 3: STRUCTURAL EVALUATION

3.1 Documentation and Site Observations
No record or as -built drawings were available for the fire station. Additionally, no soils data or reports were available. A facility condition assessment report , “Tier 1 Report - Facility Condition Assessment for Fire Station # 2” by Faithful+Gould, Inc. dated January 30, 2015, was provided by the City of Alameda as additional reference information.

Greg Tolan, SE, and Natsuki Okuda, PE, of Biggs Cardosa Associates performed a site visit on October 21 , 2025 . The field observation was limited to readily visible structural components ; architectural finishes were not removed to expose concealed structural framing.

3.2 Building Systems
Foundation Systems
The type of foundation and slab are unknown at this time. The structure is likely to have continuous conventional spread footings supporting wood bearing walls and a reinforced concrete slab -on- grade.

Vertical Load Resisting Systems
The type of roof and floor system is unknown at this time. The architectural finishes were not removed to reveal the ceiling framing. There is a 4 -inch finished floor elevation increase between the apparatus bay and the office and living quarters.

At the apparatus bay, the gable roof likely consists of a wood framed roof system , constructed of wood trusses spanning in the east -west direction supporting 1x diagonal or straight sheathing.

Wood trusses likely frame into wood stud walls which transfer the vertical load to the foundation.

Ceiling finishes prevent visual access to framing and connections. Wood framed outriggers rafter extensions are visible at the exterior eave soffit (see Appendix Photo 12).

At the office and living quarters portion of the structure, the flat roof likely consists of a wood framed roof system, constructed of 1x diagonal or straight sheathing over wood joists framing to wood beams. A portion of the office and living quarters has a hip roof and is likely also wood framed. Wood joists frame into wood stud bearing walls , which are supported on the concrete foundation walls. The elevated first floor wood framed flooring is also supported by the foundation

Alameda Fire Station No. 2
walls and isolated piers (see Appendix Photos 14 -16), which in turn transfers the vertical load s to the soil. A crawl space is located below the wood framed floor.

Lateral Load Resisting Systems
The roof lateral system likely consists of a wood roof diaphragm of unknown sheathing . The building’s lateral load resisting system also likely consists of wood framed shear walls constructed with an unknown sheathing type. The wood diaphragm delivers seismic forces to wood sheathed shear walls. The lateral loads are assumed to transfer from the shear walls to the foundation.

Architectural finishes were not removed to reveal either the ceiling framing or the roof diaphragm attachment to the wall or wall sill bolting. The seismic load path for these components is unknown and likely deficient based on the age of the structure.

Exterior Steel Canopy Structure
There is an exterior steel framed canopy structure behind the apparatus bay. The canopy system appears to consist of 2x flat horizontal wood spanning between W12x± steel beams. The W12x± beams are supported by C8x± channel ledger s at the apparatus bay exterior wood wall, and by a steel wide flange girder spanning between WF columns on the other side. Steel diagonal braces are provided for lateral stability between the beam and wall/columns. See Appendix Photos 6-7.

PART 4: STRUCTURAL CONDITION ASSESSMENT
Building evaluations are limited by the available construction documents and the level of access possible for the observation of structural elements of the building. During the site-walk, the interior and exterior of the building were reviewed based on what could be visually observed. Based on our review, the buildings appear to be in fair condition structurally with some areas of architectural damage.
• Cracks at main apparatus bay slab [See Appendix Photos 8-10] • Minor cracks in stucco walls [See Appendix Photos 11] As no as-built drawings were available for this building. We cannot determine whether the existing field conditions match the original drawings.

PART 5: STRUCTURAL EVALUATION AND FINDINGS

5.1 Building Evaluation and Findings
Based on the ASCE 41 Tier 1 review, the following items are of significance for the performance of this building when subjected to strong earthquake ground motions. Many Tier 1 checklist items are marked as unknown, due to the lack of as -built information. Because the building is likely a wood diaphragm with a wood sheathed shear wall system, with all framing concealed by finishes , the connections and ties between systems could not be assessed from a visual review of the building.

Positive Features:
• The structure complies with the requirements for redundant lateral systems with at least two lines of resistance in each direction.
• There are no vertical irregularities in the system as the structure is a single-story building.

Alameda Fire Station No. 2
• There are no torsional irregularities in the structure for the regular rectangular shape of the building.
• There are no large diaphragm openings and diaphragms are continuous, with no split - levels.
• The site is flat and is not considered at -risk of landslides nor has uneven foundation embedment depths.

Structural Deficiencies:
• No as-built drawings are available. Many structural elements were not visible for evaluation.

The following components were unable to be assessed:
o Complete load path of gravity and lateral system, including the following:
▪ Type of foundation and depth
▪ Foundation ties/sill bolts and hold-down anchors
▪ Structure roof framing and sheathing type
▪ Framing connections, including girder -column connections and wood posts to foundation,
▪ Roof chord continuity
o Wood shear wall lengths and sheathing type
o Diaphragm type and spans
• The structure is in a potential liquefaction zone and may be prone to settlement. • Due to the lack of information regarding the existing foundation system, further analysis of the foundations is recommended, should changes be made to the existing lateral system.

Analysis may include soil excavation to confirm footing sizes, as well as removal of wall finishes to confirm shear wall hold-down anchors are anchored into concrete. • It is recommended to obtain a site geotechnical report to determine the foundation recommendations including any mitigation requirements that might include deep foundation elements or soil improvement.
• The shear walls likely have insufficient wall lengths for the seismic loads overturning loads and shear stresses, according to the quick check per ASCE 41 for an unknown wall sheathing type. Further investigation is required to understand the layout and sheathing type of all the seismic shear walls in the structure.
• Some of the shear walls are narrow and have insufficient length-to-height requirements at the apparatus bay garage door openings and at the east side of the office/residential building, which may result in exceeding overturning capacities.

PART 6: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 General Recommendations for Condition Assessment
The buildings are generally in fair structural condition for the time of construction. No significant structural material condition issues were observed. A visual inspection of the structure reveals there are signs of cracking and architectural damage in the concrete slab and stucco walls in the apparatus bay, especially near wall openings. Apparatus bay slab cracking has been previously repaired. Any deficient conditions noted should be repaired through general maintenance. Note that the condition repairs noted below do not necessarily represent a life safety hazard and may be completed at the City’s discretion.

6.2 Seismic Retrofit Recommendations

Alameda Fire Station No. 2
The following recommendations are provided to address the seismic deficiencies based on the level of analysis performed (ASCE 41 Tier 1 screening and engineering judgment). While the recommendations listed below do not represent immediate life safety concerns that warrant facility closure, they do describe building components that are non-compliant for seismic performance per the ASCE 41 Tier 1 checklist review or identified as systemic deficiencies.

The mitigations listed below are recommended for seismic safety. If upgrades are to be implemented, it should be noted that the owner has the option to choose an upgrade standard for the structural components recommended below. It is suggested that new components be designed to the current seismic code level performance criteria. Alternatively, ASCE 41 Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings can be used for the design. Our understanding is that no remediation work has been mandated for this site by governing agencies; therefore, any mitigation work undertaken is voluntary on the part of the City. Mitigations are listed in order of importance from greatest to least.

6.3 Recommended Mitigations
Seismic Strengthening
• Obtain geotechnical analysis of the site to determine all soil -structure interaction parameters including liquefaction analysis and foundation type recommendations. If a significant liquefaction problem is present, the mitigation will likely be extensive. • If remediation or retrofit is to be seriously considered, obtain detailed building as -built survey to determine the wood shear wall and floor layout, sheathing type, and create as- built plans. Partial removal of existing finishes will be necessary to determine the existing framing and lateral systems, as well as confirm the lateral connectivity of the system. This will not be necessary if the station is programmed for replacement. o It is likely that several walls will require additional plywood sheathing and new concrete foundations.
• At the tall, narrow shear wall piers at the apparatus bay opening s in the east -west direction, evaluate strengthening options to provide additional lateral resistance. o A variety of different systems may be appropriate based on further study. New steel moment frames, masonry or concrete shear walls or new plywood shear walls supported by new concrete foundations will very likely be required.

Structure Condition Repair
• Repair minor cracks in exterior stucco finishes.
• Repair any new cracks in the apparatus bay slab. It appears several cracks have previously been infilled with epoxy.

6.4 Potential Strengthening Scenarios and Scope
We understand that there is little knowledge of the history or makeup of the building’s construction.

In order to better evaluate the condition of the building and verify the structure in place, additional intrusive observations, such as finish removal, scanning of concrete reinforcement, localized demolition (if deemed necessary) etc., would need to be performed. Structure conditions should be evaluated at the time of the finish removal.

Alameda Fire Station No. 2
PART 7: LIMITATIONS AND DISCLAIMERS
The evaluation, findings, conclusions, and recommendations outlined in this report were based on available but limited information. This report has been prepared using the same degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised for this type of professional service by structural engineers practicing in this area at this time. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional advice in this report.

This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Alameda Fire Station No. 2. It may not be used by any other individual or entity without the express written approval of Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc.

Alameda Fire Station No. 2
PART 8: APPENDIX

8.1 Photos

Photo 1: Fire Station South Face

Photo 2: Fire Station North Face at App Bay

Alameda Fire Station No. 2

Photo 3: Fire Station North Face at Office/Residential

Photo 4: Fire Station East Face

Alameda Fire Station No. 2

Photo 5: Fire Station West Face

Photo 6: Steel Canopy at App Bay Wall

Alameda Fire Station No. 2

Photo 7: Steel Canopy at Garage

Photo 8: Interior of Apparatus Bay

Alameda Fire Station No. 2

Photo 9: Interior of Apparatus Bay

Photo 10: Cracking in Main Apparatus Bay Slab

Alameda Fire Station No. 2

Photo 11: Minor Chipping at Exterior Stucco

Photo 12: Exterior Soffit at Clay Tile Roof Overhang

Alameda Fire Station No. 2
Photo 13: Interior at Office
Photo 14: Joists at Crawl Space

Alameda Fire Station No. 2

Photo 15: Joists at Beam and Column at Crawl Space

Photo 16: Floor Joists at Concrete Foundation Wall at Crawl Space

Alameda Fire Station No. 2

Photo 17: Column and Isolated Footing at Crawl Space

RRM Design Group November 6, 2025
325 Davis Street 2025033
San Leandro, CA 94577

Attention: Michael Scott

Subject: Alameda Fire Station No. 4
2595 Mecartney Road, Alameda, CA 94502

Dear Michael:

Biggs Cardosa Associates would like to present this Tier 1 structural assessment report for the existing Alameda Fire Station No. 4. In accordance with our proposal, we have performed a structural review and assessment for the existing wood and steel framed structure on the property.

We completed a site visit on January 23, 202 5, and reviewed the available architectural and structural plans. The following report describes the findings of our structural review and conditional assessment of the buildings with retrofit recommendations.

It is recommended that ultimately all the retrofit options described are implemented but even this phased approach will improve the performance of the building . However, it is important to note that all the mitigation work described is entirely voluntary on the part of the city.

Sincerely,
BIGGS CARDOSA ASSOCIATES, INC.

Thomas L. Swayze, S.E.

Principal

Tier 1 Seismic Assessment DRAFT
The City of Alameda
November 6, 2025

Alameda Fire Station No. 4

2595 Mecartney Road,
Alameda, CA 94502

Alameda Fire Station No. 4

TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART 1: OVERVIEW................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 1

1.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Background ............................................................................................................................................................................ 2 PART 2: SEISMIC PERFORMANCE EVALUATION ................................ ................................ ....................... 2

2.1 Methodology ......................................................................................................................................................................... 2

2.2 Performance Level ............................................................................................................................................................... 3

2.3 Seismic Source ...................................................................................................................................................................... 3

2.4 Liquefaction, Landslide, and other Geologic Hazards ........................................................................................... 4 PART 3: STRUCTURAL EVALUATION ................................ ................................ ................................ ......... 4

3.1 Documentation ..................................................................................................................................................................... 4

3.2 Building Systems .................................................................................................................................................................. 4 PART 4: STRUCTURAL CONDITION ASSESSMENT ................................ ................................ .................... 7 PART 5: STRUCTURAL EVALUATION AND FINDINGS ................................ ................................ .............. 7

5.1 Building Evaluation and Findings .................................................................................................................................. 7 PART 6: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................ ................................ ................. 9

6.1 General Recommendations for Condition Assessment ........................................................................................ 9

6.2 Seismic Retrofit Recommendations ............................................................................................................................. 9

6.3 Recommended Mitigation ............................................................................................................................................... 9 PART 7: LIMITATIONS AND DISCLAIMERS ................................ ................................ ............................... 9 PART 8: APPENDIX ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 10

8.1 Photos ................................................................................................................................................................................... 10

Alameda Fire Station No. 4
PART 1: OVERVIEW

1.1 Introduction
The City of Alameda has requested a structural assessment of Alameda Fire Station No. 4. This report represents the results of an ASCE 41 seismic assessment and general structural condition review of the building. Alameda Fire Station No . 4 is located at 2595 Mecartney Road , Alameda, California and was initially constructed in 1991. The fire station consists of a single-story apparatus bay on one side of the building, while the remaining portion is comprised of an office, dormitory and other living quarters for employees. The team was not provided with any data or information regarding pending or past modernizations and/or retrofits for this building.

Figure 1: Aerial View of Alameda Fire Station No. 4
A Tier 1 level ASCE 41 structural evaluation and general condition assessment was performed for the building based on a review of the available record drawings and visual observations conducted by Biggs Cardosa Associates Inc. during a site visit on January 23, 2025. This report describes the findings of our structural review and contains qualitative observations and recommendations for seismic or conditional upgrades or recommended additional studies.

Alameda Fire Station No. 4

1.2 Background

With each building code cycle (approximately every 3 years) codes for new construction are modified to improve structural performance during seismic events. However, engineering standards to evaluate existing buildings have historically lagged in developm ent. For the past several years, ASCE/SEI 41 -17 Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings has been the accepted baseline standard of practice for the seismic evaluation of existing buildings. As described in that document, one of the primary goals is to include lessons learned from recent earthquakes.

The purpose of this study is to determine whether significant seismic deficiencies exist at a building, to determine the potential seismic risk of the building, and to provide general recommendations for reduction of seismic risk through mitigation. Buildings of recent construction are exempt from this type of analysis based on building type and the code enforced at the time of construction.

Such buildings are identified as “benchmark buildings”. According to ASCE 41 guidelines, none of the subject buildings of this study are classified as a “benchmark building” since they were designed and constructed prior to the benchmark cutoff date (2000) for both wood frame and steel moment resisting buildings.

The analysis methodology of ASCE 41-17 employs a quick check methodology (Tier 1 analysis). The Tier 1 quick check uses cursory calculations appropriate for each building type and a set of checklists which contain evaluation statements that help to identify areas of concern regarding the ability of the structure to adequately transmit seismic forces to the foundation and supporting soils.

PART 2: SEISMIC PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

2.1 Methodology
The potential damage to a structure in an earthquake can be evaluated provided that, (1) seismic hazards which affect the structure and site can be estimated and (2) the vulnerability of the structure to those hazards are known or can be estimated.

Site seismicity for the Alameda Fire Station No. 4 was determined using the United States Geologic Survey (USGS) web based Seismic Hazard Curves, Response Parameters and Design Parameters program. Seismic short period S S and one second S 1 response acceleration parameters were obtained through the ASCE 7 Hazard Tool.

Seismic evaluation of the structures was conducted using the ASCE 41-17 – Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings. ASCE 41 provides a three -tiered process for seismic evaluation of existing buildings based on building type and the level of seismicity for the building location. The Tier 1 study is an initial checklist evaluation of structural, non-structural, and foundation/geologic hazard elements of a building and site conditions that is intended to screen for potential seismic deficiencies. Tier 2 and 3 studies include more in -depth analysis procedures for a building or component that is identified by the Tier 1 screening process as structurally deficient or that requires further study. Non-structural items were not included as those systems are generally evaluated by an architect.

This assessment of Alameda Fire Station No. 4 utilizes the Tier 1 screening procedure to identify initial deficiencies as much as possible with the information available.

Alameda Fire Station No. 4

2.2 Performance Level
ASCE 41 Tier 1 evaluation of a building can be performed for either Collapse Prevention (CP) or Immediate Occupancy (IO) performance level s. The Basic Performance Objective focuses on Collapse Prevention for buildings in Risk Category I, II, and III and on Immediate Occupancy for buildings in Risk Category IV.

ASCE 41 summarizes the two performance levels as follows:
• CP Performance Level: After an earthquake, the structure will have damaged components and continue to support gravity loads but retains no margin against collapse. Designed to prevent only the most egregious structural failures against either partial or t otal collapse remains.
• IO Performance Level: After an earthquake, the basic vertical and lateral force -resisting system retains nearly all its pre-earthquake strength, very limited damage to structural and non-structural components has occurred and critical parts of the building remain habitable.

The ASCE 41 Immediate Occupancy Basic Configuration checklist (Table 17 -3) and Immediate Occupancy Structural Checklist for Building Types W2 (Table 17 -7) and S1 (Table 17-9) are appropriate for this building type and are included in this report. As these buildings are considered Risk Category IV, they are evaluated under the Immediate Occupancy criteria.

2.3 Seismic Source
The general seismicity in the San Francisco Bay region is influenced by several known faults, their potential faulting length, and relative orientation. The Hayward Fault extends in the North-South direction, between the North American plate and the Pacific plate. This fault is located approximately 5.3 miles east of the building. Other known, near-source faults with recorded activity, such as the San Andreas Fault, are listed in Table 1 (From California Department of Conservation) along with the estimated moment magnitude, M W, that would occur during the Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE).

Earthquakes in Southern California – namely Northridge and Whittier Narrows – have occurred along blind-thrust faults. These faults do not have readily identifiable surface features and are not extensively mapped. For our project site, t he potential for strong-ground motion to occur due to blind-thrust faulting is uncertain. Therefore, a moderate to large earthquake centered even closer to the site cannot be completely ruled out.

Fault Estimated MCE (MW) Distance (miles)
Hayward Fault 6.5 5.3
San Andreas Fault 7.9 14
Calaveras Fault 6.7 12.9
Table 1: Active Near Source Faults
As this Tier 1 Basis of Performance is Immediate Occupancy, the standard for an existing structure would be for a Basic Safety Earthquake -1E (BSE-1E). BSE-1E earthquake is also referred to as the 225-year earthquake and is based on a 20 percent probability of exceedance within a 50-year time frame.

Alameda Fire Station No. 4
The 225-year event peak ground acceleration (PGA) is 0.62g, or 62% gravity. The USGS defined accelerations are based on Site Class D. Site Class D is assumed as recommended in ASCE 7-16 Section 20.1 where soil properties are not known in sufficient detail.

2.4 Liquefaction, Landslide, and other Geologic Hazards Liquefaction is the loss of bearing strength of saturated, cohesionless soils under strong ground motions. Liquefaction can cause settlement by consolidation of soils susceptible to liquefaction .

Per the “California Earthquake Hazards Zone Application Map (EQ Zapp),” the fire station is located in a very high liquefaction susceptibility zone. EQ Zapp is an online resource by the California Department of Conservation that maps hazard zones as evaluated by California Geological Survey (CGS).

The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning (AP) Act is a state law that regulates construction i n areas with close fault proximity and the potential for surface fault rupture. The AP Act was established following the 1971 San Fernando earthquake and has since been refined and revised.

This building is not located in an AP zone.

The fire station is considered not at-risk for seismically induced landslide s per the EQ Zapp map.

Based on the aerial maps and our site visit, the building does not appear to be on any significant slopes.

PART 3: STRUCTURAL EVALUATION

3.1 Documentation
Available record or as-built drawings for the fire station include:
• Original drawings of the fire station (Sheets A0.1 through A4.3 architectural, sheets S 0 through S6) dated January 3 rd, 1989, by Hallenbeck Chamorro & Associates Architecture and RKI International Engineers Inc.

No soils data or reports were available at this time.

Greg Tolan, SE, and Natsuki Okuda, PE, of Biggs Cardosa Associates performed a site visit on January 23, 2025. The field observation was limited to readily visible structural components; architectural finishes were not removed to expose concealed structural framing.

3.2 Building Systems
Foundation Systems
The structure is constructed on interlocking prestressed grade beams that are post tensioned supporting wood shear walls , steel moment frame columns, and a reinforced concrete slab -on- grade.

Vertical Load Resisting Systems
The main building’s roof consists of 2x12 joists at 24 inches on center with plywood sheathing. The main building has a raised main entry approximately 20 by 20 feet constructed of 2x8 r afters at 24 inches on center with 2x8 collar ties. The rafters are connected to either the top of the wood shear wall or wood ledgers to transfer the vertical loads to wood shear walls.

Alameda Fire Station No. 4
The apparatus bay is constructed of glulam trusses equally spaced in in the east -west direction, with a continuous elevated roof clerestory portion at the center. 2x10 joists at 24 inches on center span from truss-to-truss supporting plywood sheathing. The joists are connected to the top of the wood shear walls to transfer the vertical loads to wood shear walls and into the foundations. The trusses are supported at each end by HSS steel columns.

Figure 1: Apparatus Bay Truss Elevation
Lateral Load Resisting Systems
The lateral load resisting system for the office and dormitory portion of the building consists of a ½” plywood diaphragm supported by wood shear walls. The plywood diaphragm delivers seismic forces to the wood shear walls through blocking or ledger s, and into the wood shear wall at the main building. The lateral loads are transferred from the shear walls into the foundation.

See Figures 1 and 2 for the typical framing to wall attachment at the low roof and high roof.

Figure 1: Diaphragm Attachment to Shear Wall Through Blocking

Alameda Fire Station No. 4

Figure 2: Diaphragm Attachment to Shear Wall Through Ledger The lateral system for the apparatus bay portion of the building consists of a wood diaphragm constructed of ½” plywood sheathing supported by wood shear walls and steel moment frames .

The wood diaphragm delivers seismic forces to the wood shear walls through the plywood diaphragm to the wood ledger, and into the shear walls in the east-west direction. In the north- south direction, the apparatus bay is laterally supported by steel moment frame s along the apparatus bay door openings. The wood diaphragm delivers forces to the steel moment frame through a short plywood sheathed wall above the doors. The lateral loads are transferred from the shear walls and the moment frames into the foundations.

See Figures 3 and 4 for the typical diaphragm to wall attachment at the apparatus bay at the wood shear walls and at the steel moment frames respectively. More visuals of the apparatus bay framing system can be found in the Appendix (Photos 3-6).

Figure 3: Diaphragm attachment at the Apparatus Bay – Wood Shear Wall Condition

Alameda Fire Station No. 4

Figure 4: Diaphragm attachment at the Apparatus Bay – Steel Moment Frame Condition PART 4: STRUCTURAL CONDITION ASSESSMENT
Building evaluations are limited by the available construction documents and the level of access possible for the observation of structural elements of the building. During the site-walk, the interior and exterior of each building was reviewed based on what could be visually observed. Based on our review, the buildings appear to be in good condition structurally with some areas of architectural damage and general deterioration from age.
• Minor cracking at main apparatus bay slab [See Appendix photo 6] Our observations indicate that existing field conditions substantially match the record drawings provided.

PART 5: STRUCTURAL EVALUATION AND FINDINGS

5.1 Building Evaluation and Findings
Based on the ASCE 41 Tier 1 review, the following items are of significance for the performance of these buildings when subjected to strong earthquake ground motions.

Positive Features:
• Structure shows an adequate load path with no geometric irregularities. • Structure complies with requirements for redundant lateral systems with at least two lines of resistance in each direction for both the shear walls and the moment frames. • Ties exist between foundation elements to resist seismic forces. • Structural panel wood sheathing is used for the sheathing of all shear walls for both the apparatus bay and the main building.
• All wood posts and girder connections have a positive connection to the foundation and columns respectively. The wood sill anchor bolt attachment spacing does not exceed 4 feet. • Plywood diaphragms are connected for transfer of in-plane seismic forces to the shear wall and are not composed of split-level floors.

Alameda Fire Station No. 4
• The average flexural stress in the moment frame is lower than the allowable strength of steel at the beams.
• The steel columns used for the steel moment frames are anchored to the foundation. • The diaphragm connection to the steel moment frames is able to develop the strength of the diaphragm through the nailing and steel angle attachments. • The columns for the steel moment frames meet the compact member requirements per AISC 341, Table D1.1.
• The beam flanges have continuity plates at all moment frame joints.

Structural Deficiencies:
• There are several discontinuous shear wall conditions at the raised area in the apparatus bay extending in the north-south direction and on three sides of the lobby. These are clerestory walls that are all fully sheathed with no openings in them. These will act as an extension of the diaphragm rather than shear walls.
• The structure is in a high liquefaction zone and is prone to settling. • The concentration of the seismic overturning forces in foundation elements may exceed the capacity of the soil and foundation.
• The shear stress in several of the wood shear walls exceeds the allowable shear stress at both the app aratus bay and the main building for a Tier 1 check , with the demand-to- capacity ratio exceeding 3.1 at the worst case.
• Some shear walls at the main building exceed a height to length aspect ratio of 2 to 1. • Some shear walls at the main building in both directions and at the apparatus bay in the north south direction do not have the holdowns shown on the drawings. • The anchorage of the steel columns for the steel moment frame cannot develop the uplift capacity of the foundation.
• The moment connections at the steel moment frame cannot develop of the expected strength of the adjoining members based on the minimum yield stress of the steel. • The panel zones of the steel moment frames have a shear capacity less than 1.1 times the sum of the flexural strength of the beams, with a demand -to-capacity ratio of approximately 2 to 1.
• Only half of the steel moment frame joints consist of strong -column weak -beam connections. Where the column is not strong enough to force the beam to fail prior to the column, the frame may experience a concentration of inelastic forces at specific members, causing the column to potentially hinge.
• The beams for the steel moment frames do not meet the compact member requirements per AISC 341, Table D1.1. Noncompact frame elements may experience local buckling before the development of their full moment capacities, which will lead to poor ductility and behavior during a seismic event.
• None of the bottom flanges of the steel moment frame beams or the beam -to-column connections are braced out-of-plane. The flanges must be braced in order to prevent lateral torsional buckling, which limits the frames’ ability to resist seismic forces. • The out of plane attachment from the wood wall to the steel moment frame is inadequate as it relies primarily on nails in withdrawal and the wood members in cross grain bending.

Alameda Fire Station No. 4
PART 6: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 General Recommendations for Condition Assessment
The buildings are generally in good structural condition for the time of construction. No significant structural material condition issues were observed. A visual inspection of the structure reveals there are signs of cracking and architectural damage in the concrete in the apparatus bay.

6.2 Seismic Retrofit Recommendations
The following recommendations are provided to address the seismic deficiencies based on the level of analysis performed (ASCE 41 Tier 1 screening and engineering judgment). While the recommendations listed below do not represent immediate life safety concerns that warrant facility closure, they do describe building components that are non-compliant for seismic performance per the ASCE 41 Tier 1 checklist review or identified as systemic deficiencies. All seismic remediation measures noted here are considered voluntary.

The mitigations listed below are recommended for seismic safety. If upgrades are to be implemented, it should be noted that the owner has the option to choose an upgrade standard for the structural components recommended below. It is suggested that new components be designed to the current seismic code level performance criteria. Alternatively, ASCE 41 Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings can be used for the design. Our understanding is that no remediation work has been mandated for this site by governing agencies; therefore, any mitigation work undertaken is voluntary in part of the City. Mitigations are listed in order of importance from greatest to least.

6.3 Recommended Mitigation

Seismic Strengthening
• Install holdowns at the shear walls missing holdowns. • Retrofit the beam to column connections at the steel moment frames with additional steel plates and welds.
• Add flange bracing at the steel moment frame beams such as angled pieces of steel to the roof framing.
• Perform geotechnical investigation to determine soil properties of building site and confirm if soil is liquifiable.
• Perform additional analysis o f the wood shear walls, steel moment frames, and beams supporting discontinuous shear walls to confirm sufficiency per ASCE 41 Tier 2 analysis.

PART 7: LIMITATIONS AND DISCLAIMERS
The evaluation, findings, conclusions, and recommendations outlined in this report were based on available but limited information. This report has been prepared using the same degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised for this type of professional service by structural engineers practicing in this area at this time. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is given as to professional advice in this report.

This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of Alameda Fire Station No. 4. It may not be used by any other individual or entity without the express written approval of Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc.

Alameda Fire Station No. 4
PART 8: APPENDIX

8.1 Photos

Photo 1: Apparatus Bay Entrance

Photo 2: Interior of Apparatus Bay

Alameda Fire Station No. 4

Photo 3: Apparatus Bay Roof Framing

Photo 4: Apparatus Bay – Steel Moment Frame

Alameda Fire Station No. 4
Photo 5: Apparatus Bay – Truss to Wall Connection
Photo 6: Interior of Apparatus Bay – Cracks in Slab

Alameda Fire Station No. 4

Photo 7: Roof of Main building

Photo 8: Roof of Apparatus Bay

RRM Design Group November 6, 2025
325 Davis Street 2025033
San Leandro, CA 94577

Attention: Michael Scott

Subject: Alameda Fire Station No. 5
950 W Ranger Ave, Alameda, CA 94501

Dear Michael:

Biggs Cardosa Associates would like to present this Draft Tier 1 structural assessment report for the existing Alameda fire station number 5. In accordance with our proposal, we have performed a structural review and assessment for the existing concrete framed structure on the property.

We completed a site visit on January 23, 2025, and reviewed the available architectural and structural data that was available. The following report describes the findings of our structural review and conditional assessment of the buildings with retrofit recommendations.

It is recommended that ultimately all the retrofit options described are implemented but even this phased approach will improve the performance of the building . However, it is important to note that all the mitigation work described is entirely voluntary on the part of the city.

Sincerely,
BIGGS CARDOSA ASSOCIATES, INC.

Thomas L. Swayze, S.E.

Principal

Tier 1 Seismic Assessment DRAFT
The City of Alameda
November 6, 2025

Alameda Fire Station No. 5

950 W. Ranger Road
Alameda, CA 94501

Alameda Fire Station No. 5

TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART 1: OVERVIEW...................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Background ...................................................................................................................................... 2 PART 2: SEISMIC PERFORMANCE EVALUATION ....................................................................................... 2

2.1 Methodology .................................................................................................................................... 2

2.2 Performance Level ............................................................................................................................ 3

2.3 Seismic Source .................................................................................................................................. 3

2.4 Liquefaction, Landslide, and other Geologic Hazards ....................................................................... 4 PART 3: STRUCTURAL EVALUATION ......................................................................................................... 4

3.1 Documentation ................................................................................................................................. 4

3.2 Building Systems .............................................................................................................................. 5

3.2-1. Single Story Apparatus Bay and Training Area .......................................................................... 5

3.2-2. Two Story Dormitory/Residential............................................................................................... 5 PART 4: STRUCTURAL CONDITION ASSESSMENT .................................................................................... 6 PART 5: STRUCTURAL EVALUATION AND FINDINGS .............................................................................. 7

5.1 Building Evaluation and Findings ..................................................................................................... 7 PART 6: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................................. 8

6.1 General Recommendations for Condition Assessment .................................................................... 8

6.2 General Recommendations for Seismic Retrofit ............................................................................... 8

6.3 Recommended Mitigations or Further As-Built Survey Requests ..................................................... 8

6.4 Potential Strengthening Scenarios and Scope .................................................................................. 9 PART 7: LIMITATIONS AND DISCLAIMERS ............................................................................................... 9 PART 8: APPENDIX .................................................................................................................................... 10

8.1 Photos ............................................................................................................................................ 10

Alameda Fire Station No. 5
PART 1: OVERVIEW

1.1 Introduction
The City of Alameda has requested a structural assessment of Alameda Fire Station No. 5. This report presents the results of a partial ASCE 41 seismic assessment and general structural condition review of the building at Alameda Fire Station No . 5, located at 950 W. Ranger Avenue in Alameda, CA. The fire station was originally a U S Navy fire station on Alameda Naval Air Station before being taken over by the City in 1997. The fire station was closed in 2009 and is currently used as a fire training site. The existing building is “U”-shaped, with a small second story concrete and wood framed penthouse over a concrete roof/floor slab with concrete wall apparatus bays.

The building appears to have been constructed in 1936, according to the facility assessment report dated 2015.

There is a seismic gap between the Department of Public Works buildings, south of the fire station.

The team was not provided with any as -built record drawings, nor any data or information regarding pending or past modernizations or retrofits for any of the buildings.

Figure 1: Aerial View of Alameda Fire Station No. 5 and the Alameda Fire Training Center

N

Alameda Fire Station No. 5
Due to the limited as -built data and unknown structural data, a complete Tier 1 analysis of the building was unable to be completed. However, we have performed a qualitative review based on all available information of the building and our engineering jud gment using the Tier 1 procedure as a guideline. A Tier 1 level ASCE 41 structural evaluation and general condition assessment was partially performed for the buildings based on a review of the available record drawings and visual observations conducted by Biggs Cardosa Associates Inc. during a site visit on January 23, 2025.

This report describes the findings of our structural review and contains qualitative observations and recommendations for seismic or conditional upgrades or recommended additional studies.

1.2 Background
With each building code cycle (approximately every 3 years) codes for new design are modified to improve structural performance during seismic events. However, engineering standards to evaluate existing buildings have historically lagged in development. For the past several years, ASCE/SEI 41- 17 Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings has been the accepted baseline standard of practice for the seismic evaluation of existing buildings. As described in that document, one of the primary goals is to include lessons learned from recent earthquakes.

The purpose of this study is to determine whether significant seismic deficiencies exist at a building, to determine the potential seismic risk of the building, and to provide general recommendations for reduction of seismic risk through mitigation. Buildings of recent construction are exempt from this type of analysis based on building type and the code enforced at the time of construction. Such buildings are identified as “benchmark buildings”. According to ASCE 41 guidelines, the subject building of this study is not classified as a “benchmark building” since they were designed and constructed prior to the benchmark cutoff date (2000) for reinforced masonry buildings.

The analysis methodology of ASCE 41-17 employs a quick check methodology (Tier 1 analysis). The Tier 1 quick check uses cursory calculations appropriate for each building type and a set of checklists which contain evaluation statements that help to identify areas of concern regarding the ability of the structure to adequately transmit seismic forces to the foundation and supporting soils.

PART 2: SEISMIC PERFORMANCE EVALUATION

2.1 Methodology
The potential damage to a structure in an earthquake can be evaluated provided that, (1) seismic hazards which affect the structure and site can be estimated and (2) the vulnerability of the structure to those hazards are known or can be estimated.

Site seismicity for Alameda Fire Station No. 5 was determined using the United States Geologic Survey (USGS) web based Seismic Hazard Curves, Response Parameters and Design Parameters program. Seismic short period S S and one second S 1 response acceleration parameters were obtained through the ASCE 7 Hazard Tool.

Seismic evaluation of the structures was conducted using the ASCE 41-17 – Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings. ASCE 41 provides a three -tiered process for seismic evaluation of existing buildings based on building type and the level of seismicity for the building location. The Tier 1 study is an initial checklist evaluation of structural, non-structural, and foundation/geologic hazard elements of a building and site conditions that is intended to screen for potential seismic deficiencies. Tier 2 and 3 studies include more in -depth analysis procedures for building or

Alameda Fire Station No. 5
component that is identified by the Tier 1 screening process as structurally deficient or that requires further study. Non-structural items were not included as those systems are generally evaluated by an architect.

This assessment of Alameda Fire Station No. 5 utilizes the Tier 1 screening procedure to identify initial deficiencies as much as possible with the information available.

2.2 Performance Level
ASCE 41 Tier 1 evaluation of a building can be performed for either Collapse Prevention (CP) or Immediate Occupancy (IO) performance level s. The Basic Performance Objective focuses on Collapse Prevention for buildings in Risk Category I, II, and III and on Immediate Occupancy for buildings in Risk Category IV.

ASCE 41 summarizes the two performance levels as follows:
• CP Performance Level: After an earthquake, the structure will have damaged components and continues to support gravity loads but retains no margin against collapse. • IO Performance Level: After an earthquake, the basic vertical and lateral force -resisting system retain nearly all their pre-earthquake strength, very limited damage to structural and non -structural components has occurred and critical parts of the building remain habitable.

The ASCE 41 Immediate Occupancy Basic Configuration checklist (Table 17 -3) and Immediate Occupancy Structural Checklist for Building Types C2 (Table 17-25) are appropriate for this building type and are included in this report . As these buildings are considered Risk Category IV, they are evaluated under the current Immediate Occupancy criteria.

2.3 Seismic Source
The general seismicity in the San Francisco Bay region is influenced by several known faults, their potential faulting length, and relative orientation. The Hayward Fault runs North to South, between the North American plate and the Pacific plate. This fault is located approximately 5.8 miles east of the structure. Other known, near-source faults with recorded activity, such as the San Andreas Fault, are listed in Table 1 (From California Department of Conservation) along with the estimated moment magnitude, MW, that would occur during the Maximum Considered Earthquake (MCE).

Earthquakes in Southern California – namely Northridge and Whittier Narrows – have occurred along blind-thrust faults. These faults do not have readily identifiable surface features and are not extensively mapped. For our project site, the potential for strong-ground motion to occur due to blind-thrust faulting is uncertain. Therefore, a moderate to large earthquake centered even closer to the site cannot be completely ruled out.

Fault Estimated MCE (MW) Distance (miles)
Hayward Fault 6.5 5.8
San Andreas Fault 7.9 13.0
Calaveras Fault 6.7 15.0
Table 1: Active Near Source Faults

Alameda Fire Station No. 5
As this Tier 1 Basis of Performance is Immediate Occupancy, the standard for an existing structure would be for a Basic Safety Earthquake -1E (BSE-1E). BSE-1E earthquake is also referred to as the 225-year earthquake and is based on a 10 percent probability of exceedance within a 50-year time frame.

The 225-year event peak ground acceleration (PGA) is 0.585g, or 59% gravity. The USGS defined accelerations are based on Site Class D. Site Class D is assumed as recommended in ASCE 7-16 Section 20.1 where soil properties are not known in sufficient detail.

2.4 Liquefaction, Landslide, and other Geologic Hazards Liquefaction is the loss of bearing strength of saturated, cohesionless soils under strong ground motions. Liquefaction can cause settlement by consolidation of soils susceptible to liquefaction .

Per the “California Earthquake Hazards Zone Application Map (EQ Zapp),” the fire station is located in a very high liquefaction zone. EQ Zapp is an online resource by the California Department of Conservation that maps hazard zones as evaluated by California Geological Survey (CGS).

The Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning (AP) Act is a state law that regulates construction i n areas with close fault proximity and the potential for surface fault rupture. The AP Act was established following the 1971 San Fernando earthquake and has since been refined and revised.

This building is not located in an AP zone.

The fire station is considered not at-risk for seismically induced landslide s per the EQ Zapp map.

Based on the aerial maps and our site visit, the building does not appear to be on any significant slopes.

PART 3: STRUCTURAL EVALUATION

3.1 Documentation
No record or as -built drawings were available for the fire station. Additionally, no soils data or reports were available. A facility condition assessment report , “Tier 1 Report - Facility Condition Assessment for Fire Station #5/Bldg 6,” by Faithful+Gould, Inc. dated September 3, 2015 was provided by the City of Alameda to provide additional information.

Natsuki Okuda, PE of Biggs Cardosa Associates performed a site visit on January 23, 2025. The field observation was limited to readily visible structural components ; architectural finishes were not removed to expose concealed structural framing.

Alameda Fire Station No. 5
Figure 2: Building Layout

3.2 Building Systems

3.2-1. Single Story Apparatus Bay and Training Area
Foundation Systems
The type of foundation and slab are unknown at this time. The structure appears to have concrete columns and a reinforced concrete slab-on-grade.

Vertical Load Resisting Systems
The building consists of a concrete roof system with concrete beams approximately spaced at approximately 6 feet on center supporting a concrete slab of unknown thickness . There are intermittent concrete girders supporting the beams as shown in Photo 5. Concrete girders frame into concrete columns which transfer the vertical load to the foundation.

Lateral Load Resisting Systems
The building lateral system appears to consist of a concrete roof diaphragm supported by concrete shear walls. The concrete diaphragm delivers seismic forces to concrete shear walls. The details of this load transfer along with the concrete wall thickness and reinforcement are unknown. The lateral loads are likely transferred from the shear walls directly to the foundation.

3.2-2. Two Story Dormitory/Residential
Vertical Load Resisting Systems
The type of roof and floor system is unknown at this time . The architectural finishes were not removed to reveal the ceiling framing. From a review of the “Tier 1 Report – Facility Condition Assessment for Fire Station #5/Bldg 6,” it appears that the roof framing likely consists of wood joists framing into wood beams supporting plywood sheathing.

The floor framing likely consists of the first-floor concrete slab over concrete beams supported by concrete columns and concrete bearing walls. Concrete walls and columns transfer the vertical load into the foundation. See Photo 5.

Alameda Fire Station No. 5
Lateral Load Resisting Systems
The roof lateral system appears to consist of a wood roof diaphragm. The wood diaphragm delivers seismic forces from the diaphragm to concrete shear walls. The lateral loads are assumed to transfer from the shear walls to the first-floor shear walls. The architectural finishes were not removed to reveal either the ceiling framing or the roof diaphragm attachment to the wall.

The floor lateral system appears to consist of a concrete diaphragm. The details of the diaphragm to wall transfer and concrete wall thickness and reinforcement are unknown. The lateral loads are assumed to transfer from the shear walls to the foundation.

Exterior Shade Structure
There is an exterior wood framed shade structure within the building exterior courtyard. The structure roof system appears to consist of wood joists supporting a straight -sheathed wood diaphragm. The joists are supported by the building concrete walls an d wood beams over steel posts. The shade structure lateral system appears to consist of the wood diaphragm transferring loads to the existing concrete walls of the main building.

PART 4: STRUCTURAL CONDITION ASSESSMENT
Building evaluations are limited by the available construction documents and the level of access possible for the observation of structural elements of the building. During the site-walk, the interior and exterior of the building was reviewed based on what could be visually observed. Based on our review, the building appears to be in moderate to poor condition structurally with some areas of architectural damage and general deterioration from age , corrosion, and weathering. Structural damage and deterioration were observed at concrete walls around windows and corners.

The building is located approximately a quarter mile from the San Francisco Bay and therefore is exposed to salt-laden moisture, resulting in significant corrosion in locations throughout. Some of the significant concrete spalling of concrete from corrosion of reinforcement bars was observed and is noted below.
• Cracks and chipping at the exterior concrete [Photos 8, 9, 19, 20, 21] • Paint peeling and water damage at storage apparatus bay ceilings [Photo 7] • Cracks at ceiling slab concrete by apparatus door [Photo 10] • Water damage at concrete roof slab and wall [Photos 11, 12] • Crack at concrete wall at bearing connection to roof beam [Photo 13] • Cracks at infill concrete wall [Photo 14]
• Cracks at interior concrete wall [Photo 16]
• Cracks at window opening concrete [Photos 9, 15, 20]
• Cracks at concrete floor slab [Photo 17]
• Water damage at interior finish of conference room [Photo 18] As no as-built drawings were available for this building, we cannot determine whether the existing field conditions match the original drawings.

Alameda Fire Station No. 5
PART 5: STRUCTURAL EVALUATION AND FINDINGS

5.1 Building Evaluation and Findings
Based on the partial ASCE 41 Tier 1 review, the following items are of significance for the performance of these buildings when subjected to strong earthquake ground motions. Many Tier 1 checklist items are marked as unknow n, due to the lack of as -built information. Because the building is a concrete diaphragm with a concrete shear wall system, with wood framing concealed by finishes, the connections and ties between systems could not be assessed from a visual review of the building.

Positive Features:
• The structure complies with requirements for redundant lateral systems with at least two lines of resistance in each direction. Each wing of the C -shaped structure appears to have well balanced seismic resisting elements.
• There are no weak story or soft story system concerns at the main single -story building portion. The building is concrete framed at the first story with a partial lightweight second story wood framed structure. The fi rst story is significantly stiffer so there is likely no concern of a weak story seismic-force system.
• A seismic separation is present between the Fire Station and the adjacent Department of Public Works buildings which were not part of the evaluation. Additional analysis may be required as the size of the separation is unknown.

Structural Deficiencies:
• No as-built drawings are available. Many structural elements were not visible for evaluation.

The following components were unable to be assessed:
o Type of foundation and depth, or foundation ties
o Concrete shear wall thickness and lengths
o Penthouse framing and sheathing type (evaluate presence of roof to wall ties) o Concrete reinforcement and concrete connection details , including shear wall reinforcement, floor to wall connections, reinforcement at diaphragm boundaries. • The building configuration shows large plan irregularities from the C shape of the building.

The re-entrant corner building ties should be evaluated. • The site is in a high liquefaction-susceptible zone per the EQ Zapp site maps and may be prone to significant settlement.
• Due to the lack of information regarding the existing foundation system, further analysis of the foundations is required. It is recommended to obtain a project geotechnical report to determine the foundation recommendations including any mitigation requirements that include deep foundation elements.
• Concrete shear walls are a part of the vertical -load-carrying system. Additional analysis is recommended to be performed to determine the adequacy of the wall to support combined vertical and lateral loads.
• It is unknown if the shear walls have sufficient wall lengths for the seismic loads. Further analysis is required to understand the layout of all the seismic shear walls in the structure. • The shear wall at the two -story portion of the building appears to be discontinuous and does not continue to the foundation.
• Torsion may be a concern from the plan layout of the walls with walls on each leg of the diaphragm. Torsion is significant when the distance between the center -of-mass and the center-of-rigidity is large. Significant torsion can cause additional seismic demands and

Alameda Fire Station No. 5
lateral drifts from the rotation of the diaphragm. The building does have walls on each side of the diaphragm and appears to have a balanced system. • The exterior shade structure at the building courtyard appears inadequate for seismic loading.

PART 6: CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

6.1 General Recommendations for Condition Assessment
The building appears to be in moderate to poor structural condition. There are many cracks and damage locations in roof slabs and concrete walls, especially around window and door openings.

Assessment of existing reinforcement is recommended prior to patching cracks to determine if more substantial repairs are needed beyond patching.

6.2 General Recommendations for Seismic Retrofit
The following recommendations are provided to address the seismic deficiencies based on the level of review performed in site observation and engineering judgment. While the recommendations listed below do not represent immediate life safety concerns that warrant facility closure, they do describe building components that are non -compliant or likely non -compliant for seismic performance per the ASCE 41 Tier 1 checklist review or identified as systemic deficiencies. All seismic remediation measures noted he re are considered voluntary unless a change of occupancy or renovation modifications or additions trigger a mandatory seismic retrofit.

The mitigations listed below are recommended for seismic safety. If upgrades are to be implemented, it should be noted that the owner has the option to choose an upgrade standard for the structural components recommended below. It is suggested that new components be designed to the current seismic code level performance criteria. Alternatively, ASCE 41 Seismic Evaluation and Retrofit of Existing Buildings can be used as a guideline for the design. Our understanding is that no remediation work has been manda ted for this site by governing agencies; therefore, any mitigation work undertaken is voluntary on the part of the City of Alameda. Mitigations are listed in order of importance from greatest to least

6.3 Recommended Mitigations or Further As-Built Survey Requests Seismic Strengthening
• Perform geotechnical analysis of the site to determine all soil -structure interaction parameters including liquefaction analysis and foundation type recommendations. If a significant liquefaction problem is present, the mitigation will be extensive. • Perform detailed building as-bult survey to determine the entire concrete wall and floor layout, wall and slab thicknesses, and create as -built plans. P erform non-destructive testing of select concrete walls and slabs and scan to generally determine typical wall and slab reinforcing.
• Perform subsequent Tier 2 structural analysis after confirmation of existing conditions. The Tier 2 analysis will allow further analysis of shear wall load transfer, story drift, collector strength, foundation adequacy and more.
• Perform additional analysis on concrete diaphragms and shear walls to determine adequacy of re -entrant corners at the roof level. Where deficiencies are present, streel straps or plates may be needed to strengthen the diaphragm.

Alameda Fire Station No. 5
• Perform in-depth inventory and investigation of all concrete spalling and reinforcement corrosion to document the full extent of damage and limits of repair areas. • Where there are tall, narrow shear wall piers, evaluate benefits of infilling non-essential openings to provide additional lateral resistance.
• Remove and replace the existing wood shade structure at the exterior courtyard of the building. Retrofitting this structure would be more costly than replacement.

Structure Condition Repair
• At locations with spalling due to reinforcement corrosion, chip out damaged concrete to expose the rust, and patch with corrosion retardant and concrete repair grout or epoxy. • Evaluate the building for hazardous materials such as lead paint or asbestos.

6.4 Potential Strengthening Scenarios and Scope
We understand that there is little knowledge of the history of the building’s construction. In order to better evaluate the condition of the building and verify the structure in place, additional intrusive observations, such as finish removal , scanning of concrete reinforcement, localized destructive demolition (if deemed necessary) etc., would need to be performed. Structure conditions should be evaluated at the time of the finish removal and scanning.

PART 7: LIMITATIONS AND DISCLAIMERS
The evaluation, findings, conclusions, and recommendations outlined in this report were based on available but limited information. As-built drawings for the performing arts center were not available. This report has been prepared using the same degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised for this type of professional service by structural engineers practicing in this area at this time. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the professional advice in this report.

This report has been prepared for the exclusive use of the City of Alameda. It may not be used by any other individual or entity without the express written approval of Biggs Cardosa Associates, Inc.

Alameda Fire Station No. 5
PART 8: APPENDIX

8.1 Photos

Photo 1: Entrance to Building on Northern Face

Photo 2: Southern Face of Building

Alameda Fire Station No. 5
Photo 3: Eastern Face of Building
Photo 4: Western Face of Building at Seismic Gap

Alameda Fire Station No. 5

Photo 5: Wood Shade Structure

Photo 6: Concrete Roof/Ceiling Framing at Classroom

Alameda Fire Station No. 5

Photo 7: Concrete Roof/Ceiling Framing at Storage Apparatus Bays

Photo 8: Exterior Cracks at Southern Face Two Story

Alameda Fire Station No. 5
Photo 9: Exterior Cracks at Northern Face
Photo 10: Roof Slab Cracks at Apparatus Door

Alameda Fire Station No. 5

Photo 11: Water Damage at Concrete Roof Slab

Photo 12: Water Intrusion at Mechanical Room Concrete Roof Slab and Wall

Alameda Fire Station No. 5

Photo 13: Cracks at Apparatus Bay Wall and Ceiling

Photo 14: Crack at Interior Infill Wall

Alameda Fire Station No. 5

Photo 15: Crack at Classroom Window Concrete Wall

Photo 16: Crack at Locker-room Concrete Wall

Alameda Fire Station No. 5

Photo 17: Crack at Second ???? Floor Slab

Photo 18: Interior Water Damage at Conference Room

Alameda Fire Station No. 5

Photo 19: Second Story and Penthouse

Photo 20: Exposed Reinforcement at Penthouse Gym Window

Alameda Fire Station No. 5

Photo 21: Exterior Damage – Exposed Reinforcement at Roof Parapet Concrete

Photo 22: Cracks at Exterior Wall of Penthouse Gym

APPENDIX I

I - MECHANICAL NARRATIVES

CITY OF ALAMEDA

PREPARED FOR

RRM DESIGN
GROUP
Byron Wong
3 765 S. Higuera. San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
510.751.4907 | [email protected]

PREPARED BY
3C ENGINEERING INC
Brian Starr
ett
1500 Palm St. San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
805.540.3363 | [email protected]
2/18/2025

ASSESSMENT

FACILITY ASSESSMENT

2 City of Alameda – Fire Station 5
Facility HVAC and Plumbing Assessments
Space Con
ditioning Systems

1. Steam boiler
a. There is an existing steam boiler plant that appears to be abandoned in place.

Steam piping is also abandoned. The insulation appears to all be asbestos. There are associated hydronic unit heaters and steam radiators throughout the entire building that have been abandoned in place. The entire hydronic system needs to be removed.

2. PTAC (packaged terminal air conditioning) units
a. There are 3 abandoned PTAC units in the office/admin area that need to be removed and the walls patched.
b. There are a number of PTAC units in the 2nd floor bunk area that are all working but at the en
d of their life and need to be replaced.

3. Packaged AC units
a. (2) rooftop packaged 5 ton units were installed within the last 5 years to serve the office/admin area. These were installed with all new supply/return ducting. The units are assumed to have at least 10 years of life remaining.

4. Plymovent vehicle exhaust
a. A 3 rail vehicle tailpiece with single exhaust fan exists but the fan is at the end of it’s life and needs to be replaced. The rail system and tailpiece flexible ducts appear to be in good condition and could be reused.

5. Exhaust
a. There are (2) separate general exhaust systems serving the east and west garage/shop areas. These systems appear to be abandoned and in need of replacement.
b. The restrooms are served by ceiling exhaust fans that all need to be replaced.

Plumbing Systems

1. Laundry
a. There is a commercial grade extractor and 2 residential dryers that appear to be in good working order.

2. Showers

FACILITY ASSESSMENT
3 a. There are 4 marble wall shower compartments in the gang restroom that appear to be in good
condition but the shower hardware is showing signs of age and calcium buildup.
b. The bunk area has a couple shower areas that are showing signs of age and are recommended to be replaced.

3. Water closets
a. There are multiple restrooms throughout the facility with floor mounted water closets that are all in need of replacement.

4. Lavatories
a. There are multiple restrooms throughout the facility with wall and counter mounted lavatories that are all in need of replacement.

5. Water distribution piping
a. There weren’t an visible leaks in the system so it’s assumed the existing copper piping is in good condition and not in need of replacement except for where restrooms are being reconfigured.

6. Service sinks
a. There are 3 service sinks that are all in need of replacement. Per code, only a single service sink is required for the facility but 1 per wing seems appropriate for janitorial services.

7. Water heating
a. There is a gas fired 200 MBH / 100 gallon water heater that was installed within the last 5 years. The system is assumed to have at least 10 years of life remaining.

8. Air compressors
a. Both the general use air compressor and SCBA appear to be in good working order and not in need of replacement.

FACILITY ASSESSMENT

4 City of Alameda – Fleet Garage
Facility HVAC and Plumbing Assessments
Space Con
ditioning Systems

1. Unit heaters
a. (2) gas fired 200 MBH unit heaters are original and in need of replacement. 1 gas fired unit heater was replaced within the last 5 years and is assumed to have at least 10 years of life remaining.
b. The office has an electric baseboard heater that isn’t working and is abandoned in place.
c. There is no additional space conditioning beyond the unit heaters and baseboard heater. It is recommended to add space conditioning to the office, break room and parts room.

2. Exhaust
a. A vehicle exhaust system with underground ducting and rooftop exhaust fan exists and is still operational but according to the staff, it hasn’t been used in over 10 years. If the system will be utilized in the near future, it’s recommended to replace the exhaust fan.
b. A general maintenance bay exhaust system is existing but the fan is at the end of it’s life and needs to be replaced.
c. The restrooms are served by ceiling exhaust fans that all need to be replaced.

Plumbing Systems

1. Water closets
a. The restroom contains a single wall mounted water closet and urinal that both are in need of replacement.

2. Lavatories
a. There are multiple restrooms throughout the facility with wall and counter mounted lavatories that are all in need of replacement.

3. Water distribution piping
a. There weren’t any visible leaks in the system so it’s assumed the existing copper piping is in good condition and not in need of replacement except for where restrooms are being reconfigured.

4. Sinks
a. There is a wall mounted service sink that is in need of replacement.

FACILITY ASSESSMENT

5 b. The breakroom has a counter mounted sink that is in need of replacement.

5. Emergenc
y stations
a. (3) emergency eye wash & shower stations are in the maintenance area. They are in good condition and not in need of replacement.

6. Water heating
a. There is an electric 20 gallon water heater that still appears to be in good working order.

7. Air compressor
a. The general use air compressor appears to be in good working order and not in need of replacement.
b. Compressed air piping and quick connects/hose reels all appear to be in good condition without leaks.

FACILITY ASSESSMENT

6 City of Alameda – Maintenance Services Center
Facility HVAC and Plumbing Assessments
Space Con
ditioning Systems

1. Packaged AC units
a. (3) rooftop packaged ranging from 3-5 ton units were installed within the last 10 years to serve the office/admin area. The units are assumed to have at least 10 years of life remaining.

2. Furnaces
a. (2) gas fired furnace units are installed in the shop mezzanine to serve the gang restroom and storage areas.

3. Unit heaters
a. Gas fired unit heaters for each individual maintenance/shop area that are working but past their life. These are all original and in need of replacement. b. The office has an electric baseboard heater that isn’t working and is abandoned in place.
c. There is no additional space conditioning beyond the unit heaters and baseboard heater. It is recommended to add space conditioning to the office, break room and parts room.

4. Exhaust
a. (6) rooftop exhaust fans on the lower roof serve the restrooms, janitor, break and individual
b. Traffic signal maintenance has a rooftop general exhaust fan that is in need of replacement. No other maintenance/shop areas are provided with exhaust. c. The woodshop is provided with a dust collection system with snorkel type intakes at individual pieces of equipment. This fan is in working order and nearing the end of its life but doesn’t need to be replaced yet.

Plumbing Systems

1. Water closets
a. The gang and single stall restrooms have floor mounted water closets and wall mounted urinals that are in good shape and not in need of replacement.

2. Lavatories
a. The gang and single stall restrooms have wall mounted lavatories that are in good shape and not in need of replacement.

FACILITY ASSESSMENT

7 3. Water distribution piping
a. There w
eren’t an visible leaks in the system so it’s assumed the existing copper piping is in good condition and not in need of replacement except for where restrooms are being reconfigured.

4. Sinks
a. The gang restrooms are provided with group foot operated hand washing stations that are in good condition and not in need of replacement. b. The breakroom has a counter mounted sink that is in good condition and not in need of replacement.
c. Service sinks throughout the facility are in good condition and not in need of replacement.

5. Showers
a. (5) showers serve the facility and are all in fair condition. Per maintenance feedback, these are rarely used and not recommended for replacement. b. (1) emergency eye wash & shower stations are in the maintenance area. They are in good condition and not in need of replacement.
c.

6. Water heating
a. There is a gas fired 85 MBH / 100 gallon water heater that was installed within the last 10 years. The system is assumed to have at least 10 years of life remaining.

FACILITY ASSESSMENT

8 City of Alameda – Animal Shelter
Facility HVAC and Plumbing Assessments
Space Con
ditioning Systems

1. Packaged AC units
a. (1) rooftop packaged 3.5 ton unit serves the office/admin area. It appears to be at the end of its life and in need of replacement within 5 years.

2. Furnaces
a. (1) gas fired furnace serves the “middle wing” cat, food pantry, laundry and iso clinic. This is in need of replacement.

3. Unit heaters
a. (2) Gas fired unit heaters serve the dog wings. These are in need of replacement. b. (16) electric radiant heaters are placed at the exterior walls of the dog kennels.

These appear to be a temporary solution as they are poorly hung and plugged into extension cords. Recommend a more permanent solution.

4. Exhaust
a. There are (2) separate general exhaust systems serving the dog wings and “middle wing” cat, food pantry, laundry and iso clinic. These are in need of replacement. b. The restroom is served by a ceiling exhaust fan that all need to be replaced.

5. Laundry
a. There are 3 commercial grade dryers that appear to be in good working order. The exhaust is all tied to a single outlet with an inline booster fan. It is recommended to put an additional lint trap in the duct upstream of the booster fan.

Plumbing Systems

1. Laundry
a. There are 3 commercial grade extractors that appear to be in good working order.

2. Water closets
a. There are multiple restrooms throughout the facility with floor mounted water closets that are all in need of replacement.

3. Lavatories
a. There are multiple restrooms throughout the facility with wall and counter mounted lavatories that are all in need of replacement.

FACILITY ASSESSMENT

9 4. Water distribution piping
a. There w
eren’t an visible leaks in the system so it’s assumed the existing copper piping is in good condition and not in need of replacement except for where restrooms are being reconfigured.

5. Service sinks
a. There is 1 service sink that appears to be in good condition and not in need of replacement.

6. Water heating
a. There is a gas fired 85 MBH / 100 gallon water heater that was installed within the last 10 years serving the shelter side. The system is assumed to have at least 10 years of life remaining.
b. There is an electric 30 gallon water heater that was installed within the last 10 years serving the admin side. The system is assumed to have at least 10 years of life remaining.

FACILITY ASSESSMENT

10 City of Alameda – Fire Station 1
Facility HVAC and Plumbing Assessments
Space Con
ditioning Systems

1. Ductless split systems
a. There are multiple ductless split units from a VRF fan coil that have been abandoned and need to be removed.

2. Furnaces
a. There are 3 furnaces in the 1st floor electrical room that serve the FS kitchen/d
ayroom and FS admin area. These are at the end of their life. It is recommended to remove these from this room because of a lack of clearance and add packaged rooftop heat pump units to serve these areas. b. There is a furnace upstairs that serves the lockers and restrooms that is at the end of its life. It is recommended to replace it with a heat pump fan coil.

3. Fan coil – heat pump
a. There is a new 5 ton heat pump fan coil with condensing unit on the roof installed in 2022 serving the bunk rooms.

4. Unit heaters
a. There are 2 large gas fired unit heaters in the app bay that we are told do not get used. It is recommended to remove these and only install new unit heaters if heating is desired in the app bay.
b. The shop and turnout room don’t have any heat. It is recommended to add heating to these rooms.

5. Plymovent vehicle exhaust
a. A 4 rail vehicle tailpiece with single exhaust fan is operating but the fan is at the end of its life and needs to be replaced. The rail system and tailpiece flexible ducts appear to be in good condition and could be reused.

6. Exhaust
a. The shop and turnout rooms have separate exhaust ducts up to the roof but weren’t functional. It is recommended to reuse these ducts and provide new exhaust fans on the roof.
b. The exercise room room appears to have exhaust but it was not functioning. It is recommended to add a new exhaust fan.
c. There is a room that the chief said will be used as a future narcotics storage room. It is recommended to add exhaust to this room.

FACILITY ASSESSMENT

11 d. The FS gang restroom and locker room is served by a rooftop exhaust fan that is operatio
nal but recommended to be replaced.
e. The kitchen exhaust fan is at the end of its life and needs to be replaced.

Plumbing Systems

1. Laundry
a. There is a residential grade washer and dryer that appears to be in good working order.

2. Showers
a. There are 3 shower compartments in the gang restroom that appear to be in good condition and don’t need to be replaced.

3. Water closets
a. There 3 water closets and 4 urinals in the gang restroom that appear to be in good condition and don’t need to be replaced.

4. Lavatories
a. There are multiple restrooms throughout the facility with wall and counter mounted lavatories that appear to be in good condition and don’t need to be replaced..

5. Water distribution piping
a. There weren’t any visible leaks in the system so it’s assumed the existing copper piping is in good condition and not in need of replacement except for where restrooms are being reconfigured.

6. Sinks
a. There is 1 service sink that is in good condition and doesn’t need to be replaced. b. There is 1 kitchen sink that is in good condition and doesn’t need to be replaced.

7. Water heating
a. There is a gas fired 85 MBH / 100 gallon water heater that was installed within the last 10 years. The system is assumed to have at least 10 years of life remaining.

8. Air compressors
a. Both the general use air compressor and SCBA appear to be in good working order and not in need of replacement.

FACILITY ASSESSMENT

12 City of Alameda – Fire Station 4
Facility HVAC and Plumbing Assessments
Space Con
ditioning Systems

1. Packaged AC units
a. (5) rooftop packaged 3-5 ton units serves the entire station. These were replaced 10 years ago. The units are assumed to have at least 10 years of life remaining.

2. Unit heaters
a. The shop and turnout room don’t have any heat. It is recommended to add heating to these rooms.

3. Plymovent vehicle exhaust
a. A 3 rail vehicle tailpiece with single exhaust fan is operating but the fan is at the end of its life and needs to be replaced. The rail system and tailpiece flexible ducts appear to be in good condition and could be reused.

4. Exhaust
a. The shop and turnout rooms have separate exhaust ducts up to the roof but weren’t functional. It is recommended to reuse these ducts and provide new exhaust fans on the roof.
b. The app bay has 2 high, through wall exhaust fans nearing the end of their life. It is recommended to replace these.
c. The medical storage room has a through wall exhaust fan discharging into the app bay that is in working order and doesn’t need to be replaced. d. The gang restroom and locker room is served by a rooftop exhaust fan that was replaced in the last 5 years and doesn’t need to be replaced. e. The kitchen exhaust fan is at the end of its life and needs to be replaced.

Plumbing Systems

1. Laundry
a. There is a residential grade washer and dryer that appears to be in good working order.

2. Showers
a. There are 3 shower compartments in the gang restroom that appear to be in good condition and don’t need to be replaced.

3. Water closets

FACILITY ASSESSMENT

13 a. There 3 water closets and 1 urinal in the men/women’s restrooms that appear to be in good c
ondition and don’t need to be replaced.

4. Lavatories
a. There are 8 counter mounted lavatories that appear to be in good condition and don’t need to be replaced..

5. Water distribution piping
a. There weren’t any visible leaks in the system so it’s assumed the existing copper piping is in good condition and not in need of replacement except for where restrooms are being reconfigured.

6. Sinks
a. There is 1 service sinks that is in good condition and doesn’t need to be replaced. b. There is 1 kitchen sinks that is in good condition and doesn’t need to be replaced.

7. Water heating
a. There is a gas fired 76 MBH / 100 gallon water heater that was installed within the last 10 years. The system is assumed to have at least 10 years of life remaining. The high combustion air was tapped into for the dryer exhaust. Combustion air needs to be brought up to code.

8. Air compressors
a. Both the general use air compressor and SCBA appear to be in good working order and not in need of replacement.

FACILITY ASSESSMENT

14 City of Alameda – Fire Station 2
Facility HVAC and Plumbing Assessments
Space Con
ditioning Systems

1. Heat pump split systems
a. (2) 3-5 ton heat pump split system fan coil units with condensing units at grade serve the entire station. These were replaced 10 years ago. The units are assumed to have at least 10 years of life remaining. There is existing ducting in the ceiling and in the crawl space. It is recommended to replace all ducting.

2. Plymovent vehicle exhaust
a. A 3 non-rail vehicle tailpiece with single exhaust fan is operating but the fan is at the end of its life and needs to be replaced. The entire system should be replaced with sliding rails and a new fan.

3. Exhaust
a. The kitchen hood is served by a rooftop exhaust fan that needs to be replaced. b. The restrooms are served by ceiling exhaust fans that need to be replaced. c. The exercise room doesn’t have any exhaust. It is a code requirement to add exhaust.

Plumbing Systems

1. Laundry
a. There is a residential grade washer and dryer that appears to be in good working order.

2. Showers
a. There are 3 shower compartments in the gang restroom that appear to be in good condition and don’t need to be replaced.

3. Water closets
a. There 5 water closets and 1 urinal in the men/women’s restrooms that need to be replaced.

4. Lavatories
a. There are 6 counter mounted lavatories that need to be replaced.

5. Water distribution piping
a. There weren’t any visible leaks in the system so it’s assumed the existing copper piping is in good condition and not in need of replacement except for where restrooms are being reconfigured.

FACILITY ASSESSMENT

15 6. Sinks
a. There i
s a 3 comp service sink in the rear yard that is in good condition and doesn’t need to be replaced.
b. There is a single bowl kitchen sink that is in good condition and but the faucet is recommended to be replaced.

7. Water heating
a. There is a gas fired 80 MBH / 100 gallon water heater that was installed within the last 10 years. The system is assumed to have at least 10 years of life remaining. The high combustion air was tapped into for the dryer exhaust. Combustion air needs to be brought up to code.

8. Air compressors
a. Both the general use air compressor and SCBA appear to be in good working order and not in need of replacement.

APPENDIX J

J - ELECTRICAL NARRATIVES

3562 Empleo, Ste.C - P.O.Box 1167
San Luis Obi
spo, California 93406
(805) 543-3850 FAX (805) 543-3829
E-mail – [email protected]

Electrical Assessment

Project: Alameda Fl eet Service Garage
2040 Grand Street, Alameda, CA 94501
Site Visit Date: January 23, 2025
Date Issued: March 5, 2025

The City of Alameda Fleet Service Garage, constructed in 1984, consists of a main first floor with a mezzanine level. The facility is primarily used for vehicle maintenance and includes a small office and break room.

Existing Electrical System
• Main Service: 800A, 120/208V, 3-phase switchboard located in the Electrical Room. See image A
• Sw
itchboard: 3-section Zinsco switchboard:

1. Utilit
y pull section

2. Meter and main section

3. Distribution section
• Utility Meter: Alameda Municipal Power, Meter #90000575. • Utility Transformer: L-873, located south of the building.

Alameda Fleet Service Garage

Distribution Section Breakers:
• Lift Unit – 70A/3P
• SPARE – 100A/3P
• Compressor – 90A/3P
• Panel A – 200A/3P (Located in Office)
• Panel B – 200A/3P (Located in Garage)
• Panel C – 200A/3P (Located in Garage)
• SPARE – 225A/3P
Sub-Panel
s: See image C
Existing GE load centers, surface-mounted:
• Panel A – Office
• Panel B & C – Garage Area
• Existing panels are fed underground.

Communica
tion & Data:
• Telephone backboard, MPOE, and wall-mounted data rack are located in the electrical room. See
image B.

Lighting & Fire Safety:
• Interior Lighting: Fluorescent fixtures (surface-mounted in offices, storage, break room, mezzanine
; pendant-mounted in garage shop).
• Exterior Lighting:
o Rear and front floodlights upgraded to LED.
o Side exterior wall packs (possible HID) remain outdated. o Front entry has two recessed HID lamps (one non-functional). • Emergency Lighting: No visible emergency or exit lighting. • Fire Alarm System: Not present.

Security
System:
• Existing security cameras are in place.

Recommend
ations

1. Switchboard and Panelboard Replacement (if Budget Allows) • Switchboard Replacement
o Existing Zinsco switchboards are outdated and prone to maintenance issues. o Lead Time: A new floor-mounted switchboard requires 35-52 weeks for delivery. o Consideration: Ensure new switchboard dimensions fit the existing space. • Panelboa
rd and Breaker Replacement
o Existing GE load center panels are fed underground and are aged. If the budget allows, r
ecommend replacing the panels and breakers to ensure reliability and safety.

2. Arc Flash Analysis
• Perform an Arc Flash Hazard Analysis per NFPA 70E to assess electrical hazards and determine
required PPE (Personal Protective Equipment) for worker safety.

3. Short Circuit & Coordination Study
• Conduct a Short Circuit and Coordination Study to:
o Ensure proper selective coordination of breakers.
o Prevent nuisance tripping and enhance personnel safety. o Verify existing electrical system reliability and protection.

Alameda Fleet Service Garage

4. Lighting Upgrades & Emergency Lighting
• Replace all fluorescent fixtures with LED for energy efficiency and reduced maintenance. • Add occupancy sensors and dimming switches for compliance with Title 24 energy codes.
• Con
duct a photometric study to determine proper exterior illumination levels. • Install emergency lighting throughout the facility to ensure proper egress lighting in case of power
failure.
• Electrical Room is underlit and will need more lumens and need emergency lighting.

5. Electr
ical Device & Control Upgrades
• Replace all outlets and switches with updated, code-compliant devices. • Confirm how exterior lights are controlled and install a time clock to automate operation and meet
energy code requirements.

6. Fire Alarm & Life Safety
• No existing fire alarm system observed.
• Install smoke alarms in all office and breakroom areas per current code requirements. • If fire suppression is installed or desired, consider a full fire alarm system for enhanced safety.

7. Communication & Data System Upgrades
• Upgrade all data cabling to CAT6 to improve network performance and reliability. • Install new Wireless Access Points (WAPs) throughout the building for consistent wireless
connectivity.

8. Security Camera System Upgrade
• The existing security cameras should be replaced with new City-standard cameras to ensure co
mpatibility with municipal security infrastructure.
• Additional cameras should be installed to provide full facility coverage and enhance safety an
d security.

Alameda Fleet Service Garage

IMAGE A - EXISTING MAIN SWITCHBOARD

IMAGE B – TELEPHONE BACKBOARD

Alameda Fleet Service Garage

IMAGE C – EXISTING PANELS

Conclusio
n
The City of Alameda Fleet Service Garage requires several electrical and safety upgrades to improve efficiency, security, and compliance with modern standards. Key recommendations include switchboard, panelboard replacement, arc flash analysis, lighting upgrades, fire alarm installation, security camera system upgrades, and network infrastructure improvements. A detailed site survey is recommended to confirm specific requirements and implementation feasibility.

If you have any questions or need further assistance, please feel free to contact us.

Sincerely,

Christopher M. Jose
Thoma Ele
ctric, Inc.

K:\ENG\2025\25-8009\RECORDS\2025-02-28 electrical assessment\2025-03-25_Thoma 25-8009_Alamdeda Fleet Service Garage_Electrical Assessmen
t Report.doc

3562 Empleo, Ste.C - P.O.Box 1167
San Luis Obi
spo, California 93406
(805) 543-3850 FAX (805) 543-3829
E-mail – [email protected]

Electrical Assessment

Project: Alameda M aintenance Service Center
1616 Fortmann Way, Alameda, CA 94501
Site Visit Date: January 23, 2025
Date Issued: March 5, 2025

The City of Alameda Maintenance Service Center Building, constructed in 1984, contains workshops
, storage areas, a maintenance shop, offices, kitchens, and restrooms. The building also features an exterior car wash that is not in operation and a vehicle refueling area.

Existing Electrical System
• Main Service: The existing switchboard is an 800-amp, 120/208V, 3-phase switchboard located within the shop area.
• The switchboard consists of three sections (I-T-E Switchboard, now part of Siemens, though the I-T-E brand is no longer used):
o Section 1: Utility pull section
o Section 2: Meter/Main
o Section 3: Distribution
• Utility Meter: Alameda Municipal Power, Meter #90000573 • Utility Transformer: Located at the corner of Alaska Packer Place and Fortmann Way, Transform
er #L-222

Alameda Maintenance Service Building

Distribution Panel Information: The third section of the switchboard has two parts:
• Top (DP2):
o Panel D - 100A/3P
o Panel E - 125A/3P
o Panel F - 60A/3P
o DP1 - 300A/3P
• Lower (DP1):
o Panel A - 125A/3P
o Panel B - 225A/3P
o Panel C - 200A/3P
o Transfer Switch DP1 - 300A/3P
Emergency
Power System:
• Automatic Transfer Switch (ATS): ASCO Product, 400A
• Generator: 75kW MTU Detroit Diesel, located outside
• Backup Power Distribution: Generator feeds the top part of the Distribution Board (DP2), supplying
Panel D, Panel E, and Panel F.

Panel Boards:
• Panels are spread throughout the building and are I-T-E panelboards. Siemens still manufactu
res circuit breakers compatible with older I-T-E breakers. • Panel E: Feeds another panel, EP, via a 60A/3P breaker. • Panel EP: Square D panelboard and breakers, which power the gates and fuel system.

Lighting
System:
• Interior: Combination of surface-mounted, pendant, and 2'x4' recessed fluorescent fixtures
on a T-bar ceiling grid.
• Exterior: Surface-mounted fluorescent fixtures and exterior wall packs. • Outdoor Storage Area: Pendant-mounted linear fluorescent strip lights.

Fire & Se
curity Systems:
• Fire Alarm System: Full addressable system monitored on the property. o Fire Alarm Panel: Silent Knight by Honeywell, Model 5808 • Fire Sprinkler System: Installed throughout the building. • Security System: Existing security cameras are in place. • Communications:
o MPOE, telephone backboard, and data rack located in a closet space adjacent to the break
room.

Recommended Electrical Upgrades & Maintenance

1. Service Panel & Grounding:
o Confirm proper grounding of service panels and secure all ground connections to comply wi
th code requirements.

2. Circuit Breaker Testing:
o Test all circuit breakers for proper operation; replace any breakers failing to trip correctly
.

3. Cleaning & Maintenance:
o Vacuum and clean inside service panel enclosures.
o Seal openings in enclosures to prevent dust accumulation.

4. Non-De
structive Testing & Feeder Cable Inspection:
o Conduct non-destructive testing of feeder cables to assess their condition. o Inspect all feeder cables for wear, damage, or degradation; replace or repair as needed.

Alameda Maintenance Service Building

5. Electrical Studies & Analysis:
o Arc Flash Analysis: Conduct per NFPA 70E to assess electrical hazards and determine
required PPE.
o Short Circuit & Coordination Study:
 Ensure selective coordination of breakers.
 Prevent nuisance tripping and enhance safety.
 Verify system reliability and protection.

6. Light i
ng Upgrades & Emergency Lighting:
o Replace fluorescent fixtures with energy-efficient LED lighting. o Add occupancy sensors and dimming switches to comply with Title 24 energy codes.
o Con
duct a photometric study for proper exterior illumination levels. o Install emergency lighting throughout the facility for proper egress lighting. o Improve lighting in the electrical room and install emergency lighting.

7. Commun
ication & Data System Upgrades:
o Upgrade all data cabling to CAT6 for improved network performance and reliabili
ty.
o Install new Wireless Access Points (WAPs) for consistent connectivity.

8. Securi
ty Camera System Upgrade:
o Replace existing security cameras with new City-standard models. o Install additional cameras to ensure full facility coverage.

9. Electr
ic Vehicle (EV) Infrastructure Considerations:
o If EV fleet vehicles are added, a new 277/480V service should be provided to accommoda
te the increased electrical load without impacting the existing system.

IMAGE A - EXISTING MAIN SWITCHBOARD

Alameda Maintenance Service Building

IMAGE B –T

ELEPHONE BACKBOARD
IMAGE C –

EXISTING FIRE ALARM

Alameda Maintenance Service Building

IMAGE D – EXISTING GENERATOR

Conclusio
n

While the electrical system is in satisfactory condition, implementing these upgrades and maintenance procedures will ensure continued safe and reliable operation for the facility.

If you have any questions or need further assistance, please feel free to contact us.

Sincerely,

Christopher M. Jose
Thoma Ele
ctric, Inc.

K:\ENG\2025\25-8009\RECORDS\2025-02-28 electrical assessment\2025-03-05_Thoma 25-8009_Alameda Maintenance Service.doc

3562 Empleo, Ste.C - P.O.Box 1167
San Luis Obispo, California 93406
(805) 543-3850 FAX (805) 543-3829
E-mail – [email protected]
Electrical Assessment
Project: Alameda Animal Shelter
1590 Fortmann Way, Alameda, CA 94501
Site Visit Date: January 23, 2025
Date Issued: March 6, 2025
Existing E
lectrical System
The City of Alameda Animal Shelter, built circa 1984, currently operates with a 200-amp , 120/208V, three-phase disconnect switch (see Image A). The utility meter is registered under Alameda Municipal Power, Meter #20013399. The service is presumed to be fed from the existing transformer L-222, which also supplies power to the Maintenance Service Building. Since the disconnect switch was not opened during the assessment, the service is assumed to have a 175-amp capacity.

There are two surface-mounted I-T-E panelboards in the facility:
• Panel S: 175-amp panel with a main breaker and 42 spaces. This panel is fully occupied,
and it is recommended to replace it with a Siemens panelboard with 48-60 spaces to accommodate additional breaker needs.
• Heater Panel: Fed from Panel S with a 100-amp breaker, mounted adjacent, consisting of 30 spac
es.

Alameda Animal Shelter

Recommendations

1. Service and Panel Upgrades
o If the project requires additional load, the City should request a maximum demand lo
ad report from the utility company.
o Panel S should be replaced if new load is added, as it is currently at full capacity. o Consider upgrading the 175A service to 200A.

2. Circu i
t Expansion
o Staff reported a frequent tripping circuit, likely due to overloading. An additional circuit s
hould be added to balance the load.
o A vehicle on-site requires a 50-amp, 120/240V rated outlet with a lockable cover.

A new 50-
amp circuit should be installed at the exterior wall near the vehicle parking area. Routing of the circuit will require field verification.

3. Lighting Upgrades
o Interior lighting consists of fluorescent pendants around the Kennel area and upgraded
2’x4’ LED fixtures.
o Exterior lighting includes wall packs and 4-ft vapor-tight fluorescent fixtures under the outdo
or canopy. The front and rear areas are underlit and require additional illumination for safety and security.
o Conduct a photometric study to determine proper exterior illumination levels. o Upgrade all fluorescent fixtures to LED for energy efficiency and reduced maintenan
ce.
o Install occupancy sensors and dimming switches to comply with Title 24 energy codes.
o Ins
tall emergency lighting throughout the facility to ensure proper egress lighting in case o
f power failure.

4. IT & Communication System Upgrades
o The IT closet (Image B) lacks proper working clearance (minimum 3ft required).

A larger
space is needed for compliance and accessibility.
o Upgrade data cabling to CAT6 to improve network performance and reliability. o Install new Wireless Access Points (WAPs) for consistent wireless connectivity.

5. Fire A
larm System
o The building has a fully addressable fire alarm system monitored externally by Protectio
n One Security. No change required.

6. Security System Enhancements
o The facility has a Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) system, but upgrading to City-stan
dard security cameras is recommended for better compatibility and performance.
o Additional security cameras should be installed to provide full facility coverage and enhan
ce security.

Alameda Animal Shelter

7. Electrical Safety & Compliance Studies
o Arc Flash Hazard Analysis per NFPA 70E to assess electrical hazards and determine
required PPE (Personal Protective Equipment) for worker safety. o Short Circuit & Coordination Study to:
 Ensure proper selective coordination of breakers.
 Prevent nuisance tripping and enhance personnel safety.  Verify system reliability and protection.

IMAGE A -

EXISTING METER SERVICE AND SERVICE DISCONNECT

IMAGE B – IT CLOSET

Alameda Animal Shelter

IMAGE C – EXISTING PANELBOARDS

By implem
enting these recommendations, the City of Alameda Animal Shelter can improve electrical safety, energy efficiency, and security while ensuring compliance with modern standards.

If you have any questions or need further assistance, please feel free to contact us.

Sincerely,

Christopher M. Jose
Thoma Ele
ctric, Inc.

K:\ENG\2025\25-8009\RECORDS\2025-02-28 electrical assessment\2025-03-06_Thoma 25-8009_Alameda Animal Shelter.doc

3562 Empleo, Ste.C - P.O.Box 1167
San Luis Obi
spo, California 93406
(805) 543-3850 FAX (805) 543-3829
E-mail – [email protected]

Electrical Assessment

Project: Alameda Fi re Station 1
1300 Park Street, Alameda, CA 94501
Site Visit Date: January 23, 2025
Date Issued: March 6, 2025

Existing Electrical System

The City of Alameda's Fire Station 1, originally constructed in 1968, is a two-story building containing a fire administration area, offices, changing and storage areas, and a dormitory. The building operates with a 400-amp, 120/208V, 3-phase Main Switchboard (MSB) located in the equipment room. This includes a 400-amp Automatic Transfer Switch (ATS), Panel A, and mechanical units. The ATS is a 400-amp Kato Light model. The Alameda Municipal Power Meter is #90000331.

The main switchboard is Westinghouse switchgear with two sections:
• Section 1: Underground pull section.
• Section 2: Meter, main breaker, and distribution (see Image A).

The room
was dark, affecting picture clarity. The distribution section includes a 50-amp, 120V emergency panel located in the IT closet. Panel A, located adjacent to the MSB, is fed with a 50-amp/3P breaker and serves the first-floor living space. Panel C is a 150-amp/3P flush- mounted panel in the workroom on the support side of the apparatus bay, serving the apparatus

Alameda Fire Station 1

bay and support areas. Panel D, a 50-amp/3P panel, serves the second-floor living space. This panel has
been replaced with a new Square D panel rated at 22KAIC. However, no AFCI breakers are present, which are required per the California Electrical Code for living spaces.

Panel B, located in the administration offices, has also been replaced with a Square D panel with 22KAIC breakers.

The existing generator is a 124KW Generac (See image B), permitted on October 4, 2023.

However, it appears too close to the property line and should be evaluated for compliance. A minimum clearance of 5 feet from the property line is required, and relocation may be necessary.

Recommendations:

1. Electrical Panels & Breakers
• Replace existing fire station Panels A, B, and C with seismically certified panels. • Provide AFCI breakers for all living spaces.
• Ensure proper coordination of breakers per the Arc Fault Study to enhance safety and reliabili
ty.
• Replace the main switchboard (MSB), though fitting a new unit in the existing location will be c
hallenging. The switchgear does not have a two-section board meeting utility requirements.
o Proposed solution: Remove mechanical equipment in the room and install a new three-sec
tion switchboard opposite the existing MSB or relocate to an exterior- mounted switchgear.
o Coordination with the utility company will be necessary to extend a new service secondary
.
• Replace the ATS with a seismically certified transfer switch.

2. Interi
or & Emergency Lighting
• Current interior lighting consists of various fluorescent fixtures (surface, pendant, and recessed
mounted).
• Upgrade all fixtures to LED for energy efficiency and reduced maintenance. • The facility has lit exit signs with battery backups and some emergency "bug-eye" lights. o Recommended upgrades:
 Install additional emergency lighting where necessary.  Ensure proper egress lighting for compliance with life safety codes.

3. Exteri
or Lighting
• Existing exterior lighting consists of wall-mounted fixtures. • Replace all exterior lights with LED fixtures for improved energy efficiency and visibility. • Conduct a photometric study to determine the required illumination levels for safety.

4. Outlet
s & Switches
• Replace all existing outlets and switches with modern, updated equipment to meet current s
afety and accessibility standards.
• Tamper rated outlets will be required in the living spaces.

Alameda Fire Station 1

5. Fire Alarm & Life Safety
• The building contains smoke alarms, but lacks a fire alarm control panel and fire sprinkler
system.
• Recommendations:
o Replace and install smoke alarms in all living spaces. o If the City desires full fire alarm coverage, install a complete fire alarm system.

6. Commun
ication & Data Systems
• The telephone service board is located in the communication closet (see image C) with a free-st
anding data rack and MPOE, consisting of multiple telephone lines and CAT5 cabling.
• Upgrade all data cabling to CAT6 for improved performance and reliability. • Install new Wireless Access Points (WAPs) for building-wide wireless connectivity.

7. Securi
ty System Enhancements
• The facility has a Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) system, but upgrading to City- standard security cameras is recommended for better compatibility and performance. • Additional security cameras should be installed to provide full facility coverage and enhance security.

8. Short Circuit & Coordination Study
• Conduct a short circuit and coordination study to:
o Ensure proper selective coordination.
o Enhance equipment protection and personnel safety.

9. Arc Fl
ash Analysis
• Perform an Arc Flash Hazard Analysis per NFPA 70E to:
o Assess electrical hazards.
o Determine required Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) for worker safety.

By implem
enting these recommendations, Fire Station 1 will enhance electrical safety, improve energy efficiency, and ensure compliance with industry codes and best practices.

Alameda Fire Station 1

IMAGE A - EXISTING MAIN SWITCHBOARD

IMAGE B - EXISTING GENERATOR

Alameda Fire Station 1

IMAGE C - EXISTING TELECOME ROOM

If you have any questions or need further assistance, please feel free to contact us.

Sincerely,

Christopher M. Jose
Thoma Ele
ctric, Inc.

K:\ENG\2025\25-8009\RECORDS\2025-02-28 electrical assessment\2025-02-28_Thoma 25-8009_Alamdeda FS5l_Electrical Assessment Report.doc

3562 Empleo, Ste.C - P.O.Box 1167
San Luis Obi
spo, California 93406
(805) 543-3850 FAX (805) 543-3829
E-mail – [email protected]

Electrical Assessment

Project: Alameda Fi re Station 2
635 Pacific Avenue, Alameda, CA 94502
Site Visit Date: January 23, 2025
Date Issued: March 10, 2025

The City of Alameda Fire Station 2 was constructed in 1921. The property includes a two-door apparatus bay, offices, restrooms, showers, dormitory, kitchen, and recreational area. At the rear of the property, there are two small sheds:
• Garage – Used for exercise.
• Paint Shed – Used for storage or maintenance.

Alameda Fire Station 2

The building appears to have undergone some renovations and electrical upgrades over the years. How
ever, the exact timeline and details of these upgrades are unknown.

Existing Service and Distribution
• Main Service: 200A, 120/240V, single-phase.
• Utility Transformer: Pole-mounted, located at the front of the building. • Meter/Main (M/M): Surface-mounted on an exterior wall (see Image A), fed underground from the u
tility transformer.
• Service Panel:
o 200A, surface-mounted (see Image B).
o Located adjacent to a Kohler Automatic Transfer Switch (ATS) rated at 200A. • Subpanel:
o 125A main breaker, fed from the service panel.
o Supplies power to:
 100A/2P mechanical load
 Water heater (kitchen area)
• 8-Space Load Center:
o Fed from the subpanel.
o Powers laundry, refrigerator, telephone system, and gate circuit. • Panel Recommendations:
o Panels are in functional condition and do not require replacement. o A typewritten panel schedule is needed to verify branch circuits and update labeling f
or clarity.

Generator & Backup Power
• Existing Generator:
o 33kW Kohler (Model 30/ROZJ61) with a sub-base fuel tank (see Image C). o The installation date is unknown.
o The generator appears to supply power to the entire station. • Concerns:
o The generator is too close to the garage/fitness shed—it should be at least 5 feet away from
any structure for safety compliance.
o Proposed Actions:
 If budget allows, replace the generator and ATS with seismically certified units.
 Reloc
ate the generator to meet clearance requirements.

Existing C
ommunication & Data Systems
• Telephone System:
o Located in the Apparatus Bay (see Image D).
o Recommendation: Remove and disconnect. If a landline (LAN) is required, relocate c
opper wiring to the IT closet.
• IT Closet:
o Contains telephone backboard, fiber termination point, CATV termination, and a data rack
(see Image E).
o Although compact, the available space is sufficient for IT needs.

Alameda Fire Station 2

• Fire Alarm:
o A fire alarm control panel was not observed.
o Fire alarms may not be required unless a fire sprinkler system is installed. o Recommendation:
 Replace all smoke alarms with carbon monoxide detectors per NFPA requireme
nts.

Recommendations

1. Electrical Equipment & Safety Upgrades
• Service Panel & Grounding:
o Verify proper grounding of service panels.
o Secure all ground connections to meet code requirements. • Circuit Breaker Testing:
o Test all breakers for proper operation.
o Replace any breakers that fail to trip correctly.
• Cleaning & Maintenance:
o Vacuum and clean inside panel enclosures.
o Seal any openings to prevent dust accumulation.
• Feeder Cable Inspection:
o Conduct non-destructive testing to assess cable condition.

2. Interi
or & Emergency Lighting
• Upgrade all fluorescent lighting (surface, pendant, recessed) to LED for energy efficienc
y and reduced maintenance.
• Review emergency lighting:
o Install additional egress lighting as needed.
o Ensure compliance with life safety codes.

3. Exteri
or Lighting
• Replace all wall-mounted exterior fixtures with LED alternatives for improved efficiency and visib
ility.
• Conduct a photometric study to verify illumination levels meet safety standards.

4. Outlet
s & Switches
• Replace all outdated outlets and switches with modern, code-compliant equipment. • Install tamper-resistant outlets in living spaces per safety standards.

5. Fire A
larm & Life Safety
• Replace and install smoke alarms with carbon monoxide detectors in all living spaces per NFPA
Code.
• Upgrade the Fire Alarm System if a sprinkler system is added.

6. Commun
ication & Data Systems
• Upgrade CAT5 cabling to CAT6 for better performance.
• Install Wireless Access Points (WAPs) for full-building wireless coverage.

Alameda Fire Station 2

7. Security System Enhancements
• Install additional security cameras for full facility coverage. • Upgrade to City-standard security cameras for improved compatibility.

8. Short Ci
rcuit & Coordination Study
• Conduct a short circuit and breaker coordination study to:
o Ensure selective coordination.
o Enhance equipment protection and personnel safety.

9. Arc Flas
h Analysis
• Perform an Arc Flash Hazard Analysis per NFPA 70E to:
o Identify electrical hazards.
o Determine Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) requirements for worker safety.

10. Additio
nal Considerations
• Inspect all feeder cables for wear, damage, or degradation—repair/replace as needed. • Provide AFCI breakers in all living spaces.
• Ensure proper breaker coordination per the Arc Fault Study.

IMAGE A - EXISTING METER/MAIN SERVICE

Alameda Fire Station 2

LEFT PICTURE (ATS) AND SERVICE PANEL

RIGHT PICTURE SUBPANEL WITH LOAD CENTER

IMAGE B - EXISTING PANELS AND ATS

IMAGE C - EXISTING GENERATOR

Alameda Fire Station 2

IMAGE D - EXISTING TELEPHONE SYSTEM

IMAGE E -

EXISTING IT CLOSET

Alameda Fire Station 2

Implementing these recommendations will significantly improve electrical safety, energy efficienc
y, and compliance with current codes and best practices at Fire Station 1.

If you have any questions or need further assistance, please feel free to contact us.

Sincerely,

Christopher M. Jose
Thoma Ele
ctric, Inc.

K:\ENG\2025\25-8009\RECORDS\2025-02-28 electrical assessment\2025-03-10_Thoma 25-8009_Alameda FS2_Electrical Assessment Report.doc

3562 Empleo, Ste.C - P.O.Box 1167
San Luis Obi
spo, California 93406
(805) 543-3850 FAX (805) 543-3829
E-mail – [email protected]

Electrical Assessment

Project: Alameda Fi re Station 4
2595 Mecartney Road, Alameda, CA 94502
Site Visit Date: January 23, 2025
Date Issued: March 10, 2025

The City of Alameda Fire Station 4 was constructed in 1991. The two-story property includes a three-vehicle apparatus area and contains offices, dormitories, a kitchen, showers, restrooms, and exercise areas.

Existing Electrical System
Electrical Service & Distribution
• Main Service: 400A, 120/208V, 3-phase, fed underground from a utility transformer located a
t the side of the building.
• Main Switchboard (MSB): Square D "Speed D" with two sections: (See image A) o Section 1: Underground pull section.
o Section 2: Meter/Main and distribution, located in the Apparatus Bay. o Alameda Municipal Power (AMP) meter: #90000531.
• Switchgear Breakers:
o 20A/3P breaker for a 3-phase receptacle adjacent to the switchgear. o 200A/3P breaker feeding Panel M.
o Unlabeled 200A/3P breaker feeding an adjacent panel, identified in as-built plans as Panel
A, but differs from what is installed on-site.

Alameda Fire Station 4

• Panel EM (Previously identified as Panel A in as-built plans):
o Surface-mounted, 30 circuits, breakers rated at 10kAIC. o Concerns:
 Low AIC rating for its proximity to the MSB.
 Needs confirmation of Available Fault Current and breaker coordination. o Feeds:
 Panel E – 100A/3P breaker.
 Panel A – 100A/3P breaker.
 Air compressor, telephone system, fuel system.
 70A/3P breaker for parking lot lighting.
• Automatic Transfer Switch (ATS): Adjacent to Panel EM. • Cell Site Meter: AMP meter #20012728 (for cell site at the rear of the property). • Generator: (See image B)
o 50kW / 52.5kVA Generac, manufactured on 2/18/2001.
o Provides emergency power to Panel EM.
• Panel E: Located in the MSA room, flush-mounted, 22kAIC breakers, in good condition. • Panel A & Panel M: Located in a storage closet, flush-mounted, Square D breakers rated at
22kAIC, in good condition.
• IT Room: Contains telephone backboard, MPOE, and data systems (see Image C). o Issue: Lacks proper 3-foot working clearance—requires a larger space for complianc
e and accessibility.
• Fire Alarm System:
o Manufacturer: Potter PFC series.
o Monitored by: Tri-Signal Integration.
o Building also has a fire sprinkler system.

Recommend
ations

1. Electrical Equipment & Safety Upgrades
• Switchgear & Generator Replacement: If budget allows, replace the switchboard, generator
, ATS, and Panel EM with seismically certified units.
• Service Panel & Grounding:
o Verify proper grounding of service panels.
o Secure all ground connections to meet code requirements. • Circuit Breaker Testing:
o Test all breakers for proper operation.
o Replace breakers that fail to trip correctly.
• Cleaning & Maintenance:
o Vacuum and clean inside panel enclosures.
o Seal any openings to prevent dust accumulation.
• Feeder Cable Inspection:
o Conduct non-destructive testing to assess feeder cable condition.

2. Interi
or & Emergency Lighting
• Upgrade all fluorescent lighting (surface, pendant, recessed) to LED for energy efficienc
y and reduced maintenance.
• Remove and replace existing occupancy switches at bedrooms. They are not required. • Review emergency lighting:
o Install additional egress lighting where needed.
o Ensure compliance with life safety codes.

Alameda Fire Station 4

3. Exterior Lighting
• Replace all exterior wall-mounted fixtures with LED alternatives for energy efficiency and improved
visibility.
• Conduct a photometric study to verify illumination levels meet safety standards.

4. Outlet
s & Switches
• Replace all outdated outlets and switches with modern, code-compliant equipment. • Install tamper-resistant outlets in living spaces per current safety standards.

5. Fire A
larm & Life Safety
• Replace and install smoke alarms in all living spaces. • Upgrade the Fire Alarm System to meet current standards.

6. Commun
ication & Data Systems
• Upgrade CAT5 cabling to CAT6 for better performance.
• Install new Wireless Access Points (WAPs) for full-building coverage.

7. Securi
ty System Enhancements
• Install additional security cameras to achieve full facility coverage. • Upgrade to City-standard security cameras for improved compatibility.

8. Short
Circuit & Coordination Study
• Conduct a short circuit and breaker coordination study to:
o Ensure selective coordination.
o Enhance equipment protection and personnel safety.

9. Arc Fl
ash Analysis
• Perform an Arc Flash Hazard Analysis per NFPA 70E to:
o Identify electrical hazards.
o Determine Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) requirements for worker safety.

10. Addit
ional Considerations
• Inspect all feeder cables for wear, damage, or degradation—repair/replace as needed. • Provide AFCI breakers in all living spaces.
• Ensure proper breaker coordination per the Arc Fault Study.

Alameda Fire Station 4

IMAGE A - EXISTING MAIN SWITCHBOARD

IMAGE B - EXISTING GENERATOR

Alameda Fire Station 4

IMAGE C -

EXISTING IT CLOSET

Implementing these recommendations will significantly improve electrical safety, energy efficiency, and compliance with current codes and best practices at Fire Station 4.

If you have any questions or need further assistance, please feel free to contact us.

Sincerely,

Christopher M. Jose
Thoma Ele
ctric, Inc.

K:\ENG\2025\25-8009\RECORDS\2025-02-28 electrical assessment\2025-03-10_Thoma 25-8009_Alameda FS4_Electrical Assessment Report.doc

3562 Empleo, Ste.C - P.O.Box 1167
San Luis Obi
spo, California 93406
(805) 543-3850 FAX (805) 543-3829
E-mail – [email protected]

Electrical Assessment

Project: Alameda Fi re Station 5
950 W. Ranger Road, Alameda, CA 94501
Site Visit Date: January 23, 2025
Date Issued: February 28, 2025

The City of Alameda's Fire Station 5, originally constructed in 1940, was designed to serve as both a fire station and a public works facility. The existing electrical service is provided by Alameda Municipal Power (AMP) through transformer L1428.

Existing Electrical System
The facility is served by a 1200A, 120/208V, 3-phase, 4-wire main switchboard, located in the Electrical Room. The switchgear is a five-section Square D QED board that includes two 600A metered services. The installation date of the switchboard is unknown, but it is noted to be a newer system. See image A.

Service #1 (Label: 950A, Meter #: 90000051)
• Main Breaker: 800A bolted pressure contact switch (assumed to have a 600A fuse). • Distribution Breakers:
o Back-Generator: 100A/3P
o Panel 2+: 100A/2P
o Panel C: 100A/2P

Alameda Fire Station 5

o Panel B: 125A/3P
o Panel M3: 400A/3P
o HVAC Panel: 200A/3P
o Stove: 150A/3P
o Panel A: 100A/2P
o Panel D2+2: 100A/2P
o Trailer: 50A/2P
Service #2
(Label: 950B, Meter #: 90000155)
• Main Breaker: 800A bolted pressure contact switch (assumed to have a 600A fuse). • Distribution Breakers:
o Panel H: 125A/3P
o Panel E+2E: 100A/2P
o Panel F+G: 200A/3P
Existing G
enerator System
The facility has an MTU Detroit Diesel Model 30PJS6DT2 30KW generator located outside (See image B), which only feeds selected loads. The Automatic Transfer Switch (ATS) is located in the Electrical Room, with the generator load panel adjacent to it.

Generator Load Panel Breakers:
• (1) 100A/2P main breaker
• (4) 20A/1P breakers powering:
o Hallway Lights
o Electrical Room Lights and Receptacles
o Generator Charger/Heater
o Spare Circuit
• (1) 40A/2P breaker feeding a panel in the communication room Recommenda
tions

1. Electrical Panels & Breakers
o Replace all existing panels with seismically certified panels. o Ensure all breakers are coordinated based on the Arc Fault Study for improved safety and
reliability.

2. Interior & Emergency Lighting
o The interior lighting consists of a variety of fluorescent fixtures (surface, pendant, and recess
ed mounted).
o Recommend replacing all fixtures with LED for energy efficiency and reduced maintenanc
e.
o The facility has lit exit signs with battery backup and some emergency "bug-eye" lights; ho
wever, we recommend:
 Adding or replacing emergency lighting throughout the facility.  Ensuring adequate emergency lighting along the path of egress for compliance
with life safety codes.

3. Exterior Lighting
o The facility uses wall-mounted light fixtures for exterior lighting. o Recommend replacing all existing exterior lights with LED fixtures to enhance visibility
and energy efficiency.
o Conduct a photometric study to determine the required light levels for proper exterior i
llumination.

Alameda Fire Station 5

4. Outlets & Switches
o Recommend replacing all existing devices (outlets and switches) with new, updated e
quipment to meet modern safety and accessibility standards.

5. Fire Alarm & Life Safety
o No existing fire alarm system was observed.
o Smoke alarms will be required and should be replaced in all living spaces. o If a sprinkler system is installed, or if the Owner desires full fire alarm coverage, we recomm
end installing a complete fire alarm system for enhanced safety.

6. Communication & Data Systems
o The telephone service board is located in multiple areas, with various telephone lines and
added CAT5 cables for data.
o Recommend consolidating all communication services into one central location. o Upgrade all data cabling to CAT6 to improve network performance and reliability. o Install new Wireless Access Points (WAPs) throughout the building to provide adequate
wireless coverage.

7. Generator Replacement
o Option 1: Full Facility Backup – Replace the existing 30KW generator with a larger un
it to power the entire facility.
o Option 2: Selected Loads Backup – If full backup is not required, size the generator
to support:
 Emergency lighting
 Essential loads (refrigerators, overhead doors, communication equipment
)
 One dedicated outlet per office

8. Short
Circuit & Coordination Study
o Conduct a short circuit and coordination study to ensure proper selective coordinat
ion, equipment protection, and personnel safety.

9. Arc Flash Analysis
o The contractor should perform an Arc Flash Hazard Analysis per NFPA 70E – Standard
for Electrical Safety in the Workplace to assess electrical hazards and determine the required personal protective equipment (PPE).

By implementing these recommendations, the facility will enhance electrical safety, improve energy efficiency, and ensure compliance with industry codes and best practices.

Alameda Fire Station 5

IMAGE A - EXISTING MAIN SWITCHBOARD

IMAGE B - EXISTING GENERATOR AND UTILITY TRANSFORMER

Alameda Fire Station 5

If you have any questions or need further assistance, please feel free to contact us.

Sincerely
,

Christopher M. Jose
Thoma Ele
ctric, Inc.

K:\ENG\2025\25-8009\RECORDS\2025-02-28 electrical assessment\2025-02-28_Thoma 25-8009_Alamdeda FS5l_Electrical Assessment Report.doc

APPENDIX K
K - STATION 5 TIDELANDS EMAIL

FROM STATE LANDS COMMISSION

1 Byron Wong
From: Nicholas Luby <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2025 5:15 PM
To: Byron Wong
Cc: Jennifer Ott
Subject: FW: Alameda Point Fire Station/Training Center Discussion Follow-up Byron,
I am forwarding
the email we received today from the CA State Lands Commission. Since CM Ott is away for a few weeks, I wanted to ensure you have this. Please share with your team.

This confirms what we discussed yesterday.

Cheers.
-Nick
From: Plovnick, Jeffrey@SLC <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2025 5:07 PM
To: Jennifer Ott <[email protected]>; Kershen, Andrew@SLC <[email protected]>; Kato, Grace@SLC <[email protected]>; Caldwell, Vicki@SLC <[email protected]> Cc: Bill White <[email protected]>; Nicholas Luby <[email protected]>; Abby Thorne-Lyman <[email protected]>; Amy Wooldridge <[email protected]> Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Alameda Point Fire Station/Training Center Discussion Follow-up Hi Jennifer,
Thank you for providing a recap of the City’s fire station and training center proposal, and for engaging with Commission staff about the consistency of such a facility in regards to the Public Trust Doctrine. I would also like to thank you for taking the time to join us on our site visit. It was fantastic to see how much progress the City has made in redeveloping Alameda Point, and to hear all of the plans for continuing development in the area.

As for the proposed fire station, Commission staff understands that the City has identified an urgent need for improved emergency services within Alameda Point, the area subject to the Naval Air Station Alameda Public Trust Exchange Act (Exchange Act, as amended) and the Naval Air Station Alameda Title Settlement and Exchange Agreement (Exchange Agreement). The City has proposed demolishing, partly or wholly, an existing Fire Station (Building 6) and rebuilding a new, expanded fire station facility to meet modern standards.

The proposed fire station would serve all of Alameda Point. In this area, some filled land and all the surrounding tidelands and submerged lands have been or will be confirmed as public trust lands through the Exchange Agreement. Other land at Alameda Point has been or will be confirmed as outside the public trust.

The City proposes building the fire station on lands subject to the public trust and the Exchange Act.

Staff recommends that for a fire station to meet the requirements of the Exchange Act and the Public Trust Doctrine, the City must primarily intend the fire facility to serve statewide and regional interests connected with the public trust. The fire station, as described to Commission staff, may meet this condition because the station focuses its services on public trust uses and users.

2 The proposed new fire station’s service area would include maritime facilities and public spaces on trust land and the Oakland/Alameda Estuary, Seaplane Lagoon, and San Francisco Bay; the station would be staffed to respond to water emergencies; and the fire station would serve as a regional training center for water emergency response. Staff believes that, as proposed, the fire station could primarily benefit public trust uses.

Staff looks forward to hearing more from the City as it designs and implements a fire and emergency services facility compliant with the Exchange Act. Please feel free to reach out if you would like to discuss further.

Best,
Jeff Plovnick (he/him), Granted Lands Specialist
Land Man
agement Division

CALIFORNIA STATE LANDS COMMISSION
100 Howe Avenue, Suite 100-South
Sacramento, CA 95825
916.312.4747
[email protected]

From: Jenn
ifer Ott <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 21, 2025 2:07 PM
To: Kershen, Andrew@SLC <[email protected]>; Kato, Grace@SLC <[email protected]>; Plovnick, Jeffrey@SLC <[email protected]>; Caldwell, Vicki@SLC <[email protected]> Cc: Bill White <[email protected]>; Nicholas Luby <[email protected]>; Abby Thorne-Lyman <[email protected]>; Amy Wooldridge <[email protected]> Subject: Alameda Point Fire Station/Training Center Discussion Follow-up

Attention: This email originated from outside of SLC and should be treated with extra caution.

Dear Jeffery:

First, I ju
st want to thank you, Andrew and Vicki for coming down to the City to a@end the Alameda Point tour, and for the follow up meeAng with you and Andrew on the Fire StaAon/Regional Training Center Project. As you’ve seen, the City has been making significant progress toward transforming the former base into a vibrant community and spectacular public waterfront, but there is much work leD to do. We sincerely value our partnership with State Lands staff and look forward to working with you on the Fire StaAon and other projects that will revitalize the unique trust property at Alameda Point.

To recap our discussion, the City has idenAfied an urgent need to provide a new fire staAon to serve District 5, which comprises all of Alameda Point. ExisAng staAons are too far from the site to reliably meet the naAonal standard of responding to emergencies within 4-minutes or provide an effecAve fire response force that is appropriate for the level of development at Alameda Point (25+ personnel within 8 minutes). In addiAon, the exisAng fire training center at Alameda Point, located on trust lands at the historic Navy Fire StaAon (Building 6), must be overhauled. Building 6 is in poor condiAon and was not designed to meet modern fire service facility standards.

You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important

3 The City is proposing to respond to these needs by revamping its exisAng training facility to create a state-of-the-art regional training center that would also include construcAon of a modern fire staAon that meets essenAal services building codes. Although Building 6 is a contribuAng building to the NAS Alameda Historic District, some porAons of the building would likely need to be demolished and rebuilt to modern facility standards. To expand the training center, the project would also likely demolish the Navy power plant (Building 10), also on trust lands, which the NAS Alameda Exchange Act idenAfied as exisAng non-trust structure having a remaining useful life through 2025. Building 10 has remained vacant since the base was closed and the City has not idenAfied any viable trust use that could be made of the building.

As we’ve discussed, the City believes its vision for the project is consistent with the public trust. The trust at Alameda Point covers a vast area that includes numerous buildings, mariAme faciliAes and public spaces, as well as the waters of the Oakland/Alameda Estuary, Seaplane Lagoon, and the adjacent Bay. A substanAal number of the emergency responses at Alameda Point have involved incidents on the City’s trust property, both on land and in the water. It is essenAal that the Fire Department establish an operaAonal presence at Alameda Point to provide the trust property with a level of emergency services that meets naAonal standards. The staAon would also serve as the training base for the Department’s rescue dive team (the sole dive team serving Alameda and Contra Costa CounAes), would be staffed with at least one rescue swimmer at all Ames, and would be home to an inflatable rescue boat to respond to water emergencies. The crew for the City’s fireboat docked at Fortman Marina on the estuary may also be housed in part at the new staAon.

The proposed regional training center and staff would also advance trust purposes. It would provide dive training, State Fire Training (SFT) water rescue swimmer cerAficaAons, SFT rescue boat training, shipboard firefighAng training, and US Coast Guard training support. The new training center would assist with filling a gap within the region and would improve water emergency response capabiliAes throughout San Francisco Bay.

The proposed project provides an opportunity to return the Building 6 site to its historic use as an operaAonal fire staAon, provide the Alameda Point trust lands with needed fire and emergency medical services, eliminate the blighted Building 10, and expand the exisAng fire training facility to create a premier training center. The City believes the new facility would serve trust purposes and indeed would be a significant trust asset. It is thus our opinion as trustee that the project would be a permi@ed use of the granted lands, even if Building 6 cannot be preserved in its current condiAon.

We would appreciate hearing from you as to whether State Lands staff agrees that a project along the lines described above could be consistent with the trust.

We understand that the proposal is only at the conceptual stage so we are not requesAng a trust consistency determinaAon at this Ame but only an iniAal indicaAon from your staff that the project appears feasible from a trust perspecAve This will allow the City to make a more substanAal investment in planning phase of the project and develop a more refined set of opAons for further consideraAon.

The slide deck from our last meeAng is a@ached to provide some addiAonal informaAon about the project.

As always we look forward to working with State Lands as we conAnue to develop the Alameda Point trust lands.

Jen
Jennifer O@
City Manager
City of Alameda
jo@@alamedaca.gov
c: (510) 867-8237

APPENDIX L

L - FIRE TRAINING FACILITY - ODOR ASSESSMENT OF

EXISTING BURN OPERATIONS

5963 La Place Court, Suite 207, Carlsbad, CA 92008 | 760-744-9611 | Fax 760-744-8616 Environmental Consultants & Contractors
October 29, 2024

File No. 24224362.00 Task 1

MEMORANDUM
TO: Cody Moxley, Deputy Chief of Operations
Alameda Fire Department
1300 Park Street
Alameda, CA 94501
FROM: Paul Schafer, Vice President, Project Director, and National Expert Ambient Air Monitoring and Odor Assessment
SCS Engineers

Greg Hauser, Project Director
SCS Engineers

SUBJECT: Memorandum of Findings – Odor Assessment of Existing Burn Operations Alameda Fire - Training Division Facility (950 W Ranger Avenue)

INTRODUCTION
SCS Engineers (SCS) was contracted by the City of Alameda (Client) to provide odor assessment services for the Alameda Fire - Training Division facility located at 950 W Ranger Avenue in Alameda, CA. The goal of this study was to review existing operations and assess future viability with respect to potential off-site nuisance odor impacts from live fire burns. To achieve this goal, SCS visited the site during one live fire training day to review recent odor complaints, observe operations, and evaluate plume trends in the surrounding area in order to recommend measures that would reduce potential off-site nuisance odor impacts. The following summarizes the findings and recommendations from the study.

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
SCS conducted an initial review of information provided by the Alameda Fire – Training Division to define the parameters for a field investigation. On Tuesday, October 8, 2024, SCS conducted a site visit to observe current burn operations. This included a review of odor complaints, anecdotal wind speed and direction data for those complaint periods, and an evaluation of topographic conditions.

SCS arrived on-site at 0800, observed the fire crew prepare for the day, attended the 0900 Morning Meeting, and observed the burns, which started at roughly 1000. SCS met with Cody, Alex, and Dallas, who provided the following background and logistical information on current burn practices:
 Items used in the burns include wood pallets, hay, and roughly 40 sheets/day of 4’x8’x7/16” oriented strand board (OSB).
 The OSB is first used for training purposes, simulating a roof for cutting practice, and then recycled to be used as fuel.
 Burns are conducted on roughly 12 days a year. Six (6) are reserved for Academy training.

These days are less flexible compared to the remaining six (6) days designated for

Memorandum of Findings – Odor Assessment of Existing Burn Operations October 29, 2024

professional certifications. The Academy is a 24-week program with a schedule that predetermines specific days or weeks dedicated to live fire training. This structure causes burns to occur even if the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) issues a Spare the Air Day. These burns are generally in the September to October timeframe and never occur at night. The professional certification days are more flexible.  Burns are conducted from roughly 0900 to 1500 with a one (1) hour lunch break at noon.  Smoke from a burn clears/dissipates approximately 20 minutes after ignition.  The burn structure consists of multiple storage containers stacked to a maximum height of three containers, with each level representing a different building floor. Most burns occur on the first floor although burns on the second and third floor also occur.  One (1) windsock was placed above the highest storage container.  Alameda Fire provides advance notice to neighboring buildings before conducting burns through informational flyers and at community meetings. A-frame signs are also placed at entrances to provide burn information.

RECOMMENDATIONS
To reduce the potential for nuisance odor impacts on downwind neighbors, it is recommended that appropriate mitigation measures be implemented. The hierarchy of controls is a system designed to prioritize methods for reducing or eliminating hazards. At the top is Elimination, followed by Substitution, then Engineering Controls, Administrative Controls, and finally Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) at the bottom. In this context, Elimination and PPE were not viable due to the nature of the operations. Therefore, SCS focused on identifying effective substitution (e.g., alternative source of smoke), engineering (e.g., ventilation systems and barriers), and administrative controls (e.g., procedural changes) tailored to the facility’s needs.

In addition, this memo is not focused on the relocation of this site to another property in the immediate vicinity. Potential viable locations to relocate the burn operations in the vicinity of the current site will also experience development of residential properties downwind from operations.

Therefore, relocation of the site to an alternative plot would only provide temporary reprieve.

SUBSTITUTION
The choice of materials burned significantly influences the resulting odor. Our observations indicated a notable increase in both odor and smoke (See Figure 1) when tar paper was burned. In the interest of preventing nuisance odors downwind, we advise discontinuing the use of this material under all circumstances. If the goal is to generate more smoke while minimizing odor, then we recommend exploring alternative materials such as Training Smoke Q - Water Based, Quick Dissipating Smoke Fluid which is used in small and medium training spaces where the smoke needs to dissipate quickly to reset exercises and provide visibility for post exercise assessment. Key features include:
 Fast dissipating fog fluid - water based fog juice
 Leaves less residue in machines for longer maintenance free periods  Odorless, non-irritating, non-toxic, non-flammable
 Strong density, short hang time, excellent dispersion  Froggy’s Fog only uses de-ionized water and pharmaceutical grade chemicals

Memorandum of Findings – Odor Assessment of Existing Burn Operations October 29, 2024

See the attached Safety Data Sheet for details (https://www.trainingsmoke.com/training-smoke- fluid/water-based-training-smoke-fluid/training-smoke-q-water-based-quick-dissipating-smoke- fluid.html).

Figure 1. (Top) Exhaust observed from far end of rooftop of neighboring apartments when tar paper was burnt. (Bottom) Exhaust observed from edge of rooftop closest to the Training Facility when no tar paper was involved. Odor and smoke opacity noticably increased when tar paper was used.

Memorandum of Findings – Odor Assessment of Existing Burn Operations October 29, 2024

ENGINEERING CONTROLS
Based on this analysis, a feasible solution to mitigate downwind impacts from air emissions is to install a filtration system above the roof vent of the storage container, where over 90% of the plume escapes (See Figure 2). Maintaining a centralized exit, as currently configured, allows for easier integration of an air treatment system. By incorporating an exhaust fan coupled with a HEPA filter, the burn smoke and associated odors can be effectively treated before it is released into the atmosphere. A HEPA filter with impregnated carbon would not only reduce particulate impacts but odorous molecules as well. This setup must also be able to accommodate the intense heat generated by each burn and the frequency of burns conducted each day. If a HEPA filter cannot be used due to the heat of the effluent, stainless steel filters can be utilized at reduced effectiveness.

Figure 2. Smoke release through roof vent on storage container. Fan and HEPA filter recommended at this exit point as an engineering control.

Alternatively, a blower filter box (or multiple), can be placed adjacent to the roof vent outlet (See Figure 3). This system would reduce odor and particulate impacts but would be less effective than a system ducted to roof vent. This system is proposed as an alternative because ducting a filtration system to the roof vent location may be logistically not practical. This system would be fairly inexpensive to implement.

Memorandum of Findings – Odor Assessment of Existing Burn Operations October 29, 2024

Figure 3. Blower Filter Box with Blower System Example

Another potential solution is to relocate the burn site to another spot within the same property.

Currently, there are two (2) sites within the property and one (1) additional site on a neighboring property that could serve as alternatives. Among these three (3) options, we observed dumpster burns at the two (2) on-site locations. One (1) of these sites demonstrated greater effectiveness in creating distance between the odor source and sensitive receptors, while also benefiting from topographical features that could help diffuse smoke and odors (See Figure 4). Anecdotal evidence suggests that prevailing winds primarily travel from west to east, so adding barriers on the east side of the burn structure could further enhance diffusion. SCS did not visit the off-site location as we believe it would be more effective to address the issue at its current location rather than moving to a new site.

Memorandum of Findings – Odor Assessment of Existing Burn Operations October 29, 2024

Figure 4. Blue (preferred) and Red squares represent the two (2) sites within the property that could serve as alternatives. Existing burn site is seen in center of property.

ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS
Regarding administrative controls, one of the first observations SCS made was the low wind conditions the morning of the burn day. Although it may seem counterintuitive, higher winds are actually more effective for diffusing smoke and odors, even when blowing toward sensitive receptors.

As we noted during the site visit, low winds caused the plume to linger in the area. Therefore, in situations where the schedule allows for flexibility, we recommend conducting burns on windy days and during peak wind speeds, ideally between 1100 and 1800 hours, rather than the current window of 0900 to 1600 hours. Upon SCS’s visit, there were no windsocks in place until a few burns in, when one (1) windsock was placed at the top of the tallest container. We suggest having a permanent windsock, or better yet, a stationary meteorological (MET) system that logs, at minimum, wind speed (WS) and wind direction (WD).

Additionally, while the site has been proactive in notifying residents of the neighboring apartment complex about the burns, we still observed open windows. To enhance communication, we suggest implementing additional measures, such as mass text updates from property management to keep residents informed.

Memorandum of Findings – Odor Assessment of Existing Burn Operations October 29, 2024

Attachment – Safety Data Sheet for Potential Alternative Source of Smoke

Training Smoke Q
Quick Dissipating Fog
Safety Data Sheet
Froggy's Fog LLC
302 Rutherford Lane
Columbia, TN 38401
United States
Phone: (615) 469-4906
according to Federal Register / Vol. 77 , No. 58 / Monday, March 26, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

Version: 1.0
Revision Date: 10/20/2014

10/20/2014 EN (English US) 1/5

SECTION 1: IDENTIFICATION OF THE SUBSTANCE/MIXTURE AND OF THE COMPANY

1.1. Product Identifier
Product Form: Mixture
Product Name: Training Smoke Q – Quick Dissipating Fog

1.2. Intended Use of the Product
Use of the Substance/Mixture: Theatrical Fog/Haz e

1.3. Name, Address, and Telephone of the Responsible Party

Froggy's Fog LLC
302 Rutherford Lane
Columbia, TN 38401
1-615-469-4906
www.froggysfog.com

1.4. Emergency Telephone Number
Chemtrec: (800) 424- 9300
SECTION 2: HAZARDS IDENTIFICATION

2.1. Classification of the Substance or Mixture
Classification (GHS- US)
Not classified

2.2. Label Elements
GHS-US Labeling
No labeling required

2.3. Other Hazards
Other Hazards Not Contributing to the Classification : Exposure may aggravate those with pre -existing eye, skin, or respiratory conditions.

2.4. Unknown Acute Toxicity (GHS -US)
No data available
SECTION 3: COMPOSITION/INFORMATION ON INGREDIENTS

3.1. Substance
Not applicable

3.2. Mixture
Name Product Identifie r % Classification (GHS -US)
Water (CAS No) 7732-18-5 Proprietary Not classified
1,2-Propylene glycol (CAS No) 57-55-6 Proprietary Not classified

The specific chemical identity and/or exact percentage of composition has been withheld as a trade secret.

Full text of H-phrases: see section 16
SECTION 4: FIRST AID MEASURES

4.1. Description of First Aid Measures
First-aid Measures General : Never give anything by mouth to an unconscious person. If you feel unwell, seek medical advice (show the label wher e possible).

First-aid Measures After Inhalation : If symptoms occur: go into open air and ventilate suspected area. Obtain medical attention if breathing difficulty persists.

First-aid Measures After Skin Contact : Remove contaminated clothing. Drench affected area with water for at least 15 minutes. Obtain medical attention if irritation develops or persists.

First-aid Measures After Eye Contact : Rinse cautiously with water for several minutes. Remove contact lenses, if present and easy to do. Continue rinsing. Obtain medical attention if pain, blinking or redness persist.

First-aid Measures After Ingestion : Rinse mouth. Do NOT induce vomiting. Seek medical attention.