FAIRFAX TOWN COUNCIL MEETING
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM #3
MEETING DATE April 2, 2025
PREPARED FOR Mayor and Town Council
PREPARED BY Jeffrey Beiswenger, AICP, Planning & Building Services Director SUBJECT Authorize Town Manager to execute Professional Services Agreement with Bureau Veritas to provide Town of Fairfax with Facilities Condition and Needs Assessment for Town Facilities in the amount of $36,312
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a resolution authorizing the Town Manager to execute a professional services agreement with Bureau Veritas to provide the Town of Fairfax with a Facilities Condition and Needs Assessment in an amount not to exceed $36,312.
BACKGROUND
The Town owns and maintains seven buildings/structures including Town Hall/Police Department, Fire Station 21 (used by the Ross Valley Fire District), the Community Center (currently primarily used by the Finance Department and as a meeting space), the Women’s Club (currently used as Council Chambers and other local programs), the Pavilion, the Corporation Yard offices and apparatus bays, and the buildings around the ball field (including a Little League work room, announcer’s tower and restrooms).
In many cases, the buildings have not experienced significant restoration or improvements since their original construction. The purpose of obtaining a facilities assessment is to review all of the buildings and structures at one time to ascertain the condition and maintenance needs of all of the Town’s facilities to better anticipate and plan for maintenance and capital improvement needs now and in the future.
A facilities assessment removes the guesswork out of capital investment planning and resource allocation. Fairfax has limited resources and seeks to stretch funding as much as possible. And accurate and defensible facility capital plan provides data needed for grant applications to agencies such as FEMA, to help decision-makers make decisions related to major building systems like HVAC and plumbing, a proper accounting of repairs and replacements to determine a true facilities age, and a detailed inventory of spaces. A facilities assessment provides an objective baseline for so that funding can be used most effectively and provide information for future grant opportunities.
DISCUSSION
The Town issued a Request for Qualifications on September 9, 2024 seeking qualified firms to submit proposals to provide statements of qualifications to assess the Town’s facilities. The RFQ was posted to Builder’s Exchanges and shared with contacts and other contacts. The Town received four Qualifications packages. Each submitting firm was instructed to provide a Qualifications Package and a separate envelope with their cost estimate. A qualified group of Town Staff reviewed the Qualifications Package using a ranked scoring scale.
2 The following is a list of the firms that submitted proposals, along with a summary of the evaluation completed by Town staff.
1. Bureau Veritas. Local firm that specializes in facilities assessments with experience with many similar agencies in the Bay area including jurisdictions in Marin and surrounding counties. This firm provides a robust and easy to understand proposal that is tailored to fit the specific needs of Fairfax. The project would result in a facilities condition assessment, and a recommended plan for capital improvements over the next twenty years. The cost estimate is reasonable, at $36,312.
2. Terracon. A California based firm that also specializes in facilities assessments. The experience of this firm was impressive and they were selected for an interview. The approach was not as clearly explained in the proposal as Bureau Veritas, and the $68,900 price tag was significantly more. This firm did offer a lower, streamlined estimate of $29,300, but that would only provide the Town with baseline property conditions analysis - insufficient for the Town’s data needs and planning purposes.
3. Kappa Architects. A small local architecture firm submitted a proposal which included a team of five different consulting firms with a variety of expertise. This firm (or team) has significant experience with individual buildings, but not as much experience in facilities assessments across an entire organization. This firm had the disadvantage of not having all the required expertise “under one roof” unlike the other bidders. The total bid was $35,450.
4. Roth IAMS. This large firm, based in Florida, was the lowest ranking bidder, with no local experience. It was also the highest cost proposal at $96,700. The proposal was not tailored to Fairfax but appeared to be the firm’s boilerplate approach that would be applied anywhere. The scope of work called for the Town to provide much of the information about each building to the firm remotely. Fairfax does not have the necessary staffing level to work with a firm of this type.
The top two firms, Bureau Veritas and Terracon, were selected for interviews. Upon conclusion of the interviews, the Town staff unanimously agreed that Bureau Veritas met the needs of the project and would provide the best product of evaluating the Town’s facilities based upon their initial proposal, their interview and review of their previous and current relevant work experience. After making the determination, Town Staff opened the cost proposal envelopes and the estimate provided by Bureau Veritas was competitive and in line with the other vendor. Professional Services are not based solely upon the cost provided but upon qualifications and the proposed approach and responsiveness to the project.
Based upon the information provided and the quality of the interviews, Staff recommends the selection of Bureau Veritas and recommends that the Town enter into an agreement with the firm to provide the Town with a Facilities Condition Assessment for our Buildings and structures.
Upon approval, Bureau Veritas will begin their assessment examination of each of the Town’s facilities which shall include existing building structure and layout investigation, HVAC systems and other plumbing and electrical equipment, assessment of building code and ADA issues, roofing and 3 waterproofing, and other existing conditions. Upon completion, the Town will be provided with a report outlining existing conditions and recommended maintenance and capital improvement plans and costs that the Town can use to assess priorities and needed maintenance programs for future budgetary needs.
FISCAL IMPACT
Each Firm was asked to submit a Qualifications Package to be evaluated and ranked prior to opening any cost proposal envelopes in order to ensure that the Town made a decision based upon qualifications and not only price. The two firms selected for interviews were Bureau Veritas and Terracon based upon the ranking of their qualifications package. Bureau Veritas submitted a proposal to provide the necessary services for a cost not to exceed $36,312. The other second-ranked firm provided a baseline cost estimate of $29,300, although additional services were offered that could potentially have raised their cost estimate to up to $68,900. Even though the cost of Bureau Veritas was higher, staff determined that the scope of services offered would result in more complete and useful information than the Terracon scope.
Staff opened the other Cost proposal envelopes from the two firms not selected for follow-up interviews and the costs were $35,450 and the other at $96,700.
ATTACHMENTS
A. Qualifications Package from Bureau Veritas
B. Cost Estimate from Bureau Veritas
C. Resolution
TOWN OF FAIRFAX
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS FOR FACILITIES CONDITION & NEEDS
ASSESSMENT
October 7, 2024FP No.
RFP Name
BUREAU VERITAS
180 PROMENADE CIRCLE, SUITE 150 | SACRAMENTO, CA 95834
P 800.733.0660 | BVNA.COM
ATTACHMENT A
1. Cover Letter....................................................................................................................................1
2. Project Understanding and Approach....................................................................................2
3. Organization Chart.....................................................................................................................11
4. Staffing Plan.................................................................................................................................12
5. Work Plan/ Schedule/ Deadlines............................................................................................18
6. Project Cost ..................................................................................................provided separately
7. References.....................................................................................................................................20
8. Professional Services Contract...............................................................................................25 Table of Contents
BUREAU VERITAS
180 PROMENADE CIRCLE, SUITE 150 | SACRAMENTO, CA 95834
P 800.733.0660 | BVNA.COM
1 October 7, 2024
Town of Fairfax
ATTN: Loren Umbertis
Public Works Department
C/O Town Hall
142 Bolinas Road
Fairfax, CA 94930
RE: Proposal for Facilities Condition & Needs Assessment for the Town of Fairfax Dear Ms. Umbertis :
Bureau Veritas Technical Assessments LLC (Bureau Veritas) is pleased to provide the Town of Fairfax (Town) with the enclosed proposal in response to the RFP for Facilities Condition & Needs Assessment. Bureau Veritas understands the requirements of the RFP and is well qualified to perform the services. BV acknowledges and has included in this response, Addendum #1 issued by the Town of Fairfax, dated October 1, 2024.
Proven Experience | Facility Condition Assessments are one of the core services of Bureau Veritas. We have completed thousands of projects with more than 800 million square feet of space in the last five (5) years for State and Local Government, Higher Ed, K-12, Public Housing, and Parks and Recreation clients.
Highly Qualified Team | Bureau Veritas is an architecture and engineering firm focused solely on building lifecycle and capital planning studies, with more than 800 building professionals nationwide. Bureau Veritas has over 30 years of experience conducting Facility Condition Assessments. We have provided similar services for the following similar clients:
• City of Sausalito, CA
• City of Mill Valley, CA
• City of Menlo Park, CA
• City of Napa, CA
• City of Vallejo, CA
• City of Monterey, CA
• City of Seaside, CA
• City of Milpitas, CA
• City of Santa Clara, CA
• City of Palo Alto, CA
• City of Fresno, CA
• City of Hayward, CA
• City of Stockton, CA
Bureau Veritas is committed to providing quality services and consistently demonstrating our corporate commitment to quality, continual improvement, and client satisfaction. Bureau Veritas is not debarred, suspended, or otherwise prohibited from professional practice by any federal, state, or local agency.
The following pages detail our history, similar project experience, our key personnel and team, and our approach to your unique project. Bureau Veritas is committed to working with the Town of Fairfax to provide the highest possible quality of service. We appreciate the opportunity to present our qualifications for this project and look forward to working with the Town. I am available at 800.733.0660, ext. 7292704 or [email protected] to further discuss our qualifications.
Sincerely,
Erik Piller
Senior Vice President
BUREAU VERITAS
180 PROMENADE CIRCLE, SUITE 150 | SACRAMENTO, CA 95834
P 800.733.0660 | BVNA.COM
1. COVER LETTER
2 2. PROJECT UNDERSTANDING AND APPROACH
Project Understanding
BV understands that the Facility Condition Assessment (FCA) project with the Town of Fairfax (Town) will:
• Include a comprehensive assessment of all sites,
buildings, building systems, and infrastructure.
• Follow ASTM E2018-24 Standard Guide for Property
Condition Assessments, as applicable.
• Determine the present condition and estimated life
expectancy of various building systems and components.
• Identify and document present condition of all physical assets including grounds, facilities, and infrastructure. • Recommend corrections for all deficiencies and provide cost estimates for corrections.
• Prioritize and categorize deficient conditions, associated corrective actions, and information concerning building systems and deficiency categories.
• Establish anticipated renewal and replacement costs for the various systems and components.
• Result in strategic plan for capital repairs, lifecycle component replacement, and building modernization.
• Calculate the Current Replacement Value (CRV) and
Facility Condition Index (FCI) for each facility.
• Establish a protocol for FCA data to migrate/transfer to a CMMS/IWMS system.
We understand that a key factor to performing FCAs is the evaluation of physical needs and accurate forecasting
for capital repair and replacement budgets. Pre-emptive measures to manage maintenance budgets and programs
are essential in ensuring the elimination of potential issues, which can range from deferred maintenance, or premature replacement of building systems that can prove costly.
Data Gathering and Interview
Our project plan details three distinct phases of the project.
During each phase, we will require coordination and support from the Town's facility management.
Data Gathering Phase – BV will need the support of staff who can provide us access to drawings and records. The
following is a typical list of exhibits requested.
• Inspection reports (sewer, boiler, chiller, etc)
• Building systems Maintenance Records
• Maintenance policy documentation
• Owner elected repair list (if available)
• Original building plans (can be viewed on-site)
• Capital expenditure schedules (prior or planned)
• Fire protection / life safety plans
• Rehabilitation budget and scope (draft or final)
• Certificates of occupancy / facility license
• Prior assessments
• Site plan / floor plans
• Accessibility transition plans / studies
• CMMS / IWMS data set
In addition to the drawings and records, we will supply a presurvey questionnaire for each facility or site. Our expectation is that someone with knowledge of maintenance and
operations of the facility will complete this survey and be prepared to discuss it with us while on-site.
Site Phase – BV will need support in the form of escorts while in the facilities to help us access mechanical areas, to discuss with us any known issues in the facility, and to answer other technical questions.
Report Review Stage – BV will provide a complete
deliverable for each building.
BV will become familiar with the Town's existing Project Directory - property list and contact directory for each location. We will contact or interview the facilities contacts as part of tour process to determine current use requirements and priority of properties based on agency goals.
Working with the Town, we will develop procedures to
gain Facility Access. Our visits will be coordinated and preapproved by the Town prior to the visit. We will work with the Town to establish a protocol that will ensure that our activities will have minimal disruption to the operation of each facility and will maintain a safe work environment.
Technical Approach
Prior to assessments beginning, BV will conduct a Kick-Off Meeting to review requirements and to consolidate exhibits such as drawings and prior completed reports.
During the term of the project, BV will conduct regular Progress Meetings to maintain open communication with
the entire project team and the Town. BV will lead with an agenda that includes a focus on work plan, schedule, and project needs. This will permit the opportunity to
proactively address challenges encountered, so that course adjustments may be made. Each meeting will conclude with 3 task assignments, schedules, and goals to be met. BV will provide the Town with a written status report that tracks and monitors the progress of the assessments against the schedule submitted.
BV has allocated time for regular teleconference meetings and the following in-person meetings: Kick-Off Meeting, Pilot Review Meeting, and a Final Findings Presentation meeting. Any additional in-person meetings will be on a time and expense basis.
PILOT PROGRAM
To begin the work, BV proposes a Pilot Program where we will perform an assessment of a single building and prepare a written Draft Report for review. A meeting will be held with the Town staff to review the draft report before assessing the remaining buildings. BV’s Assessment Team will visit the building to evaluate the general condition of the buildings and site improvements, review available construction
documents in order to become familiar with, and be able to comment on the in-place construction systems, life safety, mechanical, electrical and plumbing systems, and the
general built environment.
FIELD ASSESSMENTS
The Assessment Team will conduct a walk-through
survey of the facility and site to observe systems and
components, identify physical deficiencies, and formulate recommendations to remedy the physical deficiencies.
As a part of the walk-through survey, the Team will survey 100% of each facility. BV will survey the exterior and
grounds, including the building exterior, roofs, sidewalk/ pavement, and recreational/other areas as applicable.
They will interview the building maintenance staff about the property’s historical repairs and replacements and their costs, level of preventive maintenance exercised, pending repairs and improvements, and frequency of repairs
and replacements. The Assessment Team will develop
opinions based on their site assessment, interviews with the Town's building maintenance staff, and interviews with relevant maintenance contractors, municipal authorities, and experience gained on similar properties previously
evaluated.
The Team may also question others who are knowledgeable of the property’s physical condition and operation or
knowledgeable of similar systems to gain comparative
information to use in evaluation of the subject property.
The Assessment Team will review documents and
information provided by the Town's maintenance staff
that could aid the knowledge of the property’s physical improvements, extent and type of use, and/or assist in i identifying material discrepancies between reported
information and observed conditions.
The facility condition assessment will will include the Town identified assets and will focus on the following facility and site systems and components:
Site + Infrastructure
• Topography: Observe general topography and note any
unusual or problematic features or conditions observed
or reported.
• Paving, Curbing, and Parking: Identify material types of paving and curbing systems at the property.
• Flatwork: Identify material flatwork at the property
(sidewalks, plazas, patios, etc.).
• Landscaping and Appurtenances: Identify material
landscaping features, material types of landscaping
(fences, retaining walls), and site appurtenances
(irrigation systems, fountains, lighting, signage, ponds). • Utilities: Identify type of material utilities provided to the property (water, electricity, natural gas); and assess condition, physical deficiencies, life cycle repair, and replacement issues.
Structural Frame + Building Envelope
• Identify material elements of the structural frame and exterior walls, including the foundation system, floor
framing system, roof framing system, facade or curtainwall system, glazing system, exterior sealant, doors, commercial overhead doors, sliders, windows, and
stairways, etc.
• Observe general conditions and note any physical
deficiencies identified or unusual items or conditions
observed. Observations may be subject to grade, and
rooftop vantage points.
• Visually inspect observable areas for cracking and
moisture infiltration as well as areas of apparent
foundation settlement and displacement.
• In the event more information or exploratory testing is required, in order to provide remedial measures, the
report may include recommendation for additional
investigative testing (Tier 1 or Tier 2).
Wall Evaluation
• Photograph elevations and details both from internal
and external vantage points, as well as from adjacent
structures where possible.
• Observe representative operable and fixed panels on all facades, operating a representative sample of units to
assess hardware and visually inspect exterior conditions and condition of waterproofing seals.
4 • Assess curtain wall condition to determine water
infiltration, damage, caulk degradation, metal panel
degradation, stone degradation and anchoring, and
other related curtain wall issues.
Curtain Wall
• Review curtain wall condition and a sampling of fixed panels on facades to assess hardware and visually
review exterior conditions and the condition of
waterproofing seals, where accessible without the use
of lifts, ladders, scaffolding, suspension devices, or
the like; may include observations from internal and
external vantage points, as well as adjacent structures.
Observations are limited to grade and may include
accessible balconies or rooftop vantage points.
• Review provided drawings and records of repair,
replacement, and maintenance of framing and glazing.
Roofing (Non-Invasive Visual)
• Identify material roof systems (roof type, reported age, slope, drainage) and any unusual roofing conditions or
rooftop equipment.
• Observe general conditions of the roof system
(membranes, attachment methods, flashings,
counter flashings, pitch pans, gravel stops, parapets,
miscellaneous appurtenances, insulation).
• Observe for evidence of material repairs, significant ponding, or evidence of material roof leaks. Note if a
roof warranty is in effect. Note any physical deficiencies identified or unusual items observed or reported.
• Identify material rooftop equipment or accessories
(antennas, lightning protection, HVAC equipment, solar
equipment). Include any material problems reported.
• BV understands that the Town will provide OSHA
compliant ladders, lifts and/or scaffolding (depending
on roof type) so that the Project Manager may safely
access roof areas. If requested, BV can provide a quote for lift and/or ladder access as needed. Observations
will be limited to readily accessible areas.
Plumbing
• Identify material plumbing systems at the property
including domestic water supply, sanitary sewer, or any special or unusual plumbing systems (such as water
features, fuel systems, gas systems, etc.).
• Identify type and condition of restroom fixtures, drinking fountains and/or other plumbing equipment.
• Observe general conditions and note any physical
deficiencies identified or unusual items or conditions
observed. Include any reported material system
inadequacies.
Heating
• Identify material heat generating systems at the
property.
• Observe general conditions, identify reported age
of the equipment, note past material component
replacements/upgrades, note apparent level of
maintenance, and identify if a maintenance contract is
in place. If heating equipment is not operational at the time of the walk-through survey, provide an opinion of
the condition to the extent reasonably possible.
• Identify and observe any special or unusual heating
systems or equipment present (fireplaces, solar heat,
etc.) and note any reported material problems or
inadequacies.
Air-Conditioning + Ventilation
• Identify the material air-conditioning and ventilation systems at the property. Include material equipment
such as cooling towers, chillers (type of refrigerant
used), package units, split systems, air handlers, thermal storage equipment, etc.
• Identify material distribution systems (supply and
return, make-up air, exhaust) at the property.
• Observe general conditions, identify equipment
reported age, note past material component upgrades/
replacements and apparent level of maintenance, and
identify if a maintenance contract is in place (contractor name). If AC and ventilation systems are not operational at the time of the walk-through survey, provide an
opinion of the condition to the extent reasonably
possible.
• Observe general conditions and note any physical
deficiencies identified or unusual items or conditions
observed. Additionally, include any material reported
system inadequacies or operating deficiencies.
• Identify and observe any special or unusual airconditioning and ventilation systems or equipment (cold storage systems, special computer cooling equipment,
etc.) and note any material reported problems or system inadequacies.
Electrical
• Identify the electrical service provided and distribution system at the property.
• Include material switchgear disconnects, circuit
breakers, transformers, meters, emergency generators,
general lighting systems, and other such equipment or
systems.
• Observe general electrical items (distribution panels, type of wiring, energy management systems, emergency
power, lightning protection).
5 • Observe general conditions and note any physical
deficiencies identified or unusual items or conditions
observed. Also, note the presence of any special or
unusual electrical equipment, systems, or devices at
the property, and include reported material problems
or system inadequacies.
Life Safety + Fire Protection
• Identify material life safety/fire protection systems at the property, including sprinklers and stand pipes (wet or dry), fire hydrants, fire alarm systems, water storage, smoke detectors, fire extinguishers, emergency lighting, stairwell pressurization, smoke evacuation, etc.
• Observe general conditions and note any material
physical deficiencies identified or unusual items or
conditions observed or reported including any reported
system inadequacies.
Elevators + Vertical Transportation
• Identify vertical transportation systems at the property.
Include the equipment manufacturer, equipment type,
location, number, capacity, etc.
• Observe elevator cabs, finishes, call and communication equipment, etc.
• Identify the company that provides elevator/ escalator maintenance at the property. Observe general
conditions and note any physical deficiencies identified or unusual items or conditions observed or reported
including any reported material system inadequacies.
• Out of Scope Issues: Performing any calculations,
examination of operating system components such
as cables, controller, motors, etc.; entering elevator/ escalator pits or shafts.
Interior Elements
• Identify offices, special use areas, and building
standard finishes, including flooring, ceilings, walls, etc.
Furnishings and fixed components will be reviewed and
included in the cost estimate tables for replacements.
BV will identify material building amenities or special features.
• Observe general conditions and note any physical
deficiencies identified or unusual items or conditions
observed or reported.
Food Service Spaces and Equipment
• Assess all food service equipment and spaces (kitchen, cafeteria, dining, serving areas). Food service equipment (fixed equipment) will be evaluated for adherence to
life/ safety code and ventilation requirements as well
for condition and capital replacement.
Special Systems and Equipment
• Include all special systems and equipment, such as
Emergency Medical Systems (EMC), chillers, radio
towers, equipment lifts, chair lifts, chemical storage or treatment areas, storage tanks, dumbwaiters, vaults,
public address systems, and telephone systems.
Limited Accessibility Compliance
• Provide a general statement of the building’s likely
compliance to the Americans with Disabilities Act to
help identify whether the Town may be exposed to
issues and there is the need for further review.
Suspected Fungal Growth
• Perform a limited assessment of accessible areas for
suspected fungal growth. If the presence of mold,
conditions conducive to mold growth, and/or evidence
of moisture. elevated relative humidity, water intrusion, and mildew-like odors is discovered, affected areas
will be photographed and recommendations for any
additional moisture intrusion studies will be made.
Environmental Features
• Review environmental features of the property, to
include appearance, cleanliness, acoustics, ventilation, and humidity.
Lead-based Paint
• Review existing testing data and other documentation
regarding lead-based paint available on site (included
in the cost of the FCA); evaluate physical condition
and develop cost estimates for remediation of paint
necessitated by pending renovations.
• Able to provide a licensed lead-based paint inspector to conduct testing using an x-ray fluorescence analyzer at the Project as an additional service. The instrument is completely non-destructive and yields instantaneous
results.
Asbestos
• Review existing testing data and other documentation
regarding asbestos available onsite (included in the cost of the FCA); evaluate physical condition and develop
cost estimates for remediation of asbestos likely to be disturbed by renovations.
• If asbestos testing is requested, BV will provide a
licensed asbestos inspector to collect samples of
suspect asbestos-containing materials at the Project
as an additional service. Scope of this sampling will be determined after review of existing data, costs will be based on daily rate plus the cost of analysis.
Energy Conservation Analysis
• Consider energy conservation savings when making
repair or replace recommendations and include these
projects in the project prioritization.
• Able to provide an Energy Audit (ASHRAE Level I, II, or III) or Benchmarking (EnergyStar) services as an additional
service.
6 Ranking and Classification
Based upon our observations, research and judgment, along with consulting commonly accepted empirical Expected
Useful Life (EUL) tables; BV will render our opinion as to when a system or component will most probably necessitate replacement.
Accurate historical replacement records provided by the facility manager are typically the best source for this data.
Exposure to the weather elements, initial system quality and installation, extent of use, the quality and amount of preventive maintenance exercised are all factors that impact the effective age of a system or component. As a result, a system or component may have an effective age that is
greater or less than its actual age. The Remaining Useful Life (RUL) of a component or system equals the EUL less its effective age.
BV can rate the condition of each facility with the below rating system, or another Client-specified scale:
5 Excellent - No visible defects, new or near new
condition, may still be under warranty if applicable
4 Good - Good condition, but no longer new, may
be slightly defective or deteriorated, but is overall
functional
3 Adequate - Moderately deteriorated or defective, but
has not exceeded useful life
2 Marginal - Defective or deteriorated in need of
replacement; exceeded useful life
1 Poor - Critically damaged or in need of immediate
repair; well past useful life
BV can also include alternative categories to rank and
weight priorities as required by the Town, such as functional deficiencies, aesthetics, time-based urgencies, and other mission critical factors. The analysis will include all cost observations ranked by Priority Classes.
The five classes to the right are typical but can be altered to meet your specifications and needs:
DEFICIENCY CATEGORIES/PLAN TYPES
Each deficiency identified in the Assessment shall be
classified in the following manner (or other Client-defined categories):
Category 1- Scheduled Maintenance: Maintenance that
is planned and performed on a routine basis to maintain and preserve the condition.
Category 2 - Deferred Maintenance: Maintenance that
was not performed when it was scheduled or is past its
useful life resulting in immediate repair or replacement.
Category 3 - Capital Renewal: Planned replacement
of building systems that have reached the end of their
useful life.
Category 4 - Energy and Sustainability: When the
repair or replacement of equipment or systems are
recommended to improve energy and sustainability
performance.
Category 5 - Security: When a system requires
replacement due to a security risk or requirement.
UNIFORMAT CATEGORIES
The deficiencies observed will be classified into categories using the Uniformat System (up to Level 4):
Level 2
A10 Foundations
Potentially Critical
Requiring action in the next
year including components
experiencing intermittent
operations, potential life safety
issues, and rapid deterioration,
returning a building component
to normal operation.
Currently Critical
Requiring immediate
action including a cited
safety hazard and areas of
accelerated deterioration,
returning a building
component to normal
operation.
IMMEDIATE
1 Necessary - Not Yet
Critical
Requiring appropriate
attention to preclude
predictable deterioration,
potential downtime,
additional damage, and
higher costs to remediation if
deferred further.
Recommended
Representing a sensibile
improvement to the existing
conditions (not required for
the most basic function of the
facility; however, will improve
overall usability and/or reduce
long-term maintenance costs.
Does Not Meet
Current Code
No Action required at this
time but should substantial
work be undertaken
correction would be
required.
PRIORITY CLASSES
YEARS 1-2
2 YEARS 3-5
3 YEARS 6-10
YEARS 15-20
4 “GRANDFATHERED”
5 7
A20 Basement Construction
B10 Superstructure
B20 Exterior Enclosure
B30 Roofing
C10 Interior Construction
C20 Stair
C30 Interior Finishes
D10 Conveying
D20 Plumbing
D30 HVAC
D40 Fire Protection
D50 Electrical
E10 Equipment
E20 Furnishings
F10 Special Construction
F20 Selective Building Demolition
Cost Estimating
BV uses a cost library model for cost estimating. Our
database follows Uniformat Level 4 framework and is based in part on data from national commercial cost estimating guides. BV maintains and updates our Uniformat-based
cost estimating system with information received from
the field. Through construction monitoring work, we have current cost data from hundreds of in-progress construction and rehabilitation projects. This data allows us to calculate costs based on local conditions to maintain a cost database that is typically more current than national cost estimating platorms.
Each report will include a Capital Needs Analysis including an estimated cost for each system or component repair or replacement anticipated during the evaluation term. The report will provide options for repair of the deficiency, and the capital needs analysis will be presented as an Excelbased cost table that includes a summary of the description of each component, the age and estimated remaining useful life, the anticipated year of repair or replacement, quantity, unit cost and total cost for the repair of each line item.
A consolidated Capital Needs Analysis will be presented that includes all anticipated capital needs for all buildings.
The cost estimate for capital deficiencies will be based on the estimate for maintenance and repair, but may at
Client's option, also include project management costs, construction fees, and design fees. Project management
costs, construction fees, and design fees will be derived using actual costs from previous projects. After determining these costs, we will confirm these costs with your staff.
Equipment and Asset Inventory
During the assessment, each field team will be responsible for collection and storing the inventory and condition
assessment data in an electronic format that is readily transferable to the Town's CMMS system.
BV will collect information on the major pieces of facility equipment. Specifically, the data collection will include Client-defined assets, and also focus on the following
components:
• HVAC (level of detail for which Preventive
Maintenance would be performed)
– Heating System
• Identify boilers, furnaces, unit heaters and major
labeled equipment
– Ventilation System
o Identify the major labeled equipment; exhaust
hoods, fans
– Air Conditioning System
o Identify the material air-conditioning
components, including cooling towers,
compressors, chillers, package units, roof
top units, split systems and major labeled
equipment. Excluded are window units, terminal
units, VAV boxes, and thermostatic controls
• Electrical
– Major panels only-for identification to track
maintenance
– Transformers
– Switchgear
• Equipment
– Building Automation System
• Plumbing
– Pumps external to HVAC systems
– Domestic Hot Water heaters over 80 gallons
– Other major labeled equipment
• Commercial Kitchen - major equipment (above
approximately $2000 value)
– Walk-in freezer and refrigerator equipment
– Ovens, stoves, broilers, grills
– Reach-in refrigerators and freezers
– Dishwashers
– Fryers
• Life Safety/Security
– High Level (system level) only-for identification to
track maintenance
o Alarm Panels
o Emergency generators
o Exhaust hood fire suppression
8 • Vertical Transportation
Where appropriate, the following data will be collected for each component:
• Location data
• Model
• Serial Number
• Manufacturer
• Manufactured Date
OPTION: Barcoding / QR Coding
For the above referenced equipment, BV will apply a durable barcode / QR code/asset tag with a unique number for use as an identifier in the CMMS system. We will use labels supplied by the Town or a vinyl tag for indoor applications, and a durable foil tag for outdoor use. Barcode / QR code numbers will be recorded in the database and all future work orders etc., and can be tied back in to a single piece of equipment or system. The cost of Barcoding / QR coding assumes that we will tag equipment during the FCA process.
Preventative Maintenance Schedules
Services
BV will provide preventive maintenance (PM) schedules for the equipment listed in the equipment inventory provided by client. Preventive maintenance schedules will include the following information:
• Safety precautions specific to the recommended PM
instructions
• Description of tools required for recommended PM
instructions. Tool list will not be exhaustive but identify common tool sets and specialty tools required for tasks. • Recommended preventive maintenance instructions
and frequencies specific to the equipment classification and type. PM instructions are based on the following
sources:
o Prevailing national standards
o Survey of Common Manufacturers
recommendations
o Industry best practices
• Estimated labor hours required to complete each PM
work order
BV will provide the PM schedules in spreadsheet format
suitable for upload into clients CMMS. Spreadsheet will also contain analysis of PM labor hour requirements for use by client for planning purposes. BV will review PM schedules with client and adjust frequencies and start dates as required to meet clients’ needs and match available resources.
Report Deliverables
BV will provide an in-depth report including a description of each of the building components and systems as described in the approach sections above. Each report is organized by building system and include digital photos of major
systems and components and of all deficiencies identified.
Reports will include current and anticipated repairs and deficiencies, recommended repair and component lifecycle replacements, and applicable options for repair or maintenance of building components.
The Capital Needs analysis will include a cost database sorted by building system and ranked by priority for repair.
The format of the database will allow for reporting by
building, system, or priority for repair, and a year-by-year analysis of capital needs.
Facility Condition Index
A Facility Condition Index will be calculated for each building.
This index will be a function of required repairs compared to building replacement costs. The Facility Condition Index will be generated from the data collection/capital planning database and will be updated as components age or are
replaced.
Capital Plan
Reports will reflect a 5, 10, or 20-year capital plan based on BV’s 20-year building system evaluation. The analysis will include a cost table sorted by building and system and ranked by priority for repair. Tables will allow for the customization of reporting and a year-by-year capital needs analysis. The report will include:
• An Executive Summary with graphic presentation of
results to provide a quick, user-friendly summary of
the property’s observed condition and estimated costs
assigned by category. These estimated costs shall be
cross-referenced to report sections where an elaboration of cost issues will be presented.
• Components observed that are exhibiting deferred
maintenance issues and estimates for immediate and
capital repair costs based on observed conditions,
available maintenance history and industry-standard
useful life estimates. If applicable, this analysis will include the review of any available documents
pertaining to capital improvements completed within
the last five-year periods, or currently under contract. BV shall also inquire about available maintenance records
and procedures and interview current available on-site
maintenance staff.
• Recommended schedule for replacement or repairs
(schedule of priorities).
9 • Digital photographs for the buildings including photos of deficiencies.
• General description of the property and improvements
and comment generally on observed conditions.
• Critical repairs and life safety issues separately from repairs anticipated over the term of the analysis.
• Facility Condition Index (FCI) number for the building.
BV will submit draft reports electronically via PDF format and once approved and finalized, a program summary
report is provided to include a roll-up of all prioritized capital needs across all facilities. All electronic copies of the report will include all text, deficiency tables, digital photos, and supporting documentation and report appendices.
Program-wide Report
In addition to each building report, BV will develop a
program-wide report that includes a ranked system-wide
Capital Plan for all facilities with programmatic conclusions and recommendations. The report includes a brief narrative description of each facility/building component and system, and discusses the current and anticipated repairs and
deficiencies of all buildings assessed. The report analyses will include tables sorted by building system and ranked by priority for repair. The format of the tables will allow for the several perspectives of reporting by FCI, building, system, or priority for repair, and a year-by-year analysis of capital needs.
AssetCALC™ - Assessment Software and
Database Deliverable
Bureau Veritas proposes utilizing AssetCALC™ as its platform for all data collected on this project. AssetCALC™ is a cloud platform developed, licensed, maintained, and supported solely by Bureau Veritas for our clients. The use of this software is at your option and there are no licensing fees for this software for three (3) years.
AssetCALC™ is a web-based SQL database platform that
enables users to: • query, edit, and analyze their facility condition data • plan immediate and short-term repairs • budget capital expenditures throughout the lifecycle of a building or an entire portfolio
The system unites Bureau Veritas’ experienced field data collection methods with advanced planning and reporting tools, construction cost libraries, location mapping (GIS) features, digital photo management, and document storage.
DATA DEVELOPMENT
AssetCALC™ includes a configurable facility hierarchy and asset data architecture - this will include all of your assets 10 grouped based on site location, asset group, and function.
Data can be exported to an Excel, XML, or an ODBC database format compatible for upload into your CMMS, EAM, or workorder systems.
FEATURES INCLUDE: • Facility Condition Assessment access: – Component/system descriptions – Locations – Conditions and EUL/RUL – Repair and replace recommendations – Digital photos – Search and Sorting Functionality • Prioritization of maintenance projects • UniFormat II Cost Database • Project Budgets and Capital Plans • Unlimited concurrent user licensing • Secure IT platform and back-ups • Client is the owner of data collected and residing in the database
• Online User Training and Documentation
REPORTING
AssetCALC™ includes more than a dozen standard options
for data summaries and reports: • Facility Condition Index (FCI) Reports • Rank and Prioritize Capital Improvement Projects • Deferred Maintenance Backlog • Facility Queries (by building, priority, system, or dollar deficiency amount)
• Capital Budget Planning • Year-by-Year Capital Needs Analysis • 5, 10, or 20-Year Replacement Reserve Reports • Custom 3rd party form automation available Screen Shots - Additional screen shots of the AssetCALC™ Database and a live demo are available upon request.
CMMS-Ready Data
BV will collect and store all information in our SQL database.
Our database allows us to routinely update and run reports for the Town after the initial assessment is complete. This system also allows us to export the Town's FCA data into existing or future CMMS work order platforms. BV has
experience with more than 50 CMMS platforms including:
CityWorks, Lucity, Brightly, Archibus, Maximo, TMA, Corrigo, Cartegraph and many more.
11 $0
$1,000,000
$2,000,000
$3,000,000
$4,000,000
$5,000,000
$6,000,000
Oct-24 Nov-24 Dec-24 Jan-25 Feb-25 Mar-25 Apr-25 May-25 Jun-25 Workload Capacity - Availability
committed capacity open capacity total capacity
Key Personnel Project Role Years of
Exp
Certification /
Registration
Availability
to Project
FCA
Experience
Municipal
Experience
Erik Piller Project Executive 20 20% ü ü
Mary Venable Program Manager 22 RA, CEM, LEED AP, BPI 80% ü ü Matt Anderson QA/QC 30+ RA 30% ü ü
Mary Endsley Assessment Team 23 RA 100% ü ü
Kay Van der Have Assessment Team 30+ RA 100% ü ü
Allen Manning Assessment Team 16 100% ü ü
Aren Hofland Assessment Team 15 100% ü ü
Shannon Vogt Assessment Team 24 100% ü ü
Richard Henrikson Assessment Team 30+ PE, LEED AP 100% ü ü Bureau Veritas has maintained itself as a viable, professional assessment services corporation. Bureau Veritas is
fully staffed to manage any size project load, including simultaneous multiple site projects. Our field staff can provide a commitment of time suitable to the needs of the proposed Town program. The proposed project would be
a significant one for Bureau Veritas, and we have the inhouse resources to fully staff this project without program disruption or cost impact.
Bureau Veritas has 800 staff and a dedicated Asset
Management team. The regional team usually has
approximately three to five concurrent assessment projects engaged that range from 400,000 SF to 1,000,000 SF. For example, currently we have three School Districts, one
University, and three Municipal projects concurrently in progress. Bureau Veritas has a very scalable staff and can provide resources from one team to over ten teams on a
project.
Availability of all key personnel is included in the chart below.
3. ORGANIZATION CHART
12 Bureau Veritas’ Team includes Registered Architects, Accessibility Professionals and Energy Managers with an average of over 22 years of relevant experience. These life cycle subject matter experts coordinate logistics, conduct comprehensive site assessments, analyze collected data, provide asset management strategies, create capital
planning studies, and develop facility condition reports.
Bureau Veritas also has an internal information technology group that migrates the field data and findings into CMMS platforms and other client database applications.
Erik Piller | Project Executive
Mr. Piller will oversee all contractual aspects of the project and be available to meet with the Town for the duration of the project on an as-needed basis. He will have primary responsibility for defining the scope of engagement, and will meet regularly with Bureau Veritas’ Program Manager and Assessment Team to assure that the Town’s needs
are being met, and that the project is adequately staffed, running smoothly, and on schedule.
Mary Venable, RA, CEM, LEED AP, BPI | Program Manager
Ms. Venable will be the primary point of contact for the Town throughout the duration of the project. He will work with the Assessment Team and the Town to assure project success.
Ms. Venable will be responsible for the assessment team’s overall performance, delivery of the project, and will work with the Town staff to develop the implementation plan
based on the results.
Matt Anderson, RA | Quality Assurance Manager
Mr. Anderson will oversee the project, assuring technical, process, and content quality. He will have direct management responsibility for all technical personnel, which will allow for quick and effective implementation of quality assurance measures both at inception and throughout the duration of the project.
Assessment Team
The Assessment Team is comprised of industry professionals with direct experience in conducting Facility Condition Assessments. They will observe and describe building
systems and components, identify physical deficiencies, and formulate recommendations to remedy the deficiencies.
Erik Piller
PROJECT EXECUTIVE
Mary Venable, RA, CEM, LEED AP, BPI
Matt Anderson, RA
QUALITY ASSURANCE
MANAGER
PROGRAM MANAGER
ASSESSMENT TEAM
PROJECT
ORGANIZATION
CHART
4. STAFFING PLAN
13 PROJECT EXPERIENCE:
City of Fresno, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
City of Brea, CA
Facility Condition Assessment & ADA
Assessment
City of Oceanside, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
Sacramento Metropolitan Fire District, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
City of Monterey, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
City of Fremont, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
City of Milpitas, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
City of Napa, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
City of St. Helena, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
City of Redwood City, CA
Facility Condition Assessment & Energy Audit
City of Phoenix, AZ
Facility Condition Assessment & Inventory
Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian
Community, AZ
Facility Condition Assessments
State of New Mexico, NM
Facility Condition Assessment
ERIK PILLER
PROJECT EXECUTIVE
Mr. Piller has 18 years of experience in client coordination of assessment, architectural-engineering, energy consulting, and construction phase services.He has been involved with projects of similar scope to the proposed project. As Project Executive, Mr. Piller is responsible for overseeing all contractual aspects of the project and will be available to meet with the client for the duration of the project on an as-needed basis. He will have primary responsibility for defining the scope of engagement, and will meet regularly with BV’s Program Manager and Assessment Team to assure that the client’s needs are being met, and that the project is adequately staffed, running smoothly, and on schedule.
YEARS OF EXPERIENCE: 20
Industry Experience
Government
K-12 Education
Multi-Family Housing
Higher Education
Industrial
Office
Retail
Hospitality
14 PROJECT EXPERIENCE:
City of Palm Desert, CA
Facility Condition Assessment, Inventory
City of Fresno, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
City of Cudahy, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
City of Lacy, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
City of Milpitas, CA
Faciity Condition Assessment
City of Oxnard, CA
Faciity Condition Assessment, inventory, PM
City of Glendora, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
City of Santa Monica, CA
Facility COndition Assessment
City of Menlo Park, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
City of Palm Desert, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
Judicial Center of California, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
Las Vegas Convention Center, NV
Facility Condition Assessment, Inventory
City of Phoenix, AZ
Facility Conditon Assessment
City of Austin, TX
Facility Condition Assessment
MARY VENABLE, RA, CEM, LEED AP, BPI
Education
Master of Architecture, University of Nevada
MS, English, University of Virginia
PROGRAM MANAGER
Ms. Venable has been the Senior Project Manager for government, educational, and private sector clients. She supervises teams of architects, engineers, and facility professionals in conducting facility condition assessments, physical needs assessments and energy audits. As Senior Project manager, she will lead onsite efforts for the duration of the project. Ms. Venable will manage the Assessment Team and meet with the Client on an agreed-upon basis to ensure project success.ARY VENABLE, RA, CEM, LEED AP, BPI License & Certification
Registered Architect | NV #4224
Certified Energy Manager | NV #18462
LEED Accredited Professional | 38469
BPI Multi-family Building Analyst | 5006070
YEARS OF EXPERIENCE: 22
15 PROJECT EXPERIENCE:
City of Monterey, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
City of Milpitas, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
City of Palo Alto, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
City of Menlo Park, CA
Facility Condition Assessment & Energy Audit
City of Mill Valley, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
City of St. Helena, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
City of Vallejo, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
City of Poway, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
Solano County, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
City of Laguna Niguel, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
City of Pico Rivera, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
Kern County, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
County of San Diego, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
Judicial Courts of California, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
City of Fresno, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
MATT ANDERSON, RA
Education
Bachelor of Architecture, California
Polytechnic University
QUALITY ASSURANCE MANAGER
Mr. Anderson is a registered architect with experience in the assessment and design of residential projects in addition to construction management processes and procedures. He routinely supervises teams of architects and engineers conducting property condition assessments. He also specializes in cost estimating, government programs, and an array of other services. As Quality Assurance Manager, he will assist the Program Manager by providing QA/QC review on the data collection and reports.
Registration
Registered Architect | CA | C15753
YEARS OF EXPERIENCE: 30+
16 PROJECT EXPERIENCE:
City of South San Francisco, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
City of Mill Valley, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
City of Fremont, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
City of Milpitas, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
City of Garden Grove, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
KAY VAN DER HAVE, RA
ASSESSMENT TEAM
Education
Bachelor of Architecture, University of
Minnesota
YEARS OF EXPERIENCE: 30+
License
Registered Architect | CA | C23054
PROJECT EXPERIENCE:
City of Brea, CA
Facility Condition Assessment, ADA
Assessment
City of Burbank, CA
Facility Condition Assessment, Inventory
City of Covnia, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
City of Cudahy, CA
Facility Condition Assessment, Space
Utilization, Preventative Maintenance
City of San Marino, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
ALLEN MANNING
ASSESSMENT TEAM
Education
Bachelor of Arts, Psychology, University of California
YEARS OF EXPERIENCE: 16
17 PROJECT EXPERIENCE:
City of Burbank, CA
Facility Condition Assessment, Inventory
City of Napa, CA
Facility Condition Assessment, Transition Plan
City of Oxnard, CA
Facility Condition Assessment, Inventory,
Barcoding
City of Pico Rivera, CA
Facility Condition Assessment, Inventory
City of Fresno, CA
Facility Condition Assessment, Inventory
AREN HOFLAND
ASSESSMENT TEAM
Education
Bachelor of Science, Mechanical Engineering, San Francisco State University, CA YEARS OF EXPERIENCE: 15
PROJECT EXPERIENCE:
City of Fremont, CA
Facility Condition Assessment & Inventory
City of Fresno, CA
Facility Assessment
City of Montery, CA
Facility Condition Assessment
City of Sacramento, CA
Facility Assessment, Master Plan
City of Phoenix, AZ
Facility Condition Assessment, Inventory
SHANNON VOGT
ASSESSMENT TEAM
Education
Master of Science, Engineering and Management, University of California Bachelor of Science, Mechanical Engineering, Penn State University YEARS OF EXPERIENCE: 24
18 Bureau Veritas has the ability and resources to complete the Facility Condition Assessments in a timely manner. The following details our proposed timeline to complete the project. This schedule is open to negotiations between the client and BV.
5. Work Plan/ Schedule/ Deadline
ID Task Name Start
1 Notice to Proceed Mon 11/25/24
2 Review Period with Fairfax Mon 11/25/24
3 Mobilization and Program Planning Mon 11/25/24
4 Database Review and Customization Fri 11/29/24
5 Kickoff Meeting Mon 12/2/24
6 Progress Updates (teleconference) Mon 12/2/24
36 Field Data Collection Mon 12/9/24
37 Facility/Site Conditon Assessments Mon 12/9/24
38 Draft Report Deliverable Period - Data Development Fri 12/13/24 39 Draft Report Deliverable (Rolling Delivery) Fri 12/13/24 40 Fairfax Review of Draft Report Tue 12/31/24
41 Draft Review Meeting (Teleconference) Tue 1/14/25
42 Final Report Deliverable Period Tue 1/14/25
43 Revisions to Reports Tue 1/14/25
44 Final Presentation / Meeting Tue 1/28/25
11/25
12/2
1/14
1/28
11/17 11/24 12/1 12/8 12/15 12/22 12/29 1/5 1/12 1/19 1/26 December January Feb
Task
Split
Milestone
Summary
Project Summary
External Tasks
External Milestone
Inactive Milestone
Inactive Summary
Manual Task
Duration-only
Manual Summary Rollup
Manual Summary
Start-only
Finish-only
External Tasks
External Milestone
Progress
Deadline
Project: Facility Condition Assessment
Date: Fri 10/4/24
19 Project Cost is provided in a separate sealed envelope.
6. PROJECT COST
20 Below is the contact information for each of our references.
Profiles for our reference projects, including a description of the scope and other project details, are included in the Similar Work section of this proposal.
CITY OF MENLO PARK, CA
FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT
Brian P. Henry
Assistant Public Works Director
City Corporation Yard
333 Burgess Drive
(650) 330-6799
[email protected]
CITY OF MONTEREY, CA
FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT
Janna Aldrete
City of Monterey
353 Camino El Estero
Monterey, CA 93940
(831) 646-1743
[email protected]
HAYWARD AREA RECREATION AND PARK DISTRICT, CA
FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT, ADA SELFEVALUATION & TRANSITION PLAN, ENERGY AUDIT Meghan Tiernan
Hayward Area Recreation and Park District
1099 East Street
Hayward, CA 94541
(510) 881-6712
[email protected]
7. REFERENCES
21 Bureau Veritas has extensive experience with Facility Condition Assessment projects. The following chart highlights a partial list of recent Bureau Veritas FCA projects completed for clients in the region.
CLIENT STATE SERVICES YEAR
COMPLETED
City of Sausalito CA FCA Just Awarded
City of Pacific Grove CA FCA with Inventory 2024
City of Monterey CA FCA with Inventory 2024
City of Placentia CA FCA with Inventory 2024
City of Burbank CA Facility Condition Assessment 2023
City of Pasadena CA Facility Condition Assessment 2023
City of Glendale CA Facility Condition Assessment 2023
City of Seaside CA Facility Condition Assessment 2023
City of Goleta CA Facility Condition Assessment 2023
City of Glendora CA Facility Condition Assessment 2023
City of Covina CA Facility Condition Assessment 2023
County of Riverside CA Facility Condition Assessment 2023 City of Alameda CA ADA Assessment 2022
City of Rancho Cucamonga CA Facility Condition Assessment 2022 City of Menlo Park CA Facility Condition Assessment 2022 City of Palo Alto CA Facility Condition Assessment 2022 City of Rancho Palos Verdes CA Facility Condition Assessment 2022 City of Laguna Niguel CA Facility Condition Assessment 2022 City of Pico Rivera CA Facility Condition Assessment 2022 City of Aliso Viejo CA Facility Condition Assessment 2021 City of Montebello CA Facility Condition Assessment 2021 City of Vallejo CA Facility Condition Assessment 2021
Judicial Courts of California CA Facility Condition Assessment 2021 City of Temecula CA Facility Condition Assessment 2021
City of Oceanside CA Facility Condition Assessment 2020 San Joaquin County CA Facility Condition Assessment 2020 City of Montebello CA Facility Condition Assessment 2020 Sutter County CA Facility Condition Assessment 2020
City of Garden Grove CA FCA, ADA Transition Plan 2020
County of Nevada CA Facility Condition Assessment 2019
City of San Marino CA Facility Condition Assessment 2019 City of Sacramento CA FCA, Master Plan 2019
City of Fullerton CA FCA with Inventory 2019
City of Napa CA FCA with Inventory 2019
City of Portola Valley CA Facility Condition Assessment 2019 City of Mill Valley CA FCA, Needs Assessment 2019
City of Stockton CA Facility Condition Assessment 2019
City of Covina CA Facility Condition Assessment 2019
California Dept. of Veterans Affairs CA Facility Condition Assessment 2019 Similar Work
22 CITY OF MENLO PARK
FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT
The City of Menlo Park, CA Department of Public Works is a long-time Cartegraph OMS customer who wanted to expand their use of Cartegraph to include some municipal facilities under their jurisdiction. At the same time the City was looking to improve their understanding of the capital needs of their facilities and park infrastructure, audit the energy performance of their buildings, and assess their critical risks associated with hazards such as seismic disruption, intrusion from exterior air pollution (especially smoke from wildfires), and flooding. Cartegraph recommended Bureau Veritas (BV) to the City as a trusted partner with the breadth and depth of skills needed to deliver these assessments and get all the data into OMS.
The City hired BV to perform an in-depth Facility Condition Assessment (FCA), detailed energy audit, and critical hazards risk assessment for 26 of their major municipal buildings and multiple parks within the City limits.
Additionally, BV was contracted to capture detailed equipment data and apply durable bar code tags on all major equipment in each facility to allow maintenance technicians to directly access equipment information and maintenance records using the Cartegraph mobile application on their phones and tablets. Deliverable products from this engagement included:
• Condition assessments for all city-owned buildings (Individual facility reports)
• Energy conservation measures(ECMs) and electrification options for all buildings (included in each facility report and consolidated in the Consolidated Electrification table)
• Risk and Vulnerability Assessments (included in each facility report, Seismic assessment and maximum loss statement in a separate report) • A consolidated table describing every major building component of each facility, the current condition and remaining life (Observation report)
• Consolidated annual capital improvement costs to maintain facilities (Consolidated Cost Table and Replacement Reserve Report table) • Recommendations for annual maintenance procedures and staffing requirements. Also, added scannable barcode tags to all equipment requiring regular maintenance (Preventative Maintenance Schedule and table)
PROJECT PROFILE
LOCATION
Menlo Park, CA
SERVICE
Facility Condition Assessment
Energy Audit
Critical Risks Assessment
Preventative Maintenance
Plans & Equipment Tagging
Data Integration with
Cartegraph OMS
SIZE
26 Municipal Buildings
Multiple City Parks
FACILITY TYPE
City Hall & Police HQ
Recreational Facilities &
Amenities
Municipal Offices
Library
COMPLETION
2022
REFERENCE
Brian P. Henry
Assistant Public Works Director
City Corporation Yard
333 Burgess Drive
(650) 330-6799
[email protected]
23 HAYWARD AREA RECREATION AND
PARK DISTRICT
FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT, ADA SELFEVALUATION & TRANSITION PLAN, ENERGY AUDIT Bureau Veritas Technical Assessments LLC (BV) was awarded a contract for the Hayward Area Recreation and Park District. Services included a comprehensive facility condition assessment, energy audits, and an ADA transition plan. Facilities included an art center, nature center, community centers, administrative building, corp yard, theater, senior centers, swim centers, and recreation centers.
The District required a comprehensive building evaluation including architectural, structural, mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and code compliance evaluation. The project scope included corrective recommendations, budget estimates for the corrective work, an estimated schedule for the completion of all recommended corrective work at District-owned facilities, and preventive maintenance recommendations for major systems. An energy audit was also conducted at each facility utilizing ASHRAE Level 2 protocols.
In 2019, we conducted an ADA Self-Evaluation, which included individual park assessments and a Transition Plan. Components of the Transition Plan included a schedule of improvements necessary to meet ADA requirements, associated order of magnitude cost estimates for barrier removal, a prioritized list of improvements, and a timeline for completion of needed improvements or modifications.
BV used AssetCALC™, a proprietary capital asset management database for data collection and capital planning reports. AssetCALC™ enables the District to generate reports to address maintenance backlog, funding projections, and life cycle forecasting.
PROJECT PROFILE
LOCATION
Hayward, CA
SERVICE
Facility Condition Assessment
ADA Self-Evaluation &
Transition Plan
Energy Audit
SIZE
88 Parks & Facilities
603 Acres
193,000 SF
FACILITY TYPE
Parks
Community & Recreation
Centers
Senior Centers
Administrative Buildings
Corp Yard
COMPLETION
2020
REFERENCE
Meghan Tiernan
Hayward Area Recreation and
Park District
1099 East Street
Hayward, CA 94541
(510) 881-6712
[email protected]
24 CITY OF MONTEREY
FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT
Bureau Veritas Technical Assessments LLC (BV) was contracted to perform a facility condition assessment and equipment inventory for 445,861 square feet of facilities, including fire station. Community centers, parking structures and wharfs. The facilities were assessed to the building system and component levels for condition, remaining life cycle, cost to replace, and evaluation of repair versus replace options.
The property assessments included complete visual inspections of facility components (exterior systems, interior finishes, fire/life systems, accessibility issues, MEP systems). We will describe facility deficiencies, provided corrective action for each deficiency, and establish prioritization standards to characterize deficiencies.
BV established a database to include square footage delineations, immediate/ short-term repairs and 10-year capital estimates, and digital full color photographs of each property. The database provides a property description and improvements and comments on observed conditions. The project came in on time and within budget.
BV was just awarded another city-wide assessment program for the City of Monterey consisting of 66 buildings.
PROJECT PROFILE
LOCATION
Monterey, CA
SERVICE
Facility Condition Assessment
SIZE
17 Facilities
445,800 SF
FACILITY TYPE
Wharf
Pump House
Concessions
Restaurants
Parking Garage
COMPLETION
2023
REFERENCE
Janna Aldrete
City of Monterey
353 Camino El Estero
Monterey, CA 93940
(831) 646-1743
[email protected]
25 8. PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT
BV agrees to accept the terms and conditions in the Sample of Agreement for Consultant Services, provided in the RFP, without exceptions.
26 27
28 ATTACHMENT B
ATTACHMENT C
RESOLUTION NO. 25-
A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF FAIRFAX
AUTHORIZING THE TOWN MANAGER TO EXECUTE AND PAY FOR A CONTRACT WITH BUREAU VERITAS FOR AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $36,312.00 TO COMPLETE A FACILITIES
CONDITION & NEEDS ASSESSMENT OF TOWN FACILITIES
WHEREAS, the Town Council has prioritized the maintenance and repair of critical infrastructure, including public facilities, in the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Budget; and WHEREAS, the Public Works budget includes funding for a facilities condition and needs assessment; and
WHEREAS, the Town owns and maintains seven buildings and structures that have seen limited restoration since original construction; and
WHEREAS, a comprehensive assessment is necessary to evaluate the condition and maintenance needs of Town facilities for future planning and budgeting; and WHEREAS, the Town issued a Request for Qualifications on September 9, 2024, and received four responses; and
WHEREAS, after evaluation and interviews, Bureau Veritas was selected as the most qualified firm to conduct the assessment; and
WHEREAS, the total cost of $36,312 will be paid from Fund 01-510 (Public Works Administration); NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Town Council of the Town of Fairfax that the Town Manager is authorized to execute a contract with Bureau Veritas for a Facilities Condition and Needs Assessment in an amount not to exceed $36,312.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Town Council of the Town of Fairfax on this 2nd day of April, 2025, by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
____________________________ ________________________________
LISEL BLASH CHRISTINE FOSTER
MAYOR DEPUTY TOWN CLERK