125_10102024%20Agenda%20Packet — Newark City Council, October 10, 2024 (part 2 of 3)

Building Area 18,000 SF
Number of Stories 2
Outside Occupants / Leased Spaces None
Date(s) of Visit January 23, 2023
Management Point of Contact Andrea Gifford
Group 4 Architecture Research + Planning, Inc.

Principal
415.531.4456
[email protected]
On-site Point of Contact (POC) Tonya Connolly
Assessment and Report Prepared By Nezar M. Tibi
Reviewed By Matthew Anderson
Technical Report Reviewer for:

Mary Venable
800.733.0660 x7292719
[email protected]
AssetCalc Link Full dataset for this assessment can be found at:
https://www.assetcalc.net/
Packet Page No. 614
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 2 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Significant/Systemic Findings and Deficiencies
Historical Summary
Fire Station 28 consists of a single two-story building. The station was constructed in 2005 with some limited renovations to the HVAC system in 2015.

Architectural
The building is slab on grade construction with masonry bearing walls with steel columns and beams with metal decking for the upper floor. The building exteriors consist of brick veneer with aluminum windows. The roofs are a combination of flat roofs with modified bitumen finishes and gables with metal roofing. Interior finishes are generally carpet, painted walls, and ceiling, ceramic tile walls and floors in the restrooms. In general, finishes are replaced as needed. Typical lifecycle costs are expected and budgeted.

Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing and Fire (MEPF)
Individual condensing units and ductless split systems with exhaust fans provide heating and cooling in the station. All equipment is original to the construction of the building and are generally in fair condition. The electrical system has switchboard and distribution panels with copper wiring located in the electrical room. Plumbing is copper supply with PVC waste piping. The fire alarm system is addressable with strobes with alarms, pull stations, smoke sensors, and LED exit signs. No issues were observed or reported. Typical lifecycle costs are expected and budgeted.

Site
The parking lot is a combination of asphalt and concrete pavement. The fire trucks driveway is concrete. Concrete sidewalks and walkways are located throughout the property. Irrigation is located throughout the property and is in fair condition.

Recommended Additional Studies
No additional studies recommended at this time.

Packet Page No. 615
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 3 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Facility Condition Index (FCI)
One of the major goals of the FCA is to calculate each building’s Facility Condition Index (FCI), which provides a theoretical objective indication of a building’s overall condition. By definition, the FCI is defined as the ratio of the cost of current needs divided by current replacement value (CRV) of the facility. The chart below presents the industry standard ranges and cutoff points.

FCI Ranges and Description
0 – 5% In new or well-maintained condition, with little or no visual evidence of wear or deficiencies. 5 – 10% Subjected to wear but is still in a serviceable and functioning condition. 10 – 30% Subjected to hard or long-term wear. Nearing the end of its useful or serviceable life. 30% and above Has reached the end of its useful or serviceable life. Renewal is now necessary.

The deficiencies and lifecycle needs identified in this assessment provide the basis for a portfolio-wide capital improvement funding strategy. In addition to the current FCI, extended FCI’s have been developed to provide owners the intelligence needed to plan and budget for the “keep-up costs” for their facilities. As such the 3-year, 5-year, and 10-year FCI’s are calculated by dividing the anticipated needs of those respective time periods by current replacement value. As a final point, the FCI’s ultimately provide more value when used to relatively compare facilities across a portfolio instead of being overanalyzed and scrutinized as stand-alone values. The table below summarizes the individual findings for this FCA:

Packet Page No. 616
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 4 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
The orange line in the graph below forecasts what would happen to the FCI (left Y axis) over time, assuming zero capital expenditures. The capital expenditures allocated for each year (blue bars) are associated with the dollar amounts along the right Y axis.

Needs by Year with Unaddressed FCI Over Time
Packet Page No. 617
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 5 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Immediate Needs
Packet Page No. 618
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 6 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Key Findings
Roofing in Failed condition.
any type, Repairs per Man-Day
Fire Station 28
Uniformat Code: B3010
Recommendation: Repair in 2023
Priority Score: 88.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $12,000
$$$$
Roof is reported to leak over app bay - AssetCALC ID: 7215555 Plumbing System
any type, Repairs per Man-Day
Fire Station 28 Restroom
Uniformat Code: D2010
Recommendation: Repair in 2023
Priority Score: 84.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $16,400
$$$$
Bathroom plumbing has issues - AssetCALC ID: 7215556
Parking Lots in Poor condition.

Pavement, Asphalt
Fire Station 28 Parking lot
Uniformat Code: G2020
Recommendation: Seal & Stripe in 2023
Priority Score: 84.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $11,300
$$$$
ADA parking stall markings barely visible - AssetCALC ID: 5252840 Uninterruptible Power Supply
UPS, 30 KVA
Fire Station 28
Uniformat Code: D5010
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 61.9
Plan Type:

Retrofit/Adaptation
Cost Estimate: $54,600
$$$$
UPS requested - AssetCALC ID: 7215554
Packet Page No. 619
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 7 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Generator in Poor condition.

Diesel
Fire Station 28 Generator enclosure
Uniformat Code: D5010
Recommendation: Replace in 2024
Priority Score: 61.9
Plan Type:

Retrofit/Adaptation
Cost Estimate: $126,600
$$$$
Generator is near end of life and replacement should be planned for a larger unit - AssetCALC ID:
5252866
Packet Page No. 620
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 8 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Plan Types
Each line item in the cost database is assigned a Plan Type, which is the primary reason or rationale for the recommended replacement, repair, or other corrective action. This is the “why” part of the equation. A cost or line item may commonly have more than one applicable Plan Type; however, only one Plan Type will be assigned based on the “best” fit, typically the one with the greatest significance.

Plan Type Descriptions
Safety  An observed or reported unsafe condition that if left unaddressed could result in injury; a system or component that presents potential liability risk.

Performance/Integrity  Component or system has failed, is almost failing, performs unreliably, does not perform as intended, and/or poses risk to overall system stability.

Accessibility  Does not meet ADA, UFAS, and/or other handicap accessibility requirements.

Environmental  Improvements to air or water quality, including removal of hazardous materials from the building or site.

Retrofit/Adaptation  Components, systems, or spaces recommended for upgrades in in order to meet current standards, facility usage, or client/occupant needs.

Lifecycle/Renewal  Any component or system that is not currently deficient or problematic but for which future replacement or repair is anticipated and budgeted.

Plan Type Distribution (by Cost)
Packet Page No. 621
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 9 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

2. B u il di ng a nd Si t e I nf orm at i on
Systems Summary
System Description Condition
Structure Masonry bearing walls with metal roof deck supported by wood joists and concrete raft foundation slab
Good
Facade Primary Wall Finish : Stone veneer
Secondary Wall Finish: Concrete integral to superstructure Windows: Aluminum
Good
Roof Primary: Gable construction with metal finish
Secondary: Flat construction with modified bituminous finish Fair
Interiors Walls: Painted gypsum board, ceramic tile and Unfinished Floors: Carpet, ceramic tile, rubber tiles and unfinished concrete Ceilings: Painted gypsum board and unfinished / exposed Fair
Elevators Passenger: One hydraulic car serving both floors Fair Plumbing Distribution: Copper supply and PVC waste and venting Hot Water: Gas water heater with integral tank
Fixtures: Toilets, urinals, showers and sinks in restrooms. Sinks in the kitchen and apparatus bay.

Fair
HVAC Non-Central System: Condensing units
Supplemental components: Ductless split-systems and exhaust fans Fair
Packet Page No. 622
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 10 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Systems Summary
Fire Suppression Wet-pipe sprinkler system and fire extinguishers, and kitchen hood system Fair Electrical Source and Distribution: Main switchboard and panel with copper wiring Interior Lighting: LED, linear fluorescent, and incandescent Emergency Power: Diesel generator with automatic transfer switch Fair
Fire Alarm Alarm panel with smoke detectors, heat detectors, alarms, strobes, pull stations, and exit signs
Fair
Equipment/Special Commercial kitchen equipment. Commercial and residential laundry equipment Fair Site Pavement Asphalt lots with limited areas of concrete aprons and pavement and adjacent concrete sidewalks, and curbs
Fair
Site Development Property entrance signage; metal tube fencing Fair Landscaping and
Topography
Landscaping features include lawns, trees, bushes, and planters Irrigation present
No retaining walls
Low to moderate site slopes throughout
Fair
Utilities Municipal water and sewer
Local utility-provided electric and natural gas
Good
Site Lighting Pole-mounted: LED
Building-mounted: LED, and incandescent
Fair
Ancillary Structures None n/a
Accessibility Presently it does not appear an accessibility study is needed for this property.

Key Issues and
Findings
Accessible parking stall striping is barely visible.

Packet Page No. 623
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 11 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Packet Page No. 624
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 12 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

3. P r op ert y Sp ac e U s e an d O bs e rv ed Ar eas
Areas Observed
The interior spaces were observed in order to gain a clear understanding of the property’s overall condition. Other areas accessed included the site within the property boundaries, the exterior of the property, and the roofs.

Key Spaces Not Observed
All key areas of the property were accessible and observed.

Generally, Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) prohibits discrimination by entities to access and use of “areas of public accommodations” and “commercial facilities” on the basis of disability. Regardless of its age, these areas and facilities must be maintained and operated to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG).

Buildings completed and occupied after January 26, 1992 are required to comply fully with the ADAAG. Existing facilities constructed prior to this date are held to the lesser standard of compliance to the extent allowed by structural feasibility and the financial resources available. As an alternative, a reasonable accommodation pertaining to barrier removal must be made.

Removal of barriers to accessibility should be addressed from a liability standpoint in order to comply with federal law, but the barriers may or may not be building code violations. The Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines are part of the ADA federal civil rights law pertaining to the disabled and are not a construction code. State and local jurisdictions have adopted the ADA Guidelines or have adopted other standards for accessibility as part of their construction codes.

Additional clarifications of this limited survey:
▪ This survey was visual in nature and actual measurements were not taken to verify compliance ▪ Only a representative sample of areas was observed
▪ Two overview photos were taken for each subsection regardless of perceived compliance or non-compliance ▪ Itemized costs for individual non-compliant items are not included in the dataset ▪ For any “none” boxes checked or reference to “no issues” identified, that alone does not guarantee full compliance The facility was originally constructed in 2005. The facility has not since been substantially renovated.

During the interview process with the client representatives, no complaints or pending litigation associated with potential accessibility issues was reported.

No detailed follow-up accessibility study is currently recommended since no major or moderate issues were identified at the subject site. Reference the appendix for specific data, photos, and tables or checklists associated with this limited accessibility survey.

Packet Page No. 625
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 13 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

4. P u rp os e an d Sc op e
Purpose
Bureau Veritas was retained by the client to render an opinion as to the Property’s current general physical condition on the day of the site visit.

Based on the observations, interviews and document review outlined below, this report identifies significant deferred maintenance issues, existing deficiencies, and material code violations of record, which affect the Property’s use. Opinions are rendered as to its structural integrity, building system condition and the Property’s overall condition. The report also notes building systems or components that have realized or exceeded their typical expected useful lives.

The physical condition of building systems and related components are typically defined as being in one of five condition ratings. For the purposes of this report, the following definitions are used:

Condition Ratings
Excellent New or very close to new; component or system typically has been installed within the past year, sound and performing its function. Eventual repair or replacement will be required when the component or system either reaches the end of its useful life or fails in service.

Good Satisfactory as-is. Component or system is sound and performing its function, typically within the first third of its lifecycle. However, it may show minor signs of normal wear and tear. Repair or replacement will be required when the component or system either reaches the end of its useful life or fails in service.

Fair Showing signs of wear and use but still satisfactory as-is, typically near the median of its estimated useful life. Component or system is performing adequately at this time but may exhibit some signs of wear, deferred maintenance, or evidence of previous repairs. Repair or replacement will be required due to the component or system’s condition and/or its estimated remaining useful life.

Poor Component or system is significantly aged, flawed, functioning intermittently or unreliably; displays obvious signs of deferred maintenance; shows evidence of previous repair or workmanship not in compliance with commonly accepted standards; has become obsolete; or exhibits an inherent deficiency. The present condition could contribute to or cause the deterioration of contiguous elements or systems. Either full component replacement is needed, or repairs are required to restore to good condition, prevent premature failure, and/or prolong useful life.

Failed Component or system has ceased functioning or performing as intended. Replacement, repair, or other significant corrective action is recommended or required.

Not Applicable Assigning a condition does not apply or make logical sense, most commonly due to the item in question not being present.

Packet Page No. 626
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 14 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Scope
The standard scope of the Facility Condition Assessment includes the following:
▪ Visit the Property to evaluate the general condition of the building and site improvements, review available construction documents in order to familiarize ourselves with, and be able to comment on, the in-place construction systems, life safety, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems, and the general built environment. ▪ Identify those components that are exhibiting deferred maintenance issues and provide cost estimates for Immediate Costs and Replacement Reserves based on observed conditions, maintenance history and industry standard useful life estimates. This will include the review of documented capital improvements completed within the last five-year period and work currently contracted for, if applicable.
▪ Provide a full description of the Property with descriptions of in-place systems and commentary on observed conditions. ▪ Provide a high-level categorical general statement regarding the subject Property’s compliance to Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act. This will not constitute a full ADA survey, but will help identify exposure to issues and the need for further review.
▪ Obtain background and historical information about the facility from a building engineer, property manager, maintenance staff, or other knowledgeable source. The preferred methodology is to have the client representative or building occupant complete a Pre-Survey Questionnaire (PSQ) in advance of the site visit. Common alternatives include a verbal interview just prior to or during the walk-through portion of the assessment. ▪ Review maintenance records and procedures with the in-place maintenance personnel. ▪ Observe a representative sample of the interior spaces/units, including vacant spaces/units, to gain a clear understanding of the property’s overall condition. Other areas to be observed include the exterior of the property, the roofs, interior common areas, and the significant mechanical, electrical and elevator equipment rooms. ▪ Provide recommendations for additional studies, if required, with related budgetary information. ▪ Provide an Executive Summary at the beginning of this report, which highlights key findings and includes a Facility Condition Index as a basis for comparing the relative conditions of the buildings within the portfolio.

Packet Page No. 627
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 15 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

5. O p in io ns o f P ro b ab le C os t s
Cost estimates are attached throughout this report, with the Replacement Reserves in the appendix.

These estimates are based on Invoice or Bid Document/s provided either by the Owner/facility and construction costs developed by construction resources such as R.S. Means, CBRE Whitestone, and Marshall & Swift, Bureau Veritas’s experience with past costs for similar properties, city cost indexes, and assumptions regarding future economic conditions.

Opinions of probable costs should only be construed as preliminary, order of magnitude budgets. Actual costs most probably will vary from the consultant’s opinions of probable costs depending on such matters as type and design of suggested remedy, quality of materials and installation, manufacturer and type of equipment or system selected, field conditions, whether a physical deficiency is repaired or replaced in whole, phasing or bundling of the work (if applicable), quality of contractor, quality of project management exercised, market conditions, use of subcontractors, and whether competitive pricing is solicited, etc. Certain opinions of probable costs cannot be developed within the scope of this guide without further study. Opinions of probable cost for further study should be included in the FCA.

Methodology
Based upon site observations, research, and judgment, along with referencing Expected Useful Life (EUL) tables from various industry sources, Bureau Veritas opines as to when a system or component will most probably necessitate replacement. Accurate historical replacement records, if provided, are typically the best source of information. Exposure to the elements, initial quality and installation, extent of use, the quality and amount of preventive maintenance exercised, etc., 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 chronological age. The Remaining Useful Life (RUL) of a component or system equals the EUL less its effective age, whether explicitly or implicitly stated. Projections of Remaining Useful Life (RUL) are based primarily on age and condition with the presumption of continued use and maintenance of the Property similar to the observed and reported past use and maintenance practices, in conjunction with the professional judgment of Bureau Veritas’s assessors. Significant changes in occupants and/or usage may affect the service life of some systems or components.

Where quantities could not be or were not derived from an actual construction document take-off or facility walk-through, and/or where systemic costs are more applicable or provide more intrinsic value, budgetary square foot and gross square foot costs are used. Estimated costs are based on professional judgment and the probable or actual extent of the observed defect, inclusive of the cost to design, procure, construct and manage the corrections.

Definitions
Immediate Needs
Immediate Needs are line items that require immediate action as a result of: (1) material existing or potential unsafe conditions, (2) failed or imminent failure of mission critical building systems or components, or (3) conditions that, if not addressed, have the potential to result in, or contribute to, critical element or system failure within one year or will most probably result in a significant escalation of its remedial cost.

For database and reporting purposes the line items with RUL=0, and commonly associated with Safety or Performance/Integrity Plan Types, are considered Immediate Needs.

Replacement Reserves
Cost line items traditionally called Replacement Reserves (equivalently referred to as Lifecycle/Renewals) are for recurring probable renewals or expenditures, which are not classified as operation or maintenance expenses. The replacement reserves should be budgeted for in advance on an annual basis. Replacement Reserves are reasonably predictable both in terms of frequency and cost. However, Replacement Reserves may also include components or systems that have an indeterminable life but, nonetheless, have a potential for failure within an estimated time period.

Replacement Reserves generally exclude systems or components that are estimated to expire after the reserve term and are not considered material to the structural and mechanical integrity of the subject property. Furthermore, systems and components that are not deemed to have a material effect on the use of the Property are also excluded. Costs that are caused by acts of God, accidents, or other occurrences that are typically covered by insurance, rather than reserved for, are also excluded.

Packet Page No. 628
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 16 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Replacement costs are solicited from ownership/property management, Bureau Veritas’s discussions with service companies, manufacturers' representatives, and previous experience in preparing such schedules for other similar facilities.

Costs for work performed by the ownership’s or property management’s maintenance staff are also considered.

Bureau Veritas’s reserve methodology involves identification and quantification of those systems or components requiring capital reserve funds within the assessment period. The assessment period is defined as the effective age plus the reserve term. Additional information concerning system’s or component’s respective replacement costs (in today's dollars), typical expected useful lives, and remaining useful lives were estimated so that a funding schedule could be prepared. The Replacement Reserves Schedule presupposes that all required remedial work has been performed or that monies for remediation have been budgeted for items defined as Immediate Needs.

For the purposes of ‘bucketizing’ the System Expenditure Forecasts in this report, the Replacement Reserves have been subdivided and grouped as follows: Short Term (years 1-3), Near Term (years 4-5), Medium Term (years 6-10), and Long Term (years 11-20).

Key Findings
In an effort to highlight the most significant cost items and not be overwhelmed by the Replacement Reserves report in its totality, a subsection of Key Findings is included within the Executive Summary section of this report. Key Findings typically include repairs or replacements of deficient items within the first five-year window, as well as the most significant high-dollar line items that fall anywhere within the ten-year term. Note that while there is some subjectivity associated with identifying the Key Findings, the Immediate Needs are always included as a subset.

Exceedingly Aged
A fairly common scenario encountered during the assessment process, and a frequent source of debate, occurs when classifying and describing “very old” systems or components that are still functioning adequately and do not appear nor were reported to be in any way deficient. To help provide some additional intelligence on these items, such components will be tagged in the database as Exceedingly Aged. This designation will be reserved for mechanical or electrical systems or components that have aged well beyond their industry standard lifecycles, typically at least 15 years beyond and/or twice their Estimated Useful Life (EUL). In tandem with this designation, these items will be assigned a Remaining Useful Life (RUL) not less than two years but not greater than 1/3 of their standard EUL. As such the recommended replacement time for these components will reside outside the typical Short Term window but will not be pushed ‘irresponsibly’ (too far) into the future.

Packet Page No. 629
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 17 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

6. C e rt if ic at io n
Group 4 Arch, City of Newark, Facilities Master Plan (the Client) retained Bureau Veritas to perform this Facility Condition Assessment in connection with its continued operation of Fire Station 28, 7550 Thornton Avenue, Newark, California 94560, the “Property”. It is our understanding that the primary interest of the Client is to locate and evaluate materials and building system defects that might significantly affect the value of the property and to determine if the present Property has conditions that will have a significant impact on its continued operations.

The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based on the brief review of the plans and records made available to our Project Manager during the site visit, interviews of available property management personnel and maintenance contractors familiar with the Property, appropriate inquiry of municipal authorities, our Project Manager’s walkthrough observations during the site visit, and our experience with similar properties.

No testing, exploratory probing, dismantling or operating of equipment or in-depth studies were performed unless specifically required under the Purpose and Scope section of this report. This assessment did not include engineering calculations to determine the adequacy of the Property’s original design or existing systems. Although walk-through observations were performed, not all areas may have been observed (see Section 1 for specific details). There may be defects in the Property, which were in areas not observed or readily accessible, may not have been visible, or were not disclosed by management personnel when questioned. The report describes property conditions at the time that the observations and research were conducted.

This report has been prepared for and is exclusively for the use and benefit of the Client identified on the cover page of this report. The purpose for which this report shall be used shall be limited to the use as stated in the contract between the client and Bureau Veritas.

This report, or any of the information contained therein, is not for the use or benefit of, nor may it be relied upon by any other person or entity, for any purpose without the advance written consent of Bureau Veritas. Any reuse or distribution without such consent shall be at the client's or recipient's sole risk, without liability to Bureau Veritas.

Prepared by: Nezar M. Tibi
Project Manager
Reviewed by:

Matthew Anderson
Technical Report Reviewer for
Mary Venable
Program Manager
[email protected]
800.733.0660 x7292719
Packet Page No. 630
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 18 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

7. A p pe nd ic es
Appendix A: Photographic Record
Appendix B: Site and Floor Plans
Appendix C: Pre-Survey Questionnaire
Appendix D: Accessibility Review and Photos
Appendix E: Component Condition Report
Appendix F: Replacement Reserves
Packet Page No. 631
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix A:

Photographic Record
Packet Page No. 632
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
1 - FRONT ELEVATION 2 - LEFT ELEVATION
3 - REAR ELEVATION 4 - RIGHT ELEVATION
5 - OVERHEAD/DOCK DOOR AND WINDOWS 6 - BALCONY
Packet Page No. 633
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
7 - VEHICULAR ACCESS DEVICES 8 - EXTERIOR DOOR
9 - INTERIOR DOOR 10 - FLOORING
11 – METAL ROOFING 12 – GUTTERS AND DOWNSPOUTS
Packet Page No. 634
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
13 - LOBBY 14 - OFFICE
15 - CONFERENCE ROOM 16 - KITCHEN OVERVIEW
17 - LIVING ROOM 18 - BEDROOM
Packet Page No. 635
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
19 - APPARATUS BAY 20 - APPARATUS BAY
21 - HALLWAY 22 - WORKOUT ROOM
23 - ELEVATOR DOOR 24 - SHOWER
Packet Page No. 636
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
25 - SINK/LAVATORY 26 - TOILET STALL OVERVIEW
27 - URINALS 28 - SINK/LAVATORY
29 - SPLIT SYSTEM 30 – AIR HANDLER
Packet Page No. 637
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
31 - SPLIT SYSTEM DUCTLESS 32 - EXHAUST FAN
33 - UNIT HEATER 34 - AIR COMPRESSOR
35 - LAUNDRY EQUIPMENT 36 - WATER HEATER
Packet Page No. 638
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
37 - GENERATOR 38 - AUTOMATIC TRANSFER SWITCH
39 - SWITCHBOARD 40 - DISTRIBUTION PANEL
41 - FIRE ALARM PANEL 42 - FRONT DRIVEWAY
Packet Page No. 639
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
43 - ASPHALT PARKING LOTS 44 - CONCRETE PARKING LOTS
45 - SIDEWALK 46 - EXTERIOR LIGHTS
47 - LANDSCAPING 48 - BACKFLOW PREVENTER
Packet Page No. 640
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix B:

Site and Floor Plans
Packet Page No. 641
Aerial Site Plan
Project Number Project Name
159125.22R000-006.017 Fire Station 28
Source On-Site Date
Google January 24, 2023
Packet Page No. 642
Floor Plan
Project Number Project Name
159125.22R000-006.017 Fire Station 28
Source On-Site Date
Owner January 24, 2023
Packet Page No. 643
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix C:

Pre-Survey Questionnaire
Packet Page No. 644
Building / Facility Name: Fire Station 28
Name of person completing form: Assessor
Title / Association w/ property:

Length of time associated w/ property:

Date Completed: 1/24/2023
Phone Number:

Year(s) constructed
Building size in SF
Major Renovation/Rehabilitation
None
None
None
BV FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT: PRE-SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE Directions: Please answer all questions to the best of your knowledge and in good faith. Please provide additional details in the Comments column, or backup documentation for any Yes responses.

Data Overview
1 2
3 List other significant capital
improvements (focus on recent years;
provide approximate date).
4 List any major capital expenditures
planned/requested for the next few
years. Have they been budgeted?
5 Describe any on-going extremely
problematic, historically chronic, or
immediate facility needs.
6 Response
Accessibility
18,000 SF
Additional Detail
Method of Completion: DURING - verbally completed during assessment Facade
Roof
Interiors
HVAC
Electrical
Site Pavement
None
As needed
None
2015
As needed
None
None
2005
Constructed Renovated
Year
Packet Page No. 645
Mark the column corresponding to the appropriate response. Please provide additional details in the Comments column, or backup documentation for any Yes responses. (NA indicates "Not Applicable", Unk indicates "Unknown") Are there any problems with
foundations or structures, like
excessive settlement?
Are there any wall, window,
basement or roof leaks?
Has any part of the facility ever
contained visible suspect mold
growth, or have there been any
indoor air quality complaints?
Are your elevators unreliable, with
frequent service calls?
Are there any plumbing leaks, water
pressure, or clogging/backup issues?
Have there been any leaks or
pressure problems with natural gas,
HVAC piping, or steam service?
Are any areas of the facility
inadequately heated, cooled or
ventilated? Poorly insulated areas?
Is the electrical service outdated,
undersized, or problematic?
Are there any problems or
inadequacies with exterior lighting?
Is site/parking drainage inadequate,
with excessive ponding or other
problems?
Are there any other unresolved
construction defects or significant
issues/hazards at the property that
have not yet been identified above?
ADA: Has an accessibility study been
previously performed? If so, when?
ADA: Have any ADA improvements
been made to the property since
original construction? Describe.

ADA: Has building management
reported any accessibility-based
complaints or litigation?
Question Response Comments
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16
17 18
19 20
Signature of Assessor Signature of POC
Yes No Unk NA
Are any areas of the property leased
to outside occupants? 21
Packet Page No. 646
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix D:

Accessibility Review and Photos
Packet Page No. 647
Visual Checklist - 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist
Facility History & Interview
Question Yes No Unk Comments
Has an accessibility study been previously
performed? If so, when?
Have any ADA improvements been made to
the property since original construction?
Describe.

Has building management reported any
accessibility-based complaints or litigation?
1 2
3 Property Name: Fire Station 28
BV Project Number: 159125.22R000-006.017
Packet Page No. 648
Parking
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

CURB CUT ACCESSIBLE PATH
Question Yes No NA Comments
Is an accessible route present from public
transportation stops and municipal sidewalks
on or immediately adjacent to the property ?
1 Does a minimum of one accessible route
appear to connect all public areas on the
exterior, such as parking and other outdoor
amenities, to accessible building entrances ?
2 Are curb ramps present at transitions through
raised curbs on all accessible routes? 3
Do curb ramps appear to have compliant
slopes for all components ? 4
Do ramp runs on an accessible route appear
to have compliant slopes ? 5
Do ramp runs on an accessible route appear
to have a compliant rise and width ? 6
Packet Page No. 650
Do ramps on an accessible route appear to
have compliant end and intermediate
landings ?
7 Do ramps and stairs on an accessible route
appear to have compliant handrails? 8
For stairways that are open underneath, are
permanent barriers present that prevent or
discourage access?
9 Packet Page No. 651
Building Entrances
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

MAIN ENTRANCE DOOR HARDWARE
Question Yes No NA Comments
Do a sufficient number of accessible
entrances appear to be provided ? 1
If the main entrance is not accessible, is an
alternate accessible entrance provided? 2
Is signage provided indicating the location of
alternate accessible entrances ? 3
Do doors at accessible entrances appear to
have compliant maneuvering clearance area
on each side ?
4 Do doors at accessible entrances appear to
have compliant hardware ? 5
Do doors at accessible entrances appear to
have a compliant clear opening width ? 6
Packet Page No. 652
Do pairs of accessible entrance doors in
series appear to have the minimum clear
space between them ?
7 Do thresholds at accessible entrances appear
to have a compliant height ? 8
Packet Page No. 653
Interior Accessible Route
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR PATH DOOR HARDWARE
Question Yes No NA Comments
Does an accessible route appear to connect
all public areas inside the building ? 1
Do accessible routes appear free of
obstructions and/or protruding objects ? 2
Do ramps on accessible routes appear to
have compliant slopes ? 3
Do ramp runs on an accessible route appear
to have a compliant rise and width ? 4
Do ramps on accessible routes appear to
have compliant end and intermediate
landings ?
5 Do ramps on accessible routes appear to
have compliant handrails ? 6
Packet Page No. 654
Are accessible areas of refuge and the
accessible means of egress to those areas
identified with accessible signage ?
7 Do public transaction areas have an
accessible, lowered service counter section ? 8
Do public telephones appear mounted with an
accessible height and location ? 9
Do doors at interior accessible routes appear
to have compliant maneuvering clearance
area on each side ?
10 Do doors at interior accessible routes appear
to have compliant hardware ? 11
Do non-fire hinged, sliding, or folding doors on
interior accessible routes appear to have
compliant opening force ?
12 Do doors on interior accessible routes appear
to have a compliant clear opening width ? 13
Packet Page No. 655
Elevators
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

LOBBY LOOKING AT CAB IN-CAB CONTROLS
Question Yes No NA Comments
Are hallway call buttons configured with the
“UP” button above the “DOWN” button? 1
Is accessible floor identification signage
present on the hoistway sidewalls on each
level ?
2 Do the elevators have audible and visual
arrival indicators at the lobby and hallway
entrances?
3 Do the elevator hoistway and car interior
appear to have a minimum compliant clear
floor area ?
4 Do the elevator car doors have automatic reopening devices to prevent closure on obstructions?
5 Do elevator car control buttons appear to be
mounted at a compliant height ? 6
Packet Page No. 656
Are tactile and Braille characters mounted to
the left of each elevator car control button ? 7
Are audible and visual floor position indicators
provided in the elevator car? 8
Is the emergency call system on or adjacent
to the control panel and does it not require
voice communication ?
9 Packet Page No. 657
Public Restrooms
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

TOILET STALL OVERVIEW SINK, FAUCET HANDLES AND ACCESSORIES Question Yes No NA Comments
Do publicly accessible toilet rooms appear to
have a minimum compliant floor area ? 1
Does the lavatory appear to be mounted at a
compliant height and with compliant knee
area ?
2 Does the lavatory faucet have compliant
handles ? 3
Is the plumbing piping under lavatories
configured to protect against contact ? 4
Are grab bars provided at compliant locations
around the toilet ? 5
Do toilet stall doors appear to provide the
minimum compliant clear width ? 6
Packet Page No. 658
Do toilet stalls appear to provide the minimum
compliant clear floor area ? 7
Where more than one urinal is present in a
multi-user restroom, does minimum one urinal
appear to be mounted at a compliant height
and with compliant approach width ?
8 Do accessories and mirrors appear to be
mounted at a compliant height ? 9
Packet Page No. 659
Kitchens/Kitchenettes
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

KITCHEN CABINETS OVEN WITH CONTROLS
Question Yes No NA Comments
Do kitchens/kitchenettes appear to have a
minimum compliant path of travel or area of
maneuverability ?
1 Are the appliances centered for a parallel or
forward approach with adequate clear floor
space ?
2 Is there an accessible countertop/preparation
space of proper width and height ? 3
Is there an accessible sink space of proper
width and height ? 4
Does the sink faucet have compliant
handles ? 5
Is the plumbing piping under the sink
configured to protect against contact ? 6
Packet Page No. 660
Are the cooktop/range controls front-mounted
(or in a location that does not require reaching
across the burners) ?
7 Packet Page No. 661
Playgrounds & Swimming Pools
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist
Playgrounds & Swimming Pools section not applicable at this site.

Packet Page No. 662
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix E:

Component Condition Report
Packet Page No. 663
Packet Page No. 664
Packet Page No. 665
Packet Page No. 666
FIRE STATION 28 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-006.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix F:

Replacement Reserves
Packet Page No. 667
Packet Page No. 668
Packet Page No. 669
Fire Station 29
35775 Ruschin Drive
Newark, California 94560

FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT
prepared for
City of Newark
37101 Newark Boulevard
Newark, California 94560
PREPARED BY:

Bureau Veritas
10461 Mill Run Circle, Suite 1100
Owings Mills, MD 21117
800.733.0660
www.us.bureauveritas.com
BV CONTACT:

Mary Venable
Program Manager
800.733.0660 x7292719
[email protected]
BV PROJECT #:
159125.22R000-007.017
DATE OF REPORT:

February 23, 2023
ON SITE DATE:

January 29, 2023
Bureau Veritas
10461 Mill Run Circle, Suite 1100 | Owings Mills, MD 21117 | www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660 Packet Page No. 670
Fire Station 29 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-007.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. 1 Property Overview and Assessment Details .......................................................................................... 1 Significant/Systemic Findings and Deficiencies ..................................................................................... 2 Facility Condition Index (FCI) ................................................................................................................. 3 Immediate Needs.................................................................................................................................... 5 Key Findings ........................................................................................................................................... 7 Plan Types............................................................................................................................................ 10

2. Building and Site Information ........................................................................................................... 11

3. Property Space Use and Observed Areas ....................................................................................... 14

4. ADA Accessibility............................................................................................................................... 15

5. Purpose and Scope ............................................................................................................................ 16

6. Opinions of Probable Costs .............................................................................................................. 18 Methodology ......................................................................................................................................... 18 Definitions ............................................................................................................................................. 18

7. Certification......................................................................................................................................... 20

8. Appendices ......................................................................................................................................... 21 Packet Page No. 671
FIRE STATION 29 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-007.017 1 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

1. Ex ec ut iv e S um m a ry
Property Overview and Assessment Details
General Information
Property Type Fire Station
Main Address 35775 Ruschin Drive
Newark, California 94560
Site Developed 1962 Renovated: 1975
Site Area 0.58 acres
Parking Spaces 10 total spaces all in open lots; 1 of which are accessible.

Building Area 5,142 SF
Number of Stories 1
Outside Occupants / Leased Spaces None
Date(s) of Visit January 29, 2023
Management Point of Contact Andrea Gifford
Group 4 Architecture Research + Planning, Inc.

Principal
415.531.4456
[email protected]
On-site Point of Contact (POC) Mark Valdez
Assessment and Report Prepared By Kay van der Have
Reviewed By Matthew Anderson
Technical Report Reviewer for:

Mary Venable
800.733.0660 x7292719
[email protected]
AssetCalc Link Full dataset for this assessment can be found at:
https://www.assetcalc.net/
Packet Page No. 672
FIRE STATION 29 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-007.017 2 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Significant/Systemic Findings and Deficiencies
Historical Summary
The fire station was built in 1962. It was later enlarged, providing more dormitory space as well as more common areas.

The expansion maintained the original exterior architectural vocabulary.

Architectural
The exterior walls are load bearing concrete block, the windows are aluminum framed and the roofing is lightweight concrete tile. These materials provide long, fairly maintenance free service. The roof framing and interior partitions are wood. Some fascia problems were noted, possible termite damage and a dryrot situation, both of these issues should be addressed in the near term. A pest control inspection is recommended. Ffascia replacement with gutter extension has also been budgeted.

Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing and Fire (MEPF)
The electrical system appears dated short term replacement is recommended. HVAC and the plumbing infrastructure are in generally serviceable working order. The building has a fire sprinkler system but no fire alarm system and is also missing carbon monoxide detectors. The existing emergency generator is very old and cannot supply the entire building with emergency power. Short term replacement is recommended.

Site
The parking lot has been periodically repaved, sealing and striping is due. There is currently no way to control access to the site, fencing is highly recommended.

Recommended Additional Studies
Some of the wood fascia is showing insect caused damage. A professional consultant must be retained to analyze the existing condition, provide recommendations and, if necessary, estimate the scope and cost of any required repairs. The cost of this study and some fascia replacement is included in the cost tables.

Based on the history of past complaints and some observed areas of non-compliance a full measured ADA Study is recommended.

Packet Page No. 673
FIRE STATION 29 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-007.017 3 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Facility Condition Index (FCI)
One of the major goals of the FCA is to calculate each building’s Facility Condition Index (FCI), which provides a theoretical objective indication of a building’s overall condition. By definition, the FCI is defined as the ratio of the cost of current needs divided by current replacement value (CRV) of the facility. The chart below presents the industry standard ranges and cutoff points.

Packet Page No. 674
FIRE STATION 29 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-007.017 4 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
The orange line in the graph below forecasts what would happen to the FCI (left Y axis) over time, assuming zero capital expenditures. The capital expenditures allocated for each year (blue bars) are associated with the dollar amounts along the right Y axis.

Needs by Year with Unaddressed FCI Over Time
Packet Page No. 675
FIRE STATION 29 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-007.017 5 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Immediate Needs
Packet Page No. 676
FIRE STATION 29 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-007.017 6 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Packet Page No. 677
FIRE STATION 29 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-007.017 7 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Key Findings
Fences & Gates
Fence, Metal Tube 6'
Fire Station 29 Site
Uniformat Code: G2060
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 90.9
Plan Type: Safety
Cost Estimate: $63,700
$$$$
Security for the site should be provided - AssetCALC ID: 5165179 Recommended Follow-up Study:

Structural, Seismic
Structural, Seismic
Fire Station 29
Uniformat Code: P2030
Recommendation: Evaluate/Report in 2023
Priority Score: 90.9
Plan Type: Safety
Cost Estimate: $43,600
$$$$
- AssetCALC ID: 7215559
Fire Alarm Devices in Poor
condition.

Carbon Monoxide Detector
Fire Station 29 Sleeping and living area
Uniformat Code: D7050
Recommendation: Install in 2023
Priority Score: 90.9
Plan Type: Safety
Cost Estimate: $800
$$$$
No CO detectors are present but there are gas-fired equipment in the facility - AssetCALC ID: 5352964 Wood Fascia in Poor condition.

Damaged
Fire Station 29 Building Exterior
Uniformat Code: A2010
Recommendation: Repair in 2023
Priority Score: 86.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $9,300
$$$$
Damaged fascia, it could be termites, and should be replaced - AssetCALC ID: 5165211 Packet Page No. 678
FIRE STATION 29 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-007.017 8 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Recommended Follow-up Study:

Possible Damage
Possible Damage
Fire Station 29 Fascia & Framing
Uniformat Code: P2030
Recommendation: Inspection in 2023
Priority Score: 81.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $3,300
$$$$
Damage at the Fascia appears to be from termites or other wood destroying insect and should be reviewed by a professional. - AssetCALC ID: 5165234
ADA Miscellaneous
Reception Desk, Writing Surface
Fire Station 29 Entry
Uniformat Code: Y1090
Recommendation: Modify in 2023
Priority Score: 63.9
Plan Type: Accessibility
Cost Estimate: $2,000
$$$$
Counter not configured for accessibility - AssetCALC ID: 5165222 ADA Kitchen & Laundry Areas
Sink/Counter/Maneuverability, Full
Reconfiguration
Fire Station 29 Kitchen
Uniformat Code: Y1060
Recommendation: Renovate in 2023
Priority Score: 63.9
Plan Type: Accessibility
Cost Estimate: $32,700
$$$$
Cabinet not configured for accessibility - AssetCALC ID: 5165193 ADA Van Parking
Signage, Pole-Mounted
Fire Station 29 Parking lot
Uniformat Code: Y1010
Recommendation: Modify in 2023
Priority Score: 63.9
Plan Type: Accessibility
Cost Estimate: $1,100
$$$$
No marked van spaces - AssetCALC ID: 5165182
Packet Page No. 679
FIRE STATION 29 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-007.017 9 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
ADA Miscellaneous
Level III Study, Includes Measurements
Fire Station 29
Uniformat Code: Y1090
Recommendation: Evaluate/Report in 2023
Priority Score: 63.9
Plan Type: Accessibility
Cost Estimate: $16,400
$$$$
- AssetCALC ID: 7215653
Residential Appliances
Range, Gas
Fire Station 29 Kitchen
Uniformat Code: E1060
Recommendation: Replace in 2024
Priority Score: 63.9
Plan Type: Accessibility
Cost Estimate: $1,500
$$$$
No front controls, Does not meet ADA. - AssetCALC ID: 5165206 Generator in Failed condition.

Diesel, 35 to 60 KW
Fire Station 29 Building exterior
Uniformat Code: D5010
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 61.9
Plan Type:

Retrofit/Adaptation
Cost Estimate: $87,300
$$$$
This generator fails to address the emergency power needs of the station - AssetCALC ID: 5165233 Supplemental Components
Oil Water Separator, Underground
Fire Station 29
Uniformat Code: D2020
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 59.9
Plan Type:

Retrofit/Adaptation
Cost Estimate: $68,300
$$$$
New oil water separator for truck washing - AssetCALC ID: 7215558 Packet Page No. 680
FIRE STATION 29 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-007.017 10 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Plan Types
Each line item in the cost database is assigned a Plan Type, which is the primary reason or rationale for the recommended replacement, repair, or other corrective action. This is the “why” part of the equation. A cost or line item may commonly have more than one applicable Plan Type; however, only one Plan Type will be assigned based on the “best” fit, typically the one with the greatest significance.

Plan Type Descriptions
Safety  An observed or reported unsafe condition that if left unaddressed could result in injury; a system or component that presents potential liability risk.

Performance/Integrity  Component or system has failed, is almost failing, performs unreliably, does not perform as intended, and/or poses risk to overall system stability.

Accessibility  Does not meet ADA, UFAS, and/or other handicap accessibility requirements.

Environmental  Improvements to air or water quality, including removal of hazardous materials from the building or site.

Retrofit/Adaptation  Components, systems, or spaces recommended for upgrades in in order to meet current standards, facility usage, or client/occupant needs.

Lifecycle/Renewal  Any component or system that is not currently deficient or problematic but for which future replacement or repair is anticipated and budgeted.

Plan Type Distribution (by Cost)
Packet Page No. 681
FIRE STATION 29 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-007.017 11 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

2. B u il di ng a nd Si t e I nf orm at i on
Systems Summary
System Description Condition
Structure Masonry bearing walls with wood roof deck supported by wood joists over a concrete slab on grade
Fair
Facade Primary Wall Finish : CMU
Windows: Aluminum
Fair
Roof Primary: Hip construction with concrete tiles Fair Interiors Walls: Painted gypsum board painted CMU
Floors: Carpet, VCT, sheet vinyl, sealed concrete
Ceilings: Painted gypsum board and exposed
Fair
Elevators None n/a
Plumbing Distribution: Copper supply and cast-iron waste and venting Hot Water: Gas water heater with integral tank
Fixtures: Toilets, urinals, and sinks in all restrooms
Fair
HVAC Non-Central System: Furnace with split-system condensing units Supplemental components: Suspended unit heaters
Good
Fire Suppression Wet-pipe sprinkler system and fire extinguishers Fair Electrical Source and Distribution: Main panel with copper wiring Interior Lighting: Linear fluorescent
Emergency Power: Gasoline generator with automatic transfer switch Fair
Packet Page No. 682
FIRE STATION 29 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-007.017 12 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Systems Summary
Fire Alarm One smoke detector Poor
Equipment/Special Plymovent system for fire truck inspection Good Site Pavement Asphalt lots with limited areas of concrete aprons and pavement. Concrete sidewalks, curbs, ramps
Fair
Site Development Building-mounted signage; no fencing; CMU wall dumpster enclosure Fair Landscaping &
Topography
Limited landscaping features including lawns, trees, bushes, and planters Irrigation present
No retaining walls
Low site slopes throughout
Fair
Utilities Municipal water and sewer
Local utility-provided electric and natural gas
Good
Site Lighting Pole-mounted: HPS
Building-mounted: HPS
Fair
Ancillary Structures None n/a
Accessibility Presently it does not appear an accessibility study is needed for this property. n/a Key Issues and
Findings
No way to secure the site,
Extremely aged emergency generator
No Carbon Monoxide detector observed
Packet Page No. 683
FIRE STATION 29 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-007.017 13 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Packet Page No. 684
FIRE STATION 29 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-007.017 14 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

Key Spaces Not Observed
All key areas of the property were accessible and observed.

Packet Page No. 685
FIRE STATION 29 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-007.017 15 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

4. AD A Ac c es s ib il it y
Generally, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) prohibits discrimination by entities to access and use of “areas of public accommodations” and “public facilities” on the basis of disability. Regardless of their age, these areas and facilities must be maintained and operated to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG).

A public entity (i.e. city governments) shall operate each service, program, or activity so that the service, program, or activity, when viewed in its entirety, is readily accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities.

However, this does not:

1. Necessarily require a public entity to make each of its existing facilities accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities;

2. Require a public entity to take any action that would threaten or destroy the historic significance of an historic property; or

3. Require a public entity to take any action that it can demonstrate would result in a fundamental alteration in the nature of a service, program, or activity or in undue financial and administrative burdens. In those circumstances where personnel of the public entity believe that the proposed action would fundamentally alter the service, program, or activity or would result in undue financial and administrative burdens, a public entity has the burden of proving that compliance with 35.150(a) of this part would result in such alteration or burdens. The decision that compliance would result in such alteration or burdens must be made by the head of a public entity or his or her designee after considering all resources available for use in the funding and operation of the service, program, or activity, and must be accompanied by a written statement of the reasons for reaching that conclusion. If an action would result in such an alteration or such burdens, a public entity shall take any other action that would not result in such an alteration or such burdens but would nevertheless ensure that individuals with disabilities receive the benefits or services provided by the public entity.

Additional clarifications of this limited survey:
▪ This survey was visual in nature and actual measurements were not taken to verify compliance ▪ Only a representative sample of areas was observed
▪ Two overview photos were taken for each subsection regardless of perceived compliance or non-compliance ▪ Itemized costs for individual non-compliant items are included in the dataset ▪ For any “none” boxes checked or reference to “no issues” identified, that alone does not guarantee full compliance The facility was originally constructed in 1962. The facility was enlarged, date unknown, but few accessibility improvements appear to have been implemented at that time.

Complaints about accessibility issues have been received by property management, although no prior or pending litigation was reported.

A detailed follow-up accessibility study is included as a recommendation because potential moderate to major issues were observed at the subject site. Reference the appendix for specific data, photos, and tables or checklists associated with this limited accessibility survey.

Packet Page No. 686
FIRE STATION 29 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-007.017 16 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

5. P u rp os e an d Sc op e
Purpose
Bureau Veritas was retained by the client to render an opinion as to the Property’s current general physical condition on the day of the site visit.

The physical condition of building systems and related components are typically defined as being in one of five condition ratings. For the purposes of this report, the following definitions are used:

Failed Component or system has ceased functioning or performing as intended. Replacement, repair, or other significant corrective action is recommended or required.

Not Applicable Assigning a condition does not apply or make logical sense, most commonly due to the item in question not being present.

Packet Page No. 687
FIRE STATION 29 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-007.017 17 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Scope
The standard scope of the Facility Condition Assessment includes the following:
▪ Visit the Property to evaluate the general condition of the building and site improvements, review available construction documents in order to familiarize ourselves with, and be able to comment on, the in-place construction systems, life safety, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems, and the general built environment. ▪ Identify those components that are exhibiting deferred maintenance issues and provide cost estimates for Immediate Costs and Replacement Reserves based on observed conditions, maintenance history and industry standard useful life estimates. This will include the review of documented capital improvements completed within the last five-year period and work currently contracted for, if applicable.
▪ Provide a full description of the Property with descriptions of in-place systems and commentary on observed conditions. ▪ Provide a high-level categorical general statement regarding the subject Property’s compliance to Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act. This will not constitute a full ADA survey, but will help identify exposure to issues and the need for further review.
▪ Obtain background and historical information about the facility from a building engineer, property manager, maintenance staff, or other knowledgeable source. The preferred methodology is to have the client representative or building occupant complete a Pre-Survey Questionnaire (PSQ) in advance of the site visit. Common alternatives include a verbal interview just prior to or during the walk-through portion of the assessment. ▪ Review maintenance records and procedures with the in-place maintenance personnel. ▪ Observe a representative sample of the interior spaces/units, including vacant spaces/units, to gain a clear understanding of the property’s overall condition. Other areas to be observed include the exterior of the property, the roofs, interior common areas, and the significant mechanical, electrical and elevator equipment rooms. ▪ Provide recommendations for additional studies, if required, with related budgetary information. ▪ Provide an Executive Summary at the beginning of this report, which highlights key findings and includes a Facility Condition Index as a basis for comparing the relative conditions of the buildings within the portfolio.

Packet Page No. 688
FIRE STATION 29 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-007.017 18 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

6. O p in io ns o f P ro b ab le C os t s
Cost estimates are attached throughout this report, with the Replacement Reserves in the appendix.

For database and reporting purposes the line items with RUL=0, and commonly associated with Safety or Performance/Integrity Plan Types, are considered Immediate Needs.

Replacement costs are solicited from ownership/property management, Bureau Veritas’s discussions with service companies, manufacturers' representatives, and previous experience in preparing such schedules for other similar facilities.

Costs for work performed by the ownership’s or property management’s maintenance staff are also considered.

Packet Page No. 689
FIRE STATION 29 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-007.017 19 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Bureau Veritas’s reserve methodology involves identification and quantification of those systems or components requiring capital reserve funds within the assessment period. The assessment period is defined as the effective age plus the reserve term. Additional information concerning system’s or component’s respective replacement costs (in today's dollars), typical expected useful lives, and remaining useful lives were estimated so that a funding schedule could be prepared. The Replacement Reserves Schedule presupposes that all required remedial work has been performed or that monies for remediation have been budgeted for items defined as Immediate Needs.

Exceedingly Aged
A fairly common scenario encountered during the assessment process, and a frequent source of debate, occurs when classifying and describing “very old” systems or components that are still functioning adequately and do not appear nor were reported to be in any way deficient. To help provide some additional intelligence on these items, such components will be tagged in the database as Exceedingly Aged. This designation will be reserved for mechanical or electrical systems or components that have aged well beyond their industry standard lifecycles, typically at least 15 years beyond and/or twice their Estimated Useful Life (EUL). In tandem with this designation, these items will be assigned a Remaining Useful Life (RUL) not less than two years but not greater than 1/3 of their standard EUL. As such the recommended replacement time for these components will reside outside the typical Short-Term window but will not be pushed ‘irresponsibly’ (too far) into the future.

Packet Page No. 690
FIRE STATION 29 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-007.017 20 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

7. C e rt if ic at io n
Group 4 Arch, City of Newark, Facilities Master Plan (the Client) retained Bureau Veritas to perform this Facility Condition Assessment in connection with its continued operation of Fire Station 29, 35775 Ruschin Drive, Newark, California 94560, the “Property”. It is our understanding that the primary interest of the Client is to locate and evaluate materials and building system defects that might significantly affect the value of the property and to determine if the present Property has conditions that will have a significant impact on its continued operations.

Prepared by: Kay van der Have
Project Manager
Reviewed by:

Matthew Anderson
Technical Report Reviewer for
Mary Venable
Program Manager
[email protected]
800.733.0660 x7292719
Packet Page No. 691
FIRE STATION 29 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-007.017 21 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

8. A p pe nd ic es
Appendix A: Photographic Record
Appendix B: Site and Floor Plan
Appendix C: Pre-Survey Questionnaire
Appendix D: Accessibility Review and Photos
Appendix E: Component Condition Report
Appendix F: Replacement Reserves
Packet Page No. 692
FIRE STATION 29 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-007.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix A:

P h ot o gr a p h ic R ec o rd
Packet Page No. 693
FIRE STATION 29 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-007.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
1 - FRONT ELEVATION 2 - LEFT ELEVATION
3 - RIGHT ELEVATION 4 – APARATUS BAY
5 - RECREATION ROOM 6 - WORKOUT ROOM
Packet Page No. 694
FIRE STATION 29 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-007.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
7 - DORMITORY 8 - SHOWERS
9 - HEATING MAIN COMPONENTS 10 - MAIN ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT 11 - WATER HEATER 12 - GENERATOR
Packet Page No. 695
FIRE STATION 29 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-007.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix B:

S it e a nd F lo o r P l a n
Packet Page No. 696
Aerial Site Plan
Project Number Project Name
159125.22R000-007.017 Fire Station 29
Source On-Site Date
Google February 7, 2023
Packet Page No. 697
Floor Plan – before addition
Project Number Project Name
159125.22R000-007.017 Fire Station 29
Source On-Site Date
CSM February 7, 2023
Packet Page No. 698
FIRE STATION 29 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-007.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix C:

P r e - Su rv ey Q ue s t i o n na i re
Packet Page No. 699

PRE-SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
Name of Person Completing Questionnaire: N/A - Not returned to EMG Association with Property:

Length of Assocation with Property:

Date Completed:

Phone Number:

Property Name:

EMG Project Number:

Inspections Date Last
Inspected
List any Outstanding Repairs Required
1 Elevators
2 HVAC, Mechanical,
Electric, Plumbing
3 Life-Safety/Fire
4 Roofs
Question Response
5 List any major capital improvement within
the last three years.
6 List any major capital expenditures
planned for the next year.
7 What is the age of the roof(s)?
8 What building systems (HVAC, roof,
interior/exterior finishes, paving, etc.) are
the responsibilities of the tenant to
maintain and replace?
Question Yes No Unk N/A Comments
9 Are there any unresolved building, fire, or
zoning code issues?
10 Are there any "down" or unusable units?
11 Are there any problems with erosion,
stormwater drainage or areas of paving that
do not drain?
12 Is the property served by a private water
well?
13 Is the property served by a private septic
system or other waste treatment systems?
14 Are there any problems with foundations or
structures?
15 Is there any water infiltration in basements or
crawl spaces?
16 Are there any wall, or window leaks?
17 Are there any roof leaks?
18 Is the roofing covered by a warranty or bond?
19 Are there any poorly insulated areas?
20 Is Fire Retardant Treated (FRT) plywood
used?
Packet Page No. 700

PRE-SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
Question Yes No Unk N/A Comments
21 Is exterior insulation and finish system (EIFS)
or a synthetic stucco finish used?
22 Are there any problems with the utilities, such
as inadequate capacities?
23 Are there any problems with the landscape
irrigation systems?
24 Has a termite/wood boring insect inspection
been performed within the last year?
25 Do any of the HVAC systems use R-11, 12,
or 22 refrigerants?
26 Has any part of the property ever contained
visible suspect mold growth?
27 Is there a mold Operations and Maintenance
Plan?
28 Have there been indoor air quality or mold
related complaints from tenants?
29 Is polybutylene piping used?
30 Are there any plumbing leaks or water
pressure problems?
31 Are there any leaks or pressure problems
with natural gas service?
32 Does any part of the electrical system use
aluminum wiring?
33 Do Residential units have a less than
60-Amp service?
34 Do Commercial units have less than
200-Amp service?
35 Are there any recalled fire sprinkler heads
(Star, GEM, Central, Omega)?
36 Is there any pending litigation concerning the
property?
37 Has the management previously completed
an ADA review?
38 Have any ADA improvements been made to
the property?
39 Does a Barrier Removal Plan exist for the
property?
40 Has the Barrier Removal Plan been approved
by an arms-length third party?
41 Has building ownership or management
received any ADA related complaints?
42 Does elevator equipment require upgrades to
meet ADA standards?
43 Are there any problems with exterior lighting?
44 Are there any other significant
issues/hazards with the property?
Packet Page No. 701

PRE-SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE
Question Yes No Unk N/A Comments
45 Are there any unresolved construction
defects at the property?
Comments
Packet Page No. 702
FIRE STATION 29 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-007.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix D:

Ac c es s ib ilit y Re v i e w a n d P h ot os
Packet Page No. 703
Visual Checklist - 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist
Facility History & Interview
Question Yes No Unk Comments
Has an accessibility study been previously
performed? If so, when?
Have any ADA improvements been made to
the property since original construction?
Describe.

Has building management reported any
accessibility-based complaints or litigation?
exterior ramp to entry
1 2
3 Property Name:

BV Project Number: 159125.22R000 - 007.017
Fire Station 29 (2)
Packet Page No. 704
Parking
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

ACCESSIBLE RAMP CURB CUT
Question Yes No NA Comments
Is an accessible route present from public
transportation stops and municipal sidewalks
on or immediately adjacent to the property ?
1 Does a minimum of one accessible route
appear to connect all public areas on the
exterior, such as parking and other outdoor
amenities, to accessible building entrances ?
2 Are curb ramps present at transitions through
raised curbs on all accessible routes? 3
Do curb ramps appear to have compliant
slopes for all components ? 4
Do ramp runs on an accessible route appear
to have compliant slopes ? 5
Do ramp runs on an accessible route appear
to have a compliant rise and width ? 6
Packet Page No. 706
Do ramps on an accessible route appear to
have compliant end and intermediate
landings ?
7 Do ramps and stairs on an accessible route
appear to have compliant handrails? 8
For stairways that are open underneath, are
permanent barriers present that prevent or
discourage access?
9 No exterior stairways
Packet Page No. 707
Building Entrances
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

ACCESSIBLE ENTRANCE DOOR HARDWARE
Question Yes No NA Comments
Do a sufficient number of accessible
entrances appear to be provided ? 1
If the main entrance is not accessible, is an
alternate accessible entrance provided? 2 Main entry is accessible Is signage provided indicating the location of
alternate accessible entrances ? 3 Main entry is accessible Do doors at accessible entrances appear to
have compliant maneuvering clearance area
on each side ?
4 Do doors at accessible entrances appear to
have compliant hardware ? 5
Do doors at accessible entrances appear to
have a compliant clear opening width ? 6
Packet Page No. 708
Do pairs of accessible entrance doors in
series appear to have the minimum clear
space between them ?
7 No doors in series
Do thresholds at accessible entrances appear
to have a compliant height ? 8
Packet Page No. 709
Interior Accessible Route
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR PATH PUBLIC COUNTER
Question Yes No NA Comments
Does an accessible route appear to connect
all public areas inside the building ? 1
Do accessible routes appear free of
obstructions and/or protruding objects ? 2
Do ramps on accessible routes appear to
have compliant slopes ? 3 No interior ramps
Do ramp runs on an accessible route appear
to have a compliant rise and width ? 4 No interior ramps Do ramps on accessible routes appear to
have compliant end and intermediate
landings ?
5 No interior ramps
Do ramps on accessible routes appear to
have compliant handrails ? 6 No interior ramps
Packet Page No. 710
Are accessible areas of refuge and the
accessible means of egress to those areas
identified with accessible signage ?
7 No areas of refuge
Do public transaction areas have an
accessible, lowered service counter section ? 8
Do public telephones appear mounted with an
accessible height and location ? 9 No public phones
Do doors at interior accessible routes appear
to have compliant maneuvering clearance
area on each side ?
10 Do doors at interior accessible routes appear
to have compliant hardware ? 11
Do non-fire hinged, sliding, or folding doors on
interior accessible routes appear to have
compliant opening force ?
12 Do doors on interior accessible routes appear
to have a compliant clear opening width ? 13
Packet Page No. 711
Elevators
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist
Elevators section not applicable at this site.

Packet Page No. 712
Public Restrooms
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

TOILET STALL OVERVIEW SINK, FAUCET HANDLES AND ACCESSORIES Question Yes No NA Comments
Do publicly accessible toilet rooms appear to
have a minimum compliant floor area ? 1
Does the lavatory appear to be mounted at a
compliant height and with compliant knee
area ?
2 Does the lavatory faucet have compliant
handles ? 3
Is the plumbing piping under lavatories
configured to protect against contact ? 4
Are grab bars provided at compliant locations
around the toilet ? 5
Do toilet stall doors appear to provide the
minimum compliant clear width ? 6
Packet Page No. 713
Do toilet stalls appear to provide the minimum
compliant clear floor area ? 7
Where more than one urinal is present in a
multi-user restroom, does minimum one urinal
appear to be mounted at a compliant height
and with compliant approach width ?
8 There is only one urinal
Do accessories and mirrors appear to be
mounted at a compliant height ? 9
Packet Page No. 714
Kitchens/Kitchenettes
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

SINK CLEARANCE OVEN WITH CONTROLS
Question Yes No NA Comments
Do kitchens/kitchenettes appear to have a
minimum compliant path of travel or area of
maneuverability ?
1 Are the appliances centered for a parallel or
forward approach with adequate clear floor
space ?
2 Is there an accessible countertop/preparation
space of proper width and height ? 3
Is there an accessible sink space of proper
width and height ? 4
Does the sink faucet have compliant
handles ? 5
Is the plumbing piping under the sink
configured to protect against contact ? 6
Packet Page No. 715
Are the cooktop/range controls front-mounted
(or in a location that does not require reaching
across the burners) ?
7 Packet Page No. 716
FIRE STATION 29 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-007.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix E:

Co m p o n en t C on d it i on R e po r t
Packet Page No. 717
Packet Page No. 718
Packet Page No. 719
Packet Page No. 720
FIRE STATION 29 BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-007.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix F:

Re p lac e me nt Re s e rv e s
Packet Page No. 721
Packet Page No. 722
Packet Page No. 723
Old Fire Station
7700 Thornton Avenue
Newark, California 94560

FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT
prepared for
City of Newark
37101 Newark Boulevard
Newark, California 94560
PREPARED BY:

Bureau Veritas
10461 Mill Run Circle, Suite 1100
Owings Mills, MD 21117
800.733.0660
www.us.bureauveritas.com
BV CONTACT:

Mary Venable
Program Manager
800.733.0660 x7292719
[email protected]
BV PROJECT #:
159125.22R000-008.017
DATE OF REPORT:

March 6, 2023
ON SITE DATE:

January 20, 2023
Bureau Veritas
10461 Mill Run Circle, Suite 1100 | Owings Mills, MD 21117 | www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660 Packet Page No. 724
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. 1 Property Overview and Assessment Details .......................................................................................... 1 Significant/Systemic Findings and Deficiencies ..................................................................................... 2 Facility Condition Index (FCI) ................................................................................................................. 3 Immediate Needs.................................................................................................................................... 5 Key Findings ........................................................................................................................................... 9 Plan Types............................................................................................................................................ 12

2. Building and Site Information ........................................................................................................... 13

3. Property Space Use and Observed Areas ....................................................................................... 16

4. ADA Accessibility............................................................................................................................... 17

5. Purpose and Scope ............................................................................................................................ 18

6. Opinions of Probable Costs .............................................................................................................. 20 Methodology ......................................................................................................................................... 20 Definitions ............................................................................................................................................. 20

7. Certification......................................................................................................................................... 22

8. Appendices ......................................................................................................................................... 23 Packet Page No. 725
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 1 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

1. Ex ec ut iv e S um m a ry
Property Overview and Assessment Details
General Information
Property Type Fire Station
Main Address 7700 Thornton Avenue, Newark, California 94560 Site Developed 1980
Site Area 0.37 acres
Parking Spaces 20 total spaces all in open lots; 0 of which are accessible.

Building Area 4,852 SF
Number of Stories 1
Outside Occupants / Leased Spaces None
Date(s) of Visit January 20, 2023
Management Point of Contact Andrea Gifford
Group 4 Architecture Research + Planning, Inc.

Principal
415.531.4456
[email protected]
On-site Point of Contact (POC) Tonya Connolly
Assessment and Report Prepared By Nezar M. Tibi
Reviewed By Matthew Anderson
Technical Report Reviewer for:

Mary Venable
800.733.0660 x7292719
[email protected]
AssetCalc Link Full dataset for this assessment can be found at:
https://www.assetcalc.net/
Packet Page No. 726
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 2 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Significant/Systemic Findings and Deficiencies
Historical Summary
The old Fire Station was built in 1980.The building is abandoned and is being used for storage during the last 12 years.

Architectural
The building has a steel structure with steel framed roof over concrete slab foundation. Exterior walls are painted stucco with aluminum windows. Interior finishes are mostly in failed or poor condition and will require replacement.

Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing and Fire (MEPF)
Heating and cooling system is provided by one split system unit and one interior unit heater. These units are in failed condition. The electrical system is copper wiring and appears to be original to the construction of the building. There was no power to the building at the time of this assessment. Plumbing is copper supply with PVC waste system. The water is shut down for the building with fair and poor condition plumbing fixtures.

Site
The parking lot is in poor condition and will require a new asphalt pavement. Concrete sidewalk is in poor condition as well due to cracks and broken and uneven sections. Irrigation is present but is not operational. Some trees trimming will be required due to trees growing over the building.

Recommended Additional Studies
Some areas of the facility were identified as having major or moderate accessibility issues. Bureau Veritas recommends a study be performed to take measurements, provide additional itemized details, research local requirements, and, if necessary, estimate the scope and cost of any required improvements. The cost of this study is included in the cost tables. Due to the lack of measurements and itemized findings at this point in time, the costs for any possible subsequent repairs or improvements are not currently included.

The building contains spray on fireproofing on the roof members. Given the age of the initial construction the material could contain asbestos. Before any renovation takes place the fireproofing should be tested for asbestos. If the City already has an Asbestos Operations and Maintenance Plan for the building then testing is not required.

Packet Page No. 727
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 3 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Facility Condition Index (FCI)
One of the major goals of the FCA is to calculate each building’s Facility Condition Index (FCI), which provides a theoretical objective indication of a building’s overall condition. By definition, the FCI is defined as the ratio of the cost of current needs divided by current replacement value (CRV) of the facility. The chart below presents the industry standard ranges and cutoff points.

Packet Page No. 728
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 4 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
The orange line in the graph below forecasts what would happen to the FCI (left Y axis) over time, assuming zero capital expenditures. The capital expenditures allocated for each year (blue bars) are associated with the dollar amounts along the right Y axis.

Needs by Year with Unaddressed FCI Over Time
Packet Page No. 729
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 5 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Immediate Needs
Packet Page No. 730
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 6 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Packet Page No. 731
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 7 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Packet Page No. 732
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 8 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Packet Page No. 733
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 9 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Key Findings
Exterior Walls in Poor condition.

Stucco and Metal
Old Fire Station Building Exterior
Uniformat Code: B2010
Recommendation: Prep & Paint in 2023
Priority Score: 89.8
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $49,100
$$$$
New fresh paint is required. - AssetCALC ID: 5252661
Roofing in Poor condition.

Inspection and Repairs
Old Fire Station Roof
Uniformat Code: B3010
Recommendation: Repair in 2023
Priority Score: 88.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $4,800
$$$$
Signs of water intrusion observed in the interior. - AssetCALC ID: 5414903 Window in Poor condition.

Aluminum Double-Glazed, up to 15 SF
Old Fire Station Building Exterior
Uniformat Code: B2020
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 87.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $5,700
$$$$
Leaks were reported throughout the building's windows. - AssetCALC ID: 5252667 Sidewalk in Poor condition.

Concrete, Large Areas
Old Fire Station Site
Uniformat Code: G2030
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 85.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $23,600
$$$$
Uneven and broken concrete surface, replacement is required. - AssetCALC ID: 5252666 Packet Page No. 734
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 10 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Exhaust Fan in Poor condition.

Centrifugal, 28" Damper
Old Fire Station Garage bay
Uniformat Code: D3060
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 85.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $8,700
$$$$
The unit has not been used for a long time and will require inspection and possibly replacement. - AssetCALC ID: 5252689
Plumbing System in Failed
condition.

Supply & Sanitary, Low Density (includes
fixtures)
Old Fire Station Throughout building
Uniformat Code: D2010
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 84.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $74,100
$$$$
The plumbing system has not been in use for the last 12 years, repair will be mostly required. - AssetCALC ID:
5256859
Parking Lots in Poor condition.

Pavement, Asphalt
Old Fire Station Parking lot
Uniformat Code: G2020
Recommendation: Mill & Overlay in 2023
Priority Score: 84.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $29,000
$$$$
New fresh pavement is required. - AssetCALC ID: 5252660 Interior Clean up in Poor
condition.

Minor Repairs and Debris Removal
Old Fire Station Throughout
Uniformat Code: C1010
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 84.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $60,500
$$$$
There is trash and evidence of vandalism in the interior. - AssetCALC ID: 5414891 Packet Page No. 735
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 11 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Electrical System in Poor
condition.

Wiring & Switches, Average or Low
Density/Complexity
Old Fire Station Throughout building
Uniformat Code: D5030
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 84.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $26,500
$$$$
The electrical system is not operational. - AssetCALC ID: 5252656 Parking Lots in Poor condition.

Pavement, Asphalt
Old Fire Station Parking lot
Uniformat Code: G2020
Recommendation: Seal & Stripe in 2023
Priority Score: 84.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $3,700
$$$$
New fresh seal and stripe is required. - AssetCALC ID: 5252650 Toilet in Failed condition.

Commercial Water Closet
Old Fire Station Restrooms
Uniformat Code: D2010
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 83.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $8,500
$$$$
Units are not operational. Replacement is required. - AssetCALC ID: 5252687 Sink/Lavatory in Failed condition.

Wall-Hung, Vitreous China
Old Fire Station Restrooms
Uniformat Code: D2010
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 83.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $3,300
$$$$
Sinks is broken, replacement is required. - AssetCALC ID: 5252663 Packet Page No. 736
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 12 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Plan Types
Each line item in the cost database is assigned a Plan Type, which is the primary reason or rationale for the recommended replacement, repair, or other corrective action. This is the “why” part of the equation. A cost or line item may commonly have more than one applicable Plan Type; however, only one Plan Type will be assigned based on the “best” fit, typically the one with the greatest significance.

Plan Type Descriptions
Safety  An observed or reported unsafe condition that if left unaddressed could result in injury; a system or component that presents potential liability risk.

Performance/Integrity  Component or system has failed, is almost failing, performs unreliably, does not perform as intended, and/or poses risk to overall system stability.

Accessibility  Does not meet ADA, UFAS, and/or other handicap accessibility requirements.

Environmental  Improvements to air or water quality, including removal of hazardous materials from the building or site.

Retrofit/Adaptation  Components, systems, or spaces recommended for upgrades in in order to meet current standards, facility usage, or client/occupant needs.

Lifecycle/Renewal  Any component or system that is not currently deficient or problematic but for which future replacement or repair is anticipated and budgeted.

Plan Type Distribution (by Cost)
Packet Page No. 737
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 13 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

2. B u il di ng a nd Si t e I nf orm at i on
Systems Summary
System Description Condition
Structure Steel frame with concrete-topped metal decks over concrete raft foundation slab Good Facade Primary Wall Finish : Stucco
Secondary Wall Finish: Metal siding
Windows: Aluminum
Poor
Roof Primary: Flat construction with metal finish Fair
Interiors Walls: Painted gypsum board
Floors: Carpet, VCT, and unfinished concrete
Ceilings: Painted gypsum board, ACT and Unfinished/exposed Poor
Elevators None n/a
Plumbing Distribution: Copper supply and PVC waste and ventin Hot Water: None
Fixtures: Toilets, and sinks in all restrooms
Failed
HVAC Non-Central System: Split-system
Supplemental components: Suspended unit heater
Failed
Fire Suppression None n/a
Packet Page No. 738
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 14 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Systems Summary
Electrical Source and Distribution: Main panel with copper wiring Interior Lighting: incandescent
Emergency Power: None
Failed
Fire Alarm None n/a
Equipment/Special None n/a
Site Pavement Asphalt lots with limited areas of concrete aprons and pavement and adjacent concrete sidewalks and curbs.

Poor
Site Development No Property entrance signage; chain link fencing; Fair Landscaping and
Topography
Limited landscaping features including lawns, trees, and bushes Irrigation present but not operations
No retaining walls
Low to moderate site slopes throughout
Poor
Utilities Municipal water and sewer
Local utility-provided electric and natural gas
Missing
Site Lighting Pole-mounted: None
Building-mounted: None
n/a
Ancillary Structures None n/a
Accessibility Potential moderate/major issues have been identified at this property and a detailed accessibility study is recommended.

Key Issues and
Findings
Exterior painting, broken windows, rusted entrance doors, antiquated HVAC components and infrastructure, building lacks fire suppression, aged electrical infrastructure, heavy asphalt wear, severe alligator cracking and potholes, significant sidewalk trip hazards, widespread irrigation leaks, plumbing fixtures, residential appliances, trees trimming, casework cabinets, replace all interior finishes, roof gutters, exterior light fixtures
Packet Page No. 739
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 15 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Packet Page No. 740
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 16 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

Key Spaces Not Observed
All key areas of the property were accessible and observed.

Packet Page No. 741
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 17 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

4. AD A Ac c es s i bil it y
Generally, Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) prohibits discrimination by entities to access and use of “areas of public accommodations” and “commercial facilities” on the basis of disability. Regardless of its age, these areas and facilities must be maintained and operated to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG).

Additional clarifications of this limited survey:
▪ This survey was visual in nature and actual measurements were not taken to verify compliance ▪ Only a representative sample of areas was observed
▪ Two overview photos were taken for each subsection regardless of perceived compliance or non-compliance ▪ Itemized costs for individual non-compliant items are not included in the dataset ▪ For any “none” boxes checked or reference to “no issues” identified, that alone does not guarantee full compliance The facility was originally constructed in 1980. The facility has not since been substantially renovated and has been abandoned for the last 12 years.

No information about complaints or pending litigation associated with potential accessibility issues was provided during the interview process.

Packet Page No. 742
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 18 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

5. P u rp os e an d Sc op e
Purpose
Bureau Veritas was retained by the client to render an opinion as to the Property’s current general physical condition on the day of the site visit.

The physical condition of building systems and related components are typically defined as being in one of five condition ratings. For the purposes of this report, the following definitions are used:

Failed Component or system has ceased functioning or performing as intended. Replacement, repair, or other significant corrective action is recommended or required.

Not Applicable Assigning a condition does not apply or make logical sense, most commonly due to the item in question not being present.

Packet Page No. 743
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 19 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Scope
The standard scope of the Facility Condition Assessment includes the following:
▪ Visit the Property to evaluate the general condition of the building and site improvements, review available construction documents in order to familiarize ourselves with, and be able to comment on, the in-place construction systems, life safety, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems, and the general built environment. ▪ Identify those components that are exhibiting deferred maintenance issues and provide cost estimates for Immediate Costs and Replacement Reserves based on observed conditions, maintenance history and industry standard useful life estimates. This will include the review of documented capital improvements completed within the last five-year period and work currently contracted for, if applicable.
▪ Provide a full description of the Property with descriptions of in-place systems and commentary on observed conditions. ▪ Provide a high-level categorical general statement regarding the subject Property’s compliance to Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act. This will not constitute a full ADA survey, but will help identify exposure to issues and the need for further review.
▪ Obtain background and historical information about the facility from a building engineer, property manager, maintenance staff, or other knowledgeable source. The preferred methodology is to have the client representative or building occupant complete a Pre-Survey Questionnaire (PSQ) in advance of the site visit. Common alternatives include a verbal interview just prior to or during the walk-through portion of the assessment. ▪ Review maintenance records and procedures with the in-place maintenance personnel. ▪ Observe a representative sample of the interior spaces/units, including vacant spaces/units, to gain a clear understanding of the property’s overall condition. Other areas to be observed include the exterior of the property, the roofs, interior common areas, and the significant mechanical, electrical and elevator equipment rooms. ▪ Provide recommendations for additional studies, if required, with related budgetary information. ▪ Provide an Executive Summary at the beginning of this report, which highlights key findings and includes a Facility Condition Index as a basis for comparing the relative conditions of the buildings within the portfolio.

Packet Page No. 744
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 20 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

6. O p in io ns o f P ro b ab le C os t s
Cost estimates are attached throughout this report, with the Replacement Reserves in the appendix.

For database and reporting purposes the line items with RUL=0, and commonly associated with Safety or Performance/Integrity Plan Types, are considered Immediate Needs.

Packet Page No. 745
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 21 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Replacement costs are solicited from ownership/property management, Bureau Veritas’s discussions with service companies, manufacturers' representatives, and previous experience in preparing such schedules for other similar facilities.

Costs for work performed by the ownership’s or property management’s maintenance staff are also considered.

Packet Page No. 746
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 22 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

7. C e rt if ic at io n
Group 4 Arch, City of Newark, Facilities Master Plan (the Client) retained Bureau Veritas to perform this Facility Condition Assessment in connection with its continued operation of Old Fire Station, 7700 Thornton Avenue, Newark, California 94560, the “Property”. It is our understanding that the primary interest of the Client is to locate and evaluate materials and building system defects that might significantly affect the value of the property and to determine if the present Property has conditions that will have a significant impact on its continued operations.

Prepared by: Nezar M. Tibi
Project Manager
Reviewed by:

Matthew Anderson
Technical Report Reviewer for
Mary Venable
Program Manager
[email protected]
800.733.0660 x7292719
Packet Page No. 747
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 21 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

8. Appendices
Appendix A: Photographic Record
Appendix B: Site and Floor Plans
Appendix C: Pre-Survey Questionnaire
Appendix D: Accessibility Review and Photos
Appendix E: Component Condition Report
Appendix F: Replacement Reserves
Packet Page No. 748
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix A:

Photographic Record
Packet Page No. 749
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
1 - FRONT ELEVATION 2 - LEFT ELEVATION
3 - REAR ELEVATION 4 - RIGHT ELEVATION
5 - EXTERIOR DOOR 6 - OVERHEAD DOORS
Packet Page No. 750
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
7 - WINDOWS 8 - ROOFING
9 - ROOF GUTTERS 10 - FRONT LOBBY
11 - INTERIOR FINISHES 12 - OFFICES
Packet Page No. 751
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
13 - KITCHEN 14 - APPARATUS BAY
15 - TOILET STALL OVERVIEW 16 - SINK/LAVATORY
17 - SPLIT SYSTEM 18 - EXHAUST FAN
Packet Page No. 752
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
19 - UNIT HEATER 20 - ELECTRICAL SYSTEM
21 - PARKING LOTS 22 - PARKING LOTS
23 - LANDSCAPING 24 - FENCES AND GATES
Packet Page No. 753
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix B:

Site and Floor Plans
Packet Page No. 754
Aerial Site Plan
Project Number Project Name
159125.22R000-008.017 Old Fire Station
Source On-Site Date
Google January 23, 2023
Packet Page No. 755
Floor Plan
Project Number Project Name
159125.22R000-008.017 Old Fire Station
Source On-Site Date
Owner January 23, 2023
Packet Page No. 756
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix C:

Pre-Survey Questionnaire
Packet Page No. 757
BV Facility Condition Assessme nt: Pre-Survey Questionnaire Building / Facility Name: Old Fire Station
Name of person completing form: Tonya Connolly
Title / Association with property: Maintenance Superintendent Length of time associated w/ property: 7 years
Date Completed: 1/20/2023
Phone Number: 510 578 4802
Method of Completion: PRIOR: fully completed by client in advance Directions: Please answer all questions to the best of your knowledge and in good faith. Please provide additional details in the Comments column, or backup documentation for any Yes responses.

Data Overview Response
1 Year/s constructed / renovated 1980
2 Building size in SF 4,515
3 Major Renovation/Rehabilitation
Year Additional Detail
Façade 1980 stucco
Roof 1980 flat – low - metal
Interiors 1980
Ceiling – suspended, acoustical and acoustical tile
Partitions - drywall
HVAC 1980
Electrical 1980
Site Pavement 1980 concrete
Accessibility
Question Response
4 List other significant capital
improvements (focus on recent
years; provide approximate date).
5 List any major capital expenditures
planned/requested for the next few
years. Have they been budgeted?
6 Describe any on-going extremely
problematic, historically chronic, or
immediate facility needs.

Packet Page No. 758
Mark the column corresponding to the appropriate response. Please provide additional details in the Comments column, or backup documentation for any Yes responses. (NA indicates “Not Applicable”, Unk indicates “Unknown”) Question Response Comments
Yes No Unk NA
7 Are there any problems with
foundations or structures, like
excessive settlement?
x
8 Are there any wall, window,
basement or roof leaks? x
9 Has any part of the facility ever
contained visible suspect mold
growth, or have there been any
indoor air quality or mold related
complaints from occupants?
x
Damp smell due to leaks over time. Facility is used as
storage and unmanned
10 Are your elevators unreliable, with
frequent service calls? x
11 Are there any plumbing leaks,
water pressure, or clogging/backup problems?
x
Restrooms are stagnant
12 Have there been any leaks or
pressure problems with natural
gas, HVAC supply/return lines, or
steam service?
x
13 Are any areas of the facility
inadequately heated, cooled or
ventilated? Any poorly insulated
areas?
x
14 Is the electrical service outdated,
undersized, or otherwise
problematic?
x
15 Are there any problems or
inadequacies with exterior lighting? x
16 Is site/parking drainage
inadequate, with excessive
ponding or other problems?
x
17 Are there any other unresolved
construction defects or significant
issues/hazards at the property that
have not yet been identified
above?
x
18 ADA: Has an accessibility study
been performed at the site? If so,
indicate when.
x
19 ADA: If a study has occurred, have
the associated recommendations
been addressed? In full or in part?
x
20 ADA: Have there been regular
complaints about accessibility
issues, or associated previous or
pending litigation?
x
Packet Page No. 759
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix D:

Accessibility Review and Photos
Packet Page No. 760
Visual Checklist - 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist
Facility History & Interview
Question Yes No Unk Comments
Has an accessibility study been previously
performed? If so, when?
Have any ADA improvements been made to
the property since original construction?
Describe.

Has building management reported any
accessibility-based complaints or litigation? Unknown
1 2
3 Property Name: Old Fire Station
BV Project Number: 159125.22R000-008.017
Packet Page No. 761
Parking
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

CURB CUT ACCESSIBLE PATH
Question Yes No NA Comments
Is an accessible route present from public
transportation stops and municipal sidewalks
on or immediately adjacent to the property ?
1 Does a minimum of one accessible route
appear to connect all public areas on the
exterior, such as parking and other outdoor
amenities, to accessible building entrances ?
2 Are curb ramps present at transitions through
raised curbs on all accessible routes? 3
Do curb ramps appear to have compliant
slopes for all components ? 4
Do ramp runs on an accessible route appear
to have compliant slopes ? 5
Do ramp runs on an accessible route appear
to have a compliant rise and width ? 6
Packet Page No. 763
Do ramps on an accessible route appear to
have compliant end and intermediate
landings ?
7 Do ramps and stairs on an accessible route
appear to have compliant handrails? 8
For stairways that are open underneath, are
permanent barriers present that prevent or
discourage access?
9 Packet Page No. 764
Building Entrances
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

MAIN ENTRANCE ACCESSIBLE ENTRANCE
Question Yes No NA Comments
Do a sufficient number of accessible
entrances appear to be provided ? 1
If the main entrance is not accessible, is an
alternate accessible entrance provided? 2
Is signage provided indicating the location of
alternate accessible entrances ? 3
Do doors at accessible entrances appear to
have compliant maneuvering clearance area
on each side ?
4 Do doors at accessible entrances appear to
have compliant hardware ? 5
Do doors at accessible entrances appear to
have a compliant clear opening width ? 6
Packet Page No. 765
Do pairs of accessible entrance doors in
series appear to have the minimum clear
space between them ?
7 Do thresholds at accessible entrances appear
to have a compliant height ? 8
Packet Page No. 766
Interior Accessible Route
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR PATH DOOR HARDWARE
Question Yes No NA Comments
Does an accessible route appear to connect
all public areas inside the building ? 1
Do accessible routes appear free of
obstructions and/or protruding objects ? 2
Do ramps on accessible routes appear to
have compliant slopes ? 3
Do ramp runs on an accessible route appear
to have a compliant rise and width ? 4
Do ramps on accessible routes appear to
have compliant end and intermediate
landings ?
5 Do ramps on accessible routes appear to
have compliant handrails ? 6
Packet Page No. 767
Are accessible areas of refuge and the
accessible means of egress to those areas
identified with accessible signage ?
7 Do public transaction areas have an
accessible, lowered service counter section ? 8
Do public telephones appear mounted with an
accessible height and location ? 9
Do doors at interior accessible routes appear
to have compliant maneuvering clearance
area on each side ?
10 Do doors at interior accessible routes appear
to have compliant hardware ? 11
Do non-fire hinged, sliding, or folding doors on
interior accessible routes appear to have
compliant opening force ?
12 Do doors on interior accessible routes appear
to have a compliant clear opening width ? 13
Packet Page No. 768
Elevators
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist
Elevators section not applicable at this site.

Packet Page No. 769
Public Restrooms
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

TOILET STALL OVERVIEW RESTROOM ACCESSORIES
Question Yes No NA Comments
Do publicly accessible toilet rooms appear to
have a minimum compliant floor area ? 1
Does the lavatory appear to be mounted at a
compliant height and with compliant knee
area ?
2 Does the lavatory faucet have compliant
handles ? 3
Is the plumbing piping under lavatories
configured to protect against contact ? 4
Are grab bars provided at compliant locations
around the toilet ? 5
Do toilet stall doors appear to provide the
minimum compliant clear width ? 6
Packet Page No. 770
Do toilet stalls appear to provide the minimum
compliant clear floor area ? 7
Where more than one urinal is present in a
multi-user restroom, does minimum one urinal
appear to be mounted at a compliant height
and with compliant approach width ?
8 Do accessories and mirrors appear to be
mounted at a compliant height ? 9
Packet Page No. 771
Kitchens/Kitchenettes
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

KITCHEN OVERVIEW OVEN WITH CONTROLS
Question Yes No NA Comments
Do kitchens/kitchenettes appear to have a
minimum compliant path of travel or area of
maneuverability ?
1 Are the appliances centered for a parallel or
forward approach with adequate clear floor
space ?
2 Is there an accessible countertop/preparation
space of proper width and height ? 3
Is there an accessible sink space of proper
width and height ? 4
Does the sink faucet have compliant
handles ? 5
Is the plumbing piping under the sink
configured to protect against contact ? 6
Packet Page No. 772
Are the cooktop/range controls front-mounted
(or in a location that does not require reaching
across the burners) ?
7 Packet Page No. 773
Playgrounds & Swimming Pools
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist
Playgrounds & Swimming Pools section not applicable at this site.

Packet Page No. 774
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix E:

Component Condition Report
Packet Page No. 775
Packet Page No. 776
Packet Page No. 777
OLD FIRE STATION BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-008.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix F:

Replacement Reserves
Packet Page No. 778
Packet Page No. 779
Packet Page No. 780
Old Library
6300 Civic Terrace
Newark, California 94560

FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT
prepared for
City of Newark
37101 Newark Boulevard
Newark, California 94560
PREPARED BY:

Bureau Veritas
10461 Mill Run Circle, Suite 1100
Owings Mills, MD 21117
800.733.0660
www.us.bureauveritas.com
BV CONTACT:

Mary Venable
Lead Project Manager
800.733.0660 x7292719
[email protected]
BV PROJECT #:
159125.22R000-009.017
DATE OF REPORT:

January 16, 2023
ON SITE DATE:

December 18, 2022
Bureau Veritas
10461 Mill Run Circle, Suite 1100 | Owings Mills, MD 21117 | www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660 Packet Page No. 781
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

TABLE OF CONTENTS

2. Building and Site Information ........................................................................................................... 11

3. Property Space Use and Observed Areas ....................................................................................... 14

4. ADA Accessibility............................................................................................................................... 15

5. Purpose and Scope ............................................................................................................................ 16

7. Certification......................................................................................................................................... 20

8. Appendices ......................................................................................................................................... 21 Packet Page No. 782
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 1 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

1. Ex ec ut iv e S um m a ry
Property Overview and Assessment Details
General Information
Property Type Library
Main Address 6300 Civic Terrace, Newark, California 94560 Site Developed 1983
Site Area 1 acre
Parking Spaces 10 total spaces all in open lots; 2 of which are accessible.

Building Area 15,560 SF
Number of Stories 1
Outside Occupants / Leased Spaces None
Date(s) of Visit December 18, 2022
Management Point of Contact Andrea Gifford
Group 4 Architecture Research + Planning, Inc.

Principal
415.531.4456
On-site Point of Contact (POC) Roya Gonzalez
Assessment and Report Prepared By Aren Hofland
Reviewed By Mary Venable, CEM, RA
800.733.0660 x7292719
[email protected]
AssetCalc Link Full dataset for this assessment can be found at:
https://www.assetcalc.net/
Packet Page No. 783
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 2 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Significant/Systemic Findings and Deficiencies
Historical Summary
The Old Library was built in 1983. The roof has had multiple problems over the years, with ponding occurring on the North side. Additional roof drains were added in 2017 to reduce the ponding. New construction of a modern civic center has occurred and a new library building opened in 2020. The building has been vacant for approximately 2 years.

Architectural
The building has a heavy timber structure with wood framed roof over concrete slab foundation. Exterior walls are painted stucco with aluminum framed windows. Interior finishes are updated as needed. Settlement has occurred with superficial cracking notes towards the front of the structure. Some doors have difficulty opening.

Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing and Fire (MEPF)
Heating and cooling are supplied by rooftop packaged units. The rooftop packaged units are at the end of their expected useful life and replacement should be budgeted for further building use. A supplementary ductless split system serves the server room. The electrical system is copper wiring and appears to be original to the construction of the building. An active roof leak is above a secondary transformer and should be repaired immediately due to safety concerns. Plumbing is copper supply with cast-iron waste. The waste system has been problematic due to visitors disposing of inappropriate materials down the drain. The library has wet-pipe fire suppression. A fire alarm system monitors for safety, but does not have an addressable panel on site.

Site
The site has property signage and landscaping with irrigation. The building shares a parking lot with the New Library, City Hall, and Police Station. Directly adjacent to the library are 10 parking spots with 2 accessible spots.

Recommended Additional Studies
No additional studies recommended at this time.

Packet Page No. 784
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 3 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Facility Condition Index (FCI)
One of the major goals of the FCA is to calculate each building’s Facility Condition Index (FCI), which provides a theoretical objective indication of a building’s overall condition. By definition, the FCI is defined as the ratio of the cost of current needs divided by current replacement value (CRV) of the facility. The chart below presents the industry standard ranges and cutoff points.

Packet Page No. 785
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 4 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
The orange line in the graph below forecasts what would happen to the FCI (left Y axis) over time, assuming zero capital expenditures. The capital expenditures allocated for each year (blue bars) are associated with the dollar amounts along the right Y axis.

Needs by Year with Unaddressed FCI Over Time
Packet Page No. 786
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 5 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Immediate Needs
Packet Page No. 787
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 6 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Packet Page No. 788
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 7 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Key Findings
Roof Hatch in Poor condition.

Metal
Old Library Roof
Uniformat Code: B3060
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 90.9
Plan Type: Safety
Cost Estimate: $3,100
$$$$
Difficult to open, damper piston failed, safety latch almost non functional. - AssetCALC ID: 4739675 Roofing in Poor condition.

Clay/Concrete Tile
Old Library Roof
Uniformat Code: B3010
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 89.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $564,400
$$$$
Cracked, missing, lifted, leaks are common and frequent - AssetCALC ID: 4739690 Roofing in Poor condition.

Metal
Old Library Roof
Uniformat Code: B3010
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 89.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $2,500
$$$$
Leaks greatly - AssetCALC ID: 4739668
Roofing in Poor condition.

Modified Bitumen
Old Library Roof
Uniformat Code: B3010
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 88.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $77,000
$$$$
Missing asphalt, leaks are common and frequent - AssetCALC ID: 4739677 Packet Page No. 789
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 8 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Secondary Transformer in Poor
condition.

Dry, Stepdown
Old Library Throughout building
Uniformat Code: D5020
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 87.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $24,100
$$$$
Leak from roof directly over transformer - AssetCALC ID: 4739670 Suspended Ceilings in Poor
condition.

Acoustical Tile (ACT)
Old Library Throughout building
Uniformat Code: C1070
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 81.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $13,500
$$$$
Leaks are common and frequent - AssetCALC ID: 4739659
Packaged Unit in Poor condition.

RTU, Pad or Roof-Mounted
Old Library Roof
Uniformat Code: D3050
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 81.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $86,700
$$$$
Inadequate and inefficient - AssetCALC ID: 4739652
Packaged Unit in Poor condition.

RTU, Pad or Roof-Mounted
Old Library Roof
Uniformat Code: D3050
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 81.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $72,200
$$$$
Inadequate and inefficient - AssetCALC ID: 4739655
Packet Page No. 790
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 9 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Interior Lighting System in Poor
condition.

Full Upgrade, Medium Density & Standard
Fixtures
Old Library Throughout building
Uniformat Code: D5040
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 81.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $168,600
$$$$
Aging light inefficient - AssetCALC ID: 4739688
Packet Page No. 791
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 10 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Plan Types
Each line item in the cost database is assigned a Plan Type, which is the primary reason or rationale for the recommended replacement, repair, or other corrective action. This is the “why” part of the equation. A cost or line item may commonly have more than one applicable Plan Type; however, only one Plan Type will be assigned based on the “best” fit, typically the one with the greatest significance.

Plan Type Descriptions
Safety  An observed or reported unsafe condition that if left unaddressed could result in injury; a system or component that presents potential liability risk.

Performance/Integrity  Component or system has failed, is almost failing, performs unreliably, does not perform as intended, and/or poses risk to overall system stability.

Accessibility  Does not meet ADA, UFAS, and/or other handicap accessibility requirements.

Environmental  Improvements to air or water quality, including removal of hazardous materials from the building or site.

Retrofit/Adaptation  Components, systems, or spaces recommended for upgrades in in order to meet current standards, facility usage, or client/occupant needs.

Lifecycle/Renewal  Any component or system that is not currently deficient or problematic but for which future replacement or repair is anticipated and budgeted.

Plan Type Distribution (by Cost)
Packet Page No. 792
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 11 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

2. B u il di ng a nd Si t e I nf orm at i on
Systems Summary
System Description Condition
Structure Conventional wood frame structure over concrete slab foundation Fair Facade Primary Wall Finish : Stucco
Windows: Aluminum
Fair
Roof Primary: Hip construction with modified bituminous finish Secondary: Hip construction with clay/concrete tiles
Tertiary: Pyramid construction with metal finish
Poor
Interiors Walls: Painted gypsum board, ceramic tile
Floors: Carpet, ceramic tile
Ceilings: Painted gypsum board and ACT
Poor
Elevators None -
Plumbing Distribution: Copper supply and cast-iron waste and venting Hot Water: Electric water heaters with integral tanks
Fixtures: Toilets, urinals, and sinks in all restrooms
Fair
HVAC Non-Central System: Packaged units
Supplemental components: Ductless split-systems
Fair
Fire Suppression Wet-pipe sprinkler system and fire extinguishers Fair Electrical Source and Distribution: Main panel with copper wiring Interior Lighting: Linear fluorescent, CFL
Emergency Power: None
Fair
Packet Page No. 793
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 12 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Systems Summary
Fire Alarm Smoke detectors, back-up emergency lights, and exit signs Fair Equipment/Special None -
Site Pavement Asphalt lots with limited areas of concrete aprons and pavement and adjacent concrete sidewalks, curbs, ramps, and stairs
Good
Site Development Property entrance signage; no fencing Fair Landscaping and
Topography
Significant landscaping features including lawns, trees, bushes, and planters Irrigation present
No retaining walls
Low to moderate site slopes throughout
Good
Utilities Municipal water and sewer
Local utility-provided electric and natural gas
Fair
Site Lighting Building-mounted: HPS, CFL Poor
Ancillary Structures None -
Accessibility Presently it does not appear an accessibility study is needed for this property. - Key Issues and
Findings
Possible structural settlement, warped and loose roof tiles, sticking entrance doors, leaking roof, antiquated HVAC components and infrastructure, -
Packet Page No. 794
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 13 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Packet Page No. 795
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 14 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

Key Spaces Not Observed
All key areas of the property were accessible and observed.

Packet Page No. 796
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 15 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

However, this does not:

1. Necessarily require a public entity to make each of its existing facilities accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities;

2. Require a public entity to take any action that would threaten or destroy the historic significance of an historic property; or

Additional clarifications of this limited survey:
▪ This survey was visual in nature and actual measurements were not taken to verify compliance ▪ Only a representative sample of areas was observed
▪ Two overview photos were taken for each subsection regardless of perceived compliance or non-compliance ▪ Itemized costs for individual non-compliant items are not included in the dataset ▪ For any “none” boxes checked or reference to “no issues” identified, that alone does not guarantee full compliance The facility was originally constructed in 1983. The facility has not since been substantially renovated.

During the interview process with the client representatives, no complaints or pending litigation associated with potential accessibility issues was reported.

Packet Page No. 797
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 16 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

5. P u rp os e an d Sc op e
Purpose
Bureau Veritas was retained by the client to render an opinion as to the Property’s current general physical condition on the day of the site visit.

The physical condition of building systems and related components are typically defined as being in one of five condition ratings. For the purposes of this report, the following definitions are used:

Failed Component or system has ceased functioning or performing as intended. Replacement, repair, or other significant corrective action is recommended or required.

Not Applicable Assigning a condition does not apply or make logical sense, most commonly due to the item in question not being present.

Packet Page No. 798
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 17 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Scope
The standard scope of the Facility Condition Assessment includes the following:
▪ Visit the Property to evaluate the general condition of the building and site improvements, review available construction documents in order to familiarize ourselves with, and be able to comment on, the in-place construction systems, life safety, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems, and the general built environment. ▪ Identify those components that are exhibiting deferred maintenance issues and provide cost estimates for Immediate Costs and Replacement Reserves based on observed conditions, maintenance history and industry standard useful life estimates. This will include the review of documented capital improvements completed within the last five-year period and work currently contracted for, if applicable.
▪ Provide a full description of the Property with descriptions of in-place systems and commentary on observed conditions. ▪ Provide a high-level categorical general statement regarding the subject Property’s compliance to Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act. This will not constitute a full ADA survey, but will help identify exposure to issues and the need for further review.
▪ Obtain background and historical information about the facility from a building engineer, property manager, maintenance staff, or other knowledgeable source. The preferred methodology is to have the client representative or building occupant complete a Pre-Survey Questionnaire (PSQ) in advance of the site visit. Common alternatives include a verbal interview just prior to or during the walk-through portion of the assessment. ▪ Review maintenance records and procedures with the in-place maintenance personnel. ▪ Observe a representative sample of the interior spaces/units, including vacant spaces/units, to gain a clear understanding of the property’s overall condition. Other areas to be observed include the exterior of the property, the roofs, interior common areas, and the significant mechanical, electrical and elevator equipment rooms. ▪ Provide recommendations for additional studies, if required, with related budgetary information. ▪ Provide an Executive Summary at the beginning of this report, which highlights key findings and includes a Facility Condition Index as a basis for comparing the relative conditions of the buildings within the portfolio.

Packet Page No. 799
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 18 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

6. O p in io ns o f P ro b ab le C os t s
Cost estimates are attached throughout this report, with the Replacement Reserves in the appendix.

For database and reporting purposes the line items with RUL=0, and commonly associated with Safety or Performance/Integrity Plan Types, are considered Immediate Needs.

Packet Page No. 800
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 19 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Replacement costs are solicited from ownership/property management, Bureau Veritas’s discussions with service companies, manufacturers' representatives, and previous experience in preparing such schedules for other similar facilities.

Costs for work performed by the ownership’s or property management’s maintenance staff are also considered.

Packet Page No. 801
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 20 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

7. C e rt if ic at io n
Group 4 Architecture, Research + Planning, Inc. (the Client) retained Bureau Veritas to perform this Facility Condition Assessment in connection with its continued operation of Old Library, 6300 Civic Terrace, Newark, California 94560, the “Property”. It is our understanding that the primary interest of the Client is to locate and evaluate materials and building system defects that might significantly affect the value of the property and to determine if the present Property has conditions that will have a significant impact on its continued operations.

Prepared by: Aren Hofland
Project Manager
Reviewed by:

Mary Venable, CEM, RA
Lead Project Manager
[email protected]
800.733.0660 x7292719
Packet Page No. 802
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 20 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

8. Appendices
Appendix A: Photographic Record
Appendix B: Site and Floor Plans
Appendix C: Pre-Survey Questionnaire
Appendix D: Accessibility Review and Photos
Appendix E: Component Condition Report
Appendix F: Replacement Reserves
Packet Page No. 803
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix A:

Photographic Record
Packet Page No. 804
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
1 - FRONT ELEVATION 2 - LEFT ELEVATION
3 - REAR ELEVATION 4 - RIGHT ELEVATION
5 - STRUCTURAL SETTLEMENT 6 - METAL ROOFING AND SKYLIGHTS Packet Page No. 805
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
7 - CLAY TILE ROOF 8 - ROOF HATCH; DAMAGED, NEEDS REPLACE 9 - WINDOW 10 - RESTROOM OVERVIEW
11 - ENTRY FOYER 12 - INTERIOR OVERVIEW
Packet Page No. 806
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
13 - ACTIVE LEAK ABOVE TRANSFORMER 14 - WATER HEATER
15 - BACKFLOW PREVENTER 16 - SINK/LAVATORY
17 - DRINKING FOUNTAIN 18 - TOILET
Packet Page No. 807
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
19 - URINAL 20 - SINK/LAVATORY
21 - SPLIT SYSTEM 22 - PACKAGED UNIT
23 - BACKFLOW PREVENTER 24 - FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM
Packet Page No. 808
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
25 - SECONDARY TRANSFORMER 26 - DISTRIBUTION PANEL
27 - FIRE ALARM PANEL 28 - IRRIGATION SYSTEM
29 - IRRIGATION SYSTEM 30 - 2ND AREA OF ACCESSIBLE PARKING Packet Page No. 809
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix B:

Site and Floor Plans
Packet Page No. 810
Aerial Site Plan
Project Number Project Name
159125.22R000-009.017 Old Library
Source On-Site Date
Google December 19, 2022
Packet Page No. 811
Floor Plan
Project Number Project Name
159125.22R000-009.017 Old Library
Source On-Site Date
Owner December 19, 2022
Packet Page No. 812
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix C:

Pre-Survey Questionnaire
Packet Page No. 813
BV Facility Condition Assessme nt: Pre-Survey Questionnaire Building / Facility Name: Old Library
Name of person completing form: Tonya Connolly
Title / Association with property: Maintenance Superintendent Length of time associated w/ property: 7 years
Date Completed: December 16, 2022
Phone Number: (510) 578-4802
Method of Completion: PRIOR: fully completed by client in advance Directions: Please answer all questions to the best of your knowledge and in good faith. Please provide additional details in the Comments column, or backup documentation for any Yes responses.

Data Overview Response
1 Year/s constructed / renovated 1983
2 Building size in SF 15,570
3 Major Renovation/Rehabilitation
Year Additional Detail
Façade
Roof 2017
(approx.)
We added a relief drain on far right to minimize
water level on roof (far right side)
Interiors
HVAC 2017
(approx.)
We have re-leveled the units on front side of the
facility as they sloped over time.

Electrical
Site Pavement
Accessibility
Question Response
4 List other significant capital
improvements (focus on recent
years; provide approximate date).
5 List any major capital expenditures
planned/requested for the next few
years. Have they been budgeted?
None
6 Describe any on-going extremely
problematic, historically chronic, or
immediate facility needs.

Pagoda/roof leaks around windows and joints especially on right far side of facility.

Packet Page No. 814
Mark the column corresponding to the appropriate response. Please provide additional details in the Comments column, or backup documentation for any Yes responses. (NA indicates “Not Applicable”, Unk indicates “Unknown”) Question Response Comments
Yes No Unk NA
7 Are there any problems with
foundations or structures, like
excessive settlement?
x
8 Are there any wall, window,
basement or roof leaks? x
Window and roof
9 Has any part of the facility ever
contained visible suspect mold
growth, or have there been any
indoor air quality or mold related
complaints from occupants?
x
Tested and verified not to contain mold
10 Are your elevators unreliable, with
frequent service calls? x Not applicable
11 Are there any plumbing leaks,
water pressure, or clogging/backup problems?
x
Yes, in front public restrooms. Mostly due to flushing of foreign objects.
12 Have there been any leaks or
pressure problems with natural
gas, HVAC supply/return lines, or
steam service?
x
Under floor (cement) HVAC supply – has experienced
some issues due to rise in water table (i.e., system will shut down and windows will fog over).
13 Are any areas of the facility
inadequately heated, cooled or
ventilated? Any poorly insulated
areas?
x
Units undersized in certain areas
14 Is the electrical service outdated,
undersized, or otherwise
problematic?
x
15 Are there any problems or
inadequacies with exterior lighting? x
16 Is site/parking drainage
inadequate, with excessive
ponding or other problems?
x
17 Are there any other unresolved
construction defects or significant
issues/hazards at the property that
have not yet been identified
above?
x
18 ADA: Has an accessibility study
been performed at the site? If so,
indicate when.
x
19 ADA: If a study has occurred, have
the associated recommendations
been addressed? In full or in part?
x
20 ADA: Have there been regular
complaints about accessibility
issues, or associated previous or
pending litigation?
x
Packet Page No. 815
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix D:

Accessibility Review and Photos
Packet Page No. 816
Major Issues
(ADA study
recommended)
Moderate Issues
(ADA study
recommended)
Category Minor Issues
Old Library: Accessibility Issues
Parking
Exterior Accessible Route
Building Entrances
Interior Accessible Route
Elevators NA
Public Restrooms
Kitchens/Kitchenettes NA
Playgrounds & Swimming
Pools NA
Other NA
Hospitality NA
None*
*be cognizant that if the “None” box is checked that does not guarantee full compliance; this study is limited in nature Facility History & Interview
Question Yes No Unk Comments
Has an accessibility study been previously
performed? If so, when?
Have any ADA improvements been made to
the property since original construction?
Describe.

Has building management reported any
accessibility-based complaints or litigation?
1 2
3 Visual Survey - 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design Property Name: Old Library
BV Project Number: 159125.22R000-009.017
Packet Page No. 817
Old Library: Photographic Overview
OVERVIEW OF ACCESSIBLE PARKING AREA 2ND AREA OF ACCESSIBLE PARKING

CURB CUT ACCESSIBLE PATH

MAIN ENTRANCE AUTOMATIC DOOR OPENER
Packet Page No. 818
Old Library: Photographic Overview

ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR PATH ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR PATH

TOILET STALL OVERVIEW SINK, FAUCET HANDLES AND ACCESSORIES Packet Page No. 819
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix E:

Component Condition Report
Packet Page No. 820
Packet Page No. 821
Packet Page No. 822
OLD LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-009.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix F:

Replacement Reserves
Packet Page No. 823
Packet Page No. 824
Packet Page No. 825
Redeker Senior Center
7401 Enterprise Drive
Newark, California 94560

FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT
prepared for
City of Newark
37101 Newark Boulevard
Newark, California 94560
PREPARED BY:

Bureau Veritas
10461 Mill Run Circle, Suite 1100
Owings Mills, MD 21117
800.733.0660
www.us.bureauveritas.com
BV CONTACT:

Mary Venable
Program Manager
800.733.0660 x7292719
[email protected]
BV PROJECT #:
159125.22R000-010.017
DATE OF REPORT:

March 15, 2023
ON SITE DATE:

January 30, 2023
Bureau Veritas
10461 Mill Run Circle, Suite 1100 | Owings Mills, MD 21117 | www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660 Packet Page No. 826
Redeker Senior Center BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-010.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. 1 Property Overview and Assessment Details .......................................................................................... 1 Significant/Systemic Findings and Deficiencies ..................................................................................... 2 Facility Condition Index (FCI) ................................................................................................................. 3 Immediate Needs.................................................................................................................................... 5 Key Findings ........................................................................................................................................... 6 Plan Types.............................................................................................................................................. 8

2. Building and Site Information ............................................................................................................. 9

3. Property Space Use and Observed Areas ....................................................................................... 12

4. ADA Accessibility............................................................................................................................... 13

5. Purpose and Scope ............................................................................................................................ 15

6. Opinions of Probable Costs .............................................................................................................. 17 Methodology ......................................................................................................................................... 17 Definitions ............................................................................................................................................. 17

7. Certification......................................................................................................................................... 19

8. Appendices ......................................................................................................................................... 20 Packet Page No. 827
Redeker Senior Center BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-010.017 1 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

1. Ex ec ut iv e S um m a ry
Property Overview and Assessment Details
General Information
Property Type Senior Center
Main Address 7401 Enterprise Drive
Newark, California 94560
Site Developed 1979 Renovated: 1992
Site Area 0.84 acres
Parking Spaces Fifty total spaces all in open lots; eight of which are accessible.

Building Area 7,300 SF
Number of Stories 1
Outside Occupants / Leased Spaces None
Date(s) of Visit January 30, 2023
Management Point of Contact Andrea Gifford
Group 4 Architecture Research + Planning, Inc.

Principal
415.531.4456
[email protected]
On-site Point of Contact (POC) Tonya Connolly
Assessment and Report Prepared By Kay van der Have
Reviewed By Matthew Anderson
Technical Report Reviewer for:

Mary Venable
800.733.0660 x7292719
[email protected]
AssetCalc Link Full dataset for this assessment can be found at:
https://www.assetcalc.net/
Packet Page No. 828
Redeker Senior Center BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-010.017 2 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Significant/Systemic Findings and Deficiencies
Historical Summary
The Redeker Senior center was built in two phases, 1979 and 1992 with additional updates in 2007. It continues to serve as a Senior Center.

Architectural
The original building was built of load bearing masonry units and the1992 addition is wood frame construction. Typical lifecycle-based interior and exterior finish replacements are anticipated.

Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing and Fire (MEPF)
Gas-fired furnace with split system air-conditioning. Pad mounted condensers provide space conditioning. Some of the mechanical equipment is extremely aged, short term replacement is recommended. Reportedly the commercial kitchen equipment is very lightly used, the Remaining useful life of many of those items has been extended to reflect the light use pattern.

Site
The asphalt parking area and the surrounding landscaping is in good repair.

Recommended Additional Studies
No additional studies recommended at this time.

Packet Page No. 829
Redeker Senior Center BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-010.017 3 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Facility Condition Index (FCI)
One of the major goals of the FCA is to calculate each building’s Facility Condition Index (FCI), which provides a theoretical objective indication of a building’s overall condition. By definition, the FCI is defined as the ratio of the cost of current needs divided by current replacement value (CRV) of the facility. The chart below presents the industry standard ranges and cutoff points.

Packet Page No. 830
Redeker Senior Center BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-010.017 4 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
The orange line in the graph below forecasts what would happen to the FCI (left Y axis) over time, assuming zero capital expenditures. The capital expenditures allocated for each year (blue bars) are associated with the dollar amounts along the right Y axis.

Needs by Year with Unaddressed FCI Over Time
Packet Page No. 831
Redeker Senior Center BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-010.017 5 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Immediate Needs
Packet Page No. 832
Redeker Senior Center BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-010.017 6 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Key Findings
Movable Partitions in Poor
condition.

Folding Wall,
Redeker Senior Ctr Multipurpose Room
Uniformat Code: C1010
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 83.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $5,200
$$$$
This no longer works properly - AssetCALC ID: 5541312
Standard Fixture w/ Lamp in Poor
condition.
any type, w/ LED Replacement
Redeker Senior Ctr Building exterior
Uniformat Code: D5040
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 81.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $500
$$$$
Fixture appears burnt out - AssetCALC ID: 5541330
Foodservice Equipment in Poor
condition.

Refrigerator, 2-Door Reach-In
Redeker Senior Ctr Kitchen
Uniformat Code: E1030
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 81.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $10,000
$$$$
Not plugged in, possibly failed - AssetCALC ID: 5541341 Roof Appurtenances in Poor
condition.

Gutters & Downspouts, Aluminum w/ Fittings
Redeker Senior Ctr Roof, original bldg
Uniformat Code: B3020
Recommendation: Replace in 2024
Priority Score: 81.8
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $2,900
$$$$
Rusting and leaking - AssetCALC ID: 5541317
Packet Page No. 833
Redeker Senior Center BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-010.017 7 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
ADA Kitchen & Laundry Areas in
Poor condition.

Sink Maneuverability, Minor Reconfiguration
Redeker Senior Ctr Kitchen
Uniformat Code: Y1060
Recommendation: Modify in 2023
Priority Score: 63.9
Plan Type: Accessibility
Cost Estimate: $4,400
$$$$
No wheelchair access under the sink. - AssetCALC ID: 5543980 Split System in Poor condition.

Condensing Unit/Heat Pump
Redeker Senior Ctr Building exterior
Uniformat Code: D3030
Recommendation: Replace in 2025
Priority Score: 54.7
Plan Type:

Retrofit/Adaptation
Cost Estimate: $22,700
$$$$
These units are 30 years old, replacement is strongly advised - AssetCALC ID: 5541322 Packet Page No. 834
Redeker Senior Center BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-010.017 8 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Plan Types
Each line item in the cost database is assigned a Plan Type, which is the primary reason or rationale for the recommended replacement, repair, or other corrective action. This is the “why” part of the equation. A cost or line item may commonly have more than one applicable Plan Type; however, only one Plan Type will be assigned based on the “best” fit, typically the one with the greatest significance.

Plan Type Descriptions
Safety  An observed or reported unsafe condition that if left unaddressed could result in injury; a system or component that presents potential liability risk.

Performance/Integrity  Component or system has failed, is almost failing, performs unreliably, does not perform as intended, and/or poses risk to overall system stability.

Accessibility  Does not meet ADA, UFAS, and/or other handicap accessibility requirements.

Environmental  Improvements to air or water quality, including removal of hazardous materials from the building or site.

Retrofit/Adaptation  Components, systems, or spaces recommended for upgrades in in order to meet current standards, facility usage, or client/occupant needs.

Lifecycle/Renewal  Any component or system that is not currently deficient or problematic but for which future replacement or repair is anticipated and budgeted.

Plan Type Distribution (by Cost)
Packet Page No. 835
Redeker Senior Center BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-010.017 9 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

2. B u il di ng a nd Si t e I nf orm at i on
Systems Summary
System Description Condition
Structure masonry bearing walls and wood frame structure over concrete slab foundation. Wood roof deck supported by wood joists.

Fair
Facade Primary Wall Finish : CMU
Secondary Wall Finish: Stucco
Windows: Aluminum
Good
Roof Primary: Gable construction with asphalt shingles Fair Interiors Walls: Painted gypsum board, painted CMU
Floors: Carpet, VCT, vinyl plank flooring
Ceilings: Painted gypsum board and ACT
Fair
Elevators None n/a
Plumbing Distribution: Copper supply and cast iron waste and venting Hot Water: Gas and Electric water heaters with integral tanks Fixtures: Toilets, urinals, and sinks in all restrooms
Fair
HVAC Furnaces with split-system condensing units Fair
Fire Suppression Wet-pipe sprinkler system and fire extinguishers. Commercial kitchen hood system
Fair
Electrical Source and Distribution: Main switchboard with copper wiring Interior Lighting: Linear fluorescent, CFL
Emergency Power: None
Fair
Packet Page No. 836
Redeker Senior Center BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-010.017 10 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Systems Summary
Fire Alarm Alarm panel with smoke detectors, heat detectors, alarms, strobes, pull stations, back-up emergency lights, and exit signs
Fair
Equipment/Special Commercial kitchen equipment Fair
Site Pavement Asphalt lots with limited areas of concrete aprons and pavement and adjacent concrete sidewalks and curbs
Good
Site Development Property entrance signage; wood board fencing; CMU wall dumpster enclosures
Good
Landscaping and
Topography
Significant landscaping features including lawns, trees, bushes, and planters Irrigation present
No retaining walls
Low site slopes throughout
Fair
Utilities Municipal water and sewer
Local utility-provided electric and natural gas
Good
Site Lighting Pole-mounted: LED
Building-mounted: incandescent
Fair
Ancillary Structures None
Accessibility Presently it does not appear an accessibility study is needed for this property. Good Key Issues and
Findings
None observed at time of assessment. Good
Packet Page No. 837
Redeker Senior Center BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-010.017 11 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Packet Page No. 838
Redeker Senior Center BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-010.017 12 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

Key Spaces Not Observed
All key areas of the property were accessible and observed.

Packet Page No. 839
Redeker Senior Center BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-010.017 13 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

However, this does not:

1. Necessarily require a public entity to make each of its existing facilities accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities;

2. Require a public entity to take any action that would threaten or destroy the historic significance of an historic property; or

Additional clarifications of this limited survey:
▪ This survey was visual in nature and actual measurements were not taken to verify compliance ▪ Only a representative sample of areas was observed
▪ Two overview photos were taken for each subsection regardless of perceived compliance or non-compliance ▪ Itemized costs for individual non-compliant items are // are not included in the dataset ▪ For any “none” boxes checked or reference to “no issues” identified, that alone does not guarantee full compliance Packet Page No. 840
Redeker Senior Center BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-010.017 14 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
The facility was originally constructed in 1979. The facility was substantially enlarged and renovated in 1992 and some accessibility improvements appear to have been implemented.

The Presurvey Questionnaire identifies some complaints associated with potential accessibility issues.

Packet Page No. 841
Redeker Senior Center BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-010.017 15 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

5. P u rp os e an d Sc op e
Purpose
Bureau Veritas was retained by the client to render an opinion as to the Property’s current general physical condition on the day of the site visit.

The physical condition of building systems and related components are typically defined as being in one of five condition ratings. For the purposes of this report, the following definitions are used:

Failed Component or system has ceased functioning or performing as intended. Replacement, repair, or other significant corrective action is recommended or required.

Not Applicable Assigning a condition does not apply or make logical sense, most commonly due to the item in question not being present.

Packet Page No. 842
Redeker Senior Center BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-010.017 16 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Scope
The standard scope of the Facility Condition Assessment includes the following:
▪ Visit the Property to evaluate the general condition of the building and site improvements, review available construction documents in order to familiarize ourselves with, and be able to comment on, the in-place construction systems, life safety, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems, and the general built environment. ▪ Identify those components that are exhibiting deferred maintenance issues and provide cost estimates for Immediate Costs and Replacement Reserves based on observed conditions, maintenance history and industry standard useful life estimates. This will include the review of documented capital improvements completed within the last five-year period and work currently contracted for, if applicable.
▪ Provide a full description of the Property with descriptions of in-place systems and commentary on observed conditions. ▪ Provide a high-level categorical general statement regarding the subject Property’s compliance to Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act. This will not constitute a full ADA survey, but will help identify exposure to issues and the need for further review.
▪ Obtain background and historical information about the facility from a building engineer, property manager, maintenance staff, or other knowledgeable source. The preferred methodology is to have the client representative or building occupant complete a Pre-Survey Questionnaire (PSQ) in advance of the site visit. Common alternatives include a verbal interview just prior to or during the walk-through portion of the assessment. ▪ Review maintenance records and procedures with the in-place maintenance personnel. ▪ Observe a representative sample of the interior spaces/units, including vacant spaces/units, to gain a clear understanding of the property’s overall condition. Other areas to be observed include the exterior of the property, the roofs, interior common areas, and the significant mechanical, electrical and elevator equipment rooms. ▪ Provide recommendations for additional studies, if required, with related budgetary information. ▪ Provide an Executive Summary at the beginning of this report, which highlights key findings and includes a Facility Condition Index as a basis for comparing the relative conditions of the buildings within the portfolio.

Packet Page No. 843
Redeker Senior Center BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-010.017 17 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

6. O p in io ns o f P ro b ab le C os t s
Cost estimates are attached throughout this report, with the Replacement Reserves in the appendix.

These estimates are based on Invoice or Bid Document/s provided either by the Owner/facility and construction costs developed by construction resources such as R.S. Means, CBRE Whitestone, and Marshall and Swift, Bureau Veritas’s experience with past costs for similar properties, city cost indexes, and assumptions regarding future economic conditions.

For database and reporting purposes the line items with RUL=0, and commonly associated with Safety or Performance/Integrity Plan Types, are considered Immediate Needs.

Packet Page No. 844
Redeker Senior Center BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-010.017 18 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Replacement costs are solicited from ownership/property management, Bureau Veritas’s discussions with service companies, manufacturers' representatives, and previous experience in preparing such schedules for other similar facilities.

Costs for work performed by the ownership’s or property management’s maintenance staff are also considered.

Packet Page No. 845
Redeker Senior Center BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-010.017 19 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

7. C e rt if ic at io n
City of Newark (the Client) retained Bureau Veritas to perform this Facility Condition Assessment in connection with its continued operation of Redeker Senior Center, 7401 Enterprise Drive, Newark, California 94560, the “Property”. It is our understanding that the primary interest of the Client is to locate and evaluate materials and building system defects that might significantly affect the value of the property and to determine if the present Property has conditions that will have a significant impact on its continued operations.

Prepared by: Kay van der Have
Project Manager
Reviewed by:

Matthew Anderson
Technical Report Reviewer for
Mary Venable
Program Manager
[email protected]
800.733.0660 x7292719
Packet Page No. 846
Redeker Senior Center BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-010.017 20 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

8. A p p e n d i c e s
Appendix A: Photographic Record
Appendix B: Site Plan
Appendix C: Pre-Survey Questionnaire
Appendix D: Accessibility Review and Photos
Appendix E: Component Condition Report
Appendix F: Replacement Reserves
Packet Page No. 847
Redeker Senior Center BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-010.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix A:

P h o t o g r a p h i c R e c o r d
Packet Page No. 848
REDEKER SENIOR CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-010.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
1 - FRONT ELEVATION 2 - LEFT ELEVATION
3 - PARTIAL RIGHT ELEVATION 4 - PARTIAL RIGHT AND REAR ELEVATION 5 - MASONRY WALL WITH WINDOW 6 - PRIMARY ROOF OVERVIEW
Packet Page No. 849
REDEKER SENIOR CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-010.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
7 - INTERIOR 8 - INTERIOR
9 - INTERIOR 10 - OFFICE
11 - KITCHEN 12 - KITCHEN
Packet Page No. 850
REDEKER SENIOR CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-010.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
13 - RESTROOM FIXTURES 14 - COOLING CONDENSERS
15 - HEATING MAIN COMPONENTS 16 - MAIN ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT 17 - FIRE ALARM PANEL 18 - LANDSCAPING OVERVIEW
Packet Page No. 851
Redeker Senior Center BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-010.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix B:

S i t e P l a n
Packet Page No. 852
Redeker Senior Center Aerial Site Plan
Project Number Project Name
159125.22R000-010.017 Redeker Senior Center
Source On-Site Date
Google February 15, 2023
Packet Page No. 853
Redeker Senior Center BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-010.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix C:

P r e -S u r v e y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e
Packet Page No. 854
BV F a c i l i t y C o n d i t i o n A s s e s s m e n t : P r e - S u r v e y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Building / Facility Name: Redeker Senior Center
Name of person completing form: Tonya Connolly
Title / Association with property: Maintenance Superintendent Length of time associated w/ property: 7.5 years
Date Completed: 2/11/2023
Phone Number: 510 578 4802
Method of Completion: PRIOR: fully completed by client in advance Directions: Please answer all questions to the best of your knowledge and in good faith. Please provide additional details in the Comments column, or backup documentation for any Yes responses.

Data Overview Response
1 Year/s constructed / renovated 1979
2 Building size in SF 6,538
3 Major Renovation/Rehabilitation
Year Additional Detail
Façade Stucco/Concrete block
Roof Flat – composite - tile
Interiors Drywall/concrete block partitions
HVAC
Electrical
Site Pavement
Accessibility
Question Response
4 List other significant capital
improvements (focus on recent
years; provide approximate date).

Built in two parts, 1979 and 1992 with additional updates in 2007. Flooring updated in original section in 2001.
5 List any major capital expenditures
planned/requested for the next few
years. Have they been budgeted?
6 Describe any on-going extremely
problematic, historically chronic, or
immediate facility needs.

Bi-fold partition (in open area) need of replacement.

Packet Page No. 855
Mark the column corresponding to the appropriate response. Please provide additional details in the Comments column, or backup documentation for any Yes responses. (NA indicates “Not Applicable”, Unk indicates “Unknown”) Question Response Comments
Yes No Unk NA
7 Are there any problems with
foundations or structures, like
excessive settlement?
x
8 Are there any wall, window,
basement or roof leaks? x
9 Has any part of the facility ever
contained visible suspect mold
growth, or have there been any
indoor air quality or mold related
complaints from occupants?
x
10 Are your elevators unreliable, with
frequent service calls? x
11 Are there any plumbing leaks,
water pressure, or clogging/backup problems?
x
12 Have there been any leaks or
pressure problems with natural
gas, HVAC supply/return lines, or
steam service?
x
13 Are any areas of the facility
inadequately heated, cooled or
ventilated? Any poorly insulated
areas?
x
14 Is the electrical service outdated,
undersized, or otherwise
problematic?
x
15 Are there any problems or
inadequacies with exterior lighting?
x
16 Is site/parking drainage
inadequate, with excessive
ponding or other problems?
x
17 Are there any other unresolved
construction defects or significant
issues/hazards at the property that
have not yet been identified
above?
x
18 ADA: Has an accessibility study
been performed at the site? If so,
indicate when.
x
19 ADA: If a study has occurred, have
the associated recommendations
been addressed? In full or in part?
x
20 ADA: Have there been regular
complaints about accessibility
issues, or associated previous or
pending litigation?
x
Packet Page No. 856
Redeker Senior Center BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-010.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix D:

A c c e s s i b i l i t y R e v i e w and P h o t o s
Packet Page No. 857
Visual Checklist - 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist
Facility History & Interview
Question Yes No Unk Comments
Has an accessibility study been previously
performed? If so, when?
Have any ADA improvements been made to
the property since original construction?
Describe.

Has building management reported any
accessibility-based complaints or litigation?
1 2
3 Property Name:

BV Project Number: 159125.22R000 - 010.017
Redeker Senior Ctr
Packet Page No. 858
Parking
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

ACCESSIBLE PATH CURB CUT
Question Yes No NA Comments
Is an accessible route present from public
transportation stops and municipal sidewalks
on or immediately adjacent to the property ?
1 Does a minimum of one accessible route
appear to connect all public areas on the
exterior, such as parking and other outdoor
amenities, to accessible building entrances ?
2 Are curb ramps present at transitions through
raised curbs on all accessible routes? 3
Do curb ramps appear to have compliant
slopes for all components ? 4
Do ramp runs on an accessible route appear
to have compliant slopes ? 5 No ramps
Do ramp runs on an accessible route appear
to have a compliant rise and width ? 6 No ramps
Packet Page No. 860
Do ramps on an accessible route appear to
have compliant end and intermediate
landings ?
7 No ramps
Do ramps and stairs on an accessible route
appear to have compliant handrails? 8 No ramps or stairs For stairways that are open underneath, are
permanent barriers present that prevent or
discourage access?
9 No Stairs
Packet Page No. 861
Building Entrances
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

ACCESSIBLE ENTRANCE AUTOMATIC DOOR OPENER
Question Yes No NA Comments
Do a sufficient number of accessible
entrances appear to be provided ? 1
If the main entrance is not accessible, is an
alternate accessible entrance provided? 2 Main entrance is accessible Is signage provided indicating the location of
alternate accessible entrances ? 3 Main entrance is accessible Do doors at accessible entrances appear to
have compliant maneuvering clearance area
on each side ?
4 Do doors at accessible entrances appear to
have compliant hardware ? 5
Do doors at accessible entrances appear to
have a compliant clear opening width ? 6
Packet Page No. 862
Do pairs of accessible entrance doors in
series appear to have the minimum clear
space between them ?
7 No entrance doors in series
Do thresholds at accessible entrances appear
to have a compliant height ? 8
Packet Page No. 863
Interior Accessible Route
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR PATH RECEPTION DESK
Question Yes No NA Comments
Does an accessible route appear to connect
all public areas inside the building ? 1
Do accessible routes appear free of
obstructions and/or protruding objects ? 2
Do ramps on accessible routes appear to
have compliant slopes ? 3 No ramps
Do ramp runs on an accessible route appear
to have a compliant rise and width ? 4 No ramps
Do ramps on accessible routes appear to
have compliant end and intermediate
landings ?
5 No ramps
Do ramps on accessible routes appear to
have compliant handrails ? 6 No ramps
Packet Page No. 864
Are accessible areas of refuge and the
accessible means of egress to those areas
identified with accessible signage ?
7 No areas of refuge
Do public transaction areas have an
accessible, lowered service counter section ? 8
Do public telephones appear mounted with an
accessible height and location ? 9 No public telephones Do doors at interior accessible routes appear
to have compliant maneuvering clearance
area on each side ?
10 Do doors at interior accessible routes appear
to have compliant hardware ? 11
Do non-fire hinged, sliding, or folding doors on
interior accessible routes appear to have
compliant opening force ?
12 Do doors on interior accessible routes appear
to have a compliant clear opening width ? 13
Packet Page No. 865
Elevators
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist
Elevators section not applicable at this site.

Packet Page No. 866
Public Restrooms
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

TOILET STALL OVERVIEW SINK, FAUCET HANDLES AND ACCESSORIES Question Yes No NA Comments
Do publicly accessible toilet rooms appear to
have a minimum compliant floor area ? 1
Does the lavatory appear to be mounted at a
compliant height and with compliant knee
area ?
2 Does the lavatory faucet have compliant
handles ? 3
Is the plumbing piping under lavatories
configured to protect against contact ? 4
Are grab bars provided at compliant locations
around the toilet ? 5
Do toilet stall doors appear to provide the
minimum compliant clear width ? 6
Packet Page No. 867
Do toilet stalls appear to provide the minimum
compliant clear floor area ? 7
Where more than one urinal is present in a
multi-user restroom, does minimum one urinal
appear to be mounted at a compliant height
and with compliant approach width ?
8 Only one urinal
Do accessories and mirrors appear to be
mounted at a compliant height ? 9
Packet Page No. 868
Kitchens/Kitchenettes
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

KITCHEN CABINETS OVEN WITH CONTROLS
Question Yes No NA Comments
Do kitchens/kitchenettes appear to have a
minimum compliant path of travel or area of
maneuverability ?
1 Are the appliances centered for a parallel or
forward approach with adequate clear floor
space ?
2 Is there an accessible countertop/preparation
space of proper width and height ? 3
Is there an accessible sink space of proper
width and height ? 4
Does the sink faucet have compliant
handles ? 5
Is the plumbing piping under the sink
configured to protect against contact ? 6
Packet Page No. 869
Are the cooktop/range controls front-mounted
(or in a location that does not require reaching
across the burners) ?
7 Packet Page No. 870
Playgrounds & Swimming Pools
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist
Playgrounds & Swimming Pools section not applicable at this site.

Packet Page No. 871
Redeker Senior Center BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-010.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix E:

C o m p o n e n t C o n d i t i o n R e p o r t
Packet Page No. 872
Packet Page No. 873
Packet Page No. 874
Packet Page No. 875
Redeker Senior Center BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-010.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix F:

R e p l a c e m e n t R e s e r v e s
Packet Page No. 876
Packet Page No. 877
Packet Page No. 878
Second Chance Shelter
6516 Central Avenue
Newark, California 94560

FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT
prepared for
City of Newark
37101 Newark Boulevard
Newark, California 94560
PREPARED BY:

Bureau Veritas
10461 Mill Run Circle, Suite 1100
Owings Mills, MD 21117
800.733.0660
www.us.bureauveritas.com
BV CONTACT:

Mary Venable
Program Manager
800.733.0660 x7292719
[email protected]
BV PROJECT #:
159125.22R000-011.017
DATE OF REPORT:

March 9, 2023
ON SITE DATE:

January 24, 2023
Bureau Veritas
10461 Mill Run Circle, Suite 1100 | Owings Mills, MD 21117 | www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660 Packet Page No. 879
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. 1 Property Overview and Assessment Details .......................................................................................... 1 Significant/Systemic Findings and Deficiencies ..................................................................................... 2 Facility Condition Index (FCI) ................................................................................................................. 3 Immediate Needs.................................................................................................................................... 5 Key Findings ........................................................................................................................................... 6 Plan Types.............................................................................................................................................. 7

2. Building and Site Information ............................................................................................................. 8

3. Property Space Use and Observed Areas ....................................................................................... 11

4. ADA Accessibility............................................................................................................................... 12

5. Purpose and Scope ............................................................................................................................ 13

6. Opinions of Probable Costs .............................................................................................................. 15 Methodology ......................................................................................................................................... 15 Definitions ............................................................................................................................................. 15

7. Certification......................................................................................................................................... 17

8. Appendices ......................................................................................................................................... 18 Packet Page No. 880
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 1 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

1. Ex ec ut iv e S um m a ry
Property Overview and Assessment Details
General Information
Property Type Residential
Main Address 6516 Central Avenue
Newark, California 94560
Site Developed 1960 Renovated: 1991
Site Area 0.51 acres
Parking Spaces Twelve total spaces all in open lots; 2 of which are accessible.

Building Area 3,166 SF
Number of Stories 1
Outside Occupants / Leased Spaces None
Date(s) of Visit January 24, 2023
Management Point of Contact Group 4 Architecture Research + Planning, Inc.

Andrea Gifford
Principal
415.531.4456
[email protected]
On-site Point of Contact (POC) Tonya Connolly
Assessment and Report Prepared By Nezar M. Tibi
Reviewed By Matt Anderson
Technical Report Reviewer for:

Mary Venable
800.733.0660 x7292719
[email protected]
AssetCalc Link Full dataset for this assessment can be found at:
https://www.assetcalc.net/
Packet Page No. 881
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 2 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Significant/Systemic Findings and Deficiencies
Historical Summary
The Second Chance Shelter consists of a single-story building that originally may have been a single family house. The house was constructed in 1960 with renovation work completed in 1991. There have been some limited renovations during the years as needed.

Architectural
The building is a wood frame structure. The original portions of the building are over a crawl space and the 1991 addition is a slab on grade. The house exteriors consist of painted stucco finishes with vinyl windows. The roof is gable with asphalt shingle finishes. Interior finishes are a mixture of carpet, ceramic tile, quarry tile, vinyl sheeting, flooring and painted walls and ceiling, In general, finishes are replaced as needed. Typical lifecycle costs are expected and budgeted.

Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing and Fire (MEPF)
One individual evaporative cooler roof unit and an interior furnace with exhaust fan are providing heating and cooling to the house. All infrastructure is original to the construction of the buildings and are generally in fair condition. The electrical systems has a distribution panel with copper wiring located at the interior hallway. Plumbing is copper supply with PVC waste piping. Problems have been reported with the sewer lines. The fire alarm system is addressable with strobes with alarms, pull stations, and smoke sensors. No issues were observed or reported.

Site
The parking lot has an asphalt surface finishes and it is in fair condition. Concrete sidewalk and walkways are located throughout the property site. Irrigation is located throughout the site areas and is in fair condition. Ponding was reported at the back of the property possibly caused by the parking lot curb. BV did not observe any area drains and it appears that the property depends on the pavement sloping toward the street and site rainfall soaking into the landscaped areas.

Recommended Additional Studies
Sewer line clogging and back-up was reported throughout the house. The house main drain line may not have been sized for the commercial kitchen equipment. If the sewer line is original it has exceeded its estimated remaining useful life and may need to be replaced. A CCTV of the sewer line is recommended to determine the pipe size and condition of the main and branch sewer lines. Excessive parking lot ponding was reported to be problematic. A professional engineer must be retained to analyze the existing condition, provide recommendations and, if necessary, estimate the scope and cost of any required pavement resurfacing or the installation of new area drains. The cost of this study is included in the cost tables. Due to the ambiguity of the required repair scope at the time of this assessment, the cost for any possible subsequent repairs is not included.

Packet Page No. 882
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 3 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Facility Condition Index (FCI)
One of the major goals of the FCA is to calculate each building’s Facility Condition Index (FCI), which provides a theoretical objective indication of a building’s overall condition. By definition, the FCI is defined as the ratio of the cost of current needs divided by current replacement value (CRV) of the facility. The chart below presents the industry standard ranges and cutoff points.

Packet Page No. 883
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 4 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
The orange line in the graph below forecasts what would happen to the FCI (left Y axis) over time, assuming zero capital expenditures. The capital expenditures allocated for each year (blue bars) are associated with the dollar amounts along the right Y axis.

Needs by Year with Unaddressed FCI Over Time
Packet Page No. 884
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 5 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Immediate Needs
Packet Page No. 885
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 6 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Key Findings
Piping in Poor condition.

Sanitary Drainage,
Second Chance Shelter Site
Uniformat Code: D2020
Recommendation: Replace in 2025
Priority Score: 86.7
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $14,800
$$$$
Clogs in the sewer line are reported. - AssetCALC ID: 5456303 Casework in Poor condition.

Countertop, Solid Surface
Second Chance Shelter Commercial kitchen
Uniformat Code: E2010
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 82.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $2,900
$$$$
The countertop is damaged and scratched, replacement is recommended. - AssetCALC ID: 5265171 Recommended Follow-up Study:

Paving, Site Drainage
Paving, Site Drainage
Second Chance Shelter Parking lot
Uniformat Code: P2030
Recommendation: Evaluate/Report in 2023
Priority Score: 81.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $15,300
$$$$
Excessive parking lot ponding was reported to be problematic. A professional engineer must be retained to analyze the existing condition, provide recommendations and, if necessary, estimate the scope and cost of any required repairs. - AssetCALC ID: 5265939
Recommended Follow-up Study:

Sewer Line
Sewer Line
Second Chance Shelter Sewer Lines
Uniformat Code: P2030
Recommendation: Evaluate/Report in 2023
Priority Score: 81.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $1,600
$$$$
Plumbing clogging and back up was reported throughout the facility. Video of the sewer lines is needed to understand the cause of the problem and to clarify if repairs or replacement are required. - AssetCALC ID:
5252928
Packet Page No. 886
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 7 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Plan Types
Each line item in the cost database is assigned a Plan Type, which is the primary reason or rationale for the recommended replacement, repair, or other corrective action. This is the “why” part of the equation. A cost or line item may commonly have more than one applicable Plan Type; however, only one Plan Type will be assigned based on the “best” fit, typically the one with the greatest significance.

Plan Type Descriptions
Safety  An observed or reported unsafe condition that if left unaddressed could result in injury; a system or component that presents potential liability risk.

Performance/Integrity  Component or system has failed, is almost failing, performs unreliably, does not perform as intended, and/or poses risk to overall system stability.

Accessibility  Does not meet ADA, UFAS, and/or other handicap accessibility requirements.

Environmental  Improvements to air or water quality, including removal of hazardous materials from the building or site.

Retrofit/Adaptation  Components, systems, or spaces recommended for upgrades in in order to meet current standards, facility usage, or client/occupant needs.

Lifecycle/Renewal  Any component or system that is not currently deficient or problematic but for which future replacement or repair is anticipated and budgeted.

Plan Type Distribution (by Cost)
Packet Page No. 887
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 8 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

2. B u il di ng a nd Si t e I nf orm at i on
Systems Summary
System Description Condition
Structure Conventional wood frame structure over a crawl space Good Facade Primary Wall Finish : Stucco
Windows: Vinyl
Fair
Roof Primary: Gable construction with asphalt shingles Fair Interiors Walls: Painted gypsum board
Floors: Carpet, ceramic tile, quarry tile, and vinyl sheeting Ceilings: Painted gypsum board
Fair
Elevators None n/a
Plumbing Distribution: Copper supply and PVC waste and venting Hot Water: Gas water heaters with integral tanks
Fixtures: Toilets, showers, and sinks in all restrooms
Fair
HVAC Non-Central System: Evaporative cooler unit and furnace. Single through the wall air conditioning unit
Supplemental components: Exhaust fan
Fair
Fire Suppression Wet-pipe sprinkler system and fire extinguishers, and kitchen hood system Fair Packet Page No. 888
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 9 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Systems Summary
Electrical Source and Distribution: Main panel with copper wiring Interior Lighting: Linear fluorescent, and incandescent Emergency Power: None
Fair
Fire Alarm Alarm panel with smoke detectors, heat detectors, alarms, strobes, pull stations, and exit signs
Fair
Equipment/Special Commercial kitchen equipment Fair
Site Pavement Asphalt lots with limited areas of concrete aprons and pavement and adjacent concrete sidewalks.

Fair
Site Development No property signage; chain-link fence dumpster enclosures Fair Landscaping &
Topography
Landscaping features include lawns, trees, bushes
Irrigation present
No retaining walls
Low to moderate site slopes throughout
Fair
Utilities Municipal water and sewer
Local utility-provided electric and natural gas
Good
Site Lighting Pole-mounted: None
Building-mounted: Incandescent
Fair
Ancillary Structures There is a wood framed shed resting on the landscaping at the rear of the facility
Good
Accessibility Presently it does not appear an accessibility study is needed for this property.

Key Issues and
Findings
Countertop replacement, parking lot ponding, plumbing clogging issues Packet Page No. 889
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 10 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Packet Page No. 890
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 11 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

Key Spaces Not Observed
All key areas of the property were accessible and observed.

Packet Page No. 891
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 12 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

However, this does not:

1. Necessarily require a public entity to make each of its existing facilities accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities;

2. Require a public entity to take any action that would threaten or destroy the historic significance of an historic property; or

Additional clarifications of this limited survey:
▪ This survey was visual in nature and actual measurements were not taken to verify compliance ▪ Only a representative sample of areas was observed
▪ Two overview photos were taken for each subsection regardless of perceived compliance or non-compliance ▪ Itemized costs for individual non-compliant items are not included in the dataset ▪ For any “none” boxes checked or reference to “no issues” identified, that alone does not guarantee full compliance The facility was originally constructed in 1960. An addition was completed in 1991 with some limited renovation over the last few years, accessibility improvements appear to have been implemented at that time.

No information about complaints or pending litigation associated with potential accessibility issues was provided during the interview process.

Packet Page No. 892
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 13 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

5. P u rp os e an d Sc op e
Purpose
Bureau Veritas was retained by the client to render an opinion as to the Property’s current general physical condition on the day of the site visit.

The physical condition of building systems and related components are typically defined as being in one of five condition ratings. For the purposes of this report, the following definitions are used:

Failed Component or system has ceased functioning or performing as intended. Replacement, repair, or other significant corrective action is recommended or required.

Not Applicable Assigning a condition does not apply or make logical sense, most commonly due to the item in question not being present.

Packet Page No. 893
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 14 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Scope
The standard scope of the Facility Condition Assessment includes the following:
▪ Visit the Property to evaluate the general condition of the building and site improvements, review available construction documents in order to familiarize ourselves with, and be able to comment on, the in-place construction systems, life safety, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems, and the general built environment. ▪ Identify those components that are exhibiting deferred maintenance issues and provide cost estimates for Immediate Costs and Replacement Reserves based on observed conditions, maintenance history and industry standard useful life estimates. This will include the review of documented capital improvements completed within the last five-year period and work currently contracted for, if applicable.
▪ Provide a full description of the Property with descriptions of in-place systems and commentary on observed conditions. ▪ Provide a high-level categorical general statement regarding the subject Property’s compliance to Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act. This will not constitute a full ADA survey, but will help identify exposure to issues and the need for further review.
▪ Obtain background and historical information about the facility from a building engineer, property manager, maintenance staff, or other knowledgeable source. The preferred methodology is to have the client representative or building occupant complete a Pre-Survey Questionnaire (PSQ) in advance of the site visit. Common alternatives include a verbal interview just prior to or during the walk-through portion of the assessment. ▪ Review maintenance records and procedures with the in-place maintenance personnel. ▪ Observe a representative sample of the interior spaces/units, including vacant spaces/units, to gain a clear understanding of the property’s overall condition. Other areas to be observed include the exterior of the property, the roofs, interior common areas, and the significant mechanical, electrical and elevator equipment rooms. ▪ Provide recommendations for additional studies, if required, with related budgetary information. ▪ Provide an Executive Summary at the beginning of this report, which highlights key findings and includes a Facility Condition Index as a basis for comparing the relative conditions of the buildings within the portfolio.

Packet Page No. 894
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 15 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

6. O p in io ns o f P ro b ab le C os t s
Cost estimates are attached throughout this report, with the Replacement Reserves in the appendix.

For database and reporting purposes the line items with RUL=0, and commonly associated with Safety or Performance/Integrity Plan Types, are considered Immediate Needs.

Costs for work performed by the ownership’s or property management’s maintenance staff are also considered.

Packet Page No. 895
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 16 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Bureau Veritas’s reserve methodology involves identification and quantification of those systems or components requiring capital reserve funds within the assessment period. The assessment period is defined as the effective age plus the reserve term. Additional information concerning system’s or component’s respective replacement costs (in today's dollars), typical expected useful lives, and remaining useful lives were estimated so that a funding schedule could be prepared. The Replacement Reserves Schedule presupposes that all required remedial work has been performed or that monies for remediation have been budgeted for items defined as Immediate Needs.

Packet Page No. 896
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 17 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

7. C e rt if ic at io n
Group 4 Arch, City of Newark, Facilities Master Plan (the Client) retained Bureau Veritas to perform this Facility Condition Assessment in connection with its continued operation of Second Chance Shelter, 6516 Central Avenue, Newark, California 94560, the “Property”. It is our understanding that the primary interest of the Client is to locate and evaluate materials and building system defects that might significantly affect the value of the property and to determine if the present Property has conditions that will have a significant impact on its continued operations.

Prepared by: Nezar M. Tibi
Project Manager
Reviewed by:

Matt Anderson
Technical Report Reviewer for
Mary Venable
Program Manager
[email protected]
800.733.0660 x7292719
Packet Page No. 897
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 18 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
8 . A p pe n d ic es
Appendix A: Photographic Record
Appendix B: Site and Floor Plans
Appendix C: Pre-Survey Questionnaire
Appendix D: Accessibility Review and Photos
Appendix E: Component Condition Report
Appendix F: Replacement Reserves
Appendix G: Equipment Inventory List
Packet Page No. 898
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix A:

P h ot o gr a p h ic R ec o rd
Packet Page No. 899
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
1 - FRONT ELEVATION 2 - LEFT ELEVATION
3 - REAR ELEVATION 4 - RIGHT ELEVATION
5 - TRASH ENCLOSURE 6 - MAIN ENTRANCE
Packet Page No. 900
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
7 - WINDOWS 8 - INTERIOR DOORS
9 - ROOFING 10 - ROOF SKYLIGHT
11 - OFFICE 12 - LIVING ROOM
Packet Page No. 901
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
13 - HALLWAY 14 - BEDROOM
15 - COMMERCIAL KITCHEN 16 - COMMERCIAL SINK
17 - SHOWER 18 - SINK, FAUCET HANDLES AND ACCESSORIES
Packet Page No. 902
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
19 - TOILET STALL OVERVIEW 20 - EXHAUST FAN
21 - EVAPORATIVE COOLER 22 - FURNACE
23 - ELECTRICAL SYSTEM 24 - DISTRIBUTION PANEL
Packet Page No. 903
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
25 - FIRE ALARM PANEL 26 - WATER HEATER
27 - PARKING LOTS 28 - PARKING LOTS
29 - SIDEWALK 30 - LANDSCAPING
Packet Page No. 904
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix B:

S it e and Floor P la ns
Packet Page No. 905
Aerial Site Plan
Project Number Project Name
159125.22R000-011.017 Second Chance Shelter
Source On-Site Date
Google January 24, 2023
Packet Page No. 906
Floor Plan
Project Number Project Name
159125.22R000-011.017 Second Chance Shelter
Source On-Site Date
Owner January 24, 2023
Packet Page No. 907
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix C:

P r e - Su rv ey Q ue s t i o n na i re
Packet Page No. 908
B V F a c i l i t y C o n d i t i o n A s s e s s m e n t : P r e - S u r v e y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Building / Facility Name: Second Chance Shelter
Name of person completing form: Tonya Connolly
Title / Association with property: Maintenance Superintendent Length of time associated w/ property: 7.5 years
Date Completed: 1/20/2023
Phone Number: 510 578 4802
Method of Completion: PRIOR: fully completed by client in advance Directions: Please answer all questions to the best of your knowledge and in good faith. Please provide additional details in the Comments column, or backup documentation for any Yes responses.

Data Overview Response
1 Year/s constructed / renovated
1960 – original facility (1,600 sq ft)
1991 – addition (1,100 sq ft)
2 Building size in SF 3,166
3 Major Renovation/Rehabilitation
Year Additional Detail
Façade Wood frame
Roof Shingle
Interiors
HVAC
Electrical
Site Pavement Concrete in front – asphalt in rear
Accessibility Ramp installed in rear of property (year unknown) Question Response
4 List other significant capital
improvements (focus on recent
years; provide approximate date).
5 List any major capital expenditures
planned/requested for the next few
years. Have they been budgeted?
6 Describe any on-going extremely
problematic, historically chronic, or
immediate facility needs.

Packet Page No. 909
Mark the column corresponding to the appropriate response. Please provide additional details in the Comments column, or backup documentation for any Yes responses. (NA indicates “Not Applicable”, Unk indicates “Unknown”) Question Response Comments
Yes No Unk NA
7 Are there any problems with
foundations or structures, like
excessive settlement?
x
8 Are there any wall, window,
basement or roof leaks? x
9 Has any part of the facility ever
contained visible suspect mold
growth, or have there been any
indoor air quality or mold related
complaints from occupants?
x
10 Are your elevators unreliable, with
frequent service calls? x
11 Are there any plumbing leaks,
water pressure, or clogging/backup problems? x
Due to high usage
12 Have there been any leaks or
pressure problems with natural
gas, HVAC supply/return lines, or
steam service?
x
13 Are any areas of the facility
inadequately heated, cooled or
ventilated? Any poorly insulated
areas?
x
14 Is the electrical service outdated,
undersized, or otherwise
problematic?
x
15 Are there any problems or
inadequacies with exterior lighting? x
16 Is site/parking drainage
inadequate, with excessive
ponding or other problems?
x
Some ponding in rear of facility
17 Are there any other unresolved
construction defects or significant
issues/hazards at the property that
have not yet been identified
above?
x
18 ADA: Has an accessibility study
been performed at the site? If so,
indicate when.
x
19 ADA: If a study has occurred, have
the associated recommendations
been addressed? In full or in part?
x
20 ADA: Have there been regular
complaints about accessibility
issues, or associated previous or
pending litigation?
x
Packet Page No. 910
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix D:

Ac c es s ib ilit y Re v i e w a n d P h ot os
Packet Page No. 911
Visual Checklist - 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist
Facility History & Interview
Question Yes No Unk Comments
Has an accessibility study been previously
performed? If so, when?
Have any ADA improvements been made to
the property since original construction?
Describe.

Has building management reported any
accessibility-based complaints or litigation?
1 2
3 Property Name:

BV Project Number: 159125.22R000 - 011.017
Second Chance Shelter
Packet Page No. 912
Parking
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

ACCESSIBLE PATH ACCESSIBLE RAMP
Question Yes No NA Comments
Is an accessible route present from public
transportation stops and municipal sidewalks
on or immediately adjacent to the property ?
1 Does a minimum of one accessible route
appear to connect all public areas on the
exterior, such as parking and other outdoor
amenities, to accessible building entrances ?
2 Are curb ramps present at transitions through
raised curbs on all accessible routes? 3
Do curb ramps appear to have compliant
slopes for all components ? 4
Do ramp runs on an accessible route appear
to have compliant slopes ? 5
Do ramp runs on an accessible route appear
to have a compliant rise and width ? 6
Packet Page No. 914
Do ramps on an accessible route appear to
have compliant end and intermediate
landings ?
7 Do ramps and stairs on an accessible route
appear to have compliant handrails? 8
For stairways that are open underneath, are
permanent barriers present that prevent or
discourage access?
9 Packet Page No. 915
Building Entrances
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

MAIN ENTRANCE ADDITIONAL ENTRANCE
Question Yes No NA Comments
Do a sufficient number of accessible
entrances appear to be provided ? 1
If the main entrance is not accessible, is an
alternate accessible entrance provided? 2
Is signage provided indicating the location of
alternate accessible entrances ? 3
Do doors at accessible entrances appear to
have compliant maneuvering clearance area
on each side ?
4 Do doors at accessible entrances appear to
have compliant hardware ? 5
Do doors at accessible entrances appear to
have a compliant clear opening width ? 6
Packet Page No. 916
Do pairs of accessible entrance doors in
series appear to have the minimum clear
space between them ?
7 Do thresholds at accessible entrances appear
to have a compliant height ? 8
Packet Page No. 917
Interior Accessible Route
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR PATH DOOR HARDWARE
Question Yes No NA Comments
Does an accessible route appear to connect
all public areas inside the building ? 1
Do accessible routes appear free of
obstructions and/or protruding objects ? 2
Do ramps on accessible routes appear to
have compliant slopes ? 3
Do ramp runs on an accessible route appear
to have a compliant rise and width ? 4
Do ramps on accessible routes appear to
have compliant end and intermediate
landings ?
5 Do ramps on accessible routes appear to
have compliant handrails ? 6
Packet Page No. 918
Are accessible areas of refuge and the
accessible means of egress to those areas
identified with accessible signage ?
7 Do public transaction areas have an
accessible, lowered service counter section ? 8
Do public telephones appear mounted with an
accessible height and location ? 9
Do doors at interior accessible routes appear
to have compliant maneuvering clearance
area on each side ?
10 Do doors at interior accessible routes appear
to have compliant hardware ? 11
Do non-fire hinged, sliding, or folding doors on
interior accessible routes appear to have
compliant opening force ?
12 Do doors on interior accessible routes appear
to have a compliant clear opening width ? 13
Packet Page No. 919
Elevators
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist
Elevators section not applicable at this site.

Packet Page No. 920
Packet Page No. 921
Public Restrooms
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

TOILET STALL OVERVIEW SINK, FAUCET HANDLES AND ACCESSORIES Question Yes No NA Comments
Do publicly accessible toilet rooms appear to
have a minimum compliant floor area ? 1
Does the lavatory appear to be mounted at a
compliant height and with compliant knee
area ?
2 Does the lavatory faucet have compliant
handles ? 3
Is the plumbing piping under lavatories
configured to protect against contact ? 4
Are grab bars provided at compliant locations
around the toilet ? 5
Do toilet stall doors appear to provide the
minimum compliant clear width ? 6
Packet Page No. 922
Do toilet stalls appear to provide the minimum
compliant clear floor area ? 7
Where more than one urinal is present in a
multi-user restroom, does minimum one urinal
appear to be mounted at a compliant height
and with compliant approach width ?
8 Do accessories and mirrors appear to be
mounted at a compliant height ? 9
Packet Page No. 923
Kitchens/Kitchenettes
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

SINK CLEARANCE OVEN WITH CONTROLS
Question Yes No NA Comments
Do kitchens/kitchenettes appear to have a
minimum compliant path of travel or area of
maneuverability ?
1 Are the appliances centered for a parallel or
forward approach with adequate clear floor
space ?
2 Is there an accessible countertop/preparation
space of proper width and height ? 3
Is there an accessible sink space of proper
width and height ? 4
Does the sink faucet have compliant
handles ? 5
Is the plumbing piping under the sink
configured to protect against contact ? 6
Packet Page No. 924
Are the cooktop/range controls front-mounted
(or in a location that does not require reaching
across the burners) ?
7 Packet Page No. 925
Playgrounds & Swimming Pools
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist
Playgrounds & Swimming Pools section not applicable at this site.

Packet Page No. 926
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix E:

Co m p o n en t C on d it i on R e po r t
Packet Page No. 927
Packet Page No. 928
Packet Page No. 929
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix F:

Re p lac e me nt Re s e rv e s
Packet Page No. 930
Packet Page No. 931
Packet Page No. 932
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix G:

E q ui pm e nt I nv e nt ory L is t
Packet Page No. 933
Packet Page No. 934
Service Center
37440 Filbert Street
Newark, California 94560

FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT
prepared for
City of Newark
37101 Newark Boulevard
Newark, California 94560
PREPARED BY:

Bureau Veritas
10461 Mill Run Circle, Suite 1100
Owings Mills, Maryland 21117
800.733.0660
www.us.bureauveritas.com
BV CONTACT:

Mary Venable
Program Manager
800.733.0660 x7292719
[email protected]
BV PROJECT #:
159125.22R000-012.017
DATE OF REPORT:

March 15, 2023
ON SITE DATE:

February 15, 2023
Bureau Veritas
10461 Mill Run Circle, Suite 1100 | Owings Mills, MD 21117 | www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660 Packet Page No. 935
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. 1 Campus Overview and Assessment Details .......................................................................................... 1 Campus Findings and Deficiencies ........................................................................................................ 2 Facility Condition Index (FCI) ................................................................................................................. 2 Immediate Needs.................................................................................................................................... 6 Key Findings ......................................................................................................................................... 10 Plan Types............................................................................................................................................ 13

2. Evidence and Vehicle Storage .......................................................................................................... 15

3. Crews Quarters/Alternate EOC/Fleet Shop...................................................................................... 17

4. Drive Through Building...................................................................................................................... 19

5. Parking Shed....................................................................................................................................... 21

6. Administration .................................................................................................................................... 23

7. Maintenance Department Office........................................................................................................ 25

8. Chemical Storage ............................................................................................................................... 27

9. Site Summary...................................................................................................................................... 29

10. Property Space Use and Observed Areas ....................................................................................... 30

11. ADA Accessibility............................................................................................................................... 31

12. Purpose and Scope ............................................................................................................................ 33

13. Opinions of Probable Costs .............................................................................................................. 35 Methodology ......................................................................................................................................... 35 Definitions ............................................................................................................................................. 35

14. Certification......................................................................................................................................... 37

15. Appendices ......................................................................................................................................... 38 Packet Page No. 936
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 1 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

1. Ex ec ut iv e S um m a ry
Campus Overview and Assessment Details
General Information
Property Type Municipal Service Center
Number of Buildings Seven
Main Address 37440 Filbert Street, Newark California 94560 Site Developed 1965-1988
Site Area 4.9 acres (estimated)
Parking Spaces 36 total spaces all in open lots; one of which is accessible Outside Occupants/Leased Spaces None
Date(s) of Visit February 15, 2023
Management Point of Contact Andrea Marie Gifford
650.871.0709 x218
agifford@g4arch
On-site Point of Contact (POC) Tonya Connolly
Assessment and Report Prepared By Kay van der Have
Reviewed By Matthew Anderson
[email protected]
800.733.0660 x7297613
AssetCalc Link Full dataset for this assessment can be found at:
https://www.assetcalc.net/
Packet Page No. 937
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 2 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Campus Findings and Deficiencies
Historical Summary
The main thrust of development at this location is when the tilt-up buildings, Evidence & Storage, Crews Quarters & Alternate EOC and the Drive Through Building, were built, 1988. These were built specifically for their current functions. The other buildings seem to be an ad-hoc collection of storage and garage like buildings that might have been re-purposed along the way.

Architectural
A recurring short coming is roofs with evidence of leaking inside and lots of visible patching on the roofs themselves. Exterior walls of the tilt-up buildings are in good condition. The walls of buildings finished with T-111 plywood tend to show rot and deterioration. Most interior spaces are work/repair or storage areas with unfinished walls, ceilings and concrete floors. The interior office areas would all benefit from a through up-dating of finishes and fixtures.

Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing and Fire (MEPF)
Most of the spaces are not conditioned, but in those spaces that are conditioned much of the HVAC equipment appears to be on life support and replacement is recommended. There were no complaints about the adequacy of the electrical power provided though in several buildings the main distribution panel seems very small for the size and amount of equipment that is being run in the building. A study to determine how much power each building gets and how it arrives there is recommended.

Only few buildings have a fire alarm or fire sprinkler system, providing them throughout is recommended.

Site
Sidewalks are in good condition. The parking lot is deteriorated and striping is in poor condition.

Recommended Additional Studies
As described above, how much electrical power each building is provided with and where it comes from is not clear. A professional engineer must be retained to analyze the existing condition, provide recommendations and, if necessary, estimate the scope and cost of any required repairs. The cost of this study is included in the cost tables. Due to the ambiguity of the required repair scope at the time of this assessment, the cost for any possible subsequent repairs is not included.

The Crew Quarters building had moisture intrusion, including a mushroom-like fungus growing at the base of a structural steel column, between the first and subsequent site visits. At the second site visit the growth had been removed, and the adjacent wall was being repaired where there had been moisture damage. Moisture accumulation was however noted at the skylights, possibly from condensation. A nondestructive roofing study is recommended, and a budgetary cost for addressing the issue is included. Additional costs may be recommended by the study.

Some areas of the facility were identified as having major or moderate accessibility issues. Bureau Veritas recommends a study be performed to take measurements, provide additional itemized details, research local requirements, and, if necessary, estimate the scope and cost of any required improvements. The cost of this study is included in the cost tables.

Due to the lack of measurements and itemized findings at this point in time, the costs for any possible subsequent repairs or improvements are not currently included.

Facility Condition Index (FCI)
One of the major goals of the FCA is to calculate each building’s Facility Condition Index (FCI), which provides a theoretical objective indication of a building’s overall condition. By definition, the FCI is defined as the ratio of the cost of current needs divided by current replacement value (CRV) of the facility. The chart below presents the industry standard ranges and cutoff points.

FCI Ranges and Description
0 – 5% In new or well-maintained condition, with little or no visual evidence of wear or deficiencies.

Packet Page No. 938
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 3 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
FCI Ranges and Description
5 – 10% Subjected to wear but is still in a serviceable and functioning condition. 10 – 30% Subjected to hard or long-term wear. Nearing the end of its useful or serviceable life. 30% and above Has reached the end of its useful or serviceable life. Renewal is now necessary.

Overall facility – all buildings
Packet Page No. 939
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 4 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Campus Level FCI:

The vertical bars below represent the year-by-year needs identified for the entire campus. The orange line in the graph below forecasts what would happen to the campus FCI (left Y axis) over time, assuming zero capital expenditures over the next ten years. The dollar amounts allocated for each year (blue bars) are associated with the values along the right Y axis.

Needs by Year with Unaddressed FCI Over Time
Packet Page No. 940
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 5 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
The table below shows the anticipated costs by trade or building system over the next 20 years.

Systems Expenditure Forecast
Packet Page No. 941
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 6 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Immediate Needs
Packet Page No. 942
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 7 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Packet Page No. 943
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 8 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Packet Page No. 944
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 9 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Packet Page No. 945
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 10 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Key Findings
Fire Extinguisher in Failed
condition.

Wet Chemical/CO2
Evidence Storage/Vehicle Storage Service
Center Evidence
Uniformat Code: D4030
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 90.9
Plan Type: Safety
Cost Estimate: $700
$$$$
This fire extinguisher was not tested within the past year - AssetCALC ID: 5297167 Pressure Wash in Poor condition.

Exterior surfaces
Maintenance Department Service Center
Building Exterior
Uniformat Code: B2010
Recommendation: n/a in 2023
Priority Score: 89.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $2,300
$$$$
Pressure wash exterior walls - AssetCALC ID: 5272092
Roofing in Poor condition.

Asphalt Shingle, 20-Year Standard
Parking Shed Service Center Roof
Uniformat Code: B3010
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 89.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $34,000
$$$$
The roof leaks and appears to be excessively aged. - AssetCALC ID: 5300564 Exterior Walls in Poor condition.

Plywood/OSB
Chemical Storage Service Center Building
Exterior
Uniformat Code: B2010
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 89.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $7,400
$$$$
The siding is showing rot complete replacement of the west façade is recommended. - AssetCALC ID: 5271825 Packet Page No. 946
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 11 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Exterior Walls in Poor condition.

Plywood/OSB
Parking Shed Service Center Building Exterior
Uniformat Code: B2010
Recommendation: Replace in 2024
Priority Score: 89.8
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $8,200
$$$$
Some of the panels have holes in them, and almost all of it is showing rot - AssetCALC ID: 5300571 Roof Sheathing in Poor condition.

Plywood
Parking Shed Service Center Building exterior
Uniformat Code: B1020
Recommendation: Replace in 2025
Priority Score: 89.7
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $9,800
$$$$
Sheathing at roof's edge is rotting. Replace when reroofing. - AssetCALC ID: 5300572 Roofing in Poor condition.

Modified Bitumen
Evidence Storage/Vehicle Storage Service
Center Roof
Uniformat Code: B3010
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 88.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $288,500
$$$$
There have been many spot leaks on this roof - AssetCALC ID: 5297146 Roofing in Poor condition.

Modified Bitumen
Drive-Through Building Service Center Roof
Uniformat Code: B3010
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 88.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $170,200
$$$$
Significant leaking - AssetCALC ID: 5300455
Packet Page No. 947
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 12 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Structural Framing in Poor
condition.

Wood
Maintenance Department Service Center
Building Exterior
Uniformat Code: B1010
Recommendation: Repair in 2023
Priority Score: 88.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $2,200
$$$$
The framing is rotted out on either side of the door - AssetCALC ID: 5272096 Recommended Follow-up Study:

Electrical, General Design
Electrical, General Design
Administration Service Center Throughout the
facility
Uniformat Code: P2030
Recommendation: Follow up study in 2023
Priority Score: 81.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $15,300
$$$$
There were no complaints about the adequacy of the electrical power provided though in several buildings the main distribution panel seems very small for the size and amount of equipment that is being run in the building. - AssetCALC ID: 5300448
Packaged Unit in Failed condition.

RTU, Pad or Roof-Mounted
Evidence Storage/Vehicle Storage Service
Center Roof
Uniformat Code: D3050
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 81.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $12,000
$$$$
Currently not working, parts have been ordered - AssetCALC ID: 5297165 Roof Skylight in Failed condition.
per unit, up to 20 SF
Crews Quarters/Alternate EOC/Truck Repair
Service Center Roof
Uniformat Code: B3060
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 81.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $6,300
$$$$
The skylights are cracked - AssetCALC ID: 5296641
Packet Page No. 948
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 13 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Plan Types
Each line item in the cost database is assigned a Plan Type, which is the primary reason or rationale for the recommended replacement, repair, or other corrective action. This is the “why” part of the equation. A cost or line item may commonly have more than one applicable Plan Type; however, only one Plan Type will be assigned based on the “best” fit, typically the one with the greatest significance.

Plan Type Descriptions
Safety  An observed or reported unsafe condition that if left unaddressed could result in injury; a system or component that presents potential liability risk.

Performance/Integrity  Component or system has failed, is almost failing, performs unreliably, does not perform as intended, and/or poses risk to overall system stability.

Accessibility  Does not meet ADA, UFAS, and/or other handicap accessibility requirements.

Environmental  Improvements to air or water quality, including removal of hazardous materials from the building or site.

Retrofit/Adaptation  Components, systems, or spaces recommended for upgrades in in order to meet current standards, facility usage, or client/occupant needs.

Lifecycle/Renewal  Any component or system that is not currently deficient or problematic but for which future replacement or repair is anticipated and budgeted.

Packet Page No. 949
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 14 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Plan Type Distribution (by Cost)
Packet Page No. 950
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 15 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

2. Ev i de nc e a nd V e hic le St or age
Evidence and Vehicle Storage: Systems Summary
Constructed/Renovated 1988
Building/Group Size 13,223 SF
Number of Stories One above grade with no below-grade basement levels System Description Condition
Structure Concrete tilt-up bearing walls with wood roof deck supported by wood joists and concrete raft foundation slab
Fair
Façade Primary Wall Finish: Concrete integral to superstructure Secondary Wall Finish: Metal
Windows: Aluminum
Fair
Roof Primary: Flat construction with modified bituminous finish Poor Interiors Walls, Evidence: Painted gypsum board, painted concrete Walls, Vehicle Storage: Unfinished
Floors, Evidence: Sealed concrete
Floors, Vehicle Storage: Unfinished concrete
Ceilings, Evidence: Painted gypsum board
Ceilings, Vehicle Storage: Unfinished/exposed
Fair
Elevators None --
Plumbing Distribution: Copper supply and cast-iron waste & venting Hot Water: Electric water heater with integral tank
Fixtures: Toilet and sink in restroom
Fair
HVAC Evidence: Packaged heating and cooling unit
No HVAC in Vehicle Storage
Failed
Packet Page No. 951
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 16 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Evidence and Vehicle Storage: Systems Summary
Fire Suppression Evidence: Wet-pipe sprinkler system and fire extinguishers Vehicle Storage: Fire extinguishers only
Fair
Electrical Source & Distribution: Main switchboard with copper wiring Interior Lighting: Linear fluorescent
Emergency Power: Diesel generator with automatic transfer switch Fair
Fire Alarm Evidence: Smoke detectors with exit signs only Vehicle Storage: None
Fair
Equipment/Special None --
Accessibility Potential moderate/major issues have been identified at this building and a detailed accessibility study is recommended. See Appendix D.

Key Issues and Findings Leaking roof, failed skylights, antiquated HVAC component, no fire alarm system in vehicle storage
Packet Page No. 952
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 17 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

3. C r ew s Q u art ers / Alt er na t e EOC / F le et S ho p Crews Quarters/Alternate EOC/Fleet Shop: Systems Summary Constructed/Renovated 1988
Building Size Crews Quarters/Alternate EOC 3,900 SF
Fleet Shop 2,300 SF
TOTAL 6,200 SF
Number of Stories One above grade with no below-grade basement levels System Description Condition
Structure Crews Quarters/Alternate EOC: Concrete tilt-up bearing walls with wood roof deck supported by wood joists. Concrete slab foundation Fleet Shop: Pre-engineered steel structure over concrete slab foundation Fair
Façade Crews Quarters/Alternate EOC Wall Finish: Concrete integral to superstructure
Fleet Shop: Metal
Windows: Aluminum
Fair
Roof Crews Quarters/Alternate EOC : Flat construction with modified bituminous finish
Fleet Shop: Gable construction with metal finish
Poor
Interiors Walls: Painted gypsum board, ceramic tile, unfinished Floors: VCT, ceramic tile, unfinished concrete
Ceilings: ACT, unfinished/exposed
Fair
Elevators None --
Plumbing Distribution: Copper supply and cast-iron waste & venting Hot Water: Electric water heaters with integral tanks
Fixtures: Toilets, urinals, and sinks in all restrooms
Fair
Packet Page No. 953
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 18 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Crews Quarters/Alternate EOC/Fleet Shop: Systems Summary HVAC Non-Central System: Packaged units
Supplemental components: Suspended unit heaters
Fair
Fire Suppression Crews Quarters/Alternate EOC: Wet-pipe sprinkler system and fire extinguishers
Fleet Shop: Fire extinguishers only
Fair
Electrical Source & Distribution: Main switchboard with copper wiring Interior Lighting: Linear fluorescent
Emergency Power: Diesel generator with automatic transfer switch Fair
Fire Alarm Smoke detectors with exit signs only Fair
Equipment/Special None --
Accessibility Potential moderate/major issues have been identified at this building and a detailed accessibility study is recommended. See Appendix D.

Key Issues and
Findings
Leaking roof, antiquated HVAC components, no fire alarm system Packet Page No. 954
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 19 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

4. D r iv e T h ro ug h B u il di ng
Drive Through Building: Systems Summary
Constructed/Renovated 1988
Building Size 8,400 SF
Number of Stories One above grade with no below-grade basement levels System Description Condition
Structure Concrete tilt-up bearing walls with wood roof deck supported by wood joists. Foundation is a concrete slab-on-grade.

Fair
Façade Primary Wall Finish: Concrete integral to superstructure Windows: No windows
Fair
Roof Primary: Flat construction with modified bituminous finish Poor Interiors Walls: Painted gypsum board, painted concrete Floors: Unfinished concrete, unfinished plywood
Ceilings: Unfinished/exposed
Fair
Elevators None --
Plumbing Distribution: Copper supply and cast-iron waste & venting Hot Water: None tank
Fixtures: None
--
HVAC Unit heaters Fair
Fire Suppression Fire extinguishers only Fair
Packet Page No. 955
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 20 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Drive Through Building: Systems Summary
Electrical Source & Distribution: Main panel with copper wiring Interior Lighting: Linear fluorescent
Emergency Power: None
Fair
Fire Alarm Smoke detectors with exit signs only Fair
Equipment/Special None --
Accessibility Potential moderate/major issues have been identified at this building and a detailed accessibility study is recommended. See Appendix D.

Key Issues and
Findings
Leaking roof, leaking skylights, the only electrical panel found seems very undersized for the equipment in the building
Packet Page No. 956
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 21 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

5. P a rk i ng Sh e d
Parking Shed: Systems Summary
Constructed/Renovated 1973/1980 estimated
Building Size 7,400 SF
Number of Stories One above grade with no below-grade basement levels System Description Condition
Structure Conventional wood frame structure over concrete slab foundation Pre-engineered steel structure over concrete slab foundation Fair
Façade Primary Wall Finish: T-111
Windows: None
Poor
Roof Primary: Gable construction with asphalt shingles
Secondary: Shed construction with metal finish
Poor
Interiors Walls: Chain-link, unfinished gypsum board, painted gypsum board Floors: Unfinished concrete
Ceilings: Unfinished/exposed
Fair
Elevators None --
Plumbing No plumbing --
HVAC No HVAC --
Fire Suppression Fire extinguishers throughout
Wet-pipe sprinkler system and fire extinguishers at the south end of the building
Fair
Packet Page No. 957
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 22 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Parking Shed: Systems Summary
Electrical Source & Distribution: Main panel with copper wiring Interior Lighting: Linear fluorescent
Emergency Power: None
--
Fire Alarm None --
Equipment/Special None --
Accessibility Presently it does not appear an accessibility study is needed for this building. See Appendix D.

Key Issues and Findings Leaking roof, roof sheathing rotting at west facing soffit, no fire alarm system , questionable electrical power amount and source
Packet Page No. 958
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 23 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

6. A dm i n is t r at i o n
Administration: Systems Summary
Constructed/Renovated 1970
Building Size 2,400 SF
Number of Stories One above grade with no below-grade basement levels System Description Condition
Structure Conventional mobile home wood frame structure over crawl space foundation
Fair
Façade Primary Wall Finish: Painted Wood
Windows: Aluminum
Fair
Roof Primary: Flat med construction with built-up finish with gravel ballast Secondary: Mansard construction with wood shakes
Fair
Interiors Walls: Painted gypsum board, wood paneling, vinyl Floors: Carpet, VCT
Ceilings: ACT
Fair
Elevators None --
Plumbing Distribution: Copper supply and cast-iron waste & venting Hot Water: Electric water heater with integral
Fixtures: Toilets, urinals, and sinks in all restrooms
Fair
HVAC Packaged heating and cooling units Fair
Fire Suppression Fire extinguishers only Fair
Packet Page No. 959
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 24 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Administration: Systems Summary
Electrical Source & Distribution: Main switchboard with copper wiring Interior Lighting: Linear fluorescent
Emergency Power: None
Fair
Fire Alarm Exit signs only Fair
Equipment/Special None --
Accessibility Potential moderate/major issues have been identified at this building and a detailed accessibility study is recommended. See Appendix D.

Key Issues and
Findings
Antiquated HVAC components, building lacks fire suppression, aged electrical infrastructure, no fire alarm system
Packet Page No. 960
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 25 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

7. M a i nt e na nc e De p art m ent Of f ic e
Maintenance Department Office: Systems Summary
Constructed/Renovated 1965
Building Size 1,920 SF
Number of Stories One above grade with no below-grade basement levels System Description Condition
Structure Conventional wood frame structure over concrete slab foundation Fair Façade Primary Wall Finish: T-111
Windows: Aluminum
Fair
Roof Primary: Gable construction with asphalt shingles Fair Interiors Walls: Painted gypsum board
Floors: VCT, unfinished concrete
Ceilings: Painted gypsum board, unfinished/exposed
Fair
Elevators None --
Plumbing None --
HVAC Non-Central System: Packaged unit
Supplemental components: Electric wall heater
--
Fire Suppression Fire extinguishers only Fair
Packet Page No. 961
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 26 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Maintenance Department Office: Systems Summary
Electrical Source & Distribution: Main panel with copper wiring Interior Lighting: Linear fluorescent
Emergency Power: None
--
Fire Alarm None --
Equipment/Special None --
Accessibility Potential moderate/major issues have been identified at this building and a detailed accessibility study is recommended. See Appendix D.

Key Issues and
Findings
Aged electrical infrastructure, no fire alarm system
Packet Page No. 962
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 27 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

8. C h em ic a l St ora g e
Chemical Storage: Systems Summary
Constructed/Renovated 1973
Building Size 840 SF
Number of Stories One above grade with no below-grade basement levels System Description Condition
Structure Conventional wood frame structure over concrete slab foundation Fair Façade Primary Wall Finish: T-111
Windows: None
Fair
Roof Primary: Gable construction with asphalt shingles Fair Interiors Walls: Painted exposed framing and insulation Ceilings: Exposed framing
Fair
Elevators None --
Plumbing No plumbing to the interior of the building
The emergency eyewash station at the exterior is plumbed with PVC --
HVAC No HVAC --
Fire Suppression Fire extinguisher only Fair
Packet Page No. 963
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 28 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Chemical Storage: Systems Summary
Electrical Source & Distribution: No electrical panel in the building Interior Lighting: Linear fluorescent
Emergency Power: None
Fair
Fire Alarm None --
Equipment/Special None --
Accessibility Presently it does not appear an accessibility study is needed for this building. See Appendix D.

Key Issues and
Findings
Warped, rotting siding, building lacks main electrical panel, no fire alarm system Packet Page No. 964
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 29 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

9. S it e S um m a ry
Site Information
System Description Condition
Pavement/Flatwork
Asphalt lots with limited areas of concrete aprons and pavement and adjacent concrete sidewalks, curbs, ramps, and stairs
Fair
Site Development
Property entrance signage; chain link fencing; Fair
Landscaping and
Topography
Limited landscaping features including trees, bushes, and planters Irrigation present, not used
Concrete retaining walls
Low site slopes throughout
Fair
Utilities
Municipal water and sewer
Local utility-provided electric and natural gas
Good
Site Lighting
Pole-mounted: HPS
Building-mounted: HPS
Fair
Ancillary Structures
Storage shed Fair
Accessibility Potential moderate/major issues have been identified associated with the site areas and a detailed accessibility study is recommended. See Appendix D.

Key Issues and
Findings
None observed at time of assessment
Packet Page No. 965
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 30 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
1 0. P r op ert y Sp ac e U s e an d O bs e rv ed Ar eas Areas Observed
Most of the interior spaces were observed in order to gain a clear understanding of the property’s overall condition.

Other areas accessed included the site within the property boundaries, the exterior of the property, and the roofs.

Key Spaces Not Observed
Areas of note that were either inaccessible or not observed for other reasons are listed here:
▪ Parking Shed; Two locked rooms that are police access only Packet Page No. 966
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 31 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
1 1. AD A Ac c es s ib il it y
Generally, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) prohibits discrimination by entities to access and use of “areas of public accommodations” and “public facilities” on the basis of disability. Regardless of their age, these areas and facilities must be maintained and operated to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG).

However, this does not:

1. Necessarily require a public entity to make each of its existing facilities accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities;

2. Require a public entity to take any action that would threaten or destroy the historic significance of an historic property; or

During the FCA, Bureau Veritas performed a limited high-level accessibility review of the facility non-specific to any local regulations or codes. The scope of the visual observation was limited to the same areas observed while performing the FCA and the categories set forth in the checklists that are included in the appendix. It is understood by the Client that the limited observations described herein do not comprise a full ADA Compliance Survey, and that such a survey is beyond the scope of this particular assessment. A full measured ADA survey would be required to identify any and all specific potential accessibility issues. Additional clarifications of this limited survey:
▪ This survey was visual in nature and actual measurements were not taken to verify compliance ▪ Only a representative sample of areas was observed
▪ Two overview photos were taken for each subsection regardless of perceived compliance or non-compliance ▪ Itemized costs for individual non-compliant items are included in the dataset ▪ For any “none” boxes checked or reference to “no issues” identified, that alone does not guarantee full compliance The campus was originally constructed between 1965 - 1988. The campus has not since been substantially renovated.

The following table summarizes the accessibility conditions of the general site and at each building on campus:

Campus: Accessibility Summary
Facility Year Built/
Renovated
Prior Study
Provided?
Major/Moderate
Issues Observed?
Evidence and Vehicle Storage 1988 No No
Crews Quarters/Alternate EOC/Truck Repair 1988 No Yes
Drive Through Building 1988 No No
Parking Shed 1988 No No
Packet Page No. 967
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 32 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Campus: Accessibility Summary
Administration 1970 No Yes
Maintenance Department Office 1976 No No
Chemical Storage 1973 No No
No information about complaints or pending litigation associated with potential accessibility issues was provided during the interview process.

Detailed follow-up accessibility studies are included as recommendations because potential moderate to major issues were observed at the buildings identified above. Reference the appendix for specific data, photos, and tables or checklists associated with this limited accessibility survey.

Packet Page No. 968
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 33 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
1 2. P u rp os e an d Sc op e
Purpose
Bureau Veritas was retained by the client to render an opinion as to the Property’s current general physical condition on the day of the site visit.

The physical condition of building systems and related components are typically defined as being in one of five condition ratings. For the purposes of this report, the following definitions are used:

Poor Component or system is significantly aged, flawed, functioning intermittently or unreliably; displays obvious signs of deferred maintenance; shows evidence of previous repair or workmanship not in compliance with commonly accepted standards; has become obsolete; or exhibits an inherent deficiency. The present condition could contribute to or cause the deterioration of contiguous elements or systems. Either full component replacement is needed or repairs are required to restore to good condition, prevent premature failure, and/or prolong useful life.

Failed Component or system has ceased functioning or performing as intended. Replacement, repair, or other significant corrective action is recommended or required.

Not Applicable Assigning a condition does not apply or make logical sense, most commonly due to the item in question not being present.

Packet Page No. 969
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 34 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Scope
The standard scope of the Facility Condition Assessment includes the following:
▪ Visit the Property to evaluate the general condition of the building and site improvements, review available construction documents in order to familiarize ourselves with, and be able to comment on, the in-place construction systems, life safety, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems, and the general built environment. ▪ Identify those components that are exhibiting deferred maintenance issues and provide cost estimates for Immediate Costs and Replacement Reserves based on observed conditions, maintenance history and industry standard useful life estimates. This will include the review of documented capital improvements completed within the last five-year period and work currently contracted for, if applicable.
▪ Provide a full description of the Property with descriptions of in-place systems and commentary on observed conditions. ▪ Provide a high-level categorical general statement regarding the subject Property’s compliance to Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act. This will not constitute a full ADA survey, but will help identify exposure to issues and the need for further review.
▪ Obtain background and historical information about the facility from a building engineer, property manager, maintenance staff, or other knowledgeable source. The preferred methodology is to have the client representative or building occupant complete a Pre-Survey Questionnaire (PSQ) in advance of the site visit. Common alternatives include a verbal interview just prior to or during the walk-through portion of the assessment. ▪ Review maintenance records and procedures with the in-place maintenance personnel. ▪ Observe a representative sample of the interior spaces/units, including vacant spaces/units, to gain a clear understanding of the property’s overall condition. Other areas to be observed include the exterior of the property, the roofs, interior common areas, and the significant mechanical, electrical and elevator equipment rooms. ▪ Provide recommendations for additional studies, if required, with related budgetary information. ▪ Provide an Executive Summary at the beginning of this report, which highlights key findings and includes a Facility Condition Index as a basis for comparing the relative conditions of the buildings within the portfolio.

Packet Page No. 970
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 35 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
1 3. O p in io ns o f P ro b ab le C os t s
Cost estimates are attached throughout this report, with the Replacement Reserves in the appendix.

For database and reporting purposes the line items with RUL=0, and commonly associated with Safety or Performance/Integrity Plan Types, are considered Immediate Needs.

Packet Page No. 971
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 36 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Replacement costs are solicited from ownership/property management, Bureau Veritas’s discussions with service companies, manufacturers' representatives, and previous experience in preparing such schedules for other similar facilities.

Costs for work performed by the ownership’s or property management’s maintenance staff are also considered.

Exceedingly Aged
A fairly common scenario encountered during the assessment process, and a frequent source of debate, occurs when classifying and describing “very old” systems or components that are still functioning adequately and do not appear nor were reported to be in any way deficient. To help provide some additional intelligence on these items, such components will be tagged in the database as Exceedingly Aged. This designation will be reserved for mechanical or electrical systems or components that have aged well beyond their industry standard lifecycles, typically at least 15 years beyond and/or twice their Estimated Useful Life (EUL). In tandem with this designation, these items will be assigned a Remaining Useful Life (RUL) not less than two years but not greater than 1/3 of their standard EUL. As such the recommended replacement time for these components will reside outside the typical Short-Term window but will not be pushed ‘irresponsibly’ (too far) into the future.

Packet Page No. 972
SERVICE CENTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-012.017 37 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
1 4. C e rt if ic at io n
Group 4 Architecture, Research + Planning, Inc (the Client) retained Bureau Veritas to perform this Facility Condition Assessment in connection with its continued operation of Service Center, 37440 Filbert Street, Newark California 94560, the “Property”. It is our understanding that the primary interest of the Client is to locate and evaluate materials and building system defects that might significantly affect the value of the property and to determine if the present Property has conditions that will have a significant impact on its continued operations.

Prepared by: Kay van der Have,
Project Manager
Reviewed by:

Matthew Anderson
Technical Report Reviewer for
Mary Venable,
Program Manager
[email protected]
800.733.0660 x7292719
Packet Page No. 973
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 18 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
8 . A p pe n d ic es
Appendix A: Photographic Record
Appendix B: Site and Floor Plans
Appendix C: Pre-Survey Questionnaire
Appendix D: Accessibility Review and Photos
Appendix E: Component Condition Report
Appendix F: Replacement Reserves
Appendix G: Equipment Inventory List
Packet Page No. 974
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix A:

P h ot o gr a p h ic R ec o rd
Packet Page No. 975
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
1 - FRONT ELEVATION 2 - LEFT ELEVATION
3 - REAR ELEVATION 4 - RIGHT ELEVATION
5 - TRASH ENCLOSURE 6 - MAIN ENTRANCE
Packet Page No. 976
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
7 - WINDOWS 8 - INTERIOR DOORS
9 - ROOFING 10 - ROOF SKYLIGHT
11 - OFFICE 12 - LIVING ROOM
Packet Page No. 977
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
13 - HALLWAY 14 - BEDROOM
15 - COMMERCIAL KITCHEN 16 - COMMERCIAL SINK
17 - SHOWER 18 - SINK, FAUCET HANDLES AND ACCESSORIES
Packet Page No. 978
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
19 - TOILET STALL OVERVIEW 20 - EXHAUST FAN
21 - EVAPORATIVE COOLER 22 - FURNACE
23 - ELECTRICAL SYSTEM 24 - DISTRIBUTION PANEL
Packet Page No. 979
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
25 - FIRE ALARM PANEL 26 - WATER HEATER
27 - PARKING LOTS 28 - PARKING LOTS
29 - SIDEWALK 30 - LANDSCAPING
Packet Page No. 980
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix B:

S it e and Floor P la ns
Packet Page No. 981
Aerial Site Plan
Project Number Project Name
159125.22R000-011.017 Second Chance Shelter
Source On-Site Date
Google January 24, 2023
Packet Page No. 982
Floor Plan
Project Number Project Name
159125.22R000-011.017 Second Chance Shelter
Source On-Site Date
Owner January 24, 2023
Packet Page No. 983
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix C:

P r e - Su rv ey Q ue s t i o n na i re
Packet Page No. 984
B V F a c i l i t y C o n d i t i o n A s s e s s m e n t : P r e - S u r v e y Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Building / Facility Name: Second Chance Shelter
Name of person completing form: Tonya Connolly
Title / Association with property: Maintenance Superintendent Length of time associated w/ property: 7.5 years
Date Completed: 1/20/2023
Phone Number: 510 578 4802
Method of Completion: PRIOR: fully completed by client in advance Directions: Please answer all questions to the best of your knowledge and in good faith. Please provide additional details in the Comments column, or backup documentation for any Yes responses.

Packet Page No. 985
Mark the column corresponding to the appropriate response. Please provide additional details in the Comments column, or backup documentation for any Yes responses. (NA indicates “Not Applicable”, Unk indicates “Unknown”) Question Response Comments
Yes No Unk NA
7 Are there any problems with
foundations or structures, like
excessive settlement?
x
8 Are there any wall, window,
basement or roof leaks? x
9 Has any part of the facility ever
contained visible suspect mold
growth, or have there been any
indoor air quality or mold related
complaints from occupants?
x
10 Are your elevators unreliable, with
frequent service calls? x
11 Are there any plumbing leaks,
water pressure, or clogging/backup problems? x
Due to high usage
12 Have there been any leaks or
pressure problems with natural
gas, HVAC supply/return lines, or
steam service?
x
13 Are any areas of the facility
inadequately heated, cooled or
ventilated? Any poorly insulated
areas?
x
14 Is the electrical service outdated,
undersized, or otherwise
problematic?
x
15 Are there any problems or
inadequacies with exterior lighting? x
16 Is site/parking drainage
inadequate, with excessive
ponding or other problems?
x
Some ponding in rear of facility
17 Are there any other unresolved
construction defects or significant
issues/hazards at the property that
have not yet been identified
above?
x
18 ADA: Has an accessibility study
been performed at the site? If so,
indicate when.
x
19 ADA: If a study has occurred, have
the associated recommendations
been addressed? In full or in part?
x
20 ADA: Have there been regular
complaints about accessibility
issues, or associated previous or
pending litigation?
x
Packet Page No. 986
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix D:

Ac c es s ib ilit y Re v i e w a n d P h ot os
Packet Page No. 987
Visual Checklist - 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist
Facility History & Interview
Question Yes No Unk Comments
Has an accessibility study been previously
performed? If so, when?
Have any ADA improvements been made to
the property since original construction?
Describe.

Has building management reported any
accessibility-based complaints or litigation?
1 2
3 Property Name:

BV Project Number: 159125.22R000 - 011.017
Second Chance Shelter
Packet Page No. 988
Parking
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

ACCESSIBLE PATH ACCESSIBLE RAMP
Question Yes No NA Comments
Is an accessible route present from public
transportation stops and municipal sidewalks
on or immediately adjacent to the property ?
1 Does a minimum of one accessible route
appear to connect all public areas on the
exterior, such as parking and other outdoor
amenities, to accessible building entrances ?
2 Are curb ramps present at transitions through
raised curbs on all accessible routes? 3
Do curb ramps appear to have compliant
slopes for all components ? 4
Do ramp runs on an accessible route appear
to have compliant slopes ? 5
Do ramp runs on an accessible route appear
to have a compliant rise and width ? 6
Packet Page No. 990
Do ramps on an accessible route appear to
have compliant end and intermediate
landings ?
7 Do ramps and stairs on an accessible route
appear to have compliant handrails? 8
For stairways that are open underneath, are
permanent barriers present that prevent or
discourage access?
9 Packet Page No. 991
Building Entrances
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

MAIN ENTRANCE ADDITIONAL ENTRANCE
Question Yes No NA Comments
Do a sufficient number of accessible
entrances appear to be provided ? 1
If the main entrance is not accessible, is an
alternate accessible entrance provided? 2
Is signage provided indicating the location of
alternate accessible entrances ? 3
Do doors at accessible entrances appear to
have compliant maneuvering clearance area
on each side ?
4 Do doors at accessible entrances appear to
have compliant hardware ? 5
Do doors at accessible entrances appear to
have a compliant clear opening width ? 6
Packet Page No. 992
Do pairs of accessible entrance doors in
series appear to have the minimum clear
space between them ?
7 Do thresholds at accessible entrances appear
to have a compliant height ? 8
Packet Page No. 993
Interior Accessible Route
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR PATH DOOR HARDWARE
Question Yes No NA Comments
Does an accessible route appear to connect
all public areas inside the building ? 1
Do accessible routes appear free of
obstructions and/or protruding objects ? 2
Do ramps on accessible routes appear to
have compliant slopes ? 3
Do ramp runs on an accessible route appear
to have a compliant rise and width ? 4
Do ramps on accessible routes appear to
have compliant end and intermediate
landings ?
5 Do ramps on accessible routes appear to
have compliant handrails ? 6
Packet Page No. 994
Are accessible areas of refuge and the
accessible means of egress to those areas
identified with accessible signage ?
7 Do public transaction areas have an
accessible, lowered service counter section ? 8
Do public telephones appear mounted with an
accessible height and location ? 9
Do doors at interior accessible routes appear
to have compliant maneuvering clearance
area on each side ?
10 Do doors at interior accessible routes appear
to have compliant hardware ? 11
Do non-fire hinged, sliding, or folding doors on
interior accessible routes appear to have
compliant opening force ?
12 Do doors on interior accessible routes appear
to have a compliant clear opening width ? 13
Packet Page No. 995
Elevators
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist
Elevators section not applicable at this site.

Packet Page No. 996
Packet Page No. 997
Public Restrooms
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

TOILET STALL OVERVIEW SINK, FAUCET HANDLES AND ACCESSORIES Question Yes No NA Comments
Do publicly accessible toilet rooms appear to
have a minimum compliant floor area ? 1
Does the lavatory appear to be mounted at a
compliant height and with compliant knee
area ?
2 Does the lavatory faucet have compliant
handles ? 3
Is the plumbing piping under lavatories
configured to protect against contact ? 4
Are grab bars provided at compliant locations
around the toilet ? 5
Do toilet stall doors appear to provide the
minimum compliant clear width ? 6
Packet Page No. 998
Do toilet stalls appear to provide the minimum
compliant clear floor area ? 7
Where more than one urinal is present in a
multi-user restroom, does minimum one urinal
appear to be mounted at a compliant height
and with compliant approach width ?
8 Do accessories and mirrors appear to be
mounted at a compliant height ? 9
Packet Page No. 999
Kitchens/Kitchenettes
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

SINK CLEARANCE OVEN WITH CONTROLS
Question Yes No NA Comments
Do kitchens/kitchenettes appear to have a
minimum compliant path of travel or area of
maneuverability ?
1 Are the appliances centered for a parallel or
forward approach with adequate clear floor
space ?
2 Is there an accessible countertop/preparation
space of proper width and height ? 3
Is there an accessible sink space of proper
width and height ? 4
Does the sink faucet have compliant
handles ? 5
Is the plumbing piping under the sink
configured to protect against contact ? 6
Packet Page No. 1000
Are the cooktop/range controls front-mounted
(or in a location that does not require reaching
across the burners) ?
7 Packet Page No. 1001
Playgrounds & Swimming Pools
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist
Playgrounds & Swimming Pools section not applicable at this site.

Packet Page No. 1002
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix E:

Co m p o n en t C on d it i on R e po r t
Packet Page No. 1003
Packet Page No. 1004
Packet Page No. 1005
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix F:

Re p lac e me nt Re s e rv e s
Packet Page No. 1006
Packet Page No. 1007
Packet Page No. 1008
SECOND CHANCE SHELTER BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-011.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix G:

E q ui pm e nt I nv e nt ory L is t
Packet Page No. 1009
Packet Page No. 1010
Silliman Center and Scorekeepers Hut
6800 Mowry Avenue
Newark, California 94560

FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT
prepared for
City of Newark
37101 Newark Boulevard
Newark, California 94560
PREPARED BY:

Bureau Veritas
10461 Mill Run Circle, Suite 1100
Owings Mills, Maryland 21117
800.733.0660
www.us.bureauveritas.com
BV CONTACT:

Mary Venable
Program Manager
800.733.0660 x7292719
[email protected]
BV PROJECT #:
159125.22R000-013.017
DATE OF REPORT:

February 22, 2023
ON SITE DATE:

January 30-31, 2023
Bureau Veritas
10461 Mill Run Circle, Suite 1100 | Owings Mills, MD 21117 | www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660 Packet Page No. 1011
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. 1 Campus Overview and Assessment Details .......................................................................................... 1 Campus Findings and Deficiencies ........................................................................................................ 2 Facility Condition Index (FCI) ................................................................................................................. 3 Immediate Needs.................................................................................................................................... 6 Key Findings ........................................................................................................................................... 8 Plan Types............................................................................................................................................ 11

2. Silliman Center I & II........................................................................................................................... 12

3. Scorekeepers Hut ............................................................................................................................... 14

4. Site Summary...................................................................................................................................... 16

5. Property Space Use and Observed Areas ....................................................................................... 17

6. ADA Accessibility............................................................................................................................... 18

7. Purpose and Scope ............................................................................................................................ 20

8. Opinions of Probable Costs .............................................................................................................. 22 Methodology ......................................................................................................................................... 22 Definitions ............................................................................................................................................. 22

9. Certification......................................................................................................................................... 24

10. Appendices ......................................................................................................................................... 25 Packet Page No. 1012
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 1 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

1. Ex ec ut iv e S um m a ry
Campus Overview and Assessment Details
General Information
Property Type Community Center
Main Address 6800 Mowry Avenue, Newark, California 95460 Site Developed 2000 Silliman Phase I
2004 Silliman Phase II
1989 Scorekeepers Hut
Site Area 7.7 acres (estimated)
Parking Spaces 195 total spaces all in open lots; 12 of which are accessible Building Area Silliman Phase I 36,410 SF
Silliman Phase II 32,320 SF
Subtotal 68,730 SF
Scorekeepers Hut 100 SF
Total 68,830 SF
Number of Stories One above grade
Outside Occupants / Leased Spaces None
Date(s) of Visit January 30-31, 2023
Management Point of Contact Ms. Andrea Gifford
650.871.0709
[email protected]
On-site Point of Contact (POC) Gus Perez
Assessment and Report Prepared By Kay van der Have, Architect Reviewed By Matthew Anderson for
Mary Venable
Program Manager
[email protected]
800.733.0660 x7292719
AssetCalc Link Full dataset for this assessment can be found at:
https://www.assetcalc.net/
Packet Page No. 1013
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 2 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Campus Findings and Deficiencies
Historical Summary
Both Phases, I and II, of the Silliman Center were designed at the same time. Phase I was built in 2000, the major element of this section is the gymnasium with the basketball courts. Phase II was built in 2004 and its major element is the aquatic center with a lap pool, water slide and a major waterspout play structure. The facility is currently functioning as intended.

Construction date of the Scorekeepers Hut is 1989. It appears to be unchanged since then. The purpose of the Scorekeepers Hut was and still is to house the equipment that controls the scoreboard.

Architectural
The slate roofs are in great condition replacement is not anticipated for the coming 30 years. Replacement of the modified bitumen roofs has been budgeted during the replacement reserve term. The extensive skylights appear to be in serviceable condition. The stucco exterior shows no failures, painting should be anticipated in the near term. The aquatic area has suffered recent significant moisture which caused rust and failure in the alarmed panic bars of the exterior doors. As a safety measure immediate replacement is recommended. Interior finishes of the heavily used activity areas are well maintained. Finishes in the corridors and smaller spaces are ready for replacement.

The exterior siding and roof of the Scorekeepers Hut is in adequate condition. Regular maintenance is recommended.

Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing and Fire (MEPF)
With the exception of the aquatic area HVAC is provided by rooftop package units. The Phase I units were replaced in 2017 and function well. Replacement of the Phase II units is budgeted. The aquatic area HVAC is provided by two air handlers, one has failed. Replacement of the failed unit is anticipated within the year, the other unit should be replaced within five years. The remaining systems, electrical, plumbing and fire are well maintained and replacement is based on anticipated lifecycles.

Site
In general, the site has been well maintained. The extensive landscaping is served by in-ground irrigation systems. Asphalt paved parking areas and drive aisles are fairly well maintained, spot repairs are evident and sealing and striping is needed.

A significant portion of the site lighting has been upgraded to LED, and it is recommended that the remaining lighting is upgraded to improve energy efficiency.

Due to the lack of measurements and itemized findings at this point in time, the costs for any possible subsequent repairs or improvements are not currently included.

Packet Page No. 1014
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 3 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Facility Condition Index (FCI)
One of the major goals of the FCA is to calculate each building’s Facility Condition Index (FCI), which provides a theoretical objective indication of a building’s overall condition. By definition, the FCI is defined as the ratio of the cost of current needs divided by current replacement value (CRV) of the facility. The chart below presents the industry standard ranges and cutoff points.

Needs by Year with Unaddressed FCI Over Time
Packet Page No. 1016
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 5 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
The table below shows the anticipated costs by trade or building system over the next 20 years.

Systems Expenditure Forecast
Packet Page No. 1017
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 6 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Immediate Needs
Packet Page No. 1018
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 7 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Packet Page No. 1019
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 8 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Key Findings
Sidewalk in Poor condition.

Concrete, Small Areas/Sections
Silliman Center West side of building
Uniformat Code: G2030
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 94.9
Plan Type: Safety
Cost Estimate: $5,200
$$$$
Uplift and cracking, this is a trip hazard - AssetCALC ID: 5147449 Door Hardware in Failed condition.

Office
Silliman Phase II Silliman Center Silliman ll
Uniformat Code: C1030
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 93.9
Plan Type: Safety
Cost Estimate: $5,100
$$$$
Excess humidity in the pool has caused the electronics in the door handles to fail, all needs to be replaced - AssetCALC ID: 5139322
Flooring in Poor condition.

Carpet, Commercial Standard
Silliman Phase I Silliman Center Silliman l
Office
Uniformat Code: C2030
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 90.9
Plan Type: Safety
Cost Estimate: $14,400
$$$$
Wavy, staff room - AssetCALC ID: 5139332
Exterior Walls in Poor condition.

Plywood T-111
Silliman Center Scorekeepers Hut
Uniformat Code: B2010
Recommendation: Replace in 2024
Priority Score: 89.8
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $1,600
$$$$
The T-111 has begun to rot, replacement recommended - AssetCALC ID: 5270248 Packet Page No. 1020
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 9 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Storage Tank in Failed condition.

Domestic Water
Silliman Phase II Silliman Center Silliman ll hot
water storage
Uniformat Code: D2010
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 84.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $7,200
$$$$
Not connected, not working - AssetCALC ID: 5139242
Air Handler in Poor condition.

Exterior AHU
Silliman Phase II Silliman Center Silliman ll roof
Uniformat Code: D3050
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 81.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $285,800
$$$$
Currently not working, will be repaired , then replaced - AssetCALC ID: 5139214 Dumpster Enclosure in Poor
condition.

Gates, Wood/Metal
Silliman Phase I Silliman Center Site
Uniformat Code: G2060
Recommendation: Replace/Install in 2024
Priority Score: 81.8
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $4,100
$$$$
The hinges have failed - AssetCALC ID: 5139274
ADA Miscellaneous
Level III Study, Includes Measurements
Silliman Phase II Silliman Center Throughout
Uniformat Code: Y1090
Recommendation: Evaluate/Report in 2023
Priority Score: 63.9
Plan Type: Accessibility
Cost Estimate: $18,100
$$$$
- AssetCALC ID: 5147149
Packet Page No. 1021
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 10 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
ADA Kitchen & Laundry Areas
Sink/Counter/Maneuverability, Full
Reconfiguration
Silliman Phase I Silliman Center Silliman l
Uniformat Code: Y1060
Recommendation: Renovate in 2023
Priority Score: 63.9
Plan Type: Accessibility
Cost Estimate: $36,100
$$$$
The kitchen cabinet does not allow roll under - AssetCALC ID: 5139361 ADA Paths of Travel in Failed
condition.

Ramp/Stair Handrails, Full Rail Modifications
Silliman Phase II Silliman Center
Uniformat Code: Y1020
Recommendation: Modify in 2023
Priority Score: 63.9
Plan Type: Accessibility
Cost Estimate: $7,900
$$$$
There is currently no accessible ramp or hand rail - AssetCALC ID: 5147334 ADA Kitchen & Laundry Areas in
Failed condition.

Range, Self-Cleaning w/ Front Controls
Silliman Phase I Silliman Center Silliman l
Uniformat Code: Y1060
Recommendation: Install in 2023
Priority Score: 63.9
Plan Type: Accessibility
Cost Estimate: $1,700
$$$$
The controls are not at the front - AssetCALC ID: 5139333 ADA Paths of Travel in Failed
condition.

Ramp, Concrete Up to 48" Wide
Silliman Phase II Silliman Center Scorekeepers
Hut
Uniformat Code: Y1020
Recommendation: Install in 2023
Priority Score: 63.9
Plan Type: Accessibility
Cost Estimate: $57,800
$$$$
There is currently no ramp to access the interior. - AssetCALC ID: 5147190 Packet Page No. 1022
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 11 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Plan Types
Each line item in the cost database is assigned a Plan Type, which is the primary reason or rationale for the recommended replacement, repair, or other corrective action. This is the “why” part of the equation. A cost or line item may commonly have more than one applicable Plan Type; however, only one Plan Type will be assigned based on the “best” fit, typically the one with the greatest significance.

Plan Type Descriptions
Safety  An observed or reported unsafe condition that if left unaddressed could result in injury; a system or component that presents potential liability risk.

Performance/Integrity  Component or system has failed, is almost failing, performs unreliably, does not perform as intended, and/or poses risk to overall system stability.

Accessibility  Does not meet ADA, UFAS, and/or other handicap accessibility requirements.

Environmental  Improvements to air or water quality, including removal of hazardous materials from the building or site.

Retrofit/Adaptation  Components, systems, or spaces recommended for upgrades in in order to meet current standards, facility usage, or client/occupant needs.

Lifecycle/Renewal  Any component or system that is not currently deficient or problematic but for which future replacement or repair is anticipated and budgeted.

Plan Type Distribution (by Cost)
Packet Page No. 1023
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 12 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

2. S i ll im a n C e nt er I & I I
Systems Summary
System Description Condition
Structure Silliman I and II:

Steel frame with concrete-topped metal decks over concrete pier and grade beam foundation
Silliman I Basketball Court:

Concrete tilt-up bearing walls with metal roof deck supported by open-web steel joists concrete foundation slab
Good
Façade Primary Wall Finish: Stucco
Windows: Aluminum, Fiberglass
Fair
Roof Primary: Gable construction with slate shingles
Secondary: Flat construction with modified bituminous finish Good
Interiors Walls: Painted gypsum board, vinyl, ceramic tile Floors: Carpet, VCT, faux wood plank LVT, ceramic tile, slate tile, wood strip, coated concrete
Ceilings: Painted gypsum board and ACT, exposed
Fair
Elevators None --
Plumbing Distribution: Copper supply and cast-iron waste and venting Hot Water: Gas domestic boilers with storage tanks
Hot Water: Gas water heaters with integral tanks
Fixtures: Toilets, urinals, and sinks in all restrooms
Fair
HVAC Phase I Non-Central System: Packaged units
Phase II Central System: Air handlers
Fair
Fire Suppression Wet-pipe sprinkler system and fire extinguishers Fair Packet Page No. 1024
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 13 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Systems Summary
Electrical Source and Distribution: Main switchboards with copper wiring Interior Lighting: Linear fluorescent
Emergency Power: Inverter for emergency lights
Good
Fire Alarm Alarm panel with smoke detectors, heat detectors, alarms, strobes, pull stations, back-up emergency lights, and exit signs
Fair
Equipment/Special Commercial kitchen equipment (snack bar), Swimming pool Fair Accessibility An accessibility study is recommended for this property. See Appendix D.

Key Issues and
Findings
Failed air handler, failed emergency exit door panic hardware Packet Page No. 1025
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 14 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

3. Sc o rek ee pe rs H u t
Scorekeepers Hut: Systems Summary
Constructed/Renovated 1989
Building Size 100 SF
Number of Stories One above grade
System Description Condition
Structure Conventional wood frame structure over crawl space foundation Fair Façade Primary Wall Finish: T-111
Windows: None
Fair
Roof Primary: Gable construction with asphalt shingles Fair Interiors Walls: Painted gypsum board, Unfinished
Floors: VCT, Unfinished
Ceilings: Painted exposed
Fair
Elevators None --
Plumbing Distribution: No plumbing --
HVAC No HVAC --
Fire Suppression Fire extinguishers only Fair
Electrical Source and Distribution: Main switchboard with copper wiring Interior Lighting: incandescent
Emergency Power: None
Fair
Packet Page No. 1026
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 15 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Scorekeepers Hut: Systems Summary
Fire Alarm None --
Equipment/Special None --
Accessibility Potential moderate/major issues have been identified at this building and a detailed accessibility study is recommended. See Appendix D.

Key Issues and
Findings
Interior finishes are heavily worn, no fire alarm system Packet Page No. 1027
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 16 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

4. S it e S um m a ry
Site Information
System Description Condition
Pavement/Flatwork
Asphalt lots with limited areas of concrete aprons and pavement and adjacent concrete sidewalks, curbs
Fair
Site Development
There is property entrance signage
Fencing is chain link and CMU wall fencing; CMU wall dumpster enclosures Playgrounds and sports fields and courts with bleachers, dugouts, press box, fencing, and site lights
Limited park benches, picnic tables, trash receptacles
Indoor swimming pool
Fair
Landscaping and
Topography
Significant landscaping features including lawns, trees, bushes, and planters Irrigation present
No retaining walls
Low site slopes throughout
Fair
Utilities
Municipal water and sewer
Local utility-provided electric and natural gas
Good
Site Lighting
Pole-mounted: LED, metal halide
Building-mounted: LED, metal halide
Pedestrian walkway and landscape accent lighting
Fair
Ancillary Structures
None --
Accessibility Potential moderate/major issues have been identified at this property and a detailed accessibility study is recommended. See Appendix D.

Key Issues and
Findings
Very uneven sidewalk on west side of building
Packet Page No. 1028
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 17 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

5. P r op ert y Sp ac e U s e an d O bs e rv ed Ar eas
Areas Observed
The interior spaces were observed in order to gain a clear understanding of the property’s overall condition. Other areas accessed included the site within the property boundaries, the exterior of the property, and the roofs.

Key Spaces Not Observed
All key areas of the property were accessible and observed.

Packet Page No. 1029
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 18 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

6. AD A Ac c es s ib il it y
Generally, Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) prohibits discrimination by entities to access and use of “areas of public accommodations” and “public facilities” on the basis of disability. Regardless of their age, these areas and facilities must be maintained and operated to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG).

However, this does not:

1. Necessarily require a public entity to make each of its existing facilities accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities;

2. Require a public entity to take any action that would threaten or destroy the historic significance of an historic property; or

During the FCA, Bureau Veritas performed a limited high-level accessibility review of the facility non-specific to any local regulations or codes. The scope of the visual observation was limited to the same areas observed while performing the FCA and the categories set forth in the checklist that is included in the appendix. It is understood by the Client that the limited observations described herein do not comprise a full ADA Compliance Survey, and that such a survey is beyond the scope of this particular assessment. A full measured ADA survey would be required to identify any and all specific potential accessibility issues. Additional clarifications of this limited survey:
▪ This survey was visual in nature and actual measurements were not taken to verify compliance ▪ Only a representative sample of areas was observed
▪ Two overview photos were taken for each subsection regardless of perceived compliance or non-compliance ▪ Itemized costs for individual non-compliant items are included in the dataset ▪ For any “none” boxes checked or reference to “no issues” identified, that alone does not guarantee full compliance The facility was originally constructed in 2000 and 2004. The facility has not since been substantially renovated.

The following table summarizes the accessibility conditions of the general site and at each building on campus:

Packet Page No. 1030
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 19 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Campus: Accessibility Summary
Facility Year Built/
Renovated
Prior Study
Provided?
Major/Moderate
Issues Observed?
General Site 2000 No No
Silliman I and II 2000/2004 No Yes
Scorekeepers Hut 1989 No Yes
During the interview process with the client representatives, no complaints or pending litigation associated with potential accessibility issues was reported.

Detailed follow-up accessibility study is included as a recommendation because potential moderate to major issues were observed at the buildings identified above. Reference the appendix for specific data, photos, and tables or checklists associated with this limited accessibility survey.

Packet Page No. 1031
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 20 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

7. P u rp os e an d Sc op e
Purpose
Bureau Veritas was retained by the client to render an opinion as to the Property’s current general physical condition on the day of the site visit.

The physical condition of building systems and related components are typically defined as being in one of five condition ratings. For the purposes of this report, the following definitions are used:

Poor Component or system is significantly aged, flawed, functioning intermittently or unreliably; displays obvious signs of deferred maintenance; shows evidence of previous repair or workmanship not in compliance with commonly accepted standards; has become obsolete; or exhibits an inherent deficiency. The present condition could contribute to or cause the deterioration of contiguous elements or systems. Either full component replacement is needed or repairs are required to restore to good condition, prevent premature failure, and/or prolong useful life.

Failed Component or system has ceased functioning or performing as intended. Replacement, repair, or other significant corrective action is recommended or required.

Not Applicable Assigning a condition does not apply or make logical sense, most commonly due to the item in question not being present.

Packet Page No. 1032
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 21 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Scope
The standard scope of the Facility Condition Assessment includes the following:
▪ Visit the Property to evaluate the general condition of the building and site improvements, review available construction documents in order to familiarize ourselves with, and be able to comment on, the in-place construction systems, life safety, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems, and the general built environment. ▪ Identify those components that are exhibiting deferred maintenance issues and provide cost estimates for Immediate Costs and Replacement Reserves based on observed conditions, maintenance history and industry standard useful life estimates. This will include the review of documented capital improvements completed within the last five-year period and work currently contracted for, if applicable.
▪ Provide a full description of the Property with descriptions of in-place systems and commentary on observed conditions. ▪ Provide a high-level categorical general statement regarding the subject Property’s compliance to Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act. This will not constitute a full ADA survey, but will help identify exposure to issues and the need for further review.
▪ Obtain background and historical information about the facility from a building engineer, property manager, maintenance staff, or other knowledgeable source. The preferred methodology is to have the client representative or building occupant complete a Pre-Survey Questionnaire (PSQ) in advance of the site visit. Common alternatives include a verbal interview just prior to or during the walk-through portion of the assessment. ▪ Review maintenance records and procedures with the in-place maintenance personnel. ▪ Observe a representative sample of the interior spaces/units, including vacant spaces/units, to gain a clear understanding of the property’s overall condition. Other areas to be observed include the exterior of the property, the roofs, interior common areas, and the significant mechanical, electrical and elevator equipment rooms. ▪ Provide recommendations for additional studies, if required, with related budgetary information. ▪ Provide an Executive Summary at the beginning of this report, which highlights key findings and includes a Facility Condition Index as a basis for comparing the relative conditions of the buildings within the portfolio.

Packet Page No. 1033
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 22 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

8. O p in io ns o f P ro b ab le C os t s
Cost estimates are attached throughout this report, with the Replacement Reserves in the appendix.

For database and reporting purposes the line items with RUL=0, and commonly associated with Safety or Performance/Integrity Plan Types, are considered Immediate Needs.

Packet Page No. 1034
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 23 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Replacement costs are solicited from ownership/property management, Bureau Veritas’s discussions with service companies, manufacturers' representatives, and previous experience in preparing such schedules for other similar facilities.

Costs for work performed by the ownership’s or property management’s maintenance staff are also considered.

Packet Page No. 1035
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 24 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

9. C e rt if ic at io n
Group 4 Architecture, Research + Planning Inc (the Client) retained Bureau Veritas to perform this Facility Condition Assessment in connection with its continued operation of Silliman Center and Scorekeepers Hut, 6800 Mowry Avenue, Newark, California 95460, the “Property”. It is our understanding that the primary interest of the Client is to locate and evaluate materials and building system defects that might significantly affect the value of the property and to determine if the present Property has conditions that will have a significant impact on its continued operations.

Prepared by: Kay van der Have, Architect,
Project Manager
Reviewed by:

Matthew Anderson
Technical Report Reviewer for
Mary Venable,
Program Manager
[email protected]
800.733.0660 x 7292719
Packet Page No. 1036
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 24 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

10. Appendices
Appendix A: Photographic Record
Appendix B: Site and Floor Plans
Appendix C: Pre-Survey Questionnaire
Appendix D: Accessibility Review and Photos
Appendix E: Component Condition Report
Appendix F: Replacement Reserves
Packet Page No. 1037
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix A:

Photographic Record
Packet Page No. 1038
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
1 - FRONT ELEVATION 2 - RIGHT ELEVATION
3 - LEFT ELEVATION 4 - REAR ELEVATION
5 - SLATE ROOFING 6 - MODIFIED BITUMINOUS ROOFING
Packet Page No. 1039
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
7 - KALWALL ROOFING 8 - NURSERY AREA
9 - COMMUNITY ROOM 10 - STAFF KITCHEN
11 - WORKOUT ROOM 12 - MEETING ROOM
Packet Page No. 1040
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
13 - BASKETBALL COURTS 14 - BASKETBALL COURTS
15 - POOLS 16 - POOLS
17 - RESTROOM FIXTURES 18 - LOCKER ROOM
Packet Page No. 1041
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
19 - WATER HEATER, SILLIMAN PHASE I 20 - BOILERS SILLIMAN PHASE II 21 - PACKAGE UNITS, MAIN HVAC FOR BOTH
PHASE
22 - MAIN ELECTRICAL PHASE I
23 - ELECTRICAL PHASE II 24 - FIRE ALARM PANEL
Packet Page No. 1042
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
25 - FIRE ALARM PANEL 26 - POOL PUMPS
27 - PLAY STRUCTURE 28 - PARKING AREA
29 - SCOREKEEPERS HUT 30 - SIGNAGE
Packet Page No. 1043
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix B:

Site and Floor Plans
Packet Page No. 1044
Silliman Aerial Site Plan
Project Number Project Name
159125.22R000-013.017 Silliman Center and Scorekeepers Hut Source On-Site Date
Google January 30-31, 2023
Packet Page No. 1045
Silliman Phase I Floor Plan
Project Number Project Name
159125.22R000-013.017 Silliman Center and Scorekeepers Hut Source On-Site Date
CSM January 30-31, 2023
Packet Page No. 1046
Silliman Phase II Floor Plan
Project Number Project Name
159125.22R000-013.017 Silliman Center and Scorekeepers Hut Source On-Site Date
CSM January 30-31, 2023
Packet Page No. 1047
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix C:

Pre-Survey Questionnaire
Packet Page No. 1048
BV Facility Condition Assessme nt: Pre-Survey Questionnaire Building / Facility Name: Silliman Center
Name of person completing form: Tonya Connolly
Title / Association with property: Maintenance Superintendent Length of time associated w/ property: 7.5 years
Date Completed: January 20, 2023
Phone Number: 510 578 4802
Method of Completion: PRIOR: fully completed by client in advance Directions: Please answer all questions to the best of your knowledge and in good faith. Please provide additional details in the Comments column, or backup documentation for any Yes responses.

Data Overview Response
1 Year/s constructed / renovated Phase I – 2000 and phase II - 2004 2 Building size in SF 36,410 (phase I) and 32,320 (phase II) 3 Major Renovation/Rehabilitation
Year Additional Detail
Façade
Roof
Interiors
HVAC
2018 – phase I
2019 – air handler II
Electrical
Site Pavement
Accessibility
Question Response
4 List other significant capital
improvements (focus on recent
years; provide approximate date).
5 List any major capital expenditures
planned/requested for the next few
years. Have they been budgeted?
Water tanks in phase II and water heater in phase I
6 Describe any on-going extremely
problematic, historically chronic, or
immediate facility needs.

Packet Page No. 1049
Mark the column corresponding to the appropriate response. Please provide additional details in the Comments column, or backup documentation for any Yes responses. (NA indicates “Not Applicable”, Unk indicates “Unknown”) Question Response Comments
Yes No Unk NA
7 Are there any problems with
foundations or structures, like
excessive settlement?
x
8 Are there any wall, window,
basement or roof leaks? x
9 Has any part of the facility ever
contained visible suspect mold
growth, or have there been any
indoor air quality or mold related
complaints from occupants?
x
10 Are your elevators unreliable, with
frequent service calls? x
11 Are there any plumbing leaks,
water pressure, or clogging/backup problems?
x
12 Have there been any leaks or
pressure problems with natural
gas, HVAC supply/return lines, or
steam service?
x
13 Are any areas of the facility
inadequately heated, cooled or
ventilated? Any poorly insulated
areas?
x
14 Is the electrical service outdated,
undersized, or otherwise
problematic?
x
15 Are there any problems or
inadequacies with exterior lighting? x
16 Is site/parking drainage
inadequate, with excessive
ponding or other problems?
x
17 Are there any other unresolved
construction defects or significant
issues/hazards at the property that
have not yet been identified
above?
x
18 ADA: Has an accessibility study
been performed at the site? If so,
indicate when.

19 ADA: If a study has occurred, have
the associated recommendations
been addressed? In full or in part?

20 ADA: Have there been regular
complaints about accessibility
issues, or associated previous or
pending litigation?
x
Packet Page No. 1050
BV Facility Condition Assessme nt: Pre-Survey Questionnaire Building / Facility Name: Scorekeepers Hut
Name of person completing form: Tonya Connolly
Title / Association with property: Maintenance Superintendent Length of time associated w/ property: 7.5
Date Completed: January 20, 2023
Phone Number: 510 578 4802
Method of Completion: PRIOR: fully completed by client in advance Directions: Please answer all questions to the best of your knowledge and in good faith. Please provide additional details in the Comments column, or backup documentation for any Yes responses.

Data Overview Response
1 Year/s constructed / renovated 1989
2 Building size in SF 80
3 Major Renovation/Rehabilitation
Year Additional Detail
Façade Wood
Roof Low composite
Interiors
HVAC
Electrical
Site Pavement
Accessibility
Question Response
4 List other significant capital
improvements (focus on recent
years; provide approximate date).
5 List any major capital expenditures
planned/requested for the next few
years. Have they been budgeted?
6 Describe any on-going extremely
problematic, historically chronic, or
immediate facility needs.

Some portions of exterior walls needs replacement due to age Packet Page No. 1051
Mark the column corresponding to the appropriate response. Please provide additional details in the Comments column, or backup documentation for any Yes responses. (NA indicates “Not Applicable”, Unk indicates “Unknown”) Question Response Comments
Yes No Unk NA
7 Are there any problems with
foundations or structures, like
excessive settlement?
x
8 Are there any wall, window,
basement or roof leaks? x
9 Has any part of the facility ever
contained visible suspect mold
growth, or have there been any
indoor air quality or mold related
complaints from occupants?
x
10 Are your elevators unreliable, with
frequent service calls? x
11 Are there any plumbing leaks,
water pressure, or clogging/backup problems?
x
12 Have there been any leaks or
pressure problems with natural
gas, HVAC supply/return lines, or
steam service?
x
13 Are any areas of the facility
inadequately heated, cooled or
ventilated? Any poorly insulated
areas?
x
14 Is the electrical service outdated,
undersized, or otherwise
problematic?
x
15 Are there any problems or
inadequacies with exterior lighting? x
16 Is site/parking drainage
inadequate, with excessive
ponding or other problems?
x
17 Are there any other unresolved
construction defects or significant
issues/hazards at the property that
have not yet been identified
above?
x
18 ADA: Has an accessibility study
been performed at the site? If so,
indicate when.
x
19 ADA: If a study has occurred, have
the associated recommendations
been addressed? In full or in part?
x
20 ADA: Have there been regular
complaints about accessibility
issues, or associated previous or
pending litigation?
x
Packet Page No. 1052
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix D:

Accessibility Review and Photos
Packet Page No. 1053
Visual Checklist - 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist
Facility History & Interview
Question Yes No Unk Comments
Has an accessibility study been previously
performed? If so, when?
Have any ADA improvements been made to
the property since original construction?
Describe.

Has building management reported any
accessibility-based complaints or litigation?
1 2
3 Property Name: Silliman Center and Scorekeepers Hut
BV Project Number: 159125.22R000-013.017
Packet Page No. 1054
Parking
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist
OVERVIEW OF ACCESSIBLE PARKING AREA 2ND AREA OF ACCESSIBLE PARKING Question Yes No NA Comments
Does the required number of standard ADA
designated spaces appear to be provided ? 1
Does the required number of van-accessible
designated spaces appear to be provided ? 2
Are accessible spaces on the shortest
accessible route to an accessible building
entrance ?
3 Does parking signage include the International
Symbol of Accessibility ? 4
Does each accessible space have an adjacent
access aisle ? 5
Do parking spaces and access aisles appear
to be relatively level and without obstruction ? 6
Packet Page No. 1055
Exterior Accessible Route
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

CURB CUT ACCESSIBLE PATH
Question Yes No NA Comments
Is an accessible route present from public
transportation stops and municipal sidewalks
on or immediately adjacent to the property ?
1 Does a minimum of one accessible route
appear to connect all public areas on the
exterior, such as parking and other outdoor
amenities, to accessible building entrances ?
2 Are curb ramps present at transitions through
raised curbs on all accessible routes? 3
Do curb ramps appear to have compliant
slopes for all components ? 4
Do ramp runs on an accessible route appear
to have compliant slopes ? 5 A ramp is needed at scorekeepers hut Do ramp runs on an accessible route appear
to have a compliant rise and width ? 6 No ramps
Packet Page No. 1056
Do ramps on an accessible route appear to
have compliant end and intermediate
landings ?
7 No ramps
Do ramps and stairs on an accessible route
appear to have compliant handrails? 8 No ramps or stairs For stairways that are open underneath, are
permanent barriers present that prevent or
discourage access?
9 Exposed stair at pool area
Packet Page No. 1057
Building Entrances
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

ACCESSIBLE ENTRANCE AUTOMATIC DOOR OPENER
Question Yes No NA Comments
Do a sufficient number of accessible
entrances appear to be provided ? 1
If the main entrance is not accessible, is an
alternate accessible entrance provided? 2 The main entry is accessible Is signage provided indicating the location of
alternate accessible entrances ? 3 The main entry is accessible Do doors at accessible entrances appear to
have compliant maneuvering clearance area
on each side ?
4 Do doors at accessible entrances appear to
have compliant hardware ? 5
Do doors at accessible entrances appear to
have a compliant clear opening width ? 6
Packet Page No. 1058
Do pairs of accessible entrance doors in
series appear to have the minimum clear
space between them ?
7 Do thresholds at accessible entrances appear
to have a compliant height ? 8
Packet Page No. 1059
Interior Accessible Route
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR PATH LOWERED COUNTER
Question Yes No NA Comments
Does an accessible route appear to connect
all public areas inside the building ? 1
Do accessible routes appear free of
obstructions and/or protruding objects ? 2
Do ramps on accessible routes appear to
have compliant slopes ? 3 No ramps
Do ramp runs on an accessible route appear
to have a compliant rise and width ? 4 No ramps
Do ramps on accessible routes appear to
have compliant end and intermediate
landings ?
5 No ramps
Do ramps on accessible routes appear to
have compliant handrails ? 6 No ramps
Packet Page No. 1060
Are accessible areas of refuge and the
accessible means of egress to those areas
identified with accessible signage ?
7 No areas of refuge
Do public transaction areas have an
accessible, lowered service counter section ? 8
Do public telephones appear mounted with an
accessible height and location ? 9 No public phones
Do doors at interior accessible routes appear
to have compliant maneuvering clearance
area on each side ?
10 Do doors at interior accessible routes appear
to have compliant hardware ? 11
Do non-fire hinged, sliding, or folding doors on
interior accessible routes appear to have
compliant opening force ?
12 Do doors on interior accessible routes appear
to have a compliant clear opening width ? 13
Packet Page No. 1061
Elevators
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist
Elevators section not applicable at this site.

Packet Page No. 1062
Public Restrooms
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

TOILET STALL OVERVIEW SINK, FAUCET HANDLES AND ACCESSORIES Question Yes No NA Comments
Do publicly accessible toilet rooms appear to
have a minimum compliant floor area ? 1
Does the lavatory appear to be mounted at a
compliant height and with compliant knee
area ?
2 Does the lavatory faucet have compliant
handles ? 3
Is the plumbing piping under lavatories
configured to protect against contact ? 4
Are grab bars provided at compliant locations
around the toilet ? 5
Do toilet stall doors appear to provide the
minimum compliant clear width ? 6
Packet Page No. 1063
Do toilet stalls appear to provide the minimum
compliant clear floor area ? 7
Where more than one urinal is present in a
multi-user restroom, does minimum one urinal
appear to be mounted at a compliant height
and with compliant approach width ?
8 Do accessories and mirrors appear to be
mounted at a compliant height ? 9
Packet Page No. 1064
Kitchens/Kitchenettes
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

SINK CLEARANCE OVEN WITH CONTROLS
Question Yes No NA Comments
Do kitchens/kitchenettes appear to have a
minimum compliant path of travel or area of
maneuverability ?
1 Are the appliances centered for a parallel or
forward approach with adequate clear floor
space ?
2 Is there an accessible countertop/preparation
space of proper width and height ? 3
Is there an accessible sink space of proper
width and height ? 4 Sink cabinet not open to the floor Does the sink faucet have compliant
handles ? 5
Is the plumbing piping under the sink
configured to protect against contact ? 6 No insulation Packet Page No. 1065
Are the cooktop/range controls front-mounted
(or in a location that does not require reaching
across the burners) ?
7 Controls at the rear
Packet Page No. 1066
Playgrounds & Swimming Pools
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

ACCESSIBLE ROUTE TO PLAYGROUND POOL LIFT
Question Yes No NA Comments
Is there an accessible route to the play area /
s? 1
Has the play area been reviewed for
accessibility ? 2 Unknown
Are publicly accessible swimming pools
equipped with an entrance lift ? 3
Packet Page No. 1067
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix E:

Component Condition Report
Packet Page No. 1068
Packet Page No. 1069
Packet Page No. 1070
Packet Page No. 1071
Packet Page No. 1072
Packet Page No. 1073
Packet Page No. 1074
Packet Page No. 1075
Packet Page No. 1076
SILLIMAN CENTER AND SCOREKEEPERS HUT BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-013.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix F:

Replacement Reserves
Packet Page No. 1077
Packet Page No. 1078
Packet Page No. 1079
Packet Page No. 1080
Packet Page No. 1081
Packet Page No. 1082
Sports Field Restroom
3911 Cherry Street
Newark, California 94560

FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT
prepared for
City of Newark
37101 Newark Boulevard
Newark, California 94560
PREPARED BY:

Bureau Veritas
10461 Mill Run Circle, Suite 1100
Owings Mills, MD 21117
800.733.0660
www.us.bureauveritas.com
BV CONTACT:

Mary Venable
Program Manager
800.733.0660 x7292719
[email protected]
BV PROJECT #:
159125.22R000-014.017
DATE OF REPORT:

February 28, 2023
ON SITE DATE:

January 29, 2023
Bureau Veritas
10461 Mill Run Circle, Suite 1100 | Owings Mills, MD 21117 | www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660 Packet Page No. 1083
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. 1 Property Overview and Assessment Details .......................................................................................... 1 Significant/Systemic Findings and Deficiencies ..................................................................................... 2 Facility Condition Index (FCI) ................................................................................................................. 3 Immediate Needs.................................................................................................................................... 5 Key Findings ........................................................................................................................................... 5 Plan Types.............................................................................................................................................. 8

2. Building and Site Information ............................................................................................................. 9

3. Property Space Use and Observed Areas ....................................................................................... 12

4. ADA Accessibility............................................................................................................................... 13

5. Purpose and Scope ............................................................................................................................ 14

6. Opinions of Probable Costs .............................................................................................................. 16 Methodology ......................................................................................................................................... 16 Definitions ............................................................................................................................................. 16

7. Certification......................................................................................................................................... 18

8. Appendices ......................................................................................................................................... 19 Packet Page No. 1084
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 1 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

1. Ex ec ut iv e S um m a ry
Property Overview and Assessment Details
General Information
Property Type Public Restroom
Main Address 3911 Cherry Street, Newark, California 94560 Site Developed 1992
Site Area acres
Parking Spaces 55 total spaces all in open lots; 2 of which are accessible.

Building Area 680 SF
Number of Stories 1
Outside Occupants / Leased Spaces None
Date(s) of Visit January 29, 2023
Management Point of Contact Andrea Gifford
Group 4 Architecture Research + Planning, Inc.

Principal
415.531.4456
[email protected]
On-site Point of Contact (POC) Gus Perez
Assessment and Report Prepared By Kay van der Have
Reviewed By Matthew Anderson
Technical Report Reviewer for:

Mary Venable
800.733.0660 x7292719
[email protected]
AssetCalc Link Full dataset for this assessment can be found at:
https://www.assetcalc.net/
Packet Page No. 1085
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 2 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Significant/Systemic Findings and Deficiencies
Historical Summary
According to the PSQ, this building was built as a restroom facility in 1992. It continues to serve in that capacity.

Architectural
The CMU building appears to have been built in anticipation of hard usage. The structure itself appears able to continue to serve in its capacity as a restroom for several more years. The interiors need attention. Graffiti was observed on the interior walls.

Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing and Fire (MEPF)
The plumbing fixtures are surviving, replacement during the reserve term can be anticipated. The building is provided with a fire alarm and fire sprinklers.

Site
The site appears well maintained.

Recommended Additional Studies
No additional studies recommended at this time.

Packet Page No. 1086
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 3 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Facility Condition Index (FCI)
One of the major goals of the FCA is to calculate each building’s Facility Condition Index (FCI), which provides a theoretical objective indication of a building’s overall condition. By definition, the FCI is defined as the ratio of the cost of current needs divided by current replacement value (CRV) of the facility. The chart below presents the industry standard ranges and cutoff points.

Packet Page No. 1087
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 4 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
The orange line in the graph below forecasts what would happen to the FCI (left Y axis) over time, assuming zero capital expenditures. The capital expenditures allocated for each year (blue bars) are associated with the dollar amounts along the right Y axis.

Needs by Year with Unaddressed FCI Over Time
Packet Page No. 1088
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 5 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Immediate Needs
Key Findings
Fire Extinguisher in Failed
condition.

Type ABC, up to 20 LB
Sports Field Restroom Utility closet
Uniformat Code: D4030
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 90.9
Plan Type: Safety
Cost Estimate: $400
$$$$
It has not been inspected in the pat year - AssetCALC ID: 5133365 Roofing in Poor condition.

Clay/Concrete Tile
Sports Field Restroom Roof
Uniformat Code: B3010
Recommendation: Replace in 2025
Priority Score: 89.7
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $28,700
$$$$
Packet Page No. 1089
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 6 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
The tiles are breaking and falling off - AssetCALC ID: 5133380 Sidewalk in Poor condition.

Sectional Repairs
Sports Field Restroom Sidewalk
Uniformat Code: G2030
Recommendation: Repair in 2023
Priority Score: 85.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $2,400
$$$$
significant cracking - AssetCALC ID: 5133366
Dumpster Enclosure Gates in Poor
condition.

Metal
Sports Field Restroom Site
Uniformat Code: G2060
Recommendation: Replace in 2024
Priority Score: 81.8
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $8,200
$$$$
They have been misused and one gate was laying on the ground under the dumpster. - AssetCALC ID:
5133345
ADA Restrooms
Lavatory, Pipe Wraps/Insulation
Sports Field Restroom restrooms
Uniformat Code: Y1050
Recommendation: Install in 2023
Priority Score: 63.9
Plan Type: Accessibility
Cost Estimate: $400
$$$$
- AssetCALC ID: 5133463
ADA Parking
Designated Stall, Pavement Markings &
Signage
Sports Field Restroom Parking lot
Uniformat Code: Y1010
Recommendation: Install in 2023
Priority Score: 63.9
Plan Type: Accessibility
Cost Estimate: $2,400
$$$$
- AssetCALC ID: 5133467
Packet Page No. 1090
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 7 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Flooring in Poor condition.

Paint or Sealant
Sports Field Restroom Throughout building
Uniformat Code: C2030
Recommendation: Prep & Paint in 2025
Priority Score: 54.6
Plan Type:

Retrofit/Adaptation
Cost Estimate: $2,500
$$$$
Worn and abused - AssetCALC ID: 5133379
Packet Page No. 1091
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 8 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Plan Types
Each line item in the cost database is assigned a Plan Type, which is the primary reason or rationale for the recommended replacement, repair, or other corrective action. This is the “why” part of the equation. A cost or line item may commonly have more than one applicable Plan Type; however, only one Plan Type will be assigned based on the “best” fit, typically the one with the greatest significance.

Plan Type Descriptions
Safety  An observed or reported unsafe condition that if left unaddressed could result in injury; a system or component that presents potential liability risk.

Performance/Integrity  Component or system has failed, is almost failing, performs unreliably, does not perform as intended, and/or poses risk to overall system stability.

Accessibility  Does not meet ADA, UFAS, and/or other handicap accessibility requirements.

Environmental  Improvements to air or water quality, including removal of hazardous materials from the building or site.

Retrofit/Adaptation  Components, systems, or spaces recommended for upgrades in in order to meet current standards, facility usage, or client/occupant needs.

Lifecycle/Renewal  Any component or system that is not currently deficient or problematic but for which future replacement or repair is anticipated and budgeted.

Plan Type Distribution (by Cost)
Packet Page No. 1092
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 9 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

2. B u il di ng a nd Si t e I nf orm at i on
Systems Summary
System Description Condition
Structure Masonry bearing walls with wood roof deck supported by wood joists on a concrete slab on grade.

Fair
Facade Primary Wall Finish : CMU
Secondary Wall Finish: None
Windows: None
Fair
Roof Primary: Gable construction with concrete tiles Poor Interiors Walls: CMU,
Ceilings: Painted wood
Fair
Elevators None n/a
Plumbing Distribution: Copper supply and cast iron waste and venting Hot Water: None
Fixtures: Toilets, urinals, and sinks in all restrooms
Fair
HVAC No HVAC n/a
Fire Suppression Wet-pipe sprinkler system and fire extinguishers. Fair Electrical Source and Distribution: Main switchboard with copper wiring Interior Lighting: linear fluorescent
Emergency Power: None
Fair
Packet Page No. 1093
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 10 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Systems Summary
Fire Alarm Smoke detectors with exit signs Fair
Equipment/Special None n/a
Site Pavement Asphalt lots with areas of concrete aprons and pavement and adjacent concrete sidewalks, curbs
Fair
Site Development Property entrance signage; chain link fencing; CMU wall dumpster enclosure Limited park benches, picnic tables, trash receptacles
Fair
Landscaping and
Topography
Limited landscaping features include lawns
Irrigation present
Low site slopes throughout
Good
Utilities Municipal water and sewe
Local utility-provided electric and natural gas
Good
Site Lighting Pole-mounted: metal halide
Building-mounted: incandescent
Fair
Ancillary Structures None n/a
Accessibility Presently it does not appear an accessibility study is needed for this property. Fair Key Issues and
Findings
None observed at time of assessment. n/a
Packet Page No. 1094
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 11 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Packet Page No. 1095
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 12 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

Key Spaces Not Observed
All key areas of the property were accessible and observed.

Packet Page No. 1096
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 13 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

However, this does not:

1. Necessarily require a public entity to make each of its existing facilities accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities;

2. Require a public entity to take any action that would threaten or destroy the historic significance of an historic property; or

Additional clarifications of this limited survey:
▪ This survey was visual in nature and actual measurements were not taken to verify compliance ▪ Only a representative sample of areas was observed
▪ Two overview photos were taken for each subsection regardless of perceived compliance or non-compliance ▪ Itemized costs for individual non-compliant items are included in the dataset ▪ For any “none” boxes checked or reference to “no issues” identified, that alone does not guarantee full compliance The facility was originally constructed in 1992. The facility has not since been substantially renovated.

No information about complaints or pending litigation associated with potential accessibility issues was provided during the interview process.

Packet Page No. 1097
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 14 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

5. P u rp os e an d Sc op e
Purpose
Bureau Veritas was retained by the client to render an opinion as to the Property’s current general physical condition on the day of the site visit.

The physical condition of building systems and related components are typically defined as being in one of five condition ratings. For the purposes of this report, the following definitions are used:

Failed Component or system has ceased functioning or performing as intended. Replacement, repair, or other significant corrective action is recommended or required.

Not Applicable Assigning a condition does not apply or make logical sense, most commonly due to the item in question not being present.

Packet Page No. 1098
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 15 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Scope
The standard scope of the Facility Condition Assessment includes the following:
▪ Visit the Property to evaluate the general condition of the building and site improvements, review available construction documents in order to familiarize ourselves with, and be able to comment on, the in-place construction systems, life safety, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems, and the general built environment. ▪ Identify those components that are exhibiting deferred maintenance issues and provide cost estimates for Immediate Costs and Replacement Reserves based on observed conditions, maintenance history and industry standard useful life estimates. This will include the review of documented capital improvements completed within the last five-year period and work currently contracted for, if applicable.
▪ Provide a full description of the Property with descriptions of in-place systems and commentary on observed conditions. ▪ Provide a high-level categorical general statement regarding the subject Property’s compliance to Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act. This will not constitute a full ADA survey, but will help identify exposure to issues and the need for further review.
▪ Obtain background and historical information about the facility from a building engineer, property manager, maintenance staff, or other knowledgeable source. The preferred methodology is to have the client representative or building occupant complete a Pre-Survey Questionnaire (PSQ) in advance of the site visit. Common alternatives include a verbal interview just prior to or during the walk-through portion of the assessment. ▪ Review maintenance records and procedures with the in-place maintenance personnel. ▪ Observe a representative sample of the interior spaces/units, including vacant spaces/units, to gain a clear understanding of the property’s overall condition. Other areas to be observed include the exterior of the property, the roofs, interior common areas, and the significant mechanical, electrical and elevator equipment rooms. ▪ Provide recommendations for additional studies, if required, with related budgetary information. ▪ Provide an Executive Summary at the beginning of this report, which highlights key findings and includes a Facility Condition Index as a basis for comparing the relative conditions of the buildings within the portfolio.

Packet Page No. 1099
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 16 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

6. Op in io ns o f P ro b ab le C os t s
Cost estimates are attached throughout this report, with the Replacement Reserves in the appendix.

For database and reporting purposes the line items with RUL=0, and commonly associated with Safety or Performance/Integrity Plan Types, are considered Immediate Needs.

Packet Page No. 1100
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 17 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Replacement costs are solicited from ownership/property management, Bureau Veritas’s discussions with service companies, manufacturers' representatives, and previous experience in preparing such schedules for other similar facilities.

Costs for work performed by the ownership’s or property management’s maintenance staff are also considered.

Exceedingly Aged
A fairly common scenario encountered during the assessment process, and a frequent source of debate, occurs when classifying and describing “very old” systems or components that are still functioning adequately and do not appear nor were reported to be in any way deficient. To help provide some additional intelligence on these items, such components will be tagged in the database as Exceedingly Aged. This designation will be reserved for mechanical or electrical systems or components that have aged well beyond their industry standard lifecycles, typically at least 15 years beyond and/or twice their Estimated Useful Life (EUL). In tandem with this designation, these items will be assigned a Remaining Useful Life (RUL) not less than two years but not greater than 1/3 of their standard EUL. As such the recommended replacement time for these components will reside outside the typical Short-Term window but will not be pushed ‘irresponsibly’ (too far) into the future.

Packet Page No. 1101
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 18 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

7. C e rt if ic at io n
Group 4 Arch, City of Newark, Facilities Master Plan (the Client) retained Bureau Veritas to perform this Facility Condition Assessment in connection with its continued operation of Sports Field Restroom, 3911 Cherry Street, Newark, California 94560, the “Property”. It is our understanding that the primary interest of the Client is to locate and evaluate materials and building system defects that might significantly affect the value of the property and to determine if the present Property has conditions that will have a significant impact on its continued operations.

Prepared by: Kay van der Have
Project Manager
Reviewed by:

Matthew Anderson
Technical Report Reviewer for
Mary Venable
Program Manager
[email protected]
800.733.0660 x7292719
Packet Page No. 1102
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 19 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

8. Appendices
Appendix A: Photographic Record
Appendix B: Site Plan
Appendix C: Pre-Survey Questionnaire
Appendix D: Accessibility Review and Photos
Appendix E: Component Condition Report
Appendix F: Replacement Reserves
Packet Page No. 1103
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix A:

Photographic Record
Packet Page No. 1104
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
1 - FRONT ELEVATION 2 - LEFT SIDE ELEVATION
3 - REAR ELEVATION 4 – RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION
5 – PARK AREA 6 - PRIMARY PARKING AREA
Packet Page No. 1105
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
7 - INTEIROR 8 – TOILET STALL
9 – OVERHEAD DOOR 10 – METAL DOOR
11 - FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM 12 – ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT
Packet Page No. 1106
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix B:

Site Plan
Packet Page No. 1107
Sports Field Restroom Aerial Site Plan
Project Number Project Name
159125.22R000-014.017 Sports Field Restroom
Source On-Site Date
Google January 31, 2023
Packet Page No. 1108
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix C:

Pre-Survey Questionnaire
Packet Page No. 1109

THE PRE-SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE WAS

NOT RETURNED TO EBV
Packet Page No. 1110
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix D:

Accessibility Review and Photos
Packet Page No. 1111
Visual Checklist - 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist
Facility History & Interview
Question Yes No Unk Comments
Has an accessibility study been previously
performed? If so, when?
Have any ADA improvements been made to
the property since original construction?
Describe.

Has building management reported any
accessibility-based complaints or litigation?
1 2
3 Property Name: Sports Field Restroom
BV Project Number: 159125.22R000-014.017
Packet Page No. 1112
Parking
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist
OVERVIEW OF ACCESSIBLE PARKING AREA CLOSE-UP OF Curb Cut Question Yes No NA Comments
Does the required number of standard ADA
designated spaces appear to be provided ?
55 total spaces provided. One
standard and one van accessible. 3
accessible spaces are required
1 Does the required number of van-accessible
designated spaces appear to be provided ? 2
Are accessible spaces on the shortest
accessible route to an accessible building
entrance ?
3 Does parking signage include the International
Symbol of Accessibility ? 4
Does each accessible space have an adjacent
access aisle ? 5
Do parking spaces and access aisles appear
to be relatively level and without obstruction ? 6
Packet Page No. 1113
Exterior Accessible Route
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

CURB CUT ACCESSIBLE PATH
Question Yes No NA Comments
Is an accessible route present from public
transportation stops and municipal sidewalks
on or immediately adjacent to the property ?
1 Does a minimum of one accessible route
appear to connect all public areas on the
exterior, such as parking and other outdoor
amenities, to accessible building entrances ?
2 Are curb ramps present at transitions through
raised curbs on all accessible routes? 3
Do curb ramps appear to have compliant
slopes for all components ? 4
Do ramp runs on an accessible route appear
to have compliant slopes ? 5 No ramps
Do ramp runs on an accessible route appear
to have a compliant rise and width ? 6 No ramps
Packet Page No. 1114
Do ramps on an accessible route appear to
have compliant end and intermediate
landings ?
7 No ramps
Do ramps and stairs on an accessible route
appear to have compliant handrails? 8 No ramps
For stairways that are open underneath, are
permanent barriers present that prevent or
discourage access?
9 No stairs
Packet Page No. 1115
Building Entrances
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

ACCESSIBLE ENTRANCE MAIN ENTRANCE
Question Yes No NA Comments
Do a sufficient number of accessible
entrances appear to be provided ? 1
If the main entrance is not accessible, is an
alternate accessible entrance provided? 2 Existing entrances are accessible Is signage provided indicating the location of
alternate accessible entrances ? 3 Existing entrances are accessible Do doors at accessible entrances appear to
have compliant maneuvering clearance area
on each side ?
4 Do doors at accessible entrances appear to
have compliant hardware ? 5 No hardware
Do doors at accessible entrances appear to
have a compliant clear opening width ? 6
Packet Page No. 1116
Do pairs of accessible entrance doors in
series appear to have the minimum clear
space between them ?
7 No pairs of doors in series
Do thresholds at accessible entrances appear
to have a compliant height ? 8
Packet Page No. 1117
Interior Accessible Route
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR PATH ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR PATH
Question Yes No NA Comments
Does an accessible route appear to connect
all public areas inside the building ? 1
Do accessible routes appear free of
obstructions and/or protruding objects ? 2
Do ramps on accessible routes appear to
have compliant slopes ? 3 No ramps
Do ramp runs on an accessible route appear
to have a compliant rise and width ? 4 No ramps
Do ramps on accessible routes appear to
have compliant end and intermediate
landings ?
5 No ramps
Do ramps on accessible routes appear to
have compliant handrails ? 6 No ramps
Packet Page No. 1118
Are accessible areas of refuge and the
accessible means of egress to those areas
identified with accessible signage ?
7 No areas of refuge
Do public transaction areas have an
accessible, lowered service counter section ? 8 No public transaction areas Do public telephones appear mounted with an
accessible height and location ? 9 No public telephones Do doors at interior accessible routes appear
to have compliant maneuvering clearance
area on each side ?
10 No interior doors
Do doors at interior accessible routes appear
to have compliant hardware ? 11 No interior doors
Do non-fire hinged, sliding, or folding doors on
interior accessible routes appear to have
compliant opening force ?
12 No interior doors
Do doors on interior accessible routes appear
to have a compliant clear opening width ? 13 No interior doors Packet Page No. 1119
Elevators
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist
Elevators section not applicable at this site.

Packet Page No. 1120
Public Restrooms
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

TOILET STALL OVERVIEW SINK, FAUCET HANDLES AND ACCESSORIES Question Yes No NA Comments
Do publicly accessible toilet rooms appear to
have a minimum compliant floor area ? 1
Does the lavatory appear to be mounted at a
compliant height and with compliant knee
area ?
2 Does the lavatory faucet have compliant
handles ? 3
Is the plumbing piping under lavatories
configured to protect against contact ? 4
Are grab bars provided at compliant locations
around the toilet ? 5
Do toilet stall doors appear to provide the
minimum compliant clear width ? 6
Packet Page No. 1121
Do toilet stalls appear to provide the minimum
compliant clear floor area ? 7
Where more than one urinal is present in a
multi-user restroom, does minimum one urinal
appear to be mounted at a compliant height
and with compliant approach width ?
8 Do accessories and mirrors appear to be
mounted at a compliant height ? 9
Packet Page No. 1122
Kitchens/Kitchenettes
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist
Kitchens/Kitchenettes section not applicable at this site.

Packet Page No. 1123
Playgrounds & Swimming Pools
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

ACCESSIBLE ROUTE TO PLAYGROUND ACCESSIBLE ROUTE TO PLAYGROUND Question Yes No NA Comments
Is there an accessible route to the play area /
s? 1
Has the play area been reviewed for
accessibility ? 2 Unknown
Are publicly accessible swimming pools
equipped with an entrance lift ? 3 No pool
Packet Page No. 1124
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix E:

Component Condition Report
Packet Page No. 1125
Packet Page No. 1126
Packet Page No. 1127
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix F:

Replacement Reserves

Packet Page No. 1128
Packet Page No. 1129
Watkins Hall
37013 Ash Street
Newark, California 94560

FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT
prepared for
City of Newark
37101 Newark Boulevard
Newark, California 94560
PREPARED BY:

Bureau Veritas
10461 Mill Run Circle, Suite 1100
Owings Mills, MD 21117
800.733.0660
www.us.bureauveritas.com
BV CONTACT:

Mary Venable
Program Manager
800.733.0660 x7292719
[email protected]
BV PROJECT #:
159125.22R000-015.017
DATE OF REPORT:

March 23, 2023
ON SITE DATE:

January 23, 2023
Bureau Veritas
10461 Mill Run Circle, Suite 1100 | Owings Mills, MD 21117 | www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660 Packet Page No. 1130
Watkins Hall BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-015.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. 1 Property Overview and Assessment Details .......................................................................................... 1 Significant/Systemic Findings and Deficiencies ..................................................................................... 2 Facility Condition Index (FCI) ................................................................................................................. 3 Immediate Needs.................................................................................................................................... 5 Key Findings ........................................................................................................................................... 8 Plan Types............................................................................................................................................ 11

2. Building and Site Information ........................................................................................................... 12

3. Property Space Use and Observed Areas ....................................................................................... 15

4. ADA Accessibility............................................................................................................................... 16

5. Purpose and Scope ............................................................................................................................ 17

6. Opinions of Probable Costs .............................................................................................................. 19 Methodology ......................................................................................................................................... 19 Definitions ............................................................................................................................................. 19

7. Certification......................................................................................................................................... 21

8. Appendices ......................................................................................................................................... 22 Packet Page No. 1131
Watkins Hall BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-015.017 1 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

1. Ex ec ut iv e S um m a ry
Property Overview and Assessment Details
General Information
Property Type Community Centers / Special Interest Facilities Main Address 37013 Ash Street
Newark, California 94560
Site Developed 1896
Site Area 0.35 acres
Parking Spaces 45 total spaces all in open lots; none of which are accessible.

Building Area 8,640 SF
Number of Stories 3
Outside Occupants / Leased Spaces None
Date(s) of Visit January 23, 2023
Management Point of Contact Group 4 Architecture Research + Planning, Inc.

Andrea Gifford
Principal
415.531.4456
[email protected]
On-site Point of Contact (POC) Tonya Connolly
Assessment and Report Prepared By Nezar M. Tibi
Reviewed By Matthew Anderson
Technical Report Reviewer for:

Mary Venable
800.733.0660 x7292719
[email protected]
AssetCalc Link Full dataset for this assessment can be found at:
https://www.assetcalc.net/
Packet Page No. 1132
Watkins Hall BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-015.017 2 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Significant/Systemic Findings and Deficiencies
Historical Summary
The Watkins Hall was built in 1896.The building has been abandoned for more than 12 years and is not being used at present time. .

Architectural
The building is a wood structure with wood framed roof over a concrete slab foundation. Exterior walls are painted stucco, wood siding, or stone veneer with wood windows. Interior finishes are mostly in failed or poor condition and will require replacement. Some wallboard is missing.

Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing and Fire (MEPF)
The only heating system is provided by one failed furnace. The electrical system is copper wiring and appears to be from the 1970s. There was no power to the building at the time of the assessment. Plumbing is copper supply with cast iron waste system. The water is shut down for the building with failed and poor condition plumbing fixtures. The plumbing fixtures appear to be from the 1940s or 1950s.

Site
The parking lot is in poor condition and will require new asphalt pavement. Concrete sidewalk is in fair condition. Irrigation is present but is not operational.

Recommended Additional Studies
Due to the current condition of the facility, there are possible issues with indoor air quality or mold growth. Before the building can be occupied a consultant must be retained to analyze the existing condition, provide recommendations and, if necessary, estimate the scope and cost of any required repairs. The cost of this study is included in the cost tables. Due to the ambiguity of the required repair scope at the time of this assessment, the cost for any possible subsequent repairs is not included.

The interior walls are in failed condition. Cracks were found throughout the interior walls that may be the result of settling. A professional engineer consultant must be retained to analyze the existing condition, provide recommendations and, if necessary, estimate the scope and cost of any required repairs. Due to the ambiguity of the required repair scope at the time of this assessment only replacement or repair of finishes is included. The cost for any possible subsequent structural repairs is not included.

If the building is going to be occupied for a public use Bureau Veritas recommends an ADA study be performed to take measurements, provide additional itemized details, research local requirements, and, estimate the scope and cost of required improvements. The cost of this study is included in the cost tables. The second floor is not accessible to the disabled and any use on the second floor will likely require the installation of an elevator or lift.

Packet Page No. 1133
Watkins Hall BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-015.017 3 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Facility Condition Index (FCI)
One of the major goals of the FCA is to calculate each building’s Facility Condition Index (FCI), which provides a theoretical objective indication of a building’s overall condition. By definition, the FCI is defined as the ratio of the cost of current needs divided by current replacement value (CRV) of the facility. The chart below presents the industry standard ranges and cutoff points.

Packet Page No. 1134
Watkins Hall BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-015.017 4 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
The orange line in the graph below forecasts what would happen to the FCI (left Y axis) over time, assuming zero capital expenditures. The capital expenditures allocated for each year (blue bars) are associated with the dollar amounts along the right Y axis.

Needs by Year with Unaddressed FCI Over Time
Packet Page No. 1135
Watkins Hall BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-015.017 5 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Immediate Needs
Packet Page No. 1136
Watkins Hall BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-015.017 6 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Packet Page No. 1137
Watkins Hall BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-015.017 7 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Packet Page No. 1138
Watkins Hall BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-015.017 8 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Key Findings
Structural Flooring/Decking in
Poor condition.

Concrete
Watkins Hall Staircase
Uniformat Code: B1010
Recommendation: Repair in 2023
Priority Score: 98.9
Plan Type: Safety
Cost Estimate: $9,800
$$$$
Staircase has multiple broken steps, repair is required. - AssetCALC ID: 5252726 Structural Flooring/Decking in
Poor condition.

Wood
Watkins Hall Throughout
Uniformat Code: B1010
Recommendation: Repair in 2023
Priority Score: 89.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $4,800
$$$$
Numerous holes in the flooring apparently from an old removed HVAC system. - AssetCALC ID: 5420302 Exterior Walls in Poor condition.

Stucco and Wood
Watkins Hall Building Exterior
Uniformat Code: B2010
Recommendation: Prep & Paint in 2024
Priority Score: 89.7
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $81,800
$$$$
New fresh paint is required. - AssetCALC ID: 5252713
Window in Poor condition.

Wood, up to 15 SF
Watkins Hall Building Exterior
Uniformat Code: B2020
Recommendation: Replace in 2024
Priority Score: 87.8
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $22,700
$$$$
Warped and deteriorated windows, repair is required. - AssetCALC ID: 5252716 Packet Page No. 1139
Watkins Hall BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-015.017 9 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Furnace in Failed condition.

Gas
Watkins Hall Utility closet
Uniformat Code: D3020
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 86.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $5,500
$$$$
Broken unit. Replacement is required. - AssetCALC ID: 5252728 Wall Finishes in Poor condition.

Wood Paneling, Raised Architectural Wainscot
Watkins Hall Throughout building
Uniformat Code: C2010
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 85.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $152,700
$$$$
Broken and missing panels, repair is required. - AssetCALC ID: 5252707 Interior Wall Construction in
Failed condition.

Gypsum Board/Plaster
Watkins Hall Throughout
Uniformat Code: C1010
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 84.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $15,300
$$$$
Missing and damaged gypsum board throughput the interior walls. Replacement is required. - AssetCALC ID:
5256940
Plumbing System in Failed
condition.

Supply & Sanitary, Low Density (includes
fixtures)
Watkins Hall Throughout building
Uniformat Code: D2010
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 84.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $132,000
$$$$
The plumbing system has not been used for the last 12 years, repair will be mostly required. - AssetCALC ID:
5256858
Packet Page No. 1140
Watkins Hall BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-015.017 10 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Parking Lots in Poor condition.

Pavement, Asphalt
Watkins Hall Parking lot
Uniformat Code: G2020
Recommendation: Full Replacement in 2023
Priority Score: 84.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $102,100
$$$$
Deteriorated parking lot asphalt surface, repair is required. - AssetCALC ID: 5252710 Toilet in Failed condition.

Residential Water Closet
Watkins Hall Restrooms
Uniformat Code: D2010
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 83.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $4,600
$$$$
Units are broken, replacement is required. - AssetCALC ID: 5252709 Sink/Lavatory in Failed condition.

Vanity Top, Solid Surface or Vitreous China
Watkins Hall Restrooms
Uniformat Code: D2010
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 83.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $4,800
$$$$
Broken sinks, replacement is required. - AssetCALC ID: 5252717 Urinal in Poor condition.

Standard
Watkins Hall Restrooms
Uniformat Code: D2010
Recommendation: Replace in 2023
Priority Score: 83.9
Plan Type:

Performance/Integrity
Cost Estimate: $2,400
$$$$
Urinal is not fully working, replacement is required. - AssetCALC ID: 5252723 Packet Page No. 1141
Watkins Hall BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-015.017 11 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Plan Types
Each line item in the cost database is assigned a Plan Type, which is the primary reason or rationale for the recommended replacement, repair, or other corrective action. This is the “why” part of the equation. A cost or line item may commonly have more than one applicable Plan Type; however, only one Plan Type will be assigned based on the “best” fit, typically the one with the greatest significance.

Plan Type Descriptions
Safety  An observed or reported unsafe condition that if left unaddressed could result in injury; a system or component that presents potential liability risk.

Performance/Integrity  Component or system has failed, is almost failing, performs unreliably, does not perform as intended, and/or poses risk to overall system stability.

Accessibility  Does not meet ADA, UFAS, and/or other handicap accessibility requirements.

Environmental  Improvements to air or water quality, including removal of hazardous materials from the building or site.

Retrofit/Adaptation  Components, systems, or spaces recommended for upgrades in in order to meet current standards, facility usage, or client/occupant needs.

Lifecycle/Renewal  Any component or system that is not currently deficient or problematic but for which future replacement or repair is anticipated and budgeted.

Plan Type Distribution (by Cost)
Packet Page No. 1142
Watkins Hall BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-015.017 12 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

2. B u il di ng a nd Si t e I nf orm at i on
Systems Summary
System Description Condition
Structure Wood framed structure. There is a likely a concrete foundation slab but it could not be observed.

Fair
Facade Primary Wall Finish : Stucco
Secondary Wall Finish: Wood siding and stones
Windows: Wood
Poor
Roof Primary: Gable construction with asphalt shingles Fair Interiors Walls: Painted gypsum board, wood paneling, and Unfinished Floors: Carpet, and wood strip
Ceilings: wood paneling and Unfinished/exposed
Poor
Elevators None n/a
Plumbing Distribution: Copper supply and cast iron waste and venting Hot Water: None
Fixtures: Toilets, urinal, shower and sinks in all restrooms Failed
HVAC Non-Central System: Furnace
Supplemental components: None
Failed
Fire Suppression None n/a
Packet Page No. 1143
Watkins Hall BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-015.017 13 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Systems Summary
Electrical Source and Distribution: Main panel with copper wiring Interior Lighting: Incandescent
Emergency Power: None
Poor
Fire Alarm None n/a
Equipment/Special None n/a
Site Pavement Asphalt lots with limited areas of concrete aprons and pavement and adjacent concrete sidewalks, curbs, and stairs.

Poor
Site Development None n/a
Landscaping and
Topography
Limited landscaping features including lawns
Irrigation present
No retaining walls
Low to moderate site slopes throughout /
Poor
Utilities Municipal water and sewer
Local utility-provided electric and natural gas
Missing
Site Lighting Pole-mounted: None
Building-mounted: Incandescent
Poor
Ancillary Structures None n/a
Accessibility Major issues have been identified at this property and a detailed accessibility study is recommended.

Key Issues and
Findings
Suspect interior mold issues, antiquated HVAC components and infrastructure, building lacks fire suppression, aged electrical infrastructure, heavy asphalt wear, widespread irrigation leaks, inadequate site lighting, broken plumbing fixture, major renovation for all interior finishes, flooring structure issues, exterior wall finishes, exterior door problems.

Packet Page No. 1144
Watkins Hall BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-015.017 14 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Packet Page No. 1145
Watkins Hall BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-015.017 15 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

Key Spaces Not Observed
All key areas of the property were accessible and observed.

Packet Page No. 1146
Watkins Hall BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-015.017 16 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

However, this does not:

1. Necessarily require a public entity to make each of its existing facilities accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities;

2. Require a public entity to take any action that would threaten or destroy the historic significance of an historic property; or

Additional clarifications of this limited survey:
▪ This survey was visual in nature and actual measurements were not taken to verify compliance ▪ Only a representative sample of areas was observed
▪ Two overview photos were taken for each subsection regardless of perceived compliance or non-compliance ▪ Itemized costs for individual non-compliant items are not included in the dataset ▪ For any “none” boxes checked or reference to “no issues” identified, that alone does not guarantee full compliance The facility was originally constructed in 1896. The facility has not since been substantially renovated. The facility has been abandoned for over 12 years. Before any occupancy of the building occurs an ADA study is recommended.

For informational purposes an allowance for ADA upgrades has been estimated and is included as a lump sum cost in year 3 of the reserve tables. The actual cost may be higher depending on costs to replace plumbing piping or other systems in the walls that were not visible during the assessment.

No information about complaints or pending litigation associated with potential accessibility issues was provided during the interview process.

A detailed follow-up accessibility study is included as a recommendation because major issues were observed at the subject site. Reference the appendix for specific data, photos, and tables or checklists associated with this limited accessibility survey.

Packet Page No. 1147
Watkins Hall BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-015.017 17 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

5. P u rp os e an d Sc op e
Purpose
Bureau Veritas was retained by the client to render an opinion as to the Property’s current general physical condition on the day of the site visit.

The physical condition of building systems and related components are typically defined as being in one of five condition ratings. For the purposes of this report, the following definitions are used:

Failed Component or system has ceased functioning or performing as intended. Replacement, repair, or other significant corrective action is recommended or required.

Not Applicable Assigning a condition does not apply or make logical sense, most commonly due to the item in question not being present.

Packet Page No. 1148
Watkins Hall BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-015.017 18 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Scope
The standard scope of the Facility Condition Assessment includes the following:
▪ Visit the Property to evaluate the general condition of the building and site improvements, review available construction documents in order to familiarize ourselves with, and be able to comment on, the in-place construction systems, life safety, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems, and the general built environment. ▪ Identify those components that are exhibiting deferred maintenance issues and provide cost estimates for Immediate Costs and Replacement Reserves based on observed conditions, maintenance history and industry standard useful life estimates. This will include the review of documented capital improvements completed within the last five-year period and work currently contracted for, if applicable.
▪ Provide a full description of the Property with descriptions of in-place systems and commentary on observed conditions. ▪ Provide a high-level categorical general statement regarding the subject Property’s compliance to Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act. This will not constitute a full ADA survey, but will help identify exposure to issues and the need for further review.
▪ Obtain background and historical information about the facility from a building engineer, property manager, maintenance staff, or other knowledgeable source. The preferred methodology is to have the client representative or building occupant complete a Pre-Survey Questionnaire (PSQ) in advance of the site visit. Common alternatives include a verbal interview just prior to or during the walk-through portion of the assessment. ▪ Review maintenance records and procedures with the in-place maintenance personnel. ▪ Observe a representative sample of the interior spaces/units, including vacant spaces/units, to gain a clear understanding of the property’s overall condition. Other areas to be observed include the exterior of the property, the roofs, interior common areas, and the significant mechanical, electrical and elevator equipment rooms. ▪ Provide recommendations for additional studies, if required, with related budgetary information. ▪ Provide an Executive Summary at the beginning of this report, which highlights key findings and includes a Facility Condition Index as a basis for comparing the relative conditions of the buildings within the portfolio.

Packet Page No. 1149
Watkins Hall BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-015.017 19 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

6. O p in io ns o f P ro b ab le C os t s
Cost estimates are attached throughout this report, with the Replacement Reserves in the appendix.

These estimates are based on Invoice or Bid Document/s provided either by the Owner/facility and construction costs developed by construction resources such as R.S. Means, CBRE Whitestone, and Marshall and Swift, Bureau Veritas’s experience with past costs for similar properties, city cost indexes, and assumptions regarding future economic conditions.

For database and reporting purposes the line items with RUL=0, and commonly associated with Safety or Performance/Integrity Plan Types, are considered Immediate Needs.

Packet Page No. 1150
Watkins Hall BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-015.017 20 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Replacement costs are solicited from ownership/property management, Bureau Veritas’s discussions with service companies, manufacturers' representatives, and previous experience in preparing such schedules for other similar facilities.

Costs for work performed by the ownership’s or property management’s maintenance staff are also considered.

Packet Page No. 1151
Watkins Hall BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-015.017 21 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

7. C e rt if ic at io n
Group 4 Arch, City of Newark, Facilities Master Plan (the Client) retained Bureau Veritas to perform this Facility Condition Assessment in connection with its continued operation of Watkins Hall, 37013 Ash Street, Newark, California 94560, the “Property”. It is our understanding that the primary interest of the Client is to locate and evaluate materials and building system defects that might significantly affect the value of the property and to determine if the present Property has conditions that will have a significant impact on its continued operations.

Prepared by: Nezar M. Tibi
Project Manager
Reviewed by:

Matthew Anderson
Technical Report Reviewer for
Mary Venable
Program Manager
[email protected]
800.733.0660 x7292719
Packet Page No. 1152
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 19 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

8. Appendices
Appendix A: Photographic Record
Appendix B: Site Plan
Appendix C: Pre-Survey Questionnaire
Appendix D: Accessibility Review and Photos
Appendix E: Component Condition Report
Appendix F: Replacement Reserves
Packet Page No. 1153
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix A:

Photographic Record
Packet Page No. 1154
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
1 - FRONT ELEVATION 2 - LEFT SIDE ELEVATION
3 - REAR ELEVATION 4 – RIGHT SIDE ELEVATION
5 – PARK AREA 6 - PRIMARY PARKING AREA
Packet Page No. 1155
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
7 - INTEIROR 8 – TOILET STALL
9 – OVERHEAD DOOR 10 – METAL DOOR
11 - FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM 12 – ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT
Packet Page No. 1156
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix B:

Site Plan
Packet Page No. 1157
Sports Field Restroom Aerial Site Plan
Project Number Project Name
159125.22R000-014.017 Sports Field Restroom
Source On-Site Date
Google January 31, 2023
Packet Page No. 1158
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix C:

Pre-Survey Questionnaire
Packet Page No. 1159

THE PRE-SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE WAS

NOT RETURNED TO EBV
Packet Page No. 1160
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix D:

Accessibility Review and Photos
Packet Page No. 1161
Visual Checklist - 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist
Facility History & Interview
Question Yes No Unk Comments
Has an accessibility study been previously
performed? If so, when?
Have any ADA improvements been made to
the property since original construction?
Describe.

Has building management reported any
accessibility-based complaints or litigation?
1 2
3 Property Name: Sports Field Restroom
BV Project Number: 159125.22R000-014.017
Packet Page No. 1162
Parking
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist
OVERVIEW OF ACCESSIBLE PARKING AREA CLOSE-UP OF Curb Cut Question Yes No NA Comments
Does the required number of standard ADA
designated spaces appear to be provided ?
55 total spaces provided. One
standard and one van accessible. 3
accessible spaces are required
1 Does the required number of van-accessible
designated spaces appear to be provided ? 2
Are accessible spaces on the shortest
accessible route to an accessible building
entrance ?
3 Does parking signage include the International
Symbol of Accessibility ? 4
Does each accessible space have an adjacent
access aisle ? 5
Do parking spaces and access aisles appear
to be relatively level and without obstruction ? 6
Packet Page No. 1163
Exterior Accessible Route
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

CURB CUT ACCESSIBLE PATH
Question Yes No NA Comments
Is an accessible route present from public
transportation stops and municipal sidewalks
on or immediately adjacent to the property ?
1 Does a minimum of one accessible route
appear to connect all public areas on the
exterior, such as parking and other outdoor
amenities, to accessible building entrances ?
2 Are curb ramps present at transitions through
raised curbs on all accessible routes? 3
Do curb ramps appear to have compliant
slopes for all components ? 4
Do ramp runs on an accessible route appear
to have compliant slopes ? 5 No ramps
Do ramp runs on an accessible route appear
to have a compliant rise and width ? 6 No ramps
Packet Page No. 1164
Do ramps on an accessible route appear to
have compliant end and intermediate
landings ?
7 No ramps
Do ramps and stairs on an accessible route
appear to have compliant handrails? 8 No ramps
For stairways that are open underneath, are
permanent barriers present that prevent or
discourage access?
9 No stairs
Packet Page No. 1165
Building Entrances
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

ACCESSIBLE ENTRANCE MAIN ENTRANCE
Question Yes No NA Comments
Do a sufficient number of accessible
entrances appear to be provided ? 1
If the main entrance is not accessible, is an
alternate accessible entrance provided? 2 Existing entrances are accessible Is signage provided indicating the location of
alternate accessible entrances ? 3 Existing entrances are accessible Do doors at accessible entrances appear to
have compliant maneuvering clearance area
on each side ?
4 Do doors at accessible entrances appear to
have compliant hardware ? 5 No hardware
Do doors at accessible entrances appear to
have a compliant clear opening width ? 6
Packet Page No. 1166
Do pairs of accessible entrance doors in
series appear to have the minimum clear
space between them ?
7 No pairs of doors in series
Do thresholds at accessible entrances appear
to have a compliant height ? 8
Packet Page No. 1167
Interior Accessible Route
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR PATH ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR PATH
Question Yes No NA Comments
Does an accessible route appear to connect
all public areas inside the building ? 1
Do accessible routes appear free of
obstructions and/or protruding objects ? 2
Do ramps on accessible routes appear to
have compliant slopes ? 3 No ramps
Do ramp runs on an accessible route appear
to have a compliant rise and width ? 4 No ramps
Do ramps on accessible routes appear to
have compliant end and intermediate
landings ?
5 No ramps
Do ramps on accessible routes appear to
have compliant handrails ? 6 No ramps
Packet Page No. 1168
Are accessible areas of refuge and the
accessible means of egress to those areas
identified with accessible signage ?
7 No areas of refuge
Do public transaction areas have an
accessible, lowered service counter section ? 8 No public transaction areas Do public telephones appear mounted with an
accessible height and location ? 9 No public telephones Do doors at interior accessible routes appear
to have compliant maneuvering clearance
area on each side ?
10 No interior doors
Do doors at interior accessible routes appear
to have compliant hardware ? 11 No interior doors
Do non-fire hinged, sliding, or folding doors on
interior accessible routes appear to have
compliant opening force ?
12 No interior doors
Do doors on interior accessible routes appear
to have a compliant clear opening width ? 13 No interior doors Packet Page No. 1169
Elevators
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist
Elevators section not applicable at this site.

Packet Page No. 1170
Public Restrooms
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

TOILET STALL OVERVIEW SINK, FAUCET HANDLES AND ACCESSORIES Question Yes No NA Comments
Do publicly accessible toilet rooms appear to
have a minimum compliant floor area ? 1
Does the lavatory appear to be mounted at a
compliant height and with compliant knee
area ?
2 Does the lavatory faucet have compliant
handles ? 3
Is the plumbing piping under lavatories
configured to protect against contact ? 4
Are grab bars provided at compliant locations
around the toilet ? 5
Do toilet stall doors appear to provide the
minimum compliant clear width ? 6
Packet Page No. 1171
Do toilet stalls appear to provide the minimum
compliant clear floor area ? 7
Where more than one urinal is present in a
multi-user restroom, does minimum one urinal
appear to be mounted at a compliant height
and with compliant approach width ?
8 Do accessories and mirrors appear to be
mounted at a compliant height ? 9
Packet Page No. 1172
Kitchens/Kitchenettes
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist
Kitchens/Kitchenettes section not applicable at this site.

Packet Page No. 1173
Playgrounds & Swimming Pools
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

ACCESSIBLE ROUTE TO PLAYGROUND ACCESSIBLE ROUTE TO PLAYGROUND Question Yes No NA Comments
Is there an accessible route to the play area /
s? 1
Has the play area been reviewed for
accessibility ? 2 Unknown
Are publicly accessible swimming pools
equipped with an entrance lift ? 3 No pool
Packet Page No. 1174
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix E:

Component Condition Report
Packet Page No. 1175
Packet Page No. 1176
Packet Page No. 1177
SPORTS FIELD RESTROOM BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-014.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix F:

Replacement Reserves

Packet Page No. 1178
Packet Page No. 1179
City Hall
37101 Newark Boulevard
Newark, California 94560

FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT
prepared for
City of Newark
37101 Newark Boulevard
Newark, California 94560
PREPARED BY:

Bureau Veritas
10461 Mill Run Circle, Suite 1100
Owings Mills, MD 21117
800.733.0660
www.us.bureauveritas.com
BV CONTACT:

Mary Venable
Program Manager
800.733.0660 x7292719
[email protected]
BV PROJECT #:
159125.22R000-016.017
DATE OF REPORT:

March 15, 2023
ON SITE DATE:

January 27, 2023
Bureau Veritas
10461 Mill Run Circle, Suite 1100 | Owings Mills, MD 21117 | www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660 Packet Page No. 1180
CITY HALL BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-016.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. 1 Property Overview and Assessment Details .......................................................................................... 1 Significant/Systemic Findings and Deficiencies ..................................................................................... 2 Facility Condition Index (FCI) ................................................................................................................. 3 Immediate Needs.................................................................................................................................... 4 Key Findings ........................................................................................................................................... 4 Plan Types.............................................................................................................................................. 5

2. Building and Site Information ............................................................................................................. 6

3. Property Space Use and Observed Areas ......................................................................................... 9

4. ADA Accessibility............................................................................................................................... 10

5. Purpose and Scope ............................................................................................................................ 11

6. Opinions of Probable Costs .............................................................................................................. 13 Methodology ......................................................................................................................................... 13 Definitions ............................................................................................................................................. 13

7. Certification......................................................................................................................................... 15

8. Appendices ......................................................................................................................................... 16 Packet Page No. 1181
CITY HALL BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-016.017 1 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

1. Ex ec ut iv e S um m a ry
Property Overview and Assessment Details
General Information
Property Type Administration Office
Main Address 37101 Newark Boulevard, Newark, California 94560 Site Developed 2020
Site Area 3.84 acres
Parking Spaces 280 total spaces all in open lots; 8 of which are accessible.

Building Area 25,638 SF
Number of Stories 1
Outside Occupants / Leased Spaces None
Date(s) of Visit January 27, 2023
Management Point of Contact Group 4 Architecture Research + Planning, Inc.

Mary Venable
800.733.0660 x7292719
[email protected]
AssetCalc Link Full dataset for this assessment can be found at:
https://www.assetcalc.net/
Packet Page No. 1182
CITY HALL BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-016.017 2 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Significant/Systemic Findings and Deficiencies
Historical Summary
The City Hall consists of a multi-story building. The building was constructed in 2020 as part of the Newark Library and Police Station buildings.

Architectural
The building consists of steel framed construction on a concrete slab. The exterior enclosures consist of painted stucco, aluminum curtainwall and windows, entry doors, and steel service doors. The stucco has been designed to resemble panel or stone siding. Roofs primarily consists of flat single-ply membrane, PVC assemblies. The interior finishes and fixtures are original to the 2020 construction and are anticipated for lifecycle replacement.

Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing and Fire (MEPF)
The MEPF systems and components are original to the 2020 building construction and have been well-maintained since that time. Heating and cooling is provided by rooftop air handler and VAV units with package unit and split system units as backup. The MEPF infrastructure itself is generally in good working condition with no major expenditures anticipated in the short term. In general, the plumbing and electrical systems are adequate to serve the building. A main switchboard and distribution panels are located within the electrical room. The building is protected by both fire alarm and fire sprinkler systems. Only lifecycle replacement of the majority of the MEPF is anticipated.

Site
In general, the sites have been well maintained. The site contains moderate to heavy landscaping, which is served by inground irrigation system. The asphalt paved parking areas is well maintained. The concrete sidewalk is in good condition.

Recommended Additional Studies
No additional studies recommended at this time.

Packet Page No. 1183
CITY HALL BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-016.017 3 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Facility Condition Index (FCI)
One of the major goals of the FCA is to calculate each building’s Facility Condition Index (FCI), which provides a theoretical objective indication of a building’s overall condition. By definition, the FCI is defined as the ratio of the cost of current needs divided by current replacement value (CRV) of the facility. The chart below presents the industry standard ranges and cutoff points.

Packet Page No. 1184
CITY HALL BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-016.017 4 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
The orange line in the graph below forecasts what would happen to the FCI (left Y axis) over time, assuming zero capital expenditures. The capital expenditures allocated for each year (blue bars) are associated with the dollar amounts along the right Y axis.

Needs by Year with Unaddressed FCI Over Time
Immediate Needs
No Immediate Needs were identified
Key Findings
The building is relatively new and no problems or short term expenditures were identified.

Packet Page No. 1185
CITY HALL BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-016.017 5 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Plan Types
Each line item in the cost database is assigned a Plan Type, which is the primary reason or rationale for the recommended replacement, repair, or other corrective action. This is the “why” part of the equation. A cost or line item may commonly have more than one applicable Plan Type; however, only one Plan Type will be assigned based on the “best” fit, typically the one with the greatest significance.

Plan Type Descriptions
Safety  An observed or reported unsafe condition that if left unaddressed could result in injury; a system or component that presents potential liability risk.

Performance/Integrity  Component or system has failed, is almost failing, performs unreliably, does not perform as intended, and/or poses risk to overall system stability.

Accessibility  Does not meet ADA, UFAS, and/or other handicap accessibility requirements.

Environmental  Improvements to air or water quality, including removal of hazardous materials from the building or site.

Retrofit/Adaptation  Components, systems, or spaces recommended for upgrades in in order to meet current standards, facility usage, or client/occupant needs.

Lifecycle/Renewal  Any component or system that is not currently deficient or problematic but for which future replacement or repair is anticipated and budgeted.

Plan Type Distribution (by Cost)
Packet Page No. 1186
CITY HALL BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-016.017 6 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

2. B u il di ng a nd Si t e I nf orm at i on
Systems Summary
System Description Condition
Structure Steel frame with concrete-topped metal decks over concrete pad column footings over concrete foundation slab.

Good
Facade Primary Wall Finish : Stucco
Secondary Wall Finish: Curtain wall
Windows: Aluminum
Good
Roof Primary: Flat construction with single-ply TPO/PVC membrane Good Interiors Walls: Painted gypsum board, Laminated paneling (FRP), ceramic tile Floors: Carpet, VCT, ceramic tile, and terrazzo
Ceilings: Painted gypsum board and ACT
Good
Elevators Passenger: One hydraulic car serving both floors Good Plumbing Distribution: Copper supply and PVC waste and venting Hot Water: Gas water heater with integral tanks
Fixtures: Toilets, urinals, Shower, and sinks in all restrooms Good
HVAC Central System: Boilers, air handlers, and heating pumps feeding VAV units Supplemental components: Package units, Ductless split-systems and Exhaust fans
Good
Fire Suppression Wet-pipe sprinkler system and fire extinguishers Good Packet Page No. 1187
CITY HALL BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-016.017 7 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Systems Summary
Electrical Source and Distribution: Main switchboard and panels with copper wiring Interior Lighting: LED, and linear fluorescent
Emergency Power: UPS only
Good
Fire Alarm Alarm panel with smoke detectors, heat detectors, alarms, strobes, pull stations, and exit signs
Good
Equipment/Special None Good
Site Pavement Asphalt lots with limited areas of concrete aprons and pavement and adjacent concrete sidewalks, and curbs
Good
Site Development Limited park benches, Bike Racks, trash receptacles Good Landscaping and
Topography
Limited landscaping features including lawns, trees, bushes, and planters Irrigation present
No retaining walls
Low to moderate site slopes throughout
Good
Utilities Municipal water and sewer
Local utility-provided electric and natural gas
Good
Site Lighting Pole-mounted: LED
Building-mounted: LED
Pedestrian walkway lighting
Good
Ancillary Structures None n/a
Accessibility Presently it does not appear an accessibility study is needed for this property.

Key Issues and
Findings
None observed at time of assessment.

Packet Page No. 1188
CITY HALL BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-016.017 8 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Packet Page No. 1189
CITY HALL BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-016.017 9 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

Key Spaces Not Observed
All key areas of the property were accessible and observed.

Packet Page No. 1190
CITY HALL BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-016.017 10 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

However, this does not:

1. Necessarily require a public entity to make each of its existing facilities accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities;

2. Require a public entity to take any action that would threaten or destroy the historic significance of an historic property; or

Additional clarifications of this limited survey:
▪ This survey was visual in nature and actual measurements were not taken to verify compliance ▪ Only a representative sample of areas was observed
▪ Two overview photos were taken for each subsection regardless of perceived compliance or non-compliance ▪ Itemized costs for individual non-compliant items are not included in the dataset ▪ For any “none” boxes checked or reference to “no issues” identified, that alone does not guarantee full compliance The building was originally constructed in 2020. The building is relatively new and does not require any renovation.

During the interview process with the client representatives, no complaints or pending litigation associated with potential accessibility issues was reported.

Packet Page No. 1191
CITY HALL BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-016.017 11 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

5. P u rp os e an d Sc op e
Purpose
Bureau Veritas was retained by the client to render an opinion as to the Property’s current general physical condition on the day of the site visit.

The physical condition of building systems and related components are typically defined as being in one of five condition ratings. For the purposes of this report, the following definitions are used:

Failed Component or system has ceased functioning or performing as intended. Replacement, repair, or other significant corrective action is recommended or required.

Not Applicable Assigning a condition does not apply or make logical sense, most commonly due to the item in question not being present.

Packet Page No. 1192
CITY HALL BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-016.017 12 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Scope
The standard scope of the Facility Condition Assessment includes the following:
▪ Visit the Property to evaluate the general condition of the building and site improvements, review available construction documents in order to familiarize ourselves with, and be able to comment on, the in-place construction systems, life safety, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems, and the general built environment. ▪ Identify those components that are exhibiting deferred maintenance issues and provide cost estimates for Immediate Costs and Replacement Reserves based on observed conditions, maintenance history and industry standard useful life estimates. This will include the review of documented capital improvements completed within the last five-year period and work currently contracted for, if applicable.
▪ Provide a full description of the Property with descriptions of in-place systems and commentary on observed conditions. ▪ Provide a high-level categorical general statement regarding the subject Property’s compliance to Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act. This will not constitute a full ADA survey, but will help identify exposure to issues and the need for further review.
▪ Obtain background and historical information about the facility from a building engineer, property manager, maintenance staff, or other knowledgeable source. The preferred methodology is to have the client representative or building occupant complete a Pre-Survey Questionnaire (PSQ) in advance of the site visit. Common alternatives include a verbal interview just prior to or during the walk-through portion of the assessment. ▪ Review maintenance records and procedures with the in-place maintenance personnel. ▪ Observe a representative sample of the interior spaces/units, including vacant spaces/units, to gain a clear understanding of the property’s overall condition. Other areas to be observed include the exterior of the property, the roofs, interior common areas, and the significant mechanical, electrical and elevator equipment rooms. ▪ Provide recommendations for additional studies, if required, with related budgetary information. ▪ Provide an Executive Summary at the beginning of this report, which highlights key findings and includes a Facility Condition Index as a basis for comparing the relative conditions of the buildings within the portfolio.

Packet Page No. 1193
CITY HALL BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-016.017 13 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

6. O p in io ns o f P ro b ab le C os t s
Cost estimates are attached throughout this report, with the Replacement Reserves in the appendix.

For database and reporting purposes the line items with RUL=0, and commonly associated with Safety or Performance/Integrity Plan Types, are considered Immediate Needs.

Packet Page No. 1194
CITY HALL BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-016.017 14 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Replacement costs are solicited from ownership/property management, Bureau Veritas’s discussions with service companies, manufacturers' representatives, and previous experience in preparing such schedules for other similar facilities.

Costs for work performed by the ownership’s or property management’s maintenance staff are also considered.

Packet Page No. 1195
CITY HALL BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-016.017 15 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

7. C e rt if ic at io n
Group 4 Arch, City of Newark, Facilities Master Plan (the Client) retained Bureau Veritas to perform this Facility Condition Assessment in connection with its continued operation of City Hall, 37101 Newark Boulevard, Newark, California 94560, the “Property”. It is our understanding that the primary interest of the Client is to locate and evaluate materials and building system defects that might significantly affect the value of the property and to determine if the present Property has conditions that will have a significant impact on its continued operations.

Prepared by: Nezar M. Tibi
Project Manager
Reviewed by:

Matt Anderson
Technical Report Reviewer for
Mary Venable
Program Manager
[email protected]
800.733.0660 x7292719
Packet Page No. 1196
CITY HALL BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-016.017 16 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

8. Appendices
Appendix A: Photographic Record
Appendix B: Site and Floor Plans
Appendix C: Pre-Survey Questionnaire
Appendix D: Accessibility Review and Photos
Appendix E: Component Condition Report
Appendix F: Replacement Reserves
Packet Page No. 1197
CITY HALL BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-016.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix A:

Photographic Record
Packet Page No. 1198
CITY HALL BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-016.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
1 - FRONT ELEVATION 2 - LEFT ELEVATION
3 - REAR ELEVATION 4 - RIGHT ELEVATION
5 - CURTAIN WALL 6 - EXTERIOR DOOR
Packet Page No. 1199
CITY HALL BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-016.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
7 - WINDOWS 8 - EXTERIOR DOORS
9 - INTERIOR DOORS 10 - STAIRCASE
11 - CHARGING STATION 12 - ROOFING
Packet Page No. 1200
CITY HALL BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-016.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
13 - LOBBY 14 - COUNCIL CHAMBERS
15 - ENGINEERING 16 - OFFICES
17 - CONFERENCE ROOM 18 - BREAK ROOM
Packet Page No. 1201
CITY HALL BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-016.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
19 - TOILET PARTITIONS 20 - SINK, FAUCET HANDLES AND ACCESSORIES 21 - TOILET STALL OVERVIEW 22 - URINAL
23 - AIR HANDLER 24 - PACKAGED UNIT
Packet Page No. 1202
CITY HALL BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-016.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
25 - SPLIT SYSTEM DUCTLESS 26 - VARIABLE AIR VOLUME UNIT 27 - PUMP 28 - WATER HEATER
29 - BOILER 30 - SWITCHBOARD
Packet Page No. 1203
CITY HALL BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-016.017 Photographic Overview
www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
31 - ELECTRICAL SYSTEM 32 - FIRE ALARM PANEL
33 - PARKING LOTS 34 - SIGNAGE
35 - SITE BENCHES 36 - LANDSCAPING
Packet Page No. 1204
CITY HALL BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-016.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix B:

Site and Floor Plans
Packet Page No. 1205
Aerial Site Plan
Project Number Project Name
159125.22R000-016.017 City Hall
Source On-Site Date
Google January 27, 2023
Packet Page No. 1206
Floor Plan
Project Number Project Name
159125.22R000-016.017 City Hall
Source On-Site Date
Owner January 27, 2023
Packet Page No. 1207
CITY HALL BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-016.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix C:

Pre-Survey Questionnaire
Packet Page No. 1208
BV Facility Condition Assessme nt: Pre-Survey Questionnaire Building / Facility Name: City Hall
Name of person completing form: Tonya Connolly
Title / Association with property: Maintenance Superintendent Length of time associated w/ property:

Date Completed: 1/20/2023
Phone Number: 510 578 4802
Method of Completion: PRIOR: fully completed by client in advance Directions: Please answer all questions to the best of your knowledge and in good faith. Please provide additional details in the Comments column, or backup documentation for any Yes responses.

Data Overview Response
1 Year/s constructed / renovated 2021
2 Building size in SF 25,638
3 Major Renovation/Rehabilitation
Year Additional Detail
Façade
Roof
Interiors
HVAC
Electrical
Site Pavement
Accessibility
Question Response
4 List other significant capital
improvements (focus on recent
years; provide approximate date).
5 List any major capital expenditures
planned/requested for the next few
years. Have they been budgeted?
6 Describe any on-going extremely
problematic, historically chronic, or
immediate facility needs.

Packet Page No. 1209
Mark the column corresponding to the appropriate response. Please provide additional details in the Comments column, or backup documentation for any Yes responses. (NA indicates “Not Applicable”, Unk indicates “Unknown”) Question Response Comments
Yes No Unk NA
7 Are there any problems with
foundations or structures, like
excessive settlement?
x
8 Are there any wall, window,
basement or roof leaks? x
9 Has any part of the facility ever
contained visible suspect mold
growth, or have there been any
indoor air quality or mold related
complaints from occupants?
x
10 Are your elevators unreliable, with
frequent service calls? x
11 Are there any plumbing leaks,
water pressure, or clogging/backup problems?
x
12 Have there been any leaks or
pressure problems with natural
gas, HVAC supply/return lines, or
steam service?
x
13 Are any areas of the facility
inadequately heated, cooled or
ventilated? Any poorly insulated
areas?
x
14 Is the electrical service outdated,
undersized, or otherwise
problematic?
x
15 Are there any problems or
inadequacies with exterior lighting? x
16 Is site/parking drainage
inadequate, with excessive
ponding or other problems?
x
17 Are there any other unresolved
construction defects or significant
issues/hazards at the property that
have not yet been identified
above?
x
18 ADA: Has an accessibility study
been performed at the site? If so,
indicate when.
x
19 ADA: If a study has occurred, have
the associated recommendations
been addressed? In full or in part?
x
20 ADA: Have there been regular
complaints about accessibility
issues, or associated previous or
pending litigation?
x
Packet Page No. 1210
CITY HALL BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-016.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix D:

Accessibility Review and Photos
Packet Page No. 1211
Visual Checklist - 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist
Facility History & Interview
Question Yes No Unk Comments
Has an accessibility study been previously
performed? If so, when?
Have any ADA improvements been made to
the property since original construction?
Describe.

Has building management reported any
accessibility-based complaints or litigation?
1 2
3 Property Name: City Hall
BV Project Number: 159125.22R000-016.017
Packet Page No. 1212
Parking
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

OVERVIEW OF ACCESSIBLE PARKING AREA CLOSE-UP OF STALL
Question Yes No NA Comments
Does the required number of standard ADA
designated spaces appear to be provided ? 1
Does the required number of van-accessible
designated spaces appear to be provided ? 2
Are accessible spaces on the shortest
accessible route to an accessible building
entrance ?
3 Does parking signage include the International
Symbol of Accessibility ? 4
Does each accessible space have an adjacent
access aisle ? 5
Do parking spaces and access aisles appear
to be relatively level and without obstruction ? 6
Packet Page No. 1213
Exterior Accessible Route
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist
ACCESSIBLE PATH 2ND PATHWAY
Question Yes No NA Comments
Is an accessible route present from public
transportation stops and municipal sidewalks
on or immediately adjacent to the property ?
1 Does a minimum of one accessible route
appear to connect all public areas on the
exterior, such as parking and other outdoor
amenities, to accessible building entrances ?
2 Are curb ramps present at transitions through
raised curbs on all accessible routes? 3
Do curb ramps appear to have compliant
slopes for all components ? 4
Do ramp runs on an accessible route appear
to have compliant slopes ? 5
Do ramp runs on an accessible route appear
to have a compliant rise and width ? 6
Packet Page No. 1214
Do ramps on an accessible route appear to
have compliant end and intermediate
landings ?
7 Do ramps and stairs on an accessible route
appear to have compliant handrails? 8
For stairways that are open underneath, are
permanent barriers present that prevent or
discourage access?
9 Packet Page No. 1215
Building Entrances
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

MAIN ENTRANCE ADDITIONAL ENTRANCE
Question Yes No NA Comments
Do a sufficient number of accessible
entrances appear to be provided ? 1
If the main entrance is not accessible, is an
alternate accessible entrance provided? 2
Is signage provided indicating the location of
alternate accessible entrances ? 3
Do doors at accessible entrances appear to
have compliant maneuvering clearance area
on each side ?
4 Do doors at accessible entrances appear to
have compliant hardware ? 5
Do doors at accessible entrances appear to
have a compliant clear opening width ? 6
Packet Page No. 1216
Do pairs of accessible entrance doors in
series appear to have the minimum clear
space between them ?
7 Do thresholds at accessible entrances appear
to have a compliant height ? 8
Packet Page No. 1217
Interior Accessible Route
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

ACCESSIBLE INTERIOR PATH DOOR HARDWARE
Question Yes No NA Comments
Does an accessible route appear to connect
all public areas inside the building ? 1
Do accessible routes appear free of
obstructions and/or protruding objects ? 2
Do ramps on accessible routes appear to
have compliant slopes ? 3
Do ramp runs on an accessible route appear
to have a compliant rise and width ? 4
Do ramps on accessible routes appear to
have compliant end and intermediate
landings ?
5 Do ramps on accessible routes appear to
have compliant handrails ? 6
Packet Page No. 1218
Are accessible areas of refuge and the
accessible means of egress to those areas
identified with accessible signage ?
7 Do public transaction areas have an
accessible, lowered service counter section ? 8
Do public telephones appear mounted with an
accessible height and location ? 9
Do doors at interior accessible routes appear
to have compliant maneuvering clearance
area on each side ?
10 Do doors at interior accessible routes appear
to have compliant hardware ? 11
Do non-fire hinged, sliding, or folding doors on
interior accessible routes appear to have
compliant opening force ?
12 Do doors on interior accessible routes appear
to have a compliant clear opening width ? 13
Packet Page No. 1219
Elevators
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

LOBBY LOOKING AT CABS IN-CAB CONTROLS
Question Yes No NA Comments
Are hallway call buttons configured with the
“UP” button above the “DOWN” button? 1
Is accessible floor identification signage
present on the hoistway sidewalls on each
level ?
2 Do the elevators have audible and visual
arrival indicators at the lobby and hallway
entrances?
3 Do the elevator hoistway and car interior
appear to have a minimum compliant clear
floor area ?
4 Do the elevator car doors have automatic reopening devices to prevent closure on obstructions?
5 Do elevator car control buttons appear to be
mounted at a compliant height ? 6
Packet Page No. 1220
Are tactile and Braille characters mounted to
the left of each elevator car control button ? 7
Are audible and visual floor position indicators
provided in the elevator car? 8
Is the emergency call system on or adjacent
to the control panel and does it not require
voice communication ?
9 Packet Page No. 1221
Public Restrooms
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

TOILET STALL OVERVIEW SINK, FAUCET HANDLES AND ACCESSORIES Question Yes No NA Comments
Do publicly accessible toilet rooms appear to
have a minimum compliant floor area ? 1
Does the lavatory appear to be mounted at a
compliant height and with compliant knee
area ?
2 Does the lavatory faucet have compliant
handles ? 3
Is the plumbing piping under lavatories
configured to protect against contact ? 4
Are grab bars provided at compliant locations
around the toilet ? 5
Do toilet stall doors appear to provide the
minimum compliant clear width ? 6
Packet Page No. 1222
Do toilet stalls appear to provide the minimum
compliant clear floor area ? 7
Where more than one urinal is present in a
multi-user restroom, does minimum one urinal
appear to be mounted at a compliant height
and with compliant approach width ?
8 Do accessories and mirrors appear to be
mounted at a compliant height ? 9
Packet Page No. 1223
Kitchens/Kitchenettes
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist

KITCHEN CABINETS KITCHEN OVERVIEW
Question Yes No NA Comments
Do kitchens/kitchenettes appear to have a
minimum compliant path of travel or area of
maneuverability ?
1 Are the appliances centered for a parallel or
forward approach with adequate clear floor
space ?
2 Is there an accessible countertop/preparation
space of proper width and height ? 3
Is there an accessible sink space of proper
width and height ? 4
Does the sink faucet have compliant
handles ? 5
Is the plumbing piping under the sink
configured to protect against contact ? 6
Packet Page No. 1224
Are the cooktop/range controls front-mounted
(or in a location that does not require reaching
across the burners) ?
7 Packet Page No. 1225
Playgrounds & Swimming Pools
Abbreviated Accessibility Checklist
Playgrounds & Swimming Pools section not applicable at this site.

Packet Page No. 1226
CITY HALL BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-016.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix E:

Component Condition Report
Packet Page No. 1227
Packet Page No. 1228
Packet Page No. 1229
Packet Page No. 1230
CITY HALL BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-016.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Appendix F:

Replacement Reserves
Packet Page No. 1231
Packet Page No. 1232
Newark Library
37055 Newark Boulevard
Newark, California 94560

FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT
prepared for
City of Newark
37101 Newark Boulevard
Newark, California 94560
PREPARED BY:

Bureau Veritas
10461 Mill Run Circle, Suite 1100
Owings Mills, Maryland 21117
800.733.0660
www.us.bureauveritas.com
BV CONTACT:

Mary Venable
Program Manager
800.733.0660 x7292719
[email protected]
BV PROJECT #:
159125.22R000-017.017
DATE OF REPORT:

March 9, 2023
ON SITE DATE:

January 26, 2023
Bureau Veritas
10461 Mill Run Circle, Suite 1100 | Owings Mills, MD 21117 | www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660 Packet Page No. 1233
NEWARK LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-017.017 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................. 1 Property Overview and Assessment Details .......................................................................................... 1 Significant/Systemic Findings and Deficiencies ..................................................................................... 2 Facility Condition Index (FCI) ................................................................................................................. 3 Immediate Needs.................................................................................................................................... 4 Key Findings ........................................................................................................................................... 5 Plan Types.............................................................................................................................................. 6

2. Building and Site Information ............................................................................................................. 7

3. Property Space Use and Observed Areas ....................................................................................... 10

4. ADA Accessibility............................................................................................................................... 11

5. Purpose and Scope ............................................................................................................................ 12

6. Opinions of Probable Costs .............................................................................................................. 14 Methodology ......................................................................................................................................... 14 Definitions ............................................................................................................................................. 14

7. Certification......................................................................................................................................... 16

8. Appendices ......................................................................................................................................... 17 Packet Page No. 1234
NEWARK LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-017.017 1 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

1. Ex ec ut iv e S um m a ry
Property Overview and Assessment Details
General Information
Property Type Library
Main Address 37055 Newark Boulevard, Newark, California 94560 Site Developed 2020
Site Area 0.66 acres
Parking Spaces Parking is shared with the adjacent City Hall building.

Building Area 25,580 square feet
Number of Stories 2
Outside Occupants/Leased Spaces None
Date(s) of Visit January 26, 2023
Management Point of Contact Group 4 Architecture, Research + Planning, Inc Andrea Gifford
Principal
415.531.4456
[email protected]
On-site Point of Contact (POC) Tonya Connolly
Assessment and Report Prepared By Nezar M. Tibi
Reviewed By Matt Anderson
Technical Report Reviewer for
Mary Venable
800.733.0660 x7292719
[email protected]
AssetCalc Link Full dataset for this assessment can be found at:
https://www.assetcalc.net/
Packet Page No. 1235
NEWARK LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-017.017 2 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Significant/Systemic Findings and Deficiencies
Historical Summary
The Newark Library consists of a multi-story building. The library was constructed in 2020 as part of the Newark City Hall and Police Station buildings.

Architectural
The building structure consists of steel framed construction on a concrete slab. The exterior enclosures consist of painted stucco, aluminum curtainwall, windows, entry doors, and steel service doors. Roofs primarily consist of flat PVC single-ply membrane assemblies. The interior finishes and fixtures are original to the 2020 construction and are anticipated for lifecycle replacement.

Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing and Fire (MEPF)
The MEPF systems and components are original to the 2020 building construction and have been well-maintained since that time. Heating and cooling is provided by rooftop air handler and fan coils units with multi-zone split system. The MEPF infrastructure itself is in good working condition with no major expenditures anticipated in the short term. In general, the plumbing and electrical systems are adequate to serve the building. A main switchboard and distribution panels are located within the electrical room. Building is protected by both fire alarm and fire sprinkler systems. Lifecycle replacement of the majority of the MEPF is anticipated.

Site
The parking lot is shared by the adjacent City Hall and Police Station buildings. Costs for parking lot maintenance and repair are included in Bureau Veritas' report on the City Hall. The concrete sidewalk is in good condition with a trash enclosure located at the rear of the building.

Recommended Additional Studies
A moisture intrusion was reported at the floor electrical conduits. A professional consultant must be retained to analyze the existing condition, provide recommendations and, if necessary, estimate the scope and cost of any required repairs. A wire insulation resistance test should be part of this study. The cost of this study is included in the cost tables. Due to the ambiguity of the required repair scope at the time of this assessment, the cost for any possible subsequent repairs is not included.

Packet Page No. 1236
NEWARK LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-017.017 3 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Facility Condition Index (FCI)
One of the major goals of the FCA is to calculate each building’s Facility Condition Index (FCI), which provides a theoretical objective indication of a building’s overall condition. By definition, the FCI is defined as the ratio of the cost of current needs divided by current replacement value (CRV) of the facility. The chart below presents the industry standard ranges and cutoff points.

Packet Page No. 1237
NEWARK LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-017.017 4 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
The orange line in the graph below forecasts what would happen to the FCI (left Y axis) over time, assuming zero capital expenditures. The capital expenditures allocated for each year (blue bars) are associated with the dollar amounts along the right Y axis.

Needs by Year with Unaddressed FCI Over Time
Immediate Needs
Packet Page No. 1238
NEWARK LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-017.017 5 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Key Findings
Packet Page No. 1239
NEWARK LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-017.017 6 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Plan Types
Each line item in the cost database is assigned a Plan Type, which is the primary reason or rationale for the recommended replacement, repair, or other corrective action. This is the “why” part of the equation. A cost or line item may commonly have more than one applicable Plan Type; however, only one Plan Type will be assigned based on the “best” fit, typically the one with the greatest significance.

Plan Type Descriptions
Safety  An observed or reported unsafe condition that if left unaddressed could result in injury; a system or component that presents potential liability risk.

Performance/Integrity  Component or system has failed, is almost failing, performs unreliably, does not perform as intended, and/or poses risk to overall system stability.

Accessibility  Does not meet ADA, UFAS, and/or other handicap accessibility requirements.

Environmental  Improvements to air or water quality, including removal of hazardous materials from the building or site.

Retrofit/Adaptation  Components, systems, or spaces recommended for upgrades in in order to meet current standards, facility usage, or client/occupant needs.

Lifecycle/Renewal  Any component or system that is not currently deficient or problematic but for which future replacement or repair is anticipated and budgeted.

Plan Type Distribution (by Cost)
Packet Page No. 1240
NEWARK LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-017.017 7 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

2. B u il di ng a nd Si t e I nf orm at i on
Systems Summary
System Description Condition
Structure Steel frame with concrete-topped metal decks. Concrete pad column footings and a concrete slab on grade.

Good
Facade Primary Wall Finish : Stucco
Secondary Wall Finish: Curtain wall
Windows: Aluminum
Good
Roof Primary: Flat construction with single-ply TPO/PVC membrane Good Interiors Walls: Painted gypsum board, ceramic tile and Unfinished Floors: Carpet, VCT, Rubber tile, ceramic tile, terrazzo, and unfinished concrete
Ceilings: Painted gypsum board and ACT
Good
Elevators Passenger: One hydraulic car serving all two floors Good Plumbing Distribution: Copper supply and PVC waste and venting Hot Water: Electric water heaters with integral tanks
Fixtures: Toilets, urinals, shower and sinks in all restrooms Good
HVAC Central System: Air handler, and fan coil units
Supplemental components: Ductless split-systems, Multi-Zone Split-system, and exhaust fan
Good
Packet Page No. 1241
NEWARK LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-017.017 8 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Systems Summary
Fire Suppression Wet-pipe sprinkler system and fire extinguishers, and kitchen hood system Good Electrical Source and Distribution: Main switchboard and panels with copper wiring Interior Lighting: LED, and linear fluorescent
Emergency Power: UPS only
Good
Fire Alarm Alarm panel with smoke detectors, heat detectors, alarms, strobes, pull stations, back-up emergency lights, and exit signs.

Good
Equipment/Special None -
Site Pavement Concrete sidewalks, and curbs. Access drive to the rear of the facility. Good Site Development Metal gate dumpster enclosure Good
Landscaping and
Topography
Drought Tolerant plants and trees. Good
Utilities Municipal water and sewer
Local utility-provided electric and natural gas
Good
Site Lighting Please refer to the City Hall report. -
Ancillary Structures None -
Accessibility Presently it does not appear an accessibility study is needed for this property.

Key Issues and
Findings
Moisture intrusion study at electrical conduit.

Packet Page No. 1242
NEWARK LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-017.017 9 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Packet Page No. 1243
NEWARK LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-017.017 10 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

Key Spaces Not Observed
All key areas of the property were accessible and observed.

Packet Page No. 1244
NEWARK LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-017.017 11 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

However, this does not:
▪ Necessarily require a public entity to make each of its existing facilities accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities;
▪ Require a public entity to take any action that would threaten or destroy the historic significance of an historic property; or ▪ Require a public entity to take any action that it can demonstrate would result in a fundamental alteration in the nature of a service, program, or activity or in undue financial and administrative burdens. In those circumstances where personnel of the public entity believe that the proposed action would fundamentally alter the service, program, or activity or would result in undue financial and administrative burdens, a public entity has the burden of proving that compliance with

35.150(a) of this part would result in such alteration or burdens. The decision that compliance would result in such alteration or burdens must be made by the head of a public entity or his or her designee after considering all resources available for use in the funding and operation of the service, program, or activity, and must be accompanied by a written statement of the reasons for reaching that conclusion. If an action would result in such an alteration or such burdens, a public entity shall take any other action that would not result in such an alteration or such burdens but would nevertheless ensure that individuals with disabilities receive the benefits or services provided by the public entity.

Additional clarifications of this limited survey:
▪ This survey was visual in nature and actual measurements were not taken to verify compliance ▪ Only a representative sample of areas was observed
▪ Two overview photos were taken for each subsection regardless of perceived compliance or non-compliance ▪ Itemized costs for individual non-compliant items are not included in the dataset ▪ For any “none” boxes checked or reference to “no issues” identified, that alone does not guarantee full compliance The building was originally constructed in 2020. The building is relatively new and does not require any renovation.

During the interview process with the client representatives, no complaints or pending litigation associated with potential accessibility issues was reported.

Packet Page No. 1245
NEWARK LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-017.017 12 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

5. P u rp os e an d Sc op e
Purpose
Bureau Veritas was retained by the client to render an opinion as to the Property’s current general physical condition on the day of the site visit.

The physical condition of building systems and related components are typically defined as being in one of five condition ratings. For the purposes of this report, the following definitions are used:

Failed Component or system has ceased functioning or performing as intended. Replacement, repair, or other significant corrective action is recommended or required.

Not Applicable Assigning a condition does not apply or make logical sense, most commonly due to the item in question not being present.

Packet Page No. 1246
NEWARK LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-017.017 13 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Scope
The standard scope of the Facility Condition Assessment includes the following:
▪ Visit the Property to evaluate the general condition of the building and site improvements, review available construction documents in order to familiarize ourselves with, and be able to comment on, the in-place construction systems, life safety, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems, and the general built environment ▪ Identify those components that are exhibiting deferred maintenance issues and provide cost estimates for Immediate Costs and Replacement Reserves based on observed conditions, maintenance history and industry standard useful life estimates. This will include the review of documented capital improvements completed within the last five-year period and work currently contracted for, if applicable.
▪ Provide a full description of the Property with descriptions of in-place systems and commentary on observed conditions. ▪ Provide a high-level categorical general statement regarding the subject Property’s compliance to Title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act. This will not constitute a full ADA survey, but will help identify exposure to issues and the need for further review.
▪ Obtain background and historical information about the facility from a building engineer, property manager, maintenance staff, or other knowledgeable source. The preferred methodology is to have the client representative or building occupant complete a Pre-Survey Questionnaire (PSQ) in advance of the site visit. Common alternatives include a verbal interview just prior to or during the walk-through portion of the assessment. ▪ Review maintenance records and procedures with the in-place maintenance personnel. ▪ Observe a representative sample of the interior spaces/units, including vacant spaces/units, to gain a clear understanding of the property’s overall condition. Other areas to be observed include the exterior of the property, the roofs, interior common areas, and the significant mechanical, electrical and elevator equipment rooms. ▪ Provide recommendations for additional studies, if required, with related budgetary information. ▪ Provide an Executive Summary at the beginning of this report, which highlights key findings and includes a Facility Condition Index as a basis for comparing the relative conditions of the buildings within the portfolio.

Packet Page No. 1247
NEWARK LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-017.017 14 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

6. O p in io ns o f P ro b ab le C os t s
Cost estimates are attached throughout this report, with the Replacement Reserves in the appendix.

For database and reporting purposes the line items with RUL=0, and commonly associated with Safety or Performance/Integrity Plan Types, are considered Immediate Needs.

Packet Page No. 1248
NEWARK LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-017.017 15 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660
Replacement costs are solicited from ownership/property management, Bureau Veritas’s discussions with service companies, manufacturers' representatives, and previous experience in preparing such schedules for other similar facilities.

Costs for work performed by the ownership’s or property management’s maintenance staff are also considered.

Packet Page No. 1249
NEWARK LIBRARY BUREAU VERITAS PROJECT: 159125.22R000-017.017 16 www.us.bureauveritas.com | p 800.733.0660

7. C e rt if ic at io n
Group 4 Architecture, Research + Planning, Inc (the Client) retained Bureau Veritas to perform this Facility Condition Assessment in connection with its continued operation of Newark Library, 37055 Newark Boulevard, Newark, California 94560, the “Property”. It is our understanding that the primary interest of the Client is to locate and evaluate materials and building system defects that might significantly affect the value of the property and to determine if the present Property has conditions that will have a significant impact on its continued operations.

Newark City CouncilOctober 10, 2024

Newark City Council
October 10, 2024