property condition report - loopnet

Engineers who understand your business

PROPERTY CONDITION REPORT

Flex Building 131 Franklin Street

San Francisco, California 94102

July 26, 2018 Partner Project Number: [Project Number]

Prepared for:

iBorrow Finance Loan Fund I, L.P. Los Angeles, CA 90025

800-419-4923 www.PARTNEResi.com

July 26, 2018

Ms. Jeanna Sterman iBorrow Finance Loan Fund I, L.P. 12100 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 510 Los Angeles, CA 90025 Subject: Property Condition Report

Flex Building 131 Franklin Street

San Francisco, California 94102 Partner Project No. 18.221498.1 Dear Ms. Sterman:

Partner Engineering and Science, Inc. is pleased to provide the results of the assessment performed on the above-referenced property. At a minimum, this assessment was performed in conformance with the scope and limitations as set forth by ASTM E2018-15 “Standard Guide for Property Condition Assessments: Baseline Property Condition Assessment Process” and as specified in the engagement agreement that initiated this work.

The purpose of this assessment is to provide sufficient information to evaluate the condition of the real property in order to facilitate completion of due diligence as a secured lender. The findings of this report are intended to be used in support of securing the debt created through the prospective financing for which the subject property serves as collateral. This report may not be used for any other purpose, including, without limitation, use by owner, borrower or tenant for the purpose of evaluating specific building components and systems, or as an instrument in negotiations related to the acquisition or disposition of the property.

We appreciate the opportunity to provide these assessment services. If you have any questions concerning this report, or if we can assist you in any other matter, please contact Gavin Jones at (310) 765-7251 or [email protected].

Sincerely,

Partner Engineering and Science, Inc.

Rick Richter Gavin S. Jones, EP

Senior Author Relationship Manager

Property Condition Report Project No. 18-221498.1 July 26, 2018 Page i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND PROPERTY DESCRIPTION

Executive Summary

Partner Engineering and Science, Inc. (Partner) has performed a property condition assessment (PCA) of the parcel and improvements defined in the following table (the “subject property”). The assessment was performed in accordance with ASTM E2018-15 “Standard Guide for Property Condition Assessments: Baseline Property Condition Assessment Process”. The purpose of this Property Condition Assessment was to observe and document readily-visible materials and building system defects that might significantly affect the value of the subject property, and determine if conditions exist which may have a significant impact on the continued operation of the facility during the evaluation period.

Property Data Name Flex Building Address 131 Franklin Street City, State and Zip Code San Francisco, California 94102 Property use Commercial Office Land acreage (acres) 0.55 Acres Number of buildings 1 Number of floors 3 + Basement Year built 1909 Gross building area (sf) 9,580 sf Net rentable area (sf) 9,580 sf. Foundation / Substructure Concrete, Slab on Grade Superstructure Wood Columns and Beams Façade Masonry Roof type Wooden decking supported by wooden trusses Parking area N/A Parking space count N/A ADA-designated parking count N/A HVAC system Roof mounted packaged units I per floor Water supply piping Copper Electrical branch wiring Copper Number of elevators 1 Electro Fire suppression Wet pipe sprinkler system Fire alarm Central system with notification

Reported Capital Expenditures

No recent or planned capital improvements were reported by property management.

Immediate and Short-Term Repair Items

This report presents opinions of costs for items or conditions that require immediate action as a result of the following: Material existing or potentially unsafe conditions, material code violations, or any other physical deficiencies that if left uncorrected would be expected to result in or contribute to the failure of

Property Condition Report Project No. 18-221498.1 July 26, 2018 Page ii

critical elements or systems within one year or may result in a significant increase in remedial costs. These items should be addressed at the first practical opportunity.

In addition, this report presents opinions of costs for items or conditions that may not require immediate action, but should be conducted on a priority basis above and beyond routine maintenance. Generally, the recommended time frame for addressing these items is two years.

Deferred maintenance items and/or physical deficiencies that are considered significant are also identified in Table 1 - Immediate Repair and Deferred Maintenance Cost Opinion.

Replacement Reserve Items

In accordance with the terms under which this assessment was performed, this report includes opinions of costs for capital replacement reserve items that are anticipated to occur during a specified evaluation period. These items are identified in Table 2 – Long-Term Cost Opinion. Systems or components that are present at the subject property, but not listed in Table 2, are expected to realize a useful life that exceeds the evaluation period.

Cost Exclusions

This report excludes costs for systems or components that are reported to be a tenant responsibility to maintain and replace, that are generally associated with the normal operation of the subject property, that are part and parcel of a building renovation program, for enhancements to reposition the subject property within the marketplace, for work that is cosmetic or decorative, for work that is being conducted for warranty transfer purposes, and routine maintenance activities. This report also excludes costs that are below the reporting threshold established by the engagement agreement.

Recommendations for Additional Investigations

There were no issues observed or reported that indicate the need for additional investigations.

Sect.

No.Deficiency or Repair Item Quantity Unit Unit Cost Total Cost

2.0 Regulatory Compliance

None Noted

3.0 Site ImprovementsNone Noted

4.0 Structural Frame and Building EnvelopeNone Noted

5.0 Mechanical and Electrical SystemsNone Noted

6.0 Interior ElementsNone Noted

7.0 AccessibilityNone Noted

8.0 Water Intrusion and Microbial GrowthNone Noted

TOTAL $ 0

TABLE 1 - IMMEDIATE REPAIRS & DEFERRED MAINTENANCE COST OPINION

131 franklin Street

San Francisco, California 94102

The Flex Building

Partner Project No. 18.221498.1

July 26, 2018

The Flex Building Rentable area (sf): 9,580

131 franklin Street Site effective age (years): 109

San Francisco, California 94102 Inflation rate: 2.5%

Evaluation period (years): 12

Sect.

No. Description

Avg

EUL

(YR)

Eff Age

(YR)

RUL

(YR)

On Site

Qty

Qty in Eval

Period Unit Unit Cost YR 1 YR 2 YR 3 YR 4 YR 5 YR 6 YR 7 YR 8 YR 9 YR 10 YR 11 YR 12 a

Total

Cost

3.0 Site Improvements

None anticipated -$

-$

4.0 Structural Frame and Building Envelope

4.3.1Exterior cleaning, masonry

pointing, sealing8 3 5 20,000 20,000 SF $0.25 5,000$ 5,000$

-$

5.0 Mechanical and Electrical Systems

5.1Central water heater, Replace

15 9 6 1 1 EA $1,200 1,200$ 1,200$

5.2HVAC package unit (RTU),

Replace20 10 10 8 8 TON $1,200 9,600$ 9,600$

5.4.1Elevator mechanical systems,

Modernize25 20 5 1 1 STOP $15,000 15,000$ 15,000$

5.4.1Elevator cabs interiors,

Replace/Refurbish10 7 3 1 1 EA $10,000 10,000$ 10,000$

5.5.2 Fire alarm panel, Replace 20 9 11 1 1 EA $10,000 10,000$ 10,000$

6.0 Interior ElementsNone anticipated-tenant

responsibility-$

-$

Uninflated Totals: -$ -$ 10,000$ -$ 20,000$ 1,200$ -$ -$ -$ 9,600$ 10,000$ -$ 50,800$

Inflated Totals: -$ -$ 10,506$ -$ 22,076$ 1,358$ -$ -$ -$ 11,989$ 12,801$ -$ 58,730$

Uninflated cost per square foot per year: $0.44

Inflated cost per square foot per year: $0.51

TABLE 2 - LONG-TERM COST OPINION

July 26, 2018

Partner Project No. 18.221498.1

Property Condition Report Project No. 18-221498.1 July 26, 2018

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Purpose ................................................................................................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Scope of Work ................................................................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Cost Evaluation Methodology .................................................................................................................................... 1 1.4 Descriptive Qualifiers ...................................................................................................................................................... 2 1.5 User Reliance ..................................................................................................................................................................... 2

2.0 RECONNAISSANCE, REGULATORY AND DOCUMENT REVIEW .................................................... 3 2.1 Site Reconnaissance ........................................................................................................................................................ 3 2.2 Property Personnel Interviewed/Contacted .......................................................................................................... 3 2.3 Regulatory Compliance Inquiry .................................................................................................................................. 3 2.4 Document Review ............................................................................................................................................................ 4

3.0 PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS ....................................................................................................... 5 3.1 Parcel Configuration ....................................................................................................................................................... 5 3.2 Site Improvements........................................................................................................................................................... 5

3.2.1 Topography and Storm Water Drainage ........................................................................................................... 5 3.2.2 Vehicular Access, Paving .......................................................................................................................................... 5 3.2.3 Retaining Walls ............................................................................................................................................................ 5 3.2.4 Site and Building Signage ....................................................................................................................................... 6 3.2.5 Perimeter Walls, Gates, and Fences ..................................................................................................................... 6 3.2.6 Exterior Lights ............................................................................................................................................................... 6 3.2.7 Site Amenities ............................................................................................................................................................... 6 3.2.8 Special Utility Systems .............................................................................................................................................. 6

4.0 STRUCTURAL FRAME AND BUILDING ENVELOPE ........................................................................ 7 4.1 Foundation/Substructure .............................................................................................................................................. 7 4.2 Building Frame .................................................................................................................................................................. 7

4.2.1 Exterior Walls ................................................................................................................................................................ 7 4.2.2 Windows ......................................................................................................................................................................... 7 4.2.3 Doors ............................................................................................................................................................................... 7 4.2.4 Parapets .......................................................................................................................................................................... 8

4.3 Roof ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 8 4.3.1 Roofing Materials ........................................................................................................................................................ 8 4.3.2 Roof Drainage .............................................................................................................................................................. 8

4.4 Fire Escapes, Stairs or Balconies ................................................................................................................................. 9 5.0 MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS .................................................................................. 10

5.1 Plumbing, Domestic Hot Water, and Sewer Systems ..................................................................................... 10 5.2 Heating, Air Conditioning, and Ventilation ......................................................................................................... 10 5.3 Electrical ............................................................................................................................................................................ 10 5.4 Vertical Transportation ............................................................................................................................................... 11

5.4.1 Elevators ...................................................................................................................................................................... 11 5.4.2 Escalators ..................................................................................................................................................................... 11

Property Condition Report Project No. 18-221498.1 July 26, 2018

5.5 Life Safety and Fire Protection ................................................................................................................................. 11 5.5.1 Fire Suppression Systems ..................................................................................................................................... 11 5.5.2 Alarm Systems ........................................................................................................................................................... 12 5.5.3 Other Systems ........................................................................................................................................................... 12

6.0 INTERIOR ELEMENTS ..................................................................................................................... 13 6.1 Common Areas .............................................................................................................................................................. 13 6.2 Amenities and Special Features ............................................................................................................................... 13 6.3 Support Areas ................................................................................................................................................................. 13 6.4 Commercial Tenant Spaces ....................................................................................................................................... 13 6.5 Residential Spaces ........................................................................................................................................................ 13

6.5.1 Finishes ......................................................................................................................................................................... 13 6.5.2 Cabinetry and Fixtures ........................................................................................................................................... 13 6.5.3 Soft Goods .................................................................................................................................................................. 13 6.5.4 Hard Goods and Appliances ................................................................................................................................ 13

7.0 ACCESSIBILITY ............................................................................................................................... 14 8.0 SUSPECT WATER INTRUSION AND MICROBIAL GROWTH ........................................................ 15 9.0 NATURAL HAZARD INFORMATION ............................................................................................. 16

9.1 Flood Zone ....................................................................................................................................................................... 16 10.0 OUT OF SCOPE CONSIDERATIONS ............................................................................................... 17 11.0 LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................................................. 19 FIGURES AND APPENDICES

The following report Figures and Appendices are attached at the end of this report.

Figures Figure 1: Site Location Map

Figure 2: Site Plan

Appendices Appendix A: Site Photographs

Appendix B: Supporting Documentation

Appendix C: Qualifications

Property Condition Report Project No. 18-221498.1 July 26, 2018 Page 1

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose

The purpose of this assessment is to provide information to evaluate the condition of the subject property in order to facilitate completion of due diligence by the addressee. The purpose is accomplished by describing the primary systems and components of the subject property, identifying conspicuous defects or material deferred maintenance, and presenting an opinion of cost to remedy the observed conditions. In addition, this report identifies systems or components that are anticipated to reach the end of their expected useful life during the specified evaluation period and includes an opinion of cost for future capital replacements.

The findings of this report are intended to be used in support of securing the debt created through the prospective financing for which the subject property serves as collateral. This report may not be used for any other purpose, including, without limitation, use by owner, borrower or tenant for the purpose of evaluating specific building components and systems, or as an instrument in negotiations related to the acquisition or disposition of the property.

1.2 Scope of Work

This assessment was performed in conformance with the scope and limitations as set forth by ASTM E2018-15 “Standard Guide for Property Condition Assessments: Baseline Property Condition Assessment Process” (the Standard) and as specified in the engagement agreement that initiated this work. Specific requirements or deviations from the minimum ASTM standard are described herein.

This assessment was performed utilizing methods and procedures consistent with good commercial or customary practices designed to conform to acceptable industry standards. The independent conclusions represent Partner’s best professional judgment based upon existing conditions and the information and data available to us during the course of this assignment.

1.3 Cost Evaluation Methodology

Opinions of costs presented within this report are based on construction costs developed by construction resources such as Marshall & Swift, RS Means, Partner’s experience with past costs for similar projects, city cost indexes, consultations with local specialty contractors, client-provided information, and assumptions regarding future economic conditions. Actual cost estimates are determined by many factors including but not limited to: choice and availability of materials, choice and availability of a qualified contractor, regional climate zone, quality of existing materials, site compatibility, and access to the subject property and buildings. In addition, opinions of costs are based solely on material replacement and do not account for soft costs.

Items included in the replacement reserve table are determined based upon the estimated useful life (EUL) of a system or component, the apparent effective age (EA) of the system, and the remaining useful life (RUL) of that system. Factors that may affect the age and condition of a system include, but are not limited to, the frequency of use, exposure to environmental elements, quality of construction and


installation, and amount of maintenance provided. Based on these factors, a system may have an effective age that is greater or less than its actual chronological age.

1.4 Descriptive Qualifiers

The following definitions and terminology are used in this report regarding the physical condition of the project, and the estimated life expectancies/age of the components and systems.

Good In working condition and does not require immediate or short-term repairs above an agreed threshold.

Fair In working condition, but may require immediate or short-term repairs above an agreed threshold.

Poor Not in working condition or requires immediate or short-term repairs substantially above an agreed threshold.

The agreed threshold is presumed to be the de minimis reporting threshold, unless otherwise specified in this report.

Unless stated otherwise in this report, the systems reviewed are considered to be in good condition and their performance appeared to be satisfactory.

1.5 User Reliance

Partner was engaged by the Addressee, or their authorized representative, to perform this assessment. The engagement agreement specifically states the scope and purpose of the assessment, as well as the contractual obligations and limitations of both parties. This report and the information therein, are for the exclusive use of the Addressee. This report has no other purpose and may not be relied upon, or used, by any other person or entity without the written consent of Partner. Third parties that obtain this report, or the information therein, shall have no rights of recourse or recovery against Partner, its officers, employees, vendors, successors or assigns. Any such unauthorized user shall be responsible to protect, indemnify and hold Partner, the Addressee and their respective officers, employees, vendors, successors and assigns harmless from any and all claims, damages, losses, liabilities, expenses (including reasonable attorneys’ fees) and costs attributable to such use. Unauthorized use of this report shall constitute acceptance of, and commitment to, these responsibilities, which shall be irrevocable and shall apply regardless of the cause of action or legal theory pled or asserted.

This report has been completed under specific Terms and Conditions relating to scope, relying parties, limitations of liability, indemnification, dispute resolution, and other factors relevant to any reliance on this report. Any parties relying on this report do so having accepted Partner’s standard Terms and Conditions, a copy of which can be found at https://www.partneresi.com/terms-conditions

https://www.partneresi.com/terms-conditions


2.0 RECONNAISSANCE, REGULATORY AND DOCUMENT REVIEW

2.1 Site Reconnaissance

Date: July 18, 2018 Weather: Clear Approximately 65 degrees F Field Assessor(s): George Sanen Escort: Cheryl Lane, President Porte d’Or Financial Ltd. 415-921-5263 x 225

Limiting Conditions

The performance of this assessment was limited by the following condition(s):

• No limiting conditions beyond those specified by ASTM were encountered while preparing this report.

2.2 Property Personnel Interviewed/Contacted

The site escort was interviewed during the course of the survey. Additional site personnel were not available for interview. Ms. Cheryl Lane has been associated with the subject property for nine years and was cooperative/uncooperative during the property observations. Ms. Lane appeared to be knowledgeable about the subject property history and maintenance practices.

2.3 Regulatory Compliance Inquiry

Building Codes City and County of San Francisco Building Department Contact: Mr. John Rahaim Telephone: 415-558-6268 Findings: No Violations Violations Awaiting response

No violations reported. Fire firfife Safety City and County of San Francisco Fire and Life Safety Dept. Contact: Mr. Lawrence Kentfield Telephone: 415-554-5968 Findings: No Violations Violations Awaiting response

No violations reported. Zoning City and County of San Francisco Planning and Zoning Department Contact: Mr. Isoken Omokaro Telephone: 415-558-6403 Findings: No Violations Violations Awaiting response

No violations reported. The subject property was reported to be compliant with current zoning regulations According to a review of the zoning map obtained from the City Zoning Department, the subject property is zoned Hayes-Gough NCT zoning district. The permitted uses listed in the zoning regulations include retail, office, commercial and mixed use. Based on limited review, the subject property appeared to be compliant.

This information does not constitute a detailed regulatory-compliance investigation and any code compliance issues noted in this report are based on information provided by the regulatory agencies noted above. If possible, the provided information was confirmed with on-site observations. Additional information that is received within 30 days of the site visit will be forwarded upon receipt.


2.4 Document Review

The following documents were readily available or provided to Partner for reference as part of this assessment.

• Tax Assessor property information • Zoning Map • On-line building code violation database • Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) flood hazard layer map • Plans, prepared by Building Solutions dated June 01-2018


3.0 PROPERTY CHARACTERISTICS

3.1 Parcel Configuration

The subject property improvements are placed upon one parcel. The parcel is rectangular and comprise approximately 0.55 acres. APN Number 0833-002

3.2 Site Improvements

3.2.1 Topography and Storm Water Drainage

The general vicinity is flat with a very light slope towards the south.

Storm water from the roof of the subject building, and paved areas is removed primarily by sheet flow action which drain to the public right of way, and to on-site storm water drains.

The subject property is connected to a storm sewer system that is owned and maintained by the municipality.

Survey Condition and Analysis

The topography appeared to be in good overall condition and appeared to adequately accommodate the built improvements. Routine maintenance is anticipated during the evaluation period.

Precipitation was not present during the walk-through survey; consequently, direct observation of the operation of the storm water drainage system was not possible. Evidence of improper operation was not readily apparent. Routine maintenance, including clearing of debris from inlets, channels, piping, and outlets, is anticipated throughout the evaluation period.

3.2.2 Vehicular Access, Paving

Vehicular access or parking is not provided at the subject property

Municipal Curbing is found on south and east area perimeters and are part of the municipal sidewalk system and consist of cast-in-place concrete


Exterior Municipal-owned pavement appeared to be in good structural condition.

Curbing appeared to be in good condition. Maintenance provided by the municipality.

Building entrance flatwork and pedestrian walkways consist of cast-in-place concrete construction. Ramps accommodate sidewalk grade changes.


The pedestrian concrete walkways appeared to be in good overall condition. Exterior Landscaping and Irrigation is provided by the municipality

3.2.3 Retaining Walls

Retaining walls are not present.


3.2.4 Site and Building Signage

Building address identification is primarily provided by painted signage on canvas positioned along pedestrian walkway above the building entrance. A small bronze plate façade-mounted, is also mounted by the building entrance along Franklin Street.


The signage appeared to be sufficient and in good condition. Sign painting or replacement can be conducted on an as-needed basis during the evaluation period as part of routine maintenance.

3.2.5 Perimeter Walls, Gates, and Fences

Concrete masonry unit (CMU) walls and painted decorative metal security fencing are provided along the western, northern and eastern perimeters of the subject property.


The perimeter walls, doors and gate, appeared to be in good operational condition. Routine maintenance is anticipated during the evaluation period.

3.2.6 Exterior Lights

Sconce lights are present above the walkway main entry area of the building along Franklin Street.


The light fixtures were reported and appeared to be in good overall condition. Repairs and replacements that can be addressed as part of routine maintenance during the evaluation period.

3.2.7 Site Amenities

Recreational facilities and additional site amenities are not present.

3.2.8 Special Utility Systems

Special utility systems are not present.


4.0 STRUCTURAL FRAME AND BUILDING ENVELOPE

4.1 Foundation/Substructure

According to property management, foundations consist of a conventional, concrete spread footing system.


Evidence of structural distress indicative of foundation settlement was not observed. Foundations appeared to be in functional condition. Normal monitoring of the foundation is anticipated during the evaluation period.

4.2 Building Frame

The building is constructed of conventional, wood-stud platform framing with perimeter walls on all four sides that consist of unreinforced masonry units covering all three upper levels of the building. All floors consist of wooden beams and joists with wooden sheathing supported by interior wooden columns. The flat roof structure consists of wood trusses with wooden decking.


Evidence of structural distress indicative of framing failure was not observed. The framing appeared to be in functional condition. Normal monitoring of the framing is anticipated during the evaluation period.

4.2.1 Exterior Walls

The exterior walls of the building consist of unreinforced masonry at all four sides of the property


The exterior walls appeared to be in generally good condition. Routine maintenance is anticipated during the evaluation period.

4.2.2 Windows

Windows appeared to be double-pane fixed units on the first floor and operable units on upper floors. Window framing appeared to be aluminum Windows at the building entrances are part of a storefront window system consisting of full height, clear glazing in aluminum frames that incorporates the entry doors.


Windows were reported and appeared to be in good overall condition. No signs of window leaks or condensation were evident during the observation. Window sealants appeared to be intact, with no signs of deterioration. Routine maintenance is anticipated during the evaluation period.

4.2.3 Doors

The main entrance consists of a pair of aluminum-framed doors with full-height glazing set in an aluminum storefront system. Hardware includes exterior pulls, closers, and deadbolts.


Secondary doors along the south side of the property are painted, hollow metal set in metal frames. The doors have exterior lever handles, closers, and deadbolts.

One roll-up door that is not in service is found on the south side of the property at street level along Hickory Street. The door consists of overhead, steel panel, roll-up that is operated with electric opener.


Doors were reported and appeared to be in good overall condition. Routine maintenance is anticipated during the evaluation period.

4.2.4 Parapets

Exterior walls extend above the roof plane as parapets and are capped with masonry copings. Roof materials cover the inboard lower sides of the parapets. The materials terminate under the coping counter-flashing.


Parapets appeared to be in good overall condition. Routine maintenance is anticipated during the evaluation period.

4.3 Roof

4.3.1 Roofing Materials

Roof coverings consist of a built-up roofing (BUR) system with mineral-surfaced aggregate

Conventional domed skylights and raised domed skylight smoke vents are provided. The skylights are constructed of translucent Plexiglas materials and are factory flashed.


The roofing systems appeared to be in good overall condition. According to property management, the entire roof membrane was replaced in 2011 and has a 25-year warranty.

Routine maintenance shall be performed during the evaluation period.

4.3.2 Roof Drainage

Storm water runoff for the roof is directed to roof drains connected to internal leaders that exit through the exterior walls and discharge at grade into the storm drain collection system. Emergency overflow scuppers are provided at the corners of the west side of the building.


Roof drains appeared to be in good overall condition.

Evidence of water damage indicative of roof leaks was not observed.


4.4 Fire Escapes, Stairs or Balconies

The building features a couple of interior stairs one of them, located on the northeast corner of the 1st floor and the second set of interior stairs is located along the south side of the building, both sets of stairs provide access from the basement level to the third-floor level. Roof area is only accessed via a hand ladder. Stairs are wood-frame construction with wood treads supported by angle brackets.


Stairs appeared to be in good condition. Routine maintenance is anticipated throughout the evaluation period. Painting of the stairs, can be performed in conjunction with the painting of interior common areas.


5.0 MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS

5.1 Plumbing, Domestic Hot Water, and Sewer Systems

Observation of visible piping at water heaters and plumbing stub-outs indicates that the piping is copper

Observation of visible vent piping indicates that the piping is cast iron.

Domestic hot water to the restrooms located on the first and third floors, is provided by a gas-fired; 100-gallon water heater.


The plumbing systems were reported to be in good overall condition. Evidence of leaks or faulty piping was not observed. Routine maintenance is anticipated during the evaluation period.

The sanitary drainage and vent system was reported to be in good overall condition. Evidence of leaks or faulty piping was not observed. Routine maintenance is anticipated during the evaluation period.

The water heater(s) appeared to be in good overall condition. The unit was reported to be seven years old and is not anticipated to require replacement during the evaluation period.

5.2 Heating, Air Conditioning, and Ventilation

Heating and cooling are provided by four individual HVAC packaged units that are located on the roof. The packaged units were manufactured by various manufacturers and each of the four units has an input capacity ranging from one to two tons.


According to property management, the mechanical equipment is maintained by an outside vendor, A1 heating and A/C, which inspects the units each quarter

The rooftop packaged units were reported to be in good overall condition. According to the site contact, the units are approximately twenty years old. Based on the current condition and effective ages, replacement of a portion of the packaged units is anticipated during the evaluation period. An opinion of cost for this work is included in Table 2.

5.3 Electrical

Electrical service is delivered via one main switchboard located in the basement area on the east side of the property. Main electrical service is rated at 1,200 amps, 120/208 volts, 3-phase 4-wire service phase main distribution panel.

Breaker panels for lighting and power controls are located at each floor level. Observed panels were manufactured by various manufacturers

Electrical branch wiring was reported to be copper. Ground fault circuit interrupter (GFCI) outlets were not observed in kitchens and bathrooms.



The electrical service was reported to be adequate for the current demands of the facility. The switchgear, circuit breaker panels, electrical meters, and wiring appeared to be in good condition. Routine maintenance is anticipated during the evaluation period.

5.4 Vertical Transportation

Vertical conveyances are not provided.

5.4.1 Elevators

A hydraulic passenger elevator is provided. According to posted signs and placards, the elevator was manufactured by Star Elevators and the capacity is for 20 persons and 3000 pounds.

The interior cab finishes consist of plastic laminate walls and vinyl tile flooring.

The control panel is does not feature illuminated push button floor indicators, alarm button, emergency pull button, or emergency phone. Access to each one of the floors is provided via a coded security system installed at the control panel.


The elevator appeared to be in good overall condition. According to the operation permit, the elevator was last inspected on July 2018. The elevator was reportedly last load tested in July 2018. Inspection and test certificates were observed within the elevator switchgear.

The elevator is reportedly maintained through a service contract with Metropolitan Elevator. The service contract reportedly provides for minor repairs and maintenance activities. The date of last service was June 1, 2018

Routine maintenance, including inspection, testing and minor repairs, is anticipated throughout the evaluation period.

5.4.2 Escalators

Escalators are not provided.

5.5 Life Safety and Fire Protection

5.5.1 Fire Suppression Systems

The building is protected by an automatic fire protection system consisting of a wet-pipe automatic sprinkler system. Water is supplied via a fire sprinkler line from the municipal main that is fitted with flow and tamper switches and a backflow prevention device all located at the basement level on the east side.

A fire department connection is located on the exterior wall near the main entrance along Franklin Street Fire sprinkler piping appeared to be steel.

Fire extinguishers were observed in corridors, elevator, offices, and in mechanical/electrical spaces. They are reportedly inspected on a yearly basis by Mazzy’s, a third-party contractor, with the last inspection having occurred on November 6, 2017



The fire suppression system appeared to be in good overall condition. The system is reportedly tested on an annual basis. Current inspection tags were observed on the riser. Routine maintenance, including regularly-scheduled testing, is anticipated during the evaluation period.

Current inspection tags were observed on the fire extinguishers. Routine maintenance, including regularly-scheduled testing and as-needed replacement, is anticipated during the evaluation period.

5.5.2 Alarm Systems

The fire alarm system is reportedly comprised of heat detectors, and alarm horn/strobes. Hardwired smoke detectors are located in the ceilings of each tenant space and are connected to a central panel. A central fire alarm control panel monitors the smoke detectors, pull stations, and sprinkler system flow switches. The panel and remote dialer were manufactured by Sonitrol. The system is fully-addressable / zoned and is reportedly monitored by Mazzy’s fire protection services.


The fire alarm system appeared to be in good overall condition and is reportedly tested on an annual basis. Current inspection tags were observed on the main control panel. Routine maintenance, including regularly-scheduled testing, is anticipated during the evaluation period.

5.5.3 Other Systems

Additional systems are not provided.


6.0 INTERIOR ELEMENTS

6.1 Common Areas

The subject property is a single tenant facility. The entire property is currently unoccupied If redeveloped for multi-tenant occupancy, areas that would be considered common would include elevator lobbies, stairwells, break rooms, toilet rooms, and corridors.

6.2 Amenities and Special Features

Significant amenities are not provided.

6.3 Support Areas

No support areas are present.

6.4 Commercial Tenant Spaces

Commercial tenant spaces are not provided.

6.5 Residential Spaces

Residential spaces are not provided.

6.5.1 Finishes

Floors are typically finished with hardwood flooring, while vinyl flooring is present in the bathrooms. Walls and ceilings are typically painted gypsum board.

Entrance doors are typically solid core wood set in metal frames. Hardware includes a locking handle activated by coded security system, separate deadbolt, and closer. Interior doors are also solid core wood set in metal frames with a locking lever handle.


The interior finishes appeared to be in good condition. Based on EUL, replacement of the finishes is anticipated during the evaluation period and an opinion of cost for this work is included in Table 2.

6.5.2 Cabinetry and Fixtures

Typical bathroom fixtures include a floor-mounted, tank-type commode, a lavatory without a vanity,


Overall, the fixtures appeared to be in good / fair / poor condition with no significant deficiencies.

6.5.3 Soft Goods

Soft goods are not provided.

6.5.4 Hard Goods and Appliances

Hard goods and appliances are not present at the subject property


7.0 ACCESSIBILITY

Americans with Disabilities Act

As part of this assessment, a limited, visual, accessibility survey was conducted. The survey did not include taking measurements or counting accessibility elements. The scope of the survey was limited to determining the existence of architectural barriers or physical attributes of the subject property, which affect on-site parking, path of travel into and through public areas of the building, and elevators, as applicable. Furthermore, the scope of our survey includes only the federal requirements of the ADA; it is not intended to address state or local codes. Our observations were limited to the places of public accommodation on the subject property.


Based on current use, the subject property is a “commercial facility.” Common area elements were identified that are not accessible. Non-accessible issues have been listed for future planning purposes. Design of the means of access is beyond the scope of this report.

Exterior routes from public transportation stops, accessible parking spaces, and public sidewalks at the subject property appeared to be generally accessible

Exterior entrances provided at the subject property appear to be generally accessible.

Elevator within the subject building appeared to be generally accessible.

Toilet facilities in the building appeared to be generally accessible.

PRE-1991 CONSTRUCTION

The subject property was first occupied before March 13, 1991; as such, it is not required to comply with the provisions for new construction buildings under the FHAA.


8.0 SUSPECT WATER INTRUSION AND MICROBIAL GROWTH

As part of performing this PCA, visual observations for overt signs of suspect mold growth were also performed. These observations were not performed to discover all affected areas, nor were areas of the subject property observed specifically for the purpose of identifying areas of suspect mold growth. The subject property areas viewed were limited to those necessary to perform the primary scope of this PCA.


Visual or olfactory indications of significant suspect microbial growth were not observed.


9.0 NATURAL HAZARD INFORMATION

Partner reviewed readily-available materials to obtain the following information. Determination of site-specific conditions is not within the scope of this report and may require additional investigation.

9.1 Flood Zone

FEMA has not completed flood maps for the location of the subject property.

Seismic Zone

According to the seismic zone map, published in the Uniform Building Code 1997, Volume 2, Table 16.2, the subject property appears to be located in Seismic Zone 4.


10.0 OUT OF SCOPE CONSIDERATIONS

These following items are categorically excluded from the scope of work.

• Utilities: Operating conditions of any systems or accessing manholes or utility pits. • Structural Frame and Building Envelope: Entering of crawl or confined space areas (however,

the field observer will observe conditions to the extent easily visible from the point of access to the crawl or confined space areas), determination of previous substructure flooding or water penetration unless easily visible or if such information is provided.

• Roofs: Walking on pitched roofs, or any roof areas that appear to be unsafe, or roofs with no built-in access, or determining any roofing design criteria.

• Plumbing: Determining adequate pressure and flow rate, fixture unit values and counts, verifying pipe sizes, or verifying the point of discharge for underground systems.

• Heating: Observation of flue connections, interiors of chimneys, flues or boiler stacks, or tenant owned or maintained equipment. Entering of plenum or confined space areas.

• Air conditioning & Ventilation: Process-related equipment or condition of tenant owned or maintained equipment. Entering of plenum or confined space areas. Testing or measurements of equipment or air flow.

• Electrical: Removing of electrical panel and device covers, except if removed by building staff, EMF issues, electrical testing, or operating any electrical devices. Opining on process related equipment or tenant-owned equipment.

• Vertical Transportation: Examining of cables, sheaves, controllers, motors, inspection tags, or entering elevator/ escalator pits or shafts.

• Life Safety/ Fire Protection: Determining NFPA hazard classifications, classifying, or testing fire rating of assemblies. Determination of the necessity for or the presence of fire areas, fire walls, fire barriers, paths of travel, construction groups or types, or use classifications.

• Interior Elements: Operating appliances or fixtures, determining or reporting STC (Sound Transmission Class) ratings, and flammability issues/regulations.

Activity Exclusions- These activities listed below generally are excluded from or otherwise represent limitations to the scope of a PCA prepared in accordance with this guide (ASTM 2018-15). These should not be construed as all-inclusive or imply that any exclusion not specifically identified is a PCA requirement under this guide.

• Providing opinions of costs that are either individually or in the aggregate less than a threshold amount of $3,000 for like items unless specifically requested by the addressee.

• Identifying capital improvements, enhancements, or upgrades to building components, systems, or finishes;

• Removing, relocating, or repositioning of materials, ceiling, wall, or equipment panels, furniture, storage containers, personal effects, debris material or finishes; conducting exploratory probing or testing; dismantling or operating of equipment or appliances; or disturbing personal items or property, that obstruct access or visibility;

• Determining adequate pressure and flow rate, fixture-unit values and counts, verifying pipe sizes, or verifying the point of discharge for underground drains;


• Determining NFPA hazard classifications, identifying, classifying, or testing fire rating of assemblies. Determination of the necessity for or the presence of fire areas, fire walls, fire barriers, accessible routes, construction groups or types, or use classifications;

• Preparing engineering calculations to determine any system’s, component’s or equipment’s adequacy or compliance with any specific or commonly accepted design requirements or building codes, or preparing designs or specifications to remedy any physical deficiencies;

• Identification of code or OSHA compliance beyond what has been reported through communication with local regulatory offices.

• Taking measurements or quantities to establish or confirm any information provided by the owner or user;

• Reporting on the presence or absence of pests or insects; • Reporting on the condition of subterranean or concealed conditions as well as items or

systems that are not permanently installed or are tenant-owned and maintained; • Entering or accessing any area deemed to potentially pose a threat of dangerous or adverse

conditions with respect to the field observer’s health or safety; • Performing any procedure, that may damage or impair the physical integrity of the property,

any system, or component; • Providing an opinion on the operation of any system or component that is shut down; • Evaluating the Sound Transmission Class or acoustical or insulating characteristics of systems

or components; • Providing an opinion on matters regarding security and protection of occupants or users from

unauthorized access; • Evaluating the flammability of materials and related regulations; • Providing an opinion on matters regarding security of the subject property and protection of

its occupants or users from unauthorized access; • Operating or witnessing the operation of lighting or any other system controlled by a timer,

operated by the maintenance staff, or operated by service companies; • Providing an environmental assessment or opinion on the presence of any environmental

issues such as potable water quality, asbestos, hazardous wastes, toxic materials, the location and presence of designated wetlands, IAQ, etc. unless specifically defined within the agreed scope;

• Evaluating systems or components that require specialized knowledge or equipment; • Entering of plenum or confined space areas.


11.0 LIMITATIONS

This assessment is based upon the guidelines set forth by the ASTM Standard current to the issuance of this report and subject to the limitations stated therein. Our review of the subject property consisted of a visual assessment of the site, the structure(s) and the accessible interior spaces. Any technical analyses made are based on the appearance of the improvements at the time of this assessment and the evaluator’s judgment of the physical condition of the subject property components, their ages and their EUL. Consequently, this report represents the condition of the subject property at the time of observation. Acceptance and use of this report infers acknowledgment that the condition of the property may have changed subsequent to site observations and/or that additional information may have been discovered, and that Partner, its officers, employees, vendors, successors or assigns, are not liable for changes in the condition of the property, failures in property components or systems, and damages that may occur as a result of the changes or failures.

Information regarding the subject property is obtained from a site walk-through survey, local government agency records review, interviews and client-, tenant- or property owner-provided documents. No material sampling, invasive or destructive investigations, equipment or system testing was performed. The observations and related comments within this report are limited in nature and should not be inferred as a full and comprehensive survey of the building components and systems.

Information regarding operations, conditions, and test data provided by the Addressee, property owner, or their respective representatives has been assumed to be factual and complete. Information obtained from readily-available sources, including internet research and interview of municipal officials or representatives is assumed to be factual and complete. No warranty is expressed or implied, except that the services rendered have been performed in accordance with generally-accepted practices applicable at the time and location of the study.

The actual performance of systems and components may vary from a reasonably expected standard and will be affected by circumstances that occur after the date of the evaluation. This assessment, analyses and opinions expressed within this report are not representations regarding either the design integrity or the structural soundness of the project.

The report does not identify minor, inexpensive repairs or maintenance items, which should be part of the subject property owner’s current operating budget so long as these items appear to be addressed on a regular basis. The report does identify infrequently occurring maintenance items of significant cost, such as exterior painting, roofing, deferred maintenance and repairs and replacements that normally involve major expense or outside contracting.

The assessment of the roof, façade and substructure contained herein cannot specifically state that these items are free of leaks and/or water intrusion and should not be interpreted as such. Comments made with respect to the condition of the systems are limited to visual observation and information provided by the designated site contacts and/or on-site representatives and their contractors/vendors. The evaluation of these systems did not include any sampling and/or testing. A more extensive evaluation may be required if a comprehensive report on the condition of these systems is required.


Performance of a comprehensive building, fire or zoning code review is outside of the scope of work for this report. Information provided within this report is based on readily-available information or interview of municipal officials.

This report presents an evaluation of the accessibility of the subject property as specified in the engagement agreement. This report does not present an audit of all components specified in federal, state or local accessibility regulations. Instead, this review observed general design components such as routes of travel, door hardware, plumbing amenities, elevator controls and signals, basic emergency alarm components and signage. This report is not a comprehensive Americans with Disabilities Act review.

Acceptance and use of this report infers acknowledgment that the condition of the property may have changed and that Partner, its officers, employees, vendors, successors or assigns, are not liable for changes in the condition of the property, failures in property components or systems, and damages that may occur as a result of the changes or failures.

FIGURES

1. SITE LOCATION MAP

2. SITE PLAN

FIGURE 1: SITE LOCATION MAP Project No. 18-221498.1

KEY:

Subject Property

FIGURE 2: SITE PLAN Project No. 18-221498.1

KEY:

Subject Property

APPENDIX A: SITE PHOTOGRAPHS

APPENDIX A: SITE PHOTOGRAPHS Project No. 18-221498.1

1. View of south side façade along Hickory Street 2. View of main entry area along Franklin Street

3. Main entry to property along Franklin Street 4. View of property number along Franklin Street

5. View of south side façade towards east 6. View of inactive door along south side


7. Fire Hydrant by entry area along Franklin Street 8. Property sign by main entry along Franklin Street

9. Main corridor on 1st floor 10. Conference room on 1st floor

11. Main lobby at entry area 12. Office on 1st floor


13. Restroom on 1st floor 14. ADA signs on all restroom doors

15. Restroom on 1st floor 16. Office on first floor north side

17. Office on 1st floor, north side

18. Office on 1st floor north side


19. Detail of wood structure ceiling at 2nd floor 20. Detail of wood structure ceiling at 2nd floor

21. South side stair to 2nd floor 22. South side stairs to basement area

23. Security system at stair on 1st floor 24. Current FE tags throughout building


25. Multiple mail boxes on 1st floor 26. Printer area on 1st floor

27. Emergency exit sign on 1st floor south side 28. Stairs on northeast corner to basement

29. Elevator panel with security key pad 30. Cab panels and flooring at elevator


31. Ceiling at elevator cab 32. Electrical distribution conduits at basement area

33. View of open area workstations at basement 34. Open area at basement

35. Main has meter at basement area 36. Sump pump at basement area


37. Added column (1 of 3) at basement and 2nd floor 38. Structural steel reinforcement at basement area

39. Steel structural reinforcement at basement area 40. Elevator door at basement area

41. Hydroelectric motor for elevator at basement 42. 5 year load tag at elevator motor


43. Cast iron pipe system for bathrooms on 1st floor 44. Pipe system and telecomm equipment at basement

45. Fire Sprinkler system at basement east side 46. Sonitrol fire alarm system

47. View of basement area with IT room 48. Electrical panel for IT room


49. Electrical switchboard at basement 50. Electrical meter for entire building

51. Electrical basement area 52. Electrical panel 2nd floor west side

53. Conference room 2nd floor 54. Office on 2nd floor southeast corner


55. Office on 2nd floor 56. Office on 2nd floor

57. Corridor area 2nd floor 58. Office on south side 2nd floor

59. Main Lobby on 3rd floor 60. Main office on 3rd fl. Southeast corner


61. Kitchenette at 3rd floor level 62. Office on 3rd floor

63. 3rd floor Large Conference Room Area 64. Section of large conference room 3rd floor

65. View of wood structure ceiling on 3rd floor 66. View of wood structure ceiling on 2nd floor


67. Stair from basement to first floor 68. View of south side stair from 2nd to 1st floor

69. Exit corridor and electrical panel at 3rd floor 70. Restroom on 3rd floor

APPEN

DIX B: SU

PPORTIN

G D

OCU

MEN

TATIO

N

APPENDIX C: QUALIFICATIONS

g


George Sanen Partner Associate

Education B.A. Public Administration. University of San Francisco Architecture, Instituto Politecnico Milano Urban Planning, Instituto Politecnico Milano Facilities Planning and Management, Cornell University Interior Architectural Design, Harvard University Graduate School of Design Golf Course Design, Harvard University GSD Correctional Facilities Planning and Design Airport Planning and Design, Harvard University GSD Hotel Planning and Development, Harvard University GSD Courthouse Design, Harvard University GSD Hospital Design and Operations, Harvard University GSD Registrations CCM – Certified construction Manager LEED AP – LEED Accredited Professional Training OSHA- 30 Hours Training for construction Highlights Over 30 years of professional experience in the fields of Real Estate and Property Facilities Management, Design and Program Management of multi-million dollar Commercial, Hospitality, Retail, Healthcare, Laboratories, and Biotechnology projects throughout the U.S. Directed the development of Architectural and Engineering construction documents, provided scheduling, estimating services and constructability reviews, managed the construction environment, including processes and procedures, integrated all architecture, BIM technology and Construction Management Services into a single cohesive group. Manage all aspects of retail development projects, including but not limited to Site Identification, Entitlement, Plan Preparation, Plan Processing, Pro Forma Preparation, Schedule Development, On-site Construction, Tenant Coordination, Finance and Operations. Contract management, risk management and client management; oversight of surety, insurance, safety, and purchasing policy; hire, develop, and manage professional staff. Select and assign job staff to projects; Develop general conditions plans for various projects with division manager; Negotiate claims, delays and project issues; oversight of site specific programs, and timely policy compliance; Negotiate and/or work with counsel on legal matters, liens, and actions affecting the division; ensured effective global operation of office Outstanding presentation and communication skills in various languages. Over 12 years of experience performing Property Construction Assessments and Construction progress monitoring for multi-family housing, corporate, commercial, retail and industrial projects.

George Sanen

2 | P a g e

Experience Summary Manage and coordinate teams in various project disciplines that include: portfolio management, preconstruction services, construction management, financial analysis, property management, maintenance operations, marketing, architects, civil engineers, interior design, landscape and structural engineers. Direct all program development management activities across a region. Manage project budgets and maintained monthly forecasts and cash flow analysis. Oversaw project implementation and execution through completion of design and construction. Managed ground-up projects including creation of reports and evaluations of competitive markets, supply and demand studies, identifying opportunities and challenges in primary market areas. Build and carry out development initiatives to best deliver results to user groups. Oversaw capital improvement/asset preservation programs with design and construction processes at multiple sites through local resources. Developed project budget including hard costs and soft costs and firm knowledge of construction and facilities management cost/benefit analysis. Provide technical support; project budgeting and scheduling including objectives, site improvements, consultant selection; design team management, schedule creation and management, contractor selection and management, financial management including cash flows, anticipated cost reports and monthly reports. Prepare and conduct regular financial review meetings with upper management. Assemble and manage required teams of consultants and contractors. Managed entitlement and development relationships with cities agencies. Project Experience Moffett Place – Construction Program Management work for 7 Buildings comprising 1.94 million sf (Jay Paul Development Company for GOOGLE) Tech Corners – Project Management work for 935,000 sf in 6 buildings for Google People OPS (Jay Paul Development Company) IRIS Laboratory for Google X, Mt. View CA. Makani Wind Power Google X, Alameda CA. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (DOE): BELLA Project – The world’s most powerful Laser Accelerator EDISON- The 2nd most powerful Super-Computer in the world UTBF – The world’s first and only 2-story rotating building (360 degrees) BBVA Bancomer (World’s 8th Largest Bank) – Mexico City: 55-story Executive Tower (450,000 sf) - Mexico City’s tallest skyscraper 36-story Operations Center (380,000 sf) 320,000 sf Data Center with a combined total of 1.15 million sf, and construction costs of $1.2 Billion dollars. Health Care Experience: Highland Hospital Acute Care Tower replacement Project - Oakland, CA Project Director Vanir Construction Management Project Director for Program Management and Construction Management of a $683 Million dollar replacement project for the No. 1 Acute Care Trauma Center in the Bay Area

George Sanen

3 | P a g e

Justice Facilities and Civic Experience: Corcoran II State Prison - Corcoran, CA Project Director ICF Kaiser Engineering for the largest prison in the world, $465 million dollars for construction Alameda County Juvenile Detention Center: Director of Program and Construction Management - Vanir Construction Management - San Leandro, CA $145 Million dollars for construction Marin County Civic Center - San Rafael, CA: Two independent projects on the Architectural Landmark designed by Frank Lloyd Wright. Structural Seismic Reinforcement of the Hall of Justice Building and complete renovation of the central Spire. Total construction cost of both projects $43 Million dollars Affiliations AIA – Associate, American Institute of Architects ACA – American Correctional Association CSSA -California State Sheriff’s Association SHPE – Society of Hispanic Professional Engineers CMAA- Construction Managers Association of America CCM BOMA- Building Owners Management Association


Rick Richter

Senior Project Manager

Education

B.S. in Biological Sciences, California State University Sacramento

Training

Certificate of Completion for PCA/PNA 8-Hour Training and Final Exam

Highlights

38 years of experience in the Building Sciences/Construction field

27 years of experience in construction monitoring and engineering due diligence

21 years of experience in Property Condition Assessments

Experience Summary

Mr. Richter serves as a Senior Project Manager for Partner Engineering and Science, Inc. (Partner),

performing quality assurance/quality control report reviews, Property Condition Assessments in

conformance with the scope and limitations as set forth by ASTM E2018-08 “Standard Guide for Property

Condition Assessments: Baseline Property Condition Assessment Process”. He has extensive portfolio

management experience throughout the United States.

Mr. Richter has been actively involved as a Building Scientist, Client Manager, Sr. Project Manager, and

Senior Author for projects associated with more than 13,000 real estate transactions and has supervised

hundreds of construction projects from a lender’s perspective. His background in building assessments

allows him to provide complete and thorough assessments and evaluations to serve a client’s specific needs.

Mr. Richter was a Real Estate Engineer and Assistant Vice President for several regional banks in Southern

California. He performed cost analysis, cost estimates, project observations, disbursement reviews, and

approvals and environmental site assessment reviews in accordance with established bank policies. He

assumed construction project management responsibilities for completion of bank-owned residential,

commercial and tenant-improvement properties. Mr. Richter also coordinated and directed account officers,

loan administrators, and bank clients in evaluating and interpreting appropriate cost analysis results,

progress observations, and disbursement issues and made necessary and appropriate recommendations.

In addition, Mr. Richter also worked for the Newport Beach, California branch of a nationwide bank, where

as a Construction Engineer and Assistant Vice President he was responsible for construction estimates and

analysis. He performed periodic site inspections and approval of progress payments for California and out-

of-state projects. He acted as the Project Manager for the bank for special projects and participated in

Environmental Site Assessments (ESAs). Mr. Richter also initiated modification of engineering cost reviews,

inspections, and procedures.

Working in the property transaction industry, Mr. Richter has provided various professional services,

including: physical assessments of properties; surveys for workmanship and code compliance; estimating;

oversight management; limited ESAs; engineering reviews of costs, inspections, and procedures; cost-to-

complete analysis for troubled projects; construction project management; and cost database development

and maintenance.

Rick Richter

2 | P a g e

Over the past 19 years, Mr. Richter has managed as many large due diligence portfolios as any building

engineer in the country. Mr. Richter has developed expertise in managing field staff and controlling quality

for large portfolios. Whenever the portfolio is over 100 sites, efficiency is key and every activity must be

carefully coordinated. Mr. Richter’s ability to communicate and organize has made him an invaluable

resource for due diligence portfolios.

As a Construction Engineer/Estimator, Mr. Richter performed cost estimations and inspections of bank-

financed projects, conceptual cost estimates, and cost to complete estimates for problem projects. He was

responsible for site inspections and reviewed fee estimations and inspections.

Project Experience

Construction Project Manager for several Northern California real estate developers overseeing multiple

commercial and industrial projects. Responsible for project assigned client negotiations, bid estimates,

contract negotiations, material purchasing, and site personnel. Responsible for obtaining the required

approvals and permits from governmental agencies site development as well as architectural and structural

plan development.

Monitored all aspects of project development including budgets, design, feasibility, contract negotiations,

construction due diligence, cost estimating, plans and specifications development, project scheduling,

planning/zoning and other related project documentation.

Developed and implemented budget spreadsheets, monitoring spreadsheets, and report formats.

Performed Project Management services on commercial, multifamily residential and industrial projects.

Performed Architectural and Engineering Due Diligence Assessments of multifamily residential, retail, office,

industrial and special use properties.

Contact

[email protected]


Gavin S. Jones, EP

Principal

Education

Bachelor of Science, Environmental Science, Emphasis in Regulation and Economics

University of California, Riverside

Registrations

Registered Environmental Assessor - California

OSHA 40-Hour Hazwoper

AHERA Certified Asbestos Building Inspector

Training

Technical Writing Course - 1995

Highlights

More than 22 years of experience in the environmental and engineering consulting field.

Equity/Acquisition Property Condition Assessments and Phase I ESAs.

Agency Lender Acquisition Property Condition Assessments and Phase I ESAs.

Soil and groundwater contamination investigations and remediation.

Regulatory compliance projects.

Ordnance Removal Engineering Studies.

Experience Summary

Mr. Jones currently serves as a National Client Manager for Partner Engineering & Science, Inc. providing

solutions to clients’ physical condition and environmental due diligence and engineering needs. He is

responsible for ensuring consistency and quality and on-time report delivery of due diligence and

engineering services provided by Partner. Current day to day responsibilities include project oversight, staff

supervision, problem solving, report review, and client management.

Mr. Jones has served as an environmental scientist, project manager, or senior author for projects associated

with over 7,000 real estate transactions. Mr. Jones is familiar with the due diligence requirements of a varied

number of reporting standards, including ASTM, EPA’s All Appropriate Inquiry (AAI), Fannie Mae DUS, HUD,

and Freddie Mac. He also has experience with fulfilling numerous customized client scopes of work. Mr.

Jones’ due diligence resume includes experience at all levels including advising traditional and agency

lenders, real estate investors, and other client types through the following product types: Phase I

Environmental Site Assessments, Environmental Transaction Screens, Phase II Subsurface Investigations,

Remedial Cost Estimates, Remediation Design, Property Condition Assessments, Probable Maximum Loss

Assessments, asbestos, lead-based paint, lead-in water, radon, mold surveys, geophysical surveys,

regulatory compliance projects, Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis projects, and Preliminary

Endangerment Assessments. His specialty is performing engineering and environmental due diligence for

lenders, real estate investors, attorneys, and government entities.

Additionally, over the course of his career, as a staff scientist, project manager, senior project manager and

client manager, Mr. Jones has significant relevant project experience relating to investigation and cleanup

of soil, soil vapor, and groundwater contamination. The investigations and cleanup projects have occurred

at current and former gas stations and dry cleaning facilities, agricultural properties, industrial and

http://www.partneresi.com/fannie-mae-freddie-mac.php

http://www.partneresi.com/fannie-mae-freddie-mac.php

http://www.partneresi.com/services/probable-maximum-loss.php

http://www.partneresi.com/services/probable-maximum-loss.php

Gavin S. Jones, EP

2 | P a g e

manufacturing facilities, and military installations. Investigation and cleanup projects have been as the

result of releases from underground storage tanks, dry cleaning equipment, and from spills and/or dumping

activities. Media that has been investigated and remediated has included dry cleaning chemicals and

wastes, gasoline, diesel, and other fuel types, and PCA and TCE plumes. In addition, Mr. Jones was often

the point of contact for regulatory agencies, and produced work plans, bid documents, contracts,

specifications, and the documents that detailed the investigation, long-term groundwater monitoring,

and/or soil and groundwater cleanup activities.

Project Experience

Acquisition Assessments, LAX Marriott. Mr. Jones led a team of specialty consultants who evaluated the

physical condition of the LAX Marriott hotel. A generalist specializing in management of equity PCAs

worked with a team of specialists under Mr. Jones’ direction, including the following scopes and disciplines:

Mechanical, Engineering, and Plumbing / Fire Life Safety (MEP/FLS) assessments, elevator assessment, roof

assessment, accessibility survey, and curtain wall evaluation. Additionally, the team performed a Phase I

Environmental Site Assessment (ESA), Phase II ESA, site characterization due to contaminants identified from

historic manufacturing uses, a seismic risk assessment, and an ALTA survey. Mr. Jones’ team worked with

several attorneys and the client’s acquisitions team to provide a detailed account of problematic issues and

associated costs for their consideration in order to help determine whether the acquisition should occur.

Acquisition Property Condition Assessments, Tustin Center I & II, Santa Ana, CA; 235 Pine Street, San Francisco,

CA; Park 80 West, Saddle Brook, NJ; United Plaza, Philadelphia, PA; California Plaza, Walnut Creek, CA;

Stadium Gateway. Mr. Jones led a team of specialty consultants who evaluated the physical condition of

the above mid to high-rise office building properties. A generalist specializing in management of equity

PCAs worked with a team of specialists under Mr. Jones’ direction, including but not limited to the following

scopes and disciplines: Mechanical, Engineering, and Plumbing / Fire Life Safety (MEP/FLS) assessments,

elevator assessments, roof assessments, curtain wall evaluations, structural engineering evaluations,

microbiological influenced corrosion (MIC) testing, and water intrusion assessment and testing. Mr. Jones’

team worked with the client’s acquisitions team to provide a detailed account of problematic issues and

associated costs for their consideration in order to help determine whether the acquisitions should occur.

Acquisition Property Condition Assessments (PCAs) and Phase I Environmental Assessments (ESAs) for Medical

Office Buildings. Mr. Jones led a team of specialty consultants who evaluated the physical and

environmental condition of hundreds of medical office building properties across the United States. The

due diligence work was associated with both portfolios of medical office buildings as well as individual

properties. A generalist specializing in management of equity PCAs worked with a team of specialists under

Mr. Jones’ direction, including but not limited to the following scopes and disciplines: Mechanical,

Engineering, and Plumbing / Fire Life Safety (MEP/FLS) assessments, elevator assessments, roof

assessments, curtain wall evaluations, and structural engineering evaluations. Phase I ESAs and in many

cases Seismic Risk Assessments were also performed. Mr. Jones’ team worked with the client’s acquisitions

team and their attorneys to provide a detailed account of problematic issues and associated costs for their

consideration in order to help determine whether the acquisitions should occur.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac ESAs and PCAs. Mr. Jones’ team has performed hundreds of Phase I

Environmental Site Assessments and Property Condition Assessments for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

Gavin S. Jones, EP

3 | P a g e

agency lenders. The multi-family developments evaluated by Mr. Jones and his team have been located all

across the United States.

PEAs, Beaumont and Coachella, CA School Districts. Mr. Jones’ team has performed several Preliminary

Endangerment Assessments on agricultural properties to determine whether the sites were impacted with

agricultural chemicals and to determine if the properties were suitable locations for public schools to be

developed. The analysis included developing a protocol for pesticide and herbicide testing, performing the

sampling in accordance with said protocol, and an evaluation of the sampling results.

EBS’ at U.S. Air Force Bases. Mr. Jones has been part of a team that performed numerous Environmental

Baseline Surveys (EBS’) at United States Air Force Bases across the country. The EBS document was a

comprehensive survey or assessment that was essentially a very detailed account of the environmental

issues and status at the Air Force Base and on properties that adjoined the Air Force Base. The document

contained information including but not limited to: aboveground and underground storage tanks, oil water

separators, hazardous materials use and hazardous waste storage locations, chemical inventories, buildings

with known or suspected PCBs, asbestos, and/or lead based paint, contamination sites, and sites with

radioactive materials or wastes.

EE/CA, Fort Ord, Monterey Bay, CA. Mr. Jones was the Deputy Task Order Manager for an Engineering

Evaluation/Cost Analysis study at the former Fort Ord, California. The study identified and documented

both newly discovered and known ordnance sites at the former Fort Ord. The types of ordnance at each

site were determined as well as the expected depths of penetration upon impact. The costs associated with

removing the ordnance was also determined and recommendations were made as to what depths below

ground surface the ordnance removals should occur at each site.

Subsurface Investigation, Ogden, UT. Mr. Jones performed a large scale investigation to determine if any

soil or groundwater contamination was present at numerous locations where fuel was stored in

underground and aboveground storage tanks at the U.S. Army Defense Depot Ogden. When contaminants

were identified, the sites were then characterized to determine extent of impact to soil and groundwater.

Environmental Compliance Audit, Atchison, KS. Mr. Jones performed an Environmental Compliance Audit

(ECA) of numerous environmental resource management protocols at the Atchison Facility for the Federal

Defense Logistics Agency in Atchison, Kansas.

Contact

[email protected]

property condition report - loopnet

Documents