report of facilities condition assessment

Capitol View Branch Library

5001 Central Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20019

October 21, 2014

Report of Facilities Condition Assessment

DRAFT

2318 MILL ROAD SUITE 1410 ALEXANDRIA VA 22314 PH 703.684.6550 FX 703.684.8590

October 21, 2014

Smoot Construction DC

5335 Wisconsin Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20015

Attention: Mr. Stu Dziura Senior Vice President

Reference: Proposal for Facilities Condition Assessment

Capitol View Branch Library

5001 Central Avenue, SE

Washington, DC

Faithful+Gould Project Number 100036495

Dear Mr. Dziura:

Faithful+Gould, Inc. has completed a report of our Facilities Condition Assessment of the Capitol View

Branch Library located at 5001 Central Avenue in Southeast Washington DC (“the Property”). This

report provides a summary of the project information known to us at the time of the study, the scope

of work performed, an evaluation of the visually apparent condition of the Property, a forecast of

anticipated capital expenditures required over the next ten‐years, and a cost benefit analysis which

considers retention versus replacement of the library building and related site systems.

This report was completed in general accordance with the ASTM E2018‐08 Standard Guide for Property

Condition Assessments: Baseline Property Condition Assessment Process. Please review the attached

report and advise us of any questions or comments. We will issue a final report within three days of

receipt of comments.

Very Truly Yours,

Imran I. Ishaq, MRICS D. Jonathan Bailey, CEM, CCM

Lead Facility Assessor Scope & Technical Compliance Review

Capitol View Branch Library 5001 Central Avenue, SE October 21, 2014 Washington, DC 20015

Report of Facilities Condition Assessment F+G Project No. 100036495

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................... 1

2.0 OBJECTIVES & SCOPE OF SERVICES ....................................................................................... 9

FACILITY CONDITION ASSESSMENT

SITE FEATURES .............................................................................................................................................. 15

3.0 SITE SYSTEMS ................................................................................................................... 15

BUILDING ELEMENTS ................................................................................................................................... 18

4.0 STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS ..................................................................................................... 18

5.0 ROOFING COMPONENTS .................................................................................................. 20

6.0 BUILDING EXTERIORS ........................................................................................................ 23

BUILDING SYSTEMS ...................................................................................................................................... 27

7.0 MECHANICAL SYSTEMS ..................................................................................................... 27

8.0 ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS ........................................................................................................ 32

9.0 PLUMBING SYSTEMS ......................................................................................................... 36

10.0 FIRE & LIFE SAFETY ........................................................................................................... 38

11.0 CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS .................................................................................................... 40

BUILDING INTERIORS & FINISHES ................................................................................................................ 43

12.0 INTERIOR FINISHES ........................................................................................................... 43

AMERICANS WITH DISABILITY ACT .............................................................................................................. 45

13.0 ACCESSIBILITY ................................................................................................................... 45

Appendices

Appendix A ‐ Photographs Appendix B ‐ Expenditure Forecast by Year Appendix C ‐ Resumes of Assessment Team Appendix D ‐ ROM Estimate

Capitol View Branch Library 5001 Central Avenue, SE October 21, 2014 Washington, DC 20019 Page 1 of 49

Report of Facilities Condition Assessment F+G Project No. F09936511

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 Introduction

The Capitol View Library (“the Property”) consists of a two‐story (with basement and a subbasement boiler

room) reinforced concrete‐framed detached library building located on an approximately 21,890 square

foot (0.5 acre) site at 5001 Central Avenue in Southeast Washington DC. The Property contains a reported

gross floor area of 25,272 square feet, a reported net floor area of 22,240 square feet and was designed by

Clark T. Harmon in 1962 for construction in 1963 and occupancy in early 1964. The building is of

Construction Type 2B (Un‐Protected Non‐Combustible) and arranged for Use Group A‐3 (Assembly ‐

Library). Table 1‐1 and Plan 1‐1 below provides a summary of the building.

Table 1‐1 – Subject Building

Gross Square Foot

Floor Area (SF)

Net Square Foot Floor

Area (SF) Levels Construction Date

25,272 22,240

Sub Basement,

Basement, Ground and

First Floors

1962 ‐ 1963

Plan 1‐1 – Aerial View of Property

North



1.2 Scope of Services

On September 8, 2014, Mr. Benjamin Dutton, MRICS, MCIOB and Mr. Imran Ishaq, MRICS of

Faithful+Gould, Inc. visited the Property to complete a comprehensive facilities condition assessment. The

objectives of the assessment were as listed on the following page.

1. Identify the condition of the Property and the timing and cost of expenditures required over the

next 10 years

2. Complete a cost benefit analysis of retaining the building and completing the recommended

capital expenditures (hereafter referred to as “retention”) or demolishing the building and

building a replacement library (hereafter referred to as “demolition / reconstruction”)

In order to meet the above objectives, we evaluated the current condition of the building and utilities and

projected future repair and replacement needs required over the next 10 years (study period) and

developed opinions of cost for demolition and reconstruction.

1.3 Cost Benefit Analysis

1.3.1 Cost of Retention & Required Expenditures

1.3.1.1 Expenditures

Over the ten years considered by this report the building will require a series of capital expenditures. These

relate to expenditures required to address various building defects resulting from poor original design and

(primarily) systems reaching the end of their effective useful life. The cost table included within Appendix B

of this report and the narrative included within the following report sections provide details of these

expenditures. The listing below and Table 1‐2 on the following pages provide a summary of these

expenditures. All numbers are shown in current (2015) dollar values.

Near‐Term Expenditures (2015 – 2017)

Resurfacing (mill and overlay) of the asphalt pavements

Replacement of failed site concrete at building entrance

Replacement of the built‐up roofing system

Replacement of lintels and installation of through wall flashings to the external wall system

Replacement of failed external precast concrete panels

Replacement of anodized aluminum windows

Recoating of external precast concrete panels and lintels

Cleaning of external brickwork

Replacement of chiller

Replacement of cooling tower

Replacement of the boiler

Replacement of air handling units

Replacement of electrical switchgear Mid‐Term Expenditures (2018 – 2021)

Crack filling, seal coating and re‐striping of asphalt pavements



Replacement of perimeter chain link fence

Replacement of carpet tiles throughout Late‐Term Expenditures (2022 – 2024)

Recoating of external precast concrete panels and lintels

Cleaning of external brickwork

Table 1‐2 – Summary of Total Expenditures over 10‐year Study Period

Year Expenditures

Immediate $0

2015 $0

2016 $756,121

2017 $0

2018 $29,025

2019 $74,805

2020 $0

2021 $5,847

2022 $0

2023 $0

2024 $0

TOTAL $865,798

1.3.1.2 Facility Condition Index

The Facility Condition Index (FCI or FCNI) provides a relative measure for comparing one building (or group

of buildings) to another. This index is a calculation, derived by dividing the total accumulated project cost

for the 10‐year window covered by this report by the total Component Replacement Value (CRV) of the

building. The index is intended to show the current and future conditions of the building if no capital

investment is made. Tables 1‐3 provide a summary of the FCI / FCNI condition ranges for the Property.

Table 1‐3 – Facility Condition Index

Accumulated Deferred Maintenance

Current Replacement Value (CRV)

Facility Condition Index (FCI)

$865,798 $12,177,498 0.071 / Fair

david.saulter

Rectangle

david.saulter

Typewritten Text

david.saulter

Typewritten Text

david.saulter

Typewritten Text

david.saulter

Typewritten Text

david.saulter

Typewritten Text

david.saulter

Rectangle

david.saulter

Typewritten Text

Section Redacted

david.saulter

Typewritten Text

Section Redacted



1.3.2 Cost of Demolition / Reconstruction

In the demolition / reconstruction scenario considered by this report, the Property will be redeveloped for

the purposes of a branch library configured for the services of the Washington DC Public Library system,

with an infrastructure that supports the changing technology of library sciences and the needs of an inner

city community. We have assumed that this redevelopment will consist of the activities listed below and

included within Table 1‐4.

Closing of the existing library and transfer of all programs to neighboring libraries (most likely a

combination of Anacostia Library, Deanwood Library, Dorothy I. Height/Benning Library and

Francis A. Gregory Library). Under our demolition / reconstruction scenario, we have included

allowances for moving and storage (within a DC DGS warehouse) of existing equipment and books

and for surplus disposal of furnishings. We have not included allowances for the creation of a

temporary library facility.

Environmental remediation of the Property. Pending the results of studies being completed in

conjunction with this report, we have assumed that the building contains asbestos containing

insulation around enclosed piping and lead based paint. We have included a lump sum allowance

for remediation of these items prior to demolition.

Following clearing of the building of all items and environmental contaminants, we have included

an allowance for complete demolition of the building and clearing of the entire site.

Retention of a design team and a General Contractor to design and construct a replacement

library. We have assumed that the replacement library will consist of a two story structure with

basement containing approximately 25,000 gross square feet. The design will incorporate

sustainable low energy design solutions, and program space for digital reference center, computer

lab, a 200‐seat community room and cultural center, meeting rooms and seminar rooms, and will

contain modern furniture, fixtures and equipment.

Table 1‐4 – Summary of Demolition / Reconstruction Costs

Activity Cost

Move & Store Books. Dispose of Furnishings $30,000

Environmental Remediation Allowance $100,000

Demolish Existing Building & Clear Site $190,000

Construct Replacement Building (Exc. FF&E) $11,267,498

FF&E $590,000

TOTAL $12,177,498

david.saulter

Rectangle

david.saulter

Typewritten Text

Section Redacted



1.3.3 Cost Comparison

Table 1‐5 on the following page provides a comparison between the cost of retention and demolition /

reconstruction.

Table 1‐5 – Cost Comparison (Retention Vs. Demolition / Reconstruction)

Year Retention Demolition Reconstruction

Immediate $0 $0

2015 $0 $0

2016 $756,121 $12,177,498

2017 $0 $0

2018 $29,025 $0

2019 $74,805 $0

2020 $0 $0

2021 $5,847 $0

2022 $0 $0

2023 $0 $0

2024 $0 $0

TOTAL $865,798 $12,177,498

1.3.4 Cost Benefit Analysis of Retention and Demolition / Reconstruction Options

All real properties require maintenance and implementation of capital expenditure projects to prolong the

life of systems and replace items that have reached the end of their effective useful life. The goal is to

maintain the tangible value of the underlying asset. The cost of expenditures outlined within Table 1‐2

represent the level of capital expenditure necessary to maintain the underlying value of the 1962 library

facility. The type of cost expenditures outlined do not address the more salient question of the functional

adequacy of space configuration, infrastructure, energy efficiency, security, handicapped accessibility,

image and branding, parking, or community engagement needed to meet the needs of a 2015 library

structure. Identifying the feasibility and expense of remodeling the existing structure to meet the needs of

a contemporary library is outside the goal of this report. However, by comparative analysis of

contemporary library projects completed or under construction within the past 5 years we can discern the

projected probable cost for the demolition / reconstruction of a new building on the current site that

designed to meet contemporary library standards. Similarly, the value of induced benefit from energy

savings through new construction can be identified for the 10‐year study period. Assuming design and

david.saulter

Rectangle

david.saulter

Typewritten Text

Section Redacted



construction is completed in 3 years the remaining 7 years in the study period could experience a 15%

reduction in energy costs.

The long term benefits of retaining or replacing the existing structure extends beyond the capital expense

of the physical property presented in this report. We recommend conducting further evaluation and

analysis of outcomes measurement in public libraries such as the research and grant studies conducted by

Dr. Glen Holt, executive director, Saint Louis Public Library and Prof. Donald Elliott, professor of economics

and business, Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville, Illinois.

1.4 System & Condition Summaries

Site features at the property include asphalt paved parking areas, cast‐in‐place concrete sidewalks, curbs

and gutters, raised planters, chain link perimeter fencing, landscaping and storm water management

features. Site systems are generally in fair but worn condition with some localized defects noted. The

asphalt pavements require near‐term resurfacing and mid‐term seal coating, failed concrete adjacent to the

front entrance should be replaced near‐term and the perimeter fence should be replaced mid‐term.

The building comprises of a reinforced concrete superstructure (columns, concrete joists, concrete beams)

supporting a concrete roof deck and a non‐load bearing exterior wall system. The superstructure is

supported on isolated and continuous cast in place concrete footings varying in size and depth. The

structural systems appeared to be in good condition with no observed evidence of settlement,

deterioration, or other distress noted. Assuming correction of defective conditions at the exterior systems,

we do not anticipate a requirement to complete significant expenditures relative to the structural systems.

The building is enclosed horizontally with a low‐slope roof covered with an asphaltic based built‐up roofing

(BUR) system. The roof was installed in 1991 and is in fair to poor condition with large blisters,

missing/detached flashings, active leaks and failure of the surface coating noted. We have recommended

budgeting for near‐term replacement of the roof system.

The exterior wall system consists of brickwork cladding with steel lintels, precast concrete cladding panels,

anodized aluminum framed windows containing single‐glazed glazing units and (at the ground floor)

painted steel security grills, glazed front entrance and sealants at control joints and the perimeter of the

openings. The exterior wall systems are in fair to poor condition. Of significant concern was the condition

of the precast concrete panels and corroded steel lintels. Several concrete panels have spalled/cracked and

near‐term replacement of a number of panels is recommended. The corroding steel lintels (caused by a

lack of through‐wall flashing) is causing separation within the mortar applied at joints in a linear pattern

above the windows at each level. The defective mortar will permit ongoing water entry which may lead to

further corrosion, water ingress, damp and the development of mold growth. We have recommended

budgeting for the near‐term installation of through wall flashing, and replacement of failed lintels, mortar,

bricks and concrete cladding panels.

The majority of the single glazed, anodized aluminum windows date from the original construction,

however, some units have been replaced to the rear of the reception desk. The windows are in fair

condition due to their age/general wear and tear and are no longer considered to be energy efficient. In

some instances the windows are warped and permit air infiltration, which will be affecting heating and

david.saulter

Rectangle



cooling performances. We have recommended near‐term replacement of the existing windows with

anodized aluminum, double glazed units.

Hot water for heating purposes for is generated by one natural gas fired cast iron boiler manufactured by

Smith in 1991 with a rated capacity of approximately 1,137‐MBH. Heating hot water is circulated through

the two pipe distribution system via two circulation pumps operated in a duty and standby configuration.

Chilled water for cooling generated by one water cooled chilled manufactured by Carrier with a rated

capacity of approximately 50‐tons. Condenser water for the chiller is generated by one single cell cooling

tower located at the southeast corner of the site. The cooling tower was manufacture by Baltimore Air Coil

in 1991 with an approximate capacity of 50‐tons. Condenser water is distributed via one distribution pump

with a rated capacity of 170‐gpm. Conditioned air is provided by single‐ and multi‐zone air‐handling units

equipped with a two pipe chilled water/hot water coil. Conditioned air from the air‐handling units is

ducted throughout each floor to the respective zones and/or areas served. Supplemental cooling for the

elevator equipment room is provided by a split system air conditioning unit with the remote condensing

unit being mounted on the east side of the building. The split system air conditioning unit has an

approximate cooling capacity of 1.5‐tons and was manufactured by Carrier. The HVAC systems are

controlled via a direct digital control system.

The gas‐fired boiler appeared to be in fair condition. Replacement should be anticipated near‐term. The

chiller appeared to be in fair condition but due to its age it will likely become maintenance intensive and

less efficient as it continues to age. Based on the age of the chiller and advances in chiller efficiencies, we

recommend budgeting for its replacement near‐term. The cooling tower was in a similar condition and

should be replaced in conjunction with the chiller. The air handling units appeared to be in fair condition

with sheet metal and interior deterioration noted. Replacement of the air handling units is recommended

near‐term.

Secondary electrical service is supplied at 208‐volts, 3‐phase from a PEPCO pole mounted transformer

located along 50th Street SE. Conductors from the transformer are then routed to a 1,500‐amp main C/T

cabinet in the basement mechanical room. Service from the main switchboard is then routed to various

breaker panels, fuse boxes, and fused disconnects to serve the electrical loads throughout the building.

Lighting throughout the building is typically 2’ x 4’ recessed fluorescent fixtures with T8 lamps and

electronic ballasts. Emergency lighting is provided by fixtures with battery backup units and the

emergency power circuit. Security systems within the building consist of various security cameras located

throughout the building which are monitored by a digital video recorder and an electronic theft detection

system located at the main library entrance. The electrical installations appeared to be in fair condition

with most of the equipment and components dating to the 1960’s. Based on the age and type of some of

the electrical components it is likely that these components will reach the end of their service life and

become increasingly unreliable throughout the study period. We recommend budgeting for a electrical

system upgrade near‐term to ensure the electrical systems continue to provide reliable service.

Plumbing systems include the cast iron and galvanized sanitary and storm sewer piping, copper domestic

hot and cold water piping, sewer ejector pumps, sump pumps, and natural gas domestic water heater.

Plumbing systems appeared to be fair condition with no major issues note or reported to us. The domestic

water heater was in fair to good condition and should not require replacement within the study period.

The sump and sewer ejector pumps appeared to be in fair condition and will likely be repaired or replaced



on an as needed basis during routine maintenance activities as an operational expense. The domestic

water and sanitary sewer piping appeared to be in fair condition. Replacement of the sanitary sewer and

domestic water distribution piping should be considered for replacement should the library every undergo

an extensive renovation.

Fire and life safety elements observed audible fire alarm and detection system (fire alarm / annunciator

panels, duct detectors, strobes, pull stations, emergency and exit lights), handheld fire extinguishers, and

fire‐rated means of egress. The fire and life safety elements were in generally good condition and installed

in accordance with the code in effect at the time of construction and last renovation. The fire alarm

control panel was replaced in 2010 and should remain serviceable throughout the study period.

Conveying systems within the building consist of one hydraulic elevator with a capacity of 2,500‐lbs and a

speed of 150 feet per minute. The elevator components appeared to be in good condition having been

subject to large‐scale modernization in 2007. Future modernization or capital replacement is not

anticipated within the study period.

Interior finishes consisted of carpet tiles, 2’ x 2’ suspended acoustical ceiling tiles and painted gypsum

board or concrete masonry unit walls. Finishes were in generally good condition with the majority of

finishes (flooring, walls, ceiling tiles) replaced in 2006. We have recommended budgeting for mid to late‐

term replacement of carpet tiles.

The building generally complied with the 2010 edition of the Americans with Disability Act.



2.0 OBJECTIVES & SCOPE OF SERVICES

2.1 Report Objectives

The objective of this report is to produce an advanced facilities assessment and capital planning process,

utilizing all current data from a complete condition assessment of the Property, to result in a strong and

well‐developed plan to support strategic capital investment, identify and reduce risk and through the

completion of a cost benefit recommend either retention or demolition/reconstruction of the existing

Property . In short – the objective is to assess the condition of all included building and site systems and

develop a prioritized forecast of anticipated capital expenditures over the 10 year period between 2015

and 2024 and to determine the best build alternative for the Property. This will inform the long term

investment plan for the building by developing an array of projects, architectural and

mechanical/electrical/plumbing systems that can be inputted into a planning model from which sound

management decisions can be made to best utilize funding resources. Specific objectives of this study are

listed below.

Identification and documentation of the present condition and risks of the building

Recommendation of corrections for all deficiencies

Provision of cost estimates for such corrections

Cost of demolition and reconstruction

Forecasting of future facility renewal costs based on documented methodology, of the facilities and

equipment in the building

Obtaining a Facilities Condition Index (FCI) to illustrate the relative condition of the subject building

In order to meet these objectives we completed a visual evaluation of installed systems at the property

(i.e. site systems, structural, roofing, exterior, mechanical, electrical, plumbing, fire protection and life

safety, and interiors) and produced this report of Facilities Condition Assessment. This report represents a

comprehensive evaluation of the building systems and major components including criteria for assessment,

expected useful life, remaining useful life, year to be replaced, project priority and plan type, existing

condition, estimated replacement date, and estimated replacement cost standards.

2.2 Key Issues

Faithful+Gould was requested to complete a Facilities Condition Assessment of the site and site

improvements. The key issues to be addressed by the Facilities Condition Assessment include the

following:

1. Identification of the visually apparent condition, installation date, remaining useful life and

deficiencies at the Property to include all systems and elements detailed in the following “Strategy

Employed to Meet the Key Issues” section

2. Through the completion of a cost benefit analysis determine the best build alternative

3. Recommendations and opinions of cost for capital projects over a 10 year period from and including

2015. Projects are to be categorized using two priority tools and one set of deficiency categories

4. The replacement value of the component or system

5. Proposed projects and timelines for when the system/component should replaced



6. Proposed execution strategies for the identified projects that minimizes cost and disruption

2.3 Strategy Employed to Meet Key Issues

The strategy employed to meet the key issues detailed above (i.e. our scope of services) consisted of

performing a visual assessment of the interior, exterior and site components of the subject building. The

scope of services was governed by Faithful+Gould’s proposal for Facility Condition Assessment services

dated July 14, 2014

The primary purpose of the Facilities Condition Assessment was to identify visually apparent deficiencies in

the building and site. The evaluation included site visits to observe the building and site systems,

interviewing building management and maintenance personnel, and reviewing available maintenance

systems, design and construction documents and plans. This Facilities Condition Assessment has been

conducted in general accordance with industry standards and the American Society for Testing and

Materials (ASTM) Standard E 2018‐08 Standard Guide for Property Condition Assessment: Baseline

Property Condition Assessment Process.

We performed a visual non‐destructive assessment of the interior, exterior and site components of the

building, including the following major components and systems:

Site Systems. We visually observed the site systems for the removal of storm water and evidence of

poor drainage and / or erosion potential. We also reviewed (where applicable) the condition of

pavements, site concrete, retaining walls, fencing, landscaping, site grading, and storm water drainage

features.

Structural System. We observed the structures for visible signs of distress and have reported our

findings. We also reviewed available structural drawings for information regarding the design load

criteria of the existing structures and the building codes to which the structures were designed. We did

not complete a seismic probable‐maximum‐loss (PML) evaluation of the Property.

Roof System. We visually evaluated the condition of accessible roof systems, accessories, and details.

In addition, where applicable we discussed existing roof warranties.

Building Exterior Elements. We visually observed the exterior wall system, window and door systems

for visible evidence of deficiencies, continuity of seals, and other types of distress and have reported

our findings. We reviewed available flashing and connection details for drainage design and observed

the condition and placement of expansion joints. Our visual observations were based on those

conditions that can be observed from ground level, roof level terraces and through the use of

binoculars.

Mechanical / HVAC, Electrical, Plumbing (MEP) Systems. We observed the age and condition of the

MEP and related building systems and have commented on their condition and visible deficiencies.

Fire Protection and Life Safety. We observed the age and condition of the fire protection and life

safety elements and have commented on their condition and any visible deficiencies. The elements



surveyed included structural fire protection, means of egress, fire suppression systems, and fire

detection and alarm systems.

Conveyance. We visually observed the conveyance systems and have reported their general condition.

Interior Finishes. We visually observed the interior areas of the Property and have reported their

general condition.

Disabled Access. We visually identified barriers to disabled access based upon the 2010 edition of the

Americans with Disability Act.

The scope of services under which the Facilities Condition Assessment was completed was visual in nature

and not intended to be destructive to the Property to gain access to hidden conditions. We did not perform

any destructive testing or uncover or expose any system members. We have documented the type and

extent of visually apparent defects in the systems in order to perform the condition assessment.

The scope of services under which the Facilities Condition Assessment was completed includes only those

items specifically indicated. The evaluation does not include any environmental services such as (without

limitation) sampling, testing, or evaluation of asbestos, lead‐based paint, lead‐in‐water, indoor air quality,

PCB’s, radon, mold, or any other potentially hazard materials, air‐borne toxins or issues not outlined in the

previous scope of services. In addition, the assessment does not include identification of underground

soils, identification or quantification of underground contaminants.

2.4 Personnel

On September 8, 2014, Mr. Benjamin Dutton and Mr. Imran Ishaq from Faithful+Gould visited the Property

to observe and document the condition of the building and site components. During the course of our

assessment, Faithful+Gould interviewed the personnel detailed in Table 2‐1.

Table 2‐1 – DC Public Library Personnel Interviewed by Faithful+Gould Team

Name Title Tenure at Property

Darrell Gray Building Engineer Since 1990

2.5 Document Review

In addition to interviewing Management representatives listed in Table 2‐2, we also reviewed

documentation as listed below:

Air conditioning program prepared by Lutz, Schiebla & Fulford – Engineers dated 9/21/1967.

Drawing sheets 11‐23‐67 (ME4, ME5).



Project Drawings prepared by Clark T Harmon of the Government of the District of Columbia

dated 12/27/1962. Architectural: A‐1 to A‐12, Structural: S‐1 to S‐4, Mechanical: E‐1 to E‐3. P‐1.

M‐1 to M‐2.

Roof replacement drawings prepared by Government of the District of Columbia (Department of

Public Works). Drawing sheet 612101 – CS‐1. Drawing dated May 1, 1991.

2.6 Assessment Methodology

Each member of the assessment team has a minimum of 10 years of experience completing similar

projects. We used this experience coupled with our review of the requested scope of services, objectives

and discussions with the parties listed in Table 2‐1 to develop a specific assessment methodology for DC

Public Library (DCPL). This methodology focused upon risk mitigation and standard capital renewal.

Our methodology commenced with reviewing available drawings, specifications and other relevant

information for each system. Following review of documentation, we met with DCPL and reported subject

matter experts for each system. Subject matter experts typically consisted of facility or management

personnel with experience operating or managing the systems to be assessed. Information reported by the

subject matter experts was considered to be for information purposes only, with all information verified

(where possible) by our assessment team.

Following review of documents and interview with subject matter experts, we evaluated each system. Our

evaluation consisted of a visual non‐destructive assessment completed in general accordance with the

ASTM 2018‐08 Standard Guide for Property Condition Assessments. A copy of this standard is included

within the appendix of this report section. For each system and component of that system we noted the

visually apparent condition noted for system / component specific modes of failure, noted the age of the

system / component and made a determination of required repairs / replacements and the timing of those

actions. We also quantified any system / components that we judged would require replacement within

the 10 year study period. Upon completion of the physical evaluation, we generated this report.

2.7 Development of Estimated Useful Life / Remaining Useful Life

A fundamental part of any capital planning process is the development of the Estimated Useful Life (EUL)

and Remaining Useful Life (RUL) for each piece of equipment. EUL considers the life of a system or

component of that system (i.e. a roof may have a 15 year life). RUL considers what is the remaining life of

that system (i.e. a roof may have a RUL of 10 years – therefore replacement will occur in 10 years).

We developed our EUL and RUL based upon the determined condition of a system, our experience with

that specific installation (i.e. roof membranes installed by a manufacturer such as Carlyle may last longer

than a comparable system installed by Firestone) and the impact of that system’s failure. For instance,

batteries for an Uninterruptable Power Supply system may typically last 5 to 7 years. However, as they may

be a critical part of the electrical supply to a process machine, we would consider a RUL of 4 years under

the assumption that one replaces prior to failure and prior to when the likelihood of failure increases to an

unacceptable risk level.



The EUL and RUL can be further modified by the quality / type of existing installation and the quality / type

of the replacement installation. For instance, if we noted that a system that typically achieves a 10 year life

was not installed correctly and as a result will require replacement at a 7 year life, we will show

replacement after 7 years. However, assuming that a replacement system is installed correctly, it will last

10 years, we then show a cycle 1 replacement after 7 years, and a cycle 2 replacement 10 years after the

cycle 1 replacement.

2.8 Opinion of Cost

Our opinions of cost included within this report are based upon our experience with similar buildings and

systems, industry‐standard cost data, local cost data and the knowledge of Faithful+Gould’s in‐house cost

estimators. We have considered that any expenditure below $1,000 will be funded as a Routine

Maintenance (“operational”) expense and therefore will not be included within this study. However, where

similar projects with values less than $1,000 are anticipated, we have grouped these projects to create a

combined capital project with a value above the cost threshold. We have followed a four phase approach

when developing our opinions of cost:

1. Identify project scope and complexities during assessment phase

2. Identify DCPL specific factors that may increase project cost above typical market conditions (i.e.

work completed in off hours, procurement, union, insurance requirements, prevailing wage etc.)

3. Utilize the District of Columbia prevailing wage

4. Included for General Conditions and Architectural / Engineering fees (where applicable)

5. Utilize our Cost Estimators to develop opinions of cost considering various factors including 1, 2

and 3 above and as detailed below

It should be understood that costs provided are for planning purposes only. Actual project costs may vary

significantly to those projected based upon inflationary factors, weather and time of season, unforeseen

economic circumstances and market trends, contractor schedules, unusual owner requirements, and other

factors beyond our control.

2.9 Terminology & Limitations

This report and the attached expenditure forecast generally identify the Expected Useful Life (EUL) and the

Remaining Useful Life (RUL) of observed systems and components. EUL is projected based upon industry‐

standard guidelines and our experience with similar systems. RUL is projected based upon our assessment

of age, condition and maintenance / repair history. The timing of the projected expenditures and their

associated costs represent our opinion considering the aforementioned factors. Alternative methods of

managing the existing equipment or systems may be feasible over the 10 year study period. However,

these alternative methods will depend upon actual management practices, financing requirements, and

the ability of the engineering staff to perform some of the repairs in‐house. Alternative scenarios that have

not been presented to Faithful+Gould have not been considered within this report.

This report has been presented based upon our on‐site observations, information provided to us,

discussion with building management and maintenance staff, our review of available documentation (see

scope of services and document review section) and our experience with similar systems. If any



information becomes available that is not consistent with the observations or conclusions expressed within

this report, we request that this information be immediately forwarded to us. The evaluation of existing

structures requires that certain assumptions be made regarding existing conditions. This evaluation was

based upon our visual non‐destructive evaluation of accessible conditions of the Property. Furthermore,

this evaluation was limited in time on‐site, fee, and scope and was not based upon a comprehensive

engineering evaluation.



SITE FEATURES

3.0 SITE SYSTEMS

Site features at the Property include an asphalt paved parking lot, cast‐in‐place concrete sidewalks and curb

and gutter, a raised planter, chain link perimeter fencing, landscaping and storm water management

features (reference Photographs 14, 15 & 17 in Appendix A).

3.1 Description

The Property contains a continuous asphalt‐paved parking lot located to the east and south

elevations. The pavement is accessed via entrances / exits off Central Avenue Southeast to the

North and 50th Street Southeast to the West. The lot contains 19 spaces plus one additional space

assigned for bus use. Standard spaces measured 19’ x 9’. Site development plans were not

reviewed, however the pavement has an asphaltic surface course and it is assumed that there is

also an asphaltic base, aggregate base and compacted subgrade. Plan 3‐1 provides a graphical

overview of the site areas considered by this report.

Plan 3‐1 – Aerial View of Property

Cast‐in‐place concrete sidewalks provide pedestrian access to the building from Central Avenue

Southeast. Sidewalks are laid in approximately 5’ x 4’ sections and laid to drain to the City

maintained stormwater systems. The parking areas are accented with cast‐in‐place concrete curb

and gutter sections. All concrete was assumed to be cast over compacted subgrade.

The extents of the parking lot are enclosed with dwarf height (approximately 2’ 6”) concrete wall. A

6’ tall steel chain link fence is mounted upon the perimeter concrete dwarf wall. There is a pair of

gates to the entrance of 50th Street Southeast which were locked at the time of the assessment.

Tables 3‐1 and 3‐2 on the following page summaries the site areas.

North



Table 3‐1 – Parking Spaces Counted

Standard Bus Parking ADA Drop Off TOTAL

19 1 0 0 20

Table 3‐2 – Site Areas Measured

Asphalt Pavement Sidewalks Curb & Gutter

1,063 SY 736 SF 32 LF

There are landscaping features present to the the front of the Property. These consist of a raised

planter area contained within a brick enclosure, flagpole, cycle racks and grass lawn area.

Stormwater is collected within brick culverts which expel to the City maintained stormwater

management system.

3.2 Condition

The asphalt parking areas are generally in fair condition with considerable areas of longitudinal and

transverse cracks through the pavement wearing surface, unsealed construction joints and general

failure of surface markings noted. In addition, a section (approximately 26’ x 16’) of the pavement

has settled following the removal of an underground oil tank. This has caused ponding of the

surface water. In addition, vegetation growth has also penetrated through the wearing course

which is causing further deterioration in various locations.

To extend the life of the pavements, we recommend the implementation of a structured approach

to on‐going maintenance and repair. This should commence with resurfacing the asphalt pavement

wearing course in the near term. We recommend that the pavement wearing surface (the top 1” to

1 ½”) be edge milled and overlaid. Replacement of the asphalt pavement wearing course should be

followed by the mid‐term application of a two‐coat asphaltic based seal coat and the re‐application

of surface markings to prolong the life expectancy of the surface. This will reduce water ingress

(and resulting deterioration) of the pavement sub‐base and subgrade, increase the flexibility of the

pavement wearing surface (allowing it to accommodate movement) and maintain the appearance

of the pavements until the end of the study period.

Sidewalks were in generally good condition. However, the sidewalks adjacent to the front entrance

are in poor condition, with numerous areas of longitudinal cracks and surface spalls noted. Based

upon the public location of the sidewalks and the potential that tripping hazards will be caused by

the cracked concrete; we recommend budgeting for near‐term replacement of the failed sidewalk

panels. We have also included an allowance for mid‐ and late‐term replacement of sidewalk panels

in anticipation of future failed sections.



Concrete curb and gutter sections, landscaping and storm water management features are

considered to be fair condition. We do not anticipate budgeting for capital repair or replacement of

these elements within this study period.

The chain‐link fence is in fair condition with areas of surface corrosion. The posts and panels are

still in a functioning condition and have not yet reached the end of their effective life. In some

isolated areas, vegetation has started to grow through the fence from the neighboring property.

We have allowed for mid‐replacement of the chain link fence.

3.3 Projected Capital Expenditures

Required:

1. We recommend budgeting for edge milling and overlay (resurfacing) of the pavements in 2016.

Our opinion of cost for this work is $23,386 ($22 per square yard). This includes an allowance

for localized full depth replacement of the pavement (at areas of alligator cracking) and for the

installation of a geotextile fabric to help retard reflective cracking.

2. We recommend budgeting for the application of a two‐coat asphaltic‐based seal coating over

the asphaltic pavement, the re‐application of surface markings and filling of surface cracks. Our

opinion of cost for this work is $5,847 ($5.50 per square yard) in 2021.

3. We recommend budgeting for replacement of failed sidewalk panels contained at the front of

the building. Our opinion of cost for this work is $2,940 ($15 per square foot) in 2016.

4. We recommend budgeting for mid‐term replacement of the chain link fencing. Our opinion of

cost for this work is $9,025 ($25.00 per linear foot) in 2018.

david.saulter

Rectangle

david.saulter

Rectangle

david.saulter

Rectangle

david.saulter

Rectangle



BUILDING ELEMENTS

4.0 STRUCTURAL SYSTEMS

The description of the respective structural systems is based upon our review of available drawings (see

document review section), and our observation of exposed portions of the building structure at the

mechanical room, at exposed columns, wall and floor assemblies, and at support rooms (reference

Photograph 46 in Appendix A).

4.1 Description

The structural system consists of a reinforced concrete superstructure (columns, concrete joists

and concrete beams) supporting the concrete floor and roof decks. The building is supported on a

combination of isolated and continuous cast in place footings varying in size and depth.

Concrete Strength

We were not provided with details in regard to concrete strength.

Foundations

Supporting columns were to be founded on isolated and continuous cast in place footings which

vary in size. The footings are recorded as having high strength reinforcing steel with intermediate

grade ties and stirrups. Major walls are supported on continuous footings.

Lowest Floor Level

The ground floor slabs comprises of reinforced concrete with a vapor barrier and a compacted

granular fill.

Superstructure

The structural system consists of a reinforced concrete superstructure (columns, concrete joists

and concrete beams) supporting the concrete floor and roof decks. The concrete beam schedule

indicates that the beams vary between 8” and 16” deep and 10” and 48” wide.

Internal Walls

Interior walls consist of 5/8” type X gypsum wallboard supported on either steel studs or 8” thick

concrete masonry units.



Ceilings

Common area ceiling systems consist of a combination of painted gypsum wallboard coffered

ceilings supported on a suspended ceiling grid, 2’ x 2’ suspended acoustical ceiling tiles placed

within a prefinished steel grid or the exposed underside of the roof structure.

Exterior Walls

The external walls are non‐load bearing and primarily consist of clay brick veneer and precast

concrete panels between the brickwork at horizontal and vertical interfaces. The exterior walls

also incorporate embedded steel lintels which are installed as through wall continuous flashing.

We could not ascertain the size of the lintels from the drawings and no opening up of the

structure was undertaken during the assessment.

Roof Structure

The roof structure consists of a 5½” thick reinforced concrete slab. The canopy roof also has a

concrete roof deck which is 4” thick and also has an additional 3” of concrete on top of the roof

deck underneath the built up roof.

4.2 Condition

The structural systems for the building appeared to be in good condition and should not require

repair or replacement within the study period. However, we noted stepped cracks at the exterior

wall system which serves the single level storage building located at the rear of the Property.

Based upon the minimal size of the building, we have anticipated that repair or localized

reconstruction of the building can be funded as an operational expense.


Required:

No Expenditures are anticipated.



5.0 ROOFING COMPONENTS

The entire building is enclosed horizontally by a low‐slope roof covered with an asphalt built‐up

roofing (BUR) system installed in 1991 (reference Photographs 4 through 8 in Appendix A).

5.1 Description

The building is enclosed by a two level (main and canopy) low‐slope roof. Each roof level is

covered with an internally‐drained asphaltic based four‐ply built‐up roofing system installed in

1991. The sectional detail of the roof consists of the structural concrete deck, a base sheet,

tapered rigid insulation, the four‐ply asphaltic membrane and a field‐applied solar reflective

acrylic coating. Plan 5‐1 below indicates roof areas covered by the built‐up system.

Plan 5‐1 – Built‐Up Roofing Areas

The roof was enclosed by 3" to 8” tall parapet walls which consisted of an extension of the main

wall system to the outer face and an extension of the field membrane to the inner face. Base

flashings consist of a two‐ply modified bitumen membrane covered with the acrylic field coating

and applied over 4” wood cant strips. Cap flashings consist of standing seam steel caps attached

to 2” x 4” and 2” x 8” wood nailing blocks. Counter flashing consisted of stainless steel units. The

built‐up roofing areas are internally drained through 5” internal drainage outlets. Table 5‐1 on the

following page provides a summary of the built‐up roofing areas.



Table 5‐1 ‐ Summary of Roof Construction (BUR)

Roof Component Built‐Up Roof

Installation Date 1991 (Coating Applied 2009)

Roof Area

(SF / total / approx.) 9,351

Application/ Membrane 4‐Ply Built‐Up Roofing System

Manufacturer / Model Unknown

Surface Acrylic Coating

Deck Type Cast in Place Concrete

Insulation Rigid Tapered Insulation

Cover Board None

Drainage 5” Roof Drains

Overflow Scuppers 4" External

Base Flashings Modified Bitumen

Cap Flashings Steel Caps

Perimeter Enclosure Variable Height Parapet Wall

Warranty (Manufacturer) None

Warranty (Contractor) None

5.2 Condition

The built‐up roofing system was in generally fair to poor condition. Installed in 1991, we noted

numerous areas of blistering and general softness across the roof field (both indicative of trapped

moisture within the roof system), areas of poorly completed patch repairs, at the surface coating

areas of debonding and delamination, open and split base flashings, and areas of water ingress

through the roof system. Parapet walls were also generally in poor condition. A number of

sections have been damaged and aluminum parapet capping sections are missing, exposing

underlying wood blocking which are being subjected to water saturation. If not rectified, these

elements will deteriorate further, resulting in aesthetic and possibly structural failure. Costs for

the replacement of parapet covering have been included within the roof replacement cost. Based

upon the extent of deterioration noted, we have recommended budgeting for near‐term

replacement of the roof.




Required:

1. We recommend budgeting for replacement of the built‐up roofing system in 2016. Our opinion

of cost is $130,914 ($14 per square foot). This opinion of cost assumes removal of the existing

roof (including all flashings) to the structural deck and the installation of a 60‐mil single‐ply

thermoplastic polyolefin roof membrane over tapered insulation.

david.saulter

Rectangle



6.0 BUILDING EXTERIORS

The exterior wall systems consist of an anchored brick veneer, steel lintels, architectural precast concrete

cladding panels, anodized aluminum windows with painted metal security grills (ground floor only), glazed

storefront entrance doors and sealants at control joints and the perimeter of the openings (reference

Photographs 1, 2, 9 – 13, 18 and 19 in Appendix A).

6.1 Description

Brick Veneer

The primary exterior wall system consists of a clay brick veneer. The veneer is provided at

approximately 50% to 60% of each elevation with the sectional detail consisting of the 4” to 5”

clay face brick laid in stretching bond, supported on a steel shelf angle and placed against a

concrete masonry unit back‐up.

Precast Concrete Cladding Panels

Architectural precast concrete cladding panels make up approximately 25% of the wall area of

each elevation. The concrete masonry panels have a painted surface, are typically 3” to 4” thick

and form infill panels between the brickwork and the window units. The precast concrete panels

typically measure approximately 2’6” x 4’6” at each section with flush joints between each panel.

The brickwork is dowelled to the vertical concrete sections adjacent to each section of brickwork.

The concrete masonry panels are separated from the brickwork by vertical concrete sections

which protrude from the outer face of the elevation walls by approximately 4”. The precast panels

are interconnected using steel masonry ties.

Doors and Windows

The front entranceway includes glazed storefront doors consisting of anodized aluminum framing

members with single pane glazing. Doors are operable by the use of proximity sensors with level

access is afforded from street level. The current doors are not original and have been replaced.

Painted steel panel doors are located as secondary access / egress points at the sides and rear of

the building.

Windows at each elevation consist of operable, single glazed anodized aluminum framed hopper

style units. Glazing units are ¼” thick. The windows are fitted to the ground and first floors and the

ground floor windows are fitted with security grills for added security. With the exception of

replacement double glazed anodized aluminum windows installed at the rear of the main

reception desk, windows date from original construction.



Other Exterior Elements

A canopy is located along the north and west elevations over the main entrance to the building.

The canopy consists of a cantilevered assembly covered by a low‐slope roof.

6.2 Condition

Brick Veneer

The brickwork is currently suffering from expansion

within the mortar joints due to corroding of the

embedded steel shelf angles. Resulting from a lack of

through‐wall flashing, corrosion of the shelf angles has

caused separation which is approximately up to an inch

wide in a continuous linear pattern. The gap is visible

above the windows at each level around the entire

perimeter and is separated only by the windows and

concrete panels. The open gaps in the mortar joints

allows water penetration leading to further corrosion

and potentially damp and mold growth internally, if not

rectified.

We recommend scaffolding of the building, removing of three courses of brick above each shelf

angle, removing and replacing the shelf angle, installing a through‐wall flashing and reinstalling

(where possible) the removed brick.

In addition to concerns with the shelf angles, we noted stains on the brickwork, particularly to the

front elevation. While this is not considered to major issue, from an appearance point of view the

staining is particularly unsightly when viewed at street level. On this basis, we have allowed for

two terms of brick cleaning to be undertaken in the near and late terms of this study period for

approximately 15% of the external wall area.

Precast Concrete Cladding Panels

The condition of the precast concrete cladding panels ranges from fair to good with numerous

areas of surface and minor sectional cracks noted at the panels. We have recommended that the

defective panels be replaced in conjunction with correction of the previously cited shelf lintel issue.

In conjunction with this replacement work, we have also recommended that an allowance be made

for recoating of the cladding panels and replacement of sealants installed between the panels and

brick veneer.

Doors and Windows

Doors appeared to be in good condition. Assuming the completion of on‐going maintenance

replacement or capital expenditure should not be required within the study period.



Windows are in fair to poor condition due to their age/general wear and tear and are no longer

considered to be energy efficient. During our assessment we identified that daylight was visible

between the operable casement sections of the windows indicating that the frames have warped

over time which is exacerbated by the absence of seals. Gaps in the windows have a significant

affect upon the heating and cooling equipment, resulting in overuse, increased maintenance plus

unnecessary expenditure on fuel costs. We recommend that windows be replaced in the near

term with anodized aluminum framed double glazed units. This work should be completed in

conjunction with the previously discussed brick and precast work.

Other Exterior Elements

The entrance canopy appeared to be in good condition. However, we noted general failure of the

roof cover provided at the canopy and we have allowed for this to be replaced in the near‐term

along with the main roof.

The condition of sealants installed at the connection between the joints of the precast concrete

panels and the surrounding horizontal and vertical sections varied. Approximately 15 ‐ 20% of the

sealants were missing creating gaps between the sections. We have recommended budgeting for

near‐term replacement of currently failed sealant and replacement of all remaining sealant

towards the end of the study period.


Required:

Based upon the extent of the exterior defects noted and interconnected nature of the trades

involved in correction of those defects, we recommend budgeting for a multi faceted exterior

renovation project. Completed in a single phase / mobilization, the project should consist of the

items below.

Mobilization / Design

1. Prior to the commencement of any work, we recommend retaining a District of Columbia

registered architect to design, specify and monitor the replacement and repair work detailed

below. Our opinion of cost for this work is $30,408 in 2016.

2. Once designs are complete, bid and contractor(s) selected, scaffolding should be installed at

each elevation. Our opinion of cost for this work assuming a three month project schedule is

$29,200 in 2016.

Correct Deficiencies

3. We recommend removing of three courses of brick above each shelf angle, removing and

replacing the shelf angle, installing a through‐wall flashing and reinstalling (where possible) the

removed brick. Our opinion of cost for this work is $75,950 in 2016.

david.saulter

Rectangle

david.saulter

Rectangle

david.saulter

Rectangle



4. We recommend budgeting for replacement of cracked precast concrete cladding panels. Our

opinion of cost for this work is $41,800 in 2016.

5. We recommend budgeting for recoating of the cladding panels and replacement of associated

sealants. Our opinion of cost for this work is $15,400 in 2016.

6. We recommend budgeting for cleaning of stains at the building exterior. Our opinion of cost

for this work is $9,243 in 2016.

7. We recommend that the existing windows are replaced with anodized aluminum windows.

Our opinion of the cost for replacement of the 4’3” x 2’1” windows is $57,750 in 2016.


Our opinion of the cost for replacement of the 2’4” x 2’ windows is $18,960 in 2016.


Our opinion of the cost for replacement of the single 0.91’ x 1’3” window is $620 in 2016.

david.saulter

Rectangle

david.saulter

Rectangle

david.saulter

Rectangle

david.saulter

Rectangle

david.saulter

Rectangle

david.saulter

Rectangle



BUILDING SYSTEMS

7.0 MECHANICAL SYSTEMS

The following information was obtained through our visual observations of the building systems, review of

available documents, and discussions with building maintenance personnel. The heating, ventilation and

air conditioning systems consist of the constant volume system which incorporates the natural gas boiler,

chiller, cooling tower, three air‐handling units, exhaust fans and the direct digital control (DDC) system

(reference Photographs 16, 33, 34, 38 – 41 & 43 in Appendix A).

7.1 Heating Systems

Description

Heating hot water is generated by one natural heating boiler manufactured by Smith in 1991 with

a capacity of approximately 1,137‐MBH. Heating hot water is circulated to the multi‐ and single‐

zone air handling units, radiant heaters through the two pipe distribution system via two

circulation pumps operated in a duty and standby configuration.

System Capacity

Based upon discussions with maintenance personnel and our review of the equipment and

documentation, the heating load on the building is minimal and the system has adequate capacity

to meet comfort conditions.

Condition

The heating hot water distribution boiler and pumps appeared to be in fair condition with the

boiler being serviced at the time of our assessment, and with the pumps having been replaced

within the last five years. The boiler should be programmed for replacement near‐term. Assuming

the completion of on‐going repair and maintenance, we do not anticipate a requirement to

replace the pumps within the study period.

Projected Capital Expenditures

Required:

1. We recommend budgeting for replacement of the boiler in 2016. Our opinion of cost for this

work is $22,000.

david.saulter

Rectangle



7.2 Cooling Systems

Description

Chilled water that is circulated within the air handling unit coils is produced by one fluid‐cooled

reciprocating liquid chiller. The chiller is located within the basement level boiler room and

consists of a 50 ton capacity unit manufactured by Carrier® and installed in 1991. The chiller

utilizes R‐22 refrigerant. Chilled water is distributed to the various air‐handling units via two 120‐

gpm pumps.

Condenser water for the chiller is generated by one cooling tower located at‐grade at the south

east corner of the Property. The cooling tower was manufactured by Baltimore Air Coil in 1991

and had a capacity of approximately 50‐tons. Condenser water is distributed via two approximate

150‐gpm pumps with two horsepower motors. Pumps for the cooling tower contained three

horsepower motors and were rated with a flow capacity of 170‐gpm.

Supplemental cooling for the elevator equipment room is provided by a split system air

conditioning unit with the remote condensing unit being mounted on the east side of the building.

The split system air conditioning unit has an approximate cooling capacity of 2‐tons and was

manufactured by Carrier.

System Capacity


documentation, the chilled water and the condenser water systems are adequate for the

building’s cooling needs.

Condition

The chiller and the cooling tower appeared to be in fair condition having been in service for

almost 25 years. Based on the age of each unit, it is likely that replacement components will

become increasingly difficult to procure or become obsolete altogether. In addition,

advancements in technology have increased the energy efficiency of chillers and cooling towers

drastically since the existing units were installed. Based on these factors, we recommend

budgeting for the replacement of the chiller and cooling tower near‐term. When replacing the

existing units, it is possible that the existing pumps may require replacement based up on the new

capacity of the chiller, so the associated cost of replacing the distribution pumps have been

included within the chiller replacement cost.

The supplemental cooling unit appeared to be in good condition and should not require

replacement within the study period.




Required:

2. We recommend budgeting for replacement of the chiller in 2016. Our opinion of cost for this

work is $75,000.

3. We recommend budgeting for replacement of the cooling tower in 2016. Our opinion of cost

for this work is $30,000.

7.3 Air Distribution Systems

Description

Conditioned air is provided by two single‐zone and one multi‐zone air‐handling units

manufactured by ACME and equipped with hydronic coils. Conditioned air is then distributed

throughout each floor of the building via sheet metal ducts. Table 7‐1 provides a summary of the

air handling units.

Table 7‐1 – Air Handling Units

AHU # Location Served Capacity Installation Date

1 (Multi Zone) Principal Areas of the

Building

632,000 BTU/Hr

15,650 CFM 1962/3

2 (Single Zone) Meeting Room in

Basement

77,900 BTU/Hr

3,180 CFM 1962/3

3 (Single Zone) Hallways at 1st Floor Not Accessible 1962/3

System Capacity


documentation, the air‐handling systems have the capacity to maintain comfort conditions within

the building.

Condition

The modular air‐handling units appeared to be in fair condition with coils replaced in 2007. We

noted widespread deterioration of the sheet metal housings and condensate pans noted. Based

upon the age of the units and the extent of housing and pan failure, we recommend budgeting for

replacement of the units near‐term.

david.saulter

Rectangle

david.saulter

Rectangle




Required:

4. We recommend budgeting for replacement of AHU # 1 in 2016. Our opinion of cost for this

work is $65,000.


work is $25,000.


work is $25,000.

7.4 Ventilation and Exhaust Systems

Description

Ventilation Air

Outside air for ventilation is supplied to the air‐handling units via various outside air fans. The

outside air fans are typical mounted within each of the mechanical rooms on the vertical outside

air duct. The individual outside air fans are typically rated at 1,200‐cfm.

Exhaust Systems

General building exhaust systems include exhaust fans for the restrooms and boiler room. The

various exhaust fans have rated capacities ranging from 580‐ to 9,840‐cfm.

System Capacity

In general the supply and exhaust systems for the building appear appropriate for the

applications. However, it is possible that the existing air‐handling units are not capable of meeting

new outside air ventilation rates.

Condition

The various supply and exhaust systems for the building appeared to be in good condition. The

estimated useful life for the types of fans used is 20 to 30 years. Based on the minimal cost of

replacement, we anticipate that the exhaust or ventilation fans will be replaced upon failure as a

routine maintenance expense.

david.saulter

Rectangle

david.saulter

Rectangle

david.saulter

Rectangle




Required:

No expenditures are anticipated at this time.

7.5 Temperature Control Systems

Description

Control of the air handling units and other equipment was via a digital control system

manufactured by Johnson Controls.

Condition

The digital control system appeared to be in good condition having been installed in 2010. Based

upon obsolescence, we have recommended budgeting for mid‐term upgrade of the supporting

software.


Required:

7. We recommend budgeting for upgrade of the building management software in 2018. Our

opinion of cost for this work is $5,000.

david.saulter

Rectangle



8.0 ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS

The following information was obtained through our visual observations of the building systems, and

discussion with building maintenance personnel. The electrical systems include the incoming electrical

service, service switchgear and electrical distribution equipment, lighting systems, communications

systems, and security systems (reference Photographs28, 30, 36 & 37 in Appendix A).

8.1 Electrical Service and Distribution Equipment

Description

Electrical Service Equipment

Secondary electrical service is supplied at 208‐volts, 3‐phase from a PEPCO pole mounted

transformer located along 50th Street SE. Conductors from the transformer are then routed to a

400‐amp main C/T cabinet located in the basement boiler room. Service from the main C/T

cabinet is then routed to various breaker panels, fuse boxes, and fused disconnects to serve the

electrical loads throughout the building.

Power Distribution

Voltages

Large motors in the buildings (e.g. chillers and motors driving the HVAC system pumps, supply and

exhaust fans, and the boiler) are supplied at 208‐volts. Building fluorescent and interior and

exterior lighting fixtures, small motors, and miscellaneous power branch circuits are also supplied

from the 208/120‐volt system panels.

Wire and Conduit

Typical power distribution for feeders and branch circuits is accomplished using wire in conduit.

Observed wiring consists of copper with thermoplastic insulation. No aluminum wiring was

observed.

Conduit types varied in the buildings based on area and usage. Rigid metal conduit is used in areas

subject to constant moisture and physical damage. Electrical metallic tubing (EMT) is used in

interior spaces. Limited amounts of flexible metal conduit and Type MC cable are used.

Panelboards

Panel boards throughout the building range in capacity from 100‐amps up to 250‐amps. All panels

utilize either circuit breakers or plug type fuses for overcurrent and short circuit protection.



Condition

The electrical installations appeared to be in fair condition with most of the equipment and

components dating to the 1960’s. Based on the age and type of the electrical components, it is

likely that these components will reach the end of their service life and become increasingly

unreliable towards the end of the study period. We recommend budgeting for an electrical

system upgrade near to mid‐term to ensure the electrical systems continue to provide reliable

service.

System Capacity

The building is equipped an electrical service rated for 540‐kVA. Using a net building area of

22,240 square feet (SF) yields a unit load factor of 41.1‐VA/SF. Based on industry design standards,

the demand load for this building should be on the order of 8‐ to 10‐VA/SF. The building electrical

capacity appears to be more than adequate for the anticipated needs of this building.


Required:

1. We recommend budgeting for upgrading the main electrical system. Our opinion of cost for

this work is $75,000 in 2016.

8.2 Lighting Systems

Description

General office area lighting consists of nominal 2’ x 4’ lensed, lay‐in fluorescent fixtures.

Equipment areas are illuminated using fluorescent strip lighting. Linear fluorescent lamps are

F32T8 type. Fluorescent ballasts are energy saving electronic style. Most downlights in offices and

conference rooms utilize compact fluorescent lamps and electronic ballasts. Surface mounted

fixtures with metal halide lamps are used in the exterior.

Emergency egress lighting is provided by fixtures powered by the emergency power system.

Illuminated exit signs are installed at exit doors and along the path of egress. Exit signs styles vary

somewhat, but most are edge‐lit. Lighting is controlled by a combination of local switches and

sensors.

Condition

Fixtures generally appeared to be in good condition and appropriate for the applications. Most of

the fixtures have been replaced within the last ten years. We did note that some T12 fluorescent

fixtures are still installed in the main mechanical rooms.

david.saulter

Rectangle




Required:

No expenditures are required at this time.

8.3 Communication and Data Systems

Description

Telephone service enters the building at the basement level in the boiler room. Trunk cables are

then routed up through floor telephone closets to serve the main and second floor. Incoming

service cables belong to the telephone companies.

Condition

The data and telephone infrastructure appeared to be in good condition and should not require

significant repair or replacement within the ten‐year study period.


Required:


8.4 Security Systems

Description

The building is protected by electronic security systems. A closed circuit television (CCTV) system

is installed throughout the building. A digital video recorder (DVR) manufactured by GE is installed

at the main entrance desk. In addition, an electronic anti theft system is installed at the main

library entrance.

Condition

The security systems appeared to be in good condition with the CCTV and DVR systems having

been upgraded within the last four years. The estimated useful life of the cameras and DVRs

equipment is typically 8 to 10 years due to advances in technology and systems obsolescence. We

recommend budgeting for the general replacement and upgrade of the security systems mid‐

term.




Required:

1. We recommend budgeting for the as needed replacement of the security cameras and DVRs

late‐term. Our opinion of cost for this work is $15,000 in 2018.

david.saulter

Rectangle



9.0 PLUMBING SYSTEMS

The following information was obtained through our visual observations of the building systems and

discussions with building maintenance personnel. The plumbing systems include the domestic cold water

system, domestic hot water system, sanitary waste and vent system, and storm water collection system

(reference Photograph 42 in Appendix A).

9.1 Domestic Water Systems

Description

Domestic Cold Water

Domestic cold water service, consisting of a 2” diameter water main, enters the building at the

west side of the building in the boiler room. Shut‐off valves are installed shortly after the service

enters the building. The metered service is routed through a double check‐valve type backflow

prevention device, and then to the respective areas of the building and site. Water distribution

relies on the pressure from the service main at around 55‐ to 60‐psi.

Domestic Hot Water

Domestic hot water is generated by one natural gas fired water heater located in the boiler room

in the basement. The water heater has a storage capacity of approximately 60‐gallons and

appears to have been installed in 2010.

System Evaluation

The capacity and configuration of the water service to and through the building appears to be

appropriate. No problems were reported or noted concerning water distribution.

Condition

The domestic water systems appear to be in good condition. No leaks or restricted flow was noted

or reported within the piping systems. The domestic water heater was in good condition having

been installed in 2010. Future replacement should not be required within the study period.


Required:




9.2 Sanitary Waste and Storm Drainage Systems

Description

Sanitary Waste Systems

Sanitary waste is collected from multiple riser stacks and routed to the municipal sanitary system

via a duplex sanitary booster pump system contained within the basement level boiler room.

Visible portions of the sanitary piping were of cast iron construction with some PVC repairs.

Storm Water Systems

Storm drainage from the low‐slope roof areas is via roof drains and internal leaders and

downspouts. Storm water is drained via gravity lines to site lines that discharge into the City

maintained system. Visible portions of the storm water piping were of cast iron construction with

some modifications being completed with PVC piping.

System Evaluation

The capacity and configuration of the sanitary and storm water collection systems for both

buildings appear to be appropriate for the current occupancy.

Condition

The sanitary and storm drainage systems appeared to be in fair to good condition with no

significant leaks or other areas of deterioration noted or reported to us. We do not anticipate a

requirement to complete significant repair or replacement of the sanitary systems within the ten‐

year study period. We do anticipate that one or both of the sump pumps and sewage ejector

pumps will need to be replaced during the study period. However, based upon the minimal

replacement cost of the pump and/or motor, we anticipate that they will be replaced upon failure

as a routine maintenance expense.


Required:




10.0 FIRE AND LIFE SAFETY SYSTEMS

Fire and life safety elements observed audible fire alarm and detection system (fire alarm / annunciator

panels, duct detectors, strobes, pull stations, emergency and exit lights), handheld fire extinguishers, and

fire‐rated means of egress (reference Photographs 23 – 25, 29, 32 & 45 in Appendix A).

10.1 Code References

The building was designed in 1962 for construction and occupancy in 1963. The building was

constructed under the 1961 edition of the District of Columbia Building Code.

10.2 Structural Fire Protection

Description

The structure consisted of reinforced concrete columns and floors, some structural steel beams

and columns, concrete masonry unit (CMU) walls, and drywall partitions. Exit stairs are generally

enclosed, with the rated assemblies created using rated partitions. Shaft enclosures consist of

CMU walls with protected openings and penetrations. These elements have two hour fire

resistance rating construction. Fire rating labels at doors typically indicated a 1, 1 ½ or 2 hour

rating.

Condition

We noted the condition and adequacy of the structural fire protection systems at the mechanical,

electrical and telecommunication rooms, in the corridors and exit stairs, and above select ceiling

tiles. The structural fire protection appeared to be in good condition and generally installed in

accordance with industry accepted practice and the codes enforced at the time of construction.


Required:


10.3 Means of Egress

Description

Primary exit stairwells are contained at the east and west of the building. Both exits expel to the

building exterior. Exit doors had a clear opening width of 33” per leaf. Exit signs are provided at

each exit and at appropriate locations along the path of egress. Emergency lighting serving the

egress paths and the interior of exit stairs is provided by selected ceiling mounted fixtures

powered by the emergency circuit and battery backups.



Condition

Means of egress comply with the fire codes enforced at the time of construction with regard to

exit discharge, travel distances and other factors. We do not anticipate a requirement to upgrade

the means of egress components during the study period.


Required:


10.4 Fire Detection and Alarm Systems

Description

The building is protected by a Simplex 4100 addressable fire alarm system. The fire alarm control

panel (FACP) is located in the elevator control room. An annunciator panel is located at the main

library entrance near the service desk.

The fire alarm system monitors manual pull stations and smoke detectors throughout the

building. Duct detectors are provided in air‐handling units rated for more than 2,000 cubic feet

per minute (cfm) of airflow. Pull stations are provided at exits. Alarm notification is provided by

horn/strobe signals and strobe‐only signals located throughout the building.

Elevator recall is accomplished via an interface with the fire alarm system. Upon activation of a

smoke detector associated with an elevator lobby, machine room, or hoistway, the elevator is

recalled to the main access floor (or the alternate floor), the doors open, and the elevator is taken

out‐of‐service until re‐activated by emergency personnel.

Condition

The fire alarm system was upgraded in 2010 and appears to be in good condition. Replacement of

the existing system is not required as long as it continues to function. However, historically the

main fire alarm control panels often become obsolete after 10 to 15 years and must undergo

replacement to remain current and fully functional. This timing is beyond the 10 years considered

by this study.


Required:




11.0 CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS

11.1 Description

The building contains one passenger elevator (reference Photograph 31 in Appendix A). The

elevator consists of a direct plunger basement hydraulic unit which serves the basement, 1st floor

and 2nd floor. The elevator consists of a wall‐mounted non proprietary solid state microprocessor

controller, a hydraulic oil tank with integral pump, the car and car guide rails, car doors and door

operator, travelling cables, the in‐ground double wall hydraulic cylinder, plunger and associated

PVC wrapping and stop ring, and the landing indicator, landing push buttons, landing doors, and

the car buttons and finishes. Omni Elevator Company is the current maintenance provider. Table

11‐1 provides a summary of the elevator systems.

Table 11‐1 ‐ Summary of Elevators

Elevator

Designation

Floor Levels

Served Type

Capacity

(LBS)

Speed

(FPM 1)

Passenger or

Freight

1 B, 1, 2 Hydraulic 2,500 150 Passenger

1. FPM indicates feet per minute

Machine Room Equipment

The machine room for the elevator is located adjacent to the elevator shaft at the lower level. The

machine room consists of a purpose built dedicated room and contains the microprocessor solid

state controller which is wall‐mounted adjacent to the pump unit. The controller consists of a

V3MH model non‐proprietary unit manufactured by Virginia Controllers and installed in 2007.

Pits & Hoistway

The elevator pit contains the major pieces of equipment listed in Table 12‐2.

Table 12‐2 ‐ Summary of Pit & Hoistway Equipment

Limit Switches Door Operating Equipment

Hoistway Wiring and Conduit Door Operators

Panels and Frames Car Operating Station

Fascias and Dust Covers Leveling Equipment

Spring Buffers PVC lined Double Walled Hydraulic

Jack Assembly



Cab

The elevator cab consists of a steel enclosure with decorative finishes. A car‐operating panel is

provided within the cab. Raised numbers and Braille tags are provided at the operating panel. A

hands free communication system is provided within the cab. The cab is provided with side

opening single‐stage doors with infrared sensors. Cab finishes consist of 12” x 12” vinyl floor tiles,

wood laminate wall panels and an acrylic ceiling system.

Lobbies

Hall call risers are provided at each lobby serving the elevator. Hall buttons provided at the

passenger elevators are newer style and comply with the Americans with Disability Act

Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG). Arrival lanterns and Braille floor designations are provided on

the hoistway entrances.

11.2 Condition

The elevator appeared to be in good condition with records reviewed detailing that the hydraulic

pump jack assembly is not loosing oil. Routine maintenance is completed by the Omni Elevator

Company. Based upon observed conditions and documents reviewed, it appears that the elevator

system was subject to large‐scale modernization in 2007. Modernization was generally completed

using non proprietary components and appeared to consist of the following general scope:

Machine Room

Replacement of the original relay logic controller with a with microprocessor controller

and new VVVF AC drive

Replacement of wiring

Replacement of hydraulic pump unit

Installation of a 1.5 ton capacity split system air conditioning unit

Fixtures

New main applied panel car station

New flushmount hall stations

New hall lantern inserts with LED lights and electronic gongs

Reuse of the jamb Braille

New lobby fire panel with required devices

Replacement of car finishes

Door Equipment

Installation of a closed loop door operator

Refurbishment of the car door tracks and hanger assemblies

Refurbishment of the existing hoistway door equipment (replace rollers, gibbs, closers,

interlocks as necessary)

Installation of new hoistway door astragals



Hoistway Equipment

New wiring throughout (traveling cable, hoistway wiring, etc.)

New landing system (position transducer and limit switch package)

New load weighing devices

Refurbishment of the existing car and counterweight guides (replace rollers as necessary)

New cartop exit switch

Installation of bevel ledges through hoistway

Pit Equipment

New pit stop switch

New pit ladder as necessary to meet code requirements

Replacement of the hydraulic jack assembly

Based upon observed conditions, the use of long‐life non propriety equipment and the extent of

the 2007 modernization project, repeat cycle modernization of the elevator should not be

required until the existing components reach a 20 year age in circa 2027. This is beyond the

timeframe considered by this study.


Required:

No required expenditures are anticipated at this time.



BUILDING INTERIORS AND FINISHES

12.0 INTERIOR FINISHES

The interior areas of the building can be divided into 1) the public areas, 2) meeting rooms and 3)

staff areas (reference Photographs 22 & 26 in Appendix A).

12.1 Description

The interior areas of the building can be divided into three principal areas (reference Photographs

xx through xx in Appendix A). These consist of 1) the public areas, 2) meeting rooms and 3) staff

areas. The public areas account for the majority of the building and consist of the entrance

vestibule and lobby, reception and the main library area on the ground floor. The first floor has

limited books and is primarily used as a meeting space.

Finishes within communal areas, such as library spaces typically have a carpet tiles. However,

finishes within communal staircases consist of resilient vinyl floor tiling and some lobby areas have

ceramic floor tiles. Wall finishes generally consist of painted gypsum board, however some areas

have concrete masonry units (CMU) with a painted finish.

Floor finishes within restrooms consist of ceramic mosaic tiling to the floors. Walls consist of

gypsum board and are a partially clad with ceramic tiling to a height of around five feet, the

remainder of the wall has a painted finish.

Ceiling finishes throughout consist of a suspended ceiling grid with 2x4' composite infill tiles.

12.2 Condition

Floor finishes throughout are in fair condition. Areas of carpeting were showing signs of wear and

had localized stains, it is therefore recommended that carpet tiles are replaced in the mid‐term. It

is assumed that all other floor finishes will be replaced during the next internal refurbishment

project. Wall finishes are in fair condition, it is however recommended that cyclical redecoration

works are undertaken ever 5‐7 years, however such costs have been excluded from this

assessment.

The condition of the interior finishes varied from fair (where original) to good (where replaced).

Replacement finishes consisted of carpet tiles and paint in the public areas and meeting rooms.

These finishes were replaced in 2012. We have included an allowance for periodic replacement of

interior finishes based upon observed conditions, discussion with management personal and our

experience with similar facilities.

The ceiling finishes are in fair condition and should not require any significant capital expenditures

during this study period.




Required:

1. We recommend budgeting for replacement of carpet tiles in 2019. Our opinion of cost for this

work is $74,805.

david.saulter

Rectangle



AMERICANS WITH DISABILITY ACT (ADA)

13.0 ACCESSIBILITY

13.1 The Guidelines

As a publically accessible office facility, the building should seek compliance with the 1991

Americans with Disability Act (ADA) Accessibility Guideline. This report section compares the

requirements of the ADA with as‐built conditions, and where applicable, recommends upgrades

required to achieve compliance. Specifically, two areas of the ADA have significant effect on the

physical aspects of the Property.

Title I deals with employment discrimination, and requires that employers not discriminate

against a disabled person in hiring or employment. This can impact the configuration and features

of buildings and those employers are expected to make “reasonable accommodation”, including

making facilities readily accessible to disabled employees.

Title III requires that public accommodation provide goods and services to disabled patrons on an

equal basis with the non‐disabled patrons. This title is the part of the ADA with perhaps the

greatest impact on buildings, which provide public accommodations, including libraries.

The ADA has provided a benchmark for measuring accessibility, primarily orientated towards new

construction. It also provides guidance for modification of existing facilities to eliminate barriers to

access. This benchmark is the ADA Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG). The ADAAG was written by

the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, and first issued in final form in

July 1991. The stated purpose of the guidelines is to ensure that newly constructed facilities and

altered portions of existing facilities covered by the ADA are readily accessible to disabled

persons.

The ADA in its purest form relates only to facilities first occupied or significantly altered after

March 13, 1991. For facilities with Certificates of Occupancy issued prior to March 13, 1991 and

not significantly altered after this date, the ADA is seen as a “good practice guide” with a

requirement to complete accessibility upgrades typically made by civil suit and employee / user

request.

Regulatory implementation of the ADA includes the following prioritizes for barrier removal in

existing facilities:

Accessible Entrances. Providing access from public sidewalks, parking or public

transportation that enables disabled individuals to enter the facility.

Access to Goods and Services. Providing access to areas where goods and services are

made available to the public.

Usability of Restrooms. Providing access to restroom facilities.



Removal of Remaining Barriers. Providing access to the goods, services, facilities,

privileges, advantages, or accommodations.

13.2 Applicability

The ADA relates primarily to facilities occupied or significantly altered after March 13, 1991. For

facilities with Certificates of Occupancy issued prior to March 13, 1991 and not significantly

altered after this date, the ADA is seen as a “good practice guide” with a requirement to complete

accessibility upgrades typically made by civil suit and employee / user request. The building was

first occupied in circa 1963. Therefore, compliance with the ADAAG is not necessarily required,

but compliance of the Property has been considered to be needed as a good practice.

13.3 Accessible Entrances

The first consideration relates to measures that will enable individuals with disabilities to

physically approach and enter a place of public accommodation. The priority of “getting through

the door” recognizes that providing actual physical access to a facility from public sidewalks,

public transportation, or parking, is generally preferable to any alternative arrangement in terms

of both business efficiency and the dignity of individuals with disabilities.

Persons travelling to the building via public transportation are likely to access the site from a small

section of private sidewalk which is accessed via public sidewalks located on either 50th Street SE

or Central Avenue SW. The sidewalks at the perimeter of the site are provided with curb ramps

where required and are generally accessible.

The building provides combined access for visitors and for employees. All parties entering the

building via public transport or from the parking stalls on site can enter via the main entrance

located at the corner of 50th Street SE and Central Avenue SW. Access vie the main entrance is

provided through a pair of glazed double doors with an adjacent vestibule and with power‐

assisted automatic opening devices. The entrance doors’ configuration is generally compliant with

the ADAAG. However, it should be noted that no accessible parking is provided at present and the

route from the parking lot to the main entrance is via a paved roadway.

The entrance doors’ configuration is generally compliant with the ADAAG. Once through the

elevator lobby entrance doors, access to the second floor’s main lobby and the upper floors is

unrestricted via an elevator. Door widths and hardware are compliant with the applicable

sections of the ADAAG.

An item to address as an operational expense is provision of directional signage at the entrance

drive and along the sidewalk indicating the accessible route to parking and the entrance at first

floor level.



13.4 Accessible Drop‐Off and Pick‐Up Areas

If passenger drop‐off areas are provided, they must be accessible and an accessible route must

connect each accessible drop‐off area with the accessible entrance(s). Curb ramps must be

provided if the drop‐off area is next to a curb and raised sidewalk. The building is not provided

with a drop off area.

13.5 Route of Travel

Disabled persons wishing to access the Property are able to gain suitable means of entry via the

main entrance located at the corner of 50th Street SE and Central Avenue SW. This route of travel

utilized public and private sidewalks and is generally in compliance with ADAAG.

The route of travel, from the parking lot is partially restricted as access is provided via a paved

access road, which has locked gate outside of business hours.

13.6 Horizontal and Vertical Circulation

The building is served by a single passenger elevators that generally comply with the requirements

of Section 4.10 (Elevators) of the ADAAG, including hall call buttons, hall lanterns, raised and

Braille characters on hoistway entrances, and car controls.

Horizontal circulation throughout the building is in corridors or open areas with level floors and

typically of adequate width and configuration.

13.7 Door Widths and Signage

Section 4.13 (Doors) of the ADAAG states that doorways and gates, including security entrance

gates, shall have a minimum clear opening of 32‐inches. The doorways met this requirement with

a typical clear opening width of 33‐ to 34‐inches. The threshold at doorways is to not exceed ½‐

inches in height, and the door hardware (handles, pulls, latches, locks etc.) on accessible doors are

to have a shape that is easy to grasp with one hand and does not require tight grasping, tight

pinching, or twisting of the wrist to operate. The doorways at the Property were compliant with

these requirements.

The ADAAG states that signs that identify permanent rooms and spaces such as those identifying

restrooms and exits or providing room numbers must have Braille and raised letters or numbers to

allow them be read visually or tactilely. The ADAAG also states that signs must also meet specific

requirements for mounting location, color contrast, and non‐glare surface. Signs that provide

direction to, or information about, functional spaces must only comply with requirements for

character proportion, character height, and finish and with contrast between the characters and

background.

Signs used to identify offices and other permanent rooms and spaces within the Property meet

these requirements.



13.8 Space Allowance and Reach Ranges

Section 4.2 (Space Allowance and Reach Ranges) of the ADAAG requires that a minimum clear

width for single wheelchair passage shall be 32‐inches, the minimum width for two wheelchairs to

pass is 60‐inches, the space required for a wheelchair to make a 180‐degree turn is a clear space

of 60‐inches, and the minimum clear floor or ground space required to accommodate a single,

stationary wheelchair occupant is 30‐inches by 48‐inches.

The Property generally complies with these requirements.

13.9 Protruding Objects

Section 4.4 (Protruding Objects) of the ADAAG requires that objects projecting from walls (e.g.

drinking fountains) with their leading edges between 27‐inches and 80‐inches above the finished

floor shall protrude no more than 4‐inches into walks, halls, corridors, passageways, or aisles.

Objects mounted with their leading edges at or below 27‐inches above the finished floor may

protrude any amount. Free‐standing objects mounted on posts or pylons may overhang 12‐inches

maximum from 27‐inches to 80‐inches above the ground or finished floor. Protruding objects shall

not reduce the clear width of an accessible route or maneuvering space.

The section also states that walks, halls, corridors, passageways, aisles, or other circulation spaces

shall have a minimum clear head room of 80‐inches. If a vertical clearance of an area adjoining an

accessible route is reduced to less than 80‐inches (nominal dimension), a barrier to warn blind or

visually‐impaired persons shall be provided.

The Property’s interior spaces generally comply with these requirements.

13.10 Ground and Floor Surfaces

Section 4.5 (Ground and Floor Surfaces) of the ADAAG requires that ground and floor surfaces

along accessible routes and in accessible rooms and spaces, including floors, walks, ramps, stairs,

and curb ramps, be stable, firm, and slip‐resistant.

Flooring within the Property generally complied with this requirement.

This section also requires that changes in level between ¼‐inches to ½‐inches be beveled with a

slope no greater than 1:2, and that changes in level greater than ½‐inches be accomplished by

means of a ramp. The section also states that carpet or carpet tile used on a ground or floor

surface be securely attached; have a firm cushion, pad, or backing or no cushion or pad; and have

a level loop, textured loop, level cut pile, or level cut/uncut pile texture. Where gratings are

located on walking surfaces, then they shall have spaces no greater than ½‐inches wide in one

direction.

Ground and floor surfaces for the Property were generally compliant.



13.11 Ramps

Section 4.8 (Ramps) of the ADAAG requires that any part of an accessible route with a slope

greater than 1:20 shall be considered a ramp. The Property does not contain ramps.

13.12 Accessible Amenities

ADAAG requires that the controls and operating mechanisms of vending machines in restaurants

and cafeterias comply with all of 4.27 (Controls and Operating Mechanisms) of the ADAAG.

Common area vending machines were not noted at the Property.

13.13 Usability of Restrooms

Sections 4.16 through 4.21 of the ADA detail those measures needed to provide individuals with

disabilities with access to restroom facilities. These include the height of fixtures, size and

arrangement of toilet stalls, location and height of grab bars and accessories, and floor and reach

range clearances. In general, the restrooms fixtures, stall configurations, dimensions and

accessories, the floor clearances and reach ranges to fixtures and accessories appear to comply

with the ADAAG.

13.14 Drinking Fountains

Bi‐level drinking fountains are provided on each floor level. Section 4.15.2 (Spout Height) of the

ADA requires that the spout height of drinking fountains no exceed 36”. The spout height of one

of the drinking fountains one each floor was compliant at 32”.

Drinking fountains were compliant with this section of the ADAAG.

13.15 Parking

An insufficient number of accessible parking spaces were provided for the building. ADA

requirements state that for a building which contains 20 spaces, one ADA compliant parking

spaces is required under Section 208.2, Parking Spaces ‐ Minimum Number, of the ADAAG and

only one was provided. No of accessible spaces are provided to the building, therefore parking

requirements are non‐compliant.

We recommend that an ADA compliant parking space is provided. This should be located at the

nearest point to the main building entrance. These works will likely be undertaken during the re‐

striping of the parking lot and have therefore been excluded from this assessment.


Required:

No required expenditures are anticipated at this time.

Appendix A Photographs

Photograph 01 Library sign at front entrance

Photograph 02 Front elevation

Photograph 03 Main roof covering in poor condition

Photograph 04 Peeling surface coating and evidence of ponding

Photograph 05 Missing capping and exposed timbers to roof perimeter

Photograph 06 Split and detached roof capping sheet

Photograph 07 Roof covering to canopy on the front elevation

Photograph 08 Missing roof covering and exposed timber decking to storage area (Rear elevation)

Photograph 09 Aluminum windows and security grills to lower level (Rear elevation)

Photograph 10 Precast concrete panels between brick work

Photograph 11 Damaged brickwork and corroding embedded steel lintel

Photograph 12 Efflorescence stained brickwork

Photograph 13 Corroded and detached rainwater pipe

Photograph 14

Patched and worn parking lot pavement with vegetation growth

Photograph 15 Cracking to parking pavement

Photograph No.01 Southeast Corner of the Property

Photograph 16 Cooling tower located in parking lot

Photograph 17 Main parking lot entrance and ponding water to pavement

Photograph 18 Debris build up on interior of aluminum windows

Photograph 19 Glazing obscured by etched effect to the surface

Photograph 20 Typical ceiling mounted CCTV camera

Photograph 21 ADA compliant water fountains

Photograph 22 First floor finishes

Photograph 23 Ceiling mounted smoke detection and strobe light

Photograph 24 Fire exit door from first floor

Photograph 25 Stair well and fire escape

Photograph 26 Typical rest room finishes

Photograph 27 Typical door furniture (Non ADA Compliant)

Photograph 28 Main electrical circuit breakers

Photograph 29 Fire alarm annunciator panel in reception

Photograph No.01 Southeast Corner of the Property

Photograph 30 Security barriers adjacent to exit doors

Photograph 31 Lift control circuitry

Photograph 32 Addressable fire alarm control panel

Photograph 33 Chiller

Photograph 34 Chiller

Photograph 35 Sewage ejector pumps

Photograph 36 Main electrical panels

Photograph 37 Main electrical panels

Photograph 38 Prime and stand-by pump

Photograph 39 Main air handling unit

Photograph 40 Secondary air handling unit

Photograph 41 Boiler

Photograph 42 Domestic water heater

Photograph 43 Interior view of boiler

Photograph 44 Sump pump

Photograph 45 Fire control panel

Photograph 46 Floor structure

Appendix B Expenditure Forecast By Year

Component No. ComponentEstimated Useful

Life or Replacement Cycle (Yrs)

Remaining Useful Life (Yrs)

QuantityUnit of

MeasurementUnit Cost Immediate 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

Req

uire

d

Year 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Site Systems

Ten Year Capital Expenditure Forecast Capitol View Branch Library

5001 Central Avenue, SEWashington, DC

RequiredRequired

1 Resurface (Mill & Overlay) Asphalt Pavements 20 2 1,063 SY $22.00 $23,386 $23,386

2 Crack Fill, Seal Coat & Re-Stripe Asphalt Pavements 5 N/A 1,063 SY $5.50 $5,847 $5,847

3 Replace Failed Concrete at Building Entrance 20 1 196 SF $15.00 $2,940 $2,940

4 Allowance For Replacement of Perimeter Chain Link Fence 15 4 361 LF $25.00 $9,025 $9,025

Structural Systems

Roofing Systems

1 Replace Built-Up Roof System 20 1 9,351 SF $14.00 $130,914 $130,914

Exterior Elements

1 A/E Fees Relating to Recommendations 3 - 9 N/A 1 15 % $219,723.00 $32,958 $32,958

2 Scaffolding for Recommendations 3 - 9 N/A 1 1 LS $29,200.00 $29,200 $29,200

3 Refurbish or Replace Lintels and Install Through Wall Flashings 60 1 434 LF $175.00 $75,950 $75,950

4 Replace Failed Precast Concrete Panels 60 1 19 EA $2,200.00 $41,800 $41,800

5 Recoat Precast Concrete Panels and Apply Sealants 8 1 280 SF $55.00 $15,400 $15,400

6 Clean External Brickwork 15 1 1027 SF $9.00 $9,243 $9,243

7 Replace Windows (4'3" tall x 2'1" long) 35 1 55 EA $1,050.00 $57,750 $57,750

8 Replace Windows (2'4" tall x 2' long) 35 1 24 EA $790.00 $18,960 $18,960

9 Replace Windows (0.91' tall x 1'3" long) 35 1 1 EA $620.00 $620 $620

Mechanical

1 Replace Boiler 20 2 1 EA $22,000.00 $22,000 $22,000

2 Replace Chiller 20 2 50 Ton $1,500.00 $75,000 $75,000

3 Replace Cooling Tower 20 2 50 Ton $600.00 $30,000 $30,000

4 Replace AHU # 1 20 2 1 LS $55,000.00 $65,000 $65,000

5 Replace AHU # 2 20 2 1 LS $25,000.00 $25,000 $25,000

6 Replace AHU # 3 20 2 1 LS $25,000.00 $25,000 $25,000

7 Upgrade Software at Building Automation System 8 4 1 LS $5,000.00 $5,000 $5,000

Required

Required

Required

No Expenditures Required at This Time

Required

Component No. ComponentEstimated Useful

Life or Replacement Cycle (Yrs)

Remaining Useful Life (Yrs)

QuantityUnit of

MeasurementUnit Cost Immediate 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024

Req

uire

d

Year 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Ten Year Capital Expenditure Forecast Capitol View Branch Library

5001 Central Avenue, SEWashington, DC

Electrical

1 Replace Electrical Switchgear 30 2 1 LS $75,000.00 $75,000 $75,000

2 Replace CCTV & Proximity Sensor Systems 8 4 1 LS $15,000.00 $15,000 $15,000

Plumbing

Fire & Life Safety

Interiors

1 Replace Carpet Tiles 8 5 14,961 SF $5.00 $74,805 $74,805

$0 $0 $756,121 $0 $29,025 $74,805 $0 $5,847 $0 $0 $0 $865,798

$0 $0 $778,805 $0 $31,716 $84,194 $0 $6,981 $0 $0 $0 $901,696Cost (Inflated @ 3% Per Yr.)

Required Cost (Present Worth)

Required

Required


Required

Required


Appendix C Resumes of Assessment Team

Imran Ishaq , MRICS, CSCS Senior Facility Assessor Imran is a Chartered Building Surveyor with considerable experience in the Healthcare and Social Housing sector. He graduated from DeMontfort University, Leicester in 1999, started his career in London and returned to the North in June 2003 to commence employment with Faithful+Gould. Imran has undertaken projects from inception to completion and is familiar with contract procedures under JCT and NEC Forms of Contract. SELECTED PROJECT EXPERIENCE Sheffield City Council: Building fabric assessments using Apple iPad’s and Technology Forge IT platform to identify building pathology defects and estimated 5 year maintenance liability of municipal buildings including libraries, cemeteries and schools. Included the survey of Grade I Listed – Sheffield Town Hall. Lovell: Sheffield Family Courts – Condition assessment of building fabric and M&E installations to establish 20 year maintenance liability. Lovell: Fabric & M&E Condition assessments of 74nr residential properties using iPad technology and Kykloud Survey system. South Yorkshire Police: Condition assessment of building fabric and M&E installations to 72nr police properties including stations and other ancillary buildings. Anchor Housing Trust: Condition assessment of building fabric and M&E installations to 134 residential sites located in the Midlands, Yorkshire, Lancashire and North East. Development of specification documents and implementation of construction works. Halifax Plc: Project involved the survey and alteration of the building fabric and M&E to 1100 nationwide properties in accordance with Equality Act 2010. Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council: Building fabric surveys to implement roof refurbishments to the Grade 1 & 2 Listed Buildings – Mansion House, Priory Place and Cusworth Hall.

Education B.S., Building Surveying,

University of West England, 2000

Certifications Professional Member of The

Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (MRICS)

Bachelor of Science Degree with Honours in Building Surveying

Achieved certification with the Construction Skills Certification scheme (CSCS)

NEBOSH general certificate in Health and Safety and NEBOSH fire safety and risk assessments

Years of Experience 16

Benjamin Dutton, FFB, MCIOB, MRICS Project Executive Benjamin Dutton is the director of Faithful+Gould’s facility condition assessment practice for North America. With more than 15 years of experience in facility assessments, Benjamin has worked in all sectors of the industry, from both municipal and federal governmental facilities to airports and resorts. Since 2005, Benjamin has grown Faithful+Gould’s condition assessment practice and built strong relationships with clients such as the District of Columbia Department of Real Estate Services (DRES), District of Columbia Public Schools, Archon Group and the U.S. General Services Administration. Benjamin’s driven nature and technical knowledge are assets as he spearheads Faithful+Gould’s condition assessment service across the United States and provides strategic facility information creating value for our clients. SELECTED PROJECT EXPERIENCE Archon Group Portfolio; Nationwide: Partnered with Archon Group on the condition assessment of more than 20 million square feet of office, hotel and related buildings under acquisition. National Institutes of Health (NIH); Bethesda, MD: Completed a comprehensive facility condition assessments on NIH’s 120-acre, 49-building campus to help them better understand the condition of its properties and develop a better maintenance system. Comerica Bank Portfolio; Various Locations, CA: Provided ongoing on-call due diligence engineering evaluations for various Comerica Bank properties varying in size of 5,000 square feet to 100,000 square feet. District of Columbia Department of General Services, City-wide Facility Assessment Portfolio; Washington, DC: Acted as project executive overseeing the comprehensive facility condition assessment of several different facility types for DRES such as office and administrative buildings, police stations, fire stations, the DC hospital, parks and recreation facilities, detentions facilities and much more. City of Milwaukie, City-wide Facility Assessment Property Portfolio; Milwaukie, OR: Provided executive oversight for the asset inventory, 10-year life cycle expenditure forecast and facility condition, energy and sustainability assessment consisting of the site systems, exterior and interior building systems, MEP systems and health/fire/life safety systems.

Education B.S., Building Surveying,

University of West England, 2000

Certifications Member of Royal Institution

of Chartered Surveyors (MRICS)

Member, Chartered Institute of Building (MCIOB)

Fellow, Faculty of Building (FFB)

Member, Society for the Protection of Ancient Buildings

Certified Reserved Specialist Faculty of Building CoreNet Global RICS, Royal Institution of

Chartered Surveyors, UK The Society for the Protection

of Ancient Buildings (SPAB)

Chartered Institute of Building (CIOB)

Years of Experience 15

Appendix D ROM Estimate

Capitol View Branch LibraryNew BuildingWashington, D.C.D.C. Public Library Area:Rough Order of Magnitude Date:

Summary

DESCRIPTION TOTAL $/SF %

02 Sitework $998,244 $39.50 11.2%03 Concrete $612,846 $24.25 6.9%04 Masonry $884,520 $35.00 10.0%05 Metals $688,662 $27.25 7.8%06 Woods & Plastics $181,958 $7.20 2.0%07 Thermal & Moisture Protection $866,830 $34.30 9.8%08 Doors & Windows $574,938 $22.75 6.5%09 Finishes $796,068 $31.50 9.0%10 Specialties $214,812 $8.50 2.4%11 Equipment $353,808 $14.00 4.0%12 Furnishings $151,632 $6.00 1.7%13 Special Construction $189,540 $7.50 2.1%14 Conveying Systems $151,632 $6.00 1.7%15 Mechanical $1,405,123 $55.60 15.8%16 Electrical $808,704 $32.00 9.1%

Estimated Direct Construction Cost $8,879,317 $351.35 100.0%

Estimating & Design Contingency 10.0% $887,932

General Conditions & Overhead 12.0% $1,172,070Fee 3.0% $328,180

25,272 gsfOctober 20, 2014

Estimated Construction Cost Award (ECCA) $11,267,498 $445.85

Summary Page 1 of 1

david.saulter

Rectangle

report of facilities condition assessment

Documents