Board of Supervisors Business Meeting

Date of Meeting: September 17, 2014

# 14L BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

ACTION ITEM

SUBJECT: FINANCE/GOVERNMENT SERVICES & OPERATIONS

COMMITTEE REPORT: Old Arcola Elementary School

Building: Options for Future Use of the Building and Site

ELECTION DISTRICT: Blue Ridge

CRITICAL ACTION DATE: At the Pleasure of the Board

STAFF CONTACTS: Steve Torpy, Director, PRCS

Danny Davis, Special Projects Coordinator, PRCS

Dick Pezzullo, Director, General Services

Paul Brown, Deputy Director, DTCI

PURPOSE: To provide options for pursuing a public-private partnership or other future use of the Old

Arcola Elementary School building.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

Committee: On September 9, 2014, the Finance/Government Services & Operations Committee voted 4-

0-1 (Reid, absent) to recommend that the Board of Supervisors direct staff to explore any viable options

for public-private partnerships, up to and including selling the site, with the preference to save the

building if possible.

Staff: Staff recommends the Board of Supervisors direct staff to develop a solicited PPEA for the Old

Arcola Elementary School building and site, to include preferences for: preservation of the building;

retention, improvement, or expansion of the athletic field(s); and other creative uses that will benefit the

community. Staff recommends any proactive process to sell the site be deferred until after the PPEA

process.

BACKGROUND: The Old Arcola Elementary School building was built in 1939 as a Public Works

Administration project and was formerly used as both a school and community center. In the staff report

for the July 16, 2014 Board of Supervisors’ Business Meeting, staff provided an account of the history of

the Old Arcola Elementary School building, including the desire by an organized community group to

have the Board renovate and reopen the existing building (Attachment 1). Members of the public spoke at

the Business Meeting in support of keeping the existing building, which has sat vacant since the preschool

and community center activities were relocated in 2006.

During the Board’s discussion at the July 16th meeting, Board members commented on the preliminary

cost estimate for renovating the building, how those costs would be financed, and that other uses may be

called for in the approved Capital Needs Assessment or Capital Facility Standards. Further, Board

members asked for information about the Arcola Center rezoning and its associated proffer obligations in

regards to the County-owned property. The Board voted 9-0 to send this item to the September 9, 2014

Finance/Government Services and Operations Committee (FGSOC) meeting.

Item #14L -FGSOC Report: Old Arcola Elementary School Building

Board of Supervisors Business Meeting

September 17, 2014

Page 2

Vicinity Map of Old Arcola Elementary School on Gum Spring Road, between Evergreen Mills Road

and Route 50, with property owned by the County outlined in yellow. Arcola Center property is

outlined in blue, and the Arcola Slave Quarters site is noted by the star.

COMMITTEE DISCUSSION:

At the September 9, 2014 Finance/Government Services & Operations Committee (FGSOC) meeting, the

Committee discussed the revised cost estimates to renovate the Old Arcola Elementary School building.

The breakdown of potential costs is provided in more detail below. The Committee also discussed options

for the site, to include seeking public-private partnerships or selling the property. During the FGSOC

discussion, Committee members raised a number of questions which are addressed below, including

proffer contributions from Arcola Center, timing of Arcola Center development, and options for Public-

Private Partnership or selling the property.

Proffer Contribution from Arcola Center

Chairman York asked about a $29,000 proffer contribution from the Arcola Center developer that was

specifically for this building. Staff further researched the recent approvals for Arcola Center and

identified that ZCPA-2012-0004 amended the original Arcola Center proffers to add section VI.E (see

Attachment 2). Specifically, the proffer is to be used for the repurposing or renovation of the Old Arcola

Elementary School site. The proffer further states, “The County may use these funds as part of a County

project for a community center at the former Arcola Elementary School building location or may make

these funds available to a private organization engaged in establishing a community center at this

location.”

Finally, the proffer allows the County to use these funds for any other County capital project in the Dulles

Planning Subarea if the proffer funds are not utilized on the Old Arcola Elementary School site within 4

years of receipt by the County. The proffer was paid to the County on June 20, 2014.

Timing of Arcola Center Development Adjacent to Site

A question was raised during the FGSOC discussion about the developer’s timeline of development and

when the adjacent residential units in the PD-TC (Town Center) district may be constructed. This timeline



September 17, 2014

Page 3

would affect the developer’s requirement for extending public utilities to the Old Arcola Elementary

School site, as well as providing inter-parcel access to Gum Spring Road, adjacent to the site.

Staff reached out to the developer for an indication of their intended timeline. According to the developer,

there have been discussions to pursue a proffer amendment to their current approvals that would facilitate

the construction of the residential units in the north/PD-TC portion of the development. That would also

provide them with the financing for the infrastructure in the north portion of the development, to include

those pieces of infrastructure related to the Old Arcola Elementary School site. The timing is still

unknown, although the developer indicated an interest in initiating the proffer amendment later this year

or early next year.

Options for Public-Private Partnership or Selling the Property

The FGSOC recommendation to the Board is to direct staff to explore viable options for a public-private

partnership, up to and including selling the site. The Committee further expressed its preference to save

the building, if possible, but to not limit the Board’s options only to saving the building. The Committee

also asked to see a timeline for these options. In discussions with Procurement and General Services,

seeking a public-private partnership and seeking potential purchasers are two separate processes and

timelines. The two options are discussed in more detail below:

Public-Private Partnership

Should the Board be interested in seeking a public-private partnership from an interested entity, staff

recommends that the Board direct staff to develop a solicited proposal through the Public-Private

Education Facilities and Infrastructure Act of 2002 (through which projects are referred to as a “PPEA”).

By developing a solicited PPEA, the County will be able to establish a framework for desired proposals.

This could include: preservation of the building; retention, improvement, or expansion of the athletic

field(s); and other desired components. These components of the PPEA could be recommended for a

private entity to include in its proposal, but would not be restrictive. If the Board directed staff to pursue

an unsolicited PPEA, it would open up for any proposal by any entity and does not give the County the

same level of influence over desired components in a project. The timeline for a PPEA is generally as

follows:

Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun July Aug

Development of

Solicitation (90 days)

Solicitation Open for

Proposals (60 days)

Review/Approval

(120 days)

Negotiation with Final

Proposer (60 days)

Options for Selling the Property

There are two basic ways that the County can approach selling a property. The more proactive way is to

hire a broker or market the property through staff resources. This could include signage, listing on real

estate sites, and other direct means. The other option is to not directly market the property but be open to

receiving unsolicited offers to purchase a site. In this case, staff would take any unsolicited offer that is

received and bring it to a closed session of the Board for consideration. In either case, the Board would

have to hold a Public Hearing before a county site could be sold.



September 17, 2014

Page 4

Combination of Options

The FGSOC motion indicated an interest in pursuing both options (PPEA and selling the property). Staff

recommends the Board direct staff to pursue a solicited PPEA. If the Board were to pursue selling the site

at the same time a PPEA is on the street, it may discourage serious interest on the PPEA as proposers may

not be willing to invest the time on a PPEA if the site were simply going to be sold. In addition, the PPEA

would likely give the County more control over the future use of the building and site than if the site were

sold to a private entity. If the PPEA process is unsuccessful, or if negotiations with the preferred proposer

fail, then the Board could pursue a more direct effort to sell the site. During the PPEA process, the County

could still receive unsolicited offers for purchase, which would be brought to the Board for consideration.

ISSUES:

Potential Renovation of Existing Building

Subsequent to the July 16th Business Meeting, staff contracted with Building Evaluations, LLC to update

the renovation estimates for the Old Arcola Elementary School. The site evaluation was performed on

Monday, August 4th. According to the report (Attachment 3), the condition of the building is essentially

the same as described in the report from January 2011. As stated in the latest report, “The overall

condition of the property is fair to poor, as compared to [the contractor’s] experience with properties of

similar age and construction type.” The report further states, “The main structural systems for the building

generally appear to be in fair to good condition. No major structural issues were observed…” except for

the basement walls leaking and the design and load capacity of the small (8x8) shed. Staff believes these

are minor issues that could be easy to address.

Building Evaluations, LLC provided an updated cost estimate of $7,556,098 to bring the building up

to a usable condition at the current configuration and square footage and to meet all code requirements.

This estimate of “Probable Costs” is based on the additional survey of the building, updated cost factors,

and other considerations. Staff has provided additional information below on other costs that should be

considered for re-opening the Old Arcola Elementary School. These potential costs include:

Costs to bring the building up to licensing standards for preschool facilities. Examples of these

additional requirements include: 35 square feet of indoor wall-to-wall space per child (not

including kitchens, hallways, restrooms, closets or storage rooms), at least 75 square feet of

outdoor play area space per child (at any given time), one toilet and sink per 20 children, and

other safety guidelines. The cost to meet these standards is preliminarily estimated at $235,200.

Costs to add typical infrastructure found in a community center building. For example, the

proposed Capital Facility Standard for a Community Center is 20,000 square feet. The existing

Old Arcola Elementary School building is 16,500 square feet. If the desire is to bring the building

up to the new standard, staff has estimated the cost for constructing the additional 3,500 square

feet at approximately $1,645,000. Another amenity that would normally be included in a

Community Center is a commercial kitchen. Due to new code requirements and structural

modifications needed, this enhancement would cost approximately $222,000.

Costs for architectural and engineering (A&E) design; furniture, fixtures, and equipment (FF&E)

(including DIT, telecommunications, and security connections); and water and sewer lines and

connections (based on bond estimates provided by Loudoun Water). Based on general estimates

and past experience with renovation projects, these costs could total up to $2,450,000, depending

on the scope of work desired by the Board.



September 17, 2014

Page 5

Transportation improvements would likely be required to reopen the building with a community

use. The extent of the improvements is unknown, especially in regards to the possible need to acquire

right-of-way and relocate existing utilities. Two possible improvements are introduced below.

The Department of Transportation and Capital Infrastructure (DTCI) prepared a broad scope of

potential transportation improvements if the facility were opened as a preschool with 20,000

square feet of space. This use would likely require a 250 foot stacking turn lane for southbound

Gum Spring Road, with a 100 foot taper. Northbound Gum Spring Road would need a right turn

lane with 100 foot taper. Based on a very preliminary review of the site conditions, it is likely that

right-of-way would be required, at least north and south of the property, and potentially on the

west side of Gum Spring Road. In addition, utility poles run along both sides of Gum Spring

Road and would likely need to be relocated. The basic cost of the new roadway (turn lanes) is

approximately $240,000. However, this cost does not factor any utility relocation or right-of-way

acquisition. Those costs cannot be determined until a further analysis and detailed plans are

prepared, though the costs could be extensive.

Another transportation alternative is that Arcola Center is proffered to provide interparcel access

from its development to Gum Spring Road. More discussion on this proffer is provided below in

the discussion of proffer commitments from Arcola Center. The difficulty with this option is that

the timing of the improvement is solely at the discretion of the developer, so the County cannot

rely upon any certain date for this access to be provided.

The estimated total costs for renovating and opening the building as a community center with preschool

activities is summarized in Table 1.



September 17, 2014

Page 6

Table 1: Costs to renovate the Old Arcola Elementary School Building (in FY 2015 Dollars)

Improvement Cost Notes

Renovate to operational capability and

code compliance

*$7,137,000 Estimate updated by Building Evaluations,

LLC, August 19, 2014

Increase contingency to 20% $648,800 Recommended by DTCI for renovation

projects (based on prior experiences)

Renovate to preschool standards $235,200 Bathroom improvements for preschool

licensing requirements

Architectural and Engineering (A&E)

and Fixtures, Furniture, and Equipment

(FF&E) for Renovation

$1,700,000 A&E runs approximately 15% of

construction cost; FF&E based on

Community Center package

Water/Sewer Connection $400,000 Bond estimate from Loudoun Water; actual

construction cost may be higher

SUBTOTAL: Renovation and

Licensing costs

$10,121,000 Estimated cost to make the building

operational and up to licensing standards for

preschool uses

Expand building to 20,000 square feet $1,645,000 To meet new proposed Community Center

standard

Additional A&E Design and FF&E for

expanded building

$750,000 Additional funding to cover increased

building size

Add commercial kitchen $222,000 To meet Community Center standard

Transportation Improvements $238,000 Minimum. Does not include possible ROW

issues or utility relocation – Gum Spring

Road appears to be a 30 foot prescriptive

easement, which means relocation of

utilities would be necessary

GRAND TOTAL $12,976,000 Cost estimates are still preliminary and not

based on formal drawings or plans

*This base cost varies from the final cost in the report, as the report included the cost for classroom bathroom updates and a

commercial kitchen in the base cost. Staff removed those costs and recalculated the 10% contingency based on the reduced

amount. Those costs are then provided as optional improvements for the Board’s consideration.

Proffer Commitments from Arcola Center (ZMAP-2006-0015)

The Arcola Center rezoning was approved by the Board of Supervisors on December 4, 2007. The

following two proffers specifically pertain to the County-owned property on which the Old Arcola

Elementary School sits.

The first proffer obligates the Arcola Center developer to extend public water and sewer to the

County’s property line: “The applicant shall also extend public water and sewer to the County

owned property identified as PIN: 162-25-3177 at the time the adjoining portion of the PD-TC

district is developed.” This will bring a connection point to the easternmost portion of the site

(furthest from the existing building). However, this water and sewer extension is only required

once the adjacent PD-TC (Town Center) portion of Arcola Center is developed. The timing for

this part of the development is unknown at this time.



September 17, 2014

Page 7

The second proffer obligates the Arcola Center developer to provide interparcel access from the

PD-TC area of the development to Gum Spring Road: “The applicant shall provide for and

construct interparcel access between the PD-TC district and Gum Spring Road, provided such

interparcel access is approved by the County and by the Virginia Department of Transportation

(VDOT). This interparcel access will be constructed in conjunction with the development of the

immediately adjoining area of the PD-TC district with which the interparcel access will

connect.” This road would likely run along the northernmost edge of the County property. The

specific connection and roadway have not yet been designed. However, preliminary discussions

during the rezoning indicated that access to the Old Arcola Elementary Building may be shifted

to this new interparcel road, instead of the existing entrance from Gum Spring Road. The

implications of this new road and any potential access reconfiguration would need to be explored

in more depth when the new road is submitted to the County and VDOT for approval.

Staff also notes that there are other proffers for civic uses and public use sites within Arcola Center, but

they do not affect the Old Arcola Elementary School site. In particular, the Arcola Center developer

dedicated 10 acres to the County encompassing the Arcola Slave Quarters site, which will be created as a

historic site and passive, interpretive park (shown on the vicinity map on page 2). The developer also

included a $500,000 contribution for improvements to the Slave Quarters site. The proffer for these funds

has not yet been triggered.

A second public use site of 10.7 acres was proffered to the County as part of the Arcola Center rezoning.

The proffer limited potential uses of this site to a school, library, or public park with ball fields. At the

option of the Board, the Board could have chosen a cash contribution in lieu of the site dedication. In May

2008, at the request of the School Board, the Board of Supervisors designated this second public use site

as an elementary school site and directed the Zoning Administrator to officially request dedication of the

site. The Zoning Administrator sent a letter to the developer dated June 18, 2008, requesting the

developer designate the site as an elementary school and convey the site in accordance with the timing

stated in the proffers. Although the proffer trigger has not been met for the site to be conveyed to the

County, LCPS has continued to support the development of an elementary school on this property.

Overview of Capital Planning - Capital Needs Assessment and Capital Facility Standards

Loudoun County’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) is an important element of the comprehensive

capital planning process prescribed by Chapter 3 of the County’s Revised General Plan (the General

Plan), Fiscal Planning and Public Facilities. The General Plan requires the development of a ten-year

Capital Needs Assessment (CNA) every four years, and the development and adoption of a six-year

Capital Improvement Program (CIP) by the Board of Supervisors annually.

Loudoun County uses an integrated approach to land use and fiscal planning. This approach uses

economic and demographic forecasting models, as well as service and facility standards, to help

determine current and future capital facilities needs in the County. The overall capital facility planning

process begins with the development of the County’s Capital Facility Standards (CFS). The Capital

Facility Standards determine the type, acreage and size (square footage) of capital facilities to be

developed in the County. The CFS use population forecasts, demographic trends, and geographic

considerations to identify the number, size, general location and type of facilities that will provide desired

levels of service to the residents of the County.

The Capital Needs Assessment uses the County’s projected population growth and adopted Capital

Facility Standards to identify the type and number of capital facilities needed over a ten-year planning

period, beyond the end of the current Capital Improvements Program timeframe, to maintain the County’s

desired levels of service to its residents. The Board’s Fiscal Impact Committee has been reviewing the

Capital Facility Standards during the spring and its recommendations are being discussed at this FGSOC



September 17, 2014

Page 8

meeting. The Fiscal Impact Committee is expected to begin review of the CNA in the fall and make a

recommendation to the Board at that time. At that time, an extended public process will begin that will

lead to the adoption of a new CNA in the Summer of 2015.The Capital Facility Standard for Community

Centers is 1 per 42,000 population. There are currently ten (10) community centers in Loudoun County.

With the anticipated construction of the 20,000 square foot Ashburn Community Center (co-located with

the Ashburn Recreation Center) in FY 2018, it will be the last identified community center to be

constructed. Staff notes that a majority of the existing community centers are old schools or facilities that

were not strategically located near population centers.

Members of the community have approached the Board and staff about re-opening the Old Arcola

Elementary School as a community center with preschool activities. Current waitlist numbers for the

preschool at the Dulles South Multipurpose Center (DSMC), as of August 22, 2014, indicate that 278

children are enrolled with a waitlist of 160 children. For childcare programs at DSMC, there are currently

20 children enrolled and 225 children on a waitlist (some of whom are not of age).

In regards to the Old Arcola Elementary School site and possible County uses, staff has identified needs

in the CNA/CFS that could potentially be met at this site. It is important to note that these

recommendations may differ from the adopted CNA based on the proposed CFS being presented to the

Committee. These potential needs include:

Community Park – A community park is expected to be 30 or more acres, with athletic

fields, restroom/concession space, playground, and other activities. Although the site is not a

full 30 acres, the addition of adjacent land or configuration of the property may allow this site

to meet the need for a community park.

Neighborhood Park (new proposed standard) – A neighborhood park is between 1 and 29

acres and also includes amenities such as athletic fields or passive uses. The property fits this

standard and would meet the need for additional neighborhood parks in the County.

Teen Center - The adopted and recommended standard for teen centers indicates the County

will need two by 2020. The standard calls for a building of 20,000 square feet on at least 5

acres. Teen Centers can be located anywhere in the County, although the preference is in

Ashburn or Leesburg. One location of choice would be the Dulles Planning Subarea, so this

site could fulfill that need.

Adult Day Center – The standard for adult day centers indicates that one is not needed until

at least 2020. There is no Adult Day Center in the Dulles area yet (existing locations are

Purcellville, Leesburg, and Ashburn). The Old Arcola Elementary School building is bigger

than needed for an Adult Day Center, but the site could be used as one. A typical Adult Day

Center is approximately 7,000 square feet in size.

Elementary School – There is the need for an additional elementary school in the vicinity of

this site. As indicated above, however, this need is proposed to be fulfilled through the public

use site dedication from Arcola Center. No other public school uses have been identified at

this time.

PRCS Maintenance Facility (new proposed standard) – All maintenance for unmanned

parks is managed from a central location in Leesburg. The ability to have satellite

maintenance facilities would reduce travel time and increase productivity. The Old Arcola

Elementary School site could serve as a good location for a southern maintenance facility.

The Board could also consider acquiring adjacent or nearby land for such a facility in this

part of the County.



September 17, 2014

Page 9

Financing Capital Improvements

As stated in the item for the July 16th Board Meeting, there is currently no cash or debt capacity in the

adopted CIP to finance any improvements, renovations, or new facilities on this site. Should the Board

wish to consider an option for a capital project on this site, staff recommends that this be brought back as

an option during the FY 2016 budget work sessions. However, staff notes that the currently adopted FY

2015-2020 CIP is the first year of the CIP biennium. The second year of the biennium (FY 2016) is an

“amendment year,” and amendments to the capital plan are generally only made as necessary to reflect

changing circumstances and priorities. New project requests are typically not considered for inclusion in

the CIP in the second year of the biennium.

At the July 16, 2014 Business Meeting, the Board was provided a letter from the Virginia Department of

Historic Resources (dated July 11, 2014), indicating that tax credits may be available to assist with the

renovation of the Old Arcola Elementary School building. Staff notes that these tax credits would not

apply to the County government and would be better suited for a private entity or foundation to pursue. If

the Board directs staff to develop a solicited PPEA, then a private entity responsible for renovating the

building would very likely qualify for this historic tax credits through VDHR.

FISCAL IMPACT: There is no project for the Old Arcola Elementary School building or site currently

in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Furthermore, Capital Budget staff has indicated that there is

no debt or cash capacity to add a renovation or new construction project in the 2015-2020 CIP, as

currently adopted.

As stated above in the FGSOC discussion, there is $29,000 received by the County that could be used for

the repurposing or renovation of the Old Arcola Elementary School site. Staff believes that these funds

could be used for any purpose related to the building and site, and the proffer also allows those funds to

be provided to a private entity who is establishing a community center at the site.

If the building were to be used for County-operated pre-school and community center activities (similar to

the current Dulles South Multipurpose Center), some of the programs themselves may be revenue-neutral.

However, the overall facility operations would likely require some local tax funding, depending on the

nature of programs and activities provided at the facility.

ALTERNATIVES:

Renovation: As discussed in the Issues Section, the Board may consider the renovation and reopening of

the Old Arcola Elementary School as a community center use with preschool activities. This facility,

while not identified specifically in the CNA, would serve a growing population and be an adaptive reuse

of the existing building.

Sell or Partner with Private Entity: In the time since the Board discussed this item at its Business

Meeting, staff has been approached by several persons and groups who have expressed potential interest

in purchasing the site or entering into a public-private partnership with the County. Staff has indicated to

these parties that the Board has referred this discussion to the Finance/Government Services and

Operations Committee and no specific direction has been given at this time. If there is an interest in

pursuing these options further, the Committee could recommend that the Board initiate a public-private

partnership effort or a process for selling all or a portion of the site.

Use Building and/or Site for Future Capital Need: If there is an interest in keeping the site and using it

for a stated capital facility need, the Committee and Board are asked to provide additional guidance. As

detailed above in the Issues Section, there are numerous capital facilities called for in this area that could

be developed on this site. If the Board pursues a capital facility other than a community center, it is likely

that the building would be razed and the new facility/amenity built on site. An appropriate historical



September 17, 2014

Page 10

plaque/description would be erected, recognizing the Old Arcola Elementary School’s listing on the

National and Virginia Historic Registers. Alternatively, the Board could direct staff to consider other

adaptive reuses for the building. However, this option may cost more than constructing a new facility.

Maintain in Current State: The Committee may also recommend that the Board maintain the building in

its current condition, only making those improvements necessary to restrict unwanted access into the

building. The remainder of the property could continue to be used as a park with two ball fields.

DRAFT MOTIONS:

1. I move the recommendation of the Finance/Government Services and Operations Committee that

the Board of Supervisors direct staff to explore viable options for a public-private partnership at

the Old Arcola Elementary School building and site, up to and including selling the site, with the

preference to save the building if possible.

OR

2. I move that the Board of Supervisors direct staff to develop a solicited PPEA for the Old Arcola

Elementary School building and site, to include preferences for: preservation of the building;

retention, improvement, or expansion of the athletic field(s); and other creative uses that will

benefit the community. I further move that the Board direct staff to not actively market the site

for sale, but to bring to the Board any unsolicited purchase offers for consideration.

OR

3. I move an alternate motion.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Item 06 - July 16, 2014 Business Meeting Staff Report (without attachments)

2. Proffer VI.E. – ZCPA-2012-0004 (Arcola Center)

3. Updated Building Report for Old Arcola Elementary School by Building Evaluations, LLC.

August 19, 2014

Date of Meeting: July 16, 2014

# 6

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

BUSINESS MEETING ACTION ITEM

SUBJECT: Old Arcola Elementary School Building

ELECTION DISTRICT: Blue Ridge CRITICAL ACTION DATE: At the Pleasure of the Board STAFF CONTACTS: Steve Torpy, Acting Director, PRCS Danny Davis, Special Projects Coordinator, PRCS PURPOSE: The purpose of this item is to seek direction from the Board on the future use of the Old Arcola Elementary School Building, to include possible consideration of renovation and reuse as a community center. RECOMMENDATION: Staff: Staff recommends the Board provide guidance on the degree, if any, of future staff efforts related to the Old Arcola Elementary School Building and property, to include possible renovation and reuse as a community center.

BACKGROUND: The Old Arcola Elementary School (also referred to as the Arcola Community Center) is a former school and community center building located on Gum Spring Road in Arcola. It was built in 1939 as part of the Public Works Administration construction efforts and was the only school built in Loudoun as part of this program. Additionally, it was the first school in the County built with individual classrooms for each grade, indicative of the shift in educational standards and philosophies of the time. The building is approximately 16,500 square feet and sits on 5.00 acres, with another 6.13 acres of County-owned land adjacent to it. Also on the properties are the following amenities, which are currently used by members of the public: baseball field, soccer field, playground, basketball and tennis courts, picnic pavilion, and

danny.davis

Text Box

ATTACHMENT 1

Item 6 - Old Arcola Elementary School Building Board of Supervisors Business Meeting

July 16, 2014 Page 2

a recycling drop-off center. The properties sit immediately north of the former Arcola/Pleasant Valley Volunteer Fire Department building. The Old Arcola Elementary School building has not been available for public use since 2006, when the community center activities moved to the former Arcola Elementary School (on Goshen Road) and ultimately to the Dulles South

Multipurpose Center in South Riding. Additional pictures of the facility are provided as Attachment 1.

Vicinity Map of Old Arcola Elementary School on Gum Spring Road, between Evergreen Mills Road

and Route 50, with property owned by the County outlined in yellow.

Aerial view of Old Arcola Elementary School site, with property owned by the County outlined in

yellow.



In March of 2008, a group was formed under the name of “Friends of the Arcola Community Center.” The vision of this group of citizens was to create a public-private partnership to bring the community center back and that it have a focus on childcare programs to be operated by Parks, Recreation, and Community Services (PRCS). The group recognized that while the Blue Ridge District already has four community centers, they are not strategically located near some of the major Dulles South communities and large population base. It was believed that although the Dulles South Multipurpose Center is a tremendous asset to the Dulles South community, it still is the only indoor PRCS facility in the Dulles South area, and residents north of Route 50 (in communities such as Brambleton, Arcola Center, and Loudoun Valley Estates) might be more inclined to use a facility closer to their homes. In addition, the current preschool numbers at the Dulles South Multipurpose Center indicate the demand for preschool and community center activities. For school year 2013-2014, the preschool ended the year with 274 children enrolled and 70 on a waiting list. For school year 2014-2015, there are already 278 children enrolled and 505 children on a waiting list. Child care services at the Dulles South Multipurpose Center have not exceeded capacity in prior years, although there is currently a waiting list of approximately 175 children of age, with an additional 65 children that are not yet of age, for these activities. Attachment 2 provides a map of residential development in the Blue Ridge District, demonstrating its continued growth, especially in the area near Arcola. The Old Arcola Elementary School building has similar history and potential as the Carver Center in Purcellville. The Carver School was built in Purcellville in 1946 and was the first modern school for African-American children in Loudoun County. As part of a broad community effort to preserve the building and retain its historical character, the old Carver School building was renovated and opened in 2007 as a Senior Center and community center. Pictures of the Carver School are shown in Attachment 3. Through the efforts of the “Friends of the Arcola Community Center,” the Old Arcola Elementary School was placed on the “Most Endangered Historic Sites – 2008” by the Association for the Preservation of Virginia Antiquities (now known as “Preservation Virginia”). Subsequently, and in response to requests and support from the “Friends” group, the Parks, Recreation and Open Space Board voted to send a letter to the Board of Supervisors requesting that the Board direct staff to apply for a grant to develop an application for listing the Old Arcola Elementary School on the National Register of Historic Places and Virginia Landmarks Register. Following this, the Board directed staff in February of 2011 to apply for a grant through the Loudoun Preservation Foundation to be used to obtain these designations. The grant was received and a contractor was hired to work with staff and apply for these designations. In April of 2013, the County received word that the Old Arcola Elementary School had indeed been listed on both the National Register of Historic Places and Virginia Landmarks Register. Designation on these registries does not compel the County to preserve or reopen the building, nor does it legally preclude the County from razing the structure. Nonetheless, approval of these designations clearly indicates the unique nature and historic qualities found in this building. In addition, approval of these designations creates opportunities for pursuing grants and other types of funding for preservation or rehabilitation of the building.



ISSUES: Prior to construction of the Dulles South Multipurpose Center Phase 1, the County went through extensive reviews of the building to determine the costs of renovation and keeping the facility open. It was determined that although construction of a new facility would ultimately have a higher cost, the county would be getting a new, efficient, accessible, and larger facility. Considering this, the decision was made to close the Old Arcola Elementary School, and the voters approved a referendum in 2004 to build the Dulles South Multipurpose Center Phase 1. In 2011, the County contracted with a building inspection and evaluation company to investigate the viability of renovating the Old Arcola Elementary School and bringing it up to current building code standards (see Attachment 4). At that time, the anticipated cost to reopen the building for public use was approximately $5.7 million. While the overall structure itself is sound, some of the required renovations include: replacement of the roof, floors, and exterior wood that has rotted; provision of ADA compliant access, both external and internal; a complete HVAC replacement; new electrical system to support the new HVAC system; sprinklers and central fire alarm system; and confirmation or remediation of minor environmental issues, if present (such as mercury light fixtures, lead paint, and plumbing). It is important to note that the building evaluation addressed the concern of asbestos and visually confirmed (to the extent possible) that any asbestos had been abated through prior efforts by the County and according to the reports provided to the engineer. General Services managed two asbestos abatement projects – one in the 1990s and one in 2003 – and it is believed that all asbestos has been abated. Finally, in regard to this report, staff also notes that the cost estimate of these improvements is likely greater than when the evaluation occurred, whether due to further deterioration of the building, changes in building codes, or cost escalation since the time of the original evaluation. The report also did not address whether any transportation improvements (such as turn lanes) would be required as part of any reuse of the property. Further, the report did not anticipate any additional configuration changes to the usable space that may be required depending on the future programmatic use of the building. As such, based on general estimates, the cost to renovate and reopen the building in a usable configuration may be closer to $10 million. While there is community support to rehabilitate and reopen the Old Arcola Elementary School as a PRCS facility, there has not been any indication from the full Board of Supervisors that there is support for the county to renovate, reopen, and staff this facility. The Board could consider different options for this site, including:

Renovate and rehabilitate the building and program it for PRCS uses, to include community center and pre-school activities, or other PRCS services as identified by the Board and staff (other potential uses include: Adult Day Center, Teen Center, Community Park, or Parks Maintenance Facility);

Seek public-private partnerships for the purpose of renovating and operating the building as a public or private use;

Keep the building as a static, historic display (external access only) and continue using the active recreation fields for PRCS activities and as a public park;



Demolish the building, create a historic marker recognizing the designations received,

and repurpose the land for additional uses by the County government, such as an additional ballfield;

Sell the property, or subdivide the property and sell the portion with the building to a private entity, retaining the other park uses as currently programmed (subject to further review by staff for Zoning and site development constraints).

Staff is willing to investigate options at the direction of the Board and is seeking the Board’s direction for future staff efforts related to the building and property.

FISCAL IMPACT: As stated above, the likely cost to reopen the building is at least $6.7 million (factoring in inflation since the study was performed) and more likely closer to $10 million, based on very preliminary estimates. Staff notes that this project is not currently listed in the Capital Improvement Program. If the Board is interested in a project to renovate the existing building for PRCS uses, staff recommends that the Board direct staff to update the costs estimates and include this in the CIP in the future. Capital Budget staff have indicated that there is no debt capacity or cash capacity to add this project in the six-year plan as currently adopted. If the building were to be used in a manner similar to the Dulles South Multipurpose Center (for pre-school and community center activities), some of the programs may be revenue-neutral. However, the overall facility operations would likely require some local tax funding, depending on the nature of programs and activities provided at the facility. Upon a cursory review, staff has found that there are Virginia Department of Historic Resources grants for which the building would qualify. However, these funding levels are limited and would not alone cover the costs of renovations. Staff has not expended significant time or resources to pursue other historic grant opportunities. ALTERNATIVES: As stated above, the Board may direct staff to pursue any number of options for the Old Arcola Elementary School. This may include: renovation and reopening; public-private partnerships with the community; retention of the building without opening it to the public; demolition and reuse of the land for other purposes; or subdividing the property and selling the building to a private entity. In regards to staff effort in relation to this building, the Board may direct staff to continue efforts in investigating rehabilitation and reuse of this building, or the Board may direct staff to cease efforts at this time. Should the Board direct staff to continue to investigate options for the building, to include public-private partnerships, grants, and other staff programming and design work, it would likely take a significant amount of staff time. This could require between 0.5 and 1.0 FTE of time across the various departments impacted by this work effort.



DRAFT MOTIONS: 1. I move that the Board of Supervisors direct staff to continue investigating opportunities to

rehabilitate and renovate the Old Arcola Elementary School, to include pursuing grant opportunities from state and federal government programs. I further move that the Board direct staff to update cost estimates to renovate the building to be used as a community center with pre-school activities and to include this project in a future year of the Capital Improvement Program.

OR 2. I move that the Board of Supervisors direct staff to continue investigating opportunities to

rehabilitate and renovate the Old Arcola Elementary School. I further move that the Board direct staff to develop a solicited Public-Private Partnership (PPEA) to seek opportunities for private entities to participate in the cost of renovating the building.

OR 3. I move that the Board of Supervisors direct staff to cease efforts in regards to renovating the

Old Arcola Elementary School and continue basic maintenance of the grounds and building to prevent unwanted and unauthorized access into the building.

OR 4. I move that the Board of Supervisors direct staff to investigate options for repurposing the

property on which the building sits, to include subdividing and selling the building or demolishing the building, and return to the Board with options.

OR 5. I move an alternate motion. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Pictures of Old Arcola Elementary School 2. Map of Residential Developments in the Blue Ridge District (LCPS, dated Nov. 1, 2013) 3. Before and After Pictures of Carver School/Center 4. Building Condition Evaluation of Arcola Community Center (aka, Old Arcola Elementary

School)

danny.davis

Text Box

ATTACHMENT 2

danny.davis

Line

danny.davis

Line

danny.davis

Line

21351 Gentry Drive Suite 230 Sterling, Virginia 20166 703.385.3070 (phone) 703.385.3113 (fax)

Building Condition Evaluation

for

Arcola Community Center 24244 Gum Spring Road

Arcola, VA 20107

Contract No: QQ-01709A-A BE, LLC No.: 14-058

Prepared for Loudoun County General Services

Facility Support Services 801 Sycolin Road

Suite 300 Leesburg, VA 20175

August 19, 2014

Building Evaluations, LLC

Facility No. 5036

danny.davis

Text Box

ATTACHMENT 3


21351 Gentry Drive, Suite 230 • Sterling, Virginia 20166 • 703.385.3070 (tel) • 703.385.3113 (fax) [email protected]

August 19, 2014

Project No.: 14-058

John D. Hillis Senior Project Manager Facilities Support Services Loudoun County Department of General Services 801 Sycolin Road, Suite 300 Leesburg, VA 20175 Reference: Arcola Community Center Arcola, Virginia Subject: Level I Building Condition Evaluation Dear Mr. Hillis: In accordance with the terms of Contract No. QQ-01709A-A, Purchase Order 175314, Building Evaluations, LLC is pleased to submit the attached final Level I Building Condition report for the above-referenced property. The objective of this engagement was to visually assess the present condition of the subject building(s) and site. The report describes the primary components and systems of the property and identifies physical deficiencies and conditions that would limit the expected serviceable life of those systems. Also included is a spreadsheet tabulating the opinions of probable costs to address code and safety issues, repair and maintenance items, capital expenditures, and suggested modernizations/improvements to the property. Thank you for selecting Building Evaluations, LLC to perform this assessment. Please do not hesitate to contact us should you have questions concerning this report. Respectfully submitted, BUILDING EVALUATIONS, LLC Donald J. Kozlowski, PE Principal

Arcola Community Center ARCOLA, VIRGINIA

Table of Contents

Section I Salient Facts • Property Description/Condition • Site Characteristics • Public Records • Building Data • Building Systems • Utility Companies • Projected Useful Life • Site Contacts • Opinions of Probable Costs Summary

Section II Purpose and Scope

• Background • Purpose • Scope of Services • Documents Reviewed • Representation

Section III Property Condition Assessment

• Site • Structural • Building Exterior • Roofing • Building Interiors • Limited Disabled-Access Review • HVAC • Plumbing • Electrical • Fire/Life Safety • Vertical Transportation • Phase I Environmental Site Assessment • Asbestos & Lead Paint Survey • Special Systems • Conclusion

Section IV Opinions of Probable Costs

Confidential Client Material 1 Arcola Community Center Building Evaluations, LLC 14-058


I. SALIENT FACTS

Property Description/Condition

Building Evaluations, LLC (BE) conducted an initial assessment of the condition of the property located at 24244 Gum Spring Road, Arcola, VA 20107, on December 20, 2010. BE revisited the property on August 4, 2014 to assess the current condition and update the previous report. The property consists of a 16,504 square foot community center located on 5 acres. The community center was originally an elementary school built in 1939 with additions in 1951 and 1956. The building is vacant and is currently only utilized for storage and as a recycling drop off center. The building was built by the Public Works Administration and was added to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) on June 5, 2013. Adjacent ball fields, playground, pavilion, and tennis courts were not part of the review. The building has not been utilized as a community center since 2006. The overall condition of the property is fair to poor, as compared to BE’s experience with properties of similar age and construction type. A summary of the systems evaluated, along with BE’s opinions of probable costs for recommended repairs/upgrades follows.

Site Characteristics

Topography: Gently sloping topography

Land Area: Reported to be 5.00 acres or 217,800 square feet

Site Visit: August 4, 2014

Arcola Community Center 24244 Gum Spring Road

Sterling, Virginia

Report Date: August 19, 2014

8/19/14


Paving: Concrete paving for pedestrian walks, gravel lot for vehicles

Type of Parking: Surface (gravel) parking - unstriped

No. of Parking Spaces: Space for approximately 55 vehicles (30 in the front lot and 25 in the rear lot.

Public Records

PublicRecords Information:

Not part of the scope of work.

Flood Zone: Per the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map, the subject property is located within Zone X – Areas determined to be outside the 500-year flood plain.

Building Data

Number of Buildings: One

Gross Building Area: 16,500 square feet

Net Building Area: Approximately 16,025 square feet

Year Built: 1939, with additions in 1951 and 1956

Number of Stories: One story with partial basement boiler room

Clear Height: 12’-8” in common areas, 17’-0” in multi-purpose room

Total Height: Approximately 25 feet

Building Type: School and Community Center

Construction Type: Type III B, Unprotected and unsprinklered

Occupancy Class: Group E-Educational, A-3 Assembly

Current Code(s): 2012 Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code

Code at Construction: Unknown

Code Compliance: General compliance, see attached OPC

8/19/14


Building Systems

Structural: The primary structural framing system for the original building (built in 1939) and two subsequent additions (built in 1951 and 1956) is single-story wood and masonry construction; the exterior walls are of masonry construction and the interior walls are a mix of wood stud and masonry walls supporting a wood framed roof. The first addition is on the north end of the original building and consists of the kitchen and multi-purpose room areas. The second addition is on the south end of the original building and consists of additional classrooms. The first floor is a wood framed floor system over a crawlspace consisting of wood beam lines supporting wood joists covered with diagonal wood plank subfloor and stained wood flooring. The wood beam lines are supported by masonry piers on isolated concrete spread footings. The multi-purpose room floor of the first addition consists of a concrete slab-on-grade. A portion on the northeast corner of the original building consists of a structural concrete slab/beam system over an approximately 22’x35’ partial basement and a 25’x12’ crawl space. The partial basement walls are brick masonry – the interior walls are 8-inch double wythe brick with integral 16”x16” brick piers for the concrete beams. The thickness of the exterior brick masonry walls could not be observed. The wood roof is composed of wood trusses/rafters spaced at 24 inches on center and supports a wood roof deck and asphalt shingle roof on the high-sloped portions of the roof. The center portion of the two addition roofs is a low-sloped flat roof with built up membrane roofing. There is a small (approximately 8’x8’) wood shed constructed on the east end of the first addition. This shed consists of 2x4 rafters and stud walls at 16 inches on center. The main structural systems for the building generally appear to be in fair to good condition. No major structural issues were observed other than the following items: • The partial basement walls leak water from the buried faces.

There is an electric sump pump, but it was reported that the basement has been known to flood.

• The small shed roof joists and sheathing appears to be wet and show signs of rotting as some areas. The 2x4 rafters are not adequate for the required design loading condition and the 2x4 ledger is connected at the exterior brick face with only cut nails.

8/19/14


Seismic Zone: According to the 1997 Uniform Building Code Seismic Zone Map,

figure 16-2, the seismic zone for the subject property is Zone 1, an area with a low probability of experiencing a major seismic event.

Exterior: The exterior walls consist of 4-inch Flemish bond brick veneer on an 8-inch concrete masonry unit backup. A brick soldier course is provided at the elevated floor level and brick quoins are featured at the building corners. The building sits on a crawl space. Numerous cracks were observed in the brick exterior. Moderate brick repair and repointing will be required. Large double-hung wood windows with single pane glazing provide the fenestration. The windows have cast stone sills. Almost all windows are rotting or damaged. Exterior doors consist of painted wood which are damaged. Exterior trim consists of painted wood fascia and frieze. The exterior doors and wood trim are rotted and will require replacement. There are four wood canopy overhangs at exterior doors that are rotted and will require replacement.

Roofing: The roof consists of asphalt composition shingles in a hip configuration which were installed in 1997. An area of low slope membrane roof is provided at the top of the hip. The property management reported that the roof is currently leaking. Perimeter gutters and downspouts are provided for drainage. The roof is in fair to poor condition and should be replaced.

Interiors: The interiors consist of painted plaster walls, plaster ceilings, and hardwood flooring. The multi-purpose room has vinyl composition tile on a concrete slab. Some areas of 12-inch square spline type ceilings as well as suspended acoustical ceiling tiles were observed. The hardwood floors are damaged and buckled due to roof leaks and will require replacement. Numerous cracks in plaster walls and ceilings were observed. No insulation is provided in the floors, walls, or ceilings. The kitchen was removed when the building was decommissioned. Provide an allowance to install a new kitchen.

ADA: The building is not accessible to the disabled. A partially accessible unisex toilet room is provided adjacent to the multipurpose room but this area can only be accessed by going down stairs. The building will require accessible parking, accessible ramp at the main entrance, disabled access to the multi-purpose room, accessible public toilets, accessible doors and hardware, accessible water fountains, and Braille signage. All toilet rooms would have to be brought into compliance with the ADA if re-opened as a community center.

8/19/14


HVAC: The HVAC system has been decommissioned since 2006. Some of the components have been removed, such as the fuel oil tank for the boiler and the LP tanks for the gymnasium furnaces and the kitchen. What remains is a low pressure steam boiler that is 24 years old, steam piping and radiators dating from 1939, 1951, and 1956, and two split system units for the gymnasium dating from 1991. The classrooms do not have air conditioning. It was reported that when the building was used as a community center it had window type air conditioning units. To bring this building back to full use as a community center, BE recommends replacing the entire HVAC system. The boiler is near the end of its serviceable life, the steam pipes are 60 to 72 years old, and the radiators are 58 to 72 years old. The classrooms have no cooling. The split systems for the multi-purpose room (gymnasium) are 20 years old and at the end of their serviceable life. It was reported that the steam lines are no longer insulated as a result of asbestos abatement. Also, it was reported that the steam lines leaked. This may explain some of the moisture damage to the wood floors. All of the equipment has lain fallow for almost 5 years. It does not make sense to try to re-commission it as it is so close to the end of its median life expectancy. BE recommends that a design firm be engaged to design a complete system with heating and air conditioning for the building to operate as a community center.

Plumbing: Water is provided by an onsite well and sewage flows to onsite septic fields. The well water and septic fields have had minimal use since 2006, as only one restroom has been used by the parks department employees. It is recommended that the well and septic fields be inspected, tested and certified for use by the community center. Provide an allowance to either repair, replace or connect to nearby municipal system. The piping observed was a mix of copper and galvanized steel. The exact age and condition of the piping could not be determined from a visual inspection. BE recommends that an invasive inspection be performed by taking samples of pipe for metallurgic testing and running cameras down pipes looking for damage and obstructions. Provide an allowance to replace piping as necessary. The kitchen was removed when the building was decommissioned. Provide plumbing to support a new kitchen. The plumbing fixtures observed appeared to be in fair to good condition. However, it is understood that all toilet rooms are to be made compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act and the fixtures may be replaced.

8/19/14


Electrical: Electricity is brought to a main trough. It is fed by two 120/240

volt single phase, services. The services are a 400-amp and 200-amp panel. This system would be insufficient for the proposed HVAC system and other upgrades. BE recommends installing a completely new electrical system. Interior lighting consists of a mix of fluorescent fixtures and high-hat fixtures. Replace all the lighting as part of the renovation to re-use the facility. Install energy efficient fixtures. Exterior lighting was not observed at night. However, there are façade-mounted fixtures at the entrances and pole-mounted fixtures for the parking areas. No telecommunication or security systems were observed. It appears to have been removed when the building was decommissioned. New telecommunications and security systems would have to be installed.

Fire Protection: There is no fire sprinkler system. The facility would not require a fire sprinkler system per code. However, if a fire sprinkler system is desired, then a fire pump and tank with a 30-minute supply of water would be required because the system is supplied by a well. There is a fire alarm system in the building. The system is manual. The alarms are audible (bell) and visual. There are stand-alone smoke detectors in the classrooms. With the renovation, a central fire alarm system would be required by code. Fire extinguishers were observed in the building. The inspections are out-of-date as the building has been decommissioned for 4 years. New fire extinguishers would have to be installed and maintained. There is a fire hydrant at the old fire station approximately 500 feet from the site. This should provide adequate coverage.

Phase I Environmental Site Assessment:

Applied Environmental, Inc. conducted a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) of the property in 2010 but did not revisit the property in 2014. The 2010 ESA was conducted in accordance with the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard Practice E1527-05, Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments. This ESA included an examination of available historical aerial photographs, a review of historical documents, a review of owner/representative-provided site information, appropriate interviews, and a search of environmental regulatory records. In addition, a site reconnaissance and visual survey of adjoining properties was conducted.

8/19/14


The original part of the building and the 1956 addition were heated most recently with fuel oil which was stored in a 2,000-gallon aboveground storage tank (AST), formerly located behind the building. The AST was reportedly removed from the property in 2006 when the community center ceased operations. There was no staining or other evidence of environmental contamination observed in the vicinity of the former tank. The 1951 addition was heated with liquefied propane (LP) gas supplied from two tanks, located behind the building. These tanks were also removed from the property after community center operations ceased. The building was cooled with 12 window air conditioning units. A sump pump is located in the basement. There are two septic fields located at the property. One of the fields and the septic tank, both installed in 1939, are located to the north/northeast of the building. The second septic field was installed in the front lawn in 1956. This assessment has revealed no recognized environmental conditions and no historical recognized environmental conditions in connection with the subject Property. Potential asbestos and lead paint concerns are addressed in a separate report.

Asbestos & Lead Paint Survey:

Applied Environmental was provided with two asbestos abatement reports (dated in the 1990’s) and an asbestos and lead-based paint survey report (dated 2003) for review prior to the 2010 site visit. This information was relied upon by us for the purposes of performing the visual asbestos and lead survey and recommendations. The two asbestos abatement reports included one for the boiler room/adjacent storage room and one for the crawl space. Based on the visual asbestos screening survey at the structure, it was apparent that the asbestos-containing pipe insulation and debris was abated from the boiler room and adjacent storage room. While it appears from looking into the crawl space that the pipe insulation and debris was removed, the crawl space is a confined space and it could not be entered to definitively determine if any suspect asbestos is present or remains from the abatement project. The 2003 survey report stated that asbestos containing materials were not present in the tested building materials. While most of the tested building materials observed during the current visual survey reflect the findings of the 2003 survey, there are additional suspect building materials that do not appear in the tested building material list in the 2003 survey that should be tested for asbestos. These include glue dots, possible floor tile and mastic and areas above the drop ceiling. If the structure is to be

8/19/14


renovated, it is recommended that the additional suspect asbestos-containing materials be sampled and submitted for laboratory analysis. The 2003 survey noted that lead-based painted surfaces were identified throughout the structure. By Environmental Protection Agency and Commonwealth of Virginia regulation, lead-based paint is defined as equal to or greater than 1.0 milligrams of lead per square centimeter; however, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration’s (OSHA) Lead in Industry Standard (29-CFR-1926.62) is applicable for this structure and is provoked for any amount of detectable lead (no number cited). Applied Environmental’s review of the reported lead test data indicates that most surfaces have detectable levels of lead. It is recommended that, for the purpose of operations and maintenance and/or renovation, all painted surfaces be managed in accordance with the OSHA lead regulation. Several old lighting fixtures, which could contain possible polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) light ballasts and mercury containing light bulbs, were also observed throughout the structure and were not noted in the 2003 report. It is recommended that a PCB (visual survey for “no PCB” label on @ 5% of ballasts) survey be performed. It is also recommended that a toxic characteristic leachate procedure test be performed on several representative light tubes to determine disposal criteria. Alternatively, these light tubes can remain or be used elsewhere until their normal life cycle is expended and then properly recycled/disposed.

Elevators: Not applicable as the building is a one-story structure.

Utility Companies

Domestic Water: Onsite well

Gas Service: None

Electric: Dominion Power

Sanitary Sewer: Septic field

Storm Drainage: To grade

Cable: None – COMCAST is local provider.

Internet: None

Telephone: None - Verizon is local utility.

8/19/14


Projected Useful Life Projected Useful Life:

The projected remaining useful life expectancy of the subject building(s) is estimated to be 0 years unless a complete renovation is performed. If a complete renovation is performed the building should have a useful life of at least 35 years with proper maintenance.

Site Contacts Site Contact: Mr. John Hillis - 571.233.0340

Opinions of Probable Costs Summary

The total Opinions of Probable Costs identified by BE include the following:

Rating 1 – Code/Safety ........................................................................................ $866,600 Rating 2 – Maintenance and Repair ...................................................................... $163,000 Rating 3 – Capital Expenditure ........................................................................... $5,640,180 Rating 4 – Optional Improvement ........................................................................ $200,000 Total ............................................................................................................. $6,869,180 Contingency (10%) ............................................................................................. $686,918 Grand Total .................................................................................................. $7,556,098

8/19/14


II. PURPOSE AND SCOPE

A. BACKGROUND

Building Evaluations, LLC (BE) performed the initial visual observation of the subject building and site on December 20, 2010. Andrew Kunz, AIA, revisited the property on August 4, 2014. This report summarizes BE’s findings and opinions of recommended corrections to the building and site. No destructive tests were undertaken. B. PURPOSE The purpose of this assessment is to evaluate the condition of the existing building and site. The report is based on those conditions observed on the days the field assessment was accomplished and from information obtained from BE's review of the available construction documents. This report is by no means a guarantee of the overall condition of the facility.

C. SCOPE OF SERVICES

This evaluation was conducted in accordance with the terms of the agreement, dated July 29, 2014 between Loudoun County Department of General Services and BE. Reference Loudoun County Purchase Order 175314. The Scope of Services for this assignment includes the follow ing: • Architectural Assessment • Mechanical, Electrical, Plumbing, Fire/Life Safety Assessment • Structural Assessment • ESA Phase I (2010 assessment only) • Visual Asbestos Survey (2010 assessment only) • Opinions of Probable Costs • Limited Photographic Documentation of Specified Deficiencies

The Scope of Services for this assignment does not include the follow ing: • Concealed or inaccessible areas of the building that require the use of destructive investigations

beyond that proposed in the Scope of Services. • Work requiring the use of special consultants beyond that noted in the Scope of Services. • Furniture, fixtures, and process equipment not part of the building structure. • Utility rooms and power vaults, which are the property of the utility company. • A definitive opinion concerning compliance with all codes/regulations, due to the existence of literally

thousands of local and model codes, and regulations pertaining to design and construction. BE shall exercise usual and customary professional care, as architects and engineers, in its efforts to obtain available information and to assess building code/regulation compliance.

• A guarantee of the accuracy and/or the completeness of information provided to BE by others. • A legal opinion regarding our findings or recommendations. BE does not engage legal counsel to

assist in our due-diligence process or to review our findings and recommendations.

8/19/14


D. DOCUMENTS REVIEWED

Sheet No./ No. of Pages Date Document Description Architect/Engineer

Drawings/Plans

+/- 20 sheets Unknown Architectural Drawings Albert Lurbert, AIA Arlington, VA

M-1 1991 HVAC for multipurpose room (Gymnasium) FDEC of Columbia, MD

M-2 7/1956 Heating and Plumbing for Addition Joseph P. Melly & Associates

E-1 7/1956 Electrical for Addition Joseph P. Melly & Associates

Specifications

No specifications were provided for review.

Soils Reports

No soils reports were provided for review.

ALTA Survey

1 sheet 2/1988 Topographical Survey Paciulli Simmons

Other

28 pages 1/2003 Facility Assessment Report SWSG of Reston, VA

8 Pages Undated Excerpt from Settlement of Justice Department versus Loudoun County for ADA issues. Department of Justice

22 pages 1/16/2003 Asbestos and Lead Paint Survey ECS

3 pages 7/16/14 Letter from VA Dept. of Historic Resources Loudoun County PRCS

44 pages 7/16/14 Board of Supervisors Meeting Minutes Loudoun County BOS

E. REPRESENTATION This property condition assessment report was prepared by BE for the exclusive use of Loudoun County Department of General Services and its investors, lenders, assignees, designees, successors, and assigns. The aforementioned parties intend to rely upon this report as an assessment of the existing physical condition of the subject property for the purpose of deciding whether, and under what conditions, to proceed with a real-estate transaction regarding the subject property. This work was performed with sufficient detail and scope to meet the standard due-diligence practices associated with a physical assessment for an institutional investor of real estate in the current marketplace. The work does not constitute or imply a guarantee or warranty of the subject property, building, or improvements. BE is not responsible or liable for any claims that are associated with the interpretation of the available information. In the event the client requires this report to be assigned, a new contract will need to be signed between BE and the Assignee.

8/19/14


III. PROPERTY CONDITION ASSESSMENT Site The property consists of a 16,504 square foot community center located on 5 acres. The community center was originally built as an elementary school in 1939 with additions in 1951 and 1956. The building is currently only utilized for storage and an outdoor recycling drop-off center. Adjacent ball fields, pavilions, and tennis courts were not part of the review. The vehicle entrance is from Gum Spring Road, which provides access to the gravel parking lot. The gravel parking lot is not suitable for disabled access and may have impacts upon the storm water management of the site. Engage a civil engineer to study zoning compliance and storm water management for the site in conjunction with the possible future addition of a fully paved parking area. Include an allowance for permit, earth moving, or other erosion and storm water structures. Provide an allowance for a new bituminous asphalt paved parking lot in the front and rear of the building. No accessible parking or accessible ramp is provided. Provide new asphalt paving for 4 accessible parking spaces and access aisles. This paving must be completed to provide a stable and level surface for the required accessible parking. See Limited Disabled Access Review, below, for details. The site is gently sloping and landscaping consists of trees and shrubs adjacent to the building and areas of turf along the road frontage. Provide an allowance to remove the existing overgrown trees and shrubs at the perimeter of the building and provide new trees and shrubs with mulch beds. Some areas of grade at the rear have been built up higher against the building, which does not allow proper separation of wood framing from the adjacent grade. Reconfigure the existing high grade at areas around the rear of the building to allow for proper separation of wood framing from the ground. Concrete sidewalks are provided along the road and to access ball fields. Areas of the sidewalks are damaged and will require repairs and replacement. Provide an allowance to repair cracked and damaged concrete walkways.

Remove overgrown trees and shrubs. Damaged and cracked concrete paving.

8/19/14


Gravel parking lot in front of building. Turf areas on the north side of the building.

Main entrance from Gum Spring Drive. Parking area at the rear of the building.

Structural The primary structural framing system for the original building (built in 1939) and two subsequent additions (built in 1951 and 1956) is single-story wood and masonry construction; the exterior walls are of masonry construction and the interior walls are a mix of wood stud and masonry walls supporting a wood framed roof. The first addition is on the north end of the original building and consists of the kitchen and multi-purpose room areas. The second addition is on the south end of the original building and consists of additional classrooms. Structural drawings for the two additions were reviewed at the Loudoun County General Services office building after the site visit, which appear to be consistent with the construction of the original building. Therefore, the descriptions of the structural systems are based on the structural information provided on these drawings, field observations, and experience with similar structures. Geotechnical information was not available for review onsite and the design criteria were not able to be determined from the structural drawings available. The foundations appear to be functioning adequately in terms of providing structural support for the building. As typical with most structures, the foundations were not directly visible. However, a general assessment of the foundation performance can be made by observing the supported structure and the visible finishes for cracks, deflections, or movement or other tell-tale signs of foundation issues. No structural issues were observed that would indicate there is an

8/19/14


issue with the building foundations. The first floor is mostly a framed floor system over a crawlspace consisting of wood beam lines supporting 2x10 wood joists at 16 inches on center covered with diagonal wood plank subfloor and stained wood flooring. The wood beam lines are supported by masonry piers on isolated concrete spread footings. The multi-purpose room floor of the first addition consists of a concrete slab-on-grade and a portion on the northeast corner of the original building consists of a structural concrete slab/beam system over an approximately 22’x35’ partial basement and a 25’x12’ crawl space. The partial basement walls are brick masonry – the interior walls are 8-inch double wythe brick with integral 16”x16” brick piers for the concrete beams. The thickness of the exterior brick masonry walls could not be observed. The wood roof is composed of wood trusses/rafters spaced at 24 inches on center and supports a wood roof deck and asphalt shingle roof on the high-sloped portions of the roof. The center portion of the two addition roofs is a low-sloped flat roof with metal or membrane roofing. The original ceilings are either plaster on metal lathe and the multi-purpose room has 12”x12” concealed spline acoustical tile finish on the plaster. Some areas have an additional acoustical tile grid suspended from the original ceiling – these ceilings were added at an unknown date. There is a small (approximately 8’x8’) wood shed and entrance canopy constructed on the east end of the first addition. This shed consists of 2x4 rafters and stud walls at 16 inches on center. The construction of the entrance canopy could not be determined. The wood framing is in poor condition for both of these sections. Overall, the structural framing systems appear to have been properly designed for the intended use in most areas, which the International Code Council (ICC) specifies the following minimum design live loads: Classrooms: 40 pounds per square foot (psf) First Floor Corridors: 100 psf Assembly Areas – Moveable Seats: 100 psf Stages and Platforms: 125 psf The main corridor along the long axis of the building is typically a short span capable of supporting the 100 psf design load, however, it is not clear if the main entrance lobby area (which would be classified as a corridor area as well) is designed for the higher design load. The stage area also does not appear to be designed for the 125 psf required loading condition. The main structural systems for the building generally appear to be in good condition. No major structural issues were observed other than the following items: 1. The partial basement walls leak water from the buried faces. There is an electric sump pump, but we

were informed that the basement has been known to flood. 2. The small shed roof joists and sheathing appears to be wet and show signs of rotting as some areas.

The entrance canopy and exterior utility closet walls are also in poor condition. The shed 2x4 rafters are not adequate for the required design loading condition and the 2x4 ledger is connected at the exterior brick face with only cut nails.

8/19/14


Rear exterior; second addition is left of the roof gable. Rear exterior: first addition is portion beyond roof gable.

Hardwood floor damage. Hardwood floor damage.

Typical roof framing. Typical roof framing.

8/19/14


Typical roof framing. Typical roof framing.

Building Exterior The exterior walls consist of 4-inch Flemish bond brick veneer on an 8-inch concrete masonry unit backup. A brick soldier course is provided at the elevated floor level and brick quoins are featured at the building corners. The building sits on a crawl space. Numerous cracks were observed in the brick exterior. Moderate brick repair and repointing will be required. Provide an allowance to repair cracked bricks and repoint all masonry surfaces including the entrance stoops and area well. Clean all masonry when complete. Large double-hung wood windows with single pane glazing provide the fenestration. The windows have cast stone sills. Almost all windows are rotting or damaged. Exterior doors consist of painted wood and are damaged. Exterior trim consists of painted wood fascia and frieze. Provide an allowance to remove and replace all existing single-pane windows with new energy efficient insulated glass windows. Replace all cast concrete window sills. Prep and repaint all steel lintels over windows and doors. Anticipate the need to repaint on a 7-year cycle. Remove all existing rotted wood doors and provide new exterior doors. Remove all rotted wood fascia, frieze, soffit, and rake boards and provide new exterior trim. Budget for the future repainting on a 7-year cycle. There are four wood canopy overhangs at exterior doors that are rotted and will require replacement. A painted exterior gypsum board soffit is provided at each recessed entrance. The soffits are damaged and should be replaced. Remove the existing peeling and damaged soffits at the entrances and provide new soffits. Metal railings are provided at the entrances and the mechanical area well. The railings are in poor condition. Remove all existing metal guardrails, handrails, and railings at entrances and the basement area well and provide new railings. Cement plaster stucco gables are provided at the rear of the building. The gables are deteriorated and should be replaced. Repair and resurface the cement plaster stucco gables at the rear of the building.

8/19/14


Repoint all masonry joints. Replace rotted and damaged wood windows.

Replace rotted wood overhangs. Repair cracked and damaged bricks.

Replace rotted wood trim. Replace rotted wood exterior trim.

8/19/14


Roofing The roof consists of asphalt composition shingles in a hip configuration, which was installed in 1997. An area of low slope asphalt membrane roof is provided at the top of the hip. The property management reported that the roof is currently leaking. Perimeter gutters and downspouts are provided for drainage. Budget for the future replacement of the roof membranes, flashing, coping, eave protection, and all gutters and downspouts. Remove all existing roof vents and provide a new roof ventilation system. Engage a roof consultant to assist with the replacement of the roof membrane. This should include specifying the new membrane, creating bid documents, and monitoring the installation. Provide an annual allowance to inspect and maintain the roof once the new roof membrane is installed.

Typical sloped roof membrane. Roof shingles at gutter line.

Low slope roof membrane. Replace all gutters and downspouts.

8/19/14


Building Interiors The interiors consist of painted plaster walls, plaster ceilings, and hardwood flooring. The multi-purpose room has vinyl composition tile (VCT) on a concrete slab. Remove the existing damaged VCT floor in the multi-purpose room and adjacent kitchen and provide new VCT. Some areas of 12-inch square spline type ceilings as well as suspended acoustical ceiling tiles were observed. Provide an allowance to install new suspended acoustical tile ceilings in all areas in order to accommodate new mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems. The hardwood floors are damaged and buckled due to roof leaks and will require replacement. Provide an allowance to remove all the existing damaged maple hardwood flooring and provide new hardwood flooring. This includes an allowance to replace up to 15 percent of the subflooring that may be damaged. Numerous cracks in plaster walls and ceilings were observed. Repair the interior walls. Skim coat the plaster walls and repaint. This does not include lead abatement, but does include lead stabilization to comply with OSHA 29 CFR 1926.62. No insulation is provided in the floors, walls, or ceilings. Provide an allowance to install insulation in the attic and crawl space areas and build an insulated stud wall at the interior of all exterior walls. The existing kitchen was removed when the building was de-commissioned in 2006. Provide an allowance to install a new kitchen. Include all plumbing and electrical and ventilation to make for a complete kitchen. Provide an allowance to replace miscellaneous millwork including base molding, chair rail, and bookshelves. The building does not currently meet the building code for certain fire rating and draft stopping issues. Provide new 36-inch-wide fire rated doors for the entrances to the classrooms from the corridors. Provide a fire rated door between the boiler room and the adjacent storage room in the basement. Provide an allowance to install draft stopping for all attic and crawl space areas.

Replace all rotted wood windows. Replace all water damaged finishes.

8/19/14


Replace all rotted wood window sills. Replace the buckled hardwood floors.

Limited Disabled-Access Review The building is generally not accessible to the disabled. The building will require accessible parking, an accessible ramp at the main entrance, disabled access to the multi-purpose room, accessible public toilets, accessible doors and hardware, accessible water fountains, and Braille signage. Provide three standard accessible parking spaces and access aisles with proper signage. Provide one van accessible parking space and access aisle with proper signage. Since the multi-purpose room is on a different level access only by stairs, provide an allowance to install a wheelchair lift to provide disabled access to this assembly area. Provide an allowance to remove inaccessible door knob hardware and provide new accessible lever type hardware. Provide a complete Braille signage package for the building which identifies all permanent rooms. A partially accessible unisex toilet room is provided adjacent to the multipurpose room. Provide an allowance to bring the existing partially accessible toilet adjacent to the multi-purpose room into full compliance with the ADA. All toilet rooms would have to be brought into compliance with the ADA if re-opened as a community center. Provide an allowance to reconfigure the existing men's and women's public restrooms to be fully compliant with the ADA. This should include new finishes and fixtures. Renovate the existing toilets for each classroom to be fully ADA compliant, as the building is intended to be utilized as a school or daycare facility. Provide two new hi/lo accessible water coolers.

8/19/14


Inaccessible entrance ramp. Provide lift for change in level at the multi-purpose room.

Partially accessible toilet room. Provide an accessible hi/lo water cooler.

HVAC The HVAC system has been decommissioned since 2006. Some of the components have been removed, such as the fuel oil tank for the boiler and the LP tanks for the gymnasium furnaces and the kitchen. What remains is a low pressure steam boiler that is 25 years old, steam piping and radiators dating from 1939, 1953, and 1956, and two split system units for the gymnasium dating from 1991. The classrooms do not have air conditioning. It was reported that when the building was used as a community center it had window type air conditioning units. Cooling is provided to the multipurpose room (gymnasium) by two split system units manufactured by Lennox. The units are 1.5 and 5 tons for a total of 5.5 tons. This would appear to be insufficient for an assembly use in the summer. The units are approximately 23 years old with a 20-year median life expectancy. With the last 8 years of no maintenance, the units are at the end of their expected life. The classroom and other areas of the building have no mechanical cooling. It was reported that at one time there were window units, but these have been removed. BE recommends installing a new cooling system for the entire facility to operate as a community center. This would require a complete design and installation of a new system.

8/19/14


Heating is provided by an oil-fired boiler located in the basement. The boiler provides steam to the radiators in the classrooms. The split systems for the multipurpose room have liquefied petroleum (LP) burning furnaces. The oil tank for the boiler and the LP tanks for the furnaces have been removed. The boiler is 25 years old with a 25-year median life expectancy and with 8 years of neglect it is considered to be at the end of its serviceable life. The furnaces are 23 years old with a 20-year median life expectancy and are also considered to be at the end of their serviceable life. The steam piping reportedly leaks, which may account for some of the floor warping. The pipe insulation was removed as part of a past asbestos abatement effort. The radiators are from original construction of 1939, 1951, and 1956. A new heating system should be installed as part of the new cooling system. Ventilation is accomplished by the operable windows. It is questionable if the windows still open. The new HVAC system should provide for mechanical ventilation with filtered and conditioned air. The HVAC equipment observed is listed in the table below:

Equipment Brand Qty Size Age RUL Boiler Weil-McLean 1 1.477MMBTUH 25 0

Split system Lennox 2 1.5 & 5 ton 23 0 Radiators Unknown 20 NA 50 + 0

RUL = Remaining Useful Life. This is the serviceable life that is anticipated based on statistical data, observed condition, past maintenance and assuming an ongoing regimen of preventive and prescriptive maintenance.

View of the steam boiler. View of fill pipe from removed tank.

8/19/14


View of typical radiator. View of split system condenser units.

View of split system furnace. View of ceiling grill for natural ventilation.

Plumbing Water is provided by an onsite well and sewage flows to onsite septic fields. The well is to the northeast of the building just outside from the multipurpose room. From review of a previous report there are two septic fields. The original septic field from 1939 is at the area north-northeast of the building. The second septic field is the front lawn at the 1951 addition. The well water and septic fields have had minimal use since 2006, as only one restroom has been used by the parks department employees. It is recommended that the well and septic fields be inspected, tested and certified for use by the community center. Provide an allowance to implement any recommendations of the report. This may include repairs, installing new septic and wells, or connect to municipal systems in nearby developments. The piping observed was a mix of copper and galvanized steel. The exact age and condition of the piping could not be determined from a visual inspection. BE recommends that an invasive inspection be performed by taking samples of pipe for metallurgic testing and running cameras down pipes looking for damage and obstructions. Provide an allowance to replace piping as necessary. Domestic hot water is provided by electric water heaters. Only a few were observed, as the restrooms were locked and the previous report states that each restroom has a water heater. The exact age is unknown, but after 8 years of neglect, replacement is recommended.

8/19/14


Not many plumbing fixtures could be observed, as the toilet rooms were locked. However, from the fixtures observed it appears that routine maintenance can bring them back to serviceable condition.

View of access caps for well and original septic field. View of pressure tank for domestic water well system.

View of a water heater. Note that it is being held together

with duct tape. Also note the copper piping. View of plumbing vent piping in attic. Note that it is

galvanized metal.

View of only plumbing fixtures observable. View of single sump pump in boiler room.

8/19/14


Electrical Dominion Power provides electricity to the property via an overhead service entrance at the rear of the building. Electricity is brought to a main trough. It is fed by two 120/240 volt single phase, services. The services are a 400-amp and 200-amp panel. This system would be insufficient for the proposed HVAC system and other upgrades. The age of the electrical wiring is also suspect. The wiring observed was copper, but much of the wiring was hidden within walls. BE recommends installing a completely new electrical system. Exterior lighting was not observed at night. However, there are façade-mounted fixtures at the entrances and pole-mounted fixtures for the parking areas. These are considered to be adequate as they are the same fixtures as when the property was used as a community center prior to it’s decommissioning in 2006. Interior lighting consists of a mix of fluorescent fixtures and high-hat fixtures. Replace all the lighting as part of the renovation to re-use the facility. Install energy efficient fixtures. The type of lighting depends on the architectural treatment of the ceilings. No telecommunication or security systems were observed. It appears to have been removed when the building was decommissioned. Wires and cables from overhead lines were observed going to the building, but appear to have been terminated at that point when the building was decommissioned in 2006. New telecommunications and security would have to be installed.

Electrical panel adjacent to rear entrance. View of incoming utility service from overhead lines.

8/19/14


Electric meter adjacent to rear entrance. Battery backup emergency lighting.

Fire/Life Safety There is no fire sprinkler system. The facility does not require a fire sprinkler system by current code. The building would be considered a mix use occupancy A-3 (Assembly – Gymnasium & Community Hall) and E – Educational (Day care and classrooms). Neither would require a sprinkler system, as the A-3 occupancy would have to be more than 12,000 square feet and the gymnasium on ground level with exits would be exempt. The educational portion of the building would have to be more than 20,000 sf and the total area including the Gym is only 16,500 square feet. However, if a fire sprinkler system is desired, then a fire pump and tank with a 30-minute supply of water would be required because the system is supplied by a well. The availability of public water is unknown. BE recommends installing a fire sprinkler system as an optional upgrade for safety. There is a fire alarm system. The system is manual. The alarms are audible (bell) and visual. There are stand-alone smoke detectors in the classrooms. With the renovation, a central fire alarm system would be required by code. Install a central fire system with automatic annunciation and automatic signaling to an off-site monitor to alert the fire department. The fire extinguishers observed had out-of-date inspection tags. The building has been decommissioned for the last 8 years. New fire extinguishers would have to be added per code. There is a fire hydrant and fire station within 500 feet of the property. This should provide adequate coverage.

8/19/14


View of visual strobe alarm that appears to meet the ADA

requirements. View of multipurpose room. Note no sprinkler system.

Vertical Transportation There is no vertical transportation as the building is one story in height. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Applied Environmental, Inc. conducted a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) of the property in 2010. Refer to their 2011 report under separate cover. Asbestos & Lead Paint Survey Applied Environmental, Inc. was provided with two asbestos abatement reports (dated in the 1990’s) and an asbestos and lead-based paint survey report (dated 2003) for review prior to the site visit. This information was relied upon by for the purposes of performing the 2010 visual asbestos and lead survey and recommendations. Refer to the 2011 report under separate cover. Public Records Not included in the Scope of Services. Conclusion With the completion of the recommendations contained in this report and a well-planned program of ongoing maintenance, this facility should have a usable life expectancy of at least 35 years. Corrective costs as detailed in the attached Opinions of Probable Costs spreadsheet total $7,556,098.

Opinions of Probable Costs

S E C T I O N I V

OPINIONS OF PROBABLE COSTS

DELINEATION OF TERMS

The following spreadsheet describes BE, LLC’s recommendations and opinions of probable costs to remedy identified issues at the property. Descriptions of the corrective work are brief and may not be all-inclusive. A more detailed scope of work, or construction documents, may be necessary prior to contracting for the identified corrective work. Corrections are listed using the following criteria: Item No.: Item numbers are related to the primary report section heading;

however, they are not cross-referenced to specific sub-sections. Recommendation: Brief description of the recommended correction and purpose of the

work. Rating: Priority rating of the recommendation, identifying its potential need and

reason for attention.

1 – Code and Safety Code violation and/or threat to health and safety

2 – Repair and Maintenance Repair or routine/preventive

maintenance 3 – Capital Expenditure Capital expenditure necessary for

continued facility operation consistent with industry standards

4 – Optional Improvement Recommended improvement or

modernization to enhance the facility’s marketability

Cost: The amount indicated is BE, LLC’s opinion of the probable construction

cost in current dollars for performing the identified correction(s). The actual cost to provide this work may vary, depending on the quantity and type of work performed at a given time, the type of contractor selected to perform the work, and local market conditions. Note that this opinion of cost is provided on a preliminary basis.

Year: The assigned year corresponds with the timing in which the corrective

work should be undertaken for proper operation of the facility. Unit Abbreviations: bldg building ls lump sum cf cubic foot pr pair cy cubic yard sf square foot ea each sq square (roofing) lf linear foot sy square yard

Date of Report: 8/19/14Date of Site Visit: 8/4/14


Arcola Community CenterArcola, Virginia

Rating:1 - Code/Safety2 - Maintenance and Repair3 - Capital Expenditure4 - Optional Improvement 1 of 5

Confidential Client MaterialBuilding Evaluations, LLC

14-058

Item No.

Recommendation Rating Qty. Unit UnitCost

Year 12014

Year 22015

Year 32016

Year 42017

Year 52018

Year 62019

Year 72020

Year 82021

Year 92022

Year 102023

Totals

A. SITE

A.1Provide new asphalt paving for 4 accessible parking spaces and access aisles. This paving must be completed to provide a stable and level surface for the required accessible parking.

1 1,500 sf $33 $49,500 $49,500

A.2 Provide an allowance to repair cracked and damaged concrete walkways. Anticipate additional repairs on a 3-year cycle.

2 1 ls $23,000 $23,000 $5,000 $5,000 $5,000 $38,000

A.3 Replace the damaged existing chain link and wood privacy fence on both ends of the building.

3 1 ls $25,000 $25,000 $25,000

A.4Provide an allowance to remove the existing overgrown trees and shrubs at the perimeter of the building and provide new trees and shrubs with mulch beds.

3 1 ls $125,000 $125,000 $125,000

A.5 Provide an allowance to pipe all downspouts underground to a drywell or some other storm water system.

3 25 ea $4,000 $100,000 $100,000

A.6Reconfigure the existing high grade at areas around the rear of the building to allow for proper separation of wood framing from the ground.

3 1 ls $50,000 $50,000 $50,000

A.7Engage a civil engineer to study zoning compliance and storm water management for the site in conjunction with the addition of a fully paved parking area.

3 1 ls $25,000 $25,000 $25,000

A.8

Provide an allowance for a new bituminous asphalt paved parking lot in the front and rear of the building. This estimate includes an allowance for permit, earth moving, and other erosion and storm water structures.

3 28,000 sf $33 $924,000 $924,000

Subtotal $247,500 $150,000 $924,000 $5,000 $0 $0 $5,000 $0 $0 $5,000 $1,336,500B. STRUCTURAL

B.1 Repair shed roof. The shed roof framing is insufficient. 1 1 ls $7,000 $7,000 $7,000

B.2Waterproof basement walls. The basement reportedly was subject to flooding in the past. There was evidence of past water intrusion.

2 1 ls $20,000 $20,000 $20,000

Subtotal $27,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $27,000C. BUILDING EXTERIOR

C.1Provide an allowance to repair cracked bricks and repoint all masonry surfaces including the entrance stoops and area well. Clean all masonry when complete.

3 12,708 sf $10.00 $127,080 $127,080

C.2

Provide an allowance to remove and replace all existing single pane windows with new energy efficient insulated glass windows. These windows may need to match the existing historical windows.

3 76 ea $10,000 $760,000 $760,000

C.3Remove all rotted wood fascia, frieze, soffit, and rake boards and provide new exterior trim. Budget for the future repainting on a 7-year cycle.

3 2,824 lf $40 $112,960 $28,240 $141,200






14-058

Item No.


Year 12014

Year 22015

Year 32016

Year 42017

Year 52018

Year 62019

Year 72020

Year 82021

Year 92022

Year 102023

Totals

C.4 Replace all cast concrete window sills. 3 76 ea $3,000 $228,000 $228,000

C.5 Remove all existing rotted wood doors and provide new exterior doors.

3 12 ea $4,000 $48,000 $48,000

C.6 Remove 4 existing rotted wood canopies over exterior doors and provide a new canopy.

3 4 ea $17,000 $68,000 $68,000

C.7 Remove the existing peeling and damaged soffits at the entrances and provide new soffits.

3 2 ea $20,000 $40,000 $40,000

C.8Remove all existing metal guardrails, handrails, and railings at entrances and the basement area well and provide new railings.

3 3 ea $25,000 $75,000 $75,000

C.9 Prep and repaint all steel lintels over windows and doors. Anticipate the need to repaint on a 7-year cycle.

3 500 lf $20 $10,000 $10,000 $20,000

C.10 Repair and resurface the cement plaster stucco gables at the rear of the building.

3 2 ea $12,000 $24,000 $24,000

Subtotal $1,493,040 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $38,240 $0 $0 $0 $1,531,280D. ROOFING

D.1 Provide an annual allowance to inspect and maintain the roof. 2 20,000 sf $0.15 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $27,000

D.2

Budget for the future replacement of the roof membranes, flashing, coping, eave protection, and all gutters and downspouts. Remove all existing roof vents and provide a new roof ventilation system.

3 20,000 sf $25 $500,000 $500,000

D.3

Engage a roof consultant to assist with the replacement of the roof membrane. This should include specifying the new membrane, creating bid documents, and monitoring the installation.

3 1 ls $35,000 $35,000 $35,000

Subtotal $535,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $562,000E. BUILDING INTERIORS

E.1 Provide new 36-inch-wide fire rated doors for the entrances to the classrooms from the corridors.

1 12 ea $2,000 $24,000 $24,000

E.2 Provide a fire rated door between the boiler room and the adjacent storage room in the basement.

1 1 ls $2,000 $2,000 $2,000

E.3 Provide an allowance to install draft stopping for all attic and crawl space areas.

1 1 ls $125,000 $125,000 $125,000

E.4

Provide an allowance to remove all the existing damaged maple hardwood flooring and provide new hardwood flooring. This includes an allowance to replace up to 15 percent of the subflooring that may be damaged.

3 12,000 sf $20 $240,000 $240,000

E.5

Repair the interior walls. Skim coat the plaster walls and repaint. This does not include lead abatement , but does include lead stabilization to comply with OSHA 29 CFR 1926.62.

3 27,120 sf $8 $216,960 $216,960






14-058

Item No.


Year 12014

Year 22015

Year 32016

Year 42017

Year 52018

Year 62019

Year 72020

Year 82021

Year 92022

Year 102023

Totals

E.6Provide an allowance to install suspended acoustical tile ceilings in all areas in order to accommodate new mechanical, electrical, and plumbing systems.

3 16,500 sf $8 $132,000 $132,000

E.7 Provide an allowance to install insulation in the attic and crawl space areas.

3 33,000 sf $7 $231,000 $231,000

E.8Provide an allowance to build an insulated stud wall at the interior of all exterior walls. The existing walls have no insulation.

3 21,180 sf $18 $381,240 $381,240

E.9 Remove the existing damaged VCT floor in the multi-purpose room and adjacent kitchen and provide new VCT.

3 2,400 sf $8 $19,200 $19,200

E.10 Provide an allowance to replace miscellaneous millwork including base molding, chair rail, and bookshelves.

3 1 ls $200,000 $200,000 $200,000

E.11Install a kitchen. The existing kitchen was removed when the building was de-commissioned in 2006. Include all plumbing and electrical and ventilation to make for a complete kitchen.

3 1 ls $185,000 $185,000 $185,000

E.12 Provide an allowance to install a vestibule at the front and side entrances.

3 3 ea $25,000 $75,000 $75,000

Subtotal $1,831,400 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,831,400F. LIMITED DISABLED-ACCESS REVIEW

F.1Replace the existing inaccessible ramp at the entrance to the building. Provide the proper slope, railings, handrails, and landings to be fully compliant with the ADA.

1 1 ls $45,000 $45,000 $45,000

F.2 Provide one van accessible parking space and access aisle with proper signage.

1 1 ea $1,500 $1,500 $1,500

F.3 Provide three standard accessible parking spaces and access aisles with proper signage.

1 3 ea $1,000 $3,000 $3,000

F.4Provide an allowance to reconfigure the existing men's and women's public restrooms to be fully compliant with the ADA. This should include new finishes and fixtures.

1 2 ea $75,000 $150,000 $150,000

F.5 Provide an allowance to install a wheelchair lift to provide disabled access to the gymnasium assembly area.

1 1 ls $35,000 $35,000 $35,000

F.6 Provide a new hi/lo accessible water cooler. 1 2 ea $4,000 $8,000 $8,000

F.7 Provide an allowance to remove inaccessible door knob hardware with new accessible lever type hardware.

1 30 ea $300 $9,000 $9,000

F.8 Provide a complete Braille signage package for the building which identifies all permanent rooms.

1 1 ls $25,000 $25,000 $25,000

F.9Provide an allowance to bring the existing partially accessible toilet adjacent to the multi-purpose room into full compliance with the ADA.

1 1 ls $5,000 $5,000 $5,000






14-058

Item No.


Year 12014

Year 22015

Year 32016

Year 42017

Year 52018

Year 62019

Year 72020

Year 82021

Year 92022

Year 102023

Totals

F.10Renovate the existing toilets for each classroom to be fully ADA compliant as the building is intended to be utilized as a school or daycare facility.

1 10 ea $30,000 $300,000 $300,000

Subtotal $581,500 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $581,500G. HVAC

G.1

Install a completely new HVAC system for the building. The existing system is archaic, beyond its useful life and does not provide cooling. The steam boiler is 25 years old and the radiators are 50+ years old. To bring the building into use as a modern community center BE recommends a new HVAC system. Engage a design engineer to perform a feasibility study on the best system to install. Implement design engineer's recommendations for installation.

3 1 ls $325,000 $325,000 $325,000

Subtotal $325,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $325,000H. PLUMBING SYSTEMS

H.1Have the well and septic fields inspected and certified. Provide an allowance to repair or provide new well and septic, or to connect to nearby municipal water and sewer.

2 1 ls $20,000 $20,000 $50,000 $70,000

H.2

Perform a comprehensive inspection of the plumbing piping, including, pipe sampling, pressure testing and video inspection. A lot of the pipe was not observable at the site visit. The actual age of the piping is unknown. The supply piping and vent piping is copper and galvanized.

3 1 ls $25,000 $25,000 $25,000

H.3 Provide an allowance to replace piping as necessary based on the findings of the testing of the piping.

3 16,500 sf $7 $115,500 $115,500

H.4 Replace the domestic water heaters. They are considered to be at the end of their serviceable life.

3 6 ls $1,500 $9,000 $9,000

Subtotal $169,500 $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $219,500I. ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS

I.1

Install a completely new electrical system. The current system could not handle the new HVAC requirements. Also, the existing system would not pass current code and to bring this building back to life it would have to meet current codes.

3 1 ls $150,000 $150,000 $150,000

I.2 Install new telecommunications and security systems for the facility.

3 1 ls $20,000 $20,000 $20,000

Subtotal $170,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $170,000J. FIRE/LIFE-SAFETY SYSTEMS

J.1

Install a fire alarm system that monitors all the smoke detectors, future duct smoke detectors in HVAC units, manual pull stations and flow and tamper switches if a fire sprinkler system is installed.

1 1 ls $75,000 $75,000 $75,000

J.2 Install new fire extinguishers as required by code. 1 1 ls $2,000 $2,000 $2,000






14-058

Item No.


Year 12014

Year 22015

Year 32016

Year 42017

Year 52018

Year 62019

Year 72020

Year 82021

Year 92022

Year 102023

Totals

J.3Install a fire sprinkler system for the community center. This is to include a diesel engine driven fire pump, and a 7,500 gallon storage tank.

4 1 ls $200,000 $200,000 $200,000

Subtotal $277,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $277,000K. VERTICAL TRANSPORTATIONNot applicable. $0 $0

Subtotal $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0L. PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT

L.1 Perform a hazmat survey (asbestos, lead, PCB, mercury). 2 1 1 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000

L.2 Develop and implement a Hazmat Operations and Maintenance plan.

2 1 1 $1,500 $1,500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $6,000

Subtotal $3,500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $500 $8,000M. PUBLIC RECORDS REVIEWNot included in the Scope of Services. $0

Subtotal $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

TOTALS $5,660,440 $203,500 $927,500 $8,500 $3,500 $3,500 $46,740 $3,500 $3,500 $8,500 $6,869,180

TOTALS BY RATING$866,000 1 $866,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0$163,000 2 $66,500 $53,500 $3,500 $8,500 $3,500 $3,500 $8,500 $3,500 $3,500 $8,500

$5,640,180 3 $4,527,940 $150,000 $924,000 $0 $0 $0 $38,240 $0 $0 $0$200,000 4 $200,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0

CONTINGENCY @ 10% $686,918

GRAND TOTAL $7,556,098

Code/SafetyMaintenance and RepairCapital ExpenditureOptional Improvement