FINAL Condition Assessment - Sept 2022 - Pinconning.MI.401 East 5th St.PCA.pdf

Pinconning Partners LLC Petitioner Vs. Township Of Pinconning Respondent · 26-000635-TT

← View full record

Text extracted from the reviewed PDF, organized by page. OCR and reading order may contain errors; confirm details in the PDF below.

Property Condition Assessment 

September 19, 2022 

 

PREPARED FOR: 

WP Carey Inc. 

395 9th Avenue, 58th Floor 

New York, NY 10001 

 

PREPARED BY: 

The Vertex Companies, LLC 

2501 Seaport Drive, Suite BH 110 

Chester, Pennsylvania 19013 

PHONE 610.558.8902 

 

VERTEX Project No: 81549 

401 East Fifth Street 

401 East 5th Street 

Pinconning, Michigan 48650

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

1.0 

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

2.0 

PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES ........................................................................................................ 3 

2.1 

PURPOSE ............................................................................................................................................. 3 

2.2 

SCOPE OF SERVICES ............................................................................................................................ 3 

2.3 

REPORT RELIANCE ............................................................................................................................... 4 

2.4 

DEVIATIONS FROM THE GUIDE ........................................................................................................... 4 

2.5 

INACCESSIBLE AREAS / OBSERVATION LIMITATIONS / AREAS REVIEWED ......................................... 4 

3.0 

REPORT INFORMATION ........................................................................................................................... 6 

3.1 

ASSESSMENT DEFINITIONS ................................................................................................................. 6 

3.2 

REPORT TENSE .................................................................................................................................... 6 

3.3 

OPINIONS OF COST ............................................................................................................................. 6 

4.0 

ASSESSMENT INFORMATION .................................................................................................................. 8 

4.1 

SITE RECONNAISSANCE ....................................................................................................................... 8 

4.2 

BUILDING HISTORY ............................................................................................................................. 8 

4.3 

INTERVIEWS ........................................................................................................................................ 8 

4.4 

PRE-SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE AND REQUEST FOR DOCUMENTATION ............................................. 9 

4.5 

DOCUMENTS ....................................................................................................................................... 9 

4.6 

MUNICIPAL RESEARCH & CODE COMPLIANCE ................................................................................. 10 

4.7 

SITE CHARACTERISTICS ..................................................................................................................... 11 

5.0 

SITE INFORMATION AND OBSERVATIONS ............................................................................................. 14 

5.1 

SITE ................................................................................................................................................... 14 

5.2 

BUILDING STRUCTURE ...................................................................................................................... 18 

5.3 

BUILDING EXTERIOR AND OPENINGS ............................................................................................... 20 

5.4 

BUILDING INTERIOR .......................................................................................................................... 24 

5.5 

BUILDING SYSTEMS AND FIRE/LIFE SAFETY, CONVEYANCE.............................................................. 26 

6.0 

ACCESSIBILITY (ADA) ............................................................................................................................. 31 

7.0 

REPORT QUALIFICATIONS & LIMITATIONS ............................................................................................ 36

TABLES & CHARTS 

 

No. 

 

1. 

Immediate Repairs / Deferred Maintenance & Short Term Repairs Table 

2. 

Capital Needs Table 

 

 

APPENDICES 

 

 A 

Photographic Documentation 

 B 

Pre-Survey Questionnaire 

 C 

Relevant Documents 

 D 

Staff Statements of Qualifications

THE VERTEX COMPANIES, LLC 

 

 

700 TURNER WAY, SUITE 105 

ASTON, PA 19014 

 

 610.558.8902 | VERTEXENG.COM 

 

September 19, 2022 

 

WP Carey Inc. 

395 9th Avenue, 58th Floor 

New York, NY 10001 

Attn: Mr. Ryan Heard 

 

RE: 

Property Condition Assessment 

 

401 East 5th Street 

 

Pinconning, MI 

 

VERTEX Project No. 81549 

 

Dear Mr. Heard: 

 

The Vertex Companies, LLC (VERTEX) is pleased to submit this Property Condition Assessment 

(PCA) report for the above referenced property (the site). 

 

Our work was conducted in general conformance with proposal P.6135.22, dated August 25, 

2022, and in general accordance with selected provisions of the E 2018-15 American Society for 

Testing and Materials (ASTM) document entitled "Standard Guide for Property Condition 

Assessments: Baseline Property Condition Assessment Process" for commercial real estate. 

 

Please do not hesitate to contact us at your convenience should you have any questions or 

comments regarding this report or our recommendations. It has been a pleasure working with 

you on this project. 

 

Sincerely, 

 

The Vertex Companies, LLC 

 

 

 

 

Greg Bednarz 

 

 

 

Andrea G. Self 

Field Observer & Report Author 

 

Report Reviewer 

Project Manager 

 

 

 

Senior Project Manager

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 1 

 

 

1.0 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 

The Vertex Companies, LLC (VERTEX) performed a Property Condition Assessment (PCA) of the 

industrial building located at 401 East 5th Street in Pinconning, MI, on September 01, 2022. 

Overall, the property and improvements appeared to be in poor condition with respect to age, 

use and location. 

 

A table of salient information associated with the project is presented below and utilized 

throughout this report. 

 

SALIENT PROPERTY INFORMATION 

Property Name: 

Industrial Building 

Location/Address: 

401 East 5th Street 

Pinconning, MI 48650 

Construction Year(s): 

1945 with approximately eight additions 

Property Type: 

Rear-load industrial 

Number of Units: 

Not Applicable 

Number of Stories: 

Single-story warehouse with 2nd floor office area 

Reported/provided Building Area (SF): 

220,588 (Owner) 

Reported/provided Site Acreage: 

13.4 (Bay County Address and Property Search) 

Surrounding Property Usage: 

Residential, retail, government, educational, cemetery 

Utility Service: 

 

Gas: 

Electric: 

Water: 

Sanitary: 

Storm: 

Consumers Energy 

Consumers Energy 

Bay County Water and Sewer 

Bay County Water and Sewer 

Bay County Storm Water 

 

For this assessment, issues identified as both Immediate/Deferred Maintenance and Capital 

Needs were categorized by building system in appropriate sections of the report the associated 

tables. A table of recommended Immediate/Deferred Maintenance and Short Term Repair items 

is presented immediately following this section as an overall summary of the building’s current 

condition.

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 2 

 

 

A Capital Needs table, appended to the report, indicates a tabulations of items which, in our 

opinion, will reach the end of their useful life and need significant repair, renovation or 

replacement within a specific time period (5 years for this project).

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 3 

 

 

2.0 

PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF SERVICES 

2.1 

PURPOSE 

The purpose of the Property Condition Assessment (PCA) was to observe and document readily 

visible material and building system defects that might significantly affect the value of the 

property. The PCA also assessed existing conditions that might have a significant impact on the 

continued operation of the facility during a specified evaluation term. The term for this PCA was 

5 years. 

 

It is understood that the Client owns the building, and the report will be used to identify 

necessary improvements to get the building into “good working order” at the end of the tenant’s 

lease and to better understand materials, systems or components nearing the end of their 

associated useful life. 

 

Observations performed during the PCA were made without operational testing and/or removing 

or damaging components of the building systems. Consequently, some system specific 

assumptions were made regarding the existing conditions and operating performance of each 

system. Furthermore, recommendations developed for this report were based on information 

discovered during the PCA. If additional information is discovered concerning the facility, the 

assumptions, conclusions, and recommendations presented herein may require re-assessment. 

 

The recommendations and opinions of cost provided in this report were also based on the 

understanding that the facility will continue to operate under similar use and occupancy as 

observed on the date of the site reconnaissance. 

2.2 

SCOPE OF SERVICES 

The PCA included the following: site reconnaissance; limited interviews with property 

management and maintenance personnel; written inquiries with appropriate local government 

authorities (e.g., building department and fire department) and a review of readily available 

documents provided by the current property owner. The PCA does not confirm the presence or 

absence of asbestos, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), mold, or contaminated soils or 

groundwater on the property. 

 

During the PCA, VERTEX made visual observations of the following facility features: site 

development systems; building structure systems; building exterior systems; building interior 

systems; roof systems; mechanical systems; electrical systems; plumbing systems; conveyance 

systems; and life and fire safety systems.

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 4 

 

 

2.3 

REPORT RELIANCE 

This report is for the exclusive use of WP Carey Inc. and its affiliates, successor and assigns, and 

lender, and no party other than the preceding entities shall have the right to rely on any service 

provided by VERTEX without prior written consent. Use of this report by any other party shall be 

at such party’s sole risk. 

 

This report is intended for review as a complete document. Therefore, interpretations and 

conclusions drawn from the review of any individual section are the sole responsibility of the 

user. Conditions present at any time following the site visit date are subject to change, and as 

such the report is considered to have a limited shelf life. In any case, use or reliance upon the 

report shall not occur after six (6) months from the date of the site visit without VERTEX’s prior 

written authorization. In the event that future use or reliance is desired, an update of this report 

may be requested for an additional fee. 

2.4 

DEVIATIONS FROM THE GUIDE 

ASTM E2018-15 “Standard Guide for Property Condition Assessments: Baseline Property 

Condition Assessment Process,” was utilized as a guideline for the site visit and associated report 

preparation. ASTM requires that deviations from the guidelines be stated in the report. 

 

The following items were not required by the ASTM standard but were provided as part of this 

PCA at the request of the client or as value added considerations. 

 

 Determination of USGS Seismic Hazard and IRC Termite Zone. 

 A Capital Needs Assessment with a term length of 5-years was performed. 

 A visual review of ADA related issues and general compliance was performed. 

2.5 

INACCESSIBLE AREAS / OBSERVATION LIMITATIONS / AREAS REVIEWED 

Representative observations were made at the facility in accordance with ASTM E2018-15. The 

following areas were not accessed, or access was limited during the site visit: 

 

 Select metal roofs were viewed from above but not accessed (due to unsafe conditions) 

 Select roof-mounted mechanical equipment information (due to unreadable or missing nameplates) 

 Indoor split-system units (due to location above ceilings) 

 Select drive-in bay doors (due to open doors/occupied bays)

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 5 

 

 

Observations of the various systems, materials and building areas were performed as part of the 

site walk-through. Site observations of similar portions of the building or similar systems or 

materials were performed until, in VERTEX’s professional opinion, a representative sampling was 

adequate for extrapolation to the remainder of the building.

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 6 

 

 

3.0 

REPORT INFORMATION 

3.1 

ASSESSMENT DEFINITIONS 

GOOD: 

Material or building system was in average to above-average condition. Opinion is 

rendered with consideration to the item’s type, age, design, and location. Generally, 

other than normal maintenance, no work is recommended or required. 

 

FAIR: 

 

Material or building system was in average condition. Some work is required or 

recommended to return the system or material to a good condition. 

 

POOR: 

Material or building system was in below average condition. Significant work is 

anticipated to return the building system or material to an acceptable condition. 

 

Unless stated otherwise in this report, the material and building systems reviewed were 

considered to be in good condition and their performance appeared to be satisfactory. 

3.2 

REPORT TENSE 

This report was prepared in the past tense as it is intended to only describe observed conditions 

at the time of the site reconnaissance. 

3.3 

OPINIONS OF COST 

The cost tables associated with the PCA include itemized costs divided into two categories: 

 

Immediate / Deferred Maintenance / Short-Term Repair items. 

 

• Immediate Deferred Maintenance Repair items are defined as physical deficiencies that 

cannot be remedied with routine maintenance, normal operating maintenance, etc., 

excluding de minimis conditions that generally do not present a material physical 

deficiency to the subject property. These items are typically considered to be: (1) material 

existing or potential unsafe conditions resultant from damage or deterioration (2) 

material building or fire code violations as revealed by municipal agencies; or (3) 

conditions that if left unremedied, have the potential to result in or contribute to critical 

element or system failure within one year, or will result most probably in a significant 

escalation of its remedial cost. In most cases, items deemed as Deferred Maintenance, or 

items that should have been repaired to maximize their service life, are also included in 

this category.

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 7 

 

 

• Short-Term Repairs are defined as physical deficiencies that may not warrant immediate 

attention, but require repairs or replacements that should be undertaken on a priority 

basis in addition to routine preventative maintenance. In some cases, Short-Term repairs 

may include recommendations for testing, exploratory probing, and/or further analysis. 

Generally the expected time frame for Short-Term Repairs is within one to two years. 

 

Capital Needs 

 

• Capital Needs are those items of a capital nature which are expected to require repair, 

renovation or replacement during the requested evaluation term, in this case 5 years. 

 

The opinions of cost presented herein were based on readily visible material and building system 

defects that might significantly affect the value of the property during the requested assessment 

term. These opinions were based on approximate quantities and values, and do not constitute a 

warranty or guarantee that all item(s) requiring repair were included. Items not incorporated 

into the cost tables include operational costs, such as landscaping maintenance and utility (gas 

or electricity) usage, unpredictable (aesthetic) upgrades, or normal operation and maintenance. 

The availability of parts or qualified personnel for repairs or renovations may be limited and is 

not factored into cost estimates unless specifically stated. Unless specified otherwise, anticipated 

costs do not consider the presence of hazardous materials with regard to escalation in unit costs 

for repairs or replacements. 

 

Estimated costs were developed with published unit price data and industry experience. These 

opinions should not be interpreted as a bid or offer to perform the work. The primary source of 

cost data was Commercial Renovation Costs with RS Means Data (2021 and 2022) as published 

by R.S. Means and Company. Costs for selected items were estimated based on provided 

documentation, and VERTEX’s experience with buildings of similar size, construction and 

geographic location. 

 

It is important to understand that actual costs will vary depending on such factors as contractor 

expertise, previous contractor commitment, seasonal workload, insurance and bonding, and 

local labor conditions. These factors may cause wide variations in the actual costs as estimated 

by different bidders. In addition, the costs presented in the tables do not include fees for design 

services, permits, management fees, taxes or other indirect costs which may be required for 

some work items. In view of these limitations, the costs presented herein should be considered 

“order of magnitude” estimates and used for preliminary budgeting purposes only. Preparation 

of scopes of work and contractor bidding are recommended to forecast the actual costs.

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 8 

 

 

4.0 

ASSESSMENT INFORMATION 

4.1 

SITE RECONNAISSANCE 

The site reconnaissance portion of the PCA was performed by Greg Bednarz of VERTEX. Weather 

conditions during the site reconnaissance were as follows: 

 

On-site Date 

Weather Description 

Average Temp. 

September 01, 2022 

Sunny 

77°F 

 

 

The following building features were assessed, if applicable: 

 

• Exterior Site Elements 

• 

 Mechanical System 

• Building Structure System 

• 

 Electrical System 

• Building Exterior System 

• 

 Plumbing System 

• Roof System 

• 

 Building Interior System 

• Life and Fire Safety System 

 

4.2 

BUILDING HISTORY 

The subject property is located at 401 East 5th Street, Pinconning, Bay County, Michigan. The 

subject property consists of approximately 13.4 acres of land. 

 

The subject property is improved with a 220,588 square-foot, single-story production warehouse 

with a two-story office space. The original building was constructed in 1945, with several building 

expansions in the following years. The building includes production warehouse space, office 

space, employee break areas and restrooms. Exterior areas on-site consist of a paved parking lot 

and drive lanes, truck loading bays and limited landscaped areas. Advanced Vehicle Assemblies 

is currently the sole tenant. 

 

According to the Site Contact, significant capital improvements and/or major repairs at the site 

have not been performed in recent years. 

4.3 

INTERVIEWS 

Interviews were conducted with personnel familiar with the facility to obtain information relative 

to the condition of the various building systems. Information obtained during the interviews has 

been incorporated into this report in the applicable sections. The following individuals or 

agencies were interviewed or contacted:

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 9 

 

 

• 

Leonard Sweet, Plant Manager, Tubular Metal Systems, LLC (Site Contact) 

• 

Jaron Trombley, Maintenance Technician, Tubular Metal Systems, LLC 

• 

Gary, Building Inspector, Area Code Enforcement (zoning, building) 

• 

Dave Ramsey, Fire Chief, City of Pinconning 

4.4 

PRE-SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE AND REQUEST FOR DOCUMENTATION 

VERTEX requested additional documentation from the Site Contact by sending a Pre-Survey 

Questionnaire and Request for Documentation (PSQ). At the time of this report, the PSQ had not 

been returned. A blank copy of the written request is included in Appendix B. VERTEX will forward 

additional significant information upon receipt and review. 

4.5 

DOCUMENTS 

The table below indicates the documents requested by VERTEX as part of this assessment, and 

the status of the request. 

 

 Priority 1 - Critical to the PCA analysis. 

 Priority 2 - Confirmatory in relation to our estimates of system, material or component age. 

 Priority 3 - Supplemental information in support of observations, opinions or other 

documents. 

 

PRIORITY DOCUMENT REQUESTED 

RECEIVED?* 

1 

ACTIVE WARRANTIES 

☐ YES ☒ NO 

☐ N/A 

1 

LISTING OF CAPITAL EXPENDITURES WITHIN PAST 5 YEARS 

☐ YES ☒ NO 

☐ N/A 

1 

PENDING PROPOSALS FOR REPAIR OR RENOVATION S 

☐ YES ☒ NO 

☐ N/A 

1 

COPIES OF CITATIONS, VIOLATIONS FROM MUNICIPALITY 

☐ YES ☒ NO 

☐ N/A 

1 

CERTIFICATE(S) OF OCCUPANCY 

☐ YES ☒ NO 

☐ N/A 

1 

CERTIFICATES OF COMPLIANCE (ELEVATOR, BOILERS, ETC.) 

☐ YES ☐ NO 

☒ N/A 

2 

REPAIR/MAINTENANCE LOGS 

☐ YES ☒ NO 

☐ N/A 

2 

ALTA SURVEY 

☐ YES ☒ NO 

☐ N/A 

2 

BUILDING PLANS 

☐ YES ☒ NO 

☐ N/A 

3 

PREVIOUS STUDIES (PCA, ESA, ROOF CONDITION, ADA, ETC.) 

☐ YES ☒ NO 

☐ N/A 

3 

PROMOTIONAL LITERATURE/LEASING INFORMATION 

☐ YES ☒ NO 

☐ N/A 

3 

SERVICE/MAINTENANCE CONTRACTS 

☐ YES ☒ NO 

☐ N/A

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 10 

 

 

PRIORITY DOCUMENT REQUESTED 

RECEIVED?* 

3 

BUILDING RENT ROLL, OCCUPANCY PERCENTAGE 

☐ YES ☒ NO 

☐ N/A 

 

In addition to the documents above, the following additional documents were either provided or 

discovered during VERTEX’s research of the property history. 

 

Description 

Author 

Date 

Reviewed 

No copy 

obtained 

Copy 

obtained* 

Flood Insurance Rate Map 

(Community Panel # 26017C0127E) 

Federal Emergency 

Management Agency 

09/17/2010 

☐ 

☒ 

Property Details 

Bay County GIS 

08/31/2022 

☐ 

☒ 

 

*We have included copies of selected documents in Appendix C; however, larger documents we obtained may simply be 

referenced here and can be provided upon request. 

 

4.6 

MUNICIPAL RESEARCH & CODE COMPLIANCE 

A detailed analysis of the building in order to determine compliance with current codes was not 

performed as part of this assessment. Code compliance research and evaluation was limited to 

the following. 

 

a) Visual observation of materials, components or systems that due to obvious deterioration or 

damage have resulted in an unsafe condition. Such conditions must have been visible without 

probing, dismantling or uncovering or unblocking access, and must not have required specialized 

knowledge of any particular code or any measurement or calculation for dimensional, clearance, 

or other compliance. 

b) Written inquiry or verbal interview with local building officials to determine if there were open or 

unresolved building, zoning or fire code issues on file with the local government related to the 

subject property. 

c) An attempt to determine whether or not there were specific “non-grandfathered” items listed 

with the local government that an owner may be forced to upgrade or replace even if no building 

renovations are performed. 

d) A written inquiry or verbal attempt to obtain the most recent “base-building” Certificate of 

Occupancy for the property. 

 

Issues of unsafe conditions related to visual deterioration or damage, if observed, are identified 

and discussed in the various sections of this report specific to the material, component or system.

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 11 

 

 

VERTEX sent written requests for information to the local municipal offices with jurisdiction over 

the property with respect to building, zoning and fire code compliance. The requests referenced 

the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and inquired about the existence of any material code 

violations or safety related issues on file with the municipality. 

 

At the time of this report, responses from the appropriate authorities had not been received. 

VERTEX will forward significant information upon receipt and review. Copies of the written 

requests for information are provided in Appendix C. 

4.7 

SITE CHARACTERISTICS 

General site characteristics including site topography, flood zone, seismic considerations, and 

termite considerations are tabulated and discussed below. 

 

Topography 

The property was relatively flat, with crowns in pavements and landscaped areas provided for 

runoff of surface water. 

 

Flood Zone 

VERTEX visually plotted the general property location on FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map. This 

should not be considered a flood zone certification. Actual determination of flood zones should 

be performed by a registered surveyor. 

Subject Property Flood Zone: 

The site is generally located in Zone AE, defined as areas subject to inundation by the 100-year 

flood determined in a Flood Insurance Study by detailed methods. Base flood elevations are 

typically shown within these zones. However, the southwest portion of the site is located in an 

area identified as Zone X (non-shaded area), defined as areas outside the 500-year flood plain.

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 12 

 

 

Seismic Considerations 

The probability of ground damaging motion 

within each Seismic Zone is defined below 

based on the Seismic Zone Map in Figure A, 

(1997 Uniform Building Code). 

• 

(0 or 1) low probability 

• 

(2A) low to moderate probability 

• 

(2B) moderate probability 

• 

(3) moderate to high probability 

• 

(4) high probability 

 

While there are more recent seismic risk maps, 

they generally require specific information on the seismic response characteristics of the site and 

structure. For ease and consistency, and comparision with previous standards, the ASTM 

standards associated with Probable Maximum Loss (PML) seismic studies, rely on this 1997 map. 

In general terms, those properties located in Zones 3 and 4 have a greater risk of ground 

damaging motion, and PML studies are typically recommended in these zones. 

The subject property for this evaluation was located in Seismic Zone: 0 and a PML is not not 

recommended.

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 13 

 

 

Termite Considerations 

Termite Zones identified in the 2000 International 

Residential Code (IRS) are shown in Figure B. 

The subject property is located in the following 

Termite Infestation Region: Slight to Moderate 

 

Foundation and exterior walls constructed with 

concrete, CMU, steel, and glass may serve to 

minimize the risk of building damage due to wood 

destroying insects; however, structures with 

signifcant portions of wood framing elements are 

subject to potential damage from wood destroying insects. 

 

Wood framing elements were utilized for the construction of portions of this facility. We did not 

observe evidence of wood destroying insect activity and none was reported by the Site Contact; 

however, in the event that certification of the absence or present of termite activity is required, 

a licensed pest inspection professional should be engaged to perform a formal survey.

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 14 

 

 

5.0 

SITE INFORMATION AND OBSERVATIONS 

The following sub-sections describe the major building systems as observed during the PCA. Comments and/or recommendations offered by VERTEX 

regarding each system are presented immediately after each description in italic print. Each deficiency is assigned an item number and is cross-

referenced in either the Immediate/Deferred Maintenance and Short Term Repairs Table in Section 1.0 or the appended Capital Needs Table. 

Numbered photographs are presented in Appendix A and cross-referenced to report and table sections as applicable. 

5.1 

SITE 

Item: 

 

Description: 

Comment / Observed Conditions: 

Deferred 

Maint. 

Item 

5-Year 

Cost 

Item # 

No. of Parking Spaces: 

 

135 Standard parking spaces 

None Accessible parking spaces 

135 Total spaces 

Based on a physical count and satellite image. Due 

to moderate to severe weathering of asphalt 

pavement, this is an approximate estimate. 

 

 

Pavement: 

 

Parking was provided on an open surface lot at the 

northeast and east sides of the building. Pavement 

was constructed with asphalt with painted parking 

stalls. Additionally, a narrow section of pavement 

was observed along East Pinconning Road at the 

south side of the building 

 

 

 

Pavement at the drive-in bays, scrap metal area and 

other selected locations at the north and east sides 

Significant portions of the asphalt pavement 

throughout the property were in poor condition with 

evidence of surface weathering, cracking, and 

potholes that require milling and repaving. See the 

Deferred Maintenance Table. It is recommended 

that a formal scope of work and cost estimate be 

obtained by a qualified vendor. 

 

In addition, regular cutting and patching and crack 

sealing and sealcoating of asphalt will be required 

during the evaluation term. Budgetary allowances 

 

 

 

1.01, 

1.02 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1,2,3

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 15 

 

 

Item: 

 

Description: 

Comment / Observed Conditions: 

Deferred 

Maint. 

Item 

5-Year 

Cost 

Item # 

of the building was constructed with cast-in place 

concrete. 

and forecasts for implementation are included in the 

Capital Needs Table. 

 

Significant cracking and deterioration was noted at 

a cast-in place concrete pad at a metal service door 

and overhead door near the southeast corner of the 

building. Sectional replacement of this area should 

be performed as soon as possible. See the Deferred 

Maintenance Table. 

 

Additionally, we observed areas of edge cracking, 

random cracking and vegetation growth that 

indicate some cutting and patching repairs should 

be expected during the evaluation term as part of 

Routine Maintenance. 

 

 

 

 

 

1.03 

 

 

Curbs and Sidewalks 

 

A small portion of concrete sidewalk was observed 

at the office entrance near the southwest corner of 

the building. The sidewalk was raised above the 

pavement areas with no curbing. 

 

Concrete curbing was provided at the driveway near 

the southeast corner of the site, along East 

Pinconning Road. 

The curbing at the southeast driveway appeared to 

be in generally good overall condition requiring 

general repairs as part of Routine Maintenance 

during the evaluation term. 

 

Evidence of cracking and deterioration was observed 

near the main office entrance and represent a 

tripping or safety hazard. Sectional replacement of 

this area should be performed as soon as possible. 

See the Deferred Maintenance Table. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.04

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 16 

 

 

Item: 

 

Description: 

Comment / Observed Conditions: 

Deferred 

Maint. 

Item 

5-Year 

Cost 

Item # 

Fencing & Retaining 

Walls: 

 

We observed a chain link fence with rolling gates 

extending from the driveway off East 4th Street to 

the driveway off East Pinconning Road. The fence 

provided security at the parking lots and truck court 

and was topped with barbed wire. 

 

A masonry retaining wall was observed at the drive-

in bay at the north side of the building off East 4th 

Street at the grade change between the well and 

adjacent pavement. In addition, two (2) masonry 

retaining walls were located near the main office 

entrance at the grade change between planted 

landscaping and hardscape. 

 

Metal guardrails were located along the exterior 

walls at the northeast corner and east side of the 

building in the main parking lot and truck court. 

 

 

The observed fencing appeared to be in good to fair 

overall condition with evidence of corrosion and 

bent or damaged support poles at a few scattered 

locations, and an inoperable rolling gate at the 

northwest 

driveway 

entrance. 

Sectional 

replacement of the fencing and gate should be 

performed as soon as practical. 

 

The drive-in bay retaining wall was in poor overall 

condition with significant evidence of deterioration, 

settlement cracking and displacement was observed 

at isolated locations. A budgetary allowance for 

repair/replacement is presented in the Deferred 

Maintenance Table. In addition, regular inspections 

of the retaining structure should be performed to 

monitor potential movement. This is considered a 

routine maintenance item. 

 

The retaining walls at the main office entrance 

appeared to be in good condition. Regular 

inspections of the retaining structure should be 

performed to monitor potential movement. This is 

considered a routine maintenance item. 

 

We noted some corrosion and peeling paint at the 

metal guardrails. We recommend cleaning and 

 

 

 

 

1.05 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.06

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 17 

 

 

Item: 

 

Description: 

Comment / Observed Conditions: 

Deferred 

Maint. 

Item 

5-Year 

Cost 

Item # 

painting with an anti-corrosive paint. This is 

considered to be an item of Routine Maintenance. 

Drainage: 

 

Storm water drained across the paved surfaces to 

catch basins and underground piping that reportedly 

discharged to the municipal storm sewer system. 

Site drainage systems appeared to be in generally 

good 

condition. 

Regular 

inspection 

and 

maintenance of drainage components and clearing 

of the inlets and drainage paths will be required 

during the evaluation term as part of routine 

maintenance. 

 

 

Exterior Lighting: 

 

The facility parking areas and drive-in bays were 

illuminated by wall mounted fixtures located along 

the north and east sides of the building perimeter. 

 

Additional lighting at the west end of the main 

parking area was provided by a metal pole-mounted 

light fixture and a utility pole-mounted light fixture. 

 

The main office entrance at the southwest corner of 

the building was illuminated by recessed fixtures at 

the underside of the exterior soffit. 

The site lighting appeared to be in good overall 

condition; however, VERTEX did not visit the site at 

night to observe the operation of the site lighting. 

No action other than regular inspection and routine 

maintenance is anticipated.

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 18 

 

 

Item: 

 

Description: 

Comment / Observed Conditions: 

Deferred 

Maint. 

Item 

5-Year 

Cost 

Item # 

Landscaping: 

 

The landscaping at the site consisted of shrubs and 

flowers at the main office entrance and grass areas 

and trees along portions of East Pinconning Road to 

the south. 

The observed landscaping elements appeared to be 

in good overall condition and were well-maintained. 

 

 

 

Recreational Areas: 

 

Not Applicable 

 

N/A 

N/A 

Ancillary Structures: 

 

Not Applicable 

 

N/A 

N/A 

5.2 

BUILDING STRUCTURE 

Item: 

 

Description: 

Comment / Observed Conditions: 

Deferred 

Maint. 

Item 

5-Year 

Cost 

Item # 

Building Structure: 

 

Plans were not provided for our review. Based on 

our experience with buildings of this size and type in 

this geographical area, it is assumed that the 

building 

foundation 

system 

consisted 

of 

conventional spread and continuous wall footings 

with steel reinforcement. 

The building foundations were concealed below 

grade; however, no significant damage or evidence 

of building settlement or failure was evidence. The 

foundations are presumed to be in good condition 

based on exterior and interior observations.

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 19 

 

 

Item: 

 

Description: 

Comment / Observed Conditions: 

Deferred 

Maint. 

Item 

5-Year 

Cost 

Item # 

The building was constructed with cast-in-place 

concrete floor slabs at the grade level. Portions of 

the warehouse floor slab were concealed with an 

epoxy resin finish. In areas where exposed, control 

joints and expansion joints were observed at regular 

intervals throughout the field of the floor. 

 

Based on our observations at exposed locations, the 

building structure consisted primarily of a mixture of 

masonry and structural steel framing supporting 

structural steel open web joists and metal roof 

decking. 

 

At pitched metal roof locations, the metal roof 

panels were supported by structural steel framing 

elements, including steel purlins supported by steel 

beams and columns. 

 

 

 

 

The floor slabs appeared to be in good to fair 

condition 

with 

no 

evidence 

of 

significant 

deterioration or failure; however, evidence of slab 

cracking and deteriorated epoxy resin finish was 

observed in scattered locations at the production 

warehouse areas. Epoxy repairs of selected slab 

areas is recommended. This is considered to be an 

item of Routine Maintenance 

 

The control joints observed at the building floor slabs 

had not been filled with semi-rigid materials or had 

been filled but the sealants were badly worn and 

shrunken. Crack filler serves to stabilize the control 

joints and limit potential for edge cracking under 

typical warehouse loadings such as fork trucks. 

Cleaning of control joints and filling with semi-rigid 

sealant should be considered as a measure to limit 

pre-mature 

deterioration 

and 

associated 

performance issues. Addition of this material also 

inhibits moisture and pest intrusion. A budgetary 

allowance for this repair is included in the Capital 

Needs Table; however, it is recommended that a 

formal scope of work and repair estimate be 

obtained by a qualified vendor. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 20 

 

 

Item: 

 

Description: 

Comment / Observed Conditions: 

Deferred 

Maint. 

Item 

5-Year 

Cost 

Item # 

We observed approximately five impact damaged 

columns located at scattered locations throughout 

the manufacturing portions of the building. Repairs 

to the observed damaged columns should be 

evaluated, designed and performed by a qualified 

structural repair contractor. Budgetary allowances 

and forecasts for implementation are included in the 

Deferred Maintenance Table; however, It is 

recommended that a formal scope of work and cost 

estimate be obtained by a qualified vendor. 

 

 

2.01 

5.3 

BUILDING EXTERIOR AND OPENINGS 

Item: 

 

Description: 

Comment / Observed Conditions: 

Deferred 

Maint. 

Item 

5-Year 

Cost 

Item # 

Exterior Walls: 

 

The primary cladding at the building consisted of 

painted concrete masonry unit (CMU) block and 

metal panels. 

 

Wall adornments, trims and decorative accents 

included brick in a running bond pattern at the main 

office entrance with a metal panel clad canopy 

above. 

 

The masonry block walls at the building appeared 

to be in good to fair condition with some evidence 

of step cracking and deteriorated mortar at 

scattered locations throughout. Renovation of 

walls including block repair, repointing, cleaning 

and painting should be anticipated during the 

evaluation term. A budgetary allowance is 

included in the Capital Needs Table. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5, 6

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 21 

 

 

Item: 

 

Description: 

Comment / Observed Conditions: 

Deferred 

Maint. 

Item 

5-Year 

Cost 

Item # 

Joints within the field of the CMU walls, wall 

penetrations (window and door openings) and at 

cladding material interfaces were filled with flexible 

caulking. 

 

The metal panel walls appeared to be in generally 

good condition. Impact damage was observed at 

a scattered locations. Based on the observed 

condition, age and estimated RUL of the coatings, 

renovation of the metal panel walls including 

minor metal panel repair, cleaning and painting 

will be required during the evaluation term. A 

budgetary allowance is included in the Capital 

Needs Table. Estimated budgetary allowance 

includes raised portions at roof. 

 

The sealants appeared to be in fair to poor 

condition, removal and re-application of wall and 

wall penetration sealants should be expected 

during the evaluation term at wall joints and wall 

penetrations. A budgetary allowance is included in 

the Capital Needs Table. 

 

 

 

 

7 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8 

Windows and Doors: 

 

The building windows typically were operable tinted 

units set in wood and aluminum frames. 

 

The main entrance door to the office portion of the 

building was a storefront style swing door with full 

glass vision panels set in metal frames. Metal 

service doors provided building access to warehouse 

and back-of-house areas. 

Windows appeared to be in good to fair condition. 

No action other than routine repairs and 

maintenance is anticipated. 

 

The exterior storefront style entrance door 

appeared to be in good condition. 

 

The metal service doors appeared to be in good to 

fair condition with some showing evidence of

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 22 

 

 

Item: 

 

Description: 

Comment / Observed Conditions: 

Deferred 

Maint. 

Item 

5-Year 

Cost 

Item # 

corrosion and general wear. Replacement of metal 

service doors is recommended. See the Deferred 

Maintenance Table. 

3.01 

Truck Docks 

 

The building included four (4) interior truck docks 

accessed by drive-in metal rollup doors that 

provided an elevated loading platform. The docks 

included bumper guards and load levelers. The 

metal rollup doors were manually operated. 

 

The building included five (5) additional drive-in bays 

with manually operated metal rollup doors. 

The interior truck dock equipment and drive-in 

metal rollup doors appeared to be in generally 

good condition requiring routine repairs and 

maintenance during the evaluation term. 

 

 

 

Roof Covering: 

 

The primary building roof was covered with the 

following system: 

 

• 

Single-ply Thermoplastic Polyolefin (TPO) 

• 

Built-up roof with gravel surfacing 

• 

Standing Seam Metal Roofing Panels 

 

The roof included a perimeter parapet at the west 

and portions of the north sides. The membrane 

roofing turned up the parapet wall and terminated 

under perimeter coping. 

 

We requested a copy of any roof warranties, but 

none had been provided at the time of this report. 

Any active warranties should be provided, so that 

transfer provisions and warranty limitations can 

be reviewed. 

 

The TPO and Built-up roofing membranes 

appeared to be in fair overall condition with 

evidence of some historical patching, general 

surface wear and overall weathering of the roof 

coverings and flashings. Based on the observed 

conditions and estimated ages and RUL of the 

membranes, replacement is anticipated during the 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

9, 10

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 23 

 

 

Item: 

 

Description: 

Comment / Observed Conditions: 

Deferred 

Maint. 

Item 

5-Year 

Cost 

Item # 

A canopy structure with a standing-seam metal roof 

was observed over the scrap metal area at the 

northeast corner of the facility. The structure was 

supported by structural columns. Two similar, 

smaller structures were also observed at the 

building. 

evaluation term. A budgetary allowance is 

included in the Capital Needs Table. 

 

The metal roofs may be candidates for renovation, 

which often includes application of elastomeric 

liquid applied coatings. Such actions can serve to 

extend the service life of metal roofs and a 

budgetary allowance is included in the Capital 

Needs Table. 

 

 

 

 

 

11 

 

 

Roof Drainage: 

 

The TPO and Built-up roof systems were relatively 

flat, with a slight pitch toward internal roof drains 

and perimeter gutters and downspouts. The primary 

drains discharged to underground piping and the 

downspouts discharged to underground piping and 

internal roof drains at lower level roofs. 

 

The metal panel roofs were equipped with 

perimeter gutters and downspouts, with direct 

discharge into the storm water management system 

through underground piping. 

Evidence of water ponding was observed in 

multiple locations throughout the field of the roof 

systems. While installation of supplemental roof 

drains in these areas may relieve the current 

ponding conditions; in the absence of active 

leaking, restoration of positive drainage through 

the use of tapered installation or installation of 

supplemental roof drains should be performed at 

the time of re-roofing, unless leaking issues 

become apparent or chronic in these locations.

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 24 

 

 

5.4 

BUILDING INTERIOR 

Item: 

 

Description: 

Comment / Observed Conditions: 

Deferred 

Maint. 

Item 

5-Year 

Cost 

Item # 

Common Areas: 

 

The property tenant entrances were accessed 

directly from the exterior. There were no common 

spaces or public areas. 

 

N/A 

N/A 

Office Areas: 

 

Office areas and general work spaces for tenant 

employees were generally finished with the 

following: 

 

• 

Floors: Epoxy Resin 

• 

Walls: Painted gypsum board, Wainscot 

panel 

• 

Ceiling: Suspended grids with drop-in tiles 

The office area finishes appeared to be in 

generally good overall condition requiring 

routine maintenance during the evaluation 

period. 

 

Ceiling tile damage associated with past roof 

and/or 

mechanical 

equipment 

leaks 

was 

observed at a few scattered locations throughout 

the office areas. Replacement of damaged and 

missing tiles should be expected during the 

evaluation term as part of routine maintenance. 

 

 

Employee Break Areas: 

 

Employee break areas were generally finished with 

the following: 

 

• 

Floors: Epoxy Resin, Tile 

• 

Walls: Painted gypsum board, Wainscot 

panel 

The employee break area finishes appeared to be 

in generally good overall condition requiring 

routine maintenance during the evaluation 

period.

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 25 

 

 

Item: 

 

Description: 

Comment / Observed Conditions: 

Deferred 

Maint. 

Item 

5-Year 

Cost 

Item # 

• 

Ceiling: Suspended grids with drop-in tiles 

Warehouse Areas: 

 

Warehouses generally included exposed concrete 

flooring, exposed structural elements at the ceiling 

and painted CMU, gypsum board and metal panel at 

the perimeter walls. 

The warehouse finishes appeared to be in 

generally good to fair overall condition requiring 

cleaning and repairs as part of routine 

maintenance during the evaluation term. 

 

 

Restrooms: 

 

Typical restroom finishes at the buildings were 

consistent with the general tenant space finishes. 

The restroom finishes appeared to be in generally 

good to fair overall condition requiring routine 

maintenance during the evaluation period. 

 

 

Stairs: 

 

Stairs provided access between the ground floor and 

second-story office space and were constructed 

with a rubber-covered stair assembly with closed 

risers, and wood perimeter handrails. 

 

Observed stairs at the warehouse mezzanines and 

interior truck dock were constructed with steel 

assemblies with open risers and painted steel pipe 

railings and handrails. 

 

Except as noted below, the stair assemblies 

appeared to be in generally good overall 

condition 

requiring 

routine 

cleaning 

and 

maintenance during the evaluation term. 

 

We observed damage and deterioration to a 

metal stair assembly located at a warehouse 

mezzanine leading to roof access. The stair treads 

bowed under pressure and appeared unstable. 

Based on these observations, repairs and/or 

renovations are required and a budgetary 

allowance 

is 

included 

in 

the 

Deferred 

Maintenance Table. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4.01

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 26 

 

 

5.5 

BUILDING SYSTEMS AND FIRE/LIFE SAFETY, CONVEYANCE 

Item: 

 

Description: 

Comment / Observed Conditions: 

Deferred 

Maint. 

Item 

5-Year 

Cost Item 

# 

HVAC Systems 

(Cooling): 

 

The 2-story office space and a portion of the 

manufacturing warehouse at the southwest corner 

of the building were air conditioned with rooftop 

package units (RTUs). 

 

The 9 units serving these areas were manufactured 

by Trane, York, Rheem and Fraser-Johnston 

between 1999 and 2015. The units had estimated 

rated cooling capacities ranging from 2.5 to 6 tons. 

Units had efficiency ratings (SEER) of 14, 13 and 11 

or less. Condensate was allowed to drip directly to 

the roof surface. 

 

Two (2) split system units serving warehouse office 

spaces were manufactured by Trane between 2015 

and 2018. The units had estimated rated cooling 

capacities of 3 tons. Condensing units had efficiency 

ratings (SEER) of 13. Air handlers (AHUs) were 

reportedly located above ceilings and condensers 

were located on the roof. 

 

A few selected spaces were cooled by through 

wall/window units. 

 

The observed package units appeared to be in 

generally fair to poor condition. We observed 

corrosion to the cabinets, bent and damaged 

condensing fins, overall wear and weathering. 

Based on the age, wear and estimated RUL of the 

units, replacement most of the units is 

recommended. A budgetary allowance of cost is 

included in the Deferred Maintenance Table. 

 

The observed split systems appeared to be in 

generally good condition. Based on the estimated 

RUL of the units, replacements should not be 

expected during the evaluation tern. 

 

The 

observed 

through 

wall/window 

units 

appeared to be in generally fair condition. Based 

on the estimated RUL of the units, replacements 

should be expected during the evaluation tern. 

Due to the minimal aggregate quantity and 

associated cost, this item is considered to be 

routine maintenance. 

 

 

 

 

 

5.01

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 27 

 

 

Item: 

 

Description: 

Comment / Observed Conditions: 

Deferred 

Maint. 

Item 

5-Year 

Cost Item 

# 

A summary of major mechanical equipment is 

presented in Appendix C of this report. 

HVAC Systems 

(Heating): 

 

Primary heating of the office portion of the building 

was provided by the units described above. The 

RTUs were equipped with natural gas heat. 

 

The primary heating source for the manufacturing 

warehouse portion of the building included a series 

of natural gas infrared tube heaters suspended 

below the roof structure of the building. 

 

The condition of the RTUs is discussed above in 

HVAC Systems (Cooling). 

 

The infrared tube heaters appeared to be in fair 

condition and due to the age, observed condition 

and estimated RUL of the units; some 

replacements are expected as needed during the 

evaluation term and a budgetary allowance of 

cost for this item is included in the Capital Needs 

Table; however, it is recommended that a formal 

scope of work and replacement estimate be 

obtained by a qualified vendor. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

12 

HVAC Systems 

(Ventilation): 

 

The RTUs were equipped with fresh air economizers. 

Bathrooms were provided with exhaust by powered 

centrifugal ventilation units mounted on the roof. 

 

Additional mechanical ventilation at the warehouse 

areas was provided by conventional ceiling fans, 

floor- and column-mounted industrial fans and 

through wall ventilation fans. 

 

Indoor air quality was not studied as part of this 

assessment. Observed exhaust and air movement 

equipment appeared to be in good to fair 

condition. Renovation of selected ventilation 

equipment including fan motor replacement, 

lubrication and general repairs should be 

expected throughout the evaluation term as part 

of Routine Maintenance.

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 28 

 

 

Item: 

 

Description: 

Comment / Observed Conditions: 

Deferred 

Maint. 

Item 

5-Year 

Cost Item 

# 

Passive ventilation was provided by operable 

windows and doors, overhead doors in the 

warehouse and natural air infiltration. 

Electrical Systems: 

 

Pad mounted transformers located outside the 

south end and southeast corner of the building fed 

the main switchgears in the production warehouse. 

 

It was reported that the distribution wiring providing 

power to the branch circuits within the leased 

spaces consisted of copper. Where observed, wiring 

was located in rigid and flexible metal conduit. 

 

The electrical equipment generally appeared to 

be in good condition. The building is considered 

to have adequate capacity and power available 

for the tenant and current occupancy. The main 

electrical gear was accessible and was free from 

debris or stored materials. No action other than 

routine inspection and maintenance of electrical 

equipment is anticipated during the evaluation 

term. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Plumbing Systems: 

 

A series of smaller electric water heaters (estimated 

50-gallon or less) provided hot water for the 

building. The heaters typically were located above 

the restroom ceilings or suspended from the 

warehouse roof deck. 

 

Wastewater generated at the building was conveyed 

to underground piping, which discharged to the 

municipal sewer system owned and maintained by 

the Sanitary provider. 

The water heaters appeared and were reported 

to be in generally good condition. Based on the 

estimated RUL of the units, some replacements 

should be expected during the evaluation term; 

however, based on the limited expected costs 

associated with such replacements, this is 

expected to be handled as part of Routine 

Maintenance. 

 

 

 

Fire Protection: 

 

The building was protected by an automatic, wet-

pipe fire sprinkler system, which relied on municipal 

water pressure to operate. Pressure read from 

gauges on the risers indicated a static pressure of 

The sprinkler system appeared to be in good 

condition. Inspection tags on the system from the 

private 

fire 

protection 

vendor 

(Summit

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 29 

 

 

Item: 

 

Description: 

Comment / Observed Conditions: 

Deferred 

Maint. 

Item 

5-Year 

Cost Item 

# 

approximately 50 psi. Sprinkler heads were 

observed throughout the building. A spare sprinkler 

head cabinet was not observed at the property. 

 

The building was not provided with a fire alarm 

system. 

 

Hard-wired smoke detectors were not observed at 

the building. Smoke control measures were not 

observed. 

 

Fire extinguishers were provided at various locations 

throughout the building. 

Companies) indicated the system was last tested 

and inspected in October, 2021. 

 

We could not locate documentation relating to 

the last 5-year internal inspection. An estimated 

cost for this item is included in the Deferred 

Maintenance Table. In the event that current 

inspection documentation can be provided, this 

item is not required. 

 

A cabinet of spare sprinkler heads was not 

provided near the sprinkler risers as required by 

NFPA. Installation of a spare sprinkler head 

cabinet equipped with spare heads and wrenches 

for each type is recommended and a budgetary 

estimate of cost is included in the Deferred 

Maintenance Table. 

 

We observed several heads in scattered locations 

throughout the office areas with missing 

escutcheon places. A detailed inspection and 

inventory of missing plates would be required to 

determine the number of specific locations where 

installation is required. A budgetary estimate of 

costs extrapolated from the areas where this 

 

 

 

5.02 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5.03 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5.04

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 30 

 

 

Item: 

 

Description: 

Comment / Observed Conditions: 

Deferred 

Maint. 

Item 

5-Year 

Cost Item 

# 

condition was observed, is included in the 

Deferred Maintenance Table. 

 

According 

to 

equipment 

tags, 

the 

fire 

extinguishers in the building were last tested and 

inspected within the last 12 months by Summit 

Fire Protection. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Elevators: 

 

Not Applicable 

 

N/A 

N/A

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 31 

 

 

 

6.0 

Accessibility (ADA) 

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is not a building code; it is a civil rights law that was 

enacted in 1990 to provide persons with disabilities with accommodations and access equal to, 

or similar to, that available to the general public. Title III of the ADA requires that owners of 

buildings that considered to be placed of public accommodations remove those architectural 

barriers and communications barriers that are considered readily achievable in accordance with 

the resources available to the building ownership to allow use of the facility by the disabled. 

 

The obligation to remove barriers where readily achievable is an ongoing one. The determination 

as to whether removal of a barrier or implementation of a component or system is readily 

achievable is often a business decision, which is based on the resources available to the owner 

or tenants and contingent upon the timing of implementation. Determination of whether barrier 

removal is readily achievable is on a case-by-case basis; the United States Department of Justice 

did not provide numerical formulas or threshold of any kind to determine whether an action is 

readily achievable. 

 

As required by the ADA, the U.S. Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board 

promulgated the ADA Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG), which provided guidelines for 

implementation of the ADA by providing specifications for design, construction and alteration of 

facilities. The ADAAG was superseded by the 2010 ADA Standards for Accessible Design. 

 

As part of this PCA, VERTEX performed a “Baseline Evaluation” of ADA consisting of a limited 

scope visual survey and completion of a checklist extracted from ASTM E2018-15 X2. This visual 

review most closely resembles what was previously known as a Tier I ADA survey in ASTM E2018-

08. 

 

Our survey was limited to visual observations unless specifically stated. Measurements were not 

taken, and compliance with dimensional tolerances stated by the guidelines was only visually 

assessed. While opinions of cost to correct noted barriers have been provided, they do not 

constitute a recommendation that removal of the barriers are “readily achievable” and not an 

“undue burden” as stated in the ADA. 

 

Although access is required to be provided to individuals with disabilities to approach, enter, and 

exit employee-only areas, VERTEX did not review the employee-only interior spaces and 

entrances. Paths of travel leading to the entrances were reviewed as part of the interior and 

exterior common areas. At least one accessible entrance to each tenancy in a facility should 

comply. VERTEX did not review the tenant entrances or features and amenities within the tenant 

spaces since they are the responsibility of the tenant.

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 32 

 

 

 

In addition to the new 2010 ADA Standards, some states and municipalities have adopted 

building codes similar to the 1991 ADA Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG). In some instances, 

these code requirements are more restrictive than the 1991 ADAAG. For purposes of this report, 

state specific requirements were not considered as part of this report. 

 

Representative areas of the following portions of the site were surveyed: 

1) Parking – Comparison of the number of provided parking stalls designated for 

handicapped use to the number required for the reported parking stall total for the site. 

2) Exterior Accessible Route and Building Entrances - Visual identification of physical 

barriers from parking to the building entrances. 

3) Building Entrances - Review of the building entrance access to the interior. 

4) Interior Accessible Routes and Amenities – Review of the interior route, obstructions, 

path of travel and access to public features and equipment. 

5) Interior Doors – Review of doors, clear width, hardware and apparent opening force. 

6) Elevators – Observation of elevator floor area, signals, signs, safety devices, and 

emergency call systems. 

7) Toilet Rooms - Visual review of common area restrooms available for public use (toilet 

stalls designed with accessible features, sinks at lower heights with adequate clearances, 

appropriate sink fixtures and accessories). 

 

ASTM E2018-15 - Uniform Abbreviated Screening Checklist for the 2010 Americans with Disabilities Act 

 

Item 

Yes No NA 

Comments 

A. History 

1. Has an ADA survey previously been completed for this property? 

 

 

✓ Unknown 

2. Have any ADA improvements been made to the property since original 

construction? 

 

 

✓ Unknown 

3. Has building ownership/management reported any ADA complaints or 

litigation? 

 

✓ 

 

B. Parking 

1. Does the required number of standard ADA-designated spaces appear 

to be provided? 

 

✓ 

 6.01/6.02: Convert five 

(5) existing standard 

spaces ADA-designated 

spaces (including a 

2. Does the required number of van-accessible designated spaces appear 

to be provided? 

 

✓

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 33 

 

 

 

 

ASTM E2018-15 - Uniform Abbreviated Screening Checklist for the 2010 Americans with Disabilities Act 

 

3. Are accessible spaces part of the shortest accessible route to an 

accessible building entrance? 

 

✓ 

 single van accessible 

space) 

4. Is a sign with the International Symbol of Accessibility at the head of 

each space? 

 

✓ 

 

5. Does each accessible space have an adjacent access aisle? 

 

✓ 

 

6. Do parking spaces and access aisles appear to be relatively level and 

without obstruction? 

✓ 

 

 

C. Exterior Accessible Route 

1. Is an accessible route present from public transportation stops and 

municipal sidewalks on the property? 

 

 

✓ 

2. Are curb cut ramps present at transitions through curbs on an 

accessible route? 

 

 

✓ 

3. Do the curb cut ramps appear to have the proper slope for all 

components? 

 

 

✓ 

4. Do ramps on an accessible route appear to have a compliant slope? 

 

 

✓ 

5. Do ramps on an accessible route appear to have a compliant length and 

width? 

 

 

✓ 

6. Do ramps on an accessible route appear to have compliant end and 

intermediate landings? 

 

 

✓ 

7. Do ramps on an accessible route appear to have compliant handrails? 

 

 

✓ 

D. Building Entrances 

1. Do a sufficient number of accessible entrances appear to be provided? 

 

✓ 

 

6.03: Modify existing 

metal service door as 

required 

6.04: Provide signage 

indicating the location 

of accessible entrance 

2. If the main entrance is not accessible, is an alternate accessible 

entrance provided? 

 

✓ 

 

3. Is signage provided indicating the location of alternate accessible 

entrances? 

 

✓ 

 

4. Do doors at accessible entrances appear to have compliant clear floor 

area on each side? 

 

✓ 

 

5. Do doors at accessible entrances appear to have compliant hardware? 

 

✓ 

 

6. Do doors at accessible entrances appear to have a compliant clear 

opening width? 

 

✓ 

 

7. Do pairs of accessible entrance doors in series appear to have the 

minimum clear space between them? 

 

 

✓

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 34 

 

 

 

 

ASTM E2018-15 - Uniform Abbreviated Screening Checklist for the 2010 Americans with Disabilities Act 

 

8. Do thresholds at accessible entrances appear to have a compliant 

height? 

 

✓ 

 

E. Interior Accessible Routes and Amenities 

1. Does an accessible route appear to connect with all public areas inside 

the building? 

✓ 

 

 

2. Do accessible routes appear free of obstructions and/or protruding 

objects? 

✓ 

 

 

3. Do ramps on accessible routes appear to have a compliant slope? 

 

 

✓ 

4. Do ramps on accessible routes appear to have a compliant length and 

width? 

 

 

✓ 

5. Do ramps on accessible routes appear to have compliant end and 

intermediate landings? 

 

 

✓ 

6. Do ramps on accessible routes appear to have compliant handrails? 

 

 

✓ 

7. Are adjoining public areas and areas of egress identified with accessible 

signage? 

 

 

✓ 

8. Do public transaction areas have an accessible, lowered counter 

section? 

 

 

✓ 

9. Do public telephones appear mounted with an accessible height and 

location? 

 

 

✓ 

10 Are publicly-accessible swimming pools equipped with an entrance lift? 

 

 

✓ 

F. Interior Doors 

1. Do doors at interior accessible routes appear to have compliant clear 

floor area on each side? 

✓ 

 

 

2. Do doors at interior accessible routes appear to have compliant 

hardware? 

 

✓ 

 

6.05: Replace existing 

hardware with ADA 

compliant hardware as 

required – confirm 

exact quantity in field 

3. Do doors at interior accessible routes appear to have compliant 

opening force? 

✓ 

 

 

4. Do doors at interior accessible routes appear to have a compliant clear 

opening width? 

✓ 

 

 

G. Elevators 

1. Are hallway call buttons configured with the “UP” button above the 

“DOWN” button? 

 

 

✓

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 35 

 

 

 

 

ASTM E2018-15 - Uniform Abbreviated Screening Checklist for the 2010 Americans with Disabilities Act 

 

2. Is accessible floor identification signage present on the hoistway 

sidewalls? 

 

 

✓ 

3. Do the elevators have audible and visual arrival indicators at the 

entrances? 

 

 

✓ 

4. Do the elevator hoistway and car interior appear to have a minimum 

compliant clear floor area? 

 

 

✓ 

5. Do the elevator car doors have automatic re-opening devices to 

prevent closure on obstructions? 

 

 

✓ 

6. Do elevator car control buttons appear to be mounted at a compliant 

height? 

 

 

✓ 

7. Are tactile and Braille characters mounted to the left of each elevator 

car control button? 

 

 

✓ 

8. Are audible and visual floor position indicators provided in the elevator 

car? 

 

 

✓ 

9. Is the emergency call system at the base of the control panel and not 

require voice communication? 

 

 

✓ 

H. Toilet Rooms 

1. Do publicly-accessible toilet rooms appear to have a minimum 

compliant floor area? 

✓ 

 

 

2. Does the lavatory appear to be mounted at a compliant height and with 

compliant knee area? 

✓ 

 

 

3. Does the lavatory faucet have compliant handles? 

✓ 

 

 

4. Is the plumbing piping under lavatories configured to protect against 

contact? 

 

✓ 

 

6.06: Provide protection 

at piping under sinks as 

required 

5. Are grab bars provided at compliant locations around the toilet? 

✓ 

 

 

6. Do toilet stall doors appear to provide the minimum compliant clear 

width? 

 

 

✓ 

7. Do toilet stalls appear to provide the minimum compliant clear floor 

area? 

 

 

✓ 

8. Do urinals appear to be mounted at a compliant height and with 

compliant approach width? 

 

 

✓ 

9. Do accessories and mirrors appear to be mounted at a compliant 

height? 

✓

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 36 

 

 

 

7.0 

REPORT QUALIFICATIONS & LIMITATIONS 

This report was prepared in accordance with the scope of work, and terms and conditions 

associated with VERTEX’s proposal number P.6135.22, dated August 25, 2022. 

 

This report was intended to provide a general overview of the building systems at the facility and 

the general conditions of such. The evaluation was performed using that degree of skill and care 

normally exercised by reputable consultants performing similar work. The activities of this 

evaluation included observations of visible and readily accessible areas. Consequently, a 

comprehensive study to identify, document, and assess specific property/building defects was 

not conducted. In some cases, additional study may be warranted to more fully assess concerns 

noted. In addition, system checks or testing, or the operation of machinery and equipment is 

beyond the scope of this evaluation. This report should be construed as neither a complete 

inventory of the building materials, contents or components nor a survey to determine status of 

material or equipment recalls. 

 

The opinions and recommendations presented in this report are based on VERTEX's observations, 

evaluation of the information provided, and interviews with personnel possessing knowledge of 

the facility. No calculations were made to determine the adequacy of the facility’s original or 

existing design. The possibility exists that defects and deficiencies are present at the subject 

facility, which were not readily visible or accessible. The development of future problems not 

identified in this report, on any observed system, at the subject property should be anticipated. 

 

The opinions and recommendations in this report should not be construed in any way to 

constitute a warranty or guarantee regarding the current or future performance of any system 

identified. 

 

A Property Condition Assessment (“PCA”) is the process by which VERTEX observes, researches 

and documents in a written report the current physical condition of commercial property and, in 

addition, provides required estimated expenditures to remedy physical deficiencies. A physical 

deficiency is defined to be a patent, conspicuous defect, or significant deferred maintenance of 

the subject property’s material systems, components or equipment. It could also include material 

systems, components or equipment that are approaching, have realized, or have exceeded their 

typical expected useful life (“EUL”) or whose remaining useful life (“RUL”) should not be relied 

upon as a result of actual age, abuse, excessive wear and tear, exposure to the elements, lack of 

proper maintenance, or other factors. This definition specifically excludes routine maintenance, 

miscellaneous repairs, operating maintenance, etc. It should be noted that items considered as 

routine or operating maintenance may be defined by the current practices of the management 

or property owner operating the site.

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 37 

 

 

 

The scope of the PCA has been specifically agreed upon by VERTEX and the Client in the proposal 

for these services. Unless specifically requested by the client and included in the written scope 

of work or services, the PCA does not include an environmental assessment of the property; 

building system or component operation or testing; building or fire/life-safety code reviews; or a 

survey to determine the compliance of building plans with any as-built conditions unless items 

of non-compliance are reasonably observable during the walk through survey. 

 

The amount of time and effort provided within this assessment is further dictated by additional 

factors including cost and time constraints and risk tolerance established by the client. VERTEX’s 

proposal for the evaluation clearly states the scope of work and level of effort agreed upon. 

 

The visual observation portion of the PCA consists of a walk-through survey of the subject 

property undertaken to observe readily accessible property components, systems, and elements 

for the purposes of providing a brief description of same, providing an opinion on their general 

apparent physical condition, and identifying material physical deficiencies as of the time of 

VERTEX’s site visit in accordance with the criteria agreed by the client and VERTEX and set forth 

in the PCA’s scope of services. This portion of the PCA is a non-intrusive, visual survey; it is not 

to be construed as a punch list or detailed survey of the property’s major physical deficiencies. It 

is also not considered to be an inventory of building system or material components. 

 

The observation portion of the PCA is based on the concept of visually observing a representative 

sampling of differing types of building conditions and locations to provide the client with a 

reasonably expected magnitude of commonly encountered conditions. VERTEX typically does not 

survey all systems and equipment nor all tenant and common areas, back-of-house areas, etc., 

only a representative sampling of such equipment, systems and areas designated in VERTEX’s 

proposal, and either (a) reasonably believed by VERTEX to provide a reasonable representation 

of the present and probable future condition of the subject property’s units, areas, systems, 

buildings, etc. or (b) as otherwise specified by the client. VERTEX may then extrapolate these 

representative findings to all such typical areas and systems of the subject property to provide 

the client with a reasonably estimated magnitude of commonly anticipated conditions and to use 

as a basis for estimating the cost of required expenditures to remedy physical deficiencies at the 

subject property. 

 

Based on observations and information received during the PCA, VERTEX has prepared general-

scope type or budgetary-level estimates of the costs to remedy the material Physical Deficiencies 

observed. Estimates are provided for observed components or systems exhibiting significant 

deferred maintenance, and existing physical deficiencies requiring major repairs or replacement. 

Repairs or improvements that could be classified as (a) cosmetic or decorative, (b) part or parcel

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 38 

 

 

 

of a building renovation program, (c) enhancements to reposition the asset in the marketplace, 

(d) under warranty or required for warranty transfer purposes, (e) the financial responsibility of 

the tenant of a leased space at the property, and/or (f) routine or normal preventive maintenance 

are not included, unless stated otherwise. 

 

Unless specifically requested by client and included in the agreed upon, written scope of services 

the following items were excluded from the scope of services for this PCA: 

• Removal of materials, furniture or finishes; conducting any exploratory probing or testing; 

dismantling or operation of any equipment; or disturbing any personal items or property 

which obstructs access or visibility. 

• Preparation of engineering calculations (civil, structural, mechanical, electrical, etc.) to 

determine any system’s, component’s or equipment’s adequacy or compliance with any 

specific or commonly accepted design requirements and building codes, or the preparation 

of designs or specifications to remedy any physical deficiency. 

• Taking any measurements or quantities to establish or confirm such information or 

representations of owner such as size and dimensions of property, any legal encumbrances 

such as easements, floor areas, dwelling unit count and mix, building dimensions, building 

property line setbacks or elevations, number and size of parking spaces, etc. 

• Reporting on the presence or absence of pests such as wood damaging organisms; rodents 

or insects unless such evidence is readily apparent during the course of the consultant’s 

survey or information is provided to the consultant as to their presence by the owner, user, 

property manager, etc. 

• Reporting on the condition of subterranean conditions such as underground utilities, 

separate sewage disposal systems, wastewater treatment plants, wells or systems that are 

either considered process related or peculiar to a specific tenancy or use, or items or systems 

that are not permanently installed. 

• Entering or accessing any area of the premises deemed to pose a dangerous or adverse 

condition to the consultant or to perform any procedure which may damage or impair the 

physical integrity of the property, any system or equipment. 

• Providing an opinion on the condition of any system or component which is seasonally shut 

down. 

• Evaluation of any acoustical or insulating characteristics of any system or component.

401 East Fifth Street 

Privileged and Confidential 

Page 39 

 

 

 

• Opining on matters regarding security of the property and protection of its occupants or users 

from unauthorized access except to the extent of comments on the integrity of readily 

observable exterior security fencing. 

• Operation or witnessing the operation of lighting or other systems typically controlled by time 

clocks or that are normally operated by the facility operating staff. 

• Provision of a warranty or guarantee of any systems or component’s physical condition or 

use. A PCA is not to be construed as a substitute for any system’s or equipment’s warranty 

transfer inspection. 

• Review of compliance with any federal, state, city, trade/design, or insurance industry 

building codes, local laws, health codes or local zoning ordinances; however, violations to 

codes laws and ordinances that are observed and any retroactive or pending requirements 

contained in such codes, laws, and ordinances that are known to the consultant, or to the 

extent identified during interviews with code authorities, will be identified in the report. 

• Compliance of any material, equipment or system with any certification or actuation rate 

program, vendor’s or manufacturer’s warranty provisions, or provisions established by any 

standards that are related to insurance industry acceptance/approval such as Factory Mutual 

(FM), State Board of Fire Underwriters, etc. 

• Surveying for the presence of any environmental issues such as wetlands, hazardous wastes, 

hazardous materials, mold, asbestos, lead based paint, or indoor air quality.

IMMEDIATE REPAIRS / DEFERRED MAINTENANCE / SHORT TERM REPAIRS TABLE

Deferred Maintenance, Immediate Repairs, Short Term Repairs

VERTEX

Site Name:

# Buildings:

1

City, ST:

Est. Building SF:

220,588

Age, Yrs.:

Project No.:

Description

Notes

Unit Type

QTY

Unit Price

Budget

Site

1.01 Mill and repave 1" of deteriorated asphalt surfaces in north lot and along south side of building

sf

 42,000 $ 1.34 

56,280

$ 

Map cracking and surface weathering pervasive through asphalt, surfaces to be milled and repaved

1.02 Mill and repave 2" of deteriorated asphalt surfaces in east truck court

sf

 86,500 $ 2.35 

203,275

$ 

Map cracking and surface weathering pervasive through truck court asphalt, surfaces to be milled and repaved

1.03 Sectional replacement of concrete pad near service door and overhead door near southeast corner of 

building

sf

 70 $ 16.00 

1,120

$ 

Significant cracking and deterioration at this location

1.04 Sectional replacement of deteriorated concrete sidewalk at main office entrance

ls

 1 $ 750.00 

750

$ 

Tripping/safety hazard at main office entrance

1.05 Replace sections of chain link fencing at scattered locations and replace gate at parking lot entrance

ls

 1 $ 1,500.00 

1,500

$ 

Bent or damged support poles at scattered locations, inoperable gate

1.06 Repair/replace masonry retaining wall at north drive-in bay

sf

 220 $ 25.42 

5,592

$ 

Significant deterioration and settlement cracking

Site

SUBTOTAL

268,517

$ 

Building Structure & Shell

2.01 Cut out and replace bent or twisted steel column, splice in new steel section, provide impact protection

ea

 5 $ 5,500.00 

27,500

$ 

Impact damage observed at scattered locations throughout warehouse. It is recommended that a formal scope of work and 

repair estimate be obtained by a qualified vendor. 

ng Structure &

SUBTOTAL

27,500

$ 

Building Exterior & Openings

3.01 Remove and replace exterior door, hollow core metal, insulated, standard size

ea

 15 $ 1,497.00 

22,455

$ 

g Exterior & Op

SUBTOTAL

22,455

$ 

Office & Warehouse Interior

4.01 Replace interior stair assembly, metal

 ri 

 20 $ 521.55 

10,431

$ 

& Warehouse I

SUBTOTAL

10,431

$ 

MEP and FLS Systems

5.01 Replace 7 of 9 rooftop package units

Ton AC

 28 $ 1,400.00 

39,200

$ 

Based on observed condition, estimated age and RUL, replacement of most units is expected

5.02 Engage fire protection vendor to perform 5-year internal inspection

ls

 1 $ 2,000.00 

2,000

$ 

5-year inspection documentation not provided

5.03 Provide cabinet of spare sprinkler heads and wrench near sprinkler risers

ls

 1 $ 750.00 

750

$ 

No spare sprinkler head cabinet provided

5.04 Engage fire protection vendor to inspect and inventory missing escutcheon plates and install new

ls

 1 $ 1,000.00 

1,000

$ 

Missing escutcheon plates at scattered locations

P and FLS Syste

SUBTOTAL

42,950

$ 

ADA Compliance

6.01 Install ADA parking with signs and access aisle, standard space

ea

 5 $ 650.00 

3,250

$ 

No standard ADA parking spaces provided

6.02 Install handicapped parking stall with signs and access aisle, Van Accessible Space

ea

 1 $ 700.00 

700

$ 

No van accessible ADA parking spaces provided

6.03 Modify existing metal service door for ADA compliance as an alternate option

ea

 1 $ 750.00 

750

$ 

Main entrance not accessible, and significant modifications would be required

6.04 Add building signage directing visitors to accessible entrance

ls

 1 $ 750.00 

750

$ 

6.05 Replace existing hardware with ADA compliant hardware

ea

 6 $ 275.00 

1,650

$ 

Confirm exact quantity in field

6.06 Provide protection at piping under lavatories

ea

 6 $ 50.00 

300

$ 

Confirm exact quantity in field

DA Complianc

SUBTOTAL

7,400

$ 

DEFFERED MAINTENANCE TOTAL

379,253

$ 

Administrative Costs

GENERAL CONDITIONS

9.00%

%

 $ 34,132.81 

34,133

$ 

BUILDING PERMIT ALLOWANCE

0.85%

%

 $ 3,513.78 

3,514

$ 

SUBGUARD

1.25%

%

 $ 5,211.25 

5,211

$ 

INSURANCE

0.65%

%

 $ 2,743.72 

2,744

$ 

CONTINGENCY

5.00%

%

 $ 21,242.75 

21,243

$ 

CONTRACTOR FEE

3.00%

%

 $ 13,382.93 

13,383

$ 

strative Costs

ADMINISTRATIVE TOTAL

80,227

$ 

PROJECT TOTAL

459,481

$ 

Budget

401 East Fifth Street

Pinconning, MI

77

81549

CAPITAL NEEDS TABLE

TABLE 1

CAPITAL NEEDS ESTIMATE

VERTEX

1

Total

Per SF

Per SF/YR

Site Name:

# Buildings:

1

Immediate Repairs $:

$459,481

$2.08

City, ST:

Est. Building SF:

220,588

Short Term $ (no inflation):

$1,106,337

$5.02

$2.51

Age, Yrs.:

Eval. Term, Yrs.:

5

Short Term $ (inflated):

$1,132,549

$5.13

$2.57

Project No.:

CPI:

2.50%

Capital Needs $ (no inflation)

$1,411,154

$6.40

$1.28

# Units:

NA

Capital Needs $ (inflated)

$1,461,539

$6.63

$1.33

1

2

3

4

5

ITEM

Reserves

CAPITAL NEEDS

RESERVE

ITEM No.

PHOTO No.

DESCRIPTION

QTY

UNIT

UNIT COST

YEARS 1-5

YEAR 1

YEAR 2

YEAR 3

YEAR 4

YEAR 5

TOTAL

SITE DEVELOPMENT

1

4,5,6,7

Budget for future cut & patch deteriorated asphalt 

pavement areas

8,915

SF

$4.53

$40,385

$40,385

$40,385

2

8

Budget for future cut & patch deteriorated asphalt 

pavement areas, heavy duty areas (truck traffic 

locations)

4,360

SF

$6.59

$28,732

$28,732

$28,732

3

4,5,6,7,8

Budget for future renewal of asphalt pavement 

surfaces, including crack sealing (moderate), seal coat 

and re-stripe

257,000

SF

$0.18

$46,260

$46,260

$46,260

$0

$0

$69,117

$0

$46,260

BUILDING STRUCTURE

4

19,20

Route, clean and fill existing control joints in concrete 

flooring with semi-rigid sealants (polyurea) - existing 

sealants worn or missing

12,000

LF

$3.99

$47,880

$47,880

$47,880

$0

$0

$0

$0

$47,880

BUILDING EXTERIOR

5

37,38,39, 

44

CMU block - repair step cracking with epoxy injection 

and surface finishing

5,000

SF

$3.39

$16,950

$16,950

$16,950

6

34,37,38, 

39,44

Scraping, surface preparation and re-painting of 

exterior walls, 2-coat, spray applied - CMU block

22,850

SF

$0.78

$17,823

$17,823

$17,823

7

32,33,34, 

46

Minor repair, scraping, surface preparation and re-

painting of exterior walls, 2-coat, spray applied - Metal 

Wall Panels

25,000

SF

$0.70

$17,500

$17,500

$17,500

8

37,39,40, 

41,44

Cut out and replace sealants between expansion and 

control joints - CMU and wall penetrations (windows 

and doors)

1,200

LF

$4.67

$5,604

$5,604

$5,604

$57,877

$0

$0

$0

$0

401 East Fifth Street

Pinconning, MI

77

81549

Page 1 of 3

TABLE 1

CAPITAL NEEDS ESTIMATE

VERTEX

1

Total

Per SF

Per SF/YR

Site Name:

# Buildings:

1

Immediate Repairs $:

$459,481

$2.08

City, ST:

Est. Building SF:

220,588

Short Term $ (no inflation):

$1,106,337

$5.02

$2.51

Age, Yrs.:

Eval. Term, Yrs.:

5

Short Term $ (inflated):

$1,132,549

$5.13

$2.57

Project No.:

CPI:

2.50%

Capital Needs $ (no inflation)

$1,411,154

$6.40

$1.28

# Units:

NA

Capital Needs $ (inflated)

$1,461,539

$6.63

$1.33

1

2

3

4

5

ITEM

Reserves

CAPITAL NEEDS

RESERVE

ITEM No.

PHOTO No.

DESCRIPTION

QTY

UNIT

UNIT COST

YEARS 1-5

YEAR 1

YEAR 2

YEAR 3

YEAR 4

YEAR 5

TOTAL

401 East Fifth Street

Pinconning, MI

77

81549

ROOF

9

48,49,53, 

57

Remove existing roof and replace with Built-Up-Roof 

(BUR), multi-ply, gravel surfaced

133,000

SF

$6.78

$901,740

$901,740

$901,740

10

50,52,52

Remove existing roof and replace with single ply 

Thermoplastic Polyolefin (TPO) - 60 mil

28,000

SF

$5.24

$146,720

$146,720

$146,720

11

54,55,56

Apply elastomeric coating to roof surface for extension 

of roof service life

64,000

SF

$1.04

$66,560

$66,560

$66,560

$0

BUILDING INTERIOR

No significant costs identified, BUILDING INTERIOR costs are tenant responsibility

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

MECHANICAL SYSTEMS

12

72

Replace suspended infrared tube heater, natural gas

15

EA

$5,000.00

$75,000

$25,000

$25,000

$25,000

$75,000

$0

$0

$25,000

$25,000

$25,000

ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS

No significant ELECTRICAL SYSTEM costs identified

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

PLUMBING SYSTEMS

No significant PLUMBING SYSTEM costs identified

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

CONVEYANCE SYSTEMS

Not Applicable

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

LIFE SAFETY/FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS

No significant LIFE SAFETY/FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEM costs identified

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

Page 2 of 3

TABLE 1

CAPITAL NEEDS ESTIMATE

VERTEX

1

Total

Per SF

Per SF/YR

Site Name:

# Buildings:

1

Immediate Repairs $:

$459,481

$2.08

City, ST:

Est. Building SF:

220,588

Short Term $ (no inflation):

$1,106,337

$5.02

$2.51

Age, Yrs.:

Eval. Term, Yrs.:

5

Short Term $ (inflated):

$1,132,549

$5.13

$2.57

Project No.:

CPI:

2.50%

Capital Needs $ (no inflation)

$1,411,154

$6.40

$1.28

# Units:

NA

Capital Needs $ (inflated)

$1,461,539

$6.63

$1.33

1

2

3

4

5

ITEM

Reserves

CAPITAL NEEDS

RESERVE

ITEM No.

PHOTO No.

DESCRIPTION

QTY

UNIT

UNIT COST

YEARS 1-5

YEAR 1

YEAR 2

YEAR 3

YEAR 4

YEAR 5

TOTAL

401 East Fifth Street

Pinconning, MI

77

81549

ANCILLARY STRUCTURES

Not Applicable

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

$0

TOTAL - Immediate Repairs

TOTAL - Capital Needs

$1,411,154

TOTAL CAPITAL NEEDS, BY YEAR, UNINFLATED

$57,877

$1,048,460

$94,117

$91,560

$119,140

$1,411,154

Inflation Factor

1.000

1.025

1.051

1.077

1.104

TOTAL CAPITAL NEEDS, BY YEAR, WITH INFLATION

$57,877

$1,074,672

$98,882

$98,600

$131,508

$1,461,539

Notes/Abbreviations: 

*Item Number corresponds to item described in supporting "cost item #" in text report.

LS = Lump Sum; LF = Linear Foot; SF = Square Feet; SY = Square Yard; EA = Each; TN = Ton; kW = Kilowatt; FL = Floor; RI = Riser; RUL = Remaining Useful Life

 

Immediate Needs = material existing or potential unsafe conditions resultant from a damaged or deteriorated condition, material building or fire code violations on file with municipal agencies, or conditions that if left uncorrected, have 

the potential to result in or contribute to critical element or system failure within one year or will result most probably in a significant escalation of its remedial cost. Also included as immediate needs are items, materials or systems that 

have exceeded their useful life. Immediate Repair time frame for repair is between 0 and 1 year. These items are generally included regardless of cost.

Short Term Repairs = Items that may not warrant immediate attention, but require repairs or replacements that should be undertaken on a priority basis in addition to routine preventive maintenance. Such opinions of probable costs 

may include costs for testing, exploratory probing, and further analysis should this be deemed warranted by VERTEX. Short Term repairs are the aggregate sum of Capital Needs repairs within years 1 and 2. See report text for cost 

thresholds defining Short Term Repairs/Capital Needs versus items of Routine Maintenance.

Capital Needs = Items which are expected to require significant repair, replacement or renovation during the specified evaluation term due to the observed condition and estimated RUL. See report text for cost thresholds defining 

Short Term Repairs/Capital Needs versus items of Routine Maintenance.

Page 3 of 3

APPENDIX A 

 

PHOTOGRAPHIC DOCUMENTATION

Project Name—City, ST 

 

VERTEX

® 

Photo #1 

Photo #2 

Photo #3 

Photo #4 

Photo #5 

Photo #6

Project Name—City, ST 

 

VERTEX

® 

Photo #7 

Photo #8 

Photo #9 

Photo #10 

Photo #11 

Photo #12

Project Name—City, ST 

 

VERTEX

® 

Photo #13 

Photo #14 

Photo #15 

Photo #16 

Photo #17 

Photo #18

Project Name—City, ST 

 

VERTEX

® 

Photo #19 

Photo #20 

Photo #21 

Photo #22 

Photo #23 

Photo #24

Project Name—City, ST 

 

VERTEX

® 

Photo #25 

Photo #26 

Photo #27 

Photo #28 

Photo #29 

Photo #30

Project Name—City, ST 

 

VERTEX

® 

Photo #31 

Photo #32 

Photo #33 

Photo #34 

Photo #35 

Photo #36

Project Name—City, ST 

 

VERTEX

® 

Photo #37 

Photo #38 

Photo #39 

Photo #40 

Photo #41 

Photo #42

Project Name—City, ST 

 

VERTEX

® 

Photo #43 

Photo #44 

Photo #45 

Photo #46 

Photo #47 

Photo #48

Project Name—City, ST 

 

VERTEX

® 

Photo #49 

Photo #50 

Photo #51 

Photo #52 

Photo #53 

Photo #54

Project Name—City, ST 

 

VERTEX

® 

Photo #55 

Photo #56 

Photo #57 

Photo #58 

Photo #59 

Photo #60

Project Name—City, ST 

 

VERTEX

® 

Photo #61 

Photo #62 

Photo #63 

Photo #64 

Photo #65 

Photo #66

Project Name—City, ST 

 

VERTEX

® 

Photo #67 

Photo #68 

Photo #69 

Photo #70 

Photo #71 

Photo #72

Project Name—City, ST 

 

VERTEX

® 

Photo #73 

Photo #74 

Photo #75 

Photo #76 

Photo #77 

Photo #78

Project Name—City, ST 

 

VERTEX

® 

Photo #79 

Photo #80 

Photo #81 

Photo #82 

Photo #83 

Photo #84

Project Name—City, ST 

 

VERTEX

® 

Photo #85 

Photo #86 

Photo #87 

Photo #88

APPENDIX B 

 

PRE-SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE & REQUEST 

FOR DOCUMENTATION

The Vertex Companies, Inc. 

 

T: 610.558.8902 

700 Turner Industrial Way 

 

F: 610.558.8904 

Aston, Pennsylvania 19014 

 

 

 

 

 

 

. 

 

PRE-SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE & REQUEST FOR DOCUMENTATION 

TO: Leonard Sweet 

 

PROJECT NAME: Pinconning, MI 

 

VERTEX #: 81549 

 

 

VERTEX has been contracted to conduct a Property Condition Assessment (PCA) at the site referenced 

above. It would be greatly appreciated if you could direct the questionnaire to the person(s) most 

knowledgeable about the property for completion. The completed questionnaire may be returned to 

VERTEX via fax, email or mail, or may be delivered at the time of our on-site visit. The questionnaire will 

be presented as an exhibit in our PCA report. 

 

In addition to the questionnaire, we are requesting that information relating to the building be available 

for our review prior to, or during the on-site visit. Where practical, we also request that copies of this 

information be provided. Requested information includes the following. 

 

❑ Building Plans (Structural, Architectural, Electrical, Mechanical, Plumbing, Site Surveys, Site Plans, 

etc.) – preferably As-Built drawings if available 

❑ Municipal Department Documents (Certificates of Occupancy, Building Code Violations, Zoning 

Variances or Restrictions, etc.) Copies of any outstanding violations with respect to building, zoning 

or fire codes or safety. 

❑ Promotional/Leasing Information (Offering Memorandum, Recent Appraisals, Sales/Leasing 

Literature, Rent Roll, Site Diagrams, Reduced Floor Plans, etc.) 

❑ Warranties for materials and systems (Roofs, Mechanical Systems, Equipment, etc.) 

❑ Certificates of inspection or compliance (Elevators, Escalators, Boilers, Fire Sprinklers, Fire Alarms, 

etc.) and/or any safety inspection records 

❑ Service/Maintenance contracts including vendor names and phone #s (Elevator, Roofing, Mechanical, 

etc) 

❑ Building rent roll, records indicating occupancy percentages and turnover percentages 

❑ Previous Property Studies (Property Condition Surveys, Inspections, Phase I ESAs, Appraisals, Roof 

Condition Reports, ADA Compliance Studies, etc.) 

❑ Historical information with regards to Capital Expenditures for a minimum of the past five years (Dates 

and summaries of work performed with associated costs) 

❑ Pending proposals for repair, renovation or general work on the building or associated systems 

 

Any other information that is relevant to the maintenance, repair history or condition of the property is 

also welcome.

PRE-SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE 

 

 

 

VERTEX PCA - Pre-Survey Questionnaire 

 

Page 2 of 5 

GENERAL PROPERTY INFORMATION 

Property Name: 

Property Address: 

City, State, Zip: 

Current Owner: 

Year Constructed: 

Year Purchased: 

Gross SF: 

Zoning District: 

Site Acreage: 

# of Parking Spaces: 

 

Utility Providers: 

Gas: 

 

Electric: 

 

Water: 

 

Sewer: 

 

Storm: 

 

 

RESPONDENT INFORMATION 

 

Name: 

Date: 

Title: 

Company:

PRE-SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE 

 

 

 

VERTEX PCA - Pre-Survey Questionnaire 

 

Page 3 of 5 

Please respond to the following questions to the best of your knowledge. 

 

1. 

Please describe the maintenance, repair or replacement responsibilities of the landlord and tenant. (For 

example, “tenant maintains interior space, landlord is responsible for all structural elements including 

the roof covering, and replacement of HVAC equipment, if needed”) 

 

 

 

 

2. 

To the best of your knowledge, does the building have any of the following problems? and, if so, please 

describe the location and condition. 

 

ISSUE 

YES 

NO 

N/A 

Roof, Wall or Window leakage? 

 

 

 

Location, description: 

Basement water/moisture infiltration? 

 

 

 

Location, description: 

Structural Problems? 

 

 

 

Location, description: 

Heating capacity or distribution deficiencies? 

 

 

 

Location, description: 

Air conditioning capacity or distribution deficiencies? 

 

 

 

Location, description: 

Inadequate domestic water pressure/leaks/drainage problems? 

 

 

 

Location, description: 

Inadequate electrical capacity or distribution or frequent power outages? 

 

 

 

Location, description: 

Elevator service problems? 

 

 

 

Location, description:

PRE-SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE 

 

 

 

VERTEX PCA - Pre-Survey Questionnaire 

 

Page 4 of 5 

3. 

Please provide a general description of significant (greater than $3,000) capital improvements with 

associated costs, which have been made at the property within the past 5 years. Please provide 

documentation if possible. 

 

Description of Improvement 

Year 

Completed 

Approx $ 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4. 

If you are in receipt of, or solicited any proposals to perform any repairs, renovations or replacement 

work to the building(s) or any of its components that will exceed an aggregate cost of $3,000, please 

describe those projects. Please attach copies of bids or proposals, if possible. 

 

Proposed Project 

Year 

Anticipated 

Approx $

PRE-SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE 

 

 

 

VERTEX PCA - Pre-Survey Questionnaire 

 

Page 5 of 5 

5. 

Is there any ongoing or pending litigation related to the property’s physical condition? 

 

 

 

 

If yes, describe: 

 

6. 

Has any structure or portion of the property considered “down” or been condemned, or deemed un-

inhabitable? 

 

 

 

 

If yes, describe: 

 

 

7. 

To the best of your knowledge, please check any of the following materials or issues that are present 

within the building(s). 

 

Recalled Sprinkler Heads

 

Reactive Chinese Drywall

 

Aluminum branch wiring 

Electrical fuses (not circuit breakers) 

Fire Resistant Treated (FRT) plywood

Polybutylene piping

Galvanized steel piping

Phenolic foam roof insulation

Fire damage

 

 

Please describe location and extent of materials checked in Question 7 above. 

 

8. 

Are there any other building attributes, deficiencies, issues or improvements not already discussed 

herein, that may be of interest to a potential lender or purchaser? If so, please describe below. 

 

 

 

No

Yes

No

Yes

APPENDIX C 

 

RELEVANT SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

ENERGY SAVING POTENTIAL 

Item 

Yes 

No 

N/A 

Unk 

Comments 

Building Shell 

Is the roof a light color, or covered with a light colored gravel 

or reflective coating? 

X 

 

X 

 

 

Approximately 40% white TPO and 

standing-seam metal panels 

Has additional roofing or attic insulation been added during 

any past re-roofing projects or other renovations? 

 

 

 

X 

 

Has additional wall insulation been added during any past 

exterior or other renovations? 

 

 

 

X 

 

Have building wall and window sealants been replaced within 

the past 10 years? 

 

X 

 

 

 

Does the building have primarily double or triple pane 

windows? 

 

X 

 

 

 

Do the building windows have exterior light shelves, blinds, 

solar films or window tinting to limit direct sunlight? 

X 

 

 

 

Window tinting and blinds at select 

locations 

 

Does the building have primarily CFL, T5, T8 or LED lighting? 

X 

 

 

 

T5/T8 amps are being replaced 

throughout with LEDs as existing burn 

out 

Has the building replaced metal halide, sodium vapor or 

mercury vapor lighting with higher efficiency alternatives? 

 

 

 

X 

 

Does the building utilize occupancy sensors or other timing or 

lighting controls? 

 

X 

 

 

 

Is de-lamping in practice at any part of the facility? 

X 

 

 

 

Lamps are being replaced throughout 

with LEDs as existing burn out 

 

Are there any high efficiency air conditioning units (rooftop or 

condensing units with greater than 13 SEER)? 

X 

 

 

 

1 rooftop unit has a greater than 13 

SEER 

Is plate-frame heat exchanger equipment utilized in 

conjunction with cooling tower systems? 

 

 

X 

 

 

Have heating units been replaced in the past 10 years? 

X 

X 

 

 

2 rooftop package units and 1 split 

system indoor unit have been replaced 

Does the boiler have a water temperature reset? 

 

 

X 

 

 

Has the boiler or boiler burner been replaced in the past 10 

years? 

 

 

X 

 

 

Is exhaust heat from heating and water heating equipment 

simply discharged to the exterior (not captured)? 

 

 

X 

 

 

 

Do fan and/or pump motors generally have nominal 

efficiencies greater than 92%? 

 

 

X 

 

 

Has the building installed Variable Frequency Drives (VFDs) on 

selected equipment? 

 

 

X 

 

 

Does the cooling tower include a VFD or multi-speed fan 

motor? 

 

 

X

ENERGY SAVING POTENTIAL 

Item 

Yes 

No 

N/A 

Unk 

Comments 

System Controls 

Does the building employ Variable Air Volume (VAV) systems 

for air distribution? 

 

X 

 

 

 

Do the building systems include Direct Digital Controls (DDC)? 

 

X 

 

 

 

Does the building utilize a Building Automation System (BAS) 

or Energy Management System (EMS)? 

 

X 

 

 

 

Does the building utilize programmable thermostats for 

control during reduced occupancy hours? 

X 

X 

 

 

Building utilizes a combination of 

programmable/non-programmable 

thermostats 

 

Has hot water generating equipment been replaced in the 

past 10 years? 

 

 

 

X 

 

Are there any gas condensing water heaters in use at the 

facility? 

 

 

X

Key Site Map 

Pinconning, MI 

Project #81549 

Production 

Warehouse

Truck Court 

2-Story Office Space 

Main Parking Lot 

2-Story Office Space . 

~ 

Key Site Map 

Pinconning, MI 

VERTEX 

Project #81549

National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette 

BIST4AW 43°51 

TIRE) 

«¢ 

v 

\T17N RAE S26 

3 

_ 

| 

2 

Feet 

fm 

-- — 

rs of Pinconning 

=r 

1:6,000 

Ir 

‘Townshiplof-Pinconning & 

Map: Or 

Legend 

OTHER AREAS OF 

| 

FLOOD HAZARD 

| 

‘SEE FS REPORT FOR DETAILED LEGEND AND INDEX MAP FOR FIRM PANEL LAYOUT 

Without Base Flood Elevation 

(BFE) 

Zone, 

V. AS 

With BFE or Depth za AF A0, AK VE. A7 

Regulatory Floodway 

| 

0.2% Annual Chance 

Flood Hazard, Areas 

of 1% annual chance flood with average 

depth less than one foot or with drainage 

areas 

of less than one square mile zore x 

[ne 

4 Future Conditions 

1% Annual 

ME Chance 

Flood Hazard zo 

© 

| 

4 Avea with Reduced Flood Risk due to 

“Levee. 

See Notes. zo0e x 

7 4) Avea with Flood Risk due to Levee zene 

0 

| Noscaeen Area of Minimal 

Flood Hazard zone x 

|= eftective LOMRs 

OTHER AREAS 

| 

Area of Undetermined 

Flood Hazard zene 0 

GENERAL | = === Channel, 

Culvert, or Storm Sewer 

STRUCTURES [1111111 Levee, Dike, or Floodwall 

Cross Sections with 1% Annual Chance 

—1LE 

Water Surface Elevation 

| 

: 

“wen 

sty Base Flood Elevation 

Line (BFE) 

Limit of Study 

Jurisdiction Boundary 

— Coastal Transect Baseline 

OTHER 

|- —— Profile Baseline 

FEATURES |_____ Hydrographic Feature 

| 

Digital Data Available 

N 

No Digital Data Available 

The pin displayed on the map is an approximate 

point selected by the user and does not represent 

an authoritative 

property location. 

MAP PANELS 

| 

Unmapped 

This map complies with FEMA's standards for the use of 

digital flood maps If itis not void as described below. 

‘The basemap shown complies with FEMA's basemap 

accuracy standards 

‘The flood hazard information is derived directly from the 

authoritative NFHL web services provided by FEMA. This map 

was exported on 

and does not 

reflect changes 

or amendments subsequent to this date and. 

time. The NFHL and effective information may change or 

become superseded 

by new data over time. 

This 

map image is void f the one or more of the following map 

‘elements 

do not appear: basemap imagery, flood zone labels, 

legend, scale bar, map creation date, community identifiers, 

FIRM panel number, and FIRM effective date. Map images for 

unmapped 

and unmodernized 

areas cannot be used for 

regulatory purposes.

Building Information Request 

 

THE VERTEX COMPANIES, INC. 

 

 

133 N JEFFERSON ST, 3rd Floor 

CHICAGO, IL 60661 

 

 708.490.9014 | VERTEXENG.COM 

 

 

 

City of Auburn Hills City Clerk’s Office 

 

 

 

August 05, 2022 

Via Email: lpierce@auburnhills.org 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Re: 2750 High Meadow Circle 

Henniges Automotive Headquarters 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Ms. Pierce: 

The VERTEX Companies, Inc. is an engineering firm currently conducting a Property Condition Assessment of the 

above referenced property. As part of the due-diligence process we request your assistance by providing us 

with some information from your files. Through the Freedom of Information Act, we request your assistance 

by providing us with the following information concerning the site and buildings at the referenced property files: 

1) 

Are there any open building code violations, or unresolved building safety issues on file for the property?

 

☐ YES ☐ NO 

 

Brief description of violation(s) or open issue(s) 

2) 

Does the building have a current Certificate of Occupancy? 

☐ YES ☐ NO 

 

If yes, can a copy be provided? _____________________________________ 

3) 

Are there specific items (such as elevators, backflow preventers) that the municipality may require 

updating to current codes, even if no renovations or use changes are planned? In other words, are there 

any “non-grandfathered” items required at the property due at a certain date? ☐ YES ☐ NO 

If yes, please describe _____________ 

 

________________________________________ 

 

4) 

Name of Respondent: _______________________________ 

Date: _______________________ 

Thank you for your assistance in this matter. If you need additional information to complete our request, please 

contact me at (708) 490.9014. Responses may be emailed to my attention at gbednarz@vertexeng.com. 

Respectfully submitted, 

 

 

 

Greg Bednarz 

Project Manager

Fire Information Request 

 

THE VERTEX COMPANIES, INC. 

 

 

133 N. JEFFERSON ST, 3rd Floor 

CHICAGO, IL 60661 

 

 708.490.9014 | VERTEXENG.COM 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

City of Auburn Hills City Clerk’s Office 

 

 

 

August 05, 2022 

Via Email: lpierce@auburnhills.org 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Re: 2750 High Meadow Circle 

Henniges Automotive Headquarters 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Ms. Pierce: 

The VERTEX Companies, Inc. is an engineering firm currently conducting a Property Condition Assessment of the 

above referenced property. As part of the due-diligence process we request your assistance by providing us 

with some information from your files. Through the Freedom of Information Act, we request your assistance 

by providing us with the following information concerning the site and buildings at the referenced property files: 

1) 

Are there any open fire code violations, or unresolved fire safety issues on file for this property? 

☐ YES ☐ NO 

 

Brief description of violation(s) or open issue(s) 

 

2) 

Does your Department inspect the property regularly? 

☐ YES ☐ NO 

If yes, can a copy of the most recent inspection be provided? ☐ YES ☐ NO ☐ ATTACHED 

 

3) 

Name of Respondent: _______________________________ 

Date: _______________________ 

Thank you for your assistance in this matter. If you need additional information to complete our request, please 

contact me at (708) 490.9014. Responses may be emailed to my attention at gbednarz@vertexeng.com. 

Respectfully submitted, 

 

 

 

Greg Bednarz 

Project Manager

Zoning Information Request 

 

THE VERTEX COMPANIES, INC. 

 

 

133 N JEFFERSON ST, 3RD FLOOR 

CHICAGO, IL 60661 

 

 708.490.9014 | VERTEXENG.COM 

 

 

 

 

City of Auburn Hills City Clerk’s Office 

 

 

 

August 05, 2022 

Via Email: lpierce@auburnhills.org 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Re: 2750 High Meadow Circle 

Henniges Automotive Headquarters 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dear Ms. Pierce: 

The VERTEX Companies, Inc. is an engineering firm currently conducting a Property Condition Assessment of the 

above referenced property. As part of the due-diligence process we request your assistance by providing us with 

some information from your files. Through the Freedom of Information Act, we request your assistance by 

providing us with the following information concerning the site and buildings at the referenced property files: 

1) 

What is the current zoning at the property? 

 

Current Zoning 

Is a flex industrial warehouse considered to be a permitted use? 

2) 

Are there any open zoning code violations, or unresolved zoning issues on file for the property? 

☐ YES ☐ NO If yes, please give a brief description of violation(s) or open issue(s) 

 

3) 

Name of Respondent: _______________________________ 

Date: _______________________ 

Thank you for your assistance in this matter. If you need additional information to complete our request, please 

contact me at (708) 490.9014. Responses may be emailed to my attention at gbednarz@vertexeng.com. 

Respectfully submitted, 

 

 

 

Greg Bednarz 

Project Manager

» 

SS FF 

eN480 

\ 

General Property Details: 180-P10-003-001-00 

| 

\ 

NK 

Ny 

Click here for County Website 

Click here for Recorded Documents 

Property Address 

<| 

401 ESTHST 

PINCONNING, MI, 48650 

adsl 

Owner Address 

CORPORATE PROPERTY ASSOCIATES 

Unit: 

180 

- 

Unit Name: 

CITY OF PINCONNING 

401 ESTHST 

PINCONNING, MI 48650-9321 

td 

General Information for 2021 Tax Year 

EINER) APOGEE 

Parcel Number: 

180-P10-003-001-00 

Assessed Value: 

$1,883,300 

Property Class: 

301 

Taxable Value: 

$1,648,145 

Class Name: 

INDUSTRIAL-IMPROVED 

State Equalized Value: 

$1,883,300 

School Dist Code: 

09090 

School DistName: ~~ PINCONNING SCHOOL DIST. 

PRE 2020: 

0% 

PRE 2021: 

0% 

Prev Year Info 

MBOR Assessed 

Final SEV 

Final Taxable 

2020 

$1,906,200 

$1,906,200 

$1625390 

2019 

$1,789,900 

$1,789,900 

$1,595,084 

Land Information 

Acreage: 

134 

Zoning:

Unit Number

Unit Type

Location

Manufacturer

Estimated Cooling Capacity 

(tons)

ASHRAE Estimated Useful 

Life

Estimated Year of 

Manufacture

Estimated Remaining 

Useful Life

Heat: gas, electric none

Observed Condition 

G F P

1

Rooftop Package Unit

Roof

Trane

3 to 5

15

Unknown

0

Gas

P

2

Rooftop Package Unit

Roof

Trane

3 to 5

15

Unknown

0

Gas

P

3

Rooftop Package Unit

Roof

Fraser-Johnston

3 to 5

15

Unknown

0

Gas

F

4

Rooftop Package Unit

Roof

Trane

2.5

15

2015

8

Gas

G

5

Rooftop Package Unit

Roof

Trane

3 to 5

15

1999

0

Gas

F

6

Rooftop Package Unit

Roof

York

6

15

Unknown

4

Gas

F

7

Rooftop Package Unit

Roof

Rheem

5

15

2014

7

Gas

G

8

Rooftop Package Unit

Roof

Trane

3

15

Unknown

0

Gas

F

9

Rooftop Package Unit

Roof

Trane

5

15

Unknown

0

Gas

F

10

Split System Condenser

Roof

Trane

3

15

Unknown

8

Electric

G

11

Split System Condenser

Roof

Trane

3

15

2018

11

Electric

G

Heating & Cooling Equipment

HVAC Equipment Listing

APPENDIX D 

 

STAFF QUALIFICATIONS

The Vertex Companies, LLC

vertexeng.com

 

 

Greg Bednarz (Last modified on 6/15/2022) 

Page 1 of 1 

 

 

 

Highlights 

Project Management Experience 

Nationwide 

Nationwide Due Diligence 

Experience 

 

Expertise 

Property Condition Assessments 

Architecture 

Feasibility Studies 

Construction Management 

Construction Due Diligence 

Project Monitoring & Funds 

Control 

Tenant Improvement 

Owner's Representation 

LEED Assessment & Certification 

Site Remediation Coordination 

Construction Monitoring 

 

 

Greg Bednarz | Project Manager: Property Condition Assessor 

EMAIL gbednarz@vertexeng.com | PHONE 312.428.3658 

BIOGRAPHY 

Mr. Bednarz is a Project Manager with over 20 years of experience in the design and construction 

industry. He has extensive knowledge related to due diligence and feasibility studies, building and 

accessibility code review, architectural design, construction documents, engineering consultant 

coordination, project budget and scheduling, and construction administration. Projects have ranged 

from tenant improvements to new construction. He has provided architectural/project management 

services for national developers and tenants on a wide range of projects nationwide, including office, 

retail, restaurant and mixed-use multi family. Mr. Bednarz currently serves as Project 

Manager/Property Condition Assessor at VERTEX. 

As Project Manager at VERTEX, Mr. Bednarz's responsibilities include building/site assessment, 

municipal research, review of existing documents related to the condition of the property, technical 

report writing, capital reserve planning, and coordination of external contractors. 

 

EDUCATION/TRAINING 

B.Arch, Bachelor of Architecture - Structures, University of Illinois at Chicago 1996 

LICENSES/CERTIFICATIONS 

LEED Accredited Professional (LEED AP) 

OSHA 10, State of IL

The Vertex Companies, LLC

vertexeng.com

 

 

Andrea Self (Last modified on 6/15/2022) 

Page 1 of 1 

 

 

 

Highlights 

Nationwide Due Diligence 

Experience 

National Due Diligence 

HUD LEAN SOW 

Freddie Mac SOW 

Fannie Mae SOW 

 

Expertise 

PCA 

Phase I ESAs 

Transaction Screen 

Database Review 

Peer Review 

Environmental Portfolio Reviews 

Report Re-Issue 

 

 

Andrea Self | Senior Project Manager 

EMAIL aself@vertexeng.com | PHONE 312.428.3658 

BIOGRAPHY 

Ms. Self is a civil engineer with over 15 years of experience in Due Diligence consulting conducting 

Property Condition Assessment and Phase I Environmental Site Assessment reports for commercial 

properties across the continental United States, Alaska, and Canada. As a Senior Project Manager, 

she has comprehensive experience assessing a wide variety of commercial property types, ranging 

from multifamily, office/retail, industrial storage/warehouse, hotel, undeveloped land, 

manufacturing facilities and manufactured housing communities. These projects have been 

performed in compliance with a variety of work scopes, including ASTM, the EPA’s All Appropriate 

Inquiry (AAI), Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, HUD, and various conduit and life insurance company 

requirements. 

Ms. Self has been involved in performance of both Phase I and Condition Assessments directly for 

Fannie Mae’s Risk Group in Dallas, and she has also provided expert witness testimony related to 

loan workouts and divestiture. 

Ms. Self has completed numerous Phase I investigations and Physical Needs Assessments (PNA) for 

HUD’s Affordable Healthcare LEAN programs. Ms. Self’s PNA Assessments have included review of 

applicable Section 504/UFAS, FHA, and ADA standards as required by HUD. Reports completed 

and/or reviewed under the HUD scopes of work include senior living and assisted living facilities in 

the Minneapolis metro area, the Chicago metro area, the Atlanta metro area, Alabama, Florida, 

Idaho, New Jersey, North Carolina, Texas, and Wisconsin. 

Ms. Self’s senior review responsibilities at VERTEX involve peer technical review and scope 

conformance/compliance evaluations on Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and HUD assignments within the 

firm. 

EDUCATION/TRAINING 

B.S., Civil Engineering, University of Tennessee at Chattanooga 2004 

LICENSES/CERTIFICATIONS 

Engineer In Training (EIT), State of TN 

Hazwoper 

OSHA 10 

AHERA Building Inspector, State of WI 

ASSOCIATIONS 

Healthcare Mortgage Advisory Council (HMAC) - 2018 

Midwest Lenders Association - 2018 

PUBLICATIONS/PRESENTATIONS 

Due Diligence for Federal Agency Lending - Property Condition and Environmental Assessments, The 

Vertex Companies Online Blog, October 2, 2018

← View full record