The URL can be used to link to this page

5C - Handout - Consideration of a demolition permit application for 819 6th St. (HIS2007-00301) - for the demolition of the primary structure,~ ~Jb~,~ ~.~~~ ~.~~~ ~1~C~~ f-~-~ ~~ 819 6t" Street Preservation Implications Architecture importance The Labrot / Uberoi home is one of the best examples of the Frank Lloyd Wright "Usonian" style of architecture in the City. In 1936, when the United States was in the depths of an economic depression, Frank Lloyd Wright developed a series of homes he called Usonian. Designed to control costs, Wright's Usonian houses had no attics, no basements, and little ornamentation. The word Usonia is an abbreviation for United States of North America. Frank Lloyd Wright aspired to create a democratic, distinctly American style that was affordable for the "common people." These houses feature low roofs, often with high clerestory windows to bring in ample daylighting. The floor plans are arranged with rooms opening up to each other allowing spaces to allow and be flexible. These buildings make abundant use of brick, wood, and other natural materials. Usonian homes were small, one-story structures set on concrete slabs with piping for radiant heat beneath. The kitchens were incorporated into the living areas. Open car ports took the place of garages. Almost all of these features can be seen in the Labrot / Uberoi house. The principle deviations are the expressive upward sloping "butterfly" roofs and the split level floor plan. Both are characteristic of the architecture of Hobart Wagener. The house was designed by the architecture firm of Hobart Wagener. His company is the most prolific modern architecture firm in the history of Boulder. It even surpassed the work of famed Boulder architect Charles Haertling in terms of the number of buildings produced during the career of Mr. Wagener. Mr. Wagener was educated in Michigan and initially practiced architecture in Portland Oregon, working for the internationally known architect Pietro Belluschi. In the mid 1950's he and his wife moved to Boulder, where he began to work in the office of James Hunter. Mr. Hunter's firm is known as the designer of the Municipal Building, the Boulder Public Library, the Masonic Temple and the First Presbyterian church. Social importance - The Labrot / Uberoi building is characteristic of a unique type of house found in the University Hill and Flatirons neighborhoods - primarily homes for artists and professors. These were the most progressive and innovative homes in Boulder during the time period from 1940 to 1970. They always capture the individual personalities of the home owners. Also the homes were typically built very affordably to match up well with the limited income of artists and teachers. Often these were built on land that had difficult site constraints so the homes were specifically shaped to take advantage of the dramatic property locations. In this case, the property slopes a lot from back to front. Historic importance - This property was the home of Syl Labrot and Mahinder Ubero. Syl Labrot was born in New Orleans in 1929 and died in 1977. He was an acclaimed artist. He worked in many aspects of photography and printmaking including a collaboration with Walter Chappell and Nathan Lyons, that produced the book 'Under the Sun' in 1960 and 'Pleasure Beach' in the 1970's. His photographs, prints and paintings were widely exhibited and collected during his lifetime. Dr. Uberoi was a celebrated and infamous professor at CU. He was born in 1924 in India. He later became a naturalized U.S. citizen. He earned his doctorate from Johns Hopkins University in 1953 and was named a Guggenheim Fellow in 1957. He served on the faculty at the University of Michigan until 1963, when he joined the CU faculty as chair of the newly named department of aerospace engineering sciences. Dr. Uberoi had earned a reputation for his work in magneto hydrodynamics, turbulent flow and other basic sciences of fluid flow. As chairman, he built up the new department, adding faculty strong in basic research areas in fluids, controls and biology (to create a bioengineering program). Nis theory was to bring in researchers strong in basic sciences and have them apply their work to engineering. His term as chair ended in 1975. He was the author or co-author of a number of scholarly papers, including "Directional Spectrum of Wind Generated Ocean Waves," published in the Journal of Fluid Dynamics in 1963; "Magnetically Distorted Polytropes: Structure and Radial Oscillations," in The Astrophysical Journal in 1972; and "Magnetized Positive Column Between Coaxial Cylinders," in Physica Scripta in 1986. Dr. Uberoi later filed eight lawsuits over six years against the University, alleging among other complaints, discrimination against foreign-born faculty, hazardous laboratory conditions and violations of the state's Public Records Act. He was terminated as a member of the CU faculty in 2000, making him the first tenured faculty member to be dismissed by the Board of Regents. His case arguing that CU was subject to the open records law went to the Colorado Supreme Court. The court ruled in 1984 that the law did not apply to CU, but in 1985 the Legislature enacted a subsection to the law, bringing every state institution of higher education, including the University of Colorado, under the provisions of the open records act. Mr. Uberori is the second owner of the property. A Mr. Labrot commissioned the design of the house in 1954. Mr. Uberoi lived in the home from the time of his arrival in Boulder until his death in 2006. 2 P~b~ LPq~ ll ~ ~ D$ Page 1 of 6 \C.~ t ~5~~ lames Hewat - RE: Additional info concerning 819 6th St. From: "Fenster, Herbert" To: "Sue Ellen Harrison" Date: 12/4/2007 7:29 AM Subject: RE: Additional info concerning 819 6th St. CC: "Jerry Gordon" , "James Hewat" , "Susan Richstone" , "Lisa Podmajersky" , "Kirk Watson" , "Tim Plass" , "Leonard May" , "Nancy Kornblum" Ms Harrison: Just for the record, I most emphatically disagree with your position: it is not my "decision" to present less then a complete body of evidence regarding the lack of historical value of the property in question. When the presentation of this evidence can consume only ten minutes (and perhaps only three minutes) because of "rules" that are imposed arbitrarily (and without any statutory premise whatsoever), that becomes a "decision" of the so-called "quasi-judicial" body that makes up these rules (or its staff, as the case may be). And I would note that the original burden of making sure that the administrative record included a fair and well- balanced presentation or the evidence was that of the Board and its staff; in this respect, the staff seriously failed to provide such a record. In all events, if this arbitrary process produces an "administrative record" that is defective, the result cannot be sustained in a true judicial review; that is a conclusion based on Supreme Court precedents which are at least eighty years old. A sustainable administrative record in a case such as this one would necessarily include all evidential matter that has been considered that would potentially sustain the opposite of the result reached and the logic path that was followed to reach the actual result. (See, for example, Overton Park v Volpe (1971); Burlington Truck Lines v U.S. (1962); SEC v Chenery (1943)). It appears here that NO evidence supporting the demolition permit was even considered by the staff and the criteria that might have supported that result were meaningfully omitted from the work that the staff actually did; it is my view that the burden of proof to sustain the denial of the demolition permit lies with the Board and that burden cannot be sustained by the meaningful manipulation of the evidence. None of this error in process and procedure represents my "decision". The record as it now stands is seriously flawed by acts of commission (such as the manifestly false representation that the structure was designed by the named architect) and acts of omission (such as refusing to consider evidence in support of the demolition permit). These are not my "decisions" but I certainly can oppose the possibility that they will diminish the investment backed expectations of those having property interests and the investment and aesthetic interests of those who must gaze upon this architectural, construction and maintenance nightmare. H. L. Fenster Page 2 of.b From: Sue Ellen Harrison ' Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 4:48 PM To: Fenster, Herbert Cc: Jerry Gordon; James Hewat; Susan Richstone; Lisa Podmajersky; Kirk Watson; Tim Plass; Leonard May; Nancy Kornblum Subject: RE: Additional info concerning 819 6th St. Mr. Herbert L. Fenster McKenna Long and Aldridge LLP 1900 K Street NW Washington DC 20006-1108 202.496.7500 1875 Lawrence St., Suite 200 Denver CO 80202 303.634.4000 Mr. Fenster: Thank you for your email. As previously stated, it is your decision as to what extent of written materials you wish to submit for Wednesday's hearing and what statements you choose to make. Sue Ellen Harrison Sue Ellen Harrison Assistant City Attorney City of Boulder Box 791 1777 Broadway Boulder, Colorado 80306 303-441-3020 FAX: 303-441-3859 "Fenster, Herbel± ~ ~ 12/3/2007 4:28 PM Ms Harrison: Unfortunately, I must differ with you. Not only was "all" information not posted on the website on Friday, November 30, 2007, it has not yet been provided to me and apparently may not be available even tomorrow. It now seems very apparent that a full and complete record could not possibly be made at the Wednesday proceeding, particularly under the timing circumstances you have outlined. Page 3 of 6 However, it is also apparent that a great deal could be accomplished in a proceeding on that date and I am, at this point, uncertain about what additional evidential materials would be necessary for a full and complete record, supportable on review. Under these circumstances, I would not agree to a postponement nor would I now agree that the proceedings anticipated for Wednesday will necessarily produce a fair and complete record; that remains to be seen. Prior to the proceeding on Wednesday, I anticipate providing to you a list of issues and questions that grow out of both the StafF Report and the application of the City's regulations for Historical Marking considerations. H. L. Fenster From: Sue Ellen Harrison ~ Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 4:1i5 rr•i To: Fenster, Herbert Subject: RE: Additional info concerning 819 6th St. Mr. Fenster: All information concerning this item was posted on the website on Friday, November 30, 2007. It is your choice if you wish to submit any information or if you wish to make any statements at the Landmarks Board hearing. You may request more time, or that the hearing occur at a later date. Subject to code requirements, such a request is at the discretion of the Landmarks Board. If the Board is so inclined, landmarking, or even designation would not happen on Wednesday night. They would set a hearing to determine whether or not to initiate such landmarking. If they decide to initiate at that subsequent hearing, then another hearing is set to determine the Board's decision on landmarking. Ultimately landmarking occurs by ordinance by the city council, which is also byquasi-judicial hearing. Sue Ellen Harrison Sue Ellen Harrison Assistant City Attorney City of Boulder Box 791 1777 Broadway Boulder, Colorado 80306 303-441-3020 Page 4 of~6 FAX: 303-441-3859 harrisons@bouldercolorado.gov "Fenster, Herbert" < • 12/3/2007 3:00 PM Ms Harrison: Thank you for your a-mail. It is not clear that there will be time before the Board meeting for the submission of written materials. I note in this connection that the complete report has now been provided to me and it is within about 48 hours of the hearing itself. One of the Board's communications to me (and one of the regulations applicable to this proceeding) characterized the hearing as "quasi judicial" in nature. If that is the case, and if the "record" that will be created and potentially relied upon by a court is to be made in this proceeding, it is my view that the scheduling of the hearing, the time allowed for respondent presentation of exhibits, argument and witnesses is grossly inadequate and does not comport to due process obligations of the city government. I would point out in this connection that the Board staff undoubtedly spent a matter of weeks, if not longer, in gathering evidential materials in support of their position. Forty eight hours is obviously not adequate time for response even though the city has the burden of proof in this matter. Since you appear to be counsel to the board and its staff, I do not intend to the board or its staff directly; I shall assume that you will carry on those communications as their counsel. H. L. Fenster From: Sue Ellen Harrison [ Sent: Monday, December 03, 2007 1:53 PM To: Fenster, Herbert Cc: James Hewat; Susan Richstone Subject: Additional info concerning 819 6th St. Mr. Fenster: I just sent you an email. However, after I sent it, I realized that perhaps you may want to get information to the Landmarks Board prior to the meeting. We are very limited in time, so it is beneficial for everyone to submit information ahead of time, including the resumes of anyone you would like to have speak. We have a bit of a time constraint here, since the meeting is Wednesday night, but please feel free to forward any information you may have to them ahead of time. Under present Board policies, applicants get 10 minutes and also get to rebut. However, you have stated you are not representing the applicant, so you would get 3 minutes, but anyone else who is part of your group, would also get 3 minutes each. The Board may extend the time at its discretion. You will find the email addresses of the Board and staff at the website links that I gave you in Page 5 of 6 my last email. You will not see that if you go directly to the memo link, but if you go to www.bouldercolorado.gov "City A-Z", Boards and Commissions, Landmarks Board, that is the first information that will appear. Please send any information that you submit to all board members, to the staff that is listed and to me. Thanks and I hope this is helpful information. Sue Ellen Harrison Sue Ellen Harrison Assistant City Attorney City of Boulder Box 791 1777 Broadway Boulder, Colorado 80306 303-441-3020 FAX: 303-441-3859 harrisons@bouldercolorado.gov CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments contain information from the law firm of McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP, and are intended solely for the use of the named recipient or recipients. This e-mail may contain privileged attorney/client communications or work product. Any dissemination of this e-mail by anyone other than an intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you are not a named recipient, you are prohibited from any further viewing of the e-mail or any attachments or from making any use of the e-mail or attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail in error, notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the e-mail, any attachments, and all copies thereof from any drives or storage media and destroy any printouts of the e-mail or attachments. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments contain information from the law firm of McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP, and are intended solely for the use of the named recipient or recipients. This e-mail may contain privileged C'\__//!l.\T_ __J f\_u' _\TT ___1\1 1[1_u' _\T -\VT _\AnL G/11 /lAllllT 1//1 //\/\/\[l Page 6 of,6 attorney/client communications or work product. Any dissemination of this e-mail by anyone other than an intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you are not a named recipient, you are prohibited from any further viewing of the e-mail or any attachments or from making any use of the e-mail or attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail in error, notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the e-mail, any attachments, and all copies thereof from any drives or storage media and destroy any printouts of the e-mail or attachments. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments contain information from the law firm of McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP, and are intended solely for the use of the named recipient or recipients. This e-mail may contain privileged attorney/client communications or work product. Any dissemination of this e-mail by anyone other than an intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you are not a named recipient, you are prohibited from any further viewing of the e-mail or any attachments or from making any use of the e-mail or attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail in error, notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the e-mail, any attachments, and all copies thereof from any drives or storage media and destroy any printouts of the e-mail or attachments. Page 1 of 5 James Hewat - RE: In The Matter of 819 Sixth Street From: "Fenster, Herbert" To: "James Hewat" Date: 12/3/2007 10:28 AM Subject: RE: In The Matter of 819 Sixth Street Mr. Hewat: Thank you for forwarding the staff memo. There will be additional documents that my experts and I shall want -before the hearing - after I have had an opportunity to review the memo. At the moment, I note that what you sent me did not include the attachments to the report; those attachments should be made available now. I would also like to receive the notes, memoranda, exhibits and all other materials that were generated by the staff in compiling this report. This would include, but not be limited to, the field notes, additional photographs and drawings and other materials that may have represented any site visits and research. These additional materials must include all of the documents reviewed representing the original design and construction of the structure which appears not to have been the work of Hobart Wagener at all. Further, to the extent that ANY documents, however informal, may have been generated concerning the criteria "(3)" and "(4)" of subsection 9- 11-23(f), those materials should also be produced at this time. In addition, I would be obliged if you would provide a copy of the complete Agenda for the subject meeting. H. L. Fenster From: James Hewat ~ _ Sent: Monday, Decen~~;i J3, 1007 9:26 AM To: Fenster, Herbert Subject: RE: In The Matter of 819 Sixth Street Mr. Fenster: Please find attached the staff memo for 819 6th Street. Let me know if you have questions or need more information. Sincerely, James M. Hewat Historic Preservation Planner City of Boulder 303.441.3207 "Fenster, Herben _ > 11/28/2007 4:15 PM Mr. Hewat, First, I am NOT a representative of the Uberoi estate nor do I represent the estate in any manner whatsoever. However, I would appreciate copies of the records you plan to distribute on Friday. Second, if the proceeding isquasi-judicial in nature and if testimony is to be elicited and a record made, ten Page 2 of.5 minutes for that purpose is an absurdly short period of time; an expert witness's qualifications alone could consume that much time. For this reason, it is my view that if such a limitation on the presentation of evidence exists, it is contrary to due process and is likely to result in the creation of a materially defective record which would not survive judicial review. Further if such a limitation exists, I request that you provide me a citation to law, rules or regulations that embody such a limitation. Third, I refer to your statement that "We are still in the process of undertaking research on the property, architect Hobart Wagener, ans M.S. Uberoi." The meaning of this sentence is not understood by me. I am familiar with at least some of the work of H. Wagener and would expect that evidence of his involvement in the "design" of this particular structure would be accompanied by a substantial amount of evidence as to the record he created in that connection. From my own experience, both as a lawyer and as an architect and civil engineer, I anticipate that the record for this structure would probably be found on the back of a napkin. Fourth, I assume that the staff memo including an analysis of the research would be accomplished by those having expertise in design and construction disciplines including, of course, historical elements of design. I also assume that the memo would take into consideration a careful analysis of the condition of the structure. Fifth, a closed proceeding by the Board is not, in my opinion, consistent with the laws of the State of Colorado but, in any event, I assume that a full and complete transcript of everything that occurs in such a "closed" proceeding will be made and will be made part of the record, subject to judicial review. Sixth, I do not believe that an advisory board under any circumstances has the authority, the Revised Code notwithstanding, so to delay the demolition of this structure as to cause a half year to pass before any decision is made. Further, your statement about alternatives suggests that tfie decision of this "advisory board" would be final as to the rights of demolition and that only the consideration of alternatives, including, of all things, a "Landmark Designation" would survive. This will serve as notice that such a determination by the advisory board may result in immediate judicial review. Seventh, I am familiar with all of the code provisions that you have cited. H. L. Fenster From: James Hewat [m. Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 20072:53 Pth To: Fenster, Herbert Cc: Sara Conover; Sue Ellen Harrison; Chris Meschuk; Susan Richstone Subject: RE: In The Matter of 819 Sixth Street Dear Mr. Fenster: Thanks for your recent correspondence regarding documents relating to the demolition hearing for the house at 819 6th per section 9-11-23(e-g) of the Boulder Revised Code. All documentation relating to this review is public record and subject to your inspection. So far, an application submitted by Andrew Kossoy (and the estate of M.S. Uberoi) has been filed, the property has been posted, and a public notice has been posted in the Boulder Dairy Camera and on the city's web site. We are still in the process of undertaking research on the property, architect Hobart Wagener, ans M.S. Uberoi. An analysis of this research will be included in a staff memo to the Landmarks Board. This memo will be sent to you as representative of the Uberoi estate via courier on Friday, November 30th. As soon as the memo is completed, I will also a-mail a copy to you directly. Of course, you also have the right to make a records request under the Colorado Freedom of Information Act. In terms of the hearing, it is quasi-judicial in nature. As the applicant, you will have ten minutes to present to the Landmarks Board following a roughly ten minute presentation by city staff. Your ten minutes needs to include any expert testimony that is going to be presented on the applicants behalf. Following the presentations, a public comment period is opened and each speaker is afforded three minutes to speak. The applicant then has an opportunity to rebut any public testimony. Following the public hearing the Board will Page 3 of 5 close the public hearing and deliberate. The Board may choose to: approve the application to demolish the building if they find it has no historic significance under section 9-11-23(f)(1-4). If the Board finds that the building may have historic significance per section 9-11-23(f)(1-4), the application will be suspended for a period of up to 180 days to seek alternatives to the demolition per 9-11-23(h). This may include, but is not limited to the initiation individual landmark designation. The following is a link to Chapter 9-11 (Historic Preservation) of the Boulder Revised Code for your reference: htto://www.colocode.com/boulder2/chapter9-11. htm. Should you have questions or need more information regarding this matter, please feel free to contact me directly at 303.441.3207. Sincerely, James M. Hewat Historic Preservation Planner City of Boulder "Fenster, Herbert" < 11/28/2007 7:49 AM Ms Conover, Many thanks for your response and the two documents. Because of the very slow mail process, I would prefer that the additional documents be either attached to a-mails or faxed to my Denver office (303) 634-4400, or, if necessary, left for me at a location where they can be picked up. I assume that these additional documents will cover the remaining categories outlined in my earlier a-mail to Mr. Hewat. I am also interested in knowing (a) how much time will be allowed at the proceeding on December 5 for consideration of this matter; (b) whether professional as well as layperson presentations will be allowed, and (c) what will be the schedule for further presentations and consideration of evidential materials pertaining to the matter. Further, I am interested in knowing whether it is the practice of the Board to withhold any materials, including those prepared by staff or by Board members, from disclosure to the public (so that proceeding under the Colorado FOIA might be necessary) and whether you and the Board can give me informal assurances that all documents relating to this matter, including informal notes and electronic media, will be retained under Rule 26 of the Colorado Rules of Civil Procedure. Thanks for your cooperation in this matter. H. L. Fenster From: Sara Conove _ _ Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2UUY 4:05 PM To: Fenster, Herbert Subject: Re: In The Matter of 819 Sixth Street Dear Mr. Fenster, James Hewat asked that I send you some of the documents you requested regarding 819 6th Street. I have attached a copy of the demo permit application, as well as the public notice that was sent out on Nov. 21, 2007. The memos, notes, and minutes you requested are not yet available, but will be mailed out this Friday. Please let me know if there's anything else I can do to be of assistance. Sincerely, Sara Conover Administrative Specialist Page 4 of.5 City of Boulder 303-441-4085 ConoverS(a bouldercolorado.gov "Fenster, Herbert" ~ 11/26/2007 2:12 PM Mr. Hewat: This will serve as notice that I intend to appear at the proceedings of the Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board on December 5, 2007 in connection with the captioned matter. Prior to that date, and in a-mail attachment form if possible, I would appreciate receiving copies of all (a) applications for permits, (b) notices regarding such applications, (c) memoranda, minutes, notes in every form, including electronic, and (d) memoranda or other materials prepared for the Board in connection with the captioned matter. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Very Truly Yours, Herbert L. Fenster CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments contain information from the law firm of McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP, and are intended solely for the use of the named recipient or recipients. This a-mail may contain privileged attorney/client communications or work product. Any dissemination of this a-mail by anyone other than an intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you are not a named recipient, you are prohibited from any further viewing of the a-mail or any attachments or from making any use of the a-mail or attachments. If you believe you have received this a-mail in error, notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the a-mail, any attachments, and all copies thereof from any drives or storage media and destroy any printouts of the a-mail or attachments. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments contain information from the law firm of McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP, and are intended solely for the use of the named recipient or recipients. This e-mail may contain privileged attorney/client communications or work product. Any dissemination of this e-mail by anyone other than an intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you are not a named recipient, you are prohibited from any further viewing of the e-mail or any attachments or from making any use of the e-mail or attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail in error, notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the e-mail, any attachments, and all copies thereof from any drives or storage media and destroy any printouts of the e-mail or Page 5 of 5 attachments. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments contain information from the law firm of McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP, and are intended solely for the use of the named recipient or recipients. This e-mail may contain privileged attorney/client communications or work product. Any - dissemination o£ this e-mail by anyone other than an intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you are not a named recipient, you are prohibited from any further viewing of the e-mail or any attachments or £rom making any use of the e-mail or attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail in error, notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the e-mail, any attachments, and all copies thereof from any drives or storage media and destroy any printouts of the e-mail or attachments. CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments contain information from the law firm of McKenna Long & Aldridge LLP, and are intended solely for the use of the named recipient or recipients. This e-mail may contain privileged attorney/client communications or work product. Any dissemination of this e-mail by anyone other than an intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you are not a named recipient, you are prohibited from any further viewing of the e-mail or any attachments or from making any use of the e-mail or attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail in error, notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the e-mail, any attachments, and all copies thereof from any drives or storage media and destroy any printouts of the e-mail or attachments. 5 C~ -Walsh Environmental Scientists and En ' eers, LLC an ecology and dtviromndn company December 5, 2007 (Revised December 6, 2007) Ms. Jessica Catlin Stevens,. Littman, Biddison, Tharp & Weinberg, LLC 250 Arapahoe Avenue, Suite 301 Boulder, Colorado 80302 RE: Microbial Evaluation Report and Remediation Protocol 819 6`" Street, Boulder, CO WALSH Project #7976-010 Dear Ms. Catlin: Walsh Enviromnental Scientists and Engineers, LLC (WALSH) is pleased to submit this report surmnarizing the initial microbial evaluation performed at the residential structure located at 819 6th Street, Boulder, Colorado (iJberoi Estate). WALSH performed the initial evaluation on November 16, 2007. The objective of this evaluation was to establish the extent of contamination to use as a baseline for comparison to conditions following remediation of the affected areas. WALSH was also requested to provide a remediation protocol to address microbial contamination that was present in the structure. METHODS Interviews During the site visit, no property representatives were available for interview. Before and after the site, Walsh personnel interviewed Ms. Jessica Catlin of Stevens, Littman, Biddison, Tharp & Weinberg, LLC, which was acting as legal representative of the Uberoi estate. Walsh also interviewed Mr. Randall Nishiyama (property representative and previous friend of the late Mr. Uberoi) following the site visit. Site Inspection On November 16, 2007, WALSH personnel responded to the residence and performed a walkthrough of the residence to become familiar with the affected areas. The property was vacant at the time of the site visit. A representative moisture survey was performed tluoughout the home using anon-penetrating TRAMEX moisture counter and a penetrating TRAMEX moisture meter. Temperature and relative humidity readings were also collected in representative areas with the use of a digital thereto-hygrometer and compared to outdoor conditions. Microbial Sampling On November 16, 2007, WALSH personnel collected three (3} microbial air samples in the Foyer (UE-111607-i); in the Master Bedroom (UE-I 11607-2) and in an outdoor control location 4888 Pearl East Circle Suha 108 Boulder, Colorado 80301-2475 Phone (303)443-3282 FAX (3U3) 443-0367 C:\D000ments and Satings\jmanin\Desktop\SLB71v Nberoi) Microbial\7976-010 Uberoi Report LMB.dac -w~ ' Environmental Rcirntists attd En 'errs, LLC nn ecology and atvimmnrnt company (UE-111607-3C). The samples were collected on Air-O-Cell spore trap cassettes using an air pump calibrated before and after sampling to a flow rate of fifteen (15) liters per minute. Four (4) tape lift samples were collected from the visible surface microbial growth located on the Living Room window sill (UE-111607-4), the north Basement wall (UE-111607-5); the Bedroom #3 Closet wall (UE-111607-6) and the Master Closet #1 wall (UE-111607-7). Al] microbiai samples were submitted under chain of custody to EMLab P&K laboratories in Cherry Hill, New Jersey, for fimgal identification and quantification. The sample locations are indicated in FIGURE 1 at the end of the report. RESULTS Interviews According to Ms. Catlin and Mr. Nishiyama, the property was originally constructed in 1954. Mr. Uberoi purchased the home in the late 50's or early 60's. On November 13, 2006, Mr. Uberoi became ill and vacated the residence. Mr. Uberoi passed away on November 25, 2006. On February 9, 2007, Mr. Nishiyama entered the residence to find standing water in the 2nd floor and Basement areas. On February 13, 2007, the source of the water release was identified by a plumber as a Bathroom sink water supply line and the main .water supply to the home was shut off. Mr. Nishiyama explained that when he first entered the home, it felt very humid and that the thermostat was set at 85°F. He also detected strong musty odors throughout the home. Disaster Restoration, Inc. (303-657-1400) responded to the residence to perform water removal activities. The contractor removed affected flooring materials, installed plastic containment barriers to segregate the 2"d Floor/Basement from the Living Roam/Kitchen/Dining Room areas. They also performed dehumidification procedures in the affected areas. The residence was later evaluated by a construction contractor who provided an estimate for repairs to the home and by an asbestos consultant to determine if any asbestos containing building materials were present in the home. No previous microbial evaluations were previously performed. Mr. Nishiyama was unawaze of who may have installed examination holes in the Hallway walls and Basement ceiling. He did however note that when he first entered the home, that an access hole was previously cut in the Basement ceiling below the upstairs Bathroom pluunbing. When he spoke with a friend of Mr. Uberoi, she indicated that a previous plumbing release occurred from the upstairs bathroom. Mr. Nishiyama also explained that he helped Mr. Uberoi perform repairs to the roof in the past. He explained that the wood panel ceiling materials required replacement after the roof leaks. Site Observations Living Room and Dining Roonr Examination of the residence began in the Living Room. Water stains and microbial growth were observed on the window sills throughout the Living Room and Dining Room. Water stains 4886 Pearl East Cirole Stoto 108 Boulder, Colorado R0301-2475 Phone (303)443-3282 FAX (303) 443-0367 C;\Documents and Settings\jmanin\Desktop\SLBTW (Uberoi) Mierobiah7976-010 Uberoi Report LMB.doc ' -w~ Envimnmmtal $cimtists ettd En ~ ieen;, 1.LC nn aclogy and envimnmmt compmty were observed on the ceiling along the roof transition adjacent the fire place and chimney stack. A section of wood ceiling panels were previously replaced by an unidentified party above the west Living Room leading into the Foyer. Water stains were also observed extending from the ceiling down the east Living Room wall in the location of a main roof truss. Examination of the roof trusses on the exterior of the home revealed deterioration at the ends of the trusses leaving penetrations for precipitation to enter the truss and migrate into the home. A microbial odor was detected in the room. %itchen Examination of the Kitchen revealed pooled water on the floor at the base of the drawers located below the refrigerator. Elevated moisture was detected in the cabinet below the refrigerator. Water damage was observed in the flooring materials around the cabinet. Water damage and deterioration consistent with historical water releases were also observed on the base of the Kitchen sink cabinet. No elevated moisture was detected in the base of the Kitchen sink cabinet. Foyer Water stains were observed extending from the ceiling down the south wall at the roof transition. Water stains were also observed on the Foyer window sill and drip mazs extended down the wall below the window. Stairwell The flooring materials on the stairs area were previously removed. Water stains, deterioration, microbial growth and drip stains consistent with historical water releases originating from the Upstairs Landing area were observed on the upper west wall of the lower stairwell leading to the basement. Water stains, microbial growth and deterioration were observed on the ceiling at the entrance to the basement. Basement Water stains and microbial growth consistent with exterior moisture intrusion were observed on the south and east concrete block walls. Water stains were observed from floor to ceiling in the northwest comer below the upstairs bathroom. Water stains, deterioration and microbial growth were observed along the lower south and west walls of the Storage Closet. Water stains and microbial growth were observed on the lower north basement wall opposite the Utility Room. Examination of the Utility Room revealed water damage, microbial growth and deterioration on drywall on the south and west walls consistent with historical plumbing and water heater releases. Upstairs Landing and Hallway The flooring materials throughout the Upstairs Landing and Hallway were previously removed. Water stains and deterioration were observed on the exposed plywood sub-floor materials. Examination holes were previously installed by an unknown party at the base of the east and west walls. Examination of the Hallway Closet revealed water stains and microbial growth on the lower walls consistent with a historical water release. 4888 Pearl East Circlo Suite 108 Boulder, Colorado 80301-2475 Phone (303)443-3282 FAX (303) 443-0367 C:\DocumrnLS and SeningsUmartintDesgop\SI.BTw (Ubemi) Microbial\7976010 Ubttoi Report I-MB.doc -w~ Favironmental Scidrtius a,xi Fn inears, LLC an ecology end environment company Powder Room Portions of the vinyl flooring materials were previously removed from the Powder Room. Water stains and deterioration were observed on the exposed ply-wood sub-floor materials. Water stains and microbial growth were observed on the window sill. Drip marks extended dawn the south brick wall below the window. Bedroom#3 The flooring materials were previously removed from the room exposing water damage and deterioration on the plywood sub-floor materials. Water stains were observed on the baseboards and door trim at the entrance to the room. Water stains were observed extending from the roof trusses down the west wa1L Water damage, deterioration and microbial growth were observed on the lower west wall and window sill. Examination of the roof trusses on the exterior of the home revealed deterioration at the ends of the trusses leaving penetrations for precipitation to enter the truss and migrate into the home. Bedroom #2 The flooring materials were previously removed from the room exposing water damage and deterioration on the plywood sub-floor materials. Water stains and microbial growth consistent with a historical water release were observed on the lower walls and trim at the entrance to the room and throughout the closet. Water stains were observed extending from the roof busses down the west wall. Water damage, deterioration and microbial growth were observed on the lower west wall and window sill. Water damage, deterioration and microbial growth consistent with historical water release from the bathroom were observed on the lower north wall. Examination of the roof trusses on the exterior of the home revealed deterioration at the ends of the trusses leaving penetrations for precipitation to enter the truss and migrate into the home. Bathroom Examination of the Bathroom revealed water stains extending down the west wall from the roof trusses. Cracks were observed in the the grout and caulk throughout the shower consistent with insufficient maintenance. The shower wall tiles were loose and heaved in some areas from moisture damage and swelling of the underlying wallboazd. Dark stains consistent with microbial growth could be seen through the pain on the upper bathroom walls. Water drip marks extended from the vent fan located on the upper south wall. Water damage, deterioration and microbial growth were observed at the base of the north wall adjacent the bathtub and behind the toilet. Water damage and microbial growth was observed on the base of the vanity. Master Bedroom Water stains and microbial growth were observed on the window sills and wall below the windows. Water stains and microbial growth were observed along the lower east wall. Water stains and microbial growth were also observed on the lower walls of closet #1. Exterior Examination of the building exterior revealed extensive deterioration in the wood siding around the perimeter of the home. Deterioration in the roof truss ends on the east and west sides of the 4$$B Pearl East Circle SuitelUB Boulder, CObmda 80301-2475 Phone (303)443-32$2 FAX(303)443-0367 C:\Documents and Settings\jmarlinlDesldop\sLBTW (Uberoi)Microbiaa7976-010 Uberoi Report LMB.doc f =~~5~1 1? nmentat Scientists and Engnieers, LLC an ecology and environment company home left penetrations allowing moisture to enter the home. Deterioration was also observed in the window frames and trim throughout the home. Moisture, Temperature and Relative Humidity Elevated moisture was detected in the lower south Kitchen cabinet below the refrigerator and in the lower north Dining Room wall below the window. The moisture survey results can be found at the end of the report in TABLE 2 and FIGURE 2. The temperature and relative humidity data are listed below in TABLE 1. TABLE 1: Temperature and Relative Humidity Readingst } . Location ~ r °~3 [telahve ~ Ten~p'erature {°Fa, ~ _ Foyer 26.7 57.9 Master Bedroom 26.6 59 Outside 18.1 62.1 The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Air and Radiation, "A Brief Guide to Mold, Moisture and Your Home," 2002, recommends that relative humidity levels should be maintained below 60% (ideally between 30% and 50%) to minimize biological growth. Microbial Sample Analysis Analysis of the tape lift surface sample collected from the Living Room window sill revealed the presence of Yeasts, Penicillium/Aspergillus, Cladosporium and Chaetomium. The tape lift sample collected from the north Basement wall revealed the presence of Stachybotrys, Clzaetomium, Cladosporium and Acremonium, The tape lift sample collected from the Bedroom #3 Closet wall revealed the presence of Chaetomium, Penicillium, and Alternaria. The Tape lift sample collected from Master Closet #1 revealed the presence of Trichoderma and Alternaria. The tape lift and Air-O-Cell microbial results can be found at the end of the report in Attachment A. The Air-O-Cell analysis results are summarized in the table below. t The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Air and Radiation, "A Brief Guide to Mold, Moisture and Your Home," 2002 4888 Pearl East Circle Suite I US BouldcY, Colorado 8030 1-247 5 Phone (303) 443-3282 FAX (303) 443-0367 C:\Docwnents and Settings\jmartinlDeskiop\SLBTW (Uberoi) Microbia117976-010 Uberoi Report LMB.doc .-Walsh L'nviromnrntal Scirruists and Fn ineer.;, LLC' an ecology and enairomnent company Air-O-Cell Results Summery (Fungal Structures/m3) ,t ~I. 1r ungal Structure Idenhhcation Sample x " Sampler ~t ~ Tot,il•, r ,Fraction-of Total (Fung;tl~tructures/m3} 2~ Nl}lllb8rw wti ~La_CatI0I1 ~ r#- FUII 1l I c..yr r: w-;= °ac ~ • 3 v- ~ ` ~ ~a ~ day a , t! t~ ' - ~ ~ k~ t, .r - UE-111607-1 Foyer 5,878 ~ 27 160 1,010 547 3,520 ~ 280 ~ 2.7 ~ 120 _ UE-111607-2 Master 27,386 N/D N/D 1,490 320 23,800 1,470 N/D 240 Bedroom UE-111607-3 Outside 1,700 N/D 213 373 907 107 N/D 27 N/D Fungal Strucures/m =Fungal suvctures per cubic meter of air sampled N/D =Non-detect Samples Analyzed by EMLab P&K labor?tories, (Cherry Hill, New Jetsey) using direct microscopic examination No health-based standards have been established for "safe" or "unsafe" levels of mold spores. Indoor results which exceed outdoor concentrations indicate that a source of amplification may be present in the area sampled. A significant difference in the types} of mold detected indoors versus outdoors is also indicative of an indoor source of mold growth. The visual inspection and microbial results reveal evidence of fungal amplification throughout the hoarse when compared to the outdoor control sample. CONCLUSIONS Based on the visual evaluation, direct reading moisture measurements, temperature/relative humidity readings, and microbial air sampling results, Walsh recommends that a detailed remediation protocol be followed for remediation of the water damage and microbial growth observed throughout the home. Based on the observed conditions, it is possible that additional areas of microbial growth exist on the interior of the affected wall cavities. The total estimated area of affected building materials in the home is greater than 100 square feet. Complete removal of fungal spores is not practical, as fungal spores are ubiquitous in outdoor and indoor environments even in the absence of active microbial growth. RECOMMENDED REMEDIATION TASKS The remediation protocol described below is based on the conditions described above and on guidance documents published by the EPA2 and IICRC3. It is assumed that all sources of interior moisture release and exterior moisture intrusion will be identified and corrected before completion of the remediation tasks. Failure to do so, will likely lead to further moisture intrusion release and additional water damage/microbial growth. z The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Air and Radiation, "Mold Remediarion in Schools and Commercial Buildings," 2001 a Institute of Inspection, Cleaning and Restoration Certification (IICRC), "IICRC 5520: Standard and Reference Guide for Professional Mold Remediation," 2003 48R~i Pearl Lyel Circle 5uitc lOS Boulder, Colorado 80301-2475 Phanc (303)443-32R"_' FAX 1303) 443-0367 C:1Documents and Settingsljmartin\DesktoplSLBTW (Uberoi) Microbial\7976-010 Uberoi Report LMB.doc ~`Nalsh Fnvironmemal Sciartists and En beers, LLC an ceology end arvironmrn[ company The recommended remediation protocols entail significant disturbance and removal of structural materials. A structural engineer or designer should be consulted before removal of any structural building components is performed. It is recommended that an inspection for asbestos-containing materials be completed prior to demolition in order to satisfy federal, state, and local regulations. If asbestos containing materials are present which will be disturbed during remediation, the protocols described below may need to be modified in order to accommodate asbestos abatement requirements. Due tp the extent of microbial contamination in the structure, it is recommended that a professional remediation firm be retained. The selected contractor should have or obtain the licenses and permits required by federal, state, and local regulations for a project of this nature. WAISH recommends the following tasks: Preparation Tasks 1. The contractor should implement professional judgment regarding personal protection for restoration employees. Care should be taken to follow all applicable Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations and EPA recommended worker protection guidelines prior to and during remediation activities. 2. All high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) vacuuming and HEPA air scrubbing equipment should be cleaned before being brought on site and should have, at a minimum, a new pre-filtration media installed. Caution: The determining factors for success of the remediation project lies mainly on the cleaning abilities of the restoration staff and equipment utilized. If old, loaded or incorrectly installed filtration media are utilized during the cleaning activities, the possibilities for cross contamination of clean areas is likely. If potentially ineffective cleaning methods and equipment are used, this will make for a difficult PASS during the post remediation verification (PRV) testing. 3. The entire residence has been impacted (Figure 4). 4. Place plastic sheeting on the floors of the home that will not be removed and secure with tape. This task is meant to limit tracking of debris and microbial contaminants inside the home, and to protect the flooring from damage during the restoration activities. 5. The HVAC system should remain deactivated throughout the remediation process. Seal supply and return registers in throughout the residence with plastic sheeting secured with tape. 4888 Pearl Ease Circle Suite 108 Boulder, Cok,mdo 80301-2475 Phone (303)443.3282 FAX (303)443-0367 C:\DOCUmrnts and Servings\jmenin\Deskmp\SLB7'N' (Ubwi) Microbic(\7976.010 Ubemi Report LMB.dac -w~ Environmental Scientists and ulcers, LLC an xology mul mvironmc~u wmpnny Restoration Activities At the time of WALSH's inspection, the contents of the house had been removed except for miscellaneous items of trash and debris that should be disposed of. The objective of this task is to remove all obstacles that. might hinder the restoration effort. 6. Install a HEPA equipped air scrubbers in recirculation mode to provide adequate air cleaning in each work area. Operate the air scrubber during working hours only during this stage. 7. Remove the Bathroom vanity and Kitchen cabinets. Evaluate for microbial growth and water damage. If salvageable, damp wipe with a mild detergent solution, wipe dry, wrap with plastic sheeting and place in off site storage. If not salvageable, dispose of properly. 8. Remove and properly dispose of the following building materials (Figure 5). Proper disposal includes placing manageable sections of drywall and other materials in a 6-mil polyethylene bag, sealing the bag and placing it in a suitable container outside the premises for disposal: Living Room • Remove all baseboards and door trim. • Remove all porous carpet and padding materials. • Remove the water stained wood panels from the west ceiling as indicated in Figure 5. • Remove the wallboazd materials below the north windows. Dining Room • Remove all north wall baseboazds and door trim. • Remove all porous carpet and padding materials. • Remove the wallboard materials below the north windows. Kitchen • Remove the lower north and south cabinets. • Remove all flooring materials. Foyer • Remove all baseboards and door trim. • Remove all flooring materials. • Remove the south wallboard materials from the floor to the four (4) foot level below the window. Lower Stairwell • Remove all wood panels and wallboard materials from the upper west and south walls above the lower stairwell at the entrance to the basement. A888 Pearl Past Circle Suilc l08 Boulder, Colorado 80301-2475 Pbone (303)443-3282 FAX(303)443-0367 C:1Docwnmu and Settings\jmartin\Desktop4SLBTW (Ubaoi) MicrobiaR7976-010 Uberoi Report IlvtB.doc ~w Environm®ml Sciatists and Fa ineers, LLC an aology and asvironmont company Basement • Remove all baseboards and door trim. • Remove the drywall materials from the floor to the four (4) font level along the north walls. Examine the back side of the remaining drywall materials. Continue removal until water damage and microbial growth are no Ienger observed. • Remove the drywall materials from the floor to the ceiling along the north wall to the west of the storage entrance. • Remove all ceiling and insulation materials. • Scrape and sand the paint from the painted concrete walls until water stains and microbial growth aze no longer visible. Basement Storage • Remove all baseboards and door trim. • Remove the drywall materials from the floor to the four (4) foot level along the south walls. Examine the back side of the remaining drywall materials. Continue removai until water damage and microbial growth aze no longer observed. • Remove all ceiling and insulation materials from the south half of the room. • Scrape and the paint from the painted west and north concrete walls until water stains and microbial growth are no longer visible. Utility Room • Remove all baseboards and door trim. • Remove the drywall materials from the floor to the four (4) foot level along the south walls. Examine the back side of the remaining drywall materials. Continue removal until water damage and microbial growth aze no longer observed. • Remove the drywall materials from the floor to the ceiling along the west wall. Hallway/Landing • Remove all baseboards and door trim throughout the Hallway and Landing azeas. • Remove the plywood sub-floor materials throughout the Landing and Hallway. Remove the drywall materials from the floor to the four (4) foot level along the west Hallway wall between the Bedroom #2 entrance and the Bathroom entrance. Examine the back side of the remaining drywall materials. Continue removal until water damage and microbial growth are no longer observed. Hallway Closet • Remove the wallboazd/drywall materials from the floor to the four (4) foot level along all walls. Examine the back side of the remaining drywall materials. Continue removal until water damage and microbial growth are no longer observed. • Remove the plywood sub-floor materials. Powder Room • Remove all baseboards and door trim. 4888 Peed Fast Cimle Suite 108 Boulder, Colorado 80301-2475 Phane (303)443.3282 FAX (303) 443-0367 C:\Dauments and Settings\jmnrtin\Desktop\SL67'W (llbwi) Microbial\7976A10 Uberoi Report LMB.doc -w~ Environmental Sci®tista and Fs 'eery. LLC m ceolo8y and anvimnmgrt tympany • Remove all flooring materials. • Remove the plywood sub-floor materials throughout the Powder Room. Bedroom #3 • Remove all baseboards and door trim. • Remove the plywood sub-floor materials. • Remove the drywall materials from the floor to the four (4) foot level along the west wall. Examine the back side of the remaining. drywall materials. Continue removal until water damage and microbial growth are no longer observed. Bedroom #2 • Remove all baseboards and door trim. • Remove the plywood sub-floor materials. • Remove the drywall materials from the floor to the four (4) foot level along the west, east and north walls.. Examine the back side of the remaining drywall materials. Continue removal until water damage and microbial growth aze no longer observed. Bathroom • Remove all baseboazds and door trim throughout the bathroom, vanity and linen closet. • Remove the plywood sub-floor materials. • Remove the drywall materials from the floor to the four (4) foot level along the north wall. Examine the back side of the remaining drywall materials. Continue removal until water damage and microbial growth aze no longer observed. • Remove the drywall materials from the floor to the ceiling along the south and west walls. Master Bedroom • Remove all baseboards and door trim. • Remove the plywood sub-floor materials. • Remove the drywall materials from the floor to the four (4) foot level along the north and east walls. Examine the back side of the remaining drywall materials. Continue removal until water damage and microbial growth are no longer observed. Master Closet #1 • Remove all baseboards and door trim. • Remove the plywood sub-floor materials. • Remove the drywall materials ftom the floor to the four (4) foot level along the south and west walls. Examine the back side of the remaining drywall materials. Continue removal until water damage and microbial growth are no longer observed. 48R8 Pearl Easi Citele Snita l08 6oulda, Colorado 8030]-2475 Phone (303)443-3282 fAX (303)443A367 C:\Documents and $ettingsljmartin\Desktop\SLBTW (Ubaoi) Microbial\7976-010 U6aoi Report LMB.doc =w>~ Envitonmmtal Scirntists and ~ ecrs, LLC an ecology and rnvimntnrnl company Master Closet #2 • Remove all baseboazds and door trim. • Remove the plywood sub-floor materials. 9. 13valuate the condition of the underlying materials beneath the removed baseboards, sheetrock and flooring and the interior sides of all exposed wallg for evidence of-water damage or visible microbial growth. Examine all exposed wall cavities with a flashlight and mirror. If any evidence of water damage and/or microbial growth is apparent, the affected. section(s) should be removed and disposed of properly. 10. Examine the exposed wood framing for microbial growth and decay. Remove all necessary wall material to examine for microbial growth and decay. All wood that supports microbial growth should be damp wiped with a mild detergent solution, be allowed to dry and sanded or wire brushed to remove approximately 1/32-inch of the original wood. If cost effective, the damaged wood may be replaced with new lumber. 11. Initiate dehumidification to attain 14% moislwe or less in all. construction materials. 12, Once the wood has achieved an acceptable moisture content (<l4%), apply a low VOC clear sealer to the affected wood areas only. Minimize the application of the sealer to aeeas that supported microbial growth only. 13, Clean the HVAC unit(s) and ductwork, both supply and return, and replace the filter(s). Recover the supply and return vents in Area B with polyethylene sheeting and tape when completed. Insulated fiberboard ductwork cannot be effectively cleaned. An HVAC professional should be consulted to determine the best method of cleaning the ductwork. 14. Use a HEPA vacuum to remove all debris and dust following the removal of all water damaged materials in the residence. Dispose of HEPA vacuum contents in well-sealed plastic bags. 15. Damp wipe the non-porous floors and remaining walls in Area B with a mild detergent solution. 16. Install new filters and operate HEPA blowers inside Area B for 48 to 72 hours before the post remediation verification sampling. Use an electric leaf blower and/or fans to forcibly suspend particulates in the air. The intent of this task is to remove suspended particulate and microbial matter before testing. Deactivate the air scrubbers 12 to 24 hours before post remediation verification (PRV) sampling event. 17. Contact Walsh to schedule a post remediation verification evaluation, 4888 Peal Fawt Circlc Suite WB Bnulde{Colrnado 80301-2475 Phone (303)443-3282 PgX(303)443.0367 C;Wocummts aad Settings\jmeAin\Desktop\SL87'W (Ubemi) Micmbial\7476.010 Ubaoi Report IMB.doc ~Nalsli Envimnmeatal Scientists mtd En ' eers, I-LC an ecology and rnvvomnrnt company We have appreciated the opporhuilty to work with you on this project. Please call (303) 443- 3282 if you have any questions. Sincexel 7aso Martin, CIAQP Lindsay/~j/B CIH Microbiologist/ Industrial Hygienist Managei'~6f Health and Safety Services 4888 Pavl East Cirole Suite 108 Boulder, CGlorado R0301-2475 Phone (303)443-3282 FAX (303) 443-03G7 C:\Documents and Settings\jmartinlDcSktoplSI.BTW (ilbemi) Microbiah7976-010 Ubemi Report IMB.doc FIGURE 2: Observetl Water Damage and Microbial Growth (Uberoi Estate) Master Bedroom CL #2 CL #1 Dining Room i Bathroom s Dw i ' i i Living Room CL i coven Kitchen i ..._._i Bedroom #2 C tt ' I FP Fridge ~ .._t i s Down Foyer Down DP Bedroom CL wder 0 Le end Water DamagelSlain Microbial Growth Storage Furnace WH N Basement t to Estimated Scale (ft) FIGURE 5: Building Materials Removal (Ubara Estate) ''z ;.I Master Bedroom `-~'i 3 ~ ~ C«a a~~ x=~ CL #2 CL #1 :7 ~a~zv'4`?~ ~ Dining Room i Bathroom t I ,3 ~`F, CL ~ ~ Living Room i oven r°~ Kitchen II.~` Bedroom #2 C i FP Down Foyer )Down. UP Bedroom #3 ~ CL' + Powder t.'' R00 KEY ~ Sheetrock/insulation x~ removal to 4 It. Sheetroc~nsulation removal to 4 It. Ceiling removal Flooring removal Vanity/Cabinet removal Storage Furnace Baseboardrtrim removal Scrape/sand paint WH N t 10 Estimated Scale (fl) NOV-B-2007 02:S6P FR~I:STROM ENV. 1(303)487-4534 T0: 3034403967 P.2 LIMT!'ED ASBESTOS BULK SURVEY REPORT for the property located at: 819 6a' St Boulder, CO prepared for: Mr. Andrew Kassoy 105 Hudson 3t. li6-N New Yorly NY 10013 (91797-3903 by. Strom Euviroamentai, Inc. 6925 Broadway Deaver, CO 80221 Pbone(303~8711533 Ba=(303)487534 November O5, 2007 1 hI0V-8-2007 02:57P FROM:SIROM ENV, iC303)487-4534 T0: 3034403%7 P.5 ANALYTICAL METHODS All bulk samples were analyzed by SEt, via polarized light microscopy utilizing dispersion staining techniques according to USEPA Interim Method USEPA G00/M4-82-020. All reference testing was completed by an analyst qualified under the NVLAP Asbestos Bulk Sample Quality Assurance Progtam(DTIST/NVLAP Lab #200450-0). The USEPA Interim Method requires the microscopist to take a portion of the bully samples and treat it with an oil of specific refractive index. This pzepared slide is then subjected to a variety of tests while being viewed under varying polarizations of light. Each type of asbestos displays unique characteristics when subjected to these tests. Percentages of the identified types of asbestos are determined by visual estimation. Anv material that contains ~patPr than rmelll nrrcent by area of env tune of asbestos is considered sn Ssbeet0a-oont lnln$ materiaifACMI and must be managed in accordance with CDPIdE, OSHA, and USEPA regulations, if disturbed. SUMMARY OF RESULTS After visual examination and analysis of samples taken from the property on October 31, 2007, it was determined asbestos was found in the following materials: Trowelled texture wall coat-Basement/perimeter walls(Approx.400-1300 S~ ASSUMHD Duct Seam Insulation(Approx. 5-10 S~ "`NOTE-The actual amount of ACM may vary due to limitations of visturl estimations made by the inspector, actual measurements will need to be taken to detemtine amount of ACM present. Some basement perimeter walls were in~cessible at time of inspection. All other sampled materials tested negative for the presence of asbestos. Refer to the analysis and bulk sampling sheet included in Appendix A for a list of other materials sampled as well as the condition of the materials tested. -Tar impregnated roofing materials and vinyl floor dle were not tasted. If implosion or fire-burning techniques are used during demolition, these materials will need to be tasted. Comments- -This inspection is limited to visually accessible ACM suspect materials sampled. Further testing will berequired ifrenovation/demolition occur. 4 iJOI/-B-2667 02:SBP FROM:STROM ENV. 1(303)487-4534 T0: 30.34403%7 P.8 Strom Environmental, Inc. Environmental TestLtlzServiees ~ 6925 N. Broadway, Denver, CO.80221 Phone (866)487-4533 Fax (303~F87.4534 BULK ASBESTOS SAMPLE ANALYSIS REFQRT NISTMY4AP 1.A8 820045b0 ANDREW 1(pgSOy SEI PB:QJEC'1' Ms 1107-0i 105 $UDSON ST. N6-N DATE OF RECEIPT: 10-31-07 NEWYORK, NY 70013 DATE OF ANALYSIS: 11-01.07 pRO~~ R; SAMPLEII BY: SEI PROJECT NAME: 819 6~ ST., BOULDER, CO PAGE 1 OF 1 ABBREVIAT10N3: $AMPLB TYPE ~BRSTI~TYPB MATRRIAL TYPR H7'-YioylFloor7Yb CIIAYS~C4lywdle CELI~CeRnlats RS-Rleor Sbatlng AM09-AmaNn RG-PRrroK Ghn AC-Aeonstld Spny-0n (ROC-Cr,eldslla AGG-A6t~8o~ CI'-Coilhl` TOe TB.EM Tremolih NR-Noo Ffbrew DJM-prywa0 7o1nt Mnd NAD-Ne Atbeetm Dateded 81N-Binder WP-WaRPlor[er TRACR,x196AeDeRa SYN-Symlmtk GRAN-Grnnnlar AA-Norte Anlr G7.AiNTb BE1LA88' SAMPI,EDBSCAB!TdON %ASBBSTOS OTBIIRMATFRIALS IOJ161 81187 VT(Wfl'B PATER BACIONG} NAD 3:{%CBLIATAR COOD NO CO FIBROUS +BWDBR 1831-03A 81181 TROWCI.LBATZXTURB 3%CNRYB +3%TALO~ACC GOOD NO COAT-WII ORAN J%TOTAL ASB&4T08 1831-038 81188 PLA61'BR-wBITB, GRAN NAD 1007iAtiQRROATC GOOD NO 183783 8118! DID NOT ANALYZE " 183180 81198 DRYWALL!Wh4WNIT&GRAN 3%CNRYB(D.1M) +1S9iCELL+AGC GOOD NO Q9i TOTAL A8868'1'OS 183185 81191 DRYWALLlDJM-WNIT&ORAN 2'ACIIRYB(WM) +3094C6LLtACC GOOD NO Q%TOTALASBYRI'OS 1031-06 Blll2 DRYWALL/D3M-WRITR,CRAN =%CHRYS(WM) +38%CBLL+ACG GOOD NO 49L TOTAL ASH667'O8 METROD: Polnrtted Light Micraeopy, EPA Meriod 600/R-93/116 DE'fECf10N LIMA: 1X Atbetta ANALYST: Lars Melnutrom ABt6orized SigBStnre• • La 1 om/Lnb for ,epal P~ ®4' m lee Ihm eroet. 7'04 rpwY enY ow ~ ~ t"t wldr yaslw M BBI. 7'YY nperf aww M u.a tg nr dWt m dWO wadtel eeOMtmOtt brllVLATMrur gwer~lYe U9.Oovrttwf. Ploer7'n,rWpN, nIq rYMI"FUw NKNI.e•M7y rUWr B,e blM drdwbree~BMn. DdWtln rrdh eaob aMYttl bl T8M tr 88M adltla 861 nlotmrd, e6' OWE ~ u'et ~ 9W r T6M AeNrW(ra wF~eeM d"nAka) rr aq,i•1, rgdnlM M VA NSSHAPB nd ttWbtlta tlt te. t~l(<INX) Mab b' Teh,8s0 U1.1(PIa7? G6 wrWta an avdtbM 0r a WMtl~ul nis Strom En ' _ vironmental, Inc. Bulk Sampling Data Sheet . W 6925 N. Broadway, Denver, C0.8022I Phone(303)487~533 Faz(303}487-4534 ~2 ~ Project Name & Namber: f ~h~r~e~•s Xt,•_SSD ~ Date Sampled• /D ~3 i~D7 ~i Site Address: glq `dh ~ ~vc~~~ Gp Sample Taken By: S Project Contact: ~~d{~? Material Type Sampled:s~5~~j"~~'L~m ~I~~ ~ti / 1 3 mm z _ ~ x' ± _ C ~~t~~: log - ~ ( V w o„oer(c-~~ ~ (~c~f,~.~ Gam'?, /~G, ~ ~ N-F ODs ~ r Y-,~~~~ a-~,~~Q ~ ~ - ~ ti~ ~c. ~ d D D s~ - f Sao ~F rU3l ~a r ~ ~ r. r ~ ~w 1 ` der- it ~ t - -cd~roovl ~ l~ r r r~ ` ~ nemr~~t ~ N w ~r.~Y,aws 0 w m l~' S5u - ~ D~F ~5 ta~se•. Relinquished. By(Date & Time): Received By(Date & Time): -o in Relinquished By(Date & Time): Received By(Date & Time): QUALICLEAN 7450 W. 52"d AVENUE ARVADA, COLORADO 80002 Phone:303-833-6933 Fax:303-833-5484 November 8, 2007 Andrew Kassoy AKassoy@yahoo.com RE: 819 6~' St. Boulder, CO Deaz Mr. Kassoy; Thank you for giving Qualiclean the opportunity to provide a price for asbestos removal at the above mentioned location. SCOPE: ~ • Qualiclean will remove and dispose of approximately 1300 squaze feet of asbestos containing plaster on cement in basement. • Asbestos containing duct insulation in the mechazucal room will be removed and disposed of. • Final visual and air clearance sampling. • All work will be performed in accordance with State and Federal regulations for asbestos cleanup. CLARIFICATIONS & EXCLUSIONS: • The work azea will be unoccupied at the time of cleanup. • This is a State notifiable project. There is a ten day waiting period for Abatement Pernuts. • If any legal action arises under this agreement or any breach of it; the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover all costs and expenses including reasonable attorney fees incurred in connection therewith. • The owner will provide water and electricity for this project. PRICING: $19,250.00 I' i i r„ i' .I`' A Market Value Appraisal Report of ~ 819 6th Street , Boulder, Colorado In the Estate of M. S. ~beroi, deceased r~ as of November 25, 2006 A Effective Date of Appraisal For Client ' Roger E. Sfievens, Esq. Stevens, Littman, Biddison, Tharp & Weinberg ~r~ Boulder, Colorado ~'1 Prepared by Charles R. Travis, S.R.A., I.F.A. 335 Inca Parkv~ray Boulder, Colorado 80303-3517 r Charles R. Trnvis IFA SRA C. TRAVIS - REALTOFf 8~ AF~PRAISER 335 Inca Parkway Boulder, Colorado 80303 Phone (303) 443-0620 FAX (303) 494-3125 E-mail: c.travis1Ca?comcast.net March 28, 2007 Roger E. Stevens, Esq. Stevens, Littman, Biddison, Tharp & Weinberg, LLC 250 Arapahoe Ave., Suite 301 Boulder, Colorado 80302-5838 RE: 819 6~h Street, Boulder, Colorado 80302 in the Estate of Mahinder S. Uberoi, deceased Dear Mr. Stevens: In response to your request I have made one or more inspections of the referenced property for the purpose of forming an retrospective opinion of market value of the fee simple interest as of November 25, 2006, the date of death of M. S. Uberoi. The initial inspection was made February 21, 2007. I Market Value, as defined by the Internal Revenue Service is set forth in Part Two, Section 3 of the accompanying appraisal report. The Purpose of the Appraisal is to aid in or support decisions related to estate or inheritance taxes and the ale of the property. The Intended Users are the Estate of Mahinder S. Uberoi, deceased, and its representatives including Randall Nishiyama, Personal Representative, the Boulder County Probate Court, I the Internal Revenue Service, and the Colorado Department of Revenue. It is my opinion that the retrospective Market Value of the fee simple interest in the I property as of November 25, 2006, the date of death and the Effective Date of Appraisal, was: I ONE MILLION FOUR HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS $1,400,000. This letter and the accompanying appraisal report are subject to the Assumptions, Contingent and Limiting Conditions (Part I Section 5) and to the Certification (Part III Section 13), therein. The use of this appraisal report by you or other intended user constitutes acceptance of the Certification, Assumptions, Contingent and Limiting Conditions. Should they not be acceptable, all copies of this report should be promptly returned with reasons therefore. I 4 of 42 pages i~ I If you have any questions, please feel free to call or inquire. ` Sincerely, ~ ~ ~ Charles .Travis SRA, IFA I Colorado Certified General Appraiser CG01313935 4 copies enclosed I I 1 I 1 I I ' S of42 pages 819 6`" Street Boulder, Colorado 60302 As of November 25, 2006 1.5. Summary of Salient Facts and Conclusions I A. Property Owner: M. S. Uberoi (see the accompanying deed in the Addenda) B. Property Identification: 819 6'~ Street, Boulder, Colorado 80302 Lot 8, Spackman's Subdivision C. Land Size: A residential lot, 130' x 160' = 20,800 sq.ft. D. Zoning: ER-E or Estate Residential Established in the City of Boulder. E. Highest and Best Use: Detached single family residential, replacing the existing dwelling. F. Value Estimates: Land Value $1,400,000 Cost Approach applicable but not necessary and omitted in this analysis Market Approach necessary and developed in the land value analysis Income Approach not applicable or necessary and omitted in this analysis G. Conclusion of Market Value: $1,400,000 H. Inspection Date: February 21, 2007 This is a retrospective opinion I. Effective Appraisal Date: November 25, 2006 J. Client: Roger E. Stevens, Esq. Stevens, Littman, Biddison, Tharp & Weinberg, LLC 250 Arapahoe Ave., Suite 301 Boulder, Colorado 80302-5838 K. Intended Users: Estate of Mahinder S. Uberoi, deceased, and its representatives, including Randall Nishiyama, Personal Representative, I the Boulder County Probate Court, the Internal Revenue Service, and the Colorado Department of Revenue. I L. Intended Use: To aid in or support decisions related to estate or inheritance taxes and the sale of the property. I I I I 8 of 42 Pages 819 6`" Street Boulder, Colorado 80302 As of November 25, 2006 The heating is natural gas fired, forced warm air in three zones (presumably one zone per floor). It has a huge 50 year old furnace that is woefully inefficient in terms of today's energy efficient furnaces. There is a full bath and a half bath on the upper level. The water damage appeared to have started in the half bath. Hot water is supplied by a gas water heater in the furnace room. There is need for plumbing repairs. Built-in equipment includes a Thermador range top and wall oven, and dishwasher. These appear to be original appliances. Their operability is unknown. No personal property such as the refrigerator is included. Carport: There is an attached two car carport with accompanying storage having 270 sq.ft. The carport is attached to the dwelling via the roof structure. Between the dwelling and the carport is a simple entry way. The carport floor is dirt (most carports have concrete slab floors). There is a built-in storage area along the south wall of the carport. Feasibility of Use: It will be very costly to repair the water damage and rehabilitate the dwelling inside and out to bring it up to today's building standards. At the very least an owner is faced with replacement of windows with double glazed insulated glass, probably with some ventilation capability; paint and repair of the exterior; roof cover replacement; kitchen cabinet replacement; furnace replacement; new bath fixtures and plumbing; and complete redecoration of the interior include floor coverings. It will be shown later in this report that the highest and best use is to remove the existing dwelling and carport and redevelop the site with a new "Built Green" energy efficient dwelling. For these reasons, the valuation question becomes primarily one of land value -that is, the sale to an existing property with the intent that the buyer will remove the dwelling and carport and ~ erect a new dwelling. ~ Eauiament: Any equipment on the property, other than that associated with the dwelling as noted above, is ' deemed to be personal property and not appurtenant to the property. No valuation of any other equipment is included in this report. I 21 of42 Pages 819 6`" Street Boulder, Colorado 60302 As of November 25, 2006 2.3 B. Improvements On the property is a detached single family dwelling with attached two carport. Dwellinn: The dwelling was built in 1957 according to the Assessor's Office. I The overall quality of the dwelling is "fairy to "average" in terms of today's building code standards, especially with respect to energy efficiency. The present condition is "fair" or "below average" with an effective age estimate of about 50 years. The home does not appear to have had any updating or renovation since its construction. The dwelling is a contemporary style tri-level The dwelling has 742 sq.ft. of main floor area with living room, dining room, and kitchen. The upper level has 707 sq.ft. of floor area with two bedrooms and 1 'h baths. The lower level has 707 sq.ft. of floor area with a family room, storage room, and furnace room. The laundry area is in a corner of the family room. The lower level might be deemed basement because it is essentially all below grade along the rear of the dwelling. The total floor area is 2,156 sq.ft. There is a 195 sq.ft. covered patio on the north side of the dwelling, off the main floor level. The dwelling's exterior walls are brick with some plywood frame. Interior walls are also brick, plywood paneling, and drywall. Most windows are single glazed fixed glass. Cross ventilation is poor unless doors are opened. The exterior is in need of repainting at the very least. Existing paint is presumed to be lead based. The roof structure is a contemporary "butterfly" design. The roof cover is a mopped composition roll roofing on a 2" x 6" tongue and groove wood deck. Roof drainage is intended to be down a drainpipe in the center of the roof, but at inspection, was running over the edge of the roof suggesting a possibly clogged drain pipe. The roof cover appears to be original and is showing its age. Floors were mostly cork tile. Much of the cork the in the upper and lower levels has been severely water damaged due to a broken water line. Some of the the has been removed showing deterioration of the underlying plywood sub-floor. Interior walls are drywall and wood panel with mahogany doors. f The Pullman shaped kitchen has painted wood cabinets with formica counter tops. The cabinets appear to be original and certainly not in keeping with today's cabinet styles. 20 of42 Pages 619 6`" Street Boulder, Colorado 60302 As of November 25, 2006 PART THREE ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSIONS 3.1. Analysis of Highest and Best Use as though Vacant Highest and Best Use is defined in The Appraisal of Real Esfate, Twelfth Edition, by the Appraisal Institute, page 305 as: "The reasonably probable and legal use of vacant land or an improved property, which is physically possible, appropriately supported, financially feasible, and that results in the highest value." The major requirements are thus summarized: (al Leoallv permissible: The property is now zoned RE, formerly ER-E, in the City of Boulder. (See preceding Section 3.7 of this report.) The subdivision pre-existed the present zoning. Obtaining a Conditional Use or Use Review for alternative uses is unlikely in Boulder. The Allowed Uses by right are essentially residential in nature. The minimum site area is 15,000 sq.ft. There is no reasonable probability that the subject's zoning can be changed although "Down Zoning" changes have been accomplished by City Council actions. The "Restrictions and Limitations Spackman's Subdivision" were recorded October 27, 1941 in Book 709 at Page 44 of the Boulder County records. These restrictions essentially limited use to a one detached single-family dwelling house and a private garage..." costing at least $5,000.00 or at least °...1000 square feet in ground floor area of the main structure the exterior walls of which shall be constructed of less than 60 per cent masonry..." on an site area of not less than 20,000 sq.ft. The restriction and limitations "...shall run with the land to and until.July first, A. D. 1966..." "...the owner of any other lot (may) prosecute an action at law or in equity to prevent a breach, or the continuation of such a breach, or to recover damages therefor (sic)." There is no provision for the renewal of these covenants and they are presumed to have expired. The result is that the City's Zoning Code controls. fbl Phvsicallv possible: That there is an existing dwelling on the lot shows the site is adaptable to such a use. The topography, terrain, soils, and other characteristics are such that special engineering are likely to be needed for any new home design. With respect to other Allowed Uses, the lot is not large enough to support public schools, colleges or universities. It might be large enough for a small religious assembly and for park and recreation uses. It is not well located for a religious assembly as such uses are generally found on corner locations on more heavily traveled streets. The nature of the soils precludes crop production. The existing dwelling and carport are about fifty years old. They appear to be in "original" condition -that is, not having had any significant modernization, renovation, nor rehabilitation. i 25 of 42 Pages ~ 819 6`" Street Boulder, Colorado 80302 As of November 25, 2006 They are in need of substantial repair, demonstrating substantial physical deterioration. The dwelling is totally energy inefficient and does not meet today's building codes, demonstrating substantial functional obsolescence. The site is 130' x 160'. The Zoning setback requirements create a building envelope of about 105' x 110' without consideration of Solar Access restrictions. (c) Financially feasible: In the hands of private (non-public) ownership, a religious assembly is not feasible primarily due to lack of a "commercial" location. Financing for residential use has been available at rates of about 6% to 6.5% for 30 year fixed mortgages. VA and FHA financing is unlikely because of the high prices in Boulder. Cash sales are not uncommon. The most financially feasible use is for a new detached single family dwelling in accordance with the Zoning Code. (d) Maximally productive: While the existing dwelling, having some 2,156 sq. ft. might be repaired and updated, it will not make maximum use of the site. For example, the dwelling next door at 846 6a' St., on a 130' x 160' site or 20,800 sq.ft. (like subject), built in 1986, has a total area of 8,672 sq.ft. plus a 549 sq.ft. garage. The property sold June 22, 2006 for $2,430,000. The dwelling at 755 6`" St., on a 130' x 160' site, was built in 1950 of similar contemporary design as subject and having 1,170 sq.ft. plus basement. It was substantially updated in 2005 and 2006 and now has a total 4,723 sq. ft. plus a 770 sq.ft. garage. The property sold September 8, 2000 for $980,000 before the remodeling. The dwelling at 756 6'" St. is on a 75' x 150' site. The 2,355 sq.ft. dwelling, built in 1949 is being (March 2007) torn down in preparation for a new dwelling. The property sold March 1, 2007 for $1,031,727 with the existing dwelling. There are numerous other examples which will be cited in the Sales Comparison Analysis. The maximally productive non-public use is for a newer and larger detached single family dwelling in accordance with the Zoning Code. (e) Conclusion: fn conclusion, as of November 25, 2006, the Effective Date of Appraisal, the highest and best use of the property is for the removal of the existing dwelling and carport, perhaps preserving the lower level foundation, and a new detached single family dwelling and accessory uses such j as garage constructed. 26 of 42 Pages _ 1 "fltepcilnal patinnx of this Ibrm, ex Wtt diBbrotnlatrA eddili0nt, have bait aPD~ by the Cokuado Rent Estate Commiasi0n 2 ((`,&41.10-06 M IA7) _ _ 3 4 TH19 RORM HA3 IMPORTANT LBGAL CON96QUBNCB3 AND THE PARi169 SHOULD CONSULT 4ECAL ANb !'AX S OR OTHER COUNSEL BBRORE SIGNING. d ! CON'T'RACT TO BUY AND SELL REAL ESTATE i 8 (ALL TXPE3 OF PROPERTIES) 9 Dace: Ocatber 8.2007 I Purchase Prics:S1,316.000 i 12 13 1. ' AGREBMENT. Buyer eglew b buy, and Seller agrero to Bell, the Propotry de£med balOVf on the lama and 14 condkbna set forth M thin oanDact (Cmttrea). i i 15 16 2. DERINRD T6RM3. I~. 17 a. Buyer, Bt~oycr, Andrew Kessev. wlil take titb t0 the teal prapetty described bOlow ~ i I A 4eaeate•Ta-Glemtas ' i 9 fi. Property. 7be Thnpaty is the fallowing legally described teal rotate iD the County of ~gyyiBT, ColmBdo: ! 20 !.d 6ig11f (8j, SPA(:KMANS SUBD/YISfON, an addAlon to tM City oj8okfda, aacpdtng ro the tecmded i 21 pfm thereof, .ubjeet to dvUdit~ mod iM resbielblu and wromenfs ojrBCntd, jfatry, i i 22 2'i known oaNO. ~IJ.2S 't' ! Bariaer. Co-~n'adc 80x02. ~ 24 StreetAddrem City State ?.Ip ~ 23 together with the hlbrma, easements, Tights, beltafib, lmptovemeMa end aBadrod ftochmm apptlrteaam tberet0, and all 26 interest of Seiler in vuated sBeele and alleys adJecmot tllQatO. except ab batabl excluded. j 2 7 c Dates and TleadNBes. NOTTT: This table nn be dpNed Trine Beable. j Item NO. Raterantt BYwtt Dab orDaadNBC _ 1 4a Altamativc6ammtMon Dcadl N/A 2 Sa LeaB Applkatbn Deadline N/A 3 5b Loan Conditions D Nne N/d 4 So B 'a Credit Id amedon Deadline N/~I _ Disapproval of Buyer's Credit lnfotmedon 6 - g¢~d Bxiatin Loan 1)owmems Daadllne N/A t i 7 Sd Existin Lomt DocumO pb' Ion Deadline N/A 8 Sd Loani?ruferA IDesdlms N/A • 10•_._^__ 7a 2 Title Doedlble line _ ~t~T I a . t , off- ~7~ ~7S 1 I 8s T'kle Ob• D Ihta Ords'd>~'?t.'3SBi` 1 ~p • ZS • /f i 7~ta• •a~ //II I2 ~ 7c 9u Deed Tne ~rteiev~7r?'N r~,f 13~~ 8 Snrv O M sine _ _ 7 r ~ • 26 . fP)) ~ 14 76 Document ItostDeedlins /72•'70p7_ t.v •2 •o~' ~lOf IS 7d5 CICDocumenb0 Deadiine~- N/,f 16 86 Oli Reootd Mattes Deadline _ Oerobari3-3B9i t .Q • tS • o a- Q i I7 66 OfFRtOOrd Ma¢ers Ob" Doedllne 4Weder~i'-?B07 eo ; 2 • o•~ %'/7 ~ ~ 18 Sf fFimtRefaeelDeedline N/.1 19 l0a Selkx's Pro TAscWruo eadiina Ct'mbar4Y-4B9P' t o ' 25 • ~!N ~®f 20 146 Tnepeaidn (71t1eDdnn IMadline HeteberlT'Y00! t'O ' • ~1• Q~ ~nJ 21 Toe ResobltlonDedNne 6efeder?3'399P to~•2.5• ~Qf 22 tOd Tnamtce0b ioaDedllne ~ t a • 2`S •a~ p, 23 12 CIoaM Data November? 200E 24 17 _ Poasmbn Dab November 7 2007 / 25 t7 t Sr~ oc. 4 200 1x/~ 26 ' 29 A ttnDeadlJaellaN ! S 27 29 tgotsDaed110s7lme _ S:OOP.M.AfDT / k _J.//J fi Nn CB91-1a-aa. CAN! RACT TD BUY AND BYt•l RRAI. BSTA'IB (A4L tvPBa OP PRUPBNtIL9) Pena i of I7 ~ ! Inkld i .f I za 29 d. AttAChments.Thefallowingaroapartofthi~Comract: ' 30 NONf; I 31 Note: T'he folknving diaclowre forms are attached but eta not a put of this Contract: 32 Lend Based ~r ndaefnnaa (Safes) 33 a Applka63ity of Terms. A check or similm mark in a box means that sash provision is applkable The 34 abbroviatlon "N7A" otr the ward "Aeleted" moans ndt appliceblo whrn insured on rnY line in Dmaa and Deadgarn 2c), 33 it means drat the carreapondmg provision of the Contract to which rofttenw is mde is deloted. 'ffie abbreviation "MEC" ! 3G (mutual txeW don of this contract) moans dre lalext dam upon whkh troth patties have signed tltis Contract. 38 3. INCLUS1ON3 ANA RXCLUSIUNS. 39 a. lndaslona. The Purchase Prix Include6 the following Rana (Inclunione): 40 (1) Plrttarea. If attached m the Property on the dau of this Conaext, Iightlng, heating, plumbing, 41 vrntilating, and air condhionirrg fixture, TV antetmea, Inside telephone wiring end connoting blocks/jacks, pianos, 42 mhrora floor covainge, intercom systmrrn, built-In ki0chen applianow, sprlnkla ryatems and controls, bulb-in vacuum 43 sysroms(brcluding eoeessoria),garage door apcnern inektding ppy remoto eonaok;and ~~4d1S:Lj~Gs 44 4S Personal Property. Tho foliowbtg ue included If on the i'roPQO' whetltrer ufached or not on tfie dato 4G of this Contract: storm wbdowa, storm doors, window end porch shades, awnatgs, b8nds, aereena, window cavorMgs, 47 tvrlein rods, drapery rods, flreplaca itrroaria, fireplace acreana, firoplace grdea, heafmg atWCS, ssotage sheds, mrd alI keys. 48 If ehxked, tho following ue included: Wekr Seftenera ? Smokc/Pire Aetectots ? Secatity Systems 49 Satellite Systems (indodirrg setalilbs dishes) 30 (3) fxbsr inelaaione. 1?aJi,-(ga~ntnr nvea move. dtrhwaahar. wam hrvue. ftvrmce i 51 S2 The Personal Property to be conveyed at Cbsing shall be conveyed, hY Seilu, free and clear of all texts 53 (except pmonal properly taxes for the y~ of Cbsing), liana and wamManc¢s, except p(Q. Conveyaneo shall be by bill 54 ofsnlemotherappliaeblelegalinsaumen[ 55 S6 58 59 GO 61 62 tt4 65 GG fi7 Pe.aniEfl is G8 G9 7o b. Eaelsskaa. 71tro following itama are excluded: 71 72 73 4. PURCHASE PRICK AND TERM3. The Wrchase Price sot lath bebw shall be psyd+lo in U S Dollua by Buya 7a as mlinwa: 75 Item Na ge&rosee Iletb Amoant Amaeat I 4 _ PurohesoPrico _ 18!6000.00 2 4a EsrrestMonay~ S N/A 3 ~ 1 Now Plrst Loan N/A 4 2 New 9eoond Wan N/A 5 4e Asaum t3aWae V,_ N/A 6 4f Shcer or Privets Pinancin _ N/A 7 8 9 _ 46 Ceah ut CIoeMR 7,3id,000.OD 10 ~ TOTAL S _ I ! OOA00 $ .00 Ne CRRI-16-0rt. CO1tTRACT 7r1aW AND 86LLRWLEHfATE (Al1. tvP~9OP ?AOPLRi1B8) Paae2n(i) ~l~ l 6 V K }Yq ,mac m e. ~ "11" ~ ~ ~sy'"i t. ~ a 1 c . ~'~'~`h'~'~ ~ ~ ~i~~" ~ it ~ 1 r - 1 I s ~ '~%Fi ~ :1 ~ ~ f ! tHps. ~i 4 ~~i ~ 819 6th Street, held in trust for "Uberoi Foundation for Religious Studies" , g. Y - 1~,~ ~ 1~ Ms i ri-~:~: i p. 9~ i:.'' I t ~ c f~ t"`~ , ~ ~ - !1. f;.r "Cor.~~iously executed to 'enhance the sculptural _ - - angularity" (from staff - report at p. 3) . i y ~ 6P ny vet. ~ t _ _ } r s ~i ~ C ~~'~r ~ ~ r ? - i i, I` 1 i. A K } ' ~ r . ~ tr i , ( A it r', i r, ~ ~ - k~ - ~ ~ ~ y Ext yior vievV,of st "`x~ ~ ; ~ `~~,wall and Arabic " , \ let~~ririg in windo ~ `l p { \ ' ~s, a \ i 4'anY~A `9, i+ ~ \ k 1 ti f,~ ~ F~ o ~ Water damage where wing ~ roof sections come together ~,b ~r"' ti~ ~ I / . J x k k ' _ ~ `'r _ : t : . ~ 7n ~.~r ..h" - 'S: r C -'~L S r 15 A' ryyF ii ~ ~ ~+i~ ~ ~ yr~ ~ r ~ n z ~ * ~ x j ~ ~c1,c~~.. Vii: ~.~a w , ,.~r . x ~ ~{~,I~ s ~ ms lJ _ ~ Water and mold ,m- damage in ' bathroom area r,.. ~ ..t.. ~ 4 r f ~ ~ ~ ~ i it L ~ ~ r , ~ i "z. "1?' t ~y I' _~1 t rN~~ I J 1 f , y~'} f ' ~ , i ~ r ~ .a, 5 /J ~ Mfr ~ ~ , ~ s ~ , Vii, / ~r ~ iizx ` d ~"iire' ' G1 a a, IMr E ~ - - 3 3 s { - o Z ; ~ _ , ~f~l., t1 ~f '3T~ ' Q E d 3 t ~ ~ I a 1 j~~~-~,~ s Wp X• ~ Y ~ k e ~3RS i F~,~~:, ~ ` Water damage to subflooring of r> ~C` ~ upper level ~a^ ~ i ~p'' i T _ ~ $ ~ C~ ~ ~ Mold on trowelled ~ texture wall coat with asbestos ~ w~ - ~ q » ~ i. y 1~. ~ i ' ~ ~1 1 ~ 1 r, F f 1 g ~ fr1 • gip:, ~~F., 4}~p'~'_ .i S~. G : a. ~ ~ ~ t i ~ ~r. ~ r S -r^-""'" *a~--~t Iii 4 ~1 4• .S~.i :M u.:.iti~ttaa~ . ~rr~.:.r+. t.