The URL can be used to link to this page

06 - MINUTES FROM VARIOUS BOARDS, COMMISSIONS, AND COMMITTEESMinutes Traffic Commission City of Paris The Traffic Commission met on Tuesday September 06, 2016 at 5:15 P.M. in the Municipal Courtroom with the following members present: 1. Susan Hamby 2, Wendell Moore (5:18pm) 3. John Eyler 4. Jason Warwick 5. Tyesha Mathis The city staff was represented by Asst. Chief Randy Tuttle Chairperson Susan Hamby called the meeting to order at 5:16pm. A quorum was established with four members present. Mr. Moore arrived at 5:18pm. Ms. Hamby moved to item #2 to approve minutes from August 02, 2016 meeting. Mr. Warwick made a motion to approve the minutes and Mr. Eyler second the motion which passed 4-0 Ms, Hamby moved to item #3 regarding the discussion and possible action concerning placement of No Parking Zone on east side of S. Church Street. This item had been tabled at August 02, 2016 meeting and a motion to remove the item from the table was required. Mr. Eyler made the motion to remove this item from the table and second was made by Ms. Mathis. Motion passed 4-0. Ms. Hamby them moved to item #3 and asked for comments from residents in attendance. Matt Frierson 523 S. Church, Hank Betke 721 S. Church, and William Elliot 643 S. Church spoke in opposition to the No Parking Zone. Mr. Frierson also presented a petition to members with thirteen signatures of residents opposing the No Parking Zone. No one in attendance spoke in favor of the No Parking Zone. A motion was made by Mr. Eyler to deny placing a No Parking Zone on the east side of S. Church. The motion was second by Mr. Warwick with motion passing 5-0. Ms. Hamby then moved to item #4 regarding old business. Mr. Tuttle informed members that a request was made at last month's meeting to explore the possibility of placing Children at PI ' ay sign near the Church at 185 20th NE. Mr. Tuttle advised members no signs would be placed due to the Church not having a school or daycare in the Church. Ms. Hamby then moved to item #5 regarding future agenda items. There were no future agenda items. Mr. Tuttle did introduce Tyesha Mathis as the new Traffic Commission member filling the position vacated by resignation of Stephen Engelhardt. Ms. Mathis term expires June 30, 2017. Ms. Hamby moved to adjourn the meeting at 5:32pm. A motion was made by Mr. Warwick and second by Mr. Moore. Motion carried 5-0 Chairperson: Date: MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE BUILDING AND STANDARDS COMMISSION MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 19, 2016 3:30 P.M. 1. Johnny Norris called the Building and Standards Commission Meeting to order at 3:30 P.M. Roll was called. A. The following members were present: Matthew Allen Sally McEwin Johnny Norris Ben Vaughn Charles Richards Joseph Scott Ken Kohls B. Staff present: Robert Talley Larry Wright Stephanie Harris Clyde Crews Debra Burge Carla Easton John Godwin C. Others present: David Alarid Sherman Gann Ed Darnell, D &D Demolition Stephen Walker, Moore Law Firm Michael Arden, T- Mobile 2. Approval of minutes from previous meetings. (August 15, 2016) Sally McEwin recommended approving the minutes, seconded by Joseph Scott. Motion carried unanimously. 7 -0 3. Public Hearing to consider presentations by City of Paris Code Inspectors and owner(s) and /or lien holder(s) of the below properties who have been given notice of a violation of Article III of Chapter 7 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Paris, Paris, Texas, entitled "Substandard and Dangerous Buildings and Structures:" A. 1" National Bank Building (104 Bonham); City Block 8, Lot 7 Owner: CTRA Property Holdings Corp, 8004 Two Coves Dr, Austin TX 78730 Robert Talley stated this structure came before BSC 5/23/16 and said the owner, David Alarid, the cell companies, and the engineer working for the owner were at that meeting. The Commission ordered that the owner make repairs to the building, specifically by demolishing the west wall, within 90 days. The 90 days have passed, and the owner has made no repairs. Mr. Talley presented photos from 5/23/16 showing netting and cabling across west wall of building to temporarily hold the brick veneer which is separating from the concrete wall of the building. Photos from 9/19/16 show the same netting and cabling, and further show that no repairs have been made to this wall. Mr. Talley handed out a packet to the Commissioners with documents showing the timeline after the 05/23/16 meeting. The first document in the packet is an email dated 5/24/16 from David Isbell of Eikon Consulting Group, the engineering firm hired by the owner, to Mr. Alarid and representatives of the cell phone companies requesting a meeting on 5/26/16 to discuss how to resolve the problem of the west wall within the 90 -day period. Attached to the email were specific questions to the cell companies, scaffolding contractor, demolition contractor, roofing contractor, and Oncor. Mr. Alarid's response to the email states in part, "Good luck in the meeting with these liars [the cell phone companies] as I am willing to bet you dinner at Eddie V's or Ruth Chris steakhouse you will also conclude they only waste time, lie, and have no intention of cooperating. Which then means the City will end up paying for the wall removal and demo of the building - - -oh no, what will the cell companies cry about then ?" On 5/26/16, the City sent the owner a Notice of Order specifically addressing the problem of the west wall and cornice on the east wall and further stating that the property must be repaired within 90 days. The Notice further outlined the owner's rights related to the Order. The next item in the timeline is a report from Eikon and written by Mr. Isbell outlining the results of the meeting held at property on 5/26/16. Attendees are listed as: Jud Stringer, BAD Company (Demolition); Don Walters, BETCO Scaffolds; Jamie Pereyra, BETCO; James Reed, AT &T; Preston Spurlin, MSTI; Kendall Cook, Metro PCS /T- Mobile; Richard Moore, Blackwater Communications; Jeff Key, Oncor; Rudy Rodriquez, Castro Roofing; David K. Isbell, P.E., EIKON Consultant Group; Nathan McQuillan, EIKON Consultant Group. The summary section of the report states that all parties agreed to a temporary solution to run service to existing meter on south wall and install scaffolding; that the parties agreed to a method for getting permanent power to building to power cell equipment once building has been abated for asbestos; a plan was agreed upon by all parties to re -roof building by moving around/re- configuring the existing equipment; and that repair work for west wall could begin within a few days and should take 2 -3 months. Mr. Isbell notes that it was understood by all parties the owner still had to agree to this plan. The summary also states there would be no additional costs to the owner due to the equipment being left on the roof if this plan were followed. Ken Kohls asked if the owner was at meeting. Mr. Talley said that he was not. Charles Richards asked if Mr. Alarid was invited. Mr. Talley said that the owner was invited to the meeting, but did not attend. The next item presented was an email chain from David Isbell to Carla Easton on 6/2/16 that states that owner did not agree with the repair plan developed at meeting on 5/26/16. It also states EIKON has terminated their relationship with the property owner. Mr. Isbell also expresses concern with the condition of the wall, but that our BSC can handle it, and he does not see the need to contact the State Fire Marshal. Ms. Easton's response asks if they found a solution to facilitate the wall demolition to which the cell companies were agreeable. Mr. Isbell states that a plan was worked out with all parties to demolish and repair the wall within the 90 -day time period, but that "David did not agree to it and refuses to consider it." Mr. Kohls asked what Mr. Isbell meant when he said he did not see the need to contact the State Fire Marshal. Mr. Talley said he didn't know. Mr. Kohls asked if that was a semi - threat. Robert Talley said that as Mr. Isbell is not here, he could not speak to that. The next timeline document presented was a Scope of Work and estimate from Building Abatement Demolition Company, Jud Stringer, Director, who was in attendance at the 5/26/16 meeting. The Scope of Work is broken down in stages: Asbestos Abatement, Exterior Brick Replacement, and Exterior Restoration. The document states, "all electrical lines /conduit and gas lines must be de- energized and removed or re- routed." Mr. Isbell's follow -up notes to the 5/26/16 meeting also stated power can be re- routed, and all parties agreed except owner. Mr. Talley then presented the next document in the timeline, an email dated 7/23/16 from David Alarid to the State Fire Marshal, Chris Connealy, requesting his assistance in having the building "red- tagged" by the City of Paris. Attached to this email were the Scope of Work document from Building Abatement Demolition (BAD) Company referenced above, and a proposal from Western Specialty Contractors. Kelley Stalder with the State Fire Marshal's Office forwarded this email to Clyde Crews, stating he would be glad to discuss it with him, and that he (Mr. Stalder) had notified the inspector for this area, Scott McAnallen. Mr. Kohls asked what the term `red -tag' means. Mr. Talley said that he's not sure what Mr. Alarid meant, but Code Enforcement can orange tag buildings to be demolished. The City does use actual red tags. Fire Chief Larry Wright said a red tag is usually used by cities to tag a utility, i.e. electrical, plumbing, etc., that is not up to Code. Red tagging usually means the structure needs to be repaired before it can be "green tagged" to be used. Code Enforcement doesn't red tag buildings or electrical. The Fire Department is interested in sprinkler systems, and can red tag those, but the City doesn't red tag a building. Chief Wright stated that in his mind, red tag indicates something in a structure is not functioning properly. It's usually used when an inspector goes out and something doesn't meet code, but it is utility specific. Mr. Kohls asked if that means that this building isn't safe to be entered. Chief Wright said that the building itself at 104 Bonham is safe. He said that the term "red tag" has no meaning in this case. Mr. Talley next presented a letter from Ernest McCloud, Assistant State Fire Marshal, to Mr. Alarid in which ASFM McCloud informs Mr. Aland that an examination of his property had been made "for the consideration of the existence of `Dangerous Conditions. "' He states the State Fire Marshal's Office (SFMO) learned that City of Paris officials were familiar with the property condition and have directed Mr. Alarid to make certain repairs. He states the inspector "did not observe any condition warranting further examination or action by the SFMO at this time." ASFM McCloud further states that the SFMO believes that "local officials have a proper understanding of the nature of the repairs that need to be undertaken," and that they "recommend that you continue to work with them [City officials] to make those repairs." Finally, Mr. Talley presented a Fire Safety Inspection Report from Scott McAnallen in the SFMO office dated 8/26/16 to Mr. Alarid outlining numerous Fire Code and Life Safety hazards identified at the facility. Included in the violations noted is a description of the masonry separation on the west side of the building. The document states "enforcement of noted violations was transferred to the City of Paris Fire Marshall." The report also instructs the owner that, "It is your responsibility to correct the hazards and bring your facility up to code." Mr. Talley then stated that Mr. Alarid attended 5/23/16 BSC meeting and witnessed the 90 -day orders to repair issued. He also received notice by certified mail. He gave an interview to the Paris News stating the violations, therein expressing his knowledge of these orders. After presenting the foregoing, Mr. Talley recommended that the commission make a finding that the owner was notified of the ordinances, and that the commission make a further finding that after being put on notice of the order, which was mailed to him on 5/26/16, and the requirements of the ordinance, the owner failed to take action necessary to comply with the order and the ordinance. Mr. Talley further recommended that the commission assess civil penalties in the amount of $100 per day beginning 9/30/16 for being in violation of the 5/26/16 order. Ben Vaughn asked if the timeline allows for 180 days after Historical Commission issued its report. Mr. Talley said this issue did not go to the Historical Commission because of the danger of the west wall. Mr. Vaughn asked if the 180 day requirement included repair orders. Robert Talley said that they didn't. Mr. Richards asked about page 3 of the BAD document which references $2.3 Million to do work. Mr. Richards asked whose responsibility it would be. Mr. Talley said it would be Mr. Alarid's. Mr. Kohls asked if the commission is only concerned with the west wall. Mr. Talley said that this is correct. Mr. Talley reiterated that Mr. Stringer stated in his bid document (the BAD Company document), in the final item under the Scope of Work, Exterior Brick Replacement, thats the power must be moved OR re- routed. Mr. Richards said that now that Mr. Talley had made his recommendation, the commission should have a discussion. Johnny Norris said that the commission would have a further discussion, but first asked for a motion on Mr. Talley's recommendation. Ben Vaughan recommended approving the motion, seconded by Ken Kohls. Further discussion: Mr. Kohls said he'd like to hear from city attorney regarding the course of action. City Attorney Stephanie Harris reminded the commission that this was a public hearing, so anyone who wants to speak should be afforded the opportunity to do so. Ms. Harris stated that the BSC's authority is limited. She told the commission that she is researching potential remedies under state law, but since any action of that nature would have be taken to City Council, she was not at liberty to discuss her possible recommendations to Council. Mr. Norris said the only thing the commission is concerned with is this 90 -day to repair order. Mr. Alarid then addressed the Commission and gave members a packet which included a copy of the City of Paris Code of Ordinances Article III, Sec 7 -49 (e), "Authority of [Building and Standards] Commission," stating the BSC is authorized to declare a building or structure dangerous and to order the securing of buildings. He noted that Sec. 7- 49(f), "Standards," states that in determining whether to order a building repaired, vacated, demolished or secured the standards to be applied include "If the dangerous building or structure is in such condition as to make it dangerous to the health, morals, safety, or general welfare of its occupants or of the public, it shall be ordered to be vacated." Mr. Alarid also cited Sec 7 -50, "Preservation of substandard buildings as historic property." Mr. Alarid then stated that "red tag" means a building is not safe and cannot be used until repairs are done. Mr. Alarid made reference to 2 buildings in Paris currently "red tagged," 201 Bonham and the building across the street from 201 Bonham. Mr. Alarid then showed a photo of the "red tag" from his cell phone which appeared to be orange, as Mr. Talley stated. Mr. Alarid then referenced the roof collapse of 201 Bonham and that Code Enforcement and the Fire Dept. "red tagged" the building. Mr. Alarid also referred to Sec 7 -55 which addresses duties of code inspectors and their authority to limit access to a building. Mr. Alarid stated that Robert Smith (former City of Paris Building Official) and Mr. Talley inspected the building and said they were going to "red tag" the building. Mr. Alarid then stated the City Manager told Code not to "tag" this building, Mr. Alarid then stated that Jud Stringer, from BAD demolition, was not present for the 5/26/16 meeting. Mr. Alarid then stated that in a building with asbestos, the asbestos has to be abated before work can be done on the building. Just the west wall cannot be worked on because asbestos will be distributed if that wall is disturbed. He said that the building has to be sealed and abated, and that you cannot work on the roof or wall unless asbestos is abated. Mr. Alarid said that the emails from the State Fire Marshal read here today were only a part of the emails exchanged. The State Fire Marshal said in any city with a local fire dept, they do not get involved. They came out as a courtesy. He said that Page 2 of his handout states the cell phone companies refuse to cooperate and no contractor will work on the building with cell towers placed on the roof. Mr. Aland stated that Mr. Isbell was fired after the last BSC meeting, so he was not authorized to communicate on Mr. Alarid's behalf after that meeting. Mr. Alarid then said that The Western Specialty Contractors estimate states relocation of electrical microwave and telecommunication must be removed before work can begin and that the power must be shut off. Mr. Alarid then said that BAD Demolition, in its bid under "Scope of Work," states all power and water must be de- energized for safe access. Mr. Alarid said he was told the cell towers on roof are secondary power, not primary. He said that when he purchased the building, power was turned off to the towers and it was 2 weeks before he heard from the cell phone companies. During that time, 911 and cell service was not interrupted. Mr. Alarid then stated that City Code requires the building be "red tagged," and that the BSC has that authority. Mr. Norris addressed Mr. Alarid and said that when Mr. Alarid was before the commission the first time and the commission issued the 90 -day repair order, the commission asked him if he could do that, and he said yes. Mr. Norris said, now Mr. Alarid was back more than 90 days later had still not done any repairs on the building. David Alarid said that if the building was "red tagged" today, it could be done, but if the building was not "red tagged," no contractor will do the work. Mr. Alarid said that Code enforcement failed to do its job. He said that he has to repair the building, but he cannot do the repair unless the building is "red tagged." Mr. Richards said that in May, Mr. Alarid said he could not begin work on the west wall so long as the cell towers were on the roof, and Mr. Isbell stated in the 5/26/16 meeting that power could be re- routed. Mr. Richards asked if re- routing the power would work. Mr. Alarid said Mr. Isbell put that info together after he was fired and that there's also conflicting information from Mr. Isbell in 3 separate reports. Mr. Alarid said that Code Enforcement did not "red tag" the building, so he cannot do the repairs. Mr. Kohls addressed Mr. Alarid and said that three months ago, the commission told Mr. Alarid that he was to fix the building. Mr. Kohls further inquired as to why the building was not repaired. Mr. Alarid replied that he did not repair the building because it wasn't "red tagged." He stated that contractors cannot work on the building if there's power to the building. Mr. Norris asked if a building permit was issued. David Alarid said yes, that a permit was issued to fix the wall and repair the roof and replace the 1St floor facade. Mr. Norris asked if Mr. Alarid's contractor went before the city to obtain the permit. Mr. Alarid said that he obtained the permit, and that the Historical Commission approved it and the City issued the permit. Mr. Norris asked Mr. Talley if the City had worked on structures before that had an orange tag. Mr. Talley said yes. Mr. Norris asked why Mr. Alarid's contractor would not work on the building unless power is turned off, because the report says it can re- routed. Mr. Alarid said the re- routing of the power at that time, in March, the concern was if the wall fails, it's going to take the power with it. In May, the power was re- routed to the south of the building. But the power is still on. Mr. Alarid said that the estimates say the power must be de- energized, meaning no power. Mr. Vaughn said "de- energized and re- routed or removed" means you can re- energize it, and although Mr. Aland was asking the commision to issue an order to have the power turned off, none of the reports say that is what is required. Mr. Alarid said looking at the estimates, i.e. by Western, relocation of power must be removed prior to start, and BAD Company says it has to be de- energized. Mr. Alarid says the estimate also says the equipment must be moved. Mr. Norris said the only issue before the BSC is the wall. Mr. Alarid said that in order to remove the wall, the building has to be abated. And in order to repair the wall, the roof must be repaired. He said that contractors will not work on it with the power on. He said that if the wall is removed and the roof is not repaired, terra cotta will continue falling. Mr. Norris said the issue is still the wall and the people who own businesses next to it. Mr. Alarid again said that the wall cannot be repaired until the power is turned off. Sally McEwin asked Robert Talley why he was required to orange tag it. Mr. Talley said that he doesn't feel he was required to do so, and that he disagrees with Mr. Alarid. Mr. Talley said that when he and Robert Smith were on the property, he (Mr. Talley) never said the building was going to be orange tagged, but that he and Mr. Smith told him (Mr. Alarid) it would be brought before BSC. Mr. Richards asked what the ramifications of tagging the building are, and why Mr. Talley would object to doing so. Mr. Talley said the Code says when a building is tagged, entry into the building is then prohibited, and he and Mr. Smith didn't tag the building so that Mr. Alarid's contractors could access the building to do repairs. Mr. Talley said that one of the buildings Mr. Alarid referenced earlier (201 Bonham, also owned by Mr. Alarid) as an example of Code Enforcement tagging a building was tagged because the roof had collapsed and water was pouring into the building. The electrical service was removed because the water coming into the building could have made contact with live electricity. Mr. Gann, the tenant, was not allowed back in the building because officials on the scene didn't know if that building would continue to pancake. Mr. Richards asked again what would be the objection to "red tagging" the building. Mr. Talley said putting a sticker on the building is different than the city telling Oncor to pull power. Mr. Talley reiterated that a solution was reached to move the make the repairs by relocating the power which Mr. Alarid refused. Mr. Talley noted that some of the events Mr. Alarid discussed earlier had occurred prior to the 5/23/16 BSC meeting. Mr. Alarid said he did not refuse. Mr. Talley said the BAD Demolition document said power could be re- routed. Mr. Vaughn asked if the City has followed its code. Ms. Harris said that it has. She further explained that tagging a building means no one can then enter it, and that this is a separate issue from having power companies turn off power. Power just has to be pulled before demolition. She informed the commission that the city has no authority to pull power under these circumstances. She stated that the cell companies have a contractual right to be on the roof of the building. That right was in place when Mr. Alarid bought the building. She noted that Mr. Alarid does not agree with contractors he's hired who came up with a plan to repair the building. Mr. Kohis asked Mr. Alarid how many days he was given to repair the building, a time period with which Mr. Alarid agreed. Mr. Alarid said the only way to repair the building is to "red tag" the building and turn the power off. Ms. McEwin disagreed with Mr. Alarid's characterization of the situation and noted that people have bent over backwards to make this work. She further noted that finding a contractor who will do the repair is Mr. Alarid's responsibility. Mr. Alarid again stated that repairs cannot be done unless the power is turned off. Sherman Gann then addressed the commission. He said he was formerly in the Rogers Wade building (201 Bonham), but now he lives on Bonham. He said that the Rogers Wade building was deemed unsafe and that it still is. Mr. Gann said that Mr. Alarid has his father living in the 1St Nat'l Bank Building, and that if someone is living in the building, the City cannot condemn it. Mr. Norris said the City was not asking for the building to be condemned. Mr. Gann said that the building cannot be condemned because Mr. Alarid's father is living in the building. Manuel Ed Darnell of D &D Demolition Service addressed the commission and said that he has 30 years of experience. Mr. Darnell said that the building is very dangerous, that someone is going to get killed, and that it will be the commission's fault. He said that if an earthquake hits, 300 tons of brick will come down. Mr. Darnell said that you can't put a scaffold against the back wall and take it down, but that you have to work off the side of the building to take it down. He said that every time it rains, the water coming in weakens the wall, and that the building is already broken apart where the towers are. He said that if the terra cotta comes down, it's going to take 2 floors with it. He said this building cannot be worked on with the power on. Mr. Darnell said that even with the scaffolding on the side, electricity can jump and everyone on the scaffolding will be killed. Mr. Norris asked if scaffolding were on the south wall and it fell, would Oncor's line running down the street have be turned off as well. Mr. Darnell said yes. He said again that if the terra cotta comes down, it's going to take everything with it. Mr. Norris asked if BSC heard from Oncor at the May 13, 2016 meeting. Ms. Harris and Mr. Talley said no. Mr. Darnell made reference to Gene's Flea Market being condemned and said that he would not work on a building like this with the power turned on, especially working on scaffolding because an earthquake could be coming along and killing us on the scaffolding, and of the risk of electricity jumping. Mr. Kohls asked Mr. Darnell if when he mentioned earthquakes he was referring to a recent earthquake in Oklahoma. Mr. Darnell said yes. He said again that there are 300 tons hanging off the back of the building, and that if the commission had turned the electricity off in May, the building would have been repaired. He said that Mr. Alarid has asked for 180 days for the electricity to be turned off, but no one had done it. Mr. Kohls asked Mr. Darnell if he had a crystal ball. Mr. Kohls noted that no one knows if an earthquake will happen. He asked Mr. Darnell what would happen if a tornado hit the building. Mr. Darnell said a tornado would destroy the building. Mr. Darnell said that the only way he can remove the wall is if the power is removed. Mr. Talley directed the commission to the meeting notes for the 5/26/16 meeting at the building site and noted that BETCO Scaffolding was in attendance. The meeting report states repair work could begin in a few days and should take 2 -3 months. Mr. Talley noted that Jud Stringer (BAD Company) was also in attendance. Mr. Talley stated that as far as power jumping, he didn't know if that can happen, but the meeting notes reflect that 6 people representing Mr. Alarid were present at the meeting and were in agreement this work could be done. Mr. Alarid said he's never met the people in those notes, except one, which was Jud Stringer. He stated that Jud Stringer said he was not at the meeting. Stephen Walker of the Moore Law Firm, Representing Lease Advisors (landlord for easement on the building) addressed the commission and said that after the last meeting, Mr. Alarid's contractor called a meeting and his client cooperated. Mr. Walker said that Mr. Alarid's representative came up with a plan and everyone agreed. He noted that an external power source powers the (cell) towers, that that external power source has been moved once, and that his client will move it again if needed. Mr. Walker stated that Mr. Alarid has mentioned the all contractors that can't work on the wall with the power still attached, yet none of those people are here to speak on Mr. Alarid's behalf. Mr. Walker said after Mr. Alarid supposedly fired Mr. Isbell, Mr. Alarid was still represented by council who has the contact info of all of the cell phone companies and lessors, and they had not heard from anyone new until today. Mr. Walker said all the cell phone companies have cooperated and are willing to go to whatever expense necessary. Michael Arden from T- Mobile addressed the commission and said he was at the last BSC meeting and the meeting on May 26t' at the building site. Mr. Arden said that Mr. Stringer was present for the meeting and all tenants there agreed to the plan, and most notably Oncor was there. Mr. Arden noted Oncor was also in agreement with plan that would allow power to stay on for the entire street and allow this project to move on. Mr. Scott asked Mr. Talley why the owner could not get the electricity disconnected to the building. Mr. Talley said because the cell companies have an easement and the electricity to the towers is their names. Mr. Scott further enquired as to whose name the power to the tower was. Mr. Talley said Metro PCS, T- Mobile, and AT &T. Ms. McEwin asked whether all of the cell companies agreed to move the power, and Mr. Talley said yes, that there had been testimony as to that earlier. Mr. Talley also reminded the commission that Mr. Stringer was at the meeting and agreed to the plan, and that Oncor was also there and agreed power could be moved so the wall can be taken down, which contradicts Mr. Darnell stating work cannot be done without the power being turned off. Johnny Norris then asked Mr. Talley to make his recommendation again. Mr. Talley recommended that the commission make a finding that the owner was notified of the ordinances, and that the commission make a further finding that after being put on notice of the order, which was mailed to him on 5/26/16, and the requirements of the ordinance, the owner failed to take action necessary to comply with the order and the ordinance. Mr. Talley further recommended that the commission assess civil penalties in the amount of $100 per day beginning 9/30/16 for being in violation of the 5/26/16 order. Mr. Richards asked how many times has someone actually paid civil penalties assessed by the commission. Mr. Talley said he's not sure how many times someone has paid, but he did know the City had collected civil penalties when a property has been sold. Motion was made by Ben Vaughn, seconded by Sally McEwin to accept Mr. Talley's recommendation. Motion carried unanimously. 7 -0 Mr. Norris asked what happens now because the wall is still a danger. Mr. Talley said he didn't know what Mr. Alarid was going to do from here. Mr. Norris said he'd like to see a report on this at the next BSC meeting. Mr. Norris then said he would like to table agenda items B and C until the next meeting and go straight to code enforcement update. Motion was made by Johnny Norris, seconded by Ben Vaughn to table agenda items B and C until the next meeting. Motion carried unanimously. 7 -0 B. 538 NW 11th; City Block 83, Lot 13 Owner: Perry Patterson and Heather Bybee; 828 E Price #6, Paris TX 75460 This item was tabled until the October meeting. C. 640 W Center; City Block 251, Lot 32 & 32 -A Owner: VFM Fertilizer Inc; 550 SE Loop 286, Paris TX 75460 This item was tabled until the October meeting. 4. Code Enforcement update. In August 2016, 8 structures were presented, and in August, 8 structures were demolished. 5. Future agenda items. Report on 104 Bonham at next meeting. 6. Adjournment. Motion was made by Charles Richards, seconded by Sally McEwin to adjourn the meeting at 5:08 pm. Motion carried unanimously. 7 -0 APPROVED THIS 17th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2016. ;Irman Ste hanie Harris From: David J. Alarid <dalarid @austin.rr.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2016 12:31 PM To: Dave Isbell; michael.arden @t - mobile.com; Melanie Okon; Jud Stringer; Jeffrey. Key @oncor.com; donald.brooks @scaffold.com; Rudy Rodriguez Cc: Nathan McQuillan; Carla Easton Subject: Re: Questions and Issues It is interesting how the cell company lies continue. When we purchased the building we had no idea how had the towers and in order to find out we shut off one breaker to which it took 3 days to get a response and then additional time for anybody to meet me in Paris. If 911 was down, why wasn't it an issue then and it is now? The workers and techs stated point blank the bank location does nothing and if it were shut down, it would affect nothing, simply a redundant location. When I told cell companies their refusal to cooperate would cause the wall the fall and for people to die, not to mention that they caused the wall failure by refusal to allow roof repairs -- their response was "we have lots of attorneys ". Good luck in the meeting with these liars as I am willing to bet you dinner at Eddie V's or Ruth Chris steakhouse you will also conclude they only waste time, lie, and have no intention of cooperating. Which then means the City will end up paying for the wall removal and demo of the building - -- oh no, what will the cell companies cry about then? - - - -- Original Message - - - -- From: Dave Isbell To: michael.ardenat- mobile.com ; Melanie Okon ; Jud Stringer ; Jeffrey.KeyCa�oncor.com ; donald.brooks(a scaffold com Rudy Rodriquez Cc: Nathan McQuillan ; Carla Easton ; David J. Alarid Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2016 12:09 PM Subject: Questions and Issues See the attached list of questions I have prepared. I have put them all together so everyone can see what the other person was asked. Also attached are the plans from T- Mobile that show the equipment and conduit. Feel free to answer any questions before hand via email or we will just discuss Thursday. David K. Isbell, PE EIKON Consulting Group P (940) 458.7503 C (940) 367.3324 Disbell a.eikonco.com www.eikonca.com EIk_ RRVirus -free. www.avast.com EIKO V DESIGNING CONFIDENCE MEETING TO DISCUSS REPAIR PROCEDURES of the Multi Story Building at 104 Bonham Street Paris, Texas May 25, 2016 Questions and Issues for all parties (initial questions may not be final): Cell Companies: 1. Has an actual signal strength test been done to determine the true ramifications of not having these towers active? This could be as simple as a "Can you hear me now" test by turning power off to the towers for a very short time and canvasing the downtown area for service. I would imagine that the cell company has other more sophisticated methods, but we need something done to verify what would happen in the event of power going off to the towers, not just scare tactics and conjecture. 2. Please identify each piece of equipment on the roof and it's purpose. Can we consolidate or reduce in size some equipment or even eliminate some of it? Attached is a plan of the roof done by T- Mobile that can be used to identify each piece. 3. Can the existing equipment be installed on a single pole that is cantilevered from the roof structure to minimize the amount of space on the roof required by the cell equipment? 4. Where can the antennas mounted on the penthouse roof be moved to. We must repair those walls and cannot do so with the antennas located where they are at this time. 5. Can the equipment be moved off the roof for a period of time to allow repair of the building and re-roofing? If not, can it be moved around to facilitate these repairs and how long would that take? This also applies to all the conduit mounted on the walls and parapets. 6. Can the power to the towers be relocated to inside a chase in the building or up the north wall? 7. Can the fiber optics lines on the north be relocated and to where? 8. How many volts does the conduit carry coming up the south wall? 9. Can all 911 calls be re-routed to another cell to make sure service for that service is not interrupted? 940 458 7503 1405 W. CHAPMAN DRIVE SANGER, TEXAS 76266 -9076 EIKONCG.COM Scaffolding Contractor: 1. You have identified the south wall as the location of the access to the low roof on the west, is there any other location this can be placed? This also applies to the location to place equipment and scaffolding on the roof. 2. If the service lines from the pole were removed, can your scaffolding be located such that the existing conduit going up the wall is not a danger? This conduit is most likely housing copper lines that carry 240 volts, but we need to verify that. Demolition Contractor: 1. Where does your trash chute need to be located? Can you take the demolished brick down the existing elevator pits and out the doors of the building? 2. How far does any live conduit need to be from areas that you are working? Can you demolish the west wall if the conduit going up the wall on the corner of the south wall is live? 3. Do you have a feel for what materials on the west wall, inside or out, have asbestos and will have to be abated during demolition? (ie, what about the plaster on the walls of the penthouse ?) How long will an asbestos survey take on those areas which need to be demolished? 4. Do you have a feel for abatement needed to run a conduit up a chase inside the building? 5. Do you have the capabilities to inspect the existing cast stone parapets to determine if any are in imminent danger of falling? Can this be done by a lift? Hoofing Contractor: 1. How long if all the equipment were off the roof for you to re-roof the building? (about 5500 square feet — 75 ft to top of parapet). Assume 9" of rigid insulation. 2. How long would it take to reroof if you had to do it in two phases so the towers could be moved around? 3. Can you work on part of the roof with the equipment live on the other part? ®ncor: 1. Where does the existing service enter the building to service just the building and not the cell towers? Can that service be used for the cell towers? 2. Can service to the cell towers be relocated to somewhere other than where is it now? (coming from the pole in front of the Barber Shop) 3. Can service be underground to the cell tower conduit? 4. How many volts are in the service line and in the conduit going to the roof? All be prepared to also discuss timelines, schedules and critical paths. Page 1 2 5/26/2016 CTRA Property Holdings Corporation 8004 Two Coves DR Austin, TX 78730 NOTICE OF ORDER According to the real property records of Lamar County, you either have an ownership interest in or hold a lien on the real property described below. A City of Paris Code Inspector presented the property identified below at a hearing before the Building and Standards Commission of the City of Paris, Paris, Texas on May 23, 2016 at 3:30 PM at City of Paris Council Chambers, 107 E Kaufinan(Old Central Fire Station) Paris, Texas. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Buildings and Standards Commission issued the following ORDERS: ORDER NO. DS 16-59 AN ORDER OF THE CITY OF PARIS, PARIS, TEXAS BUILDING AND STANDARDS COMMISSION WITH REGARD TO THE ABATEMENT OF THE SUBSTANDARD AND DANGEROUS STRUCTURE /S LOCATED AT Is' Nation NW Corner Plaza (104 Bonham) PARIS, TEXAS WHEREAS, the Building and Standards Commission for the City of Paris conducted a public hearing on 5/23/16, wherein the structures located at 1" Nation NW Corner Plaza (104 Bonham), more particularly described as City Block 8, Lot 7 Paris, Texas "Property was agenda item number 2A; and WHEREAS, notice for the public hearing was timely mailed and published in the local newspaper in accordance with article III, Ch. 7 of the City of Paris Code of Ordinance; and WHEREAS, based upon the evidence presented, the Building and Standards Commission finds that the Property is in violation of Chapter 7, Article III of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Paris, Paris, Texas; and WHEREAS, the Building and Standards Commission finds that the structure is a nuisance, dilapidated, substandard, dangerous and/or unfit for human habitation, unoccupied by the owner, or lessee, or other invitee, constitutes a hazard to the health, safety and welfare of the public, is likely to endanger persons and property, and is unsecured from unauthorized entry to the extent that it could be entered or used by vagrants or other uninvited persons as a place of harborage or could be entered or used by children, to wit : Brick veneer on west wall is separating from the main west wall, cornice on east wall is damaged. THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED BY THE BUILDING AND STANDARDS COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PARIS THAT: ❑ The property be demolished and that all work be completed within days of the date of the public hearing. The property be repaired and that all work be completed within days of the date of the public hearing. ❑ The property be removed and that all work be completed within days of the date of the public hearing. ❑ The property be secured within days of the date of the public hearing. • If the work is not completed within the time stated above, the City of Paris will demolish the structure and assess expenses for the demolition against the property on which the structure was located. • If the work is not completed within the time stated above, a civil penalty of $ per day plus interest for each day the work is not completed will be assessed against the property owner. © The property owner or a lienholder of the property shall, pursuant to City Ordinance No. 2004 -009, furnish written proof to a City of Paris Code Inspector of the proper and legal disposal at a landfill of all materials from the demolition of the building or structure." You are advised that you may be entitled to have a Court determine the outcome of the decision and order of the City of Paris Building and Standards Commission concerning your property. You should contact your own attorney for legal advice and this notice to you is not to be taken as legal advice to you by the City of Paris or by any of its employees or officials. You are advised that pursuant to section 7 -51 and section 7 -53 of the City of Paris Code of Ordinances, you have a right to appeal a decision and order of the Building and Standards Commission by filing a petition to a District Court in Lamar County, Texas, within thirty (30) calendar days after the date a copy of the final decision and order of the Commission is personally delivered or mailed by first class mail, certified return receipt requested, to you. If no appeal is taken pursuant to section 7 -51 of the Paris Code of Ordinances from the decision and order of the Commission within the required period, the decision and order of the Commission is final and binding. ORDERED THIS 23rd DAY OF MAY 7hairperson ATTEST: Secretary VED AS TO FORM: Steph ie H. Harris, City Attorney CM:70150640000195039567 Rob A Talley, Code Enforid6ment Supervisor 903 - 784 -9219 K ON DESIGNING CONFIDENCE MEETING NOTES ON REPAIR PROCEDURES of the Multi Story Building at 104 Bonham Street Paris, Texas May 26, 2016 Persons in Attendance: Jud Stringer, BAD Company (Demolition) Don Walters, BETCO Scaffolds Jamie Pereyra, BETCO James Reed, AT &T Preston Spurlin, MSTI Kendall Cook, Metro PCS/T- Mobile Richard Moore, Blackwater Communications Jeff Key, Oncor Rudy Rodriquez, Castro Roofing David K. Isbell, P.E., EIKON Consultant Group Nathan McQuillan, EIKON Consultant Group Summary of Discussion: 1. It was determined how to run service to the existing meter on the south wall and also install scaffolding. All parties agreed to this temporary solution. 2. The method of getting permanent power to the building was discussed and agreed to pending the City approval. This could take approximately 6 months from when the process is started. When this occurs, the cell equipment will be powered by the permanent power through a chase and the temporary service removed from the south wall. This will happen after the building has been abated for asbestos. 3. A plan for reroofing with the existing equipment moved around and reconfigured was discussed and agreed to by all parties. 4. Repair work for the west wall could begin in a few days and should take 2-3 months. 5. It was understood that the owner still had to agree to this plan and direction. 6. There would be no additional costs to the owner due to the equipment being left on the roof if this plan is followed. 940.456.7503 1405 W. CHAPMAN DRIVE - SANGER, TEXAS 76266 -9076 EIKONCG.COM The following are detailed notes on the discussion made on the procedures for repairing and renovation of the building at 104 Bonham Street: Power issues: 1. The service wires from the utility pole on Bonham will be re-routed in a sealed conduit attached to the face of the building to move the weather head away from the location of scaffolding, subject to the City approval and inspection. 2. The scaffold will be installed on the sidewalk on the south side of the 2 story building with a stair tower. A roll off trash dumpster will be located in the street in the parallel parking space with a chute to the roof. A protected tunnel will be constructed beside the stair tower to allow pedestrian access along the sidewalk. 3. The guy wire parallel to the south building is not connected to any energized electrical conduit. It needs to avoid contact with anything including the scaffold because much strain could damage the pole but working in proximity of the guy would not pose a safety risk. 4. The meter on the west (old AT &T meter will be pulled since that line is dead and not used at this time. This must be coordinated with Oncor. 5. The meter on the east will remain to keep the conduit going up the wall live until permanent power can be located to the building and run up an interior chase to the roof for the cell equipment. 6. A ground mounted transformer from Oncor will be located on the parking lot at the southeast corner of the lot for permanent service to the building. The service from that transformer will be run underground in the street and will enter the basement through the pit and access that currently houses the existing transformer which will be removed. A check with the City of Paris verified that this is acceptable, based on preliminary information and subject to final plans and approval. 7. As soon as this permanent power is established to the building, the cell companies can run their conduit to the roof through a selected chase to power the roof top equipment. Then all the conduits and meters on the south wall can be removed. 8. The fiber optic wires on the north and west walls will be relocated as coordinated to the roofs or below any sight lines. 9. The equipment on the roof is necessary for cell service to a majority of the city. If this equipment were not active, it could cause major problems. Alternate locations for equipment could be considered but the companies would need about 2 years to make that determination of where to move to and to get that process done. 10. Both cell companies promised to have crews on hand to make all the moves and relocation happen in a timely manner, especially if done in conjunction with the re- roofing process. Roof Top Cell Equipment and Reroofing: 1. The existing roofing between the existing equipment will be removed down to the concrete deck and the parapet walls stripped down to masonry. 2. The concrete will be inspected for damage and repair as necessary. Page 1 2 EiKO1V 3. Permanent vertical supports will be structurally installed to support the equipment that is now on the skids and on the penthouse. The antennas will be removed from the skids and placed on top of the permanent posts and the ones on the penthouse will be relocated to the permanent posts. 4. The two equipment platforms will be raised up. New permanent supports will be installed and attached to the concrete roof, then the platforms will be lowered down to the top of the permanent supports leaving approximately 3 feet clear for roofing operations. There is equipment that will become obsolete sometime next year but for now the equipment has to remain on and in service. Sometime in the future, possibly in a year, the obsolete equipment can be removed and the platforms reduced in size. But for the near future, the platforms need to stay the same size. However, any unused conduits and misc panels which are not being used will be removed from the walls and roof. 5. All conduits will be removed from the penthouse roof and walls. Conduits attached to the face of the parapet will be relocated to supports on top of the roof. 6. The new roof will be installed with the necessary thickness of insulation, proper roof drains and overflow drains as required by code. Demolition and Repair: 1. A complete asbestos survey inside and outside will be done. 2. The scaffolding will be installed on the west wall after braces installed under the floor and roof of the two story building. 3. After all the scaffolding is installed on the west wall, the demolition of the masonry veneer will be done. 4. Windows will be replaced and a new veneer constructed to complete the west wall repair. 5. After the west wall is complete, the scaffolding will be installed on the north wall on top of the low roof after being reinforced. The north wall will be repaired by re- pointing, installing retrofit ties and installing windows as needed. 6. The existing cast stone and fascia on the south and east will be inspected and surveyed to determine both immediate repairs necessary and long term renovations. 7. After the equipment on the roof and walls of the penthouse are removed as described above, the penthouse walls will be replaced and the new roof installed. Misc: 1. The design engineers and architects need to determine if any roof top chillers will be used on the high roof. If so, the chillers can be installed and most, if not all, of the antennas hung off the sides of the chillers instead of on sleds or other frame work. However, the chillers would need to be installed in a timely manner to use them and not toward the end of the project as is more normal. A Comcheck energy analysis must be done to determine the roof insulation requirements. 2. The design engineers and architects also need to begin immediately to determine the electrical load requirements and work with Oncor and the City for the permanent Page 1 3 EjKOI service to the building. A set of plans will need to be prepared to submit to the City for the exterior work. 3. There was some discussion that there may be a patio or garden type of environment placed on the roof. This could be done but may be very difficult due to many issues and therefore is not considered with this plan of work. Respectfully Submitted, M-1 Of �� • / David K. Isbell, P.E. Page 1 4 EiKO'*-N Carla Easton From: Dave Isbell <disbell @eikoncg.com> Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016 2:23 PM To: Carla Easton Subject: RE: EIKON Termination Carla: Yes, we worked out a plan with all parties to demo /repair the wall in the 90 day time frame. But David did not agree to it and refuses to consider it. I would like to discuss this on the phone when you get back in the office or when you are available. let me know when and I will call or feel free to call my cell antime. I assume you will let Robert Talley know of this. David K. Isbell, PE EIKON Consulting Group P (940) 458.7503 C (940) 367.3324 Disbell - eikonca.com www.eikoncq.com E I I From: Carla Easton [mailto:ceaston @ paristexas.eov] Sent: Thursday, June 2, 2016 1:31 PM To: Dave Isbell <disbell @eikoncg.com> Subject: RE: EIKON Termination David, I'm sorry to hear that. We were hopeful that you could bring some much needed order to this situation. Without you involved, my confidence that this will be mutually resolved between parties is gone. I'm curious if you were able to find a solution that cell towers were agreeable to that would facilitate the wall demo? Just curious. I don't want to waste your time on a project that you're no longer working on, but would appreciate any info you can provide. Thanks, Carla Easton, City of Paris (903) 784 -9292 Direct From: Dave Isbell fmailto:disbell@eikoncg.com] Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016 11:54 AM To: Carla Easton Subject: EIKON Termination Carla We had a very productive meeting last Thursday but the owner does not agree with the plan we developed for moving forward with the repairs. EIKON has terminated it's relationship with the owner and no longer is working with him on this project. However, this is still an important issue and if I can be of assistance please let me know. 1 am somewhat at a loss on what to do at this time because as you know we as engineers have a responsibility to the health of the public. But I assume that the proper course of action is to let your Buildings and Standards Commission handle it from now on and I do not need to contact the State Fire Marshall or anything. David K. Isbell, PE EIKON Consulting Group P (940) 458.7503 C (940) 367.3324 Dis bell (cDeikoncg.com www.eikonca.com E 1K 2 BUILDING ABATEMENT DEMOLITION COMPANY, INC. June 16, 2016 Reference: Historical Restoration of the Old First National Bank of Paris at 104 Bonham Street - Paris, TX. In accordance with your request BAD Company, Inc. is pleased to submit this proposal to furnish labor, equipment and materials for this Historical Restoration project to include complete asbestos abatement, removal and replacement of exterior brick on west wall, the restoration to the remaining structures exterior and roof replacement of the above mentioned project. SCOPE OF WORK: Asbestos Abatement • Removal and proper disposal of asbestos containing materials from all areas of building throughout floors basement through penthouse • Work methods to include full containment, wet methods, PPE, double bag /wrap, label and manifest all ACM waste • Access to interior of building will be restricted until abatement is complete • All power and water must be terminated from the source to allow safe adequate access to all of the ACM materials to include conduits and pipes • Owner must supply power and water source from adjacent owned space • Work will be done in accordance with the asbestos specification provided by Choice Consulting as well as all DSHS and OSHA regulations • Provide pollution liability insurance with $5,000,000 aggregate and $1,000,000 occurrence • Provide only personnel licensed by the Texas Department of Health and trained in accordance with the E.P.A. Model Accreditation Plan as either an asbestos supervisor "competent person" or an asbestos worker. AUSTIN 1501 CR 256 LIBERTY HILL, TX. 78642 OFFICE 512 - 778 -6069 FAX 512 - 778 -6066 WACO 2125 FRANKLIN AVE., WACO, TX. 76701 OFFICE 254 - 498 -2904 FAX 254 - 870 -0110 BUILDING ABATEMENT DEMOLITION COMPANY, INC. Exterior Brick Replacement • Erect scaffolding system from street side at SW corner above adjacent 2 story building across to the NW corner. A trash chute will be placed at end of platform at street to allow for material removal • All brick will be removed from entire west wall including old brick ties and debris found in the interstitial space as well as all stone window sills which all that can, will be salvaged for re -use • Brick will be installed from the top of the existing 2 story structure through to the penthouse west wall, brick ties will be placed on four foot centers and at every window edge and termination joints • Detail clean masonry wall and site, teardown and continue with remainder of building • We will require clear access to west wall including roof below, all electrical lines /conduit and gas lines must be de- energized and removed or re- routed Exterior Restoration • Complete removal and re- placement of entire roof system • Complete wash down and detail cleaning of the exterior of the building • Remove and re -point 25% of the existing brick mortar and 100% of the existing terra cotta mortar • Removal of all damaged terra cotta and restoration to remaining to include complete patch and repair and re- glazing • All lintels are considered to contain lead base paint which will be handled appropriately being completely stripped of paint, primed and painted to match • All existing equipment, antennas, conduit, piping, cabling and fixtures attached to parapet wall, penthouse walls or on roof must be removed in order to provide adequate access to complete this scope of work AUSTIN 1501 CR 256 LIBERTY HILL, TX. 78642 OFFICE 512 - 778 -6069 FAX 512 - 778 -6066 WACO 2125 FRANKLIN AVE., WACO, TX. 76701 OFFICE 254 - 498 -2904 FAX 254- 870 -0110 BUILDING ABATEMENT DEMOLITION COMPANY, INC. Asbestos Abatement $ 910,000.00 Exterior West Wall $ 711,000.00 Ext Walls and Roof $ 688,000.00 Lump Sum Bid $293099000.00 BID NOTES AND CLARIFICATIONS: • In accordance with OSHA regulations all electrical lines and equipment must be locked out/tagged out before we can begin our work, we will not agree to start this project on either the interior or exterior until this task has been completed by a certified electrician which must be done prior to our mobilizing to the project • We anticipate completion to be 250 working days for interior and exterior scope of work as long as all equipment and etc... associated with roof and walls must have been removed by others prior to our agreed start date • This proposal is good for sixty (60) days from the date of the proposal • Lump sum price includes all labor, supervision, material, equipment, overhead, profit, payroll taxes, pollution liability and workers comp • All notifications, waste manifests, employee certifications, physician's written opinions, and contractor licenses, daily logs and other pertinent data will be supplied to the customer within thirty (30) working days upon request • Concealed asbestos containing materials (that are within walls, ceilings, chases, etc.) are not included unless specifically identified elsewhere in this proposal • Removal, clean up and put back will be completed in accordance with all federal, state and local regulations that are specifically applicable to this job and are in effect at the time of this proposal • The permit/notification fee is not included in this proposal. The fee is imposed by the Texas Department of Health and invoiced directly to the owner based on notified quantities as outlined in the Texas Asbestos Health Protection Rules 295.610) • BAD Company, Inc. does not hereby assume responsibility nor indemnify the general contractor and / or owner for their sole negligence. In the event of AUSTIN 1501 CR 256 LIBERTY HILL, TX. 78642 OFFICE 512- 778 -6069 FAX 512 - 778 -6066 WACO 2125 FRANKLIN AVE., WACO, TX. 76701 OFFICE 254- 498 -2904 FAX 254- 870 -0110 BUILDING ABATEMENT DEMOLITION COMPANY, INC. concurrent negligence, BAD Company's indemnity will apply to the extent of BAD Company's negligence 1� The terms of payment of the material, equipment and labor based on the original scope of work described herein will be as follow: Net 10 days after invoice. We sincerely appreciate the opportunity to submit this proposal and look forward to being of other service for you and your company. Sincerely; BAD COMPANY, INC. ACCEPTED BY: Jud Stringer Director Signature Date AUSTIN 1501 CR 256 LIBERTY HILL, TX. 78642 OFFICE 512 - 778 -6069 FAX 512 - 778 -6066 WACO 2125 FRANKLIN AVE., WACO, TX. 76701 OFFICE 254- 498 -2904 FAX 254 - 870 -0110 Stephanie Harris From: Clyde Crews Sent: Friday, September 16, 2016 3:04 PM To: Stephanie Harris Subject: FW: 104 Bonham, Paris, Texas 75460 Attachments: CTRA Property Holdings -104 Bonham Paris.pdf, West Wall 226 (1).pdf, West Wall Additional Movement 311 (1).pdf From: Kelley Stalder fmailto : Kelley. Stalder@tdi.texas.gov] Sent: Friday, August 19, 2016 4:33 PM To: Clyde Crews Subject: FW: 104 Bonham, Paris, Texas 75460 Dear FM Crews, Just wanted to make you aware that we have received this request concerning a structure in your jurisdiction. I would be glad to discuss this with you, if you like. Feel free to call me, cell number is the best way to reach me. I have also notified our inspector for that area, Scott McAnallen. Regards, Kelley Stalder, PE, CFEI Engineer State Fire Marshal's Office, Texas Department of Insurance ® 214- 830 -2956 Cell It 512 -676 -6792 Office ® kelle .stalderLa�tdi.texas.Qov http: / /www.tdi.texas. og v /fire 333 Guadalupe Street I MC 112FM I Austin, Texas 78701 (800) 578 -4677 1 @TXSFMO I @TexasTDI From: David J. Alarid <dalarid @austin.rr.com> Sent: Saturday, July 23, 2016 6:09 PM To: FireMarshal Subject: 104 Bonham, Paris, Texas 75460 State Fire Marshal Chris Connealy, The building at 104 Bonham, Paris, Texas has a west wall that failed and was discovered on 2/10/16 by Chief Larry Wright and myself, however the City refuses to red tag the building and remove the power even though it is a life safety issue which falls under the ICC, NFPA and OSHA safety codes. Attached please find some estimates and condition reports, the contractors require that power and cell towers be removed but the City refuses to red tag the building because they prefer to cater to the cell tower companies than the public hazard issue and life safety to its citizens. When the wall falls, it will destroy the buildings to the west and kill whoever is in the area at the time the wall falls. This is a public hazard and an URGENT LIFE SAFETY MATTER, is this something you can instruct the City to Red Tag the building and pull the power to the cell towers so that we can have the wall removed and repaired before it falls? Thanks, David J. Alarid CTRA Property Holdings Corporation dalarid austin.rr.com 512.476.6900 office 512.560.8100 cell 512.345.8100 fax 4 ,,,tr This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. kf— www.avast.com WE'STERNTm SPECIALTY CONTRACTORS CONFIDENCE THROUGH PERFORMANCE Concrete Restoration Masonry Restoration Stadium Restoration Balcony Restoration Plaza Restoration EIFS Restoration Historic Restoration Wall Coating Caulking & Sealants Deck Coating Planter Waterproofing Below Grade Stone Cleaning & Restoration Tuckpointing Epoxy Floori ng Cementituous Coating Post Tendon Repair Barrier Tendon Repair Expansion Joint Restoration Carbon Fiber Epoxy Injection PROPOSAL CONTRACT Mr. David Alarid CTRA Property Holdings 8004 Two Coves Drive Austin, Texas 78730 AOL (ok OWESTERN` February 26, 2016 WE (Western) HAVE PREPARED A PROPOSAL FOR: 1St National Bank — Paris, Texas SCOPE OF WORK: We propose to furnish and install all necessary labor, materials, equipment, supervision, and insurance, as shown on the enclosed sample certificate, to complete the following: Brick Masonry Wall Removal & Replacement Inclusive of the following scope of work: ➢ Install temporary roof protection over adjacent building to prevent damage from falling debris ➢ Access building exterior using suspended scaffolding system set at bank building roof ➢ Install temporary bracing to secure approximately 2600 square feet of southern half of west wall with most extreme condition of detachment ➢ Remove brick veneer from west elevation down to roof top of adjacent building only salvaging terra —cotta sills for later reinstallation ➢ Clean loose debris from remaining masonry wall ➢ Install masonry wall ties every 4 foot on center, along termination points and window perimeters ➢ Re -lay recycled brick of similar size, shape and color to exterior west wall ➢ Clean masonry wall upon completion ➢ Remove all debris, temporary protection and clean up site III ; I . 411t -11 +r�r� Member of Dallas & Ft. Worth BOMA 2601 Industrial Lane • Garland. TX 75041 • (972) 289 -7000 • F (972) 289 -7311 Restoring America since 1915 Elevation of building for brick removal and replacement BUILDING ABATEMENT DEMOLITION COMPANY, INC. June 16, 2016 Reference: Historical Restoration of the Old First National Bank of Paris at 104 Bonham Street - Paris, TX. In accordance with your request BAD Company, Inc. is pleased to submit this proposal to furnish labor, equipment and materials for this Historical Restoration project to include complete asbestos abatement, removal and replacement of exterior brick on west wall, the restoration to the remaining structures exterior and roof replacement of the above mentioned project. SCOPE OF WORK: Asbestos Abatement • Removal and proper disposal of asbestos containing materials from all areas of building throughout floors basement through penthouse • Work methods to include full containment, wet methods, PPE, double bag/wrap, label and manifest all ACM waste • Access to interior of building will be restricted until abatement is complete • All power and water must be terminated from the source to allow safe adequate access to all of the ACM materials to include conduits and pipes • Owner must supply power and water source from adjacent owned space • Work will be done in accordance with the asbestos specification provided by Choice Consulting as well as all DSHS and OSHA regulations • Provide pollution liability insurance with $5,000,000 aggregate and $1,000,000 occurrence • Provide only personnel licensed by the Texas Department of Health and trained in accordance with the E.P.A. Model Accreditation Plan as either an asbestos supervisor "competent person" or an asbestos worker. AUSTIN 1501 CR 256 LIBERTY HILL, TX. 78642 OFFICE 512 - 778 -6069 FAX 512 - 778 -6066 WACO 2125 FRANKLIN AVE., WACO, TX. 76701 OFFICE 254 - 498 -2904 FAX 254 - 870 -0110 BUILDING ABATEMENT DEMOLITION COMPANY, INC. Exterior Brick Replacement • Erect scaffolding system from street side at SW corner above adjacent 2 story building across to the NW corner. A trash chute will be placed at end of platform at street to allow for material removal • All brick will be removed from entire west wall including old brick ties and debris found in the interstitial space as well as all stone window sills which all that can, will be salvaged for re -use • Brick will be installed from the top of the existing 2 story structure through to the penthouse west wall, brick ties will be placed on four foot centers and at every window edge and termination joints • Detail clean masonry wall and site, teardown and continue with remainder of building • We will require clear access to west wall including roof below, all electrical lines /conduit and gas lines must be de- energized and removed or re- routed Exterior Restoration • Complete removal and re- placement of entire roof system • Complete wash down and detail cleaning of the exterior of the building • Remove and re -point 25% of the existing brick mortar and 100% of the existing terra cotta mortar • Removal of all damaged terra cotta and restoration to remaining to include complete patch and repair and re- glazing • All lintels are considered to contain lead base paint which will be handled appropriately being completely stripped of paint, primed and painted to match • All existing equipment, antennas, conduit, piping, cabling and fixtures attached to parapet wall, penthouse walls or on roof must be removed in order to provide adequate access to complete this scope of work AUSTIN 1501 CR 256 LIBERTY HILL, TX. 78642 OFFICE 512 - 778 -6069 FAX 512 - 778 -6066 WACO 2125 FRANKLIN AVE., WACO, TX. 76701 OFFICE 254 - 498 -2904 FAX 254 - 870 -0110 BUILDING ABATEMENT DEMOLITION COMPANY, INC. Asbestos Abatement $ 910,000.00 Exterior West Wall $ 711,000.00 Ext Walls and Roof $ 688,000.00 Lump Sum Bid $2,309,000.00 BID NOTES AND CLARIFICATIONS: • In accordance with OSHA regulations all electrical lines and equipment must be locked out /tagged out before we can begin our work, we will not agree to start this project on either the interior or exterior until this task has been completed by a certified electrician which must be done prior to our mobilizing to the project • We anticipate completion to be 250 working days for interior and exterior scope of work as long as all equipment and etc... associated with roof and walls must have been removed by others prior to our agreed start date • This proposal is good for sixty (60) days from the date of the proposal • Lump sum price includes all labor, supervision, material, equipment, overhead, profit, payroll taxes, pollution liability and workers comp • All notifications, waste manifests, employee certifications, physician's written opinions, and contractor licenses, daily logs and other pertinent data will be supplied to the customer within thirty (30) working days upon request • Concealed asbestos containing materials (that are within walls, ceilings, chases, etc.) are not included unless specifically identified elsewhere in this proposal • Removal, clean up and put back will be completed in accordance with all federal, state and local regulations that are specifically applicable to this job and are in effect at the time of this proposal • The permit/notification fee is not included in this proposal. The fee is imposed by the Texas Department of Health and invoiced directly to the owner based on notified quantities as outlined in the Texas Asbestos Health Protection Rules 295.610) • BAD Company, Inc. does not hereby assume responsibility nor indemnify the general contractor and / or owner for their sole negligence. In the event of AUSTIN 1501 CR 256 LIBERTY HILL, TX. 78642 OFFICE 512 - 778 -6069 FAX 512 - 778 -6066 WACO 2125 FRANKLIN AVE., WACO, TX. 76701 OFFICE 254 - 498 -2904 FAX 254 - 870 -0110 EUILDING DEMOLITION ABATEMENT COMPANY, INC. concurrent negligence, BAD Company's indemnity will apply to the extent of BAD Company's negligence TERMS: The terms of payment of the material, equipment and labor based on the original scope of work described herein will be as follow: Net 10 days after invoice. We sincerely appreciate the opportunity to submit this proposal and look forward to being of other service for you and your company. Sincerely; BAD COMPANY, INC. Jud Stringer Director ACCEPTED BY: Signature Date AUSTIN 1501 CR 256 LIBERTY HILL, TX. 78642 OFFICE 512 - 778 -6069 FAX 512 - 778 -6066 WACO 2125 FRANKLIN AVE., WACO, TX. 76701 OFFICE 254- 498 -2904 FAX 254 - 870 -0110 WESTERN' SPECIALTY CONTRACTORS CONFIDENCE THROUGH PERFORMANCE an OWESTEIRN Concrete Proposal Date: February 26, 2016 Restoration Re: Bank Building Masonry Paris, Texas Restoration Stadium Base Bid: $308,400.00 Restoration Balcony Sales Tax: $25.443.00 Restoration Plaza Total Price: $333,843.00 Restoration EIFS GENERAL QUALIFICATIONS: Restoration 1. Normal working hours, Monday through Friday have been used for this proposal. Historic 2. We have included one mobilization for the project. Additional mobilizations will result in Restoration additional charges. Wall Coating 3. Barricades and signs along with traffic control protection will be provided as needed. Caulking & 4. Owner to provide for onsite parking for contractors workers at no cost to contractor Sealants 5. Owner to provide access to electric power and water at no cost to contractor Deck Coating 6. Owner to provide access to on site restrooms at no cost to contractor 7. Relocation of electrical, micro wave and telecommunication equipment must be removed from Planter building exterior and all roof top locations prior to start Waterproofing 8. Price does not include window replacement or refurbishment Below Grade 9. Price does not include permit cost if required, to be provided by owner Stone 10. Price is based on use of interior of building as a staging area Cleaning & 11. Price is based on use of building elevators to move material and man power Restoration Tuckpointing Acceptance: By signing this proposal, the Purchaser accepts as a binding contract all of its terms Epoxy and conditions, including the General Conditions and the Special Conditions on this page and all Flooring Continuation Pages of this proposal. This Proposal shall expire automatically unless the above Cementituous named purchaser shall have delivered a copy of this Proposal, duly signed by it, to Western on or Coating before the 30th day from the date hereof. No modification by Purchaser to this Proposal, or to the Post Tendon General Conditions, shall become a part of the contract unless specifically agreed to in writing by Repair Western, and shall automatically make this Proposal void and of no effect. Barrier Tendon Date Accepted: Western Waterproofing Company of America Repair d /b /a Western Specialty Contractors of America Expansion Joint Restoration [Purchaser] Carbon Fiber By: 4?p6ert ScheeCar Epoxy Title: Department Manager Injection Member of Dallas & Ft. Worth BOMA 2601 Industrial Lane • Garland. TX 75041 • (972) 289 -7000 • F (972) 289 -7311 Restoring America since 1915 GENERAL TERMS OF THE CONTRACT 1. CHANGES IN THE WORK. It is understood that the type of work called for in this Agreement may require changes as the work progresses. Contractor will perform changes in the work (including changes requested by Customer) only after consultation with the Customer, and execution of a written agreement covering the changes in the scope of the work including any changes in Contract Price and time for performance. 2. PAYMENT TERMS. Payment of the Contract Price, shall be made monthly upon receipt of an invoice for portion of the Work performed during that month. If any invoice remains unpaid to the 20th day following receipt by Customer, Customer agrees to pay Contractor interest at the rate of ten percent (10 %) per annum from the due date until paid. 3. TAXES. Contractor's price includes applicable taxes imposed on the work or materials included in this contract, to the extent required by law to be collected by Contractor. Such taxes may be separately itemized on invoices. 4. SECURITY FOR PAYMENT. Customer understands that if Contractor is not paid it can assert a lien against the property. Contractor will issue waivers of its lien rights only to the extent it receives payment. 5. DELAYS AND CLAIMS. A. Liability Only for Acts Within Contractor's Control. Contractor will be excused and will not be liable for any damages, whether direct, incidental or consequential, for any delay or failure in performance (including but not limited to delays due to strikes, fires, accidents, acts of God and delays in performance by Contractor's suppliers and carriers) except to the extent caused by, or within the direct control of Contractor. B. Notice of Claims, When. Any claims by Customer against Contractor must be presented in writing with particulars to Contractor within twenty days after they arise; otherwise Contractor shall have no responsibility or liability for such claims. 6. INSURANCE AND INDEMNIFICATION. A. Customer shall purchase and maintain property insurance on its property and liability insurance to cover the acts or omissions of its agents and employees at the Site. B. Contractor maintains insurance as shown on the attached Insurance Addendum. A certificate showing coverage limits and Carriers will be issued to Customer prior to beginning work at the Site. C. Contractor agrees to indemnify Customer from any loss, damage or expense which Customer suffers as a result of claims asserted against Customer by third parties (including Contractor's employees) which arise out of Contractor's work at the Site, to the extent caused by the negligent acts or omissions of Contractor or anyone for whom Contractor is responsible. Customer agrees to indemnify Contractor for any loss, damage or expense, which Contractor suffers as a result of claims asserted against Contractor by third parties (including Customer's employees) which arise out of Customer's activities at the Site, to the extent caused by the negligent acts or omissions of Customer or anyone for whom Customer is responsible. 7. LIMITED WARRANTY AND EXCLUSIVE REMEDIES. A. Workmanship. For a period of one year from the date of substantial completion of Contractor's Work covered hereby, Contractor warrants that it will promptly repair or replace any improper or defective workmanship performed by Contractor under this contract; provided that Contractor has been paid for all work performed, and Contractor has received written notice from Customer of any such defective workmanship within 20 days after Customer first becomes aware thereof (provided such is within the aforesaid one -year period). Contractor will not pay for any inspections or repairs performed by others prior to receipt of notice and a reasonable opportunity to make repairs, if warranted. B. Warranty on Materials. Contractor warrants that it will use only new materials unless specified otherwise in this Contract, and will deliver to Customer standard warranties as issued by the manufacturer of the materials, if available. Contractor shall have no obligation under any such manufacturer's warranty, and shall not be required to seek changes to terms of such standard warranties. C. Disclaimer of Other Warranties. THE PROVISIONS IN PARAGRAPHS A AND B ARE THE EXCLUSIVE WARRANTIES PROVIDED TO CUSTOMER AND ARE EXPRESSLY IN LIEU OF ANY OTHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING ANY IMPLIED WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE. D. Mold Exclusion. Contractor specifically excludes from any and all warranties connected with this Work any warranty against the growth, infestation or spread of mold, mildew, or other fungal, bacterial or biological substance however caused. 8. OBLIGATIONS OF CUSTOMER AT SITE OF WORK A. Site Conditions. For work performed by Contractor at the site, Customer shall provide without charge to Contractor (i) sufficient and proper space for handling and storing the materials and equipment of Contractor;; (ii) sufficient power and water for the performance of the Work; (iii) removal of all obstructions to performing the Work as economically as possible. B. Unanticipated Conditions. If Contractor encounters unanticipated conditions or structural features, not reasonably ascertainable upon such inspection or testing as was allowed by Customer, Contractor will so advise Customer, and the parties will work out a mutually acceptable adjustment to the Work, the Contract Price, and the time of completion prior to continuation of the work. C. Asbestos, Lead, Mold and PCB. Contractor specifically excludes the abatement of any hazardous material, including but not limited to asbestos, lead, mold or polychlorinated biphenyl ( "PCB "). Customer warrants that the Work will not expose Contractor's workers or any other persons to contact with or exposure to such substances. If Contractor encounters material reasonably believed to be asbestos, lead mold or PCB or other hazardous substance which has not been rendered harmless, Contractor shall immediately stop Work in the area affected and report the condition to the Customer. The Work in the affected area shall not thereafter be resumed except by written agreement of the Customer and Contractor. The Work in the affected area shall be resumed in the absence of such hazardous substance, or when it has been rendered harmless and so agreed in writing by the Customer and Contractor. All cost of testing for, removal of, or to render asbestos, lead, mold or PCB harmless, shall be born by Customer. 9. DEFAULT BY CUSTOMER. If Customer fails, or is unable for any reason, to make any payment when due, or prevents Contractor from completing its Work in a timely and uninterrupted manner, or fails to comply with any term, condition or provision of this Contract, Contractor may resort to any remedy available to it by this Contract, or by law. 10. REMEDIES OF CONTRACTOR. In case of any default by Customer, including but not limited to failure to make timely payment, Contractor may, after reasonable notice and opportunity to cure, which need not exceed seven (7) days; (a) suspend all work at the site (b) demand payment of the contract price, less a sum equal to Contractor's cost of any labor and materials not yet furnished or ordered , (c) remove,its equipment and any unused material from the Premises, (d) terminate the contract and demand payments referred to in item (b) above and, (e) pursue such other or additional remedies as may be provided by law. 11. DISPUTE RESOLUTION. The parties shall attempt to resolve disputes between themselves, using more senior officials of their respective organizations if necessary, and prior to the institution of any legal action, they agree to meet with a mutually agreeable or, upon mutual application, court appointed mediator for a minimum of one five hour session. In any such dispute resolution, each party shall bear their own expenses. In the event of any legal action to enforce the terms of this Contract, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable attorney's fees from the other. 12. HOURS OF WORK. Contractor is obligated to perform the Work only during its regular working hours and has no responsibility to work beyond such regular hours. All time beyond regular hours which is required by Customer shall be paid for by Customer in addition to the contract price, at applicable premium rates of pay. 13. ENTIRE AGREEMENT. This Contract constitutes the entire agreement between the parties. No representations, statements, correspondence or discussions between Contractor and Customer or Customer's Representative shall be a part of this Contract unless specifically referred to in this Contract. 14. MODIFICATION. No waiver, alteration or modification of the terms and conditions of this Contract shall be binding unless said waiver, alteration or modification be in writing and signed by a duly authorized representative of each party. Rev 1/11/10 STANDARD INSURANCE ADDENDUM Indicating Insurance Carried by Western Waterproofing Company of America d /b /a Western Specialty Contractors of America ( "Contractor ") and incorporated into its Proposal Submitted to CTRA Property Holdings Corporation ( "Customer ") Project: 1St National Bank — Paris, Texas Contractor maintains, and shall maintain, insurance coverage substantially as outlined below, throughout the life of the project (shown above) which is the subject of the Proposal, Bid, Contract or Subcontract to which this Addendum is attached. Any contract or subcontract entered into is qualified to include this coverage, exclusive of any other insurance requirements. Workers Compensation coverage is maintained in all states where Contractor operates, including the state in which the project which is the subject of this proposal or bid is located. Employer's Liability coverage is also included with limits up to $1,000,000. Stop gap coverage is provided in monopolistic states: ND, OH, WA, WY. Carrier: Charter Oak Fire Insurance Company (MA, OR, WI) Carrier: Travelers Property Casualty Company of America (All other states) General Liability coverage is written on the ISO COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY FORM CG 0001 10 01 which includes the following: Carrier: Travelers Property Casualty Company of America COVERAGES • Bodily Injury • Broad Form Property Damage • Premises /Operations • Products /Completed Operations • Contractual Liability • Medical Payments • Fire Damage Legal Liability • Personal and Advertising Injury • Independent Contractor's Liability • Coverage for Explosion, Collapse, and Underground • Separation of Insureds /Severability of Interest O+ General Aggregate applies per project. The General Liability Policy contains an exclusion for claims arising in whole or in part out of the presence of fungi or bacteria in a building or structure. Automobile Liability coverage is carried in all states consistent with or greater than statutory requirements. Carrier: Travelers Property Casualty Company of America Combined Single Limit: $2,000,000 A 30 day notice of cancellation provision is included under our policies. Coverage and limits will be certified through a standard form Certificate of Insurance issued to Customer or through a Memorandum of Insurance upon Execution of Contract. Contractor's insurance program is written on a nationwide basis for all its locations, and not on an individual project basis. Any requests for deviations from standard coverage must be requested in writing, prior to Contract execution. Contractor reserves the right to increase its price to cover additional insurance requests. Revised 10/3/13 POLICY LIMITS General Aggregate O+ $4,000,000 Products Completed Operations Aggregate $4,000,000 Personal and Adv. Injury $2,000,000 Each Occurrence $2,000,000 Fire Damage (Anyone fire) $500,000 Medical Exp. (Any one person) $5,000 O+ General Aggregate applies per project. The General Liability Policy contains an exclusion for claims arising in whole or in part out of the presence of fungi or bacteria in a building or structure. Automobile Liability coverage is carried in all states consistent with or greater than statutory requirements. Carrier: Travelers Property Casualty Company of America Combined Single Limit: $2,000,000 A 30 day notice of cancellation provision is included under our policies. Coverage and limits will be certified through a standard form Certificate of Insurance issued to Customer or through a Memorandum of Insurance upon Execution of Contract. Contractor's insurance program is written on a nationwide basis for all its locations, and not on an individual project basis. Any requests for deviations from standard coverage must be requested in writing, prior to Contract execution. Contractor reserves the right to increase its price to cover additional insurance requests. Revised 10/3/13 WESTERN SPECIALTY CONTRACTORS CONFIDENCE THROUGH PERFORMANCE Concrete Restoration Masonry Restoration Stadium Restoration Balcony Restoration Plaza Restoration EIFS Restoration Historic Restoration Wall Coating Caulking & Sealants Deck Coating Planter Waterproofing Below Grade Stone Cleaning & Restoration Tuckpointing Epoxy Flooring Cementituous Coating Post Tendon Repair Barrier Tendon Repair Expansion Joint Restoration Carbon Fiber Epoxy Injection Mr. David Alarid CTRA Property Holdings 8004 Two Coves Drive Austin, Texas 78730 na QWESTERN' March 11, 2016 WE (Western) HAVE PREPARED A PROPOSAL FOR: 1St National Bank — Paris, Texas SCOPE OF WORK: We propose to furnish and install all necessary labor, materials, equipment, supervision, and insurance, as shown on the enclosed sample certificate, to complete the following: Brick Masonry Wall Condition and Assessment West elevation of building with Am masonry separation and detachment, south half of this significant elevation has the most si g amount of this problem and is f dangerously close to collapse. lE7t i W. � t s r Jamb and sill of window showing separation of out brick masonry veneer from back -up masonry wall. Member of Dallas & Ft. Worth BOMA 2601 Industrial Lane • Garland. TX 75041 • (972) 289 -7000 • F (972) 289 -7311 Restoring America since 1915 WESTERN' ni& SPECIALTY CONTRACTORS QWESTERN' CONFIDENCE THROUGH PERFORMANCE Concrete Restoration Masonry Restoration Stadium Restoration Balcony Restoration Plaza Restoration EIFS Restoration Historic Restoration Wall Coating Caulking & Sealants Deck Coating Planter Waterproofing Below Grade Stone Cleaning & Restoration Tuckpointing Epoxy Flooring Cementituous Coating Post Tendon Repair Barrier Tendon Repair Expansion Joint Restoration Carbon Fiber Epoxy Injection Proposal Date: March 11, 2016 Re: Bank Building Paris, Texas Member of Dallas & Ft. Worth BOMA 2601 Industrial Lane • Garland. TX 75041 • (972) 289 -7000 • F (972) 289 -7311 Restoring America since 1915 WESTERN" na SPECIALTY CONTRACTORS OWESTERN' CONFIDENCE THROUGH PERFORMANCE " 'N ` Concrete Restoration Masonry Restoration Stadium Restoration Balcony Restoration Plaza Restoration EIFS Restoration Historic Restoration Wall Coating Caulking & Sealants Deck Coating Planter Waterproofing Below Grade Stone Cleaning & Restoration Tuckpointing Epoxy Flooring Cementituous Coating Post Tendon Repair Barrier Tendon Repair Expansion Joint Restoration Carbon Fiber Epoxy Injection Proposal Date: March 11, 2016 Re: Bank Building Paris, Texas Member of Dallas & Ft. Worth BOMA 2601 Industrial Lane • Garland, TX 75041 • (972) 289 -7000 • F (972) 289 -7311 Restoring America since 1915 This is the southwest corner of the penthouse with upper most point of masonry failure. OWESTERN'" SPECIALTY CONTRACTORS OWI=STERN` CONFIDENCE THROUGH PERFORMANCE Proposal Date: March 11, 2016 Concrete Re: Bank Building Restoration Paris, Texas Masonry Restoration Conclusion Stadium ➢ A significant portion of the west elevation needs to be immediately stabilized and removed Restoration before total failure and collapse onto adjacent building. The lack of wall ties is more than Balcony likely the major reason for the wall separation. Restoration Plaza Restoration GENERAL QUALIFICATIONS: 1. Normal working hours, Monday through Friday have been used for this proposal. EIFS 2. We have included one mobilization for the project. Additional mobilizations will result in Rest oration Rest additional charges. Historic 3. Barricades and signs along with traffic control protection will be provided as needed. Restoration 4. Owner to provide for onsite parking for contractors workers at no cost to contractor Wall Coating 5. Owner to provide access to electric power and water at no cost to contractor Caulking & 6. Owner to provide access to on site restrooms at no cost to contractor Sealants 7. Relocation of electrical, micro wave and telecommunication equipment must be removed from Deck Coating building exterior and all roof top locations prior to start 8. Price does not include window replacement or refurbishment Planter 9. Price does not include permit cost if required, to be provided by owner Waterproofing 10. Price is based on use of interior of building as a staging area Below Grade 11. Price is based on use of building elevators to move material and man power Stone Cleaning & Restoration Acceptance: By signing this proposal, the Purchaser accepts as a binding contract all of its terms Tuckpointing and conditions, including the General Conditions and the Special Conditions on this page and all Continuation Pages of this proposal. This Proposal shall expire automatically unless the above Epoxy Flooring named purchaser shall have delivered a copy of this Proposal, duly signed by it, to Western on or before the 30th day from the date hereof. No modification by Purchaser to this Proposal, or to the Cementituous General Conditions, shall become a part of the contract unless specifically agreed to in writing by Coating Western, and shall automatically make this Proposal void and of no effect. Post Tendon Repair Date Accepted: Western Waterproofing Company of America Barrier d /b /a Western Specialty Contractors of America Tendon Repair Expansion [Purchaser] Joint By: Wp6ert Scheer Restoration Carbon Fiber Title: Department Manager Epoxy Injection Member of Dallas & Ft. Worth BOMA 2601 Industrial Lane • Garland, TX 75041 • (972) 289 -7000 • F (972) 289 -7311 Restoring America since 1915 N� OPT TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE � r `rG State Fire Marshars Office (112 -FM) 333 Guadalupe, Austin, Texas 78701 * PO Box 149221, Austin, Texas 78714 -9221 ' * (512) 676 -6800 1 F: (512) 490 -1063 1 (800) 578 -4677 1 TDI.texas.gov I @TXSFMO August 30, 2016 Mr. David Alarid President CTRA Property Holdings 8004 Two Coves Drive Austin, Texas 78730 RE: Inspection RRO15800A Dear Mr. Alarid: Per your request and invitation, on Friday, August 26, 2016, the State Fire Marshal made an examination of your property located at 104 Bonham Street, Paris (Lamar County), Texas ( "Property ") for consideration of the existence of "Dangerous Conditions" within the meaning of TEX. GOVT CODE 417.008. As part of our examination, we learned that certain officials of The City of Paris, Texas were already familiar with the conditions existing on the Property and have already directed you to make certain repairs or improvements. While our inspector did observe a variety of conditions on the Property that need repair, he did not observe any condition warranting further examination or action by the SFMO at this time. It is possible that future repairs or improvements to the Property would involve matters of interest to our office. However, it is our belief that local officials have a proper understanding of the nature of the repairs that need to be undertaken at this time and they have demonstrated to our satisfaction a commitment to make the Property safe. As such, we defer to theirjudgment and recommend that you continue to work with them to make those repairs. Thank you for giving us the opportunity to be of service. Sincerely, nc' < 1 Ernest McCloud Assistant State Fire Marshal cc: Clyde Crews, Deputy Chief /Fire Marshal, City of Paris TEXAS STATE FIRE MARSHAL'S OFFICE FIRE SAFETY INSPECTION REPORT FACILITY INSPECTION NUMBER DATE OF INSPECTION INSPECTOR 1St National Bank David J. Alarid 8004 Two Coves Drive Austin, Texas 78730 512- 476 -6900 Lamar County Physical Address: 104 Bonham, Paris, Texas 75460 Email address: dalarid(Daustin.rr.com 1 sr National Bank RRO 15800A August 26, 2016 Scott McAnallen The State Fire Marshal's Office received a complaint about the safety of the 15t National Bank building in Paris, Texas. A consultation was conducted and enforcement of noted violations was transferred to the City of Paris Fire Marshal. One building was inspected with the following violations noted in accordance with NFPA 1, Fire Code and NFPA 101, Life Safety Code. The 151 National Bank is a six story high rise structure with a basement and a mechanical penthouse. It is classified as mixed occupancy with new assembly and new apartment occupancies. Fire protection features are limited to portable fire extinguishers. The building is equipped with illumined exit signs and emergency lighting units. Note: There has not been any renovation of the building to be able to assess if the new occupancy would meet code. Correction of the following violations are required to meet minimum code requirements, however during renovations other violations could be noted. VIOLATION 1 The building does not have the required fire sprinkler system. NFPA 1, Fire Code, Chapter 13.3.2.17.1 and 13.3.2.26.1 VIOLATION 2 The building does not have the required fire alarm system. NFPA 1, Fire Code, Chapter 13.7.2.11.1 Inspection Number RRO15800A Page 1 of 5 Revised 12/2014 0 TEXAS STATE FIRE MARSHAL'S OFFICE '` j FIDE SAFETY INSPECTION REPORT The building does not have the required two hour separation between the assembly and apartment occupancies. NFPA 1, Fire Code, Table 6.1.14.4.1 (a) Note: Once the building is fully sprinkler this requirement may be removed upon review of AHJ. VIOLATION 4 The stairwell doors do not have the required UL Labels for fire rated doors on the following stories. • First • Second • Third • Fourth • Fifth • Sixth NFPA 1, Fire Code, Chapter 12.7.3.2.2 VIOLATION 5 There is not a secondary exit from the following floors. • Second • Third • Fourth • Fifth • Sixth NFPA 1, Fire Code, Chapter 14.9.1.1 VIOLATION 6 The exit lights in the bank area of the first floor did not work when tested. NFPA 1, Fire Code, Chapter 4.5.8.1 VIOLATION 7 Inspection Number RR015800A Page 2 of 5 Revised 12/2014 TEXAS STATE FIRE MARSHAL'S OFFICE y FIRE SAFETY INSPECTION REPORT The following floors do not have exit signs. • Second • Third • Fourth • Fifth • Sixth NFPA 1, Fire Code, Chapter 14.14.1.2.1 VIOLATION 8 There are not emergency lights on the following floors. • First • Second • Third • Fourth • Fifth • Sixth NFPA 1, Fire Code, Chapter 14.13.1.1(3) MEOM—NA101M, Unused wiring or electrical panels shall be removed or identified at its termination. NFPA 1, Fire Code, Chapter 11.1.4 VIOLATION 10 The electrical breaker panels were not identified. NFPA 1, Fire Code, Chapter 11.1.9.3.1 VIOLATION 11 The west side of the building has masonry separation which could cause a collapse of the brick veneer from the wall. NFPA 1, Fire Code, Chapter 10.1.4.1 and 10.1.4.2 VIOLATION 12 Inspection Number RRO15800A Page 3 of 5 Revised 12/2014 0 TEXAS STATE FIRE MARSHAL'S OFFICE FIRE SAFETY INSPECTION REPORT The fire extinguishers did not have the required annual inspection, the last inspection dates were 2010 and 2004. NFPA 1, Fire Code, Chapter 4.5.8.1 VIOLATION 13 The stairwell lacks stairwell signage. The lack of approved stairway signage could cause occupant confusion in an emergency evacuation. NORTH STAIR IF J �1 LN' 9 SUB - BASEMENT TO 24TH FLOOR NO ROOF ACCESS DOWN TO FIRST FLOOR FOR EXIT DISCHARGE Recommended stair sign Existing enclosed stairs serving five or more stories shall comply with the following criteria: A. The stairs shall be provided with special signage within the enclosure at each floor landing. B. The signage shall indicate the floor level. C. The signage shall indicate the terminus of the top and bottom of the stair enclosure. D. The signage shall indicate the identification of the stair enclosure. E. The signage shall indicate the floor level of, and the direction to, exit discharge. F. The signage shall be located inside the enclosure approximately 60 in. (1525 mm) above the floor landing in a position that is visible when the door is in the open or closed position. G. The signage shall comply with 14.14.8.1 and 14.14.8.2 of this Code. H. The floor level designation shall also be tactile in accordance with ICC /ANSI Al 17.1, American National Standard for Accessible and Usable Buildings and Facilities. I. The signage shall be painted or stenciled on the wall or on a separate sign securely attached to the wall. Inspection Number RROI 5800A Page 4 of 5 Revised 12/2014 TEXAS STATE FIRE MARSHAL'S OFFICE FIRE SAFETY INSPECTION REPORT J. The stairway identification letter shall be located at the top of the sign in minimum 1 in. (25 mm) high lettering and shall be in accordance with 14.14.8.2. K. Signage that reads NO ROOF ACCESS and is located under the stairway identification letter shall designate stairways that do not provide roof access. Lettering shall be a minimum of 1 in. (25 mm) high and shall be in accordance with 14.14.8.2. L. The floor level number shall be located in the middle of the sign in minimum 5 in. (125 mm) high numbers and shall be in accordance with 14.14.8.2. Mezzanine levels shall have the letter "M" or other appropriate identification letter preceding the floor number, while basement levels shall have the letter "B" or other appropriate identification letter preceding the floor level number. M. Identification of the lower and upper terminus of the stairway shall be located at the bottom of the sign in minimum 1 in. (25 mm) high letters or numbers and shall be in accordance with 7.10.8.2. NFPA 1, Fire Code, Chapter 10.12.3.1 Note: It is recommended that a licensed electrician inspect all electrical wiring for the building. Note: If cooking equipment is installed it must be protected by an approved fire extinguishing system. You are in receipt of a report that details the Fire Code and Life Safety hazards that were identified by this office at your facility. Some of the violations identified in this report may be of a serious life safety hazard. It is your responsibility to correct the hazards and bring your facility up to code. The State Fire Marshal's Office assumes no liability for your failure to follow up and correct these hazards. James Scott McAnallen Deputy State Fire Marshal Fire Safety Inspection Services Texas Department of Insurance (512) 627 -2611 cc: Deputy Chief Clyde P. Crews Jr. ccrews(o)paristexas.gov Inspection Number RRO15800A Page 5 of 5 Revised 12/2014