Disposition of LMPD Headquarters & Fiscal Court Building

Office of Facilities & Fleet Management

Acknowledgements

TABLE OF CONTENTS Cover Letter

1 Introduction

2 Overview of Existing Conditions

3 LMPD Headquarters & Fiscal Court Building Options

4 Long Range Options

5 Disposition of Surplus Property

6 Recommendations

7 Appendix 1 Introduction

Acknowledgements

The planning and preparation of this report would not have been possible without the cooperation and involvement of many individuals within Louisville Metro Government as well as other governmental agencies. The Office of Facilities & Fleet Management would like to thank and acknowledge the following for their contributions to this report.

Louisville Metro Government Doug Hamilton – Chief, Public Services Mary Ellen Wiederwohl – Chief, Louisville Forward/ Develop Louisville Laura Ferguson – Assistant Director Louisville Forward Lt. Colonel Robert Schroeder – Assistant Chief of Police Major Andrew McClinton – LMPD Commander of Administrative Services Mark Bolton – Director, Department of Corrections Daniel Frockt – Chief Financial Officer Aaron Jackson – Director of Budget & Planning Erica Smith – Budget Planning Analyst Sara Massey – Mayor’s Office -Director of Intergovernmental Affairs Teresa Lajara – Mayor’s Office – Metro Council Liaison

Louisville Metro Council Bill Hollander –District 9 Kevin Kramer – District 11

Jefferson County Attorney Matt Golden – Assistant County Attorney Eric Grainger – Assistant County Attorney Nancy House – Office Manager

Jefferson County Clerk Sue Toole – Executive Director Angela Clark Davis – Executive Director

Jefferson County Sheriff Jeffery Glass – Director of Administrative Services

Office of Facilities &Fleet Management Cathy Duncan – Director Mark Zoeller – Assistant Director Nicholas Hunter – Executive Administrator Jessica Bell - Leasing Coordinator Dennis Arthur – Facilities Projects Manager

Introduction

The Louisville Metro Council inserted language in the FY 19 approved budget, Ordinance 108, Series 2018, stating: “The Director of Facilities and Fleet Management is requested to provide a recommended plan for the Police Headquarters and Fiscal Court Building by December 31, 2018, INTRODUCTION which includes, but not limited to, location, type of structure, Metro and non-Metro positions to occupy the building and a timeline for completion. The Director is encouraged to have at least one member of the Metro Council involved in the preparation of the plan. The Metro Council expects the funding for the building to be recommended in the Fiscal Year 2019– 2020 capital budget.”

In response, the Office of Facilities & Fleet Management formed a committee of Metro and Non-Metro Stakeholders to discuss options to further the mandate and to provide a plan that is feasible, sustainable and actionable.

This report will serve as a supplement to the previously submitted study from EOP Architects in April 21, 2018, titled “Louisville Metro Facility Needs Study”.

The EOP Report provided options to determine the best path for the future with respect to the function, occupants, probable cost and locations of Metro occupied buildings.

Lastly, this report will also address Ordinance 108, Series 2018, part I.E.1.d as follows: “The Director of Facilities and Fleet Management is requested to provide a long-term plan for disposition of surplus property by December 31, 2018.”

The list of noted surplus properties have been prioritized to denote those properties that could be disposed of or redeveloped.

1.1

Overview of Existing Conditions

The following text are excerpts taken from the study prepared by EOP Architects in April of 2018, titled “Louisville Metro Facility Needs Study”. This document describes the existing conditions of the LMPD OVERVIEW Headquarters Building and the Jefferson County Fiscal Court Building. Both have long known deficiencies that plague these buildings and impact the ability of its occupants to efficiently perform their mission. LMPD Headquarters

The LMPD Headquarters building, located at the northeast corner of West Jefferson Street and South 7th Street, has zero lot line setbacks on all four sides with the main entrance canopy and pedestrian ramp appearing to extend out into the public right-of-way.

Existing sidewalks fronting Jefferson and 7th include some concrete heaving and cracking. It appears that many ledges have routinely been milled along the walk for compliance with the ADA, although there are areas where cracks and ledges exceed the allowable tolerance. Along

Congress Alley, to the north of the building, the sidewalk is in a deteriorating condition. As the sidewalk crosses the entrance to the basement level parking, the ramp apron slopes down to meet the edge of asphalt pavement. This portion of the walk exceeds the allowable cross slope for accessible paths and is non-compliant. Curbs along all road frontage have spots of deterioration. Compliant curb ramps are present at the intersection of Jefferson and 7th, although the ramps at the Congress Alley intersection are not compliant. Crosswalk striping is missing or worn at both intersections. The existing ramp into the entrance of the building lacks compliant level handrail extensions. Storm inlets are present at the intersection of Congress Alley and 7th and appear to be in decent condition. There are also several manhole covers and vault covers located in the building’s surrounding sidewalks, which all appear to be in serviceable condition. Off of the alley on the east side of the building is a service area that appears to be shared with adjacent buildings. Asphalt pavements are deteriorating with some spots where the upper courses are missing. A low concrete wall near the public right-of-way is damaged in several areas, presumably by the solid waste pick up as the wall is not protected by bollards. Solid waste dumpsters extend into the public right- of-way.

2.1

The building’s main entry is located on 7th Street and leads into a vestibule at ground level with two matching sets of monumental stairs up to the first-floor lobby. At the same entry location, a ramp leads to the first floor OVERVIEW and creates a bridge condition over the ground level main entry. There is a second entry on Jefferson Street that is accessible only by authorized personnel and leads up the stairs to the first floor. Two points of entry on the Louisville Revenue Commission Building elevation lead out to a covered porch condition. The Congress Alley elevation offers a garage entry to the basement, a pedestrian entry and access to the West wing stair.

Granite cladding is installed on the exterior of the building on the Jefferson Street, 7th Street and the front half of the Congress Alley elevations. The cladding reaches the lintels of the first-floor windows. The remainder of the 7th Street elevation is clad in White Cherokee Marble panel veneer. The remainder of the Jefferson Street elevation is clad with White Cherokee Marble panels on the half closest to 7th Street, with white brick stacked in running bond on the half closest to the Louisville Revenue Commission Building. This elevation connects to the pedestrian bridge which spans across Jefferson Street to the Jefferson County Correctional Facility. The Congress Alley elevation also has two distinctly clad halves with the 7th Street side clad in granite up to the first-floor window lintels and the remainder clad in White Cherokee Marble panels. The remaining half is clad with white brick stacked in running bond, as is the Louisville Revenue Commission Building elevation. White brick is also used in the recessed garage entry.

Much of the White Cherokee Marble paneling and brick show signs of separating from the main façade. Tremolite clads the columns between the double height storefront at the main entry and can also be seen along the jambs between windows. Overall, the Tremolite cladding is intact with some damage showing at the corners of the building. However, the grout between the slabs has degraded, sometimes to the point of disintegration, in many areas.

2.2

Metal canopies exist at the Jefferson Street entry and at the 7th Street entry. These canopies, as well as the metal door and window lintels, show signs of rust and corrosion. The ramp to the first-floor main entry is not OVERVIEW part of the original design. It is built of cast-in-place concrete and is supported by a partial concrete wall and column. The concrete shows signs of degradation such that the rebar is visible. While the column that supports the exterior landing does not show the same level of corrosion, it does sit directly in front of the ground level main entry which is undesirable for ingress and egress. Much of the natural light provided to the entry and lobby areas is blocked by the ramp.

The main roof of the building is a very old low-slope ballasted built-up roof that is failing in many locations. The penthouse roof is a low-slope single- ply membrane that is approximately 10 years old. There are several items of concern in regard to leaks and improper drainage on both levels. Biological growth is evident on the field of the main roof as well as the sealant used at the parapets and between sheets of roofing membrane. Much of the equipment is rusted and corroded, as is the door that grants roof access. The lintels and louvers on the penthouse are also rusted, and the glass of the windows is badly damaged. The white brick laid in running bond that clads the penthouse is stained from rust and exhaust from the mechanical room. Some electrical equipment has been disconnected and abandoned on the main roof. The roof is bordered by a stone capped parapet, with the exception of the area occupied by the penthouse and stair. Overall the stone is in good condition with the exception of some biological growth. Rather than a parapet, the penthouse roof is flashed with a drip edge which is intact and shows little wear. There are four skylights providing light to the third floor. Overall the skylights are in moderate to poor condition with some cracking in the sealant. Within the jail area, the skylights are barred over.

The building is a 3-story 100,800 SF building with a full basement which was constructed in early 1954. The lower level includes a small parking area and various lab, storage, and work spaces. There is also a tunnel connecting this building to neighboring City Hall buildings to the east along Jefferson Street. The west half of the building façades have marble and Tremolite panels. The east half of the building has a brick veneer.

2.3

The original building was constructed of cast-in-place concrete columns with thickened concrete column strips spanning in the north-south direction and one-way concrete slab floors spanning in the east-west OVERVIEW direction. The majority of the roof structure consists of bar joists and metal deck. Some smaller areas of the roof structure are the same concrete construction as the floors. The interior demising walls are predominantly concrete block construction.

Several locations on the west and south faces of the building have marble panels which have shifted and are pulling away from the building. It is likely that the clips anchoring the panels to the supporting structure have had long-term exposure to moisture and are deteriorated. This condition poses a safety risk to the public utilizing the sidewalks around these areas and should be investigated further so a suitable repair can be designed and implemented as soon as possible.

A consistent deficiency observed throughout the 3rd floor structure was cracking in the bottom of the floor slab as observed from the 2nd floor where the acoustical tile ceiling had been removed. Many of these cracks leak water from the cell blocks above. The cracks and leaks appear to have been there for a long time. The potential for deterioration of the reinforcing steel in the floor slab is quite high in these areas and would reduce the safe live load capacity of the floor slab. Duct work hanging from the slab has also been widely damaged from the leaks.

Though the other slabs were not readily observable due to ceilings being in place, it is likely that the other floors have similar widespread cracking. Leak issues have been most prevalent through the 3rd floor slab to the 2nd floor mostly due to that space being used as prisoner holding cells. The likelihood of deteriorated reinforcing steel in the lower floor slabs is less, given that there has not been the exposure of the reinforcing steel to the moisture from the leaks. The canopy structure over the Jefferson Street entrance is deteriorating along the front due to leaks around the edge of the roofing material.

The steel lintels over the windows were generally found to be deteriorating through oxidation (rust). The degree of deterioration is not specifically known; however, this condition has been present for several years and likely requires replacement of many of the lintels. Cracks in the brick veneer on the upper floors of the eastern half of the building were found dispersed throughout. The cracks seemed to be focused near building corners and around openings in the walls.

2.4

A support wall for the concrete ramp on the front of the building has experienced severe deterioration on the sidewalk end of the wall. Rebar is exposed from spalled concrete and more cracking has formed immediately OVERVIEW adjacent to the spalled areas. The bottom of the exterior beam/wall for the ramp has spalled at the corner where it bears on the support wall as well. The infill wall panel with a fluted face below the ramp has also developed cracks in the exterior face. Grout joints in the granite veneer were generally found to be deteriorating.

The mechanical systems in this building are outdated and inefficient. There is the potential for significant savings in energy usage with a new high performing centralized variable air volume air handler or water- source heat pump system above the existing system. The table above shows the energy cost for operating a building of this size. The building’s various systems located throughout make maintenance costly and time consuming. A new centralized and consistent system to serve the building would increase the ease of maintenance and decrease the cost and time required.

The building is served from a 1200A/277/480V/3P/4W main switch board located in the basement. The distribution panel serves branch electrical panels located throughout the facility. The majority of the branch panels are as manufactured by Frank Adam. While the exact age of the electrical distribution is unknown, the equipment appears to be very aged and should be replaced during the next major renovation.

The LMPD Headquarters building is in very poor condition. The overall main structure appears to be sound; however, significant stress cracking is apparent at the 3rd floor structural slab. Similar stress cracks have likely developed at other elevated structural slabs.

There is also evidence of leaking at the stress cracks indicating water from above has penetrated the slabs. If steel reinforcing within the structural floor slab has rusted, a weakening of the floor slab may have occurred. Nearly every aspect of the building’s exterior envelope is failing. The roof, wall cladding, brick veneer, windows and other fenestration are all in need of major repairs or replacement. All major building systems including HVAC, lighting, plumbing, fire protection (non-existent), communications, etc., need replacement. Building interiors including finishes are substandard and are inefficiently laid out relative to program need and work flow.

2.5

If it were not for the exemptions allowed under 501 KAR 3:0350 Section 8, the jail’s design, construction and current conditions violate many, perhaps most, current American Correctional Association standards as OVERVIEW well as Kentucky Jail Standards. Renovation of this building to meet current building codes, accessibility requirements, and occupancy standards for office or administrative use would require removal and replacement of most interior and exterior building components and systems down to the core structure. Elevated floor slabs exhibit evidence of stress cracking and leaking which may require repair or replacement. This would be a major renovation and would cost significantly more than the cost of comparable new construction.

Jefferson County Fiscal Court Building

The Fiscal Court Building sits on the corner of 6th Street and Court Place. In 1937, Jefferson County originally acquired the properties, which were then home to the Home Laundry Company Building and the Congress Hotel. The hotel sat on the corner and was the first purchase. The original plan called for the remodeling of the hotel in order to provide needed office space for the Jefferson County Government. After the acquisition of the Home Laundry Company Building, the plan was modified to construct a larger, more modern structure.

The flood of 1937 led the Home Laundry Company owner, Martin Sullivan, to offer his property to the County rather than take on the expensive repair process. The requirements of the County were satisfied by a ten-story building designed by Louisville architect Walter C. Wagner in a simplified Art Deco style with a basement, mechanical penthouse and low-slope roof. The County decided on partial construction of the original plan in order to satisfy immediate spatial and budget needs. This construction was completed in 1938. By 1956, the space was undersized, and construction began to complete the U-shaped design and increase its 6-story height to 10 stories. The current configuration provides a total of 109,570 gross square feet.

2.6

In 2001, the Fiscal Court Building, along with the nearby Metro Hall, Metro Hall Annex, City Hall and City Hall Annex, were designated Local Landmarks by the Historic Landmarks and Preservation Districts Commission. As a OVERVIEW Local Landmark, any exterior alterations to the Fiscal Court Building would require a Certificate of Appropriateness issued by the Architectural Review Committee. The ARC establishes high standards that promote the protection of buildings and properties designated as Local Landmarks.

The building’s main entry faces Court Place, which is gated and used by pedestrians along with limited parking. A second public entry also sits on Court Place, while a third entry on W. 6th St. is accessible only by authorized personnel. The Market Street Garage abuts the Fiscal Court Building on its North side. Stone block veneer is used on the South, East and West elevations of the first-floor exterior, including the protruding main entry condition, which is inscribed with the building’s name and county. The veneer is formed into fluted quarter-columns that sit flush with the recessed storefront double door entry. The secondary Court Place entry is also recessed and lined with the stone veneer. There are two single doors on either side of a clad structural column. There is evidence of degradation throughout the stone veneer, especially within the first two courses and at the corner conditions.

Wall surfaces above the first floor are clad in running bond tan brick with the exception of the East façade, which has EIFS (synthetic stucco) cladding on the exterior of floors two and three. Repairs to the façade can clearly be distinguished by the mortar color. There is also evidence that the brick veneer is separating from the main building façade. The original 1938 concrete structure is evident on the East elevation, North elevation, and on the U-shaped rear façade. Art deco patterned brick can be seen between the rows of windows on the South and West elevations. These windows are uniform from floors two through ten. Windows within the U- portion and on the North elevation of the East wing are also uniform in placement from floors two through ten. On the upper floors of these elevations, the window type changes to an older model. The North elevation of the West wing has no windows. All windows, with the exception of those set within the stone veneer, have stone sills. The veneer at the first floor bumps out to form the sills for the windows on the South, East and West elevations. All windows are double hung with the exception of three fixed casement windows on the first floor. The taller windows on the first floor reflect the higher ceiling height, while the windows on floors two through ten are shorter and reflect the decreased interior height.

2.7

The symmetrical South elevation reflects the simplified Art Deco style, with a recessed mid-section that includes the penthouse walls. The depth of the recess is one modular brick deep, or 8”. This midsection also includes OVERVIEW three narrow windows on floors two through ten and the penthouse. The penthouse sits atop the center section of the building so that the South elevation clearly defines the extents of the East and West wings. There is a second recess at the 6th Street entry that spans all ten floors. The East façade exhibits several unusual window conditions. The first floor has a total of five windows, four of which are symmetric around the center vertical axis and an additional one providing light to the Northeast corner.

The second-floor window placement matches the first floor, but the one closest to the Northeast corner is blocked in. On the third floor, all five windows have been blocked in. On the fourth floor, instead of windows, there are five holes cut for Air Conditioning units.

The fifth and sixth floors have one window each. Floors seven through ten match the configuration of floor two, with the exception of the blocked-in window which does not exist. Windows on the South and East façades have been replaced with aluminum clad insulated glass units. Windows at the rear of the building, within the U-portion façade and at penthouse level, are deteriorated and in need of replacement.

The building has a low-slope modified bitumen roof that supports residential-grade Air Conditioning units. There are separate entries to the East wing roof and West wing roof at the penthouse level. The stone- capped parapet continues around the roof of each wing with the exception of the U-portion, which is lined with a metal rail and gutters. The penthouse roof is also relatively flat and has a stone parapet on all sides except the North. A gutter is also present where the parapet is absent. There is a downspout in each interior corner of the U-portion as well as at each exterior corner of the main building. Within the U-portion sits another mechanical/electrical area at ground level. A partial metal deck at the second-floor level contains five more Air Conditioning units. The deck is anchored to the façade and supported by steel beams. This deck is accessible by ladder. The entire area is separated from the parking garage by a partial stone and brick wall.

2.8

The mechanical systems in this building vary throughout. The use of many packaged, split system and window units is ineffective and inefficient. The current system does not provide adequate code ventilation requirements OVERVIEW for the majority of the building. The building’s various systems located throughout make maintenance costly and time consuming. A centralized Air Conditioning system that provides conditioning and adequate ventilation to the entire building is recommended. A building-wide system with adequate ventilation will improve occupant comfort and indoor air quality. A new building-wide system will have improved efficiencies of equipment and be capable of taking advantage of the diversity in occupancy loads for a building of this type.

The majority of the electrical systems in the facility are very aged and appear to have reached their life expectancy. Equipment appears to have been added on an as-needed basis. While various pieces of equipment can be reused, it is recommended that all electrical systems be replaced during the next major facility renovation.

The Fiscal Court Building is in moderate to poor condition. While the overall structure appears to be sound, many aspects of the building envelope are failing. The roof, stone and brick cladding, rear façade windows and other fenestration are all in need of major repairs or replacement. All major building systems including HVAC, lighting, plumbing, fire protection, communications, etc., need replacement or upgrades. Building interiors are substandard and are inefficiently laid out relative to program need and work flow. The building does not meet many current building code, life-safety and accessibility requirements which would need correction as part of a major renovation.

The building’s design gives it a small footprint and U-shaped floorplate. By the nature of its design, each of the already small floors is subdivided into three even smaller occupiable spaces (east wing, west wing and a very narrow band across the front). This basic layout, which cannot be changed even with a major renovation, creates very inefficient floor space. Circulation within spaces further eats away at the usable area. The already small usable areas will be made even smaller by the need to connect the northwest stair to the elevator lobby at each floor via a dedicated egress corridor.

2.9

Accessible restrooms will need to be added at every floor to provide men’s and women’s facilities at each level. A significant problem is the building’s low floor-to floor height, which results in inadequate above-ceiling plenum OVERVIEW space in which to house new HVAC, lighting and other overhead equipment.

There are no easy solutions to this problem other than the lowering of ceilings or soffits to uncomfortable levels or the elimination of ceilings in some areas. Of particular concern is the poor condition of the brick veneer façade. Large areas of the brick façade are experiencing stress cracks and joint failure. Multiple attempts at pointing the cracks and joints, sometimes with silicone sealant instead of pointing mortar, have only provided temporary repair at best. For the past decade or more, the brick ties that attach the brick veneer to the clay tile backup walls have been failing. As they rust away, the brick veneer separates from the backup wall, creating an unsafe condition where individual bricks or larger sections of veneer can break away and fall. This has occurred in the past, and an ongoing series of repairs has been attempted. Each time, only those areas where severe separation and bowing of the brick was evident were repaired. Every few years, more veneer failure occurs, and another emergency repair effort is made. Brick tie failure will continue, and perhaps accelerate, for the foreseeable future. This is a condition that must be permanently corrected across the entire façade as soon as possible, as it is a life safety issue with public sidewalks abutting the building on three sides.

A masonry expert’s opinion on what can be done to correct the failing masonry veneer was provided to Metro. This opinion noted that it is possible to repair the existing brick in place and permanently attach it to the clay tile backup wall; however, it is a very labor intensive and expensive operation. The other option is to remove all brick and replace with new to match existing. This would also be very expensive. Renovation of the Fiscal Court Building to meet current building codes, accessibility requirements and occupancy standards for office use would require upgrades or replacement of most interior and exterior building components and systems. Correction of problems with emergency egress, restrooms and the brick veneer façade are necessary. This would be a major renovation and would cost significantly more than the cost of comparable new construction.

2.10

LMPD Headquarters & Fiscal Court Building Options

The Metro Council added language to the FY19 Budget, Ordinance 108, Series 2018, directing the Office of Facilities & Fleet Management to LMPD HEADQUARTERS & begin the process of determining the new home for the occupants of FISCAL COURT BUILDING both the LMPD Headquarters and the Jefferson County Fiscal Court OPTIONS Building. This process will require that temporary measures be employed

to house the buildings occupants.

The current substandard conditions of the buildings, as indicated in the EOP report, necessitate that all the occupants be relocated to other buildings. The repairs necessary to rehab the current buildings appear cost prohibitive. As such, the Office of Facilities & Fleet Management has been searching for appropriate office space throughout Jefferson County. Although there are many available office buildings, few meet the requirements of the agencies housed in this space. For Instance, the occupants of the Fiscal Court Building require: access to the public, on- site parking, proximity to Hall of Justice & Judicial Center, and access to public transportation. Listed below are options for LMPD Headquarters and Fiscal Court Building that could be executed upon approval.

LMPD Headquarters Building Option 1 Relocate the Jefferson County Clerk Office (JCCO) from the Edison Center to a leased Building. This scenario assumes the new space will need renovations. Additionally, included in this option is the renovation of the Edison Center for the command staff of LMPD. It is anticipated the renovation will be minimal. The existing furnishings now located in the space will be retained by Metro but must be purchased from the JCCO. This relocation could be a permanent solution for the LMPD Command Staff and would not require any temporary relocation measures. The summary FY20 proforma for this Option is noted on page 3.2. The detailed 20-year proforma is in the Appendix. (Appendix, page 7.22 – Opinion of Probable Cost 1)

3.1

Summary FY20 Proforma – Move JCCO into Leased Space

LMPD HEADQUARTERS & Opinion of Probable Cost 1 FISCAL COURT BUILDING # Item Metric/ FY 20 TOTAL Growth OPTIONS Rate 1 One-Time Expenditures 2 Fit Up Leased Facility $60.00 $ 1,200,000 $60/sq.ft. for 20,000 sq. ft. Fit Up LMPD to Edison Ctr.~$450,000 $450,000 $ 450,000

3 Move cost ~$30,000 + furniture JCC $255,000 $ 255,000 ~$225,000 4 Subtotal - One-Time Expenditures $ 1,905,000 5 Recurring Expenditures 6 Estimated Annual Lease $10 per sq. ft.* $200,000 $ 200,000

7 Subtotal - Recurring Expenditures $ 200,000 9 TOTAL $ 2,105,000

3.2

Option 2

Relocate the Jefferson County Clerk Office (JCCO) from the Edison Center LMPD HEADQUARTERS & to a building purchased by Louisville Metro. This scenario assumes the FISCAL COURT BUILDING new space will require renovations. Included in this option is the OPTIONS renovation of the Edison Center for the command staff of LMPD. It is anticipated the renovation will be minimal. The existing furnishings now located in the space will be retained by Metro but must be purchased from the JCCO. This relocation could be a permanent solution for the LMPD Command Staff and would not require any temporary relocation measures. The summary FY 20 proforma for this Option is noted on page 3.4. The detailed 20-year proforma is in the Appendix. (Appendix, page 7.23 – Opinion of Probable Cost 2)

Note: Metro could consider the purchase of the Edison Center. Current appraisal suggests a price of $8,600,000 which includes the Edison Center and two other buildings located on the site. Additionally, to the South of the Edison Center and part of the overall complex, is a vacant parcel of land (1.329 acres) which could be purchased and allow for future growth at this site. The parcel is appraised at $142,000, Refer to Appendix, Appraisals, page 7.19)

The overflow jail, located on the third floor of the LMPD Headquarters, is to remain at same location until a feasible replacement is identified. A solution for the replacement of the overflow space in the LMPD Headquarters was discussed. This option for the jail space involved the relocation to the basement level of the Hall of Justice. This option is beyond the scope of this report and as such is not addressed herein.

Jefferson County Fiscal Court Building Option 1 1. All occupants to remain in the building indefinitely.

2. Renovate the exterior masonry veneer of the building to eliminate hazards. Since this assumes a long-term occupancy of the building, provide interior renovations of the building to improve the mechanical; plumbing and electrical systems. The summary FY20 proforma for this Option is noted on page 3.5. The detailed 20-year proforma is in the Appendix. (Appendix, page 7.24 - Opinion of Probable Cost 3)

3.3

Summary FY20 Proforma -Purchase Building for JCCO

LMPD HEADQUARTERS & Opinion of Probable Cost 2 FISCAL COURT BUILDING # Item Metric/ FY 20 Total OPTIONS Growth Rate

1 One-Time Expenditures 2 Fit Up/Renovation New Facility $60.00 $ 1,200,000 $60/sq.ft. for 20,000 sq. ft.

Fit Up LMPD to Edison $450,000 $ 450,000 Ctr.~$450,000 3 Move cost ~$30,000 + furniture $255,000 $ 255,000 JCC ~$225,000 4 Subtotal - One-Time $ 1,905,000 Expenditures 5 Recurring Expenditures 8 General Capital Repairs $1.62 Baseline $1.62/sq.ft. + inflation at 2% New Purchased Bldg.

9 Debt Service for New Facility5 $4,000,000 $ 286,073

10 Operating Cost for New Facility6 $6.00 $ 120,000 $6/sq.ft. for 20,000 sq.ft.

11 Subtotal - Recurring $ 406,073 Expenditures 12 13 TOTAL $ 2,311,073

3.4

Summary FY 20 Proforma-Retain FCB Infinitely Opinion of Probable Cost 3 # Item Metric/ FY 20 Total LMPD HEADQUARTERS & Growth Rate FISCAL COURT BUILDING 1 One-Time Expenditures OPTIONS 2 Masonry Replacement1 $ 3,250,000 3 Mechanical Improvements1 $ 6,968,000 4 Structural Repairs1 $ 750,000 5 Roof Replacement $ 350,000 6 Subtotal - One-Time Expenditures $ 11,318,000 7 Recurring Expenditures 8 Personnel - Wages2 3% $ 325,198 9 Personnel - Benefits3 71% $ 146,339 10 Non-Personnel Operating Costs4 2% $ 382,795 11 General Capital Repairs $1.62 $ 162,000 Baseline $1.62/sq.ft. + inflation at 2% 12 Subtotal - Recurring Expenditures $ 1,016,332 13 TOTAL $ 12,334,332

3.5

Option 2

LMPD HEADQUARTERS & 1. All occupants to remain in the building for 2-5 years and then FISCAL COURT BUILDING transition to another building that is Metro Owned. This option allows OPTIONS for the potential for Metro to purchase or construct another building

that will house all the occupants of the Fiscal Court Building. The summary FY20 proforma for this Option is noted on page 3.7. The detailed 20-year proforma is in the Appendix. (Appendix, page 7.25 - Opinion of Probable Cost 4)

2. Following the relocation of the Building occupants, Metro could demolish the Fiscal Court Building and prepare the property for future development. Option 3 1. Relocate all the occupants of the Fiscal Court Building to an existing office building and lease the necessary spaces for the county Attorney; Jefferson Court Clerk and the Jefferson County Sheriff. The building must be in reasonable proximity to Metro Hall, Hall of Justice and the Judicial Center. The summary FY20 proforma for this Option is noted on page 3.8. The detailed 20-year proforma is in the Appendix. (Appendix, page 7.26 – opinion of Probable Cost 5)

2. Following the relocation of the Building occupants, demolish the Fiscal Court Building and prepare the property for future development.

Option 4 1. Relocate all the occupants of the Fiscal Court Building to leased space for a period of 5 years for the County Attorney; Jefferson Court Clerk and the Jefferson County Sheriff. The building must be in reasonable proximity to Metro Hall, Hall of Justice and the Judicial Center.

2. Following the relocation of the Building occupants, demolish the Fiscal Court Building and prepare the property for future development.

3. During the 5-year lease period Metro to plan and construct a new building for the occupants of the Fiscal Court Building. The summary FY20 proforma for this Option is noted on page 3.9. The detailed 20- year proforma is in the Appendix. (Appendix, page 7.27 – Opinion of Probable Cost 6)

3.6

Summary FY 20 Proforma-Retain FCB 5 Years /Build New Opinion of Probable Cost 4 # Item Metric/ FY 20 Total LMPD HEADQUARTERS & Growth FISCAL COURT BUILDING Rate OPTIONS 1 One-Time Expenditures 2 Protective Netting $275,000 $ 275,000 3 Fit Up New Facility $60 $60/sf. for 73,000sf. 4 Move cost + furniture $3,000 $3K/employee; 234 employees 5 Demolish Fiscal Court Building1 $836,000 $836K EOP estimate 6 Subtotal - One-Time Expenditures $ 275,000 7 Recurring Expenditures 8 Personnel - Wages2 3% $ 325,000 9 Personnel - Benefits3 45% $ 325,198 10 Non-Personnel Operating Costs4 2% $ 146,339 11 General Capital Repairs $1.62 $ 382,795 Baseline $1.62/sf. +2% inflation 12 Fiscal Court Building Operating Savings

13 Fiscal Court Building Capital Repair Sav.

14 Debt Service for New Facility5 $20,000,000 General Capital Repairs $1.78 Baseline $1.78/sq.ft. based on start date of YR 6 + 2% inflation 15 Operating Cost for New Facility6 $6.00 $6/sf. - 73,000 sf 16 Subtotal - Recurring Expenditures $ 1,016,000 17 TOTAL $ 1,291,000

3.7

Summary FY 20 Proforma-Demo FCB & Lease Indefinitely

LMPD HEADQUARTERS & FISCAL COURT BUILDING Opinion of Probable Cost 5 OPTIONS # Item Metric/ FY 20 Total Growth Rate 1 One-Time Expenditures 2 Move cost & furniture $3,000 $ 702,000 $3K/employee; 234 employees

3 Demolish Fiscal Court Building1 $ 836,000 $ 836,000 $836K EOP estimate

4 Subtotal - One-Time Expenditures $ 1,538,000

5 Recurring Expenditures 6 Fiscal Court Building Operating Savings (non- 2% $ (383,000) personnel)

7 Fiscal Court Building Capital Savings $1.62 $ (158,760)

8 Lease $17.50/sf -. 90,125 sq. ft.; 4% increase $17.50 $ 1,577,000 with 10-year renewal

9 Subtotal - Recurring Expenditures $ 1,035,240

10 TOTAL $ 2,573,240

3.8

Summary FY 20 Proforma-Demo FCB & Lease For 5- Years & Transition to Metro-Owned Building LMPD HEADQUARTERS & Opinion of Probable Cost 6 FISCAL COURT BUILDING # Item Metric/ FY 20 Total Growth Rate OPTIONS 1 One-Time Expenditures 2 Move cost - leased space $400.00 $ 93,600 $400/employee; 234 employees 3 Demolish Fiscal Court Building1 $ 836,000 $ 836,000 $836K EOP estimate 4 Fit Up New Facility $60.00 $60/sf. - 73,000 sf 5 Move cost to new facility + furniture $3,000.00 $3K/employee; 234 employees total

6 Subtotal - One-Time Expenditures $ 929,600 7 Recurring Expenditures 8 Fiscal Court Building Operating Savings (non- 2% $ (383,000) personnel) 9 Fiscal Court Building Capital Savings $1.62 $ (158,760)

10 Lease $17.50 $ 1,278,000 $17.50/sf -73,000 sf w/annual increase

11 Debt Service for New Facility4 $20,000,000

12 General Capital Repairs $1.78 Baseline $1.78/sq.ft. based on start date of YR 6 + 2% inflation 13 Operating Cost for New Facility5 $6.00 $6/sf.- 73,000 sf 14 Subtotal - Recurring Expenditures $ 736,240 15 TOTAL $ 1,665,840

3.9

Long Range Options

Louisville Metro Government finds itself in a similar position to many municipalities across the country, with a large portfolio of inefficient work space and deteriorating buildings, requiring a backlog of deferred LONG RANGE OPTIONS maintenance. Numerous Metro buildings are no longer functional and cannot fully serve the occupying agency or the citizens requiring civic amenities. Many services are spread across Louisville Metro leading to confusion and inefficiency.

Long term, Facilities Management suggests a phased plan for Regional Government Service Centers that would consolidate services and vacate existing Metro leased properties to better serve the community. The Government Center concept would allow for adjacencies that are logical and ease confusion for all citizens. Suggestions are made below as to what agencies would be housed in these Government Centers, but further discussion should be held to develop this idea even further and to ensure the needs of all citizens are being met. Four Government Centers, West, East, South, and Central, would be distributed across Louisville Metro. The summary FY20 proforma for this Option is noted on page 4.2. The detailed 20-year proforma is in the Appendix. (Appendix, page 7.28 – Opinion of Probable Cost 7)

These Government Service Centers would ideally be in vacant “big box” stores or strip mall shopping centers that offer ample parking and high visibility. In addition, these types of buildings provide flexible space that could easily be built for a of multitude functions. Each Metro Government Service Center could offer services such as those noted below.

• Metro Council Offices • LMPD-District Headquarters • Community Wellness Services • County Clerk- License Plates • Circuit Clerk – Driver’s License • EMS -Remote Units • Community Recreation Centers • Library • Recycling Centers

In addition to better serving the community, this plan would also allow Metro to move agencies into more efficient space. Vacated properties could be sold, or repurposed, and multiple leases could be reduced or incorporated into a single master lease.

4.1

Summary FY 20 Proforma -Regional Government Centers Opinion of Probable Cost 7 # Item Metric/ FY 20 Total LONG RANGE OPTIONS Growth Rate

1 One-Time Expenditures 2 Fit Up/Renovation New Facility $33.50 $ 2,010,000 $33.50/sq.ft. for 60,000 sq. ft. 3 Move cost + furniture $3,000 $ 150,000 $3K/employee; 50 employees total

4 Subtotal - One-Time Expenditures $ 2,160,000

5 Recurring Expenditures 6 Personnel - Wages2 3% $ 325,198 7 Personnel - Benefits3 45% $ 146,339 8 General Capital Repairs $1.62 $ 97,200 Baseline $1.62/sq.ft. + inflation at 2% New Purchased Bldg. 9 Debt Service for New Facility5 $7,000,000 $ 500,628 10 Operating Cost for New Facility6 $6.00 $ 360,000 $6/sq.ft. for 60,000 sq.ft. 11 Subtotal - Recurring Expenditures $ 1,429,365

12 13 TOTAL $ 3,589,365

4.2

The financing of the Metro Service Centers could be handled through typical Metro bonding for each of these Centers or utilizing the Public/ LONG RANGE OPTIONS Private Partnership (P3) approach.

An example of the Government Service Center concept (Appendix, page 7.1 - Figure 1) and appropriate parcel type (Appendix, page 7.2 – Figure 2) are attached for reference.

In addition to the proposed regional Metro Government Service Centers, the Central Business District could be a location in which a new building would be constructed or purchased to house all of the occupants of the Fiscal Court Building as well as many other agencies that are now housed in leased spaces or Metro owned buildings that are beyond their useful life and are in such poor state of repair that it is not practical or feasible to renovate or in other buildings that could be available for private development or other disposition. This new building could house the following agencies:

Air Pollution Control District (APCD) Develop Louisville EMS- Administration Fire Department- Administration Human Relations Commission Metro Human Resources Jefferson County Attorney Jefferson County Clerk Jefferson County Sheriff Louisville Forward Office of Health and Equity Office of Management & Budget Metro Parks- Administration Parking Authority of River City (PARC) Public Works & Assets Property Valuation Administration (PVA) Resilience & Community Services

This building could be one that establishes a new and forward-thinking approach to how Louisville Metro is perceived. A building that creates a new identity for the future rather than the past. A building that is energy efficient; user friendly, centrally located and is primed to allow flexibility in use.

4.3

Option 1

LONG RANGE OPTIONS The report previously prepared and submitted by EOP Architects to Metro Council describes such a building and a method by which the design, construction and financing could be achieved. The Public/Private Partnership (P3) approach defined in that report is but one path to making this type of building a reality. The summary FY20 proforma for this Option is noted on page 4.5. The detailed 20-year proforma is in the Appendix. (Appendix, page 7.29 – Opinion of Probable Cost 8)

Option 2

The ability to construct a new building as noted above may not be a fiscally feasible undertaking. As such the purchase of an existing building in the Central Business District may provide a more reasonable approach to achieve the same result for a new Metro Government Center. Currently, the AT&T building located at 601 West Chestnut Street is for sale. Metro has approached the real estate broker who is representing the building owner. (Appendix, page 7.3 – Figure 3) This building is an example of what could be an appropriate location for Metro’s use as described on page 4.2 of this Section. A proforma has been prepared to illustrate the cost of acquiring and renovating this particular building to illustrate the potential for lower costs of purchasing and renovating as opposed to building a new structure. The summary FY20 proforma for this Option is noted on page 4.6. The detailed 20-year proforma is in the Appendix. (Appendix, page 7.31 – Opinion of Probable Cost 9)

4.4

Summary FY 20 Proforma -Build New Building Opinion of Probable Cost 8 # Item Metric/ FY 20 Total Growth Rate LONG RANGE OPTIONS 1 One-Time Expenditures 2 Protective Netting $275,000 $ 275,000 3 Fit Up New Facility $60 $60/sf - 73,000 sf 4 Move cost + furniture $3,000 $3K/employee; 234 employees 5 EMS & PVA Amortization Due YR5 (YR10 of leases) $43,393

6 Demolish Fiscal Court Building1 $836,000 $836K EOP estimate 7 Subtotal - One-Time Expenditures $ 275,000 8 Recurring Expenditures 2 9 Personnel - Wages 3% $ 325,198 3 10 Personnel - Benefits 45% $ 146,339 4 11 Non-Personnel Operating Costs 2% $ 382,795 12 General Capital Repairs $1.62 Baseline $1.62/sq.ft. + 2% inflation $ 162,000 13 Fiscal Court Building Operating Savings 2%

14 Fiscal Court Building Capital Repair Sav. $1.62

15 Annual Lease Sav. HRC, PVA, EMS $377,265 5 16 Debt Service for New Facility $78,000,000 17 General Capital Repairs $1.78 Baseline $1.78/sq.ft. based on start date of YR 6 + 2% inflation 18 Operating Cost for New Facility6 $6.00 $6/sq.ft. for 226,000 sq.ft. 19 Subtotal - Recurring Expenditures $ 1,016,332 20 TOTAL $ 1,291,332

4.5

Summary FY 20 Proforma -AT&T Building Purchase

Opinion of Probable Cost 9 LONG RANGE OPTIONS # Item Metric/ FY 20 Total Growth Rate

1 One-Time Expenditures 2 Site Improvements $1,500,000 $ 1,500,000 3 Purchase AT&T Building $10,200,000 $ 10,200,000 4 Fit Up Costs $7,531,797 $ 7,531,797 5 Fiscal Court Building Demo $836,000 $ 836,000 5 Subtotal - One-Time Expenditures $20,067,797 $ 20,067,797 6 Recurring Expenditures 7 General Capital Repairs $1.78 Baseline $1.78/sq.ft. + inflation at 2% - 240,000 sq. ft. 8 Employee Offsite Parking Garage fees $192,000 $ 192,000 at 1% Annual Inflation

9 Fiscal Court Building Operating Savings $383,000 $ (383,000) 2%(Non-Personnel) 10 Fiscal Court Building Capital Repair Sav. $1 $ (61,132)

11 Debt Service for New Facility** $20,067,797 $ 1,435,214 12 Average Operating Cost for Metro $ 1,440,000 Facility $6/sq.ft. for 240,000 sq.ft. 13 Subtotal - Recurring Expenditures $ 2,623,082 14 15 TOTAL+ $ 22,690,879

4.6

Disposition of Surplus Property

Metro Council added language to the FY 2018-2019 Operating Budget, Ordinance 108, Series 2018, Part I.E.1.d as follows: “The Director of Facilities and Fleet Management is requested to provide a long-term plan DISPOSITION OF for disposition of surplus property by December 31, 2018.” SURPLUS PROPERTY The Office of Facilities & Fleet Management has complied a comprehensive list of all Metro Properties under their umbrella of responsibility that can be considered as surplus that could be sold and redeveloped. All the surplus properties noted therein are described as to function, location, condition and future use. (Table 1, page 5.2) It is important to note, that the Agencies housed in these facilities are not being eliminated and could be housed in newer, more efficient facilities, possibly in combination with other agencies as described in the Regional Government Center concept.

The Committee selected the noted buildings as being subject to future sale or other disposition. A few of the buildings that are noted within Table 1 have been recently appraised by Bell Ferris, Inc., a certified MAI real estate appraiser. These appraisals provide Metro with vital information as to the value of these properties should they become an asset for sale or development by outside groups. (Appendix, pages 7.3 – 7.21 – Appraisals)

All Surplus properties will be considered by Louisville Forward for future development or sale.

5.1

TABLE 1 - METRO FACILITIES -SURPLUS PROPERTIES DISPOSITION PROPERTY LOCATION DISPOSITION COMMENTS Fiscal Court Building 531 Court Place Demolish and relocate occupants- site available for redevelopment. Options for relocation detailed within report. DISPOSITION OF SURPLUS PROPERTY LMPD-HQ 633 West Jefferson Street Relocate occupants to the Edison Center and demolish at a time in the future. Corrections overflow stays active until alternative site is identified. Site ultimately available for sale and redevelopment LMPD Parking Lot 300 South 8th Street Property can be made available for sale and development possibly as part of larger parcel when combined with PARC properties. Alternative parking would be needed. CCC Community Corrections Center 316 East Chestnut Street Building is in poor condition -Location is prime for Healthcare development- building can be sold in future once new correctional facility is constructed on alternative site Metro Wellness Center* 400 South 4th Street Building can be sold for redevelopment- Wellness Center can be relocated to future Regional Government Service Center. Southwest Gov't Center-(LMPD'S 3rd 7219 Dixie Highway Building can be sold & redeveloped when regional Government Service Center is developed Division) * PW Electrical Shop 636 E. Gray Street Location is prime for Healthcare development. Operation could be relocated to allow for program growth. Health Dept. - HQ (Public Health and 400 E. Gray Street Location is prime for Healthcare development- building can be sold in future once new Health Dept Building is constructed on Wellness) * another site --Building owned by Board of Health Health Lab Bldg.* 430 E. Gray Street Location is prime for Healthcare development- building can be sold in future once new Health Dept Building is constructed on another site --Building owned by Board of Health

LMPD Auto Theft Garage 1547 Frankfort Ave Located in area prime for development. Garage could be relocated to different site. LMPD-5th Division 2301 Douglass Boulevard Building in an inappropriate location, can be relocated in favor of a more efficient and modern facility to serve this district. LMPD K-9 Unit 3411 Robards Court Building can be sold and redeveloped when regional Government Service Center is developed LMPD-Firing Range 4201 Algonquin Pkwy. Building could be sold and incorporated into LMPD campus at Edison Center. LMPD-PIU 3672 Taylor Boulevard Property could be sold, and services relocated to other standalone facility. Louisville Gardens 525 Muhammad Ali Blvd. Building has been vacated for many years and is currently be offered by Develop Louisville for redevelopment

Appraised Value* Metro Wellness Center-$1.5M Southwest Government Center-$1.9M Health Department- $3.8M *Appraised 11/2015

5.2

Recommendations

As stated in the EOP study dated April 20, 2018 and previously submitted to Metro Council, Metro Government finds itself in a position where decisions need to be made, regarding the future of LMPD Headquarters RECOMMENDATIONS and Fiscal Court Building. Based on the information gathered for this report, the Committee submits for consideration, the following recommendations.

LMPD Headquarters

Relocate the Jefferson County Clerk Board of Elections Office, now housed on the 3rd Floor of the Edison Center, to a new location. (location not finalized). The timetable for this relocation is estimated to be nine months, from the date of authorization to proceed. The County Clerk’s Staff is onboard with this relocation; the Facilities Team has and will continue to work closely with their representatives, ensuring their new space provides the ability to better serve our citizens, as well as create a much more efficient operation.

Relocate the LMPD Command Staff to the third (3rd) floor of the Edison Center. Minimal renovation is required of this space to accommodate the Command Staff.

FY20 Budget Impact

Capital Appropriation $1,905,000 Operating Net Increase $ 120,000

6.1

It is further recommended that Metro continue discussions with the developer, to purchase the Edison Center. Historic Tax Credits were used in financing of the extensive renovation project. As such, the developer RECOMMENDATIONS must remain as principal in the project for a minimum of 5 years after construction.

Current appraisal suggests a price of $8,600,000 which includes the Edison Center and two other buildings located on the site. Additionally, to the South of the Edison Center and part of the overall complex, is a vacant parcel of land (1.329 acres) which could be purchased and allow for future growth at this site. This parcel is appraised at $142,000, Refer to Appendix, Appraisals, page 7.19). The purchase of the Edison Center and the adjacent parcel would allow further consolidation of LMPD operations. This would include moving divisions currently in leased space or from Metro facilities that could be sold or repurposed.

Fiscal Court Building

The AT&T building is located at 601 West Chestnut Street. This building is well suited to house the occupants of the Fiscal Court Building as it meets all the criteria noted within this report. Secondly, this building can house the Metro agencies noted in Section 4, page 4.2 of this report, thereby creating a new Metro Government Center for the Central Business District. The building has a very distinctive and contemporary architectural style that evokes a strong presence and is well suited to the needs of Metro. The building has approximately 247,500 gross square feet, 4 floors plus a basement. The property has on-site parking for 124 vehicles that could be expanded to accommodate a total of 250 vehicles. Additionally, Metro employees who would occupy this building would be able to park in the adjacent parking garage located on 7th Street. Due to the conditions of the Fiscal Court Building, and the backlog of required capital repairs, it is recommended that negotiations commence immediately for the purchase of the ATT Building. The timeline for space planning, design and subsequent renovations would be approximately 24 months.

6.2

Once the Fiscal Court Building is vacated, it is recommended that the building be demolished at soon as practical. The time line for the demolition process to be completed is estimated to be nine months RECOMMENDATIONS

FY20 Budget Impact

Onetime Costs Building Purchase $10,200,000 Site Improvements $1,500,000 FCB Demolition $836,000 Fit-up Costs $7,531,787 Total Cost $20,067,797

Disposition of Surplus Property

The Committee was directed to review the Metro property portfolio and make recommendations for the future. Many agencies are currently housed in antiquated, inefficient facilities. Leases are also in place for agencies that may require a specific geographic location.

Long term, the Committee recommends a phased plan for Regional Government Service Centers that would consolidate services to better serve the community. The Government Center concept would allow for adjacencies that are logical and ease confusion for all citizens.

In addition to better serving the community, this plan would also allow Metro to move agencies into more efficient space from properties that are no longer viable. Vacated properties could be sold, or repurposed, and multiple leases could be reduced or incorporated into a single master lease.

It is understood that a phased approach, crossing many fiscal cycles, would be needed to implement such a large-scale plan. More study would be required to identify specific locations, financial impact and to formalize the Regional Government Service Center concept.

6.3

Appendix

Figures

• Figure 1 Page 7.1 • Figure 2 Page 7.2 • Figure 3 Page 7.3

Appraisals

• Southwest Government Center Page 7.5 • Metro Wellness Center Page 7.9 • Edison Center Page 7.13 • Parcel @ Edison Center Page 7.19

Opinions of Probable Cost

• OOPC-1 Page 7.22 • OOPC-2 Page 7.23 • OOPC-3 Page 7.24 • OOPC-4 Page 7.25 • OOPC 5 Page 7.26 • OOPC-6 Page 7.27 • OOPC-7 Page 7.28 • OOPC-8 Page 7.29 • OOPC-9 Page 7.31

Figure 1 The floor plan below is based on a typical “Big Box” retail store that can be transformed into a Louisville Metro Regional Services Center. The FIGURES occupants noted are those that have been identified in Section 4 of this report for the East, South, Central and West Locations.

7.1

Figure 2

Example of appropriate property for a Regional Government Center: FIGURES

7.2

Figure 3

FIGURES

7.3

FIGURES

This page intentionally left blank

7.4

APPRAISALS

APPRAISAL REPORT Suburban Office Building

7215 Dixie Highway Jefferson County Louisville, Kentucky 40258

PREPARED FOR: Louisville Metro Government Facilities & Fleet Management Cathy Duncan 745 W Main Street, Suite 300 Louisville, Kentucky 40202

DATE OF REPORT: December 21, 2018

EFFECTIVE DATE OF APPRAISAL: “As Is” Market Value – December 14, 2018

APPRAISER: Jason L. Ferris, MAI, SRA Bell Ferris, Inc. 13113 Eastpoint Park Boulevard Suite H Louisville, Kentucky 40223

BELL FERRIS FILE NUMBER: 400-21-18-AR

7.5

December 21, 2018

Louisville Metro Government APPRAISALS Facilities & Fleet Management Cathy Duncan 745 W Main Street, Suite 300 Louisville, Kentucky 40202

SUBJECT: Louisville Metro Southwest Government Center 7215 Dixie Highway Jefferson County Louisville, Kentucky 40258 Bell Ferris File # 400-21-18-AR

Dear Client: We are pleased to transmit this Appraisal Report that was prepared on the referenced property. The purpose of this appraisal is to derive our opinion of the “as is” market value of the fee simple estate of the property, as of December 14, 2018, the effective date of the appraisal. Our opinion of the market value is premised upon the Assumptions and Limiting Conditions. The definition of market value is in Addendum.

This report is intended to comply with the reporting requirements set forth under Standard Rule 2- 2(a) of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice for an Appraisal Report. As such, it presents sufficient discussions of the data, reasoning and analyses that were used in the appraisal process to develop the opinion of the value. The depth of discussion contained in this report is specific to the needs of the client and for the intended use as noted herein.

The subject consists of one parcel improved with an office building located at 7215 Dixie Highway in Louisville, Kentucky 40258. The Jefferson County PVA Office identifies the parcels as 0115-0028-0000 with 6.574 acres. The office building built in 1977 has two-stories plus a finished lower level and contains 28,770 square feet of gross building area and 27,200 square feet of net rentable area. Other park improvements are not considered in this analysis. The subject property is located in Flood Zone X and AE according to flood panel number 21111C0089E that is dated December 5, 2006.

7.6

APPRAISALS

7215 Dixie Highway Louisville, Kentucky 40228

Based on the analyses and conclusions, and subject to the definitions, assumptions, and limiting conditions expressed in this report, it is our opinion that the “as is” market value of the fee simple estate of the subject, as of December 14, 2018, is:

ONE MILLION NINE HUNDRED FORTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($1,940,000)

The preceding value conclusion is subject to the following General Assumptions, Extraordinary Assumptions, Hypothetical Conditions and Limiting Conditions. If these assumptions, which are directly related to this specific assignment, are found to be false, it could alter the appraiser’s opinions and conclusions.

General Assumptions 1. Financing is available for the subject property at current market rates. 2. The subject property is environmentally clean of all surface and subsurface contaminants. Further, the appraiser is not qualified to determine the presence or cause of mold, the type of mold or whether the mold might pose any risk to the property or its inhabitants. The value herein is based on the subject property being environmentally clean. 3. I am not able to view the roof from the ground. I assume the roof is in average overall condition, has 10 or more years of remaining economic life, and requires no maintenance beyond typical annual routine maintenance. 4. The subject property is referred to as 7215 Outer Loop in Louisville, Kentucky 40258 according to the Jefferson County PVA office and in this Appraisal Report. The physical address for the Louisville Metro Southwest Government Center is 7219 Dixie Highway in Louisville, Kentucky 40258.

7.7

Hypothetical Conditions 5. The subject property is currently zoned M-2. The office use is APPRAISALS considered to be a legally nonconforming use. We assume that the current owner, Louisville Metro Government, would rezone the property to OR-3 prior to sale. We have not considered any cost associated with rezoning the property; we assume this would be an internal government process.

If you have any questions or comments, please contact the undersigned. Thank you for the opportunity to be of service.

Respectfully submitted, Bell Ferris, Inc.

Jason L. Ferris, MAI, SRA Certified General Real Estate Appraiser Kentucky License Number #3736

7.8

APPRAISALS

APPRAISAL REPORT General & Medical Office Building 400 S 1st Street Jefferson County Louisville, Kentucky 40202

PREPARED FOR: Louisville Metro Government Fleet & Facilities Management Cathy Duncan 745 W Main Street, Suite 300 Louisville, Kentucky 40202

DATE OF REPORT: December 28, 2018

EFFECTIVE DATE OF APPRAISAL: “As Is” Market Value – December 14, 2018

APPRAISER: Jason L. Ferris, MAI, SRA Bell Ferris, Inc. 13113 Eastpoint Park Boulevard Suite H Louisville, Kentucky 40223

BELL FERRIS FILE NUMBER: 400-22-18-AR

7.9

December 28, 2018

Louisville Metro Government APPRAISALS Facilities & Fleet Management Cathy Duncan 745 W Main Street, Suite 300 Louisville, Kentucky 40202

SUBJECT: Medical Office Building 400 S 1st Street Jefferson County Louisville, Kentucky 40202 Bell Ferris File # 400-22-18-AR

Dear Client: We are pleased to transmit the Appraisal Report that was prepared on the referenced property. The purpose of this appraisal is to derive our opinion of the “as is” market value of the fee simple estate of the subject property, as of December 14, 2018, the effective date of the appraisal. Our opinion of market value is premised upon the Assumptions and Limiting Conditions. The definition of market value is in the Addendum.

This report is intended to comply with the reporting requirements set forth under Standard Rule 2-2(a) of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice for an Appraisal Report. As such, it presents sufficient discussions of the data, reasoning and analyses that were used in the appraisal process to develop the opinion of the value. The depth of discussion contained in this report is specific to the needs of the client and for the intended use as noted herein.

The subject is a general office/medical office building with the address 400 S 1st Street, in Louisville, Kentucky 40202. It is located in downtown Louisville’s Central Business District south of W Jefferson Street, just west of Interstate 65, north of W Muhammad Ali Boulevard and east of S 2nd Street on the corner of W Liberty Street and S 1st Street. The subject known as Louisville Metro Government Employee Wellness Center is identified by the Jefferson County PVA as parcel 017F-0058-0000 with 0.503 acres. The site is improved with an office building containing 13,729 square feet of gross building area. It is currently zoned C-2, Commercial District and D, Downtown form district.

7.10

APPRAISALS

400 S 1st Street Louisville, Kentucky

ONE MILLION FOUR HUNDRED EIGHTY THOUSAND DOLLARS ($1,480,000)

1. Financing is assumed available for the subject property at current market rates. 2. The subject is environmentally clean of all surface and subsurface contaminants. During the inspection, no environmental concerns were noted; however, appraisers are not qualified to inspect for hazardous chemicals or other environmental concerns. Further, the appraiser is not qualified to determine the presence or cause of mold, the type of mold or whether the mold might pose any risk to the property or its inhabitants. 3. The building measurements for the subject were taken from on-site measurements performed by Jason L. Ferris, MAI, during our inspection on December 14, 2018. The total land area for the subject was determined from the Jefferson County PVA office.

7.11

4. We were not able to view the roof; we assume the roof is in good working order and is not in need of replacement or significant repair. We assume that the owner maintains the building adequately. APPRAISALS If you have any questions or comments, please contact the undersigned. Thank you for the opportunity to be of service.

Respectfully submitted, Bell Ferris, Inc.

Jason L. Ferris, MAI, SRA Certified General Real Estate Appraiser Indiana Certification Number #CG40801098 Kentucky Certification Number #3736

7.12

APPRAISALS

APPRAISAL REPORT

The Edison Center 701 W Ormsby Avenue Jefferson County Louisville, Kentucky 40203

PREPARED FOR: Louisville Metro Government Ms. Cathy Duncan Facilities & Fleet Management 745 W Main Street Suite 300 Louisville, Kentucky 40202

DATE OF REPORT: December 27, 2018

EFFECTIVE DATE OF APPRAISAL: “As Is” Market Value – December 7, 2018 Hypothetical “As Is” Market Value – December 7, 2018

APPRAISER: Jason L. Ferris, MAI, SRA Bell Ferris, Inc. 13113 Eastpoint Park Boulevard Suite H Louisville, Kentucky 40223

BELL FERRIS FILE NUMBER: 0400-19-18-AR

7.13

December 27, 2018

Louisville Metro Government APPRAISALS Ms. Cathy Duncan Facilities & Fleet Management 745 W Main Street Suite 300 Louisville, Kentucky 40202

SUBJECT: The Edison Center 701 W Ormsby Avenue Jefferson County Louisville, Kentucky 40203 Bell Ferris. File # 0400-19-18-AR

Dear Client: We are pleased to transmit this Appraisal Report that was prepared on the referenced property. The purpose of this appraisal is to derive our opinion of the “as is” market value of the leased fee estate as of December 7, 2018, the effective date of the appraisal. In addition, we were asked to determine our opinion of the hypothetical, “as is” market value of the leased fee estate of the office building only. Our opinions of the market value are premised upon the Assumptions and Limiting Conditions. The definition of market value is in Addendum.

This report is intended to comply with the reporting requirements set forth under Standard Rule 2-2(a) of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice for an Appraisal Report. As such, it presents sufficient discussions of the data, reasoning and analyses that were used in the appraisal process to develop the opinion of the value. The depth of discussion contained in this report is specific to the needs of the client and for the intended use as noted herein.

The subject, known as The Edison Center, is located on one parcel of land with the address 701 W Ormsby Avenue in Louisville, Kentucky 40203. The site is located inside the Watterson Expressway (I- 264), south of W Broadway, north of W Magnolia Avenue, west of Interstate 65 between S 9th Street and S 7th Street. The parcel is identified by the Jefferson County PVA office as 031D-0001-0000 with 5.554 acres and is improved with three buildings.

7.14

The first building, the Edison Center, is a 3-story brick office building containing 119,624 square feet of total gross building area built in 1900 and renovated in 2015; the second building is a 2-story brick restaurant with an outdoor patio containing 3,004 square feet of total gross building APPRAISALS area built in 1900 and renovated in 2015; and a 1-story steel-framed warehouse with 5,247 square feet of total gross building area built in 1980. The subject property is zoned EZ-1, Enterprise Zone District, and TW, Traditional Workplace Form District and is in Flood Zone X according to flood panel number 21111C0041E that is dated December 5, 2006.

THE EDISON CENTER – LOUISVILLE, KENTUCKY

Office Building Commercial Building Edison Center North Lime Coffee & Doughnut 701 W Ormsby Ave 1228 S 7th Street

Warehouse Jefferson County Sheriff 700 Dumesnil Street

The Edison Center 701 W Ormsby Avenue Jefferson County Louisville, Kentucky 40203

7.15

Edison Center – Whole Complex Based on the analyses and conclusions, and subject to the definitions, assumptions, and limiting conditions expressed in this report, it is our APPRAISALS opinion that the “as is” market value of the leased fee estate of the subject building, as of December 7, 2018, is:

EIGHT MILLION SIX HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($8,600,000)

Edison Center – Office Building Only Based on the analyses and conclusions, and subject to the definitions, assumptions, and limiting conditions expressed in this report, it is our opinion that the hypothetical “as is” market value of the leased fee estate of the subject building, as of December 7, 2018, is:

EIGHT MILLION ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS ($8,100,000)

7.16

4. We received a copy of the lease agreement dated May 6, 2015 between the Edison Center, LLC and Louisville/Jefferson County Metro Government with all the amendments. We received copies of the leases for the Sheriff (unsigned) and the APPRAISALS coffee shop. We have considered these buildings to be leased. We have utilized this information in our report. 5. We estimated the age of the warehouse based on our inspection since no information was available regarding the building. We have utilized a year built of 1980 based in our analysis.

Hypothetical Condition 6. In addition to the “as is” value, we have valued the subject property with the hypothetical condition that the parcel is split with 4.7 acres allocated to the office building, 0.59 acres allocated to the industrial warehouse and 0.264 acres allocated to the commercial building. This value is for the office building only, excluding the industrial and commercial building.

If you have any questions or comments, please contact the undersigned. Thank you for the opportunity to be of service.

Respectfully submitted, BELL FERRIS, INC.

Jason L. Ferris, MAI, SRA Certified General Real Estate Appraiser Kentucky License Number #3736

7.17

APPRAISALS

THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK

7.18

APPRAISALS

APPRAISAL REPORT

Industrial Land 1358 S 7th Street Jefferson County Louisville, Kentucky 40208

PREPARED FOR: Louisville Metro Government Ms. Cathy Duncan Facilities & Fleet Management

Louisville Metro Government 745 W Main Street Suite 300 Louisville, Kentucky 40202

DATE OF REPORT: December 17, 2018

EFFECTIVE DATE OF APPRAISAL: “As Is” Market Value – December 7, 2018

APPRAISER: Jason L. Ferris, MAI, SRA Bell Ferris, Inc. 13113 Eastpoint Park Boulevard Suite H Louisville, Kentucky 40223

BELL FERRIS, INC. FILE NUMBER: 1600-20-18-AR

7.19

December 17, 2018

Louisville Metro Government APPRAISALS Ms. Cathy Duncan Facilities & Fleet Management Louisville Metro Government 745 W Main Street Suite 300 Louisville, Kentucky 40208

Subject: Industrial Land 1358 S 7th Street Jefferson County Louisville, Kentucky 40208 Bell Ferris, Inc. File # 1600-20-18-AR Dear Client:

We are pleased to transmit this appraisal report that was prepared on the above referenced properties. The purpose of this appraisal is to derive an opinion of the “as is” market value of the fee simple estate of the subject as of December 7, 2018, the effective date of the appraisal. Our opinion of the market value is premised upon the Assumptions and Limiting Conditions. The definition of market value is in Addendum.

This report is intended to comply with the reporting requirements set forth under Standard Rule 2-2(a) of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice for an appraisal report. As such, it presents only summary discussions of the data, reasoning and analyses that were used in the appraisal process to develop the opinion of value. Supporting documentation concerning the data, reasoning and analyses is retained in our file. The depth of discussion contained in this report is specific to the needs of the client and for the intended use as noted herein.

The subject property consists of one vacant parcel of land in the Limerick neighborhood, inside the Watterson Expressway (I-264), south of W Broadway, north of W Magnolia Avenue, west of Interstate 65 between S 9th Street and S 7th Street. The parcel of land is identified by the Jefferson County PVA Office as 031G-0018-0000 containing 1.329 acres or 57,891 square feet. According to flood map panel number 21111C0041E with an effective date of December 5, 2006, the subject property is located in Zone X, which is outside of the 100-year flood zone.

7.20

The preceding value conclusions are subject to the following General Assumptions, Extraordinary Assumptions, Hypothetical Conditions and Limiting Conditions. If these assumptions, which are directly related to this specific assignment, are found to be false, it could alter the appraiser’s opinions and conclusions.

1. Financing is available for each subject property at current market rates. 2. The subject property is environmentally clean of all surface and subsurface contaminants. 3. The total land area for the sites was taken from the Jefferson County PVA tax card. We reserve the right to make necessary adjustments to the value if there is any discrepancy in the total land area. 4. We assume the site has no historical overlay and neighborhood restrictions, including façade, design easements, etc.

If you have any questions or comments, please contact the undersigned. Thank you for the opportunity to be of service.

Respectfully submitted, BELL FERRIS, INC.

Jason L. Ferris, MAI, SRA Certified General Real Estate Appraiser Kentucky Certificate #3736

7.21

Opinion of Probable Cost -1 - Move Jefferson County Clerk out of Edison Ctr. Leased Space Into New Leased Space Note: With the exception of metric/growth rate figures, all numbers rounded to $000s # Item Metric/ Year 1 Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year TOTAL OPINIONS OF PROBABLE Growth Rate 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 1 One-Time Expenditures COSTS 2 Fit Up Leased Facility $60.00 1,200 1,200 $60/sq.ft. for 20,000 sq. ft. Fit Up LMPD to Edison $450,000 450 450 Ctr.~$450,000 3 Move cost ~$30,000 + $255,000 255 255 furniture JCC ~$225,000 4 Subtotal - One-Time $1,905 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,905 Expenditures 5 Recurring Expenditures 6 Estimated Annual Lease $200,000 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 200 4,000 $10 per sq. ft.* 7 Subtotal - Recurring $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $4,000 Expenditures 9 TOTAL $2,105 $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $200 $5,905

Average annual cost $295

Notes: *Scenario does not include any rate increases for the duration of the assumed 20-year lease Scenario assumes Metro staffing level is maintained. All dollar figures reflects present value. They are not time valued. Scenario assumes no projected savings as vacated space in Edison Ctr. Will be backfilled by LMPD

7.22

Opinion of Probable Cost - 2 - Purchase New Building To House Jefferson County Clerk From Edison Center Note: With the exception of metric/growth rate figures, all numbers rounded to $000s # Item Metric/ Year 1 Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year TOTAL OPINIONS OF PROBABLE Growth 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Rate COSTS 1 One-Time Expenditures 2 Fit Up/Renovation New Facility $60.00 1,200 1,200 $60/sq.ft. for 20,000 sq. ft.

Fit Up LMPD to Edison $450,000 450 450 Ctr.~$450,000 3 Move cost ~$30,000 + furniture $255,000 255 255 JCC ~$225,000 4 Subtotal - One-Time $1,905 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,905 Expenditures 5 Recurring Expenditures 8 General Capital Repairs $1.62 32 33 34 34 35 36 36 37 38 39 39 40 41 42 43 560 Baseline $1.62/sq.ft. + inflation at 2% New Purchased Bldg.

9 Debt Service for New Facility5 $4,000,000 286 286 286 286 286 286 286 286 286 286 286 286 286 286 286 286 286 286 286 286 5,721

10 Operating Cost for New $6.00 120 122 125 127 130 132 135 138 141 143 146 149 152 155 158 162 165 168 171 175 2,916 Facility6 $6/sq.ft. for 20,000 sq.ft. 11 Subtotal - Recurring $406 $408 $411 $413 $416 $451 $454 $458 $461 $465 $468 $472 $475 $479 $483 $487 $491 $495 $499 $504 $9,197 Expenditures 12 13 TOTAL $2,311 $408 $411 $413 $416 $451 $454 $458 $461 $465 $468 $472 $475 $479 $483 $487 $491 $495 $499 $504 $11,102

Average annual cost $555

Notes:

5Debt service estimate assumes an interest rate of 3.75%. Purchase cost of $4,000,000 for 20,000 sq. ft. equates to $200/sq.ft.

6Assumes $6/sq.ft. + 2% inflation

Scenario assumes Metro staffing level is maintained.

Scenario does not assume resale value of newly purchased facility.

All dollar figures reflect present value. They are not time valued.

7.23

Opinion of Probable Cost - 3 - Retain Fiscal Court Building Indefinitely: Complete masonry repairs and other necessary capital improvements to keep the building online. Note: With the exception of metric/growth rate figures, all numbers rounded to $000s # Item Metric/ Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year TOTAL OPINIONS OF PROBABLE Growth 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Rate COSTS 1 One-Time Expenditures 2 Masonry $3,250 $3,250 Replacement1 3 Mechanical 6,968 6,968 Improvements1 4 Structural 750 750 Repairs1 5 Roof 350 350 Replacement 6 Subtotal - One- $11,318 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $11,318 Time Expenditures 7 Recurring Expenditures 8 Personnel - 3% 325 335 345 355 366 377 388 400 412 424 437 450 464 478 492 507 522 538 554 570 8,738 Wages2 9 Personnel - 71% 146 167 193 224 260 268 276 284 292 301 310 320 329 339 349 360 371 382 393 405 5,969 Benefits3 10 Non-Personnel 2% 383 394 406 418 431 444 457 471 485 499 514 530 546 562 579 596 614 633 652 671 10,286 Operating Costs4 11 General Capital $1.62 162 165 169 172 175 179 182 186 190 194 197 201 205 210 214 218 222 227 231 236 3,936 Repairs Baseline $1.62/sq.ft. + inflation at 2% 12 Subtotal - $1,016 $1,062 $1,113 $1,169 $1,232 $1,267 $1,304 $1,341 $1,379 $1,419 $1,459 $1,501 $1,544 $1,588 $1,634 $1,681 $1,729 $1,779 $1,830 $1,882 $28,929 Recurring Expenditures 13 TOTAL $12,334 $1,062 $1,113 $1,169 $1,232 $1,267 $1,304 $1,341 $1,379 $1,419 $1,459 $1,501 $1,544 $1,588 $1,634 $1,681 $1,729 $1,779 $1,830 $1,882 $40,247

14 Average annual cost $2,012

Notes:

1 Per EOP report part 6E. Fiscal Court Building Renovation

2FY18 Actuals + two years of growth at 3% (assumes Year 1 = FY20)

3Assumes the following fringe rates, which reflects 12% increase for years 2-5: 45% year one; 50% year two; 56% year three; 63% year four; 71% year five; 71% years 6-20

4FY18 Actuals + two years of growth at 2% (assumes Year 1 = FY20)

5All dollar figures reflect present value. They are not time valued.

7.24

Opinion of Probable Cost - 4 - Retain Fiscal Court Building for 5 Years & Subsequently Own: Stabilize masonry & keep Fiscal Court Building for 5 years/ transition to Metro-owned property & demolish Fiscal Court Building Note: With the exception of metric/growth rate figures, all numbers rounded to $000s # Item Metric/ Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year Year Year Year Year Year 15 Year Year Year Year Year TOTAL OPINIONS OF PROBABLE Growth 10 11 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 20 Rate COSTS 1 One-Time Expenditures 2 Protective Netting $275,000 $275 $275 3 Fit Up New Facility $60 4,380 4,380 $60/sf. for 73,000sf. 4 Move cost + furniture $3,000 702 702 $3K/employee; 234 employees 5 Demolish Fiscal Court $836,000 923 923 Building1 $836K EOP estimate 6 Subtotal - One-Time $275 $0 $0 $0 $5,082 $923 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,280 Expenditures 7 Recurring Expenditures 8 Personnel - Wages2 3% 325 335 345 355 366 377 388 400 412 424 437 450 464 478 492 507 522 538 554 570 8,738 9 Personnel - Benefits3 45% 146 167 193 224 260 268 276 284 292 301 310 320 329 339 349 360 371 382 393 405 5,969 10 Non-Personnel Operating 2% 383 394 406 418 431 2,032 Costs4 11 General Capital Repairs $1.62 162 165 169 172 175 843 Baseline $1.62/sf. +2% inflation 12 Fiscal Court Building -444 -457 -471 -485 -499 -514 -530 -546 -562 -579 -596 -614 -633 -652 -671 -8,254 Operating Savings 13 Fiscal Court Building Capital -179 -182 -186 -190 -194 -197 -201 -205 -210 -214 -218 -222 -227 -231 -236 -3,093 Repair Sav. 14 Debt Service for New $20,000,000 1,430 1,430 1,430 1,430 1,430 1,430 1,430 1,430 1,430 1,430 1,430 1,430 1,430 1,430 1,430 1,430 22,886 Facility5 General Capital Repairs $1.78 130 133 135 138 141 143 146 149 152 155 158 162 165 168 171 2,247 Baseline $1.78/sq.ft. based on start date of YR 6 + 2% inflation 15 Operating Cost for New $6.00 438 447 456 465 474 484 493 503 513 523 534 545 555 567 578 7,575 Facility6 $6/sf. - 73,000 sf 16 Subtotal - Recurring $1,016 $1,062 $1,113 $1,169 $2,662 $2,020 $2,034 $2,048 $2,063 $2,078 $2,093 $2,108 $2,124 $2,141 $2,157 $2,175 $2,192 $2,210 $2,229 $2,248 $38,943 Expenditures 17 TOTAL $1,291 $1,062 $1,113 $1,169 $7,744 $2,943 $2,034 $2,048 $2,063 $2,078 $2,093 $2,108 $2,124 $2,141 $2,157 $2,175 $2,192 $2,210 $2,229 $2,248 $45,223

Average annual cost $2,261

Notes: 1 Per EOP report part 6C. Fiscal Court Building Demolition with 2% inflation 5Debt service estimate assumes an interest rate of 3.75%. Purchase price of $20 million for 73,000 sq. ft. equates to $274/sq.ft. 2FY18 Actuals + two years of growth at 3% (assumes Year 1 = FY20) 6Assumes $6/sq.ft. + 2% inflation

3Assumes the following fringe rates, which reflects 12% increase for years 2-5: 45% year one; 50% year two; 56% 7Scenario assumes Metro staffing level is maintained. Savings derived from demolition of Fiscal Court Building would year three; 63% year four; 71% year five; 71% years 6-20 be greater if staffing levels were reduced.

4FY18 Actuals + two years of growth at 2% (assumes Year 1 = FY20) 8Scenario does not assume resale value of newly acquired facility.

9All dollar figures reflect present value. They are not time valued.

7.25

Opinion of Probable Cost - 5 - Demolish Fiscal Court Building & Lease Indefinitely: Vacate and demolish Fiscal Court Building and lease needed space. Note: With the exception of metric/growth rate figures, all numbers rounded to $000s # Item Metric/ Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year Year Year 12 Year Year Year Year Year Year Year 19 Year TOTAL OPINIONS OF PROBABLE Growth 10 11 13 14 15 16 17 18 20 Rate COSTS 1 One-Time Expenditures 2 Move cost & furniture $3,000 702 702 $3K/employee; 234 employees 3 Demolish Fiscal Court $ 836,000 836 836 Building1 $836K EOP estimate 4 Subtotal - One-Time $1,538 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,538 Expenditures 5 Recurring Expenditures 6 Fiscal Court Building 2% -383 -394 -406 -418 -431 -444 -457 -471 -485 -499 -514 -530 -546 -562 -579 -596 -614 -633 -652 -671 -10,286 Operating Savings (non- personnel) 7 Fiscal Court Building Capital $1.62 -159 -162 -165 -168 -172 -175 -179 -182 -186 -190 -194 -197 -201 -205 -209 -214 -218 -222 -227 -231 -3,857 Savings 8 Lease $17.50/sf -. 90,125 sq. $17.50 1,577 1,316 1,356 1,396 1,438 1,481 1,526 1,571 1,618 1,667 1,717 1,768 1,768 1,768 1,768 1,768 1,768 1,768 1,768 1,768 32,575

ft.; 4% increase with 10-year renewal

9 Subtotal - Recurring $1,036 $760 $784 $809 $835 $862 $890 $918 $947 $977 $1,009 $1,041 $1,021 $1,001 $980 $958 $936 $913 $890 $866 $18,432 Expenditures 10 TOTAL $2,574 $760 $784 $809 $835 $862 $890 $918 $947 $977 $1,009 $1,041 $1,021 $1,001 $980 $958 $936 $913 $890 $866 $19,970

Average annual cost $998

Notes:

1 Per EOP report part 6C. Fiscal Court Building Demolition

4Scenario assumes Metro staffing level is maintained. Savings derived from demolition of Fiscal Court Building would be greater if staffing levels were reduced.

5All dollar figures reflect present value. They are not time valued.

7.26

Opinion of Probable Cost 6 - Demolish Fiscal Court Building, Lease for 5 Years & Subsequently Own: Vacate and demolish Fiscal Court Building, lease space for 5 years then transition to Metro-owned property. Note: With the exception of metric/growth rate figures, all numbers rounded to $000s # Item Metric/ Year 1 Year Year Year Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year TOTAL OPINIONS OF PROBABLE Growth 2 3 4 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Rate COSTS 1 One-Time Expenditures 2 Move cost - leased space $400.00 94 94 $400/employee; 234 employees 3 Demolish Fiscal Court Building1 $ 836 836 $836K EOP estimate 836,000

4 Fit Up New Facility $60.00 4,380 4,380 $60/sf. - 73,000 sf 5 Move cost to new facility + $3,000.00 702 702 furniture $3K/employee; 234 employees total 6 Subtotal - One-Time Expenditures $930 $0 $0 $0 $5,082 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,012 7 Recurring Expenditures 8 Fiscal Court Building Operating 2% -383 -394 -406 -418 -431 -444 -457 -471 -485 -499 -514 -530 -546 -562 -579 -596 -614 -633 -652 -671 -10,286 Savings (non-personnel)

9 Fiscal Court Building Capital Savings $1.62 -159 -162 -165 -168 -172 -175 -179 -182 -186 -190 -194 -197 -201 -205 -209 -214 -218 -222 -227 -231 -3,857

10 Lease $17.50 1,278 1,316 1,356 1,396 1,438 6,783 $17.50/sf -73,000 sf w/annual increase 11 Debt Service for New Facility4 $20,000,000 1,430 1,430 1,430 1,430 1,430 1,430 1,430 1,430 1,430 1,430 1,430 1,430 1,430 1,430 1,430 1,430 22,886

12 General Capital Repairs $1.78 130 133 135 138 141 143 146 149 152 155 158 162 165 168 171 2,247 Baseline $1.78/sq.ft. based on start date of YR 6 + 2% inflation 13 Operating Cost for New Facility5 $6.00 438 447 456 465 474 484 493 503 513 523 534 545 555 567 578 7,575 $6/sf.- 73,000 sf 14 Subtotal - Recurring Expenditures $736 $760 $784 $809 $2,266 $1,379 $1,374 $1,368 $1,362 $1,356 $1,349 $1,343 $1,336 $1,328 $1,321 $1,313 $1,304 $1,296 $1,287 $1,277 $25,347 15 TOTAL $1,666 $760 $784 $809 $7,348 $1,379 $1,374 $1,368 $1,362 $1,356 $1,349 $1,343 $1,336 $1,328 $1,321 $1,313 $1,304 $1,296 $1,287 $1,277 $31,359

Average annual cost $1,568

Notes:

1 Per EOP report part 6C. Fiscal Court Building Demolition Scenario assumes Metro staffing level is maintained. Savings derived from demolition of Fiscal Court Building would be greater if staffing levels were reduced. 4Debt service estimate assumes an interest rate of 3.75%. Purchase price of $20 million for Scenario does not assume resale value of newly acquired facility. 73,000 sq. ft. equates to $274/sq.ft. 5Assumes $6/sq.ft. + 2% inflation All dollar figures reflect present value. They are not time valued.

7.27

Opinion of Probable Cost 7- New Regional metro Government Service Center (cost noted below is for one Center only) Note: With the exception of metric/growth rate figures, all numbers rounded to $000s Metric/ OPINIONS OF PROBABLE Growth Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year COSTS # Item Rate Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 TOTAL 1 One-Time Expenditures Fit Up/Renovation New Facility 2 $33.50/sq.ft. for 60,000 sq. ft. $33.50 2,010 2,010 Move cost + furniture $3K/employee; 50 employees 3 total $3,000 150 150 Subtotal - One-Time 4 Expenditures $2,160 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,160 5 Recurring Expenditures 6 Personnel - Wages2 3% 325 335 345 355 366 377 388 400 412 424 437 450 464 478 492 507 522 538 554 570 8,738 7 Personnel - Benefits3 45% 146 167 193 224 260 268 276 284 292 301 310 320 329 339 349 360 371 382 393 405 5,969 General Capital Repairs Baseline $1.62/sq.ft. + inflation 8 at 2% New Purchased Bldg. $1.62 97 99 101 103 105 107 109 112 114 116 118 121 123 126 128 131 133 136 139 142 2,362 9 Debt Service for New Facility5 $7,000,000 501 501 501 501 501 501 501 501 501 501 501 501 501 501 501 501 501 501 501 501 10,013 Operating Cost for New Facility6 10 $6/sq.ft. for 60,000 sq.ft. $6.00 360 367 375 382 390 397 405 414 422 430 439 448 457 466 475 485 494 504 514 524 8,747 Subtotal - Recurring 11 Expenditures $1,429 $1,469 $1,515 $1,565 $1,621 $1,650 $1,680 $1,710 $1,741 $1,773 $1,805 $1,839 $1,873 $1,909 $1,945 $1,982 $2,021 $2,060 $2,100 $2,142 $35,829 12 13 TOTAL $3,589 $1,469 $1,515 $1,565 $1,621 $1,650 $1,680 $1,710 $1,741 $1,773 $1,805 $1,839 $1,873 $1,909 $1,945 $1,982 $2,021 $2,060 $2,100 $2,142 $37,989

14 Average annual cost $1,899 Notes: 2FY18 Actuals + two years of growth at 3% (assumes Year 1 = FY20) 3Assumes the following fringe rates, which reflects 12% increase for years 2-5: 45% year one; 50% year two; 56% year three; 63% year four; 71% year five; 71% years 6-20 5Debt service estimate assumes an interest rate of 3.75%. Purchase cost of $7,000,000 for 60,000 sq. ft. equates to ~$117/sq.ft. 6Assumes $6/sq.ft. + 2% inflation 7Scenario assumes Metro staffing level is maintained. 8Scenario does not assume resale value of newly purchased facility. 9All dollar figures reflect present value. They are not time valued. 10This scenario assumes numerous Metro offices would be consolidated within the newly purchased facility. Savings derived from vacating the related spaces is not reflected in this analysis.

7.28

Opinion of Probable Cost - 8 - Retain Fiscal Court Building for 5 Years & Build New Facility: Stabilize masonry & keep Fiscal Court Building for 5 years then transition to new Metro-owned property and demolish Fiscal Court Building Note: With the exception of metric/growth rate figures, all numbers rounded to $000s OPINIONS OF PROBABLE COSTS Metric/ Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year # Item Growth Rate Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5 Year 6 Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 TOTAL 1 One-Time Expenditures 2 Protective Netting $275,000 $275 $275 Fit Up New Facility 3 $60/sf - 73,000 sf $60 4,380 4,380 Move cost + furniture $3K/employee; 234 4 employees $3,000 702 702 EMS & PVA Amortization 5 Due YR5 (YR10 of leases) $43,393 43 43 Demolish Fiscal Court Building1 6 $836K EOP estimate $836,000 923 923 Subtotal - One-Time 7 Expenditures $275 $0 $0 $0 $5,125 $923 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $6,323 8 Recurring Expenditures 9 Personnel - Wages2 3% 325 335 345 355 366 377 388 400 412 424 437 450 464 478 492 507 522 538 554 570 8,738 10 Personnel - Benefits3 45% 146 167 193 224 260 268 276 284 292 301 310 320 329 339 349 360 371 382 393 405 5,969 Non-Personnel Operating 11 Costs4 2% 383 394 406 418 431 2,032 General Capital Repairs Baseline $1.62/sq.ft. + 12 2% inflation $1.62 162 165 169 172 175 843 Fiscal Court Building 13 Operating Savings 2% -444 -457 -471 -485 -499 -514 -530 -546 -562 -579 -596 -614 -633 -652 -671 -8,254 Fiscal Court Building 14 Capital Repair Sav. $1.62 -179 -182 -186 -190 -194 -197 -201 -205 -210 -214 -218 -222 -227 -231 -236 -3,093 Annual Lease Sav. HRC, 15 PVA, EMS $377,265 -377 -377 -377 -377 -377 -377 -377 -377 -377 -377 -377 -377 -377 -377 -377 -5,659 Debt Service for New 16 Facility5 $78,000,000 5,578 5,578 5,578 5,578 5,578 5,578 5,578 5,578 5,578 5,578 5,578 5,578 5,578 5,578 5,578 5,578 89,255 General Capital Repairs Baseline $1.78/sq.ft. based on start date of YR 17 6 + 2% inflation $1.78 402 410 419 427 435 444 453 462 471 481 490 500 510 520 531 6,957 Operating Cost for New Facility6 $6/sq.ft. for 226,000 18 sq.ft. $6.00 1,356 1,383 1,411 1,439 1,468 1,497 1,527 1,558 1,589 1,621 1,653 1,686 1,720 1,754 1,789 23,450 Subtotal - Recurring 19 Expenditures $1,016 $1,062 $1,113 $1,169 $6,810 $6,981 $7,019 $7,058 $7,097 $7,137 $7,178 $7,220 $7,262 $7,306 $7,351 $7,396 $7,443 $7,491 $7,539 $7,589 $120,238 20 TOTAL $1,291 $1,062 $1,113 $1,169 $11,936 $7,904 $7,019 $7,058 $7,097 $7,137 $7,178 $7,220 $7,262 $7,306 $7,351 $7,396 $7,443 $7,491 $7,539 $7,589 $126,562

Average annual cost $6,328

7.29

Notes: 1 Per EOP report part 6C. Fiscal Court Building Demolition 2 OPINIONS OF PROBABLE FY18 Actuals + two years of growth at 3% (assumes Year 1 = FY20) 3 COSTS Assumes the following fringe rates, which reflects 12% increase for years 2-5: 45% year one; 50% year two; 56% year three; 63% year four; 71% year five; 71% years 6-20 4FY18 Actuals + two years of growth at 2% (assumes Year 1 = FY20) 5Debt service estimate assumes an interest rate of 3.75%. Build cost of $75,275 million for 226,000 sq. ft. equates to $333/sq.ft. 6Assumes $6/sq.ft. + 2% inflation 7Scenario assumes Metro staffing level is maintained. Savings derived from demolition of Fiscal Court Building would be greater if staffing levels were reduced. 8Scenario does not assume resale value of newly constructed facility. 9All dollar figures reflect present value. They are not time valued. 10This scenario assumes numerous Metro offices would be consolidated within the newly constructed facility. Savings derived from vacating the related spaces is not reflected in this analysis. 11A public-private partnership model could be pursued in lieu of Metro issuing its own debt. In that case, debt service expense would not be incurred and an annual cost ranging between $500K and $1 million would instead be incurred.

7.30

Opinion of Probable Cost - 9 - Purchase and Renovation of the AT&T Building Note: With the exception of metric/growth rate figures, all numbers rounded to $000s Metric/ Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year Year OPINIONS OF PROBABLE # Item Growth Rate 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 TOTAL COSTS One-Time 1 Expenditures 2 Site Improvements $1,500,000 1500 Purchase AT&T 3 Building $10,200,000 10200 4 Fit Up Costs $7,531,797 7532 Fiscal Court Building 5 Demo $836,000 836 Subtotal - One-Time 5 Expenditures $20,067,797 20068 Recurring 6 Expenditures General Capital Repairs Baseline $1.78/sq.ft. +

inflation at 2% - 7 240,000 sq. ft. $1.78 427 436 444 453 462 472 481 491 501 511 521 531 542 553 564 7388 Employee Offsite Parking Garage fees at 8 1% Annual Inflation $192,000 192 194 194 196 196 198 198 200 200 202 202 204 204 206 206 208 208 210 210 212 4038 Fiscal Court Building Operating Savings 9 2%(Non-Personnel) $383,000 -383 -391 -398 -406 -415 -423 -431 -440 -449 -458 -467 -476 -486 -495 -505 -515 -526 -536 -547 -558 -9306 Fiscal Court Building 10 Capital Repair Sav. $1 -61 -62 -64 -65 -66 -67 -69 -70 -72 -73 -75 -76 -78 -79 -81 -82 -84 -86 -87 -89 -1485 Debt Service for New 11 Facility** $20,067,797 1435 1435 1435 1435 1435 1435 1435 1435 1435 1435 1435 1435 1435 1435 1435 1435 1435 1435 1435 1435 22963 Average Operating Cost for Metro Facility $6/sq.ft. for 240,000 12 sq.ft. 1440 1469 1498 1528 1559 1590 1622 1654 1687 1721 1755 1790 1826 1863 1900 1938 1977 2016 2057 2098 34988 Subtotal - Recurring 13 Expenditures 2623 2645 2665 2688 2709 3160 3190 3223 3255 3290 3323 3358 3393 3430 3466 3504 3541 3581 3620 3662 58586 14 15 TOTAL+ 22691 2645 2665 2688 2709 3160 3190 3223 3255 3290 3323 3358 3393 3430 3466 3504 3541 3581 3620 3662 58586 Average Annual Cost 2929 Notes: **Debt service includes all year 1 non-recurring expenses Personnel levels will remain the same

7.31