32A-124 PREVIOUS-FeasibilityMemo-010918 COMPLIANCE STRATEGY MEMO
Coldham Architects
Page 1 of 2
Coldham Architects
155 Pine St. Amherst, MA 01002
Tel 413.549.3616
Fax 413.549.6802
www.ColdhamArchitects.com
To: Tony Patillo, Building Inspector
City of Northampton
From: Bruce Coldham
Date: November 6, 2001
Cc: Jonathan Wright, Wright Builders
Subject: Feasibility of creating a second-floor apartment
Project Name: A–Z Feasibility Project #: 01-18
Total Pages: 2
1. INTRODUCTION: The existing single-story building was constructed in three stages
over … years. The last (rear) phase completed in 1987. There is a total of 8,755 S.F.
of primarily retail space. Theparcel is located at 57 King St. opposite the Hotel
Northampton and extends back to the railway line. Totaling 26,500 S.F. in area, it is
virtually entirely paved. The building is situated on the lot line (or within 24"±)
along the northern boundary. Mechanical systems are served by units located on the
roof, and one at least will need to be relocated to make way or the proposed
apartment addition.
2. LAND USE & ZONING CONSIDERATIONS:
There does not appear to be any inhibitions from a by-law standpoint.
3. BUILDING & RELATED CODE CONSIDERATIONS:
3.1 Construction type appears to be Type 3Bbased upon the existing conditions
reported below:
FRONT (Area 1) MIDDLE (Area 2) REAR (Area 3)
FLOOR Concrete Slab on Grade Concrete Slab on Grade Concrete Slab on Grade
PERIMETER
SUPPORT
8” Load Bearing CMU
(brick faced)
8” Load Bearing CMU 8” Load Bearing CMU
INTERMEDIATE
SUPPORT
to be confirmed none none
ROOF Steel Structure w/ Wood
Deck
Steel Truss w/ Steel
Deck
Steel Truss w/ Steel
Deck
3.2 The primary use of the building is clearly Mercantile (M), though rear portions of
the existing first floor may be considered as either Business (B) or light hazard
Storage (S1). However, since Table 503 allows mercantile an area of 9,600 S.F.
per floor for Construction Type 3B, an unseparated mixed use arrangement is
feasible. The new second floor apartment is a R4 use. Under the provisions of
(780 CMR 313.1.1) "a fire separation assembly is not required" between these or any
other uses within the building. Therefore the existing steel bar joists presently
forming the roof structure — and which would become the floor structure with
the addition of a second floor apartment — can remain "unprotected".
3.3 The Mercantile (M) use allows for 2-story, 30' high structure to be constructed in
Construction Type 3B (780 CMR Table 503).
MEMO
Coldham Architects
Page 2 of 2
3.4 Fire protection & structure (780 CMR Table 602) - Encasing of the existing bar joists
is not required in Construction Type 3B.
3.5 Non-combustibility of materials (780 CMR 604.1): — Combustible materials may be
used for the floors, roof, interior partitions and interior load bearing elements in
Type 3B. Non-combustible materials must be used for the exterior walls
3.6 Means of egress - Two means of egress (stairways) from the second floor
apartment would be required.
3.7 Architectural access - not required for a single apartment unit.
3.8 Fire suppression (780 CMR 904.2) - Not required so long as the sum total of area is
less than 12,000 S.F., which it would be.
3.10 Seismic loading (780 CMR …….): with 20% added area 50% of the lateral load
requirement would have to be met
4. PRINCIPLE ISSUES:
4.1 The addition would require increasing the bearing capacity of the existing roof
structure. This could likely be most effectively done by adding a line of support
down the center of the rear portion of the building over which the apartment
addition is intended to be located. This would also reduce the bearing on the
existing perimeter walls and footings to the extent that the second floor loads are
likely to be within the capacity of these existing elements
4.2 Seismic loading accommodation: Ryan Hellwig advises that meeting the 50% of
the lateral load requirement can be more readily achieved at the rear (in the
general location proposed for the addition), since there is an existing CMU block
fire separation wall. But there may be further structural stiffening required,
depending on the form and extent of the addition.
4.2 Reorganization of existing mechanical systems serving the lower floor -
Consideration is to be given to the need to relocate the large unit in the vicinity of
the proposed addition since this is likely to involve considerable expense (in the
region of $50,000). The feasibility of the project therefore may hinge on our
ability to create satisfactory plumbing space without needing to force the
relocation of this piece of equipment. This, in turn, will depend upon our ability
to create dwelling space that is sufficiently noise- and vibration-free. This may
involve supporting the unit on columns to a footing independent of the roof
structure.