25C-122 (12) __ _• 0�?[14/2000 17:20 413582020E ARC WELDING PAGE 02
111 Him.-
� � r
c
N
c�
N.
N M
o
s'!sA~�`.=�:., t n.�••t.a��•'.•oL:•+G.is Ci•.a!..;i,.,la..�....,6::i�;•t:u; ., �• .... .. ...
02/14/2000 17:20 4135820206 ARC WELDING PAGE 01
y,/}� �� 4 ARC WELDING � � R
71 LAWRENCE PLAIN ROAD
HADLEY, MA 01035
T `N
M�.. ToARCWELD @AOL.COM
Phone: (413) 584--6206
Fax: (413)584-6206*51
y., '?)�I'�h�Q�:Y ''��jj.:'`:'`�::;r •,.ill .:µ,
To:
Page 1 of_
�2 4djd� LIZ 4 4;i t f/�'
Mr. Anthony L. Patillo, Building Inspector
February 28, 2000
Page 2
Realistically, I do need more time in order to collect the data necessary to come up
with a final cost estimate, including the connection with the structural engineer.
My thoughts at this point are that I would like to have the chance to get this
information in order to make a thoughtful final decision. With that information, I can
evaluate the alternative of following Dave Kochan's original advice and turn the second
floor into one large apartment thereby solving the egress issue as to both. Frankly (no pun
intended), the larger the budget grows, the more logical the business decision to turn it into
one unit becomes. As I understand it, if you choose not to allow for this extension of
time, then you are going to issue an exit order which I then have an opportunity to appeal
to the appropriate office in Boston as a means of determining whether or not the existing
means of egress is a satisfactory one under the alternative interpretations of the building
code that we have each presented.
I had not taken notes as to how that appeal would be prosecuted, the time line for
the same and any related issues and as such, I would appreciate your sharing that
information with me.
As a further practical matter, if the mechanics and time horizon for such an appeal
grew to be more challenging than practical, I would probably proceed with using the exit
order as the grounds to terminate the tenancy of the smaller of the 2 units at Bridge Street,
in order to provide the egress solution to the situation that you have identified.
I will appreciate your consideration in extending the time for a response. I would
be pleased to continue our dialogue.
Respectfully submitted,
Bruce M. Fogel, E uire
BMF:laf
Enclosure
cc: Attorney Katherine Callaghan
M:\USERS\LAF\Remal.,\DiunM\P.Ii ii.2-2R.wpd
BRUCE M. FOGEL and PAULINE G. FOGEL
78 Main StreetJ.,,
Northampton, Massachusetts 01060
(413) 582-1225
OF
February 28, 2000
Mr. Anthony L. Patillo, Building Inspector
City of Northampton
Municipal Building
212 Main Street
Northampton, MA 01060
RE: Property at Bridge Street and Egress Issues
Dear Tony:
I wanted to reply to you by the end of February as we had agreed relative to the
progress of collecting information on the costs associated with the resolution of the egress
issues in accordance with your interpretation of the regulations. I had contacted my
handyman and he was going to contact all of the names that Stanley had provided to me.
I have received only one reply to date, from Arc Welding. I am enclosing a copy of the
outline and a very rough estimate that that gentleman was kind enough to provide. As you
can see, this estimate is for approximately $13,000.00. In the course of my conversations
with him, he also indicated that it would be necessary to get a structural engineer involved
in order to, I gather, establish just how the fire escape would be anchored to the building.
I have searched for time in my very hectic schedule at this time of the year, as I have told
you, to track down this engineer, but I have not yet had any success in doing so. In the
course of talking with the gentleman from Arc Welding, I was also informed that he had
been advised by Stan that you have already decided to require doors for the access to the
fire escape, rather than allowing the windows to be used for access. With these additional
circumstances and requirements, it appears to me that the total estimated cost for this
project could run in excess of$20,000.00.