39A-76 (29) tlhex ramsnx2n reetah/0(e/I7ajacec /faell /
Stale Adirr[d�/�."�i�'n�i�+/i>/'r��/ °TPg�n./nlinsm>r»i/��/'/�iilnti/o
Michael S. Dukakis ,/(�1 rckai)II/ Y04 Office e-V&,iIdoII/
Governor. O
_ (nn-<<eh/,Ai,t/eh/141114M .,Yleree,- Yinasx AYOI
FOR STATE USE ONLY S'llis#, vita ueAaoef/a 02/08
Fee Reed: (617) 727-3200
Check No.
Recd By: STATE BUILDING CODE APPEALS BOARD
APPEAL APPLICATION FORM
DATE: June 21 , 1990
DOCKET NUMBER:
The undersigned hereby appeals to the State Board of Building Regulations and Standards from the decision
of the:
Building Official from the City/Town of: Northampton
Board of Appeals from the City/Town of:
Other Municipal Agency/Official entitled:
State Agency/Oficial entitled:
OTHER:
Dated: May 29 19 90 having been aggrieved by such (Check Appropriate Space)
X Interpretation X Order X Requirement X Direction
Failure to Act Other-Explain
Subject: (Submit a brief statement of reasons and principal points upon which the application, appeal or
petition is based) ALL.APPROPRIATE SECTIONS OF THE CODE MUST BE LISTED
Sao al-tart-ton Statement of Appeal
State briefly desired relief: See attached Statement of Appeal
APPELLANT: David C. Macartney representing Quickbeam Realty Trust
ADDRESS FOR SERVICE 45 Howard Street, South Easton, MA 02375
TelephoneNo. (508) 238-9471
ADDRESS OF PROPERTY INVOLVED: 492 Pleasant Street, Northampton, MA
APPELLANT'S CONNECTION TO PROPERTY INVOLVED: agent for owner
APPLAPLGI/90
STATEMENT QF APPEAL
This appeal is entered on behalf of Quickbeam Realty Trust, owners
of the property at 492 Pleasant Street, Northampton, which is the
subject of this appeal. The subject property is a two story
reinforced concrete building which is in excess of fifty years old.
It is constructed of 8" thick concrete masonry unit walls, with
cast-in-place concrete slab floors and roof approximately 11" thick
supported by reinforced concrete columns. The building
construction type per the Massachusetts State Building Code is 1A.
The building currently is occupied by several tenants on the first
floor which include both business (use group B) and mercantile (use
group M) uses. The second floor was previously occupied by a
business use, and the owner plans to change the use of the second
floor to an assembly use (use group A-3) and to renovate the second
floor to accommodate a new tenant, the Pioneer Health and Fitness
Center. The tenant will operate a health and fitness center which
specializes in serious-minded clients, such as athletes in
training, under a five year lease.
Because the area of the building exceeds 12,000 square feet, State
Building Code Section 1202.4 requires that automatic sprinklers be
installed in the assembly portion of the building. We seek relief
from the requirements of Section 1202.4, based on the following
factors:
- Superior Construction: As stated above, this is a Type lA
building, which is far in excess of the minimum construction
type required for this use. Using the area limits established
in Article 3, this use could be placed in a structure having
a construction type classification as low as 3C or 4A. The
use of a type lA structure significantly decreases the hazard
presented by the intended new use, and is a mitigating factor
which may be used as the basis for relief from Section 1202.4.
- Ideal Exit Arrangement: The planned renovation will include
the upgrading of an existing interior exit stairway, and the
replacement of an existing fire escape with a noncombustible
exterior exit stairway. The exits are remotely arranged,
providing exit access in separate directions for the entire
second story. The exit capacity after renovation will be 300
persons, which is well in excess of the maximum occupancy of
50-60 persons anticipated by the tenant for the specialized
services to be provided.
- Low Fire Loading: The actual occupancy has an extremely low
fire load when compared to other assembly uses which fall
under use group A-3 (e.g. restaurants, libraries, exhibition
halls) . Not only will all interior partitions be
noncombustible, but the specialized equipment particular to
this tenancy such as free weights and other exercise machinery
contributes little to the building's fire load.
Statement of Appeal Page 2
In addition to the factors already noted, the subject building
offers excellent access to fire fighting equipment, with open
perimeter of at least 30 feet on all sides of the building, and the
very nature of the construction affords excellent separation of the
intended new use from the existing first floor uses. Recent
renovations to the structure have included a Class A Carlisle
ballasted roof covering and a new, efficient heating system.
The Inspector of Buildings, Bruce Palmer, has indicated his support
for the appeal, and is expected to appear and testify as to his
opinion(s) with regard to this matter. The Fire Department has
also notified Inspector Palmer that they do not object to the
elimination of the sprinkler system due to the superior
construction of the building.
We therefore ask that this Board of Appeals grant a variance from
the requirements of State Building Code Section 1202 . 4 , as the
imposition of these requirements for this particular structure and
use would represent a manifest injustice, and the relief which we
are requesting does not derogate from the spirit or intent of the
State Building Code.
Respectfully submitted,
C.
David C. Macartney
representing Quickbeam Realty Trust
-
N= r 11431143E�p
anz7rzorzW•a Sad-uoeL
�# 1.1zecatinie GAce Igo
mad
,� �M � Reya: �,a.�rnnaa�
Michael S r k Dukakis / eormachnide
Governor
Lite
�� �tdkaxon 9%.,,, - Room, 1301
Kentaro Tsutsumi :iJo n> ./lfaaaa 4aae.4 02108
Chairman
(617) 727-320(1
Charles 1. Dioezio
Administrator
DSTATE LD cont: APPEALSnon ,II qj '��' •
October 19, 1990 "i( i;ri^-�
Mr. David C. Macarmev
45 Howard Street
South Easton, MA 02375
RE: Docket: #90-0S3
Property Address: 492 Pleasant Street
Northampton
We are pleased to enclose a copy of the decision relative to the above-mentioned case wherein certain
variances from the State Building Code had been requested.
Sincerely,
STATE BUILDING CODE APPEALS BOARD
Paul Piepiora / r ��✓
Clerk
cc: State Building Code Appeals Board
. �
Oadi 3
•
�L 1",.ectax ss a
cf. ?Agit „ft Iffy
Aiard c� .erda&>nta and j'la,zas a
Michael S. Dukakis OF c
„ e Mk __
Governor Azle "�"'.Y'
are Sa/aatoze nem — A00411, '1801
Kentaro Tsutsumi .GiE4t o4Ctm, ✓ (a44aoe, 02108
Chairman
(617) 727-3200
Charles J. Dinezin
Administrator
STATE BUILDING CODE APPEALS BOARD
•
Docket #90,083
Date: October 19, 1990
In accordance with MOL c143, Section 100 and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts State Building Code,
this Appeals Board has found the following;
The appellant. Ouickbeam Realty Trust, represented by David C. Macartney, on June 21, 1990,appealed to
this Appeals Board the decision of the Building Official, City of Northampton, dated May 29, 1990.
On July 26, 1990, a public hearing was held in Boston before members of the State Board of Building
Regulations and Standards who acted as the Stale Building Code Appeals Board in which a majority of the
said Appeals Board found in its opinion the enforcement of the Massachusetts State Building Code would do
manifest injustice to the appellant and the relief requested would not conflict with the general objectives of
the State Building Code and any of its enabling legislation.
There were present at the said hearing:
David C. Macartney, 45 Howard Street, S. Easton, MA 02375
Bruce Palmer,Building Official, 212 Main Street, Northampton,MA 01060
STATE BUILDING CODE APPEALS BOARD)
Docket #90-083
Date: October 19, 1990
Docket Number: 90-083
Date of}leering: July 26. 1990
The appellant's representative testified that the property is located at 492 Pleasant Street in. Northampton,
Ma. The subject building is a two story reinforced concrete, Type 1-A, structure in excess of fifty years old.
The first floor contains 12,000 sq. ft. and the second floor is approximately 8,000 sq. ft. area. The building is ,
occupied by several tenants on the first floor. These tenants include both business and mercantile uses. The
second floor is pianned to be used as an A-3 use; namely the Pioneer Health and Fitness Center.
Because the area of the building exceeds 12,000 square feet, Section 1202.4 requires the installation of an
automatic sprinkler system in the assembly area.The appellant is seeking relief from this section requiring the
fire suppression system based on the facts that:
1) The existing building is of superior type of construction compared to the lesser types of construction
allowed by code for construction of new facilities;
2) The egress arrangement and capacity is proven to accommodate an occupancy load of 300 people far in
excess of the anticipated occupancy of 50 to 60 persons;
3) The low fire loading of this type of assembly use.
The local inspector testified that because the building will contain an assembly use and exceeds 12,000 sq. ft.
as outlined in Section 1202.4, the reading of this section allows for an interpretation that the fire suppression
system is required.The inspector also indicated his support in granting a variance from this section citing the
appellant's reasoning.
Following testimony, the Board agreed that the local inspector had correctly interpreted the building code,
and that the change of use on the second floor did trigger the installation of a fire suppression system. The
Board focused on the facts that the local inspector supported this variance request and that the Fire
Department did not object to the elimination of the sprinkler system. The Board felt that the superior
construction type, the ample egress system and low fire grading justify the elimination of this requirement.
In granting this variance the Board stipulated that an automatic fire alarm system be installed along with the
required manual fire alarm and that exterior light(s) and horn(s) be installed to warn other occupants of
building.
STATE BUILDING CODE APPEALS BOARD
Docket #90-083
Date: October 19, 1990
SO ORDERED
The following Board Members were present and voted in the above
manner:
ChairmS ` b. ohteu,
eer &
Thomas E. Donovan iiiiclas Cole Smith Joseph J. Ceellucci
A true copy attest, dated /O /6
4'-'' i. ,/,/ M, Clerk
Paul Piepiora —
Any person aggrieved by a decision of the State Building Code Appeals Board may appeal to a court of
competent jurisdiction in conformance with Chapter 30A, Section 14 of the General Laws.