32C-057 125A PLEASANT ST ► • = cJ /ze,
AUG 3 I I ,
William Weld JX/' i �� eeed� el�d i
93
�� ��jj f?EPt OF 3!JIf.D!I'�G iNSPEI;Tlr�,C m error �iie .Ja�a�eu�ort - ✓l�u+ire 131(� e�ii s'i', ;'e M1 n ltr60 t��
Deborah A. It.:ui
Exeeutn e Dirertm 4
(,6/17) 727-066C
/nnr /.7JJ
TO: Local Building Inspector
Local Handicapped Commission
Independent Living Center
FROM: Architectural Access Board
SUBJECT: L-41 J /Xdit -4-\/
DATE: ff/eZ
2k in 4/
Enclosed please find the following material regarding the above
premises:
Application for Variance ✓ Decision of the Board
Notice of Hearing Correspondence
Letter of Meeting
The purpose of this memo is to advise your office of action taken or
to be taken by this Board. If you have any information which would
assist this Board in making a decision on this case you may call this
office at (617) 727-0660 or 1-800-828-7222 Voice or TDD or you
may submit comments in writing to the above address.
Thank you for your interest in this matter.
ph_ z_ _ ,RI e_°371 rommontezecim' v 2__c_. -OS-
/ • decedzi, Mactsed
Din Sia/taxlaiv gkac& - Maarrv'SIC
William Weld
Governor ,4oakiv, 02108
Deborah A.Ryan (67') 727-0660 1-800-828- 7222
Executive Director
9/ciceP,and Ygg
RIANCE HEARING NOTICE
RE:The Depot Restaurant, 125A Pleasant Street , Northampton
You are hereby notified that an informal adjudicatory hearing before the Architectural Access
Board has been scheduled for you to appear on Monday, August 9, 1993 I
at 2:00 p.m. in Room 1310, One Ashburton Place, Boston, MA.
This hearing is upon an application for variance filed by Charles Bowles, for modification of
or substitution of the following Rules and Regulations: Section 17.2
A copy of the application is available for public inspection during regular business hours.
This hearing will be conducted in accordance with the procedures set forth in M.G.L., c. 30A,
and S. 1.02 of the Standard Rules of Practice and Procedure. At the hearing, each party may be
represented by counsel, may present evidence and may cross examine opposing witnesses.
Date: July 27, 1993 ARCHITECTURAL ACCESS BOARD
jy4/
Chair,man,
cc: Independent Living Center
Local Building Inspector
Local Handicapped Commission
- \
E alitiV g-ii r
-- dam, el
Oiw J2:�✓z/l giZace - C 1.910
William Weld
Governor . z ,Azaaackfaetti 0 2708
Deborah A. Ryan (677) 727-0660 1-S00-828- 72.2.2
Executive Director W
lidAUG 3 1 1293 i j
DEPT Of BUILDING INSPECTIONS
DECISION ,_ _ ��'oRTNAMPTON,ryia 0106O
RE: The Depot Restaurant, 125A Pleasant St., Northampton
1 . The hearing was held upon an application for variance submitted
by Charles Bowles for modification of or substitution of the
following sections of the 1982 Rules and Regulations of the
Architectural Access Board:
Section 17.2 (35.1 ) - Construction of a balcony.
2. The hearing was held on: Monday, August 9, 1993
3. The following persons appeared:
Charles Bowles and Matthew M. Pitoniak, the Depot/Union Square
Realty Trust; Cynthia Langley, City of Northampton, ADA
Cooruinator, and Robert Williams, The Access Group
All persons offering testimony were sworn in by the Chair.
4. FINDINGS AND DECISION:
The Board having considered the evidence hereby, finds and decides
as follows:
The Board took jurisdiction over the facility under Section 3.3A 1 of
its Regulations: 3.3A. "If the work being performed amounts to less
than twenty-five percent (25%) of the one-hundred percent (100%)
equalized assessed value of the building, and the cost of the work is
less than $50,000, only that portion of the work being performed
shall comply with these Regulations". The work to be performed
includes the construction of a mezzanine balcony over one end of the
1
main dining area. Therefore, the mezzanine has to comply with the
Regulations.
By way of background: The facility, a 100 year old train station is
currently used for restaurants: The Depot Restaurant; Spaghetti
Freddy's Restaurant and a banquet area. The building is on the
National Historic Register as well as the Historic Registers of the
Town and the State. The trustees are in the process of changing the
dining concept of the Depot Restaurant into a new concept called JC
Pullman's, in line with background of the building. In order to effect
this concept change, it was the trustees opinion that the addition of
a mezzanine level balcony is required.
The application for variance was first heard by the Board as an
incoming case on Monday, 12, 1993. After reviewing all materials
submitted, the Board voted to deny the variance to Section 17.2
(35.1 ) to the balcony level of the restaurant, for the reason that
impracticability had not been proven in that the cost of compliance
is not excessive as the barrier is being built in and is not an existing
condition. The petitioner was aggrieved by the Board's decision, and
requested an adjudicatory hearing to present the case in person. The
Board scheduled the hearing for the parties to appear.
The petitioner was proposing to construct a balcony on one end of
the existing dining area within the Depot Restaurant space. The
balcony will consist of eight tables with a total of 20 seats.- The
change in elevation is 11 feet. The main level of the facility will
have 155 accessible seats. The construction of the balcony will
allow for the creation of seven new accessible private booth seating
areas on the first floor below the balcony. This booth seating will
help to structurally support the balcony. All other work to be
performed will be primarily decorative additions and changes to fit
the new concept.
The Chair asked the petitioner to present the case for the variance
request.
The petitioner is seeking the variance based on "impracticability",
the cost for providing vertical access to the balcony for only 20
seats was considered excessive without providing any substantial
benefit for disabled persons. The petitioner stated that all services
provided on the balcony level will be available on the first floor.
The petitioner noted that due to the economy, the restaurant
2
business, as a whole has been in great financial difficulty. It was
noted that there is no guarantee that this concept, JC Pullman's will
do any better than its predecessor restaurant.
Cynthia Langley, the ADA Coordinator for Northampton spoke in favor
of the Board granting the variance not to provide access to the
mezzanine level. It was Ms. Langley's opinion that there would be no
substantial benefit for disabled persons to have access provided to
mezzanine, since all services provided on said level are available on
the main floor. Ms Langley stated that the City of Northampton has
made every effort to make city buildings accessible for disabled
persons, and provides grants to other businesses to effect the
necessary changes.
The Chair noted that the Board received a letter from Joe Tringali,
Chairman of the Northampton Committee on Disabilities voicing the
support of the Committee in favor of granting the variance as
requested. Mr. Tringali stated that the Committee supports the
variance, for the reason that only ten percent of the available
seating is on the inaccessible level, and the remaining seating is
fully accessible.
Board Member Connelly inquired if the seating on the proposed
balcony will be expanded if the restaurant proves to be successful.
The petitioner responded that if the seating expands, the balcony
will be made accessible for disabled persons. Board Member Davis
inquired if the balcony will be used for overflow seating, or will it
be open upon request. The petitioner responded that the booths will
probably be the first choice for seating, and the first floor and
balcony to follow. It was noted that the balcony will probably be a
smoking area. The petitioner also noted that there are smoking and
non-smoking areas on the first floor. Board Member Braman
expressed his concern with the fact that the petitioner was creating
a concept that would not allow for accessible seating on the balcony.
In other words, the petitioner was building in a barrier where one
did not exist. The petitioner noted that the concept was developed
(JC Pullman's) to follow the train theme. Mr. Braman asked, what is
there about the concept that requires the construction of the
balcony. The petitioner replied that train artifacts will be located
(displayed) above the balcony, e.g., old trunks, etc. It was Mr.
Braman's opinion that the display of train artifacts above the
balcony created an amenity on said level that was not available on
the first floor, and that disabled persons should have the benefit of
3
viewing the artifacts, as well as able-bodied persons. The
petitioner stated that the artifacts can be viewed by patrons sitting
in the first floor restaurant space. It was the petitioner's opinion
that it is impracticable to provide access to the balcony at a cost of
$12,000-$15,000 for only 20 seats, when the construction cost of
the entire project is under $20,000. Board Member Kelly asked if
the petitioner would consider a time variance, as opposed to the full
variance being sought for providing vertical access to the balcony.
To clarify matters, a time variance meaning that the Board would
allow the Depot Restaurant (JC Pullman's) to open for a period of
time without providing access to the balcony. (This would allow the
petitioner a grace period in order to secure the funding required for
providing vertical access). At the end of said time period, vertical
access would be required to be in place and fully operational. The
petitioner was amenable to the suggestion of a time variance.
The Chair called for a motion in the matter.
A motion was made by Speed Davis and seconded by Edward Kelly to
grant a time variance to Section 35.1 for providing access to the
balcony level, on condition that the balcony be made fully accessible
for disabled persons by January 1 , 1995 (vertical access be provided
and be fully operational). The Board also ordered that a status
report, outlining the progress with securing funding for providing
vertical access to the balcony, be submitted to the Board in writing,
by July 1 , 1994.
Board Member Braman voiced his opposition to the time variance. He
noted that the petitioner is creating an inaccessible space (the
balcony), and the amenities, i.e.,. the train artifacts provided for
viewing train should be enjoyed by all persons when the restaurant
opens for business. Member Davis acknowledged Mr. Braman's
concerns, and stated that that is why he proposed a time variance,
not a full variance. The Chair called for a vote. (D. Hughes, E. Kelly,
S. Davis, M. Connelly - in favor) (L. Braman - opposed)
The Board voted to waive the site visit requirement.
This constitutes a final order of the Architectural Access Board, entered
pursuant to G.L. c. 30A. Any aggrieved person may appeal this decision to
the Superior Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts pursuant to
4
Section 14 of G.L. c.30A. Any appeal must be filed in court no later than
thirty (30) days of receipt of this decision.
DATE: August 27, 1993 ARCHITECTURAL ACCESS BOARD
J yly B nnett
Chairw man
cc: Local Building Inspector
Local Handicapped Commission
Independent Living Center
5