Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit Building 2019-10-18OREGON Web Address: www.springfield-or. gov Building Permit Commercial Structura! Permit Number: 81 1-19-OO2368-STR IVR Number: 811015621463 City of Springfield Development and Public Works 225 Fifth Street Springfield, OR 97477 54t-726-3753 Email Add ress: permitcenter@springfield-or. gov SPRINGFIELD nfr Permit Issued: October 18, 2019 Category of Construction: Commercial Submitted lob Value: $40,000.00 Description of Work: Remove interior walls and remove restroom Type of Work: Alteration Worksite Address 590 MAIN ST Springfield, OR 97477 Parcel 1703353 108600 Owner: Address: CITY OF SPRINGFIELD 150 N 4TH ST SPRINGFIELD, OR 97477 Business Name TIMBERLINE PAINTING & REMODELING INC - Primary License CCB License Number t57974 Phone 54L-9L2-7777 Inspection 1999 Final Building 1999 Final Building 1540 Gypsum Board/Lath/Drywall Inspection Group Struct Com Struct Com Struct Com Inspection Status Pending Pending Pending Various inspections are minimally required on each project and often dependent on the scope of work. Contact the issuing jurisdiction indicated on the permit to determine required inspections for this project. Schedule or track inspections at www.buildingpermits'oregon.gov Call or text the word "schedule" to 1-888-299-2821 use IVR number: 811015621463 Schedule using the Oregon ePermitting Inspection App, search "epermitting" in the app store permits expire if work is not started within 180 Days of issuance or if work is suspended for 180 Days or longer depending on the issuing agency's policy, All provislons of laws and ordinances governing this type of work will be complied with whether specified herein or not. cranting of a permit does not presume to give authoriw to violate or cancel the provisions of any other state or local law regulating construction or the performance of construction, ATTENTION: Oregon law requires you to follow rules adopted by the Oregon Utility Notification Center. Those rules are set forth in OAR 952-001-OOlO through OAR 952-OO1-OO9O. You may obtain copies of the rules by calling the Center at (503) 232-L947. All persons or entities performing work under this permit are required to be licensed unless exempted by ORS 701.O1O (Structural/Mechanical), ORS 479.540 (Electrical), and ORS 593,010-O2O (Plumbing). Printed onr lOl78/L9 page 1 of 2 C:\myReports/reports//production/01 STANDARD [t -r- TYPE OF WORK JOB SITE INFORMATIOT{ LICENSED PROFESSIONAL INFORMATION PENDING INSPECTIONS SCHEDULING INSPECTIONS Permit Number: 81 1-19-0O2368-STR Page 2 of 2 Fee Description Technology Fee Structural building permit fee State of Oregon Surcharge - Bldg (12olo of applicable fees) Printed on: 10/18/19 Page 2 ol 2 Quantity Fee Amount $27.53 $s50.60 $66.07 $644.20Total Fees: C: \myReports/reports//production/01 STAN DARD PERMIT FEES SPRINGFIELD # OREGON www. sp ri n g fi e ld-o r. g ov Worksite address: 590 MAIN ST, Springfield, OR97477 Parcel: 1 7033531 08600 Transaction Receipt 811-19-002368-STR Receipt Number: 472737 Receipt Date: 10/18/19 City of Springfield Development and Public Works 225 Fifth Street Springfield, OR 97477 54t-726-3753 permitcenter@springfield-or. gov Fees Paid Transaction date 10t18t19 10t18t19 10t18t19 Units 1.00 Ea 1.00 Ea 1.00 Automatic Technology Fee Description Structural building permit fee State of Oregon Surcharge - Bldg (12% of applicable fees) Account code 224 -00000-425602-1 030 82 1 -00000-2 1 5004-0000 204-00000425605-0000 Fee amount $550.60 $66.07 $27.53 Paid amount $5s0.60 $66.07 $27.53 Payment Method Credit card authorization 086421 Payer: CITY OF SPRINGFIELD Payment Amount:$644.20 Cashier: Katrina Anderson Receipt Tota!:$644.20 Printed: l0/18/19 1:28 pm Page 1 of 1 Fl N_TransactionReceipt_pr Ctry or SpnrNcFrELD, oREGoN Structural Permit Application 225 Fifth Street o Springfield, OR 97477 . PH(541)'126-37 53 o FAX(54 I )726-3689 DEPARTMENT USE ONLY permit no.: |4. @)t LoB Date: 1Q (T rq ffi This permit is issued under OAR 918460-0030. Permits expire if work is not started within 180 days of issuance or if work is suspended for 180 days. ?n + FEE SCHEDULE 1. Valuation information (a) Job description: {*r-.ro.r.r ixta,^,r- t *}1A Occupancy <>+4) ,l atl\.i€t?r //f-3 Construction type: Square feet: Cost per square foot Other information: Type of Heat: Energy Path:rz- ! new ! addition (b) Foundation-only permit? E Yes E No s{okTotal valuation: 2. Building fees (a) Permit fee (use valuation table)s (b) Investigative fee (equal to [2a]):$ (c) Reinspection ($ per hour): (number ofhours x fee per hour)$ (d) Enter 1 2o% surcharge (.12 x [2a+2b+2c]):$ (e) Subtotal offees above (2a through 2d)$ 3. Plan review fees (a) Plan review (65% x permit fee [2a])s (b) Fire and life safety (65% x permit fee [2a]):$ $(c) Subtotal offees above (3a and 3b): 4. Miscellaneous fees (a) Seismic fee, lY6 (.01 x permit fee [2a]):$ $(b) Tech fee, 5%o (.05 x pennit fee[2a]+PR fee [3c]) I'OTAL fees and surcharges (2e+3c+4a+b):7p$r,qq LOCAL GOVERNMENT APPROVAL This project has final land-use approval. Sigrrature:Date: This project has DEQ approval. Signature:Date: Zoning approval verified: E Yes f] No Property is within flood plain: ! Yes E No CATEGORY OF CONSTRUCTION I Government CommercialE Residential JOB SITE INFORMATION AND LOCATION Job site address:nwlqState: Subdivisfo[ Ov Lot no. Taxlot:Reference: PROPERW OWNER Address: Name: (//v Phone:Fax: E-mail: Building Owner or Owner's agent authorizing this application Sign here: V\*" lr\,Ao"L.' E This installation is being made on residential or farm property owned by me or a membcr of my immediate family, and is cxempt from Iicensing requirements under ORS 701.010. CONTRACTOR INSTALLATION Business name Address City:State:ZTP: Phone Fax: E-mail CCB license no Print name: Signature: SUB.CONTRACTOR INFORMATION Nnme CCB License #Phone Electrical Plumbing Mechanical Last cdited 5-5-2019 BJoncs 1b)fl \r A . (-Y Ciw: AJ-zr-L^^zr?.11\ vl Ivlay remove these walls only il celling ls temoved. +_, I -l!. @ )'.brbov'9 @ 6fiLaa -Ps Y9 i IIAo\f $ Ad at|l -d+'t : E iLiDI-i =i _!tsrNi w(*. .wtNulil lHFll.l- "B{t*, Y^24fY r N Aoflk 6t FT.leFr{oLlsr A-ref,ts,{ryE rya.z* \/ I Ii I I - Non-bearing wall may be removed Non-bearing headwall may be removed . Ceiling may be removed -tr NE,.I-IH EX __t ! .! I 'Jk \) \F N \... $ I t I I I I I A I t-I_____ J \..ili-tJa4. @ w(4 HEN VAIJY @ C,LRTEr FEa,F. aNP,nL t&,LEstlttri rtFr.l *e 'A@ *7q 8E /A \L ttarltattrtr I Museum Remodel SOW Remove some interior walls and one restroom to make room for more displays. Walts hi-lighted in yellow. Cap off plumbing fixtures. Remove existing can lights in north entryway and hallway outside restrooms. Replace with LED track lighting. Remove existing suspended ceiling. lnstall display platform on top of existing restroom. Retocate existing light switches to wall outside restroom. (area marked in red) Delete unused lighting circuits. Relocate conduits that are running through exhibit area above restroom. Secure existing conduits to ceiling. These conduits were supported by suspended ceiling. anch INEERING; Sinca )977 February 11,2019 Jim Polston, Associate Proiect Manager City of Springfield Email: ipolston@springf ield-or.qov RE:City of Springfield Museum Remodel Feasi bilitY SummarY Branch Engineering Inc. Project No. l8-503 I. INTRODUCTION As per your requesr, Branch Engineering, Inc. has performed a preliminary and limited feasibility ,trdy p.rtuining to the proposed remodel of the City of Springfield Museum building. Thc building is a two-story concrete and masonry structure with a number if interior walls which you hope to be able to remove. you provided us with some drawings of the building dated 1980 which showed the elements of a remodel and addition which were constructed at that time. you indicated that the museum staff desires to relocate thc officc-relatcd occupancy from the lower floor to the upper floor and move the museum display items which are currently upstairs to the vacated office areas downstairs. As such, the various interior walls between the different offices downstairs are proposed to be removed to opcn up that space. we visited the site on two occasions to observe the structure and determine if any of the interior walls which are proposed to be removed are structural elements. We also conducted a limited code review to determine which, if any, code compliance issues may develop as a result of thc proposed relocation of the differcnt occupancies. The following narrative summarizes our tirai.rgr pertaining to allowable floor area, cgress requirements, the presence of interior bearing walls, and structural loading rcquirements. tt. ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA Due to the proposed change in occupancy, the building code rcquires that the buildingbe reviewed for conformance with the current code requirements related to the size of the building given the combustibility of its structural elements. With office and museum areas, the building may be considered to contain A-3 and B occupancies. Based on having non-combustible exterior walls, we believe the building should qualify as being of type III construction. At worst then, its allowable area would be 9,500 sq ft per floor, its allowable height 55 ft, and its allowable number of stories two. Though its floor i..i ir well under the threshold, the current building height and number of stories are at or near thc limits. It may be worth measuring the height of the building to make sure it is less than Ss ft; nevertheless, we believe that it should qualify. Furthermore, since the building is currently used for these same occupancies, and assuming it has been legally permitted EUCENE-SPRINGFIELD ALBANY civil. transportation structural . geotechnlcal SURVEYING 3l O srh Street, Springfield, OR 97477 | p: 541 .746.0637 | www'branchengineering'com City of Springfield Museum Remodel Feasibility February1l,2019 ro do so, even if the building did not meet thesc limitations, it is likely that it could be deemed to comply based on no incrcasc in risk to life safety. ItI. EGRESS REQUIREMENTS There are not likely to be any significant issues related to egress with the proposed reconfiguration of spaces. This is due to the reduced risk to human life in which the remodel would result. Based on the code-mandated number of occupants in an office space of one person every 100 sq ft and in a museum space of one person every 30 sq ft, both the number of occupants upstairs and the total number of occupants in the building should be reduced from their current levels based on the edsting allocation of space. The code should allow such a revision without penalty' IV, TNTERIOR BEARING WALLS Based on our observations in the attic space betwcen thc first and second storics, wc belicve that many of the interior walls which currently evist in the first story were relatively recent additions and do not play any required structural role in the stability of the building. As such, we believe these non-bearing partitions can be removed at will. A building diagram showing these non- bearing partitions is appended to this summary. V. STRUCTURAL LOADING REQUIREMENTS The building code mandates different structural loading dcmands for different occupancics. With the existing condition of the musernn space on the upper floor, the required loading would likcly have been 100 pounds per sq 11 lpsf). An office space on the second story would require at most 80 psf, so at first glance, it would appear that the loading requirement would be less' Howevcr, the code also requires that office floors be designed for a concentrated load of 2000 lbs assumed to be placed in a location resulting in the greatest amount of structural stress- No such requirement exists for assembly (museum) occupancies. Consequently, the code may mandate that the floor be analyzed for such a concentrated load or strengthened as required to support such a load. Strengthening the floor would most likely prove to be a cost-prohibitivc endeavor. As such, it may be easiest to argue that since the building previously housed presumably heavy machinery related to municipal power supply, that the upper floor should be more than adequate for an office-related occupancy. The authority having jurisdiction may require substantiating documentation of the past loading conditions for this floor if such an argument is to be successful. The next easiest solution, should one bc required, may be to prove by structural analysis that the existing upper floor is capable of supporting the required concentrated load. In order to perform this analysis, however, an engineer would need to know the size, quantity, and placement of reinforcing in the concrete floor. If no drawings exist to document this information, it would be necessary to obtain a radar scan of the floor system to map and document the existing reinforcement. VI. LIMITATIONS please note that our investigation was limited only to the items specifically listed above and is meant only as a preliminary feasibility assessmcnt to identify issucs which may come up during the course of the project as well as those which are not likely to be of structural or life-safety concern. Opinions given are based on signs noted by visual observation only. We have not 2Eranch Engineering, lnc. City of Springfield Museum Remodel Feasibility February I l, 201 9 performed any structural analysis of any of the building's structural systems or considered the structural condition of any of the existing building elements. Please let us know if there are any questions regarding our observations or conclusions. Sincerely, #6?0s2PE Digitally signed by Ricardo Hernandez OREGON Benews; JUNE30,2019 I 3Branch Engineering, lnc.