Loading...
203 LAFAYETTE STREET - BUILDING INSPECTION 203 Lafayette St. T , s _ _. 4 Worcester Insurance Company 120 Front Street,Suite 500 • Worcester. MA 01608-1408 DATE: TO: Building Commissioner or Board of Selectmen or Inspector of Buildings Board of Health ( /) riff f SAH 1 t 61-170 addresses RE: Insured: � I �� ^'�� AJ-ST— Property Address: ST— Policy Number: Loss of File or Claim Number Claim has been made involving loss, damage or destruction of the above captioned*property,which may either exceed$1,000.00 or cause Mass.Gen. Laws, Chapter 143, Section 6,to be applicable. If any notice under Mass. Gen. Laws, Ch. 139, Sec. 3B is appropriate please direct it to the attention of the writer and include a reference to the captioned insured, location, policy number,date of loss and claim or file number. ( / Ulc�'vtA�2 Title: On this date, I caused copies of this notice to be sent to the persons named bove at the addresses O � 6 indicated above by first class mail � �� e Signature Date ��— U ey X A Member of The Harleysville Insurance Companies WNS-251 CL(Ed. 5-95) , City of Salem, Massachusetts Purchasing Agent's Office ��.E9MWr,E� Dennis F. Daly ! ; te Salem Green City Purchasing Agent 01970 4 Tel.(508)745.9595 X331 '�MtyM`0�4 TO: Leo Tremblay FROM: Dennis Daly �. . DATE: July 27, 1994 RE: Structural Report On Saltonstall School Project Please review the attached communications from Robert M. Rumpf & Associates and Earl R. Flansburgh & Associates. Do you agree with either of their positions? Do you think a meeting might be in order to clear up any confusion. I look forward to your comments. Thank you for your attention. Robert M. Rumpf & Associates consulting - structural engineers 101 Derby Street Salem, Massachusetts 01970 (508) 745-6596 July 7, 1994 Mr. Dennis Daly Purchasing Agent City of Salem One Salem Green Salem, Massachusetts 01970 REPORT (FRAMING) Re: Saltonstall Elementary School Review Structural Drawine Submitted by Flansburg Associates in accordance with Massachusetts State Buildine Code Article I. Section 113.8 This is a report on our findings to date regarding the structural steel (framing) design for the referenced building. We have compared this design to what we consider a standard design based upon our experience which includes more than 70 school buildings. Through this comparison we have determined that this structure is at least 100% over designed. Same over design shall cost significantly more than a design which meets or exceeds the requirements setforth by the Massachusetts State Building Code: if a standard desiLm were used, we find that savines could be made as follows- continued- nert page page one of two July 7. 1994 Mr. Dennis Daly_ - Purchasim, AL_ent Citv of Salem REPORT (FRAMING) Re: Saltonstall Elementary School continued Table Ll - REDUCTIONS Roof (approximate structural steel 12 Tons S 27,000.00 material and erection reduction) 52,250.00 Second Floor (approximate structural steel 10 Tons @ 22,500.00 material and erection reduction) $2,250.00 First Floor (approximate structural steel 10 Tons o. 22,500.00 material and erection reduction) $2.250.00 Columns (approximate material and I 1 Tons a '_4,750.00 erection reduction) $2,250.00 Welded Studs (approximate material and 4.500 Each u 1 11-50,00 field welding reduction) $2.50 Columns (approximate material and 100 Each !cry i0,000,00 tield welding reduction) S100.00 TOTAL SAVINGS BY REDUCTIONS S 115,000.00 Based on our findings, please notify us as to what steps should be taken to remedy this situation. tf v s �— 'Robert M. u lnpf� . E. Robert M. Rumpf& Associates page two of two 07/19/94 11:16 $617 720 7873 E R FLANSBURGH -+++ PIr1NNING w001/009 EARL R. FLANSBURGH © ASSOCIATES, INC. 77 North Washington Street Boston, Massachusetts 02114 Facsimile Tel 617-367-3970 Fax 617-720-7873 To: Vh I - From: �l�1ltYlv�C� - Facsimile No. Pages: Date: -7 Regarding: 'nA , P-Nwt-ew . Comments: 07/19/94 11:17 $617 720 7875 E R FL4NSBURGB ... PLANNING 2002/009 EARL R. FLANSBURGH a ASSOCIATES, INC. 15 July 1994 Earl R.Flansburgh,FAIA Mr.Dennis Daly,Purchasing Agent City of Salem Purchasing Department Michael H.Bourque,FIBD One Salem Green David S.Soleau,AIA Salmi MA 01970 _ Kam M.Brannelly,SUPS Re: Saltonstall Elementary School/Independent Structural Review ERF+A Project No.9311 Edward E.Calamari,AIA David A.Crotew,AIA Dear Dennis: Rose M.Fiore Duncan P.McClelland,AIA In response to your 11 July 94 letter,I have reviewed the Independent Structural Alan S.Ross,AIA Engineer's report and have forwarded it to our Structural Engineer of Record. According Loualinda R.Turben,IBD to the Massachusetts State Building Code,Section 113.8,the task of the independent reviewer is to"verify that the design of the primary structure is conceptually correct and that there are no major errors in the design." Appendix I lists the criteria for review and the report and follow-up responsibilities of the engineer. Please see the attached excerpts from the MSBCode. Enclosed you will also find the follow-up letter fiom the Engineers Design Group,Inc.,our Structural Engineer of Record. Our firm respects and agrees with the conclusions of EDG,as outlined in their letter. In our opinion,Mr. Rumpfs findings conclude that the building,as designed,does in fact meet the requirements of the Massachusetts State Budding Code. Therefore,an addendum addressing this matter is not necessary. The"Reduction"section of Mr Rumpfs report is not applicable to the task that was contracted by your office. EDG's follow-up letter discusses this matter. If we can be of any further assistance,please let us know. Sincerely, EARL R. FLANSBURGH+ASSOCIATES,INC. J e A. Kuespert,AIA ject Manager cc: Charles Quigley, Director of Public Services Edward Curtin, Superintendent of Schools Beth Debski, Salem Julie Riemenschneider, Salem David Soleau,ERF+A enclosures Architecture I Master Planning I scaoe Plam.in9 I Ivtedw oeslpn 77 North Washington street Boston Massachusetts 02114 Tel 6171 6741970 Fax 617.726-76TH 07/19/94 11:18 %2617 720 7873 E R FLANSBURGH PUNNING f12j003/009 THE MASSACHUSETTS STATE bun.uur" t:vue: ,- _ w 2. the method and amount of ventilation and sanitation; 3. the methods of firestopping as required in this code; and 4. schedules and details indicating compliance of interior trim and finish with provisions of Article 9. 113.5.1 Structures subject to control: In those structures subject to control as required in Section 127.0, affidavits must be submitted with the permit application that the individuals and testing laboratories responsible for carrying out the duties specified in Section 127.0 have been licensed by the BBRS. 113.5.2 Architects' and engineers' seals: Unless otherwise provided in this code, all plans and specifications for buildings and structures containing more than thirty-five thousand (35,000) cubic feet of enclosed space shall bear the Massachusetts seal of registration of a qualified registered professional engineer or architect. Plans and specifications, plats and records whenever required to be stamped with the seal of a registered professional engineer or architect shall be signed by the registrant named thereon. The use of a facsimile signature stamp shall not be deemed to comply with this section. 113.6 Site plan: There shall also be filed prior to a permit being granted for the excavation or for the erection of any building or structure a site plan showing to scale the size and location of all new construction and all existing structures on the site, distances from lot lines, the established street grades if they exist (verified by the town or city) and proposed finished grades. In the case of demolition,•the site plan shall show all construction to be demolished and the location and size of all existing structures and construction that are to remain on the site or plot. The site plan shall not be changed except as specified in Sections 113.8 and 1153. 113.7 Engineering details: The building official may require adequate details of structural, mechanical and electrical work, including computations, stress diagrams• and other essential technical data, prepared by a registered professional engineer qualified by experience in the specific field of construction, to be filed. All such plans and computations shall bear the Massachusetts seal of registration and signature of the qualified registered professional engineer or architect. L Indeaenderrt structural ennineering_review: As a condition for the nce of a buildin ennit the structural desi of the followlures shall be reviewed by an indcRendent structural en of the Rrimary structure is concepttuals in the_design: 1-16 780 CMR - Fifth Edition WB rE rffl 6 m 07/19/94 11:19 U617 720 7873 E R FLANSBURGH PLANNING 004/009 1. fig LIding§ which are five 5 stories or more in hei ht above the lowest floor including stories below ¢rade. 2. Buildings which enclose a total volume of 400.0()o cubic feet including stories below rade. The volume shall be measured usrn the outside dimensions of the but Ming., 3. Structures Use Grou or structures which are artiall in Use Cj,roMR A.which will be used or ublic arse bl of 300 or more ersons. 4. otructures of unusual comvlexity or design shall be determ'nthe BBRS. A buildine official may apply to the BBRS for such a I a determination on a syecific structure. I Exemption: Tempora structures erected for a period of 180 days or less. 11 .8.1 Requirements for the review: 717he inde ende t structural en ineertn review shall be in accordance with the re uire a is of dix I. 113.9 Amendments to application: Subject to the limitations of Section 113.11 amendments or revisions to a plan or other records accompanying the same may not be made until the proposed changes have been filed with.and approved by the building official; and such approved amendments shall be deemed part of the original application and shalt be filed therewith. I ettne 9 780 CMR - Fitth Edition 1-16a --a 07/19/94 11:20 '$617 720 7875 E R FIANSBURGH +++ PLANNING a005/009 APPENDIX I INDEPENDENT-STRUCTURAL ENGINEER REVIEW fAonendac I. in 101AL is a new Armendix effective 6119 1.1 Primary structure: For the purposes of the independent structural engineering review, the primary structure shall be defined as the structural frame, the load supporting parts of floors, roofs, and walls, and the foundations. Cladding, cladding framing, stairs, equipment supports, ceiling supports, non-load bearing partitions, and railings are excluded from this definition of primary structure. 1-2 Reviewing engineer. The reviewing engineer shall be engaged by the owner. 1-2.1 Qualitications: The reviewing engineer shall be a professional structural engineer, registered in Massachusetts,qualified by experience and training and who 1 shall have had structural design experience with buildings or structures similar to that covered by the application for the building permit.The reviewing engineer shall be impartial,and shall be independent of the architect of record,structural engineer of record, and contractors and suppliers who will be involved in the construction of the structure. I�3 Criteria for review: The reviewing engineer shall review the plans and specifications submitted with the application for the building permit for compliance with the structural and foundation design provisions of the Code. He shall perform the following tasks: 1. Check to assure that the design loads conform with the Code; 2. Check that other design criteria, and design assumptions, conform to the Code and are in accordance with accepted engineering practice; 3. Review geotechnical and other engineering investigations that are related to the structural design to determine if the design properly incorporates the results and recommendations of the investigations; 4. Check that the organization of the structure is conceptually correct and 65M IEneaive fin9r921 780 CMR - Fifth Edition 1-1 07/19/94 11:21 $617 720 7873 E R FLANSBURGH +++ PLANNING _ 0006/009, THE MASSACHUSETTS STATE BUILDING CODE 5. Make independent calculations for a representative fraction of systems,members,and details to check their adequacy.The number Of representative systems, members, and details shall be sufficient to form a basis for the reviewer's conclusions. 1-3.1 Structural Calculations: The :structural: calculations prepared by the structural engineer of record shall be submitted to the reviewing engineer, upon his request, for his reference only. The reviewing engineer shall not be obligated to review or check these calculations. If the design criteria and design assumptions are not shown on the drawings or in the computations, the structural engineer of record shall provide a statement of these criteria and assumptions for the review. 1-4 Structural engineer of record: The structural engineer of record shall retain sole responsibility for the structural design, and the activities and reports of the reviewing engineer shall not relieve the structural engineer of record of this responsibility. 1-5 Report and follow-up: I. The reviewing engineer shall prepare a report to the building official stating whether or not the structural design shown on the drawings and the specifications conform with the structural and foundation requirements of this Code. Said report shall be based on the review as prescribed in Appendix I and shall include a summary of all deficiencies, if any,which cannot be resolved with the structural engineer.of record. 2. The structural engineer of record shall review the report of the reviewing engineer, and notify the building official in writing, whether or not he agrees with or disputes the conclusions and recommendations of.the reviewing engineer. �+ 3. Unresolved disputes between the structural engineer of record and the reviewing engineer shall be submitted by the building official, the owner, the structural engineer of record or the reviewing engineer to the Structural Peer Review Advisory Board for resolution. 4. Any changes to the structural design subsequent to the original submission of the plans and specifications shall be shown on revised drawings and specifications, submitted with an amendment to the application for permit. The reviewing engineer shall review the changes on the revised drawings and specifications, and, if the original report does not account for the changes in said drawings and specifications, a i supplementary report relating to the changes and prepared by the reviewing engineer shall be made to the building.official. 1-2 780 CMR - Fifth Edition 615M(Effective 6(19/921 07/19/94 11:22 $617 720 7873 E R FLANSBURGH PLANNING fsj 007/009 INDEPENDENT STRUCTURAL ENGINEER REVIEW 1-6 Foundation permits: When the plans and specifications are partially complete and an application is made for a foundation permit, the reviewing engineer may review the foundation plans and specifications on a conditional basis, provided that the reviewing engineer is given sufficient documentation so that he can perform Tasks 1, 2, 3, and 4 in Section I-3 for the, whole structure, and so that he can perform Task 5 in Section I-3 for that part of the foundation covered by the application for foundation permit. The reviewing engineer shall prepare a report on that part of the foundation covered by the application for foundation permit, as prescribed in Section I.5,stating all conditions upon which the report is based.When the reviewing engineer reviews the completed plans and specifications as prescribed in Section I.3, he shall reperform Tasks 1, 2,3, and 4, as necessary, to include all the revisions to the design subsequent to the application for the foundation permit. 6/5M (Effective 6119M 780 CMR - Fifth Edition 1-3 07/19/94 11:23 '&617 720 7873 E R FLANSBORGB ... PLANNING X008/009 -W�� 0-� Engineers Design Group m ins so-ee Cambridge,MA 02139 REE C � ' \�// p Phm 617/4924100 FAX 617/492-0712 July 13, 1994 JUL 181994 Ms. Jean Kuespert Earl R. Flansburgh & Associates 77 No. Washington Street Earl R.Ftonsburgh & ASSOC., Inc. Boston, MA, 02114 Re: Saltonstall Elementary School Salem, MA. EDG #8972 Dear Jean, We are in receipt of the letter from Mr. Dennis F. Daly dated July 11th and the attached report from Robert M. Rumpf& Associates dated July 7th, 1994, and wish to comment as follows. We assume from the letter that Mr. Rumpf agrees that the primary structure as detailed, meets the requirements of the Massachusetts State Building Code and is in compliance with the structural and foundation design provisions of this code. This would be the criteria for the independent structural engineer review as contained in Article 1, Section 114.8 and Appendix I. Our assumption is further reinforced in that Mr. Rumpf has not been in contact with our office regarding any deficiencies relating to the structural design and we expect that his report confirming conformance with the Massachusetts Code can now be prepared and issued to the local Building Official. As to the statement, "this structure is at least 100% over designed", we categorically refute this as being incorrect and wish to question Mr. Rumpfs findings. The statement that the building and subsequent structure is "a standard design" is simply untrue. This project is unique in many ways, including, for example the loading criteria at library, the need for moment resisting frames due to layout, and floor and roof cantilevers. We have carefully analyzed the structure and reviewed it m light of Mr. Rumpf's comments and cannot agree or understand the basis for these remarks. We have provided a safe, economic and appropriate primary structure. 07/19/94 11:24 $617 720 7875 E R FLANSBURGR ++ PLANNING IM 009/009 Our design is based on serviceability requirements, including consideration for lateral displacements, deflections and vibration, and we question whether these issues have been taken into account during Mr. Rumpf's review. Our office policy on this type of public building is to ensure that deflection and displacement criteria protect the building fabric, ie, partitions, brick veneer and ceilings from any distress or cracking as well as the comfort of the inhabitants. We would not be willing to compromise these standards in order to provide a cheaper yet inferior product, that would be unacceptable to the City of Salem. We are more than willing to meet with Mr. Daly and/or his reviewing engineer to discuss and address any concerns they have, which relate to the structure at the above. As the Engineer of Record, we would also be happy to review Mr.Rumpf's calculations to ascertain whether there is any validity in his findings. Should you require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Very truly yours, ENGINEERS DESIGN GROUP; INC. Cleme4McP.E. CM/jm e !r