PROPOSED CITY HALL BUILDING ANALYSIS CITY PROJECT 4466 MINOT, ND INDEX INTRODUCTION PAGES 1•2
FIRM INFORMATION PAGE 3
SITE PAGE 4
PROGRAM NEEDS PAGE 5
ZONING COMPLIANCE PAGE 6
BIG M BUILDING ASSESSMENT PAGE 7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY PAGES 8•12 CONSTRUCTIONBUILDING CODE COMPLIANCECOSTS PAGES 13•16 BUILDINGESTIMATE ANALYSISOF PROBABLE COST PAGE 17 ENGINEERINGBUILDING PLANS ASSESSMENTS PAGES 18•26 WELLSBUILDING FARGOPLANS ASSESSMENT PAGES 27•29 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY CONSTRUCTIONWELLS FARGO COSTS ASSESSMENT PAGE 30 BUILDINGEXECUTIVE ANALYSIS SUMMARYSUMMARY PAGES 31•34 BUILDING CODE COMPLIANCE PAGES 35•37 ESTIMATE OF PROBABLE COST PAGE 38 ENGINEERING ASSESSMENTS PAGES 39•46 BUILDING PLANS PAGE 47 INTRODUCTION PROPOSED CITY HALL BUILDING ANALYSIS
SCOPE OF WORK JLG Architects was hired by the City of Minot to lead a team of local professional, including architects, engineers and contracting, to evaluate two potential sites as potential locations for a relocation of City Hall for Minot, North Dakota. The two sites under consideration area the Midwest Federal Building (Big ‘M’ Building at 123 1st Street SW and the Wells Fargo Building located at 15 2nd Avenue SW, both in downtown Minot, North Dakota.
The Scope of Work was to include the following tasks: Task 1: Review existing studies, and reports for both structures on file with the City of Minot Task 2: Conduct a walk-through analysis of both structures with the Architectural and Engineering Teams. It was highly recommended to review the structures with local contractors who have performed work in both buildings in the past. Task 3: Perform high-level probability analysis of potential hazardous materials in the Wells Fargo Building. This includes the probability of asbestos and lead based paint within the building. Task 4: Review the feasibility to move column locations within the Big ‘M’ Building to maximize space for public assembly. Task 5: Provide feasibility and high-level cost estimate for construction of bridges from either the Big ‘M’ Building or the Wells Fargo Building to the Renaissance Parking Structure. Task 6: Perform remodel cost analysis for each building. The estimates shall be completed on a square foot basis for each floor. The costs shall incorporate space analysis requirements as provided by the City of Minot. The cost estimates shall list construction costs, contingency percentages, architectural fees and all assumptions used in developing the costs. The construction cost analysis shall also include: 1. The cost to bring each building up to currently adopted building codes. 2. The cost to repair major building systems including mechanical, plumbing and electrical systems. Building systems must meet current energy codes. 3. The costs to abate hazardous material in the buildings, based on existing reports and on-site observations. 4. The costs to remodel each floor to meet modern office building standards with good quality finishes.
ASSESSMENT SCHEDULE: JAN. 17, 2020 NOTIFICATION OF AWARD JLG Architects was notified they were awarded the contract to evaluate the two potential sites for potential relocation of City Hall. The City of Minot shared all available information they had on file which related to previous the pair of buildings including existing original construction documents, studies and reports for the Assessment Team to review and study prior to walking through the buildings. JLG Architects notified all team members of the award and distributed all City of Minot documents to the assessment teams. JLG prepared contracts for the work and began coordinating the work effort and scheduling a date for the walk-through assessments.
JAN. 29, 2020 WALK THROUGH ANALYSIS A walk-through assessment was conducted at both structures was completed with the Architectural and Engineering Teams. The Wells Fargo Building was toured from 10:30 am to 12:00 pm. The Big ‘M’ Building was toured from 1:00 pm to 3:00 pm.
1 FEB. 6, 2020 ASSESSMENT REVIEW ROUNDTABLE A roundtable discussion was held at the Minot Office of JLG Architects with the Design Professional, the local group Contractors and the City of Minot review the initial assessment thoughts and cost estimates. The purpose of the meeting was to review the required tasks to be completed, review the revised schedule for completing the assessment report and to get expert feedback and confirmation on the condition of the existing building systems. The process intends to better inform the cost estimating process and ensure all parties were in agreement on the scope of work for each building. After all roundtable discussions were complete the Architectural and Engineering Team was instructed to complete the assessment narratives and cost estimate to Doug Larson, Project Manager for JLG Architects, by the end of day on Tuesday, February 11, 2020
FEB. 13, 2020 SUBMIT DRAFT ASSESSMENT DOCUMENT FEB. 18, 2020 DRAFT REVIEW WITH CITY HALL TECHNICAL COMMITTEE FEB. 26, 2020 ISSUE DRAFT REPORT MARCH 9, 2020 CITY COUNCIL WALK-THROUGH OF BUILDINGS 4:30 pm Wells Fargo Walk-through 6:00 pm Big ‘M’ Walk-through
MARCH 10, 2020 CITY HALL TECHNICAL COMMITTEE MEETING MARCH 12, 2020 FINAL REPORT DUE MARCH 16, 2020 REPORT PRESENTATION TO CITY COUNCIL
ASSESSMENT TEAM: ARCHITECTURAL ASSESMENTS: JLG ARCHITECTS Scott Jordan-Denny Principal-in-Charge Douglas Larson Project Manager / General Assessments Tom Behm Cost Estimating
ENGINEERING ASSESMENTS: PRAIRIE ENGINEERING, PC Jason Hunze Electrical Assessments / Electrical Cost Estimating Caleb Bulow Mechanical Assessments / Mechanical Cost Estimating
CW STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS Kody Scharosch Structural Assessments
AE2S Mark Lambrecht Civil Estimating
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS: MATERIALS TESTING SERVICES Jim Kunzelman Environmental Consultant / Assessments
LOCAL CONTRACTOR RESOURCES: ROLAC CONTRACTING General Contractor Jason Sanders Expert on General Construction - Big ‘M’ Building MOWBRAY & SON Mechanical Contractor Wayne Burbach Expert on Mechanical Systems - Big ‘M’ Building C&C PLUMBING&HEATING Mechanical Contractor Jamie Lach Expert on Mechanical Systems - Wells Fargo Building FARGO GLASS Glazing Contractor Joe Haider Glazing, Curtain Wall, Storefront, Door & Hardware Expert TECTRA AMERICA DAKOTAS Roofing Contractor Kevin Pederson Roofing Assessments / Cost Estimates
2 FIRM INFORMATION JLG Architects Year Firm Established: 1989
WE DESIGN FOR LIFE We know that it takes more than just bricks and mortar to build a community. It takes passionate local stewardship, progressive leaders, and designers who understand how to turn a small idea into a big future. For over 31 years, our 150 JLGers have raised the bar on what is expected from architecture in North Dakota, Minnesota and South Dakota so that we can continuously improve the quality of life of our clients, our neighbors, and our families, while remaining dedicated to our clients’ bottom lines, today, tomorrow and for the next generation to come. We are inspired by the future, and work passionately to make our impact go beyond a building. As a result, JLG has been identified as one of the hottest architecture firms in the United States by Inc., Architectural Record, the Zweig Group, and the Minneapolis-St. Paul Business Journal and is a “Best Place to Work” according to Prairie Business magazine, the Zweig Group, GGF Young Professionals and the National American Institute of Architects Intern Development Program.
WE MIX GOOD DESIGN AND GOOD SENSE At our heart, JLG lives and breathes design excellence; it counts – at every level and for every position. We balance innovative design with borderline-obsessive budget control to generate solutions that are as creative as they are practical. Function is the baseline; form is what lifts up the spirit; and innovation elevates the experience for our clients, their visitors, and the region as a whole. JLG has over 100 design awards in our portfolio because we are committed to elevating expectations for our clients and our communities.
WE ARE HOME We believe it takes people who are an active, engaged part of a community to truly understand what matters to the people living there. We have a lifetime of vested interest in the communities in which we work.
Conservation:
At JLG, Sustainable Design means creating high performance solutions that meet our clients’ present profitability goals without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own. We do that by designing to a LEED Certified minimum on all of our projects to lower long-term maintenance costs and, since the most sustainable thing you can do is reuse your building, we design to last – creating flexible and organic solutions that are nimble and able to adapt to new parameters. LOWERED LONG-TERM COSTS JLG’s green buildings At JLG, our clients’ budgets are as intertwined in our design solutions as the architecture itself, and so it stands to reason this concern would carry on throughout the project’s reduce energy use on lifespan. To that end, we design to align to today’s bottom line while remaining average by % cost effective to maintain, especially in the areas of energy and water savings. 23
IMPROVED HEALTH We live in a region in which 90% of our time is spent indoors. Study after study has shown the effects of indoor air quality, daylighting and other environmental factors as they relate to the health and well-being of a building’s occupants. JLG maximizes indoor design opportunities to increase attention spans, lower sick days and raise productivity.
3 BIG M BUILDING
CITY PARKING GARAGE WELLS FARGO
DOWNTOWN MINOT, ND 58702
4 CITY OF MINOT PROGRAM NEEDS
City Hall Space Needs Department Needed SF Existing SF Staff Count Per Capita SF Mayor, City Council 1400 - -- City Manager 2,995 1,434 7 428 City Attorney 1,300 710 5 260 Finance 4,402 3,081 19 232 Human Resources 1,350 758 4 338 NDR Program 500 363 3 167 Information Tech 1,450 1,466 6 242 Dispatch 2,125 1,205 16 133
Total 15,522 9,017 60 259
Additional Building Needs Council Chambers/Conference Room 3 5 4,000 2,120 Main Lobby Reception Area 3 1,000 529 Meeting Rooms 4,100 320 Wellness Center 3 3,050 - Lunch Room 800 - Mail Room 600 72 Copy Rooms (6) 1 600 144 Break Rooms (6) 2 3 600 224 Storage Areas 7 6,000 790 Open Space (Hallways, Stairs, etc) 5,000 4,085 Mechanical/Electrical/Water/Closets 2,500 1,418 Total 28,250 9,702
Other Building Needs Congressional Office Lease Space 1,000 - CTE 3 - - Stakeholders (MADC, SBPC, etc) - - Social Services (United Way, MAHC, etc) - - Total 1,000 -
Subtotal SF Needed 44,772 25% Growth Factor (50 years @ .5% / year) 9,031 Total SF Needed 53,803
5 ZONING COMPLIANCE Preliminary Zoning Analysis – Downtown Minot City of Minot Code of Ordinances
ZONING: “C3” Central Business District Chapter 12
GENERAL DISCRIPTION: The C3 (Central Business District) is established as the central core business district in which use of land is commercial and services uses.
USES PERMITED: Public / Semi-public facilities Professional Offices
LOT, HEIGHT, AREA and YARD REQUIRMENTS: 1. Maximum height of any building shall not exceed one hundred fifty (150) feet. 2. Maximum coverage – no limit except as limited by yard requirements in this section and Section 28-13 of the City of Minot Code of Ordinances. 3. Minimum yards are as follows: a. Front: Zero (0) except as limited by Section 28-13 of the City of Minot Code of Ordinances. b. Rear: Zero (0) except where the rear of the lot adjoins the “AG” District or any “R” District, in which case the minimum rear yard shall be twenty-five (25) feet. c. Side: Zero (0) except where the side of the lot adjoins the “AG” District or any “R” District in which case the minimum side yard shall be five (5) feet. d. All yards are subject to the limitations, exceptions and other modifications set forth in Chapter 21. 4. Minimum lot area: None 5. Minimum lot dimensions: None 6. Buffer Strips may be required along lot lines adjacent to more restrictive zoning district.
OFF-STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS: Chapter 23 None: This Chapter does not apply to the C3 District.
120507_200 STANDARD FORM c:\users\sdavis\documents\zoning.doc
6 BIG M BUILDING BUILDING ASSESSMENT MINOT, ND
7
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Big M Building
INTRODUCTION The following document represents a summary of assessments of the Big M Building located at 123 1st Street SW in downtown Minot, North Dakota. The assessment team conducted a walk-through analysis to assess the building’s suitability to meet City of Minot program requirements as a possible future site for relocation of Minot City Hall.
Construction on this facility began in 1962 and has a total gross square footage of 86,064 square feet (including the rooftop mechanical penthouse floor areas). There have been no additions or significant structural modifications to this facility since construction was completed in 1963.
The walk-though assessment, subsequent reports and estimates were executed on the assumption that the occupation of this building is intended to continue to be a Business Occupancy and existing interior partitions will be demolished to accommodate the best possible layout for City Offices and Public Meeting Spaces. Core support facilities such as mechanical, electrical, entrances, stairs and elevators will remain as constructed if there is no Building Code reason to relocate or re-construct these elements.
ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS 1. SITE AND BUILDING ASSESSMENT: SITE CONDITIONS: • Site parcel is 10,948 square feet. • Off-Street Parking: Site zoning does not require any off-street parking at this location. • Concrete pediment base / plaza along the south side of the building is in need repair. • Safety railings need to be installed where-ever the grade difference between the building pediment and the adjacent sidewalks is 18” or greater.
GENERAL BUILDING CONDITIONS: • Building Envelope: o Exterior Walls: ▪ The exterior walls of the building area composed almost entirely of a 1963 – era aluminum curtain wall system. While the curtain wall system is technically serviceable, it does not comply with current energy code performance requirements. ▪ Recommendation: Replace the existing curtainwall system, the cost of which is accounted for in the estimate in this report. o Exterior Entrances and Windows: ▪ Aluminum framed windows at the exterior entrance systems at the First Floor (Ground Level): • Windows and door lites are single pane, untampered plate glass. • Existing exterior entrance system frames are not a thermally broken system. • Recommendation: Replace these glazing and entrance systems. o Roof: ▪ The current roof is a 20-year old built-up roof system with minimal insulation. ▪ The rood is at the end of its useful life and should be replaced.
8 . Roof replacement costs are included in the estimate for this building. If replaced, the new roof would have additional insulation added to comply with current energy code and could be specified with a warranty of 20 years. . The parapet wall around the perimeter of the existing roof is exposed, uninsulated brick. • The roof estimate includes the cost of insulation and flashing the existing parapet wall.
o General Comments: . Floor to floor heights are generally 12’-0” once you get above the First Floor. This limits available ceiling heights once you account for mechanical items such as heat pumps, lighting, security and communications.
2. STRUCTURAL ASSESSMENT SUMMARY: • The existing building structure is comprised of steel beams and columns which are supported by concrete foundations. There is no visible evidence on the exterior or the interior of this building to indicate the building is structurally compromised in any way. o No visual signs of fatigue or cracking. • The existing structure is capable of supporting current code required live loads for a Business Occupancy. • Only major structural concern relates to the current bearing capacity of the soils supporting the foundations. Design weights indicated on the existing construction documents. o Soil bearing capacity design weights are indicated to be 8,000 psf. This is a high number. o There are concerns recent flooding could have gotten into the soils below, and if the water was not able to drain adequately, the soils may not be able to provide the support the building was designed around . Additional geotechnical testing is recommended. • The concept of removing selected existing columns to create more suitable open, large public space was considered as part if this assessment. Considering the costs associate with required renovations in the rest of this facility, we do not believe the costs of accomplishing this type of modification is feasible. e o The cost involved with removing columns near the top of the existing structure, or at the bottom of the existing structure are considered to be wash. o If open space is created on the top floor of the building, Other existing structure expected to carry the additional weight would need to be reinforced all the way down, through foundations, to soils bearing. o If open space is created on the main floor of the existing building, the cumulative loading from all the floors above would need to be accommodated. Additionally, the greater loads other components of the structure would be required to carry would necessitate reinforcing through foundations to soils bearing. o Given the existing design bearing capacity of the existing soils is a high number to what is typically seen in this region, adding weight to specific areas of foundational support is also a concern.
9 3. MECHANICAL ASSESSMENT SUMMARY: • Air Distribution: The building is served by three (3) air handlers. o The Primary Air Handler serves all floors above grade except for the 7 th and 8th Floors. On each floor ducts feed hot and cold air from a central shaft into ducts embedding in the floor. It is considered inefficient by current standards. . The primary air handler is at the end of its useful life and should be replaced. o The fan on the Lower Level Air Handler was operating at the time of the inspections. . The lower level air handler had been submerged in the recent flood of the two basement levels and should be replaced. o The Upper Level Air Handler was not in operation at the time of the assessment. . The upper level air handler is at the end of its useful life and should be replaced. • Heating o This building was originally heated by three (3) 80 hp low pressure steam boilers located in the 7 th Floor Boiler Room. The system has been off-line since 2011 – 2012. The system is known to have leaks. o A gas-fired hot water boiler was installed in 2011 -2012 to replace the heat exchanger on the steam system. The boiler currently feeds two temporary unit heaters which were installed to provide freeze protection within the building. o The hot water boiler can be re-used, but the old steam boilers will need to be replaced. o The heating units throughout the building will need to be replaced. • Cooling: o Two chillers on 7th Floor provide cooling for the entire building. The cooling plant has not operated since 2012 and sub-freezing temperatures in the building have likely affected seals and allowed for loss of refrigerant. . The chilled water system is past its expected lifespan and should be replaced. o The chillers are served by a cooling tower on the roof. . The cooling tower was installed in 2000 and may be serviceable. • Temperature Controls: o The existing controls system is pneumatic based. These systems are no longer installed in commercial buildings. It has not been used recently and likely does not function properly. o It is recommended to replace the pneumatic control system with digital controls. • Plumbing: o The existing plumbing system has been disconnected and drained to prevent freeze damage. The piping systems have been empty since 2011 - 2012. o The plumbing fixture are high-flow fixture that do not meet current water conservation standards. o Domestic hot water is provided by a gas-fired tank-type water heater on 7 th Floor. It has been disconnected since 2011 – 2012 and appears to be in poor condition. o The condition of the sanitary piping and potable water piping is unknown. . Sanitary piping is a mixture of old cast, copper and PVC piping. . Potable water piping is likely in poor condition due to extended disuse and extreme temperature conditions within the building. o It is recommended to install new potable water system, sanitary system, plumbing fixture and water heater in this building. • Fire Suppression: o This building is served with a wet-pipe fire suppression system with automatic sprinkler head installed on the basement and ground floors only. . The fire sprinkler system does not extend to the floors above ground level. . The fire sprinkler system is currently disconnected due to a recent pipe break.
10 o Recommendation: . Fire Sprinkler mains can be re-used. . Replace all branch piping and sprinkler head in the lower levels. . Install new fire sprinkler system on all upper floor levels. • A fire pump will be required to serve upper floors.
4. ELECTRICAL ASSESSMENT SUMMARY: • Lighting: o Existing light fixtures throughout the building have T12 fluorescent lamps. These lamps are no longer in production. . Recommendation is to install all new LED lighting and controls. o An emergency egress lighting system will need to be installed throughout the building. . Will obtain backup power from a generator. • Switchgear and Power Distribution: o This existing switchgear and branch distribution was completely submerged and catastrophically damages in a recent flood caused by a broken water line. o The equipment is also obsolete and replacement parts are no longer available.’ o The entire electrical distribution system for this building must be replaced. o • Fire Alarm System: o A new voice/alarm communication type, addressable fire alarm system will need to be installed in accordance with NFPA 72 and 2018 IBC. o Also required will be a rescue assist communications system located on each floor to allow communications with the designated Fire Command Center. • Network Cabling: o A new fiber optic Communications Utility Service will need to be brought into the building. o Network cabling throughout the building to be upgraded to Category 6. o Dedicated Data/IT rooms should be constructed on several floors and a fiber optic backbone system should be installed in this building. • Surveillance: Recommending the installation of an IP based surveillance system at all public entrances, publicly accessible interior spaces, exterior building perimeter and parking lot. • Security: An access control system is recommended. • Dispatch: The potential relocation of Dispatch to the location, as well the City’s main IT system will require reliable backup power. This will require the construction of a hardened IT room with UPS backup and generator support. o Article 403 of the 2018 IBC requires backup power for elevators and other critical systems in high-rise buildings. This requirement is currently not met in this building. o A generator will need to be provided at this building to provide need backup power for critical systems and Dispatch.
5. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT SUMMARY: • Asbestos Abatement: o Based on existing survey information, Materials Testing Services is obtaining estimates for abatement costs within this facility. . Initial responses have led the Design Team to have a $3,000,000 placeholder in the estimates for asbestos abatement. o Costs are dependent on the following criteria: . Abatement contractor needs access to a working elevator. . Abatement must be completed within 400 working days.
11 • Lighting Ballasts: o There is a large quantity of lighting ballast in the facility that may contain PCB’s. Disposal may be costly. o Neither City of Minot Landfill or the Sawyer Landfill Facility accept PCB waste. • Existing 35 and 55-gallon drums should be removed from site by current Owner. • Potential site contamination from former dry-cleaning facility located adjacent to this site. o It was common practice in the past for dry-cleaning facilities to dispose of spent solvent onto the ground surface. o Further research is required. • Hydraulic Elevator: o There is one existing, older hydraulic elevator located within this building. Elevators installed prior to 1979 may have used hydraulic oil that possibly contained PCB’s. o Existing elevator machine room was in the basement level which was flooded. o Further research is required to determine if the hydraulic tank has leaked and has created any potential site contamination. • Lead-Based Paint: o There is no evidence a lead-base paint survey has been completed for this facility. o Materials Testing Services will do a field assessment on select surfaces to get an indication of existing conditions.
6. BUILDING CODE COMPLIANCE This structure was analyzed for compliance with the currently adopted building code for the City of Minot: 2018 International Building Code. • Structurally, the building is capable of supporting Business Occupancy live loads to its intended use. • The allowable area of this structure is unlimited because of the existing construction type. Any structural remodeling should be completed to continue to conform to Type 1A construction. o Removal of the existing asbestos containing fireproofing materials from the structural steel frame of this building would require that new fireproofing be applied to maintain the building’s code reviewed construction type. • Fire Suppression System. o There is an existing fire suppression system protecting only portions of the ground floor and the basement levels of this facility. o A fire suppression system is required by 2018 IBC for this high-rise building. . There is and existing 6” dedicated fire water line in this building which can be re- used. • There is not enough diagonal separation between the two existing, required fire-escape stairs. Both are located in the center of the building adjacent to the two main elevator shafts. o A new stair tower compliant with the 2018 IBC is accounted for in the cost estimates for this building.
7. ADA COMPLIANCE • The existing two elevators are not ADA Compliant. o The existing elevator shafts are of adequate size to accept ADA Compliant elevators. o High-rise building are required by code to have one gurney accessible elevator. The current elevator shafts are not large enough to accept a gurney accessible replacement elevator • The west main entrance to this building is not ADA Compliant. A ramp would need to be built on site.to gain handicap access to this entrance. • Existing restrooms are not ADA Compliant.
12 CODE COMPLIANCE
Preliminary Code Analysis – M Building 2018 International Building Code
OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION: Group B (Business) (Section 304) Group Accessory/Mechanical
CONSTRUCTION TYPE: Type I-A (Table 601) Fire Sprinklered Lower Levels Non-Fire Suppression on floors 2-8. (Section 403.3) Per section 403 High Rise Building, 403.3 Automatic Sprinkler System. Buildings and structures shall be equipped with automatic sprinkler systems in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 and secondary water supply where required by 903.3.5.2.
ALLOWABLE AREA: BUSINESS GROUP B – NON SRPINKLERED: Basic Allowable Area: Unlimited (Table 503)
Actual Building Area: 86,064 Square Feet (Section 506)
Sub-Basement 8,806 SF (B) Basement 10,920 SF (B) First Floor 6,068 SF (B) Second Floor 8,770 SF (B) Third Floor 8,770 SF (B) Fourth Floor 8,770 SF (B) Fifth Floor 8,770 SF (B) Sixth Floor 8,770 SF (B) Seventh Floor 8,770 SF (B) Eighth Floor 4,953 SF (B) Penthouse Lower 1,500 SF (Mech) Penthouse Upper 1,197 SF (Mech)
Total Building Square Footage: 86,064 SF
13 ALLOWABLE HEIGHT: Un-Limited (Table 503)
ACTUAL HEIGHT: 121’ – 2”
OCCUPANT LOAD: (Section 1004) B Occupancy: 556 Total Occupants (83,367 sf / 150 sf per occupant, Table 1004.1.2) Mech Occupancy: 9 Total Occupants (2697 sf / 300 sf per occupant, Table 1004.1.2)
TOTAL BUILDING OCCUPANT LOAD: 565 Occupants
MEANS OF EGRESS SIZING: (Section 1005) Required Exit Width: Occupant load x 0.2 (Other Egress Components Section 1005.3.2) Occupant load x 0.3 (Stairways Section 1005.3.1)
Actual: (2) Doors at 36” each for stair towers at the upper levers, however these are near each other not meeting the current code in exit separation. Main level has 284” of total egress.
Sub-Basement 8,806 SF / 150 = 59 x 0.3 = 17.7” Basement 10,920 SF / 150 = 73 x 0.3 = 21.9” First Floor 6,068 SF / 150 = 41 x 0.2 = 8.2” Second Floor 8,770 SF /150 = 59 x 0.3 = 17.7” Third Floor 8,770 SF / 150 = 59 x 0.3 = 17.7” Fourth Floor 8,770 SF / 150 = 59 x 0.3 = 17.7” Fifth Floor 8,770 SF / 150 = 59 x 0.3 = 17.7” Sixth Floor 8,770 SF / 150 = 59 x 0.3 = 17.7” Seventh Floor 8,770 SF /150 = 59 x 0.3 = 17.7” Eighth Floor 4,953 SF / 150 = 34 x 0.3 = 10.2” Penthouse Lower 1,500 SF / 300 = 5 x 0.3 = 1.5” Penthouse Upper 1,197 SF / 300 = 4 x 0.3 = 1.2”
EXIT ACCESS AND ACESS DOORWAYS: (Section 1015) Section 1015.2.1 Two exits or exit access doorways. Where two exits or exit access doorways are required from any portion of the exit access, the exit doors or exit access doorways shall be placed at distance apart equal to not less than one-half the length of the maximum diagonal overall diagonal dimension of the building area to be served measured in a straight line between exit doors or exit access doorways. Interlocking or scissor stairs shall be counted as one exit stairway.
14 EXIT ACCESS TRAVEL DISTANCE: (Table 1017.2) Without Sprinkler System: 200’ With Sprinkler System: 300’
Actual Maximum Exit Access Travel Distances: Sub Basement 126’ Basement 126’ First Floor: 79’ Second-Eighth Floor: 126’ Penthouse: 39’
PLUBMING SYSTEMS FOR EDUCATIONAL OCCUPANCIES: (NORTH DAKOTA AMENDED) (Table 2902.1) Water Closets: Business Occupancies: 1/25 for the first 50 Occupants and 1/50 for the remainder exceeding 50. 565 Occupant Load: 50 Occupants = 2 Required 515 Occupants / 50 = 11 Required 13 Total Water Closets Required
Totals: 7 Male Water Closets Required / 8 Provided plus 8 Urinals 7 Female Water Closets Required / 16 Female Water Closets Provided There is one family bathroom located on second floor. Lavatories: Business Occupancies 1/40 for the first 80 Occupants and 1 per 80 Occupants for the remainder exceeding 80. 565 Occupant Load: 80 Occupants = 2 Required 485 Occupants / 80 = 7 Required 9 Total Lavatories Required. 4 Male and 4 Female Lavatories Required.
Totals: 4 Male Lavatories Required / 16 Male Lavatories Provided. 4 Female Lavatories Required / 16 Female Lavatories Provided. There is one family bathroom located on second floor. Bathtubs or Showers: None Required.
Drinking Fountains: Business Occupancies: 1 / 100 Occupants Required. 565 Occupants / 100 = 6 Drinking Fountains Required.
Service Sinks: 1 Required / 10 Provided.
15 ELEVATORS AND CONVEYING SYSTEMS: (Section 1015) Section 3002.4 Elevator Car to accommodate ambulance stretcher. Where elevators are provided in buildings four or more stories above grade plane or four or more stories below grade plane, at least one elevator shall be provided for fire department emergency access to all floors. The elevator car shall be of such size and arrangement to accommodate an ambulance stretcher 24-inches by 84-inches with not less than 5-inch radius corners in the horizontal, open position and shall be identified by the international symbol for emergency medical services (star of life). The symbol shall not be less than three inches high and shall be placed inside on both sides of the hoistway door frame.
16 SUMMARY OF PROBABLE COSTS
CONSTRUCTION COSTS M Building Sub-basement & Basement General $359,000 Demolition $600,000 General Construction $4,800,000 Fire Suprpression $365,000 Plumbing $975,000 Air Distribution $1,750,000 Central Plants $675,000 Temperature Controls $145,000 Electrical $2,213,400 Communications $326,100 Electrical Safety and Security $525,100 $12,733,600
Other Elevators $375,000 Elevator Shaft Modifications $150,000 Fire Proofing $200,000 Vertical Egress Modifications $600,000 Curtian Wall Replacment $6,500,000 Site Improvements $75,000 Utilities $35,000 Roofing $455,000 Hazardous Material Removal $3,000,000 Indoor Air Testing $400,000 Skywalk $750,000 $12,540,000
Contingency 15% $3,791,040 Escalation Fall 2020 Start $0 $3,791,040 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS $29,064,640
SOFT COSTS (OWNER) Professional Fees $2,325,171 Reimbursable Expenses $50,000 Building Acquisition $800,000 Furniture, fixtures and equipment (FFE) $1,000,000 Technology Security and Equipment $500,000 Site Survey $6,000 Soil Borings $5,000 Temporary Heat $50,000 Special Inspections and Testing $50,000 Permits $60,000 Tapping Fee $0 Legal, Admin or Miscellaneous Cost $0 Moving Cost $150,000 TOTAL SOFT COSTS $5,812,928
TOTAL PROJECT COST $34,877,568
17 BIG M BUILDING MINOT, ND
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Report Date: February 12, 2020 Project No. 20005
Visual Structural Inspection To aid in the purchasing decision by the City of Minot, CWSTRUCTURAL Engineers performed a structural engineering site walkthrough to identify any obvious structural concerns, as it pertains to both layout and the existing structural state of the building. Most of the structure was covered up by finishes and fire-proofing, which made it hard to do a full inspection on the building. However, from what was visible both on the interior and exterior, we do not see any items which would lead us to the believe the above grade portion of the building was compromised in any way.
The building structure as a whole is comprised of steel beams and columns, which are supported on concrete foundations. From what we could visibly see, there were no indications that any of the structural components have been jeopardized through the years. Where we could see, there were not any visual signs of fatigue or cracking in the structure.
The only major current structural concern which was observed relates to the soil supporting the foundations. From what we understand, there was significant amount of water/flooding which occurred at both the levels in the basement. If the soils absorbed the water, then they would need to drain adequately to ensure they could achieve the required bearing capacities. If the soils did not drain, there is concern that they would not be able to provide the required amount of support for which the building was designed around.
Occupancy & Code Compliance CWSTRUCTURAL Engineers performed an existing document review to evaluate the feasibility for occupancy live load compliance. We are assuming the City of Minot will be using the space for lobbies, offices, and possible assembly areas. The current IBC 2015 code maximum service live load for first floor offices and lobbies is 100 psf (pounds per square foot). For offices and corridors above the first floor, the service live load is required to be 80 psf. All assembly floor loads are required to be 100 psf.
We then cross referenced the existing structural drawings for the Minot Federal Office building, with the required current live loads. Based solely upon the existing structural drawings, it appears the Big M building was designed for a minimum floor live load of 100 psf on the first floor, 100 psf on the mechanical floor, and 80 psf on all floor above first floor.
CWSTRUCTURAL did not physically analyze the existing structure. There is a possibility that there are aspects of the building that were under-designed, which we did not identify, due to not being part of our scope of work. As we previously discussed, we did not fully analyze the entire building for structural deficiencies. For our scope of work, we are making the assumption that the existing building was in-fact designed to the adequacy stated within the existing ‘General Structural Notes’. However, based upon the existing drawings and the City of Minot’s requirements, the Big M building would not need any structural modifications to accommodate and maintain current IBC code compliance of the required structural occupancy loads if all floors were purposed as office space. However, if the city was requiring an assembly area within the building, it would have to be located on the mechanical floor or on the main/first floor. If any other locations were required to be assembly space, the framing would more than likely need structural reinforcement.
18 Modifications & Renovations During discussions with JLG and the City of Minot, we are aware that there may be a couple possible floor plan modification requests for the M Building, that will require some significant structural modifications or support. The discussed possible modifications relate to the following: •Removal of a column on a floor to achieve a more open concept for an assembly area. •Due to the quantity of floors (greater than 4), the elevator width and depth does not comply to code requirements.
It is our understanding that the city would like to possibly remove a column to create a more ‘open’ concept on one of the floors to create assembly space. The first issue, as it relates to creating this assembly space, is that it would have to occur either on the mechanical floor or the first floor to avoid entire floor reinforcing. All other floors were not designed to support the required 100 psf code required service live load.
If the column removal occurred on the upper mechanical floor, the contractor would need to create shoring which may have to translate full height of the building structure to the foundation below. Once the beams are shored and the column is removed a new support or transfer beam must be placed. This would more than likely be a longer than usual member, due to trying to create a more ‘open’ concept. Access and placement of that member will then become a concern. If the member then can be installed, it will effectively reduce clear floor to floor heights.
The final concern is that the load from the removed column will then need to translate to other columns and beams. This will possibly require additional structural support to existing beams and columns. Worst case scenario is that columns could need to be reinforced full height of the building. Once the load gets to the foundations, the existing footings may not be able to support the new additional load. This is especially true if the existing soils were compromised by the flooding which we previously discussed.
In contrast, if the column removal was going to happen on the first floor, this creates very similar concerns. The removed column on the first floor will have a very significant amount of weight coming down on it, since it is support 7 to 8 floors. Therefore, a transfer beam of any kind will be extremely large. This will create very significant head room issues. We will also have the same concerns with the foundation supports we discussed earlier.
All in all, anything can be done with enough financial backing. However, to remove a column in a building of this nature is not very feasible due to the quantity of floors occurring either above or below the removed framing member. If any columns are removed at any level the members and foundation below them will need to support the additional lateral and gravity loads. Since the building is so tall this problem is magnified greatly.
If the column is removed foundations become a concern in themselves, but since the flooding has occurred we have concerns that the soils can even support the originally specified loads stated on the existing structural drawings. The existing structural drawings stated that the soils had an allowable bearing pressure of 8000 psf. This is a very large allowable bearing pressure in of itself. Now that we know flooding has occurred, there is a concern the existing can still provide that allowable 8000 psf pressure. For that reason, if the city does decide to proceed with the Big M building, we strongly recommend doing some soil borings and testing to validate the current allowable soil bearing capacity.
The other concern, with the building fit up, would be accommodating the required elevator sizes. Both existing elevators in the building are too small to achieve elevator code size compliance. For that reason, it appears that one or both of the elevator shafts would need to be modified full height of the Big M building. Both elevator shafts have columns encompassing them on both sides. For that reason, it may become difficult to re-frame the shaft to accommodate two larger elevators.
As we previously discussed the Big M building appears to be structurally in good shape and can accommodate a large amount of office space. However, if the City of Minot does require assembly space and existing elevator modifications, there would be a very substantial cost associated with it. We do not believe those costs are feasible, after taking into consideration the cost of the rest of the associated renovation and upgrades. We also have some significant concern as to the state of the subgrade supporting the foundations. For that reason, we firmly believe soil exploration is extremely necessary if the Big M building is to be explored further.
19 BIG M BUILDING MINOT, ND
MECHANICAL ANALYSIS Report Date: February 12, 2020 Project No. 20005
On February 2, 2018, Prairie Engineering, P.C. visited the Big M Building of Minot, North Dakota. The purpose of the visit was to assess the general condition of the mechanical and plumbing systems to provide the City of Minot with an assessment of the mechanical and plumbing infrastructure. Recommendations are based on experience in the HVAC and plumbing industry, and locally adopted building codes.
MECHANICAL SYSTEMS ASSESSMENTS The mechanical assessments give a general overview of each portion of the mechanical and plumbing systems, making note of areas that need attention in immediate to near future. Applicable Codes and Standards: North Dakota State Building Code 2018 International Building Code (IBC) 2018 International Existing Building Code (IEBC) 2018 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) 2018 International Mechanical Code (IBC) 2009 Uniform Plumbing Code (UPC)
FIRE SUPPRESSION The building is served with wet-pipe fire suppression system. Automatic sprinklers are attached to piping containing water and that is connected to water supply and monitored through an alarm valve. Water discharges immediately from sprinklers when they are opened. Sprinklers open when heat melts a fusible link or destroys frangible device. Fire sprinkler heads are installed on the basement and ground floors. The fire sprinkler system does not extend to the floors above the ground level. The fire sprinkler system is currently disconnected at the main coming into the building due to a recent pipe break that flooded the basement levels.
Recommendation: The fire sprinkler mains could be reused. Replace all branch piping and sprinkler heads on the lower floors. Install new sprinkler system on all upper floors. A fire pump will be needed to serve the upper floors.
PLUMBING The plumbing system has been disconnected and drained to prevent freeze damage. The piping system has been empty since 2011-2012. There is a high likelihood of leaks if the system were recommissioned. It is likely that several of the valve seals throughout the building would fail upon pressurizing the system. The plumbing fixtures are high-flow fixtures that do not meet the current water conservation standards. The fixtures are in poor condition due to several years of disuse. Domestic hot water was provided by a gas-fired, tank-type water heater located in the 7th floor mechanical room. The water heater has been disconnected from the plumbing system since 2011-2012 and appears in poor condition. Sanitary piping is a mixture of cast iron, copper, and PVC. Old cast iron piping is prone to plugs and leaks. The condition of the potable water piping is unknown but is likely in poor condition due to extended disuse and extreme temperatures.
Recommendation: Install new potable water system, sanitary system, plumbing fixtures, and water heater.
20 AIR DISTRIBUTION The building is served by three air handlers. The primary air handler is on the 7th floor and serves the above ground portions of the building except the 7th and 8th floor, and serves part of the basement level. A second air handler serves the remaining portion of the basement. The third air handler serves the 7th and 8th levels. The main air handler and the penthouse air handler are dual duct, constant volume systems while the lower level air handler is a single duct system.
Primary Air Handler - An air distribution shaft runs vertically from the lower level to the eighth floor. The shaft contains the hot and cold ducts from the primary air handler and the return air duct. On each floor, branch ducts distribute the hot and cold air from the shaft through the plenum space and into ducts embedded in the floor. Mixing boxes are attached to the structure with hot and cold air supplied via the floor ducts. The floor ducts feed the mixing boxes immediately below in the plenum space, and continue to the building perimeter where they feed linear perimeter diffusers on the floor above. The system is considered inefficient by current standards.
Lower Level Air Handler - The lower level air handler's OA damper linkage is disconnected and the return duct is cut. An access panel on the air handler is open so that the current air flow path is through the supply air ductwork to the lower level terminal devices, and through the space back to the open access panel. If the panel is closed the air flow path would be through the supply air ductwork, then down to the sub-basement to the open return duct. The lower level air handler's fan was operating at the time of inspection, but the air handler was submerged during the recent flood event should be replaced.
Upper Level Air Handler - The air handler was not in operation at the time of the inspection and it is likely reached the end of its expected lifespan.
Recommendation: The primary air handler system is at the end of its life and will be difficult to maintain over the next 50 years due to lack of replacement parts. The system should be replaced with a more efficient system. The lower level air handler and system should be replaced.
HEATING PLANT The building was originally heated by three 80 hp low pressure steam boilers located in the 7th floor boiler room. Steam coils and a hot water generator are all located above the boilers and a gravity condensate return system is used. Steam coils are installed in the hot deck side of both the main air handler and the penthouse air handler. The system has been off-line since 2011-2012 and the number of leaks in the piping is unknown. Leaks were reported in a 2012 inspection after the system had been decommissioned. A gas-fired hot water boiler was installed in 2011-2012 to replace the original shell and tube heat exchanger on the steam system located in the 7th floor boiler room. The hot water system originally provided heat to the lower level air handler, the stairwell radiators, the bathroom radiators, several unit heaters throughout the building (kitchen, penthouse mechanical room, seventh floor mechanical room, sub-basement, first floor north and east entry). The system was disconnected and the boiler currently feeds two unit heaters that were temporarily installed for freeze protection. At the time of inspection, the boiler circulation pump was on but the boiler was on stand-by. The heating units (radiators and old unit heaters) are in poor condition and will likely be problematic after years of disuse and extreme temperatures.
Recommendation: The hot water boiler installed in 2011-2012 could be reused, but the old steam boilers will need to be replaced. The heating units throughout the building will need to be replaced.
COOLING PLANT Originally, two Trane Centravac chillers in the 7th floor mechanical room provided cooling for the building. The chillers were served by a cooling tower on the roof. The cooling tower was installed in 2000 and looks to still be serviceable. The cooling plant has not operated since 2001-2012. Sub-freezing temperatures likely affected seals and allowed loss of refrigerant. Each of the three air handlers feature chilled water coils. A 2012 inspection reported leaks in the chilled water coils. Years of disuse increase the likelihood of additional leaks.
Recommendation: The chilled water plant and system is past its expected lifespan and should be replaced.
21 TEMPERATURE CONTROLS The original HVAC control system is pneumatic based. These systems are no longer installed in commercial buildings. Servicing the system will be difficult due to lack of replacement parts.
Recommendation: Replace the pneumatic control system with digital controls.
MECHANICAL ESTIMATES This opinion represents our best judgment as design professionals familiar with the local construction industry. It must be recognized, however, that we have no control over the cost of labor, material or equipment, over Contractor’s method of determining bid prices, or over competitive bidding market conditions. Accordingly, we cannot, and do not represent that bids will exactly match this opinion of probable costs.
FIRE SUPPRESSION Replace all branch piping and sprinkler heads on lower level; replace fire riser; provide sprinklers throughout remainder of building; provide fire pump. Opinion of Probable Construction Cost:$365,000
PLUMBING Replace all plumbing fixtures; replace potable water piping; replace cast iron sanitary piping; replace water heater. Opinion of Probable Construction Cost: $975,000
AIR DISTRIBUTION Remove primary air handler system; replace lower level air handler; remove upper air handler system; provide heat pump system; provide ventilation system. Opinion of Probable Construction Cost: $1,705,000
CENTRAL PLANTS Heating Plant: Remove old boilers; provide new gas-fired boilers. Cooling Plant: Remove old chillers; provide new chillers. Opinion of Probable Construction Cost:$675,000
TEMPERATURE CONTROLS Replace pneumatic controls with direct digital controls. Opinion of Probable Construction Cost:$145,000
TOTAL MECHANICAL Opinion of Probable Construction Cost:$3,865,000
22 BIG M BUILDING MINOT, ND
ELECTRICAL ANALYSIS Report Date: February 7, 2020 Project No. 20005
ELECTRICAL ASSESSMENT This electrical assessment will provide a general overview of each portion of the electrical systems at the Big M Building, downtown Minot, making note of areas that need attention in immediate to near future. It will also compare the existing electrical systems to the current applicable Code and highlight any deficiencies.
Applicable Codes and Standards: North Dakota State Building Code 2018 International Building Code (IBC) 2018 International Existing Building Code (IEBC) 2018 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) 2020 National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 70 – National Electric Code 2019 National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) 72 – National Fire Alarm and Signal Code Local Codes
LIGHTING Light fixtures throughout the entire facility incorporate T12 fluorescent lamps. These lamps are no longer in production. Therefore, the recommendation is to replace all light fixtures with new LED type. Lighting controls will need to be installed to comply with IECC regulations. This includes occupancy sensors, dimming, and time of day controls for all areas of the building.
An emergency egress lighting (life safety) distribution system will need to be installed. This system will obtain backup power from a generator. This generator will be further addressed in the power section of this report.
POWER The building’s electrical service is a 2500 Amp, 277/488 Volt, 3 Phase, system. A recent water line break inside the building flooded the entire basement level where the main switchgear is located. The switchgear was completely submerged and catastrophically damaged by this water. This switchgear, along with the branch distribution panels and buss duct distribution system was manufactured by General Electric. The equipment is obsolete and replacement parts are not available. Therefore, the entire electrical distribution system of the building must be replaced.
Article 403 of the IBC requires backup power for elevators and other critical systems in High Rise buildings. This requirement is currently not met in the building. Likewise, it is the intent of the City to relocate 911/dispatch as well as the City’s main IT servers to this location. Reliable backup power will be required to support these systems. This will require the construction of a hardened IT room with UPS Backup and Generator support. Based on these requirements, a generator will need to be installed. Life safety and critical equipment distribution systems will need to be constructed that provide backup power from the generator.
23 SYSTEMS:
FIRE ALARM A new voice/alarm communication type, addressable fire alarm system will need to be installed in accordance with NFPA 72 and IBC. Also required is a rescue assist communications system located on each floor to allow emergency communications with the designated Fire Command Center (Article 911 of the IBC).
NETWORK CABLING New Category 6 network cabling is recommended throughout the building. Dedicated data/IT rooms should be constructed on several floors and a fiber optic backbone system should be installed. A new fiber optic Communications Utility Service will need to be brought into the building by SRT.
SURVIELLANCE Installation of an IP based surveillance system is recommended. Minimum recommended camera coverage would include building entrances and publicly accessible interior spaces as well as exterior building perimeter and parking lot.
SECURITY An access control system is recommended. This system will automatically lock/unlock and monitor electrically controlled doors and will allow employee access via proximity type reader systems. This system will alleviate the security (duplication) concerns associated with keyed locks.
OPINION OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COSTS This opinion represents our best judgement as design professionals familiar with the local construction industry. It must be recognized, however, that we have no control over the cost of labor, material or equipment, over Contractor’s method of determining bid prices, or over competitive bidding market conditions. Accordingly, we cannot, and do not represent that bids will exactly match this opinion of probable costs.
Electrical 1.Service & Distribution………………………………………………...... ……..….$534,100 2.Lighting…………………………………………………………………...... …...... $434,300 3.Devices…………………………………………………………………...... …..….$157,400 4.Equipment Connections…………………………………………...... ………….....$265,400 5.Basic Material…………………………………………………………...... ……....$760,600 6.Lightning Protection……………………………………………………...... …..….$0 7.Snow Melting…………………………………………………….…………...... $0 8.Emergency Generator………………………………………………………...... $61,600 DIVISION 26 SUBTOTAL $2,213,400 Communications 1.CATV Distribution.….………………………………………………………...... $0 2.Intercom System….………………………………………………………...... …...$0 3.Multimedia System…...………………………………………….……...... ……...$75,000 4.Master Clock System…………………………………………………...... ….....$0 5.Voice-Data Cabling…………………………………………….………...... ……..$251,100 DIVISION 27 SUBTOTAL $326,100 Electrical Safety & Security 1.Fire Alarm & Detection…………………………………………………...... ……$292,600 2.Surveillance System …………………………………………………………...... $157,400 3.Access Control ………………………………………………….…………...... $75,100 DIVISION 28 SUBTOTAL $525,100
TOTAL ELECTRICAL CONSTRUCTION:$ 3,064,600
24 BIG M BUILDING MINOT, ND
Environmental Concerns Report Date: February 12, 2020 Project No. 20005
1. A Phase I ESA report, dated April 14, 2014, was performed on the subject property by Badlands Environmental Consultants (BEC) of Bismarck, North Dakota. MTS recommends performing an Update Phase I ESA to verify if any reported spills or discharges occurred onsite, or on any of the nearby properties since the 2014 assessment. An Update Phase I ESA includes the performance of a new site inspection of the property and all structures, as well as a regulatory review to see if any spills, discharges or reported environmental events occurred on the subject property, or on any nearby properties since 2015. An Updated Phase I ESA of the subject property would cost $1,000.00.
2. There are two (2) concerns with the Phase I ESA that weren’t adequately addressed. The first concern is related to the on-site elevators. It appears that the Phase I ESA did not inspect, nor mention the elevator(s) at the facility, specifically if the elevators were electrically or hydraulically driven. Hydraulically-operated elevators typically contain hydraulic oil in relatively small tanks either underground or aboveground. According to information obtained, at least one (1) of the elevators onsite may have been hydraulically-operated. Additionally, an oily substance was observed on the ground surface in the immediate vicinity of one (1) of the elevator shafts during a brief site visit on January 29, 2020.
Older elevators, especially if installed before 1979, may have utilized hydraulic oil that possibly contained PCBs. If the on-site elevator’s hydraulic oil tank leaked, either on the exposed ground surface, or underground, and the oil contained PCBs, the potential exists for the either the ground surface, or the underlying soils and/or groundwater in the vicinity of the elevator shaft and related equipment to be adversely impacted.
MTS recommends initially reviewing elevator inspection forms/logs, which may have been kept onsite. Elevator inspection forms/logs are typically filled out by the elevator manufacturer’s technician and typically indicate issues that may have been encountered during monthly or yearly inspections.
The second concern appears to be associated with a former dry cleaner located at 200 1st Street SW. The facility is mapped across the street to the southwest of the “M” building. According to the Phase I ESA report, the dry cleaner began operations at this location in 1926. The only information in the Phase I report about the facility was a brief statement indicating the dry cleaning facility had “its release cleaned to the satisfaction of the NDDOH on July 17, 1993.” Dry cleaning facilities utilize chlorinated hazardous solvents like Perchloroethylene (PERC) and Tetrachloroethylene in their day to day operations. Spent solvents are typically containerized and hauled offsite for proper disposal.
Before regulatory scrutiny, it was common practice for most dry cleaning facilities to dispose of their spent solvents by simply dumping the liquid onto the ground surface, usually just outside the back door of the facility. Chlorinated solvents are referred to as Dense Non-Aqueous Phase Liquids (DNAPLs), or “sinkers”. DNAPLs are very costly to properly assess and remediate. Unlike petroleum product, which floats on the water surface and migrates in the direction of subsurface groundwater flow, solvents keep sinking until they hit an impermeable layer of rock or soil and accumulate in select pockets. Chlorinated solvents do not typically migrate with the groundwater flow direction. MTS representatives have extensive experience with assessing dry cleaning facilities, and/or sites with solvents contamination.
25 To learn more about the concerns associated with chlorinated solvents, I recommend Googling, “Tallevast Florida Contamination”. This was a project I was affiliated with while working in Florida in the late 90s and 2000s.
The State’s level of regulatory scrutiny in the 1990’s was low, such that the potential exists for the environmental condition of the subject property to be adversely impacted if any chlorinated solvents were improperly discharged on the nearby property and those contaminants migrated onto the subject property’s via the subsurface soils or groundwater. MTS initially recommends a detailed review of all regulatory documents pertaining to the former nearby dry cleaning facility to determine if a significant environmental concern exists. The detailed review of this facility would be covered in the cost of an Updated Phase I ESA, previously recommended above, at a cost of $1,000.00.
3. An Asbestos Survey has been performed on the subject facility by Badlands Environmental Consultants, Inc. of Bismarck, North Dakota. The specific report, which detailed and identified asbestos containing materials and their approximate quantities, was not initially provided. However, the report and needed information was found on February 10, 2020 in a file for the facility at the City of Minot Public Works Department. MTS is presently resubmitting all known asbestos containing materials and their quantities to all North Dakota certified asbestos abatement contractors for a more accurate estimate on the removal and disposal of asbestos containing materials at the subject facility.
However, abatement quotes were initially obtained on the limited and incomplete information provided. Abatement quotes, based on the limited information, are presently between 1.9 and 4.2 million dollars for the “M” building.
It should be noted that all contractors increased the price of their quote due to the extra man-hours that would be involved in transporting equipment and materials up and down stairwells, as the facility’s elevators are currently out of order. One (1) abatement contractor quoted an additional 1.1 million dollars due to this inconvenience, and all abatement contractors had an additional (+/-) $100,000.00 budgeted for this inconvenience. MTS recommends obtaining quotes on the potential costs associated with getting at least one (1) of the elevators fully operational if plans move forward with obtaining and abating this facility.
4. There is a large quantity of lighting ballasts in the facility that may contain PCBs. MTS will schedule a detailed inspection of the “M” building to verify if the lighting ballasts do contain PCBs, and if so, quantify the amount to be disposed.
Neither the City of Minot Landfill, nor the Clean Harbors Landfill in Sawyer, accept PCB waste. Therefore, disposal of these lighting ballasts may be costly if they must be transported elsewhere for disposal.
MTS is presently working with representatives of Clean Harbors to determine where the PCB containing lighting ballasts can be disposed and approximate disposal costs.
5. There were a number of 35 and 55-galllon drums, which contained cleaning agents, and a number of smaller containers of cleaning agents, paints, and various building materials (spackle, caulk, etc.) observed in the basement of the subject facility. All of the containers generally appeared in good condition with no leakage noted, or stains on the underlying concrete surface. MTS recommends having the current property owner/seller remove and properly dispose all containers from the subject property prior to purchase of the building. The City of Minot landfill will typically accept the aforementioned waste at no charge, or for a nominal fee (dependent on the quantity).
26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 BIGBIG MM BUILDINGBUILDING 140'-0" 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 FLOORFLOOR PLANSPLANS 140'-0"
D
D C 78'-0"
C B
Basement Floor 62'-9 1/4" B 10,920 SF A Sub-Basement Floor A 8,806 SF 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
112'-10 1/4" 21'-1 1/4"
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
140'-0" M BUILDING 14'-10" OR PLANS D
C D 62'-6 1/4"
B
C
First Floor 78'-0" 6,068 SF AB Basement Floor 10,920 SF A
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
112'-10 1/4" 21'-1 1/4" 136'-4" 14'-10"
D D
C C 62'-6 1/4" 64'-4"
B B SecondFirst Floor 6,068 SF A 8,770 SF A
27 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
136'-4" 136'-4"
D D
C C 64'-5" 64'-4"
B B
Third, Fourth, Fifth,Second Sixth FloorFloor A 8,7708,770 SFSF A
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
136'-4" 136'-4"
D D
C C 64'-4" 64'-5"
B B Seventh Floor Third, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth8,770 Floor SF A 8,770 SF A
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
136'-4"
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
136'-4"
D
D
C
C 64'-4"
B 64'-4" Seventh Floor B Eighth8,770 Floor SF A 8,770 SF A
28 1 2 3 44 5 66 7 8 9
136'-4" 136'-4"
58'-0"
D 16'-1 5/8"
CC 25'-10 1/2" 64'-4" 64'-4"
BB
Lower PenthouseEighth FloorFloor 22'-5" 8,770 SF 1,500 SF A
4 6
136'-4" C 58'-0" Upper Penthouse Floor 1,197 SF B N PENTHOUSE FLOOR PLANS 16'-1 5/8"
C 25'-10 1/2" 64'-4"
B
Lower Penthouse Floor 22'-5" 1,500 SF
C Upper Penthouse Floor 1,197 SF B N PENTHOUSE FLOOR PLANS
29 WELLS FARGO BUILDING ASSESSMENT MINOT, ND
30 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY WELLS FARGO BUILDING
INTRODUCTION The following document represents a summary of assessments of the Wells Fargo Building located at 15 2nd Avenue SW in downtown Minot, North Dakota. The assessment team conducted a walk-through analysis to assess the building’s suitability to meet City of Minot program needs for a possible relocation of City Hall.
Construction on this facility began in 1975 and has a total of 46,658 gross square feet distributed over three floors as follows: First Floor – 14,698 square feet, Second Floor – 15,980 square feet and Third Floor – 15,980 square feet. There have been no additions or structural modifications to this facility since construction was completed in 1976.
The walk-though assessment, subsequent reports and estimates were executed on the assumption that the interiors of this building intended for the future Business Occupancy would be demolished to accommodate the best possible layout for City Offices and Public Meeting Space. Core support facilities such as mechanical, electrical, entrances, stairs and elevators will remain as constructed if there is no Building Code reason to relocate.
ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS 1. SITE AND BUILDING ASSESSMENT SITE CONDITIONS: • Site parcel is 42,000 square feet. • Off-Street Parking: Site zoning does not require any off-street parking at this location. There are approximately 56 parking spaces on site at this property. The condition of the paving looks generally good. • Condition of sidewalks is generally good.
GENERAL BUILDING CONDITIONS • Building Envelope: o Exterior walls: The exposed exterior wall envelope at the First Floor is poured concrete with an embedded aggregate finish and is in good condition. The exterior wall envelope of the Second and Third Floors have a veneer of precast concrete panels, which are also in very good condition. o Exterior Entrances and Windows: ▪ Aluminum framed windows at the exterior entrance systems: Based on your consultation with Fargo Glass and issues of compliance with current Energy Code, the estimates included in this report account for the replacement of the existing window and entrances for the following reasons: • Current window frames will not need modern energy code standard and the glass within the window frame is a reflective bronze, which is no longer available. As the seals fail on the insulated glass units, replacement glass will not match the older panels. • Existing exterior entrance system frames are not thermally broken system. Also, the glass panels within those frames are single pane instead of thermal pane, as is typically in modern office buildings.
120507_200 STANDARD FORM c:\users\sdavis\desktop\city of minot_executive summary_wells fargo.doc
31 ▪ Replacement of these items is optional. The existing glazing is serviceable and could be replaced at a future as part of a deferred maintenance plan. o Roof: The current roof is a 60 mill EPDM ballasted roof membrane which is 10 years old. It is not the original roof and at the time of the replaces additional taper EPS insulation was added to the overall assembly. ▪ The existing roof goes off warranty in September of 2020. ▪ The existing roof should have another 10 years of serviceable life. ▪ Roof replacement costs are included in the estimate for this building. If replaced, the new roof would have additional insulation added to comply with current energy code and could be specified with a warranty of 20 years. ▪ The parapet wall around the perimeter of the existing roof is uninsulated, painted concrete block. Vents have been installed, which is an indication of moisture penetrations issues at this existing wall. • The roof estimate includes the cost of insulation and flashing the existing parapet wall. o Structural: There is no visible evidence on the exterior or the interior of this building to indicate the building is structurally compromised in any way. ▪ Only major structural concern would be required modifications to the structure to accommodate the installation of ADA compliant elevators. • Three separate options are outlined in the Structural Assessment. ▪ It is noted there are two poured concrete vaults within this building. If these needed to be removed to suit the special needs of the City of Minot, there is no provision in the estimates for the structural re-work. The most feasible option would be to leave these two vaults in place. o General Comments: ▪ Floor to floor heights are plenty generous in this facility and seem well suited to accommodate larger public meeting rooms. ▪ Large, column free space is also available at the Second and Third Floors to accommodate larger public meeting rooms.
2. MECHANICAL ASSESSMENT SUMMARY: • Air Distribution: The existing conventional heat pump system, with a boiler and cooling tower has been well maintained and appears to be functioning properly. With continued maintenance, the system should operate indefinitely. o Older heat pumps are recommended to be replaced during renovations. • Heating: Recommend continued use of the existing 460 Kw immersion heater in the 10,000 water tank in the Lower Level Mechanical Room. o Remove humidifier. o Provide gas-fired boiler as back-up. • Cooling: Heat is being rejected from the facility via a cooling tower on the roof. It is recommended the cooling tower be replace as it looks to be in poor condition. • Temperature Controls: The existing controls system are a mixture of pneumatic, electronic and digital controls. It is recommended to replace all existing control systems with digital controls. • Plumbing: The existing plumbing system is in good condition. o It is recommended that all plumbing fixture be replaced with low-flow fixtures.
32
3. ELECTRICAL ASSESSMENT SUMMARY: • Lighting: Recommendation to replace all lighting and upgrade lighting controls. o Five year estimated payback. • Switchgear and Power Distribution: This system is adequate and serviceable and does not need to be addressed at this time. • Fire Alarm System: Existing system to be expanded to meet the requirement of current codes. • Network Cabling: o Existing SRT fiber optic service into the building is adequate. o Network cabling throughout the building to be upgraded to Category 6. • Surveillance: Recommending the installation of an IP based surveillance system at all public entrances, publicly accessible interior spaces, exterior building perimeter and parking lot. • Security: An access control system is recommended. • Dispatch: The potential relocation of Dispatch to the location, as well the City’s main IT system will require reliable backup power. This will require the construction of a hardened IT room with UPS backup and generator support. o The existing generator will need to be replaced with a larger unit.
4. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT SUMMARY: • Because of the era during which this building was constructed, there is a possibility of necessary hazardous material abatement if the structure is remodeled. o Materials Testing Services will submit samples for lab analysis on observed or typically questionable materials within the building. o Testing will look for the presence lead based paint and asbestos containing materials within the building. o All remodeling projects within the State of North Dakota require the submission of a Notification of Demolition and Remodeling form to the North Dakota Department of Health note the presence or absence of hazardous materials and the plan for abatement should it be necessary. o An assumption of some required abatement will be budgeted into the estimate of probable cost. • Existing reports note the removal of two (2) existing underground tanks associated with an old gas station with was located at the south end of the site. However, records indicate there may have been five tank total on site and the assessment team is unable to verify whether the remaining three are still below grade on site, or were also removed at some point o Additional due diligence is required to verify this possible site condition. A ground penetrating radar survey should reveal the presence of any additional tanks below grade.
5. BUILDING CODE COMPLIANCE This structure was analyzed for compliance with the currently adopted building code for the City of Minot: 2018 International Building Code. • Structurally, the building is capable of supporting Business Occupancy live loads to its intended use. • The allowable area of this structure is unlimited because of the existing construction type. Any structural remodeling should be completed to continue to conform to Type 1A construction. • Installation of a fire suppression system is optional. o If there is no fire suppression system in the building, all exit corridor will be required to be 1- hour rated. o If fire suppression system is added to the building, corridors need not be rated.
33 ▪ If fire suppression is added to the building, a separate 6” fire water line will need to be brought into the building. Estimates are providing for the cost of a new fire suppression system.
6. ADA COMPLIANCE • The existing two elevators are not ADA Compliant. The existing elevator shafts are too small to accept ADA Compliant elevators. o Compliance could involve three options: 1. Enlarge the existing elevator pits and shafts. 2. Relocate the elevators to the escalator location where there is a pit and adequate space to install compliant elevators. 3. Provide a building addition to install compliant elevators. • Work need to be done at the south entrance / parking lot to provide ADA adequate compliant parking and a compliant accessible route into this building. • Existing restrooms are not ADA Compliant
7. FACILITY ADEQUACY SUMMARY:
34 CODE COMPLIANCE Preliminary Code Analysis – Wells Fargo Building Preliminary2018 International Code Building Analysis Code – M Building 201 8 International Building Code Occupancy Classification: Business Group B (Section 304)
OCCUPANCYConstruction Type: CLASSIFICATION: GroupType 1 BB / (Business) Non-Fire S prinkled (Section(Table 601) 304) Group Accessory/Mechanical Fire Separations: 1-Hr. separation required at the Mechanical Room. CONSTRUCTION TYPE: Type I-A (Table 601) 1-Hr. required on Corridors serving an Occupant Load greater than 30. (Table 1018.1) Fire Sprinklered Lower Levels Allowable Area: Non-Fire Suppression on floors 2-8. (Section 403.3) PerBusiness section Group 403 B High– Non Rise Sprinklered Building,: 403.3 Automatic Sprinkler System. Buildings and structures shall be equipped withBasic automatic Allowable Area: sprinkler systemsUnlimited in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 and secondary water(Table supply 503) where required by 903.3.5.2 Actual Building Area: 46,658 Square Feet (Section 506) ALLOWABLE AREA: Occupant Load: (Section 1004) BUSINESS GROUP B – NON SRPINKLERED:
BasicRoom Allowable Name Area: Floor AreaUnlimited Occupant Load Factor Occupant Load (Table 503) First Floor: ActualBusiness Building Areas: Area: 6,45486,064 Square Feet 150 44 (Section 506) Storage Rooms: 1,911 300 7 SubMechanical-Basement / Electrical: 8,806 2,500 SF (B) 300 9 BasementRestrooms: 10,920 273 SF (B) 0 0 FirstCorridors Floor / Stairs /Elevat ors: 6,068 3, SF560 (B) 0 0 SecondFirst Floor Floor Totals: 8,770 14,698 SF (B) 60 Third Floor 8,770 SF (B) Second Floor: Fourth Floor 8,770 SF (B) Business Areas: 11,852 150 80 Fifth Floor 8,770 SF (B) Conference Rooms: 503 15 34 SixthStorage Floor Rooms : 8,770 SF737 (B) 300 3 SeventhMechanical Floor / Ele ctrical: 8,770 1SF00 (B) 300 1 EiRestrooms:ghth Floor 4,953 581SF (B) 0 0 PenthouseCorridors / LowerStairs /Elevat ors: 1, 500 2,207 SF (Mech) 0 0 PenthouseSecond Floor Upper Totals: 1,197 15,980 SF (Mech) 118
Third FlooTotalr: Building SBusinessquare Footage Areas: : 86,064 11,910 SF 150 80 Conference Rooms: 500 15 34
Storage Rooms: 675 300 3
Mechanical / Electrical: 203 300 1 Restrooms: 526 0 0 Corridors / Stairs /Elevators: 2,166 0 0 Third Floor Totals: 15,980 118
Total Building Occupant Load: 296 Occupants (Table 1004.5)
35 Required Exits: Occupant Load per Story: 1 – 500: 2 Exits Minimum per story (Table 1006.3.2) Actual Exits per Story: First Floor: 4 Exits Provided CODE COMPLIANCESecond Floor: 2 Exits Provided Third Floor: 2 Exits Provided
Preliminary Code Analysis – M Building Means of Egress Sizing: (Section 1005) 201 8 InternationalTotal Building Occupant Building Load = 296 Occupants Code
First Floor Stairways; OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION:Occupant Load of 60Group x .3 = 18 B ”(Business) Required (Section 304) Provided Egress Capacity:Group 2 StaAccessory/Mechanicalirways @ 40’ Ea. = 80” Provi ded Second Floor Stairways CONSTRUCTION TYPE:Required Stairway EgressType Capacit I-A y: Occupant Load of 118 x .3 = 35.4” Required (Table 601) Provided Egress Capacity:Fire Sprinklered 2 Stairways @Lower 40’ E a.Levels = 80 ” Provided Third Floor Stairways Non-Fire Suppression on floors 2-8. (Section 403.3) Per sectionRequired 403 High Sta Riseirway Building,Egress Capacity: 403.3 AutomaticOccupant Load Sprinkler of 118 xSystem. .3 = 35.4 Buildings” Required and structures shall be equipped with automaticProvi ded sprinklerEgress Capacity: systems 2 Stain accordanceirways @ 40’ E witha. = 80 Section” Provided 903.3.1.1 and secondary water supply where
required by 903.3.5.2 Other Egress Components: Required Egress Capacity: 296 x .2 = 59.2” Required ALLOWABLE AREA: Provided Egress Capacity: 10 doors @ 33” ea. = 333” Provided BUSINESS GROUP B – NON SRPINKLERED: Exit AccessBasic Travel Allowable Distance: Area: Unlimited (Table(Table 503)1017.2) Without Sprinkler System: 200’ With Sprinkler System: 300’ Actual Building Area: 86,064 Square Feet (Section 506)
SubActual-Basement Maximum Exit Access Travel8,806 Distances: SF (B) Basement First Floor: 10,920123’ SF (B) Second Floor: 120’ First Floor 6,068 SF (B) Third Floor: 130’ Second Floor 8,770 SF (B) AutomaticThird Sprinkl Floorer Systems 8,770 SF (B) (Section 903) FourthBusiness Floor Grou p B: 8,770 SF (B)Not Required if Exit Corridors are 1-Hour Rated (Table 1020.1) Fifth Floor 8,770 SF (B)(For Corridors w/ Occupant Load > 30) Sixth Floor 8,770 SF (B)Automat ic Sprinkler System required if Corridors Seventh Floor 8,770 SF (B)are not 1-Hour Rated Eighth Floor 4,953 SF (B) Plumbing Systems forPer Business sectio Occupancies: (North Dakota Amended) (Table 2902.1) Penthouse 1,500 SF (Mech) Water Closets: Penthouse Upper 1,197 SF (Mech) Business Occupancies: 1/25 for the first 50 Occupants and 1/50 for the remainder exceeding 50. 296 Occupant Load: 50 Occupants = 2 Required Total Building 246 Occupants / 50 = 5 Required Square Footage : 86,064 SF 7 Total Water Closets Required
Totals: 4 Male Water Closets Required / 4 Provided plus 3 Urinals 4 Female Water Closets Required / 5 Female Water Closets Provided Lavatories: Business Occupancies 1/40 for the first 80 Occupants and 1 per 80 Occupants for the remainder exceeding 80. 296 Occupant Load: 80 Occupants = 2 Required 216 Occupants / 80 = 3 Required 5 Total Lavatories Required.
36 3 Male and 3 Female Lavatories Required.
Totals: 3 Male Lavatories Required / 3 Male Lavatories Provided. 3 Female Lavatories Required / 4 Female Lavatories Provided.
Bathtubs or Showers: None Required.
CODEDrinking COMPLIANCE Fountains: Business Occupancies: 1 / 100 Occupants Required. Preliminary Code Analysis 404 – OccupantsM Building / 100 = 4 Drinking Fountains Required. 2018 InternationalService Sinks: Building 1 Required Code / 3 Provided.
OCCUPANCY CLASSIFICATION: Group B (Business) (Section 304) Group Accessory/Mechanical
CONSTRUCTION TYPE: Type I-A (Table 601) Fire Sprinklered Lower Levels Non-Fire Suppression on floors 2-8. (Section 403.3) Per section 403 High Rise Building, 403.3 Automatic Sprinkler System. Buildings and structures shall be equipped with automatic sprinkler systems in accordance with Section 903.3.1.1 and secondary water supply where required by 903.3.5.2
ALLOWABLE AREA: BUSINESS GROUP B – NON SRPINKLERED: Basic Allowable Area: Unlimited (Table 503)
Actual Building Area: 86,064 Square Feet (Section 506)
Sub-Basement 8,806 SF (B) Basement 10,920 SF (B) First Floor 6,068 SF (B) Second Floor 8,770 SF (B) Third Floor 8,770 SF (B) Fourth Floor 8,770 SF (B) Fifth Floor 8,770 SF (B) Sixth Floor 8,770 SF (B) Seventh Floor 8,770 SF (B) Eighth Floor 4,953 SF (B) Penthouse Lower 1,500 SF (Mech) Penthouse Upper 1,197 SF (Mech)
Total Building Square Footage: 86,064 SF
37 SUMMARY OF PROBABLE COSTS
CONSTRUCTION COSTS Wells Fargo Building Demolition $336,000 General Construction $2,520,000 Fire Suppression $135,000 Plumbing $87,500 HVAC System $625,000 Central Plants $275,000 Temperature Controls $63,000 Electrical $944,500 Communications $188,800 Electrical Safety and Security $277,300 $5,452,100
Other Elevators $160,000 Modify Elevator Shaft $75,000 Infill Floor $40,000 Storefront Replacement $150,000 Site Improvements $75,000 Roofing $140,000 Hazardous Material Removal $75,000 Skywalk $500,000 $1,215,000
Contingency 15% $1,000,065 Escalation Fall 2020 Start $0 $1,000,065 TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS $7,667,165 SOFT COSTS (OWNER) Professional Fees $613,373 Reimbursable Expenses $50,000 Building Acquisition $2,900,000 Furniture, fixtures and equipment (FFE) $1,000,000 Technology Security and Equipment $500,000 Site Survey $6,000 Temporary Heat $20,000 Special Inspections and Testing $20,000 Permits $60,000 Tapping Fee $0 Legal, Admin or Miscellaneous Cost $0 Moving Cost $150,000 TOTAL SOFT COSTS $5,319,373
TOTAL PROJECT COST $12,986,538
38 WELLS FARGO BUILDING MINOT, ND
STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS Report Date: February 12, 2020 Project No. 20005
Visual Structural Inspection To aid in the purchasing decision by the City of Minot, CWSTRUCTURAL Engineers performed a structural engineering site walkthrough to identify any obvious structural concerns, as it pertains to both layout and the existing structural state of the building. Most of the structure was covered up by finishes, which made it hard to do a full inspection on the building. However, from what was visible both on the interior and exterior, we do not see any items which would lead us to the believe the building was compromised in any way.
The building structure as a whole is comprised completely of concrete. The columns, beams, walls, foundations, roof, etc. are all constructed of reinforced concrete members. From what we could visibly see, there were no indications that any of the structural components have been jeopardized through the years. Where we could see, there were not any visual signs of fatigue or cracking in the structure.
Occupancy & Code Compliance CWSTRUCTURAL Engineers performed an existing document review to evaluate the feasibility for occupancy live load compliance. Based upon the assumption the City of Minot will be using the space for lobbies, offices, and possible assembly areas; the current IBC 2015 maximum code service floor live load required for those applications would be 100 psf (pounds per square foot).
We then cross referenced the existing structural drawings for the Wells Fargo building with the required current live loads. Based solely upon the existing structural drawings, it appears the building was design for a minimum floor live load of 100 psf. Some areas were actually designed for a slightly greater live load as well.
CWSTRUCTURAL did not physically analyze the existing structure. There is a possibility that there are aspects of the building that were under-designed, which we did not identify, due to not being part of our scope of work. As we previously discussed, we did not fully analyze the entire building for structural deficiencies. For our scope of work, we are making the assumption that the existing building was in-fact designed to the adequacy stated within the existing ‘General Structural Notes’. However, based upon the existing drawings and the City of Minot’s requirements, the Wells Fargo Building would not need any structural modifications to accommodate and maintain current IBC code compliance of the required structural occupancy loads.
Modifications & Renovations During discussions with JLG and the City of Minot, we are aware that there may be a couple possible floor plan modifications that will require some significant structural medications or support. The discussed possible modifications relate to the following: •Removal of the existing escalator, which will then be followed by a floor infill of the existing escalator opening. •Either modification of the existing elevators or installation of new elevator shafts to maintain ADA elevator compliance.
39 Due to the existing escalator comprising almost 400 square feet on both the first and second floor (800 sf total), it has been discussed that the escalators may need to be removed. If the escalator is to be removed, it could possibly require some floor infill on the second floor. If the floor is chosen to be infilled on the second level, there will likely be new required beams and columns. This will also possibly require new foundations. Overall, the new framing and reinforcing would appear to be pretty standard for renovation floor infill, reinforcing, and foundations. There does not appear to be too many constraints which would make this infill overly complicated or not-feasible.
The larger concern with the building fit up, would be accommodating the required ADA elevator sizes. Both existing elevators in the building are too small to achieve ADA compliance. For that reason, one of three options would need to be completed. The first option would be a new exterior elevator tower. The second option being modification of the existing elevator shaft. The third option is installing a new elevator shaft located within the existing escalator opening, and then providing a new opening in third floor to accommodate the elevator penetration.
All three elevator options come with their own individual concerns, issues, and costs. As it pertains to feasibility/cost with the structure, the most feasible option in our opinion would be option 3 (new shaft in existing escalator opening). The next feasible would be option 2 (modifying the existing shaft). Then the least economical option ,we believe, would be option 1 (new exterior elevator shaft).
The elevator option 3, would require a new elevator pit and shaft walls full height to the roof. However, at the second floor we would infill in the new opening to accommodate the new shaft. No removal at the second floor would be required. There would however have to be some modifications to the third-floor framing to provide an adequate floor opening.
The elevator option 2, would require one or both (depending on the need for ADA elevators) of the existing elevator shaft sizes be enlarged. This would require size modification of the existing pit, the shaft walls, and the floor openings at all levels. Since the floor framing is comprised entirely of concrete beams, any modifications to the existing floor openings will jeopardize the floor beams integrity. This will also require some significant floor reinforcing.
The elevator option 1 becomes the most expensive, in our opinion, due to the fact the a whole new shaft and pit will need to be constructed. On top of that, there will also need to be modifications made to the existing exterior walls for new openings all the egress locations. This option will also require adequate insulation, moisture protection, etc. along the walls and between the joint of the shaft and the building.
The final structural item, as it relates to building renovations would be some concrete and masonry vaults located within the building. At a few locations in the building, there are some concrete and masonry vaults. The walls of the concrete vaults are used as structural bearing walls as well. Therefore, it would be the most feasible structurally if the floor plan could be worked appropriately to leave the vaults without any modifications to the floors, ceilings and walls.
Beyond the previous discussed renovation items, the Wells Fargo building has a very open structural concept beyond the interior concrete columns. There are very few interior bearing walls. This would allow for a good range of flexibility as it relates to conceptual floor layouts.
40 WELLS FARGO BUILDING MINOT, ND
MECHANICAL ANALYSIS Report Date: February 12, 2020 Project No. 20005
On February 2, 2018, Prairie Engineering, P.C. visited the Wells Fargo Building of Minot, North Dakota. The purpose of the visit was to assess the general condition of the mechanical and plumbing systems to provide the City of Minot with an assessment of the mechanical and plumbing infrastructure. Recommendations are based on experience in the HVAC and plumbing industry, and locally adopted building codes.
MECHANICAL SYSTEMS ASSESSMENTS The mechanical assessments give a general overview of each portion of the mechanical and plumbing systems, making note of areas that need attention in immediate to near future. Applicable Codes and Standards: North Dakota State Building Code 2018 International Building Code (IBC) 2018 International Existing Building Code (IEBC) 2018 International Energy Conservation Code (IECC) 2018 International Mechanical Code (IBC) 2009 Uniform Plumbing Code (UPC)
FIRE SUPPRESSION The building is served with a dry fire suppression system. Automatic sprinklers are attached to a dry pipe system that is pumped full of water in a fire event. Fire sprinkler heads are installed on ground floor lobby. Dry standpipes are in the north stairwell.
Recommendation: Provide wet pipe fire sprinkler system throughout the facility.
PLUMBING The plumbing system is in good condition and has been well maintained. The plumbing fixtures are high-flow fixtures that do not meet the current water conservation standards. The fixtures are in good condition. Domestic hot water is provided by electric tank-type water heaters located janitorial closets on each floor. The water heaters are in good condition. Sanitary piping is a mixture of cast iron, and PVC. Observed piping appeared in good condition. The potable water piping is copper and appears in good condition.
Recommendation: Install new low-flow plumbing fixtures.
AIR DISTRIBUTION The HVAC system is a conventional heat pump system with boiler and cooling tower. Some of the heat pumps are original, but many have been replaced. The system has been regularly maintained over the last 20 years and all equipment appears to be currently functioning. Fresh air is delivered through a heat exchanger in the lower level to recapture exhaust heat. The air is ducted to the ceiling plenum space of each zone on each floor. Exhaust air is ducted primarily from toilet rooms. Heat pumps are installed above the ceilings. Supply air is ducted to diffusers. Return air is taken from the plenum space above the ceilings. Humidity was controlled with a steam humidifier in the lower level mechanical room. The humidifier has been disconnected and the heating element removed.
Recommendation: With continued maintenance, the system should operate indefinitely. Replace older heat pumps as needed in the tenant renovations.
41 HEATING PLANT Heat comes from 460 Kw immersion heater in the 10,000 gallon water tank in the lower level. The heater appears in good condition. A backup gas-fired heat source should be provided to support dispatch in the event of a power outage.
Recommendation: Continue to use the immersion heater as the heating source. Remove the humidifier. Provide gas-fired boiler as backup.
COOLING PLANT Building heat is rejected via a cooling tower on the roof. The cooling tower appears in poor condition. It has been regularly maintained but should be replaced. The indoor sump is in good condition.
Recommendation: Replace the cooling tower.
TEMPERATURE CONTROLS The current building controls are a mixture of pneumatic, electronic, and digital. Recommendation: Replace the control systems with all digital controls.
MECHANICAL ESTIMATES This opinion represents our best judgment as design professionals familiar with the local construction industry. It must be recognized, however, that we have no control over the cost of labor, material or equipment, over Contractor’s method of determining bid prices, or over competitive bidding market conditions. Accordingly, we cannot, and do not represent that bids will exactly match this opinion of probable costs.
FIRE SUPPRESSION Provide wet-pipe sprinkler system throughout remainder of building. Opinion of Probable Construction Cost:$135,000
PLUMBING Replace all high-flow plumbing fixtures. Opinion of Probable Construction Cost: $87,500
HVAC SYSTEM Relocate heat pumps as required; replace older heat pumps as needed. Opinion of Probable Construction Cost: $625,000
CENTRAL PLANTS Heating Plant: Provide backup old boilers; provide new gas-fired boilers. Cooling Plant: Replace cooling tower. Opinion of Probable Construction Cost:$275,000
TEMPERATURE CONTROLS Replace controls with direct digital controls. Opinion of Probable Construction Cost:$63,000
TOTAL MECHANICAL Opinion of Probable Construction Cost:$1,185,000
42 WELLS FARGO BUILDING MINOT, ND
ELECTRICAL ANALYSIS Report Date: February 7, 2020 Project No. 20005
43 SYSTEMS:
FIRE ALARM The building incorporates a modern addressable fire alarm system as manufactured by Simplex. This system should be able to be extended and expanded as required to accommodate the requirements of NFPA 72 and IBC.
NETWORK CABLING Although there is some existing network cabling in the building, it is mostly Category 5e type, which is not conducive to the speeds and bandwidth requirements of today’s networks. Most outlet locations will likely not be in the correct place to be utilized for the renovation. Therefore, new Category 6 network cabling is recommended throughout the building. Communications Utility Service is provided by SRT by means of a fiber optic cable. This service should be adequate for the intended usage.
SURVIELLANCE Installation of an IP based surveillance system is recommended. Minimum recommended camera coverage would include building entrances and publicly accessible interior spaces as well as exterior building perimeter and parking lot.
SECURITY An access control system is recommended. This system will automatically lock/unlock and monitor electrically controlled doors and will allow employee access via proximity type reader systems. This system will alleviate the security (duplication) concerns associated with keyed locks.
OPINION OF PROBABLE CONSTRUCTION COSTS This opinion represents our best judgement as design professionals familiar with the local construction industry. It must be recognized, however, that we have no control over the cost of labor, material or equipment, over Contractor’s method of determining bid prices, or over competitive bidding market conditions. Accordingly, we cannot, and do not represent that bids will exactly match this opinion of probable costs.
Electrical 1.Service & Distribution………………………………………………...... ……..….$119,900 2.Lighting…………………………………………………………………...... …...... $245,900 3.Devices…………………………………………………………………...... …..…...$89,100 4.Equipment Connections…………………………………………...... …………...... $56,900 5.Basic Material…………………………………………………………...... ……....$384,100 6.Lightning Protection……………………………………………………...... …..….$0 7.Snow Melting…………………………………………………….…………...... $0 8.Emergency Generator………………………………………………………...... $48,600 DIVISION 26 SUBTOTAL $944,500 Communications 1.CATV Distribution.….………………………………………………………...... $0 2.Intercom System….………………………………………………………...... …...$0 3.Multimedia System…...………………………………………….……...... ……...$75,000 4.Master Clock System…………………………………………………...... ….....$0 5.Voice-Data Cabling…………………………………………….………...... ……..$113,800 DIVISION 27 SUBTOTAL $188,800 Electrical Safety & Security 1.Fire Alarm & Detection…………………………………………………...... …..…$95,700 2.Surveillance System …………………………………………………………...... $89,100 3.Access Control ………………………………………………….…………...... $42,500 DIVISION 28 SUBTOTAL $227,300
TOTAL ELECTRICAL CONSTRUCTION: $1,360,600
44 WELLS FARGO BUILDING MINOT, ND
Environmental Concerns Report Date: February 12, 2020 Project No. 20005
1. A gasoline filling station was located in the southeastern corner of the site from the 1920s until the 1970s. According to a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) report, dated June 23, 2015 by Stantec, the filling station contained “seven (7) underground storage tanks (UST) in the three (3) separate areas” of the property. Two (2) 3,000-gallon USTs were removed in 2015. It is unknown if the remaining five (5) USTs have been previously removed from the site, or if they remain onsite. Nonetheless, no documentation exists regarding either the removal, or existence of the five (5) identified USTs on the Wells Fargo Property.
MTS recommends the performance of a ground penetrating radar assessment of the parking lot area to verify whether any USTs presently remain onsite. The cost to perform a GPR survey on the subject property’s entire parking lot is estimated between $3,500 (to assess 75% of the parking lot) and $4,000 (to assess the entire parking lot).
2. A UST Closure Report was performed in 2015 by Terracon Consultants, Inc. The report indicated the removal of two (2) 3,000-gallon steel USTs from the southeast corner of the Wells Fargo property. The closure report generally concluded that visual or olfactory indications of petroleum impacted soil was not evident within the excavated tank basin and no contaminants were detected above State regulatory levels.
MTS has noted an error in the Terracon report. The report states that one (1) composite soil sample was collected from a stockpile of soils which originated from the tank basin. This one (1) composite soil sample, referred to as SP-2, revealed the presence of diesel range organics (DRO) at a concentration 70.5 milligrams-per-kilogram (mg/kg). This concentration is below the State’s regulatory level of 100 mg/kg. However, the report does not indicate how many stockpile locations were sampled to form this composite soil sample.
Composite soil samples typically include collecting 2 to 5 soil samples from a stockpile, placing all of the collected soil samples in a pre-cleaned stainless steel bowl, then mixing the soils with a pre-cleaned stainless steel hand trowel to “homogenize” the sample, and finally transferring and placing the homogenized sample into laboratory supplied jars. The concern with the Terracon Tank Closure Assessment pertains to the analysis of composite soil sample SP-2, and the reported DRO concentration, which could very well exceed State regulatory levels. For example, if three (3) locations on/in the stockpile were sampled and homogenized, the composite sample could technically be three (3) times higher than the reported amount. So, if one (1) of the three (3) samples was “hot” and the other two (2) sample areas were non-detect, then, in theory, the sample was diluted. Therefore, and as a result of this finding, there is a concern that elevated levels of DRO may remain in the excavated tank basin. Additionally, it has been our experience that sampling and data collection on most tank closure assessments performed in North Dakota are grossly inadequate, and many sites were incorrectly given a “No Further Action” (NFA) status as a result of poor regulatory scrutiny.
MTS has assessed a number of sites in North Dakota where no contamination was previously “seen” or documented in the excavated pits following the removal of USTs by both environmental consultants and State representatives. Subsequent verification testing performed by MTS on these select sites revealed the properties were, in fact, heavily impacted with contaminants.
45 It is our recommendation to perform a Limited Phase II Soils and/or Groundwater Investigation and Analysis on the subject property to verify if contamination exists onsite, specifically in the former locations of the gasoline filling station, former (and possibly present) tank locations, former fuel dispenser islands and in select locations along the southern and western property boundaries at the closest approach to neighboring businesses of environmental concern. Additionally, MTS recommends an update Phase I ESA to verify if any reported spills or discharges occurred onsite, or on any of the nearby properties since the 2015 assessment. An update to the Phase I ESA would include an inspection of the property and all structures, as well as a regulatory review to see if any spills, discharges or reported environmental events happened on the subject property or nearby properties since 2015. An Updated Phase I Assessment of the subject property would cost $1,000.00.
As previously discussed, a Phase II Soils and/or Groundwater Investigation and Analysis of the subject property is recommended. The Phase II study would generally consist of performing between 8 to 10 borings in the former (and possibly present) tank locations, former fuel dispenser islands, and in select locations along the southern and western property boundaries at the closest approach to neighboring businesses of environmental concern, to check for the presence of volatile organic compounds (VOC) in the on-site soils and/or saturated soils. The on-site soils would be screened onsite utilizing a photo-ionization detector (PID). At least one (1) soil boring should be performed downgradient from either the former gasoline station’s tank farm, fuel dispenser island and/or garage. The downgradient boring should be performed to a depth of 1 foot below the existing water table. The existing water table is anticipated to be at a depth of between 40 and 50 feet below the existing ground surface. The estimate to perform the Phase II Assessment would be between $3,000 and $6,000, and would ultimately depend on the amount of work performed.
3. Since no asbestos survey was neither located, nor provided for this facility, the performance of an asbestos survey is recommended. The cost to have the entire property surveyed for the presence of asbestos containing materials would cost between $950.00 and $1,300.00. The final cost of the survey is dependent on the amount of samples ultimately collected.
MTS, however, is currently scheduled to perform a limited asbestos bulk sample collection and analysis of suspect building materials at the facility on Thursday, February 13, 2020. This limited study will consist of sampling suspect materials including, but not necessarily limited to, floor tiles, ceiling tiles, roofing materials, sheet rock, wall paper, spray-on insulation and boiler insulation wrap. The laboratory analysis of the collected samples should be available by Monday, February 17, 2020 (by 5 PM).
4. There is no evidence that a lead based paint survey has been performed on the subject facility. The cost to have the subject facility screened for the presence of lead-based paint will be between $1,500.00 and $3,000.00. However, a limited lead-based paint field assessment will be performed on select surfaces at the subject facility on Thursday, February 13, 2020. The results of our field tests for lead will be available by Thursday, February 13, 2020 (by 5 PM).
46 WELLS FARGO A B C D E F G FLOOR PLANS 1
2
3
First Floor 14,698 SF 4
A B C E F G
1
2
3
Second Floor 15,980 SF 4
1 R
A B C E F G
1
2
3
Third Floor 15,980 SF 4
1 T A202 S
47 PROPOSED CITY HALL BUILDING ANALYSIS CITY PROJECT 4466 MINOT, ND