building audit & site analysis

Transcription

1 bowen island firehall bowen island municipality & bowen island fire department bowen island, b.c. building audit & site analysis issued june 30, 2008 johnston davidson architecture + planning inc Richards Street, Vancouver, BC Canada, V6B 3G6 T F info@jdarch.bc.ca

2 1 of 7 Building Audit and Site Analysis BOWEN ISLAND FIREHALL 788 Grafton Road Bowen Island, BC, V0N 1G0 June 30, 2008 team: CLIENT: Bowen Island Municipality 981 Artisan Lane Bowen Island, BC, V9P 9E6 T , F Contact: Bryan Kirk, CAO, bkirk@bimbc.ca Bowen Island Volunteer Fire Department 788 Grafton Road Bowen Island, BC, V0N 1G0 Contact: Fire Chief Brian Biddlecombe T , F bbiddle@telus.net CONSULTANT TEAM: Architects and Coordinating Registered Professional: Johnston Davidson Architecture and Planning Inc Richards St. Vancouver, BC, V6B 3G6 P F Contacts: Doug Johnston, Kim Johnston doug@jdarch.bc.ca kim@jdarch.bc.ca Steering Committee: Bowen Island Municipality Councillor Alison Morse, Chairperson Councillor David Wrinch Bryan Kirk, CAO Gordon Elliott Fire Chief Brian Biddlecombe

3 2 of 7 1. summary 1.1 architectural While the existing building continues to function as a firehall, the deficiencies in the general spatial layout, the building envelope, structural system, the mechanical and electrical systems, and the small site, indicate that renovating this building to meet the needs of the Bowen Island Fire Department now and in the future do not justify the cost of upgrading the building. Meeting the requirements of the BC Building Code (BCBC) with regard to post-disaster design, environmental, accessibility and other sections would be difficult and extremely expensive. Horizontal and vertical fire separations throughout the existing building do not meet the BC Building Code. Environmentally, the existing building does not meet current energy, water conservation and site development minimum standards. Not only is the building technically deficient, but the existing building forms and their relationship to each other on the site, do not lend themselves to a firehall suitable for the provision of generally accepted fire service standard response times. The existing site, because of its shape and topography highly compromises the development of an up to date efficient firehall. It is the recommendation of this report that the Bowen Island Municipality consider not upgrading this building as a firehall, and that an alternate suitable site be found to accommodate a new building. 1.2 structural The following summary notes of the structural capacity of the firehall are taken from the Seismic Assessment Report by Read Jones Christoffersen Ltd., August 22, The report has not been reassessed in regards to the requirements as outlined in the new 2006 BC Building Code which is more severe in its seismic design requirements for masonry buildings. The existing buildings would require extensive upgrading to the walls, floors and roof to meet the minimum seismic standards of the BC Building Code. The BC Building Code, requires that firehalls be designed to meet post-disaster standards, which will be difficult and expensive to achieve, requiring the replacement of many exterior walls and the addition of new footings as well as reinforcing to many of the existing concrete block walls. The structural engineers do not recommend retaining the 1969 wing, and only recommend keeping the 1977 wing if it can be added to with an upgraded structure which is similar in size and shape to the existing. Probable cost of upgrading this building could exceed the cost of a new building. 1.3 mechanical Critical pieces of mechanical equipment and systems, such as heating, water boiler, are nearing the end of their life cycle, and will require replacing. Code infractions for plumbing systems need to be addressed and may require extensive re-piping. Ventilation systems need to be added to meet both comfort requirements, the building code, and to prevent migration of vehicle fumes. Energy efficient equipment and water conserving fixtures are not currently in place.

4 3 of electrical The current BC Hydro service is close to fully loaded and does not allow for any future expansion. The generator is undersized to provide power for the entire facility. A supervised fire alarm system is recommended. Existing lighting provides a poor level of lighting and is not energy efficient. Exterior lighting levels are poor for training purposes, and are not energy efficient nor have the fixtures cut off optics to reduce light pollution. Emergency lighting does not meet the requirements of the Building Code. Generally most of the electrical systems need considerable upgrading if the building was retained. 2. building description study history The building is comprised of two sections constructed in 1969 and The two sections have been constructed side by side, but each section is structurally independent from each other, and does not rely on its neighbour for any form of structural assistance. The buildings are interconnected by openings in the party walls allowing the building to function as one building. An area summary is shown in the table below indicating that the total area is approximately 3890 square feet exclusive of a number of small frame decks and exit stairs on the north side of the building. Floor 1969 Wing 1977 Wing TOTALS Main Upper Shed Building TOTALS* *Areas include circulation and stairs and are shown in square feet. A seismic review of each building was undertaken in August of 2002, and options for upgrading made in June of A study by Downs Archambault, Architects in conjunction with the seismic assessment by Read Jones Christoffersen Ltd. was undertaken in 2002 which looked at 3 options for development, ranging in scope from seismic upgrading of existing buildings to construction of a new building. Cost figures for these options were provided. The Cost Consultant indicated that these figures would need to be increased by a minimum of 50% to reflect today s construction costs. In June of 2007 a second study examined further options for development of this exiting site for a new firehall building The construction of the 1969 wing is a single storey constructed of un-reinforced concrete block exterior walls and roof constructed of wood decking supported on a series of glulam beams. The main floor contains space for two apparatus and some minor related functions which coexisting with the apparatus in this area. Ceiling heights of this wing generally match the ceiling of the adjacent 1977 wing. The floor is a concrete slab on grade with undetermined reinforcing. Wall insulation is non existent and the roof insulation is undetermined. Overhead doors open directly onto the existing apron, but there are no rear vehicle entry doors, nor vehicle exhaust extraction system in these bays. At the rear of this building are small wood sheds. (See the comments related to these structures in the following section.) The BC Building Code requires that the Apparatus Bays be separated from the remainder of the building by a 1.5 hour fire separation. This building does not achieve this, as no fire separation exists between the vehicle garage and the remainder of the building.

5 4 of building The construction of the existing 1977 wing is a two storey space which is comprised of a lower floor area containing a two apparatus garage and ancillary functions, such as the Self Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) service area, radio area, washrooms, furnace room, hose storage and bunker gear storage areas. The upper floor area contains a large recreation assembly room, kitchen, washrooms and exterior exit stairs. The structure consists of a lower floor area of load bearing partially reinforced concrete block walls supported on reported strip concrete footings, and a second floor of wood frame walls T&G wood decking and glulams. The roof structure is also T & G Decking with glulam beams bearing on wood frames walls as noted above. The exterior wood frame walls are constructed with large single glazed exterior windows, cedar siding with interior wood frame walls of painted gyproc. It is assumed that the exterior walls are insulated with R-12 batt insulation. The BC Building Code requires that the Apparatus Bays be separated from the remainder of the building by a 1.5 hour fire separation. In this case that would need to be accomplished through a horizontal fire separation between the upper and lower floors, which is currently non-existent. At the rear of this building and the 1969 wing, are a series of wood frame sheds serving the main floor with storage. The roofs of these sheds also serve the upper floor as balconies, and exit stairs. These sheds are constructed of light wood frame with indeterminate foundations which do not meet current BC Building Code standards. 3. architectural 3.1 general The building condition ranges from good in the 1977 wing to moderate/poor in the 1969 wing with none of the buildings meeting the building code for seismic design, fire separation, accessibility or environmental standards. Apparatus bays are seriously compromised by the addition of encroachments into the side aisles and at the rear to accommodate related functions. Location of main stair from the upper level is outside and does not allow for direct and quick access to the apparatus. The upper floor recreation assembly room does not meet the BC Building Code for assembly purposes due to the inability for accessibility by persons with disabilities. The Code determines that any space holding greater than 60 persons to be considered an Assembly use, and thus be accessible to persons with disabilities. This current room is sized for greater than 60 persons and although it is intended to be mainly used by able bodied firefighters, there are no provisions for access for persons with disabilities. Applicable fire separations as per the 2006 BCBC and outlined below are not met by the current building construction: i. 1.5 hour fire rated separation between the Apparatus Bays and the other adjoining rooms at that level. Both horizontal and vertical separations. ii. 1 hour around exit stairs iii. 1 hour around mechanical rooms which house fuel fired appliances and electrical rooms. Accessibility within the apparatus bays on the main floor in particular, is compromised by encroaching storage and other uses. The entire structure does not meet the BC Building code for post disaster design, and upgrading is possible but costly.

6 5 of building envelope Generally the exterior envelope provides little in the way of protection from solar heat gain nor heat loss during colder temperatures. In addition, the construction of the building envelope does not meet current design standards for water ingress and general building envelope design. Lower level walls are constructed of un-insulated concrete block which provide little in the way of energy saving. Walls at the upper floor are constructed of wood frame, with wood siding exterior cladding and minimal batt insulation, which does not meet current environmental or exterior envelope design. Exterior walls have single glazed windows. The existence of any hazardous materials was not observed, but an examination for these contaminants should be undertaken, particularly in the 1969 wing, regardless of whether the building remains for renovation or not. The existing roofs have been upgraded with the application of a 2 ply torched on membrane. The type and thickness of the roof insulation was not determined. 3.3 sustainability Sustainable use of means and materials was not a consideration when this building was constructed; as a result, measures for energy efficiency, water conservation and building occupant satisfaction are non existent. The lack of insulation in the envelope provides little energy efficiency. The lack of low flow fixtures does not contribute to overall building water conservation. Existing light fixtures may contain contaminates and are inefficient. Exterior lighting creates some light pollution to surrounding areas. There is a shortage of mechanical and natural ventilation throughout the entire building. 3.4 site considerations The size, shape and configuration of the existing site are the primary factor constraining the development of an efficient and cost effective new firehall. Generally the site for a hall of the size required to meet the space needs of a single firehall for Bowen Island should be in the order of 1.25 acres (55,000 SF) to 1.5 acres (65,300SF) with a depth to the street of 50 meters to provide suitable building layout, apron, on site parking, and training area. While compromises on some of the recommended siting requirements are normal, the site under review does not meet any of these criteria. The existing site is about 17,287 SF, but the useful area is reduced by site conditions to less than 13,500 SF. Municipal Zoning set backs further reduce the useable area of the site to 4026 SF. The useful or buildable site depth is only 16 meters (reduced to 8.5M by the zoning setback), far less than the recommended 28 meters and the ideal depth of 50 meters. Previous reports suggested increasing the buildable area of the site by removing a portion of the rock bluff. We do not recommend this approach to site development as being extremely non-sustainable and very costly, and most of the area is outside the allowable building area by set backs.

7 6 of 7 There has been some discussion regarding the possible acquisition of the adjoining site to the west. This site is about 21,500 SF in area, with a buildable area of less than 10,000 SF, and is equally constrained by the existence of a rock bluff on the north half of the property which reduces it useful width to about 16M, reduced to 8.5 M by the required zoning setback. This site while providing additional area is too narrow to be of use for purposes other than training and parking. Its acquisition might be considered questionable, in light of the restricted width, topography, and allowable building area. 4. needs assessment A needs assessment of the current program has resulted in a functional program for future development, an analysis of flow of operational activities, and identification of short comings with the existing layout. 4.1 future development A space program for future requirements is shown on the following page. It has been determined that the current bldg size at 3890sf would not allow for the Fire Department to meet the growing needs of the area and changes in the method of fire protection operation. Although the attached program is preliminary, it would be impossible to implement the changes needed to the existing building without extensive expense. Implementation of the proposed space plan will provide the fire department with the opportunity to respond to the changing complexity of the community. Of major concern is the need for 6 apparatus bays. The current apparatus bays are not sized to meet requirements for current apparatus sizes.(see attached photos) 4.2 operational activities Operation and effective flow within the existing building are compromised by the existing layout and structure. New fire rescue strategies and equipment make it paramount for revisions to the current flow of activity in order to allow the department to operate at maximum potential. 4.3 specific deficiencies Observations on some examples of specific deficiencies within the current building. Personal Protection Equipment (PPE bunker gear) storage and lockers on the side aisles between the apparatus reduce the functioning width of the apparatus bays to a point where quick and efficient access to the vehicles is compromised. Separate bunker gear storage or making the Apparatus Bays wider. (17-0 for middle bays and 19-0 for end bays x 45 feet long is recommended). Apparatus bays are broken into 2 separate enclosures, separated by concrete block walls, making visual communication and access between bays challenging. A 45 foot long apron should be provided at the front of the building and if possible a rear entrance for apparatus provided to remove the obvious risk of reversing off a busy road. Bunker Gear are not protected from vehicle exhaust contamination. Direct vehicle exhaust system is recommended. Overhead doors are narrower than the optimum 14 feet wide by 14 feet high. Hose tower for drying hoses and training is recommended. SCBA equipment repair area is small and not in a separate sanitary controlled area. No opportunity for control of contaminates from on call gear A single washroom with access directly from the Apparatus Bays is recommended so as to not spread contaminates through into the house portion of the hall. Additional washrooms to accommodate both men and women should be provided with showers and lockers.

8 7 of 7 As this is the only firehall currently planned for the Municipality, it is critical that the site have suitable room for proper training within the hall, and also have an outdoor training area to allow for the upgrading of skills needed by a fire department in a growing community with increasing building sizes, complexity and heights. A training area of approximately 20 to 23 meters deep and 25 to 30 meters wide adjacent to a 10 meter high hose drying and training tower is the current standard for training. This should be an area free from parking during training periods. On site parking for volunteer vehicles should also be provided. It is crucial that the Fire Hall be brought up to post disaster standards. This means that the building must be able to withstand 1.5 times the normal seismic forces to enable it to be functional in time of a natural disaster. Any structure which does not meet this requirement is not suited to be a firehall. 5. Photographs Refer to attached photographs of existing site and bldg. 6. Site Studies See attached drawings: o Existing site analysis o Fire Hall site studies