Dear Nancy:
In our recent telephone conversation, I promised that I would put down my thoughts regarding what would be involved in leaving Penn Place "as is," while bringing the building up to code. I understand that some residents of Garrett Park have suggested "leaving the building as is," rather than pursuing the renovation and addition that we and the Penn Place Committee have developed.
First, let me say the obvious. The existing Penn Place building does not meet current building codes, contains many barriers to universal accessibility mandated by Americans with Disabilities Act, and has many building elements and systems that need to be modified or replaced. The idea of leaving Penn Place "as is" and bringing the building up to current code is a non-sequitur. Major changes are mandated in order to meet current codes.
Balodemas Architects conducted a building evaluation and published a report of their findings on 20 February 1997, describing a building with severe violations of current code. The report concludes:
"The overall condition of Penn Place is classified as poor. The structure exceeds the allowable height for wood construction, lacks sprinkler protection, and has other life-safety violations. Major components, such as the main roof, have reached the end of their useful lives. Existing HVAC systems do not adequately serve the various uses. And, the building is virtually inaccessible to the handicapped."
The plumbing systems in the building are in need of major work. The Balodemas Architects report indicates that a single water-meter serves the entire building and piping and hot water systems were described as in "fair condition". The report indicates that sewer back-ups were reported about once a year, there is no grease trap for the Market prep sink, there is improper venting, and a deterioration of some of the waste lines.
The electrical systems in the building has been modified many times over the life of the building and do not meet current code. The Balademas report indicates that current code requires that tenant panels be located within each tenant space. The report recommends that some fuse boxes remain and should be replaced, and points out that there are insufficient and ungrounded outlets and a lack of ground-fault circuit interruption in some areas.
The HVAC systems that exist at Penn Place do not meet current code. The Balademas report recommended new independent systems be installed for the Cafe and Salon, as well as major modifications to the other HVAC systems. The present systems do not provide outside air, as mandated by current commercial codes.
The Balademas report indicates that the construction type of Penn Place restricts use to one story. To meet current code and occupy the second floor, the building would need to be provided with an automatic sprinkler
system and a fire alarm system. Such systems are expensive to install in existing buildings, since the layout and installation of the sprinkler within an existing structure is more difficult than a new structure.
The Balademas report indicates that the means of egress for Penn Place does not meet current code for means of egress. Current code would require a second means of egress from the first and second floor.
The Balademas report outlines other general safety concerns and health violations. Although the report does not examine ADA compliance, it is evident that there are numerous barriers. The floor levels of the existing addition and the historic building do not align, resulting in numerous barriers. An elevator would be required to bring accessibility to the building and changes in levels would require either ramps or raising of
existing floors to eliminate barriers.
It is clear that major modifications are required to bring the existing space into compliance with current codes. In addition, the existing spaces do not serve the Post Office and Cafe as well as they could. The site also has barriers for the disabled and site drainage problems. There are parking conflicts and service/pedrestrian conflicts that present safety concerns. There are problems with securing mail deliveries, limited dining space for the Cafe, and limitations of the existing Cafe kitchen. The historic building has been modified and concealed by various changes that have occurred over the years; the roof needs replacing. Keeping the "status quo" without restoring the historic portion of Penn Place would mean that the only commercial building in Garrett Park, the center of a wonderful historic town, would remain unrestored as a reminder of previous years of neglect.
Although we are not able to quantify the cost of making all these changes, but it is apparent that these changes would require a considerable investment, far beyond the modest stopgap repairs that the Balademas report recommended over four years ago. It is often more costly to make incremental repairs...many times replacement is the more cost-effective option. Major renovation costs can exceed the cost of new construction, especially if you consider life cycle costs. In order to permit the Post Office and Cafe to
make needed modifications, the County would require that the entire building be brought up to current code.
The current design embodies the above stated goals, while using the renovation to help reorient the Post Office and Town Lobby toward the town and begin to reinforce the notion that Penn Place as the "center" of Garrett Park. I firmly believe that the proposed restoration of the historic portion and the modest addition we are proposing to the Penn Place represents the best solution to the myriad of issues that surround the existing building. It is important to remember that the proposed building is slightly smaller
than the existing building. Our goal is to address the above concerns and problems and restore Penn Place to make it meet code and serve its tenants well into this century.
I sincerely hope that the Town has the conviction to invest in what promises to be a vital part of Garrett Park for many years to come.
Sincerely,
Greg Wiedemann, AIA
WIEDEMANN ARCHITECTS
Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
Did you all have fun???
