Loading...
6 FEDERAL COURT - BUILDING JACKET 6 FEDERAL COURT l - I I �. CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING DEPARTMENT tr II 120 WASHINGTON STREET,3" FLOOR TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX(978) 740-9846 KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL MAYOR THOMAS ST.PIERRE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROPERTY/BUILDING COMMISSIONER October 18, 2011 Federal Court Realty Trust Joanna Peabody/Mary Richard-Trustees 53 Charter Street Salem Ma. 01970 R.E :6 Federal Court Dear Trustees, August 3,2011, you were sent a notice of violation of the State Building Code. Two and a half months later, no work has been done and no permit applications have been received. Unless the code issues are addressed immediately, this Department will begin daily fines and further enforcement actions. If you have any questions, please contact me directly. Thom St.Pierre,, Building Commissioner/Director of Inspectional Services cc. Jason Silva,Fire Prevention,Health Department CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS t3 ' ` BUILDING DEPARTMENT 120 WASHINGTON STREET,3" FLOOR TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAx(978) 740-9846 KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL MAYOR THOMAS ST.PIERRE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROPERTY/BUILDING COMMISSIONER August 3, 2011 Federal Court Realty Trust Joanna Peabody/Mary Richard -Trustees 53 Charter Street Salem Ma. 01970 R.E . 6 Federal Court Dear Trustees, This department has received and investigated complaints relating to the condition of the carriage house at the above property. Specifically, sections of the roof, that were the subject of previous violations are once again missing and open to the weather. There are also openings on the windows and around the foundation,the latter creating a harborage for raccoons. The Mass. State Building Code 780 C.M.R section 116.1 through 116.8 descibes unsafe buildings due to inadequate maintenance. Due to the Historic regulations, removal is not an option. Therefore you are directed to contact this office upon receipt of this notice, to discuss your plans to resolve the code violations at this property. Failure to comply will result in Municipal Code tickets and further enforcement actions. If you have any questions, please contact me directly. Thomas St.Pierre Building Commissioner/Director of Inspectional Services cc. Jason Silva, Fire Prevention, Health Department CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING DEPARTMENT 120 WASHINGTON STREET,3�FLOOR g TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAX(978) 740-9846 KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL MAYOR THomAs ST.PIERRE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROPERTY/BUILDING CONMSSIONER August 3, 2011 Federal Court Realty Trust Joanna Peabody/Mary Richard -Trustees 53 Charter Street Salem Ma. 01970 R.E . 6 Federal Court Dear Trustees, This department has received and investigated complaints relating to the condition of the carriage house at the above property. Specifically, sections of the roof, that were the subject of previous violations are once again missing and open to the weather. There are also openings on the windows and around the foundation,the latter creating a harborage for raccoons. The Mass. State Building Code 780 C.M.R section 116.1 through 116.8 descibes unsafe buildings due to inadequate maintenance. Due to the Historic regulations, removal is not an option. Therefore you are directed to contact this office upon receipt of this notice, to discuss your plans to resolve the code violations at this property. Failure to comply will result in Municipal Code tickets and further enforcement actions. If you have any questions, please contact me directly. Thomgs�st.Pierre / /!rr - �� Building Commissioner/Director of Inspectional Services cc. Jason Silva, Fire Prevention, Health Department N CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING DEPARTMENT tit 2 ^ � - 120 WASHINGTON STREET,3an FLOOR rtRa TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAx(978) 740-9846 HIMI3ERLEY DRISCOLL MAYOR THONIAS ST.PIERRE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROPERTY/BUILDING COMMISSIONER October 1 ,2008 Harlan B. Peabody 53 Charter Street Salem Ma.01970 R.E : Federal Court Mr . Peabody, This Department received and investigated a complaint at your property. Specifically, the tree located in the front yard overhanging Federal Court.. The Director of Public Services, Richard Rennard, who is a certified arborist,has determined that the tree is in a dangerous condition and needs to be removed. You are directed to remove the tree within 30 days of this notice. If you have any questions regarding the tree, please contact Richard Rennard at the D.P.W office. Thank You in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. T s St.Pierre � Mele4� Building Commissioner ce.Richard Rennard, Jason Silva,Ward 2 Ciouncilor,Mike Sosnowski 1 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE 1 First-Class Mail Postage&Fees Paid USPS Permit No.G-10 • Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box Iiif{ll{liiifiiIII IIIll IIIt{iiNit MIIiIill AAIAIII I;I MI SENDER: COMPLETE THIS SECTION COMPLETE THIS SECTION ON DELIVERY ■ Complete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A. signature Item 4 If Restricted Delivery is desired. ❑Agent ■ Print your name and address on the reverse (PS- / ❑Addressee so that we can return the card to you. B. Received by(Printed Name) 0 1 C. Date of Delivery ■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on on the front if space permits. 1. Article Addressed to: D. Is delivery address different from item 17 ❑Yes If YES,enter delivery address below: ❑ No -AC� 3., Service Type Cj P—r.\— rn6VI 7� Y 0 Certified Mail ❑Express Mail 0 Registered ❑Return Receipt for Merchandise 0 Insured Mail 0 C.O.D. 4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) ❑Yes 2. Article Number (Transfer fmm service label) PS Form 3811,February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-02-M-1540 b R Salem Historical Commission 120 WASHINGTON STREET,SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 (978)745-9595 EXT. 311 FAX (978) 740-0404 September 4, 2007 Harland B. & Joanna N. Peabody 53 Charter Street Salem, MA 01970 RE: Application for Waiver of Demolition Delay Ordinance - Received 9/4/07, for 6 Federal Court (barn) Dear Mr. and Ms. Peabody, Enclosed please find your Application for Waiver of the Demolition Delay Ordinance which I received today for 6 Federal Court . I am returning this to you because the Application for Waiver of the Demolition Delay Ordinance is applicable for only those properties that are outside of the local historic districts. To apply for demolition for a property within a local historic district, you will need to submit your request on either an Application for a Certificate of Appropriateness or on an Application for a Certificate of Hardship. I have enclosed a copy of both for your convenience. I you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincer 1 , Jan Guy Ass . Community Development Director Cc: Thomas St. Pierre, Building Dept. Elizabeth Rennard, City Solicitor RECEIVED SEP .0 42007 RRDEPT.OF PLANNING&. s Salerii Historical Commi►ssZ�VMMNITY DEVELOPMENT 120 WASHINGTON STREET SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 01970 ,,ll (978)715-9W W-311'- FAX(978)740-0404 APPLICATION FOR WAIVER OF THE DEMOLITION DELAY ORDINANCE Pursuant to the Historic Districts Act .G.L. (M Chapter 40C)"and Salem Code 2-1572,application is hereby made for issuance of a Waiver of the Demolition De l ay Ordinance for demolition as described below. AW Address of Property: �' �e of'Q . . Name of Record Owner(s): �I Original Building Construction Date, if lmovm C r Isthe property listed-on the National`Register of Historic Places or contributing to a NR District? Description of Demolition Work Proposed= Please attach any historical data and photographs, building plans structural reports or other pertinent information and submit at least a week before the scheduled meeting. Applicants who am&this rnfarnwlion or submit their application less than a week before the meeting date should expect to attend additional meeting(s). A site visit of theproperty may be requested. Briefly describe the extent of the demolido Briefly describe the reason/justication for demolition: � Briefly describe any proposal for future construction/development: Signature of Owne -"' - Tel: Mailing address: 33 517 CiZ ty: Stater Zip: C7 CRIMINAL COMPLAINT 10336CR003261 Trial Court of Massachusetts DEFENDANT Salem District Court PEABODY, HARLAN 53 CHARTER ST SALEM, MA 01970 TO ANY JUSTICE OR CLERK-MAGISTRATE OF THE SALEM DISTRICT COURT DATE OF BIRTH SEX RACE HEIGHT WEIGHT EYES HAIR 01/03/1929 M W 5'03" 200 IBRO GRY The undersigned complainant, on behalf of the INCIDENT REPORT# SOCIAL SECURITY# Commonwealth,on oath complains that on the date and at the location stated herein the defendant did commit the 036-20-8176 offense(s)listed below. DATE OF OFFENSE PLACE OF OFFENSE 07/25/2003 SALEM COMPLAINANT POLICE DEPARTMENT ST PIERRE, THOMAS I SALEM PD DATE OF COMPLAINT RETURN DATE AND TIME 09/19/2003 02/11/2004 9:00 AM COUNT-OFFENSE 1. 777777 MISCELLANEOUS CODE OF MASS REGS VIOLATN on 07/25/2003 did FAIL TO MAINTAIN PROPERTY,in violation of 780CMR Code Mass.Regs. §103.00. COUNT-OFFENSE COUNT-OFFENSE COUNT-OFFENSE COMPLAINANT SWORN TO BEFORE CLERK-MAGISTRATE ON(DATE) TOTAL COUNTS X X 1 FIRST JUSTICE COURT Salem District Court Hon. SAMUEL E ZOLL ADDRESS 65 Washington Street A TRUE CLERK-MAGISTRATE/ASST.CLERK ON(DATE) Salem, MA 01970 COPY ATTEST:X Salem Historical Commission 6 Federal Court Timeline 10/19/92 - Homeowner submitted application for Certificate of Appropriateness to demolish barn (carriage house) 11/16/92 - Owners of 6 Federal Court & 95/97 Federal premises submit joint application for Appropriateness to move barn from 6 Federal Court premises to 95/97 Federal Street premises 12/3/92 -Notice of Denial issued for barn demolition 12/8/92 - Applicants withdraw application to move barn 4/27/95 -Notice of violation sent to homeowner concerning signage erected without approval 5/26/95 - Sign applications (Hardship& Appropriateness)submitted 6/5/95 - Sign application(non-applicability) submitted 6/28/95 - Denials issued for Hardship, Appropriateness & Non-applicability for signs as proposed. Certificate of Non-applicability issued for temporary continued use of installed signage. 6/26/95 - Sign application(appropriateness) submitted 7/17/95 Denial issued for Appropriateness for signs, due to lacking sufficient information and being inappropriate based on information received. 7/20/95 - Certificate of Appropriateness issued for two wood signs 8/7/95 - Revised Denial for Non-applicability issued 9/22/95 - Letter to homeowner thanking for the removal of signs and request to remove remaining visible sign. 11/7/95 - Second letter to remove unapproved sign sent to homeowner 12/12/95 -Application for Certificate of Non-applicability submitted for roof repair. Certificate of Non-applicability issued Salem Historical Commission 6 Federal Court Timeline 2/27/03 - Received application for Certificate of Appropriateness for alterations to carriage house to convert to single family dwelling 3/19/03 - Historical Commission meeting - proposal presented by applicant representatives; public comment received, application continued to a site visit and to the meeting of 4/2/03 3/27/03 - Site visit 4/2/03 -Historical Commission meeting; AppIicant's representatives requested continuance to 4/16/03 4/16/03 - Historical Commission meeting; Revised drawings submitted& reviewed - comment provided; applicant's representative requested continuance to 5/7/03 5/2/03 - Received application for Certificate of Non-applicability for repairs to brick building 5/7/03 - Historical Commission meeting; no applicant nor representative present; unanimous vote to deny Appropriateness application for carriage house alterations without prejudice, reviewed Certificate of Non-applicability application for brick building 5/13/03 - Certificate of Non-applicability issued for various repairs to 6 Federal Court main brick house and clapboard addition 5/13/03 - Issued written Denial of Certificate of Appropriateness without prejudice for alterations to carriage house to convert to single family dwelling due to applicants/representative not present and not submitting request to continue 1/15/04 - Received application for Certificate of Non-Applicability to demolish barn. Left message for Attorney Fitzpatrick that wrong application submitted and pictures did not come through in his fax. 1/20/04 Returned call to Atty. Fitzpatrick (message had been left after closing hours on Friday, January 16`h) and informed him wrong application used and pictures did not come through. I faxed a blank application for Appropriateness at 4:43 a.m. 2/4/04 - Salem Historical Commission reviewed application for Non-applicability(never received new, correct application)and denied based on being an alteration of existing conditions and outward appearance; therefore requiring review under Appropriateness. KNEELAND CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION 407R MYSTIC AVE SUITE 34B-MEDFORD MA 02155 TEL 781393-9899 FAX 781393-0601 www.kneelandeonstruction.com Repair Item: Brick/lintel repair at windows in various locations Proposed Repair: Remove loose bricks, install galvanized lintel and replace bricks Estimated Cost: $650.00 each Photo of existing condition: �wAO�Y 11�f 91 aiii - - I' [ i 4 KNEELAND CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION 407R MYSTIC AVE SUITE 348-MEDFORD MA 02155 TEL 781393-9899 FAX 781393-0601 www.kneelandconstruction.com Repair Item: Basement entry bulkhead in disrepair Proposed Repair: Remove bulkhead doorway and close off entry completely with a framed-plywood structure with rubber membrane weather proofing Estimated Cost: $950.00 Photo of existing condition: 'ar r KNEELAND CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION 407R MYSTIC AVE SUITE 34B-MEDFORD MA 02155 TEL 781393-9899 FAX 781393-0641 www.kneelandcanstruction.com Repair Item: Chimney curvature at front wall of building Proposed Repair: Construct galvanized steel rod and angle brace which will fit around chimney and brace it back to the existing roof structure Estimated Cost: $2,600.00 Photo of existing condition: _ S ' KNEELAND CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION 407R MYSTIC AVE SUITE 34B-MEDFORD MA 02155 TEL 781393-9899 FAX 781393-0601 www.kneelandconstruction.com Repair Item: Left rear entry in disrepair Proposed Repair: Remove entire portico and install new door and porch with landing Estimated Cost: $1,800. Photo of existing condition: 7 KNEELAND CONSTRUCTION i " ` i ' i 407R MYSTIC AVE SUITE 34B-MEDFORD MA 02155 TEL 781393-9899 FAX 781393-0601 www.kneelandconstruction.com Repair Item: Miscellaneous window panes missing/broken Proposed f iRepair glassplace Estimated Cost: $65.00 each Photo i i 1 i WI e ern - I KNEELAND CONSTRUCTION t " t ' • t r MEDFORD MA 02155 TEL 781393-9899 FAX r ,r Repairbrick foundation • roof damage at right front • f rear addition Proposed r .ir: Repair roofand trim at which has caused the deterioration of the structure, remove • • repoint them as required and replace rotted Estimated r $3,250.00 Photo r r r r 41 A. KNEELAND► CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION 407R MYSTIC AVE SUITE 34H-MEDFORD MA 02155 TEL 781393-9899 FAX 781393-0601 www.kneelandeonstruction.com Repair Item: Sill, brick foundation and roof damage at right rear of rear addition structure Proposed Repair: Repair roof and trim at which has caused the deterioration of the structure, remove all loose bricks and replace and repoint them as required and replace rotted sill. Estimated Cost: $4,200.00 Photo of existing condition: t Y r 1 KNEELAND CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION 4078 MYSTIC AVE SUITE 34&-MEDFORD MA 02155 TEL 781393-9899 FAX 781393-0601 www.kneelandconstruction.com Repair Item: Sill, brick foundation and roof damage at left rear of rear addition structure Proposed Repair: Repair roof and trim at which has caused the deterioration of the structure, remove all loose bricks and replace and repoint them as required and replace rotted sill. Estimated Cost: $3,850.00 Photo of existing condition: .e a A I jjj !!! 1,:, KNEELAND CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION 407R MYSTIC AVE SUITE 34D-MEDFORD MA 02155 TEL 781393-9899 FAX 781393-0601 www.kneelandconstruction.com Repair Item: Side porch at right side of property Proposed Repair: Remove and rebuild porch in kind Estimated Cost: $825.00 Photo of existing condition: l— v :Gi1a3 'Fa11;:.� _ iifgw ♦ . N KNEELAND CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION 407R MYSTIC AVE SUITE 34B-MEDFORD MA 02155 TEL 781393-9899 FAX 781393-0601 www.kneelandconstruction.com Repair Item: Side porch at left side of property Proposed Repair: Remove weeds and vines and rebuild porch in kind Estimated Cost: $825.00 Photo of existing condition: ' 1 y4 _ _ t � m . V Y • • _ Salem Historical Commission 120 Washington St. ,SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 41970 APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS Pursuant to the Historic District's Act (M.G.L. Chapter 40C) and the Salem Historical Commission Ordinance,application is hereby made for issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness for: ❑ Construction ❑ Moving ❑ Reconstruction ® Alteration ❑ Demolition ❑ Painting ❑ Sign ❑ Other as described below. District: McIntire Building Construction.Date,if known: Unknown Address of Property: 6 Federal Court (carriage house in rear) Name of Record Owner: Harlon B. Jr. and Joanna Peabody Description of Work.Proposed: (Please attach required scale drawings, paint chips andlor samples of work and material proposed, where applicable) Alterations to carriage house to convert to single family dwelling. Signature of Owner:t0� =L�� � Tel. #: (978) 745-5991 i 93 Charter Street 01970 Mailing address: City: Salem State:�Zip: f l.� Salem Historical_Commission ONE SALEM GREEN,SALEM.MASSACHUSETTS 01970 (508)745-9595 EXT.311 NOTICE OF DENIAL OF APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS RREE: 6 Federal Court - Carriage House On Wednesday, December 2, 1992, the Salem Historical Commission unanimously voted to deny a Certificate of Appropriateness from Harland and Joanna Peabody to demolish the carriage house at 6 Federal Court. I attest that this is an accurate record of the vote taken, not amended or modified in any way to this date. December 3, 1992 all Jan Guy Cle of the C mmission cc : Building Inspector City Clerk JGWANEWENIALI4 of �ttiem, �Htts�ttr�u�rtt� Public Vroperttt Department 9e M1Ne " Nuilbinu Department lone enlem (5reen 508-745-9595 Ext. 380 Leo E. Tremblav Director of Public Propertv Inspector of Building Zoning Enforcement Officer June 11 , 1996 Harlan B . Peabody Jr. Joanna N. Peabody 6 Federal St. Court Salem, Mass . 01970 RE : 6 Federal St. Court Dear Mr . & Mrs . Peabodv: Several of your neighbors are concerned about the property located at the above mentioned location . The two buildings located on the properties are abandoned and becoming a safety hazard, as far as being a fire concern and a structural hazard. The main structure seems structurally sound, but I do question the garage structure which seems to me as being unsafe . I am asking that you have a structural engineer inspect the property to assure me in writing that the structure is sound. Jr that you apply for proper permits for demolition of the structure . Please contact this office within fifteen ( 15 ) days upon receipt of the letter as to what course of action you will take to rectify this matter . Failure to do so will result in legal action being taken against you. Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter . Sincerely, Leo E . Tremblay Inspector of Buildings LET: scm cc: David Shea Jane Guy Councillor Flynn. :lard 2 P 348 634 422 Receipt for Certified Mail ? s No Insurance Coverage Provided ?. Do not use for International Mail a a�S (see Reversal ITY OF SALEM HEALTH DEPARTMENT Sem t BOARD OF HEALTH Sueet and Ne. 9 North Street Salem, Massachusetts 01970 P.O.,State and ZIP Code Postage• F February 16,1993 W.H.B.Peabody • 'Feder; l Court Salem,MA 01970 re DeaAir.'Peabody: , 4 } M1 hit A Prehmmar}Board of _Hearing is scheduled for Thursday,February 25,1993 at 3:00 p.m.at i _7 _ _._ - - 'tlieSim Health Department located at the Bowditch House;9 North Street,2nd floor,Salem, y { use us 01970 t ANsard hearing,you will be given an oppoitimity to be heard relative to violation(s)of 6 Federal Court in the City of Salem. w The above Preliminary Hearing is to be held in accordance with State Sanitary Code,Chapter II, 105 iCMR410.000 Minimum Standards of Fitness for Human Habitation. The Board of Health respectfully requests you attend this hearing. FOR THE BOARD OF HEALTH REPLY TO Robert E.Blenkhom,CHO Virginia E.Moustakis Health Agent Sanitarian REB:bas cc: Leo Trembly,Building Inspector Kevin Daly,City Solicitor Certified Mail P348 634 422 C:•..= OF SALEM 4:Z,LTH DEPT,, 1 February 199:• Robert E. Blenkhorn, Health Agent City of Salem Health Department Board of Health 9 North Street, Salern, PIA 01970 Monday, February 8, aletter addressed to Berkley H. Peabody, Certified Mail P 348 630 909, ordering corrective anion on property at. 6 federal Court was received. This letter, in reply, is a request for ,a hearing before the Board of Health, submitted to you, hand delivered In timely fashion, in accordance with rights outlined in your, letter,on the matter, you requested. Sincerely your�s,-yam H. B}Pe body T d eowoti Y !t 7 CITY OF SALEM HEALTH DEPARTMENT BOARD OF HEALTH 9 North Street ROBERT E. BLENKHORN Salem, Massachusetts 01970 HEALTH AGENT 508-741-1800 February 16, 1993 Mr. H. B. Peabody 6 Federal Court Salem, MA 01970 Dear Mr.Peabody: A Preliminary Board of Health Hearing is scheduled for Thursday,February 25, 1993 at 3:00 p.m.at the Salem Health Department located at the Bowditch House,9 North Street, 2nd floor,Salem, Massachusetts 01970. ACsaid hearing,you will be given an opportunity to be heard relative to violation(s)of 6 Federal Court in the City of Salem. The above Preliminary Heating is to be held in accordance with State Sanitary Code,Chapter II, 105 CMR 410.000 Minimum Standards of Fitness for Human Habitation. The Board of Health respectfully requests you attend this hearing. / FOR THE BOARD OF HEALTH REPLY TO Robert E.Blenkhom,CHO Virginia E. Moustakis Health Agent Sanitarian REB:bas cc: Leo Trembly, Building Inspector Kevin Daly,City Solicitor Certified Mail P348 634 422 of *o1Em, Mali tiac4usetts raublir � P }tertg Department "Builbinq Department (One 6nletn (6reen 500-745-9595 Ext. 300 Leo E. Tremblay Director of Public Property Inspector of Building Zoning Enforcement Officer June 11 , 1996 Harlan B. Peabody Jr. Joanna N. Peabody 6 Federal St. Court Salem, Mass . 01970 RE: 6 Federal St . Court Dear Mr . & Mrs . Peabody: Several of your neighbors are concerned about the property located at the above mentioned location. The two buildings located on the properties are abandoned and becoming a safety hazard, as far as being a fire concern and a structural hazard. The main structure seems structurally sound, but I do question the garage structure which seems to me as being unsafe . I am asking that you have a structural engineer inspect the property to assure me in writing that the structure is sound. Or that you apply for proper permits for demolition of the structure . Please contact this office within fifteen ( 15 ) days upon receipt of the letter as to what course of action you will take to rectify this matter . Failure to do so will result in legal action being taken against you . Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, Leo E . Trembla Inspector of Buildings LET: scm cc: David Shea Jane Guy Councillor Flynn, Ward 2 P( 348 630 909 CODr Receipt for s + ertified Mail ; No Insurance Coverage Provided Do not use for International Mail Z w" (See Reverse) Sent a ITY OF SALEM HEALTH DEPARTMENT BOARD OF HEALTH Street and No. 9 North Street P.O.,State and ZIP Code Salem, Massachusetts 01970 Postage January 21, 1993 C kley H. Peabody al Court MA 01970 Dear Mr. Peabody• Regarding the exterior premises at 6 FEDERAL COURT in the City of. Salem Massachusett,�,^oxf January 20, 1993 a reinspection was conducted of the property at, 10:30 a.m: by Robe'Ai E. Blenkhorn, C.H.O. , Health Agent. The following was noted:Front Brick Building = --l)-drain pipe- in,front of building, hanging loose. 2) window blinds broken, parts loose, not secure in place (danger of falling parts) Wood,Carriage;"House 1)°awindows •'(open) broken and/or missing. 2) ,soffit, area .open with hanging wood and/or metal flashing, " danger of falling, 3)oside door not tight fitting, has open space under and side. This open building is creating potential harborage and infestation of animals, rodents and insects and in its:,open conditon is a danger to life and safety. You are HEREBY ORDERED to make a good-faith effort to correct these violations within (7) days - 1) SECURE THE WOOD BUILDING 2) REMOVE AND/OR REPLACE LOOSE DRAIN PIPE AND BROKEN WINDOW BLINDS FROM BRICKHOUSE. Should you be aggrieved by this ORDER, you have the right to request a hearing before the Board of Health. A request for a hearing must be received in writing in the office of the Board of Health within seven (7) days of receipt of this ORDER. At this hearing, you will be given an opportunity to be heard and to present witness and documentary evidence as to why this ORDER should be modified or withdrawn. �- a ale MA'.tdi fo 5� � PEABODY j r JANUARY 21, 149.3^` PAGE 2 You may be represented by an Attorney. Please also be informed that you have the right to inspect and obtain copies of all relevant inspection or investigation reports, ORDERS, notices or other documentary information in the possession of the Board and that ,any adverse party has the right to be present at the Hearing. Failure on your part to comply within the specified time can result in a complaint being sought againstyou in Salem District Court. FOR THE BOARD ,OFAIRALTH ; f r Robert E. Blenkhorn C HBO: ; Health Agent REB:bas cc: Attorney Jeffrey Loeb, 1 Corporate Place, 55 Ferncroft Drive, Danvers, MA 01923 Kevin T. Daly, .City Solicitor Certified Mail P 348 630 909 : 1 TAU of gtt1Em, ttssttrhusetts Public Propertg Department +Nuilbing Department (ane #atem Green 500-745-9595 Ext. 300 Leo E. Tremblay Director of Public Property Inspector of Building Zoning Enforcement Officer June 11 , 1996 Harlan B. Peabody Jr . Joanna N. Peabody 6 Federal St . Court Salem, Mass . 01970 RE : 6 Federal St . Court Dear Mr. & Mrs . Peabody: Several of your neighbors are concerned about the property located at the above mentioned location. The two buildings located on the properties are abandoned and becoming a safety hazard, as far as being a fire concern and a structural hazard. The main structure seems structurally sound, but I do question the garage structure 1' which seems to me as being unsafe . I am asking that you have a structural engineer inspect the property to assure me in writing that the structure is sound. Or that you apply for proper permits for demolition of the structure . Please contact this office within fifteen ( 15 ) days upon receipt of the letter as to what course of action you will take to rectify this matter. Failure to do so will result in legal action being taken against you . Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, Leo E . Trembla Inspector of Buildings LET: scm cc: David Shea Jane Guy Councillor Flynn, Ward 2 �f al r re P four-unit dwelling located in the City of Salem oss income no greater than 80 percent of the area Maximum Income Levels Sheet) Ad income must be no greater than 60% of median i nnmunities and Development (EOCD), which rovernment, shall have the right to inspect Projects for the purpose of ensuring compliance Wram. Tito of �ttlrm' massar4usetts Public Properttl i9epartment Nuilbing i9epartment (Ont dahm Q4ran 588-745-9595 Ext. 388 Leo E. Tremblay Director of Public Property Inspector of Building Zoning Enforcement Officer DATE Harlan B. Peabody Jr. Joanna N. Peabody 6 Federal St . Court Salem, Mass . 01970 RE : 6 Federal St . Court Dear Harlan & Joanna: At our meeting held in my office in June of 1996 , you informed me that you had no intention on spending any money for repairs on the garage located at the above mentioned location. You also informed me that back in 1992 you offered the building to the Historic Commission free of charge if they wanted to move the structure to an alternate location. You were given no satisfaction that the building would be relocated through the Historic Commission, and you still do not intend to do any repairs to the structure . But you did indicate to me that if I ordered the removal of this unsafe structure you would do so by means of demolishing. I am considering the garage structure located at the above mentioned location on unsafe structure that must be removed by means of demolishing within the next fifteen ( 15 ) days per Section 123 . 0 of the 780 CMR Fifth Edition of the Massachusetts State Building Code . Please notify my office upon receipt of this letter as to your course of action in this matter . Failure to do so could result in legal action. Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, Leo E . Tremblay Inspector of Buildings LET: scm uLitp of Salem, a �acYju ett� Public Propertp Department 3guilbing Department one 9salem oreen (976) 745-9595 (Ext. 380 Peter Strout Director of Public Property Inspector of Buildings Zoning Enforcement Officer f NOTICE OF VIOLATION Date // r 40 Owner's Name fit✓ ��1�1e� �c>nr�e tr `�c � Address fir, 7 Ccaj 2 ��ll� M rutin O/9'7 C7 Regarding Property at Dear � : Based upon the findings of the inspection detailed below, the Board of Health and Building Department determine that the following violation(s) exist at your property cited above: X4 rT C�) ��•� C�'�-. t c}', �' S � f .ten t1 `�,-," `� .Z r-� You are ordered to correct the violations listed above within 30 days of receipt of this letter. Failure to comply within 30 days may result in a criminal complaint sought against you in Housing Court, or after 30 days the City may correct the violations and impose a lien on your property to recover the costs of such action. This inspection was conducted in accordance with Massachusetts General Law, Chapter 111, Sections 127A and 127 B and 105 CMR 410.602(A), of Chapter II, State Sanitary Code, Minimum Standards of Fitness for Human Habitation, and Section 12-56 et seq. of the Code of Ordinances, City of Salem, Massachusetts at the above cited property. This inspection was conducted for the oar of Health n� _ S-Cr�tl(5 for the Building Department ons �6�i �i. You have the right to request a hearing before the City Council. A request for a hearing must be received in writing in the Office of the City Clerk and the Director of Public Property within 10 days of receipt of this Order. At the hearing, you will be given the opportunity to present evidence as to why this Order should be modified or withdrawn. You may be represented by an attorney. You have the right to inspect and obtain copies of all relevant inspection or investigation reports, orders, and other documentary information in the possession of the Board of Health and Office of Public Property, and that any adverse party has the right to be present at the hearing. Si i P ertrout Joanne Scott Director of Public Property Health Agent cc: James G. Gilbert, Assistant City Solicitor Thomas Philbin, Mayor's Chief of Staff Clean or Lien 2 CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS vg _ BOARD OF HEALTH <. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 4TH FLOOR SALEM, MA 01970 TEL. 978-741-1800 FAX 978-745-0343 STANLEY USOVICZ, JR. JOANNE SCOTT, MPH, RS, CHO MAYOR HEALTH AGENT REFERRAL NOTIFICATION Date: J / Building Inspector Vhf V Electrical Department Plumbing/Gas Inspector Fire Prevention Other Minimum Standards of Fitness for Human Habitation (State Sanitary Code: Chapter II ) Dear A recent inspection of the property at IG i Sr x found the following violation(s), which may involve your department: The owner was notified of these violations in writing. We informed the owner that corrections may require a permit from your department. For the Board of Health: Owner info:0 /1 c-referral notification#3 uCitp of ibalem, fiKamwbuoetw r Public Propertp Mcpartment �guiIbing Mepartment (one 90alem ffireen (97B) 7459595 Cxt. 380 Peter Strout Director of Public Property Inspector of Buildings Zoning Enforcement Officer NOTICE OF VIOLATION Date / � % /car Owner's Name Address cc%-)C2- Regarding Regarding Property at (b Dear., r)E,? : Based upon the findings of the inspection detailed below, the Board of Health and Building Department determine that the following violation(s) exist at your property cited above: _�.�����C'2�J�C? 1J' Ca�.'1>.-, r'"1� ✓� Cf- JT6Zc.X'tS.—X"'�...� i i I You are ordered to correct the violations listed above within 30 days of receipt of this letter. Failure to comply within 30 days may result in a criminal complaint sought against you in Housing Court, or after 30 days the City may correct the violations and impose a lien on your property to recover the costs of such action. This inspection was conducted in accordance with Massachusetts General Law, Chapter 111, Sections 127A and 127 B and 105 CMR 410.602(A), of Chapter ll, State Sanitary Code, Minimum Standards of Fitness for Human Habitation, and Section 12-56 et seq. of the Code of Ordinances, City of Salem, Massachusetts at the above cited property. This inspection was conducted for the oar of Ilea h ��n� for the Building Department ons /G�, �alh - You have the right to request a hearing before the City Council. A request for a hearing must be received in writing in the Office of the City Clerk and the Director of Public Property within 10 days of receipt of this Order. At the hearing, you will be given the opportunity to present evidence as to why this Order should be modified or withdrawn_ You may be represented by an attorney. You have the right to inspect and obtain copies of all relevant inspection or investigation reports, orders, and other documentary information in the possession of the Board of Health and Office of Public Property, and that any adverse party has the right to be present at the hearing. Wertrout i Joanne Scott Director of Public Property Health Agent cc: James G. Gilbert, Assistant City Solicitor Thomas Philbin, Mayor's Chief of Staff Clean or lien 2 CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC PROPERTY DEPARTMENT 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR �o SALEM, MA 01970 9g TEL. (978) 745-9595 EXT. 380 q FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. PETER STROUT, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROPERTY MAYOR December 11, 2001 Harlan & Joanne Peabody 6 Federal Street Court Salem, Ma. 01970 Dear Owners: Please be advised, this department has received several complaints about the condition of your carriage house at the above-mentioned address. Massachusetts State Building Code 780 CMR, Section 103.1 and 103.2 requires the owner of a building to maintain that structure in good condition. I have enclosed a copy of this section for you to read. You are directed to begin repairs to weatherproof and secure this within thirty (30) days. Failure to comply will result in a complaint being filed in Salem District Court. Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation in this matter. Sincerely, p 4/�icr/''r�v � ✓(/7 Q'�9r��./ Thomas St. Pierre Local Building Inspector cc: Mayors Office Councillor Flynn Sharon McCabe, Health Department 44- 780 CMR: STATE BOARD OF BUILDING REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS . THE MASSACHUSETTS STATE BUILDING CODE 102.3 Zoning Bylaw Restrictions: When the structures and provided further that the siting and provisions herein specified for structural strength, fire separation distance comply with the adequate egress facilities, sanitary conditions, requirements for new structures. equipment, fight and ventilation, energy 780 CMR 103.0 AL4DnI.NANCE conservation or fire safety conflict with the local 1031 General: An buildings and structures and all zoning bylaws or ordinances,780 CMR shall control parts thereof both existing and new,and all systems the construction or al.eration of buildings and and equipment therein which are regulated by structures unless such bylaws or ordinances are 780 CMR shall be maintained in a safe,operable and - promulgated in accordance with the provisions of sanitary condition. All service equipment,meow of M.G.L.c. 143, §98 . egress,devices and safeguards which are required by 780 CMR in a building or structure,or which were 102.4 General bylaw restrictions: When .the required by a previous statute in a building or provisions herein specified for structural strength, structure,when erected,altered or repaired,shall be adequate egress facilities, sanitary conditions, maintained in good working order. equipment, light and ventilation, energy conservation or fire safety conflict with the local 103.2 Owner responsibility The owner, as general bylaws or ordinances, 780 CMR Shan defined in 780 CMR 2, shall be responsible for control the construction or alteration of buildings compliance with provisions of 780 CMR 103.0. and structures unless such bylaws or ordinances are promulgated in accordance with the provisions 780 CMR 104.0 VALIDrfl' M.G.L.c. 143, §98. 104.1 General: The provisions.of 780 CMR are. 102.5 Applicability to Existing Buildings severable, and if any of its provisions shall be held unconstitutional or otherwise invalid by any court of 102.5.1 General: Existing buildings and competent jurisdiction, the decision,of such court structures shall comply with the provisions of shall not affect or impair any of the remaining 780 CMR 102.5 and a0 other applicable provisions. provisions of 780 CMR- 102.5.2 MR102.5.2 Unless specifically provided otherwise in 780 CMR 105.0 OFFICE OF THE 780 CMR,any existing building or structure shall INSPECTOR OF BUILDINGS OR meet and shall be presumed to meet the provisions BUILDING COMMISSIONER of the applicable laws,codes,rules or regulations, 105.1 Appointment: The chief administrative bylaws or ordinances in effect at the time such officer of each city or town shall employ and building or structure was constructed or altered designate an inspector of buildings or building and shall be allowed to continue to be occupied commissioner(hereinafter inspector of buildings)as pursuant to its use and occupancy, provided that well as such other local inspectors as are reasonably the building or structure shall be maintained in necessary to assist the inspector of buildings to accordance with 780 CMR 103.0. administer and enforce 780 CMR and of M.G.L. . 102.5.3 In cases which applicable codes,rules or c. 22, § 13 A and the rules and regulations made regulations,bylaws or ordinances were not N use under the authority thereof. The inspector of at the time of such construction or alteration,the buildings shall report to and be solely provisions of 780 CMR 103.0 shall apply. responsible to the appointtinging authority. 102.5.4 In cases where the provisions of 105.2 Alternate: The inspector of buildings is 780 CMR are less stringent than the applicable . authorized to designate an alternate who shall codes,rules or regulations,bylaws or ordinances exercise all the powers of the inspector of buildings at the time of such construction or substantial during the temporary absence, disability or confect alteration,the applicable provisions of 780 CMR of interest of the inspector of buildings. Said - shall apply, providing such application of these alternate shall be duly qualified pursuant to provisions does not result in danger to the public, 780 CMR 105.3. as determined by the building official. 102.5.5 Existing buildings or parts or portions 1053 Qualifications of the Inspector of Buildings: thereof which are proposed to be enlarged, In accordance with the provisions of M.G.L.c. 143, altered,repaired or changed in use or occupancy § 3, each inspector of buildings shall have had at a altel comply with the provisions of 780 CMR 34. least five years of experience in the supervision of building construction or design or in the alternative 102.5.6 Moved Structures: Buildings or a four year undergraduate degree in a field related to structures moved into or within the Jurisdiction building construction or design, or any combination shall comply with the provisions of 780 CMR 34 of education and experience which would confer provided that any new system shall comply as far equivalent knowledge and ability,as determined by . as practicable with the requirements for new the BBRS. In addition each inspector of buildings 14 780 CMR-Sixth Edition 2/7/97 (Effective 2/28/97) CRIMINAL COMPLAINT 10336CR003261 Trial Court of Massachusetts DEFENDANT Salem District Court PEABODY, HARLAN 53 CHARTER ST SALEM, MA 01970 TO ANY JUSTICE OR CLERK-MAGISTRATE OF THE SALEM DISTRICT COURT DATE OF BIRTH SEX RACE HEIGHT WEIGHT EYES HAIR 01/03/1929 M W 5'03" 200 BRO I GRY The undersigned complainant, on behalf of the INCIDENT REPORT# SOCIAL SECURITY# Commonwealth,on oath complains that on the date and at the location stated herein the defendant did commit the 036-20-8176 offense(s)listed below. DATE OF OFFENSE PLACE OF OFFENSE 07/25/2003 SALEM COMPLAINANT POLICE DEPARTMENT ST PIERRE, THOMAS I SALEM PD DATE OF COMPLAINT RETURN DATE AND TIME 09/19/2003 1 02/11/2004 9:00 AM COUNT-OFFENSE - 1. 777777 MISCELLANEOUS CODE OF MASS REGS VIOLATN on 07/25/2003 did FAIL TO MAINTAIN PROPERTY,in violation of 780CMR Code Mass. Regs. §103.00. , 7�11 �ry C-7f1I' 5 ,81 79t .,WNT-OFFENSE I,1, .4; � .. &�di j E 1 ptu 'nn� `-,. "t 7 Y '9II COUNT-OFFENSE 1; COUNT-OFFENSE COMPLAINANT SWORN TO BEFORE CLERK-MAGISTRATE ON(DATE) TOTAL COUNTS X X I 1 FIRST JUSTICE COURT Salem District Court (PROSECUTION COPY) ADDRESS Hon. SAMUEL E ZOLL 65 Washington Street A TRUE CLERK-MAGISTRATE/ASST.CLERK ON(DATE) Salem, MA 01970 COPY ATTEST: X APPLICATION ADULT NUMBERS Trial Court of Massachusetts FOR COMPLAINT El JUVENILE. r District Court Department �3 ❑ ARREST ' HEARING LJSUMMONS El WARRANT COURT DIVISION The within named complainant requests that a.complaint issue against the within swelm Disuld Coyvt named defendant, charging said defendant with the offense(s) listed below. TlBt $I DATE OF APPLICATION DATE OF OFFENSE PLACE OF OFFENSE // 65 VifWa,Stilf!n al$tOi1 st O ti 57 C O�/� NAME OF COMPLAINANT Cy Jj O r/ i� /mak' / 1�P�1 ( NO. OFFENSE G.L. Ch. and Sec ADDRESS AND ZIP CODE OF COMPLAINANT (�/• T�t e r NAME,A DRESS AND ZIP CODE OF DF�FENDANT U C r/ SPG /"7 Sc lr,3 /} COURT USE A hearing upon this complaint appli tion DATE OF HEARING "mp OF HEARING COURT USE ONLY--o- will be held at the above court addr ss on2_AT / ) J( *—ONLY CASE PAR ULARS —'BE SPECIFIC NAME OF VICTIM DESCRIPTION OF PROPER VALUE OR PROP TYPE OF CONTROLLED NO. ` Owner of property, Goods stolen,what er SUBSTANCE OR WEAPCEN person assaulted,etc. destroyed,etc. $250. Marijuana,gun,etc. Cohv lei 2 3 e /L 4 OTHER REMARKS: 71-171-1 ; %/PfP/,'pry 7<< G7 r� / S p�Pn 7 40 Ile ----' � _ X c SIGNATURE OF eOMPLAINANT DEFENDANT IDENTIFICATION INFORMATION — Complete data below if known. DATE BIRT PLACEOFBIRTH SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER SEX RACE HEIGHT WEIGHT EVES HAIR o/ 03 a9 0 3G -as - 176 OCCUPATI N EMPLOYER/SCHOOL MOTHER'S NAME(MAIDEN) FATHER'S NAME J a J n O 3 v s z D Z 1 rn O DC.CR2(3188) ' 14 SOUTH STREET CONCORD,NH 03301 603 225-4334 FAX 603224-8350 HINCKLEY, ALLEN & SNYDER LLP Attorneys at Law ccarter@haslaw.com June 4, 2002 VIA FACSIMILE (978-740-9846) and FIRST CLASS MAIL Thomas St. Pierre Building Department 120 Washington St, P Floor Salem, MA 01970 Re: Property at 6 Federal Court Dear Mr. St. Pierre: This letter follows up on our telephone conversation of earlier today concerning Mr. Harlan Peabody's property located at 6 Federal Court in Salem, Massachusetts. I have spoken with Mr. Peabody, and he is willing to take immediate steps to clear overgrowth from the 6 Federal Court property, and to address any problem concerning a population of bees at that location. Mr. Peabody would appreciate further guidance from your office regarding the scope of clearing work that should be completed on the property. He or I will call you tomorrow to discuss this matter in further detail. Based on our agreement to address these immediate remedial issues, it is my understanding that there will be no need to proceed with the court hearing scheduled for June 10, 2002 to address alleged building code violations at the 6 Federal Court property. You noted that you would be able to notify the Court that the hearing should be cancelled. Thank you for your cooperation and assistance. Please do not hesitate to give me a call if you have any questions, or would like to discuss this matter in greater detail. Sincerely, / Q& � ' ` P Christopher H. M. Carter CHMC/dll c- , , Mr. Harlan Peabody #396678 28 STATE STREET ❑ BOSTON,MASSACHUSETTS 02109-1775 ❑ 617 345-9000 ❑ FAX 617 345-9020 1500 FLEET CENTER 0 PROVIDENCE,RHODE ISLAND 02903-2393 0 401 274-2000 ❑ FAX 401 277-9600 Cltp of *alem, ffIag!gacbugettg Aublic Propertp Department Juilbing Department CCP (One gDatem Oreen (978) 745-9595 Cxt. 380 Peter Strout Director of Public Property Inspector of Buildings Zoning Enforcement Officer July 15, 2002 Harlan/Joanna Peabody 53 Charter Street Salem,Ma. 01970 RE: 6 Federal Street Court Dear Mr. & Mrs. Peabody: This letter is to notify you of your next court date. Your case has been continued for a magistrate hearing on August 14, 2002. We appreciate the fact that you cleared away the overgrowth and addressed the bee issue. However, the original complaint was a building code violation MGL 143: 780 CMR, Section 103: This section of the Massachusetts State Building Code requires the owner of a property to maintain all parts of a building and all systems associated with it. I have enclosed this section of the code for your review. The house and the carriage house are both in need of serious repairs. Both structures are open to the weather and the carriage house specifically is developing structural problems in both the roof and foundationTavoid further court action, a plan to repair the structure needs to be approved by this office. Hopefully, this letter will help you understand the City of Salem position in this matter. Also, some of the items such as the chimney leaning on the east side of the house pose a_ serious threat to the public. Sincerely, Thomas St. Pierre Acting Building Commissioner Cc: Mayors Office Tom Phillbin Councillor Flynn Health Department Attorney Christopher Carter Enclosures 1. Copy of Bld Code 2,Pictures 780 CMR: STATE BOARD OF BUILDING REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS THE MASSACHUSETTS STATE BUILDING CODE 102.3 Zoning Bylaw Restrictions: When the structures and provided further that the siting and provisions herein specified for structural strength, fire separation distance comply with the adequate egress facilities, sanitary conditions, requirements for new structures. equipment, light and ventilation, energy 780 CMR 103.0 MAINTENANCE conservation or fire safety conflict with the local 103.1 General: All buildings and structures and all zoning bylaws or ordinances,780 CMR shall control parts thereofy both existing and new, and all systems the construction or al.eration of buildings and and equipment therein which are regulated by structures unless such bylaws or ordinances are 780 CMR shall be maintained in a safe,operable and promulgated in accordance with the provisions of sanitary condition. All service equipment,means of M.G.L.c. 143, §98. egress,devices and safeguards which are required by 780 CMR in a building or structure,or which were 102.4 General bylaw restrictions: When the required by a previous statute in a building or provisions herein specified for structural strength, structure when erected,altered or repaired, shall be adequate egress facilities, sanitary conditions, in good working order. equipment, light and ventilation, energy conservation or fire safety conflict with the local 103.2. Owner responsibility: The owner, as - general bylaws or ordinances, 780 CMR shall defined in 780 CMR 2, shall be responsible for control the construction or alteration of buildings compliance with provisions of 780 CMR 103.0. and structures unless such bylaws or ordinances are promulgated in accordance with the provisions 780 CMR 104.0 VALMM M.G.L.c. 143, §98. 104.1 General: The provisions.of 780 CMR are _ 102.5 Applicability to Existing Buildings severable, and if any of its provisions shall be held unconstitutional or otherwise invalid by any court of 102.5.1 General: Existing buildings and competent jurisdiction, the decision of such court structures shall comply with the provisions of shall not affect or impair any of the remaining 780 CMR 102.5 and all other applicable provisions. provisions of 780 CMR. 102.5.2 Unless specifically provided otherwise in 780 CMR 105.0 OFFICE OF THE 780 CMR,any existing building or structure shall INSPECTOR OF BUILDINGS OR meet and shall be presumed to meet the provisions BUILDING COMMLSSIONER of the applicable laws,codes,rules or regulations, 105.1 Appointment: The chief administrative bylaws or ordinances in effect at the time such officer of each city or town shall employ and building or structure was constructed or altered designate an inspector of buildings or building and shall be allowed to continue to be occupied commissioner(hereinafter inspector of buildings)as pursuant to its use and occupancy,provided that well as such other local inspectors as are reasonably the building or structure shall be maintained in necessary to assist the inspector of buildings to accordance with 780 CMR 103.0. • administer and enforce 780 CMR and of M.G.L. 102.5.3 In cases which applicable codes,rules or c. 22, § 13 A and the rules and regulations made regulations,bylaws or ordinances were not in use under the authority thereof The inspector of at the time of such construction or alteration,the buildings shall report directly to and be solely provisions of 780 CMR 103.0 shall apply. responsible to the appointing authority. 102.5.4 In cases where the provisions of 105.2 Alternate: The inspector of buildings is 780 CMR are less stringent than the applicable authorized to designate an alternate who shall codes, rules or regulations,bylaws or ordinances - exercise all the powers of the inspector of buildings at the time of such construction or substantial during the temporary absence, disability or conflict alteration,the applicable provisions of 780 CMR of interest of the inspector of buildings. Said shall apply, providing such application of these alternate shall be duly qualified pursuant to provisions does not result in danger to the public, 780 CMR 105.3. as determined by the building official. 102.5.5 Eristing buildings or parts or portions 1053 Qualifications of the Inspector of Buildings: thereof which are proposed to be enlarged, In accordance with the provisions of M.G.L. c. 143, altered, repaired or changed in use or occupancy § 3, each inspector of buildings shall have had at shall comply with the provisions of 780 CMR 34. least five years of experience in the supervision of building construction or design or in the alternative 102.5.6 Moved Structures: Buildings or a four year undergraduate degree in a field related to structures moved into or within the iurisdiction building construction or design, or any combination shall comply with the provisions of 780 CMR 34 of education and experience which would confer provided that any new system shall comply as far equivalent knowledge and ability, as determined by . as practicable with the requirements for new the BBRS. In addition each inspector of buildings 14 780 CMR-Sixth Edition 2/7/97 (Effective 2/28/97) 14 SOUTH STREET CONCORD,NH 03301 603225 4334 FAX 603 224-8350 HINCKLEY, ALLEN & SNYDER LLP Attorneys at Law ccarter@haslaw.com July 29, 2002 VIA FACSIMILE (978-740-9846) and FIRST CLASS MAIL Thomas St. Pierre Building Department 120 Washington St, 3`d Floor Salem, MA 01970. Re: Property at 6 Federal Court Dear Mr. St. Pierre: As you requested, I am sending you this letter to summarize the immediate steps that my client, Harlan Peabody, is taking to address your Department's concerns regarding the condition of Mr. Peabody's property on Federal Court. As discussed, Mr. Peabody has had the property appraised, and he also is in the process of having the boundary of the property surveyed. These steps are necessary as part of any extensive renovation effort. Additionally,Mr. Peabody is in the process of identifying a contractor who can assist in this project. Once a contractor has been retained and has provided me with his assessment of the condition of the Federal Court property and the repairs necessary to bring the buildings in compliance with the Building Code, I will forward that information to you. Finally, I am scheduled to personally meet with Mr. Peabody on the Federal Court property on Thursday, August 1, 2002. It is my hope that based on the above information, you will deem it appropriate to continue the currently scheduled August 14, 2002 hearing in this case at least until the latter part of September 2002. Mr. Peabody and I both look forward to continuing to cooperate with your office in addressing your concerns with the Federal Court property. Postponing any further court action will greatly promote our ability to achieve a mutually-agreeable remedial solution as soon as possible. 26 STATE STREET ❑ BOSTON,MASSACHUSETTS 02109-1775 ❑ 617 345-9000 0 FAX:617 345-9020 1500 FLEET CENTER 0 PROVIDENCE,RHODE ISLAND 02903-2393 0 401 274-2000 ❑ FAX 401 277-9600 HINCKLEY,ALLEN& SNYDER LLP Mr. Thomas St. Pierre July 29, 2002 Re: Property at 6 Federal Court Page 2 Thank you for your continued cooperation. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to give me a call. Sincerely, n �/ Christopher H. M. Carter CHMC/smh cc: Mr. Harlan Peabody #403300 !' 07/29/2082 11:42 2248350 HINCKLEY ALLEN SNYDE PAGE 01/93 Hinckley, Allen & Snyder LLP AtOa.,AtLaw 14 South Street,3rd Floor O CONCORD,New HANIPSWRE 03301. 603-2254334 0 FAX 603-224 8350 0 www,haslaw.com FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL SHEET FROM: Christopher . NL Carter CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This facsimile transmission and the accompanying documents DATE: Jul 29 2002 contain legally privileged confidential information, The Y information is intended only for the use of the recipient named below. If you are not an intended recipient, you are NUMBER OF FACIES TRANSMITTED hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distrbuttioe,or (INCLUDING COVER SHEET) eaploitetion of,or the taking of any action in reliance on,tie contents of this facsimile is strictly prohibited. If you have If you did not receive the indicated number ofpages or if any pages we received this facsimile in error,please notify us immediately illegible,please callus immediately at: (603)2254334 by telephone to arrange for the return of the original CLIENT: MATTER: documents to us at our expense_ TO: Thomas St. Pierre FIRM: Building Department RE: Property at 6 Federal Court PIIONT NUMBER: FAx NUMBER: 978-740-9846 ❑URGENT ❑PF.X OUR DISCUSSION 0 AS REQUESTED ❑PLEASE CALL TO DISCUSS PLEASE SEE BELOW NQTES/Comm-mals: 1500 FLEET CENTER 0 PROVIDENCE,RHO11E ISLAND 02903-2393 0 401-274-2000 C FAX 401-277-9600 28 STATE STRtta 0 BOSTON,MlassAcuWF.Trs 02109-1775 0 617 345-9000 0 FAX 617 345-9020 14 SOUTH STREET,3°1 Flom 11 CONCORD,Nsw HAMFsmt 033010 603-2254334 0 Fax 603-224-8350 "r 07/29/2002 11:42 2248350 HINCKLEY ALLEN SNYDE PAGE 02/03 1e aOUTH STREET cONCORo.NH 03101 603 2n�.�a3a FAX'.GQ:e2aP,5:p HINCKLEY,ALLEN & SNYDER LLP .Attorneys at Law ccarter&aslaw.com July 29,2002 VIA FACSAvnLE(978-740-9846) and FIRST CLASS MAIL Thomas St. Pierre Sodding Department 120 Washington St, P Floor Salem,MA 01970 Re: Property at 6 Federal Court Dear Mr. St.Pierre: As you requested, I am sending you this letter to summarize the immediate steps that my client,Harlan Peabody, is taking to address your Department's concerns regarding the condition of Mr.Peabody's property on Federal Court. As discussed,Mr. Peabody has had the property appraised, and he also is in the process of having the boundary of the property surveyed. These steps are necessary as part of any extensive renovation effort. Additionally,Mr.Peabody is in the process of identifying a contractor who can assist in this project. Once a contractor has been retained and has provided me with his assessment of the condition of the Federal Court property and the repairs necessary to bring the buildings in compliance with the Building Code, I will forward that information to you. Finally, 1 am scheduled to personally meet with Mr.Peabody on the Federal Court property on Thursday,August 1, 2002. It is my hope that based on the above information,you will deem it appropriate to continue the currently scheduled August 14, 2002 hearing in this case at least until the latter part of September 2002- Mr. Peabody and I both look forward to continuing to cooperate with your office in addressing your concerns with the Federal Court property. Postponing any further court action will greatly promote our ability to achieve a mutually-agreeable remedial solution as soon as possible. 26STATESTREET ❑ 6OSTOKMrSSACHUSE3 $02108.1775 ❑ 617345-9000 ❑ FAX:51T,145.40W 1500FLEETCENTER 0 ❑ 401274-2000 ❑ FAH:401277-9600 07/29/2002 11:42 2246350 HINCKLEY ALLEN SNYDE PACE 03/03 HINCKLEY,ALLEN&SM-DER LLP Mr. 'Phomas St. Pierre July 29, 2002 Re: Property at 6 Federal Court Page 2 Thank you for your continued cooperation. If you have any questions,please do not hesitate to give me a call. Sincerely, Christopher H.M. Carter CHMC/smh cc: Mr. Harlan Peabody #40330 14 SOUTH STREET CONCORD,NH 03301 603225 4334 FAX 603 224-8350 HINCKLEY,ALLEN & SNYDER LLP Attorneys at Law ccarter@haslaw.com August 7, 2002 VIA FACSIMILE (978-740-9846) and FIRST CLASS MAIL Thomas St. Pierre Building Department 120 Washington St, 3`d Floor Salem, MA 01970 Re: Property at 6 Federal Court Dear Mr. St. Pierre: This letter will confirm our agreement that the Salem District Court hearing regarding the 6 Federal Court property, originally scheduled for August 14, 2002, will not take place on that date. As we discussed, Harlan Peabody has engaged builders to provide an assessment of the immediate steps needed to bring the property in compliance with the Building Code, and I will forward that assessment to you as soon as it is available. Thank you for your continued cooperation. Please do not hesitate to call me if you have any questions or wish to discuss this matter further. Sincerely, Christoer H. M. Carter CHMC/smh e cc: Mr. Harlan Peabody #404525 28 STATE STREET ❑ BOSTON,MASSACHUSETTS 02109-1775 ❑ 617345-9000 ❑ FAX:617 345-9020 1500 FLEET CENTER 0 PROVIDENCE,RHODE ISLAND 02903-2393 11 401274-2000 ❑ FAX:401 277-9600 CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC PROPERTY DEPARTMENT 3 - 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR SALEM, MA 01970 TEL. (978)745-9595 EXT. 380 'OMnaB FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. LISOVICZ, JR. MAYOR ®py September 3, 2002 Hinckley, Allen and Snyder LLP ATTN: Christopher Carter 14 South Street Concord, N.H. 03301 RE: 6 Federal Street Court Please be advised, I have asked the Clerk Magistrate to postpone a hearing on 6 Federal Street Court until October 15, 2002. Hopefully, this matter will be resolved by that date. Sincerely, Thomas St. Pierre Acting Building Inspector cc: Mayors Office Tom Phillbin Councillor Flynn KNEELAND CONSTRUCTION.CORPORATION 407R MYSTIC AVE SUITE 34B-MEDFORD MA 02155 TEL 781393-9899 FAX 781393-0601 www.kneelandconstruction.com September 18,2002 Mr. Harlan Peabody 5 Federal Court Salem,MA 01970 RE: 5 Federal Court Property Dear Mr. Peabody, I have made an inspection of your property at 5 Federal Court in Salem, Massachusetts. There exists a number of safety/repair/code issues which should be addressed and are listed in the attached report. In addition to the report, I have noticed many window sills missing or rotted. These do not fall under the category of a safety or structural issue. These mostly exist where there is a boarded window; I suggest that these sills be repaired in kind when you replace the window itself. I have also made a visual inspection of both the inside and the outside of the existing carriage house structure. The building is in a serious state of disrepair with multiple structural failures including a collapse of the 2"d floor within the structure. This building is beyond repair and should be demolished in a timely fashion. It would be possible to save the front fagade of the building if it can be braced from the adjacent property side of the building. I understand this may be an option you choose to save some of the historical significance of the structure. I trust that this information will help you to progress with your property. Sincerely, t:a Call O. DUmaS Kneeland Construction Corp. Builders License#CS 042144 14 SOUTH STREET CONCORD,NH 03301 603225 4334 FAX.603 224-8350 HINCKLEY,ALLEN & SNYDER LLP Attorneys at Law cearter@haslaw.com September 26, 2002 Thomas St. Pierre Building Department 120 Washington St, 3rd Floor Salem, MA 01970 Re: 6 Federal Court Property Dear Mr. St. Pierre: Enclosed please find a report by Carl Dumas of Kneeland Construction Corporation regarding his inspection of Mr. Harlan Peabody's property at 6 Federal Court in Salem, Massachusetts. The report indicates various steps that should be taken to address safety/repair/code issues pertaining to the property. Mr. Peabody will proceed to address these issues. I would appreciate the opportunity to speak with you directly about the mechanics of implementing a remedial plan for the property. Sincerely, Christopher H. M. Carter CHMC/smg Enclosure cc: Mr. Harlan Peabody #410610 28 STATE STREET ❑ BOSTON,MASSACHUSETTS 02109-1775 ❑ 617 345-9000 ❑ FAX 617 345-9020 1500 FLEET CENTER 0 PROVIDENCE,RHODE ISLAND 02903-2393 0 401 274-2000 0 FAX:401 277-9600 CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC PROPERTY DEPARTMENT $ 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR SALEM, MAO 1970 TEL. (978) 745-9595 EXT. 380 °�'tinus FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. MAYOR September 30, 2002 Hinckley, Allen & Sayder L.L.P. Christopher Carter 14 South Street Concord, N.H. 03301 RE: 6 Federal Street Court Dear Mr. Carter: I am in receipt of your letter and report dated September 26, 2002. The survey and estimates are a step in the right direction. At this time, I would like to add that 6 Federal Street Court is in a Historic District. Subsequently, any work that is performed on this property needs approval from the Historic Commission. The contact person for the Historic Commission is Jane Guy. Her telephone number is 978-945-9595 x 311. Please contact her directly to facilitate the permitting process. Sincerely, Thomas St. Pierre Acting Building Commissioner cc: Mayors Office Tom Phillbin Councillor Flynn 14 SOUTH STREET CONCORD,NH 03301 603225 4334 FAX:603 224-8350 HINCKLEY,ALLEN & SNYDER LLP Attorneys at Law ecarter@haslaw.com December 4, 2002 VIA FACSIMILE and FIRST CLASS MAIL Thomas St. Pierre Building Department 120 Washington St, 3`1 Floor Salem, MA 01970 Re: 6 Federal Court Property Dear Mr. St. Pierre: As we discussed yesterday, I am providing you with this letter to outline the efforts Mr. Berkley Peabody has taken to address your Department's concerns with respect to the 6 Federal Court property, and to summarize our plan to further advance this process. As I explained, Mr. Peabody has focused his attention on the carriage house located on the 6 Federal Court property. As your previous reports and correspondence have noted, the carnage house is in serious disrepair and requires the most extensive attention. It is Mr. Peabody's hope that he can preserve and fully rehabilitate this structure. To accomplish this, he has retained a local architect, Mr. Staley McDermet, and has been working with Mr. McDermet over the past one and a half months to develop a plan to restore the carriage house. Mr. Peabody also has retained local counsel in Salem to provide further guidance on obtaining the necessary approval from the Salem Historic Commission and other city agencies. I have spoken to Mr. McDermet, who advised that he is in the process of preparing a submission to the Historic Commission. Separately, while the brick structure at 6 Federal Court appears to require far less attention, Mr. Peabody has begun taking steps to address the concerns you raised this past fall. In particular, he has replaced the windowpanes that you identified as requiring attention, and he has retained a carpenter to assist in performing other necessary, immediate repairs. 28 STATE STREET ❑ BOSTON,MASSACHUSETTS 02109-1775 ❑ 617345-9000 ❑ FAX:617 345-9020 1500 FLEET CENTER ❑ PROVIDENCE,RHODE ISLAND 02903-2393 ❑ 401274-2000 0 FAX:401 277-9600 . i Mr. Thomas St. Pierre December 4, 2002 Re: Property at 6 Federal Court Page 2 I appreciate your continued cooperation. If at any time you have questions or concerns about this process,please do not hesitate to call me. Sincerely, Christo�ier H. NI. Carter CHMC/dll cc: Mr. Berkley Peabody #419202 12/04/2002 16: 29 2248359 HINCKLEY ALLEN SNYDE PAGE: 02/03 i 14 5CQTI i STFE1' OONCORO,NH 0301 G03&2€-4331 PAX:503112E-5d80 HINCKLEY,ALLEN & SNYDER LLP Attorneys at Law ccarter@ hastaw.com December 4,2002 VIA FACSIMILE and FIRST CLASS MAIL. Thomas St. Pierre Building Department 120 Washington St,3"a Floor Salem,MA 01970 Re: 6 Federal Court Property Dear Mr. St.Pierre; As we discussed yesterday,I am providing you with this letter to outline the efforts Mr.Berkley Peabody has taken to address your Depar'tment's concerns with respect to the 6 Federal Court property, and to summarize our plan to further advance this process- As I explained,Mr, Peabody has focused his attention on the carriage house located on the 6 Federal Court property. As your previous reports and correspondence have noted, the carriage house is in serious disrepair and requires the most extensive attention. It is Mr.Peabody's hope that he can preserve and fully rehabilitate this structure. To accomplish this,he has retained a local architect,Mr. Staley McDermet, and has been working with Mr.IvlcDermet over the past one and a half months to develop a plan to restore the carriage house. W.Peabody also has retained local counsel in Salem to provide further guidance on obtaining the necessary approval from the Salem Historic Commission and other city agencies. I have spoken to Mr. McDermet,who advised that he is in the process of preparing a submission to the Historic Commission. Separately,while the brick structure at 6 Federal Court appears to require far less attention,Mr.Peabody has begun taking steps to address the concerns you raised this past fall. In particular,he has replaced the windowpanes that you identified as requiring attention, and be has retained a carpenter to assist in performing other necessary, immediate repairs. , 29 STATE STREET L7 BOSTON,MAE3nCnU5ETT5 021U,./T]g ❑ 617 344.9000 ❑ FAX 617 345-8020 1500 FLEET CENTER 12 PROVIDENCE RHOOF ISLAND 02903+2393 O 401,274-2000 O FA-X:401 M4600 12/04/2002 16:29 2248350 HINCKLEY ALLEN STIYDE PAGE 03/03 Mr. Thomas St.Pierre December 4. 2002 Re; Property at 6 Federal Court Page 2 I appreciate your continued cooperation. If at any time you have questions or concerns about this process,please do not hesitate to call me. Sincerely,2 isto�Ut ier H. M. Carter CHMC/dlI cc; Mr. Berkley Peabody #414202 Thursday;December 12,2602 5:32 PM To:Thomas Si.Pierre From:Staley McOemiel,978-745-4969 Page:i cd i STALEY McDERMET ASSOCIATES PRESERVATION.&RESTORATION ARCIRTECTURR 175 Essex Street Salem,Massachusetts 019+0.3726 978.745.4969 December 11,2002 Thomas St. Pierre, Building Inspector Status Building Department,City of Salem 6 Federal Court 120 Washington Street Salem,Massachusetts Salem, Massachusetts 01470 Job No. 0227 Dear Mr. St,Pierre: Last week.I called to update you as to the progress on the Peabody's property on Federal Court. As you requested,this is a summary of the present status. Early last month I was retained by Mr. &Mrs.Peabody to prepare drawings for the conversion of the carriage house located behind the brick house at No. 6 Federal Street into a single family dwelling. To date I have measured and photographed the carriage horse and have prepared erdsting conditions drawings that include a plan and the four exterior elevations. I have also meet with the Peabodys about three times, While I am now preparing preliminary schemes for the conversion of the carriage house, Mr.and Mrs.Peabody are not available for progress- consultation until the end of December, As a result,the schemes cannot be finalized until they have had a chance to review them Additionally, some revisions will likely be required alter their review. The conversion of the carriage house into a single family dwelling will require a Special Permit from the Salem Board of Appeals. Priorto submitting an application to the Board of Appeals, however,approval must be obtained from the Salem Historical Commission. The Historical Commission meets the first and third Wednesdays of the month, and the Commission requires submission of materials at the meeting prior to the meeting at which the project will be reviewed. Therefore,I anticipate that the materials will be finalized the middle of Januay,and will then be submitted to the Commission at either their second January meeting (for hearing at the first February meeting),or,at the latest,at their first February meeting(for hearing at the second February meeting). If youhave any questions,please feel free to contact me. Please pardon the fax,but my printer has been inoperable for over a week,and this is the only way I can get this letter out, Sincerely, Stctley.�tc�?7ef tvicet" Staley 1vIeDermet SMTsb cc: Mr.&Mrs.Berkley Peabody Christopher H. M.Carter-Hinckley,Allen&Snyder I March 19, 2003, Page 1 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES March 19, 2003 A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on March 19,2003 at 7:30 p.m.at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Messrs. Kasparian, Desrocher, Stevens, Mangifesti and Spang and Ms. Kilroy and Ms. Guy. 0 Washington Square The City of Salem submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace and add new benches within the Salem Common. Douglas Bollen,Director of Park and Recreation,represented the City. Mr.Bollen stated that the City has initiated a new bench donation program where a resident can finance the purchase of a bench that will have the name of their departed loved one on a plague. He stated that there are currently 3 different style benches on the Common. He provided a sketch indicating approximately where benches are currently located and stated that there are several areas where benches are missing and in disrepair. Mr. Bollen provided a catalog cut of a 6' cast iron and cedar bench(#57)being proposed for use on the column. He noted that it was the closest he could find in similarity to the existing benches. Mr. Bollen stated that he is looking for a blanket approval so he does not have to come back for each bench that someone finances. His intent is to fill in the areas where there are long stretches without benches. He currently has 3-4 commitments under the program. Ms. Kilroy asked if the locations were benches are missing will be replaced. Mr. Bollen replied in the affirmative and stated that they will also be adding benches in new locations. He noted that approximately 6-8 were knocked off the concrete pads by plows. Mr.Kasparian stated that it appeared that most were being installed along the perimeter of the Common. He asked if Mr. Bollen could identify the locations proposed for the first four benches. Mr. Bollen indicated two stretches of paths where they would be located. Mr. Kasparian asked if any existing would be taken away or replaced. Mr. Bollen replied in the negative. Mr. Stevens asked if they would pour new cement pads in the new locations. Mr. Bollen replied in the affirmative and stated that the pads which match the existing. Mr. Kasparian asked if the proposed bench will continue in the future when the existing benches need replacement. Mr. Bollen replied in the affirmative. Mr. Stevens stated that the benches on Essex Street had a center arm put in to keep the homeless from sleeping on the benches and that it was a bad retrofit and was concerned about the possibility for the new 6' benches. Mr. Bollen stated that he was not aware of the needs, had not considered it and felt it was a police issue. John Carr, 7 River Street, stated that the Commission is being asked to approve a prototype and that they should make sure that what is approved will be the right bench and that he shared Mr. Stevens' concerns. March 19, 2003, Page 2 Mr. Spang stated that it would be nice to see the actual bench. He stated that it looks like the existing benches have more details. Mr. Kasparian stated that the cost of the 8' split bench is over$1000. The six foot bench is just over$700. Mr.Kasparian stated that he would like to visit the site and see what is there. He noted that he wanted to be sure that the new benches are durable. Mr. Stevens stated that he wondered if the existing split bench was available in a two arm style,noting that it appears a little more durable than the proposed. Ms. Kilroy stated that the program seems like a great idea. She asked if it were possible to get the 8' split benches and have two donors per bench. Mr. Bollen stated that he did not think the donors would want to share. Mr. Mangifesti stated that the City may get a better price break if the vendor knows the City will be purchasing more. Mr. Spang stated that placement is also critical and that he would like to see a master plan. Mr. Kasparian stated that there is not enough detail on the diagram to know where the benches are going. Mr. Stevens asked how many cement pads are vacant. Mr. Bollen stated that they have been covered with snow and that he was not sure. Mr. Kasparian stated that it could be okay to install a new bench wherever an existing concrete pad is located, but that the Commission would need to review the location where new pads are to be poured. Mr. Stevens asked if Mr. Bollen could look into getting the double style in a 6' length. Mr. Spang stated that the bench should match the size of the cement pad. Mr. Stevens made a motion to continue the application to the next meeting. Mr. Mangifesti seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried. 1-6 Federal-COurt Harlan and Joanna Peabody submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to undertake alterations to the carriage house at 6 Federal Court to convert it to a single family dwelling. Drawings were submitted. George Atkins and Staley McDermet represented the applicants. Atty. Atkins stated that there needs to be a more global approach to the property than just converting it to a single family dwelling. He stated that he recommend to the client that they apply to the Historical Commission first and then see if the clients design ideas can be married with the Commission's and the public's comments before proceeding to the Board of Appeals. Atty.Atkins stated he has been made aware of the history of both structures which have been requested to be improved by the Building Department and he hopes to meet with the Building Inspector on site to address the structural concerns, begin the zoning process and then come back to the Historical Commission to receive a Certificate of Appropriateness. r March 19, 2003, Page 3 Mr. McDermet stated that the carriage house is in an advanced state of disrepair. He noted that the Peabody's intend to move into the carriage house. The proposal is to substantially alter the rear with the front being preserved. Everything from 5' back from the front will be new. The material will masonry, probably stucco, something to disappear from view as requested by the owner due to fire concerns and the desire to protect antiques housed inside. There will be a recessed porch in the rear with splayed windows with large glass doors. There will be operable shutters and there will be four pilasters which will be shutters to close off the porch when the Peabody's are away. Mr. Kasparian asked the timetable for the construction. Mr. McDermet stated that he has not discussed a timetable with the client, but felt it would be immediate. Mr. Stevens asked if the other elevations were visible. Mr. McDermet replied in the affirmative,but noted that one would need to be looking for the structure. Mr. Spang asked what is salvageable or to be salvaged from the existing. Mr. McDermet stated that they will only salvage the front using pieces salvaged from the rest of the building. Mr. Spang asked if the reason to go with a completely new structure on 3 sides due to they're not being salvageable or because of the desire for masonry. Mr:McDermet noted that anything is salvageable if given enough money and noted that the building is in advanced disrepair. Mr. Kasparian asked if the carriage house has a cellar. Mr. McDermet stated that at one time there was a cellar, but it has been filled and has an asphalt floor. Mr. McDermet noted that the roofing is gone and that water is coming in through the roof. William Wrightson, 131 Federal Street,questioned that if the owners are antique collectors,why they would let the buildings deteriorate to the state they are in. Atty.Atkins stated that he did not know the answer,but noted that they are here to resolve the deterioration. Mr. Wrightson stated that the Federal Street Neighborhood Association is opposed to consideration of these plans until the main house is restored. John Carr, 7 River Street, stated that he applauds the concept for retention of the building and noted that, historically, the carriage house was built simultaneously with 95-97 Federal Street. He stated that he believed that in the 1940's it became a nursing home and was later subdivided and sold to the Peabody's. Mr. Carr stated that the carriage house ordinance was written to make it easier for them to be preserved by allowing them to be converted into single family homes. Mr. Carr suggested that there be a site visit. He stated that he was pleased that the Peabody's chose Mr. McDermet as the architect,but was concerned that the proposal was for essentially a new building with new materials. He noted that the thrust of the ordinance is to preserve antique carriage houses which could pose a problem for the Board of Appeal. He added that the owners have not maintained their buildings and was concerned whether they have the ability to complete the project. Mr. Carr stated that he felt there should be some assurance that all work will be completed, including the main house. Mark Dufour,4 Federal Court, stated that both buildings are an eyesore and a safety hazard. He stated that Kneeland Construction did an assessment of repairs needed. He stated that he felt both buildings should be March 19, 2003, Page 4 linked and the safety hazards addressed. He noted that the chimneys are teetering. Eric Olsen, 3 Federal Court, stated that he felt the carriage house should be restored, not rebuilt, but if masonry is to be allowed,it should match the main house(brick),and not introduce a new kind of masonry. Jane Arlander, 93 Federal Street, stated that the building is animal infested and the neighbors had to pay to have the animals removed. She noted that it is also a fire safety issue. Ms. Arlander stated that she agreed that the main house needs to be addressed. She also questioned how the carriage house will be accessed. Ms. Arlander stated that, with regard to quality of life, there should not be a lot of congestions and was concerned about adding another single family home. Alicia Hart,47 Washington Square, stated that she was glad to hear there is interest to work on the carriage house and that she hoped the owners would not be frightened off if required to do the main house work first. She noted that the new design lacks dormers and that there is a whole new style on the back that looks mis- matched. Betsy Burns,22 Beckford Street, concurred that the carriage house should be restored rather than changed. She stated that the mansard roof should be restored and consistent all the way around. She stated that she felt that both properties should be fixed at the same time. She noted that she was happy and encouraged that the Peabody's were proceeding. Edwina Drummond, 95 Federal Street, stated that she felt there should be a site visit with the building inspector. She stated that she would be surprised if anything is salvageable. Arty.Atkins stated that access stated that access will only be from Federal Street Court. He noted that there could be an argument for demolition and that they are trying an approach to preserve and that he and Mr. McDermet are trying to work with the Peabody's. He noted that the Building Department's jurisdiction is only with the building code and not with aesthetics. He stated that the design will need to accommodate the Building Department,Historical Commission,neighbors and owners. He stated that his hope is to address all the safety issues in both buildings and that the would be happy to have a site visit. He asked if the Commission would comment on the issue of restoration versus new construction. Mr. Mangifesti stated that he would like to know more before he comments and that a site visit would be very important. Mr. Stevens stated that he would like to see the original form be retained. He was not in favor of switching materials. He stated that he would like to see it remain as is, with maybe adding windows and doors for livability. He stated that he preferred the mansard roof be retained along with the foundation and the proportions. Mr. Stevens stated that the inset balcony, columns, etc. is a far departure but that he may be willing to incorporate some of the owners new details. He stated he would like to see how decrepit the building is. Mr. Kasparian stated that the Commission's guidelines site the Secretary of Interior's standards for rehabilitation. He questioned if they are dealing with new construction as a matter of necessity due to the condition of the building. He stated that he would want to look into whether the carriage house should relate more to 95-97 Federal Street. Mr. Kasparian stated that he did not want to pre-empt any action to address the Building Department's citations for making the building safe. He stated that developing a global approach should be done as soon as possible. March 19, 2003, Page 5 Mr. Spang asked if a Certificate of Non-applicability will be submitted for the repair of the main house. Atty. Atkins stated that there is an intent to repair but there may not be a restoration. He stated that he has advised the Peabody's to address all safety issues and that the plan is to fashion some solution to address both buildings. Mr. Carr stated that there is precedent on Lafayette Street (Jon Ronan) where the Commission required measured drawings to be prepared and the carriage house was rebuilt. Mr. Spang stated that he would have a difficult time supporting this design and this approach. He stated that he preferred to replicate what is there or rebuild if necessary. He added that he would want to link the two buildings together. Airy. Atkins agreed that the Building Inspector's issue must be addressed,but added that he did not believe that aesthetic improvements could be required by the Commission. Ms. Spang noted that repairs on the main structure will need to conform to the Commission's guidelines. Atty. Atkins was in agreement. Mr. Kasparian stated that his critical concern was life safety and demolition by neglect. Marie Olsen, 3 Federal Court, stated that she has not seen any work done to the main house in six years and that she has had to ward off homeless individuals and bees. She stated she was concerned that not enough will be done to the main structure. She noted that the chimneys are ready to come down and that areas have had to be bordered up due to animals and squatters. Ms. Hart sated that the property has a long history of neglect, but that she had a concern that there not be obstructionists. She noted that safety concerns clearly need to be addressed. Arty. Atkins stated that he is seeking voluntary solutions from the client to address safety issues, but noted that the City has the means to force the safety issues. David Williams,342 Essex Street stated that he did not have a problem with the design in general. He noted that the masonry could be concealed in ivy. He added that he felt there was a flaw in the roof line-that there is not enough detail to carry the face through, along with the dormer windows. He stated that he was conflicted,but if the building can't be saved this could be a compromise if the roof and dormer were carried through. Ms. Olsen stated that if the carriage house cannot be saved,they should concentrate on the main house. Ms. Drummond stated that she was concerned the owners are putting up road blocks and coming up with a solution that they know will fail and will then blame the city and the public when it fails. Atty. Atkins stated that there is no lack of good faith and that he will not bring the design to the Board of Appeal until they come up with some sort of an agreement amongst all parties. Mr.Desrocher made a motion to continue the application to a site visit on Thursday,March 27 at 5:00 p.m. and then to the next meeting on April 2, 2003. Ms. Kilroy seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. March 19, 2003,Page 6 Mr. Kasparian stated that he would like the objective out of the site visit to be to encourage the submission of a Certificate of Non-applicability to address life safety issues. Other Business Mr. Desrocher made a motion to approve the minutes of February 5, 2003, February 19, 2003 and March 5, 2003. Mr. Spang seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Ms. Guy stated that,through Survey and Planning Grant funding, a consultant has been hired to prepare a preservation and maintenance study for Fort Lee and Fort Pickering and asked if the Commission had any concerns or information that they would like passed on to the consultant. The Commission will be provided a draft of the report when it is ready. Ms. Guy stated that the City is applying for new Survey and Planning Grant funds to prepare a design guidelines manual and provided a letter of support for the Chair to sign. Ms. Guy read a letter from Massachusetts Historical Commission to the Massachusetts State College Building Association finding that the proposed new residence building will unlikely effect historic resources. Mr. Stevens was in disagreement and felt it will impact the work done on the Art Deco building. Mr. Spang suggested the Commission get a copy of the Project Notification Form. There being no further business, Mr. Mangifesti made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Desrocher seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Respectfully submitted, Jane A. Guy Clerk of the Commission Salem Historical Commission 6 Federal Court Timeline 2/27/03 - Received application for Certificate of Appropriateness for alterations to carriage house to convert to single family dwelling 3/19/03 - Historical Commission meeting - proposal presented by applicant representatives; public comment received, application continued to a site visit and to the meeting of 4/2/03 3/27/03 - Site visit 4/2/03 - Historical Commission meeting; Applicant's representatives requested continuance to 4/16/03 4/16/03 - Historical Commission meeting; Revised drawings submitted &reviewed; applicant's representative requested continuance to 5/7/03 5/2/03 - Received application for Certificate of Non-applicability for repairs to brick building 5/7/03 -Historical Commission meeting; no applicant nor representative present, unanimous vote to deny without prejudice, reviewed Certificate of Non-applicability application 5/13/03 - Certificate of Non-applicability issued for various repairs to 6 Federal Court main brick house and clapboard addition 5/13/03 - Denial of Certificate of Appropriateness without prejudice for alterations to carriage house to convert to single family dwelling due to applicants/representative not present and not submitting request to continue March 27, 2003, Page 1 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES - SITE VISIT March 27, 2003 A site visit was held on March 27,2003 at 5:00 p.m. at 6 Federal Court, Salem,MA. Present were Messrs. Kasparian,Desrocher,Stevens,Mangifesti and Ms. Guy. Also present were Building Inspector Thomas St. Pierre,City Councillor Regina Flynn,Architect Staley McDermot and interested parties Edwina Drummond, 95 Federal Street, Salem and Bill Whalen, 48 Atlantic Avenue, Swampscott. John Carr, 7 River Street, joined later. Mr. McDermot stated that he and Mr. St. Pierre reviewed the work items that need to be done in order to make the property safe and weather tight. On the main house,the North chimney is okay,but the remaining two need to be secured. The one on the ell, is okay. Other necessary repair work includes loose bricks and open mortar joints at the three corners of the foundation, rotted sills, two cracked and shifting lintels and broken window panes. The gutter section on the east needs removal and replacement,the cornice on the ell needs to be secured from the weather and the main vestibule is missing a side. The entrance stairs should be temporarily removed until occupancy. Councillor Flynn asked about the roof. Mr. St. Pierre stated that it would need to be weather-tight. Mr. Desrocher stated that the main house bulkhead has a big hole. Mr. McDermet stated that the building could be made weather-tight, but the work may not be historical. Mr. St. Pierre stated that he has reviewed the building code and that he can tie in the historical commission guidelines and other required bylaws. Mr. McDermet asked if it were possible to temporarily fix the conditions and then meet the historical guidelines. Ms. Guy stated that it could be possible, but if it is not met within the timeframe provided by the Commission,it would become a violation,subject to the Commission's enforcement. Ms.Guy noted that an escrow could be put in place to guarantee the work. Mr. McDermet stated that the worse case scenario is that the owner's demolish. Ms. Guy stated that the Demolition Delay Ordinance does not apply to properties in an historic district and that the Commission can outright deny demolition. Mr. St. Pierre stated that receivership is also one of the City's options. Mr. Stevens suggested tying in the main house to the occupancy permit of the carriage house. Mr. Carr arrived at this time. Mr. St.Pierre stated that,in his opinion,the carriage house work required was beyond economical repair,but maybe not to the owners. He noted that the structure was relatively straight. Mr. Kasparian stated that the roof of the carriage house is open in several places and framing may be March 27, 2003, Page 2 damaged. Mr. Carr stated that from the exterior,the lines are better than two thirds of the homes on River Street. He stated that the only way to determine structural integrity is to see the interior. Mr. St. Pierre stated that, for safety,he did not think anyone should go inside. He stated that he assumed a structural report should be provided before a determination is made. He noted that he has sited the property for failure to maintain. Ms. Drummond stated that getting it cleaned up and weather-tight is important and noted that she was concerned about fire safety, animals and animal dung. There being no further business, Mr. Mangifesti made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Desrocher seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Respectfully submitted, Jane A. Guy Clerk of the Commission a April 2, 2003, Page 1 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES April 2, 2003 A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on April 2, 2003 at 7:30 p.m. at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Messrs. Kasparian, Desrocher, Stevens, Mangifesti and Ms. Guy. 0 Washin on Square In continuation of a previous meeting, the City of Salem submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace and add new benches within the Salem Common. Douglas Bollen,Director of Park and Recreation, represented the City. Mr. Bollen stated that he found the phone number for the bench manufacturer on one of the benches and found the exact bench. The 6' bench is $699 with or without the center arm and the 8' is $899 with or without the center arm. He stated that he preferred the 6' without the arm. Mr.Mangifesti stated that he would like the City to continue with the same style bench whether it is 6' or 8'. Mr. Kasparian suggested the option of using two 6' benches side by side, 1' apart. He added that he would be willing to approve locations were there are existing bench pads. Mr. Mangifesti made a motion to approve the Titan Faneuil Hall Bench B-76 in wood to be installed in locations along the perimeter of Salem Common where there is evidence of a previous existing bench,with the option to install one 8' bench (with center arm) or two 6' benches, 1' apart. The motion is also to delegate Commission Desrocher to approve any new bench locations. Mr. Stevens seconded the motion. All were in favor and the motion so carried. 6 Federal o rt In continuation of a previous meeting,Harlan and Joanna Peabody submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to undertake alterations to the carriage house at 6 Federal Court to convert it to a single family dwelling. George Atkins represented the applicants. Chairman Kasparian read a letter in to the record from City Councillor Regina Flynn. Atty. Atkins stated that they are requesting a continuance, due to his being overly optimistic on the timeframe to develop plans. He noted that Staley McDermet met with the Building Inspector and they need to meet with the contractor followed by discussion with the owners and their counsel. Mr. Stevens made a motion to continue the application to the next meeting. Mr. Desrocher seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. 59 '/z Summer Street Beverly Montgomery submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for paint colors at 59 '/z Summer Street. The body will be custom paint chip provided, the trim will be Essex Green and Antique White. Photographs were provided indicated that the paint scheme will be the same as the Narbonne House. April 2, 2003, Page 2 Mr.Mangifesti made a motion to approve the body color as submitted(to match the Narbonne House),with doors to be Essex Green and the sash and trim to be Antique white. Mr. Desrocher seconded the motion,all were in favor and the motion so carried. Other Business Ms. Guy stated that she has received a written request from the Curriers at 46 Broad Street requesting an extension on their Certificate of Appropriateness dated 5/21/98 until September. Mr. Mangifesti made a motion to approve the extension until September 30, 2003. Mr. Stevens seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Ms. Guy read a letter from Massachusetts Historical Commission to Salem State College Building finding the proposed flagpole to have no adverse effect. Ms. Guy noted that she checked the plans for the new residence building and noted it was 325' away from the Art Deco building (12- & 3-story building), is a 3- and 4-story residence and that several neighborhood meetings were held with the Ward Councillor regarding the project. It has received Conservation Commission approvals as well. She also noted that she received a letter of opinion from the attorneys for the Massachusetts State College Building Authority indicated that they are exempt from local land use regulations (i.e. Demolition Delay Ordinance). There being no further business, Mr. Mangifesti made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Desrocher seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Respectfully submitted, Jane A. Guy Clerk of the Commission April 16, 2003, Page 1 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION MINUTES April 16, 2003 A meeting of the Salem Historical Commission was held on April 16,2003 at 7:30 p.m.at 120 Washington Street, Salem, MA. Present were Messrs. Kasparian, Spang, Mangifesti and Ms. Kilroy and Ms. Guy. Mr. Kasparian announced that all four votes would be needed in order to approve any application. 60-62 Washington Square Jerold and Regina Flynn submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for paint colors at their home at 60-62 Washington Square. Ms. Guy read a request from the applicants to continue the application to the next meeting. Mr. Mangifesti made a motion to continue the application to the next meeting. Ms. Kilroy seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. 6 Fedeial`Court In continuation of a previous meeting,Harlan and Joanna Peabody submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to undertake alterations to the carriage house at 6 Federal Court to convert it to a single family dwelling. Atty. George Atkins and Staley McDermet, architect, represented the applicants. Mr. Atkins stated that he did not expect a decision tonight. He noted that his client is prepared to go ahead with the required repairs to the main structure and that an application will be prepared and submitted. He stated that some progress has been made with regard to the design of the carriage house and that he would like the Commission to comment on the rehabilitation of existing versus demolish and reconstruction. Staley McDermet presented revised drawings. Mr.McDermet noted that the front of the carriage house will be retained and the two sides will be removed and rebuilt to its present design. The rear will be a substantial departure from the existing. The flat part of the roof(ridge)will be longer. The west elevation will have a ridge. The mansard arch will be slightly different on the rear portion of the sides There will be a flat break in the mansard from the dormer to the rear. Mr. Atkins stated that the last time masonry was discussed and has since been abandoned. The current materials will remain. Mr. Spang noted that the south elevation floor line goes through the side windows. Mr. McDermet stated that the windows will be blocked on the side which is usually done with stuccoed plywood painted flat black, so as to be non-reflective. This was previously done at Old town Hall when the elevator was added. Mr. Kasparian asked if nine windows will be blanked. Mr. McDermet replied in the affirmative, stating that there will be no working windows on three sides. April 16, 2003, Page 2 Mr. Spang asked if the doors on the north would be inoperable. Mr. McDermet replied in the affirmative. He noted that the east elevation will have a camouflaged door. Mr. Spang asked if the rear windows are shuttered. Mr. McDermet replied in the affirmative and stated that the center is recessed glass. Mr. Spang asked if the glass proposed is 8' by 8'. Mr. McDermet replied in the affirmative. Mr. Kasparian asked if the foundation is retained. Mr. McDermet stated that it is retained on three sides. Jane Arlander,93 Federal Street,asked what the materials will be on the rear. Mr. McDermet stated that he believed it would be stucco and glass. Mr. Kasparian read from the Commission's guidelines and noted that the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation in the guidelines state that deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. He stated that he did not feel the proposed meets the guideline. He added that he was concerned about blanking windows on the entire building and felt that in certain circumstances, one or two windows could blanked. Mr. Kasparian stated that blanking windows on the main fagade will make it appear as a big, black box at night. He stated that there should be some natural light. Mr. Atkins stated that historically, a carriage house would not be lit. Mr. Kasparian noted that the proposed design preserves original materials, but aesthetically all of the windows which are visible from a public way will be permanently blanked, which will force the interior space to always be dark unless new windows are added in the future. Mr. Mangifesti stated that this would be basically building a stage set with a home on the other side. Mr. McDermet stated that the proposed floor framing goes through the existing first and second floor windows. Mr. Spang asked if the structure is rebuilt without adding the third floor, would the client looses storage. Mr. McDermet replied in the affirmative. Mr. Atkins stated that the client has made considerable concessions from the original proposal. Mr. Spang stated that removing what is rotted and replacing it is standard practice,but felt the proposal was an unusual mixture. Mr. Spang asked if there is a basement. Mr. McDermet stated that it appears that there may have been. Mr. Spang (stated) suggested moving the attic storage to the basement in order to keep the original floor heights. He noted that,as proposed with the floors going through the windows,if someone else were to buy the property, it could not be returned to its original condition. He stated that blanked windows are not reversible if there is floor framing there. April 16, 2003, Page 3 Mr.Mangifesti suggested returning the mansard to the rear,which would soften the alteration to the rear and retaining the floor levels. Mr. McDermet stated that he provided a scheme with the mansard and it was not acceptable to the client. Mr.Mangifesti asked if storage in the basement would be acceptable to the client. Mr.McDermet stated that he has not pursued it. Mr. Spang stated that new footings would likely have to be pursued either way. Mr. Kasparian stated that it may be possible to put a simple utilitarian addition on the rear or to extend the wall of the rear. This would provide better access and space for storage than the 3`d floor attic space and there is precedent for this type of addition on the back of carriage houses. It could also eliminate the need to raise the roof and put new floor framing in front of all the windows. Mr. Spang stated that the South side is visible and although he felt it could be fundamentally different,the proposed was too different. He stated that he did not feel 8' x 8' sheets of glass were appropriate. He added that if the owner wants a(s) glassy wall, it should be presented as a sun porch or designed similar to other glassy walls in the district. Mr. Atkins stated that he did not feel the fagade was that visible,particularly when the trees are in bloom. Mr. Spang stated that he could support a large window but not 8' x 8' plate glass. He noted that he could not support a hidden door. Mr. Kasparian suggested adding a real door, matching the existing door on the west fagade in lieu of the camouflaged door. Mr. Spang noted that another possibility was to substitute a window for a door. Mr. Mangifesti made a motion to continue the application to the next meeting, conditional that a written waiver is submitted, and if a waiver is not received prior to the next meeting, the motion is to deny the application. Ms. Kilroy seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. 20 Beckford Street Brenda and Adam Schutz presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to reshingle the light gray north and west slopes of the main hipped roof to match the black shingles on the rest of the structure. Mr.Mangifesti made a motion to approve the application as submitted. Mr. Spang seconded the motion,all were in favor and the motion so carried. Also submitted was an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to replace the broken plastic gutter and downspouts on the front of the main structure with seamless heavy gauge aluminum gutter and downspouts. The gutter will by typical, approximately 4" deep. All will be painted to match the house color. The application is also to remove the plastic gutter on the west side without replacement. Mr. Kasparian stated that without a gutter on the west side,water would be shed on the sidewalk. He stated April 16, 2003, Page 4 that he preferred the gutter be continuous around so that the cornice is continuous. Mr. Schutz stated that he would need to add another downspout and that he was concerned with the neighbors not wanting a downspout draining into their yard. Mr. Spang stated that it may not require an additional downspout. Mr. Kasparian stated that the Commission usually requires .032 inch thick aluminum. Ms. Kilroy made a motion to approve the removal of plastic gutter on the front and west sides and replacement with .032 inch seamless aluminum with profile as per sketch and for the installation of two downspouts as proposed with the option of a third downspout on the west corner or in the rear. All to be painted the house color. 12 Gifford Court Elizabeth Mooney presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to remove and reconstruct an existing secondary egress with a new larger structure which will create a mudroom and will include a 4'x 6' wood entrance landing. The window of the (in the) structure will be 2 over 2 and the door will be a six panel, wood door. The application is also to add shutters to the house. Also with Ms. Mooney was Joel White. Drawings were provided. Mr. White stated that the new mudroom will be wood clapboard. Mr. Kasparian asked if the window will match the rest of the house and if the shutters will be wood,federal style. Mr. White replied in the affirmative, that the windows will be Brosco, 2 over 2. Mr. Mangifesti asked if the addition will have an asphalt shingle roof. Mr.White replied in the affirmative and stated that it will be black. Mr. Kasparian asked the paint color of the addition. Ms. Mooney stated that they intend to come back for vinyl siding removal and paint colors. The colors of the addition would match the proposed paint colors for the house. The body will be Alexandria Beige,the trim will be Monteray White and the shutters will be black. Mr. Kasparian stated that the lower part of the structure should have a skirtboard and cornerboard. He added that the rail spindles should not be in front of the bottom rail of the deck. Mr.Kasparian also suggested 1 ''/d' square balusters, 34"on center with horizontal Brosco molded top and bottom rail and pyramid cap on the post. Mr. White stated that the post will be 4" by 4". Mr. Kasparian stated that if the vinyl siding is to be removed,the comerboards of the new structure should match what is under the siding. Mr. White stated that he believed they were 8". Ms. Mooney stated that the vertical boards will be painted the body color and that the cornerboard, April 16, 2003, Page 5 skirtboard,balusters and railings will be painted the trim color. The stairs and decking will be stained brown mahogany. Mr. Kasparian stated that the vertical boards should match the existing (1x4 with '/2" space). Mr. Spang stated that he was finding the roof shape strange and preferred a shed roof. He stated that he would also need some detail as to the fascia and eave. He suggested matching the other porch. Mr. Kasparian stated that he felt the ridge should align with the other porch and match the pitch. He also suggested aligning up the new window with the one above. Mr. White stated that moving the window would defeat getting the additional closet space inside. Mr. Kasparian suggested providing the centered window location as an option. Mr. Spang made a motion to continue the application to the next meeting. Mr. Mangifesti seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. 39-41 Washington Square David Lomasney presented an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to remove 3 i/2 feet of wrought iron fence and a half-gate to make way for a two-car parking space on the Pleasant Street Court side of the house. Mr. Kasparian asked about the finial currently on the section to be removed. Mr. Lomasney stated that he will put it on the end of the fence. He stated that he also wants to temporarily remove the section of fence being pushed out by the tree, so that the fence stops&starts on each side of the tree. He stated that he will retain the fence portion for a time when the tree is removed. He will also repair the entire wrought iron fence as needed. Mr. Spang made to approve the repair of the fence as necessary and to remove the 3 %2' section and gate as noted on the drawing. The finial is to be reused. The motion is also to temporarily remove the section of the fence that the tree has pushed out(to be replaced when tree is removed). Frangoise McCoy, 24 Winter Street, stated that she was in favor of the application. The motion was voted on, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Mr. Lomasney also submitted an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to install a bathroom vent on the third floor, southeast corner. It will be a 6" x 6"unpainted copper vent which will be flush on the brick, 11' from the southeast corner and 7' down from the top of the bathroom window. The alternative is to install a 5 '/2" copper pipe through the slate roof, 15' high. Mr.Kasparian stated that the copper will corrode and stain the brick. He suggested a flush,louvered,plastic vent, painted to match the brick. Mr. Mangifesti made a motion to approve a flush, louvered,plastic vent,painted to match the brick,not to exceed 6" x 6". Ms. Kilroy seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. April 16, 2003, Page 6 Other Business Mr. Mangifesti made a motion to approve the minutes of March 19, 2003. Mr. Spang seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. There being no further business,Mr.Mangifesti made a motion to adjourn. Mr. Spang seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. Respectfully submitted, Jane A. Guy Clerk of the Commission RECEIVED MAY � 2 2003 DEPT.OF PLANNING& Salem Historical Commis UNffYOEVELOPMENr 120 Washington St..,SALEM.MASSACHUSETTS 01970 (978)745-9595 EXT.311 FAX(978)740.0404 APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF NON-APPLICABILITY Pursuant to the Historic District's Act (M.G.L. Chapter 40C) and the Salem Historical Commission Ordinance, application is hereby made for issuance of a Certificate of Non-Applicability for: ❑ Construction ❑ Moving ❑ Reconstruction ❑ Alteration ❑ Demolition ❑ Painting ❑ SignF Other as described n_below. District: /�'.f� j 11 _Building Construction Date,if known: Address 4 ofPropertyi �lKn ��/Y Name of Record Owner: n`J/� D �e,oW1 - A r/�z7; ' 0� Description of Work Proposed: 'J Signature of Ownet� iy9IN�/� 930 � U�_ y/! �tT V7 —74V- Mailing Mailing address:�-<;3 re'))"�LL Stag Zip: L 43 NORTH MAIN STREET CONCORD.NH 03301-4934 603 225-4334 FAX:603 224-8350 HINCKLEY, ALLEN & SNYDER LLP Attorneys at Law ecarter@haslaw.com May 7, 2003 By Facsimile (978-740-9846) -Original By Regular Mail Thomas St. Pierre Building Department 120 Washington St, 3Ta Floor Salem, MA 01970 Re: Property at 6 Federal Court Dear Mr. St. Pierre: As I mentioned in my phone message to you on May 5, 2003, Mr. Peabody is seeking approval from the Historic Commission to move forward with the necessary repairs to the brick structure at 6 Federal Court in Salem. However, he has been advised that he,must submit an itemized list of the work that will be accomplished. Based on our prior discussions,,it is my understanding that your office agrees that the repairs identified in the September 18, 2002 report by Carl O. Dumas of Kneeland Construction Corporation would be sufficient to satisfy your concerns with respect to the brick structure. Accordingly, I am recommending to Mr. Peabody that he seek approval from the Historic Commission to conduct the following work: 1. Repair/rebuild porch on left side of the property; 2. Repair/rebuild porch on right side of the property; 3. Brick/lintel repair on six windows on various locations; 4. Remove bulkhead doorway and seal entry; 5. Address chimney curvature; 6. Remove/repair left rear entry; 7. Secure broken windows; 8. Repair damage to brick foundation, and corner roof damage, at right front of the addition structure of the brick house; 9. Repair sill, brick foundation, and corner roof damage, at right rear and left rear of the addition structure. ,,.If any ofthe above information is not consistent w,ith.your understanding of our prior discussions, please contact meat your earliest convenience. 28 STATE STREET ❑ BOSTON,MASSACHUSETTS 02109-1775 ❑ 617 345-9000 ❑ FAX 617 345-9020 1500 FLEET CENTER 0 PROVIDENCE,RHODE ISLAND 02903-2393 0 401 274-2000 ❑ FAX:401 277-9600 HINCKLEY,ALLEN& SNYDER LLP Mr. Thomas St. Pierre May 7, 2003 Page 2 Sincerely, ilk Christopher H. M. Carter CHMC/smh cc: Harlan Peabody #438777 Salem Historical Commission ONE SALEM GREEN,SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 01970 (978)745-9595 EXT.311 FAX(978) 740-0404 CERTIFICATE OF NON-APPLICABILITY It is hereby certified that the Salem Historical Commission has determined that the proposed: ❑ Construction ❑ Moving )K Reconstruction ❑ Alteration ❑ Demolition ❑ Painting ❑ Signage ❑ Other Work as described below does not involve an exterior architectural feature or involves a feature covered by the exemptions or limitations set forth in the Historic District's Act(M.G.L. Ch.40C)and the Salem Historic Districts Ordinance. District: McIntire Address of Property: 6 Federal Court -main brick house & clapboard addition Name of Record Owner: Harlan R. &Joanne Peabody Description of Work Proposed: Repair/rebuild porch on the south side ofproperty to replicate existing. Repair/rebuild porch on the north side ofproperty to replicate existing. Remove boards over windows. Repair or replace windows as needed to replicate existing(wood, true divided light, single glaze, clear glass). Repair clapboards as necessary to replicate existing. Repair or replace window heads to replicate existing. Masonry: Repair and repoint masonry walls, chimneys and foundations, including window&door sills and lintels, to match existing and as directed by the Building Inspector. Brick, brick/stone coursing, mortar color(s),joint size(s)and joint profile(s) to match existing(original). Roofing: Repair or replace roofing to match existing and as directed by the Building Inspector. All work noted above is approved as non-applicable due to being in-kind repair/replacemendmaintenance. No changes in color, material, design or outward appearance permitted No additional work is permitted with this Certificate. Review of bulkhead doorway and south rear entry removal will be undertaken pending the submission of an Application for a Certificate of Appropriateness. Dated: May 13, 2003 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION By: The homeowner has the option not to commence the work(unless it relates to resolving an outstanding violation). All work. commenced must be completed within one year from this date unless otherwise indicated. THIS IS NOT A BUILDING PERMIT. Please be sure to obtain the appropriate permits from the Inspector of Buildings(or any other necessary permits or approvals)prior to commencing work. CO T Salem Historical Commission ONE SALEM GREEN, SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 (978)745-9595 EXT.311 FAX (978) 740-0404 CERTIFICATE OF NON-APPLICABILITY It is hereby certified that the Salem Historical Commission has determined that the proposed: ❑ Construction ❑ Moving J2(- Reconstruction ❑ Alteration ❑ Demolition ❑ Painting ❑ Signage ❑ Other Work as described below does not involve an exterior architectural feature or involves a feature covered by the exemptions or limitations set forth in the Historic District's Act(M.G.L. Ch. 40C) and the Salem Historic Districts Ordinance. District: McIntire Address of Property: 6 Federal Court - main brick house & clap hoard addition Name of Record Owner: Harlan B & Joanne Peabody Description of Work Proposed: Repair/rebuild porch on the south side ofproperty to replicate existing. Repair/rebuild porch on the north side ofproperty to replicate existing. Remove boards over windows. Repair or replace windows as needed to replicate existing(wood, true divided light, single glaze, clear glass). Repair clapboards as necessary to replicate existing, Repair or replace window heads to replicate existing, Masonry: Repair and repoint masonry walls, chimneys and foundations, including window& door sills and lintels, to match existing and as directed by the Building Inspector. Brick, brick/stone coursing, mortar color(s),joint sizes)and joint profile(sy to match existing(original). Roofing: Repair or replace roofing to match existing and as directed by the Building Inspector. All work noted above is approved as non-applicable due to being in-kind repairlreplacementhnainienance. No changes in color, material, design or outward appearance permitted. No additional work is permitted with this Certificate. Review of bulkhead doorway and south rear entry removal will be undertaken pending the submission of an Application for a Certificate of Appropriateness. Dated: May 13, 2003 SALEM 141STORICAL COMMISSION The homeowner has the option not to commence the work(unless it relates to resolving an outstanding violation). All work commenced must be completed within one year from this date unless otherwise indicated. THIS IS NOT A BUILDING PERMIT, Please be sure to obtain the appropriate permits from the Inspector sof Buildings(or any other necessary permits or approvals)prior to commencing work. Y � Salem Historical Commission ONE SALEM GREEN,SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 01970 (978)745-9595 EXT.311 FAX(978) 740-0404 NOTICE OF DENIAL OF APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS RE: 6 Federal Court (carriage house) On Wednesday, May 7, 2003, the Salem Historical Commission, voted unanimously to deny an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness without prejudice from Harlan B.Jr. and Joanna N. Peabody for alterations to the carriage house to convert to a single family dwelling. The denial was due to the applicants, nor their representative, not being present and not submitting a request to continue the application. I attest that this is an accurate record of the vote taken,not amended or modified in any way to this date. May 13, 2003 Jane elGuy Clerk of the Commission cc: Building Inspector City Clerk 0 s CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC PROPERTY DEPARTMENT c yam. 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR ' �OrMINB SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. TELEPHONE: 978-745-9595 EXT. 380 MAYOR FAX: 978-740-9846 February 9, 2004 ®Py Harland& Joanne Peabody 53 Charter Street Salem, Ma. 01970 RE: 6 Federal Street Court Carriage House Dear Mr. Peabody: On January 27`h, this Department received a letter from David Brosan, a Structural Engineer with the Structural Integrity Engineering Group Inc. Mr. Brosan.. at your request, visited the carriage house site on January 13 and inspected the interior and exterior at the carriage house. His Professional opinion is that the building is unsafe, represents a health and safety hazard and is not secured against the weather and represents a hazard to firefighters. It is his opinion the building was an unsafe structure as identified in 780 CMR Section 121.0 of the State Building Code. Immediately after receiving the letter from Mr. Brosan, and pursuant to Section 121.2 of the Mass Building Code, I made arrangements with a local Structural Engineer John Watney of Structures North. On Wednesday, February 4`h, Mr. Watney and I inspected the Carriage House at 6 Federal Street Court. Mr. Watney and I agreed the structure is unsafe and we have posted the structure with the appropriate signage per 121.7 and 121.8. Per Section 121.3 you are ordered to begin repairs within 24 hours to make the building safe. A copy of Mr. Watney's report should be available at this office a If you have any questions regarding this issue, please contact me immediately. Sincerely, Thomas St. Pierr Acting Building Commissioner cc: Mayors Office John Keenan Tom Phillbin Salem Fire Prevention `M a Michael J.Gilroy 115 Euclid Avenue-Lynn,Massachusetts 01904-USA Phone 781-595-2452 September 26, 2003 Mr. Berkley Peabody 6 Federal Court Salem, MA 01970 Re: Property located at 6 Federal Court, Salem Dear Sir: As you probably know, real estate values are at an all time high. Public records indicate that you have an interest in the real estate located at the above address. I am interested in purchasing said property if it is for sale now, or becomes for sale at a later date. Most houses in the area were built sometime in the early twentieth century. Consequently, because of physical or functional obsolescence, there is a need for updating. My company specializes in purchasing these properties rehabilitating and recycling them. We are presently in need of property that requires some degree of updating and are ready to pay top dollar for your property. With the recent reduction in the capital gain tax, now might be the perfect time for you to sell the above noted property. Because there will be no contingency for financing we will be able to pass papers at your convenience. In some instances we may be able to trade your property for one of our newly rehabilitated properties. I can be reached at 781595-2452 . Please contact me as soon as possible regarding this matter. Sincerely, chael J. Gilroy cc: Mr. Thomas St. Pierre, Salem Building artment I Ak STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY 0^0 Engineering Group , Inc . f �Iz ,, January 21, 2004 r r; Commissioner of Buildings City of Salem {= 120 Washington St. Salem, MA 01970 Regarding: 6 Federal St. Court, Salem, Mass. Accessory Building(Barn)at rear of house To the Commissioner of Buildings: Pursuant to the professional responsibilities of a Registered Pro.fessi9rial Engineer, as required by 250 CMR 4.00, I am writing to report that the above referenced barn structure is dangerous to life and limb, uninhabited, and open to the weather as described in 780 CMR 121.0. On January 13, 2004 I personally visited the site to make observations, measurements,"and photographs of the existing barn building both inside and outside. This building measures approximately 32 ft. x 41 ft in plan. It is a 2-story wood frame structure having a mansard-type roof. The building sits on stone foundation walls of unknown depth below grade. The ground floor of the building is covered with bituminous paving(a porous, combustible material)and has subsided along one exterior wall. The wood sills, where visible, are deteriorated from rot and insect damage. The second floor planking,joists, and beams are rotted, distorted, and in obvious distress. At least 50% of the second floor has collapsed. Another 25%of the same floor appears to be in danger of collapse. A number of holes exist in the roofing and sheathing material on the sides and top of the mansard. In addition, substantial lengths of soffit panel are missing. At the time of my visit I observed animal droppings at the remaining portion of second floor and snow accumulating at the ground floor. In my professional opinion the building is unsafe for occupancy, represents a health and safety hazard, is not tightly secured against the weather, and also represents a particular hazard to firefighters. Very truly yours, STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY tN OF N ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. dog DAV D P. yG� ZZ BROS" � 4 ®T�a�� David?. Brosnan, P.E. ;President Copies: Mr. &;Mrs H B. Peabody, Atry:John D.Fitzpatrick , 11 Salem Street, Suite 2 - Medford, MA 02155-3262 Tel: (781) 391-3022 Fax: (781) 391-2866 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE First-Class Mail Postage&Fees Paid USPS Permit No. G-10 • Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box SENDER: COMPLETE THIS SECTION COMPLETE THIS SECTION ON DELIVERY ■ Complete items 1,2,and 3.Also complete A. Si ature item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. 0 Agent ■ Print your name and address on the reverse X Addressee so that we can return the card to you. R ceived by(Printed Name) C Da of elivery ■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, / /_N 1 F ,Da or on the front if space permits. �t D. Is delivery address different from em 17 0 Yes 1. Article Addressed to: If YES,enter delivery address below: ',XNNo ec 5 j C. kc, -4v- 3. Service Type ❑ Certified Mail 0 Express Mail G { Y�-Y r L lJ V 0 Registered 0 Return Receipt for Merchandise 0 Insured Mail 0 C.O.D. 4. Restricted Delivery?(Extra Fee) 0 Yes 2. Article Number (Transfer from service label) PS Form 3811,August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-02-M-1540 . o CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS w PUBLIC PROPERTY DEPARTMENT eye_ 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. TELEPHONE: 978-745-9595 'EXT. 380 MAYOR FAX: 978-740-9846 January 23, 2004PY Fitzpatrick and Warranband LLP One McKinley Square Boston, Ma. 02109 RE: 6 Federal Street Court Attorney Fitzpatrick: Please be advised, I have forwarded your letter of January 15, 2004 to City Solicitor John Keenan. The only suggestion I can offer to you is that you research the history of this use before the Magistrate's Hearing on February 11`h. Also, you might want to touch base with the Peabody's previous Attorney, Chris Carter of Hinkley, Allen and Snyder LLP of Concord, N.H. Sincerely, Z6"hr.G Thomas St. Pierre Acting Building Commissioner cc: John Keenan ,1 �r n ,e I coxwr CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC PROPERTY DEPARTMENT y, 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR SALEM, MA O 1970 TEL. (978)745-9595 EXT. 380 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. LISOVICZ, JR. MAYOR March 13, 2003 Hinckley, Allen & Snyder L.L.P. COPY 14 South Street ATTN: Christopher Carter Concord, N.H. 03301 RE: Peabody Property 6 Federal Street Court Dear Mr. Carter: I am aware of your client's recent submittal to the Historic Board for proposed reconstructing of the derelict Carriage House to create a dwelling unit. The conversion of a Historic Carriage House to a dwelling unit is only allowed by a Special Permit granted by the Zoning Board of Appeals per section 5-3 (11) of the Salem Zoning Ordinance. The Special Permit also requires that the Carriage House remain an accessory structure to the main house and cannot be subdivided. It is my opinion that the Special Permit should be applied for at this time. Additionally, I inspected the exterior of both the main and carriage housed on March 11, 2003. There has been virtually no work done on the main house in the 14 months that has transpired since I first contacted your clients. To date no permits and no historic applications have been filed for the main house. This office has recorded the same problems with both buildings dating back at least 10 years. I think the City of Salem and the residents of the Federal Street neighborhood have been more than patient hoping your clients would settle this matter. Unless some immediate steps are taken to repair the exterior of the main house, and to secure the carriage house, I will have no choice but to start court proceedings again. Sinc ely, Thomas St. Pierre Acting Building Commissioner � 1 cc: Tom Phillbin John Keenan Councillor Flynn Jane Guy MET STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY, Enginseering Gr-Ou:p , Inc '. - - '✓., _ tin January 21, 2004 Commissioner of Buildings =' City of Salem 120 Washington St. Salem,MA 01970 Regarding: 6 Federal St. Court, Salem,Mass. Accessory Building(Barn)at rear of house To the Commissioner of Buildings: Pursuant to the professional responsibilities of a Registered Professional Engineer, as required by 250 CMR 4.00,I am writing to report that the above referenced barn structure is dangerous to life and limb, uninhabited, and open to the weather as described in 780 CMR 121.0. On January 13, 2004 I personally visited the site to make observations,measurements,and photographs of the existing barn building both inside and outside. This building measures approximately 32 ft. x 41 ft in plan. It is a 2-story wood frame structure having a mansard-type roof. The building sits on stone foundation walls of unknown depth below grade. The ground floor of the building is covered with bituminous paving(a porous, combustible material)and has subsided along one exterior wall. The wood sills,where visible, are deteriorated from rot and insect damage. The second floor planking,joists,and beams are rotted, distorted, and in obvious distress. At least 50%of the second floor has collapsed. Another 25%of the same floor appears to be in danger of collapse. A number of holes exist in the roofing and sheathing material on the sides and top of the mansard. In addition, substantial lengths of soffit panel are missing. At the time of my visit I observed animal droppings at the remaining portion of second floor and snow accumulating at the ground floor. In my professional opinion the building is unsafe for occupancy, represents a health and safety hazard, is not tightly secured against the weather,and also represents a particular hazard to firefighters. Very truly yours, STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. 1]AVDP.BROSW w STRUMIUVAL David P. Brosnan, P.E. ,t President Copies: Mr. &Mrs. H.B. Peabody Atty: John D. Fitzpatrick 11 Salem street Suite 2 Ma6lard, MA 021554262 7e1 (780-391 3022 Fax. (7803911-2866 1 0 CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS ry PUBLIC PROPERTY DEPARTMENT a � 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. TELEPHONE: 978-745-9595 EXT. 380 MAYOR FAX: 978-740-9846 January 2, 2004 C Harlan & Joanne Peabody 53 Charter Street Salem, Ma. 01970 RE: 6 Federal St. Court Dear Owners: I have denied your request for a demolition permit for the barn located at the above mentioned address. As you are well aware, the property is located within the Historic District established in Salem Ordinance 30-136. Per the Salem Historical Board and per Massachusetts Zoning Law 40C Section 6, no permits for construction or demolition shall be issued without a Certificate from the Historic Commission. You are directed to contact the Historic Commission regarding this issue. Sincerely, Thomas St. Pierre Zoning Enforcement Officer cc: Mayors Office Tom Phillbin Jane Guy, Salem Historic Commission Fitzpatrick & Warrenbrand LLP Attorneys at Law One McKinley Square John D. Fitzpatrick Boston, Massachusetts 02109 Neil D. Warrenbrand (617) 720-2286 Facsimile (617) 723-1710 January 15, 2004 By Fax(978-740-9486) And By First Class Mail Thomas St. Pierre Zoning Enforcement Officer City of Salem 120 Washington Street, 3`d Floor Salem, MA 01970 Re: 6 Federal Street Court Dear Mr. St. Pierre: I am representing Mr. Harlan B. Peabody, an owner of 6 Federal Street Court. You sent my client a letter dated January 2, 2004 in which you denied his recent request for a demolition permit for the barn on his property. My client was surprised by your decision. Apparently, in the course of pursuing a criminal complaint against him, you assured Mr. Peabody that if he sought to demolish the barn in question you would approve his application and do everything you could to facilitate this process. He proceeded as he understood you told him to do. Under these circumstances, your letter was quite disappointing. The Peabodys have been attempting to get their property in order despite repeated obstructionist tactics by the City of Salem. For example, last year the Peabodys sought to completely renovate the barn, only to be rebuffed without any coherent explanation by the City's Historical Commission. In the past year the Peabodys also expended considerable time and money in having the house on the property repaired. The net result of the Peabodys' good faith efforts to upgrade their property is the current criminal complaint. This makes no sense. At present, the issue of the barn needs to be addressed immediately. The Peabodys first attempted to have the barn renovated, and then, upon being rebuffed by the City, are now attempting to have the barn demolished. There is no reason why the Peabodys should be given the proverbial "run around" as they attempt to deal with this in a responsible manner. I would welcome any assistance you can offer in addressing this matter. If you have suggestions or questions in this regard please do not hesitate to contact me. S' ere Jo D. Fitzpatri� cc: David P. Brosnan, P.E. eA � e j!F . Mme'^ F t444� a • ._ ^ : d\ Al . . > « ! 1; iXXi tt , t t � j tilt) , a , r u ♦ � .i.. 1. •. ,,, �, kat- = µ -i»a, '��,,,+ _ - ? �s a T,�• 9 OpRol NOW w 4,r 1 jjj� { ♦T• ! 1 ! �y Mt ! SAA"" 'yy'�y F� �►Y w" Me 4 g y . ♦ � A� y k f •. Yi r y iy :4ry Rt All MW AL 2 ow '�'`< _mow",, �yw T . ��h'�` +wn�- . . ,F IA t •,i. h � 17, F A + y 1 F pl ' r s k r� t 1 V`Y ftam 44 wn.J bY� rr e,a14 'ot it r I w � It lu � m k R 'y'rAP`'r�' '�► rri Fl�r+ ,"Rr � it 4 ■- 1 } !tk � * x A, t t F } 1 'Y M1A t lip- ti k At Tv I .i AO y � �y ��� ��. #}^ iii ♦ F�T � .L �Y�'x .. f E � * a gg �b r fi `.r All rA a� �{� y "",{ •' -° }�} "�,� ' `� ,,.fir w • t C� ♦ '� b' �� 1 '�f t Y + i M A Fitzpatrick Warrenbrand LLP Attorneys at Law .. .. .. , , .;. One McKinley''Square `�� ri , -. John,D, Fitzpatrick Boston, Massachusetts 42109 ` s^� '1{ r ' �� .3 C Neil D. Warrenbrand (617) 720-2286 P l r t. -i c,, n .. Facsimile (617) 723,-1710 February'10 2004 By Facsimile(978-740-0072) and By Fust Class Mail John D. Keenan, Esq. 222 Essex Street Salem,MA 01970 Re: 6 Federal Court and K D.Peabody Dear Mr. Keenan This will confirm our telephone conference yesterday. As I stated at that time, my client, Mr. Peabody, has been receiving contradictory instructions from City officials as to what is to be done with the barn on above property. Last year he was told to fix up the barn,and that application to do so had to be made to the Historic Commission. When my client submitted detailed plans to the Commission for an extensive renovation of the barn,these were rejected without explanation. My client then applied to the City Building Inspector, Mr. St. Pierre,for permission to tear down the barn. Mr. St. Pierre,as per his letter of January 2,2004 (copy enclosed), instructed Mr.Peabody to go to'thc Historic Commission. Yesterday Mr.St. Pierre slipped a note in my client's front door,demanding that my, client reiiovate,the=barn within 24 hours. Obviously, given the foregoing events,this demand is _,,, "unreasonable and borders on the bizarre. Mr. St. Pierre also continues to write to my clients _ —"' without copying me on his letters. I would request that this behavior also cease immediately. The bottom line here is that my client is willing to take reasonable measures to deal with the barn,but he cannot proceed without getting consistent instructions from the City. Being told by the City that(1)the barn cannot be renovated (2)the barn cannot be demolished but that(3) the barn must be renovated within 24 hours is not conveying a coherent or constructive message to my client. We agreed that you,I and other involved parties from the City will meet soon to resolve this unfortunate situation. In terms of scheduling, when we spoke yesterday I overlooked that I will be away next week with my children during school vacation week. Please let me know what dates and times will be available for a meeting the following week. I look forward to hearing from you. S' Gere y Jo D. Fitzpatrick Enclosure cc: ILD. Peabody Thomas St. Pierre CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC PROPERTY DEPARTMENT �r IZO ',VASY ':GTCN STREET. 33_C FLCCfl NIASSAC'rJSETT5 01970 STANLEY J. U50VICZ, JR. TEI..c?HOSE'. 978-74S-9595 Z%T, 380 MAYOR FAx978-740-9646 January '-', 3004 Harlan & Joanne Peabody 53 Charier Street Salem. 'la. 01970 RE: 6 Federal St. Court Dear Owners: I have denied your request for a demolition permit for the barn located at the above mentionedaddress. As you are well aware. the property is located within the Historic District established in Salem Ordinance 30-136. Per the Salem Historical Board and per'Massachusetts Zoning Law 40C Section 6, no permits for construction or demolition shall be issued without a Certificate from the Historic Commission. You are directed to contact the Historic Commission regarding this issue. 4 Sincerely. �/✓�"t.�sza Thomas St. Pierre Zoning Enforcement Officer cc: Mayors Office Tom Phii1bin Jane Guy, Salem Historic Commission o r CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC PROPERTY DEPARTMENT o' 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR ' MMBSALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. TELEPHONE: 978-745-9595 EXT. 380 MAYOR FAX: 978-740-9846 February 12, 2004 Fitzpatrick and Warrenbrand LLP ®�� One McKinley Square Boston, Mass. 02108 RE: 6 Federal Street Court Carriage House/Mr. Peabody Dear Mr. Fitzpatrick: I am in receipt of your letter dated February 10, 2004. Instead of trying to battle this issue with second hand information and through the City Solicitor, why don't you make an appointment to meet at my office and go through the file and get more information about the case. As to not copying you on the letters, no slight was intended. If you have a problem with my Department feel free to contact me directly. To address your allegation that I slipped a note into Mr. Peabody's door and that my behavior borders on bizarre is insulting and once again demonstrates you failure to gather the facts. Mr. Peabody's letter was served by a Constable and followed up with a certified letter. This is the exact procedure outlined in the State Building Code 780 CMR, Section 120 regarding unsafe structures. The Peabody's started this sequence of events when they hired a Structural Engineer, Mr. Brosnan. Mr. Brosnan notified me in a letter dated January 15'h that in his opinion the Carriage House is an unsafe structure. My response was measured and correct. I retained a structural Engineer John.Watney to evaluate the building to determine to what extent the building was unsafe. Mr Watney's report is included and a copy was sent to the Peabody's on February 10`h. The order that was served on the Peabody's , was to make safe the structure not to renovate it.. Under Section 120 of the State Building Code and after a Board of survey is conducted, the City will if your client fails to, supply sufficient labor to make the structure safe. I would like to work amicably with you to resolve this matter. In the interim, I suggest you take a look at Section 103, which is the Section that initially started this case. Sincerely, Thomas St. Pierre Acting Building Commissioner cc: Harland Peabody John Keenan cc: copies of Mr. Brosnan's letter of Jan. 21, 2004 Building Commissioner letter of Jan. 23, 2004 Building Commissioner letter of Feb. 9, 2004 i CITY OF SALEM} MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC PROPERTY DEPARTMENT 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RO FLOOR QAgryg SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. TELEPHONE: 978-745-9595 EXT. 380 MAYOR FAX: 978-740-9846 January 23, 2004 Fitzpatrick and Warranband LLP One McKinley Square Boston,Ma. 02109 RE: 6 Federal Street Court Attorney Fitzpatrick: Please be advised, I have forwarded your letter of January 15, 2004 to City Solicitor John Keenan. The only suggestion I can offer to you is that you research the history of this use before the Magistrate's Hearing on February 11`'. Also, you might want to touch base with the Peabody's previous Attorney, Chris Carter of Hinkley, Alien and Snyder LLP of Concord, N.H. Sincerely, Thomas St. Pierre 24 Acting Building Commissioner cc: John Keenan + f STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY Engineering Group , Inc . " January 21,2004 Commissioner of Buildings City of Salem 120 Washington St. Salem,MA 01970 Regarding: 6 Federal St. Court, Salem,Mass. Accessory Building(Barn)at rear of house To the Commissioner of Buildings: Pursuant to the professional responsibilities of a Registered Professional Fngirteer,as required by 250 CMR 4.00,I am writing to report that the above referenced barn structure is dangerous to life and limb, uninhabited, and open to the weather as described in 780 CMR 121.0. On January 13,2004 I personally visited the site to make observations, measurements, and photographs of the existing barn building both inside and outside. This building measures approximately 32 ft. x 41 ft in pian. It is a 2-story wood frame structure having a mansard-type roof. The building sits on stone foundation walls of unknown depth below grade, The ground floor of the building is covered with bituminous paving(a porous, combustible material) and has subsided along one exterior wall. The wood sills, where visible, are deteriorated from rot and insect damage. The second flax planking,joists,and beams are rotted, distorted,and in obvious distress. At least 50%of the second floor has collapsed. Another 25%of the same floor appears to be in danger of collapse. A number of holes exist in the roofing and sheathing material on the sides and top of the mansard. In addition, substantial lengths of soffit panel are missing, At the time of my visit I observed animal droppings at the remaining portion of second floor and snow accumulating at the ground floor. In my professional opinion the building is unsafe for occupancy, represents a health and safety hazard, is not tightly secured against the weather,and also represents a particular hazard to firefighters. Very truly yours, STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY tµOF H ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. +1 DAVDP. 6 a � am o aid David P. Brosnan; P.E. President Copies: Mr. &Mrs.A.B. Peabody Atty. John D. Fitzpatrick 11 Salem street, Suite 2 Medford, MA 021553262 Tet: (981) 391.3022 Fax: (981) 391.2066 ` - _ CITY 'OF SALEM 7VIASSi►C�i1�SETTS PUBLIC PROPERTY DEPARTMENT 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS.01.970 - STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. TELEPHONE: 976-745-9595 EXT. 380 MAYOR FAX: 978-740-9846 - February 9, 2004 cop Harland&Joanne Peabody 53 Charter Street Salem, Ma. 01970 i RE: 6 Federal Street Court Carriage House Dear Mr. Peabody: On January 27`", this Department received a letter from David Brosan, a Structural Engineer with the Structural Integrity Engineering Group Inc. Mc Brosan. at your request, visited the carriage house site on January 13 and inspected the interior and exterior at the carriage house. His Professional opinion is that the building is unsafe, represents a health and safety hazard and is not secured against the weather and represents a hazard to firefighters. It is his opinion the building was an unsafe structure as identified in 780 CMR Section 121.0 of the State Building Code. I Immediately after receiving the letter from Mr. Brosan, and pursuant to Section 121.2 of the Mass Building Code, I made arrangements with a local Structural Engineer John Watney of Structures North. On Wednesday, February 4a',Mr. Watney and I inspected the Carriage House at 6 Federal Street Court. Mr. Watney and I agreed the structure is unsafe and we have posted the.structure with the appropriate signage per 121.7 and 121.8. Per Section 121.3 you are ordered to begin repairs within 24 hours to make the building safe. A copy of Mr. Watney's report should be available at this office If you have any questions regarding this issue, please contact me immediately. Sincerely, Thomas St. Pierre Acting Building Commissioner A. cc: Mayors Office John Keenan Tom Phillbin Salem Fire Prevention s -FES-09-2004 07:30PM FROM-Structures North 19787456067 T-323 P.001/003 F-600 Mucrugs HOATA CONSULTING February 9, 2004 ENGINEERS,INC. Building Department City of Salem 120 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 Fax: 978-740-9846 Attention: Mr.Thomas Saint Pierre Building Commissioner Reference: Carriage House at 6 Federal Street Court Salem, MA Dear Mr. Saint Pierre: On Wednesday, February 4 1 visited the Carriage House at 6 Federal Street . Court to observe its structural condition. This Is a French Second Empire style structure that was constructed ca. 1870 to 1875 as part of the Shrieve property at 95-97 Federal Street and then annexed to the a Federal Street Court property In the early to mid.1960's. During the my visit I noted the following: Noted Conditions-Exterior • The exterior woodwork that Is exposed on the Carriage House Is generally intact, though In need of painting and repairs. There are gaps and holes In the woodwork that can allow weather and vermin to enter the structure. There are also scattered trim and siding boards that are severely weathered and/or rotted and in need of replacement. .There is a pronounced bulge In the west wall of the Cartage House that is indicative of the damage that has occurred Inside the structure (see below). • Many of the windows are broken and a few have been boarded. • There are shingles missing from the mansard and the main roof. In many places the roof sheathing boards (and the gaps between them) are exposed. • Long portions of the wooden fascia between the.mansard roof and the main roof are missing, leaving gaps where weather can enter the structure. P.O.Box 8560/60 Washington Street, Suite 401 • Salem, Massachusetts 01971 Voice (978) 745.6817 • Fax (978)745-6067 www.structures-north.com - .- -FE6-09-2004 07:30PM FROM-Structures North 19767456067 7-323 P.002/003 F-600 Struetmw North 6 Federal Sheet Court Carriage Hoon Febrou"9,2004 Salem,MA Noted Conditions- interior a As can be easily observed from the interior, there Is little covering stall left on the main roof and one can see daylight from between the sheathing boards over most of the roofs surface. Rainwater is free to enter the structure and has taken a significant toll on the interior. a The ground floor of the Carriage House Is covered almost entirely with a vast stock of personal belongings that have been soaked with water for long periods and landed-upon by debris. The furred wood floor construction below has not been able to dry-out and has rotted in many places. e The base of one of the central loft posts has rotted and compressed downward. There may also be scattered conditions that are similar In the exterior wall construction along the perimeter, however, no significant downward movement was detected from the exterior that would suggest this to be a pervasive condition. • The western half of the loft has collapsed due to what appears to have been the tenon failures of lofts' main floor glrts (beams). The east end of the northern girt has fallen, along with the west end of the southern girt. This has spilled much of the loft's contents onto the ground floor, along with pieces of the loft Itself. a The loft's eastern half remains intact, although it has dropped by several Inches due to the central post compression (see above). a The partial collapse of loft has eliminated the lateral tle that once existed along the base of the mansard roof at the west wall. This,combined with the fact that much of the loft's fallen debris is now leaning against this wall has caused the wall to bulge outward. The fact that the wail has not failed under the combined lack of lateral bracing and debris loading speaks well for the wall's condition. • The roof framing appears visually to be in generally sound condition, with rainwater falling past the rafters and not collecting on them. The roof survived this winter's 3-feet of snow without incident, which was a critical test of Its strength. Conclusions and Recommendations- Based upon the conditions that I have seen, it appears that the Carriage House has suffered severely from an extreme lack of maintenance and many years of blatant neglect. Were it not for this neglect, none of the problems that are noted in this report would have arisen. 2 ,SEB-09-2004 07:30PM I'MStructures North 19T67456067 T-323 P.003/003 F-600 Straota<a North 6 Federal Street Court Carrlap Home February 9,2W Salem,MA Fortunately, the structure is still salvageable with if the following preventative and . corrective measures are taken: 1. The area within ten feet of the west wall should be cordoned off. An outward buckling of this wall and the resulting.collapse of the roof and possibly more of the loft is the structure's most Immediate threat. 2. The remaining, Intact portion of the loft should be shored under the chance that the eastern girls' tenons have also begun to rot. Struts, cables and dunnage should be installed between the east and west walls of the structure to counter the lateral tying action that has been lost by the partial collapse of the loft. 3. The collapsed debris should be removed from the western half the Carriage House In order relieve the structure of this burden. Additionally, the damp, rotting contents of the Carriage House should be sorted and removed as they present a breeding ground for rodents and retain moisture. 4. The roof structure should be closely Inspected and repaired as needed, and then covered with a new roofing system to stop the continuing influx of rainwater. At the same time, the broken windows should be covered with louvered vents to provide airFlow within the structure (to attempt to dry It) while protecting it from the weather. Because of its current status as an "unsafe structure", the cordoning and stabilization portion of the work must happen as soon as possible, hopefully within the next few weeks. Because the wood-rot fungus that has attached this structure is dormant when the air temperature Is below forty degrees, the condition of the structure should not worsen until the spring thaw. By that time, it Is critical that the roofing and drying portion of the work be well underway or even completed. If this Is not done, another year of weather exposure could bring this once proud structure to a tragic and premature end. Please contact me If you have any questions or comments. . ReVest iy urs, 4M1 �{T J>,fin M. Wathne PE President Structures North Consulting Engineers, Inc. n 3 r Fitzpatrick & Warrenbrand LLP Attorneys at Law One McKinley Square John D. Fitzpatrick Boston, Massachusetts 02109 Neil.D. Warrenbrand (617) 720-2286 Facsimile (617) 723-1710 January 15, 2004 By Fax (978-740-0404) And By First Class Mail Salem Historical Commission City of Salem 120 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 Re: 6 Federal Street Court Dear Madam or Sir: Enclosed please find an Application for a Certificate of Non-Applicability for the barn at the above address, along with copies of photographs and a copy of a letter from Mr. St. Pierre to the Peabodys dated January 2, 2004. Please let me know if you have any questions in this regard. Sin e y o . Fitzpatrick Enclosures cc: David P. Brosnan, P.E. Thomas St. Pierre ✓ ir,�CO T Salem Historical Commission 120 Washington St. .,SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 01970 (978)745-9595 EXT.311 FAX(978)740-0404 APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF NON-APPLICABILITY Pursuant to the Historic District's Act (M.G.L. Chapter 40C) and the Salem Historical Commission Ordinance, application is hereby made for issuance of a Certificate of Non-Applicability for: ❑ Construction ❑ Moving ❑ Reconstruction ❑ Alteration k Demolition ❑ Painting ❑ Sign ❑ Other as described below. District: Nt c J-.^ k2. Building Construction Date, if known: Address of Property: Name of Record Owner: Description of Work Proposed: Signature of Owner Tel. #: �'�� Mailing address: fi;t,/1;2,t k * w �/��W , �vP City: 30 <Ti A State-.V'% Zip: G ZI c One Mckoo- Sera.-e tl S 4-1,\n PROCEDURES FOR FILING APPLICATIONS A. Be prepared to apply for approvals well in advance of commencing any exterior work. Before making my changes to the exterior of a property in an historic district, the owner should call or visit the Commission representative at the Salem Planning Department to discuss proposed alterations and to determine the category of the application(Appropriateness,Non-Applicability or Hardship). B. The Commission normally meets on the first and third Wednesdays of each month and notices are posted at City Hall. The meetings are held at 120 Washington Street,3rd floor,and begin at 7:30 p.m. All meetings are open to the public and any person is entitled to appear and be heard on any matter before the Commission before it reaches a decision. C. An application for a Certificate of Appropriateness or Hardship must be received by 3:00 p.m.on the Monday 16 days before the meeting in order to make the agenda. An application for a Certificate of Non-Applicability may normally be added to the agenda up to the day of the muting. In some cases,a Certificate of Non-Applicability may be issued by the Clerk,without review by the full Commission,after receiving signatures of approval from an officer and a member of the Commission. There is no fee for any applications. D. All applications for Certificates of Appropriateness or Hardship require a public hearing. Notice of the hearing must be posted with the City Clerk 14 days before the hearing and abutters must be notified in writing. Commission staff will handle these procedures. A public hearing is not required for a Certificate of Non-Applicability. E. Applications must be submitted by the owner of the property. In case of a tenant,a waiver of the owner's appearance may he granted at the discretion of the Commission if it is requested by the owner. F. All applications must include three to four 35mm photographs of existing conditions. No certificates can be issued prior to receipt of photographs. G. An application will not be considered complete unless alLwork items are thoroughly described on scaled drawings and include specifications regarding dimensions, materials, and any other information needed for the Commission to visualize the changes in order to make a determination. Applications for paint colors should include a paint chip or chart. The following items should be included in your drawings as applicable: I. Site plan showing location of improvements; - 2. Elevation drawings of the specific'improvements:. - 3. DetaihYprofiles(ix,moldings,fence caps,cornices,vents,etc.); 4. Materials(i.e.wood,brick,etc.); 5. Dimensions(i.e.size of trim);and 6. Transformers,heat pump and condenser locations,electrical entries and meters, lamp posts,stove pipes. H. At the hearing,the Commission will discuss the application with the applicant or his representative,hear the abutters and take a vote. Owners having professional consultants such as architects or contractors are urged to have them be present at the hearing. If the application is approved, a Certificate will be issued,mailed to the applicant and copies will be sent to the City Clerk and Building Inspector. Please note that the application can be continued until the next meeting if the Commission deems necessary(i.e.for reasons of incomplete drawings,to perform a site visit,etc.). In any case,the Commission must make a determination within 60 days from the date the application is received,unless the applicant waives that requirement in writing. I. A property owner or a contractor cannot receive a building permit unless a Certificate has been issued or the applicant has a letter from the Commission stating that the change involved is not subject to the Commission'sjurisdiction. Please be sure to obtain appropriate permits from the Inspector of Buildings prior to commencing work. I. The City of Salem reserves the right to inspect the project to determine compliance with the conditions set forth in the Certificate issued. Violations A person commencing or completing work to the exterior of a building in an historic district without the necessary approval of the Commission is subject to fines of up to$500 per day from the date of violation. The Commission is not responsible for an owner's neglect to inquire about necessary City permits and approvals. All records are public and we will confidentially assist you if you are concerned that someone in your neighborhood is in violation. Assistance The Commission's guidelines are available for viewing at the Salem Planning Department and the Salem Public Library. The guidelines provide examples of what is historically appropriate(or inappropriate)for Salem's neighborhoods including trim,siding,doors,fences,gutters,masonry,paint colors, parking solutions,porches,roofing,satellite dishes,secondary egress,skylights,utilities,windows,etc. These guidelines help you understand what changes are likely or unlikely to be approved. The Commission supports your efforts to improve your property and can guide you on historical appropriateness. Further information,in the form of books,articles and pamphlets,City-wide architectural inventories,and photographs,are available at the Historical Commission's office at 120 Washington Street. For more information,contact the Clerk of the Commission,Jane Guy,at the Salem Planning Department, 120 Washington Street,Salem,MA 01970,978 745.9595,Ext 311. Rev.9/01 Y M R> Al k . t4d ` c. p Kjk w'v �4} sx Ni ^•„. �» ¢'�J zl r '\ 'ot{ � 14 i xt% m R at n• w � � ° a , .. xxn � .(Y v.3'^�kro .� "r3 '"mak" z',� ao Www " „ko a-;� '�„H, e TV- >nmu` `"� �' s'w ,." � i 4 g i r tlY �YYL"4`4^'v'�� P � �� '^'°i ��4 W y. �✓Z: .rvM'„ H�A�i�+ *�+}�`S�y � W^:�y5`i: h�dY fi 5 {.. ��'e ..% � nt ^ L'�.., ><ri^ s ? mk � `^Y""'" q h"A't p� A'� "�'�,«LAY. A"..'�' �"rga".>,y;Yi'§.�' "Y2t # £ � xl4'�.'�'���.�}�y,. •^'hAn >� .< `' s 5 ^ .`" x*y,yc. e t�. 1 ° S..i`ti, fir`3 w ~�"� "'' 'r'-WE'uf ✓"'�•��.,+ ^^T^�+c r �$�?` "^ „,r k v L W,x tg .a x.rN sw 3i ? tyYx.TS ^kdi., A } d ,T � �j w` ��� '� 'Y A- ✓�d �� s' "'k n k �ij �y,� A # ' #a„m � . µ\ td"' +'�ai"•"? '^C�'tlrtl �„yw, '"s^ ��t� ��h4-vm yy3�� xad iy',:, m A' Y i r��., � +Ya,Ay ,;gr,°5:��.��5°eM" 3*"'�S"��^" ri+2w•, �.`"fir" �``*�.: s"k"s ..� � xmame;,t.�.„ r rrs�v� ,av � �S'A+�+YyC��, �m a � m ',�' i'`'" � Yt:,'^Y�c N'AQ a5 '_g4 t r� "moi`' Y �'<Y tl S ' W„# x '�'.P � x% ”, � t �..> + ✓& tir-^. -*.*�.+� y,�„ R "�,Ph-hYLSK��` '.',. R aAYxz '§ ( } S 'al' "FRYrtMya. Pi mr y C euta'��^ ✓�$ln fi F °� 4 "-+; j �`' t •..ws7,,�,$��*+, qa t � �§'y#t;F F >qp � k "' �. - F ' rt ror a�F"`�h ��C�`,"` U. � �� l�',K�rF,�;�•"d +aa ^[,x5` mr a 'i�7md` .� a +•�l�. „} s^�.�,a ,`3s. �'1+ } k+ C �� .:#fr'p.'. ti,"e?14 t �rq,'n"€T�' y5'� �� x. •�"r �'' �"a, u _� 3r xs Y�*ggr �;�,�'n'ysS�e "'- � s + * iy��t: r rs ..a• iso, ik " S � _ yri Is s, .i• -fx a'a ^'b k 3+� �-ar L -x a"' -� a n �, r-�+�' 4 t .. .tY� �f r'�F'F.' bF� >� h.`"r .e*a,.{✓'� `{*sY'2� a?.' li J � 4���� '�.�t""��' C. it t s ''a` „�3� Ys5'a. ;e �-'- z...+^� ., x �' 'c�� 3-h✓- �a. ,.� J' 7"` "f y rs ,�' r X �"` ���� H s ,:a M?+ a»"a f7✓ •" d#h} fl' r' ' ,h` .,+'tom- w i `h"" i .,,. , or,Ao" M i J. ,y n`pY Y' L�t g d• `3 41 x#`�'�`.i '�� .w3 r _.. �' *». ' =. a. m" n • ` rgxr�e �' z r '�{";.� �n�#,.a���rc5� t �a s a a a°�.,^ , �`., -:p � L d < ✓"., oda"���rv..�' � "�d���'^".*�''�Y'f't�''e�"'2y�-� q'W��*'"`` � .za+' to ..- r sirs �F� d } } t rzt ° }a e r'�.n73 A + .er✓ �a�*` q» 4 r r � t �t } ' tT w,x 4,Y d t s r $ s q s ty J+ ,,.s a- 7r a � ,a-c' Stiw:YA+YtIb. d x L r 2 ry4 r'r a�'ai �,A g4 e + x a T ",i•,'"4 ik t p Mfr t'�a¢t r ae° e�r,��p 6 > w IN �, � 'T 7 5&? "Nth 1 '� iar' si<�w.~633¢+a� �`• .v7, *sa' F a i u t;~ a �' 2'A .zb t� s` a,,x�L�, '^ rs'�r�*+�r'p� 7�v�-s p 5E#'j� €z S x �%1' s.r ( ✓ ",;,K.� s¢ ;.�. s r � �' r a ✓- r 3 - � O ,,�, a t 4. x s � ,. w a ✓ y ,�, e. t -• x .a fd '` � W� .. 4 x g fxa l� zf 6p4ttt r 1 z m ++ rJ + i d� �Tj R"s}ta2e r °p 11 Al + t tom . gp Mr; } i � N',r§s n � Ao ,b i. t & e 'v7_•§ n '�SM4 ''�sx�.y s..x r - a' ,' ''7 t`S'p' i Ia EY' � 4"n.,}�r u .... 3� 1 � $ �+'S 'YID { `e1 k�' +Y' `.S }t" 4-at�k 1 � � �{ y➢� cM v^ d R^ �! V 5t ,Sh%^d'� .�.tt,'X," '�J J aN� �' " �Y y2''Sa ° s �a.'tk' ;. a" fG efb`,",. •",a'� .�t '" '6 Ai *44 r' "'r tp++ p} �a J �+ i ,.4 % 'a+ ys � °`4"e„ " p ,S� sE?�`'gr`" r s �' 3�� "3����i *aa MN � 3 �'r�µ.,c .r s+��1+�; a �"i'`�w �' yc�, t��,"�y a. �.�9.c ' x e v >ti•: .�,....t + .^e'S` :+� ?� .aY +ra�i���, a to sN` tw`" ,7 'Z:T^X�*�`"+ .N a ' '.. F �i ,"� ;•,,n e> ��� a �a+dJy � ryt�ha ^ `f �. aar' c?'� .x iy a'r, [ 1 T. :.: '`"5 a✓^ 3> a .i Yr.:,L .{ _g a ? ' &�� € .x�5 Y P ,dx °, .A n,u p s`� "All W r' ° _* *" '1 .•. � b� f"� '',��� +'' " !��,'�'h'�w5��'�" &' k � $"fit '� �� ' ^i „� >i #a s;a�iq,.'Yr4 ^ *�' �, F �. Zti,}k .r a s a c`„• �� F c �,.p.'P�"6Y �,z r -reu'R.'�y, ig{ yta5� 4' "v✓ r`'C•9�nrs r 'a, rva�,.�,y,.,.{ ,r`_ At �.:A „yk + �*k ' + y �`� s Y Y♦ ai} � � �saa� H!3� '3.a��!!s`?,_,�r,�h � e4-a�SSd�. }'Y � Y r e R � Y, v .f e PL }gar ' 0 t A d� h� t <Y 2 M 4 � - s fN mg .Y 3 n y�4�-�'S•`r��+. �+-` 'rte,?. ! P s }" t� d s. � s i.e f? 0;"z7.ag, .R tda 'rcfJ�.✓""a % ,�y3 3h. 'i�A �� b. ^ � 2 f. r ..A,4 ✓ }�*- }2Fx'� �F rP 3 �� °( �`: kegv "< S J t^�Y k 4 i -I r~�� .kA ,. A ' „„ �r :bncN. Y 1Y s zl W,5966, aky as `M � � � s CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS '.1 w PUBLIC PROPERTY DEPARTMENT 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3R0 FLOOR O�hl.'IE�N SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 STANLEY J. USOvICZ, JR. TELEPHONE: 978-745-9595 EXT, 380 MAYOR FAX: 978-740-9848 January 2, 2004 Harlan & Joanne Peabody 33 Charter Street Salem, Ma. 01970 RE: 6 Federal St, Court Dear Owners: 1 have denied your request for'a demolition permit for the barn located at the above mentioned address. As you are well aware, the property is located within the Historic District established in Salem Ordinance 30-136. Per the Salem Historical Board and per Massachusetts Zoning Law 40C Section 6, no permits for construction or demolition shall be issued without a Certificate from the Historic Commission. You are directed to contact the Historic Commission regarding this issue. Sincerely, Thomas St. Pierre Zoning Enforcement Officer cc: Mayors Office Tom Phillbin Jane Guy, Salem Historic Commission �o T CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC PROPERTY DEPARTMENT 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR SALEM, MAO 1970 TEL. (978)745-9595 EXT. 380 FAX (978) 740-9846 STANLEY J. LISOVICZ, JR. MAYOR July 28, 2003 Harlan/Joann Peabody 53 Charter Street Salem, Ma. 01970 RE: 6 Federal Street Court Dear Mr. Peabody: I contacted you by letter on December 11, 2001. In that letter you were notified of a violation of the State Building Code, Section 103-1 and 103-2. This section requires the owner of a structure to maintain the structure in a safe and good condition. Both the main house and carriage house are in very poor and potentially unsafe condition. In the year and a half since I first notified you of the violations, nothing has been repaired on either structure. In fact, both buildings are in worse condition. Because of your failure to act, I have refiled the building code violations in Salem District Court. A magistrate hearing has been scheduled for August 7, 2003 at 2:30 p.m. Sincerely, Thomas St. Pierre Actino Buildine Commissioner cc: Mayors Office Tom Phillbin Health Department Fire Prevention Councillor Flynn FEB-09-2004 07:30PM FROM-Structures North 19767456067 T-323 P.001/003 F-600 H OATA CONSULTING February 9, 2004 ENGINEERS, INC. Building Department City of Salem 120 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 Fax: 978-740-9848 Attention: Mr. Thomas Saint Pierre Building Commissioner Reference: Carriage House at 0 Federal Street Court Salem, MA Dear Mr. Saint Pierre: On Wednesday, February 4 1 visited the Carnage House at 8 Federal Street Court to observe its structural condition. This Is a French Second Empire style structure that was constructed ca. 1870 to 1875 as part of the Shreve property at 95-97 Federal Street and then annexed to the 8 Federal Street Court property in the early to mid.1980's. During the my visit I noted the following: Noted Conditions-Exterior • The exterior woodwork that Is exposed on the Carriage House is generally intact, though In need of painting and repairs. There are gaps and holes in the woodwork that can allow weather and vermin to enter the structure. There are also scattered trim and siding boards that are severely weathered and/or rotted and in need of replacement. • There is a pronounced bulge In the west wall of the Carriage House that is indicative of the damage that has occurred inside the structure (see below). • Many of the windows are broken and a few have been boarded. • There are shingles missing from the mansard and the main roof. In many places the roof sheathing boards (and the gaps between them) are exposed. Long portions of the wooden fascia between the.mansard roof and the main roof are missing, leaving gaps where weather can enter the structure. P.O. Box $560160 Washington Street, Suite 401 a Salem, Massachusetts 01971 Voice (978) 745.6817 • Fax (978) 745-6067 www.structures-north.com FEB-09-2004 O7:30PM FROM-Structures North IOT87456O6T T-323 P.002/003 F-60O Structures North 6 Federal Sheet Court Carriage House February 9,2904 Salem,MA Noted Conditions-Interior As can be easily observed from the Interior, there is little covering still left on the main roof and one can see daylight from between the sheathing boards over most of the root's surface. Rainwater is free to enter the structure and has taken a significant toll on the interior. + The ground floor of the Carriage House is covered almost entirely with a vast stock of personal belongings that have been soaked with water for long periods and landed-upon by debris. The furred wood floor oonstruction below has not been able to dry-out and has rotted in many places. • The base of one of the central loft posts has rotted and compressed downward. There may also be scattered conditions that are similar In the exterior wall construction along the perimeter, however, no slgniflcant downward movement was detected from the exterior that would suggest this to be a pervasive condition. • The westem half of the loft has collapsed due to what appears to have been the tenon failures of lofts' main floor girls (beams). The east end of the northern girt has fallen, along with the west end of the southern girt. This has spilled much of the loft's contents onto the ground floor, along with pieces of the loft Itself. • The loft's eastern half remains intact, although it has dropped by several Inches due to the central post compression (see above). • The partial collapse of loft has eliminated the lateral tie that once existed along the base of the mansard roof at the west wall. This, combined with the fact that much of the loft's fallen debris is now leaning against this wall has caused the wail to bulge outward. The fact that the wall has not failed under the combined lack of lateral bracing and debris loading speaks well for the wall's condition. • The roof framing appears visually to be in generally sound condition, with rainwater falling past the rafters and not collecting on them. The roof survived this winter's Vest of snow without incident, which was a critical test of Its strength. Concluslons and Recommendations- Based upon the conditions that I have seen, It appears that the Carriage House has suffered severely from an extreme lack of maintenance and many years of blatant neglect. Were it not for this neglect, none of the problems that are noted in this report would have arisen. 2 FES-09-2004 07:30PM FROWStructures North 19797456067 T-323 P.003/003 F-600 Structures North 6 Federal Street Court Carriage House February 9,2004 SsleA MA Fortunately, the structure is still salvageable with if the following preventative and corrective measures are taken: t. The area within ten feet of the west wall should be cordoned off. An outward buckling of this wall and the resulting collapse of the roof and possibly more of the loft is the structure's most Immediate threat. 2. The remaining, Intact portion of the loft should be shored under the chance that the eastern girls' tenons have also begun to rot. Struts, cables and dunnage should be installed between the east and west walls of the structure to counter the lateral tying action that has been lost by the partial collapse of the loft. 3. The collapsed debris should be removed from the westem half the Carriage House in orxler relieve the structure of this burden. Additionally, the damp, rotting contents of the Carriage House should be sorted and removed as they present a,breeding ground for rodents and retain moisture. 4. The roof structure should be closely Inspected and repaired as needed, and then covered with a new roofing system to stop the continuing influx of rainwater. At the same time, the broken windows should be covered with louvered vents to provide airtlow within the structure (to attempt to dry it) while protecting it from the weather. Because of its current status as an "unsafe structure", the cordoning and stabilization portion of the work must happen as soon as possible, hopefully within the next few weeks. Because the wood-rot fungus that has attached this structure is dormant when the air temperature is below forty degrees, the condition of the structure should not worsen until the spring thaw. By that time, It Is critical that the roofing and drying portion of the work be well underway or even completed. If this Is not done, another year of weather exposure could bring this once proud structure to a tragic and premature end. Please contact me If you have any questions or comments. Ressl urs, w;�•: Fac it>d;1(:' �.. John M. Wathne, PE, President Structures North Consulting Engineers, Inc. 3 0 CITY OF SALEM9 MASSACHUSETTS < PUBLIC PROPERTY DEPARTMENT 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR 1 M1N6� SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. TELEPHONE: 978-745-9595 EXT. 380 MAYOR FAX: 978-740-9846 February 18, 2004 Harland Peabody 53 Charter Street Salem, Ma. 01970 RE: Carriage House 6 Federal Street Court Dear Mr. Peabody: This letter is to inform you that Board of Survey was conducted on the Carriage House on Friday February 11. The Board consisted of Joe Nerden, Assistant City Engineer, Chief Cody, Chief of Salem Fire Department, Engineer, John Wathne and myself. This survey was done in conformance with State Building Code 780 CMR, Section 120.4 This letter is to further notify you that pursuant to Section 121.5the City will employ sufficient labor to make the building safe. Per Section 121.6 if you feel you are aggrieved by these orders you may seek relief as specified in MGL Section 139&2. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me directly. Sincerely, Thomas St. Pierre Acting Building Commissioner cc Mayors Office Tom Phillbin Joe Nerden, Asst. City Engineer John Keenan John P. Fitzpartick, Attorney for the Peabody's COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS ESSEX, ss. SUPERIOR COURT DEPARTMENT C.A. NO. 4 a HARLAN PEABODY and ) � JOANNA PEABODY ) Plaintiffs ) V. ) CITY OF SALEM and ) THOMAS ST. PIERRE, Defendants COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND 1. This Complaint is an appeal under G. L. c. 139, §2 from an Order served on the plaintiffs by the defendants on Friday, February 20, 2004, in which the defendants stated that the City would perform work on the plaintiffs' barn at 6 Federal Street Court in Salem under 780 CMR 121.5, which will, if permitted, result in a lien on the plaintiffs' property. A true copy of this Order (the "Order") is attached as Exhibit"A". The Order further informed the plaintiffs that"if you feel you are aggrieved by these orders you may seek relief as specified in MGL Section 139&2 [sic]" (referring to G. L. c. 139, §2). The plaintiffs have been attempting to repair or demolish this barn for some time, only to be repeatedly rebuffed by the defendants. The defendants' present actions are unfounded and unlawful. 2. The plaintiffs. Harlan and Joanna Peabody, are individuals residing in Salem, Essex County, Massachusetts and own 6 Federal Street Court, Salem. 3. The defendant, the City of Salem (the "City"), is duly organized and existing as a City within Essex County, Massachusetts. 4. The defendant Thomas St. Pierre ("St. Pierre") is the Acting Building Commissioner for the City of Salem with a usual place of business in Salem, Essex County, Massachusetts. 5. For a lengthy period of time the plaintiffs have been attempting to either renovate or demolish a barn located on their Federal Street Court property (the „bam„ 6. Most recently, in early 2003 the plaintiffs requested approval from the City to conduct extensive renovations on the bam. Toward this end, the plaintiffs had engaged an architect who produced plans for the barn's conversion to a single family dwelling. 7. The plaintiffs' renovation request was considered by the City's Historical Commission (the "Commission") at a meeting on March 19, 2003, attended by both the plaintiffs' architect and prior counsel. After lengthy and inconclusive consideration by the Commission, the Commission then decided to hold a site visit, which was conducted on March 27, 2003, with the plaintiffs' architect in attendance. The Commission held further meetings on April 2, 2003 (with the plaintiffs' prior counsel present) and on April 16, 2003 (with the plaintiffs' architect and prior counsel present). Despite these multiple meetings still no decision was forthcoming from the Commission on the merits of the plaintiffs' request to renovate their barn. 8. On May 7, 2003, the Commission held yet another meeting during which the plaintiffs' renovation request was considered. Instead of finally issuing a decision on the merits of the plaintiffs' request, the Commission instead . denied the plaintiffs' application , noting that, despite the multiple prior meetings during which the plaintiffs' counsel and/or architect were present, "the applicants, nor their representative, not being present and not submitting a request to continue the application". A true copy of this Denial is included in Exhibit `B", attached. 9. By now it was clear that the Commission would continue to delay and rebuff the plaintiffs' attempts to renovate their barn. Accordingly, the plaintiffs began efforts to obtain permission from the City to demolish the barn at their own expense. 10. The plaintiffs first applied to St. Pierre to obtain a demolition permit. On January 2, 2004 he denied the plaintiffs' application, and referred them to the Commission instead. A true copy of St. Pierre's denial is included in Exhibit "B" 11. The plaintiffs then applied to the Commission for a Certificate of Non- Applicability. The Commission denied the plaintiffs' application (without the plaintiffs or counsel being present) on February 4, 2004, The Commission indicated that the plaintiffs should instead submit"an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness". A true copy of the Commission's Denial is included in Exhibit`B". 12. On February 13, 2004, the plaintiffs submitted their application for a Certificate of Appropriateness to the Commission. A true copy of the plaintiff's application is included in Exhibit`B". This application remains pending. 13. The plaintiffs' present counsel has been in communication with the City in January and February 2004 in an attempt to receive coherent guidance from the City regarding how the City will allow the plaintiffs to deal with their barn, either through renovation or demolition. On January 15, 2004, counsel wrote to St. Pierre, expressing frustration at the City's obstructionist tactics regarding the bam and stressing "the issue of the barn needs to be addressed immediately". In response, in a letter dated January 23, 2004 St. Pierre simply stated that he referred counsel's letter to the City Solicitor and that "[t]he only suggestion I can offer to you is that you research the history of this use". True copies of counsel's letter to St. Pierre and St. Pierre's reply are included in Exhibit"C", attached hereto. 14. On or about February 9, 2004, St. Pierre instructed the plaintiffs to begin work on their barn within 24 hours, although he had just denied their 2 application for a demolition permit and he was aware of the plaintiffs' continuing efforts to obtain permission to demolish the barn. 15. In response, plaintiffs' counsel agreed to meet with the City Solicitor"to resolve this unfortunate situation". A true copy of counsel's letter to the City Solicitor dated February 10, 2004 is included in Exhibit "C". 16. Counsel is continuing his attempts to schedule this meeting with the City Solicitor. 17. The plaintiffs have not refused or failed to begin to make efforts to render their barn safe or to take down their barn. On the contrary, despite resistance from the City,the plaintiffs have been persistently attempting to either rehabilitate or demolish the barn. 18. On Friday, February 20, 2004 the plaintiffs were served with the Order now being challenged in this appeal. This Order was unlawful and illegitimate and without adequate basis or cause. WHEREFORE, the plaintiffs pray as follows: 1. That the Order of St. Pierre attached hereto as Exhibit "A", dated February 18, 2004 and served on the plaintiffs on February 20, 2004, be annulled; 2. Alternatively, that the Order be modified to allow the plaintiffs to continue their efforts to obtain permission from the City to either demolish or renovate their barn, and that while the plaintiffs' efforts continue the City be enjoined from causing its workers or designees to alter or work on the barn, and further enjoining the City from imposing any lien on the defendants' property for any such alteration or work. 3. That Judgment be rendered accordingly and that said Judgment take effect as an original order; 4. That the plaintiffs be awarded their attorneys' fees and costs as may be allowed by law; and 5. That the Court grant such further relief to the plaintiffs as may be in the interests of justice. PLAINTIFFS DEMAND A TRIAL BY JURY ON ALL ISSUES SO TRIABLE Respectfully Submitted, HARLAN and JOANNA PEABODY By their attor y, Job/6. Fitzpatrick BBO 9550059 ZPATRICK & WARRENBRAND LLP One McKinley Square Boston, MA 02109 t� 617-720-2286 Dated: .Z,'L:�I � I 3 �� rm CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC PROPERTY DEPARTMENT 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR 9pCy°°� SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. TELEPHONE: 978-745-9595 EXT. 380 MAYOR FAX: 978-740-9846 February 18, 2004 Harland Peabody 53 Charter Street Salem, Ma. 01970 RE: Carriage House 6 Federal Street Court Dear Mr. Peabody: This letter is to inform you that Board of Survey was conducted on the Carriage House on Friday February 11. The Board consisted of Joe Nerden, Assistant City Engineer, Chief Cod}', Chief of Salem Fire Department, Engineer, John Wathne and myself. This survey was done in conformance with State Building Code 780 CMR, Section 120.4 This letter is to further notify you that pursuant to Section 121.5the City will employ sufficient labor to make the building safe. Per Section 121.6 if you feel you are aggrieved by these orders you may seek relief as specified in MGL Section 139&2. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact me directly. Sincerely, r Thomas St. Pierre Acting Building Commissioner cc Mayors Office Tom Phillbin Joe Nerden, Asst. City Engineer John Keenan John P. Fitzpartick, Attorney for the Peabody's Salem Historical Commission ONE SALEM GREEN,SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 01970 (978)745.9595 EXT.311 FAX (978) 744.0404 NOTICE OF DENIAL OF APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS RE: 6 Federal Court (carriage house) On Wednesday, May 7, 2003, the Salem Historical Commission, voted unanimously to deny an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness without prejudice from Harlan B.Jr. and Joanna N. Peabody for alterations to the carriage house to convert to a single family dwelling. The denial«as due to the applicants, nor their representative, not being present and not submitting a request to continue the application. I attest that this is an accurate record of the vote taken,not amended or modified in any way to this date. May 13; 2003 — Jane . Guy Clerk of the Commission cc: Building Inspector City Clerk 's CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS PUBLIC PROPERTY DEPARTMENT 120 wA5H1 !GTCP4 STREET, 3RC F'-00' SALEtd. ^h.q%A_ -J5ESTS 01970 r-� STAN Lev J. USOVICZ, JR. T= =_?:nor+ 978-765.9595 ExT, 3SO MAYOR FAx: 978-740-98,16 anuary 2, 200-1 Harlan & Joanne Peabody 53 Charter Street Salem, Ma. 01970 RE: 6 Federal St. Court Dear Owners: I have denied your request for a demolition permit for the barn located at the above mentioned address. As you are well aware, the property is iocated within the Historic District established in Salem Ordinance 30-136. Per the Salem Historical Board and per Massachusetts Zoning Law 40C Section 6, no permits for construction or demolition shall be issued without a Certificate from the Historic Commission. You are directed to contact the Historic Commission regarding this issue. V Sincereiv. Thomas St. Pierre Zoning Enforcement Officer cc: Mayors Office Tom Phillbin Jane Guy, Salem Historic Commission ' e,�conwr�a� -�v —A n 4' yi 9pG.'RN£CA Salem Historical Commission _: NASHINGTON STREET, SALEM, MA,SSACHUSETTS 01970 (978) 745-9595 EXT. 311 FAX (978) 740-0404 NOTICE OF DENIAL OF APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF NON-APPLICABILITY RE: 6 Federal Court (carriage house) On Wednesday, Februan 4,2004,the Salem Historical Commission,voted unanimously to deny an application for a Certificate of Non-Applicability from Harlan B. Jr. and Joanna N. Peabody for the demolition of the carriage house at 6 Federal Cuiut. The denial was Liue tu: the proposed dcniulitioi would be an alteration of existing conditions and outward appearance; therefore requiring review under an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness. I attest that this is an accurate record of the vote taken, not amended or modified in any way to this date. 1 � February 5, 2004 Jane A uy CleriJof the Commission cc: Building Inspector City Clerk Fitzpatrick & Warrenbrand LLP Attorners at Law One McKinley Square John D. Fitzpa:"ck Boston, Massachusetts 02109 Xeil D. V,arre^brand (617) 720-2286 Facsimile (617) 723-1710 February 1'), 2004 By Fax (978-740-0404) And Bv First Class Mail Salem Historical Commission City of Salem 120 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 Re: 6 Federal Street Court Dear Madam or Sir: Enclosed please find an Application for a Certificate of Appropriateness for the barn at the above address, along with four 35 mm photographs and a copy of a letter from Mr. St. Pierre to the Peabodys dated January 2, 2004. Please let me know if you have any questions in this regard. SincerekFitzpa J Dk Enclosures cc: John Keenan, Esq. David P. Brosnan, P.E. Harlan Peabody ,CON'If� Ti Tci� `a Salem I1Istor-Ical COMMISS1017 ONE SALEM GREEN, SALEM,MASSACHUSETTS 61870 (508) 7458545 EXT. 311 FAX(608) 140-0404 �L'1.'.L�4`SiUty' FnR. A i;rRT1F1�T.�9r AppROYR7AT"FT, .SS Pursuant to the Historic District's Actl(M.G.L. Chapter 40C) and the Salem Historical Co^'^fission Ordinance, application is hereby made for issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness for: ❑ Construction Cl Moving ❑ Recon-traction ❑ Aiteratior. E/ Demolition ❑ Painting ❑ Sign ❑ Other as described below. District: `hr // Building Construction Date, if Address ofProper6 ty: (l)-VII14 Name of Record Owner: 1`2rz C c Description of Work Proposed: (Please attach required scale drativings, paler chips and/or rumples of work and material proposed. ,vhere applicable.) A t M U j S 1 v14''N cM r1111,Z t y 1 '. : , hn0SN!)-N �:�i , c Ci •Zt �`1�3Nv 26" ot-f , Signature ofOvvmer:�,r . rl"1�- %f , ec.Atf TeL #: 61 ? '�ZOfZS(v C/o7vtttl 1zt2(lA–cn-tWIt4,5G, Mailing address:FjTZpMRj8j,,& LLP City: State:—Zip: ONE McKINLyY SQUARE BOSTON, NIA 02109 STRUCTURAL I NTEG RITY 111W E n a i n e e r i n q G r o u p , I n January 21, 2004 Commissioner of Buildings City of Salem 120 Washington St. Salem, MA 01970 Regarding: 6 Federal St. Court, Salem, Mass. Accessory Building(Barn) at rear of house To the Commissioner of Buildings: Pursuant to the professional responsibilities of a Registered Professional Engineer, as required by 250 CMR 4.00, Lam writing to report that the above referenced barn structure is dangerous to lite and limb, uninhabited, and open to the weather as described in 780 CMR 121.0. On January 13, 2004 I personally visited the site to make observations, measurements, and photographs of the existing barn building both inside and outside. This building measures approximately 32 ft. x 41 ft in plan. It is a 2-story wood frame structure having a mansard-type roof. The building sits on stone foundation walls of unknown depth below grade. The ground floor of the building is covered with bituminous paving(a porous, combustible material) and has subsided along one exterior wall. The wood sills, where visible, are deteriorated from rot and insect damage. The second floor planking,joists, and beams are rotted, distorted; and in obvious distress. At least 50% of the second floor has collapsed. Another 25% of the same floor appears to be in danger of collapse. A number of holes exist in the roofing and sheathing material on the sides and top of the mansard. In addition, substantial lengths of soffit panel are missing. At the time of my visit I observed animal droppings at the remaining portion of second floor and snow accumulating at the ground floor. In my professional opinion the building is unsafe for occupancy, represents a health and safety hazard, is not tightly secured against the weather, and also represents a particular hazard to firefighters. Very truly yours, STRUCTURAL INTEGI7ITY ENGINEERING GROUP, INC. David P.Brosnan,P.E. exaLEt"'fr President UY Copies: Mr. &Mrs. H.B. Peabody Atty. John D. Fitzpatrick i 11 Salem Street, Suite 2 Medford, MA 02155-3262 � /\ $� fid` ( {%! \ � , ( \ (qk / ) \ 4 t » � R " �s N , is �� yt5 � •�R��►^jy.s � r � ss ^. tP s r s s "u, ,i I is: } rI7Rq � �t,�� � �} x �,��h1' ♦" . e 1`i5 s j k s1't t',� 1 � �� c n�, A•,1 "$t 4��.C+• 1 �{ � '�n �� �) rr � t1ri �<: � .. ;'. Y���{Ililtll..} i 41 :J s ,` i Jf�rt `'t41 ft�lli '' •`y `�rt"'..+r... ,5 ��' Fitzpatrick Warrenbrand LLP Attorneys at Law One McKinley Square john D. Fitzpatrick Boston, Massachusetts 02104 Neil D. Warrenbrand (617) 7202286 Facsimile 16171 723-1710 January 15, 2004 By Fax (978-740-9486) And By First Class Mail Thomas St. Pierre Zoning Enforcement Officer City of Salem 120 Washington Street, 3`d Floor Salem, MA 01970 Ke: 6 Federal Street Court Dear Mr. St. Pierre: I am representing Mr. Harlan B. Peabody, an owner of 6 Federal Street Court. You sent my client a letter dated January 2, 2004 in which you denied his recent request for a demolition permit for the bam on his property. My client was surprised by your decision. Apparently, in the course of pursuing a criminal complaint against him, you assured Mr. Peabody that if he sought to demolish the barn in question you would approve his application and do everything you could to facilitate this process. Ile proceeded as he understood you told him to do. Under these circumstances, your letter was quite disappointing. The Peabodys have been attempting to get their property in order despite repeated obstructionist tactics by the City of Salem. For example, last year the Peabodys sought to completely renovate the bam, only to be rebuffed without any coherent explanation by the City's Historical Commission. In the past year the Peabodys also expended considerable time and money in having the house on the property repaired. The net result of the Peabodys' good faith efforts to upgrade their property is the current criminal complaint. This makes no sense. At present,the issue of the barn needs to be addressed immediately. The Peabodys first attempted to have the barn renovated, and then, upon being rebuffed by the City, are now attempting to have the barn demolished. There is no reason why the Peabodys should be given the proverbial "run around" as they attempt to deal with this in a responsible manner. I would welcome any assistance you can offer in addressing this matter. If you have suggestions or questions in this regard please do not hesitate to contact me. S' ere 7o D. Fitzpatric cc: David P. Brosnan,P.E. e�OONOlTA CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS mit 2 PUBLIC PROPERTY DEPARTMENT 7T PAf�4' 120 WASHINGTON STREET, 3RD FLOOR ��%I;YEDON SALEM. MASSACHUSETTS 01970 STANLEY J. USOVICZ, JR. TELEPHONE: 978-745-9593 EXT. 380 MAYOR FAX: 978-740-9846 Januar 21. 2004 Fitznatick :Ind Wan-anhnnd LLP One McKinley Square Boston, Ma. 02109 RE: 6 Federal Street Court Attorney Fitzpatrick: Please be advised. I have forwarded your letter Of January 15, 2004 to City Solicitor John Keenan. The only suggestion I can offer to you is that you research the history of this use before the Magistrate's Hearing on February I1`h. Also, you might want to touch base with the Peabody's previous Attorney, Chris Carter of Hinkley, Allen and Snyder LLP of Concord, N.H. Sincerely, Thomas St. Pierre Actino Building Commissioner cc: John Keenan Fitzpatrick Warrenbrand LLP Attorneys at Law One McKinley Square John D. F=PA-nck Boston. Massachusetts 02109 tied D. «'z-enbrand 1617) 720-2286 Facsimile (617) 723-1710 February 10, 2004 By Facsimile (978-740-0072) and By First Class Mail John D. Keenan, Esq. 222 Essex Street Salem,MA 01970 Re: 6 Federal Court and K D. Peabody Dear Mr. Keenan This will confirm our telephone conference yesterday. As I stated at that time, my client. Mr. Peabody, has been receiving contradictory instructions from City officials as to what is to be done with the barn on above property. Last year he was told to fix up the bam, and that application to do so had to be made to the Historic Commission. When my client submitted detailed plans to the Commission for an extensive renovation of the barn,these were rejected without explanation. My client then applied to the City Building Inspector, Mr. St. Pierre, for permission to tear down the barn. Mr. St. Pierre,as per his letter of January 2, 2004(copy enclosed), instructed Mr. Peabody to go to the Historic Commission. Yesterday Mr. St. Pierre slipped a note.in my client's front door,demanding that my client renovate the barn within 24 hours. Obviously, given the foregoing events, this demand is unreasonable and borders on the bizarre. Mr. St.Pierre also continues to write to my clients without copying me on his letters. I would request that this behavior also cease immediately. The bottom line here is that my client is willing to take reasonable measures to deal with the bam, but he cannot proceed without getting consistent instructions from the City. Being told by the City that(1)the barn cannot be renovated(2)the barn cannot be demolished but that(3) the barn must be renovated within 24 hours is not conveying a coherent or constructive message to my client, We agreed that you, I and other involved parties from the City will meet soon to resolve this unfortunate situation. In terms of scheduling, when we spoke yesterday I overlooked that I will be away next week with my children during school vacation week. Please let me know what dates and times will be available for a meeting the following week. I look forward to hearing from you. S' Gere y Jo D. Fitzpatrick Enclosure cc: H.D. Peabody Thomas St. Pierre (TO PLAINTIFF'S ATTORNEY: Please Circle Type ofAction Involved: - YO-911- MOTOR VEHICLE TORT CONTRACT - EQUITABLE RELIEF -(OTHE4) COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS ESSEX,ss. SUPERIOR COURT o CIVIL ACTION No. C1/ZOO —g4 C ........................ ...... ........ ....... ......... ............... v. > J C t sr T- Ar T&C/f S, ................. ................. ......... ........................ ........ ...... ............................. Defendant(s) 0 00 Sr SUMMONS o To the above named Defendant: You are hereby summoned and required to serve upon Tv ON plaintifrsattomey,whose address is ne r t G tie nl S uscGe, I3L7(.TVrJ PAA OT an answer to the o complaint which is herewith served upon you,within 20 days after service of this summons upon you,exclusive of the M day of service. If you fail to do so,judgment by default will be taken against you for the relief demanded in the complaint.You are also required to file your answer to the complaint in the office of the Clerk of this court at 12 LAWA"6f C&Vf�CkC either before service upon plaintiff s attorney or within a reasonable time thereafter. Unless otherwise provided by Rule 13(a),your answer must state as a counterclaim any claim which you may have against the plaintiff which arises out of the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter of the plaintiff s claim or you will thereafter be barred from making such claim in any other action. WITNESS,SUZANNE V DeIVECCHIO,Esquire,at Salem,the day of fao"� in the year of our Lord two thousand i;OV14 z F- E Z lork NOTES: 1. This summons is issued pursuant to Rule 4 of the Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure, 2. When more than one defendant is involved,the names of all defendants should appear in the caption.If a separate summons is used for each defendant,each should be addressed to the particular defendant. PROOF OF SERVICE OF PROCESS I hereby certify and return that on 20 I served a copy of the within summons, together with a copy of the complaint in this action, upon the within-named defendant, in the following manner(see Mass. R. Civ. P. 4 (d) (1-5): Dated: 20 N.B. TO PROCESS SERVER:- PLEASE PLACE DATE YOU MAKE SERVICE ON DEFENDANT IN THIS BOX ON THE ORIGINAL AND ON COPY SERVED ON DEFENDANT. ,20 J i M ` Z O o v O N 0 ¢ v � yy F F a > W 2 v a ¢ � o td LnUz _ za � Or � OLn 4 d 0 ti O � .J v v X � "� J _77 DOCKET NO.(S) Trial Court of Massachusetts ^ CIVIL ACTION �V Superior Court Department n COVER SHEET County: PLAINTIFF(S) E ND T !i�1l u1-IJ n.vi) )v/)avN/� ✓✓�"d.0� �C�� +, p, "PI /LVi) ;)IrYK4 < ri. (OJ ATTORNEY,FIRM NAME,ADDRESS AND TELEPHONE J O H IV 0 14' Nom` ATTO91Igr(if known) FITZPATRICK& WARRENi3RAND LLP fs(Iv Sroos`j a vi c F11A ONE WKI ILE`ISQUARE ?zo'z796 Board of BaSOSWDINYWA 02109 - I Origin code and track designation Fr an x in one box only: ❑ 4. F04 District Court Appeal c.231, s. 97 &104 (After Fr1. F01 Original Complaint trial) (X) ❑ 2. F02 Removal to Sup.Ct. C.231,s.104 ❑ 5. F05 Reactivated after rescript; relief from (Before trial) (F) judgment/Order (Mass.R.Civ.P. 60) (X) ❑ 3. F03 Retransfer to Sup.Ct. C.231,s.102C (X) ❑ 6. E10 Summary Process Appeal (X) TYPE OF ACTION AND TRACK DESIGNATION (See reverse side) CODE NO. TYPE OF ACTION (specify) TRACK IS THIS A JURY CASE? Yes ( ) No The following is a full, itemized and detailed statement of the facts on which plaintiff relies to determine money damages. For this form, disregard double or treble damage claims; indicate single damages only. TORT CLAIMS 111' j (Attach additional sheets as necessary) A. Documented medical expenses to date: 1. Total hospital expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. Total Doctor expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. Total chiropractic expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. Total physical therapy expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5. Total other expenses (describe) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ . . . . . . . . . . . . . Subtotal $ . . . . . . . . . . . . . B. Documented lost wages and compensation to date . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ . . . . . . . . . . . . . IC. Documented property damages to date . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ . . . . . . . . . . . . . ID. Reasonably anticipated future medical and hospital expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ . . . . . . . . . . . . . E. Reasonably anticipated lost wages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . $ . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,F. Other documented items of damages (describe) G. Brief description of plaintiff's injury, including nature and extent of injur (de crib 7- $ . . . . . . . . . . . . . TOTAL $ . . . . . . . . . . . . . I CONTRACT CLAIMS (Attach additional sheets as necessary) Provide a detailed description of claim(s): l�,ft- TOTAL $. . . . . . . . . . . . . PLEASE IDENTIFY, BY CASE NUMBER, NAME AND COUNTY, ANY RELATED ACTION PENDING IN THE SUPERIOR COURT DEPARTMENT "I hereby certify that I have complied with the requirements of Rule 5 of the Supreme Judicial Court Uniform Rules on Dispute Resolution (SJC Rule 1:18) requiring that I provide my clients with information about court-connected dispute resolution services and discuss with them the advantages and disadvantages of the various methods:' Signature of Attorney of Recor DATE: Z ) AOTC-6 nntc005-11/99 I n e r Inn, Commonwealth of Massachusetts County of Essex The Superior Court CIVIL DOCKET# ESCV2004-00346-C RE: Peabody et al v Salem, City of et al TO:John D Fitzpatrick, Esquire Fitzpatrick & Warrenbrand 1 McKinley Square Boston, MA 02109 TRACKING ORDER - F TRACK You are hereby notified that this case is on the fast (F) track as per Superior Court Standing Order 1-88. The order requires that the various stages of litigation described below must be completed not later than the deadlines indicated. STAGES OF LITIGATION DEADLINE Service of process made and return filed with the Court 05/24/2004 Response to the complaint filed (also see MRCP 12) 07/23/2004 All motions under MRCP 12, 19, and 20 filed 07/23/2004 All motions under MRCP 15 filed 07/23/2004 All discovery requests and depositions completed 12/20/2004 All motions under MRCP 56 served and heard 01/19/2005 Final pre-trial conference held and firm trial date set 02/18/2005 Case disposed 04/19/2005 The final pre-trial deadline is not the scheduled date of the conference. You will be notified of that date at a later time. Counsel for plaintiff must serve this tracking order on defendant before the deadline for filing return of service. This case is assigned to session C sifting in CtRm 3 (Lawrence) at Essex Superior Court. Dated: 02/25/2004 Thomas H. Driscoll Jr. Clerk of the Courts BY: Kevin Jones Assistant Clerk Location: CtRm 3 (Lawrence) Telephone: (978) 687-7463 Disabled individuals who need handicap accommodations should contact the Administrative Office of the Superior Court at(617)788.8130 udtracf_2."d 455063 inidoc0f vernevad (TO PLAINTIFF'S ATTORNEY: Please Circle Type ofAction Involved: - TOIL MOTOR VEHICLE TORT r CONTRACT - EQUITABLE RELIEF -"HE ) 4 OMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS 0 }, ° ESSEX,ss. SUPERIOR COURT T CIVIL ACTION s No.£SCVZO0 _31'16-C m u5 ANr.1h f�reaYi�a HAI"" (�ta.13vaV anol 0 9 0 ........................................................ ..._:...................,.....................................,Plaintiff{s} N 6f ^ s U L C tr1( oh 5A2£,n1 )+WvVtS sT. PI Each£, m Defendant{s} a m s SUMMONS Ad I To the above named Defendant: i 1 COMA 5 S r. P y `v n� cYou are hereby summoned and required to serve upon N a ' 1 Z�tt tYt e s plaintiff's attorney, whose address is 0 MC_kcnl Vr 13 V STD J MA 07AOq an answer to the c d o complaint which is herewith served upon you,within 20 days after service of this summons upon you,exclusive of the S day of service. If you fail to do so,judgment by default will be taken against you for the relief demanded in the S r co complaint.You are also required to file your answer to the complaint in the office of the Clerk of this court at 0 s C.,gWt2r,NG£ LS5•t'ftdV+jG ._._either before service upon plaintiffs attorney or within a reasonable time thereafter. Unless otherwise provided by Rule 13 (a),your answer must state as a counterclaim any claim which you may g 5 have against the plaintiff which arises out of the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter of the plaintiff's ffic claim or you will thereafter be barred from making such claim in any other action. � 3 0 0 ? WITNESS, SUZANNE V. De1VECCHJO,Esquire,at Salem,the Zu Z ; day of k rlitm r in the year of our Lord two thousand fCV14 d a C7 2 m W v w O � y R E A EST COPY a F z W V. EPU SF# terk ERJFF NOTES: 1. This su3mnons is issued pursuant to Rule 4 of the Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure. - 2. When more than one defendant is involved,the names of all defendants should appear in the caption.If a separate summons is used for each defendant,each should be addressed to the particular defendant. t: 7 1 � /� 1 r,,. t k. g� �� � .. S RU lS A. GENERAL HOW 1. ALL WORK SHALL COMPLY WITH THE MASSACHUSETTS STATE BUILDING CODE, 4. THE CITY OF SALEM AND THE CONTRACTOR SHALL HAVE AN EMERGENCY �BMW . t0 L�]YI. �. i SIXTH EDITION CONTINGENCY PLAN JOINTLY IN PLACE W/ THE CITY OF SALEM BUILDING DEPARTMENT TO PROVIDE FOR THE IMMEDIATE DISPOSITION OF THE STRUCTURE, 2. ALL STRUCTURAL WORK SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH THAT OF RELATED SHOULD THE CONDITION OF THE STRUCTURE BECOME SO SEVERE THAT TRADES. STRUCTURAL DRAWINGS AND SKETCHES SHALL BE USED IN STABILIZATION AND SUPPORT IS DEEMED TO BE IMPOSSIBLE. CONJUNCTION WITH ARCHITECTURAL, DRAWINGS AND EXISTING CONDITIONS DATA. 5. THE EMERGENCY PLAN SHALL CONSIST OF NOTIFICATION OF THE 3. CONTRACTOR SHALL FIELD VERIFY ALL EXISTING CONDITIONS AND DIMENSIONS FIRE DEPARTMENT, CLOSING OR RESTRICTING ACCESS TO W/ IN AND SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR DIMENSIONAL COORDINATION. NOTIFY THE 30 FEET OF THE STRUCTURE UNTIL SUCH A TIME THAT THE ENGINEER OF ANY AND ALL DISCREPANCIES. STRUCTURE HAS BEEN STABILIZED, DETERMINED TO BE SAFE FROM IMMEDIATE COLLAPSE, OR REMOVED. 4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL TEMPORARY SHORING AND GUYING OF THE EXISTING AND NEW STRUCTURE DURING THE WORK, AND C. GENERAL REQUIREMENTS FOR TEMPORARY PROTECTION OF THE SURROUNDING ENVIRONS. 1. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL INSTALL ALL CABLE GUYS AS INDICATED, 5. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL MEANS OF ALONG W/ ALL NECESSARY ATTACHMENTS, BLOCK, TURNBUCKLES, u CONSTRUCTION EMPLOYED ON THIS PROJECT, AND FOR FOR THE SAFE �i GUSSETS AND HARDWARE, WHETHER SPECIFICALLY INDICATED ON INSTALLATION OF ALL TEMPORARY BRACING, SUPPORT, AND PROTECTION OF ao THE EXISTING STRUCTURE AS NEEDED FOR THE INSTALLATION OF THIS WORK. THESE DRAWINGS REQUIRED AS `INCIDENTALS" FOR THE E COMPLETION OF THE WORK. 6. CONTRACTOR SHALL BE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTAINING THE SAFETY 2. ALL WOOD FRAMING & BLOCKING SHALL BE PROVIDED AS INDICATED. crj AND STABILITY OF THE STRUCTURE AND ALL ADJACENT STRUCTURES DURING 02 ALL PHASES OF THE WORK, INCLUDING FOUNDATION STRENGTHENING AND 3. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL PROVIDE TEMPORARY CABLES, STATIC LINES MASONRY AND FRAMING REPAIRS, AND SHALL CORRECT ANY DEFECTS OR AND WALKWAYS AS NEEDED TO ALLOW "4S-SAFE-AS-POSSIBLE" DAMAGE WHICH RESULTS FROM HIS ACTIONS. rA ACCESS TO WORK AREAS BY WORKMEN AND ENGINEERING PERSONNEL a 0 AND FOR TRANSPORT OF MATERIALS WITHOUT UNDUE DAMAGE TO THE q B. GENERAL INTENT AND SCOPE OF STRUCTURAL WORK: EXISTING BUILDING STRUCTURE. F crj u co 1. THE INTENT OF THE WORK INDICATED ON THESE DRAWINGS IS THE INITIAL 4. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MAKE EVERY REASONABLE ATTEMPT TO +' ^ - PART OF WHAT IS HOPED TO BE A MULTI-STEP STABILIZATION OF AN COMPLETE THE WORK ABSOLUTELY AS QUICKLY AND AS SAFELY AS N tom" "UNSAFE" STRUCTURE AS IS REQUIRED PER 780CMR 121.0. POSSIBLE, KEEPING IN MIND THE UNCERTAINTY AND POSSIBILITY OF n THE ADDED LEVEL OF SAFETY THAT WILL BE AFFORDED BY THIS WORK IS SEVERE WINTER WEATHER WHICH MAY DAMAGE OR EVEN COLLAPSE THE STRUCTURE. DEPENDENT UPON (1) MAKING THE STRUCTURE WEATHER—TIGHT (BY OTHERS) co a; BEFORE MAY 1, 2004, WHEN TEMPERATURES WILL BE CONSISTENTLY ABOVE ( 5. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL CONTINUE WORK WITH THE CITY OF SALEM 45'f AND ABLE TO SUPPORT CONTINUED FUNGAL GROWTH) AND (2) PERIODIC AND ABUTTERS TO MAINTAIN A SAFE AND LEGAL "DROP—OFF" AREA — as FOLLOW—UP INSPECTIONS OF THE STRUCTURE BY THE ENGINEER. IT IS ALSO FOR CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS. DO NOT STORE MATERIALS ON PUBLIC y THE INTENT OF THIS WORK TO BE THE NECESSARY FIRST STEP IN THE EVENTUAL RIGHTS OF WAY OR ON PRIVATE PROPERTY WITHOUT EXPRESS bio REHABILITATION OF THIS STRUCTURE (BY OTHERS) WITHIN ONE YEAR'S TIME. PERMISSION OF THE PROPERTY OWNERS. COMPLETION OF THIS WORK WILL PROVIDE A SHORT-TERM IMPROVEMENT IN 6. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MONITOR THE CONDITION AND STABILITY OF W THE STABILITY OF THE BUILDING'S PRIMARY STRUCTURAL SYSTEM WIND AND THE STRUCTURE DURING THE WORK AND NOTIFY THE ENGINEER, AND GRAVI7Y LOAD CONDITIONS BUT IN NO WAY SHALL THIS WORK BE CONSTRUED THE SALEM BUILDING DEPARTMENT IMMEDIATELY IF THERE ARE ANY 70 MAKE THE STRUCTURE, SAFE FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY OR INDICATIONS OF NEW MOVEMENT OR INSTABILITY IN THE STRUCTURE, UNASSISTED ACCESS. STOPPING ALL WORK UNTIL IT IS DEEMED SAFE THAT THE WORK BE ' c . RESUMED. 2. WORK SHALL INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING: 7. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL KEEP THE ENGINEER ABREAST OF ALL o� a. REMOVAL OF COLLAPSED DEBRIS AND SUPPORT OF REMAINING LOFT CONDITIONS THAT ARE UNCOVERED DURING THE WORK THAT MIGHT FRAMING AFFECT IT. THE ENGINEER RESERVES THE OPTION TO MAKE b. LATERAL GUYING OF THE EAVES. MODIFICATIONS IN THE SCOPE OF WORK AS MAY BE NEEDED TO c. IMPROVEMENT OF THE HIGH ROOF CONNECTIONS ACCOMMODATE DISCOVERED CONDITIONS AND THE ENGINEER WILL CONSIDER AND REVIEW ALL SUGGESTED ALTERNATIVES SUBMITTED BY 3. STRUCTURES NORTH CONSULTING ENGINEERS, INC. (THE ENGINEER) SHALL THE CONTRACTOR AS MAY IMPROVE THE SAFETY, TIMELINESS AND NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PREMATURE COLLAPSE OF OR DAMAGE TO EFFECTIVENESS OF THE WORK. C m THE STRUCTURE AS MAY BE CAUSED BY ANY ASPECT OF THE STRUCTURAL REPAIRS OR THE DELAY THEREOF AND SHALL ONLY BE RESPONSIBLE FOR 8. MINIMIZE DAMAGE TO EXTERIOR ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS, CUTTING ti\� a THE STRUCTURE'S STABILITY AFTER SUCH A TIME AS ALL PHASES OF WORK AND DRILLING ONLY WHERE NEEDED FOR HARDWARE INSTALLATION. HAVE BEEN COMPLETED TO A SUFFICIENT DEGREE THAT THE STRUCTURE sENEW N07w IS ELIGIBLE TO BE CONSIDERED "SAFE" UNDER THE STANDARDS AND 9. TEMPORARILY RELOCATE & PROTECT PERSONAL "REAL PROPERTY" OF PROVISIONS OF THE MASSACHUSETTS STATE BUILDING CODE. THE BUILDING OWNERS AND DISPOSE OF COMBUSTIBLE RAGS & DEBRIS. REMOVE & DISPOSE OF ALL COLLAPSED STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS, S- 1 STU UIS 10. TREAT REMAINING LOFT, WALL AND ROOF FRAMING, WOOD W/ AT LEAST SOLID POST TIMBERS SHALL BE HEM. FIR NO. 2 OR BETTER WITH A HUTS THE APPLICATIONS OF BORIC ACID SOLUTION MINIMUM ALLOWABLE COMPRESSIVE STRESS PARALLEL TO GRAIN OF catm �Bloom m 425 PSI AND A MINIMUM ELASTIC MODULUS OF 1,000,000 PSL a� ff. D. STRUCTURAL DESIGN LOAD ASSUMP77ONS sem.aim m "LVL" FRAMING AS NOTED SHALL BE EQUAL OR EQUIVALENT TO sn ai ' mum 1. DESIGN LOADS CONSIDERED: "MICROLLAM" LAMINATED VENEER LUMBER AS MANUFACTURED BY LOFT LOAD = 20 PSF TRUSJOIST - MACMILLAN. WIND LOAD = 14 PSF BASIC WIND PRESSURE W/ ADJUSTMENTS FOR LOCAL SUPPORTING ELEMENTS (17 PSF MIN, LOCALLY). 2. PROVIDE STANDARD GALVANIZED METAL CONNECTORS WHERE DEAD LOAD = WEIGHTS OF COMPONENT MATERIALS APPROPRIATE FOR ALL FLUSH FRAMED BEAM AND JOIST APPLICATIONS DESIGN FACTOR FOR WIRE ROPE = 3.5. WHERE NEEDED PER THE DIRECTION OF THE ENGINEER. CAPACITIES LOFT LOAD ALLOWABLE STRESS INCREASE TAKEN FOR WIND LOADS. SHALL BE SUITABLE FOR THE MEMBER AND SPAN. E. STEEL CABLE & CONNECTOR REQUIREMENTS 3. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, NAIL ALL FRAMING IN ACCORDANCE.WITH THE MASSACHUSETTS STATE BUILDING CODE AND INDUSTRY 1. ALL STRUCTURAL STEEL MATERIALS SHALL BE ASTM A992, GRADE 50. STANDARDS. ALL WELDS SHALL BE MADE IN THE SHOP BY CERTIFIED WELDERS N USING AWS E70-XX ELECTRODES AND SHALL BE SUBJECT TO FULL 4. WOOD CONSTRUCTION IS TO CONFORM TO PART 11 "DESIGN VISUAL INSPECTION IN THE FIELD BY THE ENGINEER. SPECIFICATIONS" AS PUBLISHED IN THE 'TIMBER CONSTRUCTION 2. ALL BOLTS FOR STRUCTURAL STEEL TO STRUCTURAL STEEL MANUAL" (AITC) AND TO NATIONAL DESIGN SPECIFICATION FOR WOOD CONSTRUCTION", LATEST EDITIONS. CONNECTIONS SHALL BE 3/4" MIN. ASTM A325, FULLY TORQUED. ca ., 5. NEW LUMBER FOR STRUCTURAL USE IS TO BE SURFACE DRIED AND 3. ALL CABLE GUYS (WIRE ROPE) SHALL BE NON-GALVANIZED, NON- HAVE A MOISTURE CONTENT OF NOT MORE THAN 19 PERCENT. `�' STAINLESS STEEL, 6-WIRE (PLUS CORE) IWRC; XIP" WIRE ROPE AS �j Q MANUFACTURED BY THE "WIRE ROPE CORPORATION OF AMERICA, 6. STRUCTURAL LUMBER IS TO BE IDENTIFIED BY THE GRADE MARK OF, INC. AVAILABLE VIA THE PHILIP A. RAND CORP., NEWTON, MA. OR CERTIFICATE OF INSPECTION ISSUED BY, A GRADING OR o ai a[", INSPECTION BUREAU OR AGENCY RECOGNIZED AS BEING COMPETENT 4. WIRE ROPE SHALL HAVE THE FOLLOWING MINIMUM BREAKING p to CAPACITIES: X" DIA. L@ 11.5 TONS. 7. STRUCTURAL LUMBER IS TO BE VISUALLY STRESS—GRADED LUMBER IN crj ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF ASTM DESIGNATION D245-74, N ti :R 5. ALL ATTACHMENT HARDWARE SHALL BE SUFFICIENT TO DEVELOP THE "METHODS FOR ESTABLISHING STRUCTURAL GRADES AND RELATED au FULL DESIGN CAPACITY OF THE WIRE ROPE AND SHALL BE OF NOT ALLOWABLE PROPERTIES FOR VISUALLY GRADED LUMBER." p _ LESS THAN THE NOMINAL SIZES INDICATED ON THE DRAWINGS. 8. WOOD IS TO BE HANDLED AND COVERED TO PREVENT DAMAGE AND cid to Cca 6. HOLES FOR ATTACHMENT HARDWARE AND BOLTS SHALL BE 1/16" MOISTURE ABSORPTION FROM SNOW OR RAIN. NOMINAL OVERSIZE, UNLESS A LARGER OVERSIZE IS REQUIRED FOR - v co INSTALLATION AND ALLOWED BY THE ENGINEER. rao 7. CONTRACTOR AND WIRE ROPE SUPPLIER SHALL REVIEW THE DESIGN y AND VERIFY THE FIT AND CLEARANCE OF ALL CONNECTED ITEMS AND NOTIFY THE ENGINEER OF ANY NECESSARY MODIFICATIONS BEFORE Gj PROCEEDING WITH THE WORK. 8. NO CABLES SHALL BE BENT AT TIGHTER THAN A 20 CABLE DIAMETER RADIUS EXCEPT WHERE 3/8" CABLE PASSES THROUGH THIMBLES. BENDS OF GREATER THAN 5 DEGREES SHALL BE MADE IN PRE—BENT GALVANIZED STEEL PIPE AND BENDS OF LESS THAN 5 DEGREES SHALL BE MADE WITH SUFFICIENT PADDING, CURVED BLOCKING AND/OR TAPING AS NEEDED TO PROTECT THE CABLE FROM KINKING OR CHAFING. 9. THIMBLES SHALL HAVE AN EFFICIENCY RATING OF NOT LESS THAN 80%. 10. STEEL PLATE HARDWARE SHALL BE ASTM A36, PRIMER—PAINTED. i. - F. WOOD FRAMING REQUIREMENTS: 1. PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING ROUGH CARPENTRY MATERIALS: too. CONVENTIONAL LUMBER JOISTS, BUILT—UP POST LAMINATIONS, AND >' GENERAL NOTES MISCELLANEOUS CRIPPLES AND BLOCKING SHALL BE SPF NO. 1 OR NO. 2 GRADE OR BETTER. • S—� F:\':Al)I)\I'rn rr..=\700r\0/0.5.5 ii hcrcrrl `. :ri.r. :rrnrrr. Hri.s,:\5 .5 Ir'- IcorI Frrmirr I'Irrrwr, Ic O;�/ j'IOO/ 1():1 r:b)O AM u C X r I I vl Im 202 ® 16" O.C. 1 1 g l l o 202 ® 16" O.C. m _ 202 ® 16" O.C. x � rno — — I � CD I I a- Ln � o w II II 0 I ( ( IZ ' FALLEN JOIST _ _ � I/ 202 ® 16" O.C. I I FALLEN JOIST IIrn M ( I Ej E3 II I ) w II II I 0 rn v1 CO to 1''I V1 C7 rn O O ta( O O � O SCAM 1/4•-0•-0• MW NAYS �+ 5 UM U-25--W Emergency Stabilization of Carriage House day' Dm- PNCM,,,° ,, at 6 Federal Street Court Il�II C4 Salem, Massachusetts �1� � DET. ©/S-11 DET.QA /S-11 DEL ©/S-11 ST Un\nI U'' T� wemm w►aamaua — — — — — — m rsa� NORTH 0 I 6+6 splo I POS ST�Gr c aU m DET. ©/5-11 DET. ®/S-11 y cccU � U N ADD '/1"0 CABLES e y 4 (TYPICAL) v p rn.r 4] v a ca ca c •.r N rt e I a DET. ©/5-11co DET. ®/5-11 q N _ W s> Z /4"0 W/ ADD SOLIDx4x4 6x6 SCAB ERED TO WALL PLATE LATE 6x6 6"� j 4'-0" L 6" 6" 4'-0 6" ' DET. 5-11 Jnr- �nr— DET. ©/5-11 - i 5 EA VE LEVEL PLANPAVE Mrm 2x4 ® 24" O.C. STFUM is (MANSARD FRAMING BELOW) HO I� �+smma: nc e� samr,n ant sa vm.�7 _ NORTH _ I ADD NEW GUSSETS 1 PER DEL Q/S-12 1 \ / _ C4 2x8 ® 21" O.C. Cc\ C14 / m I . 2x4 ® 24" O.C. v (MANSARD FRAMING I 2x4 ® 24" O.C. cc I BELOW) I I - - I 1 (MANSABELOW) FRAMING 03o cri t' p '- 2x8 21" O.C. N n N X w I x �D I wl �I wl I � C14 I I W ADD NEW GUSSETS PER DET. Q/S-12 1 0 R•- a ffi i 2x4 @ 24" O.C. (MANSARD FRAMING moor Zavn BELOW) r� ROOF LEVEL PLAN STDuffolts tlO�TA Sam m OWI ma w�® r�>ws.>�aeon ....n.arse-Detma� a x yet i ROOF LEVEL Co EAVE LEVEL y � ` � � 5 l� a ':.Jn.,w�>'a -:3.W. a t' t' V 'a ..a; y l :ry •°" t '�F."tr ,� 4{ w (U t.... *'6z _ � a ROA LOC N K. 3 r ROD.,LOC'N LOFT LEVEL �w £ .,. . . "✓._ %r '� uYr+'tX �"h4Y'u,`��'§-1-w� ,''t .. ... ... (Z C9 ca % yr�wi1 101, xl3 `5'xs 5 u r z i Y t s ��} O,S �T+ V (a 'S IY..� '� -'Y�': Y! 1 -p Y .} �� h ✓ S 5a 4�S I /'4 l h 1-'✓ 211 W . - y o� NORTH ELEVATION 1'-0" (APPROX.) ri WORM ELEVA77ON _. = S_6 ST UGU HS HOPTA m 7 7 ser eie.��amri az e ROOF LEVEL i, cc p t 4 y 'S3 w��� rtj£e �• `4:." -�^. fi nr -a 3' �V ei 4 EAVE LEVEL e T , v 'v. i t i (43 EXPOSE R01a e 9C NS LOFT LEVEL w W a x-'gw k. i JzYaksu:� 'c+'a 7' hC—T c_ as s,. ::✓s 'raa .&+..»rsc.« aubw2' +` ' 9 (/] 0 vrz F s ,zw:u3 ...+. �y.a i— Ha.,eY„a �. wc,ra y F s --it' -..wE Wk "b.✓-eu. O fk .vi maxi.-us�.+uswny: ..lvaw .d4t�, - "'f Ul f'�^ co !1 �%• w. _"� .$- ifv'"-w, �r N i:- r z: ..;w.wr a.;%s,A.F-¢+w rk,.Ls%&sx fiMi gf ? t -eX '+7 'Se �5 t J �.h SRt.�. 4' } ..s-.. a. 'Y Y .0 r?— S. �.>recr resp rA i � � ..w 2e+u—'r+ �� �'✓fl..�as�de» :a. ' � .:c �'ik'a* = w}F, ,..,, a" ,-".�`�y�`iv-rxN,a4, rte.-; , �•.' iY i�-�ti s'§ .�^+ems--�' M�m4'rz�'re>'I-.n�' `� ..:'`,,,�y'�r' t �-?^r��ro� v .. y , G� EAST ELEVATION 1'-0" (APPROX.) y - EAST ELEVA71ON S- 7 STRUMS WTA "age=m ojwj M " m? PB P,��„ - Pdl PlB.?IfiGOP/ . ..�+4vetmwvmmmm t _ tl a. F .. ROOF LEVEL Y.. cn EAVE LEVEL k M e a Ct5 r03 N FASTEN ZDtSE s U LOFT LEVEL r #�. � - Y CFd - P h ww�r�'�' .S��' A.. i'kr ry• i _. ,n."^...r+! ` ir�-F`IL - O W ;i,a„ r>x» xar3atik,a + . F`'v to �_ afin:$wSUR`ksn r.'SaJiX'u'd4€ w a� xi f wt..�,.W �} 5 �3uu �o-d+Y K^iaa N�� " m4Lku-7rh.M '� NSYVWwii "- 4d.s;. ✓ �-++V�a O 00 �. ,„. -.r arx{,>an a.T�f.-.ka..w.,en; .3vsx'aL,«.N}• ..i` +,.L rt 35' kms. amu. .e-.::.{. .a..k-+.*• a^.s„yw..ra;7wy..'::eJsV�.+e�.e+. Y. Ycsi:, '.-uc�+. 't' "` t v.-` "'� •�... ,+ '�"Y.a. r>!, "' +5} h 7 i viiia mi w'u .�' >c F f i .A3.x S 9 - - '�.. '�-W�m�,mk .... ..rlli-'° Er, i' Ar.> �' �e Co a 1 Y .•f .,� din-.+ u5, c Yka. .wS�r' '••1 Q� 1 ri lw 34*� 7- '� + .wssc i^w .z..., yJt#e a K , m .�e 6m s u .zs'r3�3katu 'at„a.�a" rv�".r .,a.rva1L' +�a-•< ^-cx• - •.•w :».amu -, . 4 ,t .>*, .,_._.+r cn .r � �o (] .a +.>. Y E�'+ �J-s•• - r d ssw,. It r• S ra s � +.'�',w..' m�r-� .s`a Q co J Y : S x..r,•r.,&u %r mfr 7eaa, 5-` 'fir aa,wr S r„., a ww+`+,.�`i-Fe ,3 + a.a ••� : E •w� - , ..,, Q1 L - $�',. .x" ` '�"`tem; a:-v '�T..a«Yr'"s.cv*.*.. -� .su `*.�"'..r�rx+*'"^.'^.•,.,.s,.t *' v �''"„ _ - �_ NN �'"� e 3�S.irSs + '. ss"ak ygiy�r- ;- s SOUTH ELEVATION o " = 1'-0" (APPROX.) SOM EZ"A77ON S-8 ST UGU IS HATH c>asramrc mega=me M? M.7 i7 PB � ' paP/&f1820R! - - �Melmes-norlh.em ROOF LEVEL n co {. 1 N ..�c�,�f O t EAVE LEVEL N (Co u«�=.a1z�u...a-=srS.,�:.F `�* � atL n ?«�1n'` 4 aw rsw �.� � •� � � LOFT LEVEL i Av..+=+.n.a+ ''-•`�k74..15.. .. via+.s« .L-ba'.vam.C,v."Suxk �y. s'. mac., > M,E.....*Mx'K'�"..•..#.'�S fir$ • . .. ','�k 'e^ 'r3�aM.w.a*.u- $'�..�-L+-hr '/`x....-S.'^A � a. .Gvn'`a..-SiP.Ewq.x'k t �'� X4.1 • a 9� '� - v z�< t.ri i' � M �'ay.av,,. ea w O Q) cn co .� ,✓ x r - x ^'i "a na w .xy �✓K.$' xxai•-`"'+>£. .ri m.a ,c " eCUa3 N ,a 4wat '. ^vn»r.a +r .Yu'.f i.�firsriw4P2 - <fi t x� �L7 GL G.1 s - �- ,4.iirvpJ ,a.e4e • ++ 4P . eH.x»-.+a k+u+,h.}h'k �£$ v"a] F ao-�u>wmm:� t co � ,.%�.3"'""' refi�...�• wa.M„� +rh+w- d ,.^hw�e'e fP 4� w...tia K -.xa-�x +� � Iii 1„, ,r .+x+.^•., m- .- t3YV2.'&.v w`-,- -r' ""�` +,�, �xa Mc +am.P, ^'n 40 c '� �«i-��t5.4i•..mi,�X»'LmVet»L �, txK r.r�/++i sua�Y.uN.Y'? eta a.,-✓i ..ur.,, - q Gn�A K. c� WEST ELEVATION a a - WEST ELEVA77ON S- 9 S178 ,qG.� po GE0 A/e 0*1 s�lkeg ro O co m cdNTo41 ta A'' o °, ril yr 4 cs) z� jv �C�4�c ��-�✓ OV 8 ` a 5 � A SKS a s 4p AX'Ca W T 4f OF , • - Dov _ tNfv B Lt r� 5Ig t r F S IAle; V &I f3s���c4Z- rO 4 IG v' 71 5 - F7 ; 7otzr S, 10 Po05 � � QB 3T r i `i ST UM TS BOATI w - sem,me oin n a]n]u 1dI n8.]16EDn _ _ a4aelmv-nolhaam 2 W�p6�' �WCrt 1-4 a u/et3H�P8 it/ac�} 1 �+ 4 is r 4 4-6 r��p cL a )01.47-6 m 7�AOrC Ct A/7-6 44 SF(�°Ili fid/ fi AJC`"W 24 'Sr4/VO'l dR .ANGLe'D a & Z-) TAWe ?-H r.9-rcr� /^^✓ �L e3 5 erre �Ccij CO � ccu 44 a^Qi � ) rntoc G�� I� L 34 _ U RS 3- 72oSv'Y CL Y'S ' c�T� i�... Q. = NcsU/ tF S-6 d /Ve'7 r/ 6 k-(, W �w2G L26 r2 c' r2. cfZ ��, fI 3� 4� Txc2u—Abps 2 ~ 4T2Cs°.i �[ c� 20D5 a +6 7 0 R - - - SECPIONS AND . 5- 11 ST UM IS tl0�TA - aewi.re aan PB C2]16El1, PII P/&��6dOC! s�.a4vetmee-aarle.e® G RA-7�- a C 0) 2-0,d r✓ r c S roea = 6,4r iS C-e r— Tcs 1Z�9 /ATE a 3CAr C� O A/CW 3 `PAPP rw - - Q) (fit k r.`i7 2 mci ti cn cis .. Q) C7 N �ussr rte, co a t j ".", C''s left`f Zrte - OOp 7—t C t* L4 F" Q) 42c-7�01--tr L..- _ cf let,,. Ila 4) o� m 2 SEMONS AND DETAILS 5- 12 �r Precision Wildlife Services Inc. Serving MA,NH 8 R! `Control for, Past Office Boz 218-East Bridgewater,MA 02333.0218 -Service: i sl°. .C;T1T1A1A! '-gERY-IEEE 1.877-PWS-1278• 1-877•WILD-PR(7•Fax 548.378-1428 Dwelling type: ,,�,:,_•^__. www.PrecistonlNidiifeSarvicea.cam Health hazards2ffl-- 7- - }_"{3'` "{}47 Customer tnformati INVOICE a._.___.. Deterioration: Extended Service Y J N DnrE .`s 'w I j ..�.5 'Inspection Fee CHECK NO,--- —._—_ J MC J VISA U DISCOVER U AMEX Check N0. ACCT.h Animals Trapped III ,... _ vmax, Service Visits. - _...,..__ .. _.__... _. ._....__,...___ ZIP BILLED: rrvn" EXP.DATE .. ._ ...... Expected Close rnn" --, DCOD OCRO LINAC __..,. Close{)ate . DEPOSIT BALANCE OlSCOUh1TlDEDLIE SALES TAX a TOTAL DUE TOTAL AMOUNT PD _ DETAILS ill FULL 1 _—..___.___..___._.._.__.w.... _.._._.._.._.....__._......_.._.___..____......_..._.... �r �y�r>m rj^ f'c�nctL2!•r � _41 on In _l�i.�I"Zl✓7� ._�1r� fric�t�?t��.`��,�b�L�•(zn� SJ�• .r..,_ ...__ _ ._._ • l�dt1-T:'�Lkr"._1o.1��1��._�'�'�"w.Y!1�!�5!+7ii---.___-_____.__------ _------.�_ ._..l l /��1_ t��' lc��f,'3.'t��Gr i4w*+4 SIIhL tZd' r�i' A RW2- r^t1tr.... '1 have read and understand the"vices ourlined aheva and I am Cantracling for the Services in/ul! AN tees duo at tarma of savywe ar wheri spWdlad BASIC SERVICE PLAN AGREEMENT WARRANTY INFORMATION I Tnls 5greenmol apolias to natured area only. 2 Tei;;411"o nem is'm"nal amicus ad""A I canpfetad in III and Ili toes Bre DWELLING TYPE WARRANTY U YES U N(3 pad In hul. 'J 1 Family U a Fanuly U 30 nays U 60 Ua'ya I Any mklilmI o awvicnx magna due to coterkxaior,ana,an i animals to new U 2 Family U a Family U 5o Dow U6 Mos. maria andfnr:m•ry alemlinns of work Ione by anyone or any mgamiation other U Commercial D Other U 1 Year U 2 Year Ilan Paecsiun WiUlliic Smvice Ina.,its omhoiciaru aril any ode[dummiletl O 3 Year O B Yezr aw lfiiisiIs rut nrvurnd by any wananly glvun by WmAeioa I'Millite Sconces Inc. Addniorwl srrvicui uardnd dun In any of the acove ma ums will he performed at addeionm charges EXTENDED SERVICE PLANS 4.Prerisinu wildlife SCIVlLas mc,IUIIV guaantoos it.zboyo Work to the extent Cxtendod rewire Plans can be requested and are offered op r,expimli in m wi aanty. of Inn ustrids oudinel arum lues Font r'fmas meas flatspe44ion of tame and pauwitwa wan,me main, rumors nexice a,c covered undo,extended s,avke plans.Pmcision Wdrailo Services lar..halts all mspon- This contract may be cancelled within 3 days after sighing, sUitity for quotas are additlm)al charges airside rho exleoher amVux pian ties.Attar providing no wont has been performed, contracting lot sonoce plan cuslortnes are ander no obligation fair additional services it Naec any rr:slenaer raarosrir,•c'nee.Arxtn of cours,nest pivo 241nwrerwtkre needed,serves loos still apody. Customo inNluls and n113`I,rusywaiWx#u:n>}rc:vrkM tar. THE ABOVE.SERVICE HAS BEEN SATISFACTGAILY COMPLETED. CUSTOMER SIGNATURE LIC4 TECH SIGNATURE TECH NO. WHITE:MERCHANT YELLOWuCUSTOMER PWH:TECHNICIAN