Loading...
117 LAFAYETTE STREET - BUILDING INSPECTION (2) i a QTY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS a5i Iic�� BUILDINGDEPARTMENT 120WASHINGTON STREET,3Rp FLOOR c TEL. (978) 745-9595 FAx(978)740-9846 KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL MAYOR THOMAS STYIERRE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROPERTY/BUILDING COMMISSIONER January 7,2011 Att. Michael McArdle 204 Lafayette Street Salem Ma. 01970 R.E 117 Lafayette Street Docket# (1 OH77CV 176) Dear Mr. McArdle, I am in receipt of your letter dated December 28,2010 that requests an Inspection of 117 Lafayette Street. Your client has demanded an Inspection by us on several occasions and has been told the same thing on each occasion. We inspect the building at 117 Lafayette Street on a periodic basis and in conformance with section 106 of the Mass State Building Code. I have enclosed a copy of the 106 Inspection for your review. We do not investigate mold issues. The building Code violations that your client alleges have been explained to him over and over but I will try to go over them again. Note—This Building was built in 1915. #1 Exterior water penetration- I issued a letter back in 2007 calling on the owner of the building to address some masonry repairs. Repairs were done shortly after this notice was issued. #2 Uninsulated interior walls. It is my understanding that most if not all of the walls on the exterior facing walls, are the original lath and plaster material. If these walls were not disturbed during renovations ,they did not have to be insulated did not have to meet "Sound Transmission Ratings (S.T.C) until the sixth edition of the Building code(Effective date 2/27/97). #3 Bathroom Venting . Mechanical Venting was not required prior to the sixth edition of the State Building code (8/28/97),I should point out that the State Building Code-780 C.M.R did not exist until 1975. It should also be noted that renovations to a single component of an existing building does not necessarily trigger compliance for the entire Building. There exists a chapter in each edition of the State Building Code that directs an owner how to renovate and update existing buildings. Currently, in the Seventh Edition, it is chapter 34. When looking at "Code Compliance", you must look at the"Code" that was in effect at the time of the building permit issuance. Also , with few exceptions, buildings are considered to comply with the code if they `c` CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS 3 , ��ffi�� BUILDING DEPARTMENT ? u�' ` 120 WASHINGTON STREET,3" FLOOR �° � TEL. (978) 745-9595 KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL FAx(978) 740-9846 MAYOR TY omm ST.PIERRE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROPERTY/BUILDING COMMISSIONER met the code that was in play when they were constructed . The exceptions are usually related to egresses and alarm issues. The same applies to the Architectural Access Board's regulations found in 521 C.M.R. 44 Room size- This is not addressed in the State Building Code. I hope this explains the Position of the Building Department regarding additional inspections of this property. As always, if you feel that you are aggrieved by my actions or in this case my failure to act, you may appeal to the Board of Buildings, Regulations and Standard located in Boston. Sincerely, C.4� // 4 �+� Thomas St.Piene cc. Jack Harris-Salem Disabilities Commission Art. Sheryl Borbeau—Community Teamwork Alt. Kenneth Krems—Caritas, Inc. Joanne McGuirk-Deputy Associate Director DHDC Division of Housing Dvelopment Att. Elizabeth Rennard-City of Salem C['1"Y OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING DEPARTMENT 120 WASHINGTON STREET,31O FLOOR TEL. (978)745-9595 KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL FAX(978) 740-9846 MAYOR THOMAS STYIERRE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROPERTY/BUILDING COMMISSIONER January 7,2011 Att. Michael McArdle 204 Lafayette Street Salem Ma. 01970 R.E 117 Lafayette Street Docket # (1OH77CV 176) Dear Mr. McArdle, I am in receipt of your letter dated December 28,2010 that requests an Inspection of 117 Lafayette Street. Your client has demanded an Inspection by us on-several occasions and has been told the same thing on each occasion. We inspect the building at 117 Lafayette Street on a periodic basis and in conformance with section 106 of the Mass State Building Code. I have enclosed a copy of the 106 Inspection for your review. We do not investigate mold issues. The building Code violations that your client alleges have been explained to him over and over but I will try to go over them again. Note—This Building was built in 1915. 91 Exterior water penetration- I issued a letter back in 2007 calling on the owner of the building to address some masonry repairs. Repairs were done shortly after this notice was issued. #2 Uninsulated interior walls. It is my understanding that most if not all of the walls on the exterior facing walls, are the original lath and plaster material. If these walls were not disturbed during renovations ,they did not have to be insulated did not have to meet "Sound Transmission Ratings (S.T.C) until the sixth edition of the Building code(Effective date 2/27/97). #3 Bathroom Venting Mechanical Venting was not required prior to the sixth edition of the State Building code (8/28/97),I should point out that the State Building Code-780 C.M.R did not exist until 1975. It should also be noted that renovations to a single component of an existing building does not necessarily trigger compliance for the entire Building.There exists a chapter in each edition of the State Building Code that directs an owner how to renovate and update existing buildings. Currently, in the Seventh Edition, it is chapter 34. When looking at "Code Compliance", you must look at the "Code"that was in effect at the time of the building permit issuance. Also , with few exceptions, buildings are considered to comply with the code if they CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BUILDINGDEPARTMENT 120 WASHINGTON STREET,3ftD FLOOR TEL. (978) 745-9595 KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL FAx(978) 740-9846 MAYOR THOMAS ST.PIERRE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROPERTY/BUILDING COMMISSIONER met the code that was in play when they were constructed . The exceptions are usually related to egresses and alarm issues. The same applies to the Architectural Access Board's regulations found in 521 C.M.R. #4 Room size- This is not addressed in the State Building Code. I hope this explains the Position of the Building Department regarding additional inspections of this property. As always,if you feel that you are aggrieved by my actions or in this case my failure to act, you may appeal to the Board of Buildings, Regulations and Standard located in Boston. Sincerely, Thomas St.Pierre cc. Jack Harris-Salem Disabilities Commission Att. Sheryl Borbeau—Community Teamwork Att. Kenneth Krems—Caritas, hic. Joanne McGuirk- Deputy Associate Director DHDC Division of Housing Dvelopment Art. Elizabeth Rennard-City of Salem s" QTY OF SALEM, MMSAC HUSEM �ti3 ?i 11s+I BUILDING DEPARTMENT 120 WASHINGTON STREET,3" FLOOR TEL. (978) 745-9595 KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL FAX(978)740-9846 MAYOR TYIOMAS ST.PIERRE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROPERTY/BUILDING COMMISSIONER January 7,2011 Att. Michael McArdle 204 Lafayette Street Salem Ma. 01970 R.E 117 Lafayette Street Docket # (101-177CV176) Dear Mr. McArdle, I am in receipt of your letter dated December 28,20 10 that requests an Inspection of 117 Lafayette Street. Your client has demanded an Inspection by us on several occasions and has been told the same thing on each occasion. We inspect the building at 117 Lafayette Street on a periodic basis,and in conformance with section 106 of the Mass State Building Code. I have enclosed a copy of the 106 Inspection for your review. We do not investigate mold issues. The building Code violations that your client alleges have been explained to him over and over but I will try to go over them again. Note—This Building was built in 1915. #1 Exterior water penetration- I issued a letter back in 2007 calling on the owner of the building to address some masonry repairs. Repairs were done shortly after this notice was issued. #2 Uninsulated interior walls. It is my understanding that most if not all of the walls on the exterior facing walls, are the original lath and plaster material. If these walls were not disturbed during renovations ,they did not have to be insulated did not have to meet "Sound Transmission Ratings (S.T.C) until the sixth edition of the Building code(Effective date 2/27/97). #3 Bathroom Venting . Mechanical Venting was not required prior to the sixth edition of the State Building code (8/28/97),I should point out that the State Building Code-780 C.M.R did not exist until 1975. It should also be noted that renovations to a single component of an existing building does not necessarily trigger compliance for the entire Building. There exists a chapter in each edition of the State Building Code that directs an owner how to renovate and update existing buildings. Currently, in the Seventh Edition, it is chapter 34. When looking at "Code Compliance", you must look at the "Code"that was in effect at the time of the building permit issuance. Also , with few exceptions, buildings are considered to comply with the code if they CITY OF SALEM, MASSACHUSETTS BUILDING DEPARTMENT 120 WASHINGTON STREET,3m FLOOR TEL. (978)745-9595 F KIMBERLEY DRISCOLL FAX(978) 740-9846 MAYOR THOMAS ST.PIERRE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROPERTY/BUILDING COMMISSIONER met the code that was in play when they were constructed . The exceptions are usually related to egresses and alarm issues. The same applies to the Architectural Access Board's regulations found in 521 C.M.R. #4 Room size- This is not addressed in the State Building Code. I hope this explains the Position of the Building Department regarding additional inspections of this property. As always, if you feel that you are aggrieved by my actions or in this case my failure to act, you may appeal to the Board of Buildings, Regulations and Standard located in Boston. Sincerely, Thomas St.Pierre cc. Jack Harris-Salem Disabilities Commission An. Sheryl Borbeau—Community Teamwork Art. Kenneth Krems—Caritas, Inc. Joanne McGuirk- Deputy Associate Director DHDC Division of Housing Dvelopment Att. Elizabeth Rennard-City of Salem Law Offices of Michael M. McArdle 204 Lafayette Street Salem, Massachusetts 01970 Telephone (978) 744 5150 Facsimile (978) 744 5144 December 28, 2010 VIAFACS1,117 E(978-740-9846) - AND U.S. MAIL Salem Public Property Department Attn: Thomas St. Pierre, Building Commissioner 120"Washington Street, 3rd Floor Salem,_Massachusetts 01970 REIT'Ij ty (3(19 Day I6pe'&io'fi'Regaest 177 TL afkyette'Street,`Salem IhY Dear i&J,st 1�ierre`: Please be advised"that this''office represents Ricfiard Harrell in a pendmgallortheast Housing Court'lawsu t (Docket number'1OH77CV176) against Caritas; Inc., the record owner of the above-referenced publicly subsidized Section 8 housing project and the Commonwealth's assigned public housing agent, Community Teamwork; Inc. The sixty- three (63) tenants. currently occupying this former rooming house are largely if not all disabled. In a motion hearing before Judge Kerman on December 22, 2010, a discussion ensued about the basic issue in the case, Mr. Harrell's claim that the building has never and still does not comply with the building code and/or the state sanitary code as required by HUD and DHCD under the S'ection.8 subsidy program. As you may recall back in August of 2007 (see copy enclosed) you certified deficiencies in the exterior masonry of the premises. The alleged Section 8 housing improvements earmarked under a:$465,000 housing stabilization loan funded by DHCD and provided to the premises owner should have occurred during the period 1996 to May of 1998 when the building was first opened to Section 8 tenants. Mr.Harrell was a tenant from May 1998 through January 2008 when his thirI.d floor un ittwas'condemriedffor�triold contamination.Your office,should have a permit forthe remediation work performed for that apartment unit by the owner's . 1 contractor in the`spring of 2008. Athouib Xfr. Harrell is no"to igFr a tenant"it vas'offered by Judge.Kerman at the motion session that he still had a Salem citizen's right to request a formal inspection of the building, especially in light of the.current litigation and the concerns for the current tenants. Mr. Harrell and I recently met with Salem disability commission members at their local television recorded meeting of December 21,2010 and member, Jack Harris, who stated he had received other tenant complaints, agreed to act as point man to educate and inform the commission of the status of the living conditions of these disabled tenants. An initial inspection of the premises is being requested of you in order to determine all areas of building code non-compliance, which based on our preliminary information and assessment, would include long-term continuing water penetration, damaged and contaminated interior walls from years of water penetration affecting all exterior facing, uninsulated interior walls, lack of bathroom venting and undersized/insufficient square footage living space applicable to the term studio apartment or singe resident occupancy for most if not all of these tenants. I would like to arrange a meeting as soon as is convenient with you and the City's attorney, if you deem it is necessary, with my client, myself and Jack Harris, with a. discussion of the issues and how this inspection can be accomplished by your office and if not, to identify the impediments, so that the same can be presented to Judge Kennan at the Housing Court. Please call me upon receipt so that we can initially discuss the matter in a preliminary and informal way. Very truly yours, MICHAEL M. WARDLE MMM/sjm cc: Richard Harrell (via email) Jack Harris (via email) Attorney Sheryl Borbeau for Community Teamwork, is Inc. (via email) Attorney Kenneth Krems for Caritas, Inc. (via email) Joanne McGuirk, Deputy Associate Director DHDC's Div. of Housing Development (via email)