Loading...
44 BAY VIEW AVENUE - SURVEY LTR 603 Salem Street Nantucket, MA 02554 Wakefield, MA 01880 Tel: (508)228-7909 Tel: (781) 246-2800 SAL-0082 ;7 Hayes Engineering, Inc. Fax: (781)246-7596 Refer to File# May 20, 2019 Attorney Francis T. Mayo 265 Essex Street, Ste. 301 Salem, MA 01970 Email: Finavo0-ftmayo.com RE: 44 Bay View Avenue, Salem Dear Francis, You had requested that we conduct a survey at 44 Bay View Avenue for your clients Albert Goodhue, III and Katherine A. Van Dyke. You were specifically interested in this survey in the context of a porch easement on the subject property, described in a document at Book 6525, Page 776. The property at 44 Bay View Avenue was originally laid out in a Plan of Land in Salem, Mass., belonging to George W. Dunn, Scale: 1"= 20', dated March 23, 1937, by Walter M. Wheeler, Civil Engineer. Unfortunately, that plan contained only a single control point, which was a 4-inch cast iron soil pipe in the southeasterly corner of the lot at 44 Bay View Avenue. Hayes Engineering recreated that survey using the physical markers of the seawalls on the marine railway and the lobster house for the purpose of determining whether or not the porch on 48 Bay View Avenue encroached on the lot of 44 Bay View Avenue, as described in the easement document. We concluded that the porch encroaches approximately 1%feet on'the 44 Bay View Avenue land, which would explain the reason the easement was necessary in the beginning. This conclusion is inconsistent with the depiction on the porch on the Existing Conditions Plan, 48 Bay View Avenue, Salem, Massachusetts, dated October 25, 2016, Scale: 1" = 20', prepared by LeBlanc Survey Associates, Inc. of 161 Holten Street in Danvers, MA. Given that the new foundation and structure were constructed exactly in the footprint of the prior, unenclosed porch, we conclude that the previous porch was completely removed, invoking the language of the porch easement on 44 Bay View Avenue as follows: "It is and shall forever remain an express condition of said easement, however, that said porch shall be tastefully and properly maintained, shall not be enlarged and, if ever 50% or more of said porch shall be destroyed or removed by other than natural causes, this easement shall thereafter cease to exist as though never granted". Based on the foregoing, our conclusion is that the structure can no longer occupy the easement area which was granted. I have left a message with the Building Inspector of the City of Salem in order to discuss this, as well as other inconsistencies of the construction at 48 Bay View Avenue. Very truly yours, Peter J. Ogren, P.E., P.L.S. President PJO/dab