By Richard Gaines
Staff Writer
February 27, 2009 05:52 am Structurally, the dice were loaded against the Lorraine Apartments building — a 98-year-old wood frame building whose design encouraged flames to race up and through the four stories. But as the Municipal Resources Inc. "After Action" report noted, the smoke detector system failed when the fire many in the city had feared finally broke out. Although the city was aware and notified the owners of the required inspections, nothing was done. And the Lorraine Apartments building, which stood across School Street from the Central Fire Station, was a disaster waiting to happen, preceded by neglect, the consultants concluded. "It is uncertain when the last inspection was conducted," the Municipal Resources team wrote. Confirming reports in the Times in the immediate aftermath of the fire, the consultants quoted city building inspector Bill Sanborn as estimating it was "more than three years overdue for a safety inspection," and hadn't had an occupancy permit since at least 1998. The owner, a limited liability corporation formed by two developers active in Essex and Middlesex counties, Gary Raso and Daniel Gattineri, had been notified by the city that "an inspection is due," but when the owner failed to respond, the city did nothing, Municipal Resources noted, confirming the Times' earlier reporting. The consultants also confirmed the report that the owners did not respond to a 2006 city notice that "an egress" from the basement was not operating properly. The Lorraine was thought to have been fitted with "battery-powered smoke detectors." But the consultants wrote that "it is unknown if these detectors were interconnected or if the building had hard-wired interconnected smoke detectors in the hallways." In any event, "it appears that this system did not operate properly and sound alarms throughout the building. The Fire Department has no record relative to the last time the detectors were tested or inspected," Municipal Resources wrote. Because of its age, the building was non-conforming and so was not required by state fire code to be equipped with automatic sprinklers. "However," the consultants wrote, "the lack of protected vertical openings — stairwells, light shafts, pipe chases — and means of egress issues — for example, (victim Robert Taylor's) third-floor apartment — crated an imminent hazard to building occupants that should have been corrected." A civil suit filed within three weeks of the fire by Shanna Schultze, one of the 22 surviving tenants, is at a pivotal pre-trial stage before Judge Thomas Murtaugh in Lawrence Superior Court. On behalf of a close to a dozen additional former tenants, Schutze has asked the court to find that the owner deceived tenants into taking up residence in a tinderbox building that was three years overdue for an inspection or a valid occupancy permit. In legal language, she was complaining the Lorraine was deficient and violated the "warrant of habitability" that tenants in Massachusetts have a right to assume from their landlords. Richard Gaines can be reached at rgaines@gloucestertimes.com
—
Copyright © 1999-2008 cnhi, inc.