Hey, there! Log in / Register

Roof collapses on Fleet Street in the North End

Collapsed roof on Fleet Street

The Boston Fire Department reports firefighters responded to 43 Fleet St. in the North End this morning after much of the roof caved in - just feet from where another building collapsed on North Street in 2019.

"Multiple floors compromised," in the five-story brick building, which is unoccupied and under renovation, the department reports.

The building

The neighboring buildings at 37 and 45 Fleet St. were evacuated as a precaution, the department says, adding firefighters are now using laser scopes to monitor the structure for any shifting. "A collapse zone has been established around the perimeter of the building."

City assessors records show that 41-43 Fleet St. was built in 1900.

Neighborhoods: 
Free tagging: 


Ad:


Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

We all know how ISD inspections work.

up
Voting closed 0

n/t

up
Voting closed 0

Not quite sure what you're trying to get at here.

up
Voting closed 0

I agree that comment does require elaboration, but I myself do have questions about ISD.

Click this URL. Look at the keepout and then look UP. It was like this for YEARS. But I can report that it is now patched. Is just round the corner from my house. A million kids squeeze by there to get to the bus-stop.

https://goo.gl/maps/oPpbdsAMd9mM2WWH6

up
Voting closed 0

...would be for the CONDO ASSOCIATION! Somebody must have known about a problem, this kind of thing doesn't just "happen". Its been in process for years, maybe a decade or more. Leaking roof, rotting beam ends sitting in pockets in the brick walls, they finally gave up. The top floor unit must have noticed something over the years, perhaps the condo association (absentee? AirBnB?) kept kicking the can down the road (like that one in Florida). There is a regular registration and inspection program for many rentals, but not so for condos. Given the chance, some people will just be cheap, regardless of risk to others, so unless we start requiring condo assoc. to do regular registration and inspections, this will keep happening. I'm to lazy to look up the inspection history, but unless there was a complaint or a building permit application that would bring an ISD inspector into that interstitial space between the top floor ceiling and the underside of the roof, ISD would never know. And, if anything, an inspector is more likely to cite something that ISN"T a problem than overlook something that is, no bribe big enough to take on that risk (job, pension, wrongful death suit, jail, etc.) For the most part, those folks are risk averse.

up
Voting closed 0

A couple people on Boston reddit have reported the building being empty for 10 years +-. I would guess there is a single owner, not Condo Association.

Edit: City assessing shows single owner (43 not listed. I went with hint from article and used 41). 45 is a condo building.
https://www.cityofboston.gov/assessing/search/?parcel=&streetnumber=41&s...

up
Voting closed 0

This type of post means to be helpful, but isn't. This building is owned by an LLC run by two people.

First go here and enter the 43 Fleet, Boston, MA address:
https://maps.massgis.digital.mass.gov/MassMapper/MassMapper.html
Once you click on the 4143 Fleet building, move over to the "owner1" column.

Second go here:
https://corp.sec.state.ma.us/corpweb/CorpSearch/CorpSearch.aspx

Third enter the name from "owner1" column above into the "Enter name:" field. In this case you will have to enter 43 Fleet. Sometimes these LLCs will spell out the numbers to try and throw off those looking for the owners of properties. Once you get through this successfully, you'll see the names of the people running the LLC.

Don't use Google, don't use Bing, don't use DuckDuckGo, don't use lazy search engines. Go to the MassMapper, and if the owner is a business/company then go to the SoS website and go through the corporation search. The Boston website used to allow for a search by owner name, but crooked landlords lobbied to have that removed citing "privacy".

up
Voting closed 1

Just pointing out there isn't a condo association in the mix.

up
Voting closed 0