Salem, MA, House Vanishes in Fire

May 13—SALEM — The chatter was fast and furious, just like the raging fire on Hancock Street Monday that damaged five buildings.

What would cause a multifamily home to suddenly burst into flames amid reported explosions, rapidly spreading to two neighboring buildings and cooking the vinyl siding off a pair of other buildings before being fully extinguished five hours later? The first home, at 29 Hancock St., had a lengthy history of problems from the city.

Many people at the scene, and in subsequent days, came to the conclusion their worst fears had been realized and the litany of issues involving building code and safety violations over the years had led to tragedy.

But city officials are asking folks to pump the brakes.

"They're still investigating, and part of the investigation is interviews — they're interviewing as many people on the property as they can. It takes time to locate them," said Salem fire Chief Alan Dionne. "There's no cause yet. Given the volume of fire on arrival, it probably had a little bit of a jumpstart on us. There's nothing telling us a cause at this time."

Fire officials are effectively ruling explosions out as a cause unless new information comes to light, according to Dionne. Explosions were reported after the fire is believed to have started, meaning the sounds could've been common household items that explode when introduced to heat.

The building was torn down within 24 hours, leaving an empty parcel in its wake. This wasn't the first time the property was the scene of a conflagration, but it is the first time that 29 Hancock St. was lost.

Spared by visiting firefighters

It was June 25, 1914, about 4:45 p.m. A whole convoy of horse-drawn fire equipment from Newburyport pulled up in Salem and found "there was no one to direct them" as the city burned, wrote Arthur Jones, a former assistant fire chief in Salem, in 1914's "The Salem Fire."

Hundreds of homes and buildings were in flames, and those flames were tearing through Canal and Lafayette streets, and everything surrounding them.

"As there was no one to direct them, they took up their position at Cabot and Hancock streets," wrote Jones. The firefighters "also worked as far as Gardner streets, saving a number of houses, their work being much appreciated by the residents in this vicinity."

The triple-decker home at 29 Hancock St., built in 1910, was saved, as were four to five buildings to the left and right — every odd-numbered building from 21 to 47 Hancock, according to city assessors records.

But everything behind it on Geneva Street and Cabot Street — and most of the rest of Hancock Street — was lost. The effort that saved 29 Hancock St. was just a small stand amid a widespread landscape of destruction.

That fate was inverted Monday, when fire broke out along three of the buildings that had been spared from the Great Salem Fire.

A troubled history

Thursday afternoon, Mayor Kim Driscoll was very direct.

"We don't know if this fire had any connection to do with some of the challenges we've had at the property," she said. "I want to be clear about that. It's certainly a property that's been known to our Inspectional Services teams for decades, that we've struggled to always have in compliance with codes and regulations."

A review of city records going back to 1987 shows a cyclical level of activity from city officials with 29 Hancock St. Owned by Margie Mullen, the property has regularly run afoul of inspectors and zoning enforcement for appearing to be an illegal boarding house. The first instance of this appears on July 26, 1990.

" The Fire Prevention Bureau has received complaints concerning the operation of two illegal lodging houses at the following locations," wrote Fire Marshal Robert Turner to building inspector William Munroe, on that date.

Included in the letter was 335 Lafayette St., "alleged to be leasing rooms as single-room occupancies in violation of the above referenced statutes." Along with it was 29 Hancock, which was "alleged to be leasing four rooms on each of two floors for $85 to $90 per week."

"Please let me know when it would be possible to conduct a joint inspection of these properties," Turner wrote.

The issue was eventually cleared up, with Mullen outlining three households — including her own family on the first floor — taking up residence in the building.

By 1993, one of the residents named in the earlier tenant letter delivered his own hand-written note. He was a prior tenant on the third floor with a pair of brothers who lived in the property for more than a decade, according to the records.

"I want to report that someone is breaking the law," wrote the prior tenant, "by running a roommate place on 29 Hancock St in Salem. I like to see an investigation over this place."

Within days, building inspector Leo Tremblay began what became years of periodic correspondence with Mullen over the use of the property.

"This office has received a complaint alleging the above referenced property is being used as a rooming house and not as the three (3) family dwelling our records show it is," Tremblay wrote on July 13, 1993. "The rooming and board of more than two (2) persons is not an allowed use."

Then, on Jan. 5, 1994: "This department has received another complaint regarding an alleged illegal use of the above referenced property," Tremblay wrote.

On July 30, 1996, a Neighborhood Improvement Task Force Referral Form lodges a complaint about "2nd + 3rd floor illegal rooming house; no smoke detectors or sprinklers" at 29 Hancock St.

By 2001, with Driscoll as a city councilor and Tom St. Pierre as building inspector, the issues resurfaced.

"Upon inspection of the second and third floor, it is noted that you are operating a rooming house under the above stated definition," wrote a city building inspector. "A rooming house requires that you comply with all applicable regulations, such as the state Board of Fire Prevention and Building Department codes. Permits may also be necessary. A copy of this report will be sent to both city departments & Salem Licensing Board."

The issues would continue over the years, as recently as 2019. Then, according to records, they abruptly stopped. Since the end of 2019, the address stopped appearing in the police department's press logs. Previously, it would appear as a source of complaints about 10 times each year.

"We were doing our due diligence throughout the last several years with this property," Driscoll said, "and certainly to my knowledge there wasn't a current issue that was unresolved."

"This property was under a microscope because of the challenges with ownership there," she said. "This could be just a tragedy that occurred due to no one's fault for sure. But it certainly has been a problem property with respect to code compliance."

Dionne seconded Driscoll's response regarding recent activity at the site, saying reported issues are typically "corrected because we usually follow up immediately with them."

"We can't say definitively if the property was being used as a rooming house," Dionne said. "That's something we watch for in all the properties we inspect. We're very vigilant to ensure that section of the law is followed very closely."

Even further, the property seemed to be in good shape fire-wise, according to Dionne. Early video from the scene presents audible fire detectors going off, meaning the entire property was outfitted.

"We do everything we can to make sure these buildings are safe, but we have to rely on the people who live in them to live safely," Dionne said. "The fire alarms were there, and they did sound."

To help those impacted and get help if you were impacted, visit bit.ly/HancockStreetFire. For coverage of the fire as it happened, visit bit.ly/3wjFzmM.

___

Visit The Salem News (Beverly, Mass.) at www.salemnews.com

Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.