C10 165. Union Square Plaza Bldg. 66-70 Union Square, Somerville. Request to AMEND COMPLAINT. Submittedby email 9/11/12 p. 1 of 4September 11, 2012TO: Thomas Hopkins, DirectorDonald Lang, ChairMA DPS Architectural Access BoardOne Ashburton Place, room 1310Boston, MA 02108-1618RE: C10 165. AMENDMENTS TO COMPLAINTUnion Square Plaza Building, 66-70 Union Square, Somerville MA1Summary of requested Amendments:1. Compliance achieved on 26.10.1 Please have owner submit proof that this new element alsocomplies with 6.4 and 20.9.2. DISMISS 26.4 (1987) in the owners favor;3. ADD 20.12.4 and 28.1.Dear Director Hopkins and Chair Lang,Thank you for serving the First Notice on this facility, dated July 25, 2012.As of this date, CAPS has not received any communications showing that the owner has respondedto the First Notice.On September 6, 2012, I visited the facility and spoke with several tenants. Based on the changesmade to this facility since November 2010, plus observations following receipt of First Notice,CAPS submits the following amendments and requests. We look forward to receiving a copy ofthe AABs communications with the Owner regarding this submission.Thank you very much for revising the original complaint to update many code citations from 1987to 2006 editions; and for combining the Parking Lot complaint with the Building Complaint.1. Voluntary compliance achieved on 26.10.1In August 2012)2, the owner had work done to comply with this violation: 26.10.1. The thresholdno longer exceeds 1/2" at the back door entrance. Compliance was achieved after First Noticeserved.1below, scan of filing information for this Complaint.2Tenants spontaneously verified that this work on the backdoor threshold had just been completed about two weeksago.
C10 165. Union Square Plaza Bldg. 66-70 Union Square, Somerville. Request to AMEND COMPLAINT. Submittedby email 9/11/12 p. 2 of 4• REQUEST: As with other voluntary compliance stipulations, please require that owner submitproof that this new threshold element complies with all the requirements at 521 CMR, including6.4, Clear Floor Space for Wheelchairs; and 20.9, Accessible Route Cross Slope.below: 2 photos of new threshold apron at back (parking lot) accessible entrance:2. CAPS requests DISMISSAL of 26.4 (1987) in favor of the owner.• 26.4 (1987)explanation: Although a newly constructed mezzanine level of one program on the first floor(story) of this building is not accessible by elevator, this code citation does not coverthat issue. Please see 3 below re: 28.1.n addition, owner has good reason to lock the doors. On the day I visited, there was actually abomb threat for this building. Also, at least one tenant has important safety considerations.
C10 165. Union Square Plaza Bldg. 66-70 Union Square, Somerville. Request to AMEND COMPLAINT. Submittedby email 9/11/12 p. 3 of 43. ADD 20.12.4 and 220.127.116.11.4 Two-way Communication: A method of two-way communication, with both visible andaudible signals, shall be provided between each area of rescue assistance and the primaryentrance to the building.Complainant reports that the two-way intercoms at the primary and accessible entrances do nothave visible signals. In addition, Blind users are provided no Braille instructions on how to reachinside staff.below photo: In Winter 2010/11, owner added a CLOSED CIRCUIT TELEPHONE. Visitors canuse voice communication to obtain entry at the locked front or back entrances.• This device has no Braille instructions for Blind visitors.• This device does not have non-audible communications for Deaf and HOH visitors.• Please have owner submit proof that this device complies with all requirements of 521CMR,including the requirements of 521 CMR 6.00, Space Allowance and Zone of Reach.• There are often movable obstacles placed in front of the front entrance system. Please orderowner to keep the space in front of the device clear at all times.
C10 165. Union Square Plaza Bldg. 66-70 Union Square, Somerville. Request to AMEND COMPLAINT. Submittedby email 9/11/12 p. 4 of 428.1 GENERAL In all multi-story buildings and facilities, each level including mezzanines, shall beserved by a passenger elevator.Complainant states: in 2008/2009, Owner made structural changes to first and second stories,including addition of a MEZZANINE within the offices for a program located on the first floor.This program is City of Somerville-owned and HUD-funded.This mezzanine is only reachable by stairs and there are no ramps providing an interior accessibleramp in lieu of an elevator.3• If the AAB has granted a Variance for this structural change (cost: ~$20K), please inform CAPSof this and omit this violation from the amendments submitted today.Thank you.Sincerely,Eileen Feldman, directoron behalf of Community Access Project, Somerville3The original complaint named this violation as 35.1, accompanied by a photo (not reproducedagain here). It looks like the AAB substituted 26.4 (1987) instead of 35.1(1987) in the 2012 FirstNotice . However, since the mezzanine was added after 2006, and since the violation involvesthe lack of access between the elevator and the mezzanine; and, not between the accessibleentrance and the building elevator, we submit this amendment.