NEWRY – A second attempt to force developers and building contractors to install sprinkler systems in new housing went down in flames at Monday night’s town meeting.
Dismayed Board of Selectmen Chairman Steve Wight said Tuesday afternoon that the attempt to get the tougher fire code was “monumental” because “we would have been the only town in the state to have it.”
That doesn’t mean the issue is dead. Far from it, Wight said.
“The town is facing immense development and high-end homes, and we have a small fire volunteer fire department that’s having a hard time getting volunteers. That’s why this was worth trying, and is worth trying again,” he added.
After a 30-minute discussion Monday night in the Bear River Grange Hall, a majority voted against Article 24, which sought to add a new residential life safety and fire suppression section to the Unified Development Review Ordinance.
It would also have required:
• All new subdivisions (including those currently under Planning Board review) to provide 75,000-gallon fire ponds or 40,000-gallon cisterns or residential sprinkler systems.
• New two-family and multi-family homes to have sprinkler systems.
• New and newly converted transient rental units to have sprinkler systems. Transient rental units offer temporary occupancy of 28 consecutive days or less.
• All rental units to have hard-wired smoke detectors.
• All buildings undergoing a change of use to first be brought into compliance with the National Fire Protection Association Life Safety Code.
“Why are we targeting subdivisions, and not all new construction?” developer Mike Liberti immediately asked after Wight read the proposed changes on Monday night.
Wight replied, “That was voted down at the last special town meeting when that was proposed. People building on their own think they should have a God-given right to do whatever they damn well please.”
Liberti stressed that the changes should apply throughout the community.
Wight disagreed.
“Subdivisions are treated much differently than single-family lots. Developers are building large chunks of community – 65 units at a time as opposed to one,” he said.
Firefighter Alan Fleet said sprinkler systems made sense, because of the time it would take firefighters to reach subdivisions, which are being built on mountainsides and ridge tops.
“A fire may not be reported until someone sees it,” he said.
If sprinklers were installed, “there would be a lot more chances for saving buildings or lives,” Fleet added.
Others objected to making sprinkler systems mandatory for two-family units. Most, however, didn’t like the expected costs to install systems.
Resident Bill Herlihy argued that the town didn’t have a right to tell him what to put into his house.
The other big change came in Article 38, which many thought tried to do too much at once, and, Wight admitted, was confusing.
“It had something in it for everyone to dislike,” he said Tuesday afternoon.
Article 38 sought to replace the current 250-foot Shoreland Zone with a 75-foot Shoreland Zone Resource Protection District around all freshwater wetlands not rated moderate or high value by the state wildlife department and around all forested wetlands of 10 acres or larger.
The proposal would also have required a 75-foot Shoreland Zone Resource Protection District along the outlet streams of freshwater wetlands, and changed the Bear River’s shoreland zone from 250 feet to 75 feet from its confluence with Branch Brook to the Grafton town line.
Sensing doom, Wight launched a last-ditch attempt to have the wording amended to take the ordinance one item at a time.
But, a resident in the crowd convinced Moderator Les Otten that proposed ordinance articles could not be amended. Article 38 was then rejected by a vote of 31 to 20, with Planning Board members and developers voting against it.
Comments are no longer available on this story