Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Board flags empty fire pond and developer defaults at Burt Mill subdivision, considers stop-work and fee options
Summary
Planning Board members told staff they will press for immediate fixes after staff reported an on-site fire pond at the Burt Mill subdivision is dry and other defaults remain; the board asked staff to consult the town attorney about stop-work authority, contingency fees and a possible fire watch while repairs are completed.
The Planning Board raised urgent fire-safety and enforcement concerns after staff reported that an on-site fire pond at the Burt Mill (Hodgepond Road) subdivision lacks usable water and that other subdivision defaults remain unresolved.
Speaker 6 reported that prior stormwater and pathway defaults had been addressed but that two new defaults were identified: a dry fire pond and disturbance of a required buffer on Lot 54. "They have to fix it," Speaker 6 said, adding that the developer must propose how to resolve the defaults before any pending amendment can proceed.
Board members described practical risks to residents. Speaker 3 said residents "would be in trouble" if structures there caught fire without a reliable water supply. Speakers noted about 22 occupied homes rely on the site’s fire-protection infrastructure. Speaker 10 proposed deploying a fire watch — an on-site staffed vehicle or truck — and charging the developer overtime fees if necessary.
The board discussed enforcement tools adopted in recent ordinance changes. Speaker 6 outlined the new default-notice process that can halt issuance of building permits and enable assessment of fees, but staff and board members said they needed legal guidance on whether the town can use stop-work orders and halt activity (including blasting) that is occurring without current building permits. "Ask the town attorney," Speaker 3 urged.
Technical details and operational constraints were raised in the discussion. Earlier in the meeting, Speaker 1 and others had described limits of on-site water supplies: a three‑tank system totaling roughly 30,000 gallons (three 10,000‑gallon tanks) leaves unusable volume at the bottom of tanks and can be quickly depleted when master streams or ladder trucks flow at high rates. Speaker 1 said pump damage and debris at some fire ponds have increased maintenance work and repair risk for apparatus.
The board directed staff to: consult the town attorney about stop-work orders and authority to require a fire watch; bring fee-policy recommendations (including tiered or life-safety premium fees) to a scheduled workshop; and require the developer to present a clear plan for restoring usable water to the pond or installing an alternative cistern system before the subdivision’s pending amendments proceed. Several members also asked staff to notify or offer outreach to affected residents so they are aware of current fire-protection limitations.
Next steps: staff will request legal review of enforcement options and present proposed fee and default remediation language at an upcoming workshop; the board left the subdivision’s amendment on hold pending resolution of the pond and buffer defaults.
