Brentwood fire inspector proposes checklist for commercial applicants; planning board to send draft to SFC for peer review

Robert Tuttle, Brentwood's newly active fire inspector, presented a draft checklist the fire department wants applicants for commercial and industrial projects to see at intake, citing gaps in prior communication and recent projects that surprised applicants.

"There seems to been a lot missing and I'm surprising people a lot," Tuttle told the board as he introduced the fireflow, alarm, sprinkler and access items he recommended including in application materials. He explained that NFPA standards drive many of the recommendations and that Brentwood's lack of municipal water supply means some commercial sites may need cisterns or other high-capacity water solutions: "You're looking at 180,000 gallons of water that we need on site" for many commercial occupancies under NFPA guidance, he said.

Tuttle outlined priorities he wants the planning board to flag for applicants: required fireflow (with NFPA table references), the potential need for automatic sprinkler systems depending on building use and size, monitored fire alarm systems, and a key-access box (Knox-style) so firefighters can enter without destructive forced entry in response to alarms.

Board members acknowledged past friction between the planning and fire departments over inconsistent requests, but they also expressed support for formalizing a concise, applicant-facing checklist that separates statutory requirements already adopted by the state (RSAs/NFPA adoption) from department recommendations. Several members suggested the draft be slimmed into two tiers: "what must be done" (cite the RSA/NFPA citations) and "what the fire department recommends." An alternate board member recommended the same separation to avoid intimidating applicants.

The planning board voted to send the inspector's draft to SFC Engineering, the town's credentialed peer reviewer, for technical concurrence. Members also asked planning staff to improve early intake procedures to ensure the fire department reviews plan sets earlier in the process and to consider making certain fire sign-offs a condition of approval rather than issuing approvals without complete fire review.

Tuttle acknowledged limited staffing and said better early coordination would reduce surprises at later stages; the board asked staff to return a revised checklist after SFC review and to post a clarified applicant guidance document on the planning-board website once the peer review is complete.

The board did not adopt an ordinance change at the meeting; it directed staff to circulate the draft to SFC Engineering and return with a redlined version showing which items would require ordinance or process changes if SFC and the board agreed.