At the April 14 meeting of the Pagosa Area Water and Sanitation District (PAWSD) Board of Directors, the board discussed water flow requirements for firefighting and the district’s relationship with the Pagosa Fire Protection District (PFPD).
PAWSD Programs Manager Renee Lewis explained that the PFPD supplies fire flow requirements for building projects based on the project specifications and the International Fire Code.
She stated that, when PAWSD runs models for water flow for these projects, the models often indicate that they do not meet the standards supplied by the PFPD.
However, Lewis stated, when PAWSD staff go with PFPD representatives to test hydrants and water infrastructure at a project, “if it comes in a little low or quite a bit low, sometimes the fire department says, ‘Well, that’s good enough.’”
She stated that the PFPD has been unwilling to resubmit paperwork or provide a letter indicating its approval of a standard lower than the International Fire Code.
Lewis commented that the issue has come up frequently recently and that several PAWSD members are concerned about the issue.
She asked PAWSD legal counsel Marcus Lock what kind of language or form Lock would want to cover PAWSD in case of damage resulting from insufficient fire flow.
Lock commented that fire protection is the mission and responsibility of the PFPD, not of PAWSD, but that the two districts, as public agencies, should cooperate where possible.
However, he stated that it is “very helpful” to have “clear guidance” from the PFPD on how PAWSD can assist it.
He noted that PAWSD’s rules and regulations state that the district will seek to meet flow requirements provided by the fire district if “physically and economically feasible by the district in its sole discretion.”
Lock explained that this language recognizes that PAWSD has a variety of responsibilities and that costs associated with meeting the PFPD’s fire flow requirements fall on the developers of a project, not on PAWSD.
He continued that, if there are any misunderstandings among the public about the responsibilities of PAWSD and the PFPD, PAWSD could add language to its regulations clarifying these responsibilities and post language on its website explaining that fire-related issues are the responsibility of the PFPD.
PAWSD District Engineer/Manager Justin Ramsey explained that his concerns with the issue center on the fact that the fire district does not communicate its willingness to accept levels of fire flow below the International Fire Code standards in writing.
He stated that he would like a written document indicating that the PFPD accepted the lower fire flow.
“If somebody’s building burns down, they’re going to sue everybody, including us,” Ramsey said, “and I could just see the fire department throwing that back in our face that we had a written document saying we needed 2,000 and you guys let these guys build with only a thousand and we said we needed two. And, so, I’m just concerned when they do the slap-on-the-back, good-ol’-boy thing that we’re get held … holding the bag.”
Lock commented that he agreed that these documents needed to be in writing to prevent lawsuits and make the responsibilities of the two districts clear.
PAWSD board member Gene Tautges proposed that the district refuse to provide a letter to the Town of Pagosa Springs or Archuleta County planning departments offering the district’s approval for a project until PAWSD receives a letter from the PFPD.
Ramsey expressed concerns about how this approach might make PAWSD the “bad guy” and stated that he would prefer a rule change.
PAWSD board member Glenn Walsh expressed his “longer-term concerns” about the fire department being “too cooperative” with developers and questioned if the district wants to accept that “good enough is good enough.”
He questioned if PAWSD should enforce the fire code standards.
Ramsey commented that he does not believe PAWSD has the expertise to do this and highlighted that the fire code allows a fire district to require lesser fire flows.
Walsh expressed his concerns that PAWSD would be blamed and made responsible for fixing low standards regardless of what documentation it receives from the PFPD, but stated his support for Tautges’ proposal.
He added that he would want a letter from the PFPD to call out the fire code standard, explain that the district was willing to accept a lower standard and provide a rationale for why this lower standard is acceptable.
PAWSD board member Alex Boehmer asked if the issue of fire flows should be included as a topic of discussion for the joint meeting with the PFPD board that the district is trying to arrange.
Boehmer added that PAWSD should explain that the district needs clear guidance from the fire marshal, who oversees these approvals, and should demand that the board direct the fire marshal to give this guidance.
Walsh commented that, in the case of inclusions into PAWSD, the district could potentially require included properties to comply with the fire code since it has wide discretion over inclusions.
Tautges explained that fire flow standards could conflict with standards for water potability in outlying areas, since the larger lines and tanks needed for fire flow could make water quality more difficult to maintain.
Walsh emphasized that the district could set a variety of standards for inclusions and demand that included projects meet these standards.
Tautges noted that meeting fire flow standards in many outlying areas would be impossible due to water potability issues.
“Well, then it can’t be built,” Walsh said.
Tautges noted that he would want people to understand that these developments could not be built because the district must satisfy its responsibilities to provide potable water.
Walsh commented that, if fire flows and prevention are a top priority in the community, then it may be justified to use the district’s powers to stop the construction of certain developments where fire flow requirements cannot be met while keeping water potable.
Lock expressed concern about PAWSD deciding what adequate fire flows are due to that not being the district’s “call” or expertise.
He proposed that the district could require that inclusions meet fire flow standards provided by the PFPD.
Tautges commented that many members of the public, including some firefighters, believe that providing fire flow is PAWSD’s responsibility.
Walsh asked if the consensus was that the district needs to get clear direction from the PFPD, which several board members confirmed.
Lewis commented that the working relationship between the districts is “getting better” and that the district recently received a letter from the PFPD signing off on an aspect of a project where the achievable realities of water flow are lower than the fire code requirements.
She stated that she would like to send this letter to Lock to get his opinion of where this letter might need to be “firmed up.”
Walsh commented that he would like to see the format of the letter and would want it to be “very strong.”
He added that, until the district receives such a letter, he would support not moving forward with providing approval.
Lewis noted that this approach leads to PAWSD holding up developments, which can cause the district to “take a lot of heat.”
She stated that she does not mind, but that this displeasure would be transferred to the board.
She also explained that, with the current arrangement, the burden for the issue falls on PAWSD and the district becomes the “bad guy who’s holding up your development.”
PAWSD board member Bill Hudson commented that Lewis should not be the bad guy and that she should encourage displeased developers to come to the PAWSD board meetings.
“We like being the bad guys; that’s our job,” Hudson said.
“I would love to be the bad guy in a circumstance where public figures who have stated that fire safety is the highest priority and that money is no object and they walk in that door and say, ‘We want to approve this new development with half the recommended fire flow,’ because growth and sales tax revenue is really the highest priority,” Walsh said.
Lewis concluded the discussion by stating that she was trying to get the issue “to a place where it can be well presented to all of you.”
josh@pagosasun.com
