Faust: Dover council was wrong to overturn veto

If City Council, the fire chief and the fire marshal are making decisions to keep developers happy, this could be an issue in the future.”

William G. Faust Jr. is a resident of Dover.

At a recent Dover City Council meeting, members overturned the mayor’s veto for an upcoming development of town homes. The issue, as I understand it, is that City Council ruled that a fire suppression system is OK, and there is no need for an access road behind the units for emergency vehicles.

I believe the overriding of the mayor’s veto was very foolish for the following reasons:

• Fire sprinklers can fail.
• The developers could fail to maintain high standards, and the required maintenance could be put off or not done in a timely manner.
• There should always be a backup plan in an emergency.
• What happens if someone is trapped on the second floor of the town house, and fire personnel cannot reach him/her because they do not have access to the rear area of the town homes?

Who is going to take responsibility if deaths or injuries occur to the residents or first responders? If an issue occurs at the town homes, and fire and rescue units need access to the rear of the units, it could endanger responders. Lastly, what is going to happen if the main entrance is blocked, and there are difficulties for first responders to respond or withdraw from the area in question?

If City Council, the fire chief and the fire marshal are making decisions to keep developers happy, this could be an issue in the future.

You can turn on the TV at any time and hear of a tragedy occurring because of a safety system failure, a failure of inspectors to follow up on issues or a defect in a piece of equipment that was to keep someone safe. City Council is not using common sense.

There should always be a backup plan for any emergency. There are documented cases where fire sprinklers/suppression systems fail, and tragedies occur, causing individuals to get burned or die. It is important to note that these systems may extinguish the fire if they are functioning properly, but they do not remove the smoke or carbon monoxide, which has been known to cause death more than the fire itself.

If we cut corners for this new town house project, and a tragedy occurs, will the city be protected from a lawsuit?

I believe council members have not done their homework and should rethink this new town house development on Cecil Street. The mayor is 100% correct in that safety should come first for all our city residents, above anything else.

Reader reactions, pro or con, are welcomed at civiltalk@iniusa.org.