Life Safety Applicable to Landlords But Not the Fire Department

Page 2 of 4 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Re: Life Safety Applicable to Landlords But Not the Fire Department

Post by C on Sat Nov 08, 2008 8:25 pm

I can't see anywhere in the charter that they are breaking a law. Are they leaving the trucks there 24/7? Are they blocking a crosswalk?
Are they parked on an actual sidewalk or in their driveway? If my memory serves me right, the sidewalk ends at the edge of the municipal
building lawn. Coming the other way the sidewalk ends before the drive through exits of Franklin Bank. So what sidewalks are they blocking? Is there a crosswalk painted along front of the FD indicating that pedestrians should walk in front of the building? (I'm not sure...)

The FD have been parking their trucks in front of the FD for years, I find it coincidental that all this outrage should come at a time when the FD is under fire (pardon the pun) by the selectboard and finance committee and even more so after hearing of RT's remark of wanting to "teach the Fire Department a lesson".

So who gets inconvenienced? The occasional pedestrian or the firemen? Does parking inside the building or out back hinder their job performance? There is a crosswalk by Dunkin Donuts and one on the other side of the FD so that a pedestrian (if they were
worried for their safety) could use and avoid passing in front of the fire trucks. Is it inconvenient for these pedestrians to use those crosswalks?

With no sidewalks, 3 bank drive through lanes and fire trucks leaving in emergency situations (plus backing huge trucks into their bays upon return) is that portion of Congress St. even a safe place for pedestrians? A safe place for disabled pedestrians? I think the most sensible solution would be to discontinue any existing portion of sidewalk between the two crosswalks on the side of the street that the FD sits on. Unless of course they need to be taught a lesson.
avatar
C
Admin

Number of posts : 707
Registration date : 2008-05-24
Location : Rumford, ME

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Life Safety Applicable to Landlords But Not the Fire Department

Post by Guest on Sat Nov 08, 2008 8:37 pm

C,
Check out the by-laws, chapter 19, section 2, (a). Maybe RT is trying to retaliate against the fire department for something. I am not. This is something I've been aware of for several years and always wondered why it was never addressed.
There are lines clearly designating it to be a sidewalk. Until that gets changed, the town of Rumford is in violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act. I'm not trying to make a problem..............the problem already exists, and finally someone is calling attention to it.
I don't care if it's the fire department or my grandmother, parking on a sidewalk is illegal, creates a safety hazzard and puts the town in a liability situation.
The fact that it's been done for years does not make it alright.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Life Safety Applicable to Landlords But Not the Fire Department

Post by Guest on Sat Nov 08, 2008 8:48 pm

bug wrote:C,
Check out the by-laws, chapter 19, section 2, (a). Maybe RT is trying to retaliate against the fire department for something. I am not. This is something I've been aware of for several years and always wondered why it was never addressed.
There are lines clearly designating it to be a sidewalk. Until that gets changed, the town of Rumford is in violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act. I'm not trying to make a problem..............the problem already exists, and finally someone is calling attention to it.
I don't care if it's the fire department or my grandmother, parking on a sidewalk is illegal, creates a safety hazzard and puts the town in a liability situation.
The fact that it's been done for years does not make it alright.


Bug you are 100% CORRECT AND THE ISSUE NEEDS TO BE TAKEN CARE OF..

JASON

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Life Safety Applicable to Landlords But Not the Fire Department

Post by T on Sat Nov 08, 2008 8:51 pm

Jason & Stephanie Tho wrote:Another thing, I believe they put the Fire Truck out front as a big (edited) to the tax payers saying, YOU NEED US, SO there,

Are you saying the present FD is saying this? If so, what was the FD saying fifty years ago?

T

Number of posts : 2540
Registration date : 2008-06-23

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Life Safety Applicable to Landlords But Not the Fire Department

Post by C on Sat Nov 08, 2008 8:58 pm

avatar
C
Admin

Number of posts : 707
Registration date : 2008-05-24
Location : Rumford, ME

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Life Safety Applicable to Landlords But Not the Fire Department

Post by Timeout on Sat Nov 08, 2008 9:05 pm

Okay, I have a solution, pave over the white lines like the bank did. Undesignate (is that a word?) it as a sidewalk. One more question, why would anyone in a wheelchair want to roll in front of the bank lanes or the fire department exit?
avatar
Timeout

Number of posts : 829
Registration date : 2008-06-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Life Safety Applicable to Landlords But Not the Fire Department

Post by C on Sat Nov 08, 2008 9:07 pm

Section 2. Stopping Prohibited. No person shall stop, stand, or park a vehicle, except necessary to avoid conflict with other traffic or in compliance with the directions of a police officer, or traffic control devise, in any of the following places:
a. On a sidewalk;
b. In front of a public or private driveway
c. On a crosswalk plainly marked and designated as such;


That is not a sidewalk. wall If anyone is worried about their well being they would use the
crosswalk unless they are too lazy or don't want to be inconvenienced.


Last edited by C on Sat Nov 08, 2008 9:51 pm; edited 2 times in total
avatar
C
Admin

Number of posts : 707
Registration date : 2008-05-24
Location : Rumford, ME

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Life Safety Applicable to Landlords But Not the Fire Department

Post by Guest on Sat Nov 08, 2008 9:23 pm

Its a cross walk, town own 10 ft from road and this has been used as a sidewalk for years and years. If they want to work on the trucks do it out back and keep the chiefs car and rescue 1 underneath the FS.. Its simple, someone will have to get hurt or killed if they don't do anything about this now.

Jason

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Life Safety Applicable to Landlords But Not the Fire Department

Post by xmashen on Sat Nov 08, 2008 9:38 pm

Genius, C. cleary it's a simple matter of repainting the crosswalk! Where I live (granted, it's " away" ) there are never sidewalks in front of firehouses. there should never be, and people should be aware that quick egress from the station is essential, and firefighters should not have to worry about pedestrians wandering into areas that are essential for their ability for rapid response. It's pretty clear that a 3 foot move to the left would solve the problem.

xmashen

Number of posts : 949
Registration date : 2008-06-22

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Life Safety Applicable to Landlords But Not the Fire Department

Post by C on Sat Nov 08, 2008 9:42 pm

Note in the picture how the bank solved the problem... perhaps the fire department should have some repaving done....
avatar
C
Admin

Number of posts : 707
Registration date : 2008-05-24
Location : Rumford, ME

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Life Safety Applicable to Landlords But Not the Fire Department

Post by T on Sat Nov 08, 2008 9:53 pm

I have a question. Does it make sense to have a sidewalk in front of a fire station? It doesn't seem like a safe thing to have.

T

Number of posts : 2540
Registration date : 2008-06-23

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Life Safety Applicable to Landlords But Not the Fire Department

Post by T on Sat Nov 08, 2008 9:55 pm

oops...xmashen seems to have addressed this.

T

Number of posts : 2540
Registration date : 2008-06-23

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Life Safety Applicable to Landlords But Not the Fire Department

Post by Guest on Sat Nov 08, 2008 10:17 pm

C,
The sidewalk does NOT end where you indicate in the photo. The painted white lines indicate the continuance of the sidewalk. Now, whether a sidewalk should be there or not is an issue which could be addressed, but in the meantime, the sidewalk does exist, delineated by the white lines.
Please, just assume that I am a supportive family member of the fire department. I am in no way trying to disparage the fire department or any of its employees. This is an issue that came up and it's one that I've wondered about for several years.
Whether there is minimal traffic or few pedestrians has no bearing on this. As long as a designated pedestrian right of way exists, it is illegal to block it unless some type of traffic control device (person or otherwise) is used.
I'm not making this up just for the sake of argument. It seems that some people just refuse to see the real issue because of who presented it to the selectmen. That is unfair.

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Life Safety Applicable to Landlords But Not the Fire Department

Post by Timeout on Sat Nov 08, 2008 10:33 pm

Bug, you may be right in that the message was overlooked because of the messenger. My understanding is that Ron did fine with the presentation until he got to the part where he made it personal about the fire department...when is he going to get that part straight? Too bad DiConzo didn't have the experience to shut him off at that point. Alas, we cannot help but digress when these characters are involved. Perhaps Mr. Therriault could do all the citizens a favor and excuse himself from fighting any battles that include the fire department. Just his appearance is bound to create stress and confusion...in fact, I think he counts on it as a personal strength.
avatar
Timeout

Number of posts : 829
Registration date : 2008-06-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Life Safety Applicable to Landlords But Not the Fire Department

Post by T on Sat Nov 08, 2008 10:34 pm

bug wrote:It seems that some people just refuse to see the real issue because of who presented it to the selectmen. That is unfair.
It's fair because this person's motivation is questionable, therefore his credibility.

T

Number of posts : 2540
Registration date : 2008-06-23

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Life Safety Applicable to Landlords But Not the Fire Department

Post by Timeout on Sat Nov 08, 2008 10:38 pm

I guess that's my point T, I don't know who Bug is but I'll bet he/she would have been more effective. Ron has made himself too controversial to be a useful voice. He knows it.
avatar
Timeout

Number of posts : 829
Registration date : 2008-06-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Life Safety Applicable to Landlords But Not the Fire Department

Post by T on Sat Nov 08, 2008 10:40 pm

bug wrote:Who suggested having a lawyer look into it?
From The Rumford Reporter:

"Selectman DiConzo then made the motion to table the issue until the Town Attorney could review MDOT and ADA laws."

T

Number of posts : 2540
Registration date : 2008-06-23

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Life Safety Applicable to Landlords But Not the Fire Department

Post by C on Sat Nov 08, 2008 10:46 pm

Chapter 19 Traffic Regulations

Section 1-A. Unless otherwise stipulated in this chapter, no person shall allow, permit or suffer any vehicle under his control or currently registered in his name to stand or be parked in any public street, public right-of-way or Town property for a period exceeding two weeks.

Lol, now I'll really push buttons. This is from the charter. So are they okay so long as they don't exceed 2 weeks?
avatar
C
Admin

Number of posts : 707
Registration date : 2008-05-24
Location : Rumford, ME

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Life Safety Applicable to Landlords But Not the Fire Department

Post by Guest on Sat Nov 08, 2008 11:00 pm

Timeout, thanks for your measure of support on my position.
I've been wondering how this became such an emotionally heated argument, and I realized that I don't know the history of what's happened in the town between the fire department and Ron Theriault (others?). So, I feel like I have stepped in a line of fire in a battle I didn't know was going on.
I know, Timeout, your saying is to go beyond black and white thinking. I guess I should do that myself. Right now, I see a sidewalk and I see fire trucks parked on the sidewalk. I think "wrong". To me, this isn't anything personal "against" the fire department. I just see a traffic and ADA violation that few seem to want to admit exists. In my black and white thinking, I say;" Get rid of the lines or move the trucks." Maybe I'll dream in shades of gray.....................................................

Guest
Guest


Back to top Go down

Re: Life Safety Applicable to Landlords But Not the Fire Department

Post by Timeout on Sat Nov 08, 2008 11:14 pm

Lol...Bug, you should have known if Kevin posted a TRR article after his usual no comment on TRR there had to be a controversy behind it...come on, it's not your first day at the picnic-party.

Truthfully, my first thought was, "Oh, I love to see the pretty red fire trucks!" Must be a left-over kid thing...I like the sound of sirens too but not when they're coming to my house...just in a parade.

Next thought is that I'm in with the safest, most cost-effective solution. Not safe to be on sidewalk in front of fire department. Maybe they have some leftover road materials from the Hancock St. job...leave the lawyer out of it.
avatar
Timeout

Number of posts : 829
Registration date : 2008-06-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Life Safety Applicable to Landlords But Not the Fire Department

Post by C on Sat Nov 08, 2008 11:15 pm

Bug- I hope I didn't make you feel targeted over a difference of opinion (albeit a big one). I tend to rely on what seems logical to me, which doesn't always make it popular opinion. My logic doesn't include a sidewalk or crosswalk blocking the egress of a fire trucks from a fire station and then being discontinued for bank drive-thru egress. Your logic saw lines running parallel to where a sidewalk should be so therefore saw them as a continuance of the paved, curbed sidewalk. I do love a good debate and I'd say I've gotten it here. Lol, we'll just have to agree to disagree until a higher authority sets us straight!
avatar
C
Admin

Number of posts : 707
Registration date : 2008-05-24
Location : Rumford, ME

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Life Safety Applicable to Landlords But Not the Fire Department

Post by KevinNSaisi on Sat Nov 08, 2008 11:44 pm

Timeout wrote:Lol...Bug, you should have known if Kevin posted a TRR article after his usual no comment on TRR there had to be a controversy behind it...come on, it's not your first day at the picnic-party.

Really Timeout, I only posted a message about the incomplete reporting of TRR. I never addressed the sidewalk issue itself. Why make such a comment?
avatar
KevinNSaisi

Number of posts : 723
Registration date : 2008-06-23

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Life Safety Applicable to Landlords But Not the Fire Department

Post by Timeout on Sat Nov 08, 2008 11:46 pm

Just being sassy...I keep thinking I'll outgrow it but it hasn't happened yet. innocent You know you like me anyway!
avatar
Timeout

Number of posts : 829
Registration date : 2008-06-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Life Safety Applicable to Landlords But Not the Fire Department

Post by Timeout on Sun Nov 09, 2008 8:24 pm

Okay, for the record I drove past the fire station tonight. The painted crosswalk lines do extend around the bank as well even though they don't show in C's picture.
avatar
Timeout

Number of posts : 829
Registration date : 2008-06-14

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Life Safety Applicable to Landlords But Not the Fire Department

Post by T on Mon Nov 10, 2008 6:38 am

From the Lewiston Sun Journal:

"I don't know why after 50 to 75 years this has become such an issue,"
Wentzell said. "This is childish. Let's put an end to this."

"Parking firetrucks out on the apron is showing off. In Mexico, they
take them out back to wash them or work on them. There is no excuse
whatsoever for them to be parked outside the building. ... This is
ridiculous. You cannot legally block a walkway," he [Theriault] added."

"I have never seen those trucks out that far," Boivin said.

"Fire Lt. Chris Bryant got Theriault to admit he wasn't an expert regarding ADA rules."

"This is nothing new," Russell said. "This is ridiculous. Those trucks
got a right to be there. You've been an advocate of jumping on the fire
department and putting fuel out there for a new fire station."

"This is crazy. The thing is, you don't like it," Wentzell said to Theriault."

"I think it's stupid," Theriault said.

"No stripes, no liability," Wentzell said before Boivin ended discussion.

SJ Link

T

Number of posts : 2540
Registration date : 2008-06-23

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Re: Life Safety Applicable to Landlords But Not the Fire Department

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 2 of 4 Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum