House Fire on Winnisquam

[WinnisquamZ]

Eastman Shore Road South



Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[CooperS7777]

So sad to see this. Hopefully all are safe.

[WinnisquamZ]

No further information is known. Loud explosion heard and black smoke. It was a older home on wooden pillars with no foundation


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[chachee52]

Originally Posted by CooperS7777

So sad to see this. Hopefully all are safe.

Heard the call come in, they called a 2nd alarm before they showed up because Dispatch could see the smoke from their windows.
The home owner did call in and everyone was out and safe per the radio. Always sad to hear these calls come over the radio but glad to hear everyone was safe.

[webmaster]

https://www.laconiadailysun.com/news...a036fb27d.html

[WinnisquamZ]

Someone with knowledge must tell us why they couldn’t pump from the lake? The had to run 100’s of feet of hose and pump trucks


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[MotorHead]

This is the part I do not get.

Beattie estimated the damage at $100,000, and deemed the building a total loss.

How do you buy a lakefront property for $100k?
Just the lumber must cost more than that.

[WinnisquamZ]

Correct. The replacement cost as is will be around 500k. Here comes the interesting part. The house was on stilts and less then 50’ feet from the waterfront. My understanding is he can’t rebuild as is. The owner is a builder himself who builds multi million dollar homes around Concord and Lexington MA. Look forward to seeing the next build here on Winnisquam


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[AC2717]

Originally Posted by WinnisquamZ

Correct. The replacement cost as is will be around 500k. Here comes the interesting part. The house was on stilts and less then 50’ feet from the waterfront. My understanding is he can’t rebuild as is. The owner is a builder himself who builds multi million dollar homes around Concord and Lexington MA. Look forward to seeing the next build here on Winnisquam


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

Can keep the same footprint/property line that is closest to the water, not supposed to be able to encroach any closer than that

[LIforrelaxin]

Originally Posted by WinnisquamZ

Someone with knowledge must tell us why they couldn’t pump from the lake? The had to run 100’s of feet of hose and pump trucks


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

There are likely multiple reason for this. What comes to mind most is probably that a fire boat with pumping equipment could not easily be deployed.

Also from the sounds of it, the place was lost when they arrived, so the objective was to protect surrounding property, and keep the fire under control. (i.e no reason to fight from the lakeside where the fire isn't going to spread)

[WinnisquamZ]

Agree. The building was gone when they arrived. Also, no fireboat was in the water this early in the season. Something to think about for those of us that live on the Winnisquam Lake. Is there no equipment available that pumps water from the shore to fight fires?


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[chachee52]

Originally Posted by WinnisquamZ

Someone with knowledge must tell us why they couldn’t pump from the lake? The had to run 100’s of feet of hose and pump trucks


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

I'm going to guess that the boat was not in the water yet. Gilford put theirs in "operations" on Sunday. So there is no real way to put the pump in deep enough water that is wouldn't suck a bunch of sand into the pump. I do not know what the depth of that water is there, so this is only an assumption, knowing that can't really deploy the water pump for fires like that from land.

[TiltonBB]

A typical fire pumper carries two 10 foot sections of hard suction hose to draft from a non-pressurized water source. On older pumpers the water intakes were on the side behind the cab. Most of the newer cab forward (cab forward of the engine) pumpers have the intake on the front over an extended front bumper.

When they are operating from a hydrant a soft hose will be used and the pressurized water will enter through that intake. When they need to draft from a source such as a lake the pumper will ideally need to get no further than about 10 feet from the lake to be successful and the hard suction hoses will be used.

Some of the suction hose will be taken up by the distance to the lake and the intake end will need to be at least a foot under the surface or it will draw in air. It is best to be as close to the water source level as possible because the amount of lift for the water is a big detrimental factor to the pressure and volume that can be supplied.

I do not know what sites were available to the firefighters to get close enough to the lake to be successful.

[WinnisquamZ]

Originally Posted by TiltonBB

A typical fire pumper carries two 10 foot sections of hard suction hose to draft from a non-pressurized water source. On older pumpers the water intakes were on the side behind the cab. Most of the newer cab forward (cab forward of the engine) pumpers have the intake on the front over an extended front bumper.

When they are operating from a hydrant a soft hose will be used and the pressurized water will enter through that intake. When they need to draft from a source such as a lake the pumper will ideally need to get no further than about 10 feet from the lake to be successful.

Some of the suction hose will be taken up by the distance to the lake and the intake end will need to be at least a foot under the surface or it will draw in air. It is best to be as close to the water source level as possible because the amount of lift for the water is a big detrimental factor to the pressure and volume that can be supplied.

I do not know what sites were available to the firefighters to get close enough to the lake to be successful.

Thank you. The house that burned had a beach, but a small lot. I assume they had little chance of making it work as it would have been to close to the building on fire. Also, the homes to the left and right don’t have such access.

Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[LIforrelaxin]

Damn, we are all such good Arm chair quarterbacks... Me included... It would be interesting to understand the rational and logic the fire fighters have to think through when they are deciding how to best work a fire.......

[WinnisquamZ]

Curiosity and concern drive me to ask questions. No harm is ever done when questions are asked and honest answers given. Being a waterfront home owner on Winnisquam i just assumed, as many here have, pumping water from the lake was a given if required. We thank TiltonBB for his informed answer


Sent from my iPhone using Winnipesaukee Forum mobile app

[TiltonBB]

Most fire truck pumpers today will pump 1,500 gallons per minute and carry an average of 750 gallons of water. So if the fire is anything significant where heavy streams are required you need a good water supply right away.

In theory, using something like a deck gun, you could dump the truck water tank in the first minute or so. You wouldn't want to send firefighters into a burning building who were counting on water for protection unless you were sure of a continuing water supply.

The small pumps on a fireboat may be good for 1500 gallons per minute. That is good enough for a boat fire, and may be all that is available for a house fire on an island. The Gilford fireboat purchased a couple of years ago has a 1,500 GPM pump.

The difference, and we don't have any on the lake. is the large diesel tugboat style fireboats that cities like Boston have. Those will pump 6,000 to 12,000 gallons per minute.

[BroadHopper]

Originally Posted by AC2717

Can keep the same footprint/property line that is closest to the water, not supposed to be able to encroach any closer than that

That is correct, the 'footprint' is grandfathered. You cannot make the footprint larger or extend from it but you can build it up. Any changes to septic and or utility access require wetland approval.

[TiltonBB]

Originally Posted by BroadHopper

That is correct, the 'footprint' is grandfathered. You cannot make the footprint larger or extend from it but you can build it up. Any changes to septic and or utility access require wetland approval.

I believe on buildings within the 50 foot setback you cannot change the dimensions. The state considers height a dimension.

I know that applies to boathouses that are partially dug into the land, I am not sure about houses within the 50 foot setback from the lake but I would not be surprised if it is the same.

I know someone that would know.................

[Onshore]

There is a whole lot of mixing and matching of different laws here confusing folks. There may also be some local regulations involved that are more strict than the State's.

First, any modification to a septic system needs to be approved by the NHDES Subsurface System Bureau. If the system is a replacement having the same capacity Shoreland tries to avoid having a redundant permitting requirement. if the new system results in expanded capacity (read more bedrooms, restaurant seating) then a Shoreland permit for new system is also required. Often in these cases the other changes on the property that are prompting the application for a bigger system already required a Shoreland permit.

Second, dug-in boathouses and any residence where any portion of that residence extends over public waters fall under the jurisdiction of what might be called the "wetlands law", RSA 482-A. In the case of residences that are over or partially over public submerged lands the law is very strict and does not gives the Dept. of Environmental Services any discretion:

482-A:26 Dwellings Over Water. –
"III. (a) Existing dwellings over water which were constructed or converted to be made suitable for use as a dwelling in accordance with the law in effect at the time of construction or conversion, may be repaired or reconstructed, for maintenance purposes only, using any modern technologies, provided the result is a functionally equivalent use. Such repair or reconstruction may alter the interior design or existing cribwork, but no expansion of the existing footprint or outside dimensions shall be permitted." (emphasis added)

On this site we seem to just be talking about a primary structure within 50 feet of the shoreline (reference line). This falls squarely under the shoreland protection law, RSA 483-B. (While Shoreland staff at NHDES also cover shoreline projects under Wetlands law it is very important to remember that there are two separate programs with separate laws and approval standards under each.) Shoreland law does allow repair in kind.

483-B:11 Nonconforming Structures. –
"I. Except as otherwise prohibited by law or applicable municipal ordinance, nonconforming structures located within the protected shoreland may be repaired, replaced in kind, reconstructed in place, altered, or expanded. Repair, replacement-in kind, or reconstruction in place may alter or remodel the interior design or existing foundation of the nonconforming structure, but shall result in no expansion or relocation of the existing footprint within the waterfront buffer."(emphasis added)

The next line of the same paragraph explains the conditions where expansion within the 50 foot primary building setback can be allowed.

"However, alteration or expansion of a nonconforming structure may expand the existing footprint within the waterfront buffer, provided the structure is not extended closer to the reference line and the proposal or property is made more nearly conforming than the existing structure or the existing conditions of the property. This provision shall not allow for the enclosure, or conversion to living space, of any deck or open porch located between the primary structure and the reference line and within the waterfront buffer."

Hopefully this helps clarify some things at the State level but remember local regulations do apply and if the town prohibits replacement in place the State would not override the local authority.