Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Neighborhood Association needs help on station closing

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • hwoods
    replied
    Well...............

    Problem that I see is that there aren't enough stations in plan......

    1. Leave the Station at Approx. 15th and Madison.

    2. Build the one on 22 between Agusta and Victory.

    3. Build one on Riverfront near Warren.

    4. Build one on County 16 around Red Oak.

    If Someone asked me To Consult on a Station Site Location Plan, that would be my Thoughts.....


    (I am available to Consult, but nobody can afford Me..... )

    Leave a comment:


  • DeputyMarshal
    replied
    Originally posted by jasondart View Post
    Understandable, but wouldn't 1710 be a standard that a combo department strive to meet.
    It might be nice to "strive to meet it" but that doesn't change the fact that it is written specifically to apply to substantially all career departments. Calling your department "substantially career" would be a bit of stretch that I don't think can be reasonably supported. I honestly don't think you're going to get much traction pursuing that argument.

    From my research, if you are a combination department, the authority having jurisdiction over your department makes the decision which standard your department is going to use.
    It really isn't an AHJ sort of decision. The department is what it is. In your case it's simply not "substantially career;" you're heavily reliant on your volunteers.

    If you really want an answer to this one; ask the 1710 committee through their staff rep. Steve Sawyer (rep for both 1710 & 1720) can give you an unofficial answer or, if you really feel the need, you can formulate a request for a formal interpretation. Be warned that they may decline to make a formal interpretation specifically for a single department.

    The 1710 committee just finished their revision cycle last year and won't be having regular revision meetings again for a few years. However, they're scheduled for a special meeting in a couple of weeks. I'll ask around for unofficial opinions if that helps.

    The department may fall under both 1710 and 1710 day vs night.
    Assuming you meant both 1710 and 1720; a department is either one or the other. Neither standard provides language about mixing and matching. A department might choose to "strive to meet" the provisions of both standards in some way but that's outside the scope of both standards.

    Seeing as the City Manager seems to be in charge of these decisions (no Fire Chief) I can see why they would choose 1720. Less $ and less liability.
    It doesn't work that way. The fire department is what it is based on how the city chooses to staff it. They don't arbitrarily "choose" 1720; 1720 is just the standard that's applicable to the department staffing that they've already chosen.

    Did the response times really change?
    Response times will change any time you relocate a station. But you have to consider the city's perspective that, while they may increase slightly for your neighborhood, they're going to decrease for the neighborhood near the former station 2.

    You already mentioned fire load and frequency factors; are you sure that those factors aren't already in play? Maybe they indicate that the new location is more favorable overall for the city's only fully staffed station.
    Last edited by DeputyMarshal; 10-15-2010, 10:12 AM. Reason: typo

    Leave a comment:


  • jasondart
    replied
    Understandable, but wouldn't 1710 be a standard that a combo department strive to meet. 1710 specifically states:

    In the case of this standard, their work is the first organized approach to defining levels
    of service, deployment capabilities, and staffing levels for those “substantially” career fire
    departments.
    and 1720 states:

    In the case of this standard, their work is the first organized approach to defining deployment for those “substantially” volunteer fire
    departments.
    NFPA also says:

    More often than not, fire departments have been held accountable to the NFPA documents in court and in individual state Departments of Labor. In addition, these standards do not address the issue of the ever-increasing number of combination fire departments.
    From my research, if you are a combination department, the authority having jurisdiction over your department makes the decision which standard your department is going to use. The department may fall under both 1710 and 1710 day vs night.

    Seeing as the City Manager seems to be in charge of these decisions (no Fire Chief) I can see why they would choose 1720. Less $ and less liability.

    Regardless of staffing levels, what have some of your departments/city (Full time or volunteer) done with regards to station location and closing? How did they choose the site? What have you see in areas where stations were closed? Did the response times really change?

    Leave a comment:


  • DeputyMarshal
    replied
    Originally posted by jasondart View Post
    My argument is that the department is more 1710 and should be held to that guideline, due to the fact it was once all full time and station #1 is still 100% staffed on a full time basis (basically a full time department 24/7 out of station #1 for initial calls and response times). Station #3 is staffed full time from 6 pm to 6 am.
    1710 isn't a "guideline;" it's a standard with a specific scope and application. A department cannot be "more 1710" for purposes of applying the standard. Either it's a "substantially all career fire department" or it isn't. You only have a single fully staffed station according to your map with only 16 career firefighters (split over how many shifts?) and rely on resident and non-resident vlunteers to fill out your responses. You barely have enough career firefighters altogether to fill out a first response under 1710. The fact that the department used to be all career doesn't help; it isn't all career now.

    Our neighborhood is mostly homes from 1900's to 1930's and we have had the privilege of having a station so close for 30+ years. We understand that budgets are tight, but we believe that public safety should be one of the basic needs of any city.
    That's the argument you're going to have to make -- 1710 isn't a valid argument for you.

    Leave a comment:


  • jasondart
    replied
    Sorry about that. I included some more information that may help and I will explain more.

    http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UT...d2fd56968&z=13

    As you can see our neighborhood is in blue and the current station #1 sits on the SW side of it. The proposed new station in question that would close station #1 would be to the SW more (Yellow Marker) about 600' from the old station #2 (green marker) now closed. Station #3 SE side of city is still open. Schools are blue.

    The proposed station to the NE is not the issue. Our concern is that the potential station to the SW and the closing of station #1 will increase the response times to our neighborhood, which have been well with in 1710 for the last 40 years. The department used to be all full time and over time have lost jobs and gone more paid volunteer. One firefighter told me response times used to be 3-4 minutes and now they are 6 minutes. Due to the fact the fire department responds to medicals as needed 4 - 6 minutes is a critical time for medical treatment. Not that police can assist with CPR.

    My argument is that the department is more 1710 and should be held to that guideline, due to the fact it was once all full time and station #1 is still 100% staffed on a full time basis (basically a full time department 24/7 out of station #1 for initial calls and response times). Station #3 is staffed full time from 6 pm to 6 am.

    Our neighborhood is mostly homes from 1900's to 1930's and we have had the privilege of having a station so close for 30+ years. We understand that budgets are tight, but we believe that public safety should be one of the basic needs of any city. Especially above new amphitheaters, hanging flower baskets and beautification projects. The City has cut full time jobs of both the police and fire, meanwhile spending $30,000 on each one block alley paving projects (home owners paying most of the bill).

    A GIS map that shows fire loads, schools, topography, etc would do wonders to help settle our concerns, but we are just looking for input as to what other departments have done with station closings and relocations.
    Last edited by jasondart; 10-15-2010, 06:10 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • FF4606
    replied
    I'm not sure of the issue either but there is another proposed station site to the north east. I think maybe that is the one he is talking about.

    Leave a comment:


  • jtucker1384
    replied
    It looks like it is right by the currently closed station 2. I'm guessing there is not gonna be any fire station now where the old station one was and they will have two station 600 feet from each other. The city might be planning on selling the house two and house one. In that case the scenario purpose makes sense to me.

    Leave a comment:


  • Jonnee
    replied
    Looking at the map the OP provided, one can't tell the city/town limits.

    Plus too from what I see the locations seem to be OK where they are or where they would like to build new houses.

    Jason, you need to understand that fire houses are placed by the fire load in the area. Again, I can't tell any more by looking at your map that what I see.

    Leave a comment:


  • Dickey
    replied
    I don't really understand the issue myself....

    two blocks away from the old station isn't a big deal...am I missing something.

    Leave a comment:


  • LaFireEducator
    replied
    If it's only 600', what's the issue?

    Leave a comment:


  • LVFD301
    replied
    It looks like the proposed station is about 600 feet from the closed one....

    Is there any media attention on this? Channel 12? The newspaper?

    Leave a comment:


  • Dickey
    replied
    Originally posted by DeputyMarshal View Post
    With your career staff and resident volunteers you have a jump on typical volunteer departments but, IMHO, the standard that best fits your department is 1720.
    Yes, 1720 would best fit this city.

    Leave a comment:


  • DeputyMarshal
    replied
    Originally posted by jasondart View Post
    Good question. The City will tell you 1720.
    Having just read the department website and looked at your Google map, I have to agree with them. You don't have a "substantially all career fire department" -- that's the only way to get into 1710.

    With your career staff and resident volunteers you have a jump on typical volunteer departments but, IMHO, the standard that best fits your department is 1720.

    Leave a comment:


  • jasondart
    replied
    Originally posted by DeputyMarshal View Post
    Which standard applies to your city?
    Good question. The City will tell you 1720. We used to be a Full-Time Department City. We now have Full-Time along with paid part-time/volunteer staffing in the evenings. Each volunteer staffs a station 3 or 4 nights a month, so some stations are a crew of 3 or 4 from 6 pm to 6 am.. During the day they have more full-time staff. When a large call goes out volunteers show up in their own vehicles or respond to the station to get another truck.

    Leave a comment:


  • jasondart
    replied
    Here is a link to current locations (red marks) and proposed locations (yellow marks).

    http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UT...a0c33d2fd56968

    Just from looking at the map, instead of the new fire station being centrally located it is near the river with automatically gives the response times a fan shape versus a circular shape. This seems like a waste of $. Why not have a station encompass a larger area. (other side of the river is a different city, all volunteer)
    Last edited by jasondart; 10-14-2010, 05:18 PM.

    Leave a comment:

300x600 Ad Unit (In-View)

Collapse

Upper 300x250

Collapse

Taboola

Collapse

Leader

Collapse
Working...
X