Ann Arbor fire chief proposing restructuring plan that eliminates 2 fire stations
Nearly a decade after going from a six-station fire department to a five-station fire department, Ann Arbor might be downsizing again.
Fire Chief Chuck Hubbard is expected to present a plan to strategically restructure the Ann Arbor Fire Department at tonight's City Council work session.
A 15-page presentation on the restructuring plan is posted on the city's website. It shows Hubbard is proposing the city operate out of three fire stations instead of five: One on the north side of the city (Station 5), one on the south side (Station 2) and one downtown (Station 1).
Fire Chief Chuck Hubbard is expected to present a plan to strategically restructure the Ann Arbor Fire Department at tonight's City Council work session.
Ryan J. Stanton | AnnArbor.com
The council meets at 7 p.m. inside the council chambers on the second floor of city hall, 301 E. Huron St. The meeting is open to the public.
The reason cited for the restructuring is that, in addition to fires, the fire department is structured to handle emergency medical responses.
"Community consensus supports fire suppression to be the focus, which requires a restructuring but would result in a safer and more efficient fire response system," the proposal states, noting firefighter staffing decreased 30 percent since 2003.
The fire department currently works cooperatively with Huron Valley Ambulance to respond to medical emergencies. A recent study found there were nearly 4,500 times during a one-year period where both the fire department and HVA responded to the same medical call.
AnnArbor.com is meeting with Hubbard today to get additional details on the restructuring plan and will be reporting out of tonight's work session.
The proposal takes into consideration the city's general fund budget constraints, uncertainties regarding state revenue sharing, and recommendations that recently came from a study of the fire department conducted by the International City/County Management Association.
ICMA's report showed Ann Arbor failing to meet the National Fire Protection Association's minimum standards for responses to fires and other emergencies.
The city tries to follow the Occupational Health and Safety Administration's "two in, two out" rule that requires four firefighters on scene before anyone can enter a burning building. The city's response model has just three firefighters staffed at each station.
Hubbard's restructuring proposal is aimed at making sure the fire department is better suited toward meeting national standards, including the NFPA rule that says four firefighters should arrive at a fire within four minutes 90 percent of the time, and 15 firefighters should arrive within eight minutes 90 percent of the time.
AnnArbor.com analyzed the fire department's response times to major fires last year and found the department struggling to meet national standards — a finding that both the fire chief and Safety Services Administrator Barnett Jones questioned at the time. But the recent study from ICMA affirmed the conclusions.
The proposed restructuring plan calls for positioning two engines, one tower, one mini pumper and one battalion chief at Station 1 downtown. Another two engines and one mini pumper would be positioned at Station 2, and one ladder truck would be positioned at Station 5 off Plymouth Road near the University of Michigan's North Campus.
Hubbard claims the staffing proposal enables four firefighters to be dispatched to most scenes within the recommended industry response times.
According to his proposal, the restructuring plan provides the best opportunity to meet firefighting standards within the current staffing constraints, enhances the safety of both citizens and firefighters, provides better coverage of heavily populated areas with high-run volumes, and satisfies the ICMA fire study recommendations.
Mayor John Hieftje announced a breakthrough labor agreement with the city's firefighters union last week and said he hopes further cuts to the department can be avoided now.
Another issue facing the fire department is mechanical problems with its aging aerial trucks. Plans to replace an out-of-service tower truck are expected to be discussed tonight.
Ryan J. Stanton covers government and politics for AnnArbor.com. Reach him at ryanstanton@annarbor.com or 734-623-2529. You also can follow him on Twitter or subscribe to AnnArbor.com's email newsletters.
Comments
motorcycleminer
Tue, Mar 13, 2012 : 10:56 a.m.
Dear sheeple.. quit your complaining....the fire dept. hasen't lost a basement yet ...thats what you get for electing fox's to run the hen house......ignorance is bliss......the yellow brick road crumbles and the big talking head is just that ...life here in OZ...
Carole
Tue, Mar 13, 2012 : 10:45 a.m.
It is imperative that all six stations remain open -- I say bring the staffing back to what it should be to keep all six open -- get the equipment needed, and keep our citizens safe. Close down DDA and return art fund to original coffers and this could occur in addition to bringing up the Police Staff to what it should be to protect the city.
Stuart Brown
Tue, Mar 13, 2012 : 12:57 a.m.
Sparty said, "If the City needs additional funds, they can request it from the State, but they cannot blackmail the University for Fire Protection Services that the State is obligated to provide." What blackmail? Cutting the U off would not be blackmail; they're perfectly entitled to fend for themselves. They're not entitled to expect someone else to take care of their needs. Sparty said, "For those proposing UM add a fire department, you do realize that to compensate for the additional costs, the money has to come from somewhere, correct?" Yes I do realize; I propose that the funds come out of the budget used to pay administrators and that the U not splurge on excessive construction costs. What's amusing about this statement is the presumption that the U's tuition charges have anything to do with the underlying costs--as if the U simply totaled up all of their expenses and then estimated the tuition from these costs. Not! Tuition goes up because a college education is a commodity with inelastic demand; the price is exactly what the commodity will fetch, no more, no less. The U charges what the market will bare and then figures out how much to spend.
Peregrine
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 11:57 p.m.
I understand Chief Hubbard's goals with the new plan. But I have an issue with part of his presentation. On slide #8 of his presentation, he shows the 4-minute overlap areas, ostensibly highlighting the areas of the city for which the AAFD can currently meet the 4-people, 4-minutes goal. He then contrasts that with the map on slide #9 that shows the 4-people, 4-minutes region under the proposed plan. HOWEVER, since Station #1 staffs 4 people currently, I would think that the blue area on the page 8 map should be expanded to include those locations where Station #1 can reach within 4 minutes by itself. By my eyeball estimate, that would include quite a bit of the area that's bounded by Main St (west), Stadium (south), the Huron River (the river itself, north), and Gallup Park (east) that is currently shown as green. As presented, I think the slide presentation misleadingly exaggerates the apparent expansion of the 4-people, 4-minute region.
talker
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 11:34 p.m.
This is about saving lives. Besides the distance of the nearest fire station, there's the issue of how many trucks and firefighters can respond. Fires move fast. People can be trapped in there houses or apartments. About a year and a half ago (maybe 2 years because time flies), there was a serious house fire in a house on Georgetown Boulevard. That's north of Plymouth Road, in the Orchard Hills subdivision. It was in the middle of the night. One adult and child got out the front door. The other adult and child needed to exit onto the garage roof and jump. All this occurred before the firefighters arrived. I've heard that after one adult and child exited, fire blocked the front door. Every on-duty firefighter in the city was needed to fight that fire in a single family house. What would happen if there was a house fire and a fire in a high rise student apartment building at the same time? It's not comforting to know that Superior Township, Pittsfield Township, or Scio Township might respond because they could be fighting fires in their own areas and even if available, it would take longer for any to arrive. I haven't discussed any of this with the company that provides our homeowner insurance, partly because I don't want to alert them to AA's situation. However, I'm sure they know what's going on everywhere and make adjustments in insurance costs to go along with changes. Paying a liitle more in homeowners or renter's insurance isn't the issue. It's deviating from the best safety standards that scares me. Saving lives is the art we should car about, not that thing alongside City Hall that I've seen only due to the stop light at 5th Avenue while westbound on Huron.
doa1977
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 10:55 p.m.
Irwin Daniels I agree,the only reason they want to reopen Stadium Building is they cannot sell it(to contaminated) How about 1.downtown,2.north campus,3.huron parkway,4.jackson,5.briarwood.done settled and I did not lose any brain cells figuring that out,no council meetings,and no lost sleep anymore trying to figure out why the City would spend money on that building called "city hall" what a ugly monster that is!.
j
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 9:29 p.m.
Wrong, J, the city would have the right to do this and they also have the power too. I had a long conversation with a professor of constitutional law about this particular situation. To break it down real fast. Since the state is not adequately funding the operation (which would be the first point of the litigation) the city probably could do this. The university of michigan is provided for (supposedly) the people of michigan, and funded by the people of michigan. It is a state entity and therefore must be funded by the entire state, not a select group. Making the citizens of Ann Arbor fund the fire protection for the state entity (by significantly underfunding the fire protection monies) would be akin to North Dakota fund all the safety rails throughout the national highway system or even the highways themselves. You are right that this is the whole reason the state is supposed to make the payment in the first place, but when it is woefully inadequate it is as if no payment is made at all and the city should withhold services to the U and make sure its taxpaying citizens are provided for until the state or the U ponies up the fair share. Btw, if the U wants to raise tuition let them, but don't forget it is an entity that has over a $7,000,000,000 endowment
j
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 10:24 p.m.
akin to making
Sparty
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 9:06 p.m.
As Leah Gunn indicates, the State is responsible for providing Cities the funding for University fire protection. UM has also provided supplemental funds to purchase an additional fire truck in the past, although under no obligation to do so. If the City needs additional funds, they can request it from the State, but they cannot blackmail the University for Fire Protection Services that the State is obligated to provide.
Sparty
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 8:56 p.m.
For those proposing UM add a fire department, you do realize that to compensate for the additional costs, the money has to come from somewhere, correct? That means additional tuition, fees, etc. Or higher ticket prices for athletic events. Possibly higher parking prices for University parking spaces. The money isn't sitting around waiting to be given to the city just because they ask for it.
Jack
Wed, Mar 14, 2012 : 1:48 a.m.
Heaven forbid that athletic events cost more! How much more important it is to attend a football game than to save someone's life. Glad to see your values are in correct order. As for your contention that the state reimburses for fire services, you are incorrect.
jcj
Tue, Mar 13, 2012 : 1:07 a.m.
The U has money "sitting around" for lots of pet projects!
Kristine
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 8:11 p.m.
This plan would put Skyline High School, just barely within boundaries for the 4 minute response time as is, nearly a mile further from the nearest fire station.
joe.blow
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 5:14 p.m.
It's not about whats cost intelligent, it's about what can give as many union members a job as possible. Let me guess, that said union member will say it's dangerous to not have more union members in said field? I wonder how much safety would increase if you put a firehouse on every block, probably not much. But then remove half of those stations and they'd predict chaos. Unions feed off fear.
BornNRaised
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 7:11 p.m.
LOL! Give anyone a keyboard and you just never know that they'll write. That's hilarious! We also carry boogie man masks and scare children in the night. That's part of our union rules.
shaggy
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 5:49 p.m.
Where in the article (or any of the comments for that matter) does anybody say anything about the union other than the mention that the firefighters union recently made significant consessions that will save the department from having to make more cuts thus making the taxpayers safer? Please try to stay on topic here, and stop trying to raise undue controversy.
kulse012
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 4:59 p.m.
Cut the fire department+ cut the police department= One of the biggest problems facing Detroit. Now I am not suggesting Ann Arbor has near the problems Detroit has, but one can learn from Detroit and see what happens. Response times will sky rocket. Citiziens will also lose faith and stop calling if it gets really bad. You can only squeeze so much before something has to give. What happens if multiple fires break out aronud the same time period?
Leah Gunn
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 3:52 p.m.
The thing that jumped out at me from this article is the fact that there were 4500 duplicate responses from the Huron Valley Ambulance AND the fire dept. I find this an unessesary duplication of services, especially since they now can all (police, fire & emergency throughout the county) communicate with each other, thanks to the new 800MhZ system that is up and running. There are no more "dead zones". Therefore, the appropriate responder should be used. The various firefighting depts. also have their own agreements about mutual aid, which works very well. This was instigated by the Metro Alliance a few years ago, and the chiefs from the varous continguous cities and townships set up their own systems. Leave the planning to the professionals who know about these things. As to the UofM, (and EMU as well), the cities are supposed to receive money from the state to assist in university occurances. Needless to say, this money has been cut back to almost nothing - so talk to your state legislators. The UM did buy a fire truck for Ann arbor a number of years ago.
A2Medic
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 9:21 p.m.
YpsiVet: What u talkin bout Willis?
Sparty
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 9:03 p.m.
No, j, that is not within the Cities "rights and powers" that you so broadly give to them under some fantasy. The State is responsible for providing compensation to Cities for Fire Protection, so the Cities are not able to blackmail the Universities for additional funds for that protection. If the Cities need additional funding, they can request it from the State - period.
YpsiVeteran
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 6:40 p.m.
The fact that they both went to calls is misleading. The more important fact to consider is which agency arrived on-scene first. I'm willing to bet a large sum it was AAFD. When you are having a heart attack, do you want to wait 4 to 5 minutes for a city-employed paramedic, or 20-25 minutes, or more, for HVA? City paramedics routinely do the work that ends up saving a critically ill patient, before HVA ever arrives to transport. As a taxpayer, if I had to pick btwn. my city's paramedics and an outside ambulance company, my city's staff win every time.
CityFF
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 5:55 p.m.
HVA dispatches the AAFD. So those 4500 times the AAFD was sent to a medical it was HVA that thought that a response from the AAFD was neccessary
j
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 5:33 p.m.
So the state won't pay like they are supposed too, that dosent mean that the taxpayers of Ann Arbor have to pay. The U is part of the state for ALL the citizens of the state, to make one city responsible for the fire service would be akin to making one community responsible for all the roads in the state. The city could go to the U and say, the state is not paying and therefore we cannot afford to provide you fire service. However if you would like us to continue to provide fire service you can pick up the states cost. That is completely within the cities rights and power
Dog Guy
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 3:49 p.m.
By the numbers this is a wonderful plan: it facilitates rapid response to valuable properties without completely removing protection from outlying shacks, huts, and hovels.
Frustrated in A2
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 3:48 p.m.
I would rather have those 6 engines/tower positioned throughout the city as opposed to them being crammed into just 3 station. I still don't get that mini-pumper thing but it sounds like a truck similar to one used in Detroit where fire fighters were on scene of a fire but they did not have the right equipment to go into the house and make a rescue and a little girl died in the fire. I would rather have a fully functional fire engine than a "mini pumper" come to my home if it were on fire. And can I assume these mini fire trucks will be staffed with two people, again useless at a fire if the city uses the 2 In-2 Out theory.
Frustrated in A2
Tue, Mar 13, 2012 : 11:32 p.m.
I definitely was not trying to compare Detroit to Ann Arbor seeing as how they get more fires in a week than we see in a year. I was thinkng more along the lines of if the engines at station 2 are tied up and a fire call comes in on the south side, do they send one of the mini trucks (which seems to not be of much use) or do I have to wait an additional 5 minutes for an engine to come from another side of town. None the less it will be interesting to see how all of this plays out.
irritated
Tue, Mar 13, 2012 : 1:04 p.m.
frustrated in a2 I think the mini trucks are used for rescue calls primarily at least thats the way they do it in other cities. Comparing ann arbor to detroit is like comparing apples to oranges
YpsiLivin
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 3:46 p.m.
Combine the administrations of the police and fire departments and have a single public safety department. Reduce administrative overhead as much as possible and put as many resources toward the officers and firefighters assigned to delivering services as can be made available. If that won't work or doesn't generate enough efficiency, create a fire protection district and provide communal fire services across city/township boundaries through a single regional organization. With the mutual aid agreements, the communities in this area send their fire departments all over the place anyway. Why not have a coordinated plan for providing fire protection for the whole area instead of just borrowing each other's fire trucks all the time and hoping for the best?
Stephen Landes
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 3:30 p.m.
Remember the city administration, mayor, and council priorities at the next election. YOUR safety does not seem to be at the top of the list. I'm sure the chief is putting together the best plan he can to protect firefighters and other citizens given the resources he is allowed, but that is not the same thing as a plan that really meets fire suppression industry standards.
AACity12
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 3:24 p.m.
Ranzini for Mayor!
getmoney
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 4:42 p.m.
Good luck. Time to move.
Jack Eaton
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 3:21 p.m.
"ICMA's report showed Ann Arbor failing to meet the National Fire Protection Association's minimum standards for responses to fires and other emergencies." Our goal needs to be improving the response time for getting four fire fighters to a fire within a minimum amount of time. This plan may improve response time for those living within close proximity of one of the 3 remaining stations, but it is also likely to increase response times for much of the rest of the community. The plan does not solve the problem identified by ICMA. The cuts to fire fighting staff over the last 10 years have been explained as being necessary because of budget constraints. The fire fighters union has agreed to major concessions and projected city revenues are on the rise. Isn't it time we start rebuilding our safety services? Is there anything in the city budget that is more important that public safety?
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 2:57 p.m.
From the fire chief's presentation (see the link in the story above): "NFPA response standard: people shall arrive within four minutes 90% of the time." His presentation notes that in 2011 there were 681 fires, but only 480 fires would have been responded to by this plan within four minutes, and to achieve 90%, 613 of the fires would have to be responded to within four minutes. The chief's plan DOES NOT meet the standard he mentions in his own presentation! Look at the map in the presentation, if you live closer to a freeway than downtown, you are screwed by the new plan.
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 9:28 p.m.
@Peregrine: Sorry, I was jumping on a plane and typing fast when I posted this as the door was closing. You are correct I omitted "four" in the four people by mistake. Large swaths of the areas of the city nearer to the freeway ring are outside of the four minute coverage in the proposed plan. Again, if I had more time, that is what I would have said. Thanks for correcting my oversights.
Peregrine
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 7:49 p.m.
@Ranzine: There is another glaring falsehood in your claim. You state that Chief Hubbard's presentation claims: "NFPA response standard: people shall arrive within four minutes 90% of the time." And you provided the quotation marks and provided no indication that you removed the word "four". In fact, what is stated in the presentation is: "NFPA response standard: Four people shall arrive within four minutes 90% of the time, and 13 people shall arrive within eight minutes, 90% of the time." Why did you remove the key word "four"? Please be more careful with your quotation marks. And again, please stop making inflammatory false statements.
Peregrine
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 7:43 p.m.
@Ranzini: Your claim: "Look at the map in the presentation, if you live closer to a freeway than downtown, you are screwed by the new plan," is absolutely false. You said it in a comment above, and I countered it there. Briefly again, though, anyone who looks at the map will plainly see it's false. Or just think for a moment about those who live near Fire Station #5 or south of Fire Station #2 to realize it's a false. We do not need false and inflammatory claims in this discussion. As for your other point, Chief Hubbard never claims that his plan will achieve the standard of four firefighters arrive within four minutes in 90% of the fires. He does make at least two claims, however. First he says that this plan would greatly increase the number of residences/structures that are within the 4-minute zone. Second, he claims that his plan attempts to get us as close to that standard within current budgetary constraints. Do you disagree with either of those claims?
Jon
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 2:46 p.m.
There is no doubt that this plan will increase response times in certain areas of the city and I would have a hard time believing that it will be better for the fire dept and the city. If you move farther from work it will most likely take you longer to get to work, and if your area fire station closes and god forbid your house catches on fire or you experience a medical emergency it will take longer for help to arrive. A minute or two can make all the difference in the world. The fire dept needs to be structured to handle both fire and rescue calls. Manpower is important for fire ground operations as well as rescues, for I would hate to deal with a cardiac arrest with just two medics.
zanzerbar
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 2:43 p.m.
Is he nuts?
gofigure
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 2:42 p.m.
re @ Brad: Per google earth it's 2.37 miles from the downtown station to Weber's. No way you can get everyone loaded up and get to Weber's in four minutes. Not happening. re: I am in the Hollywood park area, Just googled the times from Scio and the fifth street fire station. 8 minutes and 7 minutes respectively. Realistically, and i have driven both routes numerous times, Scio will be to my house faster Google isn't going to help you one bit. That's for non-medical/emergency vehicles estimates. Why do you think the Fire Trucks,Police Cars and Ambulances have those Lights on their trucks???? That's to let everyone know they're on their way to an Emergency. Correct me if I'm wrong but, I believe it would take a Fire truck less time to get to a Fire than your "googling" estimate.
A2Medic
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 9:16 p.m.
Haha, your assuming people get out of the way when your coding to a call.. Avg Joe Citizen slows us down more than any reason d/t inability to put down the phone and pay attention and knowing how to pull to right and stop not pull left or just stop...
BornNRaised
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 8:55 p.m.
Ever see the Seinfield episode where Kramer told the fire department all the best routes to take? Just reminded me of that.
j
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 2:50 p.m.
Ive driven both routes numerous times, I think jumping on 94 to 14 for the hollywood park area will be able to beat the truck form fifth even with its lights. Addtinpnally the truck even with lights going cannot reach the speeds on Miller or Huron that it can on a three lane highway. Its my opinion, but you know what truck would beat both of them???? The one that is on the corner of jackson and stadium
newsboy
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 2:40 p.m.
Nothing to get all fired-up about! The real problems facing Ann Arborites are when we allow the allusion of professionalism and leadership to be performed by armatures.
Ron
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 2:37 p.m.
Here is a suggestion to go along with j's comment above. Since the U NEEDS to have fire service coverage, and they have ALOT of buildings that are over 3 stories high, why not let the U pay for the new Tower truck that the AAFD so badly needs. Also let the U pay all costs for leaving the North Campus station open and to be staffed with the 4 firefighters per shift. Surely they have enough money for that. Right?
Sparty
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 8:47 p.m.
Sure ... and they can raise tuition even further, along with ticket prices for athletic events, etc. etc. to compensate.
gofigure
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 2:43 p.m.
Good idea
Joseph Welch's Ghost
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 2:32 p.m.
Sounds scary at first, but Hubbard says apparently that "restructuring plan provides the best opportunity to meet firefighting standards within the current staffing constraints, enhances the safety of both citizens and firefighters, provides better coverage of heavily populated areas with high-run volumes, and satisfies the ICMA fire study recommendations." I'd like to see how better-staffed, but fewer stations leads to better service, but we should probably listen to the man -- he surely knows more about Fire Safety than Ranzini.
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 2:52 p.m.
@Joseph Welch's Ghost: From the fire chief's presentation: "NFPA response standard: people shall arrive within four minutes 90% of the time." His presentation notes that in 2011 there were 681 fires, but only 480 fires would have been responded to by this plan within four minutes, and to achieve 90%, 613 of the fires would have to be responded to within four minutes. The chief's plan DOES NOT meet the standard he mentions in his own presentation!
j
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 2:18 p.m.
Saturday was a fire at Webers. If this plan was in effect, it looks like it would be up to the Scio FD to get their in time.
irritated
Tue, Mar 13, 2012 : 12:53 p.m.
That 1 Fire person from scio will not be able to help you fight your fire...good luck !
BornNRaised
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 7:09 p.m.
I guess I didn't fully explain it correctly. "Even if its only two guys they can spray water on my house" True. But do you think all fires start out as fully involved house fires? No. Every fire starts out small and becomes large. So if you have a small kitchen fire, those 2 guys from Scio you're talking about can sit outside your house and wait for the flames to break through the windows or roof before that water will do any good. Remember the 2 in 2 out rule. Secondly, do you have anyone in your house you love? What if they can't get out? What if you can't get out? Those 2 guys outside waiting for the fire to break out aren't doing much for you. AAFD rules state that every pumper have a minimum of 3 people on it. Just as a heads up to your previous comment. *** Disclaimer *** This comment isn't a bash on Scio in ANY way. The poster used Scio as an example we as continued it. I hope that no radicals start a tangent of comparing departments. That's not what this is about.
j
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 6:24 p.m.
Ive driven both routes numerous times, I think jumping on 94 to 14 for the hollywood park area will be able to beat the truck form fifth even with its lights. Addtinpnally the truck even with lights going cannot reach the speeds on Miller or Huron that it can on a three lane highway. Its my opinion, but you know what truck would beat both of them???? The one that is on the corner of jackson and stadium Even if its only two guys they can spray water on my house Btw, the plan calls "for positioning two engines, one tower, one mini pumper and one battalion chief at Station 1 downtown." Not actually manning them
BornNRaised
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 6:02 p.m.
So you're saying AA city is 1 minute close but Scio will be there first? Ok... whatever. Next question... How many people will Scio be showing up with? Having a 'truck' at your house fast is meaningless w/o people. 5th street would be sending 2 engines, 1 tower, 1 mini pumper, a B/C all fully staffed with firefighters.
j
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 2:33 p.m.
I am in the Hollywood park area, Just googled the times from Scio and the fifth street fire station. 8 minutes and 7 minutes respectively. Realistically, and i have driven both routes numerous times, Scio will be to my house faster
Brad
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 2:21 p.m.
Per google earth it's 2.37 miles from the downtown station to Weber's. No way you can get everyone loaded up and get to Weber's in four minutes. Not happening.
j
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 2:16 p.m.
Get the U to pay their fair share, or get the State to start paying for the U's fire service again. Close the North Campus station if your going to close one and make the U pay for its fire service As a home owner on the west side this is ridiculous. I hope the Scio FD can make it to my house in time if I ever have a fire. QUIT letting the University of MIchigan free ride on the city fire service!!! (I have seen, and made arguments on here about the U's fire contributions, I am not going over them again, they built the north campus station decades ago and gave the city one fire truck, the state is supposed to give the city money for the U's fire service, but the payments were row to begin with, and from my email exchange with the mayor, have gotten lower over time. The city could/should withhold fire protection from the U, and it is in within the cities rights to do so. Quit playing life and death games with your actual taxpaying residents, and go after the biggest free rider in the system. O and if the u doesn't want to pay, let them establish there own fire department and that solves the problem too)
j
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 10:30 p.m.
Thats the public relations side of the argument the u plays the "how could you?" part and the city plays the "You have over $7,000,000,000 in your coffers how could you not" Why don't you get real
Sparty
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 8:45 p.m.
"Withhold fire protection from the U? Quit playing life and death games." Isn't that exactly what you are proposing? What if a fire happened on campus ... in the city boundaries? Who do you think would be responsible? Get real.
Stuart Brown
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 2:11 p.m.
The city should demand that UofM establish its own fire fighting department. The UofM has a public safety department that should be expanding to respond to fire emergencies on campus. The way to do this is to simply inform the UofM that Ann Arbor will no longer respond to fire emergencies on campus after a certain date unless a mutual aid pact agreement is in place. This mutual aid agreement would require the UofM to either operate its own fire safety services or offer other services in kind in exchange for fire suppression services provided by the city. Our mayor and his wife are currently employees of UofM so I doubt he is in a position to lead the city in this way unless he suddenly wishes to find himself "unqualified" to continue to hold his current teaching position at the U. Voters should remember this fact next time a choice for mayor is on the ballot. I am personally disgusted that our city has splurged on unnecessary expenses to the tune of $100 million dollars in construction costs for an unnecessary parking deck and an expansion of city hall over the last five years while cutting basic services like fire safety service.
j
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 2:35 p.m.
You must have posted as I typed. completely agree. I have an email from our mayor about our fire service from two years ago, when I mentioned the above, he never responded
gofigure
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 1:55 p.m.
Anyone besides me going to go to the City Council meeting tonight? That's the place to ask questions and get answers.
MyOpinion
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 1:53 p.m.
I suspect that Chief Hubbard was just floating an idea. He did this so that he could get input from all the AnnArbor.com problem solvers.
Brad
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 1:42 p.m.
I don't see how they can meet the 90%/4 minute standard with some stations probably not able to *drive* to 90% of their covered areas within four minutes. Just look at servicing the entire southern half of the city from Stadium and Packard.
Hunterjim
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 1:32 p.m.
Will the last person out of Ann Arbor please turn out the lights...
Person of Emet
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 1:27 p.m.
The FD/City new labor agreement stated that the FF's would be working more hours. Not only that, they would be getting less time off. If that is correct, then wouldn't that translate into more FF's on duty per day? If that were the case, why then shut down any station?
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 1:19 p.m.
From the presentation: "NFPA response standard: people shall arrive within four minutes 90% of the time. 681 fires, but only 480 covered by this plan, not 613. This plan DOES NOT meet the standard.
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 9:31 p.m.
@Peregrine: Sorry, I was jumping on a plane and typing fast when I posted this as the door was closing. Large swaths of the areas of the city nearer to the freeway ring are outside of the four minute coverage in the proposed plan. Again, if I had more time, that is what I would have said. Thanks for correcting my oversights.
Peregrine
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 7:33 p.m.
@Ranzini: Your claim: "Look at the map in the presentation, if you live closer to a freeway than downtown, you are screwed by the new plan," is false. Anyone who looks at the map will see that there are wide swaths of Ann Arbor that are closer to a freeway than to downtown and are within the 4-minute arrival of 4 firefighters. Or even without looking at the map, simply consider those who live in the vicinity of Fire Station #5. A clear majority of those are within the 4-minute range and are closer to M-14 and US-23 than they are to downtown. If you want to be taken seriously, how about avoiding such inflammatory falsehoods?
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 3:05 p.m.
Sorry, I was jumping on a plane and typing fast when I posted this as the door was closing. A better version of what I meant is: From the fire chief's presentation (see the link in the story above): "NFPA response standard: people shall arrive within four minutes 90% of the time." His presentation notes that in 2011 there were 681 fires, but only 480 fires would have been responded to by this plan within four minutes, and to achieve 90%, 613 of the fires would have to be responded to within four minutes. The chief's plan DOES NOT meet the standard he mentions in his own presentation! Look at the map in the presentation, if you live closer to a freeway than downtown, you are screwed by the new plan.
gofigure
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 1:08 p.m.
IMO - This is a no-brainer. 1) If you want all the stations fully staffed, then you need to come up with the funds to do so. 2) If you don't want to do that, then this seems to me to be the best compromise. You can't have it both ways. Think about it people, do you really believe the Chief is going to jeopardize the city, it's citizens and/or his FF's? quote #1 from the article..."The council meets at 7 p.m. inside the council chambers on the second floor of city hall, 301 E. Huron St. The meeting is open to the public." quote #2 from above article...."AnnArbor.com is meeting with Hubbard today to get additional details on the restructuring plan and will be reporting out of tonight's work session." My question is to Ryan - Why didn't you wait until after the city council meeting to post this? You would have been able to ask and have answered questions for both the Chief and city council.
doa1977
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 11:03 p.m.
because Ryan thinks he is better and smarter than everyone else,just ask him!.
Arieswoman
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 1:07 p.m.
Hey folks why don't we just buy some more art!
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 1:02 p.m.
The fire inspection and prevention department in Ann Arbor was obliterated by the cuts and last I heard they only had one fire inspector left, and she had only recently been trained. In my opinion, the decrease in prevention efforts as this staff was cut to the bone, is why the deaths have increased so much and the severity ofnthe fires has increased. Where is the plan to restart this critical area?
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 3:31 p.m.
@Person of Emet: I have confirmed that your information is correct. These people have been added to the inspection division since the Summer. However, by taking 4 fire safety people off the line, the city can only field 15 fire fighters per day, not the 18 required to meet the current staffing plan that would be required to fully staff all of the existing five fire stations. I really appreciate the heads-up and new information!
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 2:54 p.m.
@Person of Emet: if true that would be excellent news and a huge improvement over the information provided by a fire lieutenant at an Ann Arbor Democratic Party meeting about the situation last Summer. Thanks for the info, I'll check into it.
Person of Emet
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 1:39 p.m.
The FD now has 7 in the inspection division. However, 4 of those employees are temporarily assigned. That is a good thing to beef up the inspection division. However, those four positions were filled from the operations division. Meaning, 4 more people are no longer in the various stations. Less people available for daily emergency responses. Due to this, you would think there might be some thought to calling back the 3 laid off firefighter's.
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 1 p.m.
The "experiment" jeapardizing public safety continues! In case you missed this article, when ICMA wrote their report the fire department had 94 staff and has today 76, 18 fewer than when ICMA did the research for its report. What was inadequate then, is extremely unsafe now. Until 2000, when the cuts began, we had more than 120 fire safety employees.
jcj
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 12:49 p.m.
Too bad we don't elect the "fire chief". Then he might work towards our interest and not the mayors!
Ricardo Queso
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 12:48 p.m.
The "2% for Arts" looks better everday!
jcj
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 12:46 p.m.
Where does and I use the term loosely "chief" Hubbard live? With all the ridiculous expenditures in this town this takes the cake for the most ridiculous proposed cut!
EyeHeartA2
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 12:32 p.m.
How do they handle this in Boulder? THAT, my fiends, is where the answer lies.
jcj
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 12:38 p.m.
Boulder has 7 stations!
zip the cat
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 12:24 p.m.
Stupid idea You can't get to the outter areas of the city in 4 minutes in heavy traffic or bad weather,with 3 stations.
Peregrine
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 11:42 p.m.
I agree, the plan will likely not meet the NFPA response standard. Chief Hubbard never claimed it did. I never claimed it did. What Chief Hubbard says in his presentation is: "The following restructuring proposal is better suited toward meeting standards than the existing AAFD structure." Note that he says "toward meeting" rather than "meets". Furthermore he says: "Gives AAFD the best opportunity to meet firefighting standards within current staffing constraints." Again, it's qualified. So without the money to hire more staff, his claim is that it's the best we can do.
Stephen Lange Ranzini
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 9:33 p.m.
@Peregrine: you overlook the facts. From the fire chief's presentation (see the link in the story above): "NFPA response standard: four people shall arrive within four minutes 90% of the time." His presentation notes that in 2011 there were 681 fires, but only *480* fires would have been responded to by this plan within four minutes with four people and to achieve 90%, 613 of the fires would have to be responded to within four minutes. The chief's plan DOES NOT meet the standard he mentions in his own presentation!
Peregrine
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 6 p.m.
The chief never claims that was possible. In fact his presentation shows with maps how quickly the initial four firefighters would arrive at each point within the city, and how quickly a full response could arrive at each point in the city. The plan tries to maximize citizen safety by maximizing the area in which initial and full responses can take place within current budgetary constraints.
Irwin Daniels
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 12:17 p.m.
Reducing fire protection - and no real ladder truck in service Reducing police - Taxes going up again - (no raise at work at least I am working for now) Roads in major disrepair and missing a major bridge until at least the end of 2012 Never ending big hole/parking disaster in center of town Rapist still at large Thinking about moving out of Ann Arbor........ Priceless
TheGerman
Tue, Apr 17, 2012 : 6:45 p.m.
People who rent pay property taxes as well. It's included in the rent.
j
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 2:29 p.m.
As a homeowner I agree. Taxes going up- (while cutting services) Now I am just waiting for the jerk that posts "we won't miss you" because they probably rent and don't pay properly taxes, so they don't get to see that few thousand dollar bill stare them in the face
ranger007
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 2:25 p.m.
Probably a safe idea unless u own a gun and fire truck
Craig Lounsbury
Mon, Mar 12, 2012 : 12:03 p.m.
As a citizen I would rather see 6 fire stations. If the "two in, two out" is important I would also want to see 4 fireman at each station. I am willing to forgo other services to achieve this. i am willing to pay a bit more in property taxes to achieve this.