Docstoc

Peterborough FireRescue

Document Sample
Peterborough FireRescue Powered By Docstoc
					Peterborough Fire/Rescue

    Planning for the Future
        June 17, 2003
Peterborough Fire/Rescue

 • Department Staff – June 2003
   • 42 Firefighters/EMS Personnel
   • Call/Volunteer

 • Staffing Goals
   •Currently on a recruiting drive
 Peterborough Fire/Rescue
• Responded to 1052 incidents in 2002
• Fire related calls included:
  – 42 Fire Suppression
     • Including structure, chimney, room contents, oven, brush
  – 50 Motor vehicle incidents involving extrication/rescue
  – 88 Automatic Alarm calls
     • Including malfunctions, accidental, malicious
  – 20 Leaks/Spills Electrical hazards
  – 7 Technical Rescues
  – 32 calls for mutual aid – non-EMS
Peterborough Fire/Rescue
• $319,048 net expenditure for Fire/EMS services
   – $297,326 Net Expenditure, Town of Peterborough
   – $21,722 Revenue from Sharon
• $213,606 Ambulance Expenditures
   – Offset by income from billing for service
            – Coverage area includes Peterborough, Sharon, Dublin, Greenfield,
              Hancock and Francestown.
• $49.55 per capita cost of Fire Service
   –   Full time suburban departments average $162.72 per capita
   –   18,790 paid man hours
   –   Thousands of volunteer hours above and beyond paid hours
   –   Example: Work of this Committee
The Future of the Town We Serve
       Considering all the Variables
   • Growth
     – 100 additional residents per year + or –
     – 7500 plus population on 2015
   • Consideration of Master Plan Process
     – A desire for vertical instead of horizontal
       development along with mixed use in current target
       zones
     – Clustered Development/Workforce housing
     – Wildland / Urban Interface and Open Space
       Protection of Aquifers/Water Supply
     – Development of emergency water supplies in target
       areas
     – Traffic Issues and patterns
Future Apparatus Requirements
   • CIP Plan for Fire Apparatus Replacement
      – 2004 Aerial Ladder (1978 Model Year)
      – 2006 Pumper (1985 Model Year)
      – 2007 Command vehicle (2001 Model Year)
   • Goal of Fire/Rescue is to interface these
     purchases with the goals addressed in the
     Master Plan process and make every effort to
     fit our operations seamlessly as the master
     plan is implemented.
   • Spend the customers $ wisely/learn from the
     past
Insurance Services Office
 • Ratings are used to set insurance pricing
   relationships
 • Range through Protected, Semi-protected and
   Unprotected
    – PC 1 to 6 Protected
    – PC 7 to 9 Semi-Protected
    – PC 10 Unprotected
 • Peterborough two rating zones
    – Protection Class 9 Semi-Protected
    – Protection Class 5 Protected-highest rating for a
      non-full time staffed Dept.
          ISO Protection Class Zones



•   Red is PC 5
•   Remainder is PC 9
Insurance Rate Implications of
       Aerial Ladder
  • 2298 Residential
     – $159,823,720 Assessed Value (69.5%)
        • Buildings/units only
     – $270,901,205 Market Value
        • 1600 Square Feet Average
     – $367,680,000 Replacement Cost
        • ($100.00/SqFt)
        • $160,000 average value of buildings/units
  • 173 Commercial Units
     – $115,839,050 Assessed Value
        • Buildings only
     – $196,347,189 Market Value
     – Replacement value?
Insurance Rate Implications of
       Aerial Ladder
  • Loss of Aerial Device will impact the rating
    of the current PC5 area. A minimum a 8
    to10% increase in premiums. Loss of the
    Ladder could change the PC to PC7.
        –    Net Residential Cost Increase per year
        –    ≈$75,000 per year total in PC5
        –    ≈$30.00 per Residential unit/year
        –    Net commercial cost increase per year?
  •   Source:
  •   David Withers, FCAS, MAAA
  •   Property - Casualty Actuary
  •   New Hampshire Insurance Dept.
        Aerial Facts
• The most misunderstood piece of fire
  apparatus
• It’s not just about height
• More often its about reach
• It’s about safety
• Essential to rapid rescue
• The key to effective vertical ventilation
• Special equipment/lighting
• Elevated master stream
  Aerial vs. Ground Ladders
• Ground Ladders                   • Aerial Device
  – Supported by building on         –   Self Supporting
    fire.                            –   Out of collapse zone
  – Always in the collapse zone.     –   Used at low angles
  – Must be used at high angles.     –   Stable
  – Unstable.                        –   Deployable by one FF
  – Labor intensive.                 –   Reaches peak
  – Cannot reach peak                –   Increases Firefighter
  – Increased back injury & fall         safety margin
    hazards
Firefighter Safety Issues

• New Structures with Truss Construction collapse
  under any fire load.
• 25-30% of all current structures in Town have truss
  roof construction (source Town Building Inspector)
• Roof Pitch, Material and Construction
• Makes any on roof activity unsafe.
• Ice/snow dangers
• Fall hazards & back injuries
   Aerial Ladder History in
      Peterborough
• 1976 Chief Dyer in Evaluated the needs of the
  community and the first Aerial Ladder was
  purchased
• 1989 The Town again agreed on the value and
  need of an aerial ladder, current unit was
  purchased.
• 2003 PFR has evaluated the current and future
  needs of the community and has once again
  validated the importance of having an aerial
  device in Town.
Current Operational Status of 100’
         Aerial Ladder
    • 1978 Seagraves 100’ Ladder (25 Years Old)
    • Crew compartment does not meet current safety
      standards
    • Unable to carry required equipment due to GVW
      (Gross Vehicle Weight, set by State) limits
    • 200 lb limited angle tip load, does not meet current
      standards.
    • Bent rails/rungs on aerial device
    • Frayed cables on aerial dawgs
    • Engine oil leak
    • Aerial lift piston leak
    • Numerous electrical system malfunctions
    • Airbrake system leaks
    • Body has areas of rust
Current Aerial Purchase
     Information
 – Purchased 11 year old 100’ Aerial Ladder
 – Sale price $195,000 in 1989
 – Refitted, body work and painted
 – Total cost $220,000
 – Current Value ≈ $14,000 (Salvage Value)
 – 14 years of service in Peterborough with a
   depreciation cost $14,714 per year
 – Plus annual service, repair, and maintenance
   costs
         Proposed Timeline
• June 18th to July 15th
     –   In-Town evaluations of various Aerial units
     –   Trade Shows and visitations of other NH Departments
     –   Request meetings with Budget and CIP Committees
     –   Develop draft specifications, requirements, cost and finance requirements
•   July 16th-31
     – PFR Officer review
     – Selectman Review (schedule a meeting)
•   Aug 1
     – RFP’s or Bid Specs sent to venders
•   Sept 1
     – RFP’s due to be returned.
•   Sept 1 to Sept 30th
     – Opening of RFP’s and develop recommendation
•   October 1 to 31st
     – Formal public hearings with Selectman, Budget Committee and Public
• Process complete Nov 1.
• Town Meeting , March 2004
Research & Development Committee
                   Michael Roper, Chairman
               Jonathan Hampson, Vice-Chairman


   Chief William Naugle             Firefighter Jim Grant
   Deputy Chief Brad Winters        Firefighter Jon Hampson
   Deputy Chief Ron Bowman          Firefighter Nate Ingersoll
   Captain Paul Thibault            Firefighter “Moto” Maguire
   Lieutenant Keith Rodenhiser      Firefighter Don Parkhurst
   Lieutenant Mike Roper            Firefighter Jon Sawyer
   Firefighter Bob Berube           Firefighter David Skerry
   Firefighter Dan Failla           Firefighter Ron Stickney
                                    Firefighter Bill Sweet

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:7
posted:1/27/2012
language:
pages:25