Oregon
2011
Emergency Service Master Plan
City of Medford
Fire-Rescue
Oregon
Emergency Service Master Plan
2011
Prepared by:
Joe Parrott
Jack Snook
Introduction
The following report serves as the Medford Fire-Rescue Emergency Service Master Plan. It follows closely the Center for Fire Public Safety Excellence (CPSE) Standards of Coverage model that develops written procedures to determine the distribution and concentration of fixed and mobile resources of an organization. The purpose for completing such a document is to assist the agency in ensuring a safe and effective response force for fire suppression, emergency medical services, and specialty response situations in addition to homeland security issues.
Creating an Emergency Service Master Plan document requires that a number of areas be researched, studied, and evaluated. The following report will begin with an overview of both the community and the agency. Following this overview, the plan will discuss areas such as risk assessment, critical task analysis, agency service level objectives, and distribution and concentration measures. The report will provide documentation of reliability studies and historical performance through charts and graphs. The report will conclude with policy and operational recommendations.
In the preparation of this Emergency Services Master Plan, Emergency Services Consulting International (ESCI) reviewed earlier studies that had been completed on the Medford Fire-Rescue emergency response system. These include one completed in 1995 (Urban Planning Associates) and a follow-up study completed in 1996 (Cascade Management Services). In many ways the recommendations provided in this Emergency Services Master Plan are different from those offered in the prior studies. There are a number of reasons for this.
ESCI conducts its review of system performance in a more holistic manner reviewing in detail system elements, organizational practices, and other factors that are contributing to current response performance. ESCI is able to offer solutions that may be less expensive or more effective to resolve system deficiencies.
The technology available to evaluate current system performance and potential solutions provides far more detail than was available during the previous studies, particularly through the utilization of geographic information systems. This provides more accurate evaluation and the ability to explore a variety of options.
Other technologies have developed over the years that also offer solutions to response performance that, again, may be less expensive than adding or relocating fire stations, or adding personnel.
Finally, fire and emergency services best practices have evolved over time. The industry recognizes that response capability should be more robust in urban areas than in rural areas. Urban areas have a higher frequency of responses, greater levels of risk, and more significant potential community consequence than rural areas. Thus, response resources should be more concentrated within urban areas to serve this greater demand.
ESCI extends its appreciation to the members of Medford Fire-Rescue, elected officials from the City of Medford and Medford Rural Fire Protection District No. 2, City of Medford officials, and all others who contributed to this plan.
Table of Contents
Table of Figures ... v
Executive Summary ... 1
Component A – Description of Community Served ... 7
Organization Overview ... 7
Governance and Lines of Authority ... 7
Organizational Finance ... 7
Service Area Overview ... 9
Component B – Review of Services Provided ...11
Services Provided ...11
Assets and Resources ...12
Fire Stations ...12
Apparatus ...13
Staffing Information ...15
Organizational Structure ...15
Administration and Support Staff...17
Emergency Services Staff ...17
Current Service Delivery Objectives ...22
Component C – Review of the Community Expectations for Type and Level of Service ..23
Stakeholder Input ...23
Summary of Discussions ...24
Community Outcome Goals ...25
Component D – Overview of Community Risk Assessment ...27
Overall Geospatial Characteristics ...27
Geographic and Weather-Related Risks ...29
Weather Risk ...29 Wildfire Risk ...30 Geographic/Geological Risk ...31 Transportation Risks ...32 Roads ...32 Rail ...34 Airport ...34
Physical Assets Protected ...36
Government Buildings ...36
Congregational ...37
Schools/Day Care ...38
Medical Facilities ...38
Other Critical Infrastructure ...39
Structural Risks ...42
Terrorism ...46
Development and Population Growth ...47
Risk Classification ...53
Historic System Response Workload ...55
Temporal Analysis ...57
Spatial Analysis ...59
Station and Unit Workload Analysis ...62
Fire Station Workload ...62
Response Unit Workload ...63
Incident Workload Projection ...66
Component E – Critical Tasking and Alarm Assignments ...67
Critical Tasking ...69
Alarm Assignments ...73
Component F – Review of Historical System Performance ...76
Detection ...76
Call Processing ...76
Turnout Time ...79
Distribution and Initial Arriving Unit Travel Time ...81
First Arriving Unit Response Time ...87
First Arriving Unit Received to Arrival Time ...89
Received to Arrival Time Performance by Region ...91
Concentration and Current Effective Response Force Capability Analysis ...93
Second Unit Arrival Time ...97
Emergency Medical Services ...98
Call Concurrency, Reliability and Cancelled Responses ...99
Component G – Performance Objectives and Performance Measures ... 103
Dynamics of Fire in Buildings... 103
Emergency Medical Event Sequence ... 105
People, Tools, and Time ... 106
Component H – Overall Evaluation, Conclusions, and Recommendations ... 108
Overall Evaluation ... 108
Recommendations ... 110
Performance Goal A: Formally Adopt Response Performance Goals ... 110
Performance Goal B: Improve Dispatch Call Processing Performance ... 113
Performance Goal C: Improve Turnout Time Performance ... 114
Performance Goal D: Reduce Incident Travel Time ... 115
Performance Goal E: Improve Current Response Capability with Additional Staffed Response Apparatus ... 119
Performance Goal F: Implement Opportunities to Provide an Overall Increase in Community Fire and Life Safety ... 122
Component I – Appendices, Exhibits, and Attachments ... 127
Appendix A – Medford Fire-Rescue Compared to Others ... 127
Appendix B – Response Performance by Unit and Shift ... 129
Table of Figures
Figure 1: Generated Revenue ... 8
Figure 2: MRFPD No. 2 Contract Revenue ... 8
Figure 3: Budget/Expenditures by Year and Category, FY 2010 – FY 2012 ... 8
Figure 4: Core Services Summary ...11
Figure 5: Current Facility Deployment ...13
Figure 6: Apparatus Assigned to Medford Fire Stations ...14
Figure 7: Organizational Structure...16
Figure 8: Management, Administration, and Support Personnel by Position ...17
Figure 9: Emergency Response Personnel by Rank ...18
Figure 10: Staffing Complement ...20
Figure 11: Apparatus Staffing Configuration 2010 - 2011 ...20
Figure 12: Immediate Region Automatic Aid ...21
Figure 13: Community Outcome Goals ...26
Figure 14: Community Risk Assessment ...28
Figure 15: Flood Hazard Map ...30
Figure 16 Wildland Fire Risk Areas ...31
Figure 17: Earthquake Hazard ...32
Figure 18: Street System ...33
Figure 19: Railroad System ...34
Figure 20: Rogue Valley International-Medford Airport ...35
Figure 21: Government Buildings ...36
Figure 22: Congregational Facilities ...37
Figure 23: Medford Area Schools and Day Care Facilities ...38
Figure 24: Medical and Care Facilities ...39
Figure 25: Fire Hydrant Distribution in Relation to Developed Lands ...40
Figure 26: Hazardous Material Use Locations ...43
Figure 27: Buildings – More Than Three Stories in Height ...44
Figure 28: Buildings – 100,000 Square Feet and Larger ...45
Figure 29: Buildings – NFF Greater Than 3,500 Gallons Per Minute ...46
Figure 30 Current and Projected Population ...47
Figure 31: Population Density - 2010 ...48
Figure 32: Estimated Population by Age ...49
Figure 33: Pediatric Population Density...50
Figure 34: Senior Population Density ...51
Figure 35 Urban Growth and Urban Reserve Areas ...53
Figure 36: Workload History, 2001 – 2010 ...55
Figure 37: Responses by Type of Incident ...56
Figure 40: Hourly Workload...58
Figure 41: Service Demand Density ...59
Figure 42: Building Fires ...60
Figure 43: Emergency Medical Incidents...61
Figure 44: Responses by Fire Station Area – 2010 ...62
Figure 45: Response Unit Workload –2010 ...63
Figure 46: Average Time Committed to an Incident by Unit...64
Figure 47: Unit Hour Utilization ...65
Figure 48: Response Forecast ...66
Figure 49: Staffing Recommendations Based on Risk...68
Figure 50: Call Processing Performance – City Incidents ...77
Figure 51: Call Processing Performance – District Incidents ...78
Figure 52: Call Processing Time by Hour of Day ...78
Figure 53: City Incident Turnout Time Performance ...80
Figure 54: District Incident Turnout Time Performance ...80
Figure 55: Turnout Time by Hour of Day ...81
Figure 56: Initial Unit Travel Time Capability – City of Medford ...82
Figure 57: Initial Unit Travel Time Capability – MRFPD No. 2 ...83
Figure 58: City Incidents Overall Travel Time Performance – First Arriving Unit ...84
Figure 59: District Incidents Overall Travel Time Performance – First Arriving Unit ...84
Figure 60: Overall Travel Time by Hour of Day – First Arriving Unit ...85
Figure 61: Street Mile Coverage by Fire Stations ...85
Figure 62: Incidents Within Four-Travel Minute Coverage ...86
Figure 63: Overlapping Four Minute Travel Area ...87
Figure 64: City Incidents Response Time Performance – First Arriving Unit ...88
Figure 65: District Incidents Response Time Performance – First Arriving Unit ...88
Figure 66: Hourly Response Time Performance ...89
Figure 67: City Incidents Received to Arrival Time – First Arriving Unit ...90
Figure 68: District Incidents Received to Arrival Time – First Arriving Unit ...90
Figure 69: Hourly Received to Arrival Performance ...91
Figure 70: Received to Arrival Time Performance by Dispatch Group ...92
Figure 71: Received to Arrival Performance - Adjacent Incident Analysis...93
Figure 72: Effective Response Force – City of Medford ...95
Figure 73: Effective Response Force – MRFPD No. 2 ...96
Figure 74: Structure Fires Meeting and Not Meeting Target ...97
Figure 75: Call Concurrency Rates ...99
Figure 76: Station Reliability Rates ... 100
Figure 77: Unit Responses and the Number Cancelled Before Arrival ... 101
Figure 81: Fire Extension in Residential Structures ... 105
Figure 82: Cardiac Arrest Event Sequence ... 106
Figure 83: Proposed Fire Station 2 Relocation – Urban Response Goal ... 118
Figure 84: Proposed Fire Station 2 Relocation – Rural Response Goal ... 119
Executive Summary
This document identifies Medford Fire-Rescue’s Emergency Service Master Plan for the City of Medford and Medford Rural Fire Protection District No. 2, Oregon. Response resources, deployment strategies, operational elements, and overall community risks have been evaluated in this document. It establishes response time objectives and standards for measuring the effectiveness of resources within the department and the deployment of those resources. The document is segregated into components generally based on the format recommended by the Center for Public Safety Excellence, Standards of Cover 5th Edition, which will be referenced elsewhere in this document.
The Medford Fire-Rescue (MFR) is a direct operating department of City of Medford and provides fire protection and emergency medical services to the community. The department’s service area encompasses all of the area within the governmental boundaries of Medford and Medford Rural Fire Protection District No. 2 (a contractual service area).
The City of Medford has a resident population of 74,907 based on the 2010 census. Population in the Medford Rural Fire Protection District No. 2 is estimated to be 11,326 for a total resident population of 86,233. It is estimated that employment brings an additional 11,6321 people into the city, raising the MFR’s daytime service population to approximately 97,865.
The department serves an area of approximately 26 square miles within the City of Medford and an additional 30 square miles for Medford Rural Fire Protection District No. 2. The department operates five fire stations and 20 apparatus. Emergency Communications of Southern Oregon (ECSO) provides emergency call receipt and dispatch service.
The Insurance Services Office (ISO) reviews the fire protection resources within communities and provides a Community Fire Protection Rating system from which insurance rates are often based. The rating system evaluates three primary areas: the emergency communication and dispatch system, the fire department, and the community’s pressurized hydrant or tanker-based water supply. The overall rating is then expressed as a number between 1 and 10, with 1 being the highest level of protection and 10 being unprotected or nearly so. As of the latest rating, ISO
gave the City of Medford a rating of Class 4. Within Medford Rural Fire Protection District No. 2 the rating is also Class 4. This rating was conducted in 2005.
In the typical SOC process, potential service area classifications are broken down into five categories:
Metropolitan - geography with populations of over 200,000 people in total and/or a
population density of over 3,000 people per square mile. These areas are distinguished by mid-rise and high-rise buildings, often interspersed with smaller structures.
Urban - geography with a population of over 30,000 people and/or a population density of
over 2,000 people per square mile.
Suburban - geography with a population of 10,000 to 29,999 and/or a population density
of between 1,000 and 2,000 people per square mile.
Rural - geography with a total population of less than 10,000 people or with a population
density of less than 1,000 people per square mile.
Wilderness/Frontier/Undeveloped - geography that is both rural and not readily
accessible by a publicly or privately maintained road.
An analysis of the City of Medford’s population density reveals that it is primarily of one classification; urban. Medford Rural Fire Protection District No. 2 is primarily rural.
A Performance Statement and Objectives for the services provided by the Medford Fire-Rescue to the City of Medford and Medford Rural Fire Protection District No. 2 have been developed. These further define the quality and quantity of service expected by the community and consistently pursued by the Medford Fire-Rescue.
Overall Performance Statement
The Medford Fire-Rescue has adopted the following Performance Statement:
Performance Statement (Mission Statement)
The mission of the Medford Fire-Rescue is to serve, educate, and protect its citizens from the effects of...
HOSTILE FIRE MEDICAL EMERGENCIES
HAZARDOUS MATERIAL EXPOSURES NATURAL AND MANMADE DISASTERS
This mission will be accomplished through integrated efforts and using our available funding creatively and effectively.
In addition to the overall performance statement, the following response-specific performance objectives have been established by Medford Fire-Rescue and will be analyzed as part of this report. These objectives are based on the department’s current resources, capability and performance. As noted previously, the City of Medford is primarily urban and Medford Rural Fire Protection District No. 2 is primarily rural. Thus the territory addressed by each objective can be defined by the political boundaries of each jurisdiction.
Dispatch Performance Objective:
Response resources shall be notified of a priority emergency within 60 seconds of receipt of the call at the dispatch center, 90 percent of the time.
Turnout Time Performance Objective:
Response personnel shall assemble on apparatus and initiate movement towards a priority emergency within 90 seconds of notification by the dispatch center, 90 percent of the time.
First-Due Response Performance Objective:
1. Urban - The first response unit capable of initiating effective incident intervention shall arrive at a priority emergency within six minutes 30 seconds from receipt of the call at the dispatch center, 90 percent of the time.
2. Rural - The first response unit capable of initiating effective incident intervention shall arrive at a priority emergency within 10 minutes from receipt of the call at the dispatch center, 90 percent of the time.
Concentration Performance Objective:
1. Urban - For moderate risk incidents, the Medford Fire-Rescue shall assemble an Effective Response Force (ERF) consisting of personnel sufficient to effectively mitigate the incident based on risk within 14 minutes from receipt of the call at the dispatch center, 90 percent of the time.
2. Rural - For moderate risk incidents, the Medford Fire-Rescue shall assemble an Effective Response Force (ERF) consisting of personnel sufficient to effectively mitigate the incident based on risk within 17 minutes from receipt of the call at the dispatch center, 90 percent of the time.
It is recommended that the Medford City Council and Medford Rural Fire Protection District No. 2 Board of Directors adopt response performance goals describing its desired level of response performance. These are goals to be achieved in the future as funding is available to provide the necessary resources.
Dispatch Performance Goal:
Response resources shall be notified of a priority emergency within 60 seconds of receipt of the call at the dispatch center, 90 percent of the time.
Turnout Time Performance Goal:
Response personnel shall assemble on apparatus and initiate movement towards a priority emergency within 90 seconds of notification by the dispatch center, 90 percent of the time.
First-Due Response Performance Goal:
1. Urban - The first response unit capable of initiating effective incident intervention shall arrive at a priority emergency within six minutes 30 seconds from receipt of the call at the dispatch center, 90 percent of the time.
2. Rural - The first response unit capable of initiating effective incident intervention shall arrive at a priority emergency within 10 minutes from receipt of the call at the dispatch center, 90 percent of the time.
Concentration Performance Goal:
1. Urban - For moderate risk incidents, the Medford Fire-Rescue shall assemble an Effective Response Force (ERF) consisting of personnel sufficient to effectively mitigate the incident based on risk within 14 minutes from receipt of the call at the dispatch center, 90 percent of the time.
2. Rural - For moderate risk incidents, the Medford Fire-Rescue shall assemble an Effective Response Force (ERF) consisting of personnel sufficient to effectively mitigate the incident based on risk within 17 minutes from receipt of the call at the dispatch center, 90 percent of the time.
The analysis conducted during the evaluation phase of this process identified a number of opportunities to improve service (performance goals). The following performance goals are offered for consideration. These goals and specific recommendations for each are described in more detail at the end of this report (Component H).
Performance Goal A: Formally adopt Response Performance Goals Performance Goal B: Improve dispatch call processing performance Performance Goal C: Improve turnout time performance
Performance Goal D: Reduce incident travel time
Performance Goal E: Improve current response capability with additional staffed response apparatus.
Performance Goal F: Implement opportunities to provide an overall increase in community fire and life safety.
Component A – Description of Community Served
Organization Overview
Governance and Lines of Authority
The City of Medford is a municipal corporation and operates as a charter city that is provided the authority to levy taxes for operating a fire protection system. The City operates under a Council-Manager form of governance and the City Council is provided with necessary power and authority to govern the provision of fire protection and emergency services. The City Council maintains strictly policy-level involvement, avoiding direct management and hands-on task assignment—an arrangement established within written policy.
Extraterritorial services to Medford Rural Fire Protection District No. 2 are provided through contractual agreements between the city and the district first established in 1952. The terms of that agreement do not specify response be provided to any defined performance standard.
Organizational Finance
Establishment of financial policy for the City of Medford and the Medford Fire-Rescue is the responsibility of an elected City Council with the City Manager responsible for fiscal administration. The Fire Chief is appointed by the City Manager and is tasked with responsibility for fire and life safety emergency services within the city and district.
The City of Medford has an assessed valuation of $5,747,894,702. MRFPD No. 2 has an assessed valuation of $701,365,028 for a total of $6,449,259,730.
The city uses a two-year budget cycle to prepare the operating budget and the capital improvement plan based on a July through June fiscal year. The total Fire Department budget for biennium ending in 2013 is $25,208,720 including the General Fund, Public Safety Fund, and Capital Improvement Fund.
The fire department’s operating funds are received through the general revenue of the City. A large segment of municipal revenue is property tax receipts and, to a lesser degree, fees for service and other revenues.
Figure 1 lists the source and amount of non-tax revenue for Medford Fire-Rescue for fiscal year 2011.
Figure 1: Generated Revenue
Revenue Source Fiscal Year
2011
Service Contracts $1,460,743
Service Fees $0
Fire Permit Fees $3,367
Public Safety Fund $749,835
Total $2,213,945
The value of the contract with Medford Rural Fire Protection District No. 2 for the last five years is shown in the following table.
Figure 2: MRFPD No. 2 Contract Revenue MRFPD No. 2 Contract Revenues FY 2008 1,343,575 FY 2009 1,364,290 FY 2010 1,395,955 FY 2011 1,460,743 FY 2012 1,442,230
Figure 3 shows the general operating expenditure history (excluding the Capital Improvement Fund) for the previous two fiscal years and the current fiscal year. Three major divisions of the budget are shown.
Figure 3: Budget/Expenditures by Year and Category, FY 2010 – FY 2012 Budget/Expenditure by Year and Category
Budget (Year Ending) Salaries & Benefits Services and Supplies Capital Outlay Total FY 2010 9,498,400 1,251,500 141,000 10,890,900 FY 2011 10,104,440 1,273,540 585,820 11,963,800 FY 2012 11,771,050 1,219,000 170,500 13,160,550
During the three-year period, the department’s overall budget increased 20.8 percent. The cost of fire and emergency services to the combined communities, based on property assessed valuation, is $2.04 per $1,000 of assessed valuation.
A comprehensive capital improvement and replacement program is important to the long-term financial stability of any fire and emergency medical service organization. Such programs provide systematic development and renewal of the physical assets and rolling-stock of the agency. A capital program must link with the planning process to anticipate and time capital expenditures in a manner that does not adversely influence the operation of the agency or otherwise place the agency in a negative financial position. Items usually included in capital improvement and replacement programs are facilities, apparatus, land acquisition, and other major capital projects.
The City of Medford has an adopted a Capital Improvement Plan for fiscal year 2011-12. This document describes capital facility and other improvement needs for a two-year timeframe, and schedules those improvements based on available funding. The Medford Fire-Rescue has projects addressed in this plan, including fire station alerting systems and fire station parking lot replacement. The fire station alerting system project is funded by an Assistance to Firefighters grant and benefits the region’s fire services. MFR is managing this grant on behalf of the other area fire agencies. Actual cost to the City of Medford from this $682,000 grant is $46,000.
Service Area Overview
The Medford Fire-Rescue (MFR) is a direct operating department of City of Medford and provides fire protection and emergency medical services to the community. The department’s jurisdiction encompasses all of the governmental boundaries of the community along with Medford Rural Fire Protection District No. 2 (MRFPD No. 2) (a contractual service area).
The City of Medford has a resident population of 74,907 based on the 2010 census. Population in the Medford Rural Fire Protection District No. 2 is estimated to be 11,326 for a total resident population of 86,233. It is estimated that employment brings an additional 11,6322 people into the city, raising the MFR’s daytime service population to approximately 97,865.
The department serves an area of approximately 56 square miles; 26 within the Medford city limits and 30 within MRFPD No. 2. The department’s services are provided from five fire stations.
The department maintains a fleet of 20 apparatus including engines, ladder trucks, brush engines, and specialty vehicles. Emergency Communications of Southern Oregon (ECSO) provides emergency call receipt and dispatch service.
There are 83 individuals involved in delivering services to the jurisdiction. Staffing coverage for emergency response is through the use of career firefighters on 24-hour shifts. For immediate response and at full staffing, no less than 17 personnel would be on duty at all times.
The Insurance Services Office (ISO) reviews the fire protection resources within communities and provides a Community Fire Protection Rating. The rating system evaluates three primary areas: the emergency communication system, the fire department, and the community’s pressurized hydrant or tanker-based water supply. The overall rating is expressed as a number between 1 and 10, with 1 being the highest level of protection and 10 being unprotected or nearly so. As of the latest rating, ISO gave the City of Medford a rating of Class 4. Within Medford Rural Fire Protection District No. 2 the rating is also Class 4. This rating was conducted in 2005.
Component B – Review of Services Provided
Services Provided
The Medford Fire-Rescue provides a variety of services, including fire suppression, advanced life support level emergency medical service, entrapment extrication, high-angle rescue, initial trench, confined space, and hazardous materials emergency response (Level A).
The following chart provides basic information on each of the department’s core services, its general resource capability for that service, and information regarding staff resources for that service.
Figure 4: Core Services Summary
Service General Resource/Asset
Capability
Basic Staffing Capability per Shift
Fire Suppression 4 staffed engines
1 staffed Heavy Rescue Pumper 1 command response unit 1 two-person brush/rescue (50% of the time) plus 2 brush/rescue units staffed as needed
1 On Call Command Duty Officer Additional automatic and mutual aid engines, aerials, and support units available
22 or 23 suppression-trained personnel depending on the shift. Additional automatic and mutual aid firefighters available.
Emergency Medical Services 4 Engines - ALS equipped 1 Heavy Rescue Pumper – ALS equipped
1 Brush/Rescue – ALS equipped
11 EMT- Basics 29 EMT- Intermediates 27 paramedics
*For all 3 shifts combined
Vehicle Extrication 4 Engines equipped with
combi-rescue tool
1 Heavy Rescue Pumper equipped with hydraulic rescue tools, hand tools, air bags, stabilization cribbing, and cutter and spreader hydraulic rescue tools
All firefighters vehicle rescue trained.
High-Angle Rescue 4 Engines equipped with basic
3:1 rope rescue equipment 1 Heavy Rescue Pumper equipped with rope, rope rescue hardware, stokes basket, backboards and harnesses Additional mutual aid Special Operations Group rescue team
All personnel trained to the operations level.
Service General Resource/Asset Capability
Basic Staffing Capability per Shift
Trench and Collapse Rescue 4 Staffed Engines 1 Heavy Rescue Pumper
equipped with cribbing and hand tools for initial stabilization 1 Command Response Unit Additional mutual aid Special Operations Group rescue team available upon special request
All personnel trained to a basic awareness/operations level in trench and collapse rescue.
Swift-Water Rescue 4 engines and 1 Heavy Rescue
Pumper equipped with throw rope
Swift-water rescue kits at two fire stations
1 Command Response Unit Additional mutual aid Special Operations Group rescue team and swift-water rescue boat available upon special request
All personnel trained to a basic level in swift-water rescue techniques.
Confined Space Rescue 4 Staffed Engines
1 Command Response Unit Mutual aid Special Operations Group rescue team available upon special request
All personnel trained to an awareness level in confined space rescue.
Hazardous Materials Response
(Medford Fire Rescue and Ashland Fire Department jointly operate one of the State of Oregon Regional Hazardous Materials Response Teams)
4 Staffed Engines 1 Heavy Rescue Pumper 1 Command Response Unit State of Oregon Hazardous Materials response vehicle equipped with personal protective equipment, gas and radiation monitoring equipment, containment supplies, and non-sparking tools
All personnel trained to the operations level. 4 personnel per shift trained to the technician level in hazardous materials.
Assets and Resources
Fire StationsFire stations play an integral role in the delivery of emergency services for a number of reasons. A station’s location will dictate, to a large degree, response times to emergencies. Fire stations also need to be designed to adequately house equipment and apparatus, as well as the firefighters and other personnel assigned to the station.
Station Location and Deployment
The MFR delivers fire and EMS response from five city-owned fire stations located throughout the city. The following map shows the city boundaries, Medford Rural Fire Protection District No. 2 boundaries, and the locations of active Medford fire stations.
Figure 5: Current Facility Deployment
Apparatus
Other than the firefighters assigned to stations, response vehicles are probably the next most important resource of the emergency response system. If emergency personnel cannot arrive quickly due to unreliable transport, or if the equipment does not function properly, then the delivery of emergency service is likely compromised. Fire apparatus are unique and expensive pieces of equipment, customized to operate efficiently for a specifically defined mission.
The following table lists apparatus assigned to each of the five Medford fire stations.
Figure 6: Apparatus Assigned to Medford Fire Stations
Station Apparatus Year Condition Ownership
Medford Station 2 Engine 8102 2004 Good MRFPD No. 2
Medford Station 3 Engine 8103 2011 Good City of Medford
Engine 8113 1996 Fair City of Medford
Brush 8163 2006 Good MRFPD No. 2
Battalion Chief 8153 2009 Good City of Medford Medford Station 4 Heavy Rescue Pumper 8104 2008 Good MRFPD No. 2
Ladder 8121 1999 Good City of Medford
Engine 8114 1993 Fair MRFPD No. 2
Medford Station 5 Engine 8105 2011 Good MRFPD No. 2
Engine 8115 2001 Good MRFPD No. 2
Battalion Chief R8153 2001 Good City of Medford Medford Station 6 Engine 8106 2005 Good City of Medford
Ladder 8126 1994 Fair City of Medford
Engine 8116 1998 Good City of Medford
Tender 8146 2002 Good MRFPD No. 2
Brush 8168 2006 Good MRFPD No. 2
Brush 8166 1966 Fair State of Oregon
Hazmat 81 2000 Good State of Oregon
Hazmat 83 2007 Good State of Oregon
Air 8186 1972 Fair State of Oregon
MFR uses several types of apparatus as shown in the table above. Each type is further described as follows:
Engine – Primary response unit from each station for most types of service requests. Each is equipped with a 1,250-gallon-per-minute pump and carries between 500 and 750 gallons of water.
Ladder – A specialized apparatus equipped with long ladders, salvage and overhaul equipment, and rescue tools. Used for structure fires, rescues, and other service requests.
Brush – Smaller fire engine with a 120 gallon-per-minute pump and 400 gallons of water. Used for wildland fires and for protecting structures from an approaching wildland fire. Some also carry emergency medical service equipment.
HazMat – Specialized response unit for containment and control of hazardous materials releases. It is accompanied by the Decontamination unit, which specializes in cleanup of decontaminated persons and equipment.
The department’s apparatus are generally in good condition, properly equipped, and well maintained.
Staffing Information
Fire and emergency medical service organizations must provide adequate staffing in four key areas: emergency services, administration, risk mitigation (prevention), and support.
Organizational Structure
MFR is organized in the typical top-down hierarchy. The chain of command is identified with common roles for a department of this size. MFR has five stations that house emergency response resources. The department’s administrative office is located in a separate headquarters facility. The department’s multiple facilities and its three-shift, 24-hour-per-day, seven-day-per-week operational schedule create numerous internal communications and management challenges. The department’s organizational chart is functional and primary roles are well identified.
Administration and Support Staff
One of the primary responsibilities of a department’s administration and support staff is to ensure that the operational entities of the organization have the ability and means to accomplish their service delivery responsibilities to the public. Without sufficient oversight, planning, documentation, training, and maintenance, the operational entities of a department will struggle to perform their duties well. Like any other part of a fire department, administration and support require appropriate resources to function properly.
There are 83 individuals involved in delivering services to the combined City of Medford/Medford Rural Fire Protection District No. 2 service area. The department’s primary management team includes a Chief, two Deputy Chiefs, a Fire Marshal and four Battalion Chiefs. Additional support personnel include office staff, and deputy fire marshals. MFR has 16 total management, administration, and support staff, 13.5 full time equivalent personnel (FTE).
Figure 8: Management, Administration, and Support Personnel by Position
Position Number FTE
Fire Chief 1 1
Deputy Chiefs 2 2
Fire Marshal 1 1
Battalion Chief - Training 1 1
Fire Inspectors 4 4
Executive Support 1 1
Support Staff 5 3
Safe Kids Coordinator 1 0.5
TOTAL 16 13.5
Statistically based on FTE, the department maintains a ratio of 16.7 percent of management, administration and support staff to total personnel (13.5 out of 80.5 total FTE).
Emergency Services Staff
It takes an adequate and well-trained staff of emergency responders to put the community’s emergency apparatus and equipment to its best use in mitigating incidents. Insufficient staffing at an operational scene decreases the effectiveness of the response and increases the risk of injury to all individuals involved.
MFR uses career staffing to carry out its functions. All administrative, support, and response staff are career personnel. The following figure shows the distribution of emergency personnel by rank.
Figure 9: Emergency Response Personnel by Rank
Position Number Battalion Chief 3 Fire Captain 15 Engineer 15 Firefighter 34 TOTAL 67
As shown in the previous figure, MFR employs 67 emergency response personnel for rescue and fire suppression activities. The estimated resident population of the Medford Fire-Rescue service area is 86,233. MFR provides the City of Medford and MRFPD No. 2 with 0.78 career firefighters per 1,000 population. Including employment population, this ratio drops to 0.68.
Regardless of the raw numbers of personnel available to a department, what matters most is actual numbers of emergency responders the agency is able to produce at an emergency scene. This almost always relates to the actual number of emergency responders available for immediate deployment. MFR provides no less than 17 personnel on duty.
In most communities around the country, the number of fire calls has declined over the past decade. Yet as the frequency of fires diminishes, in part due to stricter fire codes and safety education, the workload of fire departments has risen sharply; emergency medical calls, hazardous materials spills, and other requests for emergency assistance are now a service request of the fire department.
Methodology for Incident Staffing
This document will provide an analysis of how well this department is doing at providing its own personnel for incidents within its primary service area. This data is important and can be an indicator for the department as to the effectiveness of its staffing efforts.
It is also true that for larger incidents, this fire department is typically acting together with one or more neighboring fire departments in providing fire and life protection through a coordinated
large structure fires, other high-risk incidents where staffing needs are high, and during periods of high incident activity. Therefore, the document will go on to provide an overall view of aggregate staffing in this department and the neighboring agencies.
The prompt arrival of at least four personnel is critical for structure fires. Oregon Occupational Safety and Health Division (OR-OSHA) regulations require that personnel entering a building involved in fire must be in groups of two. Further, before personnel can enter a building to extinguish a fire, at least two personnel must be on scene and assigned to conduct search and rescue in case the fire attack crew becomes trapped. This is referred to as the two-in, two-out rule.
There are, however, some exceptions to this regulation. If it is known that victims are trapped inside the building, a rescue attempt can be performed without additional personnel ready to intervene outside the structure. Further, there is no requirement that all four arrive on the same response vehicle. Many departments rely on more than one unit arriving to initiate interior fire attack. The Medford Fire-Rescue staffs fire engines with three firefighters; thus, it must wait for a second unit to arrive before it can initiate interior fire attack operations in a non-rescue incident.
Some incidents (such as structure fires) require more than one response unit. The ability of this department and its automatic aid neighbors to assemble an effective response force for a multiple unit incident within the specific period of time, also known as resource concentration, will be analyzed in a later section of this document.
Medford Fire-Rescue shift staffing varies from a minimum of 17 to a maximum of 23. Typically shift staffing is between 17 and 18. The following table lists each station, staffed unit, and the staffing assigned to each at minimum and maximum staffing. Cross-staffed means that firefighters assigned to another response unit in the station may transfer to the cross-staffed unit as needed.
Figure 10: Staffing Complement
Station Apparatus Minimum Staffing Maximum
Staffing
Medford Station 2 Engine 8102 3 4
Medford Station 3 Engine 8103 3 3
Engine 8113 Reserve 3
Brush 8163 Cross-staffed Cross-staffed
Battalion Chief 8153 1 1
Medford Station 4 Heavy Rescue 8104 4 4
Ladder 8121 Cross-staffed Cross-staffed
Engine 8114 Reserve Reserve
Medford Station 5 Engine 8105 3 4
Engine 8115 Reserve Reserve
Battalion Chief R8153 Reserve Reserve
Medford Station 6 Engine 8106 3 4
Ladder 8126 Reserve Reserve
Engine 8116 Reserve Reserve
Tender 8146 Cross-staffed Cross-staffed
Brush 8168 Cross-staffed Cross-staffed
Brush 8166 Cross-staffed Cross-staffed
Hazmat 81 Cross-staffed Cross-staffed
Hazmat 83 Cross-staffed Cross-staffed
Air 8183 Cross-staffed Cross-staffed
Total 17 23
The number of apparatus staffed by MFR varies depending on the number of personnel available on duty. The following table lists the percentage of time various configurations of apparatus were staffed for the past two years.
Figure 11: Apparatus Staffing Configuration 2010 - 2011
Year 5 Engines 5 Engines plus Brush/Rescue 6 Engines 6 Engines plus Brush/Rescue 7 Engines 2010 46.8% 23.2% 23.8% 5.1% 1.1% 2011* 59.6% 17.6% 19.0% 2.2% 1.5% * From 1-1-2011 through 10-15-2011
The Medford Fire-Rescue relies on regional mutual and automatic aid agreements for major structure fires, other higher risk incidents, and during periods of high incident activity. The following figure represents the apparatus and staffing for fire stations in reasonable proximity to the city and available for immediate dispatch. These figures are useful for reviewing the
Figure 12: Immediate Region Automatic Aid
Station Apparatus Minimum Staffing Maximum
Staffing Jackson Co Fire Dist 3
Central Point Station Engine 7711 2 3
Engine 7701 3 3
Tender 7741 0 0
Brush 7761 0 0
Brush 7781 0 0
Medic 7731 0 0
White City Station Engine 7702 3 4
Engine 7712 0 0 Ladder 7722 0 0 Tender 7742 0 0 Battalion Chief 7753 1 1 Brush 7762 0 0 Brush 7782 0 0 Brush 7792 0 0
Jackson Co Fire Dist 5
Phoenix Station Engine 8303 2 2
Engine 8313 0 0
Tender 8343 0 0
Brush 8363 0 0
Talent Station Engine 8301 2 4
Engine 8311 0 0 Tender 8341 0 0 Brush 8361 0 0 Brush 8381 0 0 Medic 8331 0 0 Duty Officer 8353 0 0 Command Staff 8151 0 0 Command Staff 8152 0 0 Total 13 17
There are additional resources available for the rare major fire emergency. The State of Oregon Conflagration Act system provides resources from around the State of Oregon as requested and available. This can include one or more “strike teams” (groups of five similar resources) or “task forces” (groups of five dissimilar resources) staffed and equipped for the specific emergency. In addition, wildland fires bring the firefighting resources of other cooperating agencies such as the Oregon Department of Forestry, Bureau of Land Management and United States Forest Service. In addition, the State of Oregon sponsors a state-wide Urban Search and Rescue Team capability.
Current Service Delivery Objectives
The Medford Fire-Rescue has established response performance objectives primarily used to evaluate performance and provide guidance for future resource planning. The objectives are:
Dispatch Performance Objective:
Response resources shall be notified of a priority emergency within 60 seconds of receipt of the call at the dispatch center, 90 percent of the time.
Turnout Time Performance Objective:
Response personnel shall assemble on apparatus and initiate movement towards a priority emergency within 90 seconds of notification by the dispatch center, 90 percent of the time.
First-Due Response Performance Objective:
1. Urban - The first response unit capable of initiating effective incident intervention shall arrive at a priority emergency within six minutes 30 seconds from receipt of the call at the dispatch center, 90 percent of the time.
2. Rural - The first response unit capable of initiating effective incident intervention shall arrive at a priority emergency within 10 minutes from receipt of the call at the dispatch center, 90 percent of the time.
Concentration Performance Objective:
1. Urban - For moderate risk incidents, the Medford Fire-Rescue shall assemble an Effective Response Force (ERF) consisting of personnel sufficient to effectively mitigate the incident based on risk within 14 minutes from receipt of the call at the dispatch center, 90 percent of the time.
2. Rural - For moderate risk incidents, the Medford Fire-Rescue shall assemble an Effective Response Force (ERF) consisting of personnel sufficient to effectively mitigate the incident based on risk within 17 minutes from receipt of the call at the dispatch center, 90 percent of the time.
The City of Medford is classified “urban”. Medford Rural Fire Protection District No. 2 is classified “rural”. The MFR is not currently achieving these targets as will be demonstrated in a later section of this report. That it is regularly reviewing emergency response performance against pre-defined targets is of great value to the response organization.
Component C – Review of the Community Expectations for Type and
Level of Service
The ultimate goal of any emergency service delivery system is to provide sufficient resources (personnel, apparatus, and equipment) to the scene of an emergency in time to take effective action to minimize the impacts of the emergency. This need applies to fires, medical emergencies, and any other emergency situation to which the fire department responds. Obtaining and understanding the desires and expectations of community stakeholders is an important first step. MFR is committed to incorporating the needs and expectations of residents and policy makers in the service delivery planning process.
It is important to note that the information solicited and provided during this process was provided in the form of “people inputs,” some of which are perceptions as reported by stakeholders. All information was accepted at face value without an in-depth investigation of its origination or reliability. The project team reviewed the information for consistency and frequency of comment to identify specific patterns and/or trends. The observations included in this report were confirmed by multiple sources or the information provided was significant enough to be included. Based on the information review, the team was able to identify a series of observations, and recommendations, and needs which are included in this report.
Stakeholder Input
ESCI interviewed a wide variety of Medford Fire-Rescue’s internal and external stakeholders. The purpose of these interviews was to gain a better understanding of issues, concerns, and opinions about the MFR emergency service delivery system. Questions posed to each sought to learn more about:
1. The community’s expectations of Medford Fire-Rescue. 2. Which expectations were being met and which were not.
3. Specific concerns about the manner and method in which services are being provided by MFR.
4. Whether the services offered by MFR had value to the community. 5. Whether MFR should offer services it currently does not provide.
6. General overall level of satisfaction with the services and service levels provided by MFR.
The following groups and individuals were interviewed: Medford City Council
Mayor Gary Wheeler Councilor Karen Blair Councilor Al Densmore Councilor Dick Gordon Councilor Greg Jones Councilor James Kuntz Councilor John Michaels Councilor Bob Strosser Councilor Chris Corcoran
External Partners
Chief Dan Petersen – JCFD #3 Chief Dan Marshall – JCFD #5 Ken Parsons – Mercy Flights Dr. Paul Rostykus – Physician Margie Moulin - ECSO
MFRD No. 2 Board of Directors
Director Bill Riggert Director Dan Marcisz Director Jack Tait
Director Duane Venekamp Director Bob Sheets
IAFF Local 1431
Bryan Baumgartner Tim Harvey
Graham Payer
City of Medford Officials
City Manager Pro Tem Bill Hoke Finance Director Alison Chan Planning Director Jim Huber
Medford Fire Rescue
Chief Dave Bierwiler
Deputy Chief Gordon Sletmoe Deputy Chief Justin Bates Fire Marshal Greg Kleinberg Battalion Chief Ken Goodson Battalion Chief Erin Sawall Battalion Chief Brian Fish
Summary of Discussions
Overall, the opinion of Medford Fire-Rescue and the services it provides is very favorable. MFR and its staff are seen as competent, capable, and providers of good service.
MFR policy officials (City Council and Board of Directors) generally believe the various services provided by MFR are appropriate for the community. There was general satisfaction with the level of service provided. Response time to emergencies appear to meet customer expectations. City councilors and Board members related that they had not heard concerns from their constituents regarding emergency response time. To the contrary comments they have received were positive.
External partners all indicated satisfaction with their working relationship with MFR and its leadership. MFR is open to cooperative efforts, willing to be engaged in regional initiatives, and is an organization that exhibits competence and professionalism. External partners emphasized the importance of good coordination and communication between agencies.
Several issues were noted as either concerns or questions. There was some concern expressed by several city councilors about over-reliance on external resources. Specifically, there was a concern about MFR’s dependence on Jackson County Fire District No. 3 for ladder truck service. Those expressing the concern indicated that MFR should be able to deliver that resource when needed.
Some District officials wanted to make sure that the needs of their service area would be considered during this study. It was their hope that service improvements considered by the City would also benefit District residents. There was also a request for a stronger focus on wildland fire mitigation efforts within the District.
A suggestion was made during the city councilor interviews that MFR should take a lead role in community emergency management and disaster preparedness. Otherwise, those expressing an opinion believed MFR was providing services appropriate for the community.
Some city councilors wanted to ensure that MFR was responding to only those incidents that were true emergencies. It is their belief that MFR should not respond to non-critical incidents such as “lift-assists” at care homes, minor medical incidents, and the like. Though MFR has reduced the number of responses to these types of incidents it was not clear to some that this response practice change had actually occurred.
Several elected officials from both the City and District also expressed the desire for more detailed information regarding MFR activity and performance.
Internal stakeholders expressed some concern about the future of the MFR. They believe that establishing a clear sense of purpose, direction and vision for the organization would be of value. Though most indicated that additional resources would help them deliver services, all were realistic in their understanding of the limitations imposed by current economic conditions. Suggested improvements to resource levels included a staffed peak activity period response unit, a staffed ladder truck, the establishment of an intern program, and four person staffing on all fire engines.
Overall, attitudes and opinions of MFR were quite favorable. Addressing the specific suggestions and concerns described above can only serve to improve MFR’s relationship with the community.
Community Outcome Goals
From these conversations general statements of outcome have been developed regarding the community’s expectations of its fire department. These statements have been synthesized by
ESCI using its understanding of community expectations. They should provide MFR with a better understanding of the needs and expectations of its community within each service area.
Figure 13: Community Outcome Goals
Service Community Outcome Goal
Fire Suppression
For all fire incidents, MFR shall arrive in a timely manner with sufficient resources to stop the escalation of the fire and keep the fire to the area of involvement. An effective concentration of resources shall arrive within time to be capable of containing the fire, rescuing at-risk victims, and performing property loss mitigation operations.
Emergency Medical Services
For priority emergency medical incidents, MFR shall arrive in a timely manner with sufficient trained and equipped personnel to provide medical services that will stabilize the situation, provide care and support to the victim and reduce, reverse, or eliminate the conditions that have caused the emergency.
Vehicle Extrication
For all vehicle accidents where rescue of victims is required, MFR shall arrive in a timely manner with sufficient resources to stabilize the situation and extricate the victim(s) from the emergency situation or location without causing further harm to the victim.
High-Angle Rescue
For all high-angle rescue incidents, MFR shall arrive in a timely manner with sufficient resources to stabilize the situation, establish an action plan for the successful conclusion of the incident, and perform the necessary rescue functions.
Trench and Collapse Rescue
For all trench or collapse rescue incidents, MFR shall arrive in a timely manner with sufficient resources to stabilize the situation, and perform the necessary rescue functions.
Swift-Water Rescue
For all swift-water rescue incidents, MFR shall arrive in a timely manner with sufficient resources to stabilize the situation, establish an action plan for the successful conclusion of the incident, and perform the necessary rescue functions.
Confined Space Rescue
For all confined space rescue incidents, MFR shall arrive in a timely manner with sufficient resources to stabilize the situation, establish an action plan for the successful conclusion of the incident, and perform the necessary rescue functions.
Hazardous Materials Response
For all hazardous materials incidents, MFR shall arrive in a timely manner with sufficient resources to stabilize the situation, establish an action plan for the successful conclusion of the incident, and perform the actions necessary to resolve the incident.
Component D – Overview of Community Risk Assessment
This section analyzes certain categorical risks that are present within the City of Medford and Medford Rural Fire Protection District No. 2 that potentially threaten the persons and businesses within the community and that can create response workload for the MFR. These risks are identified to assist the Medford Fire-Rescue in identifying where to locate response resources in the types and numbers needed to effectively respond to likely emergencies.
Additional information can be found in the City of Medford Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan, 2004. This document describes various natural and man-made hazards that exist in the greater Medford region as well as initiatives being taken by the city to mitigate those hazards.
Overall Geospatial Characteristics
The fire service assesses the relative risk of properties based on a number of factors. Properties with high fire and life risk often require greater numbers of personnel and apparatus to effectively mitigate a fire emergency. Staffing and deployment decisions should be made with consideration of the level of risk within geographic sub-areas of a community.
The community’s general risk assessment has been developed based on intended land use within jurisdictional boundaries. These uses are described in the Jackson County and City of Medford Comprehensive Plans. The following map translates land use zoning to categories of relative fire and life risk.
Low risk – Areas zoned and used for agricultural purposes, open space, low-density residential, and other low intensity uses.
Moderate risk – Areas zoned for medium-density single family properties, small commercial and office uses, low-intensity retail sales, and equivalently sized business activities.
High risk – Higher-intensity business districts, mixed use areas, high-density residential, industrial, warehousing, and large mercantile centers.
Figure 14: Community Risk Assessment
This map accurately depicts risk based on intended land uses as described on the zoning map. The color-coding depicts risk as follows:
Green - Open space, parks, golf courses, etc.
Blue - Single family neighborhoods, small office, and small neighborhood commercial Red - Large commercial properties, larger multi-family buildings, and industrial
development
The community does not present any unusual risks. Higher risk properties are generally located along major transportation routes. There are a number of larger buildings used for produce packing activities and lumber products manufacturing. Many of the larger buildings, particularly those built in more recent years, are equipped with automatic fire suppression systems.
Geographic and Weather-Related Risks
Weather RiskMedford lies in a weather shadow between the Cascade Range and Siskiyou Mountains. Most of the rain associated with Oregon bypasses Medford, leaving it drier and sunnier than typical western Oregon climates. Summers are similar to Eastern Oregon, and winters more like the coast. As many as ninety days over 90 °F occur in the summer with warmer temperatures (over 100 °F) common in July and August. Medford also experiences temperature inversions in the winter which can produce thick fog.
Extreme weather, though rare, does occur. Thunderstorms, strong wind storms, and significant rain and snow events happen infrequently. The lowest recorded temperature was -10 °F in 1910 and the highest recorded temperature was 115 °F in 1946.
The following is an excerpt from the City of Medford Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan, 2004 describing the community’s flood risk. ‘The Rogue Valley has a long history of destructive flood events. Over the past 50 years, major floods occurred in the Rogue Valley in 1955, 1962, 1964, 1974 and 1997. The region experiences the most severe flooding conditions when the effects of snowmelt and direct, heavy rainfall combine during periods of warmer temperatures in winter and early spring months. These floods can threaten public health, safety, and welfare by destroying or isolating structures, disrupting transportation systems, polluting water supplies, and destroying basic public facilities, such as sewer and electric services.
In addition to the flooding of Bear Creek and the Rogue River, the City of Medford has a history of slow-rise flooding along Larson Creek, Lazy Creek, Bear Creek, Elk Creek Terrain and Lone Pine Creek. Some flash flooding from heavy down pour may occur on Lone Pine Creek and Larson Creek. A portion of the City to the west borders Elk Creek tributary, which can exhibit uncontrollable flooding. Localized flooding may also result from debris blocking and plugging drainage systems. Recent incidences of record rainfall and flooding across Oregon have renewed concerns about the potential for flooding in the Medford UGB, and have rekindled interest in preparing for potential floods.’
Figure 15: Flood Hazard Map
Source: City of Medford Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan, 2004
Wildfire Risk
Medford’s climate, vegetation, and topography make wildland fire a real risk to the community. Parts of the city, primarily the eastern-most portions, have homes interspersed with large areas of natural vegetation. Many of these homes are located at the top of slopes increasing the risk. The rural nature of MRFPD No. 2 also presents increased risk from wildland fires.
Historically, the City of Medford experiences wildland fires on an infrequent basis. However, as more homes are built in wildland areas, the consequence of these fires will likely increase. Warm summer temperatures and strong winds can carry wildland fires into homes. Fuel types found in this region can support aggressive fire behavior.
The following map illustrates higher risk areas in and near the city.
Figure 16 Wildland Fire Risk Areas
Source: City of Medford Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan - 2004
Geographic/Geological Risk
Certain geographic and geologic risks create situations that threaten the community, or are physical barriers to street connectivity for emergency service response. Steep slopes, water barriers such as rivers, and other geographic features can impede rapid response. Medford’s urban area is relatively flat thus does not present unusual risk.
The Medford region is geologically active. The city lies between faults located in the Klamath Falls area to the east and the Cascadia Subduction Zone to the west. Both have the potential of producing damaging earth movement in the Medford area.
The MFR has completed seismic reinforcement of three fire stations, Stations 3, 4, and 5. This project was funded by a grant from the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
Figure 17: Earthquake Hazard
Source: City of Medford Pre-Disaster Mitigation Plan - 2004
Transportation Risks
Transportation corridors provide necessary access and egress for the city. These take the forms of roads, airports, and railways. The configuration of transportation systems can also affect the response capability of emergency services. Limited access freeways and rail lines can interrupt street connectivity, forcing apparatus to negotiate a circuitous route to reach an emergency scene. Street-level rail lines can impede traffic at crossings when the trains traverse through the city.
Roads
Medford enjoys ready access to the entire west coast via Interstate Highway 5 (I-5). However, it does present an impediment to east-west travel through the city. Its nature as a limited access
freeway reduces overall street connectivity and requires some out-of-direction travel for emergency response units increasing travel time to emergencies.
Large numbers of trucks carrying hazardous materials transit I-5 each year. There is a risk to the community from an accident involving one of these trucks that results in the release of hazardous materials.
The balance of the department’s service has a relatively well interconnected street network. Some areas of cul-de-sac and dead end streets exist. Traffic signals within the service area are equipped with signal pre-emption equipment. This provides a significant response time performance advantage as well as improved safety to motorists.
Rail
The Central Oregon and Pacific Railroad (COPR) operates on lines that traverse the city northeast to southwest. The rail line can cause delays in emergency vehicle response when trains are passing through. The line is not predominately grade-separated throughout the city.
Figure 19: Railroad System
Airport
Rogue Valley International-Medford Airport is owned and operated by Jackson County. It lies in the north area of the city and hosts numerous scheduled service, private, and commercial flight activities. Approach and departure paths take aircraft over populated areas.
Federal Aviation Administration aircraft crash rescue and firefighting (ARFF) services are provided by the Airport (one or two personnel operating aircraft crash rescue apparatus). The Medford Fire-Rescue and its mutual aid partners provide substantial support to a response to flight emergencies.
Physical Assets Protected
Government BuildingsThere is a variety of government buildings in Medford considered important to providing critical services to the community in times of disaster. Medford is the Jackson County seat. Buildings such as city hall, fire stations, federal, state, and county offices, police stations, and the like provide important services to the community.
The following map shows the locations of some of the important government buildings within the city.