As questions persist about firehouse on Springfield's east side, fuses grow shorter
Where exactly an east-side firehouse may be built is up in the air now, as is a timetable, after Springfield fire officials and city council members had their say at Tuesday's committee of the whole.
At issue is Station No. 6, currently at 2156 S. Ninth St., and one of the first three firehouses the city council committed to build along with Station No. 8, now at 2051 West Monroe but headed for the southeast corner of West Lawrence Avenue and Rickard Road, and Station No. 13, a new build.
A first set of soil tests by the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency at the proposed building site for Station No. 6 at 11th and Ash streets, the former site of Honeywell-Hobbs, showed that some remediation to the property will be needed. A second set of tests is being done.
See also: Joshua Stuenkel promoted to assistant Springfield police chief; 7 others earn new ranks
Meanwhile, the city held an open house about Station No. 8 last week and will consider purchasing the 3.48-acre site at next week's full city council meeting.
That irked Ward 6 Ald. Kristin DiCenso because "we were told (Station No. 6) was a top priority (since) it is landlocked and we haven't heard a peep about that," she said. "So I'm getting a little frustrated that this isn't coming our way."
After the meeting, DiCenso said she wasn't necessarily convinced 11th and Ash was the best location.
"If the site they're looking at right now needs major remediation, which is sounds like (it does because of) environmental hazards, find a new site," she maintained. "Was anybody surprised (they found problems there?) Go to 10th and Laurel (an alternative site), but we need to move this along quickly.
"We voted on a certain thing. We were told a certain thing and we got something else.
"I'm not opposed to anyone else getting the firehouses they need as well, but this was designated as a top priority and now it looks like it's going to be the third (on the list) and I have a problem with that."
"We still are confident we're going to be able to utilize that site (at 11th and Ash)," Blough said afterward. "In my opinion as fire chief, if that pushes a project back by several months, but it's still staying in the right place when you're making a 60-year decision, that's still what you should do. We shouldn't cut bait and go and try to find another location that may not be as good when within a matter of months we can possibly rectify the situation and put that firehouse where it belongs."
That location, "especially when you look at response times, is the best for it," Blough said.
"The discussion (tonight) was, we need to serve the east side more. Chief is trying to make that happen," Mayor Jim Langfelder contended. "If everything went as planned, with no environmental issues, that would be the first one built."
More: Illness forces postponement of Jones murder trial; now set for June 6
Ward 3 Ald. Roy Williams said perception is everything.
"People are listening and watching us," he said at the close of the debate. "So, tonight they're learning (about Station No. 6), and I have to go back over there and hear, 'Oh, I thought we were the first fire station,' and you have said it and many people have said it and now (Station No. 8) is going to be ahead of us for whatever reason.
"When we say we're going to do something and it happens to be the east side that has the most need or whatever all made you say it's the most important (firehouse), we need to learn to do that. Period. It doesn't have anything to do with holding up another one. It has to do with doing the right thing for the people and making people feel like I'm important, too, and I'm a part of this, too."
This story will be updated.
Contact Steven Spearie: 217-622-1788, sspearie@sj-r.com, twitter.com/@StevenSpearie.
Blough: A lot of the decision to move Station 8 was due to the westward growth. The sation we're replacing was built in 1968. We do have a considerable amount of upkeep. Not energy efficient. Money pit.
The interesection at Monroe and Chatham Road everyone knows, from time-to-time due to the coffee traffic makes that intersection particularly dangerous. When we go into that intersection, the traffic creates some blind spots. We haven't had any serious issues (there) but we've had some close calls. We think getting away from the intersection is a smart move as well.
The proximity dispatch, which we're still working on, which will allow for GIS/GPS to be utilize to provide whichever firettruck is closest, not necessarily just waht district you're in, you'll see that will make us more efficient as well so that alllows us to move the fireshouses and still have the response times we have.
We'll reach an expanded area, within the four minute response time. Areas not out of the four-minute response time for Station 8, is already covered by other stations. The luxury we have is that when the fire stations were originally built, we do have an overlap in coverage. Response polygons.
Maps of coverage/vs. new coverage. Floor plans. Hot zone "decom/decon area"
The entry and exit would be from Rickard Road side. There will be no backing in or out. 3.48 acres.
Donelan: Even with Starbucks moving out of that location, not only is the existing station old, but it's too close to the intersection.
That four-minute response time is so important because the majority of your calls are medical-related, but it is appreciated.
Blough: $3.2 million. Out to bid in the next couple of months. $10 million for three.
DiCenso: I'm thrilled for you westsiders. But Firehouse 6, we were told was a top priority because it is landlocked and we havent' heard a peep about that, so I'm getting a little frustrated that this isn't coming our way.
Blough: I agree with you. That was the intent when we went into this. The piece of property we think is best for us right now, we've run into a couple of obstacles. We're making 50 and 60-year decisions. So we want to make sure we put this in the right place. I don't want to rush moving it somewhere else when we still hopefully have the ability to acquire the piece of property that we want. I don't to move it to the wrong place just to get it out six months faster.
Conley: INtentions of what to do with old building.
6, 8 & 13 similar if not the same layouts. Two bays on all three.
Blough: I don't think one of them precludes the other. The reason we've not gotten further with Station 6 is when we were doing our environmental studies there were some things that came up we have to deal with. We think it's going to be over-comeable, but it's not something necessarily that's going to happen this week or this month. We think it's the right spot. That's why right now we're looking into what needs to be done, but we're not there yet.
Fulgenzi: I think the main thing we have to do is if there's a piece of land we want and we have an offer put on it, we ought to buy the land now. Because you never know who's coming in and what they're going to do. Land is not always just there for the taking. Some people want it more than others.
DiCenso: That's what happened to the original location for Station 6. It was sold to a car dealership. I would have liked the original location (on Stanford).
Blough: The location we're trying to put it on, especially when you look at response times, is the best position for it.
DiCenso: Firehouse No. 6 was designated as the most important one to move because it is landlocked, so, let's get moving on it. Whatever it takes, because we're already holding public open houses for this one, which, I agree, needs to be fixed.
Blough: We're doing our due diligence. We have to have certain land study done on each one of these places. Six came back with a couple of things we need to consider further.
Langfelder: We do have the option to purchase the property on 11th and Ash (the old Hobbs property). Nobody is more frustrated in this process than me because I felt I had to light a fire to get us to this point because we all know this should have been done decades ago.
Alternative: 10th and Laurel
Gregory: I stand in priority for (Station) 6 to move and I don't think it's a bad thing to want both of those (things). If we can land that Hobbs place, I think it will do wonders for the community around it.
Hanauer: These three can be done (together). We all said No. 6 is the No. 1, but when thngs come up on the other ones, we need to move. Six has to move. (No. 6 is at 2156 So. Ninth).
Williams: When I got on the council, I talked about perception. I always look at things and how we vote. People are listening and watching us. So tonight they're learning, and I have to go back over there and hear, Oh, I thought we were first fire station and you have said it and many people have said it and now (Station 8) is going to be ahead of us for whatever reason. When we say we're going to do something and it happens to be the east side, that has the most need or whatever all made you say it's the most important, we need to learn to do that. Period. It doesn't have anything to do with holding up another one. It has to do with doing the right thing for the people and making people feel like I'm important, too, and I'm a part of this, too.
Dan Dungan: Spfld Electric moved from downtown to the Ninth Street right after WWII. Our campus is corporate headquarters. The rail relocation, which we're all for, has impacted us greatly. Roughly one-third of our property (building) is in the right of way and will be eliminated. Our 16,000 square foot, our headquarters and distribution center. we supply about four counties.
Our desire all along during this rail relocation was to stay on Ninth Street, we had options. I'll be frank. We had options to move west or to go to Decatur.
When we settled with the city, there was a massive shortfall of funds because of the bidding process.
What were going to do is construct a 20,000-22,000-square-foot building immediately south and adjacent and attached to our corporate headquarters. We plan to improve Miller Street and Enos Street.
We've been an anchor in the area and we're pleased to be a part of that.
What we're asking for is $1.5 million. We're going to access the TIF and get the money back through increments.
Langfelder: The warehouse has been impacted. We appreciate their reinvestment in the area, but the differential from what they received on the rail side and the project costs, the gap is $1.5 million.
There's concern of the drainage of the Enos Park TIF, but really the reimbursement will be from the project itself.
There are two points of rebate: one is with the enterprise zone, so the sales tax rebate associated with the building materials and the other side of it will be the property tax rebate based on the project, whatever it's appraised at now, whatever that incremental increase is will be rebated back to them.
We appreciate them having that commitment. That's what you don't find in a lot of communities, especially when you get a large national company like SE.
DiCenso (tape): We need to find a site and we need to start building. It had been determined it was the highest priority of all the houses that needed to be replaced and it needs to be taken care of. If the sight they're looking at right now needs major remediation, which is sounds like there are a lot of environmental hazards, find a new site. Go to 10th and Laurel, but we need to move this along quickly.
We voted on a certain thing. We were told a certain thing and we got something else.
I'm not opposed to anyone else getting the firehouses they need as well, but this was designated as a top priority and now it looks like it's going to be the third and I have a problem with that.
Blough (tape): When we went about this, we decided to do all three of those at once.They're all going to be pretty much the same layout and design with the intention of doing all three concurrently. The problem was when we went to do the testing of the soil where Station 6 was at (at 11th and Ash), they came back with some things that needed to be remedied. We're still working on getting that done, but obviously, that delays the process. We still are confident we're going to be able to utilize that site. In my opinion as fire chief, if that pushes a project back by several months, but it's still staying in right place when you're making a 60-year decision, that's still what you should do. We shouldn't cut bait and go and try to find another location that may not be as good when within a matter of months we can possibly rectify the situation and put that firehouse where it belongs.
We are led to believe that with an amount of remediation, that site will be perfectly fine to put a fire station on.
We're doing an additional set of soil samples to see if what they found in there the first time is going to be in there the secdond time and if so what we need to do to clean it up.
We fully intended for Station 6 to be one of the first that we replaced. We ran into some issues about the soil and it's not for any other reason other than that. I don't think, from my standpoint, delaying starting the other ones makes any sense.
Langfelder: The discussion (tonight) was, we need to serve the east side more. Chief is trying to make that happen. If it's on Stanford compared to 11th and Ash, that's a mile away. If everything went as planned, with no environmental issues, that'd be the first one built. Can you relocate the fire station on that property wihout mitigation and if we have to mitigate it, to what extent. That's what we're trying to determine.
Blough: We know we're filling a need at 11th and Ash for the people in that neighborhood beause at Ninth and Ash, essentially where the one is now, it's been there for 60-plus years. We know we have a need there that we need to fill so we think it's a more responsible, a better way of taking care of the near east side residents by putting that house (at 11th and Ash).
We are led to believe by the experts who are studying the soil that that area can still be used. we're probably going to have to do some remediation, but I don't think you throw the baby out with the bathwater because it's going to take an extra 6 to 12 months. We want to make sure on a 60-year commitment to the residents in that part of the community that we're putting it in the right place.
This article originally appeared on State Journal-Register: Springfield City Council members get update on firehouse projects
