Oregon Planning Commission says no to variance for fire station addition

OREGON – An attempt by the Oregon Fire Protection District to receive a zoning variance to expand its fire station in the city’s River Front Commercial District will not have a recommendation for approval when it goes to the City Council for a final decision.

The Oregon Planning Commission voted 4-3 not to recommend approval of the variance after an hourlong public meeting Tuesday. The Planning Commission, composed of volunteers appointed by the City Council, makes recommendations to the City Council, which then decides whether to grant requests.

The existing station, located at 100 Washington St., is on the west bank of the Rock River next to the Route 64 bridge on the north side of the state highway. It was built in 1985 and was included in the city’s River Front Commercial District when that district was formed in 2016.

“The existing building is grandfathered in, but when there are significant changes planned, such as a major remodeling, a variance is needed,” City Manager Darin DeHaan said.

Expansion of the fire station would be considered “nonconforming,” which prompted the fire district to seek the variance.

Fire district trustees announced plans last week for a $4.1 million renovation and expansion of the 40-year-old fire station.

Oregon Fire Chief Michael Knoup said Tuesday that the expansion is needed to accommodate larger emergency vehicles, consolidate all fire apparatuses and equipment under one roof, and provide more living quarters for full-time firefighters and paramedics.

The district currently owns two buildings that house vehicles and equipment – the fire station and a building on Madison Street that was donated to the district after the Oregon Ambulance Service was dissolved.

Knoup said trustees had decided that moving the fire station to a new location and rebuilding from scratch would be too costly for taxpayers.

“If we were to consider just starting over and building a new building, to rebuild that same square footage plus the addition, we’d be looking at somewhere between an $8 million and $10 million project. And then on top of it we’d have to find another location [and] delay the start of the project while costs continue to rise. The cost of building is rising every day,” Knoup said. “So, looking at the taxpayers money, an addition makes sense for us at the current location.”

Consolidating all vehicles and apparatuses in one location would increase efficiency and decrease response times, which can make a difference in saving lives and property.

“Last year alone we rescued 26 people out of the river. Three to five minutes can make a big difference,” Knoup said.

Since the existing station was built, the district has transitioned from an all-volunteer force to a combination of paid full-time and volunteer staff, employing nine full-time members working in three shifts, with three members per shift, Knoup said. He noted calls for service increased from 400 in 1985 to 1,200 last year, with 80% of those being ambulance calls.

Knoup estimated that the expanded station could serve the community for the next 25 years.

But some Planning Commission members and two neighbors living near the fire station said the station should be relocated out of the River Front Commercial District.

“We live in a wonderful small town, and when you bond with your neighbors and your community, you hate to disappoint them, but I don’t feel this is best for Oregon’s growth to have the fire department stay there,” said Kim Krug, a residence and business owner at 103 W. Washington St., across Route 64 from the fire station. “Mistakes were made in the ’80s when they put the fire department in that spot, and if you continue with a variance, [it] would be continuing with the same type of bad judgment.”

Krug said allowing expansion in the existing location would “stall” future riverfront projects or “completely end” development along the riverfront. She said the proposed design also would block views of the river.

“The fire department has the No. 1 spot in the river district,” she said. “And to grow the city and to help businesses and to help tourism, we are going to need that riverfront project. Every city around us that has done a riverfront project has grown. We need to grow. ... If we don’t grow, we’re just going to be one dead little city. We really need to think about this.”

“We can grow and work together and make everyone happy,” she added, suggesting a new location for the fire station.

City Commissioner Tim Krug, Kim’s husband, said he was commenting on a more “personal note” and was a proponent of the river district.

“I’ve seen what other cities have done with it. I think it is a fabulous idea for our city,” Tim Krug said. “And if you look down in that neighborhood, you are actually starting to see it happen. Nothing happens overnight. It takes time, but we are working on it.”

Tim Krug said that although he agreed that expanding the station would be needed in the future, the proposed expansion did not meet the criteria for building in the river district and featured an “ultra-modern” use of “glass and steel” that would not reflect the image the city is trying to achieve.

“What’s there could be retrofitted into something that would be pretty [and] decorative. You could redesign that current building into something that could flow with the river district,” he said, adding that more time needs to be taken to explore other alternatives. “Nothing against Mike or any of the boys over there at the firehouse. We need our fire district. But is this the right place to have this addition, and is this addition the right look?”

Four Planning Commission members voted against recommending the variance: Liz Hiemstra, Mark Herman, Karly Spell and Randy Cropp. Three voted for its approval: Roger Cain, Jeff Hallock and Rick Ryland.

Cain said he wished more options were presented to the Planning Commission.

“I have real mixed emotions,” Cain said. “I feel there should be some other options for this.”

Ryland said the fire district should be allowed to expand the station, adding that lives had been saved because of the department’s close proximity to respond to emergencies on the river.

“You are not going to save 26 people if you are not by the river to save the people in the river,” Ryland said. “They are keeping us safe. Why can’t they add on?”

After the meeting, Cropp said he would have liked to have seen the issue tabled so more public input could be gathered regarding other locations for the fire station.

“I will go back to my board, and they will have to make a decision on how to proceed,” Knoup said after the decision.

The City Council’s next meeting is at 5:30 p.m. Tuesday, Jan. 28.