§ 00 · Executive overview

The risk picture for the Fairview service area

A community risk assessment ordered by the seven mandatory NFPA 1300 risk profiles, scored per planning zone with the PRISM probability × impact model. This document is the foundation of the chain: the risk classes established here drive the response objectives adopted in Report 2 (Standards of Cover) and measured quarterly in Report 3 (Service Delivery Scorecard).

Composite PRISM risk

R 7.5

Moderate · prob 2.9 × impact 2.6

Population protected

34,800

28.4 mi² · 1,225/mi² overall

Planning zones

1 High · 6 Moderate · 3 Low

Annual demand

2,410

2025 · 60% EMS · +2.8%/yr

Stations · personnel

38 career · 82 volunteer

5-yr structure fires

214

$4.2M property loss

▸ The one-line risk finding Fairview's dominant risks are concentrated, not uniform: one High zone (Z-06 — industrial park, 180-bed senior living, pre-war rowhomes) sits beside a Moderate urban core, while two rural zones carry long travel and no hydrants. EMS is 60% of demand and growing — the dual-role staffing model is the system's binding constraint (measured in Report 3: 23% of calls begin while units are already committed).

§ 01 · Planning-zone risk register — NFPA 1750 §10.3.6

Ten zones, scored and classified

Composite R-score (1–25) = √(probability × impact), each axis built from four weighted sub-indicators. Category breaks: Low 1–4.9 · Moderate 5–9.9 · High 10–16.9 · Critical ≥17. Click a column head to sort.

Zone risk map

Fill = PRISM risk class · ● = fire stations · demo geometry (illustrative)

HighModerateLow

Demand-zone map — NFPA 1750 Table 7.4.2

Density classification sets each zone's response objective (adopted in Report 2)

Urban >1,000/mi² — 9:00 @ 90%Suburban — 10:00 @ 80%Rural — 14:00 @ 80%

Planning-zone register

Zone	Risk class	R-score	Demand zone	Population	First-due	Key risk drivers

§ 02 · Demographic profile & social vulnerability

Who lives here

Population & vulnerability

Total population	34,800
Households	13,400
Over 65 (vulnerable band)	19.2%
Under 5	5.1%
Median household income	$94,200
Poverty rate	6.8%
Limited-English households	3.4%
Disability (non-institutional)	11.7%

CDC/ATSDR Social Vulnerability Index — 0.38 overall (moderate)

By theme (0 = least vulnerable, 1 = most) · demo values

Socioeconomic status	0.41
Household characteristics & disability	0.44
Racial & ethnic minority / language	0.22
Housing type & transportation	0.35

▸ Profile findingThe senior population (19.2%, concentrated in Z-06's congregate living) drives both EMS demand and life-risk weighting. Household & disability vulnerability (0.44) is the highest SVI theme — fall-related EMS is the fastest-growing call type.

§ 03 · Building stock, occupancy & target hazards

What can burn, collapse, or trap

Housing stock — 14,100 units

14%

44%

28%

14%

Pre-19501950–791980–992000+

58% of housing predates 1980 — pre-code construction, aging electrical, and legacy balloon framing in the Old Mill Historic District (Z-03). Garden-apartment clusters in Z-04 are the highest life-load multifamily stock.

Target hazards (inspection & pre-plan priority)

Occupancy	Zone	Why it matters
Riverbend Industrial Park	Z-06	22 occupancies · flammable-liquids storage · limited access
Lakeside Senior Living	Z-06	180 beds · non-ambulatory · evacuation-dependent
Fairview Commons Mall	Z-04	Large-area assembly · sprinklered · high daytime load
Fairview HS + 6 schools	Z-09	6,100 students · peak-hour concentration
Old Mill Historic District	Z-03	Pre-war rowhomes · balloon frame · exposure risk
WUI corridor	Z-10	Wildland-urban interface · no hydrants · single access road

§ 04 · Fire experience & incident history

What actually happens here

5-yr incidents (2021–25)

11,600

trend +2.8%/yr

EMS share

60%

1,445 EMS calls in 2025

Structure fires · 5-yr

214

~43/yr · $4.2M loss

Civilian casualties · 5-yr

2 inj

0 deaths · 5 FF injuries

Call concurrency

23%

of calls begin while committed · peak 4

2025 call mix — 2,410 incidents

EMS — medical	54%
MVC / rescue	6%
Automatic fire alarms	13%
Service / good intent	13%
Outside / vehicle fires	3%
Hazmat / gas leaks	3%
Structure fires	2%
Other	6%

Demand pattern

Demand peaks 09:00–11:00 and 16:00–19:00 — squarely inside the daytime window when volunteer turnout at Stations 3–5 is weakest. The busiest zones are the urban core (Z-03, Z-06, Z-09), which together generate 51% of volume on 42% of the population.

✕ History findingOverlapping incidents are no longer rare events: 23% of 2025 calls began while the department was already committed, and the system ran ≥2 simultaneous incidents for a measurable share of every week. Concurrency — not single-incident capability — is the emerging risk. It is tracked quarterly in Report 3 §05.

§ 05 · Response coverage — stations & modeled travel

Where the system reaches in time

Station & apparatus profile

Station	Staffing model	Apparatus	First-due zones	Modeled 4-min pop share
Station 1 — HQ	Career (4/shift)	ENG 1 · ENG 1-2 · LAD 1 · RES 1 · AMB 1 · MEDIC 1	Z-03, Z-09 (urban)	71%
Station 2	Career (3/shift)	ENG 2 · TWR 2 · AMB 2	Z-04 (urban), Z-05 (suburban)	64%
Station 3	Combination (2 career day + vol)	ENG 3 · ENG 3-2 · RES 3 · AMB 3 · MEDIC 3	Z-06 (urban-High), Z-07, Z-08	48%
Station 4	Volunteer	ENG 4 · BRUSH 4 · TANKER 4 · AMB 4	Z-02 (suburban), Z-10 (rural)	22%
Station 5	Volunteer	ENG 5 · TANKER 5 · AMB 5 · MEDIC 5	Z-01 (rural)	9%

▸ Coverage findingModeled first-engine coverage: 47% of population within 4:00 travel, 88% within 8:00. The 4-minute engine (NFPA 1750 station-based objective) is achievable only in the urban core; the suburban ring and rural zones depend on the demand-zone totals (10:00 / 14:00) their density entitles them to — which is exactly how the adopted standard in Report 2 is structured. Measured attainment appears in Report 3.

§ 06 · Water supply

Hydrants where they exist, tankers where they don't

Hydranted coverage

Protected properties within 1,000 ft of a creditable hydrant	82%
Municipal system hydrants (mapped)	1,140
Dry hydrants (static sources)	2
Unhydranted zones	Z-01 · Z-10

Rural water operations

Zones Z-01 and Z-10 (4,400 residents, both Low risk but long-travel) rely on tanker shuttle from Stations 4–5 (TANKER 4, TANKER 5) with dry-hydrant draft points. Sustained fire flow beyond ~750 gpm requires automatic-aid tankers — formalized in the Report 2 water-supply standard.

§ 07 · Natural & technological hazards

What the region throws at us

Hazard	Rating (NRI-style, demo)	Exposure
Winter weather	Relatively High	Ice-storm outage history; hillside road network; EMS surge
Riverine flooding	Relatively High	Mill Creek corridor through Z-03/Z-06; 210 structures in SFHA
Heat wave	Moderate	Senior population; congregate living
Tornado / high wind	Moderate	Garden apartments; mall assembly load
Hazmat — fixed & transport	Moderate	Riverbend Industrial Park; state highway corridor
Wildfire (WUI)	Relatively Low	Z-10 corridor; single-access development

§ 08 · Community risk reduction priorities

Five priorities, in order

#	Priority	Risk basis
1	Daytime effective-force staffing — peak-demand staffing or duty-crew program at Stations 3–5	ERF assembly fails by day (Report 3: 24% meeting); demand peaks 09:00–19:00
2	Senior & aging-in-place program — falls prevention, congregate-living pre-plans, lift-assist policy	60% EMS share; SVI household theme 0.44; Z-06 High classification
3	Automatic-alarm reduction — ordinance + verified-response for chronic AFA occupancies	13% of volume is AFAs; each consumes first-due availability
4	Winter weather & flood readiness — Mill Creek pre-plans, generator program, swiftwater partnership	Top two NRI hazards
5	WUI mitigation, Z-10 — defensible space, second access, dry-hydrant maintenance	Single-access WUI corridor, unhydranted

§ 09 · Methodology, sources & audit trail

How this was built

PRISM risk model — weights & category breaks

Probability axis: incident history .35 · exposure .20 · conditions .25 · trend .20. Impact axis: life .35 · property .25 · economic .15 · response capability .25 (response sub-indicator penalized by drive-time and hydrant gaps). Composite R = √(probability × impact) scaled 1–25. Breaks: Low 1–4.9 · Moderate 5–9.9 · High 10–16.9 · Critical ≥17. Per NFPA 1750 §10.3.6 and NFPA 1300.

Data sources & vintage (production) — synthetic in this demo

In production, this report computes from: Census ACS 5-yr · CDC/ATSDR SVI · FEMA NRI · NFIRS (5-yr) + agency CAD/RMS · TIGERweb tract geometry · OSM building/road network · state hydrant & facility registries — each run persisted as a hashed JSON artifact so Reports 2–3 cite exactly which dataset they were built from. Every figure in this demo is synthetic, generated for the fictional Fairview community to illustrate the method.

Standards referenced

NFPA 1300 (community risk assessment & CRR planning) · NFPA 1750 §10.3.6 (risk categorization), Table 7.4.2 (demand zones) · CPSE/CFAI 10th Edition Categories I–II · CDC SVI methodology.