Commission backs further planning for replacement of Station 2 amid PFAS contamination

Bay City commissioners voted to advance planning and evaluation for a replacement of Fire Station No. 2 after staff outlined contamination and cost estimates and secured a federal cleanup grant.

The commission passed a resolution to continue evaluating and developing a replacement station — including using a $959,000 grant obtained through Senator Peter’s office for demolition and remediation — by a roll-call vote that resulted in a 7–1–1 outcome (seven yes, one no, one abstention). The resolution directs staff to pursue site work and follow‑up steps; it does not authorize construction funding.

Public safety staff told the commission Station 2, built in 1956, handles a high call volume (about 2,000 calls a year) and is critical to keeping response times in the South End at the department’s standard. The presenter said EGLE testing found PFAS on the station property, including in storm and sanitary lines adjacent to the site, and recommended demolition and remediation of the parcel. “Station 2 was built in 1956. Replacement of this station is critical to maintain emergency coverage in the South End,” the presenter said during the briefing.

Staff said the federal grant covers demolition and cleanup but does not pay for a replacement building. A planning‑level construction estimate for a new station on the preferred Water Street (former DPW) site is about $9.1 million; that estimate does not include demolition of the old DPW building on that parcel. Staff cautioned that these are planning figures and that final costs will depend on design and bids.

Commissioners and staff debated whether the existing Station 2 site could be cleaned and reused. The community development director said tests showed contamination under the asphalt and in subsurface soils and that EGLE had informed staff that deed restrictions were likely, limiting reuse of the current footprint. She also noted that testing on adjoining property (a school) found PFAS at much lower levels and that EGLE had not required fencing or surface restrictions at nearby public areas. “There is not a surface contamination issue. If it was at the surface, EGLE would have required us to fence off the property and restrict entry,” she said.

Some commissioners pressed for more detail before moving forward, citing the depth and mobility of PFAS in soils and the risk that future standards or testing could require additional work. Others said moving the project to a formal planning phase would allow the city to secure more precise cost estimates and possible additional funding. Commissioner Tenney urged urgency: “We do have 1 year, if I’m not mistaken, to utilize those grant funds for the tear down of Station 2, so I fear that waiting is no longer an option.”

Several members of the public spoke during the meeting. A resident who lives near Station 2 said he appreciated firefighters’ response times but wanted more clarity about timelines; another warned that repeated requests to voters could be a difficult sell given recent survey results. A small number of commissioners voiced concern about siting and whether a new station on the preferred Water Street site would meet South End response‑time needs.

Next steps identified by staff include using the demolition/remediation grant, refining site evaluations for Water Street and other candidate locations, developing a capital package to close funding gaps, and returning to the commission with schematic costs and specific funding options, including the potential use of a millage or bond. The resolution passed without a final commitment to construction and preserves the commission’s ability to review specific funding measures.

Action: commission resolution to continue evaluating and developing a replacement for Fire Station No. 2 (motion passed 7 yes, 1 no, 1 abstain).