Building or renovating a fire station is an exercise in trade-offs. Few departments have the budget to include everything on the wish list, but some decisions made during design can affect firefighters and operations for decades.
That was the focus of FireRescue1’s webinar, “Building better stations on a tighter budget,” where fire service leaders discussed how to identify non-negotiables, find responsible savings, plan for future growth and make the case for funding.
One theme surfaced repeatedly: Cutting costs is not simply about finding cheaper options. It requires understanding what each decision will mean five, 10 or even 50 years from now.
Start by defining what is truly non-negotiable
Before value engineering begins, departments need a clear definition of what cannot be compromised.
Bozeman (Montana) Fire Chief Josh Waldo described mission-critical elements as those that directly affect safety, service delivery or the department’s ability to carry out its mission. Fire Chief Jason Caughey added another consideration: Departments need to distinguish between what they want and what their community and personnel actually need — both today and decades from now.
Those priorities will vary by department, but the panelists highlighted several areas that deserve particular protection:
- Adequate apparatus bay dimensions
- Sufficient storage
- Decontamination and contamination-control spaces
- Sleeping, hygiene and other spaces needed by 24-hour personnel
- Core mechanical and electrical systems
- Building features that support personnel health and safety
Defining these requirements early also gives chiefs a framework for responding when an architect, contractor, governing body or project manager asks where costs can be reduced.
Approach value engineering with questions, not assumptions
Value engineering often becomes shorthand for cutting the project budget. Waldo cautioned chiefs against simply approving proposed reductions because architects and engineers understand the technical details better than they do.
“You are the building owner,” he reminded attendees.
His advice was to ask what each proposed change means not only for the construction budget but also for maintenance, service life, future expansion and daily operations.
Some savings may have little operational consequence. Panelists cited examples such as simplifying finishes in mechanical areas, choosing less expensive lighting packages that still meet the department’s needs and using HVAC zoning differently in administrative areas than in spaces occupied around the clock.
Other cuts may create problems that cannot easily be corrected later. Waldo pointed to two examples from earlier station projects: apparatus space and storage. Both had been reduced during value engineering, and years later they were among the first things the department wished it could change.
The practical question for every proposed cut is simple: Is this something we can reasonably add or change later, or are we locking ourselves into a limitation?
Be careful where you save square footage
Square footage is one of the fastest ways to reduce a construction budget, which means apparatus bays, storage and support spaces can quickly become targets. The panel repeatedly warned against shrinking the building footprint simply to hit a number.
Waldo described negotiations over apparatus bay length in which even 5 feet made a significant difference. The department considered whether engines could still be double-stacked, whether personnel could safely move around apparatus and whether future truck-and-trailer combinations would fit.
City of Des Peres (Missouri) Director of Public Safety Eric Hall offered a similar lesson from a previous station that was essentially undersized from the day it opened. Reserve equipment had to be stored elsewhere, reinforcing his view that adequate footprint and storage are difficult — and expensive — to recover later.
Storage deserves particular attention because departments rarely use it exactly as predicted during design. Equipment changes. Programs grow. Community education materials accumulate. Seasonal items need a home.
When asked how much storage was enough, Waldo’s answer was straightforward: Whatever you think you need, double it.
Spend now where retrofits will cost far more later
Some infrastructure is relatively inexpensive when walls are open and construction is underway but costly once a station is finished. For example, Waldo said his department installed empty conduit and raceways throughout its facilities because adding them later could cost many times more. They can eventually support electrical upgrades, technology, solar systems or other needs that may not yet exist.
The same principle applies to electrical capacity, utilities and site planning. Bozeman could not afford to make new stations fully electric at the time of construction, but the buildings were designed so systems could be converted or expanded later. Other future improvements, including solar installations and additional generator fuel capacity, were similarly planned for even when they could not be funded immediately.
This “build ready” approach can be an effective middle ground: Do not pay for every future feature today, but avoid making tomorrow’s improvement unnecessarily difficult.
Design for the department you may become
Fire stations routinely remain in service for several decades. The department occupying the building in 2045 or 2055 may look very different from the one designing it today.
Hall said his department considered roughly a 30-year horizon while planning its renovation. That included adding enough bunk capacity for future staffing and designing a conference room that could eventually become another office.
Bozeman took a similar approach over a 50-year horizon. Administrative offices were designed with dimensions similar to bedrooms, and some administrative restrooms included showers so the space could potentially be converted to crew quarters later.
The department also looked beyond the walls themselves. If another wing or apparatus bay were added decades later, the site needed to accommodate it without first relocating utilities at significant expense.
Flexibility does not necessarily mean building more space than a department needs. It means avoiding design choices that eliminate reasonable options later.
Bring fire station expertise into the design process
Even an experienced architect may not immediately understand the operational details of station life: turnout flow, apparatus movement, decontamination, storage, training, sleeping arrangements and the interaction between public and crew-only areas.
Waldo recommended involving someone with specific fire station design expertise when possible. On his projects, a fire station specialist helped bridge the communication gap between the department and the architectural and engineering teams.
Station tours can serve a similar purpose. Visiting facilities that already contain features under consideration lets firefighters, architects and engineers see those concepts in use instead of discussing them only on drawings. It can also expose unintended consequences before they are repeated in another building.
Think carefully about what can be phased
Not every feature has to be completed on opening day. Hall described eliminating covered parking so money could instead go toward expanding the building and apparatus bay. The parking remained part of the long-term capital plan.
Other panelists discussed constructing fitness space first and adding flooring or equipment later, planning for future solar installations and providing infrastructure for generator upgrades that could be completed when funding became available.
But phasing works only when the future work has been anticipated. A station that is supposedly “ready for expansion” should have the utilities, structural capacity, site access and other infrastructure necessary to make that expansion practical.
Departments renovating occupied stations also need to plan for another form of phasing: keeping the station functional during construction. Hall’s personnel remained in their facility through an extended renovation, temporarily using offices as sleeping quarters and new spaces for makeshift functions.
That experience reinforced the need to consider noise, dust, sleeping arrangements, kitchens and other day-to-day realities before construction begins.
Protect the contingency
A construction contingency can be tempting when the project is over budget. The panel cautioned against treating it as easy money.
Waldo said contingency dollars ultimately allowed his department to purchase decontamination equipment that the operating budget could not absorb. Hall added that during a renovation, he was reluctant to use contingency funds until demolition had revealed what was behind the walls and whether unexpected structural or mechanical problems would emerge.
A contingency exists because surprises happen. Spending it too early can leave the project with few options when they do.
Consider construction timing and lead times
Budget discipline also extends to the construction schedule.
In Montana, Waldo’s department deliberately delayed construction starts rather than paying to build through winter conditions. He said that decision saved more than $500,000 on each of two projects.
Long equipment lead times present another challenge. Waldo described a generator transfer switch that took roughly 80 weeks to obtain and delayed opening the station. Hall’s department accepted an oversized transfer switch because it was available sooner than the properly sized unit.
Departments need to identify long-lead components early and understand how procurement decisions could affect the entire construction timeline.
Show elected officials the problem
When chiefs need public or political support for a station project, a presentation alone may not be enough.
Both Waldo and Hall said bringing elected officials into an existing station was particularly effective. Mechanical problems, cramped spaces and other deficiencies were easier to understand when leaders could see them firsthand.
Tours should be paired with evidence. Departments should be prepared to show:
- Call volume and response trends
- Community growth
- Standards of coverage
- Response-area or heat-map data
- Effects on service delivery
- Personnel health and safety concerns
Waldo emphasized that emotional appeals are not enough when fire departments are competing with many other priorities for public dollars. Chiefs need facts that explain why the project is needed and what the community receives in return.
Community education should also start well before a ballot measure or funding request. Waldo described spending months speaking with civic organizations, homeowners associations and other groups, while Caughey emphasized that station needs should already appear in long-term strategic planning rather than arriving as a surprise.
Use grants strategically, not as the entire funding plan
Grant funding for complete fire station construction can be difficult to find, but grants may still help departments reduce pressure on the overall capital project.
Lexipol Grant Services Manager Tabitha Vande Voort suggested looking at funding opportunities for individual components or related work, including environmental cleanup, planning and risk-assessment work, equipment, generators, wellness spaces and other specific needs.
She also noted that some state programs periodically support station construction or renovation, while USDA community facilities programs may be an option for qualifying rural communities. Congressional-directed spending and local foundation programs can provide additional possibilities.
Another strategy is to pursue grants for apparatus or equipment in the years before a station project begins so a community is not facing several major capital needs simultaneously.
Departments should verify current eligibility requirements before assuming a future grant will pay for an item that has been removed from a building project. As Vande Voort noted during the webinar, some programs will not fund certain components when they are associated with new construction.
Learn from the things other departments would change
Some of the most useful lessons came from features panelists either loved or regretted. Among the investments they valued:
- Adequate building footprint and room for future growth
- Automatic apparatus bay door closers
- Individual temperature controls in sleeping rooms
- Heated apron areas in cold climates
- Private or semi-private sleeping and hygiene space
- Built-in training features
- Polished concrete in appropriate areas because of its durability and ease of maintenance
The regrets were equally instructive.
Waldo said his department would not use the same epoxy apparatus bay flooring again because of maintenance demands and problems associated with tire chains. He also described a kitchen design that did not work well for firefighters and had to be corrected in a subsequent station.
Another seemingly small omission — failing to install power for block heaters under covered parking — ultimately cost roughly $25,000 to correct.
These examples reinforce a larger point: A feature should not be judged solely by how it looks in the architectural rendering or how much it costs on bid day. Departments need to think about how firefighters will use, clean, maintain and move through the building every shift.
Build for the long term, not simply the lowest bid
A successful station project is not necessarily the one with the lowest initial construction cost. The better measure is whether the department spent limited dollars in the right places.
Protect the footprint and the operational essentials. Question every proposed cut. Install inexpensive infrastructure now when retrofitting it later will be difficult. Plan for growth without paying for every future feature today. Preserve contingency funds for real surprises. And make sure the people designing the building understand how firefighters will actually use it.
A fire station may serve a community for 30, 40 or 50 years. The decisions made during a few months of planning will shape thousands of shifts that follow.
Watch the full webinar:
