Architects outline phased plan to replace Brandon Fire Station 11, flag structural unknowns and hurricane-hardening needs

Fleischmann Garcia Architects presented a conceptual design, phasing plan and cost guidance Tuesday during a publicly noticed procurement presentation for PS200191, the architectural/engineering services procurement for replacement of Brandon Fire Station 11 in Hillsborough County.

The presentation emphasized that the station must remain fully operational while work proceeds on a constrained suburban site, that parts of the existing apparatus bay built in 1978 may require substantial hurricane‑hardening to meet current Florida Building Code wind loads, and that converting the bay to drive‑through operation will affect the site plan and require acquisition or use of adjacent lots.

The firm’s fire‑station specialist, John Kelly of Fleischmann Garcia Architecture, said the existing 3,360‑square‑foot apparatus bay dates to 1978 and was designed to earlier wind standards. “In 1978, the design wind velocity was probably 110 miles an hour. It's now 154 miles an hour under the Florida building code currently in effect,” Kelly said. He said the county’s project team must investigate whether existing masonry walls and roof framing are properly reinforced and tied together to resist current wind loads.

Why it matters: the firm warned that undiscovered structural deficiencies could trigger expensive change orders and schedule delays. Kelly recommended early structural testing and a predefined scope to avoid ‘‘surprise structural problems’’ once construction starts.

Fleischmann Garcia showed a conceptual site plan that retains and renovates the existing apparatus bay while building a new 4,440‑square‑foot living/operations wing (the firm said about 3,640 square feet of that wing would sit north and east of the bays). The firm proposed an eight‑phase construction sequence that uses temporary living quarters and a temporary apparatus carport so firefighters can continue operations throughout construction.

On vehicle operations, Kelly said the station currently houses three pieces of apparatus (an engine, a ladder and a rescue truck, which the firm noted online sources list at the station). He described the existing interior apparatus bay as roughly 55 feet wide by 59 feet deep (inside‑to‑inside) and said the distance from the back of the building to the rear property line is only 38 feet, 6 inches — insufficient for simple back‑in conversion. “The only way to get drive through operation is to move in a north‑south direction,” Kelly said, adding that recently acquired residential lots to the north could provide the site room needed for drive‑through aisles, parking and stormwater detention.

The presentation also addressed firefighter health and station operations. Kelly described design practices the firm has used to reduce firefighter exposure to carcinogens, including “hot‑zoning” (separating apparatus, decontamination and living areas), dedicated decontamination showers and laundry, lockers for clean clothes, and diesel exhaust evacuation. He noted that some departments use source‑capture exhaust hoses that clamp to tailpipes but said crews sometimes do not use them, making centralized ventilation systems that exchange engine‑room air rapidly a more reliable control in practice.

On schedule and cost, Kelly said the firm has historically met delivery milestones for Hillsborough County work and that the only public cost figure he had seen was $6,000,000 for the full construction; he said he was comfortable that a resilient, sustainable station could be delivered within that budget but emphasized early contractor and cost‑estimator engagement to control scope and pricing.

Committee members asked about tradeoffs between full replacement and hardening the existing structure; Kelly said a detailed cost analysis is required but his “honest gut feeling” was that hardening and renovating the existing structure could yield a small savings compared with full replacement, depending on required reinforcement.

The presentation closed with the firm recommending a detailed continuity‑of‑operations plan prepared by the construction manager, continuous camera surveillance of the apron, and contractor connection to the station tone/alarm system so on‑site personnel are notified when apparatus leave.

Ending: No formal selection or action was taken at the presentation; the meeting was a procurement presentation and Q&A to inform committee members and staff before any contract award or design authorization.