Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Whitestown fire chief outlines station relocation study; council to consider RFPQ for Station 271 replacement
Summary
Fire Chief presented maps and response-time modeling showing gaps in coverage on the north side of Whitestown and recommended relocating Station 271 to the Main Street/Albert S. White corridor as planning proceeds; council discussion flagged land availability, costs and staffing as open issues.
Whitestown — Fire Chief Westridge presented preliminary run-time maps and development overlays and recommended the town solicit requests for qualifications (RFPQs) to study replacement or relocation options for Fire Station 271.
Chief Westridge said Station 271, built roughly 25 years ago as a volunteer-era pole-barn structure, is functionally inadequate for current 24/7 staffing and modern firefighter wellness standards. He presented five years of incident-location data and four-minute response-time polygons, and said the north side of town shows increasing run density and coverage gaps that relocation could address.
Why it matters: Whitestown has rapid growth and new residential developments on the north side; the fire department said a new Station 271, sited near Main Street and Albert S. White, would improve coverage for current and future development corridors and better align the department with National Fire Protection Association response-time planning standards.
Key questions and considerations: Councilmembers and the chief discussed land availability (the town owns some parcels at Main and Albert S. White, but land acquisition and site suitability remain open), costs to build versus renovate, and the implications of adding a third station (and later a potential fourth) for staffing and operating budgets. One councilmember noted potential neighborhood opposition to a station near existing subdivisions and urged careful public engagement. Members of the fire board and council said a follow-up phase should include precise cost estimates for new construction versus renovation, and that RFPQs should gather architecture/engineering and construction-feasibility information.
Outcome and next steps: No vote was taken. The chief asked for direction to proceed with soliciting RFPQs; council members said they wanted cost estimates and data to inform decisions on relocation versus renovation and on timing relative to budget constraints. Councilmembers noted land and staffing are the main constraints and asked staff to return with cost scenarios.
Ending: The discussion concluded as a data-collection and planning step: the chief will proceed with an RFPQ process and report back with proposals, cost estimates and site analyses before any formal relocation or construction decision.
