Consultants tell Burlington council current first-unit response is strong but station gaps likely as city grows

Greg Grayson, the consultant who led Burlington’s fire station location analysis, told the City Council the city’s first‑unit response times are high quality overall but that shifts in growth and land use create coverage gaps that warrant planning for additional stations.

"From the time that that 911 call is placed until the first unit arrives from Burlington Fire, it's 6 minutes 54 seconds or less 90% of the time," Grayson said, citing the study’s 2023–24 incident dataset. He explained the study uses the 90th‑percentile metric and compares the city’s performance to industry benchmarks (the cited 'consensus' standard of about 6 minutes 20 seconds at the 90th percentile).

The consultant described the model inputs — historical demand, call volume, land use, population and planned development — and said the data package the team used included 34 residential and 79 commercial projects now in the planning pipeline. "That’s going to translate into about 9,000 additional people and about 2,000 additional incidents per year for your fire department," Grayson said.

Grayson and his GIS analyst applied a Vulnerability Risk Index (VRI) grid to identify areas where travel time and the ability to assemble an effective response force diverge. He noted that while first‑unit arrival is generally fast across Burlington, the time to assemble the full complement (effective response force) is longer — roughly 13 minutes 30 seconds at the 90th percentile — which matters for structure fires requiring multiple pieces of equipment and personnel.

The study highlighted four areas for council attention: (1) the far west area near Springwood Park (the area west of Station 6), where a nearby city‑owned parcel would perform within about 1% of an ideal model location; (2) central gaps between the Holly Hill Mall area and downtown that might be mitigated by re‑positioning Station 4 or adding resources (the consultant said moving Station 4 should be studied because relocations can create new gaps); (3) a northeast quadrant that is projected to grow; and (4) the airport/Alamance Road corridor and adjacent corridors where a centrally sited unit could fill multiple gaps.

On cost, Grayson estimated contemporary single‑station construction in the region at roughly $10 million to $12 million, for buildings commonly in the 10,000–15,000 sq. ft. range and occupying about 3 acres; apparatus costs have risen significantly since COVID. He suggested design‑build as one delivery option that may reduce cost and schedule risk.

Council members pressed on operational details. Grayson said the analysis included incidents where contractual or automatic aid (for example, responses by Winston/Guilford resources where agreements exist) were the responding units; mutual‑aid (emergency assistance when the city is overwhelmed) was not counted as baseline coverage. City staff and the consultant recommended running additional model scenarios before any relocation decisions and investigating partnerships with Alamance and Guilford counties where growth crosses jurisdictional lines.

Next steps outlined in the discussion included using the model to test relocation scenarios (including a possible Station 4 move), evaluating the identified city‑owned parcel near Springwood as a high‑priority site, assembling cost estimates and phasing options, and keeping an eye on the northeast and airport corridors as development moves forward. The council did not adopt any site or spend authority at the meeting; the presentation was delivered for information and follow‑up study.