Newington committee reviews $7.3 million plan for Fire Station No. 4, debates alternates and voter timing

The Fire Department Facilities Project Building Committee on April 15 reviewed updated conceptual designs and a projected $7.3 million cost for Fire Station No. 4, debated which features should be listed as bid alternates, and discussed timing and messaging if the council places the project before voters.

Committee members questioned whether the $7.3 million figure reflected current prices or a projection; staff said the estimate is a projected cost that includes about a 4% inflation factor. A proposed alternate to remove permanent rear columns — estimated at roughly $77,000 — drew support from several members who said eliminating structural columns now avoids a permanent, hard‑to‑reverse decision later. "If we build this building with those columns, those columns are there forever," one member said during debate on the alternates.

Members also urged including higher‑durability items — a standing‑seam metal roof and radiant slab heating — as alternates because they can reduce lifetime maintenance costs. The committee discussed procurement strategy and whether to bid these items as "add" alternates or as "deduct" alternates; several members favored carrying them as deducts so the committee can remove them if funds are lacking without understating the base budget.

Operational concerns factored into the discussion. The Fire Chief told the committee the department responds to more than 1,000 fire calls a year and that current and future apparatus must fit the station. Committee members warned that if the new apparatus does not fit, an engine outage could leave the neighborhood without local coverage.

Public commenter Joe Harpy praised the committee's budgeting work but said a 10% owner's contingency looks thin given the number of alternates. "I think that 10% contingency seems to be thin to me," Harpy said, urging caution because a failed referendum could force a scramble and lost amenities. Staff responded that the owner's contingency is only one piece of the overall buffer and that design and contractor contingencies remain at this phase, bringing combined buffers closer to about $1 million.

Other technical questions included whether kitchen equipment should be commercial grade and whether garage doors are 14-by‑14 feet as shown in a budget line item. A committee member pointed to line item 293 listing a 14‑foot by 14‑foot overhead door and said staff will confirm door dimensions and correct elevation discrepancies in the drawings.

Members also discussed how to present the project to voters and the restrictions that come with a referendum: the council determines whether to place the question before voters, and once the referendum period begins the town must remain neutral and avoid advocacy. The committee expects to have revised bid documents from the project contact (Bob Roach) showing alternates as deducts where appropriate, then hold a short follow‑up meeting next week to finalize a recommendation to the council.

The committee approved the March 18 minutes earlier in the meeting and adjourned after setting a tentative next meeting to wrap up the recommendation process.