Title
title
A Motion to Select a Preferred Design Option for the Fire Station II Replacement Project and Refer the item to the Finance Committee for Future Planning
..end
Introduction
overview
As directed in the Fiscal Year 2026 Capital Improvement Budget, staff with the assistance of a consulting firm completed a Space Needs Analysis and Conceptual Programming Study of Oak Park Fire Station II. Three conceptual design options will be presented for consideration including highlighting the financial and operational advantages and disadvantages of each option.
end
body
Recommended Action
Village staff recommend that the Village Board choose a preferred option for the Fire Station II project and refer the item to the Finance Committee.
Prior Board Action
The Board has taken the following prior action(s):
• The Village Board approved funding the program as part of the Fiscal Year 2026 Capital Improvement Budget on December 9, 2025 (ORD-25-220).
Background
Fire Station II, originally constructed in 1917, has undergone numerous renovations over its 109‑year history. Despite these efforts, the facility’s size, layout, and aging infrastructure no longer align with the operational demands of modern and future emergency response models. The station is currently limited with only one engine company and its associated personnel, whereas the increasing calls for service require support of both an engine and an ambulance company. This reduction in capacity limits the Village’s ability to meet contemporary service expectations and does not reflect the Village Board’s priorities related to community responsiveness, operational readiness, and employee wellness.
Recognizing these challenges, the Village Board allocated funding in the FY 2026 Capital Improvement Budget to conduct a comprehensive space needs analysis and conceptual programming study for the facility. The study concluded that the existing building cannot be renovated in a cost‑effective or technically feasible manner to meet the requirements of a modern emergency services facility. As a result, full replacement is necessary to ensure long‑term operational effectiveness and alignment with industry standards.
Multiple conceptual design options were evaluated, including redevelopment of the existing site and potential relocation to generic parcels within the Village. Three options are being presented to the Village Board for consideration. Two options propose a two‑story facility with a basement, capable of meeting departmental needs and suitable for either the current site or a comparably sized parcel. The third option envisions a larger two‑story facility without a basement, which would require acquisition of a larger parcel to accommodate expanded operational and training functions.
These options provide the Village Board with a clear framework for determining the most effective long‑term solution to support emergency response, community safety, and workforce wellbeing.
Timing Considerations
Fire Station II, constructed in 1917, has undergone several renovations over the years. However, the demands of the community now far exceed the capacity and condition of the current facility. The aging building can no longer adequately support the growing vehicle weight and requirements of modern emergency services or the increasing needs of the residents it serves.
The cost estimates provided with the concept designs and optionality presented are provided in 2027 dollars. Cost escalation calculations would be required for any construction occurring in the future.
Financial Impact
There is no immediate budget impact associated with selecting a preferred conceptual option and referring the project to the Finance Committee. The Fire Station II replacement project is not currently included in the Village’s financing plan, and a specific funding source has not yet been identified.
As part of future planning, the Finance Committee will evaluate the project’s estimated costs, potential funding options, timing, and relationship to the Village’s other capital priorities and financial obligations. Selection of a preferred option will help establish a conceptual basis for this analysis but does not authorize construction or commit the Village to a specific funding approach.
The construction estimates presented are preliminary, order-of-magnitude estimates stated in 2027 dollars and may change as the project scope is further developed. The estimates do not include soft costs or potential property acquisition expenses. Cost escalation would also need to be considered if construction occurs in a later year.
Any future design or construction expenditures would be subject to further financial analysis, appropriation, and Village Board approval.
Operations Impact
There is no operating impact associated with this item. The item aligns with the department’s core service delivery.
DEI Impact
Replacing the outdated Fire Station II is essential to ensuring equitable access to reliable emergency services across the community. Modernizing this facility strengthens public safety for all residents, supports a more inclusive and ADA‑compliant working environment for firefighters, and helps ensure that no resident faces disproportionate delays or reduced service due to aging infrastructure. This investment advances the Village’s commitment to equity, resilience, and community wellbeing.
Community Input
There has been no community input given in relation to this item.
Staff Recommendation
Village staff recommend that the Village Board choose a preferred option for the Fire Station II project and refer the item to the Finance Committee.
Advantages:
• The financial and operational cost of the project can be accounted for, evaluated and prioritized in light of the Village’s other long term capital obligation.
• Advancement now would likely result in the lowest overall project cost as the longer a project is delayed the more likely it is for a total cost increase.
Disadvantages:
• Advancement will result in additional staff time and potential expenditure of funds on the project.
• Project cost will be included in financial planning and project may be prioritized over other existing capital obligations.
Alternatives
Alternative 1:
The Village Board can delay action to gain additional information.
Advantages:
• Taking additional time to design and further develop the Board’s vision for the project could result in a different approach than currently represented by the Board’s goals that may better align with an updated perspective on the project, based upon new insights gained through the current design process.
• A delay could provide time to address any additional concerns articulated by the Village Board and further review or secure funding mechanisms.
Disadvantages:
• Additional delays in this project will lead to increased costs.
• The time and resources spent waiting could lead to missed opportunities, such as changes in market conditions or the chance to invest in other projects.
• Additional time would allow room to change the project scope or add new features, which could complicate and lengthen the project even further.
• Delaying this project could lead to scheduling conflicts with other projects, potentially making it harder to secure the same labor and materials when the project is eventually resumed.
Alternative 2:
The Village Board can provide direction to Village staff to pause the project indefinitely.
Advantages:
• No additional staff or financial resources would be committed to this project until otherwise directed by a future Village Board.
• Staff or financial resources could be redirected to other priorities.
Disadvantages:
• Delaying this project indefinitely could make it difficult to recruit and retain valuable Fire Department staff to develop, implement, and manage Village emergence services that directly benefit community members.
• The Village Board goal to ensure a healthy working environment would be further deferred.
Anticipated Future Actions
Pending recommendations from the Finance Committee, staff will present this project and its associated costs in planning and budgeting documents for future consideration by the Village Board.
Prepared By: Rob Sproule, Public Works Director and Joseph Terry, Fire Chief
Reviewed By: Jack Malec, Assistant to the Village Manager
Approved By: Kevin J. Jackson, Village Manager
Attachment(s):
1. Fire Station II Space Needs Presentation
2. Fire Station II Space Needs Analysis Report