Project Type: Construction - Facility Project Status: Resubmitted
Project Origin: Study/Assessment
Project Schedule: August 2017 – June 2019 Requestor: Fire Rescue
Contact: Scott Lambert 3105; John Oprandy 3103 Department Ranking: 2 of 4
OFD Assistance: Yes Fiscal Agent: County Project Operating Impacts: Yes Revenue Offset: None Project Description:
This project is necessary and has been a looming need for quite some time. However, the study conducted by Teng &
Associates is now 5 years old and much has changed since the study was conducted.
The site recommended by Teng & Associates is no longer viable (the old Keene landfill.)
The once unified public safety training facility is now several separate projects and the police firing range has been designed and is moving forward on construction.
A decentralized model where classroom training and practical field training are conducted at separate smaller facilities is the model being proposed in the County CIP. This model is different from that recommended in the Teng Study. This model should be studied and its impact on the Fire Rescue Training needs assessed (this model may be more efficient and cost effective – but it is not the model this CIP project is currently designed under.)
There are new partnership possibilities that have been discussed with CATEC, Piedmont VA Community College, and the Regional Juvenile Detention Center.
The City is installing a small training burn building on Department of Forestry property off of Fontaine Ave and is no longer interested in partnering on the project.
For these reasons, a study is proposed in FY17 for the public safety training needs in the County before any architectural and/or design work is done for the project.
Fire Rescue is requesting the construction of a burn building, training tower, and practical training area. This request represents the fire rescue practical training portion of the Public Safety Training Facility, now represented in three separate projects:
1. Firearms Range facility (police practical training)
2. Public Safety Training Academy (police / fire rescue didactic training; joint facility) 3. Public Safety Training Facility (fire rescue practical training)
Special facilities are required to conduct mandatory training for our personnel, and are necessary due to growth of the fire rescue department and our reliance on a volunteer workforce that experiences turnover in excess of 25%.
Cost estimates for this project are derived from a needs assessment and study conducted by Teng & Associates. The report is available from Fire Rescue.
Minimal impact is expected on the department’s operating budget, as many of the operating expenses are currently incurred with our existing building. Inspections and some expenses will be greater with the new building and are reflected in this request. Operating impact is projected at approximately 12-15k annually.
Location/Property:
Location:
Physical Location: Existing Fire Rescue Training Site (behind Regional Jail)
GPS Coordinates: 38.00626099999999, -78.49571800000001
Magisterial District: Scottsville
40
(Continued: Public Safety Training Facility)
Neighborhood: Neighborhood 4
Site Status (Land): Long term lease arrangement with Regional Jail Assets: County Owned / Co-owned
Relationship to an Approved County Policy or Plan:
County Aspirations:
Operational Capacity: Ensure County government’s ability to provide high quality service that achieves community priorities
Critical Infrastructure: Prioritize, plan and invest in critical infrastructure that responds to past and future changes and improves the capacity to serve community needs
Comprehensive Plan: This project supports the fire rescue mission outlined in the Community Facilities section of our comprehensive plan.
Guiding Principles:
Maintain public safety as a key component of Albemarle’s livability;
Provide and maintain education facilities and technologies that enhance teaching and learning;
Other: None
Project Justification:
Our system relies heavily upon volunteer personnel, and continuous training is necessary to maintain pace with provider turnover. Over the last two years, we have invested heavily in the human resources necessary to provide a minimum training program that affords both flexibility and availability in coursework aimed at maximizing participation. To this end, we have been tremendously successful.
The additional training has accelerated the deterioration of our existing facility. When the center was initially designed in the early 80s, the expected usage of the facility is much less than the reality of today’s training requirements. Currently, our training division provides functional training at the center over 120 days out of the year, with approximately 30 of those being live fire training. The scope of training delivered at the site has expanded from only structural firefighting to include apparatus operations, hazardous materials, and technical rescue training – most of which the existing site is not designed for.
The Existing burn building is nearing the end of its functional life, and will require extensive rehab or new construction. A five year assessment was conducted in the spring of 2013, resulting in an approximately $25K in non-structural
remmediations necessary to keep the building useable. The 2013 five year assessment suggested that the existing structure would likely need extensive rehab and / or replacement by the next scheduled assessment in 2018. Staff anticipates that the 2018 State Inspection will show $150,000 to $200,000 of renovations will be necessary to keep the existing burn building open.
A renovation offers a less costly solution, but does not address the limitations of the current design and does not incorporate functionality required to deliver present day training. It is recommended that Fire Rescue pursue the construction of a new facility to meet current needs.
This timeline is significant due to the fact that should the CIP project be delayed from the proposed timeline and a renovation of the existing structure is required in 2019 it’s likely that significant funds will be expended in an attempt to rehab an aging facility which will only be torn down a short time later.
The facility should be constructed on the proposed timeline for these reasons:
The existing facility and grounds is deteriorating and has been costing more to maintain – this trend will continue.
We are vulnerable to having the building be shut down by the state for live fire evolutions based on inspection performance due to health and safety related concerns. Should this occur, it will create a significant hardship on our ability to train volunteers. The proposed timeline allows for several more years of operation at the existing facility – which we anticipate being able to sustain. Beyond that timeline, we’re vulnerable.
41
(Continued: Public Safety Training Facility)
This project directly benefits volunteer and career personnel by ensuring a training location for both the initial and on-going training necessary to maintain proficiency in core skills. Further, having a site that incorporates training capacity for skills without existing facilities (apparatus operations, hazardous materials, and technical rescue) will better prepare personnel for the day-to-day challenges faced in emergency service delivery.
Change/Reasons for Revisions:
As compared to the unfunded FY 16 request, the FY 17 request includes a needs assessment study is proposed to inform the project as discussed above. Efficiencies and/or new partnerships identified through the study could significantly impact the scope and cost of this project. The schedule is significant at this point as another State Inspection is imminent and the County must be prepared to either renovate the existing building or build a new facility – additional information on this issue is outlined above.
Alternatives/Impact if Project Not Funded/Completed:
A. Alternatives to not funding the project:
a. Continued maintenance of existing facility.
b. Discontinuation of existing facility; reliance on facility in other localities (Goochland, Buckingham, Augusta, Orange)
c. Partnership with the City d. Outsourcing fire training B. Impact if not funded
a. If existing facility is to be used, extensive maintenance will be required to maintain compliance with state regulations. Existing facility is 25+ years old, and is showing signs of extreme wear. A recent study suggested numerous structural improvements are necessary to ensure the safety and functionality of the site.
b. If neighboring facilities are to be used, changes to our existing training programs would be necessary. The current site is utilized on average of 3-4 days weekly; current scope of training includes certification courses, in-service training for existing personnel, practical training assessments for personnel, and annual testing of apparatus. Though listed as an option, the limitations afforded by this approach are not feasible. Staff trains on-duty; we would not be able to send personnel to other localities to train while they are in-service and responsible for emergency service delivery.
c. We have discussed a partnership with the City of Charlottesville as a more cost effective solution; they are currently pursuing a location better suited for their needs. The site chosen would not support the type of center needed by the county for delivery of training; the City desires a small footprint with limited functionality and plans to utilize in conjunction with training props incorporated into their new station. We have not ruled out them still participating in this project, but have ruled out us participating in their project.
d. If outsourcing is to be utilized, recruitment and retention would be affected. We enjoy a higher-than-average recruitment and retention of our volunteer personnel (based on local, state, and national trends); it is largely attributed to the ability to train new personnel and deliver numerous initial training offerings. Further, the site is used extensively for existing personnel; outsourcing this training is not an option and would negatively affect our ability to develop personnel if this training was not available.
Other Special Considerations:
X Eligible for Co-location
X Related to/Dependent upon another submitted project Public/Private Partnership
X Other: Potential partnership with other locality (Charlottesville)
42
(Continued: Public Safety Training Facility) Capital Project Request Financial Data:
Project Index
[Fire Rescue] Public Safety Training Facility FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY17 - FY21 EXPENDITURES
Architectual/Design/Engineering Costs $0 $600,490 $0 $0 $0 $600,490
Construction/Site Preparation/Utilities Cost $0 $0 $3,434,400 $0 $0 $3,434,400
Other Initial Capital Expense Costs $50,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50,000
Project Management Fee $3,654 $25,091 $76,727 $0 $0 $105,472
EXPENDITURES TOTAL $53,654 $625,581 $3,511,127 $0 $0 $4,190,362
REVENUES
OPERATING IMPACTS
Annual Maintenance Cost $0 $0 $0 $10,300 $10,609 $20,909
Operating Costs (excl. maintenance) $0 $0 $0 $6,180 $6,365 $12,545
Capital Expense $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0
Net Operating Cost $0 $0 $0 $16,480 $16,974 $33,454
Personnel Count 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
[Fire Rescue] Public Safety Training Facility FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25 FY26 FY22-FY26 FY17-FY26 EXPENDITURES
Architectual/Design/Engineering Costs $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $600,490
Construction/Site Preparation/Utilities Cost $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $3,434,400
Other Initial Capital Expense Costs $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $50,000
Project Management Fee $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $105,472
EXPENDITURES TOTAL $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,190,362
REVENUES
OPERATING IMPACTS
Annual Maintenance Cost $10,927 $11,255 $11,593 $11,941 $12,299 $58,015 $78,924
Operating Costs (excl. maintenance) $6,556 $6,753 $12,656 $7,164 $7,379 $40,508 $53,053
Capital Expense $0 $0 $11,400 $0 $0 $11,400 $11,400
Net Operating Cost $17,483 $18,008 $35,649 $19,105 $19,678 $109,923 $143,377
Personnel Count 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00