14° and Clear
Image
8-27-2025 10:32pm
Despite Resident Concerns, Planned Size of Fire Station 1 Remains Unchanged - Select Board Explains Why
Darlene Cancell
Editor
With a Special Election of September 9th approaching for a revote on the funding mechanism for a new Westwood fire station, Westwood Select Board Chair Robert Gotti provided some answers, at a remotely held August 18th board meeting, to persistent questions from residents who have described the Select Board as being “tone deaf” to concerns about the size and scope of the planned, new Fire Station 1.
At the ballot box for Special Town Election on June 3rd, Westwood residents rejected the funding mechanism required to cover the $38.1 million cost of the new FS1 project. There were 1,236 "no" votes (54%) and 1,056 "yes" votes (46%).
The June 3rd vote followed an earlier vote at the May 19th Town Meeting where a much smaller but decisive pool of residents approved the costs of a new fire station to the tune of $38.1 million. At May’s Town Meeting, votes were determined by a standing count. There were 503 "yes" votes (75%) and 164 "no" votes (25%).
Given the split votes of June 3rd and May 19th, Select Board has determined to present the June 3rd question to voters again. On September 9th, voters will be asked to make their opinions known once again at a Special Election, with early voting and mail-in voting taking place before that date. Such a revote is common, according to Mr. Gotti, in situations where the community is split on an issue.
Despite residents voicing their concerns over the project cost, the question that Select Board is presenting to residents for a revote on September 9th does not incorporate any changes since voters rejected the question on June 3rd. By way of explanation, Mr. Gotti noted that costs of redesign, time delays, and inflation would have added an estimated $5 - $7 million more on top of the current contract bid costs of $38.1 million.
Select Board Clerk Joe Previtera commented that drawing up plans for a new design would cost around $2.5 million to $3 million.
Select Board member Marianne LeBlanc Cummings added that given the unexpected willingness of contractors to hold their bid prices through September 15th, the board has an obligation to bring the question back to taxpayers for a revote.
That said, while the question Select Board is presenting to voters for a revote is unchanged, Mr. Gotti said that Select Board has asked FS1 project architects Dore + Whittier to eliminate 3 of 13 bathrooms and make other cuts, in acknowledgement of voter concerns with cost. Along with reducing the number of bathrooms, another cost that could be eliminated is the planned purchase of $20,000 to $30,000 in new gym equipment. Instead, firefighters would use existing gym equipment in the new space.
However, such cost-cutting will have limited effect, and square footage of the building would not change. “This is not going to be a game changer,” said Mr. Gotti. He noted that neither the scale nor “skin” of the building will change. Rather, the size of the building is dictated by the “apparatus floor,” he said. He added that the footprint of the second story is a cost effective, simple “box” on top of what has been established as the space for the first floor.
Mr. Gotti noted that even a reduction of $2 million to the project – a larger amount than the cost reductions to fixtures and finishings under discussion - would equate to a savings of only $20 per year over the 30 year bond for the average taxpayer.
A representative of Dore + Whittier noted that even with the reduction of toilets and other fixtures, the installed piping and square footage remains in place in the design. The eliminated bathrooms would be transformed into storage space. Cutting out any one bathroom would result in an estimated savings of $10,000 to $30,000 he said. The estimated cost savings of eliminating the bathroom fixtures and finishes in the three bathroom spaces amounts to less than $100,000.
For local news you can use, subscribe to Westwood Minute!
You may also be interested in reading:
- Westwood Residents Vote to Put Brakes on Funding New Fire Station 1 (UPDATED) (published June 3, 2025)
- Westwood Residents to Vote on Whether to Allow Borrowing for New Fire Station to Proceed as a Debt Exclusion (Updated) (published May 28, 2025)
- Westwood Voters Approve Costs of Construction of a New Fire Station, along with FY26 Operating Budget (published May 20 ,2025)
- LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Time Is of the Essence in Building FS1
- Comment on FS1
Replies
Ada Zhong
Neighbor
8-28-2025 9:36am
On June 27, 2025, I submitted a request for documents related to the proposed Fire Station 1, including the detailed room and area measurements. While I have received some records, the town has yet to provide these specific measurements.
The precise size of each room is essential for voters to evaluate the project's scale and cost. If the proposed size is truly a need rather than a want, sharing these measurements would help demonstrate the necessity to skeptics.
Why is the town withholding this information?
I disagree with this
This is unverified
Spam
Offensive
Ada Zhong
Neighbor
8-28-2025 9:38am
Lexington’s Fire Headquarters, completed in 2020, is a 25,828 sq ft, 2-story building with 6 bays, 10 bunks, meeting/training spaces, and a training tower, staffed by 10 firefighters per shift plus admin.
Would a similar 26,000 sq ft station meet our firefighters’ safety needs, or do we need a larger 36,000 sq ft facility to address their concerns?
Ada Zhong
Neighbor
8-28-2025 9:49am
Where is the OPM (Owner's Project Manager)? The OPM is hired by the town to provide cost-saving recommendations, as required by law. Why is the select board asking architects, instead of the OPM, to provide cost-saving recommendations?
Ada Zhong
Neighbor
8-28-2025 10:12am
Repeatedly revoting on the same proposal without changes until it passes is a strategy Westwood cannot afford. If the second vote passes, this tactic could be used against Westwood voters repeatedly, undermining our democratic process.
In the June 3 election, 2,292 voters turned out—one of the highest turnouts in Westwood’s local election history. Yet, the select board has disregarded this clear expression of the community’s will. This is unacceptable.
The town is now considering school projects costing $200–$300 million, alongside an extensive capital improvement list. Allowing the select board to call for revotes every time a proposal fails sets a dangerous precedent.
I urge you to vote No to demand respect for election results and protect the integrity of our democratic process.
Carol Morrison Deutsch
Neighbor
8-28-2025 10:23am
It is unfortunate that the selectboard members did not consider the reason for the disparity of the outcome of the vote at town meeting versus in the ballot box may have been that: 1) 1625 (41%) more people voted at the ballot box; and, 2) not all residents were comfortable "standing" at town meeting in opposition to this spending. And given the vitriol people have been faced with when they question FS1, that is understandable. A no vote is not an uninformed vote, as many seem to believe, nor is it a vote against the fire department. It is a vote against the ongoing significant spending our town leaders put forth year after year. The annual budget passed by fewer than 10 votes in 2024. From that, I extrapolated that many residents were clearly sending a message, indicating with their votes that they are tired of the excessive spending. Yet that too fell on deaf ears.
Brian Haak
Neighbor
8-30-2025 12:17pm
Mr Gotti says an additional $5 - $7 million more.
Mr. Previtera says another $2.5 million - $3 million..
Where are these conflicting estimates coming from?
Lets publish the background data that supports these additional random costs you randomly threw out here.
And regarding these estimates, are you telling the residents that after hiring and spending all the $ to-date for a designer/architect, you didn't have them develop Alternatives? Smaller versions? If that's the case, then you've squandered taxpayer money.
I've been doing this type of work for over 30 years and I've never hired a designer/architect to develop only design. There's always the optimum design, then there are 'downsized' designs or 'Alternatives' ready to execute should funding become an issue.
And in this case, under the current economic conditions, funding IS an issue.
Are you saying that an additional $3M (just using a 'random' number) would be needed to redesign and 'downsize' this project?
Are you saying that it can be 'downsized'?
Are you saying that the SB put all our (tax paying money) eggs in one basket in designing this project?
I'll bet the Architect is loving the current design because, as a rule of thumb, the designer/architect is generally compensated 10% of the construction estimate/cost.
Mr Gotti state's the best we could expect to save is $2M (random number?) . But WOW! What would that do in reducing our taxes?
These numbers in reducing the gym equipment and bathrooms, in the tens and hundreds of thousands, are being tossed about as if it would only be a couple of bucks.
And why the necessity of a gym? People are not there to work out and recreate. They're there to work. I work in the public sector and work long hours and I don't have a gym at my office. I go to the Y AND on my time. Will the DPW Yard be getting a gym next?
This all leads to the fact that the above referenced savings gets us nowhere because Mr. Gotti has stated that "the size of the building is dictated by the apparatus floor". Meaning, they will not reduce the size of the building. And without a reduction in the size of the building (by one bays width), this isn't going anywhere.
Remember, there will be bays down underneath. Be creative and design an utilize those bays effectively for starters.
But again, shouldn't thoughts like these have already been developed by the Designer?
