The Southern Inyo Fire Protection District (SIFPD) has taken a significant step toward building long-awaited fire stations in Tecopa and Charleston View, but key details remain unfinished before the project can move from concept to construction bids — and the process of finalizing them has been anything but straightforward.
A draft document prepared by local business owner Cynthia Kienitz, along with preliminary floor plans, outlines the vision: a 5,000-square-foot station in Tecopa Heights to house four fire apparatus, two ambulances, and living quarters for up to 12 responders, and a smaller, 2,000-square-foot station in Charleston View for one fire engine, one ambulance, and support space for two to four personnel.
At the May board meeting, it was noted that Kienitz should have presented the proposal to the board before sending it to the county — a move that, according to board president Robin Flinchum, left “ruffled feathers abound.”
“I didn’t want to let Cynthia submit the specifications for the firehouse for us,” board member Spencer McNeal said.
Flinchum defended Kienitz, noting she had conducted several meetings with Chief Bill Lutze, Larry, and Lucas, and had been working on the project for “two to three years asking firefighters and EMTs what they needed,” which is where she gathered the report’s information.
McNeal focused on the community’s future needs: “Is three engines the ideal amount to have? What are we protecting? What is the ideal amount? I never voted for Cynthia to be the project manager.” He added that he was “under the impression that it would be equal” in size between the two stations.
McNeal argued that Charleston View offers far greater potential for growth than Tecopa, which is constrained by its limited parcels. A fire station in Charleston View, he suggested, could serve as a catalyst for development, attracting new residents and enabling mortgages on newly built properties.
Kienitz’s April 29 submission to the county went forward without board approval — and without critical information needed for a complete Request for Qualifications (RFQ). In her email, she acknowledged missing data, including apparatus heights to determine building clearance, and structural load requirements for snow and wind. She described the number of bathrooms for the Tecopa facility as “a judgement call” for the county team and noted she had “fit a lot into small sq ft footprints” based on her own layouts.
What remains unclear is why Kienitz chose not to present her specifications to the board as originally scheduled. During the May meeting, Chief Lutze stepped in to keep the discussion calm, stating he would ask the county to delay action until the board completed its review. That review is now underway, and the board is expected to weigh in at an upcoming meeting. Their input will help shape the final RFQ before it goes out to design-build contractors. Under the process, Inyo County will take the submitted specifications, incorporate its own technical and regulatory requirements, and assemble a complete RFQ package for the projects.
For now, the draft is closer to a concept brief than a bid-ready package. Many technical elements — from engineering data to site orientation, drainage plans, and utility specifications — still need to be added. Missing, too, are references to the California Building Code, NFPA fire station standards, and ADA accessibility requirements, all essential for a compliant design.
A fair assessment? Roughly half the work required for an RFQ is complete — provided the specifications truly reflect what SIFPD needs these stations to accomplish. While the functional priorities are well defined, the technical and regulatory foundations remain unfinished. Without them, bidders risk costly guesswork and scope changes down the line.
Once the gaps are filled and the board signs off, the county can issue an RFQ that includes not just the “what” of the stations, but the “how” — the engineering criteria, performance standards, and compliance requirements needed to turn a vision into a buildable, biddable project.
For residents of southeastern Inyo County, where fire and EMS crews have long operated without purpose-built facilities, the stakes are high. The sooner the missing details are resolved — and the process advances with transparency and oversight — the sooner shovels can hit the ground.
The next SIFPD meeting will take place at the Tecopa Community Center on August 21, 6pm, and will be available on zoom.
What’s Still Needed to Finalize the RFQ:
- Final apparatus measurements to set building height and bay door clearances.
- Structural load requirements for snow, wind, and seismic compliance.
- Site plans with building orientation, drainage, and access roads.
- Detailed plumbing fixture counts and bathroom layouts.
- HVAC capacity and diesel exhaust ventilation specifications.
- Electrical service, generator sizing, and utility connection details.
- References to California Building Code, NFPA standards, and ADA compliance.
- Helicopter pad design and location.
- Security fencing and lighting specifications.
- Board approval of final design criteria before submission to county.
Details submitted to Inyo County:
Leave a Reply