Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 05-02-1994-IX-A r 1 VRWryE CO1UNT i BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS Action Agenda Item No. -,14 ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: May 2, 1994 SUBJECT: COURT SPACE DEVELOPMENT; FUNDING OPTIONS DEPARTMENT: PURCHASING AND CENTRAL SERVICES PUBLIC HEARING:YES: NO:� ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: ROD VISSER SALLY KOST OR PAM JONES Telephone Number- Hillsborough 732-8181 Chapel Hill 967-9251 Mebane 227-2031 Durham 688-7331 PURPOSE: To receive Information about potential funding options available for the New Courthouse Project BACKGROUND: During the April 19, 1994 Commissioners meeting,options for development of new court space at the New Courthouse were presented. The options and funding requirements are as follows: OPTION ESTIMATED AMOUNT: ADDrL FUNDS COST TO AVAILABLE NEEDED COMPLETE I. RENOVATION/UPPER 235,000 235,000 0 FLOOR II.ADDITION: CHURTON ST. 311,000 235,000 76,000 III.ADDITION: MARGARET 454,205 235,000 219,205 LANE NOTE: ARCHITECT FEES INCLUDED t 2 Potential funding sources are as follows: OPTION FUNDING POTENTIAL FUNDING REQUIRED SOURCE(S) 1. Renovation upper floor New $235,000 New Courthouse Courthouse (3,460 91 including Renovations; presently restroom areas) recommended in 1994-99 CIP 11. Churton Street Addition (2,820 s.f.) $311,000 New Courthouse Renovations $235,000 plus Transfer from Consolidated Solid Waste Centers, $76,000 Ill. Margaret Lane Addition (3,396 s.f. $454,205 New Courthouse first floor; 3,396 s.f. unfinished Renovations $235,000 plus basement) Lease/purchase balance of $219,205 for 59 months @8%; estimated $53,625/year total; total payback$268,125. The perceived advantages/disadvantages of each option are as follows: Option I: (Renovate upper floor) Upper floor of Courthouse would be entirely devoted to Courtroom and Judges offices, thereby leaving minimal room for the future expansion that is likely to take place within the Court system in the next few years; Although the Courts have exercised creativity in scheduling,with the significant and steady growth of District Court caseload,the 150 person capacity courtroom created on the third floor may be inadequate. Option 11: (Churton Street Addition) It is assumed that the new courtroom created as a result of this expansion would be appropriate in which to hold Superior Court. It would be designed for approximately 125 persons with offices for the Judge (includes toilet facility) and his clerk, a jury deliberation room with toilet facilities, as well as a small lobby area. Although the Superior Court Judge projected that two additional courtrooms will be necessary within the next fifteen years,the funds are available to add only one at this time. It will be a goal of the Criminal Justice Facilities Study Group to examine current and projected case load and make recommendations about long-term court space development. If Superior Court were to be held in the newly constructed courtroom and in the Old Courthouse, then the large courtroom on the first floor of the New Courthouse could be used for District Court. This large courtroom has a capacity of approximately 340 persons,thereby minimizing the impact of large District Court calendars. This expansion is envisioned on the south and of the New Courthouse and along Churton Street and would be tied to the existing building to allow for the sharing of public restraoms. The entrance from Churton Street would be closed. This option would 3 allow for functional assignment of court space, while still maintaining the ability for expansion of offices and support staff within the existing building. Further, this option would complement, not compete with, any future expansion to the east of the existing Courthouse. Option III: (Margaret Lane Addition) Functional use of this additional court space is the same as in Option 11; It is assumed that a Superior Court will be held in the newly constructed addition. Due to the more extensive site work Involved with the development of this option,the cost is considerably greater. Further,since the to in to the existing building is unlikely, the addition of public toilets Is required, bringing the total additional space on this level to 3,396 s.f. One advantage of this option is that the site lends itself to a multi-level structure, thereby creating an unfinished basement area of equal size . The primary disadvantage to this option Is the Inability to tie It functionally Into the existing courthouse. There is some doubt as well,as to how this expansion would impact any future development to the east of the existing building. RECOMMENDATION: The Manager recommends that the Board endorse the funding level which corresponds to one of the options listed to allow the Architect to begin design work of the expansion.