Morrow County design team narrows courthouse schematic; commissioners weigh removing justice court to hit budget

Design and construction managers presented schematic plans and reconciled cost estimates for a proposed new courthouse near Hefner, and commissioners asked the team to continue value-engineering and return with a new cost estimate at the design-development (DD) phase.

"We had our numeric program" and "a project budget, a total budget of hard and soft cost totaling 35,000,000," said a member of the DLR Group design team while reviewing site orientation, courtroom stacking and circulation for public, juror and in-custody paths. The team showed a south-facing public entry, a sally-port and staff access on the north slope and a Second‑Floor courtroom above a Level‑1 justice court in the initial plan.

County administrative staff and the CM/GC reported two independent schematic design cost estimates. One third‑party estimator put construction‑only costs near $31.0 million; the project team’s reconciled estimate was about $28.0 million for construction, with soft costs and contingencies bringing both totals above the county’s $35 million project target once escalation, site challenges and escalation contingencies were included.

Designers flagged site-specific cost drivers: steep grades on the selected site requiring cut-and‑fill and retaining measures, longer utility runs and potential added equipment such as a fire pump. The team also included an escalation allowance to account for tariffs and market volatility between schematic design and anticipated bid time.

To bring the project toward the board’s target, the team presented options including: substituting asphalt for an upper concrete parking area, reducing selected interior finishes, and removing or leaving unfinished ("shelling") the proposed 2,800 square feet justice court suite. The team estimated removing the justice court entirely could reduce cost by roughly $2.5 million; building the space as a shell for future finish could save about $1.0 million compared with full fit‑out.

Commissioners discussed operational tradeoffs. Chair Dave Sykes and another commissioner said they preferred removing the justice court from the new building; the justice of the peace had told staff he would continue to use the historic courthouse rather than move immediately. County administration noted that keeping a shell in the new building preserves future expansion space on a constrained site.

County Administrator Matt (surname not specified in the transcript) told commissioners the team would return at the end of July with an updated DD cost estimate and again before Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) development. "We'll also have this conversation then, and we'll have a whole new cost estimate then," he said. If revisions do not bring the project within acceptable cost limits, commissioners may direct further cuts or pause the project.

No binding capital appropriation was made at the meeting; the board authorized continued schematic work and directed the team to pursue the shelling option and other cost reductions as part of the DD phase and to return with updated estimates.

The design team will continue user‑group coordination, refine the construction documents through November and pursue a GMP targeting January if the schedule holds. Commissioners noted operational questions about splitting court functions between the historic courthouse and a new facility, including courtroom security and staffing if courts operate at two locations.