Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Facilities And Property topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commissioners approve feasibility study for courthouse annex, Chestnut Street detention center and 800 Corporate Drive

2679457 · March 19, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Wayne County Board of Commissioners approved a feasibility study contract with Intrepid Architecture to evaluate renovation or replacement options for the courthouse annex (former jail tower), Chestnut Street detention center and 800 Corporate Drive.

The Wayne County Board of Commissioners approved a feasibility study contract with Intrepid Architecture to evaluate renovation or replacement options for the courthouse annex (former jail tower), the Chestnut Street detention center, and the 800 Corporate Drive facility, the board said at its March 18 meeting.

Staff described the work as a reuse and feasibility study to determine structural, mechanical and code improvements needed should the county renovate the existing jail tower and adjacent buildings, or whether new construction would be more cost-effective. Intrepid Architecture was selected to perform the study; the firm is owned by Albie McLawhorn, staff said.

During discussion commissioners noted the consultant's scope will include comparing demolition-and-rebuild scenarios against renovation, producing cost estimates (the packet noted a wide range of possible costs for the jail tower alone depending on scope) and identifying what elements would drive price differences. Staff described a two-task approach under the contract: task one for the feasibility study and task two for full design, with a later amendment establishing design fees should the board choose to move forward.

A commissioner moved to approve the feasibility-study contract contingent on county-attorney review and appropriate budget amendment; the motion carried. Commissioners emphasized the need to define the county's programmatic needs for the tower so the study can produce a usable recommendation and to avoid spending on duplicative work if later design proceeds.

The packet and staff summary note that renovation of the tower alone could range widely in cost, and that the study will also look at ADA compliance and mechanical/electrical upgrades. The board asked staff to consider longer-term planning so future renovation or additional projects avoid redundant investigative costs.

No precise vote tally was entered into the transcript record; staff moved ahead with contract finalization subject to county-attorney approval and budget amendment.