Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the County Facilities topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Commissioners hear update on Marion Precinct 4 building; architect estimates higher-cost option at ~$2.6M

Guadalupe County Commissioners Court · March 25, 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

Commissioner presented schematic plans for the purchased Marion building (529 S. Center St.) to house JP and constable offices; architect provided two floor‑plan options, and staff estimated Plan B could cost roughly $2.6 million, while project interest currently costs the county about $186 per day to hold the asset.

Commissioner 15 updated the court on the status and progression plan for the new Precinct 4 building in Marion (529 South Center Street) on March 25. The county purchased the building last April from Green Valley SUD and completed asbestos abatement. The county retained architect Deborah Dockery and generated two floor‑plan options: Plan A (a conservative expansion of roughly 650 sq ft) and Plan B (an expanded option adding approximately 1,400–1,600 sq ft over the earlier idea).

Commissioner 15 said the courthouse is incurring interest costs on the purchased property of about $186 per day and argued for forward progress to avoid escalating costs. The architect advised the building has many interior walls that could be removed to create more usable space without moving plumbing, which would reduce expenses. Plan B includes a possible relocation of the courtroom and expansion of lobby areas and would add clerk capacity and allow co‑location of some tax office services (a one‑stop concept) in the northeast corner. The architect’s estimate for Plan B discussed in court was approximately $2,600,000 (an estimate rather than a final bid).

Commissioners asked about courtroom security and emergency egress; Commissioner 8 and others stressed the need for at least one exit for active‑shooter scenarios and for visibility between public windows and judicial staff. Commissioners also discussed drive‑through windows and whether to expand roof lines versus new additions to contain cost escalation. Commissioner 14 favored thinking long‑term to save money instead of incremental fixes.

Next steps: Commissioner 15 will refine the floor plans, work with the architect to get a tighter cost per square‑foot estimate and return to court with updated drawings and a proposed budget. The court offered assistance and encouraged completing the work with an emphasis on flexibility for future expansion.