Adams County weighs new judicial center and plan to keep courts in historic courthouse
Loading...
Summary
Commissioners heard a site-and-program concept for a new judicial center across 3rd Street (estimated ~$22M before soft costs) and were urged by judges to preserve court functions in the historic courthouse; commissioners asked the presenter for a refined study and fee proposal to explore multiple phasing and funding options.
Adams County commissioners on Thursday heard competing concepts for addressing inadequate courthouse space and security — including a new judicial center across 3rd Street and a plan to keep courtrooms in the historic courthouse while moving supporting offices across the street. The architect’s concept put the footprint and core program at roughly $22,000,000, with typical soft costs likely adding 20–25 percent.
The proposal presented by the county’s consultants showed Superior Court and Circuit Court located on the building’s upper level, with probation and community corrections on the ground floor, a vehicle sally port off the alley and separate staff and public elevator access. The presenter emphasized this was a sizing study to develop cost estimates and said the plan fits on property the county already owns without requiring major acquisitions.
Why it matters: County leaders face a tradeoff between security, historic preservation and cost. Judges and public advocates argued the courthouse’s current Superior Court facilities are unsafe and cramped; keeping courts downtown preserves civic presence and downtown economic activity, while a new building could provide modern security and shared office space.
A judge who spoke to the board described a recent U.S. Marshals assessment that found Superior Court’s security ‘‘extremely poor’’ and urged commissioners to prioritize safe, accessible court facilities. ‘‘Courthouses are monuments, not just office space,’’ the judge said, arguing in favor of preserving the historic courthouse’s civic role while addressing safety and circulation concerns.
Commissioners discussed alternatives including: building across 3rd Street with a smaller footprint for supporting offices; renovating the first floor of the historic courthouse to house Superior Court while using a new building across the street for probation, clerk and prosecutor offices; or using the jail site as an alternative. County staff flagged parking impacts, potential demolition costs for the Carnegie Building and the possibility of splitting work into two separately funded projects to remain under referendum thresholds.
What the board decided: Commissioners directed the consultant to return with a follow-up study and a fee proposal to refine footprints, parking and cost scenarios (including a smaller $14 million target option and a higher-cap $19 million–plus scenario), and to explore phasing that could reduce referendum risk. The county will also consult with the city about possible parking assistance during construction, and staff agreed to bring back proposed membership and legal guidance for any advisory bodies needed to support the plan.
Next steps: The consultant will submit a fee proposal and refined studies for the board to consider alongside budget and council discussions. No binding financial commitment or referendum was made at Thursday’s meeting.
