Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Judicial Centers topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Adams County commissioners review $19.5 million judicial-service complex renovation; ask consultants to study cheaper options
Summary
Architects presented a $19.5 million construction estimate (about $363/sq ft) to remodel the county's service complex into a consolidated judicial center; commissioners cited high costs and directed consultants to explore lower-cost alternatives including a jail-site option.
Architects from Elevate Us presented a study to the Adams County Board of Commissioners proposing a major renovation of the county service complex to house superior court, probation, community corrections and several administrative functions.
Dave Schaw and Caleb Study, the consultants leading the proposal, described plans that would add a secure vehicle sally port, two elevator shafts, a two-story atrium and a new second floor over the gymnasium to accommodate the court and related services. The firm estimated construction costs at about $19.5 million (approximately $363 per square foot) and said a 20–25% allowance for soft costs would raise the project into the mid‑$20 millions.
"Coming in at around $363 a square foot comes out to $19.5 million before soft costs," the presentation said. Commissioners and department heads were shown detailed floor plans and structural notes describing where new columns, underpinning and a new HVAC and sprinkler system would be required.
Commissioners expressed concern about the price and the operational disruption the work would cause. "It's too much money," Commissioner Steve said during the discussion, adding that remodeling an older building often triggers unforeseen change orders. Commissioner Doug and another commissioner also questioned whether the county should invest that level of funds in the existing service complex.
Supporters of the renovation argued that the plan met several priorities: improved safety for court officers and secure circulation for detainees, greater operational efficiency by colocating court-related services, and long-term capacity. The consultants noted some components could be built more cheaply — Garm's cost split showed a second-floor build for probation alone just under $1 million — but that parking and likely change orders would add costs.
Rather than approve the renovation as presented, the board directed Elevate Us to develop and present lower‑cost alternatives, including an option to site new court facilities adjacent to the county jail. The consultants said they could prepare a concept for the jail site quickly and could return with that analysis the following week.
Next steps: Elevate Us will produce additional site and cost options for commissioners to review; any decision to advance a project will require the county council to identify funding and a future formal approval by both the commissioners and the council.
