Recently, the Santa Rosa Press Gazette received the position paper put together by the taskforce the Milton City Council created to investigate building the new courthouse where the current one is. Here it is with supplemental pictures in the gallery.
Santa Rosa County Courthouse
Study Group Position Paper
City of Milton
Recently, the Mayor of the City of Milton in his capacity as Chair of the City's Downtown Community Redevelopment Board commissioned an analysis of the potential for siting the proposed Judicial Center at its current location. The items found here are in response to that charge. We begin with a few quotes.
"Before the first slab of concrete can be laid for the new Santa Rosa County judicial center, officials must find the land. With that in mind, county commissioners have made it a priority for their staff to identify a list of sites to accommodate a judicial center large enough to meet existing needs and allow for growth" (Judge Swanson Pg. C2 Daily News Dec. 15,2006).
That is where we are at today. These latest discussions on a new courthouse are however eight years after a letter was sent to the then County Board Chair Tom Stewart signed byCircuit Court Judges Goodman, Rasmussen, and Swanson in which they stated, "The overcrowded conditions red flag fundamental and alarming security risks to court personnel and citizens alike …….
In our view, the county is deficient in meeting this duty …… .
The lack of space and deteriorating condition of the courthouse is threatening %the right of the people to a functioning and efficient judicial system" (Letter to BOCC Dec. 7,2006).
''I urge immediacy for the crisis I see we face. It's up to the commission to prioritize the needs" (at the new courthouse). – Ron Swanson, Circuit Judge Daily News Dec. T 5, 2006.
We, as a group, found some rather interesting facts and factoids as we shuffled through the available information. Somehave asserted the construction costs of building the Courthouse at its current would increase dramatically. Data assembled for and derived from the HOK Schematic Design completed in 2001 identify a possible total project cost increase of approximately 3.6% if built where it is found today. That figure was arrived at using available geo-tech data assembled as a part of that process. Considering land acquisition, infrastructure extensions, planning and engineering, and possible relocation costs associated with the other sites that 3.6% seems inconsequential.
Now to the expressions of the 2001 schematic plan, which completed the initial design work for the facility and could and should be put to good use today.
Especially in light of the fact that we, the public, have spent $500,000.00 on this plan, to this point: "This document is the final step in our work for this phase of the project (20% Design). It is the culmination of 18 months of work that started in March 2000. We have included the design schedule to remind us all of where we have been. We have studied a number of options and taken some different roads, but we are very excited about the end product represented in this document.
The final scheme is a development of Option 1, the three-story "square" plan. We have maintained and restored the existing 1927 courts building, which will house the Courts Law Library and the office space that could be used for other noncritical courts or county functions…
….The proposed courthouse will be 130,000/SFon 3 floors and will include the following: Chambers for 8 judges and their staff, 6 courtrooms designed to provide flexible use …
…. Parking is provided on site for 300 cars, which includes some curbside parking to maintain the urban feel of the development. Secure parking is provided for 9 cars under the building." It should also be noted there are 520 existing public parking spaces in the downtown area. The 2001 Schematic anticipated and planned for expansion, which has been another "cry" as to why the Courthouse should not remain at its current location, a concern that obviously is not well founded.
Finally, as our work was completed for the City itself, we looked at the City's position on this issue and believe that they have not wavered. The expressions that follow arefrom a 2007piece titled: Santa Rosa County Courthouse; City of Milton's Position on Siting, and I quote, "There is, however, a host of other criteria used to determine the appropriate location, like the degree of general public support and amount of neighborhood support. The proximity of local supporting institutions and these directly engaged in court-related activities and the area history are recognition of the same all indicate the Courthouse's current location should be its future location. The interests of the City in downtown Milton’s development are inextricably linked to those of the County and the Court. The City desires to continue to work with the County and the Court to meet the immediate and future needs of the Court.”
It is our belief, based on expressions made historically and today, that this is the City's continuing position. We have, during this analysis, identified alternative sources of revenue, if required, to account for any costs in excess of building elsewhere. Considering land acquisition, infrastructure extensions, planning and engineering, and possible relocation costs associated with the other sites we do not believe there are any.
Finally, this Courthouse is something we can all be proud of. It remembers the past and plans for the future. There is no challenge to this location that our research has shown cannot be overcome. The Facebook Poll released Wednesday the 21st of May shows the majority supported (36.8%) the notion of, "rebuild, renovate, but leave it downtown". We ask that you place this location alongside any other proposed locations on the ballot in November.
Respectfully submitted.
Matthew Hargraves, Bradley G. Johnson, Melissa Odom, Doug Whitfield, Steve Williams, Clyde Anderson, Jay Dickson, and Rhonda Chavers.
City of Milton Courthouse Study Group
This article originally appeared on Santa Rosa Press Gazette: Milton taskforce position paper regarding downtown courthouse site