The courthouse, built in the late 1960s, has garnered criticism from judges, public officials and others for outdated elevators, unsafe means of moving prisoners and poor air conditioning.
Snohomish County will spend $1 million to begin exploring detailed renovation plans for its roughly 50-year-old courthouse, hoping to save tens of millions of dollars on the highly debated project.
The courthouse, built in the late 1960s, has garnered criticism from judges, public officials and others for outdated elevators, unsafe means of moving prisoners and poor air conditioning.
Snohomish County Councilmember Brian Sullivan said the building also has a leaky roof and a possible asbestos issue.
There has been a yearslong debate on the most cost-effective measures to take. A $162 million replacement project — approved and planned for summer 2015 — was canceled just before demolition began.
Most Read Local Stories
Now county officials hope to spend roughly half that on a renovation, according to Snohomish County Executive Dave Somers.
“I’m concerned because it’s an $8 million building that we’re putting $75 million into,” Sullivan said. “I hate to throw good money after bad … This study will cost an extra million dollars, then where are we at?”
Somers supported demolition initially, but — after deciding that even the lowest-cost new buildings were out of the county’s budget — has since pushed for the exploration of remodeling options. The Snohomish County Council voted Wednesday on the renovation plan.
In the meantime, some 20 judges are concerned about the conditions. The building’s air-conditioning system needs an upgrade; elevators frequently break down; it lacks bathrooms that are compliant with Americans for Disabilities Act; and prisoners are transported through the same hallways as the public.
“It’s a very frustrating process for the court to deal with,” said Snohomish County Superior Court Judge Michael Downes. “If what occurs is a remodel, we have significant concerns that many of the safety issues in this building will not have been dealt with.
“The building is inadequate,” he added. “There are studies going back 20 years indicating that it needs to be replaced. This is nothing new. The court has spent significant time, manpower and resources being involved in meetings for a variety of iterations of this.”
After the County Council 3-2 vote, Somers said it is unlikely the renovations will be able to address all of the concerns.
“We’ll take care of critical needs,” he said. “Clearly, it won’t be a brand spanking new building.”
Despite the yet-to-be-determined bottom line, Somers’ priority is to keep the cost of the new courthouse low while keeping benefits high.
“We want to make sure we are good stewards of public funds and also ensure our courthouse is more functional and safer,” Somers said in a news release. “A renovation will achieve those goals and cost less than half of the previous estimates for the new building.”
With the approval, Somers expects preliminary estimates and an official plan to be prepared by Aug 31.
“We’re going to find out what we can get for the $75 million,” he said. “I can see no possibility of going back to a new building because we’ve been through that process.”