New County Courthouse

[westsider28]

An interesting thing that no one has mentioned in any articles is that the recommendation for the Municipal Court and Police Department building is renovating the existing City Hall (Executive Summary, page 37 [PDF page 41]).  There's an alternative for building new, but it would be about 3 times the cost of renovations.  So it's likely the existing City Hall will remain, in addition to the new City / County Admin building. (Fire Department was not included in the study)

I can't find any mention of whether or not all or part of the existing County Courthouse would be preserved/renovated, which I would like to see from a historic preservation standpoint.  IMO, it's a more attractive example of modernist architecture than City Hall (though each have their own unique qualities).

[hub-city]

Spartanburg residents are very suspicious when it comes to taxes, but I hope they realize that a 1 cent sales tax hits everyone, including visitors etc...  It's the best way to fund facilities that are SO needed.  My only wish is that they do it right and not cut corners.

[westsider28]

County Council is planning to move forward with placing a 1-cent sales tax increase on the November ballot for the public to vote on.  If passed, the tax would be in place for 6 years (May 1, 2018 to April 30, 2024).  The projection is that the tax would bring in $37.4 million annually.  Interestingly, any extra money beyond the building costs would be put toward fixing roads & bridges.

[Spartan]

Good. I hope they do some education campaigns to advocate for why its necessary to increase taxes to pay for it. I'm always skeptical about whether or not people in Spartanburg will voluntarily increase taxes without a good reason. That said, people in District 7 did vote to increase taxes to pay for an unnecessary school building, so you never know.

[Spartan]

County Council approved the voter referendum on the new courthouse. I hope it passes. They need to plan a good public education campaign so people understand the need for it.

http://www.goupstate.com/news/20170726/sales-tax-hike-for-new-courthouse-up-to-voters

[Spartanburg Guy]

I know I'm willing to pay one extra cent on my sales tax.  

I voted against the new high school as that was a huge tax increase and for an unneeded facility (I do think that the elementary school was needed and should have been funded, however.)

But, I think that for safety reasons and the need for a modern facility which matches other cities that a new and bigger courthouse is necessary.

Edited July 30, 2017 by Spartanburg Guy

[spartanburgh]

Interesting that there has been no push to inform the voters of the implications of a no vote on this. If the one cent sales tax is turned down, the County will likely

use property taxes to build.  I would much rather pay the 1 cent sales tax that everyone would have to pay and  would automatically drop off when the debt is fully

funded by the tax.

[Spartan]

Agreed. Schools are an easier sell. Most people don't go to government buildings these days, so they may not know how crappy the situation actually is.

[westsider28]

The Spartanburg Chamber of Commerce President, the county Democratic Chair, the county Republican Chair, and the county Tea Party Chair (!) had a joint press conference this morning in support of the 1-cent sales tax for a new courthouse and city/county admin building.  I'm kind of surprised that representatives of such different viewpoints all support it.  Hopefully this show of unity will sway uncertain voters.

Edit: UBJ article

Edited October 31, 2017 by westsider28

[roads-scholar]

15 hours ago, westsider28 said:

The Spartanburg Chamber of Commerce President, the county Democratic Chair, the county Republican Chair, and the county Tea Party Chair (!) had a joint press conference this morning in support of the 1-cent sales tax for a new courthouse and city/county admin building.  I'm kind of surprised that representatives of such different viewpoints all support it.  Hopefully this show of unity will sway uncertain voters.

The informed parties, regardless of their political persuasion, recognize there's an immediate need and the funding mechanism makes good sense.   But there are voters who distrust government so much they'll never support a tax increase. 

[gman430]

Looks like it will pass: http://www.goupstate.com/news/20171107/spartanburg-county-penny-sales-tax-referendum-results 

[gman430]

It officially passed: http://www.goupstate.com/news/20171107/voters-say-yes-to-penny-sales-tax 

[westsider28]

Pretty comfortably, too: 16,901 for; 10,159 against, w/97% reporting.  Good to see.  Sales tax increase will begin May 1, 2018 and end April 30, 2024.  Next comes the site plans and building designs, I presume.  Will be interesting to follow the process.

[Spartan]

Nice, that's great news. I can't wait to see some progress!

For our tracking purposes, the current proposals are:

• New Courthouse which includes county courts, city/municipal court/police facilities, and county emergency operations center and parking is estimated to cost $151.5 million.
• New City Hall and County Administration Building with a new joint government center is estimated to cost $65.3 million. 

[westsider28]

A project manager has been hired.  It's Clerestory Projects Group, a local consulting firm which has managed basically every major project in Spartanburg lately (The George, AC Hotel, Montgomery Bldg renovation and others), which seems like a very good thing to me.  An architect and design team will be in place by July, followed by the hiring of a manager for the courthouse project by September. 

Planned schedules:

Courthouse: Construction - Spring 2020, Completion - 2022

Municipal court/police building: Design - Fall 2019, Construction - Spring 2021, Completion - 2023

City-county government center: Design - late 2020, Construction - Spring 2022, Completion - 2024

[westsider28]

Pretty big news: County Council has decided to relocate courthouse employees and activities to a temporary location because of health problems caused by the persistent mold issues.  The preliminary plan is to move out by the end of the year.  They'll need a location that's big enough for all the courthouse functions/employees and one that can accommodate them for 4 years (before the new courthouse is complete).

Side note: I think this is a decent opening for preservation of the current courthouse building.  It could now potentially be renovated as part of the construction process, since it won't have to operate at the same time.  We'd need a group to organize and pressure Council to preserve it, though.

[Sparkleman]

Why save a building like the courthouse that has persistent mold and leaking roof  problems and quite frankly is one of the more ugly buildings downtown? I could understand if it were or could be attractive, but it not. Just level it and start over.

[westsider28]

@Sparkleman That's the exact same thing people said about the 1895 courthouse before they demolished it.  The current courthouse is an excellent example of modernist architecture, which we have very few examples of (the old library was drastically altered and City Hall may be demolished).  I once thought the same way you do, but I've come to appreciate different architectural styles like this.  Also, mold isn't a problem if you totally gut the interior.  Likewise, a leaky roof is a relatively easy fix as part of major construction/restoration.

[Spartan]

On 1/27/2018 at 12:03 PM, westsider28 said:

@Sparkleman That's the exact same thing people said about the 1895 courthouse before they demolished it.  The current courthouse is an excellent example of modernist architecture, which we have very few examples of (the old library was drastically altered and City Hall may be demolished).  I once thought the same way you do, but I've come to appreciate different architectural styles like this.  Also, mold isn't a problem if you totally gut the interior.  Likewise, a leaky roof is a relatively easy fix as part of major construction/restoration.

I agree with this statement. For what it's worth, I agree that it's an ugly building, and I don't care for that style of architecture, but it's by far the best example of mid-century modern architecture in Spartanburg. I think it would be a shame to lose it, and I think we will regret tearing it down. I'm less attached to City Hall though...

[roads-scholar]

1 hour ago, Spartan said:

I agree with this statement. For what it's worth, I agree that it's an ugly building, and I don't care for that style of architecture, but it's by far the best example of mid-century modern architecture in Spartanburg. I think it would be a shame to lose it, and I think we will regret tearing it down. I'm less attached to City Hall though...

I hate city hall and can't wait to see it obliterated. 

Agree that at least some of the  courthouse be saved.  But, with the mold problems becoming a public relations disaster, saving the courthouse may not be an option. 

[Spartan]

It's absolutely possible to save the Magnolia Street façade while still obliterating the rest of the building, and you'd have the option to rebuild the interior with a more contemporary design. It doesn't matter though. They'll probably just knock the whole thing down and be done with it.

[westsider28]

Courthouse functions will be moving to a yet-to-be-built 250,000 sq ft warehouse at Flatwood Industrial Park (near I-85 & Hwy-221) starting in March 2019, and opening to the public in August 2019.  There will be 2 entrances: one for the public in front and another for law enforcement and inmates in back.  They say it will have more than double the security of the existing building.  A lease will be signed with Johnson Development, and courthouse functions will occupy the building for 3 years as the new courthouse is built.  $13 million has been set aside for the temporary facility.

This whole situation with the mold issues is quite the debacle, but IMO moving to a temp facility is the right (if awkward) thing to do.  And at least there's now a concrete plan moving forward.

[westsider28]

The opening of the new courthouse may be delayed to 2023 due to having to move operations to a temporary location in the interim.  And Jimmy Gibbs is complaining that the County is spending too much and should've used a warehouse he owns that could be made available sooner than the new construction they chose.

IMO, he's a bit biased here, since he's recommending his own building (and he would profit from the lease), but I wouldn't mind seeing the criteria for choosing a site.  However, I think we were pretty screwed from the get-go.  We're forced to consider warehouses for temporary office space because of an absolute dearth of office buildings due to our woeful lack of white-collar jobs.  I saw that the old CH2M-Hill building is now being used by U-Haul for storage units, for Pete's sake!  Bottom line: this sort of chaos is what happens when you wait WAY too long to do something about a courthouse that needed replacing years ago.

[Spartan]

Haha, I'm not surprised about a potential delay. You can't just pick up everything and move next week. You have to build internal walls, court rooms, deposition rooms, secure holding cells, offices, toilets, etc. That requires 1) space, 2) design,  and 3) construction before you even plan for your move date. Then you can tear down the old building and do all of that again in the permanent location.

Deferred maintenance on buildings is always a bad idea.

[westsider28]

Oh great.  Johnson Development has backed out of the deal to lease their building to the County for a temporary courthouse because, "statutory restrictions regarding the appropriation of funds by Spartanburg County prevent the county from entering into a lease for a term of years that would provide for construction of temporary courthouse space at the Flatwood Industrial Park."  And, “under South Carolina law, the county cannot guarantee the necessary lease term or provide the owner with the protection from liability for third party claims that we would need to make the project work.”  The article states that the specific statutes they're referencing weren’t immediately clear.

Yikes.  The County may really be up a creek without a paddle here...