Shrouded in secrecy and plagued by inflation, what’s up with this Columbus project?

The plan for a new judicial center to replace the Columbus Government Center downtown looks “spectacular,” one city councilor says.

“The design of it really looks phenomenal,” said District 2 Councilor Glenn Davis, who said he saw renderings during a Zoom meeting with the architects months ago.

“It almost looks like a hotel structure,” he said of the building voters OK’d in November 2021 with a sales tax for $200 million. It’s tall and rectangular, with a lot of glass and space, and a roof that also can serve as a public venue, he said.

“The top elevation is very nice,” he said.

Davis and other city leaders who’ve seen the latest plan confirm it has significant changes they say was caused by inflation in the cost of building materials, which put the project an estimated $50 million over budget.

The city initially intended to clear the entire Government Center block, bordered by First and Second Avenue and Ninth and 10th Street, and build a courthouse and parking deck.

The new plan is to save the existing Government Center’s east and west wings and build a new eight-story building along 10th Street, before demolishing the 12-story tower off Ninth Street.

Others are not as enthusiastic about this as Davis:

• The judges who will use the new building for courtrooms and offices fear it lacks sufficient space for future growth, and they have asked the architects to reconsider demolishing the existing tower, and look at renovating it.

• The Springer Opera House, across 10th Street from where the new judicial center would stand, wants input into the city’s plan, to alleviate concerns about how it may affect the historic theater.

• Some councilors question whether the project’s budget is being cut too short, and whether it needs a manager apart from the city department head currently assigned that task.

Meanwhile city administrators are not answering some specific questions about the project, the details of which have not been shared with the public, or with some city councilors. Questions posed by the Ledger-Enquirer include:

• What was the project’s precise cost increase, as estimated?

• Where does it stand now? Does it have target dates to begin?

• Is the city locked into the $200 million cited in the sales tax referendum, or can it spend more?

• How many courtrooms are included in the latest plan?

These were followup questions from an Aug. 4 interview with Mayor Skip Henderson, who said the increasing costs of construction materials led to the redesign.

He said the initial estimate was $180 million total, for demolition and construction, and it jumped by $50 million. The judges, who repeatedly have been briefed on the redesign, said they were told the estimate went from $200 million to $250 million.

Davis, who is in the development business, agreed that inflation in construction material led to the redesign. “Material costs today are just astronomical,” he said.

He said the structures saved will be remodeled: The wings are to be renovated with added windows and a new brick facade akin to the surrounding buildings. The white tulip pillars that now adorn them will be removed.

“It’s marrying up to everything in that area very well,” Davis said.

The courtyard between the wings will be refurbished with a pavilion, he said, and the new building will have room for a coffee shop and work spaces for visitors, with the latest technology.

“I think the citizens will be proud of it,” he said.

Once the tower is gone, the south end of the block, bordering Ninth Street, can be used for parking.

Mixed reviews

Like Davis, some of the other councilors also approved of the cost-saving plan.

“It’s going to save us some money,” midtown District 5 representative Charmaine Crabb said of the less expensive redesign.

“To me, it just makes sense,” agreed Mayor Pro-Tem Gary Allen.

“That was the update we got, was to stay within budget, they had to renovate the wings,” said District 3 Representative Bruce Huff, adding, “I’m OK with everything.”

But the judges who will work there have doubts.

“Our concern is that we not move into a new courthouse that is inadequate from a space and functionality standpoint on day one,” said Arthur Smith III, the chief judge of the six-county Chattahoochee Judicial Circuit headquartered here.

“We don’t think we would be good stewards of the taxpayers’ money if that’s the end product, something that is not adequate for the need,” he said.

The judges had briefings on July 14, July 21 and Aug. 10. At the last meeting, they said they’d reached a consensus to ask the design team to reconsider renovating the existing tower.

The 1871 Springer Opera House, across 10th Street from where the new judicial building’s to stand, would like to have some input into the city’s plan.

“We need the Springer to be at the table on this,” said retiring artistic director Paul Pierce.

He emailed the mayor, and heard back from City Manager Isaiah Hugley, he said Wednesday.

Hugley reassured him the Springer won’t be “left on the sidelines with the planning of the new judicial center,” Pierce said. The mayor told Pierce he was out of town, but promised to call next week, he said.

“”I’m encouraged that we got that much response, and look forward to the next steps,” Pierce said.

He noted that the historic opera house long has played a role in anchoring that end of the city’s public square. The three-story theater would be dwarfed by an eight-story neighbor next door.

Pierce said that in the 1960s, the city weighed demolishing the theater for city government parking, spurring a campaign to save it that birthed Columbus’ historic preservation movement.

“That’s why we’re here today,” he said.

In the 1970s, people didn’t foresee saving old buildings as a part of the city’s progress: “The vision of Columbus’ future looked like the Government Center,” Pierce said.

That has changed, he said. “We have knowledge today that we didn’t have back in 1973.... We couldn’t do anything about context at that time.”

He noted that the current Government Center complex is inadequate partly because the city cut the budget for the project. “It is in the community’s interest to make sure we do it right this time,” he said.

Councilor Judy Thomas, one of two citywide representatives on the 10-member body, also has said the city should not make the same mistake of cutting the budget too short to meet its needs.

She and District 4 Councilor Toyia Tucker have questioned whether the city should hire a project manager, as the task has been assigned to Ryan Pruett, the city’s director of buildings and codes, giving him two crucial jobs.

He also has overseen the shifting of city administrative offices to other sites. Tucker said she does not want him to be overwhelmed by the workload.

Hugley has told council that keeping the job in-house saved significant costs, up to 9% of the total project price.

Thomas said a $200 million project may need its own manager, and she believes council can require that, if it chooses to.

“I am very concerned that we don’t have a full-time project manager,” she said, later adding, “I think we could hire somebody immediately if we wanted to.”

She said she had not been briefed on the new plan.

Responding via email to the Ledger-Enquirer, District 8 Councilor Walker Garrett said he was aware of the judges’ concerns regarding the new plan.

“We were made aware of a cost overage,” he wrote. “The judges have contacted me upset that the overage may result in a reduction in courtrooms, leaving no room for expansion.”

He added: “I hope we do not cut our room for expansion and can work though the budget issues another way because we promised the voters an ‘adequate’ court building, not one that will be insufficient from the build.”

The Ledger-Enquirer also called District 1 Councilor Jerry “Pops” Barnes, District 7 Councilor JoAnne Cogle, and interim citywide Councilor Tyson Begly. None responded.

Growing courts

Columbus currently has seven Superior Court judges, but it expects the state to add an eighth. It has two Muscogee State Court judges, but that court also may add another judge, said State Court Judge Andy Prather.

The new judicial center needs room not only for the current courts, but for those additions, said Smith.

The new building also is to house probate court, municipal court, magistrate court and juvenile court. Each courtroom needs offices for judges and staff, and a conference room for backstage meetings with attorneys, outside court, Smith said.

He said the judges want the conference rooms to be on the same floor as the courtrooms, because such meetings are so frequent that moving between floors would hold up court. They did not like plans that split those up.

Still their primary focus is on future needs, he said.

Now that the city’s administrative offices have all moved to other buildings downtown, the existing tower has enough space for court expansion, he said. That’s why the judges asked the city to look at reusing it.

Plans in progress

The mayor said the existing Government Center is not what the voters were promised in the sales tax they approved.

“The tower is still likely to come down,” he said. “We looked at the possibility, back when this all began, of retaining the tower. But because of the space requirements, it just wasn’t going to work.”

He said the city recently has invested $6 million to keep the tower maintained.

It now has to deliver a new building within the budget cited in the tax, he said.

“Part of our obligation is to try and deliver what we said we were going to deliver or as close to it as we can, without any kind of significant cost overrun,” he said. “We’ve got to be pretty frugal with the funds that were given to us, and one of the things you have to do with that is look for alternative designs when you determine that you may end up with a higher obligation largely due to the cost of construction material.”

He said it’s too early to judge the new building plan, because it’s continuously updated as the design team meets with judges and other users to adjust to their input.

“It’s still fluid. It’s a work in progress. I know they’re still communicating with the judges. We want to get it right,” he said.

The builders will be Gilbane Building Company, working with the local firm Freeman & Associates, Inc. The design team is SLAM Collaborative Inc., working with local architects Barnes Gibson Partners Architects.

Will Barnes of Barnes Gibson said the design team was referring any questions to the city.

Hugley referred any questions on the project to Deputy City Manager Pam Hodge, who was sent them via email.

“Unfortunately, I do not have any additional information than what the mayor has shared. We are working through the design with our consultants,” she wrote back. “Once we have completed the process, we will provide an update to city council.”

Smith said the local judiciary hopes the city will continue to weigh its input.

“The judges want to work with the city to create something that is large enough to have expansion, so that when we get our eighth judge, there’s a place for her or him to move into and have chambers and have their support staff.”

Henderson said that process will continue.

“I think it’s important to understand that right now there’s absolutely no intention of impacting that judicial center by cutting costs.”