1. Jail/Shff Res demolition bid - Laserfiche WebLink

February 13, 2003 Ms. Bonnie Johnson: RECEIVED FEB ! 3 2003 CASS COUNTY COMMISSION Re: Response to the Historical Society comments regarding West Addition. At the request of Cass County, Foss Associates has the following comments about moving the proposed west addition to the north and east and why the Historical Society's suggestion that "adjustments should be easily completed" are not as simple as they are made out to be. 1. The footprint of the proposed expansion plan was mirrored to accommodate the existing sheriff's residence as part of future project. It gave no consideration to program requirements and spatial adjacencies. 2. Historical Society's proposal gives no consideration with this expansion to the original courthouse on the west side. The only remaining visible part of the courthouse is the south addition. 3. Requires the shoring at the sheriff's residence to be augured and braced back into the parking area of the lower level during construction because of the close proximity of the addition to the residence (less than 5 feet). Structural engineers state a concern that with any movement in soils around the sheriff's residence could be extremely detrimental to the buildings future and contractors would be sure to consider this in the bidding process. Underpinning of the footings around the sheriff's residence would be another option but equally as cosily. 4. Courthouse would now require shoring or excavation all the way to the building foundation because of the close proximity of the addition to the west side of the courthouse (less than 12'). 5. Additional cost of connecting link, length and angles. 6. Schematic plans would have to be reworked to accommodate the connecting link and other spatial relationships. 7. Added vertical circulation costs between 2nd and 3d floors for judges. Before a ramp and lift could be used, by moving the addition closer only an elevator as a primary source of movement would be wise. 8. The issue of horizontal circulation between the sheriff's residence and any addition is still an issue because of the close proximity of the addition and residence to one another and the floor elevations not matching up with the courthouse as previously stated. 9. All service parking has been displaced, only prisoner transport and deliveries could happen at the north end of the building. 10. Eliminated any continuous pedeswian way at ground level on the south side (except the public sidewalk) of the campus. Parking is fight up to the building with little or no green space on the southwest comer of the campus. 11. The suggestions forwarded seem to give little consideration to anything except the idea of attempting to save the sheriffs residence, additional design efforts would be necessary to make everything work together without any compromises. 12. Massing relationships of the Courthouse, new Courthouse west addition, sheriff's residence and Annex are challenging.