What should happen to the County-City Building? Here are the options based on costs, needs.

SOUTH BEND — Consultants on Tuesday gave St. Joseph County commissioners a look into the costs, the years needed and the pros and cons of their options to deal with an aging County-City Building that’s in need of major upgrades.

The steel framed, 14-story building is structurally sound, but most of its mechanical systems are beyond their lifespans, Stephen Kromkowski of the local consulting firm DLZ told officials as he presented his firm’s report.

Commissioners have already lamented the building’s issues with a leaky roof and basement tunnel, drafty windows, busted water pipes and heating/cooling systems that can’t keep up. They say the employees’ and visitors’ top complaint is a lack of nearby parking.

Backgrounder: Five things to know about County-City Building as officials decide what to do with it.

The county owns the 1967-built building and also faces the reality that the city will move out of its 3.5 floors in 2025, heading to the South Bend schools’ current headquarters in downtown.

The current condition of the building

The county paid the DLZ to review a range of options of what the county could do with the building. Based on work that began last summer, DLZ’s report found:

∎ At 20 years old, the boiler has a life expectancy of 30 years, but at this point it struggles to adequately heat the County-City Building and the courthouses.

∎ The chiller, now 22 years old, typically has a life span of 28 years.

∎ The air handlers typically last 25 years but are now 57 years old.

∎ The galvanized steel pipes and valves that handle water and the electrical systems are 57 years old, though their life spans are normally 30 years. They have suffered pipe bursts over the past year.

∎ The exterior windows are 57 years old and need to be replaced.

∎ And it’s unknown how old the roof is, but officials say it has been leaking.

“The building has exceeded its useful life,” Carl Baxmeyer, president of the commissioners, said, feeling that the infrastructure had simply reached a point of wearing out. “We (the county) did a lot over the last several years to extend its life. The maintenance department did do a good job.”

Kromkowski said demolition isn’t feasible because all three courthouses would have to be closed during demolition — owing to the fact that all of the buildings are on the same heating and cooling and water services. Courthouse 3 would need a new facade. Besides, demolition would be extremely close to other buildings in the downtown core.

Options under consideration

Instead, here are snapshots of the options that DLZ studied:

∎ Building a whole new government center could cost an estimated $130 million to $175 million and take four to five years. Baxmeyer has already told The Tribune that this is too costly. It could make for a more efficient and accessible space, but it would mean acquiring land and still wouldn’t address the County-City Building’s existing issues.

∎ Renovating the building all at once could cost up to $90 million and take up to three years. It still wouldn’t address the parking issues and would mean spending about $11.25 million for temporary offices while the work is being done.

∎ Renovating the building floor by floor would cost about the same, about $90 million, but take more than 10 years. But it wouldn’t require acquiring a separate building for temporary offices.

∎ Renovating only the second through fourth floors and all of the critical infrastructure issues (like the roof, the exterior windows, the basement and electrical, heating, cooling and water utilities) would cost up to $65 million and could take more than three years. It would still mean acquiring some temporary quarters for about $8.4 million. The county could also alter that plan so that only certain infrastructure issues are addressed, which would lower the cost to up to $55 million.

∎ Replacing only the key pieces of infrastructure (and not doing renovations) would cost up to $45 million and take two to three years.

∎ Acquiring and renovating an existing building could cost $8 million to $12 million and take up to a year and a half. But the county would still have to address the County-City Building’s needs and how to make use of its newly vacant spaces.

∎ Consultants also talked about building an adjacent parking structure that could cost up to $14 million and take one to two years to build. It would mean acquiring nearby buildings and property.

“We did have a preference to locate in a building other than this,” Baxmeyer said. But, noting that the utilities still tie into the courthouses and that the prosecutor’s and clerk’s offices still need to be close to the courts, he affirmed, “We will not totally abandon this building.”

Commissioner Derek Dieter has previously said he advocates that the county should move out, if it can find another existing building that it could renovate in downtown with ample parking.

Other county-owned buildings

Kromkowski stopped short of explaining DLZ's recommendations to the county, which are in the report: It suggests replacing the most critical aging parts of the building’s infrastructure, such as the roof, basement and electrical, heating, cooling and water utilities. DLZ also recommends renovating floors of the building but only as county programs need them, doing two levels at a time. DLZ reports that that would take care of long-term needs while limiting the costs and giving the county more flexibility.

But DLZ didn't directly advise whether or not the county should move elsewhere.

On Wednesday, Baxmeyer explained why DLZ left out the recommendation, saying that, although commissioners have a preference, "No decision has been made."

He said commissioners are still waiting for the consultants' analysis of the conditions and space in several other buildings owned by the county, which they expect in the next few months. The County-City Building, he said, "is one piece of the puzzle."

Once commissioners can look at the county's overall building and space needs, Baxmeyer said, then they can go to the county council, which makes funding decisions. He said the county is studying the county's other capital needs, which he hopes to become part of a capital plan. Several members of the council were at Tuesday's presentation.

A local consultant from Abonmarche also gave a presentation to commissioners Tuesday about its study of space needs for various county departments. Among the employees’ top concerns, he said, was parking, space for meetings and technology, adequate and ADA-compliant restrooms, more storage and adequate heat and cooling.

Only one person from the public spoke in reaction to Tuesday's presentations. Baxmeyer said there will be similar chances for public input when consultants bring their findings for the county's other buildings. The public can also reach out to commissioners.

South Bend Tribune reporter Joseph Dits can be reached at 574-235-6158 or jdits@sbtinfo.com.

This article originally appeared on South Bend Tribune: County-City Building options look at costs and need for major upgrades