SANFORD - The question is, where should the Seminole County judicial facilities be located, in downtown Sanford or at Five Points?

This past Thursday, the results of a Mater Space Plan were turned over to Seminole County by Architects Design Group, Inc., of Winter Park. President Keith Reeves pointed out that the plans were, as presented, a draft. In the cover letter of his presentation, Reeves wrote, "This is a draft submittal which will be augmented by additional material based upon subsequent meetings with the County Commission, if deemed necessary."

He continued, "The premise of presenting the draft findings of our study is to permit staff and individual commissioners the opportunity to have input prior to issuance of a more final version of the study."

Commissioner Win Adams met with Reeves this past week. Chairman Randy Morris and the other commissioners are scheduled to meet with Reeves on a one-on-one basis during this coming week.

After those meetings it may be determined that a full commission work session may be required in order to discuss the findings collectively.

The following is based on the information contained in the Architects Design Group draft as presently being considered. The points brought forward (below), will be in consideration of both sides of the issue: (Note: See conclusions and recommendations).

In favor of moving to Five Points

• There is sufficient land on which to construct new Judicial Facility. Approximately 18.28 acres are available with land area anticipated to be needed at 13.46 acres.
• The Five Points site, with well-considered design elements of vehicle access, landscaping, signage and overall character can be made to appropriately reflect the needs of the Judicial System.
• The cost of building at Five Points considers relocation of the Judicial and associated functions, on property currently occupied by Public Works, Fleet Maintenance and the Fueling Facility. Development costs including those associated with the adaptive reuse of the existing courthouse and renovation of the County Services Building is $64,571,297.
• The majority of the site appears to be relatively level with a gradual slope from west to east. In that respect, it is suitable for development without the need for significant on-site contour changes.
• When the small Public Works site is excluded (from 18.28 acres), the net available site would contain 14.45 acres which is approximately 1.10 acres more than basic need. Given the criteria for land area needed, it appears that the Five Points site would provide sufficient area for potential utilization.
• The City of Sanford (to keep it downtown) would have to contribute three parcels of land including the City Hall parking area, the municipal ground level parking area to the east of the existing courthouse and fronting Lake Monroe, and land currently used as an alley to the south of the courthouse.

In favor of downtown Sanford

• (With no environmental analysis), it is assumed that the historic usage of the site (at Five Points) for Vehicle Fleet Maintenance and Fueling may have resulted in some site contamination.
• The (downtown location) option considers the continued reuse of the courthouse in downtown Sanford and construction of a new facility on land contributed by the city. It also discounts the cost of a new parking garage by the anticipated contribution to the city. Cost of the development is estimated at $64,302,811. (Note, this is an estimated $268,000 less than the cost of the Five Points estimate).
• The historical location of the judicial system has been in downtown Sanford for over 100 years. As a result of this, numerous businesses associated in one manner or another with the judicial process, have elected to locate in proximity to the courthouse. These businesses would be adversely financially affected by the relocation of the judicial functions to the Five Points site.
• The Five Points site is not currently served by adequate utilities (water, sewer) or by a roadway system with sufficient capacity to accommodate the anticipated increase in traffic.
• The city of Sanford, in order to retain the judicial system in its downtown environment has tendered a preliminary offer or contribution with an approximate value of $5 million, subject to City Commission approval.

Recommendations

The report from Architects Design Group, Inc., includes the following recommendations:

• Suitability: Many important aspects of the judicial function deal with the issue of dignity and respect which are issues of public perception and that are initially based upon the surroundings and character of a courthouse. In that respect, we must suggest that the downtown location, as reflected by our evaluation matrix, potentially offers a more appropriate location. The matrix indicates a significant advantage of the Downtown site as compared to Five Points.
• The conclusion of this consultant is that the County Commission should give consideration to the continued utilization of the downtown Sanford site.
• The existing parcels of land in downtown Sanford are estimated to consist of 9.2 acres or approximately one half of the land allocated for usage at Five Points. As an urban site, it envisions that a more vertical solution (building height, multi-deck parking garage, etc) would be the appropriate solution. Utilizing that concept, the downtown site will provide sufficient area for utilization.

Conclusion

In its final statement, the document gives an overview with the following statement. Each observance is stated in consideration of an artist's conception of two possible structures, both in Five Points and downtown Sanford. The drawings, however, are merely used as examples, and would not specifically be used in any building plans. The document says:

Both sites lend themselves well to varying concepts of Master Planning. The Five Points site, by utilizing property currently occupied by Public Works, Fleet Maintenance and Vehicle Fueling, offers a greater challenge because of the distance from U.S. Highway 17-92. The building, in response to that issue, has been located across from the open, undeveloped area fronting on U.S. Highway 17-92. This tends to offer a visual access to the facility and potentially provide for amore formal (and appropriate) location separated by other county functions that tare at Five Points.

The Downtown Master Plan, as a result of its urban location, provides for a more formal Master Plan concept. The buildings are larger in vertical mass and include twin, multi-level parking garages for the proposed 1,000 vehicle parking capacity. The downtown site has more constraints as it becomes critically important to provide connectors to the existing courthouse for purposes of circulation and security.

As noted, these are just two concepts of many that are available for consideration. Actual Master Planning services would evaluate a variety of opportunities and constraints, and would be accomplished with the facility users and other county staff, including engineering, parks, etc.

SANFORD - The question is, where should the Seminole County judicial facilities be located, in downtown Sanford or at Five Points?

This past Thursday, the results of a Mater Space Plan were turned over to Seminole County by Architects Design Group, Inc., of Winter Park. President Keith Reeves pointed out that the plans were, as presented, a draft. In the cover letter of his presentation, Reeves wrote, "This is a draft submittal which will be augmented by additional material based upon subsequent meetings with the County Commission, if deemed necessary."

He continued, "The premise of presenting the draft findings of our study is to permit staff and individual commissioners the opportunity to have input prior to issuance of a more final version of the study."

Commissioner Win Adams met with Reeves this past week. Chairman Randy Morris and the other commissioners are scheduled to meet with Reeves on a one-on-one basis during this coming week.

After those meetings it may be determined that a full commission work session may be required in order to discuss the findings collectively.

The following is based on the information contained in the Architects Design Group draft as presently being considered. The points brought forward (below), will be in consideration of both sides of the issue: (Note: See conclusions and recommendations).

In favor of moving to Five Points

• There is sufficient land on which to construct new Judicial Facility. Approximately 18.28 acres are available with land area anticipated to be needed at 13.46 acres.
• The Five Points site, with well-considered design elements of vehicle access, landscaping, signage and overall character can be made to appropriately reflect the needs of the Judicial System.
• The cost of building at Five Points considers relocation of the Judicial and associated functions, on property currently occupied by Public Works, Fleet Maintenance and the Fueling Facility. Development costs including those associated with the adaptive reuse of the existing courthouse and renovation of the County Services Building is $64,571,297.
• The majority of the site appears to be relatively level with a gradual slope from west to east. In that respect, it is suitable for development without the need for significant on-site contour changes.
• When the small Public Works site is excluded (from 18.28 acres), the net available site would contain 14.45 acres which is approximately 1.10 acres more than basic need. Given the criteria for land area needed, it appears that the Five Points site would provide sufficient area for potential utilization.
• The City of Sanford (to keep it downtown) would have to contribute three parcels of land including the City Hall parking area, the municipal ground level parking area to the east of the existing courthouse and fronting Lake Monroe, and land currently used as an alley to the south of the courthouse.

In favor of downtown Sanford

• (With no environmental analysis), it is assumed that the historic usage of the site (at Five Points) for Vehicle Fleet Maintenance and Fueling may have resulted in some site contamination.
• The (downtown location) option considers the continued reuse of the courthouse in downtown Sanford and construction of a new facility on land contributed by the city. It also discounts the cost of a new parking garage by the anticipated contribution to the city. Cost of the development is estimated at $64,302,811. (Note, this is an estimated $268,000 less than the cost of the Five Points estimate).
• The historical location of the judicial system has been in downtown Sanford for over 100 years. As a result of this, numerous businesses associated in one manner or another with the judicial process, have elected to locate in proximity to the courthouse. These businesses would be adversely financially affected by the relocation of the judicial functions to the Five Points site.
• The Five Points site is not currently served by adequate utilities (water, sewer) or by a roadway system with sufficient capacity to accommodate the anticipated increase in traffic.
• The city of Sanford, in order to retain the judicial system in its downtown environment has tendered a preliminary offer or contribution with an approximate value of $5 million, subject to City Commission approval.

Recommendations

The report from Architects Design Group, Inc., includes the following recommendations:

• Suitability: Many important aspects of the judicial function deal with the issue of dignity and respect which are issues of public perception and that are initially based upon the surroundings and character of a courthouse. In that respect, we must suggest that the downtown location, as reflected by our evaluation matrix, potentially offers a more appropriate location. The matrix indicates a significant advantage of the Downtown site as compared to Five Points.
• The conclusion of this consultant is that the County Commission should give consideration to the continued utilization of the downtown Sanford site.
• The existing parcels of land in downtown Sanford are estimated to consist of 9.2 acres or approximately one half of the land allocated for usage at Five Points. As an urban site, it envisions that a more vertical solution (building height, multi-deck parking garage, etc) would be the appropriate solution. Utilizing that concept, the downtown site will provide sufficient area for utilization.

Conclusion

In its final statement, the document gives an overview with the following statement. Each observance is stated in consideration of an artist's conception of two possible structures, both in Five Points and downtown Sanford. The drawings, however, are merely used as examples, and would not specifically be used in any building plans. The document says:

Both sites lend themselves well to varying concepts of Master Planning. The Five Points site, by utilizing property currently occupied by Public Works, Fleet Maintenance and Vehicle Fueling, offers a greater challenge because of the distance from U.S. Highway 17-92. The building, in response to that issue, has been located across from the open, undeveloped area fronting on U.S. Highway 17-92. This tends to offer a visual access to the facility and potentially provide for amore formal (and appropriate) location separated by other county functions that tare at Five Points.

The Downtown Master Plan, as a result of its urban location, provides for a more formal Master Plan concept. The buildings are larger in vertical mass and include twin, multi-level parking garages for the proposed 1,000 vehicle parking capacity. The downtown site has more constraints as it becomes critically important to provide connectors to the existing courthouse for purposes of circulation and security.

As noted, these are just two concepts of many that are available for consideration. Actual Master Planning services would evaluate a variety of opportunities and constraints, and would be accomplished with the facility users and other county staff, including engineering, parks, etc.