Douglas County commissioners to review architectural options for Public Works Department

Douglas County commissioners on Wednesday will review an architectural study on the Public Works Department.

Currently, public works operates out of two buildings. Offices and engineering are based in a former church building at 1242 Mass., while the operations division is nearly two miles away, at 711 E. 23rd St.

Treanor Architects has developed three options for commissioners to consider:

The three options

Treanor Architects developed three options for updating Douglas County public works’ facilities. Costs are not final.

• Option 1: Raze the office/engineering building that’s at a former church at 1242 Mass., and rebuild there. Keep the operations facility, 711 E. 23rd St., where it is.

Projected cost: $2.49 million

• Option 2: Consolidate all offices to the 23rd Street facility and update the facility.

Projected cost: $5.37 million (possibly lower, if the Massachusetts Street property is sold)

• Option 3: Consolidate all operations at a new site with newly constructed buildings.

Projected cost: $8 million (possibly lower, if the Massachusetts Street property is sold)

• Maintain separate operations by constructing a new building at the former church location and retaining the operations division on East 23rd Street.

• Consolidate all operations at the East 23rd Street site.

• Consolidate all operations at a new site.

Keith Browning, director of public works, said to keep both facilities as they are now would mean pouring money into buildings that are not up-to-date. The former church site, for example, is not ADA compliant.

“The do-nothing alternative, I don’t think, is an option for very much longer,” Browning said.

Browning said he prefers the third option.

“With everyone together, it facilitates better communication among all the employees. It makes us feel like one department, which we are,” Browning said.

In its report, Treanor Architects says the third option would be the most expensive, carrying a very preliminary estimate of $8 million.

“It is the most expensive, but it’s also the best value,” Browning said. “The other two options really don’t meet the long-term needs of the department. We’d be spending a significant amount of money, and then have to spend more money later because we’d be out of space.”

County Administrator Craig Weinaug said if the third option were chosen, the county would likely use money gained from the gasoline tax to help buy land. He said any project would likely be undertaken over a span of years, rather than all at once, to help lessen the impact on the county’s budget.

“The question is: Do we continue to make do with our current facilities that have a lot of limitations?” he said.