Design Work for Clinton County Law Center Facility Moves Forward
By Shive Hattery
The May 12 and May 17 issues of the Clinton Herald featured updates on the Clinton County, Iowa law center facility design and construction.
In the article titled “Jail Subcommittee Backs Retaining Shive-Hattery,” a jail planning subcommittee voiced support for keeping Shive-Hattery as the engineer for the law center project, although the final decision will come from the Clinton County Board of Supervisors. Clinton County Building Maintenance Manager Corey Johnson recommended staying with Shive-Hattery, which worked with the county on conceptual drawings in preparation for the May 3 bond referendum which passed.
Clinton County Clerk of Court and Clinton County Justice Coordinating Commission Vice Chairwoman Kim Hess said that since they have already gone through the process of evaluating the various companies, there is a good chance they would come up with the same company. Johnson agreed and said he thinks they have proven themselves through the work they have done up to this point on the project.
“If anything they’ve proven their point to us how good they have been to work with and how willing they’ve been for us to get this referendum passed,” Johnson said.
In the “Design Work Continues” article, Clinton County officials decided to keep working with Shive-Hattery for their architectural needs as they continue to plan for the law center facility’s construction.
Clinton County Supervisor Dan Srp, who also serves on the Clinton County Justice Coordinating Commission (CCJCC) and was involved in the process of preparing for the bond referendum said another factor to consider is the time Shive-Hattery already put into the project prior to the referendum. He said with the work put into this part of the project the county could save money staying with Shive-Hattery rather than hiring a different company and having them start from the beginning.
“And something else that was shared with me is a lot of the work that was completed for the pre-referendum analysis and design components and some of those things can be used going forward and may actually be able to reduce the scope of the cost of the project going forward,” Srp said. “Because the cost projection we were given took into consideration completing all of that work from scratch. And being that we already have some of that that’s already been done, we potentially would be able to avoid some of the expense of having to pay for that again.”