New columns adorn the Juvenile & Domestic Relations Court on High Street. The brick columns shown here have since been covered with white stucco.
PHOTO BY DAVE MCNAIR
In 2004, the City and County approved the renovation of the old Juvenile & Domestic Relations Court on High Street. The projected $12 million project also included a new 3-level, 91-space parking deck.
Today, the project is finally nearing completion, but at a cost that has rocketed to $19.9 million. That’s nearly three Downtown Mall renovation projects.
Built in 1902, the Colonial Revival building that housed the jail was originally Elks Lodge No. 389 and featured a library, a card room, a billiard parlor, and even a bowling alley. Early photographs of the lodge show the building with a big four-column portico on the front with a giant elk or deer head attached to its pediment.
A major fire in the late 1940s destroyed much of the building, and when it was later renovated, local architect Floyd Johnson chose not to rebuild the portico. Other distinguishing features include double fan arches over the front door and the window above, two pilasters corresponding with Doric columns, and a rusticated façade on which every fifth brick is indented.
What the Juvenile & Domestic Relations Court building looked like in 2002 .
PHOTO FROM CITY WEBSITE
Part of the reason the renovation has taken so long, and cost so much, is the fact that a section of the building collapsed during construction in March 2006. Construction was delayed not only by the costly mishap, but also by the costly litigation that followed.
“It’s the City’s position that it was the fault of the contractor and/or subcontractors,” said City attorney Craig Brown in May 2007. “But we’re hoping to have this whole thing resolved this week.”
Try two more years.
The City would eventually file a lawsuit accusing Kenbridge Construction and excavation company J.A. Walder of “cutting corners” to maximize profits on the City’s dollar, and claiming that the city had to hire a structural engineer to fix the building while Kenbridge refused to go back to work. Of course, Kenbridge fired back with its own lawsuit, accusing the city of supplying “inaccurate or inadequate” plans, and then for good measure went after subcontractor Walder, accusing it of negligence. (more)