Utah State Courts

Utah Judicial System Master Plan for Capital Facilities

Section I - Operational and Facility Planning Guidelines

These guidelines have been developed by the Judicial System of the State of Utah pursuant to Rule 3-409 of the Rules of Judicial Administration, in order to meet the stated intentions of the Rule and to promote the creation of facilities that support effective and efficient Court operations. All Judicial facility planning and design will reflect the organizational, operational and facility management goals of the Utah Judicial System.

1. Goals of an Effective Judicial Facility

All Judicial facilities in the State of Utah should respond to the following goals:

1.1 Provide appropriate service to the public

Court facilities should be centrally and conveniently located to serve the citizens of all 29 Counties.

1.2 Provide an appropriate setting for the administration of justice

Courthouses should be designed to reflect an appropriate image of dignity. Space standards should be employed to ensure the appropriate judicial setting for existing and new courtrooms.

1.3 Provide for the collocation of key judicial programs, services and related agencies

Court facilities should be planned to include all organizations, agencies and services operated by the Court and/or necessary to support the effective and efficient processing of cases. See Section II.2 for listing.

1.4 Provide for the management of growth

Capital expenditures with respect to renovation, expansion and new construction of judicial facilities should reflect an awareness of statewide system growth and be part of a comprehensive strategy for responding to that growth.

1.5 Provide for the timely delivery of judicial resources

Judges, courtrooms, juries, information systems and court management personnel and policies should maximize the ability of the judicial system to resolve disputes in a timely and expeditious manner.

1.6 Provide for the uniformity of process and procedure

Physical facilities, judicial and staff resources and policies and procedures should promote the statewide uniformity of process and procedures, thereby insuring equity and consistency through the system.

1.7 Provide for the flexible use of facility and staff resources

Court facilities and court management and operations staff should take maximum advantage of opportunities to collocate, to cross-train, and to co-utilize personnel. Space standards should be directed toward the promotion of facility flexibility.

1.8 Provide for the economical use of facility and staff resources

Facility and operations planning should recognize and take advantage of opportunities to economically combine facilities and personnel and to share responsibilities and expenses.

1.9 Provide for the maintenance and protection of Judicial resources

Policies regarding property maintenance and inventory and security procedures should be developed and implemented. Physical facilities should be planned with security and property maintenance in mind.

2. Judicial System Objectives/Initiatives

Judicial facilities in the State of Utah should be planned, programmed and designed to support the policy and operational objectives of the Judicial System. These objectives may change from time to time as circumstances, issues, and initiatives may develop. At this time, the following objectives should be accommodated:

2.1 Expanded access for persons with disabilities

It is the objective of the Judicial System to promote the participation of persons with disabilities in the judicial process and to provide reasonable accommodation for all participants and litigants in both new and existing facilities. All new and remodeled facilities should comply with the ADA guidelines provided later in these standards under ADA Compliance, (3.2.).

2.2 Extended hours of operation

It is the objective of the Judicial System to improve public access to the Courts and court related services and facilities through the use of extended or alternative hours of operation. Facilities should be planned to facilitate off-hours and flexible access to appropriate services while maintaining security for and minimizing the impact on unaffected operations and areas.

2.3 Enhanced utilization of technology

It is the objective of the Judicial System to make maximum use of technology to enhance court information and operations, to improve public access to court information and services, to reduce the costs of litigation and administration and to promote timely and efficient case processing. This increased reliance on technology should not infringe on the privacy rights of individuals using the Judicial System. All judicial facilities will be planned and designed to provide maximum flexibility in the choice, installation and use of court-approved technologies.

2.4 Enlarged use of alternatives to litigation

It is the objective of the Judicial System to encourage the development and use of alternative forms of dispute resolution within the Court's administrative and service framework. Facilities should be planned and designed with the flexibility to implement mediation and other programs that may be adopted to accomplish this objective.

2.5 Expanded service center concept

It is the objective of the Judicial System to improve public access to the courts through the clustering of important services at common locations. Facilities should be planned and designed to enhance public service and to minimize the number of locations to which the public must go to accomplish court related business. Additionally, this concept is intended to improve the efficiency of court related services through closer functional adjacencies.

2.6 Enhanced working environment

It is the objective of the Judicial System to provide a safe, comfortable and healthy working environment for its staff and for all users of its facilities.

2.7 Enhanced civic use of Court facilities

It is the objective of the Judicial System to provide facilities that are open and available for use by the Bar and other civic and professional groups.

3. Specific Planning Guidelines

3.1 The role of the Administrative Office of the Courts

In order to promote the goal of a flexible Judicial System and to assure the implementation of its objectives, the Judicial Council, through the AOC, reserves the right to participate in the planning and the design of all major renovation or new facility construction projects, regardless of funding source. The AOC should be viewed as a planning resource mandated and available to assist in interpreting and implementing the goals of the Judicial System and the space standards embodied in this report.

The AOC's involvement in major renovation and new facility construction commences with the earliest stages of planning at the local level. This will permit a common understanding of the nature and scope of the project and early communication regarding facility goals and design guidelines. The AOC will be involved in all key phases of facility planning and will review and approve all master plans, programs, schematic design, design development and construction documents associated with renovation or new construction projects.

The key phases of facility planning are:

Phase One	Problem/Project Identification, Task Force Formation and Consultant Selection All court facility projects whether they involve a correction of deficiencies, programming, planning, renovation or construction must first be presented to the Judicial Council's Standing Committee on Court Facilities Planning, see Rule 1-205 (vii), Utah Court Rules Annotated. Requests will be submitted through the AOC facilities coordinator, who serves as staff to the Committee. The Committee will formulate its recommendations with regard to each proposed project and submit requests on construction projects to the Utah Judicial Council at the Council's annual budget and planning meeting. All court facilities planning will be governed by Rule 3-409, Rules of Judicial Administration. Upon recognition of deficiencies in existing facilities and a commitment to plan for future renovation or new court facility construction, initial contact will be made with the AOC regarding these initiatives. A specific AOC staff person should be assigned as liaison between AOC and the local court. This staff person should become a permanent member of any task force or planning group formed to develop operational and architectural recommendations The staff person should be involved in the development of any requests for proposals for project related consulting services and the selection of planning, programming or architectural consultants. This will insure that selected consultants have appropriate expertise and experience with the specialized requirements of Judicial facilities. Continuous consultation between the local court and AOC should be affected through this liaison position with specific review and comment by AOC. These reviews should take place at critical stages throughout the process but at a minimum should occur prior to the publication of the Master Plan, Program, Schematic Design, Design Development and Construction Documents.
Phase Two	Project Planning and Site Selection The formal planning process commences with the development of a mutual understanding of the existing system dynamics as will as an understanding of the goals and objectives of the facility renovation or new construction project. The product of Phase Two planning might be: simple - minimal renovation of an existing structure to achieve limited objectives; complex - extensive renovation or new construction to substantially change or increase facilities or to collocate courts or other government services; or comprehensive - master planning new and/or renovated facilities as a component of total jurisdiction growth with appropriated forecasting and site analysis. Whatever the ultimate focus, AOC will participate as a resource to ensure continuity with State master planning efforts and to assist in the collection and review of system workload indicators which help to determine short term and long term needs. In addition, an assessment of factors external to the jurisdiction which could impact long term facility planning such as new or proposed Rules of Court or planning guidelines, application of technology and funding implication should be conducted with AOC assistance. Additionally, AOC will participate in any site selection discussions or studies effecting the potential placement of Judicial facilities. The purpose of this involvement will be to insure compliance with the considerations outlined in Section II of this volume.
Phase Three	Pre-architectural Programming and Conceptual Design The product of Phase Three should be a document which incorporates the goals, objectives and assessment of short term and long term needs identified in Phases One and Two into a specific architectural solution. The involvement of AOC is critical in ensuring the consistent application of space standards and design guidelines and in sharing the positive and negative design experience of other jurisdictions throughout the state.
Phase Four	Facility Design and Construction The continuing design process, from schematic design through construction documents and the actual construction of the facility will occupy a period of years rather than months. AOC will provide assistance throughout the process by: Conduct of regular project reviews, Coordination of judicial input, Interpretation of the content and intent of design guidelines and space standards, Resolution of critical issues during design; and, Progress inspections during construction.
Phase Five	Ongoing Facility Review and Planning Coordination Even beyond the renovation or construction of facilities, AOC should continue to maintain a liaison role, monitoring system growth, acting as an innovation and technology resource and carrying the perceptions of the users of the new or renovated facilities regarding what they do or do not like about the new facilities to other jurisdictions throughout the State.

AOC will ensure that the planning and design process represents the combined experience of all judges, clerks of the court, court reporters, jurors, attorneys, law enforcement officers, trial court executives and members of the public from the separate jurisdictions of the State.

3.2 ADA Compliance

Court facility design should comply with all relevant portions of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Citizens with disabilities and court staff should have convenient access to all court facilities and internal areas. Among areas requiring consideration are the following:

• Parking spaces - Accessible parking spaces with designated signage should be provided.
• Entrances to buildings - These should be part of an accessible route from public transportation stops, parking and passenger loading zones and public streets and sidewalks to all accessible spaces within the building.
• Elevators - Accessible elevators should be provided on an accessible route with Courtrooms and public seating - All courtrooms should provide appropriate accessible wheelchair locations and an assistive listening system.
• Jury Box - Each jury box shall provide for one accessible wheelchair space and an assistive listening system.
• Restrooms - All facilities shall have accessible restroom locations and entrances and each shall be provided with accessible lavatories and toilets.
• Drinking fountains - Accessible public drinking fountains shall be provided for all who have difficulty bending or stooping.
• Entrance doors to all offices - These shall be a minimum of 32" with the door open.
• Counters - At least one position of multi-position counters shall be accessible and shall have a counter height of 28" to 34" with 27" knee clearance.
• Public Telephones - All facilities shall provide accessible phones with at least one text telephone.
• Signage - All facilities shall provide both visual and tactile signage.

3.3 Standards Use and Compliance

All Court facility projects, regardless of source of funding should be developed in accordance with the State Courts Capital Facilities Master Plan Guidelines and the State Division of Facilities and Construction Standards where these are not inconsistent with the Court's guidelines.

3.4 Budget Considerations

Court facilities should be recognized as a highly specialized building type. The special requirements of court facilities impact the costs of construction as well as the related project "soft" costs. The following guidelines should be observed in developing court construction related budget estimates:

3.4.1 Distinctives of Courthouse design

Courthouse construction is more complex and costly than typical office space construction. This is because courthouses have specialized requirements that are not commonly included in office buildings. Among these are the following:

• Large bay sizes to provide column free courtroom space.
• Higher ceiling heights to create proper proportions in courtrooms.
• Specialized acoustical requirements to insure audibility in litigation spaces and to isolate sensitive areas (including courtrooms, jury rooms, prisoner holding areas and Judicial chambers) from noise.
• Extensive built-in security provisions to assure the safety of the public, public records and judicial staff and to insure the integrity of the judicial process.
• Additional circulation to provide for the separation of public circulation from that of prisoners and judicial officers as well as to provide sufficient public circulation to accommodate the high volumes of system clients.
• Holding areas for prisoners and the attendant structural hardening necessary to prevent escape.
• Specialized HVAC requirements to minimize vibration and to provide flexibility in control of courtrooms and to insure that systems do not prevent the proper recording of proceedings or transfer unwanted sounds from other portions of the building.
• Specialized and integrated technology applications including courtroom evidence presentation technology, internal and remote video conferencing and Computer Integrated Courtroom (CIC) technology.
• Specialized millwork to provide for the appropriate arrangement of courtrooms, and;
• Special design features and materials to support the importance of the structure and to convey the appropriate image of justice.

3.4.2Planning for durability

Courthouses should be planned and designed for durability. High quality materials should be utilized especially in public circulation spaces and in the Courtrooms. Three reasons should be noted:

• Courthouses can be expected to accommodate high public traffic.
• Courthouses can be expected to be in long use (50 to 100 years).
• Courthouses should have a strong and enduring quality befitting their important role in the
  community and the justice system.

3.4.3 Impact of value engineering

While value engineering has proven valuable in identifying project economies, experience has shown that immediate cost savings have sometimes resulted in reduced durability, increased maintenance and lower quality products. As a result, the following guidelines are recommended:

• Representatives of the Department of Facilities Construction and Management, Facility Management and Maintenance Division shall be part of any Court related value engineering study.
• Value engineering recommendations will be evaluated on the basis of both construction cost impacts and potential operational and maintenance impacts.
• Life cycle cost benefits should be favored over short-term facility construction cost reductions.

3.4.4 Typical budget factors and multipliers

Because of the specialized conditions of Courthouse construction the following should guide the preparation of preliminary cost estimates:

Project budgets should reflect the following major categories: construction costs, project costs, site acquisition and/or off-site improvement costs, financing costs and operating costs.

• Construction costs should reflect the actual expenditures necessary to build the finished structure and should include cost of materials, cost of labor and the contractor's overhead and profit.
• Construction costs should be estimated on the basis of Utah projects of similar size built within the last five years and projects of similar size and scope from other states within the same time frame. All projects used as a basis for comparison should reflect reliance on similar standards to those provided in this document.
• Project costs should reflect professional fees, permits, inspections, site preparation, site infrastructure, FFE (furniture, fixtures & equipment), technology infrastructure, escalation factors, taxes and any other special costs over and above basic construction including site acquisition (if required), off site infrastructure and any costs of financing (if relevant).
• Site acquisition and/or off-site improvements costs should reflect the estimated or actual purchase price of land for the facility and/or the expected costs of any road or other infrastructure upgrades that must be provided in order to provide access or use of the site (i.e. expanded utilities, new turning lanes, new traffic lights, etc.).
• Financing costs should provide an estimate of the anticipated interest rates, annualized payments and total payout associated with any long term funding plans.
• Operating costs should reflect the annualized expenses of running the facility and should include the cost of replacement technology.