After a 30-minute discussion Tuesday, the Sherburne County Board of Commissioners voted, 3-2 to use a digital 3D model to design the new courtrooms in the new courts building.

 

Part of the Government Center expansion project incudes the construction of a new courts building that will house five new courtrooms. In order to make sure the county gets exactly what it needs, officials want to see a detailed example of the final design.

 

Tuesday, members of the board debated whether it was necessary to construct a physical mock-up of the courtroom, or use a 3D digital rendering that would give viewers a virtual reality view of what the courtroom would look like.

 

The cost for a physical mock-up is $26,402. There is no cost for the 3D model, since it was included in the architect’s contract. 

 

Administrator Steve Taylor said the intent of a physical mock-up would be to show how a courtroom would look and feel. It would create an environment where judges, security and court personnel could see the placement of the bench, witness stand, court reporter, jury box and public seating area. It would include ceiling heights, locations of doors and all other key elements in the room.

 

Judge Mary Yunker said the Bench preferred the physical mock-up as opposed to a virtual reality rendering.

 

“We’re asking for this because we believe it is vital for this public space,” she told members of the board. “This is the core function of the courts and if we get this space wrong, we impact the ability of the courts, both efficiently and safely, to function.

 

Yunker said design flaws could make it hard for a juror to see a piece of evidence, or make it difficult for a judge  to see an inappropriate interaction between a member of the public and the witness on the stand.

 

“We could make it physically challenging for the court staff to do their work,” she said. “It’s important that we get this right. Virtual reality is not a good substitute. It just can’t replicate the courtroom.”

 

She said if the design was wrong, it would be costly to make the changes afterwards.

 

Commissioner Bruce Anderson disagreed. He said he’s been involved in a lot of construction projects and construction meetings.

 

“This 3D is done all over the state - with homeland security and law enforcement, because it’s precise,” he said.

 

He said a physical mock-up wasn’t necessary.

 

“It’s just a waste of money, then we just toss it in the dumpster,” he said. “I have a hard time with that.”

 

Commissioner Rachel Leonard said the county went along with paying extra for a court design specialist, Dewberry as a consultant to design the rooms.

 

“We went along with the experts. I thought we did our due diligence,” she said. “It isn’t the amount of money as much as the fact that we’re doing something different we don’t need to do. No disrespect to the judges.”

 

Doug Wild of BWBR Architects, said he was in favor of a physical mock-up because it helped prevent change orders later in the project.

 

“Computers do  a wonderful job developing these renderings and images that really make us believe that is the way it will be, but they’re all based on calculations that try to mimic the human eye,” he said. “Our eyes will see things differently than we can show you in the rendering.”

 

He said his firm was willing to contribute $11,000 towards the cost of a mockup to prevent costly changes down the line.

 

“It costs us money too,” he said.

 

Commissioner Felix Schmiesing said he didn’t know a lot about courtrooms or virtual reality. But he felt it was important to maintain a good relationship with the Bench.

 

“We have a unique relationship with our judges. There will be unexpected things that will come up, and if we can eliminate some of them, I think the money could be very well spent,” he said.

 

“They’ve asked us for this. I think we should try to give it to them  and maintain a strong relationship with them.”

 

Administrator Taylor said even with the physical mock-up there was no guarantee there wouldn’t be change orders.

 

“My experience has been, you look at other courtrooms - what works and what doesn’t,” he said.

 

The board voted 3-2 to use the 3D rendering. Commissioners Anderson, Leonard and Ewald Petersen voted in favor. Commissioners Schmiesing and John Riebel voted against.