The expansion, renovation or potential relocation of Mexico City Hall has been a topic of discussion for over a decade.

For many years, other projects took priority, but deficiencies within the current facility have made it a priority once more. At its Dec. 22 meeting, the Mexico City Council was joined by Katie Aholt, professional engineer and director at Navigate Building Solutions to discuss three options for a revitalized City Hall.

Mexico’s City Hall, located at 300 N. Coal St., was built prior to 1910. It served as an Elks Lodge and eventually corporate offices for the Better and Kaiser refractories.

In 1970, the City of Mexico purchased the building to use as City Hall and in 1976, the fire station was added.

Offices for the City Manager, City Clerk, Public Safety Department, Parks and Recreation, Public Works, Municipal Court, Community Development, Engineering, Economic Development, Administrative Services and Information Technology are located within the facility.

But, like many aging facilities, City Manager Bruce Slagle said it has a number of deficiencies that include issues with public access, HVAC and data communications as well as structural problems, electrical overloading and insufficient meeting and conference space.

“To single out the public safety department to some extent, a portion of them are in the basement of this building,” Slagle said, addressing the council. “There is some limited access, there is no secure area for loading and unloading prisoners. They do have to go up and down a flight of steps to get in and out of the building, so there are issues that we need to deal with as far as this building goes.”

Slagle added that the current fire department only has three bays when they really need four. An additional bay is necessary to ensure adequate response time and allow for proper decontamination following fires.

In 2013, the City of Mexico purchased the adjacent block to the west of the existing facility and had conceptual expansion plans. However, the pandemic and the closure of Audrain Medical Center as well as other, more pressing projects set back the city’s timeline.

The closure of the hospital did open up the option to reuse the existing Cancer Center as the new City Hall, which Slagle said would not only lower deconstruction costs, but also help revitalize the area.

Option one: Cancer Center renovation

Aholt gave a recap of the initial study that was done at the Cancer Center and reviewed new concepts that include site in plan blocking diagrams for the west lot across the street as well as the cost opinion and total program budgets of the cost associated with the design and construction of the potential facilities.

This is all part of what she and Navigate Building Solutions are calling phase two of City Hall/Public Safety Feasibility.

The program study, introduced to the city council by Aholt, calculated the types and sizes of the space necessary to support the functions of City Hall and Public Safety.

Aholt told the council that after going room by room, counting staff members and anticipating future growth needs, Navigate Building Solutions estimated that a new facility would need to be 33,526 square feet.

“When we did this, it gave us the opportunity to look at the space available at the Cancer Center – would it work from a functionality standpoint, would it work from a square footage standpoint?” she said.

The most cost effective and best use of the Cancer Center space, according to Aholt, used the existing building along E Monroe St. with an apparatus bay for the fire department and sally port for the secure transport of detainees attached to the portion of the building that runs parallel with Hord Street.

The proposed entry to City Hall and Public Safety would be off N. Jefferson St. and the new design will also include secure gates at E. Monroe and Hord streets. As it stands, this option will remove the portion of the Cancer Center on the Jefferson Street side of the facility, which Aholt added would be the new location of city council chambers.

The apparatus bay and sally port would be a new construction.

“It takes advantage of the site and some of the infrastructure that’s already there to support this as an addition on to that building,” she said. “We will maintain a bulk of the parking lots, that main entrance canopy that is existing there today.”

City council also received a detailed diagram of proposed office and meeting spaces on both the upper and lower floors of the Cancer Center.

Aholt presented the total program budget, which includes construction costs, permits, furniture, fixtures, equipment, professional services, financing, design fees, project management, technology costs and material testing, that comes to a total $12,830,900.

“We call it a ‘total program budget’ because it’s encompassing of all of the project costs,” Aholt said.

The total project cost excluded property acquisition costs as the city owns part of the Cancer Center with Audrain County, but as the city is not the sole owner, Council member Larry Webber expressed concerns about owing additional money to the county.

Slagle said that because the city partnered with the county and the use of the existing facility would reduce demolition costs, there should not be much of a cost owed to Audrain County associated with that.

Council member Vicki Briggs was concerned about changes to the surrounding streets that may be necessary should Boone Health move forward with its proposed plans to utilize the grounds of the existing Audrain Medical Center for a critical access hospital.

“Whether we build there or not, there are going to be some road changes that’s going to have to happen,” Slagle said in response.

Options two and three: New construction and renovation

Option two, Aholt explained, would be an entirely new construction.

On the lot owned by the city, which is primarily parking as it stands, there is a small building that would have to be demolished to make a new construction feasible

“Overall, the goal was trying to accommodate the 33,000 square feet that we talked about from the programing effort on to this site as entirely new construction,” Aholt said.

She added that a two-story facility would be necessary — 13,700 square feet would be allocated to public safety with an additional 4,550 square feet for an apparatus bay and 600 square feet allocated to a sally port.

City hall would require 11,700 square feet and the total size of the new facility would be 30,550 square feet.

The plan also calls for the demolition of the existing City Hall for parking as well as the retention of the existing public safety apparatus bay for storage.

“The new facility construction could occur without impacting operations here at City Hall,” Aholt said, suggesting a single move across the street and the subsequent demolition.

Council member Chris Williams asked why City Hall would need more space at the Cancer Center than in a new construction, but Aholt said the size discrepancies were mainly due to site constraints, not necessity.

“The Cancer Center space is existing as available, so you’re kind of fitting in to what’s there,” she said. “There are a lot of corridors for circulation over there that are increased square footage that is not necessarily useful, so if you were going to build an entirely new facility, we believe it could be done in a more efficient floor plate than trying to work with what’s there.”

Taking into account the costs associated with the program budget outlined at the Cancer Center, Navigate Building Solutions estimated the cost of the new construction and demolition of the existing facility to be $18,742,354.

Option three would also require a new construction but the proposal includes a new one-story facility for public safety on the adjacent lot using the dimensions outlined in option two and the renovation of the existing City Hall.

This option would require the temporary relocation for City Hall as well as increased construction times.

“The public safety facility would really need to be up and running before you’re able to start any renovations here — their functions are kind of interlaced throughout the facility, especially down on the lower level, so really we wouldn’t be able to get into heavy construction here until that facility is done,” Aholt said.

Renovating the existing facility will also pose certain challenges. As Aholt explained, there is water ponding on the roof, the roof of the apparatus bay is leaking, and due to the age of the facility, there is the potential for hazardous materials such as lead and asbestos in the ceiling.

Aholt also identified areas where there are cracks in the flooring, failing brick and mortar and all windows and exterior doors will need to be replaced and sealed.

Structure aside, building renovations will also require new IT wiring and infrastructure as well as all new plumbing and HVAC systems.

The associated costs, including the temporary relocation and move back totaled $18,663,727 according to the total program budget.

Mexico City Council looks to the future

City council’s next step will be the approval of one of the three options presented to them.

The City of Mexico is in the beginning stages of asbestos and hazardous material abatement at the Cancer Center site with phase one expected to be complete in the next 90 days with outlines for demolition plans for the Stribling and Cornerstone buildings soon to follow.

As a result, Slagle told the council that a decision will have to be made within those 90 days so it can be coordinated with demolition plans.

Moving to the Cancer Center would save roughly $6 million, but council members were concerned for a number of reasons.

Webber said he worries about moving to the Cancer Center and leaving additional vacant space and “destroying” downtown Mexico. He said that considering what will happen to the already vacant buildings downtown is something he is considering when making his decision.

“I would hate to see downtown with nothing but parking lots,” Webber said.

And council member Chris Miller questioned how residents surrounding the hospital would feel about the noise from fire engines should public safety be moved there.

Slagle explained that regardless of which option the council chooses, the city has been “putting money back” for this project.

“I believe we will have in the neighborhood of $5 million available to put down,” he said. “Then when you look at the rest of it, we will be looking at a bond issue and as we stated when we passed the use tax that it was going to be used for capital projects.”

During public comments, Donna Corrado, representing the Audrain Regional Medical Center Board of Directors, spoke out against moving forward with plans for a new City Hall before a critical access hospital is established.

“The citizens of Audrain are going to be paying for this with bonds, or whatever,” Corrado said. “We want a hospital on the frontburner, please, and not your new City Hall.”

The proposals will be brought back to city council in January for further discussion.