Planning commission reviews cost‑saving changes to new police station; consultant flags roughly $20K–$35K savings per item

The St. Helens Planning Commission on the evening of the meeting reviewed proposed value‑engineering changes to the site plan for the new police station and heard line‑item savings from the project consultant.

A consultant on Zoom, identified in the meeting packet as Mackenzie, told commissioners that graveling the area reserved for a future Connex box would save “right around $20 or $25,000,” and that switching the north perimeter fencing from a decorative style to chain‑link would save “about $30,000 or so.” She said a proposed planter change would reduce cost by about “$35,000,” and that seat‑wall changes were worth roughly “$25,000 or so.” Mackenzie noted the numbers were in current‑day dollars and chosen to reduce costs without undoing key pedestrian amenities.

Commissioners pressed staff and the consultant on total project cost and lifecycle impacts. One commissioner asked for the overall construction total; staff said they did not have the full construction cost on hand but noted an approved council budget exists, and one participant referenced an earlier planning figure of about $12,000,000. The consultant said follow‑up information on total cost could be provided after the meeting.

Staff also warned of a timing pressure: building permits for the project should be requested before a scheduled April building‑code update because, as the consultant said, the “code changes in April, which will have a huge budget impact” if the project is delayed. Staff described remediation steps already completed on the site and explained that a grading permit is required before a building permit.

Commissioners discussed tradeoffs between short‑term savings and aesthetics or long‑term maintenance costs. Several members said smaller VE items are easy to reinstate later if bid prices yield savings. A staff member recommended recording the commission’s comfort with the proposed changes so that the decision is on record if questions arise later.

The commission treated a motion that it was “fine with the changes as presented” as a formal recommendation/acceptance and recorded voice support. No detailed vote tally by name was provided in the record; the motion passed by voice vote.

What happens next: staff said they will provide follow‑up cost and permit information to the commission and the council as needed; permits and bidding will determine which items — if any — are restored during final design and construction.