Ulster County committee approves $740,000 study for Golden Hill office renovation
Loading...
Summary
The Public Works and Capital Projects Committee approved a $740,000 planning and design contract to study renovations at the Golden Hill Office Building in Kingston and a separate $703,000 contract for consultant services; planning will determine whether up to an estimated $13 million in construction proceeds to later votes.
The Ulster County Public Works and Capital Projects Committee on March 9 approved funding for planning and design work at the Golden Hill Office Building in Kingston and voted to contract a consultant to do the work.
The committee passed Resolution 142 to establish capital project No. 739 and authorize $740,000 for planning and design, and then approved Resolution 144, a $703,000 contract with La Bella Associates, DPC, to carry out the consultant scope. Chair Nolan presided; Legislator Briggs moved the contract and Legislator Kovacs seconded.
Deputy commissioner and project staff told the committee the effort covers three phases and responds to concerns raised in 2025 about project scope and cost. Staff said the $740,000 funds planning and space‑use analysis, design and grant‑seeking work; any later construction funding would return to the legislature as separate resolutions. "Anything beyond this $740,000 has to come back to you folks," staff said.
Legislators asked for specifics on tenants, swing space and timing. Legislator Stewart pressed whether the Department of Health and other current tenants would need temporary space during construction; staff said swing space will be required and that tenants such as Aster and Access Support are already looking for alternatives. The administration said the project could require about 12 months to move from planning to construction bidding if the committee approves the study and subsequent steps.
Members also asked whether the project might include energy improvements. Deputy executive LaVallech said the intent out of the gate is to explore geothermal and other deep‑retrofit options and to seek grant sources to reduce long‑term operating costs. Legislator Berardi suggested codifying energy‑efficiency goals in the resolution language; staff pointed to whereas clauses and the consultant scope that already direct work on operational and energy efficiency.
The committee repeatedly emphasized that approving the capital project and consultant contract funds planning, not construction. Several legislators noted the capital improvement program shows an estimated $13 million construction figure; the committee’s approval does not obligate construction dollars and any such appropriation would require a separate legislative vote.
The planning authorization and the consultant contract passed by voice vote with all members recorded in favor. The next procedural step is the consultant’s space‑planning and programming work, which staff said will include interviews with county departments and a report back to the legislature before any construction request is made.
Ending: The committee completed votes on the Golden Hill items and moved on to other agenda business; construction funding remains contingent on future approvals and further reporting from the consultant.
