Montrose County consultants recommend phased fixes to make Naturita school usable as West End Annex; baseline estimate $4.6M

Montrose County officials spent a July 30 work session reviewing a condition assessment and cost estimate for converting the former Naturita Elementary School into the county’s West End Annex, a project that would house the sheriff’s office, court functions, clerk and recorder services and some human services operations.

“We determined at the end of the predesign that it was about a 14,600 square‑foot building,” said Amy Malone, architect and planner with Wold Architects and Engineers, describing the building program and the firm’s earlier work on a new‑construction option. Malone said Wold’s predesign work and third‑party estimates produced a roughly $9.4 million construction figure when the county was considering building new, but the county later purchased the Naturita school as a lower‑cost alternative.

Wold and FCI Constructors presented a targeted, prioritized set of infrastructure repairs they say are necessary to make the school usable for county operations. Joe Scaglione, a mechanical engineer with Wold, and Justin Mendenhall, FCI’s preconstruction manager, flagged two primary problems: the building is served by single‑phase power that limits modern HVAC equipment, and the cooling system installed for the school relied on phase converters that no longer function. "You basically are getting to the point where you're getting sophisticated... it's not like a single house," Scaglione said, arguing the building needs a proper 3‑phase service and new mechanical plant for reliable operation.

FCI outlined a 14‑item “shopping list” of priority work—mechanical and electrical upgrades, a new 3‑phase transformer/service, emergency power options, fire sprinklers and alarm upgrades, roof and exterior repairs, ADA corrections, doors and windows, restroom renovations, an ADA‑compliant service window, and hazardous‑materials abatement. At the meeting FCI said the package of items needed to make the building functional totaled about $4.6 million; staff and several commissioners said including abatement, additional fit‑outs for specific offices and other owner costs could bring total program costs closer to $8 million.

“Those individual items are things that make the building livable,” Mendenhall told the board, describing the line items as a way to phase work and prioritize the systems (electrical and HVAC) most critical to daily operations.

County staff said the board currently has $1,000,000 budgeted as a placeholder for immediate needs. Cindy Dunlap, the county finance director, called the project significant and urged a phased approach tied to a long‑range capital plan: “It’ll definitely have to be phased in,” she said, adding that design, abatement and owner costs on top of construction will increase the total outlay.

Law‑enforcement officials who already occupy part of the school described operational impacts from the deferred maintenance. “Some of the biggest things that we really need are holding cells,” Commander Smalls said, noting that lack of reliable holding facilities forces deputies to transport detainees to Montrose. He and others also described unreliable HVAC and the absence of backup power as impediments to safe, consistent operations.

Tressa Guynes, the county clerk and recorder, told the board her office is operating in cramped quarters with frequent computer and power interruptions; she requested a dedicated state‑network cable, upgraded electrical support for multiple workstations and permanent backup power for election operations, noting a portable generator used previously had been stolen.

Staff proposed convening user‑group meetings—bringing together the sheriff, clerk, human services, facilities, judicial representatives and Wold—to establish an agreed list of program needs and a prioritized phasing plan. Wold said user‑group planning is within the architecture firm’s scope and offered to support those meetings at no additional cost if the board extends the firm’s contract. The board discussed placing an extension of Wold’s contract on a forthcoming agenda; staff said the amended contract is currently subject to time limits and may require a simple extension if the board desires.

No formal vote was taken. Commissioners asked staff to return with clarified priorities, abatement pricing and options for phasing the work so the board can weigh trade‑offs during the upcoming budget cycle. The chair closed the work session after staff committed to organizing user‑group meetings and adding contract timing to a future board agenda.