Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Facilities Planning topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Feasibility study maps scattered county offices; commissioners send draft back for department review

3753531 · May 20, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A consultant presented a facilities consolidation feasibility study that inventories county office locations, projects 20-year space needs and outlines potential campus strategies. Commissioners asked that departments receive the draft for review and that the study return as a work session.

KLJ consultant Brad Ash presented the Ouray County facilities consolidation feasibility study during the May 20 meeting, summarizing department interviews, a 20-year square-footage projection and options for consolidating county operations onto a campus or improving existing leased spaces.

Ash summarized existing departmental footprints and the 20-year projected needs for elected officials, public health, sheriff, road and bridge, human services and others. He said the study incorporated input from department heads and county GIS mapping to identify priority locations and required acreage. “We were asked to go from elected officials all the way down through meeting with various staff… and really putting it into here, understanding different square footages,” Ash said.

Commissioners and staff raised multiple points: the elected surveyor’s record storage and future office needs, the question of whether EMS would remain a county facility or join a fire authority, and the challenge of locating public-facing offices versus road-and-bridge and maintenance yards. Several commissioners asked that all department heads be given the current draft for review and correction; IT and other departments flagged factual items and asked for a second review cycle.

The board did not take final action to select a site or funding path. Commissioners instead directed staff to distribute the draft to departments for comment, correct errors and return the study for a work session before any formal decision.