The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2.0 PC Staff Report 05.13.1998PC 5/13/98 PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS REQUEST: APPLICANT: I. Description of the Proposal Review of the Carbondale Community School site development plan RE -1 School District, Aspen Educational Research Foundation The RE -1 School District and the Aspen Educational Research Foundation are proposing to build a K through 8 charter school on a piece of property located in the Cooperton (Satank) area. The school would have an approximate enrollment of 115 students. The school access is proposed to be off of Dolore Way, as opposed to the Cooperton road system. (See letter and site plan pgs. 3"'q" ) II. Issues and Concerns A. Legal Process: CRS 22-32-124 (1) requires the school district to consult with and advise in writing, prior to purchase or any contracting, with the Planning Commission which has jurisdiction over the territory in which the site is proposed. The site is supposed to conform as much as possible with the adopted plan of the community. Additionally, the school district is supposed to consult with the Colorado Geologic Survey, prior to purchase or any contracting. (See statute pg. S ) B. Staff Comments: It should be noted that the County really only has the ability to comment on the proposed school site, other than the Planning Commission's ability to request a public hearing before the School Board. The School Board is only obligated to listen to the comments and may over ride any recommendation of denial by the Planning Commission or citizens. Additionally, the County has no building permit authority or responsibility under the same statute. C. Comprehensive Plan: The 1995 Comprehensive Plan has no specific language addressing the location of schools in the County. Issues related to the placement of a school would be related to the access, utilities and compatibility with the neighborhood. Access is proposed to be off of Delores Way, which minimizes the traffic impacts on the residential neighborhood in Cooperton. There is no information provided regarding the water and 1 sewer services to be provided for the school. In terms of compatibility with the area, a school is typically located in close proximity to residential uses. Since this is not a typical public school, the students at the school will include a number of children from other areas. III. CONCLUSION As noted previously, the Planning Commission has very little authority in this matter. The property has already been purchased and the school is already in the process of being built. Based upon these facts, it would appear that the RE -1 School District has already determined that this is an appropriate location for the Carbondale Community School. 2 H A R R Y T E A GU E AR CH I T EC TS 2 April 1998 Mr. Mark Bean Planning Director Garfield County 109 8th Street Suite 303 Glenwood Springs, CO Re: Aspen Educational Research Foundation Carbondale Community School Dear Mark, v_,,....._ ._; _ ....,:.,,lf,: r -: il APR 0 3. 1993 IJ In accordance with CRS 22-32-124(1) we are pleased to submit the enclosed site development plan for the Carbondale Community School, for review and comment by the Planning and Zoning commission for conformity with the County Master Plan. Based upon a charter agreement with the Roaring Fork School District (RE -1), the Carbondale Community School will be owned by the Aspen Educational Research Foundation and operated as a public school. The school will enroll approximately 115 students in grades K through 8. While legal access to the property exists as an easement across Charles Moore's land at the end of Sopris Avenue, AERF recognizes that the Satank community may have concerns regarding traffic to the school passing through the neighborhood. To address this concern, AERF has negotiated a temporary license to access the property off Dolores Way, via land owned by the Colorado Rocky Mountain School. AERF is in the process of negotiating an agreement with CRMS to create a permanent access easement off Dolores, but this has not been finalized. We would be happy to present our plans for the school to the Garfield County Planning and Zoning Commission at the next available time in your meeting schedule. Please don't hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or concerns. Sincerely yours, HARRY TEAGUE ARCHITECTS Michael Hassig, AIA General Manager cc: Jody Edwards — Hill, Edwards, Edwards & Adkison 412 N. MILL STREET ASPEN, CO 81611-1508 TEL (970) 925-2556 FAX (970) 925-7981 email hta@rof.net Block 9 Cooperton Cedar Street Sopris Avenue Block 12 Block 10 Cooperton Block 11 0.10Vt MAPIUS MIC YMCA. CHOW 1:102110 HARM L I 1100.350,01 1020 Deemorw 40 FOOT WIDE ACCESS AND UTILITY EASEMENT I I.I I5 0 t m.ar u�¢N Kay P.U.D. Phase 2 Lot12 Delores Way t!', 22-32-123 Education and meets the same requirements and standards as would be necessary if performed a school district, be apportioned by the state board of education on the basis of the , tractual obligations and paid separately to each contracting school district in the ma r'i.r prescribed by law. (2) Nothing in this section shall be construed in a manner to authorize a school dis to expend proceeds from the sale of general obligation or revenue bonds issued by ;`:: school district to procure or erect a school or other building beyond the territorial lis of the district except in accordance with the provisions of section 22-32-109 (1) (v). Source: L. 64: p. 589, § 23. C.R.S. 1963: § 123-30-23. L. 67: p. 1078, § 1. L. 75: amended, p. 7F6, § 5, effective July 1. L. 77: (1) amended, p. 1050, § 2, effective Ju l 10. L. 79: (2, ar'.<A,, r=: p. 783, § 3, effective June 7. L. 93: Entire section amend:,? p. 669, § 1, effective April 30; (1) amended, p. 1648, § 42, effective July 1. Editor's note: Subsection (1) was amended in Senate Bill 93-242. Those amendments were supet- seded by the amendment of the entire section in House Bill 93-1118. Am. Jur.2d. See 68 Am. Jur.2d, Schools, § 22. C.J.S. See 78 C.J.S., Schools and School Dis- tricts, § § 399-403. 22-32-123. Penalty. Any officer or employee who refuses to perform a duty requ" by law when specifically directed to perform such duty by the board of education is g of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction thereof, shall be punished by a fine of not m ..., than one hundred dollars, or by imprisonment in the county jail for not more than nina: days, or by both such fine and imprisonment. 4S Source: L. 64: p. 590, § 24. C.R.S. 1963: § 123-30-24. C.J.S. See 78 C.J.S., Schools and School Dis- tricts, § 77. }: 22-32-124. Building codes - zoning - planning. (1) Prior to the acquisition of T,,;. or any contracting for the purchase thereof, the board of education shall consult and advise in writing the planning commission, or governing body if no planning coin sion exists, which has jurisdiction over the territory in which the site is proposed toy located in order that the proposed site shall conform to the adopted plan of the comm insofar as is feasible. In addition, the board of education shall submit a site developm-. plan for review and comment thereon to such planning commission or governing prior to construction of any structure or building. The planning commission or gove body may request a public hearing before the board of education relating to the propo site location or site development plan. The board of education shall thereafter prom schedule the hearing, publish at least one notice in advance of the hearing, and prove: . written notice of the hearing to the requesting planning commission or governing Prior to the acquisition of land for school building sites or construction of any buil' thereon, the board of education also shall consult with the Colorado geological s `• regarding potential swelling soil, mine subsidence, and other geologic hazards and to d mine the geologic suitability of the site for its proposed use. All buildings and struct .1 shall be erected in conformity with the standards of the division of labor. Nothi this subsection (1) shall be construed to limit the authority of a board of educatio finally determine the location of public schools within the district and erect nece buildings and structures. (2) (a) Notwithstanding the provisions of section 8-1-107 (2) (d), C.R.S., upon req'" of the division of labor after consulting with the affected board of education, the appro ate building department of a county, town, city, or city and county wherein a buil, or structure has been erected pursuant to subsection (1) of this section may make. necessary inspections to determine that such building or structure has been erect conformity with the standards of the division of labor and, if such building or stru '< is in conformity, shall issue the necessary certificate of occupancy prior to use of: building or structure by the school district. A fee may be charged for such inspecti -^on aprroval of the hoard of education, if the amount of the fee is determined ofl . • st-:vi .. ''s d;-• isicr c labor after cons''', 9.- w: su th sit co co or ad wi the pr( suc fire of to p. 2,e am A §C frit T labs tion ord, becz P. 7 'tea ,,e, (2 d al (3 ppc to th (4 dent (5. tion With the s (5) s torr