The Archuleta School District(ASD) Board of Education (BoE) is preparing to make its decision on a site location for a proposed new school building serving kindergarten through eighth grade (K-8) at an upcoming special meeting scheduled for Wednesday, Jan. 21, at 6 p.m. in the Pagosa Springs Middle School library located at 309 Lewis St.
At its regular meeting held on Jan. 7, the BoE heard multiple public comments on the matter and discussed updated information provided by RTA Architects relating to the specific costs for each potential site.
The first commenter chose to focus on “one specific factual concern regarding the site location decision,” explaining that the traffic study commissioned for this decision “actually favored the downtown school location due to the existing street grid, pedestrian infrastructure and multiple access routes, which better support traffic flow.”
She mentioned that traffic congestion was listed as a “con” for the downtown site, but information shared during the April Master Planning Advisory Committee (MPAC) meeting included a traffic matrix, “and this shows the cost to the district to mitigate the identified traffic concerns are much lower for the downtown campus.”
She also mentioned the traffic congestion point has been a recurring debate in this discussion, acknowledging there are other points to consider, “but when a point as important as this is presented without the study’s findings it risks shaping perceptions in a way that isn’t fully supported by the evidence before you.”
The next commenter spoke about the distinction between uptown and downtown, stating that people do not like to travel downtown if they do not have multiple things to do there.
She also spoke from the perspective of a business owner.
“My concerns are with the business structure downtown, is we’re spending so much time, money and effort on bettering the downtown area,” she said, explaining that if the school is located uptown it may take away from the culture of the downtown community.
One person commented that he is “leaning” toward the downtown location, noting that the Pagosa Lakes Property Owners Association (PLPOA) Clubhouse near the Vista site is not open to the public.
He also listed off benefits of schools being located near the San Juan River and downtown parks for unique learning opportunities.
The commenter also noted that there has been no formally posted public survey on the site selection.
“So, I feel like the community hasn’t really had the chance to give input on site selection,” he said, also suggesting that the fields at the current elementary school site could potentially be used as a building location.
He also asked the district to consider revenue opportunities, noting that the district has“commercially viable” properties downtown.
Pagosa Springs Parks and Recreation Director Darren Lewis commented, “We have this incredible connectivity of trails that can lead you to lots of wonderful destinations downtown,” suggesting that there are no options like that uptown, “and I think the children are gonna miss out on opportunities.”
Lewis also expressed that the BoE has not voiced a preference on either site yet.
“I haven’t heard that yet,” he said.
The next commenter spoke about the possibility of the district repurposing its existing buildings to house community nonprofits.
One commenter stated they’ve been a resident in the county for 50 years and voiced support for the downtown location due to the available amenities for students, including the library being able to offer after-school programs.
“If we’re really thinking about the kids, they need to be downtown,” he said.
Another spoke about environmental sustainability, suggesting that the downtown location is not a sustainable option for the community, stating that those in support of the downtown location are not “encouraging unsustainable behavior on the part of the school board.”
A former school board member spoke in support of the downtown location, stating it is the “best” way to go for the kids.
A parent of a student spoke next, explaining they are recent transplants from central Illinois.
She noted she is in favor of the uptown location, explaining that many students in the PLPOA area would be able to walk or bike to school.
She also expressed safety concerns about having everything downtown and what it may be like when there are multiple events happening at once, along with pick-up and drop-off scenarios.
Another commenter also expressed concern over what economic impacts there might be if the district were to build uptown.
Others commented on the culture of downtown and the importance for kids to develop a sense of community with the schools being downtown.
Another commenter also noted concerns over PLPOA’s willingness in having a bunch of kids using their clubhouse and recreation center.
Following the public comment portion, BoE president Bob Lynch noted that the decision is “a tough call.”
Later in the meeting, Superintendent Rick Holt provided the BoE with updated information from RTA, explaining that early on in the process the board identified criteria to consider in making its decision.
Safety concerns
Holt then explained that the board asked for him to reach out to the community’s emergency responders for input and any safety concerns about either site.
Holt explained that Pagosa Springs Police Department Chief Bill Rockensock quickly got to the point and stated “he felt strongly that the K-8 school should not be downtown,” citing concerns of traffic, and interactions between younger and older students.
He noted that was Rockensock’s feeling when the district previously considered building a new school and it hasn’t changed.
Holt also explained that Rockensock expressed concerns about the difficulty of potentially having to relocate 1,500 students in any event.
Holt then explained that he spoke to Pagosa Fire Protection District Chief Robert Bertram, who had no real preference on either site, but noted that the high school site poses more challenges to get to.
Holt explained Archuleta County Sheriff Mike Le Roux had no real preference on either site, but acknowledged Rockensock’s concern about the difficulty in potentially needing to relocate 1,500 students in a serious safety event.
Estimated costs
Holt then went on to present a more detailed price breakdown for both sites.
He explained that the breakdown includes RTA’s costs estimations and the average of four different contractors’ estimates.
Holt indicated that RTA’s estimate for total cost at the high school site came out to $129,775,278, while the contractor’s average came out to $130,151,833.
The total estimate from RTA for the Vista site came out to $121,762,203, while the contractor’s average came out to $122,778,184.
The entire cost estimate report for both sites is available online in the BoE’s Jan. 7 agenda packet, available at https://go.boarddocs.com/co/asdco/Board.nsf/Public.
Holt also explained that the district asked for an “apples-to-apples” comparison of the two sites.
He went on to specifically note that the high school site would have about $1.2 million to $1.5 million in demolition costs, along with a $2.2 million cost to relocate the high school baseball field.
Relocating the softball fields would cost about $1 million if they are relocated to other district-owned property, Holt explained.
He also noted that there is a $750,000 cost estimate to construct a regulation-size football/soccer field behind the new school.
As for the cost for the actual building, RTA estimated $81.7 million, while the contractor’s average came in at $79.8 million, Holt noted.
He also explained that fees, such as insurance and contingencies, were included in the total estimated costs.
“All of those numbers are there so you can see what’s all baked into that estimated price,” he said, explaining that some of those fees are based on a percentage of the total project costs. “So, as the total project costs goes up, those fees go up as well.”
Holt also addressed previous comments about how the district could build into the hillside at the downtown location, “and those costs are much higher than the $130 million dollar costs.”
Holt then explained that the Vista site would have about an $800,000 cost to prepare the site to build on.
He noted that the Vista site cost estimate includes a six-lane junior high track and a natural grass athletic field with bleachers with a cost estimate of about $1.5 million.
He noted that a traffic signal installation for the Vista site is estimated to cost $2.9 million, but noted that the district has already started conversations with the county to see what kind of grant opportunities may be available to cover that cost.
As for the actual cost of the building at the Vista site, RTA estimated $76.8 million, while the contractor’s average came in at $78.2 million, Holt explained.
Holt mentioned that the soil at the high school site is “loose and not compacted,” requiring a deep foundation, “which is just more expensive.”
Lynch indicated that the district will be submitting a Building Excellent Schools Today (BEST) grant application in February or March that could potentially cover up to 45 percent of the district’s total project cost.
Hot also mentioned that the district asked RTA to put together a cost estimate for a sports complex located at the Vista site, which would include three softball fields, a middle school field, restrooms, concessions, a maintenance building and parking.
He noted that RTA’s estimate on that came out to $17 million, while contractor’s estimates came in around $22 million.
Holt also commented, “We need to invest in our baseball field anyways.”
Other ideas about a field house and alternative gym space at the high school were also discussed.
Strengths and concerns
Lynch then asked the BoE members for strengths and concerns about each site.
Multiple BoE members acknowledged the community’s desire to keep the schools downtown, noting the available resources for students such as the library, river and town parks.
BoE member Tim Taylor noted the district’s criteria for this decision, one of which being that it supports a broad range of student activities, and that the high school site has an advantage there.
BoE member Amanda Schick commented on the ease for families to be able to have a centralized drop-off for students in different grades.
Lynch commented that a lot has been done in “deepening the town” to avoid it becoming a “string” from here all the way over to Bayfield.
Schick also noted the walkability of downtown as an advantage for the high school site.
Concerns expressed by the BoE for the downtown site included traffic congestion and safety concerns with having younger students near newly licensed high school drivers.
BoE member Butch Mackey commented that the lack of space downtown is a concern.
“Can only cram so much down there, that’s a huge concern,” he said.
Taylor commented that most of what he heard from ASD staff, not administration, is that they did not prefer the high school site with serious safety concerns about younger and older student conflicts.
“This was brought up by staff,” he said.
Mackey noted there is a cost savings with the Vista site.
Lynch mentioned that the Vista site offers fewer disruptions for students, while Taylor noted the site offers a “pro” for middle school athletics.
BoE member David Iverson noted that there is a community sentiment for the downtown site, while Mackey expressed that the Vista site complicates drop-offs for families.
Schick noted that the Vista site did not poll higher with the community last summer.
She also mentioned that growth projections for the district and the community should be looked at, expressing she wants to have “minimal regret” with making this decision.
She added, “I want us to do this well.”
Lynch encouraged the board to not be shortsighted, noting that “sooner or later, Pagosa’s gonna grow.”
Before concluding the discussion, Holt commented that the district is past the point of delaying this decision to a future board, explaining that the district will keep trying to move forward however it can, regardless of BEST grant decisions, or if a bond measure fails.
Lynch commented, “We want to do the right thing.”
clayton@pagosasun.com
>