(This story has been corrected to reflect the right number of existing units at West Ranch, which is 10). 

Diana Sirko, the superintendent of the Aspen School District, was clearly informed Monday night that a subcommittee of the Woody Creek Caucus is strongly opposed to the district bypassing the county land-use code to build more teacher housing in lower Woody Creek.

“If your intention is to ram this down our throats, and the throats of Pitkin County, we are going to ask the county to fight you,” said Ann Owsley, chair of the caucus planning committee and wife of Michael Owsley, a Pitkin County commissioner and member of the caucus planning committee.

Sirko had opened the meeting by telling the group, gathered in the gallery at the Woody Creek Community Center, that “it is our desire to build on that land in Woody Creek, because it is the only land we own.”

The school district owns 14 acres at West Ranch next to Aspen Valley Ranch, just above the intersection of Upper River Road, Lower River Road and Gerbaz Way.

Today on the site there are 10 rental apartments inside five green duplexes set back against a hillside. Locals in Woody Creek call them the “Monopoly houses.”

The district wants to add 12 more rental units on the site as it is increasingly having trouble attracting and retaining teachers because of the cost of local housing.

But West Ranch is outside the county’s urban growth boundary and the new houses would be considered sprawl under the county’s land-use code and, likely, by a majority of the Pitkin County commissioners.

The school district, however, is not legally bound by the county’s land-use code or its urban growth boundary. The district derives its power from the state and need not submit a land-use application or a building permit application to the county.

For example, none of the three large school buildings constructed on the district’s Maroon Creek campus in the last decade were reviewed under local land-use or building codes.

The district believes its state-given power applies to building new teacher housing, as well as classrooms and cafeterias, and that it can build housing in Woody Creek if it chooses.

But Ann Owsley said the exercise of that power could have negative results not just in Woody Creek, but across the county.

“This is communitywide,” said Owsley, suggesting that the school district would set a bad precedent if it went forward without county review.

The committee repeatedly told Superintendent Sirko that the school district should respect the local land-use process, even though the project appears to be a non-starter because it is outside of the urban growth boundary.

“I would strongly recommend that you go through the process,” said committee member Phil Holstein. “It is not an easy process in this county. And it is not an easy process because we have been struggling with it to keep it different from other places where development has really ruined the community.”

But Sirko asked why the school district should go through a process where it has little chance of success, especially if it tries to develop within the spirit of the county’s land-use code.

“I think if you went through the process, you might be surprised,” Holstein said, meaning that perhaps a compromise could be reached.

The school district has an uncontested right to build a single-family home on West Ranch, so it is not a question of zero development on the land. And voters in the school district in November approved a $12 million bond for housing, so there is strong voter support throughout Pitkin County for more teacher housing.

Sirko was also told that it would be a bad example for the district’s students for the school board to exercise its power and build in Woody Creek — just because it can — despite the community values articulated in the county’s land-use code.

And Pitkin County Commissioner Michael Owsley told Sirko it was ironic that the school district was desperate for housing now. Owsley pointed out that if the district had come through the local land-use process with its three new large school buildings, employee housing would likely have been required and the district wouldn’t be in such a pinch.

“That’s an important point,” said Jim Collins, a planning committee member.

“Give us solutions, not barriers,” Sirko finally asked the committee.

“I think the campus option is the best option,” Michael Owsley replied. At a meeting late last year, the commissioner urged the school district to consider building the new housing on its parking lots or on its bus parking and maintenance area.

Sirko said the school board is considering the bus-area option but feels it, and the community, needs the existing parking lots for cars.

bgs@aspendailynews.com