Browse
Search
Agenda - 08-23-2011 - 7a
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2010's
>
2011
>
Agenda - 08-23-2011
>
Agenda - 08-23-2011 - 7a
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/19/2011 1:46:06 PM
Creation date
8/19/2011 1:46:01 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
8/23/2011
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
7a
Document Relationships
Minutes 08-23-2011
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2010's\2011
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
44
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
DRAFT <br />1 I did not realize it until tonight that this submission was put together by a developer. That concerns <br />2 -me a bit. ?he other item is also on page 2~4, item 6. It says, "site access," part A states there should <br />3 be a minimum of two .access points to tk~e site, and I'm wondering. how this will be accorrrplished <br />4 when there's only one driveway and it is off NC 10. I realize there is no bus service, however, the <br />5 application does- specify that two entranceways are necessary. Another thing, the lot size varies from <br />6 2.8 acres, 2.95, 3. I realize there is some rambling in there, but being a property owner of two <br />7 adjacent properties, I think it is important that these de{ineations are respectful and- surveying is done <br />8 appropriately. <br />9 I'm just wondering whether or not any other kind of safety measures are going to be in place, similar <br />10 to what Mr. Niklas said about, you know, -you just don't want children to get hurt. I'm. just trying to <br />11 understand a little bit more about that. I think it would be great to have a school nearby, but I am <br />12 concerned about this being_ proposed by a developing unit and wondering what other kind of <br />13 expansion of these application items will be allowed, such as maybe increasing enrollment beyond <br />14 12. The conditions. that-the gentleman put up first about occupancy, assessment, and accreditation - <br />15 I think those are very interesting and I'm curious to know if we will get more information befor-e -that <br />16 Planning Board meeting in July so that way our questions can be answered sooner rather than later. <br />17 Larry Wright: Does the Planning Board have any questions? <br />18 Judith Wegner: I wonder if we could hear a responses to the first question about why the move since <br />19 we have someone from the-applicant here. <br />20 Michael Harvey: The answer to-the question that I can provide based on my initial meeting with the <br />21 applicant vuas that they can-ently have a shared agreement with an- existing Montessori school on <br />22 Highway 70, through funding issues that the school is terminating that relationship, this school is <br />23 having to find additional classroom space. <br />24 Richard- Merritt -1- can answer some of that. I am from the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of <br />25 Hillsborough, and I'm working on trying to get this Special Use Permit through. One of the things I <br />26 can respond to is the question of why the school is moving. If you-need further discussion of that; the <br />27 two teachers for the-school are here tonight. <br />28 The Montessori- Farm School, which is currently at Abundant Life Church- has decided that the <br />29 students in the K-5 range are not financially worthwhile to them. The end of this year, they ar_e <br />30 stopping that part-of their program. The Montessori Farm -School will continue at Abundant Life, but <br />31 without this particular age group. Because of the connection of some of the people that-are involved <br />32 in the new school in the K-5 program with our congregation, they approached us to use some of our <br />33 facilities. Is that clear enough? <br />34 Michael Harvey: The only thing I want to remind the Board, and I alluded to it in my initial <br />35 presentation, I want to try to answer some of these questions that were posed tonight. I think the <br />36 applicant is-going to have to respond in writing to the Planning Board and County Commissioners as <br />37 well. If you will begin on page 250 of the abstract, going through approximately_ page 254, we have <br />38 taken liberty of trying-to provide basic responses to the requirements Orange County has imposed on <br />39 applicants desiring to develop a school within the County. Some of those conditions, in fact one <br />40 condition beginning on page 254, concerning-the park and ride facility -you will note that the County <br />41 Planning staff has indicated that it is our opinion that there is no need for such a facility at this site. <br />42 The applicant hasn't proposed it and we don't deem it necessary that they incorporate a park and <br />43 ride facility for this particular location. You will also note that the site plan #hat has been submitted to <br />44 you does show the required mandated two access points. The applicant has been made aware that <br />45 they are going to have to obtain the necessary driveway permit from the North Carolina Department <br />46 of Transportation and install that to address access management traffic issues. <br />34 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.