Minutes - 20060227 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

cost-effective? The girls should have a softball field, but it doesn't need to be at the expense of the Stoneycreek neighborhood. Will there be lights on the field? Who will use the field? At present, I hear noise from the football field. The loudest people use it on Sundays in the summer -sometimes even before 9:00 a.m. When I went to the school, I discovered that there were grown men and not children using the football field. Will there be a buffer of trees - or anything else - to prevent or reduce access to our neighborhood? She said that it was her understanding that the Town of Chapel Hill is very careful to leave buffers around a school and spend the money required to do this. She asked why the people who live in the country should be less important. She said that the destruction of natural areas would have a negative impact on the environment. She asked where the Environmental Impact Statement was. She said that the County Commissioners adopted a policy on December 5, 2005 on environmental responsibility in government. She asked what steps are being taken to comply with this policy. She asked if there would be another hearing before any trees are cut and before any dirt is moved. Meg McKean lives next to Sally Logan. She said that she went through the construction of Stanback. She said that there seems to be a couple of areas of confusion where the affected public is getting multiple stories. It is less the school and more the long-term deforestation plans in phase 2 that bother her. She said that they are getting inconsistent information. She said that there are only 15-20 students now and the phase 2 plan expects this number to increase to 100. She said that they are very confused about how many of this population of students would be children expelled from school, how many would have psychological problems, and how many would be children that need to be taught differently. The Stanback parents have been told that na children with psychological, disciplinary, or legal problems will be at the alternative school. Another peculiar thing to her is that the environmental impact statement refers to the 1.4 acres, but the special use permit refers to the 20 acres and includes phase 2. There are currently no funds to do phase 2 and there has not been an impact study on this. She said that it is confusing to her that a school with a maximum population of 100 students will need a softball field and tennis courts. It is fairly plain that the softball field is really for Stanback. She said that the parents at Stanback have been told that there will be no mixing of children in the use of athletic facilities. She said that this is probably not the case. She said that the tennis courts seem a little lavish and it seems that phase 2 should be discussed very slowly and carefully. She said that with the construction of Stanback, they noticed a big difference in I-40 noise. She is worried about the additional sound impact from this much clearing. She said that Stanback students already use this forested area for cross-country and it would be a shame to lose a free naturally-provided athletic facility. Her request is that the phase 2 elements be removed from the special use permit in order to allow for a more realistic projection of County needs, a clearer public discussion of what students will be combined together in the alternative school and which children would use which facilities, and much more community input in negotiations over the placement and scope of athletic facilities and deforestation that will accompany this. Also, she would like an environmental impact of a scaled down plan and a schedule far negotiations on buffers, fencing, additional plantings, hours of use, and a total ban on lights for nighttime use. Tom Clark said that he strongly endorses the separation of phase 2 from this special use permit. He does not understand why it is being added to this special use permit. He is glad to hear that the Board does not feel obligated to decide on this tonight. He said that the Planning Board was told that there was substantial public opposition to putting the phase 1 of the portion of the project on an existing campus and then phase 2 would merge the campuses' athletic facilities. He said that the public did not have any idea about this before and it was not discussed during the public hearings about the initial school. This was a concession made by