Browse
Search
Agenda - 06-14-2001-2b
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2000's
>
2001
>
Agenda - 06-14-2001
>
Agenda - 06-14-2001-2b
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/29/2008 3:39:41 PM
Creation date
8/29/2008 10:32:53 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
6/14/2001
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
2b
Document Relationships
Minutes - 06-14-2001
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2000's\2001
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
53
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
3 <br />AREAS OF CONCERN <br />During the presentations, Task Force members were given ample opportunity to ask <br />questions of the various presenters and fully develop an .understanding of the prajects <br />proposed. A few areas caused concern for Task Force members. One area that raised <br />definite concern for several Task Force members pertained to the high school plans for <br />Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools. CHCCS had proposed additions/expansions at both <br />Chapel Hill High and East Chapel Hill High to address facility needs and future student <br />population growth. Task Force members voiced a concern that this would not positively <br />and adequately address future high school space needs for the system. Among other <br />things, the increase in numbers of students at each school would have detrimental <br />effects on the schools' operations and overall success and would also preclude some <br />students from certain educational opportunities due to the sheer numbers of students <br />competing for limited spots. With this in mind, the Task Force ultimately included in its <br />recommendation a proposal that the facilities at Chapel Hill High be expanded to <br />address facility needs and future student population growth. However, the funds <br />requested for East Chapel Hill High would be directed toward the purchase of land and <br />planning for a third high schaol for the system. The actual construction of the third high <br />school would occur at some point in the next few years as funding, either from a future <br />bond referendum or from same other source, became available: <br />Another project area identified by some Task Force members needing some <br />modification was the Lands Legacy program. There were a substantial number of <br />possible projects proposed for this program, and this created significant confusion for <br />some members. To address this concem, the Task Force combined all the individual <br />projects into one "Lands Legacy" item so that any possible recommended funding could <br />be more easily detailed. This would also allow the funding to be allocated more <br />appropriately once specific properties were prioritized and pursued. <br />A last area identified by some Task Force members as causing some confusion related <br />to the Hillsborough Elementary Renovations and Central Office Expansion as proposed <br />by Orange County Schools. Initially categorized as.two independent projects, it was <br />brought to the Task Force's attention that the school renovation to provide 12 additional <br />classrooms could not proceed without the Central Office Expansion. This office .. <br />expansion would provide office space for the administrative staff that would be <br />displaced by the school renovation/additional classrooms. Following discussion by the <br />Task Force, these two interrelated improvements were incorporated into one project so <br />that any recommended allocation of funds would address the project in its totality. <br />CRITERIA <br />Following all presentations of the needs expressed by the various entities, the Task <br />Force developed criteria to be used to evaluate all of the projects. The criteria for <br />evaluating projects were as follows: <br />• Projects should have a useful life of 20+ years. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.