|
Gene Galin
|
 |
« on: February 05, 2007, 12:29:32 AM » |
|
Chatham schools looking again for school siteBy Carolyn Norton : The Herald-Sun cnorton@heraldsun.comFeb 4, 2007 : 7:32 pm ET Read the entire story at http://www.heraldsun.com/chatham/13-816254.cfmPITTSBORO -- For years, it seems, it's been a given among residents of northeastern Chatham County that a new high school would eventually go up on an untouched plot of land some 4 miles from U.S. 15-501. But now, the Board of Education is reconsidering that piece of land off Jack Bennett Road it purchased in 2001, saying the soil and topography of the site might hinder building. The board has instructed its staff to start looking for another site for the district's fourth high school. Facing an overcrowded Northwood High School, which is just down the road, district officials planned to start building the new school next year, with an opening date of 2010. Plans are for a 1,000-student school that could expand to hold 1,200. Board members have worried the one entrance could cause traffic jams and emergency access problems. The site also has a large slope, making building difficult, and low elevation, making flooding possible. The soil is also of a grade that could make building difficult. Joyce said, however, that he was confident a school could be built on the existing site.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
gonewest
Guest
|
 |
« Reply #1 on: February 05, 2007, 07:06:11 AM » |
|
Yes, I'm sure Paul Joyce is confident. Was he also confident about the leaking roofs he approved at both Harrison and North Chatham? He was also confident that Northwood could be expanded upward by adding another story (we heard this for years). Then there's the land Harrison is built on....very, very similar to the J.Bennett Road situation.
Mabe and Joyce bought this land...even on that day, seven years ago, there were unanswered questions and concerns.
I'm glad THIS BOE is looking elsewhere. But thanks, again, to the Mabe administration and it's one hanger-on, Paul Joyce, we are now even further behind the 8 ball when it comes to Northwood's overcrowded situation. It won't be easy to find a suitable piece of land with this counties lack of infrastructure. We should ALL be looking and pass on any ideas to the BOE/BOC. "This is another fine mess (Mabe) has gotten us into"....
My suggestion...look for alternatives to Northwood. Classes already have 30 plus students.(check out the report card to see how much larger the class sizes are at NW compared to state/district.) It's going to get worse before it gets better.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: February 05, 2007, 07:08:49 AM by gonewest »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
botanist
Chathamite
 
Offline
Last Login:April 14, 2010, 11:26:13 AM
Date Registerd:February 15, 2006, 08:56:49 AM
Posts: 334
|
 |
« Reply #2 on: February 05, 2007, 06:55:20 PM » |
|
Joyce said, however, that he was confident a school could be built on the existing site. It was pointed out to the BoEd during their last evening meeting by Rich Hayes, soil scientist, that while a school COULD perhaps be built on that site, it would be more EXPENSIVE as it would require more engineering - in large part to prevent flooding and foundation problems due to the shrink-swell soils and the fact that that site is receiving runoff from Boothe Hill towering more than 300 ft over the site.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
botanist
Chathamite
 
Offline
Last Login:April 14, 2010, 11:26:13 AM
Date Registerd:February 15, 2006, 08:56:49 AM
Posts: 334
|
 |
« Reply #3 on: February 05, 2007, 07:03:39 PM » |
|
North Chatham Elementary school is built on this very same type of site." Uh, no, not exactly. The soils and buildable slopes (0-6%) are the same, but that's about it. The Jack Bennett site has steeper slopes around its perimeter (not as flat overall as the N Chatham site), has lots of wetlands on site, sits directly at the base of a seepy mountain, has a looooong easement to the site that is not wide enough for one proper entrance, let alone more (how many entrances does N Chatham have?!), the entrance would need to cross a major wetland, and it is surrounded on 3 sides by Jordan Lake gamelands. A high school requires more impervious surface, more parking, will use more water, etc. than an elementary school. N Chatham gets their wastewater treated and disposed of on the Gov Club property (which has had its own share of problems over the past few years). It's not at all clear how wastewater at the Jack Bennett site would be dealt with, or how much disposing of the wastewater would cost.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
WolfpackFan
Chathamohican
   
Offline
Last Login: Today at 01:09:08 PM
Date Registerd:February 23, 2006, 04:33:05 PM
Posts: 6858
|
 |
« Reply #4 on: February 05, 2007, 07:46:58 PM » |
|
Where else are we going to find a site with water and sewer for 13 grand an acre?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
More today than yesterday - Mindy
|
|
|
botanist
Chathamite
 
Offline
Last Login:April 14, 2010, 11:26:13 AM
Date Registerd:February 15, 2006, 08:56:49 AM
Posts: 334
|
 |
« Reply #5 on: February 05, 2007, 09:11:08 PM » |
|
The Jack Bennett site does not have sewer, which is one of the problems. The old BoCs attempted to make the BoEd discuss options for wastewater with Gov Club and Booth Mtn, but there are big obstacles to making those options feasible... and cost may be an issue.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
chrstnhsbndfthr
Chathamohican
   
Offline
Last Login: Today at 10:18:09 PM
Date Registerd:February 20, 2006, 11:25:33 PM
Posts: 7786
|
 |
« Reply #6 on: February 05, 2007, 11:48:47 PM » |
|
The BOE says they do have a contract for Sewer treatment. There may be some problems with it that still need to be worked out.
They talked about having been looking for some time and have no other options found yet. Wolfpackfan is also correct about the cost issue. The land was purchased some time ago and has certainly appreciated in value. Replacing it is hard. They had some people speak about all the other places they had looked at before choosing this one. When looked at in context this doesn't look nearly as bad as when compared to a fantasy piece of land no one has yet seen or heard of either. There may well be problems with this property, as there will be with ANY property. Clearly there is nothing insurmountable. The issues of which set of problems do you want to deal with can be dealt with if they can find any suitable land to compare it to. The idea of looking at alternatives is good, and I agree with it. But, at the moment, they have NO ALTERNATIVE site.
The other sites that were looked at back when this was purchased were ruled out for grade issues, rockiness, no road access, and other issues. There is also a serious financial issue with the current land being funded by impact fees, and therefore not salable without replacing the money into the general fund. As I understood it, they are limited by law as to how they can handle this property. If it goes back to the general fund, then the county sells it, they will replace the original 1.2 million into the school buying fund, but what happens to the other equity in the property? It should go to purchasing the new land(The fantasy land that we don't have in our sites yet), but will it? Who knows?
They did not discuss the ever rising cost of the school tonight. But people of the county should realize that delays mean increases in costs. Even without adding more delays we were at 40 million the last I heard. The original plan was for 28 million.
BTW, its not easy to work in committee format, but they seemed to do a pretty good job tonight talking through issues, getting information, and working together.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
One of the great mistakes is to judge policies and programs by their intentions rather than their results. Milton Friedman
|
|
|
botanist
Chathamite
 
Offline
Last Login:April 14, 2010, 11:26:13 AM
Date Registerd:February 15, 2006, 08:56:49 AM
Posts: 334
|
 |
« Reply #7 on: February 06, 2007, 10:22:48 AM » |
|
The BOE says they do have a contract for Sewer treatment. There may be some problems with it that still need to be worked out. There are actually two agreements floating around - one with the Gov Club, and one with Booth Mtn. It's my understanding that neither development has agreed to DISPOSE of the wastewater for the County; the agreement is to treat it (though I haven't looked at those agreements in some time - correct me if I'm wrong). Disposal of the wastewater at either the Gov Club or Booth Mtn would require lots of hoops to be jumped and the costs of jumping through them are not yet known. Who is paying for wastewater to be pumped up hill, from the site to the development? Who will pay for the maintenance of that system (esp. when lift stations have problems)? Gov Club recently had to buy land in the Lystra Rd powerline to spray wastewater onto because the design of their system was causing flooding on the golf course (and perhaps elsewhere). They are maxed out, and as I understand it have not yet even completed build out. Booth Mtn has yet to be built, but may have similar issues (the same designer). Anyway, under the current "agreements," the wastewater disposal would need to take place at Gov Club or Booth Mtn (or some other property in the area). If at the school site - where? On the athletic fields? Rich Hayes, soil scientist, said about 3 times as much land would be needed at the Jack Bennett site than would a site over near Briar Chapel (different soils). How much does needing more land for wastewater spraying cost us? How much will the wastewater treatment alone cost? These systems ain't cheap, and high schools use more water than elementary or middle schools, I would think.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
tellitlikeitis
Member

Offline
Last Login:February 04, 2009, 01:03:51 PM
Date Registerd:March 01, 2006, 12:57:33 PM
Posts: 37
|
 |
« Reply #8 on: February 06, 2007, 02:41:33 PM » |
|
From what I heard and read it looks like the Gov. Club could not only send back the school waste but also its own. All at the expense of the county. All going to run into Jordan Lake! Aren't the folks out west finally getting water? Shouldn't we look out for them by not building on an inappropriate school site? And yes folks did go BEFORE the land was purchased and advised them. Advised them NOT to purchase it. And as Meg said, once it was decided they were going to purchase it, it was all under the table. Care to see the closed session minutes regarding it. It's BS!
By the way, have you walked this site? I have. Contact me via e-mail. Let's talk.
I am no building expert but it doesn't take one to figure what this "Mabe decision" will cost us! If the BOC won't let another subdivision be built there then how can they build a school there and not get their pants sued off!
It would make a nice park site which is planned for the NE, thus it could save the county that expense and everbody wins!
By the way, care to hear what the DMV and DOT experts say about the safety of that road? It's not good! I have some reports I will present to the BOE soon I will be happy to share.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
gonewest
Guest
|
 |
« Reply #9 on: February 06, 2007, 02:53:25 PM » |
|
Greg-
We gettin' old buddy. Just how long have we been fighting this school site?
No wonder things are as screwed up as they are. It's not brain surgery but it takes seven years to come to a conclusion most of us had the first time we saw this site.
Unbelievable bureaucracy and just plain bullheaded incompetence abounds....and I am referring to the last Mabe-ite.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: February 06, 2007, 06:23:56 PM by gonewest »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
WolfpackFan
Chathamohican
   
Offline
Last Login: Today at 01:09:08 PM
Date Registerd:February 23, 2006, 04:33:05 PM
Posts: 6858
|
 |
« Reply #10 on: February 06, 2007, 06:03:39 PM » |
|
Where should it be built, and how much will it cost?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
More today than yesterday - Mindy
|
|
|
|
Gene Galin
|
 |
« Reply #11 on: February 06, 2007, 08:00:33 PM » |
|
Unbelievable bureaucracy and just plain bullheaded incompetence abounds....and I am referring to the last Mabe-ite. I understand that Mabe era leftover McManus is still a strong proponent of this site. And then there's "ever-confident" Paul Joyce. 
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
tellitlikeitis
Member

Offline
Last Login:February 04, 2009, 01:03:51 PM
Date Registerd:March 01, 2006, 12:57:33 PM
Posts: 37
|
 |
« Reply #12 on: February 07, 2007, 10:04:14 AM » |
|
Wolfie, We use eminent(sp?) domain laws. Pay more than fair price, as we have in past, although 13k an acre was a little too fair for what we got 2001. The more I learn about it makes me wonder what was happening behind the close doors. Sure isn't much of a record of it! The thing is we will get a good piece of property and in the right place! We are expecting an updated study from folks at NCSU any time now. We put it somewhere the data tells us too. Imagine that , a school placed not by politics's or possible shady land deals. Things are looking up.  cheers, Greg
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Big Mo
Chathameister
  
Offline
Last Login:June 26, 2010, 10:35:44 AM
Date Registerd:November 28, 2006, 04:51:36 PM
Posts: 778
|
 |
« Reply #13 on: February 07, 2007, 11:56:57 AM » |
|
Wolfie's question still stands: What is the alternative locale and at what price?
Until there is an alternative on the table and a related price, it is impossible to judge the appropriateness of the current locale.
In the meantime, this is delaying the building of a new school - and most certainly driving up its price.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
whatsup
Chathamohican
   
Offline
Last Login: Today at 08:50:18 PM
Date Registerd:March 02, 2006, 12:56:39 AM
Posts: 1427
|
 |
« Reply #14 on: February 07, 2007, 12:10:12 PM » |
|
Yep, let's just put some lipstick on that pig and pretend everything is okay. 
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|