2005-11-18 TPARKERSCHOOL - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Im wrong or clarify how Im wrong, that incremental permitting was frowned upon in the County. That were, you didnt have to implement your whole plan at once but you had to lay it out on the table. Could you clarify that please and how that relates to this. LEITHEAD-TODD:Well, what we have in front of us is just the application for the use permit. There was testimony at the hearing that the property is not owned by Parker School and that in fact the actual owners and Im trying to remember whether its Parker Corporation or Parker Trust may have other plans for that, that may not involve expansion of the school. So when the department has the application what youre dealing with is what is in the application. And all that we have right now is the proposed expansion. I might state that although our conditions has 120 students since the applicant is saying 90 the Department does not have an opposition and in fact feels that the Board could recommend that the use permit be conditioned on 90 students since thats the representation rather than 120. Its just that when the department was making its recommendations its just in knowledge of prior applications that frequently people come in for subsequentalterationsso,totheusepermits,soitwaskindoftryingtofactorinsomepotential growth. But since the applicant is saying that they dont envision going beyond 90 perhaps the commission would like to amend our recommended condition and lower it to 90 cause that would in fact lessen any potential impact cause it would be taking 25% of that 120 away. SIRACUSA:Actually Ms. Leithead-Todd I was thinking along those lines but lowering it down to the 75 that were in the original application. LEITHEAD-TODD:My understanding is they actually have 76 students that started this year so theyre already over that 75. SIRACUSA:Cause I notice that there was only one place. I must admit I never received a copy of your answer to the intervenors comments. I only just now had a chance to browse Commissioner Grahams copy. But I notice that the only thing you really have there to mitigate the traffic problems is the car pooling policy and plan. And, it doesnt seem that any of the other conditions relate to mitigation of traffic problems. And so I see lowering the number of students as one other method that could be employed here. Would you care to comment on that? LEITHEAD-TODD:Well you know we have that condition in there but basically felt that even at 120 students there was not a substantial adverse impact on the neighboring properties and community. I think I need to reiterate that youre talking about traffic between 7 and 8 in the morning and probably between 2 and 3 in the afternoon is the bulk of your traffic. And the fact that a substantial number of these students are siblings. There really isnt that much traffic being generated by this proposed use permit. And its for a very limited period of time during the day, Monday through Friday. It doesnt impact people when theyre walking. If you looked at some of the traffic and pedestrian counts you know theyre talking about people walking at 5 in the evening. Well the school is not going to be generating traffic at 5 in the evening except for the occasional day when youve got some kind of a meeting which theyre representative going to be holding on the main campus so thats not even going to be you know going through there. Im just saying that you have to look at this in terms of when is this generated. And its a short period of time in the morning. A short period of time in the afternoon, Monday through Friday. And its usually the period of time when other people along the road driving to work or taking EXHIBIT A 21