« 9/11 memorial dedication at New York Drive Sunday | Main | Open thread: “No school on Palm?” or bad decison? »

Wednesday, September 07, 2011

Opposition remains strong
Committee chairman Mark Goldschmidt at one point asked for those who opposed the school to stand up (approximately one third of the crowd).  Those who were in favor of the school also stood up, representing about two-thirds of those attending.

Coleen Sterrit of the PSARA challenged the numbers, saying that the people from the “No School on Palm” side were the people who actually lived in the neighborhood, distinct from those who supported it and did not live in the neighborhood.  Sterrit said that the neighborhood — with narrow, sidewalk-free streets and a semi-rural character — was not suitable for a school.  Other speakers pointed out that the property is in a bowl-shaped area, which amplifies sound, and the previous experience with a school on the property just strengthened their resolve that it was not an appropriate use.

Per an agreement with Goldschmidt, only four members of PSARA spoke against the school.  This was followed by a series of pro-school testimony which included everyone from out-of-town Arroyo Pacific Academy parents to Palm Street area residents.  The PSARA members in the crowd soon were wondering why they were limited to four speakers while those supporting the school seemed to be endless.  PSARA’s Al Grindon said that he felt they were “hoodwinked” by the committee.

Committee cites neighborhood opposition
In the end, the committee members were not swayed to approve the permit.  The issue was not the quality of education the academy would provide, said town councilman Ken Roberts, but the use of the property.

Committee member Brian League said that a conditional use permit is connected to the land, not the owner of the land.  If they approved a zoning change to make it a school, it would then always be a school, no matter who owned it.  “I want to look at the property in fifty years,” League said.

Town councilman Brent Musson said that “if the entire neighborhood were on board, it’d be a no-brainer,” but the property was zoned residential, and there’d need to be an overwhelming need to change it.

Councilman Okorie Ezieme, who represents the area, said that one of the provisions of a CUP was that it needed a buy-in from those who are affected.  Ezieme said that, in his own survey of the neighborhood, there was “overwhelming opposition” to a CUP. 

The committee voted unanimously to recommend to the town council that it deny Arroyo Pacific’s CUP application.  The matter will next come up at the town council meeting Sept. 20.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83455629c69e2014e8b5b1302970d

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Land use committee rejects school on Palm St., goes to town council next:

Comments