Monday, March 19, 2007

Is the Port Royal School Site Really That Bad?

All this talk about how 'poor' the Port Royal site is for a Middle School and how 'pristine' the Cleburne Road site is has got me thinking. With a little research, I have been able to locate a copy of the Port Royal School Site Option Contract between Cyril Evers (Maury County Planning Commission Chairman) and Maury County Public Schools.

You can download the Port Royal School Site Option Contract here in its entirety (pdf).

Below is a copy of the site survey that is included in the option contract (I have added the Yellow to show the area of the site that is in the Flood Plain):


Also available for download are a letter from Director of Schools Eddie Hickman to the engineer of Harvest Point (pdf), as well as a letter of credit from Community First Bank to the City of Spring Hill regarding the surety of the completion of Rice Road (the road from Port Royal Road to the proposed school site).

Special thanks to Alderman Jonathan Duda for helping me get this information.

I'll get to the Port Royal School Site Option Contract in a minute, but first an article that appeared in the Daily Herald thursday:

Mayor: Proposed Cleburne repairs insufficient
By D. FRANK SMITH

School board officials said the developer of Harvest Point is willing to do some road improvements surrounding a site for a new middle school, but the city’s mayor said that’s not enough.

School Board Chairman Shaw Daniels said Chapter 2 Investments, developer of Harvest Point, a 1,224 home subdivision, is willing to pay for road improvements on Cleburne and Beechcroft roads, which would experience heavy traffic should a middle school be built within the development.

These improvements would include installing a traffic light at the intersection of the roads and a turn lane from Cleburne Road into Harvest Point.

Daniels said traffic from surrounding roads would also be alleviated by a 26-foot wide street that would be built through Harvest Point. This road would allow school buses to bypass Petty Lane and its narrow bridge, he said.

A commenter under a previous post had made the statement that the developer is building a new 26 foot wide road between Cleburne Road and Petty Lane, the truth is that the developer is proposing to 'bypass Petty Lane' with internal streets already required within the subdivision. I have one question for Mr. Crutchers 'spokesperson', Mr. Shaw Daniels:

What happens to that traffic once it leaves Harvest Point?
ANSWER: West Bound traffic will exit on Petty Lane, North Bound traffic will exit on Cleburne then Beechcroft Roads, South Bound traffic...Well, South Bound traffic doesn't exist according to the RPM Traffic Study...


Pete Crutcher, an associate with Chapter 2 Investments, could not be reached for comment after repeated calls Tuesday and Wednesday.

That's OK, Mr. Crutcher's pseudo 'spokesperson' Mr. Daniels was available for comment instead.

These improvements would not address what many city officials have said is the main traffic concern — the widening of Cleburne, a road that is in some parts only 10-feet across.

Again, the south bound traffic on Cleburne Rd between Petty Lane and Carters Creek Station.

Mayor Danny Leverette is skeptical of the impact these road improvements would have on traffic. He said the concessions made by the developer are not sufficient.

"That is potentially a traffic nightmare," he said. "What we’re looking at here is the creation of another Duplex Road."

Duplex, one of the highest-trafficked roads in the city, is in the process of being widened to accommodate the dozens of subdivisions that have been built on it during the past several years.

"To funnel 1,224 units of traffic out Beechcroft and then out Cleburne ... it’s just not an ideal situation at all," Leverette said.

With more than 1,200 homes, each having on average three household members and two vehicles, Leverette said there could be 1,800 vehicles on Beechcroft and Cleburne on a given day, once construction is completed on Harvest Point.

The city is currently working with the Tennessee Department of Transportation in an ongoing project to widen Duplex Road. But Leverette said widening Beechcroft, which could become another major artery in the city, is not even a project the state organization has looked at yet.

"There are other sites available, and we want to work with the School Board and the County Commission to see what we can do at those other sites," he said.

These other sites include one on Port Royal Road, the Honey Farm development that will be off U.S. Highway 31, the Northpoint development, also on U.S. Highway 31, and a piece of land near Marvin Wright Elementary School on Derryberry Lane.

The board prefers Cleburne over these sites because it would require the least amount of upfront investment, and said it is more feasible for various reasons.

Here's where it gets real interesting...
The Port Royal site would require extensive site preparation along with requirements that the school system pay for a new road and spend $150,000 for a sewer lift station, board member Daniel McCulley said.

He said the Port Royal developer wants the system to build two schools. If the system chooses to build one, it will not receive enough land to build the school.

Ok, lets take a closer look at the Port Royal School Site Option Contract between Cyril Evers (Maury County Planning Commission Chairman) and Maury County Public Schools. Although the contract says numerous times that the Grantor (Mr. Evers) will convey all (approximately 60 acres) or part of the property to Grantee (Maury County Public Schools) 'for the purpose of of constructing one or more public schools' and that if the Grantee elects to obtain more than 30 acres, Grantee shall pay $150,000 for the expense of a sewer pump station and force main (irrelevant now, since the city has already planned and appropriated funds for a GRAVITY SEWER line), I can't find anywhere in the contract where it says that Maury County Schools has to build two schools in order to exercise the option on all 60 acres. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like plenty of land for a Middle School, possibly even a High School!

I don't blame Board Member Daniel McCulley for saying that the school system must build two schools if it wants to accept the full 60 acres, after all Schools Director Eddie Hickman told that to those in attendance, including me, at the Public Meeting at Spring Hill High School last week, the Spring Hill Planning Commission last month and to the Maury County Commission the month before during the 5 year growth plan presentations.


"Right now, we can’t put a middle school there with the restriction on (the land)," he said.

Oh, I do believe that you could put a middle school or even a high school on 60 acres...

The site also includes a wetland, a flood plain, would need to be leveled to develop. However, the Cleburne site is level and would not require significant site preparation.



Another miscommunication...How many times have we heard that 20, 30, or 40% of the Port Royal Road site is in the flood plain? Well, take a look at the plat that was included in the contract:

I have highlighted the flood plain in yellow. See that handwritten "FP: 5.35 Acres"? I'm pretty sure that 'FP' stands for 'Flood Plain', which would make the total Flood Plain less than 10% of the total 60 acre site.

By the way, if you are wondering where the Cleburne Road Site Option Contract is or what it says, you'll have to keep looking because it has never been completed.

One thing is certain about the Port Royal School Site Option, if Maury County Public Schools doesn't act by June 1, 2007, the option EXPIRES.

So again, tell me what we are doing waiting to move on this Port Royal site? Why are we wrapping up this Cleburne Road site with an option that makes it available for a few years from now? Crazy! Some people around here are Crazy!

I think that tonight's vote will tell you all a lot about who stands where. I think we covered in the last post "Roll Call!" how this is going to go. Once again, a few aldermen are OUT OF TOUCH with the citizens in this city.

14 comments:

Anonymous said...

Are we to understand that Mr. Crutcher was at a private event with 4 of our sitting Aldermen last week?

So I guess this will be a 5-4 vote like the others?

Anonymous said...

Is Duda the one which provided the map showing flood plain on the Port Royal site? Did Glen Hasse say how he come up $4 million for the price to fix Cleburne Road? Why isn't he saying his porposal is to make all of Cleburne Road and Petty Lane (4 lanes)? Four lanes, I don't think so!

Gorilla in the Corner said...

I asked Jonathan Duda if he knew if a written contract existed as I had heard it mentioned a few times at a Planning Commission meeting some months back. He helped me get a copy of the option contract (which is public record). The Plat was included in that contract. I highlighted the Flood Plain to make it easier to see.

Anonymous said...

The problem is the drawing does not show the entire site. It does not show all the flood plain area or the area across the creek thich is unuable. If you look close you can see the TVA right of way which is over 10 acres.

Anonymous said...

Michael was it you or was it Jonathan which decided to not show the whole drawing with all the information?

Gorilla in the Corner said...

Anon @ 16:15
Look again, the entire contract is available for you to peruse. The last time I checked, I am not the one holding back information, Maury County School Board has us all beat on that one.

As for choices being made in regard to what to show...

As I stated earlier, Mr. Duda helped me get a copy of the actual contract, but I chose to post it as is, with all of the information available to you all.

Anonymous said...

Micheal are you saying you had the truth but choose to print it the way you did?

Gorilla in the Corner said...

As stated in the original post, here is the complete contract.

http://webpages.charter.net/gorilla1/Files/CEversMCBOELandOption.pdf

Not sure what you think I have chosen not to speak the whole truth about. Every single main post on this website is backed up entirely in fact. It is those of you that choose to ignore that that always seem confused about the facts.

Fact: There are now 6 sites that have been presented to the school board (or at least the developers have attempted to present them).

Fact: The Port Royal site that you are speaking of is 60 acres and can be used for 1 or more school sites. You can slice it up in any manner that you want and will not be able to get below 33 acres (which is the Cleburne Road site).

Fact: The Cleburne Road site needs significant road improvements to make it suitable in my mind. In the school board's mind that is debatable, as we witnessed on Monday night.

Fact: Shaw Daniels is employed by SSOE, which is the Architecure/Building firm responsible for new school construction (until sometime in the next couple of months).

I could go on with facts all day, but frankly there are numerous posts dealing with this very topic, so go read up a little more.

Anonymous said...

Gorilla,

I don't know if you have seen this or not, but it looks like this contract was signed in August of 2005. That means the Maury County School Board has had two years to come up with an alternative!! Now it looks like this contract is going to expire and 60 acres will be off the table.

As you said before, no matter how you slice it, 60 acres (even with 10 or so in wet lands / flood area) is still more than enough room for a middle school or a high school. Even with the 750,000 price tag that Tom Dudley told me this land would cost, the price per acre is ONLY 15,000 an acre!! Where else is the school system going to get 15,000 an acre??

What on earth is Tom Dudley thinking supporting this mumbo jumbo of "the Celburne site has been determined to be a better site for a middle school"?? That's all code words for "Don't you worry, The good old boys have this all taken care of".

And to think I helped get him elected!! Where's Dicky Thompson when we really need him??

Anonymous said...

I like the way you loosely use the word "Fact" because R.G. Anderson is the contractor doing the school construction. There are a number of other things which you have choosen to twist or give limited information on, but you already know that.

Anonymous said...

If there are a number of things that the gorilla has "misrepresented" list them off. This is your forum too so fire away!

I looked up SSOE Architects and Engineers and they are in fact the firm under contract for Maury County School Board. It doesn't seem too far fetched to me to believe that Shaw Daniels has an alterier motive to get this contract underway now. They get paid much more to actually work on a school project than to have it delayed a few months until after the contract is re-bid.

List off the innacuracies, I would be curious to know what they are.

Anonymous said...

SSOE is not under contract for any new schools. You should not listen to Chet for your information, he has a hard time keeping up. You have been provided with these items before more than once. I will not waste my time pointing them out again.

Silverback said...

Anonymous @ 26 April, 2007 15:13:

It all comes down to this...

How many homes will be built on the 'unbuildable' land in Roaylton Woods when the Maury County School option runs out on June 1st?

What\Who is really keeping Maury County Schools from taking that Port Royal site option?

Anonymous said...

The lay of the land and about $900,000.00 of improvements to the site before you even start on the school.

Post Ratings


IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER: The information on this website is a series of personal opinions and is not meant to reflect an official position by the City of Spring Hill.

Home | About This Blog | Issues | Definitions | New To This Site? Click Here

Template Designed by Douglas Bowman | Modified for 3-Column Layout by Hoctro