Around Sandy Springs

By Barbara

July 7, 2008 8:36 AM | Link to this

Jim, you summed it up perfectly! The residents of these neighborhoods hope that the City Council will listen. We live here 24/7 and like most neighborhoods would not want a business expanding and encroaching into their neighborhood.

By Chris Willis

July 7, 2008 12:59 PM | Link to this

Jim, your a little lax in full disclosure on the scope of HSP’s requested plan. This is an off campus athletic field to be built up against an otherwise undevelopable area at I-285. The only commercial interest involved is to allow the school appropriate athletic facilities they don’t currently have for the students. I’m sure almost all of us growing up had and now understand the importance of athletics in the education process. I think your characterization “at the expense of the integrity of the people who live around them” is a real stretch considering the location of this particular parcel. I’m saddened and hopeful that there aren’t many like you that feel that the families and children of the Holy Spirit school and church congregation contribute so little to the Sandy Springs community. By the way your right, at the end of the day we all go home and live as neighbors and local business people. You just left out the part about how and where we educate those children that we raised before we “send them on their way”.

By patricia burns

July 7, 2008 1:34 PM | Link to this

‘clean up smacks of ethnic cleansing!’ as you, Jim Osterman, point out so well. What we do not tolerate in other countries we applaud here. pburns

By C

July 7, 2008 2:07 PM | Link to this

Wow! What a lousy attitude! The private schools don’t pay taxes or contribute to the community? You should be thankful its a school that wants to expand and not a rock quarry. You have given very little to support your viewpoint other than, “we were here first”. Don’t your city councilman have a right to represent the business and commercial interests of their area as well as the homeowners? So the owners of the property in question can’t sell it to the school without your approval?

By C

July 7, 2008 2:07 PM | Link to this

Wow! What a lousy attitude! The private schools don’t pay taxes or contribute to the community? You should be thankful its a school that wants to expand and not a rock quarry. You have given very little to support your viewpoint other than, “we were here first”. Don’t your city councilman have a right to represent the business and commercial interests of their area as well as the homeowners? So the owners of the property in question can’t sell it to the school without your approval?

By Zboz

July 7, 2008 5:43 PM | Link to this

C, Owners of properties can sell to whoever they want. However, the new owners- the schools, can’t rezone the properties without permission from the City. The City’s Master Plan calls for these areas to remain residential, not commercial. Sandy Springs became a city and elected a city council to stop the irresponsible zoning and development allowed by Fulton County. This is a prime example for them to make good on their promises. We are watching.

By CY

July 7, 2008 10:38 PM | Link to this

Jim - I am disappointed by your article regarding HSPS athletic fields. The City Council is working hard to be responsible and to allow the great City of Sandy Springs to make the best use of land. Holy Spirit is a school in Sandy Springs and the children and people who go to this school are citizens who live, work, shop and vote in Sandy Springs and are dedicated to improving the city.

By 13 year resident

July 8, 2008 3:26 AM | Link to this

Jim, I’m sorry to say, but you lost your credibility with me with your statement “While I have no doubt in my mind that both schools do a superb job at educating their students, they contribute very little to the neighborhood.”. Why do you think neighborhoods with great civic institutions such as schools and churches thrive? It is because the people that comprise these communities care. This caring manifests itself in so many ways within the “neighborhood” where your garden grows, that I can not fathom someone making such a shallow statement. We became a city to insure we had enlightened representative leadership. I believe this is what we are seeing in the City Council of Sandy Springs. Somebody needs to stand fast in support of the civic institutions that are the foundation of our community and stop the petty “not in my back yard” wolf cries.

Thank you for bringing attention to this very important issue.

By CD

July 8, 2008 9:39 AM | Link to this

Jim, As a reporter, you really should do your homework before you make comments such as “their growth can’t come at the expense of the integrity of the people who live around them.” Have you investigated the community services performed by students, staff and families provided to YOUR city of Sandy Springs? If so, then you would realize that those people supposedly “degrading the integrity” of the surrounding neighborhoods actually provide support and action to make the neighborhoods in Sandy Springs better. Maybe the reason the council members are not overtly coming out against the school and expansion is because they realize a good number of the school populations are Sandy Springs residents and are also due support of their elected council members. Perhaps they have seen first hand the positive results of the community services provided by these schools. These schools have a vested interest in over compensating for their development in the Sandy Springs area, especially in those surrounding neighborhoods.

By The Monk

July 8, 2008 2:50 PM | Link to this

I must confess: I have never understood the NIMBY attitude toward schools. Save for a tad of extra morning traffic (the afternoon traffic is long gone before rush hour) and maybe hearing a cheering football crowd on a Friday night and a marching band, I don’t see the inconvenience. I also would hardly characterize a school as having the impact of a “commercial zone.” I like hearing the kids coming and going and playing at High Point School and Greenfield Academy. For that matter I like marching bands.

I guess I get it when 85 year old geezers freak out about schools in their neighborhoods, but I don’t get your attitude Jim. Where are kids to be educated - in parking lots on Roswell Road?

By DF

July 8, 2008 2:52 PM | Link to this

Jim, So you don’t want an 8 acre athletic field in your neighborhood. Have you considered how lucky you are that Holy Spirit Preparatory School wants to purchase the property? Have you looked at the acutal plans for the property? Do you have any better plans or ideas for that 8 acre tract? Oh, maybe you are thinking let it sit empty or build houses there. Considering that it borders upon I-285, not too many people are going to want to build a house there. Maybe another idea could be mini storage warehouses? How do you like that one? Any person could rent storage space in your backyard and you couldn’t stop them. And moving trucks of all sizes could come and go at all hours and you couldn’t stop them either. Seriously, I think you could do a lot worse than an athletic field for a private school. I know first hand that the administration, students and families associated with Holy Spirit are hardworking solid citizens. Many of them live and work in Sandy Springs. Personally I have lived and worked in Sandy Springs for 25 years and I am in support of the athletic complex. Contrary to your view, private schools contribute to neighborhoods and cities in many ways. Have you ever considered how much your public school taxes would increase if every Fulton County child enrolled in private school actually went to school in Fulton County or Sandy Springs and not to private school? Oh, and if every private school child enrolled in public school, the student burden would be such that Fulton County would have to build more public schools. And public schools do NOT have to apply for zoning. Public schools have the right to buy property and build where ever they want. Parents who pay for private education help the city and county every year by keeping the extra financial burden from taxpayers like you. You should applaud the private schools and parents because they actually save you money every year. Incidently if you look at the Sandy Springs Zoning Map online you will see that the property that Holy Spirit wants to purchase is directly across from property that is zoned “office and institutional”. So, maybe mini staroge warehouses aren’t that far off.

By Zboz

July 9, 2008 1:20 PM | Link to this

The situations surrounding these two schools sound entirely different. Sounds like HSPC borders 285 and is just across from Office and Institutional Zoned property. Whereas, Epstein is encroaching into the middle of an established neighborhood that is clearly residential on all sides. They agreed in a written covenant with the neighborhood not to expand their enrollment as a stipulation for Fulton County allowing a Private School to buy a formerly Public School. Even Fulton County- known for their irresponsible attitudes towards use and zoning- knew it was time to find a new location when they outgrew the site.

By Army Lifer

July 10, 2008 10:13 AM | Link to this

Zboz has it exactly right. In consideration for the opportunity to purchase a taxpayer owned public school in the middle of a quiet residential neighborhood and operate it as a private school, the Epstein School agreed to cap enrollment at 650. It is certainly reasonable for the Mountaire Springs neighborhood and for the City Council to expect the Epstein School to abide by the commitments they made that allowed them to obtain the property in the first place.

By ed j

July 10, 2008 11:34 AM | Link to this

As a former resident of the neighborhood around Epstein and a resident of a nearby neighborhood now, I would not recommend the school be allowed to expland unless the expansion doesn’t involve growing the student body.

Simply put, traffic already is atrocious in the River Valley and Riverside area. These two lane roads aren’t designed to handle the volume they have today - let alone an increase in volume. Moreover there is already excessive cut through traffic in the Mountaire neighborhood; the neighborhood doesn’t need more cars on the road.

By David Bailey

July 10, 2008 11:53 AM | Link to this

Anyone who wants to argue about the impact of the Epstein expansion on surrounding neighborhood only needs to come witness the impact NOW. Imagine if you lived next door to the school, which is completely surrounded by residential w/ only 2 lane roads serving the school and the neighborhood. There is no way in or out except on residential roads designed for residential traffic.

I believe that the city council is going to make the right decision and side w/ the neighborhoods. Let’s give them a little credit instead of assuming that they will allow the expansion. They voted the Lakeside project down, and I believe that anyone w/ common sense who looks at the history of the school as well as the impact on the surrounding neighborhood is going to vote against expansion.

By Ann

July 10, 2008 12:01 PM | Link to this

I am willing to bet big dollars that anyone that has a negative comment on this article doesn’t live in one of the neighborhoods impacted by these proposed developments. Imagine how you would feel if you lived across the street from what is now several nice 1950 ranch homes, then find out that someone wants to replace these homes and trees with a parking lot. How would you feel if they were planning on building a 19,000 square foot two-story building and a 24,000 square foot two-story building across from your house? My guess is you would be mad too! Many of these people have lived on these streets for 30 plus years. Some have bought more recently and have dreamed of raising their family in these homes. We are asking that the City protect our dream to live peacefully in our beautiful neighborhoods. Count yourselves lucky this isn’t happening in your neighborhood! If it doesn’t stop here, what may be coming to your neighborhood next?

By Allicen

July 10, 2008 12:21 PM | Link to this

As a home owner less then 100 yards from the school, I can share the daily impact the traffic has on our neighbrohood and the lack of respect parents show to our property when they pick-up and drop-off their childern. To increase this traffic would only magnify the issues already at hand. They don’t respect the neighbrohood and its homeowners, this is never going to change. If they need to grow then move to a bigger location and allow another private school to take ownership of the property.

By Allicen

July 10, 2008 12:25 PM | Link to this

As a home owner less then 100 yards from the school, I can share the daily impact the traffic has on our neighbrohood and the lack of respect parents show to our property when they pick-up and drop-off their childern. To increase this traffic would only magnify the issues already at hand. They don’t respect the neighbrohood and its homeowners, this is never going to change. If they need to grow then move to a bigger location and allow another private school to take ownership of the property.

By MMW

July 10, 2008 12:47 PM | Link to this

I guess I should not be amazed that the Epstein School has the audacity to think they can buy and demolish homes, ruin streets and the environment when they have ignored the deplorable traffic situation for years. In human performance you predict future behaviors on past performance. I am not willing to bet the neighborhood that this plan will solve any existing problems and, will only create an even larger elephant sitting in our midst.

This excellent school needs to realize that the current plan will not meet their eventual needs - what happens when 850 students is not enough? This school’s leaders need to think outside the box and look outside our neighborhood for a property that will truly benefit from and welcome development.

There is NO WIN for the neighborhood with Epstein’s expansion! I only hope the city council is listening!

By Eileen

July 10, 2008 2:43 PM | Link to this

With everything I have heard and read to date, there seems to be a lot more specific negative reasons given (primarily traffic and speeding)regarding the expansion of the Epstein school vs. the positive. More than once it has been said that the private schools contribute so much to the community……what specifically do they contribute that makes them such a valuable asset to a neighborhood? ALL schools contribute to the community. I work for the Fulton County School System and have lived in River Shore Estates for 22 years. I do not know of anything positive that Epstein has contributed that counters their traffic and the congested parking at that entrance to our neighborhood. I believe the admistrators of the Epstein have made every effort to direct their families to be considerate.Unfortunately, many families often times don’t abide to the directions and requests and continue to speed and park where they want. Please know that I do appreciate the families that make the extra effort to be considerate. I was not opposed to the Epstein School originally purchasing the property from Fulton County….why? Because they sent letters and had meetings agreeing to certain terms. (by the way, Epstein never made the serpentine driveway across the front of the school to keep more cars off the street-nor did they ever make part of the property a neighborhood park…look at the original letters) Do those agreements not matter now? Yes, they certainly do or I and numerous others would have opposed the purchase in the first place. Education is VERY important and I don’t believe that Epstein not being able to expand in our neighborhood is going to deprive anyone from a good education. I am sincerely happy for them that they have been so successful. But, they need to move. The alternative does not mean educating students in a parking lot on Roswell Road…..maybe on Roswell Road, but most likely in a building. As far as private school families doing the public schools a favor…..I don’t think so. I would like to see the in depth study that was done on that.

By Eileen

July 10, 2008 2:45 PM | Link to this

With everything I have heard and read to date, there seems to be a lot more specific negative reasons given (primarily traffic and speeding)regarding the expansion of the Epstein school vs. the positive. More than once it has been said that the private schools contribute so much to the community……what specifically do they contribute that makes them such a valuable asset to a neighborhood? ALL schools contribute to the community. I work for the Fulton County School System and have lived in River Shore Estates for 22 years. I do not know of anything positive that Epstein has contributed that counters their traffic and the congested parking at that entrance to our neighborhood. I believe the admistrators of the Epstein have made every effort to direct their families to be considerate.Unfortunately, many families often times don’t abide to the directions and requests and continue to speed and park where they want. Please know that I do appreciate the families that make the extra effort to be considerate. I was not opposed to the Epstein School originally purchasing the property from Fulton County….why? Because they sent letters and had meetings agreeing to certain terms. (by the way, Epstein never made the serpentine driveway across the front of the school to keep more cars off the street-nor did they ever make part of the property a neighborhood park…look at the original letters) Do those agreements not matter now? Yes, they certainly do or I and numerous others would have opposed the purchase in the first place. Education is VERY important and I don’t believe that Epstein not being able to expand in our neighborhood is going to deprive anyone from a good education. I am sincerely happy for them that they have been so successful. But, they need to move. The alternative does not mean educating students in a parking lot on Roswell Road…..maybe on Roswell Road, but most likely in a building. As far as private school families doing the public schools a favor…..I don’t think so. I would like to see the in depth study that was done on that.

By Eileen

July 10, 2008 2:45 PM | Link to this

With everything I have heard and read to date, there seems to be a lot more specific negative reasons given (primarily traffic and speeding)regarding the expansion of the Epstein school vs. the positive. More than once it has been said that the private schools contribute so much to the community……what specifically do they contribute that makes them such a valuable asset to a neighborhood? ALL schools contribute to the community. I work for the Fulton County School System and have lived in River Shore Estates for 22 years. I do not know of anything positive that Epstein has contributed that counters their traffic and the congested parking at that entrance to our neighborhood. I believe the admistrators of the Epstein have made every effort to direct their families to be considerate.Unfortunately, many families often times don’t abide to the directions and requests and continue to speed and park where they want. Please know that I do appreciate the families that make the extra effort to be considerate. I was not opposed to the Epstein School originally purchasing the property from Fulton County….why? Because they sent letters and had meetings agreeing to certain terms. (by the way, Epstein never made the serpentine driveway across the front of the school to keep more cars off the street-nor did they ever make part of the property a neighborhood park…look at the original letters) Do those agreements not matter now? Yes, they certainly do or I and numerous others would have opposed the purchase in the first place. Education is VERY important and I don’t believe that Epstein not being able to expand in our neighborhood is going to deprive anyone from a good education. I am sincerely happy for them that they have been so successful. But, they need to move. The alternative does not mean educating students in a parking lot on Roswell Road…..maybe on Roswell Road, but most likely in a building. As far as private school families doing the public schools a favor…..I don’t think so. I would like to see the in depth study that was done on that.

By DF

July 10, 2008 4:16 PM | Link to this

I can appreciate your traffic woes as I drive it it everyday. However, every nrighborhood has traffic. Have you ever tried to travel on Peachtree Dunwoody Road during morning or evening rushhour? Traffic is everywhere. I’d bet that if Epstein tried to buy additional property someplace else and have a split campus, there would be push back to that idea too. Look at what the Weber School went through. Incidently I think the Weber School did a terrific job with their new campus. If you look at the Fulton County Taxpayers Association June 2006 newsletter (you can find it online) they note in Atlanta, more than $11,000. per student per year is spent on public education. This is actually higher than the national average. Considering there are more than 15 private schools in Fulton County, some with enrollments over 1000 students even using conservative numbers (like 33% of the enrollment coming from Fulton) the cost savings to taxpayers in hugh. Well over $35 million dollars per year. Just consider everytime you see a car with a private school magnet if there are two children inside the car, that parent just saved the county $22,000. and that is a savings for every homeowner who pays taxes every year. Everyone should look at their Fulton School General taxes and Fulton School Bond taxes before they gripe about private schools NOT doing anything for the community.

By bc

July 10, 2008 5:43 PM | Link to this

The Epstein School began leasing their current location from the Fulton Co. B.O.E. in 1987. After nearly 7 years in that arrangement, the school purchased the property from Fulton Co. for $1.4 million in 1994. As a condition of the sale, the school voluntary established 650 students as the maximum enrollment for the school and the school’s Board of Trustees affirmed that 650 would be a PERMANENT cap for enrollment. This 650 cap was subsequently reaffirmed in January 2007 by the the Head of School, Stan Beiner, before the Sandy Springs City Council when the Epstein School applied for a variance to allow for the encroachment of the critical root zones of several specimen trees along the school’s frontage of Colewood Way to add pervious (gravel) parking.

As has been the trend, most of the comments in support of the Epstein School’s expansion have been made without an understanding of the basic facts surrounding the school’s proposal.
1. Well over 50% of the enrollment of the school live outside Fulton County. (to date, the school continues to claim that the vast majority of its students are residents of Sandy Springs, however, the school continues to refuse to provide any documentation in support of that claim. On the other hand, members of the surrounding neighborhood have independently tallied the county of the vehicles during morning and afternoon carpools on numerous occasions. Additionally, the Epstein School is required by law to report the number of its students to the Fulton Co. B.O.E. on a yearly basis.) 2. The comparison of the neighborhood street on which Epstein is located with any type of road besides a similar, neighborhood street is simply asinine and truly shows the utter ignorance that many of the school’s supports have continually demonstrated toward the neighborhoods’ fundamental reasons for their opposition. 3. The Epstein School is exempt from paying property taxes. With the School’s purchase of 8 homes amounts to over $3 million in taxable property lost to Fulton Co. and the City of Sandy Springs.

By A

July 10, 2008 6:15 PM | Link to this

The Epstein plan calls for an internal road on its property - the effect of which will get the cars that currently clog Colewood during carpool pickups off the street and on to Epstein’s property. It also calls for almost doubling parking capacity to get more cars off the streets.

By Kelmc

July 10, 2008 6:29 PM | Link to this

These two schools and their expansion plans are completely different and therefore must be addressed independently. I live on the same street as Epstein. There are alot of families with small children on this street. We have friends and kids in the neighborhood who attend Epstein and we want the best for them. But such an aggressive expansion is better suited for a site that adjoins a major thoroughfare. I wish you could see many of us in the morning sitting for an extended period of time trying to exit out of our driveways as the school traffic flows by. I wish you could see how cars park along my street all the way down to my driveway on any given day. I wish you could see how children, parents and cars try to maneuver around each other as motorists and pedestrians attempt to share the road. I wish you could see the long line of traffic and the heat from the cars as parents line up to pick up children at the end of the day on Underwood and Colewood. I wish you could see how unknowing parents speed by our home which endangers our neighborhood children. I wish you could see all that I am talking about and you would know that it’s not fair to Epstein or our neighborhood to continue this way.

The new parking as Epstein proposes is not a panacea. If there are plays, ballgames, etc. this will only worsen an already unsafe environment for us. My family hopes that Epstein can honor their word to cap the enrollment at 650 and immediately institute a busing plan with real incentives to the parents. We also hope if Epstein chooses to stay, they will avail themselves of the sister campus at the Weber School for sporting and theatrical events so that a regulation size ball field and a 450 seat auditorium is not necessary.

These are hard issues. We bought in 1999 into this lovely neighborhood and we have the BEST neighbors. Now that Sandy Springs is a city, we’re even more excited by what we see and the improvements being made. It’s a great time to live in Sandy Springs. With two young children, we’re just trying to defend our quality of life and safety for the wonderful place we call home.

By Esther Begle

July 10, 2008 7:57 PM | Link to this

As a resident of Sandy Springs, and a resident who lives on Colewood Way who is impacted daily by The Epstein School, I would hope that you would lend more credence to me than to those who attend but do not live in River Shore Estates, Montaire Springs, Sandy Springs, or even Fulton County.

My family moved here 6 years ago, thinking we were moving to a quiet, family-oriented neighborhood where our children could grow up like we did. (I know the other residents are laughing as they read this—they can tell that we house-hunted on the weekends and in the evenings—not during school hours.)

My husband and I envisioned our children riding their bikes, playing football in the streets, shooting baskets at goals on the side of the street, and walking to friends homes within the neighborhood.

Well, NONE of that occurs. Even though we have delightful neighbors, we and our children are at risk when the Epstein parents drive their children to school in the mornings, for meetings throughout the day, and when they pick them up at carpool twice in the afternoons. I have to dodge out of their way to get out of my driveway. I even can sense their frustration behind me when I actually drive the speed limit; with no traffic calming devices, some of the parents hit 60+ to make it on time.

I am so disappointed in the response for traffic calming on Colewood Way that I am thinking of moving for the safety of my family.

Feel free to come to my home for coffee on school mornings, at noon carpool, and at afternoon carpool for Epstein—then make your decision about the expansion of the school.

Here’s hoping for a decision against the expansion of Epstein.

By Stan

July 10, 2008 8:27 PM | Link to this

Per DF’s comments, it is true that Peachtree Dunwoody Road has lots of traffic during rush hour. So does I-285, I-75 and I-85. But they are NOT neighborhood streets like we have here…..next door to the Epstein School.

In order to solicit our support when they bought the property in 1994, they made numerous promises (both verbally and in writing) to their neighbors that they did not live up to. First and foremost was the promise that they would NEVER expand beyond 650 students. On that point alone, their expansion plans should be rejected.

As someone said earlier, when will 850 students be too small? How about 1,000 students? Maybe 1,200 perhaps? I guess they could promise (once again) to take care of the queing and parking problems and promise (once again) not to expand. “We REALLY mean it this time!” However, based on their 14 year track record, I’m not willing to buy into any more promises.

Besides…..if the Epstein School really wanted to, they could have dramatically increased carpooling and expanded on-site queing and parking areas years ago! I’m confident that the neighbors would have supported these efforts.

Finally, to make it clear, I’m not against the school being in our neighborhood……with a maximum of 650 students. However, like the vast majority of neighbors, I’m STRONGLY opposed to their expansion plans and fully expect the council members to protect our neighborhood. We’ll be watching…….

By A

July 10, 2008 10:10 PM | Link to this

There is a common thread running through virtually all of the posts against the Epstein expansion — it seems that your preference really is that the school not be there at all. But it is, and it is likely not going to be picked up and moved in its entirety anytime soon. While there are some who apparently want that to happen now, the choice before everyone else is to support the status quo with all of the problems you see or work with the school and the city council to help alleviate the issues in connection with the expansion approval process.

A number of you have legitimate concerns about the current quantity of cars / traffic at carpool time. Ask yourself which would be better — little changing, or the new internal loop that will encircle the school and move all of those cars off of Colewood and Bridgewood Valley during carpool times.

A number of you have legitimate concerns about current excess parking on the streets during events. Ask yourself which would be better — little changing, or twice the amount of parking on the Epstein grounds. It is not a “panacea” (most things aren’t), but it is a meaningful improvement. And whether there is a new theater building behind the school or the status quo of having productions put on in the school cafeteria is maintained, people are still going to show up to see their kids / grandkids for as long as the school exists in the neighborhood.

In a perfect world, Epstein would probably not be in the middle of a single family residential neighborhood. But it is. Nothing in this expansion process is going to change that fact.

Yes, I am an Epstein parent. It is a wonderful institution and we are thrilled to have our family be part of it. Like many other families in the school, we moved into Sandy Springs to be close to the school. But while the school culture is wonderful, the existing physical facilities do need improvement and expansion. I believe that the school is doing what it can to address that problem for the Epstein community while at the same time doing what it can to alleviate many of the issues raised on this blog. And I believe you cannot reasonably expect to accomplish both objectives without increasing enrollment to support the necessary changes.

By Elizabeth Knight

July 10, 2008 10:30 PM | Link to this

Jim Osterman — Thank you for giving some much-needed publicity to this subject. As I see it, the problem is not our Sandy Springs officials – who after all can’t comment on pending zoning matters – but the arrogant, overweening private schools themselves.

These businesses take over land in quiet, residential communities where they have few if any students. They seek to install massive, disruptive facilities that will inflict noise and traffic on their unwilling neighbors, with no corresponding benefits. Since these businesses are tax-exempt, the neighbors also have to pay their share of governmental services.

I own a home in the Mountaire Springs neighborhood, not far from Epstein School, and my mother, an elderly widow, owns a home on Long Island Drive, just a couple of doors down from the property Holy Spirit School wants to take over. We have lived in Sandy Springs for more than forty years.

It infuriates me that these businesses are tax-exempt. There is nothing charitable about them. They operate like the aliens in a summer sci-fi movie: infiltrate, multiply and destroy. Where’s Will Smith when we need him? AEK

By sp

July 10, 2008 10:36 PM | Link to this

I”m not an Epstein parent, but strongly disagree with Osterman’s points. The “neighborhoods” are essentially a group of about a dozen activists who don’t like and have never liked the school. I have personally seen much of the communication that has come out of the school and they are really trying to find a win-win. Unfortunately, the “neighborhood leaders” have no intention of working with the school to find a way to find common ground. Ask Osterman whether there was a vote in any of the surrounding neighborhood associations to oppose the plan. There wasn’t at all. So why in the world should a City Council member join a small group on NIMBYs who are acting on their own behalf? Particularly before the City Council process has a chance to work itself out. What a horrible suggestion!

By Mary Vaughan

July 11, 2008 12:07 AM | Link to this

Jim, you are echoing what so many of us said at the planning meeting recently. I live in the Mountaire Springs community and when the Epstein School first formed, many of us were excited about their taking over that site and viewed it as a move that would improve our neighborhood. What we now know is that rather than enhancing the value of our homes the opposite has occurred. Pity the poor folks who live on any of the streets leading to and from the school but the impact is even more far reaching than just for those folks. I am all for Epstein and Holy Spirit growing and expanding; just NOT IN OUR BACK YARDS!!

By mmw

July 11, 2008 7:47 AM | Link to this

sp,

There were clearly more than 100 people at the meeting on June 24th at city hall. Just drive through the neighborhood and you see signs of opposition on every street. The leaders of the neighborhood have spent countless hours over the last 10 years trying to find a common ground with the school This Epstein School has outgrown its footprint and to continue to offer the superior education to the students they draw, they need to look outside the neighborhood and let these facilities serve a school whose needs can be met by the size of these facilities.

By DF

July 11, 2008 7:58 AM | Link to this

Stan, Yes there are homes on Peachtree Dunwoody Road and yes it is a neighborhood. Yes there are school buses too. Ed j memtioned that the traffic on River Valley Road and Riverside Drive was “atrociuos” and what I meant was that most two lane roads in town have a lot of traffic at rush hour and car pool time. To name a few: Ashford Dunwoody (inside the perimeter), Johnson Ferry (inside the perimeter), Hammond Drive, Heards Ferry Road and Heards Road. Personally I’ve been caught in the Riverwood High School traffic many times. I just didn’t complain about it becuase everyone has a right to attend school and therfore there WILL be traffic. BC: In all fairness, public schools do not pay taxes either so if all the private school properties became public school properties the county still would not collect property taxes from them. To Elizabeth Knight: I would guess you nor anyone in your family ever attended private school. I’m not from a rich family per se but my parents scraped up enough money every year to send my brothers and sisters and I to private school because they believed in education. As to your comments that private schools are businesses that are tax exempt, you are only partly right. They are recoginized as tax exempt under the IRS Code but they are not businesses. They do not take profits or sell stock options. They pay all their own bills; power bills, insurance, telecommunications, audio visual, teacher salaries, landscaping, and the like. In addition, private schools provide Financial Aid and Need Based Grants to promote social and economic diversity within the school community. All of this happens without you paying a cent. Again, take a look at your Fulton School General taxes and Fulton School Bond taxes. As to private schools being the equivalent of “aliens” I would guess that you don’t have any friends who went to private school either or you would realize that the “aliens” actually stand next to you at your place of worship on Sunday, shop at the same grocery store, and live on your street.

By Ed Johnson

July 11, 2008 11:03 AM | Link to this

Clearly public opinion from residents of the surrounding areas is against the Esptein school expanding. That the school wants to force it down the throats of community that it supposedly respects is hard to understand.

In this case, we have a private school most of whose student body does not come from those surrounding areas. We have a school that wants to expand in a residential area that is not designed to handle the traffic volume.

Hopefully, the city council will honor the will of the residents of the area.

By ed j

July 11, 2008 11:12 AM | Link to this

note to DF…I am sorry your parents supposedly scrimped and saved for your private school education. You misspelled atrocious!

Your argument on traffic is absurd. Just because there is traffic in other areas, I should accept in my own neighborhood? We all have to look out for our own best interests in our neighborhoods. If you want to sit in traffic in your neighborhood, then I guess you have the choice to try and fight it. I don’t want more traffic in my neighborhood if I can help it and I intend to fight against it where I can.

By H. Anderson

July 11, 2008 1:24 PM | Link to this

Anyone who says that the traffic is only heavy twice a day, doesn’t live with it! There are many new reasons to be against the enlargement of Epstein school, but traffic is the old one. All parents aren’t rude, I’m sure, but enough of them are so so that it’s very noticeable. Some days they park so that it’s difficult to get out of your driveway, other days they won’t Let you out of your driveway and most of the time when they park, it’s in front of the mail box so that the postman has to get out of his vehicle. Beyond that, who needs a theater and another classroom building with 200 more cars each day?

By Robert

July 11, 2008 3:00 PM | Link to this

Mr. Osterman’s blog is really about the role of city council and the place of private, not for profit institutions in our city. The merits of each school’s request are really not relevant to his case. He articulately and very succinctly makes the case for the NIMBY, a term coined in the 1980’s. NIMBY- not in my backyard. The fact is that we elect our officials to represent us, but also to be more than just mouthpieces for the group that yells the loudest at a particular point in time. I am grateful that our elected officals do not behave in knee-jerk fashion everytime a group of people decides they are opposed to a project. These council members represent all citizens and entities in the the city, not just those opposed and not just those in favor. City council members are elected to govern, not just react. They should hear both sides and then weigh what is best for our city. More disturbing is Mr. Osterman’s view of private institutions. He defines the “them” as “commercial interests” who “contribute very little to our neighborhoods” in his words. The “us” are the taxpayers who live in the city and who voted for our elected officials. Under Mr. Osterman’s definition, every church, synagogue, or private not for profit group would be defined as “them.” And I guess likewise the “them” should really find somewhere else to locate because they don’t pay taxes, don’t vote, and only want to grow “at the expense of the integrity of the people who live around them”, in Mr. Osterman’s words. Our surrounding cities are envious of the private schools we have in Sandy Springs because they recognize the contribution they make to keeping the city vibrant and attractive for new families to the area. As a Sandy Springs taxpayer whose back property line borders a large church (not one I attend) and who drives past two private schools every day (not the two in question), I am grateful I live in a community where the “them” are not only present, but also welcomed. Shame on Mr Osterman for being so small minded about what makes a community rich and diverse. Religious schools and religious institutions do belong in our backyards and I am glad I have one of “them” in mine.

By Elizabeth Knight

July 11, 2008 5:23 PM | Link to this

DF, I believe in education myself; I have a couple of degrees to prove it. However, I do not believe in disrupting established residential neighborhoods by placing large, intrusive sports complexes in the middle of them. In the case of Holy Spirit Prep, the sports complex includes a LIGHTED football stadium with seating for 500 people, along with tennis, swimming pools, assembly halls, office space for a dozen or so employees, etc. Epstein’s plans are similar, except for the lighting (at least for now). What’s residential about that?

Don’t try to justify the disruption these complexes would cause by pointing to the office building not far from the Holy Spirit site. The office building is on Lake Forrest, but the curb cut for the sports complex would be on Long Island. All those cars and SUVs would come and go right across from First Atlanta Montessori School — the only thing for miles on Long Island Drive that isn’t a single-family house. The street is already crowded mornings and afternoons with Montessori School traffic. And what’s the excuse for Epstein?

Private schools don’t have profits as such, but they are businesses just the same. In particular, they have endowments and professionally managed fund-raising campaigns to increase those endowments. HSPS and Epstein clearly take a businesslike approach to marketing. These grandiose sports complexes are intended to dazzle the schools’ potential customers and donors and lure them away from more established competitors.

Capitalism is wonderful. But it should be practiced forthrightly, without smarmy claims that it’s all about the greater good. If these schools were more charitable and less businesslike, they would apply their apparently substantial resources to offer a quality education to students who would benefit the most, regardless of how much those students could pay. I suppose that’s a concept from a more innocent time. Instead these schools have chosen the way of the world — and who can blame them? — but their claims and desires should be evaluated accordingly.

By A

July 11, 2008 9:09 PM | Link to this

“Epstein’s plans are similar, except for the lighting”?! To be kind, let’s just assume that Elizabeth has never reviewed Epstein’s plan and is merely rehashing the misinformation that’s been put out there. There is no proposal to add any football field, tennis courts, swim facility. There already is a soccer field behind the school today — the plan just calls for moving it so the school can put in the internal loop to get cars off the streets. No lights being put in. No permanent outdoor bleachers. In fact, the total increase in outdoor athletic space is .35 acres. Does that sound similar to you? The facility additions consist of adding a theater (to state the obvious, the seats for that are indoors) so the existing cafeteria doesn’t have to double as the theater any longer, a new early childhood program building, and an outdoor plaza between those the buidings that will seat between twenty to forty kids if they have class outside.

All these facts are readily available to anyone who cares to educate themselves about what is actually proposed. Link to the URL below to debunk the myths like the above the neighborhood activists would otherwise have you believe:

http://www.epsteinfacts.org/Myths_Facts.html

By Dave

July 12, 2008 12:23 AM | Link to this

Re A’s post…..I don’t agree with the comment that most people would like the school to leave the current site. Living up to their promises from 1994 would be nice and quite possible….if the Epstein School wanted to…..without expanding enrollment.

Epstein bought the property from Fulton County for a little over 1 million dollars in 1994 then (after adding a building) almost sold it back to Fulton County 10-12 years later for over 15 million dollars! Not bad…..for the Epstein School. To assume that the school HAS TO expand (ie can’t afford it) in order to make improvements is ridiculous. I know the Epstein School WANTS TO expand on the existing site since it’s the lowest cost option, but that doesn’t mean that the neighbors need to agree with it.

It hasn’t been mentioned yet, but if the Epstein School would at some point decide to leave, I wouldn’t be surprised if other private schools would be interested in the property……and be quite happy with a maximum enrollment of 650 students!

Re “SP’s” comments that a “dozen activists” are against the school….were you at the last meeting when over 100 NEIGHBORS voiced their stong opposition to the plans?

To DF…..last time I checked, Colewood Way (where the school sits) is on a dead end “neighborhood” street! Wouldn’t you say that it’s just a LITTLE different than Ashford Dunwoody Road? We’d like to keep it that way thank you.

By MShehan

July 12, 2008 9:29 AM | Link to this

Thanks Jim for this article.

We also need to keep in mind that a theatre, amphitheatre and full size soccer field are going to create traffic and parking issues outside of normal school hours: weekends and evenings. Even now I can hear the PA system on field days. Our local streets don’t have sidewalks. People will park on those streets, get out onto our yards, drop litter to and from the event. What happens to evening walks, quiet weekends???? Inner streets are designed for local traffic only. Will the expansion create a potential widening of these streets? Will I have to live with NO PARKING signs in front of my own house?

I think The Epstein community is really setting its sights way too low, trying to cram all of this onto a parcel too small for their vision. The design shows buildings right on top of each other. Surely there is a piece of land they could be looking at that will give the children room to breathe and will accomodate future expansion needs. They should be looking at their own investment more carefully.

By Ann

July 12, 2008 5:20 PM | Link to this

SP A dozen Activits???? Better check your #s we are talking several hundred homeowners who are opposed to the Expansion. Over 150 of them were at the first meeting at City Hall. We aren’t Activists - we are concerned citizens.

By JoAnn McGorry

July 15, 2008 10:07 AM | Link to this

The Epstein School should look for another location for expansion. When I moved here three years ago nothing was said about a great big school will be coming to a neighborhood near you! Nor will that be a big resale feature. Thanks but no thanks, move elsewhere. JoAnn McGorry

By Neither Hebrew nor RC

July 15, 2008 4:47 PM | Link to this

I find the suggestion above that Holy Spirit wants to build “a LIGHTED football stadium with seating for 500 people, along with tennis, swimming pools, assembly halls” as intrusive, pretty laughable.

First of all, I bet there are 20+ churches in Sandy Springs with seating exceeding 500. I suspect many of these larger churches have “Swimming pools and assembly halls” and host meetings and events almost every night of the week.

Second, football stadiums are lighted during the fall when games are played - Friday nights from about 7:30 to 10:00. HS teams play 10 regular season games. That’s only 5 at home. The first games are played in August and September and barely require the field to be - oh my God - LIGHTED! The field is not likely to be LIGHTED in excess of 20 hours all fall.

Shall anyone dare to bring up the unstated - these are not just “private schools.” One is a Jewish school and one is Roman Catholic. I am sure many of those who oppose the plans are not religious bigots and just normal NIMBYs. I do wonder how many have more questionable motives.

By Sarah

July 15, 2008 9:19 PM | Link to this

I have been a resident of Sandy Springs for 37 years. And I have a unique position in that I have a vested interest in this argument from both sides. I am the parent of a student at one of the schools, but I live within a 1/4 mile of the other. Regarding Holy Spirit’s proposition: the proposed usage of this property is without a doubt a better use than what is currently there which is vacant land. Driving down Lake Forrest, you see an old blocked off driveway and litter on the property now. Have any of the opponents driven by the Holy Spirit campus? It is attractive and pleasant looking. For the people opposed to the Epstein plan: you talk about the current traffic on streets such as Riverside Drive—the traffic I see on Riverside is due mostly to Cobb County commuters getting to/from 285. If you want to decrease traffic in the area, why don’t you argue for closing off Riverside where it meets Johnson Ferry? That would improve traffic more than defeating Epstein’s plan. And for the people living in Mountaire—your neighbors who have lived there for many decades most likely SENT their kids to Epstein, only it was called Underwood Hills then. I know because I attended Underwood Hills—and many of my friends lived in Mountaire. And at that time, we all walked to school—yes, there was less traffic, but there was also a worn dirt path in the grass across all of the neighbor’s front yards from the foot traffic next to the street. Will both schools add a little noise, traffic and lighting to the area? Possibly so. But small local schools are good for the community. Since when did a school or church become a detriment? Do you really think that a school with 850 students should not be located in a residential area? Look at Riverwood—I don’t know how many students attend there now, but when I went it was over 1200. I drive by Riverwood on a frequent basis as well and I don’t think that the traffic generated there is unbearable. I have looked at the plans and I feel that both schools are making an effort to be good neighbors. I want all of our kids—mine AND yours—going to a school that is safe—not one located in some commercial area. I think it is worth a little sacrifice on all of our part for the greater good which is to have quality schools where our children can get a good quality education. I propose the City Council approve both petitions.

By Elizabeth

July 18, 2008 11:37 AM | Link to this

Jim it is clear you understand BECAUSE you live in the area and KNOW what the traffic and noise is like and how it will impact the people and environment as well as our quality of life. If those who want the Atletic and office complex lived here I think their view would be different. Many of the bloggers think that because we oppose these expansions that we oppose children period and in particular the students and parents of Epstein School or Holy Spirit. Nothing could be farther from the truth. On Lonog Island we love the children and families of the Montessori School who are our neighbors but it is a small school used a limited number of hours each day part of the year. Even then have you ever driven down Long Island Drive when the Montessori school parents are picking up and tried to get in and out of your neighborhoodand with cars parked along the street (and some even in neighborhoods.)Have you watched as a firetruck tried to get down the street during that higher traffic time (no teen drivers just parents? How long does it take for you to get out on to Mt. Vernon Highway normally? During that that traffic time? Have you been on Long Island Drive when a funeral procession comes? Long Island Drive has become the main corridor for funeral processions from Buckhead. Would you want this sports complex and office building in your neighborhood where excited teen drivers are coming and going 7 days a week down your two lane neighborhood street? Since 60% of the Holy Spirit Upper School students live in Cobb County why not put their lighted football field nearer to the majority of your students in Cobb County?

I found it very disturbing after attending the City Planning Meeting last night that they came with their recommendations which clearly they had decided in their ‘pre-meeting’ BEFORE they heard tacts of the presentations. Is this democracy or tyrany? I hope the City Council will not come next month to vote with their minds made up and not listen to the facts. I hope they will remember what they stated they wanted for Sandy Springs and the reason they were elected.

By Richard

July 18, 2008 7:03 PM | Link to this

Add to your list of schools trying to ruin neighborhoods the Notre Dame Academy of Duluth, which is trying to move into the middle of a very upscale neighborhood in Suwanee. NDA has upset no less than 12 different neighborhood organizations AND the City of Suwanee with their plans to occupy 35 acres which was previously slated for roughly 40 $1 million dollar homes. Although the City has sided with the residents on this issue, both the seller and NDA have deep pockets and are forcing the issue.

Interestingly enough, the NDA web site announced this site was “God’s will” for the school, to which the neighbors responded, “then why are so many lawyers required?” !!

By debra

July 19, 2008 12:39 AM | Link to this

there could be a cremetorium coming to your neighborhood soon

By d

July 19, 2008 12:41 AM | Link to this

there may be a cremetorium coming to your neighborhood soon

By mike

July 19, 2008 1:20 AM | Link to this

This is not “God’s will”, please do not blame him about these money making tax exempt organizations like NDA, etc. How can they pay for a $30 million dollar project and pay $8 million for 37 acres of land in a residential area of Suwanee? How can tuitions and donations pay for all this??

By Jo

July 19, 2008 8:35 AM | Link to this

Apparently, some education is needed about education for stakeholders on both sides of this discussion.

By Sarah

July 20, 2008 1:11 PM | Link to this

It is interesting that “Elizabeth” recommends that Holy Spirit move its field to Cobb County since “60% of its students are from Cobb County.” For the last several years, Holy Spirit HAS [plyaed its games at a field in Cobb County. The reason they need a field in Snady Springs is because all of the SANDY SPRINGS students have had to drive to Cobb County for football games. I would be interested to know where “Elizabeth” got her statistic of 60% of HSPS being from Cobb County. It certainly does seem as though the opposition (those in the red shirts) are against ANY school expansion since many of the comments raised in the HOLY SPIRIT City Council meeting seemed as though they were truly aimed at Epstein—and some of your speakers even admitted as much—as I was leaving the meeting I overheard one red-shirted opponent state, “OK—the next one is July 31—let’s be ready”. (Which happens to be the next date for an Epstein meeting, not a Holy Spirit meeting). The City Council seems to be actually listening to both sides—but in the minds of those activists who are against ANY improvements at all, maybe that does look like tyranny. Keep in mind that that meeting was split with many supporters from both sides. The members of the opposition are not the ONLY ones the Council is supposed to represent. The reason they were elected was to represent the interests of ALL in Sandy Springs and to make decisions in the COMMUNITY’s best interest.

By Jim B

July 20, 2008 5:12 PM | Link to this

I believe the first school expansion in the new City of Sandy Springs was the Schenck School (Mt. Paran / Powers Ferry / Forrest Lake). The City inherited the school expansion project’s approval from Fulton County, but the City had the job of managing/enforcing it. The neighbors and the school’s board had sharp disagreements, but ultimately mapped out a recorded Agreement that satisfied both parties through compromise. There will be another day for Schenck School’s appetite for neighborhood expansion to be revisited, but the then-current concerns were addressed and compromise reached. Included in the Agreement, among other things, was a defined hiatus before the school’s new board and new neighbors may be required to line up for battle again.

I do hope the elected city decision makers listen to those neighbors who live close by the schools now seeking expansion. The rest of us need to listen closely to those neighbors’ concerns and support them as best we can because one single house in your neighborhood that is granted a Special Use Permit for Education by the City Council can easily become the next Schenck School, Holy Innocents, Epstein, or Holy Spirit. These are all terrific schools and good for the community, but it is my opinion that neighborhood integrity and respect for those who call those neighborhoods home should take priority if attempted compromise is not possible.

In regards to Holy Spirit’s desire for a sports complex … Has there been any consideration given to attempting a sharing agreement with one of several facilities nearby that already have the lights, the fields, the stands, the traffic control, etc.? Holy Innocents (no lights), Riverwood, Ridgeview, Weber, North Springs, Mt. Paran Presbyterian (all in Sandy Springs), or North Atlanta or Sutton (in Atlanta), may be willing to share “home field advantage” for improved facilities. Couldn’t Sandy Springs government intervene and help plan for better community use of such existing venues instead of endorsing possible overbuilding of such facilities within the City? I believe Holy Spirit is partially in the City of Atlanta. If compromise with Sandy Springs’ neighbors can’t be found perhaps Holy Spirit can be encouraged to seek a property on the south side of the school and deal with the neighbors and elected officials in the City of Atlanta for this approval.

If you are a resident of Sandy Springs and wish to let the City Council know your opinion about this issue (and others) you can start by sending an email directly to each of the council members by going to text to be linked.

By Jim B

July 20, 2008 5:17 PM | Link to this

I believe the first school expansion in the new City of Sandy Springs was the Schenck School (Mt. Paran / Powers Ferry / Forrest Lake). The City inherited the school expansion project’s approval from Fulton County, but the City had the job of managing/enforcing it. The neighbors and the school’s board had sharp disagreements, but ultimately mapped out a recorded Agreement that satisfied both parties through compromise. There will be another day for Schenck School’s appetite for neighborhood expansion to be revisited, but the then-current concerns were addressed and compromise reached. Included in the Agreement, among other things, was a defined hiatus before the school’s new board and new neighbors may be required to line up for battle again.

I do hope the elected city decision makers listen to those neighbors who live close by the schools now seeking expansion. The rest of us need to listen closely to those neighbors’ concerns and support them as best we can because one single house in your neighborhood that is granted a Special Use Permit for Education by the City Council can easily become the next Schenck School, Holy Innocents, Epstein, or Holy Spirit. These are all terrific schools and good for the community, but it is my opinion that neighborhood integrity and respect for those who call those neighborhoods home should take priority if attempted compromise is not possible.

In regards to Holy Spirit’s desire for a sports complex … Has there been any consideration given to attempting a sharing agreement with one of several facilities nearby that already have the lights, the fields, the stands, the traffic control, etc.? Holy Innocents (no lights), Riverwood, Ridgeview, Weber, North Springs, Mt. Paran Presbyterian (all in Sandy Springs), or North Atlanta or Sutton (in Atlanta), may be willing to share “home field advantage” for improved facilities. Couldn’t Sandy Springs government intervene and help plan for better community use of such existing venues instead of endorsing possible overbuilding of such facilities within the City? I believe Holy Spirit is partially in the City of Atlanta. If compromise with Sandy Springs’ neighbors can’t be found perhaps Holy Spirit can be encouraged to seek a property on the south side of the school and deal with the neighbors and elected officials in the City of Atlanta for this approval.

If you are a resident of Sandy Springs and wish to let the City Council know your opinion about this issue (and others) you can start by sending an email directly to each of the council members by going to text to be linked.

By Jim B

July 20, 2008 5:44 PM | Link to this

I believe the first school expansion in the new City of Sandy Springs was the Schenck School (Mt. Paran / Powers Ferry / Forrest Lake). The City inherited the school expansion project’s approval from Fulton County, but the City had the job of managing/enforcing it. The neighbors and the school’s board had sharp disagreements, but ultimately mapped out a recorded Agreement that satisfied both parties through compromise. There will be another day for Schenck School’s appetite for neighborhood expansion to be revisited, but the then-current concerns were addressed and compromise reached. Included in the Agreement, among other things, was a defined hiatus before the school’s new board and new neighbors may be required to line up for battle again.

I do hope the elected city decision makers listen to those neighbors who live close by the schools now seeking expansion. The rest of us need to listen closely to those neighbors’ concerns and support them as best we can because one single house in your neighborhood that is granted a Special Use Permit for Education by the City Council can easily become the next Schenck School, Holy Innocents, Epstein, or Holy Spirit. These are all terrific schools and good for the community, but it is my opinion that neighborhood integrity and respect for those who call those neighborhoods home should take priority if attempted compromise is not possible.

In regards to Holy Spirit’s desire for a sports complex … Has there been any consideration given to attempting a sharing agreement with one of several facilities nearby that already have the lights, the fields, the stands, the traffic control, etc.? Holy Innocents (no lights), Riverwood, Ridgeview, Weber, North Springs, Mt. Paran Presbyterian (all in Sandy Springs), or North Atlanta or Sutton (in Atlanta), may be willing to share “home field advantage” for improved facilities. Couldn’t Sandy Springs government intervene and help plan for better community use of such existing venues instead of endorsing possible overbuilding of such facilities within the City? I believe Holy Spirit is partially in the City of Atlanta. If compromise with Sandy Springs’ neighbors can’t be found perhaps Holy Spirit can be encouraged to seek a property on the south side of the school and deal with the neighbors and elected officials in the City of Atlanta for this approval.

If you are a resident of Sandy Springs and wish to let the City Council know your opinion about this issue (and others) you can start by sending an email directly to each of the council members by going to text to be linked.

By Here we go again

July 22, 2008 12:22 PM | Link to this

I have to take exception to your assertion that “a private school that doesn’t grow doesn’t stay in business.” Nothing could be further from the truth. Many of the private schools I am familiar with CAP their enrollment at a certain level, because the smaller classes, etc., are what parents are searching for. Wanting additional facilities, etc. are a planning function — if the schools did not plan for future growth in a responsible manner, that’s not the fault of the surrounding neighborhood. To suddenly wake up one day and say, “Hey! Wouldn’t a new athletic field be nice?!” and start eyeing your neighbor’s back yard is rude.

I remember, in 1995/96, when Wesleyan School was moving from Sandy Springs Methodist Church and was offered a 26-acre tract on the corner of Riverside and Brandon Mill, and across the street from Wildercliff. The residents of Wildercliff made a few calls to Fulton County Council members, and suddenly, the plans was deemed to be “endangering the watershed”. Funny how one of those Wildercliff residents, who didn’t want a school across the street from his neighborhood, later felt that it was perfectly ok to build four 12-story office buildings smack in the backyard of a residential neighborhood on Peachtree Dunwoody Road — no, THAT wasn’t encroachment, that was business. Riiighht.

If a school is all you guys have to worry about, then count yourselves fortunate.

By Sandy Springs Native

August 11, 2008 4:51 PM | Link to this

Here are A Few of the Reasons One Native Opposes the Rezoning to create yet another growing campus branch for HSPS Between Long Island Drive and Lake Forrest Drives:

• Unbridled Proliferation and Expansion of New Schools in Area (Note: HSPS Site Plan includes survey of three additional adjacent lots fronting on both Long Island Drive and Lake Forrest Drive inside I-285!)
• Will Politicians Ignore the Wishes of Native/Residents? (Isn’t that what precipitated the creation of the City of Sandy Springs?)
• The current plan does not add to the current local tax base, but creates a substantial drain upon overburdened resources which will further deplete the local tax base (Keeping the current R1 zoning on the current property could allow an additional $16 million of taxable residential revenue)
• Snarling of Few Remaining Traffic Corridors by Drawing Additional Non-Resident Traffic
• Increased Erosion, Flooding (particularly for - Residences and the Roadway at the Long Island Creek Bridge at the bottom of the street)
• Increased Run-off Degrading Major Watershed - Long Island Creek
• Significant Reduction of Greenspace and Mature Trees, affecting I-285 Corridor and Resident Air Quality
• Day, Night and Weekend Noise and Light Pollution in One of Few Remaining Tranquil Low Density Areas
• No Environmental Impact Study for Watershed/Air/Drainage/Natural plants & animals (wild turkeys, foxes, etc. live in Long Island Creek woods)

These are but a few of many reasons I oppose this expansion. I understand that HSPS also plans to allow St. Pius to use these facilities, adding still more non-resident load to these already busy, narrow and hilly two-lane blacktops.

• A Sandy Springs Native