HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 03-13-2012 - 8eORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: March 13, 2012
Action Agenda
Item No. ~ " ~
SUBJECT: Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (SAPFO) - Receipt and
Transmittal of 2012 Annual Technical Advisory Committee Report
DEPARTMENT: Planning & Inspections
PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No
ATTACHMENT(S):
1. SAPFO Partners Transmittal Letter
2. Draft 2012 SAPFOTAC Annual
Report (Under Separate Cover)
INFORMATION CONTACT:
Shannon Berry, 245-2589
Craig Benedict, 245-2592
PURPOSE: To receive the 2012 Annual Report of the SAPFO Technical Advisory Committee
(SAPFOTAC) and transmit it to the SAPFO partners for comments before certification in May.
BACKGROUND:
1. Annual Report
Each year the SAPFOTAC Report is updated to reflect actual changing conditions of
student membership and school capacity. This information is analyzed and used to
project future school construction needs based on adopted levels of service standards.
There are finro steps to the full report. The first part (Student Membership and Capacity) is
certified in the fall and then this full report, in the following spring, is to keep the SAPFO
system calibrated. At the December 5, 2011 Board of County Commissioners meeting,
the Board approved the November 15, 2011 actual membership and capacity numbers
(i.e. first part) for both Orange County Schools (OCS) and Chapel Hill-Carrboro City
Schools (CHCCS).
A draft of the full annual SAPFOTAC Report is complete and has been reviewed by the
SAPFOTAC members.
2. SAPFOTAC
The SAPFOTAC, comprised of representatives of both school systems and the Planning
Directors of the County and Towns, is tasked to produce an annual report for the
governing boards of each SAPFO partner outlining changes in actual membership,
capacity, student projections, and their collective impacts on the Capital Investment
Program (CIP) and the future issuance of Certificates of Adequate Public Schools
(CAPS). Orange County's Planning Staff compiles the report, holds a meeting to
discuss the various aspects, and then prepares a draft report, which is reviewed by the
SAPFO Technical Advisory Committee.
3.
Membership Data
CHCCS total increase from the previous year
168 Elementary School
31 Middle School
74 High School
OCS total increase from the previous year:
63 Elementary School
6 Middle School
61 High School
( ) denotes decrease
4. Capacity Data
There were no changes to school capacities this year for Orange County Schools or
Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools.
5. Capacity Issues
SAPFO vs. DPI
The SAPFO is a local ordinance, independent of State Department of Public Instruction
(DPI) projections and rules regarding class size. The SAPFO, for instance, does not
count temporary modular classrooms as fulfilling the capacity level of service outlined in
the SAPFO interlocal Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). The MOU requires `bricks
and mortar' instead of temporary facilities and also requires its own set of future student
projections to identify long-term capital school construction needs. However, the County
did phase in the smaller class size in previous years that decreased capacity. Decisions
will have to be made if new discussions at the state level create any class size changes
that should or should not be reflected in the County's SAPFO.
CHCCS does not exceed the adopted levels of service established in the SAPFO at this
time. However, projections show potential needs at the elementary, middle, and high
school levels within the 10-year planning period. Projected needs are noted below.
OCS does not exceed the adopted levels of service established in the SAPFO at this
time. However, projections show potential needs at the elementary school level within
the 10-year planning period. Projected needs are noted below.
6. Student Projection Analysis
Student membership projections show an increase at all levels in both school systems,
except for a slight drop in 2018-2019 at the high school level for OCS. The projections
are shown on pages 35-36 of the report.
7. Orange County Schools Systems - Capital Investment Plan (CIP) Needs Analysis
CHCCS
Projected needs:
New Elementary #11 2012-2013 (projected overage of 66 students; 106.3% LOS)
New Middle School #5 2017-2018 (projected overage of 30 students; 108.1 % LOS)
High School 2020-2021 (projected overage of 43 students; 111.1 % LOS)
273 students
130 students
ocs
Projected needs:
New Elementary 2020-2021 (projected overage of 1 student; 105°/a LOS)
Middie School projections show no needs in the next 10 years
High School projections show no needs in the next 10 years
The SAPFOTAC report notes that development approval activity within the portion of the
City of Mebane that lies within Orange County has been significant in past years.
Because the City of Mebane is not a party to the SAPFO at this time, CAPS are not
required by the local government to be issued prior to development approvals. However,
once students generated from Mebane development actually enter the school system,
faster enrollment increases would affect projections and may identify CIP needs within 10
years, unless enrollment is balanced by slower growth in other areas of the district.
8. Student Generation Rates
On October 6, 2009 the Orange County Board of Commissioners approved the updated
Student Generation Rates, as recommended by the SAPFOTAC. The updated Student
Generation Rates became effective with the November 15, 2010 CAPS system update.
Even though the increased Student Generation Rates we~e recently adopted for SAPFO,
both Orange County Schools and Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools have observed an
even larger increase in students generated from developments in both districts. The
SAPFOTAC discussed the increased number of students generated in both districts, in
particular for the multi-family housing type. While this may be a short term trend caused
by the current economic climate or other factors, the SAPFOTAC recommends further
consideration of the Student Generation Rates.
9. Access to Full Report
The draft SAPFOTAC report will be posted on the Orange County Planning Department's
web site. A letter and the Executive Summary of the report will be sent to all SAPFO
partners after this BOCC meeting advising them of the availability of the draft report and
inviting comment.
It is anticipated the draft 2012 SAPFOTAC report will be brought back to the BOCC for
certification at the May 15, 2012 regular meeting.
FINANCIAL IMPACT: Current 10-year student growth projections show future needs for
additional schools in both the CHCCS and OCS Districts. CHCCS Elementary School #11 is
projected to be needed in 2012-13; CHCCS Middle School #5 is projected to be needed in
2017-18; and additional High School level capacity in the CHCCS District is projected to be
needed in 2020-21. For OCS, additional Elementary level capacity is projected to be needed in
2020-21.
Section 7 of the Schools Adequate Public Facilities Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
states, "Orange County will use its best efforts to provide the funding to carry out the Capital
Improvement Plan referenced in Section 1 above."
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends the Board:
1. Receive the 2012 SAPFOTAC Annual Report; and
2. Authorize the Chair to sign the transmittal letter to SAPFO partners contained in
Attachment 1.
Attachment 1 4
March 13, 2012
Mark Kleinschxnidt, Mayor
Town of Chapel Hill
405 Martin Luther King Jr.
Chapel Hill, NC 27514
Mark Chilton, Mayor
Town of Carrboro
301 W. Main Street
Carrboro, NC 27510
Tom Stevens, Mayor
Town of Hillsborough
P.O. Box 429
Hillsborough, NC 27278
To be printed on BOCC Letterhead
Donna Coffey, Chair
Orange County Board of Education
Blvd. 200 E. King Street
Hillsborough, NC 27278
Mia Day Burroughs, Chair
Chapel Hill-Carrboro Board of Education
750 Merritt Mill Road
Chapel Hill, NC 27516
Subject: Schools Adequaxe Public Facilities Ordinance Technical Advisory Committee
(SAPFOTAC) Annual Report
Dear Sir or Madam:
This letter is to update you on the status of the 2012 Annual SAPFOTAC Report. In accordance
with the SAPFO Memoranda of Understanding (MOU), the Board of County Commissioners
(BOCC) approved the November 15, 2011 actual membership and capacity numbers for Orange
County Schools and Chapel Hill - Carrboro City Schools at its meeting on December 5, 2011.
The SAPFOTAC, comprised of representatives of both school systems and the Planning Directors
of the County and Towns has produced the 2012 Annual Report. As per the SAPFO MOU, the
annual technical report contains information on Level of Service, Building Capacity, Membership
Date, Capital Investment Plan, Student Membership Projection Methodology, Student Membership
Projections, Student Membership Growth Rate, Student/Housing Generation Rate, and the SAPFO
Process. Enclosed for your use are copies of the 2012 Executive Summary and the March 13,
2012 BOCC meeting agenda item abstract when the BOCC received the draft report.
The full draft SAPFOTAC report is available on the Orange County Planning Department website
in the Current Interest Projects section
http•//www co oran~e nc.us/plannin~/SpecialProjects.asp
The 2012 Annual SAPFOTAC Report is scheduled to be certified by the BOCC at a regular
meeting in May 2012. Therefore, if you have any comments pertaining to the report, please
5
forward them to Craig N. Benedict, Planning Director, no later than 5:00 p.m. on April 17, 2012.
Mr. Benedict can be reached by phone at (919) 245-2592, by e-mail at cbenedict~a,co.oran e.~nc_us,
or by fa~c at (919) 644-3002. Any comments received will be part of our agenda package in May.
Please share this information and the 2012 SAPFOTAC report with your respective boards.
Sincerely,
Bernadette Pelissier
Chair
Enclosures
cc: Board of County Commissioners
Frank Clifton, Orange County Manager
Roger L. Stancil, Manager, Town of Chapel Hill
Steven Stewart, Manager, Town of Carrboro
Eric Peterson, Manager, Town of Hillsborough
Tom Forcella, Superintendent, Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools
Patrick Rhodes, Superintendent, Orange County Schools
George McFarley, Chief Operating Officer, Orange County Schools
Todd LoFrese, Assistant Superintendent for Support Services, Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools
Kevin Morgenstein Fuerst, Coordinator for Student Enrollment, Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools
Craig Benedict, Planning Director, Orange County
J.B. Culpepper, Planning Director, Town of Chapel Hill
Margaret Hauth, Planning Director, Town of Hillsborough
Trish McGuire, Planning Director, Town of Carrboro
Attachment 2
ORANGE COUNTY, NC
SCHOOLS ADEQUATE PUBLIC
FACILITIES ORDINANCE
PREPARED BY A STAFF COMMITTEE: PLANNING DIRECTORS,
SCHOOL REPRESENTATIVES, TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
(SAPFOTAC)
(PURSUANT TO PROVISIONS OF A MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING ADOPTED ~N 2002 & 2003)
(ORDINANCES ADOPTED IN JULY, 2003~
Annual Re ort
p
2012
(BASED ON NOVEMBER 2011 DATA~
CERTIFIED BY THE BOCC ON ~~XXXX
Table of Contents
Page
Executive Summary ............................................................................................................ i
Introduction ......................................................................................................................... i~
Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance Partners ............................................ ~
Planning Directors, School Representatives, Technical Advisory
Committee (SAPFOTAC) members ....................................................................... ~i
I. Base Memorandum of Understanding
A. Level of Service .............................................................................
B. Building Capacity ........................................................................ 2
Attachment: I.B.1. - Orange County School Capaciry (Elementary, Middle & High) (2010-11) ................... 5
Attachment: I.B.2. - Chapel Hill/Carrboro School Capacity (Elementary, Middle & High) (2010-11)............ 8
Attachment: I.B.3. - Orange County School Capacity (Elementary, Middle & High) (2011-12) .............. ... ...11
Attachment: I.B.4. - Chapel Hill/Carrboro School Capacity (Elementary, Middle & High) (2011-12) ..... .. ...... 14
C. Membership Date ............. ............................................................... i~
II. Annual Update to Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordi~ar-ce System
A. Capital Investment Plan (CIP) ......................................................... is
B. Student Membership Projection Methodology ......................................
19
Attachment: II.B.1. - Student Membership Projection Descriptions ....................................................... 20
Attachment: II.B.2. - Student Membership Projection Models Performance Analysis for 2010-11 .................. 21
Attachment.• II.B.3. - Student Membership Projection Models Performance Analysis for 2011-12 .................. 25
C. Student Membership Projections ......................................................
2
Attachment: II.C.1. - Orange County Student Projections (Elementary, Middle & High) (2010-11) .............. 33
Attachment: II.C.2. - Chapel Hill/Carrboro Student Projections (Elementary, Middle & High) (2010-11)....... 34
Attachment: II.C.3. - Orange County Student Projections (Elementary, Middle & High) (2011-12) ... ... ... 35
Attachment: ILC.4. - Chapel Hill/Carrboro Student Projections (Elementary, Middle & High) (2011-12)....... 36
D. Student Membership Growth Rate ............................................ .................. 3~
Attachment: II.D.1. - Orange County & Chapel Hill/Carrboro Student Growth Rates
Chart dates from 2011 - 2021 based on 11/I S/10 membership numbers (2010-11) ........... ....................... 38
Attachment: II.D.2. - Orange County & Chapel Hill/Carrboro Student Growth Rates
Chart dates from 2012 - 2022 based on 11/I S/11 membership numbers (2011-12) ........... .......................... 39
E. Student / Housing Generation Rate ....................................................
Attachment: II.E.1. -Current Student Generation Rates (2007) .......................................................... 42
III. Flowchart of Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance Process
A. Process 1- Capital Investment Plan ...................................................................... a3
Attachment: III A.1. - Process 1 Capital Investment Plan ... ... ... . ... ..... .. ... ............ ... ... ... .. .... ... .... .. .... ... 44
B. Process 2- Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance;
Certificate of Adequate Public Schools (CAPS) System ..................................... as
Attachment: III B.1. - Process 2 Certificate of Adequate Public Schools (CAPS) Allocation .......................... 47
2012 SAPFOTAC Executive Summary
I. Base Memorandum of Understanding
A. Level of Service ..............................................(No Change).........Pg. 1
Chapel HilUCarrboro
School District Orange County
School District
Elementa 105% 105%
Middle 107% 107%
Hi h 110% 110%
B. Building Capacity and Membership .........................(Change)..........Pg. 2
Chapel HilUCarrboro
School District Orange County
School District
Capacity Membership Increase from
Prior Year Capacity Membership Increase from
Prior Year
Elementa 5244 5464 168 3694 3348 63
Middle 2840 2753 31 2166 1704 6
Hi h 3875 3714 74 2558 2283 61
C. Membership Date - November IS ........................(No Change).......Pg.17
II. Annual Update to SAPFO System
A. Capital Investment Plan (CIP) ........................... .(Change)..........Pg. 18
B. Student Membership Projection Methodology.......(No Change).......Pg. 19
The average of 3, 5, and 10 year history/cohort survival, linear and arithmetic projection models.
C. Student Membership Projections ..............................(Change)...........Pg.29
Analysis of 5 Years of Projections for 2011-12 School Year - Chapel Hill Carrboro City Schools
(The number in brackets [n] is the number of students the projection was off compared to actual membership. A number in pazenthesis
within the brackets [(n) ] indicates the projection was low compared to the actual whereas a number not in parenthesis indicates the
ro~ection was hi h com ared to the actual.
Year Projection Made for 2011-12 Membership
Actua12011 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-I1
Membershi
Elemen 5464 5654 190 5718 254 5623 159 5503 39 5398 66
Middle 2753 2902 149] 2924 [171] 2885 132] 2791 [38 2749 4
Hi 3714 3787 73 3860 146 3861 147 3724 10 3687 27
Executive Summary
Analysis of 5 Years of Projections f"or ZU11-1L acnooi Y ear - vra.,~c ..,~..,..y V1~11VVav
(The number in brackets [nJ is the number of students the projection was off compared to actual membership. A number in parenthesis
h
e
within the brackets [(n) ] indicates the projection was low compared to the actual whereas a number not in parenthesis indicates t
ro'ection was hi com ared to the actual.
Year Projection Made for 2011-12 Membership
Actua12011 Z~6_~~ 2007_pg 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11
Membershi
87 61
3304 44
3362 14
3348 3297 51 3464 116 32
Elemen 691 8 1732 28 1716 12
Middle 1704 1718 14 1724 20 1
8 45 2274 9 2263 20
Hi 2283 2226 57 2249 34 223
D. Student Growth Rate ............................................(Change)..........Pg. 37
Avera e Annual Growth Rate over 10 Years
Chapel HilUCarrboro Orange County
School District School District
2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-i1 2011-12 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12
Elementa 1.85% 1.5% 1.72% 1.44% 1.59% 1.84% 1.16% 1.34% 1.57% 1.6%
Middle 2.58% 2.03% 1.93% 1.67% 1.94% 1.78% 1.44% 1.53% 1.84% 2.01%
Hi h 2.31% 2.21% 1.8% 1.57% 1.73% 1.49% 1.0% 138% 1.59% 1.61%
E. Student / Housing Generation Rate .................... (No Change)...........Pg. 40
SCHOOL ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES ORDINANCE STATUS
(based on future year Student Membership Projections)
CHAPEL HILL/CARRBORO SCHOOL DISTRICT
Elementary School District
A. Does not exceed 105% LOS standard (current LOS is 104.2%).
B. The projected growth rate at this level is expected to increase at a greater rate over the
next 10 years.
C. The projections are showing a need for Elementary School #11 in 2012-13 by a projected
overcapacity of 66 students. Elementary School #11 is expected to open in the fall of
2013. However, if the 2012 membership numbers (to be reported November 15, 2012)
and/or CAPS issued /requested meet or exceed the established Elementary level LOS, the
issuance of further CAPS may be impacted until Elementary School #11 is opened and
additional Elementary level capacity is added.
Middle School District
A. Does not currently exceed 107% LOS standards (current LOS is 96.9%).
B. The projected growth rate at this level is expected to increase at a greater rate over the
next 10 years.
C. Chapel Hill/Carrboro Middle School #5 is projected to be needed in 2017-18.
ii
Executive Summary
High School District
A. Does not currently exceed the 110% LOS standard (current LOS is 95.8%).
B. The projected growth rate at this level is expected to increase at a greater rate over the
next 10 years.
C. Expansion of Carrboro High School from the initial capacity of 800 students to the
ultimate capacity of 1,200 students is projected to be needed in 2020-21.
ORANGE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT
Elementary School District
A. Does not currently exceed 105% LOS standard (current LOS is 90.6%).
B. The projected growth rate at this level is expected to increase at a greater rate over the
next 10 years.
C. Projections are showing a need for an additional Elementary School in 2020-21.
Middle School District
A. Does not currently exceed 107% LOS standard (current LOS is 78.7%).
B. The projected growth rate at this level is expected to increase at a greater rate over the
next 10 years.
C. Does not affect or prompt CIP activity in 10-year time frame. However, staff is
monitoring new development activity in the Orange County portion of Mebane, which is
not a party to the Schools APFO MOU at this time.
High School District
A. Does not currently exceed 110% LOS (current LOS is 892%).
B. The projected growth rate at this level is expected to increase at a greater rate over the
next 10 years.
C. Does not affect or prompt CII' activity in 10-year time frame. However, Orange County
Schools has requested the N.C. Department of Public Instruction (DPI) re-examine the
capacity rating of Orange High School. This assessment could result in a significant
decrease in capacity at the high school level. Any capacity modifications approved by
DPI prior to the November 15, 2012 reporting date would become effective with the
approval of the 2012-13 membership and capacity numbers.
iii
Orange County, NC School Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance
INTRODUCTION
The Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance and its Memorandum of
Understanding are ordinances and agreements, respectively. Supporting documents are
anticipated to be dynamic to incorporate the annual changing conditions of inembership, capacity
and student projections that may affect School Capital Investment Plan (CIP) timing. This
formal annual report will be forthcoming to all of the Schools Adequate Public Facilities
Ordinance partners each year as new information is available.
This updated information is used in the schools capital needs process of the Capital
Investment Plan (Process 1) and within elements of the Schools Adequate Public Facilities
Ordinance Certificate of Adequate Public Schools (CAPS) spreadsheet system (Process 2).
This report and any comments from the Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance
partners will be considered in the first half of each year by the Board of County Commissioners
at a regular or special meeting. The various elements of the report are then "certified" and
formally considered in the process of the upcoming Capital Investment Plan. The Certificate of
Adequate Public Schools system is updated after November 15 when data is received from the
school districts with actual membership and pre-certified capacity (i.e. CIP capacity or prior
` joint action" capacity changes).
The Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance and Memorandum of Understanding
have dynamic aspects. The derivation of the baseline and update to the variables will continue in
the future as a variety of school related issues are fine-tuned by technical and policy groups.
The primary facet of this report includes the creation of mathematical projections for
student memberships by school levels (Elementary, Middle and High) and by School Districts
(Chapel Hi1UCanboro and Orange County). This information is found in Section II, Subsections
B, C, D, and E.
In summary, this report serves as an update to the dynamic conditions of student
membership and school capacity which effect future projected needs considered in Capital
Investment Planning.
Interested parties may make their comments known to the Board of County
Commissioners prior to their review of the report and school CIP completion or ask questions of
the SAPFOTAC members.
iv
ANNUAL REPORT AS OUTLINED IN
Schools Adequate Public Facilities.Ordinance Memorandum
of Understanding (Schools APFO MOU)
SECTION ld
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED
TO SCHOOLS ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES
ORDINANCE PARTNERS
Chapel HiWCarrboro School District
School APFO
Board of County Commissioners
Carrboro Board of Aldermen
Orange County School District
School APFO
Board of County Commissioners
Hillsborough Town Council
Chapel Hill Town Council
Chapel Hill/Carrboro School Board
Orange County School Board
v
Plannin~ Directors/School Representatives
Technical Advisorv Committee
(aka SAPFOTAC)
Town of Carrboro
Trish McGuire, Planning Director
301 West Main Street
Carrboro, NC 27510
Town of Chapel Hill
J.B. Culpepper, Planning Director
405 Martin Luther King, Jr. Blvd.
Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27514
Town of Hillsborough
Margaret Hauth, Planning Director
P.O. Box 429
Hillsborough, NC 27278
Orange County Planning Department
Craig Benedict, Planning Director and
Shannon Berry, Special Projects Planner
131 W. Margaret Lane
P.O. Box 8181
Hillsborough, NC 27278
Orange County School District
Patrick Rhodes, Superintendent and
George McFarley, Chief Operating Officer
200 E. King Street
Hillsborough, NC 27278
Chapel Hill-Carrboro School District
Todd LoFrese, Assistant Superintendent for Support Services and
Kevin Morgenstein Fuerst, Coordinator of Student Enrollment
750 Merritt Mill Road
Chapel Hill, NC 25716
vi
I, BASE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
A. Level of Service
1. Responsible Entiry for Suggesting Change - Change can only be effectuated by
amendment to Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) by all School APFO partners.
2. Definition - Level of Service (LOS) means the amount (level) of students that can be
accommodated (serviced) at a certain school system grade group
[i.e., Elementary level (K-5), Middle Level (6-8), High School Level (9-12)].
3. Standard for: Standard for:
Chapel Hill Carrboro School District Orange County School District
Elementary Middle High School Elementary Middle High School
105% 107% 110% 105% 107% 110%
4. Analysis of Existing Conditions
Chapel Hill Carrboro School District
These standards are acceptable at this time.
Analysis of Existing Conditions
Orange County School District
These standards are acceptable at this time.
S. Recommendation -
No Change from above standard
Recommendation-
No Change from above standard
Section I
B. Building Capacity
1. Responsib[e Entity for Suggesting Change - The Planning Directors, School Representatives,
Technical Advisory Committee (SAPFOTAC) will receive requested changes that are CIP
related and adopted in the prior year. CIP capacity changes will be updated along with actual
membership received in November of each year.
Other changes will be sent to a`Joint Action Committee' of the BOCC and Board of Education,
as noted in the MOU, who will make recommendations and forward changes (on the specific
forms with justification) to the full Board of County Commissioners for review and action.
These non-CIP changes would be updated in the upcoming November CAPS system
recalibration and included in the SAPFOTAC report.
2. Definition- "For purposes of this Memorandum, "building capacity" will be determined by
reference to State guidelines and the School District guidelines (consistent with CIP School
Construction Guidelines/policies developed by the School District and the Board of County
Commissioners) and will be determined by a joint action of the School Board and the Orange
County Board of Commissioners. As used herein the term "building capacity" refers to
permanent buildings. Mobile classrooms and other temporary student accommodating classroom
spaces are not permanent buildings and may not be counted in determining the school districts
building capacity."
3. Standard for:
Chapel Hill Carrboro School District
The original certified capacity for each of the
schools was certified by the respective
superintendent and incorporated in the initialization
of the CAPS system (Chapel Hill Carrboro School
District April 29, 2002 - Base)
Capacity changes were made each year as follows:
2003: Increase of 619 at Rashkis Elementary.
2004: No changes at Elementary, Middle, or High
School levels.
2005: No changes at Elementary, Middle, or High
Standard for:
Orange County School District
The original certified capacity for each of the
schools was certified by the respective
superintendent and incorporated in the
initialization of the CAPS system (Orange
County School District Apri130, 2002 - Base)
Capacity changes were made each year as
follows:
2003: No net increase in capacity at
Elementary level. No changes at Middle
School level. Increase of 1,000 at Cedar Ridge
2
Section I
School levels.
2006: No changes at Elementary, Middle, or High
School levels.
2007: An increase of 800 at the High School level
with the opening of Carrboro High School.
2008: An increase of 323 at the Elementary School
level due to the opening of Morris Grove Elementary
School and the implementation of the 1:21 class size
ratio in grades K-3
2009: No changes at Elementary, Middle, or High
School levels.
2010: An increase in capacity of 40 students at the
High School level with Phoenix Academy High
School becoming official high school within the
district
2011: No changes at Elementary, Middle, ar High
School levels.
High School.
2004: No net increase in capacity at
Elementary level. No changes at Middle or
High School levels.
2005: An increase in capacity of 100 at
Hillsborough Elementary with the completion
of renovations.
2006: An increase in capacity of 700 at the
Middle School level with the completion of
Gravelly Hill Middle School and an increase of
15 at the High School level with the temporary
location of Partnership Academy Alternative
School. An increase of 2 at the Elementary
level due to a change in the capacity
calculation for each grade at each school.
2007: No changes at Elementary, Middle, or
High School levels.
2008: A decrease of 228 at the Elementary
School level due to the implementation of the
1:21 class size ratio in grades K-3 and an
increase of 25 at the High School level with the
completion of the new Partnership Academy
Alternative School.
2009: No changes at Elementary, Middle, or
High School levels.
2010: No changes at Elementary, Middle, or
High School levels.
2011: No changes at Elementary, Middle, or
High School levels.
3
Section I
4. Analysis of Existing Conditions
Chapel Hill Carrboro School District
The Schools Facilities Task Force developed a
system to calculate capacity. Any changes year to
year will be monitored, reviewed, and recorded by
the SAPFOTAC on approved forms distributed to
SAPFO partners and certified upon approval by
the Board of County Commissioners each year.
The requested 2011-12 capacity is noted on
Attachment I.B.4
Analysis of Existing Conditions
Orange County School District
The Schools Facilities Task Force developed a
system to calculate capacity. Any changes
year to year will be monitored, reviewed, and
recorded by the SAPFOTAC on approved
forms distributed to SAPFO partners and
certified upon approval by the Board of
County Commissioners each year.
The requested 2011-12 capacity is noted on
Attachment I.B.3
5. Recommendation - Accept school capacities Recommendation - Accept school
at all levels, as reported by CHCCS and
shown in Attachment I.B.4.
capacities at all levels, as reported by OCS
and shown in Attachment I.B.3.
4
Section I
Attachment I.B. i
(page lof 3)
2010 -11
tttal
52.491
455
+455
455
455
455
263
t►tdCULi.4
64l16
497
497
447
497
497
447
dyBnum
74.916
544
544
544
34-1
544
479
14torough
551.106
471
471
471
471
477
411
k liope
499,164
5x6'
5N6
,Rt,
5fie
577
httia1s
x+,?R2
576
5?t,
?7t;
5 °6
57h
483
"sprse4�i t�4ottTlSi: 1 l:rr lt,r:�ireemh�.g i5.3t�Y I+,x�•xv�pr tt:<k+s,to.E�sauy>ASl �kr stFv^ riutazat irN� .r�vfxx8e.t{s�n:iti�,'a��ati �d i.#µ °Sth.na t;t��.Ei3
la.i. taetir nyx+n : id N+tt4 i °iaetiR-la :rsxi ti.In.,xi ��+s,•ta�Fta{i,r i "ei�mie.ti �.3, :*.aa t'ta�ttsnitice lt�S�.•n I Fur v4gwl ties +c111 w nt.un Ow"I'4e until
tia:_�i4 tsy tlitk�e 4. 6S. If1 !'or ;aant,,oaix�.trdxua�.nc. -t tine C.nen of rtii a,toi"i:d(�s'dlx lit ZC' <-.
Justification:
Capacity C ificatior
r • t 'l
Superintendent Date
Merttbership Certification,
Superintendent Date
BOCC Chair Date
yet
BOCC Chair Date'
5
Section I
Attachment LB.1
(page 2 of 3)
2010 -11
Schotst ilistri�tc tirsltn� t ittttlly' llttt4t�
SAPFF)CAPS Year. Novell wr 34.24110- iv,,.xxtllmr141 24111
Capacity and Nlemrmmhip Su6mtitta Oute: itttvctnh"r 1?.'t111Y
k.L.Stsithntk 14(,1)444 740 7411 740 74” 1413 c:a
,.W. St tnCc',td 1117,E N 7 ?h 726 72h 776 726 ?1
3ravl~liy Bill 9 2 ,1190 700 74111 704 Ton 700 �t
Tollll j 4tsi1,620 2.1is6 M66 2,166 2,166 2,166 161,
Special Note (s); I t .t it a F» . # 44 15, „t? _ l o r t III, l+ wda,' '}+ka4 tkm it cit£:E'%I ea a:Nt, .I, Jut "rthr*N'*Vk.i I, ihl IV,
ia. 4. t., teeerxtt. �u., mt.-' ��rnE' isant�t* .nxi� °Pr.,;.Efd,4•t,�.rcn,�ti., G�ft�t;. at4 .#,t „ar.i��atattrttss.(ti7`..n iin^ er., dg.,. ian °.r�ilircnt.� "vrtrtT.Stisrtrnti3
,3hts>• I ln= t l l tkr SAU' A UIP m I N "" .ascrvt O ,er n *n eaf IN, l.atu ttatt t V'ItificJ h, 11w 10 91
Justification:
Capacity Certification,
Superintendent Cate
Membomhlp Certification:
_arc
_— \� I, 2w,
Superinlendel4t Mite
04CC Chair Dale
BOCC Chair Cate
l�J
Section I
Attachment I.B.1
(page 3of 3)
2010 -11
SPOCIal - �iYtc,s }« N, € r Zia .eMxyl!€ Y Y, , FH I k t 2L rl t,sJ11€ .fl i } €x N S!N' K� UE;zS . 1 i € r! H E d. € .9f2 € i s • !kw t } a.`3N! €t
l.rkk Ta�sxvs ir.v.unt.'r�s €ll.nnx r. rstiF €`x ins +ll & €�srs.esn.utec la.3snex,t}is }xt -sag Exsnt +snE #a tE.taaE 1}..r.'ar }.ansr. aril te7sc�tnc`t }:s9sa: uss�4
.k6mni + €. €ri s I i Eh.� `., In * >@ E € }s,y r bN. •�� +.rNn,'s��:A a��, Hs 9 =€:E €er. Hnen Eir.H i. xxati €ixr'€1 *_ s1Er lfE €E `i ",
Justification:
Capacity Certification,.
Stliy+tri}llc°rn3Et}3t DaW
Membership Certification:
SU�St�elrl4crx6r€EtR' 1�. }ter
BOCC { l 16r Date
r r
MCC chilir Date
7
I8ii1�
w'ed.Yrl2�§!}[+"• «!l }E;!! €�
I, }x € €f
f. €x€�3
ifl �.t�asa
lkri
LOW
29
Ilartmrtii}x ir.(dttl
15
f;
0 !,I
441
SPOCIal - �iYtc,s }« N, € r Zia .eMxyl!€ Y Y, , FH I k t 2L rl t,sJ11€ .fl i } €x N S!N' K� UE;zS . 1 i € r! H E d. € .9f2 € i s • !kw t } a.`3N! €t
l.rkk Ta�sxvs ir.v.unt.'r�s €ll.nnx r. rstiF €`x ins +ll & €�srs.esn.utec la.3snex,t}is }xt -sag Exsnt +snE #a tE.taaE 1}..r.'ar }.ansr. aril te7sc�tnc`t }:s9sa: uss�4
.k6mni + €. €ri s I i Eh.� `., In * >@ E € }s,y r bN. •�� +.rNn,'s��:A a��, Hs 9 =€:E €er. Hnen Eir.H i. xxati €ixr'€1 *_ s1Er lfE €E `i ",
Justification:
Capacity Certification,.
Stliy+tri}llc°rn3Et}3t DaW
Membership Certification:
SU�St�elrl4crx6r€EtR' 1�. }ter
BOCC { l 16r Date
r r
MCC chilir Date
7
Section I
Attachment I.B.2
(page lof 3)
2010 -11
1'wkFarcerevicwaW2AQ3!lmwE rm =dSobpCgKgMMVArvetecrseicas^ --,Y.
cbmgcd by (t) ft &bOW CW at (2) an ==&d vmian afthia Poem that is acetifwd bylkCW
dustJfiaationn
Capacity Ce iffautian:
— — SC3C Chair Tie
Superintendent Date
membership Certiixcafion.
u rintendent
Date SOGC Chair ' Rate
8
Attachment I.B.2
Section I (page 2 of 3)
2010-11
School APFO Capacity Membership rship and Change Request Form
dChoot District: Chaps 31ll-earrbore C'ilp'Schools
SAPFO CAPSVear: hfov €tom 15,2010-Novcant 14,2011 m V
`parrs-I an, a,.., ers >i `{>F*t"'I' a T.a e: Nev em ; .a
,
2[106 2011' 2007-2110S 2i os,2Ol) 2000.2(1Q 2010-2nii sustifrcat o Aien�treasltip' ;<
'S?"'"e retcre tit.eti
41it3tllc ch�oi ltetitte�ted ltcciutstr# It y�rsstebl iieiiusste� fteq€rexierl 1,conote4
t<ct (.r;aaetty (arncitt` C'ap;isio, C pacitg C.111aeit sotto! ear)
s 671 %0 671 ,,:� .
136,221 73 `a 732•�,, t
41.1771,M,74,VI 4 {. 7[16 ,, 76, t�
128,7. 333 732 �� � "d
' te".s
; "
a .
ti , : j 1844 t
,
Sipecialmotet's)* 1.Fix 4.Novernbet 13,3903 baseyc th board acex ted the suportnten3cat-tent0a4 ona itteaasp °title School-Faceiitiea'
Task ForoeVW/kW and 2003 Piannos and Selrad ReptatSenbitive Taehnieat AdeisoryCommuttee Repast.Them eopacitieti wdi lemma effective until
changed by(1)the Schaal CUP or(2)an Stnandtdvomion at'thls turn that is axxtified by the 130ee.
,
JustifiCattion.`
.
.
3
.
Capacity Certification:
1411 ill-1, '
'`r
superintendent Date eo c Chair Date
f
Membership Certification:
A
Superintendent Date B0CC Chair Date 'J
,
9
Attachment I.B.2
Section I (page 3of 3)
2010-11
School APFO Capacity, Membership and Change Request Form
schooi7afserict. Chapel Hill-Carrbosa City Schools
CFO CAPS Year: November 15,20 Id-Istoveinb cr 14,4011
ape ' a - 'env ers to ,m `a +"a es Novels 5, 0 Q.
200(20(17 20ii7v2IH0 2005-2009 2009-2010 2(110-2011 lir�nnk)et,iilp
`Srito1rc dodilartarin
Ilio0S'whim' lirgucstedl Rostovstcd Regatcxlcil iseilaacsterl Re�ltaecisti Er,+atta+arc; {rcteterased
Geer elk peciiy C.}1)ncity U113;acit) Capac kV, C`;ipacat) schcnI yea )
tiger, i 241,111 ' .'o I,52r, I S20 74, P,,
8.'w.,,,-°i'Vel4,144 1,515 7e;.:4.,°',4,..,4,44. 5, .a
1,31
14$,023 =i 80 a fri 51 a i ;� �4.
wnt;e440:::::i;*.t„:11,ir 3 .4
- :,A7.4.:;:.-, ,t`R,
Spectra Noto(sk, 1.For thoNoytretbar 15,2002 baax year the board acccpttsd the superintoodent'certi5ed capaoties as part of the School Facilities Task.
Forte review and 2003 Phemete std School Representative Teclmisl Advisory Coineaiftee Report These capacities will renisin effective nnift changed by(1)
the School CU'or(2)ao reseeded version of this runeihes is certified by theBOCC,
Justification: Adding a new high school facility. Phoenix Academy High School became an official high
school within the Chapel Hil-Carrboro City Schools starting in the 2010-11 school year
Capacity Certff%atio
9141d / /1-12
Superintendent Date BOCC Chair Date
Membership Certification:
2
041,4,04111k- it-°17-1s ` ` i ,k,-,,,,,,,,,..,Ar`.o't#
Superintendent Date BOCC Chair - Date
-,_4
10
Attachment I.B.3
Section I (page lof 3)
2011-12
School APFO Capar.ity, Me rnbership and Change Request Form
School District: Orange County Schools
SAPFO CAPS Year: November 15,2011-November 14,2012
Capacity and Ifierribership Submittal Date; November 15,2011
ttØ .241(t8.2ittiO 2titto-2t5141 -1t141-2111 21111-21112
rictus it t'iti'y 4ititt.i re 4 tic tie,ted
Heti u este ti / I,nthi.IiIp
LT/ i);1(11) C'''1`1)`.1'115‘65 31)`1' 1.1k65
esimerartPaitic 70,812 565 565
Ceintiil 52,492 455 455 455 455 455 278
64 316 - 497
Eliot;Cheeks 497 497 497 497 450
anittBrown 74,016 144
Iiinsboraush 51,106 471 341 544 544 544 486
471 471 471 471 - 424
- 586
1`40w14009 100,164 596 586 586 586
Pathways 85,282 576 576 576 576 576 463
Total 4411 IRS -5 694 3,694 " 3,694 3,694 3,694........„.....11111111111111111111111 - 3,3411
Note(s)tot 498,188 3,694
Noventb:r 15,2002 bast year the board aeteratt,the superintr.itilennified cattacttiet as filar, ot:attinicoSettreAtootiwi Fuaenlittiiities
ak FfOtee re,A7tesv'sfin'*d 201)3 Planners and Schein 1 Representative-itellnital Advisory(.:thartiittee Iteticiit.These eispiitities sv
chaitge,d by(1)the Schittil CIP or(2)an amended version of this tivitt that is cr,rtifiesi by the BOCC.
Justification:
Capacity Certififaatio
ti°111IF
11-16
Superintendent Date BOCC Chair Date
Membership Corti cation:
Ii Al")1 Pei-ViAlh
-16-i
Superintendent Date BOCC Chair Date
11
Attachment I.B.3
Section I (page 2 of 3)
2011-12
School APFO Capacity, Membership and Change Request Form
School District: Orange tc;unry Schools
SAPFO CAPS Year November 15,2011-Noventber 14,2012
Capacity and membership Submittal Date: November 15,2011
1(1' 21)04 '10)9-'011/ '1110 21111 24111-2012
Niiddle Stitt:Iry " -2°1)8
kvtiliested Kett tiestett Requestoi.1 Requested R.q urstv11
l'411:arity („%amicity. C.ttiliells Capacity C',1rnie Iii
401
A.1.44'Stanbadc 136.000 ' 740 740 740 740
C.W.:Stanfard 107,620 726 n6 726 726 726
,
Gravelly Bill 123,000 700 700 700 700 700 472
Total 366,6-0 2,166 2,166 2,166 2166 , .
2 1''11111111111111111 1704
Special hote(s): I.For the November IS,2002 base year the board accepted the MJperInten(lent-aertlfred capacities kW part of Inc School Facilities
Task Force re-View and 2003 Planners and School Representative Technical Advisory CoinivntrEitt(er)ckcipnt. These capacities will:villain.effective ant
changed by Of the Schivit( P or(2)an amended version of tins forist thed certified by
,Oustification:
Capacity Certification:
eit-j,..„, 4 /1---/4 -1(
Superintendent Date 130CC Chair Date
Membership Certification:
e/c,,t)etristautiL 11-16-1 I
Superintendent Date BOCC Chair Date
12
Attachment I.B.3
Section I (page 3of 3)
2011-12
School APFO Capacity, Membership and Change Request Form
School District: Orange County Schools
SAPF+ AtPS ear: November 1e5,2011-November 14,2012
Capacity and Membership Submittal Date: November 15,2011
c{tttr�
2Gt*ZOtt}3 21111S 2O0q 2(109-2411() 2tWWtt-2011 2:g.! ?[)1? �a� tiiitaEs<an
311 11�c1(rn1 Rrn[steti 'Retfiuectc�rl ReElere4t1"1 Rc ttc�tt¢1 t2c ttrsir �1cinizz r1,202
1�tL ad3lttnreip f4
C'atrteiE ;''113:11:015‘0018. tn[E cats ;pn its €°nirac3t}"
213,509 . 2,518 1,518 I c 18 1,518
Cedar itzct 206,900
1,000 i.4 1,000 1,000 1,
l3tp 6,600 25.. 40 40 40 40
427,009 2,533MM 2458 2,558
Special Note(s):I.(or the P is n,i'er 15.2tt(12 ha>e yt 2r the htrnrtl aced the sopetininrident-certiired ca }ties as i xi o!the Schwpi Etecnit,11
Tas1:i arec rrvies'srid 2{103 Planners and S,:hcttrl Rapresentaiiee Teshni,a1 A lvisvey C+xnmittce Report 11rese capnei(ics will r�•es eEie Mire,eui1
thanes by(E)the Schist CEP or(2)an amended verskir.z'f thin m m,that is certified l'the 13tk i
Justification:
Capacity Certification:
P IT efis?',. 1 s,. = t..> 41 s', ... „t:; l"4'„
Superintendent Date BOCC Chair Date
Membership Certification:
ttiTctio it—46
Etn . 4 „ms ,2„_,
Superintendent Date BOCC Chair Date
13
•
Attachment I.B.4
Section I (page lof 3)
2011-12
t
,
School APFO Capacity, Membership and Change Request Form
$
School District; Chapel 1iill-Carrboro City Schools
Capacity and Membership Submittal Date: November 15,2011 3
'007-1008 1008-100 1009-7010 201tt-'011 2011.2012 'Membership
„, _ .. „, . . , _ _ , !
Elementary Square Justfficaton ,
. . Requested Requested lItlitestell Requested Iteqttested ,, ,,, tretereticeot 1
School beet . 1 ootnott**
Cat)acits i apacits' C'at)acit} Capacity Capacity schtail),car/
, . - . ,
Carrboro 60,832 533 533 533 533 s33- 580
Ephesus 66,952 448 448 , 448 448 448 460
527 527 527 527 532
Estes Bills 56,299 527
. ....
Glenwood 50,764 423 423 423 423 423 505
F1)Graham 66,689 538 538 538 538 538 455911 .
meDougle 98,000 564 564 564 564 564
11,
Raihkis " 95,729 585 585 585 585 585 516
Screw 90,980 575 575 575 575 575 616
Seawell 52,896 466 466 466 466 466 643
Morris Grove 90,221 0 585.:'s.,:i8-$ 585 585 569
Total 729,362 4,659 5,244 5,244 5,244 5,244 5 7 464
Special Note(s):I,For the November 15,2002 base year the board accepted the suprainiende.m-certified capacities as part of the School Facilities
Task Force review and 2003 Planners and School Representative Technical Advisory Committee Report.These capacities will remain effective until
changed by(1)the School CCP or(2)an amended version of this form that is certified by the BOCC. ,
- ,
I
Justification:
1,
Ca 'city
Ce I' atio :
4.
/ . ,,i„--ift,, , ,
_
Superintendent Date BOCC Chair Date
Priem rshi -C ification:
de
.). .
i
Su 'ntendent Date BOCC Chair Date
i
I
,
1
14
■sh.
Attachment I.B.4
Section I (page 2 of 3)
2011-12
t
t
School APE() Capacity Membership and Change Request Form
1
School District: Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools
. ,
SAPP()CAPS Year: November 15,2011-November 14,2012
apacity and Membership Submittal Date: November 15,2011
2007-2008 21/118-2009 2009-20111 2ti1 0-2011 2011-2012 NIentlfership
Square Justiticatiott
'Middle School Requeste41 ltetpiested Requested Requested Requested (referenced
Feet Footnote,4
Cattacitv Capacitls (*apaeits Capacit,s Catiatity sehtitil;s,citr1
Ctilbretli 108,058 67 670 670 670 67i 689
McDoitgle 136,221 732 732 732 732 73 683
.
,
Phillips 109,498 71■ 706 71 706 70 644 !
Smith 128,7,' 732 732 732 732 73 73
,
i
1
I
Total azIpzij 2,840 2,840 2,840 2,840 2,84 IMMIN 753
Spacial Hote(s): 1,For the Nethereher I 5,21101 base year the board accepted the superintendent-certitied ettprieities as part oldie School Facilities
Task Force review and 2003 Planners and School Representative Technical Advisory'Committee Report These capacities will remain effective until
changed by(I)the School CIP or(2)an encoded version iii forts,that is etirtifted by the BOCC.
Justification:
,
1
"..,,Capacity
C' . i ic atr :
d l
‘elet.-(
4(
.,,
,... , ,...
,
Superintendent Date BOCC Chair Date
Membership ' 'ficat"ori:
, ,, ......._ ,
" 7h4 44.4•F si ti t( is c I
-,„--v c-
Superintendent Date BOCC Chair Date
.t-
15
Attachment LB.4
Section I (page 3 of 3)
2011-12
I
3
School APFO Capacity, Membership and Change Request Form
School District: Chapel Ilill-Carrboro City Schools 1
SAPFQ CAPS Year: November 15,2011-November 14,2012
Capacity and Membership Submittal Date: November 15,2011
2007-2008 20118-2009 2004-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 M1lcmbership
Square Justificative i
Nigh School 1tequested Reque%tet1 Requested Requested Requested Footnote# (referenced
Feet Capacitys Papa€e% Capaeit4 Capacity Capacity sehigol ear) g
Chapel Hill 241,111 1,520 1,520 1,5 t, 1,520 1,520 1,353
East Chapel dill 259,869 1,515 1,515 1,515 1,515 1,515 1,445
Carrboro 148,923 800 811 800 800 8011 88
Phoenix Acad. 5,20 0 0 0 40 4 t' 31 4
i
'total 654,210 383 3,835 3 t "111111KM 3,87 3,714
Special Note(s): 1..For the November 15,2002 base year the board accepted the superiatendent-eerti#ied capacities as part of the School Facilities
Task Force review and 2003 Planners and School.Representative Technical Advisory Committee Repeat,These capacities will cantata effective until t
chanced by(t)the School CIF or(2)an amended version of this form that is certified by the PO(C:.,
l
Justification:
d
Ca ity Ce if'cati•;-: jj(/ ]J
,,,,,,,,7a
ift;ii„,,,
Superintendent Date GC Chair Date
Me rship C:rtl a'<atl n:
Superintendent Date BOCC Chair Date
i
i
1
16
Section I
2.
C. Membership Date
Responsible Entity for Suggesting Change - Change can be effectuated only by amendment to
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) by all School APFO partners. The Planning Directors,
School Representatives, Technical Advisory Committee (SAPFOTAC) may advise if a change in
date would improve the reporting or timeliness of the report.
Definition - The date at which student membership is calculated. This date is updated each year
and also serves as the basis for projections along with the history from previous years. "For
purposes of this Memorandum, the term "school membership" means the actual number of
students attending school as of November 15 of each year. The figure is determined by
considering the number of students enrolled (i.e. registered, regardless of whether a student is no
longer attending school) and making adjustments for withdrawals, dropouts, deaths, retentions
and promotions. Students who are merely absent from class on the date membership is
determined as a result of sickness or some other temporary reason are included in school
membership figures. Each year the School District shall transmit its school membership to the
parties to this agreement no later than five (5) school days after November 15.
Standard for:
Chapel Hill Carrboro School District
Standard for:
Orange County School District
November 15
of each year
4
November 15
of each year
Analysis of Existing Conditions
This will be analyzed in the future years to determine if it is an exemplary date.
5. Reeommendation - No change at this Recommendation - No change at this time
time
17
Section II
II. ANNUAL UPDATE TO SCHOOLS ADEQUATE PUBLIC
FACILITIES ORDINANCE SYSTEM
A. Capital Investment Plan (CIP)
1.
2.
Responsib[e Entity for Suggesting Change - The updating of this section will be
conducted by the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) after review of the CIP
requests from the School Districts. Action regarding CIP programs usually occurs during
the BOCC budget Public Hearing process in the winter and spring of each year. The
development of the CIP considers the conditions noted in the SAPFOTAC report released
in the same CIP development year including LOS (level of service), capacity, and
membership projections.
Definition - The process and resultant program to determine school needs and provide
funding for new school facilities through a variety of funding mechanisms.
3. Standard for:
Chapel Hill-Carrboro School District
Not Applicable
4.
5.
Standard for:
Orange County School District
Not Applicable
Analysis of Existing Conditions
The MOU outlines a system of implementing the SAPFO, including issuing Certificates
of Adequate Public Schools (CAPS) to new development if capacity is available. The
Requests for CAPS will be evaluated using the most recently adopted Capital Investment
Plan. A new Capital Investment Plan is currently under development for approval prior
to June 30, 2012.
Recommendation -
Not subject to staff review
18
Section II
B. Student Projection Methodology
Responsible Entity for Suggesting Change - This section is reviewed and recommended
by the Planning Directors, School Representatives, and Technical Advisory Committee
(SAPFOTAC) to the BOCC for change, if necessary.
2. Definition - The method(s) by which student memberships are calculated for future
years to determine total membership at each combined school level (Elementary, Middle
and High School) which take into consideration historical membership totals at a specific
time (November 15) in the school year. These methods are also known as `models'.
3. Standard for: Standard for:
Chapel Hill Carrboro School District Orange County 5chool District
Presently, the average of five models is being used: namely 3, 5, and 10 year
history/cohort survival methods, Orange County Planning Department Linear
Wave and Tischler Linear methods. Attachment II.B.1 includes a description of
each model.
4. Analysis of Existing Conditions
Performance of the models is monitored each year. The value of a projection model is in its
prediction of school level capacities at least three years in advance of capacity shortfalls so the
annual Capital Investment Plan (CIP) updates can respond proactively with siting, design, and
construction. Attachment II.B.1 includes a description of each model. Attachment II.B.3 shows
the performance of the models for the 2011-12 school year from the prior year projection.
5. Recommendation -
Ten years of projection results are now available. Analysis on the accuracy of the results is
showing that some models have better results in one district while others have better results in
the other district. The historic growth rate is recorded by the models but projected future
growth is more diff'icult to accurately quantify. In all areas of the county, proposed growth is
not included in the SAPFO projection system until actual students begin enrollment. The
system is updated in November of each year, becoming part of the historical projection base.
This is especially pertinent in the Orange County School District which serves students living
within the Orange County portion of the City of Mebane which had had little historic
enrollment impact. The significant proposed residential growth occurring within Mebane's
jurisdiction has yet to be fully entered into the historically based projection methods.
19
n-
STUDENT MEMBERSHIP PROJECTIONS
PROJECTION TYPE
DESCRIPTION / CHARACTERISTICS
FORMULA
ASSUMPTIONS
Tischler Linear (OCS &
CHCCS)
Mathematical formula; straight line projection
y-q(clb)*x)+b
Y-proieded Fopubdion; c=hislorical annual change; b4m Year; x- PrOf-11- V08M
Historical growth is reflected in projected growth
SYM + (BYI + 6(a)) - FYM EYM `%S1. a EYMISL
Sm year growth reflector lolear average:
OCP Linear Wave
Mathematical linearvilh percent variation among school
SYR-- base year 2nd mangy membership; BYI=yearstudert memberaNp increment
be"; EYM"nauing membership; ft--projection year, %SL--% of total
increase in BYI of 5 every other year reflects
(OCS)
levels; reflects progfassing waves of membership
year
membership per school level (!,a, elementary, middle. high): EYMISL=errsuing Year
increases in housing growth; reflects truldoul,
constraints
member by school level
BYM + (BYI - 16(n)): EYM EYM' %SL - EYMtSL
Base year growth refteft 10-yLar average;
OCP Linear Wave
Mathematical linear vath percent variation among school
SYM= base year 2nd month membership; BYtoyear student membership increment
base; EYINI-ensuing membership; n=projectJon year; %r>L--% of total
decrease In BYI of 15 until school year 2010201 1
(CHCCS)
levels; reflects pmgrass4n waves of membership
year
membership per school level (im, elementary, middle, high); EYMISLzensuing yew
re,"ft decreases in housing growth; reflects
Indidout constraints
member by school level
K„ x k (k., * 0,01)
Mathematical fomyA that computes the average
ncl
advancement rate over the previous 3 years for each
a w(TL Gn I gj) 13
Assures a 1% annual growth rate for the
3-Year Cohort (OCS &
grade level and then uses each rate to calculate
n=3
kindergarten grade lavat; assumes the some
CHCCS)
projected membership by school level; an assumed
bag A (3)
percentage of students in each grade level
kindergarten membership is based on birth records
K-kindargarlon mernksorship; "given school year; Q=grv*fl Wml**$
graduate to the rwxt Level each year
and/or historical growth rates
mernbership(olhef than itindergerten); g- previous grade's membership; a--average
advancement rate; ls=pwjected membership
Kn = k (k., * 0.01)
Mathematical formula that computes the average
nzi
advancement rate over the previous 5 years for each
a =(I G, I ltn,) 16
Assumes a 1% annual growth (ate for the
5 year Cohort (OCS
grade We] and than uses each fate to calculate
M25
kladeroarten grade beet; assumes the same
CHCCS)
projected membership by school twat; an assumed
bso �, (a)
percentage of students In each grade W01
kindergarten membership is based an birth records
K-Wndergaden membership: n-given school year: Gcgiven grades
graduate to IN nand Wal each year
and/or historical growth rates
menibership(othet than kindergarten); g= previous grade's membership; a*average
advancement rate; baprojected membership
r. 2 k , + (k., ' 0.01)
Mathematical formula that computes the average
nxl
advancement rate over the previous 10 years for each
a =(1 0. 1 9,,)l ic
Assumes a 1% annual growth rato for the
10 year Cohort (OCS
grade level and Then uses each rate to cakularlit
nz;10
xinder9nden grade level,, assumes the same
CHCCS)
projected momborship, by school level; an assumed
bg .1 (a)
percentage of students in each grade level
kindergarten membership is based on birth records
K=Kindergartim membership; n-giverr school year, GmUlver, grade's
gradual* to the fteg Leval each year
and/or historical growth rates
membarsbip(other than Kindergarten); It= pwA*w anuWa membership; azaversob
advancement rate: bwpmjeded membership
CD
O
ti
Section II
Attachment II.B.2
(page 1 of 4)
Orange County School District
School Membership 2010-11 School Year (November 15, 2010)
11/13/09
Actual
2009-10 2010 Report
Projection for
2010-11
11/15/10
Actual 2010-11
Change between actual
Nov 2009- Nov 2010
Elementa 3211 3285 +74
Model Pro ection is
T 3339 H54
pCp 3265 L20
10C 3217 L68
5C 3228 L57
3C 3222 L63
AVG 3254 L31
11 /15/2010
Middle 1665 1698 +33
Model Pro'ection is
T 1696 L2
OCP 1672 L26
10C 1713 H15
5C 1728 H30
3C 1747 H49
AVG 1711 H13
11 /15/2010
Hi h 2217 2222 +5
Model Pro ection is
T 2258 H36
OCP 2271 H49
10C 2198 L24
5C 2217 L5
3C 2238 H16
AVG 2236 H14
11 /15/2010
Totals
Elementa 3211 3285
Middle 1665 1698
Hi h 2217 2222
7093 7205 +112
Mode Pro'ection is
T 7293 H88
OCP 7208 H3
10C 7128 L77
5C 7173 L32
3C 7207 H2
AVG 7201 L4
H means High L means Low
21
Section II
Attachment II.B.2
(page 2 of 4)
Orange County School District
School Membership 2010-11 School Year (November 15, 2010)
Statistical Findinqs
PROJECTION TYPE ABBREVIATIONS
10-YEAR COHORT (10C)
`TISCHLER' LINEAR (T) 5-YEAR COHORT (5C)
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING (OCP) 3-YEAR COHORT 3C
Elementary School Level
Projections were primarily low, ranging from 68 students low to 54 students high. The
average of the projections was 31 students lower than actual student membership.
• The membership actually increased by 74 students between November 13, 2009 and
November 15, 2010.
Middle School Level
• Projections were mixed low and high, ranging from 26 students low to 49 students high.
On average, the projections were 13 students higher than the actual membership.
• The membership actually increased by 33 students between November 13, 2009 and
November 15, 2010.
High School Level
• Projections were mixed (low and high) ranging from being low by 24 students to being
high by 49 students. One average, the projections were 14 students higher than the
actual membership.
• The membership actually increased by 5 students between November 13, 2009 and
November 15, 2010.
TOTAL
• The totals of all school level projections were mixed low and high, ranging from 77 below
actual membership to 88 above actual membership. On average, the projections were
low by 4 students.
• The membership increased in total by 112 students, which is the sum of +74 at
Elementary, + 33 at Middle and +5 at High.
22
Attachment II.B.2
Section II (page 3 of 4)
Chapel HiIl/Carrboro School District
School Membership 2010-11 School Year (November 15, 2010)
11/13/09
Actual
2009-10 2010 Report
Projection for
2010-11 11/15/10
Actual
2010-11
Change between actual
Nov 2009- Nov 2010
Elementa 5219 5296 +7~
Model Pro ection is
T 5436 H140
OCP 5350 H54
10C 5410 H114
5C 5365 H69
3C 5346 H50
AVG 5381 H85
11 /15/2010
Middle 2708 2722 +14
Model Pro'ection is
T 2761 H39
OCP 2704 L18
10C 2767 H45
5C 2746 H24
3C 2732 H10
AVG 2742 H20
11 /15/2010
Hi h 3606 3640 +34
Model Pro ection is
T 3677 H37
OCP 3704 H64
10C 3649 H9
5C 3639 L1
3C 3640 accurate
AVG 3662 H22
Totals 11 /15/2010
Elementa 5219 5296
Middle 2708 2722
Hi h 3606 3640
11533 11658 +125
Model Pro'ection is
T 11874 H216
OCP 11758 H100
10C 11826 H168
5C 11750 H92
3C 11718 H60
AVG 11785 H127
H means High
L means Low
23
Attachment II.B.2
Section II (page 4 of 4)
Chapel HiIl/Carrboro School District
School Membership 2010-11 School Year (November 15, 2010)
Statistical Findinqs
PROJECTION TYPE ABBREVIATIONS
10-YEAR COHORT (10C)
`TISCHLER' LINEAR (T) 5-YEAR COHORT (5C)
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING (OCP) 3-YEAR COHORT 3C
Elementary School Level
• Projections were all high, ranging from 50 students to 140 students higher than the
actual November 15, 2010 membership numbers. On average, the projections were 85
students higher than the actual membership.
• The actual membership increased by 77 students between November 13, 2009 and
November 15, 2010.
Middle School Level
• Projections were primarily high, ranging from 18 students low to 45 students higher than
the actual membership. On average, the projections were 20 students higher than the
actual membership.
• The actual membership increased by 14 students between November 13, 2009 and
November 15, 2010.
High School Level
• Projections were primarily high, ranging from 1 student below to 64 students higher than
the actual membership. On average, the projections were 22 students higher than the
actual membership.
• The actual membership increased by 34 students between November 13, 2009 and
November 15, 2010.
TOTAL
• The total of all school level projections were high, ranging from 60 to 216 students. On
average the projections were high by 127 students.
• The membership increased in total by 125 students, which is the sum of +77 at
Elementary, +14 at Middle, and +34 at High.
24
Section II
Attachment II.B 3
(page 1 of 4)
Orange County School District
School Membership 2011-12 School Year (November 15, 2011)
11/15/10
Actual
2010-11 2011 Report
Projection for
2011-12
11/15/11
Actual 2011-12
Change between actual
Nov 2010 - Nov 2011
Elementa 3285 3348 +63
Model Pro ection is
T 3343 L5
OCP 3348 accurate
10C 3366 H18
5C 3373 H25
3C 3379 H31
AVG 3362 H14
11/15/2011
Middle 1698 1704 +6
Model Pro'ection is
T 1728 H24
OCP 1729 H25
10C 1698 L6
5C 1713 H9
3C 1714 H10
AVG 1716 H12
11 /15/2011
Hi h 2222 2283 +61
Model Pro'ection is
T 2261 L22
OCP 2249 L34
10C 2258 L25
5C 2273 L10
3C 2276 L7
AVG 2263 L20
11 /15/2011
Totals
Elementa 3285 3348
Middle 1698 1704
Hi h 2222 2283
7205 7335 + 130
Mode Pro'ection is
T 7332 L5
OCP 7326 L9
10C 7322 L13
5C 7359 H24
3C 7369 H34
AVG 7342 H6
H means High L means Low
25
Section II
Attachment II.B3
(page 2 of 4)
Orange County School District
School Membership 2011-2012 School Year (November 15, 2011)
Statistical Findinqs
PROJECTION TYPE ABBREVIATIONS
10-YEAR COHORT (10C)
`TISCHLER' LINEAR (T) 5-YEAR COHORT (5C)
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING (OCP) 3-YEAR COHORT 3C
Elementary School Level
Projections were primarily high, ranging from 5 students low to 31 students high. The
average of the projections was 14 students higher than actual student membership.
• The membership actualty increased by 63 students befinreen November 15, 2010 and
November 15, 2011.
Middle School Level
• Projections were primarily high, ranging from 6 students low to 25 students high. On
average, the projections were 12 students higher than the actual membership.
• The membership actually increased by 6 students between November 15, 2010 and
November 15, 2011.
High School Level
• Projections were entirely low ranging from being low by 7 students to 34 students. On
average, the projections were 20 students lower than the actual membership.
• The membership actually increased by 61 students between November 15, 2010 and
November 15, 2011.
TOTAL
The totals of all school level projections were mixed low and high, ranging from 13 below
actual membership to 34 above actual membership. On average, the projections were
high by 6 students.
The membership increased in total by 130 students, which is the sum of +63 at
Elementary, + 6 at Middle and +61 at High.
26
Section II
Attachment II.B.3
(page 3 of 4)
Chapel HiIl/Carrboro School District
School Membership 2011-2012 School Year (November 15, 2011)
11/15/10
Actual
2010-11 2011 Report
Projection for
2011-12 11/15/11
Actual
2011-12
Change between actual
Nov 2010- Nov 2011
Elementa 5296 5464 +168
Model Pro'ection is
T 5389 L75
OCP 5407 L57
10C 5419 L45
5C 5395 L69
3C 5380 L84
AVG 5398 L66
11 /15/2011
Middle 2722 2753 +31
Model Pro'ection is
T 277p H17
OCP 2733 L20
10C 2764 H11
5C 2742 L11
3C 2734 L19
AVG 2749 L4
11 /15/2011
Hi h 3640 3617 +74
Model Pro'ection is
T 3704 L10
OCP 3743 H29
10C 3679 L35
5C 3665 L49
3C 3645 L69
AVG 3687 L27
Totals 11 /15/2011
Elementa 5296 5464
Middle 2722 2753
Hi h 3640 3714
11658 11931 +273
Mode l Pro'ection is
T 11863 L68
OCP 11883 L48
10C 11862 L69
5C 11802 L129
3C 11759 L172
AVG 11834 L97
H means High
L means Low
27
Attachment II.B.3
SeCtion II (page 4 of 4)
Chapei HiIl/Carrboro School District
School Membership 2011-2012 School Year (November 15, 2011)
Statistical Findinqs
PROJECTION TYPE ABBREVIATIONS
10-YEAR COHORT (10C)
`TISCHLER' LINEAR (T) 5-YEAR COHORT (5C)
ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING (OCP) 3-YEAR COHORT (3C)
Elementary School Level
• Projections were all low, ranging from 45 students to 84 students lower than the actual
November 15, 2011 membership numbers. On average, the projections were 66
students lower than the actual membership.
• The actual membership increased by 168 students between November 15, 2010 and
November 15, 2011.
Middle School Level
• Projections were primarily low, ranging from 20 students low to 17 students higher than
the actual membership. On average, the projections were 4 students lower than the
actual membership.
• The actual membership increased by 31 students between November 15, 2010 and
November 15, 2011.
High School Level
• Projections were primarily low, ranging from 69 students below to 29 students higher
than the actual membership. On average, the projections were 27 students lower than
the actual membership.
• The actual membership increased by 74 students between November 15, 2010 and
November 15, 2011.
TOTAL
• The total of all school level projections were low, ranging from 48 to 172 students below.
On average the projections were low by 97 students.
• The membership increased in total by 273 students, which is the sum of +168 at
Elementary, +31 at Middle, and +74 at High.
28
Section II
C. Student Projections
1. Responsible Entity for Suggesting Change - The updating of this section will be
conducted by the Planning Directors, School Representatives, and Technical Advisory
Committee (SAPFOTAC) and referred to the BOCC for annual report certifications.
Projections will be distributed to SAPFO partners for review and comments to the BOCC
prior to certification.
2. Definition - The result of the average of the five student projection models represented
by 10 year numerical membership projections by school level (Elementary, Middle, and
High) for each school district (Chapel Hill/Carrboro School District and Orange County
School District).
3. Standard for:
Chapel Hill Carrboro School District
Standard for:
Orange County School District
The 5 model average discussed in Section II.B
(Student Projection Methodology)
See Attachment II.C.4
The 5 model average discussed in Section II.B
(Student Projection Methodology)
See Attachment II.C3
4. Analysis of Existing Conditions
The membership figures and percentage growth on the attachments show continued
growth in both systems. Variability by school level and between the School Districts is
also noted. Year-by-year percent growth is shown on the attached table as well as the
projected LOS. The projections models were updated using current (November 15)
memberships. Ten years of student membership were projected thereafter.
29
Section II
Chapel Hill Carrboro School District
Elementary
The previous year (2010-11) projections for November 2011 at this level were underestimated by
66 students. The actual change was an increase of 168 students. Over the previous ten years,
this level has shown varying increases in growth. From 2001 until 2003, growth steadily
increased; however, in 2004, the increase suddenly fell to an increase of only 3 additional
students. In years 2005-06 through 2008-09 student membership increased by over 100 students
per year. In 2009-10 there was a drop in membership, most likely due to the shorter enrollment
period caused by the institution of the new date rising kindergarteners must be five years old.
Following that dip, membership numbers are again increasing, with a significant jump (168
students) this year. The projections show the need for Elementary School #11 in 2012-13, versus
2013-14 as projected last year. A site has been acquired for Elementary School #11 and work
on-site has commenced. The school is scheduled to open in the fall of 2013. However, if the
2012 membership numbers (to be reported November 15, 2012) and/or CAPS issued /requested
meet or exceed the Elementary level capacity, the issuance of further CAPS may be impacted
until Elementary School #11 is opened and additional Elementary level capacity is added.
Although not included in SAPFO school capacity or membership numbers, Pre-K programs
continue to impact operations at District elementary schools where Pre-K programs exist.
Middle
The previous year (2010-11) projections for November 2011 for this level were underestimated
by 4 students. The actual membership increased by 31. Over the previous ten years, growth
decreased precipitously from 214 to 68 to 4, to -52 and then has seen modest increases of +12,
+20, +30, +75, + 1 l, +14 and +31 since 2004. The projections show a need for Middle School
#5 in 2017-18, which is one year earlier than projected last year.
High School
The previous year (2010-11) projections for November 2011 for this level were underestimated
by 27 students. The actual membership increased by 74 students. Over the previous ten years,
change has varied from a high of 199 students to the 2009-10 school year loss of 24 students.
Membership has increased the past two years with +34 in 2010-11 and+74 this year. This year's
30
Section II
projections show that additional capacity is needed in 2020-21, whereas last year's projections
did not show a need in the 10-year projection time frame. Additional High School capacity is
expected to be achieved by expanding Carrboro High School from 800 students to 1,200
students, which was included in the construction plans for the high school.
Orange County School District
Elementary
The previous year (2010-11) projections for November 2011 at this level were overestimated by
14 students. The actual membership increased by 63 students. Over the previous ten years, this
level has experienced erratic enrollment which changed from -185 to +8 to +44 to +71 to -10 to
+66 to +86 to +7, +46, +74, and +64 students a year. This created a historical base of negative
growth which was captured by the various mathematical models to produce moderate growth
projections. However, the membership numbers have shown steady increase in recent years. In
the Orange County school system, historic growth is more closely related to new residential
development than in the Chapel Hill-Carrboro School District, which has a sizeable number of
new families in older, existing housing stock. Projections show the need for an additional
Elementary School in 2020-21.
Although not included in SAPFO school capacity or membership numbers, Pre-K programs
continue to impact operations at District elementary schools where Pre-K programs exist.
Middle
The previous year (2010-11) projections for November 2011 for this level were overestimated by
12 students. The actual membership increased by 6. Over the previous ten years, growth has
varied widely and included an unexpected decrease of 78 students in 2004-OS with smaller
decreases each year unti12007-08 and then increasing the past three years. The district's third
Middle School, Gravelly Hill Middle School, opened in October 2006. The need for an
additional Middle School is not anticipated in the 10-year projection period. However, staff is
closely monitoring new sizeable residential projects in the Orange County portion of Mebane
and Hillsborough.
31
Section II
High School
The previous year (2010-11) projections for November 2011 for this level were underestimated
by 20 students. The actual membership increased by 61. Over the previous ten years, growth
was relatively constant. However, there was a decrease in enrollment in 2009-10 and only
modest increase of +5 students last year. Membership increased by +61 this school year. Even
though historic growth at the high school level is moderate and recognizable, future projections
are more moderate because of the fluctuations at the elementary and middle school levels. The
need for an additional High School is not anticipated in the 10-year projection period. However,
Orange County Schools has requested the N.C. Department of Public Instruction (DPI) re-
examine the capacity rating of Orange High School. This assessment could result in a significant
decrease in capacity at the high school level. Any capacity modifications approved by DPI prior
to the November 15, 2012 reporting date would become effective with the approval of the 2012-
13 membership and capacity numbers.
Additional Information for Orange County School District
The City of Mebane lies partially within Orange County and students within the Orange County
portion of Mebane attend Orange County schools. However, the City of Mebane is not a party to
the SAPFO agreement and therefore does not issue CAPS (Certificate of Adequate Public
Schools). In previous years, development activity and platting of new subdivisions increased
within the Orange County portion of Mebane. However, changing economic conditions may
curb this activity.
Increased coordination with the City of Mebane regarding development issues may be necessary
in the future. OCS currently has capacity to serve additional growth, but it is possible that
rampant development in the Orange County portion of Mebane could quickly encumber
available capacity.
5. Recommendation -
Use statistics as noted in 3 above
32
CCS$,.d ni Prow:Son.'
rani
_ ... • u. tf, ^, MI 3,4 ra sassI
11111114_,.1=. ,,,,,111111111M1111•1111111111ffill1111FITIM
��,. u. •,x ,.
. ,:'{ _
..,...va.�..�..m..-+.sr.,...r.tcm.>®..,
7717770.:n777u.,77..:.,n:77.ca.,rwn«.,..>..w.r•+*�.«s., .,.,..._.......:..._....,.e�w�,nu.
ea...r...r,.......*worm r.=::m>al,•::...a.>,..+u..-+..+i>w.«..wl.:c„-uw.11.1.1:,
�.,.a•ima r�,.xos4.wane wee:.w.. :.s w«c.s.•.....,w.,.r.:,,,.........:,....,,•.-,:.u,v..eo-.:�.srwce.:...«� cz•>amaw:.,m.:aw..v:.a:wua.:.e.»>an
CGS Stud:3,t Prajaatians”•
was.
sir. .n+�Yacc I _ , x... =r+<s i ,,. m..,e x,... .,r 7 m:.v St
•
1=�!!?LiE' !'11S:.I�SPf�lfl7 'f 71iRnwir siren
.Y s.ems•.,,. �'!'7�fl1�i71.��... I - --i +n^an.J�Sd
.7. 7,SISISSLIZSIMMISCIIIIIISOCISISISZT!
++ •
•
a:+ww..,s.,..w a a..ra..w«n.:aua>.a.wsw�,:aw s•a=»aw..Y.a,.w.a:.r:�..;.,.�.y
�.r.«,....,a,,,w,.a a.•w,..xa,u+ .aux:=u,cs
My! eau.. .O:Y was,.0+awv29Yn.a:a.2216 01aaa.r,a.*a+:rarym•w74g. astwP 5:3:+
CCS SOaden:ProjtetSOna
a. ONIN8ifi8i7®�A
-a feti.>RFEiL'71111115r1�„+7MIC371111•FIi7
` 1 OFF!7'✓�FSil.saa�+£31111 f1MINF*^+IONILx_t��
41111111111M NIMIZMINER911TGLoww. ANNUM',^Re.....`
as :J17::10IIi17. ,.. .1 I rri 1 =1 r'i •
wr ..J1=°�•,#.itA,r'14.ata't�1.-4 _ -ia 1 .+ wmairn M.1N®
.»r... .r........ ,,,mmammimaimnizawroirsimumnizamem a 9 Millesnas■aml
a�..,..._n.�,.:.e,..�.e:......r.,Ya:>.�,«,....-x,>:,Y�...>a>• .mr«,.r,:.�•.:r.�s::>:,
O
ay
I
Co
W
W
CHCCS Student Peahens m
mansiorinu
_- 111111113ThIlliern s.Iz n
i
I
0.0..30.13 303,04...>•3:ivuge 0.01=11n43 2.U.?ew+rww.Yai WUtCLevc.n Wa,p+aawGei es3..w wad::.aacavn.+..wv.:0.031431v'.S wvn..•1:an.cr
CHCCS Student Pre eedefs";
Mt• 41.1.11111111111.111. , •11111=1.1111®
.,
r
nt111731 AIME1111 "1 ?,1' 3.? -1 '33 1111111111€1211
H
.:.a»c :.6.1 .�..
-«a:aw.t.�.a.,..�:ww uw.o..rwu.tr•+a!«.c-xu.m ass ..310,s033..,.a...«v.�.r.:a..,r..w..w..•w.�t....�...e.>.rv<,u:s.
iss0 Noy iv plan a.,y,:�•-.,w..4+a.,...,..m,..�.mi"?....3.X0031
CHCCS Student Prelewons"
n
msocratmarazinmeriwortra
111111111Mi8'.fiL&l11111111111i'3111111111161'7 =1115 a!
astsgmomma miorsimor1mmr7l7amern f 7
_......__ .w�1�66L�97Yi •.
.,d
.«- ......... :,,. .�? "i"`t:.:°^r-;a "�.?'^,i.....w'^,"w.aa«.P°^:�.wa....x�•;:�:^-'"s..a.:sC"°�«� "^1`e."w''=< r.'�'^".'" . vcsf:i _.. "-'^^'SC°.a.�"'�# d
.4MN 0.0.3 Mwn..frN.VDil . .x f..a+w..aaw..•......,
....ay.kaa-001.31130. „ b, v. ..m.7.h..Cuw, yy
a ..vat M .. .. u
... ' *+ Y.?'.1w .ra..e�a.+.+..A-5-5.'-, 0
M ey
K
C'1
t,.) lJ
•
.
OCS Student Projoctluns'4°
E 22”2
k w»« >: , s�,rar �a ■ ®r ter »
� �� ® tttttt�
INNIMMEnninirrn
:. -• A j_-} A* xnn to 1,R7 Vast as )•}II 024
_ ..
P omm _,¢47.am -. .N§ "_ _
3:11,4
, w
w
X4 4,44 4404411147474 ue 4.47.1.•a,.1.wuw,w oc aasroacoyws.aw 4774,01,7774707471777-74744 �,••"+w •.,...ww....
7.4 « . g«ro«v,,w«vewa7,744..,w7x,rrra.,,7r77„.yw w<...w*+Hw•r.ar^.r:,«,.:m,7.]c:.m?w.:,..awc-.u.,a wc._as
...e.n.�,vo«uT�.e:v..r,.,.;.w.,r:w'.4avw«ezN•.«..-a,...m...�.,ra.s+.n•av
c...a.,. a ..s..nw•. w7.xa�w,.r,•.a.��.....�,:.,...ew......�.:«.v.r.<.•sa..��.w..,.,..7.a_«aa<ror,vwr.a..w,,..»o�.a.a.,.:v-:...a.+.w.,..a,.........w.+:.�w.7..a,,....,...
OCS Student Projoctiatxlll
cc ma,
raw 1 _ _:-, t St'l...,•,_.mmi- F7S�®
.w. .va i&HTY[ 7 _.
.'•a „ „,1 �:. .. _`sarrzn
r x^r *R om
eu.�nenu-m:rueem raysm•w.w.aaser,l�nf w,J.tcravuex aauam�:YS]aS:•mal+sm.Was faaak O�n».or.
.a.a:..ms«�s cw•,.um 'aprxs,Wa :n7CC Mo(KS.[.41H-V4w,.eua.a.p o..r':�:,.�i NA13 Y.�:Arpti.,s'[Wew,.ra,LLbs vuGCCC.
OCS Student PrMocitOOo Ip,..e�...
h
f -.. •_a ;:4a 1taae- fap:..a .rasa '0* Mn - I »n.1 1 1
T -.._ __. lo....a 4+141, assn s,. aouaa :ua3
,
TAW' ._._ • .••■ ••_. raa
S".
... °1
, zrx aw ►^1 TS�7�!p7�
NIIM
e7.. .,., _4} ,
aru
..... - ... .a.:.
M.wYw.,ly.rMiy �' eee am s>f. .. ••Y°CtaiueY t..t�}"*1i�'ST �� ��t+i -.
,wa,».«• <..v«wrWwa.a4u.+wn ue.4ww ua ww ,..wnc ,s..r...a.e.,,w-..,whcr.cn�. N
7744mf.14474 7717*47ar44477:4744*4430 044.4411197744 444*4Y..«ap 77440i aW p1a13,47.7416,7 77
—, n
N �
7.r
W w
Ct
GHCGS Student Pro laolous tN ro
_ _._. m �cxcx,�;•2•_• INIOVI
w _ _. . a.uAm _.. . ...
`° •11•111MISIMInutmmeelINIM51t:FI21_P1IIIIIS1Gt!
• n.._." .
Mrintg
a x „
• ads IIIMMIEWIRMERairomemor9
.etp+.Yawx.RtlP.\N.d.ti,u...wti.ie•itldd+w:am,:wwwi+¢+Fba.v<sadau.>.i.'s iw tYw:M..++•*.an r.xa sue,.a>Ya a.r..iw. y nvv.�ma.
Wlmta'Y.MPwdat:�.a•.Y.a-M,t4PV}a,Ynr«MH�:Ca.'^awae;.^.e N�a's'�:atw,avµry«mw,rgeCaiaucA l+Ga.a¢a-.aap iat.vxu4tNRGC,tiCt.
Mt�dfl.a'NeowS..;a,N..O- -O,lN.Na:as...icy a Una.r»...._.o._tr,tw x.I3YLa$xxis
..aa»»a•�,M.!..:.D•lat4p\la.W.VWa.r..swauaw...aaW a.W:.Nf«ar Mn..mvracaa,»a...I•:.o..2, to.....,dI.tofls....o. w.1.w.r.a.11lwld4tW9L4yHa:.+.m+n
CHCCS Student Proledlooi°1
W M.
UMW ■r:11111111718.1.1iT
FR.wuax_—aw±y af9l�#7�timsstm�lri..7En�
t
a'TMa ie'
tr2 a �r-tmExz X11 �3^ilor- �tt�l RSifiJ
1�1f.�•*} .,. .,.
y
aa.aaa.w tYNr�swrh+l M6:Y'.+,'w+rrelw..�.�Newa ,
,.rP'4<�zexYw.w.MUaw WS�f..l 4ftttras.aewesauwwan>aew.v,aaaa'wa1..tla:.aaYe Gawaa.xMrestautcf.arteta-.a t+�axre.sA '
a YaWMarf0fl 4w'SO.wccfa>aa:s C .waaNMSaw_.._.m L••IO2.Ma W#da..tlt4: 1
µ.y�«.w'.wa.d:L•a.wxa.»c:xrNieuw:a..ry a.as+a�r,+.xrMO,sywitss
CHCCB Student Prol.Wlians ro
«+ m< tu�:t.YfA :'M,:-.ilt„L .. w+o Nu.0 »u•a + >na.» �!
���'+®IIIt�R9�l1'n _ 1
i ttttltt�2
X17
=P5 � kV, 3pt
•
•
a • .. r
ipmAremesin a
-�.uruaw•u r.,ouc..a xs a....w:«w„w,.w •..w:...w
.u!
IIMER
M,nrwaw .vdxaa
O
— C)
1--1
rti
n
W
Section H
D. Student Growth Rate
1. Responsible Entity for Suggesting Change—The updating of this section will be
conducted by the Planning Directors, School Representatives, Technical Advisory
Committee (SAPFOTAC) each year and referred to the BOCC for annual report
certification.
Projections will be distributed to SAPFO partners for review and comments to the BOCC
prior to certification.
2. Definition —The annual percentage growth rate calculated from the projections resulting
from the average of the five models represented by 10 year numerical membership
projections by school level for each school district. This does not represent the year-by-
year growth rate that may be positive or negative but rather the average of the annual
growth rates over ten(10)years.
3. Standard for: Standard for:
Chapel Hill Carrboro School District Orange County School District
See Attachment II.D.2 See Attachment II.D.2
4. Analysis of Existing Conditions Analysis of Existing Conditions
The membership figures and percentage The membership figures and percentage
growth on the attachments show continued growth on the attachments show continued
growth at each school level within the growth at each school level within the
system. system.
Average Annual Growth Rate over ten years: Average Annual Growth Rate over ten years:
Year Projection Year Projection
Made: 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 Made: 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-112011-12
Elementary 1.85% 1.5% 1.72% 1.44% 1.59% Elementary 1.84% 1.16% 1.34% 1.57% 1.6%
Middle 2.58% 2.03% 1.93% 1.67% 1.94% Middle 1.78% 1.44% 1.53% 1.84% 2.01%
High 2.31% 2.21% 1.8% 1.57% 1.73% High 1.49% 1.0% 1.38% 1.59% 1.61%
5. Recommendation Recommendation
Use statistics as noted. Use statistics as noted
37
2010-2011 C3*
Orange County Student Projections
Elementary
chool Y '0;0-20 1 11 2011:2012 2012-2013 13
20 -2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 "016-" 1-0 "011-1018 '01 01
8= 9 2o19-,320 ,0"%-,0°:1
Sear - ! — -
tactual
Menthessnip
I 3,285 3.362 3,435 F 3.473 t 3,519 3.617 1 3,661 13.705 3,750 3,795 3,839
Average%Increase I I 2.34% 218% -1-.(-597-YG-7 1.34% 2.80% 1.21% 1.20% 1.20% 1.20% 1.17%
Middle
ol Year
20:0-2311 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 5
Ti 2014-2015'20 -2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019 2GB-2020 2020-2021
Scho ,acluatij. I
Membershi 1,698 1715 1,732 i 1,786 1.842 1,846 1834_____1 895 1,983 2,011 I 2,037
Aver.:e%Increase 1.08% 0.93% 3.'r—I2%— 3.11% 0.22% 1.00% I 1.57% 4.59% 1 41% 1.30%
High School
School Year 2010 20
-2011 i t1-2012 2012-20:3 2013-2014 ! 2014-2015 2015-2316 2616-2017 201--2018 2018-2019 2014:2020 2020-2021
tactuaii
Membership 2,222 1-7.2227258 2,313 1 2.349 2.375 2,449 T203 2,495 2,566 2,599
Average%Increase 1 1.86% -0.25% 2.44% I 1.57% 112% 311% 1 2.19% _ -0.30% 2.82% 1.29%
Chapel 111111/Carrboro Student Projections
Sementaiy
2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 201-10.5 2015-26.6 ; 20i7-2018 2018-2010 2019-2020 2020-2021
School Year
Membership 5,296 5,398 5,489 5,557 5,627 5,752 5,821 5,889 5,957 6,031 I 6,106
Average%Increase 1.93% 1,68% 1.25% 1.27% 2.22% 1.19% 1.17% 1 1.16% 1.25% I 1.24%
Middle
School Year 2010-2611 2011-26:2 2u:2-2013 2J13-2014 20 14-2015 2015-2316 ; 20.16-20:7 2617-2018 2018-201) 26B-2020 2026-2,,2:
(LiCE110 1
Membership 2,722 2,749 2,795 2,879 2,894 2,951 2,993 3,037 3,139 3,175 3,212
Average%Increase I 0.98% _ 1.69% 3.02% 0.49% 1.97% 1.42% 1.47% 1 3.37% 1.15% 1.15%
High School
1 1010-,011 2011 2012 /-1013 013-7014 2014-2015 I 2015-2016 2016-2017 ° :,118-201( :.:1;-262372020-2021
School Year " -
Membership 3,640 3,687 3,733 3,766 3,846 3,911 3,997 4,093 , 4,108 4.190 4,252 I
173
Average%Increase 1.30% 1.24% 0.88% 2.12% '1.68% 2.20% 2.40° 1.47% g
SOUK,:5 hiodal Compilation orn?STAG mambos at&lama as wag.Eased on Icovaram 15,2010 rnanbc,mhip numbas and hiaarto
-Oran:County Planning and Inspocoona Dal:wawa Ewa:tiara Anrwal Growth Rao from A,.
00
2011-2012
3rairige C7,112:-YAff Student ::-.;)rojecr..t..!,onz
Elementary
2i,14-2015 a 2b16-21::: 2U17-av in :it 14-2i 1-; 2„i-J-2;1■2:r
Scriooi Year
(„ictew
Membership 3,348 3,438 I 3,485 I 3,546 I 3,649 3,699 I 3,744 3,789 3,835 1 3,880 I 3,925
Average%Increase I 2.69% I 1.37% I 1.75% I 2.90% I 1.37% I 1.22% 1.20% 1.21% 1.17% I 1.16%
Middle
04,trY-411 ,
Membership 1,704 1,716 I 1,774 1,815 1,829 1 1,853 I 1,896 I 1,988 2,023 2,051 2,078
Average%Increase ■ 0.70% I 3.38% 2.31% 0.77% j 1.31% I 2.32% I 4.85% 1.76% 1.38% 1.32%
Hi•h School
-=20 i 2020-2021 ; 2021-2
Membershi• 2 283 2,278 2 314 2,347 2,379 2,449 2,502 2,498 2,576 2,619 2,677
Average%Increase -0.22% 1.58% 1.43% 1.36% 2.94% 2.16% -0.16% 3.12% 1.67% 2.21%
Chapel Hill/Carrboro Student Projections
Elements
2019-2020 2026-2021 2621-2A22
Membership 5,464 5,572 5,676 5,784 5,921 6,026 6,097 6,169 6,240 6,318 I 6,396
Averacre%Increase 1.98% 1.87% 1.9% 2.37% 1.77% 1.18% 1.18% 1.15% 1.25% I 1.23%
Middle
7.1
Membership 2,753 2,796 2,886 2,930 2,949 2,987 3,069 3,181 3,260 3,298 3,336
Average%Increase 1.56% 3.22% I 1.52% 0.65% 1.29% 2.75% I 3.65% 2.48% 1.17% 1.15%
High School
sch..i
'am.r.13
Membership 3,714 3,733 3,82% , 3,863 ; 3,937 4,018 4 4,138 4,208 4,305 4,408
Average%Increase 1.86% 1.0% I 1.1% 1.92% 2.06% 1.87% 1.1% 1.69% 2.31% 2.39%
Soiree.5 Model Compilation from PSTAC members to determine average based on November 15,2011 membership numbers and historical data
-Orange County Planning and Inspections Department Extraction of Annual Growth Rate from Averages 11)
(")
'sc., a
Section II
Ea Student / Housing Generation Rate
1. Responsible Entity for Suggesting Change—The updating of this section will be
conducted by Planning Directors, School Representatives, Technical Advisory
Committee (SAPFOTAC) and referred to the BOCC for certification.
Projections will be distributed to SAPFO partners for review and comments to the BOCC
prior to certification.
2. Definition—A projected number of students that are generated from four different types
of housing, "single-family detached", "single-family attached", "multifamily", and
"manufactured homes", as defined in Appendix C to the 2007 TischlerBise School
Impact Fee Report.
3. Standard for: Standard for:
Chapel Hill Carrboro School District Orange County School District
See Attachment II.E.1 See Attachment II.E.1
40
Section II
4. Analysis of Existing Conditions
On October 6, 2009, the Orange County Board of Commissioners approved the updated
Student Generation Rates as recommended by the SAPFOTAC. The newly adopted
Student Generation Rates became effective the 2010-11 school year with the November
15, 2010 CAPS system update. The current standards are shown in Attachment II.E.1.
Even though the Student Generation Rates were recently adopted for SAPFO, both
Orange County Schools and Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools have recognized a larger
increase in students generated from developments in both districts, particularly the multi-
family housing. The SAPFOTAC discussed the increased number of students generated
in both districts. While this may be a short term trend caused by the current economic
climate or other factors, the SAPFOTAC recommends further evaluation of the adopted
Student Generation Rates.
Also, it should be noted that students are generated from new housing as well as from
existing housing where new families have moved in. The CAPS system estimates new
development impacts and associated student generation but it is important to understand
that student increases are a composite of both of these factors. This effect can be
dramatic and can vary greatly between areas and districts where either new housing is
dominant or new families move into a large inventory of existing housing stock.
Recommendation - No Change
The SAPFOTAC does not recommend a change at this time. However, the SAPFOTAC
recommends further evaluation of the Student Generation Rates to determine whether a
change is warranted.
41
N
TischlerBise Student Generation Rates - 2007
Chapel Hilt- Carrboro Schools
Elementary
Middle
High
All Grades
Single - Family Detached
0.263
0.143
0.197
0.603
Single - Family Attached
0.158
0.077
0.115
0.350
Multifamily
0.038
0.015
0.017
0.070
Manufactured Homes
0.141
0.066
0.061
0.268
All Housing Types
0.149
0.078
0.105
0.332
Orange County Schools
Elementary
Middle
High
All Grades
0.168
0.090
0.126
0.384
Single - Family Detached
Single - Family Attached /
Multifamily
Manufactured Homes
0.066
0.096
0.022
0.041
0.034
0.049
0.122
0.186
All Housing Types
0.145
0.074
0.102
0.321
Source: School Impact Fees.- Orange County Schools, TischlerBise, December 31, 2007
D�TII
�7
n
�r
O
ti
v
i�
Section III
III. FLOWCHART OF SCHOOLS ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES
ORDINANCE PROCESS
Abstract: The Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance process has two distinct
components:
A. Capital Investment Plan (CIP) (Process 1)
Timeframe: In November of each year, Student Membership and Building Capacity is
transmitted from the school districts to the Orange County Board of Commissioners for
consideration and approval and used in the following years CIP (e.g. November 15, 2004
membership numbers used to develop a CIP to be considered for adoption in June, 2005).
Process Framework
1. SAPFOTAC projects future student membership from historical data, current
membership and hypothetical growth rates from established methodologies.
2. School Districts and BOCC compare projections to existing capacity and
proposed Capital Investment Plan.
3. SAPFOTAC forwards data and projections to all Schools APFO partners.
4. School Districts develop Capital Investment Plan Needs Assessment during this
process
5. The Capital Investment Plan work sessions and Public Hearings are conducted by
the BOCC in the spring of each year.
6. The adoption of CIP that sets forth monies and timeframe for school construction
(future capacity) by BOCC.
43
Section III
School Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance
Process 1 - Capital Investment Planning (CIP)
Projection Method
(Historical Membership'
plus Hypothetical Growth Rate
T
CIP
Approval
(Proposed New Construction
i.e. School Capacity
Added by number seats & ear
Actual Adjustments
(Current Year Actual Replaces Past Year
Membership Projection)
CAPS
System2
(Certificate of
Adequate Public
Schools)
'Historical Membership is a product of students generated from: (1) pre- existing/approved undeveloped lots where new housing is built, (2) Y
existing housing stock with new families /children, and (3) newly approved housing development (in the future this component will be known as
CAPS approved development)
CD
2The only part of the CAPS System (i.e., computer spreadsheet subdivision tracking) that receives data from the Process 1 CIP includes the actual
membership (November 15 of preceding CIP year) and new school capacity amount (seats) in a specific year pursuant to the CIP.
Y
44
Section III
B. Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance
Certificate of Adequate Public Schools (CAPS)
Update (Process 2)
Timeframe: The CAPS system is updated approximately November 15 of each year when the
school districts report actual membership and `pre-certified' capacity, whether it is CII'
associated or prior `joint action' agreement. `Joint action' determinations of changes in capacity
due to State rules or other non-construction related items are anticipated to be done prior to the
November 15 capacity and membership reporting date. This update may reflect the Board of
County Commissioners action on the earlier year Capital Investment Plan (CIP) as it affects
capacity and addition of new actual fall membership. The Schools Adequate Public Facilities
Ordinance Certificate of Adequate Public Schools (CAPS) stays in effect until the following year
-(e.g.: November 15, 2005 to November 14, 2006).
New development is originally logged for a certain year. As the CAPS system is updated, each
CAPS projection year is `absorbed' by the actual estimate of a given year. Later year CAPS
projections of the same development remain in the future year CAPS system accordingly. For
example, if a 50-lot subdivision is issued a CAPS, 15 lots may be assigned to "Year 1," 10 lots to
"Year 2," 10 lots to "Year 3," 10 lots to "Year 4," and 5 lots to "Year 5." When "Year 1" is
updated, the students generated from the 15 lots are absorbed by the actual estimate. The
students generated in "Years 2, 3, 4, and 5" are held in the CAPS system and added to the
appropriate year when the CAPS system is updated.
As was discussed in Section ILC, The City of Mebane is not a party to the SAPFO and does not
issue CAPS. However, residential development within the Orange County portion of Mebane
has increased dramatically in the last two years and over 1,000 residential lots are currently
undeveloped. Increasing development within this area of the county has the potential to
encumber a significant portion of the available capacity within the Orange County School
District.
45
Section III
Please note that the two processes (C]P and CAPS) are on separate but parallel tracks. However,
the CIP does create a crossover of capacity information between the two processes. For
example, the Schools APFO system for both school districts that will be established / initiated /
certified each year in November and is based on prior year created and / or planned CIP capacity
and current school year membership. The SAPFOTAC report including new current year
membership and projections are to be used for upcoming CIP development as noted in Process l.
CIP Process 1(for CII' 2009 - 2019)
November 2008 - June 2009 (using 2009 SAPFOTAC Report)
Schools APFO CAPS Process 2(for Schools APFO System 2009- 2010)
November 2009 - November 2010
46
Section III
School Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance
Process 2 - Certificate of Adequate Public Schools (CAPS) Allocation
2008 CAPS system is effective November 15, 2007 through November 14, 2008.
The system is updated with new membership, CIP capacity changes, and any other BOCC /School District joint
action approved capacity prior to November 15, 2007. This information is received within 5 days of November 15
and posted within the next 15 days. This CAPS system recalibration is retroactive to November 15, 2007.
CAPS Allocation System
1. Certified Capacity
2 LOS Capacity
3. Actual Membership
4. Year Start Available Capacity
5. Ongoing Current Available Capacity (includes available
capacity decreases from approved CAPS development by
year)
6. CAPS approved development
a. Total units
b. Single Familys
c. Other Housings
CAPS System
AC2 =SC2 - (ADM2 +ND 12 +ND22 +... )
AC >_0 - Issue CAPS
AC <0 - Defer CAPS to later date
'Student Generation Rates from CAPS housing type create future membership estimate. Please note that this CAPS membership future estimate is
different than the projection based on historical data and projection models used in the CIP process 1. This estimate only captures new a
development impact, which is the component that the SAPFO can regulate.
ZAC - Available Capacity -Starts at Annual Update Capacity and reduces as CAPS approved development is entered into the system.
SC - Certified School Level Capacity
ADM - Average Daily Membership
ND - New Development; ND1 means first approved CAPS approved development
47