HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 03-28-2001-1ORANGE COUNTY
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT
Meeting Date: March 28, 2001
Action Agenda
Item No. 1
SUBJECT: Coun /OCS /CHCCS Discussion/Policy Issues
DEPARTMENT: County Manager PUBLIC HEARING: (Y /N) No
ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT:
As listed in Background" John Link or Rod Visser, ext 2300;
Donna Dean, ext 2151; Craig Benedict,
ext 2592; Rosie Summers, ext 2411
TELEPHONE NUMBERS:
Hillsborough 732 -8181
Chapel Hill 968 -4501
Durham 688 -7331
Mebane 336- 227 -2031
PURPOSE: To discuss various issues with policy and/ or financial implications that are of
current interest to the Orange County Commissioners, Orange County Board of Education,
and /or Chapel Hill - Carrboro Board of Education.
BACKGROUND:
a) Capital Needs Advisory Task Force Process
In January 2001, the Board of Commissioners created a Capital Needs Advisory Task Force.to
review identified school and County capital needs, and to develop recommendations regarding
the scope, elements, cost, and priorities of projects that should be included in the planned
November 2001 bond referendum. Appointments to this task force were made in February,
and the group held its first meeting on March 14. The group will meet every week or two until
the middle of May, and will present its report to the BOCC before the end of May. Task force
members from the BOCC and the. two school boards may wish to offer comments or answer
questions from other elected officials about the process.
No Attachments
b) November 2001 Bond Referendum
The identified capital needs of both school systems will be presented to the Capital Needs
Advisory Task Force during that group's next two meetings. As noted above, their
recommendations are scheduled for presentation to the BOCC in May. The Commissioners
will deliberate and decide in June the amounts to be included on the ballot for various
purposes (e.g. schools, land for parks and open space, public buildings, etc). County staff will
review the major steps leading up to the November bond vote, including procedural steps
required by the Local Government Commission.
No Attachments
c) School Nurses
County and school representatives have met several times in recent months to discuss
approaches for increasing the availability of nurses to support student populations in both
school systems. Pursuant to those discussions, Health Director Rosie Summers has prepared
a proposal that would lead to a staffing pattern of one nurse for each school in Orange County
phased in over a period of several years. County Manager's Note: While the implementation
of this proposal will be subject to the availability in future fiscal years of adequate funds for this
and other school and County priorities, this proposal serves as a good starting point for
discussions among the three boards of enhancing school nursing services. It is likely that the
phase -in period may be elongated to 3 or 4 years.
Attachment 1c — Proposal on School Nurse Deployment
d) School Impact Fees
The County Commissioners and Orange County Planning Board held a joint public hearing on
February 26 to receive public comment regarding possible amendments to the County's
schedule of school impact fees. The changes under consideration are based.on the student
generation ratermpact fee. study prepared by Tischler and Associates. The BOCC and school
boards may wish to discuss recommendations for changes to the current impact fee schedule
($750 in the OCS district and $3,000 in the CHCCS district for each new residential dwelling
unit), and the process for and timing of any changes to that fee schedule.
Attachment Id — Memorandum from Craig Benedict with Information from Tischler and
Associates Study
e) Planning for Alternative Schools and Other Cooperative Ventures
Both school boards indicated a desire to discuss at this work session the prospects for
collaboration in planning for alternative schools. All three boards may also wish to examine
other opportunities for cooperation with regard to facilities and programming.
No Attachments
f) School Facilities Task Force
Task Force members and staff can provide a brief summary of the major points of discussion
regarding school construction standards, school capacity, student population projections, and
related topics. The draft task force report is nearing completion, and the final report to the
Board of Commissioners should be available in April.
No Attachments
g) Possible Waiver of County /Municipal /Utility Development Fees for School
Construction
The Board of Commissioners and Boards of Education share an interest in constructing high
quality school facilities at reasonable cost. To that end, the Commissioners have expressed a
willingness to support the school boards in approaching the municipalities and public utilities
with requests that they waive or minimize the fees that they impose for development review
activities associated with school construction projects. County and school staffs have
collaborated to compile figures that reflect development- related fees that have been paid (or
are anticipated) by both school systems for school construction projects in recent years. The
boards may wish to discuss steps that could lead to reductions or waivers in development
related fees that would lower the direct costs of new school construction projects.
Attachment 1g — 1 3122100 Memo from Donna Dean on `Development Related Fees
for School Construction"
Attachment 1g — 2 Table: "New School Construction Permits and Fees"
FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact tied directly to the discussion at this
meeting. However, decisions that the school boards and BOCC will make at subsequent
meetings are likely to have significant implications for future capital and operating budgets.
RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the boards discuss the issues
noted and provide direction to staff, as appropriate.
Prepared by Rosemary Summers
Orange County Health Director
Proposal on School Nurse Deployment
for Chapel Hill- Carrboro and Orange County School Systems
March 28, 2001
"Students who are hungry, sick, troubled or depressed cannot function well in the
classroom, no matter how good the school."
.Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development
INTRODUCTION
The goal of a working infrastructure between education and health is to enable schools
and communities to create coordinated school health programs. Coordinated School
Health Programs (CSHPs) is a goal of both the . North Carolina Department of Public
Instruction and the Department of Health and Human Services. A model- coordinated
program includes all eight of the following components:
• Comprehensive School Health Education (grades K -12)
• School Health Services
• A Safe Physical Environment
• School Counseling, Psychological, and Social Services
• Physical Education
• Nutrition Services
• School -Site Health Promotion for Staff
• Family and Community Involvement in Schools
With all of these components in place, a student will be healthier. They will be in
school, in class, and ready to learn.
This discussion focuses on only one aspect of the components above: School Health
Services.
NEED FOR SCHOOL NURSING SERVICES
In 1997, the North Carolina Youth Risk Behavior Survey for Grades 9 -12 found the
following for North Carolina students:
• 21 % reported having seriously considered suicide in the last year
• 25% reported smoking a cigarette before age 13
16% reported having had four or more sexual partners
48% reported having sexual intercourse
• 79% reported drinking alcohol in the last 30 days
47% reported using marijuana at least once
These behaviors obviously do not begin at the ninth grade, but are the cumulative result
of prior years.
School Nurse Deployment Proposal
Page 2
Today, schools are serving more medically complex children than ever before. More
children are taking more medications than in the past. When there is no school nurse on
site, it is a challenge to ensure that the right children are getting the correct medications
in the correct amount and for the desired period of time. For the most medically
complex children, there is a need for skilled nursing services like tube feedings,
catheterizations, nebulizer treatments and the like.
These factors are not imaginary for our school systems. One example can be seen with
asthma. A survey to determine asthma prevalence and risk factors was conducted
during the 1999 -2000 school year in 7th and 8th grades by the, North. Carolina
Department of Health and Human Services. In Orange County the survey found that
nearly one - quarter (24.1 %) of the children surveyed either were already diagnosed with
asthma or experienced undiagnosed wheezing symptoms. Translated into real
numbers that means that of the 1900 children surveyed, 458 of them experience
asthma or asthm
a -like symptol-ns. Compared to statewide figures, this is only slightly
lower than the average of 27% across the state. Eight percent of those children
reported missing school for one -half or more days per month because of wheezing or
breathing problems. Fourteen percent (about 266) carry inhalers that they may use less
than once a month or almost daily.
In addition, children in both school districts take a variety of medications or experience
chronic health conditions. All of these situations require monitoring on a frequent basis.
Overall, service statistics reported by school nurses in both systems show the following:
*Not a total number, only those by school nurse
These statistics show that school nurses are "first -line" health services for children in
both our school systems.
CURRENT STRUCTURE OF. SCHOOL NURSING SERVICES
The majority of nurses in both school systems are hired and supervised by each school
system. Chapel Hill - Carrboro School System employs eight school nurses (not all full -
time) for thirteen. schools and the Orange County School System employs seven full -
time school nurses for ten schools. The Orange County Health Department employs
two full -time Public Health Nurse I's as school nurses and one part-time (50 %) School
Health Aide. One health department nurse is assigned to the Chapel Hill - Carrboro
School System full -time and one nurse is assigned to the Orange County School
System 40% time. The remaining 60% time for that nurse is assigned to the Hepatitis B
Immunization Program for sixth and twelfth graders in both school systems. The school
OCS
CHCCS
.Total
Medications authorized to be given at school
946
870
1816
Students with known chronic health'
conditions
11.18
1628
2746
First aid /iniuries managed by school nurse*
5992
5660
11652
Health education sessions*
217
210
427
*Not a total number, only those by school nurse
These statistics show that school nurses are "first -line" health services for children in
both our school systems.
CURRENT STRUCTURE OF. SCHOOL NURSING SERVICES
The majority of nurses in both school systems are hired and supervised by each school
system. Chapel Hill - Carrboro School System employs eight school nurses (not all full -
time) for thirteen. schools and the Orange County School System employs seven full -
time school nurses for ten schools. The Orange County Health Department employs
two full -time Public Health Nurse I's as school nurses and one part-time (50 %) School
Health Aide. One health department nurse is assigned to the Chapel Hill - Carrboro
School System full -time and one nurse is assigned to the Orange County School
System 40% time. The remaining 60% time for that nurse is assigned to the Hepatitis B
Immunization Program for sixth and twelfth graders in both school systems. The school
School Nurse Deployment Proposal
Page 3
health aide is responsible for assisting with the Hepatitis B immunization program and
assists both school systems in various screening and immunization tracking functions.
The number of nurses for each system does not include Head Start, Hospital School, or
specific nurses assigned to the severely and profoundly handicapped students. In both
systems, those are accounted for separately.
A full -time Health Coordinator provides administration and coordination in Chapel Hill -
Carrboro Schools and is responsible for both health services and health education.
This individual is a nurse. In Orange County Schools, the Director of Student Services
and Personnel and /or a school nurse designee is assigned to coordinate the program.
On -site supervision in both systems is the responsibility of the Principal of the individual
schools. A nurse supervisor in the Orange County Health Department provides
supervision, coordination, and liaison with both school systems at 30% time.
Both school systems school nurses function under an annually developed Memorandum
of Agreement. The Agreement, jointly developed between the individual school system
and the Orange County Health Department, varies slightly for each system. The
Memorandums of Agreement specify that the health services policies and protocols of
each system are subject to the approval of the Orange County Health Department's
Medical Director. Each Agreement details _areas of specific responsibility for both
organizations.
The table on the following page shows nurse /student ratios per school for each system
in the current school year (2000 - 2001). This table shows that in the Chapel Hill -
Carrboro School System there are 7.8 full -time equivalent nurses serving 9,648
students for a ratio of one nurse for 1,237 students. In the Orange County School
System there are 7.4 full -time equivalents serving 6,168 students for a ratio of one
nurse for 834 students. Eleven of the thirteen schools in the Chapel Hill - Carrboro
Schools share a school nurse or have one less than full -time. Seven of the ten schools
in the Orange County Schools share a school nurse or have one less than full -time. In
addition, each school system is anticipating opening a new school during the 01 -02
school year. These newly opening schools are not considered in these numbers.
Sharing a nurse between schools often means that a school may be without a nurse for
a day or more at a time depending on the needs of each of the schools.
School Nurse Deployment Proposal
Page 4
Nurse /Student Ratios by School
Cha el Hill - Carrboro and Oran a County School S stems
School
Nurse Time
in FTE's *
Number of
Students
Nurse /Student
Ratio
Ephesus Elem
.5
581
1/1162
Carrboro Elem
.5
523
1/1079
Scroggs Elem
.5
556
1/1079
McDou le Elem
.5
676
1/1552
McDou le Middle
.5
876
1/1552
Frank Porter Graham Elem
.5
586
1/953
Glenwood Elem
.5
367
1/953
Phillips Middle
.5
816
1/1358
Estes.Hills Elem
.5
542
1/1358
East CH High - -
1.0
1273
1/1273
CH High OCHD
-1:0
1519
1/1519
Culbreth Middle
.8
678^
1/814
Seawell Elem
.5
655
1/1310
Total CH /C
7.8
9648
1/1237
Central Elem
.5
359
1/752
Hillsborough Elem^^
.5
393
1/752
New Hope Elem
1.0
614
1/614
CW Stanford Middle
.5
792
1/1308
Cameron Park Elem
.5
516
1/1308
Efland Cheeks Elem
.5
542
1/1249
AL Stanback Middle
.5
707 ^^
1/1249
Orange High
2.0
1596
1/798
Pathways Elem OCHD
.4
137
1/342
Grady Brown Elem
1.0
512
1/512
Total OCS
17.4
16168
11/834
* FTE equals full -time equivalents
^ Includes Phoenix Academy
^^Year -Round Schools/ AL Stanback's year round is school within a school
(OCHD) is Orange County Health Department assigned nurse
FUTURE GOALS FOR NURSING SERVICES
Discussions on future goals for providing nursing services to both school systems
began in late 2000. Representatives from both school boards, the health board, the
board of county commissioners, the county manager's staff, staff from the health
department and staff from both school systems met and . agreed on two
recommendations:
• Each school within Orange County should have a full -time nurse.
• New schools should include a full -time school nurse as part of the core funding
requirements for opening a new school: (Beginning with Smith Middle School and
Cedar Ridge High School.)
School Nurse Deployment Proposal
Page 5
It was also recognized that to reach the goal with the current complement of open
schools, further planning would be necessary. The staffs of each of the respective
agencies were tasked with developing a specific plan for achieving the goal in order for
the plan to be considered during budget deliberations this spring.
The staff working group met in February to develop the specifics of the plan.
Recommendations for increases in the number of nurses is tied to the number of
schools currently on -line in each of the school systems since the assumption was made
that new schools would include a nurse in its -core staffing complement.
The estimated annual cost for one -nurse totals approximately $47,650. In addition,
there are one -time start -up costs of about $3,600 for each position. The table below
out one proposal, phased -in over a two -year period, that would enable both school
districts to meet the goal of one full -time nurse in every school. If the plan below were
initiated with the upcoming- fiscal year (FY 2001 -02), the goal would be attained in fiscal
year 2002 -03:
Estimated Annual Cost for One Nurse
Salary & Fringes 45,860
Operating Costs 1,790
Estimated Total Annual Cost 47,650
Plus: One -Time Start-Up Costs 3,592
Estimated Total First Year Cost 51,242
Year 3 and
School District Year One (1)
Year Two (2)
Beyond (3)
CHCCS
Additional # Nurses Required to Meet
Goal 3
3
0
Estimated Cost to Meet Goal $153,726
$296,676
$285,900
OCS
Additional # Nurses Required to Meet
Goal 2
1
0
Estimated Cost to Meet Goal $102,484
$146,542
$142,950
Total Estimated Cost for Both
Districts $256,210
$443,218
$428,850
Year one includes annual cost plus one -time start-up
Year two includes annual cost for positions added in year 1
plus annual and one -time
start -up for positions added in year 2
(3) Year 3 and beyond includes annual cost of positions added in Year 1 and Year 2
School Nurse Deployment Proposal
Page 6
Finally, the staff working group recommended that the funding for the positions outlined
above be included in the Health Department's annual budget. It is important to note that
the
positions would not be Health Department positions. Instead, the working group
recommended that each school system should employ and supervise their respective
positions. The Health Department would develop service contracts with each school
system and pay each district for services provided by these positions. As a provision of
the contract, each school system would maintain the equivalent number of nurses
currently funded, and the Health Department would continue to allocate 1.4 full -time
equivalent nurses directly to the schools until Year 2 of the funding plan. At that time,
both school systems would attain the goal of one nurse per school. The Hepatitis B
nurse will continue to fulfill the goals of that program, until that program achieves 100%
immunization of the school population (projected for FY 2004- 2005). The remaining
health department nurse. currently assigned directly_to.ahe schools, will be assigned- to .
coordinate with both school systems,to plan and provide continuing education to meet
best practices for the school health program. In addition, this nurse will be available to
cover either school system in the event a school nurse requires extended .leave. The
health department will continue to provide medical direction for policy and protocol
development and will provide school - nursing continuing education appropriate to
maintain best school nursing practices in each system. Public health nursing principles
are particularly important in confined settings such as schools. Coordination of health
services between school systems will also be part of the health department role. '
MEMORANDUM
TO: JOHN M. LINK, JR., COUNTY MANAGER
FROM: CRAIG N. BENEDICT, PLANNING DIRECTOR
DATE: March 22, 2001
Subject: PUBLIC SCHOOLS IMPACT FEES
PURPOSE: To discuss a consultant (Paul Tischler and Associates) report on the calculation of
maximum permissible public school impact fees that consider differentiated fees based on
housing type. _ .
BACKGROUND: The Orange County Educational Facilities Impact Fee Ordinance was
adopted on June 7, 1993, and impact fees were set at $750 per newly constructed residential
dwelling unit (regardless of type) for both the Orange County and Chapel Hill - Carrboro School
Districts. The ordinance has been amended several times since 1993 and impact. fees are
currently $750 for the Orange County School District and $3,000 for the Chapel Hill - Carrboro
School District.
A concern voiced at past public hearings was that different housing types (e.g. apartments vs.
single family homes) generated students at varying rates and that impact fees should be
proportional to the demand created rather than across- the - board. A recent technical study
prepared by Tischler & Associates has been drafted to determine a maximum supportable
impact fee per housing unit for each school district, taking into consideration different types of
housing units. That report will serve as the basis for an evaluation of impact fees for both the
Orange County and Chapel Hill - Carrboro school systems and of possible changes to the
current fees. Paul Tischler of Tischler and Associates and Planning Director Craig Benedict
presented preliminary findings of the Tischler & Associates report at the February 8 Schools
and Land Use Councils meeting and at a February 12 Public Hearing.
ATTACHMENTS: See Legal Ad Notice.
See also 5 -page excerpt of 50 -page report.
g: \craig\ abstracts \impactfeesmemo.dot \3 -22 \jb
PUBLIC SCHOOL IMPACT FEES
Effective July 1, 1993, the Board of County Commissioners established a system
of impact fees to help fund a portion of the school capital needs created by
growth in the county. Since that date, an impact fee has been collected for each
new housing unit constructed or installed in the county, including single - family
homes, multi family housing units, apartments, and mobile homes. Fees
collected in the Chapel Hill - Carrboro School District are deposited in a special
account and used exclusively for the construction of new school facilities in that
district. The same is true for fees collected in the Orange County School District.
The impact fee supplements funds provided by the County from sales tax and
property fax revenues for school capital projects. The public school impact fee
collected is now $750.00 for each new residential unit located in the Orange
County School District and $3,000 for each new residential unit located in the
Chapel Dill- Carrboro School District.
The Board of County Commissioners recently employed a consultant to evaluate -- .
- the potential for a public - school impact fee rate structure that could legitimately
be the basis for a less regressive fee. structure based on charging a different fee
amount for different housing types. Also, the Orange County Board of Education
has recently requested that the Orange County Board of Commissioners
increase the amount of the fee for new residential dwelling units located in the
Orange County School District.
The 2001 Technical Report prepared by the consultant concluded that there was
a legitimate basis for charging one fee for single family homes and a lower fee for
all other residential dwelling units. The Report reflects new demographic data
concerning the number of students per household and recommendations of the
School Facilities Construction Standards Work Group, and calculates MAXIMUM
fees that could be charged as follows:
Maximum for
Maximum for all other
single - family residenial
homes units
Orange County School District $5,375 $2,538
Chapel Hill- Carrboro School
District $7,374 $3,304
The Board of Commissioners will consider whether or not to change public
school impact fees following the February 25, 2001 public hearing. THE
MAXIMUM LEGALLY PERMISSIBLE FEES CALCULATED IN THE REPORT
OF THE CONSULTANT ARE NOT A PROPOSAL TO CHARGE THOSE
FEES. Any change in the present fees will be determined by the Board of
Commissioners following public comment at the public hearing and otherwise.
In no event will public school impact fees be changed to an amount or amounts
that exceed the maximums determined by the 2001 Technical Report.
Craig Esened ict - c ee.doc age
School Impact Fees Orange County, North Carolina
Executive Summary
Tischler & Associates, Inc. (TA) calculated school impact fees for Orange County, North
Carolina based on data for the current school year (2000 - 2001). Impact fees are one-
time payments that are used to construct public facilities needed to accommodate new
development. Impact fees are proportionate to the school capital facility service
demands for two categories of residential development. The impact fee methodology
establishes an equitable allocation of the costs in comparison to the benefits received
(i.e, capital improvements to be provided by either Orange County or Chapel Hill —
Carrboro School District).
The school impact fee methodology is based on current public school student
generation rates, local costs, and level of service standards. Figure 1 illustrates the
methodology used to calculate the fee, The basic formula used to derive the impact fee
for both school districts is to multiply student generation rates by the net capital cost of
public schools per. student. To avoid potential double payment for school facilities, a
credit for future principal payments on existing General Obligation bonds is reflected in
the maximum supportable impact fee per housing unit. Impact fees will address.the
cost of five different types of facilities, including school sites, school buildings (i.e., total
project cost), relocatable classrooms, support buildings and vehicles used by the .
School Districts.
Section II of this report discusses development projections and student generation rates
used in the impact fee calculations. Section III of the report documents each cost factor
and level -Of - Service (LOS) standard used to derive the school impact fees. The final
section of this report discusses implementation and administration of the fees, including
a cash flow analysis (See Appendix A) and a memorandum on the methodology used
to derive the student generation rates .(see Appendix B).
n
School Impact Fees
0
Public School Students
Per Housing Unit
multiplied by
Net Capital Cost
Per Student
Land Cost
plus
Relocatable
Classroom Cost
Plus
Vehicles Cost
Orange County North Carolina
plus
Local Share of
School Project Cost
plus
Support Buildings
Cost
minus
Principal Payment
Credit
Craig ene ict - ch ee. oc age t
School Impact Fees
Orancle Counk North Carolina
Based on the above methodology, the maximum supportable school impact fees for .
both the Orange County and Chapel Hill -- Carrboro Districts are shown in Figure 2
below. The -current fee schedule does not differentiate by type of housing. Under the
proposed fee schedule, a higher fee is imposed on single - family detached houses due
to higher student generation rates.
p Housing Unit
Figure 2 - School Impact Fees Per _
Current Fee
Single Family Detached
$7501
$3,000
All Other Residential
$750L____
$3,0001.
Maximum Supportable Fee
Single Family Detached.
$5,3641
$7,345
All Other Residential 1
$2,5391
$3,298
Demand Generators
The primary indicators of the need for additional, growth - related school facilities are
projections of housing units and public school students, as measured by Average Daily
Membership (ADM). The memo found in Appendix B provides a detailed explanation of
the demographic data shown in Figure 3.
Figure 3 — Orange County Projections Summary
Craig ene pct - CSc ee. oc pag
School Impact Fees
160,000
140,000
120,000
10.0,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
0
0
Orange County, North Carolina
Orange County Growth Indicators
!001 t02011,
2001
2006
2011
Population
116,217
127,928
139,639
Housing Upits
55,000
61,007
67,015
Households
45,819
50,824
55,829
Pub Sch ADM
15,841
17,888
20,259
160,000
140,000
120,000
10.0,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
0
0
Orange County, North Carolina
Orange County Growth Indicators
!001 t02011,
,erage Annual
reasc Growth Rate
2,342
2.0%
1,202
2.2%
1,001
2.2%
442
2.8%
2001 2006 2011
t' �
qC�rY�zn`�
ORANGE COUNTY BUDGET OFFICE
Donna Dean, Budget Director
208 South Cameron Street, Post Office Box 8181 • Hillsborough, NC • 27278
Phone: 919 - 245 -2151 0 Fax: 919 -644 -3324
E -Mail: ddean@co.orange.nc.us
To: Board of County Commissioners
John M. Link, Jr., County Manager
From: Donna Dean, Budget Director
Subject: Development Related Fees for School Construction
Date: March 22, 2001
At the December retreat, the Board raised concerns about the amount of money
that local school districts are required to expend for local review fees and other
requirements they plan and construct new schools. It is important to make the
distinction between (1) fees that the County, the Towns and OWASA may charge
for particular inspections or services and (2) costs for additional requirements to
meet particular local ordinances or codes.
Most local governments and public utility companies assess user fees to offset
costs of providing those services — the majority of which are State mandated.
Examples of these fees include plan reviews, use and building permits, and
connection or tap fees. In addition, entities may also require that a construction
project meet particular local codes or ordinances. Examples of these types of
requirements include construction of sidewalks, road improvements, and
installation of building sprinkler systems.
Fees Assessed for Project Review and Approval
I recently contacted representatives from local government entities and OWASA
regarding, typical fees that potentially could be assessed to a school system
during a construction project. I am currently compiling this information and will
have it available at the meeting with the School Boards next Wednesday night.
Attachment 1 of this memorandum provides, by recent school construction
project, the fees that each district has paid to local and State agencies.
Additional Requirements to Meet Local Initiatives
As stated earlier, in addition.-,to review and permit fees, local, state and federal
agencies may require each school system to meet particular requirements or
codes. The requirements and costs for these elements vary with each
construction project. Both school systems have provided specific examples for
recent projects. Examples of local requirements associated with CHCCS Smith
Middle School include $23,265 for upgrading existing sewer lines (required by
OWASA) and $28,497 for roadway improvements required by NC Department of
-2— March 22, 2001
Transportation. It is interesting to note that the Town of Carrboro requires that
applicants reimburse the Town for 80 percent of its engineering services, and this
cost is included in the Smith Middle School project. For East Chapel Hill High
School, the Town of Chapel Hill required CHCCS to increase the number of
parking spaces in order to accommodate potential overflow from a Town park
located across the street. In addition, the school system was required to
construct a pedestrian walkway located on property adjacent to the high school.
While the school district did incur additional costs for these items, staff was not
able to identify the specific costs of these additions. Other examples required
during construction of new schools in both systems include installation of
sprinkler systems, removal of site clearing debris (instead of burning), and
installation of storm water management systems.
Feel free to contact me if you have additional comments or questions.
wMw/,
W
w
W
U.
AWN .
.E
L
0
o.
0
U
.F U
� •O
U�
_ C
V
co
3
Z
■
W
E
V
a
4)
ire
V =
d
V
H
3 =
� m
� m
Q...W.
C M
CD
W
t d
E
CO g
0
y � �
m� T
o 69
o m
W
CD co
CL .0 M
U =
W
T
N
0
ca
O
69
r
M.,
i Ci
�.r
i IOi
o1W1CY
O
Ci Ri C
='d'J
°1ir
o�v:=
CiLiW
O
o" O;0
�-!z!z
00
N
O
LO
qt
cn
ti
w
0
co
cp
ti
ti
44.
ti
N
as
O
H
C M
E
C (n CU
t
i i> a
t V
i 7
U.
> C
W Mi @i
o cu a
V d�a: 7
M CU
I- �lll!0 m a�
r
M.,
i Ci
�.r
i IOi
o1W1CY
O
Ci Ri C
='d'J
°1ir
o�v:=
CiLiW
O
o" O;0
�-!z!z
00
N
O
LO
qt
cn
ti
w
0
co
cp
ti
ti
44.
ti
N
as
O
H