Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda - 03-10-20; 8-l - Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (SAPFO) – Receipt and Transmittal of 2020 Annual Technical Advisory Committee Report
1 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: March 10, 2020 Action Agenda Item No. 8-1 SUBJECT: Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (SAPFO) — Receipt and Transmittal of 2020 Annual Technical Advisory Committee Report DEPARTMENT: Planning and Inspections ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: 1. SAPFO Partners Transmittal Letter Ashley Moncado, Planner 11, 919-245-2589 2. Draft 2020 SAPFOTAC Annual Report and Craig Benedict, Director, 919-245-2575 Larger Scale Projection Worksheets PURPOSE: To receive, in conjunction with the standard and customary annual process outlined in the Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, the 2020 Annual Report of the SAPFO Technical Advisory Committee (SAPFOTAC) and transmit it to the SAPFO partners for comments before certification in May. NOTE: The School Capacity Capital Investment Plan (CIP) Needs Analysis projects no new school capacity needs in the next 10 years for elementary, middle and high school levels for both Orange County Schools (OCS) and Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools (CHCCS). ADDITIONAL NOTE: In 2018, the North Carolina General Assembly unveiled House Bill 90 which allows for a phasing-in process to address the decrease in class size averages over the next three school years. Based on House Bill 90, average class sizes for kindergarten to third grade will be phased-in as provided below: 2019 — 2020 1:19 2020 — 2021 1:18 2021 — 2022 1:17 Based on numbers contained in the 2019 SAPFOTAC Report, reductions in class size averages are expected to create elementary school capacity issues for the 2021-2022 school year. In order to address these impacts in time, the School Boards and Orange County Board of Commissioners continue to meet and review options to determine how to implement the school capacity changes into the SAPFO annual report and 10-year student membership and building capacity projections sheets. ADDITIONAL NOTE: Charter and private schools are not included as part of the SAPFO Annual Report and, as a result, their membership and capacity numbers are not formally monitored or included in future projections. SAPFO projections are used for projecting only public school capacity needs. However, the SAPFO Technical Advisory Committee does monitor charter and private schools and their effect on student enrollment in both school districts. Charter and private schools numbers are not collected for SAPFO purposes; however, impacts due to enrollment at these schools are accounted for in SAPFO process with the annual reporting of student membership and growth rates contained in the 10-year student projections. 2 BACKGROUND: 1. Annual Report Each year, since 2004, 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 level of service standards. There are two 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 10, 2019 Board of County Commissioners meeting, the Board approved the November 15, 2019 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, the Planning Directors of the County and Towns, and County Finance staff, 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 Plan (CIP) and the future issuance of Certificates of Adequate Public Schools (CAPS). Orange County's Planning Staff compiles the report, holds a meeting discussing the various aspects, and then prepares a draft report, which is reviewed by the SAPFO Technical Advisory Committee. 3. Membership Data CHCCS total increased from the previous year: 11 students (108) Elementary School 111 Middle School 8 High School OCS total increased from the previous year: 59 students 27 Elementary School (16) Middle School 48 High School ( )denotes decrease 4. Capacity Data There were no changes to school capacities this year in either school district. Mandated class size changes, discussed in a "Note" on the previous page, are expected to create capacity issues in the 2021-22 school year. 5. Capacity Information 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 mandates in previous years that decreased capacity. Decisions will have to be made if new discussions at the state level create any class size 3 changes that should or should not be reflected in the County's SAPFO. Future decisions would reflect the timing and impact of new state legislation. This year, CHCCS and OCS did not exceed the adopted level of service standards established in the SAPFO, nor do projections show a potential need for additional capacity at the elementary, middle, and high school levels within the 10-year planning period. 6. Student Projection Analysis CHCCS Student membership projections show a mix of increases and decreases at all levels within the 10-year planning period. Projections are shown on page 39 of the report. OCS Student membership projections show a mix of increases and decreases at all levels within the 10-year planning period. Projections are shown on page 38 of the report. The City of Mebane lies partially within Orange County and students within the Orange County portion of Mebane attend Orange County schools. However, Mebane is not a party to the SAPFO agreement and does not require that CAPS be issued prior to development approvals. Although the SAPFO system is not formally regulated in Mebane, students residing within the Orange County portion of Mebane are accounted for in the SAPFO process with the annual reporting of actual student membership and ensuing growth rates contained in the 10-year student projections. 7. School Capacity CIP Needs Analysis CHCCS Projected needs: Elementary School Projections show no needs in the next 10 years Middle School Projections show no needs in the next 10 years High School Projections show no needs in the next 10 years OCS Projected needs: Elementary School Projections show no needs in the next 10 years Middle School Projections show no needs in the next 10 years High School Projections show no needs in the next 10 years NOTE: School capacity changes as part of a school renovation/upgrade project will be reviewed as necessary by the BOCC and school districts. 8. Student Generation Rates The updated student generation rates were approved on May 19, 2015 and are shown in Attachment II.E.1 on page 45 of the report. Updated rates began to be used for CAPS issuances in the fall of 2015 and are based on an inventory of recently built units from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2013. 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 2020 SAPFOTAC report will be brought back to the BOCC for certification at the May 19, 2020 regular meeting. 4 10. Additional Information There are two primary parts to the SAPFO system. The first part, Certificate of Adequate Public Schools (CAPS), is the testing of the student generation rate (SGR) from development projects against available capacity within the schools. The second part, student projections and capacity needs assessment, is the tracking of historical enrollment and the projection of future student enrollment against existing capacity at a certain school level. This part is not directly related to a development project, but a current year outcome of how many children actually `show up' in a school year. This includes new students that also come from existing housing stock. The purpose of explaining these two parts of the SAPFO system is to illustrate how projects can be approved as part of the CAPS system when capacity is available yet aberration in actual enrollment can cause future year projections to accelerate capital needs dramatically. The 10-year student projections developed for the SAPFO Annual Report forecast future school needs based on current student membership numbers and historic growth rates derived by the five projection models. The process accounting for students once they are actually enrolled in the school system emphasizes a delay that exists from the time a residential development is approved and developed to when students begin to enter the system. For example, the proposed residential growth that has occurred in the recent past within Mebane's jurisdiction has yet to be seen with OCS student membership numbers and fully entered into the historically based projection methods. Orange County staff will continue to work with the SAPFO Technical Advisory Committee and our planning partners to monitor future residential development throughout Orange County. In summary, although the SAPFO Technical Advisory Committee report does not show immediate capital needs, the development approvals in both school districts could, after a normal lag, accelerate capital school needs and renovations based on localized student increases at specific schools. These local impacts will have to be analyzed by the school district to determine the best method to resolve new demands (i.e. redistricting, renovation, new school construction, etc.). FINANCIAL IMPACT: Current student growth projections do not show capacity needs for additional schools in either the CHCCS District or OCS District during the 10-year projection period. SOCIAL JUSTICE IMPACT: The following Orange County Social Justice Goal is applicable to this agenda item: • GOAL: ENSURE ECONOMIC SELF-SUFFICIENCY The creation and preservation of infrastructure, policies, programs and funding necessary for residents to provide shelter, food, clothing and medical care for themselves and their dependents. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT: There are no Orange County Environmental Responsibility Goal impacts applicable to this item. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends the Board: 1. Receive the 2020 SAPFOTAC Annual Report in conjunction with the standard and customary annual process outlined in the Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance; and 5 2. Authorize the Chair to sign the transmittal letter to SAPFO partners contained in Attachment 1. Attachment 1 6 BOCC Letterhead March 11, 2020 Pam Hemminger, Mayor Will Atherton, Chair Town of Chapel Hill Orange County Board of Education 405 Martin Luther King Jr. Blvd. 200 E. King Street Chapel Hill,NC 27514 Hillsborough,NC 27278 Lydia Lavelle, Mayor Mary Ann Wolf, Chair Town of Carrboro Chapel Hill-Carrboro Board of Education 301 W. Main Street 750 Merritt Mill Road Carrboro,NC 27510 Chapel Hill,NC 27516 Jenn Weaver, Mayor Town of Hillsborough P.O. Box 429 Hillsborough,NC 27278 Subject: Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance Technical Advisory Committee (SAPFOTAC) Annual Report Dear Sir or Madam: This letter is to update you on the status of the 2020 Annual SAPFOTAC Report. In accordance with the SAPFO Memoranda of Understanding(MOU), the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) approved the November 15, 2019 actual membership and capacity numbers for Orange County Schools and Chapel Hill— Carrboro City Schools at its meeting on December 10, 2019. The SAPFOTAC, comprised of representatives of both school systems and the Planning Directors of the County and Towns has produced the 2020 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 2020 Executive Summary and the March 10, 2020 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 at the following link: hgps://www.oran eg countync.gov/1722/Current-Interest- Proj ects. The 2020 Annual SAPFOTAC Report is scheduled to be certified by the BOCC at a regular meeting in May 2020. Therefore, if you have any comments pertaining to the report,please forward them to Craig N. Benedict, Planning Director, no later than 5:00 p.m. on April 13, 2020. Mr. Benedict can be reached by phone at(919) 7 245-2592 or by e-mail at cbenedict&oran-eg countync.gov. Any comments received will be part of our agenda package in May. Please share this information and the 2020 SAPFOTAC report with your respective boards. Sincerely, Penny Rich Chair Enclosures cc: Board of County Commissioners Bonnie Hammersley, Orange County Manager Travis Myren, Deputy Orange County Manager Maurice Jones, Manager, Town of Chapel Hill David Andrews, Manager, Town of Carrboro Eric Peterson, Manager, Town of Hillsborough Pamela Baldwin, Superintendent, Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools Monique Felder, Superintendent, Orange County Schools Patrick Abele, Assistant Superintendent for Support Services, Chapel Hill—Carrboro City Schools Catherine Mau, Coordinator for Student Enrollment, Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools Michelle Dodson, Student Assignment and Student Transfers, Orange County Schools Craig Benedict, Planning Director, Orange County Judy Johnson, Planning and Development Services Interim Director, Town of Chapel Hill Margaret Hauth, Planning Director, Town of Hillsborough Trish McGuire, Planning Director, Town of Carrboro 8 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 IN 2002 & 2003) (ORDINANCES ADOPTED IN JULY 2003) Annual Report 2020 (BASED ON NOVEMBER 2019 DATA) CERTIFIED BY THE BOCC ON MAY X, 2020 9 Table of Contents 2020 SAPFOTAC Executive Summary............................................................................................................................i Introduction......................................................................................................................................................................vii Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance Partners.............................................................................................viii Planning Directors/School Representatives Technical Advisory Committee..............................................................ix I.Base Memorandum of Understanding.........................................................................................................................1 A. Level of Service.....................................................................................................................................................I B. Building Capacity and Membership...................................................................................................................2 Attachment I.B.1 Orange County School Capacity(Elementary,Middle,&High) (2018-19)....................................................5 Attachment I.B.2 Chapel Hill/Carrboro School Capacity(Elementary,Middle,&High)(2018-19)...........................................8 Attachment I.B.3 Orange County School Capacity(Elementary,Middle,&High)(2019-20).................................................. 11 Attachment LB.4 Chapel Hill/Carrboro School Capacity(Elementary,Middle,&High)(2019-20)......................................... 14 C. Membership Date................................................................................................................................................17 II.Annual Update to Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance System............................................................18 A. Capital Investment Plan (CIP)..........................................................................................................................18 B. Student Membership Projection Methodology................................................................................................19 Attachment II.13.1—Student Membership Projection Descriptions.............................................................................................20 Attachment II.13.2—Student Membership Projection Models Performance Analysis(2018-19)...............................................21 Attachment II.13.3—Student Membership Projection Models Performance Analysis(2019-20)...............................................25 C. Student Membership Projections......................................................................................................................29 Attachment II.C.1 —Orange County Student Projections(Elementary,Middle,&High)(2018-19).........................................34 Attachment II.C.2—Chapel Hill/Carrboro Student Projections(Elementary,Middle,&High)(2018-19)...............................35 Attachment II.C.3—Orange County Student Projections(Elementary,Middle,&High)(2019-20).........................................36 Attachment II.C.4—Chapel Hill/Carrboro Student Projections(Elementary,Middle,&High)(2019-20)...............................37 D. Student Membership Growth Rate...................................................................................................................38 Attachment II.D.1 —Orange County and Chapel Hill/Carrboro Student Growth Rates (Chart dates from 2019-2029 based on 11/15/18 membership numbers)(2018-19)..................................................................39 Attachment II.D.2—Orange County and Chapel Hill/Carrboro Student Growth Rates (Chart dates from 2020-2030 based on 11/15/19 membership numbers)(2019-20)..................................................................40 E. Student/Housing Generation Rate..................................................................................................................41 Attachment II.E.1 —Current Student Generation Rates(2015)..................................................................................................43 III. Flowchart of Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance Process............................................................44 A. Capital Investment Plan (CIP)(Process 1).......................................................................................................44 Attachment III.A.1 —Process 1 Capital Improvement Plan........................................................................................................45 B. Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance Certificate of Adequate Public Schools(CAPS) Update(Process 2)..............................................................................................................................................46 Attachment III.B.1 —Process 2 Certificate of Adequate Public Schools(CAPS)Allocation.....................................................48 10 2020 SAPFOTAC Executive Summary I. Base Memorandum of Understanding A. Level of Service ....................................................................(No Change)........Pg. I Chapel Hill/Carrboro Orange County School District School District Elementary 105% 105% Middle 107% 107% High 110% 110% B. Building Capacity and Membership ..................................(Change)..............Pg. 2 Chapel Hilt/Carrboro Orange County School District School District Capacity Membership Increase from Capacity Membership Increase from Prior Year Prior Year Elementary 5664 5363 (108) 3361 3232 27 Middle 2944 3044 111 2166 1763 (16) High 3875 3940 8 2439 2397 48 C. Membership Date—November 15.......................................(No Change)........Pg. 17 II. Annual Update to SAPFO System A. Capital Investment Plan (CIP) ...........................................(No 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 2019-2020 School Year—Chapel Hill/Carrboro City Schools (The first column for each year includes the student membership projection made for 2019-2020 in that given year.The second column for each year includes the number of students the projection was off compared to actual membership.An"L"indicates the projection was low compared to the actual,whereas an"H"indicates the projection was high compared to the actual.) Year Projection Made for 2019-2020 Membership Actual2019 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019 Membership Elementary 5363 5839 H476 5634 H271 5658 H295 5467 H104 5448 H85 Middle 3044 3058 H14 2995 L49 2977 L67 2936 L108 2962 L82 High 3940 3979 H39 3857 L83 3864 L76 3930 L10 3948 H8 i 11 Analysis of 5 Years of Projections for 2019-2020 School Year-Orange County Schools (The first column for each year includes the student membership projection made for 2019-2020 in that given year.The second column for each year includes the number of students the projection was off compared to actual membership.An"L"indicates the projection was low compared to the actual,whereas an"H"indicates the projection was high compared to the actual.) Year Projection Made for 2019-2020 Membership Actual 2019 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019 Membership Elementary 3232 3227 L5 3332 171100 3230 L2 3154 L78 3213 L19 Middle 1763 1848 H85 1846 H83 1824 H61 1794 H31 1790 H27 High 2397 2579 H182 2559 H162 2474 H77 2416 H19 2348 L49 D. Student Membership Growth Rate....................................(Change)..............Pg. 38 Projected Average Annual Growth Rate Over Next 10 Years Chapel Hill/Carrboro Orange County School District School District Year Projection 2015- 2016- 2017- 2018- 2019- 2015- 2016- 2017- 2018- 2019- Made: 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Elementary 0.92% 0.91% 0.36% 0.56% 0.65% 0.80% 0.51% 0.58% 0.91% 0.84% Middle 0.82% 0.95% 0.21% 0.19% -0.07% 0.67% 0.36% 0.13% 0.28% 0.37% High 0.93% 0.72% 0% 0.16% 0.03% 0.56% 0.22% -0.10% 0.21% 0.21% E. Student/Housing Generation Rate ..................................(No Change)........Pg. 41 SCHOOL ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES ORDINANCE STATUS (based on future year Student Membership Projections) CHAPEL HILLICARRBORO SCHOOL DISTRICT Elementary School Level A. Does not currently exceed 105% LOS standard(current LOS is 94.7%). B. The projected growth rate at this level is expected to increase and remain positive over the next 10 years (average-0.65%per year compared to 0.33% over the past 10 years). C. Similar to last year, projections are not showing a need for an additional Elementary School in the 10-year projection period. Middle School Level A. Does not currently exceed 107%LOS standard(current LOS is 103.4%). B. The projected growth rate at this level is expected to decrease over the next 10 years (average--0.07% compared to an average of 0.85% over the past 10 years). C. Similar to last year, projections are not showing a need for an additional Middle School in the 10-year projection period. High School Level A. Does not currently exceed the 110% LOS standard(current LOS is 101.7%). B. The projected growth rate at this level is expected to decrease over the next 10 years (average-0.03% compared to 0.82% over the past 10 years). ii 12 C. Similar to last year, projections are not showing a need to expand Carrboro High School from the initial capacity of 800 students to the ultimate capacity of 1,200 students in the 10-year projection period. ORANGE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT Elementary School Level A. Does not currently exceed 105%LOS standard(current LOS is 96.2%). B. The projected growth rate at this level is expected to increase and remain positive over the next 10 years (average—0.84% compared to 0.15% over the past 10 years). C. Similar to last year, projections are not showing a need for an additional Elementary School in the 10-year projection period. Middle School Level A. Does not currently exceed 107% LOS standard(current LOS is 81.4%). B. The projected growth rate at this level is expected to decrease, but remain positive over the next 10 years (average—0.37% compared to 1.08% over the past 10 years). C. Similar to last year, projections are not showing a need for an additional Middle School in the 10-year projection period. High School Level A. Does not currently exceed 110%LOS standard(current LOS is 98.3%). B. The projected growth rate at this level is expected to decrease, but remain positive over the next 10 years (average— 0.21% compared to 0.5% over the past 10 years). C. Similar to last year, projections are not showing a need to expand Cedar Ridge High School from the initial capacity of 1,000 students to 1,500 students in the 10-year projection period. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION The Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (SAPFO) student projections illustrate when the adopted level of service capacities are forecasted to be met and/or exceeded in anticipation of CIP planning and the construction of a new school. Both school districts continue planning efforts to renovate and expand existing facilities to address school capacity needs in a more feasible way. Additional capacity resulting from school renovations and expansions will be added to the projection models in stages, once funding is approved, versus the addition of greater capacity when a new school is constructed and completed. The renovation and expansion to existing facilities may delay construction of new schools further into the future, depending on how and how much capacity is added to the system. This process will pose some challenges to SAPFO compared to the existing process which indicates in advance when a completely new school is needed. Decisions on the timing of reconstruction(i.e. capacity additions) funding would be directly linked to the SAPFO model at the appropriate time. SAPFO student projections for this year are not showing a need for new school construction or expansion in the 10-year projection period for both school districts due to slowing student growth rates. However, planned residential development in the near future may increase student membership and accelerate school construction and expansion needs into the 10-year projection period. Although capacity and construction needs are not identified this year, both school iii 13 districts face a large backlog of school capital maintenance and renovation projects that need to be addressed. Given that student projections are not showing an immediate need for school construction in the 10-year period, this may provide the time for both school districts to commence and/or complete these projects in order to address ongoing needs. Changes in Average Class Size In 2018, the North Carolina General Assembly unveiled House Bill 90 which allows for a phasing-in process to address the decrease in class size averages over the next three school years. Based on House Bill 90, average class sizes for kindergarten to third grade will face a decrease from 1:20 to 1:19 for the 2019-2020 school year, 1:19 to 1:18 for the 2020-2021 school year, and 1:18 to 1:17 for the 2021-2022 school year. Reductions in class size averages may create elementary school capacity issues for the 2021-2022 school year. In order to address these impacts in time, the School Boards and Orange County Board of Commissioners have met to review elementary school capacity(including Pre-K impacts) and determine how to implement the school capacity changes into the SAPFO annual report and 10-year student membership and building capacity projections sheets. Charter and Private Schools Currently, there are two Charter Schools located in the Town of Hillsborough. Charter student membership for these two schools is as follows: � • 1 111 School Year Number of Students Number of Students 2017-18 542 326 2018-19 655 (+113) 355 (+29) 2019-20 715 (+60) 365 (+10) Charter and private schools are not included as part of the SAPFO Annual Report and, as a result, their membership and capacity numbers are not monitored or included in future projections. SAPFO projections are used for projecting only public school construction needs. However, the SAPFO Technical Advisory Committee does monitor charter and private schools and their effect on student enrollment in both school districts. If a charter or private school were to close and a spike were to be realized in school enrollment, the student projections would likely accelerate the need for additional capacity in future years, but likely still within an appropriate time for CIP planning. Charter Schools are also monitored by the Department of Public Institution(DPI) which provides pupil information, based on data received from Charter Schools located in Orange County, to the County for funding purposes. The County budgeted for charter schools as follows: Ii 1 11 Fiscal Year Number of Students Number of Students 2017-18 162 617 2018-19 155 (-7) 769 (+152) 2019-20 169 (+14) 843 (+74) Although charter and private schools numbers are not collected for SAPFO purposes, impacts due to enrollment at these schools are accounted for in SAPFO process with the annual reporting of student membership and growth rates contained in the 10-year student projections. iv 14 Future Residential Development Following the economic downturn, there has been an increase in approved and undeveloped residential projects in Orange County. Currently, there are over three thousand proposed single family and multifamily housing units approved,but undeveloped in the CHCCS district. In addition, there are over a thousand proposed residential units approved,but undeveloped in the OCS district. Proposed growth is not included in the SAPFO projection system until actual students begin enrollment. The Certificate of Adequate Public Schools (CAPS) test is conducted during the approval process at a certain stage. Once students are enrolled in a school year, through annual reporting of student membership numbers, 10-year student projections can be updated to display future capacity needs in time to efficiently plan for future school construction requests. Staff and the SAPFO Technical Advisory Committee continue to monitor and evaluate the demand and growth of residential development throughout Orange County as well as its effect on student membership rates. Below is a list of larger residential projects and the potential number of students from these projects which may have impact to the schools in the short term. Please note, the City of Mebane is not a party to the SAPFO agreement and therefore does not require that CAPS (Certificate of Adequate Public Schools)be issued prior to development approvals. As a result, the potential number of students is based on unit type and bedroom count estimates. Residential Project JurisdictionProposed Students Elementary: 84 Collins Ridge Phase 1 Hillsborough 672 Middle: 45 High: 57 Elementary: 36 Forest Ridge Hillsborough 233 Middle: 19 High: 26 Elementary: 28 Carraway Village Chapel Hill 400 Middle: 10 High: 14 Elementary: 44 Weavers Grove Chapel Hill 235 Middle: 18 High: 20 Elementary: 60 The Meadows Mebane 256 Middle: 31 High: 34 Elementary: 9 Stagecoach Corner Mebane 35 Middle: 5 High: 6 Bowman Village/ Elementary: 48 Bowman Place Mebane 177 Middle: 23 High: 30 v 15 Potential Number Residential Project Jurisdiction Proposed Students The Townes of Oakwood Elementary: 5 Square Mebane 88 Middle: 4 High: 5 Northeast Village Elementary: 46 (Havenstone Phase 1 & 2) Mebane 169 Middle: 22 High: 29 The Retreat at Lake Elementary: 12 Michael Mebane 43 Middle: 6 High: 7 vi 16 Orange County,NC School Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance Introduction The Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (SAPFO) and its Memorandum of Understanding are ordinances and agreements, respectively. Supporting documents are anticipated to be dynamic to incorporate the annual changing conditions of membership, 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 Hill/Carrboro 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 affect 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. vii 17 Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance Partners ANNUAL REPORT AS OUTLINED IN Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance Memorandum of Understanding (SAPFO MOU) SECTION ld RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED TO SCHOOLS ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES ORDINANCE PARTNERS Chapel Hill/Carrboro School District Orange County School District SAPFO SAPFO AM Board of County Commissioners Board of County Commissioners Carrboro Board of Aldermen Hillsborough Board of Commissioners Chapel Hill Town Council Chapel Hill/Carrboro School Board Orange County School Board viii 18 Planning Directors/School Representatives Technical Advisory Committee (aka SAPFOTAC) Town of Carrboro Trish McGuire, Planning Director 301 West Main Street Carrboro,NC 27510 Town of Chapel Hill Judy Johnson, Interim Planning and Development Services 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 Ashley Moncado, Special Projects Planner Gary Donaldson, Director of Finance and Administrative Services 131 W. Margaret Lane P.O. Box 8181 Hillsborough, NC 27278 Orange County School District Monique Felder, Superintendent 200 E. King Street Hillsborough, NC 27278 Chapel Hill-Carrboro School District Patrick Abele,Assistant Superintendent for Support Services Catherine Mau, Coordinator of Student Enrollment 750 Merritt Mill Road Chapel Hill, NC 2751 ix 19 I. Base Memorandum of Understanding A. Level of Service 1. Responsible Entity for Suggesting Change—Change can only be effectuated by amendment to Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) by all SAPFO 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: Analysis of Existing Conditions: Chapel Hill/Carrboro School District Orange County School District These standards are acceptable at this time. These standards are acceptable at this time. 5. Recommendation: Recommendation: Chapel Hill/Carrboro School District Orange County School District No change from above standard. No change from above standard. 1 20 Section I B. Building Capacity and Membership 1. Responsible Entity for Suggesting Change—The Planning Directors, School Representatives, and 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: Standard for: Chapel Hill/Carrboro School District Orange County School District The original certified capacity for each of the The original certified capacity for each of the schools was certified by the respective schools was certified by the respective superintendent and incorporated in the superintendent and incorporated in the initialization of the CAPS system (Chapel Hill initialization of the CAPS system(Orange County Carrboro School District April 29, 2002 - Base) School District April 30, 2002 - Base) Capacity changes were made each year as follows: Capacity changes were made each year as follows: 2003: Increase of 619 at Rashkis Elementary. 2003: No net increase in capacity at Elementary 2004: No changes at Elementary, Middle, or High level. No changes at Middle School level. School levels. Increase of 1,000 at Cedar Ridge High School. 2005: No changes at Elementary, Middle, or High 2004: No net increase in capacity at Elementary 2 21 Section I School levels. level. No changes at Middle or High School 2006: No changes at Elementary, Middle, or High levels. School levels. 2005: An increase incapacity of 100 at 2007: An increase of 800 at the High School level Hillsborough Elementary with the completion of with the opening of Carrboro High School. renovations. 2008: An increase of 323 at the Elementary 2006: An increase in capacity of 700 at the School level due to the opening of Morris Grove Middle School level with the completion of Elementary School and the implementation of the Gravelly Hill Middle School and an increase of 15 1:21 class size ratio in grades K-3 at the High School level with the temporary 2009: No changes at Elementary, Middle, or High location of Partnership Academy Alternative School levels. School. An increase of 2 at the Elementary level 2010: An increase in capacity of 40 students at the due to a change in the capacity calculation for each High School level with Phoenix Academy High grade at each school. School becoming official high school within the 2007: No changes at Elementary, Middle, or High district School levels. 2011: No changes at Elementary, Middle, or High 2008: A decrease of 228 at the Elementary School School levels. level due to the implementation of the 1:21 class 2012: No changes at Elementary, Middle, or High size ratio in grades K-3 and an increase of 25 at the School levels. High School level with the completion of the new 2013: An increase in capacity of 585 students due Partnership Academy Alternative School. to the opening of Northside Elementary School. 2009: No changes at Elementary, Middle, or High 2014: An increase in capacity of 104 students due School levels. to the opening of the Culbreth Middle School 2010: No changes at Elementary, Middle, or High addition. School levels. 2015: No changes at Elementary, Middle, or High 2011: No changes at Elementary, Middle, or High School levels. School levels. 2016: No changes at Elementary, Middle, or High 2012: No changes at Elementary or Middle School School levels. levels. A decrease of 119 at High School level as a 2017: A decrease in capacity of 165 students due result of a N.C. Department of Public Instruction to the implementation of the 1:20 class size ratio in (DPI) study. grades K-3. 2013: No changes at Elementary, Middle, or High 3 22 Section I 2018: No changes at Elementary, Middle or High School levels. School levels. 2014: No changes at Elementary, Middle, or High 2019: No changes at Elementary, Middle, or High School levels. School levels. 2015: No changes at Elementary, Middle, or High School levels. 2016: No changes at Elementary, Middle, or High School levels. 2017: A decrease in capacity of 333 students due to the implementation of the 1:20 class size ratio in grades K-3. 2018: No changes at Elementary, Middle, or High School levels. 2019: No changes at Elementary, Middle, or High School levels. 4. Analysis of Existing Conditions: Analysis of Existing Conditions: Chapel Hill/Carrboro School District Orange County School District The Schools Facilities Task Force developed a The Schools Facilities Task Force developed a system to calculate capacity. Any changes year to system to calculate capacity. Any changes year to year will be monitored, reviewed, and recorded by year will be monitored, reviewed, and recorded by the SAPFOTAC on approved forms distributed to the SAPFOTAC on approved forms distributed to SAPFO partners and certified upon approval by SAPFO partners and certified upon approval by the Board of County Commissioners each year. the Board of County Commissioners each year. The requested 2019-20 capacity is noted on The requested 2019-20 capacity is noted on Attachment I.B.4 Attachment I.B.3 5. Recommendation: Recommendation: Chapel Hill/Carrboro School District Orange County School District Accept school capacities at all levels, as reported Accept school capacities at all levels, as reported by CHCCS and shown in Attachment LB.4. by OCS and shown in Attachment I.B.3. 4 23 Section I Attachment I.B.1 Orange County School Capacity(Elementary,Middle,& High) (2018-19) (Page 1 of 3) School District: Orange County Schools SAPFO CAPS Year: November 15,2018-November 14,2019 Capacity and Membership Submittal Date: November 15,2018 I i I I Elementary squo e Requested. Requested Requested Ik Requested capacity :Capacity Capacity acity Capacity Cameron Park: 7012,8 565 565" 565 :" 502 " '502 59Z Cenhal "" 52,492 455 455 455 '428 428 267 F,6nd Cheeks 64,316 497 ..497 497 455 455 467 Grady"Brown' 74,016 544 544 544 ` 490 490 462 Hillsboro ikh r 51,106 471 - 471 471 ,.420 420 435. New) ope 100,164 586 586 586 ` 526 " 526 589 Pathovays 85,282 576 516 " 576 : 540 540 388 Total" " 498,188 3,694 3,694 3,694 ` 3361 " 3361 3205 Specfni Note(s). 1.For the November 15,2002 base year the board accepted the wpednfendcnt-certified capacities as part oSthe 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 CfP or(2)an amended version of this form that is certified by the BOCC. Justification: Capacity Certification: e J a7 Superintendent Date OCC Chair Date Membership Certification: (Z�S'a ` 2 OCCS er'n a dent Date C hi Date 5 24 Section I Attachment I.B.1 Orange County School Capacity(Elementary,Middle, & High) (2018-19) (Page 2 of 3) School District: Orange County Schools SAPFO CAPS Year: November 15,2018-November 14,2019 Capacity and Membership Submittal Date: November 15,2018 ! 1 i I School Feet Foutnote A.Stanback 136,000 740 740 740 740 740 649 C;W.Stanf6id 107,620 726 726 726 726 726 649 Gravelly Hill 123,000 700 700 700 700 700 48.1 Total 1 366,620 2,166.: 2;166 2;166 2,166. 2,,1661 11 T19 Special Note(s): 1.For the November 15,2002 base year the board accepted the superintendent-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 CIP or(2)an amended version ofthis form that is certified by the BOCC. Justification: Capacity Certification: l-Ib--Ir 'I ($�!� Sup rintendent Date B C Chair Date Membership Certification: 44 its Superintendent Date RIOCC Chair Date 6 25 Section I Attachment I.B.1 Orange County School Capacity(Elementary,Middle, &High) (2018-19) (Page 3 of 3) School District: Change County Schools SAPFO CAPS Year: November 15,2018-November 14,2019 Capacity and Membership Submittal Date, November 15,2018 i I I2018-21019 SqU111T Justification i High School Requested. Requested Requested Requested Requested Membership Feet Footnote Q ange, 213,509 1399 399 1,399 ' 1,399 1,399 1290 Cedar Ridge 206,900 1,000 1000 1,000 1,000 1,000 I018 Partnership' 6,600 40 40 40 40 40 41 761 427,009 7439 2439 2,439 t t 2439 7 2439 2y349 Special Note(s):1,For the November I5,2002 base year the board accepted the superintendent-certified capacities as part of the School Facilities Cask Force review and 2003 Planners and School Representative Technical Advisory Committee Report. These capacities will remain effective until changed by(1)the School CIP or(2)an amended version of this form that is certified by the BOCC.2,The 2012-2013 capacity numbers for Orange High School(1,399)is based on a capacity analysis and facilities study completed by the Department of Public Instruction in August 20I2. Justification: Capacity'Certification: P41- ��LL—tk I1 16 / Suplerintenderit Date B C hair Date Membership Certification: LLobb)Iq S erintendent Date B CC Chair I Date 7 26 Section I Attachment LB.2 Chapel Hill/Carrboro School Capacity(Elementary,Middle, &High) (2018-19) (Page 1 of 3) School APFO Capacity, Membership and Change Request Form School District: Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools SAPFO CAPS Year: November 15,2018-November 14,2019 Capacity and Membership Submittal Date: November 15,2018 1 1 School Feet Requested Requested Requested Requested Requested Footnote 0 (referenced Capacity Capacity Capacity Capacity Capacity school year) CatbQro ; 60,832` 533 533 533 518 Ephesus 66,952 4'48 448 498 436 43G 944 )3stesills 56,299 $27 527 5Z7 516 slG 473, Gleriwna 50,764 423 53$ ,` 423 12 4x2 4$4 1'Grahaiu 66,689 53$ 423 538 s22 522 !> 5 McDoule 98,000` $64, 564 564 548 548 340. I20shk)s" 95,729 585 S85 585 Sb8 SG8 454 c oggs 90,980:, S75 S$S 5,75 55$ 7, 470 Sea�ve71 52,896 4b6 585: 466 450 4S0 503. 1vlaXzlsrgve " 90,221 585 57S ,'. 585 % 568 56$" 5$5 Nort)aside';; 99,500 585 466 Total. 828,862 ' S8?9 .. $,$Z9 S;89 5,664 5,654 5,9/1 Special Note(s):1,For the November 15,2002 base year the Board accepted the superinleadent-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(f)the School CIP or(2)an amended version of this form that is certified by the BOCC. Justification: Capacity Certification: Superintendent Date B hair [late Membership Certification: 0 i Superintendent Date BOCC Chair at 8 27 Section I Attachment I.B.2 Chapel Hill/Carrboro School Capacity(Elementary,Middle, &High) (2018-19) (Page 2 of 3) SchoolAPFO Capacity, Membership School District: Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools SAPFO CAPS Year: November 15,2018-November 14,2019 Capacity and Membership Submittal Date: November 15,2018 Square i Middle School Feet Requested Requested Requested Requested Requested Footnote 9 (referenced Capacity Capacity Oqpacity Capacity Capacity school year) G b th.'o 122,467 a 670 774 774 774 �7 r' 736 IvlcDou� 136,221 732 732 732 732 732 b83 Pknlailis 104,498 706 70fi 706 705 Smtth" 128,764 732` " 732 T&W i 496,950; M.40 ;{2,944 .2,944 2 g44 2,9441 2933 Special Note(s)t 1, For the November 15,2002 base year the Board accepted the superintendent certified capacities as part of the School Facilities Task Force review and 2003 Planners and School Representative Technical Advisory Cornmittee Report. These capacities will rejuain effective untii changed by(1)the School CIP or(2)an amended version of this form that is certified by the BOCC. Justification: Capacity Certification: PfAA AA A Superintendent Date B CC Chair Date M mtrership Certification: Superintendent Date VM Chair Date 9 28 Section I Attachment I.B.2 Chapel Hill/Carrboro School Capacity(Elementary,Middle, &High) (2018-19) (Page 3 of 3) School APFO Capacity, Membership and Change Request Form School District: Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools SAPFO CAPS Year: November 15,2018-November 14,2019 Capacity and Membership Submittal Date: November 15,2018 Squal*e 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-200 Justification Memberskipi I- -d Requested (referenced I"igh School et Requested Requested Requested Requeste Footnote 9 Capacity Capaci(y Capacity Capacity capacity school year) 20k $20: _1527 Esst 869 '151 1.515 Chap®� 4 148,023 -800, "40 877 10 5,207.� �40 r:.40 6 Total 654,210 ` 3,$757.i 7,7797177 7 3,875 7,51 371 3.8 Special Nate(s), 1. For the November 15,2002 base year the Board accepted the superintendent-certified capacities as part of the School Facilities Task Force review and 2003 Planners and School Representative Technical Advisory Committee Report- These capacities will remain effective until changed by(1)the Schcol CIP or(2)an amended version of this form that is certified by the BOCC Justification: Capacity Certification- Z-"Dat &A Superintendent Date ha Membership Certification: lr� fL 4 paj— Superintendent DateDate 10 29 Section I Attachment LB.3 Orange County School Capacity(Elementary,Middle, & High) (2019-20) (Page 1 of 3) School • Capacity, Membership and:Change Request Form School District: Orange County Schools SAPFO CAPS Year: November 15,2019-November 14,2020 Capacity and Membership Submittal Date: November 15,2019 Elementary Square I I I ! ; 1 I I Justification School Fect Requested Requested Requested Requested Requested Footnote Membership Capacity Capacity Capacity Capacity Capacity Cameron Park'- 70,812 W S6S 502 60E Central ...`. 52,492 =455 455 428 d2$ 428, 28b j?tlarldCheeIcs G4,31G;" 497`- 497 '455 455 45a. 449 C>ady Bro�n' 74,01 G 544 544 490 i 490 490 442 Hillsborough"""Hillsborough""" 471 471 420 420 420 444 Kim I op 100164 , 58G- s$6 52G 526 .. 526. 579 Pathways°,'.; 85,282 576 576: S40 S40 54Q 38I F;otel,., 498,188 " "3i694... 3694 3,361?' 3,361 3,361 3,2.32 Special Nete(s): 1.For theNovcmber 15,2002 base year the board accepted the superintendent-certified capacities as part of the School Facilities Task Force review and 2003 Planners and SchoDI Representative Technical Advisory Committee Report. These capacities will remain effective until changed by(1)the School UP or(2)an amended version of this form that is certified by the AOCC. Justification: i!0 v 1 Capacity Certification: 10,A A A,A 0 uperint dent/ Date B CC' C air Date Membership Certification: uperin n lent Date B Chai Date 11 30 Section I Attachment I.B.3 Orange County School Capacity(Elementary,Middle, & High) (2019-20) (Page 2 of 3) s School District: Orange County Schools SAPFO CAPS Year:November 15,2019-November 14,2020 Capacity and Membership Submittal bate: November 15,2019 I I E SchoolFootnote Capacity capacity Capacity Capacity Capacity 4 L Staubacic 136,000 74 W. 740 740 140 74Q 653 C W,S#aford 107,620 '726 726 726 726 726 6a2 i ra e�1�31ll 123,000 7fl0 700 7� 700 70Q 4G'8 a Rai 4 s '; 5 . 3ota1' ,_ 366,620. 2;166 2;166 2,165' F,,,, 2; b6 2;166 1,763 Special Note(s): 1.For the November 15,2002 base year the board accepted the superintendent-certified capacities as part of the School Facilities Task Force review and 2003 Planners and School Representative'fechnical Advisory Committee Report. These capacities will remain effective until changed by(1)the School CIP or(2)an amended version ofthis form that is certified by the BOCC. Justification: Capacity Certification: /�/1-1 iik�' PW perintet ent Date BO Chair Date Membership Certification: �j S perinten nt Date B C Chair Date 12 31 Section I Attachment I.B.3 Orange County School Capacity (Elementary,Middle, & High) (2019-20) (Page 3 of 3) School School District: Orange County Schools SAPFO CAPS Year: November 15,2019-November 14,2020 Capacity and Membership Submittal Date: November 15,2019 I 1 1 I I 1 I I Justification RequestedHigh School 11: Requested Requested Requested , , Membership Fm Capacity Capacity Capacity Capacity Capacity Footnote# 7range 213,509 1,399!. 1399 1,399 1,399 1,399 1,296. Cedarlttdge, 2061900  1;006- 1,000 " 1,000' 1,000 1;000" 1,0G7 Pattnerslrip" 6,600 40 40 40 40 40. 3d Total 421,009 2,439 ;434 2,439 ? . ' 2439 2,439. 2397: Special Note(s):1,For(he November 15,2002 base year the board accepted tl)c superintendent-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 CIP or(2)an amended version ofthis form that is certified by the BOCC.2.The 2012-2013 capacity nurnbcrs for Orange High School(I,399)is based on a capacity analysis and facilities study completed by the Department of Public Instatetion in August 2012. Justification! p Capacity Certification, AMA A tembershiDt rint den Date BO air Date Gertification: uperi e en Da BO C thair Date 13 32 Section I Attachment I.B.4 Chapel Hill/Carrboro School Capacity(Elementary,Middle, &High) (2019-20) (Page 1 of 3) School , Membership School District: Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools SAPFO CAPS Year: November 15,2019-November 14,2020 Capacity and Membership,Submittal Date: November 15,2019 2015-2016 I I 1 RequestedElementary Square Instifleation School Feet Requested Requested Requested Footnote Capacity Capacity Capacity Capacity Capacity school 60,832 66,952 56,299 50,764 66,689 98,000 95,729 90,980 52,896 i 90,221 49,500' - 828,862 Special Note(s):I.For the November 15,2002 base year the Board accepted the superintendent-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 CIP or(2)an amended version of this form that is certified by the BOCC. Justification: Waiting for the Schools Joint Action Committee reductions for class size changes Capacity Certification: LaA, —Alma t� �� ��611 Superintendent Date B C Chair Date /Membership Certification: (W1lUel�>1 �V1 `a 11 k2e011(� Superintendent Date B CC Chai Date 14 33 Section I Attachment I.B.4 Chapel Hill/Carrboro School Capacity(Elementary,Middle, &High) (2019-20) (Page 2 of 3) School • Capacity, , School District: Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools SAPFO CAPS Year: November 15,2019-November 14,2020 Capacity and Membership Submittal Date: November 15,2019 i I Middle School Feet Requested Requested Requested Requested Requested l"ootnote 4 (i,eferenced Cqjaacilly Capacity Capacity Capacity capneily school year) Culbreth 122,467 774 774 7. .M774 774 ti0O 1�IcDougie�. 136,221 732 732 732 732 732 692 Fhtlhps 109,498 706 706 706 206 7.66 10 S1ni1h 128,764 732 732 . 732 732 732 804 T.ptal,, 496,9501 2,994 2 944 2,944 2,944 ,.= 44 3,04.4 Special hote(s): L For the November 15,2002 base year the Board accepted the superintendent-certified capacities as part orthe 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 CIP or(2)an amended version of this form that is certified by the BOCC_ Justification- Capacity Certification: Superintendent Date BOtC chair Date Membership Certification: ik�Z.©�t� Superintendent Date BCJCC Chair Date 15 34 Section I Attachment I.B.4 Chapel Hill/Carrboro School Capacity(Elementary,Middle, &High) (2019-20) (Page 3 of 3) . .l APFs Capacity, Membership and Change Request Form School District: Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools SAPFO CAPS Year: November l5,2019-November 14,2020 Capacity and Membership Submittal Date: November 15,2019 1 i 1200-2020 Membership Square Iligh School Fcet Requested Requested Requested Requested Requested (referenced Capacity capticity Capacity Capacity Capacity school Year) G4t�pe�'fTi11', 241,111 1, 0 15 �1. 1,5t1 1,52Q '1,S2D 1,514 East Cllapel�HAt, 259,869 1,513 I's 1,515 'I 1,5 3 �1,515 1,51 airbord 148,023. 80D 800 800 80.0, 800 869 Phverrix:Acad; `: 5,207 40 40 40 40 40 38 Tptal,,, 654,210 3,875 3�895 3,875 3;875 -3,875 � �3t940 Special Note(s): I. For the November 15,2002 base year the Board accepted the superintendent-certified capacities as part of the School Facilities Task Farce review and 2003 Plamwrs and School Representative Technical Advisory Committee Report, These capacities will remain offcctive until changed by(1)the School CP or(2)an amended version of this Form that is certified by the BOCC, Justification: Capacity Certification: 44.a — 2 It I � Superintendent Date BO e air Date UP Membership Certification: Superintendent Date BICC Chair Date 16 35 Section II C. Membership Date 1. Responsible Entity for Suggesting Change—Change can be effectuated only by amendment to Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) by all SAPFO partners. The Planning Directors, School Representatives, and Technical Advisory Committee (SAPFOTAC) may advise if a change in date would improve the reporting or timeliness of the report. 2. 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. 3. Standard for: Standard for: Chapel Hill/Carrboro School District Orange County School District November 15 of each year November 15 of each year 4. Analysis of Existing Conditions: This will be analyzed in the future years to determine if it is an exemplary date. 5. Recommendation: Recommendation: Chapel Hill/Carrboro School District Orange County School District No change at this time. No change at this time. 17 36 Section H II. Annual Update to Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance System A. Capital Investment Plan (CIP) 1. Responsible 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. 2. 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: Standard for: Chapel Hill/Carrboro School District Orange County School District Not Applicable Not Applicable 4. 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, 2020. 5. Recommendation: Not subject to staff review 18 37 Section H B. Student Membership Projection Methodology 1. 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 School 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 2019-20 school year from the prior year projection. 5. Recommendation: More than fifteen 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 difficult 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. 19 38 STUDENT MEMBERSHIP PROJECTIONS PROJECTION TYPE DESCRIPTION 1 CHARACTERISTICS FORMULA ASSUMPTIONS Tischier Linear(OCS& Mathematical formula;straight tine projection y=((c*b)*x)+b Historical growth is reflected in projected growth CHCCS) y-projected population;c=historical annual change;b=base year;x=projection years BYM+(BYI+5(n))=EYM EYM*%SL=EYMISL Base year growth reflects 10-year average; SYM=base year 2nd month membership;BYI=year student membership increment OCP Linear Wave Mathematical linear with percent variation among school o increase m BYI of 5 every other year reflects (OCS) levels;reflects progressing waves of membership base;EYM ensuing year membership;n=projection year; /oSL=u total increases in housing growth; reflects buildout membership per school level(i.e.elementary,middle,high);EYMISL=ensuing year constraints member by school level BYM+(BYI-15(n))=EYM EYM*°/oSL=EYMISL Base year growth reflects 10-year average; BYM=base year 2nd month membership;BYI=year student membership increment OCP Linear Wave Mathematical linear with percent variation among school decrease in BYI of 15 until school year 2010-2011 (CHCCS) levels;reflects progressing waves of membership base;EYM=ensuing year membership;n=projection year;%SL=%of total reflects decreases in housing growth; reflects membership per school level(i.e.elementary,middle,high);EYMISL=ensuing year buildout constraints member by school level K„=k„.€+(k„.1*0.01) Mathematical formula that computes the average n=1 advancement rate over the previous 3 years for each a=(E G I girl)13 Assumes a 1%annual growth rate for the 3-Year Cohort(OCS& grade level and then uses each rate to calculate n=3 kindergarten grade level; assumes the same CHCCS) projected membership by school level;an assumed b=g„_1(a) percentage of students in each grade level kindergarten membership is based on birth records K=kindergarten membership;n=given school year;G=given grade's graduate to the next level each year andfor historical growth rates membership(other than kindergarten);g=previous grade's membership;a=average advancement rate;b=projected membership K„=k„-t+(km, 0.01) Mathematical formula that computes the average n=1 advancement rate over the previous 5 years for each a=(f G„1 g„.1)/5 Assumes a 1%annual growth rate for the 5 year Cohort(OCS& grade level and then uses each rate to calculate n=5 kindergarten grade level; assumes the same CHCCS) projected membership by school level;an assumed b=g„-1(a) percentage of students in each grade level kindergarten membership is based on birth records K=kindergarten membership;n=given school year;G=given grade's graduate to the next level each year and/or historical growth rates membership(other than kindergarten);g=previous grade's membership;a=average advancement rate;b=projected membership K„=k„.1+(k„.1*0.01) Mathematical formula that computes the average n=1 advancement rate over the previous 10 years for each a=(E G„I g„.1)/10 Assumes a 1%annual growth rate for the 10 year Cohort(OCS& grade level and then uses each rate to calculate n=10 kindergarten grade level; assumes the same CHCCS) projected membership by school level;an assumed b=g n-1(a) percentage of students in each grade level kindergarten membership is based on birth records K=kindergarten membership;n=given school year;G=given grade's graduate to the next level each year and/or historical growth rates membership(other than kindergarten);g=previous grade's membership;a=average advancement rate;b=projected membership 39 Section II Attachment II.B.2 —Student Membership Projection Models Performance Analysis(2018-19) (Page 1 of 4) Orange County School District School Membership 2018-2019 School Year (November 15, 2018) 11/15/17 2018 Report 11/15/18 Change between actual Actual Projection for Actual Nov 2017 - Nov 2018 2017-18 2018-19 2018-19 Elementary 3183 3205 +22 Model Proiection is T 3201 L4 OCP 3200 L5 10C 3140 L65 5C 3128 L77 3C 3139 L66 AVG 1 1 13161 L44 11/14/17 11/15/18 Middle 1730 1779 +49 Model Protection is T 1740 L39 OCP 1739 L40 10C 1822 H43 5C 1812 H33 3C 1814 H35 AVG 1 11785 H6 11/14/17 11/15/18 High 2445 2349 -96 Model Projection is T 2458 H109 OCP 2460 H111 10C 2354 H5 5C 2368 H19 3C 2340 L9 AVG 1 1 12396 IH47 Totals 11/14/17 11/15/18 Elementary 3183 3205 Middle 1730 1779 High 2445 2349 7358 7333 -25 Model Projection is T 7399 H66 OCP 7399 H66 10C 7316 L17 5C 7308 L25 3C 7293 L40 AVG 7342 H9 H means High L means Low 21 40 Section II Attachment II.13.2 —Student Membership Projection Models Performance Analysis (2018-19) (Page 2 of 4) Orange County School District School Membership 2018-2019 School Year (November 15, 2018) Statistical Findings PROJECTION TYPE ABBREVIATIONS `TISCHLER' LINEAR (T) 10-YEAR COHORT (10C) ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING (OCP) 5-YEAR COHORT (5C) 3-YEAR COHORT 3C Elementary School Level • The projections were all low, ranging from 4 students to 77 students below actual membership. On average, the projections were 44 students lower than the actual membership. • The membership actually increased by 22 students between November 16, 2017 and November 15, 2018. Middle School Level • Projections were mixed, ranging from 40 students below to 43 students above actual membership. On average, the projections were 6 students higher than the actual membership. • The membership actually increased by 49 students between November 16, 2017 and November 15, 2018. High School Level • The majority of projections were high, ranging from 5 students to 111 students above actual membership. One projection was 9 students below actual membership. On average, the projections were 47 students higher than the actual membership. • The membership actually decreased by 96 students between November 16, 2017 and November 15, 2018. TOTAL • The totals of all school level projections were mixed, ranging from 40 students below to 66 students above actual membership. On average, the projections were 9 students higher than the actual membership. • The membership decreased in total by 25 students, which is the sum of+22 at Elementary, +49 at Middle, and -96 at High. 22 41 Section II Attachment II.B.2—Student Membership Projection Models Performance Analysis (2018-19) Chapel Hill/Carrboro School District (Page 3 of4) School Membership 2018-2019 School Year (November 15, 2018) 11/15/17 2018 Report 11/15/18 Change between actual Actual Projection for Actual Nov 2017 - Nov 2018 2017-18 2018-19 2018-19 Elementary 5522 5471 -51 Model Pro�is T 5556 H85 OCP 5541 H70 10C 5496 H25 5C 5475 H4 3C 5479 H8 AVG 1 15509 H38 11/14/17 11/15/18 Middle 2833 2933 + 100 Model Projection is T 2850 L83 OCP 2848 L85 10C 2926 L7 5C 2907 L26 3C 2915 L18 AVG 1 1 12889 L44 11/14/17 11/15/18 High 3927 3932 +5 Model Projection is T 3951 H19 OCP 3938 H6 10C 3884 L48 5C 3889 L43 3C 3912 L20 AVG 1 1 13915 IL17 Totals 11/14/17 11/15/18 Elementary 5522 5471 Middle 2833 2933 High 3927 3932 12,282 12,336 +54 Model Projection is T 12,357 H21 OCP 12,327 L9 10C 12,306 L30 5C 12,271 L65 3C 12,306 L30 AVG 12,313 L23 H means High L means Low 23 42 Section II Attachment 11.13.2—Student Membership Projection Models Performance Analysis(2018-19) (Page 4 of 4) Chapel Hill/Carrboro School District School Membership 2018-2019 School Year (November 15, 2018) Statistical Findings PROJECTION TYPE ABBREVIATIONS `TISCHLER' LINEAR (T) 10-YEAR COHORT (10C) ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING (OCP) 5-YEAR COHORT (5C) 3-YEAR COHORT 3C Elementary School Level • Projections were all high ranging from 4 students to 85 students above actual membership. On average, the projections were 38 students higher than the actual membership. • The actual membership decreased by 51 students between November 16, 2017 and November 15, 2018. Middle School Level • Projections were all low, ranging from 7 students to 85 students below actual membership. On average, the projections were 44 students lower than the actual membership. • The actual membership increased by 100 students between November 16, 2017 and November 15, 2018. High School Level • Projections were mixed, ranging from 48 students below to 19 students above actual membership. On average, the projections were 17 students lower than the actual membership. • The actual membership increased by 5 students between November 16, 2017 and November 15, 2018. TOTAL • The majority of all school level projections were low, ranging from 9 students to 65 students below actual membership. One projection was 21 students above the actual membership. On average, the projections were 23 students lower than the actual membership. • The membership increased in total by 54 students, which is the sum of-51 at Elementary, +100 at Middle, and +5 at High. 24 43 Section II Attachment II.B.3—Student Membership Projection Models Performance Analysis (2019-20) (Page 1 of 4) Orange County School District School Membership 2019-2020 School Year (November 15, 2019) 11/15/18 2019 Report 11/15/19 Change between actual Actual Projection for Actual Nov 2018 - Nov 2019 2018-19 2019-20 2019-20 Elementary 3205 3232 +27 Model Projection is T 3217 L15 OCP 3215 L17 10C 3217 L15 5C 3197 L35 3C 3217 L15 AVG 1 1 13213 L19 11/15/18 11/15/19 Middle 1779 1763 - 16 Model Projection is T 1786 H23 OCP 1773 H10 10C 1808 H45 5C 1794 H31 3C 1788 H25 AVG 1 11790 H27 11/15/18 11/15/19 High 2349 2397 +48 Model Projection is T 2358 L39 OCP 2385 L12 10C 2339 L58 5C 2339 L58 3C 2318 L79 AVG 1 1 12348 IL49 Totals 11/15/18 11/15/19 Elementary 3205 3232 Middle 1779 1763 High 2349 2397 7333 7392 + 59 Model Projection is T 7361 L31 OCP 7373 L19 10C 7364 L28 5C 7330 L62 3C 7323 L69 AVG 7351 L41 H means High L means Low 25 44 Section II Attachment II.B.3—Student Membership Projection Models Performance Analysis(2019-20) (Page 2 of 4) Orange County School District School Membership 2019-2020 School Year (November 15, 2019) Statistical Findings PROJECTION TYPE ABBREVIATIONS `TISCHLER' LINEAR (T) 10-YEAR COHORT (10C) ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING (OCP) 5-YEAR COHORT (5C) 3-YEAR COHORT 3C Elementary School Level • The projections were all low, ranging from 15 students to 35 students below actual membership. On average, the projections were 19 students lower than the actual membership. • The membership actually increased by 27 students between November 16, 2018 and November 15, 2019. Middle School Level • Projections were all high, ranging from 10 students to 45 students above actual membership. On average, the projections were 27 students higher than the actual membership. • The membership actually decreased by 16 students between November 16, 2018 and November 15, 2019. High School Level • The majority of projections all low, ranging from 12 students to 79 students below actual membership. On average, the projections were 49 students lower than the actual membership. • The membership actually increased by 48 students between November 16, 2018 and November 15, 2019. TOTAL • The totals of all school level projections were low, ranging from 19 students to 69 students below actual membership. On average, the projections were 41 students lower than the actual membership. • The membership increased in total by 59 students, which is the sum of+27 at Elementary, -16 at Middle, and +48 at High. 26 45 Section II Attachment II.B.3—Student Membership Projection Models Performance Analysis(2019-20) (Page 3 of 4) Chapel Hill/Carrboro School District School Membership 2019-2020 School Year (November 15, 2019) 11/15/18 2019 Report 11/15/19 Change between actual Actual Projection for Actual Nov 2018 - Nov 2019 2018-19 2019-20 2019-20 Elementary 5471 5363 - 108 Model Projection is T 5512 H149 OCP 5417 H54 10C 5423 H60 5C 5473 H110 3C 5418 H55 AVG 1 1 15448 IH85 11/15/18 11/15/19 Middle 2933 3044 + 111 Model Protection is T 2955 L89 OCP 2910 L134 10C 3010 L34 5C 2908 L136 3C 3025 L19 AVG 1 11 2962 IL82 11/15/18 11/15/19 High 3932 3940 +8 Model Projection is T 3962 H22 OCP 4055 H115 10C 3894 L46 5C 3902 L38 3C 3926 L14 AVG 1 1 13948 IH8 Totals 11/15/18 11/15/19 Elementary 5471 5363 Middle 2933 3044 High 3932 3940 12,336 12,347 + 11 Model I Projection is T 12,429 H82 OCP 12,382 H35 10C 12,327 L20 5C 12,283 L64 3C 12,369 H22 AVG 12,358 H11 H means High L means Low 27 46 Section II Attachment II.13.3—Student Membership Projection Models Performance Analysis (2019-20) (Page 4 of 4) Chapel Hill/Carrboro School District School Membership 2019-2020 School Year (November 15, 2019) Statistical Findings PROJECTION TYPE ABBREVIATIONS `TISCHLER' LINEAR (T) 10-YEAR COHORT (10C) ORANGE COUNTY PLANNING (OCP) 5-YEAR COHORT (5C) 3-YEAR COHORT 3C Elementary School Level • Projections were all high ranging from 54 students to 149 students above actual membership. On average, the projections were 85 students higher than the actual membership. • The actual membership decreased by 108 students between November 16, 2018 and November 15, 2019. Middle School Level • Projections were all low, ranging from 19 students to 136 students below actual membership. On average, the projections were 82 students lower than the actual membership. • The actual membership increased by 111 students between November 16, 2018 and November 15, 2019. High School Level • Projections were mixed, ranging from 46 students below to 115 students above actual membership. On average, the projections were 8 students higher than the actual membership. • The actual membership increased by 8 students between November 16, 2018 and November 15, 2019. TOTAL • The totals of all school level projections were mixed, ranging from 64 students below to 82 students above actual membership. On average, the projections were 11 students higher than the actual membership. • The membership increased in total by 11 students, which is the sum of-108 at Elementary, +111 at Middle, and +8 at High. 28 47 Section II C. Student Membership 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 City School District and Orange County School District). 3. Standard for: Standard for: Chapel Hill Carrboro School District Orange County School District The 5 model average discussed in Section The 5 model average discussed in Section II.B (Student Projection Methodology) II.B (Student Projection Methodology) See Attachment II.C.4 See Attachment II.C.3 4. Analysis of Existing Conditions The membership figures and percentage growth on the attachments show an increase at the Chapel Hill/Carrboro City Schools' middle and high school levels and at the Orange County Schools' elementary and high school level. The attachments show a decrease at the Chapel Hill/Carrboro City Schools' elementary school level and Orange County Schools' middle school level. The majority of Chapel Hill/Carrboro Schools and Orange County Schools projected average annual growth rates have all decreased since the previous year, except the elementary school levels in both districts which have experienced an increase. The majority of projected annual growth rates show positive growth for the three levels in the 10-year projection period. However,the Chapel Hill/Carrboro City Schools' middle school level shows a negative growth rate in the 10-year projection period. Attachment II.C.3 and Attachment II.C.4 show year by year percent growth and projected level of service (LOS). The projection models were updated using current(November 15, 2019) memberships. Ten years of student membership were projected thereafter. 29 48 Seetion II Chapel Hill/Carrboro School District Elementary The previous year(2018-19)projections for November 2019 at this level were overestimated by 85 students. The actual membership decreased by 108 students. Over the previous ten years, this level has shown varying increases and decreases in growth rates. Following a significant increase (168 students) in 2011-12, this level has experienced a decrease in four out of the five previous school years including this year. Growth rates during the past ten years have ranged from-1.57%to+3.17%. The district's eleventh elementary school,Northside Elementary School, opened in 2013. Capacity was decreased in 2017-18 due to changes in class size averages for kindergarten to third grade by the North Carolina State Legislature. The need for an additional elementary school is not anticipated in the 10-year projection period. This is similar to last year's projections. 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. Specific impacts of Pre-K programs at the elementary school level will continue to be reviewed and discussed in the coming year. Middle The previous year(2018-19)projections for November 2019 for this level were underestimated by 82 students. The actual membership increased by 111 students. Over the previous ten years, this level has shown varying increases before experiencing a decrease in 2015-16 and 2016-17. Growth rates during this time period have ranged from -0.59%to+3.53%. Capacity was increased in 2014 with the opening of the Culbreth Middle School science wing. The need for an additional middle school is not anticipated in the 10-year projection period. This is similar to last year's projections. High School The previous year(2018-19)projections for November 2019 for this level were overestimated by 8 students. The actual membership increased by 8 students. Over the previous ten years, change has been variable with decreases in membership in four of the ten years. Growth rates during this time period have ranged from-0.90 to+4.39%. The need for additional high school capacity at Carrboro High School is not anticipated in the 10-year projection period. This is similar to last 30 49 Section II year's projections. Due to renovations to Chapel Hill High School, this level will experience an increase in capacity of 105 seats for the 2020-21 school year. Additional Information for Chapel Hill/Carrboro School District Following the economic downturn, there has been an increase in residential projects, specifically multifamily development, in the Town of Chapel Hill. Currently, there are over three thousand proposed single family and multifamily housing units approved, but undeveloped in the CHCCS district. As previously stated,proposed growth is not directly and immediately included in the SAPFO projection system until actual students begin enrollment. The CAPS test is conducted during the approval process at a certain stage and this step does project development impacts against rated capacity. Once students are enrolled in a school year, through annual reporting of student membership numbers, 10-year student projections can be updated to display future capacity needs in time to efficiently plan for future school construction requests. Staff and the SAPFO Technical Advisory Committee will continue to monitor and evaluate the demand and growth of residential development in Chapel Hill and Carrboro as well as its effect on student membership rates. Charter schools are not included as part of the SAPFO Annual Report and, as a result, their membership and capacity numbers are not monitored or included in future projections. However, the SAPFO Technical Advisory Committee does monitor charter schools and their effect on student enrollment at both school districts. If a charter school does close and a spike is realized in school enrollment, the student projections will likely accelerate the need in future years, still within an appropriate time for CIP planning. Charter Schools are additionally monitored by the Department of Public Institution (DPI) which provides pupil information, based on data received from Charter Schools located in Orange County, to the County for funding purposes. Orange County School District Elementary The previous year(2018-19)projections for November 2019 at this level were underestimated by 19 students. Actual membership increased by 27 students. Over the previous ten years, this level experienced positive growth before experiencing decreases in 2014-15, 2016-17, and 2017-18. Growth rates during this period have ranged from -5.07% to+2.30%. In the Orange County school system, historic growth is more closely related to new residential development than in the 31 50 Section II Chapel Hill/Carrboro School District, which has a sizeable number of new families in older, existing housing stock. Capacity was decreased in 2017-18 due to changes in class size averages for kindergarten to third grade by the North Carolina State Legislature. The need for an additional Elementary School is not anticipated in the 10 year projection period. This is similar to last year's projections. 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. Specific impacts of Pre-K programs at the elementary school level will continue to be reviewed and discussed in the coming year. Middle The previous year(2018-19) projections for November 2019 for this level were overestimated by 27 students. The actual membership decreased by 16 students. Over the previous ten years, growth has varied widely with decreases in student membership in 2012-13, 2015-16, 2016-17, and this school year. Growth rates during this period have ranged from -1.31%to+4.00%. 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. This is similar to last year's projections. High School The previous year(2018-19) projections for November 2019 for this level were underestimated by 49 students. The actual membership increased by 48 students. Over the previous ten years, growth has been varied. Growth rates during this period ranged from -3.93%to 4.58%. In 2012- 13 student membership increased by 32 while capacity decreased by 119 at Orange County High School as a result of a N.C. Department of Public Instruction(DPI) study. Similar to last year's projections, the need for additional capacity at Cedar Ridge High School is not anticipated in the 10 year projection period. However, to address public safety concerns with the current high school capacity exceeding the 100%threshold, Orange County Schools is in preliminary planning stages to expand Cedar Ridge High School from initial capacity of 1,000 students to1,500 students for the 2021-22 school year. 32 51 Section II 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 require that CAPS (Certificate of Adequate Public Schools)be issued prior to development approvals. Following the economic downtown, there has been an increase in approved and undeveloped residential development in the City of Mebane and the Town of Hillsborough. Currently, there are over one thousand proposed single family and multifamily housing units approved,but undeveloped in the City of Mebane and the Town of Hillsborough. The residential growth that has occurred in the recent past within Mebane's and Hillsborough's jurisdiction has yet to be seen with OCS student membership numbers and fully realized into the historically based projection methods due to the recession, charter schools, and possibly new family dynamics effecting family size. Staff and the SAPFO Technical Advisory Committee will need to continue monitoring and evaluating the demand and growth of residential development in Mebane and Hillsborough as well as its effect on student membership rates. Currently, there are two Charter Schools located in the Town of Hillsborough. Eno River Academy(K-12) serves 715 students and The Expedition School (K-8) serves 365 students. Both of these charter schools continue to have an effect on OCS membership numbers. Charter schools are not included as part of the SAPFO Annual Report and, as a result, their membership and capacity are not monitored or included in future projections. However, the SAPFO Technical Advisory Committee does monitor charter schools and their effect on student enrollment at both school districts. If a charter school were to close and a spike were to be realized in school enrollment, the student projections will likely accelerate the need for additional capacity in future years, still within an appropriate time for CIP planning. Charter Schools are also monitored by the Department of Public Institution (DPI)which provides pupil information,based on data received from Charter Schools located in Orange County, to the County for funding purposes. 5. Recommendation: Use statistics as noted in 3 above 33 52 �o OCS Student Projections(1)(4) Elementmy See dYear =I849 M0S-10 M10.11 M11A M12AS W13.14 M14-15 M16.16 M1&1T M17.18 M19-19 201940 202E-21 2021.22 202243 2029]4 MU46 202546 =6d NI272 2028.28 Ac19al 3165 3211 3285 3348 34Q3 3.433 3259 3318 3293 3183 3205 Tlschbr(2 9,217 3,229 3,2A1 3- 3,255 3,27E 3,290 3.302 3 mA 3,527 OC Plemm� 3215 3.236 3259 3283 3308 3334 336Q 3.385 3407 3426 10 Year Gr h 321T 3293 3314 3379 3411 3, 3517 3552 15flfi 3821 S Year GrOr4M1 3197 S.- 3265 331T 3.?i9 34 3498 21.4. 51`.- 355➢ 3 Year GraNM1 3217 S294 1311 3371 'sA',t :f,471 3,506 3.61 u612 13 3 3m 9 3 T 3" 3 4 34fi2 3480 3fi09 An el Chan -Ixrea¢e Ge¢reaeel In ActualB Pr ected Member¢hlpl 7 6 7a 6a 6s . 69 n 11v 22 6 as 16 43 4T 2e 2e 26 2e n Ca ac -100%LevelM3ervlce "S. 44 3664 36B4 3fi84 S.S. 3634 3694 3fi84 3.1 361 3.1 3361 3.361 3.3fi1 33fi1 3361 3,361 3359 3361 3361 nr Nrunber of fitutlerRa.Actual and Pr p-d Over 1lntler I-LOfi 29 A63 _09 fi 291 26t A36 Tfi AOi 17fi 1 _ 14B 9 63 GO 6 96 fi3 91 tt9 11 r� 106%Leueld Service 3879 3,679 43 9 9 3979 3G79 3W9 3979 3879 3529 36S 3 3 9 3529 3629 3.628 3 3 29 3,529 354 9529 Number of stutleds 0.c[ua[antl Pr'ected Over Untler 105%o L03 14 B f d]6 446 1 6B6 324 iT 251 t62 134 105 ]] Q9 1 1ny oe 9 s�•.s, 3t,5b e aGs 1Jri 2-, )' 1('r"v Mnu016[utlenl Glwrlll R01E 13I 0_ 1- 2. 1 1.64% O.wjM E 191 1, 140% 0 1 O tl. OS1 6. y�.nr Y.r 1mPw�xrbre:rs��orerrmd.m�asrm rmpa,d aa.�mneod caA lNce�re�e a_wm mar�r In sass a:e raooa cer no.�5ln ulx-3 P'? vm vie v o� mem w , e w mw. ���a°r�av^aebeW'Pr.a�Grxiq ru lr2asa,0 rm9trtm�o���repnM axrage e�eslze ravosae lao asdrenetl bvsrare legslaeae xeorz) Ny anrwra.'xma nee irexxeawn a cxvcsxnors. gxarcaimvn n nmmmwwsvaemvmsrs'nfmnxmwncnres. er,r0ee(t¢dbn bpvlggltia xlm rt',.Nxetl ties 196 I/re¢�� [a1 a~u trra .wt.end:e.ep.aawod��.i®�.rnaas�mamanm.wn +s e.�.a>'n. 'P ebw+nnacxccaee...drne,wi.e m:a1:21..c.�MNaa HURL ,1 OCS Student Projections(1) tnwnae Q 8d1pPl Yes 2008413 M09-1n M10-it M1142 M12-13 M13.14 M14-15 M16.16 M1&17 M1748 M18-19 M1948 28M41 2@i-22 M2243 2029]A M2A36 2026-26 M26- 202728 2=4SI ALWaI t,BQi 1,.1 1- 17. 18B9 17Qi 17. 1,739 1,7. 1730 I- Tluhlar 2 t]86 1]03 1 799 1 816 1 010 1 820 1 026 i 833 1 8a0 1&17 n� OC Planrdn 1 T73 1776 1770 1,782 1 T3B 1 791 11795 1 822 1641 1 681 10 Year Growth 11. 1726 1715 1578 1705 171P 1TBE 1615 1833 1851 S Veer GrcvM t'U 1 700 1,BT9 f 634 1 B52 1,s43 1,680 1,T25 1,742 1,750 3 Year GrovAa 1.11 1 893 1 B94 1 052 1 683 1 684 1729 1 779 1707 1 815 v..IQ.n -Ixraws act In Actual&Pr ecbd Membctchl 64 33 6 53 15 16 6 49 11 1 16 1 29' 37 16 16 0 Ca aG -10p%LeY¢Id6ervlcre 2166 a166 M. 2166 2.1. 21. 2.1. 2166 2186 2,1. 2166 2166 at66 M. M. a166 21fi6 atfid 2IN 21. 2166 NumberMSWtlerta Actualentl Prj- Over1lnder iOM LOS 85 1 Afi6 - A62 A19 40A A2I 412 I:1fi 3Tfi 429 A35 d58 436 43] A06 371 %5 336 a.r 1O7%Leveid S- 2118 2 16 2 10 2 18 2310 2318 2310 2316 2318 318 231E 2310 2310 2318 2 1B 2 16 2310 23101 2318 1 231el 2.310 r"r Number oTBhdsrts Actrml entl Pr acts Ovm Under 107%LOB gin 16 fiii 6B4 6 3 GOT 1 Aclasl-R Lmal of GPrvt[e 738R 1- iBf,R 78.71 117% BO]% 813% 383% 796% i39% 32% �] t•h Anlwal StWaM GroMh R¢b 4.2E 4.00% 0.36% fD -1.17% 9.14% 0.88% 1.31 -0b6x 03595 2.89% v.av% 4.9@1c -v36% 1.65 2.u1 Q95% 089% ,r��rrr.,e e.dd ral xeue vo.wrmwwmwmemwmemwmrm wreexsrumasaraca meassmmminunwennaanoeiama vrsramiomammncnws. Z OCS Student Projections(1) � [A.- 1 Yes 200849 20094E 2010.1 2011.12 201243 M19.14 20.16 2016.16 2016.17 MIT48 2918-19 20194E =41 2021.22 =43 202334 202d46 202643 202647 -7T 2028 2242 2217 2222 2283 2315 2421 2502 ^_4u9 244E 2445 ^349s65 2482 342E 1- 2459 2479 2499 24M 2504 istsar&-h 2339 2 82 2419 2499 2443 2432 2378 2 51 2420 2439 r 239 377 23 2a 290 2301 T 230 239 r 13 2329 2327 23s0 2- 177fi 112A -1, 227E 22AA• 2 2 1 2,383 2 6 2 2 2 4 346 2 366 2 Mdin ACNd&N ecbd MambarsM1i 41 6 61 32 1O6 91 . 1 96 1 23 11 39 3cI fl 7 17 40 12 i -10E°le Lavald3¢nice 2558 2 2.55E 255E 24� 439 2 2439 2439"� l2499 211 2939 1 2939 2999 2 9 291 191 1939 2939 sm9ludenc Attwland Pr ecle Over Under ilMLOS 316 1 3 e 7fi IV 1 63 30 1 9 651 9 576 593 563 42 LavaldS-1. 2 10. 2 14 2814 2614 2583 BB3 2686 2603683 2 3293 9 43 3 3,,,eSWdert¢Actual entl Pr ecle Over Under 110%LOB 1 1B1 1412 TO'- I Inre Bi 6% 86.7% 869% 992% A9% 993% v021% 101 1003%�: 171% Sl 3% a26% Xl v'% 313%131udeM G,¢ Rate 13) i. -1.1 E29% 7, 1.40Y. 4A8% 3.36% 4. 4 A6 1, tl71 1.69% -0.24% -02896 -1.14% O, 1. OABrk \ v n1n:�.wm+m�umrlw,.ea.u,.uo��ie,name....le+pasaumncr�s.w.omn.sw.rmwmoa,.a. `'-\ .........\\ It`�yI wa-newswmuww..n,a<ir..w.nsao�®.weadtts..ear egdr.n�.���r.�.ae�•�,.ae.ee.umea�m.xwnecxtts raa�nP.r�bnA'alremaweslml relra�r�xigmtletl agervy.r;aclq dveaey ra oPl serh ^ dr md2e wdli^sMd tlelq mm seen. /re lL,'mes=wrrwnukeuare>-lamrne.arrb weexml0unp,mlalo erdxry.mmerMcnw..'eoleatr.«g.mxc� hr�ar F� Q 0x I 11 ®moo®®® ®®® J ��®' Slf�i���i'l1�IG�11�1.3 ��ili��l.�.:a:t������� • ® ® ems OEM o • ®®®®®®®®®® ®®®®®®®®®®® ®®®®®®®®®® • MEN M."TP�� �"+ ®®®®®®®®®®®® ®®®®®®®®®®® ®®®®®®®®®® ®®®®®®®®®® 56 Section II D. Student Membership Growth Rate 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) 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 anticipated growth rates over the next 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: Chapel Hill/Carrboro School District Orange County School District The membership figures and percentage The membership figures and percentage growth on the attachments show continued growth on the attachments show growth at each school level within the continued growth at each school level system. within the system. Projected Average Annual Growth Rate Projected Average Annual Growth Rate over next ten years: over next ten years: School Year Projection Made School Year Projection Made Level 2015- 2016- 2017- 2018- 2019- Level 2015- 2016- 2017- 2018- 2019- 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 Elementary 0.92% 0.91% 0.36% 0.56% 0.65% Elementary 0.80% 0.51% 0.58% 0.91% 0.84% Middle 0.82% 0.95% 0.21% 0.19% -0.07% Middle 0.67% 0.36% 0.13% 0.28% 0.37% High 0.93% 0.72% 0% 0.16% 0.03% Hi h 0.56% 0.22% -0.10% 0.21% 0.21% 5. Recommendation: Recommendation: Chapel Hill/Carrboro School District Orange County School District Use statistics as noted. Use statistics as noted. 38 57 �o 2018-2019 Orange County Student Projections Elementary Schoo]Year 201�1A19 2019-2020 2020-2021 2021-2022 2022-2023 2023-2024 2024-2025 2025-2026 2026-2027 2027-2028 202&2029 actual Membership 3,205 3.213 3,262 1 3.278 1 3,321 1 3,367 1 3.395 1 3,424 1 3,452 3,480 1 3,508 Avera a%Increase 1 023% 1.53% 1 0.50% 1 1.31% 1 1.40% 1 0.83% 1 0.83% 1 0.83% 0.81% 1 0.790A rr Middle 2018.2019 ^ School Year (actual) 2019-2020 2020-2021 2,921-2022 2022-2023 20232024 2024-2025 2025-2026 20M,2027 2027-202N 2029-20N t9 WrnbeMhip 1 1.779 1.700 1,737 1,731 1,710 1728 1729 1,758 1,705 1.811 1827 Avers e%Increase 0 60% -2.93% -0.36% -1.19% 1.03% 0.08% 1.65% 2.09% 0.89% 0.89% ¢ � >v Hi h School y d School Year 2018-2019 2019-2020 2020-2021 2021-2022 2022-2023 20232024 2024-2025 202�2026 2026-2027 2027-2028 2029-20N .� I actual Membership 2,349 2,348 1 2,371 2,388 2,426 2,396 2,390 2,363 2,340 2,386 2,397 Avera a%Increase -0.05% 1 1.00% 0.71% 1.59% -1.24°/0 -026% -1.14% -0.72% 1.70% 0.48% N O� Chapel Hill/Carrhoro Student Projections N Elementary `o 2018-2019 School Year actual 2019-2020 2020-2021 2021-2022 2022-2023 2023-2024 2024-2025 202-2026 2026-2027 2027-2028 20M2029 0 0 Membership 5.471 5 448 5.444 1 5.474 1 5,498 1 5.557 1 5.606 1 5.653 1 5,700 1 5.745 5 787 Average%Increase -0,41% -0.08% 1 0.65% 1 0.43% 1 1.07% 1 0.89% 1 0.84% 1 0.83% 0.78°/0 0.740A p (� Middle School Year 2 aMu�a119 2019-2020 2020-2021 2021-2022 2022-2023 2023-202-4 2024-2025 2025-2026 2026-2027 2027-2029 202&2029 (n �y Membership 2.933 2,962 2,981 2,961 2,943 2.898 1 2.905 1 2.904 2.939 1 2,962 2,988 00 Average%Increase 0.97% 0.65% -0.68% -0.60% -1.52% 1 0.21% 1 -0.04% 1.24% 1 0.78% 0.86% 5 n High School 2019.2019 school Year 2019-2020 2020-2021 2021-2022 2022-2023 2023-2024 2024-2025 202�2026 NZ64627 2027-2028 ZOM2029 eD � Llemhzrshi 3.932 3,948 3,972 3,981 4,037 4 086 4.068 4,058 4.007 3,983 3.995 cr Avera a%Increase 0.40% 0.62% 0.23% 1.400A 1.21% -0.44% -0.24% -1.27% 1 -0.58% 0.30% 'C C rp rA rA o N rr � 00 i G t9 rn 58 �o 2019-2020 Orange County Student Projections Elementary School Year 2019-2020 2020-2021 2021-2022 2022-2023 2023-2024 2024-2025 2025-2026 2026-2027 2027-2028 2028-2029 2029-2030 actual Membership 3 232 3,267 3,281 3,320 3 351 3 378 3,406 3,433 3,459 3,488 3,513 Average%Increase 1.08% 0.42% 1.19% 1 0.95% 0.790% 0.820A 0.79°f° 0.77% 0.77% 0.77% Middle 2019-202D School Year actual 2020-2021 2021-2022 2022-2023 2023-2024 2024-2025 2025-2026 2026-2027 2027-2028 2028-2029 2029-2030 Membership 1763 1.728 1,719 1713 1,732 1732 1,762 1,781 1,796 1,812 1,828 ; Average%Increase -2 01% -DA7% -0.35% 1.11% -0.01% 1.72% 1.10% 0.84% 0.87% 0.87% ^* O. 0.0 A'+ High School y d School Year 2019-2020 2020-2021 2021-2022 2022-2023 2023-2024 �24( 2025 2025-2026 2026-2027 2027-2028 20M2029 2029-2030 "+ I acl ual Membership 2 397 2 401 2,415 2 433 2 404 1 2,370 2,380 2,408 2,416 2,4470Average%Increase 0.16% 0.57% 0.76% -1.18% 2% -1.31% 0.44% 1.16% 0.34% 1.27% N >v O O N� O � Chapel Hill/Carrboro Student Projections w ElementaryO 2019-2020 School Year (actual) 2020-2021 2021-2022 2022-2023 2023-2024 2024-2025 2025-2026 2026-2027 2027-2029 2028-2029 2029-2030 w Membership5 363 53 5,357 5 367 5 442 5 489 5 537 5,584 5,632 5,680 5,723 0„ Q„ Average%Increase -0.14% 0.03% 0.18% 1.40% 0.87% 0.86% 0.86% 0.86% 0.85% 0.76% O O O Middle V 2019-2020 �= School Year 2020-2021 2021-2022 2022-2023 2023-2024 2024-2025 2025-2026 2026-2027 2027-2028 2028-2029 2029-2030 actual Membership 3 044 3.045 3 016 2,992 2 933 2,917 2,897 2 946 2,970 2.995 3,020 ~ :' Average%Increase 0 03% -0 97% -0.77% -1 97% -0.55% -0,68% 1.69% 0.81% 0 84% 0.83% n f9 A� High School L(actual) 20 School Year 2020-2021 2021-2022 2022-2023 2023-2024 2024-2025 2025-2026 2026-2027 2027-2028 2029-2029 2029-2030 y A�Iembershi� 3,965 4,021 4085 4123 4,111 4090 4,001 3972 3,959 3,950 CA Avera e%Increase1.15% 0.89% 1.60% 0.94% -0.31% -0.50% -2.17% -0.74% -0.31% -0.23% O O. C �p O eD � O N O � tJ � O y 59 Section H E. Student / Housing Generation Rate 1. Responsible Entity for Suggesting Change—The updating of this section will be conducted by Planning Directors, School Representatives, and 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 — Student generation rate refers to the number of public school students per housing unit constructed in each school district, as defined in the Student Generation Rate Study completed by TisherBise on October 28, 2014. Housing units include single family detached, single family attached/duplex, multifamily, and manufactured homes. 3. Standard for: Standard for: Chapel Hill/Carrboro School District Orange County School District See Attachment II.E.1 See Attachment II.E.1 4. Analysis of Existing Conditions: At the January 2014 SAPFOTAC meeting, members discussed the increased number of students generated in both school districts from new development,particularly multifamily housing. The SAPFOTAC recommended further evaluation of the adopted Student Generation Rates and the impacts the number of bedrooms a particular housing type may have on student generation rates. As a result, Orange County entered into a contract with TischlerBise to update the student generation rate analysis. The new student generation rates were approved on May 19, 2015 and are shown in Attachment II.E.1. New rates from the 2014 Student Generation Rates for Orange County Schools and Chapel Hill-Carrboro School District Report are based on an inventory of recently built units from January 1, 2004 to December 31, 2013. 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 41 60 Section II housing is dominant or new families move into a large inventory of existing housing stock. 5. Recommendation: No change at this time. 42 61 �o o' ti TischlerBise Student Generation Rates — 2014 Chapel Hill/Carrboro Schools 0-3 Bedrooms 4 Bedrooms 5+ Bedrooms Weighted Average Single-Family Detached 0.61 0.84 1.13 0.84 y 0-2 Bedrooms 3+ Bedrooms Weighted Average Single-Family Attached 0.27 0.42 0.38 Multifamily/Other 0.11 0.47 0.18 Manufactured Home 0.268 0.86 0.78 CrJ Weight Average for Chapel Hill/Carrboro School District 0.49 n Orange County Schools 0-3 Bedrooms 4 Bedrooms 5+ Bedrooms Weighted Average Single-Family Detached 0.35 0.57 0.57 0.44 G� 0-2 Bedrooms 3+ Bedrooms Weighted Average Single-Family Attached 0.07 0.17 0.15 Multifamily/Other 0.08 0.67 0.17 Manufactured Home 0.67 0.47 0.52 y Weight Average for Orange County School District 0.37 N 0 Source:Student Generation Rates for Orange County School District and Chapel Hill-Carrboro School District,TischlerBise,October 28,2014 Revised N1ay 7,2015 W 62 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, 2019 membership numbers used to develop a CIP to be considered for adoption in June 2020). 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 SAPFO 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. 44 63 Section III School Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance Process 1 - Capital Investment Planning (CIP) Projection Method 1 CIP Approval CAPS System (Historical Membership (Proposed new construction (Certificate of Adequate plus Hypothetical Growth i.e. school capacity added by Public Schools) Rate) number of seats and year) Actual Adjustments (Current year actual replaces y past year membership projections) g 'Historical Membership is a product of students generated from: (1)pre-existing/approved undeveloped lots where new housing is o built, (2) 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). n 2The only part of the CAPS System(i.e., computer spreadsheet subdivision tracking) that receives data from the Process 1 CIP14. a includes the actual membership (November 15 of preceding CIP year) and new school capacity amount(seats) in a specific year pursuant to the CIP. a 0 P 0 45 64 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 CIP 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 previously noted in Section II.C, The City of Mebane is not a party to the SAPFO and does not require that CAPS be issued prior to approving development activities. 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. Although the SAPFO system is not formally regulated in Mebane, staff monitors development activity and when students enter the school system their enrollment is calculated and used in future school projection needs. Please note that the two processes (CIP and CAPS) are on separate, but parallel tracks. However, the CIP does create a crossover of capacity information between the two processes. 46 65 Section III For example, the SAPFO 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 1. CIP Process 1 (for CIP 2020 - 2030) November 2018—June 2019 (using 2019 SAPFOTAC Report) SAPFO CAPS Process 2 (for SAPFO System 2020—2021) November 2019 -November 2020 47 66 School Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance Process 2 - Certificate of Adequate Public Schools (CAPS) Allocation 2020 CAPS system is effective November 15, 2019 through November 14, 2020. The system is updated with new membership, CIP capacity changes, and any other BOCC/School District joint action approved capacity prior to November 15, 2019. 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, 2019. CAPS Allocation System CAPS System2 1. Certified Capacity AC = SC — (ADM+ND I+ND2+. . .) b 2 LOS Capacity o 3. Actual Membership 4. Year Start Available Capacity 5. Ongoing Current Available Capacity(includes available n capacity decreases from approved CAPS development by year) 6. CAPS approved development AC>_0 - Issue CAPS a. Total units b. Single Family' AC<0 - Defer CAPS to later date C. Other Housings .n 1 Student Generation Rates from CAPS housing type create future membership estimate. Please note that this CAPS membership future estimate is a different than the projection based on historical data and projection models used in the CIP process 1. This estimate only captures new development impact,which is the component that the SAPFO can regulate. 0 a AC—Available Capacity- Starts at Annual Update Capacity and reduces as CAPS approved development is entered into the system. SC—Certified School Level Capacity n ADM—Average Daily Membership ND—New Development; ND means first approved CAPS approved development 48 ������ ® ��1��1��1��1��1��1��1��1��1��1��1�m1� 1�m1��1 ��1��f��1��1�m1��1��1��1��Qilt�ml�E�i1��1��1��1�dF71�®1��f1�m1�ra1��11�m1 . . �� ��1��1��1��1��1��1��1�m1��i1�Em1��1��1�m1��f��1��1��1�Emf��1��m1��f ��1��1��1��1�®1��1��1��1� 1��1��1��1��1��1��1��1��1��1�®1��1��f � � ���� ��1��if�®1��1�m1�����m1�m1�m1��1�1��1��1��1��1��1��1��1 ��1��1��1��1�F�11��1�F�f�®1��1�m1��1�F�11��1���1��1��1��1��1��1��1 MIMI— m�bL