Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 09-25-2000-1ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: September 25, 2000 Action Agenda Item No. 1 SUBJECT: County/OCS/CHCCS Discussion/Policy Issues DEPARTMENT: County Manager PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No ATTACHMENT(S): As listed in "Background" INFORMATION CONTACT: John Link or Rod Visser, ext 2300 Donna Dean, ext 215.1 Cra~_Benedict, ext 2592 TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough 732-8181 Chapel Hill 968-4501 Durham 6$$-7331 Mebane 336-227-2031 PURPOSE: To discuss various issues with policy and/ or financial implications that are of current interest to the Orange County Commissioners, Orange County Board of Education, and/or Chapel Hill-Carrboro Board of Education. BACKGROUND: a) School Capital Planning/Funding Task Force Discussions At the March 29, 2000 CIP work session, the BOCC expressed its intent to convey to the two school boards expectations regarding communication about, and review processes that should be associated with, school capital projects. The BOCC enumerated a number of points that should be addressed in a written policy related to planning and funding school projects. Staff drafted a proposed policy document to lay out the BOCC's expectations regarding collaboration and communication on planning and funding schaal capital projects. Both school boards expressed a number of concerns about the draft policy and requested that the BOCC refrain from adopting any such policy until formal dialogue among the boards could be conducted. In August 2000, the work group that had reviewed school funding options last winter met to discuss potential improvements to the draft policy on school capital planning and funding. Several revised versions of the policy have been circulated among the elected officials and staff involved in that work group. While full consensus on the policy has not been achieved, there seems to be general agreement that the version of the proposed policy presented here for discussion among the three full boards is more workable than the original draft prepared in April. The Manager recommends that the BOCC discuss the proposed policy with the school boards and consider the schools' feedback in moving towards formal adoption of this policy, likely at a subsequent BOCC meeting in .October ar November. Since the September 7 draft of the policy was circulated for comment to the elected officials serving on this task force, Superintendent Pedersen has submitted a memo outlining five proposed changes that the Boards may wish to discuss and consider far inclusion in the policy to be adopted. Attachment 1 a-1- 9/7/00 Draft Policy on Planning and Funding School Capital Projects Attachment 1a-2 - 9/18/00 Memo from CHCCS Superintendent b) Program/Staff/Facility Issues with Significant 2001-02 Budgetary Impacts It has become a regular practice of both school systems to outline at semi_annual work sessions with the Board of Commissioners those initiatives that might lead to additional funding requests in future fiscal years. This has also been a regular topic reviewed at monthly meetings between the County Manager and the two Superintendents. Both school systems indicated their desire to discuss at this September 25 work session initiatives or external factors that may impact the 2001.-02 school budgets. OCS indicated specifically an interest in addressing class size reduction in grades 3, 6, and 9; Spanish teachers; and pre-K classes in all K-5 schools. The Boards may wish to discuss the financial implications of these issues, and any others that OCS or CHCCS may be considering for the upcoming fiscal year. No Attachments c) Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance Development Orange County Planning staff has been collaborating with school and municipal staffs and attorneys for more than a year on the development of an adequate public facilities ordinance (APFb). The fundamental purpose of such an ordinance would be to ensure, to the maximum extent practical, that new residential development be approved only when it can reasonably be expected that adequate public school facilities will be available to accommodate students who would live in the new residential developments. The Schools and Land Use Councils (SLUG) have been examining this issue in detail during 2000. The SLUG, at their last meeting on September 13, approved a resolution recommending that the proposed Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance be formally transmitted to the County Commissioners, and then to the governing boards of the municipalities and school systems for comment and suggested revisions. This meeting provides an opportunity for the full boards to discuss the main provisions of the proposed APFO, review the process to date, and discuss possible next steps that would ultimately lead to adoption and implementation of a Schools APFO in Orange County. County Planning Director Craig Benedict will be available to the various governing boards aver the next few months for presentations and/or to respond to questions about the proposed APFO. Attachment 1c-1-Draft Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance Attachment 1 c-2 -Draft Memorandum of Understanding Attachment 1c-3 -SLUG Resolution Recommending and Transmitting fhe Schools APFO and Memorandum of Understanding FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact tied directly to the discussion at this meeting. However, decisions that the school boards and BOCC will make at subsequent meetings are likely to have significant implications for future capital and operating budgets. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the boards discuss the issues noted and provide direction to staff, as appropriate. DRAFT Revised 9/07/00 ORANGE COUNTY Policy on Planning and Funding School Capital Projects (This document is intended to clarify the expectations of the Orange County Board of Commissioners in collaborating with the Boards o}~Education in planning for and implementin.~ school capital protects, ~~l~is' l'~~1~L{,1 i9^y 1. Background The County's ten year capital investment plan is a planning document that is updated annually. Before the beginning of each fiscal year, the Boazd of County Commissioners approves the funding plan in concept. However, funding of individual projects is contingent upon the scope of work required to complete the project. Concern: Clearly • Level 1 Projects: Level one projects are those projects that have a relati define Level 1 and small sco a of work and can be accom lished usin a ~ T` P. P g ~~ e.~~! Leve12 projects. ~ ~ ~ ;~{` in-house staff or entail urchasin a ui ment and vehicles °n~~ ~^~~~~ Far. _~~s' ~~ ~ M ~ "~ ' The Boazd approves the entire project ordinance at one time. • Level 2 Projects: Level two projects are major projects that require several phases to complete. For these projects, the Baazd approves funding for individual components as project scope develops rather than allocating a lump sum for the life of the project. Major components include: Concern: Continue to use the "phased approval approach" for Leve12 projects but decrease the number of times the Beard of Commissioners approves the pxoject anal ordinance Timing is a major concern in the rraulti- phase~f process ~~ • Planning, architect, engineering • Site acquisition and associated fees • Construction • Equipment, Furnishings, Non-Recurring Start-Up costs • Technology y ~,. Page 1 of 7 Policv on Plannine and Fundine Schnnl C:anital Prniects 4 DRAFT Revised following 8/17/00 task force meeting and includes Superintendents' comments Revised 9/07/00 ~N ~ w,~ . ~': .•.' 2. Site Standards Tn accordance with North Carolina State Statutes, a local board of education cannot execute a contract nor expend funds to purchase' a facility site without the consent of the local board of county commissioners. As each school system in Orange County plans for future school-related facilities, it is important that they adhere to the following guidelines related to the potential acquisition, either by purchase or donation, of a site, in addition to any siting criteria they may have established internally: Patential Sites -The Board of Education is to notify the Orange County Board of Commissioners, in writing, whenever ,they have tentatively identified a potential school site for purchase, or if a potential donor indicates interest in donating a site to the system. The written correspondence should provide the following information for Commissioner consideration: • Location, including tax map numbers, of the potential site; • Opportunities for additional facilities to be co-located as a park site, as outlined in the "Memorandum of Agreement for Providing Coordinated Site and Facility Planning"; • The availability of public utilities at or in close proximity to the site; • If a donated site: • Any knowledge of a donor's plans for adjacent development; Concern: Ensuring that the • Special considerations or expectations the donor may have entire Board of referenced in initial discussions pertaining to the donation; Commissioners is aware of talks Upon receipt of the Board of Education's notification, the Commissioners and potential sites from the will appoint, by a majority vote of the Board, a representative to work beginning; avoid directly with the Board of Education. As a partner with the school system, "surprises" in the the Commissioner representative will receive information and provide input end Page 2 of 7 Policy on Plannins and Funding School Capital Projects 5 DRAFT Revised following 8/17/pp task force meeting and includes Superintendents' comments Revised 9/07/00 talks and negotiations related to the potential site. W,~-Ws ~ ~ ~,~' Environmental Factors -- A school system is to pay particular attention to the physical environment surrounding the site and new facility. Jn order to avoid future flood hazazds, a facility should not be located in close proximity to wetlands, stream buffers, or in a flood plain. Facility siting should also avoid other physical factors that create either additional construction or longer-term maintenance problems, or other unfavorable environmental impacts. Once a system acquires a site and before grading begins, each school system receives State approval of its erosion control plan and additional County review to ensure that unnecessary cutting of trees or clearing of land does not occur. Adequate natural buffers are to be left intact with existing trees, or replanted if the areas are disturbed during construction. Special attention should be paid to "specimen" trees as outlined in the County land development code. Road and Utility Requirements -Major elements For a system to consider in siting a new facility relate to infrastructure requirements by a Town or other public utility. In some recent instances, the systems have been required to provide costly infrastructure such as sidewalks and road improvements. These elements greatly inflate construction costs of new facilities. As a system begins initial planning, there should be a joint meeting between elected Town, County and Education offtcials to ~~ ~~ particulaz requirements that all parties expect of other project partners. 3. Building Design Standards As a school system selects a particulaz facility design, it is important that the most cost-effective design alternative be pursued. Historically in Orange County, new school buildings have been designed uniquely. for each particular project. The Board of Commissioners encourages systems to pursue non-traditional, or prototype, designs that can be replicated for use on more than one nroiect. ~ ' 4. Construction Standards ~ ~~ °;uia: Over the past few years, the County has given special attention to defining construction standards for each school level -elementary, middle and high schools. The standards provide a Page 3 of 7 Policy on Planning and Funding School Capital Praiects 6 DRAFT Revised following 8/17/00 task force meeting and includes Superintendents' comments Revised 9/07/00 minimum and maximum square footage and student capacity for each level. As a system undertakes constructiori of a new facility, it is critical that the system adheres to the most recent school construction standards (estimated project cost should include a reasonable allowance for inflation). The Commissioners agree to provide funding for new school facilities that are designed. within the adopted standazds. They do not agree to fund projects that go beyond the adopted standards unless there is sufficient justification provided in writing by the Boazd of Education. One justification for going beyond the standazds centers on community use of the new facility. For example, a system may design a facility with a "lazger than standards gymnasium" that allows for citizen/communityuw. In this, case, the system must provide detailed explanations outlining the benefits to be offered to the community and citizens, in the context of the intergovernmental "Memorandum of Agreement for Providing Coordinated Site and Facility Planning". 5. Project Approval A project's inclusion in the ten-year plan does not give the Schools or the County legal authority to expend funds. The legal authority to expend funds lies in County Commissioner approved capital project ordinances. Therefore, the schools should not incur any expenses far any capital project until the Boazd of County Commissioners approves the capital project ordinance. In order to provide timely flow of the approval process and ensure that all elements are addressed, the following steps should be followed: • Details included in each system's ten-yeaz Capital Investment Plans regarding the scope and timing of various phases of individual capital projects is limited. To that end, as individual Boards of Education begin discussions related to new capital projects ~ ,construction, site acquisitions, major renovations; etc), they will be expected, in writing, to notify the Board of County Commissioners of the substance of those discussions. The memorandum from the School Board will: • Provide the Commissioners with an overview of the project concept along with other project specifics that the Board of Education has defined to that point; • Justify the need based on current school capacities and projected student enrollments consistent with the School Adequate Public Facility Ordinance (if the Ordinance is in effect at this time); rovide a preliminary cost projection of the project based upon the adopted school construction standazds and provisions of the Cost Effective Facilities Initiative (CEFl7, which has derived from earlier discussions about "value engineering" ~~~~~p~~Gy; .,;~; ; ,.''.,, • Request that the Board of Commissioners approve a capital project ordinance to provide funding for the initial planning phase of the project; Page 4 of 7 Policy on Planning and Funding School Capital Projects 7 DRAFT Revised fallowing 8/17/00 task force meeting and includes Superintendents' comments Revised 9/07/00 • Instruct the Superintendent to update the County Manager, in writing, of the project's progress at his/her monthly meetings with the County Manager. • .Upon receipt of the memorandum from the Board of Education, the Board of Commissioners will: • Aet upon the project concept by either approving it or asking the Board of Education to amend the concept plan; • Instruct County staff to confirm the project's cost estimate and student capacity in accordance with the County's adopted School Construction Standards Reports along with student enrollment projections; • If the Board of Commissioners approves the project concept, the County Budget Director will prepare an agenda abstract and related capital project ordinance that provides funding for the concept and pre-planning phase of the project; • .Appoint, by ma'ority vote of the Board, either a Commissioner h ^' 6~ _ _ representative ~h. and one staff representative, or two staff - ~ representatives, to partner with the school system as the plans ,,;, .:;.. re develop; ~ ~~~-- ei. • Instruct the County Manager to update the Commissioners on a regular basis regarding the written information shared by the School Superintendent. 6. Expenditure of Project Funds Funding far Praject Planning -School systems will not expend or encumber for planning of any project until the Soard of County Commissioners has approved the plan concept. Background -For several years, the Board of Commissioners has approved a capital project ordinance entitled Planning for Future Projects for each school system. The creation of these ordinances enabled a system to expend a portion of their pay-as-you-go funds for planning during a project's conceptual stages. Once a project grew beyond the. concept stages, systems requested the Commissioners to approve a "project specific" capital project. ordinance allocating all funds anticipated to carry out the planned project. In turn, each district expended their monies up-front for planning, design, architect, construction, furniture and equipment. In return, the County reimbursed each District with all of the project-related expenditures up to the total project budget. With the changes implemented by the County Commissioners in June 1999, this process has changed. Tt is important to note that unless a County approved capital project ordinance is in place (i.e. adopted by the County Commissioners), that the County is Page S of 7 Policy on Planning and Fundine School Capital Proiects 8 DRAFT 'Revised following 8/l7/00 task force meeting and includes Superintendents' comments Revised 9/07/00 not legally or otherwise obligated to reimburse the school system for their expenditures. If the Board of County Commissioners approve the project concept and capital project ordinance as outlined in Item S above, the following. steps occur: • Following Board of Commissioner approval of fmal plans for the project, the school system advertises for construction bids; • Once the system receives the bids, the School Superintendent notifies the County Manager, in writing, of the result of all bids received. 7. Submission Timelines • While the Board of Education may receive the bids, it should not execute any contract until the Board of County Commissioners receives bid information and approves a capital project ordinance for the construction phase of the project; ~t~~~~ . ''t .rF . t_~ sue, +~ rrulr~~ ~1~~ ~1 1 ~. i r ~~~ to i ~~~,111:1~~U]~ ~ ,, 3: ~ r7' Ij { a1 aP~ir{i~ral s ~ K ~~IJ.ur If1~ ~ u~"3~P I ~ y~.~ ~, i i ~' Upon adoption by the Board of Commissioners, the County Budget Director informs the School Finance and Budget Director and the County Finance Director of the abstract Page 6 of 7 Pnlicv nn Planning and Fundine School Capital PrOieCtS ~F 't^i -~~ ar • ~ to ~ ~1~~ ~ k~~ ° iii ;~' . G ,. ,~ ,~ =~~~ '~ DRAFT Revised following 8/17/00 task force meeting and includes Superintendents' comments Revised 9/07/00 approval and the assigned account number(s). This is done via a standard memorandum that indicates purpose and account codes. All requests for payment from the School Finance Directors are forwarded to the County Finance Department for payment. The County Finance Department ensures that the requisition for payment falls within the purposes approved by the Board of Education. $. Change Orders The School Superintendent submits, in writing, to the County Manager all contract change orders for the project. Upon receipt of the information, the County Budget Director prepares an agenda abstract and an amended capital project ordinance for approval by the Board of Commissioners. at their next scheduled meeting. Page 7 of 7 Policy on Planning and Fundine School Capital Proiects 1p DRAFT .. MEMORANDUM OF AG FOR PROYIDIl~G CUORDIl~TATED SITE AND FACII~ITY PLANNIl~TG This agreement between the Orange County and Chapel Hil]/ Carrboro Boards ofEducati~n and the governing Boards of orange County and the Towns of Chapel Hyll, Carrbaro and Hillsborough is intended to establish and implement a coordinated site and facility planning process for schools and compatible government facilities: The purpose of the coordinated planning process is to share iafai~nation among the parties to the agreemeirt,, optimiie the collocation and use of schools and other public facilities in a way that builds community, provides public services where they are most needed, assures the compatibility of collocated services; and e£~ciently uses public _ resources. This agreement recognizes the existence of two school districts -the Chapel Hill/CaiTbaro School District and the Prange County School District - and, a.Schools and Land Use Council for each district. Decisions on collocation of facilities in the Chapel Hall/Carrbaro School District may involve the Chapel HilUCarrboro Board of Education and any or all of the following units of local government: the Town of Chapel Hill, the Town of Carrboro, and Orange County. Decisions on collocation pf facilities is the Orange County School District may involve the Orange County Board of Education and one, or both of the following units of local government; the Town of Hillsborough and Orange Caumy. Wherever passible, agreementJcoaperation across school district lines shall be pursued. To £uther these goals, the Orange County and Chapel Hill/ Carrbam Boards of Education and .the governing Boards of Orange County and the Towns of Chapel Hill, Carrboro and Hillsborough do hereby agree to the following separate and shazed responsibilities for coordinated facility planning to the extent that rt does rat delay time critical construction af, either school or government facilities. These statements of responsibilities are intended to be consiste>Yt with all applicable laws and regulations; where they are not, they are superseded by those applicable laws and regulations. Specifically, this agreement is nvt intended to supersede the statutory autbority~ of either Board of Education to. select school sites or to build, inaiutaan or~epair school facilities or the other governing Boards to approve the .amounts to be spent for sites. and to determine the funds available for school 'and cawrty or municipal facilities. This agreement does not supersede local government planniing and zoning authority and/or land use planning and zoning requirements. L The Orange County and/or Chapel H~l/Carrboro Boazds of Education will: A Identify appropriate site criteria for public school facilities; and B. Identity interior and exterior space and exterior site requirements for school facilities; and C. Begin a planning process after the interna]/exteraal space needs for collocated facilities are determined; and 19 D. Recommend school facility priorities, timetables. far completion, and related funding needs; and E. Determine the most appropriate means of managing the construction, renovation, or repair of public school facilities, within the funding available for these activities; and F. Whenever possible, address joint collocation of facilities on each parcel of land being considered for development; and G, Assign to the superixrtendent the responsibility of providing the necessary staffing and other resources to participate in a joint facility planning process. II. When joint development (or cooperative development) of facilities are planned far a school site, the Governing Boards of Orange County and/or the Towns of Chapel I~11, Carrboro and ~Tillsborough will, as appropriate and in their respective interests: . A Identify appropriate site criteria far county and municipal government facilities and facilities in which contracted county or municipal services are provided; and B. Identify interior space and exterior site requirements, £or county or municipal government facilities and facilities in which contracted county or municipal services are provided; and C. Determine priorities, timetables for completion,, and related funding requirements for county or municipal government facilities; and . D. Determine the most appropriate means of managing the construction, renovation, or repair of county or municipal government facilities; and E. Determine the funding available for school and county or municipal government facilities; and F. Assign to the County and/or Town Managers the responsibility of providing the necessary staffing and other resources to participate in a coordinated facility planning process; and G. Whenever possible, address joint collocation of facilities on each parcel of land being considered for development. . III. The Orange County and/or Chapel IdilUCarrbaro Boards of Education and the governing Boards of Orange County and/or the Tawas of Chapel Dill, Carrbaro, and/or I~llsborough will jointly: A Identify opportunities for collocating compatible public facilities on sites, including facilities for schools, county government, municipal governments, state and federal government, and other public authorities providing complementary public services; and 12 B, Develop master site•plans on which public facilities will be collocated; and C. Determine the most appropriate means of relating various public services on sites, considering all program needs, and including opportunities for sharing spaces; and D. Designate a lead jurisdiction in designing common facilities and include other jurisdictions in design; and E. Determine the most appropriate and effective means of coordinating the construction of shared facilities located on common sites; and F. Determine the most appropriate and effective means of coordinating maintenance of shared public facilities located on common sites; and G, Determine the most appropriate and effective means of scheduling and establishing fees for usage of any shared public facilities an common sites; and H. Determine the most appropriate and pract~ira1 means of sharing operating costs for shared public facilities on common sites; and L ,Determine the most appropriate and practical means of providing public ownership of sites and site improvements where public facilities are collocated. Public ownership of sites will be implemented in the following manner: 1. School sites will be owned in fee simple by the Orange County School Board and/or the Chapel Hill-Carrbaro City Schools Board or orange County in those instances where the financing of the purchase of the site or the financing of the cost of the facilities on the site requires Orange County ownership. Z. Park sites will be owned in fee simple by the appropriate jurisdiction (i.e., County; taws) unless otherwise agreed. A faint lease agreement will be signed between the appropriate parties setting forth the conditions of the joint use~area and facilities. •I,anguage will be included in the agreement to address review and approval of joint use facilities and who bears the cost of installation/ COnstrLlCtlon' and maintenance. N. The Orange County and Chapel Hill/Cazrbom Boards ofEducation and the governing Boards of Orange County and the Towns of Chapel Hill, Carrbaro, and Hillsborough will, as appropriate, jointly develop any iaterlocal agreements or understandings .needed to allow participation of other units of government in the collocation of public facilities. V. This Memorandum of Agreeme~ shall become effective upon approval by each governing board and school board. It shall remain in effect until terminated by all parties to it. A party may not withdraw from this agreement until it holds a public hearing on the proposed withdrawal followed by written notices to the other parties within thirty (3D) 'days of the public hearing. The withdrawal shall be effective one (1) yeaz following receipt by the other parties of the written notice. Withdrawal of one party shall not invalidate the Memorandum of Agreement with respect to the remaining pies SCHOOLS AND LAND USE COUNCIL FOR SCHOOLS AND LAND USE COUNCIL CI3APEL T~.L/CARRBORO SCHOOL FOR ORANGE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT DISTRICT CHAPEL HII.LCARRk30R0 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION BOARD OF IDUCATION ORANGE COUNTY ORANGE COUNTY TOWN OF CARRBORO TOWN OF I~LSSOROUGH TOWN OF CHAPEL NR •T - x:scxoor~.vrnao,~~rs.DOC d m ro R a~i C '~ C O a C ~ C d O ~ V G7 O Q~ ~. w U d ~O V a c 0 w o ~ = a m ti ~ ~ L ~ Q 0 C ,fi O ~ V b ~ ~ fA N C ~ ~] ~ O O Q ~ .C ~ ~ O C w ~7 ~tl F `~ m hi ~ ~ ~ (~ m r+ ~"` w V d ~O L a 0 a N N X .a .a Q O O U N O C O .~ 7 9 _N 15 ~_ mrNMe~Y7tpt~rNM~~AtOI~ rNN1'erlf'lCO1~rNMer~A~O1~ C7C7t~t9t7C7t7aai.da4aag~~ggggwwwwwww c d .r a w v c 0 :-. a .` 16 This page intentionally left blank. r ,~.da. -; 77 CHAPEL HILL - CARRBORO CITY SCHOOL'S Lincoln Center, Merritt Mill Road Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27516-2881 . Telephone: (919) 967-8211 . Fax: (919) 933-45fi0 Neil G. Pedersen Superintendent Steve Scroggs, William J. Mullin, MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DATE: John Link Neil G. Pederse ~tar~C Superintendent for upport Services Comments Regarding September 7, 2000 D Planning and Funding School Capital Projec September "! 8, 2000 The following suggestions regarding the September 7th draft on Planning School Capital Projects were compiled by Bill Mullin. We recommend the into the final document. Pacfe 1. Level 1 Projects Suggested wording as follows: "Specific examples of Level 1 projects include roofing projects, parking conditioning and mechanical upgrades, re-wiring of existing buildings, improvements to buildings and grounds." Pa e 1 Level 2 Projects Comments regarding the draft's suggestion of multiple phasing of project The last draft dated $/20/OO was better in that it stipulated a 3 phase proc Planning phase, a Design/Construction phase, and a Final Accounting pt The 9R/00 draft includes a new 4th phase. The ConoepUPre-Planning PI occur as the first step and cover "preliminary design work that is needed new facility". The additional phase seems cumbersome and somewhat redundant., Th site selection is part of the work perFormed by the Schools and Land Use subject to the newly adopted acreage guidelines for combined school anc >r of Facilities Management Policy on id Funding inclusion paving, air standard ;a would to siting a subject of ;ouncil and park sites. 78 Preliminary design is addressed by adherence to the County's new scr standards. A project's initial schematic design is further developed after a Site has Indeed, the chosen site can dramatically effect the reuse of plans and prototypes. The 3' Phase approach, outlined in the 8/20!00 draft is more efficient. Pape I, Level 2 Projects The major project components that require approved funding should s~ a Project Contingency. Since the availability and use of contingency fu construction change orders is suggested under Section 8 (page 7), the specii'led with the other budget components. Available contingency fur to keep the project moving on schedule. Paae 3, Buifdins~ Design Standards The draft policy~states that "unique design" would require cost comparisc it is assumed, this would occur as part of the early planning phase of the Design concepts, such as new approaches in the area of environmental a goal of the project or a regulatory requirement of the development pern event, it may not be practical to provide "a detailed cost comparison" of u features during the initial stages of discussion. More reliable estimates c later in the project's design development or at the time construction bids and approved. . Pa e 7 Chan a girders The actual wording of Section 8 has not been suggested, however, the ~ broader than just referring to contingency funds that are permitted far ch The project's budget contingency should be approved by the Commissic the process along with the other major budget components. The school have the discretion of using the approved contingency funds for change other work associated with the project. The Final Accounting Phase of t provide information regarding the expenditure of contingency funds. construction n selected. ing fically include .for ids should be are essential analysis and, asign, may be t. In either ique design n be provided re reviewed cy should be ~e orders. rs early in stem should iers and process will AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE DEVELOPMENT ORDINANCE ~ 9 TO REQUIRE THAT IN MOST CASES THE ADEQUACY OF PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITIES TO ACCOMMODATE NEW DEVELOPMENT BE CONSIDERED IN THE APPROVAL PROCESS WHEREAS, the portion of Orange County served by the [Chapel HilUCarrboro] [Orange County] school system, has for the past decade been experiencing rapid growth in population; and WHEREAS, this rapid growth, and that which is anticipated, creates a demand for additional school facilities to accommodate the children who reside within new developments; and WHEREAS, the responsibility for planning for and constructing new school facilities lies primarily with the [Chapel HilUCarrboro School Board] [Orange County School Board], with funding provided by Orange County; and WHEREAS, [Chapel Hill; Carrboro, Orange County and the Chapel Hill/Carrboro School District] [Orange County, Hillsborough, and the Orange County School District] have recognized the need to work together to ensure that new growth within the School District occurs at a pace that allows Orange County and the School District to provide adequate school facilities to serve the children within such new developments; and WHEREAS, to implement the Memorandum of Understanding between [Orange County, Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and the Chapel Hi1UCarrboro School Boazd] [Orange County, Hillsborough, and the Orange County School Boazd], the [governing body] desires to provide a mechanism to assure that, to the extent possible, new development will take place only when there aze adequate public school facilities available, or planned, which will accommodate such new development; NOW THEREFORE, [THE GOVERNING BODY] ORDAINS: Section 1. Section adding a new ADEQUATE PUBLIC SCHOOL FACILITIES 1. Purpose. The purpose of this ordinance is to ensure that, to the maximum extent practical, new residential development will be approved only when it can reasonably be expected that adequate public school facilities will be available to accommodate such new development. 2. Certificate of Adequacy of Public Schools Facilities. (a) No application for approval of a subdivision preliminary plat, minor subdivision final plat, site plan, or conditional or special use permit for a project containing a residential use may be accepted as complete unless on the date of such acceptance there Development Ordinance is amended by to read as follows: of the ~o exists a valid and current Certificate of Adequacy of Public Schools Facilities (CAPS) applicable to the project for which such approval is sought. (b) A CAPS shall not be required for a general use or conditional use rezoning or for approval of a master land use plan. However, if a rezoni~ig or master plan is approved, a CAPS will be required before any residential development of the property is authorized pursuant to any of the approvals specified in subsection (a) of this section, and the rezoning of the property or approval of a master plan provides no indication as to whether the CAPS will be issued. The. application for rezoning or master plan .approval shall contain a statement to this effect. (c) A CAPS must be obtained from the School District. The School District will issue or deny a CAPS in accordance with the provisions of the Memorandum of Understanding between [Chapel Hill, Carrboro, Orange County, and the Chapel Hill Carrboro School District] [Orange.County, Hillsborough, and the Orange County-School District] dated (d) An applicant shall seek from the School District a CAPS for a proposed residential development before an application for approval of a subdivision preliminary plat, minor subdivision final plat, site plan, or conditional or special use permits submitted to the [town] [county]. The CAPS, if issued, shall expire as provided in Section 4. (e) A CAPS attaches to the land in the same way that development permission attaches to the land. A CAPS may be transferred along with other interests in the property with respect to which such CAPS is issued, but may not be severed or transferred separately. 3. Service Levels. (a) This section describes the service levels regarded as adequate by the parties to the Memorandum of Understanding described in subsection (b) with respect to public school facilities. (b) As provided in the Memorandum of Understanding between [Orange County, Chapel Hill, Carrboro, and the Chapel Hi1UCarrboro School District] [Orange County, Hillsborough, and the Orange County School District], adequate service levels for public schools shall be deemed to exist with respect to a proposed new residential development if, given the number of school age children projected to reside in that development, and considering all the factors listed in the Memorandum of Understanding, the number of students projected to attend the elementary schools, the middle schools, and the high school[s] within the [Chapel HilUGarrboro) [Orange County] School District will not exceed the following percentages of the building capacities of each of the following three school levels: elementary school level 105% middle school level 107% high school level ] 10% For purposes of this ordinance, the term "building capacity" means the capacity of permanent buildings, not mobile units or trailers. ~"~ t1 A P T 4. Expiration of Certificates of Adequacy of Public Schools Facilities. (a) A CAPS that has been obtained pursuant to Subsection 2(d) before an application for approval of a subdivision preliminary plat, minor subdivision final plat, site plan, or canditional or special use permit has been submitted shall expire unless the developer submits and the [Town] [County] accepts as complete an application for approval of that subdivision preliminary plat, minor subdivision final plat, site plan, or conditional or special use permit within 90 days of the date of the CAPS and receives the requested approval within two years of the date of the CAPS. (b) A CAPS issued in connection with approval of a subdivision preliminary plat, minor subdivision final plat, site plan, or conditional or special use permit shall expire automatically upon the expiration of such plat, plan; or permit approval. 5. Applicability to Previously Approved Projects and Projects Pending Approval. (a) This ordinance and the Memorandum of Understanding between the [governing body], Orange County and the School District are general in nature and applicable to all property subject to land use regulation by the [governing body]. Except as otherwise provided herein, the provisions of this ordinance shall apply to applications for approval of subdivision preliminary plats, site plans and conditional or special use permits that are submitted for approval after [the effective date of this ordinance]. (b) The provisions of this ordinance shall apply to subdivision preliminary plats, site plans and conditional or special use permits that have expired. (c) The provisions of this ordinance shall not apply to amendments to subdivision preliminary plat, site plan, or special or conditional use permit approvals issued prior to the effective date of this ordinance so long as the approvals have not expired and the proposed amendments do not increase the number of dwelling units authorized within the development by more than five percent. (d) The [governing body] shall issue a special exception to the CAPS requirement to an applicant whose application for approval of a subdivision preliminary plat, minor subdivision final plat, site plan or conditional or special use permit covering property within a planned unit development or master plan project that was approved prior to the effective date of this ordinance, if the [governing body] finds, after an evidentiary hearing, that the applicant has (1) applied to the School District for a CAPS and the application has been denied, (2) in good faith made substantial expenditures or incurred substantial binding obligations in reasonable reliance on the previously obtained planned unit development or master plan approval, and (3) would be unreasonably prejudiced if development in accordance with the previously approved development or plan is delayed due to the provisions of this ordinance. Tn deciding whether these findings can be made, the [governing body] shall consider the following, among other relevant factors: (1) Whether the developer has installed streets, utilities, ar other facilities or expended substantial sums in the planning and preparation for installation of such facilities which were designed to serve or to be paid for in part by the . ~ _ ~~ development of portions of the planned unit development or master planned project that have not yet been approved for construction; (2) Whether the developer has installed streets, utilities, or other facilities or expended substantial sums in the planning and preparation far installation of such facilities that directly benefit other properties outside the development in question or the general public; (3) Whether the developer has ,donated land to the School District for the construction of school facilities or otherwise dedicated land or made improvements deemed to benefit the School District and its public school system; (~) Whether the developer has had development approval for a substantial amount of time and has in good faith worked to timely implement the plan in reasonable reliance on the previously obtained approval; (5) The duration of the delay that will occur until public school facilities are improved or exist to such an extent that a CAPS can be issued for the project, and the effect of such delay on the development and the developer. The decision of the [governing body] is subject to review by the Orange County Superior Court by proceedings in the nature of certiorari. Any petition for review by the Superior Court shall be filed with the Clerk of Superior Court within 30 days after a written copy of the decision [of the governing body] is delivered to every aggrieved party who has filed a written request for such copy with the Clerk to "the [governing body] at the time of its hearing on the application for a special exception. The written copy of the decision of the [governing body] may .be delivered to the aggrieved party either by personal service or by certified mail, return receipt requested. The [chair or the mayor] of the [governing body] or any member temporarily acting as [chair or mayor] may, in his or her official capacity, administer oaths to witnesses in any hearing before the [governing body] concerning a special exception. 6. Exemption From Certification Requirement for De Minimus Development Impact Associated with Negligible Student Generation Rates A CAPS shall not be required under the following circumstances: (a) . For a residential development permanently restricted by zoning or federal guidelines to housing for the elderly and/or adult care living and/or special needs facilities. (b) For residential development permanently restricted as dormitory housing. 7. Appeal of School District Denial of a CAPS. The applicant for a CAPS which is denied by the School District may, within 30. days of the date of the denial, appeal the denial to the [governing body] of [local government from which development permit is sought]. Any such appeal shall be heard by the [governing body] at an evidentiary hearing before it. At this hearing the School District will present its reasons for the denial of the CAP5 and the evidence it relied on in 22 23 denying the CAPS. The applicant appealing the denial may present its reasons why the CAPS application should have, in its view, been approved and the evidentiary basis it contends supports approval. The [governing body] may (1) affirm the decision of the School District, (2) remand to the School District far further proceedings in the event evidence is presented at the hearing before the [governing body] not brought before the School District or, (3) make a recommendation to the School District. The [governing body] will only make a recommendation if it finds that the CAPS should have been issued by the School District as prescribed in the Memorandum of Understanding ampng the School District, Orange County and the [governing body]. A decision of the [governing body] affirming the School District may be appealed by the applicant for a CAPS by proceedings in the nature of certiorari and as prescribed for an appeal under Section 5(d) of this ordinance. 7. information Required From Applicants. The applicant for a CAPS shall submit to the School District all information reasonably deemed necessary by the School District to determine whether a CAPS should be issued under the provisions of the Memorandum of Understanding between the [governing body], Orange County, and the School District. An applicant for a CAPS special exception or an applicant appealing a CAPS denial by the School District shall submit to the [governing body] all information reasonably deemed necessary by the [governing body] to determine whether a special exception should be granted as provided in Section 6(d) of this ordinance or for the hearing of an appeal of a School District denial of a CAPS as provided in Section 7 of this ordinance. A copy of a request for a CAPS special exception or of an appeal of a School District denial of a CAPS shall be served on the superintendent of the School District. Service may be made by personal delivery or certified mail, return receipt requested. Section 2. This ordinance shall become effective The foregoing ordinance, having been submitted to a vote, received the following vote and was duly adopted this day of , 2000. Ayes: Noes: Absent or Excused: ~~ w ~°~ 24 This page intentionally left blank. ,t ~.a MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ~ s by and This Memorandum of Understanding is entered into this day of , 2000, between the Town of ,the City of ,Orange County, and the (the "School District"). WHEREAS, the portion of Orange County, served by the [name of school district] has for the past decade been experiencing rapid growth in population; and WHEREAS, this growth, and that which is anticipated, creates a demand for additional school facilities to accommodate the children who reside within new developments; and WHEREAS, the responsibility for planning for and constructing new school facilities lies primarily with the (Orange County School District or Chapel HilUCarrboro School District), with funding provided by Orange County; and WHEREAS, ,Orange County and the School District have recognized the need to work together to ensure that new growth within the School District occurs at a pace that allows Orange County and the School District to provide adequate school facilities to serve the children within such new developments; WHEREAS, parties have worked cooperatively and developed a system wherein 'school facilities are currently adequate to meet the needs of the citizens of the county and will continue to maintain a Capital Investment Plan (CJP) that is financially feasible and synchronized with historical growth patterns; NOW, THEREFORE, the parties to this memorandum hereby agree as follows: Section 1. The parties will work cooperatively to develop a realistic capital facilities program for the construction of schools such that, from the effective date of this Memorandum; a. No school level (i.e. elementary, middle or high) is more than 1. Elementary School 105% of Building Capacity 2. Middle School 107% of Building Capacity 3. High School 110% of Building Capacity (if number of schools within a level is very low the district may initiate a higher percentage limit and step down in percentage to the number above as new schools open) b. The term "the school districts building capacity" will be determined by State guidelines and the school district guidelines (consistent with CII' School Construction Guidelines/policies developed by the school districts and the Board of County Commissioners) and as used herein 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. ~6 c. The capital facilities program shall utilize a projected growth rate for student enrollment agreed upon by the parties, which growth rate may differ from one school level to another: (i.e., number of students per level per year.) Section 2. The towns and the county will adopt amendments to their respective ordinances, in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit A, to coordinate the approval of residential developments within the School District with .the adequacy of existing and proposed school facilities. Section 3. The School District will establish an administrative process to receive and take action upon applications for Certificates of Adequacy of Public Schools Facilities ("CAPS") submitted by developers who are required by an implementing ordinance conceptually similar to that attached as Exhibit A to have such certificates before obtaining development permission from the town or the county. The School District will issue a CAPS for a proposed development if it concludes that, given the number of school age children projected to reside in that development, and considering all of the factors listed immediately below, the number of students projected to attend the applicable school district elementary, middle, and high school levels will not exceed the capacities noted in Section 1 of this memorandum. Factors to be considered by the School District in making this determination include the following: a. The number of students attending elementary schools, middle schools, and high schools and the building capacity at each school level. b. ,Projected or ongoing construction of new schools or permanent expansion of existing schools as planned in the adopted CIP. If the completion of such school construction is necessary for a CAPS to be issued for a particular development project, then there must be a reasonable expectation that such construction will be completed in time to be of benefit to such project. A "reasonable expectation" of a proposed completion date requires, at the very least, that construction of a proposed new school has received all. necessary governmental approvals and that funding is in place, or that such approvals and funding appeaz "reasonably certain." c. Projected increases, in enrollment due to residential growth. The following will be taken into consideration in determining projected enrollment increases: (i) Single-family residential building lots that have received final plat approval, or have been created by a plat exempt from subdivision regulation approval, but that do not contain a completed dwelling; (ii) Single-family or multi-family residential building lots for which: (1) preliminary subdivision plat approval, (2) minor subdivision final plat, (3) zoning compliance permit approval or special or conditional use permit approval have been granted so long as such approvals have not expired; (iii) Developments for which subdivision preliminary plat, minor subdivision final plat or site plan approval applications have been submitted but not yet granted, so long as CAPS for such projects have been issued and remain unexpired or special exceptions that have been granted; (iv) Any phasing and time schedule for project development consistent with preliminary plat and/or master plan application and, if applicable, approval. d. Any other factors deemed relevant by the School District in determining whether each school level will meet the level of service described herein if the proposed project is constructed. Section 4. A CAPS that has been obtained before an application for approval of a subdivision preliminary plat, minor subdivision final plat, site plan, or conditional or special use permit has been submitted shall expire unless the developer submits and the [Town/County] accepts as complete an application for its approval within 90 days of the date of the CAPS and receives the requested approval within two years of the date of the CAPS. A CAPS issued in connection with approval of a subdivision preliminary plat, minor subdivision final plat, site plan, or conditional or special use permit shall expire automatically upon the expiration of such plat, plan, or permit approval. Section S. The towns and the county will provide to the School District all information reasonably requested by the School District to assist the District in making its determination as to whether the CAPS should be issued, including without limitation all information the other parties to this agreement have regarding the matters specified in Section 3.c.(i) through (iv) above. Section 6. The School district will use its best efforts to construct schools and/or permanent expansion/additions in accordance with the CIl' referenced in Section 1 above. Section 7. Orange County will use its best efforts to provide the funding to carry out the capital facilities program referenced in Section 1 above. Section 8. The affordable housing element shall be incorporated into the Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance agreed upon by all parties, which shall provide an accommodation for affordable housing. Affordable housing as defined in Orange County Affordable Housing policy and meets all criteria (i.e. 80% or less with some permanency requirement) is an important goal of local governments within Orange County. Although affordable housing will be subject to the SAPFO, the county through its funding to the school districts for new school construction will be providing for adequate capacity far students generated from affordable housing by apportioning their funding as an allocation or reservation for affordable housing. The :funding formula accommodation will approximate new affordable housing goals which is a minor portion of new housing construction. 2$ Section 9. The parties agree that there is an exemption from Certification Requirement for De Miniimus Development hnpact associated with Negligible Student Generation Rates. A CAPS shall not be required under the following circumstances: (a) for a residential development restricted to housing far the elderly and/or adult raze living and/or special needs facilities, (b) for residential development restricted to housing for students. Section 10. The parties acknowledge that this Memorandum of Understanding is not intended to and does not create legally binding obligations on any of the parties to act in accordance with its provisions. Rather, it constitutes a good faith statement of the intent of the parties to cooperate in a manner designed to meet the mutual objective of all the parties that the children who reside within the School District aze able to attend school levels that satisfy the level of service standazds set faith herein. m ~~ ~~Ji~l ' A RESOLUTION BY THE SCHOOLS AND LAND USE COUNCILS (SLUG) TO RECOMMEND AND TRANSMIT THE SCHOOLS Zg ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES ORDINANCE (SCHOOLS APFO) MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING AND ORDINANCE WHEREAS, the Orange County Board of Commissioners and municipal governing boards make land use, zoning, and development decisions that can increase the numbers of school children; and WHEREAS, the Orange County Schools Board of Education and Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools Board of Education are responsible for school policy and school buildings; and WHEREAS, the Boazd of County Commissioners with approval of the other jurisdictions has established Schools and Land Use Councils (one for each school district) to advise on issues concerning growth and land. use issues relating to schools; and WHEREAS, the Schools and Land Use Councils aze charged with developing a coordinated plan for approving developments, accounting for the impact of the developments on school capacity, siting schools, and building schools to meet demonstrated need in a timely manner; and WHEREAS, the Schools and Land Use Councils (SLUG) are composed of elected representatives from the Orange County Commissioners, Carrboro Board of Aldermen; Chapel Hill Town Council, Hillsborough Town Board of Commissioners, Chapel Hill- Carrboro City Schools Boazd of Education, and Orange County Schools Boazd of Education; and WHEREAS, the SLUG has met on primarily a monthly basis to develop and review a Schools APFO since April of 1999; and WHEREAS, the SLUG referred the development of legal and technical matters and pazameters for policy decisions to a workgroup of attorneys and planning director and school representatives from all member agencies and a draft was submitted to the SLUG; and WHEREAS, the various aspects of a Schools APFO was explained to each of the elected bodies in the latter part of 1999 early 2000 by the Orange County Planning Department where questions and answers were explored; and WHEREAS, On March 27 and 30, 2000 joint meetings with school districts and Assembly of Governments were held to further elaborate on the implications of a Schools APFO and receive direction to pursue finalization of the Memorandum of Understanding and ordinance from the SLUG; and WHEREAS, the SLUG finds the Memorandum of Understanding and ordinance to be supportive of the goals and responsibilities of the councils and strongly believes the ordinance to be in the best interests of the community; 30 NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the SLUC have approved the Schools APFO Memorandum of Understanding and ordinance and hereby transmit the memorandum and ordinance to the Board of Count Commissioners for comme t and review of fiscal impact and then to the respective entities to: a. Review and make comment, if necesssary, on the Memorandum of Understanding and ordinance; b. Approve, approve with conditions/comments or refer back to the SLUC for further research and analysis; Acknowledge that the Memorandum of Understanding and ordinance is not construed to be the final adoption of implementing land development regulations that will process through a later public hearing germane to the applicable entity. Approved by the members of the councils: Schools and Land Use Council for the Schools and Land Use Council for the Chapel Hi11-Carrboro Schools District Orange County Schools District Alice Gordon Orange County Board of Commissioners Nick Didow Chapel Hill-Carrboro School Board Teresa Williams Chapel Hill-Carrboro School Board Edith Wiggins Chapel Hill Town Council Lee Pavao Chapel Hill Town Council Allen Spalt Carrboro Board of Aldermen Diana McDuffee Cazrboro Boazd of Aldermen Maxgazet Brown Orange County Boazd of Commissioners Stephen Halkiotis Orange County Boazd of Commissioners Susan Halkiotis Orange County School Board Brian Lowen Hillsborough Town Board .