BC 2009 09 08 Work Session - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

September 8, 2009 (Work Session) Page 1554 Middle School Northwest Cabarrus -923 -431 1173 1165 1173 1165 High School Adequacy Determination As illustrated above, adequate school capacity does not exist for this multi-family project at the elementary school. (Note that according to Section 15-11, Number 9, of the APFO, "...future available capacity must be "...equal to or greater than the projected enrollment that will be produced by the proposed development for all school types," not just one or two.) Is the project subject to Chapter 15, Adequate Public Facilities? Yes. Board of Commissioner Action Options: Consider approval of the Reservation of Capacity with the conditions outlined below: 1. The project is subject to a phasing schedule. In calendar year 2009, no more than 3 multi-family apartment unit permits issued; In calendar year 2010, no more than 11 multi-family apartment unit permits issued; In calendar year 2011, no more than 11 multi-family apartment unit permits issued; Zn calendar year 2012, no more than 11 multi-family apartment unit permits issued; In calendar year 2013, no more than 11 multi-family apartment unit permits issued; In calendar year 2019, no more than 59 multi-family apartment unit permits issued. 2. Mitigation of the pro-rata share of the cost of the planned capacity, which equals $9,153.00 per multi-family residential apartment unit, payable prior to the issuance of building permitting. Ms. Watts also reported there is an existing mobile home park on the property which will be removed; and, she announced that Ms. Cathy Connors, representative of Solstice Partners, LLC, would like to address the phasing schedule. Jonathan Marshall, Commerce Director, elaborated on the fact that apartments are not built in three (3) units at a time but rather usually built in buildings and occupancy permits are used to effect a build-out schedule. The number of units per building and the schedule would be enforced based on occupancy permits. He further stated this is the first time the Department has had a development replacing a development. There are currently 56 existing students on the property and based on the numbers received from Robert Kluttz with Cabarrus County Schools, there are more students there currently than was projected to be generated by the apartments. Ms. Watts reiterated that thirty (30) students are projected out of the new project. Mr. Marshall stated the assumption is that a good majority of those students will stay within the county. He also stressed that the project is not a "green field" and the students are not all new; and, based on calculations, less students would be coming from an apartment complex of that size. Finally, he recommended the Board keep this information in mind as the build-out schedule is considered. Vice Chairman Mynatt questioned whether the situation of the students already there should be taken into consideration and be part of the APFO (Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance). Mr. Marshall responded by stating it is a unique situation and typically with a new development not all residents come from outside the county, but it can be assumed a large percentage do. To further complicate the issue, he said the school seats already occupied by the existing students of the mobile home park will no longer come from this property; but that a smaller amount of students will be generated by the new apartment complex. He added, it is difficult to determine how many of those students will stay in the district. In response to further questioning, he