Browse
Search
Agenda - 08-10-95 - 3 (No abstract sheet available)
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
1990's
>
1995
>
Agenda - 08-10-95
>
Agenda - 08-10-95 - 3 (No abstract sheet available)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/18/2014 8:17:18 AM
Creation date
12/18/2014 8:16:43 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
8/10/1995
Meeting Type
Work Session
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
3
Document Relationships
Minutes - 19950810
(Linked From)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\1990's\1995
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
31
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
• Analysis by Subdivision <br /> In addition to examining the student generation rate for new housing in each school <br /> district as a whole, the student generation rates for a number of individual subdivisions in <br /> Chapel Hill and Carrboro were also calculated. These are summarized in the tables on the <br /> following page. The average student generation rate for new housing units in these <br /> subdivisions is 0.70 children per unit in Chapel Hill, although it ranges from 0.15 to 1.63 <br /> children, and 0.77 children per unit in Carrboro, with a range from 0.49 to 1.56 children. <br /> The methodology for this study and a detailed analysis of the results can be found below. <br /> Finally, the student generation rates for Carrboro are compared to the rates calculated by the <br /> Planning Director of Carrboro in April 1994. <br /> Methodology <br /> 1. Choosing the Subdivisions <br /> The subdivisions chosen generally included those with more than 30 lots and with <br /> • recent building activity. One or two subdivisions fitting this description may not have <br /> been included due to difficulties in determining the precise borders of the subdivision. <br /> For comparison, two subdivisions completed prior to 1992 were examined for Chapel <br /> Hill and one for Carrboro. <br /> 2. Determining the Borders of the Subdivisions <br /> Two steps were used to determine the precise boundaries of the subdivisions. First, <br /> taxmaps were examined for subdivision boundaries. Second, all the subdivisions were <br /> visually inspected and roads and addresses confirmed. <br /> 3. Delimiting Addresses for Subdivisions <br /> In most cases, a road within a subdivision begins and ends in that subdivision and all of <br /> its addresses are contained therein. For roads not completely enclosed in one <br /> subdivision, taxmaps identified which addresses fell within the subdivision borders. <br /> 4. Matching Students and Permits to Subdivisions <br /> Using the list of applicable roads and addresses for each subdivision, all public school <br /> children and new permits that matched those addresses were isolated and labeled by <br /> 15 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.