12.07.2015 Views

Volume 2: Draft Gorst Planned Action Environmental Impact Statement

Volume 2: Draft Gorst Planned Action Environmental Impact Statement

Volume 2: Draft Gorst Planned Action Environmental Impact Statement

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

GORST PLANNED ACTION EIS | AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT, SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS, AND MITIGATION MEASURESAlternative 2Table 3.12-16 Projected SKSD LOS – Alternative 2 summarizes projected capacity for SKSD in 2035 based on currentcapacity, planned capacity improvements, and projected enrollment based on household growth. The analysis isshown based on both permanent capacity and capacity including interim facilities. This Alternative has a higherlevel of projected growth than Alternative 1, but less than Alternative 2.Time PeriodStudent perHouseholdRatio 1Table 3.12-16Projected SKSD LOS – Alternative 2HouseholdsEnrollment2Perm.CapacityNet Reserve or(Deficiency)TotalCapacity 3Net Reserve or(Deficiency)2011 0.38 25,860 9,742 9,065 (677) 10,834 1,092Additional <strong>Planned</strong> Capacity Through 2035 1,900 1,9002035 Alternative 2 0.42 36,158 15,139 10,965 (4,174) 12,734 (2,405)Note:1 This is the effective ratio calculated by applying the multifamily and single family generation rates to growth in thosespecific types of households.2 October 2011 headcount from OSPI.3 Includes permanent and interim (portables) facilities.Source: SKSD, 2012; Washington State OSPI, 2012; Washington State OFM, 2012; and BERK, 2013By 2035, SKSD is estimated to have a deficit of about 2,400 student spaces under Alternative 2. This is about 200additional students that the District would need to plan for above the No <strong>Action</strong> level of growth.Alternative 3Table 3.12-17 Projected SKSD LOS – Alternative 3 summarizes projected capacity for SKSD in 2035 based on currentcapacity, planned capacity improvements, and projected enrollment based on household growth. The analysis isshown based on both permanent capacity and capacity including interim facilities. This Alternative has a higherlevel of projected growth than Alternative 1, but less than Alternative 2.Time PeriodStudent perHouseholdRatio 1Table 3.12-17Projected SKSD LOS – Alternative 3HouseholdsEnrollment2Perm.CapacityNet Reserve or(Deficiency)TotalCapacity 3Net Reserve or(Deficiency)2011 0.38 25,860 9,742 9,065 (677) 10,834 1,092Additional <strong>Planned</strong> Capacity Through 2035 1,900 1,9002035 Alternative 3 0.42 36,217 15,164 10,965 (4,199) 12,734 (2,430)Note:1 This is the effective ratio calculated by applying the multifamily and single family generation rates to growth in thosespecific types of households.2 October 2011 headcount from OSPI.3 Includes permanent and interim (portables) facilities.Source: SKSD, 2012; Washington State OSPI, 2012; Washington State OFM, 2012; and BERK, 2013By 2035, SKSD is estimated to have a deficit of about 2,430 student spaces under Alternative 3. This is about 230additional students the District would need to accommodate by 2035, compared to the adopted No <strong>Action</strong> level ofgrowth.<strong>Draft</strong> | June 2013 3-201

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!