APS Closing Nottingham

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eh. Of course the Notties are there. We all know from the boards and the neighborhood list serves and their text chains. But that doesn’t mean anything re: the outcome. The question is what’s best for Arlington. Not Nottingham.

Sure, and if you actually heard what they were saying last night, they were advocating for more study into this before rushing to close a school. There's basically nothing in the pre-cip to back up this plan other than effectively "trust us."

Just because the community wasn't in on the planning doesn't mean they haven't studied it.

OK that would be great! Let APS show us the studies then! Which schools will use the swing space? For how long? How will they handle extended day? How many busses will be needed and where will they park? I assume then if APS has studied it, they must have completed a traffic study for all the increase in traffic? What will the capacity be at Tuckahoe and Discovery after they absorb Nottingham? Will they need (additional) trailers? What will enrollment be in 2026 and beyond?

And when they tell you any of that information you'll scream about how everything they are telling you is wrong or a lie or misguided. Right?

+1. Yep. They will say that APS planning is incompetent and can’t be trusted. They are already saying that. This is not a constructive community. They will just try to put up obstacles so nothing can be done. They prefer no action to help others in the county over their minor inconvenience.

Again with the nonstop hate for people trying to save their walkable, neighborhood school community. How dare they not just roll over and accept this proposal without any APS showing any supporting data!

NP- I support closing Nottingham bc there are too many elementary schools in that fringed band of neighborhoods and it is not operating nearly at capacity. But I’m willing to listen. What are the data driven arguments for keeping it open? Most of what I have heard are emotional responses about community, walkability, traffic complaints, that frankly are generic enough to apply to any school. My understanding is that both Tuckahoe and Nottingham are struggling, but more so Nottingham. Tuckahoe also has planning units that would make more sense to be at Cardinal, but have been left because they need the bodies? Similarly, isn’t Jamestown struggling to fill seats? I thought that was the reason they had the Montessori/preschool program up there. The county demographic study has shown a declining birth rate for the past 5 years or so - ArlCo births began to decline around 2017, which would be right around the cohort entering ‘, so I assume numbers will continue to decline.

The incoming K class at Nottingham is bigger than the K class of last year, so I don’t think it’s a safe assumption.

How much bigger?

I don’t know, I just know they needed to hire another K teacher

[Anonymous]

But weren’t they at the max class size last year, so only 1-2additional students would necessitate a split to much smaller classes?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eh. Of course the Notties are there. We all know from the boards and the neighborhood list serves and their text chains. But that doesn’t mean anything re: the outcome. The question is what’s best for Arlington. Not Nottingham.

Sure, and if you actually heard what they were saying last night, they were advocating for more study into this before rushing to close a school. There's basically nothing in the pre-cip to back up this plan other than effectively "trust us."

Just because the community wasn't in on the planning doesn't mean they haven't studied it.

OK that would be great! Let APS show us the studies then! Which schools will use the swing space? For how long? How will they handle extended day? How many busses will be needed and where will they park? I assume then if APS has studied it, they must have completed a traffic study for all the increase in traffic? What will the capacity be at Tuckahoe and Discovery after they absorb Nottingham? Will they need (additional) trailers? What will enrollment be in 2026 and beyond?

And when they tell you any of that information you'll scream about how everything they are telling you is wrong or a lie or misguided. Right?

+1. Yep. They will say that APS planning is incompetent and can’t be trusted. They are already saying that. This is not a constructive community. They will just try to put up obstacles so nothing can be done. They prefer no action to help others in the county over their minor inconvenience.

Again with the nonstop hate for people trying to save their walkable, neighborhood school community. How dare they not just roll over and accept this proposal without any APS showing any supporting data!

NP- I support closing Nottingham bc there are too many elementary schools in that fringed band of neighborhoods and it is not operating nearly at capacity. But I’m willing to listen. What are the data driven arguments for keeping it open? Most of what I have heard are emotional responses about community, walkability, traffic complaints, that frankly are generic enough to apply to any school. My understanding is that both Tuckahoe and Nottingham are struggling, but more so Nottingham. Tuckahoe also has planning units that would make more sense to be at Cardinal, but have been left because they need the bodies? Similarly, isn’t Jamestown struggling to fill seats? I thought that was the reason they had the Montessori/preschool program up there. The county demographic study has shown a declining birth rate for the past 5 years or so - ArlCo births began to decline around 2017, which would be right around the cohort entering ‘, so I assume numbers will continue to decline.

The incoming K class at Nottingham is bigger than the K class of last year, so I don’t think it’s a safe assumption.

How much bigger?

I don’t know, I just know they needed to hire another K teacher

They only had 50 K kids last year. When my oldest started 7 years ago they had about 85 kids. Nottingham lost about 20% of its student body during covid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:But weren’t they at the max class size last year, so only 1-2additional students would necessitate a split to much smaller classes?

Yes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But weren’t they at the max class size last year, so only 1-2additional students would necessitate a split to much smaller classes?

Yes

I asked the question and this is what I thought when I asked if.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eh. Of course the Notties are there. We all know from the boards and the neighborhood list serves and their text chains. But that doesn’t mean anything re: the outcome. The question is what’s best for Arlington. Not Nottingham.

Sure, and if you actually heard what they were saying last night, they were advocating for more study into this before rushing to close a school. There's basically nothing in the pre-cip to back up this plan other than effectively "trust us."

Just because the community wasn't in on the planning doesn't mean they haven't studied it.

OK that would be great! Let APS show us the studies then! Which schools will use the swing space? For how long? How will they handle extended day? How many busses will be needed and where will they park? I assume then if APS has studied it, they must have completed a traffic study for all the increase in traffic? What will the capacity be at Tuckahoe and Discovery after they absorb Nottingham? Will they need (additional) trailers? What will enrollment be in 2026 and beyond?

And when they tell you any of that information you'll scream about how everything they are telling you is wrong or a lie or misguided. Right?

+1. Yep. They will say that APS planning is incompetent and can’t be trusted. They are already saying that. This is not a constructive community. They will just try to put up obstacles so nothing can be done. They prefer no action to help others in the county over their minor inconvenience.

Again with the nonstop hate for people trying to save their walkable, neighborhood school community. How dare they not just roll over and accept this proposal without any APS showing any supporting data!

NP- I support closing Nottingham bc there are too many elementary schools in that fringed band of neighborhoods and it is not operating nearly at capacity. But I’m willing to listen. What are the data driven arguments for keeping it open? Most of what I have heard are emotional responses about community, walkability, traffic complaints, that frankly are generic enough to apply to any school. My understanding is that both Tuckahoe and Nottingham are struggling, but more so Nottingham. Tuckahoe also has planning units that would make more sense to be at Cardinal, but have been left because they need the bodies? Similarly, isn’t Jamestown struggling to fill seats? I thought that was the reason they had the Montessori/preschool program up there. The county demographic study has shown a declining birth rate for the past 5 years or so - ArlCo births began to decline around 2017, which would be right around the cohort entering ‘, so I assume numbers will continue to decline.

Of course, the challenge of too many schools in too small a geography was exacerbated by adding yet ANOTHER elementary school (Cardinal) to the already crowded mix. APS Planning has zero credibility.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eh. Of course the Notties are there. We all know from the boards and the neighborhood list serves and their text chains. But that doesn’t mean anything re: the outcome. The question is what’s best for Arlington. Not Nottingham.

Sure, and if you actually heard what they were saying last night, they were advocating for more study into this before rushing to close a school. There's basically nothing in the pre-cip to back up this plan other than effectively "trust us."

Just because the community wasn't in on the planning doesn't mean they haven't studied it.

OK that would be great! Let APS show us the studies then! Which schools will use the swing space? For how long? How will they handle extended day? How many busses will be needed and where will they park? I assume then if APS has studied it, they must have completed a traffic study for all the increase in traffic? What will the capacity be at Tuckahoe and Discovery after they absorb Nottingham? Will they need (additional) trailers? What will enrollment be in 2026 and beyond?

And when they tell you any of that information you'll scream about how everything they are telling you is wrong or a lie or misguided. Right?

+1. Yep. They will say that APS planning is incompetent and can’t be trusted. They are already saying that. This is not a constructive community. They will just try to put up obstacles so nothing can be done. They prefer no action to help others in the county over their minor inconvenience.

Again with the nonstop hate for people trying to save their walkable, neighborhood school community. How dare they not just roll over and accept this proposal without any APS showing any supporting data!

NP- I support closing Nottingham bc there are too many elementary schools in that fringed band of neighborhoods and it is not operating nearly at capacity. But I’m willing to listen. What are the data driven arguments for keeping it open? Most of what I have heard are emotional responses about community, walkability, traffic complaints, that frankly are generic enough to apply to any school. My understanding is that both Tuckahoe and Nottingham are struggling, but more so Nottingham. Tuckahoe also has planning units that would make more sense to be at Cardinal, but have been left because they need the bodies? Similarly, isn’t Jamestown struggling to fill seats? I thought that was the reason they had the Montessori/preschool program up there. The county demographic study has shown a declining birth rate for the past 5 years or so - ArlCo births began to decline around 2017, which would be right around the cohort entering ‘, so I assume numbers will continue to decline.

Of course, the challenge of too many schools in too small a geography was exacerbated by adding yet ANOTHER elementary school (Cardinal) to the already crowded mix. APS Planning has zero credibility.

Unfortunately, APS has limited land and money so they can’t just manifest the ideal facilities for schools where seats were needed. We all knew adding seats there was not ideal but it was the least bad options. And APS obviously couldn’t have foreseen the pandemic.

They should stop listening to parents because the loudest of the bunch are completely irrational.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eh. Of course the Notties are there. We all know from the boards and the neighborhood list serves and their text chains. But that doesn’t mean anything re: the outcome. The question is what’s best for Arlington. Not Nottingham.

Sure, and if you actually heard what they were saying last night, they were advocating for more study into this before rushing to close a school. There's basically nothing in the pre-cip to back up this plan other than effectively "trust us."

Just because the community wasn't in on the planning doesn't mean they haven't studied it.

OK that would be great! Let APS show us the studies then! Which schools will use the swing space? For how long? How will they handle extended day? How many busses will be needed and where will they park? I assume then if APS has studied it, they must have completed a traffic study for all the increase in traffic? What will the capacity be at Tuckahoe and Discovery after they absorb Nottingham? Will they need (additional) trailers? What will enrollment be in 2026 and beyond?

And when they tell you any of that information you'll scream about how everything they are telling you is wrong or a lie or misguided. Right?

+1. Yep. They will say that APS planning is incompetent and can’t be trusted. They are already saying that. This is not a constructive community. They will just try to put up obstacles so nothing can be done. They prefer no action to help others in the county over their minor inconvenience.

Again with the nonstop hate for people trying to save their walkable, neighborhood school community. How dare they not just roll over and accept this proposal without any APS showing any supporting data!

NP- I support closing Nottingham bc there are too many elementary schools in that fringed band of neighborhoods and it is not operating nearly at capacity. But I’m willing to listen. What are the data driven arguments for keeping it open? Most of what I have heard are emotional responses about community, walkability, traffic complaints, that frankly are generic enough to apply to any school. My understanding is that both Tuckahoe and Nottingham are struggling, but more so Nottingham. Tuckahoe also has planning units that would make more sense to be at Cardinal, but have been left because they need the bodies? Similarly, isn’t Jamestown struggling to fill seats? I thought that was the reason they had the Montessori/preschool program up there. The county demographic study has shown a declining birth rate for the past 5 years or so - ArlCo births began to decline around 2017, which would be right around the cohort entering ‘, so I assume numbers will continue to decline.

Of course, the challenge of too many schools in too small a geography was exacerbated by adding yet ANOTHER elementary school (Cardinal) to the already crowded mix. APS Planning has zero credibility.

Unfortunately, APS has limited land and money so they can’t just manifest the ideal facilities for schools where seats were needed. We all knew adding seats there was not ideal but it was the least bad options. And APS obviously couldn’t have foreseen the pandemic.

They should stop listening to parents because the loudest of the bunch are completely irrational.

Nothing irrational: Reed simply should have been made into ATS. This whole mess was, unfortunately, predictable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

It's most likely one year, not multiple years.

Anonymous wrote:I think some of the candidates for renovation are Taylor and Jamestown. Not south.

Nope, this is incorrect. They aren’t even in the top 7 candidates for remodel. The board had said at past meetings that the schools will be totally leveled and rebuilt, a process that will take a year of planning and 2 years of construction.

Facts! Always getting in the way of a good story.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's most likely one year, not multiple years.

Anonymous wrote:I think some of the candidates for renovation are Taylor and Jamestown. Not south.

Nope, this is incorrect. They aren’t even in the top 7 candidates for remodel. The board had said at past meetings that the schools will be totally leveled and rebuilt, a process that will take a year of planning and 2 years of construction.

Facts! Always getting in the way of a good story.

Barcroft was last renovated in 1992. Randolph in 1993. Long Branch in 1996. And HB and Oakridge in 1999. These are the schools that will be rehoused at Nottingham—and they’re ALL in South Arlington. It makes no sense to bus these kids 25-30 min each way. And you can’t tell me that these families would prefer that solution (if APS even asked them, which it didn’t). That’s why APS needs to come up with if another choice that would keep their kids closer to home and simplify commute/logistics/drop off/pick up/extended day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Eh. Of course the Notties are there. We all know from the boards and the neighborhood list serves and their text chains. But that doesn’t mean anything re: the outcome. The question is what’s best for Arlington. Not Nottingham.

Sure, and if you actually heard what they were saying last night, they were advocating for more study into this before rushing to close a school. There's basically nothing in the pre-cip to back up this plan other than effectively "trust us."

Just because the community wasn't in on the planning doesn't mean they haven't studied it.

OK that would be great! Let APS show us the studies then! Which schools will use the swing space? For how long? How will they handle extended day? How many busses will be needed and where will they park? I assume then if APS has studied it, they must have completed a traffic study for all the increase in traffic? What will the capacity be at Tuckahoe and Discovery after they absorb Nottingham? Will they need (additional) trailers? What will enrollment be in 2026 and beyond?

And when they tell you any of that information you'll scream about how everything they are telling you is wrong or a lie or misguided. Right?

+1. Yep. They will say that APS planning is incompetent and can’t be trusted. They are already saying that. This is not a constructive community. They will just try to put up obstacles so nothing can be done. They prefer no action to help others in the county over their minor inconvenience.

Again with the nonstop hate for people trying to save their walkable, neighborhood school community. How dare they not just roll over and accept this proposal without any APS showing any supporting data!

You guys have shown yourself to be the worst over and over during the last several rounds. Many of us have lost patience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's most likely one year, not multiple years.

Anonymous wrote:I think some of the candidates for renovation are Taylor and Jamestown. Not south.

Nope, this is incorrect. They aren’t even in the top 7 candidates for remodel. The board had said at past meetings that the schools will be totally leveled and rebuilt, a process that will take a year of planning and 2 years of construction.

Facts! Always getting in the way of a good story.

Barcroft was last renovated in 1992. Randolph in 1993. Long Branch in 1996. And HB and Oakridge in 1999. These are the schools that will be rehoused at Nottingham—and they’re ALL in South Arlington. It makes no sense to bus these kids 25-30 min each way. And you can’t tell me that these families would prefer that solution (if APS even asked them, which it didn’t). That’s why APS needs to come up with if another choice that would keep their kids closer to home and simplify commute/logistics/drop off/pick up/extended day.

No thanks. Seems like this plan will work and solves the serious underenrollment problem in 22207 for now, so we’re good.

[Anonymous]

Yep. Closing the school with 2 classes in two different grades AND with at least 2 other walkable options seems sensible. The report shows that Nottingham will impact the fewest number of students. Isn’t that a logical criteria? I just don’t see what the other choice is that costs less money and impacts fewer kids. If Notties want to be constructive THAT is what they need to determine. Not take pot shots at the current plan. Help find a plan that costs less and impacts fewer kids.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's most likely one year, not multiple years.

Anonymous wrote:I think some of the candidates for renovation are Taylor and Jamestown. Not south.

Nope, this is incorrect. They aren’t even in the top 7 candidates for remodel. The board had said at past meetings that the schools will be totally leveled and rebuilt, a process that will take a year of planning and 2 years of construction.

Facts! Always getting in the way of a good story.

Barcroft was last renovated in 1992. Randolph in 1993. Long Branch in 1996. And HB and Oakridge in 1999. These are the schools that will be rehoused at Nottingham—and they’re ALL in South Arlington. It makes no sense to bus these kids 25-30 min each way. And you can’t tell me that these families would prefer that solution (if APS even asked them, which it didn’t). That’s why APS needs to come up with if another choice that would keep their kids closer to home and simplify commute/logistics/drop off/pick up/extended day.

Walter Reed community center would be a good location to re-home students while those schools are renovated/re-built. But the County Board has made it pretty clear it won't share facilities with APS at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

It's most likely one year, not multiple years.

Anonymous wrote:I think some of the candidates for renovation are Taylor and Jamestown. Not south.

Nope, this is incorrect. They aren’t even in the top 7 candidates for remodel. The board had said at past meetings that the schools will be totally leveled and rebuilt, a process that will take a year of planning and 2 years of construction.

Facts! Always getting in the way of a good story.

Barcroft was last renovated in 1992. Randolph in 1993. Long Branch in 1996. And HB and Oakridge in 1999. These are the schools that will be rehoused at Nottingham—and they’re ALL in South Arlington. It makes no sense to bus these kids 25-30 min each way. And you can’t tell me that these families would prefer that solution (if APS even asked them, which it didn’t). That’s why APS needs to come up with if another choice that would keep their kids closer to home and simplify commute/logistics/drop off/pick up/extended day.

Besides Fairlington community center - because it's not likely the County is going to agree to hand it over -- Just where do you propose a swing space for these south arlington schools? And also, please indicate how much preparing that swing space will cost and justify it and keeping multiple under-enrolled schools operating as a better option to Nottingham which will require minimum costs to open as a swing space, even factoring in the additional transportation costs.