Drew Model Elementary: proposed boundaries (s/o from APS/SA thread specific to Drew)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Focusing on the PUs with no walkers, I think you take the Abingdon-Kenmore units and send them to Barcroft or Randolph, put more of eastern Barcroft to Fleet, and put the south-of-pike Fleet units to Drew. It's not great for Barcroft but my math suggests doing it that way would have both Barcroft and Drew in the 60s for fr/l rate, vs. in the 40s for Barcroft and over 80 for Drew under the current proposal.

I don't think that works. I only see 1 Eastern Barcroft planning unit that is not in the walkzone (37050) It has about 50 kids- 18 of which are FARMS.
So under that theory Barcroft could pick up about 1/3 of Columbia Heights. In terms of putting Columbia Heights at Randolph- randolph currently only has 2 non walkking PU's. 38050 and 38100. Its a total of about 33 kids- of which 31 are FARMS? (I think there is a DATA problem with 38050 b/c it reflects a higher number of FARMS students than total students). Either way if you figure out a way to move out those two units from Randoph- which would probably mean sending them to Drew, you still don't have any seats for Columbia Heights even split between Randolph and Barcroft.
Drew is getting Columbia Heights b/c of the walkzone issue. You are going to have to move at least one PU that is in a walkzone in order to send Columbia Heights anywhere other than Drew.

Are you guys confusing Columbia Heights and Columbia Forest? Unless I’m reading the proposed map incorrectly, Columbia Heights is staying Henry/Fleet and not going to Drew.

yes- sorry, I was thinking Columbia Forest, but I wrote Columbia Heights. It is Columbia Forest that is weirdly districted to Drew and was the numbers I was looking at.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Focusing on the PUs with no walkers, I think you take the Abingdon-Kenmore units and send them to Barcroft or Randolph, put more of eastern Barcroft to Fleet, and put the south-of-pike Fleet units to Drew. It's not great for Barcroft but my math suggests doing it that way would have both Barcroft and Drew in the 60s for fr/l rate, vs. in the 40s for Barcroft and over 80 for Drew under the current proposal.

I don't think that works. I only see 1 Eastern Barcroft planning unit that is not in the walkzone (37050) It has about 50 kids- 18 of which are FARMS.
So under that theory Barcroft could pick up about 1/3 of Columbia Heights. In terms of putting Columbia Heights at Randolph- randolph currently only has 2 non walkking PU's. 38050 and 38100. Its a total of about 33 kids- of which 31 are FARMS? (I think there is a DATA problem with 38050 b/c it reflects a higher number of FARMS students than total students). Either way if you figure out a way to move out those two units from Randoph- which would probably mean sending them to Drew, you still don't have any seats for Columbia Heights even split between Randolph and Barcroft.
Drew is getting Columbia Heights b/c of the walkzone issue. You are going to have to move at least one PU that is in a walkzone in order to send Columbia Heights anywhere other than Drew.

You're saying Columbia Heights, but I think we are talking about Columbia Forest. I have no opinion on where 38050 and 38100 should go. If they're currently Randolph, maybe they should stay there. I think 37040 and 37050 are both outside Barcroft's walk zone and could go to Fleet. This would make room for Barcroft to take Columbia Forest (i.e., units currently zoned Abingdon that feed into Kenmore).

There are many PUs that have 2017 FARMS students greater than 2019 projections. I guess APS thinks all those kids are 5th graders with no younger sibs or neighbors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Focusing on the PUs with no walkers, I think you take the Abingdon-Kenmore units and send them to Barcroft or Randolph, put more of eastern Barcroft to Fleet, and put the south-of-pike Fleet units to Drew. It's not great for Barcroft but my math suggests doing it that way would have both Barcroft and Drew in the 60s for fr/l rate, vs. in the 40s for Barcroft and over 80 for Drew under the current proposal.

I don't think that works. I only see 1 Eastern Barcroft planning unit that is not in the walkzone (37050) It has about 50 kids- 18 of which are FARMS.
So under that theory Barcroft could pick up about 1/3 of Columbia Heights. In terms of putting Columbia Heights at Randolph- randolph currently only has 2 non walkking PU's. 38050 and 38100. Its a total of about 33 kids- of which 31 are FARMS? (I think there is a DATA problem with 38050 b/c it reflects a higher number of FARMS students than total students). Either way if you figure out a way to move out those two units from Randoph- which would probably mean sending them to Drew, you still don't have any seats for Columbia Heights even split between Randolph and Barcroft.
Drew is getting Columbia Heights b/c of the walkzone issue. You are going to have to move at least one PU that is in a walkzone in order to send Columbia Heights anywhere other than Drew.

You're saying Columbia Heights, but I think we are talking about Columbia Forest. I have no opinion on where 38050 and 38100 should go. If they're currently Randolph, maybe they should stay there. I think 37040 and 37050 are both outside Barcroft's walk zone and could go to Fleet. This would make room for Barcroft to take Columbia Forest (i.e., units currently zoned Abingdon that feed into Kenmore).

There are many PUs that have 2017 FARMS students greater than 2019 projections. I guess APS thinks all those kids are 5th graders with no younger sibs or neighbors.

yes, you are correct that 37040 is also outside the walkzone- I had originally read it to be only the National Guard Bureau- but I misread the map, it has about 35 students. HOwever- even combining 37040 and 37050 and moving both of them that still only gets you to 75 or so spaces at Barcroft. Enough for about 1/2 of Columbia Forest. Under this theory- You might be able to move the western 1/2 of columbia forest to Barcroft- 37100/37070/37071/36030- and leave the eastern 1/2 with the long ride to Drew (otherwise you are going to run into contiguity problems). But I think that would still be leaving the highest FARMS units at Drew so I'm not sure how much it really helps. (I'm honestly trying to help- just trying to figure out a realistic proposal to lobby for.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In the more general SA boundary proposal thread someone mentioned that in the current proposal there are (presumably higher SES) kids who will be bused to a different school, who could just as easily bused to Drew and thereby reduce the FARMs rate there. Could someone provide some specifics about that? PUs or specific map locations to help visualize the potential bus rides?

The more I study this map- the PU that I think best fits this category- on a bus anyway, higher SES kids, that could easily bus to Drew is Fairlington- 36130. It's 150 kids, and all non-FARMS. the problem is it is hemmed in by the Abingdon walkzone. Now- if you move 36091 to Drew as well you have a path. 36091 is central Shirlington, it has less than 10 kids, and it a pretty good walk to Abingdon anyway- so its not like busing these 10 kids is going to add substantially to transportation costs.

Portions of Arlington Ridge and Aurora Highlands also fit this category. But it is harder at least for me to see how to send them anywhere other than Hoffman-Boston (where they are currently slated) or Oakridge. I guess you might be able to bridge across army-navy country club and toss them in that way- but I still don't see what you do with Columbia Forest.

I thought that the south of the Pike Fleet units fit this category- but when are look at the PU data It seems like those are more mixed income then I originally thought.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the more general SA boundary proposal thread someone mentioned that in the current proposal there are (presumably higher SES) kids who will be bused to a different school, who could just as easily bused to Drew and thereby reduce the FARMs rate there. Could someone provide some specifics about that? PUs or specific map locations to help visualize the potential bus rides?

The more I study this map- the PU that I think best fits this category- on a bus anyway, higher SES kids, that could easily bus to Drew is Fairlington- 36130. It's 150 kids, and all non-FARMS. the problem is it is hemmed in by the Abingdon walkzone. Now- if you move 36091 to Drew as well you have a path. 36091 is central Shirlington, it has less than 10 kids, and it a pretty good walk to Abingdon anyway- so its not like busing these 10 kids is going to add substantially to transportation costs.

Portions of Arlington Ridge and Aurora Highlands also fit this category. But it is harder at least for me to see how to send them anywhere other than Hoffman-Boston (where they are currently slated) or Oakridge. I guess you might be able to bridge across army-navy country club and toss them in that way- but I still don't see what you do with Columbia Forest.

I thought that the south of the Pike Fleet units fit this category- but when are look at the PU data It seems like those are more mixed income then I originally thought.

Seems like some good ideas, though ANCC is never going to let a school bus chug through their property. They don't even let my kids sit on a bench and watch the golfers. The biggest thing you're overlooking, I think, is that even units that are "mixed income" still help Drew. Drew is 85% fr/l. If you take 150 kids from Columbia Heights that are only about 30% fr/l, that has a meaningful effect on Drew's %.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Focusing on the PUs with no walkers, I think you take the Abingdon-Kenmore units and send them to Barcroft or Randolph, put more of eastern Barcroft to Fleet, and put the south-of-pike Fleet units to Drew. It's not great for Barcroft but my math suggests doing it that way would have both Barcroft and Drew in the 60s for fr/l rate, vs. in the 40s for Barcroft and over 80 for Drew under the current proposal.

I don't think that works. I only see 1 Eastern Barcroft planning unit that is not in the walkzone (37050) It has about 50 kids- 18 of which are FARMS.
So under that theory Barcroft could pick up about 1/3 of Columbia Heights. In terms of putting Columbia Heights at Randolph- randolph currently only has 2 non walkking PU's. 38050 and 38100. Its a total of about 33 kids- of which 31 are FARMS? (I think there is a DATA problem with 38050 b/c it reflects a higher number of FARMS students than total students). Either way if you figure out a way to move out those two units from Randoph- which would probably mean sending them to Drew, you still don't have any seats for Columbia Heights even split between Randolph and Barcroft.
Drew is getting Columbia Heights b/c of the walkzone issue. You are going to have to move at least one PU that is in a walkzone in order to send Columbia Heights anywhere other than Drew.

You're saying Columbia Heights, but I think we are talking about Columbia Forest. I have no opinion on where 38050 and 38100 should go. If they're currently Randolph, maybe they should stay there. I think 37040 and 37050 are both outside Barcroft's walk zone and could go to Fleet. This would make room for Barcroft to take Columbia Forest (i.e., units currently zoned Abingdon that feed into Kenmore).

There are many PUs that have 2017 FARMS students greater than 2019 projections. I guess APS thinks all those kids are 5th graders with no younger sibs or neighbors.

Oh I see, 38050 and 38100 were that weird corner that used to be zoned Hoffman-Boston on the other side of Drew. Misunderstood you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the more general SA boundary proposal thread someone mentioned that in the current proposal there are (presumably higher SES) kids who will be bused to a different school, who could just as easily bused to Drew and thereby reduce the FARMs rate there. Could someone provide some specifics about that? PUs or specific map locations to help visualize the potential bus rides?

The more I study this map- the PU that I think best fits this category- on a bus anyway, higher SES kids, that could easily bus to Drew is Fairlington- 36130. It's 150 kids, and all non-FARMS. the problem is it is hemmed in by the Abingdon walkzone. Now- if you move 36091 to Drew as well you have a path. 36091 is central Shirlington, it has less than 10 kids, and it a pretty good walk to Abingdon anyway- so its not like busing these 10 kids is going to add substantially to transportation costs.

Portions of Arlington Ridge and Aurora Highlands also fit this category. But it is harder at least for me to see how to send them anywhere other than Hoffman-Boston (where they are currently slated) or Oakridge. I guess you might be able to bridge across army-navy country club and toss them in that way- but I still don't see what you do with Columbia Forest.

I thought that the south of the Pike Fleet units fit this category- but when are look at the PU data It seems like those are more mixed income then I originally thought.

Making that part of Fairlington Drew would elevate crowding AND help with the issue of kids going to different middle schools too since they are Gunston already. Plus make a huge impact on the FARMS rate. Only problem is Fairlington would never allow that. They will come up with something about how it’s destroying the neighborhood vibe or whatever. I kind of want to see it go down.

Especially considering that area is well within the 1 mile walk zone to Abingdon but a bunch of parents complained so they have buses to go 3 blocks. I bet they would suddenly decide to walk if given the choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Thank you for starting this (I'm the person who originally asked how I could help advocate for you). I'm making notes on all of this and will keep following this and other discussions here to get as much info as I can before I submit my response.

NP. What would be absolutely fantastic is if you could rally your PTA and other NA school PTAs to take a stand on this and take the position that intentionally creating an 80% FRL school is absolutely unacceptable and inconsistent with the professed values of Arlington County and Arlington Public Schools. The only way anything is ever going to change in APS or in the County is if the NORTH pushes for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with you, and was horrified when I first looked at the map. I sat down with all the data to try and make some alternative proposals.
The problem is our current walk-zone fetish. Try to move Columbia Heights somewhere else. They can't go to Abingdon b/c it is full, and moving any Abingdon units results in either breaking contiguity or breaking their walk zone. They can't go to Randolph b/c it is basically full from its walkzone. the same with Barcoft- You could switch 37050 out of Barcroft and replace it with 37090- but that is not going to make much of a difference. You can't send all of Columbia Heights to Barcroft- it would way overflow it.

If you drop the walkzone obsession, you could move 36091 to Drew, allowing 36130 to also go to Drew. 36130 is Fairlington on the other side of 395- its 150 kids, less than 10 FARMS. 36091 is about 10 kids all FARMS. It looks like there are about 170 kids in the Columbia Heights units proposed to go to Drew- most of which are FARMS (maybe 150 FARMS?) That would maybe put Abingdon at 1/2 FARMS, and bring Drew's FARMS rate down significantly.

If you did that- you might also be able to make 38050 Abingdon instead of Randolph, and swap it for 46011 which would slightly help Randolph demographics.

Correct. Making walk zones priority #1 makes everything more difficult. It's pretty depressing that saving money on a few bus drivers is the justification for creating schools that are 80%+ poor.

And it just costs us more money in other ways.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with you, and was horrified when I first looked at the map. I sat down with all the data to try and make some alternative proposals.
The problem is our current walk-zone fetish. Try to move Columbia Heights somewhere else. They can't go to Abingdon b/c it is full, and moving any Abingdon units results in either breaking contiguity or breaking their walk zone. They can't go to Randolph b/c it is basically full from its walkzone. the same with Barcoft- You could switch 37050 out of Barcroft and replace it with 37090- but that is not going to make much of a difference. You can't send all of Columbia Heights to Barcroft- it would way overflow it.

If you drop the walkzone obsession, you could move 36091 to Drew, allowing 36130 to also go to Drew. 36130 is Fairlington on the other side of 395- its 150 kids, less than 10 FARMS. 36091 is about 10 kids all FARMS. It looks like there are about 170 kids in the Columbia Heights units proposed to go to Drew- most of which are FARMS (maybe 150 FARMS?) That would maybe put Abingdon at 1/2 FARMS, and bring Drew's FARMS rate down significantly.

If you did that- you might also be able to make 38050 Abingdon instead of Randolph, and swap it for 46011 which would slightly help Randolph demographics.

This is OP. The walk zone thing isn't going away and I'm not going to fight it. It's a huge problem for really doing anything about demographics, but I'm taking APS at its word that transportation costs are a problem and need to be minimized. I am, however, also taking APS at its word that it really weighs its own policy considerations. When I see a boundary like the proposed Drew boundary, APS's word on that is seriously called into question.

Focusing on the PUs with no walkers, I think you take the Abingdon-Kenmore units and send them to Barcroft or Randolph, put more of eastern Barcroft to Fleet, and put the south-of-pike Fleet units to Drew. It's not great for Barcroft but my math suggests doing it that way would have both Barcroft and Drew in the 60s for fr/l rate, vs. in the 40s for Barcroft and over 80 for Drew under the current proposal.

Barcroft isn't in the 40s in the proposal. It remains around 60% as it is now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with you, and was horrified when I first looked at the map. I sat down with all the data to try and make some alternative proposals.
The problem is our current walk-zone fetish. Try to move Columbia Heights somewhere else. They can't go to Abingdon b/c it is full, and moving any Abingdon units results in either breaking contiguity or breaking their walk zone. They can't go to Randolph b/c it is basically full from its walkzone. the same with Barcoft- You could switch 37050 out of Barcroft and replace it with 37090- but that is not going to make much of a difference. You can't send all of Columbia Heights to Barcroft- it would way overflow it.

If you drop the walkzone obsession, you could move 36091 to Drew, allowing 36130 to also go to Drew. 36130 is Fairlington on the other side of 395- its 150 kids, less than 10 FARMS. 36091 is about 10 kids all FARMS. It looks like there are about 170 kids in the Columbia Heights units proposed to go to Drew- most of which are FARMS (maybe 150 FARMS?) That would maybe put Abingdon at 1/2 FARMS, and bring Drew's FARMS rate down significantly.

If you did that- you might also be able to make 38050 Abingdon instead of Randolph, and swap it for 46011 which would slightly help Randolph demographics.

This is OP. The walk zone thing isn't going away and I'm not going to fight it. It's a huge problem for really doing anything about demographics, but I'm taking APS at its word that transportation costs are a problem and need to be minimized. I am, however, also taking APS at its word that it really weighs its own policy considerations. When I see a boundary like the proposed Drew boundary, APS's word on that is seriously called into question.

Focusing on the PUs with no walkers, I think you take the Abingdon-Kenmore units and send them to Barcroft or Randolph, put more of eastern Barcroft to Fleet, and put the south-of-pike Fleet units to Drew. It's not great for Barcroft but my math suggests doing it that way would have both Barcroft and Drew in the 60s for fr/l rate, vs. in the 40s for Barcroft and over 80 for Drew under the current proposal.

I seriously doubt this map will change between now and November. But in the meantime, I would LOVE to see a survey of available extracurricular activities available at every Arlington elementary school. I think the results would shock and dismay everyone who saw it.

There are PTAs that can raise 100k in a single silent auction and that money goes a long way. I think wealthy, well meaning people in Arlington justify their resistance to integrated schools because they think title 1 and other spending somehow makes up for the lack of a critical mass of MC and UMC families. It would show finally and clearly how much more opportunity comes with a school that is not dominated by poverty.

I do think they are somewhat clueless; but not absolutely clueless. They KNOW there's less and that's why they aren't at those schools and fight tooth and nail to never be at those schools or allow any hint of change at their schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with you, and was horrified when I first looked at the map. I sat down with all the data to try and make some alternative proposals.
The problem is our current walk-zone fetish. Try to move Columbia Heights somewhere else. They can't go to Abingdon b/c it is full, and moving any Abingdon units results in either breaking contiguity or breaking their walk zone. They can't go to Randolph b/c it is basically full from its walkzone. the same with Barcoft- You could switch 37050 out of Barcroft and replace it with 37090- but that is not going to make much of a difference. You can't send all of Columbia Heights to Barcroft- it would way overflow it.

If you drop the walkzone obsession, you could move 36091 to Drew, allowing 36130 to also go to Drew. 36130 is Fairlington on the other side of 395- its 150 kids, less than 10 FARMS. 36091 is about 10 kids all FARMS. It looks like there are about 170 kids in the Columbia Heights units proposed to go to Drew- most of which are FARMS (maybe 150 FARMS?) That would maybe put Abingdon at 1/2 FARMS, and bring Drew's FARMS rate down significantly.

If you did that- you might also be able to make 38050 Abingdon instead of Randolph, and swap it for 46011 which would slightly help Randolph demographics.

This is OP. The walk zone thing isn't going away and I'm not going to fight it. It's a huge problem for really doing anything about demographics, but I'm taking APS at its word that transportation costs are a problem and need to be minimized. I am, however, also taking APS at its word that it really weighs its own policy considerations. When I see a boundary like the proposed Drew boundary, APS's word on that is seriously called into question.

Focusing on the PUs with no walkers, I think you take the Abingdon-Kenmore units and send them to Barcroft or Randolph, put more of eastern Barcroft to Fleet, and put the south-of-pike Fleet units to Drew. It's not great for Barcroft but my math suggests doing it that way would have both Barcroft and Drew in the 60s for fr/l rate, vs. in the 40s for Barcroft and over 80 for Drew under the current proposal.

Barcroft isn't in the 40s in the proposal. It remains around 60% as it is now.

Sorry, you're right. Barcroft is now low 60s, would go to high 50s under the current proposal. Under my rough math, it would go to high 60s if you do the above.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with you, and was horrified when I first looked at the map. I sat down with all the data to try and make some alternative proposals.
The problem is our current walk-zone fetish. Try to move Columbia Heights somewhere else. They can't go to Abingdon b/c it is full, and moving any Abingdon units results in either breaking contiguity or breaking their walk zone. They can't go to Randolph b/c it is basically full from its walkzone. the same with Barcoft- You could switch 37050 out of Barcroft and replace it with 37090- but that is not going to make much of a difference. You can't send all of Columbia Heights to Barcroft- it would way overflow it.

If you drop the walkzone obsession, you could move 36091 to Drew, allowing 36130 to also go to Drew. 36130 is Fairlington on the other side of 395- its 150 kids, less than 10 FARMS. 36091 is about 10 kids all FARMS. It looks like there are about 170 kids in the Columbia Heights units proposed to go to Drew- most of which are FARMS (maybe 150 FARMS?) That would maybe put Abingdon at 1/2 FARMS, and bring Drew's FARMS rate down significantly.

If you did that- you might also be able to make 38050 Abingdon instead of Randolph, and swap it for 46011 which would slightly help Randolph demographics.

This is OP. The walk zone thing isn't going away and I'm not going to fight it. It's a huge problem for really doing anything about demographics, but I'm taking APS at its word that transportation costs are a problem and need to be minimized. I am, however, also taking APS at its word that it really weighs its own policy considerations. When I see a boundary like the proposed Drew boundary, APS's word on that is seriously called into question.

Focusing on the PUs with no walkers, I think you take the Abingdon-Kenmore units and send them to Barcroft or Randolph, put more of eastern Barcroft to Fleet, and put the south-of-pike Fleet units to Drew. It's not great for Barcroft but my math suggests doing it that way would have both Barcroft and Drew in the 60s for fr/l rate, vs. in the 40s for Barcroft and over 80 for Drew under the current proposal.

Barcroft isn't in the 40s in the proposal. It remains around 60% as it is now.

Sorry, you're right. Barcroft is now low 60s, would go to high 50s under the current proposal. Under my rough math, it would go to high 60s if you do the above.

You're forgetting that Gilliam Place is slated to open in 2019 and zoned Barcroft. That is easily 100+ kids, all FARMs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I agree with you, and was horrified when I first looked at the map. I sat down with all the data to try and make some alternative proposals.
The problem is our current walk-zone fetish. Try to move Columbia Heights somewhere else. They can't go to Abingdon b/c it is full, and moving any Abingdon units results in either breaking contiguity or breaking their walk zone. They can't go to Randolph b/c it is basically full from its walkzone. the same with Barcoft- You could switch 37050 out of Barcroft and replace it with 37090- but that is not going to make much of a difference. You can't send all of Columbia Heights to Barcroft- it would way overflow it.

If you drop the walkzone obsession, you could move 36091 to Drew, allowing 36130 to also go to Drew. 36130 is Fairlington on the other side of 395- its 150 kids, less than 10 FARMS. 36091 is about 10 kids all FARMS. It looks like there are about 170 kids in the Columbia Heights units proposed to go to Drew- most of which are FARMS (maybe 150 FARMS?) That would maybe put Abingdon at 1/2 FARMS, and bring Drew's FARMS rate down significantly.

If you did that- you might also be able to make 38050 Abingdon instead of Randolph, and swap it for 46011 which would slightly help Randolph demographics.

This is OP. The walk zone thing isn't going away and I'm not going to fight it. It's a huge problem for really doing anything about demographics, but I'm taking APS at its word that transportation costs are a problem and need to be minimized. I am, however, also taking APS at its word that it really weighs its own policy considerations. When I see a boundary like the proposed Drew boundary, APS's word on that is seriously called into question.

Focusing on the PUs with no walkers, I think you take the Abingdon-Kenmore units and send them to Barcroft or Randolph, put more of eastern Barcroft to Fleet, and put the south-of-pike Fleet units to Drew. It's not great for Barcroft but my math suggests doing it that way would have both Barcroft and Drew in the 60s for fr/l rate, vs. in the 40s for Barcroft and over 80 for Drew under the current proposal.

Barcroft isn't in the 40s in the proposal. It remains around 60% as it is now.

Sorry, you're right. Barcroft is now low 60s, would go to high 50s under the current proposal. Under my rough math, it would go to high 60s if you do the above.

You're forgetting that Gilliam Place is slated to open in 2019 and zoned Barcroft. That is easily 100+ kids, all FARMs.

Isn't that a good reason to send that PU to Fleet? It's in 37050 no?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Focusing on the PUs with no walkers, I think you take the Abingdon-Kenmore units and send them to Barcroft or Randolph, put more of eastern Barcroft to Fleet, and put the south-of-pike Fleet units to Drew. It's not great for Barcroft but my math suggests doing it that way would have both Barcroft and Drew in the 60s for fr/l rate, vs. in the 40s for Barcroft and over 80 for Drew under the current proposal.

I don't think that works. I only see 1 Eastern Barcroft planning unit that is not in the walkzone (37050) It has about 50 kids- 18 of which are FARMS.
So under that theory Barcroft could pick up about 1/3 of Columbia Heights. In terms of putting Columbia Heights at Randolph- randolph currently only has 2 non walkking PU's. 38050 and 38100. Its a total of about 33 kids- of which 31 are FARMS? (I think there is a DATA problem with 38050 b/c it reflects a higher number of FARMS students than total students). Either way if you figure out a way to move out those two units from Randoph- which would probably mean sending them to Drew, you still don't have any seats for Columbia Heights even split between Randolph and Barcroft.
Drew is getting Columbia Heights b/c of the walkzone issue. You are going to have to move at least one PU that is in a walkzone in order to send Columbia Heights anywhere other than Drew.

You're saying Columbia Heights, but I think we are talking about Columbia Forest. I have no opinion on where 38050 and 38100 should go. If they're currently Randolph, maybe they should stay there. I think 37040 and 37050 are both outside Barcroft's walk zone and could go to Fleet. This would make room for Barcroft to take Columbia Forest (i.e., units currently zoned Abingdon that feed into Kenmore).

There are many PUs that have 2017 FARMS students greater than 2019 projections. I guess APS thinks all those kids are 5th graders with no younger sibs or neighbors.

Oh I see, 38050 and 38100 were that weird corner that used to be zoned Hoffman-Boston on the other side of Drew. Misunderstood you.

Yes 38050 and 38100 are new to Randolph.